BY MARIK VON RENNENKAMPFF, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 06/09/23
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct misleading assertions about the nature of the intelligence community inspector general’s findings. We regret the error.
According to explosive reporting, and a subsequent clarification, the powerful internal investigative body that oversees the nation’s intelligence agencies found a whistleblower’s assertion that UFO-related information was inappropriately concealed from Congress “urgent and credible.”
Beyond this stunning revelation, the whistleblower – a former high-level intelligence official – was represented until recently by a lawyer who served previously as the intelligence community’s first inspector general, a Senate-confirmed position. The managing partner of the law firm representing the whistleblower reportedly co-signed the complaint submitted to the current intelligence community inspector general.
In a June 9 press release, the firm that formerly represented the whistleblower clarified that it “took no position and takes no position” on the substance of the explosive information provided to the intelligence community inspector general, which the whistleblower “has now publicly characterized.”
Importantly, current and former officials vouched for the whistleblower, David Grusch, while also corroborating the broad outlines of his allegations. Moreover, Grusch spoke to Congress for hours, generating hundreds of pages of transcripts. Grusch also gave an exclusive interview to Ross Coulthart of NewsNation, which like The Hill is owned by Nexstar Media Group.
For their part, Grusch and other knowledgeable individuals who have spoken to investigators seem to have little incentive to lie. “Knowingly and willfully making false statements” to the intelligence community inspector general carries the risk of financial penalties and imprisonment.
The facts enumerated above should, on their face, captivate every newsroom and living room in America. But there are reasons to be skeptical.
For one, Grusch has not provided proof of his allegations. Similarly, the notion that such monumental revelations could remain secret for any appreciable amount of time strains credulity.
In a statement to NewsNation, the Department of Defense denied that the Pentagon’s new UFO office has uncovered the sort of activity alleged by Grusch.
According to Grusch, the evidence supporting his allegations is highly classified, a reasonable claim. However, logic suggests that, given the profound nature of the allegations, the classified evidence [that] Grusch provided to Congress and two inspectors general [alleging that UFO information was improperly withheld] would have to have been robust, detailed and substantiated by other knowledgeable individuals for the intelligence community watchdog to deem his claims “credible and urgent.”
To be sure, Grusch could have conducted a Daniel Ellsberg-style leak of highly classified information. But from what is known publicly, Grusch is making use of the well-established, legally protected whistleblower process. By honoring his commitment not to divulge classified information improperly, Grusch appears to be proceeding “by the book.” As a former top secret security clearance holder, I can certainly respect this decision.
With the House Oversight Committee vowing to hold a hearing, it is now up to congressional staff and the relevant inspectors general to adjudicate their investigations based on the evidence presented by Grusch and, as noted, reportedly corroborated by individuals involved in the alleged program.
Some of those individuals appear to have spoken in detail with author and political commentator Michael Shellenberger. As Shellenberger writes, numerous current and former officials confirmed the outlines of Grusch’s explosive allegations. The officials also provided context and descriptions of the vehicles allegedly recovered by the surreptitious UFO retrieval and reverse engineering effort.
If Grusch’s allegations are ultimately substantiated, how could such a monumental, earth-shattering development have remained secret for so long? This is a perplexing question which, based on my experience in government, left me deeply skeptical of long-standing rumors of the existence of such activities. While only a thorough, objective investigation will answer this question, it is plausible that the many individuals necessarily on the margins of such alleged efforts were led to believe that they were recovering terrestrial, as opposed to more exotic, vehicles.
Earlier this week, the Department of Defense released a statement in response to Grusch’s stunning allegations. According to the department, the Pentagon’s new UFO office “has not discovered any verifiable information to substantiate claims that any programs regarding the possession or reverse-engineering of extraterrestrial materials have existed in the past or exist currently.”
However, this may be clever wordsmithing. Grusch claims that staff of previous UFO analysis programs were not “read in” — that is, given access — to information regarding the kind of activities that he and others allege exist. As such, it is conceivable that, like its predecessor organizations, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (the Defense Department’s current UFO analysis effort) is simply not privy to the alleged program.
Of note, Grusch’s striking statements about the retrieval of “exotic” craft of “non-human” origin were reportedly approved by the Pentagon’s pre-publication review office, which scrutinizes books, movie scripts and statements by former officials to ensure that no sensitive information is inadvertently disclosed. Some critics have questioned how, if such information is so highly classified, the Pentagon cleared Grusch to make these explosive statements.
However, logic suggests that if a UFO retrieval and exploitation effort operated illegally, as is alleged, it would be unknown to the Pentagon’s censors. After all, if the pre-publication review office were “read in” to such activities, it would likely have been exposed long ago.AI gets political: How do we keep fake news out of campaign ads?The US is losing the Global South: How to reverse course
Key national security-focused members of Congress seem to have found explosive allegations of illegal UFO crash retrieval activities credible. A major defense bill, signed by President Biden in December, establishes robust whistleblower protections for individuals with knowledge of UFO programs engaged in “material retrieval, material analysis, reverse engineering [and] research and development.”
Federal law now bears the unmistakable imprint of individuals committed to exposing what they are convinced is a profound and long-concealed truth.
Marik von Rennenkampff served as an analyst with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, as well as an Obama administration appointee at the U.S. Department of Defense.TAGS ALIENS UAP UFO
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct misleading assertions about the nature of the intelligence community inspector general’s findings. We regret the error.
According to explosive reporting, and a subsequent clarification, the powerful internal investigative body that oversees the nation’s intelligence agencies found a whistleblower’s assertion that UFO-related information was inappropriately concealed from Congress “urgent and credible.”
Beyond this stunning revelation, the whistleblower – a former high-level intelligence official – was represented until recently by a lawyer who served previously as the intelligence community’s first inspector general, a Senate-confirmed position. The managing partner of the law firm representing the whistleblower reportedly co-signed the complaint submitted to the current intelligence community inspector general.
In a June 9 press release, the firm that formerly represented the whistleblower clarified that it “took no position and takes no position” on the substance of the explosive information provided to the intelligence community inspector general, which the whistleblower “has now publicly characterized.”
Importantly, current and former officials vouched for the whistleblower, David Grusch, while also corroborating the broad outlines of his allegations. Moreover, Grusch spoke to Congress for hours, generating hundreds of pages of transcripts. Grusch also gave an exclusive interview to Ross Coulthart of NewsNation, which like The Hill is owned by Nexstar Media Group.
For their part, Grusch and other knowledgeable individuals who have spoken to investigators seem to have little incentive to lie. “Knowingly and willfully making false statements” to the intelligence community inspector general carries the risk of financial penalties and imprisonment.
The facts enumerated above should, on their face, captivate every newsroom and living room in America. But there are reasons to be skeptical.
For one, Grusch has not provided proof of his allegations. Similarly, the notion that such monumental revelations could remain secret for any appreciable amount of time strains credulity.
In a statement to NewsNation, the Department of Defense denied that the Pentagon’s new UFO office has uncovered the sort of activity alleged by Grusch.
According to Grusch, the evidence supporting his allegations is highly classified, a reasonable claim. However, logic suggests that, given the profound nature of the allegations, the classified evidence [that] Grusch provided to Congress and two inspectors general [alleging that UFO information was improperly withheld] would have to have been robust, detailed and substantiated by other knowledgeable individuals for the intelligence community watchdog to deem his claims “credible and urgent.”
To be sure, Grusch could have conducted a Daniel Ellsberg-style leak of highly classified information. But from what is known publicly, Grusch is making use of the well-established, legally protected whistleblower process. By honoring his commitment not to divulge classified information improperly, Grusch appears to be proceeding “by the book.” As a former top secret security clearance holder, I can certainly respect this decision.
With the House Oversight Committee vowing to hold a hearing, it is now up to congressional staff and the relevant inspectors general to adjudicate their investigations based on the evidence presented by Grusch and, as noted, reportedly corroborated by individuals involved in the alleged program.
Some of those individuals appear to have spoken in detail with author and political commentator Michael Shellenberger. As Shellenberger writes, numerous current and former officials confirmed the outlines of Grusch’s explosive allegations. The officials also provided context and descriptions of the vehicles allegedly recovered by the surreptitious UFO retrieval and reverse engineering effort.
If Grusch’s allegations are ultimately substantiated, how could such a monumental, earth-shattering development have remained secret for so long? This is a perplexing question which, based on my experience in government, left me deeply skeptical of long-standing rumors of the existence of such activities. While only a thorough, objective investigation will answer this question, it is plausible that the many individuals necessarily on the margins of such alleged efforts were led to believe that they were recovering terrestrial, as opposed to more exotic, vehicles.
Earlier this week, the Department of Defense released a statement in response to Grusch’s stunning allegations. According to the department, the Pentagon’s new UFO office “has not discovered any verifiable information to substantiate claims that any programs regarding the possession or reverse-engineering of extraterrestrial materials have existed in the past or exist currently.”
However, this may be clever wordsmithing. Grusch claims that staff of previous UFO analysis programs were not “read in” — that is, given access — to information regarding the kind of activities that he and others allege exist. As such, it is conceivable that, like its predecessor organizations, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (the Defense Department’s current UFO analysis effort) is simply not privy to the alleged program.
Of note, Grusch’s striking statements about the retrieval of “exotic” craft of “non-human” origin were reportedly approved by the Pentagon’s pre-publication review office, which scrutinizes books, movie scripts and statements by former officials to ensure that no sensitive information is inadvertently disclosed. Some critics have questioned how, if such information is so highly classified, the Pentagon cleared Grusch to make these explosive statements.
However, logic suggests that if a UFO retrieval and exploitation effort operated illegally, as is alleged, it would be unknown to the Pentagon’s censors. After all, if the pre-publication review office were “read in” to such activities, it would likely have been exposed long ago.AI gets political: How do we keep fake news out of campaign ads?The US is losing the Global South: How to reverse course
Key national security-focused members of Congress seem to have found explosive allegations of illegal UFO crash retrieval activities credible. A major defense bill, signed by President Biden in December, establishes robust whistleblower protections for individuals with knowledge of UFO programs engaged in “material retrieval, material analysis, reverse engineering [and] research and development.”
Federal law now bears the unmistakable imprint of individuals committed to exposing what they are convinced is a profound and long-concealed truth.
Marik von Rennenkampff served as an analyst with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, as well as an Obama administration appointee at the U.S. Department of Defense.TAGS ALIENS UAP UFO
No comments:
Post a Comment