Grusch claimed early on that he had tried to reach out to
AAROspecifically Kirkpatrick, before AARO existed, for years before the whistleblower hotline came available. He also claims he tried repeatedly leading up to his tapping the hotline, and he was routinely ignored. This unfortunately tracks withAARO’s public faceKirkpatrick; they have expressed more than once that they do not follow up on the majority of tips they receive as they discount them as “not credible.”It’s his word against Kirkpatrick, in this case, and Kirkpatrick has not shown a great deal of willing, or even interest, in this regard.
EDIT: Since this is a repost on this new instance, I’m reposting this comment. Also, in the other instance, someone pointed out some flaws in my remembering, and I have amended them here. AARO didn’t exist at the time Grusch claims he was reaching out to Kirkpatrick.
I think it’s also important to note the specific words used by Dr. Kirkpatrick, AARO, Susan Gough, and others. They are extremely careful about their choice of words and how they convey their message. I’m using Susan Gough as a specific example due to her choice of attributing knowledge (or lack thereof) about these programs to AARO rather than the Pentagon. She also prefers terms like ‘extraterrestrial’ or ‘alien’ over ‘Non-Human Intelligence,’ which Mr. Grusch has used.
It appears to me that they are cautious with their statements, striving to avoid outright falsehoods while still withholding full disclosure. You can interpret this as you wish.
Edit: I would also like to highlight that, if we are to believe Ross Coulthart and other journalists, many whistleblowers are refusing to liaise with AARO due to a lack of trust. Therefore, when Dr. Kirkpatrick asserts that he hasn’t been made aware of certain allegations, he may not be lying. However, David Grusch has repeatedly stated that he provided Dr. Kirkpatrick with all the information he had given to the Inspector General.
This is a good point, because I think the same thing is likely happening with Grusch, but in the opposite direction. For example, he will say something like “non-human biologics”, which people are going to interpret as alien. But that could also just be plants or some fungus. The charitable interpretation is that he’s trying to stay within legal and classification boundaries, but he could also be phrasing things to maximize his future earning potential (dude is definitely going to be writing a book, at minimum, in the future).
You raised an interesting point regarding Mr. Grusch’s choice of words at the hearing. I chalked it up to ‘off the cuff’ responses, rather than carefully thought out word choices, but I recognize I could be mistaken. I’m trying to withhold any judgments one way or the other until more information is revealed.
In my opinion, this topic has crossed the Rubicon, and I’m presuming we won’t have to wait too long for answers or clarity one way or the other.
In my opinion, this topic has crossed the Rubicon, and I’m presuming we won’t have to wait too long for answers or clarity one way or the other.
Unless there is no “there, there”, which is still my betting position. Anything that can or has been revealed in a SCIF to members of Congress is probably already known by other people in government, specifically in the Pentagon and Executive Branch, or as Grusch mentioned (IIRC, could have been one of the other two guys) the Gang of Four may know more than the rest of Congress.
Unless I see compelling evidence to the contrary, the most likely and plausible explanation is that we’re just seeing a repeat of history. Which means we probably won’t actually know whatever cool tech is being occasionally glimpsed is for another few decades.
Yeah, I’m interested in the whistleblower protections. I’m hopeful we’ll get some information through them. I have my doubts in getting unclassified evidence of anything.
Whatever it is, if anything, Congress doesn’t appear to be letting this go. We’ll just have to see what happens.
I think it’s also important to note that in this letter, Dr. Kirkpatrick states, ‘The Subcommittee, whose questions and oversight duties are irreproachable and genuinely in need of answers, has never asked AARO for an update on the reporting system, the historical review, the operations, or the S&T strategy that AARO leads and is undertaking.’
I find this transcript from the April 19th hearing segment, regarding the public website that AARO is supposed to launch for whistleblowers to report UAP data, to be relevant:
Gillibrand: Dr. Kirkpatrick Congress has mandated that your office establish a discoverable and accessible electronic method for potential witnesses of UAP incidents and potential participants in government UAP related activities to contact your office and tell their stories. Congress also set up a process whereby people are subject to nondisclosure agreements, preventing them from disclosing what they may have witnessed or participated in could tell you what they know about risk of retribution from or violation of their NDAs. Have you submitted a public facing website product for approval to your superiors and how long has it been under review?
Kirkpatrick: I have. We submitted the first version of that before Christmas.
Gillibrand: And do you have an estimate from them when they will respond and when you’ll have feedback on that?
Kirkpatrick: No, I don’t.
Gillibrand: Okay. We will author a letter asking for that timely response to your superiors. When? When do you expect that you will establish a public facing discoverable and access portal for people to use to contact your office as the law requires.
Kirkpatrick: So I would like to first say thank you all very much for referring the witnesses that you have thus far to us. I appreciate that we’ve brought in nearly two dozen so far. It’s been that’s been very helpful. I’d ask that you continue to do that until we have an approved plan. We have a multi-phased approach for doing that, that we’ve been socializing and have submitted for approval some time. And once that happens, then we should be able to push all that out and get get this a little more automated.
Gillibrand: Great.
Kirkpatrick: What I would ask, though, is, as you all continue to refer to us and refer witnesses to us, I’d appreciate if you do that. Please try to prioritize the ones that you want to do, because we do have a small research staff dealing with that.
Gillibrand: Thank you. And then do you have any plans for public engagement that you want to share now that you think it’s important that the public knows what the plan is?
Kirkpatrick: So we have a number of public engagement recommendations as according to our strategic plan. All of those have been submitted for approval. They have to be approved by USDINS We are waiting for approval to go do that.
Gillibrand: Okay. I will follow up on that.
Is that true? Didn’t Grunsch say he worked for AARO? Who is lying?
I was my agency’s co-lead in Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) and trans- medium object analysis, as well as reporting to UAP Task Force (UAPTF) and eventually the All- Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO).
This is taken from his opening statement at the hearing.
I agree with you, there appears to be a disagreement on facts between the two parties.
Could it be that he was only “reporting to” AARO like UAPTF? Also, we’re there others that said they “worked for AARO” as he says they “stated”?
I’m not entirely sure. I recall him giving a specific job title for UAPTF. I don’t recall a specific job title for AARO. I would need to go back and listen.
Thanks. I’m only starting to get into this in earnest so I’m trying to get my facts straight.
Not a problem. This may be one of the most challenging topics from which to reliably extract facts or determine the truth. I believe that’s part of its allure. Regardless of how you approach it, it’s a massive story.
I believe that’s part of its allure.
For sure. The entire field of UFO reporting as a cultural phenomenon–and really all of cryptography including bigfoot and ghosts–is one that exists in the gray areas. As soon as we have clear photos or facts one way or another, the discussion and fun is over because the conclusion is obvious (so far only in favor of one side).
We’ve seen this play out before with other topics many times, but science eventually answered those definitively so there’s no sizable community left to discuss them anymore.
That pretty much sums up my position on this matter and how I envision the future of this community. There are essentially two options.
- We obtain evidence that proves this is prosaic. As a result, this community will likely fizzle out.
- We obtain evidence that proves the existence of Non-Human Intelligence. As a result, this community grows because many more questions will need answering.
