There must be people hired just to come up with commission names - and the ridiculous acronyms. Similar to pharmaceutical companies which hire PR people to make up names hoping we would all remember when we go to the doctor and ask for more whatever-it-is.
I applaud you for being able to use and understand the names that distinguish one band of brothers from another.
You certainly have a talent for showing how disparate circumstances and characters are interconnected. (But, then, isn't everything?)
To quote The Bard and later the iconic English detective: "...the game is afoot." My concern is that we'll keep seeing new iterations of the task force every year or so after the latest Congress / Pentagon scrum breaks. Meanwhile the ball goes nowhere. How will anything get done if they're in perpetual organizational mode?
It almost looks like a cynical version of 'kick the can...'
(Meanwhile, former Naval aviator Ryan Graves said recently in an interview that active duty pilots are telling him they are frustrated and pissed by the lack of response from HQ after they file UAP close encounter reports. Why bother with the extra paper work if nothing comes of it?)
...
Yeah, I can say ARRO. "Me and my ARRO. Straighter than narrow. Wherever we go, everyone knows it's me and my ARRO."
This is becoming more incredible as time goes on. There's obviously a hardcore effort by certain politicians to effect change. This 'vision' is exactly what's needed: The investigation (including rapid deployment of assets) and analysis of anomalies detected in space, air, sea and underwater as well as around nuclear facilities. Plus a side order of probing for similar, but hidden programs.
$20,000,000 for 2023 to achieve the above.
But isn't that like asking a junkyard dog to investigate, analyse and report suspicious activities, while liaising with other guard dogs in the neighbourhood? I know that's highly insulting, but I'm trying to emphasise the difference between trained individuals maintaining systems and an expectation of proactive research using unprovided skills, knowledge and experience. Blue Book suffered from those issues and the results varied depending on the mindset of the individual e.g. Ruppelt vs Quintanilla.
(Speaking of individual mindsets - Elizondo's account of his AATIP activities seems to be biased towards the ETH (which I am too), but without supporting evidence for the '5 observables'. It will be interesting to see how Elizondo's book compares to Ruppelt's.)
The U.S. is in unknown territory. Our democracy seems increasingly provisional. Congressional determination to get on top of the mystery may also need a few things one can never rely on -- time and luck.
In my experience there's also a general division between:
1. The managers (or politicians) at the top, with their vision, but usually lacking in specialist expertise.
2. A very limited number of subject matter experts.
3. A small army of staff maintaining or manning systems, working within rigid rules.
Okay for bureaucracy, but not the optimal mix to have when confronted by exceptional circumstances or significant change. It'll take them at least a year to get the correct reporting and lines of communication in place and then there's still no guarantee regarding the quality of output.
Creating fast-response teams, with the right skills, might never happen. It took Mellon to create SOCOM before special forces got the right support; fast-response AARO teams would need the same level of support to be effective because they'd be 'invading' the territory of every branch of the military (and they'll meet resistance).
I think we're fast approaching the equivalent of a New Deal moment, in terms of enormity of the challenge. But without sharper visual cues -- breadlines, shuttered banks, entire communities migrating to higher ground -- I'm not sure we have the incentive to properly mobilize for it. We'll know the DoD is on board only when and if it releases the videos we know it's been hoarding.
There's probably more than a couple of scenarios that could play out, all depending on what the reality of the 'hoarding' is though e.g.
1. Part of the clueless majority of the Pentagon bureaucracy gets on board and follows the Congressional directives - and the gatekeepers (with their hidden stash) lose control.
1.a. The gatekeepers abandon ship, taking all relevant info with them (or destroying it), leaving Congress to start from scratch.
2. The gatekeepers have positioned themselves to prevent any attempt by Congress to obtain good information through ARRO, possibly by classifying the good data beyond its reach - although any attempt to route (future) good data away, could be tracked down if examples of re-directed cases can be found (like cases known to be missing/removed from Blue Book).
Y'know, it's entirely conceivable that the WWII generation, which set the coverup in motion, may have already erased their original tracks. I'm thinking of the 1948 "Estimate of the Situation" from Project Sign that concluded the phenomenon was ET in origin. If the brass destroyed that documentation, as they apparently did, who knows the extent of the additional evidence they dispensed with. Reconstructing the original profile of this problem might well be mission impossible.
I've written a detailed breakdown of the crop of new UAP proposals that are advancing in Congress, which involve four different legislative vehicles; they include a number of significant provisions in addition to those described by Billy here. My article is here:
As Billy notes, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick is on board as the director of the Pentagon UAP office, as the Pentagon finally confirmed in a July 20, 2022 press release. I reported his selection on May 12, 2022, and put up a lengthy profile (which leaves many questions unanswered):
Intransigence, lack of accountability, and unfamiliarity with history. Good article spotlighting the trifecta that truth is up against. Of course there's also ufology's internecine warfare and a disinformation/denial program without peer -- but I'm sure everything's going to be fine.
There must be people hired just to come up with commission names - and the ridiculous acronyms. Similar to pharmaceutical companies which hire PR people to make up names hoping we would all remember when we go to the doctor and ask for more whatever-it-is.
I applaud you for being able to use and understand the names that distinguish one band of brothers from another.
If I knew how to get in on that racket, I'd never blog again.
🤑
You certainly have a talent for showing how disparate circumstances and characters are interconnected. (But, then, isn't everything?)
To quote The Bard and later the iconic English detective: "...the game is afoot." My concern is that we'll keep seeing new iterations of the task force every year or so after the latest Congress / Pentagon scrum breaks. Meanwhile the ball goes nowhere. How will anything get done if they're in perpetual organizational mode?
It almost looks like a cynical version of 'kick the can...'
(Meanwhile, former Naval aviator Ryan Graves said recently in an interview that active duty pilots are telling him they are frustrated and pissed by the lack of response from HQ after they file UAP close encounter reports. Why bother with the extra paper work if nothing comes of it?)
...
Yeah, I can say ARRO. "Me and my ARRO. Straighter than narrow. Wherever we go, everyone knows it's me and my ARRO."
"Everybody's talkin at me/I can't hear a word they're sayin..."
This is becoming more incredible as time goes on. There's obviously a hardcore effort by certain politicians to effect change. This 'vision' is exactly what's needed: The investigation (including rapid deployment of assets) and analysis of anomalies detected in space, air, sea and underwater as well as around nuclear facilities. Plus a side order of probing for similar, but hidden programs.
$20,000,000 for 2023 to achieve the above.
But isn't that like asking a junkyard dog to investigate, analyse and report suspicious activities, while liaising with other guard dogs in the neighbourhood? I know that's highly insulting, but I'm trying to emphasise the difference between trained individuals maintaining systems and an expectation of proactive research using unprovided skills, knowledge and experience. Blue Book suffered from those issues and the results varied depending on the mindset of the individual e.g. Ruppelt vs Quintanilla.
(Speaking of individual mindsets - Elizondo's account of his AATIP activities seems to be biased towards the ETH (which I am too), but without supporting evidence for the '5 observables'. It will be interesting to see how Elizondo's book compares to Ruppelt's.)
The U.S. is in unknown territory. Our democracy seems increasingly provisional. Congressional determination to get on top of the mystery may also need a few things one can never rely on -- time and luck.
In my experience there's also a general division between:
1. The managers (or politicians) at the top, with their vision, but usually lacking in specialist expertise.
2. A very limited number of subject matter experts.
3. A small army of staff maintaining or manning systems, working within rigid rules.
Okay for bureaucracy, but not the optimal mix to have when confronted by exceptional circumstances or significant change. It'll take them at least a year to get the correct reporting and lines of communication in place and then there's still no guarantee regarding the quality of output.
Creating fast-response teams, with the right skills, might never happen. It took Mellon to create SOCOM before special forces got the right support; fast-response AARO teams would need the same level of support to be effective because they'd be 'invading' the territory of every branch of the military (and they'll meet resistance).
I think we're fast approaching the equivalent of a New Deal moment, in terms of enormity of the challenge. But without sharper visual cues -- breadlines, shuttered banks, entire communities migrating to higher ground -- I'm not sure we have the incentive to properly mobilize for it. We'll know the DoD is on board only when and if it releases the videos we know it's been hoarding.
There's probably more than a couple of scenarios that could play out, all depending on what the reality of the 'hoarding' is though e.g.
1. Part of the clueless majority of the Pentagon bureaucracy gets on board and follows the Congressional directives - and the gatekeepers (with their hidden stash) lose control.
1.a. The gatekeepers abandon ship, taking all relevant info with them (or destroying it), leaving Congress to start from scratch.
2. The gatekeepers have positioned themselves to prevent any attempt by Congress to obtain good information through ARRO, possibly by classifying the good data beyond its reach - although any attempt to route (future) good data away, could be tracked down if examples of re-directed cases can be found (like cases known to be missing/removed from Blue Book).
Y'know, it's entirely conceivable that the WWII generation, which set the coverup in motion, may have already erased their original tracks. I'm thinking of the 1948 "Estimate of the Situation" from Project Sign that concluded the phenomenon was ET in origin. If the brass destroyed that documentation, as they apparently did, who knows the extent of the additional evidence they dispensed with. Reconstructing the original profile of this problem might well be mission impossible.
Yup.
They'd be hard pressed to make *everything* vanish though. Even a partial reconstruction could be world-changing.
I've written a detailed breakdown of the crop of new UAP proposals that are advancing in Congress, which involve four different legislative vehicles; they include a number of significant provisions in addition to those described by Billy here. My article is here:
https://douglasjohnson.ghost.io/probes-for-hidden-government-ufo-data-proposed-in-defense-and-intelligence-bills-now-advancing-in-congress-with-bipartisan-backing/
As Billy notes, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick is on board as the director of the Pentagon UAP office, as the Pentagon finally confirmed in a July 20, 2022 press release. I reported his selection on May 12, 2022, and put up a lengthy profile (which leaves many questions unanswered):
https://douglasjohnson.ghost.io/director-picked-for-new-pentagon-intelligence-office-to-study-unidentified-aerial-phenomena/
Douglas Dean Johnson
@ddeanjohnson
Intransigence, lack of accountability, and unfamiliarity with history. Good article spotlighting the trifecta that truth is up against. Of course there's also ufology's internecine warfare and a disinformation/denial program without peer -- but I'm sure everything's going to be fine.