"Nearly six months later, however, that new organization, with the unwieldy acronym of AOIMSG, is still staffing up, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told The War Zone Tuesday afternoon.
“We're still working to sufficiently staff that organization and get them into a battle rhythm," Kirby said."
A "battle rhythm"?!
Military bureaucrat speech.
This will be nothing but stage scenery set-up in front of the same brick wall that's been there for decades.
Let's get real. This is why no one in the House or Senate is REALLY going to push this issue hard.
“Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.” - Sen. Chuck ("The Schmuck") Schumer
And that is the same reason that LE and Mellon are just role playing. Were they actually not playing on the same team as the intel agencies they would both be dead by now.
Interesting that he says he knows more, but can't say; which suggests a briefing including some classified material. Yet he states unequivocally that there's been a cover-up by the DoD. But he also believes there's zero to no chance of the truth coming out.
Saying it's all about the security implications and gathering data. But if security is the final word then there really is zero to no chance of the public learning anything significant.
Is there any truth to Mr Elizondo's claim that Garry Reid stovepiped his UFO data, *after* failed attempts to talk to Mattis? Elizondo's 'portfolio' must have been assigned to him by someone else, someone who has never been identified (as far as I'm aware). Surely that individual kept AATIP reports and copies of emails, all of which could be FOIA'd, even if it was in redacted form. AATIP was supposed to have been active after Elizondo left, so one would expect its 5 years worth of records to exist somewhere.
Doesn't the public deserve the smallest of peeks, given that we're not going to see anything significant from the short-lived UAPTF or the DoD's AOIMSG?
How does Chris Mellon square his past association with TTSA and it's objective of educating the public, against the apparent necessity of keeping UAP data secret? Is he for public disclosure, or military security with government oversight?
What would a politician's duty be if (theoretically) confronted with classified information showing an object from space landing on Earth and returning to space? Could they say 'there is irrefutable evidence of a technology doing such and such', thereby not compromising sources or methods? Have we heard that yet? Or would the duty of any government be to keep that information from other governments (and therefore its own citizens as well)?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/first-ufo-hearing-in-over-50-years-to-be-held-by-congress-next-week
"Nearly six months later, however, that new organization, with the unwieldy acronym of AOIMSG, is still staffing up, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told The War Zone Tuesday afternoon.
“We're still working to sufficiently staff that organization and get them into a battle rhythm," Kirby said."
A "battle rhythm"?!
Military bureaucrat speech.
This will be nothing but stage scenery set-up in front of the same brick wall that's been there for decades.
Billy looks like the hearings are going to happen: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/10/us/politics/ufo-sightings-house-hearing.html
Let's get real. This is why no one in the House or Senate is REALLY going to push this issue hard.
“Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.” - Sen. Chuck ("The Schmuck") Schumer
And that is the same reason that LE and Mellon are just role playing. Were they actually not playing on the same team as the intel agencies they would both be dead by now.
Being a Brit I didn't know anything about Burchett and I found a short interview of his on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pLIiUv-p8k
Interesting that he says he knows more, but can't say; which suggests a briefing including some classified material. Yet he states unequivocally that there's been a cover-up by the DoD. But he also believes there's zero to no chance of the truth coming out.
YouTube followed on with this interview with Chris Mellon from last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8a_wKO-uVs
Saying it's all about the security implications and gathering data. But if security is the final word then there really is zero to no chance of the public learning anything significant.
Is there any truth to Mr Elizondo's claim that Garry Reid stovepiped his UFO data, *after* failed attempts to talk to Mattis? Elizondo's 'portfolio' must have been assigned to him by someone else, someone who has never been identified (as far as I'm aware). Surely that individual kept AATIP reports and copies of emails, all of which could be FOIA'd, even if it was in redacted form. AATIP was supposed to have been active after Elizondo left, so one would expect its 5 years worth of records to exist somewhere.
Doesn't the public deserve the smallest of peeks, given that we're not going to see anything significant from the short-lived UAPTF or the DoD's AOIMSG?
How does Chris Mellon square his past association with TTSA and it's objective of educating the public, against the apparent necessity of keeping UAP data secret? Is he for public disclosure, or military security with government oversight?
What would a politician's duty be if (theoretically) confronted with classified information showing an object from space landing on Earth and returning to space? Could they say 'there is irrefutable evidence of a technology doing such and such', thereby not compromising sources or methods? Have we heard that yet? Or would the duty of any government be to keep that information from other governments (and therefore its own citizens as well)?