PENTAGON IN CRISIS OVER UFO DEBRIS DISCLOSURE -

WEAPONS PROGRAMS USED AS COVER FOR STUDYING MATERIAL

 

March 2021

 

 

The US Pentagon is in a communications crisis, scrambling to explain away how it is that one of its own agencies, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has publicly confirmed the testing of debris from Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs.) Through a recent official response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for results on the study of recovered debris from UFOs, over 150 pages of technical documents were received by this author on possible ways to use strange, futuristic materials. This material, inspired by UFO debris analysis, has the potential to control the speed of light, remember its original shape when deformed, and can promote the invisibility of objects. See the original article here.

 

The ensuing controversy over the released information has directly pitted the Defense Intelligence Agency (whose FOIA Chief has repeatedly confirmed his accurate response to the FOIA) against those of a Pentagon spokesperson. She has issued a brief statement that says that the reports released relate to weapons research, not to UFOs. In so doing, she has exposed the fact that recovered UFO debris has inspired material that has been "folded into" existing advanced weapons and aerospace materials applications research programs. A staffer indicates that fending off the sheer volume of inquiries that the Pentagon has received from media and the public has fueled more chaos. And having to strategize their next promised statement on the matter must add to this even further.

 

PENTAGON'S DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO "BACKPEDAL" THE UFO DEBRIS FOIA

 

The Pentagon had become aware of the global interest in the original story on this matter. They are now contradicting one of their most important agencies, their intelligence agency, and trying do major "backpedaling." Responding to a civilian inquiry on the matter, a representative for the Pentagon, Susan Gough, said in a short statement that though she is "aware of the social media chatter," the information provided by the DIA actually relates in some way to an "advanced weapons program" and not UFO items. Responding to an American Military News request for comment, a DIA public affairs staff said that they could not provide further public statement on the disclosed materials, but that the DIA plans to eventually make their (presumably fuller) response to the FOIA request publicly available on the DIA FOIA website.

 

DIA CONFIRMS THEY WERE REFERENCING UFOS
 

However, Defense Intelligence Agency Chief of FOIA Steven Tumiski, who released the UFO debris information, is proud of his work product, including what he considers the thoroughness in his fulfillment of the FOIA request. He has repeatedly insisted, including in official replies, that the DIA has been responsive to the controversial FOIA request. Curiously, after his release of the documents to me and this story first broke, he has not returned my outreach to him. If he recants or changes his story, this would be clear evidence that he had been influenced by his superiors.

Pentagon Spokesperson Gough cannot speak with any authority to anything on this matter because she was not privy to the FOIA request when it was residing with the DIA. Her office was not aware at the time that the FOIA did not mention or refer to anything related to "advanced weaponry" nor to aircraft alloys or aerospace metals. The request in fact only mentioned UFO debris "found as flotsam, shot-off, or crashed material" recovered by the 

Department of Defense. It names the private contractor understood to hold the material in specialized facilities (Bigelow Aerospace) and it further specified what type of test results were sought on such anomalous material.

 

Here is the original FOIA request that was filed with the DIA, and here is the official reply document sent back from the DIA Chief of FOIA.

They both clearly and only reference the words: "UFO", "Unidentified Flying Objects", "Bigelow Aerospace" (an involved defense contractor), and UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) "tests" and "debris". At no time whatsoever does the request or reply ever mention "weapons programs" material as the Pentagon Spokesperson wishes to maintain in desperate explanation.

There is more evidence that the Pentagon fulfilled a request for UFO debris and not simply for something prosaic, like aircraft alloy, as the Pentagon now wishes to claim:

 

  • The DIA attached over 150 pages of technical reports on exotic functional materials. One of these materials was Nitinol and its advantage as a "memory metal" -- similar to some of the debris found at the UFO crash at Roswell. Rather than detailing potential use in weapons, it encourages exploration of further use for medical and dental applications. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "advanced weaponry" as the Pentagon Spokesperson states these FOIA documents do.

 

  • In addition to the FOIA request and DIA reply, there are a series of supporting emails between the DIA and this author, seen here.

 

The DIA Chief is clear in these emails that what is being discussed relates to the testing of UFO debris and does not relate in any way to a request for information on "advanced weapons" programs, as maintained now by the Pentagon. Only UFOs are discussed, never weapons.

Driving home this point is one particular "bombshell" email from the DIA Chief (in the email thread linked to above, this email is dated Wednesday, January 6, 2021 12:46 PM) which leaves no doubt whatsoever that the Pentagon is lying that the reports relate to weapons. It also confirms phone conversations between this author and the DIA on the FOIA.

  • And in a telephone conversation between this author and the DIA FOIA Chief in early January seeking status on the awaited FOIA reply, I reiterated to him the meaning of the FOIA and explained to him that I was not seeking information on any materials work known to or developed by man -- I was referring specifically to UFO test debris results. I was confirming in real time exactly what was written in my FOIA request to him.

 

No reasonable person could possibly confuse the two things. If you are asking for technical information on debris from UFOs, you would not then be sent technical information on aircraft alloys.

 

PENTAGON SPOKESPERSON'S CONCERNING PAST
AND HER ATTEMPTS TO DISCREDIT
 
 
Susan Gough,
Pentagon Spokesperson
and Strategic Planner

Ms. Gough is experienced in propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, and opposing information to polarize public opinion. Her past experience reveals this, as does what she is currently doing:

 

  • She refuses to contact me about the matter after I have sent several emails to her. She has, however, selectively communicated with others inquiring about the issue. Not only is it appalling for her to ignore me, it indicates that she does not wish to deal with me directly while she plots her next public move.

 

  • She refers to me in her statement as "social chatter" of which the Pentagon is "aware". This is a not-so-subtle attempt to belittle what I say as "chatter" and intimidate me by indicating their "awareness" of me.

 

  • She states in a questioning way that the FOIA documents I have presented "appear" to be genuine. They do not "appear" to be genuine, but are in fact genuine. This is reflective of her known ability to craft messages to discredit and obscure. It is also revealed by her background as a paid intelligence consultant and hired gun:

 ​

  • Prior to her role as Pentagon Spokesperson, she was employed by Booze, Allen and Hamilton in the DC area. They are a multibillion-dollar defense contractor and high-end consulting firm to many of our nation's military and intelligence agencies.

 

  • She helped lead the firm's Psychological Operations consulting practice. Such operations "convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately their behavior." A graduate of the US Army War College, she possesses a graduate degree in Strategic Studies.

  • Gough appears to be the Pentagon's Public Affairs "point person" on the subject of UFOS and on the subject of advanced military technologies. She has single-handedly confused the issue of government involvement in such matters perhaps more than anyone in government today. Simply Google her name and "UFO" or "AATIP" for her history of ambiguous and confusing statements.

 

It is possible that Gough herself has no idea that such ET research has been folded into -- and often works under the guise of -- aeronautical materials research. Although she holds security clearances with full scope polygraph, she has no need to have been read into the Roswell program nor the exploitation of UFO crash debris. She says what she is told.

 

SOME REPORTS SENT WERE ALREADY MADE PUBLIC

 

It has been pointed out that some of the technology reports can be found prior to their FOIA release on a few obscure science and paranormal sites in the recent past, with allusions that the reports related to advanced military and aerospace materials research.

 

The fact remains that these same reports were sent in direct response to a FOIA request on UFO debris study. It solidly connects the two. It furthers the case for ET metals research being conducted under the guise of, and to benefit, "military metals" research.

 

Some of this technical information is out there -- and should be out there. The technology transfer of lessons learned from ET material study has already occurred. And it continues. Controlled release of such technical information spurs innovation, and ultimately seeps benefit to the private sector. These documents were formerly for official use only and circulated among select theoretical physicists in academia contracted by government. Once they were deemed suitable for general release, they were "trickled out" to larger audiences.

 

HOW THE COVERUP WORKS

 

Retrieved UFO debris study is being conducted under the cover of advanced weapons and aerospace materials research programs. This use of scientists within the private sector and in academia to learn more about ET-related technical matters has long been suspected by many researchers. And the reply received by the DIA now confirms this. The scientists given grants to work on this research and to generate these reports do not know (nor should they know) the extraterrestrial impetus or origin of their work. Much of their work represents the continuation of work begun decades before they were even born.

 

THE EMERGING TRUTH

 

Both the Pentagon and the DIA are correct: They have "blended" or "laundered" research on extraterrestrial material into applications for military use. They are studying UFO debris under the cover of "materials research for defense applications". They have integrated them to obscure the truth: these materials represent our best efforts at replicating them to the military's advantage.

 

  • Such technical reports do not mention "Roswell" or "alien" as some would naively like them to. It is extraneous and irrelevant to such materials research work and would never be included in such a report.

 

  • The very first ways that technical information derived from ET materials would be used, would be in military and aerospace applications.

 
Conceptual Craft with
"Shape Shifter" Materials
  • Various program names have been used over the years such as Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), Advanced Aerospace Weapons Systems Applications program (AAWSA), and Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF), to further confuse the mission of these programs. At various points in time, these programs could involve UFO study, weapons research, or airborne enemy threats, allowing the Pentagon to answer an inquiry in a number of ways.

 

Despite efforts by the Pentagon to "spin" the importance of these UFO documents, they remain the best official written evidence ever received confirming alien visitation. And one thing is certain: they will continue to develop reasons and excuses to explain away the truth.

By Anthony Bragalia

(Copyright 2020)

 

May Be Reproduced With Permission and Attribution