By Steve Yarwood
First published 18th May 2022
The long-awaited day finally arrived. 17th May 2022 will go down in not just UFO history but history itself as the date the first congressional hearing on UFO’s was held for more than 50 years. I didn’t have the opportunity to make in depth notes but until I can get hold of a decent transcript, I will just set out some of the things scribbled down I deemed important.
Both Under Secretary of Defence for Intelligence and Security, Ronald Moultrie and Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence, Scott Bray gave testimony. These gentlemen will be overseeing the setting up and running of the Pentagons new task force, after the Intelligence report on UAPs in 2021, that will be overseeing the investigation into UAPs. AOIMSG aka the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronisation group.
The AOIMSG is finally setting up a formal reporting process that, at least to my understanding and to yesterday’s rhetoric, will allow pilots and military personnel to be seen as witnesses and not “kooks”, thus enabling more witnesses to come forward, allow more data to be collected to better understand the UAP phenomena and its possible risks or threat.
Since the beginnings of modern UFO sightings back in the forties both pilots and military personnel have faced a terrible stigma to a point the majority would not consider filing a report because of career limiting threats. Because of this much collectable data has been lost. During the hearing, Andre Carson (Chairman of the Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation Subcommittee) hit the nail on the head when he said that the stigma had “gotten in the way of good intelligence reporting.
By now removing this stigma to the reporting of UFO/UAP sightings/encounters The Pentagon hopes the increased reporting will increase data and now actively encourages all military personnel to make the report. Again, within the hearing, Scott Bray said “The message is clear: If you see something. Report it.”
I was hoping there would be more involvement from civilian organisations, but Ronald Moultrie dismissed this when he said that organisations, civilians or other countries could spread or promote false images or encounters. These intentional red herrings would be harmful to the AOIMSGs investigations. He said “Anything that diverts us off with what we have…sends us off on spurious chases and hunts that are not helpful. They also contribute to the undermining of the confidence of the Congress and the American people have.”
The database for this collectible data is obviously going to grow. From 2004 – 2021 there were 144 unexplained UAP encounters that could not be explained away and they were not tricks of the light or faulty sensor data and during the hearing Bray said, “It’s clear that many of the sightings are physical objects based on the data we have.”
Both Bray and Moultrie noted that these many unexplained sightings are potentially hazardous. Bray stated that whilst there had been no collisions there have been at least 11 near misses between UAPs and aircraft and also that the database numbers have now risen to about 400 unexplained sightings. Some of these reports were either historical or anecdotal and he believes these numbers will drop over time. He was also quizzed whether we had wreckage of these UAPs to which Bray said no.
The Pentagon had declassified a video clip of a spherical object whizzing past a pilot’s canopy at high speed whilst he was flying on a training exercise. Bray admitted “I do not have an explanation for what this object is.”
A clip and images were also shown of flying triangles. This was explained as “drones”. The triangular image was caused by the way the single lensed reflex camera resolved the image after photographing/videoing the object through a night vision scope. For me the jury is out on this until I see the details of the experiment that was said to have been done to prove this was indeed the case.
During Brays opening statements he acknowledged that UAPs represented a serious hazard and were potential national security threats. Later on, Andre Carson (who quite impressed me) stated that UAPs “are real, they need to be investigated, and the many threats they pose need to be investigated.”
Rick Crawford warned of dangerous implications to American National security if any of the UAPs were to be a “technical surprise” from foreign nations such as China or Russia.
Mr Carson repeatedly pressed both Bray and Moultrie about being more transparent with the public unlike previous programs that were continually shrouded in secrecy. They replied that they would be as open and transparent as allowable but would be unable to declassify anything that may pose a risk to national security. Moultrie put forward the point that the Pentagon had in fact disclosed more information in the past three or four months on various events than it had in the last ten years. But, call me cynical as it didn’t take long before we were back to old chestnuts of “not being able to answer because of lack of data” and of course answers only being able to be given in the “classified section” of the briefing.
Which brings me to a few little niggles regarding openness.
Another stand out Congressman was Mike Gallagher. This guy either was interested in the subject or had done his homework. One of the famous historic UFO encounters was in 1967 where it’s been claimed that a UFO shut down 10 nuclear missiles at Malmstrom Air Force Base. Captain Robert Sallas and a number of nuclear weapon specialist personnel have gone on record to state this happened and that the UFO/UAP phenomena has at various times interfered with the United States’ atomic weapons systems.
So, I was mighty impressed when Mr Gallagher asked about this during the hearing the reply from Scott Bray was that he had not “seen the official data”.
The following exchange from that reply was interesting to say the least:
“You’re the guys investigating it who else is doing it?” asked a frustrated Congressman Gallagher.
In an effort to placate the congressman Ronald Moultrie said that if they got an official request to investigate the case then they will “take a look.”
To which Mr Gallagher snapped “I am bringing it to your attention, this is pretty official”
Brilliant. Whether this was further discussed in the classified section of the hearing I have no idea.
Another point raised in the hearing was that if the United States was seeing more UFO sightings then surely so must other countries like Russia and China. This was also closed down and put aside to be discussed in the “closed session”
Another interesting issue was brought up by Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi. This time an issue relating to Unidentified Submerged Objects (USOs). Mr Krishnamoorthi asked if there were sensors that were designed to detect these submerged objects? To which Mr Moultrie said it would have to be discussed in the classified “closed session”.
All in all, on the surface it seems like a good way of going forward. But, as many people who know me point out, I’m old and cynical. I have an awful feeling that due to this being delivered in such a high profile way the “openness and transparency” we will get will be only for explainable sightings and the “good stuff” may end up behind an even bigger wall of secrecy. I mean, after all,.this was a congressional hearing. Was there not better footage than the unexplained canopy footage perhaps something with better imaging. Its presentation was a bit of a joke. Millions of dollars spent on sensor and radar technology but pretty much unable to use a basic video player. Would it not have been easier to have prepared a screenshot of the frame they were trying to find then present that after the video was shown instead of embarrassingly taking forever to attempt to use frame by frame. To quote Douglas Adams creation Zaphod Beeblebrox, “Okay. So, ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, huh?”
I admit I may have missed a few things as I was distracted a few times during the stream but I’m pretty sure that whilst the Space Force was mentioned the Air Force didn’t seem to be and I find that odd. But I will double check when I get chance to rewatch or read a transcript and If I am wrong…then I’m wrong.
I’m also pretty sure that after Mr Gallaghers attempt to get blood from a stone regarding the Malmstrom incident and Mr Moultries statement against diversions that I can’t see this new task force getting involved with historical cases. Roswell has pretty much been done to death and the Air Force signalled it as “case closed”. But what about, for instance the Cash/Landrum case 1980, Phoenix Lights 1997, O’Hare International Airport 2006, Washington Incident 1952 and JAL Flight 1628 1986. Are all these going to be now forgotten about because we have a new era with a new task force.
Whichever way we look at this we are left with one constant. We will only find out about what they want us to find out. Admittedly every so often we will get a piece of footage, or a picture released which will more often than not have a most prosaic explanation for us to take on board but I guarantee if a high resolution close up shot of some advanced military tech or a craft of certain extra-terrestrial origin gets taken then this will be locked behind the steel walls of bureaucracy for time immemorial. All we know for certain is something that we within the UFO field have known for years is that it is a serious subject and now the Pentagon are ostensibly saying so. For all I know just the very statement and act of all this could still be nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
