SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the Close-Encounters-of-the-Federal-Kind dept.
Ex-official who revealed UFO project accuses Pentagon of 'disinformation' campaign
The former Pentagon official who went public about reports of UFOs has filed a complaint with the agency's inspector general claiming a coordinated campaign to discredit him for speaking out — including accusing a top official of threatening to tell people he was "crazy," according to documents reviewed by POLITICO.
Lue Elizondo, a career counterintelligence specialist who was assigned in 2008 to work for a Pentagon program that investigated reports of "unmanned aerial phenomena," filed the 64-page complaint to the independent watchdog on May 3 and has met several times with investigators, according to his legal team.
The claim that the government is trying to discredit him comes weeks before the director of national intelligence and the Pentagon are expected to deliver an unclassified report to Congress about UFOs and the government's strategy for investigating such encounters. The report is expected to include a detailed accounting of the agencies, personnel and surveillance systems that gather and analyze the data.
"What he is saying is there are certain individuals in the Defense Department who in fact were attacking him and lying about him publicly, using the color of authority of their offices to disparage him and discredit him and were interfering in his ability to seek and obtain gainful employment out in the world," said Daniel Sheehan, Elizondo's attorney. "And also threatening his security clearance."
Previously:
Pentagon's UFO Investigation Program Revealed
UFO Existence 'Proven Beyond Reasonable Doubt': Former Head Of Pentagon Program
Newly-Released Video Shows 2015 U.S. Navy Sighting of UFO
The US Navy is Drafting New Rules to Report UFO Sightings
US Navy Spokesman Acknowledges UFO Videos
The Pentagon Releases Official Footage of UFOs. No, Seriously!
The Pentagon Has Continued to Investigate UFOs Under Renamed Program
You Can Now Easily Download All CIA UFO Documents to Date
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday May 27 2021, @09:03PM (7 children)
Navy pilots describe encounters with UFOs [youtube.com] (13m47s)
Navy pilots recall “unsettling” 2004 UAP sighting [youtube.com] (6m45s)
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday May 27 2021, @09:19PM (5 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Thursday May 27 2021, @09:36PM (3 children)
Pilot eyewitness reports are potentially better than those from people on the ground. These military pilots can even maneuver to try to get closer to the "object" (passenger jets won't be doing that).
Anyway, it should be good enough for Runaway, who was in the Navy IIRC.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday May 27 2021, @10:17PM (1 child)
Yes, and no. In the pilot's favor, yes they are free to maneuver to get a better look at things they can't understand. And, they are trained to identify stuff in the sky. They aren't trained to interpret stuff that their eyes, their radar, and their cameras can't make sense of.
Within the scope of his training, you can probably believe most of what a pilot reports. Outside that scope, a pilot is just like anyone else. He is left floundering for explanations. When it comes to hi-tech, potentially alien technology, a Navy pilot is little more of an expert than you or me.
If a pilot comes back from a mission, and reports that he saw something that he can't explain, you can believe him without reservation.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday May 27 2021, @10:35PM
If it is "hi-tech" (drones or aliens), that's big news no matter which one it is. The skeptics don't believe this is highly technological at all, and are putting forward explanations such as weather balloons, distant passenger jets, oil rig flares, ball lightning, etc.
The pilots are gathering data with cameras, infrared sensors, etc., which is why we have these crappy videos. They are potentially seeing more than what the videos show too. Do they know if they are looking at a metallic or solid object?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Funny) by ilPapa on Friday May 28 2021, @04:00AM
I thought he was the navy guy in the Village People.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday May 28 2021, @06:23PM
Nobody wants to look at decades of history where American military pilots were indeed the first to see unidentified flying objects that turned out to be SA-2 or Mig-29 or all kinds of nifty weapons or weapons platforms.
Not like every time you fly but good odds that once per career the "MIB" are going to interview you and years or decades later you can publicly tell people you're the first American to see a SA-10 up close-ish or that Mig-27 ground attack thing or whatever.
They're trained to pay very close attention. Classic example from when I was a kid in the 80s, the Mig-23 was supposed to be super maneuverable according to the spy services, but that was more of a failed development project goal, Americans who actually watched -23 in flight noticed they had absolute shit stall performance and as such the non-suicidal pilots flew it with kid gloves low angle of attack all the time. This kind of observation is militarily important if your job is literally to shoot something like -23s down, so your tactics can assume if you push the 23 into high angle of attack flight scenario either you got an advantage or the 23 will withdraw or the 23 will enter a spin and crash itself as its stall performance is absolute shite. So to summarize a very long story, in the "early years" of combat flight sim you could tell if the programmers were gullible about bullshit and the 23 was more maneuverable than real life, or if the programmers were realistic and the -23 plane AI flew like a delta wing aka low angle of attack all the time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 31 2021, @09:54AM
videos have fairly mundane explanations. see article by phil plait (I *think* that's his name, you may know him as "the bad astronomer"): https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/navy-videos-showing-ufos-not-aliens [syfy.com]
stories told by pilots? not true unless backed up by actual evidence. also, I'll say a lot of things if you pay me enough for a book/movie deal. stephen colbert pointed out that if ufos are seen every day for two years in the late 2010s (that's what the matt damon character said in the 60 minutes video), then why not bring a fucking phone in at least one of the hundreds of days?!
bob lazar is an interesting fellow, because apparently he's not making money from his story. but he may just be a useful idiot: they probably showed him some toys to confuse the public through him. he certainly has no understanding of physics, no matter what joe rogan thinks of that.