SHOOTING THE MESSENGER: DIRTY TRICKS OR SIMPLE CONFUSION?
MANY FOLLOWERS OF the UAP subject woke up on 27th April 2021 to a flurry of Twitter posts regarding Senator Harry Reid’s letter in response to an earlier statement from the Pentagon “confirming” Luis Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), regarded by many as America’s UFO programme. The official “confirmation”, swiftly contradicted by Senator Reid’s rebuke in the form of a letter listing Luis Elizondo’s involvement and leadership role within AATIP, was simply the latest in a long line of statements emanating from the Pentagon which have been designed to muddy the waters, sow confusion, deny everything or downright trash the reputation of an American patriot, depending on one’s point of view.
Senator Reid’s letter (dated 26th April 2020), for those who have not yet seen it, read as follows:
“To whom it may concern:
As the United States Senate Majority Leader, I worked with Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and Democratic Senator Dan Inouye of Hawaii to secure $22 million of funding for what would become known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), an unclassified but unpublicized investigatory effort dedicated to studying Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon.
As one of the original sponsors of AATIP, I can state as a matter of record Lue Elizondo’s involvement and leadership role in this program. Mr. Elizondo is a former intelligence officer who has spent his career working tirelessly in the shadows on secretive national security matters, including investigating UAPs as the head of AATIP. He performed these duties admirably.”
Why did Harry Reid feel it necessary to write and issue such a statement? You only had to wind the clock back a couple of hours to find the answer. NBC’s Gadi Schwartz reported earlier on 26th April that a spokesperson for the Office of the Secretary of Defense had confirmed to him that Luis Elizondo “had no assigned responsibilities for the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) while he was assigned to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security.”
It’s not as this is the first time that Luis Elizondo’s position or even existence within AATIP has been questioned or refuted by Pentagon spokespeople. They have form for this sort of thing. All organisations seek to limit the reputational damage that embarrassing leaks and revelations can cause and can hide inconvenient facts from seeing the light of day. They often attempt to control the narrative in such circumstances. However, when the tactics include actively trying to discredit the reputation of whistleblowers or individuals who draw attention to things that organisations don’t want anyone to know about, then they’ve crossed a line. When they start shooting the messenger, that speaks volumes. It’s a tacit admission of defeat, that they’ve actually got something to hide, and this is the only course of action they have left in their arsenal. The Pentagon, or maybe an agency or special access program (SAP) it has devolved the UAP issue to, has a dirty little secret tucked away somewhere, and they don’t want anyone to know that it even exists, let alone what it is.
Let’s have a look at what some might say is the tawdry history of how various Pentagon spokespersons have confirmed, denied and prevaricated over the issue of Luis Elizondo’s role at AATIP. For those who believe in transparency and accuracy, it’s not going to be a pleasant read. However, those of us who keep tabs on the UAP issue and how the US government reacts to questions about it should not be too surprised. After all, the Pentagon does not appear to be able to keep its story straight on this either, as numerous commentators have confirmed since news of AATIP broke in December 2017.
The New York Times article published on 16th December 2017 saw the first mention of Luis Elizondo in connection with AATIP, with the story even going as far as to refer to him as an intelligence officer who ran the programme. This was followed up by Bryan Bender over at Politico, who confirmed what the NYT had stated and included quotes from Elizondo about “scores of unexplained sightings by Navy pilots and other observers of aircraft with capabilities far beyond what is currently considered aerodynamically possible.” Bender’s article quoted Pentagon spokesperson Dana White, who told him that AATIP did indeed exist, and yes, Luis Elizondo had ran the programme. However, she could not confirm just how long he had been in charge of it.
However, the first signs of the Pentagon back-tracking on this initial statement appeared around eighteen months later, and via an indirect source. Keith Kloor, noted debunker and contributor to The Intercept, claimed in an article dated 1st June 2019 and published on the website, that there was “no discernible evidence that Luis Elizondo ever worked for a government UFO program, much less led one.” Clearly someone was trying to mislead the public about what was happening. Had the New York Times got their story completely wrong? Was the former career intelligence officer spinning a line? Or could it be that Keith Kloor was incorrect, or had been fed misinformation?
Kloor’s cue came from Pentagon spokesperson Christopher Sherwood, who while confirming the existence of AATIP and its role, rowed back on the previous comment made about Elizondo. “Mr. Elizondo had no responsibilities with regard to the AATIP program while he worked in the Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (OUSDI), up until the time he resigned effective 10/4/2017.” Sherwood also informed Kloor that he could not confirm [Dana] White’s earlier statement. Asked how the spokesperson knew Elizondo had not worked for AATIP during his time with OUSDI, Sherwood claimed he spoke with “leadership” there, including several individuals who had been in place when the former intelligence officer started working there in 2008.
The article also reported that White, a Trump appointee, had resigned earlier that year amid claims of misconduct. It seemed as though there was a concerted effort underway to deny Elizondo’s connection with AATIP, his role within the programme, and even undermine the Pentagon’s own previous statement on both points. Whilst White was criticised for misconduct whilst in office, and legitimately so, it appeared that these actions were being used to discredit the former intelligence officer by her previous admissions that he was in charge of AATIP.
Sherwood’s statement appeared to be at odds with a so-called “bigot list” memo from Senator Harry Reid, dated 24th June 2009. A copy had been obtained by KLAS 8 News Now in Las Vegas, who released the leaked memo in July 2018, almost a year before the publication of Kloor’s article. The AATIP “bigot list”, a circulation list showing which people the memo was addressed to and could be read by, was attached to a letter sent by Sr. Reid to William Lynn III, Deputy Secretary of Defense in June 2009. Eleven names were listed under the heading “FY 10 Preliminary Bigoted List of Government Personnel”, Deputy Secretary Lynn’s name was listed along with Senators Reid and Inouye. The other eight were redacted, along with the three names under the heading “FY 10 Preliminary Bigoted List of Contractor Personnel funded under the ATTIP”. The term “Bigot” was originally a security classification regarding details relating to the date, time, location of and planning for the Normandy Landings in June 1944. It was higher than “Top Secret” and included a list of Allied personnel who had been cleared for access.
However, on 4th June 2019, just days after Keith Kloor’s article dropped, George Knapp released a further version of the same “bigot list” with two more names revealed. One was the last of the three under “FY 10 Preliminary Bigoted List of Contractor Personnel funded under the ATTIP”, and this was Doctor Hal Puthoff, BAASS (CTR). BAASS was Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, which was granted the Defense Intelligence Agency’s Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) in 2008. The DIA set up AAWSAP the previous year and then drafted its specification and a solicitation for a contractor. According to the statement of objectives, Bigelow Aerospace’s AAWSAP was contracted by the DIA to complete advanced aerospace weapon system technical studies in twelve separate areas, including propulsion, control, materials, configuration and signature reduction. UFOs are not mentioned anywhere. AATIP was created inside AAWSAP to focus on the military UAP cases, as there were indications that certain sections of the US government were uncomfortable with AAWSAP investigating potential “demonic” occurrences.
Former head of AATIP, Luis Elizondo pic via Mystery Wire
Number 10 on the list of “Preliminary Bigoted List of Government Personnel” was one Special Agent Luis Elizondo, USDI (Gov’t). John Greenewald, Jr. at The Black Vault asked the Pentagon to comment on the ATTIP “bigot list” memo and the inclusion of Elizondo’s name. He reported on 14th June 2019 that Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough (pronounced “Goff”) had told him “I can confirm that the memo you’re referring to is authentic. DoD received it and responded to Senator Reid. (…) It makes no change to previous statements. Mr. Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for AATIP while he was in OUSDI.” Two weeks after Kloor’s “revelations”, the new Pentagon spokesperson was effectively parroting Sherwood’s earlier denial that Luis Elizondo was part of AATIP.
Or was she? Note the inclusion of the word “assigned”. Not only do organisations seek to control the narrative, but they often do also so by being clever with terminology and phraseology. Sherwood did not use this word in his reply to Keith Kloor. Susan Gough is reviled by many who follow the UAP issue, but she must have demonstrated an ability to do the job otherwise the Pentagon would not have assigned her to this role. The inclusion of this word is presumably not by accident. Replies – especially those sent to UAP researchers and even debunkers – can be and are scrutinised thoroughly to pick out discrepancies and possible meanings beyond the obvious. They will undoubtedly go through numerous revisions, checks and sign-offs from various unnamed individuals above Gough’s pay grade before she can hit the “send” button. Did Luis Elizondo have “non-assigned roles” within AATIP, which if correct would be true under the wording of Gough’s reply? It was of course possible, but leading and running the programme would be classed as an “assigned role”. Surely an individual, even one with a skill-set such as Luis Elizondo, presumably could not simply walk into an unadvertised programme such as AATIP and take charge without someone noticing – or objecting?
Susan Gough’s reply to The Black Vault’s John Greenewald did not seem to make any sense. She flatly refused to acknowledge Elizondo’s participation in AATIP, even though her words confirmed the authenticity of the memo that George Knapp had released. However, Gough elaborated on her statement to The Black Vault, which appeared to explain the former intelligence officer’s position vis-à-vis AATIP. “DIA administered ATTIP, and Elizondo was never assigned to DIA. Elizondo did interact with the DIA office managing the program while the program was still ongoing, but he did not lead it.” In essence, according to Susan Gough, Luis Elizondo had dealings with the DIA personnel who oversaw AATIP, but he did not run the programme itself.
The word “interact” could cover a multitude of sins. A cynic may suggest that the Pentagon were confirming Luis Elizondo’s participation in AATIP without actually going as far as to categorically say so on the record, giving that their previous statements had essentially backed them into a corner. Assigning meaning to individual words in an email is however to venture down a rabbit hole. Let’s simply read what Dr. Puthoff, one of the contracted personnel on the AATIP “bigot list” had to say on the subject after John Greenewald contacted him for comment on Susan Gough’s statement. “I have no problem asserting that as an AAWSAP/AATIP Contractor & Senior Advisor, I continued to attend meetings, provide briefings, gain access to videos, provide Proposed Program plans, meet with staff, etc., all under the aegis of Elizondo’s leadership and responsibility for maintaining continuity of the Program effort and goals until he resigned.” Dr. Puthoff also suggested that the Public Affairs Office, responsible for handling media and public enquiries, was not always aware, or were “sketchy” about matters involving highly-classified and sensitive programmes which they had no access to, or knowledge of, for valid national security reasons.
Three months later, in September 2019, Swedish researcher Roger Glassel contacted the Pentagon, asking ten questions about AATIP and also Luis Elizondo’s role within the organisation. Number nine read: “In the Navy’s effort to study reports of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, was former DOD/OUSDI employee Luis Elizondo involved in such effort?” Joseph Gradisher, official spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare, replied with the following: “While he was a U.S. Government employee, Mr. Elizondo occasionally provided coordination and professional connections/liaison within DoD and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.” That would fall under the definition of “interact” but was still light years away from Dana White’s original confirmation that Luis Elizondo was part of AATIP and did indeed run the whole effort.
The Drive’s Tyler Rogoway stated in an article dated 23rd March 2020 that his experiences with the Public Affairs Office’s Susan Gough was the worst he had “with any of the Department of Defense’s public affairs personnel, ever.” Although his own questions did not concern Luis Elizondo or his role in AATIP, Rogoway was not happy with his own interactions with Gough. After a fairly lengthy period of time awaiting responses from her, he still had received no meaningful reply. I include this aside as evidence that the issue of whether Luis Elizondo was part of AATIP is not the only subject on which researchers and journalists have a beef with the Pentagon’s spokespeople, and Susan Gough in particular. If the focus on one individual at the PAO seems unfair, that is because someone has decided that every request regarding UAPs sent to the Department of Defense is funnelled to her, and her alone. According to Tyler Rogoway, “the services no longer had control of their own messaging on the matter. Why this decision was made has not been made clear.”
Luis Elizondo answered a series of journalists’ questions at a media event on 20th April 2021. Including among their number was NBC’s Gadi Schwartz, who asked about the process involved in requesting documents and understanding the process that took place. He also asked whether Susan Gough held any of these details. The answer Mr. Elizondo regarding the latter was clear. “No, because she is a Public Affairs Officer and not operationally engaged. Her job is to simply communicate with the media and the public. And unfortunately, sometimes that communication hasn’t been very consistently delivered in the past. But that’s neither here nor there.”
Part 1 of 3: Luis Elizondo answers questions from the United States mainstream press. Available on Mystery Wire YouTube channel, together with parts 2 and 3.
Inevitably, Gadi Schwartz reached out to Susan Gough for comment about Luis Elizondo’s position within AATIP and received the now standard line about how the former intelligence officer had no assigned responsibilities within the programme. Senator Reid then dropped his bombshell hours later. Will Gough change her tune? Based on previous replies to researchers, it’s doubtful, even in the face of evidence that suggests what she is saying is inaccurate at the very least. One thing is for sure – the issue of Luis Elizondo’s participation in and position at AATIP is not going away any time soon. Requests to the Public Affairs Office for confirmation and explanation of Mr. Elizondo’s role will no doubt increase after the amount of media exposure this latest debacle has unleashed, and the furore it has caused on UFO Twitter. Susan Gough’s inbox will in all likelihood soon be overflowing with emails asking why her recent statement was totally refuted by the former Senate Majority Leader.
We await the next official proclamation on Luis Elizondo’s status – or lack of it – within AATIP but aren’t holding our collective breaths that it will confirm what we have known or suspected for some time now. “Pursue, Discuss and Engage” is Lue’s mantra. Researchers may have a dim view of Susan Gough, but we need continuing engagement with Public Affairs to discuss the UAP issue as that is the only current route for official answers, and when those are not forthcoming, or there’s a suspicion their spokespeople are dodging the issue, we need to pursue them further.
Luis Elizondo deserves better treatment by the organisation that once employed him.
