THE LIES THAT RULES THE WEB - PART 3
The final part of our examination of the multiple inconsistencies in the Pentagon’s handling of the UAP subject and specifically the role of Luis Elizondo within AATIP.
Luis Elizondo, former head of the Advanced Aerial Threat Identification Program (AATIP) until his resignation in 2017. via MysteryWire.com
May, 2020
In the May of 2020, we see support of the contradicted Pentagon conclusions by Tim McMillan. Dr Eric Davis, Ph.D. was asked by Steven Greenstreet on his Basement Office YouTube channel about his time investigating UAP for the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) at the Department of Defense.
*Susan Gough and others since 2017 have repeatedly claimed AATIP shut down in 2012.
Dr. Davis stated that AATIP was UAP and never shut down, that it is still in operation today under a new name and that he personally is still doing contract work for this program under OUSD(I). In May we also saw Roger Glassel focuse his attention to the terminology of Anomalous Aerial Vehicles (A.A.V.) and it’s significance to the Navy. Keep in mind the Nimitz (2004) reported released by George Knapp in 2018 which uses A.A.V. terminology.
Roger Glassel: In the Navy’s effort to investigate sightings of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) is there a centralized office, program or council, that analyse such sightings?
Susan Gough: Under the cognizance of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (USD(I)), there is an interagency team charged with gathering data and conducting investigations into range incursions. As the preponderance of recent/reported sightings are from naval aviators, the Navy is leading much of the effort. All reports of range incursions are sent to this team for inclusion in the overall effort, thus maximizing the data available for analysis.
Roger Glassel: Are the Navy using the term Anomalous Aerial Vehicles, AAV, in relation to investigation of UAP incursions?
Susan Gough: When an observed object is NOT immediately identifiable, the Navy/DOD refers to it as UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena). The generic term UAP is used in communications to avoid pre-judging the results of any investigation. If we are able to identify the object, we would use the appropriate term. For example, a quadcopter would be referred to as an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) or Unmanned Aerial System (UAS). The U.S. Navy does not use the term “Anomalous Aerial Vehicles.”
One year later and Susan Gough regurgitated Joseph Gradisher and used the exact same emphasis on ‘NOT’ immediately identified, that suggests these objects and technology are identifiable, given time and resources.
The other point of note is the dismissal of the ‘Advanced Aerospace Vehicles’ (A.A.V.) terminology, why is this important? For one, it distinguishes and separates the unclassified Nimitz (2004) report released by George Knapp in 2018 that uses A.A.V. in its terminology to categorise genuine ‘Tic-Tac’ styled technology. Some might argue that this whole plan is to eradicate anything suggesting this technology even exists.
Others have argued that Susan Gough and some areas of the Pentagon don’t want that Ninitz report officially recognised, and subsequently the official documentation of such a technology being tied to the DOD. Also, it is important to note that the New York Times articles from July 2020 refers to ‘DOD sources’ who have gone anonymously on the record to state that A.A.V. essentially means genuinely unidentifiable.
New York Times article whose DOD sources explained that AAV means truly unidentified.
Some have claimed that the Gough statement means there are no true A.A.V.s (unidentifiable objects), others, such as Roger Glassel, have simply pointed out that this means term was stated by people not from the DOD and is not a term they (DOD) use.
June, 2020
Moving along into June and journalist Tim McMillan made the Department of Defense aware that there was verified evidence available to verify that Luis Elizondo was managing AATIP. At this point Susan Gough has gone away to look again at her statements.
‘In June of 2020 I notified the DoD I was aware of 12 separate, individual and officially available Government sources of evidence that could verify @LueElizondo’s claims of managing AATIP.’
– McMillan, T., Twitter, (24/08/2020)
August, 2020
Almost three years following the AATIP disclosures and no further forward with AATIP. What is interesting is that we now have an Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force (UAPTF) (19), that has been spearheaded by the Select Senate Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).
However, given the Pentagon walk back on the terminology of UAP/AAV as genuine unidentifiable technology craft such as the ‘Tic-Tac’ (as suggested by Luis Elizondo and the AATIP five observables – both of which are now walked back), the issue over a ‘UAPFT’ can now be implied by the Pentagon to be ‘non-Anomalous’ in nature.
When an observed object is NOT immediately identifiable, the Navy/DOD refers to it as UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena).
The generic term UAP is used in communications to avoid pre-judging the results of any investigation.
The U.S. Navy does not use the term “Anomalous Aerial Vehicles.’
Three statements given to Glassel in May that sort to have arguably an in-depth narrative over the UAP definition. The implemented theme is that ‘they’ are simply advanced-terrestrial foreign weapons systems which seemingly will prove to by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Such terminology could ensure control over the concept of UAPTF.
‘The DoD established the UAPTF to “improve its understanding of, and gain insight into, the nature and origins of UAPs,” Pentagon spokesperson Sue Gough says in the statement. “The mission of the task force is to detect, analyze, and catalog UAPs that could potentially pose a threat to U.S. national security.’
‘The Department of Defense and the military departments take any incursions by unauthorized aircraft into our training ranges or designated airspace very seriously and examine each report. This includes examinations of incursions that are initially reported as UAP when the observer cannot immediately identify what he or she is observing.’
– Daniels, A., and Susan Gough, Popular Mechanics, (16/08/2020)
Despite the official acknowledgement of a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) task force to investigate ‘Unidentified’ incursions into ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon’ (UAP), we still see this control over the AATIP narrative, rather than open UAP transparency with regards to this anomalous technology.
In theory, this is possibly why we see continue to see the Pentagon hard line on both AATIP and Elizondo following both the BAASS revelations by Tim McMillan and the new UAPTF. On the 24th of August, John Greenewald released theatrically most recent Pentagon statement from the very vocal Gough. Additionally, Luis Elizondo also have his response to the way the AATIP information has been handled.
‘Regarding Elizondo and the AATIP program, the department’s position has not changed. Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for AATIP while he was in OUSD(I).’
– Greenewald, J., and Susan Gough, The Blackvault (24/08/2020)
Luis Elizondo responded thus:
“‘I’m greatly disappointed but not surprised. When the U.S. Government’s last resort is to refer to a single sourced opinion article, you know their position is getting desperate. This response is clearly a vindictive effort by some in the Pentagon to inflict retribution on myself and others for speaking the truth to the American people. It’s a failure for any real journalist to not recognize this is the eighth time the government has changed their position on this matter in the last three years; even contradicting their previous official statements.
There are numerous senior former and current government officials who have stated for the record my role in AATIP to include the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (the AATIP Program sponsor), Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Christopher Mellon, the Secretary of Defense’s own Press Secretary Dana White, numerous senior scientists, contract personnel, and even existing members of the Taskforce to name only a few.
What is intriguing is that despite the overwhelming evidence and documentation that exists at both the classified and unclassified levels that the government continues to deny information that is easily verifiable. In essence, calling all of these individuals liars is not only despicable but duplicative and should cause one to wonder whether there is a real conspiracy to hide the truth to which we are privy. For those individuals who remain vindictive and untruthful, they will eventually be held accountable for their actions.”
”
September, 2020
Then in September of 2020, Researcher Roger Glassel received another reply regarding UAP from Susan Gough, UAP spokeswoman for the Pentagon.
“Q) If an observer initially characterize an observation as unidentified aerial phenomena, that he or she cannot immediately identify, and the observation cannot later be explained after an analysis by the UAPTF, or any other component, what will such observation be categorized as?
A) Unidentified”
– Glassel, R., and Susan Gough, ‘UAP Task Force: The Pentagon Responds to Questions’
Although not directly relevant to AATIP, the statement acknowledges a characteristic of the UAPTF assessment with regard to UAP. It shows how the task force itself was and is involved within UAP cases, but at the same time, Gough was dismissing AATIP was UAP. This is a strange situation to be in. The important part to recognise here is that although Gough (Pentagon) is reluctantly acknowledging Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon, they are making a point and a narrative that the technology involved is terrestrial and foreign adversaries. So if this was the case, why are they so interested in dismissing AATIP as a UAP program of UAP doesn’t mean anything anomalous?
The reason is Luis Elizondo.
The Fmr. Director of AATIP who not only has stressed that AATIP was UAP, but that the technologies involved were anomalous, aka, not specifically foreign terrestrial advanced technology, as the forced Gough narrative suggests.
April, 2021
With the introduction of the UAPTF, a UAP quasi-program, the focus shifted from AATIP. In the UAP research community, Elizondo was confined as the Director of AATIP and AATIP was a UAP program. And still, Gough maintained that Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities and AATIP wasn’t a UAP program. UAP leaks started to occur from April, photos, videos and testimony took media interest forward and the role of Elizondo once again came up (interestingly, the entire mainstream media still reported Lue as Director and AATIP as a UAP program despite the unverified claims of Gough).
“Today, when asked if Elizondo ran AATIP, a pentagon spokesperson said, “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.”
Gadi Schwartz, (27/04/2021)
After NBC journalist Gadi Schwartz reached out to the Pentagon for clarification on Elizondo and his role at AATIP, he received the same exact reply.
However, this time there was a response from Senator Harry Reid (founder and sponsor of the AATIP program), who categorically stated Elizondo’s position as leader of AATIP and that AATIP was indeed a UAP program. Senator Reid had many times spoken out about his program, AATIP and had previously confirmed Elizondo as being involved, but now it was an official document.
The reply was clinical. Once again, pressure mounted upon the Susan Gough and the Pentagon’s attempt to spread misinformation. The war over UAPinfo continued.
May, 2021
As May rolled into a 60 minutes segment on UAP, the world suddenly flickered from awareness to focus. UAPinfo with its leaks and testimony from pilots suddenly became a problem for those trying to influence the conversation. Additionally, May saw the start of Inspector General investigations into how the Pentagon had handled UAPinfo within the public sphere (34). That meant AATIP and that meant Elizondo.
Towards the end of May, Roger Glassel sent out a tweet that confirmed a new position by the Pentagon. He received a statement from Susan Gough, about AATIP, after months without any update (35).
"In developing the reports and exploring how to create a ‘center of expertise,’ the contract allowed for research drawn from a wide variety of sources, including reports of UAPs. However, the examination of UAP observations was not the purpose of AATIP.”
Over three plus years, the Pentagon had admitted AATIP was a UAP program, that Elizondo was the director, then that Elizondo wasn’t involved and that AATIP wasn’t a UAP program, then that AATIP did involve UAP investigations, but wasn’t the sole directive of the program.
The person who has remained constant throughout is Luis Elizondo. His position and testimony has not changed throughout, the people backing him have not changed in their support. The Pentagon however have not only changed their position several times, but also never produced a shred of evidence to substantiate their claims.
Conclusions
Spokeswoman Susan Gough and what seems to be a cohort from the USAF, are directly involved in how such information is presented to the public via Public Affairs Office. It would also seem that an operation of misinformation is underway to manipulate the facts about both AATIP, UAP and Elizondo. It would be safe to assume that the Pentagon wouldn’t overtly lie in a way which would leave them open to legal prosecution. But this leaves us with some very alarming questions about classification and transparency on the biggest issue in recent history. Unfortunately, due to the seriousness and severity of the reported UAP/UFO/AAV technology and the drastic implications for our world, we simply cannot accept the mishandling of information which has been officially presented by the Pentagon.
Hopefully the Inspector General’s investigation will reveal the truth.
