The controversy surrounding Luis Elizondo’s claims of directing the “Pentagon’s Secret UFO Program” known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) has sparked widespread debate. While Elizondo’s exact role in AATIP remains disputed by the Pentagon, it is confirmed that he was the director of the National Programs Special Management Staff (NPSMS) within the Department of Defense (DoD) at the time of his resignation.

In July 2021, The Black Vault made a discovery that Colonel Evelyn Laptook had replaced Luis Elizondo as the director of NPSMS. This document below revealed her name, as connected to being the director of the office that Elizondo resigned from less than a year prior:

The revelation prompted speculation by The Black Vault that if AATIP-related activities continued, they might still be managed within the NPSMS office where Elizondo was previously employed. Consequently, a FOIA request (21-F-1235) was filed by The Black Vault in July 2021 to uncover more information about this, as it possibly connected to Laptook or the office she ran at that time.

The FOIA request sought records containing keywords such as “AATIP,” “AAWSAP,” and “Advanced Aerospace” within Laptook’s email box. The search revealed one single exchange that connected to another FOIA request from 2018, referred to as CMO003127-18. This designator likely stems from the Correspondence and Task Management System (CATMS), a system designed for efficient management of tasks and correspondence within the DoD.

The likely FOIA request itself that this refers to is identified as 18-F-1477, which was filed by researcher Keith Basterfield, on August 8, 2018. Basterfield’s request sought, “… a copy of documents relating to the purpose; mission statement; vision; assessments; contracts; technical reports and outcomes of the Advanced Aerospace Threat (and) Identification Program. This program operated out of the National Programs area of the Sensitive Activities Directorate, under the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, for HUMINT, Counterintelligence and Security.” This wording matched that of the tasking email, indicating this was the request it referred to.

While processing the request for Basterfield, the FOIA office tasked it to a redacted individual, likely Col. Laptook, who was the NPSMS director at the time. Col. Laptook’s response indicated that the NPSMS’ mission “relates strictly to” a short redacted term, which is protected under FOIA exemption (b)(2). This exemption pertains to information solely related to the internal rules and practices of an agency. The secrecy surrounding the NPSMS’ mission continues to raise questions about the sensitivity and confidentiality of their operations. There remains not much known about the office, and when searched, the internet produces primarily results about Elizondo himself, but not much beyond it with the exception of court transcripts profiled by The Black Vault in 2019.

Additionally, a reference to a “sister office” was also redacted, suggesting that an extension of NPSMS is equally classified and shrouded in secrecy.

Despite the National Programs office within OUSDI stating they had no records related to AATIP, a subsequent email hinted at “background information” that could be relevant to the request. This suggests that although no direct records were found, there were still underlying details worth noting. One email stated, “I’ll try to touch base with you later today about background information that could be related to this request being tasked to your office.”

This exchange is significant as it highlights the complexity and secrecy surrounding AATIP and related programs. The correspondence shows that within the DoD, information about AATIP is closely held and continues to be a challenge to access. The fact that there was still “background information” to discuss, despite the official stance of no records given to Basterfield’s request in this instance, adds another layer to the mystery. More FOIA requests have been filed to seek out that information.

While these latest FOIA findings may not be earth-shattering, they contribute another piece to the complex puzzle of unraveling AATIP and its operations, whatever they may be, following its exposure by the New York Times and Politico.

Note: The original request filed by The Black Vault for information about what became ultimately known as AATIP to the public was filed on October 13, 2017. This was more than two months prior to the acronym AATIP (and full program name) being published by the mainstream media. This was FOIA case number 18-F-0077 and sought information about the program Elizondo described at the To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science press conference, which first introduced Elizondo to the public. That request yielded a “no records” response, after it went through several appeals.

The Black Vault remains committed to transparency and continues to seek answers through FOIA requests on this issue. Each new document and detail brings the general public closer to understanding the truth, whatever that may be.

For more in-depth and factually accurate articles grounded in verifiable evidence, stay tuned to The Black Vault.

UPDATE: On May 7, 2025, the Department of Defense responded to the remanded appeal (meaning, my appeal was granted) when fighting the original redactions on the records. In short, there was only one word, the name “Michael”, which was unredacted. The remaining exemptions stayed in place. That release is located below.

###

Document Archive

21-F-1322 Release [4 Pages, 1.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.13 MB]

21-FR-1322 Release (Appellate Release) [4 Pages, 1.5MB]

The post From AATIP to NPSMS: The Mystery Continues To Deepen first appeared on The Black Vault.

After years of bureaucratic obstacles and inconsistent responses, The Black Vault has obtained a highly sought after document through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that directly references the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), reported since 2017 as “The Pentagon’s Secret Search for UFOs“. The draft memo, never-before-seen by the public and authored by former DoD counterintelligence agent Luis Elizondo, details AATIP’s mission as “focusing on beyond next generation technologies in the areas of lift, propulsion, cloaking, and human effects,” and describes how AATIP was gathering information on “unexplained or unknown aerial systems” from various DoD components and elements. But more importantly to some, it may even confirm Elizondo’s official work within the program, a claim denied by the Pentagon since 2019.

The journey to obtain these records began on May 5, 2021, when The Black Vault filed FOIA case 21-F-0964. The request specifically sought communications between Elizondo and Neill Tipton, a senior DoD official that was also one of three named individuals in Elizondo’s DoD Inspector General (IG) complaint filed on May 3, 2021. This complaint alleged that all three (Tipton, Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough and former Director for Defense Intelligence [Intelligence and Security] Garry Reid) “conducted retribution and provided false information to the public,” and were also accused by Elizondo of “abusing government authority” and “illegal destruction of information.” This complaint stemmed from Elizondo’s belief that he was being mistreated after his resignation from the Pentagon due to his decision to speak about his time investigating UFOs, now being referred to as Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP).

After amending the FOIA request to focus only on emails between Elizondo and Tipton containing keywords such as “unidentified,” “AATIP,” and “UAP,” (and others) in response to the DoD’s request to narrow the search scope, the DoD initially replied in December 2021, stating that “no records” were found.

Believing differently, The Black Vault filed an appeal within one day, asserting that responsive documents existed. This assertion was based on knowledge gained from various sources and research means during the timeframe leading up to the case filing. The information learned through this process, combined with the specific keywords provided for the FOIA request along with the date range requested for the search (2008 – 2017), left little to no doubt that responsive records existed.

“September 25, 2017, at 11:23a, Mr. Luis Elizondo sent an e-mail to Mr. Neill Tipton which included the ‘AATIP’ acronym in the body,” the appeal stated. This fact alone should have yielded at least one responsive document to the request, which was used as the basis of the appeal.

The appeal letter filed by The Black Vault went on to further express deep frustration with the FOIA process, the DoD, and their handling of cases related to AATIP and Elizondo, stating:

“Let me add within the body of this appeal, on how frustrating some of these requests are getting. I believe, and hope, your office has seen the lengths I’ve gone to try and make your efforts easier by closing / withdrawing requests, to reduce paperwork etc. I am also always there, when possible, to amend requests to also lessen the burden of a workload. However, as you can see with this case alone (and now many others), cases are having me reduce the scope to help, but after months (and sometimes years) of waiting, they are inappropriately closed, and I have to then go through the lengthy appeal process. There are NUMEROUS agencies that I can cite, where requests are processed for communications between two people, without stipulating a keyword search. I am sure a keyword reduction in scope helps, but as we can see here, that is likely creating more problems; generating more paperwork; and wasting more time than it is actually helping.”

The appeal was also cc’d electronically to the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), which acts as a mediator between FOIA requesters and federal agencies, helping to resolve disputes and ensure proper handling of FOIA requests.

The appeal was ultimately granted in February 2022, and the case was remanded back to the DoD for further processing. Despite this, The Black Vault never received an acknowledgment that the case had been reopened, as required by law. When The Black Vault inquired about the status in August 2023, a year and a half after the case should have been reopened and acknowledged, the DoD responded that an acknowledgment letter had not been sent as it was “overlooked.” Although it was then sent that day, and the case was renumbered as 21-FR-0964 due to the remand, there was no estimated date of completion given.

In a puzzling sequence of events that followed, the documents related to FOIA case 21-FR-0964 were later  allegedly released on March 29, 2024. But yet again, The Black Vault never received that correspondence, either, and no explanation was given as to why that was by the writing of this article. The results of that case, once the documents were finally received just this week, in a moment.

But first, it turned out that the same documents requested in 21-FR-0964 happened to turn up and were released in May 2024 under FOIA case 21-F-1154, but they had extensive redactions. This case was originally filed by The Black Vault in June 2021.

These redactions included the complete blacking out of a crucial memo on AATIP which was attached to one of the emails written by Elizondo that was released in that case. In addition, another reference to AATIP in one of the emails was also mysteriously redacted, even though it had already been published unofficially and was available in the public domain through Elizondo’s IG complaint about 2 years prior and a portion of the same referenced in Popular Mechanics another 2 years prior to that.

These actions further complicated the DoD’s already questionable handling of these types of requests. The DoD had claimed FOIA’s “deliberative process” exemption known as (b)(5) to justify the redactions of AATIP related material, despite some of it already being available in the public domain for years. From a legal standpoint, The Black Vault felt none of these actions were justified, and an appeal was filed. As of the writing of this article, that appeal remains open. This was all reported by The Black Vault on May 13, 2024.

Now back to FOIA case 21-FR-0964.

This week, sparked by the release of Elizondo’s new book Imminent which contains numerous references to Tipton, a follow up was sent by The Black Vault regarding FOIA case 21-FR-0964 to check on the status. Although no explanation was given, the same day the follow up was sent, the FOIA case officer emailed the final FOIA response letter that was dated March 29, 2024, nearly 5 months ago; an email thread between Elizondo and Tipton about “responsibilities for AATIP” being transferred between the two gentlemen which mysteriously had redactions lifted contrary to FOIA case 21-F-1154; and the AATIP memo that The Black Vault was fighting for through appeal on FOIA case 21-F-1154, which now appeared nearly entirely unredacted.

The documents, which were first denied by the DoD to even exist three years ago, were now found. As of the writing of this article, no explanation as to either why the DoD never found them, or why they were not truthful in their 2021 response to The Black Vault, has been given.

This AATIP memo, never-before-seen by the public until now, was originally drafted in 2017 by Elizondo in hopes that it would be later issued by then Deputy Secretary of Defense (DepSecDef) Patrick M. Shanahan. It confirms the existence of AATIP and the scope of the program. The memo states that AATIP was a program with a strategic focus on “beyond next generation technologies in the areas of lift, propulsion, cloaking, and human effects,” and sought “unexplained or unknown aerial systems” information from all DoD elements “for the purposes of intelligence analysis and exploitation.”

The memo states that the “DoD continues to consider AATIP a priority, especially given recent advancements with Unmanned Aerial Surveillance (UAS) platforms that are becoming widely available.”

Further to that, it states that OUSDI “has a demonstrated interest for any and all reporting involving anomalous UAS threats” and it goes on to order that “all DoD elements are hereby required to provide a courtesy copy of any data and information obtained from the field that related to unexplained or unknown aerial systems to the Director of Defense Intelligence for Technical Collection and Special Programs.” That position was held by Neill Tipton, and this memorandum, if officially issued by the DepSecDef department-wide, would ultimately make Tipton’s desk the central point of information related to AATIP once information was received from DoD elements.

Although it does not reference “UAP” or “UFOs” specifically, the mention of “unexplained or unknown aerial systems” and “anomalous UAS threats” makes it the first official DoD document of its kind to connect “AATIP” to such a mission investigating “unexplained” objects.

In addition to giving a rundown of AATIP’s scope and mission, the existence of this memo may also directly contradict the DoD’s ongoing assertions that Elizondo had no official role in the program. This has been a claim by the Pentagon that has fueled much controversy that has lasted for years. Could the revelations within the memo have played a role in why the DoD wanted to deny the memo’s existence three years ago? Or, was this truly an administrative oversight, and the documents were simply “overlooked” similar to how the DoD failed to send an acknowledgement letter once the case was remanded back to them that sought it in the first place?

Regardless of why this memo was not discovered and denied to exist in 2021, it likely won’t settle the debate about Elizondo’s claimed leadership of AATIP or the stated objectives of AATIP once and for all.

For some, this memo will absolutely be viewed as a pivotal piece of evidence in the ongoing debate over AATIP’s scope and Elizondo’s involvement. To them, this will serve as undeniable proof, if they even felt undeniable proof wasn’t already out there to begin with.

To others, the release of this may simply be seen as a draft memorandum that was authored by Elizondo, without definitively proving his leadership or directorship of a “funded” “UFO program” known as “AATIP,” and in the end, to them, it will prove nothing.

This juxtaposition is a true testament to the divide between skeptics and believers in today’s conversation about the UFO topic.

But even as early as just days ago, the DoD still continues to deny Elizondo’s official involvement in AATIP — a claim Elizondo still strongly disputes. However, that was prior to the DoD releasing and the public seeing this memorandum. So, The Black Vault reached out to the Pentagon for comment.

“How does this not contradict the DoD’s stance on Luis Elizondo, and the denial of his official responsibilities on AATIP? Why would he be drafting such a memorandum if AATIP had long been cancelled (per DoD), and that he had no official responsibilities on it (per DoD)?”, the first question asked.

After publication of this article, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough submitted comment by stating, “Luis Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for AATIP.  As noted in the Historical Record Report Volume 1, available on www.aaro.mil, AATIP was never an official, recognized DoD program. The draft, unsigned ‘memo for the record’ that you reference was crafted by Mr. Elizondo and appears to have been unsolicited.”

Given the opportunity to respond to the above, Elizondo added, “The memo they claim was ‘unsolicited’ was in fact a request by none other than the Secretary’s front office staff. Not only is the DoD spokesperson wrong, but any due diligence on their part would have illustrated this. This is yet another sad attempt to once again deceive the American people by a select few in the Pentagon’s PAO. Unfortunately, this type of behavior conducted by a few bad faith individuals, only further damages the credibility of an organization who has very little credibility left to offer. The sad truth is that this type of behavior reflects poorly on the entire Pentagon, including the majority who are patriotic, loyal, and selfless. Fortunately, the truth always comes out as it always has.”

This was followed up by, “Why would the DoD tell me [this memo]  didn’t exist, but I later would be successful getting it after an appeal from the same office that denied it existed in the first place?”

After publication of this article, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough submitted comment by stating, “As indicated in the response letter to you dated December 14, 2021, regarding 21-F-0964, the initial FOIA search did not yield responsive records.”

Given the opportunity to respond to the above, Elizondo added, “This response isn’t even worthy or a response. It’s clear that obfuscation and deceit is the new norm for the same few at the PAO office. I would once again remind them that propaganda and disinformation against the American public is illegal.”

Elizondo also provided the following written statement to the Black Vault about this release, which underscores his thoughts about the importance of it all:

“Thanks to The Black Vault’s continued pursuit of the facts, the DoD had no choice but to relent and admit the obvious. 1) AATIP was a real program and funded. 2) My former employer, the OUSD(I) has had, and currently has a keen interest in AATIP and the UAP topic. 3) There remains a clear national security nexus as it relates to UAP. My fear is that unless more people demand the truth, this information which many of us already knew, would never see the light of day and remain hidden from the public. An excellent example of The Black Vault not taking ‘no’ for an answer.” 

As the controversy surrounding AATIP will undoubtedly continue, The Black Vault remains committed to bringing the truth to light, whatever that may be, despite the challenges posed by the DoD’s problematic FOIA process.

###

Document Archive

21-FR-0964 FOIA Case File Release [4 Pages, 1.43MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.43 MB]

The post AATIP Memo Unveiled After FOIA Battle: DoD Inconsistencies Exposed first appeared on The Black Vault.

Through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) originally filed in June 2021, The Black Vault has just obtained the official release of an email chain involving Luis Elizondo, the alleged former head of the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), and Neill Tipton, a defense official who previously worked as the Director of Defense Intelligence, Collection and Special Programs. A portion of these emails was initially published by Popular Mechanics in 2020, then later seen as part of a Department of Defense (DoD) Inspector General (IG) complaint submitted by Elizondo in 2021, then later published by the NY Post in 2022. But in the newest FOIA release, the references to AATIP, along with a memorandum written about AATIP and the transferring of duties, was withheld from release and redacted by the DoD, despite the unclassified emails having already been in the public domain for years.

Elizondo has been at the center of controversy since he publicly claimed to have directed the AATIP, a program allegedly focused on studying unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). His assertions have been consistently refuted by the Pentagon, which denies that Elizondo was ever assigned responsibilities within AATIP. However, the email chain in question, sent by Elizondo to Tipton the same day his first resignation letter was submitted when he retired from the Pentagon, was intended to clarify roles and transferred  responsibilities within the AATIP. This seemingly contradicts the Pentagon’s stance on AATIP, Elizondo, and the role he may have played within the program.

Through the public release of Elizondo’s IG complaint by the NY Post, it is well known that Elizondo’s email states that an attached memo, “…helps [Tipton] better assume the new responsibilities for AATIP.” That memo was also written by Elizondo. However, in the official release of the emails already in the public domain, the reference to AATIP in the body of the email is redacted under FOIA exemption (b)(5), along with the entire memo Elizondo had written transferring the responsibilities of AATIP to Tipton.

The two versions can be seen here:

As conveyed by the FOIA release letter, exemption (b)(5) covers “inter- and intra- agency memoranda which are deliberative in nature; this exemption is appropriate for internal documents which are part of the decision-making process, and contain subjective evaluations, opinions and recommendations”.

The redacted line in the email is crucial to the AATIP story, as it directly references AATIP in a manner that supports Elizondo’s claims of some level of involvement in the effort. Though the Pentagon’s decision to redact the line does come as a surprise since the line is not “deliberative in nature” nor does it quite fit in the other areas (b)(5) would exempt. The selective redaction by the government raises questions about the transparency behind what AATIP was and was not.

Also accompanying the email was the draft memorandum that Elizondo had written, though it remains unclear whether it was addressed to the Deputy Secretary of Defense (DepSecDef) directly or written on the DepSecDef’s behalf. The entirety of this document was redacted, obscuring significant content that could potentially further clarify the internal discourse regarding AATIP and Elizondo’s role.

While Luis Elizondo has claimed to have an interest in disclosing information about UAP and AATIP to the public without violating his NDA, his statements have often been met with skepticism and outright denial by the Pentagon. This latest release through FOIA, with the redactions it contains, may suggest a deliberate attempt to obscure Elizondo’s contributions and the existence of AATIP. Despite the public’s access to these documents, the redactions serve as a barrier to full transparency. The reason for it, in this instance, remains unknown.

The Pentagon has maintained a stance of minimal disclosure concerning AATIP and UAP investigations,  often citing national security and the protection of sensitive information when referring to the latter.

In response to the redactions, The Black Vault has filed an appeal, challenging the justification for withholding parts of the email and the entire memorandum.

###

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [687.57 KB]

The post New FOIA Release Highlights Redactions in Key AATIP Correspondence: What is the Pentagon Hiding? first appeared on The Black Vault.

The documents date from late December 2017 and offer a compelling glimpse into the internal concerns of the DoD about Elizondo saying on television that humanity “…may not be alone,” all while talking about his role studying UFOs within the DoD as the director of AATIP. This video is a breakdown of those documents, however, it is highly recommended the article also be explored for much more information at (Documents available for download).

LIVE STREAM VERSION

The post Ep. #124 – Ex-DoD Intelligence Officer’s UFO Claims Spark Security Concerns & Confusion, Pentagon Memos Reveal first appeared on The Black Vault.

Background

The UFO videos circulated as the “Gimbal,” “Flir1” and “GoFast” have received widespread coverage in the media. However, controversy has surrounded the videos as being “unauthorized leaks” vs. “officially released.”

As first broken by Vice News / Tim McMillan, AFOSI investigated the release of the videos. In early December of 2019, The Black Vault had also filed for similar records (FOIA Case 2020-02456-F) based on the statement that McMillan received from the Pentagon.

Although he got them in December of 2019, The Black Vault did not get them released until June 9, 2020, even though the release letter was written and dated April 14, 2020.

The reason for such a drastic delay for this request, which only yielded two pages, is unknown.

Document Archive

AFOSI Investigation #3290517356125 Into Unauthorized Release of Three UFO Videos, 2018 [4 Pages, 1.5MB]

Naval Air Systems Command Emails Relating to AFOSI Investigation #3290517356125 [21 Pages, 1.5MB]

Note: There is an attachment presentation referenced, but was not included in the responsive records. There was one document withheld as referenced in the release letter, which is potentially this presentation (but not likely). I am still figuring that part out, and an appeal will likely be filed. Updates will be posted, when available. 

The post AFOSI Investigation Into Unauthorized Release of Three UFO Videos, 2018 first appeared on The Black Vault.

So I will throw a monkey wrench into this wheel. I see a lot of talk and dismissal of a story posted on Reddit, and I can add a few things, including what I verified to be true.  The post throws into question on what was depicted in the History channel show “Unidentified” and how people depicted as running the present day AATIP effort, may not have been. Although it’s a tv show, and some people may not care about context, it does created additional questions worthy of asking.

First? This story came to me in 2019, and it checks out, at least on the points I can check. It ties in to the History Channel; the show “Unidentified”; and specifically a scene in Season 1, Episode 6, that depicts what appears to be a secret meeting just outside the Pentagon between, “a new team of Pentagon officers who are studying UFOs” and “running this [AATIP] effort,” “…with official blessing.” (Quotes taken from the tv show “Unidentified,” as said by Luis Elizondo.)

Let me explain, and take this for what it’s worth.

Second? You all know I do not like anonymous sources. So, when this person came to me, I do what I always do. I vet and verify. However, please note from the get go, they were NOT anonymous to me and made ZERO effort to hide their identity with me (which is always a red flag if they did try to do that). They just did not want me to blast out their identity. Every claim I could check… checked out. All evidence pointed to they WERE active U.S. Army counterintelligence, and they even contacted me through a military e-mail initially to also help verify credentials. That also checked out as it was verified not to be a spoofed address. In addition, the Reddit moderator where this was posted recently was given enough evidence to convince them as a law enforcement officer, that the person’s credentials checked out. So, there are multiple people who vetted the source, and to that extent, it could be verified by all.

Third? Back in 2019, I dissected the claim of where the alleged Elizondo/Delonge meeting was. I was told in 2019, as was posted publicly here in 2021, it was the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Virginia. I took a different approach here.

The scene in episode 6, season 1, of “Unidentified” showed Elizondo and DeLonge inside a hotel room. Captured on the side of the frame was a hotel room mirror. It was a very distinct design, and likely unique to the hotel, emulating the “Crystal” part of the Crystal Gateway Marriott. In other words, it was a crystal shaped mirror. Heading to the website of the Crystal Gateway Marriott, there are numerous photos of the rooms. There was a 100% match on the mirror on the wall and the desk lamp on the table.

Another scene showed DeLonge walking through the hotel going to the meeting. Slightly blurred behind him, was a long light pillar, also found within photos of the hotel in the lobby area. Again, yet another match.

So, in 2019, you’d have to be a very lucky guesser, or someone with intimate knowledge of the television shoot’s location to nail that one.

Let’s move on.

Fourth? The physical description of the person. I won’t go into any other detail, other than this. While vetting the person, I found numerous photographs of them. In Unidentified, that person was a match, in both stature and physical appearance, along with a somewhat unique physical feature of the person – and yes, you could tell even with the blurred face. Yet another indicator the person was truly there, and telling the truth about sitting at the meeting in a hotel lobby.

Because this person did not want to have their identity known in 2019 or even here at the end of 2021, I respected that then as I do now. I also knew with my own personal conviction, I wouldn’t run a story with one single source, who could not be named, and was known only by me. It was no offense to this counter-intelligence agent speaking up; rather, that’s how I’ve always operated. So, I just sat on it until they were ready to come forward to people beyond just me and invited themselves to be vetted. That time has now come.

People thought I was/am out to get Elizondo, and I am not. Not then and certainly not now. If I was, I would’ve been happy to publish this in 2019 with no named sources, since most UFO blogs and sites claiming to be a “news site” do the same anyway making all sorts of claims. But, that’s not my style or intent. I am out to get the truth, whatever that may be, with no personal bias on what I want it to actually be. So, I just dig and dig and dig, and with stories like this, I verify what I can, and store it for later use.

That said, this story has always been a bit of a surprise to me, even to this day.

I decided to post the above at this point, given the raging debate that people think this CI agent is not an agent, and is some kid on Reddit making it up. I can at least say through research and personal interaction, that isn’t true, and their story has remained consistent since 2019. In addition, all things that I could challenge of the story? All checked out.

Most of all, I was let down that what was framed as a secret meeting between intelligence officers, was nothing of the sort. It was more of a “job interview” (as this Army CI agent said), with at least one of the parties at the table not knowing it would end up in a TV show or the fact they were even being filmed. In addition, with that context, at least one of the people at this meeting was certainly not “running [the AATIP]effort,” but according to them, they were just “talking about some wild stuff [with]little evidence to support any of it.”

I wonder what the other two at the table knew about this “meeting” and whether or not they are happy with being secretly filmed and put on tv?

As a television producer who worked extensively for A&E networks / History Channel, I could NEVER film someone without their consent. Or, if they just seemed to be in the shot (ie: a person walking behind my main framed character), then we would have to blur the face and only show those who were cleared with an appearance release. Many have tried to dismiss this story because the Army officer says he had no knowledge of being filmed. Well, I am here to tell you as someone with first hand knowledge, although shady, the producers could get away with it if they adequately blurred the face and did not use the person’s voice.

I re-watched the segment on Unidentified, and I can say that again, from experience, that meeting was intentionally misrepresented with narration and sound bites, if this counterintelligence agent is telling the truth (I see no signs they are not). Also as a television producer with experience, I now question what else could have been misrepresented more for entertainment/intrigue/mystery/tease rather than accuracy. Trust me, in television production, that’s an easy thing to get away with (obviously, as seen here).

Why is this important? Because when I saw the meeting aired and represented how it was on the TV show, I was incredibly intrigued and encouraged. I felt that this was maybe some proof the Pentagon was lying, and the AATIP effort was underway, even in “secret.” Yet, now, one of the people at the table comes forward, and we learn that at least according to them, they wanted to be involved in the effort, but were not at all, nor were they ever. And what was supposed to be a meeting between those at the table who were currently running AATIP, well, it was actually just a scene secretly filmed for a tv show, and misrepresented on the air as something it was not.

Let it be known, I do not blame DeLonge or Elizondo by default for this. It is very possible that they, too, were unaware of the filming being taken in secret from the 2nd level of the hotel. So, my post here is not an attack on them in the slightest, nor is it an insinuation they did this. They could very well have been unaware of all this in the context it was shown.

Producers often will take b-roll shots, especially without the talent’s knowledge, so it appears to be more genuine and real in the context of a television program. In fact, I did this myself on quite a few occasions, but certainly not maliciously or for the intent of misrepresenting. And my talent was always made aware after the fact they were filmed, if I shot b-roll of them.

That said, SOMEONE made the call to frame this all in this way. So I hope in the interest of accuracy, someone will speak out about it from the cast and/or crew just to clear it up. And, maybe they should even apologize, since this Army counterintelligence agent had to file a formal report with superiors since they were told things about “classified material” that weren’t actually classified, and all that same information ended up on DeLonge’s social media account and on a tv show.

What do you all do with the above? Well, that is up to you. I am sure my post will entice the same attackers to start throwing stones my way for posting about this, like I am somehow to blame for all this. However, the facts are what they are. I challenged the story in every way I could, and it all checked out.

But I do believe this is an important part of this saga and it should be dealt with. If players in this story advocate for truth and transparency, then I think at least some of the above should be addressed.

In addition, I feel there is a possibility (though I am not 100%) this CI agent’s identity may be known ONE DAY when they decide to put a face and a name to the anonymous posting. And when that happens, people will see they are a real person.

As for the other two at the table? Well, I may have something to add to that, too, should they ever decide to come forward. But that is a story for another day.

Until then, I wish you continued luck with unraveling the AATIP/AAWSAP/UAP saga. We are all going to need it as the waters seem to be getting muddier rather than clearing up.

###

The Original Reddit Post – Archived 12/20/2021 @ 6:51a Pacific

The post History Channel’s “Unidentified” and a Secret Meeting Between Intelligence Officials Running AATIP. Or… was it? first appeared on The Black Vault.

Premieres October 29th, 2021 @ 5p Pacific / 8p Eastern

Since December of 2017, we have all been told a story… a story about a $22 million “Secret Pentagon UFO Study” and the man who ran it.

But now, nearly four years later, a new book has has turned much of this story upside down.

According to this book, those original stories were all wrong. And what we thought we knew, is not the case. This new book, according to page 160 anyway, aims to simply “correct the record.”

But does it? Should we dismiss the old claims and make room for the new ones? Although not all the original claims are being challenged, which do we choose TO believe and which do we choose NOT to believe?

This is the story about why for the past nearly four years, the saga that has involved AATIP, AAWSAP, UFOs, a ranch in Utah infested by the paranormal, and multiple former government personnel — is still riddle with confusion and lingering quest ions — even with this new book that aims to correct the record.

Stay tuned… you’re about the journey Inside The Black Vault.

The post AAWSAP & AATIP: Why Confusion Continues To Reign and Questions Continue To Linger first appeared on The Black Vault.

The following is the original bid solicitation (public posting seeking bidders for the contract) for the Advanced Aerospace Weapon Systems Applications Program (AAWSAP). This program is connected to the rumored “Pentagon UFO Study” known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). That exact connection and how they relate is unknown, as there are varying explanations depending on the party involved.

This page aims to archive the original posting of AAWSAPs description, as many have proposed that AAWSAP investigation paranormal cases (including UFOs) at Skinwalker Ranch. One issue with that theory, is that no where in this solicitation is there anything closely matching the need or desire for paranormal study.

In addition, it should be noted this contract was awarded to Bigelow Aerospace‘s subsidiary Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS). Ultimately, it was reported that $22 million went to BAASS over the course of two years, and as a result, they produced 38 Defense Intelligence Reference Documents (DIRD) reports.

Although there has been a large shroud of secrecy around AAWSAP and AATIP (and as stated their relationship to one another), the bid solicitation for the program was public for many years. You now have to visit the Wayback Machine to see the public posting, due to the fact that over the years, the US government has changed their website and URL to new bid solicitation postings, therefore breaking previous links.

The original posting of the bid solicitation description, was the following:

Original Bid Posting

Solicitation Number:
HHM40208R0211

Notice Type:
Combined Synopsis/Solicitation

Synopsis:
Added: Aug 18, 2008 1:53 am

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6 as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. The solicitation number is HHM402-08-R-0211. The complete formatted solicitation will be available for download on the Federal Business Opportunities Website at www.fedbizopps.gov under solicitation number HHM402-08-R-0211. Interested offerors shall download the complete version of the solicitation from the aforementioned website. This solicitation is being issued as a Request for Proposal. The Virginia Contracting Activity has a requirement for engineering services in the Washington DC area. This requirement is solicited as a total small business set aside. NAICS code is 541330 with a size standard of 25 million. One firm fixed price contract is anticipated to be awarded as a result of this solicitation under a Best Value Basis. The term of the contract is from Date of Award through September 30, 2009. The contract will have four one-year options, for the period of September 29, 2008 through September 30, 2013. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES FOR THE ADVANCED AEROSPACE WEAPON SYSTEM APPLICATIONS PROGRAM 18 July 2008 1. BACKGROUND: The Acquisition Support Division (DWO-3) of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has the responsibility to provide guidance and oversight to the Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition process along with leveraging the DoD Intelligence Community to coordinate, produce and maintain projections of the future threat environment in which U.S. air, naval, ground, space, missile defense and information systems operate. In order to accurately assess the foreign threat to U.S. weapon systems, a complete as possible understanding of potential breakthrough technology applications employed in future aerospace weapon systems must be obtained. 2. OBJECTIVE: One aspect of the future threat environment involves advanced aerospace weapon system applications. The objective of this program is to understand the physics and engineering of these applications as they apply to the foreign threat out to the far term, i.e., from now through the year 2050. Primary focus is on breakthrough technologies and applications that create discontinuities in currently evolving technology trends. The focus is not on extrapolations of current aerospace technology. The proposal shall describe a technical approach which discusses how the breakthrough technologies and applications listed below would be studied and include proposed key personnel that have experience in those areas. 3. REQUIREMENTS: a) The contractor shall complete advanced aerospace weapon system technical studies in the following areas: 1. lift; 2. propulsion ; 3. control; 4. power generation; 5. spatial/temporal translation; 6. materials; 7. configuration, structure; 8. signature reduction (optical, infrared, radiofrequency, acoustic); 9. human interface; 10. human effects; 11. armament (RF and DEW); 12. other peripheral areas in support of (1-11); b) It is expected that numerous experts with extensive experience (minimum of 10 years) in breakthrough aerospace research and development will be required to meet the demands of the above program. The offeror should clearly identify their approach to obtaining the services of and their utilization of these scientific and technical experts. Management personnel must include a lead integrator to oversee the work of the various analytical teams, and to integrate their findings into final coherent products. At least one member of each analytical team must have a PhD, although that member can be on several teams. A technical plan for conducting the advanced aerospace weapon system studies described above must be included in the offeror’s proposal. (c) Offeror must be able to produce integrated finished assessments in each of the above advanced aerospace weapon system technical areas. Finished reports and presentations, while highly analytical and technical, must be in a format suitable for dissemination at the highest levels of the federal government. In addition to the main technical section of each assessment, an executive summary utilizing clearly understandable (non-technical) language must also be contained in each report.(d) To assess relevant experience, offerors shall submit at least three (3) references, including a POC name and phone number, with a brief description of the business relationship with the Government or other corporations. In addition, offerors should provide examples, conducted within the past 7 years, of having performed, as a prime contractor, the analysis, design, construction, and flight testing of high performance aircraft and/or satellites. Success in this program is dependent upon this capability and experience.4. PLACE OF PERFORMANCE: The work under this contract shall be performed at the Contractor’s facility.

5. SECURITY REQUIREMENT: Contractor company and personnel proposed shall be clearable and able to obtain a security and facility clearance upon award of the contract. All requirements specified in this SOO may be based on materials classified at or below Top Secret with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/ SCI). The contractor shall comply with the terms and conditions of the DD-254 BEFORE initiating any classified effort. The contractor shall notify the COR and Contracting Officer immediately upon the determination that higher classification requirements exist in order to accomplish the specified requirements. The contractor shall ensure that each individual assigned to this contract shall be identified, cleared, and approved through DIA/DAC-3 PRIOR to granting that individual access to, or authority to generate classified information in association with this effort.

5.1. Contractor shall provide a work facility (including unclassified information systems) with a Top Secret Facility Clearance granted by the Defense Security Service (DSS). Cleared facilities are not required at contract inception. Offeror must provide personnel eligible for a Top Secret clearance level with further eligibility for SCI access. At least two personnel cleared at the Secret level are required at contract inception. 6. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY/EQUIPMENT: The Government will provide the contractor access to computers and peripherals such as printers as the Government deems necessary to access and produce classified information. These computers and peripherals remain the property of the Government. 7. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION/DATA: Data required by the contractor to fulfill the terms of this contract shall be requested from the Government Project Lead (GPL). A good faith effort will be made to fulfill any legitimate request (as assessed by the GPL), however, the responsibility to collect information and data necessary for the conduct of this effort remains with the contractor. Any classified data provided by the Government in support of this contract will remain the property of the Government and will be returned to the government not more than 30 days after contract conclusion. 8. CONTRACTOR ACQUIRED / GOVERNMENT OWNED PROPERTY:

Any accountable property acquired by the contractor with government funds during the execution of this contract shall become government owned property. The contractor shall obtain written permission from the CO or Contracting Officer Representative (COR) prior to any purchase of real property with government funds. The contractor shall establish and maintain an inventory of all such property. This property must be inventoried and returned to the government not more than 60 days after the end of the contract. 9. EQUIPMENT LEASE OR PURCHASE:

The purchase of equipment is preferred, however, it may be more advantageous to the government to lease in certain circumstances. When it is contemplated a lease would be more advantageous to the government, contractor shall furnish the following information to the COR so the government can determine the best solution: 1. Estimated length of time the equipment will be used and the extent of use within that period; 2. Financial and operating advantages of alternative types and makes of equipment; 3.Cumulative rental payments for the estimated period of use; 4. Net purchase price; 5. Transportation and installation costs; 6.Maintenance and other service costs; 10. TRAVEL: It is anticipated that travel will be required for this contract. The Government will pay up to the rates specified in the government Federal Travel Regulations for travel destination. Travel reservations will be made by the contractor and will be reimbursed for actual costs only, with supporting documentation/receipts attached to the invoice. 11. DELIVERABLES: The contractor shall prepare the following deliverables: a. Status Reports – monthly reports outlining accomplishments, milestones, and work in progress. b. Project Management Plan – For each technical area, the team lead shall submit, at the 60 day point, an overview paper identifying the scope of the final report; a Plan of Action and Milestones, and the composition of the analytical team. c. Research Reports – For each technical area, a comprehensive report and briefing forecasting potential advancements and their impact is to be submitted to the GPL by the end of the tenth month. An executive version of each report should also be submitted. Format will be specified by the GPL. d. Integrated Threat Assessment – A final report and briefing that assesses the foreign threat from advanced aerospace platforms incorporating the technologies discussed in the individual research reports will be provided to the GPL at the end of the period of performance. An executive version of the report should also be submitted. Format will be specified by the GPL. e. Resumes – The Contractor shall submit resumes of all key personnel proposed for this effort. The Government reserves the right to review resumes and qualifications prior to acceptance of individuals for assignment. 12. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: The term of this contract shall is anticipated to be 5 years which consists of a base year of 12 months from date of award plus four (4) 12 month option years. 13. CONTRACT TYPE: The contract shall be firm fixed priced (FFP). 14. KEY GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL: The Contracting Officer for this contract will be Jennifer Sylvestre, AE, (202) 231-1246. The COR and Government Project Leader will be Dr. James T. Lacatski. 15. DEFINED TERMS: Key personnel – defined as proposed management and lead science and engineering staff. ; Contracting Officer Representative (COR) – The government official appointed by the contracting officer and who is responsible for operations of the execution of the contract. The COR handles all aspects dealing with the interpretation and deliverables of the contract.; Contracting Officer – Procurement official who holds a contracting warrant and is authorized to obligate the government under the terms of a contract and make changes to the contract.; The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-012. The following FAR clauses and provisions apply to this acquisition: FAR 52.204-7 Central Contractor Registration ;52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items; and 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications ? Commercial Items; Offerors are requested to provide a completed copy of this provision with their offer. Offerors shall complete annual representations and certifications on-line at http://orca.bpn.gov in accordance with FAR 51.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications ? Commercial Items. If paragraph (j) of the provision is applicable, a written submission is required. FAR 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions/Commercial Items applies. 52.222-49 Service Contract Act. 52.247-21 Contract liability for personal injury and or property damage. FAR 52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders Commercial Items applies to this acquisition Supervision Labor and Materials. The following clauses within paragraph 52 .212-5(b) apply to this solicitation. FAR 52.222-21 Prohibition of segregated Facilities. FAR 52.222-26 Equal Opportunity. FAR 52.222-35 Affirmative Action for Disabled Veterans and Veterans of the Vietnam Era. FAR 52.222-36 Affirmative Action for Workers with Disabilities. FAR 52.222-37 Employment Reports on Disabled Veterans and Veterans of the Vietnam Era. FAR 52.225-13 Restriction on Certain Foreign Purchases. FAR 52.232-18 Availability of Funds. FAR 52.217-9 Option to Extend the Term of the Contract. Contract Terms And Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders Applicable to Acquisitions of Commercial Items apply to this acquisition Required Central Contractor Registration applies to this acquisition. The complete text of any of the clauses and provisions effective on the date of the latest Federal Acquisition Circular is available electronically from the following site:http://www.arnet.gov/far. Firms offering a response to this notice should ensure registration in the Central Contractor Registration database prior to submission for consideration. Offerors are requested to submit offers via e-mail to Jennifer.sylvestre@dia.mil. Proposals are due at the Contracting office on September 5. 2008 by 4:00 PM EST to the point of contactindicated below.

Point of Contact: Jennifer Sylvestre; Contracting Officer Jennifer.sylvestre@dia.mil

Contracting Office Address:

Other Defense Agencies, Defense Intelligence Agency, Virginia Contracting Activity (ZD50), 200 MacDill Boulevard Post Office Box 46563, Washington, DC, 20035-6563, UNITED STATES

Place of Performance:

Bolling Air Force Base, Washington DC
20340

Point of Contact(s):

Jennifer Sylvestre, Contracting Officer, Phone 202-231-1246, Jennifer.sylvestre@dia.mil

Added: Aug 18, 2008 11:43 am
The purpose of this amendment is to correct the language in the DD Form 254, Block 13. It shall be changed from :

“THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A TOP SECRET FACILITY CLEARANCE GRANTED BY THE DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE (DSS) PRIOR CONTRACT IMPLEMENTATION.”

to

“THE CONTRACTOR WILL NOT BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A TOP SECRET FACILITY CLEARANCE GRANTED BY THE DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE (DSS) PRIOR TO CONTRACT IMPLEMENTATION. HOWEVER, IT MUST BE OBTAINED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE DURING THE INITIAL YEAR OF THE CONTRACT.”

Amended Solicitation # HHM402-08-R-0211v2 is attached to this notice.

All offerors shall acknowledge receipt of this amendment.

Document Archive

.zip of all bid solicitation revision documents [0.3MB]

Original, Final, Bid Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items v.3 [32 Pages, 0.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [826.54 KB]

The post Advanced Aerospace Weapon Systems Applications Program (AAWSAP) Original Bid Solicitation first appeared on The Black Vault.

In the past week, a claim that the Pentagon had admitted to having UFO debris, and that they released the test results, began circulating social media channels and some mainstream media publications. Ultimately only gaining traction within tabloid style newspapers known for sensationalized headlines and wild claims; the overall story was easily debunked rather quickly. But, that brief attention to an outlandish claim revived interest in a different story from 2017, which is when the NY Times said that “metal alloys… had been recovered from unidentified aerial phenomena [UAP]” giving many the impression that specially modified buildings in Las Vegas, Nevada, were being used to store and test the unknown material. But, did these secret warehouses actually store the material? And if not; does it even exist?

The Legend Begins

On December 16, 2017, Helene Cooper, Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean wrote the explosive article, “Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program.” This trio of journalists profiled the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), which was what they called the “Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program.”  Within that article, buried thirty-one paragraphs below their masthead, was a bombshell allegation that specially modified buildings were being used to house debris obtained from Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), or what they called, UAPs.

“Under Mr. [Robert] Bigelow’s direction, the company [Bigelow Aerospace] modified buildings in Las Vegas for the storage of metal alloys and other materials that Mr. [Luis] Elizondo and program contractors said had been recovered from unidentified aerial phenomena,” the article outlined. “Researchers also studied people who said they had experienced physical effects from encounters with the objects and examined them for any physiological changes.”

As a result of writing this, many who read the story, along with news outlets who critiqued it, believed this to indicate that “metal alloys” from UAPs were actively being stored within these buildings. This claim was touted throughout many publications, which in turn helped create a more than three yearlong UFO legend about pieces of “metal” from unknown craft housed within secret warehouses in Las Vegas. Outlets who covered that angle included Scientific American, Live Science, New York Magazine, Vice News, Space.com, Popular Mechanics, The Independent, Deadspin, and many others, which all conveyed the NY Times’ claim about “metal alloys” and the buildings they resided in.

The Clarity

However, despite the seemingly incontrovertible claim put forward by the NY Times about the alloys, and the lack of any known legitimate opposition to what was printed; it is now being clarified by those intimately involved with the overall storyline here more than three years later.

The Black Vault received word this week from Mr. Luis Elizondo, the man who says he headed the AATIP program prior to his retirement from the Department of Defense (DoD). He felt the quote from the NY Times may have been confusing to some, after seeing it cited in an article last week on this website.

“Buildings were constructed to house material. Meaning, if Bigelow were to collect material, they would then be stored at the modified buildings,” Elizondo told The Black Vault in an e-mail. “I never said HE DID indeed collect material for AAWSAP. As I have always stated, I was part of AATIP, and had little to do with AAWSAP.”

AAWSAP was the Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Application Program, a program that according to Elizondo, differs from AATIP. Where AAWSAP, also according to Elizondo, focused on a broad-spectrum view of the paranormal and was spearheaded by Bigelow Aerospace’s subsidiary called BAASS; AATIP focused on more of the “nuts and bolts” of UAPs which Elizondo headed while working within the Pentagon.

The NY Times never mentioned AAWSAP in their original reporting, even though their claims were more about this program rather than the referenced AATIP.

And Then There Was None

With Elizondo denying having ever said Bigelow housed UAP material, that leaves the other part of the NY Times’ claim that “program contractors” had also confirmed the storage of the mysterious alloys. As has been established, Bigelow would be the overall contractor related to AAWSAP, and by chance, he recently addressed the UFO “metal alloy” claim in a video interview just weeks ago.

In a one-on-one discussion with George Knapp of MysteryWire.com, Bigelow was asked point blank about the claim. “NY Times reported that you modified your facility here in order to house some material from somewhere else. Did you ever have it?” Knapp asked. Bigelow simply responded, “We never had any.”

To further confirm that no contractor informed the NY Times about the pieces of UAP housed at Bigelow Aerospace, The Black Vault also reached out to Dr. Hal Puthoff. Puthoff is the President & CEO of EarthTech International, and at this time, served as a contractor and the “Senior Science Advisor” to BAASS during the AAWSAP. When asked about the statements given by Bigelow and Elizondo regarding the UAP debris being acquired and studied during the AAWSAP; Puthoff’s brief response to The Black Vault was that “their statements are correct.”

The Contradictions

The Black Vault also reached out to the journalists who wrote the original claim that has become more controversial rather than incontrovertible. Leslie Kean was the only to respond directly, and believes that The Black Vault “mischaracterized” what they originally wrote.

“You mischaracterized what we said. We did not write that Bigelow had collected material through AAWSAP or that Bigelow ever had material at all,” Kean said in a direct message on Facebook. “We said that Bigelow Aerospace modified buildings so that they could store materials recovered from what contractors told us had been retrieved from unidentified aerial phenomena.”

Although Blumenthal and Cooper did not respond directly to The Black Vault’s requests for comment, a December 17, 2017, interview of Blumenthal with MSNBC not only provides additional context of the claims made by the NY Times, but it also confuses the situation further.

Contrary to Kean’s statement that the NY Times never said Bigelow’s buildings had the material but rather just modified them in preparation; Blumenthal recounted a rather detailed story about “material” being studied by scientists during this program. In fact, he did so while speaking specifically about the Pentagon’s “UFO program” and his co-authored NY Times article about AATIP. He calls back to the only section of their article that deals with material, which is where the three authors of the piece specifically wrote about specially modified buildings at Bigelow Aerospace, which were modified solely to house the UAP “metal alloys.”

“They have, as we reported in the paper, some material from these objects that is being studied so that scientists can find what accounts for their amazing properties, this technology of these objects, whatever they are,” Blumenthal told MSNBC’s Yasmin Vossoughian. “They are studying it. It’s some kind of compound that they don’t recognize.”

It appears based on Blumenthal’s interview with MSNBC, two of the three co-authors of the article seem to disagree with what facts they were both originally reporting.

But, despite the seeming contradiction, Blumenthal stands by what he said. Although he did not respond to The Black Vault directly, Kean passed on a statement when she was asked about the contradiction.

“Leslie earlier responded for both of us. What I said on MSNBC is accurate and I’m not going beyond that. No further comment.”

When asked for further clarification on how both Kean’s and Blumenthal’s statements could both be true; Kean did not respond by the publish date of this article. (Any follow ups submitted will be added here)

To make matters even more confusing, the truth behind the “metal alloys” reported in 2017 would become even more elusive as time went on. Two and a half years after Blumenthal’s 2017 interview with MSNBC; he and Kean appeared together on a YouTube channel called “Project Unity” in a joint interview on July 25, 2020. In this interview, Blumenthal seemed to change his previous version of the story about what was really housed in Las Vegas.

“We did report that Robert Bigelow, who was a contractor on the program and was close to Harry Reid who got the money for the program, built a warehouse to hold retrieved materials. That was in the story,” Blumenthal said. “That’s as far as we got. That’s as much as we could find out at the time.” Blumenthal then goes on to state that since their original article, they learned that “… no materials were provided,” and that “… they never were put into the warehouse.”

It is unclear why the detailed story about materials and testing conveyed to MSNBC in 2017 was omitted, and the 2020 shifted to saying that no material was ever housed in Las Vegas or even given to Bigelow for the AAWSAP.

“Many Millions” Of Dollars

If three major players in the saga of AAWSAP and AATIP all agree there were no “metal alloys” in Las Vegas, then why were the buildings modified in the first place? The price tag to do such a remodel, according to Bigelow, was into the “millions” of dollars.

“We had bought facilities, spent many millions of dollars in buying buildings and I did have a large program to do a major construction on this property besides what we already have here and that was going to be really fun and cool, ” Bigelow told MysteryWire.com when asked about the NY Times article and the work Bigelow did through the AAWSAP. “So we would have nothing that would protrude the surface much, I was going to use life support systems that you use in space because you don’t have a door you can go out of or a window you can put up. So you survive based on the ecosystem the environmental control support systems that you create on board your stations. And so I was going to actually implement those into the underground facility which was going to be substantial and so that was a lot of fun to to do.”

If the NY Times article was right about building modifications for UAP material, but just incorrect with the impression that material was actually being stored there, why would Bigelow Aerospace need artificial ecosystems and “environmental control support systems” in an underground facility in order to house these “alloys” and other pieces of debris? Who informed Bigelow he would be getting material to spark a project spending “many millions of dollars” in preparation for its arrival? Were the modifications done with taxpayer dollars out of the $22 million reportedly going to Bigelow Aerospace for the AAWSAP contract?

The answers to these questions are unknown.

The Black Vault has reached out to Bigelow Aerospace numerous times in the past couple of years regarding AAWSAP and the claims by the NY Times in 2017. Those requests have all been ignored to date.

There is UFO Material – But Where?

With a muddied past of reporting on UFO or UAP material; it might reinvigorate you to know there actually is material out there from unknown craft, and it is documented within the archives of the US government. Although some of that documentation goes back decades, it is documented none-the-less. But what about today? Is the US government and military actively hiding UFO artifacts and testing them?

That answer, is hard to come by. In a May 31, 2019, interview between Elizondo and Fox News’ Tucker Carlson; that truth may have started to reveal itself, even if just for a moment.

“Do you believe based on your decade of serving in the US government on this question, that the US government has in its possession any material from these aircrafts?” Tucker Carlson asked. With clear hesitation to answer, Elizondo stated simply, “I do, yes.” Carlson quickly followed up. “You think the US government has debris, from a UFO, in its possession right now?” And it was that question that sparked Elizondo to close the door on going any further. “Unfortunately, Tucker, I really have to be careful of my NDA [Non-Disclosure Agreement]. I really can’t go into a lot more detail than that. But, simply put, yes.”

Shortly after Elizondo’s appearance on FoxNews, he did an interview with Alejandro Rojas and OpenMinds.tv. During this, Elizondo brought up his reference to the materials in possession of the US government on his own accord, which prompted an interesting exchange.

“Now, I did state for the record when I was asked on, on a recent interview by Tucker Carlson, do I believe that material exists? Um, I stand, absolutely stand by that statement, but I unfortunately, I don’t think I can elaborate more on that,” Elizondo affirmed. Rojas added, “Right. And to clarify, I mean, you believe that likely does exist, but it’s not like something you can prove.” Elizondo responded, “I didn’t say that. I just, I’m going to probably politely, deflect that question.” Thus the door was closed again.

Elizondo has further clarified with The Black Vault, that his assertion about “material,” comes from “real information not related to AAWSAP.” Where, or what, that material is remains a mystery.

Will We Ever Know?

There is no telling if, or when, the US government will come clean on if they truly hold UFO debris. The powers that be have had a long, documented, history of covering up the full story for quite some time, whatever that full story actually is.

However, despite the general public’s frustration of not knowing the big picture and what the ultimate truth actually is, there is one crucial aspect to getting to that point: accuracy. Accuracy in reporting, and accuracy from those conveying the stories.

As proven in the past couple of weeks, numerous erroneous claims about UFO debris have circulated and are easily debunked. Couple that with newly revealed clarity that partially tarnishes claims published three years ago by the NY Times, it becomes a murky bog of unsubstantiated rumors and unclear assertions.

On the surface, many stories seem clear, concise, and mind-blowing. Yet, once challenged, many stories fall apart. And those that haven’t yet; they become heavily questioned.

Maybe that is the plan. Maybe this is all part of massive disinformation campaign spearheaded by the US intelligence community which has succeeded in confusing the general public to the point of simply believing nothing. Or, maybe, it’s all a necessary part of a well-orchestrated and finely-crafted strategy which leads us all on a step-by-step path to “disclosure” where mistruths are sprinkled in with absolute truths in order to progressively get the general public to believe. Or, maybe it is something else entirely.

Whatever may be at the root of this all, in the end, no one still has the right answer. At least, not yet.

###

Additional Quotes, Published In Full

The post The UFO Legend of Unknown “Metal Alloys” Housed in a Secret Las Vegas Warehouse first appeared on The Black Vault.

The CEO of the corporation, Tom DeLonge, said in an Instagram post (which he later deleted) that he worked up an “established credibility” between TTSA and OSD. 

The Black Vault then filed a second time for documents on TTSA within OSD, having previously been told no records existed in 2018.

They found four pages within OSD that dealt with TTSA. Every page was not releasable as they said they were all about a “decision making process” or known as exemption (b)(5).

The previous “no record” response could still have been legitimately “no records.” Why? I submitted it in October of 2017 on a hunch after seeing Luis Elizondo, and his testimony, claiming to be a former employee of OSD. OSD’s denial was in August of 2018. The four pages could theoretically have been created after August 2018.

What’s it all mean and what’s in the four pages?

Is it about the CRADA? Is it about the UAP Video Leak investigation? Who knows… It will, for now, remain a mystery.

###

The post Department of Defense Exempts Records on To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science first appeared on The Black Vault.

In the process of seeking UFO related memorandum within the Executive Office of the President / Office of Science and Technology Policy, my May 2018 FOIA request was redirected to NASA for a response.

As a result, in November of 2019, NASA sent one responsive document that pertained to my request. It was their NASA Daily Comms Brief, which they felt the need to include Space.com’s “We may not be alone, former Pentagon UFO investigator says” article which was published the previous day, which included information on AATIP, Luis Elizondo and To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science.

Document Archive

NASA Daily Comms Brief for December 21, 2017 Included News about AATIP / UFOs [9 Pages, 5.4MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [5.42 MB]

The post NASA Daily Comms Brief for December 21, 2017 Included News about AATIP / UFOs first appeared on The Black Vault.

In December of 2019, The Black Vault broke the story that the Pentagon was amending their previous statements about the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, and their admission it studied “unidentified aerial phenomena” or UAPs. This was originally broken by the NY Post in May of 2019.

Although controversial, on the night of January 9, 2020, the Pentagon issued the following statement explaining in more detail, why they made that move.

The statement was sent en mass to an unknown number of recipients. It is published here, in full:

“At some point in the last couple months you have asked, in one way or another, why some DOD statements about the AATIP program have changed since December 2017 or even since this past Spring.  I wanted to provide you with a broad comment regarding the changes.   

Myself and my predecessors in my office, as well as our colleagues in the Defense Intelligence Agency and elsewhere in the department, have done our best to provide you and others asking about AATIP the most accurate information we had available to us at the time we responded to your questions.  Questions about AATIP have continued ever since this past Spring, becoming more focused and asking for details beyond what was readily available on a program that ended nearly eight years ago, especially as people who had direct knowledge of AATIP have moved to other positions or left the department.  As we conducted research to try to answer the continuing questions, we sometimes uncovered new information that changed some of our previous responses.  When responding to subsequent queries, we used the new information in our responses to be as accurate as possible with what we now knew.”
— Susan Gough, Pentagon Spokesperson

At this point, no other major statements are being amended, including their stance that the objects captured on three U.S. Navy videos, are UAPs.

Further information will be published when available.

The post The Pentagon Explains WHY They Changed Past UFO Statements first appeared on The Black Vault.

In a series of statements obtained exclusively by The Black Vault, the U.S. Navy confirms three UFO related videos represent what they call “unidentified aerial phenomena” or UAPs.  Originally released by the New York Times and To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science (TTSA) beginning in December of 2017, the three videos are commonly referred to as the “FLIR1,” “Gimbal” and “GoFast” (the third being released in March 2018). According to TTSA’s website, the clips represent, “… the first official evidence released by the US government that can be rightfully designated as credible, authentic confirmation that unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) are real.”  The Navy’s official position now confirms TTSA’s claims, at least, in part.

“The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena,” said Joseph Gradisher, official spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare. When asked why the phrase “UAP” is now utilized by the U.S. Navy, and not “UFO,” Mr. Gradisher added, “The ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomena’ terminology is used because it provides the basic descriptor for the sightings/observations of unauthorized/unidentified aircraft/objects that have been observed entering/operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges.”

(story continues below this video…)

However, the Navy also asserts that the three videos were never cleared for public release, thus confirming the official stance of the Pentagon originally issued to The Black Vault in May of 2019, and contradicting TTSA’s widespread claims the U.S. government “declassified” the footage for public consumption.

“The videos were never officially released to the general public by the DoD and should still be withheld,” said Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough to The Black Vault earlier this year. Mr. Gradisher, on behalf of the Navy, confirms the Pentagon’s position this week by adding, “The Navy has not released the videos to the general public.”

The Navy’s new statements also contradict information contained in a string of e-mails recently released by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The FOIA release to The Black Vault yielded sixteen pages of e-mails between Mr. Luis Elizondo, the man who sits as a board member of TTSA and claims to have headed the Pentagon’s secret UFO study known as “AATIP,” and the Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review (DOPSR), a component of the OSD that manages security reviews of information both “public and controlled release.”

In one of the released e-mails, Mr. Elizondo stated his justification for the clearance to use the three videos for U.S. government use only: “Unmanned aerial vehicles (balloons, commercial UAVs, private drones such as quadcopters, etc) continue to pose a potential threat to DoD facilities, equipment, and location. Army, Navy, and Air Force have all acknowledged the potential threat by UAS’ to DoD equities but no single UNCLASSIFIED repository exists to share this Information across all stakeholders.” Mr. Elizondo continued, “Our collective purpose is to eventually establish an UNCLASSIFIED database or ‘Community of Interest’ of related signature data to be accessible by stakeholders such as DIA, the Navy, Defense Industry partners, and perhaps even State, Local & Tribal authorities to catalog and identify specific UAS threats to national security and/or DoD equities.”

No e-mail released by OSD, which contained the entire conversion between Mr. Elizondo and DOPSR, mentioned UFOs, UAPs or anything “unidentified.”

In addition to these e-mailed communications released, there was a DD Form 1910. This document is used to officially request a DOPSR review of information, and here, Mr. Elizondo described the videos also as “UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle], Balloons, and other UAS [unmanned aerial system].”

Again, no reference to UFOs, UAPs or anything “unidentified.”

When asked for clarification from the Navy on why the discrepancy exists, Mr. Gradisher stated, “The Navy has no comment on, nor control over, how civilian individuals or organizations may or may not describe the objects in the referenced videos. The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena.” He then added, “You’d have to contact Mr. Elizondo on his descriptions.  I can’t comment or speculate on how/why he referred to them in that way.”

Mr. Elizondo and To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science (TTSA) were contacted for comment, but neither party has responded.

The e-mails show that although Mr. Elizondo was ultimately granted “[U.S. Government] Use Only” for the videos to be used in a database about aerial threats from unmanned systems such as drones; it was the Navy that needed to correspond with DOPSR and offer their official sign-off for full, unrestricted, public release. That communication required from the Navy was absent from the FOIA release, so the Navy was contacted for comment.

“Neither the cognizant Navy offices nor DOPSR have record of any correspondence responding to a request for unrestricted release of the subject videos in 2017,” said Mr. Gradisher, thus confirming that no evidence exists that authorized a public release for the three videos in question.

The Navy told The Black Vault the three videos are considered “unclassified,” however, unclassified information still requires a review for public release. Anything considered unclassified may still contain sensitive information, imagery or data embedded within digital files that may not be considered classified; yet it may still be considered sensitive.

Multiple statements and written records now show that the approval required for “public release” never took place, and the claims by TTSA that the videos represent, “official evidence released by the US government,” remain unfounded.

This new information comes amidst a flurry of other official comments complicating the claims of TTSA. In May of this year, The Black Vault began receiving the first statements from the Pentagon indicating the “FLIR1,” “Gimbal” and “GoFast” videos were not cleared for public release, despite the claims of TTSA.  In June, Keith Kloor with The Intercept received a statement from the Pentagon that Mr. Luis Elizondo had “no responsibilities” within the AATIP program, despite the widespread published claims by TTSA that he headed it. A 2009 letter by Senator Harry Reid was quickly touted by some to claim Mr. Elizondo’s story was in fact true; however the Pentagon quickly countered with official statements issued to The Black Vault stating that the letter’s existence did not change their stance.

To date, these official statements and comments by the Pentagon and the Navy have not been addressed or refuted by TTSA, despite them being contacted numerous times for comment.

The post U.S. Navy Confirms Videos Depict ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomena’; Not Cleared For Public Release first appeared on The Black Vault.