John Greenewald: Hey everybody, John Greenewald. Here with an
update. That's a little bit unexpected. I would say in this
last week, the Department of Defense had sent an email to
myself and quite a few others, I don't know how many are on the
mailing list. But they gave us all a heads up about a new
office, essentially, the successor to the UAP Task Force,
which is now entitled The airborne object identification
and management synchronization group, or a OIMS G, which
replaces again, the UAP task force. Now for those who are not
following this all the time, the UAP task forces that group, that
internal group, from the Department of Defense run by the
Department of the Navy that essentially looks into
unidentified aerial phenomena, or UFOs. Now, we've heard very
little about it, in the sense that they're very secretive,
they are keeping all of the UFO cases hidden. We don't know how
many there really are. We do know, the June of this year of
2021, the June report had talked about 144 cases that went into
the development of that report. So essentially, they were
analyzing that number. But we don't know if that was 10% 100%
a fraction of a penny a fraction of a percent, not a penny. But
we don't know you know how many there are, and how many that
they've looked at the 144 number was kind of a surprise, because
143 of them, according to them remained unidentified, and so
there was no answer to them. So that a little bit was a
surprise. I'll get into the memo. But that report then
sparked a few other things in motion, which is the news of the
day. Now let me pull up that that message that we got with
the DoD was accompanied by this memorandum. Now I'm going to
read this to you because I'm going to drop this to audio form
two for those of you who are listening on the podcast, just
know I do these live so go to the black vault comm slash live,
that will bounce you to the YouTube channel. And that way
maybe next time, you can get involved and use the call in
lines and, and and have fun in a live setting. But I'm going to
go ahead and read this to you because it's an important, it's
a little over a page so it won't take too long. But I think that
this will give the best understanding over what they are
announcing now the memo itself is November 23 2021. This was a
memorandum for the senior Pentagon leadership commanders
of the combatant commands, Defense Agency and field
activity directors,
the subject establishment of the airborne object identification
and management synchronization group. It's a tongue twister,
the presence of unidentified aerial phenomena or UAP. In
special use airspace or su a designated in accordance with 14
CFR Part 73 represents a potential safety of flight risk
to air crews and raises potential national national
security concerns. Accordingly, I direct the Undersecretary of
Defense for intelligence, intelligence and security to
establish the airborne object identification and management
synchronization group to synchronize efforts across the
department and with other federal departments and agencies
to detect, identify and attribute objects of interest in
ES UAS and to assess and as appropriate mitigate any
associated threats to safety of flight and national security. To
provide oversight and direction to the aeoi MSG, I established
the airborne object identification and management
executive council or aeoi. Me X EC. I laugh because these
acronyms are out of control. The US di N S will be the lead DoD
official responsible for management of this process will
co chair the aeoi me FCC along with the Director of Operations
Joint Staff and will invite principle level participation
from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Resourcing for this requirement will be addressed in the program
budget review process. The director aeoi MSG, hereafter
referred to as the director will synchronize the activities among
the Office of the Secretary of Defense and DOD components, and
with other US government departments and agencies to
minimize safety of flight and national security concerns
associated with UAP or other airborne objects. And SEPA. The
director with support from the OSD and DOD component leads will
address this problem by standardizing UAP Incident
Record ports across the department, identifying and
reducing gaps in operational intelligence detection
capabilities, collecting and analyzing operational
intelligence and counterintelligence data,
collecting and analyzing statutory changes as
appropriate. Identifying approaches to prevent or
mitigate any risks posed by airborne objects of interest,
and other activities as deemed necessary by the director.
Additionally, the director in coordination with the OSD and
DOD component leads or heads, I should say, will identify
requirements and recommended changes and doctrine,
organization training material leadership, personnel, workforce
facilities, and resources to be brought to the aeoi me FCC for
review consideration and implementation as appropriate by
the applicable DoD component head. Effective immediately the
aeoi Emmy FCC, in coordination with the OSD and DOD component
heads will manage the transition of the current UAP task force to
the aeoi MSG, the aeoi me x EC, will designate an active
director of the aeoi MSG, and we'll submit implementation
guidance for my approval. This guidance will specify
organizational membership roles, responsibilities, and
authorities for the aeoi MSG, a y mx, EC, and OSD and DOD
components, Kathleen Hicks, and it was CC to the Director of
National Intelligence.
Man Oh, man, those acronyms are out of control. And yes, I truly
believe at this point, the acronyms are so out of control
by design. That way, it makes it incredibly hard for all of us to
continue to talk about it. UFOs are pretty much rolling off the
tongue UAPs just as easy to talk about a tip or SAP. Yeah, those
are pretty easy to reference. Now you're getting into all
these other ones that are just outrageously long. And from a
research standpoint, when you constantly change the
terminology, it makes researching and investigation
that much harder for people like myself. So in other words, if
you keep changing the program name, the offices who's in
charge, your paper trail is fractured, into 12,000 different
directions. And that is by design. I mean, we can clearly
establish a cover up and can comfortably do so with evidence
that has been legally obtained. Not anything leaked, we can
prove that beyond any shadow of a doubt, and it stretches back
decades. Now what we're seeing is a mess. I mean, it's an
absolute, utter mess. And with this change, albeit it is very
exciting, makes it incredibly difficult to try and figure out
what in the world is going on in the sense that who's in charge
at this point, who now do the UFO UAP reports go to. And when
you fracture that paper trail, it makes it more challenging.
Now I always say challenge accepted, I love that kind of
stuff. But a lot of people will give up, give up talking about
it, because they're so frustrated because it becomes so
confusing, or give up because it does become incredibly
challenging to track down and trace down exactly where all of
this is going. And when it is changing every couple of years.
Now, that makes it that much more difficult. Now, that's kind
of the the bad thing about this. But also there's a very much a
positive thing about this. And that is the fact that they are
creating this office, that this seems to be a more permanent UAP
task force, so to speak. And something that will give me a
paper trail, at least a fracture part of the paper trail, but a
paper trail nonetheless, that they will be taking these UAP
reports in that they will be taking them seriously that they
will be looking into them. There will be an office that is
established just for this. That is the good thing. So when we
hone in on the recent developments, that paper trail
leads to one office, at least for now, where my challenge
comes in. And that's where the challenging part is, is that
when you instead of focusing on just recent developments, and
let's say go back to the last 510 to 15 years, you can see a
much more fractured paper trail so it gets more challenging to
essentially track stuff down. Now there's a lot of rumors,
speculation, some positive spin, some negative spin, some really
upset people out there. And if you use social media, you'll see
the bigger names chiming in on what their different stances
are. Now I'll be honest with you, although I do have a stance
and we can get into this a little bit. None of us are
fortune tellers. None of you watching well, maybe a couple of
you give me a call. I mean, I can, I can always use some
psychics, but none of us know what really is ultimately going
to happen. And what what I kind of I used the word entertaining
the other day, and I'll get into that tweet. And boy that upset a
lot of people. But for me, it is entertaining, where we're people
are acting as those fortune tellers, that they know what's
going to happen that if this happens, or that happens, then
this is going to happen. Well, none of us know. Right? I mean,
we just don't, we have to go step by step and figure out what
is going on. And this is a positive development, in the
sense that it is concrete. It has happened, it does not
require a future vote. There's no speculation here on Will it
happen? No, it has happened. And and that's how my mindset is.
And I think that that gets me in trouble with some people. Were
they hate that I look at the now versus pretend I know what's
going to happen tomorrow. And I think that that's what a lot a
lot of people are doing right now,
we don't know how this is going to unfold. But there is one
thing I can promise you that I would bet money on. And that is
going to be secrecy. And and I think that the secrecy will
prevail, no matter what, in this topic, it just will it I mean,
this is not something that is getting easier, but rather it is
getting harder. Now going back to the to the formation of this
new again, we'll call it UAP Task Force successor. This goes
all the way back to the June report. And I think some people
forgot about this. And that is the June 25 memo that was also
signed by the same Kathleen Hicks Deputy Secretary of
Defense to essentially take that UAP report. And within the DOD
take the next step on creating and and formulating an effort
like this. There's a lot of speculation that it is attacking
Kiersten Gela brand and her amendment that's now sponsored
by a couple other senators. I don't see it that way. And the
reason is, is the paper trail shows that here I mean, I'll
show you here on screen. I won't read the whole thing for you on
this one. But this is the June 25 memo signed by Kathleen
Hicks. And she had asked for the following to be established
number one established procedures to synchronize
collection, reporting and analysis on the UAP problem set
and to establish recommendations for securing military test and
training ranges. Number two identify requirements for the
establishment and operation of the new activity to include the
organization alignment, resources and staffing required,
as well as any necessary authorities and a timeline for
implementation. Number three be developed in coordination with
the principal staff assistants, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, the secretaries of the military departments, and the
commanders of the combatant commands. And with the DNI and
other relevant interagency partners. Essentially, she was
saying, hey, we need to create a much more established procedure.
And that is the result of this. Was it an attack on Kirsten
Gillibrand and her, essentially, her effort to try and better
inform the general public with some transparency, but also
better tackle the UAP issue, which she felt feel felt is very
important, hence why she created the language. So I don't see it
that way, just simply because the paper trail doesn't lie. The
paper trail shows in June, that they were aiming to establish
something like this. The timing, which I know some people are
saying, well, this is a clear attack on Gillibrand and her
efforts. And they're trying they meaning the Pentagon and the DoD
are essentially trying to clamp down and solidify that they are
at the helm of this and that they will continue the secrecy.
I just don't don't see it that way. Let me pull this question
from Sky Hawk 88. And sky hawk. Thank you so much for supporting
the channel, John, with this as the Pentagon trying to
circumvent pending legislation oversight via Senate Senator
Jilla brands amendment. So obviously, I'm getting into that
but sky Hawk, I did want to show my appreciation for your support
of the channel. And and to better expand on it.
I don't see it just simply because going back to that paper
trail, the paper trail doesn't lie, the timing with the Jilla
brand amendment and how it's kind of been rewritten a couple
times, and so on and so forth. That's obviously going on right
now. And and the timing seems strange. In the same respect. I
find the timing expected dropped the news by the DoD on a holiday
week. At like, I think it was like 6:30pm When that when I got
it in California. So They dropped at about 930 or so,
Eastern Time, Pentagon time. That to me is the humorous part.
That's the timing. So on Friday nights, you see a lot of stuff
dropped more bombs, Shelley, you know, headlines that are going
to arise from this, you see that on holidays. So you see that
obviously with something a UAP, or UFO related, so they do that
Thanksgiving week, or new cycles are kind of dead. You know, you
see the major newscasters, they're all on vacation, those
that are doing the same news programmes are all kind of the,
you know, the backup team, and so on. So it's because the
ratings are a lot lower during this week. So the attention that
it Garner's is a lot less. So the timing for me, and this is
just my opinion. But this is proven by decade's worth of
looking at these types of drops and, and and revelations given
out by the Pentagon is that they plan it this way to do it on
holiday weeks, and Friday nights and stuff where new cycles are
either over or dead. And and that's what I think about the
timing on this other's felt that it was a shot at a jello brand
and, and essentially her effort with this amendment. I don't see
it that way. Again, none of us are fortune tellers, we really
don't know. But it is what it is. Now, one thing I'll bring up
here, which I posted on on Twitter, and this is where it
got a little bit. I think I've offended a couple people by
saying that it was entertaining. Here's what I posted, watching
the back and forth on who should control UAP research from within
the US government is entertaining. If you all think
one side of the government will be more transparent than the
other, regardless of what branch they are, you haven't been
paying attention. Now, this was, you know, more or less to create
dialogue and conversation. But here was my overall point. And
I'll get into a much expanded version. But But in short, the
secrecy has been rampant from every corner of the government
and military and has been for decades. And when you deal with
just the last couple of years, and just that we won't go back
to, you know, the blue book era and Condon committee and all
that, just now, it's getting worse. And so just because
congressmen, senators, politicians, whomever wants to
say or create an effort to get transparency surrounding this
issue, it doesn't mean that we will ultimately have the
absolute truth in the end. And although I am excited, I think
that the Jilla brand amendment is very worthwhile. It's very
welcome. I want to see it pass. I want to see these yearly
reports, we have to remember look at June as a provable
documented example. And that documented example was a
congressionally mandated report on UAPs. What did we learn? Did
we learn nuggets? Absolutely. Was it helpful? Absolutely. Do
we have what really is going on now? Do we understand?
Absolutely not. So these yearly reports, let's say this all
passes. Those would be great. Don't get me wrong. That's
that's a big win. But I think a lot of people are framing this
that. Well, if the Jilla brand amendment goes, we'll get much
more transparency. If the DoD handles it, then we'll get much
more secrecy. I'm here to tell you, you're going to get the
same level of secrecy no matter what. I honestly believe that
and I think that history and documentation proves that I am
all for lifting the shroud of secrecy. But will it happen and
give us the absolute truth?
I just don't see it. Now to give you guys an alternative view. My
tweet was not directed at Mr. Luis Elizondo, although some
people of course tried to accuse me of like attacking his
viewpoint. Truth be told, I had no idea that Mr. Elizondo had
tweeted about it. I just put mine out there. And then of
course, you know, twitterverse takes over and goes, you know,
here you are going at Mr. Elizondo again, which I wasn't I
didn't even know his viewpoint, but I felt it was interesting.
So I wanted to read it to you guys. It was a little bit
fractured. He tweets kind of a single tweet at a time he
doesn't thread it. So what I did is I threaded it here for you.
So here's a different take so you guys can can can see the
alternative view. Again, this was posted by Luis Elizondo,
November 24. Important update before anyone gets too excited
about the recent Pentagon announcement of a new UAP group.
Please consider the following Usdi is precisely the same
organization that has underplayed and tried to kill
the UAP effort for years. USDA is an oversight organization and
non operational. Nowhere is there a requirement to provide
unclassified findings to Congress or work with our
international partners. Given that elements still exist in the
Pentagon who are actively underplaying the significance of
this topic, this is akin to giving an alcoholic the key and
control to the liquor cabinet. If you want to maintain UFO UAP
slash UFO secrecy, this is exactly how you do it. This is a
direct and blatant attempt to circumvent and undermine the
Senate set and he tagged Senator Gillibrand Marco Rubio, Ruben
Gallego, Martin Heinrich and Tim Burchett, Burchette. apologize
if I mispronounce that, and others back to his quote,
please, please, please contact your representatives and let
them know this is unacceptable, and not in the best interest of
the American people. The USDA is the one single office that has
continually lied about this topic and persecuted
whistleblowers. So that's kind of an alternative view. But
where I would just respectfully disagree, the USDA is the one
single office that has continuously lied about this
topic and persecuted whistleblowers. I'm not really
sure what whistleblowers were persecuted. So I'd love to see
some expansion on that I believe Mr. Elizondo does not consider
himself a whistleblower, even though the mainstream media has
tagged him as such, I believe he has spoken out rather strongly
about that. But be that as it may, I'm not sure if he's
referencing himself there or somebody else. But Usdi is the
one single office that has continuously lied. The US
government as a whole has continually lied about this
topic and has for decades, it is backed up by press statements,
spokespeople and documentation that has come out through the
Freedom of Information Act, along with those that have come
out and talked about their personal experiences in the
military and what they've encountered. That said, it's not
just Usdi. In addition, when you look at the the congressional
side and the legislative branch, they are not that much better.
They there's a reason why during a campaign, they essentially
preach about transparency. But once they get in, they sit on
classified, sit in on classified settings all the time. Do they
tell you and I about it? Of course not. And the UAP issue is
definitely one of those that they have talked about. And let
me go ahead and read to you guys what I wrote in response to
essentially that the will call a backlash, I guess, for saying
that hey, look, there's this isn't a bad thing on what's
going on, but it's not going to give us the the ultimate truth.
And here was my expansion on it. And I feel it's important to
read.
I know this tweet upset some. But let me add more to properly
explain what I meant. legislative mandates,
initiatives, bills, etc, are trumped by national security. I
am excited to see how this all plays out when it comes to UAP
transparency, but we need to be realistic. I posted yesterday
about how the 1960s played out very similar to today. And we
ended up with the Condon report, will this be the same? I'm no
fortune teller, nor is anyone so who really knows I just to
choose to be cautiously optimistic. But let me use a
modern non UFO example. President Trump who sat in the
highest office of the land, had the desire to release all JFK
assassination files. He had a history of rocking the boat in
DC, and this appeared to be part of the intent. However, national
security one in the end, and secrecy prevailed. Despite what
you think of Trump, he rocked the boat plain and simple. So if
this was explosive, it would be him that would light the fuse,
yet national security trumped even Trump. So being realistic
is not pessimistic. It's just being real in the face of
reality. Bringing it back to UFOs. politicians know the UAP
UFO issue is hot, and will garner votes. Sorry, but we all
need to admit that's true. So even the intent to have
transparency will not magically Trump national security, but it
will score them points with the voters. It's why senators slash
Congressman will preach transparency during the election
season, but most will sit on committees that have numerous
classified setting settings or sessions that they never tell
you or AI about. And some of those of late have been on the
UFO slash UAP issue. There's been no push to declassify what
was learned in those sessions by anyone. Transparency push, yes,
declassification push, no. There is a difference. So the public
will get reports and that is a triumph and a win. I won't hide
from that nor should anyone. However, the false hope This is
all going to lead to the ultimate truth, where we learn
all the secrets is likely not going to happen. But generic
reports with little revealed, like the one in June can lead to
legal pushes for information through FOIA. And that's a win.
But all this leading to a public that can lean back in their
chairs and wait for the ultimate truth to be revealed. I'm sorry,
but I do not believe there is a chance. There are many aspects
of this that are exciting and awesome. But some are making
something making it something that it is not. So with that,
that was my response and expansion. All of this is
exciting, it really is, it's going to generate a lot of what
I call FOIA fodder to go after. And that's what's exciting about
this. But we also have to be realistic about our
expectations. And that's what's kind of, I would say, worrisome,
that I think people think, oh, DOD bad, Congress Good. Well, I
don't like the whole bad and good descriptors for either of
those. But secrecy prevails on both sides. And like I said, in
this expansion of the tweet, I'm sorry, the congressmen and
senators and so on, that are preaching transparency, and they
weren't open as they are not coming out of those classified
briefings, telling us anything about them. And I think the
point being, is that there's been real no push to declassify,
it's just the push to have more transparency. And although
that's a good thing, that still I think, will not give us the
ultimate truth. So that is the update on what's going on now,
and what may happen in the future. And one of my closing
thoughts to you guys, is this. A lot of people want me to focus
on the Jilla brand amendment, and what that could potentially
provide all of us. And although I think it is a, a great effort
to contact representatives, and I encourage you all to do it, I
was a big supporter, and am a big supporter of the big phone
home, I was involved in that I tried to give him Luis Jimenez
and his entire crew, as much support as I could, for that
effort, because I think it's very worthwhile. So I don't want
to take away from that. But sadly, I just think that the
congressmen and senators show as much secrecy I think, as the
government agencies we love to persecute. And that's where I
say that we need to keep this in perspective. But
the problem with focusing on the Gillette brand amendment,
despite what I say about secrecy, is that it hasn't
happened yet. And when it comes to me, and this isn't a right
the right way or the wrong way, it's just the way that I operate
is I can't go off of possibilities of tomorrow, I
have to go off of the reality of today. So that DOD memo, I can
act on that Agila brand amendment that hasn't passed
yet. That means nothing to me, from an investigative
standpoint, it's exciting. And I'm encouraged by it. But it
doesn't mean anything yet, until it is signed. Once it's signed,
we go from there. Until then, all we have is today, all we
have is what is written in stone, and essentially concrete
and unfolding. And as much as people hate the DoD getting
involved, their paper trail goes back to June that they were
going to do this effort, and that they were going to create
essentially this office and and establish a more, I guess,
structured way that they're going to research all of this
and go from there, that is something that I can act on. But
the Jilla brand amendment, I'll be exciting. I cannot. And
that's why I kind of veer away from it for now, until it
becomes concrete. I did the same thing with the UAP report before
it passed. And then obviously it passed. And we got that UAP
report and we dealt with that when it came but until it
passes, absolutely we can't do anything except just get excited
and cheer him on which I'm all for doing so please do it. Right
your representatives but until then, nothing we can do. So
that's my closing thought thank you all for tuning in. As
always, if you can give a thumbs up thumbs up for these videos,
huge help to me, make sure you're subscribed to the
channel. And the biggest help of all, is making sure that you
spread the word about this very channel is John Greenwald Jr,
signing off, and we'll see you next time.