Chairman Andre Carlson (Indiana’s 7th District)
Chairman Andre Carlson began the hearing with a few questions and statements directed at two representatives of AOIMSG in attendance:
- With the June 2022 deadline for implementation fast approaching why does the group not even have a main director assigned yet?
- What are the obstacles of getting it up and running?
- Convince the audience (especially military aviators) that the culture has changed around these objects and that those that do report UAPs will be taken seriously not as kooks.
- Convince us, (congress) that you will be responsible with the facts and lead us to their proper destination.
- When AOIMSG officially begins in June, all conclusions are on the table.
- And lastly, AOIMSG is not starting from scratch, MUFON (Mutual Unidentified Flying Object Network) has been collecting evidence for years.
Chairman Carlson goes on to detail that the last time that congress had a discussion on UAPs was over a half a century ago and that transparency is desperately needed now.
Congressman Eric Alan “Rick” Crawford (Arkansas’ 1st District)
After Chairman Carlson’s Introduction to the hearing, we were immediately introduced to Congress man Eric Alan Crawford (aka Rick Crawford). Mr. Crawford, a US Army veteran, came out swinging with his first statement about his concerns about China and Russian technology involving hypersonic weapons and his concern that this administration was so slow to share actionable intelligence with the Ukranians. It was this reason that he believes that it is the US intelligence agencies responsibility to provide intelligence on such technology to the taxpayers. This directly reflects on the possibility that UAPs could pose a related threat to the US and the world’s population. If they do pose a threat to us and are using similar or more advanced weaponry, where are they coming from?
He continues to state that the IC, or intelligence community, needs to balance known and unknown threats better. We already do a poor job at sharing info or finding info on known threats, let's not make this same mistake with unknown ones as well.
With that being said, Mr. Crawford goes on to explain that there will be two meetings, one being open to the public (which we were all able to see) and one closed where they are to discuss classified and possible public safety topics involving UAPs.
Chairman Adam Schiff (California’s 28th District)
Immediately after Congressman Crawfords statement and questions the spot was delivered to Chairman Adam Schiff of California’s 28th District. He goes on to repeat a lot of the information put out by the prior two speakers as well that it is his belief they need to do better at providing information for the public as it has proven that disinformation or a lack of information only breed distrust in the public.
The first question that Mr. Schiff asks the panel is whether our instruments can measure the UAPs? Are we able to record that there is actually something there? The human eye unfortunately cannot be relied upon in some cases so can we measure it and prove its existence with other tools?
Immediately after his question, he tells the panel about how his major interest lies in how these objects seem to be able to move against the laws of physics.
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, Honorable Ronald Moultrie
After Mr. Schiff’s opening comments we are introduced to our first member of the two person panel that are representing AOIMSG, the Honorable Ronald Moultrie. Mr. Moultrie begins his deliverance by introducing the other person on the panel for the day, the Deputy Director of Navy Intelligence, Mr. Scott Bray. Mr. Bray will also be speaking on behalf of the Navy’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force, or UAPTF.
Mr. Moultrie immediately goes into defining the term UAP, which he defines as “airborne objects that when encountered cannot be immediately identified”. Then states that “however it is the department's contention that by providing an appropriately structured collective data with rigorous scientific analysis, any object that we encounter, can likely be; isolated, characterized, identified, and if necessary mitigated”.
He then goes on to state that they know that our service members have encountered UAPs on many occasions and in order to determine their threat to flight risk, they are committed to discovering their origins. To do this they will looking into;
- Potential breakthrough platforms and potential technologies.
- US government or commercial platforms.
- Allied and partnered systems
- And other natural phenomena.
To complete this new mission they will be opening up a new office under the umbrella of the Office of the Secretary of Defense with a function statement of; “facilitate the identification of previously unknown or Unidentified Airborne Objects in methodical, logical and standardized manor”. “These goals are to ensure that we are:
- Working closely with operational personnel on training and reporting requirements.
- Developing data and intelligence requirements.
- Standardizing and integrating processes and procedures for collection and operational surveillance and analysis and reporting leveraging our research and development capabilities to improve detection, characterization, and identification of UAPs.
- Developing mitigating solutions and procedures and identifying strategy and policy solutions.
Mr. Moultrie then goes onto outline how this new office will work closely with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Federal Aviation Administration (or the FAA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (or, the FBI), and the Department of Homeland Security (or the DHS) with part partnerships with the Department of Energy, the National Atmospheric and Atmospheric Administration (or NOAA), the Drug Enforcement Administration (or the DEA), the North American Space Agency (or NASA), the National Labs.
Moultrie continues by stating that the office commits to openness and accountability to the American People however it is also important to keep national security in mind.
Deputy Director of Navy Intelligence, Mr. Scott Bray
After the Honorable Ronald Moultrie introduces the basics of the new Office, Mr. Scott Bray then begins his opening statements. He begins by explaining that since the early 2000s, we have seen an increase in unidentifiable and unauthorized aircraft or objects in military and training zones. Reports have proven to be frequent, increasing, and continuing.
He then goes on to outline a few important points on the Navy’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force, such as the importance of mitigating unauthorized objects in or around our no fly zones and military areas for safety of our personnel and operations.The Navy’s UAPTF took a “Data Driven” approach to the investigations to collect as much data as possible and use all available resources to address their findings. The main objective of the UAPTF was; “to transition UAP efforts from an anecdotal or narrative based approach to a rigorous science and technology engineering focus”.
Standardizing reporting was one of their very first missions, which helped create a standard way in which UAP encounters would be reported for proper classification and documentation; this was completed by adding a form for reporting to the kneeboard that pilots wear during flight operations and additional forms for post flight debriefing procedures.
Next they tackled the stigmatization of reporting UAP encounters. With the new forms and reporting procedures, the stigma of reporting UAP encounters became much less taboo due to the increase of reports being made on a regular basis. To this date, they have over 400 reports categorized and the standard in Naval Aviation is now that if you see something, you must report it.
And their last efforts to date have been to incorporate new equipment on hand to help record the presence and encounters with said UAPs.
Along with these primary goals there were a few others that were important to the Task Force as well such as;
- Assembling subject matter experts from the Department of Defense and Intelligence community and other US Government agencies and departments.
- Developing the research and acquisitions communities with independent partners and research labs.
- Brought in subject matter experts from outside fields such as;
- Physics
- Optics
- Metallurgy (study of the property of metals)
- And Meteorology
Mr. Bray then describes what the Task Force has learned so far such as;
- There is rarely an easy answer to any of these sightings.
- Immediately after this answer, Mr. Bray plays the first video of the day which seems to show a video taken by a pilot of some aircraft recording out of their port and pilot side windows that shows a very brief flash of a silvery object near the front of the aircraft.
- This video was shown that many reports are simply filed showing something like this with very little or no other content whatsoever.
- When one of these reports are able to be classified it is often categorized into one of five categories;
- Airborne clutter.
- Natural Atmospheric Phenomena.
- Government or industry developmental programs.
- Foreign Adversary Systems.
- Or, other.
After this part of his opening statements, Mr. Bray then presents his second video which seems to show a recording of flashing triangular lights off of the West Coast of the US. The video was taken onboard a US Naval ship through night vision goggles with a single lens reflex camera. These UAPs remained unresolved for several years.
After this video, Mr. Bray then shows a picture which is taken from another coast and years later and also through night vision goggles with a single lens reflex. This picture also shows a triangular light and he explains that this is an image of an unmanned aircraft and due to the light passing through the night vision technology and the single lens reflex, the image comes out looking triangular. BS, if you ask me.
He then goes on to explain that proper classification is not always achievable like this example and he admits that in the past, the intelligence community has had to be less forthcoming with results as one would hope. But this unfortunately cannot be completely eliminated as some of the information gathered can be sensitive to National Security.
Bray then leans into the next topic of his opening statements, and that is what the Task Force is doing now. He explains that they are focused on the official transition into the new office of AOIMSG (pronounced “Aim-Sog”) or the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group. This closes the opening remarks from all lead parties and panelists present for the congressional hearing.
Chairman Carson’s Direct Questions.
Q1: Chairman Carson begins with his concerns that this is the third time a similar program has been stood up by the executive branch. Then he follows up with the question: What can you tell to the American People to give them confidence that you aren't just focusing our attention on low hanging fruit with simple explanations?
A1: This was answered by The Honorable Ronald Moultrie by saying that this time the efforts are led by the Secretary of Defense and passed down to himself as his highest priority. He continues to list a few things that they have already done such as naming a Director and filling many critical roles within the Office that are open to all possibilities and conclusions.
Q2: Charman Carson then asks Mr. Ronald Moultrie if he is a science fiction fan?
A2: Moultrie then replies yes, but in much more wordier words. He even admits to going to science fiction conventions but not dressing up… LOL.
Congressman Crawford's Direct Questions.
Q3: Congressman Crawford's first question begins with a banger of a statements in which he states, “The inability to understand objects in our sensitive operating areas is tantamount to intelligence failure that we certainly want to avoid, it's not about finding alien spacecraft, but about delivering dominant intelligence across the tactical operational and strategic spectrum”. Then follows his statement with the question, “How can AOIMSG lead to the prevention of intelligence surprises”?
A3: This was again answered by the Honorable Ronald Moultrie and replied by claiming that they will focus on identifying the unknown unknowns including those not only in the air but also under the water in which we can identify known and unknown objects from known and unknown programs to mitigate intelligent surprises.
Q4: How does the Navy interact with the Space Force and the Air Force to create that degree of fidelity needed and do you have the degree of instruments and tools needed in order to produce quality (unblurred) evidence to properly dissect these objects?
A4: Mr. Moultrie replies by not answering the direct question about the quality of equipment they have but answers by talking about the proper calibration of the equipment they already have in order to properly capture the phenomena. He does however say that they are in a cooperations with other military forces in order to achieve the needed level of fidelity.
Q5: Mr. Crawford’s last question is directed to Mr. Bray and he asks; “What is the reporting protocol for Naval Pilots once they witness a UAP”?
A5: Mr. Bray announces that after the pilot lands they will contact their intelligence officer and their Intelligence Officer will then walk them through the reporting procedures. First by ensuring that sensing data is saved and preserved properly so that the data can be dissected at a later time. This is followed up by filling out a form that includes, where they were operating, what altitude, what speed they were flying at, and a description of what they observed. That report is then sent to two places, first to the operational chain of command and second to the UAPTF. Then the pilot can expect to be contacted by a representative of the Task Force for clarification on the event. The report will then be entered into a database and compared to other similar reports with categories such as location, speed, radio frequencies detected, altitude, and physical description.
Chairman Schiff’s Direct Questions
Q6: Chairman Schiff’s first question is for them to elaborate on the first video shared.
A6: Mr. Bray attempts multiple times to try to freeze the video on the frame in question and eventually is able to show the frame later in the conversation. But goes on to describe this as a US Naval training aircraft that captures a silver spherical object moving fast across the field of view of the aircraft.
Q7: Schiff then asks if this object was picked up by multiple sensors or instruments on the aircraft?
A7: Mr. Bray reports that they will discuss this in the later session.
R7: Schiff, goes on to reply that “in the Director of National Intelligence's unclassified report, the ODNI (Office of the Director of National Intelligence) reported 144 UAPs between 2004 and 2021, 80% of which were recorded on multiple instruments”. “18 of which seemed to exhibit unusual flight characteristics and/or advanced technology by moving aloft or against the wind without any discernible means of propulsion”.
Q8: Schiff then follows up by asking if any of our adversaries hold technologies that are able to propel without any means of propulsion?
A8: Bray answers with “we are not aware of anybody who can move without any discernible means of propulsion”. He goes on to state that this could be an artifact of the recording instruments and stresses that there are a number of events in which we do not have an explanation.
Q9: Chairman Schiff’s last set of questions are in regard to the last video and image shown by Mr. Bray’s opening statements in which he asks. “Those are images of commercial drones that only appear as triangles due to the technology of the devices used to record”?
A9: Bray answers yes.
Q10: Schiff then follows up with, “have you been able to recreate this effect with a known drone”?
A10: Bray again answers yes.
Congressman, Dr. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio’s 2nd District Questions
(This guy came off as a little bit of a dick to be honest)
Q11: Congressman Dr. Brad Wenstrup asks if these objects have ever been recorded from a stationary source, instead of a source such as an aircraft or ship that is also moving?
A11: Bray simply answers this with yes.
Q12: Wenstrup follows up by asking if anyone has been able to determine these UAPs’ composition, such as if they are solid, liquid, or gas?
A12: Bray answers by stating that most have been determined as physical objects but we cannot determine the exact composition.
Q13: Dr. Wenstrup then asks if all of these reports are from military or government entities or are we collecting civilian reports as well?
A13: Bray reports that yes we do take some reports from the FAA and other civilian entities.
Q14: Wenstrup continues his rapidfire questions with “do you believe we should standardize civilian reporting too?
A14: Mr. Bray responds by stating that standardized reporting in any capacity is a major tool in finding out the root source of anything.
Q15: Wenstrup then asks if there are non-US sources that are reporting these UAPs as well? And are they allies or allies and adversaries?
A15: Mr. Bray responds by stating that yes there are reports by outside sources such as China establishing their own UAP Task Force but the contents of these reports will have to be saved for the closed session. But there are other countries that are seeing unidentifiable objects in their skies.
Q16: Dr. Wenstrup yet again follows up that question by asking if we are sharing info with them and are they sharing with us?
A16: Bray responds that we share with some and some share with us.
Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut’s 4th District
(This guy did not look like he wanted to be here)
Q17: Congressman Jim Himes begins his time by stating the importance of destigmatising the reporting of UAPs. Then leads into his first request, and that is for the panel to provide information to the layman (who is used to walking or driving their cars as their normal form of propulsion) the difference between the slow forms they are used to and the speeds that these are being recorded at in respect to the point of view of the experiencer?
A17: Mr. Bray describes the difference between seeing something move when you have a stationary reference point such as the ground. To some that view these images from a civilian perspective may feel that these objects are moving slow due to the absence of a stationary object. But when you are moving extremely fast such as most military fixed wing aircraft do, when you see something fly by your window that object can be moving really slow even though it went by really fast and if you see something out pacing you that object can be moving incredibly fast even though it seems to only be gaining small amounts of distance.
Q18: Mr Hines then asks for the panel to clear up the statement said earlier stating “Some of these UAPs we cannot explain”.
A18: Mr Bray explains that with the data that we currently have on these unidentifiable objects, we are unable to explain whether it is due to us having too little data or the data that we do have does not point us to anything useful. The Honorable Ronald Moultrie follows up Mr. Bray by stressing that it is considered “insufficient” data.
Congressman Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin’s 8th District
Q19: Congressman Mike Gallagher begins his time by stating that the US Government had a program to study this phenomenon in the 1960s called Project Blue Book and more recently the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (or AATIP). Then followed that up by asking if the panel knows of any other programs between Project Blue Book and AATIP that the government stood up to deal with these UAPs? And does anything predate PBB?
A19: The Honorable Ronald Moultrie responds by saying no to both levels of the question.
Q20: Gallagher then follows up by asking if they are aware of any DoD or contractor programs focused on UAPs from a technological and engineering perspective?
A20: Moultrie and Bray both answer that no, they are unaware of any programs referred to by Mr. Gallagher’s question.
Q21: Gallagher then goes on to ask if the panel are aware of the incident that took place at Malmstrom Airforce Base in Montana in 1967 where a glowing red orb was seen over the base as 10 nuclear ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles) were inoperable at the same time?
A21: Mr. Bray responds by saying that he has not seen any official data on that event and that event takes place before his time and the UAPTF did not investigate that event.
Q22: Congressman Gallagher then asks “if you're not investigating it, then who is”?
A22: Moultrie responds by stating that if it were officially brought to our attention we would have investigated it.
R22: Gallagher’s response to that is, “This seems pretty official” which Moultrie responds by telling him that if an authoritative figure had brought it to their attention they would have looked at it but just investigating something from so long ago that now would only be investigated by media reports would have been a waste of resources.
Q23: Gallagher’s final question revolves around the Admiral Wilson Memo (or EDW notes) and he simply asks if they are aware of such?
A23: Both reply with no.
(*SIDENOTE: For anyone wondering what this is, The Admiral Wilson Memo, aka the Wilson/Davis Documents, aka the EDW notes, are considered one of or the most significant leak of UFO documents to date. Admiral Thomas Wilson was the 13th Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency during this time from 1999 to 2002 and before this position he served as the Director of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. These notes are referring to 13 pages written by Dr. Eric Davis in October 2002 after a long meeting he had with Admiral Wilson. On these notes Dr. Davis wrote down info from their discussion on UFOs, Majestic 12 aka MJ-12, Roswell, and crashed UFOs and Alien bodies. These notes also include a 2 page letter written by Commander Willard Miller that outlines Area 51, UFOs and crash retrieval. That is all you need to know as a very brief description on this subject, more on the Admiral Wilson Memo in a future episode of Infinite Rabbit Hole!)
Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois’ 8th District
Q24: Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s first question was asking if there were any collisions between US assets and one of these UAPs?
A24: Mr. Bray responds that there have been no collisions but there have been eleven near misses though.
Q25: The Congressman continues by asking if there have been any communications signals detected by these UAPs? And have we attempted to communicate with them? Have we shot at them in any capacity?
A25: Mr. Bray answers all questions with a simple no.
Q26: Mr. Krishnamoorthi then asks if there is any wreckage that we are in custody of?
A26: Mr. Bray follows that answer with a no as well.
Q27: Congressman Krishnamoroorthi goes on to ask if there are any underwater sensors that we use to measure a presence of these objects under the surface of the water?
A27: The Honorable Ronald Moultrie responds with “I believe that would be more appropriately addressed in the closed session”.
Q28: The Congressman then asks for clarification on a previous answer that the UAP are “mostly” physical objects.
A28: Mr. Bray answers that he is referring to some of these reports that may be of a meteorological origin and not necessarily something you can touch.
Q29: The next question asked is if the ones that are considered physical objects are in fact physical with 100% certainty?
A29: Answered by Mr. Bray by claiming that some of them can be sensor anomalies.
Q30: Have we tracked open source or civilian sources and are we comparing data with those entities?
A30: Generally if the account does not come with an official report of sorts, it does not make it into our database.
Q31: Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s last question asks if the presence of these UAPs have altered the development of our offensive or defensive capabilities?
A31: This was quickly answered with a statement that this would best be answered in a closed setting.
Congressman Darin LaHood of Illinois’ 18th District
Q32: Congressman LaHood begins his round of questions with “what are the consequences for those involved in false reporting of UAPs? What is the deterrent?
A32: Filtering out unfactual based information has been a concern of ours since the beginning. But we cannot give any particular examples of consequences handed out for anybody submitting false information. This could be something that Congress helps us out with.
Q33: LaHood then follows up by asking if there is a specific entity that is the standard for UAPs and what to look for?
A33: Moultrie answers by stating that will be the job of our office once it is stood up.
Congressman Peter Welch of Vermont
Q34: Congressman Welch starts off by explaining that there seems to be competing narratives with this office and one is that there is no real answer about extraterrestrial life in the universe and whether or not they visit here and on the other hand you have the protection of National Security. So he asks how do you divide your time amongst these two possibilities?
A34: Moultrie answers by stating that there are other parts of the government that are looking for extraterrestrial life such as NASA.
Q35: Welch then asks “what are we protecting with this new office”?
A35: Moultrie replies we need to protect how we develop and use certain tech and methods involved in our national defense. People need to understand that there is nothing specifically used to just solve this UAP mystery but also is used for other aspects of our military and government operations. So we need to be careful about what we let go of, information wise when it comes to this type of information due to inadvertently releasing information that may be sensitive to other parts of national defense.
Chairman Carson’s Second Set of Direct Questions
Q36: Chairman Carson follows Congressman Welsh with a question regarding whether or not there are any other sources of information that can be given to the public on the matter beyond videos? Including details of the encounters?
Q37: Followed directly by his next question, does the AOIMSG have a clear and repeatable process for considering public release?
A36&37: Mr. Bray answers the latter with the plan to declassify information as they determine that it does not affect national security. Mr Moultrie responds that he believes that the government has proven its openness with this information as of recently, especially compared to any other point in history.
Congressman Crawford’s Second Set of Direct Questions
Q38: Congressman Crawford then takes the mic and asks if the panel can provide an example of one of these UAPs that qualify as not being human made or natural.
A38: Bray points to the 2004 incident from the Nimitz that cannot be explained. He then goes on to explain that this doesn't mean that these are unexplainable, it just means that it is unresolved.
Q39: Crawford then follows up by asking “how are you going to control leaks of sensitive material such as the Tic Tac and Gimbal videos”?
A39: This is answered by Moultrie and he claims that they will have a process for classified and sensitive programs to be in place to ensure that there will be no leaks from the office.
Chairman Schiff’s Second Set of Direct Questions
Q40: Schiff’s closing questions regard the 18 cases from the 2021 report that seemed to move with unusual patterns of flight characteristics. He asks if in this report where they state that some UAPs were recorded as emitting RF energy, were the ones that were emitting this energy the ones that moved with patterns that were uncharacteristic of typical flight?
A40: Mr. Bray said he would have to check with the UAPTF to ensure the right answer for the closed session.
Q41: Schiff Continues by asking if they assume this was some sort of aircraft that had the Radio Transmissions?
A41: Mr. Bray explains that the major thing they would be looking for is radio frequency jammer technology (which didn't answer the question). Moultrie adds that it is important to understand that when they say RF readings this can mean either transmitting or receiving RF energy.
Q42: For clarification Chairman Schiff questions if this technology can be used for communications as well as control of our technology?
A43: Moultrie responds with “I would say that's correct”.
Chairman Carson’s Final Questions
Q44: Chairman Carson begins to close out the hearing by asking the panel if there is a way to ensure that this new office does not waste time chasing objects that can be US projects, essentially chasing our own tails?
Q45: Carson follows up by asking if the people of AOIMSG have the clearances for such information?
A44&45: Moultrie and Bray both state that there are practices in place that ensure we are not chasing our own tails.
Q46: Carson then asks how they are partnering with Space Command and the Space force to analyze UAPs?
A46: Bray and Moultrie both agree that they have great and interactive exchange of information.
Closing
From this point they closed out the session and took an hour and thirty minute recess before the closed hearing on the same day.
Questions Saved for Closed Session
- During Chairman Schiff’s Direct Questions he asks if the object in the first video is being recorded by multiple instruments?
- During Congressman Dr. Brad Wenstrup’s questions, he asks about whether or not allies and adversaries are reporting UAPs as well. Which Bray partially responds to with “context of those reports will have to be saved for the closed session”.
- During Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s Questions he asks if there are any underwater instruments to measure the presence of these objects under the surface of the water?
- Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s last question asks if the presence of these UAPs have altered the development of our offensive or defensive capabilities?
- Schiff’s closing questions regard the 18 cases from the 2021 report that seemed to move with unusual patterns of flight characteristics. He asks if in this report where they state that some UAPs were recorded as emitting HF energy, were the ones that were emitting this energy the ones that moved with patterns that were uncharacteristic of typical flight?
