Aliens and UFOs/UAPs

[Observer]

 

[SiamSam]

View attachment 52167

They are smoking alien rock candy on the flightline

 

[Observer]

Howdy UFOs,

It’s been awhile since I’ve talked about audits and aliens. I would like to present some findings which may corroborate specific claims made in the legendary Wilson/Davis memo, namely in identifying the audit which nearly outed the program, according to Admiral Thomas Wilson. I will begin with a brief passage of relevant points within the memo, and will provide further information that may tie up a few loose threads, and wrap up with a brief timeline of events. As always, I am happy to answer the community’s questions and will provide a link to the good questions at the bottom of this post. I've also left a brief conclusion/TLDR at the bottom for the folks who can't bother reading all of the details...

Wilson/Davis Memo recap

full notes link: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6185702-Eric-Davis-meeting-with-Adm-Wilson

(Prior context: Adm. Thomas Wilson (TW) is recounting to Eric Davis (EWD) how he discovered a UFO program within OUSDAT records and him reaching out to said-program.)

TW: Yes, ten days later (mid-June or so). Flew out there

• Met in their conference room in their secure vault
• Three of them show up

EWD: Three guys with whom you had telecon?
TW: Yes, same 3

• Security director (NSA-retired, a CI expert)
• Program director
• Corporate attorney
• Called themselves “the watch committee,” or gate keepers.

EWD: What that phrase or name?
TW: I asked; they said they were formed out of necessity to protect themselves after a near disaster in the past almost blew their cover - something to do with an agreement that was reached with a couple of Pentagon SESs overseeing SAPs in those days - were vague about when that was.
EWD: What was this?
TW: Let me finish!
- They said years ago in past an audit investigation led to them, and it wasn’t supposed to- nearly outed!

• A battle, a nasty back n’ forth between them and the investigator and his Pentagon chief ensued - like a tug of war for program transparency, they told me- money was the issue- their hiding out became the other issue! - Some kind of threat was leveled to blow the lid off them so they backed down and let the investigator in to complete his job
• (They work very hard to keep program hidden)

EWD: What happened with that?
TW: He was officially briefed, given tour, shown their program
EWD: Did they show him a craft? Or hardware they said was “alien” or from a UFO?
TW: Didn’t say more about that.
- Said after that episode a formal agreement was struck with Pentagon people (SAPOC) to prevent this in future - didn’t want a repeat.

• Special criteria were established in agreement

- A special circumstance that must meet rigorous access criteria set by contractor committee

• No USG personnel are to gain access unless they met the criteria - to be administered by contractor committee (program director, attorney, security director) irregardless of the tickets and position USG personnel possessed.
• Literally their way or the highway

Helpful context: Eric’s detailed notes indicate that Admiral Thomas Wilson had this exchange with “the watch committee” around May 1997.

GAO Audits of the DoD

The Government Accountability Office, or GAO, is an independent government agency within the legislative branch that provides auditing, evaluative, and investigative services for the United States Congress. When instructed, the GAO has the capacity and legal authority to investigate any federal government agency and report relevant findings to the appropriate Congressional committees. ***You may have seen this office (w / r/ t UFOs) in passing, as there is a recent amendment to the IAA for 2025

which requires a GAO Comptroller General review of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), namely its UAP reporting and Federal agency coordination efforts.

The GAO isn’t the only office with purview over DoD audits, and general monetary audits are usually performed by the Inspectors General of each agency, sometimes with the assistance of public accounting firms. However, if Congress asks any questions about DoD spending or programs, they often call upon the GAO to get it done, sometimes in the form of an amendment to the annual spending bill. With that in mind, and also keeping in mind the context of the Wilson/Davis memo, let’s take a look at a pretty scathing report of DoD Special Access Programs, which was completed and reported to Congress just a few years before Thomas Wilson would meet with the “gatekeepers”.

DoD Special Access Programs: Administrative Due Process Not Provided When Access Is Denied or Revoked, published May 1993

~https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-93-162.pdf~

The full report is 38 pages, but I will summarize key findings, quotes, and major takeaways:

• The GAO “review(ed) the due process procedures and practices for individuals whose access to Special Access Programs (SAPs) and sensitive compartmented information (SCI) in the Army, Navy, and Air Force is denied or revoked.”
• Report was requested by:
  • William Clay (D), Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
  • Frank McCloskey (D), Chairman, Subcommittee on the Civil Service, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
  • Don Edwards (D), Chairman, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, Committee on the Judiciary

Key Quote on due process: “When unfavorable information surfaces or actions occur that indicate that authorizing or continuing an individual’s access to a SAP or SCI is not clearly consistent with the interest of national security, the access may be denied or revoked. When this happens, the individual should generally receive administrative due process, which includes being notified of the reasons, given a chance to respond, and advised of any appeal procedures. The nature and extent of due process depends on whether there is a security clearance, SAP access, or SCI access and whether the individual is a government or contractor employee.”

• “DoD procedures for security clearance and SAP/SCI access denials and revocations for government personnel provide that the individual be told in writing that denial or revocation is being considered, including the reasons; given an opportunity to respond in writing; given a written response with the reasons for the final administrative action; and given an opportunity to appeal the decision to a higher authority within the service or component.”
• “The Director of Central Intelligence (present-day Director of National Intelligence) has established minimum appeal procedures for individuals whom access to SCI has been denied or revoked. The SCI due process procedures are not as extensive as DoD’s. For example, the individual can request the reasons for denial or revocation of SCI access, but there is no requirement that the reasons be provided.”
• “With respect to DoD military and civilian personnel in SAPs, the Navy and Air Force did not comply with DoD Regulations, which generally requires due process when access to a SAP is denied or revoked.”
• In responding to this apparent noncompliance by the Navy and Air Force, DoD officials said the regulation was not intended to cover covert or unacknowledged SAPs. However, the regulation does not contain such qualification or limitation.
• The Navy and Air Force used the minimum procedures established by the Director of Central Intelligence (ie. individuals were notified after the access had been denied or revoked).
• “The Navy and Air Force did not have appeal procedures for SAPs because they did not have administrative due process for these programs. The Army had SAP administrative due process, including appeals, which was similar to its SCI process.”
• “Some of the designated appeal officials of the Navy and Air Force were in the same commands as the officials who made the determinations that resulted in the appeals (ie. revoking SAP clearance).”
• “DoD officials told us that the regulation was not intended to cover covert or unacknowledged SAP or SCI programs; however, there is no mention in the regulation about this limitation. DoD officials said that in the case of SAPs involving DoD personnel, they used the due process procedures established by the Director of Central Intelligence for SCI because of the program similarities.”

I call this next section, “fun with audit samples”

• “Because DoD does not maintain centralized records on SAP denials and revocations, we could only review the cases provided by the services, who told us that unacknowledged program cases would be excluded.”
• “The Navy gave us a listing of 70 SAP cases that covered the 9-month period beginning October 1, 1991, and we randomly selected 30.”
• “The Air Force gave us 26 SAP cases, and we reviewed them all. Most of the cases involved contractor personnel.”
• “DoD maintains a central records system that shows the security clearance and SCI eligibility status to DoD military, civilian, and contractor personnel. We used these records to select random samples of security clearance denials and revocations during our previous review, but we could only use them to select Army cases. We could not use them to select Navy and Air Force cases because of unreliable data partly resulting from the way the two services were organized to adjudicate security clearances and SCI accesses.”
• “The Army has a central adjudication facility to handle clearances and SCI access, whereas the Navy has one office handling clearances and two that handle SCI accesses. The Air Force, until recently, had two separate offices handling clearances and SCI accesses.”

Admiral Wilson also mentions how the unacknowledged UAP SAPs are in the same records group, but their relationship to each other is not obvious, which is weird based on his experience.

• "The central records showed that during the first 6 months of fiscal year 1992, there were 479 DoD and contractor employees for whom the Army denied or revoked SCI access. We selected our 30-case sample from that number. When we extracted random samples of Navy and Air Force cases from the central records and attempted to review the cases at the Navy and Air Force SCI adjudicating offices, we had some problems. The offices had many cases that did not appear in the central records. Therefore, we had to use listing of cases provided by the offices to select random samples of cases to review."

Did the GAO accidentally stumble across the UAP program due to the sampling approach used to review SCI cases? The next section might shed some more light.

Unacknowledged SAPs in the sample?

• “When we started our review, DoD was reluctant to give us SAP cases from unacknowledged programs because of security reasons. DoD told us that such programs accounted for about 10 to 20% of the total number of SAPs.”
• “We agreed to review access denials and revocations for only the presumably less sensitive acknowledged programs.”

Sure, it seems as if the sample sizes might not have accounted for revocations cases involving unacknowledged SAPs, but the way these are phrased possibly infers that an unacknowledged program was accidentally discovered during this particular audit. Was the SAP discovered during the concurrent review of SCI cases?

Director of Central Intelligence 1/14 for SCI

• Signed in May 1976 by George H.W. Bush, Director of Central Intelligence at the time.
• Sets minimum standards for notification that access to SAP or SCI has been denied or revoked, no provision for individual response to notification, however individuals are given the opportunity to appeal decisions.
• “Navy and Air Force, as permitted by DoD regulation, used minimum procedures established by the DCI. Individuals were notified after the access had been denied or revoked.”

GAO Recommendations to DoD

1. Direct Secretaries of the Navy and Air Force to comply with the due process requirements of DoD’s personnel security program regulation with respect to military and civilian personnel for whom access to a SAP is denied or revoked;
2. Require that the services designate officials for appeal purposes from commands that are independent from those officials who make unfavorable SAP/SCI access determinations;
3. Establish oversight procedures to ensure compliance by the services and components with the SAP/SCI due process requirements for DoD and contractor personnel;
4. Propose that the National Industrial Security Program (NISP) establish SAP due process procedures for contractor employees that are similar to DoD’s procedures for its military and civilian personnel.

DoD’s Response to GAO Recommendations

• DoD generally did not agree with our findings and recommendations, although it agreed with several issues.
• Basic differences exist with respect to the interpretation of requirements of DoD regulations (over SAP/SCI administrative due process procedures), DoD’s practical definition of due process, and results of our review and accompanying recommendations.
• “DoD did not concur with our recommendation calling for Navy and Air Force compliance with the administrative due process requirements. DoD said that we incorrectly took the position that its regulation requires the same administrative due process to deny or revoke an individual’s clearance for access to SAPs, regardless of the sensitivity of the program information.”

If the GAO only looked at acknowledged SAP cases, why is the DoD defending their rationale for cases involving “sensitive” (unacknowledged) programs?

Creation of the Senior Review Group (SRG) supporting SAPOC

Following the public release of the report in May 1993, DoD officials worked to revamp their protocols for SAPs and SCI. Notably, the SAPOC (Special Access Program Oversight Committee) modified its process for validating SAPs and reviewing security protocols. On January 5, 1994, the DEPSECDEF (Deputy Secretary for Defense) announced the creation of a Senior Review Group, which would review all SAPs before they were presented to the SAPOC. Click here for that document.

This is the same Senior Review Group that intimidated Admiral Wilson after he discovered a SAP dealing with UAP. Direct quotes from Wilson/Davis memo below:

EWD: Did you complain to SAPOC?
TW: Yes - called the subgroup members (Senior Review Group members) to a meeting at Pentagon

• Told them what happened at meeting
• They responded that they would sustain the contractor on their access denial
• So I ended up arguing with them a while
• Broke up in 20 minutes and they would meet me in 2-3 days.
• Got the call 2 days later (near end of June) and met again with Senior Review Group members

EWD: When?
TW: Before last week of June (97’)

• They told me (TW) that they were sustaining the contractor, that I was to immediately drop the matter and let it go - forget about it as I did not have purview over their project, it didn’t fall within my oversight, etc.
• I became very angry - started yelling when should have kept my mouth shut

EWD: Miller and Greer said you nearly got busted.
TW: Close to that!
- Told Miller Senior Review Group chairman said if I didn’t follow their suggestion that I would not see Director DIA promotion, got early retirement, lose 1 or 2 stars along the way

• Really incredibly angry - upset over this - livid!!!
• Why such a big deal over this considering the position of trust I have in the Pentagon - I do have relevant regulatory/statutory authority over their program - that’s my position!!!

Chronological Timeline of Events Described Above

February 1993-April 1993: GAO reviews SAP and SCI administrative due process protocols for Army, Navy, and Air Force. GAO finds limited evidence that Army follows DoD regulations, but seriously questions due process protocols for SAPs/SCI for Navy and Air Force.

April 1993: DoD responds to draft GAO report, indicates due process is not required for sensitive/unacknowledged programs. Agrees with several issues, but does not concur with GAO’s underlying assessment or definitions.

May 1993: GAO report forwarded to Congress. DoD begins addressing recommendations.

January 1994: DEPSECDEF announces creation of SRG to review all SAPs prior to transmission to SAPOC.

July 1994: While directly unrelated to this narrative, the Air Force publishes the “Roswell Report” after a lengthy GAO records inspection for documents “on the 1947 weather balloon crash at Roswell Army Air Field, New Mexico, focusing on the requirements for reporting air accidents similar to the Roswell crash; and any government records concerning the Roswell crash. (Anyone find the scope of this investigation curious?)

May 1997: Admiral Thomas Wilson discovers a series of unacknowledged SAPs under his authority and demands read-in to the program.

mid-June 1997: Admiral Wilson is told by “the watch committee”, a group of three corporate officials, that their program is reverse engineering a vehicle “not from this earth - not made by human hands.” The gatekeepers are extremely testy with Wilson’s lines of questioning.

late-June 1997: Admiral Wilson then meets with the SRG overseeing the portfolio and is told to drop his inquiries. Warned he will lose his promotion chances, forced into early retirement, or worse.

October 2002: Eric Davis meets with Admiral Wilson to discuss his discovery of an unacknowledged SAP dealing with a UAP vehicle in the possession of a "top aerospace defense contractor with intelligence in their portfolio."

Conclusion

Based on the details provided within the Wilson/Davis memo, I have reasonable confidence that this GAO audit-in-question is the audit referenced within the memo, which almost inadvertently outed the UAP Program. The GAO’s review focused on the larger concept known as due process, which is a fundamental right afforded to all Americans under the US Constitution. The GAO believes that due process should be afforded to all individuals, including those working in SAPs or working with SCI. However, the DoD (mainly the Air Force and Navy) disagreed with this notion, stating that due process is not required for cases involving unacknowledged or extremely-sensitive programs, among other reasons. The DoD were required to address the recommendations of the report, which likely led to the creation of the Senior Review Group that assists the SAPOC, the same SRG which intimidated Admiral Wilson after he discovered a UAP program.

 

[Observer]

View attachment 52167

loved this patch

it was an official unreleased icon afaik

 

[Observer]

With all the stars, planets, solar systems and galaxies out in space............


It Would Be Ignorant to Think Earth is the only planet harboring Life.

 

[Observer]

Nazca Tridactyl Alien Reptiles of Peru and Russia, are they the same species and does the existence of both establish that they are genuine aliens? One thing it kind of does indicate that it would be awfully far to walk from Peru to Russia so the skeletons featured here probably had some kind of airborne craft to take them from one place to another. The 'identical' nature is pretty interesting and if you dig around in the ground sooner or later you can have a TV show (Oak Island comes to mind).​

im still waiting to see more data

but it appears some are legit mummies that are NOT HUMAN, and are UNKNOWN ORIGIN.


but again. waiting for more data and lab work, from reputable places....

 

[Observer]

""It was Charles Bowsher Comptroller General of the United States under President Reagan from 1981 to 1996 that was the one doing the audit that almost blew the lid off the program.

In Jacques Vallee’s book Forbidden Science 5 he states ““Hummingbird. Friday 24 September 2004. Jim Westwood, in Virginia, has come up with new data, looking up archives and “inspecting government documents. He’s close to Fred Durant (of the old Robertson panel) and his contemporaries.

He’s uncovered a third official trail into the secret UFO project through Charles Bowsher, Comptroller General of the United States under President Reagan from 1981 to 1996.

He may be one of the four “iron posts” beyond Sheehan and Wilson. Bowsher found a crashed UFO program during a massive audit of classified projects: “Less than a handful of officials knew about it.” In the period 1984-85, Bowsher uncovered a bizarre special access program coverup which surely violated every classification, executive order, regulation, and Congressional rule. They contemplated turning it over to Justice for prosecution, but “a powerful person in DoD quenched it.” The program, according to the reviewers, had to do with an exotic, non-Earthly vehicle.""

 

[SiamSam]

""It was Charles Bowsher Comptroller General of the United States under President Reagan from 1981 to 1996 that was the one doing the audit that almost blew the lid off the program.

In Jacques Vallee’s book Forbidden Science 5 he states ““Hummingbird. Friday 24 September 2004. Jim Westwood, in Virginia, has come up with new data, looking up archives and “inspecting government documents. He’s close to Fred Durant (of the old Robertson panel) and his contemporaries.

He’s uncovered a third official trail into the secret UFO project through Charles Bowsher, Comptroller General of the United States under President Reagan from 1981 to 1996.

He may be one of the four “iron posts” beyond Sheehan and Wilson. Bowsher found a crashed UFO program during a massive audit of classified projects: “Less than a handful of officials knew about it.” In the period 1984-85, Bowsher uncovered a bizarre special access program coverup which surely violated every classification, executive order, regulation, and Congressional rule. They contemplated turning it over to Justice for prosecution, but “a powerful person in DoD quenched it.” The program, according to the reviewers, had to do with an exotic, non-Earthly vehicle.""

Could have been a weather balloon or spent elephant prophylactic.....

 

[TomH]

Could have been a weather balloon or spent elephant prophylactic.....

Light from Venus, dispersed by swamp gas.

 

[Observer]

his latest video was made private, trying to figure out why, it did involve china.....curiously...

 

[Observer]

UK MoD sent two intelligence officials to classified Pentagon UFO summit

EXCLUSIVE: The UK MoD sent two intelligence officials to a top-secret Pentagon summit despite defence officials closing the UFO desk in 2009 insisting it was a waste of money.

www.express.co.uk

 

[Observer]

""There were three crashes at Kingman. Rough timeline is this, allegedly:

Operation upshot-knothole was launching high explosives and nukes from May 15-25.

Many people reported UFOs dancing in the skies during this period.

On May 19 the 'dirty Harry' bomb was detonated. It was far larger than expected, and caused significant contamination for the down winders.

This is where the saucer craft has a forced landing, near Kingman. It was retrieved on the 21st by an m25 tank transporter, over the Colorado River and eventually passing through a few afbs before ending up at Wright-Patterson. Allegedly, it was retrofitted as a flight simulator for USAF test pilots who train to fly other landed craft.

But a second elongated tear shaped craft crashed near Red Lake, North of Kingman. It was partially destroyed. Crashed. There is evidence of military action there, with rations and garbage from 53 still being found at the site.

The third crash happened on haulapi mountain on May 24. Witnesses saw a fireball crash into the mountain. Fire fighting crews were dispatched, and noticed two or three disoriented and partially burnt 'strange looking' people.

There are two variations from here. Newspapers I've read indicate three people, one of which died in the ambulance were taken to a hospital. The other account says that the two survivors were arrested on suspicion of arson, and kept in the courthouse basement jail, where they mysteriously escaped. Though, the courthouse jail wasn't built until later, so I have many doubts on this variation of the story."""

 

[Observer]

""wonder if the EMP from the nuclear weapons tested brought the UFOs down? There is talk of a UFO brought down due to the Starfish Prime atmospheric nuclear tests, Bluegill shot in particular.""

 

[Observer]

https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/Z3u3gr5Ne3

 

[Observer]

.

 

[Observer]

They create gravity waves and ride it like surfing.

How exactly?


Thomas Townsend Brown....knew/figured it out I bet...





There's a paper called "the minor quantum", he wrote, you can't find it.

But you can easily find the one he wrote after, called "the structure of space".

 

[SpectrumFarms]

I whole heartedly believe we are not alone in this universe. I witness a UFO when I was 14 and uprooted my beliefs. I do think we spend too much time looking in space and not enough time looking in our own oceans. Only 10% mapped and 5% explored, we are still at the starting line. I also can go down my rabbit hole of the human perception and how much we can’t observe what is going on around us. So many questions…

 

[Observer]

I whole heartedly believe we are not alone in this universe. I witness a UFO when I was 14 and uprooted my beliefs. I do think we spend too much time looking in space and not enough time looking in our own oceans. Only 10% mapped and 5% explored, we are still at the starting line. I also can go down my rabbit hole of the human perception and how much we can’t observe what is going on around us. So many questions…

well, i can tell you we definitely are not, i just can not provide evidence.


i think it would be silly to think this one marble out of a trillion+, only this one can harbor life?

no way.

"theres literally everything in space, morty"

 

[Observer]

there is a shit-ton of other species and civilization's out there.

 

[Observer]

another mindfuck too is that its possible theres humans on another solar system out there too......

 

[Observer]

 

[Observer]

Magnesium-bismuth aluminum alloy acting as a terahertz waveguide for electric fields ***

 

[SiamSam]

another mindfuck too is that its possible theres humans on another solar system out there too......

There are probably so many different kinds of aliens; think Men in Black HQ and then figure many can also shape shift on command. Laura Boomer recently mentioned something about aliens coming in and claiming benefits, so there's that. Earth's nickname in the Cosmos is " Endless War Planet". It makes you wonder what the "others out there" are proud of other than germs, guns and steel.

 

[Zen_seeker]

The WF? have been a little disappointing lately. Back to new posts every two or three weeks with compilations rather than new or updated content.

Guess it’s getting harder to find new or updated topics.

 

[Observer]

Lue Elizondo Interview with Jesse Michels

 

[Observer]

The WF? have been a little disappointing lately. Back to new posts every two or three weeks with compilations rather than new or updated content.

Guess it’s getting harder to find new or updated topics.

Yeah, I've not been watching them as much, watched all the really interesting ones too, already.

 

[Zen_seeker]

Yeah, I've not been watching them as much, watched all the really interesting ones too, already.

He’s had one or two pulled the last 30 days. Buddy saw half of one, came back later to finish and gone.

Last new one was interesting.

I learned about it on Facebook. Don’t go on FB normally but he’s got 5 to 10 minute snips of larger releases there.