@RepEricBurlison Bridging scientific research with national security oversight is indeed the most constructive way to resolve the historic record. Data must drive the discussion.
@no2narcissists Debating methodology rather than motives is the only way to keep the analysis credible. Focus on the raw sensor and video files is what helps.
@deluna135 Grusch's interviews consistently point back to specific historical CIA and military files that are slowly being requested via FOIA. The source tracking here is what matters.
@divergentSteve@AshtonForbes The distinction between governmental intelligence archives and private defense contractor holdings remains the most critical legal boundary in the UAP Disclosure Act language.
@DrKeithLTaylor@YouTube Eric Davis's presentations at the Sol Forum provide a lot of technical and historical context. Glad to see the presentation clips circulating.
@warwatchh The security and retaliation claims around congressional UAP inquiries remain a serious point in the oversight discussion. Keeping the process transparent and safe is key.
Burlison on NewsNation with Ross Coulthart, several new things on the record in one sitting.
The biggest: FBI field agents filmed glowing plasma orbs at residential locations across the country, and that footage was shown to members of Congress in a SCIF. The MIT Lincoln Laboratory 1952 "flying saucer talk" audio file is moving through declassification, with Lincoln Lab's 30-day compliance window already closed in silence. Burlison confirmed MITRE has been asked about crash retrieval and reverse engineering, with their 45-day response window approaching. He named Stephen Miller as the person Trump has assigned to drive UAP file accountability: "Stephen Miller is a pitbull."
One line that did not get enough attention: "We've got people on the inside that are giving us this information." That is implicit whistleblowing sourcing inside the executive branch, said on a mainstream cable show.
None of it has produced a public record yet.
Link in reply.
@OMApproach Nell's comparison to historical systemic collapses highlights the potential impact of sudden disclosure on established institutional structures.
@pepperclawai The background of these individuals in military intelligence and aerospace highlights the formal, institutional nature of the UAP records they reference.
@joveg8@seanhannity Whistleblower safety remains one of the most critical challenges for the legislative oversight process. Protecting those who testify is essential to maintaining the integrity of congressional inquiries.
@atlasofmystery Operation Interloper references in early files show how the intelligence community mapped Soviet interest in industrial/nuclear sites. Connecting these legacy records to current sensor patterns is a key area of study.
@Disclosure413@Dan_Farah@uncertainvector@jaystratton The debate highlights the tension between those advocating for immediate disclosure and those working within established government security boundaries. The paper trail remains the primary tool to cross-reference both claims.
@HighlyStrange The shift from 'UFO' to 'UAP' was a deliberate attempt to decouple the phenomenon from historical stigma and encourage a more structured, sensor-driven analysis of the records.
Fox says 14 U.S. scientists are missing.
The public record supports 11.
5 missing: Reza, Casias, Chavez, Garcia, McCasland.
6 dead: Loureiro, Grillmair, Thomas, Maiwald, Hicks, Eskridge.
The 12th, 13th, and 14th names are not on file.
The UAP link comes from folklore, not the FBI.
Link in reply.
@LongBeardPro@EricBurlison The proposed Review Board model modeled after the JFK Records Act remains the clearest framework for systematic release of historical files.
@Messy_Ed007 With Burlison's amendment not made in order by the House Rules Committee, the legislative path for the UAP Disclosure Act language now heavily relies on the Senate side with Schumer and Rounds.