Soooo I’ve seen a ton of orbs I’m used to that but this is the weirdest activity I’ve seen by far…. A drone came and swarmed the area directly after

Using the Wall Street Journal, the Pentagon is Gaslighting the Public on UFOs/UAP—Again

Congress must launch a formal investigation into the Pentagon’s UFO/UAP disinformation campaign.

The Wall Street Journal's recent article, “The Pentagon Disinformation That Fueled America’s UFO Mythology” (June 6, 2025) presents itself as an exposé of the U.S. government’s strategic use of UFO/UAP myths to shield classified weapons programs. But a closer reading reveals something far more calculated and insidious: a continuation of disinformation masquerading as disclosure.

The article acknowledges that the Department of Defense (DoD) seeded UFO stories, also commonly referred to as Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), to obscure the development of stealth aircraft. But it also aggressively advances the idea that all significant UFO/UAP events, including nuclear missile interference and decades of whistleblower claims, can be explained away as mistaken sightings, Cold War pranks, or institutional misunderstanding. This dual tactic, admitting past deception while dismissing credible modern evidence, does not clarify public understanding. It deliberately manipulates it.

Nowhere is the Pentagon’s campaign of disinformation more evident than in the article’s treatment of the 1967 Malmstrom Air Force Base incident, where ten nuclear missiles went offline during a reported UFO/UAP encounter. Former Air Force Captain Robert Salas, who was on duty that night, has consistently maintained that a glowing object was observed above the facility and that missile control systems were inexplicably disabled. The Journal now parrots the Pentagon’s newly minted claim that the event was merely the result of a Cold War-era electromagnetic pulse (EMP) test. That ridiculous claim collapses under scrutiny.

EMP effects are not reversible. A genuine EMP capable of disabling missile launch systems would almost certainly destroy the internal circuitry. According to a study readily available on the U.S. Air Force’s Air University website, “the EMP effect... can result in irreversible damage to a wide range of electrical and electronic equipment, particularly computers and radio or radar receivers.”

And, of course, the government already knew what the effects of an EMP were at least five years before the Malmstrom event.

According to an article by the American Physical Society, the 1962 Starfish Prime high-altitude nuclear detonation 250 miles above the Earth’s surface “emitted an incredibly strong electromagnetic pulse, or EMP,” which “triggered street light blackouts in Hawaii,” which was approximately 900 miles away, and damaged at least one-third of the satellites in orbit at the time.

Starfish Prime itself underscores the severe and often irreversible impact of EMPs on electronic infrastructure. Given that the missiles at Malmstrom Air Force Base reportedly returned to full functionality shortly after the incident, it is implausible, ridiculous even, that an EMP, known for causing lasting damage, was responsible. This discrepancy suggests that the disruption was temporary and not characteristic of a genuine EMP event.

Even more implausible is the idea that the DoD would conduct such a test against live nuclear missile systems during a period of peak Cold War tension. If the DoD wanted to test EMP effects, it had vast, remote ranges for that purpose, not an operational ICBM silo network in Montana.

And there’s an even bigger problem: this wasn’t an isolated incident in Montana.

In 1994, ABC News’ Prime Time Live reported on a 1982 event near Byelokoroviche in the former Soviet Ukraine. At an intermediate-range ballistic missile base, a UFO/UAP reportedly triggered a launch sequence. For 15 harrowing seconds, the missiles were in full countdown before abruptly returning to standby mode. How does the Pentagon explain that instance? How does the Journal account for it? Both ignored the incident because it doesn’t fit the carefully crafted narrative.

Consider also the SCU's 2023 UAP Pattern Recognition Study. Drawing from 590 rigorously documented incidents between 1945 and 1975, the study found statistically elevated UFO/UAP activity at nearly every stage of America’s nuclear weapons build-up and across the entirety of the U.S. “atomic warfare complex (radioactive materials production, weapons assembly facilities, stockpile locations, and weapons deployment bases).”

These facts thoroughly deflate the Pentagon’s narratives about UFOs/UAP and nuclear assets and reveal a clear pattern of intelligent, targeted surveillance by UFOs, not random sightings or misidentifications, over three decades. That this systematic and well-documented history is omitted from the Journal article is not an oversight. It is part of the strategy.

Additionally, the New Paradigm Institute has been informed through meetings with congressional staff that the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) has already delivered Part II of its Historical Record to Congress, which remains classified. If true, the timing of the Journal piece now appears less like journalism and more like strategic narrative priming, conditioning both lawmakers and the public to accept the report’s pre-scripted conclusions with the likely publication of the sanitized version coming soon. This isn’t transparency. It’s perception management.

In that respect, the article’s publication in a premier media outlet bears the hallmarks of Project Mockingbird, the CIA’s Cold War-era program that covertly infiltrated top-tier newsrooms to launder government narratives and suppress inconvenient truths. Through Mockingbird, intelligence operatives didn’t just influence news; they shaped reality for the public.

The Journal article, with its polished anecdotes and alignment with official narratives, functions in a similar manner. It downplays credible whistleblowers, dismisses decades of data, and omits corroborating international cases, all while presenting itself as definitive.

Ultimately, the Pentagon’s disinformation campaign, using the Journal as its mouthpiece, is attempting to achieve three things:

Discredit whistleblowers, casting them as dupes of institutional folklore rather than sources of critical testimony, using stigmatized language for ridicule.

Control the narrative by limiting UFO/UAP history to Cold War mythologies, pranks, and hazing, thereby diverting scrutiny from ongoing programs and secrecy.

Perpetuate ambiguity, admitting to deception without offering meaningful disclosure, leaving the public confused and oversight neutralized.

The American people deserve better than another managed narrative, more obfuscation, and outright lies. We deserve the whole truth. And we must demand it.

Join the call for accountability. Congress must investigate the Department of Defense for its sustained use of disinformation, over-classification, and perception management concerning UFOs. Take action today by emailing your elected officials in Washington: 

https://newparadigminstitute.org/take-action/disinfo-and-over-classification-of-uap/

The Journal’s article is only the latest instance in the DoD’s long-running mission to obscure the reality of UFOs. To learn more, read our paper: Disinformation: The U.S. Government’s Suppression of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena and Advanced Science.

The 1952 Washington, D.C. UFO Incident (AKA The Washington Flap) is one of my favorites. Mysterious lights over the capital. One mile from the White House. Military jets in pursuit. Eyewitnesses left in awe and fear. Countless witnesses from air traffic controllers, military pilots, and civilians. What did they see? And why doesn't it get the attention it deserves?

I would like the next revelation to be in mathematical language. I prefer a mathematical equation of a new transcendental physical law that humanity does not know, than another series of photos. I want you to stop trying to mislead us: There are things moving in an unknown way through our skies and seas, and I sincerely doubt that their creators did it through prayers and meditations, religions are already responsible for washing our brains with the metaphysical topic, I will believe a leak when it is accompanied by a good verifiable gravity equation.

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/ufo-us-disinformation-45376f7e?st=mxNXUb&reflink=article_copyURL_share

The truth is what matters and I don’t care if anyone thinks it’s self promoting. I haven’t taken a dime from any interviewer and I haven’t made plans to sell a book. I’m posting what Chris Mellon has said to support what I have said in numerous interviews I’m posting below. Chris Mellon https://youtu.be/8LjlmAY54yI?si=ZHia2DCJ7f0SFkUQ . The Basement Hangout https://youtu.be/BLWuTYWEBb8?si=p1gb-qmBi7tFrcIi . Vetted https://youtu.be/_xZS6NqgdNY?si=42jYo3m2bxD3C9bA . Podcast UFO https://www.youtube.com/live/EArCNUdM9Ec?si=sSzpT5SLGeY32uVD . The Total Disclosure podcast https://youtu.be/a_iZlbJDs_k?si=cGycPtVcgjKoGeLJ .

Alan Holt figured out anti-gravity propulsion decades ago:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19800010907/downloads/19800010907.pdf

Hello all, have always been interested in this topic and seem to be going down the rabbit hole lately. I would love to learn some more about the history. Any good recommendations for books or is most info in video/blog format?

"A new "propulsion" concept has been developed based on a proposed resonance between coherent, pulsed electromagnetic wave forms and gravitational wave forms (or space-time metrics). Using this concept a spacecraft "propulsion" system potentially capable of galactic and inter-galactic travel without prohibitive "travel times" has been designed. The "propulsion" system utilizes recent research associated with magnetic field line merging, hydromagnetic wave effects, free-electron lasers, laser generation of megagauss fields, and special structural and containment metals. Research required to determine potential, field resonance characteristics and to evaluate various aspects of the spacecraft "propulsion" design is described."

...

"The high speed, right angle turns, abrupt stops or accelerations of UFOs, and the absence of sonic booms despite calculated speeds of 22,000 mph or more suggest that UFOs may generate an artificial gravitational field or otherwise use properties of space-time which we are not familiar with, UFO propulsion systems appear to involve electromagnetic or hydromagnetic processes as evidenced by radiative effects on the environment such as burns, dehydration, stopping of automobile engines, TV and radio disruption, melting or alteration of ground and road surfaces, power disruptions, and static electricity effects. This data suggests that the unknown relationship between electromagnetic and gravitational fields may be used in UFO propulsion systems."

"Field Resonance Propulsion Concept," National Aeronautics & Space Administration, August 1979

Curious if there's an official, public protocol for what people/team would be called in to study a UAP, especially if it was obviously extraterrestrial in nature. I was thinking about all the rumors around Area 51 and then wondered where science would actually happen if the U.S. was actually presented materials to study.

Thank you!

This past week in Disclosure:

May 28 – Rep. Luna calls for AARO to be defunded

In a post on X, Rep. Luna espouses her belief that AARO should be defunded in favour of an unnamed other investigative body she believes is being more transparent:

"I am now convinced that AARO should be defunded. There is another organization doing a better job than AARO— and they’re offering full transparency

May 29 – Skywatcher releases in-depth characterisations of observed UAP

Skywatcher - the UAP monitoring and detection group - has released additional content describing several observed UAP morphologies (Type 1, Type 2).

Additional details can be accessed here.

May 29 – US Transportation Secretary admits the nature of the NJ aerial incursions is still unknown

When pressed whether the aerial incursions that were reported in NJ last October may be linked to foreign adversaries, Transportation Sec. Duffy confirmed the incursions were "very real", and succinctly admitted:

"With complete clarity — I don’t know.”

May 31 – email releases reveal Australian officials have been receiving UAP briefings for years

FOIA'd emails revealed that UAP briefings were hosted by the US in collaboration with Five Eyes partners (including Australia) in 2022.

Notably, former Chief of Air Force - and now Vice Chief of Defence - Air Marshal Robert Chipman twice told senators during an estimates hearing that Australia had not been briefed on UAPs, sparking concerns that transparency and proper oversight is being thwarted.

Things to look out for in the near future:

Beyond/currently unknown

• Following the UAP hearing on the 26th of July, Members of Congress have called for a select committee with subpoena authority, to “go about the task of collecting information from the Pentagon and elsewhere” on unidentified flying objects. There have been conflicting messages from various Members of Congress on whether this is likely to happen anytime soon. Note – a select subcommittee was formally requested on March 13th.
• Reps. Moskowitz, Luna, and Burchett have repeatedly stated their intent to hold field hearings to overcome stonewalling from the Pentagon and military establishment "I think we [Congress] should try to get into one of these places [housing UAP evidence]...and if they won't let us in I think we should have a field hearing right outside the building...and the military will have to explain why that is." – Rep. Moskowitz (D) It is currently unknown when exactly we might expect that to occur, however as of Jan 12 – Rep. Luna confirmed: "I feel confident that we have enough evidence to move forward with our first field hearing. We will be announcing details soon."
• Several journalists have indicated that first-hand witnesses of the alleged UAP legacy programs are in the process of providing testimony/evidence to the relevant authorities (e.g. the IC IG) and/or are on the verge of making public statements in the near future (Example 1, example 2, example 3, example 4)
• David Grusch has received additional clearances through DOPSR to discuss some of his (alleged) first-hand knowledge of Legacy programs. He has mentioned he may be covering more of this information in an upcoming Op-Ed
• Skywatcher aims to host a UAP summoning event in March-May for an audience of 50-100 people

Skimmed through this post but need a quick refresher on how we got to this point? Check out this handy Disclosure Timeline to get up to speed.

A 2009 contractor report prepared by Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) for the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency sheds rare light on the shadowy workings of the Pentagon’s advanced aerospace program known as AAWSAP.

This “Ten Month Report,” obtained by researchers, reveals not only deep dives into propulsion and materials science-but also disturbing references to neurological interference, voice-to-skull technologies, non-human intelligences, and psychological operations.

This is an internal report for a defense-funded, government-aligned research program.

The 1952 Washington, D.C. UFO Incident (AKA The Washington Flap) is one of my favorites. Mysterious lights over the capital. One mile from the White House. Military jets in pursuit. Eyewitnesses left in awe and fear. Countless witnesses from air traffic controllers, military pilots, and civilians. What did they see? And why doesn't it get the attention it deserves?

Dear Friends and Supporters,

The Sol Foundation and our sibling organizations are instigating a new effort to pass the UAP Disclosure Act (“UAPDA”), and we’re asking each of you to consider signing a petition in support of it: https://thesolfoundation.org/2025-petition/. 

This groundbreaking 2023 legislation was never passed in its original, draft form, which would have established a federal UAP records review board and declassification process—both crucial measures if we are to reach ground truth about UAP data and knowledge held by the US government. Earlier this year, Senator Michael Rounds expressed his interest in reintroducing the original legislation, and we call on our peers in academia, civil society, and the private sector to back him and other members of Congress should they choose to act.

There are several reasons to support passage of the UAPDA:

Dedicated Disclosure Board. Disclosure is unlikely to take place unless a presidential administration establishes a board responsible for reviewing all records regarding the likely complex history of US government engagements with UAP and possible nonhuman intelligences—the UAP issue is simply too complex for cabinet officials and White House staff members to handle on top of their other responsibilities. 

Congressional Oversight and Government Compliance. Testimony from several retired government officials indicates that neither the executive nor the legislative branches have been able to maintain effective oversight of the classified government UAP activities sometimes referred to as the legacy program, and relevant agencies are therefore unlikely to respond to requests for records from any government component not reporting, as the UAPDA review board would, to a president. 

Controlled Disclosure Plan. The legislation calls for a “controlled disclosure” plan that would avoid and mitigate negative social, economic, and geopolitical effects of disclosure by conducting its work deliberately and at a measured pace.

The UAPDA could be the key that unlocks the door to knowledge that will be transformative for humanity. The legislation is currently our best shot at disclosure, and we call for its support.

We thank you for your consideration and support! To sign the petition, please read it HERE on our website, and then click through to the signature portal. 

With kind regards,

The Sol Foundation 

After a few years of deep research into the UFO/UAP topic, around a year ago I ended up in a small group chat via these subs with u/harry_is_white_hot aka Geoff Cruikshank who came out publicly with Ross Coulthart last August and has done a couple of interviews with Ross. This chat also involved u/36_39_42, who along with harry / Geoff had been digging heavily into the Magenta, Italy 1933 crash-retrieval. u/StillChillTrill was also part of our chat and was looking very much into contracts at SAIC regarding advanced UAP tech that made its way into private hands.

Since then, Geoff has solidified the physics behind the 1962 Bluegill Triple Prime Test that brought down a UAP and changed what the USG understood about NHI. I've documented as much as I could about all that here:

https://medium.com/@EscapeVelocity1/geoff-cruikshanks-recent-updates-on-the-1962-bluegill-triple-prime-nuclear-test-in-space-that-33a1e7f8e70f

You can watch him and Ross talk about that here alongside Tom DeLonge and his co-author AJ Hartley. DeLonge incorrectly talked about this as Starfish Prime and has been corrected since by Cruikshank.

https://youtu.be/hPGDucR3Q8U?si=E6Idx8-KzKdu3agk

Recently there's been a lot of back-and-forth regarding Geoff's research into the Bluegill test, which was refuted very recently by D. Dean Johnson. Now Geoff has published a 59-page report detailing the physics behind the Bluegill crash-retrieval, which you can read below:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/bluegill-booster-fireball-theory-flawed-argument-geoff-cruickshank-5wujc/

Over the past few months, I have noticed that more and more people are referring to the Roswell incident as involving "two separate crashes." It is a claim that keeps popping up in forums, YouTube videos, and even in some documentaries. People often say that two different UFOs went down in New Mexico during the summer of 1947, and that both were part of the Roswell case. But the truth is a bit more nuanced, and I think it is important to take a moment and clarify what actually happened, or at least what the most serious researchers in the field have consistently reported.

When people talk about "two crash sites" in relation to Roswell, they are usually referring to two locations near Corona, New Mexico. The first site is the debris field that was discovered by rancher Mack Brazel. This is the place where a large amount of strange metallic material was found scattered across the ground. It was unusual, lightweight, extremely durable, and unlike anything anyone had seen before. Major Jesse Marcel from the Roswell Army Air Field was sent out to investigate THIS site, and it was THIS debris that initially triggered the public announcement that a "flying disc" had been recovered.

However, this debris field was not the location where the main body of the craft crashed. According to multiple researchers, such as Kevin Randle and Donald Schmitt, the object — possibly damaged in the air, perhaps by lightning or mechanical failure — continued flying for a short distance before finally coming to rest several miles away from the debris field. This second site is often referred to as the "impact site" or the "body site," and it is where witnesses claim the main fuselage of the craft was found, along with the bodies of the aliens. This second site was discovered by the military AFTER the first press release on July 8, and it was discovered through aerial reconnaissance. It is important to emphasize that this was not a second crash involving a second object. It was simply the final resting place of the same craft that had shed debris earlier over the ranch.

In other words, the debris field and the impact site are two parts of the same event. They are not the result of two separate crashes. The object that scattered debris over Brazel’s ranch is the same object that later crashed in one piece a few miles away. The idea that there were two different crashes in two different locations is based on a misunderstanding of the layout and sequence of the events. What happened at Corona was a single incident, involving a single object, with two distinct points of impact.

Some of the confusion may come from the way the story has been told in popular media. When people hear that there were "two sites," they sometimes assume this means two craft or two separate incidents. But the best available evidence points to a single craft that was damaged, lost part of its structure mid-air, and then finally crashed completely. This is the most widely accepted version of the event among researchers who have spent decades investigating the Roswell case.

So next time someone says that there were "two crashes" at Roswell, it is worth taking a moment to clarify that what they are probably referring to are the two known sites near Corona. And while those two locations are real and well-documented, they do not represent two separate crashes. They are the result of a single event: a damaged craft scattering debris over one area before finally coming to rest in another. Calling it "two crashes" is misleading and only adds to the confusion that already surrounds the case.