Onsdag den 13. november blev der afholdt en høring i USA’s kongres om UFO-fænomenet; Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Exposing the Truth. Til lejligheden var der indkaldt fire nye vidner, som afgav edsvorne erklæringer og svarede på spørgsmål fra udvalgte kongresmedlemmer (ved høringen i 2023 var der indkaldt 3 vidner).
Et af vidnerne var Luis ’Lue’ Elizondo, der tilbage i 2017 trak sig fra sin stilling i Pentagon, og som sidenhen har været en aktiv fortaler for større åbenhed omkring den viden den føderale regering gemmer på i forhold til UAPs/UFOer.
Jeg har endnu ikke læst eller hørt om reaktioner på det som kom frem under den over 2 timer lange høring, men tænker, at kritikerne nok hurtigt trækker frem, at der ikke kom håndfaste beviser på bordet.
Efter min opfattelse faldt der dog nogle ganske slagfældige ordvekslinger sted. Det kræver dog at man tager vidnernes edsvorne udsagn for gode varer. Som jeg ser det er der ingen grund til at betvivle, at Lue Elizondo holder sig til sandheden.
Nedenfor har jeg udvalgt de ordvekslinger med Elizondo, som gjorde mest indtryk.
Spørgsmål fra Nancy Mace (medlem af repræsentanternes hus, og ordstyrer for høringen) i fed, Elizondos svar i kursiv:
- Are you read in to secret crash retrieval programs?
- We would have to have a conversation in a closed session ma’am. I signed documentation
- three years ago that restricts my ability to discuss specifically crash retrievals. I submitted for my book through the DOPSR process which took a year for it to be reviewed – and what is in the book is what I was told I’m allowed to talk about.
- Has the government conducted secret UAP crash retrieval programs, yes or no?
- Yes.
- Okay, were they designed to identify and reverse engineer alien craft, yes or no?
- Yes.
- In your book you mentioned government employees who’ve been injured by UAPs placed on leave and receiving government compensation for their injuries, is that correct?
- That is correct.
- How can the government deny we have recovered craft if they’re paying people because they’ve been injured by recovered craft?
- Ma’am that’s a great question. That’s why I think we’re here again because I’ve seen the documentation by the US government for several of these individuals who have sustained injuries as a result of a UAP incident.
- It’s a crazy idea, right? The hypocrisy and the logic…
Spørgsmål fra Jared Moskowitz (medlem af repræsentanternes hus, og ordstyrer for høringen) i fed, Elizondos svar i kursiv:
- I’m a recovering lawyer so I’m going to put my hat on for a second… you said you signed a document… love that… who gave that to you?
- The US government, sir.
- Okay, do you have a copy of it?
- It is stored in a SCIF right now. I do not have possession of it, the US government does.
- What department of the US government gave you this document?
- I will say, the Department of Defence. Unfortunately I can’t say in this forum much more than that.
- You specifically said the document said you can’t talk about crash retrieval. Well, you can’t talk about Fight Club if there’s no Fight Club …
- Correct.
- Okay, I’m just making an observation. So, that document that you signed, that you said exists, specifically said you can’t talk about crash retrieval?
- Correct sir. It was a limitation on what I… because already I had been speaking publicly about the topic… and so the document said you can continue saying XYZ, but you cannot discuss the topic…
Det må være oplagt at gå i clinch med det amerikanske forsvarministerium angående det omtalte dokument, som Elizondo skulle have underskrevet. Hvis pentagons talsperson kan bekræfte at der eksisterer sådan en skriftlig aftale med Elizondo, der hindrer ham i at udtale sig om UAPs i statens varetægt bliver det svært ikke at kunne ekstrapolere til noget mindblowing.
Omvendt, hvis Pentagon afviser at sådan en skriftlig aftale eksisterer burde det jo give Elizondo grønt lys til at afsløre viden om eksistensen af ikke-jordiske UAPs i USA’s varetægt.