Classified UAP Report to Congress Partially Released , John Greenewald Breaks it Down

Following the release of the public version of the report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena presented to Congress in 2021 John Greenewald filed a request for the version of the report presented to Congress , he now has that report , heavily redacted but interesting for what is not shown due to some of those redactions.

This effort by The Black Vault is the result of a Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) case filed under 32 CFR § 1704 (not the usual Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] cases generally filed under 5 U.S.C. § 552) less than 24 hours after the public version of the same was released.

The case mandated that the the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), in conjunction with ALL agencies and military branches that contributed to the report, review their respective contributions, and in the end, release the unclassified/declassified/non-exempt portions.

In this video of the live stream John Greenewald goes through the 17 page report and questions the validity of some of the redactions , particularly when it comes to the shape of the UAPs (as seen at 30.30 on the video)


Also check out @54,00 on the video for the redacted "Common shapes" table.

John Greenewald says he will appeal some of the redactions , how can the shape of a UAP be a National Security issue.

originally posted by: gortex


how can the shape of a UAP be a National Security issue.

It's in the shape of a phallus.
Just like Austin Powers.

a reply to: gortex

how can the shape of a UAP be a National Security issue?

Because if you know the shape it wouldn't be an unidentified unknown, but a known unidentified. In other words: it is a national security issue because if the shape is that of a secret aircraft, then you know it is a secret aircraft, and it belongs to the very nature of the national security for you to believe in UAPs. That's why.

a reply to: Direne

Heh... never thought about that. Or I guess I did. But it suddenly makes sense why the airforce or army would struggle to talk about it.

Better to say we saw something that might be alien, than to admit we saw something that turns out to be Russian or Chinese and we have no idea what to do about it.

UFOs over nuclear plants? How about military drones prepping?

a reply to: Direne

Or,

If the shape is something that could not be aerodynamically explained, given current understanding of universal aerodynamic principles (thus making the object unlikely to be of Earth origin), it then becomes a national security issue due to the potential indefensibility we would have against such objects.

"If we know it ain't ours, and we know it ain't yours because it violates the laws of physics we both have to follow, it's obviously a national security issue".

a reply to: flice

UFOs over nuclear plants? How about military drones prepping?

Perhaps in the last 20 years but UAPs have been seen and reported around nuclear plants , ships and aircraft for decades and before such technologies existed.

a reply to: gortex

Nice.

(not the usual Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] cases

So I have a question.

a reply to: gortex

1561
1561 celestial phenomenon over Nuremberg


Or Just a good marketing strategy to sell paintings.



Edit: I don't like wiki, but here's a link for anyone.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

The shape is classified so that if it is other worldly, that the engineering and design isn't copied by one of our terrestrial adversaries.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: flice

UFOs over nuclear plants? How about military drones prepping?

Perhaps in the last 20 years but UAPs have been seen and reported around nuclear plants , ships and aircraft for decades and before such technologies existed.

Exactly! Also the reason so many Senators wanted disclosure, is because of their ability to disable our nuclear weapons! Very interesting that a UFO would want to make it known, it (they?) Can do that.

www.google.com...

a reply to: gortex

Great subject matter Gortex, I hope John Greenewald can move forward and I support his efforts 100%. He has long been someone that has never sat on his hands in his Quest for truth and answers.

a reply to: Bigburgh

Not making an attempt to derail the discussion... just a clarification, just want to correct your post a bit as your Image is not of the 1561 Nuremberg event but of the 1566 Basel Switzerland celestial phenomenon The interesting thing about this event is that it happened/appeared on three days (on 27 and 28 of July, and on August 7).


The proper image for the 1561 celestial phenomenon over Nuremberg would be the below;





Carry On back with the conversation
Johnny

a reply to: JohnnyAnonymous

I am not sure why but those pictures creep me out.. Is that Z part of the pic or??

a reply to: gortex

I love me some black vault.

Appreciate the post

a reply to: gortex
Maybe the US intelligence should use the UAP as a countermeasure as own technology that will rise some serious questions about continuing a war ?

Maybe it was ours all along?

a reply to: gortex
Nice analysis by JG Jr.

At time index 10:45, Elizondo's attorney Sheehan claiming the full report was 400 pages is quite a claim when the released redacted document is only 17 pages. That makes me wonder where the 400 pages really came from and is it completely fictitious? The other three claims Greenewald mentions of 70, 74 and 78 pages are all clustered closely but still nowhere near either 17 pages or 400 pages. The only one who can back up their claim at this point is Greenewald so I don't know why people are hating on him for reporting the smaller number of pages he actually has, but he says they are.

It will be interesting to see if any redacted content gets unredacted based on Greenewald's future appeal.

a reply to: MarlbBlack

I am not sure why but those pictures creep me out.. Is that Z part of the pic or??

The 1561 drawing is not a picture. There were numerous things seen in the sky over a period of time, and it shows them all at once, but they weren't all seen at once, so at no time did the sky look like that with all of them appearaing at the same time.

If you follow the links, you can find a written description to accompany the drawing, describing what was reported in the sky by witnesses, but I don't think the person making the drawing actually saw it, so there's a lot of interpretation. I don't remember reading anything about a Z shape in the description which accompanied the drawing. The Z looks like some kind of watermark to me, which might possibly be related to the Zentralbibliothek Zürich, where the document is archived.

This is a more modern graphic of a satellite entry over Yukon, but you would never guess it was a satellite re-entry from the sensationalized image, would you?


I suspect the images you refer to are also a bit sensationalized, and also perhaps not the most accurate representation of what you would have actually seen had you been there.

a reply to: JohnnyAnonymous

Oh goodness.

Thank you, thank you very much!

One reason they redacted shapes might be to keep from being inundated with folks saying "I saw one like was shown in the government report!". And now they can loosely tell which reports are kooks and which ones just might be authentic. All speculation on my part of course.

Kinda reminds me what happens in this age with Bigfoot 😁. Once you have heard enough reports, you can make your own report - fictitious or not, how can you tell? 👍

The real origin of the term "UAP" when they invented it was a wordplay on a Microsoft term "User Account Control"

The clever wordplay here is that in Windows the description of User Account Control says "UAC will notify you when apps try to make changes to your computer"

The innuendo here meaning that no, the UAP will not notify you when apps make changes to your computer.

Cant you see the conspiracy here?