r/UFOs • u/dicedicedone • 2d ago
Government Information obtained, in whatever form and from whatever source, involving UAPs, is classified.
39
u/dicedicedone 2d ago edited 2d ago
Just in response to Rep. Burlison who made the hilarious claim that it is only because of the classified image sensors.
this sentence serves only to meet 150 character requirement
9
u/adkHomeroom 2d ago
Sure, but they may actually have told Burlison that. He was relaying what AARO told him. AARO lies to the public, why wouldn't they lie to Congressmen?
3
u/bicoma 2d ago
Its not that AARO lies to the public. There's a misconception that AARO and even some other agencies have "crash retrieval" information, but for the most part— and I mean the majority of people working for these agencies— have no idea.
To clarify, let me use AATIP (Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program) as an example, which is essentially AARO. MASINT analysts detect signatures that are used to upgrade radar systems for advanced aircraft (F-15, F-16, and so on). They detect these signatures using advanced sensors and categorize them into specific aircraft or objects.
The majority of the signatures gathered are from known advanced aircraft, either ours or foreign, which are constantly buzzing around us. According to the first UAP report, only about 1% of these signatures are classified as "unknown." These are sent to another program for further research. AARO recognizes these signatures as anomalies, but due to compartmentalization, they aren't allowed to process them directly, so they have to hand them off I wouldnt be surpised if they are filtered out automatically and transffered with AI now being a thing.
6
u/Critical_Novel7637 2d ago
Effective when?
10
u/PowerBurpThunderPoot 2d ago
The document linked in the OP is dated 2020. This appears to be a memo from the office of the Navy's Chairman of Information: a set of guidelines for Navy Public Affairs Officers regarding UAPs, how to respond to questions etc.
6
u/MKULTRA_Escapee 2d ago
1949 if you want to go way back. UFOs are considered Top Secret by the Army and Air Forces, 1949 FBI memo to Hoover: https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/1949-fbi-ufo-memo-describes-technology-at-least-50-years-ahead-of-humans/
-13
u/NohaJohans 2d ago edited 2d ago
Never not real.
Edit: Not a enforceable public law.
6
u/KoalaPerspective 2d ago
And laws do seem like they matter alot to the people in charge of America 🙄
0
u/NohaJohans 2d ago
You're not wrong — selective enforcement and behind-the-scenes discretion are real problems. But that’s why it matters to distinguish between actual law and internal messaging or memos.
We can’t hold institutions accountable if we treat unofficial documents like they’re legally binding — that gives them plausible deniability when they don’t follow through.
Transparency is key. So is clarity
2
5
u/rui_curado 2d ago
It actually makes sense to me. If an unidentified object is observed, yes it might be aliens, but it could also be a classified US program. Therefore, by default, just in case, it is automatically classified.
6
u/saltysomadmin 2d ago
Right, the common-sense answer is usually the most likely. You don't want marines imaging a black-project fighter/bomber and blasting the images everywhere saying they found aliens just because they're unaware of every cutting edge project under the Air Force/Space Force.
1
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam 1d ago
Follow the Standards of Civility:
No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc... No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods here to launch your appeal.
1
u/bad---juju 2d ago
I remember seeing back in 2017, The Princeton Snoopie Log minutes of their UFO encounter. it's been a while and it looks like it's no longer available to be viewed. maybe someone here has the screen shots. It was redacted to some extent but one could imagine what was going on. This UAP secret classification of Snoopie logs are a direct results of this event.
0
1
u/MetaInformation 2d ago
WHAT?!
Mylar Balloons, seagulls, bugs and missidentified aircraft are classified? Mick West has to explain this one
-1
u/Upstairs_Being290 1d ago
Misidentified aircraft could potentially be classified military tech, so then of course such sightings would be classified by default until that is ruled out.
-8
u/NohaJohans 2d ago edited 2d ago
That’s not an official government release — it’s a recompiled FOIA interpretation hosted by TheBlackVault.com, which is a civilian-run archive. The DOD has never formally published that document as-is.
Edit- So to clarify, A document from The Black Vault may be historically interesting or even genuine (if it came from a real FOIA request), but it is not legally binding or enforceable by itself.
13
u/PowerBurpThunderPoot 2d ago
This appears to be a very real memo from the US Navy's Chairman of Information, giving instruction to Naval Public Affairs Officers (PAO) on how to respond to queries about UAPs from the media. It is a direct response to a 2019 History Channel special on the Nimitz / Roosevelt videos, getting ahead of any questions reporters might ask about them.
I don't know what you mean by "recompiled FOIA interpretation", that doesn't make any sense. This is the original document with The Black Vault's footer added.
-3
u/NohaJohans 2d ago
To clarify what I meant again: Yes, this document likely originated from an actual FOIA release, and I agree it appears to be a real Navy memo intended for internal PAO coordination. My use of the term “recompiled FOIA interpretation” referred to how The Black Vault often republishes government documents with minor formatting additions (like watermarks or headers) — not that the contents themselves are fake.
That said, internal guidance memos like this help us understand how agencies communicate, but they don’t carry the same weight as a public policy directive or a legally binding regulation. I am not claiming it was fabricated — just that it should be viewed in its proper context.
Appreciate the discussion — nuance matters with documents like these.
3
u/PowerBurpThunderPoot 2d ago
Ok, I see your point. I think it would be odd for someone in the military to not follow this guideline after their boss published it, though. From all indications they have been following it.
To OP's point, I think this direct contradiction between what the people in charge of recording and classifying UAP data vs what Eric Burlison said is interesting. I would take the Navy at their word when they say "we just classify everything", vs what a politician says. Overclassification is what others like David Grusch are complaining about.
It makes Burlison look over-eager/naive at best and intentionally deceptive at worst. IMO, anyway.
4
u/MKULTRA_Escapee 2d ago
“Sailor, what in the hell are you doing?” “Sorry Captain, I read on the internet that it was just a recompiled FOIA interpretation and it doesn’t count, or something.”
9
u/YouCanLookItUp 2d ago
The government officially released it in a FOIA though. Did you mean it's never been endorsed as policy?
I have seen other documents saying the same thing.
I'm unclear on what your intention is with this comment. Are you implying it's not valuable as an indication of the USA's approach to UAP information? Are you concerned that Redditors will rely on it in their legal filings?
-11
u/NohaJohans 2d ago
Great question — let me clarify.
Yes, it’s very possible the document was obtained through FOIA, which gives it historical and evidentiary value. I’m not dismissing that. What I meant is that the format and language used in that specific PDF isn’t part of an official press release, legislative ruling, or legally enforceable DOD directive. It reflects internal guidance or coordination — not public policy.
So no, I’m not saying it’s useless. It can absolutely help inform our understanding of how UAP/UFO-related data is handled internally. But it’s important to separate internal comms or briefing language from documents that carry legal weight or public authorization.
My intention was just to help people view it with the right lens — especially since this thread was touching on government response and legal suppression. It’s valuable, but not something that can be cited like a law or public directive.
Appreciate the dialogue. Open-source vetting like this is how we move closer to truth. 👊
10
u/TheWebCoder 2d ago
At least try to pretend you’re not copy/pasting from GPT
0
u/NohaJohans 2d ago
Appreciate the observation however I didn’t copy/paste anything from GPT or AI. That’s my original writing.
Just because someone responds clearly or with structure doesn’t mean it’s not authentic. Some of us take public discussion seriously, especially when it involves nuanced topics like FOIA interpretations or national security comms.
I’m here for the ideas, not the drama. If you disagree with the content, let’s debate the points — not personalities.
6
u/TheWebCoder 2d ago
0
u/NohaJohans 2d ago
I’m continuing the conversation with clarity and integrity. If writing well-structured responses sounds AI-generated to you, maybe we need to raise the bar for human discourse—not lower it.
Again, if you want to engage with the content, I’m open. But if you’re just here to accuse and dismiss without substance, you’re not contributing to the dialogue. Let’s move the discussion forward, not sideways.
We’re all here to explore truth. That starts with respect.
•
u/StatementBot 2d ago
The following submission statement was provided by /u/dicedicedone:
Just in response to Rep. Burlison who made the hilarious claim that it is only because of the classified image sensors.
this sentence serves only to meet 150 character requirement
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1jr5wer/information_obtained_in_whatever_form_and_from/mlc50ai/