USAF Security Policeman Sights Orbs Near ICBM Launch Site

Between 1973 and 2010, I interviewed 167 former/retired US military personnel regarding their nuclear weapons-related UFO encounters. More than a hundred of those accounts were presented in the second edition of my book, UFOs and Nukes: Extraordinary Encounters at Nuclear Weapons Sites. [ad] Since 2010, I’ve more or less ceased investigating the topic, primarily due to advancing age. Recently, however, another military veteran contacted me after reading a post by Joe Murgia on X (@TheUfoJoe) regarding my work. I was of course interested in what he had to say.

By Robert Hastings The UFO Chronicles 7-8-2025*

Former US Air Force Security Policeman Devin C. Lingo emailed me and briefly summarized an incident he witnessed while stationed at Malmstrom AFB, Montana, in 1995, involving two orbs maneuvering near a Minuteman-III nuclear missile launch facility (LF).

I asked Lingo to provide me with his DD214 document, which is a Department of Defense record of his military service. It confirmed that he had been stationed at Malmstrom beginning in February 1995, and had been a Security Police/Security Forces member assigned to the 12th Missile Squadron.

Once his bona fides had been established, I called Lingo. He told me,

At the time, I was an Airman, a trainee, preparing to become a full-fledged member of an Alert Response Team (ART). The person supervising my training was an Airman 1st Class named Brent Mullings. Our particular group of ARTs would rapidly respond to alarms at any of the Fox Flight missile sites, to determine whether or not there was a real security threat.

On the day of my sighting, we had six alarms at one LF! That was a record, at least for me, during the years that I worked there. The site was Launch Facility Fox-2, located on Pishkun Road, just west of the town of Choteau, Montana.

The first Outer Zone alarm came in around 6:00 p.m. We quickly proceeded out there to investigate. Our alarms were triggered by the sensors on the IMPSS pole at each site. That’s the Improved Minuteman Physical Security System, which is basically a motion-detection system. Almost all of the time, an alarm was set-off by a wild animal or something like that.

That evening, we discovered a rabbit inside the fence. I tried to scare it away by throwing rocks at it, but it kept hiding inside a culvert. Eventually we left but, over the next several hours, we had to return five more times to reset the alarms.

I asked Lingo why they didn’t just shoot the rabbit. He responded, “The only way we had to kill it was with our duty weapons—M-16 A2 rifles—and that wasn't an option. Had we returned to base after our [shift] and turned-in our weapons to the armory with missing rounds, it would have been a big deal. Also, I personally wouldn't have felt good about killing a rabbit over an alarm.”

He continued,

My orb sighting took place during our last visit, at roughly 4:00 a.m. I had gotten out of the truck and was standing on the site access road. As I was facing west towards the Rockies, in my peripheral vision I saw a small reddish glow in the sky. For a moment, I thought that it might be the Northern Lights.

I turned my head to the right and immediately saw that it was actually a small, glowing object, just hovering there. I couldn’t tell how far away it was. As I was trying to figure out what I was looking at, another object just like it, but blue in color, suddenly appeared. It was to the left of the red one. They were very close together, from my perspective, and at the same altitude. Both seemed to shimmer as if they were energized somehow.

I was stunned! I had no idea what I was looking at. After a few seconds, the red object blinked-out. Gone, just like that. A second or two later, the blue object shot straight up into the sky and instantly disappeared. There was no noise.

During this final alarm of the night, Brent felt sorry for me because I had already conducted the five previous searches, so he decided to run the final one himself. So I just stood there on the LF access road, covering him and giving status-updates to our Flight Security Controller on the two-way radio.

During the time-frame when I noticed the orbs, Brent was doing his detailed search on the LF. His focus would have been on searching the ground within the fence with his flashlight. I’m sure that he didn’t see them.

I was the new guy, the trainee, so I quickly decided that I wouldn’t mention what I saw to Brent, or anyone else. I was afraid that they would think I was crazy. I was worried about losing my PRP.

(RH: Anyone assigned to work with or around nuclear weapons is subject to a Department of Defense directive known as the Personnel Reliability Program, or PRP. An individual whose conduct, on or off-the-job, is judged by his or her superiors to be suspect and, therefore, a potential threat to the weapons, may be ordered to undergo psychological evaluation and risks being relieved of duty. In short, if one wishes to continue working with nuclear weapons while serving in the U.S. Air Force, reporting a UAP is definitely not a good career move. Unfortunately, this situation has undoubtedly resulted in a great many sightings at ICBM sites going unrecorded over the years, something arguably detrimental to US national security.)

Lingo continued,

So, that’s where I left things. I never talked about the incident, but I sure wondered about what I had seen! I don't believe that any other members of my squadron ever mentioned seeing anything strange in the sky. Even if someone had seen something out of the ordinary, there's a high probability that they would never have reported it out of fear of ridicule.

The only other sighting that I'd heard rumors about happened on the east side of Malmstrom, which would have been the 10th Missile Squadron or the 490th Missile Squadron. I was told that sometime during the years prior to 1995, a couple of Security Policemen were at a launch facility when some sort of triangular craft started hovering above them. I don't have any information on how long the encounter lasted or what the fallout was.

Lingo may have been referring to an incident at Alpha Flight, as described to me in 2003 by former Security Policeman Joseph M. Brown. One spring night in 1992, his two-man team, and a second team located a few miles away, observed a bright object erratically racing around the sky for several minutes. At some point, the men became unnerved by what they were seeing and began anxiously discussing the sighting with each other over the radio, whereupon the Alpha Flight Security Controller, who had been listening-in on the tense exchange, broke into the conversation and asked about the situation.

Finally, the aerial object instantly stopped in mid-air and remained stationary. As the sun rose, the craft’s triangular shape could be seen through binoculars. Then it disappeared. When the two teams returned to base, they were debriefed by their commander and pointedly told that any further mention of the UFO would jeopardize their PRP status. This incident is covered at length in my book. [ad]

Lingo said that after leaving the Air Force he had consulted the state-by-state UAP-sighting database at The National UFO Reporting Center website, to learn whether any sighting report in Montana in 1995 might have matched his own.

He told me, “On 9/25/1995 there were two sightings in the towns of Ronan and Polson. One of them states that there were red and blue strobing lights observed. The other just says that the witness saw lights. Both reports stated that the objects were in the eastern sky. Both towns are many miles west of Choteau, at roughly the same latitude, just on the opposite side of the Rocky Mountains. I had been just west of Choteau myself, so what those witnesses reported could have been what I saw. I’ve often wondered whether those sightings related to my incident.”

VISIT ROBERT's SITE ►

See Also:

	UFOs Have Closely Monitored US Missile Tests Since the 1940s
	AARO Interviews 'UFOs and Nukes' Witnesses
	UFO Activity at Nuclear Weapons Sites, Including Disabling Ballistic Missiles

REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

from THE UFO CHRONICLES https://bit.ly/4lsgMFx

UFO Cultism at the Wall Street Journal?

"The 'just isn't possible' cult (yes, CULT) of editors and reporters is alive and well among what fragments remain of real, hard-hitting journalism in the USA ..."

By now it's easy-peasy to regard George Adamski's alleged flying saucer photos and wild tales as the concoctions they were, and I certainly have no less curiosity in what drives "contactees" such as Buck Nelson, who enthralled us -- make that a specifically narrow segment of us -- with his adventures as laid out in his obscure book, My Trip to Mars, the Moon and Venus. The "space brother" cult enjoyed a veritable field day of public interest during the 1950s, is probably gone for good, but one should never say never.

By Robert Barrow The UFO Chronicles 7-6-2025

However, as if smacked with behemoth-sized bird droppings from the sky, UFO research is suddenly drenched with poisonous excretions from something of a different cult: That of respectable journalists who work for a respectable newspaper who insist upon ignoring perfectly good UFO evidence in exchange for pure bull you-know-what with no respect whatsoever. Unfortunately, this is not merely sporadic cult-nouveau territory in many American newsrooms.

I've long been appreciative of the Wall Street Journal as a source of fair reporting, but this time around, with two articles tackling the UFO subject in June, the WSJ got it wrong, disastrously wrong. If you stayed current with my links to Frank Warren's UFO Chronicles, Kevin Randle and The Black Vault you already know the facts.

These days, I'm far removed from the UFO issue which once consumed my writing hours for newspaper and magazine articles, but I can still smell journalistic decay when its stinking fragrance becomes widespread enough to draw flies. It's a funny thing how every once in a while some esteemed publication or public figure emerges from the shadows and performs an incredibly absurd jack-in-the-box hatchet job on the entire history of the UFO subject, totally disregarding tons of hard-mined evidence acquired for eyes willing to see over the decades.

In June, the Journal bungled it all up via an editorial policy which apparently wasn't editing for facts and reporters who flat-out ignored the documentation placed on a platter before them. If they weren't also pleasantly guided along by intentional government-generated misinformation with a clear agenda I would be very surprised. After all, the formula hasn't changed much despite ongoing official promises to get to the truth. Deep state or freak state may be in charge ultimately, take your choice.

The very concept that a SIGNIFICANT percentage of UFO observations and dramatic encounters going back decades can be chalked up to top secret devices, classified testing, gullible military personnel and pilots and joking diversionary tactics is just ridiculous, and even a cursory examination of even lesser known but admirable cases clearly indicates suitable explanations lacking.

In my declining years I'm a "one trick pony" in that I've put all my eggs into one UFO basket, and that basket is the Pascagoula, MS incident of 1973 in which two now deceased fishermen, Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker reported an encounter with a UFO complete with bizarre creatures which examined them physically. Multiple witnesses have come forth over the years and there was clear electronic evidence of something tangible emerging from the sky. Yet, as is the instance with multiple cases of crushing interest and intrigue, you won't find this one highlighted by the WSJ in June, nor in many other "respectable" publications. Believe me, I know firsthand how, particularly at the editorial staff level, the most important UFO-related stories and topics get squashed. Or ridiculed out of existence.

Many of us thought a new day had dawned in recent years as the UFO issue appeared to gain value and even urgency among public officials and the media. Maybe we were wrong. All we can do now is wait as government inquiries continue in the face of poorly researched, blatantly stupid or purposefully misguided reportage destined to influence public minds already perpetually unfamiliar with UFO history and facts. The "just isn't possible" cult (yes, CULT) of editors and reporters is alive and well among what fragments remain of real, hard-hitting journalism in the USA, and we dare suggest that the sun will continue revolving around the Earth for this bunch, innately blinded by the comforts of mass conventionality.

Welcome back, deja vu, welcome back, though we all know you never really left.

VISIT BOB's SITE ►


See Also:

The Black Vault Lays Bare the Fallacies of the WSJ Articles

Analysis of “Was It Scrap Metal or an Alien Spacecraft?” (WSJ)

UFOs and Nukes Researcher Robert Hastings Refutes WSJ Article

	UFO Myth to Government Disinformation Myth
	1967 Malmstrom AFB UFO Incident Botched by David Duchovny
	UFO Sightings at ICBM Sites and Nuclear Weapons Storage Areas
	My Evidence: The Account of Minute-Man Missiles Being Disabled, While UFOs Hovered Over The Launch Facilities

The UFOs-Nukes Connection Press Conference: Witness Affidavits and Declassified Documents VISIT Bob's SITE ►

REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

from THE UFO CHRONICLES https://bit.ly/44fdBLg

The Black Vault Lays Bare the Fallacies of the WJS Articles

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), long considered a bastion of serious journalism, as readers know recently published a two-part series on UFOs/UAP. For those of us paying attention to these matters, on its face it, prior to the read it was presumed given

By The UFO Chronicles 6-30-2025

WSJ’s long-held good standing that they would approach the topic with journalistic neutrality, being fair and balanced (no pun intended) if you will; however, rather than serving as a balanced entry into a complex field, the articles—according to veteran researcher John Greenewald (and many others) of The Black Vault—represent a glaring case study in narrative bias, selective sourcing, and evidentiary omission.

Greenewald’s critique (video below) delivered in a detailed livestream dated June 28, 2025, raises several scientifically and journalistically significant concerns. His experience—as an extensively interviewed source who saw none of his evidence-based input included—offers a unique vantage point for assessing not only the WSJ’s reporting, but the broader implications for public understanding of UAP data.

Misdirection by Design: Framing the UAP Topic as Disinformation

At the heart of Greenewald’s critique lies the assertion that the WSJ framed the entire UAP issue as an orchestrated disinformation campaign—primarily by the U.S. military to mask classified aerospace technologies. This framing is not novel; Cold War-era narratives often suggested that UAP sightings were encouraged to conceal stealth aircraft like the U-2 or SR-71.

What is problematic, Greenewald contends, is not the inclusion of this hypothesis but its presentation as the primary explanatory model, unsupported by robust sourcing. The series leaned heavily on anecdotal recollections, such as a story of an Air Force colonel allegedly planting fake UFO photos in a Nevada bar. According to Greenewald, such stories were offered without corroborating documentation, effectively reducing decades of global UAP data to the level of rumor and myth.

Selective Silence: Ignoring Documented, Declassified Evidence

Perhaps the most serious allegation Greenewald levels against the WSJ is the deliberate omission of government-verified documentation. According to Greenewald, he provided the paper’s reporters with hundreds of pages of primary source material—obtained legally through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)—showing long-term, classified interest in UAPs across multiple agencies including the DIA, CIA, NSA, and DoD.

These “heavily redacted and classified UFO specific documents” span decades before and beyond Project Blue Book’s official closure in 1969. Greenewald emphasizes that if UAPs were nothing more than Cold War-era misidentifications or misinformation, such persistent classification—well into the 2000s and beyond—would make little logical sense.

By omitting these materials, the WSJ not only narrowed the scope of the article but arguably misled its readers about the state of official knowledge and concern. The result is a narrative vacuum—one that falsely suggests there is no "there" there, when in fact substantial government documentation confirms otherwise.

The “Yankee Blue” Incident: Reporting Without Verification

The WSJ series introduced a claim about “Yankee Blue,” an alleged Air Force hazing ritual in which personnel were tricked into believing they were part of a classified UAP retrieval program. The articles claimed this practice was so persuasive that it led individuals to whistleblow under false assumptions, and that even Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines was briefed and stunned by the discovery.

While intriguing, Greenewald sought to verify this account by filing multiple FOIA requests with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) and other oversight agencies. As of his broadcast, no records confirming investigations or official documentation of Yankee Blue were found.

Again, the WSJ’s failure to corroborate this sensational claim—or even provide the alleged memo—violates basic journalistic standards. In the absence of documentation, presenting such narratives as fact risks crossing the line from skepticism to disinformation by omission.

Ignoring the Global Scope: The Helicopter & Nuclear Incursions

Another significant gap in the WSJ reporting was the failure to address documented incidents of UFO/UAP incursions over nuclear facilities and military installations, both in the U.S. and internationally. Greenewald referenced declassified reports from the 1970s describing encounters with unidentified helicopters and craft over Strategic Air Command bases and nuclear storage facilities.

Whether these were terrestrial, foreign adversary, or genuinely unknown in origin, they represent verifiable, unresolved cases involving national security infrastructure. The WSJ not only ignored these cases but also failed to investigate how often UAP sightings involve highly restricted airspace—an analytical dimension critical to any good-faith inquiry.

Instead, the paper chose to cast doubt on one well-known nuclear incident involving Robert Salas in 1967, by citing an EMP weapons test document that was not contemporaneous with the event and appears to misalign with the technological timeline. No sourcing or technical analysis was provided to support the implication that EMP testing could explain the missile shutdowns.

Bias by Comparison: Hypocrisy in Evidentiary Standards

Greenewald also highlights a double standard in how evidence is weighed. Critics of whistleblowers like David Grusch and Luis Elizondo often decry the lack of hard documentation supporting their claims. Yet many of those same critics celebrated the WSJ article, which itself provided no documentation to substantiate its central claims about misinformation campaigns, safe contents, or hazing rituals.

Misused Authority: Mistaking Mastheads for Truth

Perhaps the most important theme in Greenewald’s video-editorial is the misplaced trust in journalistic prestige. The Wall Street Journal, he notes, is a masthead that commands credibility. But when that reputation is used to publish poorly sourced claims under the guise of investigative reporting, it becomes a vehicle for institutional bias rather than public service.

Greenewald makes clear that the WSJ had every opportunity to tell a more complete, balanced story. They had interviews with researchers, access to primary source documentation, and ample time to investigate claims. That they did not reflects not a lack of information, but a lack of editorial will.

The call for UFO/UAPs transparency has been extant since the birth of modern day Ufology in 1947. Conversely, this is goal has been led by independent researchers, such as John Greenewald and or Independent UFO organizations along the way—the Fourth Estate which should be the spearhead in this endeavor has been a hindrance at best and or erroneous propaganda machine at its worst. The Wall Street Journal’s recent articles, as criticized by John Greenewald continue in this vein.

Conclusion: A Call for Scientific Integrity in Journalism

The call for UFO/UAPs transparency has been extant since the birth of modern day Ufology in 1947. Conversely, this is goal has been led by independent researchers, such as John Greenewald and or Independent UFO organizations along the way—the Fourth Estate which should be the spearhead in this endeavor has been a hindrance at best and or erroneous propaganda machine at its worst. The Wall Street Journal’s recent articles, as criticized by John Greenewald continue in this vein.

They present a narrow hypothesis (disinformation) as definitive explanation. They ignore decades of declassified documentation. They promote unverified anecdotes over publicly available evidence. And they selectively report claims that align with their narrative, while excluding equally credible counterpoints.

In doing so, the WSJ has not advanced the public conversation—it has obscured it. And that is perhaps the greatest disservice of all: Not the conclusion the paper drew, but the conversation it chose not to have.

As Greenewald reminds us, skepticism is not the rejection of possibility. It is the insistence on evidence—consistently applied, transparently sourced, and fairly examined. That principle must guide all inquiry into UFOs/UAPs, from FOIA requests to front-page stories. Anything less is not journalism. It’s misdirection.

VISIT THE BLACK VAULT'S SITE ►

See Also:

Analysis of “Was It Scrap Metal or an Alien Spacecraft?” (WSJ)

UFOs and Nukes Researcher Robert Hastings Refutes WSJ Article

	UFO Myth to Government Disinformation Myth
	1967 Malmstrom AFB UFO Incident Botched by David Duchovny
	UFO Sightings at ICBM Sites and Nuclear Weapons Storage Areas
	My Evidence: The Account of Minute-Man Missiles Being Disabled, While UFOs Hovered Over The Launch Facilities

The UFOs-Nukes Connection Press Conference: Witness Affidavits and Declassified Documents

REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

from THE UFO CHRONICLES https://bit.ly/4lrL0YI

Analysis of “Was It Scrap Metal or an Alien Spacecraft?” (WSJ)

"... the WSJ article’s dramatization of UFO investigations contains several misrepresentations. It overstates what AARO was tasked to do, mischaracterizes Kirkpatrick’s role, and repeatedly uses loaded language to mock UAP research ..."

The Wall Street Journal’s two-part investigation of UFOs (parts titled “The Pentagon Disinformation that Fueled America’s UFO Mythology” and “Was It Scrap Metal or an Alien Spacecraft?”) presents an out of character, specious narrative that various UFO

By The UFO Chronicles 6-25-25

accounts, imagery, etc., over decades were spawned by the Pentagon itself to mask highly classified aircraft and weapons programs. In part II, it misrepresents the mission of the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and the role of its director, Sean Kirkpatrick, and it repeatedly uses loaded language to marginalize UAP (unidentified anomalous phenomena) reports. Crucially, the story relies heavily on second-hand anecdotes without citing any verifiable documents, omitting key contextual facts, and contradicting established government findings. Below we point out these issues, contrasting the article’s claims with the public record.

AARO’s Official Mission vs. WSJ Portrayal

By law and Pentagon directive, AARO’s purpose is to collect and analyze data on unexplained aerial (and other) objects around U.S. military and sensitive sites, and to “mitigate any associated threats to safety of operations and national security”. The Department of Defense announcement establishing AARO (July 2022) explicitly states its mission as “synchronize efforts…to detect, identify and attribute objects of interest in, on or near military installations…This includes anomalous, unidentified space, airborne, submerged and transmedium objects”. In short, and generally speaking—AARO was created to bring scientific rigor and intelligence tradecraft to UAP sightings (e.g. determine if they are foreign drones, balloons, sensor glitches, etc.), not to hunt for aliens per se. Its official mission statement is to “minimize technical and intelligence surprise” by systematic detection, identification and analysis of UAP.

The WSJ article, by contrast, characterizes AARO’s work almost entirely as debunking a phantom “secret U.S. alien program.” Phrases like “CIA-sponsored UFO study groups,” “mythology,” “UFO true believers,” and “secret program to harvest alien technology” pervade the text. This framing is misleading. The article implies Kirkpatrick and AARO were on a crusade to prove or disprove extraterrestrial hypotheses. In reality, Congress directed AARO to review historical UAP claims and produce a “Historical Record” report, but as one part of its tasking under the NDAA – a task described as separate from its core safety mission. The AARO website explicitly notes it “accepts reports” from government personnel about programs dating to 1945 “to inform AARO’s congressionally directed Historical Record Report”. In other words, Kirkpatrick’s inquiries into decades-old UFO anecdotes were undertaken because Congress mandated them, not simply to prove or disprove alien accounts.

Likewise, the article’s emphasis on Kirkpatrick as a maverick or lone truth-seeker is at odds with the facts of his appointment. Defense.gov records show Dr. Sean M. Kirkpatrick was officially named AARO director on July 15, 2022 by the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security. He was brought in for his scientific background (he had been Chief Scientist at DIA’s Missile and Space Intelligence Center), not as an alien hunter or debunker. The DoD announcement presents AARO’s charter under his leadership in formal terms: dealing with “objects of interest … to mitigate any associated threats”. There is nothing in the official mandate about hunting aliens or reverse-engineering “off-world technology.” Indeed, Congress on its face gave AARO unprecedented access to classified programs to determine the truth about UAP claims, not to conceal it.

Rhetorical Framing and Language Choices

Throughout the WSJ piece, the authors use loaded language that trivializes legitimate inquiry into UAPs. For example, they describe Pentagon investigators as a “growing collection of UFO true believers” who had spent years in “the outer reaches” of intelligence researching “psychic powers and teleportation…not to mention…werewolves”. This innuendo primes readers to view all UAP-related efforts as fringe fantasy rather than a serious matter. The article repeatedly calls UFO lore “mythology” and recounts (at length) anecdotes – from chupacabras to tortilla reflections – suggesting UAP reports are laughable. Headlines and phrases like “Was it scrap metal or an alien spacecraft?” and “spoiler alert: the idea didn’t fly” sensationalize the subject while minimizing its complexity.

By contrast, official U.S. science and defense sources treat UAP as a potentially real phenomenon worthy of careful study. A 2023 NASA panel on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena emphasizes a “rigorous, evidence-based approach” and notes UAP study is “a unique scientific opportunity” (with NASA working “within the broader whole-of-government framework led by” AARO). The Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG), AARO’s predecessor, explicitly collected and analyzed hundreds of UAP reports to inform safety protocols (many were ultimately attributed to mundane causes). But the WSJ article itself never acknowledges this official context. Instead, its consistent framing – “true believers,” “myths,” “legend” – serves to marginalize UAP reports as mere belief or fantasy, ignoring that Congress and the military have taken them seriously enough to stand up a dedicated office.

Lack of Verifiable Evidence Behind Claims

The WSJ narrative rests almost entirely on unnamed witnesses and colorful anecdotes – “thousands of pages of documents, emails, text messages and recordings” are referenced, but none are shown or cited.

Similarly, the Journal’s account of “witnesses” is imbalanced. It quotes David Grusch and Luis Elizondo (notable UFO whistleblowers) at length, then quickly notes that investigators found no records to support their stories. But it provides no source or evidence of what investigators did find (beyond hearsay).

Omissions of Context and Contradictory Facts

The WSJ story omits many publicly documented facts that would put its narrative in perspective. The Journal casually rehashes the Roswell events again and melds the account with “UFO culture.”

Likewise, the authors fail to acknowledge that Congress and federal agencies treat UAP as legitimate security and science issues. Apart from AARO’s formal mandate, there is a bipartisan “House Caucus on UAP” overseeing investigations, and government agencies (DOD, DNI, FAA, NASA) have published annual UAP reports, launched scientific studies, and encouraged reporting via established channels. None of this consensus is mentioned. NASA’s recent Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Independent Study Report, for instance, explicitly endorses data-driven inquiry into UAP, yet the WSJ article never acknowledges that a major federal science agency has invested resources into UAP research.

Comparison with Official Sources

Contrasting the WSJ narrative with public records highlights the discrepancies. The Pentagon’s own press release announces AARO’s creation as a normal counterintelligence measure, not an admission of aliens. The WSJ article, however, largely ignores these mainstream assessments and instead highlights only the more dramatic unsubstantiated claims.

By contrast, citing official documents yields a very different tone. In short, the government’s own vocabulary treats UAP sightings as data points to analyze, not as gospel. The WSJ piece substitutes that nuance with sensationalism, e.g. in its headline question “scrap metal or an alien spacecraft?”, as if the only alternative explanation is an alien one.

Tone and Bias Assessment

Taken together, the WSJ piece exhibits a clear skeptical bias toward UAP claims. It consistently frames UFO investigators as gullible or conspiratorial, while portraying Pentagon denials as obvious truth. The narrative voice is that of debunking journalists rather than detached reporters. Almost every sentence about UFO proponents is laced with sarcasm or disbelief (e.g. calling witnesses “UFO true believers” or describing paranoia about stock markets and religion if aliens were disclosed). In contrast, statements from official sources are often described dismissively or in passing. For example, the article quotes a Pentagon spokeswoman’s denial of any UFO cover-up but does not interrogate that denial; the quote appears only as a perfunctory “Pentagon spokeswoman said… inaccurate,” without further analysis.

This tone suggests the authors came in with a presumption that UFOs are largely myth. Even when reporting facts (the alloy test result, Grusch’s claims, etc.), the language is chosen to diminish their significance (“material isn’t from outer space,” followed immediately by “spoiler alert…” sarcasm). By comparison, more neutral outlets would balance such reporting with the broader significance of a government probe and the reasons why it was undertaken. The WSJ's framing sets up an “us vs. them” scenario: on one side, enlightened officials and skeptics; on the other, credulous fringe figures. (Sound familiar?) That kind of agenda-setting undermines journalistic neutrality.

In conclusion, the WSJ article’s dramatization of UFO investigations contains several misrepresentations. It overstates what AARO was tasked to do, mischaracterizes Kirkpatrick’s role, and repeatedly uses loaded language to mock UAP research. It makes grand claims based on unnamed sources without providing documentary evidence. Those facts should temper the wildest implications of the article.

Sources: Official DoD releases and AARO documents on mission and findings; AARO website (reporting guidelines); NASA UAP Independent Study final report; U.S. Air Force Roswell investigations report; Wall Street Journal, Schectman & Viswanatha (June 2025), excerpts; etc.

See Also:

UFOs and Nukes Researcher Robert Hastings Refutes WSJ Article

	UFO Myth to Government Disinformation Myth
	1967 Malmstrom AFB UFO Incident Botched by David Duchovny
	UFO Sightings at ICBM Sites and Nuclear Weapons Storage Areas
	My Evidence: The Account of Minute-Man Missiles Being Disabled, While UFOs Hovered Over The Launch Facilities

The UFOs-Nukes Connection Press Conference: Witness Affidavits and Declassified Documents

REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

from THE UFO CHRONICLES https://bit.ly/4kgRYPv

Officer Who Filmed UFO Downing Missile Sets the Record Straight

A DETAILED TRUTH

The venerable Wall Street Journal recently published an article telling readers that the entirety of the UFO/UAP issue in America from 1945 through today is nothing more than an official DoD program of utter disinformation perpetrated to deflect the public from what is really going on behind closed doors, SCIF sessions, trillions of dollars being spent on God knows what and the ruse has been perpetrated by a mysterious Air Force colonel passing out photos and films of non-existent unknown flying objects. Supposedly initiated to dispel the mystique of Area 51 and Groom

By Bob Jacobs The UFO Chronicles 6-20-2025

Lake, Nevada the program now casts doubt on all UFO, alien abductions by these craft on the people, all of the people, who have reported sightings in the air, land and sea.

I am one of those people.

Many podcasters and one brilliant researcher wrote about their and our collective outrage at this disgraceful reportage. I needed to personalize it. Six million Jews murderd by Hitler is a terrible writ. One Jewish girl named Ann Frank personalizes it.

Here is a first-hand report of what I experienced. And also the result of my having reported it to Sean Kirkpatrick, then head of AARO- the All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office in DC:

In 1964 I was an Air Force officer in charge of the Photo-optical Instrumentation section of the 1359th Photographic Squadron at Vandenberg Air Force Base. (now Vandenberg Space Force Base).

I was OIC of this 135-man unit charged with providing both normal and high- speed motion picture coverage of every launch from the base down the Western Test Range. We had cameras on the launch pad getting detailed information from engine ignition through liftoff. There were 20 to 30 cameras at a time. I was involved personally in hundreds of such events.

In addition to on the pad coverage we also provided tracking from three opposed sites triangulating each missile with 6 to 8 cameras using long focal length lenses to follow the missile up and away on its flight heading for targets at either Kwajalein Island or Eniwetok Lagoon in the deep south Pacific.

I received outstanding OERs (Officer Efficiency Reports) all during my three and one-half years at VAFB as well as commendations from my squadron and group HQ, from contractors like Boeing, as well as the Air Force Guided Missile Badge for “making a significant contribution to America’s Missile and Space Program.” In short, I knew what the Hell I was doing.

One day in the Fall of 1964 I was called into the office of Major Florenze J. Mansmann in the Chief Scientists section of the 1st Strategic Aerospace Division HQ. He and I had worked together before determining ways to improve coverage. He asked me if I knew anything about the coastal area north of the base known as Big Sur. I told him that I did, having driven my MG-TD up Highway 1 in my college days to listen to Beat Poets like Alan Ginsberg and Henry Miller at a resort called Nepenthe.

The Major then asked me to take a film camera and a radio unit up there, staying out of uniform and make contact with a Forest Service Ranger who would escort me up to a spot close to Anderson Peak. There I was to wait for a call telling me that a launch was in progress to see if I could see the missile through all three stages of powered flight from the side. Since we were not in uniform I took my Dad up with me. We had a camera and the radio and within a couple of hours on site I got the call. An Atlas missile was about to launch. I sighted it, rolled my Bell and Howell and got the bird seen from the side.

Engineers hoped to tell more about a flight if they could get a side view rather than as seen from the base, a shot up the tailpipe. They could and my tracking site at Big Sur was established.

A few weeks after this successful experiment and fun with Dad, I had to get serious. In caravan I escorted one our M-45 tracking mounts fully equipped up Highway 1 and then up the winding Forest Service road to a large flat cutout area on the edge of a steep declining mountain side with a sweeping, unimpeded view to the Southeast looking back from Big Sur located miles northwest of the base. The map of California indicates how Point Arguello, where VAFB lay, is several miles farther east. Hence our side view. Well-established after three days on site we were notified of an upcoming launch. With our 180 -inch telephoto lenses on our tracker we provided previously unavailable reactions from contractor engineers. They were thrilled.

The stage was set for a totally unexpected, unprepared for event that would change my understanding of reality and make my life in many respects a continuing morass of danger and calamity and a fractured dream.

Next time I met with major Mansmann he had a surprise. At Cape Canaveral they had employed an experimental large astronomical telescope run by Dr. Walter Manning at Boston University. This device employed a folded Gregorian scope that, the signal from which, fed directly into a large scale Image Orthicon tube. The face of thaThat afternoon the VAFB visitors went back home, Mr. Paulson and his crew operating the BU telescope retired downhill to rooms at the Nepenthe, Staff Sergeant Dodd, Airman First class Williams and I worked on our gear to be ready for the promised launch tomorrow morning. And with all assembled back on site by 0600 hours we, with our M-45, the crew from the Cape and high hopes were set to make history. There was a vast coastal fog bank hugging the coastline t tube was filmed by a 35mm Mitchell motion picture camera. The combining of these instruments allowed for maximum manipulation of the image for definition and focus. It was a very large device that had to be hauled around by a big rig truck. And it was arriving in two days to be transported up the Forest Service road to my tracking site. I departed for the site that day with a crew of one NCO and two airmen.

We camped in the pickup truck with a camper and an Army tent. In the morning the crew and I awoke, had lots of coffee and Cheerios for breakfast and waited. By noon, an entourage of Brass from VAFB arrived lead b Major Mansmann, a Mister Poulson from the Cape and Walter Manning. Behind them came the BU telescope and excitement as we placed it in the best spot to view down the coast.

L to R - CWO Guy Spooner, Lt Bob Jacobs Mr. Paulson Major Mansmann

That afternoon the VAFB visitors went back home, Mr. Paulson and his crew operating the BU telescope retired downhill to rooms at the Nepenthe, Staff Sergeant Dodd, Airman First class Williams and I worked on our gear to be ready for the promised launch tomorrow morning. And with all assembled back on site by 0600 hours we, with our M-45, the crew from the Cape and high hopes were set to make history.

There was a vast coastal fog bank hugging the coastline as far as we could see. It was early morning light. Over our radio we heard the countdown and trained eyes and instruments at the coordinates we knew would be Vandenberg. And the countdown reached 30 seconds and 20 seconds and the 10, 9,8, 7, I shouted out “Roll Cameras” and they rolled to 6, 5, 4,3,2,1 and we heard “engines start” and “liftoff”.

And after 3 seconds the big Atlas popped out of the white coated seacoast and up and away on AZ and on Elevation to targets, one hoped. As our M-45 cameras ran out we lost sight of the bird to distance. The BU Telescope unit however kept rolling, finally shutting down. Mr. Paulson gave a thumbs up and we all cheered the fact that we had given the Convair/General Dynamics engineers and all other stake holders in our missile and space program the cherished side view all the way. We had no idea the quality of the BU footage because the screen is not visible during the operation as it must be covered by a dark hood to prevent light hitting the Image Orthicon tube. With hearty handshakes all around I collected all of the film from both units and drove back to base to have it processed. Mission accomplished I supposed.

The second day I received a call from Major Mansmann asking me to come to his office right away. I thought it might have to with the success at Big Sur. I rapped on his office door and was invited in. There in the middle of the room was a 16mm film projector on a table. Next to it was a chair. Against the far wall was a Da-Lite projection screen. In one corner two men in business suits stared at me. Major Mansmann without introducing us asked me to sit down. He dimmed the lights. I hoped that this would be the BU film. I was not wrong.

“Lieutenant Jacobs watch the screen,” he said. Then he flicked on the projector. There was the image of the bottom of the Atlas missile seen from 130 miles away, filling the screen. My heart soared, this was, indeed the view as seen by the Folded Gregorian telescope lifting skyward. Major Mansmann said, “Watch closely to the end.”

As the bird continued on, it rose rapidly looking spectacular against the sky made black by contrast on the IO. The Atas D was a stage and a half weapon. It had a main pressurized body for fuel and liquid oxygen, when it burned out and fell away, three smaller engines propelled the nose cone holding the warhead downrange. I watched Stage One burnout and drop off, the final stage ignition puff. By this time with our eyes from Big Sur we were losing the object. But here on the screen the nose cone was a quite small white object. It opened and a small batch of aluminum foil splayed out in a fan to deflect the enemy radar tracking. The dummy nuclear warhead, in every dimension, weight and appearance identical to the real thing deployed into a slightly higher trajectory in front of the chaff. I smiled at Major Mansmann. He said, “Watch carefully.” So I did.

On that movie screen I watched another object slide into the frame. It approached the warhead from the same direction; in short it chased and caught up. The entire image on screen was moving away down range at several thousand miles an hour. The object, a larger spot on film than the warhead, moved closer and shot a beam of light striking the device. The object rotated above the package and shot another beam of light down, hitting it again. The object than dropped down in the path and struck it in the front with a third beam, rotated beneath it and fired a fourth beam then zipped out of the frame at a fantastic rate of speed back the same way it had come in. The dummy warhead than slowed and malfunctioned. It appeared to me to be falling out of the frame when the film ended.

The object as made out in fine detail later as Major Mansmann studied it frame by frame with a jewelers loupe, was a classic Flying Saucer, two dinner plates turned convex side out and stuck together with a round dome on top. The illustration is an enlarged artist’s conception.

The two CIA agents glared at me as the lights came back on. Major Mansmann stood up between them and me. He said, “Lieutenant were you guys screwing around up there?” (Meaning at Big Sur.)

“No sir,” I replied.

He said. Pointing at the screen, “Then what was that?”

Wanting badly to talk about it I said confidently, “It looks like we got a UFO!”

The agents stepped around so I could see them.

Major Mansman said very firmly, “You are never to say that again.”

I was startled.

“As far as you’re concerned, this never happened. Do you understand.”

I couldn’t reply. I did not understand.

“You can go now. Not a word to anyone.” And he escorted me to and out of the door to his office. It would be twenty years before I ever spoke with him again.

I did not talk about the revelation I had just witnessed–not to anyone.

Never a ‘believer” in flying saucers before this moment, my whole intellectual being was shaken by the fact of all facts, we are NOT ALONE in the vast universe.

One night ten years later I was hosting a late night radio talk show in Eureka, California. Topics among lost, late night souls reaching out in the dark for something, anything to soothe anxiety and god-awful loneliness, turn to ghosts and goblins and Jewish banking conspiracies and yeah, UFOs. About two a.m. a guy named Rick Van Pelt phoned in with a story that happened to him as an Air Force security force sergeant.

He and a partner were summoned to Thule AFB, Greenland to guard a flight of B-52 nuclear bombers on a frosty snowy night. While at a remote end of the base he and his partner spotted an apparent native Greenlander appearing over a snow bank a few feet away. Rick sent his partner to check the guy out. When his partner got near, it turned out that the “guy” was a couple of feet taller than the airman. He wore a skin tight iridescent ski suit and had long blonde hair. They spoke for a bit, then the partner started back to join Rick, dragging his rifle on the ground. He stared blankly. Rick stopped him. “Hey, what did he say?”

“He said we were supposed to stop using nukes.”

Just then Rick looked over to see a brilliant, glowing “flying saucer” lift up and shoot silently away.

Without even thinking about it, I went ahead and told mine. The same one you just read about.

Nothing happened. No bolts of lightning. No armed guards at the station door. My car didn’t blow up when I started it. The curse was lifted.

I thought.

It came back in a blind fury that goes on to this very day when I am still in pain for telling the truth: I and many, many more of my brothers-in-alien land. The date was November 1, 1982. I was a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. I had a small alfalfa farm in the country. My pay at UWO was only for nine months. So every summer I had to make some money. I usually did it producing TV commercials. Nothing was in the offing so I turned to freelance writing. It had been 18 years now since Big Sur so I wrote a small article about it to try out. Omni Magazine, Life Magazine, Argosy Magazine all turned it down. So I sent it to sleaze publications and The National Enquirer bought it. I paid the mortgage, kept the farm and went back to teaching film production.

Shortly after the story hit the streets, as they say, the decades long nightmare began. I started to get telephone calls that ended in a click. My address got out and letters from a large number of UFO ‘nuts’ began mounting up in my rural mailbox. Some of these things were from various people around the country claiming to have been on a space ship to Venus, to have flying saucers in their back yard or being from some planet or another. Mixed in with these came a few from apparently rational humans seeking the truth. One of these was a gifted researched named Lee M. Graham. The Air Force denied to him that there had ever been any of the following: anyone named Robert M. Jacobs in the Air Force, assigned to the Photo-Optical section of the 1359th Photographic Squadron, nor had there even been an Atlas D missile launched on that date, nor that they had any record of a BU Telescope, nor of anything at Big Sur… ever.

Lee dug into them with FOIA requests, letters and phone calls and did verify that they had lied on each and every count. I was reinstated into humanity.

Then the terror campaign began on the phone. I had an answering machine back then and it began to record dozens of threatening phone calls, each ending with the epithet that I received live in person to wit; “You talk too much. You’re going down motherfucker!” My fiancé at the time, now my wife also got these calls. And one night in 1986 we had come home from a movie. There was a call waiting on the answering machine. The same gruff voice said, “Fireworks in your mailbox at night, oh, what a beautiful sight. You’re going down motherfucker!” and my rural mailbox exploded.

I bought a gun. I learned how to shoot it. I practice and I don’t miss.

Then in September, 1986 I met Robert Hastings. We are close friends today. His counsel has meant a great deal to my ability to deal with the issue. Here’s what the issue has cost me personally after appearing on several television, motion picture, print and podcasts to keep telling my account, which has never varied an iota. I left Wisconsin under the constant threats to my life and the safety of my wife. I lost my next professorship at the University of Maine under a character assassination by Phillip J. Klass, I lost my next professorship at Cleveland State University under a mysterious character assassination accusing me with no proof of sexism and homophobia and after a relatively pleasant and productive 20 years as Full Professor at Bradley University from which I retired 2017, the final character assassination of all.

In a phone call one day, Robert said that he had been contacted at AARO, led by Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, when it began its investigation into UFO- now called UAP phenomena, to see if any of his interviewees would testify. He said, with a caveat that he would. He passed this invitation on to me, to Mario Woods, and Terry Lovelace that I know of. I told him that I would be happy to do so.

A few days later I was called by a man saying he was from AARO and he would like to hear my story. I asked if he was recording me and he said that he was not. So I spoke with him for nearly an hour. Afterward I sent the following note to Robert and the others in my group:

On April 29, 2023 Sean Kirkpatrick after being praised lavishly by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, chairing the Senate Armed Services Committee testified. After extensive investigation and testimony from military and former military witnesses and ‘whistle blowers’ he reported that AARO had found “no evidence of extraterrestrial” objects, machines, space ships or little green men in the United States of America. Nothing to see here.

If you’ve hung with me to this point, I’ve tried to spell out a no doubt extraterrestrial or NHI incursion that I filmed at Big Sur. My account has been substantiated by Major Mansmann, then Dr. Mansmann who when contacted by a number of researchers and TV producers stated in writing that my account was TRUE as written. The images I captured have been seen by others in government, including by Luis Elizondo. He saw the film when he was with ATTIP in Washington, DC. He told Dave Grusch when he had left his post, exactly where to find it. When Dave got to the ATTIP office everything of Lue’s in it had been cleared out. It is certain that Sean Kirkpatrick knew all about that film if not having seen it himself. In spite of the fact that that Big Sur UFO committed an act of war, this guy is a shill for the cabal suppressing NHI presence among us; everything that every honest, American patriot has told us about since 1945.

I have been compelled for reasons I don’t fully understand to prepare this document, this testimony, this tribute to my fellow witnesses, experiencers, rational thinkers. Others of us have suffered from PTSD to depression, defamation, unmitigated anger, self-doubt, threats, loss of jobs, community standing and worse- to be sold out by shills and fakirs, like AARO and the damned Wall Street Journal. F%CK YOU!

FAREWELL THE TRANQUIL MIND.

See Also:

	Big Sur UFO Film: Government Whistleblower Reveals He Watched It Big Sur UFO Film: Government Whistleblower Reveals He Watched It - PART 2
	UFOs are Stalking and Intercepting Dummy Nuclear Warheads During Test Flights
	Mansmann Letters

REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

from THE UFO CHRONICLES https://bit.ly/3ZEWWhu