PENTAGON ADMITS IT HAS UFO DEBRIS! UFO =/= Alien

PENTAGON ADMITS IT HAS UFO DEBRIS! UFO =/= Alien

PENTAGON ADMITS IT HAS UFO DEBRIS! UFO =/= Alien 1436 804 Jeremy

Anthony Bragalia claims to have gotten over 970,000 hits on his blog, after recently publishing the viral clickbait headline:

https://www.ufoexplorations.com

This sent John Greenwald of the BlackVault.com has been on a debunking rampage releasing 3 videos and doing

I reached out to Anthony Bragalia for comment, and he clarified his position by sending me the following email exchanges between him and the Pentagon FOIA Office, whom Greenwald has a comfy relationship with, dealing primarily in FOIA work himself. The most important piece of this story, is the FOIA documents themselves and the scientific and technical information they contain, which I view as confirmation of the technologies and ideas we have been discussing on this channel for the better part of the last decade and a half..

https://7f215854-ce29-4a12-9bb0-f4e7eb88d38a.filesusr.com/ugd/aa4aac_e69847bdf5814f43b69d49e2962a17d8.pdf

https://7f215854-ce29-4a12-9bb0-f4e7eb88d38a.filesusr.com/ugd/aa4aac_4b1d0bacf5bc4db0922c82b4fad3d132.pdf

Email from Tony Bragalia to Susan Gouph:

Sue-

This is Anthony Bragalia. I am the individual who filed a FOIA request on the UAP/UFO debris held for testing at Bigelow Aerospace. I have been dealing with the Defense Intelligence Agency Chief for FOIA, Steve Tumiski and he fulfilled my request last month. You have mislead the public in your statement about me and the FOIA.

 Both the request and the fulfilment of that request had only to do with debris from UAPs/UFOs curated by the Pentagon and given to Bigelow Aerospace for testing. You have not told the truth that the tests and the materials do not relate to debris, but rather, to aerospace metals testing only.

I never requested anything whatsoever related to traditional defense metals or manmade aero research items. I never mentioned anything other than UFOs – and the DIA understood that request exactly as written.

You are in some way trying to obfuscate  the matter. The DIA stands by the work product provided me. I believe that we may have to contact General Berrier on the matter if you do not retract your public statement. You have defamed me. And I do not appreciate you making official statements that the documents provided me “appear” to be genuine. They are genuine, Sue.

Go to www.ufoexplorations.com and within the article are links to my original FOIA request from 3.5 years ago. Also included are links to the official response to my request from the DIA.  Below is a cut/paste article showing the email trail between the DIA and me on this matter. Only UFO debris is mentioned. Never mentioned is what you are implying: prosaic, non-extraterrestrial inspired materials research.

I look forward to hearing from you very soon as I have learned much since the publication of the article and there is now no question whatsoever that you have purposely confused the matter. I believe that the extraterrestrial materials science and engineering research has been “folded into” existing aero R&D efforts to further bury the true impetus of these scientific efforts- UFOs/UAPs.

Best,

Anthony Bragaglia

PENTAGON CAUGHT CONTRADICTING ITSELF ON UFO DEBRIS – MISLEADS CIVILIAN RESEARCH GROUP “BLACK VAULT” by ANTHONY BRAGALIA

 Pentagon officials, caught in a web of contradiction that they possess and have tested UFO debris, now state that the reports provided to this author under a FOIA request made over three years ago do not relate to UFOs, but to things known. This is contradicted by other Pentagon branch officials, the New York Times reporter who broke the story originally, and by the President of the defense contracting company for storing the anomalous materials. A statement released to the operator of a civilian investigative research group “Black Vault” denying the relationship of the study to UFO debris is inaccurate and misleading. A lawsuit against the Pentagon by this author has been initiated today with the retention of counsel to uncover the underlying truth.

The Pentagon Confirms FOIA Response Involved UFO Debris – Then Denies It – Tony Bragalia

On January 6th  a phone conversation transpired between this author and the DIA’s Branch Chief, Steven W. Tumiski (GG-15, Supervisory Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Branch Chief (FAC-2C), Records Management & Information Services Mission Services Directorate (MS), Office of Facilities & Services (FAC)  He affirmed that information to be received on January 17, 2021 “would be responsive in every way possible to your request” to my request for UAP test results, but that some would have to necessarily be redacted.

In a January 6th email and in a January 13th, 2021 email seen below, DIA Branch Chief Tumiski again confirms his understanding of a request for UFO/UAP related test results – not for known aero-defense metals as the Pentagon now claims they were referring to when replying to John Greenewald, operator of an investigative research site called the “Black Vault.”

From: Tumiski, Steven W CIV DIA (US)

Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 4:38 PM

To:

Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] RE: FOIA-0089-2018 (BRAGAGALIA Anthony)(AATIP – Bigelow Aerospace)

Hello, Mr. Bragaglia,

I am sorry that you are concerned. I was trying to help you get what you considered most important to you perhaps sooner than this summer. It was obviously a misunderstanding.

Please accept our prospective forthcoming response as an installment/rolling release.

You will have to wait until FOIA officers finish processing release of the various respectively responsive records to the many requests/requesters related to AATIP and Bigelow Aerospace, which at this time, we project releases to requesters toward JUN-JUL2021.  All responses will be processed in accordance with the FOIA. DIA fully supports DOJ and DOD guidance toward release and transparency to the fullest extent possible with exception of information that should be lawfully withheld under the FOIA.

All parties should remember that that an estimated completion date is only an estimate based on the available information at the time of making the estimate. Estimated completion dates are subject to change.

If there are delays as we approach JUN-JUL; we will contact you with an updated estimated completion date.

Thank you.

Kind regards and V/R,

Steve

Steven W. Tumiski

GG-15, Supervisory Program Manager Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)

Branch Chief (FAC-2C), Records Management & Information Services

Mission Services Directorate (MS), Office of Facilities & Services (FAC)

Desk Location: MS2 3E135

N: Tumiski, Steven W CIV DIA (US

S: Tumiski, Steven W CIV DIA (US

J:  ic.gov

From:

Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 4:20 PM

To: Tumiski, Steven W CIV DIA (US)

Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: FOIA-0089-2018 (BRAGAGALIA Anthony)(AATIP – Bigelow Aerospace)

Yes, that is the general request : “test results from the UAP material from Bigelow Aerospace under contract to the DoD/Pentagon” however, the specifics of that request were also included in the original 2017 request, Steven.

They are enumerated in my previous email.

Besides, “test results” by their very nature would have to include what I have enumerated: physical description, properties, and composition of the material tested, titles and authors of those tests, names of those contractors that conducted those tests, etc.  Hope that this helps.  I did request “test results from the UAP..” but in the interest of helping you and of focusing the request I enumerated what “tests” and “test results” means.

I am very concerned that Alesia did not handle this well. It is clear that where we are now is not what I requested four years ago. It cannot be simple incompetency. I am concerned something else is going on. Bigelow Aerospace is the contractor who conducted the tests requested. The company is now bankrupt and they still have the material. Bigelow refuses to answer my questions and keeps on directing me back to “the FOIA Officer” in charge of that kind of request – namely, you.

Tony Bragaglia

From: Tumiski, Steven W CIV DIA (US)

Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 4:02 PM

To:

Subject: RE: FOIA-0089-2018 (BRAGAGALIA Anthony)(AATIP – Bigelow Aerospace)

Hello, Mr. Bragagalia,

Please excuse me if there has been a misunderstanding.

I had understood, and you had confirmed, in our last email exchange that you accepted narrowing your scope to:

test results from the UAP material from Bigelow Aerospace under contract to the DoD/Pentagon

Your confirmation (per the thread below):

—-

From:

Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2021 3:08 PM

To: Tumiski, Steven W CIV DIA (US)

Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: FOIA-0089-2018 (BRAGAGALIA Anthony)(AATIP – Bigelow Aerospace)

Thanks Steven…yes, just the test results on the material.  Tony

—-

Thus, this is the basis for my fulfilled promise to you from 06JAN where I told you I would update you ASAP with an estimated completion date based on what I thought was your narrowed scope.

I regret that you have doubts about us fulfilling your request in accordance with the FOIA.

I can assure you that your request is not being handled differently than any other request processed by DIA.

I can assure you that your request is being processed in accordance with the FOIA.

I am not concerned with your statements regarding press or legal actions; I have dealt, and will continue to deal, with you in good faith, and I hope that you will do so with me.

If you no longer agree to what was understood as narrowing the scope of your request to responsive records specific to:

test results from the UAP material from Bigelow Aerospace under contract to the DoD/Pentagon then, please accept our prospective forthcoming response on this scope as an installment/rolling release.

You will have to wait until FOIA officers finish processing release of the various respectively responsive records to the many requests/requesters related to AATIP and Bigelow Aerospace, which at this time, we project releases to requesters toward JUN-JUL2021.  All responses will be processed in accordance with the FOIA. DIA fully supports DOJ and DOD guidance toward release and transparency to the fullest extent possible with exception of information that should be lawfully withheld under the FOIA.

All parties should remember that that an estimated completion date is only an estimate based on the available information at the time of making the estimate. Estimated completion dates are subject to change.

Thank you.

Kind regards and V/R,

Steve

Steven W. Tumiski

GG-15, Supervisory Program Manager

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)

Branch Chief (FAC-2C), Records Management & Information Services

Mission Services Directorate (MS), Office of Facilities & Services (FAC)

Desk Location: MS2 3E135

 

The New York Times Refutes the Pentagon’s Claim that the Reports Relate to Known Technologies.

Investigative reporter Ralph Blumenthal was one of the authors of The Times expose’ of the Pentagon’s AATIP on the television network MSNBC in December, 2017 about the alloys: “They have, as we reported in the paper, some material from these objects that is being studied so that scientists can find what accounts for their amazing properties, this technology of these objects, whatever they are.” When asked what the materials were, Blumenthal responded, “They don’t know. They’re studying it, but it’s some kind of compound that they don’t recognize.” Mr. Blumenthal is being sought for additional comment to clarify the contradictory statement received by civilian research group “Black Vault.”

Defense Contractor President Robert Bigelow Contradicts Pentagon’s Claims

On February 5th, former President of Bigelow Aerospace Robert Bigelow, knowing of my attempts at contacting him just days before about the debris through several emails, himself admits to his involvement with material objects of unknown origin. They are not known to man, as the Pentagon tells Black Vault. In fact, they are unable to be back-engineered. Bigelow knows this because he was contracted by the Pentagon for this reason. Bigelow committed his knowledge to tape in an interview with investigative reporter George Knapp,  at 20:36: “Machinery really does exist. It does exist. But the problem has been the inability to back-engineer it.”

https://youtu.be/9Sv66dG6Ldc?t=1236

The US Government’s Long History of “Mixing” ET and Defense Research – Tony Bragalia

The easiest way to study extraterrestrial material is to “fold it into” existing programs of terrestrial materials. This serves as a seamless “cover” for study of highly sensitive materials. From Battelle scientist Elroy John Center famously being told that his work on an unusual metal was “from the Russians” to the US government program called “Project Moon Dust” which could refer to a downed Soviet satellite recovery or that of an ET spacecraft- it’s a two-edged ploy. The association of these exotic metals with defense materials research allows them to confuse their true origin. And they have done this again with their reply to an inquiring research group questioning the veracity of these claims.  – Tony Bragalia

I decided to run a Twitter Poll on what people thought about Pentagon retrieval of “foreign artifacts”:
I should have removed the alien face to make it more ambiguous… But obviously we had project Moondust to recover Russian Satellites which are technically “foreign artifacts”…

Back to top