Are UFOs a national security risk? Hearing puts Pentagon on notice

Three former defense officials on Wednesday gave explosive testimony at a House hearing on unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs), warning that the sightings “potentially” pose national security risks. 

The witnesses before the House Oversight subcommittee — a former Navy pilot, a retired Navy commander and an ex-Air Force intelligence official — also stressed that the government has been far too secretive in acknowledging such incidents, prompting calls from lawmakers for the intelligence community to be more forthcoming.

“If UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem. If it is something else, it is an issue for science. In either case, unidentified objects are a concern for flight safety,” said Ryan Graves, a former F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot who founded Americans for Safe Aerospace, a non-profit group meant to encourage pilots to report UAP incidents. 

And all three witnesses replied “yes” when asked if the UAPs could be collecting reconnaissance information on the United States or probing the country’s capabilities. 

The hearing seemed to unite lawmakers in a push for answers on a topic that has largely been dismissed by politicians, who for decades have been hesitant to touch on UAPs — also known as unidentified flying objects, or UFOs — and other extraterrestrial life lest they become a laughingstock. 

A series of reports from The New York Times beginning in 2017 began to change that. The reports — exploring the Pentagon’s secretive Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program and DOD-documented UAP sightings. 

Lawmakers also worry that the sightings could be tied to military technology owned by adversaries but unbeknownst to most Americans. 

“UAPs, whatever they be, may pose a serious threat to our military and our civilian aircraft, and that must be understood,” said the subpanel's ranking member, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.). “We should encourage more reporting, not less on UAPs. The more we understand, the safer we will be.” 

The Pentagon has only given tentative information on UAPs, in 2021 releasing a report which found more than 140 inexplicable encounters. 

Videos released by the Defense Department have also shown unexplained happenings, including the now famous “Tic Tac” video, taken in November 2004 on a routine training mission with the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz off the coast of southern California. 

During the encounter, Navy ships and planes used sensors to track an oval-shaped flying object that resembled a Tic Tac breath mint, with four pilots visually sighting the apparatus that flew at high speed over the water before abruptly disappearing.  

Former Navy pilot David Fravor, the commander of the mission and the individual who filmed the video, on Wednesday told the committee that the object “was far superior to anything that we had at the time, have today or looking to develop in the next 10 years.” 

He added that he found it “shocking” that “the incident was never investigated” and said none of his crew were ever questioned.

And fellow witness Graves said during the hearing that he had seen UAPs off the Atlantic coast “every day for at least a couple years.” 

He said the sightings were “not rare or isolated” – noting that UAP objects have been detected “essentially where all Navy operations are being conducted across the world,” and were also seen by military aircrews and commercial pilots. 

But Graves also estimated that only 5 percent of sightings are reported, which he attributed to stigma among pilots who feel it will “lead to professional repercussions either through management or through their yearly physical check.” 

But the most explosive testimony of the day came from David Grusch, a former member of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency whose previous allegations on UAPs and the government’s efforts to conceal them sparked Wednesday’s hearing. 

Grusch claimed that the Pentagon and other agencies are holding back information about UAPs and hiding a long-running program that is attempting to reverse engineer the objects. 

Grusch said that he “absolutely” believes the U.S. government is in possession of non-human technology, adding that he knows “the exact locations” of that material.

He also claimed that he has faced serious reprisals for his statements and had knowledge of those who have been harmed or injured as part of ongoing efforts to cover up extraterrestrial technology.   

Grusch in the past has claimed that the U.S. government has for decades recovered nonhuman craft with nonhuman species inside. 

He repeated similar assertions at Wednesday’s hearing, though he repeatedly told lawmakers he could not share details in a public setting and that his information was based upon what he had been told by others. 

Republicans and Democrats now want to get to the bottom of what these incidents mean for U.S. national security.  

“There clearly is a threat to the national security of the United States of America,” Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) said. “As members of Congress, we have a responsibility to maintain oversight and be aware of these activities so that if appropriate we take action.” 

He later told reporters that lawmakers have “a responsibility now to move forward aggressively to get to the answers of these questions.”

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) told reporters that a bipartisan group of lawmakers will seek a closed meeting with the witnesses to discuss confidential information in a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF.  

And Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) said Wednesday's hearing was the “first of many” on the government's handling of information related to UAPs, which “is an issue of government transparency.” 

“I’m shocked, actually, at just the amount of information that came out because all the roadblocks that we were put up against,” he told reporters. 

“I think what’s gonna happen now, the floodgates — other people are gonna say, ‘You know, I’ve got some information, I’d like to come swear in,’ and that’s what we’re going to start doing.”

UFO whistleblower makes explosive claims, but wary of divulging details

Former intelligence official David Grusch made far-reaching claims about possible U.S. government cover-ups of contact with UFOs and non-human pilots in a House Oversight subcommittee hearing on Wednesday.

But Grusch could not offer any hard evidence to substantiate his claims — largely due to his fears of prosecution for sharing classified data in a public setting, he told Congress.

“As a former intelligence officer, I go to jail for revealing classified information,” he told the members.

Lawmakers on the national security subcommittee noted that evasion is not the same thing as Grusch admitting he doesn’t have proof. 

“We should remind viewers and witnesses — and I think is really important — that we also cannot share classified information in public settings,” Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said.

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, testifies during a House National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing to discuss Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena on Wednesday, July 26, 2023. (Greg Nash)

Members repeatedly complained that they had been denied access to a secure hearing room (a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF) where they could hold a fully secure interview with Grusch.

“Every person watching this knows that we need to meet with Mr. Grusch in a secure compartmentalized facility so that we can get fulsome answers that do not put him in jeopardy,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) told the committee.

Gaetz's GOP colleagues said after the hearing that they would demand to interview Grusch and the other witnesses in a SCIF to gather additional information. 

Here are three specific areas where Grusch said he could share further classified information with Congress to bolster his claims. 

Naming his sources 

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, is sworn in

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, is sworn in during a House National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing to discuss Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena on Wednesday, July 26, 2023.

Grusch said that during his time as co-lead of the Pentagon’s Unexplained Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) task force, fellow intelligence officials leaked to him the existence of the secret program focused on retrieving — and attempting to reverse engineer — non-human craft.

“Do you have direct knowledge — or have you spoken to people with direct knowledge of this imagery of crash sites,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) asked Grusch.

“I can't discuss that in an open session,” Grusch said. 

But he promised to offer a list of potential witnesses — both cooperative and “hostile” — who could give the committee more information.

Claims of retaliation 

(L-R) US Representatives Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Robert Garcia (D-CA), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) arrive for a House Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs hearing titled "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security Public Safety and Government Transparency," on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on July 26, 2023. (Photo by Brendan SMIALOWSKI / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

While most of his intelligence agency colleagues have been supportive, Grusch told Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-N.Y.), “I do have knowledge of active and planned reprisal activity against myself and other colleagues,” in what he called “administrative terrorism.”

When Raskin pressed on where these reprisals had come from, Grusch said the source was “certain senior leadership at previous agencies I was associated with.”

“That’s all I’ll say publicly,” Grusch added, “but I can provide more details in a closed environment.”


Related coverage from The Hill


Asked if anyone had been killed over potential leaks, Grusch told Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) that "I have to be careful asking that question, I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.”

By contrast, former Navy pilot Commander David Fravor, sitting next to Grusch, said that he and other pilots who had witnessed UAP had been treated “very well.”

Misappropriation of funds

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, testifies during a House National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing to discuss Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena on Wednesday, July 26, 2023. (Greg Nash)

Grusch alleged that aerospace and weapons manufacturers were siphoning money off of government contracts — and plowing it into unsanctioned research projects in advanced technology.

The Secretary of Defense does have the authority to deny congressional oversight of particularly sensitive “special access programs,” or SAPs. But the group of high-powered congressional leaders known as the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be informed — which Grusch said didn’t happen in this case.

Asked how such a secret program gets funded, he said: “I will give generalities — I can get very specific in a closed session — but misappropriation of funds.”

“Do you think US corporations are overcharging for certain tech they're selling to the US government and that additional money is going to programs?” Rep. Moskowitz asked.

“Correct, through something called IREN,” Grusch said, referring to the INFOSEC Research and Engineering Network, a joint research and development venture between several corporate weapons contractors.

Sign up for the latest from The Hill here

Pressed for details, Grusch said he could reveal more in a closed session and offered Rep. Alexia Ocaio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) a list of corporations and sites to begin targeting.

“I'd be happy to give you that in a closed environment, I can tell you specifically,” Grusch responded. 

UFOs, UAPs and angels: Lawmakers have different views on extraterrestrial explanations

As the House prepares to hear from a UFO whistleblower who claims the U.S. is concealing evidence of nonhuman craft, the question looms over members of Congress: Are we alone?

Many members insist they have not seriously considered the question or are keeping their concern focused on national security risks from not knowing the cause of UFO sightings.

But some members say they have seen enough to think that the unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs) — a more recent term for sightings of strange objects or effects in the sky — are of nonhuman extraterrestrial origin.

“It’s either something extraterrestrial, or something extraterrestrial that they reverse-engineered,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), a leader of Wednesday’s UAP hearing, said when asked about the possibility of the sightings being secret Chinese or Russian technology.

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) also said he thinks the UAPs were of nonhuman extraterrestrial origin.

“Listen, God made a phenomenal planet with phenomenal people, even though we disagree, we have our own issues. I don’t think we’re the only ones in the universe,” Donalds said.

“Do I think that our federal government has hidden information from the American people? 100 percent. Not even close,” he added. 

But while most of the focus around the UAPs is on whether their source is dangerous technology from adversaries such as China or Russia or extraterrestrial, some people have pointed to a third explanation behind the sightings. 

“I’m a Christian and I believe the Bible,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). “I think that to me, honestly – I’ve looked into it. And I think we have to question if it’s more of the spiritual realm. Angels, or fallen angels. And that’s my honest opinion.”

Wednesday’s hearing will feature David Grusch, a former intelligence official who is now a whistleblower alleging that the government is concealing evidence of a crash retrieval program focused on wreckage of “nonhuman origin.”

“These are retrieving nonhuman origin technical vehicles, call it spacecraft if you will. Nonhuman exotic origin vehicles that have either landed or crashed,” Grusch told NewsNation last month, going as far as to suggest that some crash retrievals have included recovery of “dead pilots.”

In the UFO enthusiast community, Grusch’s claims were a bombshell. But they did not land that way with all members of Congress.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) brushed off a recent question about whether he believes in extraterrestrial life.

“I will continue to see, but I think if we had found a UFO, I think the Department of Defense would tell us, because they probably want to request more money,” McCarthy said. “I’m very supportive of letting the American public see whatever we have.”

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, also rebuffed concern about UAPs and their origins.

“There are so many things that we get an opportunity to dig into and talk about here. It’s really the reason why people run for Congress, is to help their constituents and to weigh in on serious things. And this is just not in my top 20 that constituents in my district are asking me about or talking about,” Aguilar said.

But there is some UFO and UAP alarm among leaders on the other side of the Capitol.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) spearheaded an amendment that was added to the chamber’s annual defense bill that would require government records related to UAPs be declassified and disclosed unless a review board says they must be kept classified.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee, recently told The Hill that he is concerned about the national security implications of the UAPs and the whistleblower claims.

“Either A, they’re telling the truth or some version of the truth, or B, we have a bunch of people with high clearances and really important jobs in our government [who] are nuts. Both are a problem,” Rubio said.

But do not expect any hard answers in the meeting about whether Earth has been visited by aliens.

“I don’t think we’re gonna get into little green men,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), who is helping lead Wednesday’s UAP hearing.

The focus, he said, is on government transparency about UAPs.

“What does the government know? And why aren’t they telling the American people?” Moskowitz said. “Even just trying to get this hearing done — there are different factions of the government that tried to stop the hearing from happening. Why?”

Last year, a House Intelligence subcommittee held a rare open hearing on UAPs, with lawmakers seeking to destigmatize reporting of the sightings and stressing that they are a national security concern. But it did little to provide an explanation for the hundreds of recorded UAP encounters.

“I’m on the Intelligence Committee, and yes, we do have hearings on this stuff,” said Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio). But while most of those are closed hearings, Wenstrup said they “might as well be open,” alluding to a lack of explanation about the encounters.

Despite the intense outside interest, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, is leaving exploration of the topic to Burchett and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.).

“I’m just gonna sit there. I’m gonna yield my time to Luna,” Comer said. “I’m just there to listen and learn.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), top Democrat on the Oversight panel, said that bipartisan interest in UAPs is a “positive thing.” But as of last week, he had not deeply looked into the issue.

“With climate change and extreme fanaticism running loose on earth, other planets are seeming more and more attractive to people,” Raskin said. “So, I don’t blame them for wanting to have this hearing.”

Earth hears a possible signal: We are here, we are here, we are here

In a year that has brought an impeachment, a raging pandemic, far too many tragic deaths, a hopeful election, and months of increasingly aggressive sedition aimed at overturning the government of the United States, could there still be a story to top them all. Well … maybe. 

The biggest story of 2020 might be one that didn’t hit the press until mid-December. Or it could be nothing. Because back in April and May, for a combined period of 30 hours, scientists at the Parkes Observatory in Australia listened in on a signal. A radio signal. One that they believed to be coming from the sun's nearest neighbor, Proxima Centauri. The nature of that signal could rock humanity’s beliefs about the universe and introduce perhaps the most groundbreaking discovery in history. Or it might have been someone warming a burrito. Despite what the wild-haired guy says on cable, it’s not aliens, because it’s never aliens. But the longer people have looked, the more of the “easy explanations” have been eliminated.

The story first leaked to The Guardian on Dec. 18. That the researchers involved, and those carrying out the analysis, sat on the data for eight months without spilling the beans makes it clear they understood exactly the reaction that comes any time someone pops up claiming to have discovered a possible sign of intelligent life in space. There will be jokes. The words “little” and “green” will be used. And skepticism tends to run right past the bounds of appropriate into dismissive.

There are very, very (and … very) good reasons to be skeptical. Not least of all because several past natural phenomena have first been thought to be potential signals of intelligence before astronomers and physicists figured out just how “clever” nonliving matter could be. In the most cited example, pulsars—regular points producing rapidly repeating patterns of “signals” at both radio and other wavelengths—turned out not to be either massive transmitters or some spectacular variety of space pharos. Instead they are the rapidly spinning neutron star cores left behind by exploded giant (but not supergiant) stars. Which kind of makes it not all that surprising that it took a bit for someone to find the explanation.

In another famous (or infamous) case, what had appeared to be a set of signals recurred so frequently that they were given a name: perytons. These signals kept returning over and over for 17 years, baffling scientists until the installation of a new instrument revealed that the mystery signals actually came from a microwave oven at the facility. And what facility would that be? Why, Parkes Observatory in Australia. That was just five years ago.

Oh yeah. You better believe they are checking everyone’s lunch schedule.

Another good reason to be skeptical of this report is that the researchers involved seem to have found exactly what they were looking for. This data was collected by the Breakthrough Listen project, a SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) project founded in part by Stephen Hawking and funded primarily by Israeli-Russian tech billionaire Yuri Milner. The signal itself was first detected by a student, Shane Smith, who tagged it as BLC1, for “Breakthrough Listen Candidate 1.” That’s right. This is the first candidate they’ve found.

Anyone who stumbles across the very thing they hoped to locate, and does so practically in their own backyard, has to be held to quite a high standard of proof.

However, as Scientific American reports, after months of wading through the data, searching for possible sources of interference, and reviewing the contents of the signal, the scientists involved remain hopeful. The signal appears to come from a point source at distance rather than something close at hand. It also appears to be quite narrow in bandwidth, which would be somewhat unusual for a natural source. Finally, not only does the signal appear to originate from the area of Proxima Centauri, the researchers believe it shows signs of a regular shift that might be expected if the source was actually a planet orbiting that star.

As it happens, Proxima Centauri is quite a complex little system. It’s a red dwarf star, the most common kind of star in the universe, quite a bit smaller and cooler than our sun. In fact, it’s so small and cool that, despite being the nearest star to our own, it can’t be seen by the naked eye. (It also can’t be seen at all from the Northern Hemisphere, so plan a trip and bring at least a good pair of binoculars.)

This small star is believed to  orbit around the binary star Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B. (Proxima is also known as Alpha Centauri C.) Those stars are larger yellow stars, more similar in size and temperature to the sun. Exactly what that orbit looks like, or how long it’s been going on, is the cause for a lot of computation and a lot of frustration. (Read Three Body Problem from Chinese science fiction writer Liu Cixin if you want to understand more about why this is so difficult to suss out.)

Little red Proxima is known to have at least two planets which, for perfectly sound planet-hunter reasons, are known as Proxima B and Proxima C. Proxima C is about 7 times the mass of Earth, making it roughly the same size as Neptune. However, it’s not clear if the planet is actually a gas giant or just the kind of oversized rocky world known as a “super Earth.”

Proxima B is where it really gets interesting. The planet is located very close to the star, much closer than Mercury is to the Sun. So close, in fact, that Proxima B’s “year” is just 11 days long. However, because Proxima Centauri is so much smaller and cooler than our sun, this close orbit places Proxima B squarely in the “habitable zone.” Which means nothing except that the level of radiation received by the planet is such that it could potentially have liquid water on the surface. Water is something that scientists believe is critical to everything we understand as life. Proxima B is also not a lot larger than Earth—about 1.17 times the mass of Earth. As far as Earth-like exoplanets go, Proxima B is a pretty decent candidate.

And, in interstellar terms, it’s right next door. Like right next door. This is absolutely the closest star out there. Why, it’s so close that if the Voyager 1 probe happened to be aimed in the right direction (it’s not), it would pass by Proxima in just … 71,000 years. 

Space: It’s big.

There are reasons to be dismissive of the idea that there could be life on Proxima B. For one thing, red dwarf stars may be smaller than yellow stars like our sun, but they also tend to be rather grumpy. Red dwarf stars have frequent storms and eruptions that would hit a close-orbiting planet like Proxima B with so many energetic particles it might quickly strip away any atmosphere. Not all scientists think this is the case, but if there’s going to be life around red dwarf stars, it would take some mechanisms we don’t yet understand. In Proxima’s case, there is also the complication of that maybe-orbit around the Alpha Centauri binary star, which could cause serious instability over time both for the red star and its planets.

Breakthrough Listen has been going to sites around the globe, buying up time on radio telescopes, and listening in for signals like what seems to have been detected at Proxima. It is definitely the hottest show in the whole of the many decades of SETI. So, as might be expected, SETI.org is … completely skeptical. Their latest news release contains what amounts to a sneering dismissal of the possible signal from Proxima Centauri. 

Besides emphasizing that this is only a candidate, the biggest thrust of the article is just how unlikely it would be to encounter intelligent life at the next system over. Not just intelligent life, but life at a technological stage so similar to our own that it’s using radio signals that we can detect and possibly identify. All of which is a pretty good point. In fact, the director of Breakthrough Listen has announced that the signals are “likely interference” that will soon be explained. 

Still, as SETI researcher Franck Marchis says in his conclusion … 

2020 has been a crazy year on so many levels, even in the field of SETI. After the mysterious appearance of monoliths and the announcement of the galactic federation, we now have BLC1, a curious and mysterious signal that might—or might not—have come from Proxima Centauri. It’s probably not alien and we will confirm this soon. Of course, as a SETI Institute scientist, nothing would please me more than to be proven wrong.