Pentagon used UFO conspiracies to hide secret weapon programs: Report
In a review of a 2024 Pentagon report on UFO sightings, The Wall Street Journal claimed that some of the most common theories regarding UFOs, including reports about aliens being held at Nevada's Area 51, were directly encouraged by the Pentagon to hide details on various secret weapon programs.
According to The Wall Street Journal, evidence based on interviews with roughly two dozen U.S. military contractors, scientists, and officials and thousands of pages of documents, emails, text messages, and recordings reportedly show that the U.S. government engaged in efforts to encourage UFO conspiracies since the 1950s.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon's 2024 report indicated that a Nevada bar owner near Area 51 was given fake photos of flying saucers near Area 51 by an Air Force colonel in the 1980s. The Air Force colonel told the Pentagon's investigators that he was given a mission at the time to share disinformation and protect the true objective of Area 51, which was to test the F-117 Nighthawk stealth airplane.
READ MORE: Video: Pentagon whistleblower says gov't restricting UFO retrieval info
According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. military determined that its secret weapon and technology programs could be hidden from the Soviet Union during the Cold War by encouraging UFO conspiracy theories.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Sean Kirkpatrick, the former director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, found multiple examples of the Pentagon spreading disinformation regarding UFO sightings, including an incident that involved the Air Force hazing multiple military members by introducing them to a fake unit allegedly responsible for investigating alien aircraft. The outlet noted that Kirkpatrick also determined that the government intentionally withheld information from the public regarding documented sightings of secret military projects.
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Robert Salas, a former Air Force captain, said, 'This is a gigantic cover-up.'
In a statement obtained by The Wall Street Journal, the Department of Defense said, 'The department is committed to releasing a second volume of its Historical Record Report, to include AARO's findings on reports of potential pranks and inauthentic materials.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Upturn
12 hours ago
- Business Upturn
Presentation Uncovers Why Millions Could Be Headed West Again—Just Like 150 Years Ago
Washington, D.C., Aug. 10, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — A presentation from former CIA advisor Jim Rickards unveils an unexpected trend emerging across the U.S.— a coming wave of domestic migration not driven by housing markets or politics, but by resources, geography, and history. 'We've seen this before. Entire cities formed overnight when people went looking for opportunity beneath their feet.' The American Migration Story Is About to Repeat Itself From the California Gold Rush to the Texas oil boom, America has a long history of internal migration driven by the discovery of valuable resources. According to Rickards, the next wave is already forming—and this time, the migration may not be physical, but financial and digital . 'You don't have to uproot your family or endure months of labor. The modern rush is quieter—but just as real.' Why Forgotten Regions Are Becoming the New Frontier Rickards outlines how regions once dismissed as 'flyover country' are now being reexamined for their rich, untouched mineral reserves . He points to vast public lands in the Mountain West, the Southwest, and Alaska as potential epicenters for new development, infrastructure, and technological growth. 'About 90% of this land is concentrated out west… many of the deposits have never been touched.' Cities Don't Just Appear—They're Built on What's Below Throughout the briefing , Rickards draws a straight line between natural resources and the birth of America's most iconic cities. Denver, Birmingham, Houston, and San Francisco didn't just happen—they rose because of the minerals that lay beneath them. 'Houston was known as 'Mexican Texas' until the discovery of Spindletop. Then everything changed.' Could the Same Thing Happen Again? While the circumstances are different, Rickards says the pattern is clear: when the country needs to rebuild, it turns inward—and downward. And this time, instead of pickaxes and railroads, the boom could be powered by AI infrastructure, advanced manufacturing, and energy-hungry tech. 'These minerals are fueling everything—from chips to satellites to next-gen cities.' About Jim Rickards Jim Rickards is a former advisor to the CIA, the Pentagon, and the White House, with over five decades of experience in intelligence and economic strategy. He currently leads Strategic Intelligence , a monthly briefing series that helps Americans anticipate and prepare for major economic and societal shifts—before they hit the headlines. Disclaimer: The above press release comes to you under an arrangement with GlobeNewswire. Business Upturn takes no editorial responsibility for the same. Ahmedabad Plane Crash
New York Post
18 hours ago
- New York Post
Why geopolitical alliance between the US and India is on ice
President Trump's announcement of sweeping new tariffs on India, totaling 50%, should dispel illusions that the US–India relationship is a warm alliance of like-minded democracies. The move marks a sharp escalation in what is now openly a trade war. Trump cited India's ongoing imports of discounted Russian oil, accusing New Delhi of helping fund Moscow's war machine and selling refined Russian crude on the open market for profit. India responded sharply, hinting at retaliation. Yet Trump pressed on: The first 25% tariff takes effect this week, with another 25% kicking in later this month. This is one of the harshest tariff regimes the US has ever imposed on a major trading partner — and it's aimed at a country Washington claims to view as a key ally. 5 President Trump's announcement of sweeping new tariffs on India, totaling 50%, should dispel illusions that the US–India relationship is a warm alliance of like-minded democracies. Trump is seen here with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. REUTERS On paper, India looks like the perfect partner. It's the world's most populous democracy, largely English-speaking, and deeply embedded in the US economy. Bilateral trade in goods and services hit $212 billion in 2024, with the US trade deficit at about $46 billion. India serves as a key manufacturing hub for pharmaceuticals, apparel and tech. The US sees India as a counterweight to China in the Indo-Pacific. But India doesn't see the relationship through sentimental eyes. Since the Cold War, New Delhi has pursued a doctrine of non-alignment, which has evolved into strategic autonomy. It joins US-led forums like the Quad — in which, alongside Japan and Australia, they aim to promote a free and open Indo-Pacific without demanding formal allegiance. But India is also a member of the BRICS group of developing nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. It buys weapons from the US and France, but also Russia, maintaining friendly ties with Iran and boycotting no one. 5 Russia is a long-time defense partner and energy supplier. India now imports more than a third of its oil from Russia, totaling over $50 billion annually — which is a huge spike since 2021. Modi is seen here with Russia's President Vladimir Putin. AP That instinct is rooted in deep historical memory. Colonized by Britain and sidelined by US Cold War support for Pakistan, India emerged with a fierce desire to avoid foreign dependency. Especially under the nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi, it sees itself not as a junior partner in a Western-led order but as a civilizational power asserting its own sovereignty. This helps explain India's refusal to isolate Russia over the Ukraine war. Russia is a long-time defense partner and energy supplier. India now imports more than a third of its oil from Russia, totaling over $50 billion annually — which is a huge spike since 2021, meaning India has taken advantage of Russia's discounts, and which makes it the largest importer of Russian crude ahead of China and Iran. Some of that oil is refined and re-exported to Western markets through a sanctions loophole. It's a lucrative arrangement India has no intention of abandoning — and it keeps Vladimir Putin in business. That's the connection driving events these past few weeks: As Trump has lost faith in Putin's willingness to engage on ending the Ukraine war, so has his impatience with Modi gone through the roof. 5 The US wants India's help in containing China and securing global supply chains. Modi is seen here with China's President Xi Jinping. Getty Images But Trump's response — tariffs as geopolitical punishment — is unusual. Tariffs are typically used to protect domestic industry. Using them to enforce foreign policy aims introduces a different logic. Is it madness? Not entirely. Tariffs are one of the few levers a president can pull unilaterally. But the India case exposes the risks of this approach. India is unlikely to cave. With 1.4 billion people (the most in the world), a $4.2 trillion economy (tied with Japan for fourth in the world) and decent economic growth, it doesn't take kindly to coercion. Worse, this tactic invites charges of hypocrisy. Other countries still trade with Russia in fertilizer, chemicals and refined products. There's also blowback. Tariffs generally raise prices for US consumers, particularly in sectors like generic drugs and clothing. They also threaten to undermine supply chain shifts away from China. Companies like Apple have moved production to India — only to find their new base hit with punitive tariffs. Meanwhile, India may retaliate against US exports in energy and aerospace. 5 The US sees India as a counterweight to China in the Indo-Pacific. But India doesn't see the relationship through sentimental eyes. Carlo – American policymakers of the pre-Trump era spoke of a shared democratic identity and mutual values. But the real relationship is transactional. The US wants India's help in containing China and securing global supply chains. India wants American technology, markets and investment. That's why cooperative efforts like the iCET tech partnership and semiconductor joint ventures may succeed where talk of 'friendship' falls flat. The signs of this can be subtle. For example, Trump has been bragging in recent weeks about having averted war between India and Pakistan earlier this year. Putting aside the likely exaggeration, it did not escape notice in New Delhi that he was placing India — an imperfect but pluralistic democracy — on equal footing with its less-than-democratic rival. For a country deeply conscious of its global standing, this surely reinforced the perception that the Trump administration views India not as a partner of principle, but as just another actor to be cajoled as the situation demands. So it is no surprise that trade negotiations have repeatedly stalled over tariffs and market access. India maintains high barriers on agricultural imports and resists regulatory alignment. The US complains of protectionism; India sees imperialism. Neither is entirely wrong. India's foreign policy is rational, pragmatic, occasionally aggressive and ruthlessly self-interested. Trump's tariffs may sting, but they won't alter that fact. 5 In 1949, President Herbert Hoover met with Indian activist Mahatma Gandhi in New Delhi. Bettmann Archive The discomfort lies in letting go of the fantasy that India is a democratic soulmate. If both sides accept that the relationship is not built on shared values but overlapping interests, then real partnership is still possible. For the likes of Trump and Modi, that's about the best that you can hope for. Dan Perry led Associated Press coverage in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, and served as AP's special international editor. He publishes Ask Questions Later on Substack.
New York Times
a day ago
- New York Times
Trump's Cartel Order Revives ‘Bitter' Memories in Latin America
Just a decade ago, the era of U.S. wars, coup plots and military interventions in Latin America seemed to be ebbing when the Obama administration declared that the Monroe Doctrine, which long asserted U.S. military supremacy in the Americas, was dead. Now this cornerstone of foreign policy is roaring back to life, resurrecting fears over U.S. military interference in the region after President Trump ordered the Pentagon to use military force against certain Latin American drug cartels. Leaders in the region are still trying to decipher what Mr. Trump's order could mean. Mexico and Venezuela, two nations where the administration has designated cartels within their borders as terrorist groups, seem especially vulnerable. But up and down much of Latin America, any whisper of reviving such actions could also unleash a chain reaction resulting in a surge in anti-American sentiment. The news of Mr. Trump's order has already intensified a wariness against intervention from abroad, even in Ecuador and other countries plagued by violent drug wars in recent years. 'I'm a right-wing conservative, so I want armed citizens and the military actually shooting,' said Patricio Endara, 46, a businessman in Quito. 'But I wouldn't agree with having foreign soldiers in Ecuador.' That skepticism draws from the bitter memories left by the long record of U.S. military interventions in the region, whether through direct or indirect action, as during Colombia's long internal war. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
