In the article published in Scientific American, Dr. Kirkpatrick took swipes at whistleblowers under threat from reprisals and current members of Congress currently investigating UAP.
Dr. Kirkpatrick, referring to former senior intelligence official and UAP whistleblower David Grusch, wrote:
'Our efforts were ultimately overwhelmed by sensational but unsupported claims that ignored contradictory evidence yet captured the attention of policymakers and the public, driving legislative battles and dominating the public narrative.'Dr. Kirkpatrick in October 2023 admitted that as director he had not spoken to Grusch about the allegations, casting doubts over his position to know whether they are unsupported.
Grusch has lodged an official complaint with Thomas Monheim, the Intelligence Community's Inspector General (ICIG), addressing UAP programs and the reprisals he endured. The complaint has been recognized as both credible and urgent.
That complaint was lodged in May 2022, almost two months before the AARO was stood up.
Liberation Times has learned that first-hand witnesses to retrieval and reverse engineering programs relating to non-human materials have supported Grusch's allegations, and so have other governmental sources, which were not associated with previous UAP programs referenced by Dr. Kirkpatrick in his article.
Speaking to Liberation Times, Grusch confirmed that he did decide to approach AARO staff, but held reservations regarding the way information was handled:
"On request of a Senator in late October 2023, I have been in communication via email with AARO staff and have been willing to work on an interview arrangement.Earlier this month, members of the House's Oversight Committee met with Monheim to discuss the ICIG's investigations relating to Grusch's allegations.
"AARO staff have been unwilling to address in writing the specific handling of classified compartmented information, such as the CIA Directorate of Operations' compartmented data on human sources and non-UAP related but adjacent compartmented programs.
"I take my obligations to protect sources and methods extremely seriously."
Those who attended did not leave the meeting feeling like Grusch's claims were not supported. Representative Moskowitz stated on X:
'Based on what we heard many of Grusch['s] claims have merit!'Dr. Kirkpatrick in his article seemed to discourage members of Congress from investigating such whistleblower allegations, writing:
'The result of this whirlwind of tall tales, fabrication and secondhand or thirdhand retellings of the same, was a social media frenzy and a significant amount of congressional and executive time and energy spent on investigating these so-called claims — as if we didn't have anything better to do.'This comes after key mechanisms for the disclosure of UAP-related information and materials were removed from the 'Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act of 2023' (UAPDA), proposed by Senate leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Mike Rounds, following alleged hostility from senior Republicans, including House Intelligence Chair Mike Turner.
Dr. Kirkpatrick has again and again underlined the importance of evidence.
However, by seemingly discouraging investigations by Congress and the Executive Branch, and following the hollowing of the UAPDA, producing evidence becomes almost impossible.
Speaking with Liberation Times, Lester Nare, the founder of the UAP Caucus - a group dedicated to raising UAP awareness and advocating for action among congressional members - commented:
'It's ironic: the Department of Defense, often accused of hiding UAP information, now, through Dr. Kirkpatrick, is actively discouraging Congress from finding evidence and potential whistleblowers from coming forward.It is not clear whether Dr. Kirkpatrick provided his article to the Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review (DOPSR).
'History reminds us, as with the Church Committee, that a thorough, transparent investigation is imperative now more than ever.'
The Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review's website states:
'Department of Defense employees and military service members have a lifelong responsibility to submit for prepublication review any information intended for public disclosure that is or may be based on protected information gained while associated with the Department.'Dr. Kirkpatrick's article touched upon aspects relating to the AARO's upcoming Historical Record Report Volume 1, yet to be submitted, which may cause complications regarding the DOPSR process.
Commenting on the lack of clarity on whether the article was submitted to DOPSR, one defense source, speaking under condition of anonymity, told Liberation Times:
"This is troubling for two reasons.Dr. Kirkpatrick also wrote that none of the whistleblowers within the public eye had ever approached the AARO to provide evidence and a statement for the record, remarking:
If Dr. Kirkpatrick did not have it reviewed, it is a serious breach of standing Department of Defense policy and could result in another Inspector General complaint against the Department.
"On the other hand, if he did have it reviewed and they approved it, this is also problematic because in his article he provides a summary of the results of a study for Congress and the Department of Defense that has not been completed yet or provided to the U.S. government.
"One then must ask questions. Who gave him authority to release the results of a report before they were even provided to Congress? If the study is ongoing, where is the analysis? If he is biased, why is he still being used by the Department of Defense as an "unpaid consultant" to advise the Deputy Secretary of Defense?"
'As of the time of my departure, none, let me repeat, none of the conspiracy-minded "whistleblowers" in the public eye had elected to come to AARO to provide their "evidence" and statement for the record despite numerous invitations.'Liberation Times understands that this is inaccurate.
One whistleblower in contact with Liberation Times has asserted that they did speak to Dr. Kirkpatrick and his team on record, and they were aware of several other whistleblowers who did the same. It is understood that the AARO was provided with statements and specific data.
Multiple U.S. intelligence and defense sources have previously confirmed to Liberation Times that the AARO, as one source stated, has "coordinated the collection and analysis of materials from an unknown origin."
Following the article's publication, Travis Taylor, the former Chief Scientist for the U.S. government's UAP Task Force told Dr. Kirkpatrick online:
'In order to find substantiating evidence, you have to actually look.A former government official, familiar with Dr. Kirkpatrick, informed Liberation Times that he was not trusted among other whistleblowers.
'ARRO [AARO] was a farce to shovel the manure back into the manufacturer and the public doesn't realize it.'
The official, speaking under condition of anonymity, commented:
"Now we see why whistleblowers didn't trust Kirkpatrick.Another source who knows Dr. Kirkpatrick pondered how someone who recently published an article about the possibility of 'Alien Mother ships' orbiting our planet could now take the stance that it's all hogwash, unless there is a hidden agenda that Dr. Kirkpatrick is engaged in.
"It will be very difficult for the Department of Defense to regain faith and trust with new whistleblowers given the behavior and deceitfulness of Kirkpatrick.
"His article appears to be written from the perspective of someone who failed at their job and is now throwing a child's fit of rage"
This month, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) confirmed to Liberation Times that Dr. Kirkpatrick, since his departure, continues to serve the AARO as an unpaid consultant.
Liberation Times has asked the DoD, if it will continue to utilize Dr. Kirkpatrick in this capacity following the publication of his recent article and whether it was submitted to DOPSR.