4 ms·
> People with direct access to such classified materials would not legally be able to divulge details and especially not publicly. It would be a fairly quick tr
by revscat 3y ago
> People with direct access to such classified materials would not legally be able to divulge details and especially not publicly. It would be a fairly quick trip to prison.
I believe this is no longer strictly true for UAP-related information [1]. Congress has gotten much more serious about offering legal protections to those who have knowledge about UAP programs.
[1] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ufo-whistleblowers-would-get-protection-under-new-amendment https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ufo-whistleblowers-wou...
- tptacek 3y agoWhatever else those protections might mean, they apply only to disclosures made through official DoD channels, not to interviews given to book authors.
- revscat 3y ago> In accordance with protocols, Grusch provided the Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review at the Department of Defense with the information he intended to disclose to us. His on-the-record statements were all “cleared for open publication” on April 4 and 6, 2023, in documents provided to us. Source: https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/ https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-re...
- tptacek 3y agoYes: we all agree that what he's saying is cleared for publication. Because it's nonsense and the DoD doesn't care.