2024-11-12 - Statement to Steven Greenstreet re: accusations by Tim Gallaudet
"Mr. Gallaudet is clearly still bitter that I didn’t hire him into AARO when he came looking for a job. His predisposed tendencies for conspiracies without evidence made him unsuitable for a job that required objectivity and evidence-based reason. I verified my decision with some of his previous bosses and peers.
In his first paragraph he states that AARO should brief Congress. AARO has been briefing the appropriate committees in Congress since day 1. I was on the Hill personally answering questions and providing data nearly weekly not only as Director but after I retired. What Mr. Gallaudet clearly doesn’t understand is that the HCOA is not one of those committees as they don’t have authority over AARO. It was not until after I retired that the HCOA committee even asked for a briefing, and then I came up to answer their questions, which basically had little to do with fact and more to do with playhouse theater, even in a classified setting.
Furthermore, let’s be clear. I had at least two interviewees who came to us and stated for the record that certain members and staffers on the Hill specifically told them NOT to come share their information with AARO, not because they didn’t trust us, but because they wanted to hide information. Information that we discovered through other means. In other words, there were elements on the Hill obstructing the very office that other elements on the Hill established to investigate these claims. Mr. Gallaudet was associated with that contingent of people.
To address his specific claim concerning errors in the historical report. I have answered that question previously to the press. Yes, there were a few errors in the report that did not get caught by the technical editors in the rush to get the report to Congress by the deadline, both the unclassified and classified versions. The classified annex had no such mistakes as that was the most relevant. The errors do not substantially change the resulting conclusions and evidence presented. In my briefing to Congress, that was discussed with the appropriate committees.
Referring to his second paragraph, this is a typical response from conspiracists who do not want to believe an alternative explanation given evidence. It is either fake news, or disinformation. The difference is evidentiary. The historical report is born out by both public and classified records. Particularly interesting was the KONA BLUE effort that we uncovered and DECLASSIFIED as per Congressional direction. The fact that we questioned everything is exactly what an objective, evidentiary based investigation should do. The response from Mr. Gallaudet that suggests that we had no right to question, is a glaring red flag calling into question his judgement. Suggesting that AARO was employing disinformation is the expected response in the face of contrary evidence and science. As this is becoming the new norm, I sense a return to dark ages of mysticism and magic. I would have expected better from a Navy Officer, however, if I’ve learned anything in my time as AARO Director, it is that rational actors are becoming an endangered species."
No Comments