Michael Schellenberger

Rank 44 of 47
|
Score -102
12/4/2025, 6:44:22 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
17d
@theblackvault It could be one of them. The reason I think it's not is because it's an internal @DeptofWar document, which would raise the question of why they couldn't rule out US tech. But I agree it could be given the level of compartmentalization.
FromDeathToLife
@optionski
·
17d
@shellenberger "..the slide censors two of the three potential explanations for UAPs." Why isn't Advanced US Technology one of the 2 censored?
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
17d
Thank you, @theblackvault for your work over the last 30 years petitioning the government to reveal more of the things it is unnecessarily and illegally keeping secret. You don't get enough credit.
John Greenewald, Jr.
@theblackvault
·
17d
I fully support and advocate for removing the redactions on the below documents I got through FOIA. And there are many more just like it.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
17d
Take a close look at this document. Everything you need to know about UAPs (UFOs) you can learn from it. It's a slide from a presentation by the Pentagon's UAP Task Force.

You might wonder what we can learn from a document that is so heavily censored, or redacted. That's exactly
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
18d
Marco Rubio says he has no "way to verify” the “spectacular claims” made by “people with high clearances.” But if the Nat. Sec. Advisor lacks access to classified intel, and cannot tell if officials are lying, then it's up to Trump to reveal what the government knows about UAP.

The statement critiques government censorship related to national security, suggesting it is excessive and unjustified. It engages in public discourse by addressing transparency and accountability in government actions.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement challenges government actions, potentially promoting accountability and transparency, aligning with the principle of doing no harm by advocating for public awareness. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects privacy and dignity by focusing on government actions rather than individuals, adhering to the principle of avoiding harassment or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by questioning government practices, encouraging public dialogue and scrutiny. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    It engages in constructive criticism of government actions without personal attacks, aligning with the principle of constructive dialogue. [+1]