Tag: pentagon

Pentagon whistleblower fears execution after revealing bombshell UFO program secretly studying alien tech

The whistleblower behind a stunning report submitted to Congress – exposing what he claims is a secret Pentagon program tracking unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs) – has now revealed his identity and says he fears for his future in speaking out.

Matthew Brown is a former U.S. national security official who previously served as a Policy Advisor for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, a Technical Advisor for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security, and a Program Advisor for the Department of State. 

He publicly identified himself as the whistleblower in WEAPONIZED Episode 74 – a podcast released Tuesday that is hosted by investigative journalists and UFO experts Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp.

Brown is the author of the Immaculate Constellation Field Report, a document entered into the Congressional Record earlier this year that alleges the Executive Branch has been secretly managing UAP programs for decades – without congressional oversight.

‘This is absolutely what I did not want to do,’ Brown said during the podcast. ‘I am, on a personal level, giving up the future that I made for myself and was going to try to make for a family. My hope is that the stakes are not paid out, but they are life imprisonment and the possibility of execution.’

Brown, who held Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearances with a Counterintelligence Scope Polygraph (CI Poly) during his government career, is bound by strict secrecy agreements that carry steep penalties if classified information is improperly disclosed.

Speaking to DailyMail.com, Corbell said those fears are not unfounded – even if rarely enforced to the extreme.

‘When you’re in the classified world, you sign your life away,’ Corbell explained. ‘There are serious consequences for leaking national security information – and yes, on paper, that includes life imprisonment or even capital punishment in rare cases tied to espionage.’

Keep reading

Inside the Pentagon’s shameful effort to draft mentally disabled men to fight in Vietnam

In 1967, a young man named Johnny Gupton was drafted into the Army to fight in Vietnam. Gupton didn’t know how to read or write; he didn’t even know what state he was from. He had never heard of Vietnam. When a fellow soldier questioned a noncommissioned officer (NCO) about how someone with such an obvious mental disability could join the Army, the NCO responded, “Ehh, he’s one of McNamara’s Morons.” 

This is what soldiers like Gupton were known as throughout the Armed Forces during the Vietnam War era. In 1967, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara lowered military recruiting standards as part of a program called Project 100,000. Its goal, as the name suggests, was to recruit 100,000 men each year who were otherwise mentally, physically or psychologically underqualified for service. These men all had IQs below 91, and nearly half had IQs below 71. From the Project’s launch in 1966, through its termination in 1971, it allowed 354,000 previously ineligible men into the military. Of these, 5,478 died in combat and 20,270 were wounded. 

These men were aggressively recruited and pushed through training without having met even the bare minimum of standards set for them. They were sent into combat in large numbers and many died. They were promised greater benefits and opportunities as an incentive to join the military, but those who returned alive came home to broken promises and were abandoned by the government. It’s a largely forgotten and shameful chapter in American history. 

Robert McNamara and the Johnson Administration sold Project 100,000 as an expansion of Great Society welfare programs where poor, mentally disabled men could learn important life skills. Labor Secretary Daniel Moynihan said, “Expectations of what can be done in America are receding. Our best hope is to use the Armed Forces as a socializing experience for the poor.”

This is how the idea was sold to the public, but there is a much more obvious reason to aggressively recruit mentally disabled soldiers. As the war raged on, more and more Americans were needed to fight in Vietnam each year. Children of the affluent middle class could avoid the draft by seeking an educational deferment (like Dick Cheney) or by finding a friendly doctor to get a medical deferment (like Donald Trump). McNamara and Johnson were faced with a choice; they could end draft deferments for college students and send children of the affluent to war in a country most Americans could not yet find on a map, or they could start signing up a lot more mentally disabled people. Guess which one they chose?

Keep reading

Obama Lapdog Susan Rice, the “Genocide Queen,” SNAPS AND LASHES OUT at Pete Hegseth After Being Removed from Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board

Former UN Ambassador and Obama National Security Advisor erupted after she was canned from the Pentagon’s Defense Police Board.

The board’s role is to provide the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense with independent, informed advice and opinions concerning matters of defense policy.

Rice found out she was sacked on Thursday night.

The Daily Beast reported:

Her sacking was announced late Thursday evening, with the Defense Department issuing a statement that read, “changes are needed to support the new strategic direction and policy priorities of the department and to ensure departmental resources are used efficiently.”

The Gateway Pundit reported on Friday that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has formally terminated the service of every member sitting on the Department of Defense’s advisory committees.

Based on the information available on the website as of Thursday, the now-defunct panels included several well-known Democrats and Bush-era Republicans.

  • Janine Davidson (Chair) – Former Under Secretary of the Navy under Obama. A staunch Democrat and longtime proponent of Obama-era military reforms, now steering Pentagon policy advice.
  • Michèle Flournoy – Held major Pentagon roles under Clinton and Obama; often discussed as a potential Secretary of Defense under Hillary Clinton or Biden.
  • Colin Kahl – National Security Advisor to then-VP Biden, later Under Secretary of Defense for Policy under Biden. Key Biden ally and architect of many failed Middle East strategies during the Obama years.
  • Susan Rice – National Security Advisor under Obama; Domestic Policy Advisor under Biden. Central to Obama’s foreign policy blunders and later helped craft Biden’s radical domestic agenda.
  • Dana Shell Smith – Career diplomat; served as U.S. Ambassador to Qatar under Obama.
  • Eric Edelman – Undersecretary of Defense for Policy under George W. Bush; strong neoconservative background.
  • Jon Huntsman Jr. – Served under George W. Bush (Ambassador to Singapore) and Obama (Ambassador to China); briefly served under Trump (Ambassador to Russia).
  • Kori Schake – Held roles under Bush; associated with AEI and other think tanks; known for hawkish, internationalist views.

In a statement issued late Thursday, Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell made clear that the department was taking a new direction:

“Yesterday, informed by the recently concluded 45-day review of DOD advisory committees, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth directed the conclusion of service of all members of each DOD advisory committee that had been subject to the review, consistent with applicable law.

Secretary Hegseth appreciates the members’ efforts on behalf of the department and the United States of America, but changes are needed to support the new strategic direction and policy priorities of the department and to ensure departmental resources are used efficiently.”

Susan Rice lashed out at Pete Hegseth after she was shown the door on Thursday night. Of course, she hurled racist and sexist epithets to attack the current Secretary of Defense.

Keep reading

Pentagon Denies New York Times Report with Anonymous Sources Accusing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of Leaking Yemen Strike Details in Second Private Signal Chat with Wife, Brother, and Lawyer

In yet another desperate attempt to undermine President Trump’s administration, The New York Times published a baseless report accusing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of leaking sensitive Yemen strike details in a private Signal chat.

The Pentagon has swiftly and forcefully denied these allegations, with Chief Spokesman Sean Parnell labeling the story as “fake news” driven by disgruntled former employees with clear motives to sabotage Hegseth and Trump’s agenda.

This latest attack comes on the heels of the firing of three former Pentagon officials—Dan Caldwell, Darin Selnick, and Colin Carroll—accused of leaking unauthorized information.

The Times claims Hegseth shared details of a March 15 Yemen strike in a Signal group chat named “Defense | Team Huddle,” which included his wife, Jennifer, his brother, Phil, and his personal lawyer, Tim Parlatore.

The article further alleges that Hegseth shared similar details in another chat that mistakenly included The Atlantic’s editor, Jeffrey Goldberg.

These accusations, sourced from four anonymous individuals, lack any concrete evidence and reek of political vendetta.

The New York Times reported:

Unlike the chat in which The Atlantic was mistakenly included, the newly revealed one was created by Mr. Hegseth. It included his wife and about a dozen other people from his personal and professional inner circle in January, before his confirmation as defense secretary, and was named “Defense | Team Huddle,” the people familiar with the chat said. He used his private phone, rather than his government one, to access the Signal chat.

The continued inclusion following Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation of his wife, brother and personal lawyer, none of whom had any apparent reason to be briefed on operational details of a military operation as it was getting underway, is sure to raise further questions about his adherence to security protocols.

[…]

Mr. Hegseth created the separate Signal group initially as a forum for discussing routine administrative or scheduling information, two of the people familiar with the chat said. The people said Mr. Hegseth typically did not use the chat to discuss sensitive military operations and said it did not include other cabinet-level officials.

Mr. Hegseth shared information about the Yemen strikes in the “Defense | Team Huddle” chat at roughly the same time he was putting the same details in the other Signal chat group that included senior U.S. officials and The Atlantic, the people familiar with Mr. Hegseth’s chat group said.

[…]

In the case of Mr. Hegseth’s Signal group, a U.S. official declined to comment on whether Mr. Hegseth shared detailed targeting information but maintained that there was no national security breach.

But according to the Pentagon, the entire narrative is nothing more than a politically motivated smear campaign aimed at derailing the Trump administration’s bold military leadership and undermining Secretary Hegseth’s credibility as he continues to clean house at the Department of Defense.

Keep reading

“Unnamed Pentagon Officials Have Slandered Our Character with Baseless Attacks”: Hegseth Aides Ousted in Leak Probe Fire Back, Say They Were Never Told What They Were Accused Of

Three senior advisers to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—Dan Caldwell, Darin Selnick, and Colin Carroll—were abruptly ousted this week amid an expanding probe into alleged information leaks.

The trio, all veterans and key figures in the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to reform the Pentagon, have publicly condemned their dismissals as unjust and politically motivated.

In a joint statement, Caldwell—an advisor to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth; Selnick, Hegseth’s deputy chief of staff; and Carroll, chief of staff to Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg—expressed profound disappointment over their treatment, asserting that they were never informed of the specific allegations against them.

Read their full joint statement below:

“We are incredibly disappointed by the manner in which our service at the Department of Defense ended. Unnamed Pentagon officials have slandered our character with baseless attacks on our way out the door.

All three of us served our country honorably in uniform – for two of us, this included deployments to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And, based on our collective service, we understand the importance of information security and worked every day to protect it.

At this time, we still have not been told what exactly we were investigated for, if there is still an active investigation, or if there was even a real investigation of “leaks” to begin with.

While this experience has been unconscionable, we remain supportive of the Trump-Vance Administration’s mission to make the Pentagon great again and achieve peace through strength. We hope in the future to support those efforts in different capacities.”

Keep reading

Pentagon’s Yemen Operations Nearing $1 Billion Price Tag

Fresh analysis in both the NY Times and CNN have estimated that America’s Yemen operations will soon hit the $1 billion mark. Still, war-planners are admitting only ‘limited success’ in degrading and dismantling the Houthis sophisticated weapons network.

‘Operation Rough Rider’ has seen warplanes and warships in the Red Sea go through at least $200 million in launched munitions alone since March 15, the Times report says. An in total, CNN says the overall operation is “nearing $1 billion in just under three weeks, even as the attacks have had limited impact on destroying the terror group’s capabilities,” according to several US defense officials.

US military assets in the region have utilized JASSM long-range cruise missiles, JSOWs (GPS-guided glide bombs), and Tomahawk missiles – all of which are very costly, advanced munitions.

Keep reading

The All-Devouring Machine: Pentagon Malfeasance and Insatiable Empire

The eyes of a new generation were opened in an episode that seemed like dark science fiction for those of a certain age, and an unyielding nightmare regardless: a genocide streaming into smartphones around the world in real time. Many American eyes were opened for the first time to the reality not only in Palestine, but in the places in the world that are meant to be forgotten, where the U.S. and its allies may tread at their will and pleasure. At the center of this system of license and aggression is the Department of Defense, as it is now euphemistically named. What we call “defense” spending in the United States is actually spending on weapons and war-making, and it has continued its unabated rise in both red and blue presidential administrations.

The U.S. spends far more on its military than any other country – it spends more than the next nine countries combined, and as a share of GDP, its military spending far outpaces that of other rich countries in the G7 group. The Department of Defense is massive, “with $4 trillion in assets dispersed across fifty states and over 4,500 locations worldwide,” and its sheer size is at the heart of pathological accounting failures in recent years. Last November, the Pentagon flunked its seventh audit in a row, again failing to properly account for its budget – over $800 billion. A Stimson Center policy brief published last July called the Pentagon’s wild spending “a budgetary time bomb set to explode in the next twenty years,” noting the explosion in Pentagon spending in the years since 9/11. “Adjusted for inflation, defense spending has increased more than 48% in just the first 24 years of this century.” The U.S. imperial military is a truly global enterprise. According to data compiled by political anthropologist David Vine at American University, there were about 750 bases outside of the United States as of 2021, scattered throughout the world in 80 countries and colonies. Vine points out that given the “sheer number of bases and the secrecy and lack of transparency” around the information, a complete list is impossible:

The Pentagon’s previously annual list of its bases, the “Base Structure Report,” is notoriously incomplete and, at times, inaccurate. The Pentagon has also failed to release the Congressionally-mandated annual report since the Fiscal Year 2018 version, making an accurate list even more difficult than in prior years. Most observers assume the U.S. military does not know the true number of bases occupied by U.S. forces. It is telling – but not a good sign – that when a recent U.S. Army-funded study evaluated the effects of U.S. bases on conflict globally, the study relied on my 2015 list of bases rather than the Pentagon’s list.

Keep reading

Pentagon Considers Tasking Musk’s SpaceX With Military ‘Missile Tracking’ Satellite Program: REPORT

Tech billionaire and DOGE chief Elon Musk is constantly under fire these days by the lunatic left, but on the real world, where relevant things are in motion, he continues to excel and thrive.

His SpaceX company is reported to be about to considerably expand its share of military business, as the Pentagon considers overhauling a program to deploy hundreds of missile-tracking satellites into low orbit.

Washington Post reported:

“Competitors have fallen so far behind SpaceX that many fear they won’t be able to catch up, leaving NASA and the Pentagon with few other options as it faces increased competition in space from China and other nations. Musk’s hard-charging company rakes in billions of dollars from the U.S. government, flying everything from cargo to astronauts to some of the Defense Department’s most sensitive satellites. The company also operates more than 7,000 Starlink internet satellites in orbit, more than any other entity.”

Keep reading

Pentagon Kills Off HR IT Project After 780% Budget Overrun, Years Of Delays

After blowing deadlines and budgets for years, the Pentagon has finally pulled the plug on a troubled project to overhaul its outdated civilian HR IT systems.

Like many government projects before it, the US Defense Civilian Human Resources Management System (DCHRMS) promised big things when it was kicked off nearly a decade ago. According to a memo [PDF] signed by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth late last week, the program was intended to streamline a large portion of the DoD’s legacy HR IT systems, but it’s being axed after officials concluded pouring more funds into it would be “throwing more good taxpayer money after bad.”

DCHRMS started in 2018 with a planned development timeline of one year and a budget of $36 million, “but instead it’s taken eight years and is currently $280 million over budget – that’s 780 percent over budget,” Hegseth said in a video announcing the DCHRMS and other spending cuts. “We’re not doing that anymore.”

That’s not to say the DoD is giving up on modernizing its civilian HR systems – the memo noted that the Pentagon still wants a new solution, with Hegseth directing officials to develop a fresh plan within 60 days to achieve the project’s original goals.

While the headline item in the memo is the cancellation of DCHRMS, Hegseth ordered cuts to additional programs, contracts, and grants too.

The memo mentioned the cancellation of more than $360 million in grant programs “in areas of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and related social programs, climate change, social science, COVID-19 pandemic response” and the like, stating these efforts were not aligned with the DoD’s current priorities.

We’ve reached out to the Defense Department to get a more complete list of the programs being terminated, but Hegseth did single out a couple in the video. In particular, he pointed to a $6 million grant for decarbonizing the emissions from US Navy ships and a $9 million university grant to develop “equitable AI and machine learning models.”

“I need lethal machine learning models,” Hegseth said. “Not equitable machine learning models.” 

The memo also directed the cancellation of $30 million in contracts with Gartner and McKinsey for analysis products and what Hegseth described as “unused licenses” from “external consulting services.” The move echoes the ongoing scrutiny of federal consulting contracts, such as reviews of deals involving Accenture, IBM, and Deloitte.

Keep reading

Dear DOGE: Here’s How To Cut the Pentagon Budget by $100 Billion in 6 Easy Steps

America’s military budget is more than just numbers on a page – it’s a reflection of the priorities that shape our society. Right now, that nearly trillion dollar budget is bloated, inefficient, and far removed from the needs of everyday Americans. We’ve identified six simple yet effective ways to cut at least $100 billion from the Pentagon’s budget – without sacrificing even the most hawkish of war hawk’s sense of national security. Ready to take the scissors to that excess spending? Here’s how we can do it.

1. Halt the F-35 Program (Save $12B+ per year)

The F-35 is the poster child for military mismanagement. It’s a fighter jet that was supposed to revolutionize our military – except it’s plagued by cost overruns, delays, and underperformance. Despite a projected lifetime cost of over $2 trillion, this aircraft only meets mission requirements about 30% of the time. If we ended or paused the F-35 program now, we’d free up $12 billion annually. The military-industrial complex can afford a few less fancy jets that destroy land and lives, especially when they don’t even do their job right.

2. Reassess Long-Range Missile Defense (Save $9.3B+ per year)

For over half a century, we’ve sunk an eye-watering $400 billion into long-range missile defense systems that have never delivered. The cold, hard truth is these systems are ineffective against real-world threats. In fact, no missile defense technology has ever proven capable of neutralizing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) attack. Cutting back on these programs would save us $9.3 billion per year – money that could be better spent on diplomacy initiatives that actually work.

3. Cut the Sentinel ICBM Program (Save $3.7B+ per year)

ICBMs were once the crown jewels of our nuclear deterrence strategy, but they’re outdated in today’s geopolitical climate. With more reliable and flexible platforms like submarines, bombers, and emerging hypersonic technologies, maintaining an expensive, high-risk ICBM arsenal makes little sense. Ending the Sentinel ICBM program would save taxpayers $3.7 billion annually, and even more in the long run, with total savings over its lifespan estimated at $310 billion. It’s time to face facts: we don’t need to keep pouring money into a strategy that no longer aligns with modern defense needs. Especially when the best nuclear deterrence system is ending nuclear weapons programs to begin with.

4. Cease Procurement of Aircraft Carriers (Save $2.3B+ per year)

Aircraft carriers are relics of a bygone era, costing billions to build and maintain, while becoming increasingly vulnerable to modern missile technology. These floating cities are no longer the symbols of naval power they once were. By halting new aircraft carrier procurements, we can save $2.3 billion a year – money that could be better allocated to ways that actually keep us safe in the 21st century like housing, healthcare or climate justice.

5. Cut Redundant Contracts by 15% (Save $26B per year)

The Pentagon’s bureaucracy is a cash cow for contractors – more than 500,000 private sector workers are paid to do redundant and often wasteful work. Many contracts overlap or go toward projects that are, frankly, unnecessary. Cutting back just 15% on these contracts would save $26 billion annually. That’s a massive chunk of change that could be reallocated to more efficient and effective defense projects. Want a starting point? Look no further than SpaceX’s lucrative contracts – it’s time we hold these companies accountable.Maybe DOGE knows a guy there?

6. Prioritize Diplomacy (Save $50B+ per year)

The best way to avoid unnecessary military spending is to prevent conflicts from happening in the first place. By focusing on diplomatic solutions instead of military interventions, we can scale back expensive overseas bases, reduce troop deployments, and use reserves and National Guard units more effectively. This shift could save up to $50 billion a year – and possibly as much as $100 billion in the long term. It’s about time we put our resources into creating peaceful solutions rather than preparing for endless wars.

What Could We Do with the $100 Billion in Savings?

The possibilities are endless when we take a more practical approach to national security spending. What could we do with the $100 billion we save? Here’s a snapshot of just some of the incredible investments we could make in American society:

  • 787,255 Registered Nurses: Filling critical healthcare gaps nationwide.
  • 10.39 million Public Housing Units: Making affordable housing a reality for families across the country.
  • 2.29 million Jobs at $15/hour: Providing good jobs with benefits, boosting the economy.
  • 1.03 million Elementary School Teachers: Giving our children the education they deserve.
  • 579,999 Clean Energy Jobs: Building a sustainable, green future for the next generation.
  • 7.81 million Head Start Slots: Giving young children a foundation for lifelong success.
  • 5.88 million Military Veterans receiving VA medical care: Ensuring those who served our country receive the care they earned.

The Bottom Line?

Keep reading