Congressional Hearing on UAP: Missed Opportunities and Familiar Themes

By Anthony F. Sanchez, Author & UFO Researcher
For UFO Currents

Let's talk, chat. Or maybe it's more like me reflecting on what got missed and what we all recognized—again; (ugh, here we go).

The recent congressional hearing on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs) in Washington, D.C., has drawn mixed reactions from the public and experts alike. While some appreciated the ongoing governmental focus on UAP transparency, others, myself included, found the session lacking compared to the 2023 hearing that featured David Grusch, Commander David Fravor, and Ryan Graves.

Like thousands of others, I tuned in via the Vetted Podcast YouTube channel, where the Live Chat allowed for a collective outpouring of thoughts and reactions. It was a dynamic experience, hella cool; but let’s be honest—the hearing itself? Kind of a letdown.

(Now, the UFO community will now cancel me for using the slag term 'hella'—maybe.)

A Platform for Personal Agendas?

One of the biggest critiques floating around is that the hearing seemed more like a stage for promoting Luis Elizondo's book, Imminent: Inside the Pentagon’s Hunt for UFOs, rather than diving into new revelations. Many felt it prioritized personal narratives over objective inquiry.

But, did I get that sense?

Look, as someone who also writes books on UFOs, I can’t throw too many stones. But I did opine in the Vetted Live Chat: "These hearings seem aimed at delaying, obscuring, and creating 'UFO TV stars' for book sales. Mr. Gold echoed my MUFON speech on using AI to uncover the truth, but I don’t trust him."

For clarity, my skepticism was directed at Michael Gold, not Elizondo.

And let me be transparent:
my frustration with Gold stems from him presenting ideas to Congress that were almost identical to what I covered during my speech at the 2024 International MUFON Symposium in Irving, Texas, this past July. I couldn't help but think, "Wait, did I just give him the blueprint?"  

Me, at the 2024 MUFON International  Symposium, Irving Texas (July 2024).

So, yeah, I was there. Cool, right? Also, my son Eric and my buddy Ric Prestel (shoutout to MUFON) like to remind me that maybe—just maybe—I'm a little full of myself. Apparently, there are millions of other software engineers with a UFO obsession who also independently thought, "Hey, let's use AI to sift through the mess of disparate data sources and algorithmically cross-correlate answers that our tiny monkey brains can't handle."

So, yeah. Guess I’m not that special after all.

The Disappointment of "Immaculate Constellation"

The imminent attraction (pun intended) of the hearing was supposed to be the revelation of the alleged "Immaculate Constellation" program—a supposed secret initiative to manage UFO-related data and technology. However, the hearing provided little in the way of groundbreaking details.

The Department of Defense has already denied the program's existence, leaving many of us wondering: was this just another buzzword to pad the agenda?

Now, here's where things get interesting. I have some background on a very similar program—one that Project Camelot (hi Kerry) and I were digging into as far back as 2006. This involved an aerospace facility in Southern California where two individuals, known to us, worked as archivists cataloging UFO-related materials. Here is the thing, the parallels between that and “Immaculate Constellation” are uncanny. But more on that in another article.  

A Tale of Two Hearings

Let's compare. The 2023 hearing with Grusch, Fravor, and Graves was a landmark event. It introduced compelling firsthand accounts, like the Magenta Italy UFO incident in (1933) and the infamous Tic Tac encounter, alongside mentions of "biologics" (a fancy way of saying aliens without actually saying it).  In contrast, the recent hearing lacked that "wow" factor. It felt like a retread, recycling familiar claims without offering fresh insights. The sense of stagnation was palpable, leaving many frustrated over the lack of progress.

And what does that do? It freaking adds skepticism and the bigger picture. Dang it. So, with the focus on Elizondo's book and the murky "Immaculate Constellation" program, it's no surprise that skepticism has crept into the conversation. People are questioning the motives behind the hearing and the credibility of what was presented. 

Does this mean it was a total loss? No, not really. The fact that Congress is still engaging with UAP topics is, in itself, a win. But the session underscored the need for future hearings to prioritize transparency, verifiable information, and more diverse voices (like, not DoD guys—maybe some , you know, regular folks).

Oh snap! There was also this...

Perhaps, this was that poignant moment that salvaged the day. What you ask? Well, amid a sea of serious faces and committee decorum, Rep. Lauren Boebert decided to drop this gem:

"Uh, now that we have all been cautioned in this committee hearing that the mention of the Pentagon's Immaculate Constellation program could, uh, put us on a list—well, um, I already find myself on many lists, I'm sure. So, um, I speak my mind often, so why not just keep going with it? May as well just go all out and say it: the Earth is flat, birds are government drones, and, uh, we've never set foot on the moon. And Joe Biden received 81 million votes in the 2020 election. So, uh, let's just see how many in the best interest of the people—is that correct? Yeah, I mean, with the caveat that, of course, I, you know, would support classification necessary to protect secrets essential to national security. But I think it's pretty obvious that there's over-classification. Over-classification, yes. And so, in most instances, if they can't tell us, what do you think?"

Wait, what? Uh, yeah. Sure. That checks out.

And she managed to turn the word *immaculate* into "immanculant" on national television.

Moving on, I would like to give a shoutout to the community. You see, despite the hearing’s shortcomings, the UFO, UAP (and NHI) community remains vibrant. How do I know this? Well because, MAJOR Kudos need to go out to Patrick Scott Armstrong, host of Vetted on YouTube, for providing an engaging platform for enthusiasts like us to share our thoughts. And yes, I did manage to sneak in a mention of Moriarty Hecklefish (clearly an Anunnaki, for those in the know).  

Big shoutout to Hecklefish and the Vetted Podcast. Of course I buy Live Chat Stickers.

Final Thoughts

For future hearings to regain public trust and interest, they must rise above the noise of book promotions and vague claims. It's time for concrete, verifiable information and bold steps toward genuine disclosure. Until then, we'll keep asking questions, piecing together the puzzle, and—of course—watching the Live Chat.

Cheers, I'm Anthony, and I write books. Wait, oh shiznet, I did it; I promoted my books.

***

Anthony is the author of the books 'UFO Nexus' and 'UFO Highway 2.0', available in paperback or eBook @ https://StrangeLightsPublishing.com

STAY AT THE FOREFRONT OF UAP and NHI DISCLOSURE.
By following and participating on these platforms, you’ll ensure that you’re always at the forefront of UFO discourse.

***

Citations:

VETTED. (2024, November 13). UAP hearing live stream (November 13th) w/ post-hearing reaction [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZ6uQhxe34c

News.com.au. (2024, November 14). Pentagon denies report claiming to reveal name of top-secret UFO program for the first time. Retrieved from (https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/space/pentagon-denies-report-claiming-to-reveal-name-of-topsecret-ufo-program-for-the-first-time/news-story/20c779c042ebc69f8fa54a3af81dc986)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

UAP Disclosure: An Impasse, Amidst Official Pentagon Denials And Think Tank Advocacy

A Perspective on God and Extraterrestrial Life

Navigating the Future: Understanding AI, Robotics, and Our Path Forward