The Department of War's disclosure route, from the first file release to the September waiver, and what UAPverse has said about it along the way.
Latest change
New entry
Thread published
Timeline
8 events · 0 corrections
Follow
Follow PURSUE
I'll email you when something meaningful changes here: a new take, a real update or a correction. Nothing for commits, mentions or previews.
Follow this
Where this stands
PURSUE turned from a file-release system into a route for protected disclosures in one announcement. This thread keeps the dated record straight: what the department actually said and when, the earlier episodes that show where the speech boundary sits, the witness costs Brown describes, and the point where I started asking who picked the designated representatives.
A Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review letter to James T. Lacatski clears his submitted UAP manuscript for public release, explicitly disclaims Department of Defense endorsement or factual accuracy, and requires disclaimers identifying the views as the author's. Release clearance alone proves neither truth endorsement nor government authorship.
At the House Oversight hearing, Rep. Mace asks whether recovered pilots were human or nonhuman; David Grusch attributes a nonhuman assessment to people with direct knowledge whom he interviewed. Asked what evidence supported it, he answers that the specific documentation would have to be discussed in a SCIF. The claim reached the public; its supporting documentation did not.
The Department of War identifies PURSUE as the Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters, describes an interagency effort and announces its first public release of files. The announcement says many security-reviewed materials had not yet been analysed to resolve anomalies.
In his interview with Jesse Michels, Brown describes an intrusion at his home, prolonged stress afterwards and costs to his wife, family and friends, and separately says speaking needed to happen and that he hopes it leads to meaningful change. These are Brown's allegations; the police record was not examined.
Happened
Source published
Added to UAPverse
Interview publication date on YouTube; no recording date is claimed.
Department of War announces a targeted legal waiver
The department describes protected communications by covered current and former personnel and contractors to PURSUE representatives, relief from civil and administrative NDA and SAPIA enforcement for those communications only, then review, security evaluation and possible declassification. The portal separately invites private-sector analysis of released material. The release does not name the receiving representatives, attach the signed waiver or state a public release deadline.
Joe's quote post on the announcement: even the most honest whistleblower's story still lands with designated representatives, so who picked those people, and where does the public get a say? He wants people to come forward and does not assume there is no plan behind a government disclosure initiative.
PURSUE Release 06 puts AAWSAP paperwork and old film back on the official stack
CBS, quoting Pentagon notes, reports a sixth PURSUE tranche: tens of files dated 1952 to 2025, most redacted, including AAWSAP DIRDs the Pentagon says are reference-and-synthesis products that should not be read as current validation, plus Blue Book / Tremonton material and Colorado law-enforcement clips. The official file IDs (D102–D154, LLE-UAP-D001) are recorded from the public index that points at war.gov and DVIDS. This is another release, not a finding of recovered technology.
UAPverse publishes PURSUE: Who's setting the stage?
The Disclosure Take develops the reaction into five topics: who receives the story, who gets the spotlight, who might stay away, whose reality this is, and what knowing could make possible. Veya's two accepted contributions sit beside it as separate commentary.