Documents / Hearing transcript

Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (hearing transcript, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counterproliferation, 17 May 2022)

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence · 2022-05-17 · 53 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is the transcript of the open session of a hearing on unidentified aerial phenomena, held on 17 May 2022 by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence's Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counterproliferation. Under Secretary Ronald Moultrie and Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence Scott Bray testified on the new AOIMSG office, efforts to reduce stigma in reporting, and a UAP database of about 400 reports. Bray showed videos, explained flashing triangles as drones seen through night vision goggles, and called the 2004 Nimitz incident unresolved.

22
spacecraft but about delivering dominant intelligence across the tactical, operational, and
strategic spectrum.
So my question is: How can AOIMSG lead to prevention of intelligence
surprises?
Mr. Moultrie. Sure. I will start with that. So the goal of our effort is to
integrate it into what we already do on a normal basis which is look for the
unknown-unknowns, Congressman, as you stated in your opening remarks, across all
domains.
So we have been doing this for decades. We have been looking at the space
domain, looking at space objects, looking at space weather, looking at space
phenomenon. We have been looking at things in the air domains. And as you know,
we -- and I will talk more about this in classified session. But we have a very concerted
effort to understand adversarial platforms and adversarial development programs. And
we do that also on the ground domain. And, of course, we are very interested in what
happens in the underwater or sea domain, if you will, subsurface domain.
So, if there are objects that our aviators or air crews are encountering in this air
domain and their sensors are discovering or detecting some of these objects, we want to
just bring that in to the normal process that we have for identifying unknown-unknowns.
We want to make sure we have the intelligence requirements that allow us not only to
look at that event from the time that it occurs forward, but maybe retrospectively we
want to go back and see if we can Government the left of that event to say, was there
some developmental program that we, to get to your technical surprise issue, sir, that we
should have known about? And, if so, how do we put that intelligence requirement in
place to ensure that we are following an adversarial development or any other
development that may be out there?

Cases discussed

About this file

Hearing transcript, from the hearings collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 53 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.