UFOS AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION:
THE SECRET REASONS THAT REQUESTS FOR RECORDS
WILL NOT BRING DISCLOSURE
April/May 2026
The real reasons that Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests made to various federal agencies will never yield information on UFO recovery will be exposed here and now:
-
The little-discussed intelligence practice called "Close Hold" that prevents the disclosure of such secrets
-
The use of an impenetrable device called a "Blacker" that stores such secrets
-
How the government uses private contractors to shield these secrets
-
Evidence of records destruction involving UFO retrieval
-
The Pentagon monitors all UFO-related FOIAs to prevent breaches through their point-person, Susan Gough, as revealed in a discovered internal email from a top Navy official (shown within this article).
-
The government has directly lied to those requesting UFO information and has even used threats. A letter sent to this author on behalf of President Gerald Ford denied the existence of a now-acknowledged intelligence agency, stated that there was no government interest in UFOs, and warned that to mention anything related to UFOs and government personnel could be met with imprisonment or fines (letter shown within this article).
Last month the US Navy rejected a FOIA request filed by the organization "The Black Vault" for the release of photographic evidence of UFOs that the Navy has acquired. The Navy acknowledged the existence of 78 still images that were responsive to the request, but they denied access citing National Security exemption. An appellate Judge Advocate upheld the Navy's denial of public release in the interest of National Security. This is despite a presidential directive issued last month to declassify and release all government UFO files. What is widely misunderstood is that Trump did not issue an actual Executive Order for this and his "directive" does not carry any real weight as it is merely a request or a statement of intent.
Beyond refusing FOIA requests based on supposed National Security exemptions, there are other reasons that such requests for records will never yield any substantial information on UFO visitation and retrievals. In an interview with a retired Professor of National Security Studies at a renowned university, two measures – a technique and a device – were discussed. They help assure that incontrovertible evidence of UFOs held by the government will never be found.
THE "CLOSE HOLD" PRACTICE
The Professor (name withheld) indicates that "if such a thing as a downed extraterrestrial craft had ever occurred", information relating to it "would represent a technical secret of such significance that it would be treated very differently. Much of this would be handled through 'oral transmission only' in secure settings, with no notes or recordings of any kind ever made." This, he says, is a largely unacknowledged practice. He continues, "It is called 'Close Hold' and it supersedes and supplants the need for security classification. These kind of secrets are of such a nature that the very act of classification brings the risk of compromise. In intelligence and national security circles, "Close Hold" describes the technique of keeping information restricted to a very small, specifically chosen set of people, with deliberate efforts to leave no documentary record by using only the spoken word."
He states that the aim is to prevent discoverability (through FOIA, litigation, audits, inspectors general, or leaks) and to tightly control who knows what and when. Instead of cables, memos, emails, or storage on computer, communication relies solely on face-to-face briefings. In this way such things as tasking orders, policy, meeting minutes, and technical or operational details are never generated. This effectively thwarts institutional oversight mechanisms. If no records are made, then none can be found responsive to any request. Memory and secured conversation are the keys to "Close Hold" and, he said, "those read into certain types of programs are actually schooled in this practice."
This is also a reason why whistleblowers have no documentation of what they have been told relative to UFO debris exploitation.
THE BLACK BOX OF SECRETS
The source indicates that when transmission of information must include material beyond that which can be made by spoken word, this information is not held on computers. For some time the defense and intelligence departments of the US government have utilized highly sophisticated encryption devices. The evolution of these devices is striking. He states, "They leave no paper or digital trail and no records of the information that they contain are ever made. They bypass the national security classification system entirely."
These ruggedized, box-like devices are black in color. In intelligence jargon, he says, "they are called 'Blackers' because they hold 'black program' information and they "black out" the information they contain from those who don't need to know their contents. They are
electromagnetically shielded, they aren't networked, they have no outside connection, and they use quantum-resistant algorithms."
Access to the device holding the secrets requires multi-factor authorization, and single-person access is not possible. To be able to view the contents in the blacker through the display monitor requires facial recognition, fingerprint, and retinal scan access. The blacker will not operate without a biometric match to the authorized individual. Using advanced optics, the display monitor is polarized so that one can only view what is on the screen at a direct head-on angle, making side view by another impossible.
Because of this method of transmission of sensitive information (which would certainly be used relative to information on UFO recovery), no files, emails, records, or reports will ever contain information capable of being accessed by the public, a government department or investigative body.
There are four additional methods by which information on such a sensitive issue as physical UFO evidence can be withheld:
THE PRIVATE SECTOR SHIELD
Private sector companies, even those whose sole purpose is to function as a government defense contractor, have no obligation of any kind to answer questions from the public about their work. They are not subject to FOIA requests. They can elect to not reply to anyone at any time.
Because of this, an opportunity became apparent to elements of government defense and intelligence. By placing items of extraordinary technical importance (such as non-terrestrial technology) in the hands of private sector contractors, concerns about FOIA and private investigation are allayed. This also provides "plausible deniability" for those read into such programs. It serves as a practical shield against inquiry. Defense contractors who hold sensitive information are
covered under FOIA Exemption 4, with such information characterized as "trade secrets" and "commercial data."
A specific example of this is the defense contractor Battelle Memorial Institute. Battelle operates nearly all of the U.S.'s National Laboratories (including Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, and Brookhaven). They have no obligation to answer questions about these labs, even though they are operated on behalf of the government and its citizens. Some believe that some of the technical study done on retrieved UFO debris is accomplished at some of these National Laboratories.
Battelle has been officially acknowledged as having helped manage official UFO investigations such as Project Blue Book. But Battelle did not want their name publicly associated with this, and for some time it operated UFO study under the code name "Project Stork" and was referred to as a "midwest research institute". Battelle has also been implicated in the study of shape-recovery alloys or "memory metal" directly after such material was found fallen near Roswell, NM in 1947 (see article archive on this website). Battelle has consistently denied attempts by this author to answer questions related to this.
BURN AND SHRED: COVERING THE TRAIL IN THE EARLY DAYS
In 1947, the year of the crash and recovery of a UFO near Roswell, New Mexico, secrets related to the incident had to be held in physical documents, as this was well before the digital age. We now know from the testimony of key military witnesses there at the time that every conceivable effort was made to eliminate any paper trail that would ever allude to the details of the true nature of the crash. It is very evident that this was accomplished by the brute burning or shredding of documents- or by not ever entering records of events into the written record in the first place.
​
In a prior article archived on this site, it was shown that flight, pilot and visitor records, budgetary records, and incoming/outgoing base messages made at the time are "missing."
This was further evidenced by the testimonies of three individuals: the Base Adjutant at the Roswell base at the time, Patrick Saunders, the Base Budget and Fiscal Officer, Richard Clayton Harris, and by Air Force Pilot Benjamin Games.
Saunders boasted to his daughter before his death about how well he had covered up the paper trail associated with the crash. And, in his own handwriting, he had jotted in the margins of a book "The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell" by Kevin Randle and Don Schmitt, "Here is the truth and I still haven't told anybody anything!"
Richard Clayton Harris related to his daughter and researchers that he destroyed expense records related to money allocated for the retrieval of the craft at Roswell.
Ben Games told this author and reporter Billy Cox that he flew General Laurence Craigie (who headed Air Force R&D at the time) to Roswell after the crash and then back to see President Truman. He claimed that records of these flights were missing or destroyed.
THE ART OF LYING
Perhaps the easiest way to not release such records is to simply lie about it. And one of the biggest lies on the subject ever told by the government was made to this author as a preteen in the 1970s. I had become aware of the existence of the National Reconnaissance Office (the NRO, which is the nation's satellite intelligence agency) through a friend whose father had at one time worked there. The friend told me that his father's work had to do with "things in outer space". As a child UFO enthusiast, I had to find out what NRO meant and more about what UFO secrets they may have. With the help of my father, I wrote to President Gerald Ford requesting information on the NRO and on UFOs.
I received a reply on behalf of President Ford from Col. M.L. Sorrentino of the US Air Force. Sorrentino stated that the President and he were unaware of any agency called the National Reconnaissance Office, and that there is no government interest in UFOs. He then quoted a regulation called JANAP 146, warning me that if I was aware of UFO sightings made by government personnel and said anything, that I would be prosecuted and face imprisonment or fine.
Of course there was indeed an NRO and Sorrentino had simply lied to me. Established in 1961, the National Reconnaissance Office was not publicly acknowledged as an agency of government until 1992. You can view the actual letter sent to this author in the link here:
​
UFO FOIA REPLIES MUST BE APPROVED THROUGH PENTAGON'S SUE GOUGH
A stunning internal email discovered recently clearly shows that before an agency replies to a FOIA request related to UFOs, that any reply must first be reviewed and approved by Sue Gough, a Pentagon communications official. The email, dated July 10, 2020, was from Joe Grandisher, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare to Jeff Jones, of the Navy Office of Information.
In it, he states that "All media inquiries on UAPs (UFOs) go to DoD Public Affairs Sue Gough (cc'd) keeping in the loop as we coordinate closely...make no comment...We have been requesting that FOIA offices coordinate with us on UAP-focused FOIA requests." The full email can be seen here:
​
This is an extraordinary admission that responses to such UFO inquiries are tightly controlled and directed by Gough. Gough's role and background are concerning. Just whom she reports to (as well as her compensation, which is required by law to be made public) has never been addressed. She refuses to reply to this author on these issues. She has served under several administrations. Prior to her DoD employment, she was with high-end defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. There she helped to lead the firm's "Psychological Operations" and "Perception Management" consulting practice and her sole client was the Pentagon. She has been playing "psychological" games and managing public "perception" ever since.
The misuse of National Security exemptions, divulging secrets only through spoken word and encoders, using the private sector to hide information, burning and shredding physical documents, outright lying, and running UFO FOIA inquiry responses through a Pentagon agent are concerning things. It means that any solid confirmation of UFO retrieval and exploitation will never be forthcoming through records requests, media inquiries, or congressional investigators.