Eric Davis asserts that the AAWSAP program had several sources of intelligence related to Russia.
During a recent discussion, he noted, “Russia is known to have experienced some crash retrievals, which became public knowledge after the fall of the Soviet Union when the KGB began to declassify files. George Knapp and others visited these sites and uncovered various documents.”
Davis continued, “While I can’t go into all the details due to the highly classified nature of this information, I had an independent connection through the AAWSAP program with a three-letter agency that gathered intelligence not from the declassified KGB records. Instead, they sourced information from their own assets, who provided legitimate documents, photos, reports, and summaries. From what I reviewed in a classified setting, I am convinced there’s evidence of at least one crash retrieval. I can’t confirm whether it dates back to the 40s, 50s, 60s, or 70s, but I am aware of an incident from the late 80s that I was exposed to. They have indeed collected hardware, but it seems they haven’t successfully managed to reverse engineer it.”
Additionally, David Grusch has stated that he accessed the classified archives of AAWSAP, revealing intelligence from a “foreign adversary” that supports the existence of the U.S. crash retrieval program.
Eric Davis’s claims about AAWSAP’s access to Russian intelligence are intriguing and add a layer of complexity to the ongoing conversation surrounding crash retrievals. The mention of KGB files and the involvement of various agencies suggests a depth of collaboration and information-sharing that is often overlooked in discussions about UFOs and extraterrestrial technology.
The assertion that there are legitimate documents and reports filtering through a three-letter agency’s assets is particularly compelling. It underscores the idea that there might be more concrete evidence out there than the general public is aware of. While Davis can’t disclose specifics due to classification, the implication that at least one crash retrieval is documented catches attention—especially if it pertains to the end of the 1980s.
Similarly, David Grusch’s comments about accessing the AAWSAP classified archive revealing intelligence from a foreign adversary hint at the possibility that international dynamics play a significant role in the narrative of UFOs and crash retrievals. If both of these sources point to a concerted effort to understand and possibly reverse-engineer recovered technology, it raises important questions about transparency and the information that governments are willing to share with their citizens.
Together, these statements reinforce the idea that the subject of unidentified aerial phenomena is much more complicated and potentially significant than what is typically laid out in public discourse. It beckons further investigation and dialogue about the implications of such findings on national security and scientific inquiry. What do you all think about the credibility of these claims?