Luis Elizondo offers window into US government’s hunt for UFOs

Luis Elizondo offers window into US government’s hunt for UFOs
ABC News

(NEW YORK) — Longtime Defense Department researcher Luis “Lue” Elizondo has become well-known for reporting the existence of UFOs (unidentified flying objects), now known as unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs).

In his new book, “Imminent: Inside the Pentagon’s Hunt for UFOs,” which is available now, former Pentagon insider Elizondo invites the reader into this hidden world.

He joined ABC News’ Stephanie Ramos to discuss why he decided to write the book, government secrecy around UAPs, official comments on these phenomena and some of his own unusual experiences.

ABC NEWS: Unidentified flying objects have fueled decades of speculation and conspiracy theories. In his new book, “Imminent: Inside the Pentagon’s Hunt for UFOs,” longtime Defense Department researcher Lue Elizondo, the former head of the Pentagon program responsible for the investigation of UFOs, now known as unidentified anomalous phenomena, reveals long hidden truths with profound implications for not only national security, but our understanding of the universe.

Joining us now is Lue Elizondo. Thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate it. So “Imminent” tells the story of your courageous fight to make public what the government knows and doesn’t know about UAPs. What made you want to write about this?

ELIZONDO: Yeah, well, I wanted to be able to tell the American public my experiences and what the government has been doing for a very long time, not just when I was in the program, but for decades about the government’s interest in UFOs or now what we call UAP. You’re absolutely right, unidentified anomalous phenomenon. The fact is, they’re real and they are a national security issue for this country.

ABC NEWS: And it’s so interesting because many, many years ago I worked at the Pentagon for ABC, and I remember getting a tour of some of the hallways and, and somebody said “Oh, that’s where they study UFOs, UAPs. But it’s top secret.” Like that’s all they would say. So there’s this secrecy approach to all of this, right?

You write in your book, “While there are valid reasons for secrecy around some aspects of UAPs. I do not think humanity should be kept in the dark about the fundamental fact that we are not the only intelligent life in the universe.” So why do you think the United States government and other major governments have taken a secrecy approach to UAPs?

ELIZONDO: Sure. I think if we look at this, temporally speaking, the U.S. government, when we started really looking at this, was at the height of the Cold War. And you had this contentious relationship at best with then-Soviet Union.

And what we didn’t want to do was necessarily tip our hand to any information, perhaps, that we’ve gleaned from UAP or UFOs and, certainly, perhaps any information gaps or maybe information that we don’t know about the UFOs. So that’s one reason. And then I think the other reason is that governments inherently are responsible for ensuring the protection of their people, their citizens.

ABC NEWS: So Lue, for those who may be skeptical and are thinking “Nope, there’s no such thing as UFOs, it’s non-existent.” And you’re here to tell us that there is fact and research that they do exist.

ELIZONDO: Let’s not forget, Stephanie, that we’ve had already a former director of national intelligence, a former director of the CIA, and even a former president of the United States all come out on the record and say “Yeah, looks like these things are real.”

Our very best, most sophisticated technology is picking these things up. We also have eyewitness testimony from our trained observers, our combat pilots. And then you’ve also got the radar data all basically substantiating the same event at the same time, at the same place, under the same circumstances.

ABC NEWS: And so much technology that’s been analyzed and researched. Now, let’s talk about your own personal experience. You mentioned in this book that UAPs have appeared both in and around your home. How did these personal experiences influence your views on UAP and what exactly did you see?

ELIZONDO: Yeah, sure. So first of all, let me preface. We’re not sure if they are actually UAP-related. What we do know is that a lot of people that were in the program that I was in also had very similar encounters while they were in the program.

So not before or not after, but during the time that we were researching these UAP and from our experience, when I say ours, I mean my families and even our neighbors, witnessed some of these – are these luminous green balls of light. Very diffuse in nature. No hard edges. That would just seem to kind of peruse the house and go down the hall and go through a wall.

I know it sounds rather bizarre. And look, there are absolutely possible natural explanations, right? You could say ball lightning or Saint Elmo’s fire or some sort of plasma static charge in the air. But the bottom line is, it was very bizarre. It was witnessed by not only my family, but again, neighbors and other individuals who were part of our effort, and the government, also experienced, very, very similar encounters at their residences.

ABC NEWS: Absolutely fascinating. Thank you so much Lue, for sharing your experience and for documenting what you know and what you think we should all know in your book, “Imminent: Inside the Pentagon’s Hunt for UFOs,” which is available now to purchase. Thanks Lue.

ELIZONDO: My honor and privilege. Thank you.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Related Posts

Mixed results in college admissions diversity post-SCOTUS affirmative action decision
Mixed results in college admissions diversity post-SCOTUS affirmative action decision
Jon Lovette/Getty Images

(NEW YORK) — Colleges and universities are seeing mixed results in the diversity of their incoming freshman classes after the Supreme Court set new limits on the use of affirmative action in college admissions.

For example, the Yale University class of 2028 saw no difference from the class of 2027 when it came to the percentage of African American students and Native American students. The Hispanic/Latino and International student populations remained roughly the same, dropping and rising, respectively, by 1%. However, the Asian American population dropped by 6%, the white population rose by 4%.

When comparing Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s class of 2027 to 2028, the Black population dropped from 15% to 5%, the Hispanic/Latino population dropped from 16% to 11%, and the white population decreased by 1%.

The Asian American population increased from 40% to 47% and both the American Indian/Alaskan Native and international populations increased by 1%.

Affirmative action policies allowed institutions to take into account an individual student’s race or ethnicity as one factor of many during the college admissions selection process. It rose to popularity in the 1960s to address racial inequities in access to higher education.

Researchers previously told ABC News that societal injustices – such as economic inequality, segregation and academic inequity in K-12 schools – as well as the lasting impact of historical exclusion from colleges and universities against Black and brown students have led to the continued underrepresentation in four-year institutions.

A landmark Supreme Court ruling in 1978 – in the case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke – cemented affirmative action policies in college and university admissions for decades and led to an increase in diversity on campuses.

However, the 2023 decision by the Supreme Court sided in part with Students for Fair Admissions, a conservative group that challenged race-related admissions policies. Members argued that the affirmative action policies at the schools were discriminatory against white and Asian students.

Now, as a new class of students head back to campus, many are looking at how schools might feel the impact of the required policy change.

Here’s a look at the difference in student diversity at several other institutions that have published their class breakdown:

Princeton University saw a decrease in its Asian population and International incoming populations, both of which dropped by about 2%. The Black or African American incoming population saw a .1% dip, and the Hispanic/Latino population saw a 1% dip.

However, at least 7.7% of the class’ racial or ethnic identity is unknown. Princeton did not publish the percentage of white students in its class of 2027, but noted that 31.3% of students in the class of 2028 are white.

Amherst College in Massachusetts reported larger drops in the Black and Latinx incoming student population. The incoming Black student population decreased from 19% to 9% and the Latinx population decreased from 14% to 10%, the American Indian or Alaska Native incoming population dropped by 1%.

The percentage of white students rose by 2% and the Asian student percentage increased by 1%.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Penn imposes major sanctions against controversial law professor Amy Wax, including a 1-year suspension
Penn imposes major sanctions against controversial law professor Amy Wax, including a 1-year suspension
Michelle Gustafson/Bloomberg via Getty Images

(PHILADELPHIA) — The University of Pennsylvania will impose major sanctions against Carey Law School professor Amy Wax, after an investigation concluded that she “engaged in ‘flagrant unprofessional conduct,'” which included “a history of making sweeping and derogatory generalizations about groups by race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and immigration status.”

The university also found that Wax “on numerous occasions in and out of the classroom and in public, [made] discriminatory and disparaging statements targeting specific racial, ethnic, and other groups with which many students identify.”

The Faculty Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility released a report Tuesday confirming sanctions against the tenured professor, which includes a one-year suspension with half-pay, the loss of her named chair and an inability to represent Penn in public appearances, among other measures.

“Last year, a five-member faculty Hearing Board determined that Professor Amy Wax violated the University’s behavioral standards by engaging in years of flagrantly unprofessional conduct within and outside of the classroom that breached her responsibilities as a teacher to offer an equal learning opportunity to all students,” a university spokesperson told ABC News.

Wax has been under fire for years for her controversial language about minority groups, particularly Black and Asian populations.

Dean of Penn Carey Law School Ted Ruger had initiated governing sanctions against Wax in January 2022. A hearing board conducted an evaluation in May 2023 and confirmed misconduct from Wax, which she appealed.

The Senate Committee’s decision Tuesday strikes down Wax’s appeal, and Interim President J. Larry Jameson confirmed that he will be upholding this “final decision” and implementing the sanctions recommended.

Provost John L. Jackson, Jr. also issued a public reprimand Tuesday, telling Wax that it is “imperative” that she “conduct [herself] in a professional manner in [her] interactions with faculty colleagues, students, and staff,” which includes “refraining from flagrantly unprofessional and targeted disparagement of any individual or group in the University community.”

Wax and her lawyer, David Shapiro, did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.

In a 2023 op-ed in the Daily Pennsylvanian, Shapiro defended her remarks by saying, “Professor Wax teaches a conservative thought seminar, and she is vocal on social media in expressing conservative ideas.”

“My client must defend herself against scurrilous charges of ‘racism’ and ‘white supremacy’ because, as a white Jewish conservative, she dared to question the liberal orthodoxy about the lives of many African Americans,” Shapiro added. He also went on to attack the university for what he considered to be hypocritical policies.

While Penn’s sanctions constitute major action against a tenured faculty member, students had previously expressed desire for Wax to be fired.

Law student Soojin Jeong told ABC News in 2022 that Wax’s comments were “egregious,” and added, “we really need to fire Amy Wax.”

Also speaking to ABC News in 2022, law student Apratim Vidyarthi pointed to the double standard. “If I had said something like that, or you said something like that, or an NFL coach said something like that, they’d be fired off the bat,” he said.

Students had advocated for Wax to be suspended while the investigation was ongoing. Vidyarthi told ABC News in 2022 that Wax “shouldn’t be allowed to come on campus, she shouldn’t be allowed to interact with students while this investigation is ongoing.”

Jeong and Vidyarthi helped write a petition calling for university action against Wax, in which they stated that “Wax’s racist comments have become a semi-annual ritual that receives temporary furor and temporary consequences.”

In one example cited by the students, Wax in an April 2022 Fox News interview disparaged Indian Americans and said “on some level, their country is a s–thole.”

In December 2021, Wax told Brown University professor Glenn Loury on his podcast “The Glenn Show” that “as long as most Asians support Democrats and help to advance their positions, I think the United States is better off with fewer Asians and less Asian immigration.”

Wax also told Loury in 2017, “I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Black student graduate in the top quarter of the class, and rarely, rarely in the top half,” calling this a “very inconvenient fact.”

In the letter from June 2022 initiating the disciplinary action against Wax, she was also accused of making homophobic and sexist remarks, including “commenting in class that gay couples are not fit to raise children” and telling students that “women, on average, are less knowledgeable than men.”

Wax has repeatedly defended her rhetoric as free speech.

“Make no mistake, the goal and effect of these charges is to demolish – to totally gut – the protections for extramural speech and free faculty expression, and to drive dissenters like me out of the academy,” she told free speech advocacy group FIRE Faculty Network last year.

ABC News’ Sabina Ghebremedhin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Mixed results in college admissions diversity post-SCOTUS affirmative action decision
A look at college admissions diversity after SCOTUS affirmative action decision
Jon Lovette/Getty Images

(NEW YORK) — More than one year after the Supreme Court set new limits on the use of affirmative action in college admissions, the results of the controversial decision are beginning to trickle in.

However, the results are a mixed bag, with schools seeing varied changes in the diversity makeup of their incoming freshman class after adjusting their admissions policies.

For example, the Yale University class of 2028 saw no difference from the class of 2027 when it came to the percentage of African American students and Native American students. The Hispanic/Latino and International student populations remained roughly the same, dropping and rising, respectively, by 1%. However, the Asian American population dropped by 6%, the white population rose by 4%.

When comparing Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s class of 2027 to 2028, the Black population dropped from 15% to 5%, the Hispanic/Latino population dropped from 16% to 11%, and the white population decreased by 1%.

The Asian American population increased from 40% to 47% and both the American Indian/Alaskan Native and international populations increased by 1%.

Affirmative action policies allowed institutions to take into account an individual student’s race or ethnicity as one factor of many during the college admissions selection process. It rose to popularity in the 1960s to address racial inequities in access to higher education.

Researchers previously told ABC News that societal injustices – such as economic inequality, segregation and academic inequity in K-12 schools – as well as the lasting impact of historical exclusion from colleges and universities against Black and brown students have led to the continued underrepresentation in four-year institutions.

A landmark Supreme Court ruling in 1978 – in the case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke – cemented affirmative action policies in college and university admissions for decades and led to an increase in diversity on campuses.

However, the 2023 decision by the Supreme Court sided in part with Students for Fair Admissions, a conservative group that challenged race-related admissions policies. Members argued that the affirmative action policies at the schools were discriminatory against white and Asian students.

Now, as a new class of students head back to campus, many are looking at how schools might feel the impact of the required policy change.

Here’s a look at the difference in student diversity at several other institutions that have published their class breakdown:

Princeton University saw a decrease in its Asian population and International incoming populations, both of which dropped by about 2%. The Black or African American incoming population saw a .1% dip, and the Hispanic/Latino population saw a 1% dip.

However, at least 7.7% of the class’ racial or ethnic identity is unknown. Princeton did not publish the percentage of white students in its class of 2027, but noted that 31.3% of students in the class of 2028 are white.

Amherst College in Massachusetts reported larger drops in the Black and Latinx incoming student population. The incoming Black student population decreased from 19% to 9% and the Latinx population decreased from 14% to 10%, the American Indian or Alaska Native incoming population dropped by 1%.

The percentage of white students rose by 2% and the Asian student percentage increased by 1%.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.