United States · News

Former AARO chief says Pentagon stripped case findings from UFO files

5 min read

Sean Kirkpatrick, the former head of the Pentagon’s UFO office, says department leadership ordered the office to remove investigative findings from the released files and publish the cases as unresolved. Meanwhile, the FBI won’t say why federal agents with thermal cameras were watching a sensitive national security site where a silent black triangle was reported in June 2026.

What Kirkpatrick claims

Sean Kirkpatrick, former director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), criticized how the government is releasing its UFO files in an interview with Fox News Digital published on November 1.

According to Kirkpatrick, some of the cases released as unresolved had in fact already been resolved by AARO, and he briefed several of them to Congress along with the answers. He says Pentagon leadership instructed the office to remove all resolution language and release the cases as unresolved, letting "the people make up their own mind." In his view, that was the worst possible approach, because it only feeds conspiracy theories.

Kirkpatrick did not say when the directive was issued or which leaders were behind it. He also did not name the cases it applied to.

The department's response

A Department of War official, speaking on background, told Fox News that the department is not commenting on or assessing the files as a whole or any individual file, so that Americans can make up their own minds. The department also confirmed that the images attached to the FBI report on the triangle are illustrations, not photographs of the object.

The files are released under the PURSUE program. The seventh batch, containing 28 documents, was published on October 23.

Kirkpatrick on the black triangle

The most talked-about case in the seventh batch is a June 2026 sighting: federal special agents near a sensitive national security site in the western United States reported a matte-black triangular object above a mountain ridge.

Kirkpatrick says the witnesses' backgrounds alone don't validate their account. Taking someone's testimony at face value because of their position is, in his words, "a classic case of authority bias." Without photographs or other data, there is no way to determine what the object was. He pointed to advanced aerospace technology as one possible explanation, comparing triangle sightings to earlier reports of the F-117 stealth aircraft from before it became widely known.

Kirkpatrick also drew a line between two terms:

a case is unresolved when there is no data, or too little data, to draw any conclusion;
an object is unidentified when it can be characterized from data, but no one knows what it is.

According to Kirkpatrick, none of the data AARO reviewed matched an extraterrestrial explanation.

The FBI offers no explanation

The British news site Liberation Times asked the FBI why special agents equipped with optical and thermal gear were deployed to observation posts at the site, and whether the object had been identified. The FBI's press office replied only that it had nothing to add to the documents.

The observers were spread across several posts and stayed in contact by radio. The AARO memorandum describes their assignment as "routine observation support." According to the memo, the two principal witnesses had extensive experience supporting government and academic work involving uncrewed aerial systems, and regularly saw conventional aircraft around the site. The released records do not clearly establish whether the witnesses were FBI employees.

What the documents say

The two records are an FBI statement (FBI-UAP-D043) and an AARO witness debrief memorandum (DOW-UAP-D176). According to the accounts:

the object was matte black and nonreflective, resembling a delta-wing drone, with no visible engines, exhaust, seams or control surfaces;
the estimated wingspan was 2.7–4.6 m (9–15 ft) according to the FBI statement and 4–4.6 m (13–15 ft) according to AARO; these are estimates, not measurements;
one agent watched it through a handheld thermal device: the object appeared warmer than its surroundings, with a uniform temperature across its entire surface;
according to AARO, it climbed above the ridge to an estimated 60–90 m (200–300 ft) in about ten seconds, hovered for roughly twenty seconds, then banked and descended toward a canyon, disappearing behind the terrain within two to three seconds;
the witnesses compared its speed to that of a fighter jet, but no instrumented speed measurement was taken;
they heard no sound;
a survey of the canyon the next morning found no wreckage, ground scarring or damaged vegetation.

The two records don't agree on every detail. The FBI statement describes a sighting lasting only about three seconds, and it puts the initial alert an hour earlier, at 7:23 p.m., while AARO gives 8:23 p.m. Neither document explains the discrepancies. The released material contains no radar data, video or audio recordings.

AARO says the case warrants further investigation because the object's shape and movement closely resemble those described in other reports from the western United States. It does not specify which ones.

The sober take

What is established? The Department of War is offering no assessment of the files, and the images released with the triangle report are illustrations. The department confirmed both points itself. The FBI's response is also on record: it has nothing to add to the released documents.

What is not established? Kirkpatrick's claim that leadership had investigative findings removed rests on his word alone so far. He named no date, no responsible official and no specific case. Nor did he say the claim applies to the black triangle: AARO still considers that case worth further investigation.

Strengths of the triangle case:

multiple witnesses, including a third person at a separate observation post;
experienced observers with optical and thermal equipment;
according to AARO, similar reports have come from elsewhere in the region.

Weaknesses:

nothing was measured: size, altitude and speed are all estimates;
the released material contains no photo, video or radar data;
the two official records differ on duration and timing;
it happened in late dusk, which makes distance and size harder to judge.

Ordinary explanations: one possibility is a classified military or experimental uncrewed aircraft, given that the site is a sensitive national security area. Kirkpatrick also pointed to advanced aerospace technology. However, no document confirms this, and there is no data to rule it out either.