
Dr Bruce Maccabee met Source A at secure Navy Laboratory in 2008
An ‘exposé’ has appeared on a prominent internet forum that claims a U.S. Navy officer (Source A) divulging information about covert operations involving extraterrestrial life and secret UN discussions on UFOs is a fraud. One of the founders of Reality Uncovered, Stephen Broadbent, used photos from a recent New York luncheon involving Admiral Gary Roughead, Chief of Naval Operations, to ‘out’ the officer as Richard Thielman (aka Source A). After further internet research, Broadbent goes on to conclude. “We have found evidence that shows that Richard hasn’t worked for the military since at least 2001, but possibly much earlier than that.” Among the implications of Broadbent’s ‘exposé’ and ‘outing’ is that the alleged February 2008 UN discussions on UFOs never took place, and that a secret Navy extraterrestrial liaison program is fictitious. The problem is that the same source Broadbent uses to finally confirm the ‘outing’ of the officer in question, a retired Navy Scientist, undermines his alleged ‘exposé’. Conveniently, Broadbent ignores key questions that arise from the ‘outing’ that lead to a contrary conclusion to his ‘exposé’. According to the scientist, Dr Bruce Maccabee, the officer in question had high security clearances in order to visit him unescorted at a secure Naval facility in 2008. That supports his claims that he was a covert operative for classified programs involving senior US Navy personnel.
In finding background information that revealed Source A/Richard Theilmann sought health insurance for surgery apparently conducted in 2008, this is what Broadbent asks.
Surely, an active duty officer of the United States Navy would not need to be a dependent of their ex-wife just in order to get an operation, they could have the operation as part of their military benefits? Surely, an active duty officer of the United States Navy would not class themselves as being “self-employed” or having to give up a contracting business? Surely, an active duty officer of the United States Navy would not need to look for employment that provides health insurance?
Broadbent goes on to answer his own questions: “Of course not, Richard Theilmann is not an active duty officer of the United States Navy otherwise he would never have found himself in such a precarious position in the first place.” Having reached this definitive conclusion, this is what Broadbent has to say about the final confirmation that led to the ‘outing’ of the officer in question:
The information we already had was more than sufficient to nail this down, but this was, after all, the man who had personally met with Source A on a navy base and indirectly ended up vouching for him. I called him up a couple of days later and had a very productive conversation. Whilst on the phone, I told him that we had discovered the name of Source A and I wondered whether Source A had identified himself by name to him. He said he had, to which I replied “Richard?” he answered by saying “Yeah Richard, Richard Theilmann”.
This final confirmation along with other material used to reach the conclusion that Source A had not served in the military since at least 2001 led to the stark (in bold) conclusion: The Source A / UN Meeting Story as told by the Pickering’s and assisted by Source A and other personalities in the exopolitics scene is a total and utter fabrication.
Unfortunately, for Broadbent he omits to mention that the same source he used to confirm his outing of Source A, directly contradicts his ‘exposé’. The source in question is recently retired Navy scientist Dr Bruce Maccabee who in 2008 was still working at the U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center, in Virginia. This is what Maccabee had to say in a 2009 interview about a meeting he had with Source A in 2008.
First of all, I work at a Navy Laboratory, at the time, he visited me, I think it was in April 2008. In a Navy Laboratory in order to get in you had to have credentials, you had to have clearances, a badge that would allow you to come in, and even if you get in, you might need an escort, if you didn’t have a sufficiently high clearance. Well Source A came right to my office, without any escort. Which tells me he had the credentials. He gave me a review of all the things he had done over the years. It … certainly looked real. At the very least, he was able to go right through the security of the laboratory and came right through to my desk. I told him how to get to the office and he did it. [Click here to listen]
So here we have a respected senior Navy scientist confirming that Source A had genuine credentials, and a very high security clearance as well to enable him to enter the facility unescorted. All that Broadbent refers to is that Dr Maccabee confirmed the officer’s identity and that was somehow the final nail in the coffin that his claims were all a hoax. It is disingenuous to use a respected authority such as Dr Maccabee to "out" someone, but totally ignore his testimony when it is contrary to the 'exposé' that Broadbent is pursing. If Maccabee's testimony is to be accepted, then how was it possible for the alleged 'fraud' Broadbent describes in his 'exposé' who has not served in the military since 2001, to pass through unescorted all the security levels at a classified Naval warfare facility, and visit Maccabee in 2008?
Among the security protocols at the Naval Warfare Center were showing a valid military ID card, scanning a barcode on the back of the card, as well as other security protocols in place depending on the location and classification level of secure facilities. These might include electronic fingerprinting, retina scans, biometric readings, etc. Security clearances are regularly updated and limited to specific periods so even if Source A used an old uniform or military ID card from 2001 or earlier, how was he cleared by security personnel to enter the various levels of security and finally enter Maccabee's secure facility in 2008?
Furthermore, it's not just a matter of having the right security clearance to enter a highly classified facility, one also has to show cause for being there, similar to "need to know" access. In other words, some superior authority must have sanctioned Source A to travel through the various security layers in place to visit Maccabee in his secure laboratory facility because he had some reason to be there. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work through all the implications of this, but it appears that Broadbent, et al, are pretty oblivious to the implications of Maccabee's testimony because his 'exposé' requires debunking Source A. Why?
Perhaps Dr Maccabee himself may have the answer. In his 2009 interview he went on to say:
As far as the meeting at the UN was concerned, he affirmed that there was one, he was there, and it was not a formal meeting of the UN. I got the impression it was an informal meeting of people who were in the subject… He did tell me some things that indicate the Navy has run into UFOs. UFOs have screwed up some Navy Systems. The Navy, apparently some high level people in the Navy feel this ought to be publicized .. that is the existence of UFOs.
The implications of Source A’s meeting and discussion with Dr Maccabee are startling. A senior Navy Scientist is discussing with an unescorted officer with high security clearance in his classified facility, issues concerning UFOs, secret UN discussions, and senior Navy personnel wanting to disclose the existence of extraterrestrial life. If Source A is not who he claims to be, then it appears that a secure US Navy facility was compromised at various security levels by someone who wanted to have a conversation about UFOs with a Navy Scientist for unknown reasons.
The outing of Source A as Richard Thielmann is a significant development for all who have been following discussions on secret UN UFO meetings. His alleged exposure as a fraud omits serious questions about his ability to enter highly classified military facilities to discuss the UFO topic. That lends credence to his original claims that he is a covert operative within the shadowy world of classified operations and UFOs sanctioned to leak information by a group of Navy admirals disenchanted with official UFO policy. Source A’s outing coincides with Admiral Dennis Blair’s forced resignation as the Director of National Intelligence. Perhaps it’s sheer coincidence but Source A’s outing may signal a push back against Navy sources in favor of UFO disclosure. If he is an exposed covert operative, his ‘outing’ is likely to have significant effects including official attempts to discredit him as a legitimate source of information that can be traced to more senior Navy officers.
|
Note: Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirity on other websites or email lists without author's permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org |











Comments
As the OMF admins have refused to provide me access to their forum to discuss this with you directly, I invite you to AmKon to read my response to your rebuttal.
amkon(dot)net/showpost.php?p=420779&postcount=3659
I can understand why retired or ex-military would avoid medical care at a military or veteran's facility... the quality of the care there can be, shall we say, less than stellar. In addition, if he is working with UFO matters, why would he check himself into a military/VA facility and trust getting good care there when there are still medical personnel who might consider work on UFO matters grounds for him to be detained as crazy? Or have an "accident" while under the surgical scalpel, because some one wants to shut him up?
Any officer or enlisted service person, active or retired, SHOULD be considering going public or helping to bring down the wall of secrecy in government around UFOs and other unsavory matters... such secrecy that allows criminal behavior against country and citizens to go unchecked and beyond the law is unconstitutional, and those of us who served in the military all took an oath to defend the U.S. and its Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Micheal Salla you too are guilty of putting this hoax together. Mr. Salla you have proven you know nothing at all about what you are doing and or writing about. Micheal Salla you are guilty and you need to stop making excuses for yourself and your hoaxed U.N. Story.
I agree Micheal Salla is very GUILTY in this fraud and hoax. Micheal you need to come forward and apologize for your seriously flauded reporting.
Dr. Salla why were you so guilible and nieve to write hundreds of articles on a story that turns up to be A HOAX.
Meanwhile, it's obvious: There is only one simple equation: Exo-ufoistic religion = People-fooling business.
More words would be a waste of internet bandwidth.
Most of you don't know what you're talking about. I do--I've had experiences throughout my life and know for a FACT that UFOs/aliens exist without a doubt. I also know that Michael Salla is telling the truth, as well as Bruce Maccabee and above all, the Pickerings. I know them personally, extremely well for years and they are by far, the utmost in regards to integrity, honesty and intelligence. Of course the gov. will debunk the true stuff when it comes out--that's what they do and you're all falling for it! Wake up.
I, too, wonder about Department of National Intelligence Director, Adm. Dennis Blair being fired. The Navy has long had a discrete, often more ethical program that works on e.t. issues. But Obama's short list for Blair's replacement includes an Air Force general (Corso wrote that by 1962 it was obvious that the Air Force was moving to take control of the entire UFO situation. p. 265 Day After Roswell), Republican Senator Chuck Hegel, and another man---no Navy men on the list. The Air Force did the deal with Tall Whites to let them base near Indian Springs, reportedly, so a switch to the AF would diminish structural moves to help Obama do some form of disclosure. Watch for the Rockefeller-Goldman-DuPont faction to try to avert any disclosure, also.
It will take real guts by ordinary people to accomplish a much needed disclosure.
Proof 'Onewhoknows', PROOF. Don't you see that with proof, you would have MILLIONS of average folks on your side worldwide immediately. Tens of millions.
Without proof you are just asking those same people for 'Faith" in your 'Words'.
I am impressed by the two current reports in your website about the leaks from "source A" and am intrigued ( being an Indian citizen myself! ) about his statement that the "Indians were impossible to deal with". I am not surprised, given our record of bureucratic opacity/inefficiency, which logically would extend to the diplomatic corp. At the same time I would dearly love to know just what our Indian representatives did
at the meetings that they did attend. I am surprised because, by and large, the entire subject of UFOs/ultraterrestrials is hardly visible on the social or media radar in my country.
Just one thing - where do you get the funds to sustain such an elaborate movement/network? Surely it could not be the international mega corporations, who seem to be emerging as the final bad guys ?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!