[PIF]

Again I ask, what do you take issue with?

---

The characterization as the blog being a “a mouthpiece for those in the military and possibly some departments/branches of the DOD.” The word ‘mouthpiece’ is derogatory, but maybe you do not realize that.

Tyler does not speak for any one - his opinions are his and his staff’s - many commentators take issue with some parts of some articles, and many talk about subjects off topic and about themselves and their knowledge and experiences, The DOD is not involved at all.

[RoosterRedux]

Thank you for that.

To set the record straight, I did not think of the word "mouthpiece" as a derogatory term. Tyler's sources are military, but I understand his opinions are his own.

That said, as much as Tyler speaks for himself, his sources have included retired and active members of the military including some sources that have given him direct access to what is going on in the DOD. It is my understanding that some within the DOD consider Tyler a reliable, if unauthorized, outlet for information. Considering the subject matter under discussion, the DOD might consider the use of an "unauthorized" outlet particularly valuable and it appears that Tyler is held in high regard by various sources within the DOD.

[RoosterRedux]

BTW, it is my understand that a major source of information in the case at hand is Chris Mellon, former Dep. Asst. Sec of Def for Intel. I don't think Mellon would be able to speak on this subject unless the DOD had given their permission. Same for Luis Elizondo.

While Mellon and Elizondo do not speak "officially" for the DOD, if the DOD didn't want them speaking publicly about their experiences while employed by the DOD, they would NOT be doing so.

That, to my way of thinking, means that the DOD has given its "implicit" approval for the disclosure of some information on the subject under discussion.