Sub-Rosa: Organized Secrecy

An exhaustive primer on how the modern "Legacy Program" actually functions, and the implications thereof. Please support this research if you can, attaching my name is not done lightly.

Note: If you would like to support the author directly instead of subscribing to substack, you may always do so through patreon at patreon.com/burningrob

The phenomenon examined in this report, termed herein as the "Legacy Program," refers to a covertly maintained system of clandestine government activities, carefully insulated from public oversight and operated through a sophisticated nexus of private finance, industry, and intelligence networks. This report is neither speculative nor an idle conspiracy theory; rather, it documents a structured mechanism that is meticulously designed, expertly managed, and deployed toward objectives that the public neither comprehends nor authorizes.

At the heart of this Legacy Program lies an intricate collaboration between private financial institutions, chiefly private banking institutions, and specialized equity firms, entities adept at quietly maneuvering vast sums into black-budget operations. This carefully orchestrated infrastructure permits the covert channeling of public funds, enriched by private capital, into classified initiatives concealed within a constellation of ostensibly ordinary corporations.

The parallels between the real-world entities and their fictional counterparts, as presented in Tom DeLonge’s "Sekret Machines" novels, are striking. Particularly notable is the tragic suicide of former Veritas Capital CEO Robert McKeon, which echoes a key character’s fate in the novels, hinting at troubling moral complexities, intense psychological pressures, and the possibility of foul play inherent in managing such profound secrets. The "Maynard Consortium," DeLonge’s fictional coalition of financiers and intelligence officers backing secret UFO research, finds a chilling corollary in the operations of Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman. Together, these entities constitute a contemporary equivalent, quietly ensuring the continuance and compartmentalization of extraordinary, unsanctioned programs.

This investigative report seeks to illuminate the mechanisms by which these entities have systematically cultivated a private pipeline for black-budget projects, historically rooted in the clandestine financial and operational practices established during World War II and the Cold War. We will explore critical events, such as the aborted "Kona Blue" initiative, track covert financial streams, and scrutinize recent whistleblower disclosures about a project labeled "Immaculate Constellation."

In presenting this evidence, the intent is clear: to expose not a collection of random conspiracies but a deliberate and effective system of secrecy, a system whose implications extend far beyond mere financial or bureaucratic corruption, touching upon fundamental questions of democratic accountability and ethical governance. The public remains largely unaware and entirely unconsenting to the profound consequences of this organized secrecy. This report, therefore, represents not merely an exposure but a necessary moral indictment of a meticulously crafted system that continues to operate beyond the bounds of legitimate oversight and democratic control.

Skull and Ledger

To truly grasp the intricacies of today’s clandestine funding networks, it is essential to examine their origins in the mid-20th century. During World War II, the U.S. government frequently turned to private consortia composed of scientists and businessmen to achieve groundbreaking technological advancements in secrecy. The establishment of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, led by engineer-statesman Vannevar Bush, serves as a prime example. This initiative effectively mobilized industry and academia to develop revolutionary technologies like radar, jets, and the atomic bomb under conditions of utmost secrecy. This tradition of relying on private entities for sensitive projects continued into the Cold War, where early leaders within the CIA and the Pentagon cultivated close relationships with prominent Wall Street banks and blue-blood families to finance and mask their activities. The need for deniable operations against the Soviet Union and the rapid pace of technological development further solidified this model of public-private collaboration in the shadows.

No institution exemplifies this historical connection between private finance and clandestine government operations better than Brown Brothers Harriman. Founded in 1818, BBH stands as America’s oldest private bank, and by the 1940s, it had developed an uncanny presence within U.S. intelligence circles. One notable BBH partner, Prescott Bush (father to future President George H.W. Bush), served as an officer in the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War II while simultaneously managing investments at the bank. Prescott Bush, a member of Yale’s secretive Skull-and-Bones society, possessed deep connections within the establishment. He maintained close friendships with CIA spymaster Allen Dulles and later CIA Director William Casey, and there were claims, though not directly supported by all available documentation, that he channeled support to covert operations in Europe after the war. However, it is important to note that historical accounts also reveal a more complex picture of Prescott Bush's wartime activities. Investigations have highlighted his significant business dealings with Nazi Germany during the same period, adding controversy to his profile. Among the entities linked to these dealings were Fritz Thyssen’s United Steel Works, the Hamburg-Amerika Line, and the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company, firms later identified by Allied intelligence as integral components of the Nazi war machine. While BBH itself later presented information suggesting Prescott Bush was supportive of the Allied cause through his work with the United Service Organizations, conflicting narratives underscore the difficulty in fully understanding the motivations and actions of individuals operating in these clandestine realms.

Another BBH-affiliated figure, oilman Neil Mallon, routinely provided “cover” jobs for CIA operatives in the 1950s. As the longtime Chairman of the Board of Dresser Industries, Mallon personally offered George H.W. Bush his first job at International Derrick and Equipment Company (IDECO), a subsidiary of Dresser. Mallon, described as a close confidante of Prescott Bush and a friend to numerous high-ranking Cold War intelligence officials, including Allen Dulles, would often steer prospective candidates for espionage work to Dulles and provide cover employment to CIA operatives. The CIA later acknowledged that Dresser Industries was frequently used as a front for its operations.

One critical facet of this strategy, largely shielded from public awareness until the early 2000s, was the CIA’s Non-Official Cover (NOC) Program. Unlike traditional intelligence officers who operate from embassies under diplomatic immunity, NOCs function without any formal connection to the U.S. government, posing as business executives, consultants, academics, or other private-sector professionals. Their work is among the riskiest in espionage, as their true identities are known only to a handful of handlers. The NOC Program often relied on globally active firms (like Dresser Industries) as platforms for inserting operatives into strategic regions under seemingly innocuous pretexts. The 2003 Valerie Plame affair briefly exposed this hidden architecture when her identity as a NOC operative was leaked, underscoring the depth of reliance on trusted private-sector nodes for sensitive operations.

From its inception, American intelligence has relied not only on industrial allies and elite circles but also on criminal enterprises to achieve strategic objectives. During World War II, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the CIA’s precursor, struck arrangements with Mafia boss Charles “Lucky” Luciano to secure American ports against sabotage and facilitate the Allied invasion of Sicily. This collaboration continued postwar, as intelligence agencies viewed transnational smuggling networks, money launderers, and narcotics traffickers as assets within Cold War theaters. Exclusive societies such as Skull and Bones served as connective tissue between these domains, facilitating the convergence of industrial dynasties, clandestine services, and organized crime.

These anecdotes transcend mere family history; they illustrate a significant pattern. Brown Brothers Harriman functioned as a private extension of the U.S. intelligence community, providing discreet financial vehicles, trusted intermediaries, and corporate fronts for secret programs. Allen Dulles famously relied on such "friends" to secure funding and operational cover beyond congressional oversight. This established a precedent where elite banks and firms operated as clandestine back-offices for intelligence operations, handling payments, assets, and spies. This intricate blend of finance, secrecy, and elite continuity forms the institutional lineage that persists in contemporary clandestine operations.

A Mask, Not a Face

While Brown Brothers Harriman represents the influence of old money and established networks, Veritas Capital embodies the new guard of covert power brokers. Founded in 1992, Veritas Capital is a private equity firm that has quietly become a powerhouse in the U.S. defense industry. Unlike larger private equity firms such as Carlyle or KKR, which often diversify their investments across various sectors, Veritas focuses almost exclusively on companies that serve the military, intelligence agencies, and government technology sectors. This singular focus has allowed Veritas to amass an impressive portfolio of national security contractors so extensive that some observers have likened Veritas to “a government all to itself,” echoing the pervasive reach of the fictional consortium.

To grasp the sheer scale of Veritas’s operations, the firm currently manages approximately $40 billion across its various investment funds. Through these funds, Veritas owns or has owned numerous critical contractors vital to national security. These include Peraton, a major provider of intelligence and space systems; Guidehouse, which offers sensitive consulting services to the Pentagon and CIA; Cubic, specializing in military technology and training systems; Alion Science, providing laboratory support for the Navy and DoD; and previously DynCorp International, a key logistics provider for military and covert operations. Veritas’s influence extends so deeply that over 40 of the top 100 federal contracting executives have been associated with companies backed by Veritas. Furthermore, its leadership and advisory boards are heavily populated with former generals, admirals, CIA officers, and Pentagon officials, granting the firm unparalleled insider access and influence within the corridors of power. It is hardly surprising that Forbes magazine dubbed Veritas’s CEO, Ramzi Musallam, “Wall Street’s Top-Secret Billionaire,” a moniker earned by his profound understanding and exploitation of the opaque world of government contracts.

Despite its significant size and influence, Veritas Capital maintains an exceptionally low public profile. The firm rarely issues press releases, and Ramzi Musallam seldom grants interviews. Veritas frequently employs shell LLCs to acquire companies, a tactic that further avoids unwanted publicity. This deliberate culture of secrecy is not accidental; it mirrors the clandestine nature of the work undertaken by the companies within its portfolio. As one report aptly noted, Veritas thrives in the shadows of government secrecy: “For most financiers, ‘government’ is a four-letter word. But [Musallam] turned it into a fortune.” In other words, Veritas Capital specializes in the very areas that other financial firms typically shy away from: the classified, the controversial, and sometimes the ethically ambiguous.

Crucially, Veritas has demonstrated a willingness to venture where others hesitate. When a defense firm becomes entangled in scandal or operates within legally ambiguous territories, that is often when Veritas steps in, effectively insulating sensitive programs from public scrutiny. The cases of DynCorp and MZM, which will be examined later, serve as prime examples of this strategy. All of these factors position Veritas Capital as an exceptionally plausible candidate to manage a hidden UAP technology program. The firm possesses the necessary companies, complete with cleared facilities and highly skilled engineers, to conduct exotic research. Its network of former high-ranking officials can navigate the complex web of classification silos, and its substantial financial resources allow for off-budget operations. If the Pentagon or the CIA sought to bury a UFO retrieval or reverse-engineering effort outside of official channels, Veritas Capital would represent a highly discreet and capable hiding place. As we will explore, there is mounting evidence suggesting that something along these lines may have already occurred.

Face Down, Deal Again

Veritas Capital’s operational strategy over the past fifteen years appears to follow a deliberate and intricate pattern: acquire key defense contractors, strategically reorganize their components, and repackage them in a manner that could effectively conceal the movement of highly classified programs. A compelling example of this involves a lineage of companies that began with Lockheed Martin and ultimately culminated in Veritas’s prized asset, Peraton; a journey marked by several name changes along the way. This timeline reads like a complex corporate shell game and may have served as the vehicle for transferring UAP-related projects into the hands of the private sector, far from public oversight.

• 2010 – The SI Organization (SI): In November 2010, Lockheed Martin, facing increasing pressure from the Pentagon due to perceived organizational conflicts of interest, was compelled to sell off its Enterprise Integration Group (EIG), a unit deeply involved in highly classified systems engineering for U.S. intelligence agencies. Veritas Capital swiftly acquired this unit for $815 million in cash and promptly rebranded it as The SI Organization, Inc.. This single transaction effectively transplanted a significant portion of Lockheed’s “black” program work, including contracts for the NSA, NRO, and CIA, into a privately held firm operating outside the traditional public defense industrial base. The SI Organization carried forward these highly sensitive contracts but now under the opaque ownership of Veritas Capital. This maneuver effectively mirrored the fictional scenario of Lockheed’s famed skunk works being spun off into a shadowy private entity.

• 2012–2013 – Acquisitions of Advanced Tech: Under the ownership of Veritas Capital, The SI Organization embarked on a rapid expansion strategy, acquiring two niche firms with cutting-edge technological capabilities. In 2012, SI acquired PhaseOne Communications, followed by Applied Communication Sciences (ACS) in 2013. ACS, with its roots in the prestigious Bell Labs, specialized in critical areas such as cybersecurity, data analytics, and even quantum technology. By absorbing these firms, Veritas Capital strategically integrated advanced research and development capabilities into The SI Organization. Further demonstrating its growing influence and trust within sensitive government sectors, The SI Organization also secured a significant Air Force contract in 2013 for GPS-related space systems, even outcompeting a larger rival for the award. This indicated that SI, under Veritas’s control, was now entrusted with highly sensitive space and satellite programs as well.

• 2014 – Rebrand to Vencore: Veritas Capital then orchestrated the acquisition of QinetiQ North America’s services division by The SI Organization, merging the two entities. Following this significant consolidation, The SI Organization underwent a rebranding, emerging as Vencore. This new name coincided with a reported influx of fresh classified business. Vencore now housed Lockheed’s legacy “black projects” engineering team alongside QinetiQ’s defense technology contracts under a single corporate umbrella. This consolidation likely facilitated the transfer of a substantial amount of proprietary technology and classified knowledge into Vencore’s portfolio. Crucially, all of these sensitive assets remained ultimately under the control of Veritas Capital, far removed from public scrutiny.

• 2017–2018 – Formation of Perspecta: In one of its most ambitious moves, Veritas Capital orchestrated a complex three-way merger. It took Vencore, the Veritas-owned company that held the lineage of secret programs, and merged it with the U.S. Public Sector business of DXC Technology (itself a descendant of CSC and HP’s federal IT segment) and with a smaller contractor, KeyPoint Government Solutions. The combined entity was christened Perspecta Inc., which launched publicly in 2018 as a contractor with a valuation of approximately $3 billion. Perspecta, as a publicly traded company, inherited all of Vencore’s ongoing classified contracts. effectively consolidating decades of sensitive programs into a larger, somewhat more transparent, entity. The rationale behind Veritas Capital’s decision to “go public” with these assets remains open to interpretation. It likely served to allow Veritas to realize some of its investment gains. As a private equity firm, Veritas Capital does not publish detailed earnings reports, but it has claimed strong historical returns, reporting over a 3.8x gross multiple on invested capital and IRRs exceeding 40% in past disclosures. Around the same time, Veritas completed a recapitalization of Cotiviti, its major healthcare analytics portfolio company, bringing in KKR as a co-owner. Soon after, in August 2024, Veritas acquired the digital banking division of NCR Voyix for $2.45 billion in cash. The deal gave Veritas not just a high-tech financial services platform, but something resembling an in-house banking infrastructure, thereby positioning the firm to internalize capital flows, data, and transaction processing. Though earnings after these moves were not disclosed, the timing suggests a coordinated effort to both monetize existing holdings and consolidate new strategic capabilities under a veil of private ownership. This strategy of vertical integration extended beyond finance. Through its broader portfolio, Veritas systematically absorbed critical assets across IT, analytics, and defense contracting, often restructuring or rebranding them in the process. By integrating specialized programs into larger IT services firms, the origin and lineage of those programs became obscured through successive reorganizations. One such example was Perspecta, a firm assembled by Veritas from legacy assets of Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Vencore. Perspecta’s operations spanned a wide spectrum, from providing cloud computing services for government agencies to conducting highly classified analytics for the Intelligence Community. In 2019, Perspecta secured a significant $824 million contract with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) to provide full life cycle systems engineering and integration support. This initiative focused on modernizing NGA’s legacy systems architecture, integrating cloud capabilities, artificial intelligence, and big data analytics into the agency’s operational backbone. While details remain classified, this modernization effort is broadly consistent with the objectives of a compartmented framework known informally as “Immaculate Constellation,” which will be revisited in a later section. The overlap between Perspecta’s contract scope and the technical ambitions of that initiative suggests not merely parallel development, but structural alignment.

• 2021 – Full Circle Back to Private (Peraton): The final and perhaps most revealing step in this corporate saga occurred just a few years later. Veritas Capital brought Perspecta back under private ownership. In 2021, Peraton, a portfolio company of Veritas that had been formed in 2017 by carving out a portion of Harris Corporation, acquired Perspecta for a staggering $7.1 billion. This acquisition transformed Peraton into a massive, privately held contractor with significantly expanded capabilities. Concurrently, Peraton (under Veritas's control) also acquired Northrop Grumman’s federal IT and mission support services for $3.4 billion. Essentially, by 2021, all the components of the old SI/Vencore/Perspecta lineage were once again absorbed into Peraton; a company entirely controlled by Veritas Capital and shielded from the scrutiny of public investors. Shortly thereafter, Peraton strategically spun off a portion of its business called Arcfield. It is widely believed that Arcfield houses some of the most sensitive space-intelligence programs, a move likely intended to further compartmentalize these highly classified operations.

What does this complex and seemingly endless sequence of corporate maneuvers reveal? It strongly suggests that Veritas Capital has deliberately aggregated and transferred classified projects and advanced intellectual property through a series of carefully constructed corporate shells. From Lockheed Martin’s initial divestiture to QinetiQ, then to Perspecta, and finally to Peraton, each step in this intricate dance could have provided an opportunity to quietly transfer proprietary data, patents, or even physical materials related to highly sensitive government programs. If Lockheed Martin possessed any “exotic technology” derived from UAP research, as persistent rumors and whistleblower accounts allege, the 2010 sale to Veritas Capital (as The SI Organization) might have effectively moved those assets outside of Lockheed’s direct oversight. By 2021, any such Legacy Program would have been re-absorbed into a privately held firm (Peraton), securely shielded from the prying eyes of public investors. Veritas Capital effectively engineered a closed-loop ownership chain over an eleven-year period, meaning that whatever secrets originated at Lockheed Martin in 2010 ended up back within Veritas’s control by 2021, only now completely privatized and operating with significantly less transparency.

This intricate strategy bears all the hallmarks of a carefully designed cover for a long-running “legacy” UAP crash retrieval or exploitation program. The program could be effectively buried within a series of acquisitions and mergers, moved through a “constellation” of companies in such a way that no single transition would necessarily attract undue attention. The end result is a tightly held private entity where a select group of insiders maintain absolute control. In the parlance of intelligence operations, Veritas Capital has created multiple cut-outs and ultimately a proprietary (a privately owned front company) to host the program. To the outside world, these transactions appear to be ordinary corporate reshuffling within the defense industry. However, to those with knowledge of such matters, this could very well represent the carefully concealed trail of a hidden and extraordinary project.

Kona Blue

Within the complex timeline of mergers and acquisitions orchestrated by Veritas Capital, a crucial event stands out, the attempted transfer of UAP debris from Lockheed Martin to a government program in 2010, an effort that was ultimately thwarted. This event, known by the codename “Kona Blue,” serves as a compelling case study in how legacy UFO material might be intentionally kept within private hands, and the timing of this event directly implicates Veritas Capital.

According to multiple credible insiders, including investigative journalists George Knapp and Ross Coulthart, in 2010, a senior Lockheed Martin engineer named Dr. James T. “Jim” Ryder attempted to transfer certain exotic materials out of Lockheed Martin and into a newly proposed Special Access Program³⁷. These materials were purported to be of non-human origin, presumably recovered from UAP crash sites and held within Lockheed’s vaults. Dr. Ryder, in his capacity within advanced technology projects at Lockheed, was reportedly aware of these materials. With the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) gaining momentum and expressing interest in UFOs during that period, Ryder sought to have the U.S. government formally study these items. The proposed SAP was assigned the codename Kona Blue.

The central concept behind Kona Blue was to transfer these materials to a government-controlled contract, with Bigelow Aerospace being the likely recipient. Bigelow Aerospace was the same private contractor that was then operating the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Application Program (AAWSAP), a precursor to AATIP, which also focused on the UAP phenomenon. Bigelow Aerospace had invested significant resources in building specialized facilities in Nevada specifically designed for the secure storage and examination of anomalous alloys under the auspices of AAWSAP. Kona Blue, in theory, would take possession of whatever exotic materials Lockheed Martin held and place them under a sanctioned government research effort, complete with proper oversight and dedicated funding. Essentially, it represented an attempt to legitimize and centralize the scientific analysis of potentially significant UFO artifacts.

What ultimately transpired? Officially, the Kona Blue program never progressed beyond the proposal stage. In 2024, an internal Pentagon UAP history confirmed that “during the 2010s, officials considered a proposed program codenamed ‘Kona Blue’ to reverse-engineer extraterrestrial technology, but the Department of Homeland Security rejected the idea for lack of merit”. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) became involved because the proposal may have originated through an office within that department. The Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) later emphasized that “no extraterrestrial craft or bodies were ever collected, this material was only assumed to exist by Kona Blue advocates”. The publicly stated explanation, therefore, is that DHS and other involved agencies ultimately shut down the Kona Blue proposal due to skepticism regarding the authenticity of the purported materials.

However, this official explanation may not represent the complete picture. Alternate sources suggest that Kona Blue was blocked due to high-level interference, specifically originating from within the intelligence community (on the CIA side) rather than from DHS. In private interviews, two credible individuals have reportedly corroborated key details surrounding this interference. A former CIA officer clarified that a certain CIA official (Glenn Gaffney) was not the individual who blocked the program, contradicting some earlier speculation, although that cannot be verified. Furthermore, journalist Christopher Sharp of Liberation Times, who has conducted extensive investigations into this matter, has reportedly confirmed through his sources within the Department of Defense that Cardillo was indeed the official who vetoed the Kona Blue proposal.

It is crucial to note that Robert Cardillo was not affiliated with DHS; his position was within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (and he previously held a senior role at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency). The question then arises: why would a senior DNI official intervene to block a proposed DHS program? The most plausible explanation is that allowing Kona Blue to proceed would have meant Lockheed Martin relinquishing possession of extremely sensitive materials, and certain factions within the intelligence community may have had strong reservations about this. If the CIA or the DNI had concerns, they could readily assert that the purported material was either too sensitive to be transferred or lacked sufficient credibility to warrant such a transfer. Cardillo’s alleged veto suggests an institutional protection of whatever Lockheed Martin possessed, essentially conveying the message that “we’re not allowing this to leave the private sector.”

One interpretation of these events is that Robert Cardillo was acting on behalf of those who believed that such material, if it genuinely existed, needed to remain deeply buried within the private sector for national security reasons, or perhaps to maintain a perceived technological advantage within a select group of insiders. Another interpretation could be more bureaucratic in nature: perhaps these officials genuinely doubted the legitimacy of the purported material and viewed the Kona Blue proposal as potentially embarrassing or a waste of resources. Regardless of the precise motivations, Kona Blue was effectively dead by late 2010. One DHS official who was involved in the initial proposal reportedly came away from the experience “convinced that advanced technology was sequestered under government supervision at aerospace contractors’ facilities.” After being rebuffed by other government agencies when attempting to pursue the matter further, the DHS side ultimately backed off. In their own words, they received a “‘no, and hell no’” response when they inquired about the materials, and thus “became very hesitant… to move forward”. The underlying message was clear: the aerospace contractors are the keepers of these extraordinary secrets, and they are not willing to grant external access, even to other parts of the government.

This brings us back to the central question concerning Veritas Capital. If Lockheed Martin was unable to transfer the purported UFO materials to Bigelow Aerospace or a government laboratory, what did they ultimately do with them? Insiders and researchers have developed a compelling theory: Lockheed Martin sold or otherwise transferred these materials to The SI Organization, which, as previously established, is a company owned by Veritas Capital. It is critical to recall that Lockheed Martin’s sale of its Enterprise Integration Group (EIG) unit to Veritas Capital was finalized in November 2010, precisely during the same period when the Kona Blue proposal was being actively debated and ultimately shut down. It is strongly suspected by the author that as part of this $815 million deal, some “special materials” or related technical data were quietly included or diverted to the newly formed SI Organization. In essence, instead of handing over the alleged exotic cache to the government, where it might eventually be subject to leaks or increased oversight, Lockheed Martin transferred it to a private surrogate, Veritas Capital’s company, under the guise of a standard contractor divestiture.

Veritas Capital, with its extensive and deep connections within the intelligence community, would have been an ideal custodian for such sensitive materials. It could then exploit the material in a deniable and private manner, potentially coordinating with friendly contacts within the CIA or the Pentagon who were already “in the know” about the situation. It is also noteworthy that The SI Organization (which later became Vencore) did secure contracts in subsequent years for advanced materials research and prototyping for various government laboratories, which could subtly hint at this type of activity. Furthermore, journalist Ross Coulthart has reported being told that “after Kona Blue was thwarted, the material in question was sold to a ‘cut-out’ organization with CIA oversight”. Veritas Capital’s SI Organization perfectly fits this description; a cut-out (a private intermediary) staffed by former cleared Lockheed Martin personnel, funded by a highly secretive private equity firm, and likely operating with close liaison to the Central Intelligence Agency. If this theory holds true, it would mean that Veritas Capital literally became the keeper of the purported UFO debris, continuing whatever analysis or reverse-engineering efforts were deemed necessary entirely in-house and away from the prying eyes of government agencies.

By 2014, when The SI Organization rebranded as Vencore and was subsequently integrated into larger corporate entities, any special UAP-related project would have been effectively hidden amongst a multitude of other research and development efforts. By the time of the Perspecta merger in 2018, such a project would have become virtually untraceable within a large, publicly traded company. And by 2021, it would have ended up safely ensconced within Peraton; back under the complete control of Veritas Capital and operating entirely within the private sector. In summary, the Kona Blue saga represents a critical inflection point where a significant piece of the UFO puzzle almost moved into a realm of governmental oversight, but instead, it likely remained within the shadows of the aerospace industry. This strongly suggests that Veritas Capital actively intervened to ensure that these extraordinary materials remained outside of official channels. Veritas Capital essentially picked up the ball that the government appeared to have dropped. This pivotal event serves as a compelling example of how a legacy UAP program could be quietly nursed along within the private sector for extended periods.

Gatekeeper, Keymaster

Up to this point, the focus has primarily been on the actions and strategic maneuvers of Veritas Capital, particularly its involvement with defense contractors and government programs. However, none of these complex operations would be feasible without a crucial element: money. This is where Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH) plays an indispensable and often overlooked role. If Veritas Capital can be viewed as the hands and feet of this potential consortium, then Brown Brothers Harriman serves as the circulatory system, diligently pumping the necessary financial blood throughout the entire network.

At first glance, Brown Brothers Harriman presents itself as a quiet, traditional private bank that caters primarily to wealthy families and institutions. It maintains a relatively low public profile and is not publicly traded on any stock exchange. However, within the context of this unfolding story, BBH can be more accurately understood as the central financial node that enables Veritas Capital’s entire operation. Significantly, all of Veritas Capital’s investment funds, from its initial Fund I established in the 1990s up to its most recent Fund IX, utilize Brown Brothers Harriman as their primary custodian and administrator. This crucial relationship is documented within the audited financial statements of Veritas Funds. In simpler terms, every dollar that flows into or out of Veritas Capital’s various investment funds passes directly through the accounts and systems of Brown Brothers Harriman. BBH holds the funds’ cash and securities in trust, maintains the official financial records, and processes every single financial transaction on behalf of Veritas.

This role as custodian and administrator alone grants Brown Brothers Harriman an enormous level of visibility into and control over Veritas Capital’s financial activities. But their involvement extends even further. BBH also provides active financial services to these funds. Given that Veritas’s funds engage in international investments and transactions, BBH serves as their foreign exchange dealer, facilitating the exchange of currencies when investors from overseas transfer funds into Veritas’s accounts or when portfolio companies located abroad require funding. Perhaps even more critically, BBH also extends credit to Veritas’s funds. For instance, if Veritas Capital is in the midst of acquiring a company and requires short-term liquidity to finalize the deal, BBH offers overdraft facilities; essentially providing quick loans to bridge any temporary funding gaps. As a concrete example, as of September 30, 2024, one of Veritas Capital’s sub-funds had an $11.3 million overdraft owed to Brown Brothers Harriman, indicating that BBH had fronted a significant amount of cash to ensure the smooth execution of a particular transaction. In essence, BBH is not merely a passive banking institution for Veritas Capital; it functions as an active enabler, ensuring that Veritas’s ambitious buyout and investment strategies can be executed swiftly and on demand. BBH holds the ultimate purse strings and provides additional financial leverage when needed.

The significance of this tightly integrated financial architecture cannot be overstated. Because Brown Brothers Harriman operates as a private bank, it is subject to an intense level of confidentiality and discretion. Unlike large, publicly traded banks, BBH does not conduct quarterly earnings calls with analysts or issue detailed public disclosures about its clients and their financial activities. Historically, BBH has prided itself on its unwavering commitment to secrecy and its provision of highly personalized services to a select clientele of influential individuals and institutions, ranging from prominent industrialists to even presidents. With Brown Brothers Harriman serving as the primary conduit for Veritas Capital’s financial flows, the intricate details of those cash movements are effectively sealed off from public view; protected by the stringent privacy regulations governing banking and by the inherent private status of both BBH and Veritas Capital. Even the ultimate investors in Veritas Capital’s funds remain largely hidden from public records (while some institutional investors are identifiable, the full roster and the identities of high-net-worth individuals are not publicly disclosed). This means that vast sums of capital can be channeled into defense-related projects without the level of transparency that typically accompanies government spending. It operates almost like a parallel financial system specifically designed for black-budget projects: one where taxpayer money can become commingled with private capital, but where public accountability is minimal at best.

Consider the typical scenario when Veritas Capital acquires a company: investors commit capital to a Veritas fund (e.g., Fund VIII or IX), that money is held in an account at Brown Brothers Harriman, and then BBH executes the wire transfer, perhaps an $800 million payment, to purchase a cybersecurity firm. That firm then proceeds to earn revenue through government contracts, which are ultimately funded by taxpayer dollars. Later, Veritas Capital might decide to sell the firm for $2 billion, and BBH handles the distribution of the proceeds back to the original investors. At every critical step of this process, Brown Brothers Harriman acts as the central clearinghouse. If one were attempting to trace whether any portion of those funds was being diverted to a classified sub-project, the task would be exceedingly difficult. Those specific details would likely reside within Brown Brothers Harriman’s internal ledgers or within Veritas Capital’s private financial reports, none of which are subject to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests or easily accessible to Congressional oversight committees without a formal subpoena. An auditor might encounter a payment listed as “for consulting services” or a budget line item labeled “R&D initiative X” within a contractor’s financial records, but unless they possessed prior knowledge of what to specifically look for, the true nature and purpose of these expenditures could be easily obscured. With BBH as a private custodian, the result is a black box of money flows connecting wealthy investors to secretive defense projects, managed by a trusted old bank.

Examples of such arrangements include the covert operations SEASPRAY and YELLOW FRUIT, both of which illustrate how pseudo-private financial channels were used to fund black programs while circumventing conventional oversight. SEASPRAY, initiated in 1981, was a clandestine aviation unit operated jointly by the CIA and U.S. Army that acquired and maintained aircraft through off-books procurement, funding them via undisclosed mechanisms. The aircraft were used for sensitive missions in Central America, including personnel transport and tactical surveillance, yet no formal line-item budget ever appeared in congressional appropriations. YELLOW FRUIT, activated shortly thereafter, provided operational support for similar missions, including signal intelligence flights under operations like QUEEN'S HUNTER. It operated out of safe houses and utilized non-standard contracting pipelines, with funding structures deliberately obscured. These programs relied on what insiders sometimes referred to as “Pentagon banks”, financial intermediaries not formally recognized as defense contractors, but used to warehouse and disburse funds for covert military and paramilitary activity. The architecture resembled private banking: asset shielding, deniability, and custodianship managed outside the scope of standard audit trails. In both cases, classified appropriations were routed through shadow channels that mirrored the financial opacity found in BBH’s custodial role for modern defense-linked investments.

Now, it is crucial to recall Brown Brothers Harriman’s extensive historical footprint. This venerable bank has quietly managed the fortunes of some of America’s most powerful families for generations. During both World War II and the Cold War, BBH partners were not simply passive financiers; they actively participated in the national security apparatus. As previously mentioned, Prescott Bush and Neil Mallon both played significant roles in aiding U.S. intelligence efforts. BBH was also reportedly involved in intricate funding arrangements for various clandestine operations. For example, early CIA front companies and ventures frequently utilized private banking relationships to move funds across borders without detection. A CIA internal memorandum, aptly titled “In the Company of Friends,” later acknowledged that “throughout [the Cold War], the [CIA’s] global engineering of clandestine funds had a part in the founding of the CIA. This global engine of hidden finance was well acquainted.” In other words, the very establishment and subsequent operations of the Central Intelligence Agency were deeply intertwined with private financiers, including those at Brown Brothers Harriman and its peer institutions. BBH’s long-standing ethos has been to work closely with government when called upon; always quietly, discreetly, and without leaving a public trace.

Today, Brown Brothers Harriman’s ongoing relationship with Veritas Capital can be viewed as a direct continuation of that well-established tradition. Just as Prescott Bush quietly facilitated CIA endeavors decades ago, BBH now quietly aids Veritas Capital, an entity that the author suspects is currently carrying the torch for legacy black programs. One could even argue that BBH provides Veritas Capital and its numerous affiliates with something truly invaluable: plausible deniability and operational discretion. Funds held within a BBH trust account attract minimal public attention; they are not subject to the same level of scrutiny as a line item within the federal budget or even a contract listed on a public company’s balance sheet. BBH’s corporate culture is epitomized by understatement, secrecy, and an unwavering commitment to client confidentiality, qualities that are highly prized in the realm of covert operations.

To put it bluntly, if Veritas Capital is indeed concealing a UFO exploitation effort, Brown Brothers Harriman is the mechanism through which the associated finances are hidden. Through a complex web of convoluted trusts, specialized accounts, and trusted individuals at the helm, BBH possesses the ability to effectively mask the financial trail. For instance, BBH could easily maintain a “family trust account” that invests in Veritas Capital Fund VIII, and that fund could then allocate a specific portion of its capital to a special research and development project at Peraton, innocuously labeled as “Task Order 42” or a similarly generic designation. Only a select handful of top executives within Veritas and a few key bankers at BBH might ever be privy to the true nature of Task Order 42, that it is, in reality, a project dedicated to the analysis of recovered UFO materials. While this scenario is speculative, it is entirely consistent with the historical methods employed for clandestine financing. In the 1980s, for example, the Iran-Contra affair involved the commingling of private funds with secret government money to arm Nicaraguan rebels, a complex operation facilitated by a maze of offshore accounts and cooperative bankers. Interestingly, one of the figures deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal was retired General Richard Secord, who also had subsequent ties to various private equity ventures. The fundamental point is that Brown Brothers Harriman’s involvement in Veritas Capital’s financial operations makes a multitude of potentially troubling activities possible, particularly from a financial secrecy perspective.

By Their Returns You Shall Know Them

While Brown Brothers Harriman serves as the crucial financial conduit for Veritas Capital, it is equally important to examine who the ultimate investors (Limited Partners) in Veritas’s various funds are likely to be. These are the individuals and institutions that ultimately commit billions of dollars, presumably in exchange for financial returns, and perhaps, in some cases, for strategic influence in certain sectors. Veritas Capital’s consistent ability to raise multibillion-dollar funds suggests a deep-pocketed and likely security-conscious base of Limited Partners. Although the complete roster of these investors remains confidential, a reasonable picture can be pieced together from publicly available information and logical inferences:

• Dynastic Families & Trusts: Given Veritas Capital’s specific focus on the defense and national security sectors, it is widely rumored that old-money American dynasties and allied foreign family offices constitute a significant portion of its investor base. Names frequently mentioned in these circles include the traditional pillars of East Coast wealth, families such as the Rockefellers, Mellons, Phipps, Whitneys, and, notably, potentially branches of the Bush family (descendants of Prescott Bush) or similar lineages. Historically, such families have engaged in defense and intelligence-related ventures through private channels, efforts often presented as patriotic, but more accurately driven by a blend of strategic self-interest, legacy preservation, and a preference for discreet influence. For instance, the Rockefeller Foundation quietly funded early research into the UFO phenomenon in the 1990s, and heirs to the Mellon family have been involved in recent efforts pushing for greater UAP disclosure. It stands to reason that some of these influential families might prefer to operate from the shadows when it comes to more sensitive or classified matters. Brown Brothers Harriman’s clientele has long included these patrician lineages, and indeed, BBH partners themselves, such as Prescott Bush, frequently served as trustees for various family trusts while simultaneously holding positions within national security circles. This historical overlap suggests that Brown Brothers Harriman could readily facilitate the flow of dynastic capital into Veritas Capital’s funds under the guise of “patriotic” investment, a discreet means of aligning family wealth with national security operations that also happen to yield substantial private returns. While public confirmation of specific family LPs is elusive, industry whispers and the patterns of fund commitments strongly suggest the involvement of these “silent partners.” This dynamic bears a striking resemblance to the plot of Sekret Machines, where an oligarchic cabal secretly funds UFO-related projects.

• Public Pension Funds & Big Institutions: A significant portion of Veritas Capital’s considerable war chest originates from quite public sources, specifically, various public pension systems and large institutional investors that are constantly seeking high-yield investment opportunities to meet their long-term financial obligations. For example, the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund and the Virginia Retirement System each committed a substantial $250 million to Veritas Capital Fund IX, the firm’s latest flagship fund. Similarly, the State of Michigan and the state of Indiana pension funds each contributed $150 million to the same fund. The New Mexico State Investment Council allocated $100 million, and even the Arkansas Teacher Retirement fund added $35 million to Veritas Capital Fund IX . These figures are derived from publicly accessible records, such as the minutes of state investment board meetings, and have been reported in various industry publications. On the international front, at least three major Israeli insurance companies, Clal Insurance, Migdal Insurance, and Menora Mivtachim, collectively invested approximately $210 million into Veritas Capital Fund IX, as reported in Israeli financial news outlets. Additionally, earlier Veritas funds have reportedly received contributions from sovereign wealth funds located in the Gulf region and Asia, investments that would have likely undergone scrutiny by U.S. authorities due to national security sensitivities. Why do these seemingly mainstream entities choose to invest in a firm like Veritas Capital? The primary driver is likely Veritas’s track record of delivering strong financial returns by capitalizing on the consistently rising tide of defense spending and government contracting. There is a certain irony in the fact that teachers and other public employees, through their pension funds, are unknowingly helping to finance companies that might be actively pursuing UFO secrets. This also adds a layer of complexity to the issue, as money from these public funds becomes commingled with more secretive private capital, and once it enters Veritas Capital’s fund structure, it effectively loses its public character and becomes subject to the firm’s private operational rules. While Congress can readily summon the CEO of a major defense contractor to testify before a hearing, it becomes significantly more challenging to trace exactly how Oregon’s pension check is being utilized once it is within Veritas Capital’s accounts.

• Intelligence-Linked Investors: Perhaps the most intriguing category of investors associated with Veritas Capital are not necessarily formal Limited Partners but rather co-investors and strategic allies operating within the venture capital space that has close ties to the intelligence community. In-Q-Tel, the Central Intelligence Agency’s own venture capital arm, operates in a sphere adjacent to Veritas Capital’s. While In-Q-Tel typically focuses on direct investments in early-stage technology startups that could benefit U.S. intelligence needs, it shares numerous relationships and potentially some of the same Limited Partners as Veritas Capital. For instance, if In-Q-Tel provides early funding to a cybersecurity firm that is later acquired by Veritas Capital, the question arises whether such a transaction was a result of strategic coordination or mere coincidence. Furthermore, consider certain investment funds that have a distinct focus on the defense sector, such as Paladin Capital (founded by former CIA Director Jim Woolsey) or RRE Ventures (whose partners include members of the Rockefeller family and which has a history of investing in aerospace startups). These entities might engage in co-investments alongside Veritas Capital in specific deals or even provide valuable leads on potential acquisition targets. There is also the largely unanswered question of the potential involvement of foreign intelligence services and their associated pension funds as Limited Partners in Veritas Capital’s funds. The notable commitment made by multiple Israeli insurance companies to Veritas Capital in 2022 is particularly interesting in this context, given the close intelligence alliance between the United States and Israel and the potential Israeli interest in gaining exposure to cutting-edge U.S. defense technologies. In summary, Veritas Capital’s investor base likely represents a coalition of the willing: ultra-wealthy individuals and families whose investment decisions are often framed in patriotic language, but may just as easily reflect a pursuit of influence, insulation, or alignment with long-term strategic interests; institutional investors seeking high returns in opaque sectors with government backing; and various intelligence-linked funds, all pooling their capital under the discreet stewardship of Brown Brothers Harriman. This arrangement not only provides Veritas Capital with significant financial firepower but also, as a significant byproduct, creates a built-in shield of highly influential stakeholders. Imagine attempting to conduct a serious investigation into Veritas Capital, you would potentially face opposition, directly or indirectly, from state governors overseeing pension funds, powerful Wall Street executives, close foreign allies, and former high-ranking CIA officials, all of whom have a vested financial interest in the firm’s continued success and secrecy. This constitutes a formidable deterrent to any external inquiries.

To further illustrate this point, a hypothetical (and likely incomplete) list of investors in Veritas Capital Fund VIII might include entities such as: “XYZ Family Trust (c/o Brown Bros Harriman), Oregon PERS, Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (via a feeder fund), Paladin Capital Group, Johnson Family Office, New Mexico SIC, Lockheed Martin pension plan, etc.” It is a diverse mosaic of both public and private capital. Critically, once these funds are committed to Veritas Capital’s fund structure, they all operate under the rules and regulations established by Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman, which inherently prioritize utmost secrecy and discretion. Investors receive periodic updates on the fund’s performance, but only the information that Veritas Capital deems appropriate to share. And Veritas Capital, as its history suggests, possesses a remarkable ability to keep secrets.

This intricate arrangement feeds a self-reinforcing cycle: Veritas Capital utilizes the invested capital to acquire companies that subsequently win lucrative government contracts (often classified), such as the reported $824 million contract with the NGA. These contracts generate revenue, which in turn increases the value of the acquired companies. Veritas Capital then eventually sells or takes these companies public through IPOs, yielding substantial returns for its investors, often doubling or tripling the initial investment. This consistent success in generating high returns attracts even more investors to the next fund cycle. However, along this entire process, those very defense contracts could be indirectly funding highly classified black projects, possibly including those related to the UAP phenomenon. For instance, taxpayer dollars allocated to an intelligence analysis contract at Perspecta might have included a specific task order for the exploitation of UAP-related data. The revenue generated from that task would then contribute to Perspecta’s overall profitability and ultimately benefit Veritas Capital and its investors when Perspecta was eventually sold. In effect, public funds are potentially laundered into private profit, and perhaps even into the continuation of secret and extraordinary endeavors. The investors themselves might not even be fully aware (or perhaps prefer not to know) that a portion of their investment returns could be indirectly derived from the hidden budget of a UFO reverse-engineering program. It is a brilliantly subtle and self-sustaining machine, one that the architects of the original “Legacy Program” would undoubtedly applaud for its effectiveness and inherent opacity.

“Closed eyes, dark hearts, can’t lose”

An essential component in understanding the potential role of Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman in managing sensitive government programs, including those related to UAPs, lies in examining Veritas’s past track record. If Veritas and BBH are indeed the backbone of a secret procurement network, one would logically expect to find hints of such activity in their historical dealings within the defense contracting world. It turns out that Veritas Capital has been involved in some of the most prominent defense contracting scandals of the 2000s, and the manner in which the firm handled these situations speaks volumes about its operational style and priorities.

Case 1: The MZM / Cunningham Affair (2005). This scandal stands as one of the most egregious cases of defense corruption in recent history. Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham was ultimately convicted of accepting over $1 million in bribes, including cash, luxury goods, and even the use of a yacht, from a defense contractor named Mitchell Wade, who operated a small but influential intelligence company called MZM, Inc.. In exchange for these lavish gifts, Cunningham, who held a key position on defense appropriations committees, used his influence to steer lucrative government contracts to MZM, totaling at least $150 million. These contracts reportedly included some classified projects, such as the establishment of a secure facility for a new Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) cell. Wade even went so far as to funnel illegal campaign contributions to other lawmakers in an effort to further grease the wheels of government procurement. When this elaborate bribery scheme was finally exposed in 2005, it triggered a major political fallout: Cunningham was ultimately sentenced to prison, and MZM, Inc. was effectively blacklisted from receiving future government contracts.

This is where Veritas Capital enters the narrative. Rather than allowing those valuable contracts to simply expire or be subjected to open rebidding, Veritas Capital swiftly moved in and acquired the distressed assets of MZM, Inc. as the company began to implode under the weight of the scandal. Veritas promptly renamed the acquired entity Athena Innovative Solutions, and attempted to publicly distance the company from the lingering stench of corruption. Reports at the time noted Veritas Capital’s calculated move, with one stating: “MZM Inc., suspected of bribing a congressman… Veritas acquired the company after its troubles.” By taking control of MZM’s assets and operations, Veritas Capital effectively kept MZM’s existing government contracts and ongoing projects intact, merely operating them under a new corporate banner. Within a relatively short period, just two years later in 2007, Veritas Capital then sold Athena Innovative Solutions to CACI International, a larger defense contractor, realizing a significant profit on its initial investment.

What is particularly telling about this episode is how seamlessly the potentially sensitive and classified projects continued despite the high-profile corruption scandal. Veritas Capital’s timely takeover ensured that whatever work MZM, Inc. was performing for the Pentagon proceeded with minimal disruption. While the specific details of all of MZM’s contracts remain somewhat opaque, it is known that the company held at least one highly classified contract (and likely more, given Mitchell Wade’s reported interest in selling a controversial software program called Trailblazer to the National Security Agency). Some observers have speculated that the rapid sale of Athena Innovative Solutions to CACI International was strategically orchestrated to prevent any deeper investigation into the precise nature and scope of those classified contracts. Veritas Capital, as a well-established and trusted player within the defense industry, was in a unique position to absorb MZM and thereby shield the government (and any potentially implicated officials) from further embarrassment or public disclosure. In essence, Veritas appeared to be acting as a discreet mechanism to buy the evidence and quietly continue operations. Mitchell Wade himself admitted not only to engaging in bribery but also to providing illegal benefits to numerous Department of Defense officials beyond Congressman Cunningham, raising serious questions about what those officials may have provided him in return. If any of these transactions involved extremely sensitive government projects, such as a data analysis program that might have intersected with UAP-related information or other unconventional intelligence, Veritas Capital’s intervention served as a crucial firewall to ensure such activities remained hidden from public scrutiny. One illustrative example is Veritas’s acquisition of Alion Science and Technology, a defense contractor known for its work in advanced analytics, electronic warfare, and modeling and simulation for the Department of Defense and Intelligence Community. By acquiring Alion and absorbing its operations into a private equity structure, Veritas ensured that any sensitive programs under Alion’s purview would be protected not only by classification but also by the opacity of private capital ownership. This acquisition, like that of Perspecta, reflects a broader strategy: integrating high-sensitivity government assets into a financial architecture where public inquiry becomes structurally impractical. The entire episode strongly suggests how a determined private equity player can effectively buy access to black budget funding, and how another private entity (Veritas Capital) can then strategically buy silence and operational continuity in the aftermath of scandal.

Case 2: DynCorp’s Dark Cloud. DynCorp International was a major military contractor that provided a wide range of services, from aviation maintenance and support to police training and security operations in numerous overseas locations. The company had a significant contract footprint in many covert or highly sensitive operations, particularly as a key contractor for the Central Intelligence Agency in counter-narcotics and various security missions. In the late 1990s, DynCorp employees working under a United Nations policing contract in Bosnia were implicated in a horrific sex trafficking ring. Whistleblowers within DynCorp revealed disturbing allegations that some company personnel were actively purchasing underage girls and women from local brothels or were otherwise involved in forced prostitution. The scandal eventually broke into public awareness, even being featured in a report by National Public Radio (NPR) in 2005, which detailed the alleged involvement of DynCorp employees in trafficking activities and the apparent lack of significant consequences for the company as a whole. Despite the serious nature of these allegations, DynCorp as a corporation was never criminally charged in connection with the trafficking ring; a few individual employees were reportedly terminated, and the company eventually paid a settlement to one of the whistleblowers. By the early 2000s, the shadow of this scandal still hung over DynCorp, and the company’s public reputation was tarnished in some circles, although it continued to secure lucrative government contracts.

Veritas Capital, ever alert for strategic opportunities, recognized a potential opening. In 2004, Veritas Capital acquired DynCorp’s government services business from its parent company, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), and subsequently merged it with a legacy DynCorp entity to create a new, reorganized company named DynCorp International. Veritas then took DynCorp International public through an Initial Public Offering (IPO) in 2006, realizing a substantial profit on its initial investment, and continued to hold a significant stake in the company until selling off its remaining shares around 2010. What does this sequence of events reveal? Once again, Veritas Capital demonstrated that it was undeterred by a defense contractor’s deeply troubling past if the underlying government contracts were sufficiently valuable. DynCorp International held billions of dollars in contracts with the U.S. State Department and the Department of Defense, including managing the Afghan police training program and conducting drug interdiction missions for the CIA. Veritas Capital willingly took on the risk of the negative public relations associated with the past scandal. One might argue that Veritas Capital specializes in navigating “special situations” where discretion and a willingness to overlook ethical concerns are paramount, whether that involves a significant public scandal or a deeply classified government project. In DynCorp’s case, the scandal involved gross violations of human rights, which bears an unsettling parallel to the morally ambiguous territory that a clandestine UFO retrieval and analysis program might potentially occupy (operating without proper oversight, potentially violating international norms or domestic laws in order to maintain secrecy). Veritas Capital’s apparent attitude seems to be: we are willing to take on entities with ethically or legally dubious histories, provide a superficial cleanup of the public image, and ensure the flow of revenue from government contracts continues uninterrupted. This is precisely the type of steward that a hidden UAP program might require, as the very existence of such a program, operating outside of established government oversight, could be considered an illegal withholding of information from Congress and the American public (some legal scholars argue it might violate the National Security Act). Veritas Capital has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to operate within legal gray areas if there is sufficient profit and strategic value to be gained.

The common thread running through both of these scandals is a profound lack of effective oversight and accountability within the realm of defense contracting, which, as history shows, is a particularly fertile ground for concealing unusual and potentially illicit activities. The Cunningham affair vividly illustrated how a relatively small firm like MZM, Inc. managed to carve out its own mini black-budget within the Pentagon through bribery and corrupt patronage, essentially creating a secret pipeline for funding controversial projects protected by illicit relationships. It is not an unreasonable leap to imagine that some of that unaccounted-for money could have been diverted to projects entirely unrelated to what was officially documented (for example, Mitchell Wade could have easily funneled funds into his own pet “special projects” that might have been unconventional or exploratory in nature). When Veritas Capital took over MZM’s operations, any such unusual project would have been conveniently swept under the rug and allowed to continue quietly within the shadows. The DynCorp case further demonstrated that even egregious misconduct within a major defense contractor (conduct that would typically prompt contract termination or at least intense scrutiny from government agencies) did not ultimately halt the flow of lucrative government contracts, they simply continued under new corporate ownership. Veritas Capital profited handsomely from this transaction while essentially acting as a fixer for the government: the public scandal eventually faded from the headlines, but the highly sensitive missions and operations undertaken by DynCorp continued without significant interruption.

This recurring pattern- of Veritas Capital strategically stepping in to absorb defense contractors that are either politically toxic due to scandal or potentially harbor significant secrets- strongly suggests that Veritas and its affiliated entities can function as an effective firewall, insulating clandestine programs from both public and congressional scrutiny under the seemingly normal guise of routine corporate mergers and acquisitions. The strategy appears to be: buy the company, take it private or restructure it significantly, and external inquiries and investigations tend to diminish. As one astute observer noted, following Veritas Capital’s acquisition and subsequent rebranding of MZM, “the scandal focused almost entirely on Congressman Cunningham’s personal criminal activities, and Athena [the newly formed company] quietly carried on the work.” Precisely; the public attention shifted away from the underlying contracts and operations, and whatever sensitive or classified work MZM was engaged in likely continued in the shadows, shielded by the change in ownership and corporate identity. This bears a striking analogy to how supposed “Legacy Program” would likely operate to keep a highly sensitive program, such as one related to UFOs, under tight wraps: absorb it into a private network where outside inquiries and attempts at oversight are met with a dead end. Indeed, after these high-profile scandals involving MZM and DynCorp, the Veritas-owned companies (Athena, later part of CACI; DynCorp post-IPO, etc.) rarely appeared in the press in connection with their scandalous pasts, they effectively flew under the radar, their controversial histories largely forgotten by the public.

In conclusion regarding these scandals: Veritas Capital has consistently proven itself to be remarkably adept at operating within the murkiest and most ethically challenging corners of the defense contracting industry. The firm has demonstrated a strong stomach for navigating public scandals, possesses the necessary high-level connections to mitigate political fallout, and exhibits a clear willingness to prioritize the continuity of potentially secret government programs over the principles of transparency and public accountability. While this pattern of behavior does not, by itself, definitively prove that Veritas Capital is currently running a UFO crash retrieval and reverse-engineering operation, it undeniably demonstrates the capability and the specific mindset that would be required for such a role. Veritas Capital has repeatedly shown that it possesses (a) the discretion to engage in ethically dubious arrangements if necessary, (b) the extensive network of connections to smooth things over with influential government officials, and (c) direct control over entities that can effectively conceal extraordinary projects behind layers of corporate secrecy. When you combine this established track record with all the other specific indicators discussed earlier in this report (the Lockheed Martin EIG acquisition, the revolving door of personnel between Veritas and agencies like the NGA, the financial architecture involving BBH), the circumstantial case becomes increasingly compelling that Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman are, in fact, at the very heart of a real-world “shadow program.”

As Above, So Below

In late 2024, another intriguing piece of this complex puzzle emerged into the public discourse: the revelation of an alleged ongoing UFO/UAP program with the evocative name “Immaculate Constellation.” While the name possesses a certain poetic quality, according to whistleblower testimony, the program is very much a reality, and a potentially highly significant one. Immaculate Constellation is reportedly described as a “parent” Special Access Program (SAP) that serves to coordinate various highly compartmentalized projects all related to the study and potential exploitation of UAPs. Essentially, it functions as an overarching umbrella program designed to integrate efforts, perhaps including crash retrievals, materials analysis, and global monitoring initiatives, that have historically been scattered across numerous government agencies and departments. The program reportedly involves a massive data-driven surveillance component, heavily leveraging imagery intelligence (think sophisticated spy satellites and advanced reconnaissance aircraft) and likely also incorporating signals intelligence to track unidentified anomalous phenomena on a worldwide basis.

What is particularly striking about this description is how closely it aligns with the existing capabilities of the various companies within Veritas Capital’s extensive portfolio. Immaculate Constellation allegedly draws in vast amounts of data from key intelligence agencies such as the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the very agencies responsible for managing the nation’s sophisticated satellite imagery and other overhead sensing platforms. Now, recall that Perspecta, a company owned by Veritas Capital until its acquisition by Peraton in 2021, held significant contracts to manage the critical IT systems of both the NGA and other intelligence agencies, including providing cloud computing and advanced analytics capabilities specifically for GEOINT (geospatial intelligence). Perspecta’s successor, Peraton, currently holds billions of dollars in classified contracts for a wide range of space and intelligence missions. These Veritas-linked firms literally operate and maintain much of the fundamental infrastructure that collects and analyzes the vast amounts of sensor data utilized by the U.S. government. If one were tasked with establishing a global UAP detection and tracking network, it would be a logical and efficient approach to integrate it with the existing network of spy satellite feeds, advanced radar systems, and air defense networks, much of which is already operated or heavily supported by private contractors such as Peraton.

Furthermore, Immaculate Constellation reportedly utilizes data from the NGA and NRO to track UAPs on a global scale. The critical question then becomes: who possesses the specialized expertise in interpreting and effectively managing the complex data streams originating from the NGA and NRO? The answer likely points to companies such as Peraton, as well as other major government contractors like SAIC and Booz Allen Hamilton. However, Peraton holds a unique position in this landscape due to Veritas Capital’s strategic decision to populate its ranks with numerous former NGA personnel. Notably, in May 2019, Robert Cardillo, the very same former Director of the NGA and the individual who allegedly vetoed the Kona Blue program, joined the board of directors of Peraton. His stated role was to provide strategic guidance on intelligence community business, which in practical terms likely translates to leveraging his extensive knowledge of the NGA to secure lucrative contracts. This move occurred just months after his departure from the NGA, a classic example of the “revolving door” phenomenon between government service and the private sector. Peraton’s former CEO, Stu Shea, is also of note as a highly respected figure within the geospatial intelligence community and an inductee into the NGA Hall of Fame, boasting decades of experience in GEOINT-related fields. In short, Veritas Capital has strategically stacked Peraton with individuals who possess deep insider knowledge of geospatial intelligence operations. Currently Peraton is led by former Dyncorp CEO (2009-2014) Steve Schorer.

Now consider the timing: if Immaculate Constellation was established by 2018, following the exposure of AATIP by investigative journalists and government insiders, then who would be responsible for its actual execution on the ground by the time whistleblower revelations surfaced in 2024, indicating it was already in progress, possibly without proper authorization? It is highly improbable that such a complex and data-intensive program would be run entirely in-house by the NGA or the Air Force. Large-scale data surveillance programs of this nature are frequently outsourced to private contractors for implementation and ongoing management. The most logical candidates for such a role are the very companies that Veritas Capital either currently owns or has owned in the recent past. It is entirely conceivable that significant portions of the Immaculate Constellation program have been outsourced to Peraton for tasks such as data integration, advanced analytics, and overall program management. Other Veritas-affiliated companies, such as Cubic or L3Harris, might also be involved in providing specialized sensor systems or other technological components. We do know that the whistleblower material specifically indicated “witting participation by elements of the Defense Department, civil service, and intelligence community in a global surveillance apparatus”. This strongly suggests the involvement of private contractors, as this is the typical mechanism through which such a large-scale apparatus is established and maintained, through close public-private cooperation.

Veritas Capital’s strategic moves also appear more coherent when viewed through the lens of the Immaculate Constellation revelations. The decision to take Perspecta private in 2021 (merging it into Peraton) occurred right around the time that UAP issues began to receive more serious attention within the Pentagon and the broader national security establishment. By ensuring that Perspecta’s considerable technological capabilities remained within a tightly controlled private firm (Peraton), Veritas Capital effectively ensured that these resources could be readily utilized for any purpose, without the need for public shareholder oversight or detailed disclosures. Furthermore, the addition of Robert Cardillo, the very individual who likely knew where many of the U.S. government’s most sensitive secrets (or perhaps even metamaterials) were buried, provided Veritas Capital with a direct and influential line of communication into any UAP monitoring initiatives that might be quietly taking shape at the NGA. It represents an elegant and potentially highly effective one-two punch: control the essential tools and talent required for a sophisticated UFO surveillance program, and simultaneously operate as the private intermediary that can execute it largely off the books and away from public scrutiny.

So, is Immaculate Constellation essentially the culmination of the long-term efforts of the Veritas Capital/Brown Brothers Harriman consortium? It is certainly tempting to answer in the affirmative, at least in part. The alleged program’s very name evokes something grand, pristine, and all-encompassing: an “immaculate constellation of resources” assembled to achieve objectives that no official government program could openly pursue. In a more metaphorical sense, Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman have indeed assembled an immaculate constellation, one of interconnected companies, specialized expertise, vast financial resources, and significant political influence, that could very plausibly be covertly surveilling, studying, and potentially even exploiting the UAP phenomenon all under the seemingly innocuous guise of ordinary defense contracting activities.

One might envision Immaculate Constellation operating as an overarching framework where:

• Collection: National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) satellites (often operated and maintained by contractors), advanced Air Force radar systems, and other sophisticated sensors continuously gather data on reported UAP sightings from around the globe.

• Analysis: The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s (NGA) advanced algorithms and artificial intelligence systems (much of which were developed and implemented by Perspecta/Peraton) sift through vast quantities of imagery and other sensor data. Signals intelligence (from the NSA) and human intelligence (from various sources) are likely also integrated into this analytical process.

• Exploitation: If a UAP is detected, tracked, or if physical materials are somehow recovered, these assets could be discreetly routed to a private laboratory (perhaps hidden within a defense contractor like Arcfield or another similarly controlled entity within Veritas’s network) for in-depth analysis and potential reverse-engineering.

• Coordination: A small, highly cleared group of individuals from various government agencies oversees the program at a high level, but they rely heavily on the private consortium to actually perform the bulk of the operational and analytical work.

This hypothetical operational model aligns remarkably well with the various hints and suggestions that have surfaced in recent whistleblower accounts and leaked documents pertaining to UAP programs. It also fits neatly with the strategic positioning and demonstrated capabilities of Veritas Capital and its extensive network of portfolio companies. It is worth noting that the term “Immaculate Constellation” first publicly surfaced in late 2024 in a story published by investigative reporter Michael Shellenberger, which drew from sources involved in closed-door inquiries conducted by the House Oversight Committee. The term has not been officially acknowledged or confirmed by the Department of Defense. The fact that information about this alleged program has leaked into the public domain suggests that some members of Congress are now becoming increasingly aware of these complex dynamics.

Congressional staff have reportedly begun to actively investigate the potential involvement of private contractors in UAP-related programs, and it is quite possible that their inquiries are increasingly focusing on the extensive network controlled by Veritas Capital. Publicly, however, much of the attention surrounding UAPs has been directed towards legacy aerospace companies (like Lockheed Martin) and the Pentagon itself. The significant role that private equity firms and the broader financial sector might be playing in this arena has not yet received widespread mainstream media coverage- yet. This is precisely what makes this particular investigation so critically important.

In summary, the speculative yet compelling elements surrounding Kona Blue and Immaculate Constellation add significant weight to the central hypothesis that a private consortium, primarily composed of components like Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman, is actively managing legacy UAP-related efforts. The saga of Kona Blue strongly suggests the diversion of potentially significant materials into private hands, while the revelations about Immaculate Constellation point towards the integration of diverse capabilities and resources through private sector entities. These two alleged programs can be viewed as two sides of the same secretive coin, one focused on keeping physical evidence out of government oversight, and the other focused on maintaining observational efforts and data analysis within a similarly controlled private domain. And in both of these alleged initiatives, Veritas Capital’s extensive network of portfolio companies appears to be playing a central and pivotal role. Veritas-owned entities are deeply embedded in the agencies (NGA, NRO) that would be running Immaculate Constellation. It is not hard to imagine that Veritas functions as a proxy executor for some of the most sensitive unacknowledged programs, keeping them within a trusted commercial domain and out of the public sector’s reach.

The Shape in the Fog

Stepping back to consider the totality of the evidence uncovered, a disturbing picture emerges: a private equity firm that operates with the secrecy and influence of a covert government agency, a venerable private bank that quietly channels billions of dollars towards secretive ends, a complex trail of corporate maneuvers that may very well be concealing the Holy Grail of UFO secrets, and a pervasive culture of impunity and deliberate obscurity. This is the potential blueprint of a “Legacy Program” It is likely not a formal committee that meets in a smoke-filled room or a sinister Illuminati-esque gathering in a hidden boardroom. Rather, it appears to be a sophisticated system, an intricate ecosystem of interconnected companies, powerful financiers, and well-placed former government officials whose collective interests are aligned in keeping certain extraordinary programs out of the public eye.

Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman, operating in concert, appear to form a unique and highly effective mechanism for the management and concealment of black-budget programs. Veritas Capital brings to the table its extensive network of defense and intelligence contractors and its deep connections within the highest echelons of the national security establishment. Brown Brothers Harriman provides the essential component of shadow banking, with its long history of managing wealth for the elite and its unwavering commitment to client confidentiality. Through deliberate acquisition strategies, the strategic hiring of former government officials, and the opaque flow of capital through private funds, they have collectively created a haven for unacknowledged and potentially revolutionary projects. If a legacy UFO crash retrieval or reverse-engineering program truly exists within the United States, the accumulating evidence strongly suggests that it would find refuge within this very network. One could logically come to the conclusion that if a ‘legacy UFO program’ exists in the private sector, Veritas and its portfolio are strong candidates for being at the core of it. They possess the means (the necessary companies and vast capital resources), the motive (potential profit, increased power and influence, and perhaps even a misguided sense of patriotic duty), and the opportunity (unfettered access to government secrets and a significant degree of freedom from traditional public oversight) to undertake exactly what the fictional consortium did in the novels, keeping revolutionary aerospace secrets in the shadows for decades in order to maximize profits and control.

What are the profound implications of these findings? For one, it fundamentally reframes the entire UAP transparency debate. Thus far, public discourse and legislative efforts have largely focused on government agencies: demands for the Pentagon to declassify and release UFO data, calls for the Air Force to open its long-held files, and legislative proposals to mandate the reporting of any recovered “non-earth origin” materials. However, if the core of the UAP secret has long since migrated to the private sector, then traditional methods of government oversight may be inadvertently targeting the wrong institutions. The usual tools of transparency, such as Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, Inspector General probes, and Congressional hearings, have inherently limited reach into the inner workings of private equity firms and their shadowy investment funds. Veritas Capital, as a private entity, is not subject to FOIA regulations. Brown Brothers Harriman is highly unlikely to voluntarily hand over detailed client transaction records; obtaining such information would require formal subpoenas and potentially protracted legal battles, at a minimum. In essence, Congress may now have to contend with a significant privatization of secrecy, that is, a deliberately cultivated gap in the existing legal framework.

This phenomenon of utilizing private entities to conduct sensitive government work outside of direct public oversight is not entirely unprecedented in American history. The U.S. has a documented history of employing private organizations to circumvent certain restrictions or to undertake operations that the government itself could not directly conduct. For example, Air America served as a private airline secretly owned and operated by the CIA to conduct clandestine operations in Southeast Asia during the Cold War, activities that the U.S. military could not openly engage in. Similarly, during the War on Terror, private military contractors such as Blackwater were employed to perform tasks that would have been politically problematic for official U.S. forces to undertake. The outsourcing of highly classified black projects to a firm like Veritas Capital represents a logical, albeit concerning, extension of this historical trend. It provides a crucial element of plausible deniability for the government. If questioned about the existence of crash retrieval programs or the possession of non-human technologies, Pentagon officials can truthfully state, “We have no active program on that matter”, because such a program, if it exists as hypothesized, would not reside within a Department of Defense Special Access Program (SAP); instead, it would be nestled within a private company funded by private capital. This blurring of the lines between the public and private sectors in such critical areas of national security immensely complicates the process of accountability.

For transparency advocates and lawmakers who are actively pushing for greater disclosure of information related to UAPs (such as the members of Congress who held public UAP hearings in 2023, or those who included the UAP Disclosure Act in recent legislative efforts), the Veritas Capital/Brown Brothers Harriman model represents a formidable challenge. How does one effectively compel a private entity to reveal information that it is determined to keep secret? One potential approach currently being discussed involves legislative action: enacting laws that would require government contractors to report any UAP-related materials or data in their possession and perhaps even creating legal liability for failing to come forward. Language to this effect was indeed proposed in recent legislation, an amendment that would have required current or former government contractors to hand over any such materials under a kind of amnesty by a specific deadline. If such legislation ultimately becomes law, the world in which Veritas Capital operates could be directly impacted. However, even with such laws in place, enforcement would still heavily rely on voluntary self-disclosure or the bravery of whistleblowers willing to risk their careers and potentially face legal repercussions, unless the government already possesses precise knowledge of where to look for these hidden programs and materials.

The future of these alleged legacy UAP programs will likely depend on an ongoing tug-of-war between the deeply entrenched forces of secrecy and the growing pressure for greater transparency and accountability. On one hand, the public and political pressure for transparency is undeniably mounting. In 2023, a subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee held an open hearing where multiple former military officials and pilots testified under oath that the U.S. government is actively concealing significant evidence related to UAPs. This testimony included shocking claims about the recovery of “non-human biologics” and the existence of clandestine crash retrieval teams, which resonated deeply with the public and further fueled the demand for answers. The Senate Intelligence Committee has also been increasingly vocal on this issue, with a recent report stating their belief that a UAP Legacy Program may indeed exist, operating unlawfully and hidden from proper congressional oversight. These signals from within the highest levels of government indicate that a significant faction within the U.S. establishment wants to pull these extraordinary secrets out of the shadows and into more appropriate channels of oversight and accountability (even if the information is not immediately made fully public, at least it would be subject to Congressional authority). The driving reasons behind this push for transparency are varied: some believe that the public has an inherent right to know about such significant matters, others are deeply concerned that if such potentially revolutionary technologies exist, they should not be monopolized by a small group of unelected insiders, and still others are worried about potential legal violations and the fundamental principle of civilian control over the military and intelligence apparatus.

On the other hand, the established interests in maintaining the current level of secrecy are undoubtedly strong and deeply entrenched. The individuals who have been involved in these private programs have likely operated with a significant degree of impunity for decades and have much to potentially lose if the truth were to be revealed, including their careers, their professional reputations, and even the perceived technological advantage that secrecy is believed to provide against potential adversaries. Furthermore, the investors who have been quietly funding these endeavors (including powerful family dynasties and other influential entities) would likely strongly oppose any public exposure; they may genuinely believe that they are acting as responsible guardians of a dangerous secret that must not fall into the hands of the general public or rival nations. Brown Brothers Harriman, for example, has cultivated a two-century-long legacy built on unwavering confidentiality, it is highly unlikely to break that deeply ingrained culture simply because some lawmakers are now expressing curiosity.

In practical terms, what might we realistically expect to see unfold in the near future? It is quite possible that there will be increased scrutiny directed towards Veritas Capital and similar private equity firms by investigative journalists and government watchdogs. We might also witness more whistleblowers from within the defense contractor world coming forward with firsthand information. David Grusch’s groundbreaking testimony (he is the former National Reconnaissance Office/National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency officer turned whistleblower) hinted at the significant involvement of private contractors in UAP-related activities; perhaps his revelations will embolden others with similar knowledge to step forward, especially now that the environment for such disclosures has become somewhat safer thanks to whistleblower protection provisions included in recent defense authorization bills. Each new piece of credible evidence can potentially help Congress and the public map out this hidden ecosystem of private involvement.

There are also indications that the executive branch is quietly investigating aspects of the UAP phenomenon. If any of these ongoing investigations begin to focus more intently on the role of entities like Veritas Capital or Brown Brothers Harriman, it could lead to some very uncomfortable questions being asked behind closed doors within the halls of power. For instance, if an investigation were to discover credible evidence that a particular contractor was in possession of unusual materials or technologies dating back to a certain period, they might not disclose this information publicly but could certainly inform relevant Congressional oversight committees, who might then issue subpoenas to that contractor or invite their executives to provide classified briefings.

For Brown Brothers Harriman, direct public exposure in connection with alleged UAP secrecy would likely be a nightmare scenario, the bank’s entire business model and reputation are built upon its low profile and unwavering commitment to client confidentiality. It is possible that BBH might quietly attempt to distance itself from Veritas Capital if public scrutiny intensifies, but given its seemingly integral role in facilitating Veritas’s financial operations, such a move would likely be exceedingly difficult and potentially damaging. Alternatively, it is also conceivable that both BBH and Veritas Capital are already preparing a sophisticated exit strategy: for example, moving any physical artifacts or sensitive information to offshore locations or to yet another layer of cut-out corporations, if they haven’t already done so, or ensuring that critical knowledge is so tightly compartmentalized that only a select few individuals would ever be in a position to reveal significant details.

From a national security perspective, one could argue that this private consortium approach to managing potentially revolutionary technologies has been remarkably effective in maintaining secrecy, perhaps even too effective. It has potentially created a situation where even the President of the United States or key Congressional leaders could be kept out of the loop, which raises serious constitutional questions about civilian control over sensitive national security matters. One is inevitably reminded of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s famous 1961 farewell address, where he warned about the burgeoning “military-industrial complex” and the potential for it to acquire “unwarranted influence,” as well as the danger of a “misplaced power” that could ultimately endanger fundamental liberties or democratic principles. Here, with the potential involvement of Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman, we appear to have precisely that: a powerful military-industrial-financial complex whose misplaced power may have allowed it to hold and guard extraordinary technological secrets with virtually zero public accountability.

As we reach the conclusion of this investigation, it is worth considering the grand irony at play: in the relentless pursuit of the ultimate unknown (UFOs and the possibility of non-human technology), the U.S. security apparatus may have inadvertently created an equally enigmatic earthly construct, a privatized black program infrastructure that is itself shrouded in layers of secrecy and financial opacity. Shining a light on the mysteries of unidentified aerial phenomena might first require shining a far brighter light on the activities of entities like Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman. The coming months and years, with Congress’s continued interest in UAPs and the increasing likelihood of more whistleblowers coming forward, could potentially bring about a significant reckoning. We may see increasing demands for special audits of major defense contractors, or a renewed push for legislation that mandates any “non-earth origin” materials in private possession must be reported and centralized under government control (some language to this effect was indeed included in the draft UAP Disclosure Act in 2023). If such laws are enacted, the question remains whether the alleged consortium will comply or actively resist these efforts. That could potentially lead to a historic showdown between elected government oversight and the deeply entrenched “secret keepers.”

In essence, the ongoing quest for the truth about UFOs is gradually revealing a much larger truth about how power operates within the United States. Black budgets and highly classified programs do not simply vanish into thin air, they can often metastasize into the private sector, where traditional mechanisms of government oversight struggle to reach. Activities that were once conducted within unmarked government buildings may now be taking place in corporate laboratories and high-security boardrooms. The torch of secrecy may have been passed from the World War II-era science club of Vannevar Bush, to the Cold War banker-spy clique of Prescott Bush and Allen Dulles, to the 21st-century private equity fund of Ramzi Musallam. The names and faces may change across the decades, but the underlying theme remains remarkably consistent: a select group of individuals, operating in the “company of friends” and driven by their own interpretations of national security imperatives, advancing secret agendas in the firm belief that they know best.

Unraveling the precise role of Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman in alleged UAP-related programs is not simply about uncovering the truth about aliens or exotic metals, it is fundamentally about restoring a measure of transparency and democratic control over profoundly important endeavors that could have far-reaching consequences for all of humanity. If truly miraculous technologies or paradigm-shifting scientific discoveries are being made in secret, should they remain the exclusive domain of a few powerful CEOs and financiers? Or do we, as a society, have a right to know and a say in how such knowledge is utilized? That is the crux of the matter. This investigative look has exposed the potential outlines of a real-life Maynard Consortium. It is now up to public institutions and an informed citizenry to decide what action, if any, should be taken. Will there be subpoenas issued, public hearings convened, and forensic accounting investigations launched? Or will the consortium close ranks, further entrench its secrecy, and simply wait out the gathering storm, as it has perhaps done for decades?

One thing is increasingly clear: the infrastructure sustaining secrecy around advanced aerospace and intelligence programs is no longer invisible, it is simply unacknowledged. Veritas Capital and Brown Brothers Harriman have long operated at the intersection of capital, covert operations, and statecraft. Their discretion has never implied irrelevance; rather, it has been a feature of their function. What has changed is not their behavior, but our ability to map the architecture they enable.

As more credible whistleblowers come forward and fragmentary revelations begin to cohere, it becomes harder to dismiss the possibility that some of the most consequential programs in modern history, potentially involving non-human technologies, have been executed and obscured through privately managed, extralegal channels. These are not rogue elements. They are structured, resourced, and protected by systems intentionally designed to frustrate oversight. If such systems have been used to conceal advanced aerospace programs, they are almost certainly being used to manage and obscure a broader range of covert activities, spanning data operations, exotic materials research, biological experimentation, and undisclosed intelligence capabilities. These are not isolated anomalies; they are expressions of a durable, institutionalized system designed to operate permanently beyond oversight.

Systems, designed, funded, and sustained in plain sight.

“The difference between conspiracy and coordination is a bank account.” — Catherine Austin Fitts

Works Cited

1. Van Auken, Bill. “Prescott Bush and the Nazis.” World Socialist Web Site, December 5, 2018. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/12/05/intr-d05.html. Accessed March 31, 2025.

2. All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). “History and Origin of KONA BLUE.” AARO.mil. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/UAP_RECORDS_RESEARCH/History_and_Origin_of_KONA_BLUE_FINAL_508.pdf.

3. Hubler, David. “Lockheed Finalizes $815 M Sale of EIG Division.” Washington Technology, November 29, 2010. https://www.washingtontechnology.com/2010/11/lockheed-finalizes-815m-sale-of-eig-division/342969/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

4. Boeing (press release). “Boeing Awarded US Air Force Contract to Continue GPS Modernization.” February 12, 2013. https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2013-02-12-Boeing-Awarded-US-Air-Force-Contract-to-Continue-GPS-Modernization. Accessed March 31, 2025.

5. Brown Brothers Harriman. “Brown Brothers Harriman in the Second World War.” BBH.com. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.bbh.com/us/en/bbh-who-we-are/our-story/200-years-of-partnership/brown-brothers-harriman-in-the-second-world-war.html.

6. “Scandal Folds MZM into Veritas.” Buyouts Insider, September 14, 2005. https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/scandal-folds-mzm-into-veritas/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

7. “NMSIC Approves up to $715 M Worth of Commitments to PE.” Buyouts Insider, February 20, 2025. https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/nmsic-approves-up-to-715m-worth-of-commitments-to-pe/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

8. Hubler, David. “Lockheed’s EIG Renamed The SI Organization.” Washington Technology, November 30, 2010. https://www.washingtontechnology.com/2010/11/lockheeds-eig-renamed-the-si-organization/344517/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

9. Central Intelligence Agency. “CIA Memo: In the Company of Friends.” June 30, 1961. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp99-01448r000401570011-0. Accessed March 31, 2025.

10. Dakota Financial News. “Indiana PRS Invests $568 M to Private Markets, Real Assets.” Dakota.com. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.dakota.com/fundraising-news/indiana-prs-invest-568m-to-private-markets-real-assets.

11. Dakota Financial News. “Report: Veritas Capital’s $10 B Defense Fund Draws $270 M from Israeli Investors.” Dakota.com. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.dakota.com/fundraising-news/report-veritas-capitals-10b-defense-fund-draws-270m-from-israeli-investors.

12. (WashingtonExec News) “The SI Organization Swaps Name for Vencore.” WashingtonExec, July 23, 2014. https://washingtonexec.com/2014/07/si-organization-swaps-name-vencore/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

13. U.S. Department of Defense. “Department of Defense Releases the Annual Report on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP).” Defense.gov (press release). Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3964824/department-of-defense-releases-the-annual-report-on-unidentified-anomalous-phen/.

14. Essential Services Division, Washington Headquarters Services. “Trafficking in Persons Meeting with Donna Hughes and John Miller.” Memorandum, August 12, 2003. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/CPA_ORHA/06-F-0803_Trafficking_in_Persons_meeting_with_Donna_Hughes_and_John_MIller_8-12-2003.pdf.

15. GovCon Wire. “Transforming Perspecta into a $7.1 B Company: The Journey of Mac Curtis.” February 2, 2021. https://www.govconwire.com/2021/02/transforming-perspecta-into-a-7-1b-company-the-journey-of-mac-curtis/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

16. Human Rights Watch. “XI. SFOR Contractor Involvement” (in Hopes Betrayed: Trafficking of Women and Girls to Bosnia and Herzegovina). November 2002. https://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/bosnia/Bosnia1102-11.htm. Accessed March 31, 2025.

17. Hanks, Micah. “Pentagon UAP Report Says No Evidence U.S. Has Collected Exotic Technology, Kept Programs Hidden from Congress.” The Debrief, March 9, 2024. https://thedebrief.org/pentagon-uap-report-says-no-evidence-u-s-has-collected-exotic-technology-kept-programs-hidden-from-congress/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

18. Slaughter, George. “Bush, George Herbert Walker.” Handbook of Texas Online. Texas State Historical Association. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/bush-george-herbert-walker.

19. Lake, Sydney. “Perspecta to Be Acquired for $7.1 B in All-Cash Deal.” Virginia Business, January 27, 2021. https://virginiabusiness.com/article/perspecta-to-be-acquired-for-7-1b-in-all-cash-deal/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

20. Lake, Sydney. “Peraton Closes on $3.4 B Cash Purchase of Northrop Grumman Biz.” Virginia Business, February 1, 2021. https://virginiabusiness.com/article/peraton-closes-on-3-4b-cash-purchase-of-northrop-grumman-biz/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

21. Los Angeles Business Journal. “Computer Sciences Corp. Sells DynCorp to Veritas Capital for $850 Million.” December 13, 2004. https://labusinessjournal.com/news/computer-sciences-corp-sells-dyncorp-to-veritas/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

22. McLaughlin, John. “How the CIA Got into the Venture Capital Game.” New America (online), n.d. https://www.newamerica.org/future-security/articles/how-the-cia-got-into-the-venture-capital-game/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

23. Paladin Capital Group. “James Woolsey.” PaladinCapital.com. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://paladincapital.com/team/james-woolsey/.

24. Petty, Kelly. “The SI Organization Acquires PhaseOne Communications.” WashingtonExec, March 6, 2012. https://washingtonexec.com/2012/03/the-si-organization-acquires-phaseone-communications/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

25. PR Newswire. “Applied Communication Sciences Acquired by The SI Organization, Inc.” May 15, 2013. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/applied-communication-sciences-acquired-by-the-si-organization-inc-207519011.html. Accessed March 31, 2025.

26. PR Newswire. “The SI Organization to Acquire QinetiQ North America Services and Solution Group.” April 22, 2014. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-si-organization-to-acquire-qinetiq-north-america-services-and-solution-group-256160961.html. Accessed March 31, 2025.

27. Trevithick, Joseph. “Senate Intel Committee Wants ‘UAP’ Investigators to Focus on Ones That Are ‘Not Man-Made’.” The War Zone, July 26, 2022. https://www.thewarkzone.com/senate-intel-committee-wants-uap-investigators-to-focus-on-ones-that-are-not-man-made. Accessed March 31, 2025.

28. Turner, Ben. “US Government Wanted to Reverse-Engineer Alien Ships — But Never Found Any, Pentagon UFO Report Reveals.” Live Science, March 11, 2024. https://www.livescience.com/us-government-wanted-to-reverse-engineer-alien-ships-but-never-found-any-pentagon-ufo-report-reveals. Accessed March 31, 2025.

29. U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Accountability. “Hearing on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena – Written Testimony of Ryan Graves.” November 13, 2024. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/117721/documents/HHRG-118-GO12-20241113-SD003.pdf.

30. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “CACI International Inc Announces Acquisition of Athena Innovative Solutions, Inc.” Press release, October 31, 2007. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/16058/000001605807000064/ex99.htm. Accessed March 31, 2025.

31. Vardi, Nathan. “Meet Ramzi Musallam: Wall Street’s Top Secret Billionaire.” Forbes, August 17, 2021. https://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2021/08/17/meet-ramzi-musallam-wall-streets-top-secret-billionaire/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

32. Veritas Capital. “Veritas Capital Announces DynCorp International Inc. Initial Public Offering.” VeritasCapital.com. Accessed March 31, 2025. https://www.veritascapital.com/news/veritas-capital-announces-dyncorp-international-inc-initial-public-offering.

33. Warner, Mark R. “Statement of Senate Intel Chair Mark R. Warner on UAP Report.” Press release, January 2023. https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/1/statement-of-senate-intel-chair-mark-r-warner-on-uap-report. Accessed March 31, 2025.

34. Washington Technology. “Acquisitions, Changes Drive New Name for SI Org.” July 2014. https://www.washingtontechnology.com/2014/07/acquisitions-changes-drive-new-name-for-si-org/355758/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

35. The Washington Post. “Defense Contractor Pleads Guilty in Congressman Bribery Scheme.” February 25, 2006. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/2006/02/25/defense-contractor-pleads-guilty-in-congressman-bribery-scheme/9134119a-511d-4a4a-a741-11494149858c/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

36. Ziadeh, Amanda. “Former NGA Director Robert Cardillo Joins Peraton Advisory Board.” WashingtonExec, May 1, 2019. https://washingtonexec.com/2019/05/former-nga-director-robert-cardillo-joins-peraton-advisory-board/. Accessed March 31, 2025.

37. Valentine, Douglas. The Strength of the Wolf: The Secret History of America’s War on Drugs. Verso Books, 2004.

38. Nicaso, Antonio, and Marcel Danesi. Organized Crime: Culture, Markets and Policies. Springer, 2013.

39. Scott, Peter Dale. American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan. Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.

40. Smith, W. Thomas, Jr. Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency. Facts On File, 2003.

41. McCoy, Alfred W. The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade. Lawrence Hill Books, 2003.

42. Cockburn, Alexander, and Jeffrey St. Clair. Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press. Verso Books, 1998.
    
    Please note that the usage of artificial intelligence is extremely controversial, and the author would like for you to know that this work represents personal analysis and conclusions which were not guided by artificial intelligence in any fashion, and would highly recommend that you read many of the referenced works for greater understanding of clandestine operations historically. AI tools were used in the structuring of this paper, and while useful, represent nothing more than a tool for the human mind to express itself. The author does not advise subcontracting critical thinking to machines.