UFOpedia

borland-house-oversight-testimony-2025-09-09

9 min read

Dylan Borland — Sworn written testimony, House Oversight Committee UAP Task Force (September 9, 2025)

Source: Whistleblower Statement for the House of Representatives Task Force Author: Dylan Borland (former USAF 1N1 geospatial intelligence specialist) Hearing: Restoring Public Trust Through UAP Transparency and Whistleblower Protection, House Oversight Committee Date: September 9, 2025 Primary URL (PDF): https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Borland-Written-Testimony.pdf YouTube (full testimony): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyFheZrcayk Full transcripts in repo:

  • borland-house-oversight-testimony-2025-09-09.txt — verbatim spoken testimony with timestamps (~40 KB)
  • This file — verbatim written testimony submitted to the Committee Sourced: 2026-05-19 via congressional document PDF extract + YouTube transcript API

The first sworn congressional testimony by Dylan Borland, a named USAF/IC professional with firsthand UAP experience at Langley AFB (summer 2012) and subsequent SAP exposure to UAP legacy crash retrieval program material. Borland is one of the named individuals in the Corbell “Sleeping Dog” documentary and is referenced in the Coulthart May 2026 Reality Check broadcast.

Full written testimony (verbatim)

Statement to the Task Force

I would like to express my gratitude for being invited to testify to the current task force created under the People’s Chamber and the American public. As an American citizen, veteran, and Intelligence Community professional, it is an honor and privilege to serve under oath before you on behalf of our country.

Identity and credentials

My name is Dylan Borland. I am a former “1N1” geospatial intelligence specialist for the U.S. Air Force in an active duty enlisted capacity from 2010 to 2013. I also worked for BAE Systems and Intrepid Solutions as a Senior Analyst, an expert in analyzing video, radar, and advanced electrooptical imagery for official identification of aerial order of battle as well as naval and ground.

I am a federal whistleblower, having testified to both the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) and All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) with direct firsthand knowledge of and experience with craft and technologies (commonly known as UFO or UAP) that are not ours and that are reportedly operating without Congressional oversight. Because of my direct knowledge of the reality of certain legacy UAP programs, my professional career was deliberately obstructed, and I have endured sustained reprisals from government agencies for more than a decade.

The Langley AFB 2012 firsthand encounter

From 2011 through 2013, I was stationed at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia conducting twenty-four-hour operations via Manned and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) for Special Operations Forces (SOF) for the Global War on Terror (GWOT). During the summer of 2012, my team was on standby for weather and I returned to my barracks on base.

At approximately 0130 I saw an approximately 100-foot-long equilateral triangle fly from near the NASA hangar on base and come within one hundred feet of where I was standing. This craft interfered with my telephone, did not have any sound, and the material it was made of appeared fluid or dynamic. I was under this triangular craft for a few minutes, and then it rapidly ascended to commercial jet level in seconds. It displayed zero kinetic disturbance, sound, or wind displacement.

Subsequent SAP exposure to UAP legacy material

Some years after that experience, I was further exposed to classified information from the UAP legacy crash retrieval program through a sensitive position I held within a Special Access Program (SAP). During this time, intelligence officers approached me in fear for their own careers, citing misconduct within these programs and the same retaliation I was already enduring.

The pattern of retaliation

These issues included:

  • medical malpractice by Veterans Affairs staff
  • denial of work I performed while enlisted in the U.S. Air Force
  • forged and manipulated employment documents
  • workplace harassment, including colleagues being directed not to speak with me
  • manipulation of my security clearance records by certain agencies to block or delay my access to classified employment

The retaliation I faced, and the retaliation against individuals I know who worked in these programs, is what convinced me in March of 2023 to become a whistleblower. I came forward out of concern for people’s lives and to ensure I did everything I could to let our elected representatives know the truth about what is really happening within the executive branch.

AARO interaction (March 2023)

At the end of March 2023, I agreed to meet with AARO, following the suggestion of other federal officials, believing it was what our nation required of me. I had reservations about AARO due to assessments they were reporting publicly at that time as a “misrepresentation” of the truth. Because of these concerns, I did not share sources and methods information to protect current and former federal personnel who had firsthand exposure to “technologies of unknown origin.” I did not want anyone to face further retaliation beyond what they had already endured.

ICIG complaint (August 2023) and aftermath

After David Grusch testified under oath in the summer of 2023 and provided historic disclosure, I was then asked to go to the ICIG, and I did so in August 2023. It was very clear early on during my intake interview, which was video recorded under oath, that their objective was solely to assess just how much I know, not to move forward with an investigation based on new information. The aftermath of that IG complaint still troubles me to this day.

Post-complaint retaliation

Since my ICIG complaint, I have been prevented from resuming my prior employment and can confirm I am still blacklisted from certain agencies within the Intelligence Community. In addition, multiple agencies attempted phishing attacks to assess what I had divulged to the Inspector General, including being asked to disclose details of my ICIG complaint during a CI polygraph for a position entirely unrelated to UFO/UAP matters in November 2024.

As I sit before you today, I and many other whistleblowers have no job prospects and no foreseeable professional future in a nation all of us came forward to defend.

Closing

Numerous individuals have come forward in various ways to reveal the truth of the UAP reality as patriots and defenders of our nation. Yet many feel discarded, isolated, and hopeless, separated from the country they serve. Efforts to rectify the situation for all whistleblowers have been difficult and troubling, and to my fellow whistleblowers and officials who have encountered these programs, I offer my apology that you are in this position.

I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, an oath that demands truth and transparency for our democratic republic to function. Each day these truths remain hidden from our citizens, humanity drifts further from the principles our nation was founded to uphold. Each day that victims of crimes committed by agencies and companies maintaining this secrecy are denied justice is another day the Constitution is effectively shredded.

In 2023, patriots provided this committee and the executive branch with undeniable proof of the UAP reality, and I commend your continued commitment. The future of humanity is one in which we either travel to the stars or regress to the Stone Age with this technology. My career has been to deliver critical information to decision makers; your role, as elected representatives of the people, is to act on it. The time to act is now.

Very Respectfully,

Dylan Borland

Why this primary matters

  1. Direct firsthand UAP encounter on the record, from a credentialed IC professional. Borland’s 1N1 geospatial intelligence specialist background gives technical credibility to his observation register (equilateral triangle, ~100 ft, ~100 ft proximity, fluid/dynamic material, no sound or wind displacement, rapid ascent). This is the mid-tier-named-witness register — Grusch-parallel but with firsthand experience, not secondhand.

  2. The Langley AFB 2012 location is institutionally specific. “From near the NASA hangar on base” is a verifiable physical location. The NASA Langley Research Center is adjacent to Langley AFB; the geographic claim is precise.

  3. The ICIG complaint dynamics on record. Borland’s testimony that the ICIG intake was “video recorded under oath” but “their objective was solely to assess just how much I know, not to move forward with an investigation based on new information” is a documented criticism of the institutional whistleblower-processing apparatus from within the process itself.

  4. The CI polygraph phishing-attempt is a specific institutional-retaliation claim. November 2024 polygraph for an unrelated position with questions about the ICIG complaint contents. If accurate, this is a specific procedural-misconduct allegation against the IC clearance process.

  5. Borland joins the pre-emptive-threat-awareness pattern. The retaliation inventory (medical malpractice, employment documents, security clearance manipulation, blacklisting) is documented and adjacent to the Burlison “I am not suicidal” + Elizondo Jillian Michaels podcast threat-awareness disclosures from 2026.

What this testimony does NOT establish

  • No physical evidence presented. Borland’s testimony is observational + institutional-retaliation experience; no documentary primaries are submitted with the testimony.
  • No identification of specific other whistleblowers / officers approached him. Borland references “intelligence officers approached me in fear for their own careers” but does not name them.
  • No specific named program / SAP designation. The “UAP legacy crash retrieval program” framing is the Grusch / Coulthart / Brown / Mace lexicon; Borland does not give it a different name.

Cross-references

External primary references

Triage note

This file replaces the prior routing of post 1ndhwtx to contactee-tradition-and-experiential-claims.md. Borland’s testimony, on review, is firsthand-named-witness register with IC credentials — closer to the Fravor / Graves / Nell tier than the contactee-tradition tier. The contactee-routing was an initial-triage misclassification; this primary correction now anchors him properly.

Graph View

Backlinks