The Intercept’s Misguided Assault on David Grusch

The recent article by The Intercept targeting David Grusch, a retired Air Force intelligence officer and whistleblower, is not just disconcerting; it’s a significant departure from responsible journalism. By focusing obsessively on Grusch’s personal struggles, The Intercept has not only overlooked the core issues at hand but managed to undermine its own credibility.

Grusch’s allegations, involving a government cover-up related to Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), are no small matter. These are claims that have resonated with high-level members of Congress and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG). They deserve serious investigation and a fair assessment.

Instead, what The Intercept offered was an unwarranted invasion into Grusch’s personal life. By highlighting his battles with PTSD, grief, and depression, they have sidestepped the central issue, reducing what could have been a comprehensive investigation into a personal attack. This line of inquiry isn’t merely misguided; it’s morally wrong.

This approach by The Intercept is alarming on several fronts. Firstly, it diverts attention from the UAP issue, a topic that warrants serious scrutiny. By shifting focus from potential government cover-ups to Grusch’s mental health, the publication has turned readers away from the real debate and fueled a sensationalized narrative.

Secondly, the absence of a scientific connection between Grusch’s PTSD and his allegations is glaring. The article offers no credible evidence linking his mental health struggles to the claims he’s made. Such a lack of rigor is not just irresponsible; it perpetuates harmful stigmas around mental health, especially concerning veterans.

This brings us to an essential point that The Intercept seems to have forgotten: the gravity of PTSD among veterans. Many of our brave men and women who have served in the military grapple with this debilitating condition. Rather than using Grusch’s struggles to discredit him, it would have been more fitting for The Intercept to approach this issue with empathy and understanding.

The very insinuation that PTSD could invalidate Grusch’s entire testimony is not only baseless but offensive to all veterans who live with this condition. We must always remember that these individuals have offered their lives for our country. They deserve our respect and support, not judgment or character assassination.

Moreover, The Intercept’s path from its earlier reporting on WikiLeaks-related subjects to this current form of sensationalism is highly troubling. The publication once stood as a symbol of truth and transparency. Now, it appears to have succumbed to a form of journalism that prioritizes scandal over substance.

By failing to explore Grusch’s claims thoroughly and resorting to personal attacks, The Intercept has lost sight of what journalism ought to be. This approach does not only reflect poorly on The Intercept but on the media landscape at large.

The critical question of UAPs, government cover-ups, and hidden truths deserve an exploration led by integrity, curiosity, and diligence. What we’ve seen from The Intercept is a failure on all these fronts.

We must not lose sight of the core issues and must reject a form of journalism that resorts to personal invasions and superficial analysis. We must also remember our responsibility to support and respect those who have served our country, especially when they struggle with conditions like PTSD.