Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

390 feet, 100 mph exit velo 🚀 What can't Trinity Christian's (TCA Conquerors Athletics) Ethan Wheeler do?

19,742 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

🐶: can you be friends with guinzly? 🌸: *nods head* 🐶: you can be friends? 🌸: *nods head* ☁️: *shakes head no* 🐶: is he annoying/bothersome? 🌸☁️: *shakes head no* 🐶: not annoying! 🐶: aow... why are you playing around... 🌸: *pats smyle* 🐶: you're waiting for smyle to decide if being friends (with guinzly) is approved or not 🌸: *nods head* ☁️: *shakes head no* (so not approved 😅) 🐶: what's up smyle? ☁️: *shakes head no* 🐶: noo?? ☁️: *shakes head no* 🐶: what has to be traded to be friends with him? what will make you allow jeje (big sis) to be friends (with guinzly)? 🌸: *stomps feet* 😡‼️ 🐶: what? you're stomping your feettt 👥: it's hia (big bro)! 🐶: what do you want? are you hungry? 👥: it's not jeje! he wants to be hia! 🌸: *points to fans, agreeing with them* 🐶: call you that? or not? 🌸: *stomps feet* 🐶: (is it) ninaaa? 👥: he wants to be hia! he wants to be hia! 🐶: ...but that can't be~ 🌸: *stomps feet and runs to 🐱 sulking* 🐶: tattling! tattling again! ☁️: *walks over to stand by 🌸* 🌸: *tattles to 🐱 while wiping tears* 🐱: *consoles 🌸 and wipes the tears away* 🐶: .... 🐶: so tired... signing for 100 people isn't as tiring as raising/taking care of these two //i need more of my family of 4 drama 😭 it's my favourite show 🥹 SKYNANI FANIVAL WITH U #GMMTVFANIVALxSkyNani #GMMTVFANIVAL2026xSkyNani #skynani #สกายนานิ #SmyleNeonaTwins

𝙚𝙧𝙜𝙤 ✧

42,963 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

After 1,000+ trades, this is the only setup that consistently works in any market condition. It's called liquidity sweep reversal—and it's the highest probability trading strategy I know. Before I show you what it is, here are the two things most traders get wrong with it: 1) They enter too early and get stopped out on the second sweep. 2) They try to predict the LAST sweep with certainty This is a sure-fire way to burn your money. Here's what to do instead: Step 1: Identify market control Look at structure. Higher highs and higher lows? Buyers are in control. We're only trading from demand zones. Step 2: Mark your liquidity zones Find equal lows. When retail sees a "double bottom," they go long because textbooks tell them to. Their stop losses sit right below those lows. Available liquidity for institutions to sweep. Step 3: Wait for the sweep Price drops, sweeps those stops, liquidates retail traders, then creates a sharp V-shaped reaction. This sweep breaks structure. Zoom into 1-hour timeframe - price was making lower highs and lows. After the sweep? Higher highs and higher lows. That sweep zone becomes your institutional demand zone. Step 4: Enter on mitigation Wait for price to pull back to the liquidity zone. Enter there. Stop below the zone. Target 2-3R. Remember: You'll NEVER predict with 100% certainty when it's the LAST liquidity sweep. Sometimes price sweeps 2-3 times before the real move. But that's trading—we trade probabilities, not certainties. Also, keep in mind: If you can't spot the liquidity, you ARE the liquidity. — This is just a breakdown of one of the trading strategies we covered in our 2-hour long cryptocurrency trading course. I also discussed the trend pullback strategy, how to trade breakout retests without getting stopped out on fake moves, and why understanding liquidity is the only way to avoid becoming exit liquidity. Just comment "COURSE" and I'll DM it to you immediately so you can watch it.

The Trading Geek (Brad Goh)

53,996 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Let’s talk about Zipline’s test sites and who we’re hiring for 🧵 They are where elite talent meets 24/7 large scale high volume testing. They’re the engine that helped scale Zipline to the largest autonomous delivery service on earth, 5,000+ autonomous trips around the world and we’re just getting started. Zipline's testing in 2025: 315,000+ test flights 🚀 35,000+ flight hours (480+ straight days of nonstop flying) 🙂‍ 3,000+ flights per day 📈 Our test sites are built to push our system to the max so that we de-risk tomorrow. Each one tackles a different brutal edgecase to make sure the system’s reliability is bulletproof. Our 'engineering test site' in the video I posted is reconfigured every few weeks: new obstacles are added, new flight apps reviewed, new edge cases are tested in any weather condition. Every new software build deploys here first, into live airspace. Our other sites are placed around the U.S. and are focused on testing in severe conditions that ground most if not all other forms of transport. They operate in scorching heat of up to 125 degrees, high-altitudes, intense rainstorms, 60+ mph winds, hail, sleet, and extreme cold-weather, down to -20F. Heavy ice and snow accumulation on propulsion and sensors is the norm. We aggressively chase these conditions in test so we dominate when it really matters. We are now developing 5+ new test sites, each one dialed in to push even more extreme weather and edge conditions. What I am especially proud of is that our safety has kept improving even as flight volume, complexity and environmental hostility increases. We’ve been able to test and develop at a scale that’s unprecedented in aviation history because our teams own a 100% fully vertical tech stack, built hand in hand with our flight and application software teams. We have to have the most robust airspace and fleet management tools on earth because Zipline will soon operate the largest fleet of aircraft on earth. Now to the fun part, we're hiring! DM me or send me an email to marcusZipline.com if you want to join Zipline Test Operations! We're hiring Flight Test Operators, Test Site Operators, Flight Test Electricians, Flight Test Construction Staff, Flight Test Project and Program Managers, Flight Test Engineers, Flight Test Safety Managers, Flight Test Security and, most importantly, Flight and Fleet Application Software Engineers. Please, cut to the chase. We have zero requirements on degrees, formal education or tenure. What counts is what you can do, merit, and what you’ve shown you’re capable of. Highlight that. Let's go!

Marcus Mueller

311,452 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

And Tim Wilson gave us MORE. As if the "Salon" - which is seemingly a predominantly online business 'run' by an 18-year-old, wasn't enough, he gave us this also: See Speers very specific questions: David Speers asked at the #NPC: David Spears from the ABC. Thanks Tim Wilson for your address. The government says there's a whole lot of misinformation around its capital gains tax changes. I wonder if I could ask you to explain the example you just used in your speech. You talked about Sienna who started Tweenyskin five years ago, done well, business has grown. You said half of her profits will be taken by the silent shareholder, the Prime Minister. Can you just explain how that would happen? The government says existing exemptions for small business would remain. So how exactly would Sienna lose half her profit? And here is what goober TIM replied - Remember, NPC rules mean Speers cannot ask another question so Tim's reply goes unchecked. Read this bullshit, or better still, watch him say it. ▓ Skip the bit BETWEEN the bricks ▓ if you are going to watch the video, but read the explanation below. ▓ Tim's reply and its full of shit: Well it depends on when Sienna chooses to opt out of her business and sell it and for what price. I mean she started from her bedroom, her cost structures were zero so of course she's going to have a maximum uplift associated with her businesses. A lot of the people who are setting up businesses are the treasurers out there today spinning a message, as often he does, highlighting existing exemptions for CGT. Most of those are focused at the back end of people's lives, particularly as they head towards retirement and also based on the price at which they sell. I can't tell you what Sienna's going to sell but I can tell you the work, saving and sacrifice and everything they have put into it could, depending on the exit strategy and price, ultimately face up to 47%. But is it possible she could pay no capital gains tax as well? Well I can't give you, we're dealing with hypotheticals, I'm telling you what her story is. It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she's at based on the current application of the law. But there are a lot of small business owners all around the country that are looking at the proposals put in this budget and not just do they think it comes in a tax them, they are looking at it and saying we worked, we sacrificed, we saved, we were there at 2am on a Sunday morning when nobody else was there. And all of a sudden the government, which traditionally takes some of the capital gain, no one's disputing that, is essentially working towards doubling that and in some cases it would be that much. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>▓ 1. The Hypothetical Dodge Tim Wilson explicitly admits his example is hypothetical: "I'm telling you what her story is. It depends on when she decides to exit, it depends on what she sells for, it depends on what stage of life she's at..." Translation: He has no concrete evidence that Sienna (or any small business owner like her) would face a 47% tax under the current or proposed CGT rules. Reality: The government’s proposed changes do not affect small business CGT concessions. Sienna, as a small business owner, would still qualify for: →15-year exemption (100% tax-free if she retires and owned the business for 15+ years). →50% active asset reduction (only 25% of the gain is taxable after discounts). Retirement exemption (up to $500k lifetime exemption). →Roll-over relief (defer CGT by reinvesting). Result: Her effective CGT rate would likely be 0–25%, not 47%. His answer is a word salad to avoid admitting the truth: His example is baseless. 2. The "Silent Shareholder" Myth - Tim claims: "...the government, which traditionally takes some of the capital gain, no one's disputing that, is essentially working towards doubling that and in some cases it would be that much." Reality Check: The current top marginal tax rate is 47% (45% + 2% Medicare levy), but this only applies to salary earners on income over $190k. For small business owners like Sienna: If structured as a company (Probably not she is under 18 or just turned 18, so likely, we will come back to this, 'held' by her ex-beautician mother/family): 25% company tax rate. If selling the business: 0–25% CGT after concessions. No scenario exists where the government takes 47% of her business sale profits under the proposed changes. The "doubling" claim is false. The budget does not double CGT for small businesses. It tightens loopholes for high-income earners (>$450k) and super funds, not small business owners. 3. The Emotional Manipulation Tim leans on melodrama: "...we worked, we sacrificed, we saved, we were there at 2 am on a Sunday morning..." Irrelevant to tax policy. Hard work doesn’t justify false claims about tax rates. Distraction tactic: He avoids the Speers direct question ("How exactly would Sienna lose half her profit?") by appealing to emotion. 4. The Press Club Rules Loophole David Speers couldn’t follow up due to Press Club rules. Tim knew this. He used the format to dodge accountability, knowing he couldn’t be pressed for details. TIM IS SPREADING MISINFORMATION like a PRO COOKER. Quote - Tim Wilson: "We're dealing with hypotheticals"

The Noisy Elephant

25,563 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🙌Meet Artifig: A Figma Plugin to Generate Figma Plugins Do you use Figma and ever feel like this: - Your mind is bursting with plugin ideas, but you can't bring them to life because you don't know how to code? - You want to focus on design, but repetitive tasks keep slowing you down? - You dream of creating custom tools for your team, but lack the time or resources? I’ve been there too. That’s why I created Artifig. ✨ What is Artifig? Artifig is an AI-powered Figma plugin that empowers anyone to build their own Figma plugins using just natural language. No coding needed—simply describe what you want, and watch as your idea transforms into a fully functional, real-time plugin. 🚀 Redefining Figma Plugin Development The core philosophy of Artifig is simple: Designers often have countless ideas and creative visions, but many of them remain unrealized due to a lack of technical skills. We believe designers shouldn’t be limited by their inability to code. You should focus on creating, not be held back by technical barriers or repetitive tasks. Artifig takes you directly from "description" to "implementation." 🛠️ How Does It Work? 1. Describe Your Needs: Tell Artifig what you want, like “Create a skew transformation tool for objects, supporting horizontal and vertical skew with real-time preview functionality.” 2. Generate and Run the Plugin: Artifig instantly generates the plugin and runs it right within Figma. For example, the generated plugin can apply skew transformations to objects, precisely controlled via matrix transformations, with an intuitive user experience. 3. Optimize and Iteration: Need adjustments? Simply describe them, and Artifig will Iterating the plugin step by step. 4. Share Your Creations: Publish your plugins to the Artifig community, or remix plugins shared by others to build on their ideas. No learning curve. No complex steps. It’s as simple as that. 🌟 Key Features - Zero Barrier to Entry: No coding experience needed—any Figma user can create plugins effortlessly. - Multilingual Support: Works in multiple languages, including English, Chinese, French, Japanese, and German. - What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get: Generated plugins run in real-time, so you can quickly validate and refine your ideas. - Open and Flexible: The generated plugin code is 100% yours—modify it, distribute it, even use it commercially. - Global Community: Share your plugins, explore others’ creations, and publish your plugins to the Figma community. 🎯 Why is Artifig a Game-Changer? 1. No More Repetitive Work Let AI handle the tedious, time-consuming tasks: batch renaming layers, auto-aligning elements, or applying styles in bulk. All you need to do is say, “Import a PDF and arrange each image on the canvas with 20px spacing.” 2. Quickly Bring Ideas to Life From color contrast checks to data imports and custom components, all your “what if we could” ideas can now become plugins. Just one natural language description, and Artifig makes it happen. 3. Custom Tools for Your Team Build tailored tools for your team, creating unique solutions to streamline your workflow. 4. Not Just a Tool, But a Learning Experience Artifig explains the logic behind the code it generates, helping you understand Figma APIs and JavaScript. Today, you’re a designer; tomorrow, you could also be a design engineer. 🧑‍🚀👩🏻‍💻🥷🏻 Who is Artifig For? - Beginners: No development experience needed—just describe your ideas and let Artifig do the rest. - Experts: Save time and focus on high-value tasks while Artifig handles the repetitive work. - Learners: Use Artifig as a bridge to deepen your understanding of development. - Teams: Build custom tools to enhance collaboration and efficiency. 🎉 Ready to Get Started? I believe designers’ time and focus should be spent on creating, not on wrestling with complex tools. Artifig is the first step toward realizing this vision. Try Artifig now and experience an unprecedented flow of creativity!

yancymin

21,222 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

What's happening right now in our capital markets is going to DESTROY the retirement savings of millions of Americans. Anyone of good conscience needs to rise up and say enough. This must be stopped. I don't say that lightly. I've been doing this for 45 years, and what's happening right now to the integrity of our capital markets is unlike anything I have ever seen. This is not about Elon Musk or Donald Trump. This is not about whether you like rockets or hate rockets. This is about the systematic CORRUPTION of the financial system that every American depends on for their retirement. In the entirety of its existence, Tesla has generated approximately $36 billion in cumulative profit. That includes over $20 billion in government emission credits and tax subsidies. The company is valued at $1.7 trillion and its CEO is the richest man on the planet. I'm not talking about the stock price. I know the stock has made people money. That's the popularity contest. I'm talking about whether this company creates enough economic value to JUSTIFY the capital invested in it. And it doesn't. The returns on invested capital have been chronically below what any serious investor would demand. That's not wealth creation. So the product here isn't the car. The product is the STOCK PRICE. Elon Musk is selling hopium and an entire generation of investors is buying it without even knowing what a PE ratio is. I posted two pieces recently on Tesla and SpaceX. Each got over 1.5 million impressions. Thousands of hate replies but NOT ONE response with an actual argument. Not one. It was all "Libtard" and "Elon derangement syndrome." You would not get past a first-round interview at Fidelity thinking this way. But Tesla is just the opening act... SpaceX just filed for a $1.75 TRILLION IPO. $15 billion in revenue but no profit in sight. The private valuation was walked up from $200 billion to $400 billion to $800 billion to $1.75 trillion in two years. And Reuters has confirmed that SpaceX made early inclusion in the Nasdaq-100 a necessary condition for listing on the exchange. Nasdaq obliged by adopting a "Fast Entry" rule in March that lets mega-cap IPOs join the index after just 15 trading days, completely exempt from the normal seasoning and liquidity requirements every other company had to meet. And this matters because over $600 billion in passive funds track the Nasdaq-100. Unlike the S&P 500, which still requires months of seasoning and stricter float thresholds, the Nasdaq-100 is now a 15-day on-ramp for trillion-dollar IPOs. Every ETF and mutual fund benchmarked to that index will be FORCED to buy SpaceX within weeks of it going public regardless of whether the valuation makes any sense. Your 401(k) is literally the exit liquidity. You don't even get a choice. The structure of the market makes you a participant whether you want to be or not. That's what makes this different from every other bubble in history... You can't opt out. And the agencies that were supposed to protect you from exactly this? They're doing NOTHING. Peter Lynch would always say the product is not the stock and the stock is not the product. Show me one Hall of Fame investor who ever made his fortune chasing hype. Lynch, Druckenmiller, Soros, Buffett, Griffin, Cohen. Not one of them managed money this way. It's only the cult on X who thinks momentum and greater fool is an investment strategy. As Buffett said, in the short run the market is a popularity contest. In the long run it's a weighing machine. This popularity contest has gone on longer than any I've witnessed in my career. But gravity always wins. And when it does, the people who forced your pension fund into a money-losing rocket company at 120x revenue will have a lot of explaining to do. This must stop. And it WILL stop. The only question is how much damage gets done first. Are you listening?

George Noble

192,473 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

A study proved that $40 million was extracted from Polymarket in one year using a single mathematical formula I found a wallet that is using it right now on Iran war markets and made $1.4M in one week. Most people on Polymarket try to predict the future. Will there be a war. Who will win the election. What will happen next. I spent months doing the same thing. Reading news. Watching debates. Building my little models of what I thought should happen. And losing money. Not because I was wrong about events. Because I was wrong about the game itself. The game is not about predictions. And the wallet I'm about to show you is living proof. Three weeks ago I pulled the full trade history of this wallet: What I saw at first didn't make sense. He was opening the same market more than 30 times. US strikes Iran by January 11. US strikes Iran by January 12. January 13. January 14. January 15. January 16. January 17. The same event. Different dates. Over and over. First thought: this person is obsessed with Iran. Second thought: this person doesn't care about Iran at all. Here's what he's actually doing. Polymarket creates separate markets for the same event with different deadlines. Will the US strike Iran by March. By April. By June. These are not independent questions. If the strike happens in March then April and June automatically resolve to YES as well. But Polymarket prices each market separately. And the crowd prices them emotionally. Fear spikes on Tuesday night because someone tweeted something. One market jumps. The others lag behind. For a few minutes and sometimes hours prices on related markets stop converging. When you buy NO across multiple dates and the total cost is 94 cents and the guaranteed payout is $1 regardless of what happens you're not betting. You're collecting a 6% return on mathematical inevitability. That's the entire strategy. He buys dollars for 94 cents. I checked his numbers. On the Iran series alone he pulled $247,000 in realized profit across seven markets with different dates. Average purchase price of NO positions from 72 to 95 cents. Each one resolved at $1. The biggest hit was the government shutdown market. $88,000 in profit. Same logic. Buy both sides when the total cost is less than a dollar. One side pays. Math does the rest. 85% of his capital is in political markets. Wars. Elections. Geopolitics. Not because he has strong geopolitical convictions. Because political markets on Polymarket are where the math breaks most often. Why political markets specifically? Because they generate the most emotion. When CNN runs breaking news about Iran at 11 PM thousands of people rush to buy YES on the nearest date. They overbid the price. They panic. They push one market out of line with the rest. That panic is his paycheck. And now the part that actually matters. I dug deeper into how this type of arbitrage works at scale and found a study that made everything click. A team analyzed every trade on Polymarket over 12 months. They found 17,218 market conditions. 41% of them had an exploitable pricing error. And the total profit extracted by arbitrageurs was $40 million. The top single wallet made $2 million using one algorithm. The Frank-Wolfe method. I'll explain without math because the concept is simple even if the calculations aren't. Imagine you walk into a store that sells lottery tickets for 7 different drawings. Each ticket is priced separately. The store doesn't coordinate prices between drawings. You notice that if you buy a certain combination of tickets across all 7 drawings the total cost is $94 but you're guaranteed to win exactly $100 no matter which drawing hits. You don't need to predict which drawing will win. You just need to notice that the store mispriced the tickets. Here's Frank-Wolfe in one sentence. It scans thousands of related markets simultaneously and finds combinations where the total price is less than the guaranteed payout. Then it calculates the exact amounts to buy on each side to maximize the spread. The reason a human can't do this manually is scale. There are hundreds of active markets on Polymarket. Many are connected by logic. If event A happens then event B must also happen. If candidate X wins state Y then the national result shifts. The number of possible combinations grows exponentially. While you're checking 10 markets by hand the algorithm has scanned 17,000. What anoin123 does is a manual version of this. He picks one cluster of related markets like the Iran date series and runs the logic in his head. Buy NO across seven dates. Total cost less than a dollar. Wait. Collect. The automated version does the same thing but across all markets on the platform simultaneously. My personal takeaway after three weeks of studying this. I spent months trying to be smarter than the crowd. Reading polls. Watching news. Forming opinions. And the whole time there was a category of traders who had zero opinions about anything. They just waited for the crowd to misprice related markets and collected the difference. The uncomfortable realization is that prediction markets are not actually about predictions for those who make the most money. They're about math. And the math breaks every day because people trade on emotions and the platform prices markets independently of each other. I don't have the infrastructure to run Frank-Wolfe at scale. But I don't need to. Wallets like anoin123 do this in plain sight. Every trade on the blockchain. Every entry price. Every exit. Every timestamp. I stopped trying to predict events. I started watching wallets that make money regardless of what happens. The difference in my results is so stark it's uncomfortable to think about. If you want to understand the full math behind this the study is publicly available. Search for Arbitrage in Prediction Markets on arXiv. But the short version is this. Every time the crowd panics about a war or an election and pushes one market out of line with its related markets someone on the other side quietly buys dollars for 94 cents. The question is not whether they'll strike Iran. The question is whether you noticed that seven markets about the same event are priced as if they have nothing to do with each other. That gap is where the money lives.

Blaze

31,373 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

"I'm not sure that we need the dog whistle at this point. And maybe there are ways to re-create it." ~Nolan "There might be a day when Skywatcher doesn't need to exist." ~Nolan "If I had been running the whole show, nobody would even know what Skywatcher is right now." ~Nolan ~My comments in ( )~ Garry P. Nolan: "We've got a lot of data from multiple alleged sightings, both radar and other kinds of data. First it was about getting the raw-data files all put in one place because some of the data was collected by James (Fowler) before there was, officially, kind of a Skywatcher. "And so, getting that data, getting the instrument names that he used for those, then getting the technical manuals of what the settings might be and how much of that information is collected in the metadata when you're collecting the thing... All of this is just the organization that you need to do before you do anything else. "And then, getting from the companies how it is that they parse their raw data. Because some of these data files are put into...I wouldn't call them encrypted, but they're stacked into a certain kind of file structure - and I've seen the file structure - which is, you can think of it as a giant spreadsheet with headings and numbers for each of the columns and time on the row axis. "And so, you know, we've started looking at some of the data and put it into, let's say, 3D tracking. And it's clear that there are some things about the data that we needed to go back to the vendor who makes the instrument and say, 'Why is this and this and this happening, you know, every few dozen milliseconds?'" (I wonder if some of what they saw in their data, and labelled as anomalous, has maybe turned out to be a sensor artifact?) Nolan: "And so, you know, just getting an answer from these companies, often, when you don't even own the instrument, they're like, 'Well, why should we give you the information about how our data is constructed? How do we know that you're not a competitor?' Right? I mean, and so these are the kinds of things that we then contact somebody who has a behind-the-scenes access to this so that we can, again, it's all of these little steps. "And I'm sure there's somebody who's gonna tweet, 'Well, why don't you just put all the raw data out on the internet?' For exactly the same reason you don't put the raw data from ancient DNA sequencing. Because people will make mistakes about it. And so, if I'm going to be involved, I'm not gonna make any mistakes like that. So I'm sorry if people want stuff early. "I think you know, perhaps, if... Well, if I had been running the whole show, nobody would even know what Skywatcher is right now. We'd just be collecting the data in a fully-stealthed mode. And...but, you know, it's...there's reasons, good reasons, why they wanted some publicity. And, you know, but I don't always get my way." Vinnie - 𝐕𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐞 𝐀𝐝𝐚𝐦𝐬 𝕏: "Would you say that the data is exciting?" Nolan: "Oh, there's some interesting stuff in there. I mean, frankly, perhaps some of the better data that we have is just a couple of pictures from the ground of the helicopter with something about, you know, 200 feet in front of it. It's a clear blue sky and there's an object right in front of the helicopter. And the people in the helicopter said at the time that they couldn't see anything, even though we could see it from the ground. "But meanwhile, all of their instruments are going haywire. So, there was an effect. So why couldn't they see it? Maybe it was just out of view? Who knows? So it wasn't a lens flare, and it certainly wasn't a seagull. Mick (both laugh)." Vinnie: "Not in the desert anyway." Nolan: "I can't help myself." Vinnie: "I'm all for it. I'm sure Mick would, too. Hopefully. You know, James Fowler, we know he's left and moved on working with a new company. You know, all the best to him. Am I right in saying some of the technology being utilized by Skywatcher was proprietary to him, specifically? Maybe the dog whistle even? Is that still going to be able to be used by Skywatcher? How's that going to look going forward?" Nolan: "Umm, I'm not sure that we need the dog whistle at this point. And maybe there are ways to recreate it. I'm not party to the discussions around that. And so, we'll see where that goes." (That sounds like Fowler is NOT going to allow Skywatcher to use the dog whistle. That's a big disappointment. I mean, if this is really NHI and the dog whistle works 100% of the time, as claimed, then the whole world deserves to know about it.) Nolan: "I mean, James is not like, gone and forgotten. I mean, I could Signal chat him right now. And so he's there to help us. But, you know, my take on things is, you know, James has a life to live and a family to feed, and maybe his focus isn't entirely on UAP. He certainly has an interest in it. And maybe he has, you know, a company to build, and an opportunity that, actually, we all see now in terms of detecting drones. And, you know, if he wants to run a company like that then running around with a bunch of UAPologists might not be to that benefit. "And there might be a day when Skywatcher doesn't need to exist. The whole idea of Skywatcher is to show that something like this can be done, and it can be done in a serious way." (jakebarber claimed that they could BRING DOWN a craft. If that's true, it would change the world. What happened with that? Barber also said, "Who is operating [UAP]? How are they being operated? Where are they coming from? We should be able to answer those questions, probably entirely, in the next 12 months." Time is running out. Does he still stand behind that? Full Barber post with video clip: ) ~ Nolan: "I mean, I would...I, frankly, hope that if UAPDA - Disclosure Act is passed, because then the information that can be allowed to be out can be let out, and the stuff that needs to be kept secret stays secret. Again, I'm not, I would never advocate for a data dump." (I would 100% advocate for a data dump, minus details on anything that can be used as a weapon. Nobody, including the USG or private contractors owns this information. If it's gonna be a slow drip, for decades, then I fully support an Edward Snowden-type of leaker.) Nolan: "And so, you know, call it controlled disclosure, what have you. It needs to be done the proper way. And, you know, if any of the claims are true, there are reasons why you want to be methodical about it." (Who gets to decide what "the proper way" looks like? It seems like we're having more gatekeeping on top of the original gatekeeping. Not good.)

Joe Murgia

32,437 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

"If [Ross] had phrased it like that in the N2K segment, I think most people wouldn't have pushed back so hard." ~Murgia Lockheed, Landing Drones, Stupor, and Trump Did think this would be another LAP (Long-Ass Post), but here it is. Ross Coulthart: "It's been a very interesting week with the public response to the comments that I've made on the show that I do with my friend and colleague,Bryce Zabel, "Need to Know," where we discussed what I've been told by my sources, multiple sources, by the way, that Lockheed Martin was indeed behind the Tic Tac encounter of 2004 with the USS Nimitz battle carrier group." Let's rewind: This is what Ross and Bryce said on the @Coulthart_Zabel episode uploaded on July 6th. My comments in ( ). Ross: "I now know, categorically, that the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin technology. Categorically." Bryce: "Ooookay." Ross: "The Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin technology. Why are we being lied to? This is the issue. Why is the United States government now participating - at White-House, executive level, in collusion with the national-security state - to keep secret the fact that they've made these advances? I suspect it's because they've realized that they're being overtaken by their foreign adversaries, and they don't want you to know that." Bryce: "Okay, the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin. Well, in some respects, given how insane the Tic Tac behaved during the Nimitz, where it went from 80,000 feet to sea level in less than a second, then I would say, well there's one for the U.S. team. Obviously, we have some good stuff out there, if that's the case, right?" Ross: "How much of that is being shared with the actual Defense Department that's responsible for the defense of the United States? This is the kind of questions that Congress should be asking." Bryce: "So you're saying Lockheed Martin might - or anybody, but Lockheed Martin in this particular case - has a Tic Tac that they are testing, and have been testing, and have access to." (One can argue that when Bryce said LM has a Tic Tac that they've been testing, that could include the possibility that it's an NHI craft they somehow acquired and not something they built. That would go against my "Ross is flip flopping" allegation.) Bryce: "But they might not have shared it with the Defense Department of the United States? Which probably paid for it in their trillion-dollar budgets. That's kind of mind-blowing in itself." Ross: "Those are the questions I think Congress should be asking. I mean, what I'm saying, basically, is..." Bryce: "Why are you saying this, by the way? Where did you? Where is this from? How do we know this? What's going on?" Ross: "I'm...I'm sorry, Bryce, I can't go there." ~ Bryce: "Frankly, the only major row that you and I have ever had, which was over eminent domain, and who can... Is it not possible that that legislation has eminent domain in it as an issue that the government would be able to go seize potential things from private enterprise, if the government, in fact, thought that Lockheed Martin had a Tic Tac? Wouldn't we want to go seize it?" Ross: "Bloody hell we would. Exactly. But that hasn't happened. And, you know, I can tell you, David Grusch has told them exactly where to look. Jake Barber has told them exactly where to look. This is why I just found it, in many ways, I find it absurd that we're still debating the issue whether the NHI technology recovery is real. Of course it's real!" (I think/suspect it's real. But if I'm gonna play journalist, I need to see proof before I say, "Of course it's real!" Or, "I know it's real." Walk me into the building and show me. I don't think this has happened with Ross so a debate is still warranted, IMO.) Bryce: "This thing you just said about Lockheed Martin. Is this the first time you've said that in public, or have you said that before?" Ross: "Look, there's been speculation for a while that it's Lockheed Martin, but I'm now very, very sure that it was Lockheed Martin. And I think the Tic Tac is part of two, at least two different platforms that Lockheed's been working on. Different platforms that they've been working on. And it's technology that, until very recently, most of Congress was completely unaware of." (To me, that sounds like Ross is saying, that whatever LM is working on, they built it.) Bryce: "Well, I just hope, if there's a war with China or a war with NHI, I just hope Lockheed Martin remembers who helped pay for it, and they're on our side. That's what I would say." Ross: "Well, I hope they are. I don't think we can have any expectation, though, unless the public demands answers, that we're going to get the truth." Full post here: ~And more from yesterday's "Reality Check"~ @MeaganOurada reads a question: "You recently mentioned the Tic Tac was a produced/manufactured by Lockheed Martin, but you never mentioned if it was under autonomous flight or piloted." (This shows that others took Ross's original comments as LM manufacturing a Tic Tac and not figuring out how to fly an NHI Tic Tac that they somehow had acquired.) Ross: "That's a good question, and I'll be honest with you, I don't know for sure." (Here was a chance for Ross to say, "I didn't mean to suggest it was 100% produced/manufactured by Lockheed, just that it was one possibility. The other is they operated a NHI Tic Tac that they had acquired.) Ross: "I have been told previously that when Tic Tacs... You see, one of the other things I want to clarify here as well is, there are NHI Tic Tacs." (We don't know that for sure, and later on, Ross adds that they are "suspected" to be NHI.) Ross: "A lot of people seem to be thinking that I'm suggesting that all Tic Tacs are Lockheed Martin. That's not the case at all." (A few people who follow me thought that but I think the overwhelming majority realize that Ross didn't say that.) Ross: "What I was told, and I'm reasonably sure that this is the case, is that Tic Tac was being operated by Lockheed Martin, and it's conceivable that that was being operated neuro-meditatively, psionically, by a human psionic, which is what I understand, is the way that these retrieved, non-human craft are being operated." ("Reasonably sure" and "operated," is different than what he said on N2K: "I now know, categorically, that the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin technology. Categorically." I think most people took that as: "I now now, categorically, that Lockheed built a Tic Tac and that's what Fravor chased in 2004." That's why you saw such a pushback from people on social media.) Ross: "It's not clear to me, though, whether this is a craft that was built by Lockheed Martin, or whether it is Lockheed Martin testing the use of neuro-meditative signaling, as our friends at Skywatcher called it, to operate one of these craft. I just can't answer that question, specifically." (If Ross would have said this in the N2K episode and didn't use the word, "categorically," I think the reaction would have been, "Oh, that's interesting." I'm still skeptical that Lockheed has ANY role in the 2004 Tic Tac incident but I'll keep my mind open.) Ross: "All I can do is tell you what I've been told by my multiple sources, which is that the operation of the Tic Tac was being controlled, on the day, by Lockheed Martin." (Again, if he had phrased it like that in the N2K segment, I think most people wouldn't have pushed back so hard. I hope humans have developed the ability to control a Tic Tac and make it perform like what was reported on November 14th, 2004. But, again, I'm skeptical. The SPY-1 radar on the USS Princeton tracked objects for a week or so, leading up to the encounter Fravor and the others had with the Tic Tac. Were all of those objects LM-controlled craft? Seems unlikely. In 2019, at UFO MegaCon, Kevin Day said that on around November 10th, he started witnessing these strange tracks on his radar scope. He wasn’t really concerned with them because there was a lot of air traffic off the coast of California and they were a significant ways from the strike group. So they just monitored them and reporting them to 'higher authorities' and maintained track of them. They stood out and were anomalous because they were at 28,000 feet and going at 100 knots. Day said that was, 'extremely bizarre.' His entire job was to identify stuff and he had no idea what these were. None. Radar was shut down so they could do an extensive diagnostics to make sure it was working and these were real contacts. They were. ~ Just going through all the possibilities I can think of.... Did LM "hijack" or summon one of those craft, psychically, and "make it" have an encounter with Fravor and Friends? Or, maybe none of the above? Maybe it was a NHI craft and had nothing to do with LM? Remember, Fravor said it looked like it might be docking with a submerged object, so maybe that's why it was in that specific area? To me, that suggests NHI.) Ross: "Now I want to say here, let's be really clear about this: There is always the possibility that sources that talk to a journalist like me may be maligned. They may indeed be running some kind of psyop." (I know he has said that kind of thing in the past but I wish Ross had reiterated that point in the N2K segment. I have heard from a few people who think that's exactly what's happening here. And also, if his sources are so sure LM was involved and "operating" a Tic Tac, to me, it would make sense that they would also know whether it was a Tic Tac LM acquired or...a Tic Tac LM manufactured, based on reverse engineering the real thing.) Ross: "And of course I've taken that (disinformation/psyop) into consideration in asking the question. The difficulty is, I can't go into the detail, for very obvious reasons, about who these sources are and why I think so strongly that those sources are telling me the truth. And I can tell you, there are a lot of people who are assuring me that I'm flat wrong. And that's fine. But let's have a discussion about this." (Well now that "categorically" seems be to off the table, we can discuss it. BTW, back in 2019 on my blog, Dave Beaty 🇺🇦 and I discussed the possibility that the Tic Tac was human tech. I know others have discussed that, too, so it's not a new idea.) ~Ross then switches gears to the drones~ Ross: "And also, let's talk about what I think was actually another of the major points that I was trying to make in the course of that conversation I had with Bryce. Which is that there is an obvious contradiction between what the White House has said - that these were FAA-authorized drones operating [in] the continental United States in November, December, January - and what the U.S. Air Force has said. Which is two senior generals, one former, one serving commander of NORTHCOM, NORAD, responsible for the defense of the United States northern aerospace, stated categorically, on the record, that they have no idea who is responsible for those drone craft that were hovering over the continent of the United States. That's an obvious, logical contradiction." (In the March 16th episode of 60 Minutes with Bill Whitaker., we learned... Retired four-star general, Mark Kelly, went up to the roof and saw drones over Langley, from the size of a quadcopter up to the size of a small car. General Glen VanHerck (now retired) is the former commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM and told "60 Minutes" that we can't track the drones over Langley or see where they originated. "It's a capability gap. Certainly, they can come and go from any direction. The FBI is looking at potential options but they don't have an answer right now." General Gregory Guillot is the current commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM and told "60 Minutes," that, "the threat got ahead of our ability to detect and track the threat." Could we detect drones flying into Langley today? "At low altitude, probably not, with your standard FAA or surveillance radars. I don't think we know entirely what happened. It is alarming." And, as I've (Joe) been saying forever, a big problem was/is the rules of engagement that detail when and how you can shoot down drones. VanHerk: "It's been one year since Langley had their drone incursion and we don't have the policies and laws in place to deal with this? That's not a sense or urgency.") ~ Ross: "And if the president, think about this... If the president...it's actually a good point that actually supports the possibility that I might, in fact, be right, and that my sources are in fact telling me the truth. If the president is telling the American public they don't need to worry about these drones - drones which we know are operating anomalously, with anomalous characteristics - then what the hell is going on? It implies he's been briefed. (Okay, what Ross is saying here: If you combine the president telling us not to worry about the drones, along with these drones making anomalous maneuvers, it bolsters his claim that LM (and others) has advanced tech that can also be used in drone tech. And that the president has been briefed about this advanced tech. But the problem with that line of thinking is, when you look at what eyewitnesses have said about the drones (or whatever they were), in 99% of the cases, the only anomalous behavior was their ability avoid detection and go stealth. That's the low observability part of the UAP five observables that Lue Elizondo popularized. But no 90-degree turns or anything like that. I don't think anything the generals or Trump said bolsters the idea that Lockheed was involved with the Tic Tac in 2004.) Ross: "Just to add more smoke to the fire, earlier on today, I had a message from a guy in New Jersey who has seen one of these drones land in a New Jersey backyard. He was illegally pointing a laser beam at one of these drones, which you should not do. Naughty. Even if they are NHI or whatever they are." (I wish Ross had said, "a guy in New Jersey who CLAIMS he has seen one of these drones land." Ross was in Barcelona when recording this episode of Reality Check so there was no time for him to vet this story. It's such an outlier from everything else we have heard about the drones that I think we should remain skeptical about if it actually happened. Does this person have photos or videos? Are there any other eyewitnesses?) Ross: "This is what he told me: "I was beaming [the drones] one night around midnight, and the one flew straight over my backyard, stopped slightly above, and to my left, and seemed to sink down into the trees along the little street on the side of my house. The next thing I see is this rectangle-looking, box-like thing floating just above the street, about the size of an old Ford station wagon. It was the most incredible, starkly-lit thing I've ever seen. I've never seen colors so radiant, so intensely liquid-like in my life. Several shades of blues with oranges and yellows like intense neon lights. "'It scared the hell out of me, and I moved away from the window so it couldn't see me. I slowly poked my head around the window, and it followed every move I made. It knew I was watching it. I would pull back and it came up the street. I would move into the window and it moved back down the street. It was like we were synchronized, and I was completely freaked out to the point that I quickly ran into my kitchen and considered hiding under my sink, of all things. I found myself in some sort of stupor, like I was being drugged, confused and slowed down. So I went to my bedroom and got my point two five, and just laid back in bed. I awoke the next morning, still holding the pistol.' ~End Alleged Eyewitness Account in NJ~ Ross: "Something really anomalous that has no visible means of propulsion is landing in New Jersey, and your president is telling you he's not concerned about it. Yet, two generals responsible for the defense of the United States aerospace are telling you they're concerned about it, and they don't know what these objects are. Why is the president not concerned? And why are two U.S. Air Force generals, presumably, not briefed into what the president is briefed into? Think about that." (Allegedly landed in NJ. I don't think Trump knows more than the generals, and I don't think he was briefed into a program that they were left out in the cold on.) ~~~ @MeaganOurada reads another question: "Even if Ross seems confident that Tic Tac is U.S. tech, does he think it's a reverse engineering tech from NHI, or a tech 100% created by humans?" Ross: "As I've mentioned earlier, we're not saying all Tic Tacs are Lockheed Martin. And it's quite clear that some Tic Tacs are indeed non-human intelligence, or suspected to be non-human intelligence. But what we're talking about are objects that are showing the five observables, doing maneuvers and operating in ways that don't conform to terrestrial craft. "I can't answer the question, definitively, whether they are constructed by Lockheed Martin, or whether it's Lockheed Martin operating a recovered, retrieved craft." (Again, if he had said that in the N2K segment, there may have been less pushback. Did his sources not explain that aspect of the claim? Pretty important detail.) Ross: "Because what I've been told, and what jakebarber told me in the interview that you've all watched, hopefully, on NewsNation, is that there have been retrievals of craft, including Tic Tacs. So, why is it a surprise to people that a contractor, that I'm alleging is directly involved in the Legacy program, is involved in operating these craft." (Because when Ross spoke about this the first time, he made no mention of LM OPERATING the Tic Tac in the 2004 incident . If he didn't mean that Lockheed had BUILT or MANUFACTURED it, he should have made that clear. He must understand this.) Ross: "And moreover, why would we necessarily expect that people, even those flying in the carrier battle group, would actually know about this or be briefed into this?" (We didn't, and don't, expect that, and have been discussing it for the last 6 or so years.) Ross: "It would have been a really good idea if they were going to test this technology against the carrier battle group, to have let the people know." (Which people? How many? Fravor said they had around 6000 people on the Nimitz and Princeton, combined. If it was SAP-level, classified technology, they would've had to read all those people into the program before the test. Not realistic, IMO.) Ross: "And I think people need to be reminded that my good friend, Kevin Day, who I know disputes the possibility that the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin... In my book, Kevin Day told me - and he said this in many, many interviews - that when, I think it was the admiral in charge of the carrier battle group, was told about the Tic Tac, he didn't seem very alarmed. Why not? Why aren't people asking these questions? Why was the commander of a carrier battle fleet - that was suffering incursions by anomalous objects doing the five observables during a hugely important and sensitive naval exercise - why wasn't he concerned about those craft? Think about it." (When I met Keven in 2019, he left the door slightly open to the possibility that it was our tech. And I can't find anything about an admiral onboard the Princeton in Ross's book, "In Plain Sight." The only thing that resembles that claim is this excerpt about the captain. I also wrote about the captain in my blog in 2019.) From In Plain Sight... Kevin Day recalls asking his captain on the Princeton afterwards what he thought the object was. 'He told me, “I think the objects were spontaneously forming ice falling from space”.’ Day laughs at the absurdity of such a conclusion. His captain left him with the clear impression he knew a lot more than he was letting on about the phenomenon." From My Blog in 2019... "November 14th, they’re doing air defense exercises, also known as ADEX. Day pulls Captain Smith aside and tells him about the contacts that he and the others had been tracking and that he’s worried about 'safety of flight' because they could have a mishap with one of these craft as they conduct their exercises. Day highly recommended that they go check them out. Smith agreed and told him to take the Fast Eagle flight and 'go get ‘em.' Day said, “in the back of my mind, I was like, hell yeah! We’re going to intercept these things!” (audience laughs) It turned out to be his very last intercept in the Navy." (So, apparently, the captain WAS concerned leading up to the encounter. More from my 2019 blog...) "Voorhis shared that his captain had started a rumor that the objects were spontaneously forming ice in the atmosphere. He said he and his buddies would all sit there, smoke and say, 'Yeah, right.'" (For me, none of that is enough to suggest that the captain knew LM or some other humans/military/USG were behind the Tic Tac events. Maybe the captain thought it was something alien but didn't want the sailors to lose focus for their upcoming role in Iraqi Freedom? Or, maybe he was scared of the possibility of a non-human intelligence among us? I don't know. I'm not positive, but I think Ryan Graves mentioned one of his superiors giving a muted reaction to some of the UAP events they were facing on the East Coast.) ~ "Commander David Fravor responded to me: the Tic Tac 'was not Lockheed Martin', according to him. He seemed very confident and matter-of-fact." ~Jesse Michels Ross: "Let me first say I have nothing but admiration for David Fravor. He's given service to his country, he's a patriot, and he deserves respect and recognition for that. I'm not getting involved in a stash with a person who's done so much, honorably, for his country. It's not, though, outside the realm of possibilities. In fact, I think it would be extremely unlikely that, if there is, as I know there is, a compartmented, secret program where Lockheed Martin is one of the primary contractors operating retrieved, non-human technology and attempting to reverse engineer that technology, there is absolutely no way that David would be briefed into that, unless it was absolutely necessary for the doing of his job." (I've been saying this for several years and I agree 100%.) Ross: "As we all know, when the government wants to protect a secret, it compartmentalizes it. Even if you have a Top-Secret classification - which I'm sure David probably had - it's also compartmentalized. And that's how the U.S. keeps its secrets. And I've spoken to people, literally in institutions in the United States, one of whom knows about the program, and the other of whom is in an adjoining office and has absolutely no idea. "I've had a situation where I've spoken to the head of a government agency that ought properly to have known about the Legacy program. That head of a government agency was not informed about the fact that we are recovering non-human craft and attempting to reverse engineer that technology." (Journalistically speaking, I would say, "The head of a government agency was not informed about the CLAIM that we are recovering non-human craft." No way for Ross to know that's a fact unless he's been read in to the program to see for himself. Belief? Yes. Knowing? No. I harp on this all the time and it's a pet peeve of mine because I think it's important.) Ross: "A person two rungs down was the person that the Legacy program was using to gate keep inside that institution. It's really interesting how they compartmentalize all of this. And so, absolutely no disrespect to David Fravor or my good friend, Kevin Day, but they're good men. The simple fact is, compartmentalization works." (Again, I agree 100%. If Admiral Wilson, the vice director of intelligence, and deputy director of the DIA, was denied access, then there's a very good chance David Fravor was, too.)

Joe Murgia

22,656 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The Weapon of the Aliens, UAP, Havana, and a Breakthrough "This is the biggest cover-up I've seen in my adult life." ~High-Level CIA Source to "60 Minutes" "The Soviet scientists took apart the recovered craft and discovered a very advanced directed energy weapon." ~Dr. Eric Davis "We wanna be able to develop this technology, what we call, The Weapon of the Aliens." ~Russian Scientist to Knapp "This is a massive CIA cover-up." ~Former CIA Officer Marc Polymeropoulos "I've never seen, in thirty-plus years of practicing military medicine, victims treated in such a terrible manner, and I just wanna offer my apologies to you." ~Retired Major General, Dr. Paul Friedrichs (reportedly) "...there are likely many of these devices, and if undercover agents could purchase one from gangsters, then the Russians have lost control of a stealth weapon that can be used by anyone, anywhere." ~Pelley "We don’t think [the Skinwalker Ranch injury] has anything to do with UAPs. We think that that’s some sort of a state actor and again related to Havana syndrome somehow." ~Nolan ~ Is There a Connection Between UFOs and Havana Syndrome? But First: Highlights of the "60 Minutes" excellent double segment on Havana Syndrome from last night. "Some in the CIA believe that a microwave weapon must be the size of a truck." ~Scott Pelley But then... "Undercover Homeland Security agents purchased a miniaturized microwave weapon from a complex, Russian criminal network. It's classified, we didn't see it, but it has been described to us. We are told it doesn't look anything like a gun. It's designed to be concealed and small enough to be carried by a person. It is silent and doesn't create heat like a microwave over." ~Scott Pelley (Just a fast comparison to the UFO topic. Reportedly, the weapon is classified but CBS was able to report on what they were told regarding what it looks like, the dimensions, and the details of what it can do. There's no reason why we can't hear details about what is shown in classified UFO videos, and Rep. Eric Burlison has started to do that.) Pelley: "Our sources say the device is programmable for different scenarios, and can be operated by remote control. The range of the beam is several hundred feet. It can penetrate windows, and drywall. The vital components were made in Russia. Our sources say the key is not the hardware but the software. The programming shapes a unique, electromagnetic wave, that rises and falls abruptly, and pulses rapidly." Stanford University's Dr. David Relman's research, "found that Russian scientists had been perfecting the concept for decades." (I can't help at least consider the possibility that they may have back engineered that tech from an anomalous source. More on that later.) ~ Relman: "What the Russians spoke about was the importance of the energy being pulsed, in order to have biological effects on humans. When you produce pulses like this, you can actually stimulate electrically-active tissue, like brain tissue, and the heart for that matter, mimicking what the brain normally does. But now you're driving it with your pulses from the outside." Pelley: "An ideal stealth weapon." Relman. "Ideal. Ideal. Because, literally, the person feels as if this is in my head." ~ Pelley: "Our confidential sources tell us the still-classified weapon has been tested in a U.S. military lab for more than a year. Tests on rats and sheep show injuries consistent with those seen in humans. "Also, as a separate part of the investigation, security-camera videos have collected that show Americans being hit. The videos are classified but they were described to us." (Watch the clip for details on that. Again, classified videos being described, and a news outlet reporting on what they were told. That should be happening more in our UFO world.) Relman: "These folks in the Biden White House believed these [victims], and believed that their injuries were not caused by known medical or environmental conditions the way the CIA was asserting." Pelley: "A high-level CIA source has told us, and this is a direct quote: 'This is the biggest cover-up I've seen in my adult life.' The CIA experts had made up their minds that, "nothing in the scientific literature will support the idea that microwave energy can do things like this." ~ Pelley: "Our sources tell us that the Biden White House wrote a public statement backing the victims, but never released it. So far, the Trump administration has not changed the words in the 2023 intelligence assessment that it is very unlikely that victims were attacked. "But our sources also tell us, the Trump administration has briefed top intelligence officials in Congress, and shown them a classified picture of the weapon. We're told, at the Pentagon, people who had investigated the attacks for the Department of Defense have been moved to a unit that develops new weapons." (More weapons. Yay! Why Cover It Up?) "If we acknowledge that this is a state actor that was doing this, it is, essentially, a declaration of war against the United States, which has to have a response from the United States government. In my opinion, I don't know that the appetite was there to respond to the Russians, at that time." ~Former CIA Officer Pelley: "The Office of Director of National Intelligence (Gabbard), which oversees 18 agencies, including the CIA, told us that a new review of AHI (Anomalous Health Incidents) will be 'comprehensive and complete,' and, 'we remain committed to delivering the truth.' The victims are waiting. "The sources who informed our reporting told us the classified mission to obtain the microwave weapon points to a troubling reality. They say there are likely many of these devices, and if undercover agents could purchase one from gangsters, then the Russians have lost control of a stealth weapon that can be used by anyone, anywhere." ~ ~The UFO Connection?~ (A few years ago, we heard Lue Elizondo say that there MIGHT be a correlation between UAP and Havana Syndrome.) Elizondo: "There's some interesting, what we would perceive - we...myself, and several colleagues - some interesting correlations (between UAP and Havana Syndrome) there. I'm not prepared to elaborate right now. I simply cannot. [It] will be addressed in time. What I don't want people to think is that, 'Havana Syndrome, it equals UAP!' Not necessarily, we're not there yet. There does seem to be some correlation but we don't...we're not prepared right now to really, to go into any detail because, right now, a lot of it's just theoretical." Source: That was two years ago. ~ (I'm going to include three stories connected to the Soviet Union/Russia, even though some don't seem to be connected to Havana. This is also from two years ago. ⬇️ ) George Knapp: "One of the people we interviewed in Russia - the first trip I was there in 1993 - was a Russian scientist who worked on the equivalent of their Star Wars program. He had never spoken to a journalist. He hadn't used his real name in public. And he came forward...and spoke to us. "And he showed me...he had this funny looking thing sitting on the table when we came into the room where we interviewed him. And he had been living in one of these Star City places that didn't exist on a map, for his whole career, working on advanced weapon systems. "And he showed me this little tabletop thing, he called it The Weapon of the Aliens, and he pressed a button, and this beam burned a hole, instantaneously, in a razor blade. He said, 'This is what we're working on. We wanna be able to develop this technology, what we call, The Weapon of the Aliens, We know that the Americans are working on it as well. We wanna beat you to the punch.'" (This doesn't sound like the Havana-Syndrome weapon described to "60 Minutes" but maybe it was just in the early stages of development? Or, not related at all.) Source: ~~~ From, "The Age of Disclosure." Dr. Eric Davis: "We have seen highly-credible, U.S. government intelligence on the Soviet recovery of a crashed UAP in 1989. They recovered a Tic Tac-shaped UAP that was twice as big as the Tic Tac that was encountered by the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group, and they did recover four bodies of humanoid aliens. The important claim... ⬇️⬇️⬇️ Dr. Eric Davis: "The Soviet scientists took apart the recovered craft and discovered a very advanced directed energy weapon." (Knapp says he interviewed the Russian scientist in 1993. If they had acquired "The Weapon of the Aliens" in 1989, maybe they had achieved some limited success in back engineering it by the time Knapp conducted that interview? Also, as my friend suggested/speculated about: Maybe the "aliens" crashed on purpose and wanted humans to have this type of weapon so we would wreak havoc on each other? Yes, that's speculation. Is there any more information on the alleged Russian crash? Yes. In 2024, Davis was interviewed at the SOL conference.) Dr. Eric Davis: "Russia is one that had some crash retrievals, and that's been released when the Soviet Union fell, KGB opened up the files, George Knapp went there, other people went there, found the Thread 3 documents. And I had independent - and I can't get into this because it's still super classified - but through the AAWSAP program, I had a connection in with a three-letter agency that collected, not from the KGB open records, they collected it from their own asset. And the asset was filtering out actual, legitimate documents, photos, reports, technical and operational and executive-summary type. "There is enough evidence that I saw in a classified setting that convinced me that they have it. At least one crash retrieval, yeah. I can't say that and go back to the 40s, 50s or 60s or 70s. I know...it was at the end of the 80s was the one I was exposed to. So, they have had something and they've got hardware, but I don't see that they've been any successful with it." Starts at 38:15 - H/T: Filetofsoul ~~~ This last "Russian" anecdote doesn't seem connected but since it's interesting, I'll share. Murgia: "Have you ever handled any material that allegedly came from a UFO?" Commander Will Miller (Retired): "Yes. Certified by the Russian Academy of Sciences as metallurgy that could not be duplicated with current human technology. It was kept in oil. It was a fairly small fragment, maybe two inches by two inches, by a quarter inch thick. As I remember, it was kind of a mottle surface. It was jet black and they kept it in oil because if it became totally un-oiled, it would basically disappear, it would sublime, it would turn from a solid into a gas." Source: ~ When Dr. Garry P. Nolan was first approached by folks from the CIA and an aerospace company (probably Drs. Kit Green and Colm Kelleher) to look at UAP, it was related to injuries people had suffered after an alleged close encounter with said UAP. Here's what he told Vice in 2021. Nolan: "Of the 100 or so patients that we looked at, about a quarter of them died from their injuries. The majority of these patients had symptomology that’s basically identical to what’s now called Havana syndrome. We think amongst this bucket list of cases, we had the first Havana syndrome patients. That still left individuals who had seen UAPs. They didn’t have Havana syndrome. They had a smorgasbord of other symptoms." "With one of the patients (Thomas Winterton), it happened on the Skinwalker Ranch. Given how deep into their brain the damage went, we can actually estimate the amount of energy required in the electromagnetic wave someone aimed at them. We don’t think that has anything to do with UAPs. We think that that’s some sort of a state actor and again related to Havana syndrome somehow." (I know Winterton and Brandon Fugal may have a different opinion on who or what caused Winterton's injury, but if it WAS a state actor, why would they be using that weapon at Skinwalker Ranch? Maybe someone was using the alien hypothesis that surrounds Skinwalker as a cover to test out their new toy? If so, that doesn't mean everything that has happened at the ranch and surrounding area is being caused by a state actor. Study the history of the Uinta Basin and you'll find that hypothesis to be seriously lacking credibility. Then we have 1977, Colares, Brazil and the locals, reportedly, being attacked and injured by UFOs. Aliens? Experimental human tech being tested? Or both? In 2019, I interviewed former CIA intelligence officer, Dr. Kit Green, Dr. Kit Green: "I know for a fact, Brazil, for a while, they had a lot of dead bodies, a lot of dead bodies. I saw them, just like I saw the dead bodies in Kampuchea. Dead bodies, man. Twisted, torn, destroyed. They were dead and they were killed, okay? There were times I know for a fact, the Brazilians thought: 'Who’s doing this? Is it the United States? Is it the Nazi cadre that we’ve got here in Brazil, testing their new technologies? Is it China because they actually want to take over Southern Brazil?' "Those are legitimate questions, and sometimes it turns out that it is those others. Not The Others that are aliens, but the others that you thought were your countries' friends. Okay? And I’m sorry I’m getting so upset about this but it is hard sometimes to explain to people that looking at odd things that are real, is legitimate. Looking at odd things that people are making up, in order to make money, that’s not so legitimate. But that could also be real." (Any and all thoughts, via replies, are appreciated. Likes and Retweets help, too. I'll include info. in the replies for folks who would like to support my efforts.)

Joe Murgia

173,983 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten