Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

4/5. Royston saying this one specific assessment that Harry expected to be done wasn't needed. Because Harry had already had three recent assessments, and because the key reason his security was being removed wasn't because of a change in risk but because he was in another country. So a...

26,122 views โ€ข 1 year ago โ€ขvia X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

๐Ÿ”ฅ๐Ÿ›ธ "The startling thing is, is he's [the late Jim Ryder at Lockheed] revealing that he was one of the engineers that worked on the crash retrieval program with four other individuals." ~Eric Davis ๐Ÿ›ธ๐Ÿ”ฅ During AAWSAP, a senior VP at Lockheed (this is the late Jim Ryder) briefed Hal Puthoff, Colm Kelleher and Robert Bigelow, in a SCIF, about the crash retrieval program and that he (Ryder) had worked on for 20 years with four other people. In later interactions, he told Davis the same thing. They were all briefed up to the TS-SCI level but when they had more detailed questions, Ryder couldn't answer them because, "that's now rising up to the level of what's called the Waived Unacknowledged Special Access Program, which is the security cover that was provided for ALL of the crash retrieval programs that were going on since...probably that Italian crash of 1933 that had gotten recovered by the U.S. Army during its invasion of Italy in 1944, and transferred back to Wright Army Airfield that year. "This was kind of startling because now it's like, okay we're actually talking to somebody (Ryder) who's at a senior executive level in a major aerospace defense corporation that's pretty huge, and it's actually the largest in the world. And, of course, this is all in classified settings, so we know this is all legitimate. The only problem is we couldn't get further because we needed to get Waived Unacknowledged SAP clearances, and, unfortunately, I don't know what was going on in the background with that. I do know that Harry Reid and Jim Lacatksi attempted to get that kind of security clearances for all of us and Harry Reid failed because the Deputy Secretary of Defense during that period...William Lynn in the Obama administration. So [Lynn] turned down Harry Reid's request."

Joe Murgia

27,183 views โ€ข 7 months ago

2/4. I have so much to say about this part, I actually found it shocking. Because when Roya asked Kate about Harry choosing 'friendly' rota, I really thought they'd comment on the fact he was creating a narrative (#propaganda) And funnily, they DID say he was creating a narrative, but they just acknowledged that was his goal. They clearly didn't see it as problematic or hypocritical. (๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ๐˜ฆ'๐˜ด ๐˜ด๐˜ฐ๐˜ฎ๐˜ฆ ๐˜ช๐˜ณ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ๐˜บ ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ ๐˜™๐˜ฐ๐˜บ๐˜ข '๐˜ข๐˜ด๐˜ด๐˜ฆ๐˜ด๐˜ด๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜จ' ๐˜ฉ๐˜ช๐˜ด ๐˜ท๐˜ช๐˜ด๐˜ช๐˜ต, ๐˜ฌ๐˜ฏ๐˜ฐ๐˜ธ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜จ ๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ ๐˜ท๐˜ช๐˜ฆ๐˜ธ๐˜ด ๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ ๐˜ข '๐˜ง๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ฆ๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ๐˜ญ๐˜บ' ๐˜ณ๐˜ฐ๐˜ต๐˜ข) Roya actually says she was told (by 'someone close to him') the goal ๐˜ธ๐˜ข๐˜ด to 'curate the narrative'. Which he did by choosing friendly rota. They also talk about how he's imitating the royal household's way of dealing with the media. ๐Ÿ˜‘ You can actually see how wooed they are by him, so thrilled to have 'old Harry' back. Problem is they can't ๐˜ข๐˜ค๐˜ต๐˜ถ๐˜ข๐˜ญ๐˜ญ๐˜บ ๐˜ด๐˜ฆ๐˜ฆ that he's not a 'roving royal', he's an American resident, a celebrity, ๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—น๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฎ ๐—ฏ๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ. Do they think other US celebrities making very public donations aren't buying PR? Kate muses that that Harry and others must have 'sat around a boardroom' and planned a strategy, on what would work for a rebrand. And they decided 'old Harry' (the Ladโ„ข๏ธ) was the way to go. (so he's decided to not be nasty to the media - and say cruel things, publicly ๐Ÿฅด) Kate says it was different this time, because he went back to Britain to 'give' something, not 'ask' for something. (But that's not true, ๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ธ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐˜€๐—ผ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐˜๐—ต๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด - wake up! He profits from this rebrand, Roya actually says in her article - briefed by his team - that he's looking to make money to pay bills. I'll include it in below post) I'm actually shocked after watching this, just the fact they are so unaware of how problematic what they're saying is, and the fact they're actually saying it. (I guess now it's more ๐—ฝ๐˜‚๐—ฏ๐—น๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—น๐˜† ๐—ธ๐—ป๐—ผ๐˜„๐—ป, so that's a plus ๐Ÿ˜‘).

mrc ๐Ÿฆ‡

15,741 views โ€ข 11 months ago

Claim: Lazar Can't Show Us Why He Attended MIT Because He Doesn't Want to Risk Prison "[Lazar] had said he was at MIT, and that he was at Caltech." ~Dolan (No, Lazar said he had DEGREES from both. Surprised Dolan (Richard Dolan Intelligent Disclosure) downplayed that.) Luigi Venditelli (LV): "As far as things that I can say, [Lazar] shared with me, shared it also with my team, and also shared it with Joe Rogan in the past, in regards to his education...because that's something that I think a lot of people really attack Bob Lazar on, and rightfully so. Because if he doesn't have a paper to bring out, they can attack him. It's an easy, it's a low-hanging fruit attack for somebody who doesn't believe the story. "In regards to the MIT component, the only thing I can say is that there were national security issues there, okay?" (No, what you can say is that Lazar CLAIMED there were national security issues there. Unless you have proof that you're not sharing?) Dolan: "For people who don't know this, we'll just explain: Bob had said he was at MIT, and that he was at Caltech and no one was able to find or get any kind of confirmation that he was at those schools." (Lazar didn't just claim that he was AT those schools. He claimed he had degrees from both. This is from the 1993 Lazar Q&A at Rachel, Nevada near Area 51. Lazar: "As far as electronic technology, my degree there is from Caltech and physics is from MIT. [MIT] was a master's degree.") ~ LV: "Correct. Now, what's also important to note, specifically about MIT, is the one I wanna highlight, is that he said, 'I wasn't alone in this.' So, the government itself - he was at Los Alamos National Labs when this happened - he was sent to MIT." (Again, if LV wants to come across as unbiased and trying to get to the truth, he should be saying, "Lazar CLAIMS he was at Los Alamos and was then sent to MIT.") LV: "Now, the reason why this is important is because, and he also said, 'Not everything the government does or was doing was legal.' Okay? So there were things that were actually not necessarily legal, and they needed some scientists to go and learn certain things at MIT, and that's the reason why he was there. And there were other people there. "He said to me, 'Look, for me to bring this out, I would be revealing things that would, potentially, put other people in a compromising situation.' This had nothing...signed papers, something to do with national security. And he says, 'There's no reason for me to ruin other people's lives just to satisfy a small percentage of people who are constantly bickering about my education.'" (I don't think it's a small percentage. OK, so Bob, supposedly, says/claims he doesn't want to talk about the government allegedly sending him to MIT because he doesn't want to put other people in a compromising situation.) LV: "So, I understand that part. It's frustrating that it cannot be mentioned, but it it's also something that I understood, and it made perfect sense to me." (So Lazar can't mention any of it but LV can?) LV: "Now, I know it's frustrating to all of those who say we should still have something. Well, unfortunately, he's not gonna want to go to jail just to satisfy you." (So first it was: He doesn't want to "bring this out" because it would put people in a compromising situation and now it's: He doesn't want to risk prison. Which is it? How about we get that directly from Lazar instead of second hand?) LV: "And he would not be the only person ever to have been implicated in national security programs that were sending scientists to MIT. So that's a very important thing to also look into for history."

Joe Murgia

32,323 views โ€ข 4 months ago

Can You Trust American Healthcare? ER nurse files a $7.5 million dollar federal lawsuit because she was terminated for refusing to falsify documents Patients die and she was told to โ€œchange her charting to omitโ€ details because โ€œIt gives a lawyer a case on a silver platterโ€ โ€œI love a whistleblower more than just about anything in the entire world. And an ER nurse is suing her former employer, To Nova healthcare in Clarksville, Tennessee. it's a federal lawsuit. I assume it's a wrongful termination lawsuit, suing them for $7.5 million claiming that it is retaliation after she refused to change documentation in patients charts. So the lawsuit claims that there were two cases in particular, one in which a male patient died of cardiac arrest in the triage area due to a lack of open beds and proper monitoring. And she documented that there were not enough beds available. And the lawsuit claims that this was a violation of the Tennessee Public Protection Act and is an EMTALA violation. The supervisor directed her afterwards to change her charting to omit it because, quote, it gives a lawyer a case on a silver platter, end quote. And in the second case, the patient was exhibiting signs of sepsis, needed treatment, was waiting for a pick line and treatment. And I believe that they ended up dying because of a lack of treatment. And she documented there was a lack of safe staffing that led to this and she was told to omit that from the chart and refused and one month later she was terminated. So I am so glad that this nurse has lawyered up. I am sure that the attorney is pointing her towards OSHA and the NLRB and um, all the things. I'm gonna follow this case put someone put me in touch with her because you know I love a whistleblower more than anything and I hope she buys an island and retires after she wins this case.โ€œ

Wall Street Apes

813,031 views โ€ข 2 years ago