正在加载视频...
视频加载失败
.Devin Dwyer: "Is it possible there's a secret program here that you just don't know about?" Jon Kosloski: "(laughs) Anything's possible." Full ABC News interview with Director of Parody of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, Jon Kosloski. I think Dwyer did well. Making sure to include non-human intelligence in... show more
20,049 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)
11 条评论
I think it was a great story. I realize AARO is not popular and people want more. It seems like we’re back to 2021 in terms of mainstream tone, but maybe that needs to happen to clear out all the damage Jake Sullivan, Kathleen Hicks, Sean Kirkpatrick, Sue Gough, and Tim Phillips did.
Can AI redefine scientific discovery? Dr. Tal Patalon explores OpenAI’s Deep Research in her latest Forbes article. 🎨 Future by Eduardo Kobra, provided by Eden Gallery. @TalPatalon @forbes @edengallery_
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO God this segment just pisses me off so much. It’s so biased and cherry picked
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO There is no secret ufo program (involving aliens or NHI)
“… promising radical transparency across the board”. Anyone who still believes that hasn’t been paying attention. Especially when it comes to UFO’s, the very first opportunity they had to be transparent was to do what they promised and tell us what the drones were. Trump even promised to tell us “exactly” what they were, and said it was “ridiculous” they weren’t. Yet the one and only time they addressed it at the first press briefing, as a throw away at the end, they gave us the same non-answer as they did during the Biden administration! The Epstein bullshit is even more insane, because Pam Bondi directly gaslit people in a way that actually made her look bad! They’re so committed to NOT being transparent that they performed a PSYOP on us that involved intentionally making themselves look dishonest! There is no logical explanations for their actions other than that. And there’s other examples as well. Why make a big deal about the gold at Fort Knox, and then not follow up? Why has RFK apparently shown absolutely no obvious interest in the JFK files? Why did Kash Patel tell us what he would do “day 1” and express his beliefs in interviews even after the election that he first denied in the confirmation hearing, and then after he got in? Apparently Epstein obviously killed himself now. No funny business at all, right? Bongino at least can say he hadn’t seen the files before he got in there, but Kash literally told us he’d already seen the Epstein files and the JFK files! Now suddenly he believes the official narrative. He didn’t NEED to say any of these things he believed or what was going to do, but he did. Just like Pam Bondi didn’t need to tell everyone she had the Epstein files “on her desk” and they were bad, when she KNEW in a couple of days eveyone would know she didn’t. But she also didn’t need to engineer a media presss moment giving Conservative MAGA influencers those “Epstein binders” as if they were proud of being transparent, when the front page of that very binder is literally a copy of a letter supposedly from Pam to Kash saying she doesn’t have the files! And where the rest of binder literally contained LESS information than what was already released! … What I realized though is that this PSYOP of demoralization by gaslighting JUST SO HAPPENS to be exactly what was happening in the UFO space. Lue Elizondo is not stupid enough make these “mistakes”, nor is the accusation that he is a “grifter” adequate an explanation either. And he’s not the only one. The insane overly hyped reaction to the announcement of the Jake Barbe’s Coulthart interview, “the egg” video, the embarrassing Skywatcher stuff, the increasingly extreme claims by various people (old and new). Elizondo’s PSYOP is like the Trump administration/appointees PSYOP. It is to INTENTIONALLY make themselves look bad. Not because the goal is to just make themselves look bad, but because the goal is to demoralize us by gaslighting us. Look at the response to the Trump press briefing on the drones by the “UFO Caucasus”. People like Luna literally gaslit us by cheering it on as excellent example of transparency! They didn’t NEED to do that either!! Elizondo not only lied, he didn’t just do it once, there is no other explanation other than he lied! There is no logical charitable explanation for what he did where he didn’t lie! It’s even worse than it looks, because every time he’s responsed to it he’s made it 10x worse! Because it’s not that they’re lying because they want to fool us, because no sane semi-intelligent person would ever think this strategy is a good idea. They’re lying AND THEY WANT US TO FIND OUT THEY’RE LYING. Elizondo nuked his credibility ON PURPOSE! The GOAL isn’t to make you believe the le, it’s to demoralize you into a confused gaslit state of disassociation.
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO I THINK YOU'RE READING TOO MUCH INTO IT.
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO I see they slid in a Mick west watermark in there over one clip 🤦♂️
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO Yep, agreed. After hearing Grusch's testimony before Congress, where he detailed his inability to access several programs even with his top level security clearance, the idea of a 'black' separate world seems highly plausible. It's funded through money stolen from the DOD budget.
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO @devindwyer I would Gabe said: “if the government-or defense contractors had UAP programs but they were Unacknowledged Special Access Programs; especially those authorized by the Whitehouse, would you have access?
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO Thanks, Joe. Give him points for adding NHI. Take away points for specifying, "spacecraft".
@devindwyer @DoD_AARO Welcome. I watched lot of news to make sure I clipped it and people don't seem to give a crap. What else is new?
![Rick Rubin tells Andrew Huberman how he deals with creative or writer’s block. He treats his work like a diary entry (and doesn’t worry about internal or external judgment): ➡️ “What's the cause of the block? The block is usually something that's either personal ("I'm not good enough") or it can be a confidence issue ("I don't have anything to say") or it could be...thinking about someone else ("nobody's going to like what I make"). Do you know what I'm saying? So, it's either fear of self-judgment or external judgment. If you're making something with a freedom of "this is something I'm making for myself for now", that is all [you have to do]. It is a diary entry. Everything I make is a diary entry. The beauty of a diary entry is that I can write my diary entry and you can't tell me that my diary entry wasn't good enough. Or that [the diary entry] is not what I experienced. Of course it's what I experienced: I'm writing a personal diary for myself and no one else can judge if it is my experience of my life. Everything we make can be that: a personal reflection of who we are in that moment of time. It doesn't have to be the greatest you could ever do. It doesn't have to have any expectation that it's going to change the world. It doesn't have to sell a certain number of copies for any reason. It doesn't have any of those things at all. It is "I'm making this thing for me and I want to do it to the best of my ability and to where I feel good about it". [The work] is honest of where I'm at and if you're living in this world of just being honest to where you're at, there's nothing blocking you. There are no blocks. The blocks are all based on dealing with a different force or a different perception that is made up.” ⬅️](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1739835673853804569/amplify_video_thumb/1739835456953704448/img/ZO5pgXpJKpiyF84w.jpg)
!["It's not a congressional program. Only the president can say anything about this." ~Semivan Semivan: Congress Doesn't Have the Right or Need-To-Know About a Crash Retrieval Program Thoughts? Grusch decided Congress had a need-to-know, and Congress hadn't been told. "Which I don't think was true." ~Semivan ~~~ Semivan: "Some of the congressmen now that are being briefed (laughs) on it are not very happy because they think they have a right to know this. And I like to point out, I spoke to a couple of the committees and I told them, 'Look, it's not a congressional program. It's an executive program, and it's run by the president and only the president can say anything about this. I can't say anything about it, the president has to come out.'" (Note: Semivan was careful to cover his azz and say these were answers about a, hypothetical, crash retrieval program. Although, from his past comments, I'm pretty sure he knows (or at least believes) it exists. See here: Semivan Blockbuster I know where the legacy programs are located. You should take [Grusch] and everything he says to the bank. It's our inalienable right to know about this. ) ~ Semivan: "It's what Dave Grusch said. Dave Grusch...worked for AARO (He meant the UAPTF) and he went to various intelligence agencies and questioned the people that were actually working on these programs. And they all told them the same thing, the same story. So he takes this back, and he decides Congress has a need-to-know, and Congress hasn't been told. Which I don't think was true. He didn't know that, but he thought the public also had a right to know. And I'm perfectly fine... He did the exact right thing you're supposed to do if you're a government employee if you think there's something going on that's not legal. And he did it the right way. So, I give him a load of credit for that. And then he explains what it was, and then he's briefing some of the congressmen on this. Now the congressmen are upset, saying, 'Well, wait a minute, we're in charge of spending for the government and what have you. We should have the ability to know this.' But what Congress doesn't realize is these programs, you know, they exist at a very, very high classified level. They're Special Access Programs, and I would say, maybe the Gang of Eight, if them, have the clearances to basically know of these programs. And even if they were to be told of the programs, they could never discuss it, nor could they ever debate it, publicly. It's not theirs to do. They would be told, officially, but just, you know, as a professional courtesy that these things are going on. "Don't forget, the CIA works directly for the President of the United States, all right? So if the CIA would be running this program (AFAIK, they are. ~Joe), they just, basically, talk to the president and the president talks to them. And those conversations are not subject to congressional notification, approval or anything else. And when CIA goes to the oversight committees and briefs their programs, the committees can't tell them, 'We don't like what you're doing.' Well, they can say that. But the only thing they can do, they can't stop the programs. All they can do is stop the funding. "So, you know, the intelligence agencies that work directly for the president answer to him and him only, really. They do tell Congress, because Congress does give them money and there is...that's been going on since 1975 now, and it's a great thing to do. And they've been very, very open and honest with Congress, and Congress, I think, has been wonderful about it. As a matter of fact, you know, Congress has, basically, said in some of these programs, 'Holy cow, this is great! Give a round of applause, you need more money, because what you guys are doing [is] great.' The relationship has always been very good. I thought, you know, between them." (But the folks in the intelligence agencies who are aware of the alleged Legacy UAP-related programs, do NOT tell Congress about them. Except, as Semivan said, MAYBE some members of the Gang of Eight. Certainly NOT members of Congress like Rep. Anna Paulina Luna or Rep. Eric Burlison. I think they have zero chance of being read in right now.) Semivan: "But that doesn't mean if the president, like Truman or Eisenhower, issued a presidential executive-action document or something along those lines, where he said, 'This is an extraordinary circumstance. I'm creating this super-secret thing that nobody gets to know about, not even Congress.' That's, basically, his...he can do that. That's in the power, that's in the Constitution. He has that right to do that without acknowledging." (THAT is how these alleged Legacy UAP programs are protected.) Semivan: "Now, has he (a president) done that without telling somebody? Probably there's one or two people in Congress that know about it at any given time. Maybe one or two people in the National Security Council know about it. Most presidents probably got a very generalized briefing on it, you know, saying, 'Yeah, this is real. If you wanna know more, we can tell you more. But, if you know more then you don't have plausible deniability anymore. And/or, you can't do anything about it anyway, because we don't understand it. But if something happens [and] we discover something that's groundbreaking or earth shattering, we'll come back and tell ya.' "So, imagine if you're a President of the United States. Do you really want to know this? Do you really want to have that hanging on your shoulders? I think not. Particularly when you have somebody else doing the job for you."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1964791704948703671/amplify_video_thumb/1964765866677141504/img/Oc6iqDE9eLvsulqq.jpg)
![The Washington Post’s Cleve Wootson: “One more, Elon Musk is slated to interview [Donald J. Trump] tomorrow — tonight on — on X. I don't know if the president is going to — feel free to say if he is or not — but I — I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue. It's a — you know, it's an America issue. What role does the White House or the President have any sort of stopping that or stopping the spread of that or sort of inter — intervening in that. Some of that was about campaign misinformation, but you know it's a wider thing, right?” KJP: “Yeah, no, I mean, you've heard us talk about this many times from here about the responsibilities that social media platforms have when it comes to misinformation, disinformation. I don't have anything to read out from here about specific ways that we're working on it, but we believe that that they have the responsibility. These are private companies, so we're also mindful of that too, but look — it is — I think it is incredibly important to call that out as you're — you're doing. I just don't have any specifics on what we have been doing internally as it relates to the interviews, not something that I'm tracking, and I'm sure the President's not tracking it either.”](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1823068701240758626/ext_tw_video_thumb/1823068608278249472/pu/img/_s_gThRQNLHAOfmh.jpg)
![Phenomena, AAWSAP, Stratton and Consciousness "I keenly believe that consciousness is a key aspect of all of this, and perception." ~Jay Stratton ~ "I entered the [AATIP] program in 2008. I was asked by its director [Lacatski] to come on board and establish this program [AATIP]. And then, in 2010 is when I was asked to take over the effort." ~Lue Elizondo during WaPo Interview "Fast forward to 2015...I created a program called AATIP, which was a derivative of AAWSAP." ~Jay Stratton (As I've discussed before, AATIP (V2) didn't exist until much later (2015) than what we've been told by Lue. So what program did Lue come on board to in 2008 and which program did he "take over the effort" for in 2010 if AATIP (V2) was created by Stratton in 2015? Is that not a fair question to ask?) ~~~ Jay Stratton: "Starting back in the early 2000s, we saw the need - my colleague (Jim Lacatski. ~Joe) and I at the Defense Intelligence Agency - to start paying very close attention to this topic. Advanced technologies, emerging technologies, and really kind of the areas that the stigma has led for us to ignore for many years. "So, you know, we created a program that Hal (Puthoff) referred to as AAWSAP, you know, to address those issues. And that really started around 2005. So the DIA program, which you jumped in earlier and said the DOE or, you know, the DOD's program, and really, it's the Intelligence Community's program. DIA is part of the IC, the D in there being Defense, predominantly means the DIA looks at foreign-defense capabilities. "And we were looking at this from - and I hate to say it now - but a threat perspective. And the reason I say, 'I hate to say,' is because threat is capability plus intent, and some of these things, we just don't have an idea on the intent." (Does that mean that on some of these things we DO have an idea on the intent?) Stratton: "So, determining threat, you know, maybe it's an emerging-technologies threat or a concern anytime it can potentially exceed our own capabilities. But that DIA program focused on that, and the contract from 2008 to 2010, and then we transitioned and tried to move the program to a couple of other places. "Fast forward to 2015, I created a program called AATIP, which was a derivative of AAWSAP, and actually AATIP was a nickname for AAWSAP. And I know there's a lot of crazy names, but Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. But those 2015 events were the ones that you see now on the news: the Gimbal, the Go Fast. Ryan Graves, who usually participates in this, his wife is having a baby, currently, so he's not here (laughs). But all of those events started to happen...and those events helped fuel, you know, further highlight that need on the U.S. government side that, we gotta do something about this. "Which led to the creation of the UAP Task Force in 2018 into 2019 as when I started building it. I spent over two years building it out before the public even knew about it in 2020 when DoD established it. And at that point, it was truly a whole-of-government, interagency effort. Kind of the dream of, you know, my fifteen-years plus, at that point of looking at this topic and knowing everything that we needed with all the different authorities." (Much more on that can be found here: ) Stratton: "And that led into where we're at today with AARO, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office under DOD. And I think, you know, a few hiccups here and there, but I think now Dr Jon Koslowski, who has AARO, is approaching this problem set and dealing with the topic appropriately." (He seems like a good guy but James Fox recently said that he met with Kosloski who told him (Fox) that he (Kosloski) can't even part his hair without the DoD's permission. If that's true, and I have no reason to doubt Fox on that, I have little hope AARO will help bring Disclosure.) Stratton: "And I hope that, you know, obviously, my legacy, or the legacy of all of those involved, carries on, and that the government continues to take it seriously. And that we never have to look a pilot in the eyes again and say, 'Sorry, can't help you,' you know? Or the ridicule factor and all these other issues that happen from that." (If you want a true, lasting legacy... Push to be the UAP Czar, start another AAWSAP-like program, and do it for a few years until the world learns the truth about us not being alone on this planet and that we have craft and bodies of NHI. Allegedly, right? And help us figure out what the hell the phenomenon represents.) Stratton: "So, I mean, that's kind of the the cliff notes and the history. But the UAP Task Force recently got an award from the DNI. It's the first UFO program to get an award at that level, to my knowledge. And I'm really proud of where we're at today and and that we can have events like these to discuss this topic seriously, and everybody that's involved in putting their brands on this problem." (More on that award... ) Stratton: "I don't think we should overlook...and you had, you know, Paul (Smith) and others talk about remote viewing and that consciousness connection. I keenly believe that consciousness is a key aspect of all of this, and perception, you know, all the things that come from that. And that's an area that can get confusing, right? If you look at all of these recent drones, day-to-day, right? It's honestly driving me crazy because people are throwing in, you know, video of a Cessna Citation on final approach and calling it a UAP, you know? It's definitely a Cessna Citation. "And then folks start throwing around (laughs) the terms mimicry and other things that we've definitely looked at. And it gets like the Skinwalker Ranch, as you know I'm involved out there. You know, the things that you see, and are you really...you know, how is your brain forming that thing you're seeing and can that be manipulated? And I think that that technology is an area that, you know, I certainly focused on with my friends, Hal and others, to try to understand it." (Manipulation and perception deception. Is it a byproduct of the technology on our brains, or is it an intentional effort to deceive us? If it's the latter, that certainly doesn't seem to be a good thing for humanity, but I'm still open to all theories.) Stratton: "And that consciousness connection could be a key to understanding how some of these UAP are flying, you know, how they're acting, how they're controlled, I guess is the best way to put it, right?" (Are the craft controlled by some sort of 6th sense that the operators have and need in order to fly a craft?) Stratton: "So, you got to have that kind of open mindedness to approach this topic and I hope that my government, you know, folks are open to those kinds of things. And I know that there are still some key players that are open and thinking about...thinking out of the box about all those kinds of things. So, I mean, I think consciousness is the area that I would want to put more resources and time into if I were still there. (Yes, yes and yes. Bring back Stratton as the UAP and Consciousness Czar!) Anna Brady-Estevez: "And it's interesting because there's quite a bit of access to consciousness, you know, on a personal level-type experimentation. So it is interesting in that, you know, to get into UAPs, I mean, maybe you've seen one or more, maybe you haven't. But, if you haven't, you're kind of digging through other people's data. Whereas some of these consciousness or the remote viewing, it really just takes a couple people and a sheet of paper. So you can kind of step away pretty quickly from the, 'Do I believe the reports?' you know? Or somebody else's versus you can get to that primary experimentation at the cost of a sheet of paper, a pencil, and fifteen minutes or more of somebody's time here, at the most basic level. I mean, obviously there's extensive training to build the high-end capabilities. But some of that initial testing is pretty immediate. So thank you for bringing up that consciousness work." (When I took a basic Controlled Remove Viewing class with Lyn Buchanan (one of the OG remote viewers) in 1997, I saw the results for myself when I tried it. And right there and then, I KNEW that it worked. So people can debate with me all day long about the validity of psi and remote viewing but they won't change my mind. Seeing (and trying it for yourself) is believing.) Stratton: "I was gonna say, it took me years to move away from that nuts and bolts mentality of, you know, as an aerospace engineer, this is how it flies, thrust, you know, power, etc, you know, to...there's a lot more to this, right? Hence the name, you know, Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena, or Aerial Phenomena, however you want to look at it. That phenomena word is key in the definition and understanding of all of this." (Big H/T to neandrewthal and anybody else who let me know about this event Stratton was a part of.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1877251655475015686/ext_tw_video_thumb/1877218159318675459/pu/img/VKwNKdJL6fnPKkWs.jpg)