Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🚨Why UAP Secrecy Lasts Decades: Eric Davis Explains the Mechanism What Eric W. Davis describes is a system that works exactly as intended. Most people with eligibility and need to know access just don't talk, and not because they're constantly threatened, but because silence becomes routine. Careers end, lives... move on, and the information simply never reenters public space again. In many cases, the only time anything emerges is late in life, sometimes via affidavits meant to be recorded after death. In the case of the Corona crash, Davis points to a specific and verifiable inflection point during the Clinton administration. When John Podesta was tasked with probing UAP related secrecy, the Secretary of the Air Force issued a formal order permanently lifting NDAs for 509th Bombardment Group personnel from 1947. Criminal penalties and financial punishment were removed. Only after that did people begin to speak openly. Davis is also careful to correct the record where it's been exaggerated. There was one craft at Corona, not two. That detail doesn't weaken the case at all, in fact it strengthens it. What really underpins his confidence is provenance. He isn't relying on anonymous tips or secondhand retellings. He references direct interactions with figures like Edgar Mitchell, and extended, recorded interviews with senior military officers who had firsthand access to command staff involved in recovery and transfer. Seven hours of transcribed testimony isn't just trust me bro. There's also a timing detail that can easily be overlooked. Much of this unfolded before the modern Air Force even existed, before the National Security Act of 1947 formalized today's security architecture. Procedures were improvised and oversight was minimal. That early window made it far easier for material and documentation to disappear into permanent compartmentalization. You don't have to accept every conclusion Davis draws to understand the point he's making. Dismissing this outright requires ignoring how secrecy actually functions, how NDAs shape behavior, and how information only surfaces once those constraints are deliberately removed. Source:show more

Skywatch Signal

102,665 subscribers

10,344 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

"There was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing." ~TB 💥 If Trump Waives Eric Davis' NDAs, Is This Some of What We Can Expect to Hear? 💥 (I may not be first with these clips but I try to include info. that you won't get anywhere else.) If that information about lifeforms, and what they were doing, was accurate, it's the type of information the world deserves to know. Was it Dr. Eric Davis who briefed him/them on that? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was, and I have NOT asked Davis about this.) "All these rumors that you hear...just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me...actually has occurred." ~TB ~ Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "If I knew what you knew, I would not be able to sleep at night." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (TB): "Yeah, I was briefed in a situation, and they got into some pretty intense stuff." Hannity: "Can I ask who briefed you?" Burchett: "You can ask but I can't tell." (Again: My Guess: Dr. Eric Davis. I could be wrong, but it makes a lot of sense to me. Here's why... This is a message from Davis to me, from January... Why Won't Davis Share What He Know with Congress? Davis: "I already shared my information in a Pentagon SCIF with the SASC staff in Oct. 2019 and in a controlled access conference room in a Senate office building with the SSCI staff in Oct. 2019 and at a defense company’s controlled access room in June 2021. "Then I shared it with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's committee in a House of Representatives office building SCIF last May. (Burchett is part of that committee, and that's one reason why I feel like Davis is the one Burchett is referring to when he says someone briefed him on some intense stuff.) Davis: "So the 'Why won’t he?' has already been answered." Murgia: "So what changes if a President waives your NDAs?" Davis: "If the POTUS were to waive my NDAs, I could share everything I know with the public." (PUBLIC!) ~~~ Hannity: "Have you ever told Donald Trump about all the obstacles they're throwing in your face?" Burchett: "No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I had a discussion with somebody last week. They said, you need to have lunch with [Trump]. It's very difficult to get, you know, he's, right now, of course, things going on all over the world." Hannity: "But you're also saying, on the other hand, on a need-to-know basis. And that means the President's not on a need-to-know basis? Our duly-elected president, information is being withheld from him?" Burchett: "I believe so. I was told that, even. Yeah, in the SCIF, this one time, where they asked me, where you're quoting, I mean, there was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing. And different..." Hannity: "Lifeforms alive here? Lifeforms dead here?" Burchett: "Possibly. Both. Both." Hennity: "And vehicles that have been recovered here?" Burchett: "Yeah, and some that have possibly come here, and not in a crash-type setting (laughs). We had an individual that gave..." (Again, this feels like Davis was the guy briefing them. He has spoken about crashed AND landed craft, including the alleged Holloman AFB landing-and-meeting event.) Burchett: "And this was interesting about the whole thing was because, there's all the folks in there, and there's different groups of people, and Rep. Eric Burlison's a dear friend of mine. Because in the beginning, he was a big skeptic (According to Burlison, he still IS a skeptic. ~Joe), you know? And I asked him to join us in some of this stuff because I needed somebody that just wasn't like me, that just had been..." Hannity: "Skepticism's healthy." Burlison: "It's very healthy. I mean, you know...but a lot of people that were skeptics. But we were in this one meeting in a secure environment, and a member came in who is not really friendly to the cause. And really was a disrupter and started asking questions. And the person who was briefing us named names, dates, times, places, events, people." (That sounds exactly like the meticulous, and detail-orientated, Dr. Eric Davis. 😎 ) Burchett: "Because I'd asked a question about Jimmy Carter. There was talk, I just threw it out there, that Carter... I didn't like his politics, but I don't question his faith." (Sad that Burchett even feels the need to mention Carter's politics.) Burchett: "And they said that [Carter] was briefed at one time and became physically upset with the information that he was given." Hannity: "Of course he did." (This seemed like snide remark from Hannity, as in, Carter wasn't a real man and he couldn't handle information like that without getting upset. Cheap shot, but that's Hannity.) Burchett: "Yeah, but he had actually seen a UFO, it's a documented thing. And this person that was briefing us gave the date of that meeting and he gave the receipts. He said, 'You can go to the Carter library,' and he gave the date. and said... And there was, I think four people in the meeting (with Carter), and they listed three of them, and one of them, they weren't sure who it was. So it was probably, you know, CIA or something. And it ended up upsetting [Carter] so much that they pretty much had to clear his calendar for a while. But what is that?" (Again, that sounds like a Davis briefing.) Burchett: "And the thing is, everything that I've...all these rumors that you hear in the movies, in the books and the magazines that I read growing up, just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me that this is actually has occurred. And that, to me, is, I wonder, is this stuff being planted? Is it being pushed out, so that we gradually get a hold of it?" (Hopefully, we get to hear what Burchett and the others heard so we can judge the veracity of it and see if we can somehow confirm any of it.)

"There was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing." ~TB 💥 If Trump Waives Eric Davis' NDAs, Is This Some of What We Can Expect to Hear? 💥 (I may not be first with these clips but I try to include info. that you won't get anywhere else.) If that information about lifeforms, and what they were doing, was accurate, it's the type of information the world deserves to know. Was it Dr. Eric Davis who briefed him/them on that? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was, and I have NOT asked Davis about this.) "All these rumors that you hear...just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me...actually has occurred." ~TB ~ Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "If I knew what you knew, I would not be able to sleep at night." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (TB): "Yeah, I was briefed in a situation, and they got into some pretty intense stuff." Hannity: "Can I ask who briefed you?" Burchett: "You can ask but I can't tell." (Again: My Guess: Dr. Eric Davis. I could be wrong, but it makes a lot of sense to me. Here's why... This is a message from Davis to me, from January... Why Won't Davis Share What He Know with Congress? Davis: "I already shared my information in a Pentagon SCIF with the SASC staff in Oct. 2019 and in a controlled access conference room in a Senate office building with the SSCI staff in Oct. 2019 and at a defense company’s controlled access room in June 2021. "Then I shared it with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's committee in a House of Representatives office building SCIF last May. (Burchett is part of that committee, and that's one reason why I feel like Davis is the one Burchett is referring to when he says someone briefed him on some intense stuff.) Davis: "So the 'Why won’t he?' has already been answered." Murgia: "So what changes if a President waives your NDAs?" Davis: "If the POTUS were to waive my NDAs, I could share everything I know with the public." (PUBLIC!) ~~~ Hannity: "Have you ever told Donald Trump about all the obstacles they're throwing in your face?" Burchett: "No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I had a discussion with somebody last week. They said, you need to have lunch with [Trump]. It's very difficult to get, you know, he's, right now, of course, things going on all over the world." Hannity: "But you're also saying, on the other hand, on a need-to-know basis. And that means the President's not on a need-to-know basis? Our duly-elected president, information is being withheld from him?" Burchett: "I believe so. I was told that, even. Yeah, in the SCIF, this one time, where they asked me, where you're quoting, I mean, there was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing. And different..." Hannity: "Lifeforms alive here? Lifeforms dead here?" Burchett: "Possibly. Both. Both." Hennity: "And vehicles that have been recovered here?" Burchett: "Yeah, and some that have possibly come here, and not in a crash-type setting (laughs). We had an individual that gave..." (Again, this feels like Davis was the guy briefing them. He has spoken about crashed AND landed craft, including the alleged Holloman AFB landing-and-meeting event.) Burchett: "And this was interesting about the whole thing was because, there's all the folks in there, and there's different groups of people, and Rep. Eric Burlison's a dear friend of mine. Because in the beginning, he was a big skeptic (According to Burlison, he still IS a skeptic. ~Joe), you know? And I asked him to join us in some of this stuff because I needed somebody that just wasn't like me, that just had been..." Hannity: "Skepticism's healthy." Burlison: "It's very healthy. I mean, you know...but a lot of people that were skeptics. But we were in this one meeting in a secure environment, and a member came in who is not really friendly to the cause. And really was a disrupter and started asking questions. And the person who was briefing us named names, dates, times, places, events, people." (That sounds exactly like the meticulous, and detail-orientated, Dr. Eric Davis. 😎 ) Burchett: "Because I'd asked a question about Jimmy Carter. There was talk, I just threw it out there, that Carter... I didn't like his politics, but I don't question his faith." (Sad that Burchett even feels the need to mention Carter's politics.) Burchett: "And they said that [Carter] was briefed at one time and became physically upset with the information that he was given." Hannity: "Of course he did." (This seemed like snide remark from Hannity, as in, Carter wasn't a real man and he couldn't handle information like that without getting upset. Cheap shot, but that's Hannity.) Burchett: "Yeah, but he had actually seen a UFO, it's a documented thing. And this person that was briefing us gave the date of that meeting and he gave the receipts. He said, 'You can go to the Carter library,' and he gave the date. and said... And there was, I think four people in the meeting (with Carter), and they listed three of them, and one of them, they weren't sure who it was. So it was probably, you know, CIA or something. And it ended up upsetting [Carter] so much that they pretty much had to clear his calendar for a while. But what is that?" (Again, that sounds like a Davis briefing.) Burchett: "And the thing is, everything that I've...all these rumors that you hear in the movies, in the books and the magazines that I read growing up, just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me that this is actually has occurred. And that, to me, is, I wonder, is this stuff being planted? Is it being pushed out, so that we gradually get a hold of it?" (Hopefully, we get to hear what Burchett and the others heard so we can judge the veracity of it and see if we can somehow confirm any of it.)

Joe Murgia

30,224 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

👽 Dr. Eric Davis: I Saw Photos of a Dead Gray Alien 👽 🇷🇺 🔥 It Appears the Soviets Retrieved a Tic Tac UFO and Four Deceased Grays 🔥 🇷🇺 "[The Soviets] did recover four bodies of humanoid aliens." ~Davis Josh Golembeske (Josh Golembeske): "In the movie 'Moment of Contact,' directed by James Fox, 'New Revelations of Alien Encounters,' you made an incredible statement. You swore on your own life and your kids' life that you saw photos and reports of crash retrievals and non-human intelligent bodies." (Watch that clip of Dr. Davis...here. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ) ~ Josh Golembeske (Josh): "That's an incredible statement - that you saw in a SCIF. Then a year earlier, you in 2025, at the UAP-Disclosure-Fund briefing to Congress, mentioned four types of ET races. You said that you know they are Nordics, Grays, Insectoids, and Reptilians." ~ (Here's an edited transcript of that exchange.) Rep. Eric Burlison: "Can you comment on whatever species have been piloting these craft? Davis: "They're typically the multiple species people are familiar with. The Greys, the Nordics. A humanoid, because they have...a hand, and four limbs, and a torso, so..." Burlison: "Large? Small?" Davis: "Human size, human scale." Burlison: "How many are in a crew?" Davis: "Well, the group, well, the Greys I'm familiar with from investigating the crash at Corona, which is misnamed the crash at Roswell. It's not the crash at Roswell, it's the crash at Corona, New Mexico. Those were Greys, those were four-foot tall. And the Nordics are typically human-sized, probably...I've heard five, six-feet tall. And same with the people who mislabel Reptilian and Insectoid. They're roughly that height, too. I haven't heard anything about anything seven or eight feet or nine-foot tall, of that nature." Full transcript here: ~~~ Josh: "And you mentioned that you know the public has low credibility evidence on that, and then the classified programs is high credible evidence potentially of this." (Watch that clip here. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ) ~ Josh: "My question for you is...and I'm not trying to push you to break your NDAs here, but I know you can't say much. But in those photos and reports, were those species involved in those photos and reports that you saw?" Dr. Eric Davis: "Just one of them. And there's a minimum of four, and that was my slip up for not clarifying that. There's a minimum of four. The best example of the number of, you know, I don't know if you would say species versus morphology. You have to look at Bob Emenegger's companion book to his 1974 television documentary, 'UFOs: Past, Present, and Future.' "He's got a section in the middle of the book showing graphics of the taxonomy of different UAP craft that have been observed and investigated by Project Blue Book. And then there's one with the taxonomy of 'NHIs' or 'aliens.' And that section on the taxonomy of the different NHIs/aliens or ufonauts, as Jacques Vallée calls 'em, is an excellent example of the variety of different type of UAP beings or crew members that have been reported and investigated and encountered. "So there's a minimum of four. And as I qualified at the May 1st, 2025 House Oversight Committee, I clarified that the Reptilians and Insectoids are not a species, per [say]. Well, they are. It's just that they morphologically resemble what they're [we're] familiar with on Earth." (I would push back and say that we don't know if they're multiple species. Hell, they could be avatars created by a single, ultra-advanced intelligence that uses a type of super-duper 3D printing to make/create four different types of beings, infused with AI. In other words, robots. Or, maybe they're four different types of ETs from four different planets? We just don't know. And yes, witnesses have reported seeing lots of different craft and beings, which Dr. James Lacatski has pointed out. Could be a clue. I'll try to find and post the Emenegger taxonomies in the replies, in the morning.) Davis: "So, for example, the Insectoid is going to represent a type of NHI species that resembles or looks like, you know, it's got the face and body morphology of an insect..." Josh: "A praying mantis." Davis: "...or a praying mantis, yeah. But that's not what they are. They're not a praying mantis, by any means. They're not an insect by any means. It's just that that's how they appear. And so, the same with the Reptilian. It doesn't mean that they're reptiles, it just means that they resemble an Earth-type reptile." (How does he know that they're not actual intelligent praying mantises or reptiles or something similar? What is he basing that on?) Davis: "Remember these things, we don't know that they even come from Earth. But that doesn't mean that's exactly what they are. I'm not aware (laughs) that we've got any deceased ones. I'm aware that we've recovered deceased Grays. And the Grays are like the little ones you saw near the end of, 'Close Encounters of Third Kind.' The little guys, diminutive bodies and really large heads." Josh: "Is that the one you saw in the photos, the Grays?" Davis: "Yeah. Yeah." (Great question, and that's new information. I thought he may have seen Reptilian or Mantis bodies but a few other folks thought he was talking about Grays. You were right.) Josh: "Oh, okay, that's fascinating. Okay. And I don't know how much information you can give about these photos. Was it some of the famous crash sites that we've heard about over the years? Is it Roswell, is it Kecksburg?" Davis: "Ah no, this was foreign intelligence collected so this is a foreign crash, and that's classified, so I can't get into that. But the photos I saw came from the site of a foreign crash retrieval during the Cold War." (if you look up the end of the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the U.S., it will tell you that it ended in December of 1991 when the Soviet Union dissolved and ceased to exist. That date and timeframe will be important in a second.) Josh: "Got it. And like, how does that work, exactly, Dr. Davis? Because you're such a highly-credible person. And for you to say I saw photos of crash retrievals and ET bodies, is disclosure on some level to me and to some people. But you can't cross the line to saying more. Like, how does that work from a national-security situation? Like, who draws that line, you know?" Davis: "Well, this isn't a disclosure of American information. It's involving intelligence collection on a foreign adversary. So...you have to kind of walk a fine line here. That's all you can do. Now, whether the government agency that owns that intelligence is willing to disclose it? It's hard to say because there's a lot of sources and methods that are buried inside that intelligence, and that makes it very hard for them to want to reveal because the sources and methods are still being used today." (Okay. So which country was it, and when did the crash take place? And what type of craft? Let's go back to Davis in, "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." (Two years before the end of the Cold War with the Soviets, so the timeframe fits.) Davis: "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 Soviet scientists took apart the recovered craft and discovered a very advanced directed energy weapon." (It certainly looks like this case fits what Davis said to Josh. Davis also said this in 2024 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. " (Photos of four Grays? Again, this seems to fit with what he was talking about to James Fox, Josh, and elsewhere.) Davis: "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."

👽 Dr. Eric Davis: I Saw Photos of a Dead Gray Alien 👽 🇷🇺 🔥 It Appears the Soviets Retrieved a Tic Tac UFO and Four Deceased Grays 🔥 🇷🇺 "[The Soviets] did recover four bodies of humanoid aliens." ~Davis Josh Golembeske (Josh Golembeske): "In the movie 'Moment of Contact,' directed by James Fox, 'New Revelations of Alien Encounters,' you made an incredible statement. You swore on your own life and your kids' life that you saw photos and reports of crash retrievals and non-human intelligent bodies." (Watch that clip of Dr. Davis...here. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ) ~ Josh Golembeske (Josh): "That's an incredible statement - that you saw in a SCIF. Then a year earlier, you in 2025, at the UAP-Disclosure-Fund briefing to Congress, mentioned four types of ET races. You said that you know they are Nordics, Grays, Insectoids, and Reptilians." ~ (Here's an edited transcript of that exchange.) Rep. Eric Burlison: "Can you comment on whatever species have been piloting these craft? Davis: "They're typically the multiple species people are familiar with. The Greys, the Nordics. A humanoid, because they have...a hand, and four limbs, and a torso, so..." Burlison: "Large? Small?" Davis: "Human size, human scale." Burlison: "How many are in a crew?" Davis: "Well, the group, well, the Greys I'm familiar with from investigating the crash at Corona, which is misnamed the crash at Roswell. It's not the crash at Roswell, it's the crash at Corona, New Mexico. Those were Greys, those were four-foot tall. And the Nordics are typically human-sized, probably...I've heard five, six-feet tall. And same with the people who mislabel Reptilian and Insectoid. They're roughly that height, too. I haven't heard anything about anything seven or eight feet or nine-foot tall, of that nature." Full transcript here: ~~~ Josh: "And you mentioned that you know the public has low credibility evidence on that, and then the classified programs is high credible evidence potentially of this." (Watch that clip here. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ) ~ Josh: "My question for you is...and I'm not trying to push you to break your NDAs here, but I know you can't say much. But in those photos and reports, were those species involved in those photos and reports that you saw?" Dr. Eric Davis: "Just one of them. And there's a minimum of four, and that was my slip up for not clarifying that. There's a minimum of four. The best example of the number of, you know, I don't know if you would say species versus morphology. You have to look at Bob Emenegger's companion book to his 1974 television documentary, 'UFOs: Past, Present, and Future.' "He's got a section in the middle of the book showing graphics of the taxonomy of different UAP craft that have been observed and investigated by Project Blue Book. And then there's one with the taxonomy of 'NHIs' or 'aliens.' And that section on the taxonomy of the different NHIs/aliens or ufonauts, as Jacques Vallée calls 'em, is an excellent example of the variety of different type of UAP beings or crew members that have been reported and investigated and encountered. "So there's a minimum of four. And as I qualified at the May 1st, 2025 House Oversight Committee, I clarified that the Reptilians and Insectoids are not a species, per [say]. Well, they are. It's just that they morphologically resemble what they're [we're] familiar with on Earth." (I would push back and say that we don't know if they're multiple species. Hell, they could be avatars created by a single, ultra-advanced intelligence that uses a type of super-duper 3D printing to make/create four different types of beings, infused with AI. In other words, robots. Or, maybe they're four different types of ETs from four different planets? We just don't know. And yes, witnesses have reported seeing lots of different craft and beings, which Dr. James Lacatski has pointed out. Could be a clue. I'll try to find and post the Emenegger taxonomies in the replies, in the morning.) Davis: "So, for example, the Insectoid is going to represent a type of NHI species that resembles or looks like, you know, it's got the face and body morphology of an insect..." Josh: "A praying mantis." Davis: "...or a praying mantis, yeah. But that's not what they are. They're not a praying mantis, by any means. They're not an insect by any means. It's just that that's how they appear. And so, the same with the Reptilian. It doesn't mean that they're reptiles, it just means that they resemble an Earth-type reptile." (How does he know that they're not actual intelligent praying mantises or reptiles or something similar? What is he basing that on?) Davis: "Remember these things, we don't know that they even come from Earth. But that doesn't mean that's exactly what they are. I'm not aware (laughs) that we've got any deceased ones. I'm aware that we've recovered deceased Grays. And the Grays are like the little ones you saw near the end of, 'Close Encounters of Third Kind.' The little guys, diminutive bodies and really large heads." Josh: "Is that the one you saw in the photos, the Grays?" Davis: "Yeah. Yeah." (Great question, and that's new information. I thought he may have seen Reptilian or Mantis bodies but a few other folks thought he was talking about Grays. You were right.) Josh: "Oh, okay, that's fascinating. Okay. And I don't know how much information you can give about these photos. Was it some of the famous crash sites that we've heard about over the years? Is it Roswell, is it Kecksburg?" Davis: "Ah no, this was foreign intelligence collected so this is a foreign crash, and that's classified, so I can't get into that. But the photos I saw came from the site of a foreign crash retrieval during the Cold War." (if you look up the end of the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the U.S., it will tell you that it ended in December of 1991 when the Soviet Union dissolved and ceased to exist. That date and timeframe will be important in a second.) Josh: "Got it. And like, how does that work, exactly, Dr. Davis? Because you're such a highly-credible person. And for you to say I saw photos of crash retrievals and ET bodies, is disclosure on some level to me and to some people. But you can't cross the line to saying more. Like, how does that work from a national-security situation? Like, who draws that line, you know?" Davis: "Well, this isn't a disclosure of American information. It's involving intelligence collection on a foreign adversary. So...you have to kind of walk a fine line here. That's all you can do. Now, whether the government agency that owns that intelligence is willing to disclose it? It's hard to say because there's a lot of sources and methods that are buried inside that intelligence, and that makes it very hard for them to want to reveal because the sources and methods are still being used today." (Okay. So which country was it, and when did the crash take place? And what type of craft? Let's go back to Davis in, "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." (Two years before the end of the Cold War with the Soviets, so the timeframe fits.) Davis: "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 Soviet scientists took apart the recovered craft and discovered a very advanced directed energy weapon." (It certainly looks like this case fits what Davis said to Josh. Davis also said this in 2024 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. " (Photos of four Grays? Again, this seems to fit with what he was talking about to James Fox, Josh, and elsewhere.) Davis: "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."

Joe Murgia

63,441 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

🚨Eric Davis just put one of the most explosive claims back on the record. Speaking to Peter Skafish on the Sol Foundation, physicist Eric Davis reaffirmed that the U.S. government has operated crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs and that at least one former U.S. president was directly exposed to evidence tied to them. According to Davis, he held multiple phone conversations in 2003-2004 with George H. W. Bush after Bush's retirement. Those calls, Davis says, stemmed from introductions made through senior intelligence circles associated with AFIO and former Pentagon and intelligence officials. During those conversations, Bush allegedly confirmed that while being read in as CIA Director in the Ford administration, a DoD liaison officer mistakenly assumed Bush already had access to UAP related programs and began briefing him on them. That briefing, Davis claims, included details of a 1964 landing at Holloman Air Force Base, where a non human craft allegedly landed, a humanoid entity exited, and met with senior U.S. Air Force officers and CIA personnel. The encounter was reportedly filmed by a military helicopter crew responding to air traffic control orders. Bush, according to Davis, requested access to the files and footage and was denied. He was told the program sat outside his clearance unless a specific presidential authority was triggered. If this is accurate, this places direct U.S. executive leadership face to face with evidence of non human intelligence, while simultaneously exposing the existence of programs operating beyond normal presidential oversight. Source:

🚨Eric Davis just put one of the most explosive claims back on the record. Speaking to Peter Skafish on the Sol Foundation, physicist Eric Davis reaffirmed that the U.S. government has operated crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs and that at least one former U.S. president was directly exposed to evidence tied to them. According to Davis, he held multiple phone conversations in 2003-2004 with George H. W. Bush after Bush's retirement. Those calls, Davis says, stemmed from introductions made through senior intelligence circles associated with AFIO and former Pentagon and intelligence officials. During those conversations, Bush allegedly confirmed that while being read in as CIA Director in the Ford administration, a DoD liaison officer mistakenly assumed Bush already had access to UAP related programs and began briefing him on them. That briefing, Davis claims, included details of a 1964 landing at Holloman Air Force Base, where a non human craft allegedly landed, a humanoid entity exited, and met with senior U.S. Air Force officers and CIA personnel. The encounter was reportedly filmed by a military helicopter crew responding to air traffic control orders. Bush, according to Davis, requested access to the files and footage and was denied. He was told the program sat outside his clearance unless a specific presidential authority was triggered. If this is accurate, this places direct U.S. executive leadership face to face with evidence of non human intelligence, while simultaneously exposing the existence of programs operating beyond normal presidential oversight. Source:

Skywatch Signal

40,331 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

🛸 "He accidentally activated [the craft] and it levitated. And he couldn't figure out how to turn it off." ~Davis 🛸 (This is what Davis says he was told by Mary Elizabeth Elliot. Bring her in and have her tell the WORLD her story. You saw this craft levitating with your own eyes? Were you inside of it? How do you think it operated? Telepathy/psi?) Dr. Eric Davis: "I just know that one aerospace company (TRW) that ran their program at Wright Patterson, circa the 1990s, from not long after the birth of this company to the end of the 80s...they had an intact craft. They didn't know how to activate it. They could get inside, they didn't know how to activate it. "But one scientist, one of their engineers or scientists working on it...so I think he was inside the craft. So it's not manual, human-style control systems, it's a completely different type of control system. Definitely not anthropocentric, anthropomorphic, or anything. "He was, desperately, touching things to try to get something to work, and he accidentally activated it and it levitated. And he couldn't figure out how to turn it off (laughs). So, my source at TRW for that (Mary Elizabeth Elliot) said that that craft was just left levitating in the hangar - in a secured, classified hangar - and that's how they had to leave it because nobody could figure out how to reverse the controls to shut it down (laughs)." (Note: Davis has never said her name but if you've followed the Wilson/Davis-notes story, you know who he's talking about. And if you think he's full of it, fine. Bring her in and let's hear it from her mouth and see if anybody else who worked in that alleged UFO program (the scientist?) is willing to come forward, too. If they're Trump voters/supporters, that might help.) ~~~More on MEE from the Davis interview with The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford ~~~ (OmniTalk Radio and I obsessed over MEE for years so it's nice to see some details finally coming out. I REALLY hope we get to hear from her so we can judge her credibility. She has the potential to blow this whole thing wide open. So did Jim Ryder, the now-deceased vice president of Lockheed who, according to Davis, said he worked on the C/R program right out of graduate school, along with a friend of his (Ryder's). His loss was a horrible set-back but that can be overcome if we get to hear from MEE and others who say they worked in/on the program.) ~ Davis to Matt: "I was given leaked classified information by someone (This is Mary Elizabeth Elliot) who was an executive administrative assistant and field security officer for one of the Legacy aerospace companies (TRW ~Joe) that no longer exists. It got absorbed by one of the other Legacy aerospace companies after 2000 or about that period of time." (TRW was acquired by Northrop Grumman in December of 2002.) Davis: "And that individual (MEE) revealed that Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where they had a facility at - her company that employed her - and they had intact craft there that they were trying to reverse engineer." "And so, that I knew about, that was illegal information she shouldn't have told me, but I didn't have security clearances with the need-to-know to get that. That was leaked, and that was kept very quiet until the leak of the Wilson notes, in which elements of her story, of that woman (MEE) - that's a woman - that individual's story were included as context to provide context to the Wilson notes. It was just kind of glommed on to the Wilson transcript to provide context to the crash retrieval's absurd security measures to keep it hidden." I included the MEE parts of the Wilson notes, here:

🛸 "He accidentally activated [the craft] and it levitated. And he couldn't figure out how to turn it off." ~Davis 🛸 (This is what Davis says he was told by Mary Elizabeth Elliot. Bring her in and have her tell the WORLD her story. You saw this craft levitating with your own eyes? Were you inside of it? How do you think it operated? Telepathy/psi?) Dr. Eric Davis: "I just know that one aerospace company (TRW) that ran their program at Wright Patterson, circa the 1990s, from not long after the birth of this company to the end of the 80s...they had an intact craft. They didn't know how to activate it. They could get inside, they didn't know how to activate it. "But one scientist, one of their engineers or scientists working on it...so I think he was inside the craft. So it's not manual, human-style control systems, it's a completely different type of control system. Definitely not anthropocentric, anthropomorphic, or anything. "He was, desperately, touching things to try to get something to work, and he accidentally activated it and it levitated. And he couldn't figure out how to turn it off (laughs). So, my source at TRW for that (Mary Elizabeth Elliot) said that that craft was just left levitating in the hangar - in a secured, classified hangar - and that's how they had to leave it because nobody could figure out how to reverse the controls to shut it down (laughs)." (Note: Davis has never said her name but if you've followed the Wilson/Davis-notes story, you know who he's talking about. And if you think he's full of it, fine. Bring her in and let's hear it from her mouth and see if anybody else who worked in that alleged UFO program (the scientist?) is willing to come forward, too. If they're Trump voters/supporters, that might help.) ~More on MEE from the Davis interview with The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford ~ (OmniTalk Radio and I obsessed over MEE for years so it's nice to see some details finally coming out. I REALLY hope we get to hear from her so we can judge her credibility. She has the potential to blow this whole thing wide open. So did Jim Ryder, the now-deceased vice president of Lockheed who, according to Davis, said he worked on the C/R program right out of graduate school, along with a friend of his (Ryder's). His loss was a horrible set-back but that can be overcome if we get to hear from MEE and others who say they worked in/on the program.) ~ Davis to Matt: "I was given leaked classified information by someone (This is Mary Elizabeth Elliot) who was an executive administrative assistant and field security officer for one of the Legacy aerospace companies (TRW ~Joe) that no longer exists. It got absorbed by one of the other Legacy aerospace companies after 2000 or about that period of time." (TRW was acquired by Northrop Grumman in December of 2002.) Davis: "And that individual (MEE) revealed that Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where they had a facility at - her company that employed her - and they had intact craft there that they were trying to reverse engineer." "And so, that I knew about, that was illegal information she shouldn't have told me, but I didn't have security clearances with the need-to-know to get that. That was leaked, and that was kept very quiet until the leak of the Wilson notes, in which elements of her story, of that woman (MEE) - that's a woman - that individual's story were included as context to provide context to the Wilson notes. It was just kind of glommed on to the Wilson transcript to provide context to the crash retrieval's absurd security measures to keep it hidden." I included the MEE parts of the Wilson notes, here:

Joe Murgia

47,770 görüntüleme • 17 gün önce

One Again, Eric Davis Confirms He Interviewed Admiral Wilson "Jay [Stratton] put Dave [Grusch], and Dave's boss and I together, and I briefed them for 2.5 days [on UAP programs and crash retrievals]." ~Dr. Eric Davis (Here's Eric Davis telling you he interviewed Admiral Wilson without actually saying it. He also referenced General Jack Sheehan, who allegedly touched a craft. Sound isn't great so my transcript isn't perfect.) Davis: "One four-star General (Jack Sheehan, I believe. ~Joe) and one three-star Admiral (Tom Wilson) were able to locate these programs...and they uncovered them. One (Wilson) got a lot of resistance and a hostile reception and was told that he found who he was looking for, they were who they suspected of being. Yes, they were a UFO/UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program." (Those last two sentences are pretty much from the Wilson/Davis notes that Eric penned after his interview with Wilson in 2002) Davis: "The other one (Jack Sheehan) had a lot more political power behind him because of his stature as a four-star General. He was able to get into the program (and allegedly touch a craft) and use his authority and his access., I think they call that a Super User, who has access to all access programs. So he had the capability to look into that whole thing. "I was fortunate to meet Dave Grusch at the behest of Jay Stratton. Dave was an aero-liaison officer to the UAP Task Force. And Dave was working for his boss at the NRO. Jay put Dave, and Dave's boss and I together, and I briefed them for 2.5 days, just a week before COVID struck. And Dave took all of my classified and proprietary information of all the investigations I did at NIDS, AFRO and working for Hal Puthoff at EarthTech, and he took that data and ran with it. And what you now know the aftermath of that was his classified whistleblower complaint to the IG of the IC. So, there is a there there."

One Again, Eric Davis Confirms He Interviewed Admiral Wilson "Jay [Stratton] put Dave [Grusch], and Dave's boss and I together, and I briefed them for 2.5 days [on UAP programs and crash retrievals]." ~Dr. Eric Davis (Here's Eric Davis telling you he interviewed Admiral Wilson without actually saying it. He also referenced General Jack Sheehan, who allegedly touched a craft. Sound isn't great so my transcript isn't perfect.) Davis: "One four-star General (Jack Sheehan, I believe. ~Joe) and one three-star Admiral (Tom Wilson) were able to locate these programs...and they uncovered them. One (Wilson) got a lot of resistance and a hostile reception and was told that he found who he was looking for, they were who they suspected of being. Yes, they were a UFO/UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program." (Those last two sentences are pretty much from the Wilson/Davis notes that Eric penned after his interview with Wilson in 2002) Davis: "The other one (Jack Sheehan) had a lot more political power behind him because of his stature as a four-star General. He was able to get into the program (and allegedly touch a craft) and use his authority and his access., I think they call that a Super User, who has access to all access programs. So he had the capability to look into that whole thing. "I was fortunate to meet Dave Grusch at the behest of Jay Stratton. Dave was an aero-liaison officer to the UAP Task Force. And Dave was working for his boss at the NRO. Jay put Dave, and Dave's boss and I together, and I briefed them for 2.5 days, just a week before COVID struck. And Dave took all of my classified and proprietary information of all the investigations I did at NIDS, AFRO and working for Hal Puthoff at EarthTech, and he took that data and ran with it. And what you now know the aftermath of that was his classified whistleblower complaint to the IG of the IC. So, there is a there there."

Joe Murgia

48,388 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

🔥🛸 "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 🛸🔥 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."

🔥🛸 "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 🛸🔥 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

26,388 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

🚨Whoa Eric Davis's Spilling The Beans, This Guy Has No Chill When Davis talks about investigating UAPs and legacy programs, he's very clear that this wasn't done from the sidelines. At NIDS he was part of the scientific core, backed by a world class advisory board that included Hal Puthoff, Jacques Vallee, Edgar Mitchell, Jack Schmitt, senior Los Alamos physicists, and figures with deep backgrounds in nuclear engineering, psychology, and advanced technology. That puts the work in a very different category than most public UAP research. After NIDS, Davis moved directly into contract work for the Air Force Research Laboratory, specifically within advanced concepts programs. These weren't just observational roles. They were exploratory, future facing physics efforts, exactly the kind of environments where unconventional data and legacy issues surface behind the scenes, and certainly not publicly. By the mid 2000s, Davis was working directly under Hal Puthoff, while simultaneously participating in government funded and industry funded advanced physics research. That's the point where government, defense contractors, and frontier theoretical work intersect and where compartmented knowledge tends to migrate, but not disappear. When the DIA's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) began, Davis and Puthoff were formally deputized, with DIA letters authorizing access, security credentials acknowledged, and explicit "need to know" status for UAP related classified information. Their task was to locate programs, extract technical insight, and determine whether meaningful physics had already been uncovered. While working on quantum vacuum and advanced energy concepts with Lockheed Martin's Advanced Technology Center, a senior vice president operating officially, inside a SCIF disclosed his direct involvement in a crash retrieval program spanning decades. He operated as part of a controlled, classified disclosure between cleared professionals. This is why Davis keeps emphasizing process. This information was accumulated through credentialed work, authorized access, and long term professional trust. That's also why he's careful about what he says publicly. He's not trying to persuade anyone. He's drawing a line between what he knows, how he knows it, and what can be discussed without violating classification. You don't have to accept every implication to understand the significance of this. What Davis is describing is not belief driven disclosure. It's institutional memory surfacing through people who were formally tasked to look for it. #UAP #UAPDisclosure #EricDavis #AATIP #AAWSAP #NIDS #GovernmentSecrecy #AdvancedPhysics #NationalSecurity #FollowTheData #UAPHistory #Transparency Source:

🚨Whoa Eric Davis's Spilling The Beans, This Guy Has No Chill When Davis talks about investigating UAPs and legacy programs, he's very clear that this wasn't done from the sidelines. At NIDS he was part of the scientific core, backed by a world class advisory board that included Hal Puthoff, Jacques Vallee, Edgar Mitchell, Jack Schmitt, senior Los Alamos physicists, and figures with deep backgrounds in nuclear engineering, psychology, and advanced technology. That puts the work in a very different category than most public UAP research. After NIDS, Davis moved directly into contract work for the Air Force Research Laboratory, specifically within advanced concepts programs. These weren't just observational roles. They were exploratory, future facing physics efforts, exactly the kind of environments where unconventional data and legacy issues surface behind the scenes, and certainly not publicly. By the mid 2000s, Davis was working directly under Hal Puthoff, while simultaneously participating in government funded and industry funded advanced physics research. That's the point where government, defense contractors, and frontier theoretical work intersect and where compartmented knowledge tends to migrate, but not disappear. When the DIA's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) began, Davis and Puthoff were formally deputized, with DIA letters authorizing access, security credentials acknowledged, and explicit "need to know" status for UAP related classified information. Their task was to locate programs, extract technical insight, and determine whether meaningful physics had already been uncovered. While working on quantum vacuum and advanced energy concepts with Lockheed Martin's Advanced Technology Center, a senior vice president operating officially, inside a SCIF disclosed his direct involvement in a crash retrieval program spanning decades. He operated as part of a controlled, classified disclosure between cleared professionals. This is why Davis keeps emphasizing process. This information was accumulated through credentialed work, authorized access, and long term professional trust. That's also why he's careful about what he says publicly. He's not trying to persuade anyone. He's drawing a line between what he knows, how he knows it, and what can be discussed without violating classification. You don't have to accept every implication to understand the significance of this. What Davis is describing is not belief driven disclosure. It's institutional memory surfacing through people who were formally tasked to look for it. #UAP #UAPDisclosure #EricDavis #AATIP #AAWSAP #NIDS #GovernmentSecrecy #AdvancedPhysics #NationalSecurity #FollowTheData #UAPHistory #Transparency Source:

Skywatch Signal

15,243 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Kash Patel on Epstein: "What we have done, and just to remind folks, the Epstein case files existed in the two prior administrations, in the Obama administration and the Biden administration, and they didn't release anything." "There was President Trump in the first administration that renewed charges against Mr. Epstein. And I know it's a little complicated to understand, but what exists in the Epstein case files was a direct result of the limited search warrants from 2006 and 2007, which hamstrung future investigations because of the non-prosecution agreement." "Multiple administrations had the opportunity to look at the entirety of that case file and recommend prosecutions against anyone that was trafficked under Mr. Epstein and anyone that participated in that trafficking. And the only person to bring charges was the prior administration against Mr. Epstein. Now, I am not saying that others were not trafficked and others were not involved." "What I am telling you is that based on the information we have, and we have continuously and publicly asked for the public to come forward with more information, if there is, we'll look at it. But based on credible information, we have released all credible information and the information that the Department of Justice and the FBI never releases is information on investigations that are not credible. And we don't release the names of victims who weren't credible, but in the same time, we don't release the names of victims who were credible. And so the information, that's by law. And so the information we are releasing now is historic and it is also to the maximum capacity that the law allows." "I know that's not going to satisfy many, many, many people, but if they wanted it done right, then the investigation from its origination should have been done right and he should not have been given a get out of jail free card to do jail on the weekends for 12 hours a day and he should have been investigated fully for the entirety of his crime and criminal enterprise not just from 1997 to 2001."

Kash Patel on Epstein: "What we have done, and just to remind folks, the Epstein case files existed in the two prior administrations, in the Obama administration and the Biden administration, and they didn't release anything." "There was President Trump in the first administration that renewed charges against Mr. Epstein. And I know it's a little complicated to understand, but what exists in the Epstein case files was a direct result of the limited search warrants from 2006 and 2007, which hamstrung future investigations because of the non-prosecution agreement." "Multiple administrations had the opportunity to look at the entirety of that case file and recommend prosecutions against anyone that was trafficked under Mr. Epstein and anyone that participated in that trafficking. And the only person to bring charges was the prior administration against Mr. Epstein. Now, I am not saying that others were not trafficked and others were not involved." "What I am telling you is that based on the information we have, and we have continuously and publicly asked for the public to come forward with more information, if there is, we'll look at it. But based on credible information, we have released all credible information and the information that the Department of Justice and the FBI never releases is information on investigations that are not credible. And we don't release the names of victims who weren't credible, but in the same time, we don't release the names of victims who were credible. And so the information, that's by law. And so the information we are releasing now is historic and it is also to the maximum capacity that the law allows." "I know that's not going to satisfy many, many, many people, but if they wanted it done right, then the investigation from its origination should have been done right and he should not have been given a get out of jail free card to do jail on the weekends for 12 hours a day and he should have been investigated fully for the entirety of his crime and criminal enterprise not just from 1997 to 2001."

Gunther Eagleman™

52,307 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

“What did you think of Lando being booed at race because people and I've seen it online as well say he doesn't deserve the title because McLaren favored him over his teammate. Do you think that's total nonsense?” Jacques Villeneuve: “That's a little bit ridiculous. When there was some booing in some races, that was embarrassing. You should never boo a driver that's clean, doesn't do anything dirty, on track is respectful, and on top of it is super fast. What's wrong with people? That was embarrassing. And, had it been that Piastri was a second a lap faster than him and somehow Lando was winning because a lot of things were happening, his car breaking down every time, then you could start thinking, okay, that's really not cool. That's not fair. But that wasn't the case. And in the second half, Norris has been faster right at the beginning as well, last year as well. So there's this whole middle of the season where Piastri was driving a lot better than Norris and was getting the points. Norris had an engine blowing up, not Piastri. And so those fans, they don't look at that either. You have to look at the whole picture, at the whole season. And suddenly if your favorite is starting to go backwards, you just got to bite the bullet and accept it. Your favorite is just going backwards. That doesn't mean that the other one is treated better or the other one is undeserving just because the one you're a fan of is not winning right now. That’s really wrong. If you're a fan of the sport, then you have to be a fan of the sport and understand when your driver is maybe not cutting it at this point in time, even though he was before and he will in the future again. It's all a question of timing. But that's the price we have to pay now with social media and how big F1 has become. It's very passionate. The people are passionate and once, you know, fans come from fanatism, you stop thinking, when you get in that mindset and it happens to all of us. You want something so much that you get attached and you cannot - it's hard to start seeing reality. So you will try to mold the reality to your thought process and if your champion is not winning then it cannot be his fault. It has to be something from the outside. It has to be the team destroying his chance or not favoring and so on and so on and so on. But there's nothing concrete behind those comments. It's pure fandom and it'll always be like this. And ultimately it's not a bad thing. You know drivers at that - sportsman at that level have to grow a thick skin. If not, you don't deserve to be there. You just have to have a thick skin because they're all very happy to get the compliments. They love it when it's just positive, but it gets balanced out with negatives and you need to be able to take and accept the negatives as well. It goes both ways. You cannot have the good. You just have to be a thick skin and know that it's part and parcels of what's going on. And in one month, it will be forgotten and maybe everything will change and it be the other driver that suddenly will be criticized and so on. So, it's just that's just the way it is.”

“What did you think of Lando being booed at race because people and I've seen it online as well say he doesn't deserve the title because McLaren favored him over his teammate. Do you think that's total nonsense?” Jacques Villeneuve: “That's a little bit ridiculous. When there was some booing in some races, that was embarrassing. You should never boo a driver that's clean, doesn't do anything dirty, on track is respectful, and on top of it is super fast. What's wrong with people? That was embarrassing. And, had it been that Piastri was a second a lap faster than him and somehow Lando was winning because a lot of things were happening, his car breaking down every time, then you could start thinking, okay, that's really not cool. That's not fair. But that wasn't the case. And in the second half, Norris has been faster right at the beginning as well, last year as well. So there's this whole middle of the season where Piastri was driving a lot better than Norris and was getting the points. Norris had an engine blowing up, not Piastri. And so those fans, they don't look at that either. You have to look at the whole picture, at the whole season. And suddenly if your favorite is starting to go backwards, you just got to bite the bullet and accept it. Your favorite is just going backwards. That doesn't mean that the other one is treated better or the other one is undeserving just because the one you're a fan of is not winning right now. That’s really wrong. If you're a fan of the sport, then you have to be a fan of the sport and understand when your driver is maybe not cutting it at this point in time, even though he was before and he will in the future again. It's all a question of timing. But that's the price we have to pay now with social media and how big F1 has become. It's very passionate. The people are passionate and once, you know, fans come from fanatism, you stop thinking, when you get in that mindset and it happens to all of us. You want something so much that you get attached and you cannot - it's hard to start seeing reality. So you will try to mold the reality to your thought process and if your champion is not winning then it cannot be his fault. It has to be something from the outside. It has to be the team destroying his chance or not favoring and so on and so on and so on. But there's nothing concrete behind those comments. It's pure fandom and it'll always be like this. And ultimately it's not a bad thing. You know drivers at that - sportsman at that level have to grow a thick skin. If not, you don't deserve to be there. You just have to have a thick skin because they're all very happy to get the compliments. They love it when it's just positive, but it gets balanced out with negatives and you need to be able to take and accept the negatives as well. It goes both ways. You cannot have the good. You just have to be a thick skin and know that it's part and parcels of what's going on. And in one month, it will be forgotten and maybe everything will change and it be the other driver that suddenly will be criticized and so on. So, it's just that's just the way it is.”

naenia ¹ ⁶³

29,833 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

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."

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

32,303 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Davis Once Again Confirms the Wilson/Davis Notes. Also, Mary Elizabeth Elliot Illegally Leaked Him Info. about Intact Craft at Wright Patt AFB (OK, here's the little tidbit I was talking about earlier today. Did anybody pick up on it? Let's go to the Wilson/Davis notes...) Davis to Wilson: "I will keep mouth shut (about the meeting with Admiral Wilson)." Davis Writing: I told Wilson about Mary Elizabeth Elliot - the TRW story, Ingo’s story and the 1974 RVer woman at WPAFB (Wright Patterson Air Force Base ~Joe). Wilson: "Mary Elliot sounds like real deal based on her info and behavior with attorney (Jeffrey W. Griffith). She probably will only come totally clean on her deathbed thirty years from now." (I've tried to get more information on MEE (and so have others) but it's not easy. OmniTalk Radio. Davis added some details to her story today.) Matt - The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford: "As far as your work at NIDS...were you ever privy to any classified information that would give you a clue that the Roswell did happen?" Dr. Eric Davis: "Not Roswell, specifically. I was given leaked classified information by someone (This is Mary Elizabeth Elliot) who was an executive administrative assistant and field security officer for one of the Legacy aerospace companies (TRW ~Joe) that no longer exists. It got absorbed by one of the other Legacy aerospace companies after 2000 or about that period of time." (TRW was acquired by Northrop Grumman in December of 2002.) Davis: "And that individual (MEE) revealed that Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where they had a facility at - her company that employed her - and they had intact craft there that they were trying to reverse engineer." (Intact craft sounds plural. Not an intact craft, but intact craft.) Davis: "And so, that I knew about, that was illegal information she shouldn't have told me, but I didn't have security clearances with the need-to-know to get that. (This may be why info. on MEE is so hard to come by: She was/is being protected because she may have broken the law. I hope she shares all that she knows one day before she passes.) Davis: "That was leaked, and that was kept very quiet until the leak of the Wilson notes, in which elements of her story, of that woman (MEE) - that's a woman - that individual's story were included as context to provide context to the Wilson notes. It was just kind of glommed on to the Wilson transcript to provide context to the crash retrieval's absurd security measures to keep it hidden." (That's Davis confirming, AGAIN, that he wrote the W/D notes. I don't think we've heard the last of the MEE story and what they may have discovered when working on that (or those) intact craft.)

Davis Once Again Confirms the Wilson/Davis Notes. Also, Mary Elizabeth Elliot Illegally Leaked Him Info. about Intact Craft at Wright Patt AFB (OK, here's the little tidbit I was talking about earlier today. Did anybody pick up on it? Let's go to the Wilson/Davis notes...) Davis to Wilson: "I will keep mouth shut (about the meeting with Admiral Wilson)." Davis Writing: I told Wilson about Mary Elizabeth Elliot - the TRW story, Ingo’s story and the 1974 RVer woman at WPAFB (Wright Patterson Air Force Base ~Joe). Wilson: "Mary Elliot sounds like real deal based on her info and behavior with attorney (Jeffrey W. Griffith). She probably will only come totally clean on her deathbed thirty years from now." (I've tried to get more information on MEE (and so have others) but it's not easy. OmniTalk Radio. Davis added some details to her story today.) Matt - The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford: "As far as your work at NIDS...were you ever privy to any classified information that would give you a clue that the Roswell did happen?" Dr. Eric Davis: "Not Roswell, specifically. I was given leaked classified information by someone (This is Mary Elizabeth Elliot) who was an executive administrative assistant and field security officer for one of the Legacy aerospace companies (TRW ~Joe) that no longer exists. It got absorbed by one of the other Legacy aerospace companies after 2000 or about that period of time." (TRW was acquired by Northrop Grumman in December of 2002.) Davis: "And that individual (MEE) revealed that Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where they had a facility at - her company that employed her - and they had intact craft there that they were trying to reverse engineer." (Intact craft sounds plural. Not an intact craft, but intact craft.) Davis: "And so, that I knew about, that was illegal information she shouldn't have told me, but I didn't have security clearances with the need-to-know to get that. (This may be why info. on MEE is so hard to come by: She was/is being protected because she may have broken the law. I hope she shares all that she knows one day before she passes.) Davis: "That was leaked, and that was kept very quiet until the leak of the Wilson notes, in which elements of her story, of that woman (MEE) - that's a woman - that individual's story were included as context to provide context to the Wilson notes. It was just kind of glommed on to the Wilson transcript to provide context to the crash retrieval's absurd security measures to keep it hidden." (That's Davis confirming, AGAIN, that he wrote the W/D notes. I don't think we've heard the last of the MEE story and what they may have discovered when working on that (or those) intact craft.)

Joe Murgia

17,890 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🤬 Burlison: Putting Lacatski Under Oath in a Hearing Wasn't a Top Priority Because He Wouldn't Say Anything New 🤬 (I can't believe I just heard that.) Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Dr. James Lacatski came on our show. He ran the UFO program for the Defense Intelligence Agency, and he admitted on our show that they breached the hull of a UFO in government possession." Burlison at the Last Hearing: "You reported [that] James Lacatski came to you with government possession of NHI craft and how they ultimately gained entry. Can you testify to the veracity of that claim?" George Knapp at the Last Hearing: "Dr. Lacatski is an honorable man who served most of his career with the DIA. A very trusted, high-level rocket scientist and intelligence analyst who inspired the AAWSAP program, as I said earlier. He said this craft, we had managed to get inside of it. It had no wings, no rotor, no tail, it had no fuel, no fuel tanks. They didn't know how it flew or how it was operated. It clearly looked like it was aerodynamic, but he would not go further. He's a by-the-book guy, and until he gets clearance to say more about that, I don't think we're going to hear much more. "But, it's not ours. It wasn't ours. We didn't make it. We didn't know who made it and how it was built and how it operated. We've got at least one, and I don't know, I think that's enough confirmation that we do have recovered discs and material." (What is written in "Initial Revelations" about that alleged craft, and Lacatski standing by what was written when he was on "Weaponized" is one of the most important claims we've ever had in this field. I don't see it as confirmation that we have craft but we're getting closer. Lacatski saying that he saw it with his own eyes would take it up a notch, but I still wanna see it for myself, and not just in photos and videos. AI is just too good to accept that as proof.) Corbell: "So, and you put that in congressional record. Do you have a way that you can, you know, find out, where is it? He can't tell us, but maybe he can tell you? Where is that craft? Can you go hunt it down? Can you go see it?" Burlison: "You know, that's an interesting question. When it came to Lacatski - and I watched his interview that he did with you guys - and here's what my response to him is. Because he was frustrated that we hadn't reached out to him, but he also kind of, he also admitted that - which is what I was told, and the reason why we haven't reached out to him - is that he's not gonna tell us anything that's not in his books." (Most people on this planet have not read his books!) Corbell: "Well, hold on, hold on. You did reach out to him. There have been three hearings. I reached out to him on behalf of Congress, officially, twice, to say..." Burlison: "You did, that's right, you did." Corbell: "And I had congressional members talk with him the hearing before the last one. He just forgot. But the point is, is that maybe with you guys, in the correct environment, with the right clearances, he can tell you where it is, and you can just put this to bed and go find it." (I'm not against Congress talking to Lacatski in a SCIF, but, IMO, the chances that he tells members of the Secrets Task Force the location of this alleged craft are ZERO. Maybe Rubio would get an answer but he may already know. And if he (Rubio) does know, he's not telling us. At least not yet, and probably, IMO, never.) Burlison: "Yeah. And I remember that. I remember that he was one of the people that we had tasked you to go to reach out to. And for those people that are kind of asking how did that relationship work? Look, we don't have all the contact information for all these people. Why repeat the work that you two have done in building these contacts in your networks? And so, you, basically, patriotically dedicated your time, for free, helping us make contact and kind of coordinate some of those witnesses. (That was an awesome thing for Corbell and Knapp to do and it was for a great cause. The truth!) Burlison: "And I had been told Lacatski is probably not gonna reveal anything that he hasn't already revealed. When I've talked to people, it seemed like it wasn't gonna be new information. And therefore, to me, he wasn't as high of a priority." (He should have been THE priority, as far as witnesses for the hearing. With Lacatski, you have a respected rocket scientist, physicist and intelligence analyst, who has confirmed that this passage from Initial Revelations is accurate: “At the conclusion of a 2011 meeting in the Capitol building with a U.S. Senator and an agency Under Secretary, Lacatski, the only one of this book’s authors present, posed a question. He stated that the United States was in possession of a craft of unknown origin and had successfully gained access to its interior. This craft had a streamlined configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight but no intakes, exhaust, wings, or control surfaces. In fact, it appeared not to have an engine, fuel tanks, or fuel. Lacatski asked: What was the purpose of this craft? Was it a life-support craft useful only for atmospheric reentry or what? If it was a spacecraft, then how did it operate”? And, Lacatski may have seen the craft with his own eyes and entered it. But Burlison (or anybody else on the Task Force) didn't see it as a priority to bring him in, UNDER OATH, and have him repeat what is said in that book, and other important claims from the other two books, and his interviews with Knapp and Corbell? I'm shaking my head as I type this. You know what percentage of the world has read those books and/or watched the, limited, interviews Lacatski has given? Maybe 0.0000000000001% of the population? You had (and still do) a chance to get that man under oath and it wasn't a priority? WTAF? He's getting older and we don't know how much longer he will be around. If, as Rep. Andy Ogles told Matt Laslo, another hearing is coming in January, Lacatski, if he agrees, MUST be part of that. You can ask him about the craft, the alleged paranormal connection, and people getting sick and injured if they get too close to a UAP. And, he can be asked about the hitchhiker effect and claims of contagion. It doesn't matter if he won't add anything new or different than what's in his books or interviews. Put him under oath for the world to see and hear and, hopefully, the mainstream media picks up the story: Rocket Scientist: The USG Has an Otherworldly Craft in its Possession and Have Breached the Hull And maybe, if he's in a Disclosure mood, he'll offer up some surprise like he did in his last interview on Weaponized when he said we have made progress on back engineering these craft but, "it hasn't been achieved to its full extent." That's a MASSIVE claim! Push him to offer up more. And if his answers to many questions are: "It's all in my book"? Make him read from his book so the world can be informed about his claims and what was allegedly discovered in AAWSAP. David Grusch didn't say much more than what he said in his interview with Ross Coulthart and article in The Debrief, but was there ever any thought that he shouldn't have been put under oath and brought in as a witness for that congressional hearing? Of course not!) Burlison: "But to your point, I think getting him in a SCIF and seeing if there's maybe any additional room for him to talk, it might be worthwhile to do that." Knapp: "I think he might. I mean, the last conversations that we've had, it seems like he's edging closer to the idea that, under the right circumstances, he would be willing to share information with Congress, which would be great." (Again, I'm all for putting him the SCIF, too.)

🤬 Burlison: Putting Lacatski Under Oath in a Hearing Wasn't a Top Priority Because He Wouldn't Say Anything New 🤬 (I can't believe I just heard that.) Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Dr. James Lacatski came on our show. He ran the UFO program for the Defense Intelligence Agency, and he admitted on our show that they breached the hull of a UFO in government possession." Burlison at the Last Hearing: "You reported [that] James Lacatski came to you with government possession of NHI craft and how they ultimately gained entry. Can you testify to the veracity of that claim?" George Knapp at the Last Hearing: "Dr. Lacatski is an honorable man who served most of his career with the DIA. A very trusted, high-level rocket scientist and intelligence analyst who inspired the AAWSAP program, as I said earlier. He said this craft, we had managed to get inside of it. It had no wings, no rotor, no tail, it had no fuel, no fuel tanks. They didn't know how it flew or how it was operated. It clearly looked like it was aerodynamic, but he would not go further. He's a by-the-book guy, and until he gets clearance to say more about that, I don't think we're going to hear much more. "But, it's not ours. It wasn't ours. We didn't make it. We didn't know who made it and how it was built and how it operated. We've got at least one, and I don't know, I think that's enough confirmation that we do have recovered discs and material." (What is written in "Initial Revelations" about that alleged craft, and Lacatski standing by what was written when he was on "Weaponized" is one of the most important claims we've ever had in this field. I don't see it as confirmation that we have craft but we're getting closer. Lacatski saying that he saw it with his own eyes would take it up a notch, but I still wanna see it for myself, and not just in photos and videos. AI is just too good to accept that as proof.) Corbell: "So, and you put that in congressional record. Do you have a way that you can, you know, find out, where is it? He can't tell us, but maybe he can tell you? Where is that craft? Can you go hunt it down? Can you go see it?" Burlison: "You know, that's an interesting question. When it came to Lacatski - and I watched his interview that he did with you guys - and here's what my response to him is. Because he was frustrated that we hadn't reached out to him, but he also kind of, he also admitted that - which is what I was told, and the reason why we haven't reached out to him - is that he's not gonna tell us anything that's not in his books." (Most people on this planet have not read his books!) Corbell: "Well, hold on, hold on. You did reach out to him. There have been three hearings. I reached out to him on behalf of Congress, officially, twice, to say..." Burlison: "You did, that's right, you did." Corbell: "And I had congressional members talk with him the hearing before the last one. He just forgot. But the point is, is that maybe with you guys, in the correct environment, with the right clearances, he can tell you where it is, and you can just put this to bed and go find it." (I'm not against Congress talking to Lacatski in a SCIF, but, IMO, the chances that he tells members of the Secrets Task Force the location of this alleged craft are ZERO. Maybe Rubio would get an answer but he may already know. And if he (Rubio) does know, he's not telling us. At least not yet, and probably, IMO, never.) Burlison: "Yeah. And I remember that. I remember that he was one of the people that we had tasked you to go to reach out to. And for those people that are kind of asking how did that relationship work? Look, we don't have all the contact information for all these people. Why repeat the work that you two have done in building these contacts in your networks? And so, you, basically, patriotically dedicated your time, for free, helping us make contact and kind of coordinate some of those witnesses. (That was an awesome thing for Corbell and Knapp to do and it was for a great cause. The truth!) Burlison: "And I had been told Lacatski is probably not gonna reveal anything that he hasn't already revealed. When I've talked to people, it seemed like it wasn't gonna be new information. And therefore, to me, he wasn't as high of a priority." (He should have been THE priority, as far as witnesses for the hearing. With Lacatski, you have a respected rocket scientist, physicist and intelligence analyst, who has confirmed that this passage from Initial Revelations is accurate: “At the conclusion of a 2011 meeting in the Capitol building with a U.S. Senator and an agency Under Secretary, Lacatski, the only one of this book’s authors present, posed a question. He stated that the United States was in possession of a craft of unknown origin and had successfully gained access to its interior. This craft had a streamlined configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight but no intakes, exhaust, wings, or control surfaces. In fact, it appeared not to have an engine, fuel tanks, or fuel. Lacatski asked: What was the purpose of this craft? Was it a life-support craft useful only for atmospheric reentry or what? If it was a spacecraft, then how did it operate”? And, Lacatski may have seen the craft with his own eyes and entered it. But Burlison (or anybody else on the Task Force) didn't see it as a priority to bring him in, UNDER OATH, and have him repeat what is said in that book, and other important claims from the other two books, and his interviews with Knapp and Corbell? I'm shaking my head as I type this. You know what percentage of the world has read those books and/or watched the, limited, interviews Lacatski has given? Maybe 0.0000000000001% of the population? You had (and still do) a chance to get that man under oath and it wasn't a priority? WTAF? He's getting older and we don't know how much longer he will be around. If, as Rep. Andy Ogles told Matt Laslo, another hearing is coming in January, Lacatski, if he agrees, MUST be part of that. You can ask him about the craft, the alleged paranormal connection, and people getting sick and injured if they get too close to a UAP. And, he can be asked about the hitchhiker effect and claims of contagion. It doesn't matter if he won't add anything new or different than what's in his books or interviews. Put him under oath for the world to see and hear and, hopefully, the mainstream media picks up the story: Rocket Scientist: The USG Has an Otherworldly Craft in its Possession and Have Breached the Hull And maybe, if he's in a Disclosure mood, he'll offer up some surprise like he did in his last interview on Weaponized when he said we have made progress on back engineering these craft but, "it hasn't been achieved to its full extent." That's a MASSIVE claim! Push him to offer up more. And if his answers to many questions are: "It's all in my book"? Make him read from his book so the world can be informed about his claims and what was allegedly discovered in AAWSAP. David Grusch didn't say much more than what he said in his interview with Ross Coulthart and article in The Debrief, but was there ever any thought that he shouldn't have been put under oath and brought in as a witness for that congressional hearing? Of course not!) Burlison: "But to your point, I think getting him in a SCIF and seeing if there's maybe any additional room for him to talk, it might be worthwhile to do that." Knapp: "I think he might. I mean, the last conversations that we've had, it seems like he's edging closer to the idea that, under the right circumstances, he would be willing to share information with Congress, which would be great." (Again, I'm all for putting him the SCIF, too.)

Joe Murgia

30,311 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

👽🔥🔥Four Takeaways 🔥🔥👽 "This is coming out no matter what. And when it does, if [the folks keeping it secret] are not a part of it, this is going to be a lot worse than it already is." "I have direct, firsthand knowledge and exposure to crash recovery, reverse engineering, integration of technology into [redacted] as well as the most important piece of technology on the planet. And it's not the craft themselves." Brake lines were cut. "Not only do I have (direct knowledge of UAP being actual craft of unknown or non-human origin), I testified to it. I provided materials proving it. And it was proven to me that what I provided was, in fact, true." I testified to the, "Senate staff, House staff, AARO, and the ICIG. Under oath. FBI was there. The DoD was there at points in time, staff members from Armed Services, Intelligence..." ~~~ George Knapp: "There's a line you don't want to cross because of legal ramifications? Or because you promised you wouldn't? Dylan Borland: "Both, and I still believe in national security, which is why I'm here. It's why I went through the whistleblower process. It's why I'm so upset that so many whistleblowers have been let down. It's why I'm upset that laws are not being followed. It's why I'm upset that SEC whistleblower payments, which is 10% to anybody who comes forward with any information of financial abuse and wrong ship, should receive that. There's a number of reasons. But ultimately, I believe in the Constitution of the United States." (NOTE: "The SEC's whistleblower program was established by Congress to incentivize whistleblowers to report specific, timely and credible information about possible federal securities laws violations. "The Commission is authorized to provide monetary awards to eligible individuals who come forward with high-quality original information that leads to an SEC enforcement action in which over $1 million in sanctions is ordered. The range for awards is between 10% and 30% of the money collected." Source: Has anybody been sanctioned or money collected as it related to this? If not, how can a whistleblower receive an award?) ~~ Knapp: "Yeah, in a sense, you are a patriot. Of course, you love your country. But you are a patriot in a sense that there's a limit to it, and when people violate the Constitution or go against the law or treat people who are living up to their oaths, poorly, threatening them, intimidating, then it has to come out." Borland: "Yeah, it's infuriating. There's a difference between being disgruntled and me being disgruntled and maybe releasing everything: names, locations, places, crimes that were committed, sexual assaults I'm aware of, stalking I'm aware of, brake lines being cut. It would be me releasing all of that, and I'm not doing that." (Is all of that related to UAP programs? I hope all of that is being investigated, based on the information Borland shared and other information the investigatory bodies have collected.) Borland: "I am doing that because this needs to be told. The people that are in these programs and the decision makers at Congress and the executive branch owe it to the American people, to the whistleblowers, to the veterans, to the service members, to tell the truth in the capacity they can, because this is coming out no matter what. And when it does, if they are not a part of it, this is going to be a lot worse than it already is." Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "So you have direct knowledge of UAP being actual craft of unknown or non-human origin, from your official capacity of work? You have some direct knowledge of that?" Borland: "100%. Not only do I have it, I testified to it. I provided materials proving it. And it was proven to me that what I provided was, in fact, true." Corbell: "Who did you testify to? List them out." Borland: "Senate, staff, House staff, AARO, and the ICIG." Knapp: "Under oath." Borland: "Under oath. FBI was there, the ICIG was there, the DoD was there at points in time, staff members from Armed Services, Intelligence. Basically, I went through the whole kit and caboodle to tell the truth and get this on record, because I have grave concerns for what is happening to people." Knapp: "Is there something else in between that thing that you saw, that went (makes a noise with his mouth), other experiences, things that you saw, either as a citizen or while working for the government, that you want to share with us?" Borland: "There are many. I think, as of this time, what I will say is this: I have direct, firsthand knowledge and exposure to crash recovery, reverse engineering, integration of technology into [redacted] as well as the most important piece of technology on the planet. And it's not the craft themselves." Corbell: "It would be the power source . Borland: "You can make that assessment yourself." Corbell: "I just did."

👽🔥🔥Four Takeaways 🔥🔥👽 "This is coming out no matter what. And when it does, if [the folks keeping it secret] are not a part of it, this is going to be a lot worse than it already is." "I have direct, firsthand knowledge and exposure to crash recovery, reverse engineering, integration of technology into [redacted] as well as the most important piece of technology on the planet. And it's not the craft themselves." Brake lines were cut. "Not only do I have (direct knowledge of UAP being actual craft of unknown or non-human origin), I testified to it. I provided materials proving it. And it was proven to me that what I provided was, in fact, true." I testified to the, "Senate staff, House staff, AARO, and the ICIG. Under oath. FBI was there. The DoD was there at points in time, staff members from Armed Services, Intelligence..." ~ George Knapp: "There's a line you don't want to cross because of legal ramifications? Or because you promised you wouldn't? Dylan Borland: "Both, and I still believe in national security, which is why I'm here. It's why I went through the whistleblower process. It's why I'm so upset that so many whistleblowers have been let down. It's why I'm upset that laws are not being followed. It's why I'm upset that SEC whistleblower payments, which is 10% to anybody who comes forward with any information of financial abuse and wrong ship, should receive that. There's a number of reasons. But ultimately, I believe in the Constitution of the United States." (NOTE: "The SEC's whistleblower program was established by Congress to incentivize whistleblowers to report specific, timely and credible information about possible federal securities laws violations. "The Commission is authorized to provide monetary awards to eligible individuals who come forward with high-quality original information that leads to an SEC enforcement action in which over $1 million in sanctions is ordered. The range for awards is between 10% and 30% of the money collected." Source: Has anybody been sanctioned or money collected as it related to this? If not, how can a whistleblower receive an award?) Knapp: "Yeah, in a sense, you are a patriot. Of course, you love your country. But you are a patriot in a sense that there's a limit to it, and when people violate the Constitution or go against the law or treat people who are living up to their oaths, poorly, threatening them, intimidating, then it has to come out." Borland: "Yeah, it's infuriating. There's a difference between being disgruntled and me being disgruntled and maybe releasing everything: names, locations, places, crimes that were committed, sexual assaults I'm aware of, stalking I'm aware of, brake lines being cut. It would be me releasing all of that, and I'm not doing that." (Is all of that related to UAP programs? I hope all of that is being investigated, based on the information Borland shared and other information the investigatory bodies have collected.) Borland: "I am doing that because this needs to be told. The people that are in these programs and the decision makers at Congress and the executive branch owe it to the American people, to the whistleblowers, to the veterans, to the service members, to tell the truth in the capacity they can, because this is coming out no matter what. And when it does, if they are not a part of it, this is going to be a lot worse than it already is." Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "So you have direct knowledge of UAP being actual craft of unknown or non-human origin, from your official capacity of work? You have some direct knowledge of that?" Borland: "100%. Not only do I have it, I testified to it. I provided materials proving it. And it was proven to me that what I provided was, in fact, true." Corbell: "Who did you testify to? List them out." Borland: "Senate, staff, House staff, AARO, and the ICIG." Knapp: "Under oath." Borland: "Under oath. FBI was there, the ICIG was there, the DoD was there at points in time, staff members from Armed Services, Intelligence. Basically, I went through the whole kit and caboodle to tell the truth and get this on record, because I have grave concerns for what is happening to people." Knapp: "Is there something else in between that thing that you saw, that went (makes a noise with his mouth), other experiences, things that you saw, either as a citizen or while working for the government, that you want to share with us?" Borland: "There are many. I think, as of this time, what I will say is this: I have direct, firsthand knowledge and exposure to crash recovery, reverse engineering, integration of technology into [redacted] as well as the most important piece of technology on the planet. And it's not the craft themselves." Corbell: "It would be the power source . Borland: "You can make that assessment yourself." Corbell: "I just did."

Joe Murgia

54,064 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

💊 Sometimes, The Truth is a Hard Pill to Swallow 💊 "There's no indication that (firsthand whistleblowers who claim they worked hands-on an NHI craft) are, at this moment, willing to come forward. If people were willing at one point, I don't think it's possible anymore for them." ~Corbell (This is not the sensational and misleading "stuff" that tends to go semi-viral in this community. But it's reality. It sucks, but I'd rather hear the truth than have smoke blown up our asses. That's why I asked. Will this post spread like wildfire? Probably not.) "What would be the motivation for someone like that to break from the fold and destroy their whole lives, just because they were called in to come talk with me? It's not gonna happen." ~Corbell (the "me" in that quote is not Corbell and is clarified in the full version below.) ~~~ Joe Murgia: "Have you, or do you know of anybody else, who has claimed to have, spoken to the witness I described earlier: Somebody who claims to have worked in a program for a decent amount of time, and who had hands-on a craft, and said, 'Yeah, I worked on it, and my conclusion was, after three years,' or whatever, 'this was a non-human craft'"? Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Yes! I know people in an official capacity who have interviewed with people that exactly fit this description, and I have pushed on them, being like, 'What is it going to take for someone like that to come forward, publicly?' And by the way, that was part of an ICIG investigation where people of that level were communicated with, and I know exactly who is doing that back and forth." (I'd love to know more about that ICIG investigation. Is it related to what Grusch claimed?) Corbell: "And here's the deal, man. They said to me, 'What would be the motivation for someone like that to break from the fold and destroy their whole lives, just because they were called in to come talk with me? It's not gonna happen. It just not gonna happen.' (If those folks are sharing that information with Corbell, it appears that it's not classified. So those investigators should be able to tell us what they told Corbell. Will they? Probably not. On the flip side, those people who spoke to Corbell could get around the classified aspect by offering up a hypothetical: "Jeremy, if witnesses like that exist, and have spoken to me, why would they destroy their whole lives and go public? Just because they were told they needed to speak with me? Again, hypothetically speaking.") Corbell: "There has to be somebody who's so upset with something surrounding this, that they're just like, gonna try to burn it all down. And usually those people never make it to the starting point, you know? If they're coming from that attitude. People that work in those programs are so highly monitored with polygraphs, and, you know, their family lives, making sure they're stable. "If you remember, all the way back, looking to Lazar, why did he get not called back for The Program? It was because they found out his wife was cheating on him and he became a security risk. That's how security clearances work, is you have to have a stable family life. So people that would break from the fold, that are feeling all that type of pressure and just try to burn the whole house down? Dude, they're going to find out they're in that mental state way prior to them ever being able to get to the starting point. "So it's a long way to say, yeah, man, the Holy Grail? Yeah, I know about those conversations. I've talked to people on both sides of those conversations." (Both sides to me means that Corbell is saying he DID talk to the people who interviewed the whistleblowers and the actual whistleblowers themselves. That's not the biggest takeaway from what he said, but it would be nice to know if he or George Knapp have spoken directly to those firsthand folks and aren't just hearing it second hand.) Corbell: "The thing is, there's no indication that people like that are at this moment willing to come forward. And in fact - I can't go further than that - but in fact, if people were willing at one point, I don't think it's possible anymore for them." (What's changed to where Corbell doesn't think it's possible any more? That's extremely important to know.) Murgia: "And just to be clear, you're talking about other people have had the conversations with those whistleblowers?" Corbell: "Yes." Murgia: "Not you?" Corbell: "Well, what I'm admitting to is that, in official capacity, there are people doing this investigation that have conveyed to me their direct, official debriefing with individuals in those programs. Like, working on the technology, currently. Non-human technology. So I know these people have had those investigatory roles and had those briefings and took the information because of the ICIG, you know, reports." (That makes it seem like it was more than just a hypothetical, which I mentioned earlier.) Murgia: "Cool." Corbell: "Yeah, I wish I could help more on that, guys, you know?" (If you've been waiting for those types of hands-on, firsthand folks to come forward, you need to adjust your expectations after seeing what Corbell said. I have. Some will decide they're tired of waiting and leave this field. Others, who are interested in the phenomenon and not just relying on what happens with witnesses, will always be here. And we still have a hearing coming in September where we will, hopefully, learn new and interesting information from firsthand witnesses who we have never heard from before.)

💊 Sometimes, The Truth is a Hard Pill to Swallow 💊 "There's no indication that (firsthand whistleblowers who claim they worked hands-on an NHI craft) are, at this moment, willing to come forward. If people were willing at one point, I don't think it's possible anymore for them." ~Corbell (This is not the sensational and misleading "stuff" that tends to go semi-viral in this community. But it's reality. It sucks, but I'd rather hear the truth than have smoke blown up our asses. That's why I asked. Will this post spread like wildfire? Probably not.) "What would be the motivation for someone like that to break from the fold and destroy their whole lives, just because they were called in to come talk with me? It's not gonna happen." ~Corbell (the "me" in that quote is not Corbell and is clarified in the full version below.) ~~~ Joe Murgia: "Have you, or do you know of anybody else, who has claimed to have, spoken to the witness I described earlier: Somebody who claims to have worked in a program for a decent amount of time, and who had hands-on a craft, and said, 'Yeah, I worked on it, and my conclusion was, after three years,' or whatever, 'this was a non-human craft'"? Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Yes! I know people in an official capacity who have interviewed with people that exactly fit this description, and I have pushed on them, being like, 'What is it going to take for someone like that to come forward, publicly?' And by the way, that was part of an ICIG investigation where people of that level were communicated with, and I know exactly who is doing that back and forth." (I'd love to know more about that ICIG investigation. Is it related to what Grusch claimed?) Corbell: "And here's the deal, man. They said to me, 'What would be the motivation for someone like that to break from the fold and destroy their whole lives, just because they were called in to come talk with me? It's not gonna happen. It just not gonna happen.' (If those folks are sharing that information with Corbell, it appears that it's not classified. So those investigators should be able to tell us what they told Corbell. Will they? Probably not. On the flip side, those people who spoke to Corbell could get around the classified aspect by offering up a hypothetical: "Jeremy, if witnesses like that exist, and have spoken to me, why would they destroy their whole lives and go public? Just because they were told they needed to speak with me? Again, hypothetically speaking.") Corbell: "There has to be somebody who's so upset with something surrounding this, that they're just like, gonna try to burn it all down. And usually those people never make it to the starting point, you know? If they're coming from that attitude. People that work in those programs are so highly monitored with polygraphs, and, you know, their family lives, making sure they're stable. "If you remember, all the way back, looking to Lazar, why did he get not called back for The Program? It was because they found out his wife was cheating on him and he became a security risk. That's how security clearances work, is you have to have a stable family life. So people that would break from the fold, that are feeling all that type of pressure and just try to burn the whole house down? Dude, they're going to find out they're in that mental state way prior to them ever being able to get to the starting point. "So it's a long way to say, yeah, man, the Holy Grail? Yeah, I know about those conversations. I've talked to people on both sides of those conversations." (Both sides to me means that Corbell is saying he DID talk to the people who interviewed the whistleblowers and the actual whistleblowers themselves. That's not the biggest takeaway from what he said, but it would be nice to know if he or George Knapp have spoken directly to those firsthand folks and aren't just hearing it second hand.) Corbell: "The thing is, there's no indication that people like that are at this moment willing to come forward. And in fact - I can't go further than that - but in fact, if people were willing at one point, I don't think it's possible anymore for them." (What's changed to where Corbell doesn't think it's possible any more? That's extremely important to know.) Murgia: "And just to be clear, you're talking about other people have had the conversations with those whistleblowers?" Corbell: "Yes." Murgia: "Not you?" Corbell: "Well, what I'm admitting to is that, in official capacity, there are people doing this investigation that have conveyed to me their direct, official debriefing with individuals in those programs. Like, working on the technology, currently. Non-human technology. So I know these people have had those investigatory roles and had those briefings and took the information because of the ICIG, you know, reports." (That makes it seem like it was more than just a hypothetical, which I mentioned earlier.) Murgia: "Cool." Corbell: "Yeah, I wish I could help more on that, guys, you know?" (If you've been waiting for those types of hands-on, firsthand folks to come forward, you need to adjust your expectations after seeing what Corbell said. I have. Some will decide they're tired of waiting and leave this field. Others, who are interested in the phenomenon and not just relying on what happens with witnesses, will always be here. And we still have a hearing coming in September where we will, hopefully, learn new and interesting information from firsthand witnesses who we have never heard from before.)

Joe Murgia

53,949 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Kash Patel CONFIRMS Judge Juan Merchan should have never been assigned to Donald Trump’s case Kash Patel “I'm calling for the subpoenas to be issued to Judge Merchant's Daughter's company who made $15+ million dollars from the illicit information pouring out of her father's courtroom - I wanna know the bank records because money doesn't lie - I wanna know how deep it is and how much of it went to the family and how much of it is going to the family after this false conviction - Then we need to investigate the FEC actual violations that this judge and his family conducted Judge Juan Merchan should never have been overseeing this trial to begin with because of the illicit campaign money that was flowing through there and the unconstitutional due process violations are only the beginning.“ That’s not all, here’s more reasons why he should have NEVER been assigned Donald Trump’s case from The Older Millennial: ‘For these type of cases, the way it's supposed to work is that there is a panel of 24 judges, and they are all put in rotation and randomly assigned these types of cases. Judge Merchan is not on that panel. That's because he's not a judge. He's an acting judge. The only way he could have caught this case was to be specifically assigned to it. There was no chance of him being randomly selected. The wild thing is that according to the left and the department of justice, judge Merchan was not only randomly selected to be the judge in this trial, but he was also randomly selected to be the judge in the Trump Organization case, and he was randomly selected to be the judge in the Steve Bannon case. So judge Merchan, a judge that is not in the pool of 24 judges that is supposed to catch these cases, a judge that is not an actual judge, but an acting judge caught all 3 Trump related cases randomly. This is a judge who gives heavily to an organization very plainly named Stop Trump, and a judge whose daughter makes tens of millions of dollars every year promoting Democrats.’ Insane corruption.

Kash Patel CONFIRMS Judge Juan Merchan should have never been assigned to Donald Trump’s case Kash Patel “I'm calling for the subpoenas to be issued to Judge Merchant's Daughter's company who made $15+ million dollars from the illicit information pouring out of her father's courtroom - I wanna know the bank records because money doesn't lie - I wanna know how deep it is and how much of it went to the family and how much of it is going to the family after this false conviction - Then we need to investigate the FEC actual violations that this judge and his family conducted Judge Juan Merchan should never have been overseeing this trial to begin with because of the illicit campaign money that was flowing through there and the unconstitutional due process violations are only the beginning.“ That’s not all, here’s more reasons why he should have NEVER been assigned Donald Trump’s case from The Older Millennial: ‘For these type of cases, the way it's supposed to work is that there is a panel of 24 judges, and they are all put in rotation and randomly assigned these types of cases. Judge Merchan is not on that panel. That's because he's not a judge. He's an acting judge. The only way he could have caught this case was to be specifically assigned to it. There was no chance of him being randomly selected. The wild thing is that according to the left and the department of justice, judge Merchan was not only randomly selected to be the judge in this trial, but he was also randomly selected to be the judge in the Trump Organization case, and he was randomly selected to be the judge in the Steve Bannon case. So judge Merchan, a judge that is not in the pool of 24 judges that is supposed to catch these cases, a judge that is not an actual judge, but an acting judge caught all 3 Trump related cases randomly. This is a judge who gives heavily to an organization very plainly named Stop Trump, and a judge whose daughter makes tens of millions of dollars every year promoting Democrats.’ Insane corruption.

Wall Street Apes

3,331,510 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

▲ Davis: Lacatski Never Told Us We Had Made Progress with Reverse Engineering! ▲ (This may be kind of a big deal. I've posted several times about Lacatski's claim that we've reverse engineered craft, but not to their full extent. Say what? I've always been surprised that Lacatski said that. If it's true, it's HUGE. Today, Davis addressed it, and his answer seems to put to bed the claim that he's (Davis) been trying to hide any progress we may have made on that front, as others have suggested. Hell, I thought he might be downplaying any progress we've made on that because these guys (Eric, Lue, Stratton, etc.) don't want our adversaries to know certain things, and I thought that was one of those things. Yes, Davis has always downplayed (and pretty much rejected) the claim that we've made progress on the reverse-engineering front, but it now appears he was saying that only because that's what he had learned through his investigations and research and not because he was trying to protect that specific secret.) Dr. Eric Davis: "So the military was seeing triangles, and so, we were...so the AAASAP was trying to figure out the physics of how to do that type of propulsion. And [Lacatksi] was asked by Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell, "Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAASAP had a lot of value?' And Jim Lacatski replied, 'It hasn't been achieved to its full extent (laughs).'" (As you've seen me ask more than a few times: If not to the full extent, how much? 50% 75? If we've really had success, that's an important question. Glad to see Davis and I are on the same page with that. And was Lacatski JUST referring to triangular craft, or all craft in our possession?) Davis: "So how much did they achieve it? 25% 50% 75% I don't know because he never told us! So, Hal Puthoff and I have talked about these things, and we're looking at each other like, 'Huh?' So, uhh...no, this isn't disinformation." (I've wondered on here if it was a disinformation attempt by Lacatski to trick our adversaries into thinking we may have made more progress than we actually have. But Davis appears to think otherwise.) Davis: "This is the DOPSR telling Jim what he can say publicly in his books versus what he can't say in his books. And they cleared him to say what he said, and obviously they cleared him to say what he said to Corbell and George Knapp." (Either that, or he slipped up during the interview with "Weaponized." But Lacatski seems to measure his words and he doesn't appear to be a guy who slips up like that. He's VERY hesitant to share too much because he's said that our adversaries are listening to every word he says or writes.) Davis: "I haven't read his second and third books yet, so I don't know if that thing about the triangles is even in there. I haven't gone all the way through the first book yet, either. So, it's real. Lacatski would have the eligibility for access." ~~~ The original exchange between Corbell and Lacatski... Jeremy Corbell: "We hear about all these people on military bases seeing triangles, and you're doing this study, AAWSAP to try to figure out the physics of how to do that. Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAWSAP had a lot of value?" Lacatski: "It hasn't been achieved to its full extent."

▲ Davis: Lacatski Never Told Us We Had Made Progress with Reverse Engineering! ▲ (This may be kind of a big deal. I've posted several times about Lacatski's claim that we've reverse engineered craft, but not to their full extent. Say what? I've always been surprised that Lacatski said that. If it's true, it's HUGE. Today, Davis addressed it, and his answer seems to put to bed the claim that he's (Davis) been trying to hide any progress we may have made on that front, as others have suggested. Hell, I thought he might be downplaying any progress we've made on that because these guys (Eric, Lue, Stratton, etc.) don't want our adversaries to know certain things, and I thought that was one of those things. Yes, Davis has always downplayed (and pretty much rejected) the claim that we've made progress on the reverse-engineering front, but it now appears he was saying that only because that's what he had learned through his investigations and research and not because he was trying to protect that specific secret.) Dr. Eric Davis: "So the military was seeing triangles, and so, we were...so the AAASAP was trying to figure out the physics of how to do that type of propulsion. And [Lacatksi] was asked by Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell, "Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAASAP had a lot of value?' And Jim Lacatski replied, 'It hasn't been achieved to its full extent (laughs).'" (As you've seen me ask more than a few times: If not to the full extent, how much? 50% 75? If we've really had success, that's an important question. Glad to see Davis and I are on the same page with that. And was Lacatski JUST referring to triangular craft, or all craft in our possession?) Davis: "So how much did they achieve it? 25% 50% 75% I don't know because he never told us! So, Hal Puthoff and I have talked about these things, and we're looking at each other like, 'Huh?' So, uhh...no, this isn't disinformation." (I've wondered on here if it was a disinformation attempt by Lacatski to trick our adversaries into thinking we may have made more progress than we actually have. But Davis appears to think otherwise.) Davis: "This is the DOPSR telling Jim what he can say publicly in his books versus what he can't say in his books. And they cleared him to say what he said, and obviously they cleared him to say what he said to Corbell and George Knapp." (Either that, or he slipped up during the interview with "Weaponized." But Lacatski seems to measure his words and he doesn't appear to be a guy who slips up like that. He's VERY hesitant to share too much because he's said that our adversaries are listening to every word he says or writes.) Davis: "I haven't read his second and third books yet, so I don't know if that thing about the triangles is even in there. I haven't gone all the way through the first book yet, either. So, it's real. Lacatski would have the eligibility for access." ~~~ The original exchange between Corbell and Lacatski... Jeremy Corbell: "We hear about all these people on military bases seeing triangles, and you're doing this study, AAWSAP to try to figure out the physics of how to do that. Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAWSAP had a lot of value?" Lacatski: "It hasn't been achieved to its full extent."

Joe Murgia

13,125 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Never forget that Donald Trump was the only person who helped the Epstein victims with useful information back when Epstein had the entire system blackmailed & controlled. He also kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago. Now, as President, he's releasing the truth to the public. "The only thing that I can say about President Trump is that he is the only person who, in 2009, when I served a lot of subpoenas on a lot of people... He is the only person who picked up the phone and said, 'Let's just talk. I'll give you as much time as you want. I'll tell you what you need to know.' And was very helpful in the information that he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever, but had good information that checked out and that helped us and that we didn't have to take a deposition of him." - Epstein Victim Attorney Bradley Edwards. God works in mysterious ways.

Never forget that Donald Trump was the only person who helped the Epstein victims with useful information back when Epstein had the entire system blackmailed & controlled. He also kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago. Now, as President, he's releasing the truth to the public. "The only thing that I can say about President Trump is that he is the only person who, in 2009, when I served a lot of subpoenas on a lot of people... He is the only person who picked up the phone and said, 'Let's just talk. I'll give you as much time as you want. I'll tell you what you need to know.' And was very helpful in the information that he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever, but had good information that checked out and that helped us and that we didn't have to take a deposition of him." - Epstein Victim Attorney Bradley Edwards. God works in mysterious ways.

George

1,358,718 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

👽 "I can say to you guys that there are a minimum of four different alien species. ~Dr. Eric Davis 👽 "The credibility of that ranges on the spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility is the classified part." ~Davis (Impossible to judge unless we get to see that evidence. And the follow-up should be about the photos he's allegedly seen of NHI bodies and craft. Is that part of the reason he believes there are four?) Dr. Eric Davis: "Okay, so [people] hear me say these things on podcasts or at these big forums. 'Oh my god, he's revealing classified information! Why isn't he getting arrested and charged and going to prison!" And all that stuff. And no, it's because I've been trained on the process, I know what the criteria and the guardrails are, so I know what I can say. "I can say to you guys that there are a minimum of four different alien species, and they are known from the public domain, and in the classified world. The credibility of that ranges on the spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility is the classified part. "And in the high credibility, not on the far end of it, but there are credible witnesses who have been corroborated by multiple other witnesses or had other means of corroborating their account of an encounter with one of these four species. So, there's some high credibility for witness accounts, and there's medium, low, and none. And there's a minimum of four."

👽 "I can say to you guys that there are a minimum of four different alien species. ~Dr. Eric Davis 👽 "The credibility of that ranges on the spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility is the classified part." ~Davis (Impossible to judge unless we get to see that evidence. And the follow-up should be about the photos he's allegedly seen of NHI bodies and craft. Is that part of the reason he believes there are four?) Dr. Eric Davis: "Okay, so [people] hear me say these things on podcasts or at these big forums. 'Oh my god, he's revealing classified information! Why isn't he getting arrested and charged and going to prison!" And all that stuff. And no, it's because I've been trained on the process, I know what the criteria and the guardrails are, so I know what I can say. "I can say to you guys that there are a minimum of four different alien species, and they are known from the public domain, and in the classified world. The credibility of that ranges on the spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility is the classified part. "And in the high credibility, not on the far end of it, but there are credible witnesses who have been corroborated by multiple other witnesses or had other means of corroborating their account of an encounter with one of these four species. So, there's some high credibility for witness accounts, and there's medium, low, and none. And there's a minimum of four."

Joe Murgia

27,311 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce