Video yรผkleniyor...
Video Yรผklenemedi
๐ข๐ป ๐ก๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐ฎ๐น ๐ง๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ต๐ป๐ผ๐น๐ผ๐ด๐ ๐๐ฎ๐, ๐ฎ ๐น๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ธ ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฝ ๐๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฑ ๐๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ด๐ถ๐ฐ ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐น๐ณ-๐ฅ๐ฒ๐น๐ถ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ. The ๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฏ๐น๐ฒ ๐๐ฒ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐ ๐ถ๐ป๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ, ๐ฆ๐ต๐ฟ๐ถ ๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ท๐ป๐ฎ๐๐ต ๐ฆ๐ถ๐ป๐ด๐ต, and the ๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฏ๐น๐ฒ ๐๐ต๐ถ๐ฒ๐ณ ๐ ๐ถ๐ป๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐จ๐๐๐ฎ๐ฟ ๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐๐ต, ๐ฆ๐ต๐ฟ๐ถ ๐ฌ๐ผ๐ด๐ถ ๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐๐๐ฎ๐ป๐ฎ๐๐ต laid the ๐ณ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐๐๐ผ๐ป๐ฒ๐ of s๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ป ๐ฐ๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐น ๐ฝ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ท๐ฒ๐ฐ๐๐ of Aerolloy Technologies, a wholly owned subsidiary of PTC Industries at the ๐จ๐๐๐ฎ๐ฟ... show more
41,303 gรถrรผntรผleme โข 1 yฤฑl รถnce โขvia X (Twitter)
2 Yorum
Sourav1 yฤฑl รถnce
Big step for self reliance
ashish gadoya1 yฤฑl รถnce
Great work. Keep progressing.
![Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Fox News last night that the interview he gave for the new documentary film, โThe Age of Disclosure,โ about unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) or what used to be called UFOs, was โthree or four years ago when I was in the Senate,โ that โI was describing what people had said to me, not things that I have firsthand knowledge of.โ He described the โpretty spectacular claimsโ made by โpeople with high clearances in governmentโ and said, โI just donโt have any independent way to verify everything they said.โ And Rubio said the film engaged in a โLittle bit of selective editing, but itโs okay, because, you know, youโre trying to sell a show there.โ But Rubio also said, โIโm not disavowingโ what he said in the film, and, as both Secretary of State and National Security Advisor (NSA), he should have ways to either verify or debunk the spectacular claims made in โThe Age of Disclosure.โ If Rubio feels he lacks the power to verify the claims in the film, then he should explain why. As NSA and Secretary of State, Rubio has unparalleled access to Special Access Program briefings, compartmented intelligence, and interagency assessments comprised of top-secret and classified information. If Rubio cannot determine whether highly cleared officials are telling the truth or lying, that raises questions as troubling as those around UAPs. Many UAPs are, without question, drones and balloons. Rubio said โthe point I was trying to drive atโ in โThe Age of Disclosureโ was preparedness for anomalous threats. โWeโre looking for missiles and fighter jets, and theyโre coming at us with drones and balloons,โ the Secretary of State explained. โI remember when NORAD turned on the radars and started looking for balloons, and all of a sudden, they spotted a bunch of balloons flying overhead, and 90% of them were innocent. A couple of them were Chinese. But we never looked for balloons because our radars arenโt trained for that.โ But the Intelligence Community, the Department of Defense, and Congress have rejected the notion that all UAPs are simply advanced Chinese or Russian drones. โNone of these resolved [UAP] cases substantiated advanced foreign adversarial capabilities or breakthrough aerospace technologies,โ noted the Department of War last year. In โThe Age of Disclosure,โ Rubio, Senator Mike Rounds, Senator Chuck Schumer, and others say the government is hiding UAP information from the public and Congress. Tulsi Gabbard, President Trumpโs Director of National Intelligence, said in August she thought UAPs could represent nonhuman intelligence. โSome of these people were Navy pilots, admirals, generals, whatever,โ Rubio told Hannity last night, โthat would come forward and say that there were programs in the US government that not even presidents were made aware of.โ Pointing this out is not an appeal to authority but rather the recognition that their security clearances and activities give them access to information the public and most lawmakers do not have. Such secrecy must be justified. Whatever UAPs ultimately are, the possibility, raised again by Rubio in his Hannity interview, that Americaโs President, Secretary of State, Senate-confirmed intelligence heads, and Congressional overseers are being kept in the dark, is troubling. Excess UAP secrecy, as displayed by the redacted documents below, not the claims that UAPs represent nonhuman intelligence, is undermining public trust in government, which is essential for democracy and national security. For years, a large share of the American people have believed the government is hiding what it knows about UAP. Earlier this year, a survey found that 44 percent of Americans โbelieve the US Government is hiding information about the existence of UFOs,โ against 28 percent who donโt. Gallup found that 71 and 68 percent of voters believed the government knows โmore about UFOs than it is telling usโ in 1996 and 2019. The public is right to believe that the government is hiding what it knows. Dramatic visual proof of this can be seen in the blackened-out pages of the handful of documents that the federal government has released about UAPs in recent years. A February 2020 US Navy UAP briefing document redacts the entire analysis section. The entire โBackground,โ โObjective,โ and most of the substantive sections of the Charter for the Navyโs UAP Task Force is redacted. Even the guide for how to classify UAPs, โThe UAP Security Classification Guide,โ is heavily redacted. I have, for the last several months, urged President Trump and the leaders of the Intelligence Community to lift the redactions on these documents to no avail. Trump has repeatedly said the government is hiding information. In a summer 2020 interview with his son about an alleged UAP crash in Roswell, New Mexico, Trump said, โI wonโt talk to you about what I know about it, but itโs very interesting.โ In June of 2024, Trump said that the government has information about UAPs that it has not released. โI have access,โ he said, โand I speak to people about it. Iโve had actually meetings on it. And they will tell you thereโs something going on.โ And Trump told Joe Rogan last year that โa lotโ about UAPs has not been revealed. Others in the administration point to secrecy. โFrankly, there are a lot more sightings than have been made public,โ said CIA Director John Ratcliffe in 2021. John Greenewald, who filed the successful FOIA requests for the redacted UAP documents described above, told Public in 2023, โSecrecy is tightening. If we are in a new level of transparency that some UFO believers want us to believe we are in, then why is that the case?โ Whatever the reason for the secrecy, it is time for President Trump to level with the American people about what the government knows about UAPs. The president has significant discretion over what to share with Congress regarding classified national security material. Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have expressed frustration with the information they have received regarding UAPs. โI donโt really know what is true on this subject,โ said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) at a UAP hearing in September. โBut I do know when weโre being lied to and we are definitely being lied to, thereโs just no doubt about that.โ Said Chuck Schumer in 2023, โThe American public has a right to learn about technologies of unknown origins, non-human intelligence, and unexplainable phenomena. And Rubio said, that same year, โThere is a lot we still donโt know about these UAPs and that is a big problem.โ In 1953, the Office of Scientific Intelligence of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) worked with a professor at the California Institute of Technology to create a panel of experts to discredit (โdebunkโ) sightings out of fear that the Soviets would use public panic and misinformation to undermine trust in the government or distract from actual threats. โThe โdebunkingโ aim would result in a reduction in public interest in โflying saucersโ which today evokes such a strong psychological reaction,โ wrote the reportโs authors. But the report, declassified in 1975 and made public in 2001, simply asserted these risks and offered no evidence of such threats. In fact, while the report expressed concern that โskillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust of duly constituted authority,โ it also noted that โthe general absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many obvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian official policy.โ Despite the โdebunkingโ effort, President Jimmy Carter said, while running for office in 1976, โIf I become president, Iโll make every piece of information this country has about UFO sightings available to the public and the scientists. I am convinced that UFOs exist because Iโve seen one.โ Public distrust of the government is proof that the CIAโs 1950s approach of โdebunkingโ has not worked. And anyone who thinks itโs dangerous for current and former government officials to say that UAPs may represent nonhuman intelligence should advocate for greater transparency and disclosure by the government about what it knows.... Please subscribe now to support Public's award-winning investigative journalism, read the full article, and watch the entire video!](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1996315637397016601/amplify_video_thumb/1996314571116888064/img/waEaaB_TVyqEJ6WZ.jpg)
![Phenomena, AAWSAP, Stratton and Consciousness "I keenly believe that consciousness is a key aspect of all of this, and perception." ~Jay Stratton ~ "I entered the [AATIP] program in 2008. I was asked by its director [Lacatski] to come on board and establish this program [AATIP]. And then, in 2010 is when I was asked to take over the effort." ~Lue Elizondo during WaPo Interview "Fast forward to 2015...I created a program called AATIP, which was a derivative of AAWSAP." ~Jay Stratton (As I've discussed before, AATIP (V2) didn't exist until much later (2015) than what we've been told by Lue. So what program did Lue come on board to in 2008 and which program did he "take over the effort" for in 2010 if AATIP (V2) was created by Stratton in 2015? Is that not a fair question to ask?) ~~~ Jay Stratton: "Starting back in the early 2000s, we saw the need - my colleague (Jim Lacatski. ~Joe) and I at the Defense Intelligence Agency - to start paying very close attention to this topic. Advanced technologies, emerging technologies, and really kind of the areas that the stigma has led for us to ignore for many years. "So, you know, we created a program that Hal (Puthoff) referred to as AAWSAP, you know, to address those issues. And that really started around 2005. So the DIA program, which you jumped in earlier and said the DOE or, you know, the DOD's program, and really, it's the Intelligence Community's program. DIA is part of the IC, the D in there being Defense, predominantly means the DIA looks at foreign-defense capabilities. "And we were looking at this from - and I hate to say it now - but a threat perspective. And the reason I say, 'I hate to say,' is because threat is capability plus intent, and some of these things, we just don't have an idea on the intent." (Does that mean that on some of these things we DO have an idea on the intent?) Stratton: "So, determining threat, you know, maybe it's an emerging-technologies threat or a concern anytime it can potentially exceed our own capabilities. But that DIA program focused on that, and the contract from 2008 to 2010, and then we transitioned and tried to move the program to a couple of other places. "Fast forward to 2015, I created a program called AATIP, which was a derivative of AAWSAP, and actually AATIP was a nickname for AAWSAP. And I know there's a lot of crazy names, but Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. But those 2015 events were the ones that you see now on the news: the Gimbal, the Go Fast. Ryan Graves, who usually participates in this, his wife is having a baby, currently, so he's not here (laughs). But all of those events started to happen...and those events helped fuel, you know, further highlight that need on the U.S. government side that, we gotta do something about this. "Which led to the creation of the UAP Task Force in 2018 into 2019 as when I started building it. I spent over two years building it out before the public even knew about it in 2020 when DoD established it. And at that point, it was truly a whole-of-government, interagency effort. Kind of the dream of, you know, my fifteen-years plus, at that point of looking at this topic and knowing everything that we needed with all the different authorities." (Much more on that can be found here: ) Stratton: "And that led into where we're at today with AARO, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office under DOD. And I think, you know, a few hiccups here and there, but I think now Dr Jon Koslowski, who has AARO, is approaching this problem set and dealing with the topic appropriately." (He seems like a good guy but James Fox recently said that he met with Kosloski who told him (Fox) that he (Kosloski) can't even part his hair without the DoD's permission. If that's true, and I have no reason to doubt Fox on that, I have little hope AARO will help bring Disclosure.) Stratton: "And I hope that, you know, obviously, my legacy, or the legacy of all of those involved, carries on, and that the government continues to take it seriously. And that we never have to look a pilot in the eyes again and say, 'Sorry, can't help you,' you know? Or the ridicule factor and all these other issues that happen from that." (If you want a true, lasting legacy... Push to be the UAP Czar, start another AAWSAP-like program, and do it for a few years until the world learns the truth about us not being alone on this planet and that we have craft and bodies of NHI. Allegedly, right? And help us figure out what the hell the phenomenon represents.) Stratton: "So, I mean, that's kind of the the cliff notes and the history. But the UAP Task Force recently got an award from the DNI. It's the first UFO program to get an award at that level, to my knowledge. And I'm really proud of where we're at today and and that we can have events like these to discuss this topic seriously, and everybody that's involved in putting their brands on this problem." (More on that award... ) Stratton: "I don't think we should overlook...and you had, you know, Paul (Smith) and others talk about remote viewing and that consciousness connection. I keenly believe that consciousness is a key aspect of all of this, and perception, you know, all the things that come from that. And that's an area that can get confusing, right? If you look at all of these recent drones, day-to-day, right? It's honestly driving me crazy because people are throwing in, you know, video of a Cessna Citation on final approach and calling it a UAP, you know? It's definitely a Cessna Citation. "And then folks start throwing around (laughs) the terms mimicry and other things that we've definitely looked at. And it gets like the Skinwalker Ranch, as you know I'm involved out there. You know, the things that you see, and are you really...you know, how is your brain forming that thing you're seeing and can that be manipulated? And I think that that technology is an area that, you know, I certainly focused on with my friends, Hal and others, to try to understand it." (Manipulation and perception deception. Is it a byproduct of the technology on our brains, or is it an intentional effort to deceive us? If it's the latter, that certainly doesn't seem to be a good thing for humanity, but I'm still open to all theories.) Stratton: "And that consciousness connection could be a key to understanding how some of these UAP are flying, you know, how they're acting, how they're controlled, I guess is the best way to put it, right?" (Are the craft controlled by some sort of 6th sense that the operators have and need in order to fly a craft?) Stratton: "So, you got to have that kind of open mindedness to approach this topic and I hope that my government, you know, folks are open to those kinds of things. And I know that there are still some key players that are open and thinking about...thinking out of the box about all those kinds of things. So, I mean, I think consciousness is the area that I would want to put more resources and time into if I were still there. (Yes, yes and yes. Bring back Stratton as the UAP and Consciousness Czar!) Anna Brady-Estevez: "And it's interesting because there's quite a bit of access to consciousness, you know, on a personal level-type experimentation. So it is interesting in that, you know, to get into UAPs, I mean, maybe you've seen one or more, maybe you haven't. But, if you haven't, you're kind of digging through other people's data. Whereas some of these consciousness or the remote viewing, it really just takes a couple people and a sheet of paper. So you can kind of step away pretty quickly from the, 'Do I believe the reports?' you know? Or somebody else's versus you can get to that primary experimentation at the cost of a sheet of paper, a pencil, and fifteen minutes or more of somebody's time here, at the most basic level. I mean, obviously there's extensive training to build the high-end capabilities. But some of that initial testing is pretty immediate. So thank you for bringing up that consciousness work." (When I took a basic Controlled Remove Viewing class with Lyn Buchanan (one of the OG remote viewers) in 1997, I saw the results for myself when I tried it. And right there and then, I KNEW that it worked. So people can debate with me all day long about the validity of psi and remote viewing but they won't change my mind. Seeing (and trying it for yourself) is believing.) Stratton: "I was gonna say, it took me years to move away from that nuts and bolts mentality of, you know, as an aerospace engineer, this is how it flies, thrust, you know, power, etc, you know, to...there's a lot more to this, right? Hence the name, you know, Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena, or Aerial Phenomena, however you want to look at it. That phenomena word is key in the definition and understanding of all of this." (Big H/T to neandrewthal and anybody else who let me know about this event Stratton was a part of.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1877251655475015686/ext_tw_video_thumb/1877218159318675459/pu/img/VKwNKdJL6fnPKkWs.jpg)
![#ZimElection2023 ZAMBIA-LED SADC ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION OUT OF ORDER AS IT, AU AND COMMONWEALTH COUNTERPARTS RELEASE PRELIMINARY REPORTS ON ZIM ELECTION It is a good thing that three major international election observer missions have submitted their preliminary reports: The Commonwealth Election Observation Mission, the African Union (AU) Observation Mission and the Sadc Election Observation mission. The links to the three reports are indicated below: The Commonwealth Zim Election Observation Mission Report AU Zim Election Observation Mission Report Sadc Election Observation Preliminary Report Notably, and significantly so, the three preliminary reports echo an important sentiment expressed by CITE's Zenzele Ndebele (Zenzele) a few weeks ago on Newzroom Afrika โ for which he was vilified and demonised by the usual quarters among self-proclaimed champions of democracy โ that Zimbabweโs 2023 harmonised general election โhas been largely peacefulโ, compared to previous editions characterised by widespread violence. A peaceful harmonised general election in Zimbabwe is no mean achievement. It is big ns, and a huge social and political relief. And to say the election has been largely peaceful is not to say there have been no skirmishes or worse, any loss of life even if it was of one person, as Ndebele pointed out to Newzroom Afrika on the attached video clip. Meanwhile, there are no matters arising from the preliminary reports by the Commonwealth and the AU election observers, pending the release of their final reports in two or so months. Otherwise, election observation mission reports are precisely that, namely, reports on what the relevant missions actually observed on the conduct of an election in question. But not so for the Sadc Election Mission Preliminary Statement on Zimbabweโs 2023 harmonised general election. Led by former Zambian Vice President Nevers Mumba, appointed by Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema, who recently assumed the chairmanship of the Sadc Organ on Politics, Defence and Security. Unlike its African Union and Commonwealth counterparts, the Mumba Mission clearly, intentionally and scandalously wrote its report on the basis of what it heard, and not what it observed. Rather than making news about the election it ostensibly observed, the news is on the Sadc Election Observation for coming to Zimbabwe with an axe to grind, wielding it recklessly and shamelessly. It would be irresponsible to let the preliminary report of the Sadc Election Observation Mission go scot-free, unchallenged. The Mumba report is premised on this far reaching conclusion, which it is not competent to make: The Mission noted that some aspects of the Harmonised Elections, fell short of the requirements of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the Electoral Act, and the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections. Writing under the rubric, โConstitutional and Legal Framework for the Elections,โ Mumba and his colleagues make sweeping and opinionated statements and conclusions that are all based not on the direct observation of the election by the Mission but on hearsay with not a single thread of even desktop evidence. The sweeping statements and conclusions include an array of gratuitous comments based on hearsay about the voters roll; freedom of assembly in general and the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act (MOPA); freedom of expression in relation to the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act; the nomination of candidates; participation of women as candidates; alleged intimidation of voters; postal voting controversy; and coverage of the election by the state media. In the result, the main thrust of the report is pure and naked hearsay. In this connection, the reportโs treatment of two key issues is telling: one is the delimitation of constituencies and the other is on the so-called Patriotic Act. Regarding the so-called Patriotic Act, the report makes the following conclusion based on untested hearsay submissions: The Mission noted that the Patriot Act is incompatible with the spirit of section 61(1) of the Constitution, and paragraph 4.1.2 of the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections which requires Member States to uphold, amongst others, the freedom of expression. This is utterly shocking. What jurisdiction, power and legal competence do Nevers Mumba and his colleagues in the Sadc Election Observation Mission on the Zimbabwean 2023 harmonised general election have to make such a judicial pronouncement? The pronouncement is manifest and gross interference with the rule of law in Zimbabwe under which such judicial findings are made by competent courts of law and, even worse, the pronouncement is an unacceptable violation of Zimbabweโs sovereignty. Then thereโs the reportโs treatment of the delimitation of constituencies, about which it says: โThe mission WAS INFORMED that the delimitation exercise that was conducted in 2022 by the ZEC was marred with controversyโ. Without saying who informed it, the Sadc Observation Mission preliminary report makes the following scandalous statements and partisan conclusions on Zimbabweโs delimitation exercise conducted by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission in 202, which it is not entitled to make โ as it lacks the jurisdiction, authority and competence to do so โ and which statements and conclusions demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that its preliminary report is heavily opinionated hearsay that smacks of a malicious and predetermined hatchet job: "(i) In its Delimitation Report of 2022, the ZEC rightly states that, โthe Constitution recognisesthe impracticability of having equal number of voters in each constituency by allowing the Commission to depart from this requirement within a stipulated margin. In this case the Constitution in section 161(6) stipulates that โฆโno constituency may have more than 20% more or fewer registered voters than other such constituenciesโ. The constitution in section 161(6)a-f also lists factors that need to be considered when delimiting since they are important during the exercise.โ However, the ZEC goes on to also state that, โBased on the provision of section 161(6) the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission then calculated the 20% deviation from the national average voter registration expected in each constituency which was 27 640. This yielded a deviation of 5,528 voters. Since the average number of registered voters was regarded as a stable benchmark against which delimitation of constituencies was conducted, the deviation figure was added to the national average to determine the maximum number of registered voters that a constituency delimited would contain i.e., 33 168.โ (ii) The Mission noted that the use of the average number voters per constituency is not consistent with the provision of section 161(6) of the newConstitution that was adopted in 2013. The word โaverageโ appears in section 61A(6) of the old Constitution of Zimbabwe under which it was permissible to calculate the minimum and maximum permissible number of voter per constituency by using the national average as the baseline. That word โaverageโ does not exist in section 161(6) of the new Constitution which deals with the same subject matter. The difference between section 61A(6) and section 161(6) of the old and the new constitutions respectively is far from being merely technical. (iii) In the new Constitution, and in the context of section 161(6), the maximum deviation is 20% of the voters registered in the constituencies. The new Constitution uses actual constituency by constituency registered voter population, not the national average number of constituency voter population to calculate the permissible deviation from the requirement that constituencies must have an equal number of voters. Mathematically, the two methods produce very different results and affect the equality of the vote with respect to the elections to parliament. On the other hand, since the country votes as a single constituency in the presidential election, the difference in the methods has no particular impact on the equality of the vote in that election. It was therefore not unexpected that ZEC would receive substantial criticism on this aspect of its latest Delimitation Report. (iv) The Mission noted that the use of the average number of voters per constituency is not consistent with the provision of section 161(6) of the new Constitution that was adopted in 2013. The word โaverageโ appears in section 61A(6) of the old Constitution of Zimbabwe under which it was permissible to calculate the minimum and maximum permissible number of voter per constituency by using the national average as the baseline. That word โaverageโ does not exist in section 161(6) of the new Constitution which deals with the same subject matter. The difference between section 61A(6) and section 161(6) of the old and the new constitutions respectively is far from being merely technical. (v) In the new Constitution, and in the context of section 161(6), the maximum deviation is 20% of the voters registered in the constituencies. The new Constitution uses actual constituency by constituency registered voter population, not the national average number of constituency voter population to calculate the permissible deviation from the requirement that constituencies must have an equal number of voters. Mathematically, the two methods produce very different results and affect the equality of the vote with respect to the elections to parliament. On the other hand, since the country votes as a single constituency in the presidential election, the difference in the methods has no particular impact on the equality of the vote in that election. It was therefore not unexpected that ZEC would receive substantial criticism on this aspect of its latest Delimitation Report." There are three things to highlight about what Mumba and his team say regarding the delimitation of constituencies. Firstly, everything they say is very familiar to Zimbabweans because the delimitation issue was widely, hotly and robustly debated. More specifically, the words used in the Mumba narrative about the delimitation report are familiar words that were used during the debate. It is disappointing that the familiar words have found their way, verbatim, into the Sadc Election Observation preliminary report. This alone is sad, and the less said about it, the better for everyone concerned. Secondly, ZECโs delimitation exercise was challenged at the High Court of Zimbabwe and in the countryโs apex court, the Constitutional Court. The views that the Sadc Election Observation Mission regurgitates as its own, when in fact theyโre not, were argued in Zimbabweโs courts, but no pronouncement or finding of the kind that the Mumba team goes to town about was made by any court of the land. What makes this even more egregious is the following statement in the Sadc Election Observer Missionโs report: In view of their significance in the event of legal challenges in the context of the electoral process, some stakeholders expressed the view that the judiciary is compromised by the Government. A key justification for this perception was information received from these stakeholders that the judiciary recently received large financial and material incentives which the stakeholders viewed as an attempt by the Government to buy the loyalty and allegiance of the judiciary. So, the Sadc Election Observation Mission on the 2023 harmonised general election in Zimbabwe โreceived information fromโฆstakeholders that the judiciary recently received large financial and material incentives which the stakeholders viewed as an attempt by the Government to buy the loyalty and allegiance of the judiciaryโ. Why is the Sadc Election Observation Mission disrespecting Zimbabweโs judiciary in this manner? The is outrageous, and for it to find expression in this report is shameless and unacceptable. In the interest of fairness, the Sadc Mission must be required by Sadc to share this information with everyone, particularly the Government of Zimbabwe which represents the Zimbabwean State, a member of Sadc. As already pointed out, the Sadc Observer Mission has no jurisdiction or competence to make any judicial pronouncements on Zimbabwean elections, not least because it is not a judicial inquiry; it is just and only an observation mission. This needs to be rectified by the Mission in its final report. Thatโs why it has been both important and necessary to engage the preliminary report at this stage. Thirdly, and last but not least, it is important to recall the Missionโs conclusion that is making news everywhere in order to show that it is politically opportunistic, and arguably is self-evident malice aforethought. The Sadc Election Observation Missionโs preliminary report has this running thread that ties everything in the report together, and which is effectively the essence of the reportโs conclusion: The Mission noted that some aspects of the Harmonised Elections, fell short of the requirements of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the Electoral Act, and the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections. Is this conclusion in any way linked to or an outcome of the observations that the preliminary report lists as the observations that were actually made by the Sadc Mission? The best way to unpack the question is by looking at the full list of the observations that the Mission says it made, and they are the following: "3. OBSERVATIONS ON ELECTION DAYS (23-24 AUGUST 2023) On the Election Days, the SADC Electoral Observation Mission observed the voting process in 10 Provinces of the Republic of Zimbabwe. The deployed observer teams covered 172 polling stations in their respective areas. The political contestants have continued to call for peace during this election period and after. The SEOM observed the following critical aspects at the 172 polling stations that we visited: (a) The environment at the polling stations was relatively calm and peaceful. (b) A number of voters expressed concern due to a lack of, or late arrival of ballot papers and poor administration at some polling stations. However, voters remained patient to exercise their constitutional right to vote. (c) Professional and attentive police presence enhanced the overall peace and secure environment in all the polling stations observed. (d) 64% of the voting stations observed opened on time, 36% did not open on time for the 07:00am stipulated opening time. Some polling stations opened more than 12 hours after the stipulated time. The reason provided by ZEC for this unprecedented development was the unavailability of ballot papers, particularly for the local authority elections, and also due to previous litigation. This challenge was, however specific to Harare and Bulawayo Provinces. Due to the delays, some voters left without casting their votes, while others opted to remain in the lengthy queues throughout the day and night. By 06:00am on 24 August 2023, some voters in these two provinces had still not voted. Consequently, these delays also had a knock-on effect as they dissuaded voters from voting in the first place. Against this observation we further note as follows: i. Section 52(1) of the Electoral Act provides that for any election, the ZEC shall ensure that every constituency elections officer is provided with polling booths or voting compartments and ballot boxes, and shall provide papers, including ballot papers. ii. Prior to election day, ZEC had assured our Mission and other stakeholders, that all necessary voting materials, including ballot papers, were available and ready for use before election day. This communication was made in the context of section 52A(2) of the Electoral Act which requires ZEC to provide information on the number of ballot papers and publication of details regarding them. On the basis of these two considerations, the subsequent information from ZEC that they did not have adequate ballot papers has the unfortunate effect of creating doubts about the credibility of this electoral process. (e) The voters roll was unavailable at 1% of the polling stations observed, and was therefore not displayed outside the polling stations for the convenience of the voters and verification by party/candidates agents. (f) During the voting period, and at 26% of the polling stations observed, not all voters who turned out could vote. The reasons advanced for this included: i. Voters were identified, but the names were not found on the votersโ roll; ii. It was not possible to establish the voterโs identity; iii. Voters were at the wrong polling station; and iv. Voters did not have a national identity card or passport, or due to the absence of an official witness confirming an electorโs identity. (g) 8% of the polling stations observed were not accessible to voters living with disabilities. (h) At 50% of the polling stations, voters living with disabilities, the elderly, and pregnant women were not given priority to vote. (i) In 3% of polling stations observed, indelible ink was not checked on the voters before allowing them to cast their vote. (j) At 97% of the polling stations observed, voting was free from irregularities. (k) Voting proceeded in an orderly manner at 95% of the polling stations observed. (l) Ballot boxes did not remain locked and/or sealed at 2% of the polling stations. (m) As a result of the excessive delays in the opening of polling stations in Harare and Bulawayo provinces, at least 36% of the voting stations observed did not close at the scheduled closing time of 1900hrs, while some had not even opened by that time. It was announced that voting would be extended to proceed into 24 August 2023 to compensate for the late opening. (n) In previous stakeholder consultations, a shadowy organisation referred to as Forever Associates Zimbabwe was accused of conducting a country-wide exercise of electoral intimidation. Our observers confirmed the existence of this group as its officials or agents were easily identifiable at some polling stations as they were dressed in regalia emblazoned with the FAZ name and were accredited local observers. These, and other unidentified persons who were not polling officials were also observed taking down the names of voters before they cast their votes. In some areas, voters were intimidated by actions of these individuals. (o) The Mission observed the closing and vote counting processes. A proper analysis of these two processes shall be provided as part of the final SEOM Report." CONCLUSION Three points to conclude: Firstly, it is notable that the actual observations made by the Sadc Election Observation Mission are given as a skeletal laundry list with little if any analysis. Yet the observations are at the core of how the actual polling or election was conducted on polling day. Secondly, thereโs no connection between the preliminary reportโs running theme that โthe Mission noted that some aspects of the Harmonised Elections, fell short of the requirements of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the Electoral Act, and the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Electionsโ. Surely, to sustain the theme, it has to be connected with the actual observations made by the Mission. But the preliminary report makes no connection, not least because the connection is contrived, based on hearsay and therefore has no factual foundation. Thirdly, one of the observations that proves malice in the preliminary report is the following [number โmโ on the laundry list of observations]: As a result of the excessive delays in the opening of polling stations in Harare and Bulawayo provinces, at least 36% of the voting stations observed did not close at the scheduled closing time of 1900hrs, while some had not even opened by that time. It was announced that voting would be extended to proceed into 24 August 2023 to compensate for the late opening. It is an unfortunate falsehood that there is any polling station that had not opened by 1900hrs on polling day, 23 August 2023. Itโs a shame that such a falsehood found itself in a report of this stature and implication. Otherwise, if the report was based on good faith, the name and location of polling stations that had not opened by 1900hrs on polling day should have been specified for purposes of verification and rectification. Fourthly, right upfront the preliminary report says: The Mission was informed that a further proclamation was issued rendering 24 August 2023 as a polling day in view of the delays experienced at certain polling stations. Furthermore, President Mnangagwa also proclaimed 2 October 2023 for the run-off election to the office of president if such a poll becomes necessary. Two points about this. One is that the mind boggles at why the Mission had to be โinformedโ about this, and why the Mission did not get a copy of the proclamation for itself. Was this out of laziness or what? The other point is why does the preliminary report fail to see and understand that โthe further proclamationโ was the specific solution to the litany of what the Mission lists in its preliminary report as its observations regarding the delayed opening of polling stations on polling day and the shortage of ballot papers and related issues? An impression, a false one at that, is created to the effect that the litany of observations of problems that beset polling stations that opened late or opened without some or all ballot papers for the three elections were left unattended to. If truth be told, the Sadc Election Observation Missionโs preliminary report leaves a distinct and disturbing impression that the Mission had a sinister and a not so hidden mission against the people of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Zimbabwe, abi nitio. Thatโs unfortunate because the impression is palpable!](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1695221640085319951/ext_tw_video_thumb/1695221134877224960/pu/img/n9BHbNRA3hxjG-tI.jpg)
![๐ฅ LAP Alert ๐ฅ "I did this sort of spy thing where I changed hotel rooms and I changed taxis. I was making sure I wasnโt followed." ~Knapp Is Lacatski Lying to Us About the Craft and Breaching the Hull? ~ "If not for that [2017 NYT] story about AATIP and the problems that [Lacatski] saw with it, he would never have mentioned [AAWSAP]...I don't think, ever." ~Knapp (So, in other words...thank you from the UFO community, to the NYT, for getting it wrong? ๐) ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Should we listen to Dr. James Lacatski on UFOs, on the fact, or the idea, that our government has at least one, he's admitted, and we breached the hull? Should we listen to him, George?" George Knapp: "I know a lot of people have noticed that he's talked about his role in counterintelligence as part of the AAWSAP program. And because they equate counterintelligence with lies, false info., cover stories, misdirection. Aha! He's putting out a bunch of false info. a decade after he retired from government service." (I saw one person suggest that, and I thought it was a questionable take...) Grant Lavac: "Given that Dr. James Lacatski was the 'counterintelligence coordinator' for AAWSAP, how much confidence can we invest in the veracity of his public statements that 'at least one recovered craft of unknown origin, a flying machine with no wings, no engine, no fuel, and no fuel tanks' is in the possession of the US government and that they had 'breached the hull' of the UFO? In the context of the counterintelligence value of UAP/UFO, his comments in this most recent interview on WEAPONIZED (edited for brevity) only raise more questions for me." ~~~ Knapp: "A, it's not [Lacatski]. He's not out there beating the bushes. He's talked to us, but that's pretty much it. He's telling the full story as much as he can in a series of books. And I was co-author on two of those, not on this one. And, you know, I remember the first time I met him, it was in 2018." ~ (In April of 2019, Knapp shared that story, minus Lacatski's name, at UFO MegaCon. Knapp in 2019: "I thought today I would share with you, sort of the informational foundation that Iโve acquired. So, one year ago, I made this trip to Washington, D.C. at the invitation of Senator Harry Reid. It was St. Patrickโs Day, 2018 and I already knew a little bit about AATIP and AAWSAP and what theyโve been studying and where the money came from and how the program was created. I did this sort of spy thing where I changed hotel rooms and I changed taxis. I was making sure I wasnโt followed. And if there was ever actually, anybody following me, they must have thought I looked ridiculous because it was way over the top. "But I ended up having to meet with Senator Reid and some other people who were directly involved in these programs and they gave me a download. And I thought I knew a lot about these programs when I went there and realized that I only knew a little tiny bit. The purpose of this was to learn about these programs. We all know about AATIP, but in reality, there was something before that. "I sat down for a couple of hours with Senator Reid and other people whose names, they donโt want to be known. They brought me up to speed on how AATIP was created. How its predecessor was under way for a number of years. It coexisted for a long time. People in this room. People who investigate this topic may have suspected for a long time that there was some kind of a program that still existed. Weโve all heard that Project Bluebook was the end. 1969 it ended and the government was done with UFOs. They closed up shop. And the reason they closed it down is because there was no evidence that it involved national security. "And we all knew that was baloney because of the stories that weโve seen that are really well documented. For example, UFOs over nuclear missile bases. UFO encounters with the military installations and atomic facilities. Things of that sort the have been well documented over the years. There are cases that involved national security. So at the end of Blue Book, of course, this memo said, alright, any cases involving national security will continue to be investigated in the regular way. Well, what the heck was the regular way? We didnโt know. Well now we do know. At least a little bit of it." (Project Blue Book was shut down in December of 1969, but a few months earlier, in October, we had the Bolender memo, which noted that "reports of UFOs which could affect national security should continue to be handled through the standard Air Force procedure designed for this purpose." What standard Air Force procedure? The regular way? Where did those cases go? We still don't know what Bolender was referring to in that memo.) ~ Knapp in 2019: "And one of the regular ways was this program called AATIP. So I went on this trip. [and] I learned this stuff about AATIP. I had known a lot about it before but I got this briefing about this alphabet soup of different programs, how they began and what they studied. December 2017, the New York Times breaks this story about AATIP. Now, I had known about it for a long time because I lived in Las Vegas. I knew Bob Bigelow. I knew Harry Reid. Weโd talk about UFO stuff and what was going on. "So when I was told the New York Times was gonna break the story, Iโm kind ticked off about it. Because hey, Iโve been sitting on this for a long time. Why donโt I get to break the story? And they had to, one after another, gently remind me, 'You know. Youโre not the New York Times.' Which I had to admit! It was true. And if I had done the story, the Times had said that they werenโt going to do it if somebody else breaks it. So, if I had done it, itโd be another story from a UFO reporter. "The New York Times did it and they changed everything. Because they did it, wider organizations did it. Some of them took shots at the New York Times because The Times got the story and they didnโt. But that story was accurate, to a degree. But the story that it told was not the full story. AATIP, that we know aboutโฆthe AATIP that studies nuts and bolts saucersโฆcase of UFOs that have encounters with military units such as the USS Nimitz, that is studied by a group of people, Lue Elizondo was the head of it. "Itโs not so much a program as it was a loose network of intelligence officials in different agencies, including the Air Force and the Navy, CIA, DIA, DARPAโฆthere might be a couple of other agencies. But a case would come in from any one of their units [and] it would be shared with this group of people, analysis would be done, evidence would be looked at and then stashed in a draw and nobody ever sees it. Itโs not passed up the chain of command. "In 2007, that changed. One of the guys (Lacatski. ~Joe 2025) I met with in this meeting in Washington is the one who changed it. He had been in the same position that Lue Elizondo had been in. And his name is just not out there. He grew frustrated with what was happening with the phenomenon and he suspected that UFOs flying around the sky, buzzing our military units every once in a while, is not the full story. Even if you could solve that part of the mystery it wouldnโt solve the bigger part of the picture. "So he grew interested in Skinwalker Ranch and he had read the (Knapp/Kelleher โ 'Hunt For The Skinwalker') book. And after he read it, he called up Bob Bigelow and saidโฆactually, he wrote him a letter and said, 'Hey, can I go to the ranchโฆgo look around? Iโm with the DIA.' Bigelow says, 'Come on out to Las Vegas and Iโll take you there.' And thatโs what happened. He flew to Las Vegas. They flew on Bigelowโs jet. They went to the ranch. "This guyโs not there fifteen minutes and he has an experience. And Iโm not gonna go into detail. Iโm hoping that heโs going to maybe come forward at some point and describe his experience. But it was just for him. Of all the people in this room, in the encounter, he was the only one who could see it. Heโs the only one who had an angle on this thing that appeared. And heโs pretending that heโs not seeing it but itโs right out of the corner of his eye. And he doesnโt say anything until he leaves the ranch. And he gets off and he asks Bigelow if he had seen it. And he had not. The other people who had been in the room had not seen it. "He flies back to Las Vegas, goes back to Washington, D.C. and looks up Harry Reid and tells him about it. Now Reid had some experience in these matters that Iโll get into in a little bit. But as a result of that conversation, Reid, who had an interest in UFOs and had maintained that interest over many years โ and I can attest to that personally โ called in a couple of his friends in the Senate โ Daniel Inouye and Ted Stevens. They had a conversation in a secure room and they decided to provide some funding for a much broader study. Something that looked atโฆbeyond flying saucers, that looked at other paranormal aspectsโฆsupernatural aspects that we would not normally associate with aliens or ETs. Assuming that thatโs what this is, which Iโm not sure anyone knows for sure. And that is how AAWSAP was born. The Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program." ~~~ Knapp Yesterday: "The only reason [Lacatski] came forward, he was ticked off about how AATIP had been described in major media reports, and no mention had been given to the actual, real program. That one that had a $22 million budget, lasted 27 months, and which put together the biggest UFO data warehouse in history, that had written all these papers that still have not been released." (In the most-recent interview (Part 1) with Weaponized, Lacatski let it fly with his issues related to the 2017 NYT article: "The initial reporting...by the New York Times story in 2017 was totally inaccurate. Contrary to what some people claim, the authors knew my name and position at AAWSAP, yet never attempted to contact me. Likewise, the The Washington Post. POLITICO (laughs) contacted me within hours after the articles were published in the free publications, asking for my opinion. They knew my name, they had my phone number. Why didn't they contact me [beforehand]?" ~Dr. James Lacatski on Weaponized ~ Knapp: "So, Jim was a counterintelligence guy for AAWSAP, but in this role. He wasn't putting out cover stories or lies, he didn't put out anything. The world didn't hear that AAWSAP existed until years later, at least by that name. There was one statement made to the press about that program. It was by Robert Bigelow, whose company, BAASS, got the contract. A week after he signed it, he came on with me on Coast to Coast AM and said, 'We got this program dealing with UFOs, we have an unnamed partner, and we're excited to get going.' That was it. "Jim Lacatski wasn't putting out PR releases about AAWSAP. There was nothing. That was the last thing anybody said until the New York Times did the AATIP story, and then Jim Lacatski felt the real story was being covered up. If not for that story about AATIP and the problems that he saw with it, he would never have mentioned this. I don't think ever." (Well, then, thank you to the NYT journalists and editors for pissing off Lacatski!) Knapp: "You'll recall, AAWSAP, at the time that things went downhill, that the funding was moved away, they were trying to make it into a SAP, a Special Access Program. And if it had happened, we probably would never have heard of it. If it had happened, Lue Elizondo would have been the counterintelligence guy for AAWSAP, that he had already talked to Lacatski. "But Lacatski is not proclaiming the greatness of the program. He's not out there beating the bushes on podcasts and newscasts, other than with us, and he never put out in counterintelligence. His role, counterintelligence, meant something different for AAWSAP. The thing that DIA had told him was, 'Look, you know, it's not a rogue program. I know it gets weird into some of the phenomena that was at Skinwalker Ranch and other places. We don't care. Here's what we care about: Don't let the secret out. We don't want to see this on the front page of the Washington Post. We want it kept secret.' (John Greenewald was one person questioning whether AAWSAP was actually a prosaic program and Lacatski just decided to go rogue with a foray into UFOs and the paranormal.) Greenewald Tweet: "Did the U.S. government really sanction this, and if so, is this really how it was run? Or was this a rogue operation by a select few on the inside playing with Uncle Sam's coffers?" (Greenewald was quote tweeting a Greenstreet hit-piece video on AAWSAP. In his interview on Weaponized aired over the past few weeks, Lacatski said that former Deputy Director of AARO, Tim Phillips, also used the "rogue" word when describing AAWSAP. Did DIA really not know what AAWSAP was about? Did Lacatski go rogue and turn a program that was supposed to look at prosaic, advanced technology into one that studied UFOs and the paranormal? Here's an exchange from the 2023 interview Knapp and Corbell did with Lacatski and Colm Kelleher.) Kelleher: "The critical part of AAWSAP that we tried to convey in 'Skinwalkers at the Pentagon,' was that there were two fundamental, parallel tracks that AAWSAP ran on. The first one was the examination of UFO performance. And, you know, the UFO performance part was getting all of the data from eyewitnesses, plus deploying sensors into the field, in order to gather data on the performance of UFOs. That was track number one. And track number two was: What effects do UFOs have on humans? That was a parallel track that, from the get go, AAWSAP decided, unambiguously, to run both tracks in parallel. We documented psychological effects, and then we also documented paranormal effects." Lacatski: "Anything can be said on the internet it seems, factual or not. Well, one thing that is not factual is, DIA knew what it was getting into in regard to both aspects that Colm just described to you. And let me end my statement right here. We had no choice but to pursue both aspects." (That was a poor way of him saying: The claim that DIA was unaware of AAWSAP looking into all aspects of UFOs, including the paranormal, is NOT true.) Lacatski: "I want to emphasize something I said on my first and only interview. It was a closed program. It operated very similar to a SAP. The director, the director of analysis, and my office chief...and, of course, division chief, knew about this program. No one else did. Now, I was also protected by the stovepipe nature of that. I did not have to address political-type questions. I was insulated, but they were, too. There was no one else. People in the surrounding cubicles didn't know. Nothing was purposely being hid. It was a closed, stovepipe system, and it needed to be. It needed to be operated that way." ~~~ Knapp: "And so, Jim Lacatski took it on himself, put it in his own hands. He and Colm Kelleher interviewed all these people who applied for the jobs, the 50 full-time positions that they staffed, in a matter of months. They did background checks, they required security clearances for all those people, and they were worried about leaks. They didn't want information to get out. "They also were concerned about espionage by foreign players, by foreign companies, things of that sort. And some of that really did happen. As Jim has shared with us, there were a couple of phones that were transmitters that were found inside Bigelow Aerospace, inside the Bigelow, uh, facilities, and it was very alarming because they weren't sure who was doing it. I think they think it was a foreign government. I'm not going to say which one, uh, they suspected the most." (Lacatski said that the phones in question were made in China.) Knapp: "But, and then they also found weird frequencies emanating from Skinwalker Ranch. That's not strange, and there's a lot of unusual stuff that happens there, but it was some sort of a an espionage program that they believed was was not only looking at the ranch, but also at BAASS. "That was his primary concern. He was worried that the story gets out, because secrecy was of paramount interest to the heads of DIA and he's worried about the information getting out to the public. Because once it happened, then the knives come out in the Pentagon and within the intelligence community, which is kind of what happened. A memo was sent from Harry Reid's office, let other people know that AAWSAP existed, and that's when things started getting problematic." Corbell: "The bugging thing. So, it's not just like Bigelow Aerospace was tapped with something, he said, specifically, AAWSAP, right? So they were looking at that new UFO program. And I don't know how public this is, but he did say it was - not just him, other people have all said - it was multiple nations, multiple, different devices from those phones. And he also said that they worked with FBI, they had FBI liaisons looking at the ranch property, and also at Bigelow Aerospace. "Because, remember, they were supposed to receive a transfer of materials. That's why they reverse, reverse engineered (laughs), you know, they built everything to be able to hold SCIF-capable and material-capable property at that classification level. So, look, I think if we pull it back, the whole idea is, James Lacatski made a statement at some point that he was, you know, head of, or part of, or running the counterintelligence for AAWSAP. But his point was to keep AAWSAP itself secret from foreign nations. So then he has to keep it secret from the U.S. He did it. He did a great job. They actually kept it secret. That doesn't mean he's going out and creating false information to the public like he's been accused of. "So, should we listen to Jim Lacatski? That was like, you know, the main question. Oh, one second. He also identified that there is currently a counter-programming, counterintelligence operation going on to the American public, but not against the American public, by AARO." (In other words, spread misinformation to the American public so they can advance their goal of misinforming and confusing our adversaries who are always listening. National security! IMO, that's only acceptable if we're talking specifics related to propulsion, technology and weapons that can be used to give us a leg up on said adversaries. But everything else should come out and be made public. We shouldn't be told a bunch of lies about information we paid for and that could, potentially, give us some clarity about our species and other lifeforms on this planet.) Corbell: That was so clear in our interview with him that he said that, you know, 'Look, they're acting this way. They are telling you lies about AAWSAP and what happened.' And that's why he said, 'My books, I'm a government employee. This was paid by taxpayers. I'm trying to give you information.' And that's what his books are. "So it's clear from these rounds of interviews that we just had with Dr. Lacatski that he supports a controlled UFO disclosure. He made that very clear. So should we listen to what he has to say? I mean, he was a big dog, right, George?" Knapp: "He was the head of the largest U.S. government-funded UFO investigation in history, that we know of. He worked with Colm Kelleher, who was the boots-on-the-ground guy in Las Vegas. He worked with Jay Stratton. Stratton's role in the development of AAWSAP has not been really fully explored, but he's got a book coming out at some point, once it gets through the DOPSR process. But then we'll get additional information to buttress what Lacatski has said."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1991268528771748027/amplify_video_thumb/1990932248116539392/img/QA2EH0b-Bfna8TB4.jpg)
!["What was in the middle of the hangar was an actual flying saucer. ~GR A Secret Revealed After 33 Years - Have We Cracked Gravity? "We got it from them." (Rogers retired in April of this year.) In 1992, Dr. Gregory Rogers, a chief flight surgeon (a physician who's responsible for the health of the aviation crew, including pilots) for NASA and an Air Force major who supported 33 space shuttle launches and was also an F-18 pilot, was at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (now called Cape Canaveral Space Force Station). He had a guide from EG&G with him but that doesn't seem relevant to what happened next. A major pulled him aside and said, "Hey Doc, I've got something to show you, I've got something even you have never seen." Josh Boswell broke this story in May. H/T: Sentinel News The major took him into an office with four computer stations, locked the door and closed the blinds. They both sat down, and on one of the computer screens, the major pulled up a video that showed a generic hangar. The screen had no markings on it. No classification markings, no location, time, date, etc. "What was in the middle of the hangar was an actual flying saucer." (This next quote isn't part of my video clip and is at 25:08 of the Chris Lehto interview.) "So I said, 'Where would we get a design like this?' And [the major] said, 'We got it from them (shows his thumb pointing up).' He did not explain what he meant, but obviously, he was referring to non-human technologies from off this planet." "There were two guys in lab cats to the bottom left, and then midway up the screen on the right side, there were three guys that looked like technicians in what I would call Tyvek suits, head-to-toe. And only their faces were shown. "And then some sort of a warning sound went off and everybody cleared out. And then, within a couple of minutes, the vehicle became active." "The vehicle itself was sort of a pearly white. There were no seams, rivets, windows, doors. Nothing that could be identified. It looked as though it was sort of a modified egg, if you just sort of shifted it around. "There was a tiny little area on top that protruded and there was a mast that came out. And on the mast, it looked like there were three umbilicals coming off." There were various, flat-black rectangles (horizontal and vatical). "I believe that these were made to monitor the movement of this craft." [Since] "it was perfectly pearly white, and it began to move, there was nothing there to show you that it was moving. So, just like any experimental aircraft, they put markings on it so you could monitor the motion. And that's what I believe these rectangles were. "There were electromagnetic discharges that told me that the vehicle had become active, and they were very peculiar. But I don't wish to describe them to anyone because, if this was a test-bed model, whatever the mechanisms were being used may still be active in more advanced craft, and I don't want to give out information that would be beneficial to those opposing the United States. But, as soon as it started to do this... (Video picks up again here. ๐๐ผ ) "...it just sort of lifted off the floor. The floor looked like a concrete floor with like, some sort of rubber matt that had been on top of it." "It lifted off, just like a feather. It rose about three feet in the air and then just hung there. The next thing that it does is that it rotates 360 degrees, clockwise. As it rotated across, I could see the writing, 'U.S. Air Force.' And then it had an American flight insignia just above that." "It completed a 360-degree circle, paused, and then completed a 360-degree circle counterclockwise, so that it was in the same position it had started in. It moved to the left and right, it moved forward and backwards. It's just like, you know, you're testing your controls, making sure you have everything working. "And then, it rotated to a 45-degree angle of attack, if it were flying and the 12-o'clock position (where the U.S. Navy and flight insignia was located) was going forward. This was amazing. Fixed-wing aircraft can't do this. A helicopter can go to a 45-degree angle of attack, but it's going to be moving forward and lifting. This thing did not do that. And so, this shocked me more than anything else, because it did not move one centimeter as it moved to what would be a 45-degree angle of attack. So that just blew me away. "Just about that time, there's a knock on the door. The guy hits the buttons to turn the computer and screen off, and he says, 'Don't tell anyone I showed you this!' "Well, I'm gonna go around telling somebody that you showed me a flying saucer? Well he goes to the door, opens it - we were both majors - and so this Lt. Colonel and two other guys came in. And so the Lt. Colonel said, "What's going on in here that you had the doors locked?" To see how they got out of this pickle, and why Rogers didn't turn in the major for showing him a classified video, watch the rest of the clip. "Along the way, I thought, 'I can't tell this to anybody.' I didn't even tell it to my wife for 15 years. But, as long as I was associated with the [DoD], I did not want to risk what the repercussions were gonna be as soon as I told this story. ~~~ How far have our reverse engineering efforts progressed? This is from my August of 2023 post. "There are people who say we have reverse-engineered them and are flying them. I never found any support for that. And found a lot of support for saying we canโt figure it out. If we do, it would be in some program at a higher security level.โ ~Michael Shellenberger ~~~ Former intel and defense contractor, and my friend, Michael Via, who I've interviewed multiple times, had his sighting of a silent, black, "majestic" triangle craft in 1992 in the Persian Gulf. He thinks it's our tech. ~~~ And then there's Nick Cook, the former aviator editor for Jane's Defence Weekly and a very respected, award-winning journalist, and author. His gut tells him that we (humans) may have cracked gravity. But he doesn't have the proof. "I found plenty of evidence the US had been trying, tho. I have no firm evidence now (who does?), but 20 years on from #THFZP, I think it is possible the antigrav issue has been cracked. Wish I could say this was more than a hunch, but this is all it is." ~Nick Cook A hunch. Possible. ~~~ And my favorite anecdote of all time, from another person I consider a friend. Retired Commander Will Miller: "I had a friend, a former military officer who worked with me. [He went to work at] the famous Groom Lake facility, Area 51 and he was out there for several years. As we all know, most folks that work out there have signed their lives away, never to disclose what goes on and for better or for worse, and this fella was no different. And over the three years I worked with him โ and he knew my interest in things extraterrestrial and my work with CSETI โ never once did he mention any of his work out at Groom Lake or any association between that and anything extraterrestrial. "And the day I was leaving the command, he took me aside and he said, 'You know, Will, some of the folks you talk with, maybe some CSETI researchers, may see objects that are doing, you know, Mach 9 and then suddenly make a right angle turn and you say, "Well, gosh, thatโs got to be an extraterrestrial craft."' "And then he looked at me and he said, 'But itโs not.' And he just turned and walked away." ~Commander Will Miller (Retired) My original post is here: ~~~ One thing that Dr. Gregory Rogers said to Lehto really jumped out at me: "And then, it rotated to a 45-degree angle of attack." Numerous witnesses have reported craft tilting up at a 45-degree angle right before they shoot off at a high rate of speed. I wrote a long thread on it (which I can't find) and Danny Silva wrote an article on it several years ago. Here's a thread from Willy Sam that covers some of that. And if you Google "UFO tilt up 45 degrees," you'll find more. Did we figure out something about UFOs and tilting up?](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1939420314737447294/amplify_video_thumb/1939387449588740097/img/Edi3P1nipVPwGc3I.jpg)