The Shadow Government is a combination of big energy, aerospace, and technology. These private sector contractors for the
military industrial complex have taken over control of a lot of the spy
programs as well as research and development on highly classified technology. This gives
those who are in an official government position plausible deniability
and the majority of the money being spent is from the private sector so
Congress is held out of the loop. Elected officials and unelected military and civilian bureaucrats are all still on a big
corporate pay roll as an insurance policy not to step outside the box of permitted discourse.
Grusch isn't asking anyone to trust him; he's asking Congress to investigate his claims. Grusch provided all of the evidence accumulated in his investigation,
including the names and testimonies of first hand witnesses, locations
where alleged craft and biology are held, and documentary evidence (e.g.
photos) to the Inspectors General of Defense and Intelligence and to
the House and Senate intelligence committees.
Apparently everyone involved in the public hearings ALREADY HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY ASKED FOR. if anything seems like a
ploy to cause the shadow government to reveal itself more. It worked.
Look at the reprisals - attacks on the witnesses, the complete lies from AARO, the clear
blackout of MSM media coverage, or if it’s covered, only ridicule.
The fact that WE the citizens have to DEMAND our government represent
our interests, when they were created for that purpose. The blockage of
House Oversight Committee investigations by obfuscation of evidence or outright denial
of access. The public’s firm grasp of the stigma and psy-op main points i.e., don’t look up, “trust us, nothing to see here.”
The ICIG’s finding that Grusch’s allegations of UAP information being illegally withheld
from Congress is “urgent and credible” (credible enough to proceed for
further investigation). Many in the public can name the contractors,
where craft are keep, and some of the 40 witnesses who have likely
previously made public statements. I do not doubt for a moment that Grusch is presenting
what he believes to be the “truth”. I do not believe that he is intentionally participating in a
psyop. I think he believes what he has been told, read, and I credit him
for his investigative efforts.
We need the public to trust the process;
people of a free and open society to trust what to date has be a very
closed hearing process. We
need clarification. To date we do not have examples because of “spy
craft”, nor access to scif debriefings, names of witness, or clear
definitions of terms like aliens, non-human intelligence, spacecraft,
off-world, crash retrieval, etc… and this is exactly how a public psyop
would work by effectively creating misunderstanding and fear through
omission. While Grusch is not using the word “extraterrestrial”, the
headlines are. He is using the
term “inter-dimensional”, a relatively modern concept but one that is
not reflected in the longer nazi, paperclip and mkultra history.
I want to trust they’ll get it right but
we have questions.
theatlantic | Earlier
today, three witnesses came before Congress to testify about their
experiences with unidentified flying objects. A former Navy pilot spoke
of the mysterious objects that he has seen with his own eyes and through
radar, and how frequently pilots encounter them in the air. A retired
Navy commander described the time he pulled his jet up to a Tic
Tac–shaped object hovering over the ocean, then watched it suddenly
speed up and vanish.
The most anticipated remarks, however, came from a former military-intelligence officer named David Grusch, who went public with his account
just last month. Grusch told the House oversight subcommittee on
national security that the American government has spent decades
secretly recovering mysterious vehicles that have crashed on the ground,
and has determined the material to be of “non-human” origin. The
government also attempted to reverse engineer some of the technology,
according to Grusch. And it’s doing all of this clandestinely, without
proper supervision by Congress.
In
the hearing, Grusch expanded on his previous claims in response to
lawmakers’ questions. If elected officials had never heard about this
effort before, how did it get any funding? The military pilfered money that had been allocated for its other programs.
A defense official recently testified before Congress that the U.S.
military hasn’t found any evidence of extraterrestrial activity on
Earth; is that statement correct? It’s not accurate. Has any of the activity been aggressive or hostile? My colleagues have gotten physically injured. By UFOs, or by people within the government? Both.
After
not holding a hearing on UFOs for more than half a century, Congress
has recently held two in as many years. In that sense, we can count
today’s events as historic. But as in the other hearings, this one had
no big reveal, no grand answer to humankind’s most existential questions
about our place in the universe. The hype surrounding the hearing—and
there has been considerable hype—says
more about the people who tuned in than about Grusch’s claims. Just as
it did in the late 1940s, when stories of flying saucers over Washington
state and crash landings in New Mexico captivated the nation, UFO fever
today indicates that Americans feel that their government knows more
than it’s letting on.
That sentiment is not new, nor is Americans’ belief in conspiracy theories. Though research suggests
that conspiracy thinking is not getting worse in the modern-day United
States, we are in a moment of acute public curiosity about—and
acceptance of—conspiracism. Compared with QAnon, vaccine microchips, and stolen elections,
a big UFO cover-up might seem almost reasonable—even if that cover-up
involves, as Grusch previously claimed in an interview, the military
discovering the “dead pilots” of alien craft. (In Congress today, Grusch
declined to give specifics about this and many other claims, saying
that there was only so much he could disclose to the public and that he
could elaborate in a closed setting.)
The
past several years have coincided with an unprecedented mainstreaming
of UFO culture. In 2017, when an interstellar object showed up in our
solar system, most scientists agreed that it was an asteroid or a comet,
but some said it could have been an alien spaceship. (The Harvard
professor leading the latter camp, Avi Loeb, recently led an expedition to the seafloor to recover material that he believes could be from alien spacecraft.) Later that year, The New York Times and other news outlets revealed that the Pentagon had a covert program dedicated to cataloging UFOs. Then NASA decided to weigh in on the topic after years of steering clear, and convened a team to consider UFOs in a “scientific perspective.” And who can forget the spy balloons that the military shot out of the sky this year?
These
events have unfolded against a shift in public knowledge about the
universe beyond Earth, which might help explain why people are
interested. In the 1940s, the only planets we knew of were the ones
around our sun, and scientists had only recently determined that there
were galaxies other than our own. Today, astronomers have discovered
more than 5,000 exoplanets, and telescopes can see nearly all the way
back to the Big Bang. In the face of so many wonders, the question of
whether we’re sharing them with anyone else becomes more urgent, and
might even seem more answerable. “I think people are just ready or at
least excited about the possibilities of alien contact, maybe more than
ever,” Jacob Haqq Misra, an astrobiologist at the Blue Marble Space
Institute of Science, told me.
Congress
has contributed to this mainstreaming too. Under the instruction of
lawmakers, the Pentagon last year established a special office dedicated
to investigating reports of unexplainable phenomena in the sky, at sea,
and on land. The effort has been unusually bipartisan, with both
far-right Republicans and progressive Democrats calling on the military
to be more transparent. This month, Senator Chuck Schumer introduced
legislation that would create a commission with the authority to
declassify government documents about UFOs. “The American public has a
right to learn about technologies of unknown origins, non-human
intelligence, and unexplainable phenomena,” Schumer said in a statement.
Yes, we do. But some undisclosed documents about UFOs is not synonymous with incontrovertible evidence that aliens have visited Earth.
UFOs are just that—objects that are flying, and that we cannot yet
identify. If the military is misusing taxpayer money to investigate
mysterious debris it doesn’t recognize, that’s bad, whether it’s the
remnants of drones from another nation or a non-human craft. “If that’s
the case, and auditors have not been allowed into these programs and
there’s illegal layers of secrecy,” Haqq Misra said, “then that’s really
important to disclose, independent of any connection to anything
else”—anything otherworldly. But even as lawmakers assert that UFOs are
primarily a national-security concern, by invoking aliens in their
discussions, they lend credence to the idea that a connection between
the two exists.
Grusch
was careful to tell lawmakers that he was only “speaking to the facts
as I have been told them”—that is, he has not seen any evidence of alien
wreckage or its inhabitants himself. And in general, though his claims
are steeped in the language of authority, he simply has not been able to
offer any concrete proof. The news website that first published
Grusch’s claims reported that the Pentagon had cleared him to speak
publicly, but that means only that his remarks don’t contain classified
information, not that they’re true. Testifying under oath before
Congress is not a measure of truth, either. Outside the hearing, some
lawmakers seemed like they didn’t know what to make of the claims.
The
prospect of extraterrestrial interlopers may be a national-security
question, but it’s also a scientific one. Science requires data, and
secondhand accounts just aren’t data. “When NASA brings back rocks on
the moon, those rocks are shared with qualified people,” David Spergel,
an astrophysicist at Princeton who chaired NASA’s committee on UFOs,
told me. “Imagine we had some samples of some craft, [and] we really
want to understand what it was. You would make materials from those
small samples available for labs anywhere in the world.” In other words,
meaningful testimony would show evidence of alien ships and
pilots, not just tell the public about them. “That would be pretty
awesome,” he said, but it’s not what we’ve got. Today, we heard some
extraordinary claims, and, to quote Carl Sagan, they require
extraordinary evidence.
— Top Notch Journal (@topnotchjournal) July 2, 2023
theconservativetreehouse | Let me take you back to 2010 and 2011 when the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, CIA Director Leon Panetta and French President Nicholas Sarkozy wanted to support the Islamist Spring uprisings in Tunis, Libya, Egypt and Yemen.
What happened then is very much related to what we are seeing right now in Europe, specifically France; only this time we are seeing the inverse of the government interests regarding social media on display.
The bad dictators were targeted for removal following the now famous Barack Obama Cairo, Egypt speech. President Barack Obama triggered the removal of the Zookeepers and released the big cats to become apex predators; the downstream consequences eventually showed up with ISIS burning people in cages.
When the leaders of Tunis, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, Sudan and a
multitude of other unapproved dictatorships, reacted to the collective
effort of the CIA and U.S. state Dept by shutting down cell phone
communication, the CIA and DoS responded by enlisting Twitter and
Facebook as the messaging platforms for the rebels in each country.
Twitter became the main conduit through which the people on the
ground could organize against their regimes. This was the initial merge
of the U.S. government using social media to effect political change.
[Side Note: this is the atom splitting moment which eventually led to
the government’s ability to control, filter and ultimately censor U.S.
social media content.]
Twitter, and to a lesser extent Facebook, served the interests of
western government by helping the people on the ground to organize
protests, violent uprisings, against the dictators in the Arab Spring.
As we eventually saw in Libya and Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt,
AQIM) and al-Qaeda (Libya, AQAP) were supported by the State Dept/CIA
during that effort.
The key takeaway is: the uprisings were supported by the western
governments, and the social media platforms served the interests of the
western government leadership.
We have the inverse issue for the interests of western government,
specifically France and broad parts of the EU as well as the United
States.
General uprisings, riots and assorted mayhem created by mostly
Islamic immigrants and the subsequent cultural clash, are against the
interests of France and the EU. The ability of the cultural insurgents
to organize on social media is now against the interests of western
government. How are they reacting? They are shutting down the utility of
the platforms and shutting down the internet.
The initial takeaway from this might be perceived as good. The
rioters are creating social unrest, looting, arson and crisis; they must
be stopped and controlled. It seems like the government action will be a
good thing.
However, as with the example of private corporations joining in
alignment with WEF government to target Russia, what do you think will
happen when a populist revolt of yellow vests, or anti-vaxxers, or
freedom rebels take to the streets? Precedents are being set.
You might cheer France using control over communication to target the
violent brown people now; but what happens when those same EU entities
decide to target the communication of a different type of uprising. This
is me, sending warning flares to those who might not care about this
‘beta-test’.
Oh, and don’t forget the Senate Intelligence Committee recent effort with the “Restrict Act“, total internet and domestic social media control pushed under the auspices of controlling TikTok data collection.
9:04
that's the only explanation I can get is that that if they if people are here
9:10
from another civilization then they if they've understood the the
9:15
higher the higher the finer points of quantum of quantum physics and how to
9:20
couple that from particles into beings that can do what quantum what particles
The best way to understand their approach is by considering something
else ordered yet non-repeating: "quasicrystals." A typical crystal has a
regular, repeating structure, like the hexagons in a honeycomb. A
quasicrystal still has order, but its patterns never repeat. (Penrose
tiling is one example of this.) Even more mind-boggling is that
quasicrystals are crystals from higher dimensions projected, or squished
down, into lower dimensions. Those higher dimensions can even be beyond
physical space's three dimensions: A 2D Penrose tiling, for instance,
is a projected slice of a 5-D lattice.
9:25
can do now when I was at wright-patterson we had the flying saucers it went up I think they covered the distance from
9:32
Columbus to Detroit in something like equivalent of about 20,000 miles an hour
9:39
I don't think anyone in the canoe in the ordinary aerospace business would have
9:46
had any knowledge of what they were even talking about if you mentioned quantum
9:51
physics or or wormholes are the type of things we know now because if you went
9:59
to CERN and talked to the particle physicists they would tell you certainly some of this was possible because they
10:06
see it all the time where they think they see mass they really see they
10:12
really see energy frozen in it in a time quantum and what they're seeing is not
10:18
is this is really a frozen bundle of energy and it moves back and forth
10:25
almost without any restriction
I thought there were enough credible stories that I may not be able to
10:32
explain them but they weren't phenomenon that were people's imagination whatever
10:41
they saw was real but I couldn't explain how it how it was real what made it real but I think what they I think they saw
10:48
what they saw near st. Louis there was a fairly large triangular object seen and
10:54
it covered the distance down to south st. Louis in some in some of its
11:00
sightings it was moving relatively benign Lee but then it it literally jumped about 20 miles in a sec couple of
11:07
seconds and I've received a lot of phone calls from the local newspapers and TV
11:13
stations is how can that be and
I said I don't know how it can be except if you
11:18
explain it through something like a quantum physics explanation of time and
11:24
space relationships it gave you time and space travel but other than that I don't
11:30
there's no way I know that I can put the biggest rocket engine I could think of
11:36
on it it still couldn't get there at that speed and the noise and the sounds
11:42
you would make doing something like that would wake everybody up for 10 miles and
11:47
it made no sound at all it's see it starts out at hover and it literally almost disappears and pops
11:53
over here so it's not like it's not like a cartoon where it goes whoosh it's
12:00
almost like it disappears and comes up over here at least that the descriptions
12:06
that some of the police officers gave to it a lot of combat pilots routinely go
12:13
up to 7 and 8 GS but that's a very specific direction that's from your head
12:19
downward along the axis of your spine if you were to take that what's called
12:24
eyeballs in which is when you accelerate the forces this way you literally would
12:32
have your eyeballs and compressed out of their sockets and you have brain damage so that the G's the do that might be in
12:40
the level of order of so no that's not physically possible for any even even insects to take that level
12:48
of acceleration even over a short period of time you might get in an automobile
12:53
accident you might get a hundred two hundred and fifty G's and that's when the car is completely crushed so that's
13:00
what happened would happen to a human being if that were a conventional force accelerator so it's not a conventional
13:06
force accelerator because if there's people in human beings in them or something being in them that isn't
13:13
crushed then it has to be a different way of doing it the hard part is to find
13:19
a way to physically do that
you know there are people who have been experimenting with zero-point energy or
13:25
try to tap zero-point energy for years every once in a while someone will do it
13:30
accidentally they'll call it cold fusion but I don't think it's cold fusion I just think it's a zero-point energy tap
13:36
except for three people that I know no
13:41
one has been able to control it when it happens it happens for a short period of time
13:47
and it's almost always destructive it's like drilling a hole into the base of Grand Coulee Dam and all of a sudden
13:54
this jet of water comes out that literally has enough pressure to cut you in half without a valve on it you can't
14:02
shut it off does one guy that that that
14:07
a friend of mine actually visited in Ann Arbor Michigan that was I consider a mathematical genius that actually
14:14
figured out a way to control it he was so paranoid he divorced his wife
14:20
left his wife and children and went in hiding because he was terrified that someone
14:26
would would kill him for the knowledge that he had the ability to tap this whenever he chose to and control it we
14:33
don't know worried we haven't seen him in five years I don't worry is you know right now today you've got an energy
14:39
problem with the price of oil what do you think would happen if you introduced
14:45
an ability to attempt zero-point energy represents about 40 to 50 megawatts of
14:53
power per cubic inch of space that's a lot of power
15:00
that's 4600 million watts of power and
15:07
if you could tap it at will then no one
15:12
would have to sell gasoline or oil anymore you would just tap into it it would be it would be like taking and
15:20
going out to the Great Lakes and taking out one drop and using it it would you'd
15:25
hardly miss it and since it permeates the whole universe and it continually
15:31
fluctuates as it as as that as the matter and antimatter interact it's not
15:40
like it's a steady lake it's um you see it's a pool the size of the universe so
15:45
you'd never for what we've used before you never even miss it the only thing this one guy claimed that happened is if
15:52
you bottle it and move it to another location and release it he sounded
16:00
exactly like mr. Spock he said you create a tear in the in the time time
16:07
domain of the of local space and actually caused a problem which he
16:13
claims he did and he will never do it again which is bottle and move it the other part is that you're knock it
16:19
doesn't work on conventional jet engines one has to create an actual zero point
16:25
energy engine to do that this one guy in Ann Arbor Mich Michigan had one running in his basement
16:30
not connected to any power source whatsoever sitting in the middle of a table and it had been running for a year
NYPost | The solar system that humanity calls home may have once been
inhabited by an extinct species of spacefaring aliens, a top scientist
has suggested.
A space scientist has suggested ancient extraterrestrials could have
lived on Mars, Venus or even Earth before disappearing without a trace.
greyfalcon | There is another, less appreciated, dimension to UFO secrecy. These objects, we know, have demonstrated amazing manoeuvring capabilities. Some of them, at least, can accelerate instantly in all directions, turn on a dime, stop and hover motionlessly, and remain silent the whole while.
Our military aircraft have been unable to compete. In 1975, UFOs that could hover like silent helicopters and move like silent jets were unmolested by U.S. aircraft. In a well-known incident over Belgium in 1990, a triangular UFO thoroughly outclassed F-16 interceptors. During the summer of 2002, just outside Washington, D.C., a UFO easily outpaced and outmanoeuvred pursuing F-16s.
A common question that arises is, what kind of propulsion system do these objects use. But I wonder, what makes them go?
This question is more than academic. There are legitimate reasons to expect that we are about to experience a petroleum crisis of epic proportions, much sooner than we expect. Once a fringe belief, there are now many oil analysts who believe this.
The problem is basic supply and demand. The supply is finite; the demand shows no signs of limit. In fact, global oil demand is now increasing at the fantastic rate of 4 percent annually, which translates into a doubling rate of every 17 years. I don’t care what your supply is, you cannot double demand of anything indefinitely, and certainly not at the rate the petroleum demand is moving.
Recall the ancient Chinese story about the peasant who performed a good deed for the Emperor. "I will grant you any wish you ask," said the grateful Emperor. The peasant took a chess board and said, "I don’t ask for much. Simply place a grain of rice on the first square, then double the amount for each successive square on the board, and I will be content." "Silly peasant," thought the Emperor. "I would have given him something of value." For much of the board, the amount of rice was small enough. By the last few squares, however, the Emperor went broke. By the final square, the amount of rice would have exceeded all the rice in the world.
Experts argue about when the petroleum crisis will hit, but it is the height of folly to pretend it won’t arrive. Whether it will be 50 years, 20 years, or 5 years, our civilization needs to find a way to replace petroleum. UFO technology very likely holds part of the answer, maybe all of the answer.
Some people agree with this assessment, and believe that the "powers that be" are simply holding out on us until the oil truly runs out, just to maximize their profit. Then it’s free energy time – although we assume someone will find a way to make money from it.
You had better hope that such blind trust turns out to be accurate. I’m less confident that a benevolent elite will bail my ass out at the eleventh hour. For all I know, they may have decided that there are too many of us on this planet, anyway. "Time to clean house. I’ve got my bunker. How about you?"
Freedom and Self-Governance
For a democratically-based political system to function, there must be a reasonable amount of congruence between what people believe and what is actually the case. You elect a member of congress with the idea that he or she will represent your interests within the nation’s primary instrument of political power: the Congress. Except that Congress has been made irrelevant by other centres of power, or been taken over by them.
You get your news from television or your newspaper with the idea that the journalist on the other end is a kind of watchdog, looking out for the public interest. Except that the journalist is working for a corporation which is itself antithetical to the public interest.
Unseen structures of power have evolved over the previous generations, advancing sometimes slowly, sometimes with a dramatic suddenness. But most people lack the conceptual means by which to understand what is happening.
As I have suggested, I believe that a significant part of that power structure involves the possession and exploitation of UFO-related technology. And I certainly believe that the secrecy has gone on for so long that it has become integral to keeping the whole system together.
Once you start lying, how can you un-do the lie? Today, UFO secrecy has been with the U.S. – and by extension the world – for about sixty years. That’s nearly as long as the Soviet Union existed on the basis of its own labyrinthine web of lies.
The comparison is apt. I still recall holding in my hands a commemorative oversized Soviet book celebrating the 20th anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. The book was published in 1937, during the depths of Stalin’s rule. There was a colorized version of a famous photograph showing Lenin at a podium speaking to a crowd, and I noticed that Leon Trotsky – Stalin’s great political enemy – had been airbrushed out of the picture. That’s simply how the Soviet system worked. The government lied constantly, and everyone knew it, and everyone in the country pretended that the government didn’t lie.
Constant lying in the Soviet Union meant that the official powers had to systematically think about how to organize and manipulate public information to keep people in line. I remember trying to read through The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia, an impossibly organized mess of propaganda and fact so that you couldn’t learn anything about anything that truly mattered. That’s just how it was.
Looking back, we can see how it would have been impossible for such a society to continue indefinitely, ruled as it was on the basis of a series of lies. When Gorbachev took power in 1985, he wanted to reform that society. His catchphrases were glasnost and perestroika: openness and restructuring. I was a young student of Soviet history at that time, and remember the excitement well. I also recall the scepticism of some of my professors who continued to believe for some time that this was yet another communist plot.
No matter. Within six years, there was no more Soviet Union. What happened? Well, one thing that happened, a big thing, was that the process of reform spiralled out of control. You make a big change here, and the next guy wants change over there. It becomes hard to put on the brakes. You start with openness, for example, and you open the books on Stalin’s gulag. You open the books on the particulars of the Bolshevik coup. Or the reconquest of the Ukraine in the 1920s, or the capture of the Baltic States in 1940, and on and on. Before long, entire subject peoples want to bolt, and many openly question the legitimacy of the Party’s rule. Then it is over.
Disclosure Scenarios
It’s no different today in America, and the UFO secret is at the core. Imagine if the President of the United States were to decide to end UFO secrecy. How would he do it?
I can see him now. President George W. Bush steps up to the podium. Beloved Vice President Dick Cheney stands behind him. Trusted lieutenants Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice are there, too. The cameras of all the world’s media are upon him.
"Good evening," he begins. "Through a series of meetings with certain senior scientific and defence officials, it has come to my attention that the UFO phenomenon apparently is real, and is of extraterrestrial origin."
Hokey dokey, that’s really all I have to say for now. We’ll provide updates as we get ‘em. I’m going on vacation for a while. Goodnight everyone.
Well, maybe not. Disclosure is a Pandora’s box with a panoply of taboo topics just waiting to spring out. It is, as one friend of mine calls it, "a sloppy tar-baby," a threatening, friendly, frightening, and inseparable bundle of unavoidable eventualities.
So I can imagine a few questions, even from a media as compliant as the American. "Mr. President," one correspondent might say, "what are the intentions of these aliens?" Or, "Mr. President, what does this say about the claims of alien abduction? Are they real, after all?" Or how about, "Mr. President, what about claims of underground alien bases? Or claims of secret possession of alien technology?" These questions might not arise immediately. But they would arise eventually. Once you open that lid, it will be very difficult to control the outcome.
The answers would not be pretty. For this reason, I doubt that disclosure will come from America ’s political establishment. But there are always other countries. There are always the aliens. The truth is already here; it’s simply waiting to land.
After all, what exactly are the secret keepers protecting? Let’s see. Power, wealth, control, their plans for the future, access to information, underground bases already built, the status quo.
But there must be more. How about communication with aliens? Worm hole technology? Access to our genetic code? Or any number of technologies that we have not even begun to discuss openly in our society. Remember the statement of an Area 51 insider to aerospace journalist James Goodall – this was back in the 1980s – "we have things in the Nevada desert that would make George Lucas envious." In other words, Star Wars technology.
Can you imagine the front page of the New York Times following a true disclosure of all this? "MASSIVE COVERUP EXPOSED." The biggest journalistic fiasco in history would finally be acknowledged, wholesale resignations would sweep the intelligence community, a political third party would do a clean sweep of Washington. Congress would promise emergency hearings, Arab oil nations would be in a state of collapse as oil price futures plummet, and the stock market would be in a headlong tailspin.
People would realize that a massive power structure has existed for generations, and has siphoned away trillions of dollars. They would learn that it has played a dominant, though unacknowledged, role in shaping their lives.
Think about NASA and the space shuttle program. There are no shortage of quiet discussions about the antiquated nature of NASA’s shuttle technology. Astronauts have died because better technology was denied to them. And that is merely the tip of the iceberg, for this issue goes far beyond NASA.
No, people wouldn’t be pleased or especially understanding. Heads would roll.
The American system of government, as it has come to exist, and by extension American society, and by extension our current global civilization, is not compatible with true UFO disclosure. Disclosure would rip it all away.
You might argue that this would be a good reason to maintain the secrecy. On the other hand, I would argue it’s the best reason for disclosure.
As bad as things look today, I retain hope for a post-disclosure world. I retain a faith – yes, I guess it’s faith – in the value of truth over all things. A statement by my favorite writer, Leo Tolstoy, hangs before me every day: "the one thing necessary, in life as in art, is to tell the truth." I cannot believe that a society based on a foundational lie can be better than one based on a foundational truth.
The personnel interviewed by Grusch shared extreme detail about the programs they are working on and Grusch found it credible.
Grusch investigated this topic for 4 years
before believing it is credible and 100% factual then submitted a
report to DOD Oversight Director which in 2023 determined it as “Credible and urgent”. This has been forwarded to Congress.
Grusch has known Kirkpatrick for eight years and has discussed the subject with him. Grusch is unsure why Kirkpatrick has not contacted Grusch on this matter or why key evidence has not been presented.
1933 craft recovered in Italy by Mussolini's forces
was intercepted by the US in "1944 OR 1945" - Grusch was unsure, so
this lines up with a historical anachronism. We can assume 1945, aligned
with history. Grusch showcased a hand-written memo in Italian that also contained small drawings at the bottom as proof.
The Vatican informed the US
of what the Italian government had in its possession. The Vatican
helped suppress this find. This means, The Vatican does indeed know NHI
(NON-HUMAN INTELLIGENCE) exist and is actively covering this up.
NHI may be alien, may be interdimensional or both.
Football-field-sized craft have been sighted.
Multiple operational craft have been recovered. It's unclear if the
football-field-sized craft is the alleged 30-ft diameter craft that
apparently contained a "football field sized interior" that was recently disclosed. Alternatively, it may be this craft is the Indonesian UAP that allegedly was smuggling drugs and weapons that was reported this week. We don't yet know the context of where it was seen. It may have been seen in a US facility or not.
"Quite a number" of crafts have been recovered by the US. At least 12 according to Grusch. Other sources claim many more than this.
NHI occupant bodies have been recovered.
It's somewhat implied that the US government may have an existing formal relationship/agreement with some NHI factions.
"Agreements that risk putting our future in jeopardy". It remains
unclear if Grusch was making the implication or if Coulthart was jumping
to that conclusion and trying to get Grusch to fill in the blanks.
Not all factions are peaceful - but the extent of why/how is not elaborated on.
Kirkpatrick is lying by means of omission to Congress. AARO needs to be held to account.
The US government have killed people to keep this information suppressed.
Nukes are an ongoing concern to NHI.
Private enterprise are working with this technology. Aerospace and defence projects.
The events of Roswell 1947 happened. Subsequent addendums by the US government were part of a disinformation campaign that continues to today.
An ongoing broad UFO disinformation campaign is being perpetrated by the US government. As part of this campaign, Grusch claims some "true" or factual intel has been presented or pushed, along with false claimsor disinformation in an effort to muddy the narrative.
Grusch has seen/verified the evidence to back these claims. Has seen "photos and documents". His job was essentially to research and corroborate witness testimony, which led him here.
Grusch stated there were techniques to bring down these UAPs. This implies that there are crafts that the US has brought down forcefully by some means.
There are also craft that were left or given to us for whatever reason. There were also partially damaged craft (including the 1933 craft recovered in Italy).
Grusch mentioned people working with these recovered UAPs have gotten sick. He did not elaborate how specifically or what work was being done that might have caused this.
Grusch highlighted the possibility that
private industry could make a breakthrough and sell it back to the
government. Give this has been funded by tax payer money, it is
unethical and needs oversight. This also implies this
technology is/could already be in the hands of private enterprise and
there may be advancements sufficient to on-sell the technology.
Grusch alluded to China's willingness to throw bodies at reverse engineering and finding success. This might also provide a speculative rationale for why we're speeding up disclosure: the need to compete with a foreign power for tech superiority.
In 1971, the
USA and USSR signed a treaty explicitly stating that both nuclear
powers would confirm if UFOs or similar breached nuclear facility
airspace and/or caused malfunctions that might trigger arming/disarming of nuclear weapons. This was cited as proof of ongoing UFO/UAP interference and knowledge by both superpowers of the situation and reality.
Grusch alleges that Russia and China are in a Cold War over this technology.
The DOD determine what specific points David Grusch is cleared to talk about and what breaches national security or classified intel. Who or how they make that distinction (or why) is unclear.
The videos released by the pentagon in 2020 were “just the tip of the iceberg” and he claims that additional video (or other) evidence exists that are far more extraordinary. This also speaks to the fact that he has seen these pieces of video with his own eyes.
Coulhart mentioned Grusch is starting his own science foundation.
Was not mentioned if this would be a continuation of his current
knowledge or expanding into different aspects of the scientific
community.
AARO does not have the adequate security clearance
(it has Title 10, needs Title 50) in order to actually investigate some
of the operations that the crash retrieval program falls under - This
has been also reported by Coulthart independently.
Grusch says he will "Make
myself available to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Director of
National Intelligence Avril Haines, who was a recipient of my complaints - I'm happy to further brief elected officials on the specific ecosystem of secrecy down to the fine details."
--------
Call
and/or write your representative! Demand Congressional investigation
into Kirkpatrick and AARO's handling of witness data, and a transparent
and thorough analysis of Grusch's evidence and testimonies.Here's the link to the .gov website for finding yours and how to contact them.
Associates who vouched for Grusch said his information was highly
sensitive, providing evidence that materials from objects of non-human
origin are in the possession of highly secret black programs. Although
locations, program names, and other specific data remain classified, the
Inspector General and intelligence committee staff were provided with
these details. Several current
members of the recovery program spoke to the Inspector General’s office
and corroborated the information Grusch had provided for the classified
complaint.
Some people seem to be taking issue with the fact that Grusch hasn't actually seen (either in person or in a photo) the craft and bodies that he's claiming exist.
Having done a deep dive on this over the last few days, I'd like to offer some perspective that seems to be getting…
— The UFO Rabbit Hole Podcast (@UFO_Rabbit_Hole) June 8, 2023
I think Grusch was selected for this role. No 36 year old flushes his future down the toilet by making disclosures such as these without significant backing and assurances of a future livelihood. It makes sense to me that some person or persons within aerospace special access programs is gaming the disclosure process. Such a one would have access to classification officers and all the programmatic detail required to game the system.
I believe he was also chosen for his clean
record, lack of skeletons (that we know of), and reputation amongst
peers. Same reason Rosa Parks was chosen to be the face of the bus
boycotts over the initial candidate who was pregnant out of wedlock. Strategic catalysts are chosen for palatability to for the general public. Grusch is the Rosa Parks of the pro-disclosure camp for now.
Regarding (4): Grusch did not employ the secure reporting system for UAP info, created by the FY23 NDAA. Rather, he filed a complaint under the law governing the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, enacted in 2010 (with some later revisions).https://t.co/9n4WUMgg8Wpic.twitter.com/xkynOJzVaQ
Grusch was chosen because he is someone who would be be viewed as
credible by the public and has all of the requisite clearances. You
would tell Grusch a bunch of juicy secrets but be extra careful not to
let him directly see anything firsthand. The reason he never saw any of
this firsthand is because, by design, he wasn't allowed to see any of
it, as it would immediately disqualify him from carrying out this task. The hearsay evidence aspect is vitally important. Certainly
some types of hearsay, if it ended up being accurate, could still be
blocked from release under the national security criteria. So it seems
like either they have determined his claims really don't endanger
national security, and/or their accuracy couldn't be determined based on
what they know. It doesn't seem possible to tell which is closer to the
truth right now.
However, it does
seem likely that the DoD could have made an argument for blocking the
release, regardless of the truth. Or at least stalled and delayed, etc.
So the fact they cleared it does (probably) tell us that, all things
equal, they preferred, at this point in time, to let him speak.
But
critically, it doesn't seem possible to know WHY DoD cleared it now -
their motives. The tweet implies that the DoD wants the story be buried.
I don't think we can assume that. The tweet also implies that Grusch
was playing 4D chess by only hearing or reading secondhand information
so that he could make a whistleblower case. Maybe?
Unfortunately,
another explanation is simply that he was intentionally shown material
that was false, misleading, or somehow inaccurate. Or, that he or the
people he got the information from drew the wrong conclusions from that
material. If that's the case, the DoD could basically conclude: "the guy
thinks he's telling the truth about these things, we know that he's
probably wrong, but it may serve our interests to let him tell his story
here anyway". I won't speculate on why they would want that, but its
not hard to come up with plausible reasons.
My
point is that its hard to know the motivations of the DoD in allowing
Grusch to speak. They could be (1) engaging in a disinformation campaign
(people were deliberately feeding him false info to see if he would
leak it, or hoping that he would leak it) (2) be taking advantage of a
guy who honestly drew incorrect conclusions from secondhand information
or (3) finally deciding to tell people about some truly crazy things
(either because they were under pressure or genuinely think its the
right thing to do). There may even be other reasons. From what I can
tell, there isn't a whole lot of evidence weighing disproportionately on
any of these.
Legal secret programs are not kept from the White House. That is the
whole basis of Grusch's whistleblower complaint. It was his job to deliver
reports from secret programs to the White House and he knew that the
non-human craft program was not disclosed in those reports. He tried to
report it and was retaliated against. By disclosing only hearsay in the context of a whistleblower retaliation complaint, Grusch harnesses a process that will administratively force investigation. That investigation will force the DoD to lie, force the DoD to admit the existence of the special access program(s), or force the DoD to be truthful in that the evidence doesn't exist which will put the issue to bed. End of day it's a win for outsiders like us, it puts enough onus on the DoD that forces them into making a move if the reports of hearings centered around the allegations are believed to be true.
Finally, a lot of people put too big a premium on the court of public opinion. None of that matters. The court of public opinion ruled a long time ago that the JFK assassination was full of holes, that hasn't meant anything, because the court of public opinion means little. It's not totally irrelevant but damn near.
quantamagazine | Assembly
theory started when Cronin asked why, given the astronomical number of
ways to combine different atoms, nature makes some molecules and not
others. It’s one thing to say that an object is possible according to
the laws of physics; it’s another to say there’s an actual pathway for
making it from its component parts. “Assembly theory was developed to
capture my intuition that complex molecules can’t just emerge into
existence because the combinatorial space is too vast,” Cronin said.
“We live in a recursively structured universe,” Walker said. “Most
structure has to be built on memory of the past. The information is
built up over time.”
Assembly theory makes the seemingly uncontroversial assumption that
complex objects arise from combining many simpler objects. The theory
says it’s possible to objectively measure an object’s complexity by
considering how it got made. That’s done by calculating the minimum
number of steps needed to make the object from its ingredients, which is
quantified as the assembly index (AI).
In addition, for a complex object to be scientifically interesting,
there has to be a lot of it. Very complex things can arise from random
assembly processes — for example, you can make proteinlike molecules by
linking any old amino acids into chains. In general, though, these
random molecules won’t do anything of interest, such as behaving like an
enzyme. And the chances of getting two identical molecules in this way
are vanishingly small.
Functional enzymes, however, are made reliably again and again in
biology, because they are assembled not at random but from genetic
instructions that are inherited across generations. So while finding a
single, highly complex molecule doesn’t tell you anything about how it
was made, finding many identical complex molecules is improbable unless
some orchestrated process — perhaps life — is at work.
Assembly theory predicts that objects like us can’t arise in
isolation — that some complex objects can only occur in conjunction with
others. This makes intuitive sense; the universe could never produce
just a single human. To make any humans at all, it had to make a whole
bunch of us.
In accounting for specific, actual entities like humans in general
(and you and me in particular), traditional physics is only of so much
use. It provides the laws of nature, and assumes that specific outcomes
are the result of specific initial conditions. In this view, we must
have been somehow encoded in the first moments of the universe. But it
surely requires extremely fine-tuned initial conditions to make Homo sapiens (let alone you) inevitable.
Assembly theory, its advocates say, escapes from that kind of
overdetermined picture. Here, the initial conditions don’t matter much.
Rather, the information needed to make specific objects like us wasn’t
there at the outset but accumulates in the unfolding process of cosmic
evolution — it frees us from having to place all that responsibility on
an impossibly fine-tuned Big Bang. The information “is in the path,”
Walker said, “not the initial conditions.”
Cronin and Walker aren’t the only scientists attempting to explain
how the keys to observed reality might not lie in universal laws but in
the ways that some objects are assembled or transformed into others. The
theoretical physicist Chiara Marletto of the University of Oxford is developing a similar idea with the physicist David Deutsch. Their approach, which they call constructor theory
and which Marletto considers “close in spirit” to assembly theory,
considers which types of transformations are and are not possible.
“Constructor theory talks about the universe of tasks able to make
certain transformations,” Cronin said. “It can be thought of as bounding
what can happen within the laws of physics.” Assembly theory, he says,
adds time and history into that equation.
To explain why some objects get made but others don’t, assembly
theory identifies a nested hierarchy of four distinct “universes.”
In the Assembly Universe, all permutations of the basic building
blocks are allowed. In the Assembly Possible, the laws of physics
constrain these combinations, so only some objects are feasible. The
Assembly Contingent then prunes the vast array of physically allowed
objects by picking out those that can actually be assembled along
possible paths. The fourth universe is the Assembly Observed, which
includes just those assembly processes that have generated the specific
objects we actually see.
Assembly theory explores the structure of all these universes, using ideas taken from the mathematical study of graphs,
or networks of interlinked nodes. It is “an objects-first theory,”
Walker said, where “the things [in the theory] are the objects that are
actually made, not their components.”
To understand how assembly processes operate within these notional
universes, consider the problem of Darwinian evolution. Conventionally,
evolution is something that “just happened” once replicating molecules
arose by chance — a view that risks being a tautology, because it seems
to say that evolution started once evolvable molecules existed. Instead,
advocates of both assembly and constructor theory are seeking “a
quantitative understanding of evolution rooted in physics,” Marletto
said.
According to assembly theory,
before Darwinian evolution can proceed, something has to select for
multiple copies of high-AI objects from the Assembly Possible. Chemistry
alone, Cronin said, might be capable of that — by narrowing down
relatively complex molecules to a small subset. Ordinary chemical
reactions already “select” certain products out of all the possible
permutations because they have faster reaction rates.
The specific conditions in the prebiotic environment, such as
temperature or catalytic mineral surfaces, could thus have begun
winnowing the pool of life’s molecular precursors from among those in
the Assembly Possible. According to assembly theory, these prebiotic
preferences will be “remembered” in today’s biological molecules: They
encode their own history. Once Darwinian selection took over, it favored
those objects that were better able to replicate themselves. In the
process, this encoding of history became stronger still. That’s
precisely why scientists can use the molecular structures of proteins
and DNA to make deductions about the evolutionary relationships of
organisms.
Thus, assembly theory “provides a framework to unify descriptions of
selection across physics and biology,” Cronin, Walker and colleagues wrote. “The ‘more assembled’ an object is, the more selection is required for it to come into existence.”
“We’re trying to make a theory that explains how life arises from
chemistry,” Cronin said, “and doing it in a rigorous, empirically
verifiable way.”
ET | Censorship
is the cudgel that is out there. Censorship and cancellation are the
two cudgels that are being used against us. It’s absolutely remarkable
how easily we’ve gone from free speech to asking, “How can I make my way
around the censorship that’s here?” We have skipped over the outrage
phase, which might have led us to a more vigorous protection. Granted, a
lot of boiling frog-type dynamics were built into the censorship
regime.
But
if you’ve been looking for the last 20 years at our press, September
11th brought a quantum leap in this need to marshal people into
categories and to prohibit certain things and certain words and certain
positions from entering into the public sphere. In 2001, Susan Sontag,
one of the great American intellectuals, wrote about having some
questions about the way the new war on terror was being pursued, and she
was hooted down.
We’re
beginning to see that a lot of this hooting down is not as spontaneous
as many of us would like to believe. With the recent Twitter Files, and
the case that the attorney generals of Missouri and Louisiana are trying
now, we’re finding out that this was anything but spontaneous. There
were a number of government actors working in concert with private
actors to achieve a censorship that, frankly, for those of us of a
certain age, is unimaginable.
You
used to be able to say, “I have the First Amendment. Screw you. I’m
going to say what I’m going to say.” We’ve gone from that to, “I have to
be on guard because someone’s always watching me.” We went down this
hole fairly quickly, and it’s very troubling.
Mr. Jekielek:
This is the treason of the experts, I suppose.
Mr. Harrington:
Yes. If you have been lucky enough to have a mentor in your life, what
is a mentor? A mentor is someone who leads you along, who suggests, who
looks at you and says, “What skills does this young person have that
they are not aware of ?” They do an inquiry into that person and suggest
and lead along, and then say implicitly, “How can I help this young
person be the best version of themselves as I see it?” That is what an
expert does. They do not impose a reality on anyone.
They
are very aware of the power they have through their social title, but
more often through their moral force. They realize that it’s a sacred
thing that they have, and that it needs to be treated with the care that
you treat treasures in your life, and that you don’t abuse it. They
need to be very rigorous and be able to look at and check some of their
ego impulses, and then ask, “Am I using this power to satisfy my ego
gratification, more than I am to help the people that I say I am
helping?”
It
seems that that line has been crossed. There’s a lot of ego
gratification that is interfering with what should be a real sober
taking of responsibility for a gift of power. Power is a gift in a
democratic society. It’s not something you own, and it’s not something
there to make people obey you. It’s a gift you have that hopefully you
can use in constructive ways that preserve the dignity of those who
don’t have as much power as you do.
With
the term treason of the experts, I’m playing with history a bit here
with the title. It’s from a famous book that was written by Julien Benda
after the First World War. He was an intellectual. As you know, the
First World War was one of the great cataclysms in the history of the
world, with violence that few people had ever seen.
When
you go back and study it, you can look at what the violence was about,
and the cynicism with which the violence was employed. Leaders marched
their hundreds of thousands of troops so that they could get a tiny
strip of land. It was an open auctioning of soldiers to be fed into the
machine.
Benda
wrote this book in 1927 called, “La Trahison des Clercs,” the Treason
of the Clerisy. What he’s playing with is that in the world after the
late 19th century, the church clerisy began to recede as an important
element in society, to be superseded by the intellectual. The
independent intellectual was made possible through newspapers and the
publishing industry. The new clerisy, as he’s suggesting, are the free
intellectuals.
He
suggests that the role of the free intellectual is to always be
rigorous and to always place themselves above their passions to the best
extent they can and say, “What’s really going on here?” He wrote a
devastating critique in the mid-1920s in which he takes on both the
French intellectuals and the German intellectuals. He said, “They
betrayed our trust. They acted as cheerleaders. They sent young men off
to war to get destroyed, and became cheerleaders of gross propaganda.”
He said, “Come on. We’ve got to reassume the responsibility that goes
with having been granted a credential or a moment in power.” The first
thing I thought about when this began three years ago was World War I.
Mr. Jekielek:
This being Covid?
Mr. Harrington:
Covid. The Covid triennial that we’re in now. In March of 2020, and
you’ll see it in the first essay in the book where I say, “What’s going
on here?” My mind immediately went to World War I. There were big forces
that were pushing us in ways that didn’t add up. There were hidden
hands in places making us do things that simply were not justified at
the level of pure rational analysis. I was very grateful that I had
studied a bit of World War I.
There’s
another wonderful book where you can see some of the madness. It’s by
Stefan Zweig, who was a wonderful intellectual back in that time. He
talks about what happened in 1914 in Vienna. He thought, “We’ve reached
the highest civilization that the world has ever seen.” He was a
Viennese Jew. His friends had been integrated into Viennese life, and
they were leading Viennese life in many ways.
All
of a sudden, they were saying, “Don’t you want to go off to the
trenches? Shouldn’t you be going off to the trenches? Shouldn’t you be
excited? I’m going to go. Isn’t it wonderful?” He began to say, “What’s
going on in this world that I thought was civilized?” I had the very
same reaction in March of 2020.
Mr. Jekielek:
Some people think that this is being done for their own good. It’s not
that there are nefarious forces with their own agendas. A lot of these
folks genuinely believe in this incredibly dystopian vision of the
world, that this is really the right thing to do, and that it will be
good for me and good for you. There is a line that I flagged in the
book, “Ever more open disdain for the intelligence of the citizenry.”
There’s hubris here. That’s particularly infuriating, isn’t it?
Mr. Harrington:
Absolutely. It’s condescension, and I’ve always had a very thin skin for
people being condescending to me. One of the nice things that my
parents did in general was they talked to us as sentient beings almost
from the beginning. It’s one of the things I’ve sought to do with both
my children and with my students.
The
condescending idea is that you need to dole it out and say, “If I told
you, you might not understand. I’m coming from a place of complexity
that you can’t understand. You’ll just have to trust me.” This is very
insulting to people, and it’s antidemocratic. That’s just a fact.
The
premise of democracy, as we understand it, and as it was formed in this
country in the late 18th century, was that the farmer, the worker, and
the lawyer were all citizens in the same measure. Granted, there would
be a natural pecking order in terms of certain skill sets that would
emerge. But in the public space, no one was inherently better or in a
place to tell someone else what they need to know and how they need to
live. It’s one of the great things about this country.
A Foundation of Joy
-
Two years and I've lost count of how many times my eye has been operated
on, either beating the fuck out of the tumor, or reattaching that slippery
eel ...
April Three
-
4/3
43
When 1 = A and 26 = Z
March = 43
What day?
4 to the power of 3 is 64
64th day is March 5
My birthday
March also has 5 letters.
4 x 3 = 12
...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...