IMO ARRO will never get to the bottom of anything really anomalous because that is their assigned mission. Not sure that the SCU can overcome this as they do not have the resources and data that mostly come from the insiders classified world in which the coverup exists. Susan Goughs mission is to keep it that way.
I doubt I’m the only one suffering from a high level of frustration with the field of ufology, especially at this time, and it’s worth stating why.
Initially, the field of ‘UFO’s focused on anomalous unknowns that appeared to represent non-human technology (or ‘flying saucers’ to use the term from the time), but it’s generally accepted that some of the more anomalous aspects of the field tended to be ignored, including ‘abductions’ and bizarre perceptions. However, the phenomenon was framed as being location-independent and appeared randomly around the entire planet in various forms, and sometimes included non-human beings.
The field of the paranormal was seen as independent, including remote viewing, which focused on a type of ‘anomalous’, yet useful perception.
Fast forward to today with Mellon & Co and the phenomenon has somewhat shifted focus to Skinwalker Ranch, a fixed location with a history of strange phenomena; apparently overlapping, but not entirely consistent with the initial ‘UFO’/flying saucer field. Add on to that the apparent finding that this specific group includes a number of individuals who share a native American gene that affects the brain.
So we seem to be moving away from a ubiquitous phenomenon to phenomena that are location specific and individual/gene specific; which strongly suggests that multiple, different phenomena are in play.
This isn’t a bad thing. It would certainly help to explain why it’s so difficult to nail anything down if overlapping phenomena are helping to create the illusion of a single phenomenon.
However, we also have to acknowledge that the nature of these phenomena (including non-human intelligences) may be compromising individuals, through direct abduction and/or induced perceptions. To what degree are the ‘anomalous’ perceptions of individuals a form of misinformation (deliberate or otherwise); whether shared or unique?
A question arises: to what degree has the efforts of Mellon & Co been compromised by such misinformation? If there was a plan to help whistleblowers come forward, then how many of those individuals possess ‘uncompromised’ testimony of relevant information that provides real and consistent evidence of a conspiracy to hide alien tech from the world in general?
From another, more generally accepted perspective, the current situation is a result of semi-random, mutually beneficial events leading from Tom Delonge’s interest in UFOs to Congressional investigations; investigations that have seemingly stalled.
To what degree is any of this ‘real’? When we seem to be getting closer to some answers, the fuzzier the picture appears.
The phenomenon appears to be growing more fluid and amorphous the more tools we bring to bear on it. Carl Sagan wrote “At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new." I'm beginning to wonder if our scientific pursuit of the truth might lead us to, in his words, "slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness..."
'Science' has enabled us to get to the position where we seem to understand a very high percentage of reality (or make accurate models at least); high enough to make us think we're very close to 100%.
If science suddenly opens the door on a deeper and more complex aspect of reality, then people are going to feel freer to fill in the gaps with a bit of belief and faith, until science catches up.
Personally, I'd worry more if the universe was as limited as science currently depicts. Science doesn't really do 'hope', except in small instances e.g. hoping that nuclear fusion will overcome the effects of decades of industrial pollution (science correcting the consequences of other scientific discovery).
Susan Gough initially proclaimed that Lue Elizondo had no managerial/leadership role in ATTIP.
She was observed shadowing Sean Kirpatrick during his final few weeks as AARO Director.
She also summoned the representatives of the MSM News reps about 1 year ago to hold an in private session with the intent of putting a lid on the topic.it was noteworthy that News Nation was not invited since their staff were intending to ask pointed questions unlike the lapdogs in the MS News media.....A few years ago John Greenewald posted on his web site or FB page a screen shot of Gough's linked in page which described her credentials.
I would expect that NYT military journalist Julian Barnes will soon be posting more content discouraging interest in the subject....probably at the behest of the Pentagon spokesperson
It appears that more of the media are catching on to Gough who is more than a Pentagon spokesperson, and should be "subpoenaed" under oath if a future UAP congressional hearing is conducted.if so, I would further expect that the legal division of the Pentagon would contest her appearance for obvious reasons.
I presented Sean Patrick Hazlett's comments on AARO.
I concur 100% with Hazlett's comments.
The All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office is a disinformation and counterintelligence operation.
Hazlett is an engineer and U.S. military veteran.
"Sean Patrick Hazlett @@seanpha... 11/15/23
Replying to @AnjaliOnGaia
When I heard witnesses saying they had to sign NDAs when speaking to AARO, it was pretty obvious it was not only a disinformation activity, but also a counterintelligence operation.
Sean Patrick Hazlett & @seanphazl... 3/9/24
Replying to @GarryPNolan and @SkyFireNews This is just part of a discrete counterintelligence operation to discredit you. Timing is the tell
(coincident with the AARO toilet paper). Thankfully, the IC isn't as competent as it used to
be given how transparently obvious this attempt is.
throughaglassdarkly @TAGlassDar... 11/9/23
Replying to @blackvaultcom
Nope. The purpose of AARO was never about disclosure; it was always a counterintelligence operation to lure, isolate, and defeat leakers."
I read Gough's paper, too. Sorry, nothing sinister or suspicious there. She's simply making the case that DoD/gov needs to update its approach to the contextualization of complex and/or perplexing information. In other words, bring DoD/gov messaging into modern communications practice. Is she trying to promote DoD's take and deflect unwelcome questions? Sure, she is. Is she determined to keep classified or sensitive information under wraps? Of course she is. What else would people be expecting from her? That's the job.
Well, the jury's out, I believe, on the issue of Elizondo's credibility. And if we're going to start talking about morality in the halls of government or at most any UFO conference we might name, we're going to be here a long time.
Maybe it's a generational thing. When I first started writing about UFOs in the 1980s, one of my literal neighbors was retired Col. Bill Coleman, chief USAF PIO from 1971-74 and former PIO for Project Blue Book. He was adamant about one thing re media relations: Never lie. You can't always tell the truth, but never lie. Given his own documented pursuit of a UFO in 1955, Coleman straddled a fine line between what he knew to be true, the USAF's official position, and his concern for his employer's "credibility." In those days, or at least in Coleman's mind, credibility was paramount. As a quaint relic from the 20th century, I never expect military public affairs to lie or fabricate. Evade, equivocate, shade? Certainly. But not outright lie. It's naive on my part, but I don't expect them to lie to the media. It's as unacceptable to me now as it was 40 years ago.
Elizondo accuses Gough of disseminating "misleading and false information." It appears that you agree with him, that she has been pushing -- that she is pushing -- one or more "outright" lies. What, specifically, are we talking about here? What lie/s has she told? Also, when we're finished dealing with the question of Gough's veracity, maybe we might discuss Elizondo's? (As for "the generational thing," Billy, well, Harry and Bess were still living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the evening I was born, so point taken.)
She initially said AAWSAP and AATIP were not UAP-related. She also said Elizondo wasn't the AATIP director, and that he had no "assigned responsibilities" within the AATIP program. One could argue that she was only repeating what she was told. But that doesn't mitigate her, um, lack of veracity. As for Elizondo's credibility, he's obviously not afraid to testify under oath. The only reason we're having this conversation today is because he decided to step up and tell the truth seven years ago.
It appears you discount the reporting of John Greenewald (Black Vault) and Steven Greenstreet (New York Post) to the effect that there's an enormous cloud over Elizondo's claims re AAWSAP-AATIP and his relationship thereto. I don't believe these issues are settled. Frankly, I don't believe we're getting the whole story from anybody involved in this affair. And I think we need to keep in mind one fact we can rely upon about Elizondo -- that's he's CI with qualifications in disinfo ops. Rather odd credentials for an AATIP director, wouldn't you agree?
He was a scientist who conducted thorough investigations and found the most credible ‘UAP’ cases, setting the bar extremely high. I’m not even sure that the whole of MUFON can compare with the value of McDonald’s efforts in highlighting strong evidence of non-human technology.
Elizondo’s AATIP? No apparent analyses and Elizondo himself seems prone to accepting evidence at face value. Mr E’s contribution appears to have been preparing the ground for whistleblowers. Is his claim regarding Lockheed Martin valid? I personally think he has no credibility where such claims are concerned, unlike McDonald and his actual investigations. (Don't trust, but we still need to verify!)
Kosloski’s comment that Aguadilla were balloons at 13,000’ is probably a typo, as the plane was well below that height with the camera looking down at the object(s). Even if the object/objects didn’t enter the water it remains strange that there was no indication of 2 objects, until they separated, even though the plane virtually circled it/them. What caused them to separate to such a degree after remaining in such close proximity up to that point (especially if it turns out they were descending into slower air currents)? (Likely altitude range is below 1300'.)
Why is there no indication of anyone from Lockheed Martin being interviewed by the Senate or Congress?
Why was the best investigation of Nimitz conducted by a documentary maker?
Why does the ‘Immaculate Constellation’ document read like an (anonymous) unofficial collation of information, that must have been less than Top Secret. What makes the initial section ‘Immaculate Constellation’ of any interest given the alleged USAP’s such recent creation?
Is it the parallax effect that makes us look like we’ve been going backwards for decades?
As you quoted, Chairwoman Nancy Mace did indeed refer, at the beginning of the November 13 hearing, to "certain individuals who didn't want this hearing to happen because they feared what might be disclosed. But we stood firm, no amount of outside pressure would ever keep me from pursuing this subject, come hell or high water.”
I was immediately intrigued by that comment, because on November 4 I had actually asked the House Oversight Committee staff about unsourced claims by certain often-unreliable X accounts of attempts by the House Intelligence Committee chairman and ranking Democrat, and the Pentagon, to get the hearing cancelled. Also on Nov. 4, I received this on-the-record statement from the official spokesperson for the Oversight Committee: "No member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or official from the Department of Defense has contacted the Committee about potential witnesses for the November 13 UAP hearing."
However, after the hearing but still on Nov. 13, Steve Bassett actually asked Mace about her comment, and this exchange followed, as video recorded by Ty Roberts and included in his "Total Disclosure" program:
Steve Bassett: We heard a rumor that there was an attempt [inaudible word] to stop your hearing…
Rep. Nancy Mace: [speaking over] We heard the rumor, too.
Bassett: … over Immaculate Constellation.
Mace: Yeah, we heard a rumor too. I don't know. I was like, "I'm holding a hearing no matter what, even if it's like in my office."
Bassett: But you weren't directly contacted about that?
Mace: No, I was not directly contacted, but we heard the rumor also.
So, here is a tidy case study in the "echo chamber." Social media accounts claim to have inside knowledge that Mace is being pressured by specific powerful people to cancel the hearing; I inquire and senior staff denies it; nevertheless Mace, in the spotlight, riffs off the social-media rumors with a public comment that some immediately interpret as a confirmation of the rumors. But in reality, Mace tells Bassett, nobody contacted her attempting to suppress the hearing.
> Well, that was an effective ploy, because it made me forget all about UFOs’ unimpeded access to our nuclear assets.
It's funny you mention that. Regarding what had likely been "off limits" look no further than how Kosloski cautiously mentioned that incident with the "law enforcement officer out west." What little he said about that case suggested to me that he was speaking about an Air Force Security Policeman out in one of the missile fields.
Kosloski stated that the individual first spotted "a large, orange orb" a mile or two in the distance. Probably rural at least, though not necessarily. What really caught my attention, though, was the hesitation in his voice as he continued to describe the incident.
He said the individual proceeded to drive to the object's location which was "about forty to sixty metres away from — some object — that was — the area was well-lit …"
The picture about jumped out at me. That's sounding an awful lot like he doesn't want to mention a missile facility in an open hearing. I suspect that this individual is one of the witnesses whom Robert Hastings has interviewed and subsequently referred to AARO.
> But when Kosloski started getting into AARO’s newly resolved cases last week without releasing the full analyses, he crossed the line from umpire to “strategic influencer.”
I got the feeling that he wasn't too pleased with having to fill the role. The parallax explanation fell pretty flat. And that promised Agaudilla report? Oh, boy. Yeah, it'll be interesting to compare it with that of SCU.
Thanks, btw, for pointing out the "situational flexibility" of certain members of Congress. I think that's important to keep in mind when getting one's hopes up about them Doing the Right Thing. Or talking about a subject so long tied up with perception management.
As for Elon Musk, on that note, he has been making all sorts of enemies from all sides. That's never a good idea because, should he disappear one day in a cloud of pink mist, we might forever be asking ourselves who REALLY pulled the trigger.
I should clarify that Kosloski was saying that the officer had pulled up to the location of the glowing orb, which was forty to sixty metres away from something else. The "some object is not the orb but the thing which he'd thought better of fully describing: a missile facility, perhaps, or storage bunker, B-52, etc.
Speculation, of course, but give a close listen to what he said, and how he said it.
Now THAT's funny. But I suspect you're correctly reading the tea leaves on the western incident. Good eye there. I'm certain AARO will fill in all the missing details in its upcoming report.
UFO people, have you seen this great UFO video?
https://ufointel.substack.com/p/ufo-video-grenville-sur-la-rouge
IMO ARRO will never get to the bottom of anything really anomalous because that is their assigned mission. Not sure that the SCU can overcome this as they do not have the resources and data that mostly come from the insiders classified world in which the coverup exists. Susan Goughs mission is to keep it that way.
I doubt I’m the only one suffering from a high level of frustration with the field of ufology, especially at this time, and it’s worth stating why.
Initially, the field of ‘UFO’s focused on anomalous unknowns that appeared to represent non-human technology (or ‘flying saucers’ to use the term from the time), but it’s generally accepted that some of the more anomalous aspects of the field tended to be ignored, including ‘abductions’ and bizarre perceptions. However, the phenomenon was framed as being location-independent and appeared randomly around the entire planet in various forms, and sometimes included non-human beings.
The field of the paranormal was seen as independent, including remote viewing, which focused on a type of ‘anomalous’, yet useful perception.
Fast forward to today with Mellon & Co and the phenomenon has somewhat shifted focus to Skinwalker Ranch, a fixed location with a history of strange phenomena; apparently overlapping, but not entirely consistent with the initial ‘UFO’/flying saucer field. Add on to that the apparent finding that this specific group includes a number of individuals who share a native American gene that affects the brain.
So we seem to be moving away from a ubiquitous phenomenon to phenomena that are location specific and individual/gene specific; which strongly suggests that multiple, different phenomena are in play.
This isn’t a bad thing. It would certainly help to explain why it’s so difficult to nail anything down if overlapping phenomena are helping to create the illusion of a single phenomenon.
However, we also have to acknowledge that the nature of these phenomena (including non-human intelligences) may be compromising individuals, through direct abduction and/or induced perceptions. To what degree are the ‘anomalous’ perceptions of individuals a form of misinformation (deliberate or otherwise); whether shared or unique?
A question arises: to what degree has the efforts of Mellon & Co been compromised by such misinformation? If there was a plan to help whistleblowers come forward, then how many of those individuals possess ‘uncompromised’ testimony of relevant information that provides real and consistent evidence of a conspiracy to hide alien tech from the world in general?
From another, more generally accepted perspective, the current situation is a result of semi-random, mutually beneficial events leading from Tom Delonge’s interest in UFOs to Congressional investigations; investigations that have seemingly stalled.
To what degree is any of this ‘real’? When we seem to be getting closer to some answers, the fuzzier the picture appears.
The phenomenon appears to be growing more fluid and amorphous the more tools we bring to bear on it. Carl Sagan wrote “At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new." I'm beginning to wonder if our scientific pursuit of the truth might lead us to, in his words, "slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness..."
'Science' has enabled us to get to the position where we seem to understand a very high percentage of reality (or make accurate models at least); high enough to make us think we're very close to 100%.
If science suddenly opens the door on a deeper and more complex aspect of reality, then people are going to feel freer to fill in the gaps with a bit of belief and faith, until science catches up.
Personally, I'd worry more if the universe was as limited as science currently depicts. Science doesn't really do 'hope', except in small instances e.g. hoping that nuclear fusion will overcome the effects of decades of industrial pollution (science correcting the consequences of other scientific discovery).
UAP Caucus Representatives, subpoena Susan Gough.
Susan Gough initially proclaimed that Lue Elizondo had no managerial/leadership role in ATTIP.
She was observed shadowing Sean Kirpatrick during his final few weeks as AARO Director.
She also summoned the representatives of the MSM News reps about 1 year ago to hold an in private session with the intent of putting a lid on the topic.it was noteworthy that News Nation was not invited since their staff were intending to ask pointed questions unlike the lapdogs in the MS News media.....A few years ago John Greenewald posted on his web site or FB page a screen shot of Gough's linked in page which described her credentials.
I would expect that NYT military journalist Julian Barnes will soon be posting more content discouraging interest in the subject....probably at the behest of the Pentagon spokesperson
It appears that more of the media are catching on to Gough who is more than a Pentagon spokesperson, and should be "subpoenaed" under oath if a future UAP congressional hearing is conducted.if so, I would further expect that the legal division of the Pentagon would contest her appearance for obvious reasons.
Congress needs to establish a new UAP office.
And subpoena the top Pentagon people.
A few days ago, I reported about AARO.
I presented Sean Patrick Hazlett's comments on AARO.
I concur 100% with Hazlett's comments.
The All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office is a disinformation and counterintelligence operation.
Hazlett is an engineer and U.S. military veteran.
"Sean Patrick Hazlett @@seanpha... 11/15/23
Replying to @AnjaliOnGaia
When I heard witnesses saying they had to sign NDAs when speaking to AARO, it was pretty obvious it was not only a disinformation activity, but also a counterintelligence operation.
Sean Patrick Hazlett & @seanphazl... 3/9/24
Replying to @GarryPNolan and @SkyFireNews This is just part of a discrete counterintelligence operation to discredit you. Timing is the tell
(coincident with the AARO toilet paper). Thankfully, the IC isn't as competent as it used to
be given how transparently obvious this attempt is.
throughaglassdarkly @TAGlassDar... 11/9/23
Replying to @blackvaultcom
Nope. The purpose of AARO was never about disclosure; it was always a counterintelligence operation to lure, isolate, and defeat leakers."
https://ufointel.wordpress.com/2024/11/26/x-com-search-term-aaro-counterintelligence-operation/
I read Gough's paper, too. Sorry, nothing sinister or suspicious there. She's simply making the case that DoD/gov needs to update its approach to the contextualization of complex and/or perplexing information. In other words, bring DoD/gov messaging into modern communications practice. Is she trying to promote DoD's take and deflect unwelcome questions? Sure, she is. Is she determined to keep classified or sensitive information under wraps? Of course she is. What else would people be expecting from her? That's the job.
I suspect Elizondo begs to differ. Moral relativism creates a ton of operating space.
Well, the jury's out, I believe, on the issue of Elizondo's credibility. And if we're going to start talking about morality in the halls of government or at most any UFO conference we might name, we're going to be here a long time.
Maybe it's a generational thing. When I first started writing about UFOs in the 1980s, one of my literal neighbors was retired Col. Bill Coleman, chief USAF PIO from 1971-74 and former PIO for Project Blue Book. He was adamant about one thing re media relations: Never lie. You can't always tell the truth, but never lie. Given his own documented pursuit of a UFO in 1955, Coleman straddled a fine line between what he knew to be true, the USAF's official position, and his concern for his employer's "credibility." In those days, or at least in Coleman's mind, credibility was paramount. As a quaint relic from the 20th century, I never expect military public affairs to lie or fabricate. Evade, equivocate, shade? Certainly. But not outright lie. It's naive on my part, but I don't expect them to lie to the media. It's as unacceptable to me now as it was 40 years ago.
Elizondo accuses Gough of disseminating "misleading and false information." It appears that you agree with him, that she has been pushing -- that she is pushing -- one or more "outright" lies. What, specifically, are we talking about here? What lie/s has she told? Also, when we're finished dealing with the question of Gough's veracity, maybe we might discuss Elizondo's? (As for "the generational thing," Billy, well, Harry and Bess were still living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the evening I was born, so point taken.)
She initially said AAWSAP and AATIP were not UAP-related. She also said Elizondo wasn't the AATIP director, and that he had no "assigned responsibilities" within the AATIP program. One could argue that she was only repeating what she was told. But that doesn't mitigate her, um, lack of veracity. As for Elizondo's credibility, he's obviously not afraid to testify under oath. The only reason we're having this conversation today is because he decided to step up and tell the truth seven years ago.
It appears you discount the reporting of John Greenewald (Black Vault) and Steven Greenstreet (New York Post) to the effect that there's an enormous cloud over Elizondo's claims re AAWSAP-AATIP and his relationship thereto. I don't believe these issues are settled. Frankly, I don't believe we're getting the whole story from anybody involved in this affair. And I think we need to keep in mind one fact we can rely upon about Elizondo -- that's he's CI with qualifications in disinfo ops. Rather odd credentials for an AATIP director, wouldn't you agree?
What would James McDonald do?
He was a scientist who conducted thorough investigations and found the most credible ‘UAP’ cases, setting the bar extremely high. I’m not even sure that the whole of MUFON can compare with the value of McDonald’s efforts in highlighting strong evidence of non-human technology.
Elizondo’s AATIP? No apparent analyses and Elizondo himself seems prone to accepting evidence at face value. Mr E’s contribution appears to have been preparing the ground for whistleblowers. Is his claim regarding Lockheed Martin valid? I personally think he has no credibility where such claims are concerned, unlike McDonald and his actual investigations. (Don't trust, but we still need to verify!)
Kosloski’s comment that Aguadilla were balloons at 13,000’ is probably a typo, as the plane was well below that height with the camera looking down at the object(s). Even if the object/objects didn’t enter the water it remains strange that there was no indication of 2 objects, until they separated, even though the plane virtually circled it/them. What caused them to separate to such a degree after remaining in such close proximity up to that point (especially if it turns out they were descending into slower air currents)? (Likely altitude range is below 1300'.)
Why is there no indication of anyone from Lockheed Martin being interviewed by the Senate or Congress?
Why was the best investigation of Nimitz conducted by a documentary maker?
Why does the ‘Immaculate Constellation’ document read like an (anonymous) unofficial collation of information, that must have been less than Top Secret. What makes the initial section ‘Immaculate Constellation’ of any interest given the alleged USAP’s such recent creation?
Is it the parallax effect that makes us look like we’ve been going backwards for decades?
Great point about the likely altitude -- correction made.
As you quoted, Chairwoman Nancy Mace did indeed refer, at the beginning of the November 13 hearing, to "certain individuals who didn't want this hearing to happen because they feared what might be disclosed. But we stood firm, no amount of outside pressure would ever keep me from pursuing this subject, come hell or high water.”
I was immediately intrigued by that comment, because on November 4 I had actually asked the House Oversight Committee staff about unsourced claims by certain often-unreliable X accounts of attempts by the House Intelligence Committee chairman and ranking Democrat, and the Pentagon, to get the hearing cancelled. Also on Nov. 4, I received this on-the-record statement from the official spokesperson for the Oversight Committee: "No member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or official from the Department of Defense has contacted the Committee about potential witnesses for the November 13 UAP hearing."
However, after the hearing but still on Nov. 13, Steve Bassett actually asked Mace about her comment, and this exchange followed, as video recorded by Ty Roberts and included in his "Total Disclosure" program:
Steve Bassett: We heard a rumor that there was an attempt [inaudible word] to stop your hearing…
Rep. Nancy Mace: [speaking over] We heard the rumor, too.
Bassett: … over Immaculate Constellation.
Mace: Yeah, we heard a rumor too. I don't know. I was like, "I'm holding a hearing no matter what, even if it's like in my office."
Bassett: But you weren't directly contacted about that?
Mace: No, I was not directly contacted, but we heard the rumor also.
So, here is a tidy case study in the "echo chamber." Social media accounts claim to have inside knowledge that Mace is being pressured by specific powerful people to cancel the hearing; I inquire and senior staff denies it; nevertheless Mace, in the spotlight, riffs off the social-media rumors with a public comment that some immediately interpret as a confirmation of the rumors. But in reality, Mace tells Bassett, nobody contacted her attempting to suppress the hearing.
Douglas Dean Johnson
Martyrs without portfolio -- the national virus.
> Well, that was an effective ploy, because it made me forget all about UFOs’ unimpeded access to our nuclear assets.
It's funny you mention that. Regarding what had likely been "off limits" look no further than how Kosloski cautiously mentioned that incident with the "law enforcement officer out west." What little he said about that case suggested to me that he was speaking about an Air Force Security Policeman out in one of the missile fields.
Kosloski stated that the individual first spotted "a large, orange orb" a mile or two in the distance. Probably rural at least, though not necessarily. What really caught my attention, though, was the hesitation in his voice as he continued to describe the incident.
He said the individual proceeded to drive to the object's location which was "about forty to sixty metres away from — some object — that was — the area was well-lit …"
The picture about jumped out at me. That's sounding an awful lot like he doesn't want to mention a missile facility in an open hearing. I suspect that this individual is one of the witnesses whom Robert Hastings has interviewed and subsequently referred to AARO.
> But when Kosloski started getting into AARO’s newly resolved cases last week without releasing the full analyses, he crossed the line from umpire to “strategic influencer.”
I got the feeling that he wasn't too pleased with having to fill the role. The parallax explanation fell pretty flat. And that promised Agaudilla report? Oh, boy. Yeah, it'll be interesting to compare it with that of SCU.
Thanks, btw, for pointing out the "situational flexibility" of certain members of Congress. I think that's important to keep in mind when getting one's hopes up about them Doing the Right Thing. Or talking about a subject so long tied up with perception management.
As for Elon Musk, on that note, he has been making all sorts of enemies from all sides. That's never a good idea because, should he disappear one day in a cloud of pink mist, we might forever be asking ourselves who REALLY pulled the trigger.
I should clarify that Kosloski was saying that the officer had pulled up to the location of the glowing orb, which was forty to sixty metres away from something else. The "some object is not the orb but the thing which he'd thought better of fully describing: a missile facility, perhaps, or storage bunker, B-52, etc.
Speculation, of course, but give a close listen to what he said, and how he said it.
Now THAT's funny. But I suspect you're correctly reading the tea leaves on the western incident. Good eye there. I'm certain AARO will fill in all the missing details in its upcoming report.
My breath: I ain't holding it.
The party line holds, the coverup remains under control. Old Stoneface Gough's vibe tells me so.
As intractable as the Moai sculptures on Easter Island.
This is the new American Gothic.
I love that photo.
I'm hoping that Koslowski can improve how AARO is run.
Whoever staged-managed those visuals did AARO no favors. Kosloski's got quite a hill to climb.
"But if she becomes the DNI that's a whole new ball game for the usual suspects in a lot of ways." 💯