The response from those who would be the most likely to know what's going on is consistent with their response to UAPs; nothing to worry about, they don't represent a threat. The major news outlets are also playing their traditional role. The latest reporting includes the same old explanations used for UFO/UAP sightings: planes, helicopters, civilian drones, planets, and stars. Swamp gas hasn't been used yet, but maybe they don't know their history. The government clearly continues to influence their reporting. After that monumental 60 Minutes interview with David Fravor, has anyone ever seen a follow up? They always do them, yet on that very popular segment they never did. Has anyone wondered why?
Clearly those responsible know what they need to know. The risk is that the public is losing confidence in them, but they don't seem to give a rats ass. My guess is that the big drones are owned by the DoD (or a related department) and ultimately are for the purpose of adding security to the sites they fly over. Yeah, I'm stupid that way, but that's what I think, and I'd like to believe that we are in good hands. Are we?
At this point, believing we're in good hands requires an act of faith. It requires that you believe the DoD when it tells you the drones are not, in fact, U.S. assets. Nor are they foreign adversaries. In other words, you need to abandon your guess and trust the authorities when they tell you public safety is not at risk. So far, so good. Right?
Here's a portion of an article put out by the Dailymail.com:
'It is possible that the drones could be the result of a 2018 defense contract to develop and test 'counterterrorism' drones.
The Department of Defense is allowed to deny claims of third-party technologies if the drones were placed on a secure tech list for contract disclosures, which means the government is applying special restrictions to the information.
The restrictions are added when technologies protect national security or to keep advanced systems hidden from hostile nations, and the developer holds primary liability if the government is not operating the drones, Retired CIA Intelligence Officer Rudy Ridolfi explained to DailyMail.com.'
He adds, “While the nature of the testing isn't specified, it's most likely the testing of payloads related to reconnaissance.”
So the DoD IS authorized to lie in order to protect what they deem to be state secrets. This explains the drone issue, and it also their position on UAP/UFOs. I don't like it, but I understand it. Yeah, it's hard to trust those who don't trust you, but telling us does serve to tell China, Russia, and the rest of our adversaries that want us to fail.
I can live with that, but I think they'd do themselves a favor by saying something like “We have knowledge that we cannot share because it deals with national security. What we can say with certainty is that they are not a threat to the American public.”
Where is our esteemed Air Force in all of this? The USAFs primary mission is to protect our air space. But again, as with the UAP/UFO topic they seem to be missing in action here, at least publicly observed. That 'service' is developing unmanned aerial vehicles infused with AI tech for both defense and offense capabilities on an autonomous level. Would they not have an interest one way or another, in any of this?
We all know the USAF is sitting on a gold mine. Saying nothing, sharing nothing, refusing to participate -- all without consequences -- has served them well so far. The ball's in the legislators' court. The GOP is in control of all branches next month; we'll see how badly they want it.
The authorities effectively withheld the FAA radar data for the older Colorado/Nebraska events, so I wonder if it did show something. Ground radars can sometimes see cars going over small bridges, air conditioning fans on buildings, tall chimneys - and windfarms are known to be a problem. So they can potentially detect stuff at very low altitudes.
I'm amazed that nothing has crashed or been shot down/neutralized. I expect related info is being withheld.
The pro-ETH side of me wants to highlight that human-made drones provide cover(/plausible deniability) for non-human 'drones' buzzing around :)
Due to the recent FOIA efforts of a Californian citizen, we were able to discern military drones (via their transponders + FAA primary radar) operating off-shore as well as flying inland.
The U.S. tends to be less regulated than other comparable countries, so this type of activity isn't entirely unexpected either.
'UFO' sightings are well know to have 'flaps'. It will be interesting to see where this one goes.
Forgive me, Billy, for emphasizing this, but your ability, shown in this post, to gather, organize, and clarify makes you a seasoned professional, which I know you are. That is why I think you could create a narrative with clear examples of the entire UFO/UAP history back at least as far as WWII.
The extent of these drones -- the number, the size, and the duration of flight -- indicates a huge amount of money, far beyond most individuals. So, unless it's Elon Musk or Peter Thiel, or the like, it is likely a nation. We know that radar can track almost anything; and we know the military will never disclose information. We also know that the US has downplayed the knowledge it has about the devastating microwave attacks by Russia for fear of having to reveal being attacked and having to respond. If I were to pick a source, I would choose China given their resources and ability to hack into our telecommunications systems; coupled with their desire to be top dog of the world. Using the shining lights is a clear insult. If it were a black ops operation, I don't think we'd see the lights. This is someone saying, Ha, Ha! We're here and there's nothing you can do to stop us.
If you're right, can you imagine the confidence these drone masterminds have in the supremacy of their technology? Holy cow -- to fly so low, so repeatedly, with the presumed knowledge that the loss of one could expose and open them to retaliation? One word -- balls!
Could it be that now that the black budget cover is being blown they need a way for legitimate funding from Congress and this is the cultural narrative to mitigate the truth?
If it is, nobody comes out looking good. I think Congress is finally beginning to realize its authority has been hijacked by the executive branch. If lawmakers want to retain any sort of credibility, they've gotta follow these crumbs wherever they lead.
So many moving parts at play here, it's hard to drill down on a single narrative. If it's a signal, all I know is who the recipients are, and that puts us at the mercy of our egos.
It really smells like a 'roll out' of some kind. 'Something' is making some kind of point or statement to the public and military. It sounds crazy but that scenario fits better than almost anything else right now. The 'drill' you are mentioning is getting sharper and possibly more in focus.
"We've never had total control of our skies" 💯
Why all of the activity at this moment in time? Is this a diversion? Why all of the exposure right now?
The response from those who would be the most likely to know what's going on is consistent with their response to UAPs; nothing to worry about, they don't represent a threat. The major news outlets are also playing their traditional role. The latest reporting includes the same old explanations used for UFO/UAP sightings: planes, helicopters, civilian drones, planets, and stars. Swamp gas hasn't been used yet, but maybe they don't know their history. The government clearly continues to influence their reporting. After that monumental 60 Minutes interview with David Fravor, has anyone ever seen a follow up? They always do them, yet on that very popular segment they never did. Has anyone wondered why?
Clearly those responsible know what they need to know. The risk is that the public is losing confidence in them, but they don't seem to give a rats ass. My guess is that the big drones are owned by the DoD (or a related department) and ultimately are for the purpose of adding security to the sites they fly over. Yeah, I'm stupid that way, but that's what I think, and I'd like to believe that we are in good hands. Are we?
At this point, believing we're in good hands requires an act of faith. It requires that you believe the DoD when it tells you the drones are not, in fact, U.S. assets. Nor are they foreign adversaries. In other words, you need to abandon your guess and trust the authorities when they tell you public safety is not at risk. So far, so good. Right?
Here's a portion of an article put out by the Dailymail.com:
'It is possible that the drones could be the result of a 2018 defense contract to develop and test 'counterterrorism' drones.
The Department of Defense is allowed to deny claims of third-party technologies if the drones were placed on a secure tech list for contract disclosures, which means the government is applying special restrictions to the information.
The restrictions are added when technologies protect national security or to keep advanced systems hidden from hostile nations, and the developer holds primary liability if the government is not operating the drones, Retired CIA Intelligence Officer Rudy Ridolfi explained to DailyMail.com.'
He adds, “While the nature of the testing isn't specified, it's most likely the testing of payloads related to reconnaissance.”
So the DoD IS authorized to lie in order to protect what they deem to be state secrets. This explains the drone issue, and it also their position on UAP/UFOs. I don't like it, but I understand it. Yeah, it's hard to trust those who don't trust you, but telling us does serve to tell China, Russia, and the rest of our adversaries that want us to fail.
I can live with that, but I think they'd do themselves a favor by saying something like “We have knowledge that we cannot share because it deals with national security. What we can say with certainty is that they are not a threat to the American public.”
Where is our esteemed Air Force in all of this? The USAFs primary mission is to protect our air space. But again, as with the UAP/UFO topic they seem to be missing in action here, at least publicly observed. That 'service' is developing unmanned aerial vehicles infused with AI tech for both defense and offense capabilities on an autonomous level. Would they not have an interest one way or another, in any of this?
We all know the USAF is sitting on a gold mine. Saying nothing, sharing nothing, refusing to participate -- all without consequences -- has served them well so far. The ball's in the legislators' court. The GOP is in control of all branches next month; we'll see how badly they want it.
The authorities effectively withheld the FAA radar data for the older Colorado/Nebraska events, so I wonder if it did show something. Ground radars can sometimes see cars going over small bridges, air conditioning fans on buildings, tall chimneys - and windfarms are known to be a problem. So they can potentially detect stuff at very low altitudes.
I'm amazed that nothing has crashed or been shot down/neutralized. I expect related info is being withheld.
The pro-ETH side of me wants to highlight that human-made drones provide cover(/plausible deniability) for non-human 'drones' buzzing around :)
Due to the recent FOIA efforts of a Californian citizen, we were able to discern military drones (via their transponders + FAA primary radar) operating off-shore as well as flying inland.
The U.S. tends to be less regulated than other comparable countries, so this type of activity isn't entirely unexpected either.
'UFO' sightings are well know to have 'flaps'. It will be interesting to see where this one goes.
Well, again, it's amazing that no one in the media is asking about the radar data. Surely it's there. Where does it lead?
The drone mystery has been solved, thanks to former Gov Christie's interest in the topic
https://www.livemint.com/news/trends/donald-trump-mocks-ex-governor-chris-christie-with-hilarious-meme-as-new-jersey-drone-mystery-deepens-11734207936143.html
Forgive me, Billy, for emphasizing this, but your ability, shown in this post, to gather, organize, and clarify makes you a seasoned professional, which I know you are. That is why I think you could create a narrative with clear examples of the entire UFO/UAP history back at least as far as WWII.
The extent of these drones -- the number, the size, and the duration of flight -- indicates a huge amount of money, far beyond most individuals. So, unless it's Elon Musk or Peter Thiel, or the like, it is likely a nation. We know that radar can track almost anything; and we know the military will never disclose information. We also know that the US has downplayed the knowledge it has about the devastating microwave attacks by Russia for fear of having to reveal being attacked and having to respond. If I were to pick a source, I would choose China given their resources and ability to hack into our telecommunications systems; coupled with their desire to be top dog of the world. Using the shining lights is a clear insult. If it were a black ops operation, I don't think we'd see the lights. This is someone saying, Ha, Ha! We're here and there's nothing you can do to stop us.
If you're right, can you imagine the confidence these drone masterminds have in the supremacy of their technology? Holy cow -- to fly so low, so repeatedly, with the presumed knowledge that the loss of one could expose and open them to retaliation? One word -- balls!
Could it be that now that the black budget cover is being blown they need a way for legitimate funding from Congress and this is the cultural narrative to mitigate the truth?
If it is, nobody comes out looking good. I think Congress is finally beginning to realize its authority has been hijacked by the executive branch. If lawmakers want to retain any sort of credibility, they've gotta follow these crumbs wherever they lead.
Sobering thoughts about our past and current situation. Billy. But I have to ask. is this drone flap a message about our future? A 'signal' of sorts?
So many moving parts at play here, it's hard to drill down on a single narrative. If it's a signal, all I know is who the recipients are, and that puts us at the mercy of our egos.
It really smells like a 'roll out' of some kind. 'Something' is making some kind of point or statement to the public and military. It sounds crazy but that scenario fits better than almost anything else right now. The 'drill' you are mentioning is getting sharper and possibly more in focus.
BOOM. Terrific column, Billy. Thanks.
Your name-calling is wearing thin on me again, Larry.