That's a practice I have heard most frequently attributed to mob bosses ...or wannabe mob bosses. And if Elizondo mentioned his reason for choosing to sit that way, it sounds as if he was drawing attention to it, cultivating a tough-guy persona or emphasizing his own importance.
I presume that it's not entirely unrelated to the concept I have for chosing seats in a restaurant or pub - I always sit in the "no stab seats".
The "greys" connection just jumped out too easily for me too, it's a bit too much of a coincidence to dismiss. However, there's also a third use of the colour that's been overlooked - the grey zone - in international relations, subversive statecraft that's not overtly aggressive. He's a foreign plant! (Maybe an alien, perhaps a triffid?)
That could explain his aversion to salt water taffy.
It's not really clear that they found the three balloons they shot down later; if one of them was that amateur radio balloon, it wasn't very big to begin with.
Article: Recovery operations concluded Feb. 16 off the coast of South Carolina, after U.S. Navy assets assigned to U.S. Northern Command successfully located and retrieved debris from the high-altitude PRC surveillance balloon shot down Feb. 4, 2023," reads a statement from NORTHCOM. "Final pieces of debris are being transferred to the [FBI] labratory in Virginia for counterintelligence exploitation, as has occurred with the previous surface and subsurface debris recovered. U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard vessels have departed the area. Air and maritime safety perimeters have been lifted."
I'm not sure how to rate that one -- a secret about a project that was never carried out in a program that was cancelled seems easier to keep than a secret about something that was done once (Truman met an Alien, say) or was carried out continually (we have UFOs warehoused in a hanger at Area 51, say). "Do secrets about things that were not in fact carried out need to be graded in a separate category or on a separate scale?" I guess is what I am wondering.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molot...s_Falsifiers_of_History_and_Axis_negotiationsExternal Quote:
If they were recovered, they might be in the same place as the big Chinese spy balloon.
Article: U.S. Northern Command said in a statement that the recovery operations ended Thursday and the final pieces are on their way to the FBI lab in Virginia for analysis.
In this image provided by the FBI, special agents assigned to the evidence response team process material recovered from the high altitude balloon recovered off the coast of South Carolina, Thursday, Feb. 9, 2023, at the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Va. FBI via AP
[Note]: Daily Mail (MailOnline) "Pentagon UFO whistleblower claims people have been killed by 'non-human intelligences' and says US government will do ANYTHING to protect the secret", 12 June 2023, Jen Smith. Very similar to the Express article; link https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ms-people-killed-non-human-intelligences.htmlExternal Quote:
-Whereas in the Express article, Grusch's assertionExternal Quote:
-practically the definition of bathos).External Quote:
We do know pilots/aircrew have died while trying to intercept/chasing UFOs. The two that come readily to mind are Mantell (over Kentucky) and the two man crew of the F-89 (over Lake Superior) in the "Kinross Incident." There's also the USAF exchange pilot who crashed into the North Sea chasing a UFO in an RAF Lightning that you might be familiar with. All three are part of ufology lore and claimed by some in the field to have been a result of aggressive actions on the part of UFOs they were looking for/chasing. I wonder if such mishaps are what Grusch and/or the UK tabloid were alluding to?
Frederick Valentich, a civilian pilot, disappeared after reporting a UFO. These were his last words:
To be honest that hadn't even crossed my mind. I'd read about Mantell a long time ago, I didn't know about the F-89.
Bit of a coincidence- I didn't know anything about this until I chanced across a story about it about 2 weeks ago.
(Aviation Safety Network, link as above).External Quote:
Article: Valentich was studying part-time to become a commercial pilot but had a poor achievement record, having twice failed all five commercial licence examination subjects, and as recently as the month before his disappearance had failed three more commercial licence subjects. He had been involved in flying incidents, for example, straying into a controlled zone in Sydney, for which he received a warning, and twice deliberately flying into a cloud, for which prosecution was being considered. According to his father, Guido, Valentich was an ardent believer in UFOs and had been worried about being attacked by them.[1]
A 2013 review of the radio transcripts and other data by astronomer and retired United States Air Force pilot James McGaha and author Joe Nickell proposes that the inexperienced Valentich was deceived by the illusion of a tilted horizon for which he attempted to compensate and inadvertently put his aircraft into a downward, so-called "graveyard spiral" which he initially mistook for simple orbiting of the aircraft. According to the authors, the G-forces of a tightening spiral would decrease fuel flow, resulting in the "rough idling" reported by Valentich. McGaha and Nickell also propose that the apparently stationary, overhead lights that Valentich reported were probably the planets Venus, Mars and Mercury, along with the bright star Antares, which would have behaved in a way consistent with Valentich's description.[1]
External Quote:
Article: Mantell pursued the object in a steep climb and disregarded suggestions to level his altitude. At high altitude he blacked out from a lack of oxygen; his plane went into a downward spiral and crashed.
Nope. There are still those who believe the stories about Mantell's last radio calls about seeing aliens in the craft, reports by witnesses (including his wingman) that the craft fired on and disintegrated Mantell's Mustang in midair, and that Mantell's horribly mutilated body was found in the crash.
Some claimed the F-89 pilot crashed after suffering vertigo. I think he may have stalled his aircraft trying to slow down enough to identify the wayward, low and slow RCAF C-47 he was scrambled to intercept. The F-89 was a big, underpowered beast not known for it handling qualities or nimbleness.
Except he did not report seeing lights, but an 'aircraft' with a long shape which was very fast and had a shiny metallic surface..
At night, in the dark.
He did say lives were lost, but IIRC it was a the hands of humans who didn't want the super seekret facts about the aliens getting out.
Good point.
I know. That's why I am surprised it is now available on the Congress' website. Maybe the 'horse is being resurrected' in light of Grusch' testimony? If it was simply a fake, I would have expected a different reaction from Davis.
While I don't believe for a minute the Dr Davis/Adm Wilson tale is true, I can certainly believe someone like the admiral in question would react as is claimed in the narrative. In the military, especially at that level, knowledge is power personified. To say it another way, lack of knowledge is a seen as a weakness and defines someone's relative standing in the system. No one wants to admit he's not "in the know," particularly someone who considers the effort being withheld to be within his official purview. At that level, senior leaders are very protective of their responsibilities/authority as it usually ties directly into budget appropriations and control. "Egos and rice bowls" is the phrase used in the DoD.
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/ri...ded institutional,program, project, or budget.External Quote:
This is a classic example of junk "evidence." Yes, perhaps such techniques are taught to a very small minority of physicians and lawyers. Why aren't they universally taught? Because they are junk. As for law enforcement, law enforcement does a lot of stupid things - eg tge whole USA suspect interviewing system was rejected decades ago in the UK because it produces false confessions…
He would recognise that it was a deliberately-manufactured artefact.
External Quote:
https://royalsociety.org/about-us/history/ -Royal Society website, "History of the Royal Society".External Quote:
I actually agree with you but there are many reasons one could think of why they hypothetically may prefer to observe physically rather than via proxy like ''nano bots''. But to assume that just because they are technologically thousands of years ahead of us means they must understand our technology is a logical fallacy in itself. For example, we are much smarter and more technologically advanced than a 'ant' but we are unable to hack into an ant's antenna systems and communicate to other ants, neither do we fully understand the behaviour of certain animals and how they communicate with each other.
No, sorry I'm not familiar with him.
He would recognise that it was a deliberately-manufactured artefact.
The accounts of his life and achievements indicate that he would show others, who would be free to make their own observations and notes.
Supposition: the 'phone would be described and archived in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, available to generations of scholars
External Quote:https://royalsociety.org/about-us/history/ -Royal Society website, "History of the Royal Society".External Quote:
The symbols on the keys would tell him that the user used Latin script and Arabic numerals (in the sense that we describe "our" letters and numbers as such- contemporary Arabic numerals are different to contemporary "European" numerals).
Markings on some internal components would further support this.
He would be intrigued by the tiny lenses. I'm sure he would study them.
If the 'phone was functional, charged and unlocked, Newton would find that manipulating the keys caused the display to change. He would probably find further evidence for the language of the user (or the 'phone's intended user).
He might work out that the battery was a power-source and that the 'phone only worked when the battery is connected.
He might find that the 'phone could generate sounds, and might identify the components responsible.
If the battery were identified as a power-source, Newton might have successfully identified connections (even without any assumptions regarding electricity) and deduced that the discrete components within the 'phone somehow manipulated that power to enable the device to fulfil its aims. I doubt if he could have deduced much about the 'contents' of integrated circuits.
And Newton would probably "invent" the Phillips screwdriver.
But we are not in Newton's position.
We have spectrometry, X-ray crystallography, scanning electron microscopy, and people who can use these techniques effectively.
We have the ability to share images of, and data about an artefact on an arbitrarily wide scale if we want to.
We have a much better understanding of chemistry and physics (thanks to people like Newton).
The structure and composition of any conventional matter, down to the scale of individual molecules (and arguably atoms) can be found if we really want to. Of course, if we found artefacts made of, or including, "exotic" matter, that would point to an unusual origin.
Clumps of slag or bits of wire comprised of alloy which don't have the constituent metal ratios found in a cursory search of US alloy manufacturer's catalogues are not exotic matter, nor do they in any way whatsoever indicate a non-terrestrial origin.
Sorry, Avi Loeb
