The MYSTERIOUS Case of The NAZLET ALIEN (Egypt)

Is the small village called Nazlet el-Samaan sitting on top of the underground Palace of Khufu? Zahi Hawass seems to think so, he bases this belief on the published work of Mark Lehner.

Now that aside what’s also interesting is that this little village is also the scene of a mystery.

On an archway above some closed gates on the edge of the village a craving which resembled an alien was to be found –





When the photographed returned sometime later he found this –







The Alien has been mysteriously removed!

More about this and other very very strange goings on in the village here -

www.richardgabriel.info...

What do you think guys?

a reply to: JamesTB

Clearly not the same gate as the bricks above, beyond the gate and on the right hand side in the 1st picture are clearly a light creamy yellow in color and yet they are clearly red in the 2nd picture.

The picture on the engraved alien creature is very interesting!

originally posted by: ForeverMan
a reply to: JamesTB

Clearly not the same gate as the bricks above, beyond the gate and on the right hand side in the 1st picture are clearly a light creamy yellow in color and yet they are clearly red in the 2nd picture.

The picture on the engraved alien creature is very interesting!

Yes there are some differences between the 2 sets of photos but I think that can be explained by the amount of time passed and amount of work that has been done there.

For instance the gates have being replaced.

That... doesnt make any sense.

You can clearly see the "alien" there, plastered over. Complete with the nips and all. You can also see part of the writing above it.

BUT... Its now been recessed (if that's the word). Huh? How is that even possible if they just wanted to "remove" it?

I suspect they accidently broke it, collapsing almost half of it (see newly constructed parts on the right, half the arch is ruined and without detail compared to the first pic, even the arch is crooked!) and did a shoddy job at putting it back together. The "alien" is still there.

Sidenote to the above saying its not the same gate - I disagree. The left side of the arch is pretty much identical, compared to the broken/plastered over right side.

a reply to: JamesTB

What makes you think it depicts an alien?

a reply to: JamesTB

The alien looks more like a knight to me.

The archway clearly looks to have had serious structural damage and been repaired by someone with less skill than a one-eyed camel.

originally posted by: ForeverMan
a reply to: JamesTB

Clearly not the same gate as the bricks above, beyond the gate and on the right hand side in the 1st picture are clearly a light creamy yellow in color and yet they are clearly red in the 2nd picture.

The picture on the engraved alien creature is very interesting!

it looks like the same gate structure but with new construction/restoration/renovation work done around it. looking at the picture it almost looks like it was either damaged or even pulled down during the work and sloppily put back together. look especially at the left side (where it looks like it hasn't been touched) it matches pretty much in both pictures.

a reply to: JamesTB

Ok, it seems the 1st set of pictures were taken in 2005 and the 2nd set was taken in 2009 and the article details further that ...

2010 UPDATE

Since these photographs were taken, a lot has happened. There was the illegal dig in the village leading to the suspicious deaths of several men.

There were the announcements of various suspicious archaeological activities on the plateau and elsewhere. There were the fanatical efforts from lofty levels to squash the reputations and information being revealed by some on anything to do with the village and the plateau.

We do know however that information is coming closer and closer to the surface for the likely presence of huge ancient archaeology beneath the village, and other tenuous links to ancient associated technology.

And so I do agree that enough time and suspicious digging activity possibly covered up by rebuilding the area lend credence to the story.

However I am of the mind that the picture of the engraved alien actually shows a moorish knight in chainmail armour.





Maybe Knights Templar related

I noticed it's wearing shoes like todays womens shoes, though the breasts look a little masculine.

the inscription above was damaged as well. i wonder what it said.

Cant believe you didnt notice that the doors arent even the same shape - flat in first photo and rounded in the next. Clearly it would take advanced laser technology to change the door like that

a reply to: JamesTB

The reason why it looks different on the 'second visit' (if it was a separate visit) is that the doorway and gate are not the same doorway and gate!

Look how on the first pictures with the intact ET carving, the door doesn't go all the way up to the top of the door frame, but ends a couple of feet from the top?

The second image, with the plastered over ET carving, goes all the way to the top of the frame...obviously a different doorway / gateway was imaged on the second visit.

The buildings and walls surrounding the gateway are different too...red bricks on the upper building on the right, not red bricks on the second image, plus the window frame on the lower right of the gateway, is different too...my guess is there are a few of these gateways in that village, all with the same decoration and carvings on them, but one got damaged by someone bringing in a load that was too high to fit through.

BTW, The ET carving is still there, you can still see it, but under big globs of plaster that's been piled on by hands.

This is probably due to someone knocking into the gateway and damaging it and then made a hasty repair using plaster.

originally posted by: JamesTB
Zahi Hawass seems to think so,

I've seen his stuff on TV and in educational movies in science museums. He reminds me of an Egyptian Geraldo Rivera. Part reporting/archeologist and part tabloid. As for the figure, looks to me like it was just broken and badly repaired. But you never know.

originally posted by: 3n19m470
the inscription above was damaged as well. i wonder what it said.

Yes I noticed the inscription too... Anybody familiar with this language...It would probably explain a lot. The figure has a prominent place above this gate so it must be someone significant for that community.

a reply to: JamesTB

I'll go with a poorly done *At the time, Almost cartoonish* representation of a Knight with his helmet removed revealing his chainmail.

I'm shocked to learn that Greys were fighting for Christ in the Holy Land.

Great find OP!

My impression would be that this is ''just'' a negroid figure and not a depiction of anything alien. I've also seen some amounts of African art and it doesn't seem surprising or unusual. On the other hand: I'm no expert and eventually know little of it. But especially when a black person is depicted it can look a bit alien and this thingie seems to have negroid facial features.

Seemingly a lot of African art has an abstract element to it and isn't meant to literally resemble a person or animal etc, and that this one doesn't exactly resemble a human body shape isn't too odd imo.

But those eyes. I didn't know knights had oversized almond shaped eyes, no nose and a small mouth. I
Is that European? Or Arab Templar advertising?

Whatever. Clearly, to the Victors go the… Historical record.

And as others have said, clearly not the same gate, just look at the other walls surrounding the gates in both pics

So firstly the quality control needs to be turned up a bit, and then we need to bear in mind that there are more than one of these gates in the area suggesting that as mentioned earlier by others, some order of knights (etc) are responsible for these and left their image on them.

They were pretty cruddy carvers too, but then they probably spent more time swinging a sword and riding horses than wielding a hammer and chisel.

a reply to: JamesTB

If its a repair job then no wonder there civilisation went in to decline, because its extremely poorly done. If its an attempt to cover up or obscure the image same applies. Possibly vandals may be the culprits?

Have to also say there is no reason to suspect the little dude is anything other than a depiction of a Man.