Beyond Bigelow & BAASS, After AATIP and on To the Stars...

a reply to: mirageman

If so then you would expect that US intelligence services would be actively seeking to interview anyone who had made contact with the original leaker(s) of the video and presentations.

This would implicate a substantial number of individuals on this thread......

a reply to: celltypespecific

This would implicate a substantial number of individuals on this thread..

hmmmmmmm.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Didn't they publish a report saying they were actively investigating this at one time, but due to the thousands of potential "suspects" they were never able to trace a single person and they considered the case closed?

The official response was

Susan Gough... saying Navy officials became aware that the video had been posted online in 2009.

“With respect to the 2004 sighting by aircraft from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68); that video was widely shared throughout the ship at that time,” Gough writes. “In 2007, one of those crewmembers posted the video onto the public web.”

But in terms of investigating the video leak, Gough writes, “Given the time since recording (approximately 5 years), the widespread distribution of the recording within the ship at the time of recording, and the size of the crew at the time (approximately 5,000), it was determined that there was no way to accurately determine who might have released the video.”

So the US Navy and the power of its intelligence services may not have been able to accurately determine who might have released the video.

But back in the thread linked previously it is confirmed that the person who leaked the video onto the German film website was known to at least two members of ATS and ufologists.

....Over the last few months, we've slowly obtained his name, place of birth, date of birth, photo and other information. But we still don't have any contact details for him. If you find that a bit frustrating, imagine how we feel about it.

Now if seasoned ufologists can track down that information and the might of the United States Intelligence services can't, then you tell me what might be going on here?

I found that hard to reconcile with some of what was posted in the TFT thread back then, but as Isaac Koi said you go back to the same people now (like the operator of the Vision Unlimited website) and ask them the same questions and they don't give you the same answer as back then, now they have "amnesia". I take it they don't want the investigation case re-opened (if it was ever really "closed").

I would say that there is something very strange going on. Wouldn't you?

originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: mirageman

If so then you would expect that US intelligence services would be actively seeking to interview anyone who had made contact with the original leaker(s) of the video and presentations.

This would implicate a substantial number of individuals on this thread......

Well you have voiced your opinions previously Cellty. But give us your best guess

a reply to: mirageman

Well you have voiced your opinions previously Cellty. But give us your best guess

I've got my hand in the popcorn bucket while we all wait. Over to you Cellty.

I think I am going to plead the 5th on this one....

Wuzzgoin'on 'ere? UFOs have been off my main radar for a while...

originally posted by: mirageman

Now if seasoned ufologists can track down that information and the might of the United States Intelligence services can't, then you tell me what might be going on here?

I would say that there is something very strange going on. Wouldn't you?

Very strange indeed, at least in terms of who has been cast in which role, and who is aiding whom during this 13-year hunt.

If ufologists managed to track down Cometa's "name, place of birth, date of birth, photo and other information." (the mind boggles as to what else - shoe-size, gym membership, brand of goatee hair dye?), then shouldn't an IC sniffer simply have to make one relatively short leap in order to cast a net around this fella?

Assuming they are any good at their job. And assuming such info is being shared between parties. If it isn't, is there any reason to assume that won't change? Which brings us full circle again...

originally posted by: celltypespecific
I think I am going to plead the 5th on this one....

I assume you don't mean on the grounds that you'd incriminate yourself. Coz that would be a giveaway.

originally posted by: mirageman
I would say that there is something very strange going on. Wouldn't you?

Indeed.

originally posted by: celltypespecific
I think I am going to plead the 5th on this one....

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
I assume you don't mean on the grounds that you'd incriminate yourself. Coz that would be a giveaway.

The 5th says: "“No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”

I don't know how else to interpret that.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I don't know how else to interpret that.

We could ask "Jeeves" or, how about Isaac Koi. He is the legal eagle and been in the middle of this stuff. 😁

@Cellty, if I eat any more popcorn I might explode.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

I've zero idea about the Nimitz, but I'll say this. If the authorities were concerned about these leakers, they should have taken action a long time ago. If they are only just interested, then they would likely benefit from talking to people like Isaac, GUT and Tim McMillian. They would save a lot of time.

a reply to: ctj83

If they are only just interested, then they would likely benefit from talking to people like Isaac

That's why I brought up Isaac....

Of course Gut and others too.

a reply to: Baablacksheep

Isaac Koi offered to verify the ID of the person claiming to have removed the video and burned it to CD in the same thread.

... TFTR has communicated with me via his current email address, his Facebook account and here on ATS. TFTR has provided me with several photos of himself and some information about himself. Using the name on his Facebook account, I have also found TFTR's LinkedIn account and a copy of his CV...

I provided him with the first letter of Cometa's real name and asked if he knew the rest of that name. He didn't remember being told Cometa's real name. I also asked him about his communication with Cometa and about any material that he retained. Again, TFTR's recollection had faded and he thinks that some relevant material is no longer available.....

....(I'm also still looking for some help in Germany to locate Cometa. I have his real name, birth date, place of birth, photo, and various other details - so remain a bit frustrated that I and Elevenaugust haven't found Cometa yet to ask him if he has retained the longer version of the video and the Powerpoint presentation...).

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The official statement from the DoD -"that video was widely shared throughout the ship at that time" seems to be a deflection. I don't think I've heard of anyone named publicly who claims to have removed a "physical" copy off the Nimitz and that this was widely shared. Anther lie from the Pentagon?

So Isaac obviously had his reasons for believing his pursuance of Cometa (the ATS member who allegedly uploaded the tape to the Vision Unlimited Servers) would have no legal repercussions. Otherwise he wouldn't have continued to do so in 2019.

His response to that question was posted almost exactly a year ago today...

Not my country or my area of expertise (nor am I being paid...), so I wouldn't really want to venture much of a view - other than, as I've said to TFTR, if I were him I'd hesitate about jumping into anything.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now I am sure Isaac can speak for himself if he wishes. To clarify why he feels able to track down these individuals without repercussions and his motives for doing so. Maybe he could also confirm if any authorities from the USA have asked him about the information he's acquired so far?

What we seem to have is a curious situation where:

1) At one extreme the Pentagon nonchalantly dismissing this issue as of no real consequence

"...it was determined that there was no way to accurately determine who might have released the video.”
Source

2) TTSA claiming the FLIR video is the real deal. And the identity of the person(s) claiming to have leaked it onto a foreign web server are actually known to a handful of individuals.

a reply to: mirageman

THANKS FOR POSTING THIS MM!!!!!

TFTR has communicated with me via his current email address, his Facebook account and here on ATS. TFTR has provided me with several photos of himself and some information about himself. Using the name on his Facebook account, I have also found TFTR's LinkedIn account and a copy of his CV... I provided him with the first letter of Cometa's real name and asked if he knew the rest of that name. He didn't remember being told Cometa's real name. I also asked him about his communication with Cometa and about any material that he retained. Again, TFTR's recollection had faded and he thinks that some relevant material is no longer available.....

....(I'm also still looking for some help in Germany to locate Cometa. I have his real name, birth date, place of birth, photo, and various other details - so remain a bit frustrated that I and Elevenaugust haven't found Cometa yet to ask him if he has retained the longer version of the video and the Powerpoint presentation...).

There you go folks.......
So for all those so called ufologist, journalist, investigators.... its right there.....

I am a little fuzzy on this now but did Koi explicitly confirm that TFTR was the same person who originally posted as TFT?

Weren't there key parts of their accounts that did not match up?

a reply to: coursecatalog

As per the link provided earlier. best viewed with two good eyes (or maybe four if they aren't so good)

However, having now been through a few hundred of TFTR's posts on Facebook (on his personal account and a related page), his CV on LinkedIn and other material (in addition to asking him various questions), I think it is very likely he was TFT and also very likely that he had access to the system on which the videos were stored. It's hard to be 100% sure that TFTR is TFT mainly because TFTR doesn't have some relevant material from that time and his memory seems - unsurprisingly - to have faded a little on some details...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: mirageman

Ha. Okay. Did not see that.

Have some pity on us over the pond here. We're a little distracted.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Thanks for the reply. Those cited passages are a case of apophenia.
Yes electromagnetic radiation EMR can have effects on people.
But there's still no evidence that EMR can send telepathic information from one person to another in a typical telepathic experiment, and a review of how EMR interacts with tissue explains how you can get "effects" but not "data" with any bandwidth. I'm not seeing "yielding military benefits" as much as apophenia here.

I can assure you that the apophenia is all yours.

Just to reiterate what I originally posted with regard to the document...

originally posted by: KilgoreTrout
It's an extraordinary document and one, with the power of hind-sight, we know was taken very seriously by some and by others seriously enough to at least give those other individuals some support and lee-way to 'do their thing'. When nothing was yielded of military use those individuals were sent back to their day jobs and left with 'hobbies'. That same document though points to other Soviet 'paranormal' research that obviously would and is yeilding military benefits. You can, in retrospect, see how the wheat was seperated from the chaff, taking the esoteric to the exoteric, while some mysteries remain mysteries and others are out and out deception.

I was perhaps too oblique. It is a matter of linguistics. The document is “extraordinary” because of the language it uses to describe, what are today in some cases extremely non-‘paranormal’ 'phenomenon'. The two examples I cited, Bekhterev and Kholodov both began their work investigating aspects of paranormal phenomenon but as they progressed in their research they eventually moved into the mainstream because they produced tangible, reproducible results. Bekhterev is considered a pioneer in the field of neurology today, and Kholodov’s work on reflexes has been cited by NASA.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
I don't know if the Shamanism is really paranormal. I thought you might have been referring to the mention of hypnosis. Hypnosis isn't paranormal, but after briefly mentioning some non-paranormal applications of hyposis, that paper quickly got into some paranormal chaff which sounded like nonsense.

Hypnosis isn’t considered paranormal now, no. It once was though, hence, esoteric to exoteric. Most ‘technology’ or creation of tools, physical or otherwise, as well as ideas, goes through such a process and were once thought of as magical, supernatural or paranormal, are now everyday things. Hypnosis is only one example.

The point is not whether you or I think that shamanism is paranormal or not (and I didn’t say it was), the point is why would the Soviet state support such research and why was the US interested in it in the context of the report?

originally posted by: ArbitrageurHypnosis can have real applications, though. I was pretty impressed with Derren Brown's demonstration of a "Manchurian Candidate" he hypnotized to kill Stephen Fry. The hypnotized man was a fairly ordinary guy who didn't want to kill anyone, but he was selected after screening many candidates for his exceptional susceptibility to hypnosis.

As you said, “he was selected after screening many candidates” which is exactly why the US military found it unsuitable for operational use, and as did the Soviet state. No mass appeal, no funding. NKVD and the CIA? Possibly.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Yes, it was an interesting read, even if it's almost all chaff, though I can't comment on what was redacted.

What it is, is a very poor evaluation of the state of Soviet research at the time it is made. I presume that this is due both to the quality of the material that they analysed as well as a general misunderstanding of what the scientists were actually engaged in doing. Plus hind sight is 20/20.

Or there is another way of looking at it, that the authors of the paper knew exactly what was being researched and the whole report is an exercise in obfuscation.

Much could depend upon that redacted section.

Here’s a paper I read this morning that sheds more light on the matter and should more than clarify why I thought it was relevant to the current discussion (Puthoff even gets a mention).

arxiv.org...

And, in that context, Alexander’s out-pouring as a consequence of that report...

tinyurl.com...

...did they really not get the ‘science’, or was it that some didn’t get it, or are we just looking at a language barrier, the point lost in translation? Or perhaps, Alexander was employed/encouraged to deflect whoever that report was meant for from seeing that the technology that the US was already developing had potentially serious consequences to human health and our environment in general?

a reply to: mirageman

Now I am sure Isaac can speak for himself if he wishes. To clarify why he feels able to track down these individuals without repercussions and his motives for doing so. Maybe he could also confirm if any authorities from the USA have asked him about the information he's acquired so far?

Sending smoke signals to Isaac Koi😁.

a reply to: Baablacksheep

Don't puff too hard

youtu.be...

a reply to: mirageman


He must be busy MM .

originally posted by: mirageman

Don't forget his mate Hal has pocketed TTSA funds to test the meta-materials and produced nothing at all of substance.Results were due by October 2018. Just a tiny part of his 50 year record of failure. Yet he remained a go to person for the military, Bigelow and DeLonge.

Puthoff is indeed still a "go to person" for the military. In her book "Phenomena," Annie Jacobsen writes, "Sources at the Defense Intelligence Agency confirmed to me that Earth Tech International [Puthoff, Davis] has for years maintained a Defense Department contract to investigate what are known as 'excess energy' claims" (p. 389).

"Excess energy" is a euphemism for "energy from nothing," or "a perpetual motion machine." Puthoff says that the Defense Department comes to them to "disprove" extraordinary excess energy claims. "So far we have disproven all of them." I'm glad to hear that, but I don't see why the Defense Department needs to spend taxpayer money refuting such claims. Anyone making such claims must prove it themselves.

badufos.blogspot.com...