It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Naval Intelligence Admits To Possessing "SECRET" Tic Tac Video

page: 2
61
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Too many people saw an actual flying Tic Tac looking object with their own eyes for this to be only a radar spoofing tool. There was an actual craft flying through the sky in ways that make man-made objects seem totally out of date.

Anyone who has read the other dozen threads about the Tic Tac incident would already know that.




posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

I think that the letter there says it all.

Whatever was flying was ours and it was a ISR platform.

The part there.


the materials would trigger protections under subcategory c), the Intelligence Activities of the United States, as well as the Sources and Methods that are being used to gather information in support of the National Security of the United States.


Followed by the other underlined part makes me think this.

We have some cool sci-fi type craft out there.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Who would you believe, someone who was in the room at the time the crime happened or someone who was not there?

Patrick Hughes and Ryan Wegelt were in the room, David Fravor was not. Patrick Hughes, Ryan Wegelt, Gary Voorhis, Jason Turner, Kevin Day and Anon402 all said the evidence was removed by two men who helicoptered onto the ships.

There is no reason that we should only believe David Fravor over these 6 men. There is no reason to think Fravor knew everything that went on. He was aboard one ship but was not present at the time that two of these incidents happened, those two being when two men landed aboard the Nimitz and the Princeton and walked in and confiscated the evidence tapes. We have several men who were there at the time and witnessed this two events. There is no reason to not believe them just because they were not the original star of the show. They were there, they saw it happen. Fravor was not there and did not see it happen.

The only question here seems to be, were these two men Air Force or G men?

Nimitz Aviation Tech Patrick Hughes says one of the carriers Hawkeyes recorded the event and that he took the brick which held the data off the plane and stored it away as usual. He says two men not from the carrier helicoptered in, removed the brick with the data, and took off again.

Apparently they went to the Princeton next, as according to Helicopter Maintenance Training Instructor Ryan Weigelt, two Air Force men choppered on board and pulled sensor equipment from the cruisers Seahawk helicopters. This meant the helicopters could not fly and the ship had to sail to and anchor in San Diego to retrieve new sensors. This means the Princeton left the battle group for 2 days during the exercise, something that usually never happens to an aircraft carriers number 1 support vessel. To be clear, the Princeton’s main role is air defense of the carrier Strike Group. Also unusual is that naval ships do not anchor in harbor; they dock at the docks, which were open for docking at this time. To remove sensor equipment must mean that the copters sensors had picked up information on the Tic Tacs that had to be removed from those sensors. Meaning the chopper pilots must have been in the air at some point and recorded Tic Tac data.


In 2014 a sailor who worked with Patrick Hughes, posted this on Reddit:

“I was aboard the USS Nimitz during the encounter. My job was to strip the black boxes from every plane. The black box tracks all of the flight data which tracks the life limits of aircraft parts. I was in charge of stripping black boxes.

The incident was not cloaked in secrecy. The entire carrier was buzzing with rumors. I was not able to see the COM/NAV actual flight recording, so I was very skeptical.

That night in the berthing I asked a very close friend in intel if he could confirm the legitimacy of the film. Without speaking, he gestured that it was correct. So, my skepticism began to fade and that next day a group of individuals were "cod'ed" onto the carrier and they retrieved all the tapes. I can confirm they cod'ed onto the ship, but the seizure of tapes came from people that work in those shops.

Com/Nav is in charge of the inflight real time footage and they did have the real-time video of the event. The confirmation that I mention I received from my friend, was confirmation that the video exists and that it showed the events as we had been described.

Cod'ed is a term that refers to a small size passenger plane that the military uses to bring personnel on and off of aircraft carriers. The term that is commonly used is ...."People were cod'ed onto the ship today..."

The individuals that took our data were American and not in military uniform. They were also very well dressed. My shop personally had pertinent data that was collected. They did not personally collect it from me, but it was given to my supervisor and after he brought the required data, he was pretty vocal upon his return about how unusual this is/was.

The general consensus aboard the ship is that the individuals were from the government in some capacity and were there to obviously remove any evidence. Imagine if a Pfc. Bradley leaked that video hahaha?” - u/anon402


www.reddit.com...

Daviv Fravor is the only one involved who is in disagreement over the Nimitz event. He disagrees with his shipmate Patrick Hughes. They disagree about one thing, that being the video evidence being confiscated from the Nimitz. He also seems to disagree with Kevin Day that the same thing happening on the Princeton. I can understand Fravor being annoyed if he was left out of the link about everything that happened that day.

I think David Fravor is telling the truth from his point of view, as I see no reason to think he is lying, but he may have been left out of the loop when it comes to some of the details that others are offering. Since we have several people claiming the original FLIR video they saw that day on board ship was much longer and clearer than what the public sees now. I see no reason to think they are lying either. And Patrick Hughes has explained nicely why Fravor would not know about the filmed evidence being confiscated.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: grey580We have some cool sci-fi type craft out there.


not as cool as these 'tic tacs'. not even close.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny




but IMO these pilots and military personnel witnessed a technology that is far greater than any black op project that currently exists on this planet.

If that's true then why would the full length video only be classified as Secret ?



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: RoScoLaz5

Oh I don't know.

Anti Matter weaponry is pretty cool.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: shawmanfromny




but IMO these pilots and military personnel witnessed a technology that is far greater than any black op project that currently exists on this planet.

If that's true then why would the full length video only be classified as Secret ?


because about 7 billion people, more or less, haven't witnessed this yet. seems like a pretty good advantage to have over less-informed governments and institutions.

if you can't hop and skip over to Mars on a moment's notice, but I can, why would I have an immediate responsibility to share this information with you? clearly i would have better things to do.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
Too many people saw an actual flying Tic Tac looking object with their own eyes for this to be only a radar spoofing tool. There was an actual craft flying through the sky in ways that make man-made objects seem totally out of date.

Anyone who has read the other dozen threads about the Tic Tac incident would already know that.


Exactly!!!! Well said!!!!



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 08:44 PM
link   
BREAKING NEWS:


Ex-Navy admiral says UFO analyses ‘inconclusive’







SARASOTA — America’s former Chief of Naval Operations stated on Thursday that the unidentified flying objects that appeared to have outperformed Navy fighter pilots on videos recorded in 2004 and 2015 remain a mystery. “I’ve seen the videos and, at least in my time, most of the assessments were inconclusive as to what it was,” said retired Admiral Gary Roughead, following a speaking engagement in Sarasota. “But the whole issue of defense against autonomous vehicles is one that the department is taking pretty darned seriously.”





“I remember there was one (UFO), and it may have been after I retired, that seemed to go underwater,” he said. “If in fact it was a real vehicle, how did it launch and recover? Because as you know, it’s not an easy thing to get something that can perform extraordinarily well in the air and dive into the water and become something else. What that phenomenon was, I can’t help you out there.”


www.heraldtribune.com...
edit on 9-1-2020 by celltypespecific because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

From quite the distance i imagine considering a gram of antimatter could produce an explosion the size of a nuclear bomb.



posted on Jan, 10 2020 @ 07:15 AM
link   
In the document posted they state they have “slides” that are top secret. You’ve seemed to be the one who’s confirmed that to be a 7-10 minute high res version of footage of the “tic tac”

Seems to me it could also be a slide (as in still frame). Perhaps the air force logo can be seen in the top secret slide they don’t want to show us. Perhaps it shows the object to be made of plasma or be a projection of some kind. Lots of grabbing at straws to be done yes.

a reply to: shawmanfromny



posted on Jan, 10 2020 @ 07:27 AM
link   
Any radar spoofing tool you’re familiar with at least.... we can’t possibly come up with new ways to deceive people, man kind is very bad at that yes.

Sorry but a military tool to create false targets and disorient the opposing force does seem to be the best answer for what the object is. Why they wouldn’t have false visual and radar targets seems like a flaw in the whole concept, not proof of its non existence. Anyone who’s read these threads should be able to see that a strong desire for an outcome does not bring it to exist.




a reply to: spiritualarchitect



posted on Jan, 10 2020 @ 02:29 PM
link   


The slides might be what thefinaltheory initially mentioned when he leaked the video on ATS...cometa is in possession of the slides.
HAPPY FRIDAY






“The Department of Defense, specifically the U.S. Navy, has the video. As Navy and my office have stated previously, as the investigation of UAP sightings is ongoing, we will not publicly discuss individual sighting reports/observations,” Susan Gough, a Pentagon spokesperson, told Motherboard. “However, I can tell you that the date of the 2004 USS Nimitz video is Nov. 14, 2004. I can also tell you that the length of the video that’s been circulating since 2007 is the same as the length of the source video. We do not expect to release this video.”




www.vice.com...[editby ]edit on 10-1-2020 by celltypespecific because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2020 by celltypespecific because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2020 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: celltypespecific
www.vice.com...[/quote ]

Caught with their pants down, The Pentagon has to lie again. Aww, it had nah thin to do with UFO's, it was just dem darn weather balloons a gain.



posted on Jan, 10 2020 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Rob808

Are you telling us that the radar spoofer can make people see concrete flying objects where there are none?



posted on Jan, 10 2020 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

I assume we have to trust Fravor's word - after all, he is the star and main focus of the entire story.



Also the parts where Fravor describes action which seems to defy laws of physics as we understand them and when Fravor says he encounterd something that rattled him ( an experienced combat veteran ) and something that was not man made?



posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 03:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
Too many people saw an actual flying Tic Tac looking object with their own eyes for this to be only a radar spoofing tool. There was an actual craft flying through the sky in ways that make man-made objects seem totally out of date.

Anyone who has read the other dozen threads about the Tic Tac incident would already know that.


I readily admit I haven't read everything about this case but how many did actually see it with their own eyes ?

Which means not via radar or IR or a disturbance of water but actual visual eye contact.



posted on Jan, 12 2020 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Dwoodward85

Flying Donut

Can we do this? Manitou Springs looking to the South. It was flying NW.



posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Top-secret UFO files could ‘gravely damage’ US national security, Navy says

www.foxnews.com...

Video of an ET craft isn’t going to “gravely damage” US national security. No more than it would damage Russian or Chinese.

Video of a DoD or US Aerospace contractor’s advanced tech would “gravely damage” US national security.

Not ET. However, we have some pretty amazing tech in the works. Pretty cool.



posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 09:06 PM
link   
If you search YouTube you can find simulations of current imaging used in fighter jets, the actual full quality output is considered national security and I bet it's 25-50 years before we see the original. They still cant explain how an astronaut in the 60s was able to find shipwrecks from space that contained treasure.
edit on 13-1-2020 by circuitsports because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
61
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join