The IDs of the Parties involved in the 2007 Nimitz UFO Video Leak are Known!!!

originally posted by: derfred33
a reply to: mirageman
You see, this is ATS at it´s best, the mud pit should be deleted. This is you want to keep this site alive.

I love this forum, but the truth is it is largely inactive. Imo this forum is akin to college sports where everyone leaches off the success of football. The Syracuse basketball coach realized one of the first things he needed to do was root for the football team.

God forbid the owners try to drive up traffic and stay afloat by creating active forums, some of those people might come over and contribute this one, crazy ...

Who cares what goes on in the Mud Pit or any other forum? No one is forcing anyone to post here or anywhere else. Presumably the people who post in the Mud Pit enjoy doing so.

It is truly disturbing to me that this site might go down due to an attack on free speech.

Self Hacked has a good illustration of exactly what is going on
Health Websites Crushed by Google's Censorship

Do a few web searches on google censorship...

If ATS does manage to stay afloat, hopefully they take a lesson from sites like self hacked that block you if you have ad blockers turned on.

originally posted by: neformore

Can't answer for the unarmed planes unless - as has been seen in other cases nor related to this - armed ones could not get near the objects?

Cases alleged also where armed planes suffer a catastrophic event - so is probably a prudent measure if either a real unknown or an expensive new toy.

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: mirageman

That is a common thread in a lot of military sightings. Recon/training flights are slightly different and although I'm not an expert in carrier ops there would always be alert aircraft kept on standby, so maybe it was judged that an unarmed intercept was the way to go?

Regarding being unarmed, Fravor gave an explanation to Joe Rogan (a link to a very useful transcript of the entire interview, with Jeremy Corbell, as ever, haunting both men from the side):

We typically don’t fly with live Hornets unless we’re actually going into a combat zone or we’re on a training range and we’re gonna shoot something. And the reason is — you can go through history of the Navy or Air Force - if you put live missiles on airplanes, and then you start doing training where you’re squeezing the trigger, someone always messes the switchology up, and someone gets shot down. It’s happened multiple times. So, we don’t do it. There’s times that we do, but it’s rare.

Fravor also clarifies that, contrary to the fibs spread by other personnel such as Kevin ("The Tic Tac gave me magical healing powers!") Day, no 'suits' showed up to confiscate materials and shut people up. Furthermore (although I may be stretching here), do his words here somewhat contradict Gough's assertion that the video was seen by a very high number of personnel...?

And no one came to talk to me. No one came to take my tapes. No one showed up in a suit. No one told me not to talk. No one talked to any of my aircrew that were involved in this all. There were six people total involved, the two that shot the video and the four of us that looked at it for five minutes with our eyes. No one — nothing.

Regarding the FLIR itself, Fravor seems to run with the idea that the object zips off to the left, rather than acknowledging it as a camera zoom, which has been the conclusion of many analysts...

It's just kinda hanging out. And they're just filming this thing. And then when they get close, it's gonna zing off the left-hand side... and that's pretty fast to leave that field of view... I mean, you're talking something that's just sitting in space in the wind, and then it just all of a sudden accelerates. Airplanes don't work that way.

If the 'movement' is indeed due to a zoom, where does that leave Fravor's reliability? And does that affect the integrity of the FLIR footage as a whole? Was it even connected to the November 2004 incident?

Was it unrelated footage from sometime in 2005 (as asserted by TFT in his first post)?

a reply to: chunder

Which cases allege that?

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Fravor is/was an O-5 in the navy. You don't get to that rank, especially working with classified weapons systems if you talk to people about things. If they came to him and told him "support this smokescreen. It's for the betterment of the country and National Security." He'd do it without a question. Not because he's a puppet or anything so dramatic, but at the point he is he's effectively "bought in."

a reply to: hawkguy

confusedbrit posted above

We typically don’t fly with live Hornets unless we’re actually going into a combat zone or we’re on a training range and we’re gonna shoot something. And the reason is — you can go through history of the Navy or Air Force - if you put live missiles on airplanes, and then you start doing training where you’re squeezing the trigger, someone always messes the switchology up, and someone gets shot down. It’s happened multiple times. So, we don’t do it. There’s times that we do, but it’s rare.

What I also found intriguing about TFT's alleged return was there were several people here who thought we were being too aggressive in questioning him and his motives. At one point TFTR said I was a "level one poster" because I couldn't see past all the contradictions in his story and I was hounding him away. He just wanted to get his story out in peace and we were getting in the way.

So what happened? I stopped questioning him and left him to tell his story.

And then a few days later he just completely disappeared.

a reply to: mirageman

2009-2010 Luis Elixondo -The man who was supposedly Director of AATIP was touting a shipping business idea around the East Coast of the US. See Never Ship Empty. Seems like he wasn't that dedicated to his day job. Or was this some kind of Studio Six like intel operation?

Didn't DeLomge say several times that someone whom we assume was Elizondo was so top secret that you were not even allowed to say his name? And here he is spearheading an apparent op with his "real name" and picture going out in press releases.

The story is fake from one end to the other.

The footage release is sanitized for release, the optical sensors and FLIR are far more advanced than what is shown in the video. They are fielding technology that was built into the f22 and miniaturized but still capable.

The original footage is classified - the technological capabilities of the sensors is classified - even when we sell these planes to our allies they are stripped of these capabilities, the lack of sales of the f35 is due in part to nations realizing the planes aren't very special without them.

This is the non classified, non thermal simulation of what pilots can actually see with modern optics displayed into their helmet, the modern hornet is capable of the same thing on their displays.

www.youtube.com...

If anyone stole the classified footage and posted it, they would take it down and that person would rightly be arrested.

I've seen alot of things that are known and some that appear to be unknown - in all cases I felt they were human, simply because there is no reason for aliens to be seen and every reason for the US to test and distribute the results of it's unannounced technology on an unwitting public. What better way to test the perception of advanced secret craft than by using pilots of known craft and what better way to disseminate information than create a video so obviously full of holes as to cause instant doubt in both sides.

I think people should realize that we could take pictures of license plates and find sunken treasures from orbit in the Apollo days, what we have now is magical by comparison.

Even on a non classified level some fairly knowledgeable computer experts accidentally got a purpose built google hard drive for there data center and literally couldn't under stand it.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: mirageman

So does this mean that the Nimitz hoax originated on ATS, more than a decade before Delonge & AATIP claimed to “declassify” the footage as part of their half-assed attempt at a psyop?

Kind of. Makes one wonder just what else has been released here that could have some weight to it but we just ignored it or scoffed at it because there wasn't quite enough to prove it was anything but junk.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: TexasTruth

Still unsure why any government would supress videos on unidentified aerial phenomenon unless the video were of their own projects. Can anyone explain this?

The government is only interested in keeping two things secret -- what they know and what they don't know. This stuff kind of falls in the second category (maybe). They usually just don't comment on them, since they'd have to say either they know what the UFO is, because it's a secret project of theirs, or they would have to lie, or admit odd things are flying around that they're baffled by. Neither is a good answer.

But they usually fall back on what they've been saying since the beginning. That they appear to be real things, there's not enough data to say for sure what they are, but they don't appear to be a threat to national security. Which is sort of true, but doesn't give away anything about what they either know or don't know about what they really are. Pretty clever.

I thought you meant the UFOs would make something bad happen to an armed aircraft.

a reply to: IMSAM

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: neformore

2009-2010 Luis Elixondo -The man who was supposedly Director of AATIP was touting a shipping business idea around the East Coast of the US. See Never Ship Empty. Seems like he wasn't that dedicated to his day job. Or was this some kind of Studio Six like intel operation?

This is just stupid. Like saying Elon Musk isn't dedicated to his day job, whatever you think that is.

originally posted by: circuitsports
The story is fake from one end to the other.

The footage release is sanitized for release, the optical sensors and FLIR are far more advanced than what is shown in the video. They are fielding technology that was built into the f22 and miniaturized but still capable.

The original footage is classified - the technological capabilities of the sensors is classified - even when we sell these planes to our allies they are stripped of these capabilities, the lack of sales of the f35 is due in part to nations realizing the planes aren't very special without them.

None of this is correct or makes any sense.

a reply to: drewlander

"Why is a video like this even classified if the craft in the video is not our own?"


and in that question lies the probable truth...

originally posted by: Sublant

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: neformore

2009-2010 Luis Elixondo -The man who was supposedly Director of AATIP was touting a shipping business idea around the East Coast of the US. See Never Ship Empty. Seems like he wasn't that dedicated to his day job. Or was this some kind of Studio Six like intel operation?

This is just stupid. Like saying Elon Musk isn't dedicated to his day job, whatever you think that is.

Surprised you didn't turn up earlier to be honest.

You are the forum's single line sniper. Who never posts a thread, rarely offers anything other than negative single comments, never answers questions on here that might open up yourself to scrutiny and general try to steer things away from things you don't want people to read. Welcome back Subby!

What is comparing a spook like Elizondo to Elon Musk got to do with anything?

So if you can for once offer the courage of your convictions and open yourself up to being scrutinized.

What is your 'plausible theory' on why the Pentagon states it cannot trace the leaker of the video but a handful of ufologists can?

If you don't then I'll assume you are too stupid to have one.

Ufology was always smoke and mirrors. But now instead of having magicians pull rabbits from a hat we got people who do this.





New players are added , new howes are getting mentored, new tricks are being shown. The phenomenon whatever it is, is far beyond the ken of the disclosure mythologists. Green and puthoff were always puppetmasters and the new puppet seems to be a rocker . It looks to me like the aviarists have taken flight again

originally posted by: hawkguy
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Fravor is/was an O-5 in the navy. You don't get to that rank, especially working with classified weapons systems if you talk to people about things. If they came to him and told him "support this smokescreen. It's for the betterment of the country and National Security." He'd do it without a question. Not because he's a puppet or anything so dramatic, but at the point he is he's effectively "bought in."

Is the whole thing just a state sponsored 'op'?

From the seeding of the video, recruiting military 'witnesses' and favourable 'journalists' . Then bringing on board the social media Twits, right through to the utilization of DeLonge as an asset to promote the TTSA venture? Some knowingly participating. Others totally unaware they are being played.

We know George Knapp was recruited early on. The Wikileaks emails leaked prove it.



This is a long game. So how many others have been roped in along the way?

It would explain a lot of things.

a reply to: mirageman

Looks like you are burning down the house MM. Pretty sure there will be a lot of talk out there.

Jeremy here… your favorite haunt.

After reading this ATS thread - I want to remind you of some history, as well as direct you towards some information that I suspect will be of interest. I suggest you first review the two early-on appearances I did regarding the Nimitz encounters - on Coast to Coast with George Knapp. The first was conducted before the NY Times article - before the highlighting of the Nimitz case by TTSA - and before the global explosion of this event series in general. So there’s a purity to that broadcast - and I’m thankful for that. The second is when I give exhaustive detail about the event series - and that one was prior to the global awareness of the events too. I will post that later.

To provide context - that first Coast to Coast interview was partly to inform the public - but mainly - it was a personal fishing trip for me. It’s important to note that prior to that show, I asked a number of my contacts to spread the “world-on-the-wash” within specific military circles - to tune-in to the show. I suggested that I might be talking about something of interest to a small sample of individuals with direct knowledge of what I would be mentioning. This process was a gentle way to let people know - that I knew enough - and that I was in contact with people who they might know or admire. I figured that would indicate an implied trust and integrity. I had kept my mouth shut for years. I hoped that it might even inspire a bit of curiosity - which would be helpful for exchange.

On that broadcast with George Knapp - I openly asked for witnesses to contact me if they had relevant information. I gave only a small set of clues while on-air. However, for anybody in-the-know, they were specific enough that the relevance would not be lost. To be clear - I was aware of a ticking clock and the looming potential for increased public attention. Public attention is always a double edged sword. Shining lights often comes with its own innate complications, as the ratio between signal to noise can easily be manipulated by external agendas. So this was the moment for me to shoot up a flare and see who would respond. I already had the principles I needed for a cohesive understanding - and I had documented my steps. Now I was looking for the additional angles of relevance. Remember - this was an event series - not an isolated incident.

We should take a moment and reflect on that fact that when this was all going down - we were living in a different world. This is before the US Government publicly acknowledged current and active study groups related to the UFO problem. So it was still a sensitive subject for many service-people. There was a sort of inherited allergy - in regards to discussing this case. But curiosity is a powerful thing. And yes, it truly can be weaponized.

The important point is the broadcast with George Knapp on May 21st 2017 - it worked. And it worked more than I had anticipated.

Some particulars you might want you to consider from my first reporting…

1. DOCKING - The AAVs (Anomalous Aerial Vehicles) - one of which is now commonly referred to as the TIC TAC UFO - were described as appearing to be “docking”.
2. THE USO - The AAVs were engaging a larger - a different - USO (Unidentified Submerged Object).
3. OBSERVATION - I reported that the SPY-1 radar was not the only observation system tracking these crafts.
4. TRAJECTORY - Other observation systems were pinged - likely due to the perception of aggressive trajectories - when the TIC TACs were approaching the USO.
5. ACTIVE JAMMING - My initial report referenced “active” jamming - which is a touchy subject for obvious reasons.

You can hear that interview clip here - vimeo.com...

In a future post on ATS, I will direct you towards my comprehensive coverage with the most direct witness to the event series (who has come forward), and that’s Cmdr. David Fravor. I will also supply you with the curve ball - the one that’s required with any in-depth investigation into a proper military UFO encounter - having that extra and added layer of compartmentalized complexity. The implications of which, won’t disappoint - if you pay attention.

Let me collect my thoughts, and I will be back to offer more.

Your pal,

Jeremy (4Name) Corbell