Yubishi

joined 1 year ago
[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago

The very same. Yep.

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The night after the UAP Hearing I was discussing with people about the possible connection between the craft discussed in the hearing and this very event. Truely marvelous seeing such a connection.

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

This reads like an angry child bent on making sure no one studies this topic. The fact that a skeptic investigator is filling am ethics complaints on the disclosure act is telling that they don't want any truth except one that keeps the phenomenon squarely in the Hocus-Pocus domain.

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago

I understand, though having Graves and Fravor actually testify beings to light, in an official capacity, everything they have been saying in podcasts and blogs. When put under oath, congress has much more incentive, if not prerogative, to go after other pilots that the DoD has shielded from providing any information. This could drive new leads the phenomenon has needed: a program insider (though not directly), and pilots on record.

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago

Date: 26 July Time: TBD Likely channel to watch: C-Span Participants: TBD/To be released

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is a serious change in tone and the narrative coming from one of the major news papers.

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

I believe this is a pressure campaign against SAPs that have willfully kept the knowledge of their programs from Congress. However, until we see the drafted papers I'm just speculating.

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

I'm not sure if this has been ever done, so I'll be curious the legal mechanism. As for which contractors, considering there will be dozens of lawsuits, I can can only assume all the major US players.

 

Body of tweet:

#ufotwitter

We held the 1st meeting of attorneys yesterday w/ Danny Sheehan and Derek Garcia.

We are preparing to file lawsuits (dozens or more) against the contractors that are holding the anamolous tech imminently.

Contractors can take the amnesty offer to stop these suits.

 

-- David Grusch and other credible individuals have provided the IC IG details about an alleged program involving recovered ET technology. Since AARO does not have this information, Congress ought to ask the IC IG to assess the issue and report what it learns. --

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Try booting into console mode. Maybe there was a botched update that needs to be fixed. Below are some instructions on how to boot into tty.

https://www.linuxuprising.com/2020/01/how-to-boot-to-console-text-mode-in.html

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Any indication on how much the pelican case cost? I'm seeing "request for quote" for the case https://sierracases.com/shop/pelican-hardigg-classic-v-series-5u-rack-mount-case/

[–] Yubishi@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I understand the sentiment, but I'm just posting the source of the information.

1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Yubishi@lemmy.one to c/ufos@lemmy.world
 

Source connected to congressional staffers says that they are telling him Grusch will be attending & testifying at the upcoming House Oversight Committee (HOC) hearing, and it is slated to take place between July 20th and July 31st.

Sawan has been giving updates on the upcoming hearings in both the House and the Senate. Previously and rightfully, some individuals in this subreddit have questioned where he is getting this information. According to this tweet, we’ll find out by the end of the month if his sources are credible or not.

From Sawan on Twitter:

“🔥HOC UAP Hearing🔥: talked to a staffer from rep. Luna who deals with the UAP issue

  • David Grusch will be testifying publically at the HOC
  • estimating hearing time frame July 20-July 31”
 

An interesting prepublication paper written by Dr. Avi Loeb and Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick.

 

Some questions and comments

  1. This SCG explicitly talks about Navy Intelligence. So would this SCG be applied to another branch?
  2. Were the programs that David Grusch mentioned under the Navy?
  3. Are SCGs retroactive? If so, where would it apply?
  4. If an SCG talked about ET materials would congress question it? What does the SCG state that falls in line with David Grusch's testimony on camera and behind closed doors?
view more: ‹ prev next ›