The fact that all the government UFO celebrities are trying to discredit without presenting evidence for how the WSJ reporting is wrong gives away the game. No one can take this topic seriously without confronting the reporting in that story. If it’s not accurate then prove it. It’s radioactive.
There are multiple factual documents that prove empirically that the 1967 EMP test narrative sourced to Kirkpatrick is false in its entirety. The EMP device in question wasn't even commissioned for build until 1972. The logistics of building this massive EMP test device requires significant site construction for concrete mounting pads, large cranes to place the device and erect, which would require many days if not weeks. The WSJ claims it was set up over live ICBM nuclear warheads without site guard knowledge. That is entirely absurd. I have the specific contract documents on my X account @RobHeatherly1.
Sounds like something Congress should have a hearing about doesn’t it? Yet the Oversight Committee doesn't want to touch it. That's not strange to you?
It’s also common for classified programs to be discussed publicly with an official explanation that’s directionally accurate while substituting releasable or simplified systems for the actual capability. So, if the device used is still classified, it will be replaced in the story with a capability that is not classified.
Also if you’re telling me that aliens visiting nuclear missile sites is less absurd than the military running tests on their own sites I think you’re untethered from reality.
I don’t know who is telling the truth in the Friedman/Herrington story, but why would Herrington ever admit that he had confided in Friedman? I have also read that Grusch has asked for contact info for Herrington. Was that simply because of the Friedman story, or is Herrington someone known by Grusch to have information related to UAP?
Yeah, I suppose my view is that it's an extraordinary story that's only backed by Friedman's account, so my presumption is untrue until shown otherwise. Where did you hear that about Grusch? I was able to track Herrington down in a couple days, so I assume Grusch would be able to do the same
I’ve heard that Harrington was on the list of witnesses that Burlison was trying to get. Don’t recall where I heard that but it might be worth inquiring to Burlison. I wouldn’t presume the story is untrue. Harrington has every reason to lie and he already changed his story once within your conversation. Friedman’s story is oddly specific and detailed.
The fact that all the government UFO celebrities are trying to discredit without presenting evidence for how the WSJ reporting is wrong gives away the game. No one can take this topic seriously without confronting the reporting in that story. If it’s not accurate then prove it. It’s radioactive.
https://youtu.be/FVpWXxneti4?is=HeZ-ZT04Me-xqBWo
There are multiple factual documents that prove empirically that the 1967 EMP test narrative sourced to Kirkpatrick is false in its entirety. The EMP device in question wasn't even commissioned for build until 1972. The logistics of building this massive EMP test device requires significant site construction for concrete mounting pads, large cranes to place the device and erect, which would require many days if not weeks. The WSJ claims it was set up over live ICBM nuclear warheads without site guard knowledge. That is entirely absurd. I have the specific contract documents on my X account @RobHeatherly1.
Sounds like something Congress should have a hearing about doesn’t it? Yet the Oversight Committee doesn't want to touch it. That's not strange to you?
It’s also common for classified programs to be discussed publicly with an official explanation that’s directionally accurate while substituting releasable or simplified systems for the actual capability. So, if the device used is still classified, it will be replaced in the story with a capability that is not classified.
Also if you’re telling me that aliens visiting nuclear missile sites is less absurd than the military running tests on their own sites I think you’re untethered from reality.
I don’t know who is telling the truth in the Friedman/Herrington story, but why would Herrington ever admit that he had confided in Friedman? I have also read that Grusch has asked for contact info for Herrington. Was that simply because of the Friedman story, or is Herrington someone known by Grusch to have information related to UAP?
Yeah, I suppose my view is that it's an extraordinary story that's only backed by Friedman's account, so my presumption is untrue until shown otherwise. Where did you hear that about Grusch? I was able to track Herrington down in a couple days, so I assume Grusch would be able to do the same
I’ve heard that Harrington was on the list of witnesses that Burlison was trying to get. Don’t recall where I heard that but it might be worth inquiring to Burlison. I wouldn’t presume the story is untrue. Harrington has every reason to lie and he already changed his story once within your conversation. Friedman’s story is oddly specific and detailed.
If I learn anything more ill report back in a future edition of Signs of Life