Posted April 19 Sooooo, if they had no knowledge, never saw any evidence, never recovered anything .......... why have a multi million dollar program created for reverse engineering? And characterized as a "critical need.?" Just asking. Anyone have a take? After actually reading the material that is. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24555561-aaro_dhs_kona_blue 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19 I particularly like this little tidbit. Bear mind these are real government documents just declassified and talks about development pf the proposal over 15 YEARS with approval of the program initially in 2008 and formally in 2012. And still the accompanying justification for "ending" the program is totally contradictory between Pentagon and Homeland Security. They STILL can't get their lies straight. Anyway a direct quote: 2. Justification for Need 2) Remote vision, remote communication, and de/re-materialization techniques to observe, communicate, retrieve data, and transfer matter across dimensional and space time barriers will undoubtedly be of an utmost interest if not a top collection priority for adversarial intelligence/security services. Countermeasures against such techniques would also be a collection priority. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 19 The government double/triple speak was quite strong in the linked materials. It had the obfuscating characteristics of an artist statement. And we get all this for a mere $100M+? 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 21 It definitely reads as official FedGov documents, with appropriate classification markers throughout. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 21 1 hour ago, FuriousWeasel said: It definitely reads as official FedGov documents, with appropriate classification markers throughout. That is because they are 100 percent legit 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 3 On 4/19/2024 at 8:53 AM, Bit Banger said: The government double/triple speak was quite strong in the linked materials. It had the obfuscating characteristics of an artist statement. And we get all this for a mere $100M+? Ok, I’m back. I had to get my dictionary out. My vocabulary is strong, but no match for yours. Lol This conversation is over my head.😳 that’s all 😂 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
