Author: emilvenere

Emil Venere is a writer with many years of experience, both at major research universities and daily newspapers. He holds a master's degree in journalism from the University of Arizona and a bachelor's in literature from Ramapo College of New Jersey. He wrote the science fiction novel Flying Saucers.

Now you’re onto something, #Nick Pope! There are no aliens at #Area 51.

This just in from the tabloid press. Essentially it’s the same vague article in three different tabloids, supposedly crafted by three different writers.

Here is one link. http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/701005/The-mystery-unmarked-passenger-jets-used-to-fly-men-in-black-into-alien-base-Area-51

Anyway, the gist is this: Yes, there is a fleet of mysterious airliners flying regularly into Area 51 to ferry workers into the base. It’s an old story, and unfortunately these tabloid offerings provide nothing new. However, at least the tabloids periodically publish stories on the subject, which you can’t say about more legitimate media sources.

One interesting note: Nick Pope, former UFO investigator from the UK’s Ministry of Defence, says there is no evidence of aliens.

“Sadly, despite the rumours, I’ve seen no evidence that we’ve recovered any extraterrestrial technology.”

Bingo!

He also acknowledges that Area 51 is “… where various secret prototype aircraft and drones are developed and test flown.”

So, the UK’s Fox Mulder gets kudos for stating the obvious … but he also gets demerits for failing to take the next step: yes, there is likely NO space alien connection to the above-top-secret military base. And yes, there are secret prototypes … so, the implication is that these secret prototypes are themselves the source of many UFO reports over the years.

This is a logical increment, not some fanciful leap. UFOs exist. Hence, many of these UFOs are a product of the U.S. military.

The question I have is, how can there be different bylines for the exact same story in three different publications?

The other two links:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1627413/area-51-mystery-as-huge-unmarked-passenger-planes-are-spotted-flying-from-las-vegas-airport-to-the-top-secret-military-base-sparking-conspiracy-theories/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3744704/Pictured-mysterious-unmarked-passenger-jets-fly-Las-Vegas-America-s-secret-military-base-Area-51.html

#MissilesandUFOs — this is a no-brainer, people

This was just posted (link below) on the National UFO Reporting Center Web site, and it calls to mind an interesting tidbit from Flying Saucers.

http://nuforc.org/webreports/128/S128388.html

The phenomenon of flying saucers shadowing missile launches at military bases and hovering over nuclear missile silos to deactivate the electronic controls has been extensively documented in the literature. (Re: the compelling accounts of Air Force Capt. Robert Salas and others)

However, it’s obvious that everyone has overlooked the only logical explanation: the Pentagon’s testing of flying saucers as the ultimate anti-missile platform.

C’mon, Davenport, get it together, dude.

This is a no-brainer, people. It’s all in Flying Saucers.

Epoch Times article, Nick Pope #Rendlesham Forest incident

 

In a new article published in the Epoch Times quoting Nick Pope, he confides that investigators concluded a secret military prototype was the only remotely plausible non-ET explanation for the famous Rendlesham Forest Incident.

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2113207-former-uk-defense-official-discusses-real-life-x-files/

Epoch Times: Aside from the heiroglyphs seen by one of the witnesses, are there any other aspects of this incident that absolutely could not be attributed to secret high-tech human operations?

Pope: Indeed, I can’t entirely rule out the possibility that what was involved at Rendlesham was a secret prototype aircraft or drone of some sort. I think it’s highly unlikely, given the details, and indeed this possibility was checked by both the MoD and the USAF.

I can’t entirely rule out the possibility that what was involved at Rendlesham was a secret prototype aircraft or drone of some sort.

— Nick Pope, former UK Ministry of Defence official

But one cannot completely discount the possibility of a secret project unknown even to those of us in government charged with investigating this incident. Of all the skeptical theories put forward over the years it’s the only one we assessed as being remotely possible.

CNN, welcome to the party, finally. #B-21 bomber

Don’t you hate the cheesy “under the radar” wording in the headline? I guess they couldn’t resist.

But at least they are finally giving the B-21 bomber story some cursory coverage

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/05/politics/b-21-stealth-bomber-cost-secrecy/index.html

It’s really sort of hilarious that people consider that silly artist’s concept drawing to be a fair representation of the super-secret bomber in any way, shape or form.

From the CNN article: “The Pentagon also made public an artist’s conception of the aircraft, which some lawmakers argue would be more useful to a foreign intelligence agency than the overall contract cost.”

 It should be fairly obvious that the alleged concept image is a ruse.

Officials have already acknowledged that they have completed extensive wind-tunnel tests of the bomber. They know what it looks like “down to the access panels” … and may have even test flown a full-scale prototype by now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

UFO-like ending to #Northrop Grumman TV ad, alludes to B-21 bomber

 

the most recent #Northrop Grumman ad is fairly interesting … it summarizes the company’s various technological feats, from stealth bombers to the first landing of a UAV on an aircraft carrier … then it segues to future  fighter jets and ends with a mysterious aircraft in a large hangar and officials standing around during some sort of hypothetical unveiling. We have to assume this is the B-21 … All you can see are three blinding white lights, but you can’t make out any contours. The narrator says: “Just wait until you see what’s next.”

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/Aqyl/northrop-grumman-just-wait

The lighting configuration reminds you of http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/pictures/Stevens4.jpg

entertaining …

#B-21 Bomber article on extreme secrecy

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-cost-of-the-b-21-bomber-is-secret-for-security-reas-1781576157

excellent article … and one of the most under-reported stories. The computer-generated artist’s concept is a joke … I attended an aerospace conference last month and some big shot from Northrop Grummon Aerospace Systems was a keynote speaker … a slide of the alleged B-21 concept came up on a big screen. “It’s an interesting photo. I’ll leave it at that,” he says. And this was greeted by a round of laughter from the audience … What’s not known is whether any members of Congress are privy to the cost figures. If not, where’s the oversight? I find it intriguing that one top military official has told the media that the platform is using “very mature” technology. But he also said, just because it’s very mature “doesn’t mean it’s known to the public.” Whaaaat?

interesting article #usmilitaryspending

 

https://mondediplo.com/openpage/the-pentagon-s-war-on-accountability

Here’s the nut graph:

The United States is on track to spend more than $600 billion on the military this year — more, that is, than wasspent at the height of President Ronald Reagan’s Cold War military buildup, and more than the military budgets of at least the next seven nations in the world combined. And keep in mind that that’s just a partial total. As an analysis by the Straus Military Reform Project has shown, if we count related activities like homeland security, veterans’ affairs, nuclear warhead production at the Department of Energy, military aid to other countries, and interest on the military-related national debt, that figure reaches a cool $1 trillion.

 

it’s too bad the American media are ignoring this issue, a great failing of the Fourth Estate.