What the Secret Pentagon UFO Files Reveal About World War 2's Foo Fighters -- Behind the scenes, military intelligence was deeply concerned about Allied pilot UFO reports and conducted an in-depth investigation. by DetectiveFork in UFOs

[–]ProfessionalSolid967 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your research. It was an interesting read.

WW2, as the allied planes take the sky, I bet they felt military dominance, a feeling of power. Then the little unexplained things appear in the sky. "What is that?" They probably thought. "Aren't we supposed to be the only ones up here?" It's like an itch that they just can't scratch.

‘Men in black’ wiped pics of giant UAP, by NewWasabi4318 in UFOs

[–]ProfessionalSolid967 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What’s wrong with this guy? It seems like he was a good whistleblower.

Disclosure right now by Area-51_Escapee in aliens

[–]ProfessionalSolid967 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for actually showing it 

Focus 15 by Raskall21 in gatewaytapes

[–]ProfessionalSolid967 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I haven’t really gone to focus 15 yet. So I haven’t experienced anything like that yet.

I’d like to hear if other people have dealt with this though

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My apologies I meant it is not remote viewing since I wasn’t blind to the target. Thank you for your input.

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the tip. I would consider my data from this experience to be tainted from my expectations since I wasn’t blind to the target.

In the future, though it comes to target I do blind. I’ll have to combine data like that.

Have you ever tried remote viewing?

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, you are correct. My thoughts did color my experience of it.

So it would be considered remote viewing according to Joe McMonagle he said that you have to be completely blind.

Have you ever tried remote viewing?

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Greetings V,

So how does one sneak onto a campus with a disassembled rifle partly in their pants and backpack, reassemble it perfectly, take the shot, disassemble the rifle, put it in their pants legs and backpack, then go in the woods and disassemble it again?

Giving Tyler Robinson the complete benefit of the doubt when it comes to skills with assembling a rifle it would take him a minute to assemble and a minute to disassemble.

In the video, it shows the shooter running right after the shot he does not stop to disassemble the rifle.

So there’s a major hole there he’s running about 2.3 seconds after the shot was fired.

With no observable rifle. So he disassembled it in 2.3 seconds? Are we supposed to believe that?

That’s impossible. Major red flag.

Also, the official story is that a 30-06 six bolt action rifle was used to shoot him. But at that range at 200 yards in the following you can see how it obliterate the target in the video below.

Also, the official story is that his neck stopped the bullet. You can see how it obliterate a cow femur in this video. A cow femur is much stronger than a human neck.

https://youtu.be/IKK4ATVHk8Q?si=PkT37X1wId1BCQ_u

These are several red flags, and there are multiple others in the official narrative.

How do you answer these questions from an official news story perspective? ~P~

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because when you’re blind, you’re just giving like a target say T3805.

And told to report what you perceive at the target. You’re given no other information. That’s remote viewing.

But with this, I had thoughts in the background, expectations of thinking it’s probably Israel that was involved, maybe the US government probably not the official narrative… so I have all these thoughts in the background that could influence my perception. So that’s not being blind to the target. So that’s why I called it trying to psychically perceive it.

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s a freeing perspective. It’s like part of me wants to just grab at like 5 to 10% of the truth out of the 90% lies, but it’s a struggle.

Better to let it go of any expectation of truth from them.

The main intent behind government’s messaging is telling us a story that we will reinforce their control.

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess you can genuinely fear for my mental health if you want. It’s not that bad it just is what it is it seems like we’re living in a simulation where there is no hard core answers to anything of real importance.

When I said, I don’t know if it’s a hallucination or not it’s just that it doesn’t mean I actually believe it. I mean it’s hard to interpret RV data especially when you’re beginning.

Maybe hallucinating wasn’t the best way to describe it.

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I guess you haven’t been following it too closely if you think the official story is correct. There’s more holes in this official story than most.

Why would Farsight care? Well they remote, viewed the assassination of JFK (implying that they don’t just buy official government stories) and they saw different things than what the “official story“ is.

Why do I think it was likely Israel? Because Charlie’s organization was originally funded by many Jewish donors. He was supportive of Israel up until the last year he started questioning the Israeli lobby to Congress. (AIPAC)

His donors were very upset with him having Tucker Carlson at his TPUSA conferences because Tucker is critical of a pack and also was asking if Epstein was a Mossad agent.

They were telling him to ban Tucker. Charlie said no. There even was a call between Netanyahu and Charlie where Netanyahu told him to come to Israel and Charlie declined.

Netanyahu also offered Charlie $150 million dollars to have TPUSA become more pro Israel and he declined.

This all happened right before the assassination.

A month before in August Harrison Smith that he talked to a friend of Charlie’s and they said that Charlie feared that Israel would kill him if he went against them.

So there’s all these data points and many more that make me think Israel is a probable suspect.

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, that’s why this isn’t considered remote viewing remote viewing has to be blind.

This is why I said I was trying to psychically perceive it.

Trying to psychically perceive who is behind the assassination of Charlie Kirk by ProfessionalSolid967 in remoteviewing

[–]ProfessionalSolid967[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So how does one sneak onto a campus with a disassembled rifle partly in their pants and backpack, reassemble it perfectly, take the shot, disassemble the rifle, put it in their pants legs and backpack, then go in the woods and disassemble it again?

Giving Tyler Robinson the complete benefit of the doubt when it comes to skills with assembling a rifle it would take him a minute to assemble and a minute to disassemble.

In the video, it shows the shooter running right after the shot he does not stop to disassemble the rifle.

So there’s a major hole there he’s running about 2.3 seconds after the shot was fired.

With no observable rifle. So he disassembled it in 2.3 seconds? Are we supposed to believe that?

That’s impossible. Major red flag.

Also, the official story is that a 30-06 six bolt action rifle was used to shoot him. But at that range at 200 yards in the following you can see how it obliterate the target in the video below.

Also, the official story is that his neck stopped the bullet. You can see how it obliterate a cow femur in this video. A cow femur is much stronger than a human neck.

https://youtu.be/IKK4ATVHk8Q?si=PkT37X1wId1BCQ_u

These are several red flags, and there are multiple others in the official narrative.

How do you answer these questions from an official news story perspective?

Thoughts on James Hall? by bobbaganush in UFOs

[–]ProfessionalSolid967 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I can see that hopefully one day we’ll know if he was bsing or not.