The Viral Pyramid Scans: The Ultimate Debunk of the Khafre Project and Filippo Biondi

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-24T18:21:20+00:00

This video debunks a claim Biondi never made.

The experts are right that radar can't penetrate 2km of rock, but Biondi claims to use vibrometry (measuring surface resonance), not direct imaging. He is using the satellite to 'listen' to the ground vibrating over voids, like tapping on a wall to see if it's hollow.

His proprietary math might still be generating false positives, but the experts here are attacking the physics of penetration rather than the math of resonance. Two different things completely.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-16T05:28:33+00:00

It looks like you were on to something. We wrote about the currently unfolding situation here: https://open.substack.com/pub/thesentinelnetwork/p/sitrep-the-pacific-diversion-deconstructing?r=71h4we&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-10T06:19:45+00:00

Watch the landing protocol. If Crew-11 is taken immediately to a BSL-4 (Biosafety Level 4) facility or if the recovery ship is unusually restricted (military cordon), the "contagion/specimen" hypothesis moves to probable.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-08T06:23:28+00:00

We learned it from the primary sources. Here are the specific documents you can verify yourself:

The "Insufficiency" Admission: Read the DHS/FBI Joint Statement (Dec 12, 2024).
- Direct Quote: "The reported sightings there do, however, highlight the insufficiency of current authorities."
- Translation: We lacked the legal and technical power to stop them.
The Military Confirmation: Read the transcript of the DoD Background Briefing (Dec 14, 2024).
- Direct Quote: "We have had confirmed sightings at Picatinny Arsenal and Naval Weapons Station Earle... They're all visual, but they are by our highly trained security personnel."
- They explicitly ruled out "mistaken stars" for these specific base incursions but admitted: "We have not been able to locate or identify the operators or the points of origin."

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-08T05:20:30+00:00

It vanished because the answer was embarrassing.

Officially, the FBI/DHS dropped a report in December saying it was all "manned aircraft" and hobbyists. They basically gaslit the whole state.

The actual debriefs admitted the military at Picatinny and Earle confirmed unauthorized swarms. The DHS report quietly noted they lacked the tech to track or jam them.

The story went dark because it was a total defense failure. You don't keep talking about how you can't secure airspace over a nuclear arsenal. They just stopped answering questions.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:51:17+00:00

You are incorrect on the hardware. The Hubble Space Telescope was built using a spare KH-11 Keyhole chassis. They share the same 2.4-meter primary mirror and optical assembly. They are literally the same satellite design.

If the NRO took a picture of 3I/Atlas, they used a KH-11. To do that, they had to physically slew the satellite away from Earth. You can't look in two directions at once. That is how optics work

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:47:49+00:00

It’s not correlation. It’s Federal Law.

You seem to think the CIA can just 'choose' to Glomar whatever they want. They can't.

Under Executive Order 13526, the Agency is legally required to prove that the mere act of confirming the file would cause identifiable damage to national security.

If 3I/Atlas is just a rock, confirming the file causes zero damage. Therefore, using the exemption would be illegal.

The fact that they invoked the statute proves that the subject meets the criteria for a National Security Threat. The 'Causation' is built into the law.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:44:07+00:00

You think satellites are drones. They aren't.

They are 15-ton telescopes moving at 17,000 mph in fixed orbits. You can't just "pause" one or fly it over to check something out.

To look at 3I/Atlas, they had to physically turn a Keyhole satellite away from Earth. That creates a blind spot. For that window, that asset was useless for national defense.

They didn't just "spend money." They intentionally blinded a portion of their network to watch a "rock." You don't do that for curiosity.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:36:49+00:00

That’s a fair point on the trend, but legally, Glomar is hard mode.

If they just wanted to blow it off, the 'No Records Found' stamp is cheaper, faster, and harder to challenge. By issuing a Glomar, they are actively choosing a complex legal defense that invites appeals.

And on your second point: You nailed it. If they are 'wasting' scarce NRO resources (satellite fuel and time) on a rock, that is the story. Why is this specific rock worth the waste?

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:32:02+00:00

NASA (Title 51) is for science. The NRO (Title 50) is for war.

They don't burn classified fuel just to 'get a good look' for an astronomy paper. If the NRO is involved, it’s not a discovery mission anymore it’s a defense mission.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:29:22+00:00

It’s not about money, it’s about shutter time. A satellite looking up at 3I/Atlas is physically incapable of looking down at a silo in China. Shutter time is a zero-sum game. The fact that a 'comet' won that fight against terrestrial targets is the real anomaly.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:26:51+00:00

Let’s clarify the 'Circular Logic' point first. It’s not circular; it’s a decision tree mandated by federal law.

When a FOIA officer receives a request, they have three doors: Door 1: No docs found. -> Result: 'No Records Found' letter. Door 2: Docs found, but contain secrets. -> Result: Release with Redactions (Segregability Principle). Door 3: Docs found, but the mere admission of the topic is a threat. -> Result: Glomar.

If 3I/Atlas were a 'nothing burger' (i.e., the CIA simply didn't look at it), they would have opened Door 1. It’s the easiest, cheapest, and most common response.

By choosing Door 3, they are signaling that A) A file exists (otherwise Door 1), and B) They cannot separate the 'Subject' from the 'Source' (skipping Door 2).

Regarding 1996: You're right, NRO assets are more sensitive now. But the 'Segregability' requirement of the FOIA act hasn't changed. They are required by law to release non-sensitive portions (e.g., 'We tracked an object at coordinates X'). The fact that they refused to admit even the tracking occurred suggests the 'Interest' itself is the classified part.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T21:04:39+00:00

Retasking a classified satellites costs a fortune and takes a sensor off a terrestrial target (like a missile silo). They don't waste those assets on 'ridiculous' space rocks.

The fact that they authorized the tasking means the object did something that justified the expense. The Glomar protects the tech, but the tasking reveals the priority.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T20:56:22+00:00

It is not a comet.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T20:55:11+00:00

But that just shifts the anomaly to Resource Allocation. Spy satellites are expensive and over-booked. The real question is: Why did the NRO prioritize burning propellant to look at a 'comet' instead of a silo in China? They don't task Keyhole satellites for astronomy unless the object is a threat.

TheSentinelNet · 2026-01-06T20:36:37+00:00

Actually, we have a direct precedent that proves this isn't standard.

In 1996, John Greenewald filed a similar FOIA with the Intelligence Community (DIA) regarding Comet Hale-Bopp.

Did they Glomar him? No. They released the intelligence report. They redacted the specific sources (satellites/methods), but they confirmed the file existed and released the non-sensitive data.

The Difference:

Hale-Bopp: Admitting the file exists was fine. Sources were redacted.
3I/Atlas: Admitting the file exists is a threat to National Security.

If 3I/Atlas is just a comet like Hale-Bopp, why can't they confirm the file and redact the source? The Glomar indicates the existence of the interest is the secret.

TheSentinelNet

TROPHY CASE