Connect with us

Nation

Former DNI reveals satellites show UFOs engaged in action that can’t be explained

Published

on

john ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe revealed to Fox News host Maria Bartiromo Friday that the United States intelligence and military apparatus has been monitoring Unexplained Aerial Phenomena (UAP), commonly known as UFOs, engaging in action that current technology cannot explain.

The admission is stunning, as Ratcliffe is the highest level former U.S. official to disclose the possibility that advanced intelligence may exist outside our planetary system. His revelations also come on the heels of a report that will be submitted to Congress on the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs), anytime between now and June 1. The demand for the report was included in the COVID-19 relief and Omnibus bill, which gave the agencies 180 days to turn over their findings to congress.

“There are a lot more sightings than have been made public,” said Ratcliffe to Bartiromo.

“Some of those have been declassified. And when we talk about sightings, we are talking about objects that have seen by Navy or Air Force pilots, or have been picked up by satellite imagery that frankly engage in actions that are difficult to explain,” he continued. “Movements that are hard to replicate that we don’t have the technology for. Or traveling at speeds that exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom.”

It isn’t unexpected to hear more officials speaking out about the phenomenon, as it was just several months ago that the Pentagon released three declassified videos of unidentified shaped Tic-Tok shaped objects traveling at extraordinary speeds that were captured by Navy aircraft cameras with infrared observation capability. Those objects – captured on info-red – sometimes are caught accelerating at incredible speeds with G-forces that no human body can withstand.

Luis “Lue” Elizondo, the former director of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (ATTIP), the secretive Pentagon unit that studied UFOs, told me Sunday that Ratcliff’s statements “further illustrates the reality of what other senior members of our Executive and Legislative Branches are already aware of, in that the UAP/UFO issue is real, relevant, and a national security interest.”

According to the Senate Intelligence Committee, the disclosure report must include “observed airborne objects that have not been identified.”

Moreover, the lawmakers request the following:

1. A detailed analysis of unidentified aerial 
        phenomena data and intelligence reporting collected or 
        held by the Office of Naval Intelligence, including 
        data and intelligence reporting held by the 
        Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force;

          2. A detailed analysis of unidentified phenomena data 
        collected by:
            a. geospatial intelligence;
            b. signals intelligence;
            c. human intelligence; and
            d. measurement and signals intelligence;

          3. A detailed analysis of data of the FBI, which was 
        derived from investigations of intrusions of 
        unidentified aerial phenomena data over restricted 
        United States airspace;

          4. A detailed description of an interagency process 
        for ensuring timely data collection and centralized 
        analysis of all unidentified aerial phenomena reporting 
        for the Federal Government, regardless of which service 
        or agency acquired the information;

          5. Identification of an official accountable for the 
        process described in paragraph 4;

          6. Identification of potential aerospace or other 
        threats posed by the unidentified aerial phenomena to 
        national security, and an assessment of whether this 
        unidentified aerial phenomena activity may be 
        attributed to one or more foreign adversaries;

          7. Identification of any incidents or patterns that 
        indicate a potential adversary may have achieved 
        breakthrough aerospace capabilities that could put 
        United States strategic or conventional forces at risk; 
        and

          8. Recommendations regarding increased collection of 
        data, enhanced research and development, and additional 
        funding and other resources.
    The report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may 
include a classified annex.
Continue Reading

Nation

Minnesota farmer’s lawsuit prompts removal of race and sex-based grant program

Published

on

GettyImages 2059551148 scaled

Five months after Minnesota farmer Lance Nistler filed a federal lawsuit with the help of the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), the state has removed race- and sex-based preferences from its Down Payment Assistance Grant Program. This significant policy change followed Nistler’s legal challenge, which highlighted the discriminatory nature of the program’s selection process.

Pacific Legal Foundation writes involvement in Nistler’s case drew attention and criticism from Minnesota progressives. Writing in the Minnesota Reformer, Sigrid Jewett accused PLF of using Nistler “as a pawn in a larger culture war game.” She questioned why a California-based legal firm with numerous Supreme Court victories would be interested in representing a small Minnesota farmer pro bono.

PLF opposes all race- and sex-based preferences in the law, and that’s the real reason the firm chose to represent Nistler. The foundation stands against discrimination in various domains, including government board selections, school admissions, government contracts, and grant distributions, such as in Nistler’s case.

Here are the facts: Minnesota’s Down Payment Assistance Grant Program offers up to $15,000 toward the purchase of farmland. Recipients are chosen through a lottery system. However, before the policy change, even if a recipient was among the first picked through the lottery—as Nistler was, being selected ninth—they could be bumped to the back of the line if they were not a racial minority, female, LGBTQIA+, or otherwise designated as an “emerging” farmer by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.

Despite being chosen ninth in the lottery, which awarded grants to 68 applicants, Nistler did not receive a grant. He was moved from ninth to 102nd on the waitlist because he is a white male.

Nistler grew up on his family farm, milking cows. “They would lose money every year,” he says of the family operation. After he left for school, his family sold the cows and switched to farming soybeans, oats, and wheat. Lance’s father and uncle now run the farm, but they’re getting older. Lance, who has a degree in electronic engineering and worked in HVAC, is interested in buying a 40-acre chunk of the family farm, becoming the fourth-generation farmer in his family.

The land isn’t just going to be given to Lance. This is a working farm, and the Nistlers aren’t a wealthy family that can transfer land from one generation to the next without consideration. “My dad and uncle, they don’t have 401(k)s or anything,” Lance says. “I mean, the land and the equipment, that’s their retirement. This stuff isn’t given away. I’m not just going to get it handed down to me and inherited. It has to be purchased, and it is not cheap.”

Despite being from a farming family, Lance considers himself a new farmer—he has never owned farmland before, and he has an electronics background. Buying these 40 acres would be a huge step for Lance, planting him firmly in the farming world, which is what Minnesota’s grant program aimed to do. The idea that he would have qualified as an emerging farmer if only his skin were a different color struck Lance as wrong.

“The country we live in, the idea is it’s equal opportunity for everyone,” he says. “And if that’s what it is, then well, why shouldn’t I have the same chances?”

When Lance filed his lawsuit in January, the complaint argued that the discriminatory process violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. The complaint stated:

“Nistler brings this lawsuit to vindicate his constitutional right to equal protection of the law. He brings it to give all Minnesotans a fair chance at a difference-making grant program. He brings it in the hope that he will be able to own that small farm in the near future. He brings it because he is not giving up on his dream.”

In May, after Lance called attention to the unconstitutional policy, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed legislation removing the race and sex prioritization from the program. Now, Minnesota will treat farmers equally—as the Constitution promises.

Continue Reading

Trending