Massive 'drone swarm' in and around New Jersey: UFO flap, govt tech, or mass hysteria?

[SOTTREADER]

Radical question - could they be some sort of sophisticated projection? Project bluebeam or variant thereof?

Looks like others have been suggesting this and now the media has taken offense and had to write some articles with some very directed and specifically chosen words "outlandish" "conspiracy" etc etc.

What Is Project Blue Beam? Conspiracy theory erupts over drones

The outlandish theory has been boosted by prominent right-wing influencers after the unexplained drone sightings in New Jersey.

www.newsweek.com

I mean, if they were a projection, then none of the anti-drone tech would work, right? The drones don't actually exist to be anti-dronned (plus projections would be silent?)

Surely all options to explain this are on the table - and that includes them being a projection?

 

[Scottie]

Right, so even if you go with 'US Secret/Private Govt Tech Test', you still end up with questions about how they can power and maneuver such large 'drones' - silently (in at least some instances), and slowly - within the inherent limits of known 3D tech... questions that can probably only be answered by bringing in 'back-engineered' 4D tech, and so with this scenario you still take a 'leap of faith' into 'alien' territory!

I was thinking about all of this last night, and then we were talking about it again in the kitchen this morning. I still think many things don't add up.

For example, many of the drones are supposedly silent. Okay, there are propellers that are whisper quiet. But then think of all the propeller-driven aircraft, including helicopters. How many are silent? Like, none, right? Well, maybe that's because when you make a silent propeller, you don't get something for nothing. So, it can be silent, but loses lift. Or it can be silent and create the same lift, but it requires 2x more power. There must be a tradeoff, or else most propeller-driven aircraft would be much quieter. We know for modern passenger jet engine design, noise level is a key design factor - because noise pollution.

Or, as Niall remarked during the NewsReal show yesterday: So some drones can go 400kph, but for how long? Plus, the vids of super-fast drones I've seen all sound like little lawnmowers.

Even if "they" have made a silent drone, apparently at least some of them are not just silent but also really really fast... which means they're not powered by any battery or engine I know about.

And why on Earth does a swarm of drones that are supposedly to detect dirty bombs need to be utterly silent? Plus, Western intelligence doesn't seem to need drones to detect anything. Apparently, they are the ones directing the entire Ukraine conflict, and the Russians generally mention satellite intelligence.

Or: Why make the drones super-silent, but then leave their bright lights flashing like crazy? And then some have no heat signature, at all?!

As for the deleted tweets from that guy who talked about the drone swarm with "200GHz horn antennas forming a mesh network"... that one just stinks. First, why 200GHz transmitters that require line-of-sight? No frequency is "jam-proof" just because of the frequency itself. The idea is that you transmit a similar frequency at a higher power level, thereby drowning out the real signals. And who in their right mind would mount "horn antennas" on an aircraft that would generally need to be aerodynamic? To me, it just doesn't add up - unless you're talking about a level of combined tech advances that neither America nor anyone else has ever seen before.

Which means that as Niall said, a "leap of faith" is still required. And this from the same MIC that can't beat Russia in Ukraine to save their lives! This is the same complex that responds to Russia's very real (and now demonstrated) wonder-weapons with, "Bro, don't worry... we're sending our top Abrams tanks and ATACMS missiles..." And then Russia laughs and blows them up.

It seems the West's ace up the sleeve is their intelligence gathering coupled with "black ops" and information warfare. They can overthrow whatever government they want, sow chaos in most countries, and they don't need standard high-tech weapons to do it. So why a drone fleet now? Well, I suppose there probably IS a series of companies madly developing drones becuz they've seen what Russia and China are doing, and they're playing catch-up. That wouldn't be surprising to me, and neither would testing them - in as stupid a way as possible.

But I suspect they aren't "super high-tech", and that at least some of the recent sightings are actual UFOs. Then you have real drone tests, and then you have a giant load of hysteria that confuses everything and makes it nearly impossible to figure out what's really going on.

So, who knows... I wanna ask the C's!!

 

[Joe]

Here's a thought exercise: if we put these anomalous drones and the secrecy around them in the context of the 'great power geopolitical conflict' that's been ongoing for some time, AND in the context of the recent Russian use of Oreshnik, and Putin's declaration that now "nukes are no longer necessary"....what if this is some kind of message to Russia? We know the 'crazies' in the US deep state are obsessed with maintaining their hegemony and, in that respect, a 'first strike' capability has always been the prize. Note, a 'first strike' capability is one where one side can attack and defeat the other with effective impunity.

The West thought they had more or less achieved this via Ukraine, where they could happily escalate the conflict in Ukraine, up to and beyond direct attacks with Western long-range precision missiles against Russia, safe in the knowledge that, no matter how much Russia complained and threatened, they would never use a nuke, and would therefore just have to 'suck it up' and accept defeat.

With the Oreshnik however, Russia effectively turned the tables on the West where, now, it is Russia that can freely use a technically 'conventional' weapon, including against NATO "decision making centers" and the West can do nothing because they won't be the first to use a nuke. That's not a nice position for the global hegemon to be in.

Now, less than one month later, and in the context of repeated reference over recent years to "drone warfare being the defining aspect of future wars" (yes, these people are crazy) we have this 'display' in NJ of 'high tech' drones that are silent, have no heat signature and basically "can't be shot down". Is this a message to Russia, in response to Oreshnik, that the 'we' (the US and allies) can invade your country from Ukraine (or other NATO territory) with masses of these types of drones and essentially defeat Russia?

We should also, in this context, place these events in the timeline of an impending Trump 2nd term and the expectation that he will be pushing for an end to the Ukraine war, BUT, on terms favorable to the US (Trump is no dove in that respect). When Trump talks to Putin and makes his case, what tools (or threats) will be at his disposal to convince Putin to accept US terms? He'd be a fool to think he can simply call Putin and ask him nicely to do what Trump wants. He definitely needs a big stick along with the nice talk.

Remember, "as above so below". Russia and China have been talking about a "multi-polar world". To me that is essentially no different to the Cs reference to a "level playing field" vis a vis 4D. We presume that 4D STS are as invested in a level playing field not manifesting here, as they are in it not manifesting in 4D. Deep state types here are essentially the "agents" of 4D STS. They are as driven to prevent a "multi-polar world" as the higher up are of preventing a "level playing field".

Just throwing it out there.

 

[Niall]

I didn't listen to all of it, but Alex Jones has climbed down from "it's a psy-op!" and "it's preparation for a dirty nuke false-flag to wreck Trump's second term!" to something more in line with our theory of a US govt semi-secret 'drone testing platform':

https://twitter.com/x/status/1868415756800602345

 

[axj]

Radical question - could they be some sort of sophisticated projection? Project bluebeam or variant thereof?

Using some kind of hologram or projection technology could certainly explain the lack of heat signatures or the silence of these drones.

And as others mentioned, bright lights for a secret drone test make little sense, especially over a populated area. They want the drones to be seen by a lot of people. Either to send a message to Russia or Trump or to test people's reaction in the same place they tested it before (War of the Worlds).

 

[Joe]

For all those here in the "it's the aliens" camp. Tell me how that plays out, in context of what the Cs have said about such a disclosure.

They said it would happen at a time when we were in dire need of outside help, and it would be provided by the "underground brothers" as "saviors". First, are we in dire need? Are things THAT bad? If so, then I think we got off pretty lightly. Secondly, surely such a revelation would upend the entire global order? We'd all have to rethink our places in the word and cosmos. Surely wars for domination would be put on the back burner. So are we expecting peace and prosperity to break out? An immediate end to the war in Ukraine, no more killings in Gaza, Israel reigned in etc. etc.

Also, if this is "alien disclosure", it's a strange way for them to go about it: anomalous drones flying over NJ and elsewhere for weeks, no communication from them or the govt. All they've achieved so far is to freak a lot of people our and really annoy them. Not exactly a positive start to "first contact". Surely they're smarter than that?

I'm still open to the idea that it is, at least in part, a psyop in the sense of subtly opening the collective consciousness to accepting the idea of a large number of strange craft in the skies, or as others have suggested, an attempt to muddy the waters in anticipation of an increased "thinning of the veil" where more such anomalous lights in the sky are expected. But beyond that I don't see the benefit.

 

[RedFox]

Is this a message to Russia, in response to Oreshnik, that the 'we' (the US and allies) can invade your country from Ukraine (or other NATO territory) with masses of these types of drones and essentially defeat Russia?

It makes the most sense if you've looking at the global stage - given they have done nothing much other than 'fly around a bit' and cause a media stir. The West likes it's PR and "Information Control", whilst the Russians go with actual hard reality on the ground.

So - maybe the message (whatever it is) is the point.

Which means that as Niall said, a "leap of faith" is still required. And this from the same MIC that can't beat Russia in Ukraine to save their lives! This is the same complex that responds to Russia's very real (and now demonstrated) wonder-weapons with, "Bro, don't worry... we're sending our top Abrams tanks and ATACMS missiles..." And then Russia laughs and blows them up.

Does the message have any substance to it? Have the West actually used them?
Because if they haven't used them to hit targets Russia is keeping an eye on, then I'm going to call their bluff and say they are (IR camouflaged) hot air.

So I'd at least like to propose that for the moment we consider it may all just be for show, and nothing else.

I remember the Star Wars laser project that Regan was involved with back in the 80's - which turned out to apparently be billions wasted on nothing. Today you have the latest military aircraft being overweight and massively over budget and plagued with technical issues.

Can the US and it's allies actually produce anything 'high tech' at this point without it being as bloated, sick and lumbering as the pathological structure that created it?

For example:

Or it can be silent and create the same lift, but it requires 2x more power. There must be a tradeoff, or else most propeller-driven aircraft would be much quieter. We know for modern passenger jet engine design, noise level is a key design factor - because noise pollution.

How about 1000x the power?
What if the only reason these things can fly is, because their is a small nuclear reactor on the ground (in the US military base) that powering the dam thing (all the heat that isn't detected from the drones, being localised to the power source)?

i.e. they are really REALLY expensive wireless kites?

 

[Chu]

Now, less than one month later, and in the context of repeated reference over recent years to "drone warfare being the defining aspect of future wars" (yes, these people are crazy) we have this 'display' in NJ of 'high tech' drones that are silent, have no heat signature and basically "can't be shot down". Is this a message to Russia, in response to Oreshnik, that the 'we' (the US and allies) can invade your country from Ukraine (or other NATO territory) with masses of these types of drones and essentially defeat Russia?

Just throwing it out there.

Possible... Though, do they even have the know-how to come up with drones fitting these descriptions? And if they really are drones, why not boast about it from the beginning and make a big deal about it? You'd think they would want the whole world to get the "warning", instead of sounding like they have no clue about it. That would give them more leverage in negotiations (though maybe not essential?).

And one question I would have is, even if this is some super tech, does it actually beat Oreshnik, or even equal it? I understand the not being able to be shot down, no heat signature and silence, but can they cause the same level of destruction, and at similar ranges to what Oreshnik can do? It doesn't look like it so far... If not, then that may not be enough to make Russia see any real threat... Dunno.

I guess it's possible that secret tech is way more advanced and all (4D back-engineered, even). But what we know (barring secrets), seems rather to point to a) the US being behind in the tech industry, b) a lot of companies going bankrupt, etc. I mean, if the best Elon Musk (as a representative of the private sector with money) can come up with was that rocket launch&land and a brain chip, it doesn't make it very plausible that super high-tech would be involved...

However... how about this crazy possibility added? There is at least some "UFO"/strange phenomenon currently going on. The deep state is aware of it, but will use it to send a message to Russia pretending it's their own tech. That has the double advantage of, on top of the message to Russia, accustoming people to the phenomenon while normalizing it right away, so that it gets ridiculed, and/or that people start thinking "drones" every time they see something in the sky?

Maybe this is worse? So many things could go wrong with piggy-backing on a real phenomenon, LOL!

 

[Joe]

Possible... Though, do they even have the know-how to come up with drones fitting these descriptions?

That's the big question, but I hesitate to dismiss the US MIC as completely useless. I think most of us here have not done enough research to know what they can and cannot do.

And if they really are drones, why not boast about it from the beginning and make a big deal about it? You'd think they would want the whole world to get the "warning", instead of sounding like they have no clue about it. That would give them more leverage in negotiations (though maybe not essential?).

Why didn't Russia boast in advance about Oreshnik?

And one question I would have is, even if this is some super tech, does it actually beat Oreshnik, or even equal it? I understand the not being able to be shot down, no heat signature and silence, but can they cause the same level of destruction, and at similar ranges to what Oreshnik can do? It doesn't look like it so far... If not, then that may not be enough to make Russia see any real threat... Dunno.

Oreshnik is limited in its range, which basically puts the USA out of reach. That's another element to the West's maneuvering: even with Oreshnik, Russia is limited to attacking European targets. The US deep state may actually be ok with Russia and the EU being at war with each other. After all, they have shown that they have no problem with attempting to hollow out EU economies (nord stream and the 'green new deal'). As the saying goes, "America has no friends, only interests".

As for the potential destructiveness of drones, apparently everyone is on board with the oft-repeated idea that drones WILL be the defining aspect of future wars. Again, there seems to be a lack of awareness among all of us about this topic.

I guess it's possible that secret tech is way more advanced and all (4D back-engineered, even). But what we know (barring secrets), seems rather to point to a) the US being behind in the tech industry, b) a lot of companies going bankrupt, etc. I mean, if the best Elon Musk (as a representative of the private sector with money) can come up with was that rocket launch&land and a brain chip, it doesn't make it very plausible that super high-tech would be involved...

By all accounts, America's economy is going from strength to strength while everyone else is losing out. Figures. I think there's a tendency to downplay American prowess and capabilities among those of us who don't like America and what it does. But the fact that America is still riding high and winning in multiple domains (most recently in Syria), suggests they're doing pretty well.

However... how about this crazy possibility added? There is at least some "UFO"/strange phenomenon currently going on. The deep state is aware of it, but will use it to send a message to Russia pretending it's their own tech. That has the double advantage of, on top of the message to Russia, accustoming people to the phenomenon while normalizing it right away, so that it gets ridiculed, and/or that people start thinking "drones" every time they see something in the sky?

Maybe this is worse? So many things could go wrong with piggy-backing on a real phenomenon, LOL!

Anything is possible. Until it's not!

 

[Laura]

I wouldn't be too sure that Oreshnik is limited in its range. Yes, it was said that the ones used were medium range, but that doesn't preclude the existence of ICBMs with Oreshnik warheads.

 

[Lilou]

That's the big question, but I hesitate to dismiss the US MIC as completely useless. I think most of us here have not done enough research to know what they can and cannot do.

I think you’re right on this point. From the little bit of reading I’ve done, plasma propelled drones are old news. The latest I’ve found is anti-gravity propulsion systems. AI driven UAPs have stealth capabilities, facial and gait recognition. All kinds of crazy tech!

 

[Mari]

Tell me how that plays out, in context of what the Cs have said about such a disclosure.

FWIW, I didn´t think it is a disclosure, but a UFO flap.

It all began with Oreshnik and UAPs that started to appear around US military bases in UK.
My first thought was that NATO is rearranging nuclear bombs to be nearer to Moscow - and UFOs are there as a warning.


Similar thing happened in 1952 Washington flap:

The most publicized sightings took place on consecutive weekends, July 19–20 and July 26–27.

Which came right after

June [1952]: Strategic Air Command begins Reflex Alert deployments of Convair B-36 and B-47 Stratojet long-range nuclear bombers to overseas bases like purpose-built Nouasseur Air Base in French Morocco, placing them within unrefueled striking range of Moscow.

I think maybe there are elements of both - there were/is some serious UFO sightings/movements going on AND they released the drones. As a distraction? As an attempt from US to show their "shiny new toys" (which may or may not be able to do anything other than flying around in circles)?

And I also can´t wait what the Cs will say about it all. I hope you ask them!

 

[Joe]

I wouldn't be too sure that Oreshnik is limited in its range. Yes, it was said that the ones used were medium range, but that doesn't preclude the existence of ICBMs with Oreshnik warheads.

It was pretty much confirmed by Putin himself in a statement. ICBMs with "Oreshnik" warheads (i.e. chunks of metal, usually tungsten) aren't really a new thing. It's the short range hypersonic aspect (almost right out of the silo) that makes them different. Conventional ICBMs take time to reach hypersonic speed, and that's usually on the downward trajectory, using gravity. On the way up, they're relatively slow, and therefore more easily shot down.

Basically, it's not so much the kinetic "warheads", it's the speed. The longer the distance to be travelled, the lighter and smaller kinetic warheads must be used.

To reach the USA, an "oreshnik" type hypersonic kinetic missile wouldn't have much in the way of kinetic warhead, if any, and conventional explosives would have to be used. Even then, over that distance, it probably wouldn't be hypersonic all the way.

Russia has touted a nuclear powered missile, although it's not sure that that would be hypersonic, the nuclear power providing (allegedly) indefinite flight time (if needed), which would be useful.

That's why Russia recently placed "oreshniks" in Belarus, to shorten the distance to EU targets and maximize warhead weight.

 

[Ben]

If this display by the US deep state is mainly directed at multipolar competitors, then it would make sense to demonstrate it in a way that leaves plenty of 'strategic ambiguity'. That is, a demonstration of technology which may hint to those in the know that there are other applications of this technology which they won't reveal unless it's a real conflict.

In other words, "this is just a taster of our most advanced capabilities, not the real thing which we have to use against you". To those really in the know, the implication is also that "this is just a small sample of what we have developed after reverse engineering alien tech, so be warned. These are actually last year's drones!"

That may or may not be a bluff, but this kind of ambiguity might be intended.

 

[Scottie]

It was pretty much confirmed by Putin himself in a statement. ICBMs with "Oreshnik" warheads (i.e. chunks of metal) aren't really a new thing. It's the short range hypersonic aspect (almost right out of the silo) that makes them different. Basically, it's not the kinetic "warheads" it's the speed.

Oreshnik was the first time I've seen anything like that in real wartime use, which is not a small thing. It's one thing to develop and test, and another to actually use the thing.

They do have other hypersonic weapons including ICBMs that they claim are "unstoppable". There was that video circulating a few years ago of the very large missile launch where it basically exploded out of the silo and was above cloud level in the blink of an eye. And Oreshnik wasn't even an officially existing missile until oops, there it is. Surprise! I suspect they have other surprises in store, but I could be wrong.

In any case, I put more stock in Russian claims of advanced tech because they've actually shown it off and it appears to work. From 'Murika I've only seen bluff and bluster so far.