В этой части поправки к UAP 2023 года говорится, что Конгресс считает доказательства и свидетельские показания заслуживающими доверия.
Похожие записи:
НЛО 2023.07.13
Больше осведомителей?
10 Самых Загадочных Видео, Снятых в Батискафе
Член палаты представителей Тим Берчетт: «Комитет по надзору Палаты представителей проведет слушание по UAP в среду, 26 июля. Мы закончили с прикрытием».
Здесь нет размытых фотографий и ошибочной идентификации. Технические специалисты, управляющие сенсорными системами на USS Nimitz во время столкновения с UAP, выступают и объясняют, почему данные, которые они получили на одном из лучших сенсорных устройств, доступных на планете, убедили их, что UAP работает лучше всего, что они видели.
Джо Роган # 1029 — Том Делонг показывает видео Triangle UFO TR3B
Британские СМИ обсуждают тему UAP и предстоящие слушания
Трэй Краудер о жизни в будущем
5 лучших видео, которые считаются НЛО — Впечатляющие и пугающие сцены.
Соответствовать. Ильхан Омар говорит, что у нас высокие температуры за 120 тысяч лет, поэтому я решил получить данные со случайной метеостанции в окрестностях Лондона, поместить данные в Excel и нанести на карту. Зеленым цветом отмечена максимальная месячная температура, синим — минимальная месячная температура. Это данные, которые у него были. Хмммм
Correct. This is written in a declarative voice. It says *»legislation is necessary»* rather than *»if* the testimony is found to be credible, legislation *may be necessary*». This is an extremely important distinction. This language shows shows the reality of where Congress is at with this situation. It shows that they’re not fucking around. Also, later on in the same section the language delineates between testimony and *evidence.* This confirms that Grusch *et al* have supplied tangible evidence of some kind, not just «hearsay» as it’s often called in public.
Great find OP, missed this myself when reading through the act.
Atomic Energy eh?
Dept of Energy come on down you’re the next contestant on Whose UAP Is It Anyway
good catch!
Also Ross twitted this yesterday, to emphasize how important is this exact part.
Looks like David Grusch is gonna be a true hero, let’s see..
>This part of the UAP ammendment 2023 says Congress finds the evidence and testimonies credible.
Not quite — it’s saying that credible evidence and testimony indicates that there exist Federal records on the matter of UAP that have not been declassified — in other words, the Federal Government is withholding documents.
This is not making any claim about the veracity of UAP eyewitness testimony directly, only about knowledge of still classified materials pertinent to Congresses investigation.
If you want the boilerplate from which this current UAP Amendment is drafted — they used [S.J.Res.282 — Assassination Materials Disclosure Act of 1992](https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/senate-joint-resolution/282/text) — otherwise known as the [JFK Act](https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/senate-joint-resolution/282)
If anyone’s interested what all this current act amounts to — [this](https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk) is basically what the 2023 UAP Amendment Act is looking to establish in terms of [public record and access](https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk).
I think they’re just trying to adjust the exemption for declassified information that was set up by the Atomic Energy Act, which may have been too broad in its exemption threshold and inadvertently classified docs that really didn’t need to be classified in the first place.
This language basically says, claims that info related to UAPs is classified are true, and legislation is necessary to update classification status.
Doesn’t say «claims about UAP are true».
I believe they are, but just wanna be clear here.
Is it weird that I have a boner reading the doc?
Soooooo if this passes, technically it’s the big D, right?
Skeptics: please note the use of the term evidence and testimony. Thank you.
What does this mean exactly? That following the testimonies they have investigated internally and verified some of the project allegations made, which in turn means this information wasn’t readily available on request due to the use of a separate classification system?
It’s technically saying that records exist, but not necessarily that those records confirm alien visitations or recovered alien technology. Maybe that is real, though. Just playing devil’s advocate here.
I remember reading this when it first dropped. The whole thing is wild. The wording is stated as fact, not theory. It holds strong they know something we don’t. That it’s real, and they have enough credible evidence to finally bring disclosure.
I think the Snowball is rolling downhill & things are happening fast folks, hold on tight and buckle up for an amazing ride.
I still want to that 23 minutes of video Lue was talking about. Anyone else?
What’s the significance of this?
I don’t think anyone is surprised that there’s classified studies and reports looking into UAPs. It’s not exactly a secret.
What I can’t understand is why proof of NHI was classified in the first place. It’s not a big deal that we’re not the only island in the sea that has life. Truman must have been really paranoid when he started the secret group to handle UFO’s and hide it from the congress.
I’d advise caution when reading this — it’s easy to jump to the conclusion that the «credible evidence and testimony» relates to the claims made, for example, by Grusch. If you read it carefully, what it’s actually saying is that they find the claims that there are classified UAP-related records to be credible based on evidence and testimony. It says nothing about what those records actually contain beyond being UAP-related. Pessimistically, the records could say nothing about recovered NHI craft or bodies.
That said, I’m hopeful the legislation was just written carefully so as to not explicitly admit in the legislation itself that there is credible evidence/testimony that the U.S. possesses NHI craft and/or bodies and we’ll find out in the relatively near future.
Edit: for clarity
My concern is that this is calling for the “military” to disclose their information. What if the organization that has the information is not technically part of the “military”. Are they exempt from this order.
This part however does not mention aliens, nor NHI. It could just refer to human-made aircrafts
They’re just going to say everything falls under the “nuclear” umbrella, and will keep it all classified.
What credible evidence and more importantly I want to know how they came to the conclusion that the evidence and testimony is credible? Context matters here.
Yeah that was the first thing I noticed too. Too bad that it only refers to concealed «records» without mentioning spacecrafts and other physical ET materials, but I’ll take whatever I can get.
What is the credible evidence?
This is very interesting
I’m in more shock about the rest of that document which outlines which provisions were used to legally hide the information…. This is BONKERS…
Ok- Looks like the military didn’t release all of the documents like they were supposed to. There was that previous legislation that requires them to open everything up… not surprising. Unless I’m misunderstanding this which it could be 🤷
Should we feel any happier about the government having eminent domain over NHI tech?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs&t=166s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs&t=166s) how they can state this hoax is credible?!
What’s the uap amendment? To what?
So aliens are real, and here👽👽🛸
they also found the kennedy conspiracies credible btw, that’s why they did all that
Just a thought in all this.
We dont have to tech (maybe) to enact the hologram mass UFO appearance part of Project Bluebeam, so could all this be a prelude to a version of this, and we are being duped into it?
I mean, if we cant produce the «real» thing en masse, would the thought/knowledge of states having tech/vehicles in thier «possesion» do the same job?
I would caution believers—especially those who *want* to believe—to not be so eager to accept anything that hints at alien visits/presence. Demand proof. That’s [what we don’t have](https://relevantmatters.wordpress.com/2021/08/11/has-a-craft-from-an-advanced-civilization-ever-visited-earth/).
«Remember: The more you want something to be true, the more skeptical you need to be of it. Otherwise, you are already violating the first principle about not fooling yourself. When you want to believe, you already are the easiest person to fool.» [That’s how we get charlatans and grifters.] -Astrophysicist Ethan Siegel