A “split” between the U.S. intelligence community and the Department of Defense appears to be growing after the proposal for a UAP crash/retrieval program called Kona Blue, made to the Department of Homeland Security in 2011 was unveiled in AARO’s Report on the Historical Record, according to investigative reporter Ross Coulthart; according to his sources, some employees in the DoD believe claims that the U.S. government has UAP on-hand to exploit, while there are those in the intelligence community that believe the opposite.
“I can tell you that there are people inside the Defense Department, former and serving, who do believe that the claims made in the Kona Blue documents were authentic,” Coulthart said in an interview with NewsNation.
First revealed in the March 11 release of All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office’s Report on the Historical Record of U.S. Government Involvement with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Volume I, and outlined in a now-declassified document, Kona Blue was a proposal made by the late Senators Harry Reid and Daniel Inouye, along with current Alaskan Senator Gary Stevens, to “investigate, identify and analyze sensitive information, advanced materials and technologies” from recovered UAP craft “to increase the basic knowledge of potential emerging and/or disruptive scientific and technical data.”
According to AARO, the proposal for Kona Blue (SAP) had gained enough “initial traction at DHS” to warrant making it a prospective special access program, the project “was eventually rejected by DHS leadership for lacking merit”—basically, there was a lack of recovered UAP that could be made available for the program to access.
The proposed project would also have studied the potential health effects on individuals exposed to UAP; whether or not rival countries, chiefly China and Russia, had access to UAP technology; and would use remote viewing as a method of intelligence collection. However, there appears to be some contention between individuals within different government agencies as to whether or not the idea behind Kona Blue had merit.
“I’m told there is a split between the intelligence community and the Defense Department,” Coulthart explained. “The Pentagon has decided to bluff it out and go it alone. There are people who are passionately of the view that there is authentic recovered nonhuman technology in the possession of the United States, and they are determined to get access to it so that its utility can be exploited.”
Subscribers, to watch the subscriber version of the video, first log in then click on Dreamland Subscriber-Only Video Podcast link.
“There are people who are passionately of the view that there is authentic recovered nonhuman technology in the possession of the United States, and they are determined to get access to it so that its utility can be exploited.”
Exploitation is their go-to response. For the good of humanity? To further our understanding of our place in this reality? I think not. I think everyone here knows the intent of the exploiters.
I wrote about this in another thread here:
https://www.unknowncountry.com/headline-news/a-covert-russian-intelligence-squad-may-be-behind-havana-syndrome-attacks/
And mentioned this interview with Dr. Garry Nolan.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7nzkq/stanford-professor-garry-nolan-analyzing-anomalous-materials-from-ufo-crashes
I’m not so sure that we haven’t already exploited some technology through crash retrievals…The ’60 Minutes’ story of Havana Syndrome could be he tip if the iceberg.
Dr. Nolan has been on ‘Dreamland’ in the past. Maybe he should be invited back to talk about specifically about crash retrievals and about Havana Syndrome, if he is willing to go there.
Since the symptoms are similar to those reported by some contactees, and since we’re still not clear about the cause of Havana Syndrome (Russians notwithstanding), I’ve wondered if nearby UAPs or Visitor tech could be involved.
Diana Pasulka reported in her latest book that her mysterious friend “Tyler” had used ideas from non-human sources to develop medical devices, and made $$$ in the process. He also implied that some common devices such as iPhones were based on knowledge from non-ordinary sources. Maybe Diana could elaborate further in a future interview with Whitley?
I think my previous comments have been caught in the spam filter again…