• In December 2017The New York Times and The Washington Post reported on the Navy’s USS Nimitz carrier strike force F-A18 jets intercepting a “tic tac” shaped UFO (part of a “whole fleet of UFOs) over the Pacific Ocean southwest of San Diego. In May, George Knapp’s ‘I-Team’ (Las Vegas CBS affiliate KLAS-TV) obtained and released a 13-page Executive Summary prepared by and for the U.S. military analyzing the encounter.
• The Executive Summary related one Navy pilot’s observation of roiling waters in the ocean the size of a football field. “The disturbance appeared to be 50 to 100 meters in diameter and close to round. It was the only area and type of whitewater activity that could be seen and reminded him of images of something rapidly submerging from the surface like a submarine or a ship sinking.” As the pilot flew away, he could see that the disturbance had cleared and seas calmed.
• The Navy pilots never made visual contact with whatever caused the undersea disturbance. But the report stated that it may have been caused by an AAV (Anomalous Aerial Vehicle), which was unseen due to advanced cloaking capabilities that made the AAF “invisible to the human eye.”
• A submarine in the vicinity did not detect anything unusual underwater. If an object was indeed in the Pacific Ocean, “it would represent a highly advanced capability given the advanced capability of our sensors,” the report stated.
New details are emerging about a UFO sighting recorded by the U.S. military in the waters off the coast of California 14 years ago.
The 2004 incident involving the “Tic Tac” UFO, named because it was a fast-moving white object that resembled one of the mints, was first revealed late last year by The New York Times and The Washington Post.
KLAS, the CBS affiliate in Las Vegas, obtained a copy of a report “prepared by and for the military” in 2009 that details multiple interactions with anomalous aerial vehicles (AAVs) over two weeks in late 2004. The report also discussed the high speed and advanced cloaking capabilities that allowed the AAVs to evade observation and detection.
“The AAVs would descend ‘very rapidly’ from approximately 60,000 feet down to approximately 50 feet in a matter of seconds,” the report noted.
Pilots indicated there may have been something in the water as well. One pilot detailed a disturbance up to the size of a football field: “The disturbance appeared to be 50 to 100 meters in diameter and close to round. It was the only area and type of whitewater activity that could be seen and reminded him of images of something rapidly submerging from the surface like a submarine or a ship sinking.”
The disturbed area also resembled shoal water around “a barely submerged reef or island,” but as the pilot flew away, he could see that the disturbance had cleared and seas calmed. Although he never made visual contact with whatever caused the disturbance, the report stated that it may have been caused by an AAV, which was unseen due to cloaking “or invisible to the human eye.”
Another pilot described a disturbance beneath the water of an AAV that “looked like frothy waves and foam almost as if the water was boiling.”
A submarine in the vicinity did not detect anything unusual underwater. If an object was indeed in the Pacific Ocean, “it would represent a highly advanced capability given the advanced capability of our sensors.”
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. ExoNews.org distributes this material for the purpose of news reporting, educational research, comment and criticism, constituting Fair Use under 17 U.S.C § 107. Please contact the Editor at ExoNews with any copyright issue.
On January 30, the Governor of Hawaii, David Ige, gave a press conference about the result of an official investigation into the January 13 ballistic missile alert that was an alleged false alarm. In the press conference Ige and other state officials gave a detailed account of the scenario that led to the false alarm.
While the official investigation concluded the emergency alert was a false alarm due to human error and a poorly designed reporting process, eyewitnesses continue to emerge saying they saw a meteorite, or something like it, exploding high in the sky over the Hawaii islands only minutes before the alert. Furthermore, eyewitnesses claim to have seen a television story about the exploding meteorite or object, before the news story was pulled.
In a video published on January 14, Marfoogle Watutu [a pseudonym] claims he was told by his sister, a Maui resident, about a tourist boat which carried multiple eyewitnesses to the exploding meteorite:
My sister has lived in Maui for eight years and what she is finding out is that a group of boaters that actually run a tour company say now that they saw something get blown out of the sky.
So, they said it looked like a meteor and then all of a sudden there was a big boom and it lit up the entire sky. It was 8 o’clock in the morning. . .
Maybe this was not a drill after all. Maybe our Boys in Blue and Boys in Green shot it down. And I would think that the U.S. would not want to cause more panic if they did try to launch something at Hawaii. Then, of course, they would say it was a mistake. They took responsibility very quickly that it was a mistake. . . This could be bullshit but I just had to relay that. . . [Transcription Source]
Apparently, some of the tourists were interviewed by a local news channel that aired these before the story was pulled.
Marfoogle has to date not released the names of any of the eyewitnesses or the tour boat company involved, making it difficult to confirm his story. He claims that Joe Rogan, a former comedian who now hosts The Joe Rogan Experience, has contacted him and is contemplating doing a report on the incident, and that some of the names have been released to him.
However, in the 500+ comments to Marfoogle’s video (80,000+ views), several purport to be eyewitnesses to the exploding meteorite and/or the television news story. What follows are the relevant comments as they appeared on January 30, which cast light on what really happened
The following comments focus on an alleged KHON2 news story about the incident, the first of which refers to a tourist boat that was covered in the story and an exploding object.
The above witnesses together, with anonymous sources cited in two previous articles, continue to raise the scenario of an intercepted ballistic missile attack, which is being officially covered up.
Multiple sources claiming that a ballistic nuclear missile had indeed been intercepted, and a cover up is underway were analyzed in my first article on the incident. My second article pointed to a rogue Deep State/CIA faction that may have used a boomer submarine to create a false flag attack, which was intended start a war with North Korea.
As to who was responsible for intercepting the ballistic missile, initial speculation focused on an anti-ballistic missile defense system run by the U.S. Navy.
On January 31, however, the U.S. Navy announced that it had conducted another exercise to intercept a ballistic missile using its Aegis class anti-ballistic missile defense technology. The exercise was the second failure by the Navy to intercept a ballistic missile attack in the past year.
Given that the exercise was conducted less than three weeks since the January 13 incident, it is clear that the U.S. Navy currently does not currently have the capacity for reliably intercepting ballistic missiles.
The announcement of the failed exercise raises an intriguing question. Were U.S. Navy leaders signaling they were not responsible for shooting down the January 13 missile? So then, who did shoot down the ballistic missile?
My initial article focused on the likelihood of a secret space program run by the U.S. Air Force that used space based weapons technologies to shoot down the ballistic missile. Photos taken on October 23, 2017, showed a rectangular shaped UFO in the vicinity of MacDill Air Force Base, Tampa, Florida.
The photographer, JP (who I have known since 2008), claims he had been earlier taken inside the rectangle UFO, and had been informed that was a weapons platform. He says that he witnessed uniformed military personnel wearing the insignia of U.S. Air Force Special Operations who could operate the weapons system.
A Directed Energy Weapons system on a space based weapons platform could have the capacity to reliably shoot down a ballistic missile intended to simulate an attack from North Korea. Unlike anti-missile missiles used in the Navy’s Aegis defense system which have failed twice in two tests against simulated ballistic missile attacks, a Directed Energy Weapon could send a pulse of laser energy at the speed of light.
A Directed Energy Weapons could therefore easily intercept a ballistic missile in the terminal stage of its flight trajectory where it travels at hypersonic speeds (5x speed of sound).
What gives further credence to the possibility that Maui residents and tourists witnessed a missile being shot down by a Space Based Directed Energy Weapon is the U.S. Air Force surveillance installation on the summit of Haleakala, Maui.
The capabilities of the Maui Space Surveillance Site (MSSS) is described by GlobalSecurity.org as follows:
The Maui Space Surveillance Site (MSSS) includes the Air Force Maui Optical Station (AMOS) is an asset of the US Air Force Materiel Command’s Phillips Laboratory. the Maui Optical Tracking and Identification Facility (MOTIF), and a Ground-based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance (GEODSS) site operated by US Air Force Space Command.
… The site is the only one of its kind in the world, combining operational satellite tracking facilities (MOTIF and GEODSS) with a research and development facility (AMOS). The MSSS operates primarily at night, but performs many of its SOI missions 24 hours a day.
It is very likely that the Maui Space Surveillance Site was used in the tracking and/or shooting down of the ballistic missile. If so, this would help explain why many Maui residents saw the explosion. It was only during the final stage in the trajectory of the missile attack that a directed energy weapon system could have been used as the Maui facility could help accurately triangulate the missile’s position.
Further insight into what happened on the morning of January 13, comes from an anonymous Hickham Air Force Base source on duty at the time of the alert. S/he pointed out the great amount of confusion over the alert which was at different points considered a drill and then a genuine attack by U.S. Pacific Command personnel.
Significantly, s/he points out it was only after a request for a military response to the presumed attacker, North Korea, was declined by the White House that Hawaii local authorities were instructed to say it was all a false alarm.
The confusion over the missile alert being a drill or genuine has the tell-tale characteristics of a false flag attack. Similar confusion has occurred in past false flag events on September 11, 2001 (New York) and July 7, 2005 (London), etc. In these alleged terrorist attacks, military and government authorities were first told about a drill where security forces were instructed to stand down, and then informed that a real attack was occurring by which time it was too late to prevent.
The exercise or drill – at the same time, at the same place – has became the sine non qua or indispensable element of the recent false flag operation.
In the Hawaii situation, it appears that cool heads at the White House did not order military retaliation against North Korea after the missile was shot down. President Trump and/or his national security advisors likely suspected that a false flag attack had been attempted.
According to my own efforts to find Hawaii residents willing to testify about witnessing a high altitude object being destroyed, I have been told that police and other authorities are intimidating witnesses into silence.
Consequently, in contrast to the official State of Hawaii report that the January 13 event was a false alarm due to human error, the following conclusions can be offered.
First, a ballistic missile likely carrying a nuclear warhead was destroyed during the final stage of its trajectory by a USAF Secret Space Program using space based Directed Energy Weapons deployed on rectangular shaped weapons platforms.
Second, the Maui Space Surveillance Site helped in the tracking and destruction of the ballistic missile as it neared the Hawaiian Islands, the most likely target being Pearl Harbor, Honolulu.
Third, a drill was scheduled for the morning of January 13, which was intended to create confusion so that a ballistic missile attack could succeed, and the missile’s trajectory would point to North Korea as the culprit.
Fourth, the party responsible for the false flag attack is a rogue Deep State/CIA group with its own ballistic nuclear submarines, which are part of a secret Navy apparently called the Dark Fleet.
Fifth, the US Navy’s January 31 test was intended to let the general public know that it does not yet have the capability of intercepting ballistic missiles, and that the real heroes in tracking and intercepting the nuclear attack on Hawaii was USAF Special Operations.
Further information is needed to determine the accuracy of these conclusions. One thing is pretty clear at this point given the number of insider sources and witnesses that have come forward so far. The official State of Hawaii investigation is a cover-up for a ballistic missile attack, which evidence suggests was a false flag attack using one or more nuclear weapons by a mysterious naval force desiring to start a regional nuclear war.
Thankfully, a classified space based weapons system was most likely used by the USAF Special Operations, thereby giving the U.S. national security planners time to develop an appropriate response to those behind the false flag attack.
As information continues to emerge confirming that there was a ballistic missile attack against Hawaii that was intercepted on January 13, the investigation begins to shift from what happened, to who was responsible. In this article, I analyze various sources describing the attack, and identify the mysterious naval force that was most likely responsible for launching the ballistic missile, which presumably was nuclear armed.
In my January 17 article, I listed three alternative news sites referring to sources that all said that a ballistic missile was launched against Hawaii by a stealth submarine. The alternative news sources were radio host Dr. Dave Janda, Operation Disclosure (RV/Intelligence Alert), and the Public Intelligence Blog. The Operation Disclosure and Public Intelligence blog sites point to an Israeli submarine as responsible, while Dr. Janda said it was a submarine belonging to a rogue Chinese Navy faction.
Further corroboration for the ballistic missile attack explanation comes from former Forbes Magazine writer, Benjamin Fulford, who says that according to his insider sources, there was a submarine based attack:
One sign of this extreme tension came last week when “a missile from a cabal submarine was stopped from hitting Hawaii and the submarine was sunk,” Pentagon sources say. Media outlets around the world have reported that Hawaiian residents all received the following warning on their mobile phones: “BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII, SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER, THIS IS NOT A DRILL,” but later this was reported to be a false alarm. It was not—it was an attempt by “the cabal” to blame the attack on North Korea and use it as a trigger for their long-desired World War III, CIA sources say.
Both Fulford and the Public Intelligence claim that the ballistic missile was intended to simulate a North Korean attack suggesting the responsible submarine was in the vicinity of North Korea, either in the Sea of Japan or off the Japanese coastline.
In determining the type of missile attack against Hawaii, yet another source refers to a Hawaii tourist boat about 100 miles out at sea that saw what appeared to be a meteorite exploding in the air shortly before the Hawaii Emergency alert went out Saturday morning, January 13. The additional source appeared as an update to the original Public Intelligence blogsite article about the Hawaii missile attack:
Word here in Hawaii is that a group of tourists and tour guides were on a boat 100 miles off shore Saturday morning around 8 AM when they witnessed what they thought to be a meteor blowing up over the ocean. It was reported on Hawaiian channel 2 but then removed from their website. Rumor is the launch came from an Israel Dolphin 2 submarine. Some college basketball games had a red alert across the screen from US Pacific Command declaring a missile launch in the Pacific near Hawaii.
This additional Hawaii source is vital in understanding what happened since it reveals that the missile was coming down from the upper atmosphere following a ballistic trajectory similar to a meteor. This helps confirm that a ballistic missile was involved rather than another type of nuclear delivery system such as a cruise missile which fly much closer to ground and have a far more limited range.
Of the sources cited so far, aside from Dr. Janda, all believe a faction of the Israeli Navy was behind the attack using a dolphin class submarine supplied by Germany. The USS Liberty attack during the 1967 Arab Israeli war is often cited as an example of Israel launching a false flag attack against the U.S. to embroil it in wars against Israel’s regional enemies.
In a private email received on January 19, former CIA covert operative and Marine Intelligence Officer, Robert David Steele, says that the attack was a “Zionist submarine doing a USS Liberty on Hawaii”.
In considering the possibility of a rogue Israeli submarine being responsible, it’s important to review the armaments possessed by the class of submarines belonging to the Israeli Navy. In a news story describing Israel’s possession of Dolphin class submarines purchased from Germany, its armaments are described as follows:
The Dolphin boats are equipped with six 533mm standard torpedo tubes and four 650mm jumbo tubes and can carry 16 weapons. The smaller tubes can fire torpedoes and Harpoon anti-ship missiles as well as other conventional weaponry, but its larger tubes are what makes the Dolphin class so special. From them, frogmen, remotely operated vehicles and especially large cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear payloads can be deployed.
Israel’s Dolphin Class submarines can carry cruise missiles which are well suited for Middle East operations, rather than ballistic missiles which are better suited for long distance targets thousands of miles away. Ballistic missiles require much larger “boomer submarines” to launch them, rather than the smaller Dolphin class submarines possessed by Israel.
The Dolphin 2 submarine is 69 meters (225 feet) in length, which is less than half the size of the Ohio class boomer submarines (170 meters/560 feet long) used by the US Navy to carry Trident ballistic nuclear missiles. Sea Launched Ballistic Missiles need vertical missile tubes as opposed to the more traditional horizontal torpedo tubes used for Sea Launched Cruise Missiles located at the front of the smaller Dolphin class submarine.
Consequently, it’s unlikely that a renegade faction of the Israeli Navy launched the ballistic missile attack since their Dolphin class submarines simply don’t have the capacity.
Furthermore, it’s hard to imagine how a U.S. war against North Korea and/or China would advance Israel’s national security interests, which are far more concerned about threats posed by major regional rivals such as Iran.
Dr. Janda describes a rogue faction of the Chinese Navy being responsible, and that after the missile had been intercepted and destroyed by the US. Missile defense system, the regular Chinese Navy destroyed the submarine.
This explanation is perhaps the scariest to consider since the US national security apparatus would almost certainly hold China responsible for such an attack despite any genuine factional divisions within the Chinese Navy.
The immediate U.S. response would have been, at the very least, a direct retaliatory nuclear attack against China’s main regional ally North Korea, which would have been scapegoated for a Hawaii attack. After destroying North Korea’s military infrastructure, the country would have then been subsequently overrun and occupied by the U.S. Military and its South Korean ally in an analogous way to Afghanistan after the 9/11 attack.
China’s strategic interests would have been severely setback in such a scenario. It’s hard to imagine any Chinese military commander, rogue Navy faction or not, would risk a nuclear retaliatory strike by the U.S. that would set back China’s steady emergence into a global superpower over the next decade or so. Patience is a characteristic that China’s political leaders possess in abundance.
Consequently, I find it unlikely that a rogue faction of the Chinese Navy was behind the ballistic missile attack.
So who then launched the attack against Hawaii?
For an answer we need to consider legendary Hawaii Senator Daniel Inouye who in 1987 described the existence of a shadowy government within the U.S. with its own separate military assets.
There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.
Inouye was clearly convinced of a very highly classified U.S. agency that had the independent funding and wherewithal to develop its own Air Force and Navy outside the regular chain of military command.
In contrast to the assets of the regular U.S. Air Force and Navy, this covert fleet of ships and aircraft would be “dark”, in terms of its security classification. It would therefore be appropriate to call it the “Dark Fleet” which is what secret space program insider Corey Goode says it is called by the U.S. military according to his confidential sources [Skype Communication Jan 18). He says that it is separate to another “Dark Fleet” which is a Secret Space Program that operates in Deep Space.
I need to point out that in 2017, I personally met some of Goode’s confidential Earth Alliance sources. They provided many documents to prove they are deeply connected to NATO security operations and the European intelligence community. They have continued to provide Goode intelligence information since they consider him to be a genuine extraterrestrial contactee, and asset of a Secret Space Program Alliance known to exist by NATO officials.
What U.S. Government agency would have the ability to raise its own “Dark Fleet” outside the regular chain of military command and Presidential executive authority? The only U.S. agency capable of doing so is the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). More specifically, we are talking about the CIA’s Directorate of Operations (formally Clandestine Service) which runs all its global covert operations, where a Dark Fleet would have been developed to meet operational requirements.
The 1949 CIA Act comprised additions to those sections of the 1947 National Security Act that dealt with the creation of CIA. The 1949 CIA Act gave a Congressional stamp of approval to the creation of a ‘black budget’ it could spend without recourse to U.S. law as the following section make clear:
… any other Government agency is authorized to transfer to or receive from the Agency such sums without regard to any provisions of law limiting or prohibiting transfers between appropriations [emphasis added]. Sums transferred to the Agency in accordance with this paragraph may be expended for the purposes and under the authority of sections 403a to 403s of this title without regard to limitations of appropriations from which transferred. [50 U.S.C. 403f(a)]
Essentially, this gave the CIA the power to generate large amounts of money through covert means and launder it however it wished through the Pentagon and the U.S. bureaucracy. The funding was used for an unofficial “black budget” that by 2001 was estimated to be as high as $1.7 trillion annually.
In addition to having the financial means, the CIA has long been developing its own covert Air Force. This began in the mid-1950’s when the CIA established Area 51, as the location to develop future fleets of spy planes with the aid of companies such as Lockheed, which today is the world’s largest defense contractor.
In the 1960’s the CIA began training personnel to develop skills necessary to operate its spy planes on U.S. aircraft carriers. CIA documents confirm that the U.S. Navy was training the CIA on how to operate spy planes on their carriers:
The above document went on to discuss how Kelly Johnson, Director of Lockheed’s Skunkworks, helped the CIA launch its U-2 spyplane from the USS Kitty Hawk
Another CIA document shows the Navy’s reluctance to allow the CIA to use its aircraft carriers to carry spy planes in trouble spots like the Mediterranean, thereby creating the operational necessity for the CIA to eventually acquire its own aircraft carrier to carry fleets of spy planes around the world.
These official CIA documents support the conclusion that by the 1970’s the CIA’s Directorate of Operations had its own squadrons of spy planes, and would have acquired its own aircraft carrier out of operational necessity that it could operate anywhere around the world without any kind of government oversight.
As far as the CIA having its own submarines, a Washington Times article from January 3, 1985 shows that two ballistic missile submarines, USS John Marshall and Sam Houston were handed over to a 2000 man Special Operations Force.
It can be guaranteed that the CIA’s Directorate of Operations would have similarly justified the acquisition of ballistic missile capable submarines for its own covert operations around the world.
With the CIA’s role in generating multiple black budgets, it could easily have diverted some of these funds to defense contractors for building ballistic missile capable submarines for exclusive use in clandestine operations. It’s worth noting that Lockheed Martin builds the Trident II ballistic missiles for the Ohio class submarines currently possessed for by U.S. Navy.
As noted earlier, the CIA and Lockheed have developed a long and close relationship since their joint efforts to develop Area 51 for spy planes and other advanced technologies in the 1950’s. Therefore it is very possible that the CIA’s Dark Fleet possesses Trident II ballistic nuclear missiles developed by Lockheed Martin.
Consequently, Inouye’s claims of a shadowy government possessing its own Air Force and Navy is very feasible given what we know about the CIA’s history, and official documents showing its military assets, training and close relationship with defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin.
The CIA had the independent funding to create squadrons of spy planes that could operate from an aircraft carrier with the necessary support craft that altogether constituted a CIA controlled aircraft carrier battle group that included nuclear submarines.
So was the CIA’s Dark Fleet behind the ballistic missile attack on Hawaii? I put this question to Corey Goode and he responded:
Yes, They DO have an Air Craft Carrier and destroyers and support vessels, a whole fleet….This stuff has been a part of recent briefings in the form of informed speculation as to what occurred in Hawaii/Japan. All are pretty convinced that a rogue CIA sub fired missiles and MIC SSP [USAF/NRO/DIA Secret Space Program] took the missiles out. We are all waiting for specifics and confirmation but these are “read in” General/Colonel types doing the speculating.[Skype Communication 1/19/18)
The CIA’s Directorate of Operations has long been the primary asset of what Inouye called the Shadow Government, but today is referred to as the “Deep State”. Due to President Trump’s December 21, 2017, Executive Order freezing the financial assets of all involved in human rights abuses and corruption, Trump was not only declaring war against U.S. global elites involved, but also against the funding sources for the CIA’s covert operations.
The CIA’s black budget is made possible by human rights abuses and corruption around the planet that provides almost unlimited funds for its covert operations, including its Dark Fleet. Consequently, the CIA’s Dark Fleet had the means, motive and opportunity to attack Hawaii with a ballistic nuclear missile that would embroil the Trump administration in a major regional war with North Korea and possibly China.
Significantly, on January 16, Japan’s major public broadcaster also warned the public about an incoming ballistic missile attack. Once again, a false alarm was issued shortly after by government authorities.
It’s quite possible that the same submarine responsible for the Hawaii attack, launched another missile attack, this time against Japan, presumably Tokyo. It was also brought down, probably by the same defense forces that tracked and destroyed the Hawaii bound missile. Again, the purpose would have been to simulate a North Korean attack thereby triggering a major regional war.
Such a war would distract the Trump administration and U.S. military from going after Deep State assets, and tie down the U.S. in a serious regional confrontation. Thankfully, the U.S. Navy and Air Force, along with the USAF run secret space program, were able to neutralize the attacks on Hawaii and Japan.
The multiple sources and documents cited above lead to a remarkable conclusion. A CIA created secret Navy launched ballistic missile attacks against Hawaii and Japan using a Dark Fleet created in the 1970’s to support covert operations around the world.
Consequently, neutralizing the “Dark Fleet” and reigning in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations must become a high priority goal for the Trump Administration and the Pentagon. A major step in doing so is for the truth to be officially released about ballistic missile attacks against Hawaii and Japan.