The IDs of the Parties involved in the 2007 Nimitz UFO Video Leak are Known!!!

a reply to: JeremyCorbell




Admit the climbing monkey flying armbar is overly ambitious and we can talk.

a reply to: hawkguy

IMSAM referenced CB's post with an explanation for this event - the specific case I was referring to was two jets scrambled, contact made and then following a weapon lock the wingman reporting the lead plane had exploded. I can't find a link at the moment, it was referenced in a fairly recent thread, I thought it was from the Middle East / Asia region but it's not really of relevance to this thread so won't follow up any further.

originally posted by: Jukiodone
a reply to: JeremyCorbell

Admit the climbing monkey flying armbar is overly ambitious and we can talk.

Your humor is endearing! This video is in fact - one of the many DEMONSTRATIONS that I developed for at-risk-youth in my Juvenile Hall programs. I taught Jiu-Jitsu for nine years at University of California in Sant Cruz, and ran a post-release program for those who completed my course during incarceration. They were given free training for life if they could continue on the better path. I then would take this demonstration around the world and use it to open my workshops prior to instruction. To answer your question - there’s something called the 90/90 rule in MMA - which states that you should train what works 90% of the time - well - 90% of the time! So yes, the “flying armbar” is QUITE ambitious! However... like in our study of UFOs - NEVER rule out the 10%. Check this out... youtu.be...

Although I’m proud of my twenty years dedicated MMA and had formative experiences through my training - let’s stick to the Nimitz UFO event series in this thread. I have much more to offer in THIS field at this time, than I do with Martial Arts.

Your pal,

Jeremy (4Name) Corbell

a reply to: chunder

PLEASE find a link for that, as an aircraft going down in such a way should be very well documented. The closest I can find is during the Tehran sightings with Iranian F4s losing power upon locking an object.

a reply to: JeremyCorbell



The specifics and more of what you say have been thoroughly discussed in another thread. The main question is, is the video(flir) related to the 2004 event? Have you by chance after that video of yours been contacted by TheFinalTheory the uploader of the video on this site a decade ago? Does the alleged longer version of said video exist?

Does it not bother you that a guy who supposedly smuggled a video from a naval ship, uploaded said video to a site of german cgi artists, went into supposed hiding but a few members and a magazine managed to find him?

What is more plausible, that he(fravor) saw a ufo? or that he saw a military asset on the navys turf.

Could it be that he saw this thingy here? Does he even have a need to know for this thingy?

Is it possible they tested a new toy against the top of the line most robust radar setup in the world?

Plus from what i understand this was a big naval exercise, and according to fravor they knew these things were about yet they continued the exercise. If you have served in your countrys armed forces you know that dosent happen, even if you serve in the zulu infantry.Even those guys would put their spears down.


I can safely say in 10 years time we will be non the wiser than we are now. I hope i am wrong but we will know during christmas wont we? That said if you have any information you can share by all means.

a reply to: JeremyCorbell

Hello Jeremy

I listened to the clip you posted and a couple of things sprung to mind. You mention that the video was made public at one point but that was "shut down real quick". It was my understanding, perhaps incorrectly, that the video was accessible until 2009. I may be mixing things up. I think it was in the Paco Chirieci article, or in his interview with Mick West*, that he mentions it being available on Youtube for some time and then just not there but he may not go into specifics. Can you clarify that at all? Was it "real quick" or just real quick once they (investigators or whatever) knew about it?

Secondly, I believe on page two miragemen gives a brief time line and he refers to you as the source of there having been an investigation into the incident, or the leak possibly, not sure, in 2007, while Chierci I believe said there wasn't one until 2009? Apart from asking if you can clarify that confusion - we're there two investigations, or was it 2007 or 2009? - I am also still not clear as to what occured immediately following the event and when, as I think it was Voorhis who has said, the data and records etc were all taken away but that no-one, who has come forward at least, was told not to talk about it (I don't think they were told to talk about it either, but I'm sure you know what I mean)...can you help me untangle all that to make a bit more sense of the situation?

Cheers

*I'm not sure it was Mick West, getting more doubtful by the minute...checking

Yes, I was right about being wrong, actually The Basement Office...

originally posted by: JeremyCorbell
Jeremy here… your favorite haunt...

Is that like a spook?

In a future post on ATS, I will direct you towards my comprehensive coverage with the most direct witness to the event series (who has come forward), and that’s Cmdr. David Fravor. I will also supply you with the curve ball - the one that’s required with any in-depth investigation into a proper military UFO encounter - having that extra and added layer of compartmentalized complexity. The implications of which, won’t disappoint - if you pay attention.

Let me collect my thoughts, and I will be back to offer more.

Looking forward to your further thoughts and thanks for the link.

Speaking of compartmentalization, Ive been pondering it much lately. It's easy to understand the concept intellectually---quite another thing to run up against it when trying to run something down and running into a brick wall instead. It's a psychologically interesting sort that could offer themselves to work under that condition I'd further proffer.

So here's what I want to know, Jeremy: How do we make sense of all the spooks and ufologists with a bent towards some form of hermeticism/occult practice/esoteric spirituality? Are these "others" the same thing the occult masters (for lack of a better term) have been claiming contact with all through recorded history?

originally posted by: mirageman

Before the ATS lights blink out forever I thought I’d blast out one or two final threads here. Mainly because people forget or remain ignorant of certain things going on.

I don't mean to go off topic for a moment but it's the site shutting down? Or is this just a figure of speech that you are using? This is a great thread and I find this particular UFO case very fascinating, but I must ask you that question.

originally posted by: p0sthuman

originally posted by: mirageman

Before the ATS lights blink out forever I thought I’d blast out one or two final threads here. Mainly because people forget or remain ignorant of certain things going on.

I don't mean to go off topic for a moment but it's the site shutting down? Or is this just a figure of speech that you are using? This is a great thread and I find this particular UFO case very fascinating, but I must ask you that question.

Circling the drain, apparently. We're looking for other places to go. A lot of us like the Reddit UFOs subreddit. Pretty active. Videos and photos. About the same level of overall skepticism in the comments. No politics (unless you go exploring).

It was fun while it lasted.

a reply to: IMSAM

Thank you for your questions. And please excuse my bluntness or avoidance to some of what you asked. I will say this... and you can take it for whatever value you would like to place on my reporting. The video you see now - in popular media labeled the TIC TAC UFO - is 100% confirmed footage from the 2004 Nimitz encounter series. At this time, I don't want to get into the idea of "longer" video footage - it's not the right question to be asking.

I am not concerned with where the footage was uploaded - not at all - as that is irrelevant and inconsequential from my personal experiences of having the footage for a long ass time. If it was uploaded to a server in Germany or simply to YouTube - it makes no difference. And those who think it does - or try to make you believe it does - it's misguided (intensionally or unintentionally. That has no bearing on the authenticity of the footage - or how it got out. Which I ALSO do not want to comment or engage discussion on. I can't say for certain - but I MAY have given some information on it in my initial interviews with Cmdr. Fravor that I made public. I don't recall off the top of my head - and if I had - I would retract it for reasons of privacy. I am grateful for all of this going public and I'm not in the business of hunting down whistleblowers - like some folks who pose as journalists. I will tell you this - and this part I do hope is said - and that it is contained in the various interviews I have released of my conversations with Cmdr. Fravor. Cmdr. Fravor was PISSED the footage leaked. Not because he's avoiding the cause or subject of UFOs, but because he is a patriot. He has an illustrious career - and he believes in the methods of compartmentalization by the DoD. When we first spoke he told me he didn't care if the vault on the ship contained evidence of Santa Clause - whoever took the tape(s) and leaked anything classified, should be thrown in jail - and that he would be the first to grab them by the back of their neck. So I want THAT to be clear.

Fravor did not engage a military asset of ours - or any other known nation's asset. It simply was not ours. I wish it was. HE wishes it was. If you still think that - you have not been paying attention to even the most basic facts. And I'm not attacking you at all - NOT AT ALL - it's not your fault if this is your true belief, and I know you are just asking questions here - I believe that - and I am just bluntly asking you to consider what you just wrote to me - human to human - hopefully, friend to friend.

To continue - and to your final point. Fear not my friend - we will be learning a TON more - and it won't take long.

I will leave you with this... you should listen carefully to this overlooked piece of testimony that I released a while back - it will have a second life soon... www.extraordinarybeliefs.com...

Your pal,

Jeremy (4Name) Corbell

a reply to: JeremyCorbell

For whatever it’s worth to you, thank you for putting yourself out there (here) — the pot-shots are sure to come.

Thread is about the IDs of those involved with the initial public release, are you here to provide any bread crumbs? Are you’re thoughts collected w.r.t. to IDs involved in the the leak? Thanks in advance.

So yes, the “flying armbar” is QUITE ambitious!

Yeah, tell that to Mighty Mouse.



ETA: I just read your above reply...and you’re not keen on blowing up a whistleblower’s spot — I can respect that. Moving on...so, Fravor was PISSED about the leak, but had no problem answering the phone when Paco called seeking validation about the incident; Fravor directed him to the YouTube video in the intervening years (2007 - 2015) without hesitation, so was he no longer pissed?

a reply to: JeremyCorbell

Given that you've said George Knapp is your mentor many,many times and the purity of that statement shines through in your respect for him.

But what first brought you two together?

How was first contact established given your widely differing personality types and age difference?

Where do you think you fit in under George? Who apparently takes direction from Tom DeLonge's Primary Advisors?

George Knapp is an multi-award winning Journalist, the one who famously broke the story of Area-51's existence many years ago [he didn't by the way/i]]. He's an incredible man. I've actually created a secondary advisory group with him included to help take the direction from my Primary Advisors and direct the info toward the youth. ..

Source

Do you feel you are directing info towards the youth as an equal or a subordinate here?

a reply to: JeremyCorbell

Hey Jeremy, I hope you understand why most of us are skeptical on this. Too much circumstantial evidence points to this whole case being something else.

From what i understand you are doing a separate investigation on this case? apart from Ttsa, is this correct?

And one more question i have for quite a few years. Senate has asked for a briefing on ufos. They said something to the effect of making a central ufo information bank. I am fairly sure there was an unofficial "project blue book" running all these years by some usg branch unbeknownst to the public. If this is true and the senate was unaware what are the chances the briefing they asked will become a reality?


I also have to repose the question asked by the gut

How do we make sense of all the spooks and ufologists with a bent towards some form of hermeticism/occult practice/esoteric spirituality? Are these "others" the same thing the occult masters (for lack of a better term) have been claiming contact with all through recorded history?

originally posted by: JeremyCorbell
Which I ALSO do not want to comment or engage discussion on.

I'm not especially interested in that myself, but what I have been trying to nail down, and why I asked you the questions that I did, is whether the Navy conducted an investigation into the event itself or whether the investigations, 'known' to have occurred in 2007 and or 2009 were just in relation to the 'leak' of the video of the event? In short, are you aware of any investigation, conducted in an official capacity, by any government body, into the event depicted in the video?

Thanks.

Very intriguing thread s&f.

I was not aware of much surrounding the procurement, or veracity of the vid, have seen it of course.

Jeremy's interview with Trevor is interesting.

It’s obvious who “Cometa” is. Juan Perez, badass gaucho and star of “ Witness of Another World”-his horse was named Cometa. Jacques Valle has a vested interest in Juan’s story and used the nome de plume, as an homage to Juan’s faithful horse, and uploaded the video!

On a serious note, 4 Name, I appreciate your transparency and class. I dig your work and even more so by putting yourself out here in the scary UFO world. Where we all want the same thing, and will vehemently reject anything that challenges our unmoving views. Keep being you

a reply to: JeremyCorbell

To claim that this aspect isn't important is your opinion of which your entitled, one to which I disagree. I do however find it ridiculous that you would then go on to state that others that find this an interesting area to investigate as being intentionally / unintentional misguided; laughable.

The clue is in the title of this thread, the origins of the footage, the leaker and those that discovered the identity of the leaker IS what is being discussed here, regardless of how much you don't want to "discuss" or "engage" in those areas; its the purpose of this thread - this isn't an AMA, this thread isn't about you either - Your opening post sounded like the synopsis / promotion for another one of your "films" off IMDB of the back of Blu-Ray box.

Some of the people discussed in this thread, have been able to track down the perpetrators that leaked the original footage; something the might of the US Navy/Military apparently couldn't. The initial leaker is said to "still be in fear of reprisals" - indicating they know they broke the law. We always seem to lack enough data in most UFO incidents, this one is no different. However the original leaker also had briefing slides of the incident - topographical and sonar data of the area during the incident. "UFO 5 Anomaly brief.ppt" was supposedly one of those files - and you claim the origins of this are not important and misguided for those that ask these questions?

We just weaponized our curiosity...

It would be highly "probable" these files were classified to some extent due to sources and methods, we can only speculate these files are the ones that NAVAIR confirmed they had and responded to a FOIA request as those files being classified as "TOP SECRET". Even if they were not the same; its logical to deduce they would have some level of classification.

I am sure I don't have to point out the seriousness and legal implications of willfully distributing classified information. You have previously claimed to "know" things not in the public domain (four other programs - AAIDOU?) and to have seen things you perhaps shouldn't (longer footage - some ufologists have loose lips)- related to this case. If it was hard to know what the classification of those materials would be, I wouldn't want to talk about it either.

To try and clarify what the main topic here before people go off on tangents.

Certain ufologists and staff on Popular Mechanics know the names of who leaked the videos. But the Pentagon has stated they were unable to track said persons down.

The sources for claiming such investigations are below with links.

...doing something as irresponsible as just putting it [the FLIR video] out through unconventional means that causes people with real lives real families problems.

Because where did you get that footage? And I believe that was part of the reason why there was the 2007 intelligence study.

When someone like David Fravor comes back with his aircraft they take the footage and they put it in a secure vault. It is in that vault. It is deemed classified by being in that vault as I understand it.

Somebody got that footage, digitized it and put it into the public realm for a moment in 2007. That is a huge breach of security and that was not David Fravor who did that. He believes that whoever did that should be taken to jail ....

Jeremy Corbell - Fade to Black 2018

Then, as detailed in the OP of the page, Susan Gough [a Pentagon Spokesperson] told Popular Mechanics that the Navy could not trace the leak of the video.

This was also reported to Black Vault by an 'Information Warfare Officer'

"the Navy admits they were not only aware of the leak as early as 2009 but also investigated how the footage ended up on the internet... “With respect to the 2004 sighting by aircraft from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68); that video was widely shared throughout the ship at that time. In 2007, one of those crewmembers posted the video onto the public web,” said Joseph Gradisher, official spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare...

“In 2009, the online post of the video came to the attention of Navy officials,” he continued....Although no further information is available on how the “FLIR1” video wound up on a German server under a different filename, the Navy was made aware of the situation. Gradisher told The Black Vault, “…in consultation with Navy law enforcement personnel, [the Navy]decided not to pursue the matter. Given the time since recording (approximately 5 years), the widespread distribution of the recording within the ship at the time of recording, and the size of the crew at the time (approximately 5,000), it was determined that there was no way to accurately determine who might have released the video…"...

Source

Paco Chierici said in an interview last November.

...I called Dave up, and at the time I'm the editor for Fightersweep [March 2015] and I've always wanted to write like a great article about this incident. So I called Dave up and said, hey man, you know that story about the aliens, do you mind if Interviewed you 'cause I'm going to write this article. And he's like "Well, it's funny...your timing is amazing 'cause this government investigative agency literally just left my house and they've been doing like a year-long investigation into this incident...

Source

So unless all of these people are feeding false information then US authorities were investigating the leak of the video.

Given the above I've asked Isaac Koi numerous times now to clarify his comments about identifying and pursuing the people responsible. Especially with the legal implications.

1) His motivations for pursuing and seeking the identities of people potentially involved in illegally removing and leaking US military files.

2) Have the US authorities (or any other interested parties) been in contact with him regarding pursuit of these persons?

Isaac's reluctance to give a straight answer could be interpreted a number of ways.

We can respect his previous work and dedication down the years to the subject, of course.

But we shouldn't be afraid of asking tough questions of him either.

a reply to: mirageman

But we shouldn't be afraid of asking tough questions of him either.

Isaac has escaped to his new thread he recently created.

a reply to: Baablacksheep

In which case maybe we should speculate on why he won't or can't answer the question.

There aren't many options are there?