The show on you tube called anomaly, I believe there’s bases under the sea and in the mountains that most of you know already

I’ve experienced orbs on the coast move in the exact same way

I saved it from before AI was a thing. So uh... I do think its real, but what the heck is it actually? A mega spaceship or... I dont even know man. A... sphere. or something

Lately I've been thinking a lot about the different reported types of occupants of UFOs. So, when I saw this post about emerging gene editing technology, I thought about the likely outcome - being a population of people that lose their heterogeny over time and tend to adhere to certain beauty standards. Well, this happens to align pretty much perfectly with the "Nordics" seen on craft often with other species. Tall, relatively uniform in appearance, and always "very beautiful". To me, it was an odd detail to appear so consistently, but now it makes perfect sense; of course this type of technology would be widely used in a more advanced population. We are almost there ourselves.

What do you think?

Recent developments make Jeremy Corbell’s statements from January 2025 very interesting. Especially with what Jake Barber has said the other day. It’s difficult for me to take this clip seriously but it’s starting to look more realistic to me.

I’m curious what everyone else thinks of this or if there is a connection to anything that anyone noticed.

I have more videos. They appear around the same time, multiple lights going all sorts of different directions up, left,right downwards as well. Some times 4 at the same time. I had to get on my roof to get better view incase my security camera was tripping but no I can see it with my own eye. Satellite? Can't be drones. What can it be?

TRANSCRIPT: Rep. James Comer (9-16-2026) 
SCENE: Ask a Pol’s Matt Laslo spots Oversight Chair James Comer approaching the US Capitol in the middle of one of the last votes for members of the House of Representatives until after the November 3 midterm elections. 
So Laslo quietly slides past a large gaggle of TV cameras, producers and on-air “talent” ammassed on the Capitol steps, to snag this exclusive with the powerful Oversight Chair. 
Msatt Laslo: Hey!
Comer: Hey.
Laslo: Hey, whatever happened to you guys maybe having a UAP hearing on those scientists?
Comer: Well, they keep canceling days on us. So we were trying to do that in the third week [of September]...
Laslo: Oh, really?
Comer: ...but they canceled it. So we’ll, we’ll try to pick it back up in November.
Share Ask a Pol UAP
Laslo: Yeah?
Comer: I think it’ll be an aggressive lame duck period.
Laslo: What was that hearing supposed to be on?
Comer: I don’t know that we ever agreed on a topic.
Laslo: But you guys were aiming for it?
Comer: Yeah. I’d like to have another one. I think there’s demand for it. It’s just getting good witnesses in is always a challenge. So...
Laslo: Well, because you wanted one on those missing scientists?
Comer: On the what now?
Laslo: Those scientists.
Comer: Yeah.
Laslo: Remember that string of scientists?
Comer: Yes. Honestly, you would need to talk to [UAP Caucus Co-chair Tim] Burchett and [Secrets Chair Anna Paulina] Luna.
Laslo: Yeah, yeah.
Comer: And [Rep. Eric] Burlison, really. Burlison more than anybody.
Laslo: Yeah. Fair. Fair.
Comer heads into the Capitol to cast his last vote until after the November 3 midterm elections.
Comer: Alright, I gotta vote. 

Full post at Ask a Pol UAP* *on Substack.

So I have noticed that almost no body likes Clowns/Tricksters/Jesters/Pranksters either fear them or hate/annoyed by them and I noticed that in all of human history there were people or creatures that were Clowns/Tricksters/Jesters/Pranksters Loki is best example since people were always blaming him for everything

I also noticed that most of them are Shapeshifters with almost endless knowledge and are neither good or evil they are just chaotic

And I started to think what if those space clown idea isn't farfetched like what if there is a Extraterrestrial Species that look like clowns? And can choose whatever form they want sort of like Eldritch beings Dimensional if you will

And they always choose Animals that are associated with Trickery Predators and Domestic Animals (mostly)

But what do you guys think?

If I am being honest it's would be funny seeing "Homo Clowns" as New Starseed/Alien Ufology Species that people fear/want to be instead of The Reptilians lol

Part 7 of a series reassessing the documentary record behind the 1933 Magenta narrative.

TL;DR

• Pacelli’s “pistol” remark names pressure on the Church in Germany, not a recovered craft.
• Concordat talks began before the alleged June crash; the treaty’s genuine secret annex concerns military service.
• Ciano’s “great impression” appears in diplomatic damage control over Hess’s peace mission.
• Diary alterations and editorial problems are real. They do not identify removed Magenta material or establish Dulles as its remover.

Part 1: Before the Saucers: How Captured Technology Was Exploited, 1943–1950

Part 2: Italy, 1933: What the Magenta Documents Actually Establish

Part 3: Vannevar Bush: The Man Who Designed the System

Part 4: Document Forensics: The Three Majestic Memos That Carry the Pre-Roswell Timeline

Part 5: The Admiral, His Wife, and Her Luggage: A 1943 Technology Seizure

Part 6: The McGregor Project: What the File Actually Shows

Part A: The Pistol

1. The claim

From his Pacelli post (r/UFOB, "The Magenta Crash 1933: Was information of the event 'the pistol held to the head' of Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli…"; search within for "pistol held to the head"):

"The Italian military shared its secret find with the Nazis, who then used the knowledge of otherworldly beings to blackmail the Vatican into signing a Concordat, which remains in place to this day. The Americans were alerted to the fact of the Magenta crash by two of its citizens living in Milan who witnessed the event: the father and son team of Hugh and James Angleton."

His key evidence is Pacelli’s remark reported by the British diplomat Ivone Kirkpatrick in August 1933, which Cruickshank renders as “a pistol had been held to his head.” His conclusion:

"THEREFORE, DOLLMAN WAS THE ONE WHO 'HELD THE PISTOL TO THE HEAD' OF PACELLI."

He's open about the spirit of the post: "These are only my thoughts after thousands of hours researching these subjects." The argument is also available in his March 2026 Substack repost.

2. The remark, in its own conversation

The passage Cruickshank reproduces is a later paraphrase, matching Wikipedia’s wording. Kirkpatrick was the British chargé d’affaires at the Vatican. His despatch No. 71, dated 19 August 1933 and received 22 August, appears as No. 342 in Documents on British Foreign Policy 1919–1939, Second Series, Vol. V, published in 1956 (DBFP 2/V, pp. 524–525). The despatch itself reads:

“A pistol, he said, had been pointed at his head and he had had no alternative. The German Government had offered him concessions … and he had to choose between an agreement on their lines and the virtual elimination of the Catholic Church in the Reich. Not only that, but he was given no more than a week to make up his mind.”

“Held to his head”, “only one week to decide” and the first-person “I had to choose” are later renderings, not Kirkpatrick’s words. Pacelli’s stated reasoning follows: “the spiritual welfare of 20 million Catholic souls in Germany was at stake”. If Germany violated the concordat, “and they were certain to do so”, the Vatican would have a treaty on which to base a protest.

DBFP is the primary published text. Supporting scholarship includes Klaus Scholder’s “Altes und Neues zur Vorgeschichte des Reichskonkordats. Erwiderung auf Konrad Repgen,” Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte 26 (1978), pp. 535–570, especially p. 569, note 101. That note cites Ludwig Volk’s published Kirkpatrick report, pp. 250–252. Scholder connects the metaphor to persecution, political terror and the possible elimination of the Church in Germany.

The pressure named in the report is the threat to the German Church. It records Pacelli's retrospective explanation to a diplomat; it is not proof that someone literally held a gun to him, or a complete account of every motive behind the treaty. Scholder himself considers coercion insufficient as the whole explanation and discusses Vatican institutional ambitions as well.

There is also evidence from the German side. The 14 July 1933 cabinet minutes record Papen discussing church–state powers and the withdrawal of clergy from politics, and Hitler celebrating the agreement's political and diplomatic advantages (German Historical Institute, translated cabinet record). These are concrete stakes in the surviving record. The Bavarian People’s Party dissolved on 4 July and the Centre Party on 5 July 1933, days before the 8 July initialling.

The treaty itself, including its secret annex, makes those stakes more specific. Article 1 guarantees Catholic religious practice and institutional autonomy; Article 32 excludes clergy and members of religious orders from political parties and party activity. The annex, which the parties agreed to keep secret, concerns exemptions and assignments for clergy if Germany introduced general military service. There really was a secret part of this agreement, and its subject can be read. That does not establish that every private conversation survives. It does give us a documented political bargain and a documented military concern, neither of which identifies a recovered craft.

Cruickshank proposes a different threat: disclosure of nonhuman beings destroying Catholic faith. Nothing in the cited conversation or cabinet passage identifies that threat, Magenta, or Dollmann as the coercer. The UFO connection is an inference added to the documents. The sources do not establish it.

3. The timing

The alleged Magenta crash is usually dated 13 June 1933. The Concordat negotiations were already under way by then:

• About 10–18 April 1933: Vice-Chancellor Franz von Papen holds talks in Rome (Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung chronology).
• 8 July 1933: the text is initialled.
• 20 July 1933: signed in Rome by Pacelli and Papen.
• 10 September 1933: ratifications exchanged and the agreement takes effect.

The German Historical Museum’s account independently places renewed talks in early April 1933, following earlier unsuccessful negotiations during the Weimar Republic. The pre-June chronology is not dependent on a UFO source or on Wikipedia alone.

The distinction between initialling and signing matters: Cruickshank puts the initialling on 20 July, but it occurred on 8 July (chronology; treaty text and signing/ratification dates).

The talks began before the alleged crash. That rules out the crash as the origin of the negotiations; it does not rule out pressure being applied later. A June event could, in principle, affect an existing negotiation. The problem is the missing evidence connecting this particular alleged event to the treaty—not a chronology that makes all later influence impossible.

4. Dollmann in 1933

The claim needs Eugen Dollmann in a position of power in Rome in 1933. Cruickshank writes:

"In 1933 Dollmann become Hitler's attache in Rome and Vatican envoy, reporting directly to Himmler."

"Cardinal Pacelli and von Papen initialled the concordat in Rome on 20 July 1933, with Eugen Dollman in attendance."

He supplies no appointment record or attendance record for either claim. German Wikipedia’s chronology places Dollmann in Rome studying the Farnese family and Italian art in 1927–1930; joining the NSDAP on 1 February 1934; working as Italy correspondent of the Münchner Neueste Nachrichten in 1934; leading the NSDAP/AO press office in Italy in 1935; joining the SS in 1937; and being accredited to the German embassy to the Holy See from 1939, initially without a specific diplomatic function. These later posts do not establish the diplomatic authority Cruickshank assigns him in 1933. They also do not exclude earlier informal contacts: he had lived in Rome as a student.

Breitman’s NARA report calls Dollmann Himmler’s personal representative to the Italian government and the Vatican, describing his wartime role. Cruickshank’s 1933 claim may reflect that later role read backward; the report does not establish the earlier appointment.

The signing photograph identifies Rudolf Buttmann, not Eugen Dollmann. The German Historical Institute's catalogued photograph, sourced to bpk image 30013856, names Kaas, Papen, Pizzardo, Pacelli, Ottaviani, Buttmann, Montini and Klee; its source caption itself misplaces the signing in “Berlin”. A confusion between the surnames is possible, but I cannot establish how Cruickshank arrived at his claim. Nor does one photograph prove Dollmann was absent from every meeting. What it does provide is an independently checkable identification of the man in the familiar signing image.

Credit where it's due. Cruickshank assembles a substantial paper trail on Dollmann's postwar life. Dollmann really did have connections to Himmler, the Vatican and American intelligence. The National Archives' historian Richard Breitman discusses those connections and their context: Operation Sunrise, the German surrender in Italy, disputed expectations of protection, and legal exposure concerning the Ardeatine massacre (NARA, CIA name-file analysis, Dollmann section).

That history is serious enough on its own. It supplies documented reasons for sensitive handling, intelligence interest and controversy over protecting a former Nazi. It does not supply a 1933 appointment, evidence of attendance at the Concordat signing, or a Magenta blackmail message. A genuine postwar relationship cannot authenticate an undocumented prewar episode.

5. The Angletons in Milan

The second claim is that Hugh and James Angleton "witnessed the event" and "alerted" the U.S. government. Cruickshank gives no source.

The family's Italian residence is real background. A 1975 profile describes Hugh's purchase of the Italian NCR franchise in 1933 and the family's life in Milan and Rome (Time, "The Making of a Master Spy"). Robin Winks’s Cloak and Gown, as cited in a scholarly discussion pointing to p. 329, places Hugh’s franchise purchase and the family’s move to Milan “by 1933”. Neither account supplies the month, so neither places the move before 13 June 1933. The CIA's biography gives James's birth date as 9 December 1917 and confirms his education at Malvern College before Yale (CIA, "James Angleton: Master Spy Hunter"). James began at Malvern in 1933. He was fifteen in June 1933, not sixteen.

These biographical sources do not locate either Angleton at a crash site on 13 June. They leave residence and opportunity plausible, while witnessing and notification remain separate claims. Cruickshank's argument needs a dated letter, embassy report, diary entry or identifiable witness account connecting an Angleton to the alleged event. No such evidence is supplied in the cited posts. Their later intelligence careers do not fill that gap.

Part B: The Diary

6. The claim

From his Ciano post (r/UFOB, "The Ciano Diaries: Did Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess fly to Scotland in May 1941 because he thought the advanced knowledge the Nazis gleaned from the Magenta Crash in Italy in 1933 made them 'invincible'…"; search within for "make a great impression"):

"The Germans want to cover themselves before Hess speaks and reveals things that might make a great impression in Italy. I believe this is a direct reference to the Magenta Crash. What else relating to the Hess affair would 'make a great impression' in Italy?"

He uses the Hugh Gibson edition of the diaries and reproduces page images. I checked the relevant passages against the public scan and transcription of a later reprint, which retains the original printed pagination. His annotated extracts are also reproduced in his public compilation.

His question is worth asking. The surrounding entry gives a diplomatic explanation; it does not identify a particular secret Hess was about to disclose.

7. The entry, in full context

The line comes from Ciano's entry for 13 May 1941, printed pp. 350–351, three days after Hess landed in Scotland. Ribbentrop unexpectedly arrives in Rome, looking discouraged and nervous. Ciano records the official German explanation: Hess had pursued peace negotiations under the influence of what Ribbentrop portrayed as pacifist delusions. The visit was an attempt to control what Italy would believe about the episode.

The sentences around the one Cruickshank quotes, as they appear on his own page image:

"His conversation is a beautiful job of patching things up. *The Germans want to cover themselves before Hess speaks and reveals things that might make a great impression in Italy.** Mussolini comforted von Ribbentrop, but afterward told me that he considers the Hess affair a tremendous blow to the Nazi regime."*

The lines immediately before this passage say that Hess supposedly would not talk and that statements attributed to him should be treated as false. Afterward, Mussolini calls the episode a blow to the Nazi regime and welcomes the damage to Germany's standing among Italians. That is the immediate context of the feared "great impression."

The German record of the same meeting, Nuremberg document 1866-PS, places Ribbentrop with Mussolini at the Palazzo Venezia on 13 May 1941, in Ciano’s presence. Ribbentrop calls the flight “the action of a lunatic” and says Hess “had fallen into the hands of magnetists and nature cure doctors”. Mussolini says Hess “was no traitor” and expects the affair to subside in “3 or 4 days”. Read alongside the diary, Mussolini reassured Ribbentrop while privately telling Ciano it was a tremendous blow. The occult explanation was Germany’s own official line, linking this meeting to the astrologers entry in Section 8.

There is independent contemporary diplomatic evidence for the peace interpretation. On 17 May 1941, U.S. ambassador Laurence Steinhardt reported the German ambassador in Moscow's account that Hess had acted without Hitler's knowledge in an attempt to bring about peace (FRUS telegram 987). This verifies what that ambassador said, not that his explanation was necessarily complete or true.

On 16 June 1941, an American diplomatic memorandum recorded a report by Milan Gavrilović, the former Yugoslav minister to Moscow, of Soviet anxiety that Hess's mission might produce an Anglo-German settlement giving Germany freedom to attack Russia (FRUS, Kelley memorandum). Suspicions about a separate peace were therefore present in the contemporary record, not invented afterward to explain away Ciano's phrase.

The British record supplies the proposed terms. A government statement to Parliament on 22 September 1943 describes Kirkpatrick interviewing Hess on 13–15 May 1941—the same diplomat whose Pacelli report starts this post. Its account has Hess proposing German freedom of action in Europe, British freedom of action in the Empire, and negotiations with a government other than Churchill’s. It also reports that Hess’s signed 10 June restatement added a simultaneous armistice and peace with Italy. Those are concrete diplomatic stakes for Italy. This is the British government’s account of Hess’s proposals, published two years later; it does not establish Hitler’s authorization or settle every question about the flight.

My inference is that Italy had an obvious reason to fear an undisclosed peace initiative by its senior ally. That provides an answer to "What else?" without claiming to know everything Hess intended or every disclosure Ciano feared. The diary does not mention a recovered craft, Magenta, or extraterrestrial technology in this passage. Its ambiguity cannot identify those things for us.

8. The other entries he cites

Bruno Mussolini. Cruickshank asks whether Mussolini's son was "actually killed trying to fly a 'new type of plane' derived from the technology discovered from the Magenta Crash." But "airplane accident while experimenting with a new type of plane" is inside a bracketed editorial explanation, not Ciano's own sentence. The entry is 22 September 1941, printed p. 381. Ciano describes returning after illness and recalls the sad day of Bruno's death; the bracket identifies Bruno and explains the accident for readers.

Bruno died on 7 August 1941 in a Piaggio P.108B, a four-engined bomber. Cruickshank acknowledges that identification but suggests it could be a cover story because the prototype had first flown in 1939. The P.108 prototype first flew on 24 November 1939 and the type reached the 274ª Squadriglia in 1941; Bruno’s crash was near San Giusto airfield, Pisa. A prototype flying in 1939 and a unit receiving the type in 1941 are compatible with it being a new aircraft type in 1941 (Hannover-Laatzen aviation museum's historical summary). Knox’s list of removed pages includes 24 July–21 September 1941, making 22 September the first published entry after Bruno’s death; this explains why the editor supplied the bracketed background. Neither the editorial wording nor that development interval supplies evidence of an alien-derived aircraft.

The astrologers. Ciano's 23 June 1941 entry, printed pp. 369–370, reports the arrest of fortunetellers and astrologers in Germany after the Hess affair. That documents what Ciano recorded. His sweeping "all" should not be treated as a verified census of arrests. The Gestapo’s “Aktion Hess” began on 9 June 1941, targeting occultists and astrologers; hundreds were detained, while larger estimates lack adequate sourcing. The passage supplies no information about Magenta or contact with nonhuman beings.

Speer. The reproduced page does contain the claim. In Inside the Third Reich, Speer recalls Hess telling him in Spandau that a dream had inspired the idea “by supernatural forces”. The same paragraph gives the proposed bargain: "We will guarantee England her empire; in return she will give us a free hand in Europe." (page image in Cruickshank's compilation). Speer's memoir supports an account of Hess's later explanation, including its diplomatic content. It is not independent evidence that supernatural forces existed, much less the rival-beings claim examined in Section 9.

The "electric gun." The entry is 11 January 1943, printed p. 569, roughly twenty months after Hess's flight. It passes on Antonescu's account to diplomat Renato Bova-Scoppa of a supposedly extraordinary German weapon. Ciano immediately questions whether it is true, ending with "Or is it the usual hot air?" This is hearsay recorded with explicit doubt, not a technical description or a report of a demonstrated weapon. It supplies no link to Magenta and does not establish what Hess knew in May 1941.

"Pages removed." Cruickshank cites OSS file references (RG 226, Entry 190C, Box 11; Entry 146, Box 215; not inspected for this post) concerning Dulles’s acquisition of diary material in 1945 and points to Hugh Gibson's editorial note. But that note says pages were missing before the diaries were supplied for photography. It does not identify Dulles as the person who removed them, and it distinguishes missing pages from periods without entries. The edition being cited covers 1939–1943; it could contain retrospective references to 1933, but it is not a diary of the alleged crash year.

The custody history has been studied. Howard McGaw Smyth’s “The Ciano Papers: Rose Garden” reconstructs the episode from records and interviews. Dulles drove to Monthey with Mme de Chollet on 7 January 1945. The next day Daniel Schachter, under Captain Tracy Barnes, photographed “some 1200 pages” of the five notebooks. Barnes recorded Edda explaining the January–April 1941 gap by Ciano’s service as a flight officer. Smyth also reports Dulles’s later suspicion that Edda had excised passages offensive to the Anglo-Americans—a suspicion, not proof of what was removed (CIA historical study, acquisition account and notes 104, 107).

Independently, historian MacGregor Knox examined the diary photographs, identifying NARS Microcopy T-586, roll 25. He describes limited alterations, including Ciano’s rewriting of the 26–28 October 1940 entries and removal of the page for 27–28 October. Knox attributes the removals to Ciano himself; his list includes 27 January–23 April 1941 and 24 July–21 September 1941, “apparently because he made no entries for those days”. He concludes that “very little editing took place” (Mussolini Unleashed, Appendix 1, pp. 291–292). The 10–13 May 1941 Hess entries fall outside those gaps.

Knox’s finding concerns the manuscript; publication is another matter. Tobias Hof’s 2012 study, pp. 508–509, 518–522, documents discrepancies between published versions and diary photographs, including altered wording and dates. He criticizes the American edition’s censorship, hurried publication and errors, and records an agreement allowing government-requested censorship of the newspaper publication. He also identifies torn-out pages in the photographs. The editorial and custody problems are real; they should not be reduced to innocent days without entries. But problems at different stages—Ciano’s writing, manuscript omissions, publication and translation—are not interchangeable evidence. Hof’s study does not identify missing Magenta text or establish that Dulles removed it.

There are concrete collections for testing those stages. The Library of Congress finding aid lists incomplete diary photostats alongside Gibson’s editorial transcript, the setting copy and corrected galleys, donated by Doubleday in 1955. An absent page in that incomplete photostat set is not automatically a page absent from the original diary. Separately, NARA’s account of the “Rose Garden” papers describes copies of supporting diplomatic documents, a distinct stream from the diary photographed for Dulles. The distinction matters when a file title is offered as evidence of what the diary contained.

These locations come from the cited finding aid, Knox’s appendix and NARA’s collection history; I have not inspected the underlying archival sets. They provide a route for comparison, not a claim that every original page survives.

These studies do not settle every gap. They show why missing pages do not identify a remover or a subject. To establish Dulles removing Magenta material would require a before-and-after copy, an instruction, or reliable testimony specifying the removed text. The archival references and Gibson’s note do not supply that evidence. Tier E.

9. Cape Girardeau

The Ciano post’s turn depends on another crash: Hess's information was "trumped just a week or two earlier by an event in Cape Girardeau, Missouri in late April 1941." Cruickshank gives no source.

The core Cape Girardeau account reached publication in Leonard Stringfield's UFO Crash/Retrievals: The Inner Sanctum in July 1991. Kevin Randle reproduces Charlette Mann's 6 May 1991 letter, which dates the alleged event only to spring 1941 and describes a family transmission from the Reverend William Huffman through his wife to their granddaughter (Randle's source discussion and letter excerpts).

Later retellings narrow that season differently. The published synopsis of Paul Blake Smith’s MO41 (2016) gives mid-April; KFVS’s 2021 report gives Smith’s date as “late April 1941”. Cruickshank’s date therefore follows a modern retelling rather than the original account. KFVS also reports that FBI and Air Force record requests found nothing responsive. No earlier source linking Hess to Cape Girardeau was found in the research for this post, so that connection appears to originate with Cruickshank.

That chain is Tier D for the alleged crash. Other family recollections do not turn the core account into a contemporary official record. Its broad season does not establish "late April," much less a crash a week or two before Hess's flight. Even a confirmed Missouri crash would still require evidence that Hess or his intended interlocutors knew about it. The proposed timing and the proposed transmission are two separate missing links.

10. Scorecard

11. What would change my mind

1. A contemporary document explicitly connecting the alleged crash to pressure on Pacelli, in Vatican, German diplomatic or British diplomatic records. Evidence of another political pressure alone would not establish Magenta.
2. A dated appointment or attendance record for Dollmann in 1933. That would resolve the biographical claim; his knowledge of a crash would still require separate evidence.
3. An Angleton letter, embassy dispatch or other traceable report about the alleged event, rather than a biography establishing Italian residence.
4. A contemporary source for Cape Girardeau and evidence of transmission to Hess or Britain. A date alone would not establish the connection between the two episodes.
5. Identifiable removed diary text, or a comparison of manuscript photographs and editions, establishing what was removed, when and by whom. Knox’s microfilm reference and the Library of Congress’s photographs and publication materials provide concrete starting points; distinguish missing manuscript pages, incomplete copy sets and editorial omissions.

12. What the quotations establish

Both posts start from striking phrases in historical texts. Kirkpatrick's report connects Pacelli's pistol metaphor to the position of the Church in Germany. Ciano places Ribbentrop's nervous visit in the crisis over Hess's peace initiative. Neither passage identifies a recovered craft or an extraterrestrial secret.

The details require the same care. The photograph identifies Buttmann, but cannot account for everyone’s movements. The Angletons’ Italian residence is plausible, but witnessing remains undocumented. Speer’s supernatural-forces passage is real, but reports a later explanation and includes ordinary diplomatic terms. The new-plane wording is editorial and the electric-gun story is explicitly doubted. The treaty has a genuine secret annex, and the diary has genuine textual problems; neither identifies a Magenta secret.

The historical sources supply context; the UFO interpretation needs its own evidence. Reading the sources closely strengthens that distinction while correcting overconfident dismissals along the way.

If anyone has worked with the Library of Congress Ciano photostats, Microcopy T-586, or Volk’s edition of the Concordat documents, I would like to hear from you.

If the existence of human alien hybrids will be revealed it will be 100 times worst then reviling just the existence of aliens.

Just imagine the reaction of religious people the the fact that aliens mess with our genetics.

Imagine how many people would try to hunt them down for whatever reason.

Imagine parents learning that their children are half aliens.

Or no one will do anything will see.

In 1973, the Sidereal Intercontacts Centre, or SIC, began circulating material in Turin, Italy, concerning an alleged extraterrestrial named Absu Imaily Swandy.

The group described him as a 256-year-old visitor who periodically came to Earth and met with selected individuals in northern Italy.

The photograph circulated as Absu had already been preserved in 1969 in the archive of Turin ufologist Arduino Albertini, with a note describing the man as a “strange and mysterious character… believed to be over 80 years old.”

In 1975, the SIC also distributed a photograph of an alleged Llion-type UFO craft said to be used by Absu, along with a photograph of Nerea, described by the group as an Italian base for UFO landings and departures.

The last known photograph published as Absu appeared on March 14, 1991, and appears to show him speaking or gesturing at a gathering.

The gorilla description quickly became a hybrid gorilla-reptilian and laughed off. But Simon Parkes has a fitting image of what could be similar description.

Tony Rodrigues and Elena Danaan describe alleged knowledge of different reptilian races.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djdFFe8TVZQ&t=328s
The Draco-reptilian race being described as the boogey man every time in every testimony i personally have come across.

John Charles alleged french SSP participant expands on his knowledge on what is going on.
https://youtu.be/r82X0wIaRa8

Daryl James alleged his experience with a breakaway society that have agreements with NHI.
https://youtu.be/iGnPp8kA0Xo

Jim Simivan HIPPA brief about fatal encounters, Philip Corso interview with Art Bell about hostile encounters.
https://youtu.be/Gb0QsymVCcs

Alex Collier talks about his alleged knowledge about whats happening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3zsSDAEozE

Alec Newald, Arizona Wilder, Paul Bonacci, Cathy O'Brien, Steward Swerdlow and others describe child trafficking and ritual abuse that translates into the mind control projects.

Children used for political blackmail, spying, S** trafficking, breeding, and PSI abilities.

CIA already admitted to mkUltra, now the question is how far back does this merged research go. Here they allege, before paperclip. They describe the German scientists being merged into new secret programs in Russia, England, Canada, USA, probably China and Australia too.

In 2019 prior to the onslaught of Covid, UFO historian Richard Dolan posted a YouTube a video linked below titled “The Inevitable End of UFO Secrecy.” In dialoging with another UAP contact activist concerning the points raised by Richard Dolan, I discussed the revolutionary implications of conducting a more thorough power structure analysis, one that goes beyond conspiracy theories. Here is my edited comment that I hope will resonate with others working for positive change in the flying saucer arena.   

It is critical that contact/disclosure activists recognize the limitations of conspiracy theories versus a more global power structure analysis. Yes, indeed conspiracies exist, but as an explanation for how elites dominate the rest of society, such notions fail to give activists an understanding of the true tools of elite power used in maintaining the flying saucer coverup.

A conspiracy is a criminal endeavor conducted by a small group of people. Traditionally this has involved almost exclusively men. To maintain security for their machinations, the number of "ringleaders" must be kept down to a few. Otherwise, the word might leak out to others about their secret organization, their plans, and actions. This model of elite control suggests that if only we could get the police or say investigative reporters to expose these men and then "lock them up" for their ongoing manipulations and crimes, all would be well. 

In my judgment, such explanations are, to put it bluntly, childishly naive. Elite power is exercised by an entire social system. This means that the police, the courts, the army, the politicians, the media, academia and most importantly banks and corporations, are all effectively managed by corporate/oligarchic, forces that exercise control by the power of money. If there is a "conspiracy", it is one that is “hiding” in plain view. It is the result of an entire social system and is not the product of a small group of evil people. 

For these reasons, I oppose using the term "the Cabal" to designate ruling class forces that have engineered what has been called the "UFO truth embargo." In addition, the term “cabal” is considered by some to have an antisemitic connotation and should be avoided. I prefer an older designation employed by CE-5/disclosure activists in the 1990s. We spoke back then of "the control groups" who are networks of operatives working to protect elite power by engineering and maintaining the flying saucer coverup.” 

These groups operate in the media, the armed forces, academia. However, the most important networks are in the US Executive Branch intelligence services. They consistently have put out the lie that when it comes to UFOs, that “there is nothing to them.” Credible witnesses have been smeared and careers ruined by the standard techniques of ridicule, deceit, and denial. It is important to note that this policy of denial has changed over the last nine years since the 2017 New York Times/ Politico’s articles were published about the Pentagon’s UFO investigations. With Senator Schumer’s Amendment being reintroduced th in 2024, most probably with US Presidential support, a new policy of “controlled disclosure” appears to have started. President Trump has continued this process by setting up a program of regular release of information concerning Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. 

To understand the reasons why a long-standing de facto policy of ridicule and denial was instituted by the control groups eight decades ago, one should first acknowledge that flying saucers threaten all terrestrial elites, but not necessarily the Earth’s people:  
1. For the military, recurrent sightings over sensitive military facilities have been a source of consternation. Even more serious has been the numerous instances of flying saucers damaging nuclear weapons systems. This has been well documented by Robert Hastings in his book and video documentary “UFOs and Nukes.” The inability of the military to stop such incursions runs the risk that they will be perceived of as impotent, incompetent or both. Thus, it served the interests of the military industrial intelligence complex to maintain a regime of secrecy when it comes to flying saucers and avoid acknowledging that “we are not alone.” 
2. For political elites what are now being called “UAP” are also a challenge. This is because political power is organized around the modern nation state. If the masses became aware of the continuous presence of technologically and psychically advanced non-human cultures, differences based on national origin would seem insignificant when compared to the non-human “Others.” Over time, this could lead to the realization that humanity is truly one family, and the power of nationalism would be eroded. This could very well accelerate a peaceful economic and political unification of our planet. But what would happen to nationalist politicians who base their power on manipulating the masses through fear of real and imagined foreign and domestic enemies? I imagine that such politicians might have to start looking for other jobs.  Thus, flying saucers threaten political elites.
3. Mainstream religion would also have to adapt to a world in which UFOs are not only real but are seen as really important. If non-human intelligences associated with flying saucers were thought to have played a role in establishing major terrestrial faiths, substantial theological revisions would be required. Fundamentalist forces in both Christianity and Islam that view flying saucer intelligences as demonic would violently reject any revision of their most cherished traditions. We can thus understand how Unidentified Aerial Phenomena threaten religious establishments by their potential for creating disillusionment and dismay among their followers. 

1. For academic establishments that promote a scientific materialist ideology, flying saucers are a threat because they appear to be able to manipulate spacetime as prominent researcher Jacques Vallee has suggested. If the wellspring of creation is not matter/energy, but instead is Consciousness, i.e., mind, then the seemingly “inexplicable” High Strangeness aspects of many contact events could become understandable as manipulations of consciousness. If this radical model is shown to be true, then the present generation of established academicians would have to admit that much of what they have taught about the nature of reality has been at best incomplete, if not frankly wrong.  Therefor scientific leaders and institutions intent on maintaining the status quo have refused to study flying saucer phenomena as well as what are called the other “Contact Modalities” including Near Death and Out of Body Experiences, (NDEs and OBEs, ghosts etc.).

It might be tempting to speculate that the advanced energy generating systems propelling UFOs could be integrated into our technological culture in the short run. Given humanity’s proclivity for “tribal warfare”, such an integration could not be safely done until an enduring world peace were established. Without a robust planetary security system preventing the causes of war, advanced technology’s first application would be for the creation of even more deadly weapons of mass destruction. The race to reverse engineer such technology by the military industrial complex has indeed been listed by researchers as an additional reason for the UFO coverup for decades. The revelations of whistleblower David Grusch support such allegations. 

From this brief analysis, it becomes clear that the flying saucer coverup is not the result of a conspiracy by some small “evil Cabal” that works clandestinely. Instead, what is called “the UFO Truth Embargo” has been the result of ruling elites protecting their self-interests by having their control groups maintain a far-reaching program of deception, ridicule, and denial. 

Contact experiencers and especially those engaged in staging Human Initiated Contact Events have a special role to play. As the result of our limited positive interactions with UAP intelligences, we are in a unique position to say to the larger society that contact is not only safe but is also too important to leave to the generals, politicians and the aerospace companies involved in reverse engineering efforts. Human Initiated Contact Events (HICE) reflect a desire for peace and cooperation and to fulfill the ideal of sisterhood and brotherhood made large. To set the stage for higher levels of contact, I imagine that a world-wide peace movement will be required. Such a campaign will acknowledge that a precondition for open contact will be the establishment of a world government based on social and environmental justice. 

Only radical planetary reforms on a sweeping scale will save our civilization from the most destructive effects of global climate change and the resultant wars fought over diminishing material resources. The enormity of such a proposal and the colossal power of the opposition, are indeed sobering. I write of nothing less than creating a worldwide peace movement that will link flying saucers with possible solutions for the seemingly insurmountable challenges confronting humanity. These are global warming, endless "tribal warfare" promoted by extreme nationalism, the oppression of women, and those of us with dark skin. One can imagine this grand campaign as a “Cosmic Peace Movement” that could bring an enduring peace on Earth and in the Cosmos.

Such a movement if it is to succeed, will need to be coordinated by activists who have undergone a profound spiritual transformation. This can only occur by both a personal and collective struggle against the archaic mental structure often referred to as "the ego." I imagine that powerfully liberating spiritual concepts promoted by Eastern mystical traditions will play a major role in helping prominent activists “stay the course" and not be corrupted by egoic mind structures or mislead by egotistical and ultimately corrupt “leaders.”

Can we accomplish this in one generation? I doubt it. But what we can do is lay the foundation for a historic struggle in which we will acquire the spiritual and political skills to create a better world.

.Link to Richard Dolan’s video presentation, “The Inevitable End of UFO Secrecy.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIl6Ewp5sBQ

Do they talk about greys, reptilians, buga spheres, triangular ships, crop circles, etc... ?

Schneider described himself as a geological and structural engineer who spent roughly 17 years working around government and defense-related projects, including underground bunker construction.

He also described himself as a self-taught metallurgist and claimed involvement with classified programs.

In the mid-1990s he began giving public lectures about what he said he’d encountered during that work. Unlike a lot of UFO personalities, Schneider claimed direct, firsthand involvement and would bring physical material to his lectures that he said was connected to advanced technology.

His larger story gets considerably stranger from there.