Six Minute Reaction to the UAP Hearing

By | July 26, 2023

Hi Everyone, 

I was going to shoot this initial reaction video for this site only but then decided just to post it to Youtube. I did a series of reactions on my twitter feed while the Hearing was happening. Check out my Twitter feed HERE if you want to see. 

I’ll have more to say no doubt, but I will state here that I thought the Hearing was far more engaging and interesting than I had expected. Fravor and Graves were pretty much as one would have expected…. essentially unimpeachable witnesses who had powerful testimony. Yes, we’ve heard most of it before but saying these things to extremely interested members of Congress is taking it to another level. 

Grusch was even more interesting. I know there are doubters about him out there, but I will just say here that I thought he was very compelling. He stated explicitly (again) that there are indeed crash retrieval reverse engineering programs, and as before declined or was unable to provide many of the details that the public would want. But in my view he was quite believable. 

I will state again that I think we are witnessing a factional battle or war going on. This is the kind of situation that Donald Keyhoe sometimes discussed back in the 1950s. I think we are seeing something along the same lines today. I was very surprised to see so many members of Congress willing to dive into this issue with genuine concern, good questions, and even passion. We love to hate our members of Congress, but the fact is, that if the United States is going to get anything done on this matter in a positive way, I would think we’d want Congress doing what it’s supposed to do, which is to ask the relevant questions on behalf of the public. 

As strange as it is to say this, I think that is what they did today. 

Let me know what you think. I really want to know. 

Richard 

 

42 thoughts on “Six Minute Reaction to the UAP Hearing

  1. JimmyBee

    The hearing was better than I expected. Crash retrievals and NHI on the congressional record. Yes!

    Cmdr Fravor and Lt Graves were great. Fravor was collected and on point. Graves was super-sharp, highly informed and prepared for today’s hearing.

    For some reason, watching your reaction, made me think of Steve Basset. I wonder what he’s thinking right now?
    Looking forward to hearing more from you, Tracey and other respected members of the UFO community.

  2. itsmeRitaC

    Hi, it was more engaging than i expected. It started out badly with that guy who was the chairperson. Not very intelligent sounding to me. What did they not go after?

    As i said, AOC specifically came in obviously, from elsewhere and wanted to get specific on private contractor information. I really appreciated her there. One or two of the congress people mentioned something about big money being diverted to private and secret stuff, but not followed up much. And too much in secret. But we know that many of these congress people don’t get much even in those situations.

    I do think it is all about weapon technology and i have to say, that is where i see it is all going. Threat narratives. So although i am interested, it does seem to have a big time military purpose and i am with Greer’s 2001 press club agenda on that score. I guess i am too old to be into big time high tech weapons, but then, i was never THAT young! 🙂

  3. Robert McGwier

    Thanks for your coverage today. I was most surprised by Gaetz. I think he violated the restrictions by commenting on what he saw at Eglin. Good for him and for us. The other revelation was Graves talking about poop-in-pants incident with Boeing contractors at Vandenburg. It was a good day.

    1
  4. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

    When you say “factional battle”, I must point out that they are ALL in the “let’s keep as many damn secrets as we can, here” faction, which means they are NOT on our side. NOT. None of them. They are like Democrats and Republicans. Is there really a struggle going on here or is this just ALL STAR UFO WRESTLING? Both of your supposed “factions” want to keep on keeping secrets that we need to know, and their adherence to a horrible secrecy religion stronger than any human morals SHOWS they are on the same team when the rubber meets the road.

    Some of the “I can’t answer that,” responses are red herrings, and again, we got NOTHING for the public. ZERO. Just more of the same crapola we’ve been getting for 6 years– “I can tell congress, but I can’t tell the public.”

    They did roll out an explicit “national security threat” narrative, but any details of that, too, must remain a secret.

    Do you think that the Mormon faction of various military and civilian agencies such as USAF, DIA, CIA, and particularly NSA has any significant effect? As the only mainstream religion that has god living on a star, Kolob, and promising planets to saved souls, their beliefs could take a more direct hit from ANY UFO explanation than your older religions without any extraterrestrial references.

    1
  5. AineEithne

    Richard –
    Finally, FINALLY, FINALLY!!! That was SOMEthing, wasn’t it? Great news and excellent to see you fired up about it. The congress had their questions very well organized and it was great to see congressional reps come into the room who’ve never been there before to get their questions in. That was a GREAT true beginning. It felt like the truth is finally beginning to see the light of day. I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on it.

    1. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

      Something?” Another slap in the face.

      Sure, they allowed the hearing… but they pulled the organizers, Burchett and Luna from being the moderators, the night before the hearing. Who did that and why? I highly doubt it was some congressional procedure-nazi.

      Please name SOMETHING we got from this hearing. Name one thing. One thing we didn’t ALREADY know about from highly placed intelligence sources such as NSA chiefs or CIA chiefs or the head of the Lockheed Skunkworks.

      None of this is new, and NOTHING more of it will cross your inbox or your viewing of the evening news. That hearing was just one response after another of, “I can’t answer that,” “I can’t answer that here but I can later in closed session,” and I can only answer that in a SCF.” These answers are NOT confirmation of any sort. You, and WE got NOTHING.

      It’s an expression thousands of years old, but I think it’s especially apropos here.

      “Don’t count your chickens before they hatch.”

      1
  6. MarkH

    Hi Richard
    From my point of view, it was excellent and moved the ball forward. And I just looked down and noticed I stepped on that toothpaste, and there is toothpaste everywhere. The 3 nailed it. Fitzpatrick has been shown to be deceitful by Grush, who would not back down. I found it was all the things Grusch couldn’t answer that were most intriguing and enlightening. The UFO community went into meltdown with every WOW moment by Grusch, while the sceptics repeated the same old comments. But let’s remember former Cmd Fravor, who was so down to earth (lol) and was the one that said when asked that the TIC TAC is not human technology. As for Graves, he definitely set the stage for representing pilots in the threat and safety awareness narrative to smooth the edges of discussion. So for me, the three of them were complementary to each other, with some overlap, but consolidated a narrative we all know to be true so we could move forward.

    We need a Historian; where is the Historian? And on that note, where do we get the 240-page brief on the History they received so we can analyse their baseline?

    So much to unpack your time will be even more scarce now doing interviews, but I hope at some stage you have a round table podcast with a couple of other pillars of the ufo community to discuss all your thoughts openly when it all sinks in.
    Thanks again for all the years of hard work.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      Thanks for this thoughtful comment, Mark. I will take your advice soon, I am sure. Also, this statement of yours … ” Fitzpatrick has been shown to be deceitful by Grush, who would not back down.” Yes, glad you mentioned this because I forgot to comment on it but it was a hell of a moment.

    2. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

      >>>”Fitzpatrick has been shown to be deceitful by Grush,”<<

      As Mr. Grusch has shown us NOTHING and has presented no more than hearsay "evidence" that would be thrown out of every court from your local municipal court all the way to the Supremes, how has Mr. Fitz been shown to be deceitful? Though Fitzpatrick IS just that, Mr. Grusch has in no way shown it.

      It's a good idea to have some standard of proof in this. It's also a good idea not to jump on a bandwagon of someone who won't tell you what music is to be played, or where the bandwagon is going.

      1
  7. Ted2

    Read a few of the legacy media responses. Misstated facts and were critical of Grusch for various reasons. The NASA UFO panel lady (I believe) that has apparently been critical about the UFO reality was quoted several times in one article. She stated that she thought the government could not keep a secret for any extended time. One Fox expert said the hearing revealed that the government may have A (as in one) craft in its possession. Typically, they covered, more or less, what transpired at the hearing and followed it up with statements by debunkers or did their own debunking. It reminded me a lot of past UFO programs on the Discovery or History Channels where UFO cases were discussed and followed up with obligatory comments by debunkers such as Oberg. I think you were right on about how the legacy media will treat this and subsequent efforts by congress to get at the truth.

  8. peter hegemer

    I refreshed the livestream a couple of times to check the numbers… a few minutes after it started, there were over 80k viewers, and before it was done, it was over 100k.

  9. walidmikhail

    Hi Richard
    agree baby steps my guess is the story goes away just like the 2017, congressional hearing on most topics lead no where .

    the YETI mic is back !

  10. Andromeda107

    I have to agree Richard that the hearing went surprisingly well . I was really shocked at some of the questions the representatives put out there. They all asked some really good questions . When representative Luna asked about the Vandenburg incident ,that surprised me,I have never heard about that incident that took place back in 2003.This hearing really had my full attention. And Fravor, Graves,and Grusch were all excellent witnesses with impeccable credentials.

  11. D.A.

    Richard,

    A good amount of skepticism is always needed to counterbalance what at first blush might seem like fantastical claims, but the definition of fantastical when it comes to UFOs has drastically changed over the course of the last 6 years, and in particular over the last month or so, which is why Mick West is becoming more of a caricature of what he used to represent than a legitimate skeptic in the new UFO reality–which is where we are now at.

    West was interviewed on News Nation tonight, and the painfully twisted rationalizations he used to refute the hard visual evidence (in particular the Tic-Tac, Gimbal, and Go-Fast videos) and credible testimony provided by highly credible individuals (Grusch, Fravor and Graves) has William of Ockham turning over in his grave. Where he used to simply hide behind the lack of credible evidence as the basis for most of his flawed UFO denier logic, he now (in light of such credible evidence) uses the whistleblower’s and Congress’ concern over the lack of government UFO transparency as the newly fabricated rationale for why he believes everything the whistleblowers presented to Congress was just a matter of simple misinterpretation of prosaic events and circumstances on their part, which the government could have easily explained away if it were more transparent about the truth. Unfortunately, the news anchor, Dan Abrams, a self-professed skeptic himself, didn’t ask West why would a government–who has historically provided the most ridiculously prosaic explanations for UFO incidents in order to minimize public speculation–purposely withhold true prosaic explanations of UFOs from the public if doing so only helped fan the flames of speculation and conspiracy theory? I’m not sure he even listens to himself when he does these interviews.

    D.A.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      I remember when the three videos first appeared in 2017-18 and read very carefully what West had to say about them on Metabunk (along with other contributors there). I was astonished even then at the close-mindedness they all demonstrated. The videos were hoaxes. The videos were of commercial airliners. On and on. it was clearly absurd at the time and you are right, he is worse now than ever before.

      1. D.A.

        Richard,

        An interesting side note to the state of the current zeitgeist surrounding the UFO subject, and the lingering effects of the still deeply rooted 75-year-old government orchestrated stigma that’s attached to it, is the fact that the legitimacy of testimony provided by a White House admin in a public hearing regarding “second-hand” knowledge of events surrounding Jan 6, which were conveyed during casual conversations with other White House staff in unofficial settings, was scrutinized less by MSM, and elsewhere, than the legitimacy of “second-hand” testimony provided by a highly decorated naval intelligence officer involving sworn testimonies, and physical evidence, provided to him during official inquiries in a highly classified setting by more than 40 high-ranking government officials in the MIC, who did so at great peril to their careers and reputations, as well as their well being.

        Moreover, the scrutiny over Grusch’s “public testimony” simply ignores the fact that physical evidence, as well as highly specific information, which includes a list of locations, companies, and witnesses within the IC (non-hostile and hostile), has already been provided to at least three other intelligence oversight committees and the ICIG over the course of the last year, and will likely be provided to the recent House oversight subcommittee in a classified setting in the not-too-distant future. One should not dismiss the significance of providing a list of “hostile” witnesses—it is tantamount to picking the criminals out of a police lineup for official questioning.

        D.A.

        1. Richard Dolan Post author

          Hostile witnesses. Yes, agreed. I think we are going to start seeing a significant counter attack over the course of the coming year. Just my hunch.

    2. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

      NASA committee member has discredited the “go-fast” video. The others are also suspect, in my opinion and will eventually be shown as bogus. Why do you think they EVER let Mellon and Elizondo walk out with these videos? They are either bogus or on the way to being discredited.

  12. Jim

    Richard, I think overall the committee did a good job. I read the forum comments from some of the members and I was surprised that they expected the 3 eyewiitnesses to act differently. To me it was important thar it is now ion the record. Given Grolsch sp classification restrictions he did numerous times say he did rreport what he knew to the appropriate agenciies and would do so again behind closed doors. What disappointed me was the non-coverage by the New York Times, Washington Post ansd the Associated Press. Are you kidding me? How do they justify this? Just gutless on their part,

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      Yes I agree with you on the witnesses. I think they did just what they needed to do, and very well. MSM coverage will be key on how this plays out and I believe the factional war I have discussed also applies to the media.

  13. Jim

    I spoke too soon about the msm coverage but still they slanted the coverage to suggest that Grosch (spelling) was dishonest . The second irritant was over emphasizing the national threat narrative. That was not the emphasis of the hearing.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      I was thinking about how the MSM would handle Grusch. Character assassination will have to be a tactic for the time being. As far as the national threat emphasis, sometimes I think it is used as a convenient political bludgeon. If you can’t get Congress and the world to consider this phenomenon even as a national security threat, well, how are you gonna get them to listen? Chris Mellon said as much to me privately several years ago. I do understand the tactic.

    2. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

      >>>”The second irritant was over emphasizing the national threat narrative. That was not the emphasis of the hearing.”<<<

      But it was the PURPOSE of the hearing. Unless congress gets the *threat narrative message*, they have NO reason to do DO anything, especially give the military and secret police agencies another TRILLION dollars to "fight aliens".

      1
  14. roger

    Just saw a news bite on MSNBC. Claire McCaskill doubted if there was non-human life on earth. Witnesses were probably seeing weather balloons. The set of news staff and commentators on the air laughed along with her…. so disappointing.

  15. Clint Child

    I recall Grusch saying he preferred to call the entities “non-human”. He thinks that we should keep all options open in trying to understand who/what they are. Can we conclude that the military and intelligence organizations also don’t know who/what they are? CC

  16. DeanTucker

    Hi Richard, I am a big fan of yours and I appreciate all you have done to bring attention to this important issue!!!! Yes, of course I agree with you that this is a battle right now within our own government. I strongly feel that the truth will win out and it is just a question of time! Thank you God for “News Nation”. they are so far above all other news outlets for covering this topic!!! It was fun to see you on News Nation, I thought you did a great job! Keep up the good work brother!!!! Big changes could be around the corner!!! Let’s hope so!!!!

    1
  17. itsmeRitaC

    Oh heck, i looked it up online to see if it is only meritac, but it isn’t. I found out that “non human biologics” means anything other than human. Unless i am not understanding something here?

    “biologic
    bī″ə-lŏj′ĭk
    noun

    A preparation that is synthesized from living organisms or their products, especially a human or animal protein, such as a hormone or antitoxin, that is used as a diagnostic, preventive, or therapeutic agent.An extremely complex drug, vaccine or antitoxin that is made from a living organism, or from products of a living organism.

    adjective

    Of or relating to biology.”

  18. D.A.

    Richard,

    This morning, I heard a clip on News Nation of Cuomo talking to Bill O’Reilly. In the segment Cuomo said he believes that all UFOs are just about secret advanced US tech. This is a notion that I believe many here on your site, including maybe even yourself, believe to a limited extent as well. Given that we truly don’t know anything about the true nature of these craft yet, I personally do not take anything off the table; however, given the circumstances that has surrounded virtually every UFO sighting, as well as the opinions of the whistleblowers, themselves, I see no reason to even foster such ideas, and am puzzled by how this notion can still be held onto with such conviction within the UFO community. Is it due to a rudimentary fear of our own vulnerability? Ignorance of our own technological limitations? It certainly isn’t due to hard evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. As the whistlebowers stated under oath when asked the same question, if any of these involved US tech, they would NOT be buzzing $50,000,000.00 aircraft and putting American pilots in harms way. As Fravor stated so eloquently, “that’s what test ranges are for.” Moreover, why would a MIC faction that is apparently going to such extremes as to engage in various forms of coercion to keep potential whistleblowers quiet, willingly parade these things right in front of not just military personnel, but in front of the public…and do it over and over again over a period of decades? Why? I want one person to provide me a reasonable explanation for that. That’s all I ask.

    Furthermore, I’ve always been perplexed by the level of confirmation bias, and informational cherry picking, people engage in when presented with information about any subject that they have an interest in, especially involving UFOs. Does the TR3B crowd only believe those parts of the whistle-blower’s testimony that comports with their own beliefs as true, and then just disregard everything else they said about these things not being man-made? Do they believe that the whistleblower’s testimony that these craft are not man-made is just a bunch of bull–despite the dearth of evidence to back up their own beliefs, which are contrary to those presented by people who are more in the know about this stuff than anyone else?

    The steadfast belief that some of the UFOs that have been witnessed by the public and/or military over the last 75 years are man-made simply defies the natural progression, or evolution, of technological advancement, which is predicated on incremental steps of scientific discovery and understanding, which does not, and cannot, occur in a vacuum. That is not opinion, but fact–just look at the history of any technological advancement. Even breakthrough discoveries are ultimately incremental in nature, and are based on a foundation of previously made discoveries in material science. And if no one thinks for even a second that if Lockheed Martin did in fact already reverse engineer some of these alien technologies using current man-made materials that they wouldn’t have already been exploiting that tech monetarily by integrating them into other, non-UFO related, platforms, then all I can say is that they are fooling no one but themselves. And quite frankly, I don’t want to hear anymore from the Ancient Alien/Philip Corso crowd, who believes fiber optics, transistors, and virtually every other man-made contrivance ever invented–which they personally don’t understand the concept of–were reverse engineered from, or based on alien tech; such notions are just born out of pure ignorance. Even Leonard Stringfield knew it, and called Phillip Corso out on the carpet about it. If any of those man-made technologies were in fact based on alien tech, then Lazar’s whole story is nothing more than a fabrication despite the fact that nearly everything he has ever said has been ultimately corroborated to one extent or another. I suspect that before all of this is said and done, he will be publicly vindicated even if he is not personally interested in such vindication.

    Also, talking about Lazar in context to cherry picking information as it dovetails with ones own beliefs, one either believes his story, or they don’t–there’s nothing in between. He would have had no reason to tell the truth about one thing, but then lie about another thing. And he clearly stated that mankind is no where near being technologically advanced enough from a material science perspective to replicate these craft, which require the integration of multiple types of ultra-advanced technologies, which were magic-like to us 30 years ago…and still are today. Just think about the number of different technologies that not only go into creating a modern-day automobile, but go into operating and maintaining it. We simply do not posses a technological infrastructure that is advanced enough to support such tech even if we could reproduce it. Given that the man-made TR3B conspiracy theory dates as far back as Lazar’s time at S-4, if not further, then one must believe only one or the other, but not both…it’s as simple as that, and the evidence (as well as common sense) so far is pointing towards Lazar.

    We may have the ability operate one or more of these “alien” craft to a limited extent, like Lazar had claimed, and perhaps–and this is a big perhaps–even have used modest discoveries made about the alien tech in these craft to nudge our own advancements in material science in a specific direction, which at some point could lead us towards the eventual ability to replicate such craft, but we are nowhere near that point yet. One example of such a nudge might be the push towards developing 3-D printing (i.e., additive manufacturing) technologies, or the development of MEMS and NEMS using micro and nano-technologies, or perhaps even the development of quantum computing. But again, at best these would be nudges, or guides, for us to follow with regards to developing our own technologies in these areas of material science–if it’s even the case at all. I mentioned these techs only because I am not aware of their specific origins, which are likely prosaic as well. Anyone who disagrees with the natural progression of mankind’s technological advancement, need just look under the hood of any car from any decade between 1900 and now, or look at the history of electricity and its use over the years–including how it is now being used in automobiles and the ancillary technological developments that were ultimately required to get us to this point.

    Given that everything Lazar has ever stated about UFOs and reverse engineering programs has essentially come true, I have no reason not to believe his story in full, and have every reason to believe that no UFOs are man-made–some may have been flown by man, as Lazar mentioned, but none are man-made. Remember, the primary reason why we always believed that UFOs were real to begin with is the preponderance of evidence supporting that fact, which non-believers simply refused to acknowledge. No such evidence, however, exists to support the belief that any UFOs are man-made; it’s just a belief based on people’s personal opinions. And to me, stories about UFOs being escorted by helicopters is more likely about human pilots flying alien UFOs off course, than human pilots flying man-made UFOs off course.

    As I had mentioned earlier, I am open to anything, I just don’t see any evidence to support the man-made hypothesis. I know you disagree with me on this, and if I am off base, please show me where.

    D.A.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      TBH, I feel that I have never really decided EXACTLY where I stand regarding the man-made hypothesis. I think I believe the ARV story, and think I believe people like Bill Uhouse. I would be shocked if the blackbudget world was not trying like mad to create a real flying saucer. That said, I have never been 100 percent sure on just how advanced the replication program is. Frustrating, even after all this time. Bottom line for me, for now: alien craft for certain. human-made replicas probable, but unknown of the scope and capability of those human-made craft. That’s where I am.

      1
      1. itsmeRitaC

        I agree Richard. I mean, if they have been reverse engineering for all these decades i have to think that they have made some progress. It just seems sort of obvious i think. And i also take for granted that these pilots that see things all over the world are not aware of that tech when they encounter it. And i can imagine that the DOD may want to get data on the way pilots react.

        But this isn’t my ‘area’, lol
        rita

      2. D.A.

        Richard,

        I wouldn’t say I am hard no on ARVs, but I definitely would not put them in the basket of “probable”, at least not with respect to operability using man-made materials…at least not yet. I say this based on the unlikely probability that we have progressed far enough over the last 35 years to have been able to replicate the reactor systems, fuel, and propulsion systems used by these craft, which by all accounts is likely integrated with the design and metallurgical compositions of the hulls. Even if we were to plop one of the alien reactor systems into a man-made craft, composed of man-made materials, like what was done in Netflix’ “Lost in Space”, it likely wouldn’t work. It’s analogous to plopping a Ford 289 engine in the back of a wooden Conestoga wagon in 1870, and then expecting Ma and Pa Kettle to drive it west without knowing what fueled the engine, or how to make the fuel; without knowing that the engine needed to be lubricated and cooled; without knowing the engine required an ignition system; without knowing the engine needed to be started with an electric motor; and without knowing that the engine needed to be connected to a transmission, drive shaft, rear end, and wheels, which are sturdy enough to withstand the torque. To put it another way, even if the brightest minds at Lockheed know as much about how these craft work and operate as you and I might know about how our cars work and operate, they could no easier replicate one using even the most advanced man-made materials and fabrication techniques than you or I could replicate a car in our driveway using a wrench, blow torch, and a pile of scrap iron. Sure, we might know how cars work and operate, but a hell of lot more actually goes into building one. At best, if we were given all the right parts, instructions, and tools, we might be able to assemble one, but the parts would likely be metric, and the instructions…Chinese.

        At best, we may have been able to make an ersatz kit car or two that we can push out of the garage once in a while to make Uncle Sam happy.

        D.A.

      3. D.A.

        Richard,

        I do believe there is a distinct possibility that we possess “alien” craft that we can technically operate to some limited extent. Such a possibility would tie in with allegations of agreements having been made with a group of Grays, as well as testimony that some of Greer’s witnesses gave at his latest press hearing. Just throwing that out there.

        D.A.

  19. Dean DeHarpporte

    Richard, thanks so much for all the work you have done. If possible, please provide a link to the to yesterday’s Congressional Hearing.

    Thank you.

    Dean DeHarpporte

  20. TomTort

    To be perfectly honest, I was amazed to hear statements I never anticipated being uttered. The entire hearing is very explosive requiring more than just a casual listen. These high profile gentleman were under oath and I hope they can back up their statements with legitimate documentation.
    This hearing is not an ordinary piece of childish rhetoric, but a serious discussion with far reaching implications requiring serious investigation to everything stated.
    I am wondering what approach you will take (as a researcher) after digesting what transpired. I am sure, you and several of your “close”colleagues will need to get together and discuss this BOMB SHELL of a hearing.

    1. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

      The questions were interesting, considering who asked them. The lack of answers and indication that the public would continue to be stone-walled… that was very boring, as it’s all we have ever gotten. Teasers, and then, “We can’t tell you peasants!”

      1
  21. Jonathan Caplan

    I have been studying this subject for just over 50 years. When I began the crash retrieval accounts from Leonard Stringfield were regarded questionably. Since then we have had so much corroboration from Philip Corso, first hand accounts from armed forces personnel, the Davis/Wilson notes, etc that we have grown to accept these retrievals or shoot downs as fact. To hear Congressmen now asking questions about this with genuine enquiry and to hear the allegations actually alluded to of potential murders to keep the cover up in place was truly historic. This surely is the crack in the dam. There must be a lot of frightened people out there in the intelligence services, armed forces and defence contractor industry who must be looking for the first time over their collective shoulder. This rolling stone can only continue to roll and become huge.

Leave a Reply