'Drones' EVERYWHERE, What's Going On?

[RatRodRob...RRR]

Posted by Satori (here)
The real story here is not that these were manmade drones “authorized by the FAA”, but that the legacy media and alt media got right on the band wagon with the UFO/UAP angle and some other clickbait, titillation and fear mongering. And, from another angle, a US Congressman looked right in the camera and said it was an Iranian mothership releasing Drones.

Why?

I’ve seen or heard very little about Drones since November 5, 2024.

Just thinking about the "drones".
Some dont have a heat signature.
Some are completely silent.
Some of the SUV sized drones do not have required FAA lights.
Some of these "drones" were not drones at all but were what can be described as "ORBS"

So The US Gov has only explained away a small part of all these sightings, there is more too it IMHO....................................... RRR

[norman]

At best, someone told Trump to leave the drones narrative to them (Cheyanne Mountain?)

Without wishing to go off topic, it doesn't bode well for the great JFK assassination reveal either.

Tectonic pressures and red flags. The easy stuff is getting done spectacularly, but there's much going on that's not for public consumption yet, if ever, and Trump isn't calling all the shots.

[Rizotto]

"The Trump White House claims the mystery drones were approved for research, but the truth lags behind. These objects hover for hours, move in ways no drone should, and vanish without a trace. Globally, they appear unchecked, a riddle of advanced tech and silent intent. The FAA’s vague assurances don’t explain the anomalies—objects that defy physics, evade interception, and spark fear. This isn’t just about drones; it’s about what we’re not being told. The pattern repeats: denial, dismissal, and the slow creep of truth. People deserve more than half-answers. The world is watching."

White House Drone Explanation Fails to Satisfy

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Nl7rq6A10OA

[Helvetic]

The foundation for a major false flag operation has already been laid. Listen to this segment at 52:32 minutes: *'Iranian Missiles and Border Security'.


Sam Shoemate - Cybertruck Bomber Matt Livelsberger’s Email Reveals NEW Evidence | Jan. 3, 2025

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xglaXVtQcis

Description:

Sam Shoemate is an intelligence officer and Chief Warrant Officer 2 (US Army, Retired). On December 31st, Sam received an email allegedly from Matthew Livelsberger - who would be named as the perpetrator in the detonation of a Tesla Cybertruck at Trump Tower the following day. In this episode of the Shawn Ryan Show, Shoemate brings forward critical information and allegations that cast doubt on the “mainstream” narratives surrounding this event - and many others - if true.


00:00 Introduction and Gifts
05:26 The Shocking Email
09:49 The Manifesto
15:10 Unveiling the Gravitic Propulsion System
20:17 Connecting the Dots
28:25 FBI and CID Involvement
35:28 Tesla Incident Theory
40:18 Drone and UAP Concerns
52:32 Iranian Missiles and Border Security
58:43 Call to Action for Community Safety

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Tired of the droning about drones!

Drones, they say...

(yes, perhaps some are, but definitely not all)

https://x.com/528vibes/status/1884956058671587339

[Mike]

It feels like not too long ago we were discussing drones within the context of the "Caret Report". Remember these?

[jaybee]

*
*

I just made a post here - in an AI thread... speculating that the drones and orbs etc might have been a testing and practice exercise for future law enforcement -

pure speculation, of course...BUT.... ???

[QueenRia]

Jake Barber and his team were assigned to support the FBI & DoD taskforce to investigate the "drones" - his take is very interesting:
(link to timestamp 2:19:30)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=dnnpyNuPdXs

[Rawhide68]

As I understand it he had 2 teams deployed at NJ. One detecting drones of high qulity.
Another team detecting UAP's zipping out to space

I'm so sad to see that Trump didn'nt deliver an answer to the drone mystery as he had promised.

[Kryztian]

Two mayors, one from New Jersey and one from the middle of Nebraska discuss the drone situation. It is amazing how much integrity these two mayors have and how integrity is completely lacking in the fetid rotting creatures of the Biden-Trump administration.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=shY369pwx9k

[Le Chat]

Here are a few maps showing some of the drone report locations around the world since the “Great Drone Flap” began on November 18, 2024. These maps are from the National UFO Reporting Center (NUFORC) and dated December 28, 2024.

NUFORC, which has been reporting UFO sightings since 1974, states this on its website:

“Despite the intense attention being paid to the phenomenon and massive number of sightings, the situation remains that not a single one of these craft has been identified, nor has anyone witnessed a single takeoff or landing. . . While we at NUFORC are keeping an open mind, the theory that these drones are non-human intelligence craft is something to consider, and at this current stage it can’t be ruled out.”




(Courtesy of Skyships over Cashiers)

[bcook1014]

That would be "coarse," not course.

[bcook1014]

Has anyone noticed that our government says not one damned word about this phenomenon? Not even President Trump who you can rest assured knows what's going on. Notice too how our Congress pays a little lip service to it but they don't stand up and demand answers like our statesmen of old, no, they're given just a smidgen of info about it and told that it's very hush-hush and that they shouldn't get too concerned about it, they're told they're not a danger to their constituents but are also warned not to question anything as it might be injurious to our "national security," that catch-all which automatically shuts anyone up who knows on which side his bread is buttered.

[Vangelo]

A friend of mine who lives in a suburb of Boston Massachusetts (about 15 miles inland of the Atlantic Ocean) showed me some pictures his Ring Camera took at around 4:00 AM. He described the pics as a bright light that was traveling from the left side of his house, across the street, to the right side of his neighbors house and into the woods (about 50 feet in the air). He said he sent it to his local police department who told him it was something benign (I forgot what they told him but I instantly knew it was BS). I asked to see the pics and concluded it was either a drone or an orb. I then asked him if I could see the actual video (Note: Ring stores the video on their cloud servers and he can access them via the web). The video was missing for that entire day. I was watching him look on his phone only to find that the video footage for that day and a few others was deleted. He did not delete them. He never deletes any of the Ring video. The obvious question is, who did? He is a little freaked out now.

For those unfamiliar with Ring, here is a link: RING.com

[Ravenlocke]

https://x.com/TheInsiderPaper/status...41408097554673

https://x.com/wakeupnj/status/1911448487746580681

[Ravenlocke]

https://x.com/rosscoulthart/status/1911207167287575015

[Ravenlocke]

https://x.com/rosscoulthart/status/1910271365069799440

[Ravenlocke]

https://x.com/rosscoulthart/status/1908194855085568408

[Ravenlocke]

https://x.com/rosscoulthart/status/1907929191028568189

[Ravenlocke]

Text:
I asked Grok to analyse the obvious contradictions between the White House statement on the purported 'drone' incursions and comments
@60Minutes
aired from Senator Wicker and Generals Kelly and VanHerck. This is Grok's analysis: that the White House statement "strains credulity":

Senator Roger Wicker’s admission to CBS 60 Minutes on March 16, 2025, alongside the statements from retired USAF Generals Glen VanHerck and Mark Kelly, paints a troubling picture of U.S. national security vulnerabilities regarding drone incursions over the continental United States (CONUS).

Let’s break this down and evaluate the plausibility of the White House’s claim that these drones are merely FAA-authorized research drones.

Senator Roger Wicker’s Admission
Wicker, as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told 60 Minutes that there is “clearly a military intelligence aspect” to the drone swarms, suggesting they could be “spying incursions.”

His most striking revelation came when pressed by Bill Whitaker: despite having access to “classified briefings at the highest level,” he confirmed that the Pentagon and national security advisors remain “still mystified” about the nature and origin of these drones.

This admission is significant—it indicates that even with the full scope of classified intelligence, the Department of Defense (DoD) and other agencies lack a clear understanding of who is behind these incidents or what their purpose is. Wicker’s logical conclusion—that these are likely espionage efforts—underscores a perceived threat, yet the absence of definitive answers after years of incidents signals a critical gap in U.S. intelligence and defense capabilities.

Generals VanHerck and Kelly’s Admissions
Retired General Glen VanHerck, former commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM, and retired General Mark Kelly, who witnessed the Langley swarm firsthand, provided detailed insights that amplify Wicker’s concerns:

VanHerck’s Perspective:
VanHerck highlighted a “capability gap” in detecting and tracking low-flying drones, noting that NORAD’s Cold War-era radar systems are ill-suited for this threat.

He deployed fighters, helicopters, and warning platforms during the Langley incident in December 2023 but couldn’t identify the drones’ origins or destinations. He dismissed the hobbyist explanation due to the “magnitude of the events, the sizes of some of the drones, and the duration,” suggesting a “foreign nexus” or “threat nexus” was plausible.

His alarm was palpable: drones flying over F-22 flightlines could “drop ordnance” or “crash into them,” posing a direct risk to critical assets. He criticized the lack of urgency from the Pentagon, White House, and Congress, noting that a year after Langley, no robust policies or laws exist to address this vulnerability.

Kelly’s Observations:
Kelly, a seasoned fighter pilot, described the drones over Langley as ranging from small quadcopters to objects the size of “a bass boat or a small car,” operating at varying altitudes and speeds. The consistency of sightings—20 to 30 drones nightly, 30 to 45 minutes after sunset—implies coordination beyond casual hobbyists. His firsthand account reinforces the scale and sophistication of the incursions, aligning with VanHerck’s rejection of simplistic explanations.

Together, these generals depict a military caught off-guard by a persistent, evolving threat it cannot adequately counter, despite its global dominance.

White House Claim: FAA-Authorized Research Drones
The White House, via a senior official and later Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in January 2025, asserted that these drones—particularly those over New Jersey and Langley—were FAA-authorized research drones or hobbyist crafts, not a national security threat. This narrative contrasts sharply with the military and congressional perspectives. Let’s assess its plausibility:

Scale and Coordination:
The Langley incident involved “upwards of 40 plus” drones over 17 nights, with some as large as a small car, flying in patterns Jonathan Butner likened to a “conveyor belt.” Kelly’s report of 20-30 nightly sightings further suggests organization.

FAA research typically involves controlled, limited operations with specific objectives—think weather studies or tech testing—not swarms of large drones over military bases for weeks. Hobbyist drones, even in numbers, rarely reach this size or persistence, and FAA rules cap recreational drones at 400 feet altitude and require registration for larger units, which would be traceable.

Military Response:
VanHerck deployed significant resources—fighters, helicopters, AWACS—to investigate, yet found no answers. If these were FAA-authorized, coordination with NORAD/NORTHCOM should have identified them swiftly, avoiding such escalation. The relocation of F-22s for safety further undermines the benign research claim—why protect stealth jets from sanctioned experiments?

Expert Dismissal:
Both VanHerck and Kelly rejected the hobbyist theory based on drone size, duration, and behavior. Wicker’s implication of espionage, backed by classified briefings, suggests the DoD suspects a more sinister motive. The White House’s downplaying clashes with these authoritative accounts.

Historical Context:
Past incidents—like the 2019 Navy drone swarm off California, suspected to originate from a Hong Kong-flagged ship—hint at foreign involvement. The 2024 Picatinny Arsenal and U.K. base sightings echo this pattern. FAA research drones wouldn’t align with such widespread, sensitive-site incursions over years.

FAA’s Role:
The FAA regulates U.S. airspace and authorizes research flights, but its radar systems, as General Gregory Guillot noted, struggle to detect low-altitude drones. If these were sanctioned, why the detection failure? And why no clear communication to NORAD or the public? Bureaucratic silos between agencies (FAA, FBI, Coast Guard, etc.) complicate matters, but authorized flights should be documented and identifiable, not “mystifying” the Pentagon.

Plausibility Assessment
The White House’s claim strains credulity. While some drones over New Jersey might have been hobbyist or research-related (FAA estimates 2.8 million drones operate annually, many registered), the Langley case and similar incidents defy this explanation.

The scale, sophistication, and targeting of high-value military sites—coupled with the DoD’s ignorance and the military’s alarm—point to a deliberate operation, likely espionage or reconnaissance, possibly by a foreign actor.

The White House narrative seems more like a public reassurance tactic than a reflection of evidence, especially given Wicker’s access to classified data and the generals’ firsthand rejection of benign intent.

Critical Takeaway
The admissions reveal a U.S. defense establishment grappling with a blind spot: an inability to detect, track, or neutralize low-flying drones over its own territory. Wicker’s mystification, VanHerck’s capability gap, and Kelly’s vivid testimony expose a vulnerability the White House appears reluctant to acknowledge fully.

Whether these drones are foreign, corporate, or otherwise, the lack of answers after years of intrusions suggests either incompetence or a deliberate obfuscation of a deeper threat.

The FAA-authorized research label feels like a convenient sidestep, not a solution to what Wicker and the generals see as a clear military intelligence challenge. Until concrete evidence—like recovered drones or intercepted signals—emerges, skepticism of the official line is warranted.

https://x.com/rosscoulthart/status/1906192343688208591