The previous questions come directly from the abductees’ accounts of what the interrogators askedduring the re-abduction scenarios. They make logical sense when you follow a crash-retrieval andreverse engineering
. First, there were the
retrieved ET craft
, then there were the
retrieved components (technology)
from those craft, and then there were the
pilots and operators(technicians)
. These individuals would otherwise be known as the
. It is logical when youdevelop the hardware, you’re left with asking who’s going to operate it and how are they going to do it?Logical, right?Certainly those involved with the management [of] covert-ops thought to consider the personal accountsof those with
first-hand, hands-on ET tech
experience, i.e. those who may have operated it, worked itscomponents, navigated, or flown it. Of course they would have! Let’s suppose that crash retrievals areabout having ET technology, and reverse engineering it is about having human technicians that do whatET technicians do, or mimic it. Then reverse-engineering crashed, shot down, or retrieved alien craft is
just about having ET hardware, but about having
human techs that do what an ET tech does
.Reverse engineering the abductee is not about learning how to abduct people (oops . . . well okay . . . somaybe it is to some degree . . . hence all the practice and development of mind control procedures, butreally that’s secondary, a spin off, a bi-product if you will, albeit a rather convenient one), but reverseengineering the abductee is more about having personnel that are able to do what abductees are able todo.
[I can certainly attest to the fact that mind-control protocols were used on me. Again I refer to blog posts #132 & 133, “An Unsettling Discovery.” – CW]
No wonder my research has come across the use of abductees in military and covert-ops training procedures. Not because they plan on using the abductees in some future scenario, but to developtraining procedures vis-à-vis the abductees. Abductees would be much too big of a risk to be useddirectly. We are way too unreliable, prone to go public at any minute, too talkative, would insist on that pesky disclosure thing, and (usually) don’t have the military or covert-ops training needed. Face it,we’re just not “yes” men! But, what we do have can possibly be taught to these kinds of individuals. Itappears they’re trying regardless.
If reverse engineering the craft is about the technology, then reverse engineering the abductee isabout the personnel!
Or, better yet, it’s about the personnel
the technology. Because when the covert-ops personnelquestion the abductees, they get both
information.Another way to look at it: You need a hybrid person to operate a hybrid technology. (No wonder there’salso a covert interest in abductees’ genetics!) Or, maybe a little more accurately, you need a hybrid-functioning person to operate a hybrid-functioning technology.
[Abductee/Experiencers are being cloned by Majestic. A good friend of mine has seen a man several times at a coffee bar in my neighborhood who may in fact be my clone. He appears to be a younger version of me and sports a short “military style” haircut. I suspect he’s part of my surveillance team. – CW]
Why Are They Developing the Technology?
In the covert-ops efforts to get their hands on ET technology they gather and reverse-engineer craft, and just like they gather craft they also gather and reverse-engineer abductees. It appears they are doing thisfor the exact same reasons: the development of advanced technologies, back-engineering of ET craft,information on the ETs themselves, and control over every aspect of these issues/ I have deduced thattheir push for technology may exist for the following three reasons.1.
– The old military mindset may be at work and would certainly apply if the covert-opscommunity thinks the ETs may be a threat. Whether preparing for a “hot war” or a “cold war” withETs, it justifies a whole lot of black project spending. Even if they are only preparing for some