Follow the Silence
In this era, let inexplicable silence be your guide to institutional capture. Follow the Silence to Congress. To Media. To Tech. The institutions that are silent on something so simple as this are the ones youâve lost.
- Eric Weinstein on X
On X[edit]
2020[edit]
Follow the silence.
2021[edit]
It is hard to read this story of Epsteinâs inexplicable deal with prosecutors without specialized vocabulary not meant for the public. The magical words are likely to be âevent deconflictionâ and âblue on blue incidentâ.
Otherwise you would think that this is about Ken Starr.
If any reporters want to ask about the history of deconfliction between the Federal and International IC and local law enforcement they can contact these entities listed by the DOJ.
This lists the three major deconfliction database systems: SAFETNet, RISsafe, and Case Explorer:
I just called to ask CaseExplorer for South Florida about the history and federal participation in deconfliction circa 2000-2008. I was getting the history going back to 1990.
Then I mentioned a Jeffrey Epstein.
âSir, I am now going to terminate this call.â
Reporters? Anyone?
The Guardian called him a Billionaire. The New York Times called him a suicide. Others called him a disgraced Financier.
Wouldnât we have to rule out IC construct? Why will no media ask about the possibility of a state sponsored Pedophile IC operation?
Is there no press at all?
He was not a billionaire. He was not a currency trading hedge fund genius. He was not a simple suicide.
This isnât about Ken Starr.
I would not trust any newspaper that refuses to ask this question:
Was Epstein a state sponsored operation tripped over by local law enforcement?
#FollowTheSilence
Two years gone.
Where-are-the-hearings?
In this era, let inexplicable silence be your guide to institutional capture. Follow the Silence to Congress. To Media. To Tech. The institutions that are silent on something so simple as this are the ones youâve lost.
#FollowTheSilence
Two years dead and gone:
Revisiting the DC DOJ's efforts to protect Jeffrey Epstein and violate the rights of his victims.
Including the names of the high-level DOJ officials who helped cover it all up.
https://technofog.substack.com/p/they-knew-everything-and-did-nothing
So this just appears now!?! And what do we learn? That if "Sources and Methods" of the Intelligence Community might be compromised, prosecutors regularly decline to push for full prosecution EVEN IN THE CASE OF SEXUAL ABUSE of minors and INFANTS.
Bingo: Follow the Silence.
I have spent a decade, literally, collecting hundreds of IG reports from the CIA via #FOIA. I've filed 13 requests and sued the agency 3 times since 2012. When @a_cormier_ & I started to review these docs earlier this year we spotted a disturbing pattern
We have an undisclosed program; there's some kind of 'understanding' that we don't understand. I very well understand why we don't casually compromise "Sources & Methods". But trafficking kids is NOT casual business. Nor is USING them as part of 'Sources & Methods' for kompromat.
One question now creates 2 teams:
Team A) 'Sources & Methods' are above child trafficking in importance.
Team B) Child Trafficking is above any exemption for our 'Sources & Methods'.
I believe that if Epstein needed to use kids for S&M as Kompromat, we lost our plot entirely.
Seriously, I am not being naive here. If we have to abuse children to gain security for the country, maybe we don't have the right to a nation? If our intelligence community is so pathetic...look you get the idea. If the US isn't protecting kids from our own IC, we aren't the US.
I understand we may occassionally have to fell a monster overseas. I understand that sometimes there's a ticking time bomb and 'extraordinary methods' are needed. I understand that we must surveil people or engage in illegal acts while undercover.
But you-can't-use-kids. Period.
Is there some GIANT understanding involving our journalists & news desks that when the IC says 'Sources & Methods' we all just say 'Ok. Anything you say boys.' Like, for example with @arobach being shut down on Epstein:
Abuse of Kids > Sources & Methods
Notice how everything adds up if there's a giant understanding that Sources & Methods trump everything protecting innocent children? You just say 'Sources & Methods are at risk'. Explains Acosta, Robach, Veritas, etc. Boom: No more Epstein mysteries. It's all 'Sources & Methods'.
Q: Why no discussion of Villard House records?
A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why no investigation of Epstein's Hedge Fund's trading partners & brokerage?
A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why do editors claim no one cares about Epstein?
A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Project Veritas?
A: S&M.
Q: Why report Epstein was a disgraced Financier when no one seems to have traded with him?
A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why so little interest in covering Ghislaine relative to Kyle Rittenhouse?
A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why did no one ask where GM last crossed a border?
A: S & M.
Moral: Our kids cant vote. We bring them into the world totally dependent on us. If we have a country that deserves an Intelligence Service, we have a right to know that kids are 100% OFF LIMITS as regards 'Sources & Methods' by the IC of us or our allies. Period. Kids >>> S & M.
P.S. And...I appear to be back to being throttled more agressively after several threads were throttled less agressively or not at all by twitter.
At least at first on this thread. We will see whether that continues. CC'ing @lexfridman @benshapiro @jordanbpeterson @SamHarrisOrg
2022[edit]
The @nsf conspired AGAiNST the scientists. With whom? The National Academy of Science through the Government University Industry Research Round Table (@GUIRR). I have been invited four times to the NAS to present this. It is an out and out conspiracy.
Debunk this claim @snopes.
This account has > 1/2M followers & is spreading a wild conspiracy story that the US science establishment destroyed US STEM careers through market tampering. Itâs housed at @nberpubs & @INETeconomics. It sews distrust in science & government. Debunk me @APFactCheck, @PolitiFact.
In the meantime, younger STEM PhDs, please donât be angry or disappointed. Why not take the long years of cutting edge training at tax payer expense & visit @PandaExpress, where fast food can put you on the fast track to success & financial freedom! đ
So nuts. #followthesilence
As you know: no one will report but no one will debunk either. Welcome to the Boomer/Silent Generation distopia.
I still canât get over that we donât have a functioning free press. Thanks.
*dystopia
Also, feel free not to give a shit as we mask up injecting ourselves and our families against a virus that likely comes from the same exact people with almost no independent secure PhDs to stand up to the gerontocracy at @NIH, NIAID. Thatâs the cost of cheap science.
Has the noise to signal ratio of UFO disinformation (or misinformation) vs. information increased in the past few years, or decreased?
If it's increased, have our denoising programs (eg. intuition about what's "BS") gotten better to compensate or are we more lost than before?
I'm curious to know what you think @EricRWeinstein.
I think that there is a lot more deliberate mis/disinformation right now and a modest increase in the level of information. So far as I can make out, they seem related. Itâs as if as soon as more needles appear, haystacks arrive that make them hard to find.
Iâm pretty annoyed.
As to intuitionâŠ.we donât and shouldnât have much.
Hard UFO/UAP data is supposed to be all about the unprecedented. Disinformation and superstition is all well precedented. So intuition should say itâs all BS. The whole thing comes down to hard data.
Intuition here is useless.
âFollow the silenceâ is my advice. What do you mean?
2024[edit]
Many of you are asking for my reaction regarding the just released @DoD_AARO report. There is much to say. I want to think carefully before saying more. I am not unsympathetic to US National Security needs in this.
In February of 2023, @joerogan invited me for four hours onto the world's largest English Language program (episode #1945) to describe in detail the mystery of potential US Government involvement in UFOs and Post-Einsteinian physics during the mysterious "Golden Age of General Relativity". It has been seen and discussed by millions as expected. I was thus eager to see how thorough this report would be by combing it for search strings raised in my research.
REFERENCES:
"Glenn L Martin Company": 0
Bryce Cecile DeWitt: 0
Institute for Field Physics: 0
Research Institute for Advanced Study: 0
Louis Witten: 0
Roger Babson: 0
Agnew Bahson: 0
Gravity Research Foundation: 0
Gravity: 1 (pg. 32)
Rennaisance Technologies: 0
UNC Chapel Hill: 0
Solomon Lefschetz: 0
Freeman Dyson: 0
Herman Bondi: 0
Negative Mass: 0
"Scientific and Intelligence Aspects of the UFO Problem"
Australian Intelligence 1971 Report: 0
Australia: 0
George Rideout: 0
Edward Teller: 0
Robert Oppenheimer: 0
David Kaiser: 0
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base: 1 (pg. 18)
Curtis Wright Aerospace Buffalo: 0
Pascal Jordan: 0
Mansfield Ammendment: 0
Joshua Goldberg: 0
Office of Global Access: 0
University of Texas, Austin: 0
Center for Dynamical Systems: 0
Physics: 5 (pgs. 16-17, 53)
Relativity: 0
Albert Einstein: 0
George Bunker: 0
Welcome Bender: 0
George Trimble: 0
CONCLUSION: This report purports to have studied the questions raised surrounding UFO/UAP related research of the US federal Government. It, in fact, appears to have studied a carefully chosen SUBSET of the claims selected from among those which appear to have mass appeal to the so-called "UFO Community." It completely, or nearly completely, avoided reporting on all questions surrounding issues which have been raised in serious research and by PhD level researchers who have raised scientific questions in this area. This continues the pattern of using PhD level government scientists who appear to avoid the actual research questions most likely to involve sensitve Special Access Programs and Stovepiped Research which are compartmentalized by design. Whether the omissions are due to issues of avoidance, misdirection (e.g. so-called Limited Hangout strategy), ignorance or incompetance cannot be discerned from the information given.
RECOMMENDATION: It is simply not possible to treat the current AARO report as historically complete or comprehensive. To gain the public trust, the successor to AARO would have to expand and redo this analysis with input from domain professionals who are trusted by the public not to have an apparent agenda or government background (e.g. Prof. David Kaiser of MIT or Dr. Nima Arkani Hamed of IAS, Prof. Brian Keating of UCSD, Avi Loeb of Harvard) Otherwise, it is relatively easy for scientists to "Follow the Silence" in government reports to see what is *not* being addressed or discussed.
Today the DoD released our Historical Record Report Volume 1.
AAROâs report covers more than 70 years of the U.S. record relating to UAP, draws from interviews, archival research, and partnerships across government and industry.
Read it here: https://statics.dod.teams.microsoft.us/evergreen-assets/safelinks/1/atp-safelinks.html