How the New Jersey Drone/UAV Incident Might Be Linked to Government Surveillance – Part 1
After seeing many theories that are easily debunked in regards to the Drone / Un-manned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) situation occurring in New Jersey, I felt compelled to provide insight based upon an analysis of the known facts.
Alright, hear me out… After considering the details surrounding the situation, reviewing the facts and listening to firsthand accounts, it is my synopsis that the drones are conducting a surveillance and possible monitoring and sensing operation. The first hand reports detail multiple drones (large UAVs) flying for extended periods of time over large areas, primarily in the tri-state region, including areas near President Trump’s residence in Bedminster.
Here’s a theory — I’ll admit it’s a bit farfetched and unsettling, but entirely plausible based on several factors. Imagine something like The Sum of All Fears (the 2002 movie based on Tom Clancy’s novel). Buckle up, because we’re about to go down the rabbit hole…
Why I Believe the New Jersey Drone Incident Could Be a Government Surveillance Operation
I believe several factors suggest that the UAV situation unfolding in New Jersey may actually be a U.S. government surveillance project. I will not, however, argue that the operation has any nefarious intent. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence of such.
This will be a multi-part article, in each section we will analyze what we know and what we don’t know. We will make inferences based upon what we know but we won’t make falsehoods.
Lack of Air Traffic Concern
Un-authorized drones flying in congested airspace is potentially a great air traffic hazard. The federal government’s lack of concern towards confronting the UAVs for air traffic points directly to the government having knowledge that they are not a threat to the public and that their movements and flight paths are known. Consider the following:
- There have been numerous instances throughout the country of a drone pilot flying outside of allowable limits or within restricted air space. In these instances, immediate response has taken place, no government agency response. A recent example was a Chinese national who is accused of flying a drone and taking photos of Vandenberg Space Force Base.
- Instances of high powered laser pointers have been directed at aircraft. These complaints have initiated immediate multi-agency government responses.
- Air combat responses to previous weather balloon incidents, however, no combat response to drone situation.
Government Threating Enforcement Towards Vigilantes
Government officials are reminding individuals of the legal consequences of shooting down a drone / UAV. This points to Government Support of the drone actions and operations, they state they don’t want you to shoot them down.
Limited Federal Support Offered & Slow Federal Response
Limited federal support to local agencies and overall lack of concern is the official response being provided to local governments. It Feels intentional.
Consider these Expert Selected products
Federal Agency Jurisdiction
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas minimized the recent increase in drone sightings across the tri-state region, firmly stating that federal officials cannot just “shoot” them down, even though some lawmakers have called for that response.
What They Say and Don’t Say
On 12/12/2024, the FBI and DHS jointly issued a statement on reported drone sightings in New Jersey, you can read the statement here.
If you read between the lines of the statement, pay attention to what they say. They explicitly state the UAV’s are not a “known threat” (of course they aren’t a threat if they are US gov property / US contractor).
They explicitly omit to comment on what they DO know. Their response further adds to the credibility that these UAVs are actually a federal government project. By stating they are not a known threat, can we infer they are of “friendly origin”?
Government Action to Discredit UAV Observations
The federal government has made statements and potentially taken actions to discredit UAV observations, while also offering rapid deployment of UFO / UAP material and recent support for federal hearings.
In a recent example, where residents report drone crashes but no debris is found, the concept of “unrecoverable craft” becomes reminiscent of the hysteria surrounding unexplainable alien phenomena.
If a government knew they were planning or had the potential to deploy a drone surveillance mission, it would be strategic to release a distraction, such as UAP hearings, to divert attention.
Additionally, government agencies have suggested that the drones could actually be manned aircraft in a further effort to discredit ALL sighting. This is an important messaging point, and I’ll explain why this could be a significant aspect of the situation later, it ha government’s messaging campaign. It has to do with the drone size requirements to move certain payloads.
For all these reasons, I believe the federal government is behind and aware of the identity of the drone operator.
Leave a Reply