A former US Air Force Intelligence Specialist Mike Turber,has sparked much controversy over his recent claims that Tic Tac shaped UFOs first witnessed and videotaped by Navy pilots back in 2004,were in fact highly classified USAF spacecraft.Turber asserts that this was first revealed to him back in 2005 by a USAF"Audiovisual Specialist"responsible for preparing PowerPoint slides for a classified briefing involving senior officials from the US Navy,Air Force,DARPA,and a major aerospace contractor at a think tank.
前美国空军情报专家 Mike Turber 最近声称 Tic Tac 形状的不明飞行物事实上是美国空军高度机密的航天器，这引发了很多争议。特伯声称，早在2005年，美国空军的一名"视听专家"就向他透露了这一情况，该专家负责为一次机密简报准备 PowerPoint 幻灯片，参与者包括美国海军、空军、DARPA 的高级官员，以及一家智囊团的主要航空航天承包商。
A number of individuals have questioned Turber's authenticity and the accuracy of his information,but a December 2019 response by the Office of Naval Intelligence(ONI)to a Freedom of Information Act request appears to confirm Turber's core claim that such a classified briefing took place in 2005,and he was the first to report it.
许多人质疑特伯信息的真实性和准确性，但2019年12月海军情报局(ONI)对《信息自由法》(Freedom of Information Act)要求的回应似乎证实了特伯的核心说法，即这种机密简报发生在2005年，他是第一个报告此事的人。
What was discussed at the meeting and what Turber's confidential source learned goes a long way in answering questions over the origins of the UFOs witnessed and videotaped by Navy personnel during training exercises held in 2004(Tic Tac case),and later in 2015(Go Fast and Gimball cases).
会议上讨论的内容以及特伯的机密消息来源了解到的情况，对于回答有关海军人员在2004年(Tic Tac 案)和2015年晚些时候(Go Fast and Gimball 案)举行的训练演习中目睹的 ufo 的来源和录像的问题大有帮助。
Turber's information also points to a specific defense contractor,likely either Lockheed Martin or Northrup Grumman,that built the Tic Tacs for the USAF,which tested them against the Navy's best surveillance and intercept capabilities in 2004.Turber further adds that the Navy later gained its own Tic Tac craft and tested these in the 2015 sightings cases.
特伯的信息也指向了一个特定的国防合约商，可能是洛克希德·马丁公司或者诺斯鲁普·格鲁曼公司，他们为美国空军制造了 Tic Tacs，在2004年测试了美国海军最好的监视和拦截能力。特伯进一步补充说，海军后来获得了自己的 Tic Tac 飞船，并在2015年的目击事件中进行了测试。
I spoke to Turber on March 12,and asked him a series of questions about the 2005 briefing and what he was told about it by his confidential source.The source was a USAF serviceman whose Air Force Speciality Code(AFSC)at the time Turber first met him was AFSC 23030(Audiovisual Specialist)whom Turber had befriended during his own prior military service with the USAF(1984-1988).
3月12日，我与特伯进行了交谈，问了他一系列关于2005年简报的问题，以及他的机密消息来源告诉他的情况。消息来源是一名美国空军军人，在特伯第一次见到他的时候，他的空军专业代码是 AFSC 23030(视听专家)，特伯在服兵役前曾与他成为朋友(1984-1988年)。
During Turber's military service,his own AFSC was"Electronic Intelligence Operations Specialist"(20530-50).Turber's job summary was described as:"Operates electronic monitoring and related equipment,operates electronic analysis equipment,and analyzes,processes,and produces results of monitored electronic emissions."
在特伯服兵役期间，他自己的 AFSC 是"电子情报作战专家"(20530-50)。特伯的工作总结描述为:"操作电子监控和相关设备，操作电子分析设备，并分析、处理和产生监控电子排放的结果。"
This is a vitally important background fact to keep in mind when considering why Turber was later asked by his A/V specialist source to comment on classified intelligence data acquired during the 2004 Tic Tac incident.
这是一个至关重要的背景事实，当考虑到为什么 Turber 后来被他的 a/v 专家线人要求对2004年 Tic Tac 事件期间获得的机密情报数据进行评论时，要牢记在心。
Turber's information is critical for understanding the true origins of the UFOs the Navy pilots began encountering in 2004 and later in 2015 during major Naval training exercises involving different carrier groups with the most advanced radar and electronic monitoring equipment used at the time.
特伯的信息对于了解 ufo 的真实来源至关重要，海军飞行员在2004年和2015年后期的海军大型训练演习中开始遭遇 ufo，演习中不同的航母战斗群使用了当时最先进的雷达和电子监控设备。
What follows are extracts from my discussion with Turber and the information he shared,which was recorded and transcribed with his permission.
I began by asking Turber when he first met his confidential source who told him about the 2005 briefing.He replied:
Probably in the mid-80s.We're doing through the Air Force,and so we kept contact,I've kept contact with quite a few people that were,you know…good friends or what have you.And I was utilized a lot,you know,I was kind of like the friend that everybody goes to…ask…what do you think about this or that or whatever…in relationship to all kinds of different subject matter.And then that correlated into the think tank program…where we met again because he was part of one of the think tanks that I was at.And he was actually doing the audiovisual for that location.
By 2005,Turber had been recruited from the Air Force with advanced skills in intelligence analysis of electronic communications,and he began working for different defense contractors and intelligence organizations.
Meanwhile,his source/friend continued to work with the Air Force as an A/V Specialist,and contacted him about"briefing slides"he was working on for an upcoming meeting involving Navy communications data about a UFO,which greatly excited him.Turber explains what happened back in 2005:
与此同时，他的消息来源/朋友继续作为 a/v 专家与空军合作，并联系了他关于"简报幻灯片"，他正在为一个即将到来的会议工作，涉及海军关于不明飞行物的通信数据，这让他非常兴奋。特伯解释了2005年发生的事情:
What he was doing was setting up the,they call them briefing slides,but it's actually a power point presentation,but they still use old terminology.…The presentation involved the data that was acquired from the[USS]Nimitz and from[USS]Princeton,and also from the[E-2]Hawkeye and a couple of other sources.I can't remember all of them.…He gave me a call.We talked for a few minutes…I could tell by his voice he was excited,but concerned at the same time.
He thought he was setting up a presentation about a UFO….So he wasn't sure how to approach it.But he went ahead and was obviously doing his job and what have you.
Now for him to contact me was obviously way out of norm because that's just something that,you know,you wouldn't do if you're[in]a compartmentalize[d project],and you're working inside of a certain area.So that's understandable.So he's given me permission to say what happened,but not any…specifics….But the gist of the matter is…he's listened to some of the comms going back and forth between the pilots and the[USS]Princeton and pilots,and then Hawkeye,and going back forth.But at the time,he didn't even know what was actually going on.Because that was the first piece of information that he had.
"So well,without listening to them,I can't really tell you"…and so when he called me back probably an hour or so later,and he played some of the comms over the phone,and I can hear the pilots talking back and forth and some of the other communications that were going on,and you could tell there was something rather odd.
The pilots were being asked what their loadout was,which obviously is a little bit strange.And then,you know,that's information[that's]been released,but the other odd thing that occurred was when the pilots of the second group now there's three,I call them three groups.There was one pilot that was out first that was doing a maintenance check on his plane,and he was going to be part of a Red Team,Blue Team kind of thing.
And then you had Commander Fravor and his…two F-18s that went out for that intercept.And then of course,you had Chad Underwood's intercept.So on the second flight,which is Commander Fravor's flight,they were ordered to come back to the ship after the Tic Tac flew past him and went back to the CAP point.But there was more communication than what we've heard so far.
然后弗拉沃中校和他的两架 f-18去拦截。当然，你还有查德·安德伍德的情报。所以在第二次飞行中，也就是弗拉沃指挥官的飞行中，他们被命令在 Tic Tac 飞过他并返回 CAP 点后回到飞船上。但是我们之间的交流比我们目前听到的还要多。
The communication that I recall was their request to go after the object and to continue the pursuit and the request to have someone else possibly come up and help them with the loadout problem.So that information has not been revealed.But they were denied that.
Turber went on to describe what happened a few days after he first listened to the radio communications between the different Navy planes and ships discussing the Tic Tac sightings:
特伯接着描述了在他第一次听到不同海军飞机和船只之间讨论 Tic Tac 目击事件的无线电通讯后几天发生的事情:
About three or four days go by,and he calls back.And at that time,he had gathered a lot more information to say about this stuff we talked about the other day."I[the AV source]figured it out.This is just Air Force,testing some new technology,blah,blah,blah.And it wasn't what we thought it was."Because on our first conversation,he was,we're both thinking UFO,extraterrestrial origin or whatever.But during the second call,either"A"he was told to clean up the first call if someone knew about it,or"B",he was actually just telling me what he really found out,which I believe…to be the case….The information that he gathered in the interim,and with the number of people that were coming to the location for the briefing,he determined that it was US in origin.
Critically,this is where the initial excitement that Turber's source felt about the UFO sighting,quickly waned since he had learned that it was US built,and not extraterrestrial as he and Turber had first speculated.
关键的是，这就是特伯的消息来源最初对 UFO 目击事件感到兴奋的地方，很快就消失了，因为他得知这是美国建造的，而不是他和特伯最初推测的外星人。
Turber went on to describe how the manufacturer of the Tic Tac's was interested in how the Navy and foreign nations responded to the secret Air Force craft maneuvers:
特伯接着描述了 Tic Tac 的制造商是如何对海军和其他国家对秘密空军飞机演习的反应感兴趣的:
The name of the manufacturer of the object and the intelligence briefing,and by the people that were coming in,it was quite clear that they were just going over what would be considered existing technology at that time in seeing the response of the Navy,how they would respond to it as it would correlate to how the Russians or how the Chinese would respond to it.Mind that timeframe 2005.The Russians and the Chinese were both of primary concern.Now the Chinese seem to be more of a concern than Russia at the moment.
The critical thing to emphasize here is that Turber is telling us that he first heard in 2005,the data communications recorded on the USS Princeton,on the E-2 Hawkeye and on the USS Nimitz that had been confiscated a year earlier according to several Navy witnesses.
这里需要强调的重要一点是，特伯告诉我们，他第一次听说这些数据通讯是在2005年，根据几个海军目击者的说法，这些数据通讯记录在普林斯顿号军舰、霍凯 e 2号军舰和尼米兹号军舰上，这些数据通讯记录在一年前被没。
Patrick[PJ]Hughes,a Petty Officer on the USS Nimitz,says that two Air Force personnelconfiscated the"data bricks"comprising all the electronic data recorded of the Tic Tacs.Meanwhile,on the USS Princeton,Gary Voorhis said that two unidentified civilians confiscated all the data.
帕特里克休斯，尼米兹号航空母舰上的一名海军士官说，两名空军人员没收了"数据砖"，其中包括记录下来的所有 Tic Tacs 的电子数据。同时，在普林斯顿号航空母舰上，加里·沃里斯称两名身份不明的平民没收了所有数据。
If Turber is accurate in claiming that he listened to radio communications data that had been confiscated a year earlier from two Navy ships,but was now being analyzed for an upcoming briefing by his A/V specialist source,this directly supports the idea that the Tic Tac incidents were part of an Air Force covert operation.
如果特伯声称自己窃听了一年前从两艘海军舰艇上没收的无线电通讯数据，而这些数据现在正在被他的 a/v 专家线人分析，为即将到来的简报做准备，那么这直接支持了 Tic Tac 事件是空军隐蔽行动的一部分的观点。
Turber offered the following insight,which strengthens the case that the Tic Tac craft were part of a USAF covert operation.
特伯提出了以下观点，这些观点加强了 Tic Tac 飞行器是美国空军隐蔽行动的一部分这一论点。
Now,that,to me,is a very pivotal point in that if you have an object that's inside military airspace or creating an issue for a training zone,which is where I guess it was whiskey one or whatever they named it,you wouldn't allow these aircraft to go after an object such as this without some form of ordinance or what have you.But at the time,the question is,why wouldn't you task someone from Coronado,or from Miramar or from any of these other…locations to go out to this area,which is obviously within minutes of flight time to aid in this in the search,especially if these objects were there for several days.
That's always been a question of mine and that in some form that leaves proof that this is obviously an Air Force operation.And that the normal military response,if an object is infiltrating our airspace,is obviously send up more assets and to actually continue the pursuit until you figure out what this thing is where it came from,or even if necessary,shoot it down.But it was out in essentially international waters,but it was inside of a military training space.
Turber went on to respond to questions about the 2005 briefing and the defense contractor responsible for building the Tic Tacs that attended,and the role of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency(DARPA)in helping develop the technologies.Significantly,Turber makes a connection to recent patents granted to the inventor Salvatore Pais on behalf of the US Navy,which had also attended the 2005 briefing.
特伯接着回答了有关2005年的简报会和负责制造 Tic Tacs 的国防合约商，以及国防部高级研究计划局(DARPA)在帮助开发这项技术方面的作用的问题。值得注意的是，特伯与最近代表美国海军授予发明家萨尔瓦托•佩斯(Salvatore Pais)的专利有关，美国海军也参加了2005年的吹风会。
The briefing,the way the slides were set up,was obviously as an introduction to the technology that was going to be utilized.The contractor was there…that actually developed the technology that created[the]Tic Tac.…DARPA was there as well.…DARPA's own presentation,which is basically the history of how that technology was developed….And that's where apparently all the patents that come out from[Salvatore Pais]are now gaining some,some traction in the end.As far as the timing and everything,the timing is obviously ultra critical for what the Navy's doing right now.
简报，幻灯片的设置方式，显然是对将要使用的技术的介绍。承包商在那里......他们实际上开发了创造 Tic Tac 的技术.....。美国国防部高级研究计划局也在那里。美国国防部高级研究计划局自己的报告，基本上是这项技术是如何发展的历史..。很明显，所有从[萨尔瓦托·帕伊斯]那里得到的专利现在都获得了一些，最终获得了一些吸引力。就时机和一切而言，时机显然对于海军现在正在做的事情至关重要。
I asked Turber whether Lockheed Martin's Skunkworks was the defense contractor that built the Tic Tac shaped craft,his response pointed out that the Navy was also working closely with the contractor that had originally built the Tic Tacs for the USAF:
我问 Turber 洛克希德马丁公司的 Skunkworks 是否是建造 Tic Tac 形状飞船的国防合约商，他的回答指出，海军也在与最初为美国空军建造 Tic Tacs 的承包商密切合作:
I would neither confirm nor deny,okay.I will say that,obviously,there's very few contractors that work.I've already revealed that the objects are built in Plant 42.And there's very few contractors that are there,but there's several adjacent contractors that would come in that would work with them,because some of the technology that was developed.
The antigravity technology that the Navy actually paid for,more recently,I guess,was from a company called EMC2.And then they shut off the funding to that organization,and then they ramped up the funding to one of the organizations at Plant 42.So apparently some transfer of information and technology was made and,and they want to keep it all under wraps at Plant 42…
What supports Turber's testimony here is that a 2016 article in Geekwire confirms that the Navy gave EMC2 a total of$12 million to study the feasibility of a nuclear fusion reactor using electromagnetic containment principles from 2008 to 2014.It is therefore very plausible that EMC2 received funding from the Navy for a classified antigravity research project at some point.
支持特伯证词的是，2016年发表在 Geekwire 的一篇文章证实，美国海军在2008年至2014年间向 EMC2总共提供了1200万美元，用于研究使用电磁遏制原理的核聚变反应堆的可行性。因此，EMC2在某种程度上接受了来自海军的资助，用于一个机密的反重力研究项目，这是非常合理的。
What is highly significant for Turber's remarkable testimony about the true origins of the Tic Tac craft revealed at a classified 2005 briefing,is a recent Freedom of Information Act response by the Navy that appears to confirm that such a meeting had indeed taken place,and that highly classified"briefing slides"had been prepared for the meeting.
对于特伯在2005年的一次机密简报会上披露的 Tic Tac 飞机的真实来源的出色证词而言，极为重要的是海军最近对《信息自由法》(Freedom of Information Act)的回应，这似乎证实了这样一次会议确实举行过，而且为这次会议准备了高度机密的"简报幻灯片"。
The Office of Naval Intelligence(ONI)had responded to an FOIA request sent on October 28,by UFO researcher,Christian Lambright.Specifically,Lambright asked:
美国海军情报局(ONI)回应了 UFO 研究员克里斯蒂安·兰布赖特(Christian Lambright)10月28日发出的信息自由法请求。具体来说，兰布赖特问道:
This request is to include all releasable portions of records and reports related to investigation of the detection of and encounter(s)with Anomalous Aerial Vehicles(AAVs)by personnel involved with the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group(CSG)operations off the western coast of the United States during the period of approximately 10-16 November,2004.The designation'AAVs'is used here because it appeared in a summary of these events,so there may also be other terms used in the material I am requesting.
On December 9…the ONI responded to Lambright's FOIA request,and referred to"briefing slides"concerning the 2004 Tic Tac incident.
12月9日...ONI 回应了兰布赖特的信息自由法要求，并提到了2004年 Tic Tac 事件的"简报幻灯片"。
Our review of our records and systems reveal that ONI has no releasable records related to your request.ONI has searched our records for responsive documents.We have discovered certain briefing slides that are classified TOP SECRET.A review of these materials indicates that are currently and appropriately Marked and Classified TOP SECRET under Executive Order 13526,and the Original Classification Authority has determined that the release of these materials would cause exceptionally grave damage to the National Security of the United States.
我们对记录和系统的审查显示 ONI 没有与您的请求相关的可发布记录。Oni 搜索了我们的记录以寻找响应文档。我们发现了一些被列为绝密的简报幻灯片。对这些材料的审查表明，根据第13526号行政命令，这些材料目前已经被适当地标记和分类为绝密，原分类机构已经确定，这些材料的泄露将对美国的国家安全造成特别严重的损害。
The ONI FOIA response confirms that a trained military serviceman with skills as an"AV Specialist"would have been required to prepare the briefing slides for the Navy,and other military personnel and contractors in attendance at such a briefing.This makes Turber's claim that his source was the AV Specialist who prepared the briefing slides based on classified intelligence data from the Navy ships acquired by the USAF,which he subsequently shared with Turber,quite plausible.
美国海军情报局的《信息自由法》答复证实，需要一名受过训练的具有"反病毒专家"技能的军事人员为海军以及参加这种简报的其他军事人员和承包商准备简报幻灯片。这使得 Turber 声称他的消息来源是 AV 专家，他根据从美国空军获得的海军军舰上获得的机密情报数据准备了简报幻灯片，他随后与 Turber 分享了这些数据，这种说法相当可信。
It's also vitally important to emphasize here that Turber was the first person to discuss"briefing slides"concerning the 2004 Tic Tac sightings when he came forward on November 4,2019,in an interview with Jim Breslo.Turber announced what his A/V source had confided to him about the briefing slides the source was working on for a classified 2005 meeting.
还有一点非常重要，那就是特伯在2019年11月4日接受吉姆·布雷斯洛(Jim Breslo)采访时，是第一个讨论2004年 Tic Tac 目击事件的"简报幻灯片"的人。特伯宣布了他的 a/v 线人向他透露的情况，关于这位线人正在为2005年的一次机密会议准备的简报幻灯片。
Turber's own background as an"Electronic Intelligence Operations Specialist",with a Top Secret security clearance,which he maintained after he was recruited into covert operations after 1988,makes it very plausible that his AV source shared the intelligence data from the 2004 Tic Tac sightings with him.It is understandable why Turber was being consulted by his AV source,who needed some expert advice in preparing his briefing slides by someone with the necessary clearances to advise him.
特伯自己的背景是"电子情报行动专家"，拥有一个绝密的安全许可情报中心，他在1988年被招募进秘密行动后一直坚持这一点，这使得他的 AV 来源与他共享2004年 Tic Tac 目击事件的情报数据变得非常可信。这是可以理解的，为什么特伯被他的 AV 来源咨询，谁需要一些专家的意见，准备他的简报幻灯片的人有必要的权限，以建议他。
I asked Turber for his thoughts on the ONI FOIA response and whether it was referring to the 2005 briefing,or more recent classified briefings involving Navy personnel and members of the US Congress that took place from December 2018 to May 2019:
我询问了特伯对 ONI FOIA 回应的看法，是否指的是2005年的简报，还是更近一些涉及海军人员和美国国会议员的机密简报，这些简报发生在2018年12月至2019年5月:
I believe because the FOIA requests that…Christian Lambright…put out…was trying to reference the Tic Tac event.And if you don't,if you don't reference,I know it was they wouldn't bring up the Congress briefings if the FOI request didn't mention them.I think he was…as it relates to the Tic Tac event.So I believe that the briefing that he's referring to…obviously was geared towards the Tic Tac event.So I believe that the briefing that they're speaking about would be the briefing back in 2005.
我相信是因为《信息自由法》要求...克里斯蒂安·兰布赖特...发布...试图引用 Tic Tac 事件。如果你不知道，如果你不参考，我知道如果《信息自由法》的要求没有提到，他们就不会提到国会简报。我觉得他是...因为这和井字游戏有关。所以我相信他所指的简报......显然是针对 Tic Tac 的。因此，我认为他们所说的情况介绍将是2005年的情况介绍。
And there may have been more than one briefing but the briefing that I'm aware of is the one where the data bricks and all the data from Nimitz and the Hornet and the Hawkeye and the Princeton were all taken to a specific location…be to be analyzed.And they did analyze them individually.And then once that data was analyzed,there was there was a group that that analyzed the data.
Now the that group included DARPA,and included the contractor included Air Force,and it included Navy.So all of those people were there analyzing that same data.Then after the data was analyzed,then it was fed into this group that was going to make it into some form of presentation that the top brass could basically digest,and that's where he came in.Now,that was done in early 2005.So that would be as much of that as I think I can discuss without getting in anyone in trouble.
I agree with Turber's analysis that the FOIA response that Lambert got is referring to"briefing slides"that were prepared by his confidential A/V Specialist source concerning the original Tic Tac sightings back in 2004.The FOIA response by ONI is specific to the 2004 sightings,rather than recent briefings of members of Congress that have occurred.
我同意特伯的分析，朗伯得到的信息自由法回应是指"简报幻灯片"，是由他的机密 a/v 专家来源准备的，关于2004年原始的 Tic Tac 目击报告。美国海军情报局对《信息自由法》的回应是针对2004年的目击事件，而不是最近发生的国会议员的简报。
Consequently,the ONI FOIA response is important corroboration for Turber's account of what he learned about a classified 2005 briefing concerning the origins of the Tic Tac craft,and them being prototype aerospace vehicles built at Plant 42 first on behalf of the USAF,and later for the Navy,by a major aerospace contractor.
因此，ONI FOIA 的回应是 Turber 关于他所了解到的关于 Tic Tac 飞行器起源的2005年机密简报的重要佐证，这些飞行器是在第42工厂首先代表美国空军建造的原型航空航天器，后来又由一个主要的航空航天承包商为海军建造。
Turber's recollections and analysis have important implications given recent efforts to depict the 2004 Tic Tac and subsequent Gimball and GoFast UFO sightings in 2015 as national security threats posed by possible extraterrestrial visitors.Indeed,Turber's testimony helps counter a growing narrative over the Tic Tac sightings that may be used to implement a false flag alien invasion plan that has long been rumored to exist.
特伯的回忆和分析具有重要意义，因为最近努力将2004年 Tic Tac 和随后的 Gimball 和 GoFast 在2015年的 UFO 目击描述为可能的外星访客构成的国家安全威胁。事实上，特伯的证词有助于反驳越来越多的关于 Tic Tac 目击事件的说法，这些事件可能被用来实施一个虚假的外星人入侵计划，这个计划长期以来一直被谣传存在。
©Michael E.Salla,Ph.D.Copyright Notice