Roswell’s biggest mystery might not be the UFO

Four University of New Mexico students are revisiting one of New Mexico’s most enduring mysteries, the notorious 1947 Roswell UFO Incident.

Not to determine whether aliens landed near Roswell, but to examine what the incident reveals about the law, government transparency and public trust.

UNM constitutional law/pre-law students Nicole Osborne, Caden Salazar, Tatiana James and Miguel Serna recently participated in an online panel discussing the Roswell incident through a legal lens, setting aside the long-running debate over whether the debris found approximately 75 miles northwest of Roswell was extraterrestrial.

That debate began in 1947, when something crashed onto William Ware “Mac” Brazel’s ranch near Corona.

Brazel reported the incident, and personnel from Roswell Army Air Field traveled to the ranch to retrieve the debris.

Soon afterward, the U.S. Army Air Force announced that it had “come into the possession of a flying saucer.”

Less than a day later, the military retracted the statement, saying the recovered object was a weather balloon.

The abrupt reversal fueled decades of speculation about a government cover-up.

“While there is this alien background to everything and a conspiracy background to everything, we’re also able to look at this incident from a legal lens and view the relationship between the people and their government and understand why it’s so applicable to our day-to-day life,” Osborne said.

The four UNM constitutional law/pre-law students are looking at it from a legal angle.

The panel stemmed from an assignment from their professor, Lawrence R. Jones, intended to help students apply constitutional knowledge to real-world scenarios.

“It’s not just about whether there were aliens or not, but there are a whole lot of other issues here on Earth that matter and should matter,” Jones said.

The panel was sponsored by the New Mexico State Library, the New Mexico Museum of Space History and the University of New Mexico Political Science Department.

Moderators asked the students several questions about the crash. They were asked background and summary questions and whether the government or military has the right to enforce a citizen’s silence on what they consider classified material.

Students discussed government secrecy, free speech, property rights, military authority and constitutional protections.

The panelists had been preparing since May and researching the Roswell crash before that.

“I actually invite the whole community to learn about the whole Roswell incident, because it just opens up opportunities for them to learn about their constitutional rights,” Serna said. “I think that one of the most important things that you have is your rights.”

Katherine Miles, bureau chief of the public services bureau at the New Mexico State Library, served as a mediator for the program.

“The Roswell incident has become a pop culture staple, fueling endless speculation about aliens and their intentions,” she said. “But in all the noise, we often lose sight of the human story at its core. These students, with their deep curiosity and insight, have brought that humanity back into focus. Their work reminds us to look at the everyday world around us with a wider, more thoughtful lens.”

You can watch the panel on the New Mexico State Library’s website. https://libguides.nmstatelibrary.org/UFOs

Keep reading

LA City Council tried to hide details of noncitizen voting — and failed

Ten days ago, the LA City Council voted to start moving noncitizen voting toward the ballot.

This week, the council ran away from it unanimously.

What happened in between? The proposal had to be written down.

Supporters said critics were overreacting. This was just the beginning of a conversation, they argued. The details would come later.

Well, the details came later.

And the details killed it.

Last week, city staff returned with the actual language needed to move the measure forward. That is when the wheels came off the car.

On Tuesday afternoon, the City Council unanimously voted to pull the proposal from the 2026 ballot and send it back for further study.

This is how bad policy gets laundered through City Hall. Politicians vote for a vague concept wrapped in moral language. They tell voters not to worry because the details will be worked out later. Then, once the authority has been granted, the real policy is written by the same politicians and activists who avoided spelling it out before the election.

That was the plan.

It just did not survive contact with paper.

The original council vote did not create noncitizen voting in LA, and it did not put noncitizen voting itself before voters. It started a process requiring city staff to come back with ballot language and a clearer explanation of what voters would be asked to approve.

Keep reading

Time To Shed Light on Canadian Military Mission to Congo

Canadian media and politicians have all but ignored Congo’s recent World Court case against Rwanda. It’s unsurprising since Canada has enabled three decades of aggression, including by leading a bizarre, little known, UN mission to the region on behalf of Washington.

On Friday the Democratic Republic of Congo filed a case to the International Court of Justice against Rwanda for repeated invasions and support for armed groups on its territory since 1996. Congolese Justice Minister Guillaume Andali said his country is seeking redress for Rwanda’s breaches of conventions covering genocide prevention, racial discrimination, women’s rights and torture.

In 1996 Rwandan forces marched 1,500 km to topple the regime in Kinshasa and then re-invaded after the Congolese government it installed expelled Rwandan troops. This led to an eight-country war between 1998 and 2003, which left millions dead. Since that time Rwanda and its proxies have repeatedly invaded eastern Congo and continue to occupy the east of the country. Some six million remain displaced.

The Rwanda government in Kigali justified its 1996 intervention into the Congo as an effort to protect the Banyamulenge (Congolese Tutsi) living in eastern Congo from the Hutus who fled the country when the RPF took power after the 1994 genocide.

The US military increased its assistance to Rwanda in the months leading up to its fall 1996 invasion of Zaire. In The Great African War: Congo and Regional Geopolitics, 1996-2006 Filip Reyntjens explains: “The United States was aware of the intentions of Kagame to attack the refugee camps and probably assisted him in doing so. In addition, they deliberately lied about the number and fate of the refugees remaining in Zaire, in order to avoid the deployment of an international humanitarian force, which could have saved tens of thousands of human lives, but which was resented by Kigali and AFDL [a Rwandan backed rebel force led by Laurent-Désiré Kabila].”

In the just released Rwanda’s 30-Year Assault on Congo: The Crimes, the Criminals, and the Cover-Up (Baraka Books) Judi Rever documents Washington’s central role in a war to topple aging kleptocrat Mobutu Sese Seko, who lost his use after the end of the Cold War. According to a review, Rever documents how “the US provided satellite tracking data to locate Hutu refugees in the jungle. It deployed AC-130 gunships, P-3 Orion surveillance planes, and a national intelligence support team drawing on the CIA, the NSA, and the Defense Intelligence Agency. It sent Special Forces from Fort Bragg to train Rwandan troops in counter-insurgency.”

Ottawa played an important, if somewhat bizarre, part in this sordid affair. In late 1996, Canada led a short-lived UN force into eastern Zaire, meant to bring food and protection to Hutu refugees. The official story is that Prime Minister Jean Chrétien organized a humanitarian mission into eastern Zaire after his wife saw images of exiled Rwandan refugees on CNN. In fact, Washington proposed that Ottawa, with many French speakers at its disposal, lead the UN mission. The US didn’t want pro-Joseph Mobutu Sese Seko France to gain control of the UN force.

Keep reading

Sadiq Khan Said There Were No Grooming Gangs In London; Police Investigating 4,000 Cases

The London mayor who once insisted there was “no indication” of grooming gangs now faces explosive new scrutiny after a police review uncovered thousands of previously sidelined child sexual exploitation files.

The Metropolitan Police has identified more than 4,000 potential child sexual exploitation cases across London that may require reopening.

These stem from roughly 12,000 reports dating back to 2010, with about one in three previously closed after police or prosecutors took no further action.

The cases have now been referred to the National Crime Agency under Operation Beaconport for urgent assessment.

Keep reading

A CIA Senior Official Personally Stopped Analysts From Concluding COVID Came From the Wuhan Lab.

40% off through July 4th because the truth deserves to come out on America’s 250th birthday. Subscribe now.

This is not a theory anymore. It is a documented fact with a paper trail.

When CIA analysts were privately concluding in the earliest days of the pandemic that the furin cleavage site in the COVID virus looked consistent with gain of function modification, a senior official at the CIA’s Weapons and Counterproliferation Mission Center personally intervened to stop them from shifting to a lab leak finding.

Not bureaucratic inertia. Not competing evidence. A person. Making a decision. To stop the conclusion the evidence was pointing toward.

On June 4th 2021 that same CIA center briefed Fauci on classified COVID origins intelligence from the President’s Daily Brief. During that briefing Fauci steered the agency toward consulting scientists who had publicly advocated for a natural origin. The scientists he recommended were the ones who had already staked out the position he needed them to hold.

Meanwhile a pre-pandemic Department of Energy warning to Fauci’s own agency about the risks of the Wuhan Institute of Virology research apparently never reached the analysts tasked with investigating the virus’s origin. The people investigating whether the lab caused the pandemic were never told their own government had already flagged that lab as dangerous before the pandemic started.

Then when a whistleblower filed a formal complaint alleging that classified intelligence contradicted Fauci’s sworn testimony to Congress, the Biden DNI’s office routed it not to an independent inspector general but to HHS Secretary Becerra, Fauci’s own boss, who had already indicated the matter was considered.

The FBI told Congress it had interviewed a key witness before reaching its lab leak conclusion. ODNI’s own records show that interview happened months after the FBI had already made its call. And when finally interviewed the witness said nothing about COVID origins at all.

This is not incompetence. Incompetence is random. This is a pattern running in one direction consistently protecting one man from accountability for five years.

Keep reading

FDA Altered Autopsy Results of Children Who Died After COVID Vaccines

Scientists at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revised the autopsy results of children who died after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, reducing the number of children the agency classified as having likely died as a result of their vaccination, according to documents released last week by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

The documents show that in November 2025, the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) identified 10 child deaths related to the COVID-19 shots. But in December 2025, it reduced the number to seven and downgraded the probability that those deaths were connected to the children’s vaccination.

The Daily Caller, which first reported, quoted two former FDA officials and a forensic pathologist who performed two of the children’s autopsies. One of the FDA officials told the outlet the emails reveal “a coverup” by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Johnson included the documents in a letter sent last week to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., CDC Acting Director Jay Bhattacharya and FDA Acting Commissioner Kyle Diamantas.

Even the reduced number of deaths was enough to trigger concern among some FDA scientists about the safety of the COVID-19 shots, Johnson’s letter stated.

“Although what drove the decision to change these three cases remains to be seen, what is clear is that these officials appear to have determined that the seven cases warranted warning about the risks,” Johnson wrote. These risks “should have raised serious concerns at HHS and CDC about the mRNA COVID-19 Injections.”

Even after the downgrade, the FDA’s Division of Pharmacovigilance recommended revising the label of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to include a warning about the risk of “myocarditis with fatal outcomes.”

The change was never made, for reasons that are not clear.

Myocarditis is widely associated with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and, with reports of deaths connected to the vaccines, particularly among teenage and young adult males.

Keep reading

NYC Democrat Socialist Candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier Wants to ABOLISH Prisons and OPEN America’s Borders — Deletes Thousands of Radical Tweets Before Tuesday’s Primary

The far-left challenger backed by NYC’s Communist Mayor Zohran Mamdani tried to scrub her record, but the receipts are devastating.

New York’s 13th Congressional District heads to the polls tomorrow in a Democratic primary that could hand a radical open-borders, abolish-prisons extremist a major platform in Congress.

Darializa Avila Chevalier, a 32-year-old democratic socialist and Justice Democrats-backed organizer, is challenging longtime Rep. Adriano Espaillat.

She’s been endorsed by far-left NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani and has positioned herself as the future of the Democrat Party in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx.

But newly uncovered deleted tweets from her old account (@darializabonet) — over 3,600 posts and reposts from 2018 to 2022 — reveal exactly who she really is.

In September 2021, she reposted this gem:

“A world without borders—just like a world without prisons or police—is possible, necessary, and the only moral way forward.”

She also amplified calls to “literally, abolish the border” and declared that “all deportation is wrong.”

She pushed for zero deportations and full open borders while the rest of the country was already suffering under Biden-era chaos.

During the 2020 riots, she doubled down on abolishing police entirely:

“F**k you. We’re gonna defund and abolish. You don’t get to water down our movements.”

And:

“No. It means ending policing full stop. Period. No more police at all ever.”

Other deleted posts praised seizing private property from landlords, nationalizing industries, and openly flirted with communism.

When confronted, Chevalier claimed the posts “did not reflect who she is today.” Too late. The mask is off.

Keep reading

CIA Official Confirms Agency Flip-Flopped Over COVID-19 Origins Over Five-Day Period

Over the span of five days in 2021, the CIA abruptly changed its opinion on the origins of COVID-19 from a laboratory to neutral, a newly released document confirms.

Originally, CIA analysts concluded that COVID-19 likely came from a high-level laboratory in Wuhan, China located near where the first cases were detected in late 2019, senior CIA officer James Erdman III told lawmakers in May. Over the span of five days in 2021, however, Edman says the agency changed its stance to ‘neutral.’ 

Then in September of 2024 during a private briefing between intelligence officials and members of Congress, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) inquired as to how the agency came to the conclusion that lab-origin vs. natural origin were about equal, according to yesterday’s document release by outgoing DNI Tulsi Gabbard. 

In response, an unnamed CIA employee told Wenstrup that “he made the call to stop the shift to lab because [redacted] had come in the day before they were ready to publish which made them back off the call,” according to a summary of the briefing compiled by an intelligence official. 

As the Epoch Times notes further, officials said in a declassified assessment based on information through August 2021 that only one agency – which was not the CIA, based on details since made public – favored a lab origin for COVID-19.

An updated assessment released in mid-2023 states that the CIA was unable to determine the origin of COVID-19 because both the lab and natural origin theories “rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting.”

The CIA said in 2025 that a lab origin for COVID-19 was “more likely.” The Trump administration maintains that COVID-19 came from the lab in China.

More on Changes

A whistleblower in 2023 told members of Congress that the CIA team tasked with analyzing the origins of COVID-19 favored a lab origin, but that after the team was paid, it changed its position.

The CIA at the time denied paying analysts to reach specific conclusions.

Erdman, the senior CIA official, told a Senate panel in May that he was on a team investigating how intelligence agencies handled the COVID-19 pandemic and that the CIA declined to provide documents the team had requested that may have shed light on the change.

Erdman said that the team found the shift happened after Dr. Anthony Fauci, at the time the head of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – which provided funding for the lab in Wuhan – briefed intelligence officials and suggested to officials that they talk to specific scientists, including researchers who wrote a paper with which Fauci and the institute’s head secretly assisted.

The paper, called “Proximal Origin,” purported to rule out a laboratory origin.

Wenstrup also asked intelligence officials in the 2024 briefing about a white paper that National Center for Medical Intelligence analysts compiled as a rebuttal to the “Proximal Origin.” The authors of the white paper felt their conclusions were ignored by intelligence officials, they informed Wenstrup.

A representative for the center was not prepared for the questioning, “which annoyed Wenstrup,” according to the briefing summary.

Fauci Briefed Intelligence Officials

Fauci briefed intelligence officials on June 4, 2021, and promoted the idea that COVID-19 had a natural origin, according to another briefing summary released by Gabbard.

Fauci “recommended that [intelligence officials] take a look at Tulane’s paper on two lineages from two separate markets,” the summary states. “To Dr. Fauci, this paper’s findings were a clear indication of natural origins of COVID-19.”

Fauci also “reminded the group that even for SARS, it took 12 years to make the link to a bat even though it only took 4 months to identify the natural reservoir” and that “we still haven’t identified source/origin of Ebola,” which is believed to have a natural origin, according to the summary.

Fauci, who has not responded to requests for comment, told lawmakers during a hearing in 2024 that he did not talk about viral research related to COVID-19 with intelligence officials.

“After the investigations began about COVID, I was briefed by intelligence agencies about possibilities of there being activities going on in different laboratories,” he said.

In another readout of the 2021 briefing, Fauci was said to have suggested intelligence officials connect with three scientists whose names were redacted.

“All three … have advocated for features of the virus that they judge to be consistent with a natural origin,” the readout states.

An email disclosed that one of the scientists was Kristian Andersen, a Scripps Research researcher who coauthored the “Proximal Origin.”

Andersen said in private messages with coauthors that COVID-19 may have been engineered before the paper was published. He has said that further analysis of the virus altered his and others’ views.

Dr. Fauci was the behind-the-scenes adviser who, alongside his hand-picked so-called experts, pushed the intelligence community to endorse a natural animal origin to hide his dangerous gain-of-function research that he funded using taxpayer dollars,” Gabbard said in a video statement posted to X on June 18.

“All of this in a deliberate attempt to cover up the truth and shift the blame and attention away from Fauci’s own actions.”

Keep reading

What’s missing from the Epstein files? Questions persist about unexplained redactions, missing documents, email gaps

When the Department of Justice released more than 3 million pages of documents under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, survivors, advocates and lawmakers quickly raised questions about an apparent discrepancy: the DOJ had said it collected more than 6 million pages of material during its investigation but was only releasing half that number.

The Justice Department tells CBS News it “has released every document required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” and maintains that those unreleased 3 million documents were either duplicative, unrelated to Epstein or protected by legal privilege.

But concerns persist about evidence that important documents are still being withheld. CBS News has analyzed the archive not only for what has been disclosed, but also for documents that appear to be absent. Our key findings include:

  • Questionable redactions, including public figures’ names
  • Most Epstein emails from older accounts not included in files
  • Missing email attachments
  • No record of Signal communications
  • Lack of massage scheduling records after 2009
  • Missing prison surveillance footage
  • Missing documents from DEA investigation into Epstein
  • Other potentially relevant materials from ICE, Treasury, CIA and other agencies were not included because the law only applies to DOJ records.

The Government Accountability Office recently announced it was launching an investigation into the way documents that were released had information blacked out. That move comes at the request of several members of Congress.

Keep reading

How Many Ways Can You Avoid Reporting That Cops Killed a Baby?

“One-Year-Old Boy Killed After Officer Fires at Vehicle in Mississippi,” said the New York Times headline (6/16/26). So, a “one-year-old boy”—what most people would call a baby—was “killed after” a police officer fired at a vehicle, but there’s no verb you could use to connect those two things?

The Times subhed continued that pacifying work:

It is not entirely clear what led up to the shooting, but the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation said that police officers were responding to a shoplifting call.

“Ohh, shoplifting…!” we’re evidently supposed to say, before turning the page; that might make the baby murder make sense. I don’t need to say that baby was Black.

There will be more coverage of this heartbreaking, infuriating news about cops in Senatobia, Mississippi, called to the five-alarm crisis of someone purportedly shoplifting diapers, opening fire into a car whose driver “allegedly drove toward them.”

But in the meantime, please think hard about reporting that tells you to calm down, that suggests that, just maybe, nothing wrong happened at all. As ABC News (6/18/26) put it in a piece on how the “officer involved in shooting outside Walmart that killed 1-year-old boy” has been placed on leave: One-year-old Kohen Wiley was killed, according to the family’s attorney.”

So maybe he’s not dead? Or he died from something other than the gun of the “involved officer”? Caution in reporting is valuable, but when it’s mainly deployed to protect the inflicters of state violence (FAIR.org7/11/16), you have to ask if it’s really a principle at all.

Keep reading