Kirby: Drones Over New Jersey are ‘Lawfully Operated Manned Aircraft’
A whole lot of hot air about nothing. We should just trust them, I guess.
White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby told the media that the drones over New Jersey are not malicious or from a foreign country.
Yeah, okay. He didn’t explain. Instead, he pushed for legislation from Congress:
Now, finally, I just want to add a few comments on the reports of drone activity here on the east coast, particularly in and around New Jersey. We have no evidence at this time that the reported drone sightings pose a national security or a public safety threat or have a foreign nexus. The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are investigating these sightings, and they’re working closely with state and local law enforcement to provide resources using numerous detection methods to better understand their origin.
Using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal authorities, we have not been able to, and neither have state or local law enforcement authorities, corroborate any of the reported visual sightings. To the contrary, upon review of available imagery, it appears that many of the reported sight sightings are actually manned aircraft that are being operated lawfully.
The United States Coast Guard is providing support to the state of New Jersey and has confirmed that there is no evidence of any foreign based involvement from coastal vessels, and importantly, there are no reported or confirmed drone sightings in any restricted airspace.
That said, we certainly take seriously the threat that can be posed by unmanned aircraft systems, which is why law enforcement and other agencies continue to support New Jersey and investigate the reports, even though they have uncovered no malicious activity or intent at this particular stage.
While there is no known malicious activity occurring, the reported sightings there do, however, highlight a gap in authorities, and so we urge Congress to pass important legislation that will extend and expand existing counter drone authorities so that we are better prepared to identify and mitigate any potential threats to airports or other critical infrastructure, and so that state and local authorities are provided all the tools that they need to respond to such threats as well.
John Kirby on drone activity in and around New Jersey: "We have no evidence at this time that the reported drone sightings pose a national security or a public safety threat or have a foreign nexus… We have not been able to…corroborate any of the reported visual sightings." pic.twitter.com/xfxFaJQUaN
— CSPAN (@cspan) December 12, 2024
DHS and FBI
DHS and FBI said the authorities are working with New Jersey authorities “to investigate this situation and confirm whether the reported drone flights are actually drones or are instead manned aircraft or otherwise inaccurate sightings.”
Dude, this should not be hard. My best friend saw two on his way home from the doctor this evening. They are literally everywhere.
Today, the @FBI and DHS jointly issued a statement on reported drone sightings in New Jersey ⤵️ pic.twitter.com/kzbmTzjvkr
— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) December 12, 2024
Reporters Push Kirby
Fox News’s Jacqui Heinrich pushed Kirby to release more information. You know, like, why doesn’t the government have images or videos of these drones?
Oh, despite that fact, the government totes know for sure everything is okay:
JACQUI TIME: “On the drones, does the U.S. government have any of its own imagery or video of these systems?”
WH’s John Kirby: “I’m not aware that we have U.S. government — uh — produced — uh — imagery ourselves, but as I said in my opening statement, we have certainly done thorough analysis of the existing imagery.”
@JacquiHeinrich: “Like, from people’s cell phones that we’re seeing? Basically, with what you’re looking at, how can you credibly tell people that there is no public safety threat, there’s no national security threat that there’s no reason to believe that a foreign government is involved?”
Kirby: “Because the analysis thus far in an investigation that is ongoing has not revealed any national security or malicious intent or criminal activity, but Jacqui, I would remind you, we’re at the beginning here, not the end. There’s a lot more work to be done and we’re working closely with state and local authorities to gain more information.”
Heinrich: “So, it might take awhile?”
Kirby: “I would argue that it’s — we’re — we’re moving — uh — pretty well here with — with a sense of energy to try to figure out what we can do to learn more about this. We’re at — we’re still in the middle of an ongoing investigation, and I’m up here explaining to you and let you know what we know so far, what we believe so far. If information comes to light that changes that characterization, then my goodness, you know, we’ll be the first ones to let you know, but right now, there’s just no indication that this is some sort of foreign malign activity or, in fact, even criminal.”
You’re not moving well. People have seen these drones since the election. Why is this just the beginning?
JACQUI TIME: “On the drones, does the U.S. government have any of its own imagery or video of these systems?”
WH’s John Kirby: “I'm not aware that we have U.S. government — uh — produced — uh — imagery ourselves, but as I said in my opening statement, we have certainly done… pic.twitter.com/IF35XATl7B
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 12, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
If Kirby’s mouth is moving he is either eating or lying. Since he doesn’t have a napkin, I assume he is lying.
Is he sitting on his hands? Because it could just be finger food.
You are absolutely correct. Brandon and company have no credibility.
You don’t believe these were lawfully manned aircraft, many of them six feet long, probably piloted by munchkins?
Nope.
Me neither.
If these are lawfully operated manned aircraft, wouldn’t there be flight plans on file?
Someone with the time and money should FOIA the relevant authorities to obtain any flight plan information for these allegedly “lawfully operated manned aircraft”. Would be interesting to see/hear what their response would be.
Not necessarily detailed ones. Visual flight rules allow you to fly without following pre-planned routes.
I just saw the link to this video, and I was astonished. This isn’t one or two UFOs or even the Phoenix Lights. This is like rush hour at War of The Worlds. A half-dozen to a dozen aircraft in frame at once, continually, zooming in all possible random directions, in patterns that air traffic control would be nuts to assign.
https://x.com/jayroo69/status/1866678487966162980
If they’re “car sized” they’re longer than 6 feet.
And a great many people can’t estimate size of aircraft on the ground, much less in flight.
I have to say one video I saw of a “drone” was very clearly a v-22 Osprey flying with the rotors at the 45 degree position. Person posting it said it was too small to be a V-22 but my guess is it was further away than they thought.
More broadly, no Dhimmi-crat apparatchik possesses a scintilla of credibility or integrity, with respect to any issue. Brazen and unabashed mendacity and prevarications are the reflexive and default operating postures of these vile snakes.
Oh there safe secure drones not ufos, but we have no information on them.
Raises ✋️
Calling BS
Now we have multiple reports of ‘drones’ flying over New Jersey at night. The Pentagon, FAA, FBI, DHS, New Jersey State Police, and local law enforcement agencies all deny knowledge of what they are. They acknowledge the existence of these SUV-sized craft, but tell us they don’t know what they are, where they come from, who’s operating them, or what they’re doing in the skies over New Jersey. They do claim, however, that they’re satisfied that these craft pose no danger to the public or threat to national security.
A few questions come to mind:
If they don’t know what they are, where they’re from, who is operating them, or what they’re doing, how can they possibly say they pose no risk to the public or national security?
If they don’t know what they are, why are they characterizing them as “drones?”
These aircraft are operating within controlled airspace. If I remember correctly, non-military aircraft entering, transiting, or operating within controlled airspace require flight plans and/or other positive identification.
The fact that the Pentagon, DHS, Department of Transportation, and FAA don’t seem too concerned with the presence of these supposedly unidentified craft certainly suggests that they already know what these aircraft are and who is controlling them.
If that’s the case, why is the information being kept from the public, and apparently members of the U.S. Congress and the Governor and legislature of New Jersey as well?
I don’t think it’s too big a leap to think that there might be a connection between these UAPs and a bill being debated in Congress that would expand control over airspace usage and surveillance authorities. (Safeguarding the Homeland from the Threats Posed by Unmanned Aircraft Systems Act of 2023 (H.R.4333/S.1631))
They’re not. Read his statement again. At no point does he refer to anything as drones. He refers only to “reported drone sightings”, i.e. what other people are claiming to have seen.
Also it has been my understanding that the reported sightings have appeared to be in unrestricted space.
White House and Pentagon spokesflaks and members of Congress have all called them drones, before and after briefings by Pentagon “officials.”
Airspace in the vicinity of busy airports is controlled airspace. Not necessarily restricted, but controlled. Air Traffic Control (ATC) needs positive identification of aircraft operating in the airspace in order to assure air traffic safety (separation, collision avoidance, orderly traffic flow). This generally means flight plans, radar transponders, ADS-B systems, and voice radio communications between controllers and pilots.
FAA permission is required for commercial drone operation in controlled airspace. Non-commercial drone operation is only permitted in uncontrolled airspace below 400 feet above ground level.
If there are unauthorized aircraft operating in controlled airspace, whether manned or remotely-piloted, they pose a potential risk to flight safety.
Also it has been my understanding that the reported sightings have appeared to be in unrestricted space.
I think the NJ ones have been. However, there have been reports previously of “drones” operating over places like Langley Air Force Base (not the same place as “Langley” for the FBI/Marines). The concern arises there because they have been actual overflights of the base. (Admittedly, the reporting there is as loose as this has been, in terms of size, terms used, etc. Because “journalists” tend to suck at this as much as they do reporting on firearms.)
FWIW, FBI training & labs are colocated at MCB Quantico, about 60-miles south of Langley, VA where CIA is. Langley AFB is about 2-hours south of MCB Quantico and just north of Naval Station Norfolk. There have been unauthorized drone incursions at Quantico, Langley AFB and NS Norfolk. There hasn’t been any publicly reported drone activity at CIA HQ, although they almost certainly wouldn’t talk about it if there were.
It’s all swamp gas.
Kirby, not the drones.
We need to consult Alex Jones. These are obviously the ones who killed all of the children at Sandy Hook. Make American Great Again!
All right, who let JR out of his playpen?
Lonejustice from the Althouse blog bringing Teh Stoopit yet again!
Well done, ya simp.
All these drones eventually have to return to some home base. It should not take a genius or sophisticated electronics to follow them home. I think someone is not confessing. Eventually it will come out.
Only after January 20th,I think.
I’m in NJ. I haven’t seen them, but know people who claim to. And they are not tin foil hat types.
Same here. What are they hiding from us now?
Does anybody actually believe anything this lying communist a****** says? Because I don’t, he works for the government therefore he is a corrupt piece of garbage.
So according to the WH they aren’t drones but are manned aircraft and are not foreign… so they are US owned and lawfully operating …but they don’t have any tail #, ownership docs or filed flight plans to provide in order to reassure the public and put this issue to bed.
Glad I ain’t the one charged with figuring out what invented stories to tell from the podium.
Drones have been required, for the last two years or so, to broadcast their ID while in flight — that’s enough for the FAA to figure out who they belong to. The FAA hired a company to set up some regional “listening centers” to listen to drone beacons and record when/where/who.
Drones also have to have their FAA-assigned number — like a tail number, but a lot longer — on their body.
But these aren’t drones, right? So they would have had ID transponders on, and the FAA would know who owns and who was flying them.
They would have to have Remote ID if they were 55-lbs or smaller (presuming they’re being operated by someone concerned with the law). If they were larger than 55-lbs, I believe they’re required to have actual transponders; you’ll occasionally see heavy-lift drones being identified on services like Flightaware. Curiously, federal agencies (including the military) are exempted from Remote ID regulations. They’re not exempted from the regulations on heavy-lift drones (>55-lbs). The regulations about heavy-lift drones, both for the drones and the operators, are surprisingly extensive. They’ve effectively viewed by the FAA as actual aircraft.
Yep, the FAA issued a FAR on UAVs and pretty much grounded my E-Flite Carbon Cub…so this ought not be a mystery.
Indeed. The WH has no clue what is going on and if they do they ain’t willing to share.
If these were truly US owned/operated, manned aircraft then it would be a simple matter of reconstruction of flight plans, radar data and transponder data. They could then tell us it was X model aircraft, originating from Y start point to Z end point, tail number __, registered to A, piloted by B, owned by C along with what altitude, headings and other flight info.
Not how the regime is fully prepared to tell you what it’s not will full certainty yet not knowing what it is.
Autodistort wins again! I got past that, I agree wholeheartedly.
Traitor Joe needs to get a better liar than the retard Kirby.
Ineptitude and arrogance abound in this America-hating junta. It is really something to behold. They are so bad at everything and so malevolent in all of their intentions. It boggles the mind, really.
It’s scary to think of the damage that these traitors can do in the next 40 days – and that they are giving their full effort to achieve. I know that people are feeling so relieved after the election, but I will not feel comfortable until Trump is actually back in the Oval Office. It’s a long, long way from here to there, still.
And an even longer road back to “We, the people!”
“Traitor Joe needs to get a better liar than the retard Kirby.”
There are only so many and he’s already hired most of them.
Like Karinge Gom-Jabbar, five-time Costanza Prize recipient.
They are travelers of both time and space from Kashmir.
Been reading Robert E. Howard’s Conan, have we? Loved them!
“That said, we certainly take seriously the threat that can be posed by unmanned aircraft systems…”
But he just said they were manned aircraft.
I’m sure the result will be more regulations on hobbyist drones, because the FAA wants to destroy the hobby along with RC aircraft.
The Deep State Government wants to destroy anything that they do not absolutely control.
Read it again. He said we take seriously the threat that can be posed by unmanned aircraft. Not that any such things have been confirmed, but if there are any then that’s worrying. That’s all.
I think logic supports these just being regular manned aircraft. If they were illegally flying drones, why the heck would they have navigation lights illuminated during their flights?
Because drones follow the same rules as other aircraft, and have to have anti-collision lights if they’re flying at night.
If they are drones, they aren’t being lawfully operated though. So why would they follow the rules about anti-collision lights?
Well, if they are legally operated drones, yes they are legal.
If they are small enough and low enough (and not around airports and such) I do not believe they are required to have lights. But that might have changed.
Remember how broad of a category “drones” is when talking about this, and require people to define what they mean.
Yes, recreational and Part 107 drones operating at night must have anti-collision lights activated when flying. Before 2021, you couldn’t legally fly a recreational drone at night at all and Part 107 drones couldn’t be flown at night without a waiver. So, at the time, few consumer drones were equipped with any kind of anti-collision lights at all. Now that you can fly at night recreationally and under Part 107, many (but not all) drone manufacturers have either put anti-collision lights in the box, or integrated them into the design of the drone. The problem is most of these lights, while marketed as anti-collision lights, don’t meet the FAA criteria of being visible from 3-miles away.
I own a newer DJI Mavic 3 Pro Cini (which is pricey) and it has these kinds of lights. The problem is even though it’s the first drone I’ve owned which came with them out of the box, they still don’t come close to being FAA-compliant. They’re not nearly bright enough. I suspect very few consumer operators flying at night make the effort to be in compliance probably thinking the lights they have are sufficient. Worse yet, on several of the older DJI variants, their firmware would turn off the navigation lights whenever the operator engaged the camera. I suspect that when observers on the ground say the lights are turning off and on, this might be culprit in some cases.
If they were legally operated drones, we’d know who was flying them since they would also be equipped with Remote ID. Since the authorities seem to be stumped by these sightings, that doesn’t seem to be the case though.
Funny, how they can turn off the lights when close to people who are viewing them…
Why is that odd? I can turn off the lights in any aircraft by flipping a switch.
The statement is self contradictory. He’s not even a good liar!
Never has been, never will be. Only a small minority of leftists are good at lying, although they try.
What private citizen has a lawfully manned drone the size of a car?
If it’s manned, it’s not a drone. However, large drones could be useful in construction, forestry, some forms of agriculture/ranching, resources management…
Private companies and public utilities are the the primary operators of heavy-lift drones. They’re primarily used in construction, topographical mapping, power line management, oil & gas industry (which are often turbine-powered with the ability to stay aloft for hours. They’re essential UAV helicopters). In the foreseeable future, they’ll be used in last-mile delivery, which will be a nightmare for everyone, unfortunately. To operate any drone over 55-lbs, the operator has to be licensed in the same way a pilot has to be licensed and the drone has to be certified. Those certifications vary depending on how the drone is being used. The airworthiness certification for these drones isn’t materially different than the certification a passenger aircraft has to endure.
If it’s a drone, it’s not manned. Correct.
However, hobbyists do have car-sized “drones” (they use to be called remotely-piloted vehicles, or RPVs). Many of them are scale models of actual aircraft. A 1/5 scale model of an F-15 would be 12 feet long and 8 feet wide – pretty much the size of a sedan or small crossover. Bigger than a Leaf. They have meets where they pretend to dogfight and such.
Time for WWII balloons.
John Lennon warned of UFOs over New York, and bemoaned the negligence of notification.
Why do I think these drone flights will stop on Jan 19?
Kirby “We don’t know what they are doing”
Kirby “We don’t know what they are are”
Kirby “They are acting in a legal manner”
Kirby ” We need legislation to deal with this”
None of what this slime ball is saying makes sense.
Nothing this Administration has done the last 4-years has made any sense. So, how they’re responding to this is very in-character.
The NJ Stae Police Commander said that they pose no threat or risk to public safety, but ordered a police helicopter to disengage from one of the drones for safety concerns
Yes, because getting too close could induce a collision. As is true with all aircraft operating in close proximity. That doesn’t make the drone a threat to public safety.
Dude, this should not be hard. My best friend saw two on his way home from the doctor this evening. They are literally everywhere.
Does your friend have any actual knowledge of this subject? Can he define “drone”? Does he have any skill at identifying aircraft?
People have seen these drones since the election.
Actually, they’ve been seeing them since they became a ‘thing’ in Ukraine and got mentioned in relation to the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea.
“Drone” is a word with very broad application. Most people think of little quadcopters or those bigger ones that Amazon and Dominos were going to use for delivery. Or they think of Global Hawk and Predator. There’s a bunch in-between. Some even use it for missiles (which is really weird). And there are a lot of hobbyists flying scaled replicas of real aircraft.
The issues are 1) which of these are actually violating airspace restrictions on bases and such, and 2) who are the operators? Everything else is scare-mongering. It’s perfectly legal for Bubba to fly his drones over your house (up to a point). It’s also legal to have drones follow Coast Guard ships, up to a point. A decent, knowledgeable report from the authorities could really help. Except for all the credibility damage they’ve done to themselves over the years.
Agree with all of this. But, what I find most curious (and potentially troubling) is the sightings, often around military bases/ships of swarming activity. The VAST majority of the videos I’ve seen are easily explainable as Bubba and his DJI drone, a passenger airplane (commercial or general aviation) and larger, commercial drones. But, the now well-documented instances of military targets like Langley AFB and several ships, in littoral waters as well as hundreds of miles out to sea, being swarmed by a fleet of drones is not Bubba, it’s not Amazon or Pizza Hut and it’s probably not any other commercial application. It’s almost certainly China or Russia, both of which have moved well-past our domestic drone technology.
With respect to your last point, I have absolutely no idea why no local or national news crews, with their incredibly expensive and capable video cameras operated by competent professional cameramen, haven’t been sitting outside at night to get better footage. I think if they did, much of this ‘panic’ would be laid to rest.
Good points, all. Except…
I think if they did, much of this ‘panic’ would be laid to rest.
Why would they want to put the panic to rest? Panic = readers = revenue.
That’s very true. There is a money motive here. And, the media LOVES salacious stories like this during this part of the year because usually not much is going on. It’s reminiscent of the Tiger Woods/ex-Wife event about 20-years ago. It was wall-to-wall coverage from Thanksgiving to Christmas.
Think of the scoop though. Can you say superviral video? So why wouldn’t they?A local NJ TV station could get national attention!
For people who claim to know very little about them, they seem to know quite a lot…..so is it rain or are they micturating on our collective legs?
Okay, there are some dark aspects to this. But let’s look at the bright side: aliens from outer space may possibly be staging an invasion of NJ. If so, the NJ political and social climate would improve, and that would be a net benefit to everyone outside of NJ. However, in reality, I’m not sure how aliens would be able to afford NJ taxes. They may prefer Mars.
Never has been, never will be. Only a small minority of leftists are good at lying, although they try.
Think of the scoop though. Can you say superviral video? So why wouldn’t they?A local NJ TV station could get national attention!