It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Defense against aliens

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 12:22 PM
I believe our Gummint gave permission for those abductions to occur.

That's what I believe.

I believe Eisenhower negotiated treaties that Congress and the people were never informed about.

I believe Majestic12 is the Official "don't ask don't tell" policy of the US Gummint that has undermined "consent of the governed" until NOBODY knows the Truth about the motives or intentions of Aliens--good, bad or indifferent.

They have been scamming us the taxpayers for fifty years.

So what do you want me to do? Praise LYING, DECEITFUL LEADERSHIP?

posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 03:10 PM

I don't believe abductions are conducted only by Aliens.

I believe our Gummint gave permission for those abductions to occur.

I happen to agree...

However, it doesn't change the idea of them (the aliens) then doing the abductions...even if only some of them (as you believe). It is still not a "good" act, and points to a less than benign agenda....

Likewise the other points have not been addressed (buzzing and interfering with defense installations, etc.)

I'd love for them to be all about peace, love, brotherhood, etc. but my gut, and the evidence, are telling me differently.....

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 08:15 AM
reply to post by instar

(edited name-calling) - the fact that no official headlines have been made to the world of the alien phenomenon (which has been going on for centuries) is simple - government coverups!! they dont want us to know the truth!51

Mod edit: Please refrain from profanity and personal attacks and stick to attacking stances on issues. Thank you.

[edit on 5-1-2009 by Gazrok]

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 09:41 AM
If they were SOOOOoo advanced , they would not even be here , and would most certainly have a different approach and an ethical type of contact.

Just like when you go visit a friend's home. You knock first and announce yourself.

That is not happening , the evidence , as said Gazrok , points the other way. And it is not really hard to see it , it's just that people want to be saved by a superior being , or entity , or whatever , that they just WANT them to be benign.

All this secrecy is not good , not at all.

Also , they do not need to start a war to take over , they do not even need to exterminate all of us humans. We have this brutish image of wars being fought by missiles , guns , etc. What makes you think advanced civilizations would do the same? Why would they exterminate all of their future workers/slaves ? That would be a waste.

This can be easily achieved through secrecy and influence , taking advantage of one's superstitions and such.

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 01:46 PM

Originally posted by Raphael_UO

Now, the other descriptions I read for "Space-Based Space Surveillance System" doesn't really sound like this description at all. But, I wonder.

Well, one could look at the Air Force TFP and argue that if we were to be attacked, we would be f*.

I quote,

page 59,

Currently, the Air Force’s stealthy fleet is limited to a
small force of B-2 bombers and F-117s, which may be inadequate to defeat future generations of air defense systems coming online. In addition, they can only exploit their stealthy qualities at night, as they cannot effectively defend themselves during the daylight if spotted visually.

page 83,

Another aspect of rapid air and space response is access to space. Today the United States cannot quickly get into space, and US space presence is not assured as space assets grow more vulnerable over time.

Wait, I though we were reverse engineering crafts for 50 years; either the author doesn't know, or we haven't gotten to far wrt to the "reverse" part...

In any case, I wouldn't want to deal with technology capable of moving being across the galaxy..It'd be like ancient Egyptians taking on a modern day Army..

new topics

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in