It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

You have all been duped.

page: 16
1
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 12:51 AM
link   
I definitelly believe Roswell happened, I can also refute the skeptic article in a concise and fairly proveable way (you can do it too)
Find yourself a pilot with a couple thousand hours of flight time over a diverse area.
Now ask this pilot what the hardest part of flying a plane is... They'll all give you a variation of this answer: "Flying a plane makes driving a car seem very difficult, taking off isn't bad either... but landing landings the trick any idiot can fly a plane but it takes real talent and skill to land one." if they're a little tipsy at the time they might even add that the most important thing they learned in flight school that the trick is landing wheels side down.
Okay now ask them to tell you their scariest story about flying not involving mechanical failure (I'll give you that because of the super sophisticated craft that defy physics supposition made) Most pilots will tell you the absolute scariest thing they can think of is that night when they were flying in to X airport that they had never been to before at night in a raging rainstorm with lightning flashing all around and the ceiling down to x feet (the ceiling referring to how low you had to go to get under the clouds and see the ground)
Do you see my point? I'll even break it down for you and draw the parallels.

A: Any pilots worst nightmare is a night landing in an environment they are unfamiliar with in bad weather (do you see it yet)
B: would earth qualify as an unfamiliar landing zone? You bet they didn't have IFR beacons landing lights nothing. On top of that if your craft is antigravity and operates by pushing off of a grav field and you are on something newly discovered or visiting for the first time I guarantee you'll be white knuckling the landing no matter what because instruments and intuitive computer mapping of a phenomena only goes so far to prepare you for your conditions. For simplicitys sake I didn't touch the unfamiliar atmosphere part.
Conclusion: I could keep listing things that refute that article but they might as well have just said that's stupid because whoever wrote that article was just being ignorant and didn't do any real research.

As far as why wouldn't anyone in the military speak out: This is from personal experience. I lived in Colorado Springs Colorado for a year, in that time I made some friends who live on base at Fort Carson. Most of the guys I knew were tankers and the like, after awhile of shooting pool with them on base on Fridays they introduced me to some other guys they knew. Now I cannot prove that these guys were delta but Fort Carson is known to have Delta force guys stationed there or as a way point. I played it safe the first few fridays and such that we all hung out, we mostly talked tactics, weapons, and women. Now beings as these guys could kill me without batting an eye I was reluctant to bring up any possible touchy subjects, and when I finally did bring up Aliens and asked them if they knew anything it felt like the temperature in the room dropped subarctic in a matter of a second. The ones that would cop to anything answered pretty uniformly with this and it is pretty much as verbatim of a quote as I can give you.
"Yeah we know things about alot of stuff, but we aren't supposed to talk about it." when I asked if they were afraid of a fine and ten years of prison which I knew at the time was the penalty for disclosure of even a peep they laughed at me and said "Why would I be in Special Forces if I was scared of prison? we face things worse than prison on every deployment. No, the reason you won't hear a peep about that stuff (having to edit the emphasis words) is if we told you anything that you didn't already know, we would be doing our familys and ourselves a favor by unholstering our sidearms and putting a bullet in each of our kids wives and anyone we've spoken to in the last 24 hours then swallowing our pistol and blowing our own brains out"

Is it proof? Certainly not, I don't delude myself into thinking a second hand quote from me will convince you of anything. Did it convince me there was something being covered up? Yes
If you had seen the looks on the faces of those guys, and the absolute horror that showed in their eyes even bringing it up caused you would too.

Yes I have other things that convinced me and started me looking including some pretty odd incidents but after that conversation happened I knew that there was something going on. I also knew that whatever it was wasn't good or benevolent or in any way something that should be kept from people. Since then I have done more research and had more experiences, at this point I am not a believer I know something is going on.




posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cade

Originally posted by NeonKnight

  • Media Would Have Uncovered It

    (Ratings people, or does Kang and Kodos' mind-control-rays extend to everyone in charge at Science, National Geographic and Time.)



  • This is a special service to you NeonKnight, I'll post it again, there is no time for closed eyes, we are in this together, so let's stand together.

    This is a simple line of questions, nothing hard:


    Thanks for the special service Cade, I appreciate it. I did not miss your first post, I was unsure that you expected specific answers from me. I will give them a stab now:

    WHO DECIEDS WHAT GETS PRINTED, WHAT GETS BROADCSTED? THE REPORTER OR THE CHIEF EDITOR AND THE EXECUTIVES ABOVE?

    Is there a chain of command? Of course there is. Do some stories get trashed because they don't have enough facts to satisfy the top of the chain? Sure. Don't forget my point about ratings. It is the chief's job to maximize profits through ratings. A reporter has solid evidence for the biggest ratings bonanza of all time. This story gets trashed, and the coverup begins. No one comes forward and blows the whistle, about either the story or the massive coverup that would have to exist, and its all just passed off as a hoax? (I find that scenario very hard to believe)

    •What could you do as a reporter if you found a hot story but your chief editor told you it was not something they would want to focus on?

    If it was the biggest story of all time, and I had solid evidence for my claims, and the chief still would not agree, I'd go around him. Especially now, when anyone can make a report to an outlet like Drudge or any of a number of similar outlets.

    •Would anyone ever read your story if you editor says no? and if no, then does it matter how many reporters we have or does it matter who owns the media and who they hire to run them?

    (see above answer, especially since I have solid evidence for the biggest story of all time)

    •Does an editor obey what the chain of command tells him is the focus of the day in their reporting? Do you do what your boss tell you? and what happens if you rebel? ...do you get fired?

    Thats why we have whistleblower laws.

    •Would anyone of us think it was a good idea if the media was owned by a small group of people?

    •Would we feel this was a good way to insure broad reporting, free press?

    •Could it ever happen in America that the mass media could be owned by a small group of people?

    •Has the media already been bought up over the last 20 years?

    •How many of you would believe that the mass media today is only owned by 5 corporations as opposed to about 50 corporations in the mid eighties? Is this compatible with democracy? Who is going to tell us about this...the media?


    I don't have time to respond to these questions in depth, but I will attempt a short answer.

    First off, I could be wrong. I don't believe in absolutes. I am not saying there is nothing to be concerned with if the media has become too consolidated. I would actually like to do some additional research on the subject, and I will check the site you've linked.

    But look, Cade, this media consolidation issue is a relatively new trend, is it not? The Roswell story is not.

    Where is the evidence of the massive coverup in the decades pre- media consolidation?

    Since I've admitted I could be wrong about some of these issues, would anyone else who believes we've been visited by UFO's admit, that they too could be wrong?



    posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 10:45 AM
    link   
    Wow. I had no idea that UFOs interaction with our planet has been so regular and so well-documented.

    As we used to say in the 60s, "Groovy!"

    Then, there's NO EXCUSE for claiming that the rest of the Universe has NO bearing on our history.

    There's NO EXCUSE for claiming that tectonic movements are the ONLY modus operandi of Planetary Change.

    Catastrophism is historically documented, as we see here.

    Therefore, I infer that galactic politics (what Mike Salla calls "exo-politics") has more influence on human existence (and annihilation) than our entire scientific community wants to acknowledge.

    Hmmm. Such timidity is regrettable among the supposedly intelligent of the specie.



    posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 11:40 AM
    link   
    I see there is still some doubt among those who believe the Roswell crash happened. Those who are trying to compare our technology with theirs are missing the point.

    Think about flying 50 years ago, or 75 years ago? Have we made any progress with safety since those days? What will flying look like 50 years from now? What will it be 500 years from now? How about thousands of years from now?

    I will try to illustrate this with some parables, Fractured Fairy Tales if you will.

    Remember, we've had manned flight for around 100 years, and any alien race that has developed interstellar space travel would likely have thousands of years experience.

    The Players:

    A Papryrus Boat
    (like Thor Heydahl's)

    The USS Enterprise
    (Since we've had thousands of years experience sailing the seas, like ET sailing the galaxies.)

    A Toddler
    (Representing our 100 years of manned flight)

    Jerome Bettis
    (260+ lb running back for the Pittsburgh Steelers)

    An Ordinary Coin

    A Slingshot


    (cue Fractured Fairy Tale Theme, from the Rocky and Bullwinkle show. Ask your parents, if you are too young to remember...)

    A papyrus boat from ancient Egyptian times is sailing in a stormy sea. In the same sea, is the USS Enterprise. They are traveling right towards each other, and they both sail into a cloudbank. Unfortunately, there is a collision, and only one of the ships emerges from the cloud bank unscathed...

    Which one will it be?

    On the deck of the USS Enterprise is a football field. On the field at the goal line is a toddler. Jerome Bettis takes the handoff, and is charging towards the endzone. Only the baby can stop him....

    Bettis finds the coin, and flips it. The coin does not land heads or tails, but instead lands on it's edge....

    Bettis now finds the slingshot, and a Navy fighter takes off from the deck. The toddler keeps track of the fighter, and shows Bettis where it is flying. Bettis takes the slingshot and spins, releasing a projectile, which is sucked in by the fighter jet engines, causing the engine to stall and the fighter crashes into the sea...

    Bettis and toddler chest bump and do a victory dance in the endzone...


    (cue music outro)

    A little over the top? Sure, but it does illustrate the type of technological mismatch we are talking about here, and also the type of improbable, incredible Murphy's laws occurences that would have happened for ET to have crashed his craft in a New Mexico desert.

    I raised the point in a previous post I could be wrong about some of these issues. Just to prove that I am open minded, and I am willing to admit that, I'll actually poke a few holes in my own theories.

    How many here would be willing to poke holes in their own views about ET visiting Roswell or anywhere on Earth?

    Backwaters of the Galaxy?

    Hard to argue with? Of course. But what if these reports are not quite what convential wisdom says they must be, visitors from outer space?

    I've done some reading on Quantam Mechanics. There is some evidence now that there are more than the traditional four dimensions. Some adherents of String Theory claim there may be as many as 11 dimensions.

    Could our visitors actually be residents of another dimension?

    What about time? Perhaps we are actually being visited by some future versions of ourselves? There are so many wonders being revealed at the cutting edge of physics. We are learning that what we thought we understood we really don't.

    Perhaps scientists of the future will actually come up with some kind of time machine?





    ....."Whats that noise"?

    "Oh, Kodos its you! You are early, the abduction patrol is not supposed to be until later...

    What am I typing? Oh its nothing...AHH just a little misinformation to throw those silly humans off...

    Kang! Put that raygun down! I am not...

    AUUUUUGHHHHHHHH!".......







    ....Kodos: "Pay no attention to what you've just read.... BWWAHA HA HA HA HA" ....(laugh echoing throughout solar system)...




    posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 07:27 AM
    link   
    NeonKnight

    The media subjectmatter. Does cencur exist? Can anything get through the keyhole of mass media as long as it is well documented or are some topics kept below radar to the american public? Before we take a look at this, let's first realize something very important. There are two groups of people when it comes to government and authorities.

    Consider this quote by Charley Reese:
    "Americans need to understand the difference between patriotism and nationalism. A patriot loves his land and his people. A nationalist loves his government. The patriot voluntarily does what is necessary to protect his land and his people. A nationalist blindly obeys his government."
    -- Charley Reese

    We need to be aware of ourselves and where we put our faith and trust. When someone brings to light evidence of misconduct it is often perceived as an attack by a nationalist, when really it is an attempt to salvage the remains of a democracy, and this should be in everyones interest who has liberty as a value.

    --
    Television is now so desparately hungry for material that they're scraping the top of the barrel.
    -- Gore Vidal

    Wouldn't it really be silly to expect everyone in media to be corrupt?
    Wouldn't it really be silly to expect everyone in media to be legit?
    The truth must be somewhere inbetween, I would even suggest that about 90% of all people involved in media are normal legit individuals. However 99% clean air and 1% toxic.....will kill you.

    --
    "The Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one"
    -- A.J. Liebling

    There is no getting around the publics role in keeping government in check, and when the public forgets, the consequese is predictable.

    --
    "When the government fears the people there is liberty, when the people fears the government there is tyranny"
    -- Thomas Jefferson

    Is the Alien precense the biggest threat to those who currently enjoy quite a few tax dollars so as to protect the country from terrorists and forign attack? If it is so, how far would they go to keep it a secret? How long could they keep it a secret? Forever? If not, then how can they turn the alien reality into their advantage? How can they keep us come running to them for protection? What would happen if we didn't need them anymore because we had found much more advanced "authorities" who were peaceful? (hint: look up)

    --
    The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.
    -- Thomas Jefferson

    In order to understand mens actions you must first understand their intensions. That's why it's so important to get the big picture, the big picture that only they normally enjoy.

    Controlling the media? It's a must! Without it they would be exposed. The frightening thing is that so many feel it would be impossible to control the media.

    --
    “Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the [U.S.] media.”
    -- Noam Chomsky
    co-author of "Manufacturing Consent"
    --

    Media propaganda in wartime?
    struggle.ws...

    --
    “Without censorship, things can get terribly confused in the public mind.”
    -- General William Westmoreland
    United States Army

    There might be an initial news report on a UFO related topic, but the next day it is "out of focus". Take a look at the OutFoxed documentary, do the reporters receive a list of "things to cover and how" each morning? When 20 witnesses stood before the world press on Maj 9 2001 and told the world that we are not alone, it was reported on CNN, but did we ever hear of it again?

    What effect does any news report have when the "follow up" is scraped from a "change of focus" the next day? Imagine a news report saying that US had attacked a forign country, but the next day there was nothing. Given the importance of the news report BUT the fact that there were no follow up, would you assume that it was a "mistake" ?

    You can fool some people all the time, and you can fool all the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all of the time.


    Sincerly

    Cade



    posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 06:24 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by NeonKnight

    Originally posted by Cade

    Originally posted by NeonKnight

  • Media Would Have Uncovered It

    (Ratings people, or does Kang and Kodos' mind-control-rays extend to everyone in charge at Science, National Geographic and Time.)



  • This is a special service to you NeonKnight, I'll post it again, there is no time for closed eyes, we are in this together, so let's stand together.

    This is a simple line of questions, nothing hard:


    Thanks for the special service Cade, I appreciate it. I did not miss your first post, I was unsure that you expected specific answers from me. I will give them a stab now:


    Well, let me thank your for taking the time to sharing your thoughts on those questions. They were not written specifically for you, but since you put down "media" as an argument after my post on this subjectmatter I was just wondering if you had any thoughts to share.



    WHO DECIEDS WHAT GETS PRINTED, WHAT GETS BROADCSTED? THE REPORTER OR THE CHIEF EDITOR AND THE EXECUTIVES ABOVE?

    Is there a chain of command? Of course there is. Do some stories get trashed because they don't have enough facts to satisfy the top of the chain? Sure. Don't forget my point about ratings. It is the chief's job to maximize profits through ratings. A reporter has solid evidence for the biggest ratings bonanza of all time. This story gets trashed, and the coverup begins. No one comes forward and blows the whistle, about either the story or the massive coverup that would have to exist, and its all just passed off as a hoax? (I find that scenario very hard to believe)


    I agree with you that some stories get trashed because they don't have enough facts to satisfy the "top of the chain", but that's a whole other situation than when something does have proof and still get's axed or get's portrayed in a distorted way. If you have never seen press distortion take a look at this:
    911inplanesite.com...

    The most frightening evidence of media "one time reporting" and "hatchetjobs" is getting a copy of the documentaries on 911 and watch what was indeed reported on the day of those tragic events, but never again. I have a link to a danish site that has a large collection of newsreports from September 11 2001 that the world has only seen on that day and never since. So now we are not talking about credibility of proof to the reporters story, we are talking about corporate civilians, firemen and policemen who were inside the WTC when bombs went off.
    www.terrorize.dk...

    The real question that should be concerning every american is, does censorship exist in the US media in the form of "one time reporting" and "hatchetjobs" and then "we don't want to focus on this any more" (study "outfoxed" if you want to look behind the curtain of mass media:
    www.outfoxed.org...

    you can watch a trailer here:
    www.outfoxed.org...

    For two years an investigator who had the help of about 10 FBI agents (supposedly in their freetime) tried to get the massmedia to air an interview with James Files who has admitted he fired the lethal shot at kennedys head in 1963. I have the 2,5 hour interview and anyone who cares about the shooting of their president will ofcause order it. Prepare for amazing details that has checked out to be true when crosschecked. Why did the mass media not want to air this interview? How many times have we seen people accused of different crimes on TV only to find out that ups it was a mistake. Here we have a thorough investigation over sereral years including about 10 FBI agents helping out in their sparetime, and the media won't even say: "a man now CLAIMS to be the JFK murderer. Is it because James Files can name the exact names of CIA officials and organized crime members who gave the orders and carried out the planning?
    www.jfkmurdersolved.com...

    --
    "a society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves"
    -- Bertrand de Jouvenal

    This way censorship comes out more as a "profit hunting" decision than actual censorship. In a dictatorship there wouldn't even be "one time reporting", but at least we would all know of the censorship. Nothing could be more effective than a mass media that looked free but was controlled.




    •What could you do as a reporter if you found a hot story but your chief editor told you it was not something they would want to focus on?

    If it was the biggest story of all time, and I had solid evidence for my claims, and the chief still would not agree, I'd go around him. Especially now, when anyone can make a report to an outlet like Drudge or any of a number of similar outlets.


    What really happens when a whistleblower goes "public" in a not so public arena? What does it matter if a small procentage of the population hears something they were not supposed to hear, tomorrow they will be filled with new reports of other things. It was long ago when James Collier on a local TV station (not mass media) showed the viewers how the US elections are rigged. No mass media would touch the story.




    •Would anyone ever read your story if you editor says no? and if no, then does it matter how many reporters we have or does it matter who owns the media and who they hire to run them?

    (see above answer, especially since I have solid evidence for the biggest story of all time)

    There are so many news stories out there which the mass media either will not touch, does a "one time reporting" on or a "hatchetjob" on. Just use google
    and a lot of patriotic americans needs your help in waking up to a harsh reality that their country has been quietly taken over by cororate, military and intelligence powers. This is not easy to deal with emotionally, intellectually or spiritually. It truely requires nerves of steel and a burning passion for the freedom america stands for. It is the responsibility of the people, and they cannot afford to fail, the outcome is too frightening.



    •Does an editor obey what the chain of command tells him is the focus of the day in their reporting? Do you do what your boss tell you? and what happens if you rebel? ...do you get fired?

    Thats why we have whistleblower laws.


    Yes, the whistleblowers law is a clever law crafted by intelligent men, but how will those who are trying to get the truth to you, to you my friend, if the loudest megaphone is screaming something else so loud you can't hear the small megaphone where the whistleblower is talking? The truth is all over in the india media, but who knows about it? (and let's not forget the ultimate whistleblowers event on May 11 2001, Disclosure Project)




    •Would anyone of us think it was a good idea if the media was owned by a small group of people?

    •Would we feel this was a good way to insure broad reporting, free press?

    •Could it ever happen in America that the mass media could be owned by a small group of people?

    •Has the media already been bought up over the last 20 years?

    •How many of you would believe that the mass media today is only owned by 5 corporations as opposed to about 50 corporations in the mid eighties? Is this compatible with democracy? Who is going to tell us about this...the media?


    I don't have time to respond to these questions in depth, but I will attempt a short answer.

    First off, I could be wrong. I don't believe in absolutes. I am not saying there is nothing to be concerned with if the media has become too consolidated. I would actually like to do some additional research on the subject, and I will check the site you've linked.

    My sincer respect goes out to you then. As I like to tell people around me "Dismissal comes after investigation, not the other way around".



    But look, Cade, this media consolidation issue is a relatively new trend, is it not? The Roswell story is not.

    Yes media consolidation is a 20 year phenomena that should be feared by any country exposed to it. The order of "National Security" is not.



    Where is the evidence of the massive coverup in the decades pre- media consolidation?

    well, I'm no James Collier, so you must forgive me in not being able to provide sworn testimony on this but take a look at the moon landing for starters...
    I have often pondered how the mass media in Denmark has also been a tool in the distortion of what really happened on Manhatten. They too reported the major bombs in the WTC's the first day, but never since. I have come to the conclusion that it's what I call the "choir effect". What happens in a choir of media if someone sings out of tune....in front of an audience? This is a kind of selfimposed cover-up.




    Since I've admitted I could be wrong about some of these issues, would anyone else who believes we've been visited by UFO's admit, that they too could be wrong?


    Oh hell yes, we're not going to have a problem there. "A man who never changes his mind, is a man who never grows" I have been wrong on many things, but I think we should look at it as "growing" or "changing ones mind". Sometimes it is said that it requires a lot of guts to admit you are wrong, I always just hope that people have a stronger passion for truth then they have fear of being wrong.

    I'm glad you brought this up, it's something that is very relevant to this forum and the topic we are discussing here. You should be praised for this.

    Yes, I could be wrong, I can be wrong, I have been wrong and I will be wrong, no question about it. Even the more reason we should all join forces in this investigation into the biggest secret of all times: our visitors.


    Sincerly

    Cade

    [edit on 2-1-2005 by Cade]



    posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 08:06 PM
    link   
    if that quote from the Delta force people (who are really hard core badasses) is true then I'm really scared.

    I think that people may be making an assumption here---that it would be our people inflicting the hurt upon the leakers.

    What if it isn't?

    What if the supposed Alien Coverup is NOT the voluntary choice of the US (and other Earth) Governments?



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 11:28 AM
    link   
    Actually the original poster is correct in stating that the governments of powerful nations, namely the USA & the old soviet state, have been flying 100% manmade saucer shaped craft under the most secret security clearances for the best part of 70 years.

    Operation Paper Clip, which was put in effect by the US in order to retrieve Nazi scientists after the second world war, was at least partly orientated around so called flying saucers and their potential.

    However, probably due to proximity, the soviets got to the majority of the nazi scientists first and the US had to wait many years before they could get their hands on the really juicy researchers in the field of flying discs. The soviets were flying saucers over the sea to spy on the states before the states had built their first functional saucer - this apparently accounted for a large wave of UFO sightings in the 40s - and specifically the three lights photo taken from the cockpit of a US plane (can't remember the name of the pic off the top of my head).

    Hitler pioneered the building of flying saucers for secret governmental/military use and apparently had a plan to fly them over to NY and scare the Americans with this new technology - thankfully he never got a chance. The secret base where the Nazis were building these discs was scuppered as the Nazis realised the war was lost to prevent the enemy gaining the technology - which happened anyway through the eventual acquisition of the scientists involved.

    It has been suggested that the "aliens among us" theory has purposefully been spread and perpetuated by the US gov't to act as a cover for their top secret flying disc programmes - however - and here's the thing - there is no way of knowing where the technology came from in the first place. This itself is rumoured to be a crash that occured in the 30s in Nazi Germany or one of her allies' countries from a genuine ET craft, although obviously this cannot be verified either way.

    So yes, the US gov't has without question been flying saucers around the USA & abroad for over half a century - this is fact.

    Whether or not the alien theory is being kept alive and relished by the gov't is just as much conjecture and cospiracy theory as any more extraterrestrial explanations - there's no way of knowing.

    Also there's no way of knowing what's been happening the last 50 years with regards to real ETs and their crafts if indeed they do exist on our earth.

    For what my opinion's worth, the technology is ET in origin, the whole alien theory behind UFOs was not purposefully started as a chinese whisper by the US gov't to throw citizens off the scent, but beyond that I couldn't say.

    Go HERE to see some photos of Nazi flying discs, under the heading "Manmade Saucers & UFOs", about 2/5 the way down. I did not get my information from this website by the way I merely cite it as pictorial support for what i have just typed.

    The OP was at least half right.





    V



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:11 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Victor the Cleaner
    Actually the original poster is correct in stating that the governments of powerful nations, namely the USA & the old soviet state, have been flying 100% manmade saucer shaped craft under the most secret security clearances for the best part of 70 years.


    Clearly the US government has attempted to research saucer shaped flyers in the fifties, a simple google on AVRO + UFO will give you lots of hits.

    To quote from AVRO Car

    "In 1955, Project Y became the U.S. Defence Department's weapon system 606A...Millions were now being poured into the project"

    So if they already had superior technology, why are US general's so interested in a giant, Canadian lawn moer?

    "But the wind-tunnel tests suggested that secret weapon 606A had severe stability problems and was in constant danger of flipping over ... had still not mastered them by the winter of 1960"

    "Mr. Frost insisted he could fix the problems, but the U.S. military was rapidly losing interest. After spending $7.5-million, the Defence Department pulled the plug at the end of 1961, killing the Avrocar"

    So is this a case of the right hand (Air Force) not knowing what the left hand (MJ-12) is doing?



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:17 PM
    link   
    Officially, they're not allowed to know.

    Unofficially, people find out all kinds of things outside the chain of command.

    But since we got ET technology from ETs, they're here and we have to deal with them.

    I think our Government perhaps has screwed up the deal and they're afraid to tell us. Otherwise, WHY "Star Wars"?

    Why "HAARP"? Why develop missile for space wars?

    There would be no purpose unless the US intends to prosecute anti-ET wars. Logical?



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:19 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by mbkennel
    if that quote from the Delta force people (who are really hard core badasses) is true then I'm really scared.

    I think that people may be making an assumption here---that it would be our people inflicting the hurt upon the leakers.

    What if it isn't?

    What if the supposed Alien Coverup is NOT the voluntary choice of the US (and other Earth) Governments?


    Your talking about the witnesses from the disclosure project right? If so, I unfortunately don't see any reason for not believing them, but I do however see why the establishment cannot afford for this cosmic reality to spread.


    Sincerely

    Cade



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:21 PM
    link   
    Actually the mj12 papers have been debunked.

    I believed 100% that this at least could be true, I no longer do.

    The original perpetrator of the hoax made a few errors when creating his hoax documents, for example the inclusion of the word "media" to describe the collective press when the word media was not in use to describe the press at the time the document was claimed to have been made. It also refers to a rear admiral as "admiral", a mistake that apparently would not be made on an official military paper. There are more mistakes but off the top of my head i don't remember them.

    Also the mj12 papers were not part of the FOIA as is commonly believed, they were privately published seperately.

    Almost definitely a hoax - 100% in my mind.




    V



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 12:33 PM
    link   

    Actually the mj12 papers have been debunked.


    Only a couple have. There are plenty of papers and documents dealing with MJ-12. Most legit ones, never refer to them as such, but usually as "the working group". The original members and their activities in regards to UFOs are also well documented through numerous documents, including some that ARE in FOIA release. I'd suggest majesticdocuments.com, as they have an excellent system for rating how authentic a given doc appears to be....



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 02:12 PM
    link   
    Thanks for the heads-up!

    I will visit the site and rekindle my interest in mj12 - I always thought they were found in the FOIA papers - because of this belief I searched for them one day at the FBI site and turned up 0 results. Later on I read that the mj12 papers weren't part of the FOIA after all and naturally believed it because of my failed search attempt.

    It was indeed only one particular document that was debunked - I wasn't aware there were many.

    It did however raise the issue of an unrelated 2nd world war project codenamed magic, and the idea that the military simply wouldn't have assigned a seperate project with the codename majik due to obvious potential for oral/aural mixups to occur. Apparently this was a specific requirement of a project codename - not to be potentially mistakeable for any other existing project - and that the whole idea of a project codenamed majik was simply not viable because of this and therefore the whole range of mj12 related literature is false.

    That was a memorable one that made me rethink my stance on the mj12 papers - what's your take on that?

    Thanks again.




    V



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 05:45 PM
    link   
    I notice even ATS has two versions of the Maj12 papers in their files.

    The latest one--the one that has been debunked most recently--is from 1951.

    The copies that I have seen that appear to be originals are from September of 1947.

    As in all defense contractor projects and software development projects, the documents went through revisions and versions.

    "The Jehovah Project" was a later version, in the 1950s. And so on.

    Which versions have you seen?



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 09:33 PM
    link   
    I think both schools of thought (regarding whether UFO and abduction phenomena are man made or of extraterrestrial/extradimensional/whatever origin) should be more flexible and open to eachother's views and theories. Sometimes the best answers to the best questions are to be discovered when seemingly opposing camps pool their thoughts and resources.

    There are indeed many cases in literature both new and old which would appear to indicate bonafide "alien" (I lack a more all-encompassing term for the many notions people have of just what the most common entities that appear to be behind such instances are, or should be called) activity.

    There are also many examples in which the easier to reach explanation seems to be a military or government run scenario.

    Both groups of cases run the gambit from UFO sightings to abductions. Both groups could be made to fit the preconceived mold of either possibility, if pondered long enough. And both groups lack clear indication of motive, atleast that I can see.

    Has it ever occured to people that both might be happening, either in cooperation, or (as is less considered it seems) independantly, or even competitively perhaps?

    Regardless, only by carefuly considering all the posibilities will either school of thought make their way to the truth (if there is any truth to be found for us at all) at the center of the maze, whatever that may be.



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 10:12 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by NeonKnight
    I see there is still some doubt among those who believe the Roswell crash happened. Those who are trying to compare our technology with theirs are missing the point.

    Think about flying 50 years ago, or 75 years ago? Have we made any progress with safety since those days? What will flying look like 50 years from now? What will it be 500 years from now? How about thousands of years from now?

    I will try to illustrate this with some parables, Fractured Fairy Tales if you will.

    Remember, we've had manned flight for around 100 years, and any alien race that has developed interstellar space travel would likely have thousands of years experience.

    The Players:

    A Papryrus Boat
    (like Thor Heydahl's)

    The USS Enterprise
    (Since we've had thousands of years experience sailing the seas, like ET sailing the galaxies.)

    A Toddler
    (Representing our 100 years of manned flight)

    Jerome Bettis
    (260+ lb running back for the Pittsburgh Steelers)

    An Ordinary Coin

    A Slingshot


    (cue Fractured Fairy Tale Theme, from the Rocky and Bullwinkle show. Ask your parents, if you are too young to remember...)

    A papyrus boat from ancient Egyptian times is sailing in a stormy sea. In the same sea, is the USS Enterprise. They are traveling right towards each other, and they both sail into a cloudbank. Unfortunately, there is a collision, and only one of the ships emerges from the cloud bank unscathed...

    Which one will it be?

    On the deck of the USS Enterprise is a football field. On the field at the goal line is a toddler. Jerome Bettis takes the handoff, and is charging towards the endzone. Only the baby can stop him....

    Bettis finds the coin, and flips it. The coin does not land heads or tails, but instead lands on it's edge....

    Bettis now finds the slingshot, and a Navy fighter takes off from the deck. The toddler keeps track of the fighter, and shows Bettis where it is flying. Bettis takes the slingshot and spins, releasing a projectile, which is sucked in by the fighter jet engines, causing the engine to stall and the fighter crashes into the sea...

    Bettis and toddler chest bump and do a victory dance in the endzone...


    (cue music outro)

    A little over the top? Sure, but it does illustrate the type of technological mismatch we are talking about here, and also the type of improbable, incredible Murphy's laws occurences that would have happened for ET to have crashed his craft in a New Mexico desert.

    I raised the point in a previous post I could be wrong about some of these issues. Just to prove that I am open minded, and I am willing to admit that, I'll actually poke a few holes in my own theories.

    How many here would be willing to poke holes in their own views about ET visiting Roswell or anywhere on Earth?

    Backwaters of the Galaxy?

    Hard to argue with? Of course. But what if these reports are not quite what convential wisdom says they must be, visitors from outer space?

    I've done some reading on Quantam Mechanics. There is some evidence now that there are more than the traditional four dimensions. Some adherents of String Theory claim there may be as many as 11 dimensions.

    Could our visitors actually be residents of another dimension?

    What about time? Perhaps we are actually being visited by some future versions of ourselves? There are so many wonders being revealed at the cutting edge of physics. We are learning that what we thought we understood we really don't.

    Perhaps scientists of the future will actually come up with some kind of time machine?





    ....."Whats that noise"?

    "Oh, Kodos its you! You are early, the abduction patrol is not supposed to be until later...

    What am I typing? Oh its nothing...AHH just a little misinformation to throw those silly humans off...

    Kang! Put that raygun down! I am not...

    AUUUUUGHHHHHHHH!".......







    ....Kodos: "Pay no attention to what you've just read.... BWWAHA HA HA HA HA" ....(laugh echoing throughout solar system)...


    Well, we have been walking for millions of years and I still occasionally trip and fall....wait...that was new years eve so it don't count
    )) just kidding.

    Applying this kind of logic assumes too much which we don't know yet if we should. I have seen too many witnesses to UFO crashes to dismiss them. Were they downed? If 12 crashes out of 12 million UFO's flying around earth is that really a lot and do we know out of how many, how many crashed? Did they stage a crash to give humans an oppotunity to approach them feeling like the superior? This is also an old trick used in warfare thousands of years ago (Sun Tzu).

    While it might be something to ponder, is it more than that?


    SincErly
    ))))

    Cade



    posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 10:37 PM
    link   
    Theories are theories are theories, but--there is only one Truth.

    And part of the Truth is that the Truth is being withheld.

    Am I wrong?



    posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 08:09 AM
    link   
    Well this is what I believe. I believe that only a portion of UFO's are US owned, and the other portion are actually real. I believe that the Roswell incident did happen but also I think that it is actually the first UFO incident that did happen. The US has probably been working on projects from there, working off of the UFO they have now. The Roswell UFO. Element115 was captured and used for anti-gravity measures and expiriments. Now I would have to think that we have a way to develope Element115, so we use them on our own expiriments. Just another way for NASA and EG&G to fly farther in a shorter amount of time. But the next question is, how does the human body handle such forces ?



    posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 06:15 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Cade

    ...Well, let me thank your for taking the time to sharing your thoughts on those questions.....


    The same thanks back to you. I think it is possible for intelligent people with opposing views to be able to discuss important issues, in an intelligent way.


    WHO DECIEDS WHAT GETS PRINTED, WHAT GETS BROADCSTED? THE REPORTER OR THE CHIEF EDITOR AND THE EXECUTIVES ABOVE?



    I agree with you that some stories get trashed because they don't have enough facts to satisfy the "top of the chain", but that's a whole other situation than when something does have proof and still get's axed or get's portrayed in a distorted way. If you have never seen press distortion take a look at this....

    The most frightening evidence of media "one time reporting" and "hatchetjobs" is getting a copy of the documentaries on 911 and watch what was indeed reported on the day of those tragic events, but never again. ....


    I really do not want to get into a discussion on 9/11, but I will say this. Of course all kinds of "one time reports" happen on the day of trumatic events. Most of the time, initial eyewitness accounts of this nature are trashed not because of some nefarious govt. sponsored conspiracy.

    More often it is because those "first day" or "one time reports" are erroneous.

    Do some things get covered up once in a while? Absolutely, but the day we get perfect media coverage out of human reporters is the day I'll agree with you that there is something very strange going on...


    Originally posted by Cade
    The real question that should be concerning every american is, does censorship exist in the US media in the form of "one time reporting" and "hatchetjobs" and then "we don't want to focus on this any more" (study "outfoxed" if you want to look behind the curtain of mass media:

    This way censorship comes out more as a "profit hunting" decision than actual censorship. In a dictatorship there wouldn't even be "one time reporting", but at least we would all know of the censorship. Nothing could be more effective than a mass media that looked free but was controlled.


    I want to make a much more detailed answer on this and all these issues at another time.

    Cade, you are a very astute and intelligent person, and I want to compliment you on that and your friendly responses.


    I want to leave off with this:

    Do you think that some folks want to believe we've been visited?

    Do you think there could be a "conspiracy/complex" built around all these conspiracy theories of every kind?

    Is there a profit motive among these people?

    Is it possible that some of these folks could not really care whether of not their own theories are correct?

    Which book or tape or whatever would be easier to sell:?

    There Are No UFO's or Govt/Alien Coverups

    or

    UFO's are Here, Alien/Govt Conspiracy Revealed

    Well, Kodos said I should sleep in the backyard tonite...

    Kang mentioned the abduction patrol works alphabetically,so there is nothing to worry about:

    we are up to the "B's"....




    new topics

    top topics



     
    1
    << 13  14  15    17 >>

    log in

    join