Tom De Longe with answers about UFOs, Life, the Universe and Everything...

a reply to: AboveBoard

It's all good, we must critically review everything and those of us who are honest agents of our own minds will see what is there, react to it sans the desire to tear it down because it conflicts with our previously held beliefs, and "it" (whatever "it" ends up becoming in this long tail) will either stand or fall of its own merits.

The rest, those who refuse to see past their existing beliefs (or absolute doubts), and those who have a reason to disagree with anything that doesn't fit the existing narrative on reality won't really matter, will they?

:-)

I don't think TDL has offered anything new in UFOLogy, either theory or fable.
It reminds me little of Snowden, we all knew what was happening, he just came out with confirmations.

I do think there is something odd behind the him being chosen to disclose information, therefore I don't trust what information will be passed to him.

I am tired of the premise that we are treated like children that need to manipulated with what information we are told and what is hidden.

Science and discovery should not be militarized.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Why so cynical Zazz? It's not like multiple somebodies have tried this before and left us hanging?

Should get Action Bronson, he likes to watch Ancient Aliens too.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I am tired of the premise that we are treated like children that need to manipulated with what information we are told and what is hidden.

Science and discovery should not be militarized.

Hear, hear!

zazz for president!!

BT

I stumbled upon an interview from Feb 2015 here :

Tom DeLonge Goes Deep on UFOs, Government Coverups and Why Aliens are Bigger than Jesus

Some points made are in the same vein as the interview in the OP:

You have to understand, I've been involved in this for a long time. I have sources from the government. I've had my phone tapped. I've done a lot of weird stuff in this industry -- people wouldn't believe me if I told them. But this is what happens when you start getting on an email chains with hundreds of scientists from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and different universities around the country, and you start outing seniors scientists from Lockheed Martin talking about the reality of this stuff, guys that hold 30 patents, guys that work underground out in the Nevada test sites in Area 51. It goes far beyond just saying, "Hey, that little light in the sky, that's a little green man." That doesn't lend the right gravity to the topic.

....I'm reading books on the secret space program, I'm talking to people that work underground for six months at a time, that are confiding in me about the national security initiatives. I've literally read 200 books on the subject, and I don't spend my time looking at UFO reports or talking to little green men. I'm way past that. If anybody tells you there's no life in universe, you should be turned off. That's just such a dumb thing to say. It's totally, universally accepted amongst the country's elite scientific establishments that there's life everywhere. The question is what kind, where, how'd they get here, what are they doing when they get here, and how do we communicate with them? That's when you start reading books about the mind and consciousness, and telepathy and ESP. It's a whole different program.

......one time I remember bringing up a very specific craft that I believe we're building, in secret, to emulate the phenomenon that our government has been observing for decades. So I started talking about the craft, and its magnetic slide system and how it displaces over 89% of the mass of the ship, how it ionizes the engine, how it glows -- I went through the whole thing, and this engineer looks at me, this guy is 70 years old, and he goes, "You better be real careful about what you're talking about." And I go, "Okay, so I'm close." And he goes, "I'm not kidding with you. You better be really careful." And he calls me up the next day and he goes, "I've had calls about you. If someone comes and asks you to get in their car, don't get in the car." [laughs] And that's the #### I'm dealing with.....


Q: Did anyone ever try to get you to take a ride?

Thankfully, I've had one interesting thing happen to me where I believe somebody was trying to get to me, that was in the intelligence industry. And... that's as much as I want to say. A very interesting thing happened.

And a very odd answer about the moon landings

Q : Do you think the moon landing is real or do you think NASA faked it?

I think it's real, absolutely. People have to understand: you know that the Department of Defense is bigger than Apple, right? So when Apple releases an iPhone, Apple will plan it out and spend billions of dollars and get thousands of people to figure how to tell that story, how to manage that story and how to get their point across. There's nothing different in the Department of Defense when it does something big. So when we landed on the moon, they're gonna go and give you something to chew on. They're gonna go out and find a conspiracy. They're gonna plan out the conspiracy. They made everybody think that we never went there. That way, when you ask questions, you're asking questions they want you to ask. They didn't want the conspiracy to be the real question, which is, "What was there when we got there?" They place the conspiracy, just like 9/11. The main thing is that terrorists did it, the backup story conspiracy they fed you was, "No, it was an inside job." What's the third story? Another nation state? An extra nation-state? You know? Who did that?

a reply to: mirageman

And a very odd answer about the moon landings

Great catch!
Now, that is some epic weirdness right there.

They didn't want the conspiracy to be the real question, which is, "What was there when we got there?"

The moon, eh?

BT

a reply to: mirageman

Good find!!!

Very interesting.

I wonder how his info/viewpoint has evolved on this topic. No doubt he doesn't believe some of the things he used to about UFOs, etc. I think a few years back he was going around with Greer. He has since moved sharply away from him.

Thanks for the post!

a reply to: AboveBoard

I met Tom in 2012, we had a meeting that lasted about an hour or so during which we discussed these topics in a general way. He was in deed a supporter of Greer then, and has distanced himself since, that's a good sign and one of the many reasons I'm listening when he has something to say.

a reply to: mirageman

That's a good observation.

You might notice, that the same strategy has been in use for thousands of years..

1) Start a great rumor/story
2) "release a snippet of purported facts" that cannot be verified ever
3) someone believes the "snippet of purported facts" and convinces everyone in their circle
who trusts them.
4) "release a contrary snippet of facts" that cannot be verified ever.
5) The same process repeats.
6) Rinse Repeat.

END Results = we are all at each other's throats and nobody can prove anything..
but we are all tied in a giant Gordian knot of absolute nullification.

It's what the Romans did with Christianity. Look how successful that deception worked.

The government, MIC and other actors just looked back in history and have adopted this
very successful practice.

You see --- if a "side" were to ever "win", then the paralysis would be over...

Then we might start revolting against PTB, rather than attacking each other on ATS
about things which don't matter.

Hell, we'd fix everything and live in peace.. CAN'T have that, can we?

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Wow, you're comparing this story (that has yet to even be revealed) to Jesus?

I don't think we're anywhere near biblical levels here or anything that is going to get that level of attention/press...

I'm certain those who will be presenting it appreciate you're confidence though!

So guys, is this still on topic ? Because all Delonge-bashing aside, the Podesta wikileak mails have proven he indeed
assembled a team of in-the-know advisors, I also read his book "Sekret Machines" and found it a drag to read but kept reading anyway because I knew that every piece of technology in there is the real deal, information fed to Delonge by his advisors.

https://__._/podesta-emails/?q=delonge&mfrom=&mto=&title=¬itle=&date_from=&date_to=&nofrom=¬o=&count=50&sort=6

Rob Weiss; Executive Vice President & General Manager Advanced Development Programs (Skunk Works) at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics

William Neil McCasland; USAF Major General, commander of the U.S. Air Force’s research laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

Michael Carey; retired USAF Major General, Special Assistant to the Commander, Air Force Space Command, Peterson Air Force Base, which is also the home of NORAD

John Podesta; Hillary Clinton's aide, and UFO disclosure proponent

One does not meet USAF Generals and the head of Lockheed Martin for some small talk...

a reply to: mirageman

The quote about the moon is, in my opinion, very well thought out. Tom here is quite right about the managing of perception and public relations.

We can see it in:

Apple / other electronics manufacturers' product launches
Hollywood movies - they are beyond adept
Crisis management for big corporations

Here is why I trust Tom on this point. The processes he described are used for any big 'event'. They have to be and he will have experience them multiple times in the music industry.

A quick example for you. Artificial Intelligence. Does anyone really think that business people pay for press releases writing, and inserting into the press / distributing about AI taking over the world for fun? Or it's there just because it's newsworthy? News organisations are desperate for content and far more of it is paid public relations than most people realise. Start looking at Hollywood tentpole movies, then track back 6-9 months on emerging trends in news outlets that had no obvious commercial intent.

Yet, most people go around squawking about the "AI revolution" without realising that the intent was not to get the public to genuinely prepared AI, but to change the conversation in our own heads and with each other.

The problem. How do you get people thinking about something, so that by the time you introduce it they are already having that conversation in their mind? That is the problem that has always faced those in power or those that need the tacit or commercial support of the public.

There appears to be a huge amount of cognitive dissonance in this thread, even for ATS. Normally I'd say it was healthy but it's quite clear that none of us want our pet theories stood on.

Heck, I don't believe disclosure will happen, because I don't believe that any of the UFO solutions involved aliens. I am however prepared to be proven wrong, because I do believe that there are several phenomena involved. There is going to be at least one shocker in that bag though and I'd consider it deeply arrogant of myself / anyone to assume I've / they've got this figured out.

Hollywood mastered the process of entering the conversation we have with ourselves and changing it decades ago. Yet so few people outside of the industry recognise the process going on. It isn't random, it has steps, a formula if you will.

Think about where our conversation has been changed:
- The Invaders - The invaders take our form and are subverting us from within
- U.F.O - The invaders are us, stealing organs to stay alive, serving some "other"
- Star Trek - The Motion Picture - That our own machines would become sentient and believe us gods. They like binary code to talk to us.
- E.T - That alien life could be friendly and vulnerable even though far in advance of us
- Close Encounters - Due to technical reasons, most of the aliens were made to be light balls rather than physical craft...

I'll end by saying this. Those most wedded to their ideas are at risk of missing the obvious. For the past few years the subsurface of ufology has been bubbling with three groups focused on disclosure. Of what, it doesn't matter right now.

- John Burrough's VA medical claim helped by Kit Green
- John Podesta - Does anyone seriously think they media trained Hilary on UAP and inserted the topic into media opportunities for the heck of it? Political campaigns don't work that way. Airtime is precious.
- The Media Industrial Complex - personified by Tom Delonge.

If anyone believes that they would just waste time on rubbish, it's less than likely. By the same token, it doesn't mean that something is there. Only that a lot of people are spending time attempting to do something they believe is of worth.

a reply to: Springer

Presenting the entire field of ufology, of which TD is just a minor blip in this manner.

This TD thing is nothing special. It's just business as usual. It doesn't rise above background noise, so it's background noise which needs to be discussed.

I also peer reviewed with reputable parties.

But as always... "IMHO".

PS: I want to make sure it is thoroughly communicated.. there *are* a lot of earnest "believers" out there, who think that they are "in the know". I suppose in all fairness I could be classified that way myself. (I don't believe in "UFOs", but close enough for discussion). These people, as I already classified with the 4 ring delusion scale, tend to get sucked up into these larger webs of deception. They make perfect patsies.

What's really clever, is that even Tom's handlers are, some of them, true believers, who are also being 'handled'. And at level 3 of the deception
you still have some really scary people who are still "being handled". Level 4 is a little murky, so not too much can be discussed about that.. whole series of books were written about that level, and it's not solid yet.

Kev

a reply to: ctj83

Nice post.

I especially liked the part where you discussed the outermost delusion level, the media.

I'd like to disagree with just one point you made.

Yes, it's obvious that there are (at least) 3 groups working on "disclosure".

It's how the human mind works.

Throw some intelligent creative people a crumb, and they turn themselves into crusading
true believers.

It's a self-powering process. In fact, I'd say that most of such "disclosure delusions" are
COMPLETELY self-powering and self-reinforcing.

"They" don't have to do much of anything..

It's like ATS. "IT" is "user content driven".

Now, there *is* something behind all this.. very loosely spurring this all on.. (even deeper than KG's
schizophrenia) but I doubt any of us will see it clearly in our lifetimes.. no matter how much "disclosure noise",
no matter how "deep in the known" people claim to represent.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
I think you're spot on. However. Assuming you believe you have an answer (and we've discussed this before), isn't it possible that one of the there groups is essentially pushing for disclosure of that?

Or, are you suggesting that all three are self generating delusions, without us having a picture of what at least two out of the three believes?

Assuming you're correct and I've mentioned before I think that's possible, how do you know you're correct? Versus Tom DeLonge, Stephen Greer etc?

Isn't it, on a probability basis, far more likely, (if you're correct) that you are part of the self generating group? As in, if you're not, (and you can state clearly "they don't have much of anything" so you imply that) - then that leaves you as the sole aberration in the game? In short, I'm not sure either of us can offer any more than Thom Delonge in terms of proof for our ideas, to the group at large.

I guess my point is, you're speaking from a place of absolutes in terms of judgements, but delivering an alternative that isn't very clear - whilst on balance we are probably all part of the same system, not separate from it.

I say this, whilst on balance agreeing with you, but seeing as our discussions won't change what is happening, it seems worth considering.

...but it's quite clear that none of us want our pet theories stood on.

Ehhh...not this kid.

I want my pet theories to be stepped on. Squished dead if possible.

That's why I am at ATS.

What I don't want to see is a dork like Tom and his buddies evaluate what is ingestible by ATS based on ATS's pet theories, and then twist it and feed it back to us as the usual and inevitable New Age Horse#.

That's my thing.

Anyway.

a reply to: ctj83

I don't markedly disagree with your response.. I did state that I have to be careful not to be sucked into a delusion framework myself. Self-delusion is built right into what we are. We are both reality and unreality generators (we can both think clearly and have wild imaginations both).

However.

I have slowly and painfully extricated myself from 3 of those 4 delusion layers over these past 55 years, and while I cannot speak precisely about the 4th delusion layer, I like some others working on it, know that it exists. That is something.

On that 4th layer.. I'd say that it runs contrary to human nature to face it head on.. that even people who say that they wish to trash all their preconsceptions and know "the truth" don't *really* want to know "the truth". I'd say that we all collude with that 4th layer on an unconscious layer.

I'd say that most of the more successful deception frameworks (religion, spirituality, UFOs) take maybe 10% of "the truth" and dress it up in a psychologically palatable format that we are willing to swallow. Some of us want yellow pills, some orange.. some green.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Great followup sir! Thankyou.

In other news, it's worth searching for Fastwalkers in the Podesta emails.

a reply to: ctj83

It has been long apparent as well with the media of how "reality" TV shows are not necessarily 'reality'. They are carefully scripted to provide entertainment and talking points for the following day's newspapers and even 'news' programmes on the same TV channel. People even pay money to 'vote' in this charade.

Where does 'Sekret Machines' stand in all of this?