Force Disclosure - Plan to expose the UFO phenomenon!

I'm game but not without a laptop hookup. This would be a technological deathtrip broadcasted all over the internet before, during and after on an intergalatical level never before seen in the history of mankind!
Ham radio operator's invited too!
Let's get going guys! And don't forget the water... please... a lot of water Ok??



[edit on 16-1-2007 by Palasheea]

Two quick observations here...

1) Storming a military facility with an army of ATSers is not only a crazy idea, but distinctly against the law.

2) Taking control of media outlets is also against the law.

In the second post on page 1 are a couple of rules which I put there to try to keep this thread out of the trash bin.

Please post only legal methods of forcing disclosure. I honestly would rather NOT see any member incarcerated (or worse).

Last warning... abide by the T&C's in your responses.

Yeah, but a "Disclosure Sit-in and Tailgate Party" is an elaborate BBQ in Groom Lake's backyard.

No Infiltration, no Armed revolts.

Just 10,000 Beachgoers with one signiture each

C'mon, it's just a 10,000 person picnic.

That's not recruiting, it's an e-vite to a social affair.




C

And again, What do you hope to accomplish by sitting a bunch of people outside the gate. All you can possible prove is there is indeed a base there. I don't think that fact is in dispute here. Its the most famous "secret" base on the planet. I don't understand how you hope to "force disclosure" like that.

On top of that you dont have to "cross the line" for them t arrest you. Simply interfering in any way with its operation is a federal offence, so no laying down in the roads or anything like that. In fact all it takes is one person to not get out of the way of a car fast enough for you all to be arrested.



[edit on 16-1-2007 by Tiloke]

Look man, I just wanna BBQ.
If I could do it inside A 51, I would, but, I can't.
If it keeps a bunch of armed rascals distracted with food and beer (neer beer is probably a good idea) long enough to NOT see ATS membership decline by 300-500 names.

More power to me, eh?
If ya don't wanna go, don't.

If ya wanna go, bring your own bottle.

But, don't rain on MY parade!






















C

Tiloke, obviously you can't read.
1) My first post (with a link to more info on that plan) and another after it mentioned that the point was to get mass media attention, NOT necessarily to actually cross the line. Pay attention! We are not trying to get anyone shot here.
2) We got it, you think sitting and waiting would be awesome, but the first post again asked for that kind of negativity to be taken elsewhere. I don't own this forum, but I am asking nicely.


Cuhail, you got it exactly! If it ever happens you are the kind of guy I want to tailgate with while leaning my lawnchair against the sign!

So, Miah....

Does that mean ya'll up for some BBQ at the mailbox?

I'm sure it would gather more media than any of the other slow-newsday crap on TV.

10,00 BBQer's can't ALL be wrong?

C

All accept the mailbox, I'd rather be closer to the signs/border personally. Otherwise, hell yeah!

You get a mass protest in a location like that I guaran-f'n-tee you the media will have a hay-day with it.

The Disclosure Project had the right idea, but it should not have gone this long without version 2.0. There should be mass organized protests at least once a year in such a way as to bring more attention by the media, the people at home, and that government that WE THE PEOPLE own!


[edit on 16-1-2007 by Miah]

Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link




[edit on 16-1-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

However, in the past people who were for disclosure, like President Jimmy Carter, changed their position once they did join the ranks of those in the know.

I personally have experienced this at NASA and have friends and relatives in the same situations in Military Research, the NSA, and the CIA. Once you know certain things, motivations can change.

I have no such first hand information nor acquaintances.

I put forth to the ATS readership this hypothesis that ought to be seriously entertained:

suppose those who are "in the know"---including those who once were for 'disclosure' and did nothing upon later elevation to a position to know---are declining to advocate public disclosure for truly honest and patriotic and intelligent reasons?

And that most of us, if we were in the same position, might also do the same?

One must consider the potential that if one does become "in position to know" that there could be facts and considerations that we do not know publicly which authentically, and legitimately, justify the lack of disclosure of what is known by humans. Perhaps it really is for our own good. This is very uncomfortable, because to me that means the "truth" may be quite upsetting.

There seems to be a strange belief here that those who become part of the 'scientific' or 'military' complex that, despite significant evidence to the contrary, most people turn into "Doctor Evil" type maniacs or droids. That really isn't the case.

I think the following is the most probable situation.

Assuming that there are ETs flying here who are responsible for some UFOs
(I can attribute no reliable probability to this, so it is for now a suppositon of mine):

1) ETs have a significant, and active policy of avoiding official, open contact and cooperation with usual relevant Earth authorities (e.g. FAA) and take affirmative steps to preclude such.

2) ETs are doing "something" here which results in occasional observation by humans, meaning that whatever they are doing for their mission is more important to them than avoiding all potential contact. This mission does not appear to be simple curiosity.

3) Human government and agencies do not have any comprehensive information about their numbers, activities, motives, or technology.

4) Human governments and agencies have no ability to convince or compel ETs to do or to not do anything. Likewise, ETs act in practice unbound by any Earthly law or rule.

5) That which humans do know about ET activities is sufficiently worrisome that men and women of good will feel compelled to actively cover this up as well from their other human compatriots. One obvious scenario could be threatening ET blackmail to enforce the ETs own secrecy.

Originally posted by Miah
Tiloke, obviously you can't read.
1) My first post (with a link to more info on that plan) and another after it mentioned that the point was to get mass media attention, NOT necessarily to actually cross the line. Pay attention! We are not trying to get anyone shot here.
2) We got it, you think sitting and waiting would be awesome, but the first post again asked for that kind of negativity to be taken elsewhere. I don't own this forum, but I am asking nicely.


Cuhail, you got it exactly! If it ever happens you are the kind of guy I want to tailgate with while leaning my lawnchair against the sign!

Well, if you "want that kind of negativity to be taken elswhere" the best way to do it is to open with an insult. Second, if you only want people that agree with you to post, start your own forum.
How are you going to get mass media attention? Are you going to ask FOX CNN CNBC and all the others to come and film you "big bbq"? Even if they did, How exactly would that "force disclosure"?

You know the signs at the facility say"photography of this area is prohibited"


Do you think the mass media will just ignore that? Do you think the guards will ignore the dozens of cameras? These are legitimate questions and deserve answers, not to be brushed off because I dont think you shoud do it.

EDIT---------------
Sorry mods... The above Picture was taken from Wikipedia's article on Area 51.

[edit on 16-1-2007 by Tiloke]

Your response again shows your closed-mindedness. I have answered those questions and even asked this forum not to contain blather as you bring.

Do you think that the Disclosure Project was a waste of time too?

I give you an A+ for working in the government's interests in keeping their secret in the dark from us 'civilians'. But your negativity and lack of balls to take a pro-active stance reveals that you would prefer that everyone sits quiet waiting to see what happens if we do nothing at all.

Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link





[edit on 16-1-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by Miah
Cuhail, you got it exactly! If it ever happens you are the kind of guy I want to tailgate with while leaning my lawnchair against the sign!

Well, I'm sure the guys in the Jeep on top of the hill in that PHOTOGRAPH YOU POSTED got pulled into a jail cell and beaten with rubber hoses for taking the photograph of a sign that says PHOTOGRAPHY PROHIBITED...
right in front of the guys in a Jeep.

Please, enough baiting. You don't want to go. I get it.

Don't bring your sign.

Don't bring your Weber.

No commradery for you.

Miah, How does August sound?




Keepin it real.
C

Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link




[edit on 16-1-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by Miah

Your response again shows your closed-mindedness. I have answered those questions and even asked this forum not to contain blather as you bring.

Do you think that the Disclosure Project was a waste of time too?

I give you an A+ for working in the government's interests in keeping their secret in the dark from us 'civilians'. But your negativity and lack of balls to take a pro-active stance reveals that you would prefer that everyone sits quiet waiting to see what happens if we do nothing at all.

OK, I just re-read this entire thread. No-where in it have you answered any questions at all. All you have done is blast those that dissagree with you.

Blather as I bring? This is an open forum and no matter how much you want to, you can not block out those that don't agree with you. "negativity and lack of balls". Again you feel the need to insult me personnaly. Did I run over your cat or something?

Answer these SIMPLE questions and I will be appeased:

1. How will you get the mass medias attention? How will you get them to come cover your "BBQ"?

2. How exactly will this "BBQ" force disclosure of alien life? The same way the protesters are stopping the Iraq war?

3. Where exactly will you hold this "BBQ" ? Its not possible to get close enough to get decent pictures of the actual base.


EDIT-----------------
I am entirely aware of the irony in posting a picture of a sign that says" photograghy is prohibited. But you have to think about scale here. The person that took that picture was with one other person and not a threat to the base. If you put 10,000 people at that sign and a lot of them have cameras, than you have a problem. At least, that how the "camo-dudes"see it.





[edit on 16-1-2007 by Tiloke]

1) www.abovetopsecret.com...
"hundreds of people holding picket signs marching accross the border signs at Area 51"
2) How did the Disclosure Project do it? It didn't! But everyone agrees it was worthwhile and a step in the right direction. But it didn't work, so we should just give up? Do you think it was a waste of time?
3) This proves that you HAVE NOT read my plan, see the posts at the link in 1. It's not that hard really. Millions watched the DP, if thousands of those interested millions show up at the border of Area 51 with signs and all of the famous UFOlogists, it simply cannot be ignored.

If you still don't get this, then I cannot help you.


Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link




[edit on 16-1-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by Tiloke

Answer these SIMPLE questions and I will be appeased:

1. How will you get the mass medias attention? How will you get them to come cover your "BBQ"?

2. How exactly will this "BBQ" force disclosure of alien life? The same way the protesters are stopping the Iraq war?

3. Where exactly will you hold this "BBQ" ? Its not possible to get close enough to get decent pictures of the actual base.

1. Well, luckily we have until August to figure that out.
2. Dunno yet. It might not. But, ya never know if ya quit before ya try!
3. OUTSIDE the gates, of course. You CAN'T go anywhere near enough to the base to get photos, and, I don't think anyone should have that intent. I wouldn't advocate the breaking of any laws.


I understand why you argue too now that I've read your signature.
I respect your stance.
I disagree.

C