care to be more specific, other than just "he doesnt sound truthful"
What has lead to doubts in my mind is a mixture of what the OP has said, what he HASN’T said and the way some of his answers have been phrased. To
his credit, he has put up with some intense scrutiny and the occasional idiotic poster with good grace and a great deal patience and for this I
applaud him. However, in one of his earlier posts in another thread he says that-
Nothing will be confirmed, only denied. But hopefully those few will be aware enough to be able to come to obvious conclusions
I think that I am aware enough to be able to sift through the nuances of what he has been saying because after all, in his own words-
its been my experience that the gut provides everything
My gut feeling is that he is not telling the truth. It may just be a phrase from a crappy TV law show but his ‘credibilty as a witness’ is
seriously undermined on many levels. For the first example, lets go back right to the beginning of the ‘testing’ thread (which was eventually
closed down by a moderator due to the OP giving the impression of stringing along).
The OP first posted on 16th Jan saying nothing more than he was testing the IP address tracking to make sure he could not be traced. He hints that he
had knowledge of Groom Lake and “the cat would be let out of the bag” He claims that he is running his own security programs to prevent being
traced and states that he has “a weight to get off my shoulder for a while now”. So far so good, nothing untoward there. However, when he is asked
by another poster whether he has photos, documents or video the OP replies thus-
I can't be for certain with what I should show. Everything I have is classified eyes only. I only have access to certain things. And anything
I have access to, ends at 6pm every day
So, he has access to classified items but only until 6PM everyday. Fair enough. But why bother saying that he is uncertain what to show as he knows
fully well what he can show- nothing because he’s just said so. The only possible reason for mentioning it is to build peoples expectations but then
he blows that out of the water straight away.
He then goes on to add-
I don’t find myself holier than thou and I am not saving the world
In the light of what he eventually reveals in his Q&A thread and his comments about it, saving the world seems to be exactly what he wants to do.
Assassination of presidential candidates and war with another muslim country (a country with nuclear pretensions) would seem to not be world changing
events in his view.
Over the next few posts he continues to hype his upcoming revelation and gets a positive welcome from other members. He then makes a curious post
where he says-
Thank goodness they don't let people like me drink during my contracted times or I might have a way to convince myself of just blurting
everything out now
So he’s on his contracted time as of now? If this is so then why later on, in reference to the fact that he seems to be posting at times when he
should be working, does he claim that he does not work during the Red Flag exercises. Red Flag 2008 started on 14th January, two days before his first
post. I’ve also been puzzling over what this says about the OP. Is he saying that he’s a blabbermouth drunk in a security position at Groom Lake?
How did that personality flaw slip through the extremely tight screening process for Groom Lake employees that he later claims is in place?
After the moderators closed the thread, the OP was not heard from until he posted in the thread started by another member who is claiming to be an
ex-employee at Groom Lake. On 5th February the OP states-
No one gets anything on to the base and no one takes a thing out. Wallets, cellphones etc are confiscated either at the Janet terminal or on
This seems to be at odds with his later post in the Q & A thread regarding what radio stations can/cannot be picked up on the base-
My radio that I listen to is a satellite radio. That or simple mp3 music. Would you know about 840 coming in loud and clear to gl having never
been on the base? no.
This is the first thing that made me sit up and think “hang on a minute…”. To be fair, perhaps radios are available from a secure source onsite
but it would seem to be doubtful in the light of the fact that if the cabin crew on the Janet flights are not allowed to even look at anyone, then it
would must be a pretty austere environment. Doesn’t prove anything obviously but the seeming contradiction of the above two statements is noteworthy
and certainly put me in a sceptical frame of mind. On the subject of Janet flights, the OP says on 5th Feb-
Janet flights were simple. Nothing on and nothing off. Simple frisks were done
Pretty clear there. But the OP then backtracks in his later reply when he is challenged because of the existence of photos of persons boarding those
flights and claims you are allowed to carry items on if you have the necessary clearance. Not worth mentioning in the earlier post when Janet flights
were apparently simple? Surely it would occur to anyone not making it up as they went along that the situation is “nothing on and nothing off
without the proper authority”. Especially as this is a situation you face everyday. Again, not conclusive but enough to raise a quizzical eyebrow
and sow seeds of doubt.
Also on 5th Feb the OP alludes to an incident at the border of Groom Lake involving a white Magnum. This incident was reported on 2nd Feb on the
Dreamland Resort website so why does he think that mentioning this will add to his authenticity? Also, the information the OP provides about telephone
numbers for Groom Lake can easily be found in publications like David Darlington’s book Dreamland Chronicles. This just adds to the suspicion that
he is recycling whatever he can find from ordinary research.
At this point the OP starts his Q & A thread which I haven’t had time to review and comment on yet. This cross referencing of long threads and posts
takes a while and sure gives you a headache. So before I set aside another whole day to do it- is anyone interested?