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.


ET Contact - Why should we wait for the US to act?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 09:36 AM
I also have to say that most of the UFO's have NOT poised a threat.

Actually the ships (Alien ships) would not have shut down our aircraft if we didn't show a threat to them FIRST.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:04 AM
This is complete Bull# !!!

The USA should be considered the last option to lead anything at all!

The US is the nation with the biggest ego problem, a nation that did not learn its lessons.
This war mongering energy wasting and irresponsible country that was highjacked 30 years ago by some international banking crooks should not lead anything on this planet.

I do not trust the military industrial complex!
I do not trust Big Pharma!
I do not trust Gas & Oil!
I do not trust this #ed up government that steals everything.
Crooks In Action - please stay home! The world does not need you!

In fact any geopolitical involvement by the USA should be banned on a international basis.
Thank god that this decision is not at all up to the US.

Mankind has a long way to go. Till there is no change on the horizon, realizing that
cooperation is better then competition, there is no way in the world that this situation will be changed to the better. Forget to think about Ufos my dear America, at first you need to grow up and then clean up your # first!!

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:21 AM

Originally posted by noonebutme

But you're correct -- there's no reason why any other world power couldn't make an attempt. However, how would they do it? What are you referring to? telescopes, etc? Radio signals? I'm not sure what else we can do... unless of course all the UFO/US conspiracy theories are correct.

The whole premise of this thread is valid but with one small exception.

Who are we to say that the US chose this issue for themselves and not that they were chosen.

If you’re an alien ship on some sort of survey/first contact mission which location seems to be the tightest group of technology?

Also most of these contacts happened right after WWII that’s when it really heated up. At that moment in time the west and especially the US had those most modern of societies as far as technology something they could identify with maybe they saw some sort of kinship with the west.

So maybe they chose who they felt represented in their opinion rightly or wrongly those who they felt had a better handle on global issues.

Its all a matter of perspective we should not confuse being politically popular with what exactly they may be looking for in a global contactees.
If you made land fall on some island and wanted to create some business contacts would you deal with a laborer or the one you thought was the chief?

In the end outside of the Russian/Former Soviets who else has been very active in space and landed on the moon?

[edit on 27-1-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:39 AM

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Who are we to say that the US chose this issue for themselves and not that they were chosen.

The thrust of your post suggests that any? alien civilisation would judge the US as being the most useful point of contact to bring about a furtherance of what they themselves hold dear ... what utter tosh! You have some awareness expansion to do my friend.

It goes without saying that the positive values held by alien civilisations are way beyond our petty bickering and self-interested activities. They have no desire to see our current behaviours perpetuated, for they wish us to take the next step toward being responsible members of our galactic community. Where does the behaviour pattern of the US fit with that?

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:40 AM

Originally posted by pieman

Originally posted by panpravda
I've picked up from just about everywhere, including on ATS, that a clear assumption is held that the US is, and should be, the leader of Earth's nations when it comes to making contact with ET civilisations. Why should that be I ask?

i really don't think it's up to us to be fair, the ET's are the ones calling the shot's, if we could choose to contact them we would have already.

Exacly again if your an alien looking to make first contact and you had advanced scanners what exactly would you pick up?

The most radio traffic, the most internet usage it is easily seen where the most usage of advanced technology is located.

I said most usage not most advanced.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:41 AM
reply to post by panpravda

And you my friend are confusing human politics with Alien first contact perspectives.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 11:10 PM
Forget waiting for the US. This is a UN issue anyway. It's going to take more than one country (even the US) to calmly convince the world that there's proof (since the majority of the media has done some shoddy reporting).

The evidence is being slowly released by some countries to get the population up to speed. People on ATS keep forgetting that most of the population doesn't dwell on this issue--they're too busy working, partying, and planning. They just go off the movies and TV for their opinion...not really knowing the facts, who the charlatans are, the uninformed skeptics, or the legit voices. Until our "celebrities" convince us, they won't be ready. If Brad Pitt, Oprah, Ronaldo, and Stephen Hawking all came out and said the aliens are here and here's some'd see some big movement then.

...As far as Stephen Greer, I would NOT follow his lead. Nick Pope is a hundred times better as far as insight and credibility. Thanks for the Disclosure Press Club Mr. Greer, but time to get off the stage and let someone else lead. Just get the facts out, stop pushing new energy, spirituality, or whatever...just tell the people. He has taken other people's testimony and attached his own personal agenda.

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:46 AM
reply to post by Atomic

I agree with a lot of what you have said, but I have a few points to make on it ...

I think you may be being a little too easy on the media, for it is they who choose to be as they are, significantly frightened and controlled. Most areas of the media have good, honest people working therein, but even they should remember more seriously one of the basic tennets of the career they have chosen ... to get the truth out to the public.

Slow release of information ... yes, that 'seems' to be happening. And 'yes' to the notion that most of us 'everywhere' are walking about 'sleeping' in our own little worlds, unconscious of what is really going on and only paying attention to the 'icons' in our lives. It's very sad for this still to be the case, but there is evidence that the alarm clock has gone off in more and more peoples' heads these days. I am personally quite hopeful that this bodes well for something on the horizon.

I am interested in your comment about Dr Steven Greer. I personally have no issue at all with the guy, in fact, I think he has demonstrated bold leadership and a personal commitment not shown by many others. Can you expand on your opinion of him?

Nick Pope seems to tow the official line and seems afraid to take a leading role with opinions that he no doubt has. We need to hear more from Mr Pope.

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:02 AM

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
Greer is a complete jerk and should be locked away in a padded cell. He has done nothing but a disservice to UFOlogy with his fabrications and CSETI money scams.

Shame on you Greer... Shame indeed!


Hmmm...Isn't he the same guy who insists that he's met with Lilliputian aliens a couple of inches tall? Holy molly!
Their darn spaceships would then be the size of actual saucers. Ahh yes - Is it why they're called Flying Saucers?

(The only flying saucers I've come across are the ones that my wife throws at me!!


posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:01 PM
To yourself Mikesingh, to InfraRedMan and to Atomic ...

Nothing any of you have said amounts to anything more than hearsay and personal opinion. I would like to have facts that can be checked regarding your statements about Dr Greer. Verifiable fact should always be provided when making pointed comments about anyone. Let me in on what you know - I'm serious, I honestly don't know - educate me!

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:47 PM
reply to post by panpravda

Good point without verifiable information it is just hearsay.
Second line here

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:20 PM

Originally posted by panpravda
To yourself Mikesingh, to InfraRedMan and to Atomic ...

Nothing any of you have said amounts to anything more than hearsay and personal opinion. I would like to have facts that can be checked regarding your statements about Dr Greer. Verifiable fact should always be provided when making pointed comments about anyone. Let me in on what you know - I'm serious, I honestly don't know - educate me!

Greer spoke of a UFO vectoring adventure in an interview on C2C I think it was.

He claimed to have a ufo fly over head so low that he could almost stand up and touch the underneath of the craft, but he never presented one piece of film/photographic evidence to back up those claims and amongst other events like a UFO dematerelising into a desert floor which also his vectoring team had witnessed.

Now if you were on a field trip like that the basic gear would be a flash light,camcorder,camera etc.

I try not to knock the guy and he done a great task puting the Disclosure Project together but he has made some wild claims laterly that does not wash with me and many others

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Bob Down Under]

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 04:28 AM
reply to post by Bob Down Under

Again Bob Down Under ... this is not proof. What you quote is an opinion based on something someone said ... even if it was Dr Greer that said it, who's to say it didn't happen?... really!?!

All I'm asking for is solid proof, otherwise it comes down to only being what someone 'thinks' the truth is, and that's just not good enough. Let's stop this Dr Greer thing right here and get back to the original point of the post ...

"Why should we accept the validity of the assumption that the US government/ military should be the ones to lead a first public contact with extraterrestrial civilisations scenario?"

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 06:17 AM
I think what we really need to ask oursevles is which nation (if any) is going to be able to best represent humanity as a whole on a galactic stage.

Would we prefer a Stalinist style regime (such as PRC?) who have no respect for human rights both home and abroad, or would we prefer a Democratic government who actually listens to its citizens allows freedom of speech and expression; granted the United States is not perfect, but which country is? They are all ruled by people, and all people both male and female seek power or to further expand their influence, regardless.

As to the statements of the UN mediating any form of first contact, how is the UN supposed to mediate such a sensitive and delicate a situation as an inter-galactic treaty, when it can't even get the Israeli's and Palestinians to behave accordingly?
Again because of its pivotal position as the world's sole Super power the United States holds maximum sway as to the descisons of the UN and its associated Security Council, this is mainly due to the nature of its armed forces and its ability to rapidly combat threats virtually any where in the world, whilst I recognise the fact that most people would not appreciate the military of any nation establishing such contact, the fact is these organisations are the best equiped and most suitable to handle the situation (after all their prime mandate is to sere and protect their home nation why not extend that to the globe?).

As to why the other nations of the planet should wait for the US to act on the situation, it is not a stretch to imagine that all global governments are in league with one another and are fully apprised of the situation and all provide valuable inmput into dealing with any potential threatening situation. Again this comes back to the strength of the US and her ability to project her power around the world, who better to project it and humanities intentions out amongst the stars?

Whilst I agree that no nation is perfect and the recent election of Barrack Obama does give hope to the world, I think that the US has become to complacent with its strength an in turn arrogant providing it's political leaders no matter what political orientation with an ego, beause of this perhaps another nation one who still hlds the democratic notions of the US to heart but which can proide a more coolheaded and relaxed perspective to the situation; perhaps a nation held in high regard around the world? (EU[ok I know it not a nation], UK, Australia etc)

By the way this is my first post so please be kind

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 06:17 AM

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in