Former Legislator Makes Statement May 8, 2010 on Un-Released Eisenhower Brief Regarding ET's

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by iSeeKEnlightenment8o5
Anyway, I came across a website with Paul Kimball last night saying how this is just a joke. And I just finished reading a comment that says he's a disinformant agent? Whaaaaaa?!

Yes, because anonymous comments on an blog are gospel.

Why are you acting like I took that to be the truth?
I was just sayin'

Rex: Just asking for the same consideration and time that you would expect from others to evaluate something new, if you had information someone or everyone might be seriously interested in.

If you have any type of disclosure to make on any relavent topic of interest to you that is posted on this forum, I will be happy, no matter what that might be, I will be more than happy, to consider the merits of same before rushing to judgment, something which I, and numerous others have tried to point out to you.

You slammed the door in this guy's face before he even had a chance to walk thru the door.

I posted a video about a year ago maybe I can find it again where MEXICO in 2009/2008 openly stated that UFO's are real, they are not man made, and that Aliens have been visiting earth and are habitants here and that its a shame that the United States Government is fighting tooth and nail to keep its citizens in the dark... God I hope I can find it.. I said Back in June or July last year that disclosure is getting close! This is just one more step, and hopefully it will create a domio effect where more and more people will come out and say what they know! Ive been doing research for a very long time almost half of my life (Im 24 and started when I was 13) I've always known something was going on. I've felt it in my soul even as a young child when they denied Area 51 and then in 1999 the satalites took pictures of the complex from space and then in 2001 they took more pictures and the base had expanded its air strip, there were more hangers....yet it doest exsist?? I watched a video where our own house of reps were scolding the pentagon for not being able to keep track of 11.2 trillion dollars in one year?!! GEE wonder where thats going? And then Obama stops the space program?? I WONDER WHY?!?!?!?! THEY ARE HIDDING SOMETHING, and the more they try to hide it sooner or later its going to come out! Whatever it is( other the aliens being Real) ITS HUGE! And thats why people are starting to talk, maybe it has something to do with that signal that Nasa lady reported on her facebook May 5th?? Before it got deleted along with her twitter account, and went missing for a week. But her insider says shes ok and is no longer allowed to discuss it..... VERY INTRESTING!!! GOOD POST!!

Originally posted by manta78
You slammed the door in this guy's face before he even had a chance to walk thru the door.

That is such a complete distortion to the point of being a lie No other way around it, Manta. You are a liar. I read Mr. McElroy's statement and only then did I come to a conclusion. Just because I did not come to the conclusion you want, does not mean I am closed-minded or dismissed him without thought.

Once again, can you defend Mr. McElroy's claims without mentioning me?

reply to post by manta78


While this has the potential to be explosive, my main question is:

Why would a state legislator be given access to such a top secret and sensitive document? Although he was a liaison for state and federal security matters, it does not make sense letting a local person in on such a matter. Much more information is needed on this story and who Mr Henry McElroy is.

Still, he has not made any financial gain off of this and is not in it for publicity at his age. I eagerly await as to how this develops.

Edited to add: After reading his statement and watching the video again, it is my belief that the Hon Henry McElroy is telling the truth of what he read in the documents. The questions I asked still need to be answered, but I do believe he is sincere in what he says.

[edit on 5/14/2010 by kidflash2008]

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


Glad your made your final assessment/execution decision of McElroy's character, credibility based upon one statement McElroy made and came to your conclusions, which were presented in the beginning. Have you never been involved in any kind of serious "vetting" or investigations of any type? Even the MSM, bad as they sometimes are, will
research things sometimes to a point of ad nauseum....

Thanks for adding me to your list of persons you are name calling. Showing some real maturity there buddy....


I have repeatedly commented in the post, and have not mentioned
you.... the majority of times. It's not about you, sorry to dissapoint you. ......

I have never said absolutely that McElroy is the one disclosure they we are seeking....it's way too early to know one way or the other.
If and when there are others, believe me, I will be watching as many other members here will, your posts about them also to see how quickly you dismiss.....

The difference between my comments and yours, is that you have
already made up your mind that he (McElroy) is crazy or insane; I believe those were the words or something similiar you used previously to describe him.... I on the other hand, while hoping this is a "valid" disclosure, am certainly willing to accept the possibility that if sufficient evidence is presented, that seems logical, that indicates here that we need to keep looking, I can accept that, and move on.

This thread is not going away anytime soon, and I am guessing
that there will be many more soon as more information is developed.




[edit on 14-5-2010 by manta78]

Lets look at the facts:

Any documents for us Mr. former legislator??? No.

Anything more than his own opinion that Eisenhower met aliens? No.

Astronauts stating their own opinions without proof?? Yes.

Ed Mitchell taking the word of old air force guys? Yes.

UFO documents released by Britain, France etc contain no proof of alien visitation.

He could be right, although if we look at the facts, we still need the golden proof of alien visitation. Although still an interesting statement to hear.

reply to post by john124


John124.....

Any documents for us Mr. former legislator??? No.

Unfortunately…..I agree

Anything more than his own opinion that Eisenhower met aliens? No.

Unfortunately…..I agree..... to an extent.

My agreement is within the context that he states he saw documented proof of the meeting, which he would define as more than just "his opinion"

So, I guess it's less "his stated opinion" & more "his stated observation" & "his stated belief".

And..... there is a great deal of related discussion & circumstantial material pertaining to this idea of a Roosevelt / alien meeting, that should be considered.

Astronauts stating their own opinions without proof?? Yes.

Unfortunately…..I agree

If one does their homework, none of the astronaut statements are strong. Indeed, many are intentionally taken out of context &/or obfuscated to support the “belief” side of the argument.

However, if professional pilots are extremely reluctant to report events, I believe astronauts would share such concerns…..probably even more so.

Therefore we really don’t know what astronauts may have seen, that has gone unreported.

Ed Mitchell taking the word of old air force guys? Yes.

Unfortunately…..I agree

However, we should not discount the reports of ALL "old air force guys" because of this.

UFO documents released by Britain, France etc contain no proof of alien visitation.

Once again, we arrive at the definition of ”proof”, which in the context of this topic almost becomes a personal definition.

There is some very compelling material in those government files.

He could be right, although if we look at the facts, we still need the golden proof of alien visitation.

Once again.....I agree.....& back to that definition of proof.....

Although still an interesting statement to hear.

I agree.....it certainly is interesting.

Kind regards
Maybe…maybe not

[edit on 14-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

save-grafton.blogspot.com...

This is a Free State Project local organizer's blog.

Scroll down to the second comment. Rep. McElroy is mentioned several times and it's made clear that he is a supporter of the FSP, was at one point the co-chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Liberty Caucus. The RLC's Leadership page does not include him; however, it does include the Mr. Tim Condon the email quoted in that comment is from.

From my experience, his being a Free Stater adds a little bit to his credibility. I've been active in libertarian circles in the past and have known many Free Staters. Free Staters tend to be somewhat... single-minded in their pursuit of their goal of establishing New Hampshire as a libertarian utopia, and really are neither interested in or supportive of things that have nothing to do with the Free State Project. The organization is almost cult-like in that regard - members are kind of expected to be fully committed to the Project, leaving nothing for outside political interests. Also, Free Staters tend not to put much stock in the more "wacky" conspiracy theories involving MJ12, etc. - they'd rather focus on ones involving the Federal Reserve, though sometimes they get into things like FEMA camps, etc. Regardless, this being ATS I'd expect we could find some representative Free Staters to give us a fuller account - we may even be able to find some FSP members on here who have met Rep. McElroy.

I'll be doing some more sleuthing on Rep. McElroy, based on my own crackpot theory. Assume he's being honest, as he appears to be in the video (and if he's hoaxing then any further digging is irrelevant anyways). The first thing I, like some others, thought was - wait - he's a member of the New Hampshire legislature, he shouldn't have access to anything of that sort! If things like he's talking about are spread as far and wide as the New Hampshire state legislature then it would have long since been leaked by multiple sources. However, if we tweak our assumption to be that he's being honest about the document but not necessarily how he saw it, then it opens up some avenues for research - because if we're assuming that he saw the document in question, but also assuming that he couldn't have seen it in his capacity as basically a nobody in the grand scheme of things, it would lead us to the interesting conclusion that he at some point wasn't a nobody, and he's not being completely honest about in what capacity he saw the document.

Hence the sleuthing. What's his employment history? Residence history? Education, military background, etc.? Is there a combination of qualification and opportunity to be "inside" some organization dealing with ETs and a period of time during which he could have been? Who is he protecting by being honest in his testimony regarding the document but dishonest in his testimony regarding when and how he saw it? It's been noted before that the latter details are rather skimpy, and this is a possible explanation for that.

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Dear Maybe...maybe not

‘perhaps an intense personal interest in the subject” perhaps however if you want to become know as a nut case in intellectual circles this sort of thing will get you there without doubt.

“combined with a desire for attention, money, etc” do you know of any cash he is making out of this??

No cash and being ridiculed as a nut job, humm one really does have to wonder what his motives are, other than perhaps telling the truth.

reply to post by MAC269


MAC269.....

Maybe...maybe not:
“perhaps an intense personal interest in the subject”
MAC269:
“perhaps however if you want to become know as a nut case in intellectual circles this sort of thing will get you there without doubt.”

Unfortunately, that is true.

Maybe...maybe not:
“combined with a desire for attention, money, etc”
MAC269:
“do you know of any cash he is making out of this??”

No....that’s why I also said that sometimes simply getting attention can be a strong motivator.

MAC269:
“No cash and being ridiculed as a nut job, humm one really does have to wonder what his motives are, other than perhaps telling the truth.”

I agree.....& that’s why I have not excluded the option that he is telling the truth.

Of course, we then get into the difficult area of it being the “truth” as he perceives it.

As I’ve said.....assuming he did see a document, we have no proof as to what that document was, if it was “real”, etc...

That's why it will be very useful if someone such as Xelif (see above) can find more background material pertaining to this case.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 14-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Dear Maybe...maybe not

“As I’ve said.....assuming he did see a document, we have no proof as to what that document was, if it was “real”

I think we can assume that he thinks this was real, I also get the impression that he thinks there is a great deal to this subject.

I know it is just a vague hope but thing do seam to be rolling along right now. Let put it this way I think we are nearer to an answer right now than any other time I have know anyway.

i think they need extra help with another kind of technology to clean up the mess from the oil spill

Originally posted by MAC269
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

Dear Maybe...maybe not
“As I’ve said.....assuming he did see a document, we have no proof as to what that document was, if it was “real”
I think we can assume that he thinks this was real, I also get the impression that he thinks there is a great deal to this subject.
I know it is just a vague hope but thing do seam to be rolling along right now. Let put it this way I think we are nearer to an answer right now than any other time I have know anyway.

MAC269.....

.....& like you, I too keep hoping!

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

I honestly hate to say this...but if this guy ends up in some plane crash, or accidentally getting electrocuted in his garage, or some other freak accident, we'll know he was telling the truth. OR....if for some reason or other he should suddenly "commit suicide".

Shhhh. ( Did I say that?)






[edit on 5/14/2010 by ladyinwaiting]

reply to post by kidflash2008


I posted a question earlier in this thread as to whether or not there
is any possibility of a connection between this guy, and the former
Secretary of Defense for the United States under the Eisenhowever
adminstation whose name was: Neil H McElroy. If yes, Neil would have
definitely had access to sensitive documents which may have been
discussed with a relative, (it does happen) or even passed down after Neil's death in 1972. It is a remote possibility, but all info must be pursued.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by manta78]

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


(do you realize you have a big toe with a happy face on it as your avatar?)

The problem is that this guy has nothing but a claim, so its hard to take him seriously. The only thing he has going for him is the principle of embarrassment. It's hard to believe he would expose himself to being called a nut for no reason.... what does he have to gain by making it up?

reply to post by ladyinwaiting


Dear ladyinwaiting

Well just like with Lazar by doing this he has protected at least his life.

His reputation well that is another matter.

If it is real you may find out that he was once an inmate of some mental institution.

If all of this is real then they will do anything to protect this secret.

reply to post by ladyinwaiting


Lol - kind of wondering about that too. Maybe or maybe not: Were you not deep in thought with your avatar yesterday?

[edit on 14-5-2010 by manta78]