Wikileaks & UFO's

Where Are The Whistle blowers?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dbc12b2b27fd.jpg[/atsimg]

In the UFO community, any material, no matter how bizarre or imaginary, is grist for study, and ongoing debate(s). The subject matter, UFOs, doesn’t rely on truth-seeking as such; it subsists on the basis of rumor and the scantiest information extant, no matter how loony that information is.

Wikileaks, like Wikipedia, is ideal for prolonging the idea that UFOs have been captured and some governments of the world have kept that information to themselves.

Maybe someone, somewhere, will disclose the documents that prove, once and for all, that the mythology of alien visitation and their downed flying saucers are facts held in abeyance by those in power, for nefarious (or other arcane) reasons.

http://__._/wiki/Media/Wikileaks_and_UFOs

So here's the big question. With so much information being leaked from all types of government departments, the military, corporations and scientists, why aren't we seeing any whistle blowers from these so called shadow groups inside our governments and military in regards to UFO's, Aliens and Advanced Propulsion's?

Why isn't someone stepping up? Especially now with the popularity, visibility and clout of Wikileaks being stronger than it ever has? We're talking about the biggest secret ever witheld from the human race here, should it be true. The type of secret you would expect thousands of people to be complicit in maintaining over the last 60+ years.

Surely there must be a disgruntled 'employee' out there! Surely there must be one person in the know who believes that withholding such a secret is the worst type of crime a government could perpetrate against it's citizens!

So where are these reports? Why aren't they there? Why aren't they coming in? I find them conspicuous by their absence! Don't you?

What are your thoughts on this? Give me your rants! ... and please keep the debate lively but civil!

IRM

reply to post by InfaRedMan


It's a good question IRM, one that I have wondered about for a while now.

If I am correct about Wikileaks they check, double-check and triple check all of their sources for legitimacy. They also ask for evidence and subtantiation before going public with anything - which is why they have managed to keep their integrity thus far.

So, does this mean that anyone who has approached Wikileaks hasn't been able to back up their claims?

This could also cast doubt upon those who, in the past, have spoken out on such topics (sometimes being given a public platform) without ever really having to provide detailed substantiation apart from "Honest, I'm telling the truth."

reply to post by LiveForever8


I like your answer LF8! Well balanced and well thought out! Indeed... are wikileaks holding themselves to a higher standard of evidence/proof than the UFO community? Is there something to be learned here?

IRM

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Great thread IRM.

When I read some of the threads containing information regarding 200,000+ Dept. of State dispatches that Wiki apparently got hold of from Manning some questions sprung up in my mind. I actually thought of all the top topics here on ATS and pondered if any diplomatic dispatches contained any disclosure or even reference to 9/11, the location or living status of Osama bin Laden, The Global Financial crisis, new technology or military secrets etc.....and yes, UFO/ET.

Cool thread, I think orgs like Wiki put some big questions to the likes of the Disclosure Project Camelot Avalon, Greer Circus, just by the way the produce results, especially recently.

Who knows what Julian Assange is sitting on though?

Thanks for chiming in atlasastro!

Originally posted by atlasastro
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

I think orgs like Wiki put some big questions to the likes of the Disclosure Project Camelot Avalon, Greer Circus, just by the way the produce results, especially recently.

Indeed!

Who knows what Julian Assange is sitting on though?

Certainly few men as visible as Julian Assange right now. The man is hitting the headlines all over the world. If he has any whistle blower testimonies or documents pertaining to the UFO cover-up, and the quality of evidence is high, he would be the man to lift the lid... if there were a lid to lift.

IRM

[edit on 22/6/10 by InfaRedMan]

reply to post by InfaRedMan


I agree it's a good question. Being somewhat of a believer, my answer is that, since as you said it's the biggest potential story that the human race is ever to experience, the compartmentalization of information must be likewise extremely well maintained. In this context, reports like Blue Book would be lower-level documentation with little if any connection to the real secret agencies.

I can imagine the "real" reports being locked away in the same places and under the same classification as the physical hardware that is supposedly kept as well. The people with access to these files would be extremely few and with a "need to know" basis.

If they do it right, and in my little scenario they would, there wouldn't be any actual evidence to present to Wikipeaks.

Just curious, what do you make of the reports of UFOs around military bases that house nuclear warheads? There's an entire sub-category of UFO reports specifically about that. Radar towers picking up what guards on the ground are witnessing, that sort of thing.

Cheers Son of Will.

I will say that although you can compartmentalize the evidence, you cannot compartmentalize the will of others.

Originally posted by Son of Will
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

Just curious, what do you make of the reports of UFOs around military bases that house nuclear warheads? There's an entire sub-category of UFO reports specifically about that. Radar towers picking up what guards on the ground are witnessing, that sort of thing.

If your referring to Bentwaters, I think it's one of the most compelling UFO cases in history!

IRM

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
.. are wikileaks holding themselves to a higher standard of evidence/proof than the UFO community? Is there something to be learned here?

I think that's it exactly.

Wikileaks seemingly have a pretty stringent policy of checking the legitimacy of the material they release.

So if someone submits a shaky handcam video of a couple of lights claiming they're UFOs, Wikileaks will simply ignore it.

Unlike here where the most ridiculous junk gets posted as "proof" and anyone calling it into question is usually deemed a dis-info agent

Originally posted by noonebutme

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
.. are wikileaks holding themselves to a higher standard of evidence/proof than the UFO community? Is there something to be learned here?

I think that's it exactly.

Wikileaks seemingly have a pretty stringent policy of checking the legitimacy of the material they release.

Unlike here where the most ridiculous junk gets posted as "proof" and anyone calling it into question is usually deemed a dis-info agent

Thanks for your point of view noonebutme! Personally I believe our humble community here at ATS could take a leaf out of wikileaks book. If UFOlogy is ever to gain any traction with the general populace, I don't see us achieving it any other way.

Perhaps if more people here posted their views as opinions only and didn't claim everything to be the absolute proof or the smoking gun, we might actually make some ground.

IRM

I would postulate because 99% of the UFO's that are seen are test-aircraft, and that there is no outlandish conspiracy. If aliens do exist and are visiting us, the government just simply is not aware of who they are. They may know they're there, but they can't explain the phenomena.

Although, from my postulation, I guess another question arises...if these black projects do exist, why aren't people disclosing them? Probably because they're so high up, that every body that works on it does not know what it is working on. Regardless, this is a great thread that some of the loonies will try to answer.

reply to post by DocEmrick


Loonies? You mean the more 'creative' types?

Thanks for you point of view DocEmrick. Compartmentalization is definitely a good dam blocker! I hope you keep participating in the thread!

IRM

It's very hard to discount the premise of this topic and thread considering Wikileaks follow up on confirming data sources. Avenue's like Wikileaks are vital, dare I say, even more vital than ATS? The water is definitely less murky, lets just say that.

Perhaps the crux of the UFO issue pertaining to Wikileaks is that many whistleblowers with anything substantial to contribute, cannot have their credentials traced due to the high level of security they hold?

If there were a way for a credible document or piece of video to be leaked, how would one get it out of "the vault" without being noticed? Via courier? I have no idea. Despite these kinds of challenges, Wikileaks remains vital, even more vital now than ever. Especially considering the threat of ACTA.

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Well, I guess it just depends on your own personal threshold of truth and credible people...

While Greer might be a crock, are all of his disclosure project witnesses also crocks? To me, that would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

How about Stanton Friedman? All the people in the History Channel's 'Ancient Aliens'?

We will see soon enough, if all of the 'ufologists' are crocks. Some are obviously better than others.

Is the latest issue on the top of this list just a joke? If so, Europe(especially Italy) should be thoroughly pissed that their reps are joking around in the European Parliament...
Europarliament on UFO's

Who knows? Maybe Assange really does have 'world changing stuff' he is getting ready to release.

Although I admit, if he does, he should have released it by now... Maybe he is ramping up his attention in calculated moves... but at the expense of people dying and natural disasters that could be greatly aided by disclosure.



edit to add: Also, there is a significant difference between UFO's and Aliens... This distinction must be made.

I think all sightings could very well be human made. Tesla was ready to do this stuff a hundred years ago...

The only thing that makes the Alien connection, in my mind, is studying comparative religion. There is no doubt that the earth once had a global advanced civilization.

Whether Aliens or not? Who knows... I personally think probably yes, but will wait until I am convinced beyond any reasonable doubt.

edited again to fix link
[edit on 22-6-2010 by beebs]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by beebs]

First id like to say that it is hardly likely that some alien ship (built by a civilisation many centuries in advance of us,) that has come from some other galaxy or planet even, is gonna break down and crash on earth at any time!
If these ships crashed as regualrly as the ufo community believes that would indeed be a surprise......
That being said, the posibility exists that there could be one or two malfunctioning craft that did crash....
The likelihood of so darn many claimed crashes must perforce be extremely miniscule....
Thus there could be a ship or two in some goverments hands it is not likely that there are many.
This leads me to conclude that the claims made by ufologists and conspiracy theorists are flawed.
Though i too follow as closely as i can the ufo story,and have done so since teenage basically, i must admit to many reservations on the numbers that are claimed.

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Regarding aliens/UFOs, I'd say there's nothing to blow the whistle on. S&F for asking the right questions

This "whistle blower" turned out to be a complete liar

Originally posted by NightVision

Perhaps the crux of the UFO issue pertaining to Wikileaks is that many whistleblowers with anything substantial to contribute, cannot have their credentials traced due to the high level of security they hold?

Thanks for participating Nightvision. Always good to see you contributing around the board. I see what your saying here and agree.

Could this mean that wikileaks has a massive gray vault of documents pertaining to UFO's but just have no way of checking their pedigree? If so, I'd love to have a flick through that vault.

Needless to say, if wikileaks had the real McCoy, you can be guaranteed they would disclose it to the public. It's what they're in the business of doing!

I would urge anyone who may be in possession of such evidence to go the way of wikileaks instead of clowns like Steven Greer.

IRM

In a world filled with black-ops it is clear that "disclosure" about any program is a rarity. I would say that for all the hoopla about recent events leaking for wiki, what they know is one sand on a beach that stretches to the horizon.

Heck I was in the service, I had a Secret clearence, I -know- things but you know what? I swore not to reveal secrets and I am sticking to that promise. It would appear the vast majority of those with "clearence" feel the same as I do.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Helmkat]

Originally posted by DocEmrick
I would postulate because 99% of the UFO's that are seen are test-aircraft, and that there is no outlandish conspiracy. If aliens do exist and are visiting us, the government just simply is not aware of who they are. They may know they're there, but they can't explain the phenomena.

That sums my thoughts on the whole thing up nicely.

I have one question though...

If the any of the claims about alien tech and the like are true, what makes you think that the people who have the clearance to know/work with the stuff would be interested in leaking it?

Also, the documents that Clifford Stone has have some interesting stuff in them.

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

Well, I guess it just depends on your own personal threshold of truth and credible people...

Absolutely! I couldn't agree more!

While Greer might be a crock, are all of his disclosure project witnesses also crocks? To me, that would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The disclosue project witnesses all had varying levels of credibility and therein lays the problem. They should have been vetted better because it's easy to dismiss all evidence when a portion of it is questionable. I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, I'm just saying that that is human nature.

How about Stanton Friedman?

I like Stanton.. really I do, but the guy has been suffering from cognitive dissonance in relation to the MJ12 documents. It's almost assured that Doty and his cronies were behind them (the aviary) and that guy can't be trusted at all. I think Stanton should just admit he's been duped instead of going the way of Linda Moulton Howe.

Thanks for your thoughtful post mate!

IRM

Originally posted by stirling
First id like to say that it is hardly likely that some alien ship (built by a civilisation many centuries in advance of us,) that has come from some other galaxy or planet even, is gonna break down and crash on earth at any time!
If these ships crashed as regularly as the ufo community believes that would indeed be a surprise......

I hear you stirling!

I think it's somewhat of a copycat phenomena. Every UFOlogist and his dog want's his own crash story. It's part of what I like to call the 'Me Too' Syndrome. Sure it may sell a few books and put some bums on seats at conventions but it's ultimately self serving and a blight on UFOlogy.

Thanks for your comments mate!

IRM