Wikileaks & UFO's

Originally posted by Anthony1138
most of you wont like what i am about to say

UFO sightings mostly started up early 60's around the time of the cold war, the latest in spy technology, Back when America and Russia were at tight ends, a former Nazi prototype vehcile, that was undectable to radar, was wanted by both sides, that ended up making them (russia first)

I guess your not aware that the then secret service as its known today as the NSA was active and very much involved with Tesla. Given that he did not go by the rules that were put forward to him resulted to what we now know as history.

Anyway the many people saw them, unknowing of what they were, american goverment officals claim they dont know and that it could be aliens, and everyone kinda went with it.

What you are referring to is what a handfull of members requested specific answers although allowing specific members to be a non threat. ..Get it ...!

Believeing in it so much that is basiclly became reality for so many people that most of you will say i am some sort of goverment guy here to make people think aliens really arent here....because they arent, if any they would pass by with a mild curiousity and leave.

Not trying to sway your or any individuals opinions, but the fact remains, that we are not alone and all intentions over 80 years plus indicate direct hostile intentions towards the human race.

They dont want your gold, or your brains, or your unborn babies, as much interset as you would have with a random ant.

and if there is some sort of "other worldly contact" then it would most likely be humans from the future rather than aliens from another planet

Sadly but then again positively, we are not the pivot point within the cosmos. We are simply a lubricant to continue what has been going on millions of years.

Originally posted by Anthony1138
most of you wont like what i am about to say

UFO sightings mostly started up early 60's around the time of the cold war, the latest in spy technology, Back when America and Russia were at tight ends, a former Nazi prototype vehcile, that was undectable to radar, was wanted by both sides, that ended up making them (russia first)

Not quite. There have been recorded UFO sightings throughout the ages. Some well recorded UFO sightings by both the Allied and Japanese and German air forces (Foo Fighters)during the WWII. If you look up UFOs and Art here on ATS or on Google you will come across a varied array of sightings by a varied array of people.

Originally posted by Xtraeme
reply to post by tristar

 

Bare assertion fallacy.

There are plenty of mechanism for delivering content covertly and anonymously (i.e. TOR, proxies, public-private key technology, wikileaks, the list goes on & on). The simple fact is nothing new is coming to light more than likely because there isn't anything from the conspiracy-angle to report.

What your theories are, i can match them byte for byte per millisecond on a 24/7 basis.

The possibilities are myriad in my opinion.

It could be that these alleged secret groups with access to alleged EBEs and their technology really simply do not exist.

It could be that the majority or totality of that technology is disguised as classified but mundane and human-conceived technology, particularly in the aviation and military sectors.

It could be that if any secret group or groups do exist with such knowledge, they are of an extremely small and exclusive nature, well beyond the reach of any government institution. Indeed, they might not even be part and parcel of any government or agency therein, at least not directly.

It could be that whatever past contact may or may not have occurred is now so ancient in bureaucratic and compartmental terms that it has literally left no tangible trace, and that there is no remaining, ongoing work pertaining to it today.

It could be, as some have suggested, that these phenomena and the alleged entities associated with them are not physical or corporeal in the sense that we would understand it.

It could be anyone in a position to ferret information out of such projects or groups is, by necessity of the structure and nature of such projects or groups (which might be very much more stringent, compartmentalized, and cryptic in their INFOSEC standards and practices by nature,) is part and parcel of those works or projects to a degree that would preclude them from wanting to leak any data to the public. (I.E. only the loyal or indentured in some fashion may know.)

We may never know for certain in my opinion.

reply to post by arizonascott
I was sort of waiting for someone to tap the head of the nail...

The only way, in my mind, that tptb (human or alien) could keep such a complete controle on the release of info/tech/evidence would be through time manipulation.


(A Cheezy Scenario)

(agent 1: "Uht-oh! Hey boss, someone is showing a non-fuzzed video of a couple of Andromedans chatting by their saucer!"
agent 2: Okay...gimmi the time coord's, and I'll get the plaz-chamber fired up so we can go back and tell those blues to zip it, and park somewhere else...
agent 1: Gotcha.., but what about that whistleblower guy from inside the agency?
agent 2: don't worry 'bout him.. Reports from the foreward teams three months up the pipe say he meets with uhm...an accident before he can show the documents, so....)



Obviously they want us to know some of what's going on, but never....and I mean never more than they are willing to allow, and even then it will only be when they are willing to allow it.






[edit on 22-6-2010 by Khurzon]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Khurzon]

Originally posted by AceWombat04
The possibilities are myriad in my opinion.

It could be that the majority or totality of that technology is disguised as classified but mundane and human-conceived technology, particularly in the aviation and military sectors.

We stopped reading after the above line as we did laugh but also cut short our enthusiasm for obvious reasons.

In response to the question, "why aren't there any UFO whistleblowers"...

Two options to consider are:

1. UFOs do not exist and no one has submitted anything.
2. The site itself is a sham created by a force in or beyond the government to further an agenda, namely which by the events unfolding seems to lead to internet monitoring, regulation and ultimately censorship.

In my opinion these are the two most likely scenarios.

Originally posted by againuntodust
In response to the question, "why aren't there any UFO whistleblowers"...

Two options to consider are:

1. UFOs do not exist and no one has submitted anything.
2. The site itself is a sham created by a force in or beyond the government to further an agenda, namely which by the events unfolding seems to lead to internet monitoring, regulation and ultimately censorship.

In my opinion these are the two most likely scenarios.

funny enough and trust me we are all breaking into tears here in respect to your questions

1) We have submitted and they have posted as links in millions of sites.

2) The site is here for a purpose of exchanging views and opinions so the coordinated cooperation may perhaps benefit of the whole.


edit; Syntax


[edit on 22-6-2010 by tristar]

reply to post by Lebowski achiever

It is indeed strange to think 'a secret as big as this' can be kept for so long...but...is it actually a secret? Everybody seems to know about it...

And in reply to Anthony1138:

UFO sightings mostly started up early 60's around the time of the cold war, the latest in spy technology

?! I have been to Peru, Quatamala, a big part of Mexico and traveled through Israel. Inspired by Erich von Daniken and his ideas on ancient civilizations - video.google.com...

...and UFO sightings started a bit earlier I am afraid. Please...early 60's?!

I don't want to sound like I know everything, but please realise that I am serious about my opinions...and know that they aren't based on only hearsay. UFO's are described through all human history.

A little, simple overview: www.crystalinks.com...

Also you have to consider the fact that in the early sixties not almost everybody owned a video-camera. When there was a sighting this usualy was 'just a story'...Nowadays these 'stories' are more reliable because we all can see it for ourselves.

And please..of course I realize that probably 25% to 30% of all these 'videos and photos' are fake and manufactured to get a high hitcount somewhere :wink:.

Nevertheless...
I also think there is more proof of UFO's and everything related to this subject then there is proof of 'God'...whatever 'God' you might come up with.

...am I crazy?

[edit on 22-6-2010 by kcire]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by kcire]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by kcire]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by kcire]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by kcire]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by kcire]

reply to post by tristar


Thanks for the reply. I wasn't posing those as questions about ATS though. Those were answers in response to the original post about why there might not be any UFO stuff on wikileaks.

I know this site has plenty of ufo links and serves as a medium to exchange views and information. That's why i like it.

reply to post by againuntodust


If you had a single question to ask , what would it be. ?

Originally posted by tristar

Originally posted by AceWombat04
The possibilities are myriad in my opinion.

It could be that the majority or totality of that technology is disguised as classified but mundane and human-conceived technology, particularly in the aviation and military sectors.

We stopped reading after the above line as we did laugh but also cut short our enthusiasm for obvious reasons.

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate? You stopped reading the remainder of my post after something you regard as improbable? I'm confused.

I was merely suggesting possibilities. Can you prove they are impossible? I never asserted that they were facts - merely possibilities. (Including the possibility that none of this exists in the first place.)

[edit on 6/22/2010 by AceWombat04]

Originally posted by AceWombat04

Originally posted by tristar

Originally posted by AceWombat04
The possibilities are myriad in my opinion.

It could be that the majority or totality of that technology is disguised as classified but mundane and human-conceived technology, particularly in the aviation and military sectors.

We stopped reading after the above line as we did laugh but also cut short our enthusiasm for obvious reasons.

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate? You stopped reading the remainder of my post after something you regard as improbable? I'm confused.

I was merely suggesting possibilities. Can you prove they are impossible? I never asserted that they were facts - merely possibilities. (Including the possibility that none of this exists in the first place.)

[edit on 6/22/2010 by AceWombat04]

Sir/Madam

It was indicating or should i say that we too were trying to establish your angle of assumption.

reply to post by tristar


I'm still uncertain as to your exact meaning. I try my utmost not to make assumptions. I do not consider presenting possibilities (as they are only that - possibilities) assumptions. To assume would mean to embrace one of those possibilities, or any other, as factual and true, without proof. I haven't done that.

Can you elaborate further or clarify? I apologize for my lack of understanding.

Originally posted by Son of Will
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.

I completely agree with you. I do believe there is evidence of ET life and for all I know there may be some living here on this planet, but all of that evidence [if any] is so highly protected that even if anything ever gets out, there will be no way to verify said evidence.

It will take either a large scale move from within the government/shadow government OR ET's themselves disclosing information to ever prove the existence of ET's... that is unless a civilian somehow manages to get their hands on something the government hasn't found but that is doubtful unfortunately.

Originally posted by AceWombat04
reply to post by tristar

 

I'm still uncertain as to your exact meaning. I try my utmost not to make assumptions. I do not consider presenting possibilities (as they are only that - possibilities) assumptions. To assume would mean to embrace one of those possibilities, or any other, as factual and true, without proof. I haven't done that.

Can you elaborate further or clarify? I apologize for my lack of understanding.

ΝΙΠΤΩ ΤΑΣ ΧΕΙΡΑΣ,

Because disclosing UFO matter would be bad for the entire social structure on the planet. Humanity isn't up to it. It would mean that all that 80% of the population suddenly loses his or her 'higher' leader...because often religion and UFO's don't go together.

Maybe Assange knows...but It would hurt more than it would cure if it were leaked it guess.

I would venture to say that Wikileaks would not touch the UFO subject with a bargepole... not if they want to retain the otherwise excellent credibility they've built up. I wouldn't blame them either

It's sad, but unfortunately true, that the air of ridicule and disbelief with which the subject has been (as a deliberate policy) tainted... and the immediate MSM giggle factor that accompanies anything to do with the subject, will ensure that whatever may come to light will almost certainly not be believed.

The whole UFO/alien phenomenon/subject is one that is incredibly easy to keep secret. Basically whatever leaks might see the light of day will just not be believed. There will always be an alternative explanation available, and if that fails the source will be easily and routinely discredited, rendering the leaked information useless and unbelieved.

It is one thing for Wikileaks to release video of alleged misdoings, or classified documents/communications involving government/military/diplomatic shenanigans. Provided sources are checked, those viewing such disclosures will be (at least) predisposed to believing the possibility that they may be genuine and true...... I doubt the same would apply to any leaks or whistleblowing to do with the UFO subject.

Partly years of conditioning, partly numerous hoaxes, partly deliberate misdirection... but no UFO leaked document would be believed, even from Wikileaks.

Wikileaks would be also be foolish to touch anything on the subject for another, related reason. If there is ONE way to shoot down the credibility of (what is to the US) a real potential threat, it is to feed them some mind-blowing (UFO/alien related) classified intel... intel that on the face of it looks credible, sources look OK, but on release turns out to be a load of deliberately planted hogwash ... RESULT: END OF WIKILEAKS

I really doubt Wikileaks will ever get involved in the UFO game

Originally posted by tristar

Originally posted by Xtraeme
reply to post by tristar

 

There are plenty of mechanism for delivering content covertly and anonymously (i.e. TOR, proxies, public-private key technology, wikileaks, the list goes on & on). The simple fact is nothing new is coming to light more than likely because there isn't anything from the conspiracy-angle to report.

Wrong,

The supposed leak of video and its source is well under wraps.

Let me guess the latest military leaks were "allowed."

On a humble note, why on (earth) internet users still assume that they can evade people like us when dealing with the internet. When will that illusion cease to exist.

While we've certainly made significant advances towards "watching all signal transmissions," we're still a far ways off from achieving TIA computationally speaking.

Fact over fiction.

Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by againuntodust

 

If you had a single question to ask , what would it be. ?

After roughly ten minutes of thought, my question is why are you asking that question? ;P