Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist


Ahhh Frank you are such a tease.

A classic Frank Warren article thread.

"Hey look everybody, I found an article that says that Mr.X says that so and so is true..."

No offense Frank. But how many vaguely sourced article threads do we have to endure here.

Post a picture of something someday, pleeeeeeeaaaase.

Read the entire interview in the upcoming book "UFO Highway" by author, researcher Anthony F. Sanchez.

I can get the entire truth for just $19.95.

First of all, if you are plugging his book, just be honest and say so...

Secondly, the person in the interview, despite not giving out his name, gave out enough info to where he could easily be identified by any number of individuals who worked with him.

Third, why are just supposed to take Sanchez' word for it? He apparently forked out all this dough for a polygraph and forgot to bring a tape recorder to the interview.

Priceless.

Would be great if the author hadn't decided to put a price on the truth.

Things like this ie exposing the truth & the lies told by the government should not come with a price tag, it only serves as a detriment to the truth movement and in the end only helps those we are trying to fight against to get the truth

Originally posted by ufo_superhero:

I think this could finally be the real confession we've been looking for.

I agree. The information about the Dulce base already out there is absolutely fascinating, but it's scattered, occasionally contradictory, and marred by claims of disinformation.

My interest was certainly piqued by the interview, and Sanchez's website makes some big claims -- i.e. finally revealing who actually operates the base.

To address those skeptical: (Giving Colonel X the benefit of the doubt--) Yes, it seems the background info and context Colonel X provided would be enough for him to be identified by -- I don't know -- 10 or so people who worked very closely with him 30 years ago. Maybe. And even if they could and did identify him based on that excerpt, what would they do about it? In what way would it benefit them to tell the government (or whoever) what he's doing? That's assuming they still have contacts in the right places. And it's assuming they're still alive. And that they read ATS and/or The UFO Chronicles. Basically, what I mean is this: by not giving his name, but by giving his story he leaves himself open to only a very, very slim chance of being identified and or prosecuted/persecuted. If he did give his name, though, he'd be open to all kinds of negatives: hate mail, harassment, general skepticism and persecution directed at him from a multiplicity of directions.

He's a professor. Look where Michael E. Salla -- a man with a PhD and a good academic record -- is now: nowhere. Because he published Exopolitics. You lose much of your cache in the academic world when you admit to believing in and/or being involved with extraterrestrials. So, it makes perfect sense to me why the Colonel would want to have his identity not disclosed.

But, because of this, Sanchez does leave himself open to criticisms relating to transparency and credibility.

Either way, I'm curious to read the full interview. Dulce is a subject I'm very fascinated by and this interview promises to set a lot of the record straight. I tend to believe that these kinds of whistleblowers and those who publish their stories are on the level. If people are just out to get money, there are easier/more lucrative options available. I'd of course rather not have to pay to read it, but this interview seems promising. I look forward, at least, to a review once it comes out (to see if the book's worth purchasing).

So, thanks for posting Mr. Warren. Do you have any idea when the book is slated to come out? Looking forward for a further excerpt from the interview. Hope you get permission to post it

I find this comment after the excerpt rather telling....

"Fantasy. Incredible. First of all, officers involved in Top Secret operations carry their knowledge to the grave (unless info is unclassified--that this apparently is not). The mythical Colonel X could be readily identified (if he existed) from the data provided, and media follow-up would be evident.

Military officers are always subject to recall and prosecution for unauthorized disclosures, that probably is reason enough to discredit this piece. (I was a USAF Major, too.) Incidentally, no one who works for or with CIA wants the fact known."