Will the Real UFO Whistleblowers, Please Stand Up?

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Over the years... while trying to find the truth, needless to say, I've become quite cynical if not, disgruntled due to the nonsense we all must weed through.

I want to believe these 'whistleblowers' are sounding off for our own good but I can't help but notice, they're usually promoting a book or DVD while doing so *sigh*.

Okay. So I've gotten passed that.

Now, have THEY gotten passed that too.....realizing some of us are on to them so, they take on a different character? Here are two examples

While perusing my usual UFO 'stuff'..... these uncanny similarities have hit me like a frying pan to the head.
David Wilcock. Although not my favorite, I do listen to him and he has a very distinctive intonation in his voice. He's very guttural, quick talking manner and uses very impressive words.
Now, I can't help but notice (without even trying) the very similarties in Andrew Basiago ?
And if that weren't enough, we have this new one; Anthony Sanschez, in a disguised throaty voice sounds just like Wilcock!
Are we being hoodwinked???

And now onto Bob Dean who I respect (or so I wanted to). Bob Dean has a hesitation to his dictation. Maybe because he's older, maybe because he's thinking or maybe because that's just his mannerism BUT, so does this elusive Victor. Plus, they both cough, sigh, take in deep breaths and hesitate in their speech.

So I ask you...are we being duped here? Are these people real (all 5 of them) or are 2 men out to take our money (with their lecture fees, book & DVD sales) or is it just pure coincidence or perhaps, just me?

David Wilcock---Anthony-----Andrew?


Anthony Sanchez
Underground Dulce Base Whistleblower - Colonel X
Starts @6:39



Andrew Basiago
Starts @1:17



David Wilcock
Starts @37 seconds



Then we have Victor. Is this Bob Dean????

Victor
Starts @ 2:00




Bob Dean




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
yea its just you
2nd



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
YEA VICTOR RETURNS BLEW IT WHEN HE SAID HE NEEDED CASH AND NOT THAT HE CARED FOR HIS SPECIES. He sounded truthful but his greed won. Sad.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 
Bob Dean yet again. He's a hoaxer and technical liar. When he's shedding crocodile tears on cue and lying to his audience, I wonder how he's gotten away with it for so long? There's no suggestion that he'd ever do such a thing...but...he reminds me of the kind of guy that'd be conning old ladies out of their savings with his rehearsed patter. Smooth operator.

Wilcock's had his moment and it's passed. He's just another huckster trawling his wares on the conference circuit. He probably looks at Lloyd Pye as a role model for time-served hucksterism. I'll be surprised if anyone remembers him in two or three years. The internet 'wayback machine' will be his legacy.

Anthony Sanchez seems like a decent guy who's had his fingers burned by his source. He didn't have the experience or subject knowledge to recognise the signs. When it began to dawn on him, he backed off and did the right thing. Two experienced guys in the field also gave his Colonel X the benefit of the doubt.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Over the years... while trying to find the truth, needless to say, I've become quite cynical if not, disgruntled due to the nonsense we all must weed through.

I want to believe these 'whistleblowers' are sounding off for our own good but I can't help but notice, they're usually promoting a book or DVD while doing so *sigh*.

Okay. So I've gotten passed that.

Now, have THEY gotten passed that too.....realizing some of us are on to them so, they take on a different character? Here are two examples

While perusing my usual UFO 'stuff'..... these uncanny similarities have hit me like a frying pan to the head.
David Wilcock. Although not my favorite, I do listen to him and he has a very distinctive intonation in his voice. He's very guttural, quick talking manner and uses very impressive words.
Now, I can't help but notice (without even trying) the very similarties in Andrew Basiago ?
And if that weren't enough, we have this new one; Anthony Sanschez, in a disguised throaty voice sounds just like Wilcock!
Are we being hoodwinked???

And now onto Bob Dean who I respect (or so I wanted to). Bob Dean has a hesitation to his dictation. Maybe because he's older, maybe because he's thinking or maybe because that's just his mannerism BUT, so does this elusive Victor. Plus, they both cough, sigh, take in deep breaths and hesitate in their speech.

So I ask you...are we being duped here? Are these people real (all 5 of them) or are 2 men out to take our money (with their lecture fees, book & DVD sales) or is it just pure coincidence or perhaps, just me?


You left out a hell of a lot of other names. People such as John Lear, David Icke, Steven Greer, Stanton Friedman, etc.

We are not being hoodwinked, you seem to be for by your comments you sound like a victim. If you use common sense, logic, and reason no one can hoodwink you. All they can do is make you think without necessarily accepting what they say as factual. I don't listen to these people becaue I know they're hoodwinkers and they don't get through to me. I have a built-in b.s. alarm and these are the guys that trigger it.
edit on 27-12-2010 by The Shrike because: Additional comments.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 



You left out a hell of a lot of other names. People such as John Lear, David Icke, Steven Greer, Stanton Friedman, etc.


Whoa there. Throwing Friedman in with Greer, Icke and Lear is a disservice to the guy and unfair. He's got next to nothing in common with those guys.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by The Shrike
 



You left out a hell of a lot of other names. People such as John Lear, David Icke, Steven Greer, Stanton Friedman, etc.


Whoa there. Throwing Friedman in with Greer, Icke and Lear is a disservice to the guy and unfair. He's got next to nothing in common with those guys.


You're entitled to your opinion. But mine is that I cannot accept or support Stanton Friedman in any way, shape, or form. He is the original Mr Bs and specializes in churning the water with his b.s. presentations about mostly UFO b.s. He definitely belongs with the names mentioned and, IMO, has done more harm to UFOlogy than anyone else. I can listen to David Icke but I can't stand hearing Friedman, Dean, Lear. One can read b.s. and not be emotionally affected. Not so with these individuals' voices because of the b.s. they spew.

I'm not the only one who feels negatively about Friedman. Here are others. But let me tell you that I've read Friedman's beginning books and met him (and took his photo which I've posted here) twice. So he's not a stranger I'm railing against.

ufocon.blogspot.com...
"Stanton Friedman is notorious for his incessant use of the term “Cosmic Watergate” which he applies to his conjecture that the U.S. government and its Air Force have been covering up the real story of what happened at Roswell in 1947.

But the Watergate reference derives from noted UFO researcher Raymond Fowler as found in an article by Mr. Fowler in the May 1976 issue of Official UFO magazine.

While Mr. Friedman was the first person to re-invigorate the Roswell episode by his 1978 interview with Jesse Marcel, his contribution was snubbed by Charles Berlitz and (discredited?) William Moore in their book, The Roswell Incident of 1980, the book that got the Roswell story back in the public arena.

Mr. Fowler applied his phrase for all UFO accounts, whereas Mr. Friedman applies his sobriquet to the Roswell incident only.

While Mr. Friedman was the first person to re-invigorate the Roswell episode by his 1978 interview with Jesse Marcel, his contribution was snubbed by Charles Berlitz and (discredited?) William Moore in their book, The Roswell Incident of 1980, the book that got the Roswell story back in the public arena."

BTW, Friedman continues to bill himself as a Nuclear Physicist. Next time you run into him ask him when was the last time he did any work as one. This used to be a UFOdom joke and here is how another individual feels about him as posted at Unexplained Mysteries:

Posted 09 June 2010 - 12:46 AM by psyche101
"I agree with Mr Friedman on one point, we certainly are fighting forces of arrogance and innocence. Anyone who takes the time to read this half baked tripe is just supporting a hobby industry based on fiction. From what I understand, Mr Friedman has not delved into Nuclear Physics for decades, he is not an actively practicing nuclear physicist, he just drags that moniker out at every opportunity to garner further support from noobs. It seems to work too, people tend to get all gooey over a couple letters after a name, even if they have no idea what they mean or if they are relevant to the investigation being carried out. He may be one of the most respected UFO claimants amongst the UFO nutter websites, but not mainstream science by a long shot. Quite a massive difference there IMO. With his credentials, one would expect that he could do better than repeat his tired version of events for Roswsell constantly, which is obvious balderdash hyped up to sell books. If he really does have some useful credentials, how about some theories on propulsion? Or a really good one, how about a theory on how ET manages to bypass the laws of physics and E=MC2?? Or regarding his claim of key players in the know, I'd love an explanation on how he is proposing World Governments co-operate when we cannot even stop the Japanese whalers or North Korea nuking whatever the hell they want to. Or why can ET manage physical stresses no other conceived creature can. Or, how he has managed to completely oust natural phenomena and black ops, especially considering the DARPA Falcon Project. Or why world Governments place all resources toward defending their countries against terrestrial threats, not outer space ones. If they have been on the ball since 1947, they have not made any preparations for our "visitors from another planet", in fact it took an Aussie amateur astronomer to inform NASA last year that a massive meteor hit Jupiter. We have plenty of people out there with theories, claims and other crap, I'd like to see just one of them put their money where their mouth is and come up with something better than 1950's sci fi. It's all too easy to use the cop out of "advanced technology beyond that of ours", this is where Michio Kaku leaves Mr Friedman in the dust.

It's just feelgood rhetoric for noobs that desire validation of ET.

[Quote

With the discovery in recent years of hundreds of planets circling other suns, scientists continue to speculate that life is plentiful in the cosmos.

Plus, in 2008, the pope's chief astronomer, the Rev. Gabriel Funes, proclaimed that intelligent beings created by God might actually exist in outer space, and that it wouldn't contradict a belief in God.

All of that gives Friedman hope.]

This gives hope? I think people have been expecting planets for quite some time. Finding none would have been a tremendous shock and against science as we know it, and proclamations by the popes astronomer? This is the research people hold dear? Gracious.

Jacques Vallee is light years ahead of Mr. Friedman IMHO. There is just much better information out there to consider than beating up Roswell for 60+ years. That ET horse is a pile of broken bones. Friedman/Roswell bah humbug. Just reading the above erroneous comments on Roswell makes me a sad Panda. People should know better than to just jump on the most sensational story. Remember, there is ALWAYS 2 sides to a story."

The Shrike: And there is no end.
edit on 27-12-2010 by The Shrike because: Additional comments.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike
You left out a hell of a lot of other names. People such as John Lear, David Icke, Steven Greer, Stanton Friedman, etc.

Since when has Icke been a whistleblower. Or Greer for that matter. Icke is a former soccer player, TV presenter, and Green Party spokesman turned conspiracy theorist. Greer is a physicist, teacher and UFOlogist. He may have gone on to set up the disclosure project and God knows what since but he's no whistle blower. In fact John Lear is a pilot turned UFOlogist (although I think he claims to have had some inside information). They are all reporting other peoples whistleblowing in the main. Stanton Freedman isn't a whistleblower either he is a nuclear physicist turned UFOlogist. None of them got their information first hand from their jobs.

Real whistleblowers with claims to be blowing the whistle on direct inside information (if they aren't lying) would include Sgt Clifford Stone (US Army), Donna Hare (who worked for a NASA contractor and had a secret clearance), Col. Philip Corso (Army Intelligence) or Sgt Karl Wolf (US Air Force) to name a few. With these guys it isn't hearsay. Of course they might all be lying. If not then there is a case to answer whatever you think it means.

I'm not vouching for the veracity of what they say though. Or their credentials. But they claim to have insider knowledge.

I suppose I should post some testimony too.






(click to open player in new window)





posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


You're missing my point.

I am not questioning so much WHAT they're saying (cause who am I to disagree?) I am wondering if they are parading around as other people?

"Victor" sounds like Bob Dean and Andrew Basiago sounds EXACTLY like David Wilcock. So I am wondering if they are shedding their identities and becoming other people.

So, that's what I meant about being hoodwinked.


And you're right, we allow ourselves to be hoodwinked if we choose to believe or disbelieve people but anyone can certainly be innocently hoodwinked if we don't realize someone else is pretending to be someone else.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

I can't answer for Bob Dean or the others. However, having a second identity is not always done for sinister reasons. They may believe that they are in danger if their identity is known. I must say though, if Victor is Bob Dean and you spotted it that easily, then Bob might be in trouble lol



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Are we being hoodwinked?

Easy answer is

Yes.

The bottom line is cash, be it book signings, books, dvd's, seminars, other events or whatever then for me its verging on the wrong side. I refuse to pay any of these people money for information that if valid should be free to everyone. I don't mind people making a living of sorts but when its the same old material week in week out then as far as I am concerned they have no use and are just robbing the blind.

As for the term 'whistle blowers', it should NOT be applied to any of these people, a real 'whistle blower' does so because they morally feel the need to put others ahead of themselves and provide information that enables a change or possibility of it. These people often lose everything around them, some end up in prison or worse based on what they believed in.

None of this crowd come anywhere near being one...



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 07:42 AM
link   
In my native language there is a sentence: "Are you a player or a country musician."
Sorry I couln’t find the correspondent rhyme in English. The essayistic inclination of
the Western thinking is a good soil for a sprayng with different and very so often quite
opposite fertilizers.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

I can't answer for Bob Dean or the others. However, having a second identity is not always done for sinister reasons. They may believe that they are in danger if their identity is known. I must say though, if Victor is Bob Dean and you spotted it that easily, then Bob might be in trouble lol


I find that hard to believe in this case. In fact, I believe that would put them more in danger.

If MIB or whomever wants to 'off'' a whistleblower they'd have to be very careful not to attract too much attention especially if the whistleblower has a following (public peers and fans)

But, if the whistle blower took on a different character then, that only makes it easier for them to be a target. Because after all, how many know of Andrew Basiago and Victor? But....how many know of Wilcock and Dean?

I think it might be greed and I think these people might be making stuff up. As much as that pains me to say especially Bob Dean. But there is something a little disingenuous about Dean too. I can't quite put my finger on it but he has presented absolute zero evidence to back up any of his claims.

And Wilcock? Well, he just creeps me out. Especially that he's the "incarnation of Edgar Cayce" part.

I would say I'm 50% sure Basiago is Wilcock who like every one else.....is peddling a book to sell.

Listen, if all this news these whistleblowers whistle about would change the course of history and have devastating consequences in our future, why not GIVE these books away to your fellow man? Why not become a worldwide Idol instead of an author? It would be the most important book ever written and story, ever told!!
Why is turning a profit that important in the scheme of things? According to most of them, we're in deep chit anyway so what good is money in the bank?

I'm starting not to believe any of these Project Camelot whistle blowers. You know who I believe though? Phil Schneider. Why? Because he's dead. The dead ones are probably the real ones by the sheer fact, they're dead/killed.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Mclaneinc
 


Well said!!!!!

I think the term whistleblower now-a-days is to capture attention. There are more people in the public domain than ever now, so people (whistleblowers in this case) need to be set them apart from the others. They're literally running out of catch-phrases and words.

And all in all, like you said, it's the same 'information'. All these people seem to offer up is a verifiable background. That doesn't mean they know or seen or touched or photographed anything super-natural. Where is any of the proof? Bob Deab shows photos of the Moon or Mars and that's it?

David Wilcock talks a great talk and knows his science but again, that's it.

So I can definiately see them taking on an alter-ego in order to keep the 'new' fans coming thus, paying their bills.

Victor, to my knowledge, never sold a book but he made MEGA bucks with the alien interview footage and all his subsequent radio-interviews. Probably enough to retire now.

I believe people like Bob Lazar and Schneider who had NOTHING to gain back in the late 80's early 90's.


All these 'whistle blowers' of today are merely repeating what's already been declared so it's real hard to tell whose telling the truth especially when there's a monetary gain to it all.

Wilcock is Basiage (and I am not the only one saying this)
And
Bob Dean is probably Victor. (and again, I didn't make this up either)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Thank you for your kind words.

I just feel there's just too many out and out rip off artists, people like Nick Pope serve no use at all, he's just making a living out of it, I'm also aware that some only have their story about the UFO's turning off the nukes but it's been heard to death and produced nothing new...Enough already


I find people like Stanton interesting just because he knows his stuff and comes across less like a 'pay me to talk' guy, you can walk up to people like him and have a chat for zero cost (well I've heard numerous stories of this happening) but for most of the others I'd not go out of my way even if it was for free, I'm certainly not going to feed their ego habit.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by The Shrike
You left out a hell of a lot of other names. People such as John Lear, David Icke, Steven Greer, Stanton Friedman, etc.

Since when has Icke been a whistleblower. Or Greer for that matter. Icke is a former soccer player, TV presenter, and Green Party spokesman turned conspiracy theorist. Greer is a physicist, teacher and UFOlogist. He may have gone on to set up the disclosure project and God knows what since but he's no whistle blower. In fact John Lear is a pilot turned UFOlogist (although I think he claims to have had some inside information). They are all reporting other peoples whistleblowing in the main. Stanton Freedman isn't a whistleblower either he is a nuclear physicist turned UFOlogist. None of them got their information first hand from their jobs.

Real whistleblowers with claims to be blowing the whistle on direct inside information (if they aren't lying) would include Sgt Clifford Stone (US Army), Donna Hare (who worked for a NASA contractor and had a secret clearance), Col. Philip Corso (Army Intelligence) or Sgt Karl Wolf (US Air Force) to name a few. With these guys it isn't hearsay. Of course they might all be lying. If not then there is a case to answer whatever you think it means.

I'm not vouching for the veracity of what they say though. Or their credentials. But they claim to have insider knowledge.
(snip)


Okay, you criticize the names I included and your criticism may be earned. But then you throw in some names also which are just as questionable!

Clifford Stone: "Stone has seen living and dead extraterrestrials in his official duties on an army team that retrieved crashed ET crafts." Do you believe this? I don't. What whistle did he blow? Who benefitted from his alleged whistleblowing?

Donna Hare: Believer her claims and then you also have to believe Ken Johnston. What whistle did she blow? Who benefitted from her alleged whistleblowing?

Col. Philip Corso: You gotta be kidding! This guy is known more for his inaccuracies than any accuracy.

Sgt Karl Wolf: I'm not familiar with his claims but looking him up brings up a host of people opining that he is also full of it, may not have been allowed where he said he was to see airbrushed photos, may not have had the clearance, did not wear an appropriate hat with flashing lights to identify an allowable person, etc. Questionable.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 

As I say, I won't vouch for the veracity of what they say. My point was more that they claim to have insider knowledge.

I understand why you would like to see documents that confirm their claims etc. That may not be possible if there is a cover up though. However, I would be careful of reading too much into hearsay about whether we should take any notice of them or how credible they are. If they have revealed any secrets then the easiest way to get us not to listen is to try to discredit them.

I would certainly like to dedicate some time to looking at the reliability/credibility of whistleblowers as I suspect some of the moves to discredit them may be propaganda. I don't doubt, of course, that many of them have embellished their stories for personal gain.





new topics
top topics
 
2

log in

join