It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Men In Black(OPs) The Aviary & UFOs

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 04:06 PM
reply to post by Clairacoustique

So he's not going to answer? Or did I miss something. Hmm.

I suppose Ezekiel's chariot could be reason enough to believe in UFOs -- but Jacque Vallee's take on it is a more general energy manifestation -- Nick Redfern has followed up on this. Like when people go to the Amazon for spiritual plant sessions (not allowed to talk about details on ats my god it's legal in OTHER Countries! ) -- they see UFOs sometimes but then it is a plant that alters the brain and so what they see tends to be what their subconscious wants them to see.

So it's all good in the end - I mean the energy is impersonal. So basically what any of us believe is delusional. haha.

Still I'd like to hear some real evidence for E.T.s -- I mean I've been reading UFO books for 15 years and I can't think of any real evidence so far. Still it's entertaining -- although Streiber creeps me out too much to read his books -- some people are obsessed with him precisely because they are also creepy. haha.

edit on 31-8-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 04:08 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 04:28 PM

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Still I'd like to hear some real evidence for E.T.s

I'm unsure why you are making your demands here. The purpose of this thread was clearly explained by The GUT. If you read his posts, which apparently you haven't, you will realize that not once did he claim he was presenting "real evidence for ETs."

Since I suspect you haven't and won't read the posts in question here is a summary of what, in essence, is the purpose of this thread:

Originally posted by The GUT
At the same time, I believe the evidence is undeniable that the spookiest of spooks have been fostering the belief in extraterrestrial visitation. If that's true, then what does it mean? I'm hoping our mutual effort will suggest and pare down the possibilities.

I hope the difference between this and what you claim the OP is saying — i.e. "ETs are real" — is now obvious to you as it was to every other member that was participating in a serious and civil manner.

Now, do you wish or have anything to contribute to the topic of the thread, which I hope you have been able to finally understand, or do you wish to keep engaging trolls and derailing this thread even more?

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 04:44 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 05:10 PM
There's a huge difference from extrapolating that... Heaps of weird# going back millenia that, even today the "spooks of all nations", keeps tabs on = something worth investigating as there seems to be a core of "real experiences", or at least, what people are convinced are real experiences against saying....

"It's the aliens mum it's the aliens mum mum it's the aliens honest"..

Why is it there is this unrepentant rump of opinion. on here and elsewhere, that have to have "aliens" or one white duck on your wall?

Firstly, there are those of us who would, just love to understand this whole phenomenon before we even attempt to explain it. People do realise there is a huge difference between understanding and explaining don't they? I understand I need to do what I do as my vocation in life can I explain it? Can I chuff.

Here lies one of the very key problems with research into the UFO phenomenon, people want explanations before understanding that is as Mr Spock would say with one arched eyebrow.............. "Highly Illogical"

How many more times does it take to for some to understand this? Those like Greer believe they can explain, those like Klass believe they, in his case, could explain and yet there's a whole bunch of us actually suspect neither sdie actually understands the first thing about it all , on any real level, let alone can explain it.

So , I'll tell you what, those who "know" and can "explain" it all, will you kindly do us, who are trying to understand, a favour and quit tying to force us to explain every 10 mins why we feel the need to understand first, before explaining ...OK?
edit on 31-8-2012 by FireMoon because: grammar

+2 more 
posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 05:22 PM
The “Insiders want to disclose, but they just can’t” meme has been a round since NICAP and the fifties. It certainly is a major theme of the Aviary and, of course, is a major point of Greer. (Note: I’m not trying to veer us to Greer. It just deserves a passing mention.) I suspect that idea is used simply to explain the continuing failure to disclose anything of note. It’s both hopeful and scary. On the one hand we’re making progress with those in the know and if we can get just a few more we’ll be there. On the other hand the Bad Guys™ are powerful and mean. They will kill to keep their secrets. It’s almost a Good Cop—Bad Cop scenario. Or maybe it’s “Heads, I win; tails, you lose.”

But the stuff that DOES get out here is often silly to the point of foolishness. Serpo, for example, is at heart a silly, boring story. Some astronauts participate in an exchange program, visit another planet, which turns out to be dull and uninteresting, fail to make any significant inroads into alien culture, manage to kill a snake thing, and after several years they come home. Not that everything has to be a Spiderman adventure, but geez! Wake me when it’s over.

The only reason I can come up with for why these stories are promulgated is simply to dilute the pot, to get people like Ryan and Cassidy to fall for it simply to give them something to do. Neither Ryan nor Cassidy are the sharpest knives in the drawer, but they’ll work hard trying to put all the nonsense together. It’s kind of like sacrificing a pig to the piranhas so the people can get across the river while the fish are busy.

Of course, the bigger question is why? Why go to all this trouble? The usual answer acceptable to many is “TPTB want to hold onto power because if we get free energy the whole thing falls apart.” The old “Big Oil is holding out on us” does not work for me. Did you know that Big Oil’s profit margins are about a third of what electronics and computers are? Did you know the government makes twice as much off oil than Big Oil itself does?

Big Oil is not really in the oil business; it’s in the energy business. If there is such a thing as “Zero Point energy” then it seems to me Exxon and GE could make trillions of dollars by manufacturing these things. They would not be able to churn them out fast enough. Every automobile would be obsolete overnight, but it would take a couple of decades to transition from oil to zero point. We’d still need oil.

And think of the economic stimulus. If I were given the opportunity to get off the electricity grid I would be willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars tomorrow to do it. There is enormous profit potential in these things. Think of it. They would be the size of a heat pump and cost as much as an automobile. I see very little downside and a whole lot of upside to this. If I were a defense contractor who managed to build these things, I’d be looking for warehouse and manufacturing space, not for hit men to make sure the word did not leak out.

At one point Bill Gates was worth $200 billion. (He’s given much of it away.) Steve Jobs was worth several billion himself. These guys did not get rich by keeping people from harnessing computer technology. They got rich by allowing it to happen. So I don’t buy the idea that TPTB are keeping these technologies from us because it would sap their power. It would make them more powerful and richer than ever before. That excuse doesn’t make any sense at all.

A second possibility has been offered that suggests these technologies are being kept secret to maintain military superiority, just like the atomic bomb was kept secret, at least for a few years. There certainly is a relationship. Triangle UFOs, for example, are almost certainly manmade craft. When things are in an experimental stage that sort of secrecy makes sense, but military superiority depends on the ability to deploy new technologies, from Stealth bombers to F-35s, and deploy them in numbers sufficient to do the job. New technologies certainly have not been used in recent conflicts.

Why not? Are these conflicts not sufficiently bad? C’mon. Iran has nukes. When CAN we use new technologies? Either we don’t have them, or we’re missing the point altogether. Sixty years of non-disclosure does not make sense in this context.

So we are back to square one. Even if we do have people on the Inside who want Disclosure to happen, we still have people on the Inside who are willing to muddy the waters, or dilute the pot so that we remain out of the loop. If this is not for money and power, and if this is not for military superiority, then why are they doing this?

I’ll try to sketch out what I suspect next post.

P.S. I suggest the best way to handle the toddler in the house is simply to ignore him. It's not worth the time to even read what he says. He's useless. Treat him accordingly.

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 05:35 PM

Originally posted by nomadros
I'm not wanting to appear troll like here, but I know a bit about the world in question in this thread (if you get my drift) and even if people wanted to go off reservation and find stuff out, they couldn't. It is a world of compartments within compartments and you only know a little of what happens within you compartment...

...Giving people bird's names and calling a group the Aviary is not how it works. Anyway, apologies for raining on your thread, but please remember in their minds, UFO and aviary is an easy google search for them to keep tracks on what's going on if they wanted to.

Hopefully it's kind of obvious by now that I'm not dealing with the Aviary per se. I am however, singling out some individuals that have been associated with that name. Yes, they obviously have tracking information built into their mythologies. Big woop. It's usable wink-wink.

It, in my estimation, gives them valuable information as far as their social engineering and black memes go. They also, it seems, enjoy their reputations to a large degree...until you hit a lil' close to home. Then folk get some feedback which is a form of information in itself. I'll be addressing some researchers that got some "feedback" in a coming post.

Probably some evidence of that on this very thread. We'll see. You see some of the "disclosure mythologists," and other assorted black ops dudes, starting to get drug out into the light and their plebes show up and whine and hissy-fit and yet never manage to say anything of substance.

Rain on my thread? Don't worry about it, brother. I think you're selling yourself short if you think that some of their broad-stroke intentions can't be figured out and illuminated, though.

I appreciate your quit being self-defeatist and let's turn the microscope on high.

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 05:35 PM

Originally posted by FireMoon
There's a huge difference from extrapolating that... Heaps of weird# going back millenia that, even today the "spooks of all nations", keeps tabs on = something worth investigating as there seems to be a core of "real experiences", or at least, what people are convinced are real experiences against saying....

I think what The GUT was trying to do was have a discussion based on the actions of intelligence when they venture into the UFO subject, in order for us to hopefully be able to deduce anything useful from that, regarding the UFO phenomenon. At least that's my take on it, and mimics my own motivations for discussion. And, again, as I've pointed out, is based on the assumption someone in government knows the truth.

This is just another avenue for research and discussion. There are plenty of places where people can talk about abductions, inter-dimensionals, analyze videos and photos, radar returns, and every other aspect of so called "ufology."

And I don't think The GUT is claiming this avenue will be fruitful or is the best to eventually find an answer. At least I'm not. I just find this particular subject — intelligence and UFOs — interesting.

I may have misunderstood FireMoon's post and we're actually on the same wave length. My apologies for this confusion.

edit on 31-8-2012 by Quaesitor because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 05:42 PM
reply to post by The GUT

Gut I would absolutely love it if you and I could hang out for a afternoon and discuss all that we know.....
I star EVERY post I find of yours. You are quite the one with eyes ... You contribute so much here, good stuff Gut. Good attitude, ( High fives) Good job.I know you are blessed with eyes that see... put it out there bro!!!

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 06:18 PM

Originally posted by Saucerwench

Originally posted by The GUT But I absolutely do think we can make some progress here. I've only just begun

"Ahhh sooo!"

So good of you to drop in, Saucerwrench. I know you have some knowledge and information regarding our cast of characters--so far.

If you have anything that fits or fills you know it would be welcomed here.

One question for you--or anyone here--did Col. John B. Alexander have a falling out with C.B. Scott Jones, or have they remained friendly?

I have a bit of info that could elucidate some things depending on the answer. Thanks.

edit on 31-8-2012 by The GUT because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 06:27 PM
reply to post by The GUT

I'm uncertain of the information on that link. It is claimed there that Scott Jones was Falcon. Do you know what's their rationale for that assertion? It doesn't say on that particular link.

I raise the question because it was Bill Moore that made up the codenames and he told Greg Bishop that Falcon was OSS/CIA former agent Harry Rositzke.

There are other things on that link that sound a little out there, but I will check it out.

In other news, it appears our trolling friend was banned. Thank you ATS moderators.

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Clairacoustique
reply to post by The GUT

Since you infer some knowledge and connection to the shadow world, and since I know who you are...

Please advise and, of course, don't forget your unequivocal proof, Mr. GUT!! Certainly all of us here would well enjoy your Charlie Chan impersonations.

I say expose him or her, GUT, he or she deserves it!

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 06:36 PM

Originally posted by H1ght3chHippie
...@ OP: The biggest riddle of them all is Steven Greer to me. No doubt he's a complete rip-off with his alien ambassador bullpoop, but I vividly remember that it was *his* Disclosure Conference in 2001 in the National Press Club in Washington that finally convinced me to believe that UFO's are real because you simply can not discuss these witnesses away, it's the most credible testimony *ever* published and recorded. So I simply don't get the whole Greer story, any analysis like this one here would be most interesting.

Appreciate your involvement and insight here, Hippie.

Schuyler has marvelously addressed Greer in his epic The Problem with Greer thread, as well as here, and I don't wanna veer too far afield, but there is a connection here that might be worth mulling over: Folk that claim to have inside knowledge of Disclosure--goons or ufo gods? Is there a connection? I have some reason to believe there is, at least in a round the 'bout way. The foul smell of disinfo permeates the air around both camps.

Mebbe Greer is just a goob...or maybe he has a "secret" mission too. Hard to say.

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 06:42 PM
For those interested in this topic, check out Chris Lambright's ebook X Descending. It has a great deal of information on Richard Doty and the whole Bennewitz affair.

One of the more interesting facts, to me, was the fact that the author uncovers plenty of evidence to suspect Doty was CIA before he joined the Air Force. And also a connection between Doty and John Lear, among other stuff.

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 06:52 PM

Originally posted by Quaesitor
reply to post by The GUT

I'm uncertain of the information on that link. It is claimed there that Scott Jones was Falcon. Do you know what's their rationale for that assertion? It doesn't say on that particular link.

In other news, it appears our trolling friend was banned. Thank you ATS moderators.

Hey, Quaesitor, you are A+ in my book, but you know that. Yeah, take that link with a grain of salt, but since info on these guys is skimpy, it's a good starting place.

I did mean to give a disclaimer on that, and usually do, so thanks for pointing that out.

In the meantime, I'm not so much focusing on the Aviary mythology as much as I am the characters I've brought up so far.

It's my belief that they have directives that caused them to muck around with that crowd, and steer some things, but we need to look at what their directive was for doing so.

They aren't, I proffer, "Birds" as much as bird handlers...

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 07:07 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 07:11 PM
Re: Greer—

I don't know if Greer is a disinformation agent or just a charlatan taking advantage of gullible people, but a lot of his actions have familiar patterns.

When he showed up on the scene he presented himself as serious and he certainly didn't make the outrageous claims he now routinely makes. His 2001 NPC conference didn't present any smoking gun, or even new information for that matter, but it was somewhat serious.

Some of the people he presented, I think, were credible people and had interesting stories to tell, but nothing conclusive either way. It's possible Greer served as bait to attract certain people and then, by association, poison their reputations, or at least muddy the waters enough for people to discard everyone and everything that was initially said by his witnesses.

In 1980 when Paul Bennewitz alerted the Air Force of what he was filming flying over Kirtland AFB, Richard Doty started up by cooking up bogus UFO reports claiming several people had seen strange things. All of a sudden it was not one man (Bennewitz) who had seen something concrete, but it was a myriad of people claiming to have seen all sorts of different things that had nothing to do with what Bennewitz recorded.

A few months after Bennewitz alerted the Air Force, a woman claiming to have been abducted eventually showed up at Bennewitz's house and, under regression hypnosis, told tales of underground bases and aliens doing experiments on people, and all kinds of shocking details.

Everyone, including poor Paul Bennewitz, focused their attentions on Dulce and underground bases, and far away from Kirtland AFB.

Now all people remember from that affair is Dulce and stories of aliens doing genetic manipulation on humans and human/alien wars and all other kind of nonsense. Paul Bennewitz was seen as crazy — and, actually, eventually had a nervous breakdown, in great part thanks to Doty & friends — and nobody remembers or cares what he recorded over the Manzano Weapons Storage in Kirtland AFB.

Intelligence has a playbook, and while the plays keep working they keep using them.

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 07:22 PM
reply to post by fulllotusqigong

No one asked you to ignore anything, only to be on topic.

Frequently when you create threads exploring one theory people immediately jump to conclusions that you exclusively believe in that one and that all others are invalid.

Since this thread is about disinformation being spread and myths being created by intelligence about the UFO phenomenon many would jump to the conclusion that he was saying UFOs are exclusively a fabrication of the intelligence agencies, so he made a disclaimer informing people of his personal beliefs.

If I'm allowed to speak for him, he basically said "I believe the alien hypothesis might be the answer to some UFOs, but let's explore what and why intelligence is saying about UFOs."

Any more questions?

posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 07:39 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 07:49 PM

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Why are you allowed to speak for him about his personal belief? That makes no sense!

That's an expression. You never heard it? I was describing my interpretation of what he was saying. And if I'm incorrect in that interpretation he will correct it and, I'm sure, address all your pressing questions.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in