Citizen Hearing on Disclosure of Life outside of Planet Earth

Originally posted by crazyewok

Originally posted by signalfire
reply to post by crazyewok

 

Yeah; it's not like you can't see people dressed just as weirdly at a Republican or Democratic Convention. And THOSE people are delegates... (and don't get me started on Mensa Gatherings, where at least everyone has a documented IQ; you should see the costumes in evidence there, especially after 10 pm).

In my humble opinion, there's no one so deluded as someone who would willingly put on a red white and blue get up, wave a flag around for several days at a staged event and think they are somehow participating in an open process.

Im not a American so I dont really have experiance of your political madness. Here in the uk we are prettyy MEH about it, I think that is beacuse we realised years ago how pointless it is as all partys are the same.


Anyway my point is this isnt the time or place to dress up like a crazy as it just hurts the cause.

A lawyer would'nt turn up to court with a cyrstal straped to there head whould they?

edit on 2-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

Think of it this way; I'm watching the vast majority of the conference and I saw two different people wearing those 'crystal headbands'; this one guy and a very pretty young woman who sat in on some of the presentation; she doesn't seem to be there today and I've never seen the man in the conference room, only that shot of him being 'interviewed' by some fake journalist. Both these people have to either live in D.C. and made their way to the Press Club which is open free to the public, or traveled there and paid for a hotel room which takes some big bucks. So, yeah, maybe they are crazy or maybe they're just one of the classic lunatic fringe that shows up at conferences of this type (see any Star Trek convention for far worse).

OR, the CIA who has been the go-to agency for debunking since four hours into the Roswell case shuttles in a few of these people and makes sure that the journalists that can't be bothered to actually do some listening for a few days and reporting on what they've heard and just want to ridicule something get their photo-op.

I didn't mean to pick on you specifically Ewok, yours was just the link to the picture that I clicked on. Sorry about that...

I find it fascinating that the very people who have spent literally HOURS on this thread ferociously debunking this and bad mouthing that can't seem to find the time or four bucks to actually just watch the presentation. Hell, if you're anti-UFO anything or anybody it's great for laughs, and if you're interested in just hearing what's going on, it's intriguing and sometimes enlightening. I do consider myself a UFO info junkie along with a great many other topics, and there's testimony here that's new to me, and it really is fun watching the rather clueless Congresscritters finally starting to realize that the government they worked for and in has been lying to them all along. Today's presentation of testimony from South America was particularly enlightening. Funny how the countries that the U.S.'s MSM seem to ignore as much as possible seem to be far more open to discussing topics without ridicule than here in the New Fascist States of America.

From Lee Speigel - he has ongoing "live" coverage... Of course it's "Weird News" but...oh well...at least SOMEONE is covering it!

I found this to be a very interesting post he put in today, and it speaks to the tone of sarcasm and lack of seriousness that must needs be put up with, apparently, when people mention UFOs... I appreciated Lee Speigel putting this out there.

Every time ridicule is heaped on credible people regarding UFO's, it makes my heart sink a bit, and makes me realize I need to be careful still whom I tell about my own, very genuine sighting (by every debunking standard I've seen on ATS, my sighting was unexplainable - but only as proof to myself...). I know there are raging debates as to who is credible and who is not - I leave that to people with more spleen than I have! I watch, listen, and do my own thinking on it.

peace,
AB

The New York Daily News today highlights a statement by U.S. Rep. Peter King of New York, in which he outright ridicules one of the military witnesses at the D.C. hearings, Ret. Air Force Capt. Robert Salas (pictured below).

Salas has a credible background as a weapons controller and launch officer of intercontinental ballistic missiles and has previously spoken about a 1967 incident at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana when signals went off indicating an intrusion at the missile site, followed by missiles "going into an unlaunchable, or no-go, mode," all during the appearance of a UFO over the base.

Salas says he sent documents about this case to King, the former House Homeland Security Chairman and believes King is ignoring him. According to the Daily News, when King was asked about Salas' claim, here's how he responded: "I have no idea what the guy is talking about. We are always getting crazy stuff in the mail by people whose brain has been taken over by aliens or something."

Really, Mr. King? As a representative of the people, is that the proper way to refer to one of many respected military men entrusted with the safety of our country -- to just shrug him off by referring to the evidence he sent you as "crazy stuff" and to further ridicule him by basically saying his brain was "taken over by aliens"?

Thursday Afternoon- Article on Media & Ridicule

Originally posted by signalfire

I find it fascinating that the very people who have spent literally HOURS on this thread ferociously debunking this and bad mouthing that can't seem to find the time or four bucks to actually just watch the presentation.

Um...as stated in more than one post. I'm watching. I even commented in a very lengthly post about the first 2 hours I watched.

I'm currently a little over 7 hours deep now.

Amd let me assure you...this is a total crap fest farce. Its worse than I thought.

Like I said, I'll be detailing it all, prolly in my own thread.

But what I find funny is- the majority of the people here pro-conference, even the alien who made this thread, have either refused to watch, or admitted to not having the time.

And lets not forget they also seem to have not had the time to study, research or watch years worth of past evidence or history on this subject. No worries, we can't ALL be dedicated.

Hell, if you're anti-UFO anything or anybody it's great for laughs, and if you're interested in just hearing what's going on, it's intriguing and sometimes enlightening.

You forgot- "if you are pro-UFO and informed on the subject"...if so, this conference would piss you off. This thing is horrible. I can't wait to get deeper into it. I'm actually taking notes. There is some REALLY GREAT QUOTES that show just how bad this conference is.

[
I do consider myself a UFO info junkie along with a great many other topics, and there's testimony here that's new to me, and it really is fun watching the rather clueless Congresscritters finally starting to realize that the government they worked for and in has been lying to them all along.

The ex-congress are making me upset the most.

Specially the Ex Senator saying "yknow, that's all amazing information. But what can this conference do? I guess you hope for us to tell other people in congress. Honestly, I can't even think of one person who will listen to this in congress. I guess we can hope to educated the public. But really, what's that going to do? The public can't do anything."

Paraphrasing, but dead on almost word for word.

AND lets not forget the little speech that the Ex senator gave about how the media is making it look like they got paid too much (20 thousand a pop) and then turns it around and yells "FOX news reporters get paid way more. WE ARE GETTING UNDER PAID FOR THIS!"

And then the crowd applauded.

Sorry, I am offended and disappointed.

Today's presentation of testimony from South America was particularly enlightening. Funny how the countries that the U.S.'s MSM seem to ignore as much as possible seem to be far more open to discussing topics without ridicule than here in the New Fascist States of America.

Ain't gotten that far yet. Can't wait.

Thanks for your opinions.

MM

This British police officer is about to have a melt down over his slideshow.

Originally posted by signalfire
reply to post by Mr Mask

 

Sorry.

I stopped reading your posts several pages ago. No content, snotty, TL/DR.

Snotty? Surly. Can't help it when I come to a UFO thread to participate with real information, links, documents and what not...and I get poo-poo-ed on by a self-proclaimed Alien, and attacked by people who admit to not studying the subject, while ignoring official government documents and/or directly turning a blind eye to past hoaxes perpetrated by some of the folks in the conference. Ya...I get a lil snotty. Sorry.

TLDR? Ya...I type a lot. Would you believe I even edit it down? Its true. Long winded here.

No content? Hardly. I've shared more content that almost anyone here. It was ignored, yelled at or called false. Mr F and FORMeTop00pn are the other two sharing most information here as well.

So instead of complaining about them complaining about their over-inflated pay scale expectations, do you have any issue with the ACTUAL TESTIMONY? Or are you just here to cheerlead Mr Fantastic's annoying posts?

Cheerleading? Hardly. Its clear me and him are on opposite teams. He is not pro-UFO and I am. As stated many times.

But yes, I have a few issues with some of the testimonies I've heard thus far. Mostly with the Rendlesham Forest incident and the UFO-turns-nukes-off incidents.

Both cases seemed to ignore the overwhelming evidence.

How come the Forest incident testimony failed to show the main two witnesses in the Forest have been caught lying and changing their stories many times. That they have changed their dates, locations, and stories overly throughout the years. They also failed to mention that others on the base have openly said that what the witnesses are saying didn't happen at all. And that they are lying intentionally.

How come the Nuke testimonies have stated that its 100% UFO caused, when there is stacks of evidence suggesting otherwise? They failed to share the evidence that shows nukes went offline all the time in the pre-70s, with most instances never having a UFO report attached.

How come the super informed "UFO experts" representing these witnesses, failed to talk about that other side of the coin and just said "clearly this is UFOs".

And how come, the ex congress men have just taken it all in and time and time again are clearly stating-

"well that's it. That 100% proof of ET" .

The logic being used by the Ex-congress, is so fricken broken its sickening. And the testimonies thus far are from people who are pretty much already in high speculation for lying to sell books.

The Forest incident for example. Half the details from that incident didn't come out till many years later, where Pennington changed his entire story and then added stuff, like the time travel, and the landing gear, and even the craft itself.

Bad display of witnesses with no critical opposing side to share the "down side" of it all.

In other words, the UFO-experts in the panel are hiding the important anti-UFO data in support of the pro-UFO data. Not very honest of them.

AND if I hear them remind the crowd one more time about how many books are for sale in the lobby, or how this will become a documentary (for sale) later this year...I'm gunna puke.

Don't bother answering. I'm really tired of the attitude, frankly. There's honest debate about the genuineness of the testimony, but the combination of ridicule and claiming everyone's in it for the money gets real old, real fast.

Its ok if you are tired of me. I'm pretty tired of you sharing nothing and showing zero history of being interested in this subject past "hog wash displays" and "Discovery Channel nonsense".

But...sadly, I'm here to stay, and unlike this conference I WILL be presenting the other side of the coin, so nobody has to suffer being fooled into thinking there is nothing to speculate.

But hey, its nice to see that 18 pages later you are actually adding information instead of just blindly clapping and barking like a seal. Its refreshing.

But I assure you (again) if you followed these cases...closely...with more than passing interest ...you too would wonder why this conference is being so one-sided and misinformed.

MM

reply to post by signalfire

OR, the CIA who has been the go-to agency for debunking since four hours into the Roswell case

Roswell July 7 1947

Act to create the CIA July 26 1947......

Another part of the conference I found sickening, is when the Ex-Congress-Goons were reading the press of this event and how it ridiculed the people in it.

They all turned it into a "looks like the government/press are trying to hide and direct attention away from the truth".

They kept saying the press was using their access to media to discredit UFOs. They gave a few long speeches about that.

When in reality, the press has not done that with the stuff they wrote. They were ridiculing the "reputations" of the wacky ex-congress-nuts.

But they seemed to weasel around that, and attach it to the press trying to "hide UFO info". It was pretty disturbing to see them reading the articles and then ignore the meaning of them and turn it into a "hey guys, the government and press are trying to stop us!" with the crowd applauding.

I also found it disturbing that each and every time the congress was asked "what can be done to spread this info", they replied one by one saying "uhhhh, I dunno, I mean, what can we do"?

The Ex Senator actually went so far as to say "honestly, I can't tell anyone about this in congress. Nobody would listen. I guess the public could listen, but lets be honest, they are powerless to do anything as well."

And I also didn't like when Ex-Congressmen Hooley (with slurred speech, stuttering and broken logic) gave her views on why the aliens are here.

She basically stated that the evidence she has seen thus far has proven to her that friendly aliens are here, and that the government must be hiding them.

Its pretty shameful. And when someone like me cares overly about this subject, you kinda want someone better than Greer n Friends and these stuttering wackos representing the evidence at hand.

But nope...we get these dishonest scum bags (UFOlogists) and these mindless monkeys (Ex-Congressmen) passing the UFO-ball back n forth in a manner that screams "unprofessional and slanted".

IMNSHO.

MM

Originally posted by MrFantastic1

Originally posted by AboveBoard

Originally posted by MrFantastic1

The event will also hear the testimony of “Dr.” Thomas Vallone. According to his biography on the hearing website, Vallone received his doctorate from Kennedy Western University. Never heard of Kennedy Western? Don’t worry. The unaccredited school was shut-down in 2009 following a Government Accountability Office investigation into diploma mills.

www.parapolitical.com...

edit on 30-4-2013 by MrFantastic1 because: (no reason given)

The article did not mention his B.S. in Electrical Engineering, B.S. in Physics and M.A. in Physics from SUNY (State University of New York). As to Kennedy-Western,

You've seen his transcripts from SUNY then and can confirm that, or you're just going by what he posted on his own website and assuming "well, he must be telling the truth - people don't lie about that stuff"?

Here's the thing - you CAN'T effectively make-up a doctorate ... it's too easy to discredit through a LexisNexis search ... your thesis will be on file somewhere. You CAN claim to have a BS/MA, however, that people -usually- can't definitively discredit without a signed authorization to pull your academic records.

That's why fakers usually buy Ph.D.s from diploma mills but just make-up BS/MAs from real schools. Trust me, I do background checks for corporate HR departments on their senior-level hires for a living. This is a very typical pattern, I've seen it a thousand times.

Did this guy make-up his MA? I don't know. All I know is that 99% of people who are bright enough to get a MA in a science-related field would not buy a Ph.D. from a diploma mill. If I were backgrounding this guy, that would be a VERY MAJOR red flag.

edit on 1-5-2013 by MrFantastic1 because: (no reason given)

A follow up -

"Red Flag" of the PhD? Perhaps, but a quick search shows him to currently work for the Federal Government in the patent approval office (PTO). While I can't pull up his college transcripts nor speak to his GPA, I would think that the background check has been done on that. Implying that he is lying about everything based on the PhD being from Kennedy-Western is a stretch, even for Mr. Fantastic! ;-)

It would seem that due to his Free Energy 'obsession' (an arbitrator's characterization, not mine) and an attempt to secure a location for a free energy conference, he was unfairly removed from his position for 6 years, but was completely reinstated with full back-pay (except for 30 days as a censure for putting something on a flyer that he shouldn't have), raises, benefits, etc. It was during this legal struggle that he did degree work at Kennedy-Western. (Degree 2003 - Arbitration 1999 - 2005)

One can surmise that this was a challenging time, with no guarantee of income or reinstatement for the six years of the arbitration, and so a less expensive degree with online learning options was preferable. Kennedy-Western was a bad choice, but it does not make Tom Valone a bad person.

The result of the arbitration (I read the whole document) was very illuminating as to the kind of back-stabbing and self-serving behavior (i.e. not wanting to share the Federal R&D money pie) that goes on behind the scenes of the struggle for inventors to bring forth new ideas and possibly new technologies. This is another form of "suppression" that doesn't have a major conspiracy behind it, merely the mundane "follow the money" sort of plotting. (That there is a "rubber stamp disapproval" for anything "free energy" at the Patent Office per their policy, was also brought to light.) The 'moral outrage' of the Association of Physical Sciences toward anything "free energy" is not as pure as they would have people believe. Money, apparently, ruled their morals.

The arbitrator is awesome in this! While Tom Valone doesn't come out totally unscathed, he is the clear victor. The arbitrator found his lack of willingness to claim any responsibility even on small things a sign of lack of integrity - though it must be noted that Valone was being represented by Union, which may have advised him to hold the line of taking NO responsibility lest it come back to bite him later. As Valone had been actively persecuted, it was a smart legal decision, even if it made him appear less than forthcoming. OR It may be that the unwillingness was purely on Valone's part, having been burned as he was and not wanting any fuel left for a future fire. He did get slapped for 30 days for "misrepresenting" that the event he was promoting was 'under the auspices' of the Dept of Commerce on his flyer/website.

peace,
AB

reply to post by Mr Mask

Hey, Mr. Mask,

It is clear to me that you feel the subject of UFOs is being misrepresented by this event, and that you feel very strongly about this. Now, the reason this event exists is due to the organization, including funding, of and by the people behind it. Perhaps if people who were more like-minded with you started their own, more reputable in your eyes, organization, could put on an event?

But anyone who does this must know that they will have to withstand ridicule and persecution of the kind that has been brought to bear on the people involved with the current conference - it is part of the territory. I have yet to see someone publicly and forcefully touch the UFO subject as being something 'real' and come out unscathed. One's personal life, family, finances, sanity, education, etc. are all put under a critical microscope, in addition to the information on UFO's they present. Much like a 'UFO' video or photo, a public ufologist is examined layer by layer and must deal with all manner of interpretations, whether true or not, about his or her intimate person, in addition to what they are actually saying.

It doesn't help that some of the claims ufologists make are extreme or at least seemingly outlandish, and that the burden of proof is nearly impossible to meet - it turns it into 'belief vs. belief.' (If I hear the words "Ancient Alien Theorists believe...." ONE more time...*sigh* - it does obscure things, doesn't it?) And yes, there ARE charlatans posting fake UFO vids for advertising $$ on youtube, which muddies the waters further.

Personally, I get tired of character assassination, defamation, etc, however. Painting someone with the crazy-brush (or con-man brush) is an effective silencer. And no one is perfect. Who wants to put themselves out there to sudden rumors of corruption, buffoonery, charlatanism, adultery, threats? Who wants mocking youtube videos with snarky narrators, defamatory comments on websites, etc. that are 'ok' because you are now fair-game as a public figure? Unfortunately, that is exactly what a public ufologist must be prepared to have happen to them, regardless of who they are, their intentions or their character - people will be happy to define those for them.

In the court of public opinion, rumor and negative labels can tear Anyone down without recourse to defense or appeal to understanding - same as in politics, lies can be told to hurt and harm. It's effective. That's why it's done.

On the outside of ufology, there are plenty of people who use the faulty logic of "UFO's are for 'nuts' or con-men, ergo whomever speaks about UFOs as being real ARE 'nuts' or con-men or both and everything they say/do is a crazy-talk lie." This leaves a lot of people keeping their mouths shut - who wants to be labeled like this?

On the inside of ufology, I see fellow researchers bashing each other over possible mistakes or disagreements. Public researchers in this field are routinely and aggressively put up for total point-by-point crucifixion by fellow researchers, in addition to the general public of skeptics and the media. It happens in academia the same way as ideas and personalities wrestle for position in the Hall of Truth (or for grants/project funding, department position, etc.).

When I hear these negative labels, accusations and such, it is distracting and takes tons of my time to wade through to see what's truth, what's innuendo and rumor, and what are simply defamatory negative comments. I have to determine the standards being used to create the negative label, the personality of the detractor, the merits and demerits of the label and ultimately where truth, lies, interpretation, emotion and 'heck if I know who's telling the truth' play out. It's frustrating to say the least! Not to mention nearly impossible. (heavy *sigh* again) But having been the victim of lies told by someone trying to oust me from my job, and how those ugly falsehoods can spread like threads of black ooze from one person to another, I know that the effort is worth it. (They didn't succeed, btw, for which I am grateful!)

Is there a safe place in public ufology? I haven't seen it yet. Anyway - if there is group of hard-core researchers more to your standards that want to do a high-powered event like this one - I would most certainly be interested! (And because this is the internet, and you can't see or hear me - I want to be clear - I am very sincere in this!!)

peace,
AB

reply to post by AboveBoard


I think high profile ufologists should be put under an examining light. I once had a high clearance and dealt with spooks.
In a somewhat digressing line of conversation here, I am amazed that no one who is a fan of certain personages, ever ever questions how someone without a day job, but with a family and mortgage, (and Ivy League education)is able to skyrocket in publishing and mainstream media publicity and world travel. do you know anyone without a day job (nor on social security income) who is moved along rapidly like that?
'The Riddler' type of question: What is a N.O.C.?
Well anyway, for those who are not emotionally invested in ufos and ufology, and are honest with themselves, maybe take a different look at our worshipped promoters, (over at reality uncovered.) Ahem.
(I didn't just commit a no no did I?)

reply to post by specialcategory


Oh no doubt one should wade through it (I guess I didn't make that clear) - I'm not saying we shouldn't investigate the investigators - but my point is that you will have a huge job trying to suss out the truth. For example, Tom Valone was disparaged. I went and looked him up. My information was challenged and so I went through HOURS of reading testimony and discovering as much as I could about him and what happened. I still don't know anything about his work and can't say I'm a 'defender' of him - all that for looking at his resume! Lucky for me it was a good read. lol!

If people go public with their information, views and experiences, they will be subject to both legitimate inquiry and mud-slinging. So often the mud-slinging goes towards "Intent" - i.e. the "intent" of a researcher is to present false information/dis-info, to hoax, to make money from gullible noobs, etc. Proving intent is a challenge, no? And now you are saying their intent may be even more nefarious?

As to spooks, I wouldn't know. I'm not in that world. The possible scenerios for intrigue are, well, if one has a creative mind, numerous indeed.

Not trying to go further off topic or derail here, so I'll give it a rest. Thank you for your insight!

peace,
AB

Well I have the Day 2 Audio Recorded onto a drive, and am starting on Day 3

I pretty much figure that with-in a couple days of this event being over, so will the availability of these audio recordings....

Here is DAY 4

reply to post by FORMe2p00p0n


Thank you!! :-) Your efforts at posting this are greatly appreciated!! I need to go back to the other's you've posted too. Awesome to have it available for however long it stays up. (I think S. Basset said they would youtube it afterwards, but it might be several weeks...)

peace,
AB

Originally posted by AboveBoard
reply to post by FORMe2p00p0n

 

Thank you!! :-) Your efforts at posting this are greatly appreciated!! I need to go back to the other's you've posted too. Awesome to have it available for however long it stays up. (I think S. Basset said they would youtube it afterwards, but it might be several weeks...)

peace,
AB

He also said aliens are real ; ) LOL I kid, I kid

Really though I know there are a lot of people that aren't computer savvy or just really can't afford 4 bucks (yes there are real people that work hard but still have to live paycheck to paycheck), and I enjoy helping them out ...

and anyway, all I'm really doing is obliging the conference's underlying topic of "free information" (they want gov to release their files on UFOs.... I want people to hear what they have to say)

reply to post by Mr Mask

2-I see a lot of hostile people looking to destroy or dismantle people’s posts here with little respect for the feelings of the OP. I will not be part of such behavior. I am someone who feels very “at peace” with peace.

these are your words from your introduction thread in 2009, I just thought I'd reflect them back to you in this current instance for your review. I really liked your UFO vid though, and you do have something to share, I just wish you would stick to that instead of being so combative with those you don't agree with, respect some 'feelings' ok????

This has got to be the highlight of the final day of the CHD.

An Ex CIA operative tells how Eisenhower had to threaten MJ-12 with the 1st Army to get them to release what they knew..
In a word - Stunning! It also collaborates many other tidbits and revelations over the years....

www....(nolink)/deathbed-testimony-about-ufos-given-by-former-cia-official-video-1002/

Originally posted by Impodog
This has got to be the highlight of the final day of the CHD.

An Ex CIA operative tells how Eisenhower had to threaten MJ-12 with the 1st Army to get them to release what they knew..
In a word - Stunning! It also collaborates many other tidbits and revelations over the years....

www....(nolink)/deathbed-testimony-about-ufos-given-by-former-cia-official-video-1002/

link was blocked by ATS, but I was able to find it in a google search...

in google search type in "Deathbed testimony’ about UFOs given by former CIA official (VIDEO)"

UFO author and historian Richard Dolan interviewed “Anonymous” on March 5, 2013. Facing impending kidney failure, this individual felt compelled to disclose secret information he feels is too important to keep secret. In the video, he claims to have served in the U.S. Army, worked for the CIA, and worked on the U.S. Air Force’s Project Blue Book–one of the USAF’s official studies of UFOs. And he refers to the project as “partially a fraud.” Asking for clarification, Dolan states, “You’re saying some of the Blue Book cases were completely fictitious?” The anonymous man responds, “Yes.”

“Anonymous” alleges that, after an invasion threat from President Dwight Eisenhower, he and his superior at the CIA were allowed inside the secretive Area 51 in Nevada to gather intel and report back to the president. There, “Anonymous” describes seeing several alien spacecraft, including the craft that crashed in Roswell, New Mexico. Then, he and his superior were taken to the S-4 facility southwest of Area 51 where they observed live extraterrestrials.

video is at (nolink)



truth is flooding out now, like I knew it would
now is the time!
all hidden truths shall be revealed, thank you God, Thank YOU soooo much
Thank You




*all a part of the divine plan

remember..


Video testimony by an anonymous alleged former CIA official was shown at the Citizen Hearing on Disclosure at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on Friday, May 3.

UFO author and historian Richard Dolan interviewed "Anonymous" on March 5, 2013. Facing impending kidney failure, this individual felt compelled to disclose secret information he feels is too important to keep secret.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by signalfire

 

OR, the CIA who has been the go-to agency for debunking since four hours into the Roswell case

Roswell July 7 1947

Act to create the CIA July 26 1947......

Jesus, I damn near rest my case. That 'Act' being put in writing less than three weeks after the crash? If ever there was a smoking gun...

Originally posted by signalfire

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by signalfire

 

OR, the CIA who has been the go-to agency for debunking since four hours into the Roswell case

Roswell July 7 1947

Act to create the CIA July 26 1947......

Jesus, I damn near rest my case. That 'Act' being put in writing less than three weeks after the crash? If ever there was a smoking gun...

lol
yep
I agree...
the evidence is just piling on now
I love these times, the truth shall be known
thank you