It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Nicorette
It's very common for former US national politicians to receive large speaking fees for giving speeches, it's how many of them make money after being in office -- or how some of them receive kickbacks for favors done while in office, from a more cynical point of view.
If Gravel didn't insist on being paid, then every church group, elk's lodge, or chamber of commerce dinner he would speak at in the future wouldn't expect to pay him either.
That said, this comment by Gravel seemed to have a bit of a Freudian slip:
“This is an opportunity which I've taken to focus on this issue for an entire week and the preparation I made in coming to it, for my enrichment that's very important,” Gravel says.
source
Originally posted by Tenacious8
How can anyone really say he would say that for the money of $20,000? If you would've watched all the videos, you would be able to see how genuine he is in his opinions throughout all five days. Either way, he would have been paid the money for his time anyways, with or without his opinions. I know of one of the committee members who hardly said anything very promising in promoting the existence of ETs. He would have been paid with or without his supporting opinions, so the doing it for money argument is pretty stupid.
Originally posted by WilliamOckham
Once money is involved (And a lack of any credible evidence), you can pretty much toss out all of it. You're creating an incentive to produce results.edit on 7-5-2013 by WilliamOckham because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Tenacious8
Originally posted by WilliamOckham
Once money is involved (And a lack of any credible evidence), you can pretty much toss out all of it. You're creating an incentive to produce results.edit on 7-5-2013 by WilliamOckham because: (no reason given)
A lack of any credible evidence?! Did you watch any of the hearing at all?
Originally posted by WilliamOckham
Originally posted by Tenacious8
Originally posted by WilliamOckham
Once money is involved (And a lack of any credible evidence), you can pretty much toss out all of it. You're creating an incentive to produce results.edit on 7-5-2013 by WilliamOckham because: (no reason given)
A lack of any credible evidence?! Did you watch any of the hearing at all?
Unless I missed something spectacular, your bar [for credible evidence], seems to be set too low.
I watched most (If not all) that clown show. Lots of the same ol' same ol'...and nothing in the way of history making, awe-inspiring like they promised. Of course, I was not expecting as much ;-) It was laughable. A staged "hearing" where former congressman pretend to give a damn about what is being said, and nothing in the way of proof of extra-terrestrial visitations. Not real evidence, anyway.edit on 7-5-2013 by WilliamOckham because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by spiritualarchitect
reply to post by Arnie123
It is funny how the posters here that live by de Nile will think that ex military/government is lying to them if they say aliens are real, yet they can't realize when the military/government is obviously lying to them when they say they are not.
Like when they say that it was a weather balloon over LA in 1942.
Really? A weather balloon took over 1,000 rounds of anti-aircraft fire and kept floating?
Or is it that they think something low and slow like that could not be hit because the US military was too enept?