Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Citizen Hearing on UFO Disclosure (complete video series within)

page: 4
72
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 7 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Many thanks for providing the full video.




posted on May, 7 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Thanks signal and freelance for the answers about the money. And OP for the links. I will listen to some of these during spring cleaning


I think impugning a profit motive here is unfair, if they spent 500,000 USD or more to pull this off, they will be lucky to break even. Bassett and Cameron and some of the others seem very pure in their motives to me. Greer and his expensive flashlight trips into the desert I am not impressed by, but who am I to judge how others spend their free time.

I wonder if Laurance Rockefeller set up a posthumous trust with his niece that continues to fund these sort of things? It would make sense. It's about the only thing that makes sense (or some other wealthy benefactors), because you are not going to make 500k back on 3.80 pay per views, not ever.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Wow thank you so very much!.
.LuisMarco., 29



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by NarcolepticBuddha
reply to post by torsion
 


Fair enough. But can you cite an example where an event wasn't "all about the money?" Everything in some way, shape, or form is going to be about money. Money will always be a factor. It's just the way things are. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove here.

edit on 7-5-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)


Just trying to make people aware that the "disclosure" crew are a bunch of guys making a fast buck out of people's gullibility. They don't give a crap about UFOs. They realise that a lot of people who are interested in them can be easily persuaded to give up their cash.

Other people on the panel such as Friedman, Moulton Howe, Dolan are genuine researchers of variable quality. They are, or were, truly interested in the subject but have to put out a lot of trash because they need to make a living out of it. Some of what they say is true, or at least sincere, but much of what they say isn't. A lot of it is also dull repetition - how many times has Friedman mentioned blacked-out FOIA documents! Why hasn't he got something new to say? But where these guys research, Greer fakes his way through the field for a big fat out of proportion fee.

I've no problem with people making money for writing or lecturing about UFOs - even if I disagree with their conclusions. I have a couple of Friedman's books in my library but I don't necessarily believe what he thinks to be true. Unfortunately real UFOlogy has been hijacked and poisoned by the likes of Greer and his ilk.

If you value the field, ditch these guys and their non-disclosing disclosures, their non-existent evidence and their untrue "Truth" talk (they've hijacked that word, too) and study the subject proper.

Also beware the likes of those who recruit for the scammers with all this pseudo-hippy "I love you - I love you" blather. Follow them and you'll get nothing but a lighter wallet and a head full of spoof.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Now this is interesting, I've got TONS of hours to look forward to now. Great post! S&F!

Nothing much to say as of now, only 50mins in on part 1.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by NarcolepticBuddha
reply to post by torsion
 


Fair enough. But can you cite an example where an event wasn't "all about the money?" Everything in some way, shape, or form is going to be about money. Money will always be a factor. It's just the way things are. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove here.

edit on 7-5-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)


Just trying to make people aware that the "disclosure" crew are a bunch of guys making a fast buck out of people's gullibility. They don't give a crap about UFOs. They realise that a lot of people who are interested in them can be easily persuaded to give up their cash.

Other people on the panel such as Friedman, Moulton Howe, Dolan are genuine researchers of variable quality. They are, or were, truly interested in the subject but have to put out a lot of trash because they need to make a living out of it. Some of what they say is true, or at least sincere, but much of what they say isn't. A lot of it is also dull repetition - how many times has Friedman mentioned blacked-out FOIA documents! Why hasn't he got something new to say? But where these guys research, Greer fakes his way through the field for a big fat out of proportion fee.

I've no problem with people making money for writing or lecturing about UFOs - even if I disagree with their conclusions. I have a couple of Friedman's books in my library but I don't necessarily believe what he thinks to be true. Unfortunately real UFOlogy has been hijacked and poisoned by the likes of Greer and his ilk.

If you value the field, ditch these guys and their non-disclosing disclosures, their non-existent evidence and their untrue "Truth" talk (they've hijacked that word, too) and study the subject proper.

Also beware the likes of those who recruit for the scammers with all this pseudo-hippy "I love you - I love you" blather. Follow them and you'll get nothing but a lighter wallet and a head full of spoof.



I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.
Did you watch the hearings ?

Besides being free on any of the days at the event. The live stream cost buttons as do the archives.

Sure, people made money but so what ?
That doesn't make it a scam.
I think Stephen Basset is genuinely trying his best to bring this issue out in the open without the usual ridicule from media and the likes.
I thought they done a thoroughly professional job and the panel of ex congress men/women really took on board what was brought to the table.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


Great, I am going to kick back with an artichoke for dinner, pull up the loveseat and watch until I fall asleep.

Thanks so much for the evenings entertainment.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ForteanOrg
reply to post by lambros56
 


This reminds me of 'salami scams': you steal a very small amount from a large population and no idividual gives a dang and lives with his loss. After all, who'd go to court to get back $ 3,80...

Conmen are very good at finding the sweet spot between willingness to pay and amount to pay. Say that 100.000 people would be interested in seeing the stream. Of those 100.000, how many would be prepared to pay 90 bucks to see it? I guess just a few, let's assume 100. That would bring 9000 dollars (minus expenses). How many would be prepared to pay 10 bucks? I guess, a few more, let's say 1000, which would earn you 10.000 dollars. Now, say we'd ask 3-4 bucks.. that's almost nothing. So, probably at least 30.000 people would be prepared to pay that small amount. And you'll end up with 114.000 dollars. Totally legal.



These events cost money.
The $3.80 wasn't a loss.
It was well worth paying that small amount for five days of live streaming of a very good event that I really enjoyed.

How much does a DVD cost to rent over the Internet ?
How much do these companies make out of thousands of people renting the same film ?

The film may be rubbish but you get on with it.
You probably rent another one the next night.
No. I'm sorry but I don't see the problem some of you are having.

It seems people are happy paying TV and cable companies to watch the stuff they screen but when people out side of the mainstream want paying for what they have to offer.....it's always about the money.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Am finding the 'they're just out to make money' argument totally disingenious... if not a bit weird. Can't you think of a better way to attack it? So ALL these witnesses are trading in their credentials, their life reputation (and that of their families) to make a quick buck (which they may not even be making)? This is one of the most STUPID things I've read on here.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   
The same intelligence groups in the UFO field continue to bring about what they deem to be "Credible" witnesses, yet until the day comes that they include individuals who have had personal experiences which are also as a whole "credible", they will continue to stumble in the dark against issues which exhaust themselves in time.

By sheer numbers the individual outweighs the same witnesses they keep bringing forth that do not get the message across.

The hidden governments and agencies who look into this phenomena find the individual of immense interest.



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
The same intelligence groups in the UFO field continue to bring about what they deem to be "Credible" witnesses, yet until the day comes that they include individuals who have had personal experiences which are also as a whole "credible", they will continue to stumble in the dark against issues which exhaust themselves in time.

By sheer numbers the individual outweighs the same witnesses they keep bringing forth that do not get the message across.

The hidden governments and agencies who look into this phenomena find the individual of immense interest.


I'm sorry Antar, I am not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that they had no credible experiencers as witnesses? If that is what you're saying, I have to beg to differ. To me, the best documented ufo sighting is the Rendlesham Forest incident. Over eighty U.S. military personnel witnessed this event including the base commander. Two of the base security people actually saw the craft on the ground and one of those security officers actually touched the craft. Both the military security officers were witnesses at the hearing and Nick Pope who worked with the England's Ministry of Defense testified. What makes you question their experience?

www.nickpope.net...

www.youtube.com...



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by NarcolepticBuddha
reply to post by torsion
 


Fair enough. But can you cite an example where an event wasn't "all about the money?" Everything in some way, shape, or form is going to be about money. Money will always be a factor. It's just the way things are. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove here.

edit on 7-5-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)


Just trying to make people aware that the "disclosure" crew are a bunch of guys making a fast buck out of people's gullibility. They don't give a crap about UFOs. They realise that a lot of people who are interested in them can be easily persuaded to give up their cash.

Other people on the panel such as Friedman, Moulton Howe, Dolan are genuine researchers of variable quality. They are, or were, truly interested in the subject but have to put out a lot of trash because they need to make a living out of it. Some of what they say is true, or at least sincere, but much of what they say isn't. A lot of it is also dull repetition - how many times has Friedman mentioned blacked-out FOIA documents! Why hasn't he got something new to say? But where these guys research, Greer fakes his way through the field for a big fat out of proportion fee.

I've no problem with people making money for writing or lecturing about UFOs - even if I disagree with their conclusions. I have a couple of Friedman's books in my library but I don't necessarily believe what he thinks to be true. Unfortunately real UFOlogy has been hijacked and poisoned by the likes of Greer and his ilk.

If you value the field, ditch these guys and their non-disclosing disclosures, their non-existent evidence and their untrue "Truth" talk (they've hijacked that word, too) and study the subject proper.

Also beware the likes of those who recruit for the scammers with all this pseudo-hippy "I love you - I love you" blather. Follow them and you'll get nothing but a lighter wallet and a head full of spoof.


So according to your logic...if you value the field of Ufology, the only way to study it properly is by not publishing your works by any means. Because apparently, you will be depicted as money-hungry and/or looking for fame. Is that about right?

That, my friend, is retarded.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tenacious8


So according to your logic...if you value the field of Ufology, the only way to study it properly is by not publishing your works by any means. Because apparently, you will be depicted as money-hungry and/or looking for fame. Is that about right?


You clearly didn't read the post very well. Go back and give it an other try and you may see the line -


I've no problem with people making money for writing or lecturing about UFOs...


But when scammers jump on board, hijack the field and start knowingly selling bs, then I have an issue with it.


That, my friend, is retarded.


Yet you put your faith in a "disclosure" guy who claims he speaks to ETs and vectors in flying saucers but he can only say he's read this document or heard that anecdote when he's on the public podium.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Choice777
Greer said that the admiral or whatever in France, told him that the radar tracked objects above their location , traveling between 100.000 km/h and 200.000 km/h.
Can a radar actually track such speeds and give them out as output ?


Don't know the answer to that but for those who haven't seen it here's Greer in France getting on board a flying saucer. Look at the one hovering above the Puja table and the big one above the trees before they all embark the huge craft that's landed in the field.



Way to go, Steve!! Why do we need government disclosure after that irrefutable evidence?

He's coming to the UK soon to summon the ETs and you can join him for just under $4000! (Not that money has anything to do with it.)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by torsion
 



THAT, my friend, is retarded.

(emphasis mine)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 05:13 AM
link   
reply to post by lambros56
 



These events cost money.


Yes, they do. But you can be sure it hasn't cost Basset, Greer, Dolan, Howe etc. a single dime.


The $3.80 wasn't a loss.


I can imagine that. Now, ask yourself: why did you pay for the event? Entertainment? There's nothing wrong with that. But did it provide what was on the label: disclosure? No, it did not. So, you payed your 4 bucks and now get on with life, having received entertainment where you expected to be one of the first to see disclosure. Yay. You were tricked, my friend. That's a scam in my book.


It was well worth paying that small amount for five days of live streaming of a very good event that I really enjoyed.


So, you now see this as entertainment, then? I can believe that, as it sure enough was not disclosure nor even remotely related. Nothing new was being said, nothing changed, only questionable hearsay stories were being told.

I'm not discussing the need to investigate a phenomenon like this, I firmly believe there is a need to do so. But please, let's do it without the showmen that live of it and would be out of income without it.


How much does a DVD cost to rent over the Internet ? How much do these companies make out of thousands of people renting the same film ?


Millions, sometimes. Let's not pretend Greers' collection of remade internet snippets ("Sirius") will earn him that much, it probably will be more in the order of hundreds of thousands. Basset, Howe, Dolan - they may not even earn money from the show that was put on - but they WILL earn money from selling their no-good quasi-documentaries promoted there.

As long as it is presented as 'entertainment' I'm fine with it. But it is NOT. It has been presented as a major part of disclosure. I haven't seen that happen.

An interesting question would be: who payed for the rent of the premises, the fees for the congresmen, who payed the bills of Dolan, Greer, Basset, Howe.. where did that money come from? Was it Bassets personal money, or money he got from a (group of) benefactors? As you may know, the Rockefeller family has a keen interest in disclosure and they are not without means. So, has the bunch of showmen (at best) found a party that pays the expenses so they can simply limit themselves to earning whatever money was made from it, direct or indirect? I would love to know, but I don't think we will have the option to inspect the books.


The film may be rubbish but you get on with it. You probably rent another one the next night. No. I'm sorry but I don't see the problem some of you are having.


That's clear to me. Again: if they had presented this as entertainment or yet another congress on ufology.. fine. But they presented this as a Hearing - the instrument for the Congress to create effective Law. Well, I say: let the congress create effective Laws - laws that allow the DA to prosecute these folks for the lies they promote.


it's always about the money.


No, it's not. It is about asking money under false pretenses. And slapping the faces of all serious folks that really would like to see proper investigations done into the subject.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 



Sorry but I wasn't duped at all.
I didn't pay my four bucks to see disclosure.
This hearing wasn't about proof of disclosure.
It was about trying to bring about disclosure.

I'm not a lover of Greer but I think Stephen Basset brought more reliable witnesses to these hearings than you get at some of these Exopolitics events.
Having a panel of ex congress men and women I thought was a good idea.

Did you watch any of the hearings ?
Because to be honest, you don't seem to be talking about the same thing I watched last week.
Don't get me wrong.
I know only too well of those who are out to earn money from hearsay etc but in my opinion most of those who gave evidence were very reliable and the comments from the panel seemed very impressive.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha
 


Thank you, Mr. Budda! This will give me something to watch, if I ever get time. But I will make time!
I hope it stays up awhile! That's a lot of videos!


I gave you your 60th flag/star. I appreciate you finding the video, and sharing it with us!



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by Impodog

This isn't all about making money.


Of course it is.


The panel had to be paid otherwise they wouldn't have been able to get a panel at all.


Exactly. They wanted to make some money. So too the witnesses, experts and organisers. None of them would have done it for free.


This is about the truth and getting the truth out there.




It has nothing to do with the truth. It has a lot to do with speculation, misunderstandings, hoaxes, theories and many lies, unfortunately. Oh, and making money!


If you think you can change the world with any money or put on an event like this without any money you're pretty naive.


Tell me exactly how the world has changed now the event is over...
edit on 7-5-2013 by torsion because: (no reason given)


What's wrong with making money? Time is money...These people deserve to be paid for their time...i do not see anything wrong with that. What exactly is your point? Are you saying things are only true if done for free?

Sorry,but i don't get what getting paid (which btw we all want for our time these days) has anything to do with it.
edit on 8-5-2013 by Tikitiboo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tikitiboo

What's wrong with making money?


Nothing. As long as it is ethical.



Time is money..


No it isn't. That's a cliche. Time is time.


These people deserve to be paid for their time...i do not see anything wrong with that.


The congress retirees already on a great pension deserve $20,000 each for a few hours sitting behind a desk while we're still in a global recession and people are being financially crippled by austerity measures?


What exactly is your point? Are you saying things are only true if done for free?


Of course not. The point is that this event was only put in place for a few people to make some money. The subject discussed may have been UFOs but the purpose was to line pockets.



Sorry,but i don't get what getting paid (which btw we all want for our time these days) has anything to do with it.


We don't all want money for our time. How much time have we contributed to the forums of ATS for free?





new topics




 
72
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join