So much for DISCLOSURE! Citizens Hearing on Disclosure demands takedown of youtube videos.

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 14 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by carl6405
What kind of frigging idiot are you to throw someone under the bus for making money for research? Really!


Research? - dang, that made coffee come out of my nose again


Let's say I hear a story. The storyteller says it's a true story. I believe him. So I tell the story to someone else, passing it off as a true story. It's a nice story, a thought provoking story, has some elements of horror in it. So, people remember it. Some write it down in books, and make some money with their fiction. Many people hear the story and re-tell it. Some add a bit to it, some change it a bit, but in the end we all created some folkore. You know, elves, leprechauns, headless hunters, Cinderella, aliens, stuff like that.

Next I hire a bunch of congressmen and hire af few well known storytellers to tell their stories. And ask money for it: for the books I want to sell, for the movies I make, I ask for donations to tell my 'true' story. But of course, there is no proof. Who needs proof for a good story, after all..

So, that's RESEARCH?

That's theatre. And had they presented it as such, both to their investors and to the public, I would not have had any problems with it. Not even if they had asked 100 bucks for a ticket.

But they did not present it as fiction. They did not say to their investors it was fiction. They did not say to the public it was fiction. They literally sold it as truth - without a shred of evidence.

Now, I know that many people believe it is ethical to lie to folks as long as they pay me for it. I'm not of that breed.
edit on 14-5-2013 by ForteanOrg because: somehow the 'y' kept falling off..
edit on 14-5-2013 by ForteanOrg because: must buy a new keyboard ..




posted on May, 14 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroPropulsion
paid the 3.80$ and never looked back..money well spent! Countless hours of videos, also theres the full video of the alleged NSA guy in it (not much longer than the one on youtube tho)


Here is some for free

areenatunkio.blogspot.fi...



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
surprise surprise



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 


Except they had a South American military pilot as a witness who had actually fired on a ufo himself.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 


You are partially correct when it comes to UFO stories. It is a slippery slope, because there are a lot of genuine sightings and encounters, but there is a lot of monkey business and disinfo thrown in the mix. Even Paul Hellyer is vulnerable to falling for the trap of disinfo. I believe he is a genuine person, a former Minister of Defence for Canada, and was exposed to Colonel Corso's book. I still don't know whether or not the Roswell story as shared by Friedman and Corso and the likes is legitimate, or a carefully crafted hoax for a VERY SPECIFIC PURPOSE (one other than making money), but I know that is how Hellyer became involved with this subject. Since then he has started networking with the UFO world, which could be a mistake, since he mentions the different alien species visiting us, and uses the terms like Zeta Riticuli etc. That I am not so sure about. I am also very skeptical of Linda Moulton Howe's cattle mutilations business. I think that is likely disinfo from intelligence agencies to make the "UFO phenomenon" a legitimate National Security threat for more military funding and secrecy, so they can keep working on advanced technologies and holding back societal progress. That's just my own take on the matter.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyingTeacup
 


These were not real congressional hearings. This was all put together by very passionate activists who legitimately believe in their cause. A lifetime of dedication to the effort. Whether or not they are doing the right thing, have the right approach or are making a huge difference has yet to be determined. But they had to assemble the panels of witnesses, perhaps even to the point of paying for their flight to Washington DC, they had to rent the National Press Club - and yes, they even had to pay the ex-congress members to chair the "committee". They openly admit this was not a "REAL" hearing, and we all know that it was not a real hearing. They stylized the whole thing as if it were a real hearing, in the hopes that it would draw attention to the subject and eventually LEAD TO a real hearing and possible legislation and policy-making. Their words:

Citizen Hearing on Disclosure - National Press Club - Opening Remarks

edit on 14-5-2013 by corsair00 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyingTeacup
 


Attacking the credibility of the messenger and not the message is one of the lowest forms of attack, perhaps you need to brush up on your Ad hominem?

en.wikipedia.org...

You claim the hearing was repackaged junk? From my understanding, the hearing was never intended to bring exclusively new content to the UFO community, it was to repackage existing knowledge and presented in the form of a mock hearing to bring the public and ex congressman up to speed.

Maybe you can be more specific about what exactly was "junk" and provide your evidence? I found the bentwaters case compelling and to my knowledge, has not been debunked in any way. Do you have evidence that suggests otherwise? Show me?

I had to laugh at your last sentence, the fact that someone writes a book on their experiences immediately invalidates their credibility and the content thereof. I guess i better throw away all my cook books, probably need to throw away all those Math books i had to pay for in college as well. Do you even read what you write? It's absolute drivel....



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 


Except it's not all simply stories, there are factual events taking place that are backed up by multiple witnesses, radar evidence, documentation released by either the government or the military and multiple pieces of data that validate each other.

To suggest the event simply contained stories without evidence is untrue.

One of the main points that came out by the UFO researchers on the day was that the critics and debunkers never attack the hard data, and if you take a look through this thread you see a trend of just that. It's far easier to suggest the guy has a lazy eye and looks funny and sells a book therefore his information is invalid, and it's a common tactic called Ad Hominem. Can't attack the data so you attack the person.

Do i believe everything that was said at the hearing? Not necessarily, there may be some who get carried away and start providing their opinions on subjects i don't necessarily agree with, but that doesn't invalidate the entire hearing and the mountain of documentation and other evidence provided that in my opinion, is fairly rock solid.

edit on 14-5-2013 by raiden12 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Except they had a South American military pilot


you mean someone who claimed to be a South American military pilot.....


as a witness who had actually fired on a ufo himself.


Who claimed to have fired on a UFO......

So again no evidence, only a claim.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   
There was never any disclosure. Just a bunch of guys telling their stories of something that may or may not have been a UFO, and trying to get as much money as possible from this so called "disclosure".



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Except they had a South American military pilot


you mean someone who claimed to be a South American military pilot.....


as a witness who had actually fired on a ufo himself.


Who claimed to have fired on a UFO......

So again no evidence, only a claim.


You're denying that Col. Oscar Santa-Maria is actually a military pilot?



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ForteanOrg

So, that's RESEARCH?

That's theatre. And had they presented it as such, both to their investors and to the public, I would not have had any problems with it. Not even if they had asked 100 bucks for a ticket.

But they did not present it as fiction. They did not say to their investors it was fiction. They did not say to the public it was fiction. They literally sold it as truth - without a shred of evidence.



That’s one of the key aspects. That is what these Brotherhood of Charlatans have been doing for so long: they present and sale fiction as being unquestionable reality. And even if they are in the same league as “Nigerian e-mail” scammers, still they have a swarm of worshipers. And they will not be in a shortages anytime soon, because, as someone said, “there's a sucker born every minute”.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by raiden12
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 


Except it's not all simply stories, there are factual events taking place that are backed up by multiple witnesses, radar evidence, documentation released by either the government or the military and multiple pieces of data that validate each other.


So we are being told.

One of the problems we have in the ufology community is that there is no clear definition what 'proof' is. Photo's? Films? Sworn testimonies? Mass sightings? I don't know. Of course, had I seen a ship land in my garden and seen some creatures departing - I would have had my personal proof. But that proof is not sufficient to convince others. I can tell the story, but that's no proof to others. So, what is proof, then?

And what is it that needs to be 'proven'?

Sure enough, UFO's exist. That's one thing EVERYBODY agrees on, unless they really haven't thought about it. Some may say that they can al be explained by conventional science, some say at least part of these may be of unknown origin. But we agree that sometimes folks sees weird things fly around. And there it stops.

The 'disclosurists' are mad as hatters. They say they don't trust their Governments to tell the truth, because it is not a truth that suits them. But if the Government would tell the truth that suits them, of course, that would be proof! As I said: mad as hatters.

Others, like me, would be satisfied just to see some real proof that at least some of these "whatevers" that fly around with no wings and at incredible speeds are machines. Even if they were of this planet. Even if they were made by humans. Would be fascinating.

Alas, no proof. Just stories.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
I kind of find the tone of desperation in the OP quite funny.

"You HAVE to believe me, it's all a scam! Everyone involved is untrustworthy, also they make money! FFS they write books! Linda Howe and Stanton Freedman are no good, PLEASE you have to believe me arghhhhhh"



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Internet Explorer
I kind of find the tone of desperation in the OP quite funny.

"You HAVE to believe me, it's all a scam! Everyone involved is untrustworthy, also they make money! FFS they write books! Linda Howe and Stanton Freedman are no good, PLEASE you have to believe me arghhhhhh"


Can't find that quote anywhere in the ops posts.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Internet Explorer
I kind of find the tone of desperation in the OP quite funny.

"You HAVE to believe me, it's all a scam! Everyone involved is untrustworthy, also they make money! FFS they write books! Linda Howe and Stanton Freedman are no good, PLEASE you have to believe me arghhhhhh"


Be careful with quotes, they suggest you are quoting him. He did not say that at all.

I believe that OP sounds 'desperate' because he cares about others. I fail to see why that is funny.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I'm not going to get into the statements made by the witnesses. I will say this. If they claim the hearing was for public information and disclosure, then it needs to be available to ALL. Taking it off any public forum only re-enforces the claims of those who say it's all about the money.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Real Congressional hearings are free and open to the general public. The transcripts are free and available on the internet. The video of these hearings is free and available on CSPAN. Hey, if people want to bow down to and worship hucksters, throwing their money at them, it's a free country, go ahead waste your money.


If youd pay these ufologists taxes im sure those disclosure hearings would be free too.

edit on 15-5-2013 by whatsup86 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
Lets be fair here. These hearings were not to trying to open up UFO disclosure to the general public who would wonder why they picked a whos who of disgraced ex congress persons to hold the so called hearing. The were for the target audience of believers. They are the ones happy to pay to stream and will be happy to by the documentry when it comes out. They are also happy to over look many of credibility issues. So if you are a believer then this is for you and you should enjoy it. If you are not sure what to think about UFOs and are looking for credible truth then this will do nothing for you. Some day maybe that will change. That day is not yet here.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyingTeacup
 


I had the feeling. And the Sirius movie left me with blood taste in my mouth. This wasn't a disclosure, it wasn't to educate people on the subject. It was all just a media stunt to garnish more attention so that other (less knowing people) will PAY him and make HIM rich. That's all this has been about, money.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join