They care about what you can prove

Although everyone has bits and pieces, some with bigger ones than others, no one in the UFO field has the missing link that ties everything together. Every story is sort of, well, different. This is why I want to recall an old quote.

Sgt. Clifford Stone once said:

They don't care about what you know, but what you can prove.

These words sounds logical, but if a whistleblower wants to send work to Wikileaks,they becomes alarmingly true words to go by. Wikileaks follows strict standards, and by no means can they be blamed for that.

Someone could, and probably is, spilling the beans right now about everything we want to know and more. All the beans were probably spilled at that disclosure conference. But no one was ever provided with ample evidence to prove the origin of those beans. For many, it is enough to believe as individuals. But disclosure would suggest bringing these truths into society, and for that you would need so much more. If the UFO secret was truly being hidden by a secret government, they probably are not concerned if a few things leak out here and there. As many have said, such a vast conspiracy is impossible. They would be correct. People would start talking..and they already probably have. As long as people aren't bringing celestial laser beams home, or the proverbial "On the White House Lawn" event happens, the stories are too unbelievable to be given the official stamp.

Think for yourself:

1. Would a real picture inside the hangar of Area 51 with an alien craft be good enough to convince everyone on this board? No, and it probably wouldn't be for Wikileaks either...even though it is real. Just by the very nature of the subject, this could happen.

1. Would a picture inside a camp in North Korea with starving victims be good enough to convince you that people are suffering there? I bet a whole lot more than the first story, despite the fact that North Korea is one of, if not the most secretive nation on earth.








[edit on 25-6-2010 by bananasam]

Right on. Proof means nothing, because, simply put we have the ability to choose to believe. Look at any trial in this country. You get two accredited-educated -expert witnesses who do what...?? ........disagree

I give you S&F because no one else will (apparently). This is an obskew (subject) topic with many obskew answers. If you will indulge me; the opposite is true;(IMHO). It is not what you can prove but precisely what you know.

[edit on 25-6-2010 by liquidself]

reply to post by bananasam
You make a fair point and describe where we're probably at right now. In fact, it likely describes where we've been for the past few decades. Fairly static.

The MJ-12 documents have removed the certainty from official documents. FOIA releases can have an element of doubt. Images have long since lost their credibility and we're pretty thick-skinned and distrustful about video....especially compressed flv. Witness testimony has been undermined by elaborations of guys like Corso or Cliff Stone. The endless line of Witness A and Bob Dean-style 'whistleblowers' has made a lot people scared of being hoaxed so the bar has been set very high.

The whole subject has been seeded with so much doubt and deceit, it's bordering on stagnant. It really couldn't have been planned any better!