Fogburn95 said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Again, we can't possibly know what their motivations would/wouldn't be. They may very well have a mandate to not influence or interact beyond a certain threshold, but otherwise don't give a sh*t if they're seen. I don't know why people keep thinking it's some kind of trump card to say they would otherwise show/hide themselves, and ascribe their motivations to basic human logic/assumptions.

---

becuase if they can do interstellar or dimensional travel, they are going to have sensors that would enable them to view and assess a planet without ever entering the atmosphere. so there is no reason they would even need to do a teaser drive-by. hell our ****ty primitive solar system probes with our limited tech give us a lot of information.
better spectrometers, better imagers better magnification would allow them to remain unseen and get as much detail as teh rive-bys.

---

This kind of bugs me as well. If they don't want to be seen then they must have technology allowing them to remain hidden. But Lue Elizondo had a good point in an interview. If scientists are studying wildebeests and fly over a herd in a helicopter and it freaks out the wildebeests, the scientists aren't going to stop and explain what's going on and show them the inside of the helicopter.

---

Lue Elizondo worked for an entertainment company. As for his time with the Undersecretary of Def, they had this to say: ""Mr. Elizondo had no responsibilities with regard to the AATIP program while he worked in OUSDI [the Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence], up until the time he resigned effective 10/4/2017.""

The guy is an entertainer.

Your ignorance in this particular instance, re: Elizondo, is really starting to make itself apparent. For all the sh*t I get about speaking out of turn or not knowing what I'm talking about, this is right there on par with that. Your're way behind/flat out wrong on your "facts" here.

TCTTS said:

---

Your ignorance in this particular instance, re: Elizondo, is really starting to make itself apparent. For all the sh*t I get about speaking out of turn or not knowing what I'm talking about, this is right there on par with that. Your way behind/flat out wrong on your "facts" here.

---

Whew, you wake up on the wrong side of the bed? I never called you ignorant. Is Elizondo your brother or something? He worked for an entertainment company. A spokesman for the US of Def said exactly what I quoted him as saying.

Sorry to rain on your UFO parade. If you want to believe in aliens, go right ahead.

Right, and since then he's quit working for the entertainment company (but has explained ad nauseam why he worked for them in the first place, and it's a more than valid reason), and Harry Reid confirmed in an official letter/announcement that Elizondo did, in fact, run AATIP. Elizondo was vindicated on that front. You're giving me sh*t for defending him, but it's only because you're seemingly trying to smear the guy with outdated info.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that if these are truly from another solar system, then there is an advanced civilization that has solved the very real problem for space travel of the vast distances in space. They may be so far advanced they view us as we view the wildebeests. I'm not saying they exist, but the fact that the behavior of these objects doesn't make any sense to us can't be used as evidence that they can't be real.

TCTTS said:

---

Right, and since then he's quit working for the entertainment company (but has explained ad nauseam why he worked for them in the first place, and it's a more than valid reason), and Harry Reid confirmed in an official letter/announcement that Elizondo did, in fact, run AATIP. Elizondo was vindicated in that front. You're giving me sh*t for defending him, but it's only because you're seemingly trying to smear the guy with outdated info.

---

I wasn't giving you **** at all. If you go through life thinking everyone who disagrees with you is giving you ****, especially with something as farfetched as aliens, you're going to have a tough time.

Enjoy your Friday!

TCTTS said:

---

Right, and since then he's quit working for the entertainment company (but has explained ad nauseam why he worked for them in the first place, and it's a more than valid reason), and Harry Reid confirmed in an official letter/announcement that Elizondo did, in fact, run AATIP. Elizondo was vindicated in that front. You're giving me sh*t for defending him, but it's only because you're seemingly trying to smear the guy with outdated info.

---

There are plenty of reports out there that point out how ingenious the guy is. If you want to believe him, you can find plenty that support him as well.

He claimed that the US Govt has remnants of a UFO, then when asked for details he says he can't talk about it because it's classified. But disclosing that our government has confirmed remnants of a UFO isn't classified? Give me a break. He's an entertainer, and good for him for scoring a spot on 60 mins and getting his 15 minutes.

Look, I find the whole topic interesting. It's entertaining to think about it. But that's the most that will come out of all this - entertainment.

Listen to the recent Neil DeGrass Tyson interview on JRE. I find Tyson to be pompous, but he's a smart, critically thinking person and has some interesting opinions on the matter.

I believe the materials you are referring to are being held by private parties that didn't hand the stuff over. Or that's what I recall them saying anyways.

Quote:

---

He claimed that the US Govt has remnants of a UFO, then when asked for details he says he can't talk about it because it's classified. But disclosing that our government has confirmed remnants of a UFO isn't classified? Give me a break. He's an entertainer, and good for him for scoring a spot on 60 mins and getting his 15

---

This bugs me about Lue. He's likely already said enough to violate any secrecy agreement he signed. He needs to quit being coy and tell us what he knows.

Not claiming I believe Bob one way or the other, but at least Bob Lazar spelled out everything he claims to have seen. He laid it all out, answered questions, drew diagrams etc then just left it like this is what I saw either believe me or don't. To my knowledge I don't think Bob is writing books about it or getting paid speaker fees or traveling the comic-con circuit getting paid to take pictures/sign autographs. I could be wrong on that but it's a tangent.,

So back to Lue

It's time for him to **** or get off the pot.

Bob Lazar has integrity because of

Consistency
Refusing interviews for a long time
Explaining in detail credential "discrepancies"

Unfortunately he linked up with Corbell, but at least Jeremy is actually releasing videos

Fogburn95 said:

---

Quote:

---

He claimed that the US Govt has remnants of a UFO, then when asked for details he says he can't talk about it because it's classified. But disclosing that our government has confirmed remnants of a UFO isn't classified? Give me a break. He's an entertainer, and good for him for scoring a spot on 60 mins and getting his 15

---

This bugs me about Lue. He's likely already said enough to violate any secrecy agreement he signed. He needs to quit being coy and tell us what he knows.

Not claiming I believe Bob one way or the other, but at least Bob Lazar spelled out everything he claims to have seen. He laid it all out, answered questions, drew diagrams etc then just left it like this is what I saw either believe me or don't. To my knowledge I don't think Bob is writing books about it or getting paid speaker fees or traveling the comic-con circuit getting paid to take pictures/sign autographs. I could be wrong on that but it's a tangent.,

So back to Lue

It's time for him to **** or get off the pot.

---

How can you possibly know this? Especially since he truly has divulged hardly anything in that regard, and is constantly "talking on eggshells," so to speak.

Btw, here's Elizondo's exact reasoning for not telling everything he knows...

Quote:

---

Question from Ron: At what point will your concern for humanity override your loyalty to non-disclosure agreements?

LE: It won't and it doesn't have to. The safety and concern for humanity is directly tied to my oath. I know it sounds like they are opposing each other but my oath to protect sensitive information is really not an oath to the government, it's an oath to you, it's an oath to the American people. And if I break that oath, even one time, then it's meaningless. It's like having a relationship with a spouse. Well, if I cheat on my spouse only one time, then it's okay. No, it's not. It's not. It's a compromise. It's an oath I've made to myself, it's an oath I made to you. I can never break that oath. And that's why we are doing what we're doing the way we're doing it because we can still have a conversation. It's a lot harder, by the way. I mean, believe me. I tell people, I used to be six foot four and long blonde hair before I started this job. I tell people, I'm only 27 for God's sake. But in reality, it's a lot of extra work to do it this way, but in the end, it's the right way. For me to break my oathyou can't break the law, to protect the law, in essence, is what I'm trying to say. And so for me, I take that oath very seriously, I will never violate that oath. Now what I will do is go right up to the line. And what I will do is work the system, so I don't have to violate that oath. And yes, there's a way to do it. It's not easy. And it takes a lot and there's no guarantees but it's been three years, and we've done it this way so far, and look where we are with the conversation. So, I don't think I have to break my oath, I don't think I need to. Look, if I broke that oath, guys, I'd have zero credibility. Because if I'm gonna break my oath for that, then I'll break my oath with everything else. I'll break my oath to tell the truth to you. So, you'd never be able to trust me again. Yeah, you might get an answer but you'd never trust me again. It's not worth it. I can't do that.

---

Honestly, IMO, he could not have given a better answer there. In fact, at every turn, to me at least, he continually comes across as an incredibly upstanding individual, and all these criticisms I see are more often than not from people who clearly haven't listened to Elizondo talk at length, haven't truly looked into his background, or aren't up to date on their facts. It's mainly piggy backing on the bias of skeptics and critics who obviously don't want this phenomenon to be real.

For those curious, though, I would read the entire Q&A between Elizondo and Richard Dolan from a few weeks ago, a week or so after the 60 Minutes piece aired. It's a super long read (and yes, it's on website called "UFOJoe," but Joe is a good, level-headed dude who simply transcribed the Q&A), what I think is the best interview Elizondo has given, touches on so many of the issues being brought up in this thread, and is such a great showcase of his character and goals in this mission he's on...

https://www.ufojoe.net/lue-dolan-transcript

A bit more context on the matter, for those who don't have the time to read the entire Q&A...

Quote:

---

RD: So can you talk about how the fact of you having security clearances affects the things that you can say to the public and how you say them? And the things that you know about that you can't talk about, publicly? Because it is clear to me, that at least a number of your detractors And I am not here just to like, blanket defend you, right? Because you've said things that I thought, okay, I don't reallyI've taken issue with some of the things you've said publicly about, "Well, we don't know what these things are." But I understand, I understand why. But I think some of your detractors don't really have an idea of this situation thatyou've got clearances. How does the fact that you've got certain clearances affect what you say and cannot say in public? Seems like an obvious question but please address it.

LE: It affects everything I say in public. Not some things. Everything. I have to thread a needle every single moment I open my mouth. I have to calculate what I'm saying, based upon an established, what we call an SCG - Security Classification Guide. Anything that is classified in the government falls underneath a security classification guide, and what we call an original classification authority. And I don't think people really understand or appreciate what that means. That is the difference between going to jail and being in exile, like Edward Snowden, and not, and having this conversation. I have to be very cognizant of every word I say because if I crossed that line, where I now violate my nondisclosure agreement, this conversation comes to an immediate and abrupt end. You will never see me again, because I will either wind up in jail, or I will be sued to the point where I'll have to wind up living probably in Antarctica with all the penguins.

It is very difficult for me because I feel like I'm in a boxing ring with one arm tied behind my back while my legs are shackled, and [I'm] blindfolded. It is very tough. But, this is why I said in the beginning, Richard, this is a process notdisclosure isn't an event. And I think if you look at the last three years, I know people are impatient but we've come a really long way. We now have have former presidents of the United States coming out and Directors of National Intelligence, not just one, but two, and directors of CIA, and the media. Everybody now, to include foreign countries, is finally nodding their head saying, "Yeah. You know what? This is a serious topic. There's enough information that we have been privy to, to recognize we need to do something about. Had I just come out day one and blurted everything out, I probably would have been been been labeled some sort of crazy, conspiracy theorist.

RD: Yeah, like me. That's my domain.

LE: People say, "That guy doesn't know what he's talking about." Every day, despite the overwhelming evidence, people still think I'm some sort of, I don't know what you call it, disinformation agent. Whatever, get out of here. I don't know how else to prove it to you. If you cannot see around you, the momentum that this topic and the seriousness and the respect that this topic has now been given by the mainstream media and our politicians and our elected officials, then you've been living under a rock for the last three years. And this isn't because someone's selling snake oil to you or someone's coming out and saying, "It's my way or the highway." If you've noticed, I've never said this is my way. I just said, "Look, here's the information, here's the facts, you do with it what you want." And I think, because I haven't violated my nondisclosure agreement, it makes it very difficult for the authorities to shut me up. They can make my life difficult but they haven't been able to shut me up. And that should be very telling that the method in which people like Chris Mellon and myself, Hal, Eric and others, have decided to have this conversation, is probably the right way to do it, because none of us want to violate our nondisclosure agreements.

---

i have zero interest in hearing any of these dudes talk more. that's all they do.

either show us or stfu.

I agree with most of your points on here TCTTS and I'm on the side of wanting it to be aliens. As said previously I think it would be cool to learn we're not alone and technology exits allowing travel amongst the stars.

But disagree with you regarding Lue's diatribe you posted. He has basically stated he has seen things and he doesn't believe they are ours or anyone else on Earth's.

It would be like saying I took a secrecy agreement not to reveal the color of an object. Logic dictates it's red, green, or blue. I then state I've seen things and it's not red or green. "So you're saying it is blue?" "No I never stated it was blue. I'm not violating my secrecy agreement."

I am glad Lue came forward and give him props for doing so. But unless he's going to tell us more, what does he really add to the conversation now other than what he's already gone on record stating? It's just a distraction at this point.

Quote:

---

LE: It affects everything I say in public. Not some things. Everything. I have to thread a needle every single moment I open my mouth. I have to calculate what I'm saying, based upon an established, what we call an SCG - Security Classification Guide. Anything that is classified in the government falls underneath a security classification guide, and what we call an original classification authority. And I don't think people really understand or appreciate what that means. That is the difference between going to jail and being in exile, like Edward Snowden, and not, and having this conversation. I have to be very cognizant of every word I say because if I crossed that line, where I now violate my nondisclosure agreement, this conversation comes to an immediate and abrupt end. You will never see me again, because I will either wind up in jail, or I will be sued to the point where I'll have to wind up living probably in Antarctica with all the penguins.

---

Here's the problem. If he's following the classifying guidelines like he says he is, then nothing he has said comes from knowledge he gained while in those programs. His expertise he talks about is commenting on the unclassified videos.

Quote:

---

New York Times Pentagon correspondent Helene Cooper interviewed Elizondo in 2017. Cooper characterized Elizondo's behavior as typical of intel officers, who are "really spooky guys, they're very secretive, they tend to be more paranoid". According to Cooper, "There was a lot of looking over to make sure nobody was seeing us, he sat with his back to the wall. He said, because he wanted to see if anybody came in". Cooper explained to "The Daily" podcast host Michael Barbaro that at the time she spoke to Elizondo, she found him very credible, but when she got on the metro after the meeting she began to have second thoughts, saying "the farther away I got from the interview the less believable it seemed".

---

Is there any information on what unit he served with in the military or what his MOS was? All I can find is him saying he worked with secret projects. Anyone saying stuff like this is trying to sound like their job was much more exciting than it was. A "counter-intelligence officer" can mean many different things, and isn't nearly as cool as it sounds for most. Discovery Channel always shows him toting a backpack around and dressed in tactical clothing. I see he was enlisted because his father taught him "you must learn to follow before you can lead."

He's a walking stereotype and has bought into the image created for him by the Discovery Channel, and has done it well.

ETA: Paranoid counter-intel officers who feel they need their back to the wall and are always looking over their shoulder don't have DIscovery Channel shows and appear on 60 Minutes.

Quote:

---

I agree with most of your points on here TCTTS and I'm on the side of wanting it to be aliens. As said previously I think it would be cool to learn we're not alone and technology exits allowing travel amongst the stars.

But disagree with you regarding Lue's diatribe you posted. He has basically stated he has seen things and he doesn't believe they are ours or anyone else on Earth's.

It would be like saying I took a secrecy agreement not to reveal the color of an object. Logic dictates it's red, green, or blue. I then state I've seen things and it's not red or green. "So you're saying it is blue?" "No I never stated it was blue. I'm not violating my secrecy agreement."

I am glad Lue came forward and give him props for doing so. But unless he's going to tell us more, what does he really add to the conversation now other than what he's already gone on record stating? It's just a distraction at this point.

---

I see zero issue with the exact logic/approach you're describing. He literally CAN'T audibly confirm that it's blue, or would otherwise be risking almost certain jail time. So, instead, he's doing everything he can to indicate it's blue, without suffering the consequences of straight up telling us it's blue. That's like... a pretty standard tactic that I don't understand people suddenly having a problem with because "aliens" or whatever.

As for "adding to the conversation," the only reason the conversation exists at all, in its currently form, is because of Lue. And if you can't see what the 60 Minutes piece has done for overall awareness, I don't know what to tell you. I've had more conversations about UFOs in the past month - with multiple friends and family members, all unprompted on my part - because of that 60 Minutes piece and everything leading up to/in the wake of it. Awareness is through the roof, like I've never seen before, and so many people I know who never spoke a word about UFOs are suddenly taking the topic seriously.

That's literally ALL because of Lue and his work with Christopher Melon and the like.

Also, the conversation is no longer for *just* us, the people who were already into this topic. Elizondo's goal at this point is to educate the masses, which requires us hearing things we already know, that the millions of others out there haven't yet heard.

SquirrellyDan said:

---

Quote:

---

New York Times Pentagon correspondent Helene Cooper interviewed Elizondo in 2017. Cooper characterized Elizondo's behavior as typical of intel officers, who are "really spooky guys, they're very secretive, they tend to be more paranoid". According to Cooper, "There was a lot of looking over to make sure nobody was seeing us, he sat with his back to the wall. He said, because he wanted to see if anybody came in". Cooper explained to "The Daily" podcast host Michael Barbaro that at the time she spoke to Elizondo, she found him very credible, but when she got on the metro after the meeting she began to have second thoughts, saying "the farther away I got from the interview the less believable it seemed".

---

Is there any information on what unit he served with in the military or what his MOS was? All I can find is him saying he worked with secret projects. Anyone saying stuff like this is trying to sound like their job was much more exciting than it was. A "counter-intelligence officer" can mean many different things, and isn't nearly as cool as it sounds for most. Discovery Channel always shows him toting a backpack around and dressed in tactical clothing. I see he was enlisted because his father taught him "you must learn to follow before you can lead."

He's a walking stereotype and has bought into the image created for him by the Discovery Channel, and has done it well.

ETA: Paranoid counter-intel officers who feel they need their back to the wall and are always looking over their shoulder don't have DIscovery Channel shows and appear on 60 Minutes.

---

Again, for all my defending of Elizondo, it's equally weird how much you actively seem to dislike/discredit him, and how much your opinion of him is steeped in an increasingly clear, pre-conceived bias. Am I probably going overboard in my defense? Sure. But you're going equally overboard with your weird knocks on the guy.

As for his background/credentials...

Quote:

---

Elizondo is a Cuban exile that volunteered for Brigade 2506, a CIA-sponsored group of exiles formed in 1960 to attempt the military overthrow of the Cuban government headed by Fidel Castro, which culminated in the Bay of Pigs invasion.

According to Elizondo's website, he attended the University of Miami, with double majors in microbiology and immunology and minors in chemistry.

Elizondo served in the U.S. Army for 20 years, running military intelligence operations in Afghanistan, South America, and Guantanamo Bay's Camp Seven.

Regarding his military career, he stated he "dealt with a lot of stuff, like coup d'tats, black market terrorism, violent drug cartels, all that kind of stuff". Following the September 11 attacks Elizondo then redirected toward East Asia, where he served as advisor of an intelligence unit assigned to support General James Mattis during his command of the Marine Expeditionary Unit Task Force 58 in the War on Terror.

From 2008 until his resignation in 2017, Elizondo worked with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in The Pentagon. During this time, he was the director of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, a special access program funded at the initiative of the then Senate majority leader, Harry Reid (D-Nevada) to investigate aerial threats including unidentified aerial phenomena.

---

TCTTS said:

---

SquirrellyDan said:

---

Quote:

---

New York Times Pentagon correspondent Helene Cooper interviewed Elizondo in 2017. Cooper characterized Elizondo's behavior as typical of intel officers, who are "really spooky guys, they're very secretive, they tend to be more paranoid". According to Cooper, "There was a lot of looking over to make sure nobody was seeing us, he sat with his back to the wall. He said, because he wanted to see if anybody came in". Cooper explained to "The Daily" podcast host Michael Barbaro that at the time she spoke to Elizondo, she found him very credible, but when she got on the metro after the meeting she began to have second thoughts, saying "the farther away I got from the interview the less believable it seemed".

---

Is there any information on what unit he served with in the military or what his MOS was? All I can find is him saying he worked with secret projects. Anyone saying stuff like this is trying to sound like their job was much more exciting than it was. A "counter-intelligence officer" can mean many different things, and isn't nearly as cool as it sounds for most. Discovery Channel always shows him toting a backpack around and dressed in tactical clothing. I see he was enlisted because his father taught him "you must learn to follow before you can lead."

He's a walking stereotype and has bought into the image created for him by the Discovery Channel, and has done it well.

---

Again, for all my defending of Elizondo, it's equally weird how much you actively seem to dislike/discredit him, and how much your opinion of him is steeped in an increasingly clear, pre-conceived bias. Am I probably going overboard in my defense? Sure. But you're going equally overboard with your weird knocks on the guy...

As for his background/credentials...

Quote:

---

Elizondo is a Cuban exile that volunteered for Brigade 2506, a CIA-sponsored group of exiles formed in 1960 to attempt the military overthrow of the Cuban government headed by Fidel Castro, which culminated in the Bay of Pigs invasion.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-Farwell-7][7][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-HeraldTribune-2][2][/url]

According to Elizondo's website, he attended the University of Miami, with double majors in microbiology and immunology and minors in chemistry.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-8][8][/url]

Elizondo served in the U.S. Army for 20 years, running military intelligence operations in Afghanistan, South America, and Guantanamo Bay's Camp Seven.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-HeraldTribune-2][2][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-9][9][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-PopularMechanicsLong-10][10][/url]

Regarding his military career, he stated he "dealt with a lot of stuff, like coup d'tats, black market terrorism, violent drug cartels, all that kind of stuff". Following the September 11 attacks Elizondo then redirected toward East Asia, where he served as advisor of an intelligence unit assigned to support General James Mattis during his command of the Marine Expeditionary Unit Task Force 58 in the War on Terror.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-PopularMechanicsLong-10][10][/url]

From 2008 until his resignation in 2017, Elizondo worked with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in The Pentagon.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-NYTGlowing-6][6][/url] During this time, he was the director[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-NYTTrail-11][11][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-12][12][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-13][13][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-14][14][/url] of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, a special access program funded at the initiative of the then Senate majority leader, Harry Reid (D-Nevada)[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-15][15][/url] to investigate aerial threats including unidentified aerial phenomena.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo#cite_note-NYTTrail-11][11][/url]

---

---

Yeah I read his wikipedia article too. I'm just wondering if there's any information about what unit he was in, other than info from his website or from his stating that he "dealt with a lot of stuff." Literally every single person in the military who deployed to IQ or AFG dealt with coup d'tats and black market terrorism.

I also see he was an "advisor of an intel unit assigned to support James Mattis...." That could refer to anyone in a military intel shop that was under TF 58.

I was merely trying to provide you with a place to start.

But I have no idea what unit he was in, as that's never really been of much concern to me. I'm sure that info is out there somewhere, though. All I know is that he was absolutely employed by the Pentagon, and you obviously don't get a job like the one he held without having the proper credentials, background, etc.

You're right I don't know the exact details of the secrecy agreement and the provisions of what he signed. But if he hasn't already violated that agreement to not talk about a secret program he led then the US govt has bad lawyers. The US govt is mainly run by lawyers. I bet we have good lawyers on the payroll. The lawyers that would be put in charge of drafting the secrecy agreement for a secret project were likely good very competent lawyers.

It would be like you signing a secrecy agreement to work on a secret James Cameron project. Then you go on a blog and state you're working on a secret project James Cameron project that's either a new Terminator movie, a new Titanic movie, or a new documentary about deep sea exploration. But you're not going to confirm what it is. Yeah I don't know the specific wording of the actual agreement you signed, but I'm pretty sure you just violated it. Unless Cameron has bad lawyers.

It's *not* a secret program, though. It was at one point, yes. But the Pentagon has since confirmed its existence, and Harry Reid has since confirmed that Elizondo ran it. So I don't understand what you think Elizondo is violating in admitting as much.

He's talking about what he learned in the project. Talking about what you've learned in a project you signed a secrecy agreement to be part of probably violates the secrecy agreement. He may think he's threading the needle here but I don't see how he's already not violated it.

But I think I'm getting into the weeds to much on this violate/didn't violate the agreement.

The big thing for me is it's frustrating. I find Lue to be credible and believe him when he says he's seen strange things. I'm glad he and the others came forward for the 60 Minutes segment. I haven't watched 60 Minutes in years. Outside of sporting events I haven't made plans to watch a network television show when it first broadcast in years. I tuned in for this in real time.

There is a segment of the population that 100% believed in aliens before any of the past few years. That segment grew in size after the 60 minutes story. There is another segment of people I would wager millions of more people who want to believe it now but want better proof, especially if these credible people are saying that better proof exists. The longer this coy dance of not revealing that proof goes on, the more he's going to lose people like me.

Maybe he's waiting for the report first. Then he'll talk. We'll see.

My thoughts are "Lue, buddy. You've likely violated your agreement already. If the govt wanted to mess with you they would have done it before 60 Minutes blew this up. You've got cover now. Don't be puss. Tell us what you know!"

Fogburn95 said:

---

He's talking about what he learned in the project. Talking about what you've learned in a project you signed a secrecy agreement to be part of probably violates the secrecy agreement. He may think he's threading the needle here but I don't see how he's already not violated it.

But I think I'm getting into the weeds to much on this violate/didn't violate the agreement.

The big thing for me is it's frustrating. I find Lue to be credible and believe him when he says he's seen strange things. I'm glad he and the others came forward for the 60 Minutes segment. I haven't watched 60 Minutes in years. Outside of sporting events I haven't made plans to watch a network television show when it first broadcast in years. I tuned in for this in real time.

There is a segment of the population that 100% believed in aliens before any of the past few years. That segment grew in size after the 60 minutes story. There is another segment of people I would wager millions of more people who want to believe it now but want better proof, especially if these credible people are saying that better proof exists. The longer this coy dance of not revealing that proof goes on, the more he's going to lose people like me.

Maybe he's waiting for the report first. Then he'll talk. We'll see.

My thoughts are "Lue, buddy. You've likely violated your agreement already. If the govt wanted to mess with you they would have done it before 60 Minutes blew this up. You've got cover now. Don't be puss. Tell us what you know!"

---

I'm in 100% agreement with this, and admit that it could end up being an issue. But it sounds like Lue's strategy, at the moment, is to keep increasingly applying enough pressure on those in government who *can* come forward with more convincing info, definitive statements, better pics and video, etc, and get *them* to do it officially. Rather than him having to go full Snowden/rogue whistleblower. So he's instead trying to create a fever pitch - legally and above board - that ultimately can't be ignored, which is going to continue to take some time. But maybe in another two or three years, if the lid still hasn't been blown off, he finally takes more extreme measures at that point. Who knows?

Quote:

---

My thoughts are "Lue, buddy. You've likely violated your agreement already. I

---

Or...he's a pundit and enthusiast talking over his head as part of a new entertainment career.

Harry Lime said:

---

Quote:

---

My thoughts are "Lue, buddy. You've likely violated your agreement already. I

---

Or...he's a pundit and enthusiast talking over his head as part of a new entertainment career.

---

Can't rule that out. But other former high level govt and military people are also saying there's something there. Even Obama, who said quote : " But what is true, and I'm actually being serious here, is that there are, there's footage and records of objects in the skies, that we don't know exactly what they are, we can't explain how they moved, their trajectory. They did not have an easily explainable pattern. "

What's his motivation? He's set for life, his daughters are set and probably his grandchildren are set. Why state something like that to risk hurting his legacy? Dude is a rock star to the left and most of the rest of the world. Either he's telling the truth or he's part of an elaborate government misinformation plan to head fake Russia and China and/or increase military funding in the US.

He isn't saying anything that we aren't saying here in this thread in that statement. Its not anything groundbreaking.

And what he has to benefit from that statement is people not paying attention to the absolute cluster**** going on in the Whitehouse right now

Quote:

---

objects in the skies, that we don't know exactly what they are

---

I've said before, I believe people are really seeing things that they can't explain. And I've had a 20+ year curiosity to know what they are.

And following this topic and all the media figures associated w/ it over the years is why I think it's worthwhile to question the experience and motives of people who make careers out of talking about ufo's.

Sea Speed said:

---

He isn't saying anything that we aren't saying here in this thread in that statement. Its not anything groundbreaking.

And what he has to benefit from that statement is people not paying attention to the absolute cluster**** going on in the Whitehouse right now

---

Are you suggesting Obama intentionally inserted himself into a controversial "tin foil hat" topic with a lie in order to provide a distraction for the Biden administration?

I guess that's possible. But it's not working. People not sci fi fans I've talked to really aren't paying much attention to this.topic. So it's not distracting a huge chunk of the population.

Obama could have easily blown off that question and no one would have thought twice. Instead he got serious for a second and deliberately answered it. So it's the truth and he felt compelled to confirm these are real objects, or he lied for a deliberate purpose. And I don't think that purpose was to provide cover to Biden. The mainstream media already does a good job of that.

Appreciate Neil deGrasse Tyson's skepticism.



I personally don't believe in aliens and do believe in the spiritual world. I think threads wouldn't get derailed if others on this thread didn't outright mock those of us with these beliefs. When we say this and the immediate response is, "then you're an idiot", you are inviting immediate retaliation and thread derailment.

I do find it funny how some on here keep saying, "the odds" of aliens existing are just too high. What are you basing this on? Do you actually KNOW the odds? What are the odds of intelligent life forming on earth, first of all. Do you have a number for this? What are then the odds for this to happen a second time in our universe? I'm asking for actual numbers, not just "hey, we're here and there are billions of other solar systems, so there must be more of us." That is not scientific at all and is not really a logical argument.

I find it to be a fun discussion, and am genuinely asking if anyone has actually calculated those odds and what they came up with. How did they calculate those odds? What metrics did they use? Is there someone else who came up with different odds and how did they calculate those?

I love when one side, who believes these events are performed by a being (or beings) who operate outside of the known laws of our world, shouts down the other side who believes these events are performed by a different being (or beings) who operate outside the known laws of our world.

I do find this topic fascinating, but it feels more fictional to me. With how connected our world is, I find it impossible that we haven't seen something more definitive than grainy videos from aircraft instruments that are only coming from the US. If these events are happening near daily in the US, surely they're happening often elsewhere? And surely they're being observed by people who aren't military, and thus aren't being suppressed by classified info? And surely there would be more instances of whistleblowers or leaks worldwide than the three videos we've seen?

You want to talk about statistical likelihood of life on other planets? What's the statistical likelihood that contact from extraterrestrial/spiritual beings has been kept under wraps across the world, aside from those three videos?

If true, this would be the most significant news story in this planet's history. Yet, the videos came out 4 years ago, and this year we've gotten, what, a 60 minutes segment and some increased discussion online?

The spiritual angle is interesting. You could probably create quite the conundrum for some people who are just flippantly dismissive of aliens having any chance even remote chance of being the explanation because it sounds crazy. Immediately then suggest that a spiritual explanation is somewhere in the realm of possibility. I'm sure some of them are Christian. "What do I say? I was just condescending and dismissive of aliens because that's crazy. Yet angels or demons also kind of sounds crazy. I can't agree with that or I sound crazy. But I believe in God, so if I say there's no way it's spiritual then am I doubting and denying the power of God? What do I do?"

Below is a link to a pretty interesting theory about how the UAP may work. This also includes the video from the Aguadilla airport in 2013, which you should check out if you haven't already seen it. It shows thermal imaging of a sphere shaped object flying around the airport and above and through the nearby waters without changing speed - the website includes some good possible explanations for the weird mirror like effects in the video.

https://www.uaptheory.com/

Just FYI, I've posted this link twice now in the thread and no one seems to have bothered with it (at least not enough to want to have a discussion about it). I find it endlessly fascinating, though, even outside of the whole UAP thing, just as a science lesson in general. It's such a cool read.