Joes said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Right. Clearly I'm saying the former. Of course Grusch can't divulge classified info on national TV, as he made clear over and over again.

---

You mean the latter. The former would imply that somebody could divulge classified info as long as they call themselves a whistle blower first. The notion is preposterous.

The latter would imply that DoD declassified it first. Then you would have to believe that they did so just so this random former AF intell major would be able to divulge it to congress. Rather than they themselves divulge it on their own terms via the DoD public affairs office.

Furthermore, you would have to believe that they gave him permission to divulge it to his WIFE. And that they declassified just enough for him to say that aliens activities have harmed humans to the point that it is "disturbing", but NOT acknowledge WHAT those activities are. There is simply no way in hell.

This guy has no credibility.

---

I need to go back and watch all that again, because watching it live I definitely jumped up when he mentioned that he and his wife had seen disturbing things or something. I couldn't believe what he said. Then afterwards I just told myself that maybe I confused his answer about what UFO evidence he had seen with the other question about threats that he had received, and he was saying he and his wife saw disturbing things regarding threats to him. Was it actually the former? Because if so then yeah, that's a serious **** up, both doing it and saying it.

---

I don't understand what you are getting at here. He said him and his wife witnessed (so not something he discussed with her). The question was related to both humans and nhi causing harm. I am assuming he meant, in that context, caused by humans. I get that it directly followed an nhi question specifically, but he said he couldn't get into specifics and then mentioned that, in which I assume he was answering the first, broader question.

Sea Speed said:

---

If the aliens are real and we exist at the pleasure of some other species of beings, I think humanity will fall off a cliff. Imagine if overnight every religion was proven to be false. What would people have to live for or strive for? Eternal life? Gone. Where do our morals come from? What reason will so many people have to do the right thing? Overnight you go from seeking a close relationship with god and caring for your fellow man to the only real purpose in life to make your existence as pleasurable as possible. What will the value of life be in places that already value it very little? I don't think we will like the world after 'disclosure' very much.

---

I also said this would be bad for humanity but I don't think this particular concern is warranted. Most religions aren't really incompatible with the idea of other life and in fact around 1900 there were a whole lot of people who just "knew" that the canals on Mars were real and that it was inhabited, and it didn't have any notable effect on religion or cause any panic in any way. I don't think even the genuine discovery of an unambiguous intelligent signal from another star system now would have an effect on religion either.

I'm not religious, not that I have any hostility to it, but I've never noticed any discernible difference in morality or lack of purpose and drive whether people are religious or not. There's almost no correlation watching closely throughout my life. I've got a very strong sense of right and wrong, I don't think most people behave the way they do based on the promise of reward or the threat of punishment. In fact, it always seemed to me that if you're only behaving the way you do because of threats or rewards then it's completely disingenuous anyway, isn't it? "I'm going to bring you this gift because if I don't I'm going to burn for eternity"? No thanks. Anyway, that's a whole other topic, but keeping it to this topic, I really don't think that would be the concern in general. I admit, the whole idea that no one would be kind or nice if they didn't think they were being watched and judged is bizarre to me.

Mr President Elect said:

---

Joes said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Right. Clearly I'm saying the former. Of course Grusch can't divulge classified info on national TV, as he made clear over and over again.

---

You mean the latter. The former would imply that somebody could divulge classified info as long as they call themselves a whistle blower first. The notion is preposterous.

The latter would imply that DoD declassified it first. Then you would have to believe that they did so just so this random former AF intell major would be able to divulge it to congress. Rather than they themselves divulge it on their own terms via the DoD public affairs office.

Furthermore, you would have to believe that they gave him permission to divulge it to his WIFE. And that they declassified just enough for him to say that aliens activities have harmed humans to the point that it is "disturbing", but NOT acknowledge WHAT those activities are. There is simply no way in hell.

This guy has no credibility.

---

I need to go back and watch all that again, because watching it live I definitely jumped up when he mentioned that he and his wife had seen disturbing things or something. I couldn't believe what he said. Then afterwards I just told myself that maybe I confused his answer about what UFO evidence he had seen with the other question about threats that he had received, and he was saying he and his wife saw disturbing things regarding threats to him. Was it actually the former? Because if so then yeah, that's a serious **** up, both doing it and saying it.

---

I don't understand what you are getting at here. He said him and his wife witnessed (so not something he discussed with her). The question was related to both humans and nhi causing harm. I am assuming he meant, in that context, caused by humans. I get that it directly followed an nhi question specifically, but he said he couldn't get into specifics and then mentioned that, in which I assume he was answering the first, broader question.

---

That's the heart of my question and which wasn't clear. It's unbelievable enough that he would share things of that sensitivity with his wife if he took his job seriously, but it would be even more astonishing if he admitted that in Congress. That's why I kept telling myself that I had misheard it. It sure doesn't seem like it from that short clip though. I don't know. It must have been a misstatement I would think or else it would be getting a lot more attention.

So you're saying it was in the context of some "sighting" by the two of them? Like he and his wife were just out driving to dinner and saw something disturbingly alien?

I agree with almost all you are saying but my premise was specifically predicated on the fact that we exist at the pleasure of another species. I guess that creation and what not could just shift to the left and be applied to how the other beings came to exist and continue down that path. One of the fundamental questions of philosophy pertains to the morality of man and whether it is innate or learned. Now I guess it could continue to be innate, but those people that believe that it is derived from the teachings of god would have to completely reevaluate their belief systems imo.

This is way more of a thought exercise than something that would we would see in our lives though and you are right, probably not suited for this thread. There are a lot of fun thought exercise like this though. Like what if humans have been created millions of times under the watchful eye of our alien creators with the hope that one day we reach enlightenment or don't kill ourselves off through war etc and we are just about at the point in our existence where we either sink or swim. If we sink, either they wipe us out and start over or we do it to ourselves. Hell we could be one of an infinite number of human colony experiments going on simultaneously in the universe. Who knows! I'll just keep on keeping on.

No, I am saying that him and his wife have witnessed harmful or threatning activity by other humans. If I had to guess, I would assume it is related to his and his families safety regarding him being a whistleblower. It was pretty vague, as a lot of his statements have been, and does warrant further explanation imo.

He has specifically mentioned that he hasn't seen ufo's out in the wild.

The clip in my reply is the full hearing marked at the question mentioned.

I definitely took it mean that he and his wife witnessed harassment of some sort, from humans. We know that his house was broken into and that he's been threatened numerous times, so I'm guessing he's referring to one of those instances.

I don't think existence of aliens would "prove" every religion false. IDK, though.

You're right words mean things. I think it would at the bare minimum test the faith of the believers more so than any other event I can think of and certainly cause a crisis of faith. Or maybe it completely strengthens their resolve. But if we found out tomorrow that some alien race allows us to exist but could annihilate us at any time for any reason, I don't think the level of peace and civility we enjoy today would continue.

redline248 said:

---

I don't think existence of aliens would "prove" every religion false. IDK, though.

---

I look to the wise words of the great Tom Delonge when questioning religon and our existence

Former Director of National Intelligence, @JohnRatcliffe was asked about David Grusch’s claims. He doesn’t deny them.

“I’ve gone to the edge of talking about information that’s classified. I can’t go over that line. I just think they (Gov)could have put more information out…” pic.twitter.com/o8J3ZBKR8h

— UAP News (@HighPeaks77) July 30, 2023

Mr President Elect said:

---

Joes said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Right. Clearly I'm saying the former. Of course Grusch can't divulge classified info on national TV, as he made clear over and over again.

---

You mean the latter. The former would imply that somebody could divulge classified info as long as they call themselves a whistle blower first. The notion is preposterous.

The latter would imply that DoD declassified it first. Then you would have to believe that they did so just so this random former AF intell major would be able to divulge it to congress. Rather than they themselves divulge it on their own terms via the DoD public affairs office.

Furthermore, you would have to believe that they gave him permission to divulge it to his WIFE. And that they declassified just enough for him to say that aliens activities have harmed humans to the point that it is "disturbing", but NOT acknowledge WHAT those activities are. There is simply no way in hell.

This guy has no credibility.

---

I need to go back and watch all that again, because watching it live I definitely jumped up when he mentioned that he and his wife had seen disturbing things or something. I couldn't believe what he said. Then afterwards I just told myself that maybe I confused his answer about what UFO evidence he had seen with the other question about threats that he had received, and he was saying he and his wife saw disturbing things regarding threats to him. Was it actually the former? Because if so then yeah, that's a serious **** up, both doing it and saying it.

---

I don't understand what you are getting at here. He said him and his wife witnessed (so not something he discussed with her). The question was related to both humans and nhi causing harm. I am assuming he meant, in that context, caused by humans. I get that it directly followed an nhi question specifically, but he said he couldn't get into specifics and then mentioned that, in which I assume he was answering the first, broader question.

---

Was she an intel officer too? How in the world would she have witnessed it?

When Chris Mellon is asked if there are aliens, he says that if Congress sees the satellite images of UAP, they will understand that it's not made by human hands.#ufo #spacepic.twitter.com/ixtuiv8tbt

— 🜃Meta Material (@MetaStudioLogic) July 30, 2023

aTmAg said:

---

Mr President Elect said:

---

Joes said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Right. Clearly I'm saying the former. Of course Grusch can't divulge classified info on national TV, as he made clear over and over again.

---

You mean the latter. The former would imply that somebody could divulge classified info as long as they call themselves a whistle blower first. The notion is preposterous.

The latter would imply that DoD declassified it first. Then you would have to believe that they did so just so this random former AF intell major would be able to divulge it to congress. Rather than they themselves divulge it on their own terms via the DoD public affairs office.

Furthermore, you would have to believe that they gave him permission to divulge it to his WIFE. And that they declassified just enough for him to say that aliens activities have harmed humans to the point that it is "disturbing", but NOT acknowledge WHAT those activities are. There is simply no way in hell.

This guy has no credibility.

---

I need to go back and watch all that again, because watching it live I definitely jumped up when he mentioned that he and his wife had seen disturbing things or something. I couldn't believe what he said. Then afterwards I just told myself that maybe I confused his answer about what UFO evidence he had seen with the other question about threats that he had received, and he was saying he and his wife saw disturbing things regarding threats to him. Was it actually the former? Because if so then yeah, that's a serious **** up, both doing it and saying it.

---

I don't understand what you are getting at here. He said him and his wife witnessed (so not something he discussed with her). The question was related to both humans and nhi causing harm. I am assuming he meant, in that context, caused by humans. I get that it directly followed an nhi question specifically, but he said he couldn't get into specifics and then mentioned that, in which I assume he was answering the first, broader question.

---

Was she an intel officer too? How in the world would she have witnessed it?

---

This:

TCTTS said:

---

I definitely took it mean that he and his wife witnessed harassment of some sort, from humans. We know that his house was broken into and that he's been threatened numerous times, so I'm guessing he's referring to one of those instances.

---

That is not at ALL what the question asked. And it's not like his answer confusingly answered something else to imply he didn't hear the question. His answer made perfect sense in the context of the question that was asked.

aTmAg said:

---

That is not at ALL what the question asked. And it's not like his answer confusingly answered something else to imply he didn't hear the question. His answer made perfect sense in the context of the question that was asked.

---

I disagree. He isn't even a first hand witness, so now him and his wife are both first-hand witnessing threatening / harmful alien behavior?

So the quote:

Quote:

---

Burlison: "So there has been activity by.. by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has cause harm to humans?"

Grusch: "Ah, I can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed-- and I have to be careful here, ah because you don't.. you know they tell you never acknowledge tradecraft, right? -- so what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing."

---

His answer makes sense in the context of the question he was answering, but not in the context of what he said in the hearing overall. That is a symptom of a liar.

In fact, I think all the nonsense about the open environment and tradecraft was him stalling to think of an answer. As none of that crap is tradecraft, and the notion that he can say it was "disturbing" yet cannot tell us how or why is preposterous.

I'm not going to go hard to bat for the guy, but it's possible he misunderstood the question. That happened at least once with Fravor, as well.


I will add that, at times, it felt to me like Grusch was trying a little hard to "sell" his statements.

aTmAg said:

---

His answer makes sense in the context of the question he was answering, but not in the context of what he said in the hearing overall. That is a symptom of a liar.

---

Zzzzzzz. Just start issuing congressional subpoenas to all of Grusch's sources.

aTmAg said:

---

So the quote:

Quote:

---

Burlison: "So there has been activity by.. by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has cause harm to humans?"

Grusch: "Ah, I can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed-- and I have to be careful here, ah because you don't.. you know they tell you never acknowledge tradecraft, right? -- so what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing."

---

His answer makes sense in the context of the question he was answering, but not in the context of what he said in the hearing overall. That is a symptom of a liar.

In fact, I think all the nonsense about the open environment and tradecraft was him stalling to think of an answer. As none of that crap is tradecraft, and the notion that he can say it was "disturbing" yet cannot tell us how or why is preposterous.

---

Eh, this is pretty weak. First, you left off the previous question by Burlison which includes both human and alien causing harm. I'll grant you that the direct question prior to him saying this was specific about NHI, but this could just as easily come across as a guy that is genuinely scared and upset about the threats happening to his family and wanted to make sure to get that on record as often as possible as Burlison did cut him off while still answering the prior question.

Also, in the event he is lying, this would be such an odd slip-up, as it isn't in line with any context of the events or anything. Not to mention, if it was his intent, you are jumping to this assumption without any details on how this might have occured.

Mr President Elect said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

So the quote:

Quote:

---

Burlison: "So there has been activity by.. by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has cause harm to humans?"

Grusch: "Ah, I can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed-- and I have to be careful here, ah because you don't.. you know they tell you never acknowledge tradecraft, right? -- so what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing."

---

His answer makes sense in the context of the question he was answering, but not in the context of what he said in the hearing overall. That is a symptom of a liar.

In fact, I think all the nonsense about the open environment and tradecraft was him stalling to think of an answer. As none of that crap is tradecraft, and the notion that he can say it was "disturbing" yet cannot tell us how or why is preposterous.

---

Eh, this is pretty weak. First, you left off the previous question by Burlison which includes both human and alien causing harm. I'll grant you that the direct question prior to him saying this was specific about NHI, but this could just as easily come across as a guy that is genuinely scared and upset about the threats happening to his family and wanted to make sure to get that on record as often as possible as Burlison did cut him off while still answering the prior question.

Also, in the event he is lying, this would be such an odd slip-up, as it isn't in line with any context of the events or anything. Not to mention, if it was his intent, you are jumping to this assumption without any details on how this might have occured.

---

That video is simply what google returned. I didn't intentionally leave off anything. I know the hearings were basically all day, and I wasn't going to scroll through the whole thing to find it.

Also. I'm not sure what NHI is.


And frankly, I simply do not I believe a thing this guy says. I highly doubt he's getting threatened by anybody. I think he is trying to get rich/famous fleecing UFO believers. Making slip ups is a whole lot easier when you are spinning a web of lies. You have to remember everything. Telling the truth doesn't have that problem.

BenFiasco14 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Mr President Elect said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

So the quote:

Quote:

---

Burlison: "So there has been activity by.. by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has cause harm to humans?"

Grusch: "Ah, I can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed-- and I have to be careful here, ah because you don't.. you know they tell you never acknowledge tradecraft, right? -- so what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing."

---

His answer makes sense in the context of the question he was answering, but not in the context of what he said in the hearing overall. That is a symptom of a liar.

In fact, I think all the nonsense about the open environment and tradecraft was him stalling to think of an answer. As none of that crap is tradecraft, and the notion that he can say it was "disturbing" yet cannot tell us how or why is preposterous.

---

Eh, this is pretty weak. First, you left off the previous question by Burlison which includes both human and alien causing harm. I'll grant you that the direct question prior to him saying this was specific about NHI, but this could just as easily come across as a guy that is genuinely scared and upset about the threats happening to his family and wanted to make sure to get that on record as often as possible as Burlison did cut him off while still answering the prior question.

Also, in the event he is lying, this would be such an odd slip-up, as it isn't in line with any context of the events or anything. Not to mention, if it was his intent, you are jumping to this assumption without any details on how this might have occured.

---

That video is simply what google returned. I didn't intentionally leave off anything. I know the hearings were basically all day, and I wasn't going to scroll through the whole thing to find it.

Also. I'm not sure what NHI is.


And frankly, I simply do not I believe a thing this guy says. I highly doubt he's getting threatened by anybody. I think he is trying to get rich/famous fleecing UFO believers. Making slip ups is a whole lot easier when you are spinning a web of lies. You have to remember everything. Telling the truth doesn't have that problem.

---

Thanks for sharing your opinion. It's riveting. Now that we all know it, there is no need to repeat it continuously. So think about that before you post again. If it's to try and bolster your opinion, I think I can confidently say nobody cares.

---

I'll post when I want and wherever I want. I don't care if you don't like hearing it. In fact, that makes me more motivated to post.

Notice how you can't even address with an actual retort.

Sorry your hearing was a nothing burger. It's not my fault that you are naive enough to keep falling for this crap.

Although, years ago, and quite shortly after initial creation, I stated that Spyder's f16 "Is UFO Secrecy Crumbling?" would be the place where I would gloat "I told you so" after official alien disclosure, it's feasible I will shift that posting to this thread. (At present, this is my preference.)

Lord Goldeneyes said:

---

Unnamed sources at the Pentagon called our hearing on #UFO and #UAP insulting. You know what’s insulting to me? The fact they have never passed an audit and have “lost” over a billion of your hard earned dollars.

— Tim Burchett (@timburchett) July 30, 2023

Even if you're not interested in UAPs, you should definitely be enjoying this.

---

Reminded me of this tweet:

As I have been saying: the US Government does not have a single position on UAP.

We are watching warring factions. That’s why everything looks so weird.

The reports we have seen before are bizarre because they are akin to forcing rival street gangs to issue joint statements. https://t.co/8aaKti20ng

— Eric Weinstein (@EricRWeinstein) July 28, 2023

It would appear that Kirkpatrick and the AARO group don't know their collective azzes from a hole in the ground.

White House backs a proposed bill from Sen.Majority Leader @SenSchumer which demands 'presumptive immediate disclosure' of #UAP records. Asserts 'credible evidence & testimony indicates' UAP records exist that have not been declassified in an 'overbroad' use of Atomic Energy Act. https://t.co/EY95iRtrON

— Ross Coulthart (@rosscoulthart) July 31, 2023

1) That Coulthart guy is long winded and enjoys hearing himself talk

2) I don't really know what to make of his claims about no phone number or website for AARO. Having spent a short time working on a government contract I can tell you things move glacially in order to get things approved for publishing. The dept is a year old, so it could just be another case of beauracratic inefficiency. Did the previous UAP task force have a website?