Doesn't every poster have some responsibility to engage in the discussion in a meaningful way, whether as a skeptic or a believer? Long diatribes and short, snarky comments are equally unconstructive. Just a random thought.Beast of Burden said:
Without one poster playing thread police, there would be no walls of text to quote. Just a random thought.
Back to aliens!
*** UAP THREAD ***
365,833 Views |
4390 Replies |
Last: 6 hrs ago by jkag89
This may have gotten lost in the chaos of yesterday. They will, apparently and allegedly, get to read Grusch’s IG report on Jan. 12th. Not sure if it’s from the DoD IG (reprisals), IC IG (hidden UAP programs), or both. #ufos #uap #ufoX #aliens #grusch #igreport https://t.co/erz8h7Np2n
— Joe Murgia (@TheUfoJoe) December 7, 2023
I am firmly on the political right, Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan style. However, we have to admit the Congressional GOP are bad actors here, and the Deep State is in harmony with so many of them.
Who is blocking Schumer, who for once in his life is doing something I want done? Mike Turner. A king of Ohio shadiness. 10th Congressional District is the chief field office for Radiance Tech, where......IMO
"Prompt Global Strike," the attempt to back engineer UFO technology to build a missile that functions with UFO technology that can travel at 20,000 miles an hour with no air resistance and can turn at a 90 d. angle at 20,000 mph ...... via a back-engineered propulsion system - chief field office, 10th in Ohio.
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Turner, is depriving us of disclosure. Random question some people in Ohio are curious about: is there a kickback situation with a man who fought a nasty second divorce?
His friend, also depriving me of alien knowledge? Mike Rogers, chair of the House Armed Services Committee, home is the 2nd district of Alabama. And that is Huntsville headquarters office of Radiant
Who is blocking Schumer, who for once in his life is doing something I want done? Mike Turner. A king of Ohio shadiness. 10th Congressional District is the chief field office for Radiance Tech, where......IMO
"Prompt Global Strike," the attempt to back engineer UFO technology to build a missile that functions with UFO technology that can travel at 20,000 miles an hour with no air resistance and can turn at a 90 d. angle at 20,000 mph ...... via a back-engineered propulsion system - chief field office, 10th in Ohio.
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Turner, is depriving us of disclosure. Random question some people in Ohio are curious about: is there a kickback situation with a man who fought a nasty second divorce?
His friend, also depriving me of alien knowledge? Mike Rogers, chair of the House Armed Services Committee, home is the 2nd district of Alabama. And that is Huntsville headquarters office of Radiant
Great points, and all very well said.
I don't mean this as an "I told you so" challenge, but I'm genuinely curious what the resident skeptics here think happened with the bill this week? Because basically the entire thing was just gutted, on the one-yard line. If passed, it may or may not have eventually lead to disclosure (unfortunately, it was almost assuredly never going to be *that* easy), but it was still utterly unprecedented in its goals and language, to the point where a group clearly wanted it dead and buried... and then got their wish. What else would motivate such a group to take such action, if they didn't feel threatened, and didn't have anything to hide? If there's no there there, why go to such trouble to obfuscate, block, and kill it? I'm legitimately asking, because, again, I'm genuinely curious what other reasons there could be, other than the blatantly obvious?
I don't mean this as an "I told you so" challenge, but I'm genuinely curious what the resident skeptics here think happened with the bill this week? Because basically the entire thing was just gutted, on the one-yard line. If passed, it may or may not have eventually lead to disclosure (unfortunately, it was almost assuredly never going to be *that* easy), but it was still utterly unprecedented in its goals and language, to the point where a group clearly wanted it dead and buried... and then got their wish. What else would motivate such a group to take such action, if they didn't feel threatened, and didn't have anything to hide? If there's no there there, why go to such trouble to obfuscate, block, and kill it? I'm legitimately asking, because, again, I'm genuinely curious what other reasons there could be, other than the blatantly obvious?
As is with most things, probably money. Someone somewhere is making it and doesn't want to stop making it. If tweets you posted are to be believed, it is the defense contractors.
Yeah, I think we can all agree that it was the defense contractors, who very likely put pressure on the names Redstone (and multiple reports) mentioned above, to kill the bill. If so, the question then becomes, if no UAP crash retrieval/reverse engineering programs exist, how would this bill passing have cut off their cash flow? If they truly have no legit UAP tech, what would they have been forced to disclose/turn over, and how would they be financially threatened by new laws that therefore wouldn't apply to them? (Again, I'm legitimately asking.)
Otherwise, the consensus is they didn't want this thing to pass because of A) the massive $$$ they're (secretly) receiving to retrieve/reverse engineer UAP tech, and B) the unprecedented legal sh*tstorm that would very likely come down on them, should disclosure happen.
Otherwise, the consensus is they didn't want this thing to pass because of A) the massive $$$ they're (secretly) receiving to retrieve/reverse engineer UAP tech, and B) the unprecedented legal sh*tstorm that would very likely come down on them, should disclosure happen.
How do we know non-human technology is being reverse engineered?
Bureaucratic blandness, slow-walking and also killing transparency. Burials by reports. That, not sensationalism, means significant things have been happening.
Bureaucratic blandness, slow-walking and also killing transparency. Burials by reports. That, not sensationalism, means significant things have been happening.
Were I a member of the House or a defense contractor CEO, I would have been concerned about the eminent domain clause regardless of whether there were actually recovered UAP to be siezed. Eminent domain allows for government theft with no due process. I hear a lot of UFO enthusiasts gleefully cheering for eminent domain, apparently under the impression that the technology will be "liberated" from those greedy capitalist defense contractors and made the property of the people. *shudder* It's downright Communist. That part of the bill should have been removed purely on limited government principles.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was about to answer the same. Anyone who saw the eminent domain clause as a good thing is either extremely naive or brand new to how governments actually work. If you haven't noticed, our government is extremely good at using and/or creating emergencies to erode our freedoms and add to its own power. Strange seeing the same types who (100% correctly) sounded the alarm bells over the Patriot Act cheer this on like the government is some benevolent truth seeker.
If your opinion on this is simply government = good, defense contractors = bad/evil, then you swallowed the narrative and I want to live in your blissful fantasy world.
The amount of blind faith in government on this thread is honestly kind of shocking to me after the last several years.
If your opinion on this is simply government = good, defense contractors = bad/evil, then you swallowed the narrative and I want to live in your blissful fantasy world.
The amount of blind faith in government on this thread is honestly kind of shocking to me after the last several years.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I will also add that I don't believe the dog and pony show we're (publicly) seeing. I don't believe all these senators and congressmen are completely in the dark on *whatever this is*. I don't believe the "we would have known the truth but Grusch couldn't get in the SCIF with us after all …oops!" narrative. To me, trying to look at it from a 30k foot view, it seems like they're constantly baiting the hook and reeling it in a little more at a time to keep people engaged.
I honestly have no clue what is really going on but all the actions and a lot of the wording/narrative around whatever this is has my spidey senses tingling like crazy.
I honestly have no clue what is really going on but all the actions and a lot of the wording/narrative around whatever this is has my spidey senses tingling like crazy.
Agree on both points. IMO, the serious reporting from Blumenthal/Kean and under oath testimony from Grusch/Graves/Favor have given Congress critters cover to do what Congress does best: grandstand. I do think there's really something to disclose; that seems unarguable now.
I do put a lot of thought into my responses here, and would appreciate Stars to ensure the posts turn blue.
I don't want to respond with an "I told you so" response, but as a resident skeptic, I've long been leery of the whole "disclosure is coming" narrative. So it played right into this skeptic's hands.TCTTS said:
I don't mean this as an "I told you so" challenge, but I'm genuinely curious what the resident skeptics here think happened with the bill this week?
Poking aside - I don't want to try to tell people they're stupid for believing that the government is hiding their knowledge about UAPs and aliens. The blunt truth is, I don't know any better than anyone and I do find the topic fascinating. I think we all agree that there's a lot the government knows that they don't share.
But I do remain skeptical that there are multiple crash sites and reverse engineering of alien technology in our defense complex. I do believe that there are a lot of things the government doesn't understand, and maybe has even compiled a more comprehensive list of data than they've let on. But I personally stick to the belief that they are seeing things that scare them.
My opinion, what you are seeing is a mix of politicians that are posturing for political points, and others that are afraid disclosure of the above does somehow damage the credibility of our intelligence, or defense vulnerabilities, or even stature. Truthfully, I don't think there's a lot to actually share. At least not at the level people are hoping for.
And ultimately, politicians lie. R? D? I? It doesn't matter…. They all do it.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
G Martin 87 said:
Agree on both points. IMO, the serious reporting from Blumenthal/Kean and under oath testimony from Grusch/Graves/Favor have given Congress critters cover to do what Congress does best: grandstand. I do think there's really something to disclose; that seems unarguable now.
I'm admittedly probably a little too skeptical but I think our government has earned it over the last century certainly. When I hear everyone seemingly suddenly parroting the same thing I get cynical. Grusch seemed to come out of nowhere (I know I don't follow near as closely as some here) and in unison all I heard was "look how credible this guy is! His credentials are impeccable! He has so much to lose by coming forward!"
I don't mean this from a religious standpoint but a narrative standpoint…all of a sudden there is this savior that comes out of nowhere in Grusch and everyone is looking to the government for answers. Our benevolent overlords want to give us the information but these dang defense contractors have gone rogue and won't listen! But just wait until the next hearing!
Call me crazy but that makes my bull**** detector start pinging. I've paid attention to our government long enough. I say this half-jokingly but if Chuck Schumer is the altruistic hero in your story I am going to have a real hard time buying it given that guy's history.
To me this isn't a left/right thing at all. It's a "you need to be super skeptical of what the government and media is feeding you" thing. Both have certainly earned that skepticism and I don't think that's debatable.
I honestly have no clue what, exactly, is going on but I would bet everything I have it's not what we're being told/shown.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:G Martin 87 said:
Agree on both points. IMO, the serious reporting from Blumenthal/Kean and under oath testimony from Grusch/Graves/Favor have given Congress critters cover to do what Congress does best: grandstand. I do think there's really something to disclose; that seems unarguable now.
I'm admittedly probably a little too skeptical but I think our government has earned it over the last century certainly. When I hear everyone seemingly suddenly parroting the same thing I get cynical. Grusch seemed to come out of nowhere (I know I don't follow near as closely as some here) and in unison all I heard was "look how credible this guy is! His credentials are impeccable! He has so much to lose by coming forward!"
I don't mean this from a religious standpoint but a narrative standpoint…all of a sudden there is this savior that comes out of nowhere in Grusch and everyone is looking to the government for answers. Our benevolent overlords want to give us the information but these dang defense contractors have gone rogue and won't listen! But just wait until the next hearing!
Grusch is a whistleblower. Whistleblowers, by definition, come out of nowhere and have everything to lose by coming forward. Evaluating a whistleblower's credibility is therefore not just relevant, but crucially important. And two separate inspectors general have done that and both agreed that Grusch satisfies the whistleblower protection requirements for his claims.
Quote:
Call me crazy but that makes my bull**** detector start pinging. I've paid attention to our government long enough. I say this half-jokingly but if Chuck Schumer is the altruistic hero in your story I am going to have a real hard time buying it given that guy's history.
To me this isn't a left/right thing at all. It's a "you need to be super skeptical of what the government and media is feeding you" thing. Both have certainly earned that skepticism and I don't think that's debatable.
Totally agree on Schumer here. I don't trust Schumer or his motivations as far as I can throw him. But, Schumer isn't Grusch, or Graves, or Favor. It's smart to be skeptical. Extending earned distrust of Schumer to cover all of those who have testified under oath and any future whistleblowers is going too far. It is possible that Schumer is a snake and Grusch is telling the truth about what he's seen and heard.
Quote:
I honestly have no clue what, exactly, is going on but I would bet everything I have it's not what we're being told/shown.
You, as well as others, have openly admitted that you don't know what's going on. With respect, I don't think you're putting enough effort into following this story. Remember, I'm also a skeptic. The documented, undisputed facts so far (e.g., Grusch is a credible whistleblower according to two inspectors general; the NY Times has reported that the Pentagon takes UAP more seriously than previously admitted; military witnesses have testified under oath about incidents involving multiple UAP encounters that represent flight and security risks; AARO exists; NASA is ginning up their own UAP office) are not difficult to get up to speed on. As I said before, nobody in a position of governmental authority is laughing at this stuff. The story is not being driven by UFO fans or grifters anymore.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I understand your points on Grusch and get the whole whistleblower thing. At this point I'm dubious on what any IG says on pretty much any subject. It doesn't quite pass the smell test to me at this point (when I try and zoom out and see everything) and for better or worse the appeal to authority doesn't work for me when it's our government involved but you are correct that I can do a little more digging/informing myself on this topic.
G Martin 87
Joined:
Oct 11, 1999
Posts:
19,240
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hmmm, lots here.
I had dealings with Schumer in my career. He is a monstrous snake that would sell his grandmother and tends to use a howitzer to kill a bothersome cat.
Our government doesn't work like it says in the civics texts. Everyone is for sale and there are more currencies than just money. It's child's play to keep an issue like "disclosure" bottled up.
And I repeat, it doesn't matter whether we have alien tech or not, there are powerful entities that want to keep the truth hidden.
I had dealings with Schumer in my career. He is a monstrous snake that would sell his grandmother and tends to use a howitzer to kill a bothersome cat.
Our government doesn't work like it says in the civics texts. Everyone is for sale and there are more currencies than just money. It's child's play to keep an issue like "disclosure" bottled up.
And I repeat, it doesn't matter whether we have alien tech or not, there are powerful entities that want to keep the truth hidden.
If anyone still needed convincing of this troll...Redstone said:
I do put a lot of thought into my responses here, and would appreciate Stars to ensure the posts turn blue.
I also want to take a moment to point out, and correct me if I'm wrong, the IGs only found Grusch's claims about a program existing outside of Congressional approval to be credible. I haven't seen anything that says they think the speculation around alien tech is credible - and that may a separate issue than what the IG is supposed to examine anyway.
This is correct. One IG found Grusch's complaints of retaliation to be credible, while the other found his claims about a crash retrieval program to be credible. From what I've read, that's as much as the IG has the authority to say. (And yet, both IG statements are significant in their own right. Why is Grusch being threatened? Excuse me, did you say that there is credible evidence of a crashed UAP retrieval program?? What??!)redline248 said:
I also want to take a moment to point out, and correct me if I'm wrong, the IGs only found Grusch's claims about a program existing outside of Congressional approval to be credible. I haven't seen anything that says they think the speculation around alien tech is credible - and that may a separate issue than what the IG is supposed to examine anyway.
G Martin 87 said:
Were I a member of the House or a defense contractor CEO, I would have been concerned about the eminent domain clause regardless of whether there were actually recovered UAP to be siezed. Eminent domain allows for government theft with no due process. I hear a lot of UFO enthusiasts gleefully cheering for eminent domain, apparently under the impression that the technology will be "liberated" from those greedy capitalist defense contractors and made the property of the people. *shudder* It's downright Communist. That part of the bill should have been removed purely on limited government principles.
Great point, and we're definitely in agreement here.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:
I was about to answer the same. Anyone who saw the eminent domain clause as a good thing is either extremely naive or brand new to how governments actually work. If you haven't noticed, our government is extremely good at using and/or creating emergencies to erode our freedoms and add to its own power. Strange seeing the same types who (100% correctly) sounded the alarm bells over the Patriot Act cheer this on like the government is some benevolent truth seeker.
If your opinion on this is simply government = good, defense contractors = bad/evil, then you swallowed the narrative and I want to live in your blissful fantasy world.
The amount of blind faith in government on this thread is honestly kind of shocking to me after the last several years.
I just don't see this at all in this thread. Throughout this entire ordeal, who here has expressed "blind faith" in the government, or has ever cast them as only the good guys? Again, posted tweets aren't endorsements, and outside of those, I see all kinds of skepticism expressed here, on nearly a daily basis, in the government's ability to get to the bottom of this, tell the truth, not to act in their own best interest, etc. From believers and skeptics alike. Do I think there are good people in the government trying to do good things? Of course. But they're definitely few and far between.
I don't know, this just feels like yet another instance of projection/vast overgeneralization to me.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ah yes, rather than provide any examples or substance whatsoever, all you post is a gif. Par for the course.
Some great summary and analysis of this whole legislation ordeal, from Courthart and Zabel, where they seem to pin its failure on the imminent domain issue as well. In that regard, I definitely side with Coulthart here, whereas Zabel's position is just too pie-in-the-sky, and fails to account for the fact the government works for itself, more than it does for the people…
I started listening to this and had to stop. Coulthart's grasp of American government is pretty weak. Granted, he's an Aussie. On the bright side, I was able to add a bunch of new phrases to my Coulthart BINGO card. Riot!TCTTS said:
Some great summary and analysis of this whole legislation ordeal, from Courthart and Zabel, where they seem to pin its failure on the imminent domain issue as well. In that regard, I definitely side with Coulthart here, whereas Zabel's position is just too pie-in-the-sky, and fails to account for the fact the government works for itself, more than it does for the people…
Good news, it is now safe to fly again. Whew!
**MH370x Statement Follow-Up**
— Ashton Forbes (@JustXAshton) December 8, 2023
I've spoken with Kim Dotcom and respect his advice. After having reviewed the raw images myself I am prepared to make the following statement;
The cloud images seem to be too close of a match to be coincidence. As a rational and logical person, I… https://t.co/lusVH8xNDS pic.twitter.com/0F6HGWlJW3
I think that mystery is solved.
Pilot sabotage.
https://theunexplained.tv/episodes/edition-597-richard-godfrey
Pilot sabotage.
https://theunexplained.tv/episodes/edition-597-richard-godfrey
I started seeing the cloud images drop late last night, and figured not even Ashton could deny them (though he tried, at least for a while). So it's good to see him admit defeat in this manner.
1) This is officially the greatest UAP hoax of all time, and I don't know that anything else will ever come close. It's truly insane, the amount of skill, effort, knowledge, and attention to detail that went into to making these.
2) That said, there's still something fishy about them, as so many other accuracies/coincidences remain unexplained, to the point where it wouldn't at all surprise me if, again, these videos were either created by the government for some unknown purpose, or a former/current government employee, with inside knowledge, created them.
1) This is officially the greatest UAP hoax of all time, and I don't know that anything else will ever come close. It's truly insane, the amount of skill, effort, knowledge, and attention to detail that went into to making these.
2) That said, there's still something fishy about them, as so many other accuracies/coincidences remain unexplained, to the point where it wouldn't at all surprise me if, again, these videos were either created by the government for some unknown purpose, or a former/current government employee, with inside knowledge, created them.
G Martin 87 said:I started listening to this and had to stop. Coulthart's grasp of American government is pretty weak. Granted, he's an Aussie. On the bright side, I was able to add a bunch of new phrases to my Coulthart BINGO card. Riot!TCTTS said:
Some great summary and analysis of this whole legislation ordeal, from Courthart and Zabel, where they seem to pin its failure on the imminent domain issue as well. In that regard, I definitely side with Coulthart here, whereas Zabel's position is just too pie-in-the-sky, and fails to account for the fact the government works for itself, more than it does for the people…
Out of curiosity, for my own good/knowledge, what is Coulthard lacking here in terms of his grasp of American government?
Blocked/debunked on back-to-back days. Ha, I'm NOT crying conspiracy here, just merely pointing out that a certain sect of believers has had a rough 48 hours...
Its interesting when the timeline of the most epic UFO hoax ever lines up exactly with the timeline of the most important UFO legislation in history.
— ᴋʟᴀᵾs (@tinyklaus) December 9, 2023
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Mr President Elect said:
Good news, it is now safe to fly again. Whew!**MH370x Statement Follow-Up**
— Ashton Forbes (@JustXAshton) December 8, 2023
I've spoken with Kim Dotcom and respect his advice. After having reviewed the raw images myself I am prepared to make the following statement;
The cloud images seem to be too close of a match to be coincidence. As a rational and logical person, I… https://t.co/lusVH8xNDS pic.twitter.com/0F6HGWlJW3
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,859
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:
Ah yes, rather than provide any examples or substance whatsoever, all you post is a gif. Par for the course.
You are quite exhausting. I preferred being on your ignore list.
Featured Stories
See All
Lone Star Showdown revival pits Aggies vs. Longhorns as SEC rivals
by Olin Buchanan
2025 Cocoa (FL) quarterback Brady Hart commits to Texas A&M
by Ryan Brauninger
6:42
23h ago
2.4k
8:36
27m ago
490
TexAgs' The Night Before: No. 20 Texas A&M vs. No. 3 Texas
by Luke Evangelist
44:52
1d ago
4.0k