Alexander - UFO's are real

[trainedobserver]

I'd assume, as a rule, military people can take it better than civilians and this sort of stoicism is a key criterion for allowing some in on the secret.

Have you looked at the military suicide rate recently?

Also, where is the bleed through, the trickle down, the indications of commercialization or that the technology has been militarized. Why are we having troops die in helicopters if we have ARVs to scoot around in? It makes no military or economic sense. Removing the "captured alien tech" or secret space program aspect you are still left with the problem of explaining how the United States is simultaneously waging a War on Terror (on numerous fronts), a War on Drugs, and a secret high-tech cat and mouse game (if not war) with aliens while in the midst of economic turmoil? We can't solve basic problems like health care or public education but we (people in general) can figure out how to fund, hide, and manage a parallel military and intelligence effort that is combating aliens?

Where's the evidence of it?

 

[Trajanus]

I don't see this as a fair comparison. First, back then, it was wartime. A time when most people understood the necessity of maintaining tight security; especially when dealing with a subject like the atomic bomb. I don't think anybody, even if involved in work where he/she has knowledge of some 'alien presence', would see the necessity of maintaining absolute secrecy on anywhere the same level as atomic secrets.

Advanced ETs could be much deadlier than nuclear bombs, or at least way tougher to deter or deal with. Unlike a-bomb technology, we lay people just can't be sure of the nature of what is covered up. There could be something about the phenomenon that would make people go bonkers. Maybe the government knows aliens were behind christianity, which is therefore phony. Just speculation of course but whatever is hidden could get a lot of people very upset.

Don't forget, even in WWII, many pilots were seeing 'foo fighters', talking and spreading rumors, and no one was seriously trying to cover it up.

But they didn't know what they represented; presumably that wasn't proven till Roswell.

Finally, even with atomic secrets, how long did this the secrecy last? Secrets were kept on a temporary basis, while absolute necessity was there only. Why would it be any different in this case?

ULTRA was kept for 30 years after the war i.e. after the most pressing reason for secrecy had long ended.

 

[softbeard]

ULTRA was kept for 30 years after the war i.e. after the most pressing reason for secrecy had long ended.

Yeah, well it's been more than 30 years for this stuff. Something always leaks. Come on, face it, you're stretching your point is real thin. (Past credulity if you ask me).

But they didn't know what they represented; presumably that wasn't proven till Roswell.

And now we 'know' what they represent? You're assuming the foo fighters suddenly became known as alien vehicles after Roswell? Is that the implication? And so what? Was there suddenly a curtain of super-secrecy slapped down after it became known? Like I said, in my mind, this is real thin stuff.

Advanced ETs could be much deadlier than nuclear bombs, or at least way tougher to deter or deal with.

This doesn't make sense. If they're so deadly, wouldn't we know about it by now? Secretly deadly? Hmm... Maybe they've got a really secret deadly alien fart; maybe that's their secret weapon.

 

[boomerang]

I would love to read Alexander's book but probably won't have the opportunity for a while.

The government cover-up aspect of the ufo mystery is almost business as usual for this phenomenon. We have numerous accounts from credible witnesses of cover up, obfuscation and seizure of material evidence on the part of people claiming to represent governments. The Gordon Cooper incident at Edwards AFB comes immediately to mind. But as is typical of the whole puzzling ufo mess, we are at a loss to explain exactly who is acting, why, and where and how such evidence might be handled in secret for many decades.

I agree with Chris about the "tricksterish" nature of ufos, and I think the appearance of coherent government expertise may yet one more aspect of it.

 

[Trajanus]

Something always leaks.

There were no leaks of ULTRA for over 30 years. But you may be right; if certain whistleblower claims are real, it has leaked.

And now we 'know' what they represent? You're assuming the foo fighters suddenly became known as alien vehicles after Roswell?

As far as I know they/the phenomenon was a mystery, until the government obtained physical evidence.

If they're so deadly, wouldn't we know about it by now?

Not necessarily; if the government can't ensure our safety, it might only cause panic. It could deter soviet n-bombs but not ETs.

 

[Randall]

Have you looked at the military suicide rate recently?

Also, where is the bleed through, the trickle down, the indications of commercialization or that the technology has been militarized. Why are we having troops die in helicopters if we have ARVs to scoot around in? It makes no military or economic sense. Removing the "captured alien tech" or secret space program aspect you are still left with the problem of explaining how the United States is simultaneously waging a War on Terror (on numerous fronts), a War on Drugs, and a secret high-tech cat and mouse game (if not war) with aliens while in the midst of economic turmoil? We can't solve basic problems like health care or public education but we (people in general) can figure out how to fund, hide, and manage a parallel military and intelligence effort that is combating aliens?

Where's the evidence of it?

Train:

All really good points. Your use of "ARV" is that Alien Reconnaissance Vehicle ... or ? I have to agree so much with your sentiments on the huge waste of human, economic and military resources that go into supporting armed conflict. But that doesn't mean that they still don't know a whole lot more than the average civilian. I believe they have the proof the skeptics would have no choice but to accept. But we just can't get any access to it. This is not to say that I know exactly what they have for evidence, but at the very least Space Command must have tracked many of them and there must be secret films, videos and military sighting reports.

 

[trainedobserver]

Train:

Your use of "ARV" is that Alien Reconnaissance Vehicle ... or ?

Alien Reproduction Vehicle. See The Disclosure Project.

I'm sure that the military has film and other data on UFOs and UAPs that they will never share. Gordon Cooper's film is just one example. I was addressing the lack of evidence for the claims of a secret space program, back-engineered alien technology, detailed knowledge of what UFOs actualy are, and so forth.

 

[softbeard]

...But that doesn't mean that they still don't know a whole lot more than the average civilian. I believe they have the proof the skeptics would have no choice but to accept. But we just can't get any access to it. This is not to say that I know exactly what they have for evidence, but at the very least Space Command must have tracked many of them and there must be secret films, videos and military sighting reports.

I'd be careful with the 'us' and 'they' idioms. I realize it's the norm in conspiracy theories to use this divergence, but I don't think it applies in real life the way you try to use it. 'They' are 'us, with the same motivations and foibles. The way you try to portray military personel is that they're part of some cult, with some bizarre agenda. Again, there simply is no motivation for 'them' to act in the way you portray. You're basically claiming there is a sizeable 'secret society' in our midst. Your theory also requires this to be an international conspiracy, with the world's militaries acting in concert to maintain the veil of secrecy.
As we've seen time and time again, reality is far more mundane than this.

 

[Randall]

I'd be careful with the 'us' and 'they' idioms. I realize it's the norm in conspiracy theories to use this divergence, but I don't think it applies in real life the way you try to use it. 'They' are 'us, with the same motivations and foibles. The way you try to portray military personel is that they're part of some cult, with some bizarre agenda. Again, there simply is no motivation for 'them' to act in the way you portray. You're basically claiming there is a sizeable 'secret society' in our midst. Your theory also requires this to be an international conspiracy, with the world's militaries acting in concert to maintain the veil of secrecy.
As we've seen time and time again, reality is far more mundane than this.

softbeard:

Fair comment. It's easy to lose the context in these forums if you don't keep it clear each time. I in no way mean to convey an "us vs them" attitude with respect to the issue. I have great respect for the courage and accomplishments of our people in the forces. I simply state it as a logical consequence of the way that the military operates. Space Command has the tools and civilians don't. I also don't imply a "conspiracy" but do state that the military has information that we are not privy to. This much has been proven by the huge number of blacked out pages provided under the FOIA and the documents that have been exempted from disclosure.

With regard to secret channels within the military across NATO. There has to be such channels. They are essential for operations. It would also be perfectly normal for UFO related information to flow through such channels ... in fact, it would be expected and has been proven. Consider the SR-71 files that have been released that indicate that they were responsible for some UFO reports from radar bases. Civilians had no access to such information. But obviously some people knew it was the SR-71. The SR-71 also did plenty of foreign runs, so foreign bases must have been notified by secret channels beforehand in the event of fly overs or landings. Alien UFO reports, if such exist, would naturally use the same channels, and possibly coded only for certain "eyes-only".

 

[softbeard]

With regard to secret channels within the military across NATO. There has to be such channels.

Yes, I agree there is classified, 'secret', information within the military. However, believe me, the 'secrets' are usually far more mundane than portrayed in the movies. True, there are exceptions. Usually this more spectacular stuff comes out ~20 years later and, as a rule, someone writes a book about it. Again, secrets are kept for a reason; usually operational. No politician in his right mind would keep real evidence of extraterrestials operating on earth, especially if they were deemed a threat, and especially while we're in relative peacetime (Iraq/Afghanistan don't count). Should something like that spill, people would hang the guy for not warning them.
As for military secret operational reports about UFO encounters with the military; I agree some probably do exist. But, first, to the military, UFO means just that. It does not necessarily mean extraterrestial. Second, there is no evidence they are any more (or less) interesting than UFO encounters in the rest of the world. Actually, we probably know about the more interesting ones already; the foo fighters, John Glenn, Rendlesham forrest, UFO's buzzing nuclear sites and temporarily disabling the missiles, the Nellis AFB UFO, Jacobs and the UFO that he saw 'zapping' a mock re-entry vehicle, many examples from the former U.S.S.R.,etc. All those are examples of military personel coming forward.
Isn't it reasonable to conclude that we already know of the more interesting/spectacular cases because military personel tend to voluntarily come forward and tell us about them, instead of assuming there exsist really juicy stuff that is being held under wraps?

 

[paulb2b2]

Winston Churchill said that he would cover-up the UFO Phenomenon if he found out that it was real.

 

[softbeard]

Winston Churchill said that he would cover-up the UFO Phenomenon if he found out that it was real.

I don't think that really counters anything I've said. First, this was over 60 years ago, during/just after a major war. Don't forget Churchill was voted out of office; people didn't see him as a good peace-time leader. Finally, his 'secret' about UFO's has indeed been revealed to the public so, if anything, it argues against the 'secret doctrine' being a reality.

 

[boomerang]

The dilemma is that we have good evidence that someone, probably plural, has received and sequestered evidence over the years. The problem is that pursuing this line of reasoning, in light of what we seem to know about how governments operate, points to a "breakaway civilization" scenario in which whoever is pulling the strings is culturally detached from 99.9 percent of humanity to an almost unbelievable degree. We also have well documented instances of people who we know for a fact were highly placed in government--Churchill, Goldwater, Lord Hill Norton--who seem as baffled and out of the loop as the rest of us.

It's a mystery within the larger mystery.

 

[Randall]

... Isn't it reasonable to conclude that we already know of the more interesting/spectacular cases because military personel tend to voluntarily come forward and tell us about them, instead of assuming there exsist really juicy stuff that is being held under wraps?

softbeard:

Given the level of resources available to the military on a global scale, I would say it is more reasonable to assume that they still have the best stuff, the stuff the skeptics couldn't deny. At the same time, I agree with the spirit of your post in that I think many civilians already know the truth from their evidence of their own senses. They don't need the government or the military to tell them what they already know. We have that on our side of the fence.

The real trick for us outside the vault is to convince those on the inside to share. They can get at what we have without any effort at all, but to get anything from them is another matter. Trying to drag it out of them via the FOIA isn't going to get us anyplace. It was a great effort, but now we know where that road leads.

So what is the answer? How do we convince them to let us in on some of the action? The only way I can think to do it is to get something they don't already have and offer up a trade. But how do we do that? My idea was to try to establish a worldwide network of civilians free of the issues that plagued other groups. So I started USI. I figured that with a combined effort we could probably come up with something. But the politics of ufology have not facilitated that effort. USI is still viable in spirit and we keep attracting new members, but the effort of the ufology community as a whole remains fragmented, each faction hoping for some unbelievable stroke of luck to give their group leverage.

So where does that leave us? Waiting for Godot ... or Everyman? Well I'm still doing my bit part, and there's my 2 cents worth for the day.

 

[bbridges]

That's some good stuff, softbeard.

 

[Sentry]

Has anyone read the paperback edition of the book? I came across comments by Jerry Clark that in it, Alexander comments on Jacobsen's Roswell-Stalin story, so I wonder if there is any other new material or revisions.
All I could find online was a brief mention:

With a brand new afterword, this edition of "UFOs" is at once a complete account of Alexander's findings, and a call to action.

 

[Trajanus]

We also have well documented instances of people who we know for a fact were highly placed in government--Churchill, Goldwater, Lord Hill Norton--who seem as baffled and out of the loop as the rest of us.

Churchill did keep secrets during WWII but he was outspoken and aging anyway, so maybe it didn't seem like a good idea. Goldwater was never that high, nor Hill. Even within the US military, high ranking officers like Shulgen were out of the loop.

 

[Trajanus]

I came across comments by Jerry Clark that in it, Alexander comments on Jacobsen's Roswell-Stalin story,

Why waste your breath refuting what is patently nonsense?

 

[Sentry]

The Jacobsen nonsense was covered by the mainstream media, so it was worth addressing for that reason. Sadly, the public has embraced her story, and her book was also a bestseller in its paperback release.

I'm much more interested in what other topics may have been covered in Alexander's book update.

 

[Randall]

i read and enjoyed Alexander's book. So imminently reasonable and reassuring. After all, if the 'insider's he spoke with had knowledge of any organized program, surely he would have been told. So that's the way it works...

I found it interesting that Alexander was probably part of the so-called Aviary. His book does come across as exactly the kind of disinformation we would expect from that group.