Speaking of death by UFO, another bit of cognitive dissonance I hope to see addressed in future interviews is the repeated statements that there was no "outward hostility" from the visitors, when so many negative experiences have been reported.
We know that many aspects of the disclosure process involve elements of BAASS and NIDS, and what we've heard about those groups' findings is not that "they" come in peace. These things come out of portals and shoot at people. They manipulate people's minds and cause what looks like poltergeist activity. They abduct cows and perform surgery with fatal consequences. They fly near populated areas and harm people in various ways, sometimes accidentally, but always knowingly. They're also happy to render our nuclear defenses inoperable. And yet, they refuse to communicate with us through language.
You know what we haven't heard? The story of the first "handshake" between a human and another intelligence. We see mysterious behavior, but never a "Hello. You're not alone. We're honored to be the first to tell you." The reason for that can't be good news, right?
The only positive UFO stories I know about are the ones where the UFO stayed far away. Close encounters are frightening, often harmful events. These visitors have clearly not been programmed to give a crap about our feelings. And why would they? We're dirty, untamed wild animals.
I keep hearing optimists say there's probably a "gardener species" out there that actually has our best interests in mind. They know our species can grow; their presence should be a hint that there's still hope for us in the long term. They could be a sort of guardian angel civilization that's acting as a basic immune system for the planet. And they're doing that for free. They want our planet's "vibrations" to rise to a new level.
Let's push that hippie crap aside for a second and think once again about the abductions, the mutilations, the physical and mental trauma, the secrecy...
Maybe our planet is actually being raped 24/7 by a slew of random space visitors that have no relationship to each other and no real interest in us as an intelligence.
Maybe we're being totally controlled by one intelligence. What if we we're not supposed to know about them? How would they react to humanity coming out of its ignorance?
Whatever the truth may be, the way it's being slow-dripped reminds me a lot of what happens in a work setting when you have to give someone a mix of positive and negative feedback. You make a little sandwich of good news, with the bad news in the middle, and a bit of optimism at the end.
What's the sandwich like in this story?
1. We're not alone!
2. They've been doing a lot of bad things to us. If they have bad intentions, the situation is almost hopeless.
3. Now that we're aware of this, we can at least try to do something about it.
Hopefully, compared to the ultra-violent apocalyptic "alien invader" sci-fi we consume as entertainment, reality will be relatively tame. But we've only taken one small bite out of the sandwich so far.
JASON COLAVITO EXPOSES NY TIMES REPORTER
RALPH BLUMENTHAL
AS PROPAGANDIST AND SHILL FOR TTSA
There’s never been any doubt about Leslie Kean’s advocacy, shilling and propagandizing for TTSA and UFO Disclosure. She is very upfront about it (as you can see in the interview she had 2 months ago with Alex Tsakiris which is linked below in Jason Colavito’s new blog post that I am introducing.
But what is quite new and newsworthy is that the venerable and retired “reporter emeritus” of The NY Times, Ralph Blumenthal, turns out to be just as much a partisan advocate, propagandist and shill for TTSA as Leslie is!
Wow! Can you say “conflict of interest?” But it’s worse than that. How much have we read about the ground-breaking NY Times article as the definitive major media news story of UFO disclosure? As if it were an objective news story that deserved its place on Page 1 of The NY Times? At best, it belonged on the OpEd page as did the opinion piece by TTSA Team member Christopher Mellon which appeared in the Washington Post in March 2018.
But actually, I think it belonged in the advertising section, perhaps as a colorful insert into The NY Times Magazine because it is an infomercial for TTSA in the guise of a news story.
Let me give you the link now and excerpt some quotes.
Tom Mellett
I Spoke with the New York Times Reporter Who Broke the Pentagon UFO Program Story. It Wasn't What I Expected.
Over the past two days, I have been in conversation with Ralph Blumenthal, who co-wrote the December 16, 2017 story revealing the existence of the Pentagon’s UFO program and the claim of Luis Elizondo, the program’s onetime head who joined Tom DeLonge’s To the Stars Academy of Arts and Science, that billionaire aerospace contractor and ufology buff Robert Bigelow was examining unknown metals, described as being metal recovered from the ships of space aliens.
... my conversation with Blumenthal was not off the record, and the public good seems to require that I share the fact that Blumenthal was unimpressed with the previously published scientific report that some of the supposed metamaterials are terrestrial in origin and likely industrial waste.
(He said he was already familiar with the material, which was surprising to me, given his published and broadcasted words; journalists are supposed to report opposing perspectives.)
He also declined to address the issue of unpublicized ties between To the Stars, the Pentagon program, and Robert Bigelow, or To the Stars and its financial dealings.
He said he was familiar with me and my work and suggested that my analysis was a “conspiracy” theory and that it was “potentially libelous.” There really is little more to say here, and you can draw your own conclusions. I will instead discuss the public record surrounding Blumenthal and his writing partner Leslie Kean’s Times report.
This is such a weird situation and it leaves me quite uncomfortable. I don’t generally like to be in the position of advocate, though here I am acting as an advocate for the truth, whatever that happens to be.
Alien metamaterials are certainly not my usual area of interest, and if it weren’t for ancient astronaut theorist Jacques Vallée’s involvement, I doubt I would have paid the subject any mind.
Nevertheless, I ended up arguing with an award-winning New York Times journalist about whether there is a need for verifiable evidence that space aliens’ jalopies dropped spare parts while joyriding before asserting that such parts exist. This is not anything I ever imagined happening, much less for me to be cast as a conspiracy theorist.
I’ll be honest: This breaks my heart. I went to journalism school, and I once dreamed of reporting for a major news organization like the New York Times. I could not conceive of reporting such a major assertion as the existence of material manufactured on another world without evidence, and yet here we are:
My uncompromising belief in the need for evidence has run headlong into a gray area of journalism.
Blumenthal technically only reported that Elizondo and the Bigelow people had said that Bigelow’s subcontracted group had examined these metals; on MSNBC he added that unnamed “scientists” didn’t know what to make of them. He stands by the accuracy of those statements, and legalistically, Blumenthal is correct. Elizondo said those things. But that’s a weaselly way around evidence, and I am concerned that Blumenthal and Kean are too close to the story. . . . .
That's such an unfair characterization. Colavito is not being remotely objective. When you read his perspective, you'd think Puthoff stated that the Art's Parts sample was from an authentic crashed UFO. He never said that. Puthoff clearly said the sample was used because it's analogous to still-classified materials. But in the same presentation, he also stated that the broken chain of custody makes the origin unverifiable and insisted that it could be a hoax. The perfectly reasonable explanation is that it was the best he could do without violating his security oath.
We can expect that the exact mechanism of action of the "real" metamaterials will be kept under wraps for a very long time. Even if civilians end up manufacturing aircraft out of these materials, it'll be critically important to protect the essential elements of the "invention" from foreign adversaries for as long as possible. We will see an operating flying saucer before the principles at work are fully explained.
!
