Why Cover Up Big Foot?

[bipedalist]

Yah I read that Steering Committee docket of approved suggestions and all that backwater has me itching to try out my new chestwaders, all kidding aside, there are a few enigmatic issues in the field.  I think Leigh Culver's experiences and breadth of knowledge let's you know how some of the diehards can be fairly lethal researchers and believe in psi and conspiracies too, lol. 

[Guest]

My guess is that if the Fed govt tomorrow called a news conference and announced that BF's exist, probably the majority of people would still not believe them.

 

Now that you mention it, I'm inclined to agree! My fantasy is that their existence will be proven with a crystal-clear video of a BF punching Rick Dyer in the face

 

The idea that it's easier to cover up these things than announce them simply based on what people will believe easiest is fascinating, and I almost wonder if that's even more compelling than the logging argument. I prefer my conspiracy theories to be simple, easy to digest!

[Cotter]

Perhaps it's not a cover-up, but an embargo?

[Guest]

Speculation, when and who? 

 

Now even early into the 20th century north American governments might not have had scruples about just "making a problem go away" treatment of native americans, even neo-genocidal and eugenic policies in that era and before prove that. I would think a well informed government may well have "heard" of them back then. But I don't think they were engaged at that time, or didn't know enough, they'd have just, burned/shelled/gassed them out. Cavalry with maxim guns could have been pretty effective.

 

So I'd tend to deprecate any active government cover up, up to the 1930s. In the '30s, we have a fragile situation, the depression. we also have expansion of the national parks system and we also have Roosevelt, who and whose family may have had personal experience/knowledge. Prohibition and rise of the gangster may have militated against giving the common citizen reason/desire to own a "tommy gun". But for all these reasons also, since it made the politics of the day inward facing, it could have been a time of obliviousness. 

 

Now we get to WWII and the expansion of pacific coast military facilities, which would seem likely to put military sentries and other personnel in places where they would have encounters. Now WWII in and of itself was the beginning of the secrecy culture, sensitive compartmented information, top secrets, manhattan project down. There is still WWII stuff that is highly classified. There's WWII stuff that only got declassified in latter decades. Like the cracking of Enigma, they were selling the machines to the south americans in 50s and 60s. It provided the foundation for most of the three letter agencies. Everything that might have caused the general populace unease in wartime was suppressed, like Japanese fire balloons, mostly ineffective, but for sake of preventing panic, top secret. Again, we have Roosevelt, "knower". So, "discovery" in that creatures were undeniably encountered, even shot by service personnel, would have been on the likely side, and for generic WWII reasons, could have been covered up then. It's possible too that Roosevelt had a "soft spot" for them and personally mandated secrecy for their protection at around about this time. He was a hunter, but also wildlife minded. This could have dovetailed with wartime contingency "keep it quiet" practices. Interestingly a lot of Roosevelt's papers disappeared, most notably, those involving the Quebec city conference which made it impossible to ratify nuclear co-operation with UK immediately following WWII. So this could lead to the ridiculous situation, of something initiated by Roosevelt as a wartime or temporary measure, just carrying on an on, it's secret because it's secret, because the reasons got lost in Roosevelt's paperwork! 

 

Also a venue for WWII discovery could have been the Aleutian islands, they had to completely clear those of Japanese, it's possible that a small population could have been harbored on one of the larger and more southerly ones, and bodies recovered. 

 

Now post WWII by the 50s, we do get some impression off national servicemen's reports of guard duty type encounters in this period, that while their immediate superiors may have not been aware of the boogers, that someone higher up knew something. So in the rank and file knowledge was only by direct experience, but the Brass had them on radar. This seems to suggest at time that it was secret by then. How much effort was put into this at this time is hard to tell, but it may be that reasons were "hardened" by now and with the advent of "American Yeti" interest, things began to take a more serious turn in terms of active suppression.

 

We have lots of suggestive things but can't call them facts. For instance, it's kind of suggestive that Tom Slick's plane "broke up in mid-air", with a 3/4 mile wreckage field, it sounds like a euphemism for "exploded". Did he get the goods in Canada? His plane "broke up in mid-air" soon after re-entering US airspace.

 

However, if it still wasn't active suppression by this point and just studied amount of deliberately ignoring it or "forgetting to mention" anything they knew, then as the mid 60s roll around we have "Rock Apes" killed/encountered in Vietnam, and the first generations of night vision equipment. So to the military at least, they should have become much more familiar. It's possible actually that Naval, stationary and large vehicle mounted passive IR systems had seen them from late WWII onwards, they may have had the sensitivity to pick up body heat from large bodies on cold nights. But they were not very mobile. I'm not sure the data presentation from the sensors was intuitive enough to conclude it wasn't a cow or moose. But you can bet your bippy that military were interested in telling a bunch of deer laying up for the night from a platoon of enemy troops, so such discrimination, either in visual displays or operator training and skill was being sought.

 

Now 50s and 60s are when the reasons for logging protection may have come into play, since the cold war was an idealogical war, capitalism against communism, which also made it an economic war, may the most productive country win. So in those times it wasn't about some pigopolist making a few more or less bucks it was national interest.

 

70s, if they really really didn't know until the 70s, then we can just blame it on somewhat believable incompetence higher up I guess. However what do we have now, energy crisis, and environmental movement pressures from the hippy sixties. Yup, oil and lumber, or as needs may be, firewood, and still a cold war, so probable reason again there to continue or begin suppression.

 

80s c'mon now, they must be seeing them from orbit by now.

 

And now what since then? Is it secret because it was secret because it was secret, the long habit of decades, the original reasons maybe unclear, or lost even, but many decades bringing a new "Maybe now's not a good time" problem just big enough to allow them to put off declassifying it, in absence of significant public pressure to do so. I mean UFO ppl have been on their arse for years, and managed to get a crumb or two, bigfooters, we're just maybe waking up to the possibility of this.

[Guest]

Flashman that is a well thought out statement.

In my opinion your last paragraph is accurate and critical to the whole game.

I think it is exactly demonstrative of the core of how government "thinks", and how we arrive at situations where the path of least resistance is found in perpetuation of the lie, because no matter how absurd it is it is much easier to create a support system for the lie, (or obfuscation) than it is to come forward with the truth.

To come forward with the truth means you not only have to deal with all the ramifications that the truth brings, but the way the group think in the .gov works they only fear one thing more than the exposure of the truth...they fear being caught in the whirlwind of anger that will build against all of the people and agencies who nurtured, perpetuated and gave support to the alternative universe that has been sold to the public.

In short, they fear for their own position, reputation, income, and arse.

Accountability.

In the real world when you have responsibility and authority for X, you are also held accountable if X doesn't/isn't what it is supposed to be.

In the .gov world, this isn't necessary so. We need only to look at the evening news to see this fact.

[Guest]

Oh btw, now I think about it, another suggestive thing... Remember google maps about 10 years back, when they got just about all imagery from government sources? Remember how the cities were reasonably detailed but anywhere in the woods/boonies was very poor resolution? Think they (.gov) really didn't have imagery in same resolution for rest of country? 

 

Best you got was barely being able to tell individual tree crowns in the amorphous mottled green of many woodlands. 

 

I seem to recall that back in the day, not sure whether it was mapquest or google, or there was another one whose name escapes me, one of them went and got Russian satellite pics because USG was so stingy with the good resolution stuff, and then about a year after that they began getting better from USG.

[Whistler]

I do believe it could very well be because of several of the theories already brought up by previous posters (people might be less likely to visit state & federal parks if the existence of bigfoot was scientifically proven, shows us the government is not in control & is vulnerable, etc..). Another one of the theories (as out there as it may seem) is that it would tell us more about our own human origins, and the possibility that we may be aliens to some degree ourselves. The link below is to a presentation (it's a little long, not the best quality, but well worth the watch- IMO) that Llyod Pie did several years ago, and several of the points he brings up are very interesting to say the least, and make you really rethink about what's really going on. 

 

http://youtu.be/pe6DN1OoxjE

 

Cheers! 

Edited February 25, 2015 by Whistler

[Cisco]

Even if the government was trying to cover up the existence of BF; how would they manage to do this in modern times?

 

If they are still actively covering it up and censoring any information from getting to the public, then we and every researcher is just wasting our time since the government will never allow the release of evidence.

 

We live in a time where infrared imaging, aerial surveillance and other technological advances are accessible to the public. Unless the government has captured and contained every BF in the country, then its bound to get out. Considering the world now operates on real time information, there's nothing the government could do to stop information from making it into the public domain.

 

While I don't believe the government has covered up the existence of BF, for any reason, I could accept there was a period of time when they may have tried or wanted to cover it up. However, I don't see any logical reason for it; considering there have been many other animals or circumstances that have had a very real impact on just about everything mentioned, so far, in this thread.

 

We've had owls stop the timber industry, we've had man eating bears, serial killers, fires and many other "scary" things in our public parks and forests yet they have not been enough to slow down visitors. In fact, if BF were proven to exist, I suspect there would be a huge increase in the amount of people that would visit public land, simply to get a glimpse of these enigmatic and majestic beings.

 

The only conspiracy regarding our government and Bigfoot is when people like Rick Dyer claim the government sequestered their evidence, as a reason to why they no longer have it.

 

I've never heard Meldrum claim the government has interfered with his research. It tends to be the "shadier" characters that use this as an excuse...

[SWWASAS]

If government researchers are out in the field researching BF,  they have to have been observed by big footers doing the same thing.    I came around a corner on a logging road the other day and some guy in suburban was sitting there in a suit.   Talk about looking out of place.   I wondered if he was lost or something.     I was suspicious one day when I found vehicle with government plates at a trailhead.   It was not the truck like forest service people normally drive but a passenger car.    I did find the guy and he was a USGS geologist.      I figured that out because of the rock hammer he had in his belt.     I said USGS?   He said yes, does it show?   I said the rock hammer is kind of a giveaway.    Anyway if BF  are being studied by the government we should see their researchers in the field unless they are only doing it on military reservations.    Anyone seen anything in the field that suggests government studies?    They would probably be equipped pretty much like most of us are in the field.    I am out enough that if they are in my research area I would notice them so I don't think they are doing anything in my area.    So others should be able to say the same thing about other areas. 

Edited February 26, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[ThePhaige]

This is an interesting read relating to the topic of cover ups and also crowd control ... if you will.

 

There are stories, then there are stories...

 

I was contacted by a person within the bigfoot community a few months back.  What they had to say piqued my interest. I give every story the benefit of the doubt because if I can't do that then how can I expect anyone to believe me?

Believing people is almost instinctual as this is what I've been trained to do. In crisis outreach everyone has a story and I have been trained to believe everyone's story... that is until through logic and sound reasoning prove to me that the story is a not exactly how it was told. People mistake my willingness to believe them as a form of gullibility. I'm trained to take mental note of what is said and believe me, I do go over what is said with a fine tooth comb. If the truth turns out to be a lie ...that is what breaks the chain of anonymity. All bets are off, especially if one is using anonymity and trust as a means to covertly hide a truth that needs to be revealed.

This post is NOT PERSONAL.

A CONFIDENCE IS DIFFERENT THAN A SECRET!
 

• Confidence relies on one's use of discretion. If something told in confidence is about an individual and does not involve hurting anyone else immediately, then yes, confidences should remain hidden.

• Secrecy relies on one's use of discretion, however a secret is designed to specifically elude someone from the truth, or knowledge about something they otherwise should know. A secret can involve one or more persons and details indiscretions that are harmful; either historical or present dangers.

In crisis outreach I am obligated to reveal things said in confidence IF they involve someone else that proves to be harmful. I am obligated to report abuse, physical and sexual of anyone including children. I am also obligated to notify authorities if by using my own discretion I believe someone is in serious danger of personal harm or injury. ( Suicide.)

As you can see, confidences can quickly turn to secretcy if I do not use personal discretion.

I've weighed very heavily about the story revealed to me, and I feel very strongly that with the secret details of what sasquatch is being hidden from the public already, by me keeping this confidence turned secret does not do us any benefit. It only serves to hide these creatures and those who are allegedly helping them.

The person that contacted me, who will remain anonymous, but many of you may know of them already. I do not know if this person goes by any other names in person or on the internet. I know very little about the person but from what I could gather on my own is that this person is very familiar with the timber or logging areas of sections of the United States.

I have no proof of what was said to me was a lie or truth, the only proof they could give me was name dropping of people they allegedly shared their story with. Not many but people I would know- by acquaintance at least. This isn't proof of anything I know, and I noted that mentally. 

This person contacted me via facebook and asked that I contact them on the phone. They told me that they had information that I might be interested in. After a few weeks of constant urging by this person, I called.

We talked for two hours... mostly they talked I listened, and that was okay. This person had A LOT of information to share. It was interesting and note worthy. 

I understand this person's right to privacy and anonymity and at the time, their credibility with me was high. I thought I was actually contacted by a whistle blower whose intent was to expose the underpinnings of a secret government faction that hires forestry workers on a contract basis to hunt and kill groups of bigfoot.

Was this phone call a teaser of what was yet to come? Was I going to be witness to evidence that would finally reveal to the public that these creatures truly existed? This person claimed to have multiple pictures and videos of  evisceration and dissection of these creatures. But for reasons understood they didn't feel comfortable enough using the internet or mail system to show me this evidence.

I was encouraged by this phone call and I had hopes that this phone call would be the first of many as this person suggested using my help to put a book together. Those calls and those talks never happened. Instead the focus of conversations shifted to a personal nature, to which I had no choice but to shut off all contact. Boundaries were not respected this is why some credibility was lost.

Don't make it personal people, it just makes this sick job that much sicker.

Some people are scared to share what they know even online as this is not the first person who has contacted me with a witness story to share. But out of fear of governmental reprisal these stories remain hidden. This is why I am sharing this story, not because it became personal but because these stories must be told in order that the TRUTH of WHO IS INVOLVED WITH BIGFOOT secrecy BE EXPOSED.  
 

• Are there governmental departments watching forums and trying to discredit authentic stories in attempts to keep bigfoot hidden? Yes, do we have proof? No.  Not in any form of documents. This is unfortunate. 

• Are there groups of bigfoot that the government knows about and actually hire people to cull these groups within the United States and Canada? Quite possibly. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the hunters from the United States who hunt in Canadian forests via permit and licenses are not hunting bear or deer so much as they are on the look out for bigfoot! 
  
  The area I live has a HISTORY of  bigfoot sightings that everyone seems to know about but is unwilling to talk. The sightings most often occur near or IN THE FORESTRY that is CROWN LAND. To which, people are allowed permission to HUNT in this specific area. While speculation on my part, I do not doubt that the DNR ( Department of natural resources) hunt on this land in hopes to find, what we say bag and tag... a b...i... g... f... bear.

Anyone who is ready to blow the whistle on the government's knowledge I encourage you to share what you know and share the evidence that you have. If you really are interested let's talk. 

Knowledge IS power!

 

Source: http://saskencounters.blogspot.com/2015/01/there-are-stories-then-there-are-stories.html#more

Edited February 26, 2015 by ThePhaige

[Guest sixxgunner]

I agree with Apehuman's post. great points. And good observations.

[Guest]

 shows us the government is not in control & is vulnerable, etc..

 

It is very easy to underestimate the amount of time, money and effort that (any) government will throw into the most seemingly trivial things in order to prove themselves, or portray themselves as infallible and never wrong.

[Guest]

I don’t have any theories but I have some ideas. I firmly believe Sasquatch/ Bigfoot have some curiosities of man but they also possess a natural distrust for them.  As our human population grows and associated development expands creating bigger demands on resources the chances of Bigfoot/ Sasquatch and Human interactions increases the potential for dangerous conflicts. It’s easier to manage or spin a few thousand sporadic encounters and sightings relatively speaking, but a lot harder dealing with millions of people dependent upon economy and resources as opposed to animals and their habitat. IMHO

 

Note: When I say it’s easier to manage or spin a few thousand sporadic encounters and sightings than millions, I say this comparatively speaking... comparing 10, 000 reports [my estimated guess and no basis or claim to know actual figures] out of 300 million people in the United States. Perhaps not in our lifetimes, as time progresses we reach a point where there will be half billion people in this country or a billion eyeballs fluttering around like shutters on a camera. There would be little to hide or conceal at point. It is what it is ...  Any thoughts?

Edited February 28, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Yuchi1]

IMO, there are two (2) versions of history:

 

What is publicly taught in the education system(s). et. al..

 

What actually happened.

 

In school, were you taught any degree of specifics about when/where the first/worst race riot occurred in the United States?

 

In school, were you taught any degree of specifics about a particular ethnic group being targeted via Congressional action?

 

In school, were you taught any degree of specifics about the removal(s) of indigenous people from their land(s)?

 

In school, were you taught any degree of specifics about the Treaty of Ft. Laramie and who actually violated it starting a 20+ year war culminating in Wounded Knee?

 

There are scores of such examples and as such, if the government does not "know" of the eixtence of UHS, then what else do they not "know" and that my friends, is the really scary thought.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Why cover up bigfoot.  Bigfoot is doing a pretty good job of covering itself up.