Government involvement

[norseman]

21 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

Your very common experience is more a reflection of bigfoot reports from the public than government suppression of sasquatch existence, isn't it?

 

The growing number of BS sasquatch YouTube storytellers is just the newest mass media flash in the pan, in my opinion. "Basecamp Chris" is telling tall tales, enjoying a beer while doing so, and making a few bucks on YouTube. After a few watches, I scroll the guy.

 

 

The answer might go back to your experience with liars. Government agents keeping secrets are akin to lying, isn't it? Or is it, as I've noted before, just keeping a secret? Isn't there a difference between withholding a truth and speaking an untruth? 

 

If a government employee reveals classified information, that's a crime. Little wonder that most such employees keep such secrets. Even revealing confidential information can bring trouble. Unless I'm told to keep a crime a secret, I'm going to remain quiet.

I would ask myself how would a whistleblower go about blowing the whistle? Sending your story to Chris could be an option.

 

I find it believable because of the Dennis Martin story and others…. 

[Huntster]

29 minutes ago, norseman said:

I would ask myself how would a whistleblower go about blowing the whistle? Sending your story to Chris could be an option.

 

I find it believable because of the Dennis Martin story and others…. 

 

Sending one's story to Base Camp Chris anonymously is scuttlebutt. Sending it to the Los Angeles Times, along with your name and willingness to swear under oath, makes you believable to those in power........if your story and evidence hold true. It also provides protection from retribution, although such an action will likely still be painful professionally, at least for a while. 

 

I didn't even listen to Chris' YouTube story. I watched several of them months ago and decided to stop wasting my time with him. 

[norseman]

7 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

Sending one's story to Base Camp Chris anonymously is scuttlebutt. Sending it to the Los Angeles Times, along with your name and willingness to swear under oath, makes you believable to those in power........if your story and evidence hold true. It also provides protection from retribution, although such an action will likely still be painful professionally, at least for a while. 

 

I didn't even listen to Chris' YouTube story. I watched several of them months ago and decided to stop wasting my time with him. 

The Los Angeles times IS NOT going to publish your Bigfoot story. 

[Huntster]

3 hours ago, norseman said:

The Los Angeles times IS NOT going to publish your Bigfoot story. 

Agreed. But whistleblowing little green men held captive? They’ll be all over it, even without evidence.

[norseman]

17 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Agreed. But whistleblowing little green men held captive? They’ll be all over it, even without evidence.

So what?

 

We are relegated to story tellers in this field. Not because we want to.

[Huntster]

6 minutes ago, norseman said:

So what?……..

That’s what they want to talk about. Why? I dunno. Seems rather ridiculous to me.

 

Quote

……..We are relegated to story tellers in this field. Not because we want to.

Yeah, but I really don’t care if Bob, the plumber in Pensacola, knows that sasquatches exist. 
 

Can you imagine if Lyle Laverty, now retired, wrote a book about his experiences and beliefs? Do you think that might shake something up?

[norseman]

17 minutes ago, Huntster said:

That’s what they want to talk about. Why? I dunno. Seems rather ridiculous to me.

 

Yeah, but I really don’t care if Bob, the plumber in Pensacola, knows that sasquatches exist. 
 

Can you imagine if Lyle Laverty, now retired, wrote a book about his experiences and beliefs? Do you think that might shake something up?

I dunno either.

 

But it wasn’t Bob the plumber. Supposedly they are Rangers who were silenced. Does that not dovetail in nicely with this topic?

 

It would be awesome!

[Huntster]

27 minutes ago, norseman said:

.......But it wasn’t Bob the plumber. Supposedly they are Rangers who were silenced. Does that not dovetail in nicely with this topic?.........

 

Yeah, it does. But if the supposed Rangers make their claims anonymously, it isn't a valid whistleblowing event. 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

Yeah, it does. But if the supposed Rangers make their claims anonymously, it isn't a valid whistleblowing event. 

Did you ever see the first Bob Lazar interview? Or any interview where the face and voice of the whistleblower has been altered?

 

Of course I think it would be great for whistleblowers to come forward. But in a lot of cases? They don’t. Not initially.

 

 

 

[Huntster]

45 minutes ago, norseman said:

Did you ever see the first Bob Lazar interview? Or any interview where the face and voice of the whistleblower has been altered?........

 

Yup. Those are almost universally "he said, she said" type accusations. Testimony with no proof. Cases where the whistleblower remains in jeopardy because the people he's blowing the whistle on won't be losing power.

 

I got accused of anonymously calling the Anchorage Daily News after a bad thing occurred. I know who did it, and I don't condemn their act......but they gave the News erroneous information. That mistake saved my bacon, because when accused, I pointed out that the bad deed was underestimated by 1000%, and had I called it in, the News would have gotten the correct information.

 

Another example would be Deep Throat. He wasn't really a whistleblower. He was an informant. A spy. And his identity remained secret until after he was suffering from dementia.

 

Whistleblowing tends to be an internal affair rather than publicized. Whistleblowing laws protect whistleblowers, but not informants or spies.

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

Yup. Those are almost universally "he said, she said" type accusations. Testimony with no proof. Cases where the whistleblower remains in jeopardy because the people he's blowing the whistle on won't be losing power.

 

I got accused of anonymously calling the Anchorage Daily News after a bad thing occurred. I know who did it, and I don't condemn their act......but they gave the News erroneous information. That mistake saved my bacon, because when accused, I pointed out that the bad deed was underestimated by 1000%, and had I called it in, the News would have gotten the correct information.

 

Another example would be Deep Throat. He wasn't really a whistleblower. He was an informant. A spy. And his identity remained secret until after he was suffering from dementia.

 

Whistleblowing tends to be an internal affair rather than publicized. Whistleblowing laws protect whistleblowers, but not informants or spies.

Well Lazar broke Area 51 in 1989. What he said became Congressional record this year. It takes time.

 

 

[Huntster]

35 minutes ago, norseman said:

Well Lazar broke Area 51 in 1989. What he said became Congressional record this year. It takes time.

 

AFAIC, it still isn't proven. And I heard of the aliens in military control back in 1975 while in the Army. A Lt. Col. told me that he'd been there. I just don't believe them.

[norseman]

Just now, Huntster said:

 

AFAIC, it still isn't proven. And I heard of the aliens in military control back in 1975 while in the Army. A Lt. Col. told me that he'd been there. I just don't believe them.

Well I don’t think they are going to wheel a dead alien into the Senate chambers. And there is a lot of push back. But the walls seem to be crumbling.

[Chim Chim]

I’d be surprised if any part of the govt had possession of anything alien related.  I’d expect it to be turned over to contractors to avoid any kind of oversight.

[Huntster]

16 minutes ago, Chim Chim said:

I’d be surprised if any part of the govt had possession of anything alien related.  I’d expect it to be turned over to contractors to avoid any kind of oversight.

 

I believe that the UFOs are defense industry contractors.