Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Saru

Col. Charles Halt claims US UFO coverup

199 posts in this topic

These mass hallucinations then should be worthy of investigation itself if that's the case.

And why are all these people hallucinating simular experiences?

Just a quick example to bare out your point about all halucinating the same thing...

When TWA 800 went down leaving New York City, over 1000 witnesses (as part of the TWA 800 Eyewitness Association) said they saw a missile hit the aircraft. The FBI said the were all dilusional and therefor would not let them testify at the publicly held meeting in Washington because of it.

In the case of American Airlines 587 that crashed - again, leaving New York City in 2011, 200 eyewitnesses told investigators from National Transportation Safety Board that they saw an explosion right behind the cockpit. The NTSB officials said "they saw no evidence of an explosion" and would not file a report on their testimony.

too bad the NTSB officials were saying that to witnesses while the aircraft was still very much in flames.

NOTE: not ONE of the TWA 800 witnesses said they saw an explosion behind the cockpit, and not ONE of the AA 587 eyewitnesses say they saw a missile rise up and hit the aircraft.

Amazing, huh??

people who habitully take the government's word on anything are total FOOLS

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Psssst, Psyche... Dr. Yigal Pat-El, the director of the Tel Aviv Observatory said he saw the object over the Israeli/Syria border. I posted that many times. that is a fact. And Dr. Pat-El is not the only Israeli that said it, too. and I posted the names. that is fact.

And if Yigal Pat-El changed his mind (he did about the objects height) I would not *at that point* believe him because his employer, the Israeli government, was clearly now telling him what to say due to covering it all up. And I said that too.

There were TWO sets of facts being posted,, things that the government supported immediately after the incident, and another set of "facts" that they implanted several days later when they decided what their course of action would be inre the coverup.

Do you believe *everything* the government tells you?

As I said all throughout that thread many times,,, they LIED through their back teeth, their front teeth, and out into the blackness of night and it is not hard to figure that out. not for me, anyway.

BTW, you I do not consider to be pompous at all. you were about the only one posting to me in ernest. And I mean that. We disagreed but you were not rude or lying at all.

I did not stop posting because I am a "sore loser". I was posting with FOUR people (you were not one) trying to tell me you can see "a fly in the sky from a hundred miles away" - and doing it with straight faces.

I then knew I was dealing with a pack of liars so I stopped posting. What's the sense

Alright, I owe you an apology, I thought I was on that pompous list and felt that was not necessary as we left it as each to their own I thought. I felt we had a decent repoire` and was surprised to think it might have been otherwise. I do not agree with your conclusion but I did appreciate that you showed why you came to that conclusion. I honestly did not think anyone was lying, I really thought they did their best to display how they also reached their conclusions. I think it is great when everyone lays everything out on the table. It's the only way to debate a subject sensibly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people who habitully take the government's word on anything are total FOOLS

I think it is not sensible to take any word on anything unless one checks out the facts and or supporting information. Context can be a tricky thing and completely reverse the meaning of a sentence. As does culture and slang. I think people who blanket any organisation are falling into a trap of paranoia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pope concluded by saying that the Ministry of Defense always had one thing on its mind about UFOs: "Whatever the nonsense you see about this subject sometimes in the field, we never lost sight of the fact that, in all of these hundreds of thousands of sightings, the believers only had to be right once, and everything changes."

------------------

I always liked Nick Pope.

And I have said in here many times... specifically about Big Foot but it surely applies to UFO's as well,

"If you have 1000 witnesses all saying they saw a huge 8-foot BigFoot, and only one was telling the truth,, guess what... it has been proven that Big Foot exists"

Life is wunnerful :--)

If one person is telling the truth, one person can prove what they say. One would be foolish to believe a tale of Bigfoot from an anonymous source, and most are, over the Government showing you extensive studies as to why Bigfoot does not exist. Anyone can double check a study.

You have far too much faith in the CT Government machine. I worked with the Government. They are not as clued up as the CTer's make out. Private Enterprise is in a far better position, and the Government would contract out for security and ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These mass hallucinations then should be worthy of investigation itself if that's the case.

And why are all these people hallucinating simular experiences?

Because they expect to see a certain thing. Is it a saucer a cigar or other? One person shouting out will make it so. Here is one of the most famous and most detailed events that I know of - Our Lady Fatima. Thousands saw Jesus and Mary. They expected to see religious figures, as predicted, and hey presto, they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they expect to see a certain thing. Is it a saucer a cigar or other? One person shouting out will make it so. Here is one of the most famous and most detailed events that I know of - Our Lady Fatima. Thousands saw Jesus and Mary. They expected to see religious figures, as predicted, and hey presto, they did.

If it is just mass hallucinations then it should be taken serious and investigated. What could be causing it?

Fumes from volcanic eruptions, radio or microwave signals passing through our bodies, the preservatives

in the foods we eat? Somethings going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is just mass hallucinations then it should be taken serious and investigated. What could be causing it?

Fumes from volcanic eruptions, radio or microwave signals passing through our bodies, the preservatives

in the foods we eat? Somethings going on.

I am pretty sure that Psychopathology is heavily involved in these studies. I would bet a quick search on Google Scholar might help a few articles surface. Not my field, but Psychopathology is primarily the field of mental illness, however, I believe the behaviours are the focus in this instance.

Something is going on I agree. The brain as a very complex place. I know there is some theory on the brain not being able to distinguish between self generated and external sources of information, TV is under scrutiny.

LINK - Reality Check.

How do you know what’s real? A new study suggests that people’s ability to distinguish between what really happened and what was imagined may be determined by the presence of a fold at the front of the brain that develops late in pregnancy, and is missing entirely in 27% of people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UFOs were always making incursions at nuclear facilities going back to World War II, and they 'invaded' missile bases and weapons storage areas a number of times, as well as Oak Ridge, Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs. There are all kinds of investigations and documents to prove this, and indeed it's one of the easiest things we can prove about UFOs. It's all in the record.

They interfered with missiles a number of times in the 1960s and 1970s, and I was even shown a case where they shot one down over the Pacific. They followed around our nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, too, so regardless of what anyone might say on here, they have been a major national security concern going back to the 1940s. Anyone who says otherwise has simply never looked at the record or just wants to pretend that it doesn't exist.

I know the government wants us to pretend the threat does not exist, that's for sure

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have posted it before, and it was not a regulation but a law passed by Congress in 1969, which could be interpreted very broadly. It's a law that gives NASA the power to quarantine those who had ET contacts, and it concluded:

"Whoever willfully violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to violate any provision of this part or any regulation or order issued under this part or who enters or departs from the limits of a quarantine station in disregard of the quarantine rules or regulations or without permission of the NASA quarantine officer shall be fined not more that $5,000 or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both."

http://www.google.co...EBQ1c4VHOegltaw

MacGuffin, if that is the case, then just *what* can be made out of the several testimonies by former astronauts recently speaking about their close encounters? I mean, all in a small time frame. weird.

does that not make them in violation of some law - if not the one you outline?

I have said in here before, I am very suspicious of those testimonies all coming out now, and others like the woman who worked at Roswell and now says she did see tiny bodies. She says she did sign a non-disclosure form but at her age, "what are they going to do to me, throw me in jail?"

actualy, it would be prison, but who's counting :--)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MacGuffin, if that is the case, then just *what* can be made out of the several testimonies by former astronauts recently speaking about their close encounters? I mean, all in a small time frame. weird.

does that not make them in violation of some law - if not the one you outline?

I have said in here before, I am very suspicious of those testimonies all coming out now, and others like the woman who worked at Roswell and now says she did see tiny bodies. She says she did sign a non-disclosure form but at her age, "what are they going to do to me, throw me in jail?"

actualy, it would be prison, but who's counting :--)

That's a good question, although NASA has never acknowledged that ETs really existed or that any of the UFOs were ET. In fact, the official policy of the US government is NOT to acknowledge this to the public.

We even have that in writing, so therefor the official story will always be that there are no aliens and that all UFOs are swamp gas or whatever. Those are exactly the same things that all "skeptics" say on here 100% of the time. You can set your watch by that.

So that means the astronauts always saw nothing but swamp gas, at least for public purposes.

As for people working on the REAL investigation--the classified one--the truth obviously can't be so easily denied and dismissed there so other policies must be in effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I owe you an apology, I thought I was on that pompous list and felt that was not necessary as we left it as each to their own I thought. I felt we had a decent repoire` and was surprised to think it might have been otherwise. I do not agree with your conclusion but I did appreciate that you showed why you came to that conclusion. I honestly did not think anyone was lying, I really thought they did their best to display how they also reached their conclusions. I think it is great when everyone lays everything out on the table. It's the only way to debate a subject sensibly.

you're right,, we did/do have a good rapore.

It is great to lay everything out on the table, but i am not fond of being screwed with. and that is what they did - as a GANG.

I was trying to make one simple point about "vanishing point". Since everyone was Soooooo negative to me on my every post, I had to at least get some common ground with them. Something to work with. an inch, that's all, an inch

So I started: "Can you see a fly in the sky from 100 miles?"

First came BoonY - his repsonse was "That question is retarded"

He absolutely refused to give me one inch of ground to stand on, not ONE. Instead of agreeing with me that you canot see a fly in the sky from 100 miles, he simply refused to answer and called the question "retarded"..

Next came BoonY's idol, Big Jim-whatever-it-is. He pontificated for 5 thousand words about how,,, YES! you can see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away.

Back came BoonY who basically implied "you could not see it" with his refusal to give a direct answer, and now he is spieling a 10 thousand word oration as to how you CAN see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away, agreeing with JIm

Two more posters in that thread chimed in with the same opinion. You can see the fly.

And you an't see any lying there??

Amazing, Psyche!

they have the intellectual integrity of an adder in the low weeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, if you ask why it's a big secret, I can only wonder if that story that Dotothy Kilgallen and others heard was true, that some of these ETs are very nasty pieces of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you're right,, we did/do have a good rapore.

It is great to lay everything out on the table, but i am not fond of being screwed with. and that is what they did - as a GANG.

I was trying to make one simple point about "vanishing point". Since everyone was Soooooo negative to me on my every post, I had to at least get some common ground with them. Something to work with. an inch, that's all, an inch

So I started: "Can you see a fly in the sky from 100 miles?"

First came BoonY - his repsonse was "That question is retarded"

He absolutely refused to give me one inch of ground to stand on, not ONE. Instead of agreeing with me that you canot see a fly in the sky from 100 miles, he simply refused to answer and called the question "retarded"..

Next came BoonY's idol, Big Jim-whatever-it-is. He pontificated for 5 thousand words about how,,, YES! you can see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away.

Back came BoonY who basically implied "you could not see it" with his refusal to give a direct answer, and now he is spieling a 10 thousand word oration as to how you CAN see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away, agreeing with JIm

Two more posters in that thread chimed in with the same opinion. You can see the fly.

And you an't see any lying there??

Amazing, Psyche!

they have the intellectual integrity of an adder in the low weeds.

What a complete mis-characterization of the events that took place. If you want to revisit that discussion, by all means bring it up again in the original thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the government wants us to pretend the threat does not exist, that's for sure

But how is that even possible in a global situation?

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you're right,, we did/do have a good rapore.

I hope we still do. I do not know too many believer/skeptic debates that are resolved with an apology after one line of explanation. I find that positive. But it is not the first time my post has been where grievances toward others is aired. That is the cause of the confusion. I assume that if my post is answered, that comments are directed at me personally.

It is great to lay everything out on the table, but i am not fond of being screwed with. and that is what they did - as a GANG.

I was trying to make one simple point about "vanishing point". Since everyone was Soooooo negative to me on my every post, I had to at least get some common ground with them. Something to work with. an inch, that's all, an inch

So I started: "Can you see a fly in the sky from 100 miles?"

First came BoonY - his repsonse was "That question is retarded"

He absolutely refused to give me one inch of ground to stand on, not ONE. Instead of agreeing with me that you canot see a fly in the sky from 100 miles, he simply refused to answer and called the question "retarded"..

Next came BoonY's idol, Big Jim-whatever-it-is. He pontificated for 5 thousand words about how,,, YES! you can see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away.

Back came BoonY who basically implied "you could not see it" with his refusal to give a direct answer, and now he is spieling a 10 thousand word oration as to how you CAN see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away, agreeing with JIm

Two more posters in that thread chimed in with the same opinion. You can see the fly.

And you an't see any lying there??

Amazing, Psyche!

they have the intellectual integrity of an adder in the low weeds.

It seems Boon would disagree with your assessment. I find Boon a really great guy, I have little doubt that you can resolve any issues there the same way we have.

Surely nobody said you could see a fly unaided? Even aided I would think it to be quite a magnificent feat.

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found a video clip where Peter Hill-Norton , Admiral of the Fleet, http://en.wikipedia....ron_Hill-Norton during the Rendlesham Forest incident comments that whether the events took place as witnesses claim, or they were hallucinating, both explanations are of extreme defence interest.

[media=]

[/media] Edited by synchronomy
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a link about a UFO sighting over my home state of Illinois, USA in 2000 by several

police officers from different towns. It was on the Discovery Channel.

http://youtu.be/618Uqte_g1I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems Boon would disagree with your assessment. I find Boon a really great guy, I have little doubt that you can resolve any issues there the same way we have.

Surely nobody said you could see a fly unaided? Even aided I would think it to be quite a magnificent feat.

Thank you for that psyche, and yes I would Indeed disagree. He's referring to this, which took place quite deep into the discussion. I'm confident that almost anyone who takes the time to go through the entire thread will see how untenable Earl's position is.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating lecture it seems. This is the kind of publicity the UFO community needs, people with some gravity on the subject. Seems to me that there are far too many amateurs who seem to hold the spotlight nowadays, and they offer very little credibility most of the time too.

May there be many more serious debates like this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not the only military service member to claim a US UFO coverup...and will probably end up getting discharged (or possible killed in a "accident") like the ones before him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not the only military service member to claim a US UFO coverup...and will probably end up getting discharged (or possible killed in a "accident") like the ones before him.

Absolute codswallop.

He is out there telling his story right now. What, the Government is going to kill him after releasing this "vital information" ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute codswallop.

He is out there telling his story right now. What, the Government is going to kill him after releasing this "vital information" ???

Halt gets smeared a lot by the cover-up crowd, but that's true of every single military UFO witness, from Jesse Marcel to Bob Jacobs to Bob Salas.

That's what they'd do to me too if I ever came forward and used my real name, telling everything I knew. That's never going to happen, though, but I will continued supplying my helpful hints to anyone who is interested. I've been doing that for years, free of charge, and care nothing about money or my 15 minutes of fame.

Halt is telling the truth, but it's his superior who KNOW all this is true--and much more--who have never backed up up. They are the ones who are continuing the cover up, not Halt. He knew this case never did his career any good, but he went public anyway. It was a very courageous thing to do, a million times more courageous than all these hacks who spend their time hacking on him.

They have nothing to lose by doing that, and any idiot can do it, but witnesses like Halt who go on record always take all the heat. No, the people who smear him don't have one-tenth the guts he does.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, they cover up boys will probably not try to kill anyone physically, but they sure try to kill their credibility and reputations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He`s most likely in a good place now ! So He`s in a really good state of mind,So ? LMAO. will get it done !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.