Interview of Supposed DULCE security guard

Here we go folks, I just found this on the MUFON webpage of a "supposed" interview of a security guard from the DULCE base. Some of it seems really interesting. In all honest opinion I am not sure if this is real or fake. I will leave this up to you the individual readers to decide if this real or not real.www.mufoncms.com...

Remember deny ignorance and lets be civil and please read it all before giving your opinion.

This is old news man. It's a great interview, but this has been posted here many times.

My bad I should of done my homework better then. Sorry too some of you who have seen it before. To those who have not then happy reading!

Hey, mcgilligan02, Thomas Castello disappeared just after the interview.. For one, I believe his admission and I also believe as a result of the interview it may have been responsible in getting some of his family killed too.

Suggest you not at all be concerned -- bringing up the event again as, there are new people here that might consider taking a read on TC's event.

Dallas

Pfft...I doubt it. There's no sign of tunnels or heavy roads anywhere near Dulce. Of course, the standard answer is "they use tunnel networks and access from other bases!" But where is the proof of these massive tunnel networks?

Originally posted by uberarcanist
But where is the proof of these massive tunnel networks?

Uhh a mile underground!

Interesing read this was. Further proves whats really going on, and that Phil Schneider wasnt really crazy

reply to post by jarheadjock


But that's just the point! Digging these tunnels IS NOT easy, even digging a ~50 mi tunnel thru chalk (the Chunnel) was a major ordeal. Surely the workers would have witnessed something, surely someone would have noticed heavy equipment. But no! All we have is crazy hearsay reports short on details.

Interesting read, no doubt. But it's something anyone could have written with a large imagination and a couple hours to kill.

reply to post by ModernDystopia


Indeed, I'm surprised by the lack of details. Good story, but I'm afraid that's all it is.

The only thing that I do not understand, is that if we have control of all of these amazingly advanced spacecraft, etc, why use regular space shuttles? They were obsolete as soon as they came off the drawing board, and there's a risk in sending people up in them. I understand that we needed something for public consumption, but you'd think it would be just a bit better than a spacecraft that has tiles that fly off of them, blow up on re-entry, etc..

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Pfft...I doubt it. There's no sign of tunnels or heavy roads anywhere near Dulce. Of course, the standard answer is "they use tunnel networks and access from other bases!" But where is the proof of these massive tunnel networks?

Miles underground. If you had read the interview, he stated himself that Dulce is a SECRET facility, and they work hard to make sure no one finds out where it is. You're not gonna find a cave with a sign that says "Secret Facility here!". If we are working with ET's, I'm sure they have technology that can place a hologram on an entrance, so it looks like there's nothing there. Mr. X was one of those people who received the box with evidence including photos, videos, documents, etc. You can ask John Lear, who's a friend of Mr. X.

reply to post by GeeGee


Urg. Don't get me started on Lear, if you're believing this guy, I suggest you read the John Lear...disinfo agent? thread.

Originally posted by metallion
The only thing that I do not understand, is that if we have control of all of these amazingly advanced spacecraft, etc, why use regular space shuttles? They were obsolete as soon as they came off the drawing board, and there's a risk in sending people up in them. I understand that we needed something for public consumption, but you'd think it would be just a bit better than a spacecraft that has tiles that fly off of them, blow up on re-entry, etc..

The reson why we still use the space shuttles that we do is because they have to keep up an image for the public. If they stoped sending people to space the old fashioned way then people might just start asking where all their taxes are going. They even may not be sending people up through the shuttles, or the shuttles that we see are engineered with this advanced tech and they just need to fake a few mistakes to make it a little more believable.

-fm

'Urg', don't get ME started on disinfo people, uberarcanist, I'm not in that group. John Lear has done a bunch, up to and including this Century, to suggest things are going on. Perhap's of an extraterrestrial nature.

I cannot include myself in close to that Man's experience(s), except to read & learn his reports on it.

Dallas

reply to post by Dallas


That's all well and good, Dallas. How can you prove he is right about what he says about Venus, for example? What he did in the past is great, but what he's doing in the present-spreading bad information on this forum-is deplorable.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Urg. Don't get me started on Lear, if you're believing this guy, I suggest you read the John Lear...disinfo agent? thread.

I don't agree with all his ideas, but that doesn't take anything away from his contact with Mr. X. I read that thread, and it's always the same people who say nasty stuff about him. John Lear is not a disinfo agent, that's absolutely ridiculous. If he was a disinfo agent, don't you think he'd be spouting off believable information? Who the heck is gonna believe that all the planets in our solar system are inhabited? But hey, if you wanna believe a few people who seem to have a personal vendetta against him, go right ahead.

[edit on 14-10-2007 by GeeGee]

[edit on 14-10-2007 by GeeGee]

[edit on 14-10-2007 by GeeGee]

reply to post by GeeGee


Anyone can claim a relationship with an unnamed, shadowy individual, this does nothing to bolster their credibility. Furthermore, I'm not sure you understand how disinfo works. Its primary purpose is not to attract belief, instead, disinfo is the most successful when it contaminates legitimate research to the point to where people stop taking the legitimate research seriously. I believe Lear is trying to turn ATS into a laughingstock, because perhaps we have gotten a little *too* close to the truth.

reply to post by uberarcanist


There you go again, uberarcanist. Your words are beginning to smell like disinfo. Seems to me get the label around here of Disinfo-agent -- days become numbered. Hopefully, you can add some meat to the reverse speculative stuff -- Sir?

Dallas

edit: Frankly I don't feel you can.

[edit on 14-10-2007 by Dallas]

reply to post by Dallas


Ahoho! The Lear Gang is throwing its weight around! Too bad they can't throw any hard facts around, but no worries, there's always gullible sheeple to lap up whatever baseless drivel Lear is serving up this week.

Back on topic: Dulce, is it real? I dunno, but I'm going to say no until I see actual hard facts. There's plenty of images and eyewitness accounts of the surrounding area, so far nothing to suggest anything remotely like what those who claim to have "been below" would suggest.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Anyone can claim a relationship with an unnamed, shadowy individual, this does nothing to bolster their credibility. Furthermore, I'm not sure you understand how disinfo works. Its primary purpose is not to attract belief, instead, disinfo is the most successful when it contaminates legitimate research to the point to where people stop taking the legitimate research seriously. I believe Lear is trying to turn ATS into a laughingstock, because perhaps we have gotten a little *too* close to the truth.

Close to the truth? Yes, we've gotten so close to the truth by watching videos of lights in the sky. They'll have to admit their cover up now!

Look, that's fine if you don't believe what John says. Einstein said it himself: "If at first an idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it." And I'll say, John's ideas sure are absurd, but so were many things that we know today.

I don't even know how you can make an assumption like that without meeting or talking to him in person.