What Was Donald Rumsfeld Doing At A UFO Symposium?

Perhaps 'ol Rummy has also been sighted at ComiCon and other fanboy conventions also!

Seriously, if this can be verified it would speak volumes. Or, it could be that UFOs are his 'hobby' just like any one else who enjoys learning about the possible truth behind this phenomena. Many have assumed for such a long time that PTB types such as Rummy are in the know. When in truth, many of them may be groping in the dark just like everyone else. Who knows? I'd rather be wrong about that. But, I just can't see how such a huge secret like this could stay hidden for so long without absolute/undeniable proof leaking out given the bumbling nature and history of secret keeping (or lack thereof) by the U.S. government.

reply to post by muzzleflash


to answer your question...he exploited poeple who trusted him implicitly. How do you know he's not giving you the same treatment? As a skeptik I would definitely say that this revelation renders his claims to be unreliable. I would not put much stock in the proclamations of such a person.

Originally posted by synchro
Perhaps 'ol Rummy has also been sighted at ComiCon and other fanboy conventions also!

Seriously, if this can be verified it would speak volumes. Or, it could be that UFOs are his 'hobby' just like any one else who enjoys learning about the possible truth behind this phenomena. Many have assumed for such a long time that PTB types such as Rummy are in the know. When in truth, many of them may be groping in the dark just like everyone else. Who knows? I'd rather be wrong about that. But, I just can't see how such a huge secret like this could stay hidden for so long without absolute/undeniable proof leaking out given the bumbling nature and history of secret keeping (or lack thereof) by the U.S. government.

This line of thought always amuses me. The government just can't keep a secret. How the hell do you know? There are probably hundreds of thousands of secrets that this government has kept from the general public. If they are successful at keeping something a secret then you would never know, would you? It seems to me that this notion that the government can't keep a secret is entirely and completely false. Most folks will just do as they're told. The honest whistle-blowers are far and few between. To honestly be a whistle-blower requires a level of courage and integrity that few people possess in our modern nation. Recent legislation goes far to punish whistle-blowers, even tho they are providing an invaluable service to their country. Sorry to burst your bubble but state secrets are alive and well and our government is very very capable of keeping the truth from a low-level service drone like you and me.

Flagged & tagged!

Mike Singh absolutely never ceases to amaze me with the data that he somehow manages to dredge up from seemingly obscure locations.

Brilliant work!

Great, Great post! You are the best! I think Rummy does know all about whatever is going on with UFO's, myself. I also think he is a little "touched" in the head! I have a question that I have been pondering...where is he now? Gone to work for ET?

Hey, I have a great idea for a new thread....where is Rummy! Any takers? I will start one now.

reply to post by godless


Apparently, that whistle is getting plenty of use these days despite your faith in the government's abilities to keep a lid on things.

It's one thing to keep secrets regarding troop locations, weapons development or even aviation technology that would appear to defy modern physics. It's quite another to keep hidden (if true) visitation by non-terrestrial craft and/or beings. I do concede that many have claimed to 'blow the whistle' on UFOs and aliens yet none have provided overwhelming proof.

Getting back to the topic of Rummey; It's not what he may have said that gave it away, it's what he may have done in this case by attending a UFO conference that could be very revealing. Whether or not he truly is 'in the know' is anyone's guess at this point.

Here's a list of nearly 60 significant whistleblower cases in recent history with links to plenty more.

Wikepedia List Of Whistleblowers:
en.wikipedia.org...

1.2 Million Documents And Counting At WikiLeaks.org
http://__._/wiki/Wikileaks:About

Hundreds of thousands of secrets you say? Well, it's a start...

This line of thought always amuses me. The government just can't keep a secret. How the hell do you know? There are probably hundreds of thousands of secrets that this government has kept from the general public. If they are successful at keeping something a secret then you would never know, would you? It seems to me that this notion that the government can't keep a secret is entirely and completely false. Most folks will just do as they're told. The honest whistle-blowers are far and few between. To honestly be a whistle-blower requires a level of courage and integrity that few people possess in our modern nation. Recent legislation goes far to punish whistle-blowers, even tho they are providing an invaluable service to their country. Sorry to burst your bubble but state secrets are alive and well and our government is very very capable of keeping the truth from a low-level service drone like you and me.

Originally posted by calcoastseeker
I find it strange that when Richard Boylan is quoted, people attack him for his character. Maybe one should read what he says with an open mind and not attack his personal life.

People believe Bill Clinton was the greatest President we have ever had,but it is rarely brought up now that he was and is a sexual predator.

Also, DR.Boylan has a Phd. which is a ACADEMIC degree. He does not need a license to use the title. Neither does DR.Condoleeza Rice.

Good point! I think we should leave personal lives out of this. If Boylan was screwing around, so was ex president Clinton! Has the latter's credibility taken a beating? No! Ditto where Dr Boylan is concerned. So let's get over with the personal sex life of people and move on, as it does not reflect on professional competence per se!



[edit on 10-1-2009 by OrionHunterX]

Originally posted by OrionHunterX


Good point! I think we should leave personal lives out of this. If Boylan was screwing around, so was ex president Clinton! Has the latter's credibility taken a beating? No! Ditto where Dr Boylan is concerned. So let's get over with the personal sex life of people and move on, as it does not reflect on professional competence per se!

Cheers!

It reflected enough to cause his professional license to be revoked. He wasn't "screwing around". It wasn't his "personal life". His actions were abusive and it wasn't only the sexual abuse charges which led to the revocation. There were charges of professional negligence.

The claims of abuse by Clinton were never substantiated (though I don't doubt they occurred). Or, was the bit with Monica considered abuse? In any case, I don't trust Clinton either.

[edit on 1/10/2009 by Phage]

I used to live near Fort Meade, and that's where I saw at least 2 UFOs, once by myself and one time with a few friends. Each occurrence was at night. As far as the Article, there wasn't really enough information there to really be able to tell which direction they were headed in, and what message they wanted to convey, other than severe ass kissing to the AIR FORCE (which strikes me as odd)

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Good point! I think we should leave personal lives out of this. Ditto where Dr Boylan is concerned. So let's get over with the personal sex life of people and move on, as it does not reflect on professional competence per se!

It was not his personal life; he committed these acts in the course of his professional life. Not only that, but he used both his professional status as a therapist, along with the trust his patients had in him to manipulate them. And he used the UFO phenomenon to do so; the patients were supposed abductees.

So let me ask again: Considering he has used the UFO phenomenon to manipulate people in the past, how can you be certain he is not doing the same now? If he is going to violate the trust of people under his care, how do you think he will behave towards people he has no responsibility to? Are we to forget that he was manipulated and lied, used the UFO phenomenon in unethical ways, just because he may be say what we want to hear?

there are no ufos you #s get over it eat # and then get laid

reply to post by SaviorComplex

Ok! I think the only way is to try and get some corroboration on what he contends is the outline organization of the secret shadow government, especially the Intelligence Dept. But that's easier said that done in spite of the locations of various organizations he has categorically mentioned.

Like Hangar 18 at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base which allegedly houses evidence from the Roswell UFO incident. But this is difficult to verify though 'insiders' have supposedly seen crashed UFOs inside.

In other words corroboration is almost impossible, seeing the very high secrecy and water tight security arrangements around such areas. And therefore one can rely only on speculation at this juncture.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
There were also skeptics at the hearing; notice Dr. Sagan was also a speaker.

Dr Carl Sagan wasn't a skeptic by any stretch of imagination. He had an open mind. Have a look at what he said at that conference:

Finally, let me say something about the question of priorities, which
Congressman Rumsfeld asked us for, and the question of significance.
Now, the possibility of discovering something about extraterrestrial
life, life originated on some other planet, is of the very highest
interest for biology and in fact for all science. A bona fide example
of extraterrestrial life even in a very simple form, would
revolutionize biology. It would have both practical and fundamental
scientific benefits, which are very hard to assess, it would truly be
immense.


Now, if the answer to this sort of profound scientific question lies
right at hand, it would be folly to ignore it. If we are being
visited by representatives of extraterrestrial life, just stick our
heads in the sand, would be a very bad policy, I think.

Cheers!

www.book-of-thoth.com...

No I think that Clinton is another subject entirely.. Not saying that I unconditionally trust him either but his infidelity hardly compares to the case of Boylan.

Again, Boylan used his profession as a means of sexual manipulation. I honestly believe that Clinton was the one who was sexually manipulated in his case with Lewinski

Originally posted by mikesingh
Dr Carl Sagan wasn't a skeptic by any stretch of imagination. He had an open mind. Have a look at what he said at that conference:

Being a skeptic and having an open-mind are not two mutually-exclusive concepts, Mike. You are also confusing an interest with a belief. Yes, Dr. Sagan was a skeptic, but he did have some interest in the phenomenon and did believe it worth of study.

Sagan "wrote frequently on what he perceived as the logical and empirical fallacies regarding UFOs and the abduction experience. Sagan rejected an extraterrestrial explanation for the phenomenon but felt there were both empirical and pedagogical benefits for examining UFO reports and that the subject was, therefore, a legitimate topic of study."

Westrum writes that "Sagan spent very little time researching UFOs ... he thought that little evidence existed to show that the UFO phenomenon represented alien spacecraft and that the motivation for interpreting UFO observations as spacecraft was emotional".

Jerome Clark writes that Sagan's perspective on UFOs irked Condon: "... though a skeptic, [Sagan] was too soft on UFOs for Condon's taste. In 1971, [Condon] considered blackballing Sagan from the prestigious Cosmos Club".

In one of his last written works, Sagan argued that the chances of extraterrestrial spacecraft visiting Earth are vanishingly small. However, Sagan did think it plausible that Cold War concerns contributed to governments misleading their citizens about UFOs...

SOURCE

Last I seen't of Rummy, his mug was apparitional, like I've been so often exposed to from supposed agents/detainees of area 51, where their identity is concealed.

He inappropriately made some comments of ET's and the genetic scoping. That was the keyword, scoping, and he fell out of favor. Of course, the mishandling of the Iraqi Conflict was cited as the main issue for his removal. But, it was this bragging of controlling the incapacitated state of the effort. that popped him out of the circle.

This was during the phase were many had the Pres. enacted as Reptilian, among those of delusional grandeur of "keen" observation. But, on the down-low, he was extricated due to trying to shift monies to a small group of friends and comrades to handle the repercussions of prior actions. Whereas, his blunders were no longer acceptable. With the hacking of instillations, total loss of secrecy, and inept lies to cover these things.

Originally posted by Majorion
I honestly believe that Clinton was the one who was sexually manipulated in his case with Lewinski

Wow! Can someone actually sexually manipulate the President of the U.S of A?? Is that possible? I mean, that amounts to the possibility of taking the president of the most powerful nation in the world for a jolly good ride, what? Talk of woman power!!! Lol!

Jeez! Another conspiracy in the making!

Cheers!

reply to post by mikesingh

There is a relationship between sex and power. Powerful men, world leaders and important politicians, are prone to exercise their power in other arenas– such as in their sexual relationships. Furthermore, many politicians have a pathological need for constant ego gratification and to “press the flesh”. Thus, it should not be surprising that some American Presidents have had affairs. Which of these alleged mistresses (or “mister”) would you be or be intimate with? We have selected a number well-documented Presidential sexual liaisons.

www.selectsmart.com...

Visit this page to take the test and see which US President you would have been best suited to become their mistress, sorry guys Sarah Palin is not on the list yet.

My most likely would be JFK and Angie Dickinson, next marilyn least William Rufus Devane King and James Buchannon... who?

BTW once the results come up just skip all of the questionare stuff and go straight to the answer.

[edit on 10-1-2009 by antar]

Originally posted by mikesingh
I mean, that amounts to the possibility of taking the president of the most powerful nation in the world for a jolly good ride, what? Talk of woman power!!!

No, not so much of woman power, more like zionist power. But THAT is another conspiracy entirely.

Cheers