Disclosure and Air France 447: A Shot Across The Bow?

Apparently, there was to be disclosure of a know ET presence by the end of May 2009. Check this thread.

France was raised as a possible candidate to make disclosure should the US government fail to do so. If the disclosure scenario is true, I am still not convinced that it is, it may be that the US had to act in order to prevent disclosure.

The question I am posing is whether it is plausible that a US government would down a French asset in order to silence a French government that was teetering on the brink of disclosure?

I would say there are good reason to believe that France may be a major player in this topic, yes.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If I understand you correctly you are saying:

France was raised as a candidate to reveal the presence of aliens on Earth before the end of May.

America did not want this disclosure to be made public.

France did not make it public.

In June America rewarded France for their silence by downing their airliner.


Seems like there are some friends a country could do without if this is true.

Planes fall from the sky. It has been a fact since the beginning of flight. There is no need to assign needless speculation when more prosaic explanations have yet to be exhausted.

Originally posted by Kailassa
If I understand you correctly you are saying:

France was raised as a candidate to reveal the presence of aliens on Earth before the end of May.

America did not want this disclosure to be made public.

France did not make it public.

In June America rewarded France for their silence by downing their airliner.

Seems like there are some friends a country could do without if this is true.

Almost but not quite my friend

What if the French were just about to make it public?

What if the US government was still negotiating with the French government for their silence moments before bringing down 447?

What if the French were still waivering on May 31st?

What if they still are?

I do not believe one way or another, I was just interested in the possible scenario and ATS reader's opinions.

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
Planes fall from the sky. It has been a fact since the beginning of flight. There is no need to assign needless speculation when more prosaic explanations have yet to be exhausted.

Obviously this is true.

However, this is not a Jane's Defence Weekly forum. This is ATS on an Aliens and UFOs forum discussing conspiracies et al.

We are here to talk, share and discuss ideas that are new,old, crazy, unbelievable or whatever.

No needless speculations? Leave the modding to the mods eh

[edit on 7/6/2009 by skibtz]

reply to post by Nightchild


Nice thread you linked to Nightchild - will go through it now

Thanks

[edit on 7/6/2009 by skibtz]

reply to post by skibtz

No.
It is not plausible the US government would down a French asset in order to silence a French government that was teetering on the brink of disclosure.

Most of you must live in a very small world, and through your UFO glasses your wearing see everything that happens on the news as a part of the "grand conspiracy", but sometimes these things just happen.

The weather that plane was flying through was not the best, and there are far to many other more probable reasons it failed. To make the flying leap of absolute absurdity that this involves "disclosure" (lol) is embracing ignorance and not denying it.

Seriously, I think if most of us are forced to read more "disclosure" thread we'll puke. You guys are whipping yourselves up to some sort of frenzy over nothing.

Just maybe, maybe there are things that happen in this world outside of this forum that just happen, and have nothing to do with friggin aliens and ufos, lol. Sucks I know, but life on the internet is much more fascinating than the real world.



[edit on 7-6-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]

Originally posted by skibtz
We are here to talk, share and discuss ideas that are new,old, crazy, unbelievable or whatever.

It makes no logical sense.

In international politics, when country A does not want country B to perform a certain action it is because that will hurt the interests of country A. In the scenario you present, the United States does not want France to disclose an alien presence on Earth. The United States tries to intimidate France by way of downing AF 447. But would this be intimidation or provocation? What better way for France to get back at the United States (ie; hurt the US) but by doing exactly what the United States did not want to happen?

See how the logic breaks down?

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts


This is my first post in a while and definitely the first on the subject of disclosure.

I had a thought, wondered if anyone else had and wanted to know what they thought.

I am sorry you are sick to death of all of the diclosre threads et al but you really only have yourself to blame for reading them in the first place.

Double post removed.

[edit on 7/6/2009 by skibtz]

reply to post by Sam60


Any reason why it is not plausbile?

I mean, if 0.01% of what is posted on ATS about the wrong-doings of our governments is true, then it must at the very least be plausible right?

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


That is a good point. Had a US government intentionally brought down a French plane the end result may not have been what the US were hoping for.

See how the logic breaks down?

Not really. If there are secret governments running secret programmes it would be very difficult to apply any logic to this unknown quantity.

reply to post by skibtz

Plausible.......
Definition: Believable & appearing likely to be true, usually in the absence of proof.
It is not believable & it does not appear likely to be true.
Therefore it is not plausible.

Originally posted by skibtz
Not really. If there are secret governments running secret programmes it would be very difficult to apply any logic to this unknown quantity.

You are relying on a lot of special pleading here to make your case.

And besides, if you want to intimidate a country, there are a lot better ways to do it. Especially if we are talking UFO-type stuff.

[edit on 7-6-2009 by DoomsdayRex]

reply to post by Sam60


My use of the word plausibe is defined as meaning at least possbile.

We are here to share right?

To question everything put before us?

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


Cool. What kind of stuff are you thinking?

I mean, it would be difficult to invoke sanctions, take trade away or use military might. Far too public. People would ask questions.

And as you say: planes do fall out of the sky. Always have done all ways will do right?

And just for the record:

I do not believe that the a rogue government has done this - I am asking if it is plausible and what your thoughts are.

I am not a UFO nut wearing UFO tinted glasses either!

I am open to new far out ideas et al and discussing them - I thought ATS was the right place for this!

[edit on 7/6/2009 by skibtz]

Originally posted by skibtz

Cool. What kind of stuff are you thinking?

I mean, it would be difficult to invoke sanctions, take trade away or use military might. Far too public. People would ask questions.

Incite a riot, commit a blatant act of terrorism (AF 447 wouldn't count; it is still a mystery. I am talking about something very public, very high profile, that leaves no doubt), shut down their power grid. And so forth...