Former Legislator Makes Statement May 8, 2010 on Un-Released Eisenhower Brief Regarding ET's

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
You would think this important revelation would warrant more discussion, not a mere 153 words.

Not really.

Here are a few examples:
-Mom, Dad, I'm in love with another woman! Ground shaking revelation in just a handful of words.

-You do love me do you? the response is silence. Horribly disappointing revelation made with no words at all.

The guy is saying he saw a document. There isn't much information there to begin with so I see no reason why one would expect more information based on an alleged witness of one or more pieces of paper.

-rrr

Wow, some people on this thread have completely missed the point. Arguing over what a skeptic is or isnt is a waste of time IMO.

This man's statement is truly extraordinary, and I believe him.

Not because I want to, or because I want disclosure, or because I'm part of a conspiracy website, only because my gut tells me this man is genuine.

Although he is clearly reading from a script, his words seem heartfelt, and he seems like he is really making an effort to get a message across.

The fact that he is in his later years only adds credibility in my eyes, at this stage of his life he most likely has nothing to lose, nor nothing to gain. He has worked hard, made something of himself, and since he's retiring he has nothing to fear by sharing this with the world. I'm sure this was a tough thing to play so close to his chest for so many years...

What all you skeptics and debunkers should take note of, is the fact that Mr. McElroy is doing this for no financial gain!

Most so called "whistleblowers," or people who claim to have inside knowledge of top secret things usually try and make a living selling books, or hitting the lecture circuit, sometimes charging as much as $20 a ticket!

Mr. McElroy makes it clear to the viewer that they may use the video, and share or distribute it as they see fit, that to me says more than anything about his credibility.

This man just wants to die knowing that he shared his secret with the world, and in my opinion he is a true patriot for his effort.

[edit on 13-5-2010 by WhiteDevil013]

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by rickyrrr
But that is not what I said. You declared that lack of evidence constitutes evidence.

That is what you said. The quote is right there.

Sometimes absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The fact there is no evidence for his claim means there is no evidence for his claims. That casts doubt on his story.



[edit on 13-5-2010 by DoomsdayRex]

There is a difference between pointing out there is no evidence and expressing doubt. I have no evidence for the fact that you went to the bathroom this morning, but I don't have any doubts.

-rrr

Originally posted by Jay-morris

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

How long does one have to be a "sceptic' before they can draw a conclusion on a particular subject? How much "evidence" do you need to see to make up your mind?
Think 40 years is enough?

Age has nothing to do with it im afraid. We can all read!

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

What an amazingly bad answer! Amazing!
So nothing is learned with age? Were you around to see this subject develop? Where you around to see how one story was lifted from a book, into another book until it became Gospel? Were you around to see technology and media develop? Does your reading give you the experience to measure context?
You are amazingly dogmatic, and sorry to say, very shallow.

Originally posted by rickyrrr
Not really.

Here are a few examples:
-Mom, Dad, I'm in love with another woman! Ground shaking revelation in just a handful of words.

-You do love me do you? the response is silence. Horribly disappointing revelation made with no words at all.

Speaking of straw man arguments...

We know people have affairs or are homosexual (not sure which you were going for there), we know people fall out of love and break people's hearts. The evidence for that is already quite extraordinary, therefore we do not require much further evidence.

However, we don't know that Eisenhower met with aliens and we don't know that state legislators are privy to documents pertaining to such. Therefore, the standard of evidence is much higher.

Originally posted by rickyrrr
The guy is saying he saw a document. There isn't much information there to begin with so I see no reason why one would expect more information based on an alleged witness of one or more pieces of paper.

That would be where you are wrong. There is a lot more information to be learned. Such as what were the circumstances under which he saw this document? Thus far, we only know the bare minimum. We don't know the why.

reply to post by WhiteDevil013


So, because you believe him to be sincere makes his claims more credible?
How does THAT work?
Many people are sincerely wrong!

Originally posted by rickyrrr

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
You would think this important revelation would warrant more discussion, not a mere 153 words.

Not really.

Here are a few examples:
-Mom, Dad, I'm in love with another woman! Ground shaking revelation in just a handful of words.

-You do love me do you? the response is silence. Horribly disappointing revelation made with no words at all.

The guy is saying he saw a document. There isn't much information there to begin with so I see no reason why one would expect more information based on an alleged witness of one or more pieces of paper.

-rrr

Oh my gosh! I think you got him!
I don't know what to make of this video. I really want this to be the truth, but who knows. If this is a "hoax" why? What motivated him to say what he said? When I first saw this video I said to my friend, "I bet the guys posting on ATS are going to say he's either lying, insane, or something along those lines." I was right.

PLEASE LET THIS BE REAL!

Originally posted by rickyrrr
There is a difference between pointing out there is no evidence and expressing doubt. I have no evidence for the fact that you went to the bathroom this morning, but I don't have any doubts.

Yes, but the evidence that human beings use the bathroom is already extraordinary. There is no reason to doubt that I wouldn't.

However, the evidence that McElroy saw this document is not so extraordinary, is it?

Originally posted by WhiteDevil013
Wow, some people on this thread have completely missed the point. Arguing over what a skeptic is or isnt is a waste of time IMO.

This man's statement is truly extraordinary, and I believe him.

Not because I want to, or because I want disclosure, or because I'm part of a conspiracy website, only because my gut tells me this man is genuine.

Although he is clearly reading from a script, his words seem heartfelt, and he seems like he is really making an effort to get a message across.

The fact that he is in his later years only adds credibility in my eyes, at this stage of his life he most likely has nothing to lose, nor nothing to gain. He has worked hard, made something of himself, and since he's retiring he has nothing to fear by sharing this with the world. I'm sure this was a tough thing to play so close to his chest for so many years...

What all you skeptics and debunkers should take note of, is the fact that Mr. McElroy is doing this for no financial gain!

Most so called "whistleblowers," or people who claim to have inside knowledge of top secret things usually try and make a living selling books, or hitting the lecture circuit, sometimes charging as much as $20 a ticket!

Mr. McElroy makes it clear to the viewer that they may use the video, and share or distribute it as they see fit, that to me says more than anything about his credibility.

This man just wants to die knowing that he shared his secret with the world, and in my opinion he is a true patriot for his effort.

[edit on 13-5-2010 by WhiteDevil013]

Thank you!

2nd line?

reply to post by Gutterpus

Now I wonder which satellite that is.

Having hurtled halfway across the galaxy at hyper-speed a high level diplomatic mission from the planet Niacin arrives with compliments and fan letters from space for Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz, only to be met, as they emerge from the ether, with this:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f6d53a55f538.jpg[/atsimg]

Having informed their home planet of the situation they are instructed to cancel the planned visit until such time as we have had a chance to tidy up.

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
However, we don't know that Eisenhower met with aliens and we don't know that state legislators are privy to documents pertaining to such. Therefore, the standard of evidence is much higher.

I agree. The standard of evidence is high. So I am calling this inconclusive but tantalizing. I am not going to say that I "Doubt" it, because I have given no reason to believe the contrary any more than I've been given reason to believe the claims, and because I hold no preconceptions one way or the other.

-rrr

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
However, the evidence that McElroy saw this document is not so extraordinary, is it?

It is not. so any judgement on the veracity or the statements purely depends on whether or not one trusts the guy. Just like when we watch the news or the weather report on TV.

You don't trust the guy. That's OK.

-rrr

reply to post by ipsedixit


Right! And now it appears I'm gonna miss the final episode of "Lost!" This is totally inexcusable.

www.examiner.com...

[edit on 13-5-2010 by Gutterpus]

Originally posted by 6205LH
I will not believe in ET's until i see them with my own eyes. Nobody will manipulate with me anymore and i heve already wasted too many time on this issue. For me is currently this entire circus around UFO's and disclosure only very well premeditated business...

second this, and its not that i don't believe aliens exist. stop wasting people's time on this earth

So for all you interested I found a few more websites - and there aren't many different ones - that may give credence or fuel the flame - depending on who you are. Check it out.


teresasilverthorn.wordpress.com...


On May 10th
1. sparrow1969 permalink
It’s very interesting how there is so much coming out about disclosure right now. You might be interested in reading about Henry McElroy, who is a former Representative from New Hampshire. Another person who blogs at WordPress is helping him with a disclosure statement that will be coming out on Youtube shortly. Her name is Teresa Silverthorn, and here is a link to her latest post:
teresasilverthorn.wordpress.com...
Blessings!
Sparrow

sbeckow.wordpress.com...



At the Free State gathering in Danbury I met Henry McElroy, a charming and dedicatedly anti-state Republican state representative whose libertarianism is so radical that it?s difficult to imagine him holding office anywhere else. McElroy thinks he?s making some headway with a bill that would return New Hampshire to the gold standard. Other bills introduced in the New Hampshire legislature (all unlikely to become law) would nullify the 16th amendment, reduce the business profits tax by half over five years, and make jury nullification an established legal right.
dogbrothers.com...

The New Hampshire Gold Money Bill
www.americanchronicle.com...


US lawmakers flay Indian atrocities

NEW YORK, March 3: A six-member US legislators group from New Hampshire charged the Indian government with committing atrocities in occupied Kashmir and called it a ``genocide and nothing less than holocaust.``

Rep. Henry W. McElroy Jr. agreeing with the conclusions of his colleagues, said that he had no questions or doubt that the planned and structured genocide was being carried out by the Indian government.

He said: ``We have taken pictures and we will provide this along with our fact-finding sheet to the businesses that deal with Indian companies and ask them to stop doing business with India.
www.chowk.com...

and this one is definitely interesting. I don’t think it passed though.
www.ijaq.net...

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Jay-morris
What makes you a de-bunker. This very thread, for one is a good example on how you work. Bringing in the mental,insane rubbish, even though you dont know the man, his personality etc.

Oh, so, based on his one statement I cannot make any judgement call about McElroy. But based on one thread, you can make one about me.

Originally posted by Jay-morris
I have a bit more respect for people than to throw insults that they are insane, even though i dont know them personaly, or medically...

Again, you are claiming I just threw around an insult. Out of curiosity, could you tell me what my arguments were?

Thats all you are doing. Can you tell me this, can you tell me that. Your like a broken record. I have made it clear already! sigh!

That would be where you are wrong. There is a lot more information to be learned. Such as what were the circumstances under which he saw this document? Thus far, we only know the bare minimum. We don't know the why.

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


Excellent point. There would be a great deal of information to be gained but why did he not share this information?
-Where? Exact location the document is kept.
-When? What month, year, time was the document read? Can we verify his location at that time?
-Who? Without a doubt he would not be the only one who read this document, if its so important why not "out" others who would also of read it, did he know anyone else in the room when he read the document?

I know if I was going to come clean on this subject I would offer this kind of information, go big or don't go at all. Before coming clean I would assume the goverment is going to do everthing they can to disarm the information with disinformation. In this case because its all heresay the disinformation agents don't have to do any work at all, its been done for them by the lack verifiable information.

Sometimes what is not said is as important as what is said and what is lost via lack of detail in this case is everything to really make a case.

reply to post by FlySolo


FlySolo…..

You might want to introspectively ask, what would be the point of hoaxing an internal high ranking document?

Who knows…..?

More importantly, if this document was hoaxed, then wouldn't it be inadvertently admitting to knowledge of extraterrestrials on our planet?

I don’t think so.

Kind regards
Maybe…maybe not

Originally posted by OldDragger

Originally posted by Jay-morris

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

How long does one have to be a "sceptic' before they can draw a conclusion on a particular subject? How much "evidence" do you need to see to make up your mind?
Think 40 years is enough?

Age has nothing to do with it im afraid. We can all read!

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

What an amazingly bad answer! Amazing!
So nothing is learned with age? Were you around to see this subject develop? Where you around to see how one story was lifted from a book, into another book until it became Gospel? Were you around to see technology and media develop? Does your reading give you the experience to measure context?
You are amazingly dogmatic, and sorry to say, very shallow.

Lol so because you are older, that means you have a better say on the ufo subject. What a load of bull, and shows that you are ignorant. So, do you use this arguement all the time on these boards. If so, then that is sad!

Originally posted by michael
Is this document, this Brief to President Eisenhower, available anywhere?

Michael.....

Exactly.....we don't know if he actually saw a document & if he did, we don't know if the document was real or false.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not