The Men In Black(OPs) The Aviary & UFOs

reply to post by schuyler


Dude. Bro.

Not scholarly? Okay, yeah, maybe I spout off a little more than I have full grounds for, but thoroughly cross-referenced accounts and a wealth of documentation have been presented here (and 9/10th of that by the GUT). You've managed to take up entire 1/4 chunkfuls of a page without addressing any of the evidence, nor do you rebut any of the conclusions put forth other than to cast aspersions on the mental competence of those who have drawn them.

Tentatively drawn them, I might add. But at least we've supported those conclusions with the evidence at hand, which is probably why you avoid saying anything of much substance in your critique.

Originally posted by schuyler
Well, I guess I'm just frustrated with "ties" that don't bind. They're too nebulous. Despite claims otherwise, you can't pin them down. It's like Greer saying a "top official" told him "X" and he wishes he could tell us who, but he just can't. He talked with the Head of State of a G8 country. Sorry, can't say who.

Not the same at all, schuyler, and rather disingenuous to say so. It's been demonstrated that Dr. Green has a lifelong tie to the intelligence community in addition to having chaired science boards and written papers (links and quotes included) that express a fairly intense interest in affecting change and beliefs in various communities and studying ways to determine false from true memories. Those are facts.

I've demonstrated the fact that the same TIGER study cited incidences of alien abduction cases as an area that holds some value to these same scientists.

It's also been established that he's been involved in the dissemination of the stories known as MJ-12 and Serpo.

It is an extrapolation that those interests might hold some answers as to why and I've given many other facts, along with evidentiary items, as to what the motives might be. I won't recount it all here, but do point out that your example and generalizations are very different from "he said, she said.

We also have seen, from Gus Russo's article, an investigative journalist of some merit, a statement that has been attributed to Dr. Green, as well as links and quotes to independent evidence that "Jim" is Dr. Green. Could be possibly counted as He said, she said...but I haven't come across any denial from Dr. Green as of yet, and that's often how it is in court. It's the supporting facts that make the difference, however.

“Jim is the person I have had the most contact with over the last several months and he seems to be interested in the spreading of viral memes over the internet, particularly in relation to this subject.”…

“The whole subject,” Jim says in wonderfully measured speech, “is composed of three components: delusion, sociological groupthink, and a kernel of truth.” Jim then reminds that he is first and foremost a medical scientist.

“My interest in this subject is much, much more professional than it is personal. That is, 90 to 95% of all persons who are engaged fully with this [UFO] subject are psychiatrically ill, and by that I mean that they are on medication or should be.” Jim elaborates that “viral memes,”[see below] in which disturbed people seek validation in numbers on the web, is, or should be, a growing public health concern.

That said, Jim nonetheless has a real interest in UFO’s, and seemingly with good reason.

Both Tom and Jim seem to share at least one rationale for their internet excursions: studying the frightening potential of “viral internet memes.”

Coined by evolutionary theorist Richard Dawkins in 1976 (The Selfish Gene), a meme is a unit of cultural information that evolves the way a gene propagates from one organism to another, and subject to all the analogous unintended mutations. In the view of many, computers and blogs could function as powerful meme “replicators.”

Richard Brodie, the creator of Microsoft Word, notes, “Most of these viruses of the mind are spread because they are intriguing or frightening or inspiring, and not necessarily because they're true. That's the problem.” It doesn’t take much intuition to envision an enemy creating memes that can be used to destabilize a society, or a freelance predator utilizing them to cozy up to potential victims. Caryn Anscomb writes online,

“The UFO community has been deeply penetrated by the manipulators of information, who couldn’t really give a fig whether there might be any valuable data pertaining to Aliens and contact hidden behind the deafening noise. That’s not their business; their business is information warfare.”

www.realityuncovered.net...

As to the rest of your rehash, I've already answered them fairly well above I think.

The logic points, as presented below are, I admit, a mixture of facts & extrapolation. I offer them for consideration, and, as I've stated, personally feel they have some merit.

Why was Kit obfuscating?

Dr. Christopher "Kit" Green would never embarrass his service record or his long-proven allegiance.

Kit doesn't appear to be the type to lie for petty purposes. He's obviously a man of honor in his intelligence paradigm, even if we might perceive--and rightly so--that any such experiment contained some psychological cruelty.

A Top Secret obligation from Kit is not only Occam's, it fits ALL the evidence squeaky tight in why he was disingenuous at times.

The Memes were powerful, they penetrated to a fair depth in our society. Even after they were largely debunked, they had some staying power. That was unlikely to be by chance and strongly suggested structuring by psychological adepts of great understanding and education. Not Doty and Collins I was pretty sure.

All the key players were intelligence pros. No one got into any real trouble as a result of the scams. Doty had to take some heat, but that's what junior operatives do in a compromised operation.

Digging into the exact types of sciences that Dr. Green was involved in, along with the items form the TIGER study, is very suggestive when looking at all factors.

Originally posted by Eidolon23
reply to post by schuyler

 

Tentatively drawn them, I might add. But at least we've supported those conclusions with the evidence at hand, which is probably why you avoid saying anything of much substance in your critique.

What do you mean "we" paleface? Do I know you? Have you ever posted on this thread on this topic? Perhaps you changed your avatar so I don't recognize you. Oh, well. No matter. I don't really care. If you care to actually read my several posts on this thread you will find what minor contributions I have been able to bring to the table. I have never claimed to be an expert on the subject matter, but I stand by my posts and my reputation here. You go ahead and do the same and we'll both be fine. Bro. I've tried hard and refrained from criticizing individuals here. There's no reason to get into a fight. My pokes at GUT's home planet were, hopefully, taken as the jest they were meant to be. If the joke fell short, alas; it wouldn't be the first time I've run "afowl" with a clunk.

After 700 some odd replies I do not believe that every post has to add a new and original brick of truth to the edifice this thread has become. Sometimes you have to take a step back and assess where we are headed, including a potential weakness in the structure. Galloping Gertie proved what happens when the details are perfect, but the structure is unsound. It falls apart regardless that every rivet was perfectly applied, inspected, and passed. As to "substance," it is my claim that my critique here is the essence of substance and that nebulous claimed "ties" with no definition or confirmation lack substance altogether. They weaken the structure. My plea is to strengthen the ties so that the structure survives. I don't do "throw-away" posts.

The thing is, I believe that can be done. People contributing here are quite capable of it. I don't expect everyone in a post to instantly conform to Turabian's Manual of Style. All I am asking is that people attempt to define what a "tie" is rather than leave it at the same level as Homer Simpson's "ties" to the nuclear plant. Just claiming it is insufficient and superficial.

The fact is I'm behind GUT 100%. I'd very much like this thread to be considered the Gold Standard in discussing the Aviary, printed out and used, referenced, and quoted for years to come. If people misunderstand my intentions and my point so completely as to accuse me of not contributing anything of "substance," then I only have my own self to blame for being insufficiently clear. My fault. Bro.

Originally posted by The GUT
Not the same at all, schuyler, and rather disingenuous to say so. It's been demonstrated that Dr. Green has a lifelong tie to the intelligence community in addition to having chaired science boards and written papers (links and quotes included) that express a fairly intense interest in affecting change and beliefs in various communities and studying ways to determine false from true memories. Those are facts.

They are???? Seriously? What "ties" to the "intelligence community" that weren't made up out of whole cloth? Greer touts "ties" to bolster his image, which everyone else vehemently denies. His "briefing" of CIA Director Woolsely is a case in point. But Greer has his story, by God, and you simply cannot refute it because he says so. And there's this "plausible deniability" issue. Although so unlikely that it boggles the mind, techically, it's possible, therefore it must be. Greer has "ties" everywhere, to Heads of State, to Admirals and Generals he won't name, to "secret" cabals and "agents" who are "afraid" to come forward because, you know, they might get into trouble or be hit by a "scalar weapon" or, like another CIA Director who was about to pump $50 million into the Disclosure Project and set them up to do some "real" investigation, was suicided at the last moment. How convenient. He has "ties" to the Space Brothers, some of whom he calls by name and, he can also summon them at will--to Mt. Shasta in the Summer or Florida in the Winter. In fact, Greer has so many "ties" that he knows for a fact that 70% of the Guys In The Know(tm) are voting for "Disclosure,' but the 30% who don't want it are Really Bad Guys(tm) and will kill all your grandchildren to prevent it. Kind of a deal killer, don'tcha think?

Of course he's interested in real and false memories. His contention is that all abductees were abducted by the secret Shadow Government and implanted with false memories for the express purpose of making people afraid of the aliens SO THAT we would all miraculously support trillions of dollars into space weaponry to fight off the Bad Guy Aliens who do not exist because the Space Brothers are all peaceful!

That paragraph above? That's EXACTLY what he says. You can read it in "Contact; countdown to transformation" and also "Hidden Truth; Forbidden Knowledge." Go read 'em and weep. It is, IMO, completely delusional. These "ties" are also delusional.

And that's what makes the bridge fall down.

Originally posted by schuyler
Originally posted by The GUT
They are???? Seriously? What "ties" to the "intelligence community" that weren't made up out of whole cloth? Greer touts "ties" to bolster his image, which everyone else vehemently denies. His "briefing" of CIA

Um, maybe, you should take a break from GreeR for just a bit and go play
with those new kitties, sky.

I was referring to Dr. GreeN.

I'm All Up in Your Head, Schuyler!

Just joking, man, like the "GUT" thing. Funny, ain't it!!?

Got any pics of the new kittens you could share, btw? Kitties r coolz.

Birdz iz Tasteez

Why would it be a surprise that any two people contributing to this thread would completely misunderstand each other?

If the disinfo motive is not that which is described 2 posts up from this, can I be so bold as to ask when any one of the people contributing to this thread... again... is going to spit out an actual motive from the larger part of the government campaign? ... Because people in here can't even seem to realize when they agree on something. That out to tell you something about all the blah blah blah.

When are we going to get that promised consensus?

No, we're just going to make very vague yet very opportunistic remarks about kitties.

Really enjoyed this thread and GUT has, to my mind, done a sterling job of tweaking the nose of a few self staisfied types and generally tied up a few loose ends with regards to how we are all "played" to some degree. Then again, Henry played the players like a pro himself and I guess, that's where we are. People push, others push back, people would like you to "believe" in so many things to suit their purposes, which leads me to this.....

reply to post by NotAnAspie


My opinion, baldly stated:

This points to a long term operation looking to exploit the control system that is religion. Secondarily, perhaps, to kick up a lot of dust around ID-related ideas about UFOs.

Also, Schuyler, I'm sorry I got punchy. My bad.

Bro.

Originally posted by FireMoon
Really enjoyed this thread and GUT has, to my mind, done a sterling job of tweaking the nose of a few self staisfied types and generally tied up a few loose ends with regards to how we are all "played" to some degree. Then again, Henry played the players like a pro himself and I guess, that's where we are. People push, others push back, people would like you to "believe" in so many things to suit their purposes, which leads me to this.....

great, more instructions on how to think.

FTR, I am NOT completely satisfied with the current answers.. anywhere.

My goal in this thread is to get gut to make his point and give that promised consensus.

Why, because his avoidance of that is an obvious mechanism.

reply to post by NotAnAspie


Well, Jeez, NAA, what's your take?

If none of the theses contending for top of the pile grab you, you must surely have a notion of your own to share?

Originally posted by Eidolon23
reply to post by NotAnAspie

 

My opinion, baldly stated:

This points to a long term operation looking to exploit the control system that is religion. Secondarily, perhaps, to kick up a lot of dust around ID-related ideas about UFOs.

Also, Schuyler, I'm sorry I got punchy. My bad.

Bro.

too neutral, we already know this.

I want to hear a motive, pick a side.

Why, the million dollar question that the average citizen wants an answer to is if aliens are here, what do they want.

Yes, the government is trying to obscure the agenda... now I'd like to hear the motive IN YOUR WORDS.

reply to post by NotAnAspie


Pick a side? Really?

Perhaps the reason the spooks and the civvies regard eachother with such a jaundiced eye is due to this mentality.

If what I think is going down is in fact going down, then I am pretty sure that there is a recursive feedback loop of distrust and blame between those charged with keeping us safe, and the people they are trying to protect. Do the good intentions justify the abhorrent means? Of course not. But we need to simmer down the tension on both sides of the divide.

So no. I am not picking a side.

Originally posted by Eidolon23
reply to post by NotAnAspie

 

Well, Jeez, NAA, what's your take?

If none of the theses contending for top of the pile grab you, you must surely have a notion of your own to share?

I already have. Some I tend to agree with more than others but I fully trust NO man.

My feelings stemming from who I have witnessed try the hardest to be convincing and to tell lies points to the government not government plus ETs... and despite all the pictures painted to illustrate that ETs are in cahoots with our shadow government, I feel there is a stark contrast in ET and government motives.

many will try to tell you otherwise in all sorts of ways.
I have been more specific in other posts but I am trying to eat pizza.

besides, it's guts thread and I'm pretty sure he would prefer if I stopped posting in light of his veiled insults.

so where is the consensus that gut promised. That is what all this was supposed to be leading up to.

reply to post by NotAnAspie


Life's not like that over in this corner of the cosmos. The info is there for you to search through, whatever your truth is , you garner from it, is your truth. It's not in GUT's remit to really make your mind up for you past, joining the dots in what seems to lend weight to, there being a certain coherence. I'm really not sure what you're difficulty with drawing a conclusion is, there are umpteen links and evidence from those in the spotlight themselves, that have for me, given me easily enough verifiable data from which to draw my own conclusion. And that is all I personally, ask of someone, to allow me and hopefully others, to make an informed guess.

This isn't really a porno movie there is no real "money shot", life isn't like TV where everything is tied up after an hour with 15 minutes of ad breaks or the legend "to be continued" appears. This thread has made me think , has made me modify, what I thought I knew about a specific side of the UFO phenomenon and has helped me immensely, to manage a handle on what might well be going on over here in Britain with reference to some in the field.

The evidence is all here on the thread, it will be your world view that will decide on how you interpret it, why do you ask others to, at the same time as seemingly, railing against being "told what to think"?

Originally posted by Eidolon23
reply to post by NotAnAspie

 

Pick a side? Really?

Perhaps the reason the spooks and the civvies regard eachother with such a jaundiced eye is due to this mentality.

If what I think is going down is in fact going down, then I am pretty sure that there is a recursive feedback loop of distrust and blame between those charged with keeping us safe, and the people they are trying to protect. Do the good intentions justify the abhorrent means? Of course not. But we need to simmer down the tension on both sides of the divide.

So no. I am not picking a side.

edit on 10-9-2012 by Eidolon23 because: (no reason given)

clearly your comprehension missed something in that statement.

My mentality is not that we should go around picking sides. I was referring to something very specific and you know it... plus, it's what we've been promised in this thread A MOTIVE. I'm simply waiting for gut to back up his words.

Again, we all know they are hiding something. It's not exactly a show of brilliance to make that statement.

Originally posted by FireMoon
reply to post by NotAnAspie

 

Life's not like that over in this corner of the cosmos. The info is there for you to search through, whatever your truth is , you garner from it, is your truth. It's not in GUT's remit to really make your mind up for you past, joining the dots in what seems to lend weight to, there being a certain coherence. I'm really not sure what you're difficulty with drawing a conclusion is, there are umpteen links and evidence from those in the spotlight themselves, that have for me, given me easily enough verifiable data from which to draw my own conclusion. And that is all I personally, ask of someone, to allow me and hopefully others, to make an informed guess.

This isn't really a porno movie there is no real "money shot", life isn't like TV where everything is tied up after an hour with 15 minutes of ad breaks or the legend "to be continued" appears. This thread has made me think , has made me modify, what I thought I knew about a specific side of the UFO phenomenon and has helped me immensely, to manage a handle on what might well be going on over here in Britain with reference to some in the field.

The evidence is all here on the thread, it will be your world view that will decide on how you interpret it, why do you ask others to, at the same time as seemingly, railing against being "told what to think"?

get off your deflection right now!

if you think I'm waiting for gut to make up MY mind then you've got issues.

I want gut to make up HIS mind.

and why not? You've made up YOURS... even though I've yet to see you spit it out.

So if you can't do that, what is driving this long winded thread of profiles who are suspicious and lie and get us all nowhere?

seriously, what exactly is this thread "wrapping up" as we were told?

Nothing as far as I can see.

reply to post by NotAnAspie


*sigh*

Here ya go, friend. Back there on page 6:

"I propose a third layer:

"What little we (the government entities concerned) know scares the almighty existential piss out of us. If we're having a hard time not acting like newly beheaded chickens, we certainly aren't about to consider the possibility that the American public, who we perceive as overgrown children, will handle it any better. Moreover, we don't want to look like a bunch of idiots in front of the international community by copping to our failure to get a grip on the phenom."

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There's a motive for impartial/misleading disclosure. It's the one I happen to think is closest to the mark, but I can only guess, right?

* GUT sits in the shadows like some oh-so-silent bird, watching the newest stoopid sock, a confused member who also rings familiar, and some brilliant and esteemed friends dance the avian-esque flamingo...or flamenco.