Paul Hellyer Claims Two ET's Are Working With The US Government!

Credible Guy????
Since when is a politician a credible source????

Ahahahahahahaha

reply to post by MisterMiyagi


Just an old dude who's interest has been captivated by reading
Books on the subject.

None of these people have any proof other than statements made by
Other people.

20 different types of extra terrestrials , really ?
Show us one.

Originally posted by The GUT
Just because a person holds high-office doesn't make them credible. Ron & Nancy Reagan, for example, consulted astrologists and the like.

If I remember correctly, Hellyer got on his UFO kick after reading Corso's book. That either makes him extremely gullible or a shill for myth-making.

Don't get me wrong: I totally believe in the anomalous nature of many sightings/experiences, however, Hellyer would flunk any course that depended on objective fact research.

Nonsense, just because you hold no credibility in any formate of ever being in those positions of high office does not mean your OPINION holds any sway either. Hellyer was in a position of military intelligence and must have been in a position of "privy" to at least have been inclined to be aware of sensitive UFO intelligence reports and that does not make him gullible or shil like.As fior the book comment i feel that is one desperate attempt at discrediting.

Anyone can claim anything. However, unless I see some evidence, this will only be a claim, and nothing more.

However, I do hope to see some evidence, as I do still believe in ETs.

Originally posted by Just Chris
Two very valid points to take into consideration here....

1) He just 'had' to mention his book during the hearing? Why...

2) He was paid $20,000.

Besides that, seems 'relatively' credible imo.

credible,yes I would agree,as far as the book and $20,000,the world is not going to end tomorrow,a little jingle in the pocket takes nothing away from his credibility.

Why would anybody who can fly here from another star "work" with anybody on earth?

If they are doing it, they must have some commonality of interest with, the American government, for example. If that is the case, then heaven help us.

On the other hand, if they are trying to make the American or any other terrestrial government see the error of its ways, surely this could be done in more efficient ways than "working" with them for decades.

This whole line of thinking doesn't pass the common sense test for me.

I really don't see anything of value of what Paul Hellyer has to say.

reply to post by JimOberg


I'd be interested in seeing the test results in that pdf you mention, Jim.

The guy's got credentials, yes, but once again he's just telling second hand stories that he's been told, and also getting in a chance to plug in an advert for his latest book.

Where do people get this idea that writing books about government secrets and an alien cover-up gets people rich? Let me tell you something, exposing government secrets and alien coverups gets you one of two things: ridiculed on a massive public scale until death, or killed if you reveal too much.

That being said, it is true that the alien conspiracy is overwhelmed with unreliable second-hand information and the unfortunate prevalence of disinformation (whatever its source/intention). The alien issue is shrouded in unanswerable questions and unreliable testimony. But the evidence for alien existence isn't so weak that the theory can be outright dismissed with permanence. The fact is "we", humanity, have no idea. The "Elite" might know, but that doesn't help us. None of their knowledge does, no matter how powerful it is. We need to learn these things for ourselves. It's not enough to say "we haven't found them yet, but they're real" - that doesn't help us. It's not enough to say, "we haven't found them yet, because they're not real" - that's just downright absurd and hopelessly arrogant. And, ultimately; very dangerous.

But of course, we ourselves are a hopelessly absurd and arrogant species in our own condition, no doubt, so it's no surprise that we can't address serious existential concepts like "aliens" and "god" without degenerating into a violent uncooperative mess of shameful human conflict both verbally and physically.

Verbal violence is responsible for the state of human suffering and inequality - not guns or bombs. Human apathy and prejudice is responsible for this sad and painful condition, not bombs. The bombs come after the battle of conscience is lost in the men who use such things on each other. A man fires his gun to end the life of another man because he wants to. Not because he had a gun, or because he was told to.

Notice that the less personal the expression of violence gets, the easier it is to resort to? Hence why it's easy for these military-industrial warmongers to destroy cultures & human lives without remorse, while more soldiers kill themselves each year than die in combat. The War begins in the Mind. Therefore, the War must be addressed from the Mind - and everyone is on the front line. 24/7. And by "The War", I of course mean all human wars of all natures. They're all the same - including the war between alien skeptics and alien believers.

To suggest that aliens don't exist, and that it's impossible for them to get here, is so arrogantly and obnoxiously insane that I question how "intelligent" we really are. Yet to say that they do without having enough evidence to convince the population of Earth is crazy too. The knowledge is not actionable. It's stagnant. Useless to us.

That being said - my point is who cares if he's telling the truth or not, if the stories are second hand or not, if he wants to promote a book or not... who cares? The issue is not "Can I trust this guy?" - the question is, what is presently so? And what do we do about it?

Because at the end of the day they can't all be liars. And our planet is strange, to say the very least, for very poorly explained reasons - at least, by our "leaders". And the universe is very big, and constantly surprising. Plus, we're a very young species in the scheme of things... I think we need to drop our obnoxious, arrogant know-it-all attitude and admit that we know sh#t. If aliens are out there, we have no way to tell. And if they didn't want us to know they were there, we wouldn't. And if they wanted to invade us, they would've. And if they could help us, they would've. So I think this entire issue is more complex than meets the eye. There's more "grey" in the alien situation than most people have the courage to admit. And such is the nature of profound existential mysteries!

Anyway, I hope we get to the bottom of it all soon, because I'm getting sick of hearing the skeptics and the "believers" constant petty bickering. Everyone's missing the point. The question is not "do aliens exist". That's irrelevant to the situation. The question is "are aliens coming here? and if they are, what are we gonna do about it? And if they're not, then why is the planet so f#cking inexplicably crazy, and what are we gonna do about it?"

Either way, the answer to the question falls on us. The question itself leads to the same unavoidable dichotomy. And every minute spent arguing over the details of the question is time better spent preparing to address the implications of the answer... because we haven't got very long before this craziness gets proportionately ugly to its stupidity. We'll destroy ourselves if we don't start focusing on where we're going instead of where we might be.

Paul Hellyer is (better was) a canadian politician.
So one take it or leave it´s testemony.

But one has to consider that this man is a former defense minister of an important NATO country.
He had access to very classified information within NATO and the canadian government. And a very significant part is still classified (even some decades after) and not known by the general public.

One must consider that Mr. Hellyer is somewhat vague on his declarations because he cannot disclose any detail about the real source of that information. He just cannot say he read that on an classified NATO/Canadian government file.

Those who are/were on top circles of the political power cannot speak freely as they want or as we wanted to.
Just trying to put things into perspective.

I think Mr. Hellyer was doing fine and was being accepted as credible up until the point where he started talking about Bush, Osama Bin Ladin, and the Muslim religion.
You could see that the chairman didn't really want to hear what Hellyer was saying and told him he had 2 minutes and then 30 seconds to finish. So as a result I think Mr Hellyer has lost his credibility with them now and will probably not be invited back to participate in anymore of these meetings.

Seems very legit to me! Nice find, thanks!

I can never understand why anyone gets excited over or lends any credence to anything that Paul Hellyer says.

Yes, he was the Minister of National Defence from 1963 to 1968 and was almost universally detested by the military for presiding over the integration and unification of the RCN, RCAF, and Canadian Army into the Canadian Armed Forces. I strongly doubt he had many friends in the military who would pass him any info once he left that post in 1968.

He hasn't been a member of government since 1969 and hasn't been a Member of Parliament since 1974. He may be a member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada but so is every other living former and current minister of the Crown. While a person may be a member, you only get to attend Council meetings if you are invited to by the current Prime Minister. I have no reason to believe he has attended a meeting since 1969, 44 years ago.

Yes, he officially inaugurated a "UFO landing pad" in 1967 but this was built by St. Paul, Alberta, as its Canadian Centennial project and a symbol of keeping space free from human warfare. Hellyer was very much opposed to the weaponization of space and plenty of Centennial projects, of all sorts, were inaugurated by government ministers that year. It holds about the same significance as the the giant pyrogy in Glendon AB or the Big Nickel in Sudbury ON.

Originally posted by meaningless333
Paul Hellyer is (better was) a canadian politician.
So one take it or leave it´s testemony.

But one has to consider that this man is a former defense minister of an important NATO country.
He had access to very classified information within NATO and the canadian government. And a very significant part is still classified (even some decades after) and not known by the general public.

I was under the impression that Hellyer made no secret that he based his claims on books he's read, and NOT on any internal classified sources. Can somebody correct me on this, if needed?

Originally posted by Mudwlke
I think Mr. Hellyer was doing fine and was being accepted as credible up until the point where he started talking about Bush, Osama Bin Ladin, and the Muslim religion.

Can you summarize, please? I missed it.

reply to post by MrJohnSmith





The thing I have noticed on ATS is this, no matter the credibility or background of any eye witness or whistleblower in relation to UFO's , and there are hundreds of names we could quote that have spoke out about the reality of ET's visiting Earth, each and every one of them is ridiculed, debunked and attacked by an element of the forum.

The point I am trying to make is this.If we dismiss these eye witnesses accounts at every turn then we diminish human testimony that would, under normal circumstances, be considered good enough for a conviction in a court of law.

Originally posted by Snaffers
Credible Guy????
Since when is a politician a credible source????

Ahahahahahahaha

Is there anyone you would accept as a viable or credible source exposing the same information, or do you dismiss every UFO account out of hand?

Originally posted by MisterMiyagi
reply to post by MrJohnSmith

 

The thing I have noticed on ATS is this, no matter the credibility or background of any eye witness or whistleblower in relation to UFO's , and there are hundreds of names we could quote that have spoke out about the reality of ET's visiting Earth, each and every one of them is ridiculed, debunked and attacked by an element of the forum.

The point I am trying to make is this.If we dismiss these eye witnesses accounts at every turn then we diminish human testimony that would, under normal circumstances, be considered good enough for a conviction in a court of law.

I've heard this analogy frequently and always smelled a rat inside.

How about this: the trials in which jurors. based on eyewitnesses, come to erroneous conclusions -- often not discovered for many years, using DNA or other confessions etc -- are the 'UFOs'.

Most trials reach proper convictions, just as most public perceptions of stuff in the sky reach correct interpretations.

But not all.

In the legal system, it's called a miscarriage of justice, and needs constant efforts to minimize and mitigate. But we know, sadly, we'll never eliminate it entirely.

In the world of aerial phenomena, it's called 'UFOs' -- and demands the same response.

So I think that analogy collapses -- it secretly assumes that ALL collections of testimony to ANY interpretation, MUST have a non-zero occurrence of accuracy. But that's what is supposed to be PROVED -- not assumed going in..

There ARE other legitimate arguments for evidence of extraordinary stimuli. But not this 'court of law' one.

Personally I do not know what to make of Hellyer's claims. It IS known that he started his research after reading Corso's Day After Roswell, so most, if not all, of his claims are second hand.

One thing I would point out, however, is that because of his title and contacts, he would be in a much better position than most to validate his claims. At least to his own satisfaction.

Originally posted by MisterMiyagi
2 ET's are actually working with the US government!

wtf...
"Working"?
Working on what ? New _javascript framework ?