Former intelligence official says information came from multiple colleagues but couldn’t ‘go into specifics’ at Congressional hearing into cover-up claims
Are you claiming that the radars conspired with the pilots to malfunction in a way that was consistent with their alleged ineptitude to not be able to identify a “far away plane” ?
Got it. None of the witnesses are claiming that. In fact they asked them why they call them “non human intelligence “ instead of extraterrestrial and they said it’s because they don’t know the origin.
Your other assumptions are also in contradiction with the statements and documents that have been released regarding an alleged recovery in italy in 1930.
Its easy to anchor our expectations on the typical and easily disregarded lowest common denominator. Especially in topics that are exploited by grifters. but they are not claiming any of that.
I think it’s reasonable to ignore the claims until there is evidence. But it’s not really reasonable to conflate them with a strawman version of their testimony and dismiss them as crazy.
Unserios?, Who are you talking about?
the witnesses? again. it’s easy to think about the grifters but the witnesses are as credible as they can get. if you really are talking about the witnesses you’d probably be better off ignoring the topic or actually getting some facts instead of conflating them with grifters or making so many baseless assumptions.
since you didn’t respond to what I said about italy, I ask you what is your basis for claiming that it’s only happening in the US? there is plenty of evidence that shows that’s false.
what is your basis for claiming that they are not serious? do you think unserious people can retain their security clearance after making “idiotic and userious” claims?
I’m asking what is your basis because It’s apparently coming from your bias on the topic, not on the facts that have been presented nor the allegations that have been made.
Ok. I hope you apply the same rigor to anyone with a religious belief.
At least you admitted you are just reacting emotionally bases on your prejudices without any basis on reality. To the point where you don’t even care about making a coherent argument
Are you claiming that the radars conspired with the pilots to malfunction in a way that was consistent with their alleged ineptitude to not be able to identify a “far away plane” ?
Otherwise I don’t see what is ridiculous.
deleted by creator
Got it. None of the witnesses are claiming that. In fact they asked them why they call them “non human intelligence “ instead of extraterrestrial and they said it’s because they don’t know the origin.
Your other assumptions are also in contradiction with the statements and documents that have been released regarding an alleged recovery in italy in 1930.
Its easy to anchor our expectations on the typical and easily disregarded lowest common denominator. Especially in topics that are exploited by grifters. but they are not claiming any of that.
I think it’s reasonable to ignore the claims until there is evidence. But it’s not really reasonable to conflate them with a strawman version of their testimony and dismiss them as crazy.
deleted by creator
Unserios?, Who are you talking about? the witnesses? again. it’s easy to think about the grifters but the witnesses are as credible as they can get. if you really are talking about the witnesses you’d probably be better off ignoring the topic or actually getting some facts instead of conflating them with grifters or making so many baseless assumptions.
since you didn’t respond to what I said about italy, I ask you what is your basis for claiming that it’s only happening in the US? there is plenty of evidence that shows that’s false.
what is your basis for claiming that they are not serious? do you think unserious people can retain their security clearance after making “idiotic and userious” claims?
I’m asking what is your basis because It’s apparently coming from your bias on the topic, not on the facts that have been presented nor the allegations that have been made.
deleted by creator
Ok. I hope you apply the same rigor to anyone with a religious belief.
At least you admitted you are just reacting emotionally bases on your prejudices without any basis on reality. To the point where you don’t even care about making a coherent argument