What's this history channel show they are launching?Something has been eating at me about the whole thing since they started rolling things out around 2017,at first I couldn't put my finger on it.
I am also freely admit to have watched an unhealthy amount of TTSA and their companions work,including the whole first and second season of "unidentified".
For the record I think Mr,Elizondo is very personable and likeable,I also very much like Jeremy Corbell..he seems like a fun dude to party with .
But if we are to take these things that they are putting out there at face value.
A little about me:
1.have some military experience.(nothing elaborate,just your regular enlisted infantryman)
2.Does/done some consulting work where social engineering as applied to PR campaigns
1.Why,if trying to build credibility are they launching several seasons of a HISTORY CHANNEL show?..the opposite of building actual credibility?
2.In said series and in talks given to various people,Elizondo does some very clever wordplay..in a sense playing with the brains dopamine/endorphine reward system.
Keeps dropping tantalizing clues(to the people in attendance),then proceeds to move the goalpost and in reserve theres the always safe card of "adhering to OPSEC/" aka its classified "so I cant tell you right now".
3.Does the same thing in mainstream media.
4.Every time a deadline of something significant promised approaches Mr.Elizondo or his TTSA surrogates go in and "adjusts expectations" of the target audience.
Example : in the run up to the bombshell report due tomorrow/june etc,they are adjusting their press apperance statements to say "you cant even paint your house in 180 days why expect something more from the Pentagon.
A valid point indeed,if only they hadnt hyped the report up to fever pitch in the prior months while slowly "leaking" NVG videos with camera artifacts or IR optics photography that really could have been showing anything.
These are text book moves for social engineering for PR purposes.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewnJ6okvsK0What's this history channel show they are launching?
I thought Lou said that was it, ie no more seasons other than the 2 they didSource: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewnJ6okvsK0
Been 2 seasons already,if you can stomach it its quite the entertainment and a lot of pieces will fall together.
So at this point the only explanation is an active disinformation campaign?
That can't be right, even Tom DeLonge could paint his house in 180 days. and unless Elizondo bought a dilapidated historical home, he can paint his house properly in a week.they are adjusting their press apperance statements to say "you cant even paint your house in 180 days why expect something more from the Pentagon.
Warning, OT: Forgive my sense of humour, but I just adore the keming in that poster!!!11!
I feel the same way,or I did feel more strongly that way initially and still find the fighter pilots accounts very compelling.I have a strong feeling Louis Elizondo is actually a good, stand-up guy (I've got the impression because of the black vault interview).
I also believe he really was not taken seriously within the Pentagon and was denied access to classified information about black projects. He also learned about the stigma among fighter pilots and was actually really upset about it.
It's probably not that he really believes these videos show E.T. but he uses them to instrumentalize the people to demand and force transparency. He became quite emotional and angry in this interview when he talked about how "they work for us, the gov works for us! not the other way around!". That's probably really his main agenda.
"Know your place, you guys work for us! If we have questions, you must answer them and take it seriously or you can go!" (paraphrasing)
Smart play... CIA trained him very well
i havent watched that many elizondo appearances until the black vault interview..
This makes me a little suspicious frankly and I hope to be proven wrong.
Yup he literally says whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear.i havent watched that many elizondo appearances until the black vault interview.
Based on the appearances i do know, he does seem to always act according to what the target audience of the interview would emphasize with.
Mick West: He stays calm, doesnt speculate, mentions data a lot (even if he cant talk about it so he comes across "russel teapotting" <- i just invented this verb lol)
The basement / UFO gatherings: He goes down the alien rabbit hole, talks about ghosts etc
Black vault: Demands free information etc
He also tends to compliment the hosts a lot to a point where it does feels ingenuine to me
Exactly what a cia trained interrogator / spy would act like imo lol
As a retired service tech. who attempted to explain to a sales rep. expensive repairs I had to make on a piece of equipment I also saw that look a thousand times. The eyes glaze over as the mental process behind them goes into damage control mode.He reminded me of a manager, who really does not understand details. As a technician, I have seen that face/response multiple times. You are trying to explain something and they nod their head but, deep down, you know that they have no idea what you are talking about and seem uninterested in learning
Otherwise, it implies that the Pentagon is lying to the intelligence committee (or if not outwardly lying, withholding the information that has been requested) just to placate the posited influential politicians in congress.I don't know what it is, but anytime you have legitimate pilots describing something that doesn't seem to conform to the laws of physics that govern aviation and is in US airspace, I think it is something we need to get to the bottom of [...] If there is a foreign government that had these kinds of capabilities I think we would see other indications of advanced technology. I can't imagine that what has been described or shown in some of the videos belongs to any government that I'm aware of.
@LilWabbit - I like this hypothesis, and it seems to line up with a lot of what is being observed. The only portion of it that I find weak, is the suggestion that the Pentagon must keep allowing the AATIP/UAPTF "fringe exercise" to continue in order to satisfy the demands of some specific influential politicians. AATIP was created due to the actions of Reid, Stevens, and Inouye - the latter two are now deceased, and Reid is no longer in congress. UAPTF was created in 2017 - who do you suggest were the influential politicians behind that?
The Senate Intelligence committee "voted to require United States Intelligence Community and the United States Department of Defense to publicly track and analyze data collected on unexplained aerial vehicles."  For such a vote to pass, there must be more than just a few influential politicians interested in the subject. Furthermore, for your hypothesis to be correct, it would require that the Pentagon basically lie in it's report, which was requested by the Senate Intelligence committee, just to please "a few influential politicians". I find that hard to believe. The point where the Senate Intelligence committee gets involved is the point where I would expect the Pentagon to clarify (not to us, but to the Intelligence Committee) that the reality of what is going on is what you have described in your hypothesis. And if that happened, I wouldn't expect people like Martin Heinrich to make the statement that he has made:
Otherwise, it implies that the Pentagon is lying to the intelligence committee (or if not outwardly lying, withholding the information that has been requested) just to placate the posited influential politicians in congress.
I think your hypothesis fits well with the genesis of this all, but doesn't seem to line up with the state of things as they currently exist.
Indeed, but I don't think this is enough to explain it. If the "unidentified" videos and other events which have been reported on represent nothing more than advanced drone prototypes/drone swarms (plus some other prosaic objects thrown in), and the executive is indeed trying to keep that secret, fueling this media circus through their various statements seems to me to be a very bad way to accomplish that mission. A simple "we know what the objects in both the videos and photos are, and we have nothing further to say publicly" statement, issued in 2017 and repeated without variation since then would have been much more successful. And if I understand correctly, your hypothesis is that the reason that hasn't happened is basically to avoid hurting the feelings of/offending a few true believer congresspeople by shooting down their UFO dreams. I find that hard to believe.Owing to executive privilege, a lot of classified information within the executive branch is commonly withheld from the Congress. Sometimes even flatly denied (yes, lied about) if deemed to pose a national security risk, as the Congress is largely viewed by the executive branch as public domain rather than government 'proper'. Releasing to the Congress a piece of classified information (even if it claims to treat it in confidence), is commonly viewed as equivalent to a public leak.
Even Obama has come to believe that there is a real unexplained phenomenon. Who are the congresspeople that have such intense power over the defense department that they are allowing people like Obama and Brennan to be misled to avoid offending their sensibilities? The explanation as proposed is not just "executive lying to congress" but "some members of the executive lying to congress and large portions of the executive".But I think some of the phenomena we’re going to be seeing continues to be unexplained and might, in fact, be some type of phenomenon that is the result of something that we don’t yet understand and that could involve some type of activity that some might say constitutes a different form of life.
"Have you been able to rule out.... the science fiction scenario of any kind of lifeform. Can you just say, for people that are interested, that you've ruled out any kind of lifeforms out there?"
To be honest, I only watched part of the interview but I got a bit fed up with his song and dance when Mick confronted him with the explanations.
- He reminded me of a manager, who really does not understand details. As a technician, I have seen that face/response multiple times. You are trying to explain something and they nod their head but, deep down, you know that they have no idea what you are talking about and seem uninterested in learning. I have been in meetings where managers/supervisors simply ask irrelevant questions while you and the engineers try and resolve the technical problem.
- Showing a bunch of aircraft flashcards is not an example of analysis. I bet you can buy those exact same cards online somewhere. They used to give cards like this to the ground observer corps back in the 40s and 50s. These cards have no bearing in the videos since one object is a dot, another is a very small line, and the third is oversaturated by the thermal image. I would think that real analysts don't bother with such cards since they probably know what a MIG-21 looks like anyway. You don't see fighter pilots pulling up flashcards in the middle of a dog fight! You do give such cards to people who are not familiar with the subject. See #1 where I mention managers with little knowledge on the subject matter. All the cards demonstrate is he needed a crutch to help him learn the subject he was unfamiliar with.
- When it comes to analysis, he states there were other factors involved in the AATIPs analysis that are not available to the public that demonstrates that the analysis is wrong. I guess my first question to this is, "why did you release the videos in the first place if you are not going to release all of the information?" It seems that it is more a publicity stunt to get money for the TTSA. My second question is, "Did the TTSA do any "analysis" on the videos and why weren't these published?" Once again, if there is no attempt at analyzing these videos, then it was just a publicity stunt. Another thought on this, "What is the difference between data that is unavailable and no data at all?" I am very skeptical that any such analysis was ever done and if there really was any additional data. Remember, we are talking about an individual, who seems to be unfamiliar with the details and was little more than a manager (if he was even that) that quickly left the DOD in order to start a money-making scheme with a singer interested in the subject of UFOs.
Imagine a technology that can do 600-700 G forces, that can fly at 13,000 mph, that can evade radar, and that can fly through air, and water, and possibly space. And, oh by the way, has no obvious signs of propulsion, no wings, no control surfaces, and yet still can defy the natural effects of earth’s gravity.
|Thread starter||Related Articles||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Debunked: "Fake" live chat from the International Space Station (ISS) with Boise State||Flat Earth||10|
|Recent Activity now live updates, replaces chat||Site Feedback & News||0|
|Chat Room (Shoutbox)||Site Feedback & News||4|
|Elizondo Claims DoD Have A 50-Feet-Away Photo & 23 Minute Video||UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy||30|
|I'm going to to interview Lue Elizondo - What should I ask him?||UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy||19|
|Tom DeLonge's TTSA: Elizondo, Mellon, and Justice Depart||UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy||4|