Guy looks like Ross Douthat with hair plugs. The first four are twee, so I won’t bother with the last six. Why would I want to know the names?
Some of these I knew, some of these I kinda knew. #2 really surprised me. It’ll always be a circus march to me. I tried listening it as it was written, still saw the clowns prancing in.
I knew 3 of the names, and should have known a 4th (Chopin) but didn’t. The Blue Danube was famously used in 2001 a Space Odyssey, but half of people today weren’t born when that came out.
RE: A new reality
Lou Elizondo, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency’s AATIP program–which was studying UFOs to try to understand what they were, their capabilities and actions, and to determine if they were a threat to our national security—has tirelessly spoken out in many forums about UFOs, slowly reveling some of the information that AATIP found, and there are a multitude of clips in which he covers all sorts of issues.
From some of these clips it is apparent that Elizondo has been giving viewers an idea of some of the questions we should be asking ourselves, and how we might need to adjust our world-view when UFOs are finally acknowledged as being of non-human origin, and we find ourselves in a Universe in which we may not really be at the top of the totem pole, the masters of our fates, and the apex predators we believed ourselves to be.
I’ve just discovered this particular clip–linked below–in which Elizondo gives a very good “hypothetical” reason for why—from a national security perspective—authorities would not want to release the information we have on UFOs, or attest to their reality.
View this video and, I must say, if his “hypothetical” answer is actually what has been playing out, it is not good news.
BTW, has anyone here looked into ‘Arkanacide’ – the string of deaths supposedly related to the Clintons over the decades? I’ve heard of it often, but kind of dismiss the whole idea, though I’ve never done any kind of research on it. I saw it somewhere recently in regards to Sussman in the Durham probe.
Snow on Pine,
I watched your linked video, as the subject is of interest.
When I was around 12 (1960) I had a real interest in astronomy and had my own telescope. One moonless night, shortly after receiving it as a birthday present, I and a friend were stargazing and, since it was a low-powered telescope, we were focused on the brightest stars.
After a while of focusing the telescope on the brighter stars, suddenly we noticed that one fairly bright star, high above the horizon and that we’d already viewed, suddenly started moving. Over about a minute, it moved across about a 60 second arc. It then came to a stop and remained in that position for hours. We of course trained our little telescope upon the ‘star’ but our scope was too low powered to discern anything beyond its brightness, which was a bit above average.
At that time, no natural phenomena or of man made technology could duplicate the observed circumstances. The conclusion that it was a Unidentified Flying Object was inescapable.
I agree with Elizondo’s hypothesis that from a strategic security perspective, public confirmation of UFO’s actual reality would be counter productive, if their intent is malevolent.
I agree with his declaring that, if some UFO sightings are true, just three categories can apply: benevolent, malevolent or observational.
He further declares observational as “just like us, a combination of good and bad” which though certainly a possiblity, I disagree to be a dispositive assumption.
I also disagree with his premise that since the UFO’s have not demonstrated their benevolence, that only leaves malevolence or observational i.e. “just like us, a combination of good and bad”.
Elizondo dismisses or fails to realize that non-interference may indicate a Star Trek like “Prime Directive” recognizing that contact between a highly advanced civilization at a much more primitive civilization has not worked out well for the more primitive civilization.
Non-interference combined with allowing their observation of humanity to be detected may also indicate a deliberate policy of allowing the more primitive civilization to gradually adjust to the knowledge that they are not alone.
Familiarity over time doing much to alleviate the all too common “fear of the unknown”. Think of the early scene in the movie “The Day the Earth Stood Still” where the visiting alien is shot by a nervous soldier when he opens the communication device that holds the gift of the cure for cancer.
So observational may be either benevolent or malevolent and we cannot ye know whch is the case.
Elizondo, in jumping to the conclusion that UFO’s failure to contact us eliminates the possibility of benevolence moves from ‘we simply don’t know’ to ‘assume the worst’. Instead, I think a better approach is to hope for the best but as best we can, prepare for the worst.
IMO, Elizondo military/intelligence background leads him to the mindset that leads to, “When the only tool you have is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail.”
I’ve seen this before. My guess then was that they were all written by Carl Stallings.
(That’s a joke, son.)
Lou Elizondo has said that he resigned from his position as head of the DIA’s AATIP program studying UFOs, and from the Federal government, because he wanted more transparency about the extremely important subject of UFOs, and wanted critical information about UFOs to be given to the Secretary of Defense, but was blocked from briefing him.
Elizondo said that, even after he resigned, and began to speak out publicly about UFOs, some people in DOD continued to try to retaliate against and discredit him, tried to take his Security Clearance away from him and, at one point, a DOD spokeswoman even publicly denied that Elizondo had any real role at AATIP.
So, Elizondo filed a very detailed and lengthy complaint with the Defense Department OIG and, according to the linked article below, the official blocking and going after him after he resigned was his former boss, Garry Reid, DOD’s very powerful Director for Defense Intelligence, who was in charge of all DOD’s Counterintelligence, Security, and Law Enforcement operations, and who was apparently just removed from his position, based on several other official complaints, in addition to that of Lou Elizondo. *
This is quite a story, and well worth taking the time to read it.
We played the Colonel Bogey March one year in symphonic band in high school. I very clearly remember the conductor, one Kirke B. Muse (and how’s that for a band leader name!), telling us that we couldn’t play it like a Sousa march; that it was a British march so we had to be very precise and restrained.
BTW, has anyone here looked into ‘Arkanacide’ – the string of deaths supposedly related to the Clintons over the decades?
I suspect it’s largely nonsense. For example, a great deal of ink over the years has been spilled about Vincent Foster’s death, nearly all of it a waste of time to produce and to read.
The thing is, there have been two people (James McDougal and Jeffrey Epstein) who have died in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and who had damaging information about Bilge Clinton (and Hellary too, in the case of McDougal). Their deaths should be investigated by men of probity. If you can find any men of probity, that is.
P,S.–I wrote here before about how the DOD hurriedly set up its own new program to investigate UFOs–the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF)–ahead of the Congressionally mandated organization to study UFOs on a much wider basis and with public reports to be regularly issued, which was ordered to be set up within DOD by the 2022 Defense Authorization act.
This, according to Lou Elizondo and others, was an attempt to continue to keep information on UFOs bottled up within DOD and, indeed, a “Security Classification Guide” produced by the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force indicated that everything about UFOs–including images of them–was to be deemed classified, going so far as to retroactively re-classifying the three Navy videos that had been released to the public in 2017.
Who was to be in charge of this new UAPTF? None other than Garry Reid.
Now that Reid has apparently been sacked, and replaced as head of the UAPTF, perhaps there will be some progress towards more transparency from DOD on the issue of UFOs.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Guy looks like Ross Douthat with hair plugs. The first four are twee, so I won’t bother with the last six. Why would I want to know the names?
Some of these I knew, some of these I kinda knew. #2 really surprised me. It’ll always be a circus march to me. I tried listening it as it was written, still saw the clowns prancing in.
I knew 3 of the names, and should have known a 4th (Chopin) but didn’t. The Blue Danube was famously used in 2001 a Space Odyssey, but half of people today weren’t born when that came out.
RE: A new reality
Lou Elizondo, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency’s AATIP program–which was studying UFOs to try to understand what they were, their capabilities and actions, and to determine if they were a threat to our national security—has tirelessly spoken out in many forums about UFOs, slowly reveling some of the information that AATIP found, and there are a multitude of clips in which he covers all sorts of issues.
From some of these clips it is apparent that Elizondo has been giving viewers an idea of some of the questions we should be asking ourselves, and how we might need to adjust our world-view when UFOs are finally acknowledged as being of non-human origin, and we find ourselves in a Universe in which we may not really be at the top of the totem pole, the masters of our fates, and the apex predators we believed ourselves to be.
I’ve just discovered this particular clip–linked below–in which Elizondo gives a very good “hypothetical” reason for why—from a national security perspective—authorities would not want to release the information we have on UFOs, or attest to their reality.
View this video and, I must say, if his “hypothetical” answer is actually what has been playing out, it is not good news.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuPBAAQ3Uiw&t=3s
“Elon Musk got the entire ruling class to publicy come out against free speech. Incredible.”—
https://twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1515095007186853892
H/T Blazingcatfur blog.
The Durham investigation presses forward – https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/apr/15/durham-writes-of-spoofed-data-clinton-conspiracy/.
BTW, has anyone here looked into ‘Arkanacide’ – the string of deaths supposedly related to the Clintons over the decades? I’ve heard of it often, but kind of dismiss the whole idea, though I’ve never done any kind of research on it. I saw it somewhere recently in regards to Sussman in the Durham probe.
Snow on Pine,
I watched your linked video, as the subject is of interest.
When I was around 12 (1960) I had a real interest in astronomy and had my own telescope. One moonless night, shortly after receiving it as a birthday present, I and a friend were stargazing and, since it was a low-powered telescope, we were focused on the brightest stars.
After a while of focusing the telescope on the brighter stars, suddenly we noticed that one fairly bright star, high above the horizon and that we’d already viewed, suddenly started moving. Over about a minute, it moved across about a 60 second arc. It then came to a stop and remained in that position for hours. We of course trained our little telescope upon the ‘star’ but our scope was too low powered to discern anything beyond its brightness, which was a bit above average.
At that time, no natural phenomena or of man made technology could duplicate the observed circumstances. The conclusion that it was a Unidentified Flying Object was inescapable.
I agree with Elizondo’s hypothesis that from a strategic security perspective, public confirmation of UFO’s actual reality would be counter productive, if their intent is malevolent.
I agree with his declaring that, if some UFO sightings are true, just three categories can apply: benevolent, malevolent or observational.
He further declares observational as “just like us, a combination of good and bad” which though certainly a possiblity, I disagree to be a dispositive assumption.
I also disagree with his premise that since the UFO’s have not demonstrated their benevolence, that only leaves malevolence or observational i.e. “just like us, a combination of good and bad”.
Elizondo dismisses or fails to realize that non-interference may indicate a Star Trek like “Prime Directive” recognizing that contact between a highly advanced civilization at a much more primitive civilization has not worked out well for the more primitive civilization.
Non-interference combined with allowing their observation of humanity to be detected may also indicate a deliberate policy of allowing the more primitive civilization to gradually adjust to the knowledge that they are not alone.
Familiarity over time doing much to alleviate the all too common “fear of the unknown”. Think of the early scene in the movie “The Day the Earth Stood Still” where the visiting alien is shot by a nervous soldier when he opens the communication device that holds the gift of the cure for cancer.
So observational may be either benevolent or malevolent and we cannot ye know whch is the case.
Elizondo, in jumping to the conclusion that UFO’s failure to contact us eliminates the possibility of benevolence moves from ‘we simply don’t know’ to ‘assume the worst’. Instead, I think a better approach is to hope for the best but as best we can, prepare for the worst.
IMO, Elizondo military/intelligence background leads him to the mindset that leads to, “When the only tool you have is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail.”
I’ve seen this before. My guess then was that they were all written by Carl Stallings.
(That’s a joke, son.)
Lou Elizondo has said that he resigned from his position as head of the DIA’s AATIP program studying UFOs, and from the Federal government, because he wanted more transparency about the extremely important subject of UFOs, and wanted critical information about UFOs to be given to the Secretary of Defense, but was blocked from briefing him.
Elizondo said that, even after he resigned, and began to speak out publicly about UFOs, some people in DOD continued to try to retaliate against and discredit him, tried to take his Security Clearance away from him and, at one point, a DOD spokeswoman even publicly denied that Elizondo had any real role at AATIP.
So, Elizondo filed a very detailed and lengthy complaint with the Defense Department OIG and, according to the linked article below, the official blocking and going after him after he resigned was his former boss, Garry Reid, DOD’s very powerful Director for Defense Intelligence, who was in charge of all DOD’s Counterintelligence, Security, and Law Enforcement operations, and who was apparently just removed from his position, based on several other official complaints, in addition to that of Lou Elizondo. *
This is quite a story, and well worth taking the time to read it.
* See https://thedebrief.org/sex-lies-and-ufos-pentagons-head-of-counterintelligence-and-security-ousted/
We played the Colonel Bogey March one year in symphonic band in high school. I very clearly remember the conductor, one Kirke B. Muse (and how’s that for a band leader name!), telling us that we couldn’t play it like a Sousa march; that it was a British march so we had to be very precise and restrained.
BTW, has anyone here looked into ‘Arkanacide’ – the string of deaths supposedly related to the Clintons over the decades?
I suspect it’s largely nonsense. For example, a great deal of ink over the years has been spilled about Vincent Foster’s death, nearly all of it a waste of time to produce and to read.
The thing is, there have been two people (James McDougal and Jeffrey Epstein) who have died in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and who had damaging information about Bilge Clinton (and Hellary too, in the case of McDougal). Their deaths should be investigated by men of probity. If you can find any men of probity, that is.
P,S.–I wrote here before about how the DOD hurriedly set up its own new program to investigate UFOs–the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF)–ahead of the Congressionally mandated organization to study UFOs on a much wider basis and with public reports to be regularly issued, which was ordered to be set up within DOD by the 2022 Defense Authorization act.
This, according to Lou Elizondo and others, was an attempt to continue to keep information on UFOs bottled up within DOD and, indeed, a “Security Classification Guide” produced by the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force indicated that everything about UFOs–including images of them–was to be deemed classified, going so far as to retroactively re-classifying the three Navy videos that had been released to the public in 2017.
Who was to be in charge of this new UAPTF? None other than Garry Reid.
Now that Reid has apparently been sacked, and replaced as head of the UAPTF, perhaps there will be some progress towards more transparency from DOD on the issue of UFOs.