Jimmy Falun Gong, Values Drive UFO Truth |542|

Alex

Administrator
Jimmy Falun Gong, Values Drive UFO Truth |542|
by Alex Tsakiris | Mar 1 | Others
Share
Tweet

Jimmy Falun Gong defines Tin Foil Left and explains why he’s skeptical of UFOs.
skpetiko-542-jimmy-falun-gong-300x300.jpg
 
Going down the UFOs and nukes rabbit hole, the farther you go, the less substance there is. For example the claim that nobody can explain why all the missiles malfunctioned at the same time was debunked in a SUNLite article. Now, if you simply dismiss the evidence contrary to your beliefs, then there's no discussion to be had, but I don't work that way. When I investigate a claim, the first thing I do is try to find evidence that contradicts it. That's the classic Socratic method. Eventually the positives and negatives can all be cancelled out, leaving the most reasonable explanation.

This doesn't mean I'm saying that no UFO sighting reports have described incidents over or near military installations. But that is a whole other starting point than aliens zapping nuclear missiles in their silos. Given that I do believe that alien visitation is a reality, I do think it's reasonable to assume that that the aliens are here for a reason, the most likely being to study what's going on here, and therefore at some point, it's reasonable to expect that at some point they'd have a look at human activity, including military operations.

In doing that it may be the case that they interfered with ICBM circuitry, or it may be the case that the circuitry was susceptible to EM emissions that were a byproduct of the UFO's propulsion system, and the malfunction was unintentional, or maybe the circuit board simply failed on its own, and all the rest is an embellishment of various disjointed bits and pieces of hearsay and fabrication — we don't know. For that matter, the whole story could be a disinformation plot as part of the ongoing Cold War with Russia.
 
... missiles malfunctioned at the same time was debunked in a SUNLite article.

Seems like hastings wins this one... ko... referee stops contest in first round

=======================

https://www.theufochronicles.com/2016/09/ufos-and-nukes-documentary-critiqued-by.html

A few days ago, I wrote an article in which I expressed surprise that none of my critics had publicly commented on my documentary film, UFOs and Nukes: The Secret Link Revealed, which has been available at Vimeo On Demand since April.

A search of the Internet reveals the extent to which some debunkers have attacked me over the years, following the 2008 publication of my book UFOs and Nukes, in which I present dozens of incidents involving UFO activity at American nuclear weapons sites, as reported in declassified files and military witness testimony. Consequently, I was expecting more of the same once the film was released.

By Robert Hastings
The UFO Chronicles
9-16-16
Shortly after my article appeared online, one of those skeptics, Tim Hebert, wrote a critique which, not surprisingly, contains a number of factual errors, convenient omissions and other misrepresentations.

For example, he writes, “There is little to no information offered to the viewer that numerous pages of documents are available that tell an entire different story, or when the highlighted document segments are shown in context to the full document itself, a different interpretation takes shape that has nothing to do with UFOs.”

This is wishful thinking on Hebert’s part. There are hundreds of declassified U.S. government files concerning UFO incursions at ICBM sites, weapons storage facilities, bomb and missile test ranges, and other nukes-related sites. The film presents excerpts from 16 of those documents—made public by the U.S. Air Force, FBI and CIA in response to FOIA requests—15 of which explicitly and entirely concern UFO activity at nuclear weapons locations. Additionally, two Soviet Army documents, smuggled out of Russia, detail UFO incidents at that country’s ICBM sites or nukes storage facilities.

The one American document that does not openly mention UFO activity is a military teletype message, known as a TWX, sent from Malmstrom AFB, Montana in March 1967, concerning the mysterious full-flight shutdown of ten Minuteman ICBMs at Echo Flight. Because the message was only the initial report of an event, prior to any investigation of it, no mention of UFOs is made.



However, two U.S. Air Force veterans—Col. Walter Figel and TSgt. Henry Barlow—have stated for the record that a UFO was reported near one of the missiles moments before all ten dropped-off alert status. Both men appear in the film—the former on audio tape—and make startling admissions.

Figel confirms that a missile security guard had called him in the Echo Launch Control Capsule to report “a large, round object” hovering directly over one of the ICBMs. Further, during my lengthy interview with him—not shown in the film—Figel stated that he had sent out two Security Alert Teams to investigate, one of which confirmed the presence of the UFO. Figel also revealed that he and his missile commander, Captain Eric Carlson, were later debriefed back at Malmstrom by “everybody and his brother” and ordered not to talk about the incident.

Figel’s first taped telephone interview with me, recorded in 2008, may be heard in its entirety. It should be noted that the colonel has never disputed the accuracy of the recording or asked me to remove it from my website. Two other telephone interviews with Figel, taped in 2009 and 2010, are also available. (These three audio files are not available on mobile devices.)

Tim Hebert and Eric Carlson’s son, James, have repeatedly denied or misrepresented Figel’s comments to me. Unfortunately for them, I have our conversations on tape. The reader may listen to them and judge for him/herself the nature and importance of Figel’s candid remarks.

The other veteran who discusses the Echo Flight incident in the film, former Electro-Mechanical Technician Henry Barlow, was involved in bringing up some of the stricken missiles. On the way to the first ICBM silo, he and his team member were told by radio to keep their eyes open “because UFO activity had been reported in the area”. Barlow was later told that a disc-shaped UFO had been spotted hovering over the missile designated Echo-2 just before the full-flight shutdown occurred.

In any case, Hebert’s characterization of the documents presented in the film—which he claims are misleading because they are either not pertinent or are taken out of context—is simply inaccurate. One may go to my website’s Documents page and leisurely read several of the declassified files that, of necessity, only briefly appear in the documentary.

Robert Kaminski
Also presented in the film are confirmatory revelations about the Echo Flight incident by the Boeing engineer who investigated it, Robert Kaminski, who has written (see below) that his team could find no known technical explanation for the missile shutdown and further mentions that a Boeing-Air Force liaison later informed him that Air Force personnel had categorized the incident as “a UFO event”.
 
Excellent work Alex.
I am a Tony Robbins fan as well, and I think values are at play too.
I point out in another thread the values of Americans who render everything into a Left/Right political dichotomy even when it doesn't make sense.
I didn't realize how bad the programming was when someone said that I was doing this simply by pointing out that Populism versus Oligarchy is not a Left/Right problem. It's a class issue and a structural problem for unregulated capitalism.
Like Thomas Frank's book "What the Matter with Kansas?" where he outlines how people vote against their self interests in America and how the strange arguments of values are used to prevent them from actually making definitive changes.
The Harvard study that showed that your federal elected officials are most likely to do what the most wealthy want as opposed to the average American should have been another loud cannon thunder in the air to tell people.
It was not. The programming is too big. Socialism is Communism bad. Capitalism is freedom good.

Even Bill Gates is a perfect example, as is the massive number of studies of what extreme wealth does to- well empathy for one.
https://jacobinmag.com/2021/08/bill-gates-jeffrey-epstein-mistake-cnn-interview
"their friendship [Epstein and Gates] was a grotesque demonstration of what happens when you give a small group of people unfathomable wealth and power."
 
It's a class issue and a structural problem for unregulated capitalism.
This is an interesting point and one I am sensitive to most certainly. I do think there's an additional descriptive element that is important here. That is the concept of the mega-corporation. I think regulation becomes more important as the entity being regulated scales in size. Its likely understood by most as implicit to this line of thinking, but I do think its important to be specific.

The drug store that dominated a rural community's market through unfair trade practices (i.e., a local variant on "unregulated capitalism") did not have the ability to drive Regulatory Capture at a federal level. Walmart certainly did and does. To the point that, as we all know, the number of small, family owned drug stores have diminished greatly. This concentrated tens of billions of dollars in wealth to one family (Waltons). All things equal probably not the outcome a society would want.

It is nuanced though as progress in commerce should be considered a good thing. Large corporations have the scale that's needed to drive innovation that would otherwise be impossible for a small business. So size does matter in some respects.
 
This is an interesting point and one I am sensitive to most certainly. I do think there's an additional descriptive element that is important here. That is the concept of the mega-corporation. I think regulation becomes more important as the entity being regulated scales in size. Its likely understood by most as implicit to this line of thinking, but I do think its important to be specific.

The drug store that dominated a rural community's market through unfair trade practices (i.e., a local variant on "unregulated capitalism") did not have the ability to drive Regulatory Capture at a federal level. Walmart certainly did and does. To the point that, as we all know, the number of small, family owned drug stores have diminished greatly. This concentrated tens of billions of dollars in wealth to one family (Waltons). All things equal probably not the outcome a society would want.

It is nuanced though as progress in commerce should be considered a good thing. Large corporations have the scale that's needed to drive innovation that would otherwise be impossible for a small business. So size does matter in some respects.

Couldn't agree more!
The larger the organization (private, corporate, NGO, religious, you name it) the more necessity for transparency because the greater the chance of it becoming less human and more of a mechanical body.
Wealth and power tends to distance us from the suffering of our fellow man.
One thing I have yet to get a successful answer is when given the whole idea that people do well because they deserve it.
Carlin was great at dispelling that myth.

The other part is, how many people can or want to be actually entrepreneurs or who have the values to make lots of money?
That's more of those values that Alex talks about. Some people simply want to do a good job and pay the bills. Hell, how many people do we know who work strictly for the weekend? They don't think beyond that. That's the values of most people.
So, are they, in this ideology just destined to starve? To fall out of the middle class when they are the backbone of any community?
It's not the Wall Street brokers, the International Bankers, even the AI tech specialists.
They are firefighters, shop keepers, street cleaners, garbage men, postal workers, and the like.
Most of those jobs have great value, but not great wealthy.

https://www.inc.com/jessica-stillma...oming wealthier,may care about their feelings.
"Researchers believe that becoming wealthier actually makes you less empathetic. "Wealth and abundance give us a sense of freedom and independence from others. The less we have to rely on others, the less we may care about their feelings. This leads us towards being more self-focused," explains the same Scientific American article. "

Until we solve the empathy and connection problem of extreme wealth. We need to limit it from existing only in the hands of the few.
J
 
Great episode Alex!
As always, it's such a huge value to have a host push back against guests perspectives.
I appreciated the sort of parallel between Hitler's Germany and UFO phenomenon.

I'm of the impression that the following goes for most topics covered on Skeptiko:
-A phenomenon/event/movement is discovered
-Some agency (Totalitarian Human Nature perhaps) succeeds at subversion
-At some point, the original phenomenon/event/movement no longer exists(in the realm of discourse), having been significantly or fully been supplanted.
-Said phenomenon/event/movement is reduced to whatever the successful agency needs it to be.

You could apply this to any p/e/m at any point during the process (any where from inception, to dissolution), and those of us who care most about the inspiration/reason/true-origin of it are basically screwed, because we're dealing with a master class of narrative-magicians.
God I hope love wins, and I don't care how wrong I am about who I presently suspect to be "the good guys".
 
Last edited:
Seems like hastings wins this one ...

Not really. In addition to the evidence in the SUNlite article, skeptics have compared the statements made over time by the various witnesses, revealing inconsistencies in the stories that look more like hole patching than failing memory. But either way, unless I simply ignore the other side of the debate for no good reason, much of the intrigue surrounding UFOs and nukes falls into the realm of uncertainty ( for me ).

But believers will be believers — nothing will change their minds. I see the same sort of believerism with respect to the Sitgreaves National Forest incident, a.k.a. the Travis Walton Abduction case. Personally, my own belief is that alien visitation is a reality, and that many eye-witness accounts are true and reasonably accurate. The problem is being certain about exactly which ones those are.

Always a good show — and thanks for the reply :)
 
Last edited:
You could apply this to any p/e/m at any point during the process (any where from inception, to dissolution), and those of us who care most about the inspiration/reason/true-origin of it are basically screwed, because we're dealing with a master class of narrative-magicians.

nice one!
 
Not really. In addition to the evidence in the SUNlite article, skeptics have compared the statements made over time by the various witnesses, revealing inconsistencies in the stories that look more like hole patching than failing memory. But either way, unless I simply ignore the other side of the debate for no good reason, much of the intrigue surrounding UFOs and nukes falls into the realm of uncertainty ( for me ).

But believers will be believers — nothing will change their minds. I see the same sort of believerism with respect to the Sitgreaves National Forest incident, a.k.a. the Travis Walton Abduction case. Personally, my own belief is that alien visitation is a reality, and that many eye-witness accounts are true and reasonably accurate. The problem is being certain about exactly which ones those are.

Always a good show — and thanks for the reply :)

ok, but I don't think the counter argument stands up:
1 these weapons systems were designed to be autonomous. a failure in one silo should have zero effect on any of the others
2. there should be no failures... I mean we're talking about nuclear weapons. they built in every safeguard that they possibly could these things should never go offline... and it's not like they didn't consider EMI.
3. if they go offline they shouldn't immediately come back online... certainly not in an EMI situation

So even if the chances of one of these silos going down is one in a thousand ( it's almost certainly closer to one in a million) then the chances of all 10 of them going down simultaneously is astronomical.

And remember that the ukrainian missile silos we're simultaneously activated ( actually there's some us ones that did the same) and we didn't know this until the wall came down. so it's doubtful that someone is controlling this narrative.
 
ok, but I don't think the counter argument stands up:

Agreed.

People like ballistic missile operator Robert Salas, who were surely screened to be stable individuals are more believable than any skeptic imo. The Press Conferences that him and his colleagues spoke at are very hard to dismiss.

 
Last edited:
ok, but I don't think the counter argument stands up:
1 these weapons systems were designed to be autonomous. a failure in one silo should have zero effect on any of the others
After launch — yes. But prior to launch, launch control centers are connected to more than one missile. In other words, there wasn't a separate launch control center for each missile. The piece of hardware that failed was the circuit board that controlled the interconnectivity between the missiles and the launch control center before launch.
2. there should be no failures... I mean we're talking about nuclear weapons. they built in every safeguard that they possibly could these things should never go offline... and it's not like they didn't consider EMI.
What should be and what are, are often different things. Parts fail, and the article had a photo of the board. Sure, maybe it was a fake picture. I don't know, but that was their explanation, and it seems reasonable to me. Exactly why it failed is another story. But being a PC tech, I can safely say that parts do wear out and cause failures. Capacitors eventually get old and leak and fail. In those days I don't think solid state caps were even around yet.
3. if they go offline they shouldn't immediately come back online... certainly not in an EMI situation

So even if the chances of one of these silos going down is one in a thousand ( it's almost certainly closer to one in a million) then the chances of all 10 of them going down simultaneously is astronomical.
Not really astronomical at all if you consider the explanation.
And remember that the ukrainian missile silos we're simultaneously activated ( actually there's some us ones that did the same) and we didn't know this until the wall came down. so it's doubtful that someone is controlling this narrative.
When I was looking into that, it turned out that the failsafe for US based systems caused the missile launch to deactivate for obvious safety reasons. However, the soviet based failsafe systems were designed on the presumption that if the launch crew was killed in an attack, the missiles would launch regardless, so when theirs failed, instead of shutting down, they went into launch mode. They were able to get them back under control, and subsequently changed their failsafe protocol to avoid a future similar mishap.

Like I said, looking into the details of most of these cases, their veracity becomes increasingly doubtful. We cannot simply ignore that doubt because we want our friendly space brothers to intervene in matters of mass destruction. If you're not already familiar with my position on alien visitation, I do believe that alien visitation has happened, and is perhaps still happening. The problem remains that of valid scientifically verifiable material evidence.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top