so what are they pulling down? after taxes?

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: so what are they pulling down? after taxes?

Postby jjflash » Wed May 11, 2011 2:36 pm

Hey, guys -

I interpret you have long since decided on a zero tolerance for people who intentionally try to misrepresent facts and distort actuality. I empathize as well as support your efforts.

I ask for a bit of empathy to be reciprocated in considering you may have grown a bit quick to interpret needs for action when no such need exists, however. Let's please start by reviewing my statements that I interpret initially drew the attention of AD:

jjflash wrote:Hello, James Carlson -

Thank you for your post. I appreciate it. You bring up valid points worthy of consideration. I would like to expand and comment on some of the issues related to nonprofit corporations that I think members of the UFO community would be well advised to keep in mind.

For starters, nonprofit organizations have a long and well documented history of providing cover for military black budget projects. There are many potential advantages to nonprofit foundations and corporations serving as conduits for shuffling funds, ultimately carrying out research and various activities as directed by the Department of Defense and its sub-agencies. This of course does not mean that every nonprofit organization should be considered suspect, but it is what it is.


Please note that I did not state I could prove any specific UFO organizations have acted as conduits for the CIA or specific branches of the military. I stated that I thought members of the UFO community would be well advised to keep some issues in mind that relate to the roles of nonprofit organizations in providing cover for black ops. This is an expression of an opinion which I happen to hold.

I then directly stated that nonprofit orgs have a long and well documented history of providing said cover. I did not state UFO research nonprofit organizations have such a history; I stated nonprofit organizations have such a history. I even went as far as to clarify the obvious: every nonprofit org should not be considered suspect.

AD then asked me to provide examples of such nonprofits that provided cover. I did.

As for the CIA not being a military division, I of course acknowledge that this is technically an accurate statement. I am sure you can equally acknowledge that of course the Agency is deeply involved in military matters. If helpful, I will pay closer attention to my use of terms in the future, perhaps simply using the term intelligence community in such circumstances.

As initially stated, I understand and appreciate your attention to detail and your attempts to keep your board clean of misrepresentations of truth. I sincerely support your efforts.
jjflash
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:40 pm


Re: so what are they pulling down? after taxes?

Postby Access Denied » Thu May 12, 2011 7:08 am

No sweat JJF… :)

Much appreciated.

[more later]
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: so what are they pulling down? after taxes?

Postby James Carlson » Fri May 13, 2011 2:42 am

jjflash -- Personally, I'm thankful for your interest and your input; a lot of things need to be said on this level, and I think it's probably a fact of life that most people just don't have any background in public charities and the legal protections that are always offered, yet rarely discussed (and definitely not guaranteed or protected as so many assume). As for me, my comments and involvement lately have been at a minimum due to factors at work that I have no control over. This does NOT mean that I'm not interested. I'm reading all of the comments, and I assure you, I have a great deal of interest in this particular thread. I'm also very curious where it will eventually go -- a lot of directions have been pointed out lately, and I don't think any of them lack the sparks of interest necessary for combustion (and what a terrible sentence that is). There are so many "next steps" available to us as a result of Luck's research and some of your own fine tuning, that when I do get the chance to settle down and relax a bit, there will be plenty of places left to go where I (for one) can learn something new and possibly very useful to my own intentions.

My primary interest is in preventing the popular establishment of silly interpolations stemming from a single case; I don't want to discuss UFOs at all. I promise you, they don't interest me very much. That being said, I've discovered the past two years or so (to my amazement and my great personal pleasure) that there are many, many ways to accomplish that end, and numerous fields of study and influence that I would never have suspected would be so useful when I first started. This happens to be one of them, and I am very grateful to everyone's input, as they tend to make my life far less complicated than it used to be, when I had to figure everything out for myself.

This thread isn't tremendously long, but in my estimation, the information thus far disclosed will eventually have very great ramifications within those communities I am most interested in reaching. When a public charity -- any public charity -- makes claims that cannot be supported, they should not be granted (as some kind of reward for their BS) legal advantages of income that surpass those granted to common citizens. And the importance of tax revenue in ALL future discussions held on every political level for the next few years will bring this issue to the attention of a great many people who consider themselves to be good Americans -- which is exactly as it should be (and please don't consider this a cut at the citizenry of other nations; I take it as given that the national economy of other nations is likely superior to our own; it was in America, after all, that shooting yourself in the foot was eventually elevated to another option for consideration). I promise you, it doesn't matter much which side of the fence you happen to lean on the most, sooner or later, everyone sees the advantages that can be gained by simply telling the truth. And, of course, by pointing out the lies.

And on that small note, I'll very likely retire in silence for a few more days as I try to work a little grease into a few rusty corners of my somewhat more annoying professional life. This doesn't, however, speak of my personal interest in this particular thread, and I am enjoying the Hell out of reading every single sentence -- often more than a few times (and not just my own!!). I'm very curious to know where it will eventually lead us, so you and everybody else have my thanks. That being said, zero tolerance applies to intentional deceit alone, as far as I'm concerned. You are welcome to read some of the very in-depth discussions on that level that we have had in the "Can You Trust Them?" thread. I think you'll discover that I can personally be very forgiving regarding any other class of assertions made. I find intentional deceit an unforgivable insult to my intelligence, and I assume most readers feel the same way. Anything else is exploration -- and people should expect varied opinions, different points of view, distortions of perceived reality, and often very heartfelt disputes to surface whenever exploration occurs. Our disagreements surrounding what we can teach each other is the only thing that makes life interesting, because it enables growth. Intentional deceit is what hinders growth and retards development. But anything less than that is fun.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Previous

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 15 guests

cron