Source A Exposed!

A study of the political relations between humanity and ET

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby jeddyhi » Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:35 pm

Lets not forget that in his friends list at facebook are other Theilmanns.....relatives one would naturally assume. This whole idea of these pages being faked is silly and is a grasp at straws. Yes Theilmann belongs to social networking sites....why is that hard to accept? Don't all covert agents that meet with extraterrestrials on behalf of the US government have facebook and myspace pages? They don't? Well, imagine that!
User avatar
jeddyhi
Reality Is In Sight
Reality Is In Sight
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:32 pm
Location: Ohio,USA


Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby AussieMike » Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:49 pm

jeddyhi wrote:Lets not forget that in his friends list at facebook are other Theilmanns.....relatives one would naturally assume. This whole idea of these pages being faked is silly and is a grasp at straws. Yes Theilmann belongs to social networking sites....why is that hard to accept? Don't all covert agents that meet with extraterrestrials on behalf of the US government have facebook and myspace pages? They don't? Well, imagine that!


Thanks jeddyhi, indeed another factor to add to the scales when weighing the balance of probability these are his accounts.
The suggestion they are fake has no merit whatsoever imo.

I'm of the view any sensible, reasonable person would be able to form that view beyond a doubt, and be satisfied in their minds this was the case
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby gunter » Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:52 pm

Don't all covert agents that meet with extraterrestrials on behalf of the US government have facebook and myspace pages?
Perhaps they do, maybe they don't. But what of people being set up? Those do. Look at the evidence developed about Lee Harvey Oswald by the Warren Commission. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that that the guy was framed by the IC? In that case- by the head of the FBI? Everything is not always as it appears to be, John. That's all I'm saying. Consider everything...

I'm of the view any sensible, reasonable person would be able to form that view beyond a doubt, and be satisfied in their minds this was the case
Reasonable people often disagree.
consider everything/ believe nothing
Image
User avatar
gunter
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby AussieMike » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:10 pm

Each member of the jury of peers must come to their own conclusions of course.
However im confident the body of evidence points to a guilty verdict in regards to the matter before us, that being the question is the source A story a lie ?.
The jury will likely not reach a unanimous decision, but again im confident that the balance of guilty votes will find the prosecutions case proven.
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby ryguy » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:12 pm

gunter wrote:Look at the evidence developed about Lee Harvey Oswald by the Warren Commission. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that that the guy was framed by the IC?


No, but that's a completely different context and level of global/international importance and national security.

If you think the Source A/Richard case through with a rational mind, the IC argument is ridiculous and doesn't make sense.

1. How would they know one of the researchers would be clever enough to identify a pin on the lapel of the man's suit?
2. How would they know another researcher would spend the time to dig through dozens/hundreds of photos to luckily locate a needle in a haystack - the man wearing a nametag.

It was only the name that netted the Myspace page. No one tipped off the team and no one pointed the team in the direction of the MySpace page. It was found through a series of unfortunate discoveries (unfortunate for Richard).

So any attempt to frame the discovery as set up by the IC is, quite frankly, completely stupid.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby AussieMike » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:24 pm

I would also add that the "no comment" stance taken by the accused does not help their case one bit

The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 amended the right to silence by allowing inferences to be drawn by the jury in cases where a suspect refuses to explain something, and then later produces an explanation (in other words the jury is entitled to infer that the accused fabricated the explanation at a later date)
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby gunter » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:49 pm

ryguy wrote:
gunter wrote:Look at the evidence developed about Lee Harvey Oswald by the Warren Commission. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that that the guy was framed by the IC?


No, but that's a completely different context and level of global/international importance and national security.

If you think the Source A/Richard case through with a rational mind, the IC argument is ridiculous and doesn't make sense.

1. How would they know one of the researchers would be clever enough to identify a pin on the lapel of the man's suit?
2. How would they know another researcher would spend the time to dig through dozens/hundreds of photos to luckily locate a needle in a haystack - the man wearing a nametag.

It was only the name that netted the Myspace page. No one tipped off the team and no one pointed the team in the direction of the MySpace page. It was found through a series of unfortunate discoveries (unfortunate for Richard).

So any attempt to frame the discovery as set up by the IC is, quite frankly, completely stupid.

-Ry

As I've said I'm playing devil's advocate here. Even the devil is owed one when accused. It seems to me that Thailmann's name would have eventually surfaced regardless of all due precaution by the the Picknoses. It is no great leap of faith then that some googledouche like the Weiner would discover a planted Myspace page. Actually- it would be predictable and expected given the circumstances. Thus are the means and methods of the IC. Would it surprise me to find that even googleboy Weiner himself was an agent of deception? Not at all. As Centrist so famously said to Shawnna lo those many years ago: "Trust no-one."
consider everything/ believe nothing
Image
User avatar
gunter
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby ryguy » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:09 pm

gunter wrote:As I've said I'm playing devil's advocate here. Even the devil is owed one when accused. It seems to me that Thailmann's name would have eventually surfaced regardless of all due precaution by the the Picknoses.

It is no great leap of faith then that some googledouche like the Weiner would discover a planted Myspace page. Actually- it would be predictable and expected given the circumstances.


Honestly - I don't think so. Not given the status quo in the world of Ufology. I'm not just spouting platitudes when I say that John and Andy represent what I consider (hope) is a new generation of Ufo research. In every way, I believe that the setup of the Thailmann hoax assumed that it would be "business as usual" in Ufology. Googleboy Weiner (as you accurately describe him...lol) only accomplished his feat of research after the rest of the team acted in a manner that was not the accepted Ufology believer protocol....that is, actually extracting any items that could be verified in the story and then following through and verifying them.

So, before you can make the leap of faith that someone would discover a "planted" MySpace page, you'd have to make the leap of faith that someone would discover the name - and I very strongly disagree that anyone would have ever predicted that from some obscure photo of a crowd of people, some readers/researchers would have the skill to extract enough data to get the name.

It wasn't the identification of the MySpace page that was the clincher, or even surprising - it was obtaining the name, and that was not at all predictable or expected given the circumstances. Absolutely no information was volunteered or offered. If the IC planted the page(s), they would have had to:

1. Assume or suspect someone would eventually obtain the name.
2. Get all of Theilmann's family to accept the account as authentic, and even interact with it without realizing the account was "planted" and fake.

Occam's Razor should apply, yes?

So, tell me, with all honesty, which is the simplest theory here...that (A) the IC completely fabricated these social networking accounts with the assumption or worry that someone would one day identify the name, additionally bamboozling Richard's entire base of family and friends and spending time interacting with them. Or (B), that the Pickerings and/or Richard completely fabricated the entire story for their own long-term agenda (which will now, thankfully, never come to fruition for them).

Thus are the means and methods of the IC. Would it surprise me to find that even googleboy Weiner himself was an agent of deception? Not at all. As Centrist so famously said to Shawnna lo those many years ago: "Trust no-one."


Weiner is nothing more than an agent of self-inflation. He'd probably love it if people started thinking he was an agent of deception.

You always take me back down memory lane....lol. Man, those are some old ghosts from the past...it's almost like another lifetime ago.

But, I digress.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby gunter » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:26 pm

You always take me back down memory lane....lol. Man, those are some old ghosts from the past...it's almost like another lifetime ago.

But, I digress.
hahahahaha My pleasure. My mum used to tell me that 'we worry the cosmos into existence.' That worry requires a long memory.
consider everything/ believe nothing
Image
User avatar
gunter
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby gunter » Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:20 pm

There's much to consider here in Mike Salla's latest post at OMF if you agree with his initial point of departure (bolded by me) that LCRT actually imparted any information to the Pickers at all- a contention that remains unproven (and one which, due to Herr Wienerwanker's flight of premature ejaculation, may never be established.) In any case I quote his remark in full here as a case in point of an issue that was never addressed in the RU investigation- the issue of possible IC involvement based upon recent, notorious examples. To my mind this is the only important issue in the entire soap opera- factual inaccuracies not withstanding (all due apologies to Andy and John).

I've noticed an increasing tendency to castigate the Pickering brothers for participating in a hoax, and disseminating patent falsehoods based on what LCDRT has told them. Some post with the vehemence of abused victims who were steered down the wrong path for two years. Demanding proof and explanations for the inconsistencies in the Pickerings story given what investigators have found.

I understand the anger but feel it is misplaced because the Pickerings have been clear from the beginning that Source A/LCDRT was a covert operative from the beginning. That what he was passing on to the Pickerings was sanctioned by more senior Navy personnel, but they were in the black world, and not the Navy white world. This meant that there was to be no official paper trail, no way for mainstream media to get involved, etc. So the normal yardstick in investigating cases and fact checking was always going to be hampered by a lack of documentation which is the norm for the covert world operations. It was always clear to me and a few others that what Source A/LCDRT was relaying was going to be seeded with obfuscations and misdirections. I believe that is the standard MO for covert ops sanctioned to leak info to the general public.

Richard Doty is an example of the kind of covert op/intelligence agent that interacts with UFO/exopolitics researchers. Very gregarious, knowledgeable, with genuine credentials and links to higher authorities, and able to win the trust and loyalty of their targets. Doty did with Linda Moulton Howe, Paul Bennewitz, Bill Moore, etc. LCDRT has met a number of researchers who have been impressed with him, Bruce Maccabee, Bob Vanderclock, Morningstar, etc.

However, anyone assessing the claims of a covert op must do so from the beginning with the assumption that there is going to be a sprinkling of the truth with disinfo. That's standard. If some want to throw out the baby with the bath water. Feel free to do so, but why assert your abused victim mentality on others that are happy to sort out the wheat from the chaff and work the aspects of the info that is most reliable and move on from there. The core of Theilmann's claims regarding UN UFO discussions and alien-Navy liaisons are accurate in my opinion since there are other sources supporting this.

As for Katrina, the heart operation, facebook etc., all probably part of a failsafe that would be used to discredit LCDRT if he was ever exposed. Again, standard MO for covert ops. As for the Pickerings, at most they can be accused of being naive in trusting LCDRT so fully and ignoring friendly advice not to bite too deeply into the apple he was giving them. Experience can be a great teacher.
http://lucianarchy.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=recent
consider everything/ believe nothing
Image
User avatar
gunter
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby ryguy » Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:57 pm

I love how every proven lie is called a "fail-safe."

Not really much sense in arguing with such circular logic, is there? If you point out an empty glass to Salla, he'll tell you that the empty glass was placed there just to mislead you into thinking that it wasn't full, proving that at some point the glass was full.

Using such logic, any con-artist can get away with any con simply by claiming that every point you prove as a lie is a "fail-safe."

In my opinion, the above quoted text just further proves to me, beyond a shadow of any doubt, that in the case of most entrenched Ufologists - you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

We'll continue trying to lead folks to water, but you know what - if you would rather return to the desert to keep walking aimlessly in circles, that's your right. I take comfort in the fact that every day I keep seeing more and more people finally taking a drink and opening their eyes.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby gunter » Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:10 pm

Ryan, with all due respect- there are indeed alternate realities based in pro-active confusion initiatives. There is always more to any abstracted reality than meets the eye. Have you considered the Vietnam MIA issue? There's a profound analysis of that in the most recent TAC (The American Conservative) which I assume you read. Perception is reality and perception can be manipulated. You're really struggling with your own preferred paradigm. Remember the hall of mirrors? Don't settle; it's not like you. http://amconmag.com/article/2010/jul/01/00008/
consider everything/ believe nothing
Image
User avatar
gunter
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby murnut » Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:02 pm

Alright...I'm back

Reply in lite blue



exopolitics

member is offline
Joined: Feb 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 303
Karma: 23

Re: UN / Source "A" - Discussion & Follow Up IV
« Reply #2815 Today at 4:37pm »
I've noticed an increasing tendency to castigate the Pickering brothers for participating in a hoax, and disseminating patent falsehoods based on what LCDRT has told them.


People are frustrated with the fact that after being confronted again the Pickering's withdrew and have not answered any questions at all about there involvement....instead, they have spokespeople...you Salla, Tricia/99/Cy.

Theories are floated to see which dog will hunt.....is this really how innocent dupes act? They clam up and have others do their talking for them?


Some post with the vehemence of abused victims who were steered down the wrong path for two years. Demanding proof and explanations for the inconsistencies in the Pickerings story given what investigators have found.


I believe we are owed an explanation...are we not?
I understand the anger but feel it is misplaced because the Pickerings have been clear from the beginning that Source A/LCDRT was a covert operative from the beginning.


Based on what exactly has it been established this was a covert op?

Was it just Richard's word...or was it supported in some manner?

How was it supported exactly?

What attempts were made to fact check exactly?



That what he was passing on to the Pickerings was sanctioned by more senior Navy personnel, but they were in the black world, and not the Navy white world.

How was it established it was sanctioned?

Was it just Richard's word?

Was there any Black world proof? What was it?

What attempts were made to fact check exactly?


This meant that there was to be no official paper trail, no way for mainstream media to get involved, etc.


How convenient for you

So the normal yardstick in investigating cases and fact checking was always going to be hampered by a lack of documentation which is the norm for the covert world operations.


I would like details into what fact checking...your yard stick as it were... was done...because it is fairly clear and painfully obvious, the brothers did very little...given the results so far of a continuing investigation.

It was always clear to me and a few others that what Source A/LCDRT was relaying was going to be seeded with obfuscations and misdirections. I believe that is the standard MO for covert ops sanctioned to leak info to the general public.


True...to be fair, you said a while ago that you thought the conformer story was false and that you had problems with it?

However Dr. Salla....

YOU HAD RICHARDS NAME FOR TWO PLUS YEARS AND

EITHER YOU FACT CHECKED AND KEPT WHAT YOU

FOUND UNDER WRAPS OR YOU NEVER FACT CHECKED

AT ALL...ZERO, NADA, ZILCH. EITHER WAY YOU WERE

TOTALLY AS NEGLIGENT AS THE BROTHERS



Richard Doty is an example of the kind of covert op/intelligence agent that interacts with UFO/exopolitics researchers.

Doty is an example that was pointed out many times by me on omf in relation to this tale...I was ignored

Very gregarious, knowledgeable, with genuine credentials and links to higher authorities, and able to win the trust and loyalty of their targets. Doty did with Linda Moulton Howe, Paul Bennewitz, Bill Moore, etc.


Clearly no one learned a damn thing from the Doty caper


LCDRT has met a number of researchers who have been impressed with him, Bruce Maccabee, Bob Vanderclock, Morningstar, etc.

I would like to interview Vanderclock and Morningstar...is it now their opinion they were duped as well?

However, anyone assessing the claims of a covert op must do so from the beginning with the assumption that there is going to be a sprinkling of the truth with disinfo.


Again...what were the steps involved in fact checking this claim...in detail please.

Or was any done at all....again Michael...you had his name for 2 plus years...what if any fact checking did Salla do.

That is a question I would sure like Salla to answer



That's standard. If some want to throw out the baby with the bath water. Feel free to do so, but why assert your abused victim mentality on others that are happy to sort out the wheat from the chaff and work the aspects of the info that is most reliable and move on from there.


Most reliable? Don't you mean most believable? Clearly you don't fact check...or if you did, you held back on disclosing it?

Whose opinion of reliable? Yours or mine?

Did you ask Richard if it was his myspace page and facebook? What did he say? I know you asked...why aren't you giving us details and only making lame excuses for those that don't speak for themselves for what ever reason?

I'm completely shocked no one is asking Salla tough questions like these.

Salla needs to be held accountable at the very least



The core of Theilmann's claims regarding UN UFO discussions and alien-Navy liaisons are accurate in my opinion since there are other sources supporting this.


What other sources? Are they as reliable as Theilmann? Did you fact check them the same as Theilmann?

Don't you think it is fair to say you were duped as well and you have no idea what to believe given this latest revelation from you?

Do you realize you just cooked your own goose?



As for Katrina, the heart operation, facebook etc., all probably part of a failsafe that would be used to discredit LCDRT if he was ever exposed. Again, standard MO for covert ops. As for the Pickerings, at most they can be accused of being naive in trusting LCDRT so fully and ignoring friendly advice not to bite too deeply into the apple he was giving them. Experience can be a great teacher. « Last Edit: Today at 4:40pm by exopolitics »[/quote]


Apparently you are not a great student of experience now are you?
"The Conformers are hard to read. They are rocks."
User avatar
murnut
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:35 am

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby ryguy » Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:23 pm

gunter wrote:Ryan, with all due respect- there are indeed alternate realities based in pro-active confusion initiatives. There is always more to any abstracted reality than meets the eye. Have you considered the Vietnam MIA issue?


Yes! But you're referring to propaganda which a majority accepts and the evidence doesn't support. In *this case* we are referring to propaganda (that the RT case has the IC involved) which a minority accepts and the evidence doesn't support. In both cases, evidence leads the way to objective reality - whether it's the reality of stranded/deserted POW's or the reality that the Pickering's and/or RT lied a minimum of 3 or 4 times to cover up their empty story. Repeat after me....the evidence always points you toward Objective Reality. You just have to be willing to accept where the existing evidence points, even though you may not like it. (Not you, specifically, but those who want to believe the IC is involved in this silly Ufology scam.)

Perception is reality and perception can be manipulated.


I disagree - perception is belief, but it isn't always reality. Reality is reality, and I'll repeat that mantra to my dying day, because despite the litany of b.s. that continues to stream from conspiracy theorists, you can believe whatever conspiracy that you want even though evidence doesn't support it - but believing and perceiving does not make it an objective reality.

You're really struggling with your own preferred paradigm. Remember the hall of mirrors? Don't settle; it's not like you. http://amconmag.com/article/2010/jul/01/00008/


Thank you, but honestly, I'm not. If the evidence pointed to RT being legit and the UN meeting actually taking place, I would be one of the first journalists booking a flight to interview anyone from the UN about it. What I do struggle with, is understanding how people can become so entrenched in their belief system that they continue to perceive something as real (that the RT/Pickering scam involves the IC) when all of the evidence points to the contrary. It truly confounds my mind how people can be so closed minded to the naked truth.

By the way *great* post Andy!

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Source A Exposed!

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:43 pm

Salla is one of the most disgusting propagandists I have ever seen. And that is putting it mildly. Mur's retorts are, of course, dead-on. And Toon, the fact that you would give cover for such a dipshitwad as Salla (with the "excuse" of playing devils advocate) brings you to a new low in my mind too. But I am sure that matters not to you.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

PreviousNext

Google

Return to Exopolitics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron