Henry W. McElroy, Jr

A study of the political relations between humanity and ET

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby exopsychman » Tue Jun 15, 2010 4:18 am

I thought for sure someone would have commented by now on ex Senator McElroy's video declaration that he saw a memo to Eisenhower referring to UFOs. Just when I was about to discard the ET hypothesis for once and for all, this video surfaces, seemingly unrelated to anyone in the exopolitics circuit. I know the Source A story captured much attention (great work!), but now this senator comes online, out of the blue, so to speak, with info that is credible because he is not associated with the exopolitics movement.
Has anyone checked to verify the identity of the man in the video? Is he who he claims to be? I was unable to find a photo of him.
Mike
exopsychman
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:57 am


Re: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby Access Denied » Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:24 am

I've seen the Eisenhower memo too...

..it's fake.
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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby exopsychman » Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:55 am

He claims he saw it years ago, while Ike was in office, so it can't be the same fake memo you refer to....if in fact he is who he says he is.
exopsychman
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:57 am

Re: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby Access Denied » Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:38 am

It appears you've been grossly misinformed...

"I would like to submit to our nation my personal testimony of one document related to one of these ongoing topics which I saw while in office, serving on the State Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee."

Did you even listen to the video before you posted it?
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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby gunter » Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:14 pm

Access Denied wrote:I've seen the Eisenhower memo too...

..it's fake.

Evidence, please.

4. Posters are encouraged to cite supporting evidence when providing facts. If no evidence is provided, posters are encouraged to preface their statement with acknowledgement that the post is a statement of opinion only.
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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby longhaircowboy » Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:42 pm

AD I don't think this is the Eisenhower memo your thinking of(that nasty MJ12 bit). From the transcript:
The document I saw was an official brief to President Eisenhower. To the best of my memory this brief was pervaded with a sense of hope, and it informed President Eisenhower of the continued presence of extraterrestrial beings here in the United States of America.


The brief seemed to indicate that a meeting between the President and some of these visitors could be arranged as appropriate if desired.
I dont recall that being in the MJ12 one. But hey I'm gettin old and the hard disk is rusty. If I'm wrong then sorry.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy.

Memory...is an internal rumor.
George Santayana
User avatar
longhaircowboy
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 3:05 am
Location: Florida

Re: A Litany of Lies - The Truth Prevails

Postby gunter » Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:47 pm

Do the rules only apply to the little people? I'll note that Tom has yet answered this notice of proof concerning his statement that he saw the Eisenhower document first hand. Please apply your own rules to yourselves. OK?
Last edited by Access Denied on Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: post moved to relevant thread
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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby Access Denied » Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:51 am

gunter wrote:Evidence, please.

First of all, that’s not how it works. It’s not up to me or anyone else to prove Santa Claus doesn’t exist… indeed, as a philosopher, you should know that’s impossible. The EBD is fake by default because there’s no evidence it’s real… it has no provenance.

That said, given you’ve never done any real research of your own in this field that I’m aware of and often appear to be fairly naive, I don't mind spoon feeding you the evidence to the contrary so start with this…

http://foia.fbi.gov/majestic/majestic.pdf

See also Robert Hastings’ article posted here at RU for a different take…

The MJ-12 Saga Continues: Operation Bird Droppings

longhaircowboy wrote:AD I don't think this is the Eisenhower memo your thinking of(that nasty MJ12 bit).

Good point, you could be right. In reviewing the EBD it appears the "motives and ultimate intentions” of our putative (and dead) visitors "remain completely unknown". Perhaps this could be setting the stage for a new hoaxed document to surface that’s more tailored to the “warm and fuzzy” exopolitical crowd but I kind of doubt it. Note the disclaimer "to the best of my memory" in reference to the alleged briefing that was "pervaded with a sense of hope" that he allegedly read just 4 to 6 (?) short years ago so maybe it was the EBD and whoever's behind this is pushing for a more “positive” spin on it?

Another possibility is this may have something to do with channeler “Gerald Light” (a pseudonym for someone who evidently doesn’t exist) who alleged that Eisenhower had a friendly (?) meeting with ET at Muroc (now Edwards AFB). If that’s the case, see my post at BAUT about that case...

“The following are some select quotes from a good article detailing the origins of this myth that Berlitz and Moore no doubt failed to mention (assuming they even bothered to research the case)…”

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php ... ost1516094

Anyway, who knows? Maybe somebody will turn up who had the foresight to xerox a copy of this alleged “document”… until then I'm not buying it.

gunter wrote:Do the rules only apply to the little people?

I suggest you see somebody about that inferiority complex. :)

gunter wrote:I'll note that Tom has yet answered this notice of proof concerning his statement that he saw the Eisenhower document first hand. Please apply your own rules to yourselves. OK?

Sorry Kim, I had already prepared the above response for you but then duty called and I neglected to post it...
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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby ryguy » Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:33 pm

exopsychman wrote:I thought for sure someone would have commented by now on ex Senator McElroy's video declaration that he saw a memo to Eisenhower referring to UFOs.


I watched the entire statement from Senator McElroy, and my initial impression was that he believes what he's saying, but if he's talking about the same documents that we've seen and heard about, then the poor guy has been misled. Maybe intentionally, maybe not - but if you listen carefully to the circumstances he describes about when & how he saw certain documents, red flags go up.

Just when I was about to discard the ET hypothesis for once and for all, this video surfaces, seemingly unrelated to anyone in the exopolitics circuit.


Thank you for adding "seemingly," as that is not yet completely out of the question.

...now this senator comes online, out of the blue, so to speak, with info that is credible because he is not associated with the exopolitics movement.
Has anyone checked to verify the identity of the man in the video? Is he who he claims to be? I was unable to find a photo of him.
Mike


Not quite yet - obviously other matters have all of our interest, but the moment we saw the video, it went onto the "list of top claims" to check out.

Thanks for the post!

-Ryan
---
"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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby exopsychman » Fri Jul 09, 2010 7:01 pm

Like many others, I tend to lean towards psychological and psychic explanations for UFO phenomena. The ETH, however, has considerable face value, when you take into account the thousands of sightings my pilots, especially by military pilots. The Nazi-era saucer technology being transferred to the USA and developed is one non-ET explanation for UFOs, one that would explain a strategy of deliberately planting evidence and indicators of ET technology. McElroy may well have been the unwitting participant of such a subtle strategy. Same goes for Edgar Mitchell, whom I respect. Like any conspiracy theory or belief system, however, this one is subject to the same weakness: anything and everything can be twisted to fit the theory. Just witness Dr. Salla's desperate attempts to explain Theilman's behaviours.
You could imagine that every one of the Disclosure Project witnesses was a dupe, led to believe that they participated in alien retreivals, etc.
Edgar Mitchell told me, to my face, that he was part of a deliberate disclosure process. His sincerity was palpable, and he also volunteered the info that when he returns to Roswell for family reunions, old timers approach him to tell him things about the crash, things they "need to get off their chest."
As a psychologist, I am am struck by Mitchell's sincerity and genuineness. His advanced age, and his preoccupation with consciousness studies are incompatible with telling tales and Cold War era attitudes. McElroy, although I know nothing about him, conveys much of the same sincerity, and simple truthfulness. A psychologist's sense of a person is data, of low value for certain, but still data, that when combined with other data may advance or refute a hypothesis.
In this case, I find myself being forced to increasingly consider the ETH as valid, despite my having moved away from that explanation. Which is more believable: an elaborate scheme spanning decades, of planted and contrived evidence of UFOs to cover up an earth based technology (to be used someday by the Illuminati to take over the world), OR, extraterrestrials and/or interdimensional entities visiting Earth?
exopsychman
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:57 am

Re: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby ryguy » Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:32 pm

exopsychman wrote:Which is more believable: an elaborate scheme spanning decades, of planted and contrived evidence of UFOs to cover up an earth based technology (to be used someday by the Illuminati to take over the world), OR, extraterrestrials and/or interdimensional entities visiting Earth?


Personally, I think a fairly simple scheme spanning decades was all that was needed. It doesn't take much to "cover-up" the truth in this case, since so many people believe the technology can't possibly be of this earth - half the job is done. All an organization would need to do is to reinforce the belief that the sightings are Alien/Extra-terrestrial in nature. People are all too willing to accept that hypothesis, and no one bothers digging any deeper into other earth-based possibilities, which in my mind is unfortunate.

The ETH is just taking the easy way out.


DUCK AND COVER(UP): U.S. RADIATION TESTING ON HUMANS

The Haywood letter may help explain a recently discovered 1953 Pentagon document, declassified in 1975. The two-page order from the secretary of defense ostensibly brought U.S. guidelines for human experimentation. in line with the Nuremberg Code, making adherence to a universal standard official U.S. policy. Ironically, however, the Pentagon document was classified and thus was probably not seen by many military researchers until its declassification in 1975.2

As these and a steady stream of similar reports confirm, for decades, the U.S. government had not only used human guinea pigs in radiation experiments, but had also followed a policy of deliberate deception and cover up of its misuse of both civilians and military personnel in nuclear weapons development and radiation research. While the Department of Energy (DoE) has made some belated moves toward greater openness, there are clear indications that other federal agencies and the White House have not yet deviated from the time-honored tradition of deceit and self-serving secrecy.


A PATTERN OF IGNORED DISCLOSURES

The record of U.S. government lies, misrepresentation, and cover-ups to support its nuclear research program is incontrovertible, if not yet complete. From the inception of the U.S. nuclear program, government policy has placed military and scientific interests above both the well-being of thousands of people and the truth. And, Secretary O'Leary's evident openness notwithstanding, the government's record in responding to earlier disclosures is not reassuring. When faced with damaging disclosures in the past, the government attempted to stonewall. When that would not suffice, the government only grudgingly responded.


This is an example of at least a 20 year cover-up, only made public in the mid 1970s.

-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: Henry W. McElroy, Jr

Postby exopsychman » Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:53 am

OK, I'm starting to get educated. But the coverup of high technology has apparently been going on for decades, involving Hollywood, strategically planting misleading ideas, recruiting many people (like McElroy) to make "Disclosures", and misleading people like Edgar Mitchell. And, unlike other coverups, this one seems bullet-proof, RU notwithstanding. Is it really the same, but better because of the inherent believability in ET, or qualitatively different sort of coverup?
I'm not sure the ETH is an "easy way out", because if we accept it as true, we would still have to explain the psychic manifestations, which are almost always associated with the few physical traces cases on record. You would think, that in an "either-or" choice, the two types of evidence would also support "either or" hypothesis.
Not only that, I could imagine some pretty hot earthling-designed technology under wraps, but the timeline does not explain the early manifestations, such as the Los Angeles event at the start of WWII. Events such as that at Rendelsham Forest also do not fit the pattern of a psy-ops: it was too complex, physical, with a cast of hundreds, etc.

If there is as coverup as described, it doesn't fit all the data.
The more I look at all the conflicting evidence, the more I feel moved to select "all of the above." Now that, is a scary thought.
Thanks for the sharing
exopsychman
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:57 am


Google

Return to Exopolitics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests

cron