From Whitley Strieber.....do we really shoot down UFOs?
Today I saw in Unknowncountry's Out There section a witness report that suggests that on July 10, the military shot at UFOs that appeared over Fort Lewis, Washington.
That the US military has done so in the past is now a matter of public record, since the British Ministry of Defence released records indicating that the US Air Force attempted to shoot down a UFO over Surrey in May of 1956. The pilot involved, Dr. Milton Torres, now lives in Florida and has confirmed that he did indeed receive such an order, in fact, before he even took off, so eager was the Air Force to carry out this extraordinary act on behalf of the human species, but without our knowledge.
I don't wish to discuss the details of why this might have been done, and why the Air Force sent up armed planes over Stephenville, Texas in 2008, or why the United States has pursued a clear and now publicly revealed policy of shooting at UFOs for more than fifty years.
Doing this may or may not be appropriate. Doing it in secret while lying to the public for over have a century is a lurid and fantastic sin, a permanent mark on the soul of everyone who has been complicit in it.
To understand why this has happened, it is necessary to understand that our world is controlled by people who are fallen. Nobody gains power on earth who is not fallen. Nobody, not ever.
So, what does 'fallen' mean? The answer to this could not be simpler: it means being soul-blind. In this state, a person quite literally cannot tell right from wrong, because they are unable to feel the effect their own actions have on their souls. The soul-blind are perfectly capable of carrying out any crime under orders, from murdering millions to denying an entire species the right to know and understand its true position in the universe.
This is why we are a society of isolated individuals, why dictators rise and gigantic corporations organize the devouring of the planet, and there seems no escape from the meatgrinder of diminished lives and the rule of the cruel and the venial and the greedy.
What might it be like if this was not the case? First, the illusion of death would no longer blind us. What we call death is a natural transition from one state to another, precisely paralleled by the transition of the caterpillar to the butterfly. But, unlike insects, we are able to understand this transition, and to know our destiny, and to interact with those who have entered the new state.
Not, however, when we are soul-blind. It's a disease, or a sort of crippling. In a healthy species, beings in the two states engage in a complex and dynamic relationship that advances consciousness. That doesn't happen here, but unless it does happen, there is little point in continuing to exist as we are, endlessly cycling back and forth between a forgetful death and an ignorant life.
Even the fact that we perceive the other state as death is wrong. It is not death, but part of the natural breathing of consciousness as it moves back and forth between the active state of physical life and the contemplative state of conscious energy.
What makes shooting at the visitors--the ones with our best interests at heart--so stupid is that they represent a rescue force that is attempting to reawaken us to who and what we really are. This is why people so often perceive them as evil. In our present state, it is easy to see their larger perspective as threatening. But as we awaken, we come to view them differently, and to understand things like the fact that so many people report seeing their own dead loved ones in the company of the visitors.
I want to add, here, that not all of our visitors are the same. There are apparently those who have some sort of connection with our clandestine agencies, and there is evidence that they may have evolved technologies that are truly and spectacularly evil, that involve mind control and the profane manipulation of souls. You can be sure that these will not be shot at, because they will be considered friends by the fallen, and will have offered them a Fata Morgana of promised technology that never really evolves, in return for the right to indulge whatever sinful desires they may wish to fulfill here.
We have reached a point of no return. Our species is going to experience the total collapse of its planetary environment. There isn't any question anymore about whether or not this will happen. It will happen.
And as long as we remain in a state of denial about our true nature, and keep shooting at those who are trying to help us, we are going to stay ignorant and stay enslaved by our soul-blindness.
>>From Whitley Strieber.....do we really shoot down UFOs?
> Today I saw in Unknowncountry's Out There section a
> witness
> report that suggests that on July 10, the military shot at
> UFOs that appeared over Fort Lewis, Washington.
> That the US military has done so in the past is now a matter
> of public record, since the British Ministry of Defence
> released records indicating that the US Air Force attempted
> to shoot down a UFO over Surrey in May of 1956. The pilot
> involved, Dr. Milton Torres, now lives in Florida and has
> confirmed that he did indeed receive such an order, in fact,
> before he even took off, so eager was the Air Force to carry
> out this extraordinary act on behalf of the human species,
> but without our knowledge.
> I don't wish to discuss the details of why this might have
> been done, and why the Air Force sent up armed planes over
> Stephenville, Texas in 2008, or why the United States has
> pursued a clear and now publicly revealed policy of shooting
> at UFOs for more than fifty years.
> Doing this may or may not be appropriate. Doing it in secret
> while lying to the public for over have a century is a lurid
> and fantastic sin, a permanent mark on the soul of everyone
> who has been complicit in it.
> To understand why this has happened, it is necessary to
> understand that our world is controlled by people who are
> fallen. Nobody gains power on earth who is not fallen.
> Nobody, not ever.
> So, what does 'fallen' mean? The answer to this could not be
> simpler: it means being soul-blind. In this state, a person
> quite literally cannot tell right from wrong, because they
> are unable to feel the effect their own actions have on
> their souls. The soul-blind are perfectly capable of
> carrying out any crime under orders, from murdering millions
> to denying an entire species the right to know and
> understand its true position in the universe.
> This is why we are a society of isolated individuals, why
> dictators rise and gigantic corporations organize the
> devouring of the planet, and there seems no escape from the
> meatgrinder of diminished lives and the rule of the cruel
> and the venial and the greedy.
> What might it be like if this was not the case? First, the
> illusion of death would no longer blind us. What we call
> death is a natural transition from one state to another,
> precisely paralleled by the transition of the caterpillar to
> the butterfly. But, unlike insects, we are able to
> understand this transition, and to know our destiny, and to
> interact with those who have entered the new state.
> Not, however, when we are soul-blind. It's a disease, or a
> sort of crippling. In a healthy species, beings in the two
> states engage in a complex and dynamic relationship that
> advances consciousness. That doesn't happen here, but unless
> it does happen, there is little point in continuing to exist
> as we are, endlessly cycling back and forth between a
> forgetful death and an ignorant life.
> Even the fact that we perceive the other state as death is
> wrong. It is not death, but part of the natural breathing of
> consciousness as it moves back and forth between the active
> state of physical life and the contemplative state of
> conscious energy.
> What makes shooting at the visitors--the ones with our best
> interests at heart--so stupid is that they
> represent a rescue force that is attempting to reawaken
> us to who and what we really are. This is why people
> so often perceive them as evil. In our present state, it is
> easy to see their larger perspective as threatening. But as
> we awaken, we come to view them differently, and to
> understand things like the fact that so many people report
> seeing their own dead loved ones in the company of the visitors.
> I want to add, here, that not all of our visitors are the
> same. There are apparently those who have some sort of
> connection with our clandestine agencies, and there is
> evidence that they may have evolved technologies that are
> truly and spectacularly evil, that involve mind control and
> the profane manipulation of souls. You can be sure that
> these will not be shot at, because they will be considered
> friends by the fallen, and will have offered them a Fata
> Morgana of promised technology that never really evolves, in
> return for the right to indulge whatever sinful desires they
> may wish to fulfill here.
> We have reached a point of no return. Our species is going
> to experience the total collapse of its planetary
> environment. There isn't any question anymore about whether
> or not this will happen. It will happen.
> And as long as we remain in a state of denial about our true
> nature, and keep shooting at those who are trying to help
> us, we are going to stay ignorant and stay enslaved by our
> soul-blindness.
VU.......thank you for that comment. Add to that the fact that if a superior race were visiting us, would they be stupid enough to get into a position where they are vulnerable to being shot down? Wouldn't such a superior technology have counter-offensive capability? Further, wouldn't shooting one down be reason for them to retaliate in some way or certainly take measures to insure that it doesn't happen again? Best wishes.........Betsy
--- On Sat, 7/18/09, virtual undisclosed <virtual.undisclo...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: virtual undisclosed <virtual.undisclo...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Shooting down UFOs To: Rise-and-Fall-of-Al-Bielek@googlegroups.com Date: Saturday, July 18, 2009, 11:27 AM
Nothing personal Betsy, but that is a bunch o' crap.
The reason that orders would be given to shoot down UFOs would be based upon the fact that they are:
a.) unidentified
b.) flying objects
c.) flying objects violating United States airspace without identifying themselves (see "a").
IF we did in fact shoot down a UFO, the occupants of that craft and their brethren would probably view such a shoot down
as we would view an ant biting our ankle as we explored a neighborhood ant hill.
What might appear to be a 'big event' to us is irrelevant and insignificant to them.
But if we dig deep enough, I'm sure we'll find Al Bielek flying one of those UFOs, bet on it.
> VU.......thank you for that comment. Add to that the fact that if a superior race were visiting us, would they be
> stupid enough to get into a position where they are vulnerable to being shot down? Wouldn't such a superior technology
> have counter-offensive capability? Further, wouldn't shooting one down be reason for them to retaliate in some way or
> certainly take measures to insure that it doesn't happen again?
> Best wishes.........Betsy
> --- On Sat, 7/18/09, virtual undisclosed <virtual.undisclo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: virtual undisclosed <virtual.undisclo...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Shooting down UFOs
> To: Rise-and-Fall-of-Al-Bielek@googlegroups.com
> Date: Saturday, July 18, 2009, 11:27 AM
> Nothing personal Betsy, but that is a bunch o' crap.
> The reason that orders would be given to shoot down UFOs would be based upon the fact that they are:
> a.) unidentified
> b.) flying objects
> c.) flying objects violating United States airspace without identifying themselves (see "a").
> From Whitley Strieber.....do we really shoot down UFOs?
> Today I saw in Unknowncountry's Out There section a
> witness
> report that suggests that on July 10, the military shot at
> UFOs that appeared over Fort Lewis, Washington.
> That the US military has done so in the past is now a matter
> of public record, since the British Ministry of Defence
> released records indicating that the US Air Force attempted
> to shoot down a UFO over Surrey in May of 1956. The pilot
> involved, Dr. Milton Torres, now lives in Florida and has
> confirmed that he did indeed receive such an order, in fact,
> before he even took off, so eager was the Air Force to carry
> out this extraordinary act on behalf of the human species,
> but without our knowledge.
What is an UFO ?
The term UFO was coined by military circles probably after World War
II. The original meaning is
Unidentified Flying Object, which from the original military point of
view means a flying object that has been spotted or detected by
optical means or radar.
It doesn't say a thing whether this object is of a natural kind or
artificial, it doesn't say a thing about whether it is from this
planet or maybe extraterrestrial. And it doesn't say a thing about the
behavior of this object, like maneuvers or a straight, ballistic
flight pass. Just something that was spotted visual or by radar and
that it for the time being could not be identified regarding it's
origin, it's nature and else.
That much to the meaning of an UFO.
Now, from this military perspective, any flying object detected while
inside national airspace (of any nation) or entering that airspace
automatically draws attention to the air force and the air defense
network. This is the same procedure in Europa, the USA and other
places in the world, were there is an air defense network and air
surveillance established.
So, if the position / flight path / size / number etc. of this object
(s) is assessed as a possible threat
- to the national security
- to the flight safety regarding other air traffic, the military
forces will deal with it by starting an investigation by radar and
usually by scrambling a pair of jet fighter aircraft for visual
identification. Additional, one would try to establish radio contact
with that object(s), assuming that it/they is/are man made aircraft /
balloon(s) or else.
After they made visual contact with that object(s), the follow-on
decision is made whether to escort those object(s) or to attack it/
them.
So, it is quite reasonable that air force pilots would get an order to
fire at such an UFO after all attempts to identify it have failed and
the assessment is such, that it might constitute a certain threat.
In the common sense, the term UFO nowadays only is associated with
extraterrestrial space ships, which is totally wrong.
> On Jul 18, 6:18 pm, Betsy Sinkey <wes...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> From Whitley Strieber.....do we really shoot down UFOs?
>> Today I saw in Unknowncountry's Out There section a
>> witness
>> report that suggests that on July 10, the military shot at
>> UFOs that appeared over Fort Lewis, Washington.
>> That the US military has done so in the past is now a matter
>> of public record, since the British Ministry of Defence
>> released records indicating that the US Air Force attempted
>> to shoot down a UFO over Surrey in May of 1956. The pilot
>> involved, Dr. Milton Torres, now lives in Florida and has
>> confirmed that he did indeed receive such an order, in fact,
>> before he even took off, so eager was the Air Force to carry
>> out this extraordinary act on behalf of the human species,
>> but without our knowledge.
> What is an UFO ?
> The term UFO was coined by military circles probably after World War
> II. The original meaning is
> Unidentified Flying Object, which from the original military point of
> view means a flying object that has been spotted or detected by
> optical means or radar.
> It doesn't say a thing whether this object is of a natural kind or
> artificial, it doesn't say a thing about whether it is from this
> planet or maybe extraterrestrial. And it doesn't say a thing about the
> behavior of this object, like maneuvers or a straight, ballistic
> flight pass. Just something that was spotted visual or by radar and
> that it for the time being could not be identified regarding it's
> origin, it's nature and else.
> That much to the meaning of an UFO.
> Now, from this military perspective, any flying object detected while
> inside national airspace (of any nation) or entering that airspace
> automatically draws attention to the air force and the air defense
> network. This is the same procedure in Europa, the USA and other
> places in the world, were there is an air defense network and air
> surveillance established.
> So, if the position / flight path / size / number etc. of this object
> (s) is assessed as a possible threat
> - to the national security
> - to the flight safety regarding other air traffic, the military
> forces will deal with it by starting an investigation by radar and
> usually by scrambling a pair of jet fighter aircraft for visual
> identification. Additional, one would try to establish radio contact
> with that object(s), assuming that it/they is/are man made aircraft /
> balloon(s) or else.
> After they made visual contact with that object(s), the follow-on
> decision is made whether to escort those object(s) or to attack it/
> them.
> So, it is quite reasonable that air force pilots would get an order to
> fire at such an UFO after all attempts to identify it have failed and
> the assessment is such, that it might constitute a certain threat.
> In the common sense, the term UFO nowadays only is associated with
> extraterrestrial space ships, which is totally wrong.
|
