4 ms·
So just to give everyone here a bit of context. This hearing was not for the UFO Believers to be used as official disclosure. This was not to convince any skept
by dtx1 3y ago
So just to give everyone here a bit of context. This hearing was not for the UFO Believers to be used as official disclosure. This was not to convince any skeptics out there this is real. This is a political tool for the congressional oversight committee (who themselves may not have any evidence) to put into record what they need to follow up on using their power of the purse and oversight rights.
Is this an issue of national Security? Who has what information? Who is housing what artifacts? What funds are used to pay for these projects? Who has committed crimes to hide this information?
All those questions weren't asked because anyone expected Grush, Fravour or Graves to tell them: Yeah I've got a UFO in my garage. In fact all witnesses answered all those questions before. This had one specific goal: Get this into congressional testimony, under oath, from credible witnesses and thus give congress the means, information and constitutional duty to investigate further.
And for all those sceptics out there: this is unusually bipartisan and seeing Gaetz and AOC both laserfocused on investigating government misuse of money on such a historically fringe subject is most interesting.
- eeeficus 3y agoThis comment should be first comment. Instead, I had to endure the HN intelligentsia writing non-sense with the specific arrogance of know-it-alls!
- RajT88 3y ago> this is unusually bipartisan and seeing Gaetz and AOC both laserfocused on investigating government misuse of money on such a historically fringe subject is most interesting. Indeed, there was very minimal political sniping. A little bit at Biden about the Chinese balloons, but that was it. I was very surprised - especially with those two in the same room.
- RetpolineDrama 3y agoFirst high-quality comment in this thread, and you absolutely nailed it.
- w0de0 3y agoIt’s filled with grammatical, typographical, and logical mistakes. It’s disorganized. There are many sentence fragments and few whole thoughts. There is no thesis. One paragraph contains only sophomoric leading questions. The name Grusch - the subject himself - is misspelled. What’s your metric for quality? Seems merely low-quality sophistry to me.
- lithos 3y agoMoney is moving without the politics of Washington being involved, favors are being "gifted" to orgs for access to novel tech. If that can't get power brokers in Washington to force some change, nothing will.
- markus_zhang 3y agoThe more persons who know about a secret, the less a secret it is. I'd say it's a good thing. It should be easier to hack a congressman's personal email account than someone in a air gapped military compound, and easier to hack a scientist's (presumably) academic email.
- firstplacelast 3y agoI’ve never really believed in aliens/UFO sightings, but have been doing some online reading the last 6months. The forums are filled with 99% delusional people trying to connect made-up information to every other conspiracy theory out there. Most seem to detract from their cause I watched the whole congressional forum today and those guys are probably the most well-spoken people I’ve ever heard discussing UAP/aliens/NHI. Also, one of the more bipartisan and civil congressional hearings I’ve witnessed in recent memory. It’s definitely intriguing to say the least and I have a hard time doubting that these guys have not witnessed what they say they witnessed, both with their eyes and in terms of government programs/secrecy/misallocated funds. Now if those UAPs are NHI or government-created machines or something else, hopefully we will find out eventually.