Wednesday, March 19, 2008

UN Meeting on UFOs?

Over the last couple of weeks, there has been a controversy raging inside the UFO community about a meeting held at the United Nations in which UFOs figured prominently. According to the exopolitics web site and Dr. Michael Salla, a confidential source had come forward to talk of this meeting and to tell us of the importance of it as we, allegedly, move toward full disclosure in 2013 or maybe 2017, depending on the mood of the reliable, but confidential source. Clearly, this meeting proved that UFOs were important and that the United Nations was aware of that importance.

According to Salla, who has been one of the leaders of exopolitics for years, "There are dozens of extraterrestrials races with a variety of motivations that are interacting with global humanity..."

He knows this because other people he believes, such as former U.S. Army sergeant Cliff Stone told him so. Stone has said that he knows, based on his service with super secret military organizations that there are 57 known alien races... just as there were 57 card carrying members of the communist party in the State Department and there are 57 varieties of Heinz products. For more on Stone and some of the other leading stars in the exopolitics heaven see the November 2005 blog. But I digress.

Anyway, this unidentified but highly qualified and reliable source said that the secret meetings were attended by the U.S. Air Force, the National Guard (the National Guard... what in the hell for?), the Vatican, representatives from 27 countries (where in the hell was the rest of the world?) and three U.S. senators. This meeting came up with such astonishing findings as that the UN is an international organization... "Therefore the briefing has do with other nation-states in context to sightings,"... whatever in the hell this means.

I could go on, but there is just too much that seems to be ridiculous in this. This inside source said "Although incidents are occurring around the world, these are NOT ‘Independence Day’ types. In fact, our source stated that the ships are not as big as the ones protrayed [sic] in the film."

And the ever popular, "You’ll know things are heating up when suicides dramatically increase."

Well, all this circulated around the Internet until it was learned from the UN that no such meeting had taken place, inside sources aside. Bernard Thouanel wrote on March 12, "It is obvious these so-called UFO Meetings at the UN never happened... and are pure hoax."

Thouanel’s information came from the UN Public Affairs Unit (at which wrote to him on March 11, "Greetings from the UN Public Inquiries Team. As far as we are aware there was no meeting concerning UFO’s at the United Nations." They attached copies of the journals for those days that showed all the meetings that took place, and they ran to more than forty pages.

Of course the "true believers" know this is all part of the cover-up and of course the United Nations would not admit to such meetings even if photographs and the agenda were published by this inside source. To prove what they said, Salla and the exopolitics crowd eventually identified the important inside source as Gilles Lorant who was further identified as a member of the French Institute of Advanced Studies for National Defense (IHEDN).

Well, that seemed to put a lie to the UN denial, which in the world of UFOs and conspiracies, and even Washington Post journalism (sorry, but I wanted to identify the source of the creation of the term) was a non-denial denial.

And then, as happens in the world of UFOs, the IHEDN denied that Lorant had ever had a role in its program. In fact, according the Gildas Bourdais (a reliable French UFO researcher and a decent fellow) reported that IHEDN was going to sue Lorant for "usurpation of title", which was going to get pricey for Lorant. He retracted his claim and confirmed that he "is not and has never been an auditor at IHEDN."

Worse still, Bourdais reports, "Michel Ribardiere, of the French group FEA (Federation Europeenne Airplane) has authorized me to reveal publicly that Gilles Lorant told him that he had not met with the two UN diplomats in charge of the UFO question!"

This, of course, didn’t mean that the meeting hadn’t taken place and we shouldn’t reject the claim just because the inside source turned out to be unreliable and the UN denied that it happened. Where would Ufology be if it wasn’t for those who claimed inside knowledge and who were eventually shown to have been less than honest in some of their claims? We listen to men (well, one man) who was thrown in jail for child molestation, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t telling the truth about his inside knowledge. We listen to those who claim high military rank only to learn that they hadn’t served in the military, or in the grade claimed, only to be told their records have been changed to make them look bad. How much of this crap are we supposed to swallow?

In the end, we’re left with another black eye for Ufology. It’ll be said that this whole sorry episode was another of the brilliant disinformation campaigns that the government has engineered to keep the truth buried when, in reality, it is just one more case of someone inventing a story to propel himself into the UFO spotlight. The landscape is littered with many examples from Cliff Stone and his 57 variety of aliens, to Gerald Anderson who injected himself into the Roswell UFO crash only to be caught in various lies, to George Adamski (or a couple of dozen other contactees) who claimed to have ridden on flying saucers with the benevolent space brothers to the nonsense of MJ-12.

The only thing to remember from this is that it was members of the UFO community who investigated the claims and revealed them for what they were. I know that the skeptics and debunkers will get the credit, but it really belongs to those who did the work, some of them cited here.

Oh, yeah... and we never learn. Tomorrow will have another story like this and in the end, it’s about the only thing people will remember... that some guy claimed to know a lot about UFOs but really didn’t.


Atrueoriginall said...

Exactly, “a black eye for Ufology”.

The flip side is though that Salla has little to no credence now, whereas before he did have at least ‘some’ with certain people.

In a big way I’m somewhat glad this happened.

I can’t peg it and I don’t know why exactly, but that high horse thing that a few too many Exo's have, always bothered me.

Anonymous said...

Hello I just entered before I have to leave to the airport, it's been very nice to meet you, if you want here is the site I told you about where I type some stuff and make good money (I work from home): here it is

cda said...

Hardly a "black eye" for ufology, unless you consider ufology is generally free from black eyes. It reminds me of the numerous occasions when certain individuals bring football, cricket, baseball, athletics etc "into disrepute". They have done it so often that by now each of these sports has become disreputable. So how do you bring a disreputable sport into disrepute? Similarly how do you bring a by now disreputable subject (ufology) into disrepute?

Michael Salla is not bringing ufology into disrepute. He doesn't need to!

It is already disreputable because on each and every occasion when someone claims to have secret information from on high that this or that government, or some big organisation like the UN, EU, NASA, etc knows the great "truth" about ufos it turns out to be baseless. A truly reputable subject would never have these continual dotty pronouncements (and even conferences based on them).

I should remark that the same applies to Roswell. It has been brought into disrepute so often (Gerald Anderson, Kaufmann, MJ-12 and other documents, alien autopsy film, phony witnesses, phony investigators, junk physical debris, Haut's revised affidavit, etc) that ultimately it leaves the subject so tainted that the case is in a 'disreputable' state. By this I mean the chances of it ever approaching scientific acceptance gets nearer to zero every passing day, despite the noble efforts of a few individuals like yourself.

For every step you take forwards someone (or something) else is forcing it 1.01 steps backwards.

Me a negativist? Perhaps.
Maybe even a "noisy" one like STF refers to. (He's very noisy too, but in the opposite direction!)

By the way, have you heard about the Bilderberg Commission? They allegedly meet in secret every year, somewhere in Europe. What do they discuss? Does Michael Salla know? Does anyone else?

rockingyoucuzican said...

Those that actually believe such a meeting took place are simply not well educated. The UN is an open agency and its members can not be sanctioned in any way, therefore such an important topic wouldn't stay secret for long. Moreover, most nations are far more open about their activities than the US, especially European nations. And more importantly, the US is not as well-respected as most Americans think. Any arm-twisting on a matter of such importance would simply not be tolerated by the likes of France, Scandinavian countries, Italy or whoever else supposedly attended this meeting.