The UFO congressional hearing was ‘insulting’ to US employees, a top Pentagon official says

3 years ago by MicroWave to c/news

A top Pentagon official has attacked this week’s widely watched congressional hearing on UFOs. In a letter posted online, Dr.

A top Pentagon official has attacked this week’s widely watched congressional hearing on UFOs, calling the claims “insulting” to employees who are investigating sightings and accusing a key witness of not cooperating with the official U.S. government investigation.

BenDoubleU 45 points 3 years ago

Who should we trust more:

the 3 military personnel/whistleblower who requested to be sworn in under oath

Or the person who frequently denies to be put under oath and instead vents on LinkedIn

path: 0 1849223, hotness: undefined, score: 45, children: 0
FlyingSquid 32 points 3 years ago

Agreed. Not one single piece of empirical evidence. Just "they told me that..."

path: 0 1845880, hotness: undefined, score: 32, children: 3
baldingpudenda 26 points 3 years ago

In their defense, the only reason the government allowed him to talk about it WAS because it's hearsay. The government allowing him to talk is neither a denial or confirmation of the anything he said. The interesting part to me was that he said he was willing to talk specifics in a SCIF, but for some reason wasn't allowed use of one. Also the hearing, while talking about UAP, is actually more about how congress has been allegedly kept from oversite of a government program and that's illegal.

path: 0 1845880 1847545, hotness: undefined, score: 26, children: 0
SCB 2 points 3 years ago path: 0 1845880 1854957, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1
FlyingSquid -4 points 3 years ago

Sure, believable.

path: 0 1845880 1854957 1865030, hotness: undefined, score: -4, children: 0
MicroWave 17 points 3 years ago
path: 0 1845655, hotness: undefined, score: 17, children: 0
Gingerlegs 14 points 3 years ago
path: 0 1846785, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 0
PenguinJuice 8 points 3 years ago
path: 0 1852368, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 0
MiddleWeigh -13 points 3 years ago

I don't discount aliens outright, in fact I do believe, but I'd imagine any type of meta being would not be bound by physical bodies, and would more so exist within consciousness itself.

I do think the whole proceeding is some flavor of sham though.

path: 0 1854732, hotness: undefined, score: -13, children: 4
restingboredface 2 points 3 years ago

Agreed. I can't help but feel like this hearing is intended as a distraction. My midwestern city just had another thunderstorm with 70+mph winds and its the 5th or 6th of the summer. We're in the middle of the hottest month ever in history and it's like DC is humming along as if it's business as usual. Nobody is even trying to do anything about fixing climate change or even just improving emergency preparedness for severe weather. Instead we have senators literally sitting in congress catatonic and having strokes on TV because staying in power is more important than doing anything for the country.

But hey, here's a crazy hearing about UFOs.

path: 0 1854732 1881533, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1
SCB 1 point 3 years ago

If this is a distraction it's a really shitty one, because it is front-page news nowhere in the US.

Meanwhile there are literally millions of other potential "distractions" like Hunter Biden news actually making and keeping headlines.

The "manufactured distraction" concept has always seemed as conspiracy-theory as alien encounters or flat earth or whatever in its own right, to me.

path: 0 1854732 1881533 1904361, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
CharlestonChewbacca 2 points 3 years ago

What do you think a consciousness looks like without a physical body?

path: 0 1854732 1951919, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1
MiddleWeigh 1 point 3 years ago

Well I wouldnt say looks. Maybe feel. It would kind of look like a "simple technicolor light" to a physical body in the minds eye, but you'd feel a separate entity with you for sure. I've had this happen to me once or twice very intensly while practicing some home brew weird shit. It was kinda overwhelming. No one will ever be able to convice me that I was not interacting with something. It was 1 or 2 sperate, but one thing, and it literally threw a weird ass tiny ball of white string at me and all my cabinets opened up upstairs. I'm a crazy person. Proceed with caution.

path: 0 1854732 1951919 1959752, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
Chickenstalker -22 points 3 years ago

Ufo nut jobs please gb2 reddit

path: 0 1849967, hotness: undefined, score: -22, children: 7
pectoralis 7 points 3 years ago

I would actually prefer them over you... So goodbye.

path: 0 1849967 1854443, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 1
soloner 1 point 3 years ago

Later!

path: 0 1849967 1854443 1855308, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
Butters 3 points 3 years ago

There was a sub r/UFO I would check in on occasionally. The arguments people would get into there were … interesting.

path: 0 1849967 1869018, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
SCB -17 points 3 years ago

This but socialists.

path: 0 1849967 1854969, hotness: undefined, score: -17, children: 3
Smatt 3 points 3 years ago

Lol wut? Socialists under every rock and behind every tree?

path: 0 1849967 1854969 1867892, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 1
SCB 2 points 3 years ago

There are tons of socialists on Lemmy. There was a front page thread about why lol

I literally have two spewing nonsense at me right now

path: 0 1849967 1854969 1867892 1880160, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0
JustAManOnAToilet 0 points 3 years ago
path: 0 1849967 1854969 1900013, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 0
news
news

@lemmy.world

login for more options
38894
39595
9044

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

go to feed...