Covert Recruitment into Space Marines “20 and Back” Program

[Aragorn]

Um so which one am I on lol

Both. I've merged them.

[Fred Steeves]

Been Vetted yet ?

Of course he's been vetted by Michael Salla.

Then the answer is no.

[Aianawa]

Nope, you Fred vetted, yes.

[Dreamtimer]

Michael Salla blundered by saying that evidence is not necessary. Personal testimony has it's value. But it's not a solid kind of evidence. Eye-witness accounts often vastly differ.

How can someone supposedly from this kind of program be vetted in any case? Records and evidence can't really be produced, can they?

Captain Kaye, Randy Cramer comes to mind. He says his command has given him permission. Can we even know if there is such a program? Secret programs are not in some big bin that anyone with clearance can look at. It's all stove-piped. You see only what you need to see, which probably isn't much in the big picture.

Salla wants the interviews to keep coming so he's not going to ride these guys too hard, imo.

[Emil El Zapato]

Stovepiped is correct. The Government Bible says, "Need to know!". One thing I do know from experience though is that people with more narrow clearances will sometimes screw up and let things slip. They aren't always cognizant of the security levels of people they are bs'ing with. (They work in groups, of course). But that isn't the same as direct knowledge. I've worked with a number of people with Top Secret clearances and ask them too many questions and they will definitely shut you down. Even if it is an area of ridicule such as UAP and USP.

Unfortunately, I was denied (not permanent) a 'program' level clearance at one time...Too many red flags (my dossier looked like a 4th of July celebration) Misspent youth and all that. But the investigators lied on my report and I was simply told ..."sign the report, or not". I did inquire several times about the veracity of the report and was told I could start an investigation regarding it and I declined because it was easier to just let it go and transfer to the Manned Space Flight Program.

[WantDisclosure]

Part 3:

Published on Oct 23, 2017

In part 3 of this five part interview series on the covert recruitment of Michael Gerloff into a Space Marines "20 and back" program, he elaborates on his background that was a major factor in his selection. He describes a lifetime of high strangeness, testing, night-time training during his youth, and DNA results which raise a possible connection to a human looking "Nordic" group of extraterrestrials.

For article with documents referred to in this episode, please visit: http://exopolitics.org/a-life-of-hig...space-marines/


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npkRY9ztPBo

[WantDisclosure]

Personal testimony has it's value. But it's not a solid kind of evidence. Eye-witness accounts often vastly differ.

Would you tell that to a child abuse victim?

People can be executed based on testimony.

[Dreamtimer]

These are reasons why people should be very careful about what they say.

I would not make any statements to any abuse victims as I am neither trained nor in a position to be doing such things. Courts have a very difficult time dealing with child testimony.

How many women have been maligned speaking of their experiences being abused?

[Fred Steeves]

I declined because it was easier to just let it go and transfer to the Manned Space Flight Program.

Wow, care to elaborate?

[Wind]

If someone claims to have been part of black ops or some secret space program, been to Mars etc. then they most probably haven't.

[WantDisclosure]

These are reasons why people should be very careful about what they say.

I would not make any statements to any abuse victims as I am neither trained nor in a position to be doing such things. Courts have a very difficult time dealing with child testimony.

How many women have been maligned speaking of their experiences being abused?

My point is that witness testimony is serious and valid and admissible in court.

The fact that eyewitness accounts of accident scenes or what have you differ does not change the fact that people testifying about their own personal experience is newsworthy and should be taken seriously by the public.

It doesn't make any difference whether or not you can know whether the person is telling the truth. It is up to you to listen and file the information as part of your knowledge base. Surely you have noticed along with the rest of the world that there have been many UFO sightings and something is obviously going on.

The secret space program is of utmost importance.

I thoroughly disagree with you in your denigration of Michael Salla, who does superb work as far as I'm concerned.

[Dreamtimer]

I did not denigrate Michael. I described his action as a blunder. Not the same.

Testimony is valid, of course. It's not enough to vet one of these people, which was my point.

[WantDisclosure]

I did not denigrate Michael. I described his action as a blunder. Not the same.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about this statement:

Salla wants the interviews to keep coming so he's not going to ride these guys too hard, imo.

That is taking a shot at his journalistic integrity.

It's not enough to vet one of these people, which was my point.

What is enough, in your opinion?

Because of the extreme secrecy and the lengths to which the Deep State goes to keep the program secret, in my opinion, witness testimony alone is valuable, and in some cases, that's all we can expect. I think these whistleblowers should be given common courtesy. The least the public should do is be neutral. We can't know what we haven't experienced ourselves. If we don't know, we shouldn't pretend that we do.

[Kathy]

Because of the extreme secrecy and the lengths to which the Deep State goes to keep the program secret, in my opinion, witness testimony alone is valuable, and in some cases, that's all we can expect. I think these whistleblowers should be given common courtesy. The least the public should do is be neutral. We can't know what we haven't experienced ourselves. If we don't know, we shouldn't pretend that we do.

Tell me, how do you discern testimony that is genuine from that which is deliberately planted, and do you mean we should all behave alike?

And why are you attacking Dreamtimer when all she is doing is expressing her opinion, which she is entitled to and which you can disagree with another more gentle way.

And I personally agree with Dreamtimer that Salla's journalistic stance is questionable in the circumstance.

[WantDisclosure]

Tell me, how do you discern testimony that is genuine from that which is deliberately planted, and do you mean we should all behave alike?

I use my intuition and general knowledge of what's going on in the world, as I expect others do, too, who will of course sometimes agree and sometimes disagree with me.

And why are you attacking Dreamtimer when all she is doing is expressing her opinion, which she is entitled to and which you can disagree with another more gentle way.

I'm not attacking Dreamtimer.

I'm defending a public figure, Michael Salla, who I think is doing us all a service with his work. I think public figures doing good work deserve the same respect as other members on a forum.