До сих пор ничего об этом, на всем сайте Би-би-си. Не удивлен, просто поделился тем, что они до сих пор не присоединяются к реальности.
Похожие записи:
Спорные смерти исследователей НЛО, журналистов и авторов. (лекция Питера Роббинса)
В свете недавних заявлений Дэвида Груша, возможно, пришло время еще раз взглянуть на звонящего из Зоны 51 от побережья до побережья. (Начало с 1:33) Также обратите внимание, что в последние годы становится все труднее найти это видео на YouTube.
Fin365 — Black Diamond НЛО преследует озеро Онтарио — 2001 — компьютерная реконструкция
Тайны и споры об НЛО: специальный репортаж на NewsNation
Кто-нибудь может поговорить с Хаимом Эшедом?
Так считаются ли иглу и гамбургеры одной и той же формой? Нам нужно начать копаться в старых книгах об НЛО
50к за мусорное ведро
Само влияние заявления Груша о том, что правительство сдерживает технологию чистой энергии, ошеломляет.
Я попытался выяснить, говорит ли Дэвид Груш правду, перевернув звук из его интервью NewsNation.
Синтез, отдача, открытие: обнаружен новый тип атомного ядра
Neither are many major news outlets,
Some are but not all
Why do you think they would continue covering this? Most news outlets covered the initial story in some way. Since then there’s been nothing of any substance, just a whole lot more hearsay.
Most news outlets are waiting for more concrete evidence to appear.
I’m not a fan of main stream news but the fact they they are not jumping on this and hyping it up for clicks and views like certain other US news outlets just makes them seem more professional in my view.
We’re basically dealing with someone that has made fantastical claims that so far haven’t been backed up with the same level of evidence.
This can also be seen as a good thing for the topic. If all news outlets were jumping on this making out like this was earth shattering news like people are doing on this sub, then it turns out to be wrong or go nowhere it will just make the subject appear even more like a joke. It’s much better that people are not jumping the gun.
I think some people here need to gain some perspective. The story as it stands is all claims (at least as far as what the public has access to). Calling it the most monumental news in human history is jumping the gun a bit. The monumental news would be the reveal that the claims are true. Regardless of the surrounding details this whole thing still boils down to people making claims about aliens and government coverups, just like every other instance in history where someone made the same claims. Were those also the most monumental news stories in human history?
Does that justify the BBC not covering it? Not necessarily, but characterizing it like this is a bit over the top.
We don’t know if it’s one of the most monumental news in human history. Let’s be cautious. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t cover it by any means, this is frustrating to say the least.
For comparison, this subreddit considers a 4chan text post «monumental». My objective **opinion** is that all of this is fun, it’s still highly intriguing, and the future is promising. But if I’m the BBC, I probably think I don’t need to report on he-said-she-said for the hundredth time like my competitors. But when the hard evidence drops I’ll be all over it. The developments thus far have moved us forward immensely, but they’ll only take us so far before we’re kind of back where we were before, which is, that these people say this and we want to believe them but we need hard evidence. Also, «I Want to Believe» is literally a framed poster on my wall. I’m ready! lol
«most monumental pieces of news in human history.»
with 0 evidence.
this subreddit is getting way ahead of itself, to the point of delusion.
Okay calling it one of the most monumental pieces of news is reaching quite a bit.
It’s not monumental because it’s hearsay. It’s a guy that says he was told by other people «trust me bro».
I’m not from this community, I just popped in after my dad mentioned something about aliens coming so I thought I’d see what’s up…
Pretty much every post I’ve see is talking like it’s the second coming (I’m not religious). You speak like the facts are there for all to see but you’re in fact a very small group of people (in the world) who follow these stories and believe what these “credible” people are telling you in the same way religious people believe what they’re preached about the bible.
The reason the bbc isn’t covering this is bloody obvious. There is no evidence that proves any of it. These credible people are as credible as anyone else in my eyes. You’ve never heard of a lying politician? Perhaps the ex-pilot didn’t leave to spill the beans on what he saw but was dismissed for being bat shit crazy lol. So many people say they’ve see UFOs and then it turns out they actually didn’t but if the event that was definitely a UFO in their eyes wasnt explained then they would continue to believe they saw a UFO.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m interested to hear this stuff and learn what is getting you all excited but good grief it’s getting real old seeing you all going on about how this must mean disclosure and disclosure is imminent and you demand full disclosure. Which has now started to change to “if we don’t get disclosure then I’m out” because guess what, perhaps there’s nothing to disclose.
Huuuuge stretch to call this «monumental» or «news» at this moment. A dude spewing incredible things without proof just leaves **incredibility**.
This is no more «monumental news» than someone claiming the Government is covering up the existence of Bigfoot, or X men.
I bet they cover it after the hearing but not before.
so far, it is nowhere near rising to the level of «most monumental pieces of news in human history».
y’all need to stop with the hyperbole. yes it potentially COULD rise to tht level, but at this point, it’s a bunch of govt/intelligence related people telling us something. for most people outside this community, that isn’t quite up to the level we sometimes act. news agencies especially often want more to a story.
cool. be excited. be hopeful or whatever. but people should quit expecting the world to stop or even to change. likely won’t happen until an alien shows up on TV in a live interview.
Why would they? Seriously, are people here that brainwashed into newly formed cult of Grush? So far all we got is Lazar 2.0 for the WWW era, without any tangible evidence.
If the guy was in his 50s, 60s and worked half of his life in government then it would have some weight. With work years comes experience and position to entrust actual important information is what I’m aiming at. But that seems to fly over heads of most here.
The guardian has some articles about him.
It’s not going to be considered monumental until actual verifiable proof comes to light, simple as.
Yeah, it seems things have changed and stories are now mainstream, but in reality it’s still fairly niche, and the topic still has a huge stigma attached to it.
this proves something
it doesn’t prove jack diddle crap about aliens
but it proves that some news agencies are deliberately avoiding it
Maybe the BBC is just waiting for the aliens to host their own talk show! 🛸📺
I actually did mean gruchy
The Grinch that blew whistles.
Everything you need to know about how and why mainstream media functions the way it does can be learned from the opening of System of a Down’s video for their song «Sugar».
Lol “they’re not joining reality”.
Delicious
What has Grusch said that Lazar didn’t say? I still don’t get it. Lazar was on point. All he said proved right, some things even 30 years later.
the narrative has been tightly controlled for decades, and we’re learning which organizations have the tightest leashes
from France: bienvenue mon ami !
The Grusch interview was an exclusive for news nation.
Just this one (searched at Goog): [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65729356](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65729356)
Only cheesy news sites are currently.
That is because it is not news. When hearings begin, it will become news. Until then, it is more unsubstantiated claims. In other words, hearsay. And given the nutjob stigma that surrounds the UAP topic, outlets like the BBC are not going to touch it without a compelling reason.
He hasn’t seen anything with his own eyes and his sources have not been verified. This is the reality — you are taking his word for it, and somehow calling it monumental human history.
What if he’s been speaking to people we know already? What if these sources are unreliable?
I don’t blame the BBC. There’s no of evidence to back up his claims. I’m allowing myself some excitement but let’s be real. This could be nothing.
Please enough of these posts, I’m tired of seeing them every other day. The mainstream media doesn’t owe us anything and they don’t have to publish anything unless there is hard evidence.
I believe Gursch but for regular folk and the journalists, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and in case of Gursch there isn’t even an iota of evidence so far.
They aren’t covering unsubstantiated claims of people other than him allegedly seeing things? Outrageous!
[removed]
I raised a complaint with them about the lack of coverage. Suggest you do the same
They want facts, they all do.
In light of declassified proof that Unregulated Special Access Programs do in fact exist they will jump on this story. They’re not going to report on the claims of NHI and they shouldn’t (yet.)
His interview is not what he said under oath and I guarantee it. He said people have been murdered over this. Think he provided classified proof of homocide under oath? He failed to mention it. Names, Addresses, and Documents pertaining to SAP’s.
Focus on the corruption, SAP’s, and the **Trillions** of taxpayers dollars that are unaccounted for in DOD audits. Do that, and the rest of the dominoes will fall. You’ll have all the public support you need for disclosure and transparency. If NHI is a variable it will come out with the rest of the skeletons in that closet.