UFO Ownership - If an ET Craft crashes on your land, whose property is it? [Archive]

View Full Version : UFO Ownership - If an ET Craft crashes on your land, whose property is it?

calikid

03-27-2012, 03:29 PM

norenrad

03-27-2012, 04:50 PM

I believe that would fall under national security and any rights you thought you had would be nil. The best chance you would have is to hide a few small pieces of evidence for future speculation, if they don't shoot you first.

Redbone

03-27-2012, 05:33 PM

norenrad

03-27-2012, 06:42 PM

... and, of course, there's that.

Your best bet is to just pack your bags and go underground, but Hillary would probably still find ya.

calikid

03-28-2012, 02:44 PM

Only if you are a Left-leaning Liberal Democrat, then you can Occupy the debris field and demand that Obama share the wealth of Alien artifacts once he has finished apologizing for inhabiting the Earth!

If you are a Right-leaning Republican, then Atty General Eric Holder will charge you with a Hate Crime for assaulting a minority with your house. While you are in prison, your kids will be tutored by Debbie Wasserman Schultz and your wife given free condoms.

If only our elected officials would be involved.
I picture an armed forces General standing on my curb, drooling over the artifacts offensive weapons potential.
And right behind him, a man in a suit from the MIC rubbing his hands in glee over the profits to be made from advanced tech.

And both of them willing to sacrifice MY rights to gain the prize.

Redbone

03-28-2012, 05:17 PM

If only our elected officials would be involved.
I picture an armed forces General standing on my curb, drooling over the artifacts offensive weapons potential.
And right behind him, a man in a suit from the MIC rubbing his hands in glee over the profits to be made from advanced tech.

And both of them willing to sacrifice MY rights to gain the prize.

That would be like....Deju Vu all over again! Remembering Col Corso and 'Day after Roswell!' :mad:

calikid

03-28-2012, 08:10 PM

I've seen cars stripped in a matter of minutes in South Central Los Angeles.
Wonder what we'd see on eBay the next day if a crash occurred in that neighborhood?

norenrad

03-28-2012, 08:29 PM

Do UFOs have hubcaps?

Anyway, I'll start the bidding for a genuine UFO part with $5.00.

CasperParks

03-28-2012, 08:56 PM

calikid

03-29-2012, 02:05 PM

I'm thinking back to the movie ROSWELL where Mac Brazil, the rancher who initially discovered the wreckage, was portrayed.
In one scene he was being interrogated and said; "Either it's real and you owe me money for the discovery, or it's not and you need to turn me loose" (paraphrased).
Next scene he is recanting his story on a radio broadcast, and then driving off in a brand new pickup truck.
Not sure he had his priorities straight, but probably was the best outcome he could have hoped for.

Fore

03-29-2012, 02:36 PM

If an ET Craft were to crash in the front yard of a house you own, would you have the right to claim ownership? For all practical purposes, no. Unless the ET lifeform consented or abandoned the property.

What if you wanted to deny government access to the vehicle? I suppose [if you're brave] walk into the crashed vehicle render assistance, ascertain the reason for the crash and ask if there is a "retrieval protocol" set in place by the ET life forms. A form of beacon or bouy.

Though, I would also consider the fact that if this is the first time a craft has crashed, there is a reason why there are no other previous incidents recorded in history.

If it's happened before, it has been retrieved by someone. If that is the case, something happened to the witnesses in previous cases...

What if you wanted to list wreckage pieces on eBay? I am pretty sure if there is any credible evidence of ET wreckage which is valuable it will be recovered within a day of such a listing going up.

Could the PTB stop you? If you are stupid enough to put it on Ebay, then yes.

The assumption being that the internet and local media is the only way to track down wreckage and artifacts. The truth is [I think] something probably very different than the assumption from what I have heard and seen. Especially in light of developments of Remote Viewing projects and associated fields of non-physical information retrieval.

If you can use RV to remotely target events in current time, it is not that much of an investment for a group of people to develop information gathering techniques on time-displaced events set in the near future. Targeting the next future headline before it actually manifests and happens is probably the biggest secret UFOlogy has yet to be let into.

With that, even the so-called Men in Black suits and interested parties like ET can locate "near-term" events that cause large ripples in future consciousness and events.

Like a "time event" with ripples in the non-physical spectrum, various people with access to these techniques can observe it, locate the emergence and focal point of the event, and have someone on it before "the event" even begins to actually take place. Nipping the event in the bud before it ever takes hold.

-----------------------

Is it really that hard to obtain information on a SCUD platform in Russia? [in "Present Time RV"]

If not, then is it truly hard to target the people with "evidence" that turns out to make headlines tomorrow? ["Near Time RV"]

----------------------

If a crashed disc fell out of the sky in the boonies miles from anyones home and none ever observed it or knew about it to leave a psychic imprint in the nonphysical ....Then I guess, yes, the event would be hard to spot from an RV perspective. IF the RVer were using "consciousness patterns" as "vectors of targeting" specific information...then it would be difficult to acquire the location if there are no conscious references or it was never witnessed by a living entity.

Could YOU stop the PTB from hauling it away?

If someone had the money, people and access to proper facilities and knowledge...and if they were to rely on conscious information gathering as a vector of targeting an event of "national interest" in "near time RV". Then it would go something like this:

Some "near time" RV'er sitting inside a non-standard intelligence gathering facility would "become aware" that an event of national interest is about to take place. They would be targeting specific attributes in their search for these kinds of these events. Other "near time RV'ers" whom are independent and in different areas would pick up on these same events and would report the same.

Confirmation would lead to a detailed evaluation of the event.

Lets say they are looking for "near time" UFO crash events that failed to be retrieved. Once aware of the clustered event in time they would need to evaluate the scope of the event. How troubling it may be and how worthwhile it is to pursue it.

A)--If a witness had a high technology craft land in their backyard and witnessed it. There is too small of an imprint to easily notice.
B)--If that witness were to walk into a local news station 10 days in the future and guide a local camera crew to the site, and proclaim it to be of ET origin. This would leave a minor imprint.
C)--If a witness were to make a concrete case globally 15 days into the future and the world became accidentally aware of ET life forms. The RV'er would notice.

Normally, i'd think if you are a "near time" RV'er you would work from C to B to A.

You would backtrack how far ahead in time it is. What the event details are. Where the story originates.

---------------------------------

Lets say the first pickup is a C sized vector point. From the future hoopla of a story of alien life and concrete proof, an RV'er should be able to target the details of a news report detailing where the incident happened. When it happened. Whom is making the claim or whom is related to the claim.

If Present Hour for the RV team is March 29, 4:30pm. Then with a C level event they can figure out how far in the future the C level event is. Lets say the C-level event is estimated around +15 days. Lets put it at about April 14th, 11:00pm.

The RV'er needs to learn as much as he can about the story by witnessing as many glimpses of the displaced event in time as he can target. Lets say he finds references to an earlier report in Arkansas. (B class event occurring in +6 days). From there he targets the original reporters identity, then find out the identity of the original witness and the rough location of the downed craft. (A class event +2 days)

Having narrowed down the people associated with the event, the RVer will probably pass it along to someone whom can take it from there and standard surveillance occurs. As the crash occurs teams are dispatched to retrieve the craft and the witness is silenced by whatever means.

The events from the A class event never evolves into a C class event.

----------------------------------

Sounds like fantasy, but I just described what I did in practice with the ET's numerous times. I also put in several mockups of conversations they had with me on things they said I needed to be aware of for my own good many years ago.

Safe to say, it is hard to keep secrets against those with the knowledge, people, technology and facilities at their disposal.

If the worlds black budget researchers have never succeeded at these points as I described them. Then the ET have an immense start on them. I have never spoken about alot of things they mentioned which I believe are credible issues to keeping secrets and uncontrolled disclosures.

Chris

03-29-2012, 03:46 PM

Technically speaking someone would have to prove ownership if they wished to take the debris, assuming that it was another private citizen looking to haul it away from you.

However, I would think that the govt would indeed declare the debris either a national security risk or a Heath issue and take it away.

And if ET showed up to reclaim the debris - well, they don't exactly play by the same rules we do! ;)

calikid

03-29-2012, 06:40 PM

Chris

03-29-2012, 07:40 PM

I remember the last shuttle crash that left debrie over a wide area in Texas. A press release stated that that ALL debrie was NASA property and anyone caught with a piece would be in legal hot water. Wonder what laws backed up their threat and if would apply to this hypothetical?

My recollection is that NASA's claim at the time was based on the fact that much of the material contained in the debris was classified and they also issued a warning that some of the debris could be hazardous. The hazardous part may have been floated out there as a way to keep people away from the debris and the potential Top Secret classification of some of that material.

calikid

03-29-2012, 08:35 PM

I suppose that since they built and launched the shuttle NASA would have some rights. But I wonder how international salvage might figure in.
Naturally in the case of an ET craft NASA could not make the same claim.

calikid

03-29-2012, 08:41 PM

@Fore
Without going to far OT why do u think the RVers did not do anything about the shuttle breakup? A simple patch kit for the wing damage would have come in handy if foreknowledge was available. Seems like a big enough event 2 show up on their A B c radar.

Fore

03-30-2012, 12:49 PM

I obviously don't know the reason but I can speculate upon pretty obvious points I heard being reiterated over the span of a previous decade.

There are a few points to take in. Through these basic points you can pretty much infer many things without actually knowing much about it.
I was told of two separate projects that the ET told me were extremely secret but necessary that I understood how some things worked:

The ET told me there is the ET agency responsible for the developments related to the Earth. They nicked named it an "affairs department" but to me it sounds more like ET intelligence. They told me its main task is keeping their ET presence and impact on Earth a secret until they are ready. This ET agency barely has any direct human access. Almost no terrestrial oversight. Its location was never disclosed nor how it came to be.

It's counterpart, they claimed, is a Human [led] Agency run primarily by [multi-national] human beings with some ET oversight. The ET told me this Human Agency was formed as a concession of a previous agreement. The ET stated at the time that these human beings were given access to technology and resources which gave them "unconventional" access to Terrestrial affairs. (paraphrased)

The Human Agency they explained is limited in its scope to Human Centric affairs and various international interests. The [Multi-National] Human Agency (they explained to me thoroughly) is "allowed" to share intelligence gathered through their facilities provided by the ET. The ET explained to me that they can give inside info on various events through back channels into foreign governments or feed information as standard intelligence through military structures.

The ETs I was told hold joint programs within the Human Agency. (These ET claim though that they were not involved directly in these affairs)

The ET claimed that this Human Agency is forbidden from interfering in ET affairs and can only utilize their adaptations and developing technology to monitor events of Earth. Gleaning what I was told was further advantages in the scope of intelligence gathering, political influence amd situational alliances with the ET projects and international/national defense projects.

--------------------------

I was told by the ET that this Human Agency has connections to worldly governments but are not run by any government. The ET told me the Human Agency has ties to political interests in various developed nations but that most of their activities are centered around what they refer to as selective intelligence. They are allowed to use this information to unduly influence world events through daughter projects as long as the ET do not object nor interferes with the evolution of their [the ET] interests.

Through daughter projects the Human Agency is allowed to exert influence (quite literally they said) on other Earth bound nations. More than one ET told me this has lead to the haves vs the have not's in the international community. Several ET told me a long time ago that the Human Agency "exercised" it's influence on developing nations through various international/national extensions that they provide the information to.

They also stated there are supposedly a number of developed nations not covered in the agreement which did not have access to the Human Agency and it's insights. The ET told me that through the daughter and sister projects this Human Agency puts "unconventional intelligence" into the hands of ordinary government/military agencies. They stated plainly the knowledge is used against other Earth bound nations. Nations not covered in the agreement are subject to meddling; whether it be military strikes or the application of international pressures.

The ET said at the time that it also leads to internal friction between international bodies when conflicting interests emerge and there are disagreements. The Internal bodies involved sometimes did not share the same interests and views.

They also stated this Human Agency is also responsible for the developments in future-event-planning at larger scales. The ET oversight is there to supposedly keep the project in check and in line with larger agendas.

One ET stated very clearly that they don't care about human affairs as long as it does not affect their future plans. They told me the Human Agency can share intelligence with various nations to remove foreign powers, and reshape politics or strike at military targets. As long as it doesn't affect their [the ETs'] bottom line.
-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------

To answer your question, the Advisor knew of the closing of the space program almost a decade ago. She alluded to the consequences that would result behind the scenes if Terrestrial parties didn't follow through. The closing of the public space program was pre-planned in advance. She said that even though her group didn't have any internal discussion it was a position that was largely widely accepted.

She stated pretty plainly about 12 years ago it was common knowledge that if the Terrestrial programs didn't cease there would be "accidents". She said even ETs not directly involved were supporting the position of keeping Terrestrial borders and what she called a few times a "quarantine".

If it is true that the ET do not want us to travel far from our home. It may explain why even if they knew what was likely coming down the pipe in terms of shuttle "malfunctions" that they let them fly.

Before the last shuttle blew up I recall hearing some sporadic comments from one ET talking about the shuttle coming to earth prematurely after a number of warnings. Is it true or false, I do not know.

------------------------------
------------------------------

Other ET I knew made comments of the plans for war across different regions years before they took place. Some of them were more vague than others. I heard about many of them (sometimes in vague references) from the ET. I was told Syria and a few others were a topic of discussion about 4 years ago.

So I take it that alot of events occurring in the world today are not accidents and some have been planned in advance if the ET know all about it in idle conversation.

----------
----------

Just a few months ago an ET intentionally told me/leaked of a report it said was drafted which outlined the preparedness of Terrestrial populations and the expected interruptions in merchant services. He more or less told me it was fine for me to share with others. Though I have not done so because I am aware that something is coming up soon which seems to be running full tilt in several rumor mills.

Some of the ET and Higher Order Spiritual rumor mills already knew about the abnormal weather in the USA before the events took place. I received warnings hours or days in advance as well as which direction and what the expect. I still receive the warnings.

Lately there is a convergence between rumor mills that depicts several bad things coming to the USA.

I'll talk about it in my own thread.

Marvin

03-30-2012, 12:56 PM

I remember the last shuttle crash that left debrie over a wide area in Texas. A press release stated that that ALL debrie was NASA property and anyone caught with a piece would be in legal hot water. Wonder what laws backed up their threat and if would apply to this hypothetical?

The only thing the PTB have to do is to invoke “National Security” and it is “game over” for any other claim. If the object belongs to a foreign power (including those who are “out of this world”) or it is a dark project… all they have to do is to claim it is property of the government and take it. You would not be able to prove otherwise… so, there goes one’s eBay dream.

“National Security” is the trump card.

M

calikid

03-30-2012, 03:57 PM

I'm trying to calculate a threshold.
If an iron metorite crashes to earth, you own it, and can sell it.
In my neighborhood the local university has reported that impacts have been tracked to our area and have offered bounty's on their recovery). No Government intervention.

If an airliner dumps some "blue ice" in your yard, nobody cares. You own it. :p

If a chunk of an airliner crashes in your yard, I'm less clear, but suspect the FAA would want a look at it.

If an airplane of any type crashes on your property, I can see the original owners wanting it back. Naturally I'd want recompense for any damages.

If a foreign power's satellite/ICBN lands on your property, I hear the national security implecations.

But if ET were to crash, well the government says they don't exist so how can they be classed as a hostile power? Prove their is offensive weapons on board. I say it is a civil matter, NOT a national security issue. I want ET in court to answer for negligent operation of an aircraft resulting in damages to my property. That vehicle is evidence in my court case and Mr General will be tampering with evidence if he touches it before I document EVERYTHING, especially occupants and their Saucer Driver's License. :)

Fore

03-30-2012, 11:42 PM

I'm trying to calculate a threshold.
If an iron metorite crashes to earth, you own it, and can sell it.My opinion only, The meteorite is naturally occurring in nature.

A UFO or any other device is a manufactured device that people came together to build and therefore exert the idea of ownership/sovereign ownership as a group.

--------------------------

Nature moves meteorites without intelligent consent from intelligent beings. A UFO though is moved and created by intelligent design.

The idea of owning a meteorite (naturally occurring substance) is probably related to the idea of owning non-manufactured assets. While the UFO is about owning manufactured assets.

In my neighborhood the local university has reported that impacts have been tracked to our area and have offered bounty's on their recovery). No Government intervention.

If an airliner dumps some "blue ice" in your yard, nobody cares. You own it. :p

If a chunk of an airliner crashes in your yard, I'm less clear, but suspect the FAA would want a look at it.

If an airplane of any type crashes on your property, I can see the original owners wanting it back. Naturally I'd want recompense for any damages. Well if a guy next door lays claim to "his [naturally occurring] property" and a lava field suddenly erupts at his property and damages yours, then you should probably get compensation.

Though in most legal cases the guy with the lava field will claim an act of God and get away with it.

I guess there is a murky role between ownership and responsibility on non-manufactured assets.

If a foreign power's satellite/ICBN lands on your property, I hear the national security implecations. The manufactured asset (built with a purpose in mind) just damaged your property. You should probably seek compensation if they don't own up to their responsibility for a given manufactured asset.

But if ET were to crash, well the government says they don't exist so how can they be classed as a hostile power? Prove their is offensive weapons on board. I say it is a civil matter, NOT a national security issue. I want ET in court to answer for negligent operation of an aircraft resulting in damages to my property. That vehicle is evidence in my court case and Mr General will be tampering with evidence if he touches it before I document EVERYTHING, especially occupants and their Saucer Driver's License. :)National Security just means national interests in my mind.

They make up the rules and apply them as arbitrarily as they go through the motions. If no ones opposes it, then they get away with it.

Applying ownership to a craft you didn't make without the consent of the managing party which built or destined it for a purpose is like stealing candy from a baby.

If they [the ET] abandon it on your front yard, then the guy with a biggest stick takes it. Whether that guy is you or your country.

-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

Property rights are really psychological more than actual in my mind. People imagine it is theirs and then act is if it were. If everyone agrees, then the illusion goes forward. If not, then there is a fight to see whom has the biggest stick and therefore wins the consensus of all others. (or die trying)

You should ask yourself if the ET have the same idea in respect to territorial rights and asset rights. Then ask what application of logic and consensus is used to determine the concept of responsibility and ownership across a wide range of ET life forms.

According to some ET your yard is not your yard. You just live there like a field mouse in it's hole in the middle of a vast field. Unaware that there are others whom lay claim to the whole field and every asset in it. (including the field mouse and it's descendants)

Fore

03-30-2012, 11:46 PM

@ Calikid

Here is a funny joke I just recalled the Advisor made years ago.

Grab a rock, any rock, then hold it day and night.

How long does it take for that rock to "belong to you"?

----------------------------------

When you get the complex humor you should feel free to laugh a bit at the absurdity.

If you don't, then imagine the joke again with a bar of gold, then back the rock. You'll probably laugh at some point when you realize how even intelligent beings can make up some dumb "stuff"...and even fully believe it as if it were actually true.

calikid

03-31-2012, 04:18 PM

We do all live in a fabricated reality.
Rules we all play by IRL.
Ownership, deeds of trust, purchases, etc. are facts of life we must deal with no matter the level of absurdity.
Which brings us back to the original topic.
If the government cannot prove hostile intent, why don't I own wreckage that is discovered on my personal property?
If an individual owns an automobile that can out perform a police cruiser, the cops don't confiscate the vehicle simply because it "might" be a threat IF used in a criminal manner.
Same with saucer tech, it is a matter of national security because it can outperform "our" aircraft?
When did that become the standard?

Fore

03-31-2012, 06:12 PM

We do all live in a fabricated reality.
Rules we all play by IRL.
Ownership, deeds of trust, purchases, etc. are facts of life we must deal with no matter the level of absurdity.

There is also a larger hidden realization to that joke up above. It has to do with the idea surrounding the concept of ownership and how any group or individual reacts based on that fabrication or self delusion that they actually own anything. The idea itself shapes behaviors and reasoning of any intelligent being.

The various questions you are posing are centered around the idea of ownership and gaining advantages (in some way).

A Question: The UFO crashed in your front yard. Why do you wish to exert ownership over it? Why are you worried that someone like a government body will come and take it from you?

The first response that comes to mind should probably be dissected until you really understand deep down what it is you really want in this hypothetical situation.

Is it to glean technology? The pride of owning some ETs' downed vehicle? The hope of some advantage by "owning" a rare item?

What will you do with "it" when you exert your idea of ownership upon the object? What is the ultimate fulfilled purpose?

Which brings us back to the original topic.
If the government cannot prove hostile intent, why don't I own wreckage that is discovered on my personal property? Arbitrary rules someone made up.

If an individual owns an automobile that can out perform a police cruiser, the cops don't confiscate the vehicle simply because it "might" be a threat IF used in a criminal manner. Actually, there are laws that prevent non-standard vehicles from operating in normal roads. There are specifications for vehicles to be road legal.

A portion of muscle cars [for example] are often deemed not road worthy and practically illegal to drive down the road. (You won't get permission nor registration for driving that vehicle on a public road.)

Even performance cars have to be designed to be road legal. Most specialized vehicles cannot be driven on normal roads, even if they actually can drive down a public road perfectly fine.

---------------------------------
The same is generally true for planes in our sky.

Same with saucer tech, it is a matter of national security because it can outperform "our" aircraft?
When did that become the standard?When the arbitrary rule was made that they take UFOs under a tarp and threaten witnesses into silence.

Our kind (humanity) is keen on just making things up on the spot and hoping no one will contradict the "new rule" put into place 5 seconds ago.

It's all made up and then logic is half applied to make it all sound sensible.

National Interests = "We reserve the right to change the rules at any time."

Doc

04-01-2012, 06:11 AM

Fore

04-01-2012, 02:40 PM

A man lived in an abandoned shack on the beach someplace where the weather was always pleasant. The shack had no windows and no door. He slept on an old mattress. He ate from a wooden bowl with a wooden spoon. He had all he needed and although it was next to nothing, he was content. One day someone who felt sorry that he had only the dirt floor brought him a nice old carpet. They put it on the floor and it was very comforatble indeed. The man suddenly realized he now needed a door. And a lock. :cool:If our government is motivated by the concept of maintaining personal comfort (and most human beings around the world are motivated in such a way) then, it is obvious they will want to take a UFO that crashed in someones front yard.

They will operate under the assumption that what is best for Uncle Sam is best for all.

(though by extension all sorts of problems later develop from that kind of thinking)

-------------------------

If a persons entire decision making process is entirely guided by the resolution to seek, maintain and perpetuate personal comfort...then they are going to take that UFO to exploit it in whatever method they believe is justified.

Going so far as to deny it exist under the tarp. Silencing witnesses, perpetuating a never ending coverup, etc.

Any individual whom only thinks entirely of perpetuating their current standard of living and fearing others whom may alter that standard for the worse...well...any number of actions are ultimately internally justified.

------------------------

In my mind it doesn't really matter if it is a rancher or a government agent with military trucks in tow. If they constantly have a fear inside them that if they "do nothing" their perceived advantage is going to be foiled. Then they will act on it to protect their perceived interests.

In this mentality, a downed ET craft is "an opportunity" rather than a tragedy.

The first thoughts crossing a ranchers mind [or government] are probably how to exploit the property to reconstruct new technologies and therefore new perceived advantages.

Etc.

It may then become a hidden secret for years until they have milked their find completely dry. Be it a rancher or a government doing the hiding.

Fore

04-01-2012, 02:41 PM

---------------------------------------
People whom are overly accustomed to thinking in these terms would find nothing at all wrong with that. (unless they are on the outside looking in)

If we had intersteller planes that arrived on a distant world and crashed. If those natives thought along the lines like we currently do. They would pry open the airlocks, look inside, be scared of the looks of a human being covered in a red substance and think about how they are going to keep this a secret.

To maintain the secret and to take advantage of these strange looking beings whom are injured, they may pull us human beings out of the wreckage one by one and those whom are still alive may be locked in a room or cave somewhere. Possibly even bound by some ropes "for their safety".

The property owners may not being advanced enough to render proper assistance to the ill fated crew, the human beings pulled from the interstellar craft may have to die shortly after the crash if they did not die upon impact.

When the human beings plead with the natives to let them go, the natives perceiving a risk to their sought after advantage may simply refuse. The survivors human beings from the interstellar craft which are now hidden away, will be interrogated and asked to divulge as much as they can about their origins, asked whether they are a threat or not and probably asked to teach them how to reconstruct such a craft.

When the human captives object, the natives of this distant world may use very persuasive methods. Those whom are captive are unlikely to ever be let go. The natives will also fear any ideas of bringing more human beings to the scene, so a rescue party will probably be denied.

--------------------------------

As the last survivor dies (hopefully) from malnutrition, the last human survivors may quip that the natives remind them of themselves from thousands of years prior.

When the last ill fated survivor is on their deathbed and asks the native of that world why they never allowed them to leave, the native will tell them because they had too many interests in them to let them leave.

They have enemies in a distant land. They need the knowledge gleaned from the craft and the passengers to build better weaponry. They wanted to learn how to make stronger materials efficiently. They wanted the advances in medicine, chemistry and physics.

The survivors were the cornucopia of new knowledge and designs.

The native admits to the last survivor that these interests far outweighed their normal goodwill. The survivors and their craft were a new opportunity they could not afford to lose.

The last survivor understood to the bitter end that the moment the opportunistic interests flashed through the mind of the first native whom witnessed them. Their fate was sealed.

The last survivor would probably say:

"Had we crashed on a world without as much fear and needs as are rife in your mind,words and actions; we might have actually gotten assistance to get home."

--------------------------
--------------------------

The Moral of this fictional story is what drives someone to want to keep such a craft? I understand the interests and the opportunity. We usually look at our military and black ops community as if they had evil intent. But they are just being...all too human.

Protecting ones personal interests and keeping those fears of losing such an opportunity is paramount to how we open and close doors.

If it were a plane crash in our front yard, would we really want to "own it" or "keep it" under some tarp as a coveted memento? What if it were a UFO? Would we act differently than our government if given the same chance?

calikid

04-02-2012, 03:36 PM

Fore said:

The various questions you are posing are centered around the idea of ownership and gaining advantages (in some way).

A Question: The UFO crashed in your front yard. Why do you wish to exert ownership over it? Why are you worried that someone like a government body will come and take it from you?

The first response that comes to mind should probably be dissected until you really understand deep down what it is you really want in this hypothetical situation.

Is it to glean technology? The pride of owning some ETs' downed vehicle? The hope of some advantage by "owning" a rare item?

What will you do with "it" when you exert your idea of ownership upon the object? What is the ultimate fulfilled purpose?

My own motivations center around NOT having the evidence disappear as it has in so many past cases.

Ownership implies the ability to determine when and where the possessed objects will be displayed.

If I own the wreckage, then I can loan it to the local university for study, or set it up in a museum for public display.

"My" ultimate goal would not be personal gain, but public disclosure.

orangekea

04-04-2012, 03:57 PM

calikid

04-05-2012, 03:18 PM

Dragonfire

04-05-2012, 07:16 PM

I could just envision the conversation.
Me on my front lawn in front of a half damaged saucer.
The news cameras running.
(in my best grumpy old man voice) "STAY OFF MY LAWN! Stay away from MY saucer!"
The army general at the curb saying "It's not a saucer, it's an Army weather balloon, and we want it back."

To expand on your conversation, I pick it up with the General;

General: "It's not a saucer, it's an Army weather balloon, and we want it back."

Grumpy old man voice: It's not a balloon, and you better to talk to my little gray friends about moving it.

calikid

04-06-2012, 02:44 PM

And that brings to mind the question of sanctuary.
What if the occupants are alive?
Have they been proven hostile?
Do they deserve medical care?

What if the occupants are dead?
If they are not considered human, then their remains are simply property, like any other dead animal found on your land.
Heck, they might even be good eatin' Mr General. Why should I surrender my road kill salad to you?

norenrad

04-06-2012, 05:01 PM

I can definitely say that aliens are off my menu.

Dragonfire

04-06-2012, 06:22 PM

Ya never know, they be made from vegitarian material...........an example is the creature iin the first "The Thing" The creature in that first one was played by James Arness by the way.

calikid

04-07-2012, 08:43 AM

Well, looking back to Roswell what do we think Mac Brazel should have done different?

Excluded contacts with the military?

Direct contact with media?

Opened a circus and charged admission? That will be $5 Mr General. :)

Dragonfire

04-07-2012, 10:49 PM

Hindsight certainly makes it easier to think of other avenues. Putting myself in his position, at that time in history. The Sheriff is the first thought.

Now, I think taking it to an independant lab for analysis would be first. Right after I made sure I had enough material hidden away in a safe place. Maybe even try and clean up as much as possible. I would not tell anyone what I found until I got the answers from the lab. I would hope they would be honest about what was determined about the material submitted.

Wansen

09-05-2015, 08:07 AM

CasperParks

09-06-2015, 08:11 PM

If an ET Craft were to crash in the front yard of a house you own, would you have the right to claim ownership?

What if you wanted to deny government access to the vehicle?
What if you wanted to list wreckage pieces on eBay?
Could the PTB stop you?
Could YOU stop the PTB from hauling it away?

Not sure about this but I think if that happened, you go to jail.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra-Terrestrial_Exposure_Law

Wansen,

You're making reference to (paraphrased version): Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations, passed into law on July 16, 1969. Anyone in contact with an extraterrestrial and or UFO is jailed. NASA can enforce quarantine that a court order cannot break.

Supposedly, in early 1990s - maybe 1992 that law was rescinded. From what I heard, jokes in both US Houses were made in the process of rescinding it. An interesting consideration, 1950s a experiment was done with subliminal message at a theater. People were outraged. Legislation was introduced to prohibit subliminal messages. People assume legislation passed, but it did not. This could be similar, people assume it was rescinded and it was not. Congress must vote, then Senate, followed by signature of sitting President. It could've passed both Houses and President failed to sign it. Or alterations were made the process, changing wording and back to Congress who votes under the radar then back to Senate and onward to the President. They can make following legislation complex and confusing to follow as it bounces around.

*It is rare that laws are rescinded. At the time, John Lear and others were drawing attention to UFOs. Richard Hoagland had books and videos regarding The Face and other oddities on Mars.

I suspect rescinding Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations was an effort to deflect reference to it. Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations could be resurrected without much effort, depending on excuses and reasoning for doing it.

If it was rescinded, I suspect another law has replaced it. A law that is buried through an amendment to unrelated legislation, and or was passed under the radar of the general population.

I am not able to answer this question: What other nations have similar laws in place?

Wansen

09-06-2015, 08:19 PM

Wansen,

You're making reference to (paraphrased version): Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations, passed into law on July 16, 1969. Anyone in contact with an extraterrestrial and or UFO is jailed. NASA can enforce quarantine that a court order cannot break.

Supposedly, in early 1990s - maybe 1992 that law was rescinded. From what I heard, jokes in both US Houses were made in the process of rescinding it. An interesting consideration, 1950s a experiment was done with subliminal message at a theater. People were outraged. Legislation was introduced to prohibit subliminal messages. People assume legislation passed, but it did not. This could be similar, people assume it was rescinded and it was not. Congress must vote, then Senate, followed by signature of sitting President. It could've passed both Houses and President failed to sign it. Or alterations were made the process, changing wording and back to Congress who votes under the radar then back to Senate and onward to the President. They can make following legislation complex and confusing to follow as it bounces around.

*It is rare that laws are rescinded. At the time, John Lear and others were drawing attention to UFOs. Richard Hoagland had books and videos regarding The Face and other oddities on Mars.

I suspect rescinding Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations was an effort to deflect reference to it. Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations could be resurrected without much effort, depending on excuses and reasoning for doing it.

If it was rescinded, I suspect another law has replaced it. A law that is buried through an amendment to unrelated legislation, and or was passed under the radar of the general population.

I am not able to answer this question: Do other nations have similar laws in place?

Very interesting indeed! I thank you for the updated information; the depth of knowledge of many of the members here is most impressive. I look forward to learning more.

calikid

09-06-2015, 08:49 PM

Wansen,

You're making reference to (paraphrased version): Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations, passed into law on July 16, 1969. Anyone in contact with an extraterrestrial and or UFO is jailed. NASA can enforce quarantine that a court order cannot break.

Supposedly, in early 1990s - maybe 1992 that law was rescinded. From what I heard, jokes in both US Houses were made in the process of rescinding it. An interesting consideration, 1950s a experiment was done with subliminal message at a theater. People were outraged. Legislation was introduced to prohibit subliminal messages. People assume legislation passed, but it did not. This could be similar, people assume it was rescinded and it was not. Congress must vote, then Senate, followed by signature of sitting President. It could've passed both Houses and President failed to sign it. Or alterations were made the process, changing wording and back to Congress who votes under the radar then back to Senate and onward to the President. They can make following legislation complex and confusing to follow as it bounces around.

*It is rare that laws are rescinded. At the time, John Lear and others were drawing attention to UFOs. Richard Hoagland had books and videos regarding The Face and other oddities on Mars.

I suspect rescinding Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations was an effort to deflect reference to it. Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations could be resurrected without much effort, depending on excuses and reasoning for doing it.

If it was rescinded, I suspect another law has replaced it. A law that is buried through an amendment to unrelated legislation, and or was passed under the radar of the general population.

I am not able to answer this question: What other nations have similar laws in place?
I'm trying to recall the shuttle explosion over Texas (tragedy). Seems they quoted some law preventing anyone from taking ownership of pieces. Can't sell on Ebay, must return to NASA. Space debris law? Hmmm, have to Google it, see if it applies.

Wally

09-07-2015, 05:55 AM

I'm trying to recall the shuttle explosion over Texas (tragedy). Seems they quoted some law preventing anyone from taking ownership of pieces. Can't sell on Ebay, must return to NASA. Space debris law? Hmmm, have to Google it, see if it applies.

Well, with the shuttle they can clearly argue that it's government property. Also having people messing with the debris would likely hinder investigation into the cause. It's probably similar in any aviation crash I would imagine that if you took pieces of the wreckage then that would be illegal.

majicbar

09-07-2015, 07:51 AM

Well, with the shuttle they can clearly argue that it's government property. Also having people messing with the debris would likely hinder investigation into the cause. It's probably similar in any aviation crash I would imagine that if you took pieces of the wreckage then that would be illegal.

My recollection of space law, U. S. Space Law and the U. N. treaty on space is that the Government where debris or alien craft lands, is responsible for custody of these items and for the eventual return to the government that launched the craft into space. The owners of the land where these items land is compensable by the government launching these items, or in their stead the government of the land where such a landing has occurred.

majicbar

09-07-2015, 07:58 AM

Wansen,

You're making reference to (paraphrased version): Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations, passed into law on July 16, 1969. Anyone in contact with an extraterrestrial and or UFO is jailed. NASA can enforce quarantine that a court order cannot break.

Supposedly, in early 1990s - maybe 1992 that law was rescinded. From what I heard, jokes in both US Houses were made in the process of rescinding it. An interesting consideration, 1950s a experiment was done with subliminal message at a theater. People were outraged. Legislation was introduced to prohibit subliminal messages. People assume legislation passed, but it did not. This could be similar, people assume it was rescinded and it was not. Congress must vote, then Senate, followed by signature of sitting President. It could've passed both Houses and President failed to sign it. Or alterations were made the process, changing wording and back to Congress who votes under the radar then back to Senate and onward to the President. They can make following legislation complex and confusing to follow as it bounces around.

*It is rare that laws are rescinded. At the time, John Lear and others were drawing attention to UFOs. Richard Hoagland had books and videos regarding The Face and other oddities on Mars.

I suspect rescinding Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations was an effort to deflect reference to it. Title 14, Section 1211 Code of Federal Regulations could be resurrected without much effort, depending on excuses and reasoning for doing it.

If it was rescinded, I suspect another law has replaced it. A law that is buried through an amendment to unrelated legislation, and or was passed under the radar of the general population.

I am not able to answer this question: What other nations have similar laws in place?

http://www.snopes.com/legal/et.asp

Rescinded!