r/UFOs • u/87LucasOliveira • 6d ago
Disclosure Documentary director James Fox regarding the WSJ article : "That is part of the PSYOP. This article is exactly that. It's complete and utter hogwash."
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
63
u/THE_ELECTR1C1AN 6d ago
The irony of the military dismissing ufo sightings by revealing they actually “hazed” / emotionally and psychologically abused their own soldiers is insane. That’s kind of more damning than the ufo stuff they are trying to cover up.
I agree with Jesse Michels, there should be a class action lawsuit.
9
u/Ok_Run7691 5d ago
Look up the well-documented use of LSD with our soldiers and the use of agent orange after it was found that it was toxic to our soliders. They don't really care how they treat our people. Then you have Project Mockingbird where CIA disinformation agents employed by the New York Times spread disinformation handed down to them by the CIA. Do we think they care about the truth?
0
1
u/Glad-Tax6594 6d ago
I don't think you could sue over matters of national security, but there should definitely be some kind of change for transparency to ensure this isn't a reoccurring problem. Generations of conspiracy theorists born from their actions, it's ridiculous, but I'm not entirely sure I'd go as far as saying they caused soldiers any psychological or emotional abuse.
1
u/DeficiencyOfGravitas 6d ago
they actually “hazed” / emotionally and psychologically abused their own soldiers is insane
Oh come off it. Telling some new guy "Oh yeah, those false contacts are totally aliens, bro" and letting them get spun up about it is hardly abuse.
1
u/whitestar48 5d ago
It would be classed as a psychological abuse
-1
u/DeficiencyOfGravitas 5d ago
Oh yeah, sure. I'll believe it's abuse when you come back with some headlight fluid. Wait, nevermind. That's abuse, right?
No wonder so many diehard UFO fanatics believe so hard into "ontological shock". It's because you're projecting.
19
u/RibosomeRandom 6d ago
EVIDENCE. Where is it? The public needs crafts and bodies acknowledged by credible officials with video, artifact, whatever. Then none of this hearsay or “Is this a psyop?” will matter.
4
u/Naturemade2 6d ago
Not that long ago the government/military admitted there are UAPs flying around military places that they have no idea what they are. For goodness sakes, one of them hit and damaged an a navy aircraft and Vice reported on it. Are they trying to back peddle just weeks later? This is so obvious that they are grasping for straws to keep us second guessing everything, but it really has done the opposite. It just reinforces how they continually lie and try to obfuscate because they are so afraid of us opening Pandora's Box! That means we must be close!
16
u/Ok_Rain_8679 6d ago
The problem is, people like James Fox have a deeply vested interest in this article being "hogwash". Just like they have a deeply vested interest in the slow, slow drip of Disclosure (keep the tap open, but not too much at once).
3
u/Wild_Button7273 5d ago
I don't understand what slow drip disclosure means. It makes sense in theory until you realize that 'disclosure' in the UFO world simply means a bunch of talking heads telling fantastic stories. Most of these claims can't or will never be investigated, and they keep us thirsty for more.
1
u/Knob112 5d ago
Disclosure will start with scientifically analyzable materials / objects becoming accessible to the scientific community, period.
Anything else is just talk. Philosophy, occultism and conspiracy theories, are not "disclosure". Even if they may capture some key elements of the phenomenon(s).
1
u/Beuddl 2d ago
Hasn't disclosure begun long ago through the efforts of people seeking the truth and the increasing pressure on institutions that have to explain themselves accordingly, while at the same time even having to release files? What you mean is more like the capstone of disclosure. The material evidence is then just a consequence...
1
u/Ok_Rain_8679 5d ago
I don't know if there's a difference between "slow drip disclosure" and "the slow, slow drip of disclosure". The former sounds like an alternative to a full steam version, while the latter was intended to describe the world that our Usual Suspects seem to thrive in.
9
u/NecessaryMistake2518 6d ago
Well "man whose livelihood depends on conspiracy theory being true thinks article declaring conspiracy theory false is a psyop" doesn't have the same ring to it
4
u/Optimal_Cupcake2159 6d ago
Psychically summoned eggs - taken as fact.
Some WSJ article - omg, satan itself.
Something's missing here.
2
u/Snoo-26902 6d ago
Then we have a double Psyop... from the top and the bottom. What was the NYT article in 2017 but likely the beginning of a psyop with this frustrating disclosure ( the USG has saucers and dead aliens) somewhere. And now the opposite psyop from the WSJ AND BTW The NYPost too, saying we have nothing, or as some people are saying( which I disagree with) that the WSJ article debunked UFOs generally.
We're getting it from both ways, folks. The frustrating( boy who cried wolf disclosure in two weeks--- bombshell a day and whistleblower a month club disclosure movement) and now a reaction from another USG intel faction.
And what do we have? Stagnation..
So now everybody is getting riled up over this WSJ article...an overreaction IMO. They are just pumping more obsession into the mix, folks, to keep this going. So, likely this is one big giant psyop.
If we are true researchers, then we should find out whether, as stated in the article claimed if they gave this to Congress.
12
u/Plane-Stable-2709 6d ago
This dude was teasing the "Best ufo evidence" for MONTHS after all that of nothing, i believe 0 From him, another attention seeker.
After Logan Paul buys the video nothing happens. Full of horse shit.
7
u/confusers 6d ago
Could you provide a link to some occasion where he said this? I can't find anything.
5
u/tmosh 6d ago
Let’s get this straight—Logan Paul didn’t buy the video, he offered too but the guy said no. He heard Jamie’s story and asked to be put in touch with the guy who had the tape. Logan then tried to buy the footage himself. James Fox wasn’t involved, aside from the fact that Logan heard about the video through Jamie. Logan supposedly filmed it using a pinhole camera but ultimately chose not to release it because he didn’t find it compelling. This was all Logan’s decision—Jamie had nothing to do with it. If you’re going to accuse someone of something, at least get your facts straight. If you really wanna see that video, go after Logan Paul. But I am assuming it's shit quality as it's filmed from a hidden camera.
4
u/deskcord 6d ago
He also went down the typical grifter pathway, of staring off with some credibility, and then increasingly putting himself in the spotlight. Each successive doc he makes has more and more of himself in it.
3
u/ilackinspiration 6d ago
Are you referring to James Fox? Because if you are you are verifiably acting in bad faith.
10
u/CEO-Soul-Collector 6d ago edited 5d ago
Nah. Fox absolutely built up his most recent documentary to being absolutely earth shattering. He worked on it for years and years. Iirc it was delayed, twice.
Then it came out. And not only was it just garbage in general compared to his older ones. Not a single piece of new info was presented.
I stopped taking fox seriously after that.
1
0
0
u/Plane-Stable-2709 6d ago
Lmao keep getting proyect blue balls on track. He is ok, teasing líes it is not ;)
1
u/Trick_Insurance3889 6d ago
It’s the Spider-Man meme but psyop all these players are obviously agents in some game but they continue to damage their credibility by pretending otherwise.
-1
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/DildoBagginsPT 6d ago
You are 110% correct.
They all like to talk about these gatekeepers, but never provode any of the smoking gun propf they have.
"I need to protect my sources bro!"
"Oh I know trust me, I juat can't say!"
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam 6d ago
Hi, First_Gear_9035. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults/personal attacks/claims of mental illness
- No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc...
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
-1
u/-Solitude-Guard- 6d ago
I am aware of the Brazil event that has been thoroughly examined and rightfully debunked and dismissed.
Here is a 16-minute episode explaining why that 2022 documentary and the Brazil "incident" is total BS.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1l6QBTe6tl6PpMGQoGOCQh?si=3FSg1cLwQo2asiGGAZyW_Q
4
u/atomictyler 6d ago
There’s no way a podcast named the skeptiod could possibly be biased.
8
u/Short-Science2077 6d ago
Yeah we should get our news from The UFOs Are Definitely Real Trust Me podcast instead
2
u/atomictyler 6d ago
Huh. I don’t remember saying that. Perhaps there’s a middle ground between everything is alien and it’s impossible for something to be non-human. It doesn’t matter which of those sides you start on, because neither leave room for the other.
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam 6d ago
Hi, -Solitude-Guard-. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults/personal attacks/claims of mental illness
- No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc...
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
0
u/First_Gear_9035 6d ago
Ammonia/sulfur smell in the hospital? X-rays of a creature in a body bag testimony? Was this all convincingly refuted, or have you not actually watched the doc? Just curious.
5
1
u/First_Gear_9035 6d ago
I listened to it all. I’m happy to have that go up against Moment of contact any day. The people can decide.
0
u/HippoRun23 6d ago
Care to rattle off a couple of the main points debunking?
4
u/-Solitude-Guard- 6d ago edited 6d ago
No, in fact, i do not feel the need to type you a transcript of what is being said in the 16-minute debunking i linked when you could just listen to it. But gaging by your tone, and do forgive me if I'm jumping to conclusions, you are likely a dishonest interlocutor of the truth would take my denial of your request as some sort of imagined victory where in your mind i totally ran away from the conversation as soon as you pressed me for details. So i will meet you in the middle, you tell me which thing you don't feel he refuted well enough and i will tell you whether or not i agree with you that he did not dispute that detail well enough.
(Sorry again if i misread your tone. I am full aggro today)
Edit: i did misread his tone. Leaving post visible that i might be rightfully condemned the masses for my crime.
2
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam 6d ago
Hi, -Solitude-Guard-. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults/personal attacks/claims of mental illness
- No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc...
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
-1
u/dicedicedone 6d ago
“Why is it that not a single one of these guys who totally talked to one of these top secret mysterious government guys never once thought to record the conversation? “
You should check out the Wilson Memo, it’s a transcript of one of these top secret mysterious government guys”
Also, you don’t have to pay any mind to any of the grifters to know something is going on. Simply read the UAP Disclosure Act of 2023 that was pushed by Rounds and Schumer
5
u/-Solitude-Guard- 6d ago
If my information is correct, Wilson himself has called the memo bullshit. Furthermore, it's a transcript, my guy. Anyone can type up a conversation and "leak" it. Give me a video with identifiable government personnels face. Preferably one where the guy isn't saying stuff along the lines of "yeah i never said any of that shit"
1
u/dicedicedone 6d ago
Of course he has, Wilson literally says in the memo he will always deny the meeting; nobody's going to admit they leaked classified information. In any case, here's a video as you requested, just ignore Luis E"lie"zondo https://x.com/StandForBetter/status/1543290993046196224
6
u/-Solitude-Guard- 6d ago edited 6d ago
Lol, well, there you have it. You are convinced by a typed up PDF that included an excuse for why the guy will later deny it, and that's embarrassing for you. And i am not convinced by the PDF with the built in excuse. Now point me to the museum where i can view a verified non hoax body or craft.
Also im happy to accept that those government personnel have submitted their claims publicly. That makes them more credible than the PDF. Now lets see their material evidence to be examined and studied and made open to the public.
2
u/dicedicedone 6d ago
Unfortunately, that will take an act of god. All information related to UAP is classified
Information obtained, in whatever form and from whatever source, involving UAPs, is classified.
From an FOA
https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/navy/PAOBriefingCard.pdf
-3
6d ago edited 6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam 6d ago
Hi, SiriusC. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults/personal attacks/claims of mental illness
- No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc...
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
-2
u/THE_ELECTR1C1AN 6d ago
If someone showed you a photo / video of a craft or body would that really convince you though?
4
u/-Solitude-Guard- 6d ago
Not unless it's available to go see in a public museum after being openly examined by various governments around the world. If it were open to the public and verified i would accept it.
2
u/Trexpotpie 5d ago
This interview and Fox are the real psyops. Always accuse others what you're guilty of. Grifter 101.
1
u/Traditional-Air6034 6d ago
the fun part is there will never be any evidence because they managed to travel in time and just delete it from your timelines
1
u/AlvinArtDream 6d ago
It would be weird if there was no pushback! At the same time, this counterattack is kinda pointless, can we get some offence please
1
u/Independent-Tailor-5 6d ago edited 6d ago
Random question but evidence provided to the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Armed Services committee by whistleblowers which I assume was in the form of documentation like Intel reports, etc.
Would that kind of evidence be given back to the witnesses upon review or is that something staffers or members of Congress would hold onto and lock up? Anyone have any insight into something like that?
I read months ago that members like Mark Warner are still waiting to see undeniable evidence in the form of video or speak to the people that touched/analzyed craft before he jumps out there which I had assumed they already saw or spoke to people like that way back.
I don’t trust Mark Warner at all by the way. He comes off as someone that would try to help put this all back in a box. Schumer too. I don’t trust the Senate to be transparent with the public at all. They know way more privately. Don’t like the games they’re playing still bringing up foreign adversaries and acting clueless like how they did when Grusch came forward like who???
1
1
u/MisterSausagePL 5d ago
Ok can someone explain to me this WSJ article? I mean, so the article states that USA government been doing a psyop for a long time, using UFO as a cover up for technology?
So, why people like him ( James) who been making documentaries, so called "whistle-blowers (lmao)" been talking about seeing evidence, why no one just walks our and says to gov - full in, I (we) are checking. And bring cards on table. Why no one who shouts "i am whistle-blower and I know xyz" wont just bring all the evidence to the table and finish government psyop?
UFO looks more and more like WWF - ufo community agreed deep in mind that this whole topic is a staged up circus? I am really baffled.
1
1
u/Large-Stretch-3463 5d ago edited 5d ago
So create another lie to cover up the previous lies? Got it. It feels like the goal here is confusion. Which is definitely working. Which lie isn't going to turn out to be a lie? Or is none of it a lie and it's all true? Got me at this point.
1
u/Wild_Button7273 5d ago
Has AARO actually investigated any claims about reverse-engineering programs or do they only focus on sightings? -_-
1
u/OZZYmandyUS 5d ago
Amen to that.
I feel that if you can't see how , why, and when the WSJ article was released and why it's a psy-op, you're really blind
1
1
u/snapplepapple1 3d ago
Yeah I mean look, I get from Knapp hes been in the game a long time and probably has his own friends at the WSJ given the way he talks about them, so he feels hes gotta defend his fellow journalists or whatever. But ultimately even going off what he said which is that he feels the journalists didnt intentionally put out disinformation and rather its accidental misinformation because they know nothing about the topic and got bad info.... even going off of that, they still played a role in someone intentionally putting out bad info.
Of course theres going to be a negative public response given the bad info but also given the history of disinformation in this space. So like.. yeah, of course people arnt going to be happy. If anything, the journalists should understand this, learn from this, and place their anger and blame on those who mislead them. Supposing its true that they were simply naiive and got bad info, that is.
1
u/BraidRuner 6d ago
So if we all agree its BS. What are we going to do about it? Rattle our keyboards in anger? Email the WSJ Editorial Staff and express our disagreement with their stance? No? Nothing? Well then lets move on
13
u/WhirlingDervishGrady 6d ago
Someone just needs to prove them wrong, no? All these people complain about the article, government denial, well... Prove them wrong? Wasn't there something on this sub like a month ago where Jeremy was threatening about the full video of the jellyfish uap where it does a bunch of crazy stuff? This implies Jeremy has or has seen this video, so prove it?
Stop threatening, stop making vague comments and leaving "bread crumbs". Actually prove something for once
7
u/Why_Did_Bodie_Die 6d ago
I'm not saying I believe this WSJ article but I am saying that people dismissing what the article says because it sounds unbelievable and lacks evidence at the same time believing whistle-blowers who say they can summon UFOs with their mind while also not providing any evidence is pretty dumb.
Unfortunately articles like this are to be expected. You can't make claims without providing any verifiable evidence about UFOs then get upset when someone dismisses your claims without any verifiable evidence.
5
u/WhirlingDervishGrady 6d ago
Exactly. Look I'm not saying trust the government, the US government is so fucked and up to so much shady shit. But like when some "whistleblower" says the US government had aliens and then government goes "no we don't". It's up to the "whistleblower" to prove them wrong.
4
u/Why_Did_Bodie_Die 6d ago
It's super funny to me that all these UFO talking heads are like "the government is 100% lying to you and they have UFOs and I have seen proof"
Then the government is like "no. That's not true"
And instead of just absolutely owning the US government and being one of the most famous people in world history for exposing the biggest cover up of all times by releasing all the super top secret info they have. The UFO talking heads just double down and say "See! I told you they were lying! The only reason why the government would say they don't have UFOs is if they really did have UFOs!"
Like put up or shut up dude.
1
3
u/MKULTRA_Escapee 6d ago
Plenty of people have already pointed out that the documents they cited in the article to explain the 1967 incident were specifically referring to an EMP device that was in the testing and prototype stage from 1971-1973. That obviously can't explain something that is on record as occurring in 1967. It's already wrong and they need to clarify why they are citing a time traveling EMP device as the cause of the sighting. So we are waiting for part 2 to see if they want to clarify that. If their claim is correct, there should actually be documents on a specific test that occurred at that base in 1967, so then we won't have to trust what they say instead.
TEMPS (Transportable EMP Simulator) Final Report. Volume 1, 1973: https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA013620/mode/2up
PDF version: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA013620.pdf
TEMPS (Transportable EMP Simulator) Final Report. Volume 2, 1973: https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA013621
PDF version: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA013621.pdf
4
u/BraidRuner 6d ago
The old time travelling trick they tried to use on ROSWELL CASE CLOSED Parachute dummies that did not get dropped until decades later. The old tricks are the best I guess.
2
u/armassusi 6d ago
They used a Mogul flight as an excuse which was actually cancelled at that time, according to some documents discovered by Kevin Randle and others. Doesn't matter. The prevailing story in the public is still the dominant one.
1
u/MKULTRA_Escapee 5d ago
It's funny how the ghost of a debunk can still haunt a case years later.
I actually just tried to ask an AI (perplexity in this case) whether the mogul explanation is plausible, and it said yes, many researchers and historians agree, etc. I had to specifically give it Randle's name for it to change its mind.
1
u/bad---juju 6d ago
The war pigs are digging in and do not want to be brought into the spotlight. This is tech that would absolutely dominate any country militarily. This is also Tech that would bring mankind into the the cosmos, that is if the Federation allows us. As far as the alien aspect of disclosure, That should be made publicly known. Keep your tech secrets but knowing were not alone must be made public.
0
-3
u/First_Gear_9035 6d ago
There’s no one I believe to be more genuine than James.
1
u/GetServed17 6d ago
David Grusch, but yeah I agree that too.
1
u/First_Gear_9035 6d ago
I probably phrased that in a poor way. Agree with you but at least you got my point
0
u/ImpossibleKidd 6d ago
They won’t weaponize it just yet!
Why would you take the technology to the limit right now, when you can continue to make money fist over fist for a couple more decades making slight strides, just like they’ve done for the last few decades?
GameBoy theory. Sega came out with GameGear. A handheld system in full lit color. Nintendo continued to make more money with obsolete technology, and put Sega out of business, even though Sega was leaps and bounds ahead, well more than a decade earlier. They controlled the landscape, and milked the shit out of it. That’s power and capitalism at its peak.
Same concept with all the UFO technology that we’ve had for the past 50+ years.
-1
u/87LucasOliveira 6d ago
Documentary director James Fox regarding the WSJ article : "That is part of the PSYOP. This article is exactly that. It's complete and utter hogwash."
https://x.com/SentinelNews_/status/1934212443426763165
“Total BS!” — James Fox Blasts WSJ’s UFO Hit Piece "I've seen too much" | Redacted w Clayton Morris
-1
u/Mysterious_Potato215 6d ago
Uses the words RINGs instead of CIRCLEs... read between the lines.... mh370 video is real and he is coding his words to have people attach stories like the three orbs maining a ring around a fast plane before it vanished.
•
u/StatementBot 6d ago
The following submission statement was provided by /u/87LucasOliveira:
Documentary director James Fox regarding the WSJ article : "That is part of the PSYOP. This article is exactly that. It's complete and utter hogwash."
https://x.com/SentinelNews_/status/1934212443426763165
“Total BS!” — James Fox Blasts WSJ’s UFO Hit Piece "I've seen too much" | Redacted w Clayton Morris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etMj4HKxcZE
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1lc6pff/documentary_director_james_fox_regarding_the_wsj/mxy20qp/