Thoughts on Joey's Interview with Michael Herrera - The Need for True Independent Vetting

"I'm re-posting this article for serious analysis and input from experts and knowledgeable parties only. Unproductive jokes, trolling or dismissive comments will not be engaged with. If you have no constructive insights to offer, please refrain from replying."

I really appreciate Joey taking the initiative to bring Michael Herrera's perspective into the public discourse through his in-depth video interview. Claims of this magnitude related to UFOs, covert government operations, and insider knowledge deserve to be scrutinized - as long as it's done in a truly impartial and substantive way.

From what I could gather based on the content provided, Joey seems to have gone in with the sincere intent of properly vetting these extraordinary assertions. However, there are some concerning patterns and shortcomings that emerge which undermine achieving that rigorous level of scrutiny such incredible claims demand.

For instance, while Joey provided a platform for Herrera to lay out his background and experiences in detail, there were multiple instances where blatant inconsistencies or dubious assertions didn't seem to be firmly challenged or reconciled:

The conflicting accounts around Herrera's military records and involvement in black ops faced no requests for clarifying documentation.
Pivotal moments like the helicopter tracking incident lacked pressing for verifiable specifics to assess credibility.
Herrera's motivations wereAccepted at face value despite clear potential financial incentives contradicting his claims.

Rather than using forensic tools to comprehensively fact-check the entire backstory, the interview came across more as an open-ended fan promotion of the narrative at times.

This wasn't helped by some of the body language and reactions observed. When faced with counterpoints like Nathan's criticism, there was a noticeable dismissive smirk and cavalier response rather than substantively addressing those concerns head-on. Similarly, questions around Herrera's connections to other fringe UFO figures were glossed over.

One of the most glaring shortcomings centers on evidence. While Herrera made a litany of bombshell claims about having special access, there was surprisingly no attempt to back that up by providing any sort of verifiable documentation or data as proof - be it photographs, user logs, access records, you name it.

Extraordinary assertions absolutely require an extraordinary level of validated evidence beyond just recounting stories by interested parties. On that front, the interview fell drastically short.

The broader investigative methods and processes that Joey utilized also remain rather opaque overall. Key details like the vetting workflows, sources consulted, and Joey's own credentials/background were all kept anonymous or vague. Lack of transparency undercuts credibility.

Now to be clear, I'm not outright dismissing the possibility that aspects of Herrera's account could have some validity or truth within the overall narrative. These are simply the warning signs and areas that highlight why independent professional investigative journalists with no preexisting beliefs or agendas need to re-examine everything through a fresh, comprehensive, and rigorously impartial lens.

Only by adhering to those elite journalistic standards - applying forensic scrutiny to every claim, meticulously fact-checking principals' backgrounds, responsibly handling extraordinary evidence - can the truth hopefully be uncovered or fiction definitively exposed. Proper vetting cannot exist in an insular ecosystem of belief-driven assumptions.

So by all means, stories like this deserve an audience. But they also require being filtered through genuinely objective processes aimed at substantiated truth over promoted beliefs. I encourage Joey and others who've taken an interest to fully cooperate with any thorough, ethical, and independent investigations undertaken by credentialed journalistic entities willing to hold bunexpensive to account.

Claims this monumental in scope demand nothing less than unbiased scrutiny of the highest order. All viewpoints should want to separate fact from fiction and implications this seismic being carelessly perpetuated as truth based on insufficient vetting. The public deserves to know what's real.

in UFOsby Krillo74

72%

View all comments

desertash

the same effort should be made for Nathan's claims...and Nathan...was on "Vetted" correct?

that podcast is of very questionable veracity

Krillo74

Nathan is the only person to say they worked with him. Where together on the same boat. Same platoon

I asked Joey about this in twitter got a frank reponse.

"Micheal conducted his missions with a pick of Marines from various squads. Nathan was not one of them. Nathan is in no postion to talk about what Micheal saw because he wasnt there on that mission"

I brought up the photos and I sort of aggree with Joey that there not really concrete proof. So I hope someone with more skill and expertise can dig into this and bring all info into the light

Gl0ckW0rk0rang3

Michael got to "pick" Marines? Lol. If you were ever in the service, you're laughing at this.

TARSknows

My reading of his use of “a pick” sounds like a synonym for being assigned with a various selection of people, not that he actually picked them himself.

desertash

that's exactly what it means

AdNew5216

Michael didn’t pick marines, the story is it was a volunteer mission that he got into while in the officers chow hall I believe.

Gl0ckW0rk0rang3

If you were in the service, you are also laughing at a "volunteer boat mission...while the officers were in the chow hall."

Not at all how that works.

mattriver

Yeah? Which humanitarian USMC missions have you been on?

Gl0ckW0rk0rang3

Enough to know that's not what happens. You don't just randomly volunteer on a humanitarian mission. The military spends way, way too much money on gear, fuel, logistics and soldiers to randomly go on some bizarre "volunteer mission." All the weapons, bullets gear, fuel are budgeted and accounted for.

I don't know you, obv, but if you believe this story, you are a fool. Not in all things; certainly in this thing.

mattriver

I think that is exactly what happens.

Moderator removed comment

UFOs-ModTeam

Hi, 8_guy. 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 or personal attacks.

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.