Questions On Disclosure

Let's think about this disclosure thing a bit. As I understand it, there are some guys that consider themselves activists in something they call exopolitics. Those guys tell us we should join them in demanding Washington spill the beans they have long hoarded about aliens among us. I have some questions.

Why give the US government so much of the credit when it comes to keeping the lid on aliens? Can't the exos think of anywhere else to look for answers about the UFO phenomenon, anywhere at all?

BOULEVARD OF DISCLOSURE A ONE-WAY STREET

Have any of those activists talked to Greer? Like, has anyone championing disclosure demanded Greer disclose data? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if you're spearheading public disclosure of the truth about aliens, you'd drop a guy an email that claims to have one in a box? If not, why not?

Okay, forget Greer. That situation is only of interest due to its continued public support in the face of such profound absurdity.

How about the Mutual UFO Network? Those guys and gals have been chasing saucers longer than some of us can remember, and it's tougher to get straight answers out of some of them than verification of election results from a third world country. Why aren't disclosure activists complaining about MUFON secrecy and double standards? Wouldn't it stand to reason that anyone sincerely interested in the truth would be hammering The Captain and the MUFON board of directors with the same persistence in which they hound White House staff?

Maybe the only thing MUFON could tell us was that after having bird-dogged thousands of UFO sightings and reports of alien abduction, it has absolutely no conclusive evidence whatsoever of any aliens. Even if that were the case, wouldn't that be something you would think should be published in the spirit of disclosing the truth?

Another thing... Genre icon Whitley Strieber claimed he has an implant in his ear. He also claimed it repeatedly dodged a scalpel during a doctor's attempts to remove it. Have any disclosure activists demanded Strieber disclose corroborating data? Why not? Wouldn't taking a look at the man's ear, or at the least asking him to cough up related data, seem like much more practical uses of resources than trying to send a million faxes to Washington? That would seem to be the case, anyway, if one were genuinely interested in the disclosure of actuality.

Have any activists made repeated demands of Robert Bigelow? Shouldn't they demand that he, like Uncle Sam, come clean in the name of truth, the public's right to know and all that? Aren't they curious what's in his files?

SCAMMING, NAIVE OR BIASED?

Rational individuals will simply suspect self-described disclosure activists are insincere, naive or without objectivity until circumstances such as questioned above are adequately addressed. Those activists might, however, continue to be rather successful at getting irrational individuals to climb on board.

The entire situation is unfortunate in that it stands to further divide the UFO community into its poorly conceived - even if comfortably preferred - sects of debunkers, believers and so on. It's the old 'you're either with us or against us' strategy, exploiting people into adopting naively simplistic perspectives in which intelligent inquiry is neither required, rewarded nor allowed.

There are aliens. The White House knows. Demand they say so.

There ya go. What more of a platform could you want out of an activist movement?

Posted in aliens,chupacabra,ufos No comments