Activists championing UFO disclosure want your moral and financial support. To obtain it they employ strategies such as conducting press conferences in which apparently credible UFO witnesses are presented. They hold conventions, make films and publish books, all seemingly designed with the intent of some way moving global governments, particularly that of the United States, closer to disclosing what they confidently tell us is the reality of an alien presence.
Others are far less convinced that the situation is as simple as disclosure activists would have us believe. Are some of the activists dishonest, knowingly attempting to deceive us? Perhaps so, while maybe other disclosure activists have good intentions but succumb to an inability to relinquish their relentless pursuits of the ever elusive alien, eventually depleted of all remaining strategies other than to demand elected officials confirm their beliefs.
The more thought one gives the concept of disclosure, the more complex they realize it to be. Some therefore argue that reasonable skepticism dictates we must consider the extent of impracticality in demanding the White House address an alleged extraterrestrial intelligence. Following are some of the reasons that is the case.
The ETH may be incorrect
Let's start with square one: There may be no aliens present; the extraterrestrial hypothesis might not be the correct explanation to any UFO sightings or reported alien abductions at all. We cannot very well demand confirmation of something that might not even be accurate.
Politically inadvisable
One would be hard pressed to identify a less attractive political platform for elected officials than addressing the UFO phenomenon. Any given politician would have to take a specific interest in directing their staff to prioritize wading through the virtually endless amounts of tales, files and red tape, all while shelving their current projects and priorities. Doing so would result in spending inordinate amounts of time and funds while very possibly producing no more, if not less, information than is already widely known throughout the UFO community.
Declassification is a specific process
The release of classified data, UFO-related or otherwise, is a specific process. It is not simply a matter of those who may have access to interesting information making a choice to share it. Channels and protocol must be followed. Learn more at the National Declassification Center.
Lack of public interest
This might be the proverbial nail in the coffin of disclosure. If officials could initiate a probe into UFOs and subsequently ride a wave of public support into their next elected office, the probe would indeed soon be underway – but they cannot.
Petitions to the White House related to disclosure are failing to produce signatures. UFO conventions do well to attract even a few hundred attendees, and some events have been canceled due to lack of interest. Disclosure activists tell us the UFO phenomenon is the most important issue to ever face humanity, but, if that is so, it appears the vast majority of people are either unaware or uninterested. The Mutual UFO Network stated on its website that it has about 3,000 members worldwide, hardly a demographic justifying politicians scrap their current platforms in favor of asking around Capitol Hill about aliens.
Military and intelligence implications
Along with an overall lack of public interest in the UFO phenomenon, its potential use as a tool to the intelligence community may be among the most damaging circumstances to hopes of official disclosure. This is indeed where we find some of the most oversimplified - and subsequently unrealistic - aspects of the disclosure movement.
It is not only possible but entirely likely that certain iconic UFO cases contain details remaining classified yet having absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with extraterrestrials. Cases such as Roswell, Rendlesham, the Gulf Breeze Six and many more may have relevant military and intelligence implications, disclosure of which might detrimentally effect ongoing operations and strategic options. While quite possibly having nothing to do with aliens, details of such operations and some of their related documents might very well remain classified and withheld long into the lifetimes of our descendants.
Such considerations bring the work to mind of British Major Jasper Maskelyne. A magician by trade, Maskelyne is credited with masterfully assisting allied forces in executing stunning deception operations during World War II. His trickery included misdirection on such grand scales as confusing enemies of the whereabouts of tank squadrons and camouflaging an entire British supply port.
A 1950 RAND (Research and Development) Corporation report submitted to the U.S. Air Force and titled, 'The Exploitation of Superstitions for Purposes of Psychological Warfare', referenced a deception operation apparently conducted by Maskelyne in Italy. As Nick Redfern reported, the extremely creative operation included circumstances strikingly similar to those of the Flatwoods Monster episode of UFO lore, including the manufacture of just such a 'monster'. The report interestingly predated the Flatwoods incident by two years. A more recent History Channel documentary stated that while some of Maskelyne's work is known, the complete exploits of his unit, curiously enough dubbed the Magic Gang, will not be considered for public review until the distant year of 2046.
We might be well advised to take such circumstances into account when considering the feasibility, or lack thereof, of official UFO disclosure. All that glitters is not gold, all that is UFO-related is not alien and intelligence agencies are in the business of confusing adversaries, not informing them.
Final thoughts
There may possibly be documents buried in the vaults of Washington that describe the existence of an advanced non-human intelligence among us. I am not qualified to say.
Disclosure activists might be worthy of respect and admiration in some cases. They have indeed managed to gather certain resources while surrounding themselves with people willing and able to help them pursue their goals, circumstances worthy of acknowledgment. They manage to coordinate their events, produce their films and staff their projects.
It is nonetheless for such reasons as listed above that disclosure activists are suspected in some cases of being simplistically naive if not dishonest. Perhaps others in their ranks become so biased in favor of the ETH that they lose abilities to accurately assess the complexities of the disclosure circumstances of which they demand. One way or another, it would seem impractical to expect Washington to legitimately address the UFO phenomenon in the foreseeable future.
Comments