Saturday, January 03, 2004

I got a free book in the mail today, a fictional thriller based on the premise that NASA is hiding knowledge of extraterrestrial artifacts on Mars -- which could be true on some level. Accusing an entity as far-flung as NASA of a cover-up is naive, of course. If data is indeed monitored and kept from the public domain, the agency responsible would be much smaller and much smarter. Politically, NASA itself simply isn't intelligent enough to engage in a cover-up of any great magnitude. Labyrinthine "need to know" security measures make sure that punctures in the security balloon are fastidiously closed. Nothing short of a massive, sustained leak -- preferably from multiple sources willing to give their names -- could do more that momentarily disrupt such a blockade.





The MJ-12 papers -- purporting to document the aftermath of at least one UFO crash -- will never be proven false or authentic on their own grounds because the people allegedly involved are dead. When Bob Lazar appeared on the scene with descriptions of S-4, Element 115 and electrogravitic saucers, it briefly seemed that a smoking gun had appeared. But the ensuing controversy over his credentials effectively ended open-minded debate. Lazar was quick to point out that he had been chosen, in part, because of his oddball past. He also frankly told reporters that the staff at S-4 (the underground base where the government supposedly stored nine ET craft) had probably tampered with his memory. In a phildickian twist, he could have been lying about his role and not even known it.

Secrets -- about aliens or Iraqi CIA assets or bioweapons development programs -- will remain secrets so long as our media obliges the intelligence community and chooses complacency instead of asking aggressive questions. Perhaps as Big Media is subverted by the kaleidoscopic and versatile rise of blogging and Net-based independent journalism, the number of potential leaks will rise. Already, Richard Hoagland claims multiple leaks from within NASA. That I don't find his leaked information plausible doesn't dispel the possibility that real people who are who they claim they are gave it to him. The ultimate question is why it was given to him. To advance impartial truth? To further various personal agendas? Or simply for the fun of seeing a true believer shout nonsense to the world?

No comments: