Friday, November 07, 2008

First Hoagland, now Strieber: Will Obama Mean UFO Change?

To be fair, I agree with Strieber's recommendations for a disciplined empirical study, regardless if we're dealing with "visitors" or something else entirely.


a meditative, expansive intense said...

This journal entry of Strieber's is one of his more coherent, especially compared to his just prior one, but, as usual, he also makes a number of presumptions, in this case which Presidents may have had knowledge of the "real" ufo phenomenon, and which probably did not.

But, Strieber had some interesting things to say in this piece, and I would agree with him that establishing a formal, government-sponsored study would be a useful and timely endeavor, but don't think it will ever happen (at least within the public domain), as to even do that would raise so many questions and public sector inquiries to the government as to why now (after nearly 40 years of supposed complete disinterest, and denial stretching back over 60 years), the government would ever begin such a program or project to seriously muster the resources necessary to comprehensively investigate the ufo phenomenon properly (and if they haven't already, on the QT, over the past several decades, considering some kind of "MJ-12"-like scenario).

I would have to guess that if any such study has been, and may still be being carried out, by aspects of USAF military intelligence, and possibly including elements of the US Navy and Army, to some lesser degree (with input from USAF's USSPACCOM's Space Surveillance Center, and other NORAD optical detection and related radar and other sensor resources, at Peterson AFB in Colorado, near the mothballed Cheyenne Mountain underground complex, and various other both national and international military base and surveillance centers, with additional input from NSA, NRO, DIA, and CIA elements), that if there is or has been any concerted program of investigation and analysis in the first place, or at least after the early 1953 period, when things seem to either have gotten dropped, or very possibly went "deep black," any such study, investigation, and analysis would remain deeply secret until and unless there was some compelling reason to reveal (or begin) such an effort, and only for the highest national security reasons, like finally understanding and being able to deal with and control such an extraordinary possible "other," or such as critical species survival needs.

Nothing less would, at least to the military/intelligence and governmental/industrial combines or complexes that could be involved, be a reasonable basis for revealing publically, and thus to any other nation, including both allies and enemy states (think Russia and China, etc.) any such project or findings. Think about it, seriously. Why would they? That would be telling, as was noted in "The Prisoner." 8^}

Also to be seriously considered is the potential cultural and societal shock effects, and possible critical disruption, depending on what was said and the nature of what was known about "the others," which the USG might, as stated in the CIA's 1953 Robertson Panel report and the later Brookings study, might consider too dangerous to disclose and might have an undermining effect on the institutional authority and power of control of the government, etc.! Nobody really wants they? A kind of mutual "prime imperative" may be in place, for stasis and stability purposes.

Because of this, some of which, of course, I should add is speculative [and some is not], it might be better, if anyone alive ever expects to find better answers than exist in the public domain today, that a public/private effort, outside of government, involving possibly, for example, MUFON (or preferably other "recruits") to conduct a national sky survey, with agreed upon instrumentation, procedures, etc., and it might be established to conduct an actual, scientific audit over time to at least see if some useful data, and possible photographic or other scientific sensor data might be obtained, and as a public basis for the US government being "compelled" to acknowledge or react and/or engage in federally sponsored, public, follow-up studies with NGO/public backing and support. I would like some better answers to these questions before I'm dead, wouldn't you?

Of course, not to (hopefully) sound too "paranoid" about it, if any such effort were possible or mounted (calling Paul Allen, or other better, or equivalent semi-aware or even "enlightened" billionaires! Soros?), funding and agreement on fundamental protocols and multi-disciplinary procedures, organization, and personnel would be essential, and if this kind of effort developed "legs," if the USG or military/intelligence elements were already involved in such a program on a covert basis, one can guess there might be some effort by "them" to either hinder, disable/disinform, or stop such an independent, public project.**

[[It would thus, if so, reveal USG involvement, possibly. But all these suggestions or ideas also constitute a very high-stakes game of the sociological equivalent of Texas Hold'em poker, metaphorically and realistically speaking. At least it would be a hell of a lot more practical, and potentially productive, than the naive, extremist motivations and efforts of the "exopolitical" types. They'll never get anywhere, and impugn and negatively impact more serious proposals and efforts as I have suggested and noted above.]]

**Then you have to ask just why that might be. I think the Men In Black owe us some cogent answers. I'm sure there would be innumerable reasons and strategic national security bases used as justification or means to preclude any such public efforts, so, all things considered, I doubt much progress can or will be made anytime soon, or especially within the Obama administration, unless something quite major occurs first involving ufo phenomena in a public domain or "venue" that is recorded by multiple witnesses and using various photographic and other forms of both supplementary, undeniable evidence and sensor recordings.

Fat chance. If the ufo phenomenon in any way involves advanced non-human intelligence [ANHI], "they" are the ones calling the shots, and "public displays" and, with the exception of the relatively rare O'Hare or Stephenville-type sightings (and isn't interesting the known radar documentation or video recordings, etc., are so...insubtantial or "non-existant?"), I don't think "they" would be "dumb" enough or would risk making any kind of public, overt, or more "formal" display that would be undeniable--I don't think that's the "game plan."

It would seem, theoretically, and given the general state and relative fragility of the human psyche, more likely that something like James Deardorff's "leaky embargo hypothesis" may be involved, an extremely gradual "conditioning," perhaps paralleling or "co-evolving" with our own development and evolution, if anything really is "up there" that would more than just suggest a non-human intelligence is present in our world. If so, I also get the feeling they may be required, in a way, for us to "catch up" before we can appropriately "shake hands." Relative "co-equality" may be the dictate or preferred requirement, which means a very long time will pass before that is possible or "appropriate."

I think, as Dr. Jacques F. Vallee has often implied, varying forms of effective "plausible deniability" are likely involved for a host of sound reasons, both from our and other governments, and more importantly, "the others," if they exist and are present or "visiting."

And that is the the great question, and one of the penultimate issues; that it really would be "nice" to get a better handle on whether any form of advanced non-human intelligence or consciousness is present (or not), wouldn't it? I sure would like to know, if at all possible and beneficial in nature.

[I apologize for the length of this involved post--when issues and subjects of central interest to me are concerned, I do tend to get a "little" expansive. Mea culpa, and all that. Mac has indicated to me that when this "spirit" moves me, I can occassionally allow myself to riff on and "hold forth" at this kind of length. Hope I was not too tedious in my "rendition" here. Someday I may learn how to better edit myself!] 8^}

Anonymous said...

That was a really good essay by Whitley.

It seemed level headed and grounded in reality.

from: Mike C!

Mac said...


You're absolutely right: I see nothing at all wrong with lengthy comments. As a blogger, I see it as a bonus.


I liked the essay too. I guess I'm just sick and tired of reading accounts of "insider tidbits," as intriguing as some of them might very well be.