RUSSIA, ADVANCED PROPULSION, AND ET MARKETING
There's been a lot of hype on the internet lately concerning the limited hangout position of the Pentagon's recent announcement of having conducted a UFO project at the request of former US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, and concerning the announcement of former Blink 182 band member and UFO enthusiast Tom DeLonge's corporation whose board looks like a Who's Who of black projects research gurus. This comes at a time that Dr. Skidmore of Michigan State University has written articles confirming missing trillions of dollars from the US budget, confirming the statements of former US Housing and Urban Development Assistant Secretary Catherine Austin Fitts. It's convenient timing, to say the least.
Now, to add to the stories, there's yet another, according to this article shared by Mr. J.S.:
Now, I am calling all this a "limited hangout position" because of several statements, including this one:
The Pentagon, at the direction of Congress, a decade ago quietly set up a multimillion-dollar program to investigate what are popularly known as unidentified flying objects—UFOs.The “unidentified aerial phenomena” claimed to have been seen by pilots and other military personnel appeared vastly more advanced than those in American or foreign arsenals. In some cases they maneuvered so unusually and so fast that they seemed to defy the laws of physics, according to multiple sources directly involved in or briefed on the effort and a review of unclassified Defense Department and congressional documents.(emphasis added)
Now, many in the UFOlogy community, including researcher Richard Dolan (see his multi-volume study UFOs and the National Security State) and many others, have argued persuasively and in my opinion quite convincingly and compellingly that these USO studies have in fact been a more or less permanent feature of covert American military interest and research since at least the end of World War Two. I too have contributed my own speculations to this picture with investigations of the funding mechanisms that would be needed for such a study, concluding that a hidden system of finance would be necessary both to insure a continual flow of money and to ensure continued secrecy. The purpose of the research in the long term was to acquire the technologies that would be able to emulate UFO performance and achieve parity or near parity with it. As a secondary objective, such research would have been seeking the origins - human or otherwise - of whomever was behind the UFO phenomenon.
Hence, the disclose of a project of a mere decade's length and running into mere "multi-millions" is far short of what the UFOlogy community has been arguing for many decades. It is, if I may put it country simple, no big deal.
There's yet another "twist" here that, again, upon examination, isn't much of a twist:
The Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program, whose existence was not classified but operated with the knowledge of an extremely limited number of officials, was the brainchild of then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who first secured the appropriation to begin the program in 2009 with the support of the late Senators Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), two World War II veterans who were similarly concerned about the potential national security implications, the sources involved in the effort said. The origins of the program, the existence of which the Pentagon confirmed on Friday, are being revealed publicly for the first time by POLITICO and the New York Times in nearly simultaneous reports on Saturday.One possible theory behind the unexplained incidents, according to a former congressional staffer who described the motivations behind the program, was that a foreign power—perhaps the Chinese or the Russians—had developed next-generation technologies that could threaten the United States. (Emphases added)
Again, experienced researchers in UFOlogy have long known about the UFO programs of Russia and China, and it stands to reason those nations would view the UFO phenomenon in a similar way to the USA, i.e., as a national security threat. And it stands to reason their responses would be similar: develop deeply black research programs and financing mechanisms to investigate and emulate the technologies and performance of UFOs to parity or near parity.
What is odd here however, is the less than typical language used in the context of the Russian and Chinese assertions. In an age when Russia seems to have replaced the former conspiracy-central theories of Masons, Zionists, Bankers, and/or Jesuits and the Vatican in the conspiracy mongering of the the US deep state, one would have expected stronger language from a mouthpiece like Politico. Instead, we get the very suggestive sentence, "One possible theory behind the unexplained incidents... was that a foreign power - perhaps the Chinese or the Russians-had developed next-generation technologies that could threaten the United States."(Emphases added) Why the subjunctive "perhaps" with the wonderfully ambiguous past perfect simple tense "had developed"? The statement leaves open the possibility of some other foreign power besides Russia and China actually achieving some sort of "next generation" technology, and having done so in a past whose terminus ante quem is left conveniently undefined...
...and as anyone might expect who has read my various books on that possibility, that statement caught my eye.
The "door", in other words, is being left open for further "disclosure" and "development" of the narrative.
And there, precisely, my misgivings lie, for how might one control the narrative in the increasingly sophisticated information age and an increasingly cynical and skeptical public? After all, this is the same swamp that gave us "social security" and "the magic bullet" and who fed us the line that Waco was "to protect the children" and that quarter-mile high steel and concrete cantilevered buildings were brought down by airplane fuel, weakened steel, and pancaking floors. How would one go about controlling the UFO narrative? Well the tried and true techniques of data obfuscation and guilt-by-association would have to be done, only this time around, by very clever marketing operations. For the Kentucky-fried gullible that inhabit the subject, more whistleblowers telling absurd stories about blue chicken McNuggets will do.
But the more sophisticated will have to be handled differently, with fiction containing just enough concepts borrowed from researchers (without attribution, of course), doling out real nuggets of genuine information, building up trust over time, and in the process, subtly spinning the aforementioned researchers' concepts, and establishing that marketing group as the gatekeepers not only of "real" information, but of the narrative interpretation to be fastened upon it.