Disclosure can we ask for it ? What difference could it make ?

And the efforts of space exploration have moved on with the likes of Elon Musk.

Wiki "As of March 2017, he has an estimated net worth of $13.9 billion, making him the 80th wealthiest person in the world.[20] In December 2016, Musk was ranked 21st on Forbes list of The World's Most Powerful People.[21]

Musk has stated that the goals of SolarCity, Tesla, and SpaceX revolve around his vision to change the world and humanity.[22] His goals include reducing global warming through sustainable energy production and consumption, and reducing the "risk of human extinction" by "making life multiplanetary"[23][24] by setting up a human colony on Mars.

I think it's going to come from outside government. That is, If government will allow it. Much as the arms race, we need a space race of like dimensions.

a reply to: Plotus

I think it's going to come from outside government. That is, If government will allow it. Much as the arms race, we need a space race of like dimensions

the more its talked about by similar people like Musk

but after I saw him in a movie with James Franco
I lost faith in him

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: schuyler

you don't know that unless your one of them maybe they have similar ideas but cant implement them because of us how we behave

I do know that because they have told us nothing. The logical possibilities are a) They don't exist, i.e.: There is no one to disclose anything and/or nothing to disclose, or b) There is something to disclose but they have chosen not to. If it is true as you say that "they can't implement them because of how we behave" well, then, there's your answer. End of discussion.

not me or you individually but a lot of us at once over a sustained period are most people are yet to be interested
and most interested in truth we want to be informed

If they were interested beyond the cursory they would have said so. The interest lies in a few fringe groups. It's not a groundswell of opinion or interest. This may very well have been engineered, but that does not make it any less so. Not that many people are interested. You can't speak for them. You may want to be informed, but that does not create an obligation for anyone to inform you.

these studies while informative demonstrate how a large populace 1 billion plus disseminates certain pieces of information ?

These purported studies (We do not know for certain they exist) purportedly say that if Disclosure happened, panic would ensue and the legitimacy of governments and the fabric of society would be threatened, etc.. This conclusion would no doubt be backed up by data and statistics to prove the case. I have to assume that if these studies exist, they are not based solely on opinion, but have some basis for coming to their conclusions. But that's just hearsay for the moment as we don't have the studies in hand. It's a rumor that has surfaced in conjunction with the topic of Disclosure explaining, in part why it has not happened. We really don't know if thy exist or if they do, what they say.

The overall issue here is that Disclosure has historically always followed a pattern. Tom DeLonge is the latest in this series and does not deviate from the very first appearance of this pattern which first appeared in the fifties. SOME of the elements are these:

1. A group of Insiders "in the know" wants to "Disclose."
2. The group confides in a relative Outsider to help them.
3. The Outsider begins to disseminate the meme to "the [UFO] community."
4. The Insiders say Disclosure is imminent, but something has to happen first (e.g. an election)
5. The community waits with bated breath!
6. The "special event" doesn't happen.
7. Disclosure is delayed.
8. Oh, dear.

This happened in the fifties. it happened with Moore and Bennewitz. It happened with Greer. It happened with Bassett. It is happening with DeLonge right now. It's very much along the lines of a Cargo Cult where Disclosure will come and bring many benefits to humanity. It's de ja vu all over again. The pattern repeats once again. Jesus will save you if you have the right attitude.

Now you come along, like so many others. pushing 'Disclosure' as if you think you can cause it to happen by asking for it. Behind this is the idea that you have the right to this information, that it is owed to you just because you want it. But nowhere is this right enumerated. it's not in the Constitution. It's not in any statute or law. Oh, there are surely are FOIA laws and such dedicated to a "free and open government," used mostly by political opponents to harass the other side, but there are always exemptions to those laws and "Disclosure" is one, big exemption.

The Bottom Line is that you wanting something from government does not incur an obligation for anyone to furnish it to you. You are not going to get it unless they want you to have it. And of they do give you something, you can be fairly well assured that it's not about you at all and that there is a higher (perhaps nefarious) purpose involved.

a reply to: schuyler

I agree with a lot of what you say
the pattern
the cynicism

The Bottom Line is that you wanting something from government does not incur an obligation for anyone to furnish it to you. You are not going to get it unless they want you to have it

the mob rules Rome
they have to pander
if enough attention is brought

no one stays in power if they cant move with the world

your right anything they do give us
is likely tainted
but we'll have confirmation of something
a inspiring moment for all those disinterested

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: schuyler

the mob rules Rome they have to pander if enough attention is brought no one stays in power if they cant move with the world

You are so far below critical mass on this issue that except for places like ATS, its not worth addressing.

a reply to: schuyler

Me ? or the disclosure movement ?>
yes the disclosure movement is

again your right
so far for TPTB its not

but its not going to go away

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: schuyler

Me ? or the disclosure movement ?>yes the disclosure movement is again your right so far for TPTB its not but its not going to go away

I meant generally, but your last is an interesting issue. It keeps coming back with the same meme, different folks, pretty every half generation or so. I'm not sure that's an accident.

I'm beginning to think the government doesn't know much about ufos so it's the wrong direction to approach concerning disclosure.

FOIA enable citizens to obtain information from the government in theory. However you might end up with nothing more then a document with a lot of blacked out sections if you get anything at all.

Corporations being private do not have to answer FOIA because they are not the government.
Take dugway proving ground for example I think it is run by the army. Various corporations test weapons and exotic military tech there. Those corporations do not have to say squat about what they are working on or testing because they are not the government. They are immune to FOIA and other types of inquiries.

Maybe at some point all the ufo stuff got moved over to the private sector of skunk works and military contractors and is now in the grey area between the government and the private sector.
It's in the hands of the "industrial" part of the military industrial complex.

I think what should be released is the mountain of evidence that seems to have been squirreled away through the years. There are many threads on it here on ATS, and if disclosure is to mean anything, that is what we need.

We don't need narratives and motion pictures. We need the photographs, movie clips, radar and sonar tracks so we can make up our own minds.

Even if that leads us to the conclusion that it's all swamp gas and weather balloons.

Disclosure won't mean anything without the documentation.

We should probably assemble a list with all the items that have gone "missing" over the years, and when anyone comes along with "disclosure" we should just present the list and ask: So, where is all this, then?

BT

There is enough personal testimony out there from people in positions of authority and in the historical record to disclose it to oneself. But I think people are really looking for everyone else to join in on the belief, or perhaps to reap the benefits. We are already reaping the benefits without disclosure, one glance at a technological time line and it's pretty clear mankind is already being juiced and primed with technology. As far as the rest of the world joining in on what we know? I think humanity needs to be ready for that. I don't mean avoiding a panic, I mean we need to become adults in the galactic sense. I don't think we are there yet. We don't know what were are getting into, we don't know what we are asking for. We should be asking "what are they?" before we ask for them to come to our fellow man. But we are not doing that, we accept them like children that accept the stories adults tease them with. Even worse some are manipulated and forced into accepting them.

I am against disclosure till I know what it is we will be disclosing. They do not act like aliens, they do not act like physical beings at all, they don't tell the truth, and they do horrible things. If they are physical then we must know what they want with us, if they are non physical it is even more imperative that we ask, what do they want with us? What does a non physical alien invasion look like? Anyone know? Does it come with permission? I just don't think we know enough right now to responsibly ask for disclosure.

originally posted by: Sansanoy

They do not act like aliens, they do not act like physical beings at all, they don't tell the truth, and they do horrible things. If they are physical then we must know what they want with us, if they are non physical it is even more imperative that we ask, what do they want with us? What does a non physical alien invasion look like? Anyone know? Does it come with permission? I just don't think we know enough right now to responsibly ask for disclosure.

This part of your post is intriguing and fits the evidence as we know it. This is why I suspect that IF there are people who could disclose something, and if they are aware of what you just said, THAT'S reason enough to withhold disclosure right there. I believe we could handle nuts & bolts 'aliens from space' who have invented Warp Drive just fine. That's already in our culture; it's expected. But non-physical liars who do horrible things? They don't seem to respect any bit of what we have come to see as moral, and this also means our take on Reality is completely wrong. The realization of that would be a heavy hit to take.

a reply to: Sansanoy

I am against disclosure till I know what it is we will be disclosing. They do not act like aliens, they do not act like physical beings at all, they don't tell the truth, and they do horrible things. If they are physical then we must know what they want with us, if they are non physical it is even more imperative that we ask, what do they want with us? What does a non physical alien invasion look like? Anyone know? Does it come with permission? I just don't think we know enough right now to responsibly ask for disclosure.

Just an opinion, but if it was my little girl who "disappeared" or my wife who was experiments on then disclosure is not disclosure, it is doing the right thing. As civilised human beings we are supposed to look after each other, especially the vulnerable. For government (who are responsible for the safety of the citizens) to keep quiet and let people suffer is wrong.

Permissions, the Pl#@&+*? (I know the "plaidians" are deservedly unpopular here at ATS, thus the £#@&+), play the "permission card" to justify atrocities. But I doubt anyonene who has been interfered with gave permission in full knowledge of what was going to be done to them. "Permission from another life" is the other permission card they play. Okay if you have the memory of actually doing so in full foreknowledge.

Those guys are not hard to find on the inner planes, though they choose who to talk to. For years I used to ask the Pla*#£&!s via a long time friend who is "in" with them to relay a question for me.

The question was this: "Why do you interfere in this world?"

Years of silence, until one day: "Because we can." They only answered honestly because they wanted something.

An example of non-physical invasion might be this: my opinion is to look at the whole pl#£_@+? thing. Especially the "disarm" and "transcend" messages with a cynical eye. "Give up your ability to defend yourselves and die". This world is physical and people get hurt and die, not some world of spiritual utopia of harmlessness and eternal universal love.

My apologies for my bad mood, I get cranky at the ETs.

But on the positive side, the ETs or whatevers can get hurt, can be fought successfully, and they are not immortal.

a reply to: schuyler

But, whatever they are, we would surely have to deal with the fact that they exist, wouldn't we?

To tell someone that lives in the jungle that "there are no snakes" is not going to do them any favours.

The only benefit to pretending there are nothing to this would be, in my view, if it goes away if you don't believe in it.

But that really doesn't seem to be the case, now does it?

BT

a reply to: schuyler

I have been wondering the exact same thing regarding disclosure.

We can't look at a non physical invasion the same way we look at a physical invasion. In a physical invasion there is no reason that alien A could not harm human B. In that case it makes sense to warn someone. But the non physical? That is a completely different world. What are the natural laws of a non physical world? Is a non physical world a realm of mind and if so how do they enter? The non physical world is the realm of religion, and there are really bad entities in all of the worlds religions.

The abductions and UFO experiences seem to follow two patterns. 1) Those that want to be a part of the UFO experience tend to be a part of it and the more one becomes fascinated with being a part of it the more likely they are to experience it. 2) They tend to abduct humans in particular genetic lines. This means there isn't a danger to the majority of the population, and that majority is protected from 1 in their ignorance. You are either born into this or you walk into it. If we expose this without knowing what we are dealing with then group 1 becomes a lot larger. They appear to want our fascination to gain more ground. When an invasion of a non physical entity occurs it seems like the battle ground will be in the mind rather than the body.

I said before that there are 2 types of experiences but really there is a third that happens that we don't experience. This part can induce panic. This quote is from Plato's Critias. He is referring to what is called the divine council. These are beings that have dominion over the land masses and nations of the earth.

"In the days of old the gods had the whole earth distributed among them by allotment. There was no quarrelling; for you cannot rightly suppose that the gods did not know what was proper for each of them to have, or, knowing this, that they would seek to procure for themselves by contention that which more properly belonged to others. They all of them by just apportionment obtained what they wanted, and peopled their own districts; and when they had peopled them they tended us, their nurselings and possessions, as shepherds tend their flocks, excepting only that they did not use blows or bodily force, as shepherds do, but governed us like pilots from the stern of the vessel, which is an easy way of guiding animals, holding our souls by the rudder of persuasion according to their own pleasure;-thus did they guide all mortal creatures. Now different gods had their allotments in different places which they set in order. Hephaestus and Athene, who were brother and sister, and sprang from the same father, having a common nature, and being united also in the love of philosophy and art, both obtained as their common portion this land, which was naturally adapted for wisdom and virtue; and there they implanted brave children of the soil, and put into their minds the order of government; their names are preserved, but their actions have disappeared by reason of the destruction of those who received the tradition, and the lapse of ages." (Critias)

If these entities are what Plato is describing how many people can handle the idea that their thoughts are not their own, or that they may be driven to do something? I think the focus of the UFO community should be on what and who they are, rather than disclosure. We have a good idea of what physical disclosure might look like through the bookings report but we need a new report on what non physical disclosure looks like. We need the military to work with the leaders in UFOlogy so that they can then help guide the focus of research on where it needs to be so that the community is prepared and can research it effectively. Our community will then write books and have discussions that will inform and prepare the world for this type of disclosure, just like we have already done for physical disclosure.

a reply to: kibric

As much I would love to see this happen, it will not happen willingly, it will only happen if something forces the issue. Even then it would not be smooth or an open process of disclosure that we all seek.

The ramifications for the people in power that have kept these secrets are too great, as is the petro-based economy we all live in. It is quite obvious that whatever these UAPs are, its quite clear that they are not running on some oil based combustible so there is the energy perspective that we have to bear in mind.

I honestly believe that the governments of the world probably dont know all either or not as much as they once did. It would seem that the technology or derivatives of the UAP are in the hands of private enterprise and not in the hands of government.

originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: schuyler

But, whatever they are, we would surely have to deal with the fact that they exist, wouldn't we?

We haven't so far.

To tell someone that lives in the jungle that "there are no snakes" is not going to do them any favours. The only benefit to pretending there are nothing to this would be, in my view, if it goes away if you don't believe in it. But that really doesn't seem to be the case, now does it?

To carry on with the analogy, if you told the natives there are snakes and they burned down their jungle to get rid of them, that wouldn't be doing them any favors either. That is one of the main arguments against Disclosure. If these guys are non-physical, mean, nasty, and treat us with disdain, then although I do not believe they are 'demons" in the Biblical sense, they may as well be. I can't see the government coming out and saying there are demons. Although I have read many books about the abductions scenario, I don't count myself as a believer. And as far as disclosure is concerned, the government may not have any solid information to disclose. If they have something of military significance, like back-engineering crashed saucers, I wouldn't expect them to. We as citizens don't have the right to know about secret weapons. So there may be many benefits to keeping stuff from being disclosed. A few whiny fringe groups demanding otherwise will not change that.

originally posted by: gortex
Obama disclosed , sadly it wasn't the disclosure Bassett or anyone else wanted.

As I've said before, what most people mean by "disclosure" is the government or somebody else in a position of authority telling them what what they already believe is true. Which is ridiculous.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: gortex
Obama disclosed , sadly it wasn't the disclosure Bassett or anyone else wanted.

As I've said before, what most people mean by "disclosure" is the government or somebody else in a position of authority telling them what what they already believe is true. Which is ridiculous.

I can see what you mean in the sense that people like Bassett and others believe they already know what is out there and are demanding the government confirm what they believe already, and maybe that's how these people think internally, but a more pure definition of the term is that the government open its files and disclose what it knows regardless of what anyone believes. Obama did not disclose anything at all, and chances are he was out of the loop anyway. After all, he was a Temp. The irony is that if the government did tell what it knew and it did not meet the predisposed notions of those demanding Disclosure, they wouldn't be believed anyway. And that's what they would have you believe right now. The government is in a no-win situation here.