It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Managed/Faked Disclosure - This is what WE should do perhaps.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 04:14 AM
Maybe the way to force disclosure is to fake it. (BUT... do we want it?)

It seems to me that if the TPTB are faking stuff, false flags, mass hallucagenics, etc then we should also do the same and play them at their own game with faking what they are trying to hide, but in a more open and obvious way.

Have a TV interview which is billed as interviewing an alien. start with two perfectly ordinary looking people and then make one(fake it) change into an alien. As if they had been walking around with other humans for eons. Conduct the interview in that way as one being an alien for the rest of the time. It would be like War of the Worlds radio program but for TV. Unless someone took pictures of the actual TV show, no one would know, and you could generate your audience as is probably often done.

It would certainly get the idea out there and being discussed. It is important that no-one denies or acknowledges whether it is true or fake though - just like the officials do.

It cannot be a Youtube video as this is too important and people know that youtubes are faked and TV is 'real' (haha)
It would be even better if you could get a known recognised reported/interviewer to take part in it too.

It would have to be done in such a way as to make it very believable and the questions and answers would have to be managed and fairly carefully scripted as a proper interview NOT as a film or doocumentary.

The other way it could be done is to fake an official disclosure document and send it to the media (lots of them, so one could not keep it quiet). On headed notepaper, write the scripted disclosure statement and if possible send it in an official envelope with an official-looking signature and from an official department. Bear in mind though that you would have to make sure your fingerprints etc did not appear on the envelope, stamp, document etc. because revenge would be swift - probably best done by someone who enjoys living close to the edge.

The only HUGE problem I can see is the moral one where we just dont know how people would react and it could backfire if people commit suicide and rush onto the streets with their guns etc.

Maybe this is totally irresponsible idea and I am a morally irresponsible person. If that is so, then we have to acknowledge here and now that TPTB are correct in not wanting disclosure for that reason and we should acknowledge that the way they are handling this subject is the best for all of us.. We cannot have it BOTH ways, having our cake and eating it.

What say you to this idea folks?

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 04:28 AM
All you'd have to do is know someone in (for example the UK ) the Home Office who can get hold of headed notepaper ( and envelopes) and simply get a draft up on Word, make it full of big words, print it out and like you say send it to all the papers/news outlets.
Trouble is though it would have to be official paper as most government offices ( that I know of) have watermarked paper.
But I agree with you sometimes people can panic over something they have no control over, like right this moment its snowing and people are panic buying at the petrol station across the road from me.
With something like Aliens you'd have to have a good long hard think of what would work, what would look fake and what you may need to envisige as to peoples reactions.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 05:03 AM
reply to post by qmantoo

What is the point? If they are out there and visiting and in cahoots with the Government the Government will know its fake and see right through it. And if the Government is still in the dark after all this time and the many reported sightings and encounters they will probably ignore it just like they ignore the rest.
Either way a lot of time and effort for no result.
If they are planning to disclose they will do so in their own sweet time and you guarantee that it wont bode well for us mere mortals. I think they know plenty and have brokered deals with the ET's in exchange for technology.
They have the masses right where they want them, consuming and entertained and they getting wealthier and wealthier by the day because of our indentured labour to them and the banks.
Yes we are still slaves, Slaves to our jobs, slaves to bills slaves to the Government's whims and probably un-beknownst to us all slaves to our Galactic overlords.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 06:12 AM
But the whole point is "people power" .

If the general mass of population realise (through our deception) that we are in touch with aliens then this idea will force the government to acknowledge what they are doing. At least another layer of it anyway. Obviously we will never know the whole story.

The interview could always later be claimed to be "fiction" or drama TV

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 06:27 AM
This has gone through my mind, Faking disclosure, making people think they are dealing with aliens to cause public outcry and demand for actual disclosure.

Actually, this is a point you miss, not this fake diclosure changing the world since it would eventually be revealed as fake, but if it has programmed people to think in the direction 'Don't hide it from us' they would start protesting for actual disclosure.

The best way for results is to control the masses and their minds, right now their minds are too far away from such issues and care about those materialistic everyday things only, the rest being laughable and ridiculous.
edit on 18-1-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:02 AM
The problem is not exactly about disclosing. To be frank we are not sure of what is to be disclosed anyway.

The problem is that although the vast majority of people have heard or read about UFOs and ETs, the vast majority amongst them is still believing it all to be ruthless lies and inventions. For many, it is still ridicule to speak of those subjects.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 11:48 AM
reply to post by qmantoo

Maybe this is totally irresponsible idea and I am a morally irresponsible person. If that is so, then ...

...What say you to this idea folks?

I think the idea is, at best, irresponsible. It is also disingenuous, counterproductive, and simple-minded.

What do I say to the idea? I say it sucks. I say that it's already being done by many equally feeble-minded idiots that set us back exponentially from uncovering the real truth every time it is done. I say that the declared target of your wrath, TPTB, are laughing their arses off in delight every time it happens and delights in hearing about others contemplating this exact same idea. I say you are playing directly into their playbook and forfeiting improved chance at honest disclosure just by proposing it. I say you are planting seeds into others that may have considered this but now will carry it out thanks to you suggesting it.

Now - do you want to know what I REALLY think?

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 09:22 PM
Another approach might be to draw up a comprehensive proposal advocating radical improvement in quality of future UFO documentaries and submit it to the History Channel.

One thing is to stop using photos and footage that are generally believed to be lens flares, hoaxes, whatever. They're very annoying and hurt credibility. Give them a comprehensive rundown on each of the photos and videos commonly used in documentaries, to make it easier for them to comply with this point. And show them what there is out there that does have some credibility.

Another is people with low credibility. It's hard or virtually impossible to prove that a certain person is a charlatan, but there are many that come off that way to the first-time viewer, thereby damaging the credibility of the particular documentary itself and the topic of UFOs in general.

In both cases, most viewers would not be familiar with the arguments have been made about each photo, video, and person, but their gut feeling is what they rely on.

People say, "I can spot a phony a mile away." Whether they're right or wrong about that doesn't matter if the goal is to get the public worked up about disclosure. You're only going to build a credible case with the public by qualifying the statements in the narration better (people may not notice it on a conscious level, but sneaky wording does sink in subconsciously and damage credibility), limiting images to those that don't come off as obvious fakes, and limiting the list of presenters and commenters to those that don't cause explosive extension of people's lie-detector antennas.

It's hard, but a switchover to quality UFO coverage has the potential to move public sentiment in the direction of demanding disclosure. They could start by taking the old documentaries and cleaning them up, which would probably require boiling four down to one, since there's a lot of stuff in the old ones that can be considered bad strategy to include, as explained above. But okay, do it like that and remove the bad stuff from YouTube. It's a start in the direction of presenting a more credible case.

And there are already some documentaries that are of good quality and need nothing removed, as well as some others that are pretty close and need only a little clean-up. If the good stuff were all that could be found on YouTube (with all the ones that damage overall credibility removed), even that might move public sentiment a bit, if not far enough, in the direction of demanding disclosure,

And even if execs of the History Channel don't care much or at all about pushing for disclosure, improved quality is good for PR, which should be at least mentioned in the proposal.

new topics

top topics


log in