Friday, July 31, 2009

The Idiocy of the Disclosure Movement

The Idiocy of the Disclosure Movement

By Robert L. Salas

Robert Salas      The so-called Disclosure Project apparently has the same objective as Gary McKinnon had when he, reportedly ‘broke-into’ some government computer files—to discover what the government knows about the UFO phenomenon. Both efforts have been met with frustration and disappointment.

Stephen Bassett Stephen Bassett’s (or Steven Greer’s depending on which one is talking) Disclosure Project has been ineffectually trying to penetrate that door of secrecy since 2001. They have presumably tried to achieve disclosure by enticing speakers (myself among them) to tell as many stories, theories, philosophies, reports, and conjectures as possible during these conferences. I say presumably because these pointless exercises have been so ineffective in gaining serious public attention that one might conclude they were intentionally designed to keep disclosure from happening.

They seem to have achieved one probable objective of those who would maintain the secrecy, i.e., "to keep the public confused and unsure about the subject." The hallmark of these Exopolitics Conferences is generally unsupported statements and conjecture—lots of conjecture.

The mainstream media has not gotten on the bandwagon because there is little substance to talk about. The public is not clamoring for action because they simply don’t know what or who to believe and take the path of least resistance, i.e., indifference. As long as the UFO phenomenon is defined by confusion and conjecture, there will be nothing specific to demand of our government. Note there is no hue and cry for a march on Washington demanding that disclosure happen now. Even though I do not agree with his methods, at least McKinnon tried to take the most direct path to the truth. The Exopolitics groupies are simply hurling whatever they can get their hands on in every direction.

I too believe disclosure of the truth of the UFO phenomenon is important. If even a small percentage of the stories are true, it should be THE most important story ever. It cries out for a federal investigation. But we find ourselves with the following ‘estimate of the situation’:
First, those who would keep disclosure from happening have done a masterful job of keeping the public dis-informed and confused on the subject. That effort has no doubt been aided by well-placed agents acting as interested parties but really promoting ineffectual activities or encouraging true advocates to bicker among themselves or act in disunity.

In addition, government agencies, like the USAF, who probably have a substantial amount of information, have showed an intense indifference to the subject, furthering the perception that there is nothing of interest to be investigated.

Second, whenever claims are made or ‘witness’ reports without credible substantiation are presented, damage is done to the credibility of the phenomenon as a whole. Claims, such as Greer’s ‘free energy’ fantasy, the controversy of the MJ-12 documents, underground alien bases have only served to provide more grist for ridicule.

There seems to have evolved a culture where certain individuals or groups compete to be identified with having insider information or some special contacts with the aliens themselves or who are making a living telling good stories at UFO Conferences. That culture can only be detrimental to the objective of disclosure.
Michael SallaAlthough the stated objectives of groups like Exopolitics profess the need for government disclosure, the result has appeared to be an eagerness to relate and support every wild-eyed story or speculation about the ET presence that anyone might come up with. An example of that occurred recently when Dr. Michael Salla wrote an article on his website for his Exopolitics Examiner extolling a supposed spectacular sighting by Walter Cronkite around a naval missile launch. After, a number of readers took exception to the truthfulness of the stories originator, he had to file a retraction and admit there was serious doubt about the story.

Steven Greer Another example is Dr. Steven Greer, in 2007, when he announced to an audience that he had held an Alien baby in his arms and promised to present proof. Two years later, we are still waiting for that proof. There have been many other examples of individuals in the Exopolitics Group simply trying to promote their own notoriety.

The public study of this phenomenon has evolved into a kind of game; the Ufology game. What is the purpose of this game? Is it to get as many people to play as you can? Do we simply want a meandering mix of fact and fiction out there to titillate curiosity?

It is time we worked smarter toward the disclosure objective. We need to stop entertaining the public and simply inform the public as to the valid history of the phenomenon and the facts of particular cases. By ‘we’, I mean each of us who have something to contribute or has an audience to speak to about the subject. We simply need to be responsible. We need to state clearly when we are relating substantiated fact and when we are simply speculating. If we want scientists to take a serious interest, we have to present our cases as scientifically as we can. I have always been open to any critique of my own case (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) and to answering any question about what I present. I believe my incident has been supported and substantiated by multiple witnesses and documentation. There are many other such valid cases. These are the ones that should be the center of exposure in trying to focus media and public attention to the phenomenon. There are many conscientious researchers out there who have worked hard to validate incidents. There is much to present to a new Congressional Hearing by witnesses and documents that could provide compelling evidence of the truth of the phenomenon. Let us focus on that and decry those who would keep the phenomenon the subject of ridicule.


  1. Somebody needed to say this. The whole "disclosure" movement has become ineffectual through it's circus atmosphere and your comments are cogent and clear. I, for one, am not holding my breath, waiting for our government (the one who financed the Condon Report, funded Blue Book, etc) to admit anything, anywhere at any time. Thanks for this great post!

  2. I'm not sure I agree. Greer/Salla and others trying to push disclosure have their lives ridiculed. What a way to make a living! But I do agree that who ever is taking disclosure to the public should deal in facts, and make clear speculation. And if these folks are in it for the money, then why dosn't congress address the issue of witnesses/insiders/whistle blowers who claim to have proof enough to at least begin a serious scientific study? Because there is truth to it.

    I do see the media taking this issue more seriouly. Maybe, in some subtle way, disclosure on a govermental scale has already started. Think of what this issue was just 15 years ago. It has come a long way. And think of the consequences when UFO/ET subject comes to reality....

  3. I respectfully disagree with your contention that all the "nut" type cases (MJ12, very weird UFO encounters, abductions by tiny aliens, etc.) be cut from the data base. If you prune the data base so that only the "nuts and bolts" UFO theory cases are examined (leaving only reports from very credible witnesses and reports that seem to conform what you already believe, i.e., UFO's are mechanical objects created by a humanoid society somewhere from out there) you become a keyhole theorists and won't get very far in understanding the nature of the phenomena we are dealing with. Whatever its ultimate nature and origin, it does encompass these weird peripheral encounters.
    Second point: Government disclosure. Just my humble opinion from decades of examining the UFO phenomena, but I think that the only the thing the government knows that leading UFO researchers don't is how stymied the government is by the whole thing. They don't deal well with phenomena that transcends both human logic and the known laws of physics; that said, they'd rather have the public believe that have secret knowledge of the phenomena, warehouses of spaceships being retro-engineered, and so on, than admit their overpaid savants are clueless.
    For political purposes, the power structure prefers to maintain the illusion that they are in control -- just as they did when the God-King system was in vogue. They are about power, and power is control. Control of belief systems is the strongest type of power there is for a political body. The last thing is the taint factor. This same political structure, and to some extent power hungry individuals and organizations, manipulate people and motivate their belief systems by the control and release of data, both factual and fictional, and the interpretation of the same. Hence, the data base is doubly tainted by the mixing of cases and incidents that are related in some fashion to mental aberration and data that is the result of pure deception from manipulators who seek to influence the belief systems of the population to suit their personal agenda.

  4. Re: Mahoney's comments

    I did not suggest that we try and delete the 'nut' cases from the database. That's not possible as there will always be some nuts making stuff up to jump on the bandwagon. What I tried to say was those who would claim to be responsible about who they invite to speak at a conference or whose story they support ought to look at them carefully, evaluate their credibility provide any and all supporting information about it. If there is none, let's say so and we can each make our minds up on who or what to believe. There has been too much public speculation about this subject and that only serves to denigrate the entire body of stories.
    As to your point about disclosure - you may be right about what the government does not know about the phenomenon. But there is something equally important to consider. A small group of insiders with whatever knowledge of the phenomenon they have accumulated should not be making all the decisions regarding ET without public knowledge or information! We should all be involved in that discussion. So, disclosure is important for that reason as well.
    R. Salas

  5. You wrote, "A small group of insiders with whatever knowledge of the phenomenon they have accumulated should not be making all the decisions regarding ET without public knowledge or information! We should all be involved in that discussion. So, disclosure is important for that reason as well. " There a big assumption herein. Though you did say "whatever" knowledge, admitting the possibility that the government's knowledge may be limited, you also said "regarding ET;" I don't think the evidence is clear that we are limited to a hypothesis of dealing with extra terrestrials (at least in the sense that the 'nuts and bolts' school perceives them). The British government tried to tackle the UFO problem in the early fifties of the last century. Their conclusion, simply stated, was that though there was a phenomena occurring, it's nature had more in common with the occult than with advanced technology from outer space. Such things are not lightly admitted by a country of practical people who have just been tested by a world war and whose survival was sustained by a rational technological approach to things.
    The other major factor is this. I'm not sure what your experience with government has been, but it has largely been my experience that those in charge of governments are not enlightened beings, and are primarily concerned with self-interest and sustaining or increasing their power; hence, when approaching the large and varied jumble of UFO data, would be no more capable of sorting it and making sense of it than anyone of us out here in the secular world. For example, Jacque Vallee: a hard core scientist trained in the Western tradition, after studying the problem for decades, conducting on site investigations, interviews with primary witnesses, assembling data and codifying it with computer studies, eventually concluded pretty much the same thing the British government had prior to him. Ditto John Keel and numerous others. I personally don't think we've retro-engineered our present technology from crashed UFO's Truman had secreted away, and I think we'll have to wait until hell freezes over for clarity to come to this issue . . . and if it does, it won't be coming from the direction of government revelation.
    All that said, we should of course keep trying to pry whatever we can from the government; what they don't know may be just as important in allowing us to get a workable perspective on the UFO phenomena.

  6. I also have great reservations about Dr Greer (and his errr 'contacts' and errr 'evidence'), and Exopolitics...LOL, I actually found here afte r I had begun reading an article at Exopolitics website where Salla suddenly starts calling out 'UFO Gatkeepers' and included Robert Hastings, calling him "hysterical". I only recently had listned to an interview given by Robert and was struck by his integrity, so I immedicately Googled 'exposing exopolitics' and found this site.

    One thing though--reading one or two replies here.
    Yes of course it is right to question gullibility on behalf of Exopolitics, the Greer Circus, Proj Cam and so on, but NOT to then become encased in the box of Scientism!

    by this I mean that it is needing to be understood that at least some UFO phenomena defy our current understandings of science, of subjective and objective, and of time and space, and so on. So in defiance of the naiveity of Exoplicital embrace of ANY testimony by 'whistleblowers' NOT to discount testimony from others who have had what our culture calls 'weird' experiences. THAT may not be able to be proved--'nuts and bolts' wise, but like the film says 'I Know What I Saw', to not discount such experience as THAT isn't scientific. Just because you don't understand it.

  7. Robert Sallas : you say : "I say presumably because these pointless exercises have been so ineffective in gaining serious public attention that one might conclude they were intentionally designed to keep disclosure from happening.

    They seem to have achieved one probable objective of those who would maintain the secrecy, i.e., "to keep the public confused and unsure about the subject.""

    Well then i am the perfect counter example.
    I even wouldn't know you exist without the disclosure project.

  8. My questions are for former Captain Salas regarding his '67 Echo Flight UFO Incident, near Malmstrom AFB:

    --We're you ever reprimanded or demoted for reporting the '67 UFO incident? If not, why are there reports from other personnel involved at the time, and since, that there were threats to remain silent, with career-ending consequences if one did not? Why were allowed to finish your career unimpeded?

    --How could there be a 40-year history of military non-effective response to ufo "incursions" on several 'nuclear' bases?

    It's been known since at least '63 that high powered radar pulses will take UFO craft down.

    --Why weren't radar installations placed over missle complexes at Malmstrom, for instance, and used as defensive/active "weapons"? And why aren't they used today?

    --Why were responses to "incursions" by US aircraft and helicopters, often slow by hours?

    --Have you ever considered you and your missile personnel were unwittingly used in a covert "exercise", so that an Official report could be established; that(US)UFO-type craft, perhaps obtained through crash retrievals, were being used "in plain sight" at your silo base, by our military?

    The logic here being the craft could then be used "in public", by our military, with "cover" provided by your official report. Thereby, the "incursion" could be advanced, as a "disinfo myth" that "aliens" of far superior technology, could interfere with our most important nuclear deterrent, at will? This powerful "fact" would advance certain military strategic goals, ie, star wars weaspons, and the need for unlimited defense? The natural consequence would be many ufo's overflying the US, at will, would be assumed to be uncontrollable alien craft, when in fact, they are most likely ours, operating under cover, "in plain sight".

    Mr. Salas, I don't think we've heard the full story on the why's and how's of these "incursions" you've dutifully reported. I have followed Greer, his Disclosure Project, and your statements for years. However, much doesn't add up here, and I wonder if you haven't been used as a patsy, or a "dupe" for some covert military purposes.

    It is too incredible for me to believe that our military would allow an "alien craft" to "sit" on your missle silo, your Echo Flight complex, and shut it down, if it were a REAL threat. And why would our military allow other incursions at other nuclear sites for over 40 years, without taking effective action EVENTUALLY, given the means for taking ufo craft down was known, at least since '63?

    I hope you get to speak to Congress someday on all of this. I hope all the Disclosure witnesses have to stand up and defend the truth, their's, and the American people's.

    As it is, the whole thing has "hoax" written all over it. Hoax, and disinformation.

  9. This is in response to Barry's comments:

    I was never reprimanded by the Air Force because I kept my oath of not talking about the incident while I was on active duty. If you read my book, I go into when and how I went public on my incident. To date, the Air Force has never confronted me about my public statements.

    Your question--How could there be a 40-year history of military non-effective response to ufo "incursions" on several 'nuclear' bases?
    My answer: I am not claiming 40 years of 'non-effective' response to ufo incursions. If you have substantiated information, please share.

    Your statement: It's been known since at least '63 that high powered radar pulses will take UFO craft down.

    My response: How do you support that statement?

    --Why weren't radar installations placed over missle complexes at Malmstrom, for instance, and used as defensive/active "weapons"? And why aren't they used today?

    My answer: see my previous comment.

    Your Question--Why were responses to "incursions" by US aircraft and helicopters, often slow by hours?

    My answer - Again, I don't know where you are getting your information. Let's see your data.

    With respect to your comment about the possibility that this was some military exercise: Again, read Faded Giant. When I reported to my Sqdn. Commander at the base on the morning of the incident I asked that question specifically of my commander. The details of his response and why I am convinced it could not have been an exercise are detailed in my book.

    As to your final statements that these incidents are too incredible to be believed and that I have been duped or have been involved in a hoax:

    There is no doubt these incidents were phenomenal and difficult to believe. Most UFO incidents are phenomenal because we are dealing with somethings we simply do not understand or have the capability to understand. That is why I do not claim that I can prove anything. What science would accept as proof would have to come from the logic of what science now understands. I am simply telling the truth as I know it in my case. I have tried to support my own statements with those of many other witnesses and some documents in my book. I am not trying to perpetrate a hoax and I don't have any reason to believe I am being duped. I and Jim Klotz did the interviewing and the research for our book and we were not influenced by anyone along the way. I have been speaking openly about my incident for over fourteen years. I have done so not for fame or money but simply to inform the public and to call for government disclosure. I will continue to do so.

    Thank you for taking the time to pose your comments and questions about this important topic.

  10. It is interesting to re-visit this thread. In the interim I have been exploring more this subject--greatly inspired post the recent NYC 'UFO' even of the 13th of October etc.

    Now, when people claim that it is 'all man-made' secret technology. I think we should become more aware of Indigenous history of contact with UFos--Google 'Petyroglyphs in the air', and the film The Phoenix Lights: We Are Not Alone, where one of the proplr featured mentions the Native Americans of that area she claims having knowledge and contact with similar UFOs AND occupants. For many Indigenous people this knowledge is of course sacred, AND they cannot share too much about it, and when we further consider the horrendous invasion and genocide into their land and of their people that must make it even more hard to share about openly. BUT the essential point I am making--IF the propaganda put out by the MIC is that the technology comes from them--IS them, then this more ancient past of contact way before modern technology must put paid to that notion.

    In looking at the Rendlesham Forest Mystery very recently it is claimed that the OSI 'worked on' one of the 'witnesses', and it was he who 'sees' high ranking officers talking to 'ETs'. Again this myth of liason between military and 'aliens' is put out. Partly no doubt to make the story seem even more absurd but also maybe for very reason of making it seem they are in some kind of cahoots with the ETs. That would make them seem in-the-know, and kinda let off the hook concerning ETs who are against their psychopathic use of contaminating nuclear weaponry. Cause after all they were 'having a meeeting' with them!! This is my speculation I am exploring. It fits in with the dropping of the MJ12 myth!

  11. Anonymous8:42 PM

    We received an rather interesting response from survey taker at

    "Not one of the alien species seem to want to share their sense of humor that can be translated into a good halftime Super Bowl ad that we might all appreciate and enjoy. Why not concur our hearts and minds with love and humor instead and go public with the process, in a simple statement: Hello. You are not alone!

    "If I were advising on PR for them I would imprint the idea of by-passing governments and dealing directly with the general public in an entertaining and non-threatening manner that millions of us would instantly recognize as such."

    Works for me!

  12. What is the public stance of other nations worldwide?

    How many have stated public acknowledgment of ET existence&activities?

    the U.S.A. is not the only nation on Earth!


Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW


Mutual UFO Network Logo