Wednesday, January 06, 2021

UFOs: What Happens When a Government Cover-Up Turns Out To Be True?

UFOs: What Happens When a Government Cover-Up Turns Out To Be True?

Bad juju in Pinocchioville

     With bottomless appetites for devouring low-grade snake oil and cheap lies running at freakish levels, maybe it’s time to take a good hard look at the sort of reception that might be awaiting an authentic form of revisionism now banging on our doors. To wit:

What happens when the longest-running conspiracy theory in contemporary American culture – a government coverup of the material reality of UFOs, cloaked in decades of denial –actually turns out to be true? What does it mean for us all – amid a cacophony of
Billy Cox
By Billy Cox
De Void
maskless hordes revolting against tyranny and Rudy Giuliani impersonating Alice Cooper at a press conference– if and when the most relentlessly debased fringe “belief” of our time is confirmed as legit after all?

The erosion of official cover continued last week with Tim McMillan’s reporting (‘Fast Movers’ and Transmedium Vehicles – The Pentagon’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force – The Debrief) on the scuttlebutt swirling around the Pentagon’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force. In the unlikely event you missed it, anonymous sources within the Director of National Intelligence office are acknowledging the existence of two new UAPTF reports, both of which allegedly focus on a new acronym, Unidentified Submersible Phenomena. USPs are “transmedium” vehicles reputed to traverse the sky and the air with equal ease. Which is mind-blowing. And by the way, that reminds me:

De Void continues to press the Office of Government Information Services for the unedited release of the famous Customs and Border Protection footage from Aguadilla, Puerto Rico in 2013. This one’s better than the three F-18 videos combined, because it caught a UFO descending into seawater and transforming into a USP. Since the Pentagon gave its four-star approval to the Navy footage, I’m confident the civilian spooks at CBP will want to one-up the military and show off the official first-generation version of that leaked Aguadilla video. They’ll probably hop on it once the vaccine puts the office back at full staff.

Anyway: From within this racket of unremitting, bile-encrusted, top-down lies at the ass-end of the worst year of the 21st century, what would happen if the grandfather of all American conspiracy legends got Certified Fresh on the Tomatometer of public interest?

Robert Thompson
Robert Thompson, director of the Bleier Center for Television and Popular Culture at Syracuse University’s Newhouse School, argues that without an agreed-upon foundation of knowledge, “You can’t even have an argument.”/CREDIT:
“It’s one thing to keep something covered up. But the power to contain a story this big – completely contained – I think, would’ve required a set of sophisticated, complex, and forever-widening controls,” says skeptical Robert Thompson, Syracuse University’s celebrated pop culture critic. “And I just don’t think we’re that good at information control.

“However,” he adds, hedging his bet only slightly, “Mark Burnett still has not released the dailies of ‘The Apprentice,’ so who knows? There are things that do manage to not get out.”

Described by Pinterest as “perhaps the most quoted popular culture expert in the world,” Thompson’s granular view of America’s busy entertainment industry doesn’t leave a lot of time for studying The Great Taboo. Understandably, like most taxpayers, Thompson just can’t wrap his mind around the concept of Uncle Sam, with such a long track record of ineptitude and bungling, being able to keep King Kong behind the tarp for decades, across all party lines, social movements and presidential temperaments.

We spoke a week or so after the election, during the first wave of Trump’s wet-diaper twitter tantrums against reality and mathematics. With polls indicating frightening numbers of voters prefer fantasy over facts, the timing seemed appropriate. However, for most Americans to accept a reality that would shove them even farther away from the center of the universe, Thompson said, three criteria would have to be unambiguously established:

1) Proof of intelligent life in the universe, 2) proof that intelligent life has made its presence known, and 3) there are authorities who know intelligent life has made its presence known, but they’ve covered it up. And if they’ve been that successful for so long, Thompson wonders, what could possibly induce the hoarders of such a bombshell revelation to give up the giant ape? A puny request from the Senate Intelligence Committee?

“It would be a story without precedent, a story in a different category from anything we’ve ever seen,” he says. “So, the rational thought here is, we’ve kept a secret for this long, and there’s something Marco Rubio can say that will make them go, oh sure, we’ve kept it quiet since the 1940s, but why not, OK, it’s yours if you ask, sure.


And which messenger could convince you that a small and unbroken chain of (probably white) men have managed to dupe the USA, the whole world, for nearly three-quarters of a century? A vast majority of 74 million Trump voters believe that what the Department of Homeland security called “the most secure (election) in American history” is a fraud. How many voters at large will believe anything coming out of Capitol Hill, which “enjoys” a 23 percent public-approval rating?

“People have so little trust for their political representatives on both sides of the aisle, and in a lot of ways for very good reason,” Thompson says. “At the very highest levels in Washington, we’ve just had four years of being told things that the evidence says is simply not true. That means a healthy skepticism of what comes out of the mouths of elected officials is rational behavior.”

Climate change, for instance, is as real as the predictive equations that jumped off the page this year and into record firestorm and hurricane seasons, Thompson says. But with Congress pretending the science is still up for debate, why would anyone anticipate lawmakers making time for an issue without an obstreperous partisan constituency?

“Climate change is not UFOs. We’ve got the data we need on climate change, with many ways to demonstrate that. I’m convinced climate change is a major alien invasion that is happening now and look how we’re dealing with it,” he says. “I mean, I can look outside and see evidence of it. I can’t look outside and see a tractor beam coming down to kill me.”

Which goes to a larger point. If, for the sake of argument, Thompson’s three criteria have been satisfied, the sublime and dodgy behavior of the phenomenon certainly doesn’t appear to meet popular expectations of urgency.

“Unless it’s like (1980s series) ‘V’ or ‘Independence Day, where the thing starts showing up on the horizon, then it becomes like climate change. If we’re talking about something that’s 75 light years away or whatever, we can say we’ll figure out how to deal with it later, what’s for dinner?

“Look, we have a crisis right here on Earth without an alien invasion, where there seems to be no body of knowledge that we can all agree on. We used to have Walter Cronkite who would say – which, of course, was ridiculous – ‘and that’s the way it is.’ But at least there was an agreed-upon set of facts that people believed, and they based their arguments accordingly.

“Certainly the Nixon administration and the Johnson administration didn’t like ‘the media’ and were complaining about their reports. But there wasn’t a sense that everything they said was out-and-out lies. But now, if you’ve got no body of knowledge that people can agree on, then you can’t even have an argument.”

Well, that’s very depressing. What’s for dinner?

No comments :

Post a Comment

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