Easy to spot people within the mainstream media who are likely compromised, but get away with it, due to the pre-existing stigma structure, still loosely in place. Julian Barnes, of the New York Times, springs to mind.
The New York Times should be uncovering the news, not covering it...up, as usual.
“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”
Thank you, Alfred. I hadn't seen Billy's excellent article before!
“And that’s why they’ve been so effective. Propaganda works with your belief systems, not against them. The idea that they (journalists) could’ve been fooled (by secrecy) for so long is unthinkable.”~ Terry Hansen
Theoretically, a beat reporter should own their beat. In reality, reporters sometimes get too close to their sources (favors, consideration, scoops, etc.) to pull back and investigate leads that might jeopardize those relationships. That's what's happening at the NYT. Helene Cooper used her sources to help break the AATIP story in 2017, but Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal had to lobby for it. Cooper apparently passed the UFO hot potato to Barnes, who performs stenography. If NYT wants to compete for it again, they'll need to bring in someone immune to those conflicts of interest.
I heartily dislike what Barnes has done with this story since it was passed to him. The New York Times' coverage of a lot of topics is pretty biased. Usually, just kind of biased towards the interests of the insular wealthy, in terms of political coverage, of socio-economic subjects.
They don't stray too far from the status quo, on any topic. And if journalists do some hard hitting reporting that threatens the super structure of the general consensus reality, created by those at the top, it's pretty obvious, they will walk that coverage back, through people like Barnes, as you describe.
It's gonna take some enlightened mindshifting at the management level to overcome the self-policing too often practiced by reporters. You'd think, given the growing public and political interest, that'd be a no-brainer. Continued negligence of this issue is no less a threat to democracy than Trumpism.
So is (was) this a one battle war, or have we just seen the defeat of a single bill? Tim Burchett has the will, but he's not part of a significant oversight committee.
Has Mellon's contribution to publicise UAP events and circumvent the DoD reached an end? Was lining up whistleblowers his trump card (whistleblowers who provided testimony that Burchett and his oversight colleagues couldn't follow)?
Does any momentum remain, unseen? Are the politicians who were drawn to the cause still seeking answers or have they all been dissuaded?
Those of us who are aware of the significance and implications of historical UFO events are probably a step behind those politicians who have been told more by insiders. If we want answers then some of those politicians must want answers just as much.
And what of the evidence that Grusch could provide? How much of that has been investigated and by whom?
There's definitely momentum in the private sector from groups like Galileo and UAPx. As their sensors grow sharper and more omnipresent, open-source surveillance tech will hopefully begin distributing the sorts of images that the military has been hoarding since the 1940s. For better or worse, imagery shapes hearts and minds in visceral ways that peer-review papers and analytics cannot. The Tic Tac, the Gimbal and GoFast videos revitalized this conversation six years ago. We'll be getting footage that'll make those three conversation-starters look archaic. This is an issue whose time has come, and it cannot be stopped by tsunamis of campaign cash.
I think that signifies the end of the beginning.. It'll generate a new debate on the informational value of multi-sensor platforms vs multi-witness testimony. Some people like to quote that witness testimony is unreliable, but human intelligence gathering can't be replaced by drones and satellites. Either way, the pace of discovery will be set by 'their' current level of interest in us - the number of opportunities they provide us with and the number of mistakes they make.
I think this was to be expected but still very disappointing. From my own polling of friends and family there is little to no knowledge of what is happening and has happened. There seems to be little understanding of what their children might face in the future based on the oversight issue of the military industrial complex and NHI tech research. I suppose with all the other issues that are coming to the forefront (AI, Climate Change, Authoritarianism, a divided populace, etc etc.) it maybe too overwhelming to contemplate. We will probably never get the money geyser out of our politics and influence so what's left of our basic democratic process will be on the chopping block. I said it before, but there is a real danger of our society becoming something similar to some version of the Hunger Games. With the advancement of AI and research into NHI tech by corporations given that tech by our own military, with little to no oversight, its really disturbing to think about the results. Many do not want too.
Well, that's the question isn't it? Who really wants to contemplate the implications? I've seen the landscape shift dramatically in growing circles over the past six years. But I think those circles are still too small to be culturally decisive. It's going to take a massive education campaign to bring this issue to the dinner table, and it's pretty obvious the media at large still don't have the chops for it.
Speaking literally of the dining room table, I come from a fairly affluent, Ivy League educated family (including my Harvard professor brother and Hoover Institute nephew)) and when I sit down at a holiday meal with three generations of us and try to discuss the topic I have been deeply involved with for most off my life, eyeballs roll, quips are made, and I am told to make it short.
It's a Catch 22. Disclosure won't be demanded without education and education won't be accepted until disclosure. The only wild card solution is the undeniable appearance of the visitors themselves. Then people will take note, and disclosure will be moot.
Well based on the last 70 or so years of UFO history there have been events or encounters which might be called visitations of sorts. If you include the abduction scenarios(?) you may come to the realization that, whoever they are, have made their presence known. However I understand your 'undeniable' as being explicit. It is very hard for me to rationalize how very intelligent persons can be so complacent and somewhat in denial on this subject especially when credible persons of 'in the know' backgrounds have come forth and given testimony to the contrary. That fact may be even more disturbing than the 'visitors'.
Forget catastrophic disclosure. After this cave, which proves again that Congress has nobody's back except its own, nobody is going to risk disclosing anything. Certainly not whistleblowers. No one wanted to seriously believe the Black Hats controlled all the action, but now you know. Some in the ragtag UFO community will try to regroup in some meaningful way, but they'll be up against the house, and you never bet against the house.
I hope somebody was keeping notes on how those backstage negotiations went down, who stood up, who folded, the actual size of congressional opposition to Schumer/Rounds, what sort of pressure -- carrots, sticks -- was brought to bear on the swing votes, what sorts of brass-knuckles arguments sealed the deal. There's a Pulitzer waiting for someone with deep sources and the guts to pursue.
The whole coverup operation, from inception 'til now, has to be some grand story in its own right. UFOs might as well be the MacGuffin (not to demean their importance, but buy the premise, buy the bit). One generation after another protecting a kind of holy grail, it might play like "Succession," or more like the latest "Fall of the House of Usher" horror. Or maybe "Dallas"? It has it all, every human element, from bad to worst. But we'll probably never know how it's gone down. It might pale in comparison to the Great Secret, but will be buried right alongside it. What's happened is pitiful.
All I can say is Amen Billy. You once again nailed it. We just continue to watch the corruption fester on the Hill. The word transparency and accountability are non-existent in the US Government. It has always been part of the UFO landscape and likely always will. Corporations who are hiding the truth for the US government won out here. They won't have move those materials to hiding places and be afraid that the USG won;t be sending in people to raid their labs. LM is off the hook. Lest any whistleblowers think that anything will change or improve things, this clearly demonstrates it is not worth their time and personal safety to open up.
Thanks, Rich. This week has been a serious gut punch. I guess the question going forward is, how badly do taxpayers want accountability on the biggest question of our time? I'm not optimistic. Maybe the next move has to be up to "them."
The Republicans screwed us on this, which I find surprising. Especially after conservative media played Grusch up so much. Coulthart, who’s taken shots at Biden on Need to Know didn’t lob any bombs at the Republicans on the latest podcast. I find that interesting. Maybe they’ll be more hearings with more whistle blowers. Maybe that’s the only way to truly break the ice on this issue.
Never thought I'd ever hear a Republican refer to the Pentagon as "war pimps," but Burchett and at least a few others appear to have had an epiphany. There's obviously a rift amid the GOP along those lines right now. How deep and abiding it is, I guess, depends on how much money it'll take wounded egos to "heal."
Even NBC's "Meet the Press" gave Graff a platform last Sunday to provide a subtle rebuttal to guest Rep Tim Burchette. I don't believe for 1 minute that the MS news media isn't complicit in this endeavor to mold public opinion, especially with the repetitive theme that "there's nothing to see".... Graff seems to fortuitously making the rounds on other talk shows and media outlets. He's probably auditioning for a public relations position in the DC bureaucracy or MIC as the "go to guy" to put the matter to rest whenever the entrenched establishment (gatekeepers) needs expedient push back when the heat gets turned up. He would be a perfect fit with his voluble public persona.
Having spent a career in corporate media, I can tell you that, when it comes to UFOs, self-censorship is contagious. And what looks like a coordinated embargo is just mass psychology. Sticking with the script certainly has certainly rewarded Mr. Graff.
Hi Billy, Very well written. Thank you. I always figured, when push came to shove ufos would be the literal and metaphorical vehicle that would begin to drive a wedge between the legislative and military branches of govt. At which point the Pentagon, Lockheed Martin would shut it all down through their compromised gatekeepers in congress, using 'national security' as an always reliable excuse.
The US is a corporate dictatorship, literally. Depressing when Lockheed Martin has more sway over legislation than hundreds of millions of American citizens.
Part of me is amazed the conversation even advanced this far -- crash retrievals, cadavers, reverse engineering, etc. I'll bet Terry would've been surprised, too. But despite what happened this week, I think military intelligence/contractors realize they've been exposed. The bill may have failed, but there are cracks and they are vulnerable. If they figure out who the finks are, they might get sloppy and decide to go after them -- where they could well fuck up.
Apropos.
Steve Bassett — great work!
https://paradigmresearchgroup.org/shift-storm/
Billy, the U.S. Congress just told us that UFOs represent technology beyond our knowledge. LOL!
U.S. Congress — I've known that for a very long time. And U.S. Congress — they are not from here.
Easy to spot people within the mainstream media who are likely compromised, but get away with it, due to the pre-existing stigma structure, still loosely in place. Julian Barnes, of the New York Times, springs to mind.
The New York Times should be uncovering the news, not covering it...up, as usual.
Jess Hansen, I wholeheartedly agree. The New York Times, The Washington Post, and other media companies work for the U.S. Intelligence Community.
This Billy Cox article tells us all we need to know about the U.S. intel/MSM perpetual machine:
https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/2007/10/15/snoozing-through-national-security/28583836007/
And the U.S. intelligence community works for Wall Street, not for the American or global citizen.
And Wall Street works for the "4 Horsemen":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CV3ILX8rQc
“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”
- Woodrow Wilson, "New Freedom"
Damn.
Thank you, Alfred. I hadn't seen Billy's excellent article before!
“And that’s why they’ve been so effective. Propaganda works with your belief systems, not against them. The idea that they (journalists) could’ve been fooled (by secrecy) for so long is unthinkable.”~ Terry Hansen
Theoretically, a beat reporter should own their beat. In reality, reporters sometimes get too close to their sources (favors, consideration, scoops, etc.) to pull back and investigate leads that might jeopardize those relationships. That's what's happening at the NYT. Helene Cooper used her sources to help break the AATIP story in 2017, but Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal had to lobby for it. Cooper apparently passed the UFO hot potato to Barnes, who performs stenography. If NYT wants to compete for it again, they'll need to bring in someone immune to those conflicts of interest.
I heartily dislike what Barnes has done with this story since it was passed to him. The New York Times' coverage of a lot of topics is pretty biased. Usually, just kind of biased towards the interests of the insular wealthy, in terms of political coverage, of socio-economic subjects.
They don't stray too far from the status quo, on any topic. And if journalists do some hard hitting reporting that threatens the super structure of the general consensus reality, created by those at the top, it's pretty obvious, they will walk that coverage back, through people like Barnes, as you describe.
Thanks for response, Billy.
It's gonna take some enlightened mindshifting at the management level to overcome the self-policing too often practiced by reporters. You'd think, given the growing public and political interest, that'd be a no-brainer. Continued negligence of this issue is no less a threat to democracy than Trumpism.
So is (was) this a one battle war, or have we just seen the defeat of a single bill? Tim Burchett has the will, but he's not part of a significant oversight committee.
Has Mellon's contribution to publicise UAP events and circumvent the DoD reached an end? Was lining up whistleblowers his trump card (whistleblowers who provided testimony that Burchett and his oversight colleagues couldn't follow)?
Does any momentum remain, unseen? Are the politicians who were drawn to the cause still seeking answers or have they all been dissuaded?
Those of us who are aware of the significance and implications of historical UFO events are probably a step behind those politicians who have been told more by insiders. If we want answers then some of those politicians must want answers just as much.
And what of the evidence that Grusch could provide? How much of that has been investigated and by whom?
There's definitely momentum in the private sector from groups like Galileo and UAPx. As their sensors grow sharper and more omnipresent, open-source surveillance tech will hopefully begin distributing the sorts of images that the military has been hoarding since the 1940s. For better or worse, imagery shapes hearts and minds in visceral ways that peer-review papers and analytics cannot. The Tic Tac, the Gimbal and GoFast videos revitalized this conversation six years ago. We'll be getting footage that'll make those three conversation-starters look archaic. This is an issue whose time has come, and it cannot be stopped by tsunamis of campaign cash.
I think that signifies the end of the beginning.. It'll generate a new debate on the informational value of multi-sensor platforms vs multi-witness testimony. Some people like to quote that witness testimony is unreliable, but human intelligence gathering can't be replaced by drones and satellites. Either way, the pace of discovery will be set by 'their' current level of interest in us - the number of opportunities they provide us with and the number of mistakes they make.
"Their"??? Current level of interest in us
I don't believe that the surveillance team/ visitors make mistakes
All is done by design
That's certainly possible, but I do wonder if some of the visitors are the equivalent of kids joyriding through the neighbourhood.
spot on.
"How do you buy this kind of coverage?"
As you pointed out at the beginning, Ike already covered that.
The same applies to the vast majority of Congress on both sides.
The NYT , WaPo, and the other legacy news organizations are bought and paid for and are now officially the Ministry of Truth.
You're better off being on our own than being with them.
I think this was to be expected but still very disappointing. From my own polling of friends and family there is little to no knowledge of what is happening and has happened. There seems to be little understanding of what their children might face in the future based on the oversight issue of the military industrial complex and NHI tech research. I suppose with all the other issues that are coming to the forefront (AI, Climate Change, Authoritarianism, a divided populace, etc etc.) it maybe too overwhelming to contemplate. We will probably never get the money geyser out of our politics and influence so what's left of our basic democratic process will be on the chopping block. I said it before, but there is a real danger of our society becoming something similar to some version of the Hunger Games. With the advancement of AI and research into NHI tech by corporations given that tech by our own military, with little to no oversight, its really disturbing to think about the results. Many do not want too.
Well, that's the question isn't it? Who really wants to contemplate the implications? I've seen the landscape shift dramatically in growing circles over the past six years. But I think those circles are still too small to be culturally decisive. It's going to take a massive education campaign to bring this issue to the dinner table, and it's pretty obvious the media at large still don't have the chops for it.
Speaking literally of the dining room table, I come from a fairly affluent, Ivy League educated family (including my Harvard professor brother and Hoover Institute nephew)) and when I sit down at a holiday meal with three generations of us and try to discuss the topic I have been deeply involved with for most off my life, eyeballs roll, quips are made, and I am told to make it short.
It's a Catch 22. Disclosure won't be demanded without education and education won't be accepted until disclosure. The only wild card solution is the undeniable appearance of the visitors themselves. Then people will take note, and disclosure will be moot.
Well based on the last 70 or so years of UFO history there have been events or encounters which might be called visitations of sorts. If you include the abduction scenarios(?) you may come to the realization that, whoever they are, have made their presence known. However I understand your 'undeniable' as being explicit. It is very hard for me to rationalize how very intelligent persons can be so complacent and somewhat in denial on this subject especially when credible persons of 'in the know' backgrounds have come forth and given testimony to the contrary. That fact may be even more disturbing than the 'visitors'.
Forget catastrophic disclosure. After this cave, which proves again that Congress has nobody's back except its own, nobody is going to risk disclosing anything. Certainly not whistleblowers. No one wanted to seriously believe the Black Hats controlled all the action, but now you know. Some in the ragtag UFO community will try to regroup in some meaningful way, but they'll be up against the house, and you never bet against the house.
I hope somebody was keeping notes on how those backstage negotiations went down, who stood up, who folded, the actual size of congressional opposition to Schumer/Rounds, what sort of pressure -- carrots, sticks -- was brought to bear on the swing votes, what sorts of brass-knuckles arguments sealed the deal. There's a Pulitzer waiting for someone with deep sources and the guts to pursue.
The whole coverup operation, from inception 'til now, has to be some grand story in its own right. UFOs might as well be the MacGuffin (not to demean their importance, but buy the premise, buy the bit). One generation after another protecting a kind of holy grail, it might play like "Succession," or more like the latest "Fall of the House of Usher" horror. Or maybe "Dallas"? It has it all, every human element, from bad to worst. But we'll probably never know how it's gone down. It might pale in comparison to the Great Secret, but will be buried right alongside it. What's happened is pitiful.
All I can say is Amen Billy. You once again nailed it. We just continue to watch the corruption fester on the Hill. The word transparency and accountability are non-existent in the US Government. It has always been part of the UFO landscape and likely always will. Corporations who are hiding the truth for the US government won out here. They won't have move those materials to hiding places and be afraid that the USG won;t be sending in people to raid their labs. LM is off the hook. Lest any whistleblowers think that anything will change or improve things, this clearly demonstrates it is not worth their time and personal safety to open up.
Thanks, Rich. This week has been a serious gut punch. I guess the question going forward is, how badly do taxpayers want accountability on the biggest question of our time? I'm not optimistic. Maybe the next move has to be up to "them."
bingo
The Republicans screwed us on this, which I find surprising. Especially after conservative media played Grusch up so much. Coulthart, who’s taken shots at Biden on Need to Know didn’t lob any bombs at the Republicans on the latest podcast. I find that interesting. Maybe they’ll be more hearings with more whistle blowers. Maybe that’s the only way to truly break the ice on this issue.
Never thought I'd ever hear a Republican refer to the Pentagon as "war pimps," but Burchett and at least a few others appear to have had an epiphany. There's obviously a rift amid the GOP along those lines right now. How deep and abiding it is, I guess, depends on how much money it'll take wounded egos to "heal."
By god I hope Marler has multiple fire suppression systems and good security.
Gulp!
Even NBC's "Meet the Press" gave Graff a platform last Sunday to provide a subtle rebuttal to guest Rep Tim Burchette. I don't believe for 1 minute that the MS news media isn't complicit in this endeavor to mold public opinion, especially with the repetitive theme that "there's nothing to see".... Graff seems to fortuitously making the rounds on other talk shows and media outlets. He's probably auditioning for a public relations position in the DC bureaucracy or MIC as the "go to guy" to put the matter to rest whenever the entrenched establishment (gatekeepers) needs expedient push back when the heat gets turned up. He would be a perfect fit with his voluble public persona.
Having spent a career in corporate media, I can tell you that, when it comes to UFOs, self-censorship is contagious. And what looks like a coordinated embargo is just mass psychology. Sticking with the script certainly has certainly rewarded Mr. Graff.
Hi Billy, Very well written. Thank you. I always figured, when push came to shove ufos would be the literal and metaphorical vehicle that would begin to drive a wedge between the legislative and military branches of govt. At which point the Pentagon, Lockheed Martin would shut it all down through their compromised gatekeepers in congress, using 'national security' as an always reliable excuse.
The US is a corporate dictatorship, literally. Depressing when Lockheed Martin has more sway over legislation than hundreds of millions of American citizens.
Catastrophic disclosure, here we come!
Part of me is amazed the conversation even advanced this far -- crash retrievals, cadavers, reverse engineering, etc. I'll bet Terry would've been surprised, too. But despite what happened this week, I think military intelligence/contractors realize they've been exposed. The bill may have failed, but there are cracks and they are vulnerable. If they figure out who the finks are, they might get sloppy and decide to go after them -- where they could well fuck up.
I'm equally amazed and Terry would have been 'gobsmacked', as the British say!
And yes, agree that the cat's out of the bag and Youtube personalities are off and running with the topic.
The finks you mention are those who ratted out the Pentagon, Lockheed Martin? The ones who testified about crash retrievals to Grush?
Thanks for doing what you do, Billy!