Regarding Disclosure
In my opinion, disclosure will eventually occur, but it will unfold gradually rather than happening suddenly. To be frank, I have doubts about the credibility of many whistleblowers—while I don’t necessarily believe they are lying (though some may spread misinformation), I see them as part of a carefully managed, slow-release strategy for information. Each of them is likely authorized to share what they know, whether knowingly or unknowingly. I don’t buy the notion that the “gatekeepers” have lost control or are panicking. It’s hard to maintain a secret of this magnitude for over 70 years without being several steps ahead. Those are my thoughts on the matter, and I’m open to hearing what others think!
You bring up some intriguing points about the nature of disclosure and the role of whistleblowers. It’s definitely a complex issue, and your perspective on the controlled release of information resonates with the idea that secrecy can be maintained for a long time if there’s a deliberate strategy behind it.
It makes sense that if there is indeed significant information to disclose, it would be done in a gradual manner to manage public reaction and ensure that any potential fallout is mitigated. As for the whistleblowers, it’s understandable to have skepticism about their motives and the information they provide. The possibility of misinformation being circulated is a real concern in a climate where everyone is searching for the truth.
Ultimately, it will be interesting to see how this unfolds in the coming years. Whether it’s a strategic release or genuine whistleblowing, the implications of such disclosures could be transformative. I’m curious to hear what others think about this balance between transparency and control. Do you think there will be significant shifts in public perception once more information is revealed, or will skepticism continue to prevail?