No Names, No Agency Disclosures, and an Absence of Complete Transparency
Why is that? Because individuals like George Bush and Dick Cheney, or even someone akin to Richard Doty, remain nameless in this narrative. We can’t identify General X, Y, or Z who holds the truth. Instead, it’s left to shadowy organizations like the CIA, AFOSI, ONI, NSA, and NASA – and the Army, Navy, and Marines – with no clear individuals or entities pointed to as actually knowing or doing anything about this secret cover-up.
Remember when the Pentagon Papers provided specific names, dates, and events? In contrast, this so-called “great mystery disclosure” offers nothing of the sort.
Back in the MJ-12 era of the 1980s, we had names of deceased individuals who were at least connected to that time. Now, however, we’re facing an invisible, unnamed secret government cabal – sparsely suggesting the CIA as a possible suspect on occasion, but never providing a definitive individual, organization, or agency that might possess “evidence” of alien bodies or crashed spacecraft and is actively involved in these covert operations.
Are the Skywatchers or the “egg people” behind it?
No tangible evidence of crashed saucers or deceased alien biological entities has surfaced from them.
Currently, no one can provide concrete proof of these activities taking place.
What we’ve been left with are vague theories about past bogeymen, devoid of names, faces, or specific organizations, and even lacking a defined timeframe.
Some speculate that this peculiar situation could stem from legitimate internal conflicts among the elite within the military, intelligence, and the military-industrial complex.
But why haven’t there been any leaks about those behind this internal division?
Who are these supposed insiders? Can you name even one from the military, the military-industrial complex, or the scientific community? Not deceased individuals recounting tales from their deathbeds in the ’90s!
At the moment, it remains an abstract void, with no concrete identities.
As it stands, we have numerous whistleblowers sharing a mix of the fantastic and the absurd, many of whom may have credible insights while others may not.
The truth remains elusive.
What’s particularly striking is that, if any of this is true, it constitutes only a partial disclosure. None of these whistleblowers are shedding light on why Non-Human Intelligence (NHI) or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) are present and what their intentions may be. Instead, they focus exclusively on mentioning crash retrievals and hidden biologics, without linking them to any tangible, living individuals involved in these operations RIGHT HERE AND NOW.
You’ve raised some compelling points about the state of UFO and UAP disclosure. It’s true that despite a plethora of whistleblower testimonies and reported sightings, there’s a glaring absence of concrete details and identifiable figures behind the supposed cover-up. The historical context you provide—such as the Pentagon Papers—highlights how powerful revelations can often include specific names and groups, whereas the current discourse feels vague and scattershot.
The frustration with the lack of hard evidence and identifiable sources is understandable. The conspiracy theories often thrive on anonymity, leading to an atmosphere of suspicion and speculation without any real substantiation. The fact that we haven’t seen definitive proof from credible individuals or agencies only deepens the skepticism surrounding these claims.
As for the question of motive and intent behind the UAPs, it seems to be a missing puzzle piece in the current narrative. Without understanding the purpose or objectives of these unidentified entities, it’s challenging to have a comprehensive discussion about their significance or the implications of their presence.
In an age of information, the lack of reliable data and accountability can lead to a proliferation of theories, some more credible than others. It will be crucial for future disclosures to address not just the existence of these phenomena but also the context surrounding them—making the case for transparency even more pressing. Until we see verified evidence and clear identification of those in the know, the discourse will likely remain in the realm of speculation.
What do you think it would take for there to be a more substantial breakthrough in this area?