Posted on 11/29/2023 9:04:51 AM PST by RoosterRedux
In July, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), along with a bipartisan group of five other senators, announced sweeping legislation to declassify and release government information about unidentified flying objects.
The announcement coincided with, and seemed to corroborate, an extraordinary series of UFO-related developments. But now, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) appear poised to quash this bipartisan transparency initiative.
In the absence of reasonable, good-faith objections to the core provisions of the historic legislation, the question is why.
If there is nothing to hide and nothing to the UFO phenomenon, why would any member of Congress object to greater transparency and oversight of an executive branch prone to excessive and dangerous over-classification?
Or perhaps there is something to hide. According to Schumer, a sweeping investigation “led some in Congress to believe that the executive branch was concealing important information regarding [UFOs] over broad periods of time.”
This is corroborated by the inspector general of the intelligence community, who deemed a decorated whistleblower’s assertion that the government inappropriately concealed UFO-related information from Congress “credible and urgent.”
Moreover, as Senate Intelligence Vice Chair Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) noted in extraordinary detail, several high-level officials with top security clearances have told congressional investigators of the existence of surreptitious government UFO retrieval and “reverse engineering” programs. At the same time, 10 ex-government officials, military officers and scientists have alleged (or suggested) publicly that the U.S. government has recovered at least one UFO.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Do they want the UFOs to be opaque? Transparent? Or translucent?
Because they’re really top secret military aircraft whose existence may violate several treaties.
We have bigger problems than this UAP nonsense.
I have heard that far too many times. And you are trying to explain that to someone who has personally seen them, twice...
I don’t care why.
“Because they’re really top secret military aircraft.”
Of course. Reverse engineered like I said.
Same as the old saying loose lips sink ships.
This is need to know information.
It is in the best interest of the government for this information to be held.
The Disclosure Bill doesn’t include the disclosure of secrets (i.e., classified information). And a lot of what is to be disclosed is only to be disclosed to Congress in classified hearings.
Then why bother commenting on this thread?
We can debate UFOs at length—but there can be no doubt that the Deep State has blackmail files on key Senators and Congress-critters of both parties.
They have to call the FBI or CIA or NSA before going to the bathroom.
Classified information is not part of this bill.
Well, that settles that! And even with billions of galaxies and trillions of planets in the Universe, there is no other life outside our little planet. Thanks for that keen insight!
I was just thinking the Dem/Deep State instant obsession with UFO’s must be a distraction when I glanced at the keywords near the top of the thread and one word was ‘squirrel’.Yes- exactly.
“Sure. Batshit crazy seasoned naval pilots, airline pilots, radar operators, astronauts, astronomers...All crazy lunatics..”
Myself included. It was all goofy 50s scifi to me until I saw them myself.
Hint: “National Security” is the code phrase for corrupt insider deals.
This is a secret.
Loose lips sink ships!
You mean distraction like “Q”? ;-)
I won’t believe that UFO’s exist until one of those extraterrestrial hobbits sits on my lap and says hello.
Reverse engineered from the designs of the Horton brothers who were designing aircraft for the Germans in WW2. That is where we get the term flying saucer. What people are seeing are atmospheric craft. Not spacecraft which do not need streamlining.
“If there’s nothing to disclose, why worry about the disclosure provision of the NDAA?”
Absolutely.
“What’s in your hand?”
Nothing.
“Let me see then”
NO...
“Then why bother commenting on this thread?”
Because it’s just as important that I don’t care why as it is that people care.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.