A.D. After Disclosure: When the Government Finally Reveals the Truth About Alien Contact (15 page)

Finally, in a class of its own, a decision taken by the Others themselves.

Photographic Evidence

Without a doubt, some UFO photographs have received detailed analysis from scientific teams and passed the test of authenticity. Two of the earliest were taken by an Oregon farmer named Paul Trent in May 1950. Trent and his wife, both shy people, never tried to capitalize on their extraordinary images. Local friends, however, realized their importance, and the photographs were soon featured in
Life
magazine. Nearly two decades later, they were analyzed by the University of Colorado’s UFO study. Even though the Committee’s leader, Edward Condon, had been predisposed to debunk all UFOs, the Trent photographs passed muster with the staff specialists. In 1968, the Condon Report concluded that “all
factors investigated…appear to be consistent with the assertion that an extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disc-shaped, tens of meters in diameter, and evidently artificial, flew within the sight of two witnesses.
⁷

Although the report acknowledged the possibility of some sort of hoax, it argued that a photometric analysis of the negatives made this very unlikely. In other words, there was no evidence of a string supporting the discs photographed—the only realistic hoax method. Subsequent computer enhancements of the images reinforced this claim. The object was not a model, but in the air.
⁸

Yet, there have always been vocal skeptics who argue that no photograph is ever good enough. To those who have taken the time to study the history of UFO photographs, this brings no small amount of frustration. There are many truly excellent images that have received in-depth analysis. In any rational courtroom or laboratory, these would be considered images of genuine UFOs. Yet the fact remains that any photograph, no matter how compelling, is open to the charge of having been enhanced or faked, no matter how remote the likelihood often seems. Therefore, neither the Trent photos, nor any of the other good photos taken throughout the years, have forced an open acknowledgment of the reality of UFOs.

The irony is that even though cameras are better and more common than ever before, any digital image today is liable to be seen as “Photoshopped,” even if it is not. An element of doubt has irrevocably entered the realm of photographic analysis. Today, there are an incredible number of seemingly outstanding UFO photographs, but they are ignored
en masse
by most journalists and scientists, as if they do not exist. In our own reader poll at the A.D. website (
AfterDisclosure.com
), still photos ranked as the single least-likely event to initiate Disclosure.

Even so, cameras do have an important role to play, and in all likelihood it is one that will increase in the coming years. The tremendous proliferation of digital cameras means that multiple photographs of the same object are much more possible than during prior decades. Even in the digital age, this is likely to constitute compelling evidence.

But video—not .jpeg files—is where it’s at. We have now entered an era in which high-definition video is just starting to become widespread
on people’s cellular phones. Getting a series of outstanding videos in this manner is only a matter of time. In other words, we are talking about a mass sighting being captured on multiple portable devices. For as long at the Others continue to fly about in our skies, it is only a matter of time.

Investigative Journalism

Regarding UFOs, the Woodwards and Bernsteins have been missing in action. No serious American journalistic organization has devoted even a small portion of the resources to this subject as had been devoted previously to the Watergate scandal, to say nothing of such weighty matters as the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the O.J. Simpson trial, and the death of Michael Jackson.

It is possible that journalism will rise from its slumber and lead an effort for Disclosure. Perhaps in one of the many universes postulated to exist by some physicists, this has already happened. In ours, such an outcome appears unlikely. It must be said, however, that there is always a chance that an enterprising journalist can make headway on this issue, albeit only with great and persistent effort.

Such an outcome was achieved by the American journalist Leslie Kean in 2010 with her book,
UFOs “On the Record”: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Talk About What They Know
. Kean had written balanced articles on UFOs for such newspapers as the
Boston Herald
and
San Francisco Examiner
. After years of investigation and interviews with prominent government individuals, she published a sober, no-frills study demonstrating that these people took UFOs seriously, and that they had ample reason to do so. Her book garnered far more attention than most previous researchers had done, in large part because of the care with which she organized her data and thesis. Yet, despite briefly making the
New York Times
Best-sellers list, her work received mixed reactions from the mainstream, and it does not appear to have created a significant breakthrough toward opening up the discussion on Disclosure.
⁹

Journalists like Kean are the exception, not the rule. As discussed in
Chapter 2
, the media has had a longstanding close relationship with government through mutual need, as well as through financial relationships
with secret government agencies like the CIA. Realistically, journalists do not even need to be offered money; working for the CIA and other Defense agencies is a major career-enhancer. And there is the obvious fact that the journalists of the establishment media have mostly decided that it is safer to ridicule the subject than to look into it.

Indeed, when it comes to UFOs, most journalists blithely dispose of the investigative standards in which they were trained—with none of the repercussions they would normally expect from their peers and supervisors.

In August 2010, for example, a British presenter for the BBC, Evan Davis, revisited the Rendlesham Forest case from 1980. He openly stated that “nothing could persuade” him that alien UFOs are real, and that “no evidence” would ever make him change his mind.
¹⁰
This was rather brazen statement coming from a professional journalist, considering that they are expected to maintain at least the pretense of detached suspension of judgment. The extent of Davis’s investigation involved a stroll through the forest at night, 30 years after the event, with two known debunkers. They concluded that the many U.S. military witnesses—soldiers who were trusted with handling nuclear weapons—were so daft that they mistook a lighthouse and police car flashers for a landed UFO. Davis spoke to no witnesses, read no books, and closed the case the day he opened it.

American journalist David Corn demonstrated the same level of ignorance. Noting that the world has exploded with photographic and video equipment, he asked “Where are all the UFO photos?” As mentioned a moment ago, there have been a number of exceptional images of UFOs taken throughout the decades. Any basic web or YouTube search would show so many recent ones that it is beyond the capabilities of any single person to analyze. While not confirmed by university scientists—who normally would not be caught dead trying—many of them, taken with ever-improving video resolution on cellphones and high-quality consumer video cameras, show activities in the sky that appear to defy our conventional realities. At the very least, they demand attention and analysis.
¹¹

Across the landscape, news has given way to opinion. It is easier to offer views than news. Investigative journalism requires time and money. Important stories require weeks, months, sometimes even years of
research. Such a luxury is at odds with today’s 24/7 news environment. The digital media revolution has only made things harder for established institutions such as
Newsweek
or the
New York Times
.

Even though journalism, that once proud and now moribund profession, will probably not initiate Disclosure, it may be saved by it. For, as a news event, the revelation of ET-reality is the gift that keeps on giving. Not only is the announcement sensational, it only grows bigger the more it is covered.

At some point, each reporter, each investigator must make a choice. Remain within the safe confines of the familiar, or leap into the unknown. Each leap must be taken alone, into the darkness of a new paradigm. To an accomplished journalist, who guards his or her public reputation above all else, nothing is more terrifying.

And yet, in the final weeks before Disclosure, a few journalists will catch on. A few may take that leap. Then once the story breaks, it will burn white hot for years. In that first decade A.D., there will be more news to cover and more to talk about than anyone ever thought possible.

Whistleblowers and Leaks

Imagine a D.C.-based journalist who has been spoon-fed stories for years by press releases, whose idea of digging is to surf the Internet. She has covered beltway politics from sex scandals, to Congressional mud-fights over healthcare and immigration, to Supreme Court nominations. One night, though, she meets a source in a bar. Something big is going on, she is told. UFOs. She agrees to meet someone, an inside source, the next day.

That night the reporter will start with a Google search. Because this is a topic she has never taken seriously, her search will be both revelatory and overwhelming. She will learn that while “real” journalists like herself were busy covering “important” stories, thousands of UFO sightings were being reported in alternative media sources every year, and hundreds of photographs and videos were being taken from around the world. Taken individually, the evidence could be dismissed fairly easily. Yet, she might wonder uneasily about the existence of such a large body of evidence.

If she does her job well, she will also learn that UFOs appear to pose national security problems. She would learn of the air space violations, the attempted interceptions, the absurd denials by the government. She might just find her world on the verge of being turned upside down.

At this point, her mind might recoil. Reporters are born and bred to be skeptics, sometimes arrogant ones. She thinks,
if UFOs were real, I would have known about them
. After all, she is a smart journalist who went to a good college. If these vehicles are flying in our skies, she reasons, it could never have been covered for so long.

Having taken the bait, she meets the inside source, her Deep Throat. She is given classified documents. These make it clear to her that UFOs are actual physical craft, and that the government has known for a long time. Suddenly, the story becomes very real. If she can convince an editor to start covering the story aggressively, she might have the distinction of being the reporter who pushed the Disclosure story forward. She might win her place in the history books.

So there is hope that the mainstream journalistic world can redeem itself. Yet, a more likely way of starting the fire is the emerging phenomenon of WikiLeaks, the organization that encourages submissions of classified or otherwise hidden documents by allowing the sources who leak them to remain anonymous. In July 2010, WikiLeaks released the Afghan War Diary, more than 90,000 documents about the war in Afghanistan. In October, the organization released about 400,000 documents relating to the Iraq War. The Pentagon called it “the largest leak of classified documents in its history.” Then, just a month later, on November 28, WikiLeaks released the U.S. State Department diplomatic cables, which it described as seven times the size of the Iraq War Logs.

Just a decade earlier, these leaks of classified information were not possible, because there was no global technological infrastructure in place to enable it. But times have changed, and they will continue to do so.

It is not hard to imagine that key UFO-related documents could come into the possession of WikiLeaks. Indeed, WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange stated that some of the “yet-to-be-published” parts of the State Department cables include references to UFOs.
¹²

A few days later, Assange’s lawyer, Mark Stephens, told the BBC that WikiLeaks had information that it considered to be a “thermo-nuclear device,” which it would release if the organization needed to defend itself. Could this be a reference to the reality and seriousness of the UFO phenomenon? As of this writing, the “device” has not been released.

Even if WikiLeaks were to release incriminating UFO data, obstacles to Disclosure would still remain. First, the WikiLeaks managers would have to not censor the material. Then, even if the documents were published, we could expect the usual sources to attack them as fabrications. We need only look to the 1980s and the MJ-12 documents to see how such a scenario might play out. Still, it is undeniable that action by WikiLeaks, or a similar type of organization, can play a major role in crashing the walls of secrecy.