by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star:
You might have noticed, if you’ve been paying attention, that another bit of the cartoon we’ve all been watching is the recent campaign of “catch-up” the lamestream propotainment media has been waging. For literally decades the goobernment denied the reality of UFOs and their sightings, and even hired well-known academics to go out and debunk the whole idea, until said academics encountered too much of a strange thing called evidence in the form of testimony of perfectly normal rational people, and had to re-evaluate the narrative and reject it. THen came the pictures, and videos. Again, the same story: some were faked, and quickly demonstrated to be such, but many were not, or were, at least, “in a gray area.” Finally, in just the recent few years, we’ve had the goobernment itself, in the form of “whistleblowers” and carefully stage-managed appearances of “witnesses” go before Congressional hearings with more officially sponsored stories. We’ve moved, in other words, from outright denial to quasi-0fficial acceptance.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
This is called “a limited hangout” in the professional parlance of intelligence skullduggery, and it is an essential and necessary step if one senses one is losing control of a narrative, for rather than lose that control, one accepts certain generalized things from the opposition in order to maintain it. I can speak from some personal experience, because having been a part of two “Secret space program conferences”, one in San Mateo, California in 2014, and the other in Bastrop, Texas in 2015, I can vouch that the organizers of both conferences were keen to avoid the “usual people” that ordinarily speak at such events, and invite a more serious panel of speakers, not with stories to tell, but speculations to argue and evidences to consider. By not inviting “the usual people and UFO divas” pushing the same general narratives of Et contact and so on, the hidden control over it began to slip. In my opinion, and in the thinking and understanding of our friend Daniel Liszt a.k.a. “Dark Journalist,” it was in response to these two conferences that new “marketing campaigns” were launched to reassert control of the narrative; there were even attempts to copyright the phrase “secret space program”, and big names were brought forward in connection with corporate projects, all in an effort to reassert influence over the UFO and associated fields.
With that in mind, consider the following story shared by W.G. (and many others):
I’m not surprised that in the falling and failing academic standards of the modern American quackademy, that such an idea should be presented as new, or if not as completely new, at least as exciting and engaging “because we (Harvard) say so”; here’s what the article says:
What if — stick with us here — an unknown technological civilization is hiding right here on Earth, sheltering in bases deep underground and possibly even emerging with UFOs or disguised as everyday humans?
In a new paper that’s bound to raise eyebrows in the scientific community, a team of researchers from Harvard and Montana Technological University speculates that sightings of “Unidentified Anomalous Phemonemona” (UAP) — bureaucracy-speak for UFOs, basically — “may reflect activities of intelligent beings concealed in stealth here on Earth (e.g., underground), and/or its near environs (e.g., the Moon), and/or even ‘walking among us’ (e.g., passing as humans).”
Yes, that’s a direct quote from the paper. Needless to say, the researchers admit, this idea of hidden “crypoterrestrials” is a highly exotic hypothesis that’s “likely to be regarded skeptically by most scientists.” Nonetheless, they argue, the theory “deserves genuine consideration in a spirit of epistemic humility and openness.”
…
First is that a “remnant form” of an ancient, highly advanced human civilization is still hanging around, observing us. Second is that an intelligent species evolved independently of humans in the distant past, possibly from “intelligent dinosaurs,” and is now hiding their presence from us. Third is that these hidden occupants of Earth traveled here from another planet or time period. And fourth — please keep a straight face, everybody — is that these unknown inhabitants of Earth are “less technological than magical,” which the researchers liken to “earthbound angels.”
The idea of Crypto-terrestrials is not new of course. I have before me as I type this blog a little book by Mac Tonnies, published in 2010, outlining precisely many of the ideas which are now receiving the Harvard nihil obstat and imprimatur. It is even blatantly titled The Cryptoterrestrials. Many academics have advanced these theories, and regular readers here will be aware of my own speculations regarding ancient civilizations, wars, and advanced technologies. One notices, in the article’s mentions of names, a definite and discernible lack of mention – deliberate omissions – of people like Dr. John Brandenburg, or Dr. David Jacobs, or even of Harvard’s own Dr. John Mack, of Dr. Jacques Vallee, of Dr. Mark Carlotto or, yes, of Richard C. Hoagland and Mark McCandlish, Michael Schratt, Catherine Fitts, Stanton Friedman, Richard Dolan and so many others who were independent thinkers and speculators and who have produced an enormous body of work to consider.
Instead, we are served up the bland and nervous dish of David Grusch, and so on. In short, the Harvard paper is only playing catchup with people and ideas that have been abroad and discussed in the serious Ufology community for decades. So what is the exercise all about? It is about those phrases nihil obstat and imprimatur: it is about asserting Harvard’s – and therefore, the deep state’s – supposed right to control “the narrative” of UFOs, and to determine which “sources” one may trust, and which ones are to be avoided. This is not about the UFO phenomenon, but about the influence and control over it. It is about trying to maintain curial control over it. it’s yet another limited hangout, another “fake out”, another “rope-a-dope”. In short, I strongly suspect it’s not “epistemic humility and openness”, because without the presence of such people in its mentions, it’s just more “business as usual,” designed to keep the wavering on the reservation.
