• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The reason for UFO secrecy - all of it!

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Goggs Mackay

Goggs Mackay

Administrator
Staff member
Money makes the world go round, at least for those at the top of the tree. Someone more clever than I once pointed out that to get to the root of virtually anything conspiracy-wise, one must 'follow the money'.

Once you understand that no-one will ever be elected president of the USA without enormous financial backing, and that no-one will give that backing solely through altruism, one must accept that to a degree, democracy does not really exist. It's the shadowy ultra-rich and influential who really decide who will be the figurehead of the next administration. I pointedly do not refer to a president as 'the person in charge' because basically, they do not wield anything like absolute power. So, if one accepts it's the money men who really decide the direction things will take then it follows that all policies are designed to reinforce this set-up.

I believe that despite the findings of the Brookings Report, it is not public panic and the shattering of long-held religious views that worry the powers that be vis a vis the disclosure of information on the UFO reality.

If UFO's exist, and I mean the ones not built by 'us', and they truly have flight characteristics that suggest super-advanced propulsion and energy sources, then I believe the sole reason for all the secrecy is that it cannot be admitted that there maybe energy sources available that are, if not free, then as good as free.

Everthing in the modern world is run on existing fossil/nuclear/renewable power sources. I don't just mean our cars, trains and aircraft. Our EVERYTHING is based on the energy source status quo. Anything that runs on, or is manufactured using electricity. All value of stocks, shares, land, companies and man-work-hours is related to the cost of providing energy.

If it was revealed tomorrow that someone has discovered a source of over-unity energy (getting more out than you put in), absolute mayhem would ensue as values of virtually anything and everything would plummet through the floor. Who is going to invest in any type of energy such as oil when we could now get energy for nothing? Who is going to buy a petrol powered car as electric cars start to be made that run for free? Tax collection from many things would dwindle and governments would quickly be broke (yes, even more so than now!). Economies would implode in days. If you give it even a little thought, the implications are awesome.

I would bet my life that every patent office has in place a system to prevent any such technology reaching the public. If you believe a government will sacrifice it's own citizens in wars over the energy that already exists (think Iraq), then do you really think they would bat an eyelid about 'permanently' taking care of some enterprising engineer about to upset the world applecart with his new free-energy device? You'd better believe ANY government would use assassination to prevent such tech getting out. We've all seen the 'use of deadly force authorised' signs posted outside military bases and that is often just to protect military security and secrets that are small fry compared to free energy.

On the bright side (if there is one), we must trust that the energy giants in the world now must be thinking about what will happen once fossil fuels run out. I very much doubt their mindset is 'well, when it's over it's over and that's that'. They must be thinking of their own survival post-fossil fuels. You think BP of Chevron are just going to fold in 40 years time? No, they must already be researching the future of energy generation. The trick will be how to slowly implement any new 'free energy' discovery so that it does not destroy overnight what is in place now. They will be racking their collective brains about how to capitalise on any new energy source. Someone is still going to have to design, build and distribute and such free-energy device. There will still be money to be made but it will have to be done right and by that I mean in a way that keeps those at the top of the tree now at the top of the tree in the future. Do not kid yourself that free-energy will instantly make the world a fairer place. 'Fair' would mean 'equal' and those in power do not want us all to be equal. They want to enjoy the fruits of others' labour and they want to have things that other people do not have - because that is the type of person who aspires to riches and power.

I have heard it said that if the USA currently has UFO technology, why have we not seen these craft in action in recent wars? The answer is simple: you can get the job done, albeit more slowly, with current technology and it would be far too high a price to pay to reveal the existence of UFO tech just to save a few servicemen's lives. Those in power have always been willing to sacrifice their soldiers to achieve their political aims. It is far more important to keep advanced tech secret, at least for the forseeable future, than it is to save some lives.

So, lets suppose some government has a crashed UFO. Chances are, they are still trying to work out how it works. It is difficult to get the best people working on the problem because of the need for them to be under the tightest of security umbrellas. Anyone who has worked in any advanced industry, e.g mobile phones, will understand that due to the enormous variety of specialised disciplines involved, it takes large numbers of people to get any worthwhile research and development off the drawing board. How is anyone in possession of UFO tech supposed to get all that research done when everyone involved would have to work at the absolute pinnacle of secrecy. It will take a lot of brilliant people a long time to get anywhere and despite the fact that agencies such as DARPA do have fantastic people, it would still be a security nightmare trying to keep a lid on it, considering the scale of it.

I think the seriousness of what UFO disclosure would bring is reason enough for all the denials and the cleverly executed ridicule of the subject. I actually do subscribe to the slow-acclimatisation to the UFO reality. I fully believe governments want to prepare their citizens for some future time at which the reality will be disclosed but that will only happen at a time when it suits those in power/those with the money. That time will be when said disclosure does not destroy our financial system and by inclusion, our society.

I don't know if ET's (if they are the ones behind the UFO mystery) are benevolent, malevolent or plain indifferent. It is possible that they are not revealing themselves en-masse precisely because they do not want societal meltdown any more than us.

I'm going to finish with a sort of separate but related thought. I do believe we've been to the moon but I also believe that long before we went there, we suspected we'd find evidence of non-human existence there. I think that's why the phots were faked. Yes, with the set-up of the lunar astronauts chest-mounted cameras, any fool could predict many terrible photos would have been taken, possible every single one may have been crap, so they had a back-up plan of nice, ready-made ones for public consumption and also the fact that they suspected there was too much stuff up there they did not want to explain to the public. I think the current interest of many countries in going to the moon is a race to exploit whatever is there that was left by someone else. I have a feeling that Apollo may have visited more interesting sites than those we believed the program went to. Any idiot with a decent telescope can see for themselves that there is stuff on the moon, in plain view far more worthy of investigation than the Sea of Tranquility!!! Blair Cuspids? Objects that move up and out of craters? Multiple 'double craters'? 17 mile long 'bridges' OVER impact craters? Need I go on?
 
I agree with you. I said something similar just a minute ago in another post.
I just hate the thought that their are people who decide who has money and who doesn't, who has advanced technology and who doesn't, who gets the "real" facts and who doesn't.
I guess no one is really living in a democracy after all. We are still serfs serving at the pleasure of the "royalty".
 
exo_doc said:
I agree with you. I said something similar just a minute ago in another post.
I just hate the thought that their are people who decide who has money and who doesn't, who has advanced technology and who doesn't, who gets the "real" facts and who doesn't.
I guess no one is really living in a democracy after all. We are still serfs serving at the pleasure of the "royalty".
Click to expand...
@exo_doc - yeah, i know it's a crap state of affairs. but i am not one of those that think my prime minister or your president actually knows the truth. they do not have the time or inclination to try to find out for themselves. and anyway, in most countries it is never the politicians that know the most, or indeed do the actual day-to-day running of things.

2 party democracy is an illusion in as much as whichever government is voted in, it is the same career civil servants that advise government ministers. so, in the UK where i am, it is either the conservative party or the labour party that 'rule' but whichever one happens to be in at the time, makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to the average person's life. maybe some little tweak of the law here and there and changes of departments etc but all this is just 'window' dressing and the important struff is really handled by the civil servants. the fact that some of them work behind the scenes for 25years+ serving the party that happens to be in government at the time means that they are the ones with most experience, they are the ones that decide what to tell the government ministers etc, so regardless of the party in office, the advise from the civil servants remains consistent - and of course, some pretty unimportant laws and decisions will be made by the elected government to give the illusion of true democracy.

i am positive it is these long-standing political advisors that know 'where the bodies are buried' and if anyone knows the truth of the UFO situation, it will be a select few of them. i personally was in naval intelligence and was seconded to GCHQ (our equivalent of your NSA) and i can assure you that these places have enough on their plates without having to worry about UFO's. i imagine that around the time of WWII and the foo-fighter sightings, a decision was made to supress the information and once that ball was set rolling, there is not actually much need to try and actively keep a lid on it because early on the ridicule factor was employed and it's taken on a life of it's own. i do not think for one minute anyone is actually ordering our media outlets not to report on UFO's seriously, there is no need. most people think its a load of crap anyway and akin to seances with 'ectoplasm' etc.

quite recently, a BBC reporter saw a disc shaped object flying low and slow and silently whilst he was driving north of london at about 5am. by the sounds of it, it was a remarkable sighting but it was only reported on that day, and the item had no discussion of the possiblities, it was just a recording of what the reporter had seen (who said himself he was reluctant to call it a flying saucer, even though that is exactly what he did see). now, the thing that bothers me is that i got the impression the reporter himself just thought it was one of life's little mysteries and that was that. i can guarrantee you that his day-to-day thoughts are not taken up with the idea of flying saucers!

to me, this shows that the way this subject is dealt with is fantastically succesful in making normal right-thinking people just dismiss it all out of hand, even when they have seen the evidence with their own eyes!! as a measure of how well the ridicule factor works, even when trusted people get a fantastic sighting, they almost manage to forget it ever happened and not bother to try to find out more! i actually think if obama went on tv tomorrow and said UFO's were real and extraterrestrial, the people who don't believe already STILL WOULD NOT BELIEVE! we have to remember many people have faith in religion, despite there not being any real proof for the more far-out things in the bible, but plonk a real UFO down in their garden and again, THEY STILL WOULD NOT BELIEVE! there are two kind of people in this field. those with an open mind and those with a closed mind. i think we should not waste our time trying to 'convert' people in to believing UFO's exist because they just wont, on principle. people like us and gene and chris and the listeners of the paracast will just have to try and satisfy ourselves that there is fact to what we think on the topic. with a few noteable exceptions, people do not tend to switch 'sides' on this debate, so why bother even trying to tell them!!
 
Well, there is a very fine line between money and power. And we know the old saying about absolute power corrupting absolutely. I wish every teacher of our youth would drill this basic truth about the dangers of concentrated social power into their students' young minds. Because it accounts for so much of the brutality and corruption that has driven human history.

For the sake of argument, assume that a relatively small group-- governmental, corporate or whatever-- has acquired the key to virtually unlimited sources of energy generated by small devices. Implications might even go beyond the "establishment's" monopoly on petroleum.

Could such devices also serve as earth-splitting weapons without the need for fissile material? What would be the implications for the environment of almost anyone having access to all of the electrical power they want at any time? The scenario gets complicated.
 
I still struggle with the idea that some incredible energy breakthrough is being withheld for economic reasons. Any company holding the patents to such devices would create an industry that would eclipse the fossil fuel industry but certainly not replace it. Oil is used for more than just the creation of energy. Also, nothing says the oil companies would not be the one holding these patents in the first place. It would benefit them greatly to be the creators of a new energy revolution. Think of the money to be made in the regulation of a new energy source.

What do we actually have? Big business still seems to think that using nuclear fission to boil water is a good idea although it is poisoning the planet and causing horrible illness for generations to come. We spend an incredible amount of energy just extracting fossil fuels from the ground and poison ourselves in the process. If someone is sitting on clean, inexpensive, and revolutionary energy producing systems they are criminally stupid and or insane. It makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.
 
trainedobserver said:
I still struggle with the idea that some incredible energy breakthrough is being withheld for economic reasons.
Click to expand...

Came across this today

In an interview in May, when referring to WB-8, Dr. Park commented that "This machine should be able to generate 1,000 times more nuclear activity than WB-7, with about eight times more magnetic field.... We'll call that a good success. That means we're on track with the scaling law." Dr. Park also made reference to the Navy's position on the possible future usage of successful polywell technology, saying that "currently all our funding comes from the Navy... that's our customer. Our customer desired that we keep most of our progress confidential. ... They're somewhat concerned about making too much hype without delivering an actual product.... Our understanding is they want us to be successful.... They want us to provide something for our sponsors. They also want us to do well commercially as well, as long as we remain US-owned and control the technology
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell

This device , could potentially "save the planet", but salvation will come at a cost.......
 
blowfish said:
Every state is always planning for the next war and maybe its all about money and the bottom feeders are left to face the cannon fodder for political ideologies.
Click to expand...

The next war? Haven't you noticed? We have been in a state of perpetual war for quite some time now. War is just a much a constant as commerce in modern society.
 
first of, oil would be very valuable even if it wasnt used for energy , from wiki "They are used as detergents, fertilizers, medicines, paints, plastics, synthetic fibers, and synthetic rubber. ". but sure , i get your point.
There is free energy already available. You could theoreticly build a wind power device in your yard and have it power your home. Also electric cars have been on the market for some time now but they dont sell, even tho they are cheaper to run.

to the topic at hand , i think that even tho there was a free energy device, its still A DEVICE . meaning the device would have to be bought for a price and ( im just assuming here ) would most likely need to be fixed etc sometimes. My point is, the people holding such a device would make an ENOURMOUS amount of money, even more than oil would make them, as i no doubt think every single family on the entire planet would get one. Also, this article assumes that the company having such a device dont have any tricks up their sleeves on how to milk this product for all its worth. They would never admit to having a device that could give eternal energy for free just as computer companies would never admit to having computer available right now that are ten times better then what they sell in the store.

The theory also assumes that ,
first, a UFO has been recovered , second , its been successfully back-engineerd , and thirdly that this backengineering has led to the discovery of a free energy device somehow applicable to human infrastructure and science.

personally i think that the question wether UFO's exist is answered as a yes with regards to all the tens of thousands of sightings. And i think its logical to assume they are not from here when these sightings and radar readings show that these objects are under intelligent control and defy the laws of physics. However, its NOT clear that "we" have one and that we somehow have managed to backengineer'd one.

Also how could any goverment hold something like this secret ? I doubt the aliens take orders from the CIA to stay away from major cities etc. If there is any secrecy i think its something that the aliens are in charge off
 
Gene Steinberg said:
The aliens in charge of UFO secrecy? Really? What's your basis for saying that?
Click to expand...

im saying that IF there is a secrecy i dont see how the "powers that be" could hold that secret without the aliens beeing in on it , since the aliens could simply land a craft in Paris and that would be it. The gov would have no way of controlling that
 
Gene Steinberg said:
So, then, we aren't capable of holding secrets for long periods of time?
Click to expand...

As i said in my original post i dont think it has anything to do with economics ( altho i agree i have no way of knowing this for sure ) . The statement often used by the military is " UFO's are not a threat to our national security" , and thats not really denying the presence of UFO's, is it ? They are avoiding to give a straight answer becouse, in my opinion, dont know what the heck they are but at the same time they know that they exist. Quite simply i think its emberrasing for the military that they dont know anything about it and that they dont have any defences against it. I think a plausible explanation is that they want to buy as much time as they can figuring this out before revealing it to avoid causing anxiety among the public. The notion that the goverment is capable of holding something like this secret for as long as they want implies that they have a say in what the UFO's does while on earth, theres no way of avoiding that

so i dont really think its a "secret" per ce , but more that they want to avoid the subject for as long as possible, before revealing it.
 
No, it doesn't imply that the military or the government in general has a say in what the UFOs do. It may mean what it says, that they have no evidence the presence of UFOs presents a national security threat. They may be right.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
No, it doesn't imply that the military or the government in general has a say in what the UFOs do. It may mean what it says, that they have no evidence the presence of UFOs presents a national security threat. They may be right.
Click to expand...

i think you misunderstood the tone of my sentence ;)
 
Considerable effort has been invested in the Farnsworth/polywell line of controlled fusion research. One honestly has to wonder if a practical over unity version of it would wind up in the public sector.
 
Back
Top