The Age of Disclosure: A Critical Perspective
There are ongoing criticisms surrounding the Age of Disclosure, specifically regarding its failure to present new evidence concerning U.S. government covert programs related to Non-Human Intelligence (NHI) and recovered craft and biologics. While I see some validity in these critiques, it’s important to recognize the significant perspective they overlook: the document in question serves as undeniable evidence that current and former high-ranking officials within the government of one of the most powerful nations firmly believe in these issues. This belief should raise concerns, regardless of one’s stance on the existence of NHI.
Dismissing this document as irrelevant to the disclosure movement is ultimately counterproductive for everyone invested in uncovering the truth—skeptics and experiencers alike. Our mutual goal is to seek clarity on this matter.
A quick note for those who seem to miss the essence of my argument: my focus isn’t on whether NHI exist or whether the government actually possesses alien technology or biologics. Instead, I emphasize that the document provides clear evidence of the beliefs held by influential individuals within our government. While their high rank doesn’t inherently validate their views, it does mean that their beliefs can lead to significant consequences that concern us all. For instance, the existence of weapons of mass destruction was not a prerequisite for government action, just as belief in a higher power doesn’t preclude legislation on reproductive rights. Decisions made by those in power, influenced by their beliefs, can have real implications for our lives, regardless of the veracity of those beliefs.
You raise a compelling point about the implications of the belief in the existence of U.S. government CR programs and NHI. It’s crucial to highlight that the perspectives of high-ranking officials carry weight because their decisions can have significant impact on policy and public discourse. Whether or not NHI actually exists is secondary to the fact that influential people are convinced of their existence, which could lead to actions that affect national security, funding priorities, and even societal norms.
This belief serves as a reminder of the intersection between perception and policy—how the convictions of those in authority can drive decisions, regardless of empirical evidence. Thus, dismissing the Age of Disclosure as redundant overlooks a vital aspect of our governance: the belief systems of those at the top can shape reality for the rest of us. It’s worth examining how these beliefs influence actions and, consequently, our lives. Thanks for shedding light on this important issue!