portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

Disclosure Project: Media Blackout

At that event, nearly two dozen witnesses stepped forward and offered their testimony as to personal knowledge of ET's and ET-related technologies. These witnesses claimed top secret clearances and military and civilian accomplishments of the highest order. Some brandished uncensored secret documents. The world's major media were in attendance, yet few reported what they saw, most neglecting to even make skeptical mention.
DEAFENING SILENCE: Media Response to the May 9th Event and its Implications Regarding the Truth of Disclosure

By: Jonathan Kolber


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My intent is to establish that the media's curiously limited coverage of the May 9, 2001 National Press Club briefing is highly significant.

At that event, nearly two dozen witnesses stepped forward and offered their testimony as to personal knowledge of ET's and ET-related technologies. These witnesses claimed top secret clearances and military and civilian accomplishments of the highest order. Some brandished uncensored secret documents. The world's major media were in attendance, yet few reported what they saw, most neglecting to even make skeptical mention.

How can this be? Major legal trials are decided based on weaker testimony than was provided that day. Prison sentences are meted out on less. The initial Watergate evidence was less, and the implications of this make Watergate insignificant by comparison. Yet the silence is deafening.

Three Possibilities:

If true, the witness testimony literally ushers in the basis for a whole new world of peace and prosperity for all. Validating the truth of Disclosure is probably the most pressing question of our times. The implications for the human future are so overwhelming that virtually everything else becomes secondary. However, the mass media have not performed validation. No investigative stories seeking to prove or disprove the witness testimony have appeared.

This cannot be due to lack of material; in the remainder of this article I will perform validation based upon material handed to the world's media on May 9th.

In my view, only three possibilities exist: the witnesses were all lying, they were all delusional, or they were documenting the greatest cover-up in history. The reason is that if any one witness were neither lying nor delusional, then the truth of Disclosure is established. Let's examine each possibility in turn.

If the witnesses were lying, a reasonable observer would ask, "where is the payoff?" What is the possible benefit to a liar pleading for the chance to testify before Congress under oath? The most likely payoff would be a trip to jail. These witnesses have not openly requested any financial compensation, speaking engagements or the like, and the Disclosure Project's operation cannot support a payoff to dozens of persons. A cursory evaluation of its "products" coupled with a visit to its Charlottesville offices will establish this. Further, the parent organization, CSETI, is an IRS 501C3 nonprofit organization, and its lack of financial resources is a matter of public record. So the notion that the witnesses were doing so for material benefit is unsupported by facts at hand.

To my knowledge, large numbers of persons do not collude to lie without some compelling expected benefit. Other than money, the only such reason I can conceive in this case would be ideology. I wonder what radical extremist "ideology" could plausibly unite such a diverse group of senior corporate and military witnesses, nearly all of whom have previously displayed consistent loyalty to the United States in word and deed? I find none, and I therefore dismiss lying as implausible.

Further, the witnesses claimed impressive credentials. Among them were a Brigadier General, an Admiral, men who previously had their finger on the nuclear launch trigger, air traffic controllers, Vice Presidents of major American corporations—persons who either routinely have had our lives in their hands or made decisions affecting everyone. To my knowledge, in the half-year since May 9th, not a single claimed credential has been challenged in a public forum. Were they lying en masse, such an exposure would be a nice feather in the cap of some reporter. However, it hasn't happened.

If all the witnesses were delusional, then a reasonable observer would presume that such "mass psychosis" did not suddenly manifest. That is, a number of witnesses would have shown psychotic tendencies in the past, in some cases probably including hospitalization. To my knowledge, this has not been alleged.

If they were documenting the greatest cover-up in history, and especially as briefing books that enumerated details of specific cases were handed out on May 9th to the dozens of reporters present, coverage should have dominated the media ever since, with a national outcry for hearings. This did not happen either.

Implications:

What do the above facts and inferences imply about the state of affairs in the media and the credibility of the witness testimony? In my view, they imply a lot.

If the witnesses were neither lying nor delusional, then the deafening media silence following May 9th implies an intentional process of failure to explore and reveal the truth. Said less politely, it implies censorship. (If I am right, this is itself an explosive statement, worthy of significant media attention—which it will not receive.) The only stories comparable in significance to May 9th would be World War III, a plague decimating millions, or the like. Yet between May 9th and September 11th, the news media was saturated with stories that are comparatively trivial.

Briefing documents were provided to reporters present. These books provided much of due diligence necessary for those reporters to explore the truth. However, neither Watergate-type coverage nor exposure of witness fraud has followed.

One of the witnesses reported how he became aware of 43 persons on the payrolls of major media organs while in fact working for the US government. Their job was to intercept ET-related stories and squelch, spin or ridicule. If we accept his testimony as factual, it provides a plausible explanation for the deafening silence following May 9th.

There is a bright spot in this situation. Some of the media did provide coverage, if only for a few days. This suggests that those who control media reporting do not have a monolithic power; they can be circumvented. The event did run on the internet and was seen by 250,000 viewers, despite "sophisticated electronic jamming" during the first hour (words attributed to the broadcast provider, not the Disclosure Project). Indeed, it continues to be fully documented at the Project's web site.

Conclusions:

Since an expose of witness deceit or mass psychosis would itself have been a good, career-building story for some reporter, but no such story has appeared, I conclude that these witnesses are who they claim to be.

If these witnesses are who they claim to be, then they presented testimony they believe truthful. Yet no factual detail of any of that testimony has since been disputed in the media. Half a year is enough time to do the research. I believe the testimony is true as presented.

If the data is true as presented and the media are essentially ignoring what is indisputably the greatest story of our era, then the media are not performing the job they claim to do. Either they are being suppressed/censored, or they do not believe the public would find this subject interesting.

The tabloids continuously run stories on ET-related subjects, and polls show high public interest in the subject, so lack of interest value cannot be the explanation. I conclude that there is active suppression. This is corroborated by the witness claim of 43 intelligence operatives on major media payrolls.

Despite active suppression, enough coverage of the May 9th event happened in major publications and broadcast media to prove that the suppression can be thwarted. An event of significant enough impact and orchestration can break through the censorship. Millions of persons previously unaware of or dubious about ET-related technologies and their significance for ending our dependence on Arab oil have since become aware.

We live in a controlled society, one in which the control is secretive yet masquerades as openness. Yet, as proven May 9th, this control can be overcome by the concerted efforts of determined groups of persons. We must seek such opportunities again.

homepage: homepage: http://www.disclosureproject.org

thank you for this 02.May.2002 18:12

openminded

It is a well-documented FACT that the mass media routinely lies and omits coverage of very significant stories. The more we can stop supporting them (STOP watching television, STOP buying the propaganda papers, etc), the less power they will have. In fact, they will become irrelevant. The controllers of the mass media do not have our best interests in mind, and never have. We need to open our minds to stories that haven't appeared in the New York Times, listen to the evidence, and make our own decisions.

Recent local coverage 04.May.2002 13:51

Agent Orange

A 10,000-pound gorilla offers a mental workout
Bill McDonald
On My Own

If you believe that all UFO sightings are made by swamp-dwelling, moonshine-guzzling hillbillies, then Dr. Steven Greer is your worst nightmare.
Bright, articulate and incredibly dedicated, this medical doctor is the man behind the Disclosure Project, a Charlottesville, Va.-based organization that aims to end government secrecy on the subject of unidentified flying objects and extraterrestrials.
It's not a topic that the media have distinguished themselves in covering. In fact, as I arrived to meet the doctor after he did an interview at the Portland Cable Access studios last week, it felt like I was the one who — as a member of the press — needed to establish some credibility.
This I accomplished by asking if he had heard of "Incident at Exeter," the book that started my lifelong interest in the subject of UFOs. He had.
He mentioned that the percentage of people who now believe in UFOs is greater than the percentage who voted for our recent presidents. I chimed in with, "Didn't both Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter have UFO sightings of their own?"
It was only then that I saw the skeptical look begin to fade. We agreed to talk after he finished his interview.
During the taping, he described UFOs as "the 10,000-pound gorilla that has been kept secret for about 50 or 60 years."
What Greer has done is to gather 400 witnesses — many of them conservative Republicans, by the way — who claim to have firsthand knowledge on subjects such as recovered technology not of this Earth.
One turning point in his efforts was a National Press Club news conference on May 9, 2001, when Greer presented 12 of these witnesses to the media and to the biggest webcast ever on the Internet.
As the Portland interview proceeded, I sat and watched in the darkness, continuing my decades-long struggle to accept the notion that it could all be true.
This is so much more than a 10,000-pound gorilla. It's the ultimate mental workout, dwarfing previous challenges such as when people first heard that the Earth was round.
How far we've come since then, though. Just look at the technological advances in the last century, and imagine if a civilization somewhere was thousands of years ahead of us.
There has to be other life out there, right? How vain is it to think that we're alone in a universe of billions of galaxies that's been around for 13 billion years?
Perhaps you were taught that nothing could ever exceed the speed of light, so there wouldn't be time to cross the incredible expanses of space. But guess what? Scientists recently have broken the speed of light.
After the taping, I asked Greer the big question: If you had five minutes of television time around the world to convince the skeptics that you were right, what evidence would you show? Would it be the Belgium sightings? That's one of my personal favorites: hundreds of viewers, pictures, radar, scrambling fighter jets, the works.
Greer said he'd most like to present his witnesses: "the people who have dealt directly with the extraterrestrial evidence and the bodies."
Wow, the big gorilla was stirring again.
Incidentally, Greer's uncle, Macon Epps, worked on NASA's lunar module, which brings up an interesting point: We already have indisputable proof of bizarre creatures traveling through space — namely, us.
Bill McDonald is a Portland writer and musician.

about UFOs and the media 04.May.2002 23:05

mussed coif

I've recently finished reading a book on the subject of US media coverage of the UFO phenomena called 'The Missing Times: News Media Complicity in the UFO Coverup' by Terry Hansen. The author's view of the national media sources is congruent to Chomsky's general view; that it's an outlet for official propaganda for purposes of political and consumer perception management.

For anyone who watched the Disclosure Project and found it interesting, and who is perplexed by the media's avoidance of this subject, I would strongly recommend reading the free excerpts of Hansen's book at Amazon (link below).

In general the concerns raised by Hansen about the national media are probably familiar with most of the folks who visit IMC, but an interesting point of Hansen's research is that the small local newspapers are actually provide fairly good coverage of UFO stories that occur within their communities. For example the 1975 UFO overflights of nuclear missile silos in Montana were extensively covered by the local media but despite the astounding implications and hundreds of credible witnesses willing to go on the record about it, the story was absolutely ignored at the national level.

 http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0738836125/qid=1020577859/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-2182188-2292617