July 8 is World Disclosure Day. It didn't get as much press as World UFO Day, but that is to be expected. "UFO" has been around since 1950. "Disclosure" is only about 17 years old - a teenager. Jealous? Perhaps.

 

There is a double symmetry to the selection of the date. On July 8,1947 General Roger Ramey held a press event at the 8th Army Air Force Headquarters in Fort Worth, Texas in which he changed the just released story of a recovered crashed disk  near Roswell, New Mexico to that of a retrieved Rawin weather balloon. This was the informal beginning of the now 64-year truth embargo regarding the extraterrestrial presence engaging the human race. For this reason July 8 was chosen as World Disclosure Day to emphasize the need to reverse that now inappropriate policy. 

 

World UFO Day is July 2 selected as a likely date for the crash event in 1947.  Given the annual Roswell Festival is celebrated over the Fourth of July weekend, these two dates bracket that festival.

 

Unless the government experiences a rare moment of citizen/activist appreciation and executes Disclosure on July 8 (PRG is not holding its breath), whichever day Disclosure does take place in whichever country, that will become World Disclosure Day forever after.  

 

Happy WDD.  May A.D. arrive sooner than later.

 

 

The Congressional Hearing Initiative has been rescheduled to launch right after the November 4 mid-term election. This rescheduling is primarily the result of new political developments and the proximity to the election. The political developments include the Benghazi, IRS, and veterans medical care scandals, the Bergdahl prisoner swap, the Sunni insurgency spreading across Syria and Iraq, and last but not least the rapidly developing immigration fiasco.

 

This toxic combination in play during the last months of the congressional election campaigns will make worse a hyperpartisan political climate many thought could not get worse. They were wrong.

 

There are some benefits to this strategy. It provides more time for PRG to raise the level of funding needed to give the initiative a real chance to succeed. The congressional members will have either won or lost the election. The winners will be feeling confident and mandated. The losers, most facing the end of their political career, may be open to doing something profound before leaving office January 3, 2015. The expected launch date is November 5.

The Language of Embargo It will not be easy, but it is time to move on from the language that developed during the first half-century of the truth embargo. First and foremost is the acronym "UFO."    Unidentified Flying Object was push forward and maintained by the Air Force and other agencies. It is now an anachronistic non-sequitur. It is ludicrous. The phenomenon involves piloted (usually) extraterrestrial craft. It is not about flocks of geese turning up on radar or pie pans being thrown from college dorm windows. It is about non-human created machines operating antigravitically in the skies. This term is no less absurd than a government sponsorship of UTP's - unidentified tiny particles - to describe the research into the sub-atomic world. And, of course, in a context where the government claims there is no evidence whatsoever for sub-atomic particles. The term "Ufologist" is perhaps even more offensive. A professional studying the unidentified - forever.      UFO? No. Extraterrestrial craft.  Ufologist? No. Extraterrestrial phenomena researcher. Which brings us to perhaps the most offensive term in the embargo lexicon - "Believer." If you have concluded the evidence amassed confirms an extraterrestrial presence, you are a "believer."  This is no less absurd than introducing a particle physicist to an audience by saying, "Dr. Jones is a believer," and everyone in that audience understands this means Dr. Jones "believes" protons and electrons are real. Pushing a universal tag on anyone who disagrees with state policy or ideology is common and ancient. More recently those who have challenged the official government conclusions regarding the events of September 11, 2001 are called "truthers."  It is not meant to be a compliment. There is a bonus for the truth embargo with "believer" as this is a tag often used for those with religious convictions, thus pairing extraterrestrial phenomena research with religion. This paring was particularly useful during the Heavens Gate fiasco. You are a researcher, investigator, journalist, activist dealing with extraterrestrial related phenomena.  You are not a "believer." As for "alien?" Lose it. The term should be "extraterrestrial."  Suck it up and deal with the syllables. "Alien" has a great deal of baggage, much of which was not innocently attached.   "Cover-up" is misleading. The basic policy of suppression was not illegal. Certain actions along the way may have been so, but not the policy. "Cover-up" inappropriately criminalizes people inside military services and civilian agencies. Many of them privately support Disclosure. It was not a "cover-up;" it is a "truth embargo."   Private persons dealing directly with extraterrestrials are "contactees." Some contactees, perhaps a majority, are "abductees" taken against their will and experiencing varying levels of pain and discomfort. It is misleading, confusing and exopolitically awkward to simply refer to a person in contact with extraterrestrials as an "abductee." At this time there is no consensus term for someone having only telepathic/psychic contact, but "contactee" is not an unreasonable choice.    Extraterrestrials are not "paranormal." The presence of multi-life forms in the galaxy is profoundly "normal."  It is not "paranormal" research. Truth be told, little if anything should be assigned to the paranormal. It should be a short list, and extraterrestrials are not on that list.   "Flying Saucer?"  Please. That's like calling airplanes flying toothpaste tubes. They are craft, ships, vehicles.   Perhaps a more debatable term would be "cattle mutilation." In this instance I offer these suggestions: "animal" not "cattle" as the phenomenon is not limited to cattle, and "harvesting" not "mutilation" as the evidence clearly points to the acquisition of certain tissues.  Thus, "animal harvesting."  On the other hand animal rights activists would certainly assert animals are mutilated when carved up for food. Nevertheless, "mutilation" does not address the purposeful nature of the event.   As for "crop circles?" Harmless, perhaps, but certainly not accurate. I lean toward "agriglyphs."   Does this matter? Yes. All propaganda is built upon language one way or another. The propagandists look for weakness in the used lexicon and/or create their own lexicon to serve their purpose. Don't play their game. Use language which most reflects the truth as discovered.    Stephen Bassett San Mateo, CA June 2014