Quote:Well, we’re clearly through the Looking Glass now. See what I did there?

First, we have Barack Obama casually suggesting that extraterrestrials exist. Then Donald Trump appears to confirm it in his own sideways fashion by claiming Obama revealed classified information. Then Trump “truths” that he will instruct the Alphabet Soup Agencies to release everything on extraterrestrial intelligence and their jaunty flying machines.

Let’s pause here.

A Truth post is not an Executive Order. It carries no legal weight. And after a year of partial disclosures—half the Epstein files, none of the remaining JFK files, and precisely nothing substantial on RFK or MLK—we are suddenly meant to believe full-spectrum alien transparency is around the corner?

Forgive me if I don’t hold my breath.

For the record, I am absolutely certain the universe is chock-a-block full of life. Statistically, it would be absurd otherwise. I am also convinced that some of that life has physics advanced enough for interstellar travel. The cosmos is ancient beyond comprehension; we are late arrivals to the party.

I am reasonably sure Earth has been visited over millions of years by non-local civilizations. I also suspect that if such visitations occurred, they may have nudged human development in ways now half-remembered as myth.

But here’s the rub: believing extraterrestrial intelligence exists is not the same as believing governments will tell us anything meaningful about it.

I’ve been fascinated by this subject since reading Erich von Däniken’s Chariots of the Gods as a boy. Over the years I’ve followed the work of Zechariah Sitchin, Immanuel Velikovsky, Jordan Maxwell, Richard Hoagland, Mike Bara, Joseph Farrell, Paul Wallis, Texe Marrs, Richard Dolan and many others willing to question orthodox timelines and tidy narratives. You don’t have to agree with every conclusion to recognize that they are at least asking the forbidden questions.

I’ve seen a few UFOs myself—the closest roughly a kilometer away. Unmistakable. Silent. Not a Chinese lantern or swamp gas. But I have never seen conclusive proof of aliens. I know UFOs exist. I am not convinced extraterrestrials are currently buzzing our airspace like cosmic surfers.

In fact, I find it easier to believe that highly advanced civilizations have existed here on Earth in the deep past—whether directly ancestral to us or not. Geological time is vast. Civilization is fragile. Ice ages erase coastlines. Plate tectonics grind continents. What survives catastrophe are myths, alignments, anomalous artefacts, and inconvenient ruins.

It is not unreasonable to suspect we are living atop a palimpsest.

At the same time, I have no difficulty believing that much of the modern UFO phenomenon is secret terrestrial technology. Governments hide things. That is what they do. The hull design of Spanish galleons was a state secret for centuries. The Manhattan Project was hidden under penalty of death. The F-117 stealth aircraft flew for years before the public knew it existed. If anti-gravitics, exotic propulsion, or radically efficient energy systems were discovered, you can bet your sweet bippy they would be buried under layers of classification and compartmentalization.

Information is power. Secret information is strategic leverage.

I’ve known mariners and submariners—sober, disciplined professionals—who describe encounters at sea that defy easy explanation. I’ve known individuals who claim abduction experiences. I believe that they believe what they experienced. Human perception is fallible, yes, but mass hallucination does not explain everything.

Where my skepticism spikes is when “authorities” suddenly give permission to think a certain thought.

When a former and sitting president begin publicly gesturing toward extraterrestrials in the same news cycle, I do not feel enlightened. I feel managed. I am deeply incredulous of “insiders”, “whistleblowers”, and conveniently timed leaks. I would not trust these people to tell me the time while they are wearing a Swiss watch and standing in front of the Naval Observatory.

Governments weaponise narratives. Always have.

Do I think governments of the world are hiding advanced technologies? Absolutely. If they possess revolutionary propulsion, new physics, or off-world artefacts, disclosure would not be altruistic—it would be tactical. Release would occur only when it serves strategic objectives.

Do I think the United States—or any state actor—will freely relinquish full disclosure on extraterrestrials? No.

Even if little green men landed on the South Lawn and started dancing the Jitterbug before a global press pool, the institutional reflex would not be confession. It would be deflection. Pearl-clutching. Strategic ambiguity. Blame assigned to the Demon of the Day.

States do not volunteer culpability for eighty years of deception.

So, will Trump release anything substantial? Not a chance. His track record on declassification speaks for itself. We’ll get grainy IR footage, a few shrugs, and carefully curated ambiguity. Enough to stir conversation. Not enough to change power dynamics.

Do UFOs exist? Absolutely. I’ve seen them.

Does extraterrestrial intelligence exist? Almost certainly. As Carl Sagan put it in Contact, “The universe is a pretty big place. If it’s just us, seems like an awful waste of space.”

What I want is not more acknowledgement of “unidentified phenomena”. We have plenty of that. What I want is the truth about our past and what has been discovered right here in our Solar System.

Why was there a humanoid head in a lunar crater? Why does Mars display geomorphology that suggests artificiality? What are the full details behind classified aerospace research from the Cold War onward? What do space agencies actually possess in raw data versus what is released?

Those are substantive questions.

But here is the uncomfortable constant: any genuinely transformative information—whether about ancient civilizations, breakthrough propulsion, or extraterrestrial contact—would be immediately weaponized. It would alter economics, energy systems, geopolitics, and public psychology. That makes it too valuable to release casually.

Real disclosure would not look like a slip of the tongue or social media post. It would look like a paradigm shift.

Until then, what we are witnessing feels less like revelation and more like narrative management—allowing the idea to circulate while maintaining operational control.

I remain convinced that the universe is teeming with life and that humanity’s past is more complex than textbooks allow. I remain open to the possibility that Earth has hosted advanced cultures before ours. I remain certain that governments conceal technologies when it suits them.

What I do not believe is that the same institutions that hid nuclear weapons programs, stealth aircraft, intelligence coups, and classified research for decades will suddenly embrace radical transparency because it trends well online.

Through the Looking Glass we may indeed be.

But I am not mistaking the reflection for the truth.

Si mundus vult dicipi, ergo dicipitatur.

=====
Our cinematic theme-based pairing of the day is one of my personal favorites, Men in Black (1997). It’s hard to believe this one is 30 years old and they haven’t tried to remake it for “modern audiences”. Great satire overlays serious points. If you need a double feature, then spin up They Live (1988). Same sarcasm, different approach.