I am not absolving people. I am describing a behavioral pattern that has remained for decades, if not longer. If anything, it’s a cautionary tale.

As a Spaniard, I can confirm that this is a great balanced summary of Spanish politics, in my opinion.

I understand Martin Luther King’s quote in its context, but I fail to see the parallel to the situation at hand. Can you elaborate?

How are “white moderates” who tolerated racial injustice similar to moderate parties who suffer electoral losses to far right populist parties? I’m honestly not seeing how the situation is analogous.

When the middle class struggles, they eventually embrace anybody who promises a break from the status quo.

Moderate parties need to ask themselves what have they done so poorly that these extremists are now becoming popular. We’ve seen these sort of authoritarian far-right movements across the globe and I’m not seeing moderates offer a great answer.

Personally, I would rather see a shift towards a sustainable future where the necessities of life, such as food, housing, education, health care and public transit were enshrined.

“How fucking convenient” that they think the laws don’t apply to them.

“How fucking convenient” they get to pick and choose which country to live in, instead of the other way around.

“How fucking convenient” that you move the goalposts as you are proven wrong.

I am in complete agreement with you. At the same time, information will not be made public unless the public demands it. As long as the public remains docile and continues to laugh at everybody who suggests there may be something here, the public will be kept ignorant.

I am an immigrant myself. I followed the law. I did everything I was asked to do. Excuse me if I’m indignant at the idea of other people getting in illegally after all the effort and years it took me.

“How fucking convenient”.

My understanding is that it referred to his allegations that some programs are being funded without the necessary Congressional oversight.

Either way, the matter of fact is that Congress is addressing these concerns regarding oversight, not the reprisals suffered by this particular person. See the recently proposed regulation by Gallagher.

I want to let people in who will contribute to our social system more than they take from it. This is achieved through a selective process, not by opening the doors to whoever wants to live here. That simple.

I really doubt that PhDs have any trouble immigrating legally to any developed country using the existing channels. I did it years ago with just a University degree and some work experience.

What I’m absolutely opposed to is uncontrolled immigration where anybody who feels like it comes to my country. In the same way that I don’t let strangers come to my home without my permission.

When my neighbor is suffering, I address that problem through means other than inviting them to my bedroom.

If the elected Congress is able to rat out these alleged secret programs and brings them back under the standard Congressional oversight, then at least you have the possibility of some information being made public.

I don’t know about you, but if there is indeed a non-human intelligence occasionally visiting Earth, I would like to know, even if details about e.g. their technology aren’t made public.

And if all there is to it is some high-ranking officials making stories up and lying to Congress, I also would want them to be put behind bars for wasting the time of our elected representatives.

There is a huge difference between uncontrolled immigration, where anybody who wants to get in does, and controlled immigration where the host country decides who gets in and under what conditions.

How about we place a safe route for uncontrolled immigrantion right around where you live? See the problem now?

But that is precisely the central allegation of the whistleblowers that we are discussing: that certain research programs have been kept hidden from the Congress. And that is why the Congress has already passed bills to encourage whistleblowers to come out and report what they know specifically about UFOs.

Why did they write such specific legislation? Do you think it may be because they already knew about some whistleblowers that wanted to speak?

Look at this post: respectful comments answering the question and offering objectively verifiable data are downvoted to hell, while comments laughing at the whole subject in a few words are heavily upvoted. The stigma is massive, and yet the subject continues to get traction in both parties in the US Congress, with several bills having passed and further in the pipeline. Perhaps we should consider the possibility that there are some things that we the public don’t know about it.

your focus on government being the ultimate truth-finder is flawed

Oh, no. What I believe is that certain institutions within our governments are the ultimate truth-keepers, because they have the means to be. Look for example at how little the public is allowed to know about national defense (e.g. the design and capabilities of submarines).

What makes you think that the alleged programs that have been supposedly kept secret from the Congress for decades were revealed to Trump? It stands to reason that if such programs existed, they would have been hidden from him as well.

I’m with you that there is no publicly available proof of non-human intelligence. And I agree that the testimony of congresspeople isn’t exactly the best way to ascertain whether something is true.

But I’m not claiming that non-human intelligences are here, I’m merely answering the question posted by the OP: the allegations made by Grusch and other whistleblowers are being investigated by Congress, and that they have shared with Congress testable evidence that has not been made public. That includes program names, names of the people in charge of those programs and the location of some of those retrieved craft.

Everything else is our personal opinion, strongly as we may feel about it. I personally think it is worth investigating these allegations. If the witnesses have lied to Congress under oath, they need to suffer the consequences. But if they haven’t… Well.

> you need to touch grass, the text you sent just has the same allegations, nothing new nothing concrete

The details are classified. You and I don’t get to see them. The people who do get to see the classified evidence, like some of the congresspeople I mentioned, take it seriously. The whistleblowers have allegedly provided Congress with the names of the people in charge of the reverse-engineering projects and the locations of the materials.

Think again about that: the elected representatives with the best access to the most sensitive information take it seriously.

What alternative explanation do you have for multiple congresspeople from both sides of the aisle being willing to investigate these claims and writing new laws to encourage more whistleblowers to come out?

> why have i never heard of flying saucers in africa?

How much news do you get from Africa, generally? You won’t know things when you don’t look for them.

One of the most widely known mass UFO sightings happened in Zimbabwe in 1994 in the Ariel School.

If it was nonsense, why did the Inspector General find his allegations “credible and urgent”, and forwarded them to Congress, where Grusch and other whistleblowers deposed under oath? And why have several Congressional committees announced that public hearings will be held in the upcoming months?

Let’s not make the mistake of thinking that just because evidence has not been made available to us it means there is none. We don’t get to learn the most highly classified weaponry in the Pentagon, why would non-human technology be released any more widely? If you want more information to be made public, go write a letter to your elected officials telling them this matters to you.

It is very much moving forward. Senator Marco Rubio has stated that he takes David Grusch’s testimony seriously. Rubio is a member of the Gang of Eight, the group of people in Congress who receive the most sensitive US intelligence.

Rubio has stated that Grusch is not the only whistleblower who has come forward and testified to Congress. According to him, over the last two years there have been multiple other highly-ranked officials sharing with Congress their first-hand knowledge of secret programs to reverse-engineer non-human technology, corroborating Grusch’s claims.

Senator Gillibrand and Rep. Burchett have publicly announced that in the coming months they intend to hold public hearings to hear the evidence put forth by Grusch and other UFO whistleblowers in various committees in Congress.

If you find the subject intriguing and would like to learn more, I can recommend the podcast Need to Know by Ross Coulthart and Bryce Zabel. Other good sources of information that have also been proven reliable in the past few years are The Debrief and Liberation Times.