The entire mass media is converging on the narrative that UFOs are evidence that the US may have fallen dangerously far behind Russia and China in military technology.
MSNBC has former CIA Director Leon Panetta on to explain to its audience that we should assume UFOs are Russian or Chinese aircraft until proven otherwise.
The only new MSM segment I've seen today which didn't promote this narrative was a new interview with Lue Elizondo, who seems to be going out of his way to say that it's NOT Russia or China on Tucker Carlson (who has been shrilly yelling that it could be).
Elizondo is instead promoting the idea that these UFOs are in fact extraterrestrial in origin. Not sure what's going on with that. He may just be a huge UFO buff acting sincerely but being used by the war machine. Worth keeping an eye on.
Overwhelmingly though we're seeing cold war arms race narratives featured prominently.
This is my first time engaging UFO Twitter, and it's been interesting. A lot of well-intentioned people believe this latest UFO narrative may yield more than new cold war escalations, and I think that's mistaken. The US war machine isn't going to suddenly embrace transparency.
There's a common belief in the UFO community that this "disclosure" stuff is the result of popular demand combined with a few rogue white hats inside the national security state, which on paper closely resembles the QAnon narrative. It just doesn't work that way, folks.
In order for public pressure to work, it needs to have some kind of leverage. The public has no leverage or influence over the US war machine to get it to disclose its UFO information. It follows then that this isn't coming out due to popular demand, but for some other reason.
MSM Wastes No Time Using Senate UFO Report To Promote Arms Race
"The New York Times has published an article on the contents of the hotly anticipated US government report on UFOs, as per usual based on statements of anonymous officials" caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/msm-wastes-n…
.@nytimes has published an article on the contents of the hotly anticipated US government report on UFOs, as per usual based on statements of anonymous officials, and as per usual promoting narratives that are convenient for imperialists and war profiteers archive.is/YGsBx
Oh well if the US government has ruled out secret US government weaponry programs, hot damn that's good enough for me. Great journalism you guys.
"You're not going to get any paradigm-shattering revelations from an exploration that's been spurred on by people like Harry Reid and Marco Rubio. Nobody's shattering a paradigm which they serve and profit from." caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/eight-though…
1. There's no getting around talking about this UFO stuff. The fact that it's a story is itself a major story. There's no point trying to look cool by ignoring it, especially given its potentially huge implications in propaganda narratives and the expansion of the US war machine.
Nothing with this much public interest that is also being pushed by the Washington political establishment, by military insiders and by the mass media in cooperation with the Pentagon is likely to go away anytime soon. The narrative needs to be engaged, and engaged critically.
Disconcerting how all the main players in the new US military/UFO narrative are consistently (A) saying it could be ETs and (B) still saying that if it is ETs they may pose a threat. This makes no sense and smells like a very nasty op. Makes no sense for real ETs to be dangerous.
No it isn't. What could a civilization that much more advanced than our own possibly want from us? What could they stand to gain by hurting us? What could we have that they couldn't make for themselves?
To say nothing of the fact that a species which managed to advance that far beyond our level must surely have matured beyond the psychotic murder-and-steal value system humanity is currently at. Otherwise they'd have killed themselves off long ago.
One of the biggest challenges for a developing anti-imperialist, at least in my experience, is learning to differentiate between those who actually want to end the oligarchic empire and those who just want the empire to act a bit more cosmetically nice than it does.
These are two COMPLETELY different positions, especially because the latter is pure fantasy: you cannot have a globe-dominating unipolar power structure that doesn't use violent force to maintain that world order. Yet the two often wind up moving in overlapping circles.
I've never had trouble knowing what my own position is toward the empire, but I've often struggled figuring out who shared that position. There was a long unfolding process of going "Ohh, we're not on the same page at all. You want entirely different things from what I want."
Some want to dismantle the imperial slaughter machine and create a harmonious world; others just want the imperial slaughter machine to give them healthcare. These are two entirely different positions. It's not strange that these factions feud—it would be strange if they didn't.
US progressives who smear The Grayzone and other anti-imperialist media never have any other equally anti-imperialist media that they promote and uphold as good. This is because they are imperialists.