Why UFOs/UAP are both a risk and an opportunity, according to Luis Elizondo

"Why Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Are A National Security Risk And Also An Opportunity For Progress," says the headline of Luis Elizondo´s article for Medium, published on the 4th of September, 2018.

Based on the title ("And Also") of Elizondo´s article, it seems one keyword in the ongoing careful and selective disclosure process is balance. A balance between satisfying the public's need - and right! - to know what their government knows about the UFO phenomena, and the government's need to keep some information and material classified so it doesn't fall into the hands of a foreign adversary.

From a military and a national security perspective, I can buy that argument. But in my mind, there is a contradiction in Elizondo´s reasoning in his article, because he is also saying that "the U.S. knows less than it should, and perhaps much less than our adversaries," referring to the factors that the U.S. Government (USG) looks at when determining whether an unknown entity is friend or foe: capabilities, intentions, vulnerabilities and exploitability. So, is the USG hiding their lack of knowledge about the UFO phenomena from foreign adversaries in fear of and in embarrassment to show its own vulnerabilities and lack of capabilities, rather than covering up some exotic technology for the public?

The balance for the USG - or the national security state apparatus - is between the risk of too much openness, transparency and too little secrecy, or vice versa. What can the consequences be from a national security perspective of telling too much or too little to the public and media?

But as Elizondo wisely writes, the concept of risk is subjective: "The significance of that risk depends on who you ask." I believe this is one reason that the ongoing disclosure is going to be a complex and slow process to reach a consensus on. I can imagine the many reactions from congressional representatives and other influential individuals when they are being briefed about the UFO-issue by the "To the Stars Academy" (TTSA). And I can imagine the many views on and opinions about "what" and "how" to do with the UFO-issue and disclosure.

Also remember, this preparation- and educational phase, which I am writing about in a previous post - of politicians, media and lawmakers, is not only going on in the USA. The careful and selective disclosure process - or the preparation- and educational phase of the process - is not yet so visible in Europe, but I believe some select individuals in different European countries are being read into the UFO-issue as well, and as we speak.

In my country, Sweden, there were no or very little news or mentions in the mainstream media about, for example, the AATIP-articles by the New York Times in December, 2017. So the careful and selective disclosure process that has got a lot of mainstream media-attention in the USA has gone unnoticed by most of the Swedish people. Hence, one reason I wanted to start this blog.

On a more hopeful note, Elizondo is saying the following about the balance between government transparency and secrecy about the UFO phenomena: "As someone without a political or religious agenda, I´m free to say the rewards outweigh the risks in this situation." 

Luis Elizondo is obviously not only referring to himself as a civilian, or to his personal opinion. It is said by a man with an insight into the UFO phenomena that few people have, and who is very careful with his public statements. His sentence on "the rewards outweigh the risks" is mainly intended to reach and affect influential individuals that may not yet have decided what to think about the UFOs: "friend or foe?"

The last third of Elizondo´s article is both interesting and to the point. Those last paragraphs is, I assume, directed to the more conspiratorial faction of the ufo-community, and he also ties back to one risk for, in this case, the USG being too secretive about its knowledge of the UFO phenomena (which according to Elizondo is "less than it should be", whatever that means):

"Secrecy empowers people selling their snake oil and YouTubers profit from peddling their ill-informed narratives about UFOs." 

In the last paragraph, he writes:

"The more knowledge people have, the better they will be able to master their own destinies, and not be held hostage to the monsters of their imaginations."

Well put, by Luis Elizondo.

Before I forget to mention it: Don't miss the neat "detail" at the beginning of Elizondo´s article. It comes in the 7th paragraph from the top which starts with the sentence "As a species..." I leave it up to the reader to speculate what Elizondo is trying to convey (if anything) with his "detail" in the form of a link that leads to the Roswell incident.

More of my thoughts on Luis Elizondo´s article.

I assume that Elizondo knows a few things about how to write a report, an article and so on. If that is the case, then he knows that the beginning and the end are where you should put the most important information. Simply because that is how our memory works: we remember the first and last bits of information and often forget the ones in the middle. 

With a string of numbers -- 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 0, 4, 8 -- it is pretty straightforward to test that "memory-rule."

With a text, it is a bit more complex, because we are not only dealing with working- and long-term memory but also with "meaning." That is, as readers, we have to interpret the meaning of words, sentences and how they are put together -- the relations or pattern between them. Then you have paragraphs that also can have certain relations with each other, and of course, we have to consider the author and the context. 

Ok, I will not make this more complicated than necessary, but I think it is important to be aware of the power of words, and particularly the meaning and associations a word can elicit in different readers. And perhaps the most important factor of all: the emotional effects words can have on a reader. 

Why do I bring this up? Because Elizondo's article is dealing with a topic that is highly charged with emotions and personal opinions and beliefs to most of us who are interested in and are following the UFO phenomena and disclosure. So, we have to read Elizondo's article with as much detachment as possible and with impartial eyes. 

Also keep in mind, the article is written by a man who seldom utters an irrelevant word. As a former military and counterintelligence officer, he is an expert in communication. And as with every skill or tool, you can use it for good or bad.

A second, and important, thing to keep in mind is that Luis Elizondo - because of his very good and sharp communication skills - has been put in the spotlight to represent a collective voice and effort. So, I do not think Elizondo put together the article all by himself (well, he probably wrote the article, but the content was likely vetted with others). 

In this article, I think Elizondo is using his communication skills for the greater good. Without having read, seen or heard every article or public appearance, he made the last eight to nine months, I get the sense that he is bolder in his statements about the USG's national security-policy regarding UAPs. Also, notice that he's using the word "secrecy." Perhaps his patience is running out?

The first and last part of the article ends with the same message, or meaning, even if formulated in slightly different ways. That is, he is connecting the beginning and the end of the article, or narrative if you will, and repeating his message. Respectively, the first and last part ends with:

"Declassifying certain information... with the public could lead to new technological discoveries..." and,
"The more knowledge people have, the better they will be able to master their own destinies..."

 As I interpret the article, the main point Elizondo is making -- the delivered message from the collective he is representing -- is that the disclosure of certain information about UAP is not only safe to do, but it could also be beneficial for society and the world. Think about it. That is not small potatoes. 

Remember Elizondo´s chess-allegory at the very beginning of the article. He is playing chess when he uses words as "certain" and "could." He is also playing chess in the title of his article. Instead of "but also an opportunity, " he writes, "and also an opportunity." Remember the power of words and the crucial balance in the ongoing disclosure-"game."

I think he genuinely believes that "certain" information is ok to declassify at this point in the disclosure, but I also think that he genuinely believes that other types of information should not be released to the public in this phase of the disclosure-process.  

The "could" is Elizondo playing chess. He knows that sharing certain information about UAP with the public will lead to new technological discoveries, and "new forms of medical research, and a broader view of how humanity understands reality."

But who or whom is he playing chess against? I don't think he is playing against the ufo-community or the disclosure-movement. In fact, based on the content of his article, I think he is playing chess on the same side of the chessboard as everyone else who wants a disclosure. However, he knows that a quick and aggressive attempt to strike out the King is not the right strategy with his adversary on the other side of the board. We can only speculate or make an educated guess to who/whom that adversary is/are. 

So, all the above makes me think that Elizondo has become bolder, or more clear, in conveying what he and the TTSA want and where they stand on the question of disclosure. I get a sense that he is back in a counterintelligence-mode :) but this time around, perhaps, directed against some "not-so-keen-on-disclosure"-faction within his former employer. 

The sentence "broader view of how humanity understands reality" is, of course, intriguing, and it ties in with a paragraph, again, in the last part of the article. I take it a little out of context here, but the paragraph in the last part of the article ends like this:

"What our ancestors thought were sea monsters are great white sharks, blue whales, and giant squid. It turns out they're just another part of our natural environment."

Before the metaphor with sea monsters turning out to be other species part of our natural environment, he writes, also in the last part of the article: "At this point, there's no question whether UAPs are out there - they are."

We know from before that Elizondo, and the others in TTSA (except for Tom DeLonge), have been, and still are, reluctant to use terms as "extraterrestrials", "aliens", etc. One obvious reason for their consistent avoidance of those terms is because they are riddled with all kinds of connotations and associations.

However, I think another and perhaps a more pertinent reason is the fact that the UFO phenomena cannot solely be understood and explained in terms of physical objects maneuvered by physical beings. I have in several and previous posts talked about how this complexity is one of the strongest drivers in maintaining the secrecy of the UFO phenomena. 

But it is easy for people to understand what Elizondo is saying with his metaphor of sea monsters and the sentence about broadening our view of how we understand reality. Yes, he is probably saying that we have neighbors out there in the universe and that some of them have been visiting Earth for some time. At the same time, I don't think that it is the only thing he is alluding to with "broaden our view of how we understand reality." 

That is why I call the ongoing disclosure for a careful and selective disclosure process. Or you can think of it as the world being in a preparation- and educational phase. Bit by bit, step by step, and carefully, people are going to be facilitated to broaden their understanding of our reality and what is part of our natural environment. And probably has been all along. Careful means it is going to take time. 

So, I am cool with the "careful" part in the disclosure process, but I am worried about the "selective" part. 

I can imagine a chess game on a cosmic scale taking place behind the scenes and away from the media's and the public's awareness. 

Disclosure is here. It is happening. But it is going to be a slow process rather than an event. The only question now is in what way and in which form the "selective"-part will play out.

Are we in the future going to get the real, unbiased, and unfiltered truth of the UFO phenomena, or are we going to get a truth that will benefit the few?

I believe the answer is going to be very much up to us in the public. And if we choose to believe or disbelieve the information and material about the UFO phenomena that are in the pipelines. Yes, sound skepticism is going to be necessary, but not paranoia. A detached analysis of the information coming from the Department of Defense, and other places, is going to be necessary, but not knee-jerk reactions. 

Anyway, I choose to be carefully optimistic about this time around. If Luis Elizondo's words truly reflect what is in his heart, and in the hearts of the collective he is a part of, then I think we have some exciting and fascinating times to look forward to.

"The more knowledge people have, the better they will be able to master their own destinies, and not to be held hostage to the monsters of their imaginations." - Luis Elizondo

Take care!

Janne