Bryce Zabel
Jun 3 · 6 min read
The New York Times has sources that lay out the essence of what they think will be the UAP report scheduled to be delivered to Congress later this month. It doesn't connect every dot that people in the know are ready to connect, but it's not a whitewash either. The Times headline reads:
U.S. Finds No Evidence of Alien Technology in Flying Objects, but Can't Rule It Out, Either
Here's an interesting aside. What you read above is the headline that the Times settled on but their original headline was "Government Finds No Evidence that Aerial Sightings Were Alien Spacecraft." For whatever reason, they chose to clarify that these UAP might be alien. So there's that.
The UAP report's deadline is June 25th, and we can expect both an unclassified public version and a classified version for Senate and House Intelligence and Armed Services committees.
The source for the Times reporting appears to be multiple "senior administration officials" who have been briefed on the findings of the report being prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence at the demand of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to The New York Times reporters Julian E. Barnes and Helene Cooper.
The report determines that the vast majority of more than 120 incidents over the past two decades did not originate from any American military or other advanced U.S. government technology, the officials said. That determination would appear to eliminate the possibility that Navy pilots who reported seeing unexplained aircraft might have encountered programs the government meant to keep secret.But that is about the only conclusive finding in the classified intelligence report, the officials said. And while a forthcoming unclassified version, expected to be released to Congress by June 25, will present few other firm conclusions, senior officials briefed on the intelligence conceded that the very ambiguity of the findings meant the government could not definitively rule out theories that the phenomenon observed by military pilots might be alien spacecraft.
The rest of the article is a re-hash of the road that has taken us here. The Times own reporting got much of this started in December of 2017, and since then the Pentagon has created a UAP Task Force, Navy videos have been released that are stunning, former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been outspoken, and even former President Barack Obama has weighed in.
"What is true, and I'm actually being serious here, is that there is footage and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what they are.''
Here at Trail of the Saucers we've covered this extensively, and you can find our many articles catalogued here.
Of course, the reporting from The New York Times spurred numerous other news organizations to write about it, using the Times as their source.
One of the first to get an article up was CNN, and it illustrates not only how far we have come, but how far we have to go, based on some of the entrenched silliness that their reporters managed to still place in their article (" US intelligence officials have no evidence confirming Navy pilot UFO encounters were alien spacecraft."
Those who advocate ending the truth embargo on UFO/UAP reality are supposed to be disappointed because CNN reports, "While the uncertainty is likely a blow to the hopes of UFO enthusiasts who were hoping for definitive proof of extraterrestrial life..." CNN goes on to use the sub-headline, "No proof of little green men."
Let me aim a few corrections in the direction of CNN reporters Zachary Cohen, Katie Bo Williams and contributor Barbara Starr -
- First, I am not disappointed, having never, ever thought that a first report would provide "definitive proof of extraterrestrial life." Nor did any of the serious people I know who are part of the movement to call for more truth in the reporting of UAP/UFO reality. All of us know that this is a process that will be accomplished in steps.
- Second, I am not a "UFO enthusiast." That Old School style of reporting is as out-of-touch as calling someone who studies the UAP issue a "buff." It is such a condescending characterization defined to marginalize the truly bright women and men who are studying this phenomenon. Shame.
- And, finally, let's retire the "little green men" trope once and for all. That dismissive description tries to make a serious issue sound silly. Besides, the actual accounts of people who claim to have seen occupants of these craft never describe green men. They're gray and humanoid more often than not, CNN, get your facts right and put away the lazy writing.
The point that should be more and more clear to reporters in the know is that this issue is not a joke, that there is real reason to study the phenomenon, and the interest in the U.S. government and other world governments should make that clear. It's time for reporters to bring their game up a level.
This road, as stated, is a process, one that leads to confirmation, and ultimately, disclosure. It is not something that happens all at once, something that is now abundantly clear, given that we are nearly 75 years removed from the Kenneth Arnold sightings and the Roswell crash of 1947.
Let's lay this one out - Step One: They're real.
For years, the government has confidently assured us that there was nothing to see here. Since 2017, that has changed. Now even Presidents are telling us something is going on that is physical and real.
Step Two: We don't make them.
Apparently, this will now be made extremely clear in the upcoming report. The sources for the New York Times have absolutely confirmed this point. This super-tech is not ours.
Step Three: We don't think Russia or China makes them either.
This is the stage we are at right now. The capabilities of these craft are so advanced that to think that a potential adversary has this technology is not only unlikely but, if they did, it would likely be game over for the U.S. Look for the final report draft to come to come very close to confirming this stage.
Step Four: They might be alien.
If they're real and we don't make them and our adversaries don't make them, it will be clear to all that we have to think of some alternate explanations. Extraterrestrial will have to be on the table. At least some of these craft are being flown by some one who isn't us.
Step Five: We are not alone.
At some point, as the evidence is either released by the governments or confirmed by journalists or whistleblowers, the reality will begin to sink in. That's when we will have some thinking (and maybe drinking) to do.
We are in the middle of a process. After seven decades this is not the end. It's not the beginning of the end. It is, as Churchill said in 1942 after the Second Battle of El Alamein, just possibly the end of the beginning.
People get ready.
Bryce Zabel is the author of three books - A.D. After Disclosure - Surrounded by Enemies: What if Kennedy Survived Dallas? - Once There Was a Way: What if The Beatles Stayed Together?