Some quotes from the article.
A bipartisan group of House lawmakers made a public appeal for transparency over reports of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) Thursday, after it was reported top leaders in both chambers were attempting to kill legislation related to the effort.
Interest in UAP sightings and has exploded since a July House hearing when three former Defense Department officials gave testimony on their experience with the phenomena, warning that the sightings could pose national security risks.
Included in that effort is a UAP-related amendment in the Senate’s version of the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a provision introduced by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.).
The UAP Disclosure Act would require the release of government records on UAP no more than 25 years after their creation unless they are found to be of enough risk to national security that they require further classification. The act would also create an official UAP Records Collection and establish a review board for the office.
They’ve been open and transparent. And they say the same things every single time.
UFO conspiracists demanding transparency remind me of crypto people demanding regulatory clarity: They’ve gotten it but they don’t like the answers so they pretend they haven’t.
Exactly. They want congress to tell them there are aliens when congress can’t do that because they don’t have the evidence of aliens.
If you have the time to watch the press conference, Moskowitz, a dem, had some insightful thoughts on why he thinks they aren’t actually being transparent. But either way, as Rubio stated, either this is true or we have a lot of crazy people at the highest levels of government saying it is. Either way it’s a question that begs for an answer. Schumer’s amendment should help us all get to the bottom of it and stop the speculation.
The point is that many don’t believe they have been open and transparent, including people in government and military. Why do you think they have, just because they say they have? If they have been open and honest, then they shouldn’t mind these amendments being passed.
I’d suggest checking out the subcommittee hearing on this from July:
https://www.youtube.com/live/KQ7Dw-739VY?si=FE16gX760e0w7Ydg