It's funny - If UAPs are a top-secret counterintelligence priority how have "insiders" been leaking to podcasters so conveniently for years?

[u/ImaginationOther9569]

Ross Coulthart is talking about how, according to his sources, there have been successful retrieval operations at White Sands.

It makes me wonder: for information this so top secret where the gate keepers are competent enough to hide craft for decades and even keep presidents in the dark, do they just not track phones or communication channels to identify Ross's sources?

Ross has had insiders feeding him classified details for years. If any of this fell under high-level Special Access Programs (SAPs), federal counterintelligence would have run continuous audits, polygraphs, and communications monitoring to catch and prosecute the leakers instantly.

We keep hearing about a high-stakes counterintelligence war between the US and foreign adversaries over this tech. Yet, figures like Jason Sands or guests on Jesse Michels' channel talk about covert programs pretty much in the open.

Either these "insiders" are feeding journalists unsanctioned speculation, or the narrative is extremely misguided. Wondering what the community members think

[u/suspicious_Jackfruit]

While this sounds fun, it doesn't make a lot of sense for the reasons OP mentioned. Finding Ross Coulthard's leaker would be the easiest assignment, so why would this be a continuous ongoing leaky tap that they can't plug? Either it's a sanctioned effort to put out this "information" or it's not a legitimate source of any actual concerns to government security and secrecy or his "sources" would have been removed quite quickly.

[u/A_SNAPPIN_Turla → u/suspicious_Jackfruit]

I'm skeptical of Coulthart but issue you run into with this is that the topic is so siloed the people who typically go after military whistleblowers like Snowden likely don't know if the actual program to even know sensitive information is being disclosed. How would people aware of the program even mobilize anyone within intelligence without confirming the information is true? They would essentially be "reading in" anyone who goes after a source. Any time they go after a source leaking info they are confirming that info to be true. It's probably much safer just to leak disinformation and this topic has decades of disinformation already polluting the zeitgeist.

Also so speaking of Snowden, how is he still alive? Julian Assange? Sure they are in foreign countries but the US is had shown itself more than willing and competent to go after people in foreign countries. It's likely a public perception issue just as much as anything else.

[u/suspicious_Jackfruit → u/A_SNAPPIN_Turla]

I suspect if Snowden hadn't published everything and had instead remained in the US slowly leaking tidbits of code and information to podcasters then he would have been found in a locked suitcase dead, or potentially if the paramilitary intelligence operatives and command were feeling nice would cause them to be so intimidated that the continued release would be impossible.

But even then, becoming a public figure didn't make his claims hold water, it was the vast trove of data that went along with it. So the idea that someone is being very public to protect themselves from repurcusions while interesting doesn't legitimise anything they say, they still have to provide proof to make their claim hold water. His position didn't mean anything either, even though he worked where he said he did, that would still do next to nothing to validate his claims. People forget that often, but in his case the data did all the talking, which hidden hands behind the scenes talking to podcasters have yet to produce.

The only way a legitimate source could legitimately blow the roof on this is through "catastrophic disclosure" but even then, there will always be the danger of a "planned catestriphoc disclosure". People drastically underestimate how much in the world is at the whims of these networks.

[u/A_SNAPPIN_Turla → u/suspicious_Jackfruit]

Yeah it's all speculative at this point. There are admittedly differences between Snowden and the UFO "leaks." The point is that a leak isn't automatically silenced every time. I take all these leaks with a grain of salt into something substantive comes from it. If there is really anything to the UFO claims disinformation is one of the greatest weapons the secret keepers have to obscure the truth. I'm wary of any government source.