Disclosure May Be Close… But It May Not Be What We Expect
One point is clear: the American people, Congress, and the world want to know what is known. They are demanding disclosure!
By James Hall,
Co-author of the popular The Sword of Damocles: Our Nuclear Age, now on Audible, Kindle and Amazon books.
“Beneath familiar skies, the unknown remembers us more deeply than we have ever remembered it.”
Art and poetry by James Hall.
For decades, the idea of “disclosure” has carried a simple expectation: that one day, governments would admit we are “not alone.” But what does that really mean? You might be surprised!
In recent months, the conversation has shifted from cautious speculation to increasingly direct concern expressed by senior officials and policymakers. One point is clear: the American people, Congress, and the world want to know what is known. They are demanding disclosure!
Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Christopher Mellon—along with physicist Hal Puthoff—have stated that some UAP exhibit capabilities beyond known human technology and may point to non-human intelligence. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has acknowledged that highly credible witnesses have come forward with accounts that warrant serious investigation. Vice President J.D. Vance has expressed open curiosity about the topic, reflecting a broader willingness among senior leaders to engage with it. Even President Donald Trump, historically cautious about the subject as a whole, has at times acknowledged awareness of the issue and hinted at information that remains classified. He in fact recently criticized former President Barack Obama for referring to UFOs/UAP as “real,” implying that the remarks touched on material he considered classified. So what do these leaders really know that we do not?
Members of Congress, including Representatives Anna Paulina Luna, Tim Burchett, Eric Burlison, and Jared Moskowitz, have gone further—publicly pressing for answers, questioning defense leadership, and insisting that critical information has not yet been fully shared with the public. Since the 2017 New York Times reporting that revealed the Pentagon’s secret Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) and released previously classified Navy encounters with unknown craft—and the subsequent disclosures by Luis Elizondo and Christopher Mellon—Congress has held multiple formal public hearings on UAP, beginning in 2022 with the first open session in more than fifty years, followed by additional hearings in both the House and Senate. Alongside these public proceedings, lawmakers have also participated in numerous classified briefings and closed-door sessions, reflecting the continuing sensitivity of the subject. Across these voices, a pattern is emerging: consistent references to advanced, structured craft; repeated encounters near sensitive military assets; and the deliberate use of the term “non-human intelligence” rather than “extraterrestrial.” What was once dismissed is now being discussed at the highest levels of government with a seriousness that is difficult to ignore.
At the same time, the institutional framework surrounding this issue is evolving. UAP investigation is no longer confined to isolated programs; it has expanded into a coordinated, government-wide effort. Central to that effort is the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), established by the Department of Defense in 2022 to serve as the government’s primary hub for investigating unidentified anomalous phenomena across air, sea, and space domains. Its mandate is to standardize reporting, coordinate analysis across agencies, and assess potential national security implications.
However, AARO has also become a focal point of controversy. While its official reports emphasize data-driven analysis and have found no confirmed evidence of non-human technology, critics—including some members of Congress and whistleblowers—have questioned whether its findings are incomplete, overly cautious, or dismissive of credible testimony.
Under presidential direction, a new interagency body—the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Governance Board—brings together the White House, the intelligence community, the Department of Defense, NASA, and law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, to standardize data collection, coordinate analysis, and accelerate the declassification of UAP-related records. (Within this structure, the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Governance Board serves as the central coordinating and oversight body, aligning priorities and policies across agencies, while the Department of Defense’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) functions as the government’s primary investigative arm, responsible for collecting, analyzing, and assessing UAP data.)
The US Department of Defense has already conducted three releases, or “tranches,” of UAP files. Much of this material remains raw and largely unaccompanied by formal analysis, yet it is not without significance. Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb, for example, has pointed to a particularly intriguing case: a June 2026 report signed by AARO Director Jon Kosloski describing a multi-day incident in October 2003. In that event, law enforcement personnel reportedly observed an “orange mother orb” deploying smaller red orbs.
Whether ultimately explained or not, this case offers a concrete illustration of what some officials have described as “advanced, structured craft.”
Supporting this effort is a newly formalized scientific component. Avi Loeb has been tasked by the White House, AARO, and elements of the intelligence community with assembling a UAP Science Advisory Council—an external group designed to provide rigorous, independent analysis in support of the Governance Board.
Although the council is limited to unclassified data, its existence signals a meaningful shift. The study of UAP is no longer treated solely as an intelligence matter, but as a sustained, multidisciplinary effort embedded across government institutions.
Even so, tensions remain. AARO, despite criticism, continues to serve as the central investigative body, while newly emerging layers of coordination suggest a broader institutional prioritization. The question is no longer simply whether unexplained phenomena exist, but how long they can remain only partially understood.
AARO operates in coordination with a range of organizations—some well known, such as the FBI, and others less clearly identified—pointing to an expanding and still-evolving network of oversight and analysis. Within this context, a recently surfaced DoD document referencing a UAP “Space Tiger Team” offers a revealing glimpse into that structure. The document confirms the existence of a dedicated planning and coordination group focused on improving detection, reporting, and response to anomalous objects, particularly in the space domain. While the term “Tiger Team” may invite speculation, the verified content makes clear that this body is not a combat or recovery unit, but rather a mechanism for organizing interagency efforts and standardizing procedures. The document also indicates a multi-agency effort, including US Space Command, NORAD, US Northern Command, the Air Force and Space Force, as well as intelligence agencies such as the NRO and NSA.
Over the past two years, reports of unidentified drone-like activity have emerged across multiple regions and environments. Sightings in New Jersey in late 2024, similar incidents in Europe in 2025, and swarming behavior observed near sensitive military installations—including Barksdale Air Force Base, Langley, Wright‑Patterson, MacDill, Fort McNair, and Joint Base McGuire‑Dix‑Lakehurst—have increasingly blurred the line between the known and the unexplained.
These are not distant or abstract events. They are occurring near critical infrastructure, within controlled airspace, and in environments where identification is not optional—it is essential.
And yet, many of these incidents resist simple explanation.
Some are categorized as drones, potentially linked to foreign actors or non-state groups. Others are classified as UAP, suggesting phenomena that fall outside conventional frameworks. In many cases, the distinction reflects not certainty, but limitation—the boundary between what can be identified and what cannot.
This ambiguity lies at the heart of the issue.
It also represents an important shift: what was once speculative is now operational. These questions are no longer being asked only by the public—they are being raised by Congress, defense officials, and policymakers responsible for national security. What began as curiosity has become urgency.
And yet, a deeper question begins to emerge.
“Non-human” does not necessarily mean “not from here.”
What if the presence we are beginning to detect is not arriving—but has always been here?
This idea is not new, though it has often remained at the fringes of serious discussion. Some researchers have proposed the possibility of ultraterrestrials—forms of intelligent life that may have originated on Earth alongside us, perhaps residing in environments we barely understand: deep oceans, subterranean regions, or even aspects of reality we can measure but not directly perceive. The term itself is most commonly associated with UFO researcher John A. Keel, who introduced it in his 1970 book Operation Trojan Horse to describe non-human intelligences that may exist alongside or within our reality rather than arriving from distant planets. More recently, physicist Hal Puthoff has revisited and expanded the concept—most notably in his 2022 paper Ultraterrestrial Models—treating it as an umbrella framework encompassing possibilities such as extradimensional entities, cryptoterrestrials, or other non-conventional forms of intelligence.
Viewed through this lens, the growing body of unexplained encounters begins to look less like visitation and more like interaction—brief intersections between human systems and a long-standing, largely unseen presence. Not invaders. But definitely observers and perhaps co-inhabitants.
Reports of unidentified submerged objects (USOs), capable of moving seamlessly “transmedium” between water, air, and space, add another dimension to this possibility. If such phenomena are real, they challenge not only our technological assumptions but also our understanding of the environment itself.
If this interpretation holds any truth, disclosure would look very different from what popular culture has prepared us to expect. There would be no dramatic arrival, no singular announcement—only a gradual realization.
A quiet correction to human certainty.
This may help explain the careful language being used today. Governments may not simply be withholding information—they may be grappling with something that challenges foundational assumptions about biology, evolution, and our place in the world. The hesitation may reflect not just secrecy, but uncertainty.
And perhaps something more complicated: timing.
Would disclosure serve as genuine clarity—or as distraction from more immediate global concerns?
Confirming a presence beyond humanity—but not beyond Earth—raises deeper questions than extraterrestrial life ever did:
How long has it been here?
Why does it appear to observe us?
Does it perceive us in ways we can understand—or in ways we cannot?
And perhaps most unsettling of all: why are these phenomena so often reported near sensitive nuclear sites?
If they share this environment with us, is their presence incidental—or intentional?
One final question continues to linger:
Has contact already occurred?
If disclosure is approaching, it may not arrive as confirmation of distant civilizations, but as a reframing of our understanding of this world. What we are beginning to observe may not be something new—it may be something we are only now learning to see.
The question is no longer whether something is there.
The question is whether we are prepared to understand it.
To read more about UAP and nuclear issues, please check out our book:
Michael and James Hall, authors of The Sword of Damocles: Our Nuclear Age, now available on Audible, Kindle, and Amazon.
