The UAP hearings in the US - does any of this actually mean anything for UK disclosure?

Right, so I've spent the better part of this week going through the transcripts from the recent US Congressional UAP hearings and I have to say, whatever your position on all this, the tone has shifted dramatically from even five years ago. We've got credentialed military witnesses saying under oath that non-human intelligence is operating in restricted airspace. Whether you believe them or think they're deluded or lying, that's a remarkable thing to be happening in a formal legislative chamber.

My question for the forum is: does any of this actually have downstream implications for the UK? The MoD closed its UFO desk back in 2009, citing lack of evidence for anything of defence significance. But that was before all this American business kicked off properly. Has anyone submitted any recent FOI requests to the MoD or DSTL? I did one in 2021 asking about any post-2009 internal assessments and got back the usual no information held which could mean precisely nothing or precisely everything depending on your level of cynicism.

I'm not a full believer, for the record. I'm what I'd call a reluctant agnostic - I think something genuinely strange has been documented, but I remain deeply unconvinced that the US government has alien craft in warehouses. The leap from something weird is happening to we have recovered non-human biologics is a very large one and I'd like some actual evidence before I plant my flag.

Anyway. Curious what people think. Is the UK government watching all this and quietly bricking itself, or have they known for decades and are just waiting to see how the Americans play it?

Honestly mate the MoD no information held response is the most predictable thing in British bureaucracy. I've done seven FOIs over the past decade on various topics ranging from Rendlesham Forest follow-up investigations to the Calvine photograph and the responses range from stonewalling to what I can only describe as aggressive boredom. The Calvine one was interesting though - they sat on that image for fifty years before it came out via a retired MoD press officer. So clearly something was worth hiding, even if it turns out to be a prototype aircraft or a weather balloon with delusions of grandeur.

I'll be the skeptic here since someone has to. The US hearings were theatre. David Grusch is not a firsthand witness - he's reporting what other people told him, which in evidentiary terms is hearsay dressed up in a military uniform. The reason it sounds credible is because Americans have a cultural tendency to treat anyone who's worn a flight suit as an unimpeachable source of truth. I'm not saying he's lying, I'm saying the chain of evidence is extremely long and thin.

As for UK disclosure - we don't have the same defence contractor culture or the black budget infrastructure that generates these stories in the US. If anything anomalous was found near RAF Bentwaters back in 1980 it's either long since been classified into oblivion or it was a lighthouse and some lads who'd had a few. I know which explanation requires fewer assumptions.

I know which explanation requires fewer assumptions.

With respect, the lighthouse explanation for Rendlesham has always been a bit of a stretch. We're talking about multiple witnesses, military personnel, tracking on radar, and physical indentations in the ground. You don't have to believe in alien spacecraft to accept that something physically anomalous occurred. The lighthouse is miles away and the reported movements don't correspond. I'm tired of that particular debunking being treated as settled - it isn't.

To actually answer the original question: I think the UK government is watching the US proceedings very carefully and saying absolutely nothing publicly, which is exactly what you'd expect. There's no political incentive to open this up domestically. The Americans have a congressional culture that allows these things to surface. We have a culture of polite institutional silence. Any minister who stood up and announced a UAP investigation would be laughed out of the Commons before teatime. That's not evidence of a cover-up, it's just how this country works.

Former RAF signals, won't say where or when for obvious reasons. The idea that the MoD has zero interest in anomalous aerial phenomena is laughable to anyone who's actually worked in that world. Whether the interest is because they think it's foreign technology, domestic technology they've lost track of, or something else entirely - I couldn't say. But no interest? Come off it. The desk closure in 2009 was a public-facing decision. What happens behind closed doors is a different matter entirely and I'll leave it at that.

Former RAF signals, won't say where or when for obvious reasons.

Every forum has one of these and I mean that in the nicest possible way. Not calling you a liar - I genuinely have no idea - but the anonymous insider post is such a staple of these discussions that it's become almost impossible to evaluate. If you do have something concrete, even something that can be corroborated indirectly, that would be far more useful than a nudge and a wink. Until then it's just vibes, isn't it.