Gene Sticco

FIRST LOOK 🎬👀🎞️ Infinity Disclosed InfinityDisclosed.com The Černohajev archive (cernohajev.omeka.net) delivers independent engineering documentation from a Soviet program that’s parallel to Western whistleblower testimony and the Congressional record. It functions as a Rosetta Stone for case and document corroboration, available to anyone in the field who chooses to reference it. The archive strengthens almost every legitimate piece of evidence already built over decades from declassified documents, to witness reports and whistleblower testimony. “Who are these people and why do they matter?” - most important, we are people who have NOT been told by any government agency what we can and can not say. We didn’t come through a pre-coordinated disclosure media pipeline. We didn’t accept offers to “go into the SCIF” where the information could then be controlled. We made a discovery, we investigated it, we published it ALL - publicly, translated, accessible. THEN we began talking about it, inviting the public to use it for their own research. We matter because unlike others who come to possess documents we didn’t gate-keep them. We didn’t hand them over the Government. We didn’t hide them from the public so our buddies could get a sweet government contract. We delivered them to the public - lock, stock, and barrel. And we matter because we’re just as credentialed, if not more so, than anyone else. Who’s in the video - The daughter of the Scientist (who also holds a Masters in Engineering); myself (a retired US Air Force Nuclear Weapons Systems Security NCO; US Intelligence contractor, and corporate whistleblower in a case that’s gone before the UK Supreme Court); a MUFON Massachusetts lead investigator and member of its national case review team (also a MEng); and two Investigative Journalists and experiencers. And others who bring additional views and experience to the story who aren’t in this video. The work matters because it leads to at least 75 US Government programs all by “the usual suspects,” because it provides a public, historic, and scientific timestamp against which every aspect the phenomenon can be measured. It matters because it demands uncomfortable questions that can be posed to almost every leading voice and across the US Government - and the people who we’d expect to be asking those questions avoid engagement the most. So now, we the public, need to demand the questions to be asked and the answers we deserve; because this is the one piece of evidence they have no way and no leverage to control. The comments below are likely to be filled with those faceless, anonymous, burner accounts throwing daggers and accusations with zero evidence; perhaps the more popular “debunkers” try to take a shot at discrediting too. The public already knows the game. The science stands on its own merits. Put in the work or STFU.

@InfinityDisclsd In addition to the KGB UFO files released in 1991 and described in my books, Gene’s files comprise concrete evidence. I posted my video re KGB many times, no need to do so again Will the powers-that-be pay attention? Invite to their hearings? I don’t know. Will keep researching.

@RussianUFOlogy There’s too much of non-US evidence that tells the whole story so they’ll just keep their blinders onto it

THE ORIGINAL RUSSIAN UFO FILES Unredacted. Published. Public. cernohajev.omeka.net/items?page=3

We’re in more agreement than you think. While this particular post dealt with challenges of the broader “market” for someone thinking they’ll make a career of some kind in what is a niche field, what you raise is the crux of the problem - that the structure of what Ufology has become incentivizes and audience rewards bad actors.

@InfinityDisclsd I disagree. The grifters & charlatans ruined the field - UFOlogy needs to be destroyed.

Ufology Does Not Owe You a Living: The Personal Grievance at the Center of the Disclosure Economy This piece circulating argues there should be more money in ufology, that researchers and creators in the field are systematically undercompensated, and that the audience's reluctance to pay constitutes a moral failure. The original article is right about one thing: there is a pattern in this community of using ‘grift’ to police almost any attempt at monetization, and creators will burn out if all serious work is expected to be free - but the argument is built on a personal memoir of poverty followed by a transposition of that experience onto the field as a whole. It's the wrong diagnosis. The framing presents a personal career problem as a structural problem of an entire field, and the rhetorical move at the center of the piece is what produces most of the disclosure economy's actual pathologies. Compensation for serious work is legitimate. Books, papers, documented archives, original investigations, sustained research. Nobody serious disputes that researchers should be paid for the work they produce. But the argument under examination is different. It says: I chose to build a career in this field, the career is not paying me what I want, and the audience that will not fund it at the level I require is failing the cause. That is a personal grievance with the market for a niche. It is the same grievance that opera professionals could make, that indie documentary filmmakers could make, that working poets could make, that academic philosophers could make. None of them make it, because the niche reality of those fields is treated as a fact about the world rather than a moral demand on the audience. The piece sidesteps that comparison by elevating the topic. The entire load-bearing premise is one phrase. "The most important topic in human history." If you accept that elevation, audience indifference becomes a moral failure and the rest of the argument follows. If you reject the elevation, the argument collapses to: I picked a niche, please pay more. That elevation is not the audience's responsibility to accept. It is the writer's responsibility to demonstrate. The way you demonstrate the importance of work in a research field is by producing work that survives scrutiny. Writing essays asserting the importance and asking why the money has not followed does not accomplish it. But there is a deeper issue underneath all of this. A field has to decide what it is. A research field is organized around verifiable output. The economic structures that grow up around it, books, conferences, institutional positions, are delivery formats for the underlying work. The optimization function is truth-tracking. A content category is organized around audience attention. The economic structures that grow up around it, subscriptions, engagement metrics, agency representation, are extraction mechanisms. The optimization function is reach. You cannot run the first as if it were the second without the second consuming the first. That is the actual structural problem of the disclosure economy, and it is not solved by demanding the audience pay more. It is produced, in significant part, by exactly the agency model the Pursuing X reply positions as the answer. An agency is not a champion of the field. An agency is a service vendor whose product is client revenue growth. Its incentives optimize for whatever performs in the feed. Cliffhangers perform. Indefinitely deferred revelation performs. Confirmable claims that turn out wrong do not perform, because they close the loop. The monetized drip is what the agency model produces when you point it at a research topic. It is also a model with a structural interest in the question never resolving, because resolution collapses engagement. That is not a conspiracy claim. It is the math of the business model. Agencies amplify whoever pays them. They do not select based on rigor, originality, or contribution. The figures who get the agency treatment are the figures who already monetize well enough to afford the fees. That is the opposite of supporting the people doing the most important work. Adjacent serious fields do not have this layer for a reason. Science journalism has editors and outlets. Academic research has institutions and peer review. None of them have a sector of agencies whose product is to build a business around a figure in the field. When that sector forms inside a field, it is a sign the field has begun to organize around personality and brand rather than around work product. The question for ufology is what it wants to be. If it is a research field, the model is books, papers, archives, documented investigations, free distribution of the underlying evidence with paid premium formats around it. If ufology is a content category organized around audience revenue, then the agency model is the natural endpoint, and the field will produce exactly what every other content category organized around audience revenue produces. Optimized cliffhangers. Permanent unresolution. A class of intermediaries whose financial outcomes depend on the question never closing. That is what the disclosure economy is. The argument that there should be more money in it is an argument for accelerating exactly the dynamic that has hollowed the field out. The personal grievance is not the audience's problem. The framing that converts personal grievance into moral demand on the audience is the field's actual problem. The agency layer that monetizes the framing is the most refined expression of it. The structural point holds in every case. Choosing a niche means accepting the economics of the niche. Producing important work in that niche may or may not be rewarded by the market. The audience that does not pay enough to sustain the career one wanted is doing nothing wrong. It is making the ordinary decisions audiences make. If anything, the Strieber case strengthens the argument rather than weakening it. He has done the work. He has the credentials. He has built the monetization layer. He has the demonstrable output. And he is still struggling. That is what the niche economically supports. The field is doing what fields do. The writer who chose it is responsible for that choice.

@galaxopithecus You’re exactly right and the fact that you have somebody like Matthew Brown talking about contracts and business arrangements has to throw into question what’s really going on with these people behind the scenes?

Personally I was confused about how content creators, academic researchers, and whistleblowers seem to be all lumped together in the same boat. All three are doing very different things and have different goals, even if they may be connected to the same topic. I've never viewed whistleblower testimony as "content creation" for my entertainment, so I don't understand the comparison of that activity to creative output. The economic consequences of those two "producers" come from very different places. Or am I looking at this the wrong way?

@OzzieFemme1 Not criminal though and I can see that being because of the sound engineering

@InfinityDisclsd I think she was flat too LOL

@OzzieFemme1 Meh, her diction needs work. Theatrics and trills mean nothing if you can't understand the lyric.

our Aussie !! 🌷

His focus on “creators, contracts and business arrangements” is telling. It reads like someone who signed a contract himself, was promised many things that haven’t materialized (perhaps continually told “coming soon” by someone?); and limiting offers he could have pursued. I’ve had a concern that he and Borland seem to be Corbell “exclusives” and I’ve heard other rumblings so maybe it’s time to just ask the question out loud. So let’s have some transparency and disclosure from @JeremyCorbell - Jeremy, have you, your associates, production company, representatives or any individuals or entities representing either, entered into or do you have knowledge of, any kind of contractual or business arrangement with any of the Whistelblowers, which includes any form compensation, non-compete and/or non-disclosure agreements, or otherwise directly or indirectly limits or curates appearances or interviews by whistleblowers on other media or binds them to your media for any period of time, or requires permission or coordination? Publicly share all releases and agreements so the public can have confidence that Whistleblowers are not being limited, restricted, or otherwise silenced and thus prevented from opportunities because of these agreements.

This might be the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen in the UFO community. Here’s Matthew Brown’s statement with a touch of reality: “Hey guys. You should pay me to do absolutely nothing because I threw my career away by admitting to the ODNI that I made up a fake document and it was presented to Congress as real proof of UFOs, labeled a “racist” against Jewish people, and associated with other labels like “treason” and “counter-espionage”. (Jeremy Cornell’s own words) And because of this, I can’t get a job.” This dude throws away his career and wants people to front his expenses to work in “UFOs” instead of just going out and getting a normal job. Entitled is an understatement. Don’t believe me? Checkout the clip from @WeaponizedPod

There is no UAP labor market. There's a media ecosystem of sole proprietors competing with each other for the same audience dollars over Patreons, Substacks, conference seats, ad shares. There's no employer. The "billionaires" don't exist in any operational sense that matches the framing. You can't organize a union against a boss who isn't there.

Fair compensation for UAP workers is an urgent issue. The people taking the risks, creating the value, and opening new opportunities are too often exploited by status quo billionaires and businesses that know they are vulnerable. The community should support its creators. Creators should also demand fair compensation, clean contracts, and ethical business arrangements. Is it time for an international UAP labor union?

@chrisramsay52 @JustAC4t @JeremyCorbell Chris - does he clarify or reconcile the glaring obviously gap that in the early 1990’s there was no such position as a Head of Cybersecurity? That job title didn’t emerge until the late 90’s-early 2000s

Tomorrow, Jeremy Corbell Joins me in the SCIF. Full interview drops at 12pm et on the Area52 Youtube Channel and Spotify.

@Truthpole Hope to have an interview soon with a former Soviet fighter pilot who chased a UFO over the Baltics in 1990

🚨 BREAKING - A newly released GOV UFO File regarding 'Beings' shooting down a Russian Cosmonaut while trying to recover a craft. If this assertion were accurate, it would undoubtedly constitute a global national security concern.

Great week back in DC - got a lot accomplished including getting “Infinity Disclosed” (a treatise on disclosure, National Security and the Soviet framework that connects them) to the offices of @realannapaulina @RepEricBurlison and other committee members; joining @WhistlingMike in a number of meetings to advance his work; meeting with an former teacher who is now the Vatican Secret Archives Archivist based at the Vatican Embassy; as well as dinner with @BobMcGwier_N4HY and coffee with @RFKJrMission 🙏 As I come up on my first year of bringing my father-in-laws works forward (published in EngineeringInfinityBook.com) and faced the challenges of trying to break-through through the “Disclosure Pipeline Gatekeepers” - the same “Champions” whose business models depend upon monetizing the PURSUIT of disclosure rather than ACTUAL disclosure while they’re advising these same officials and making them accomplices in many ways. All I can say and advise is that it takes action to get action and a willingness to stand-up to the powerhouses in the UAP Entertainment Complex they’ve created; that the structures they’ve created are just as much a hinderance to disclosure as the secrecy they claim to be fighting; and we shouldn’t accept trading one form of control for another. Name it. Call it out. Stop rewarding it.

WORD OF THE DAY - Corbelleria is an Italian noun meaning "nonsense," "rubbish," "silly action," or "stupid mistake," often used in the plural form corbellerie to describe empty words or foolish actions. It refers to actions, words, or things that are inconsiderate, nonsensical, or of little value.

Sometimes you gotta show up

More behind the scenes w @WhistlingMike and @VITOUFO76

@BobMcGwier_N4HY I’m in good w the Pope

@InfinityDisclsd You didn't catch on fire? What is your secret? LOL

Angels? Demons? Gong straight to the source! 😉 Vatican Embassy, DC

@LegacyProgramVP @JeremyCorbell All I can picture now is him sitting at that table “they’re stealing my movie mommy!”

Jeremy Corbell (@JeremyCorbell) is actively copyright striking video uploads of his “documentary” on YouTube. The same documentary that supposedly has 8 new UFO videos that he is hiding behind subscriptions to either Amazon or AppleTV. So much for transparency and that there is “no money in UFOs”. Hypocrisy at its finest.