top of page
Search
Writer's pictureDan Pontarlier
Nov 235 min read

The COMETA Report: France’s Grand –and Ambiguous– Revelation

In 1999, a group of French high-ranking officials –military and scientific minds among them– decided to draft the COMETA report. Supposedly, this document aimed to shed light on UFOs and reassure us all while they were at it. The result? A 90-page report concluding that “the extraterrestrial hypothesis is plausible.” Yes, plausible... a word so conveniently vague it could justify anything from an alien invasion to a stray weather balloon.


The report didn’t stop at hypotheses. Among its recommendations, it proposed increasing research funding, fostering international cooperation, and –naturally– preparing for a “possible” encounter with extraterrestrial civilizations. All very sensible, if it weren’t for the deliberately ambiguous language. The real question is: are governments taking this seriously, or are these actions a thinly veiled PR exercise while the military tightens its grip behind the scenes? Let’s not kid ourselves: if something is out there, civilian authorities aren’t the ones in the know.


If you think the COMETA report was a rallying cry for transparency, think again. While it hinted at serious national security implications, the accompanying lack of visible urgency or resource allocation screams something else. Could it be that significant resources are already being funneled into these programs, cloaked under layers of military secrecy? After all, the military-industrial complex thrives on control, and if these civilizations (assuming they exist) are here for anything remotely helpful –clean energy, advanced technologies, or global cooperation– that’s an existential threat… not to humanity, but to the status quo.






What Exactly Does “Plausible” Mean?


Let’s pause for a moment to scrutinize that word: plausible. It’s a classic in diplomatic doublespeak – a term that acknowledges something without fully committing to it. It’s the kind of language that governments and militaries love because it keeps options open while committing to nothing. And this brings us to a key point: what if the ambiguity isn’t about protecting us from “mass panic” but about safeguarding geopolitical and macroeconomic control?


Consider this: if extraterrestrial civilizations possess technologies that could, for example, render fossil fuels obsolete or solve planetary crises like climate change, the implications are staggering. The transition to such a paradigm would upend existing power structures. Military secrecy, therefore, isn’t about protecting us from “them” – it’s about protecting entrenched economic and political interests.



Official Investigations in Other Countries


France isn’t alone in its ambiguous approach to UFOs. Governments worldwide have dabbled in the topic, often with similar results: a mix of tantalizing glimpses and strategic omissions. Let’s take a closer look:


  • United States: The undisputed heavyweight of UFO investigations. From Project Blue Book (1952-1969) to the recent All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (2022), the U.S. has spent decades proclaiming its dedication to “researching” these phenomena. Yet, somehow, we’re always left with more questions than answers. And let’s not forget the infamous Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), a covert program revealed in 2017. Transparency, it seems, isn’t exactly their strong suit.


  • United Kingdom: The British Ministry of Defence operated its own UFO desk until 2009. Projects like The Condign Report (1997-2000) concluded that most sightings were natural phenomena. Yet, as always, there’s a stubborn percentage –around 5%– that remains “unexplained.” Their declassified archives make for interesting reading, though they raise more questions than they answer.


  • Brazil: The South American giant conducted the famous Operação Prato (Operation Saucer) in the 1970s, investigating sightings in the Amazon. Officially, the findings were inconclusive, but the sheer volume of documentation suggests there’s more to the story. Coincidence, or strategic silence?


  • Canada: In the 1950s, Canada delved into UFO phenomena through Project Magnet. Although the program concluded without groundbreaking results, there are persistent whispers of findings being buried.


  • Soviet Union: During the Cold War, the USSR initiated the secretive Setka program. Despite the classification of most documents, what has surfaced indicates that the Soviets were either genuinely concerned or keen to maintain the illusion of interest. In true Cold War fashion, it’s hard to tell where paranoia ended, and reality began.




The Role of Military Secrecy


Let’s return to the military. For decades, they’ve been the gatekeepers of UFO data. From radar logs to recovered materials (allegedly), they control the narrative. Recent congressional hearings in the United States have only deepened this intrigue. Testimonies from whistleblowers like David Grusch, a former Air Force intelligence officer, revealed that the U.S. government not only has recovered "non-human biologicals" from crash sites but also possesses high-resolution videos—not just of recovered crafts but potentially of entities themselves. Let that sink in.


And Grusch isn’t alone. Former Navy pilots like Ryan Graves have testified about encounters with unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs), further lending credibility to these extraordinary claims. Yet, despite the gravity of these revelations, the military remains opaque. Why? Because if these testimonies hold any truth, the implications go far beyond national security—they challenge our understanding of humanity's place in the universe.


If extraterrestrial civilizations are visiting, I don’t believe they’re here to wage war. On the contrary, they may be here to observe, assist, or even protect. Yet, the secrecy surrounding these encounters suggests a deeper motive: control. Imagine technologies capable of rendering fossil fuels obsolete or solving global crises like food scarcity. These aren’t just scientific breakthroughs—they’re existential threats to entrenched political and economic systems. And that, for those in power, is a far greater risk than an alien invasion.


Why Now?


You might wonder why this topic is gaining traction now. From whistleblowers to congressional hearings, the UFO phenomenon has gone mainstream in recent years. Is it because governments are finally ready to tell us the truth? Or is it another exercise in controlled disclosure, where we’re fed just enough to stay intrigued but never enough to disrupt the status quo?


Consider this: the recent establishment of offices like the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office might seem like progress. But the truth is, they raise more questions than they answer. Who decides what we’re told? And more importantly, who decides what we’re not? Everyday is clearer that we are not alone in the universe. But the more important question is: who’s really in charge of this narrative? The evidence suggests that governments aren’t the key players here – the military is. And while I don’t believe these civilizations are here to harm us, their intentions are irrelevant if the information is being controlled and weaponized for geopolitical gain.


What if these visitors offer solutions we desperately need –solutions for energy, sustainability, or even societal cooperation? The lack of transparency might not be about shielding us from panic but about maintaining a grip on power. If these technologies and knowledge become accessible, they could empower humanity but also disrupt the global balance of power. And that, for those clinging to the status quo, is the real threat.


In the end, we’re left with ambiguous reports, “plausible” explanations, and a persistent feeling that whatever happens, we won’t know until it’s far too late. If there’s one certainty in all this, it’s that civilians are the last to be told the truth.

So, what’s the takeaway? Don’t let the narrative fool you. Whether the goal is to preserve power, control the masses, or delay the inevitable, the game isn’t about us. It’s about them –both the visitors and the gatekeepers who decide what we’re allowed to know.





Comments

bottom of page