Hello r/disclosureparty,
I’m proposing a strategic approach for the UAPDA (Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act) that might significantly impact the upcoming NDAA discussions. Here’s the gist:
The Strategy: “Budget Cuts or UAPDA” Framing
We know there’s a slim majority in the House and a significant overlap between the Freedom Caucus and the UAP Caucus. Our approach? Advocate that these lawmakers push for either substantial defense budget cuts or the inclusion of UAPDA in the NDAA. Here’s why:
Defense Budget Cuts: Members like Burchett, Gaetz, and Luna are already inclined toward defense cuts. UAPDA as a More Feasible Option: We position UAPDA as a less drastic, yet meaningful alternative to these cuts. Public Support Post-Disclosure: If a UAP cover-up is unveiled, public opinion could shift dramatically towards supporting defense budget cuts. This potential shift makes the UAPDA inclusion a strategically sound choice for lawmakers.
Why It Could Work:
Political Leverage: We utilize the existing political dynamics and the overlap in caucus memberships to our advantage. Aligned Interests: The strategy aligns with the freedom caucus’s broader goals, making UAPDA a politically viable option. Public Opinion Leverage: Post-disclosure, defense cuts become more politically tenable, giving lawmakers an added incentive to back UAPDA.
Seeking Your Insight:
This strategy is high-stakes and requires careful navigation. I’m looking for your feedback on:
How feasible do you find this “budget cuts or UAPDA” approach? Strategies to persuade lawmakers to adopt this framing. Potential risks and how to mitigate them.
Your insights are critical. Let’s refine this strategy together.
submitted by /u/Omegamilky
[link] [comments]