As a public offering, the Uhouse case is uniquely credible. It's the matter-of-fact simplicity of delivery that brings accessibility to his disclosure. And yet, the panorama of circumstance volunteered by Uhouse, presents an untoward paradox to advocates of ufology. His reasoned candor affirms the pithy maxim: untruth is stranger than fiction. Although, with Uhouse, the high-strangeness is not so strange after all. His paradox is how the comprehensive bearing of his account is actually so plausibly down-to-earth. At least, the respective "need to know which Uhouse was obliged to accept, both informs us and certainly belies the fantastic imaginings of what coexistence with space aliens may actually mean. In its most practical translation, the credibility of Uhouse becomes exceptional precisely because it simply makes sense. The enterprise of his alleged career seems easy to under- stand, and is internally consistent.

Thus, the internally consistent details, according to Uhouse, are congruent with related correlations from a history of other sources.

The question is. whether the paradox thickens due to his candor? Why was Uhouse allowed to reveal his story? Those very few ufologists who studied the Uhouse disclosure, know he was very candid in claiming his supervisor-and/or personal security officer of over 20 years- allowed him to disclose some of what he knew. This is why the Uhouse case is totally unlike the Bob Lazar case, about the same basic proposition: human engineering of flying discs at the S-4 site. So, Uhouse would appear not to be so much a controlled "leak" as an unofficial discloser. This is curious, since his candor contradicts the perception there is an official "cover-up.'' For many years it was perceived an official policy existed, accurately defined as a "cover- up''-now evidence actually contradicts this, as how the system actually works, The Uhouse case would, in this light, give good cause to rethink the ongoing vetting of the Majestic Twelve documents. Regarding unverifiable motives-are these docs only available due to the good

As a public offering, the Uhouse case is uniquely credible. It's the matter-of-fact simplicity of delivery that brings accessibility to his disclosure. And yet, the panorama of circumstance volunteered by Uhouse, presents an untoward paradox to advocates of ufology. His reasoned candor affirms the pithy maxim: untruth is stranger than fiction. Although, with Uhouse, the high-strangeness is not so strange after all. His paradox is how the comprehensive bearing of his account is actually so plausibly down-to-earth. At least, the respective "need to know which Uhouse was obliged to accept, both informs us and certainly belies the fantastic imaginings of what coexistence with space aliens may actually mean. In its most practical translation, the credibility of Uhouse becomes exceptional precisely because it simply makes sense. The enterprise of his alleged career seems easy to under- stand, and is internally consistent.

Thus, the internally consistent details, according to Uhouse, are congruent with related correlations from a history of other sources.

The question is. whether the paradox thickens due to his candor? Why was Uhouse allowed to reveal his story? Those very few ufologists who studied the Uhouse disclosure, know he was very candid in claiming his supervisor-and/or personal security officer of over 20 years- allowed him to disclose some of what he knew. This is why the Uhouse case is totally unlike the Bob Lazar case, about the same basic proposition: human engineering of flying discs at the S-4 site. So, Uhouse would appear not to be so much a controlled "leak" as an unofficial discloser. This is curious, since his candor contradicts the perception there is an official "cover-up.'' For many years it was perceived an official policy existed, accurately defined as a "cover- up''-now evidence actually contradicts this, as how the system actually works, The Uhouse case would, in this light, give good cause to rethink the ongoing vetting of the Majestic Twelve documents. Regarding unverifiable motives-are these docs only available due to the good