Yes, government and military officials have lied to Congress or, at the very least, obscure the truth. Consider that, in many cases, these officials are activel

Yes, government and military officials have lied to Congress or, at the very least, obscure the truth. Consider that, in many cases, these officials are actively serving in their official capacity and have a sworn duty to protect the country. Preventing the disclosure of certain information is a major part of what they do. Since you mention the "yellow-cake uranium," you should read the history of that situation. It wasn't a single person's word before Congress that Saddam Hussein had the uranium but the result of an elaborate document forgery which was proven as false within a year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries However, each case you cite is either the justification or result of a highly-publicized event (Iraq invasion, Snowden investigation, Afghanistan withdrawal, Ukraine war). The UAP situation is quashed and remains a verboten subject in many circles, particularly in the media. As such, the UAP situation is distinct from those you mention. You do suggest that this may be a way to raise military funding. If money was the end goal, they'd say that the US military could disable UAPs if we had more firepower or plowed more money into R&D to realize next-gen systems sooner. None of that was said, and both the witnesses and members of Congress directly contradict this theory. The witnesses admit that our existing military systems and any that we may build in the next "10-20 years" are inadequate to deal with the observed UAPs. Some of my favorite questioning in the hearing came from AOC, who, when asking about increasing transparency in reporting UAP incidents, asked: "For the record, if you were me, where would you look? Titles? Programs? Departments? Regions? If you could just name...anything." Grusch responded he tell her "specifically" where to look but only in a classified briefing, which she took well enough. >This is FUD until there’s evidence — these people have zero credibility. They're individuals with verified and decorated military service records and have provided sworn testimony to Congress under penalty of perjury, which is far from zero credibility. As an anonymous individual posting on Hacker News, I have zero credibility beyond what anyone chooses to believe, and I suppose that's the main point: extraordinary claims require belief in extraordinary evidence. On Dave Grusch and his claims: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Grusch_UFO_whistleblower_claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Grusch_UFO_whistleblower... On David Fravor and his incident: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos