I’ve been vocal in my criticism of Harvey’s reluctance to step forward and take action to help save humanity. But after a powerful "dream" last night, my perspective has shifted. I’ve realized that I was too fixated on the outcome, rather than understanding the process. The true key to success here lies in perception— optics matter more than anything. The world will be swayed by which side of the ET conflict appears to be truly aligned with humanity’s best interests. That is what people will latch onto. And with the media set to vilify the "good" E.T.s, it is absolutely vital that there is no ambiguity in the perception of Harvey’s group as the “good guys.” If the masses can be manipulated into believing a bioweapon is safe, then persuading them that a particular faction of E.T.s is the enemy is entirely within the realm of possibility.

Here's a scenario:

1. The "good ETs" intervene and remove the influence of the "bad ETs".

2. After the influence has been removed, they leave the planet, mark it as a "reservation", and become the "bouncer" ensuring that no bad influence reaches the planet in order to give humanity time to heal.

Think it through: What will happen?

As the death traps are still in effect, people's lifes and businesses would go on as usual. But they would also wonder why the helpers left the planet right after they helped. Religions would use it in their own interest. New religions will emerge, worshipping the helpers as Gods. Real scientists would want to build spaceships to follow the helpers. All these different opinions would clash at some point, leading to more wars.

I mention this scenario to make clear that even the best intentions can lead to an unwanted outcome.

"The world will be swayed by which side of the ET conflict appears to be truly aligned with humanity’s best interests."

But what is in the best interest of humanity could be viewed as an assault. Let's take this example: You have a friend, and he's a drug addict lacking the will power to go through a withdrawal. What do you do? You could lock him into a room, forcing the withdrawal upon him. Will he be happy? Will he choose it voluntarily?

Disclosure is just step 1 of the process.

Getting rid of the addictions that made the prison possible is a completely different story.

Maybe they have a plan I don't understand yet. Maybe they want to use government for their own purpose because an instant withdrawal would kill the patient. But why aren't they telling us?

I agree that the slavery cycle on Earth ends with the destruction of the death traps.