Speaker 1: Can anybody give me an a man this afternoons? Welcome
Speaker 1: back in your joint.
Speaker 2: I'm your host DJA along with the co creator of
Speaker 2: this whole damn thing and who was responsible for everything
Speaker 2: you see in front of you, and that's money Nathan
Speaker 2: with his Space Force mug.
Speaker 1: And just down diagonally from him is the girl. I'll
Speaker 1: tell you what she's been doing this for a minute.
Speaker 1: She sounds like she might have had some organic mushrooms
Speaker 1: of something today. That is a study of UAP debs.
Speaker 1: And of course the curly haired young lady to her
Speaker 1: left is none other than Courtney Connected. Welcome guys, what's
Speaker 1: up Nathan? What is up? Man?
Speaker 3: Happy Saturday, everybody. It's gonna be a good one. Brother.
Speaker 3: I'm feeling it.
Speaker 1: Debs, where are you at? Homes?
Speaker 4: I just want to pick our guest brain about what
Speaker 4: is going on rate new. I want to seem of
Speaker 4: modern times. That is what I'm looking forward to you today.
Speaker 1: We're gonna talk about this dude that done shook up
Speaker 1: the UAP disclosure world. What's up Scott McGinnis, what's up? Beatrice?
Speaker 1: Jules Witler. We'll say HOI to everybody before we bring
Speaker 1: them in the joint real quick. Is this gentleman named
Speaker 1: Jake Barber. He done shook up this whole damn thing.
Speaker 1: It's a snow globe right there, little season. You know
Speaker 1: what I'm saying, Courtney, Okay, everything good.
Speaker 5: Yeah. I have a household right now, so it's not
Speaker 5: my usual.
Speaker 6: You know.
Speaker 7: I've got kids and dog and cat and they're all
Speaker 7: looking so I'm looking back, you know how it is.
Speaker 5: It's family. Family.
Speaker 1: That's all good, man, that is all good. There's Kristin Thompson,
Speaker 1: I believe from Denmark. Correct correct us on that Christian.
Speaker 1: We did the the Nordica Roundtable with you, hi h
Speaker 1: And can you read this one into into burna. Is
Speaker 1: that what that says? I might need me.
Speaker 3: Glasses, That's what it says.
Speaker 1: Yeah, into Banna. Hello, Julie's here the Jewel of the Nile.
Speaker 1: Our co collaborator from TCU, Beatrice standing Stone seventeen seven
Speaker 1: and six and one of the Canton original Gangsters, Scott McGinnis,
Speaker 1: along with Colleen Itchy horse weathers ITCHI excuse me, Itchy
Speaker 1: Withers horse Rescue, which I believe is in New Humpshop.
Speaker 1: Love what you're doing up there, girlfriend? All right. We
Speaker 1: gotta bring his brother on because we only got him
Speaker 1: an hour because it's the UK and this brother need
Speaker 1: to go to sleep. He's already got his damn jamm.
Speaker 1: He's on h he is the creator of the Liberation Times. Uh.
Speaker 1: He's the one who's got a direct lie. He's got
Speaker 1: this red phone to Susan, gob Yo, Susan, this is
Speaker 1: Christopher Shop in the UK. What the is going on
Speaker 1: over there? And he wants to be clear. He did
Speaker 1: not go to a public school. He went to a
Speaker 1: state school and then of course he graduated from the
Speaker 1: University of wint And he is none other than the
Speaker 1: man himself, the writer of Liberation Times put him together
Speaker 1: for Christopher's shop.
Speaker 2: Get anybody here give me an amen for Christopher and.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah you can all right, Christopher, sharp my bra
Speaker 1: what's going on? Man? You're on mute? Mate? Nathan put
Speaker 1: us in the in the quad chart because if there's
Speaker 1: anything from the chat when I put it up, it's
Speaker 1: gonna cover up y'all faces.
Speaker 3: All right, you got it, you got it, Thank you?
Speaker 1: All right? Uh, Christopher, we still can't hear you that
Speaker 1: new microphone I'm about to throw. Where do you go?
Speaker 1: Is he on mute, Nathan, I can you can you do?
Speaker 6: There?
Speaker 3: We go, Papa?
Speaker 1: People want to hear those dulcet tones. Do you know
Speaker 1: what I'm saying, Chris? Even though even though you went
Speaker 1: to a state school, right.
Speaker 6: I was gonna say, you put an idea into my head.
Speaker 6: Maybe I could do like the podcast this season, like
Speaker 6: maybe like ten years or so, you know, maybe maybe
Speaker 6: you can operate one day in a place to disclaiy
Speaker 6: the kind of well, you know, I love that, we
Speaker 6: love to.
Speaker 1: I know one person you don't want to do a
Speaker 1: show with, and that's Erara that she gotta terry your
Speaker 1: show up?
Speaker 4: All right?
Speaker 1: Girlfriend with Ara the Terror love it the Terra all right?
Speaker 1: Oh my god, Chris, I just I mean, I think
Speaker 1: we got to just jump into this because this what's
Speaker 1: happened with UH, with with Jake Barber, the former I mean,
Speaker 1: the construct that he's under I haven't even heard of
Speaker 1: really unless we consider UH staff Sergeant Dan Sherman. What
Speaker 1: has an internationally or even in the UK? What what
Speaker 1: have you gleaned from from this? This? To me, this
Speaker 1: is like we were just talking about shaking up the
Speaker 1: snow globe of UAP disclosure what are what are your
Speaker 1: impressions of Jake Barbara? What are you hearing, sir?
Speaker 6: I think, like a lot of people, I am still digesting.
Speaker 6: It seems to stack up with a lot of the
Speaker 6: talk that I was hearing before the new year in
Speaker 6: terms of what was on its way. And I would
Speaker 6: also say that very very incredible people, both in public
Speaker 6: and privately, are voushing for him, So I see him
Speaker 6: as credible. I think that there are some holes in
Speaker 6: the story that are there for good reason. Let's just say,
Speaker 6: when when you're doing retrieval missions, like we've reported them before, allegedly,
Speaker 6: what happens is you both have a JSOCK and CIA component,
Speaker 6: so you're operating under the title ten and title for
Speaker 6: few authorities. That's always something considered to consider. And in
Speaker 6: the Jake Barber interview, we haven't heard CIA yet and
Speaker 6: that's interesting to me, very interesting, very smart.
Speaker 1: You don't want to get your ass in trouble.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, and yeah, I mean, Chris, so you've you
Speaker 3: had an article earlier this month. You have full disclosure endgame.
Speaker 3: We kind of talked about the the very sort of
Speaker 3: imminent nature of disclosure kind of percolating in the atmosphere
Speaker 3: right now, what with the Trump administration and a lot
Speaker 3: of folks in the Trump campaign that seem to be
Speaker 3: very much pro UFO. Potentially we'll see a lot of
Speaker 3: those names have been confirmed that the process of moving forward,
Speaker 3: the cabinets coming together. What are you hearing in terms
Speaker 3: of the potential for movement there. We recently had him
Speaker 3: sign the executive order about the declassification of the rest
Speaker 3: of the JFK files, RFK files, MLK assassination, that kind
Speaker 3: of thing. Do we think that the UFO piece of
Speaker 3: it is literally on the table or is that kind
Speaker 3: of maybe a bit of a pipe dream. At this point,
Speaker 3: it should.
Speaker 6: Be on the table. It's been presented. The paper for
Speaker 6: a UAPs are which is presented by Lui Lesonda, and
Speaker 6: the UAP Disclosure Fund has been presented and sent to
Speaker 6: the Trump team. I know that, and we're just waiting
Speaker 6: to see if it's accepted and they do go ahead
Speaker 6: with a disclosure process. Now we know that all the
Speaker 6: right components are in place. We've got Ratcliffe at CIA,
Speaker 6: Tolcy Gabbard has been said to me his pro disclosure
Speaker 6: as well. We've got RFK Junior who's been on a
Speaker 6: record saying he wants disclosure. And we have Mike Waltz
Speaker 6: as well, who I've been told is very very pro disclosure,
Speaker 6: and he is also backed by Peter Field. Peter Field
Speaker 6: is a very very key figure behind this. Peter Field,
Speaker 6: I believe, gave the largest, one of the largest campaign
Speaker 6: donations in history for a Senate race for JD Vance.
Speaker 6: So this guy's very very powerful. He's got a lot
Speaker 6: of money, and he's also back Mike Waltz. He's backed
Speaker 6: on a trap, so he's got links all over this
Speaker 6: White House. This guy and Peter Field's very very interesting.
Speaker 6: I've had this from several sources, very very interested in UAP.
Speaker 6: He's funded a lot of initiatives from my understanding as
Speaker 6: well in the UAPE world. And yeah, he's a billionaire
Speaker 6: with a mental political power. So I believe he wants
Speaker 6: access to technology. It wouldn't surprise me if he's tagged
Speaker 6: teaming with Elon Musk as well. Even if Elon Musk
Speaker 6: doesn't accept the allegation that there is a non human
Speaker 6: presence here, he does want access to those classified programs
Speaker 6: involving space technologies. So everything is primed. The incentives are
Speaker 6: there for people to act. We're just waiting to see
Speaker 6: if Trump kind of like has the cajones to to act,
Speaker 6: you know, I mean he's said that he's going to well,
Speaker 6: he's going to classify the RFK files, JFK files, Martin
Speaker 6: Luther King files, and Chuck Schumer has already thrown down
Speaker 6: the Gauntont saying come on there, like what about the
Speaker 6: UFO files. So Trump likes to like present himself as
Speaker 6: this curve white person who's going to tear apart the
Speaker 6: deep state and stuff like that. And that's kind of
Speaker 6: like suba basically saying come on then, like I'll go there,
Speaker 6: I'll take on the gatekeepers I already have with my
Speaker 6: suber amendment. So Trump, if you are kind of like
Speaker 6: this person you're presenting yourself to be, go all the
Speaker 6: way do it other wise you know, you don't have
Speaker 6: the cojon as I did.
Speaker 1: Yeah, just one thing I want to say to the audience.
Speaker 1: We are, now, what are we thirty or forty subscribers
Speaker 1: away from seven thousand, which would be a really good
Speaker 1: kind of landmark for cabs. So if you're so inclined,
Speaker 1: please hit the subscribe button and we appreciate it. And Nathan,
Speaker 1: do you have any follow up or we're ready to
Speaker 1: pass it to Debs.
Speaker 6: No.
Speaker 3: I think Chrissy, you set the table really nicely there
Speaker 3: and we're going to get into some more details, so
Speaker 3: I'll pass it on to deb.
Speaker 4: You know what you were talking about the involvement of Trump.
Speaker 4: I thought about what was going to come out with
Speaker 4: Martin Luther King. A lot of it has been rumor,
Speaker 4: but it here's an indication that he was not a
Speaker 4: perfect human being, and the public at large will find
Speaker 4: that out. I don't believe there's any such thing as
Speaker 4: a perfect human being, by the way, but do you
Speaker 4: think that this disclosure of new ap could have a blowback?
Speaker 4: Could there be like, for instance, if one case everyone
Speaker 4: was setting their bets on was found to be our technology,
Speaker 4: there could be some blowback. Do you think there's a
Speaker 4: double edged sword here?
Speaker 6: So? I think it's a bit of both. I think
Speaker 6: it's a complex web. I think that the US was
Speaker 6: making its own advancements in aerospace technology, you know, way
Speaker 6: back in the thirties and nineteen forties. That's my belief.
Speaker 6: And I think that you know, it was on its
Speaker 6: way to kind of like potentially unlocking anti gravitic technology
Speaker 6: in the nineteen fifties, perhaps with all without kind of
Speaker 6: non human technology. Let's say, So, I think there's stuff
Speaker 6: that the US may have developed by itself. There's other
Speaker 6: stuff that has been replicated from non human technology, I
Speaker 6: believe as well. So I think it's a bit of both.
Speaker 6: And then OBBC you have the non human technology as well,
Speaker 6: so it's a bit of a mess in the skies
Speaker 6: and also non human intelligence as well. That's a bit
Speaker 6: of a bit of a mixed pot.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 6: It's been said to me that there are multiple intelligences
Speaker 6: visiting this planet and walking among us perhaps as well.
Speaker 6: And you don't just say, oh, species of Nordics are
Speaker 6: all good and you know this other species is all
Speaker 6: bad whatever. You know, it's kind of like humans, you know,
Speaker 6: it's not like you know this, it's not like all
Speaker 6: Russians are bad and all Americans are good. You've got
Speaker 6: some good people, some bad people, some in between.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 6: It's so that's kind of being communicated to me in
Speaker 6: terms of that as well. But yeah, and answer to
Speaker 6: your question, yeah, I think that's going to be one
Speaker 6: of the most sensitive areas in terms of the technology,
Speaker 6: and that's where the blowback would be potentially, especially if
Speaker 6: you're classifying that technology for strategic surprise. Yeah, I think
Speaker 6: that's very, very important to consider in terms of a
Speaker 6: national security perspective.
Speaker 1: And I'm going to pass it to Courtney, but I
Speaker 1: just want to acknowledge it. We've gotten some gifts here.
Speaker 1: This is a friend of the show who's helped me
Speaker 1: out with some programming and it's really just an amazing friend.
Speaker 1: Sarah in Shock and Horror. If you can use a
Speaker 1: Massachusetts accent, If you can use a Massachusetts accent when
Speaker 1: you say that, Chris, and you can sound like John F. Kennedy,
Speaker 1: our great for I'm a president from high end spot.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you can do that accent, Chris,
Speaker 1: but if you can, because you've obviously you've got the
Speaker 1: British accent down, like you totally have it, man, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, It's so natural. But thank you
Speaker 1: Sarah for the twenty Kristin Thompson, our friend who I
Speaker 1: think is from Daymark, keep up the good work, Christopher
Speaker 1: Sharp because he's a bad mother and you know how
Speaker 1: that ends. Also want to thank to Petty Paralegal. This
Speaker 1: is jen I got to meet her and her husband
Speaker 1: at the meal food we had in Massachusetts. And not
Speaker 1: only is her husband a badass, but Jen herself is
Speaker 1: also a badass and helped her her extricate her husband
Speaker 1: from the Army as an enlisted man and into the
Speaker 1: Air Force as an officer. So good job Jen with
Speaker 1: your letter writing. So anyway, yeah, she's awesome. So thank
Speaker 1: you everybody, and and thank you for your kindness. And now, Chris,
Speaker 1: if you want to do your John F. Kennedy accent
Speaker 1: toward the end of the show, we'll get that set
Speaker 1: up for you.
Speaker 6: Usually say garbage, garbage like me. He's like a kind
Speaker 6: of Massachusetts kind of like Boston accent saying your garbage
Speaker 6: or something like that.
Speaker 1: You're very garbage. You know that you're riding is garbage, Chris,
Speaker 1: I'm just kidding. All right, go ahead, your writing is brilliant.
Speaker 1: Go ahead with our friend Courtney connected.
Speaker 5: Hey, Chris, it's so nice to see you today.
Speaker 7: And I've been wanting to talk with you for so long,
Speaker 7: so I get to like ask my you know, questions
Speaker 7: I've been lining up for years, like in this tiny
Speaker 7: little spot, but I'm going to try to cover it all.
Speaker 7: So you were one of the earliest people, uh, you know,
Speaker 7: running your shop Liberation Times.
Speaker 5: It sprung up, you know, and.
Speaker 7: Had to get traction, and over the years you've gotten
Speaker 7: more and more attraction roads into DC for those who
Speaker 7: haven't been following Liberation Times, You've just done a great job.
Speaker 5: So I wanted to ask you this specific question.
Speaker 7: This is more for you personally, but also can be
Speaker 7: extrapolated for other people who want to do the same
Speaker 7: thing that you've done.
Speaker 5: And carved their own trail.
Speaker 7: You've had to cover these people in DC political power players, right,
Speaker 7: you know, Mike Johnson, Ran Paul, you know, all the
Speaker 7: big guns and so in covering as a journalist, right,
Speaker 7: but also in the field of you know, I would say,
Speaker 7: to some degree covering the history of UFOs and the
Speaker 7: legacy programs, how have you maintained you know, your impartiality
Speaker 7: in your coverage.
Speaker 5: That's one thing. And then the second thing is, I
Speaker 5: know a.
Speaker 7: Lot of people who are doing coverage would not be
Speaker 7: necessarily considered journalists, but they are covering things potentially and
Speaker 7: getting sensitive information that could be, you know, somewhat dangerous
Speaker 7: for them. I'm wondering if you can answer that as well,
Speaker 7: Like how you've been able to do that with Liberation
Speaker 7: Times as a journalist. You're coming from the UK, so
Speaker 7: it's different from the US, but maybe you could speak
Speaker 7: with that as well. How you've been able to take
Speaker 7: some very sensitive information and bring that out in a
Speaker 7: safe way through your journalism and your journalistic standards in
Speaker 7: Liberation Times.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. It's really kind of you. So
Speaker 6: I think in terms of threats, it's very difficult. I mean,
Speaker 6: sometimes you will put a story. It's happened to me.
Speaker 6: I put out a story about sensitive allegations around a
Speaker 6: naval maritime retrieval program which included elements of the Maritime
Speaker 6: Branch the CIA's Operations Directorate some sensitive kind of like
Speaker 6: very very classified systems of the water. I didn't ever
Speaker 6: reveal classified information. And it was that was from Europe,
Speaker 6: the National Underwater Recond's Office, involving Special Operations Command as well,
Speaker 6: and also involving the Office of Naval Research. So kind
Speaker 6: of like put all those things together and yeah, I
Speaker 6: told the story about that. And then when I put
Speaker 6: that story together, I was like, holy crap, like I've
Speaker 6: done the wrong thing, Like I shouldn't do that. You know,
Speaker 6: I've got a family, like I've been told that the
Speaker 6: people involved in the enable retrieval programs and not very
Speaker 6: nice people, and I messed up. So, you know, I
Speaker 6: released an article with that information in and I was like,
Speaker 6: I kind of panicked, and I deleted that section for
Speaker 6: the articles. I can't do this. And then like one
Speaker 6: person from the UFO community basically is looking at the
Speaker 6: Internet history page of Liberation Times to find it and
Speaker 6: calls me out saying, oh, you know, he changes his
Speaker 6: stories because he makes mistakes and stuff like that. It's like, no,
Speaker 6: I changed that story and because I didn't want to
Speaker 6: put that information out, but you know, as it then
Speaker 6: been found, I just kind of like reinserted that information
Speaker 6: there and then I think with my next article, so
Speaker 6: I doubled down on that. And then I also named
Speaker 6: Glenn Affne as well, who was the edge person who
Speaker 6: blocked the deal between Lockheed Martin and that element of
Speaker 6: what would have been the Bigelow team, let's say. And
Speaker 6: so that, you know, a lot of people knew Gatney's name,
Speaker 6: and he was like, Valdemore, you never shall mention him.
Speaker 6: So mentioning that name and an article was like a real,
Speaker 6: really big deal. And you know when I put that
Speaker 6: article out, a few people were like panicking, saying you
Speaker 6: were UK or you should have done that or consulted
Speaker 6: a lawyer, and you know, like people were panicking and
Speaker 6: and you know, come to think about it in hindsight, well, actually,
Speaker 6: like if you think about it, like, I'm not saying
Speaker 6: that Gaffney did anything illegal. I'm basically saying that Gapney
Speaker 6: did his job. So if it did, if that, if that,
Speaker 6: if those materials did belong to the CIA Director of
Speaker 6: Science and Technology and Lockheed were supposed to send those
Speaker 6: back years ago, then how is he breaking the law
Speaker 6: and doing and how am I kind of like alleging
Speaker 6: that any wrongdoing of him that will put me in danger.
Speaker 6: So when you kind of like think about it, and
Speaker 6: sometimes in hindsight you figure, well, actually that's not such
Speaker 6: a big deal. And I will also add as well
Speaker 6: that there may have been someone else involved with that
Speaker 6: story in terms of blocking it, so I might get
Speaker 6: onto that story one time. But yeah, so I do
Speaker 6: have legal protection though, both in the UK and the
Speaker 6: United States, so that's really good. It's nice to know
Speaker 6: that people are going to act pro bono for me
Speaker 6: if I do get any potential trouble. So that's good
Speaker 6: to know in terms of like the impartiality and stuff
Speaker 6: like that. I mean, I've always come at the story
Speaker 6: like because so many neutral outlets will pretend to like
Speaker 6: be impartial on the story. But you know, if you're
Speaker 6: actually kind of like using the Pentagon or an element
Speaker 6: of the intelligence community as your primary source, which defines
Speaker 6: the story itself, that's a problem. Because I studied parts
Speaker 6: of journalism when I was at university, and I learned
Speaker 6: things like prime definition, you know, like the source. You know,
Speaker 6: there's a battle sources. Basically to define your story, one
Speaker 6: has to define it. And then also like how do
Speaker 6: you use the source. The source that you usually use
Speaker 6: first in the story will define the story usually, and
Speaker 6: then the source that you use at the end of
Speaker 6: the story quoting them will usually not define the story.
Speaker 6: So you know, it's kind of like any publication that says,
Speaker 6: you know, we're kind of like neutral on this, you know,
Speaker 6: or impartial, it's very difficult to do that. So I
Speaker 6: basically staked out what it was about beforehand, just saying, look,
Speaker 6: I am reporting the story like it is, you know,
Speaker 6: a giant kind of conspiracy and is wrongdoing perhaps from
Speaker 6: the US government and contractors and stuff. So that's how
Speaker 6: I'm coming out the story, you know, like the Watergate scandal,
Speaker 6: Like I'm doing it like that. That's how I'm covering
Speaker 6: the story. But when you're doing that as well, you
Speaker 6: do have to stay in partial where you don't want
Speaker 6: to get involved with like debates and wars or she said,
Speaker 6: he said, or you know, go against anyone else in
Speaker 6: the community or anything like that. You want to stay
Speaker 6: on your mission, to stay focused. So that's what I do.
Speaker 6: And you know, I know about politics because I've been
Speaker 6: involved with like politics in the UK as part of
Speaker 6: my common stuff like the past decade or so, so
Speaker 6: I kind of like knew how it worked from a
Speaker 6: UK perspective, and I kind of had to kind of
Speaker 6: bring that understanding to the UAP story of how the
Speaker 6: dynamics might work. And I've also kind of had to
Speaker 6: catch up on like UK politics, intelligence community matters, how
Speaker 6: that's organized, the d D, how that's organized. And it's
Speaker 6: been you know, a big learning curve for me kind
Speaker 6: of like learning all that stuff. So yeah, it's been
Speaker 6: a it's been a it's been a big kind of
Speaker 6: like mission, and it's tough and Yeah, you have to
Speaker 6: protect sensitive information as well. You have to protect your sources.
Speaker 6: You have to be prepared to go to jail to
Speaker 6: protect your sources. So that's really really important to me
Speaker 6: as well, because people do want to find out who
Speaker 6: your sources are, and that's always a tough part of it,
Speaker 6: especially when people are digging around. So, yeah, is that
Speaker 6: answering all your questions? Is that you?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I want just we have a couple of questions
Speaker 1: in the chat, Chris, and I want to say, if
Speaker 1: you didn't actually take journalism in college and you're just
Speaker 1: damn good of a writer, you don't did something, brother,
Speaker 1: You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 6: Yeah, thank you, thank you.
Speaker 1: We have Yeah, we have this one from Andrew and
Speaker 1: maybe Nathan can read it in some sort of an accent,
Speaker 1: who knows.
Speaker 3: I don't know if I'm ready for that. Maybe on
Speaker 3: another time though, I like thea sometimes. All right, this
Speaker 3: question from Andrew Andrew, thank you, so, hi all. Given
Speaker 3: the deep psychological and archetypal aspects of the UFO phenomena,
Speaker 3: do you think it's interaction with humanity is designed to
Speaker 3: evolve our consciousness collectively? A great question there.
Speaker 1: I guess could maybe everyone would take a shot at that.
Speaker 1: Go ahead, and Nathan, and then we'll go to Chris.
Speaker 1: We'll just go around the horn.
Speaker 3: Sure, yeah, yeah, that that is a good question. I think.
Speaker 3: I think that I think that you could look at
Speaker 3: this from two perspectives. Right, So, is there an intention
Speaker 3: behind the phenomena to to to generate that kind of effect,
Speaker 3: to generate that change and in collective consciousness, or does
Speaker 3: its mere existence have the effect of changing our consciousness?
Speaker 3: You know, I sort of lean towards the latter. So
Speaker 3: it's almost one of those things where if something is
Speaker 3: a part of your environment, something is confirmed to be
Speaker 3: part of your environment, then its presence in that environment,
Speaker 3: it's it's interaction with all elements of the environment of
Speaker 3: which we are apart is going to affect the way
Speaker 3: in which we perceive it. And so over time, I
Speaker 3: would think with enough time, we it is going to impact,
Speaker 3: you know, sort of the way that we think and
Speaker 3: perceive and can and and can un of reality. And
Speaker 3: so I'd like to think that it does have an
Speaker 3: altering effect on us. Now, if you take the more
Speaker 3: proactive approach, A lot of people have argued that non
Speaker 3: human intelligence is trying to steer humanity in a certain
Speaker 3: direction or catalyze and evolving thinking on our part. Some
Speaker 3: of the people who've had direct contact partly direct contact
Speaker 3: with these beings have relayed messages. A lot of them
Speaker 3: are about our overreliance on technology or the way that
Speaker 3: we're kind of abusing the planet, the environment, seemingly trying
Speaker 3: to get us to change our ways and become a
Speaker 3: little bit more focused on achieving some kind of balance
Speaker 3: between ourselves and the nature that we are a part of.
Speaker 3: So it's a great question. I do think that consciousness
Speaker 3: and sort of the evolution of consciousness is a huge
Speaker 3: part of the phenomena because it does it is one
Speaker 3: of those factors that cannot be disregarded like it's just
Speaker 3: it's part of reality, just as we are part of reality.
Speaker 3: And for us to think be a more harmony with
Speaker 3: what reality happens to be, we have to change. And
Speaker 3: you know, if you go through through life thinking that
Speaker 3: reality is a certain way and you ignore all these
Speaker 3: other aspects of it and you kind of keep on
Speaker 3: living with blinders on, I think that that's not really
Speaker 3: a great way to be. And so this is sort
Speaker 3: of I think prodding us to say you know, there
Speaker 3: is more to what we might think reality happens to be,
Speaker 3: and maybe we need to incorporate those aspects into our
Speaker 3: way of being, and by doing that we are going
Speaker 3: to change.
Speaker 1: Yes, good, great with Nathan.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, no, Actually I think Nathan cover it really well.
Speaker 6: I mean I have a strange relationship with consciousness because
Speaker 6: I have an epilepsy and it's always a strange feeling
Speaker 6: when you get the aura and you know you're going
Speaker 6: to lose consciousness even though you don't want to. And yeah,
Speaker 6: it can be quite a scary feeling as well, but
Speaker 6: in those last moments before you can go blank, there
Speaker 6: was like an element peacefulness as well, which is quite nice.
Speaker 6: So I've got a strange relationship towards it. And because
Speaker 6: my epilepsy and polls language as well, Like sometimes I
Speaker 6: can't even think because when you're thinking and thinking a language,
Speaker 6: and so you've got to go in a meditative state.
Speaker 6: But you know, with that said, I mean with the subject,
Speaker 6: I've covered it from a real kind of like nuts
Speaker 6: and bolts agle covering the politics and stuff like that
Speaker 6: and the process of how it's going. But you know,
Speaker 6: covering this story and following this story, you can't ignore
Speaker 6: the consciousness aspect and the genesis of this. How this
Speaker 6: came out through Tom DeLonge. You know, he was talking
Speaker 6: about consciousness, about how there was a link between consciousness
Speaker 6: and how the craft worked. And you know, we've got
Speaker 6: doctor James Ryder now deceased from Rocky Mass and the
Speaker 6: vice present who was trying to visit take the deal
Speaker 6: between Lockheed and the Big Low Gang. And you know
Speaker 6: he's going off after his retire to consciousness conferences and
Speaker 6: spirituality conferences. So you know what makes someone in my
Speaker 6: kind of journalistic head, you know, someone so qualified, someone's
Speaker 6: so down to worth and the nuts and bolts in
Speaker 6: terms of aerospace egeering and stuff like that and all
Speaker 6: these clearances, and you know, is clearly the same person
Speaker 6: I've always wouldn't be in a position who was What's
Speaker 6: what leads someone like that down that route? So for me,
Speaker 6: like you know, this is this is a valid kind
Speaker 6: of area to look into. It especially when you look
Speaker 6: at the people who have kind of like spoken out
Speaker 6: about the consciousness elements, spoke publicly and privately for me
Speaker 6: as well, and that that's something that I think is
Speaker 6: really really quite interesting and all I would consider when
Speaker 6: when doing that, you know, what what if, hypothetically, like
Speaker 6: part of disclosure is not just kind of like finding
Speaker 6: out that there's a non human intelligence interaction with What
Speaker 6: about if it actually changes the definition of humanity itself
Speaker 6: and being human? What if hypothetically things were found on
Speaker 6: the recovery of these vehicles that kind of could unlock
Speaker 6: secrets to enhance our consciousness. And what if every human
Speaker 6: kind of like has psychic abilities or something along those lines,
Speaker 6: And then you know, part of disclosure would mean that
Speaker 6: a lot of the population would have these abilities. What
Speaker 6: does that mean in terms of a practical sense? How
Speaker 6: do you regulate that? How do you stop you know,
Speaker 6: what does privacy mean if everyone's psychic and stuff like that,
Speaker 6: you know, and you know, some people will use it
Speaker 6: for good, some people will use it for bad. So
Speaker 6: that presents a whole big problem. And I think Jake
Speaker 6: Barber may have actually touched upon that as well in
Speaker 6: his own interview. So yeah, there, that's really got Yeah.
Speaker 6: So I was picking that up because I mean, I'm
Speaker 6: still trying to digest the interview, the great interview that rosted,
Speaker 6: But you know, I think that's really really important to consider,
Speaker 6: you know, and obviously we haven't had the five come
Speaker 6: out yet kind of like backing or even actually kind
Speaker 6: of like defining what consciousness is, you know, but you know,
Speaker 6: I think it's been said by Eric Weinstein. It seems
Speaker 6: as though sites went underground to a large extent in
Speaker 6: the nineteen fifties and that you know, physics hasn't made
Speaker 6: any real breakthroughs for decades now. And that is also
Speaker 6: something that Peter Field has touched upon as well with
Speaker 6: a recent article that he did for the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 6: I think it was a Financial Times and it seems
Speaker 6: very really important to me, And yeah, that's it's important
Speaker 6: to touch upon, and yeah, it's definitely given me food
Speaker 6: for thought.
Speaker 1: And then our David John Lanier, the experience is in
Speaker 1: the chat here. He's had experiences both with craft at
Speaker 1: his house and beings at his house. So David is
Speaker 1: one of the first interviews we ever did on Calling
Speaker 1: All Beings. So what's up David? All right, So we'll
Speaker 1: have to tighten it up on our answers here so
Speaker 1: we can get to more Chris, especially if we only
Speaker 1: have him for twenty six minutes. More So, go ahead,
Speaker 1: court and our debs in Courtney please, or go ahead,
Speaker 1: and Courtney, since we're sort of keeping in order here,
Speaker 1: go ahead.
Speaker 5: Am I answering the original question? Am I reading this
Speaker 5: question that's up here?
Speaker 1: Yeah? No, it's this question. Forgive me. It was the one,
Speaker 1: the original question. We'll get to David. We'll get to
Speaker 1: David here. I've got everybody starred in the column over there.
Speaker 7: You know, looking at the question of the psychological aspects, right,
Speaker 7: and some of the archetypal aspects.
Speaker 5: I think that was the question, you know.
Speaker 7: I tend to fall I tend to fall in the
Speaker 7: camps of people like Terrence McKenna and Jacques Vallet who
Speaker 7: talk about this co creation aspect of our consciousness with
Speaker 7: another because people who have had encounters or experiences tend
Speaker 7: to feel like they're in contact with another intelligence. And
Speaker 7: as you saw with Jake Barber's discussion about how he
Speaker 7: felt this sensation come over him of being in contact
Speaker 7: with another right and it being very feminine, I think
Speaker 7: that I think it's all psychological, and so that's where
Speaker 7: I fall.
Speaker 5: In line with it.
Speaker 7: And I've never been or heard it described so well
Speaker 7: as Greg Bishop hit when he and I were talking
Speaker 7: about the psychological and archetypal aspects that he said through
Speaker 7: all of his discussions with experiencers, he feels like there's
Speaker 7: a co creative aspect and that just really hit you
Speaker 7: so many different cylinders.
Speaker 5: For me, I do think that there is a period.
Speaker 7: After contact which is very like a critical period that
Speaker 7: we could be studying more from a psychological standpoint.
Speaker 5: Young did call it.
Speaker 7: A critical period where there is this development or creativity
Speaker 7: or feeling on fire, you know, from contact. So for me,
Speaker 7: I think it's very psychological and I think that there
Speaker 7: are a lot of great academics looking at it. I
Speaker 7: think it's a really hard question to answer, But that's
Speaker 7: where I kind of fall in line is thinking that
Speaker 7: those are the areas that I think research wise we
Speaker 7: could really try to understand that question more and the answers.
Speaker 1: From my perspective to say it, I agree with what
Speaker 1: both Chris and Courtney and Nathan said. There's obviously and
Speaker 1: there may be both. There may actually be an intentional
Speaker 1: an intention to alter consciousness at some points and for
Speaker 1: some reasons, and there also may be just a the
Speaker 1: as Nathan said, as result a happenstance of them entering
Speaker 1: our reality and then and then forcing a change of
Speaker 1: your consciousness, which maybe is what happened. And I'll bring
Speaker 1: it right back to something topical. I can't state how
Speaker 1: huge this is about this young man this and I
Speaker 1: say young man, he's probably my age in Jake Barber
Speaker 1: and him saying that they had that. And if you
Speaker 1: want to just take somebody from the same archetype in Baker,
Speaker 1: what's his last name, that guy big is it? Jake Barber,
Speaker 1: Fred Baker? Fred? Okay? So Fred Baker is from the
Speaker 1: twenty fourth sts at Pope, you know, tier one career,
Speaker 1: tier one airman combat controller. So he's cut from that
Speaker 1: same cloth, and he's talking about the same thing about
Speaker 1: love and as opposed to war, and about consciousness and
Speaker 1: about how he went and had Basically, even if it's
Speaker 1: not the CE five construct, because Jake said that that
Speaker 1: the construct, the methodlogy that they use to call in
Speaker 1: a craft which ended up in this guy Baker seeing
Speaker 1: a huge, multiple football field size of triangular craft was
Speaker 1: the result of a construct or a modality that's similar
Speaker 1: to CE five but not C five. So that shows
Speaker 1: us that is a you know, some sort of conscious
Speaker 1: contact with this other intelligence that can't be ignored because
Speaker 1: if it were somebody, you know, that that didn't have
Speaker 1: that amount of public trust, sometimes people say, ah, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure. Well now you have you have what's
Speaker 1: his name saying it, I'm gonna screw these guys up. Barber,
Speaker 1: you have Baker, And then you have the Delta Force officer,
Speaker 1: the guy who was an officer with Delta Force who
Speaker 1: now has his PhD saying the exact same thing. So
Speaker 1: this is huge, huge for this for the people who
Speaker 1: are disclosure advocates, not only the actual physical craft that
Speaker 1: they've grabbed, but also the consciousness aspect of it that
Speaker 1: a couple of them have experienced that can't be ignored.
Speaker 4: Debs, I wanted to just throw something out there that
Speaker 4: no one chorged.
Speaker 1: Sure you love doing.
Speaker 4: That, Okay. Other cultures are at a different place with this,
Speaker 4: and they were probably we could say more spiritual, more
Speaker 4: connected to this consciousness idea. They were totally fine with
Speaker 4: accepting things like spirits and aliens and you know, all
Speaker 4: kinds of things that people are calling supernatural or paranormal
Speaker 4: in the modern world. So maybe it's less about our
Speaker 4: consciousness being impacted by the UAPs and more about our
Speaker 4: consciousness in the modern world. Quote is evolving, so we're
Speaker 4: able to to hear it and respond to it better.
Speaker 4: There's research that shows that people who have increased abilities
Speaker 4: increased instincts are able to perceive more related to UAPs.
Speaker 4: That was the Gary Nolan research. So I just wanted
Speaker 4: to throw that out there as another consideration that, you know,
Speaker 4: we had to also think about this culturally when we're
Speaker 4: talking about consciousness. Other people have been attached and are
Speaker 4: totally connected to UAP.
Speaker 1: Okay, this one is for Christopher Sharp. Maybe maybe Courtney
Speaker 1: could read this one in some sort of Alaskan accent.
Speaker 1: I don't know what they talk like up.
Speaker 5: There, Christopher.
Speaker 7: Does Christopher know the research that Richard D. Hall from
Speaker 7: UK and his work in trying to put out info.
Speaker 1: A Okay, there you get your Alaskan accent.
Speaker 5: I'm better at Howard Cosell.
Speaker 1: Oh, I'm better at Howard ad Chris.
Speaker 6: No, I've heard I've heard the name before, but I've
Speaker 6: never actually looked looked into apologies. Yeah, it's something I
Speaker 6: should obviously really read up on. So yeah, let me
Speaker 6: let me look more into that. Definitely, thank you for
Speaker 6: putting out there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, and I'll say earlier. Just to answer the
Speaker 1: question about what the administration is gonna going to do,
Speaker 1: I'll say this, and this is this is not only
Speaker 1: for this administration. This is a political because we don't
Speaker 1: do politics on cap is. They're going to look at.
Speaker 1: They're probably going to say, you bring me a PowerPoint.
Speaker 1: I want you to bring me papers, I want you
Speaker 1: to bring me analysis on how this is going to
Speaker 1: help me, how this is going to help our administration.
Speaker 1: And if they think there'd be an effect on the
Speaker 1: economy that's negative, or banking or interest rates or international banking,
Speaker 1: if they think that there's going to be some sort
Speaker 1: of a negative effect on what they're going to be
Speaker 1: graded on, which are some of those things I just
Speaker 1: talked about mainly, then they may not disclose anything. And
Speaker 1: this is not a statement about President Trump, because every Trump,
Speaker 1: every president from now until Harry Truman, has not disclosed anything.
Speaker 1: So this is not a statement about one president. It's
Speaker 1: a statement about every single one of them. So even
Speaker 1: even if he has the bully pulpit and could slam
Speaker 1: down his gavel and say I want to start firing
Speaker 1: people until I get to the people who knows about
Speaker 1: this program, well that would be one way that he
Speaker 1: could get to it right. But if he thinks it
Speaker 1: willgive negatively reflect negatively on his presidency, especially from a
Speaker 1: financial or an economic aspect, or or something where there
Speaker 1: would be any sort of hysteria or anything that that
Speaker 1: that he can't be proven to his satisfaction, then he's
Speaker 1: not going to release it. I don't care if there's
Speaker 1: two dozen advocates for UFOs in his cabinet. That is
Speaker 1: the calculus that he's going to use, and that's probably
Speaker 1: the calculus that every single one of them used. Now
Speaker 1: there may be different variations because some of them are
Speaker 1: much more about national security, others may be more concerned
Speaker 1: with the economy. So I think that's the calculus that's
Speaker 1: going to be used and will determine whether or not
Speaker 1: anything will be released. Frankly want to come in on that.
Speaker 6: I think that's really really good. That's really really good
Speaker 6: analysis there. Yeah, there are lots of repercussions that need
Speaker 6: to be thought about here, especially with the financial markets,
Speaker 6: I believe. Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1: And Chris, I think you can validate the fact that
Speaker 1: my face doesn't actually look this fat in person, right,
Speaker 1: Like it's the camera.
Speaker 6: No, No, it's absolutely fine your faces okay, yeah.
Speaker 1: All right, cool, thank you. How will this serve me? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it's it's just like again, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is not some sort of an indictment on this administration.
Speaker 1: This is what every administration has done. And it may
Speaker 1: be slightly variations in their their reasons, but it all
Speaker 1: comes back to something to do with the economy, national security,
Speaker 1: the way their presidency is viewed writ large. It also
Speaker 1: could be people from inside the established what would we
Speaker 1: call them bureaucrats that are that are sort of holding
Speaker 1: the information. They're saying, hey, mister you know those of
Speaker 1: you who are going to go brief the mister president.
Speaker 1: You know, if this information gets out, these are the
Speaker 1: ramifications that could result. They could have to do with
Speaker 1: our competitors. There are global power competitors, you know, Russia
Speaker 1: in China. So there may be a myriad of reasons,
Speaker 1: but something thereof. So let's see Sarah Shock and Horror
Speaker 1: has a question. Then we got Anthony. So somebody want
Speaker 1: to take this one? Please?
Speaker 4: Oh go ahead, No, go ahead, it's uh, it's fine,
Speaker 4: go ahead.
Speaker 1: We got another one for you, debs next, So go ahead,
Speaker 1: go ahead.
Speaker 7: To do Presidents even have the clearance to know the
Speaker 7: information in the files.
Speaker 5: My guess is known.
Speaker 1: No, they do. They absolutely do, because they are the original.
Speaker 1: They're like the OCA, the original classification authority. They can
Speaker 1: declassify anything that they so choose. But in theory you
Speaker 1: would be right, Sarah, because they are not going through
Speaker 1: like when we had Jim semi Van on the program.
Speaker 1: You know we actually we hadn't had Dave Grush, but uh,
Speaker 1: these people have had multiple lifes polygraphs because you have
Speaker 1: kind of like a mission polygraph that's going to get
Speaker 1: into your ability to keep secrets and your thoughts about
Speaker 1: the mission and all this. And then the lifestyle polygraph
Speaker 1: is extremely invasive where they can ask you anything about
Speaker 1: your life from beginning to end, any sort of devancy
Speaker 1: that you have that could dig into, and how you
Speaker 1: respond to that will determine whether or not your issue
Speaker 1: that clearance. They do not get that, they do not
Speaker 1: go through that background investigation. They are just blessed on
Speaker 1: an inauguration day. So and then there's another question here
Speaker 1: in all caps, and maybe devs could read this one
Speaker 1: from Anthony Miller. There you go, Mila, We've got question, Mila.
Speaker 4: There have been others like Julia Mossbridge, who also seem
Speaker 4: to suggest that certain sigh capacities r V in her
Speaker 4: case or Heis and Shake's story are only successful from
Speaker 4: a place of love. What do you think? And for
Speaker 4: those who don't know, there's definitely people out there who
Speaker 4: don't know what those things mean. They're saying psychic capacities,
Speaker 4: remote viewing in her case, or human and contact. Basically
Speaker 4: that's initiated with like a ritual or procedure with their
Speaker 4: attempting to contact entities when they do heist, give it up.
Speaker 1: From my homegirl, Debs Ray cool, come on, hey man, girlfriend,
Speaker 1: all right, go ahead. Who wants to respond to that?
Speaker 1: Is Chris or anybody?
Speaker 6: I mean, for me, it's it seems all about like
Speaker 6: resonance and frequency and vibrations that you're kind of putting
Speaker 6: out there perhaps. I mean, this is all kind of
Speaker 6: like really new to me. I get the feeding that
Speaker 6: someone in a classified part of government and the the
Speaker 6: science behind this and how it works. I'm just waiting
Speaker 6: for that to come out because obviously there is and
Speaker 6: something has been buried underground. So I would like to know.
Speaker 1: That Court and you know, Court, Debs and Nathan all
Speaker 1: just if you want to give your take on this one,
Speaker 1: Sue Spuntde, we're going to talk to you about that Homegirl,
Speaker 1: because these people are from Free Karen Reid, but they
Speaker 1: have some of them have had UFO experiences and I
Speaker 1: think that's why they're here, and Sue spunte is one
Speaker 1: of them. So but go ahead. Would you like to
Speaker 1: take a shot at this one, Court Nathan.
Speaker 3: Debb, I'll take a shot. And first of all, Anthony,
Speaker 3: I appreciate you joining the chat. Anthony just launched a
Speaker 3: podcast recently called Obliterate the Construct, which is great. I'm
Speaker 3: talking about tackling these various topics. So great to have
Speaker 3: you with the show tonight. I think we're entering into
Speaker 3: an interesting time, right, So I've talked about this recently,
Speaker 3: and I think that that we're living in the midst
Speaker 3: of a paradigm shift. And I think that the twentieth
Speaker 3: century sort of we saw kind of the the golden
Speaker 3: age of rationalism, and we're in sort of also the
Speaker 3: waning age of the waning time of that. And so
Speaker 3: now we're looking at a time period where we're re
Speaker 3: examining some of the things that we quote unquote discarded
Speaker 3: as a supernatural, and we're we're starting to take a
Speaker 3: fresh look at those things because they kind of have
Speaker 3: tie ins with things like quantum mechanics and aspects of
Speaker 3: reality that we don't really understand very well. And so
Speaker 3: I find it very fascinating that that love is a
Speaker 3: very it seemed to be a common thread in a
Speaker 3: lot of these contact experiences, particularly with the CU five
Speaker 3: or the highest protocols. Love seems to be very highly
Speaker 3: connected to those experiences. There's something about that that expression, right,
Speaker 3: so what is that? And to me this is exciting
Speaker 3: because it does give us a chance to re examine
Speaker 3: our humanity in a way that I think we have
Speaker 3: discarded for a very long time. We've tend to sort
Speaker 3: of bucket all of these emotional experiences as just like,
Speaker 3: well that's kind of woo woo stuff that we don't
Speaker 3: want to deal with. We're just we're really just highly
Speaker 3: rational animals. And the more rational we can be, the
Speaker 3: more computer like we can become, the closer we're going
Speaker 3: to get to discoveries and knowledge and you know, understanding
Speaker 3: how reality actually is, etcetera, et cetera. And what if,
Speaker 3: in fact, this aspect of ourselves is wrapped up in
Speaker 3: all of that and is important to our understanding of
Speaker 3: knowledge and truth and all those things. So I think
Speaker 3: it's truly exciting. And I think we need to be
Speaker 3: open to the possibilities that that you know, who you
Speaker 3: are as a person, and this is a crazy concept,
Speaker 3: who you are as a person, how you comport yourself
Speaker 3: in the world, how you approach reality, how you treat
Speaker 3: other people. You know, does happen to have some sort
Speaker 3: of correlation to you know, whatever this phenomenon might be.
Speaker 3: However it expresses itself in the world. A lot of
Speaker 3: things that are wrapped up in that. That's not to say,
Speaker 3: and I want to make sure to make this point
Speaker 3: that it's all love and light and sunshine and rainbows.
Speaker 3: You know, we know there are lots of experiences that
Speaker 3: run counter to this kind of love message. I think
Speaker 3: that that is a trap that we fall into, where
Speaker 3: we tend to sort of flatten a lot of these
Speaker 3: experiences into one category. And it seems to be based
Speaker 3: on the body of evidence that we have and encounters,
Speaker 3: et cetera, that there are lots of different kind of
Speaker 3: competing groups and elements at work here. Just like as
Speaker 3: Chris pointed out, earlier, lots of different human components to it, like,
Speaker 3: we're not all the same kinds of human we don't
Speaker 3: all behave in the same way. Some of us are
Speaker 3: really benevolent, some of us are downright evil, and I
Speaker 3: think that that's probably just just a fact of the
Speaker 3: way life happens to be everywhere else. So anyway, fascinating question, Anthony,
Speaker 3: Really appreciate you posing that.
Speaker 1: Court. What are your thoughts on that I'm going.
Speaker 7: I'm going in new directions with my philosophical thoughts about
Speaker 7: the Nhi, and you know, kind of radical, I guess
Speaker 7: in a sense where I'm coming from it from a
Speaker 7: cultural standpoint of indigenous communities who have been talking about
Speaker 7: things like the ancestors, right, and the ancestors and who
Speaker 7: they are and ancestors and sometimes born within us. And
Speaker 7: so I'm exploring this topic in terms of NHI because
Speaker 7: I do feel this is the way the trend might go.
Speaker 7: And I do think some part of that is psionic
Speaker 7: or consciousness or even in lucid dream states that we
Speaker 7: receive contact, you know, from the ancestors. So I'm taking
Speaker 7: it even further, and I think that I've said this
Speaker 7: to a couple of people. I think ASI is going
Speaker 7: to is going to disclose NHI and what it is.
Speaker 7: So I'm pretty far out there on the fringe and
Speaker 7: the curve of some of my own predictions. But when
Speaker 7: I think about hes or psi or psionics, which I
Speaker 7: kind of think of as an older term to describe,
Speaker 7: you know, psychic functioning, I'm starting to think about Nhi
Speaker 7: in very different terms from how I have in the past.
Speaker 7: And so as well as those terms, I'm also trying
Speaker 7: to think differently about we as humans and spirit and
Speaker 7: how we co mingle within ourselves and that the Nhi
Speaker 7: might actually be part of us. So I'm looking at
Speaker 7: that in different terms, and I think you need to
Speaker 7: be careful about those kind of terms. But I'm trying
Speaker 7: to just upend all my own learnings about what h
Speaker 7: Nhi really is and think about it differently, turn it
Speaker 7: upside down a little bit.
Speaker 1: That's a great way to That's a great way to
Speaker 1: do it. You know, it's you know, not only you know,
Speaker 1: because because you have to like challenge your own assumptions
Speaker 1: and your own beliefs, and like I've said, you know,
Speaker 1: since we started a cab, if you're at the exact
Speaker 1: same place that you are when we started, then you
Speaker 1: probably haven't been paying very close attention to any any
Speaker 1: thought processes that have advanced in the community, or thought
Speaker 1: thought leaders that have come and given us information or
Speaker 1: experience ers specifically experiencers. But debs, what are your thoughts,
Speaker 1: my friend?
Speaker 4: I wanted to say that from my understanding, it is
Speaker 4: not simply about love. It's definitely not. In fact, the
Speaker 4: majority of psychic abilities that I've heard about have to
Speaker 4: do more with survival. So, for instance, someone has gone
Speaker 4: through a trauma experience and suddenly they have heightened psychic abilities.
Speaker 4: People who have died come back with immense psychic abilities.
Speaker 4: So I think there's a biological element that it has
Speaker 4: to do with our survival, just like you know, we
Speaker 4: know birds migrate based on magnetic spields that we cannot perceive.
Speaker 4: I think it's just a very innate part of us
Speaker 4: that we need to accept and acknowledge is just a
Speaker 4: part of who we are are. I actually just put
Speaker 4: something on X about research that's been done on people
Speaker 4: being able to smell when someone is going to die,
Speaker 4: and also yeah, and well yeah, definitely animals are much
Speaker 4: better at this than we are. You know, for sure.
Speaker 4: They know when someone's sick, they can tell when someone's upset.
Speaker 4: They're way more accepting of this concept than we are.
Speaker 4: But it is part of us, and I think there's
Speaker 4: a biological element to it. And I also think that
Speaker 4: when we understand the quantum a little better, we'll understand
Speaker 4: what's going on a little better, because I still think
Speaker 4: it's very much about light frequency and sound.
Speaker 1: Oh that's one of your favorites. Yeah, light frequency and sound.
Speaker 1: What's up, girl friend?
Speaker 4: Yeah, physical thing that is definitely a part of it.
Speaker 4: In my opinion.
Speaker 1: I want to say we are forty subscribers away now
Speaker 1: from seven thousand. So if you're not subscribed to CAB
Speaker 1: and you guys have done great in the last you know,
Speaker 1: four or five months, we've gotten about three thousand subscribers.
Speaker 1: If you can get us to seven thousand, that would
Speaker 1: be really dope. So if you could hit some subscribe button,
Speaker 1: I really appreciate it. This is marky O'Boyle our homie
Speaker 1: right here. Hi, Mark, how are you? BBC had a
Speaker 1: Carol King? I had, Yes, No, I totally understand Carol
Speaker 1: King and her I think her thing on BBC might
Speaker 1: have had James Taylor also accompanying her, which is really dope.
Speaker 1: So I don't blame you for watching that. This is
Speaker 1: DEBS those of you who want to follow Debs who
Speaker 1: you just spoke. It's at study of UAPs on Twitter.
Speaker 1: And someone just welcomed in New Jersey Cowboys. I think
Speaker 1: that's Chris Albert. Not sure, but if so, welcome Chris Albert.
Speaker 1: If that is you, anyway, you got nobody else here
Speaker 1: is going to get that except for Courtney, but that's okay. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I would like to speak to Christopher Sharp though, believe
Speaker 1: it or not, he's our guest today even though we've
Speaker 1: spoken as much as he has. Uh. Hopefully he doesn't
Speaker 1: mind that though. If not, then do you mind that
Speaker 1: we spoke a lot.
Speaker 6: Now? I'm just going to exit the interview now, yeah,
Speaker 6: just of course not No, you guys fantastic. The thing is, like,
Speaker 6: I find that the topic is really getting out of
Speaker 6: my kind of like comfort zone now and my area
Speaker 6: of expertise in terms of like consciousness, and what you
Speaker 6: guys bring to the table in terms of your understanding
Speaker 6: is quite enlightning. It gives me like real food for
Speaker 6: forll and you know, yeah, it really does there's the
Speaker 6: reason why people like knee deep in these programs and stuff.
Speaker 6: Do you get interested in these topics? So yeah, I
Speaker 6: can't roll it out. You know, my brother has experienced
Speaker 6: like strange experiences, my mum does, and my aunt does,
Speaker 6: my cousin does. I've never been privy to that, you know,
Speaker 6: so you know this is part of like why I'm
Speaker 6: interesting in it. So I really really enjoyed just kind
Speaker 6: of like the expertise that you have on this this panel.
Speaker 6: And yeah, I think it brings like a real holistic
Speaker 6: kind of view of the topic, which is really really
Speaker 6: helpful both to me and to your audience as well. No,
Speaker 6: so thank you. I think it's fantastic.
Speaker 1: And what's well, thank you for those comments. And by
Speaker 1: the way, it's not even really our panel, it's just
Speaker 1: this is our shew. These are cabbies, so we're really
Speaker 1: blessed to have them. And that's what the result. You know,
Speaker 1: our new fans who weren't familiar with with Debs and
Speaker 1: Nathan and Courtney were just kind of like, wow, man,
Speaker 1: this is really these guys are really dope. So I
Speaker 1: have a question for you, and then Mick has a question.
Speaker 1: Mick is of course from from England like yourself. I
Speaker 1: wish you had a Cockney accent though I want to
Speaker 1: picture them with a cockney accent.
Speaker 3: I love those.
Speaker 1: But Chris, so you know of the archetype that we
Speaker 1: spoke of, that represents those Delta Force soldiers, it represents
Speaker 1: the twenty fourth STS airmen, and it represents Jake Barber,
Speaker 1: who is really this hybrid undercover, well trained Special Operations airman.
Speaker 1: But that was masquerading as an aircraft mechanic, which is like,
Speaker 1: I've got questions that I got to get to you
Speaker 1: from you to Ross about that, because I want to
Speaker 1: know how he kept that cover amongst the aircraft maintenance
Speaker 1: guys and how that would come to fruition if he
Speaker 1: went TDY, would he say goodbye to the maintenance guys,
Speaker 1: I'll see you guys in three or four days. I
Speaker 1: got to go do reconnaissance or so I've got questions
Speaker 1: about his cover, Not that I don't believe him, but
Speaker 1: just questions. But have you been contacted by let's say,
Speaker 1: special Air Service members, special Boat Service members, any of
Speaker 1: your kind of their brethren in the uk K forces
Speaker 1: that are would be your tier one? Have you been
Speaker 1: contacted by anybody.
Speaker 6: No, not not personally, but from understanding under kind of
Speaker 6: like the umbrella of five eyes. Let's say that there
Speaker 6: have been missions that have taken place, retrieval missions involving
Speaker 6: Tier one UK operators. And also it's kind of good
Speaker 6: night and gratifying to hear that, you know, Jascki is
Speaker 6: involved in these retrievals, and you know, especially hearing the
Speaker 6: twenty four for STS as well, because that's what we
Speaker 6: really cover one of the things that we focused on
Speaker 6: when we did the Office Global Access story. And it's
Speaker 6: it's been top told said to me that you know
Speaker 6: that they're they're really part of this whole kind of
Speaker 6: like legacy program from the beginning. I mean, STS has
Speaker 6: been around and some guys for decades now, so it's
Speaker 6: been part of like retrieval missions for some time. And
Speaker 6: it was also said to me that you know, they
Speaker 6: were involved potentially in the Rendersham incident as well, although
Speaker 6: back then they were known as Brand X, So that's
Speaker 6: something that I'm still investigating as well. So yeah, I
Speaker 6: just find it really really interesting how these missions kind
Speaker 6: of like get put together, and it's something I'm still
Speaker 6: learning about.
Speaker 1: But these guys are not coming forward that you at
Speaker 1: least not to mean. Now all right, Chris, could you
Speaker 1: read this one but in a British accent that isn't yours,
Speaker 1: so another regional accent.
Speaker 6: There is a there is a Liberation Times article I
Speaker 6: can't do Northern Irish.
Speaker 1: You had it?
Speaker 4: It was fair.
Speaker 3: That was pretty good.
Speaker 6: We used to do. We used to do like like
Speaker 6: my friend always used to joke around about a colleague
Speaker 6: that he had called Linda, who was from Northern Ireland
Speaker 6: and when we went to Paris, like he was pretending
Speaker 6: to do like French with an accent something like that.
Speaker 6: And then like and I joked around about that in
Speaker 6: the office in my former agency. And then like a
Speaker 6: few weeks ago when of my former colleagues sent me
Speaker 6: a message on Instagram and it was like a clip
Speaker 6: that went viral about like a Northern Irish like rugby
Speaker 6: manager who was doing a team talk in French because
Speaker 6: he wasna a French team. It was quite quite funny
Speaker 6: because he had such a strong Northern Irish accent speaking
Speaker 6: in French. It was it was a good one.
Speaker 1: Jordi, can you do a Jordi or any.
Speaker 6: I don't want to. I don't want to offend people.
Speaker 1: You could just do it in your own British accent.
Speaker 1: That's fine.
Speaker 6: You know, we've got lovely people like Graham who lived
Speaker 6: that part of the country, and if I do a
Speaker 6: Geordy accent it might be more tinge and stuff like.
Speaker 6: There was always like a famous sitcom called Adam Partridge
Speaker 6: and he had a Jeordie friend and he used to
Speaker 6: be in the army and can understand a lot of
Speaker 6: what he was saying because it was like real kind
Speaker 6: of like real Jordy, like old style Jordie and it's like, what,
Speaker 6: that's the part of the beauty of the UK. You know,
Speaker 6: so many regional accents stuff, which is great.
Speaker 1: I love it all right, go ahead read this one
Speaker 1: in your own British accent. That shouldn't be too hard
Speaker 1: for that one.
Speaker 6: There is a Liberation Times article from December fourteenth, twenty
Speaker 6: twenty one, where the alleged occupants of a flying wingcraft
Speaker 6: found in Italy were addressed. Many people write this event
Speaker 6: as a hoax. What's you'll take again? You know these
Speaker 6: allegations that I consider from serious people. I mean there's
Speaker 6: been a debate I believe in Italy as well among
Speaker 6: people interested in the UAP topic and who investigate it
Speaker 6: of whether this is a hoax and whether these memos
Speaker 6: from the Miscellini era were real or not. But I
Speaker 6: mean what we did is when the David Grush allegations
Speaker 6: came out, this really lovely guy from Italy, who I mean.
Speaker 6: I remember when I was putting out the Magenta story,
Speaker 6: there was like one comment on X about this guy.
Speaker 6: He said, oh, my uncle, no, my great great grandfather
Speaker 6: or something like that was a Podesta at the time,
Speaker 6: and no one ever like saw it or caught onto it.
Speaker 6: But I always remembered it in my head. So when
Speaker 6: the Dave Grush story came out, I got in touch
Speaker 6: with this guy again and three myself and my co
Speaker 6: writer for The Daily Mail, Josh Boswell, were able to
Speaker 6: let the story and I proved that, yeah, his granddad
Speaker 6: was a Podesta, which is basically like the head kind
Speaker 6: of like I believe, like police or secret police person
Speaker 6: like in a region of Italy. And the story was
Speaker 6: always told for his family that you know, the great
Speaker 6: great grandfather had said that something had crashed in nineteen
Speaker 6: thirty three and that was like separate and that was
Speaker 6: before you know, like this story went viral, So that
Speaker 6: was always a story. So for me, that kind of
Speaker 6: like lended some credibilit behind the story that you had
Speaker 6: someone separate come out about that. So yeah, I think
Speaker 6: there might be something behind it. I mean that there's
Speaker 6: you know that there's the allegation you know that I
Speaker 6: think I wrote about as well, that the Italians and
Speaker 6: Germans were working on reverse engineering this craft and during
Speaker 6: World War Two, and that effort after the war went
Speaker 6: to right Field where they worked as an American team
Speaker 6: continuing those efforts. So you know, the stuff I didn't
Speaker 6: report on that I couldn't corroborate as part of my story.
Speaker 6: But you know, you have to think, you know, the
Speaker 6: timing is quite interesting, you know, especially if they were
Speaker 6: trying to reverse engineer this craft. You know they have
Speaker 6: been testing out as well. Let's say, so if they
Speaker 6: were testing a prototype, you know, that could have occurred
Speaker 6: around nineteen forty seven time. What crashed in nineteen forty seven,
Speaker 6: What was taken back to right Field in nineteen forty seven,
Speaker 6: I don't know. It always makes you think, you know,
Speaker 6: it was the Roswell crash perhaps like a reverse you know,
Speaker 6: it was one of because it seems like there were
Speaker 6: two objects involved, but you know it was one of
Speaker 6: them kind of like a potential American asset that kind
Speaker 6: of like originated from German and Italian efforts. I mean,
Speaker 6: that's something that's been put on the table.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well, the metallurgy of a craft like that would
Speaker 1: be very very obvious what it was. So first of all,
Speaker 1: if you had something like a disc, there's very few
Speaker 1: ways that they would have figured out to power something
Speaker 1: like that at that time. Even looking at the most
Speaker 1: brilliant mind they had in Germany was Verner brun Brunt
Speaker 1: and what the hell technology was he using? Rocket technology?
Speaker 1: What technology are they using today? Rocket technology with SpaceX.
Speaker 1: So it's the same technology. So I don't think it
Speaker 1: was a reverse engineered craft because making something like that
Speaker 1: fly we discussed this years ago on Cab it would
Speaker 1: have to be like a flying gas can. Because in
Speaker 1: order to project that much energy, even to make something
Speaker 1: hover and then to fly forward. Let's say that you
Speaker 1: could do that, the whole thing would have to be
Speaker 1: made of fuel. I mean, you wouldn't even be able
Speaker 1: to have a person and it then when it crashes
Speaker 1: and you go to pick it up. The most distinctive
Speaker 1: thing that the people who picked those material up was said,
Speaker 1: this is not material we've ever seen before. It's very strong,
Speaker 1: but you can fold it and it goes back into shape. Well,
Speaker 1: the metallurgical aspects or properties of that metal would have
Speaker 1: been familiar to any American metal orgist that would have
Speaker 1: looked at it, so it wouldn't be something exotic that
Speaker 1: they couldn't explain. And the whole thing that people don't
Speaker 1: get about Roswell is that if it's a weather balloon,
Speaker 1: which none of us believe that. Only just the biggest
Speaker 1: idiots and debunkers in the community believe that that it
Speaker 1: was a weather balloon. But beyond that, even if it
Speaker 1: were a craft of some sort, there would be things
Speaker 1: about it that people could look at and touch and say,
Speaker 1: this has made of very similar metal properties as what
Speaker 1: an aircraft is made out of, like a wing segment,
Speaker 1: or or even at that time, if titanium were at
Speaker 1: that time. So that's why I don't think that in
Speaker 1: the late forties you would have had something that would
Speaker 1: have flown like that that people couldn't recognize as human built.
Speaker 1: That's what when people see one of these things, you
Speaker 1: kind of like, you know, even when you see a
Speaker 1: ufou and there's been a couple of people in the
Speaker 1: chat now that have seen them, not the least of
Speaker 1: which is David. But when you see it, you kind
Speaker 1: of know that you're seeing something that's just out of
Speaker 1: this Courtney's seen one, you know, it's out of this world.
Speaker 1: I've seen one, you know, when I was a boy.
Speaker 1: So it's one of those things. And now if you're
Speaker 1: actually able to pick it up and examine it and
Speaker 1: touch it, and there's occupants and there's you can you know,
Speaker 1: the most of it is still in one intact, you're
Speaker 1: going to be able to see if that's human made.
Speaker 1: And and you know, you talk to people like Gary
Speaker 1: Nolan and uh he talks about isotopic ratios and things
Speaker 1: like that that are just we're not possible at that time,
Speaker 1: and even today would be you know, you might have
Speaker 1: to create some of these these parts in a space environment,
Speaker 1: in a vacuum free environment anyway. Uh yes, sir no.
Speaker 6: No, I agree. I agree. That's that's a good point.
Speaker 6: And you know, I wasn't able to corroborate anything around that.
Speaker 6: But what I find interesting as well is that you know,
Speaker 6: from kind of like my own sources. There's one camp
Speaker 6: it kind of like says it was kind of like,
Speaker 6: you know, they were testing some kind of like radar
Speaker 6: weapons or something like that, which brought two objects down.
Speaker 6: And then there's another kind of like set of events
Speaker 6: in that there was like a dog fight and that's
Speaker 6: what happened and that's how two craft kind of like
Speaker 6: went down as well. And I find that quite interesting
Speaker 6: because we had the J. Barber interview and he was
Speaker 6: like saying that it looked like fighting. So it's interesting
Speaker 6: to consider every eventuality in terms of what may have
Speaker 6: happened there.
Speaker 1: It's getting those shapes to take flight is something, and
Speaker 1: he alluded to something that there have been at least
Speaker 1: one aerospace company that has re engineered at least one
Speaker 1: craft to be able to fly or reverse engineer or
Speaker 1: something like that. And let's say that that's the case,
Speaker 1: but in the nineteen forties, to make something fly irrespective
Speaker 1: outside the framework of what we know are the properties
Speaker 1: of Newton's laws of physics and Bernoulli's theorem and the
Speaker 1: type of propulsion that was available back then. I've had
Speaker 1: somebody that tell me that they thought that that was
Speaker 1: a Nazi craft, and I'm just like, I'm sorry, I
Speaker 1: just I just don't think that would have been possible
Speaker 1: back then. But is it possible that they've reversed engineered
Speaker 1: some sort of craft and they're able to fly it? Sure,
Speaker 1: you know, I guess that's possible.
Speaker 4: Comment on the Nazi thing real quick, real quickly, don't mind. Sure,
Speaker 4: the Army has a PDF where they investigated some of
Speaker 4: the early accounts of UAPs that were being seen. It's
Speaker 4: a very lengthy pdf that a lot of people ignore
Speaker 4: that is available in the Department of Defenses collection in
Speaker 4: the foyer room, essentially, and it is all about them
Speaker 4: going to Germany and trying to talk to people and
Speaker 4: find out what it was that Kenneth Arnold saw and
Speaker 4: determining essentially that it was not the flying wing and
Speaker 4: it was not from the Nazis.
Speaker 5: Okay, I just wanted to throw that out there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, It's just somebody would have to convince me that
Speaker 1: they were able to propulse something fuel propulse and fly
Speaker 1: and overcome gravity of something in the forties like that,
Speaker 1: and I can just tell you from my knowledge and aerospace,
Speaker 1: I don't buy it. And if somebody shows me some
Speaker 1: that changed my mind, I'm open and changing my mind,
Speaker 1: but not happening because of just a helicopter alone. First
Speaker 1: of all, we didn't even have rotary wing aircraft in
Speaker 1: the forties, so just you know, kind of that was
Speaker 1: like the early days of Igor Sikorski. So to take
Speaker 1: something that you would have to be able to hover
Speaker 1: and then make it fly would be absolutely enormous herculean
Speaker 1: feet at that time, and it would have again and
Speaker 1: if you crashed it, you'd look at it and you
Speaker 1: would understand that it has some sort of a gas
Speaker 1: turbine powered engine that made it lift off. If you
Speaker 1: did that, and it would have to be you wouldn't
Speaker 1: be able to go very far with it because the
Speaker 1: amount of fuel that it would take. I want to
Speaker 1: also say with one thing about singular sightings and then
Speaker 1: UFO incidents like what was seen by you know, Jake
Speaker 1: Barber or any of these guys. What you're trying to
Speaker 1: do is to triangulate information. So risk Chris Rose story
Speaker 1: on Nagenta Italy and what does he have to triangulate that, Well,
Speaker 1: he has Louel Zondo and his sources. Then he has
Speaker 1: the actual writings in Italian from the time that they've
Speaker 1: captured and there's the Italian journalists that have spoke to that,
Speaker 1: and then you have David Grush. So now you can
Speaker 1: triangulate that information and say, okay, now I have at
Speaker 1: least three sources to put this together that yes, there
Speaker 1: was a craft that crashed Magenta Italy in something like
Speaker 1: thirty three, and then it after the war has translated
Speaker 1: the States. When you have a singular event like what
Speaker 1: happened to Jim Semivan, we don't have a try. We
Speaker 1: can't triangulate that story and say, okay, it has to
Speaker 1: be true. We have to trust that based on Jim
Speaker 1: and his clearance that he's telling the truth, just like
Speaker 1: anybody like Courtney's UFO story driving with her daughter to college.
Speaker 1: You know, we have Courtney and we trust Courtney, so
Speaker 1: we have a tendency that we're going to believe what
Speaker 1: she's says say even though we can't triangulate it with
Speaker 1: Jake Barber because it now if he just told that story, Okay, Jake,
Speaker 1: that's great. We've never heard of this program you were
Speaker 1: in with where you're undercover. We don't know anything. Your
Speaker 1: GD two fourteen doesn't even say some of these things
Speaker 1: that you say, So I'm you know, it's great. But
Speaker 1: now when you have other Tier one soldiers and airmen
Speaker 1: that are coming, now we can triangulate that story and say,
Speaker 1: now we have something valid here. Now we have something
Speaker 1: we can sink our teeth into. And that is what
Speaker 1: makes this story extraordinary. The difficulty people have with Dave
Speaker 1: is that, and I don't have any difficulties with Dave
Speaker 1: Grush whatsoever. Is that he came out his story and
Speaker 1: really you have Carlnell that said, Okay, this guy's legitimate,
Speaker 1: but there hasn't necessarily been a triangulation. But then again,
Speaker 1: Louel Azando has said, you know, I worked in a
Speaker 1: jock with Dave and you know, and and also Dave
Speaker 1: brief President Trump, you know, during his last administration. So
Speaker 1: that's kind of what you're looking for when you're trying
Speaker 1: to evaluate. And Jake Barber has that triangulation of folks
Speaker 1: that are coming out to support him.
Speaker 7: I just wanted to mention DJ that you talked about
Speaker 7: the Italians. I just wanted to mention Paolo Gizzardo. He's
Speaker 7: one of the experts, you know, so for people want
Speaker 7: to look up, you know, contacts in Italy. I know
Speaker 7: he's available to discuss people with people, just a little reference.
Speaker 1: Say that again. I'm sorry I was reading this about Italy.
Speaker 1: Would you say, I'm sorry.
Speaker 5: Gizzardo is what the Italian experts? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Okay, so yeah, I mean so that that right there.
Speaker 1: I mean, you have a pretty good try. And guys,
Speaker 1: let me know in the chat if I've missed anything
Speaker 1: for Sharpie uh, and we'll get we'll get back to it.
Speaker 1: I know Sue is saying that she had uh, I
Speaker 1: think and Sue is actually said that she saw a
Speaker 1: flying saucer. Also, let's go around the room, let's see
Speaker 1: what else we got for sharp and then we'll get
Speaker 1: them out of here because we've already kept them fifteen
Speaker 1: minutes over.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I have a question, Chris. So, you're very well
Speaker 3: aware that the UFO, allegedly the UFO programs have been siloed,
Speaker 3: that there are various different efforts to understand these objects
Speaker 3: and the craft and the materials, and so these different
Speaker 3: programs are heavily siloed, kind of like the Manhattan Project,
Speaker 3: that they may not necessarily know what one side the
Speaker 3: other side is doing. Does that, in your opinion, make
Speaker 3: it pretty challenging to piece together a coherent narrative of
Speaker 3: what in fact it is we are dealing with. And
Speaker 3: I wonder if that is also part of the complication
Speaker 3: with UFO disclosure. And you know, here I'm thinking with
Speaker 3: the Schumer Amendment, this UAP Review Board kind of collating
Speaker 3: this information, trying to make sense of it all. You know,
Speaker 3: I am of the opinion that with more folks coming out,
Speaker 3: like Jake Barber and others, we're going to get almost
Speaker 3: I want to say, competing narratives. We're going to get
Speaker 3: some some different kinds of lanes of information because these
Speaker 3: programs didn't really talk to each other. And so how
Speaker 3: do you think that that's going to be What kind
Speaker 3: of challenged as that pose to someone who's trying to
Speaker 3: cover this or even to trying to explain it to
Speaker 3: the American people or the world, you know what, what kind
Speaker 3: of challenges that pose to kind of putting it all together.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's really difficult and complex. You know, like when
Speaker 6: I start last year sort of reporting on the Office
Speaker 6: of Science and Weapons Research, and you know how it
Speaker 6: got custody basically historically allegedly of the gender craft, which
Speaker 6: is when from understanding when an element of the Manhattan
Speaker 6: project is transferred to the Central Intelligence Group, which was
Speaker 6: precursor to the CIA. So then you're just tracking the
Speaker 6: history of you know, what it was, what happened, how
Speaker 6: it's name changed all through the years, basically, so you
Speaker 6: know that there's that element to consider. And then you
Speaker 6: see that you know, the these materials at Lockheed had,
Speaker 6: you know, they originated and they belonged to the CIA's
Speaker 6: Office of Science Technology. But then from understanding now that
Speaker 6: the craft that get retrieved now are actually that they
Speaker 6: belong to the d o D that that's the custody.
Speaker 6: But then you know, the proportion system gets studied by
Speaker 6: elements within the d OE and yeah, and and they
Speaker 6: all have different roles to play. And if you know,
Speaker 6: the Office of Scientific and Weapons Research it's called upon
Speaker 6: to help, they will, but otherwise they can't really get
Speaker 6: access unless asked by the d D requesting help. So
Speaker 6: the CIA basically used to be the only gaming or
Speaker 6: one of the only games in town. I get for
Speaker 6: the most power back in you know, the the late
Speaker 6: nineteen forties, early nineteen fifties, But since then, there's so
Speaker 6: many different kind of players involved now in terms of
Speaker 6: the UAP stuff like the combat support kind of like
Speaker 6: agencies as well, like the NRO, n g A and
Speaker 6: stuff like that. So it's really really complex from from
Speaker 6: from what I hear in terms of how these things
Speaker 6: are done, and you know the role that's played by
Speaker 6: kind of like each element of the government and stuff,
Speaker 6: so it can get really really complex. And then obviously
Speaker 6: as well, you know, you look at the contractors involved
Speaker 6: in how they're put in charge of projects and stuff.
Speaker 6: And from understanding, you know, the US Air Force and
Speaker 6: the CIA have been working a long time on this.
Speaker 6: They have an agreement where by the CIA transfers you know,
Speaker 6: these these craft, these CIA to US Air Force contractors.
Speaker 6: But then again, you know, it changes the dynamic changes
Speaker 6: when you conduct maritime missions, you know, and and it's
Speaker 6: all dependent on whether the craft yeah, and what what
Speaker 6: its capabilities are and stuff, you know, like was mentioned
Speaker 6: in one of the congressional hearings. You know, they have
Speaker 6: to make a decision of what contracts to send it to.
Speaker 6: See so if it does kind of like have underwater
Speaker 6: capabilities that are very advanced, you might send it to
Speaker 6: General Dynamics for instance. You know, it's certainly sorry I
Speaker 6: go down such a hole here is so new a Man.
Speaker 3: I mean, we we kind of have to expect there
Speaker 3: to be some confounding components here because it's sort of
Speaker 3: like the blind Man and the Elephant story, right, You've
Speaker 3: got all these different agencies that are that are addressing
Speaker 3: certain aspects of the program. Those agencies have their own culture,
Speaker 3: have their own perspective. They tend to want to look
Speaker 3: at things from a specific angle, and so their interpretation
Speaker 3: of that material, whatever it is that they're focused on,
Speaker 3: could be entirely different than an other agency's interpretation. And
Speaker 3: so it makes it very difficult for the public to
Speaker 3: kind of then go, well, what is the truth? You know,
Speaker 3: does anyone have a fulsome picture of what this all is?
Speaker 3: And I'm curious, you know, do you do you think
Speaker 3: there is anyone or any group that may have that
Speaker 3: more fulsome picture of what this all is?
Speaker 6: I think in terms of like understanding of origin, origin,
Speaker 6: intent in questions like that, the things that the public
Speaker 6: are really interested, I think that will be the CIA.
Speaker 6: CIA's task would be like to find out to answer
Speaker 6: those questions, where do they originate from, who control is,
Speaker 6: what do they want? What is their intent with us?
Speaker 6: You know, and if they are if there are different
Speaker 6: kind of species and actions that have actually been like uncovered.
Speaker 6: It's the CIA to kind of like classifiers. I suppose
Speaker 6: that would be its prime mission. So I think in
Speaker 6: terms of understanding of who the non human intelligence are
Speaker 6: and what what their intent is and their original and
Speaker 6: stuff like that, I think CIA would be a good
Speaker 6: bet in terms of its mission kind of like answering
Speaker 6: those questions. But then again, if you're interested in the
Speaker 6: questions about the technology and stuff like that, you know
Speaker 6: it will be the d D and the DOE, the
Speaker 6: natural abs and you know, the contractors. So but yeah,
Speaker 6: i'd also add to this, you know, it's it's no
Speaker 6: coincidence that Steve Justice kind of like got into this
Speaker 6: topic joining TTSA, you know, and TTSA had this kind
Speaker 6: of vision to build you know, their own kind of
Speaker 6: like craft, you know. So why would Steve Justice from
Speaker 6: Lockheed s Gunkwirks go along with this mad thing to
Speaker 6: kind of like reverse engineer and bring out a non
Speaker 6: technology based on non human technology and stuff like that
Speaker 6: if it didn't exist. Like, he's a serious guy, you know,
Speaker 6: so why would he go along with that if it
Speaker 6: didn't exist? So yeah, kind of like add more weight
Speaker 6: to what Jake Barber was saying as well, in that
Speaker 6: you know, they have kind of made some big strides
Speaker 6: reverse engineering the craft. So yeah, that's interesting as well.
Speaker 1: And could you answer this one, Chris, because I mean,
Speaker 1: we know that you're a journalist, but Sue Sponte has
Speaker 1: got some kind of like she's not aware of you
Speaker 1: because she's from the Karen Reid community legal community. So
Speaker 1: what's your what would you call your specialty? Maybe you
Speaker 1: could just tell people about what it is that you do.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 6: So I'm a journalist from the Liberation Times. I also
Speaker 6: I'm a contributor for the Daily Mail as well. And
Speaker 6: what I do is I look to where I can
Speaker 6: break new stories on the UFO topic, in terms of
Speaker 6: what whistleblowers are saying, in terms of what's happening in
Speaker 6: Congress right now. For instance, you know we had a
Speaker 6: conversation a while ago, didn't we DJ about certain members
Speaker 6: of Congress, perhaps in the intelligence community feeling fearful.
Speaker 1: Oh you freaked me out, man, when you reported that
Speaker 1: freak me out.
Speaker 6: I have to remind people when I got something right,
Speaker 6: you know, because a lot of the boys kind of like, oh,
Speaker 6: he doesn't get anything right, and we had that conversation,
Speaker 6: but I think we both like raised some really good
Speaker 6: points about that, and I think that's kind of, you know,
Speaker 6: being backed up now by by Barber's testiny. So I
Speaker 6: tried to break the stories that what's going on behind
Speaker 6: the scenes at the moment. A lot of it is
Speaker 6: like intuitive as well. Like my breakthrough article was a
Speaker 6: story that got picked up by Christopher Mellen and Lula
Speaker 6: Zonda and they retweeted it back in like a few
Speaker 6: years ago now might in twenty twenty one. And you know,
Speaker 6: that article came about because I just kind of like
Speaker 6: had this need to write something, you know, because I
Speaker 6: was feeling really strongly about the AOIMSG and the Gillibrand Amendment.
Speaker 6: So you have this feeling and you write it, and
Speaker 6: then you go to bed, and then you wake up
Speaker 6: the next day. You've got lots of messages from people saying, Wow,
Speaker 6: what an article. Chris Mellon's wanting to retweet it and
Speaker 6: stuff like that, and what is happening to my life?
Speaker 6: And then the next moment you've got people wanting to
Speaker 6: go on podcasts and stuff like that. So you go
Speaker 6: from kind of like nothing and not really well known
Speaker 6: to kind of like all of a sudden, like, oh,
Speaker 6: who's this person? And you know, the first operation times
Speaker 6: articles didn't even have my name on because I didn't
Speaker 6: want to be anyone. I didn't want to be you
Speaker 6: know known. I just wanted to provide good information and yeah,
Speaker 6: kind of got out of control. I guess, Ah, it's.
Speaker 1: Well in control, and you will beloved. I mean, when
Speaker 1: you get to be as good as Chris is, you're
Speaker 1: gonna have haters in the community that are going to say, oh,
Speaker 1: it's information crap or isn't you know They're going to
Speaker 1: try to tear him down because they know that he's
Speaker 1: breaking stories. Like I said, he can actually have comms
Speaker 1: with people at the Pentagon, with Susan Goff, people that
Speaker 1: we wish on this panel here, that we wish we
Speaker 1: could contact on but they do answer Chris, so that
Speaker 1: means that he's resonating with them. I also want to say,
Speaker 1: just to summarize what he was getting at before, like,
Speaker 1: if you're wondering why some of your this is something
Speaker 1: that Chris broke that I never even considered, never even
Speaker 1: thought of this, And he said that if you're wondering
Speaker 1: why some of your elected representatives who are interested in
Speaker 1: UFOs have have had to back off in certain circumstances,
Speaker 1: and I'm just gonna I'm not accusing anything. I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: what if there were certain agencies that were to contact
Speaker 1: that member of Congress and say, you know, if you
Speaker 1: push too hard on this subject, it would be really
Speaker 1: awful if information about you would be released to the public.
Speaker 1: And if you're a politician, you are going to back
Speaker 1: right the hell off if you have anything to hide
Speaker 1: it all, and most people do so. So I'll just
Speaker 1: leave it at that. I'll just leave it at that
Speaker 1: without any further attribution. Yep. So what do you got
Speaker 1: for Christopher?
Speaker 4: Before I asked my question, I just have to comment
Speaker 4: and ask the chat to be respectful to people who
Speaker 4: have had experiences and encounters. I've noticed some comments in
Speaker 4: the chat that are meant to be funny, but they
Speaker 4: can be hurtful to someone who's had an experience. So okay,
Speaker 4: So yes, I just wanted to ask Chris, since you know,
Speaker 4: obviously I came from a place of research with this.
Speaker 4: Every single thing related to this topic has documented evidence
Speaker 4: connected to it. Underground bases, the reconnaissance missions to collect
Speaker 4: objects that have fallen, objects that have come from space,
Speaker 4: that have been collected under programs like moon dust, so
Speaker 4: on and so forth, all of their all of these
Speaker 4: things have evidence connected to them. Why do you think
Speaker 4: people just still cannot handle it, cannot believe it despite
Speaker 4: all that evidence.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so, I mean retrieval missions and stuff like that,
Speaker 6: that is a fact. You know. Most of the time
Speaker 6: it's kind of like adversary systems and stuff like that.
Speaker 6: These are this is a faction in these you know,
Speaker 6: the JSOCK and CIA connection. It really exists, you know,
Speaker 6: but mostly for kind of like stuff that we know
Speaker 6: what it is. So you know, it's just seems that
Speaker 6: some of the time this stuff we don't know what
Speaker 6: it is. And it's been said to me is that
Speaker 6: some of this stuff is deorbited does come from space,
Speaker 6: which is wow. And yeah, on underground bases as well.
Speaker 6: And yeah, I think I think that's really really interesting.
Speaker 6: I remember, not not that it necessarily had to do
Speaker 6: anything about UAPs at all, but there was a story
Speaker 6: back in two thousand and four about some British special
Speaker 6: forces I believe, who had come to Mexico just like
Speaker 6: his tourists, and that's how they got into the country
Speaker 6: and they were basically caught in a cave system and
Speaker 6: they had actually got stranded there, and the Mexican authority
Speaker 6: is like really angry and it caused like a huge, huge,
Speaker 6: like diplomatic row be from Mexico and the UK at
Speaker 6: the time, and it kind of like made you kind
Speaker 6: of question like what were these like British special Forces
Speaker 6: personnel doing in these caves in the first place in Mexico,
Speaker 6: Like why were they there? And they wouldn't accept help
Speaker 6: at all from the Mexicans. They didn't want them knowing
Speaker 6: what they were doing. So, yeah, you hear stuff like that,
Speaker 6: and yeah you hear about as well. It's like underground
Speaker 6: systems in the mountains in the kind of like the
Speaker 6: Pyrenees area between France and Spain, you know. And it'd
Speaker 6: have been said to me as well that you know,
Speaker 6: there's like a link to this as well in terms
Speaker 6: of like RH negative blood and like when you look
Speaker 6: at the concentration of people who are RH negative, a
Speaker 6: lot of them live in that Basque area which is nearby.
Speaker 6: So I don't know, like the way that I kind
Speaker 6: of like look at this story, you know, is I
Speaker 6: kind of like contemplate everything, and if I can corroborate
Speaker 6: them one day and get serious sources to like back
Speaker 6: it up and provide me like meat on the bone,
Speaker 6: then I can report them, you know, to my audience
Speaker 6: and inform them. But I like to contemplate all these angles,
Speaker 6: you know, I've always got them in my head, and
Speaker 6: I try never to rule anything out because straight away,
Speaker 6: like a lot of the journalists, like in the UFO
Speaker 6: community have been involved previously kind of like rubbished, kind
Speaker 6: of like the Eric Davis stuff and you know, the
Speaker 6: Davis meeting that he had with Admiral Wilson. They've rubbished
Speaker 6: legacy programs and stuff like that, and they've just ruled
Speaker 6: them out, and they put themselves in the corner. You know,
Speaker 6: they're like, this can't happen. This isn't what my source
Speaker 6: of dependican are telling me, and stuff like that. So
Speaker 6: you know, they kind of like dug their own graves
Speaker 6: and stuff. But you should never do that. I don't
Speaker 6: think you should ever rule anything out or dispute something
Speaker 6: or say that person's lying on this person's line, because
Speaker 6: the facts can always change. So it's always good love
Speaker 6: of torawl anything out. But always be on the lookout
Speaker 6: for data and corroboration. So I'm sorry. I hope that
Speaker 6: answered your question. So I didn't want to go to
Speaker 6: off the path there.
Speaker 8: It's not bad, mate. So we'll get this one from
Speaker 8: Pati Murphy. I'm fascinated by this topic. Players have more
Speaker 8: shows on this subject. I'd love to share the story
Speaker 8: that I was told by someone in Advanced Crafts regularly
Speaker 8: coming out of the water in Hawaii.
Speaker 1: That's my Irish accent, right there?
Speaker 6: Is that? Okay, Chris, Yeah, it's a really really good one.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I think Rob though our friend Rob probably
Speaker 1: would want to slap me in the face right now.
Speaker 1: Uh but but anyway, Patty, Yeah, we will do more
Speaker 1: and it would be great. Yeah, we'd love to have
Speaker 1: on a panel of listeners talk about their experiences. And
Speaker 1: I want to let you know, Patty, that everybody on
Speaker 1: this channel has had, has talked to people about us OS,
Speaker 1: which basically under sea submersible you know, unknown. What is
Speaker 1: us OS again? Is it undersea submersible objects and unknown
Speaker 1: submersible objects.
Speaker 4: That's one of my favorite things to point out that
Speaker 4: they change what that means all the time. So submerged, Yes,
Speaker 4: there we go.
Speaker 1: Yeah, craft that can that can go into the water
Speaker 1: and have been spotted by naval personnel at I don't know,
Speaker 1: five hundred knots or something like that, which you know,
Speaker 1: we don't have anything that could you know, any kind
Speaker 1: of craft that could move underwater with hydrodynamic drag at
Speaker 1: you know, at that level. So so, yeah, we've all
Speaker 1: heard of us os. And Tim Galladett, the admiral, one
Speaker 1: star admiral that that testified before Congress, has taken at
Speaker 1: least one, maybe two reports of usos during his navy
Speaker 1: Navy career. So anyway, thank you, Paty Murphy. Uh Court,
Speaker 1: did you have a final question for uh?
Speaker 3: There's I do I do.
Speaker 7: It's a bit, it's a bit off the wall, and
Speaker 7: the only thing I can say it's just thinking about
Speaker 7: the Alaskan and you know, impersonation would be.
Speaker 5: Oh geez, I'm just a hockey mom. I'm just a
Speaker 5: mom and I can see Russia. I can see Russia
Speaker 5: from my back yard. Yeah, yeah, that might be the
Speaker 5: best to ask, and you know I can do today.
Speaker 7: All Right, this is an offer wall question, Chris, but
Speaker 7: I know you're going to get it because you're in
Speaker 7: the field you're you know, you're doing it. So you're
Speaker 7: on the you're on the you're in the trenches. So
Speaker 7: a lot of the people from the agency, from the
Speaker 7: CIA who have come out this kind of dovetails a
Speaker 7: little bit with Nason's question, but goes into the weeds.
Speaker 5: You know, these guys have had experiences.
Speaker 7: You know, they've had experiences on the job, They've had
Speaker 7: experiences in the field, and whether they're involved with the
Speaker 7: science and technology or whatever department they're in, they tend to,
Speaker 7: you know, come out and share experiences, whether it's Jim
Speaker 7: semi Van or John Ramirez or you know Steve who
Speaker 7: we all know. So I'm just wondering, when you're working
Speaker 7: with sources, and I'm not you know, asking you to
Speaker 7: give up any sources or methods or anything, but when
Speaker 7: you're working with people who were former agency CIA partic curely,
Speaker 7: do you find that some of them or many of
Speaker 7: them have had experiences with the NHI and they, you know,
Speaker 7: in their narratives or in their discussions, they bring that
Speaker 7: to your attention or to the four Yeah.
Speaker 6: I think a lot of people I do speak to
Speaker 6: you for an intelligence community to have these experiences, I
Speaker 6: believe there was someone as well in the USS, the
Speaker 6: Field or Reasonvelt, which was involved in some of the
Speaker 6: East Coast incidents, and an intelligence officer on there had
Speaker 6: kind of like experiences as well. So yeah, I do
Speaker 6: find that and especially like when you're taking into account
Speaker 6: like people working with the CIA, mean needs are gifted
Speaker 6: individuals to get where they are in the first place,
Speaker 6: and the CIA is looking for people who aren't just intelligent,
Speaker 6: you know, they've got to have something else, They've got
Speaker 6: to think outside the box and become extraordinary. And you know,
Speaker 6: I was thinking that were they actually you know, like
Speaker 6: a lot of people and kind of like to stigmatize
Speaker 6: people that have had experiences and stuff like that. But
Speaker 6: you know, like when you look back at history, you
Speaker 6: know you think of like John of Arc you know,
Speaker 6: like kind of has an experience and religious experience as
Speaker 6: a young girl and it transforms her and then she
Speaker 6: goes on to become a great leader and kind of
Speaker 6: like beat back US English from France, you know, and
Speaker 6: you have stuff like that. You know, that's that's that's
Speaker 6: a real world situation. It just so happened she was
Speaker 6: inspired by that. You know, you look at Oliver Cromwell,
Speaker 6: you know, who got the king beheaded and started the
Speaker 6: Civil War and became like the law protector of England,
Speaker 6: you know, and you know, you look through his biography
Speaker 6: and you know he kind of like said that he
Speaker 6: had voices in his head and stuff like that, and
Speaker 6: God spoke to him and every kind of like you know,
Speaker 6: if you would to look at his diary and stuff
Speaker 6: like that would all be about, you know, be about
Speaker 6: probably having voices in his head and stuff like that
Speaker 6: and thinking that God's telling him to do something, that
Speaker 6: that's his mission and stuff like that. Say, you know,
Speaker 6: a lot of people have had kind of like spiritual
Speaker 6: experiences who have gone on to do great things, and
Speaker 6: it's just accepted that this is part of history in
Speaker 6: terms of these experiences that have had you know, so
Speaker 6: the modern day kind of interpretation of that is kind
Speaker 6: of like to do a UAP, I guess, isn't it.
Speaker 6: So I don't know why we stigmatize that, because we
Speaker 6: know that there's evidence that spiritual experiences does do happen,
Speaker 6: and they've kind of like played a major role in
Speaker 6: history and shaping the world that we live in today.
Speaker 6: So I always think about that, and you know, I
Speaker 6: think dev as Well mentioned about experiences before as well,
Speaker 6: that we shouldn't you know, we've got to be respectful
Speaker 6: towards him, and I wholly agree. You know, I remember
Speaker 6: speaking to Peter Corey the Australian experience, you know, and
Speaker 6: you see the impact that it had on his life
Speaker 6: in terms of having that experience. You know, the guy
Speaker 6: went on TV, he did a lie detective test. You know,
Speaker 6: he found like I think it was two hairs as
Speaker 6: well from this being one of the beings that visited
Speaker 6: him got it tested. It's turned out extraordinary. But you know,
Speaker 6: you find out that his kids suffered from bullying at
Speaker 6: school and stuff on that and his life. Nothing good
Speaker 6: of that came from here, you know, came of that
Speaker 6: for him. You know, it made his life a lot harder.
Speaker 6: But and this is why many people that do have
Speaker 6: experiences haven't spoken out. And I believe that there are
Speaker 6: members of Congress as well, there are experiences that haven't
Speaker 6: come out as well. You know, just from my perspective,
Speaker 6: just because I haven't been an experiencer like many others do,
Speaker 6: you know, and many others basically will just make fun
Speaker 6: of them stuff like that because it's not happened in
Speaker 6: their life before. But that's like a really really dangerous
Speaker 6: path to go on on. You know. This is kind
Speaker 6: of how we got ourselves involved with the initial response
Speaker 6: in COVID, you know, because a lot of people didn't
Speaker 6: didn't take it seriously at first, you know, when it
Speaker 6: came to COVID, because it had never happened in their
Speaker 6: experience before. They had never experienced a pandemic before. So
Speaker 6: because it had never happened in their life before, it
Speaker 6: is outside there experience, they didn't take it seriously. And
Speaker 6: I think the same thing applies to UAP as well.
Speaker 6: Just because you have an experience in your life before
Speaker 6: doesn't mean that it's not real, and it's a psychological
Speaker 6: trap that people fall into. I feel, Chris.
Speaker 1: This last one Suisponte asked about if you had been threatened.
Speaker 1: I told her that you had, and then this is
Speaker 1: her follow up. I don't know how deep you want
Speaker 1: to go on this, if at all, but I want
Speaker 1: to throw this out there. This would be the last question.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I've been told that there have been threats and
Speaker 6: that I was treading in dangerous territory with what I'm doing,
Speaker 6: especially with certain stories that I've reported on, and it
Speaker 6: said to me that, you know, some of the people
Speaker 6: that you might be reporting on could potentially being involved
Speaker 6: with wet works, which is basically assassinations and stuff like that,
Speaker 6: and you're dealing with serious people. That's what I've been
Speaker 6: told before. So yeah, I've got a wife and I've
Speaker 6: got two kids that I loved, and I can't just
Speaker 6: think of myself when it comes to this. I've got
Speaker 6: to think about my family as well. And yeah, and
Speaker 6: I know that a lot of people that I'm in
Speaker 6: contact with have been told, you know, their phones might
Speaker 6: be bugged and stuff like that. Well, their phone calls
Speaker 6: might be listened to potentially due to being in contact
Speaker 6: with me. So you have those conversations from time to time.
Speaker 6: But I mean for me, because of like you know,
Speaker 6: I'm a full time dad basically for the most part,
Speaker 6: I'm taking my kids to score and changing nappers and
Speaker 6: stuff like that. I'm doing two jobs and just trying
Speaker 6: my best basically to stay above water in my daily life.
Speaker 6: So luckily, it doesn't really give me time to ponder
Speaker 6: that too much, which is a saving grace for me
Speaker 6: as well. So yeah, but it's definitely tough because you know,
Speaker 6: sometimes you do think should I just give up? It?
Speaker 6: Is this worth it?
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 6: But thankfully, you know, I've got so many dear friends.
Speaker 6: You know, I got my patrons who support me. They
Speaker 6: you know, don't just support me financially, they support me
Speaker 6: emotionally as well, you know, and that's my safe place
Speaker 6: to go on to the Patreon and talk to them
Speaker 6: and stuff like that. And then you know, I've got
Speaker 6: many other friends who helped me. And there was one
Speaker 6: time I remember I was just going to quit Twitter
Speaker 6: and quit journalism because a journalist I'd really looked up
Speaker 6: to just basically went crazy at me and started like
Speaker 6: throwing all these horrible abuse at me online where it
Speaker 6: felt like that anyway, and it really upset me because
Speaker 6: I'm like, well, actually, if one of my icons doesn't
Speaker 6: like me and it's criticizing and stuff like that, I
Speaker 6: just can't be bothered. I've just done with this. I
Speaker 6: don't live for this, you know. And you know, I
Speaker 6: got a call from lou Lula Zondie, you know, and
Speaker 6: he just picked me up, you know, and he was like,
Speaker 6: don't worry about it. You're doing a great job, but
Speaker 6: you know, you've got to get back on there, we
Speaker 6: need you and stuff like that. Yeah, it's just kind
Speaker 6: of like it's great to have people like that, you know,
Speaker 6: who do do inspire you. And yeah, you are going
Speaker 6: to get people in the community, especially for their journalists
Speaker 6: and stuff like that, who do attack you. And it's
Speaker 6: like that, you know, but you've just got to rise
Speaker 6: above it at the end of the day, and you've
Speaker 6: just got to carry on reporting the truth. And you know,
Speaker 6: if any of your stories are inaccurate, you've got to
Speaker 6: You've just got to correct them, you know, or update them.
Speaker 6: And I've always done that when the facts change, I'll
Speaker 6: update the story, you know, because the main thing is
Speaker 6: that my audience is well informed. You know, we've discussed
Speaker 6: it already, you know. I think I've got a pretty
Speaker 6: good track record from reporting breaking the news of the
Speaker 6: NASSA UAP study to the first hearings that happened in decades,
Speaker 6: to plenty of other stuff as well.
Speaker 7: So, yeah, after some global access, that was one of
Speaker 7: your biggest don't leave that one out.
Speaker 6: Yeah that was that was a big one as well.
Speaker 6: And I guess just piecing together just kind of like
Speaker 6: how these missions are put together and how they work
Speaker 6: differently depending on the situation as well. So, yeah, that
Speaker 6: it's just really important to me just to provide accurate
Speaker 6: information and to provide a value to people, because that's
Speaker 6: what I'm trying to do. It. It's not about me.
Speaker 6: It's about the information. That's the most important thing, and
Speaker 6: how good the information is. So that's always what I'm
Speaker 6: just focused on. And yeah, so that's always my drive.
Speaker 6: It's the information. It's the value of the information, not
Speaker 6: my personality, nothing else about me. It's the information and
Speaker 6: whether you can trust it.
Speaker 1: I'm confused. I thought it was my phone call that
Speaker 1: picked you up.
Speaker 6: And then also Alexander, who's a great guy, tell you
Speaker 6: there's so many lies that happen. Like it's like he
Speaker 6: understands life in a different way, you know, like he
Speaker 6: didn't have a plan for this happening or anything like that.
Speaker 6: It just all came together like he knew. It was
Speaker 6: like I remember when there was the big phone home,
Speaker 6: which was years ago. I wasn't in touch with Lee
Speaker 6: back then, but I remember like Dan Warren, you know,
Speaker 6: the guy from Tick Tuck's great. He called because everyone
Speaker 6: was supposed to call their local representatives, and it just
Speaker 6: so happened that Dan Warren's local representative was Tim Burchett,
Speaker 6: and I got a message from Dan Morren basically saying, look,
Speaker 6: my member of like Congress has got in touch with
Speaker 6: me after he reached out to him saying he's really
Speaker 6: interested in this and he wants to reach out and
Speaker 6: get connected to Lulas on day and I was like,
Speaker 6: oh gosh, I don't I don't know Lou, but I
Speaker 6: can introduce him to the other Lou Lou him and
Speaker 6: Hez and Dan got in touch with Lou, him and
Speaker 6: Az and then Lou Jiminais introduced them. That was that,
Speaker 6: you know, and see, it's that stuff happens all the
Speaker 6: time with Lou. I remember I was in London with
Speaker 6: him once as well, just standing outside a pub and
Speaker 6: this guy walks past. He I know you you're from
Speaker 6: you know this TV show? You know you're the whistleblower
Speaker 6: and stuff like that, and the guy went on to
Speaker 6: be his agent.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 6: Just like that happens all the time, you know. It
Speaker 6: scenings around Lou's life, all these synchronists. It's really bizarre.
Speaker 1: He's huge, man, He's huge, he really is. I love
Speaker 1: Lou and we're all big fans of him. He's Alesondo
Speaker 1: has done. You know, he basically started this whole, this
Speaker 1: whole ball rolling. He and Chris Mellon started this ball rolling,
Speaker 1: or we wouldn't be sitting here right now, and all
Speaker 1: these other people wouldn't have come out were they not
Speaker 1: the predecessors. So Chris, let's give you an opportunity to
Speaker 1: pump up your stuff and then we're gonna get out
Speaker 1: of here.
Speaker 6: Yes, yes, you can find my articles on www dot
Speaker 6: Liberation Times dot com, so you can find me on there,
Speaker 6: and on Twitter slash x can find me my handle
Speaker 6: which is Chris uk Sharp I believe, yeah, and keep
Speaker 6: on pullowing the story. It should be a pretty interesting year.
Speaker 6: But at the moment, we're just waiting to see if
Speaker 6: Trump takes action. There's like two potential routes, you know,
Speaker 6: they free potential routes that Trump takes action. Now, Trump
Speaker 6: is forced into action with new people coming forward and
Speaker 6: the new Dan Barrar documentary as well, So he's forced
Speaker 6: into action because the credibility of the people and the
Speaker 6: information is so serious incredible. He's forced to do that,
Speaker 6: you know. Or we've got the skywatchers as well, so
Speaker 6: you know, Jake is basically you know, don't just don't
Speaker 6: just like, just don't just believe what I say. I'm gonna,
Speaker 6: you know, I'm gonna, I'm going to verify, you know,
Speaker 6: I'm gonna. I'm gonna, you know, summon these craft and
Speaker 6: bring them down, you know, through that and get them
Speaker 6: invited into land. So let's see what happened, you know.
Speaker 6: So we've got different potential routes disclosure. We're just hoping that,
Speaker 6: you know, it speeds up.
Speaker 1: I have to tell you if somebody, I think it
Speaker 1: was miss Jessica and b ar Mad wanted you to
Speaker 1: see if we could get you to say free Karen
Speaker 1: Reid like that I told you about the case.
Speaker 6: Like a while ago.
Speaker 1: You probably don't remember about it, but can you say
Speaker 1: free Karen Reid?
Speaker 6: Who? I remember quite what quite some time again? Because
Speaker 6: you know, we've got like some famous, really really bad
Speaker 6: people like murderers in the UK people and I remember
Speaker 6: I think like one time they got Donald Trump like
Speaker 6: say free such and such like not know who it
Speaker 6: is or oh uncle, it's his name, not not knowing
Speaker 6: it was the Yorkshireripper or something like that, you know,
Speaker 6: because he didn't have any knowledge of it. Like I
Speaker 6: think Donald Trump ha spent along with it.
Speaker 5: Way did he politically correct? Chris?
Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, so real quick, real quick, because this
Speaker 1: this lady you're seeing on the screen, we're going to
Speaker 1: show her in a minute. We're going to talk about
Speaker 1: her in a second, because she's coming up February fifth
Speaker 1: on the show. But basically, Karen Reid was a accused
Speaker 1: of she had dropped her boyfriend off at this house.
Speaker 1: He was a Boston cop. She dropped him off at
Speaker 1: the home of another Boston cop after they were partying
Speaker 1: with a group of cops, and essentially she was accused
Speaker 1: of backing up over him at twenty four miles an
Speaker 1: hour and hitting him, and none of nobody would approach
Speaker 1: the home because this Boston cop was quite powerful and
Speaker 1: his family in the town was quite powerful. Sound a
Speaker 1: little bit like England with those sort of class you
Speaker 1: know things. His family dominated the town and so basically
Speaker 1: they arrested her for murder. But none of the injuries
Speaker 1: that are on this Sadly, this officer named John O'Keeffe.
Speaker 1: The anniversary of his death is about four days from now.
Speaker 1: None of the injuries are consistent with being hit by
Speaker 1: a six thousand pound SUV at twenty four miles an hour.
Speaker 1: They're indicative of being smacked on the back of the
Speaker 1: head with a big gash on his head, dogs on
Speaker 1: his arm, and some abrasions as if he was in
Speaker 1: a fist fight, but no broken bones and no bruises
Speaker 1: on his body from being hit by a car. So
Speaker 1: because they didn't want to approach the homeowner, they decided
Speaker 1: to make the fall girl, this single forty something woman
Speaker 1: who's a college professor that was dating this cop. So
Speaker 1: that's Karen Reid, and they the first trial ended in
Speaker 1: a hung jury, so they're going to try her again.
Speaker 1: And that's kind of like most of the people you
Speaker 1: see in the audience here, with the smattering of our
Speaker 1: UFO audience as well.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, definitely, yeah.
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 6: You know, one of my favorite songs is Hurricane by
Speaker 6: Bob Dylan.
Speaker 1: You know it's injustice, Yes, Reuben Hurricane Carter. Yeah. Michelle Littlefield,
Speaker 1: who you see here, I had an hour and an
Speaker 1: hour and fifteen minute conversation with her yesterday. Someone who
Speaker 1: brought this case to the national media. Basically he is
Speaker 1: a Christopher Sharp, but he's in Boston and his name
Speaker 1: is Aiden Carney. He calls himself turtle Boy. That's his Handleum,
Speaker 1: he's a YouTuber as well. He brought this case to
Speaker 1: the national media and so the police, the prosecutor, and
Speaker 1: one of the witnesses in the case, one of the
Speaker 1: women who was in the home when John O'Keefe was killed,
Speaker 1: when after a Turtle Boy and when she found court
Speaker 1: documents that represented a restraining order that was filed by
Speaker 1: the Albert family, she gave that to Turtle Boy himself
Speaker 1: and she actually didn't do it, but they accused her
Speaker 1: of doing it and they fired her. So we're going
Speaker 1: to have her on to talk about her experience there
Speaker 1: and her life before that as a private investigator before
Speaker 1: she went to work for the court. So very courageous woman. Chris,
Speaker 1: your stuff will be in the show notes, all of
Speaker 1: your stuff, Liberation Times, your Twitter as it always is.
Speaker 1: And I can't thank you enough for being here, brother, No.
Speaker 6: Thank you. It's been such a pleasure. I always love
Speaker 6: going on these shows. I guess me pumped up going
Speaker 6: on with the copies. Say thank you all. Thank you
Speaker 6: all for being with me this evening. It's been fantastic.
Speaker 6: As always, appreciate all your company.
Speaker 1: Say thank you Yeah, proper, Cabby. Goodbyes real quick from
Speaker 1: Nathan Debs and Courtney, Yeah, real quick.
Speaker 3: Chris, thank you so much. You've been so generous with
Speaker 3: your time this evening. I hope you have a peaceful
Speaker 3: rest when you need to log off. It's been too long.
Speaker 3: Thank you for staying around this long, and really, kudos
Speaker 3: to the work that you're doing. I know that it
Speaker 3: is difficult to be as committed as you are, and
Speaker 3: I think people just look at this it's like, oh,
Speaker 3: look how easy this is. This guy just turns out
Speaker 3: these articles left and right. It takes a lot of work,
Speaker 3: and I know that that takes a toll. So really
Speaker 3: appreciate that you're doing all of that, and know that
Speaker 3: you've got fans here that are very supportive of that
Speaker 3: time and energy. And also we wish your family the best.
Speaker 3: It's great to hear that everyone's doing well, and I
Speaker 3: hope you have a wonderful weekend.
Speaker 6: Thank you so much. Thank you.
Speaker 4: So I just want to say, no matter who they are,
Speaker 4: be they a king or another journalist, don't stop writing
Speaker 4: because of someone else's mouth. Damn right, you open minds
Speaker 4: and you move the ball forward. No one expects perfection
Speaker 4: from anybody, and if they do, I don't know what
Speaker 4: planet they're from.
Speaker 6: So just be you.
Speaker 4: You're doing great. Thank you so much for coming and
Speaker 4: sharing your time with us.
Speaker 6: Thank you so much, Thank you a lot.
Speaker 5: I'm gonna goush.
Speaker 7: So don't cry now, you know, as a long standing
Speaker 7: reader and appreciator of all your work, I just want
Speaker 7: to say that it's a little bit sad to hear
Speaker 7: that you backed out or wanted to back out because
Speaker 7: of one of your heroes, and so that really resonates
Speaker 7: with me of the pain of what one would feel
Speaker 7: because you've been on the cutting edge, the leading edge.
Speaker 5: You've done the sourcing, you've done the hard work.
Speaker 7: One of the main things I appreciate about you is
Speaker 7: your fact finding checking. You know, your journalistic standards that
Speaker 7: you bring to everybody and set that standard. So I
Speaker 7: just want to say that to you, and don't give up,
Speaker 7: you know, and keep plodding forward. There's so many exciting
Speaker 7: times ahead and you've been a huge groundbreaker on that.
Speaker 5: So I deeply respect you. And also please keep posting
Speaker 5: photos of that baby, because I'm serious.
Speaker 7: Like when I'm doom scrolling or whatever I see it,
Speaker 7: I'm like, oh my god, they're such.
Speaker 5: A lovely family. So I keep loving them and I'm.
Speaker 7: So glad that you post that and you get to
Speaker 7: see we get to see the cheery side of your
Speaker 7: life when you do that.
Speaker 5: So thanks for including a lot of us in that.
Speaker 6: Oh thank you. Yes, yes, Lily made her debut on
Speaker 6: the show. I think I have to bring it back on.
Speaker 1: I think absolutely we would love to have her on.
Speaker 1: And there's a fellow Britt who stayed up to watch you.
Speaker 1: This is Ken Hathaway from Nottingham. All right there, Uh,
Speaker 1: we have a couple of Brits that that watch for
Speaker 1: True Crime and now are aware of you, Chris, so
Speaker 1: maybe you have a new fan. And Chris, thank god.
Speaker 1: I called you one day and you said, you know,
Speaker 1: I I kind of missed being on CAB and I
Speaker 1: was like, oh, ship, let me let me get your
Speaker 1: schedule then. So so yeah, we're delighted to have you
Speaker 1: back on. We do love you and I look forward
Speaker 1: to speaking with you again.
Speaker 6: Thank you so much, Thank you brother, thank you for
Speaker 6: having me on, thank you for your kind words. And yeah,
Speaker 6: I can't wait to be on again. So let let's
Speaker 6: sit it again soon.
Speaker 1: All right, people, we're gonna, we're gonna cut it for tonight.
Speaker 1: I want to thank on behalf of Christopher Sharp Money,
Speaker 1: Nathan Debs, Courtney. This is DJ saying peace out, one love,
Speaker 1: We'll see you down the road. And we're always wondering
Speaker 1: what's up around the bend. Alright, kids,