Speaker 1: What if a nineteen sixty two nuclear blast over the
Pacific didn't just light up the sky, what if it
knocked something out of it? That claim from the late
Harold Mongren and a bombshell interview with Jesse Michaels of
American Alchemy. Mongren, an advisor to four US presidents, said,
classified footage from the Bluegild Triple Prime nuclear test shows
a UAP, an unidentified non human craft falling from the heavens.
The story doesn't end there. Retired Washington DC lobbyist Douglas
Dean Johnson fires back with three blistering articles aimed at
discrediting the late Mongren and his claims. Today, researcher Jeff
Crookshank joins us with a forty page counter strike strap
in the battle over what really fell from the sky
in nineteen sixty two starts now. Everyone, I'm Matt Ford,
and welcome to the Good Trouble Show. I want to
take a moment and wish all of you at home
a very happy Father's Day, and of course thanks for
spending your time with us on the Good Trouble Show. Now,
the issue of UAPs, what we used to call UFOs,
keeps drawing more public attention from the public and also
from the halls of Congress, and that growing interest as well.
You know, it's caused a bit of a panic over
at the Pentagon. And when that happens, well, the machine
pushes back. Whether you call it the deep state or
the swamp whatever, it obviously pushes back. So today we
are going to talk about what that pushback looks like
and focus on a recent example, targeting the claims of
the late great presidential advisor Harold Momgren. But first, please
hit the subscribe and thumbs up buttons on YouTube, leave
a comment and let us know what you think about
this episode. You can also find us on x at
Good Trouble Show and everywhere else at The Good Trouble Show.
We're also wherever you like to listen to your podcasts,
search for The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford. And
if you're already a subscriber on whatever your favorite podcasting
platform is, do us a favor and leave a quick review.
Those comments and ratings they really help bust boost our
show and promote our podcast to folks that aren't already
following it. And of course, if you would like to
chip in and keep the lights on. Consider becoming a
Patreon member of The Good Trouble Show. Just head over
to www dot patreon dot com forward slash the Good
Trouble Show. For the price of a coffee, you can
help keep us on the air and superchats are always
open and are another great way to support the show
and help us keep bringing you incredible guests like we
have today. I also want to thank our segment producer
Ali Travis. I can't tell you since she has joined
the show how much of a relief and and just
order she has brought to what really before then was
truly a one man operation. I also want to take
this chance to think our Good Trouble mods who are
in the in the chat right now. These folks, they
completely volunteer their time and here we are on a
Father's Day and they are supporting the show by keeping
the chat room all nice and clean, keeping the riff
wrath out. Anyway, we truly have just an amazing group
here at The Good Trouble Show. So thanks to everyone
for joining us. Happy Father's Day, and thanks for thanks
for everyone on our Good Trouble Mods and Ali Travis
for supporting us. Now before we jump in today's interview.
Jump into today's interview. I want to talk about the
pushback machine. And again, like I said, it could be
the deep state swamp. However you want to characterize it,
it is a push machine. This machine operates on a cycle,
and it's a predictable cycle. Basically, what happens a whistleblower
steps forward or Congress gets close too close, that is
to the truth, want to investigate more, et cetera. And
then sure enough, right on Q outcomes a Pentagon press
release or a journalist with anonymous sources and suspiciously well
timed scoops to assure us that assure us all that
there is literally nothing to see here. And the second thing,
probably the most important. They will do anything to discredit
UAP whistleblowers, go after their character, dig up a garbage
whatever they can, because at the end of the day,
if the forces at b want to throw cold water
and encourage Congress to stop looking into this and also
to message publicly that members of Congress are wasting their
time on this whole u AP business, the way the
Pentagon does that without fail is to discredit the whistleblowers.
Because obviously, if you discredit Louel Asondo, David Grusher or whoever.
Then members of Congress will say to themselves, well, maybe
there is nothing to it these whistleblowers from all this
stuff we're reading doesn't seem to amount to much. Now,
I think members of Congress truly know better. Now these
scoops that I just referenced, they they typically use catchphrases,
phrases that are seemingly copied between debunking articles and posts
on X from the professional debunkers such as mcwest, Stephens,
Green Street and others. You know, they use phrases such
as space aliens or UFO enthusiasts. It's it's not journalism really.
What it is is it's coordinated damage control with a
press badge, which brings us to the most recent operation
in narrative suppression, the now infamous Wall Street Journal article
by Joel Scheckman and Aaruna this wanathup. Now, this piece
was so perfectly timed it practically arrived gift wrapped for
the Pentagon. I mean it truly was, with a bow
and everything on it. So the question is I want
all of you to consider at home, is why, now,
why all of a sudden this press had you had
the current director of Arrow on ABC News. You you
had these articles by Dean Johnson, which we're going to
get into in a little bit. You had the Wall
Street Journal article. The question is why, now, why this
barrage of we'll just say negative articles throwing throwing water
on the whole UAP issue. The reason of my view
is because just as this article hit the press, these
articles hit the press, Congress was ramping up pressure for
more UAP hearings, and more importantly, Senators Mike Rounds and
Chuck Schumer will reintroduce the UAP Disclosure Act, that legislation,
the UAPDA, I think is version three or whatever. Now
that legislation, which is hugely important if you want to
know anything about the UAP issue, if you want to
bring this out into the sunlight and finally settle it
for everybody, the debunkers, everybody, settle it, settle the issue
of what are UAP? Are they real? This national security issue?
Pass this legislation. That's exactly what this legislation is meant
to do. And I will say when professional debunkers such
as Mick West, Stephen green Street, and Susan Gerbick of
this group of fanatic Wikipedia editors. When they do not
support this legislation, when they give you some kind of
bullshit as far as why they're not why they're not
supporting it, at tells you right there that these folks
Mick West, Susan Gerbick, Stephen green Street, and these others,
they are not operating above board. They have a hidden agenda.
That is my very strong opinion. This legislation is a
direct threat to the decades long secrecy surrounding UAP crash retrievals,
reverse engineering programs, and the abuse of the classification system
to shield legal activity from the public view. They just
they don't want this stuff out. So the timing of
this Wall Street Journal hit piece wasn't just suspicious, it
was strategic. The article casually reframes bombshell allegations such as
illegal psyops, forged documents, and even electro magnetic warfare targeting
US military personnel and new clear ICBM silos as misunderstandings,
overblown rituals, or the fallout of Cold War paranoia, what
whistleblowers described as psychological abuse and national security breaches. The
journal the Wall Street Journal presents really just presents it
as little more than sort of bizarre fraternity hazing that
I don't know, got out of canned, got out of control,
No need for investigation, just confused memories and classified antics.
Nothing to see here, folks, nothing to see and get
this when Robert Sallas, Bob Sallas, a retired Air Force captain,
once entrusted with our nation's nuclear weapons and interviewed for
the very same Wall Street Journal article by Joel S.
Sheckman and what's her name? Marona Viswanatha? When when Robert
Sallis submits a rebuttal to the Wall Street Journal basically
countering exactly everything that they were saying in the article,
countering the things that Bob Sallas told the journalists, and
then they didn't put it in. Guess what the Wall
Street Journal did. They refused to publish it. Why because
letting the actual victim speak might have disrupted the cozy,
carefully constructive, constructed narrative from the Wall Street Journal. Stop
and think about that. Former Captain Robert Sallas, United States
Air Force veteran and former nuclear launch control officer, tells
Joel S. Sheckman, one of the journalists that wrote this
garbage in the Wall Street Journal. Hey, these are the
reasons that your article got this portion wrong, and you
can go to Bob Sallas's and I'm sorry not Wikipedia
Twitter page. He lays it out exactly in step by
step format why this was wrong. And I also want
to point out too, Joel Sheckman, this journalist, if you
want to call that, he basically took verb batim Bob
Sallas's excuse me the former director of ERO, Shan Kirkpatrick's
ridiculous explanation about Bob Sallas's incident. Doctor Sean Kirkpatrick's explanation
is so asinine it makes you wonder how this guy
got a job in government. I mean is it is
beyond the pale of how ridiculous it is. And you know,
you want to know what else is ridiculous The fact
that one of America's premier legacy media outlets, the Wall
Street Journal, and this hack of the journalist, Joel Sheckman,
bought it all at face value, bought this explanation from
the former director of ARO, doctor Sean Kirkpatrick. His just
clown show of an explanation about what Robert Sallas experienced
when UAPs knocked out ten of his nuclear tipped intercontinental
ballistic missiles. Did this journalist Joel Scheckman go and do
any research. Sure doesn't look like it. It literally looks
like he took exactly what the Pentagon wanted to be
wanted put out in public in the way of this
Wall Street Journal article, and the Wall Street Journal editors
wouldn't give Bob Sallas's very calm, very logically laid out
explanation the time of day. The Wall Street editors Wall
Street Journal editors would not give Bob Sallas's rebuttal the
time of day, not even as an op ed. I mean,
that is how This is what a just journalistic mouthfeasance
by Joel Scheckman and Aruna Viswanathan, the editors, It is
just insane. I this is exactly why the American public
does not trust the legacy media, because all they are
doing is towing the water for the government. You literally
cannot trust a thing coming out of him. And it
doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or Republican or pink
or whatever, it doesn't matter. The legacy media, such as
the Wall Street Journal, is shoveling horseshit. That's really all
it is. And at the end of the day, they
want you to question the reliability of the whistleblower in
that article, in this case, in this case retired US
Air Force Captain Bob Sallas. Now there's more. Let's talk
about authorship of this article from the Wall Street Journal.
As I mentioned, the other reporter, a run of vis Wanatha.
She wrote this with Joel Sheckman. And guess what it
appears to be the sister of vis Wanatha, Vina Visjanatha.
Her sister is Vina Viswanatha. And get this. She is
the director of Global Disputes and Litigation at Northrop Grumman.
That's right, Northrop Grumman, the same defense contractor named by
multiple sources as a central player in the UAP crash
recovery and reverse engineering efforts. The same contractor allegedly involved
in retaliating against whistleblowers. This defense contractor allegedly neck neck deep.
I can't talk today. I blame it on Father's Day,
neck deep in illegal UAP programs. A major legacy outlet
publishes a hit piece aimed at discrediting the exact whistleblowers
who have accused Northrop Grumman, and one of the authors
of that piece appears to be directly connected by blood
to the contractor's top legal leadership and the top it off.
They refused to publish the rebuttal from the Air Force
veteran who was the central figure in the story itself.
Totally above board, right, I don't know about that. This
is a journalism. This is what I said earlier. It's
narrative laundering. It's a coordinated effort to protect institutional power,
silence credible voices, and bury the real story just deep
enough that no one in Washington ever must answer for it.
It's insane. Now that takes us to today's subject, the
bombshell interview with Harold Mongren by Jesse Michaels of American Alchemy.
I have to say I am one of the big
fans of the work that Jesse Michaels is doing. The
first time I ever saw his work was the interview
with whistleblower David Grush. And I tell you what, if
you guys are not subscribed to American Alchemy, you gotta
do it. I think he is absolutely one of the
best producers of content related to the UAP issue. And
he's also a super cool guy, very very cool guy. Now,
as I mentioned at the top of the show retired
to DC, lobbyist Dean Johnson wrote three articles attacking not
only the claims, but Mongren's credibility itself. So who exactly
is Dean Johnson, Douglas Dean Johnson. Well, here's an article
in Mother Jones describing him as quote chief lobbyist for
the National Right to Life Committee, the nation's pre eminent
anti abortion group. It stated in there that he's been
there since nineteen eighty one and was most recently the
unseen force behind the House GOP's push to orchestra Great
the most audacious legislative assault on abortion rights in recent memory. Obviously,
Dean Johnson he excelled in that job. And I also
want to point out to that the article from Mother
Jones that was from a while back. I couldn't actually
find the date, but anyway, that's apparently who Dean Johnson
is now. As I mentioned earlier, Dean not only went
after Harold Momgren's claims, which you know, to be fair,
anybody you know, that would be something I would expect, Okay,
bring up certain things in an article or a story
or a podcast. And this is the evidence as to
why that may not be true. Like, just keep it,
you know, keep it to the facts man sort of thing.
But what what Dean Johnson did, in my view, was
he attacked the character and credibility of the late great
Harold Momgrim himself. And that I did not think is cool.
So again rewinding the Pentagon play, go after the credibility
of the whistleblower, Go after the messenger. Now I want
to read to you some of the quotes from Dean's
three stories here, you know, and again this this is him.
He's not talking about just the facts. He's just he's
actually going after the guy. So some of the quotes
quote on small space paving stones of truth, the late
Harold B. Mongren built lofty towers of grandiose fantasy against
suggesting that he exaggerated or fabricated around a kernel of truth.
Another one, Some years ago, he began to make up
an alternative, much more exciting version of his life stories
in which he played a vastly more important role in
world affairs than the mundane, respectable reality again paints here
he is trying to paint Mamgren as delusional or self
aggrandizing mom Gren. Here's another one. Mongren was generally regarded
it as a highly intelligent man, albeit also often perceived
as egotistical and embrace it. Going after I don't know,
just it's crazy. He uses, as I mentioned earlier, something
that we see often these uh, these sort of loaded
loaded loaded phrases. Uses the phrase fan fiction used to
describe Malgren's accounts of historical events and people quote self
glorifying fantasy stories. Uh, you know, frames his testimony is narcissistic.
Fiction fiction counterfeits. It would be pure folly to place
credence in any of extraordinary claims. You know, you've got
Deanon here using sarcasm and mockery. Quote. Well, no, Harold
didn't save the world, not even once. He did once
do his part to save a Japanese whaling industry for
one hundred thousand dollars a year. But I digress here. Uh,
he's mocking Malgram's claimth historic importance undercut by a jab
about his lobbying work. Mom Groam was a lobbyist as well.
Here's another one. Before long, mom Grin apparently read the
room and gave the UFO Twitter audience what it craved.
I mean, come on, you know this is just just
such a such an insane, such an insane. Here thing here,
here's another one before long, mom grin apparently, Oh sorry,
I gave that one. I already did that one. Uh,
let's see posthumous undermining mom Graham hijacked the personas of
real people to serve as characters in his self glorifying
fantasy stories only long after they were dead, when they
can't defend themselves against mom Gren's counterfeits. Okay, yeah, you
know this, This is I don't know, uh, you know,
I it's again. It's one thing to like go over
go against facts or refute refute facts from another story,
but you know this is really what he's doing is
his character assassination of my opinion, you know. And and
in my experience, there is a pattern of this in
a lot of Dean Johnson's posts. I've I've seen him
go after Christopher Sharp and in journalist Christopher Sharp at
the Liberation Times. I remember once I was sitting on
X and I get this d M from Dean, uh,
basically saying can you believe Chris Sharp published this? I
don't even remember the exact contents of it, but it
was clear Dean was messaging people because I hadn't heard
from him messaging people out of the blue about Chris
Sharp and my I replied to to Dean, I said,
Chris Sharp is a friend of mine. Why why are
you messaging me this? Why are you direct messaging me this?
And he had some excuse, Well, I thought you would
want to know. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, you
go and you read this guy's posts, and it's just
there's a lot of I don't know. You just read
it for yourself and come come to your own conclusion,
I would say. So it really boils down to this.
Dean is basically saying the late Harold Momgren was a liar.
That's really what it is. Now, what does the evidence
say now? In nineteen eighty four a Congressional hearing by
this Subcommittee on International Trade, Momgren was called in as
an expert witness on the AT and T. Bell Labs breakup,
and actually mister Mongrem was arguing against it, but he
was called into this by both the Senate and by
Judge Green. I also want to note that AT and T.
Bell Labs at the time was the most important national
lab at the time, and obviously Mongren was expert in
most of our advanced technologies, so here's a question. Would
the United States Senate and a federal judge call in
a witness who lied about his early career, who would
was prone to exaggeration? Is that who they would? They
wouldn't do the due diligence. Of course, of course they
did their due diligence. They knew that Harold Momnggren was
none of those things. That is why he testified. It's
you know, it's just insane. So you know, we have
to be clear here. Harold Momgren, he wasn't some kind
of outsiders spinning Cold War fan fiction or making us
making up stuff about UAPs. He operated at the core
of US nuclear policy during one of the most dangerous
periods in human history. You know, here's a here's another thing,
or another example of Harold Mamgren's being involved in all
of this. This is ida's Strategy of Controlled Response memo
that reflect the exact strategic doctrine that Mamgren work with him,
classified materials discussed only among top advisors, military planners, and
nuclear analysts. Now I had to look up what the
idea is. That is the Institute for Defense Analysis. It's
a federally funded research and development think tank. It quotes
a paper by Harold Mamgren called protracted nuclear War. Now,
even though it calls that article, we have had no
luck actually locating a copy of that. But here he is.
He's he's being cited as someone who wrote an article,
wrote a paper on nuclear war, protracted nuclear war. This
isn't like some like Mamgren was out there just writing
an eye. This sounded like a serious, serious piece, so
much so that this think tank wanted to know what
Harold Momgrun thought about nuclear policy. Yeah, so this, this
note perfectly matches the strategy Mongran outlined as the arguments
used to hold the Joint chiefs back from using nukes
in a first strike, something that Dean Johnson also says
is just not possible. His reference to these doctrines isn't
a lucky yes, Mongrun. That is, it's the mark of
someone who was actually in the room when decisions about
nuclear war were being made. He then wrote about the
same nuclear matters in the Military Review and orbis I
don't know, maybe they too missed the fact that he
was a lying con man. That's what Dean Johnson wants
you to believe. I mean, give me a break, now,
what's more, he went on to be cited by the
Supreme Court of the United States, which is very rare
for an economist in this case, very very rare. Indeed.
So here's here's something else. This is here he is
in the Review of Political Economy. This guy clearly isn't
faking his career. This guy. There is no way on
earth that if somebody is prone to exaggeration, they likely
have done it most of their adult life. So you
can't tell me for a minute that Harold Mamgren built
this insanely unbelievable career advising US presidents and he was
somebody just just making it up. That's it is so
ludicrous Dean Johnson's logic. It makes me personally question what
Dean Johnson's motives are. It truly does. Now here's another one.
Here he is in Wiki Leagues. In this wiki leak stump,
it turns out that Mongrem and Kissinger made multiple trips
together to Venezuela right after they nationalized the oil industry.
I want to point out that Momngren never publicly spoke
about this with anyone, and I mean anyone. It's clear
Mongren had an exceptional mind and was deeply involved in
nuclear matters. JFK was up against both the CIA and
the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He needed his own people
who were not under the thumb of the Pentagon or
the agency the CIA. It's well documented that he interviewed
multiple nuclear bomber pilots to assess the command and control
system on JFK's behalf Again, somebody that in Dean Johnson
is claiming, wouldn't have a Q clearance, which would be
which would be required to discuss or or have knowledge
on things like nuclear command and control, nuclear policy, the
nuclear war plan. Dean Johnson says that's just not possible. Now.
Harold mom Gran and Daniel Ellsberg were close friends from
their time working under nuclear strategist Tim Schelling. For anyone
who doesn't know, Ellsberg was a top Pentagon war planner
who later leaked the Pentagon papers. But before that he
uncovered something terrifying. The United States had no real nuclear
command and control system. It was sort of I don't know,
ad hoc or whatever. But what he found instead was
in the US's nuclear war plan called the sy OPER
Single Integrated Operational Plan. It was essentially a first strike
playbook for wiping out both the Soviet Union and China
in one go. So even though Russia was involved with
the Cuban missile crisis, our nuclear war plan, which when
you read it essentially looked like at first strike option
or not option. It was what the plan was. It
had China in there. At the time, the US, the
United States had a seventeen to one nuclear advantage over
the Soviets.
Speaker 2: I mean.
Speaker 1: Huge, huge dispairy. It's huge, huge disparity. And General Curtis
la May, who was in charge of all of this,
knew that this gap wouldn't last. So he backed PSYOP
Single Integrated Operational Plan sixty two, which was the actual
nuclear plan, calling for simultaneous nuclear strikes across your agion.
The estimated death toll around a billion people. That's why
JFK signed this thing called an SAM one sixty installing
permission excuse me pals, or what it call permissive action links.
These are kind of like security locks that block somebody
from just arming a nuclear weapon. They have to have
a code. May's Lamay's bomber crews actually hated these things
that clipped their wings the only way that they would
be able to trigger one of these nuclear weapons. Or
arm it for detonation was having the code, and with
these pals on there, they couldn't just take a order
from Curtis. From Curtis, I'm sorry, General Curtis Lamay, they
clipped their wings. Now today some pushed back on the
idea that Curtis la May in General Power serious about
global nuclear war. But Elsberg had the numbers, and Mongren,
Magnamara and jfk All understood the stakes. That's why they
tried everything to slow the Joint chiefs of Staff down
just long enough for diplomacy to work. Now. In his
book The Doomsday Machine, Elsberg spelled it out. Si OP
sixty two called for forty megatons on Moscow alone. That's
four thousand times the explosion explosive yield of the Hiroshima
atomic warhead, more than every conventional bomb dropped in World
War II combined. He recalled a briefing where someone nervously
asked about the China thing, quote, what if this isn't
China's war? What if it's just the Soviets? Can we
change the plan? General Power turned and said, well, yeah
we can, but I hope nobody thinks of it, because
it would really screw up the plan. I mean, you
got to You just can't make this stuff up. So
let that sink in. They were planning to nuke China
by default because editing the plan well was just inconvenient.
That wasn't a glitch in the system. That the system.
So who do you believe A K. Street Washington, a lobbyist,
likely a gun for hire. Or Harold Mamgren, who graduated
second in his class at Yale University, served Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon,
and Ford, and the Senate Finance Committee, and who also
conducted many of America's most important trade deals. And he
was cited by the Supreme Court. Who do you trust?
You tell me now? Finally I touched on this a
little bit earlier. Dean Johnson claims that there is no
way Harold Momgren would have had a Q clearance. Q
clearance being being the clearance that is issued by the
Department of Energy, which of course is in charge of
US nuclear stockpile, nuclear engineering, nuclear research. Q clearance is
I guess would sort of like be the equivalent of
the Pentagon's Top Secret SCI Clearance TSSCI. Q clearance is
something that the Department of Energy would issue to you
in order for you to view classified nuclear data what's
called restricted data and previously rest restricted data. So if
you want to advise the president on nuclear policy or
speak to anyone in the Pentagon about your nuclear war plan,
that individual would have to have a Q clearance. I mean,
just plain and simple. So Dean Johnson claims that there's
no way Harold would have had this Q clearance due
to the fact that it wasn't listed on this form
in Dean Johnson's article called SF eighty six, this form
that was submitted by Momgren back in the day. Now,
we reached out to a former FBI agent, and I
would add that this former FBI agent actually dealt with
Q clearances, adjudicating Q clearances amongst other things this agent led,
we'll just say, some of the most famous investigations that
the general public would be aware of. This individual headed it.
This isn't just some you know, sort of a low
level person that the FBI. This was someone that was
very high up and very well accomplished. So we reached
out to this former agent and this agent sent me
this reply. Excuse me. The s F eighty six, as
completed by the applicant is not the definitive authority on
someone's security clearance status. It is simply a form leveraged
to begin the background investigation processes for a clearance and
is completely self completed. This is even more true going
back to the time period in question. The argument made
by Dean Johnson holds no merit to whether or not
mom Gren or any person in fact held a specific
clearance at the time of completion by the applicant. Now,
I actually tweeted this in a in a X chain
with Dean Johnson, and and he made some kind of
comment that, uh, you know that maybe my my FBI
person I was just making it up again attacked a messenger.
That's uh, that's that's that seems to be what is
in style, uh with these with these folks today, you know.
But but again, you know, here is here is a
FBI agent, former FBI agent saying that Dean Johnson's logic
with the Q clearance is just total hogwash. As a
matter of fact, when I spoke to this person on
the phone and told them what what Dean Johnson had
stated in this article, this individual just laughed. He just
said it's he just said it was a bunch of baloney,
and then later on provided me with this this statement.
So you know, all I can say is that I
think that you're going to find Dean Johnson's case very
very weak, uh, to say the least. But before we
jump into the interview, in just a moment, I want
you everyone at home to go to the YouTube description
for this episode and you will find a link to
the article debunking Dean Johnson's page and this this interview,
which is about an hour long. It is extensive, it
is detailed, but it's a little dry because it is
all just factual. But I think if if at home,
you go to the link that I put in there,
uh to Jeff Kroukshenks LinkedIn, it's where he has this article,
this forty page debunk of Dean Johnson. It's it's easier
and more entertaining to follow because he has a lot
of illustrations and photos, et cetera that we didn't have
time to to include here. So yeah, so go to
the description, look at it, click the link, look at
it and follow along. So anyway, there you go. So
today's guest is Jeff Krukshank, an Australian energy technologist and
critical infrastructure security specialist. That's a mouthful, especially on Father's
Day with too much coffee. With a background and intelligence analysis,
he's known for investigating national security anomalies, everything from Cold
War nuclear tests, two modern UAP encounters, and turning complex
technical data into clear, eye opening insights. Here he's here
with forty pages of research. All of you at home
are going to be following this forty pages of research
challenging a major narrative about UFOs and the US government.
Our interview with Jeff Krukshank. Enjoy, please welcome to the show.
Jeff Kroukshank. Jeff, how are you, sir?
Speaker 3: Yeah, thank you, Matt. It's great to be on your show.
I'm a longtime fan.
Speaker 4: Of your show.
Speaker 3: And yeah, hopefully we'll have some fun today.
Speaker 1: I think so. And I understand you're it's a little
bit late where you're at right.
Speaker 3: Now, Yeah, midnight here in down in Australia. Yeah, okay,
wa awake.
Speaker 1: Well, we very much appreciate you coming on the show.
We appreciate the generosity of your of your time and uh,
you know, before we dive into your research and what
I think is really a very successful takedown of Dean
Dean Johnson's attack piece on former presidential advisor Harold Momgren.
Tell us a bit about yourself and your professional background, well,
basically in power generation for the last thirty five years
around Australia.
Speaker 3: I ay says, in the maritime shipping industry. U transitioned
into intelligence back in two thousand and nine. I had
a clearance before then just doing maintenance for defense up
in Australia. In Northern Australia is the tip of the
spear for the Australian Defense Force. And then I got
into intelligence mainly because of my power generation background and
knowledge of programmable logic controllers PLCs, and moved to Canberra
Headquarters down in Canberra in twenty ten and stayed down
there for two years before returning to Darwin to build
and design skiffs securely compartmented information facilities. That was a
job that I had my own business was to design,
build and commission and certify its skiffs to make sure
they were compliant with the Australian government regulations. And I
actually did one.
Speaker 4: For the US Marines.
Speaker 3: I got a marine rotation falls here in Darwen, built
one of their armories for them.
Speaker 1: That's amazing. So you have in addition to your intelligence background,
you clearly have a technical slash engineering background as well.
Speaker 3: Yeah, mostly information technology data.
Speaker 4: That sort of thing gotcha.
Speaker 1: So how did you become interested in the topic of UFOs.
Speaker 3: When I was about eight, my father built me a
fairly large reflecting telescope, so it was an amateur astronomer
all my life and back. The size of the universe
impressed on an eight year old's mind.
Speaker 4: It's a no brainer that there's.
Speaker 3: Other life in other star systems. Whether they have the
capability of visiting the Earth is a question, a debate.
That is, there isn't a doubt that there is other
life at the universe, and that's not a Goldilocks thing.
There's chemo synthesis, photosynthesis. Life is not dependent on closeness
to a star to develop. They can produce food through chemosynthesis. Yeah,
so that's basically where my interest came from.
Speaker 1: That's fantastic. So I have to say when I was
eight years old, as opposed to my dad building me
a telescope, he actually built me a puppet theater because
I wanted to do like puppet shows. So yeah, I
didn't get into astronomy but I think probably at a
pretty pretty early age, I was interested in this whole
sort of show business thing. And as I say, I'm
not a researcher or anything like that. I'm not like
a technical guy. I'm really just a talk show host.
But I think it's incredibly fascinating that from a very
early age and very cool that your your father encouraged
your your interest in science and and engineering and whatnot.
And yeah, that's that's a that's a pretty pretty cool story.
So let's get to the topic at hand. At the
beginning of the show, we gave the audience a background
on who Harold mom Gren was, of course he passed
away recently, and and his his claims in terms of
the UEP issue, And then of course we we explained
to the audience very briefly that Dean Johnson came out
with this really in my view and an attack article.
It was really kind of, in my view, sort of
you know, littered with really kind of personal, disparaging, disparaging
attacks on Harold Momgren's uh story and and and whatnot.
Rather than it being just kind of fact based this
is it uh Just to me, it seemed personal, which
I found found upsetting, But judging on some of the
previous posts I've seen of Dean going after other people,
really really wasn't surprised surprised. So you're taking issue with
Dean's article which is titled Bluegill Triple Prime did a
nuclear test knock down a human non human craft in
nineteen sixty two, which he published last month. Now, before
we get into the nuts and bolts of your Rebuttal,
I understand you have found something that literally obliterates one
of Dean's main points of attack, where he essentially said
there's no way Harold Momgrim could have had a Q clearance.
Why don't you tell us what you found.
Speaker 3: That's correct, Matt, because back in the fifties and sixties,
Q clearances were quite common. The Marines that had to
transport the devices from San fran Francisco to the Pacific
Proving Ground all had Q clearances. People like Watergate Burgilar,
James McCord had a Q clearance. Now, as mccaud was
supposedly an audio security engineer, but on the twenty seventh
of July nineteen sixty two, he was issued with a
Q clearance. And what's interesting there is it says subjects
maybe orally advised of this clearance, but in no case
should he be notified in writing. So you know, he
could not prove later on that he had a Q clearance.
This is a this is to the Assistant Director of
Scientific Intelligence of the CIA from the Atomic Energy Commission,
So he would have no way of proving he had
a Q clearance. And we don't really know why he
did have one. So you know, Harold was working for
Rand Corporation. Now Rand Corporation was a device and Curtis Lamay,
General Curtis Lamay, he was one of the forefathers of
the And Corporation because they developed that corporation to get
away from government medaling and oversight. And they were the
ones that were heavily involved in a lot of reverse
engineering of foreign craft. And you know, they were the
ones that discovered the X ray kill mechanism. That will
go into later, but that was that formed the basis
of the anti intercontinental ballistic missile program that the United
States and the Soviet Union were heavily involved in in
the nineteen sixties. Harold was part of that group. In
nineteen sixty four, he wrote an article about removing tactical
nuclear weapons from Turkey. Now, Harold was in Turkey in
nineteen fifty eight the Jupiter missiles were getting installed, and
that was the catalyst for the Cuban Missile crisis because
they were within range of Moscow, Saint Petersburg, and Stalingrad
or Leningrad at the time, And that's what created the
tension in the Cuban missile crisis when Kristchev decided that
he'd put missiles close to the US as well. So
Harold was in the periphery of nuclear weapons even at
a young age. You know, he was a whiz kid
Goddess Lamay detested the whiz kids, he says. So when
he's memoirs called Mission with Lea May, he actually says
that he detested the liberal whiz kids. So Harold was
firmly in his target.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that makes sense. So if Harold Mamgren is
dealing at all with nuclear policy or advising the administration
on nuclear policy, I mean, it's it's it's totally a
no brainer. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to use
the phrase with our discussion here, doesn't take a rocket
science to figure out Hero Momgren is going to have
a or would have had a Q clearance, and as
you pointed out this, you know what you found with this,
with this, with you know what you found it. I
mean that clearly demonstrates people have Q clearances, and back
then it just it was a documented And I would
also think, and I have no idea if this is true.
Just something that came to mind is if if he
is making, if he is advising regarding nuclear policy, it
would make sense just strictly from a counter intelligence perspective,
to not publish that. So if if the Russians knew,
or if the Russians knew that, hey, this is one
of the key nuclear policy advisors, he's going to become
more of a target in terms of Russia's intelligence operations.
So I can also see from a a counterintelligence security
perspective that this would not be something they would that
they would advertise.
Speaker 3: And that's right because James McCord's boss was a guy
named Dave Christ and I've spoken with Ross Coultart about
Dave Chris. He also had a Q clearance who was
involved in Right Patterson Air Force Base MK Ultra, and
he got arrested in Cuba in September nineteen sixty and
over the course of two and a half years, the
Cubans managed to torture him and extract every single piece
of information that Dave christ had in his head regarding
Q clearance nuclear weapons. I believe Dave Chris was involved
in a reverse engineering project as well, and you know
the Cubans obviously passed that on to the Soviets.
Speaker 1: So let's stick into your article here. I mean, this
thing is there's literally forty something pages and just goes
into an incredible amount of detail. I would advise all
of our viewers to download this document. We'll put a
link in the YouTube description and follow along. The information
is just extensive. And I want to open this up
by quoting what you wrote in the introduction and of
course the name of your article here, the blue Gill
booster and fireball theory a flawed argument newt by Basic Physics,
and you say here this article is in response to
Dean Johnson's Blue Gill triple prime did a nuclear test
knockdown a non human craft in nineteen sixty two, which
was published May twenty first, nineteen. I'm sorry, nineteen twenty five,
twenty twenty five, and I want to know why this
quote is relevant you stayed here quote. So through Churchill's
excess of imagination, a layman's ignorance of artillery, and the
fatal power of a young enthusiasm to convince older and
slower brains, the tragedy of Galipoli was born. If I'm
pronouncing that right, what does that mean?
Speaker 3: So Gallipoli's a fairly famous battle, particularly for Australians. It
was our first intervention in World War One. My grandfather
was at Gallipoli, and that's actually how I met Ross Coulthard.
Back in twenty ten Kazi he found a whole heap
of old World War One photographs in an addict in France.
My grandfather was amongst that. So that's an interesting aside.
But what that quote is about is that then the
Franco Prussian War of eighteen seventy eighteen seventy one, the
Germans used siege mortars, really heavy caliber shells that had
a high arching trajectory to destroy the French fortifications and
win that war. Winston Churchill in World War One was
the first sea lord, and he thought he could do
the same thing with the flat shooting naval guns. They
didn't have a high lobbing trajectory. They they were heavy caliber,
but they just flat shooting. And the Turkish defenses around
the data and Els which is the entrance to the
Black Sea, so it's a very strategic choke point. The
fortifications of the Turks withstood Churchill's naval barriers because he
was ignorant to the differences in artillery hierarchic mortar rounds
compared to flat shooting naval rounds. So that pretty much
destroyed Gallipoli with the troops got boxed in and never
made any real ground Glipol and headed withdrawal. So in
a similar fashion Doug's ignorance and Doug's usually pretty switched
on in Thoro Orbati's research, he he just lost a basic, mister,
basic fact with the Blue Deal triple prime trajectories. That
just destroyed his argument straight from the get go.
Speaker 1: Okay, I want to I want to talk now about
what we're going to do here. We're going to go
through your paper and the way you have it organized,
which I think is really great, is you have it
organized in terms of a numbered series of flaws of
Dean Johnson's argument, where you you you know, really pretty
seemingly utterly destroy Dean's logic or lack of logic, I
would say, so, so let's talk about ballistic coefficients that
you have as flaw number one. What role? First of all,
what is or what are what is the what? What
is a ballistic coefficient? I can't talk this morning. And
what role did the ballistic coefficient play? And the different
behaviors of the re entry vehicle, which is, of course,
was the war head, the nuclear warhead and the booster.
Maybe for those that kind of don't know what would
be in a missile, give us a little bit of
background about what an RV is and a booster. Sort
of consider that none of us know anything about how
ICBMs work.
Speaker 3: Okay, So the thor missile that launched the Blue Gill
triple Prime nuclear tests in twenty six or twenty fifth
of bluck COVID nineteen sixty two. It was launched just
before midnight, fifteen minutes before midnight, because they were doing
high attitude tests and at midnight the use ionosphere is
at its highest points, so they wanted to test the
effects of the specific type of nuclear weapon on the
ion a sphere to stop incoming I see the ms
as they were re entering the atmosphere. So this is
a test to try and take out other ICEE thems.
So this missile, it's a single stage missile, which means
it's only it's got one engine and it's got these
two other smaller engines called Vernier engines that correct its altitude,
gets its angle right. So it's putting a re entry vehicle,
it's injecting it in a correct trajectory, and it's all
been calculated. And mind you, most of this stuff was
done with slide rules. So these people were incredibly smart.
Computational facilities back then we're pretty small. Your desktop calculators
probably got more computational power than these people had, so
they worked out these trajectories. The Thaw missile, it would
run for about one hundred and seventy six seconds, velocity
get up to.
Speaker 4: Nearly mac I think MAC.
Speaker 3: Nine on on the way up nine times the spizo
sound yep, yeah, So it's traveling very fast, and after
one hundred and seventy six seconds, the main engine cuts out.
The vernier engine still run for another ten seconds or
so to get the right angle, and then the booster
separates from the re entry vehicle. So the re entry
vehicle is still traveling at nine thousand feet per second
on its way up. It's out of the atmosphere. It's
one hundred and eighty kilometers up in the sky. And
when that booster separates, what there's retro rockets that are
angled in the direction of travel, and these retro rockets
actually push the booster back the other way in the
opposite direction of travel, but also to the side. Now,
that booster then falls away, and the re entry vehicle
continues up on an arc and it travels up to
another seven hundred odd kilometers to what they call the
apergy before it starts coming back down. And it comes
down thirty four kilometers away from where it was launched,
in a very arching trajectory and at forty eight kilometers height.
The re entry vehicle has a nuclear weapon inside. It's
a special type of nuclear weapon that generates X rays
through its design. It uses gold to produce these X rays,
and it detonates at forty eight kilometers height. The booster,
because it's separated probably seven or eight minutes prior, is
nowhere near where the detonation is. It's twenty to thirty
kilometers away. I think the calculation was fifteen. It varies,
but it's at least fifteen kilometers away from the booster.
So Doug's whole premise of his argument was that there's
an object that's seen on at least two separate pieces
of footage of some type of object falling out of
the nuclear fireball, and the footage that is on the Internet,
there's a clear shot of something falling down out through
the middle of the fireball, and there's another view from
another aircraft of a really close up in depth and
they use X ray film to actually film this footage,
and you can see the inside pressure waves bouncing and
rebounding back, and that this film rate is like in
the microsecond rage. And there's the applied a triangle covering
up where that object seems to fall from in the
other footage from the other aircraft, so it looks like
it's being redacted. So Doug's whole theory posited that that
object that fell out of the fible was the rocket booster.
Speaker 1: Okay, but really, like Doug's reasoning doesn't make any sense.
So you you have this warhead, this re entry vehicle
with the nuclear physics package inside that is heavy, it's sleek,
it's it's designed for maximum speed of travel. The slower
a warhead would re enter the atmosphere gives the enemy
a greater opportunity to knock that warhead out of the sky.
So you have an RV that is built for speed
and built to take the heat, and then you have
this booster who is bulky. It's got a light you know,
light and weight to it. It's going to have a
completely different sort of drag coefficient. Correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, actually the booster was heavier. It was three
whilst thousand kilograms, but it you know, it fell like
a brick after it separated. And there's actually footage from
the recent Starship launch it failed, but he could see
the booster separation on that launch and the booster tumbles
out of well out of the way after separation of
the first stage. So yeah, and you can see on
the profile in the report that the the boosters just
basically starts falling like a brick and it burns up
in the atmosphere as it coming down because it's one
hundred and eighty kilometers up and starts to enter the
thicker part of the lower atmosphere.
Speaker 4: It heats up. It's you know, it's.
Speaker 3: Made out of aluminium or some light metal sheet metal.
Speaker 2: I guess, yeah, sorry, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3: So you know, the ballistic coefficient is a calculation of weight,
drag and cross sectional area of the vehicle.
Speaker 4: So exactly what you said.
Speaker 3: That Avoco Mark four re entry vehicle was a special
and it was made out of similar stuff to fiberglass,
and it punched through the atmosphere really quick because the
fiberglass doesn't actually burn. It it sort of chars and
then it doesn't burn anymore. So it was quite an
innovation at the time. It punched through really quick, went
down and it it was kilometers away from where the
booster was. And Doug's era there was he thought that
the booster separated on the way down. He didn't realize
it separated on the way up.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, And I want to show here you
you have this illustration, this graph which shows the re
entry vehicle trajectory and the booster trajectory, and then you've
also marked known data points for both. And I mean,
you look at this thing. I mean it's really obvious.
There's there's no way that because it looks when I
look at this thing, it essentially says to me that
the that the that the booster was an excess of
fifteen kilometers away from the from the detonation of the
nuclear weapon. Correct, that's right. Yeah, so you ran you
ran these calculations through AI. Do the nineteen sixty three
numbers line up with what the AI modeling indicated?
Speaker 3: Basically, because you had velocity, time, and distance those three
parameters at each stage of the launch the separation, and
there was three instrument pods piggybacked onto that booster and
they ejected just before the booster separated. These people were
smart man. They put those pods within two thousand feet
of the nuclear detonation just through.
Speaker 4: Physics.
Speaker 3: Because these pods were also shaped like re entry vehicles,
because that's what they were testing. They had the materials
on the base of the pods were exposed to nuclear
detonations because they needed to see how the different types
of materials responded to a high X ray environment. So
they put those pods in a very precise spot. They
had flywheels inside to keep them orientated the right way,
and they had parachutes on them. After they were exposed
to the blast, they floated down and were recovered by
the US Navy, and all three were in really good conditions.
There was no evidence that they'd been inside the fireball.
In fact, the data they recorded put them seven hundred
and fifty feet further away than what they thought. They
had tracking beacons on them, so they knew exactly where
they were and accelerometers. The accelerometers only registered nearly half
of what they expected, meaning that the pods were further
away than what they anticipated, but they still got good
data from it. So it wasn't the booster that fell
from the explosion.
Speaker 4: And it wasn't the pod.
Speaker 1: Jeff, let's move on to point number two regarding the
retrograde rockets. You pointed out earlier that on the booster
there are a series of these small sort of rocket
engines that are that are aimed in the opposite direction
of travel, and the purpose of these rockets is to
create distance from the re entry vehicle and the booster
that really kind of got it there. I understand that
you have information that is important to this on the
timing and configuration of the retro rockets and how that
affect the booster's trajectory. Explain that to us.
Speaker 3: It basically pushed it out of the way into the
soide pushed backwards and then basically stopped its forward trouble. Yeah,
they fired for one point eight seconds each sequentially, they
didn't foore both at the same time. They call that
ripple mode, and they put two hundred and ninety two
pounds of thrust back the opposite direction in the laterally,
So there was no way that that booster could be
in the same spot as the re entry vehicle seven
and a half minutes later when it detonated.
Speaker 1: So really you have two points of data here. You
you have the the the coefficient the what is it,
the the ballistic coefficient of the two different the two
different airframes. And then you also have supporting supporting the
the your point that that the r V and and
the the booster were not even in the same vicinity
because because you have information in terms of when the
retro thrusters were fired and the mode that they were fired,
that would cause the booster to separate to be a
good distance away from the nuclear explosion. So it not
only pushed it away, it pushed it laterally out of
the way as well.
Speaker 3: Yep, so off offline of the trajectory of the the.
Speaker 1: All right, let's move on to flaw number three in
Dean Johnson's attack article on on on the late Great
Herald Momgram and this is regarding the small white dot.
Why do you think Johnson focused on this small white
dot in the in the foot it is a sort
of unidentified white dot. Could there be any valid alternative
interpretation to what he stated and actually backed it up
a bit? What what did Dean say about this small white.
Speaker 4: Dot in one of the reports as a reference.
Speaker 3: To one of the films showing a small white dot,
and they refer to that as the booster. But if
you extrapolate the trajectories from there was two aircraft was
north of the detonation, one was east of the detonation.
At flight, both flying at thirty five thousand feet with
a vast array of cameras on board. Doug quotes, the
small white dot is coming from the easternmost aircraft. And
if you extrapolate those trajectories, you could see that the
booster was to the east of the blast and behind
it and at a lower altitude, so it had heated
up coming through the atmosphere and probably looked from the
camera's point of view as a small white dot well
behind and beyond.
Speaker 4: The weapons blast.
Speaker 3: Definitely not the tumbling fiery object that you can see
emanate from the middle of the fireball.
Speaker 1: Any idea why he latched onto this particular thing.
Speaker 3: It's funny because he can't actually see the photograph because
it's being redacted. It's not included in the report. They
just make a reference to it, so it's an image
you can't.
Speaker 4: See to you make your own judgments on.
Speaker 3: So I think Doug just grabbed onto that as a
possible explainer of what that tumbling object was that clearly
it wasn't.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, no, for sure. It definitely sounds like this
guy just had confirmation bias and was really kind of
just grasping at straws now. Johnson also mentions twenty eight
Nike Cajun and Nike Apache sounding rockets fired within an
hour of the blast. So could these one of these
rockets or their boosters explain this small white dot better
than a thor booster.
Speaker 3: Possibly, But they knew the locations those rockets because the
rockets are actually conducting experiments to see how radio waves
would attenuate through a nuclear fireball. And that's one of
the tricks. If you have a look at that movie
the day after They actually demonstrate the effect quite well
on in the attack scene. There's the first burst is
a high attitude burst, and what that does It stops
the anti ballistic missile radar from locking onto the incoming
warheads because the signals can't attenuate. They get attenuated through
that fireball. So that's what those rockets were testing. They
were it's transmitting signals to surface based ships and in
a sort of a zigzag fashion across the fireball. But
most of them will fild well after the nuclear detonation.
That object that falls out is in that the first
microseconds of the blast. It's definitely not the Cajun rockets.
Speaker 1: Oh gotcha? Okay, Fly number four Kettle's on the boil.
Fom dash A and fom dash B. What is fom
dash A and what is fom dash B.
Speaker 3: I think Doug refers to that as falling object movie
A and falling object movie B.
Speaker 1: Okay, But.
Speaker 3: When he wrote the article, he was still under the
impression that the r V and the boosts separated on
the way down, So he thought, you know, the booster
would follow the downward trajectory of the r V and
B within the fireball. That's the basic flour of from
a as he calls it, but Falling Object Movie B
suspicious because it looks like one I actually made last year,
and the way Doug describes it, it's in slow motion
and it looks like it takes eleven seconds to tumble
out of the fireball, and I can assure you that's
not the case. I had to run that software through
my software at the slowest speed, record it, and then
run it through the software again that the slowest speeder
could to get that image the way it does. It
looks very much like the image I posted on my
or the footage I posted on my YouTube channel. I'd
like to know where Doug got that Falling Object Movie
B from.
Speaker 1: And you've you've actually given this report. You emailed this
report that you that you generated to Doug Johnson.
Speaker 3: Correct, Yeah, yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: Doug got a copy, yep.
Speaker 1: And how long ago did you send that to Doug?
Speaker 3: That was six days ago. He'd asked me questions for
his article. Fairly cordial exchange between us, and he gave
me a heads up when he was about to post it,
and he knew I was going to come back with
the rebuttal, so fully expecting Doug to return fire. Yeah,
and you haven't raid these sort of I haven't heard
from him yet, but I fully expect he's got something coming.
Speaker 1: How did mixing up of the two camera angles weekend
Johnson's whole.
Speaker 3: Argument, Well, looking from the eastern view that one of
the images, there's a pronounced it's called sort of like
a halo, but it's actually the magnetic lines of force
of the Earth acting on the plasma of the fireball.
So that's the easternmost aircraft called Kettle two. I was
the one that actually mixed up which aircraft was which,
because two years ago, when I first discovered this anomalies,
I wasn't sure which aircraft was which. I had a
fifty to fifty chance of getting it right, and I
actually chose the wrong one. So I mislabeled the aircraft
back in the day Kettle one and Kettle two. Yeah,
So that was my coin toss that I missed out.
But it's irrelevant really because.
Speaker 4: It makes no difference.
Speaker 3: One of the labs was running one aircraft and one
of the other labs, livermore Los Alamos, was running beach aircraft,
and that was one of the things that I positive
that there was probably some sort of animosity between the
two labs that caused the one to get fully declassified
and one to get redacted.
Speaker 1: Now, these movie cameras that filmed this stuff, this isn't
These aren't like regular cameras. These things are ultra fast,
They have super high frame rate. Why do ultra fast
camera speeds in the viewing angles of this? Why does
that change what we think we are seeing?
Speaker 3: Because they're at the microsecond level, Gldial triple Prime displayed
things they'd never seen before or since in a nuclear
fireball with rebounding shockwaves. They could never explain what caused
those shockwaves initially, and there was a second source of
radiation that they couldn't explain where that source came from.
Speaker 4: There was a report by the flight.
Speaker 3: Dynamics labor at Wright Patterson. They did a in depth
analysis of the fireball in the first microseconds, and yeah,
there was just stuff they could not explain and probably
still can't explain.
Speaker 1: Let's move on to flaw number five, miss identif to
fight white triangle footage. How was Dean's interpretation of the
white triangle footage and correct? And what do the camera
specs reveal about this?
Speaker 3: Well? Doug claimed that was a sixteen frames per second footage.
There's no way that could be sixteen frames per second.
Was twenty five hundred frames per second, and you can
see that as the shockwaves rebound. That's happening at the
microsecond level, and you can watch that on the one
with the redaction on it, you can still see the
internal structure of the fireble.
Speaker 4: There was no way that.
Speaker 3: Would happen at a sixteen frames per second rate. He
seems to sort of imply that the I think it's
Peter Kure, and the nuclear weapons film expert sort of
agrees with him on that. I doubt that Peter would
say that because it's very obvious that it's not sixteen
frames per second, it's twenty five hundred. And the report
that came to light only only got hold of that
report in May beginning of May this year, and it's
actually got frame number two four nine nine, so that's
just ten microseconds before the one second mark, and there's
an image and it's the same you can see the
same fireballs structure as the one that's been redacted, so
that pruse there is an unredacted version of that footage
that they've put in that report. So somewhere in the
archives of the Department of Energy there is that footage
for all to see in its unredacted form.
Speaker 1: But what is and maybe I'm just not quite following,
what does Dian's claim about this thing running at sixteen
frames per second? How would that support his case as
opposed to him saying that it ran at you know, what,
did you say two thousand frames a second? Why does
that make a difference to this frame rate?
Speaker 3: Because of the unredacted frame in the report, he's misidentified
it as not He even says it's not from an aircraft.
He says it's one of the fixed cameras on Johnston Island,
which is clearly not. So I'm not sure what he's
trying to do there, because it's obvious that that film
that's redacted is the same one that that still frame
is from. So we've got footage of the redaction, you know,
the whole way along, and then we've got one single
frame with no redaction on it.
Speaker 1: Were any of the cameras that were used to film
these nuclear tests? Did any of those run out sixteen
frames a second?
Speaker 3: Some of them did, Yeah, but they didn't use that
tarb of X ray in motion. I don't think, okay,
you wouldn't say that detail that the rebounding it's quite
interesting that the pressure wave goes out and it bounces
back from from within itself and forms another vireball source.
It's quite amazing and that was why later on they
studied that particular weapons test in great detail.
Speaker 1: Yeah, to me, it would make no sense as to
why they would use something of such a low low
frame rate. If you're analyzing nuclear explosion performance, just talking
from my sort of layman perspective, you would want the
maximum number of frames. I mean, even like today film
runs at thirty frames per second, So it makes just
Dean's logic is just ridiculous because it would make no
sense of if you were analyzing footage to understand what
happened during a nuclear detonation, you would want the maximum
amount of frames in the shortest amount of period of time,
so you wouldn't have motion blur. The resolution would be high.
I mean, is my logic solid on that? Yeah.
Speaker 3: There was sixty six cameras on each plane or hating
different and different organizations had different projects were running each camera.
The weapons labs wanted to see the early time fireball activity,
because that tells them if their design, their weapons design
is a success. And these particular Bluegill tests became the
basis of the what they call the W seventy one
five guiton Nikola warhead that was used purely.
Speaker 4: For anti ballistic missile defense. And that's where they had.
Speaker 3: To They say they borrowed several tons of gold from
the US Treasury to make those weapons, because gold is
the key to producing X rays.
Speaker 1: Let's move on to FLO six. Los Alamos versus Livermore
laboratory rivalry. What did you learn about the rivalry between
those two labs.
Speaker 3: It's quite odd because that was Everyone knows that Los
Alamos and Livermore don't like each other purely, or didn't
up until even today. On LinkedIn, just this week, I
saw two articles from one from Los Alamos, one from Livermore,
and they still snipe at each other today. So and
it stems from Edward Teller trying to push the hydrogen
bomb back in the late nineteen forties and Robert open
I have a j Robert Oppenheimer and some of the
other scientists were against the hydrogen bomb and a book
got written in the early fifties, which pretty much accused
Los Alamos had been traders and not wanting to develop
the hydrogen bomb. And the second director of Los Alamos
was a guy named Norris Bradbury. He was directed for
twenty five years. He took serious offense to that and
he would not let Teller at Los Alamos at all.
Teller was banned from Los Alamos.
Speaker 4: And the chief.
Speaker 3: Weapons designer was a guy named Bob Christie. He refused
to shake Teller's hand whenever they met outside conferences and stuff.
So that's well known animosity. And I even emailed Dug
a thesis written by a lady that you know that
was her whole thesis was Warhead Politics, Sybil Francis. The
name was doctor Sibil Francis. I emailed him as evidence, say,
you know, I just have a look at this. There's
some interesting stuff in there. And he refused to use that,
which I found odd. You know, it's you can't sort
of gloss these things over when it's well known. But
they don't get on because their competition.
Speaker 1: So so, but what in terms of this whole argument,
what does how do how does Doug's downplaying of this
serve as a mechanism to support his case.
Speaker 3: Yeah, pretending that there is an animosity, because it's confusing
why one lab would fully declassify the footage. It clearly
shows something falling from the fireball, and the other one
would redact it.
Speaker 4: And I asked doctor.
Speaker 3: John Zinn, who was a Weapons Lab scientist during Operation
fish Bowl, which was the high altitude tests, you know
why there would be two sort of separate films with
different classification levels. And he sort of said, Oh, it
could be just personal preference. You know some people and
people have different risk assessments. You know, someone that rock
climbs without ropes has a different assessment of risk than
someone that works in an office. So whether they thought
that there wouldn't be any risk of releasing that footage,
and you know, it worked for twenty odd years. That
footage was released in nineteen ninety eight. Twenty years it's
taken to come out that that's something that should be
looked upon it a little bit closer, Ye know that
that that was the argument that there was a disagreement
between the labs.
Speaker 4: That sounds feasible.
Speaker 1: So really a turf war could be the reason why
there is some murkiness in the story.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right, and that you know, Doug sort of
said it was an unfounded, uh, allegation of animosity between
the labs.
Speaker 4: I mean, it's well documented.
Speaker 1: So and and and please go and have Sorry.
Speaker 3: It was disingenious to sort of pretend there wasn't because
it's quite easy to dispel that.
Speaker 1: And and this this this rivalry which Doug is downplaying
or denying, this this rivalry from how you're explaining this,
this is a long rivalry. It wasn't just a rivalry
that existed during this particular test.
Speaker 3: No, as I said that from what they posted on
LinkedIn this week, they were sort of taken potshots at
one another.
Speaker 1: Still, yeah, so yeah, there you go. Okay, so let's
move on to flow number seven. Starfish Prime is not
an analog. Explain that.
Speaker 3: Starfish Prime was a completely different weapons test was done
in July ninth of July nineteen sixty two. It was
a different warhead. It was a W nine warhead, which
it was an enhanced neutron warhead. So the purpose of
that was to generate energetic neutrons to and they interact
up in the higher atmosphere with electrons and blast electrons.
Out from their parent atoms and what that does it
causes a potential difference in electrical charge and that's where
the emp electromagnetic pulses generated from. So Starfish Prime was
at an altitude of four hundred kilometers. It still used
the thaw and it was a special version of the thaw.
Missile was a Douglas Space Vehicle DSV two echo. That's
the type of that it was. It actually had a
lower apergee as well, the Starfish Prime apergee which after
the booster had separated from the RV the RV and
he went to seven hundred kilometers before it started its descent,
and it started after it reached seven hundred and only
went down to four hundred kilometers before it detonated. So
the aircraft array and they had the same aircraft that
they used for Blue Guild Triple Prime, but they were
hundreds of kilometers away from their positions they were in
Blue Guild Triple Prime. They were looking at different angles
and the field of view was much larger. And in
the Starfish Prime reports there are numerous sightings of the
booster tumbling down, which of course would have happened because
you've got a wider field of view from that distance,
and so that once Doug realized that the boosters separated
on the way up, not on the way down, they
started he started saying that Starfish prime saw the booster,
so Bluegill prime booster would have been there too, which
is just a flawed, very flawed logic, completely different tests.
You can't you can't use that as an analogue to
jam your argument into those sort of parameters.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's I think that's exactly what he
was doing again, just kind of grasping at straws. So really,
Johnson's argument is completely without merit. He's he's importing this
Starfish Prime footage even though the apogey was ten times
higher and the yield of the weapon was three times larger.
So in hard numbers, why are those conditions too different
to reuse it? I mean, is it truly in apples
and orangest thing? I think that's what I understand that
you're saying.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's correct. Yeah, And there's in the report. I've
used the aircraft array positions and you can see that
there's a massive difference in where the aircraft were located.
The different because they had to point at a different
angle in the sky, and so being further back, you've
got a wider field of view, and of course you
would have seen the boosters tumbeling in the background. They again,
you know, the neutrons traveled at light speed after the blast,
so that the booster got impinged by energetic neutrons. But
the fireball of Starfish Prime, because it was outside the atmosphere,
it didn't form like a normal fireball for the other
shots because they were much lower in the atmosphere.
Speaker 4: This thing was in space.
Speaker 3: So yeah, and by the way, it caused a lot
of damage to the satellites that were in orbit at
the time. There was only nine I think that significantly
damaged the satellites. The British government actually complained to the
US about Starfish Prime because there was another test called
Arica that was going to take place at a thousand
kilometers autitude with a one point four megaton warhead as well,
and that one got canceled because the British demonstrated so
heavily against that because there was concerns about the Van
Allen radiation belts that they're going to pump them up,
and they actually had no idea what the effect was
going to be. Of setting off such a large weapon
at that height.
Speaker 1: So really it boils down to the starfish prime analogy
that he is trying to shoehorn into this thing. It's
detonating at a at a higher altitude. It's a larger
yield weapon. So because of those two things, where the
aircraft would be in order to capture this the field
of view of the camp, the aircraft would have been
further away, the angle it would have shot it would
have been different, and therefore as well, further away it
would have been, you wouldn't have been close enough to
make out, for instance, an object falling or anything of
that nature might following you correctly.
Speaker 4: Pretty much. Yeah, it's the.
Speaker 3: You can't really compare it to you.
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, so yeah, so bottom line is it's apples
and oranges. Okay, moving on Flaw number eight, Falling sphere
rad hot recoveries. What is this?
Speaker 3: So before each test, they'd had a sphere that they
dropped from a certain attitude, and they had given an
indication of air density, and it had also give them
a chance to calibrate their radars bouncing off that sphere,
and generally it was twenty four hours before a test
they did drop one fifteen minutes after the test, but
it didn't go through the radiation cloud. And some of
those objects that they picked up in the recovery, those
instrument pods that I mentioned before, All three of those
pods were recovered by nine o'clock that morning, but in
the afternoon they were still recovering debris and it was radioactive.
One of those was described as a black ball, had
a reading of thirty milli rotogens from one foot away
one foot distance, which is fairly radioactive. Dug neglected to
mention that part in his article, which again is a
bit disingenious because it implies that it's just one of
the weather spears that they've picked up, nothing important about that.
But actually we Doug writing this report's actually made me
delve deeper into the events of that day, and I've
actually uncovered more data that supports anonymous or objects that
they couldn't describe. And the ship logs are quite interesting.
Interesting that day because there was a transfer from there
was three ships that were in the recovery mission for
the instrumentation pods. One was the Safeguard, one was the Engage,
and the other one was the McCain. So there was
a transfer of debris from the safeguard to the engage
and then from the engage to the McCain and then
at between the sixteen hundred hour and twenty hour watching
the logs, the McCain then transferred that debris to the Princeton. Now,
the Princeton was the headquarters of the whole task force.
That's where Brigadier General Alfred Starbird was located. That was
his headquarters on the ship. Because Johnston Island was quite small,
he had an a air conditioned cabin that he could
hang out in, so that was his headquarters. And there's
an interesting message that got transmitted. It's called Commserve Pack
twenty nine two one four ZULU. So that was sent
on the twenty eighth of October at sixteen fourteen local.
Speaker 4: Time, Johnston Island.
Speaker 3: And that has revealed a whole heap of new information
that I will be releasing very soon.
Speaker 1: Excellent, and I take it this information continues to a
blow to Smotheren's Dean Johnson's article.
Speaker 3: Yep, very compelling evidence. And I've got second and third
party subject matter experts looking at that data. That's very exciting.
Speaker 1: Well, I look forward to having you back on to
discuss your further findings. I want to back up a
bet to the falling sphere. What I don't understand is
why the sphere's radiation reading is significant, and like, what
about why is that important? The radiation really.
Speaker 3: Because it means it was exposed to the fireball, the
nuclear fireball. You know, they used to drop those spheres
from aircraft and from rockets just to get a gauge
of the weather and the air density, so very they
were nowhere near the nuclear explosion, so for them to
be irradiated is unusual.
Speaker 1: And and Dean's argument regarding this as.
Speaker 3: What, well, but the black ball that they recovered, and
mind you when they recovered it in their cargo nets,
that the ship lost complete power, that a total power surge. Yeah,
So what's unusual about that safeguard is it's what they
call a diver class vessel and it had two separate generators.
Those generators with DC generators, they weren't alternating current. And
for a ship to lose both generators at the same
time is extremely unusual because normally you run in a
configuration that's called a split bus. If you lose one,
you'll only lose half the ship, but that ship lost
complete power as it tried to bring that ball on
board in its nets. Which it's just another data point.
It's of strangeness.
Speaker 1: Any other points that you would like to make with
this particular sort of fly that you've found.
Speaker 3: Not really, but they need to emphasize that they helped
me uncover more compelling evidence.
Speaker 1: Next to the last one fly nine Early time fireball analysis.
What significance do you place on the absence of the
buster in the Project eight AT three fireball analysis? Well,
you know, why is it a big deal that the
official fireball photos don't show the booster at all?
Speaker 3: There's no mention of it. That was the right Patterson
people with the Flight Dynamics laboratory, and they're looking at
a millisecond level the X ray sources of the devices
in its first microseconds of life as it detonates. You know,
they're looking at the weapon how it vaporizes into a
plasma because that in the middle of that fireball that's
a million degrees kelvin. You know that matter just turns
to plasma. There's no materials that humans make that can
survive that sort of temperature. You know that nuclear fusion
reactors have to maintain a magnetic field around the reactors
when they're generating those temperatures, so there's no actual material
touching that temperature. So you know, they're looking deep inside
the fire ball. They've got cameras on those pods, pinhole
cameras that can record the X ray sources, and they
found an anomaly in the source of the X rays.
There was a large source and a small source. And
that's where that footnote comes from, because after they wrote
the report, and I think just before they published it,
they put that footnote in that said that, you know,
there was anomalies that they can't explain and that needs
further research. So you know, there's no mention of a
booster there at all, which, okay, guys would have seen it.
Speaker 1: All right. Finally, number ten radiation exposure dismissed. What are
your thoughts on why Johnson really pretty much dismissed any
kind of radiation exposure among the operation dominic personnel.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that was not a smart move because it's well
documented that the atomic veterans. That was the whole reason
that came in Tempo report was written was because NHS
had started to see veterans atomic veterans present with leukemia
and cancer at astronomical rates far outside the norm, and
that's what prompted that report to get written.
Speaker 4: But Department of Energy and Department.
Speaker 3: Of Fens selected the Carmen Tempo group because Carmen Tempo
took part in Operation Dominic, And you know, they claimed
that the high radiation exposure readings were due to faulty dossiometers,
a seal was gone, but that doesn't explain why people
started getting cancer and lakemia.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 4: So it was, Yes, it was.
Speaker 3: A finding that they had to reach to get themselves
out of trouble. Basically, Yeah, there's well documented evidence and
I've actually put a section in there of one of
the marine helicopter crew that because Bluegill Triple Prime was
the fourth test of the Bluegill series because the other
three had failed, and that the second one actually exploded
on the launchpad and spread radio active plutonium and gold
all across Johnston Island, and that those people had to
go in and clean it up. And as he said,
I think most of the crew that he was with
had died since he wrote that, and his initial attempts
to get his records of his exposure they claimed that,
you know, the records had been destroyed in a warehouse
fire in Saint Louis, And he got onto someone else
that in Washington that said that all the time because
they're lazy, you know, they just don't want to find
their records, and he actually found someone that helped him out.
But yeah, it was that was the part I didn't like,
sort of dismissing the whole radiation level. And again, one
of those ships that's mentioned there with the high radiation
level is the key to the new uncovered research. It
was only there for one test and a lot of
its crew members had high doses of radiation. They were
only there for one test and it was a high
attitude test. They were nowhere near anything in their official
assigned tasks that would have exposed them to radiation, and
yet their crew members recorded high levels of radiation. So
they got it from somewhere. And my posit that that's
from the recovery operation.
Speaker 1: But any idea why Dean would have played that down.
Speaker 3: I'm not sure. It wasn't It wasn't a smart thing
to do because it's easily disproved.
Speaker 1: Yeah, clearly. Okay, so we can wrap it up here,
One of the things that I understand is your Reddit
account was banned for discussing blue Gill, triple prime and
any idea why, And you know, what does that say
about censorship online censorship?
Speaker 3: Some people just don't want to even think about the
possibility of our higher species getting involved and particularly getting
interested in our nuclear weapons tests. The thought just blows
their mind. And some of them were moderators on that
particular sub it was called the Nuclear Weapons sub It's
quite a good sub.
Speaker 2: They go into some technical detail of of what, you know,
what's happening in a lot of the nuclear tests.
Speaker 3: Quite you know, they'll argue over the most minute details
of nuclear weapons test. But they just did not want
to even contemplate talking the possibility that this was and
the Atlas eight F tests thirty seven days prior. You know,
that's the key to this whole thing. That test that
was filmed, and it was the same type of RV
and AVCO Mark four and there was something filmed following it,
and that footage was uploaded to the National Archives by
the Office of the Secretary of Defense. That's their footage.
They uploaded it. So and this lends credence to what
Tom DeLong said in the days before he got outed
on the DNC wikileagues hacked, that they knew that they
were there was a possibility that something was going to
follow that test, and they deliberately shot it down. That's
what he was told, and I believe it was General
Neil McCaslin and Mike Carey that told him that. He
revealed that on the Jimmy Church Day to Black Radio
show on August thirty, twenty sixteen, episode five one five,
and then ten days later the DNC hack revealed that
he'd been in contact the email contact with Neil McCaslin,
John Podesta, and Mike Carey. So Tom DeLong I don't
believe has spoken about it since because he's clearly accidentally
revealed his source. Probably scared y.
Speaker 4: I think I.
Speaker 1: Understand that you reached out to nuclear historian Alex Wellerstein.
How did he respond to your theory and has his
stance evolved since your initial communication with him?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it did. He was quite interested in the whole thing.
He runs a site called nuke Map where he's got
an interactive.
Speaker 4: Site where he can.
Speaker 3: Select different yields for nuclear blasts, fill model trajectories, and
he actually made one up for Bluegill Triple prim In.
It was quite good, you know, showed that the rocket
launch and the RV separation and then the detonation. But
I'm not sure he's a professor at one of the universities.
Perhaps he was getting heat from the faculty or something,
but he seemed to change his tune a bit, and
Doug actually contacted him and asked him what he thought,
and then he posted on Reddit that day, I think
and sort of said, oh, what's going on with this
triangle sort of thing? And a few of the other
redditors were quite receptive to the idea. One had been
involved in films and he said I've never seen anything
like that in forty years wow, being in the film industry,
so you know, but ultimately they didn't moderators didn't like
where it was going, so they kicked me off. So yeah,
that's the censorship for you.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. So finally, what is your goal in publishing
this rebuttal? Is it scientific clarity, historical correction? Why did
you put so much time into this amazing forty ish
page rebuttal? Well?
Speaker 3: Marrit von rnnom Camp had actually come out just before
that and said he thought it was the instrument pods.
Doug did a pretty good job of demolishing Marrick's theory there,
so I wasn't going to help him interfere with that.
But so you know, if you eliminate the instrumentation pods,
and if you eliminate the booster as the object that
tumbles out, the only thing left is that object that
followed the AVCO r V from the Atlas eight F
test on nine eighth of the September nineteen sixty two
that was filmed in the Atlantic Missile range. But same
type of r V, same type of thing.
Speaker 1: Well, Jeff, thank you so much for joining us, and
really moreover, thank you for just putting in what had
to have been an enormous amount of time. The level
of detail here is and the references used in your research,
it is truly truly extensive. I mean, I am no
expert when it comes to this, but just speaking from
my perspective, it seems that you completely blew out of
the water Deans what I view as really ridiculous article. Yeah,
I mean really really great job, and I would love
to have you back on the show with this new
information that you have discovered. When you're ready.
Speaker 3: Yeah, thanks Matt. I've actually submitted this paper to the
SEU conference which is ongoing this weekend in Alabama, so
you know that the scientists and the physicists there can
actually see the data, and I think I already know
the answer. They're going to pretty much say that, yeah,
that's correct. There's no way the booster could have possibly
been anywhere near the detonation. So look forward to seeing
you again, Fluid.
Speaker 1: Awesome. Well, thanks again for coming on the show, Thanks
for staying up so late, and we look forward to
having you back. Jeff Crookshank, ladies and gentlemen.
Speaker 4: Thanks Matt.
Speaker 1: All right, well, I hope everyone enjoyed. I forgot to
mention that our interview with Jeff was pre recorded a
few weeks ago actually, due to the time difference in Australia.
I think we had recorded at something like seven am. Anyway,
that's why one of the reasons we didn't have them live. Also,
I do have an on air correction to make It
was Ellsberg who interviewed the pilots, not Haroldgren. Momgren was
in charge of costing the anti ballistic missile system, and
I also have some important information for you regarding mister Momngram,
something called the Weapons Systems Evaluation Group, which goes by
the acronym WITHSEG. I mean, we know the government loves
those acronyms anyway. This with SG was formed in nineteen
forty nine to carry out operational research work for the
Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States of the
United State ch Army and also for the United States
Secretary of Defense. And this group oversaw the appraisal of
weapons used during the Korean War. The group collaborated with
Israel and evaluating the effectiveness of Soviet weapons during the
Cold War. Guess who was in charge of costings for
the w SAG, Harold Momgren. Once again, here's a guy
who supposedly there's no way he could have had a
Q clearance, is working for that organization, you know. And
again you have to read this forty pages of extensive
research on why Douglas Dean Johnson's attack on Harold Momgren
is just total, total bullshit. I mean, seriously, you have
to wonder where Dean Johnson came up with this stuff.
When you read this, it is blatantly obvious that Dean
has no idea what he's talking about I mean, seriously,
it's clear to me, in my personal opinion, Dean did
not do the research. And speaking of research, let's talk
about Foya. The great Jesse Michaels of American Alchemy released
this incredible interview with Harold Momgren and his daughter Pippa
was in there as well on April twenty third, twenty
twenty five. Douglas Dean Johnson's article came out May twentieth,
twenty twenty five. So you're telling me, Douglas Dean Johnson
got all these Foya requests out the door and answer
answers back to them. It gets replies to his Foyer
requests in less than thirty days. In thirty days, Dean
Johnson sees the interview with Jesse Michaels on American Alchemy,
comes up with a bunch of Foyer requests, sends them off,
and then magically, Dean Johnson gets these Foyer requests answered
in thirty days. You gotta be kidding me. I mean,
even the great Foyer King John Greenwald of black Vault
dot Com can't get that kind of response from Foya
in anywhere near that kind of time frame. It stinks
to high heaven. Seriously, it makes zero sense. The fact
that Dean Johnson turned this around in thirty days, I'm
telling you, stinks to high heaven. How does a guy
who writes about abortion and apparently, in his other job
was the key lobbyist for the anti abortion group. How
does a guy that is an expert in well, let's
just face it, taking women's rights away. How does this
person knows so much in such detail, down to frames
per second of a freaking camera in a secret missile
test from the nineteen sixties. Who fed this to Dean Johnson? Again,
this is my personal opinion. Was it doctor Sean Kirkpatrick?
Was it, Susan? Go ask yourself that. I guarantee you, Douglas.
Dean Johnson does not have data on the shelves from
any other missile test. I guarantee it. And he magically
came up with all of this data to write his
whatever you want to call it. Uh, I don't even
want to Yeah, I can't even think of what to
call it. He wrote all that in thirty days, He
got all the Foyer stuff back, he came up with
this crazy concept. It's this whole thing about there's no
way Harold Momgraam could have couldn't have had a Q clearance.
And again I reach out to a former FBI agent
that dealt with Q clearances, and this guy, basically said
Doug Johnson is full of shit when it comes to
this whole Q clearance thing. An FBI agent, former FBI
agent that dealt with Q clearances, that knows all of
the security protocols, knows, you know, what it takes to
adjudicate it. And this former FBI agent, who again was
not a low level FBI agent at the time, he
was in charge of a few of our nation's most
important investigations, says Douglas Deane Johnson, and has no idea
what he's talking about when it comes to this Q
clearance thing. Because again, if you can shoot the messenger,
if you can, if you can do anything to disparage
a whistleblower, what happens. Congress may say to themselves, Well,
this Harold Momgrum guy, he's not who he's not who
he said he was. That's the purpose. Shoot the messenger,
throw whistleblowers under the bus, make the lawmakers in Congress
question why they're doing this, make the American public question
why Congress is spending money on this shoot the messenger.
That's what it's about. You know. Another question, how did
Doug Johnson get Harold Momgram's S eighty six in less
than thirty So you're telling me once again that a
month after Jesse Michael's interview, he magically gets Harold Momgren's
S eighty six form in less than thirty days. Has
anyone asked Doug Johnson about the other sad six's Because
here's the thing. You have to fill that form out
multiple times for each new role. So the dozens upon
dozens of roles that Harold Momnggren held in his esteemed career,
a career in service to the United States of America,
had all of these roles, And you're telling me Douglas
Dean Johnson relies on only one S eighty six. Did
he not get the other S eighty six's? Did he?
Whoever his contact is that is magically funneling all this
these Foyer requests, fast tracking, these Fourier requests, and a
single less eighty six in less than thirty days. Seriously,
no intelligence official. And this is essentially what this former
FBI agent said, This FBI agent that a former FBI
agent that Dean Johnson said to me, maybe I'm making
this up. I mean, go figure again. Yeah, it's insane.
No intelligence official you can take this to the bank.
No intelligence official wouldever put clearances of that nature on
an S eighty six. Despite what Douglas Dean Johnson says,
and is absolutely ridiculous paper or stories or whatever you
want to call it. People didn't do that. A former
FBI agent that dealt with Q clearances said exactly that
there are different rules for regular people versus high level
folks like Momgrem. And remember the whole purpose of the
Rand Corporation and their Institute for Defense Analysis. It was
set up to shield senior people from outside scrutiny. Harold
Momgren was in both in nineteen sixty three. And I
have to point out once again the interview that we
just aired with Jeff Krukshank. That interview was recorded a
few weeks ago, and at that time Jeff had sent
his forty paide rebuttal to the Dean Johnson character and
was a week prior to this interview, and he still
had not received a response. So all these weeks later,
Jeff has not received a rebuttal or response to his
forty pay of evidence that clearly show in my view
that Dean's article is flawed. I mean, come on, that
totally stinks to high heaven. Now Here is my personal
personal take, my personal guess of what has been going
on this his opinion, I don't know this for fact.
My personal opinion, Doug Johnson is just a tool. He's
a front person, a hype man. Someone is probably feeding
him this stuff. When you again, when you look at
the thirty days that all of a sudden, all this magic,
this magic information just shows up on his doorstep thirty
days when it takes people with FOYA years to get
this stuff, and Doug Johnson, I don't know who who
what frenzy has in high places, if it's Susan Goff
or a former director of Errold, doctor Sean Kirkpatrick. In
my opinion, he was He's just a front man. My opinion,
Doug Johnson is just a tool. That's it. So yeah,
that's that's my personal theory. And and another one of
my personal theories regarding really kind of the overview of
this whole UAP disclosure issue. In my view, there there
are really three distinct camps. There is the camp that
we all have known about for decades. This this camp
that says there's nothing to see here. It's swamp gas
at seagulls, it's uh, you know whatever, it's drones or whatnot.
You've got that old camp that doesn't want any of
this out period the end. Then you've got the camp
where I think you could put uh the bucket you
could put in this bucket, uh Loue Elizondo and whistleblower
David Rush who want all of this out. They want
to open the full kimono. They want to say, Okay,
we've recovered craft of non human origin, We've had a
programmed to reverse engineer this stuff. And oh, by the way,
our government has really done some well not quite legal things,
perhaps retaliation against whistleblowers, perhaps targeted killings of whistleblowers. But
they're of this opinion. You know what, this is what
it is. These were the decisions that were made at
the time. We made some bad decisions as a country.
Every country makes bad decisions. People make bad decisions. They
make decisions based on the information they had at the time.
They made decisions in the height of the Cold War,
and this is what we did. We're pulling off the band.
AID want everybody to know, and the belief there is
that that is the quickest way to reconciliation of the
American public. Just come clean. This is what happened, this
is why we hit it, this is why we retaliated
to keep this thing under wraps. This is why we
threatened people because we didn't want this getting out into
the public discourse and panicking everyone. There were probably good reasons. Now,
were there good reasons in terms of physically retaliating against people. No,
And in my opinion, those people should go to jail.
So you've got the people that says there's nothing to it.
You've got the people in the middle that have seen
all the classified evidence, they were part of classified briefings,
people like David Gresh, louel Is onto on others that
say let's open the kimono, let's just be done with
it and move on. But then you got a third group,
and in my opinion, folks like Douglas Stein, Johnson and
the others fall into this third group. And that third
group is, yes, there's something in the sky, Yes we
don't know where it is, but let's not talk about
all this stuff in the rear view mirror. Let's not
let's not talk about the legacy crash retrieval program. Let's
let's not talk about some of the dirty things our
country has done to keep it hidden. Let's not talk
about that. We have sensor systems that already track this
stuff and can tell when it crashes so that they
can go recover it. Let's not talk about any of
that stuff. Who else is in that bucket you have?
You have Arrow, You've got, You've got basically this, this, this,
this narrative and out of the Pentagon, out of Arrow
that ooh, what's all this new stuff flying around in
our skies? We got to get to the bottom of this.
We need the public's help. We need to spend some
more money on some new sense and we're gonna have
send some more money to Arrow. We're gonna find some
new sensors. We're gonna enlist the public to help us
figure out what all this new stuff is flying around
in our skies. We need to get to the bottom
of this. All these drones flying around over our nuclear
missile facilities and whatever. This is all new. We've never
seen this before. We need more money, We need more sensors.
We need to figure this out with the public's help.
We want to get to the bottom of it just
as bad as you do at home. They don't want
you at home. They don't want members of Congress, and
we know members of Congress watch this show and their staffers.
They don't want all of you on Capitol Hill looking
in the rear view mirror. They don't want all of
you on Capitol Hill looking back and asking, hey, how
many billions of dollars maybe a trillion trillion or so
has our government spent of tax payer money to look
at into this stuff. And by the way, we hit
it from all of you in Congress so that you
couldn't get your fingers on it or interfere with it.
This third group, they do not want you looking back.
That's that's really what it's about. They know it's going
to come out. They know that it's going to come out.
Stuff's here and flying around in our skies and we
don't know where it's from. But they don't want you
looking backwards. They want you looking in the present into
the future. In my opinion, it's because there are a
lot of people that have Fifth Amendment concerns, People that
when this stuff comes out have a pretty damn good
chance of ending up in jail. So the best way
to avoid all of that, avoid having egg on the
face of the United States Government, the Pentagon, the Intelligence community,
and the Department of Energy and the National Security Agency,
is to only look forward. It's the game that they
are playing. And finally, I'll say this for all the
members of Congress or staffers that are watching this show.
The third rail, the third rail the Pentagon does not
want you looking into, is the fact that UAP UFOs
whatever you want to call them, have been tampering with
our strategic nuclear deterrent. This has been going on a
very long time. UAPs disabling entire flights of ten nuclear
tip ICBM missiles in multiple squadrons. UAP not only disabling them,
putting them into a into a launch sequence where the
where the folks, the people like Robert sallis below ground
have to flip an inhibit switch to make sure that
these things don't launch. The other thing they don't want
you to know is there is a history of UAP
retargeting the warheads in the ICBMs. Let me say this again,
there is a history of UAP retargeting the nuclear warheads
in our intercontinental ballistic missiles. Members of Congress, they do
not want you looking into that. That is what you
should be looking into. What you need to be looking into, respectfully,
is asking from the United States Air Force, and that
the national non disclosure agreements that the Office the Air
Force Office of Special Investigation forced these Air Force personnel
to sign when they had these UAP nuclear incidents. That's
where the that's where the gold's at. That's that's the
pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Because
I guarantee to you when you find those reports, it's
going to blow it all open. You're gonna find out
exactly the dirty things United States Air Force has been
up to with this subject. They do not want you
to know that the crown jewel of the United States
of America, our strategic nuclear deterrent, is vulnerable to whatever
this is. I have no idea where it's from. They
do not want you to know that that continues to
this day with the minute Man three intercontinental ballistic missile platform.
They do not want you to know that this is
apparently also happening with our sea launched ballistic missiles, the
Trident two on our Ohio class ballistic missile submarines, that
there have been incidents of UAP tampering with those nuclear
weapons under the under the oceans. They don't want you
asking that, and that is why they want this to
go away. That is why you've got stories like this,
in my opinion, from Dean Johnson and the Wall Street
Journal wanting to throw cold water on this nuclear angle
and are going to throw cold water. The Pentagon's gonna
throw cold water on this. It doesn't matter what the
collateral damage is in terms of people's reputations, and what
this really is is an affront to every American voter
and moreover, an affront to every American veteran that has
worn the uniform, every man and woman who has warned
the uniform or served our country with distinction, such as
the late Great Harold Momgren. When when you have these
hit pieces, these things that are designed to discredit these whistleblowers,
are these people that are going on the record about this,
it is literally the United State States government giving the
middle finger to anyone that has served this country and
has dealt with this UAP issue as part of their portfolio.
It's disgusting, it's wrong, and I hope that every member
of Congress or the staffer that is watching this will
take that into account and hold these people accountable. You
cannot have a functional democracy when you've got the Pentagon
literally engaged in a disinformation operation against the US public.
I forgot the executive order, but it's it is illegal.
It is not supposed to be happening. However, the workaround is,
you can't have a disinformation that the Pentagon Public Affairs
Office or whatever ode and I can run an op
that targets let's say, let's just say they can run
an operation that sends out a disinformation regarding up and
the target country is France or Iran or Erat. But
as in the information age, what you send disinformation wise
over to countries across the pond, the American public is
going to consume it as well. That's how, in my view,
they probably get around this executive order that prohibits these
kinds of disinformation activities. We also know from our history,
going back to the Church Committee, that our intelligence community
back during the Cold War in the fifties and sixties
had on the payroll members of the press, editors of newspapers.
It wasn't specifically related to UAP that we know of.
But essentially what happened was our government during the Cold War,
either financially compt stated through CIA cutouts, or through sort
of backscratching. In other words, if you're a reporter for
the New York Times and you want to have a
interview during the Vietnam War with the Secretary of Defense,
we need you to write an article that really puts
forward the Pentagon's public facing view on communism. So they
had these, they had these, they have these relationships, and
all of that came out in the Church Committee back
in I think nineteen seventy two or nineteen seventy three.
But again, there is a history of the Pentagon and
the intelligence community paying people to write articles, paying people
to go on television to spread this information. It's a
communications it's a comms strategy that has been used in
the past. So you know, Members of Congress, all I
can say is when you read read this kind of stuff,
that sure seems kind of odd how much time they're
they're spending on a debunking U A p S. You
got to ask why, And I I don't know it
is it makes no sense to me. And again the
analogy I use time and time again is if if
someone out there believes Chewbacca is real and as a
wookies are real, and they get on Twitter, they write articles,
or they they put stuff on their on their their
personal web pages saying that wookies are real, I'd be like, Okay, cool,
knock yourself out. I don't think wookies are real, but
if you do, I'm I'm not going to spend all
day writing articles to counter it. I'm not going to
spend all my time on Twitter writing trying to debunk uh,
that Chewbacca is real. It just makes no sense. People's
time on this earth is the most the most valuable
commodity a human being has, and while these folks are
spending all of this time debunking something that they don't
think is real, it you have to you have to,
you have to wonder. Anyway, folks, I really appreciate everybody
tuning in today. We'll have another great it's another great
interview smarting tongue tied today. Another great interview coming up
for you guys next week. And uh and if you
want to see another great interview from The Good Trouble Show,
just click write