Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to the show.
Speaker 2: I'm Martin willis your host, and we have I think
Speaker 2: it's going to be an interesting show this evening. We're
Speaker 2: going to be taking a closer look at one of
Speaker 2: the most famous and controversial stories in UFO history, the
Speaker 2: story of Bob Blazar.
Speaker 1: And my longtime listeners.
Speaker 2: Know how I feel about Bob, and some people are
Speaker 2: not happy about my thoughts about him. But my guest
Speaker 2: is filmmaker Luigi Vendatelli, and he's a director and producer
Speaker 2: of the new documentary S four, The Bob Lazar Story.
Speaker 2: I want to be upfront. I've always been skeptical of
Speaker 2: Bob's claims, and I still have a number of serious
Speaker 2: questions about his background, education, security clearance, and certain parts
Speaker 2: of his story. Luigi, on the other hand, has worked
Speaker 2: closely with Bob and has a different perspective. And I
Speaker 2: like Luigi, but that doesn't mean we're going to agree
Speaker 2: on everything. In fact, we may get into a little
Speaker 2: bit of a debate. My goal is to have an
Speaker 2: honest but genleminly discussion, raise some of the questions that
Speaker 2: continue to trouble me, and give Luigi a fair opportunity
Speaker 2: to explain why he finds Bob Blazar's story credible. I
Speaker 2: want to say from the start, since day one, looking
Speaker 2: into Bob Bazaar, I really wanted his story to be true.
Speaker 2: Now I just want everyone to know that because you're
Speaker 2: going to hear me. You may not believe that, but
Speaker 2: that's exactly what I wanted. I really wanted his story
Speaker 2: to be true. I'm a long time fine art appraiser.
Speaker 2: I tend to scrutinize everything, and when I discover a
Speaker 2: fake in a collection, naturally makes me question the entire collection.
Speaker 1: And frankly, I'm.
Speaker 2: Just not buying Bob's Bob Lazar's collection of stories. People
Speaker 2: usually read and watch what they already believe to be true.
Speaker 2: So I'm not sure how many downloads or listens this
Speaker 2: show will get, and it doesn't matter. I think we'll
Speaker 2: have a good time tonight. So this coming Thursday at
Speaker 2: eight pm, we have Rabbi mosh Rothschild. He's on to
Speaker 2: discuss UFOs and religion. We have a lot of great
Speaker 2: guests coming out with Jacques Rela's coming up and many
Speaker 2: other really great guests on this show. So check out
Speaker 2: this week's blog over at podcastufo dot com by Charles Lear.
Speaker 2: It's an academic looks into the men in Black after
Speaker 2: a man in black looked into him.
Speaker 1: And one more thing.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to bring this up because I have
Speaker 2: decided I have this show that I do on Tesla
Speaker 2: Full Self Driving, and it's I'm just fascinated by the technology,
Speaker 2: and so that has been on this YouTube channel, and
Speaker 2: I decided to put it on its own channel.
Speaker 1: And it's when you're starting.
Speaker 2: A YouTube I think I've had this YouTube for I
Speaker 2: don't know, maybe fourteen years something like that. When you
Speaker 2: start a YouTube channel, it's like being a grain of
Speaker 2: sand on the beach. There's so many millions and millions
Speaker 2: of shows. The link to that it's called Tesla Takes
Speaker 2: a Wheel, and the link to that YouTube is below.
Speaker 2: Hope you subscribe. I think I got a whopping seven
Speaker 2: subscribers already. But anyway, I'm ready to get going and
Speaker 2: I'm bringing my guests in.
Speaker 1: Luigi, welcome to the show.
Speaker 3: Thank you for having me. Martin. It's great to be here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, great to be here. We met all the way
Speaker 2: back in Phoenix. I don't remember what year that was,
Speaker 2: but you were with Emily Trim.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't remember. I think it was twenty fifteen
Speaker 3: or sixteen, I can't remember.
Speaker 2: It sounds up right, Yeah, And unfortunately we lost Emily.
Speaker 2: She was a very sweet and interesting girl, great artists,
Speaker 2: very interesting work she did. So anyway, it's a sad
Speaker 2: day she was gone.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So Randall Nickerson and I have talked a few times
Speaker 2: about doing like a show in her honor, and hopefully
Speaker 2: that'll come about at some point.
Speaker 3: That'd be wonderful. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, she deserves it, deserves it absolutely. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're going to be getting into I did watch
Speaker 2: the movie. I think I told you that when I
Speaker 2: saw you at Contact in the Desert, and I think
Speaker 2: it's great that even though I said, even though you
Speaker 2: know that I don't buy Bob Lazare's story, you said, sure,
Speaker 2: I'll come on.
Speaker 1: So I think that's great. And I just want to
Speaker 1: hit a couple.
Speaker 2: Key reasons why I don't buy his story. First of all,
Speaker 2: I have a connection, it's a very close connection that
Speaker 2: works in archives at MIT, and she can get anywhere
Speaker 2: as far and deep on printed paper, you name it,
Speaker 2: that can't be expunged. And she said, never anything about him.
Speaker 2: There's not anything about his supposed masters anywhere there.
Speaker 1: He's never been able to name a professor there.
Speaker 2: And the thing that stands out the most is in
Speaker 2: a public forum when he was asked what Square was
Speaker 2: outside of MIT, he said he didn't recall. Same thing
Speaker 2: about he didn't recall when he got his master's degree
Speaker 2: at MIT. He thinks it was around eighty two, I
Speaker 2: think you said. But anyway, I've been looking into him
Speaker 2: a long time, and that to me when he didn't
Speaker 2: know Kendall Square is right outside of MIT. You can't
Speaker 2: go to lunch there without going through Kendall Square.
Speaker 1: So it just and then, yeah, I hear George Knapps
Speaker 1: saying he may have lied.
Speaker 2: About his education. People do that for a job. He's
Speaker 2: not doing it for a job. He was lying to us,
Speaker 2: to all of us, that he had this MIT degree
Speaker 2: and same thing with cal Tech. He just I don't
Speaker 2: buy it. He's on the bottom third of his high
Speaker 2: school class. Is no way he would have been accepted
Speaker 2: into any of those. So I'm just going to just
Speaker 2: start out with a so what do you say about that?
Speaker 3: The first thing is I decided to come on your
Speaker 3: show because I think you're you have good, very good.
Speaker 3: First of all, I like you and second of all,
Speaker 3: I think they're really good points, and I'm so used
Speaker 3: to this. By the way, it's not like I wasn't.
Speaker 3: It's not like I wasn't chastised from day one. The
Speaker 3: first thing, people are like, hey, wait a second, that
Speaker 3: guy is a fraud, and you got to be careful
Speaker 3: with that. So I knew there was a lot of
Speaker 3: bad press around Bob Blazaar, and there was a lot
Speaker 3: of controversy and people that are almost blindly believing his
Speaker 3: story and other people absolutely not accepting his story no
Speaker 3: matter what. So I'm very familiar with all of it.
Speaker 3: In fact, I became so familiar with it because I
Speaker 3: spent a couple of years researching it. Really actually not
Speaker 3: a couple of two years looking into it, but a
Speaker 3: full year of intense research so that I would not
Speaker 3: get anything wrong in whatever I was doing prior to
Speaker 3: even talking to him, if he would talk to me.
Speaker 3: And when it comes to education, it is undeniably, and
Speaker 3: Bob Lazar knows this. It is undeniably the point that
Speaker 3: is the most sensitive in the whole Bob Lazar story.
Speaker 3: And obviously we all for those who know Bob went
Speaker 3: out when public in May of nineteen eighty nine in
Speaker 3: silhouette under the pseudonym Dennis to let everybody know that
Speaker 3: there was this apparent reverse engineering program. So on. But
Speaker 3: then a few months later, I think it was November
Speaker 3: or something like that, he came. His name was provided publicly.
Speaker 3: George Knapp revealed that on the news and said Robert
Speaker 3: Robert Scott Lazar. And that's when Bob became a public figure.
Speaker 3: That's when they found out who he was. And on
Speaker 3: a couple of occasions he had gone to I believe
Speaker 3: it was Rachel Schel, did an interview in Rachel, Nevada,
Speaker 3: then did some interviews on the radio with Coast to
Speaker 3: Coast with ar Bell and a whole bunch of other people. Obviously,
Speaker 3: now I will say this obviously, and this is very
Speaker 3: important that we look at this in different pieces. Okay,
Speaker 3: So before I even begin, I will say this. When
Speaker 3: we released the film The S for the Boblazar Story,
Speaker 3: we had to release a digestible film, something that was
Speaker 3: digestible for everyone, which covered as much as we could
Speaker 3: in a reasonable time frame to allow people to have
Speaker 3: the general overall story of who is Bob Blazar and
Speaker 3: what is S four and what is this all? About
Speaker 3: so we did an hour fifty four minutes covered a
Speaker 3: little bit in the film about his history what got
Speaker 3: him started in science and engineering, and then got to
Speaker 3: listening to George Knapp about having done background background checks
Speaker 3: on Babb Blazar, and then did as four and then
Speaker 3: everything that followed afterwards. There the film was an hour
Speaker 3: fifty four minutes. Our initial cut, because I worked with
Speaker 3: Bob for four and a half years doing this, our
Speaker 3: initial cut was seven hours of the film. Okay, so
Speaker 3: imagine you have seven hours and you have to cut
Speaker 3: out five hours so that people can have a digestible story.
Speaker 3: Otherwise it's a never ending film that becomes overwhelming. And
Speaker 3: that was a huge challenge, by the way, because there
Speaker 3: were fundamentally important things that I wanted to have in
Speaker 3: the film that I had to remove out of the
Speaker 3: film because if I got into example, education, mit background
Speaker 3: calt the reasons why, that opened up a segment of
Speaker 3: the film that would have been so heavy on that
Speaker 3: that it would not have allowed a whole bunch of
Speaker 3: other interesting parts of the story. So you can have
Speaker 3: a digestible film, So I have to immediately say we
Speaker 3: are working on We initially had the idea of coming
Speaker 3: out with a second episode, if you want to call
Speaker 3: it on our We Are Not Alone channel, where we
Speaker 3: would have a very deep dive into the Sport Model
Speaker 3: the craft itself, because we did a lot of what
Speaker 3: we built the craft, so we had a lot of
Speaker 3: work done there, and there was gonna be this episode
Speaker 3: that we were gonna come out with called the Sport Model,
Speaker 3: and that kind of evolved and we are now working
Speaker 3: on something that is a lot more a lot more interesting,
Speaker 3: let's put it that way. I'm not going to reveal
Speaker 3: all the details, but I can say this, there are
Speaker 3: multiple parts of that conversation regarding specifically Mit okay, that
Speaker 3: will be covered in this piece that we are making.
Speaker 3: I will I will say some stuff now, obviously, because
Speaker 3: I don't want to just hold a dangling carrot. That's
Speaker 3: not my point, That's not my goal here. But I
Speaker 3: want to say I have to do this properly because
Speaker 3: if I don't. I've always felt a certain level of
Speaker 3: responsibility to make sure that whatever I put out is
Speaker 3: accurate in what I was told or how I interpret
Speaker 3: or why we understood it. Okay, not what a lot
Speaker 3: of things have been said throughout the years about Bob
Speaker 3: blazar that were completely incorrect. So there's a lot of
Speaker 3: information that I found and my obviously my team had
Speaker 3: found over the years that was completely inaccurate. It was
Speaker 3: really incorrect information, and that obviously circulated because Job also retrieved.
Speaker 3: He basically got out of the spotlight for decades. Bob
Speaker 3: Bazart didn't stay in the spotlight at all. He basically
Speaker 3: got out of it because he didn't enjoy what had happened.
Speaker 3: He didn't enjoy the attention he was giving he was getting.
Speaker 3: Regardless of the backlash that he received from people who
Speaker 3: didn't believe this story, there was a tremendous amount of
Speaker 3: people that did like Bob Blazarre regardless he wanted nothing
Speaker 3: to do with them. And so that's something that unfortunately
Speaker 3: allowed a lot of information throughout the years to circulate
Speaker 3: on the internet, and anybody could say anything on the Internet.
Speaker 3: So I had to do a lot of research, and
Speaker 3: a lot of that was difficult because as you are
Speaker 3: very you scrutinize, let's say, antiques and paintings. Like you said,
Speaker 3: I'd have an obsession with being absolutely insane with detail.
Speaker 3: So I absolutely want to hear all the little intricate
Speaker 3: details that could form a better story. And one of
Speaker 3: the things that I'm also fortunate because not everybody can
Speaker 3: do this the fact that I'm somebody who lived in
Speaker 3: the eighties. I grew up during the eighties. I was
Speaker 3: also involved in UFOs involved I was interested in UFOs
Speaker 3: in the nineteen eighties, since the mid nineteen eighties. So
Speaker 3: I also bring to light a lot of times. Let
Speaker 3: us never forget that the conversation back then was certainly
Speaker 3: not perceived as it is today. We can talk about
Speaker 3: this topic today with a lot less worry that we're
Speaker 3: going to be categorized as crazy or nuts. This is
Speaker 3: a topic that has finally reached a certain point where
Speaker 3: we can have open dialogue. This is important because if
Speaker 3: we go back to nineteen eighty nine, that was not
Speaker 3: the case. So we have to also think about the
Speaker 3: motivations of a person to go as far as this
Speaker 3: person went with apparently lying about a whole story, when
Speaker 3: in fact, even if the story could have been proven,
Speaker 3: many people still wouldn't have believed it because it was
Speaker 3: about flying saucers. And we can all agree that back
Speaker 3: in the nineteen eighties, if you said aliens are flying
Speaker 3: saucers and you would say that government has them. That
Speaker 3: was like crazy talk. Especially my corner's my corner of
Speaker 3: the world. That was not something that you could say
Speaker 3: openly and have a good conversation. You can have good
Speaker 3: conversation today and you still get depending who you're with
Speaker 3: at the table, you could have good conversation, but there's
Speaker 3: still circles that will still think your nuts for talking
Speaker 3: about this. So it's important to put that into perspective
Speaker 3: because it's also important to find out what was the
Speaker 3: motivation behind somebody doing this. Now, regardless of that, anybody
Speaker 3: can lie. Anybody can come up with some really good lie,
Speaker 3: and there's a plethora of liars out there. I was
Speaker 3: investigating UFOs for a long time. I found a ton
Speaker 3: of crap out there, a ton of fake photos or
Speaker 3: fake stories or people who just wanted to get attention.
Speaker 3: There's a ton of those. So there's no question that's
Speaker 3: a factor. And I take that very seriously. Now, what
Speaker 3: I can say specifically about MIT and what I can
Speaker 3: say now versus what will be said in the next
Speaker 3: few months, and I promise that will actually come out.
Speaker 3: You can you could put me I'm putting it in
Speaker 3: writing here, I'm saying it on camera when so before
Speaker 3: I say this, when a long time ago, Christopher Mellan
Speaker 3: was on the Joe Rogan Experience and they were having
Speaker 3: a conversation about Bob Zar and Christopher Mellan said, it's
Speaker 3: possible that he went out to Area fifty one, but
Speaker 3: he didn't go work at a place called S four
Speaker 3: and blah blah blah, and Rogan said, I had a
Speaker 3: conversation with Bob about it, And so Christopher Mellan attacked
Speaker 3: the thing he had there's no evidence about his education
Speaker 3: and all that, and Joe said, I had a conversation
Speaker 3: with him, and he explained some of that to me
Speaker 3: behind behind the cameras, and it made a lot of
Speaker 3: sense to me. I was very curious to know what
Speaker 3: that was. So I asked Bob Ozar okay, because to me,
Speaker 3: that was a specific thing that made me go if
Speaker 3: that information managed to make a guy like Joe Rogan
Speaker 3: pause for a second on the questioning of his education,
Speaker 3: I have to understand what that is if I'm to
Speaker 3: pursue this even further. So that was very early on
Speaker 3: when I first met Bob Blazar. I said, I don't
Speaker 3: want to come across as this guy doesn't believe your story.
Speaker 3: I want to come. I want to create something that
Speaker 3: is very factual to what you have apparently experienced and witnessed.
Speaker 3: I don't know it to be true, but so far
Speaker 3: at that time, I believed the man. Okay, now that's
Speaker 3: a different story than believing a story. I believe the man.
Speaker 3: I get to know somebody. I have an opportunity also
Speaker 3: to be with a person. You feel it sometimes if
Speaker 3: somebody is really good at lying or not. I never
Speaker 3: felt that from Bob. Regardless. I said, what's the story
Speaker 3: that you told Joe? And can I know about this?
Speaker 3: So he shared this with me, and I can say
Speaker 3: this partially because he was very specific in saying I
Speaker 3: can explain it to you. But there is a national
Speaker 3: security element to it, and because of that, I am
Speaker 3: not putting this information public. Back in the early nineteen eighties,
Speaker 3: and this is something that is absolutely verifiable, and so
Speaker 3: let me say it and then I'll tell you how
Speaker 3: it's verifiable. So back in the early nineteen eighties, I
Speaker 3: guess it's eighty one or eighty two when it was
Speaker 3: at Los Alamos National Labs. The United States government, the
Speaker 3: United States Department, the Defense Department. Okay, they're in close collaboration.
Speaker 3: They were in close collaboration with Los Alamost National Labs
Speaker 3: in many different projects, and some of them were weapon developments. Okay.
Speaker 3: So Los Alamos clearly was working on some classified weapons
Speaker 3: programs for the Department of Defense and the United States government.
Speaker 3: That is not anything that is classified. We all know
Speaker 3: they did stuff like that. At that time. The Defense
Speaker 3: Department wanted to develop a specific weapon. The weapon apparently
Speaker 3: was not legal. This was not something that the I
Speaker 3: don't know if it was the United Nations, I can't
Speaker 3: remember the details, but the weapon was not permitted to
Speaker 3: be developed and used on people. There's a lot of
Speaker 3: weapons like that, white phosphorus like that is not allowed
Speaker 3: to be the United there's sanctions on certain weapons because
Speaker 3: they could they can cause a tremendous amount of harm
Speaker 3: to innocent people and all that. So this particular weapon
Speaker 3: they wanted to develop was illegal, regardless. And this is
Speaker 3: not something that I can debate because it's again a
Speaker 3: secret program. But regardless, the government pursued and wanted to
Speaker 3: build the weapon. Mit So the people at Los Alamos,
Speaker 3: and this is very critical, the people working at Los Alamos,
Speaker 3: not just Bob Blazar. So this is a very important
Speaker 3: small detail. It was not just Bob Lazar. It's Bob
Speaker 3: Blazar was a part of something. So he goes, there's
Speaker 3: other people involved. Were sent to MIT by Los Alamos
Speaker 3: National Labs on behalf of Los Almost National Labs to
Speaker 3: go and attend specific classes at MIT that were specific
Speaker 3: to learning about the function or how to build this weapon. Okay,
Speaker 3: I have spoken to somebody I believe it was last year,
Speaker 3: who is a military contractor who without me ever saying this,
Speaker 3: because this was actually prior to me saying this public
Speaker 3: I've said this publicly before, explained exactly that to me
Speaker 3: and said I believe Bob Blazar because of so and so.
Speaker 3: It gave me a rundown on the weapon development programs
Speaker 3: and how they went about it with private contractors, and
Speaker 3: it was verbatim to how it was basically handled to
Speaker 3: send a group of people to MIT. I have spoken
Speaker 3: to Bob Blazar about this, and he is extremely familiar
Speaker 3: with MIT. And I'll tell you about something that's really
Speaker 3: critical about Bob Blazar and people will not like this,
Speaker 3: but it's the truth and I've experienced it outside of UFOs.
Speaker 3: Bob doesn't remember things well period. Bob Blazar is a genius.
Speaker 3: You know when you meet somebody who's extremely good in
Speaker 3: one thing, but they have appssolutely difficulty and other faculties.
Speaker 3: Bob Lazaar's memory is terrible. He could be in my house.
Speaker 3: We could be talking about something. We just finished dinner.
Speaker 3: We could I could be making him a specific Italian dish.
Speaker 3: We will talk about that for fifteen minutes, change topic,
Speaker 3: and two hours later I'd be like, remember the past
Speaker 3: I talked about and be like, what are you talking about?
Speaker 3: I don't remember? And he won't remember, and he genuinely
Speaker 3: doesn't remember. I've had these talbots.
Speaker 1: I have to say that's a cop out.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that's all right.
Speaker 2: So let's get back to Chris Melon. Let's go back
Speaker 2: to Chris Melon. I've known Chris Melon. I was the
Speaker 2: first one to interview him in twenty sixteen, and right
Speaker 2: after that interview, the Joe Rogan I wrote Chris and
Speaker 2: I said, what did he What did he say?
Speaker 1: What was it? He told you?
Speaker 2: And he said he promised Joe that he would he
Speaker 2: wouldn't share it, But I said, and then he did
Speaker 2: get me some more for more information, but I don't
Speaker 2: have his permission right now to say it. But anyway,
Speaker 2: the bottom line is, I said, so, when you got
Speaker 2: done finding this out.
Speaker 1: What did you think?
Speaker 2: Are you saying you believe Bob Bazaar now? And his
Speaker 2: exact quote, and I'm going to quote him on this,
Speaker 2: he said, No, what I'm saying is that my skepticism
Speaker 2: has greatly increased.
Speaker 1: That's Chris Mellan. We're saying that about Bob Bazaar.
Speaker 2: So it wasn't a big secret that all of a
Speaker 2: sudden was revealed that Chris Melon's, Oh, I believe Bob.
Speaker 3: Bl Careful, this is not a secret revealed here, by
Speaker 3: the way, there's nothing revealed in secrecy. What this clearly states.
Speaker 3: And you can if you have any direct conversations with
Speaker 3: specific with specific people that are active contractors or were maybe,
Speaker 3: but they have to be in the scientific position and
Speaker 3: not military by the way, So they have to be
Speaker 3: some type of scientific position. I've had these conversations. You
Speaker 3: can try and commune. There's a lot of people out
Speaker 3: there that are willing to talk to people. This. This
Speaker 3: argument doesn't it's not oh there's proof that he went
Speaker 3: to Mit. Oh god, no, and Bob says it himself.
Speaker 3: He says, this doesn't prove I went to MIT. He says,
Speaker 3: I'm just explaining to you what happened when I did.
Speaker 3: He says, I that's not his original story.
Speaker 1: His original story is that he got a master's disagree
Speaker 1: at MIT and then at cal Tech.
Speaker 3: Correct, and it's just correct. Correct. And I will say this,
Speaker 3: I don't deny that. Maybe I'm saying this. I'm saying
Speaker 3: I'm not saying Bob said this. I'm saying this. It
Speaker 3: is possible that he embellished back then. Okay, it's possible.
Speaker 3: But and Martin, I'm going to be very real here.
Speaker 3: We could disagree on this. But I personally have lied
Speaker 3: a million times to get to where I got in
Speaker 3: my career. I lied.
Speaker 1: But who's he lying to?
Speaker 2: He's lying to us, and MIT is lying to all
Speaker 2: the public there who's lying to?
Speaker 1: And words he getting ahead by lying to us?
Speaker 3: There is a clear disdain that Bob has or had,
Speaker 3: Sorry I should say this, a disdain that Bob had
Speaker 3: for the academic community science. Sorry, the scientific community, not
Speaker 3: the academic scientific community, specifically some people at MIT. Sorry,
Speaker 3: my bad, at lost Alimos, Sorry, the people that went
Speaker 3: to MIT from Lost Almos. I know this for a fact.
Speaker 3: I also know something that I cannot talk about, okay,
Speaker 3: that I really don't want to put him. And there
Speaker 3: is an actual program name. Not going to mention it.
Speaker 3: There was a secret program name that was in collusion
Speaker 3: with MI T to produce this way, and there were
Speaker 3: people that from Lost Animals that did go there. They
Speaker 3: were not ever listed on the roster of MIT and
Speaker 3: they would not be now hold on this sucks because
Speaker 3: this doesn't prove anything. This is just words, and I agree.
Speaker 3: What I'm saying though, is that there was a program.
Speaker 3: If somebody does do research and find out did people
Speaker 3: at Lost Animals ever have to be sent to MIT
Speaker 3: for a program that could have been considered classified or something,
Speaker 3: if that ever does come up, look into finding out
Speaker 3: are those people ever on the roster or on the
Speaker 3: books at MIT. Now. I will also tell you that
Speaker 3: I personally tested Bob Lazaar with stuff from MIT recently.
Speaker 3: I even got him on camera. That surprised everybody here
Speaker 3: when we were doing that, and he immediately recognized certain
Speaker 3: things from me. It was like you could tell that
Speaker 3: there was some type of history there with Bob about
Speaker 3: MIT but clearly it doesn't mean he has a master's
Speaker 3: degree or some type of I guess a degree. If
Speaker 3: you want to call this from MIT. Now I can't
Speaker 3: go and say, yeah, there's evidence of that. I don't
Speaker 3: have evidence of that. So yes, absolutely, there's nothing that
Speaker 3: supports it. Bob himself says that himself. Okay, he says
Speaker 3: this openly himself. He doesn't say this going No, I
Speaker 3: have that, and they're all wrong. Also, I don't know
Speaker 3: if I am cleared yet to say this, but I
Speaker 3: do have his professor's name from MIT. I do have it.
Speaker 3: I verified it.
Speaker 1: We got to hear that. Hold on, you need to
Speaker 1: hear that.
Speaker 3: I can tell you that I know it, and George
Speaker 3: Knapp knows it.
Speaker 1: Okay, Come, he didn't say it when he was questioned.
Speaker 2: He gave a name of someone that was at his
Speaker 2: high school and a name of a community college that
Speaker 2: you know, the technical school he went to.
Speaker 3: This is the frustration I've personally had with Bob Bazar. Okay,
Speaker 3: Bob will it doesn't By the way, Bob, this is
Speaker 3: not intentional forgetfullness or intentional misdirection. Bob is like that.
Speaker 3: He is a type of person who will literally not
Speaker 3: remember something, but can give you a formula like that.
Speaker 3: And I can say this because I've actually witnessed this,
Speaker 3: and you can actually interview Jesse Michaels about this, where
Speaker 3: Jesse Michaels had dinner with Bob with me and Jesse
Speaker 3: literally said, can I press Bob Blazaar? Do you mind
Speaker 3: if I press him scientifically? I said, of course, I go,
Speaker 3: there's no I don't have a problem with that. I
Speaker 3: didn't prep prep Bob. But how do I don't even
Speaker 3: know how to prep Bob scientifically because I don't know
Speaker 3: anything about science. And sitting at the table, Jesse starts
Speaker 3: feeling out equations that he's very familiar with, and Bob
Speaker 3: is sitting there listening. And after Jesse comes up with
Speaker 3: this big, very intricate scientific argument that I could tell
Speaker 3: was completely over my head, Bob Lazar stopped him and
Speaker 3: corrected him on the equations. You can ask Jesse Michaels
Speaker 3: if he hears this, he knows what happened. And Jesse
Speaker 3: could vouch for this, and Jesse's mouth is jaw dropped
Speaker 3: and he goes, oh my god, why don't you do
Speaker 3: that on camera? He said? He goes, if you did
Speaker 3: that on camera, It'll make a lot of people believe
Speaker 3: that you know this stuff. And Bob's answer was, why
Speaker 3: would I do that? Why do I need to prove
Speaker 3: myself to anybody that's his that he does?
Speaker 2: Because he's been spending this story for so long. That's
Speaker 2: why he needs to.
Speaker 3: Prove himself, I can tell you.
Speaker 2: And he was offered to have physicists and in a
Speaker 2: public forum and question him, and.
Speaker 1: He turned it down. And I have that right.
Speaker 4: Here, absolutely, yes, Yeah, So before we go, I just
Speaker 4: I also want to say this because I feel like
Speaker 4: I feel like I just need to say more in
Speaker 4: the short time that we have together.
Speaker 1: So let's just talk about this right here. And I
Speaker 1: know you know what it is. Yeah, but why would
Speaker 1: he Why to me?
Speaker 2: This is stating Bob's credibility is shot because he presented
Speaker 2: this piece.
Speaker 1: Of course he did, and it has a.
Speaker 2: Woman's social Security number, it has the IRS's employee identification
Speaker 2: on it.
Speaker 3: That information is incorrect, by the way, So there's there's
Speaker 3: a lot that is very incorrect out there, by the way, Martin,
Speaker 3: about these things, I've looked into them, So be careful
Speaker 3: with the information you're reading.
Speaker 1: Okay, this is.
Speaker 3: I can tell you this for a fact, we didn't
Speaker 3: cover because it was like we didn't even bother getting
Speaker 3: into the W two form. I can tell you that information.
Speaker 3: You remember Bob Ouschler, he died, He did a lot
Speaker 3: of He had done a little bit of research into
Speaker 3: the W two form and had verified that the W
Speaker 3: and the W two form whatever. This is a very
Speaker 3: important piece of information. If let's assume also one thing,
Speaker 3: we are not dealing with a department or a portion
Speaker 3: of the military of the Defense Department that wants to
Speaker 3: be found out. Okay, So this is not somebody. This
Speaker 3: is not a department that wants to be found Have
Speaker 3: you ever spoken to Jim Goodall about the day he
Speaker 3: went to the Pentagon with the W two form. No,
Speaker 3: So I highly encourage that you invite Jim Goodall on
Speaker 3: your show. He'll do it, Okay. Jim Goodall went to
Speaker 3: the Pentagon on behalf of Bob Lazar with the W
Speaker 3: two form. There's a whole story there, okay. And that
Speaker 3: got him to suddenly out of nowhere, got him to
Speaker 3: speak to a sitting admiral at the Pentagon that day.
Speaker 3: And at the time, Jim Goodall was not a highly
Speaker 3: ranked officer in the military. He was going there on
Speaker 3: behalf of Bob. He took Bob Lazar's W two, a
Speaker 3: copy of it, went to the Pentagon looking for the
Speaker 3: Department of Naval Intelligence, which by the way, doesn't appear
Speaker 3: to exist at the Pentagon. There's the Office of Naval Intelligence,
Speaker 3: but not department, although although department does show up in
Speaker 3: some past documentation there is reference of Department of Naval Intelligence.
Speaker 3: Regardless of that, there is no physical Department of Naval
Speaker 3: Intelligence at the Pentagon, and there was no in eighty
Speaker 3: nine and ninety one. But Jim Goodall can certainly detail
Speaker 3: that whole experience at the Pentagon with the W two form.
Speaker 3: So anybody who wants to debate the W two form
Speaker 3: has also to consider whoever was managing the program at
Speaker 3: S four, whoever that was, However they had to route
Speaker 3: money to Bob Lazar or anybody working within that environment,
Speaker 3: if you want to call it. They do not want
Speaker 3: to get caught or they do not want to be known.
Speaker 3: So it is not unlikely. I'm not saying it's proof
Speaker 3: that it's real. I'm just saying there's also it's also
Speaker 3: if we're gonna do a real investigation, which I'm open
Speaker 3: to having discussions on investigations. I'm not saying I believe
Speaker 3: at one hundred percent being real, but I also don't
Speaker 3: believe it to be false either, because there's a lot
Speaker 3: of things that we have to review in regards to
Speaker 3: how big is that program, where was it at the time,
Speaker 3: and how were they routing money to the people that
Speaker 3: were there. So the fact that you would have a
Speaker 3: W two form that shows Department of Nabel And by
Speaker 3: the way, gene Huff, whether people believe gen Huff or not,
Speaker 3: I don't care. I believe gene Huff. Gene Huff told
Speaker 3: me himself he was at Bob's house when he received
Speaker 3: the W two form. So he goes, I remember that
Speaker 3: clearly when that arrived, and he says, and he goes,
Speaker 3: that's something that Bob took very lightly. It wasn't important
Speaker 3: to him. He just goes, here, this is a pay
Speaker 3: stub of some type. He said. Bob didn't even make
Speaker 3: a fuss about that. It wasn't like he was trying
Speaker 3: to enforce his story on anybody with that. That's also
Speaker 3: very accurate to his character. Bob never ever has this.
Speaker 3: Contrary to a lot of people's disdain about Bob Bazaar.
Speaker 3: Bob never tries to convince people, always says I wouldn't
Speaker 3: believe my own story. I understand I could. I know
Speaker 3: there's no evidence of my education. I know there's no
Speaker 3: evidence of a Department of Naval Intelligence, and I know
Speaker 3: that there's no evidence of an S four operation we
Speaker 3: can find. But it happened to me. Whether they believe
Speaker 3: it or not, it happened to me. Now that will
Speaker 3: remain and will not go away. It's not because I
Speaker 3: decided to make a film that there's some miracle that's
Speaker 3: gonna come out of this, And it's not because I've
Speaker 3: chosen to go the extra mile in investigating it that
Speaker 3: we're going to suddenly have somebody come out of the
Speaker 3: Department of Defense and tell us, yeah, that's the project
Speaker 3: name by Ineen nineteen eighty two at Los Alamos, and
Speaker 3: here's this information on S four. We're never going to
Speaker 3: see that. It's clear we're not going to see that.
Speaker 3: But if you take a second, and I say this
Speaker 3: with all respect to anybody listening who absolutely is stuck
Speaker 3: on the he lied about his education, which if he did, yes,
Speaker 3: it's annoying. It's like you just said earlier. If you're
Speaker 3: trying to buy somebody's art collection and one of them
Speaker 3: is a fake, you start thinking maybe they're all fakes. Okay,
Speaker 3: So I'm one hundred percent on board with that. In fact,
Speaker 3: my entire team was like that. Everybody was like, eh,
Speaker 3: this sounds like a lot of gibberish, a lot of
Speaker 3: made up stories. Nobody even knew Bob Blazar was. And
Speaker 3: I've had numerous people here really dig and I mean
Speaker 3: dig full time, paid, full time job just doing that. Okay,
Speaker 3: so it's not like I have a bunch of yes
Speaker 3: men here going yeah, we believe him, Yeah, whatever. No,
Speaker 3: everybody was very cautious in everything that was being said,
Speaker 3: so that we also wouldn't look like these gullible people
Speaker 3: who decide to make a film on somebody's story.
Speaker 2: I feel as though Bob's kind of a cash cow
Speaker 2: for a lot of people. His story has been out
Speaker 2: there when he started his story, I don't think he
Speaker 2: really knew what the internet was going to be and
Speaker 2: how we could research things. And so here's some record.
Speaker 2: There's just a couple of things I want to say here.
Speaker 2: Here's people say to me all the time when I'm
Speaker 2: talking about how I feel about Baba Zaa. We never
Speaker 2: changed his story. Okay, he changed his story here and there.
Speaker 1: You've got to admit that.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about when people were asking him about being
Speaker 2: directly underneath.
Speaker 1: The sports model or whatever craft. I think it was
Speaker 1: a sports model. Yeah, nineteen eighty.
Speaker 2: Nine, he says, and I have all these time stamps
Speaker 2: when they're in the interviews and things like that. He
Speaker 2: never got directly beneath it. Early in the nineteen nineth
Speaker 2: he said, never saw anyone walk beneath it. The information
Speaker 2: came from Barry nineteen. We were not close. Everyone stayed
Speaker 2: back at the hangar, I guess when they were testing it.
Speaker 2: And then in twenty twenty six he's now saying Dennis
Speaker 2: sorted him outside and he personally walked beneath the hovering craft. Okay,
Speaker 2: so that's a story changed, and the hare's another one.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's actually I can immediately counter that, and that's
Speaker 3: a really important piece of information.
Speaker 1: I know I watched him say these things.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, no, I know I watched him say these
Speaker 3: things too. I actually have him in an interview saying
Speaker 3: that the top hat had two holes in it, not one.
Speaker 3: You know how there was the craft the top.
Speaker 2: I'm glad you're bringing this up, okay, because I'm going
Speaker 2: to talk about that too.
Speaker 3: Two holes and there was only one and there was
Speaker 3: only one. And I also heard him say in an
Speaker 3: interview that there were two seats and there's three seats. Okay.
Speaker 3: So we had these discussions. I've had discussions with Bob Blazar,
Speaker 3: the one about the two and three seats. Anybody who
Speaker 3: could pull that up. I can tell you that was
Speaker 3: on purpose. It was him and Gene Huff because they
Speaker 3: really got pissed off at the interview were okay, something
Speaker 3: personal happened that day, and Lazarre purposefully said, fuck this guy.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna give him any whatever I feel like giving him,
Speaker 3: so he could not enjoy having had the time with me,
Speaker 3: and I actually agreed with him. I know the story
Speaker 3: about that. If somebody were to completely disrespect you, Martin
Speaker 3: and really try to totally dupe you in something, you
Speaker 3: wouldn't respect them. So if they if you could just
Speaker 3: get them to leave, you would do that. Anybody has
Speaker 3: this happened to them, It's happened to me in my life.
Speaker 3: So there's a story about that. I know. So that
Speaker 3: that goes away. Bob said, there's three seats in the craft.
Speaker 3: That's all there is. There's not two. Who cares about
Speaker 3: what I said in one interview. As far as the
Speaker 3: two holes, I did talk to him about that. I said, Bob,
Speaker 3: you said there was one hole, and then in an
Speaker 3: interview you said there was two, and he said, now
Speaker 3: there's one. There was one hole. I remember one hole,
Speaker 3: I said, but I heard you say in one interview
Speaker 3: that there were two. Okay, this is actually very difficult
Speaker 3: for me because I'm relaying something from another person's perspective.
Speaker 3: I'm a filmmaker trying to make the film as accurate
Speaker 3: as By the way, Bob thinks I'm insane because I
Speaker 3: wanted to have so many details, so I paid attention
Speaker 3: to that. He absolutely said in a past interview that
Speaker 3: there were two holes. I built the craft in the
Speaker 3: hangar with two holes. If you look at my film,
Speaker 3: there's two holes there. And when he saw the film,
Speaker 3: he he goes, why did you put a second hole
Speaker 3: on the craft? There's supposed to just be one hole
Speaker 3: on the top. And I told him, I said, because
Speaker 3: you said in a past interview. He says, I don't
Speaker 3: even remember saying that. He goes that that's a mistake.
Speaker 3: He goes, I don't remember a second hole. Now. He
Speaker 3: was very adam after I built it. He was very
Speaker 3: adam and going, it's too bad that you did that,
Speaker 3: because it was just one hole. Now I have to
Speaker 3: tell you, okay that of course I was upset because
Speaker 3: I was like, damn it. I wanted everything to be
Speaker 3: absolutely perfect. And I remember saying that I took information
Speaker 3: also from past interviews which I had noted throughout the
Speaker 3: years of doing this. But you have to also remember,
Speaker 3: and this is something very it's a very human thing
Speaker 3: I'm going to say here, and this is really important.
Speaker 3: I have a tremendous amount of respect for Bob Lazaar,
Speaker 3: and this is something that I really have to say
Speaker 3: from a perspective of somebody who's become friends with Bob.
Speaker 3: Forget the UFOs, forget the flying saucers and the whole story.
Speaker 3: I've obviously built a relationship Bob Blazar. I spent four
Speaker 3: and a half years with a guy. Either you end
Speaker 3: up liking a person or you don't. We became friends,
Speaker 3: and I became friends with his wife as well. That
Speaker 3: doesn't take away the fact that I'm ultra critical in
Speaker 3: my thinking in whatever I'm putting out publicly to the world.
Speaker 3: I can tell you that Bob is like that. In general.
Speaker 3: Bob will forget things that are in front of us,
Speaker 3: and he will be like, yeah, it's over there, it's
Speaker 3: on the right side, and it's not it's on the
Speaker 3: left side, and he's like, no, it's on the right
Speaker 3: and he'll argue until you go, oh shit, you're right,
Speaker 3: it's on the left side about something completely mundane. So
Speaker 3: I found out what kind of person Bob is on
Speaker 3: a personal note, and it made me realize because I
Speaker 3: then spoke to Laane Kek, I spoke to Gene Huff,
Speaker 3: I spoke to Mario Santa Cruz and George Knapp and
Speaker 3: a couple of other people who personally knew him back
Speaker 3: in the desert last days in Nevada. Everyone all told
Speaker 3: me the same thing. Before I really got to know Bob,
Speaker 3: everybody was like, careful, Bob doesn't remember things properly. Careful,
Speaker 3: Bob's memory is sometimes a little bit weird because he
Speaker 3: forgets stuff. And I was like, I thought that was
Speaker 3: a what do you call it? I thought that was
Speaker 3: a suspicious thing. I'm like, what do you mean he
Speaker 3: forgets stuff? What are you talking about? To me? That
Speaker 3: was suspicious because I'm like, what do you mean he
Speaker 3: forgets stuff? Is that on purpose? But eventually I got
Speaker 3: to meet him, My team got to meet him. Not
Speaker 3: only was I analyzing and scrutinizing Bob Blazar, but they
Speaker 3: who were complete skeptics. But my sister, by the way,
Speaker 3: who works with me, Veronica, is a ultra mega She's
Speaker 3: like the ultra Megatron skeptic of this stuff. She is
Speaker 3: absolutely looking at me, going, you're fucking insane believing in
Speaker 3: all this stuff, flying saucers and aliens and all that stuff.
Speaker 3: And she got to meet him, She got to spend
Speaker 3: time with him with a skeptical outlook, and ended up
Speaker 3: coming up to me at the end of us doing
Speaker 3: all our filming and our interviews and talking and set
Speaker 3: and after him forgetting stuff. And we you know, many
Speaker 3: takes we had to do sometimes because I can't remember that,
Speaker 3: And then we would show him something oh yeah, oh
Speaker 3: my god, yeah that's right, and he would immediately remember,
Speaker 3: or gene Huff would remind him, being like remember the
Speaker 3: blue tank could be like what blue? Oh my god,
Speaker 3: and he would just remember stuff that became something that
Speaker 3: we all experienced along with Bob Blazar.
Speaker 2: Okay, now making a lot of excuses for him. Another thing,
Speaker 2: he said.
Speaker 1: I'm just you are you know, let me do a
Speaker 1: little talk in here.
Speaker 2: You're kind of taken the whole show, and I'd like
Speaker 2: to be able to talk and ask more questions. Earlier on,
Speaker 2: Lazare said there were there was no damage in any
Speaker 2: of the craft. And then as you said, there's other things.
Speaker 2: But let's talk about do you consider this a documentary
Speaker 2: or do you consider.
Speaker 1: It a film.
Speaker 3: It's a documentary.
Speaker 2: A documentary is about true stories of someone's life story.
Speaker 2: This is all just stories. This is nothing documenting anything
Speaker 2: here with this. And let's talk about his cleansess. What
Speaker 2: did he have for a position at this is let
Speaker 2: me do a little more talking. What did he have
Speaker 2: for a position at wass Almost Labs?
Speaker 1: What was his position there?
Speaker 3: He was working in two departments, so there was there
Speaker 3: were two different programs that he was on, and I
Speaker 3: don't think I have I'm not at liberty to tell
Speaker 3: you the names of the programs that he was on,
Speaker 3: but he was working on two different programs.
Speaker 1: There, and what were they?
Speaker 3: One of them was weapons. The other one was not.
Speaker 3: The other one I can't remember, but it was not
Speaker 3: one of them. One of the two was weapons was
Speaker 3: more more.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about all right.
Speaker 2: So my brother in law was a nuclear arms inspection
Speaker 2: person at Los Alamos Labs for many years. I remember
Speaker 2: when he got his clearance and what he had to
Speaker 2: go through. At the time, I had a Russian girlfriend
Speaker 2: and I couldn't even talk to him.
Speaker 1: It took a lot of scrutiny.
Speaker 2: You look at Bob's background, who he was married to,
Speaker 2: and who all the is. I don't want to get
Speaker 2: into all that, but we know about his wife's. All
Speaker 2: you have to do is look it up. One of
Speaker 2: them was a convicted murderer. Actually, the other one stole
Speaker 2: money at a bank.
Speaker 3: But that doesn't have anything that would ask four though.
Speaker 2: I it has that it has to do with getting
Speaker 2: a clearance. It would be I'm just talking about He
Speaker 2: said he had above majestic, which doesn't exist.
Speaker 1: There's no such thing. Again.
Speaker 3: Say that again, because I didn't hear that.
Speaker 2: I said he said that he was above Q clearance,
Speaker 2: which is majestic, and there's no such thing. Going back
Speaker 2: to majestic twelve maybe I don't know where he got
Speaker 2: that from, but it's.
Speaker 1: It's obviously none.
Speaker 2: And either you become friends with someone, how can you
Speaker 2: be objective being friends with someone who is known for
Speaker 2: spewing all this stuff all these years. I just don't
Speaker 2: think that was a smart thing.
Speaker 3: It's actually no. I would caution you in telling me
Speaker 3: what is smart and what is not, because I'm very
Speaker 3: responsible in the way I do my work. Regardless of that,
Speaker 3: I can build friendships with people, has nothing to do
Speaker 3: with how I view their stories.
Speaker 2: Now, R what about if you confronted him and just said,
Speaker 2: this is what we confront him all the way, with
Speaker 2: all of this stuff that everyone's been confronting him. We did,
Speaker 2: and you are confronting him and you still did this
Speaker 2: film absolutely.
Speaker 3: First of all, one of the things that is really
Speaker 3: critical here is that you have to look at all
Speaker 3: the data, not just selective data. So there's also important
Speaker 3: parts of the story that you can't omit all the
Speaker 3: information just because one piece is wrong or something doesn't jive.
Speaker 3: This is a very complex thing. Now, as far as
Speaker 3: as far as clearance, let's say top secret or que
Speaker 3: clearance or whatever, I would also say something very important
Speaker 3: not related to the bobble Azar story, personal relations, personal
Speaker 3: stuff that I'm familiar with in my life. The Las
Speaker 3: Vegas was run by the Mob for a long time. Yes,
Speaker 3: and the Mob at the time, most of the people
Speaker 3: in charge were Italians, And if you actually do some
Speaker 3: research back then, some of the people that were running
Speaker 3: the Mob were from Montreal, where I'm from. So the Mob,
Speaker 3: although might seem like these gangsters in the streets just
Speaker 3: selling drugs or prostitution or whatever, we're actually very involved
Speaker 3: in a lot of very high level things. So getting
Speaker 3: Q clearance or getting clearance, I'm not talking about Bob here,
Speaker 3: I'm talking about in general. There's a lot of people
Speaker 3: who have had a lot of things handed over to
Speaker 3: them because of some of the links they've had with
Speaker 3: the Mob back in the nineteen eighties, especially back in
Speaker 3: the nineteen eighties. So it's unfair to say that somebody
Speaker 3: who's had passed in certain things could not get clearance,
Speaker 3: because the argument could be made in the complete opposite
Speaker 3: as well, Martin, and I can assure you if you
Speaker 3: look into that, you'd be very surprised who ended up
Speaker 3: getting clearances not related to flying saucers or MIT or
Speaker 3: lost Almos, but for other things, and they were one
Speaker 3: hundred percent implicated with the mob and everybody knew about it.
Speaker 3: So it's important to look at both sides of the spectrum,
Speaker 3: not just one.
Speaker 2: Okay, but why why would they say we need this
Speaker 2: guy to do one of the most important things in
Speaker 2: the world that's ever been done.
Speaker 3: As far as that's concerned. There, the argument has been,
Speaker 3: and I believe this to be true, that if this
Speaker 3: is a true story, which I do believe the story,
Speaker 3: by the way, and I don't believe it because Bob's
Speaker 3: become a friend of mine, I do believe the story
Speaker 3: for many reasons. If that, if he was sent there,
Speaker 3: and he said that at the very beginning, he said,
Speaker 3: I was not I was not the most qualified person
Speaker 3: to be doing that. And he was even questioning why
Speaker 3: the operation was military and not scientific. He was very
Speaker 3: annoyed that the way they were proceeding at S four
Speaker 3: was not standard scientific research. It was more like a
Speaker 3: military prison feel, where everything was compartmentalized and you couldn't
Speaker 3: do anything and you couldn't have open discussion. Was this
Speaker 3: was openly discussed by Bob Blazar back in eighty nine
Speaker 3: and in the early nineties. He didn't just say that
Speaker 3: in my film. He's been saying that for decades. So
Speaker 3: he's never agreed with the way it was being handled.
Speaker 3: The fact that they hired him. He says, maybe they
Speaker 3: thought that I could bring something new to the whole
Speaker 3: to the topic because they were hiring very proficient scientists
Speaker 3: or academics, and they apparently weren't getting anywhere. And he
Speaker 3: still doesn't think they did. He says it's not because
Speaker 3: he was hired that they were able to figure anything out.
Speaker 3: He says it was a complete mystery. Even after for him,
Speaker 3: it was a mystery. He doesn't think they ever made
Speaker 3: any progress. He hopes, he says, I hope they did,
Speaker 3: but I highly doubt that they have. He doesn't believe
Speaker 3: that the government finally got and he doesn't believe the
Speaker 3: whole narrative that we mastered reverse sorry anti gravity, and
Speaker 3: we figured it out, and he doesn't believe any of that.
Speaker 3: He doesn't believe any of that. He's like, look, he goes,
Speaker 3: I believe of what I saw. He goes, if they
Speaker 3: if there's people going out there saying that we figured
Speaker 3: this out, he doesn't believe that one bit. He won't
Speaker 3: support it at all, everything, all the narrative that is
Speaker 3: coming out right now, of all these reverse engineering programs
Speaker 3: and all these whistleblowers. He doesn't want to have anything
Speaker 3: to do with them. He says. Some of them make sense,
Speaker 3: some of them I don't even know if they even
Speaker 3: know what they're talking about, because they know where never
Speaker 3: a right?
Speaker 2: Can I just jump in here a little because yeah,
Speaker 2: so I did hear someone ask why doesn't Bob Bazaar,
Speaker 2: why isn't he testifying?
Speaker 1: And then I heard him, or I think it was
Speaker 1: Jeremy Corbel, said, why would you do that? People just
Speaker 1: disparage him.
Speaker 2: No, because he's known not to have credibility, and you
Speaker 2: think it's not by design. Right, So let's go about
Speaker 2: when he was actually thirty eight levels.
Speaker 1: Above Q he said that? Did he not say that
Speaker 1: he was years ago?
Speaker 3: Years ago? Yeah?
Speaker 1: But he also I think, and then why would someone
Speaker 1: do that?
Speaker 2: He just had a two hundred and seventy thousand dollars debt,
Speaker 2: bankruptcy and other things happened before right before that, shortly
Speaker 2: before that. Why would they give him a clearance like that?
Speaker 3: Seventy thousand dollars bankruptcy? What are you talking about?
Speaker 2: He had a bankruptcy. I think it was maybe less
Speaker 2: than that, but he had a bankruptcy ahead of that.
Speaker 2: I had been in chapter seven. I am saying, Okay,
Speaker 2: but I do know that a friend also in the FBI,
Speaker 2: and they're very scrutinized for anything because they can be
Speaker 2: compromised in so many different ways when they have money trouble.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so why they.
Speaker 2: Just they're not going to give someone like him a clearance?
Speaker 2: Igin with he said he got it in eight days.
Speaker 2: Tell me how is that possible? My brother in law
Speaker 2: said it took something like almost a year for him.
Speaker 1: To get his QP. It's thirty eight levels above q
Speaker 1: in eight days. Tell me how that happened?
Speaker 3: What if it does? What if it did happen? No,
Speaker 3: but what if it did? Like, here's another question, let
Speaker 3: me throw the question. This is no, it's hold on.
Speaker 3: Be careful because you can't.
Speaker 1: I don't have to be careful. You're not going to
Speaker 1: assume me we're friends. We can talk about this.
Speaker 3: I'm saying, don't say it's delusional. First of all, let's
Speaker 3: look at other stuff. Okay, let's look at other stuff.
Speaker 3: You're really like throwing the baby with the bathwater here.
Speaker 3: It's just whatever. It's all not good. You don't think
Speaker 3: even a little bit Martin, not even a there's nothing
Speaker 3: in the story that you believe at all.
Speaker 1: You think there is something I believe And I'll tell
Speaker 1: you this.
Speaker 2: I do believe and I've said this before and it's
Speaker 2: a theory.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that Bob Blazar knew someone.
Speaker 3: This is what I'm doing.
Speaker 1: Then he's taken on the PERSONA. No, that's what I
Speaker 1: think I can tell someone. He got some tidbits.
Speaker 3: One million percent. No, that's a billion percent my entire
Speaker 3: reputation on absolutely no, absolutely no, no, all.
Speaker 2: Right, that's as much credit as I can give him
Speaker 2: because I just with all.
Speaker 3: Me. Okay, so you're telling all the li said.
Speaker 2: You know, he's lying to ox. He's not lying to employees.
Speaker 2: He's lying to the public.
Speaker 3: So how did he know about papoos Lake? How did
Speaker 3: he know that there was a facility and the radiation there.
Speaker 2: You're not going to be working in a bunch of
Speaker 2: radiation at papoos Lake.
Speaker 3: Where S four is people working there now from j
Speaker 3: T four it's yeah.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's see you how can that be proven?
Speaker 3: It's proven? You could validate it with j T four.
Speaker 3: They actually talk about them moving at pat they're having
Speaker 3: an operation at Papoos Lake. You could verify that. I did. Okay,
Speaker 3: that's active right now, they've been operating.
Speaker 1: I'll be confusing this is that I'm thinking about.
Speaker 2: S four, that that mountain that yeah, oh right there,
Speaker 2: there's radiation.
Speaker 3: There's been no radiation, No radiation that is going to
Speaker 3: kill you there. First of all, there's a lot of
Speaker 3: activity there. Okay, there's been a lot of activity there
Speaker 3: for decades. We put it in our film to show
Speaker 3: a little bit of activity that was at the lake there.
Speaker 3: We have more, more, more, Not all of it came out,
Speaker 3: but there's information people put out after my film. There's
Speaker 3: YouTube videos that people did a tremendous amount of work
Speaker 3: on putting more evidence out there that there's activity there
Speaker 3: and there has been for decades. I've personally validated the
Speaker 3: tracks at Papou's Lake from two thousand and two thousand
Speaker 3: and six to two thousand and twenty two, the differences
Speaker 3: in tracks, so there was activity between those years. Right
Speaker 3: in front of the hill where S four is. There's
Speaker 3: also a helicopter shot on the Apple Maps Beta that
Speaker 3: you could find on the time machine. Like you can
Speaker 3: go onto the time machine and the Internet, you can
Speaker 3: look at past dates and you can find the black
Speaker 3: helicopter right near S four. It's actually right there. You
Speaker 3: can look at the Google maps the way that they've
Speaker 3: hidden the territory, the terrain there. You see it in
Speaker 3: my film where they actually put a block right on
Speaker 3: where S four is located. They don't do that anywhere else.
Speaker 3: It's really interesting. On May on May May fifteenth of
Speaker 3: nineteen eighty nine, the Department of the Interior modified a
Speaker 3: map of Papoos Lake. They all the maps, all the geomaps,
Speaker 3: geological maps from the Department of the Interior of Nevada
Speaker 3: throughout the nineteen forties, all the way to nineteen eighty nine,
Speaker 3: all showed a road that went right in front of S. Four.
Speaker 3: On May fifteenth, nineteen eighty nine, eight days after Bob
Speaker 3: Blazaar went public as Dennis, that road was erased off
Speaker 3: the maps at the Department of the Interior. It was modified,
Speaker 3: it says modified on May fifteenth, nineteen eighty nine, and
Speaker 3: the one modification was the removal of the road that
Speaker 3: goes to S four to the hillside. It's just interesting
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that proves flying saucers. But what it
Speaker 3: does is it proves that there's some type of intent
Speaker 3: to hide something. The fact that the picture that was
Speaker 3: shown in my film, that was photographed by Gabriel Zeifmann,
Speaker 3: that shows undeniable no matter. I don't care who argues
Speaker 3: with it. Anybody wants to argue with that should really
Speaker 3: review their investigative skills, because we verified it, investigated, and
Speaker 3: we really forensically checked it. There are exactly nine rectangular
Speaker 3: structures right in the side of exactly where he had
Speaker 3: said they were in nineteen eighty nine. Right there, they
Speaker 3: are physically there. There's nothing that could disprove it. Even
Speaker 3: the skeptics agreed that they are there. How could he
Speaker 3: know that? So that means he had to have known
Speaker 3: that there was something in that hill. The fact that
Speaker 3: all everything I just said doesn't prove flying saucers, by
Speaker 3: the way, just proves that there's a facility there near
Speaker 3: papous Lag. Back in the nineteen eighties, you and I
Speaker 3: both know we didn't have Google. We didn't have any
Speaker 3: of the information that we could find on the internet
Speaker 3: to look for things. A lot of people today have
Speaker 3: the luxury of sitting in their homes and having access
Speaker 3: to a lot of databases, But back then that was
Speaker 3: not information you could get. He knew that. It doesn't
Speaker 3: mean flying saucers were there. I do agree with that.
Speaker 3: I'm one hundred percent not saying that proves it, but
Speaker 3: it certainly does give us some type of It should
Speaker 3: at least inspire some type of curiosity of saying, Okay,
Speaker 3: how did he know that? Why did why? How did
Speaker 3: he know that information that's valid. You're not saying Bob
Speaker 3: Lazar is saying the truth. You're just saying, yeah, that's interesting.
Speaker 3: I have a lot of people that I can't stand
Speaker 3: when I hear their stories in the UFO community. But
Speaker 3: sometimes they'll say something and I'll say, all right, I'll
Speaker 3: agree with that, even though I don't agree with the
Speaker 3: person completely. So I have you can't deny there's certain
Speaker 3: parts of that story that are pretty interesting and are
Speaker 3: point to the fact that he was, in fact the
Speaker 3: first person ever to point out Papu's slake and that
Speaker 3: specific location at that hill, which was later verified and
Speaker 3: we put it in our film. I went through a
Speaker 3: lot of trouble getting that. I'm saying that very lightly,
Speaker 3: but it took a lot to get that information.
Speaker 2: So let's see how come he didn't go to jail
Speaker 2: and have a ten thousand dollars fine because he.
Speaker 3: Because ten Yeah, he signed a ten ten form which
Speaker 3: was a ten thousand.
Speaker 2: He should have gone ten years in jail ten thous doe.
Speaker 3: Hundred percent, one hundred percent. He was not sure if
Speaker 3: he was gonna when he went public and Gene huff lame.
Speaker 3: Everybody says it. George Knapp says it. When he went public,
Speaker 3: he didn't know what was gonna happen. Mario Santa Cruz
Speaker 3: was with him all the time. Mario said, Bob was
Speaker 3: a complete mess when this happened. He didn't know if
Speaker 3: he was going to get arrested. He didn't know if
Speaker 3: they're come and take him to jail, because he didn't
Speaker 3: know if this was going to get him in trouble
Speaker 3: or not. He thought that because people were following him.
Speaker 3: And if you if this is all fake, also this
Speaker 3: is a really important thing. If this is all fake,
Speaker 3: then that means that George Knapp is a liar. It
Speaker 3: means Mario Santa Cruz is a liar because Mario was there.
Speaker 2: I don't think George Knapp is a liar. I just
Speaker 2: think George Knap's along for the ride, and I even
Speaker 2: told him.
Speaker 3: Yes, I don't particularly get along with George and a
Speaker 3: lot of things, by the way, specifically because he hangs
Speaker 3: out with Jeremy Corbell, which I personally do not like.
Speaker 3: So I'm not gonna sugarcoat my relationship with those guys,
Speaker 3: especially George, because I think George made a mistake associating
Speaker 3: himself with Jeremy Corbel, who I personally think is a liar. Okay,
Speaker 3: So I'm saying that right now. Jeremy's a liar, okay,
Speaker 3: But that is another story. And I would love to
Speaker 3: debate Jeremy because I have a few things that could
Speaker 3: put out there that would really end him, Okay. So
Speaker 3: I don't want to get into that.
Speaker 1: What I will say, this is good, this is good
Speaker 1: radio like this.
Speaker 3: But I will say, yeah, I don't care about Jeremy
Speaker 3: Corbel at all. But I do think that George Knapp
Speaker 3: deserves the respect because he did do an incredibly good
Speaker 3: job at investigating the Babblesar story. In fact, there's a
Speaker 3: lot of things that unfortunately George could not get out
Speaker 3: to the public because people got threatened, and I do
Speaker 3: know some of those details, and I do believe George.
Speaker 3: I think George is very honest about that. I think
Speaker 3: George was extremely invested in making sure that this was
Speaker 3: not type of big bullshit story. So I don't agree
Speaker 3: where you say he's along for the ride. I don't
Speaker 3: agree as much as you're saying, Okay, there are other
Speaker 3: elements that I don't agree.
Speaker 2: He's a respected journalist, but he didn't do in my opinion,
Speaker 2: he's the one who said at one time I saw
Speaker 2: it on tape where he said the education is the
Speaker 2: weakest part, and you know, I just can't see him
Speaker 2: sitting through.
Speaker 1: Blah blah blah, and and but then he goes on.
Speaker 2: To saying what you said, I've lied to get a job,
Speaker 2: that type of thing. But that's when I say, oh, yeah,
Speaker 2: but who's he lying to. He's not lying to get
Speaker 2: a job.
Speaker 1: He's lying to us, all of us.
Speaker 2: And you can tell Bob I said that, Oh absolutely,
Speaker 2: because a change in my mind, because these are these
Speaker 2: are things, they're documented.
Speaker 3: Like I said, either way, I do not care if
Speaker 3: my film, the arguments I say, change anybody's mind or not,
Speaker 3: because nobody can change each other's minds except for ourselves.
Speaker 3: So we have to go through our own process. I
Speaker 3: have things that I don't believe in this space at all,
Speaker 3: or people that I don't trust one hundred percent, So
Speaker 3: there Jeremy being one of them. By the way. So
Speaker 3: there's a tremendous amount of stuff out there that is
Speaker 3: a bunch of bullshit, no question about it. But what
Speaker 3: I can say is, I'm speaking from my experience. I'm
Speaker 3: speaking from also a position as a past investigator and
Speaker 3: a person who's done a tremendous amount of due diligence
Speaker 3: to bring this film to the public. I can tell
Speaker 3: you that the information does point us in a direction
Speaker 3: that this is real if past things associated to it.
Speaker 3: A perfect example, Martin is do you believe that Bill
Speaker 3: Clinton was the president of the United States? Yes? Okay.
Speaker 3: Do you believe that he did a good job with
Speaker 3: certain policies he put out there? Sure there's a few.
Speaker 3: Did he lie about getting a blowjob from Monica Lewinski? Absolutely?
Speaker 3: This is a family show, Yeah, so did he lie
Speaker 3: about that? Absolutely? Does that take away the fact that
Speaker 3: he was president of the United States?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 2: Oh God, is this some type of analogy? But we're
Speaker 2: talking a bj compared to Bob Lazar.
Speaker 3: Saying I'm bringing up the president of the United States
Speaker 3: to somebody, and he lied to the public, So we
Speaker 3: know that. People, So what because of that, we don't
Speaker 3: believe anything that was done?
Speaker 1: Is that with Bob Lazarre you mean, no.
Speaker 3: I'm talking about Clinton. If he lied there, does that
Speaker 3: mean he's lying everywhere?
Speaker 2: No, that's not a good analogy in my opinion at all,
Speaker 2: because this is a whole private personal thing his wife
Speaker 2: and has nothing to do with someone out there saying
Speaker 2: they reverse.
Speaker 1: Engineered alien aircraft. Why totally different.
Speaker 2: And I don't think that was a terrible analogy, I
Speaker 2: really do, so, yes, because that's okay.
Speaker 3: All right, So Galileo, all right, I'm Italian, Galileo all
Speaker 3: familiar with Galileo? Right, So, yeah, you have everybody in
Speaker 3: the academic community really like bowing down to Galileo like
Speaker 3: he's this scientific god from the past, Galileo. I'm Italian,
Speaker 3: all the in Italy. Everybody knows Galileo wasn't necessarily the
Speaker 3: straightest arrow in the scientific community. Okay, So he did
Speaker 3: a lot of stupid things. He did a lot of
Speaker 3: side things that were not always right, Yet nobody cares.
Speaker 3: He's still Galileo. Nobody gives a shit about all that.
Speaker 3: For some reason, we've selectively said, oh, that's fine.
Speaker 1: So why are you making an excuse forotball bazaarre?
Speaker 3: Not?
Speaker 2: No, no, what what do you making an excuse for it?
Speaker 2: It's not ball bizarre.
Speaker 3: Character attack or character assassination.
Speaker 2: No, No, he did it to himself when he's when
Speaker 2: he put this stuff out there. Element one fifteen. Let's
Speaker 2: talk about element one fifteen. He knew that was coming
Speaker 2: up in the periodic table. We knew that it could
Speaker 2: go up to one eighteen, so he just threw that
Speaker 2: out there. But there we go element fifteen, five hundred
Speaker 2: pounds of it when it only has a half life
Speaker 2: of a very short time fraction of a second.
Speaker 3: That's not what he said. He said that the one
Speaker 3: that he had was not the one that they synthesized. Now,
Speaker 3: he clearly said that when it came out when they
Speaker 3: synthesized E one fifteen and in Russia, he said, that's
Speaker 3: not the same thing. He said it right away.
Speaker 1: He goes it, could it not be the same thing?
Speaker 1: It has to do with protons.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's not the same isotope. He said it clearly.
Speaker 3: He said, it's not even the same isotope. So we're
Speaker 3: not talking about the same thing. He goes, Yes, they
Speaker 3: synthesized it, but it's not the same isotope. The same
Speaker 3: thing applies to gold, and so it's the same thing.
Speaker 1: Are you talking alchemy here? Is that where we're going?
Speaker 3: No, that's a reality, Martin, What do you do? This
Speaker 3: is not alchemy? This is simple, all right.
Speaker 2: So Bob Blazaarre is saying what they when they discovered
Speaker 2: one fifteen, it's not the same one fifteen the Aliens had?
Speaker 1: Is that what he's said?
Speaker 3: Absolutely?
Speaker 1: So what is he saying? What was he saying?
Speaker 3: The element one fifteen that they had at S four
Speaker 3: was stable. It was a stable version of it, that's all.
Speaker 3: It's a stable version of the element. The element that
Speaker 3: was synthesized in Dermstock, Germany is not stable. It has
Speaker 3: a has a very short half life of a microsecond
Speaker 3: or whatever.
Speaker 1: So how can okay, so, how can it be stabilized?
Speaker 2: How can it be stabilized? If it how can his
Speaker 2: be stabilized? And then we can't with all our technology stabilized?
Speaker 3: Okay, all right, this is actually this is just simple
Speaker 3: science here. If you look at gold, there's various different
Speaker 3: versions of gold, different isotopes of gold. Some gold isotopes
Speaker 3: also decay very quickly, same as the synthesized version of
Speaker 3: element one fifteen. There's nothing new about this. This is
Speaker 3: how science works. That there's various gold isotopes and the
Speaker 3: one that we're familiar with that we wear is the
Speaker 3: stable version of it. There's the same thing with hydrogen.
Speaker 3: Hydrogen has unstable isotopes and stable isotopes. So every element
Speaker 3: has its has a spectrum. So the E one fifteen
Speaker 3: that they had at S four was stable. It was
Speaker 3: something that you could hold in your hand. The one
Speaker 3: that was synthesized is decaying very quickly. They will eventually
Speaker 3: get to it, probably in many years from now. It'll
Speaker 3: probably arrive to a point where we might figure out.
Speaker 2: So we're taking Bob's word for this, is that what
Speaker 2: I'm understanding Bob's word because that he was handling stabilized
Speaker 2: element one fifteen.
Speaker 3: I would also say that in light of the element
Speaker 3: one fifteen when he took a piece of it and
Speaker 3: he had it at his house and he did a
Speaker 3: cloud chamber test, you had gene Huff and George Napp
Speaker 3: both there present at the cloud chamber test. Okay, and
Speaker 3: there was a beam of light that bent because there
Speaker 3: was a piece of Element one fifteen in a leadpuck
Speaker 3: in the cloud chamber. There is no video or photo
Speaker 3: evidence of that beam of light bending. So we have
Speaker 3: to take the word of Gene Huff and George Napp
Speaker 3: to validate what Bob Blazar said. Now you have Bob Blazar,
Speaker 3: Gene Huff, and George Napp, all three colluding with some
Speaker 3: type of fake information. Is that what we're saying. So
Speaker 3: this is why I also say, I'm I gotta give
Speaker 3: a little bit of credibility to the story when I
Speaker 3: have other people validating information that I can. Obviously we
Speaker 3: don't have we don't have a absolute, viable, hard evidence
Speaker 3: to it. But if you have other people, then we
Speaker 3: have to assume either they're fully lying to me or
Speaker 3: all of us or this, or they saw this. So
Speaker 3: if they saw a beam of light bending, that's something.
Speaker 3: If they're saying it, I cannot omit that from the
Speaker 3: information that I'm receiving. And that also tracks with the
Speaker 3: fact that Bob said he stole a piece of Element
Speaker 3: one point fifteen from Los Alamos, and he said that
Speaker 3: publicly recently. So this information is there's nothing crazy. That
Speaker 3: is only Bob Lazarn't you have other people when they
Speaker 3: went and visit. Then when they went to witness the
Speaker 3: test flight on the twenty twenty second of March. I
Speaker 3: believe twenty second of March. I'm trying to remember the
Speaker 3: date of eighty nine, and and geene Huff was there
Speaker 3: and they witnessed the craft. They witnessed the craft doing
Speaker 3: some pretty crewer.
Speaker 2: I knew that was going to come up. I talked
Speaker 2: to John Lear about that. Yeah, okay, yeah, so they witnessed.
Speaker 3: Yeah, careful with John Lear because John Lear also embellished stuff,
Speaker 3: so we have to be careful.
Speaker 1: This was back in twenty twelve.
Speaker 3: That he was already embellishing stuff. So it's important was
Speaker 3: careful with John Lear. But there's people. Gene Huff says,
Speaker 3: I saw this. I don't care if Bobizar If I
Speaker 3: wouldn't have seen that, I wouldn't say that because Bob's
Speaker 3: my friend. He says, I saw it and took it.
Speaker 3: Took a lot to get Jeane to say that publicly.
Speaker 3: It wasn't like he wanted to come out publicly and
Speaker 3: say that. I had to pull him out of the
Speaker 3: closet and be like, come on, man, please, I want,
Speaker 3: I want, I'd love to have you in the film.
Speaker 3: And he agreed to work with us, but he wasn't
Speaker 3: willing willingly putting this in out there. There's no benefit
Speaker 3: to doing this. The only benefit to doing And by
Speaker 3: the way, none of these guys I don't know about
Speaker 3: George Nap because I'm not familiar with George, but I
Speaker 3: can say for Mario Santa Cruz and Gene Huff. I
Speaker 3: can also speak on behalf of another friend of his
Speaker 3: who had recently passed away, who had been the person
Speaker 3: who interacted with the Mike Thickpen. But the gentleman passed away.
Speaker 3: But all these people have never benefited financially from this.
Speaker 3: I know stories about Bob Blazar because of his He
Speaker 3: and his wife have shared very personal stuff that they
Speaker 3: went through, or Bob went through. After all this happened.
Speaker 3: None of this was financially beneficial. And Bob Lazar turned
Speaker 3: down two movie deals one time when he was absolutely
Speaker 3: not doing well financially, and he turned them down because
Speaker 3: they were going to make the story looked like he
Speaker 3: was some type of a hero coming out of the
Speaker 3: base and they were driving after him. He didn't want
Speaker 3: to have anything to do with that. And there was
Speaker 3: a lot of money put on the table. I spoke
Speaker 3: to one of the people that was part of that project,
Speaker 3: one of the people that was part of the company
Speaker 3: to put this out there. Bob turned it down. There's
Speaker 3: a lot of money on the table. He turned it down.
Speaker 3: When we launched our posters recently, I have to say this. Recently,
Speaker 3: we put a poster out that they're here, poster on
Speaker 3: our website, and I said to Bob, I'll send you
Speaker 3: a whole bunch ifever you want to put them on
Speaker 3: United Nuclear and you could sell them. And I want
Speaker 3: Bob to benefit from something that we did. Bob never
Speaker 3: asked us for any money, by the way, I sent
Speaker 3: it to him. When we're talking, and we sold quite
Speaker 3: a few posters, and I said, so, how are the
Speaker 3: poster sales going? I said, how are the poster sales going?
Speaker 3: And Bob said, by the way, I just want to
Speaker 3: let you know we've stopped selling them to all the
Speaker 3: people overseas and or just refunding people. I said, you're
Speaker 3: refunding people. He goes, yeah, Joy is refunding them on
Speaker 3: their credit cards. It's too much trouble. I don't want
Speaker 3: to do it. So here's a grifter apparently, or some
Speaker 3: type of liar who's turning down money that's in their
Speaker 3: bank account and they're refunding their clients because they don't
Speaker 3: He doesn't want to go through the trouble of getting
Speaker 3: a poster signing his name, rolling it up and sending
Speaker 3: it out to all these people around the planet because
Speaker 3: he says, I don't want to. I don't have the
Speaker 3: time to do it. I'm semi retired, I'm helping Joy,
Speaker 3: I'm trying to do my stuff for United Nuclear. So
Speaker 3: he's not somebody who's ever come across to me as
Speaker 3: like wanting to take advantage of the story, unlike a
Speaker 3: lot of people I know who do have their book
Speaker 3: deals and they charge ten twenty thousand dollars to show
Speaker 3: up at places, and people who are very arrogant, like
Speaker 3: Avi Lobe, who goes around requesting money to go around places.
Speaker 3: There's a bunch of bullshit in this in this community
Speaker 3: that I could lay out on a red carpet and
Speaker 3: there would be enough to talk about until the end
Speaker 3: of time. I can say for sure it's controversial with Lazarre,
Speaker 3: but he's not benefiting financially. I haven't seen that. And
Speaker 3: I know that whatever he got from Jeremy's film was peanuts.
Speaker 3: Nothing I think he was. It was just travel. It
Speaker 3: was just for travel, something for him to go somewhere.
Speaker 3: So if this is if this guy he did, they're
Speaker 3: not rich people. I've been to their house many times.
Speaker 3: They're not millionaires. They're working. He's working all the time.
Speaker 3: His hands are dirty all the time. His wife is
Speaker 3: constantly working, trying to make things work for them. So
Speaker 3: this is not a fair character of the person that
Speaker 3: I got to know, or my whole he got to know.
Speaker 3: We got to know a person who. Yeah, he says it.
Speaker 3: It's a crazy story. He says, I wouldn't believe my
Speaker 3: own story. But it happened to He says, I'll never forget.
Speaker 3: He said this to me a long time ago. He said,
Speaker 3: even if I ate baby's brains, I went to S four.
Speaker 3: That happened to me, he says. Whether people believe it
Speaker 3: or not, I don't care. He says, I don't have
Speaker 3: to prove it to the world that happened to me now,
Speaker 3: the fact that we can see tracks at Papo's Lake
Speaker 3: since at least two thousand and two or two thousand
Speaker 3: and six. We can see that they removed the road
Speaker 3: in nineteen eighty nine, right after he went public. We
Speaker 3: can see that rectangular formation. It's a structure right in
Speaker 3: the side of the hill, exactly where he said it
Speaker 3: was in nineteen eighty nine. I don't know something's there.
Speaker 3: And I've always said I would love it if one
Speaker 3: of these people in Congress or in government, all these
Speaker 3: people talking blah blah blah. They're all fucking talking all
Speaker 3: the time. There's so much talk. I can't I don't.
Speaker 3: I turn off my laptop, my computer, my phone. I
Speaker 3: don't want to hear it anymore. I said, if one
Speaker 3: of them goes to area fifty one, you got JD.
Speaker 3: Van saying he's gonna go to Area fifty one. Sure
Speaker 3: they're not gonna see anything. But if they were to
Speaker 3: take a helicopter ride right there, right at the edge
Speaker 3: of that hill where S four is apparently located, I
Speaker 3: don't care if they moved shit out of there. I
Speaker 3: personally believe there's a facility there. I think that it
Speaker 3: was an extension of the Kelly Mine that was built
Speaker 3: in the late nineteen thirties, and they already had underground
Speaker 3: facility there, so they just repurposed it as a military base.
Speaker 3: If there is still signs of a facility there, then
Speaker 3: that at least gives us some type of clue. I'm
Speaker 3: not saying it says that flying saucers are real, but
Speaker 3: it's some type of clue that almost forty years ago,
Speaker 3: Bob Lazar said right there, at that exact spot, there's
Speaker 3: nine large hangar doors hidden in the side of the hill.
Speaker 3: Inside he said he saw flying saucers from another planet. Fine,
Speaker 3: you don't want to believe that, Fine, but if there
Speaker 3: is a facility, we should not pretend that. We shouldn't
Speaker 3: we we should not omit that from Let's try to
Speaker 3: at least validate that instead of saying he lied about
Speaker 3: going to university. I agree. But as as people looking
Speaker 3: for the truth here, Martin and now forget Bob Blazar.
Speaker 3: I've been searching for the truth in this field forever.
Speaker 3: If there is maybe something there, Congressman Burlison says he
Speaker 3: wants to go somewhere. Timber Check keeps talking about wanting
Speaker 3: to go and check something out. Jdven says he wants
Speaker 3: to go go there, go there.
Speaker 1: Let me ask you this.
Speaker 2: Why don't you ask Bob if he's willing to repeat
Speaker 2: his claims that he's been having all this time in
Speaker 2: a skiff with people like Barlson and all that under earth,
Speaker 2: and name the locations, name the people, name the dates,
Speaker 2: why wouldn't he do that?
Speaker 3: That's exactly no. Hold on a second, that you gotta
Speaker 3: be careful with that, because why he says, all the time,
Speaker 3: careful I've done he was the first. Okay, hold on
Speaker 3: a second, you're now minimizing the fact that Bob Lazar
Speaker 3: was the original whistleblower of all the stuff that we're
Speaker 3: talking about today.
Speaker 2: Everyone's in a real whistleblower. He didn't do the whistleblower
Speaker 2: thing either the way you're supposed to. He was just
Speaker 2: out there talking. That's a whistleblower.
Speaker 1: Look it up. He was not a whistleblower.
Speaker 2: He was someone out there repeating a story that a
Speaker 2: real whistleblower does it like David Grush did. He did
Speaker 2: it all the way, all the protocols, the where you're
Speaker 2: supposed to do it. Bob Lazar just started talking and
Speaker 2: saying he was scared for his life. Nine started out
Speaker 2: with Dennis, Like you said.
Speaker 3: Yeah, in nineteen eighty nine, he didn't even want to
Speaker 3: go public. It was George Knapfta that that kind of
Speaker 3: put the tape out public. He didn't even want to
Speaker 3: go public. It was a fight. You can't you cannot
Speaker 3: mischaracterize that as he was not a whistleblower. That's actually
Speaker 3: an unfortunate thing that you said, because I do believe
Speaker 3: I've been involved in this field for so long. I
Speaker 3: agree with you that Grush is a real whistleblower. I
Speaker 3: agree there's real whistleblowers out there, but there's no way
Speaker 3: that I would not categorize Bob Blazar as one of
Speaker 3: the whistleblowers. Who was the first one to mention the
Speaker 3: US Navy, the first one to mention Papoos Lake Area
Speaker 3: fifty one S four reverse engineering programs, the first one
Speaker 3: to say that they had intact craft and not crash saucers.
Speaker 3: Back in nineteen eighty nine when I was involved with Mewfhon,
Speaker 3: I remember everyone was talking about the Air Force crash
Speaker 3: crafts that Roswell Kingman Aztec. Nobody was talking about intact vehicles.
Speaker 3: Nobody was saying that they were reverse engineering craft that
Speaker 3: were functional and they were flying them. Nobody was saying that.
Speaker 3: Bob Wozar said that in nineteen eighty nine, So you
Speaker 3: can't say he's not a whistleblower. Maybe by the dictionary
Speaker 3: definition that you want it to be in the government. Fine,
Speaker 3: but let's face it, he blew the whistle on something.
Speaker 3: And if Bob isn't telling the truth, then why is
Speaker 3: it that it's tracking so well with some of the
Speaker 3: stuff that's being told out there. Look at guys like
Speaker 3: Eric Davis taking a crap on Bob Blazar every chance
Speaker 3: he can get. Yet everything he says is verbatim to
Speaker 3: what Bob Blazar said in nineteen eighty nine in the
Speaker 3: way the objects are functioning. I find that hilarious. I
Speaker 3: find that interesting that he just decides that he's right,
Speaker 3: but Bob's wrong, even though Bob said at thirty eight
Speaker 3: years prior. If you think about that, you think about
Speaker 3: the things that people do say today, it's tracking with
Speaker 3: Bob Lazar. Sorry, it's tracking with what Bob Lazar was claiming.
Speaker 3: So maybe just maybe there is a little bit of
Speaker 3: truth in that story. And if there is we should
Speaker 3: be mindful of not throwing away the baby with the
Speaker 3: bathwater if we don't agree with certain things. And I
Speaker 3: will be the first one here as an ex investigator,
Speaker 3: ex director of New Fund in Canada, I can say this,
Speaker 3: I agree one hundred percent with you. A lot of
Speaker 3: it cannot be proven one hundred percent I'm agreeing. But
Speaker 3: I can also tell you that after doing a very
Speaker 3: in depth investigation, there is enough evidence that points to
Speaker 3: this could be real. Maybe in a different light, but
Speaker 3: there's some real to it. So we can't say it's
Speaker 3: not one hundred percent real, it's not responsible. We have
Speaker 3: to look at the data. We have to not just say, oh,
Speaker 3: I don't believe it. Stanton Friedman did that, and I
Speaker 3: respected Stanton and I knew him very well. I thought
Speaker 3: he was I think he's one of the legends that
Speaker 3: we should always honor because he was intuitable for everything
Speaker 3: he did, and I will always put him on a
Speaker 3: pedestal always because I thought I think he was incredible
Speaker 3: and a true pioneer in all this. But if we
Speaker 3: have to go look for the truth, we need to
Speaker 3: absolutely take our personal convictions, move them aside, and be like,
Speaker 3: all right, there's things that Lula Azando says that I
Speaker 3: personally don't believe at all, at all zero, And then
Speaker 3: there's other stuff he says, and I'm like, Okay, maybe
Speaker 3: he's saying the truth here, So it doesn't mean that
Speaker 3: he's complete bullshit only because he lied a little bit here.
Speaker 3: There's clearly some truth to it. It's important that we
Speaker 3: don't throw all of it away. It's what I get
Speaker 3: worried about. What I really get worried about is the
Speaker 3: people going around saying I'm part of a secret space
Speaker 3: program and they sent me to Mars, and they did
Speaker 3: a twenty in back and they sent me back and
Speaker 3: says if I never was gone, fuck off with that.
Speaker 3: Let's just get the fuck out of here. You're wasting
Speaker 3: everyone's time with that shit. That's what I think personally.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I'm going to have to make this a
Speaker 2: non family show, this particular one, because normally I don't swear.
Speaker 2: So getting back to the whistleblower thing, just I understand
Speaker 2: what he's saying in the loose part of the sense,
Speaker 2: but he's never really been it's unverified claims, and he
Speaker 2: never filed a document and complaint, he never testified under oath.
Speaker 2: That's what I consider a whistleblower myself, but I loosely
Speaker 2: I can understand why you'd call him a whistleblower. But
Speaker 2: I know we've gone way over time here, So.
Speaker 3: I just want to quickly say, Edward Snowden. You know,
Speaker 3: Edward Snowden was a big whistleblower if you think about it,
Speaker 3: And Edward Snowden didn't have any formal education that was
Speaker 3: valid to bring him to.
Speaker 1: Where he was.
Speaker 3: I just it's just a little fyi if we did,
Speaker 3: if you do a deep dive on Snowden, we really
Speaker 3: gave him access. The government gave him access to a
Speaker 3: lot of stuff, and he had not gotten any master's
Speaker 3: degrees from anywhere. So it's just important to mention that,
Speaker 3: let's not forget there's other examples out there of people
Speaker 3: that have come out and told us truths about what's
Speaker 3: going on, and they don't absolutely have to have a
Speaker 3: diploma to be credible to say those things. Very important
Speaker 3: say that.
Speaker 2: Okay, I got to tell you, I appreciate you coming
Speaker 2: here and having this discussion, and I don't think we
Speaker 2: changed either one of our minds.
Speaker 3: I know I was going to sell it, yeah.
Speaker 1: But anyway, I do appreciate it and your movies. That's four.
Speaker 1: Is that doing well?
Speaker 3: Yeah, very well. I'm super happy. We're very happy. We're
Speaker 3: working on something right now. So we look forward to
Speaker 3: announcing something new in the next couple months.
Speaker 1: Excellent. Okay, So Lenks will be in the show notes.
Speaker 1: Thank you all for being here.
Speaker 2: Sorry I didn't get to any of your questions in chat,
Speaker 2: but I really do appreciate you.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 2: I appreciate it being willing to come here and knowing
Speaker 2: how I felt about Boba Zara. And I'm probably going
Speaker 2: to lose some of my listeners too.
Speaker 3: That just you know, a lot of people have their
Speaker 3: mind made of everybody still like Martin. No, I like Martin. No,
Speaker 3: you're not unsubscribed. Subscribe to the guy. He's good. Okay.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, I can hear the iPods.
Speaker 2: I'm plugging from the earbuds right now. But anyway, so
Speaker 2: thank you so much. All right, all right, so everyone,
Speaker 2: don't forget to come back here on Thursday night. We
Speaker 2: have Rabbi Rothschild and we have some great guests coming
Speaker 2: up in the future, So check back with us here
Speaker 2: on the YouTube channel, and don't forget If you were
Speaker 2: watching my Tesla videos, self driving videos, whatever. I have
Speaker 2: a separate YouTube channel for that now and the links below.
Speaker 2: Thanks so much for everyone for being here, and remember
Speaker 2: to keep your eyes to the skuy