Speaker 1: Good evening and welcome to the Good Trouble Show. I'm
Speaker 1: Matt Ford.
Speaker 2: A few hours ago, the Pentagon released its second batch
Speaker 2: of declassified UAP files, sixty four new records. In this time,
Speaker 2: most of them were actually video. Tonight we go through it.
Speaker 2: We're going to go through just kind of a handful
Speaker 2: of them. Some more's my first time seeing most of these,
Speaker 2: and the documents.
Speaker 1: We're going to go through some of those as well.
Speaker 2: And a clip the Pentagon itself labeled F sixteen shoots
Speaker 2: down a UAP over lake here on. I can never
Speaker 2: remember how to pronounce that. And we're going to do
Speaker 2: this live. We are live right now, and here's the deal.
Speaker 2: Drop your questions in the chat as we go. We
Speaker 2: are taking audience questions at the end of the show
Speaker 2: and we'll get to as many as we can. Put
Speaker 2: your questions in all caps, so are Good Trouble Show
Speaker 2: moderators who have volunteered their time will be able to
Speaker 2: recognize what's in the chat, what's a question, and what's not.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: I've got two people with me tonight who live and
Speaker 2: breathe the issue. Let's bring them in on your left
Speaker 2: joining me tonight. We have two leaders are both from
Speaker 2: the Disclosure Foundation, a non partisan nonprofit built to push
Speaker 2: this exact issue into the light. On your left, there
Speaker 2: we have Jordan Flowers, the Foundation's executive director, twenty years
Speaker 2: in finance and operations and Columbia NBA. Now he's running
Speaker 2: one of the most aggressive transparency shops in the country
Speaker 2: UAP Transparency, that is. And then on the right, Lester Nare,
Speaker 2: the Foundation's director of operations, a Princeton educated entrepreneur and
Speaker 2: co host of one of the fastest growing science podcasts
Speaker 2: out there from First Principles.
Speaker 1: And here's why these two matter.
Speaker 2: Four days ago, their organization forced the NSA to hand
Speaker 2: over three hundred and thirty four pages of formerly top
Speaker 2: secret records. And we're gonna get to that. So Jordan
Speaker 2: and Leicester, welcome to the show, you guys hear me?
Speaker 3: Okay, yes, sir, Thank you so much. Matt having us.
Speaker 3: I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Thanks, welcome.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Lester, how are you're you're actually not too not
Speaker 2: too far away. Hopefully in the very near future, I'll
Speaker 2: be able to have in person guests and we'll you'll
Speaker 2: have to be one of one of the first for sure.
Speaker 2: So yeah, So let's see here. So Jordan Lester, I
Speaker 2: shall throw it to you. Jordan, tell tell us exactly
Speaker 2: what is Disclosure Fund for those of a few folks
Speaker 2: who probably are not familiar with it.
Speaker 3: Sure, sure, so thank you for asking.
Speaker 4: So the Disclosure Foundation is a five oh one c
Speaker 4: three nonprofit organization. We are non partisan, and our organization
Speaker 4: pushes for transparency and education with respect to the UAP topic.
Speaker 4: We have three legs of the stool for our organization.
Speaker 4: The first is policy research, the second is a legal function,
Speaker 4: so for whistleblower representation and protection and also FOYA submissions
Speaker 4: and litigation that you mentioned, so for example the NASA,
Speaker 4: the NASA the NSA release, the three hundred plus pages
Speaker 4: there that was conducted by our legal team and there
Speaker 4: was appeals and you know, we have credible threat of
Speaker 4: litigation for that process. And then the final is leg
Speaker 4: of that still was education and advocacy for the topics.
Speaker 4: So we will go speak at universities, we will have
Speaker 4: meetings with Congress, we will talk at private clubs that
Speaker 4: are interested in this topic. So really from the top
Speaker 4: down and the bottom up, we try to educate and
Speaker 4: navocate for this topic.
Speaker 2: Leicester, So four days ago as I mentioned, you guys
Speaker 2: forced the NSA to finally cough up three hundred and
Speaker 2: thirty four pages of these formally top secret Umbra records. So, firstly,
Speaker 2: what is umbra and how long did this whole process take?
Speaker 1: How did this come about?
Speaker 5: So, you know, led by our chief legal officer, Hunt Willis,
Speaker 5: him and the legal team have been going after what
Speaker 5: was initially identified in the Yates Memo, which came out
Speaker 5: quite a few decades ago. The underlying data that sort
Speaker 5: of described what was in the Yates memo had never
Speaker 5: been had been published in part, but not in whole,
Speaker 5: and so part of the process here was to appeal
Speaker 5: to have that released in full. And you know, so
Speaker 5: the National Security Agency is one of our you know,
Speaker 5: most prominent intelligence agencies that focuses on you know, foreign
Speaker 5: signals intelligence, right spying on our foreign adversaries to understand,
Speaker 5: you know, what they're doing. And the I think one
Speaker 5: of the key aspects here is as we've seen this
Speaker 5: issue become more prominent recently, there's always been the core
Speaker 5: story about this going back decades, and there's now sort
Speaker 5: of a continued exposure of the factual record that you know,
Speaker 5: our top sort of Signals Intelligence Agency has been looking
Speaker 5: at how foreign adversaries have been thinking about and looking
Speaker 5: at and addressing this issue. So throughout the document, again
Speaker 5: parts of it had been previously declassified but not in full,
Speaker 5: we see different aspects such as when they've sent fighters
Speaker 5: to do intercepts around these descriptions of these encounters. And
Speaker 5: you know, as we continue to push for more clarity
Speaker 5: around this, ensuring that the historical record around this issue
Speaker 5: is well defined is important because we're not going to
Speaker 5: end up being in a situation at this point where
Speaker 5: this is brought up as something that just started happening
Speaker 5: in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, that makes sense now now, Jordan, the very
Speaker 2: first release, what was your reaction to it was?
Speaker 1: Was it a nothing burger?
Speaker 2: And this is just speaking on your own personal opinion,
Speaker 2: not the official opinion of Disclosure Fund.
Speaker 4: Sure, my main takeaway there was that it is incredible
Speaker 4: that we have now the power of the presidency behind
Speaker 4: transparency for the UAP topic.
Speaker 3: You know, there were one hundred and sixty something records
Speaker 3: that were released. Were some of them available prior to that? Yes,
Speaker 3: some of them were available prior to.
Speaker 4: That, And detractors love to focus on that on that fact,
Speaker 4: but many of the records were new, and I would
Speaker 4: suggest we focus on the records that were new. Many
Speaker 4: of them were newly declassified records and videos that the
Speaker 4: public hadn't seen before.
Speaker 3: And but again not to miss the forest for the trees.
Speaker 4: In that first release, it is incredible that you have,
Speaker 4: you know, this pursue program the presidential unseiling I'm blanking
Speaker 4: on the acronym, but yeah, a presidential unsealing effort for
Speaker 4: the UAP topic, right, that is incredibly powerful. We have
Speaker 4: never had that before and that this really puts us
Speaker 4: in an unprecedented situation to make progress with transparency on
Speaker 4: this topic. And then of course we have a second
Speaker 4: release of an incredible amount of videos and we can
Speaker 4: talk about the PDFs in there too, that further add
Speaker 4: to fuel to the fire and substantiate not only that
Speaker 4: there is a there there and that significant documents exist
Speaker 4: dating back seventy eighty years, but that you know these
Speaker 4: have been there, they haven't been released, and they show
Speaker 4: things that clearly demonstrate that we do not have control
Speaker 4: of our airspace and we do not understand what these
Speaker 4: things are.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, and Lester, I'm curious your perspective on this.
Speaker 1: It seems to me if.
Speaker 2: If there were you know, this whole thing was just
Speaker 2: a nothing burger, there's there's nothing to see here, it's
Speaker 2: all balloons and air trash and whatnot, why would we
Speaker 2: today still be you know, studying this stuff and the
Speaker 2: military is still paying attention to it.
Speaker 1: If if you if you know, we've been looking.
Speaker 2: At it obviously for a very long time going you know,
Speaker 2: going way way back. It's like, I would think that
Speaker 2: if there were nothing to this, all of the US,
Speaker 2: all of these records and investigations that we're done to this,
Speaker 2: are done with this, and back in the fifties, sixties
Speaker 2: and certainly before that would have been the end of it,
Speaker 2: and they would have determined, oh, there's nothing to see here,
Speaker 2: and we wouldn't be looking at this stuff today because
Speaker 2: they would have figured it out.
Speaker 5: What do you think, Yeah, I think, just piggybacking on
Speaker 5: what Jordan said, I think we have to recall, you know,
Speaker 5: less than two to three years ago. One of the
Speaker 5: things that the public has been told about this issue
Speaker 5: is that there's nothing to see here. We're not in
Speaker 5: the UAP business. And you know, part of this release
Speaker 5: is that there's an about face on this idea that
Speaker 5: you know, the US government has not been engaging in
Speaker 5: earnest on this issue for quite some time, and I
Speaker 5: think to your point. You know, one of the largest
Speaker 5: line items in the US government's budget is for our
Speaker 5: military and intelligence communities. So if we're spending all these
Speaker 5: resources on something that's not relevant, you know, we need
Speaker 5: to better allocate that funding. But clearly, not only historically
Speaker 5: but contemporaneously, this is still being viewed as an issue.
Speaker 5: I mean recall that the Senate mandated the creation of
Speaker 5: the All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office because members of the
Speaker 5: Armed forces have been saying, we're interacting with stuff on
Speaker 5: a regular basis that we don't have a protocol to
Speaker 5: deal with and we don't have a way to report,
Speaker 5: and we need to get our arms around, especially given
Speaker 5: the foot the global footprint that we have across the
Speaker 5: planet as it relates to our servicemen and women. So
Speaker 5: as a practical matter, this is really a phase shift
Speaker 5: in how the US government is positioning their engagement with
Speaker 5: this topic. That is net new. We've not actually had
Speaker 5: this before, and that environment creates the foundation, for example,
Speaker 5: our NSA release when we now go and appeal to
Speaker 5: release more records around this issue. There's now a presidential
Speaker 5: mandate that says the UAP issue is part of the
Speaker 5: declassification process, and so the push back that can be
Speaker 5: done when you have civilian and organizational efforts to declassify
Speaker 5: things beyond what's a part of the pursuit program actually
Speaker 5: becomes easier to do because the judiciary now has to
Speaker 5: look at this and say, well, the mandate says that
Speaker 5: this is no longer something that's you know, hyper classified
Speaker 5: or that we don't want to talk to the public about.
Speaker 5: So I think there's a lot of aspects to this,
Speaker 5: not only in the release but in the broader context
Speaker 5: that are a meaningful a sea change from where we've
Speaker 5: been over the last several years.
Speaker 2: Got it so now, Jordan, And of course I was
Speaker 2: originally with what was UAP Disclosure Fund. You know, my
Speaker 2: time there was was short, but I very much enjoyed
Speaker 2: it as director of strategy, and I know firsthand for
Speaker 2: my time there, there is considerable work that Disclosure Foundation
Speaker 2: is doing on Capitol Hill, and I know when I
Speaker 2: was there, you know, we were having meetings with members
Speaker 2: of Congress. Jordan, are you sensing an increased interest on
Speaker 2: capital from the work that Disclosure Foundation is doing. Are
Speaker 2: you sensing an increased interest in this topic for more
Speaker 2: lawmakers than say, a year ago, especially now that Trump
Speaker 2: is clearly on this bandwagon of getting this stuff out.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, I think you see that in terms of the
Speaker 4: results that we're observing right now. Clearly, you know, the
Speaker 4: Task Force on Declassification of Federal secrets has or the
Speaker 4: Transparency Task Force has been pushing hard on multiple fronts
Speaker 4: for that.
Speaker 3: But also you know, in some of.
Speaker 4: These meetings recently that we've had with lawmakers, they've explicitly
Speaker 4: communicated this shift.
Speaker 3: And why have they done that.
Speaker 4: They have done that because they have recently been in
Speaker 4: briefings where they have seen profound incursions on our sensitive
Speaker 4: airspace and sensitive facilities in this country that undeniably present
Speaker 4: a problem for national security, and they do not know
Speaker 4: what these things are, we do not appear to be
Speaker 4: able to defend against them, and our scentive assets are exposed.
Speaker 4: I think that is one of the core reasons why
Speaker 4: this is being elevated dramatically and at a much more
Speaker 4: rapid rapid pace we've seen. I believe it was Representative
Speaker 4: Burchett and perhaps also Representative Burlison comment on some of
Speaker 4: these briefings that they received, and I think Burchett mentioned
Speaker 4: that Steve Scalise was in one of these briefings and
Speaker 4: the people's jaws were on the floor when they.
Speaker 3: Showed the videos. And I actually think that.
Speaker 4: Putting a few of the pieces together, it appears that
Speaker 4: one of the briefings, I believe was about this late
Speaker 4: twenty twenty five incursion. That there are documents in release
Speaker 4: number one and Release number two. There are documents in
Speaker 4: each of these releases that relate to that single incursion
Speaker 4: that happened in late twenty twenty five, and we can
Speaker 4: talk about that in more detail later. But I think
Speaker 4: that it is the volume and frequency and brazenness of
Speaker 4: these incursions that have now been captured across with multi
Speaker 4: multi sensor platforms that make this undeniable for anyone who
Speaker 4: has received these briefings. And that's why it's escalated from
Speaker 4: you know, maybe a top ten priority maybe not to
Speaker 4: like a top three priority for this administration.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and are you hearing Lester that there is yet
Speaker 2: more another tranche to come, a third one.
Speaker 5: I think we've clearly seen that the administration at least
Speaker 5: that a minimum sees for you know, whatever reason a
Speaker 5: pr benefit around this. I mean, the first release, as
Speaker 5: stated by the Department of War, received a billion users
Speaker 5: you know, globally visiting in a effectively less than two
Speaker 5: week period. And so this is clearly something that they're
Speaker 5: going to dig in on, and there does seem to
Speaker 5: continue to be the demand and the ability to respond
Speaker 5: with more here. You know, with this release, what we
Speaker 5: know is these there were forty six videos that were
Speaker 5: requested specifically by Federal Task Force on Declassification, forty four
Speaker 5: of which were a part of this release, two of
Speaker 5: which were missing. And there's several documents that are now
Speaker 5: ostensibly declassified that don't have accompanying video released alongside of it.
Speaker 5: So that creates a very easy on ramp for fallow
Speaker 5: up releases to say, we've already we already know these
Speaker 5: events now exist. Where are the videos that accompany these
Speaker 5: reports that have clearly already been declassified?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 1: Yeah, that makes sense, So so let's dig into this thing.
Speaker 2: So again, we've got uh got a bunch of videos records,
Speaker 2: and I also want to point out to Disclosure Foundation
Speaker 2: is not in the business of analyzing videos uap stuff.
Speaker 2: I you know, even on this show, I don't get
Speaker 2: into this because I don't you know, I don't know
Speaker 2: what's real and what's not. I'm I'm reacting to it
Speaker 2: the same way as everyone else, so and and I'm
Speaker 2: seeing a lot of this for the first time. So
Speaker 2: the point here is to look at it just your
Speaker 2: personal reactions, personal opinions.
Speaker 1: Uh and uh yeah, so super casual.
Speaker 2: We put obviously, we put this show together very last
Speaker 2: second because none of us got a got a heads
Speaker 2: up on any of this thing. No no embargo videos. Okay,
Speaker 2: so I'm gonna go here to uh, let's sing, bring
Speaker 2: up the website.
Speaker 4: I appreciate that, Matt, while you're while you're bringing up
Speaker 4: the website, thank you for pointing that out. Yeah, we
Speaker 4: often say, as you recall internally, that we're not in
Speaker 4: the siting's business at the Disclosure Foundation. You know, we
Speaker 4: think it's fraught to you know, another of us are
Speaker 4: sensored experts, and we think it's fraught to attach the
Speaker 4: credibility of an organization to any specific siting.
Speaker 3: Or what have you.
Speaker 4: But that's kind of what makes it difficult about the
Speaker 4: situation we're in now, right it's that this is a
Speaker 4: document dump with no synthesis, with no no analysis, no contextualization,
Speaker 4: no synthesis, and so the public is I mean, I'm
Speaker 4: blown away at the the messaging coming from you know,
Speaker 4: the Public Affairs Office that you know, basically we have
Speaker 4: nothing else to offer you. The public can make of
Speaker 4: it what they will, and.
Speaker 3: You know, I'm sorry.
Speaker 4: I thought it was your job to take the tax
Speaker 4: dollars that we give you and figure out what these
Speaker 4: things are that are flying around over our airspace.
Speaker 3: So it's difficult to not want to.
Speaker 4: Try to help provide context and have these conversations because
Speaker 4: of that just total vacuum, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I completely agree. We're paying hundreds of millions
Speaker 2: of dollars. I mean, I can tell you that the
Speaker 2: Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security,
Speaker 2: they spent nearly one billion dollars on information and perception management.
Speaker 2: With sand Corp. It was like eight hundred million, so
Speaker 2: I mean an insane amount. And oh, by the way,
Speaker 2: that that same contract actually it's not sand Corp any more.
Speaker 2: It's a company called Arlow Solutions. So they're the ones
Speaker 2: running the shop at Arrow. They are the contractor running
Speaker 2: the shop at Arrow, and they are also the same
Speaker 2: company doing information and perception management, both under the same
Speaker 2: roof of OUSD I and S.
Speaker 1: So I don't know, that's pretty that's pretty fishy to me.
Speaker 2: And you and again touching on what you're you know
Speaker 2: what you just mentioned, Jordan, we're paying I mean tons
Speaker 2: upon tons of taxpayer dollars. And where is the Arrow analysis?
Speaker 2: Where are the reports the first historical report from Arrow?
Speaker 2: A fifth grader could have done a better job right
Speaker 2: in that thing. So here we are, I mean, we're
Speaker 2: grateful for these videos. We're certainly grateful to President Trump
Speaker 2: and the administration for putting this out. We know whether
Speaker 2: President has frankly had that you know what to do it.
Speaker 2: But you know, we need to see more from Arrow.
Speaker 2: Arrow needs to be doing it. It's a damn job.
Speaker 2: And and yeah, I'll just leave it at that.
Speaker 5: So anyway, I'll catch up in here briefly relate with
Speaker 5: one additional note, which is, you know, both the intelligence
Speaker 5: assessments and technical assessments related to these and other events exists,
Speaker 5: and so the lack of the sharing of those. You
Speaker 5: can maybe make the argument around the technical assessments, but
Speaker 5: we have national intelligence assessments on a variety of topics
Speaker 5: that are made available to the Congress and the public,
Speaker 5: which gives confidence levels and future looking analysis on what
Speaker 5: is our best interpretation of what it is we're dealing with.
Speaker 5: And that is yet to be a part of the
Speaker 5: releases that we've seen so far, but it is there,
Speaker 5: especially given when you look at the historical documentation, you
Speaker 5: do begin to see some of that, and we saw
Speaker 5: in some of the PDF documents in this release that
Speaker 5: some of that context is a part of the written documentation.
Speaker 5: It is not at a level where you can have
Speaker 5: independent scientific researchers begin to engage with it. But this
Speaker 5: is stuff that certainly exists but has yet to be
Speaker 5: shared with the public.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I think it's it's high time.
Speaker 2: Last week we had intelligence analyst Sarah Gammon, and who
Speaker 2: makes her living looking at these looking at videos and
Speaker 2: providing an intelligence assessment. And some of the videos that
Speaker 2: came out in that first trench she had actually vetted.
Speaker 2: Now she wasn't allowed to comment on which ones she vetted,
Speaker 2: but the thing that she was pointing out was that
Speaker 2: without an arrow assessment, a public assessment, and without the
Speaker 2: sensor data, you know, the stuff that's redacted in the
Speaker 2: heads up display in these videos. Her point was, you
Speaker 2: can't really it's difficult to analyze them without that data.
Speaker 2: Without that data, obviously the public isn't going to be
Speaker 2: able to see that data because it's classified. So that
Speaker 2: is all the more reason for ARROW to provide a
Speaker 2: unclassified assessment of what we're looking at. In my in
Speaker 2: my opinion, So okay, let's let's look at some stuff here. Okay,
Speaker 2: So again I'm going to bring up the bring up this.
Speaker 1: So this is I can't see the thing. Let's see
Speaker 1: what is this?
Speaker 2: War dot gov? So, war dot gov. You go to
Speaker 2: the to the UAP part and and you know, I
Speaker 2: have to say, so it says here the Department of
Speaker 2: Wards just released the second tronch.
Speaker 1: First time I'd ever heard that word.
Speaker 2: By the way of records under pursue, the first tronch
Speaker 2: should be the that should be a drinking game, although
Speaker 2: I don't drink was released on May eighth. Scroll down
Speaker 2: to view the second trench released on May twenty second.
Speaker 1: Today.
Speaker 2: So and Donald Trump, based on the tremendous, tremendous interest shown,
Speaker 2: I will be directing the Secretary of War and other
Speaker 2: relevant departments and agencies to begin the process of identifying
Speaker 2: releasing government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life. Interesting
Speaker 2: that he says that unidentified Aerial Phenomena UAP and Unidentified
Speaker 2: flying objects UFOs, and any and all other information connected
Speaker 2: to these highly complex but extremely interesting and important matters.
Speaker 2: God bless America. Okay, so I agree with everything he
Speaker 2: says here. Okay, so the thing that's cool, So you
Speaker 2: can go to the first release look at stuff, but
Speaker 2: we're going to look here at the second release. You
Speaker 2: can download all of the documents sevn d megabytes. You
Speaker 2: can also download all of the videos five point six gigabytes.
Speaker 2: But what Arrows has done a good job of setting up,
Speaker 2: I must say, is this search engine. And Leicester was
Speaker 2: kind of walking me through how some of this some
Speaker 2: of this works. But you know, you can come in here.
Speaker 2: You can type a DISC and it'll just show you,
Speaker 2: uh you know, what is related to that word disc.
Speaker 2: Or I'll type in orb. Actually an interesting ORB doesn't
Speaker 2: come up. But uh, over on the right here you
Speaker 2: have the ability to filter.
Speaker 1: So uh, you know, we can look at all types.
Speaker 1: Look up at ORB.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna type in Kirkpatrick now he's you know, he's
Speaker 2: busy making money at Oakridge. And uh and here what
Speaker 2: we're gonna dow?
Speaker 3: So u s O is one is listed a few
Speaker 3: times in this release.
Speaker 1: Really, h us what is us O.
Speaker 5: Sub Merged objects?
Speaker 1: Oh okay, all right, well let's start there, okay.
Speaker 2: So anyway, so yeah, you can type in a thing
Speaker 2: filter by all types. So we're just gonna look at
Speaker 2: videos right now, and uh yeah, here we go. So, uh,
Speaker 2: let's see that's pretty corazy. So that's underwater. I didn't
Speaker 2: realize that the first time I saw that, I that
Speaker 2: these were I didn't see the USO part. I thought this,
Speaker 2: these are flying against clouds. So yeah, so I'm just
Speaker 2: gonna let it play here, and guys feel free to.
Speaker 1: Chime in.
Speaker 3: You know. I would say one thing, just as a
Speaker 3: little table.
Speaker 4: Setting for some of these videos that I think is interesting,
Speaker 4: there's a what I can only describe as a disclaimer
Speaker 4: on the description.
Speaker 3: Field in the.
Speaker 4: In the each each file has like a page and
Speaker 4: like a description field, and the videos have this disclaimer
Speaker 4: that says something to the effect of eight members of
Speaker 4: Congress requested these videos on I think it was like
Speaker 4: March sixth, twenty twenty six or something like that, there's
Speaker 4: a date associated with it, and that then Arrow went
Speaker 4: and found these documents on whatever servers these things were on.
Speaker 4: It's really interesting context because it implies that you know,
Speaker 4: which there's been some discussion about on social media, and
Speaker 4: you know where this list came from, et cetera, That
Speaker 4: it was members of Congress that had the list of
Speaker 4: these videos and provided it to Arrow and said we
Speaker 4: know these exist, go get them, as opposed to the
Speaker 4: other way around of Arrow saying, hey, we've done our job,
Speaker 4: We've found these things, Congress, would you like to come
Speaker 4: take a look at them. I mean that fact pattern
Speaker 4: in itself is interesting for the dynamic at play there
Speaker 4: of what is happening at Arrow and what is Congress
Speaker 4: trying to get released. So I thought some of that
Speaker 4: context was was interesting and helpful. I know it's not
Speaker 4: germane to this specific video, but thought it was worth
Speaker 4: pointing out to your your audience here.
Speaker 1: I agree.
Speaker 2: You know what's truly fascinating at the beginning of this
Speaker 2: video the speed at which those things are moving.
Speaker 1: It's pretty h pretty pretty insane less journey.
Speaker 5: Any thoughts, I don't really have much to add here,
Speaker 5: I think, you know, just in talking about you know,
Speaker 5: I think one of the things that happens with these
Speaker 5: video releases is we've so far in this targe we
Speaker 5: have gotten a few like colorful motion video as opposed
Speaker 5: to forward looking infrared or fleer video. And for a
Speaker 5: lot of the general public, when we're looking at forward
Speaker 5: looking infrared, you know, we don't people don't have a
Speaker 5: context to really understand what they're looking at. And so
Speaker 5: I think some of the ones in this batch from
Speaker 5: the flear that were you know, put out on you know,
Speaker 5: the ABC News launched earlier were some of the spherical
Speaker 5: and instantaneous movement stuff, which again continues to need further
Speaker 5: analysis to understand what's really going on here. But in
Speaker 5: this batch we did see for the first time color
Speaker 5: and full motion video, which we see all the time
Speaker 5: when it comes to our current misadventures or adventures abroad,
Speaker 5: where within almost real time we will get color four
Speaker 5: K from fighters, etc. So there is still a delta
Speaker 5: between you know, what the capability set is and what
Speaker 5: could be released when it's in other categories of information
Speaker 5: versus as it relates to this subject. But I think
Speaker 5: one difference here is that we did see a few
Speaker 5: color videos for the first time.
Speaker 2: Agreed. Okay, so let's see here. We're going to type in.
Speaker 2: Apparently Lake Huron is of interest. Beautiful black screen, wait
Speaker 2: for it.
Speaker 1: There we go. Okay, wow, this is uh this thing
Speaker 1: looks like it has some kind of what.
Speaker 5: I'm going to echo on your mic, Matt currently, how
Speaker 5: about now still there?
Speaker 1: Okay, I've been having that for some reason. Let's see.
Speaker 5: Oh I know why appears to be gone?
Speaker 1: Now okay, let's see. Can you hear me? Is did
Speaker 1: the echo go away?
Speaker 5: Yes?
Speaker 1: Okay?
Speaker 5: Good?
Speaker 1: Uh? Yeah, So so this one's interesting.
Speaker 2: It's I don't know if that's the jellyfish or or
Speaker 2: something that it's got a.
Speaker 1: Tail hanging down and uh, I'm just gonna freeze it there.
Speaker 1: And I don't know what that is.
Speaker 2: It looks like, I don't know, maybe the drone went
Speaker 2: through the car wash or something.
Speaker 1: I have no idea what the hell that is.
Speaker 3: That's yeah.
Speaker 4: I'm I'm no expert analyst here with respect to that,
Speaker 4: but I don't know if balloons explode in that kind
Speaker 4: of way. But I'm sure the sleuths out there can
Speaker 4: I can try to answer that for us.
Speaker 5: Yeah, This appears to be to have been a part
Speaker 5: of the sort of twenty twenty three shootdowns that where
Speaker 5: we had the Chinese spy balloon that led to a
Speaker 5: variety of shootdowns across the continental United States. It is
Speaker 5: interesting that they released the Lake Huron one, but the
Speaker 5: I believe it was in dead Horse, Alaska, the one that,
Speaker 5: if our call correctly, General Glenn van Heirk had come
Speaker 5: in an interview and made some pretty interesting comments around
Speaker 5: that one still appears to not be a part of
Speaker 5: this release and was the one that had the most
Speaker 5: amount of let's call mystique around it, and a lot
Speaker 5: of people who have been following this issue have been
Speaker 5: demanding be released in here. So I do believe that
Speaker 5: this is a part of that twenty twenty three shootdown
Speaker 5: kind of era that we had for a brief period
Speaker 5: of time where for folks who might not remember what
Speaker 5: initially started that whole process was, you know, the initial
Speaker 5: Chinese Bible and that was shot off the coast of
Speaker 5: I believe it was South Carolina apparently. You know, when
Speaker 5: we have all these tracking and radar systems, they are
Speaker 5: you know, these are military systems, so they're tuned to
Speaker 5: specific use cases which are more related to identifying you know,
Speaker 5: foreign intelligence drones and other apparatus fighters, etc. And they
Speaker 5: turned the filters off or down, and then all of
Speaker 5: a sudden started seeing all of this additional stuff that
Speaker 5: they had not previously seen, and there was a little
Speaker 5: bit of then a you know, oh my god, we
Speaker 5: have to take care of this. You know, there's all
Speaker 5: these objects, what's going on? And that kind of led
Speaker 5: to all of these shootdowns that being a part of
Speaker 5: that that sort of time period, at which point they realized,
Speaker 5: you probably shouldn't be you know, having fifty million dollars
Speaker 5: or however much of his missiles over you know, densely
Speaker 5: populated areas to try to deal with this issue.
Speaker 1: Okay, agreed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And of course that's the one that we hear
Speaker 2: was actually a UAP and not a Chinese drone, the
Speaker 2: one that they're they're not wanting to release.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's let's look. I typed in here clouds.
Speaker 2: Sean Kirkpatrick called me up and said, type clouds in
Speaker 2: there and you'll see some really interesting stuff. So let's
Speaker 2: see here. This one is crazy. You know, from what
Speaker 2: I can tell, this thing looks pretty damn big. Uh,
Speaker 2: you know, you see this thing kind of going in
Speaker 2: and out of in and out of the clouds. Uh.
Speaker 2: Of course, we don't know the altitude or anything, but
Speaker 2: that is definitely not a balloon. It's definitely maneuvering, you know.
Speaker 2: If you you know, if we go back and you watch,
Speaker 2: I mean that's made that's a pretty significant, uh change
Speaker 2: in direction and seeing this thing go in and out
Speaker 2: of the clouds.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Wow, one of.
Speaker 3: The things that our balloons don't make right angle turns. Uh,
Speaker 3: you know, I'm sorry, Lester, go ahead.
Speaker 5: But no, no, So I think this you know again,
Speaker 5: if you look at the broader context of commentary that's
Speaker 5: been made around this stuff. So one of the challenges
Speaker 5: with a lot of these is when you don't have
Speaker 5: like a background context, it's hard to be able to
Speaker 5: gauge size and speed and all these other factors. So
Speaker 5: that that's one of the challenges here. But the sort
Speaker 5: of metallic spheres is something that you know, doctor Sean Kirkpatrick,
Speaker 5: you know, at during his time as director of the
Speaker 5: UL Demand Anomaly Resolution Office, publicly stated that these are
Speaker 5: a morphology that we are consistently seeing, you know, globally
Speaker 5: and don't or at least publicly, don't have an explanation
Speaker 5: that they want to provide as to what they are,
Speaker 5: what they relate to, and and so that was at
Speaker 5: least one of the quote unquote morphologies that at the time,
Speaker 5: for whatever reason he was willing to is sort of
Speaker 5: outside of the quote inventories of domestic or foreign you know,
Speaker 5: adversaries that we can kind of categorize easily, right.
Speaker 2: Agreed, Okay, Let's let's take a look at Let's see
Speaker 2: where the do we know if the other two ones
Speaker 2: with clouds? Was there anything useful there? I haven't looked
Speaker 2: at these. Let's take a look. This is a pretty
Speaker 2: clear video. I mean the amount of detail. Wow, Okay,
Speaker 2: I guess we can't look there. And the other the
Speaker 2: other thing that comes to mind too, is if if
Speaker 2: this were an aircraft or a bird, something that drone
Speaker 2: operators and pilots are used to seeing, they they would
Speaker 2: not be spending their time filming something like this. If
Speaker 2: these guys they're there, and women, these men and women
Speaker 2: they're you know, millions of dollars of training is invested
Speaker 2: in in UH into training these people to identify what
Speaker 2: is of interest and a bird, a seagull, uh, and
Speaker 2: most certainly air trash is not going to be of interest.
Speaker 2: And uh, you know, and clearly they are tracking this thing. Uh,
Speaker 2: it has drawn their attention. So that's uh, that's a
Speaker 2: good one. Let's see, we'll go into see what the
Speaker 2: third one is. I wonder if this is kind of
Speaker 2: the same same area and guys feel free to jump in.
Speaker 5: So I think another aspect of like you know, as
Speaker 5: the as the public tries to you know, again, these
Speaker 5: aren't structured, these are document dumps, and so the question
Speaker 5: is like, ultimately, what are we looking for here? And
Speaker 5: you know, as we sort of I think mentioned earlier,
Speaker 5: the the A TIP framework seems to be an entry
Speaker 5: point in terms of trying to be able to have
Speaker 5: some kind of standards of evidence around uh, you know,
Speaker 5: identifying the possibility that there's quote anomalist technology happening. So
Speaker 5: you know, any of any of these flear videos or
Speaker 5: full motion video capture that encapsulate two or more of
Speaker 5: these you know observables, uh, are going to be the
Speaker 5: things of most interest. You know, this covers stuff such
Speaker 5: as you know, quote unquote anti gravity lift, hypersonic velocity
Speaker 5: without signatures, which again is a technical description which is
Speaker 5: why you want flear because that's part of why you
Speaker 5: can tell those signatures are there, trans medium travel, Uh,
Speaker 5: you know, there's biological effect is another category. And so
Speaker 5: what really would be a category of something that would
Speaker 5: require or particularly for the scientific community get the more engaged,
Speaker 5: is are we actually seeing something that cannot just be
Speaker 5: pointed to as being any of the continued prosaic explanations
Speaker 5: that we see normally, which is birds, balloons, natural phenomena,
Speaker 5: and a couple of dynamics that would move the conversation
Speaker 5: into this has real potential to be quote anomaloust technology
Speaker 5: would be things that encapsulate you know, two or more
Speaker 5: of these observables as sort of defined by the Advanced
Speaker 5: Aerospace Threat Identification Program or ASAP the Advanced Aerospace Weapons
Speaker 5: Systems Applications Program as again a means to distinguish between
Speaker 5: what we would call as mundane and not interesting versus interesting.
Speaker 5: And so currently there clearly seems to be a position
Speaker 5: that we're not going to make that distinction in these releases,
Speaker 5: and I think moving forward, part of the challenge here
Speaker 5: is I sort of say we sort of have the
Speaker 5: Tarantino Nolan problem, which is we've already gotten the end
Speaker 5: of the movie first, you know, post the Grush hearings
Speaker 5: in twenty twenty three, the public has been identified as like,
Speaker 5: what the core most sensational allegation is that there are
Speaker 5: technological objects of non human origin both that are near
Speaker 5: Earth in atmosphere and also have physical material captured by
Speaker 5: the US government. This part of the conversation has been
Speaker 5: mostly absent from the current conversation because that's the conclusion
Speaker 5: has already been defined. You know, at the beginning of
Speaker 5: this process, much of the public demand is basically trying
Speaker 5: to fast forward to the end of the movie and say, Okay,
Speaker 5: well we already know what the end of the movie is,
Speaker 5: and where is that stuff? And so there's a sort
Speaker 5: of a gap between what the expectation that's been said
Speaker 5: about what the US government has and these initial tranches
Speaker 5: that again and are you know, in some cases some
Speaker 5: have what appear to be maybe two or more of
Speaker 5: these observables that would put it in that category of
Speaker 5: anomalous technology, but they're not limiting it to that, and
Speaker 5: a variety of people are trying to then, you know,
Speaker 5: make a characterization about there's muddying of the waters. That's
Speaker 5: happening here between mixing mundane with the non mundane as
Speaker 5: a means to kind of obfuscate what's happening here, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I totally agree.
Speaker 1: So interesting.
Speaker 2: I got a message from a whistleblower who said, so,
Speaker 2: I guess ERO doesn't feel like analyzing anything or producing
Speaker 2: the reports that are late apparently nothing. Volume two is
Speaker 2: almost two years late, and no twenty twenty five annual report,
Speaker 2: just giving the middle finger to Congress.
Speaker 1: And that certainly certainly seems to be the case. It's like,
Speaker 1: what the hell are they doing?
Speaker 4: Yeah, there was messaging out of the Public Affairs Office recently,
Speaker 4: I think today that said something to the effect of,
Speaker 4: you know, the aero's trying to complete its statutory obligations
Speaker 4: by releasing these videos, and of course the d byrony
Speaker 4: there is that if they actually cared about completing their
Speaker 4: statutory obligations, they would have turned in their homework on
Speaker 4: time and not be in violation of law by not
Speaker 4: having completed that homework, and perhaps would not have have
Speaker 4: the have had the ball taken from them by the
Speaker 4: executive branch to advance down the field here. So you know,
Speaker 4: a little bit it's a little bit rich to get
Speaker 4: some of those to accept some of those comments from
Speaker 4: today coming out of the Public Affairs Office.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, the bullshit office.
Speaker 2: Okay, so we're going to take a break from doing
Speaker 2: some videos and actually look at a couple of the PDFs,
Speaker 2: and Jordan, you brought this one up that I'm going
Speaker 2: to bring up here that is.
Speaker 1: Interesting, and let's you can zoom it in here. Let's
Speaker 1: see maybe maybe not.
Speaker 5: Let's see.
Speaker 1: Let's see, clearly are not well rehearsed here. Here we go.
Speaker 2: Okay, now what out of this?
Speaker 1: Let's see, I'll just read it here.
Speaker 2: Late twenty twenty five, during evening hours, I, a senior
Speaker 2: US intelligence officer, along with the colleague and two pilots,
Speaker 2: departed Joint Operations Center and a helicopter. Mission was to
Speaker 2: investigate loud thuds heard in the mountains on the Test Range,
Speaker 2: which coincided with UAP phenomena UAP sidings reported over the
Speaker 2: previous several nights. Waimed to remote search mountain areas or
Speaker 2: possible debris or objects that might explain to orb like sidings.
Speaker 2: After leaving JLC, we flew low outitude map the Earth
Speaker 2: rout through the mountain range for several hours. Multiple times
Speaker 2: we spotted debris on the ground and descended for closer inspection.
Speaker 1: Each time we determined it was remnants for.
Speaker 2: Rockets and other projectiles that had crashed during years of
Speaker 2: weapons testing, so we continued searching the areas of reported
Speaker 2: orb activity. We discovered a large cave entrance with no
Speaker 2: visible end in sight.
Speaker 1: I know it sounds like Land of the Lost. Maybe
Speaker 1: Chaka's in there.
Speaker 2: The terrain around the entrance offered no safe landing spot,
Speaker 2: so I instructed the pilot to orbit it several times
Speaker 2: for observation.
Speaker 1: We noted the location. Impressed on.
Speaker 2: Running low and fuel, we headed to a pre arranged
Speaker 2: rendezvous point to meet a ground team.
Speaker 1: Excuse me and let my colleague disembark.
Speaker 2: The two pilots and I then proceeded to a prepositioned
Speaker 2: tanker on the range for refueling. Our plan was to
Speaker 2: return to base afterwards, but the JLC raider radioed with
Speaker 2: the request to search a nearby mountain for debris spotted
Speaker 2: by one of the ground teams. By this time, the
Speaker 2: sun had set and the pilot switched to fleer and
Speaker 2: MVGS while I continued using the unaided naked eye. After
Speaker 2: a brief search of the mountain yielded no findings of
Speaker 2: pilots began navigating back to JLCT and the mission. I
Speaker 2: then received a message from JLC radar head detected HITS
Speaker 2: several miles up range from our position, the same area
Speaker 2: where UAP activity had been observed on prior nights. I
Speaker 2: relayed this to the pilots and we altered course to intercept.
Speaker 2: What followed was a series of close UAP encounters lasting
Speaker 2: over an hour. En route, ground teams reported spotting UAP
Speaker 2: on fleer, describing it as super hot, low to the
Speaker 2: ground and moving east then south at high speed. The
Speaker 2: object then split into two and changed direction again. A
Speaker 2: balloon's not going to do that. Upon arrival, we scanned
Speaker 2: the area using MVG and fleer and the naked eye.
Speaker 2: The ground team suddenly radioed that the object had risen
Speaker 2: from the ground, approached within ten feet of the helicopter
Speaker 2: dropped below us, then sped away. The pilot observed through
Speaker 2: mvgs and saw it split into two, smaller into two
Speaker 2: as a smaller object emerged before it accelerated out of sight.
Speaker 2: We briefly pursued, but broke off and unable to match
Speaker 2: at speed, and helicopter probably goes around one hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty knots maybe two hundred. At one point, the JAILC
Speaker 2: informed us that several fighter jets had launched on a
Speaker 2: training mission in our operating area and requested their assistance
Speaker 2: to identify. Minutes later, the JLC directed us to nearby
Speaker 2: radar detections. We took up a hovering position at seven
Speaker 2: hundred feet AGL and the distance we saw countless orange
Speaker 2: orbs swarming in all directions against the backdrop of the mountain.
Speaker 2: The display lasted several minutes before fading. The JLC then
Speaker 2: redirected to our previous position based on fresh radar hits.
Speaker 2: I provided coordinates to the pilots of the MVGS. The
Speaker 2: pilots and I observed two large orbs flare up side
Speaker 2: by side, close to the helicopter stationary and just above
Speaker 2: the rotor disc to our right. They were oval shaped,
Speaker 2: orange with a white and yellow center, and emitted light
Speaker 2: in all directions. After a few seconds that a third
Speaker 2: orb flared up below the pair, followed by a fourth
Speaker 2: below that, forming a total of four or five in
Speaker 2: a T formation. So these things are obviously intelligently controlled.
Speaker 2: This isn't some weather phenomenon. Moments later, they dimmed in
Speaker 2: reverse order remained stationary until they vanished from view. The
Speaker 2: entire event lasted ten to fifteen seconds. I didn't take
Speaker 2: photos as I was focused on assessing what it was
Speaker 2: and whether it posed a threat. This encounter, the pilots
Speaker 2: briefly considered landing due to the object's proximity, but opted
Speaker 2: to remain hovering at seven hundred feet AGL above ground level.
Speaker 2: We then spotted the fighter jets entering the visual range
Speaker 2: at about twenty three hundred feet AGL, identifiable by their
Speaker 2: blinking nave lights. As watched from AFAR, the same type
Speaker 2: of orbs appeared directly above the fighters. So these things
Speaker 2: are going from seven hundred feet AGL these orbs up
Speaker 2: to twenty three thousand feet AGL. They flared up one
Speaker 2: at a time in a horizontal formation, matching the jets'
Speaker 2: speed and flight path, so at a minimum, those jets
Speaker 2: are going probably two hundred and fifty knots. They flared
Speaker 2: up one at a time in a horizontal formation. After
Speaker 2: ten to fifteen seconds, they dimmed sequentially and disappeared. This
Speaker 2: repeated several times as the jets transited the airspace and
Speaker 2: eventually landed. I remarked to the pilots that it seemed
Speaker 2: the same orbs we encountered were now chasing the fighters.
Speaker 2: We also observed orange orbs flaring up and down US
Speaker 2: for several minutes, low and fuel, we decided to return
Speaker 2: to the JLC after landing. I briefly spoke with them,
Speaker 2: mostly to express thanks. We were virtually speechless after these observations.
Speaker 2: I then entered the JLC for a quick debrief. Driving home,
Speaker 2: I mean, holy shit, I mean wow.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so what do we okay again? Context Setting.
Speaker 4: Representative Burroson was on Twitter today saying that this document
Speaker 4: that you're pointing out is unequivocally the most important document
Speaker 4: released today.
Speaker 3: Now, why is that we note the date? This is
Speaker 3: late twenty twenty five.
Speaker 4: If you go on the system and search for this
Speaker 4: particular filing, you'll see that it's also linked to some
Speaker 4: of the documents from the first release that are marked
Speaker 4: looks like this. It's all blacked out and it says secret,
Speaker 4: no foreign on it. Right, So these two documents reference
Speaker 4: the same event. Why would Eric Burrowson be saying that
Speaker 4: this is the most important document in there. And by
Speaker 4: the way, there's other folks that have pointed out how
Speaker 4: important this is. I believe Dan Warren, who makes great content,
Speaker 4: has pointed this out. I believe Jeremy Corbell and others
Speaker 4: that do great work have pointed out this specific incident.
Speaker 3: Why does Eric Burrelson think that reading the tea leaves
Speaker 3: for me?
Speaker 4: It's that this event is one of the briefings, is
Speaker 4: one of the encouragion which required congressional briefings about and
Speaker 4: in those congressional briefings, members of Congress saw the videos
Speaker 4: and the multi sensor platforms that were associated with this incursion. Now,
Speaker 4: what's interesting is that there aren't any videos posted from
Speaker 4: for this event in late twenty twenty five, but there's
Speaker 4: multiple pieces of writing that substantiated, so that you're left
Speaker 4: with the question, why are none of the videos associated.
Speaker 3: With this event part of the public release yet?
Speaker 4: My guess is that you know, our advocates in Congress
Speaker 4: for this are desperately trying to get those those assets released,
Speaker 4: perhaps only in a subsequent.
Speaker 3: In a subsequent release. So I think that.
Speaker 4: These documents are very interesting. The public should be aware
Speaker 4: of this and should be really clamoring for more detail
Speaker 4: and for more of the sensor platform data, be it flear, video,
Speaker 4: radar data, or other corresponding data, for this particular citing
Speaker 4: or incursion to be made more clear about what the
Speaker 4: heck is happening here.
Speaker 1: I think that's an excellent point.
Speaker 2: And you know, and Leicester, one thing that comes to
Speaker 2: mind is these things are operating in close proximity to
Speaker 2: rotary aircraft. You know, this thing this report they said
Speaker 2: that these orbs were just off I think it was
Speaker 2: to the right of their of their main rotor.
Speaker 1: They are in a test range.
Speaker 2: So this is restricted airspace. I mean, it's it's it's
Speaker 2: it's pretty crazy that that people people, as you.
Speaker 1: Mentioned Jordan, should be clamoring for more UH Lestra. What
Speaker 1: are your thoughts on that.
Speaker 5: I think that's that's certainly true and especially more important
Speaker 5: in the current twenty twenty six context. And Jordan, you've
Speaker 5: mentioned this uh in the last two weeks as well
Speaker 5: as you've been talking about this issue, because if these
Speaker 5: things are continuing to occur, now you know, these are
Speaker 5: now war war time incursions that are occurring, and so
Speaker 5: ostensibly the stakes are extremely high, especially given the economic
Speaker 5: impacts that we're seeing as well as the you know,
Speaker 5: the stakes around access to nuclear material and and uranium
Speaker 5: enrichment and all these things. So there's there's a variety
Speaker 5: of different layers to look at this issue and analyze
Speaker 5: this issue. There's sort of the separation of powers problem
Speaker 5: between the executive branch and Congress in terms of are
Speaker 5: they illegally withholding classified information? Is there misappropriated funds, So
Speaker 5: that's more of like a procedural issue. There's the national
Speaker 5: security aspect to this, which is again, you know, if
Speaker 5: we are now in active hot you know, war type
Speaker 5: situations in multiple theaters across the globe, and we're shutting
Speaker 5: down Barksdale Air Force Base because of this stuff. The
Speaker 5: Alpaso Airspace just a couple of weeks ago was shut
Speaker 5: down under very mysterious circumstances that was supposed to be
Speaker 5: a cartel drones, which seems to be a little bit
Speaker 5: of an overreaction to shut down all the airspace over
Speaker 5: al Paso, which just happens to be very close to
Speaker 5: some of these same locations White Stands, for example, where
Speaker 5: we're seeing now all this factual and documentary evidence that
Speaker 5: encouragees have been happening at these places all of the time.
Speaker 5: And then there's sort of the technological objects of non
Speaker 5: human origins aspect. So there's a lot of layers here
Speaker 5: where you know, you can enter at whatever level that
Speaker 5: you feel is necessary. But there there are a lot
Speaker 5: of aspects to this that require some attention, even if
Speaker 5: just for some of the conventional aspects where the stakes
Speaker 5: are extremely high, again because we're in a wartime environment.
Speaker 5: So it's just it is very interesting to me that
Speaker 5: for nuclear facilities, for location, military facilities and bases where
Speaker 5: we have our B fifty twos, and it's nuclear both
Speaker 5: energy and weapons. It's not one or the other, it's both.
Speaker 5: That the continental United States is having these incursions and
Speaker 5: in a post nine to eleven world, people aren't running
Speaker 5: around with their hair on fire. Continues to confuse me,
Speaker 5: because again, this is the example that we just looked
Speaker 5: at from late twenty twenty five. This is not a
Speaker 5: Cold War era incuragion. This is happening in our current environment,
Speaker 5: and that at least warrants you know, from a congressional perspective,
Speaker 5: both the Armed Services Committees and the Intelligence committees to
Speaker 5: take this seriously. For example, if you were to just
Speaker 5: throw if you were to say in these descriptions that
Speaker 5: someone identified the insignia or a flag of Iran on
Speaker 5: any of these objects, we would be having a very
Speaker 5: very very different conversation.
Speaker 1: Agreed, Absolutely, agreed.
Speaker 2: And I think one of the lessons out of this,
Speaker 2: And Jordan, would you agree with this that you know,
Speaker 2: the low hanging fruit are always videos and photos, but
Speaker 2: the real meat of this the same as the real
Speaker 2: meat of the congressional hearings. It wasn't videos or photos,
Speaker 2: it's the testimony.
Speaker 1: It's you know, what is in these pds.
Speaker 2: And I worry Jordan that the people are overlooking and
Speaker 2: not taking the time.
Speaker 1: To really read this stuff. Would you agree?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I definitely agree.
Speaker 4: I mean, we wrote an entire policy memo on, you know,
Speaker 4: our legal theory of protected disclosures that has been sitting
Speaker 4: out there for quite some time, and there's very little
Speaker 4: engagement with with reading the work. So we felt like
Speaker 4: we had to create a video about it to get
Speaker 4: more engagement about it. So yeah, there's somewhat of a
Speaker 4: higher bar, it seems, for for digging in and reading
Speaker 4: the documents. But I'm glad you brought that up, Matt,
Speaker 4: for this dump data dump, because.
Speaker 3: I think that I was.
Speaker 4: I tweeted about this earlier today before Burleson. Burleson had
Speaker 4: said that his favorite release was that two pages. I
Speaker 4: tend to agree generally that the most interesting the shiny
Speaker 4: objects this release of the videos, but the PDFs are sensational.
Speaker 4: So in addition to that two page, you know, testimonial
Speaker 4: from a senior intelligence officer, there's also a I think
Speaker 4: one hundred and sixteen, one hundred and twenty page PDF
Speaker 4: that we may want to show here, which I really
Speaker 4: hope your audience will engage with.
Speaker 3: So what does this PDF show?
Speaker 4: Well, this is a document from I believe it's the
Speaker 4: Air Force Office of Special Investigations. That there's a few instants.
Speaker 4: It has thirty pages. There's a literal database included in
Speaker 4: this one hundred and sixteen page pdf. Thirty pages of
Speaker 4: it are a literal database. Another portion of it describes
Speaker 4: how in nineteen forty nine they the volume and frequency
Speaker 4: of these incursions of what they were seeing required them
Speaker 4: to have two separate secret meetings with the a FOSIE,
Speaker 4: the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, the FBI, the
Speaker 4: Atomic Energy Commission, you know, the precursor to the Department
Speaker 4: of energy that and they had secret meetings in nineteen
Speaker 4: forty nine with those entities to discuss what they described
Speaker 4: as the quote a green fireball phenomenon.
Speaker 3: So they had seen.
Speaker 4: Green glowing orbs what we now think of as you know,
Speaker 4: sort of the orb phenomena or the plasma orb phenomenon.
Speaker 4: They had seen that in spades, and it's talked about
Speaker 4: in that other document from twenty twenty five. They're still
Speaker 4: seeing orbs out there. They were described as yellow and
Speaker 4: orange in in that document, so maybe they've you know,
Speaker 4: changed clothes, changed colors, but still generally the same phenomena.
Speaker 4: These in that one hundred and sixteen page document I
Speaker 4: think had markings on it that indicated that it was
Speaker 4: only declassified as of May like recently, like May thirteenth,
Speaker 4: twenty twenty six or something like that. So these are
Speaker 4: documents that have never seen the light of day before
Speaker 4: as far as I'm aware. But I'm sure there will
Speaker 4: be people that point out if I'm wrong there.
Speaker 3: And that these secret meetings have been happening since the forties.
Speaker 4: I mean, do you think that there aren't any other
Speaker 4: documents like this from nineteen forty nine, like up until
Speaker 4: now that haven't been released about meetings to discuss these
Speaker 4: strange phenomena that they can't make sense of. I would
Speaker 4: wager that there's lots of them that have yet to
Speaker 4: be made be made public. So I would encourage your
Speaker 4: audience in the public generally to engage with with some
Speaker 4: of those PDFs as well.
Speaker 3: They're really.
Speaker 4: Surprising in terms of in terms of the content, and
Speaker 4: they they just belie an entirely different set of facts
Speaker 4: than what we have been led to believe about this topic.
Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure. And Lester, you mentioned the l Paso thing.
Speaker 1: Folks in especially any staffers or.
Speaker 2: Lawmakers that are that are watching this thing, you can
Speaker 2: absolutely take this to the bank. What occurred in l
Speaker 2: Paso is whatever the store, whatever story the d O
Speaker 2: D or the executive branch is telling you about what
Speaker 2: happened over El Paso is not what happened. It was
Speaker 2: not anything prosaic, it was not an anything from cartels.
Speaker 2: And what I can tell you is that what happened
Speaker 2: over El Passo is absolutely frightening and absolutely a threat
Speaker 2: to the national security of the United States.
Speaker 1: So those of you in Congress you need.
Speaker 2: To specifically ask for a classified briefing over what happened
Speaker 2: in El Paso, because what they are saying is an
Speaker 2: absolute lie. And when you find out what happened, you're
Speaker 2: going to be enraged if they haven't told you already.
Speaker 1: So that, in and of itself.
Speaker 2: What occurred over El Paso should alarm the public. It
Speaker 2: should alarm members of Congress because some stuff is getting
Speaker 2: hidden from you, and what is getting hidden from you
Speaker 2: is a direct threat to the sovereignty sovereignty of the
Speaker 2: United States. So I'm going to leave that there, and
Speaker 2: we're going to get into some more stuff here, but
Speaker 2: we're going to real quick, just do some housekeeping before
Speaker 2: we get to the documents and some more videos. If
Speaker 2: you're not subscribed, please hit that button, ring the bell,
Speaker 2: leave a comment, give us a thumbs up. I know
Speaker 2: it sounds like a lot, but all this really matters.
Speaker 2: YouTube sees all of that and basically says to itself, Hey,
Speaker 2: we should recommend the Good Trouble Show to people who
Speaker 2: don't know what exists. That's how all of that works.
Speaker 2: And also, please keep keep the questions coming in the chat.
Speaker 2: I promise we're going to get to those here in
Speaker 2: a bit. You can also find us on all the
Speaker 2: major podcasting platforms. If you like to listen to us
Speaker 2: on the go, we certainly would appreciate a lovely review.
Speaker 2: And then last thing, we have no sponsors on this show,
Speaker 2: absolutely zero. We are kept alive entirely by people like you.
Speaker 2: If you want to help pay the studio rent here
Speaker 2: in La we are on Patreon at www dot patreon
Speaker 2: dot com forward slash the Good Trouble Show. And then
Speaker 2: also you can support us right here on YouTube through
Speaker 2: memberships or the super chats.
Speaker 1: They're also open to means the world.
Speaker 2: It allows us to keep bringing you great shows like
Speaker 2: this with our two absolutely great guests, Jordan Flowers and
Speaker 2: Lester Nare from Disclosure Foundation. So let's look at a
Speaker 2: couple more videos here, and then we're going to get
Speaker 2: into this really interesting PDF that you mentioned earlier, Jordan,
Speaker 2: So let's see here so quick.
Speaker 5: Please, going to make a quick process point here because
Speaker 5: I think this larger context is also really interesting. So,
Speaker 5: as many of the listeners probably recall, there was a
Speaker 5: lot of effort to when it was initially introduced by
Speaker 5: Senator Schumer and Rounds and Jill Brandon Rubio the UAP
Speaker 5: Disclosure Act. One of the reasons why people felt so
Speaker 5: strongly about the importance of the UAPDA was that it
Speaker 5: was going to standardize the process of this release of
Speaker 5: information to have it be more structured in a way
Speaker 5: that would enable and now allow the kind of analysis
Speaker 5: and robust amount of information coming out. So there's actually
Speaker 5: three simultaneous sort of declassification or release pathways that exist
Speaker 5: right now that appear to be sort of uncoordinated. And
Speaker 5: this is kind of an annoying process point, but I
Speaker 5: think it's relevant here. So in twenty twenty two, we
Speaker 5: had ARROW get established based from legislation, and part of
Speaker 5: their mandate was to do the declassification process. Then in
Speaker 5: twenty twenty four we had parts of the uap Disclosure
Speaker 5: Act past that required agencies to provide the National Archives
Speaker 5: as a part of the uap Records Collection all of
Speaker 5: their files they had related to this with a deadline
Speaker 5: of September twenty twenty five that was then pushed back year.
Speaker 5: And then the third sort of pathway now we have
Speaker 5: is this new Pursue program being run out of the
Speaker 5: Executive Office of the President. There does not seem to
Speaker 5: be coordination between these three efforts to to some degree.
Speaker 5: You could argue, arrow and pursue. There's maybe a little
Speaker 5: bit there, but this is something that you know, we
Speaker 5: now have multiple different you know, there's a congressional mandate
Speaker 5: from legislation that requires agencies to provide this information. It's
Speaker 5: unclear if the pursue program supersedes that. Are we still
Speaker 5: going to get the documents from the parts of the
Speaker 5: UAPDA that passed by the deadline that's going to come
Speaker 5: later this year. And this was a circumstance that folks
Speaker 5: who are advocates for the UAPDA, we're trying to avoid
Speaker 5: because now there is basically duplicate efforts happening without really
Speaker 5: a clear structure or mandate for what to come out,
Speaker 5: which now gives the whoever is in charge the ability
Speaker 5: to dictate whatever they want to do with it. So
Speaker 5: it's a process point, and I know people's eyes might
Speaker 5: glaze over, but I think this is why some of
Speaker 5: the process matters, because if we're saying, okay, we want
Speaker 5: something differently, this is exactly why we want the U
Speaker 5: A p d A in the first place, to avoid
Speaker 5: this situation that we are now sitting in today.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and clearly there were some forces behind the scenes
Speaker 2: at play to make sure that the UAP Disclosure Act
Speaker 2: did not make it make it into law, you know,
Speaker 2: the full, the full part of it. And I think
Speaker 2: Lester's you know, a really really great point and excuse me,
Speaker 2: and I'm sure that was probably one of the reasons
Speaker 2: that they derailed the thing, was to make sure that
Speaker 2: they didn't have this this accountability. Okay, let's let's jump
Speaker 2: into another video here, ye please, yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Another reason why that's such a great point is
Speaker 3: that just because just to put a fine point on this,
Speaker 3: just because some documents have been released by executive orders
Speaker 3: through this pursue program what have you, doesn't change the law.
Speaker 4: And the law says that ARROW needs to put out
Speaker 4: a report, and it needs to you know, the historical report,
Speaker 4: It needs to put out its annual report. There is
Speaker 4: work to be.
Speaker 3: Done there that is written in the law. It is
Speaker 3: written in.
Speaker 4: Statute, and it doesn't change regardless of what is released
Speaker 4: through this pursuit program. It does not change the law
Speaker 4: and the obligations there. So I continue to hope that
Speaker 4: ARROW will do its job and meet its statutory obligations
Speaker 4: and not just talking.
Speaker 5: About I want to add on top of that, Jordan
Speaker 5: that's correct, and that Arrow obligation is independent from the
Speaker 5: National Archives obligation that's directly to agencies. Right, So they
Speaker 5: are both true, and they are both in the law currently,
Speaker 5: and so it will be interesting to see again how
Speaker 5: this gets deconflicted or unified or not. But as it stands,
Speaker 5: both agencies that are not Arrow and Arrow have these
Speaker 5: obligations that have already been established.
Speaker 2: Well said basically, Errow, do your damn job. Okay, let's
Speaker 2: see here. So we're going to look at some spheres.
Speaker 2: Have note here to look at the second one is
Speaker 2: going to click on that that thing sure seems to
Speaker 2: be moving.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: I mean that is clearly showing one of the five observables. Guys,
Speaker 2: feel free to jump in, you know, it may.
Speaker 4: You know, I keep pointing out that I'm not qualified to,
Speaker 4: you know, make an assessment on these things, but I have.
Speaker 4: I think it's an opportunity to point out that I've
Speaker 4: really enjoyed, you know, Mark von running Comp's work on this,
Speaker 4: like he is someone who brings a legitimate skill set
Speaker 4: to the table in terms of analyzing these videos, being
Speaker 4: able to differentiate, to both make a logical argument based
Speaker 4: on data and to be able to differentiate prosaic things
Speaker 4: from truly anomalous things.
Speaker 3: I'm very grateful for the.
Speaker 4: He's a true warrior for for disclosure and transparency and
Speaker 4: seems to have a tireless efforts in engaging with online
Speaker 4: with the people that he engages with to to make
Speaker 4: his points. So more power to him. So we don't,
Speaker 4: you know, we can turn the volume down on the
Speaker 4: voices who would say that, you know, oh, this is
Speaker 4: a clearly a seagull, right.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, I agreed. Okay, let's look at another one here.
Speaker 2: I think this is fourth one.
Speaker 5: And I think another aspect of this whole process that's
Speaker 5: that's interesting is you know the scientific community, right, which
Speaker 5: is a group that is poised to be very valuable
Speaker 5: in this process.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 5: Part of the challenge is the largest funder of fundamental
Speaker 5: research in the United States is the US government. There
Speaker 5: is currently not grant funding allocated in any substantive way
Speaker 5: for UAP research, and these research institution institutions and universities
Speaker 5: are looking at these data dumps and saying there is
Speaker 5: not yet enough substantive evidence to give us the incentive
Speaker 5: to move in creating and addressing this issue without the
Speaker 5: existence of that grant funding ecosystem, and so there's been
Speaker 5: a little bit of you know, either reticence or hesitation,
Speaker 5: which is changing slowly over time as we've now seen
Speaker 5: more of these come out because of that twofold problem. One,
Speaker 5: the grant funding isn't there, and you know, funding for
Speaker 5: science research has been under threat, you know, in this
Speaker 5: and past administrations, and so a lot of these research
Speaker 5: institutions are fighting over smaller and smaller amounts of funds
Speaker 5: that are being allocated to other areas, and the evidentiary
Speaker 5: basis that currently exists is not sufficient for them to
Speaker 5: do it without that monetary incentive. And so this is
Speaker 5: kind of the rock and the hard place that I
Speaker 5: think a lot of scientists and researchers are stuck in.
Speaker 5: And then because of that, they don't necessarily spend the
Speaker 5: time looking at some of the documents we've talked about
Speaker 5: because they just feel like, look, I have limited budget
Speaker 5: and limited time, and I have to spend it where
Speaker 5: it's most useful. But I think one of the aspects
Speaker 5: of this is going to be raising that evidentiary bar
Speaker 5: that then creates the incentive for the science community to
Speaker 5: actually engage with this and then once that's there, also
Speaker 5: providing the grant funding accordingly, so we can expand the
Speaker 5: scope of the groups of people that are doing this
Speaker 5: beyond just the sort of military industrial complex architecture. And
Speaker 5: this is totally independent of the fact that there's a
Speaker 5: deep side of this issue within the defense contractor space,
Speaker 5: the federally funded research center space that is sort of
Speaker 5: kind of a black box that's going to be difficult
Speaker 5: to crack open. And so there are a lot of
Speaker 5: dynamics here which are now changing because of this environment
Speaker 5: that's being driven by more and more of these videos
Speaker 5: and tranches being released.
Speaker 1: Okay, I want to.
Speaker 2: I want to because I know, Jordan, your times limited here.
Speaker 2: Let's just quick look at look at this video. And
Speaker 2: you know, so this yet another one that is you know,
Speaker 2: pretty pretty bizarre. Looks like some kind of spherical object.
Speaker 2: And I don't know if the kind of of sort
Speaker 2: of star flaring or something is a sensor artifact or
Speaker 2: but yeah, this one's uh, yeah, it's pretty it's pretty crazy.
Speaker 4: Even the description on that one, I believe, uh says
Speaker 4: like pulsing or pulsating light and so clearly I don't
Speaker 4: think it's just a sensor artifact. I think that was
Speaker 4: You're right, you know, demonstrated phenomenology from from this thing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, aerow assesses whose uploader defined title is spherical u
Speaker 2: AP pulsing over water is likely derived from infrared sensor
Speaker 2: but US military, I mean, how would they not know
Speaker 2: where this is from? I mean that seems pretty pretty silly,
Speaker 2: silly to me. I want to look at another one,
Speaker 2: and then then after that, I want to get into
Speaker 2: this this document that you you, Jordan, you would you
Speaker 2: would pointed out. So this one, I think this, this
Speaker 2: may have been one that was kind of difficult. Yeah,
Speaker 2: you can kind of see if I can stop it
Speaker 2: in time. Yeah, so you can kind of see just
Speaker 2: to the right of that car, you know, something flying by.
Speaker 2: I mean it's seeing if there was any more to it.
Speaker 2: I think they just slowed it down.
Speaker 1: There you go.
Speaker 2: Now now you can see the slow motion version of
Speaker 2: whatever this thing is that appears to be.
Speaker 1: Cylinder shape. Yeah. So let's let's.
Speaker 2: Jump into this because this was a really extensive PDF.
Speaker 2: And uh and this is something that you really thought
Speaker 2: was was definitely worth taking taking time to look at.
Speaker 2: So first, first off, Jordan, what is what is you
Speaker 2: know what is this document? So this is from Sandia Labs.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: So this appears to be a bunch of letters, memos, reports,
Speaker 4: and database related to you know, Sandy A Base, now
Speaker 4: Sandia Labs. And yeah, there's the reference to Sandia Base
Speaker 4: there classified documents. If you scroll through, there's a little
Speaker 4: sort of rectangular declassification box with a date in it
Speaker 4: that says, I believe May thirteen or something, twenty twenty six.
Speaker 4: What I thought was, there's a lot of juicy stuff
Speaker 4: in this document. This what you're on right now. I
Speaker 4: think it's especially interesting. A few paragraphs here or is it?
Speaker 3: Is it this one? I thought it was pages like nineteen.
Speaker 1: And oh yeah, let me get let me get to
Speaker 1: that one like.
Speaker 3: That of the of the pdf.
Speaker 1: But there are it's nineteen there, I think the.
Speaker 3: Can you go back to Uh yeah, I think that's it. Yep.
Speaker 4: So summary of aerial Phenomena in the new in the
Speaker 4: New Mexico area. So paragraph two there describes what is
Speaker 4: sort of in this database that's also attached to uh
Speaker 4: you know, there's a few pages after this, uh uh
Speaker 4: this executive summary here.
Speaker 3: Uh so paragraph two is interesting.
Speaker 4: I thought that paragraph four was interesting if you if
Speaker 4: you scroll down to the to the next page, that
Speaker 4: might be worth reading. So here it says on on
Speaker 4: seventeen February forty nine, and again on fourteen October forty nine,
Speaker 4: conferences were held at Los Alamos, New Mexico, to discuss
Speaker 4: quote green fireball phenomena. Representative representatives of the following organizations
Speaker 4: were there. You know, It's included University of New Mexico,
Speaker 4: the FBI, the Atomic Energy Commission, University of California, US
Speaker 4: Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, significant amount of you know,
Speaker 4: military and intelligence organizations, and academic organizations as well. Generally
Speaker 4: concluded that the phenomenon existed and they should be studied
Speaker 4: scientifically until these occurrences have been satisfactorily explained. Further, that
Speaker 4: the continued occurrence of unexplained phenomena this name sure in
Speaker 4: the vicinity of sensitive installations is cause for concern.
Speaker 3: Right. Uh.
Speaker 4: It's as if nothing has changed between then and now
Speaker 4: and we continue to get you know, the the the
Speaker 4: vector of disclosure here really has one direction, and it's
Speaker 4: that there is more things like this that reference real
Speaker 4: data with real cause of concern than there is in
Speaker 4: the opposite direction of saying, Oh, there's there's nothing nothing
Speaker 4: to see here. You know, I would just say, as
Speaker 4: a quick aside, I was on an interview recently for
Speaker 4: a large network. Uh there were there was a representative
Speaker 4: from NASA there, there was a representative from the d
Speaker 4: o D there, and the representative from NASA kept saying, Oh,
Speaker 4: there's nothing to there's nothing new in these releases. I've
Speaker 4: seen all of this before. I've seen these like Apollo Mission,
Speaker 4: you know, transcripts and documents, and you know, he's just
Speaker 4: factually wrong that there were new releases in right in
Speaker 4: like new information in both of these releases, and this
Speaker 4: is you know, a perfect example of something new in
Speaker 4: this one that hasn't been out before.
Speaker 3: And then the represented from the d D.
Speaker 4: Said something to the effect of, you know, I'm not
Speaker 4: sure who is studying this, but you know, there really
Speaker 4: should be.
Speaker 3: Someone studying it.
Speaker 4: And I'm sitting there sort of like with my mind blown,
Speaker 4: being like the d d's own rep that they sent
Speaker 4: out to talk to a.
Speaker 3: News network.
Speaker 4: Has no idea that like, there was legislation that created
Speaker 4: an office at the Pentagon called Arrow to actually study
Speaker 4: these things that's solely dedicated.
Speaker 3: To presumably trying to.
Speaker 4: Figure out what the heck is going on with with
Speaker 4: UAP that is their only job, and just the it
Speaker 4: just was bordering on like willful ignorance that the representatives
Speaker 4: had no idea, supposedly about about these things, and we're
Speaker 4: communicating that in the media. And I had to interject
Speaker 4: and just say, you know, I'm kind of surprised to
Speaker 4: hear you say that, but let me tell you about
Speaker 4: this office called ERRO.
Speaker 2: And how did he react over years and how did
Speaker 2: he react when you corrected him on air?
Speaker 4: You know, I mean I was I was professional about it,
Speaker 4: but there there it wasn't a format where you know,
Speaker 4: he sort of responded. It was was allowed to respond
Speaker 4: to that directly. It was sort of at the end
Speaker 4: of the segment, you know. But I try to do
Speaker 4: it in a professional way. I didn't want to make
Speaker 4: anybody look bad. But it's mostly the most important thing
Speaker 4: is for the audience to be educated that these things exist,
Speaker 4: and they exist because senior lawmakers in this country know
Speaker 4: that there's a reality to this phenomenon, and it enacted
Speaker 4: legislation to try and get to the bottom of it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I want to point out here, if there's
Speaker 2: nothing to see here in nineteen fifty Look at all
Speaker 2: of the people that were This was distributed to US
Speaker 2: Air Force OSI Material, Air Force Material Command, Special Weapons Command,
Speaker 2: Armed Services, Special Weapons Project, San Dia, Headquarters for the
Speaker 2: Army Holman Air Force Base, I mean FBI, i'l passo
Speaker 2: FBI Albuquerque Air Force Scientific Advisory Board. And it just
Speaker 2: goes on and on and then you know, and again
Speaker 2: this is one hundred and sixteen pages.
Speaker 1: Yeah, is crazy.
Speaker 4: See in these things that you're scrolling through right now,
Speaker 4: Matt is you see this is the database?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 4: So this is the nineteen fifties equivalent of a database
Speaker 4: on a piece of paper.
Speaker 3: I would love.
Speaker 4: To, you know, challenge your viewers. There's so many amazing
Speaker 4: like tech tools and AI tools out there right now.
Speaker 4: You know, who is going to download and index, organize,
Speaker 4: and synthesize all of.
Speaker 3: The data that is in this database?
Speaker 4: It has that data been released previously in any way
Speaker 4: through Project Grudge, through Project Bluebook that I'm not sure,
Speaker 4: but I certainly would love to know the answer to that.
Speaker 4: And I would also love for there to be some
Speaker 4: integration and synthesis of this data.
Speaker 3: What can we learn from this?
Speaker 4: Is there stuff here that's that we could use to
Speaker 4: corroborate other incidents that have happened. Is there information here
Speaker 4: that we could use to FOYA for you know, just
Speaker 4: incremental interesting FOYA submissions that under no circumstance should be
Speaker 4: the obviously twenty five years you know, older than twenty
Speaker 4: five years. I mean, geez, they're whatever, seventy years old.
Speaker 4: There should not be any reason to withhold other information
Speaker 4: about these sightings for a FOYER release. So anyway, I
Speaker 4: think that this could be a to the extent that
Speaker 4: there's you know, new information in this database in particular,
Speaker 4: certainly fertile ground for more discovery.
Speaker 2: Yeah, just kind of going through here, and I'm looking
Speaker 2: at a few things, looking at the shape ping pong ball,
Speaker 2: flat spheriotic oval round, ping pong ball, flat sphere oval.
Speaker 2: There's one that's really interesting here that I came across,
Speaker 2: flying wing, flying wing And if you you know, this
Speaker 2: is on March twenty second, case number two O FORARD
Speaker 2: eleven hundred Kirtland Air Force based New Mexico, northwest northwest
Speaker 2: changing to north so it's changing direction twenty five thousand
Speaker 2: to thirty thousand feet AGL. This thing is tanned to Brown.
Speaker 2: It's a flying wing. A flying wing about size of
Speaker 2: golf ball held at arm's length, so that is pretty
Speaker 2: pretty big. I mean, you know, it's you know again,
Speaker 2: one round like ball from Roman candle roughly circular, cylindrical,
Speaker 2: the cylindrical one may first at fifteen hundred I was
Speaker 2: silver lucid metallic object. I mean, this is I mean,
Speaker 2: this is a gold mine. And Jordan, thank you for
Speaker 2: pointing this out. I had not looked into really just
Speaker 2: frankly didn't have time today trying to get ready for
Speaker 2: the show.
Speaker 1: But I mean, this is just a gold mine. I mean,
Speaker 1: what is this here?
Speaker 5: Let's see And this goes back to what we talked
Speaker 5: about earlier, Matt, which is the analysis and the context
Speaker 5: surrounding the video or the photo, which provides a much
Speaker 5: richer picture, especially for folks who are in the scientific
Speaker 5: or research community, to kind of get their arms around this.
Speaker 5: And these historical documents are examples of technical drawings and
Speaker 5: analysis and kind of the internal workings and process that
Speaker 5: was happening at the time. And I think a couple
Speaker 5: of pages back you saw there's still a large redacted
Speaker 5: block right at the top of one of the documents
Speaker 5: which is that an image, right? And what is that
Speaker 5: image showing that it's still redacted in the context of
Speaker 5: these documents, and it is. It's really really interesting. I
Speaker 5: think it's a little bit further up from where you
Speaker 5: are currently it was before this chart. And again it's
Speaker 5: just you know, these things are so old right here, right,
Speaker 5: I'm assuming that this block here is it's either capturing
Speaker 5: the orb in some kind of IR or that's just
Speaker 5: an artifact from the scanning and it's still redacted. But
Speaker 5: this is there's a lot I think to just lean
Speaker 5: here to understand that can better arm us as we
Speaker 5: continue to push for transparency on this issue. And I
Speaker 5: think one just small detail kind of push out there
Speaker 5: is I am and this is something I think I
Speaker 5: saw someone mentioned in the chat. I am very surprised.
Speaker 5: Maybe they've tried, and he's declined that no one has
Speaker 5: had doctor John Kazlowski, who is the current director of
Speaker 5: the All Dominated Anomaly Resolution Office, come and provide an explanation, context, perspective,
Speaker 5: comment or anything as it relates to what is his
Speaker 5: mandate and his purview. Now getting a billion views plus globally,
Speaker 5: I mean, there is literally a person that media organizations
Speaker 5: can go to that is leading up this issue and
Speaker 5: putting the feet to the fire. I think on the
Speaker 5: questions that people are asking, he's actually someone in a
Speaker 5: position to be able to either expand on what's already
Speaker 5: public or give actual information that many people outside of
Speaker 5: the government can't provide as it relates to the specific issue.
Speaker 2: I want to point something out here that I just
Speaker 2: found report trip to Los Alamos, New Mexico, sixteen, nineteen
Speaker 2: forty nine by Richard Commander Richard I can't pronounce it,
Speaker 2: research and developed subject. On sixteenth February, conference was held at
Speaker 2: Los Alamos to consider the so called green fireball phenomena,
Speaker 2: which commenced about fifth of December nineteen forty eight. The
Speaker 2: following were present. Holloway, who I think was I've seen
Speaker 2: that name before, but right here Edward Teller, the father
Speaker 2: of the hydrogen bomb, is at this meeting.
Speaker 1: So the guy that developed our.
Speaker 2: Thermonuclear device, invented the thermonuclear warhead is in this meeting.
Speaker 2: I think Hoyt was a somebody in the Air Force,
Speaker 2: but I mean the father of the new.
Speaker 4: Atomic bombyli people on social media that also quickly saw
Speaker 4: that reference as well, Matt, Yeah, I think you're you're
Speaker 4: you're honing.
Speaker 3: In on the on the right things. Uh and uh,
Speaker 3: you know there are.
Speaker 4: Edward Teller seems to be his name seems to pop
Speaker 4: up frequently in this, and you know he had a
Speaker 4: relationship with other people involved in the UAP topic who
Speaker 4: are still alive.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean this, I'm going to go when I
Speaker 2: get home tonight, I'm going to look at all of this.
Speaker 2: I mean, I can't see this one. I can flip around.
Speaker 2: You know, these are different. So I'm guessing this is
Speaker 2: in relation to the base or something moving oblong fire body,
Speaker 2: fixed flash, moving fireball, moving oblong firebody.
Speaker 4: I mean, if you assume out of that when it's
Speaker 4: actually kind of a pretty picture, it's saying, you know,
Speaker 4: here's the angle at which I first saw the thing,
Speaker 4: here's what it looked like, and here's how it like
Speaker 4: changed in color and morphology as it went across the
Speaker 4: sky and at different angles.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: Okay, Yeah, this is an absolute treasure trope. So let's
Speaker 2: get to some audience questions here. I know, Jordan, you've
Speaker 2: got little ones to take care of. So this is
Speaker 2: from Rica Bowen a question, how likely is it that
Speaker 2: agencies are purposely faking UAP videos in mixing it in
Speaker 2: with genuine unexplainable UAP video UAP videos.
Speaker 1: Just to muddy the waters. Leicester, what do you think.
Speaker 5: I don't know that there's necessarily even a need to
Speaker 5: generate a fake per se. There's likely the case that
Speaker 5: there's mundane ones that any number of reasons, there's an
Speaker 5: active disinformation to put it out there to muddy the waters.
Speaker 5: It's they have other responsibilities and they don't really care
Speaker 5: about this issue, so they just pick something from the
Speaker 5: pile and send it out to meet the mandate. So
Speaker 5: I think there's a number of options here. Clearly there's
Speaker 5: several things within both tranches that, with very straightforward analysis,
Speaker 5: are again likely not having any of the five observables
Speaker 5: or the six observables that are really what people are
Speaker 5: looking for in the public, which is leading to anomalist technology.
Speaker 5: I think there's a variety of things that could be possible,
Speaker 5: but I don't think they need to generate fake data
Speaker 5: and information. I think there's enough mundane stuff they can
Speaker 5: just throw in the pile and say I did my job.
Speaker 5: Let's move on to what they perceive to be quote
Speaker 5: more serious matters as an example, Jordan, your thoughts.
Speaker 4: I think that is almost a perfect answer, Lester. I
Speaker 4: agree with you. You don't need to create fake things.
Speaker 4: There's enough. There's enough gray area. And that's the problem
Speaker 4: with the lack of context, right, and the lack of analysis,
Speaker 4: is that there's enough there too. If you want to
Speaker 4: try and steer the conversation in one way, you can.
Speaker 3: It's like the.
Speaker 4: Argument of you know, if you take the hyperbolic example there,
Speaker 4: it's like, oh, we've got you know, we've got ten
Speaker 4: thousand we've got ten thousand videos and you know whatever,
Speaker 4: all of them but one are prosaic. And then you're like, okay,
Speaker 4: well I want to see the one that's not prosaic.
Speaker 4: And they're like, yeah, well, don't worry about that one
Speaker 4: so much, you know, you know, but ninety nine point
Speaker 4: nine nine percent of these things aren't, you know, they're
Speaker 4: prosaic and not worthy of our attention.
Speaker 3: It's like, yeah, you only need you only need one.
Speaker 4: To be to be interesting dispositive, right, just from a
Speaker 4: first principles thinking perspective, you know, this isn't a you know,
Speaker 4: we need seventy percent of the things to be.
Speaker 3: You know, earth shattering.
Speaker 4: You know, there's some cognitive biases happening here respect to
Speaker 4: how this is managed. So yeah, that's my that's my perspective.
Speaker 4: But it's just adding on to I think what is
Speaker 4: an excellent point from Leicester?
Speaker 1: Absolutely okay, from Sea Kenzo.
Speaker 2: Should we be concerned that Aaron Lucas has replaced Tulsi?
Speaker 1: Either of you have any perspective on that. I don't.
Speaker 5: I don't have any real background. I think there's been
Speaker 5: a lot of chatter in both directions, so it's happened.
Speaker 5: There's a lot that's happened over the course of the day.
Speaker 5: I think more information will come out, and obviously the
Speaker 5: proof's going to be in the pudding. I've just I
Speaker 5: don't have any personal reference point to provide any value
Speaker 5: to that question.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I've heard a lot of negative things on social media,
Speaker 4: but in private, I've heard a lot of positive things
Speaker 4: about what this person's intentions could be.
Speaker 3: I don't know this person. I don't have a relationship
Speaker 3: with them.
Speaker 4: It is somewhat painful that Tolzi resigned because she seemed
Speaker 4: to be a true advocate for this. So I think
Speaker 4: I'm cautiously optimistic, But of course you know the I
Speaker 4: think the proof is going to be in the pudding
Speaker 4: for what we see coming out of Odie and I
Speaker 4: from from here out.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: One thing I was told is that Aaron watches this
Speaker 2: show so and he does pay attention to what we
Speaker 2: say as well.
Speaker 1: As deliberation time. So I, you know, I'm going to
Speaker 1: give this guy the benefit of the doubt. I'd heard
Speaker 1: been told.
Speaker 2: Some negative things, but I'm going to let that, let
Speaker 2: that go and hope that maybe that was some bad information.
Speaker 2: So Aaron, you know, here's here is your opportunity to
Speaker 2: right this wrong, bring transparency, and get control of this
Speaker 2: quote unquote deep state sort of effort that's been going
Speaker 2: on for you know, over eighty years.
Speaker 1: So Aaron, it's time to step up to the plate. Uh.
Speaker 2: Tulsi sorry to see you go, but Aaron, you're in
Speaker 2: the driver's seat. Do your job, okay? Uh u ap leo, Matt.
Speaker 2: If the pursue site is hitting one billion views, will
Speaker 2: this pressure Congress to audit the Department of Energy files
Speaker 2: that were notably missing from the second batch? I certainly hope.
Speaker 2: So what I can tell you is that stuff was
Speaker 2: specifically squirreled away in the Department of Energy because the
Speaker 2: classification mechanisms are so opaque and buried that that was
Speaker 2: the reason that a lot of stuff is stuffed into DOE,
Speaker 2: because Congress doesn't have access to it. And this kind
Speaker 2: of archaic classification infrastructure that they that they picked up
Speaker 2: from the Manhattan Project serves a very specific purpose to
Speaker 2: keep this stuff buried deep.
Speaker 1: So I personally don't think that anything.
Speaker 2: Is going to come out of DOE. It was put
Speaker 2: there by design.
Speaker 5: I'm curious, briefly. I will just know briefly, Matt. There
Speaker 5: are three documents from Release two that are from the DOE.
Speaker 5: Two of them are like letters and mundane things that
Speaker 5: are not quite related to the scope of work that
Speaker 5: the Department of Energy is really exposed to. And then
Speaker 5: there was the Enhanced pan tax Imagery, which again had
Speaker 5: something very nondescript, and again given the mandate of something
Speaker 5: like the Department of Energy, alongside the National or Connaissance
Speaker 5: Office or Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, which
Speaker 5: have the best instruments and the best tools, seem to
Speaker 5: be the least represented in the releases so far. And
Speaker 5: so when people say, you know, the good stuff, the
Speaker 5: places with the good stuff. Are suspiciously quiet as it
Speaker 5: relates to what's come out so far.
Speaker 2: Excellent, excellent point, and I'll have to take a look
Speaker 2: at that, okay, curious George seven five one five. Thank
Speaker 2: you to our guests. I found them to be very
Speaker 2: informed and intelligent. And uh, you know, folks, go to
Speaker 2: U what is it a disclosurefoundation dot org.
Speaker 1: What is the website?
Speaker 5: Just disclosure dot org. Yeah, go ahead, yeah, just literally
Speaker 5: disclosure dot org. We have a bunch of our work
Speaker 5: up there. You can catch up to everything we're doing.
Speaker 5: I mean, there's there's really work to do to continue
Speaker 5: to you know, bridge the gap between what the public
Speaker 5: understanding of where we are is and you know, the
Speaker 5: way the media and the current media channels kind of
Speaker 5: characterize this issue and this is weird. You know, we
Speaker 5: have a lot of work that's coming up. One of
Speaker 5: the big things that we're looking forward to is our
Speaker 5: disclosure form on June twenty fifth in the Kennedy Caucus
Speaker 5: Room in the Senate the Russell Stent Office building. I mean,
Speaker 5: this is going to be you know, in terms of
Speaker 5: inside Congress, actually inside Congress, not just in Washington, d C.
Speaker 5: We have senators, we have members of the House. It's
Speaker 5: going to be an all day panel. And what is
Speaker 5: a historic location for you know, historical you know situations
Speaker 5: where we talk about you know, whether it's Watergate, whether
Speaker 5: it's the nine to eleven hearings. You know, there is
Speaker 5: a real gravitas to the location in the history of
Speaker 5: really pushing for clarity around historical issues we've had around
Speaker 5: the subject of transparency and the momentum we're seeing now
Speaker 5: in terms of the amount of media that is now
Speaker 5: digging their heels into this and no longer kind of
Speaker 5: just looking at it and passing it by. You know,
Speaker 5: obviously with these dumps, people have to get the news cycle,
Speaker 5: but in the background, reporters are now being giving a
Speaker 5: little bit more of a leash to really get into
Speaker 5: this issue. So as you see more investigative reporters with
Speaker 5: larger resources and networks start to really go after this
Speaker 5: issue independent of whether what the administration does with the
Speaker 5: Pursue program, the appetite seems to be there, and we've
Speaker 5: just seen this even from the demand from folks within
Speaker 5: the media to come to the forum, to participate and
Speaker 5: to collaborate and really digging into this issue.
Speaker 1: Excellent Jordan anything to add to that.
Speaker 3: We're really excited about this forum, and I think one
Speaker 3: thing that might be addedive there is, you know, what.
Speaker 4: Is the purpose of this what's the purpose of the forum?
Speaker 3: We would like to.
Speaker 4: See in addition to having you know, senior leaders in
Speaker 4: both the House and the Senate be supportive of these
Speaker 4: efforts and be showing up to speak.
Speaker 3: You know, what we are trying to do is.
Speaker 4: This is not an event to try and convince anyone
Speaker 4: really that there's a reality here. The purpose of this
Speaker 4: event is to really take the position of Congress, which
Speaker 4: is to stipulate that there's a reality to this phenomenon,
Speaker 4: and to try and move into problem solving mode, to
Speaker 4: move into problem solving across how do we address this
Speaker 4: from a from the perspective of national security, non proliferation, science, technology, innovation, economics, markets,
Speaker 4: and even religion and philosophy. We're delighted that Professor of
Speaker 4: Religion at Yale, Carlos Air, has committed to come speak
Speaker 4: with us about his work and his perspective on how
Speaker 4: societies have.
Speaker 3: Coped and evolved.
Speaker 4: When they've come into contact with quote the impossible, you know,
Speaker 4: Carlos Air and doctor Jeffrey Kreipe will have a wonderful
Speaker 4: corpus of work on that subject. So just to give
Speaker 4: a flavor of, you know, what we're trying to do
Speaker 4: here and how we're trying to make it a little
Speaker 4: bit different. I'm delighted to say that, you know, this
Speaker 4: event is free and open to the public, and we're
Speaker 4: really glad to be able to welcome folks into this
Speaker 4: event in the Senate.
Speaker 3: So that's it. Thank you so much.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, and I certainly hope I RSVP'd for it. At
Speaker 2: the present moment, I'll be attending. Hopefully that'll be the
Speaker 2: case of if the day job allows. But but yeah,
Speaker 2: you guys are really just doing fantastic work. I'm excited
Speaker 2: for this event and I'm sure others that will be
Speaker 2: that will be coming down the pike. And then also too,
Speaker 2: just continuing Disclosure Foundation, continuing to engage lawmakers on Capitol Hill,
Speaker 2: bringing the lawmakers that have not paid attention to this
Speaker 2: particular national security issue up to speed. I mean, you
Speaker 2: guys are really doing great work, and you know, just
Speaker 2: just super excited and the kind of last thing I'll say.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm no Trump fan.
Speaker 2: I've been very very open about that, but you know,
Speaker 2: you have to give credit where credit is due. He
Speaker 2: has has done what no other president has done, which
Speaker 2: has compelled the release of these videos. But the one
Speaker 2: thing I would say to the president at the end
Speaker 2: of end of that first release, he kind of put
Speaker 2: it out there and said, you guys have fun with it.
Speaker 2: You guys figure it out. But at the end of
Speaker 2: the day, this is the government's job. This is what
Speaker 2: we're paying for for them to figure it out, for
Speaker 2: them to inform the public of what is going on
Speaker 2: in our skies. This isn't, you know, just some you know,
Speaker 2: social media project. This is the government's job to be
Speaker 2: straight with the public and tell them why these things
Speaker 2: are flying in restricted airspace and moreover arrow This is
Speaker 2: their job to be providing this analysis. The historical report
Speaker 2: is two years overdue. Two years overdue. There's no excuse
Speaker 2: for that. Had I not turned in my final report
Speaker 2: for English or whatever, I probably would have never graduated.
Speaker 2: So I certainly hope they'll do that. But anyway, a
Speaker 2: lesser any closing thoughts.
Speaker 5: No, I think you know, we covered a lot here.
Speaker 5: We are certainly in a different place than we were
Speaker 5: a year ago, a year before that, a year before that,
Speaker 5: and so you know, I think it's important in the
Speaker 5: broader context to understand the progress that we've made and
Speaker 5: how much more of the larger not only American public,
Speaker 5: but global public are now leaning into this. I mean,
Speaker 5: you know, the France is having their you know, first
Speaker 5: real serious parliamentary event related to UAP, I believe, in
Speaker 5: the next month, which is at least in part being
Speaker 5: driven and motivated by the moves here in the United States.
Speaker 5: So it continues to be as goes the United States,
Speaker 5: so goes the world on this subject. Japan similarly has
Speaker 5: said they're going to move forward with this. So I
Speaker 5: think the import here it is both we need more
Speaker 5: of the actual information, particularly the ones that show these
Speaker 5: observables and point to if there is that anomalist technology here.
Speaker 5: But this is beginning the process of spreading this even
Speaker 5: beyond our borders, and that in and of itself is
Speaker 5: extremely important and powerful.
Speaker 6: Jordan, last thoughts, I think it makes a world of
Speaker 6: difference when you have presidential will behind this topic.
Speaker 4: You have seen arrow fall into line, you know, have
Speaker 4: Glad handing pictures with members of Congress after this, you know,
Speaker 4: that is quite the That is a shift in tone.
Speaker 4: It's difficult to overestimate the amount of impact that presidential will.
Speaker 3: Can have on pushing this forward.
Speaker 4: I think that there, you know, the the initial release
Speaker 4: may have been a trial balloon to try and you know,
Speaker 4: run the political calculus to try and establish how much
Speaker 4: political capital is in this topic, and the feedback there
Speaker 4: was astounding. The answer is that there's a billion views
Speaker 4: to the site right now. We have a green light
Speaker 4: for more releases. And I think that we've really shown
Speaker 4: through the and the public has shown through its interest,
Speaker 4: the public is begging for the truth. They're just begging
Speaker 4: to be told the truth on multiple topics, including this.
Speaker 4: And finally that you know, there's an administration and a
Speaker 4: and you know, a Congress that is listening to the
Speaker 4: people and realizing that there is significant political capital in
Speaker 4: transparency and in truth telling. And I hope that that continues,
Speaker 4: and all signs indicate that it will.
Speaker 2: Yeah, speaking of truth telling, my message to Susan go directly, goffer.
Speaker 2: However you say your name, we would absolutely welcome doctor
Speaker 2: John Koslowski on the show to talk about the good
Speaker 2: thing Zero is doing. So Yeah, Susan, there's your opportunity.
Speaker 2: You've got my email send them on over.
Speaker 1: Awesome.
Speaker 2: Well, guys, thanks, thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 2: Truly appreciate your time. We threw this thing together at
Speaker 2: the very last minute, and I can tell by the
Speaker 2: comments people are just incredibly impressed with what you guys
Speaker 2: have brought to the show today, and I really do appreciate.
Speaker 3: It so our pleasure. Matt, You're doing wonderful work. So
Speaker 3: thank you, thank you, thank you.
Speaker 1: Awesome.
Speaker 2: Okay, great, so again, Jordan Flowers and Lester Nare from
Speaker 2: a Disclosure Foundation.
Speaker 1: Really appreciate you guys joining us. Okay, great, I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna mute their audio here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And this Sunday we have a very special live
Speaker 2: edition with the author Steve Aspin, who has been studying
Speaker 2: scientifically the abduction phenomenon.
Speaker 1: This is a part of this whole puzzle that I
Speaker 1: think is slowly.
Speaker 2: Beginning to make its way into the as we've had
Speaker 2: lawmakers discuss it. Congressman Tim Bershett, I believe Anna Representative
Speaker 2: Annapoline A Luna, who I'm a very big fan of,
Speaker 2: I think she had touched on it, and and former
Speaker 2: Representative Matt Gates has has brought this particular issue ofup.
Speaker 2: So again This is author Steve Aspen will be on
Speaker 2: this Sunday at one pm. His book is called Out
Speaker 2: of Time. You can get his book at https Colin Forward,
Speaker 2: Forward Slash, out of timebook dot info. This was the
Speaker 2: book you guys may have heard about that Amazon mysteriously
Speaker 2: removed this. This book was highly detailed with watch of
Speaker 2: scientific findings on these implants and other things that that
Speaker 2: are found in these people that claim to have been
Speaker 2: abducted by non human intelligence, and the book was selling
Speaker 2: like crazy and Amazon, for some reason magically.
Speaker 1: Pulled the plug.
Speaker 2: Now, speaking of pulling the plug, there was a article
Speaker 2: that I co wrote with Josh Boswell and Christopher.
Speaker 1: Sharp that was in The Daily Mail.
Speaker 2: It was a bombshell article where we revealed a classified
Speaker 2: office within the CIA called the Office of Global Access.
Speaker 2: It operates under the the what's called the CIA Directorate
Speaker 2: of Science and Technology. This office, we revealed in this
Speaker 2: exclusive reporting on the Daily Mail, was essentially the kind
Speaker 2: of coordinator of.
Speaker 1: Crashed UFOs, crashed UAP.
Speaker 2: This was a story that we spent a couple of
Speaker 2: months researching.
Speaker 1: We had absolutely some of the.
Speaker 2: Highest level sources that you could possibly imagine who told
Speaker 2: us on background exactly how while the CIA Office of
Speaker 2: Global Access ran as one of the as one of
Speaker 2: their missions global Recovery of crashed UAP crashed UFOs, they
Speaker 2: would recover these objects. They would they would generate the
Speaker 2: missions to they would send a team out to recover
Speaker 2: these things, bring them back to the United States where
Speaker 2: they would either go to the f fr DR f
Speaker 2: f r d c's a federally funded research development centers,
Speaker 2: or they would go to the private contractors.
Speaker 1: Anyway, we were warned when this article.
Speaker 2: Came out would come out that it would cause a
Speaker 2: panic in the CIA and our sources following this article
Speaker 2: that the Daily Mail put out around three years ago
Speaker 2: that we were told that it caused a literal firestorm
Speaker 2: at Langley, a literal firestorm at CIA, and they would
Speaker 2: want to know how the hell we found this out.
Speaker 2: This article went live at six am Pacific. At eleven am,
Speaker 2: I'm in Las Vegas on a television project at the
Speaker 2: top floor the Waldorf Astoria bar, and someone either from
Speaker 2: CIA or most likely from one of the defense contractors
Speaker 2: came and harassed me while I was sitting there.
Speaker 1: I don't drink alcohol.
Speaker 2: I'm sitting there drinking a soda water at the top
Speaker 2: floor bar the Waldorf Astoria.
Speaker 1: Anyway, here's the deal.
Speaker 2: The Daily Mail appears to have purposely removed this article.
Speaker 2: Let me say it again, The Daily Mail appears to
Speaker 2: have purposely removed this article about the CIA Office of
Speaker 2: Global Access.
Speaker 1: The error a this server error.
Speaker 2: Specifically is reserved for removal of content off of a
Speaker 2: website that is removed by a human. Now, we spoke
Speaker 2: Josh Boswell, who is the chief investigator, a chief chief
Speaker 2: investigative correspondent for the Daily Mail three months ago. Both
Speaker 2: Chris Sharp and I reached out to him and said, hey,
Speaker 2: just so you know, sometime in the past two months,
Speaker 2: three months ago, somewhere in that window the office that
Speaker 2: the article that we all wrote for the Daily Mail
Speaker 2: had been removed.
Speaker 1: Josh Boswell looked into it.
Speaker 2: He reached out to the editor was told that it
Speaker 2: was a over zealous SEO search engine optimization robot that
Speaker 2: had taken this thing down and had been promised by
Speaker 2: the editor of the Daily Mail that the article would
Speaker 2: be reinstated. So here we are, three months later, and
Speaker 2: the most damning article about the CIA mysteriously was removed
Speaker 2: by a human at the Daily Mail we actually we
Speaker 2: dug into this further, and that particular I don't have
Speaker 2: it in front of me, but that particular HTTP error
Speaker 2: that comes up when when you go and you click
Speaker 2: on the dead link for this article in the Daily Mail,
Speaker 2: we did some research and what we were told was that,
Speaker 2: as I mentioned that, that error indicates that a human
Speaker 2: removed that article from the server. But secondarily, the only
Speaker 2: time that that happens is for two reasons. One due
Speaker 2: to a court case involving defamation. And second, and this
Speaker 2: is the kicker, the second reason that that airpup pops
Speaker 2: up is the article was removed for national security reasons
Speaker 2: or at the request of a government. So the Daily Mail,
Speaker 2: which had this highly I mean millions of views, this
Speaker 2: article that we spent months on revealing the CIA office
Speaker 2: a Global access and their dirty tricks, their dirty deep
Speaker 2: state tricks, this was removed by the Daily Mail three
Speaker 2: years later. Three years later, so you have to ask yourself,
Speaker 2: and maybe this is an opportunity for everyone watching this
Speaker 2: show right now to email the editor of the Daily
Speaker 2: Mail and say what the hell.
Speaker 1: Is going on?
Speaker 2: I suspect Josh Boswell has done everything that he's can
Speaker 2: that he has been able to do. I suspect they're
Speaker 2: probably lying to Josh Boswell about this. You know, he's
Speaker 2: got a job he's got to worry about. He doesn't
Speaker 2: want to get get fired over there. So it's up
Speaker 2: to all of you watching right now to email the
Speaker 2: Daily Mail and ask them why. Right now, when the
Speaker 2: UAP conversation is being is at its sort of height
Speaker 2: with President Trump releasing these videos, the second batch of
Speaker 2: videos and documents, when it's all over the news, it's
Speaker 2: all over the mainstream media. This is the time if
Speaker 2: you are a print publication, to have every bit of
Speaker 2: your content that you have related to UAP, you have
Speaker 2: to ask yourself why the Daily Mail removed it? Of
Speaker 2: all times, of all times, to remove your biggest story
Speaker 2: about how the government recovers these damn things, the Daily
Speaker 2: Mail decides to remove it and again, so we let
Speaker 2: Josh know about this three months ago, and we couldn't
Speaker 2: quite tell from the wayback machine when it was removed.
Speaker 2: It was removed somewhere in about a two month period, So.
Speaker 1: What five months ago?
Speaker 2: As far back as five months ago, the Daily Mail
Speaker 2: removed from their servers, from their archives, this article where
Speaker 2: we revealed the classified operations of the CIA Director of
Speaker 2: Science and Technology with their Office of Global Access this
Speaker 2: huge program to go and recover crashed UFOs not only
Speaker 2: in friendly territory, but in denied territory. So, in other words,
Speaker 2: we have the ability to go into China, Russia, wherever
Speaker 2: and pick these things up at a whim. We also
Speaker 2: revealed in this article that the United States government, the
Speaker 2: National Geospatial Agency, has sensor systems, constant staring, sensor systems,
Speaker 2: sensor platforms, ISR capability that detects these things, whether they
Speaker 2: are cloaked or not, detects where they go down and
Speaker 2: where they crash. And then they message up to the
Speaker 2: Office of Global Access, Hey, you need to spin up
Speaker 2: this recovery mission. You need to generate this mission to
Speaker 2: go recover this thing out of China, Russia, North Korea,
Speaker 2: whatever in the continental United States are within our five
Speaker 2: ICE partner.
Speaker 1: They have this capability.
Speaker 2: The CIA has this capability to go and recover these vehicles.
Speaker 2: And Members of Congress and your staffers, you need to
Speaker 2: ask about what the Office of Global Access is up to,
Speaker 2: What dirty little things, what naughty little things? The CIA,
Speaker 2: it's probably CIA messaging right now.
Speaker 1: The CIA is up.
Speaker 2: To and what they're hiding from all of you in Congress,
Speaker 2: and what they're hiding from President Trump.
Speaker 1: You need to ask those questions.
Speaker 2: And I hope lawmakers will also reach out to the
Speaker 2: Daily Mail editor.
Speaker 1: And ask them who told them to remove.
Speaker 2: The CIA article, because I almost guarant dantee it it
Speaker 2: was the CIA. You have to wonder what kind of
Speaker 2: democracy we live in when the Central Intelligence Agency, in
Speaker 2: all likelihood made a call to the Daily Mail magically
Speaker 2: months before Trump starts to release this stuff magically, this
Speaker 2: article disappears that talks about the one thing the CIA
Speaker 2: does not want to talk about, and that's the fact
Speaker 2: that they have, for since its inception, been recovering vehicles
Speaker 2: of non human origin from our neighbors, either.
Speaker 1: Out there or down below or whatever.
Speaker 2: But this wasn't a search engine optimization AI engine that
Speaker 2: just magically went in and deleted this article from the
Speaker 2: Daily Mail.
Speaker 1: A human did it. A human did it.
Speaker 2: So again, ask yourself, why would the Daily Mail remove.
Speaker 1: One of their highest rated articles on this topic?
Speaker 2: Why would they do that when this is all over
Speaker 2: the news right now and I can virtually guarant dann
Speaker 2: tee you it was the CIA told the Daily Mail
Speaker 2: to take it down because they probably knew that Trump
Speaker 2: was going to start releasing this stuff, and all they
Speaker 2: want people to focus on are videos. They don't want
Speaker 2: the American public asking, hey, what is the CIA doing
Speaker 2: to recover these crashed UAP and reverse engineering them?
Speaker 1: The CIA doesn't want that.
Speaker 2: And I guarantee you the harassment that I received as
Speaker 2: an American journalist who does not hold a security clearance,
Speaker 2: the harassment I received at the Waldorf Astoria six hours
Speaker 2: after this.
Speaker 1: Article went live in the Daily Mail, it told you
Speaker 1: two things. Told me two things.
Speaker 2: One, the CIA or the NSA had been monitoring our
Speaker 2: signal conversations.
Speaker 1: We were very locked down.
Speaker 2: And two, it told me that the CIA had been
Speaker 2: monitoring my movements, because how the hell did they know
Speaker 2: that hours later I would be flying to Vegas. How
Speaker 2: in the hell did they know our hours after this
Speaker 2: article came came out, that I would be staying at
Speaker 2: the Waldorf Astoria on the Strip.
Speaker 1: How would how did the CIA know that I was
Speaker 1: up at the.
Speaker 2: Twenty eighth floor, top floor bar of the Waldorf Astoria.
Speaker 2: So what it tells you is the CIA was illegally
Speaker 2: monitoring the movements of an American journalist. It tells you
Speaker 2: that the CIA was monitoring the communications of an American
Speaker 2: journalist and representative Anna Polina, Timburshett, Eric Berlison. I implore
Speaker 2: you to look into that because I guarantee you if
Speaker 2: the CIA or NSA is monitoring my communications, I guarandamn
Speaker 2: to you, Congresswoman Luna, Burshett and Congressman Berlison, they're monitoring
Speaker 2: your stuff too. I guarantee you the CIA is monitoring
Speaker 2: the communications of members of Congress, and that I can't
Speaker 2: even tell you how much that makes my blood boil.
Speaker 2: So Congresswoman Luna, Congressman Burshett, Congressman Burlison, and the other
Speaker 2: folks on the UAP Task Force, you can take this
Speaker 2: to the bank. The CIA is monitoring your communications. They
Speaker 2: are looking at your emails, they are listening to your calls.
Speaker 2: And General Mike Flynn, who I politically disagree with on
Speaker 2: most things, set it best today on X The CIA
Speaker 2: needs to be splintered into a thousand pieces. In its
Speaker 2: current form, the CIA needs to be dismantled period. The
Speaker 2: fact that the CIA is illegally monitoring the communications and
Speaker 2: movement of an American journalist, the fact that the CIA
Speaker 2: was spying on former OD and I director Tulci Gabbard
Speaker 2: and their dig group. There is nothing more on American
Speaker 2: than that. And when President John F. Kennedy said, just
Speaker 2: days before he was assassinated by the CIA that the
Speaker 2: CIA needed to be splintered into a thousand pieces, President.
Speaker 1: Kennedy was right. He was right.
Speaker 2: General Mike Flynn is right, And folks in Congress, it
Speaker 2: is damn time to hold the CIA accountable. Senators, United
Speaker 2: States Senators, who I guarant Dan tee you the CIA
Speaker 2: as monitor monitoring your emails, your telephone calls. You know
Speaker 2: what time it is. It's time for a Church style committee.
Speaker 2: Senator Frank Church held in the early nineteen seventies a
Speaker 2: series of Senate hearings where they revealed to the American
Speaker 2: public all of the highly highly illegal stuff that the
Speaker 2: Central Intelligence Agency.
Speaker 1: Had been up to in the nineteen fifties.
Speaker 2: And one little tidbit that did not make it out
Speaker 2: into the hearing was the fact that the CIA had
Speaker 2: been paying off American journalists, American newsroom editors, American network
Speaker 2: network heads.
Speaker 1: The CIA had been paying them cash to.
Speaker 2: Spread disinformation that was supposed to be out in the
Speaker 2: Senate hearing, and you know who quashed that. CIA Director
Speaker 2: George Herbert walker Bush. He cut a backroom deal with
Speaker 2: a Senator Church to bury that little thing. The one
Speaker 2: thing they did not want out was that the CIA
Speaker 2: had been paying off and basically controlling American journalists to
Speaker 2: spread anti Russian propaganda. I mean, yes, it was anti Russian,
Speaker 2: but nonetheless it was propaganda.
Speaker 1: This is what the CIA does now.
Speaker 2: The other thing I will say to Congresswoman Annapoline a Luna,
Speaker 2: Congressman Timbershett, and Congressman Eric Berlison is that this is
Speaker 2: still going on. The CIA and the Pentagon are using
Speaker 2: a legal loophole called the Smith Munt Modernization Act. This
Speaker 2: was signed into law, unfortunately by President Obama. And basically,
Speaker 2: this law signed into law, or this legislation signed into
Speaker 2: law by President Obama, gave the deep state the green
Speaker 2: light to sow disinformation, to target the American public with disinformation,
Speaker 2: not only about UAP, about whatever they.
Speaker 1: Want that my friends in Congress, that is.
Speaker 2: The legal mechanism and again the legal mechanism the Pentagon
Speaker 2: and the CIA are using to target the American public
Speaker 2: with disinformation.
Speaker 1: It is a legal loophole it is.
Speaker 2: And I don't remember the executive order that prohibits the
Speaker 2: CIA from targeting American citizens with propaganda, but that is
Speaker 2: what the Smith Modernism Smith Mont Modernization Act does. That
Speaker 2: is the whole that President Obama signed into law that
Speaker 2: lets the Deep State run amok and target all of us,
Speaker 2: every American, every member of Congress with disinformation. It is
Speaker 2: the mechanism that they can have the journal and their
Speaker 2: little agreement, CIA's agreement with a Wall Street Journal to
Speaker 2: spread disinformation.
Speaker 1: About the UAP issue. And I'm talking about.
Speaker 2: Wall Street Journal reporters Joel Scheckman and a ruin of
Speaker 2: this Janatha.
Speaker 1: That is how they are able to do this stuff.
Speaker 2: And folks in Congress and the staffers that watch this show,
Speaker 2: it is your duty in protecting the Constitution of the
Speaker 2: United States from all enemies foreign and domestic, to shut
Speaker 2: this CIA stuff down, to shut down the disinformation, to
Speaker 2: shut down the CIA targeting of whistleblowers, to shut down
Speaker 2: what Northrop Grumman has been doing and targeting whistleblowers. And
Speaker 2: believe me, it is stuff that would land people in
Speaker 2: federal prison for life. And this entire program, which the
Speaker 2: CIA is one of the primary stakeholders is having Northrop
Speaker 2: Grumman and security contractors go and do some really highly
Speaker 2: illegal things that violate federal law that would land anybody
Speaker 2: committing them in federal prison for life. So think about
Speaker 2: what would land somebody in federal prison for life. And
Speaker 2: those are the things that a couple people in Northrop
Speaker 2: Grumman are directing to particular security contractors to execute. When
Speaker 2: you are executing whistleblowers, when you are targeting whistleblowers with
Speaker 2: directed energy weapons. Folks in Congress, it is incumbent on
Speaker 2: you to protect this nation against domestic enemies because they
Speaker 2: are in our midst. This has been going on for
Speaker 2: a very long time, and only all of you in
Speaker 2: Congress that have the power to shut this shit down.
Speaker 2: Because at the end of the day, when you have
Speaker 2: the CIA, the Central Intelligence Agency, directing directing defense contractors
Speaker 2: and security contractors such as wacken Hut and Pinkerton and
Speaker 2: the companies that they have involved, that they have evolved
Speaker 2: to which by the way, those companies got moved into
Speaker 2: shell corporations overseas to hide the athelonies that they are committing.
Speaker 1: It is up to all of you in Congress.
Speaker 2: To do the right thing, do the right thing for
Speaker 2: the people that elected you, that put you in that chair.
Speaker 2: Because guess what, there aren't just foreign enemies. There are
Speaker 2: domestic enemies that are on the government payroll. There are
Speaker 2: domestic enemies in Northrop g and others that are are
Speaker 2: undermining the constitution of the United States, and they are
Speaker 2: undermining the national security of the United States. It is
Speaker 2: damn time, Congress, you gotta do something about this because
Speaker 2: if you, if you, if you, if you're fine with
Speaker 2: just a bunch of videos coming out and things of
Speaker 2: that nature, you're you're missing the forest from the trees.
Speaker 2: Because what the CIA is doing to this country, it
Speaker 2: is a cancer.
Speaker 1: It is a cancer.
Speaker 2: The CIA needs to be splintered into one thousand pieces.
Speaker 2: There need to be Senate hearings. And the people that
Speaker 2: are working for Northrop Grumming and other contractors, and in
Speaker 2: particular for the security contractors Pinkerton and Wackenhut, these people
Speaker 2: need to be brought up on federal charges. There needs
Speaker 2: to be grand jury investigation right now. These people need
Speaker 2: to be held to account. They cannot be allowed to
Speaker 2: get away with this. And they're laughing at all of
Speaker 2: you in Congress with they're laughing behind your backs because
Speaker 2: they're listening to your conversations, they're monitoring your emails. They
Speaker 2: don't give a damn about the Constitution. They certainly don't
Speaker 2: give a damn about any of you in Congress. You're
Speaker 2: all temporary employees in their minds. But at the end
Speaker 2: of the day, all of you in Congress, you are
Speaker 2: the only thing protecting the constitution of the United States.
Speaker 2: You're the only body that is protecting the citizens of
Speaker 2: the United States. You're the only ones that are protecting
Speaker 2: the national sovereignty of the United States. And like I
Speaker 2: said earlier, you need to ask about El Paso because
Speaker 2: the CIA and the Pentagon, if you haven't been read
Speaker 2: in to the high side information on this, they are
Speaker 2: aligning to you because what happened in El Paso is
Speaker 2: unbelievably frightening. It is not the cartels, it is not
Speaker 2: some drone. What happened in El Paso, what truly happened.
Speaker 2: What they are not telling Congress is terrifying. It is terrifying,
Speaker 2: and it is damn time that the Pentagon and the
Speaker 2: Executive Branch and the Trump administration come clean with the
Speaker 2: American public. President Trump speaking directly to you. You are
Speaker 2: the only president that will ever do this. If this
Speaker 2: switches to a democratic administration, or if the House and
Speaker 2: Senate flip Democrat flip to the Democratic side come midterms,
Speaker 2: this issue is dead. The Democrats won't do a goddamn
Speaker 2: thing about this nothing. So to every everyone in the
Speaker 2: Trump administration, to President Trump, this is your chance to
Speaker 2: make history. This is your chance to give the middle
Speaker 2: finger to the deep state. This is your chance to
Speaker 2: give the middle finger to the CIA and the Pentagon
Speaker 2: and the Lifers and all of the folks that are
Speaker 2: doing their dandist to undermine President Trump. If it doesn't
Speaker 2: happen now, it's not going to happen. So for all
Speaker 2: of my Republican friends, my MAGA friends that are watching this,
Speaker 2: you need to let this administration know. You need to
Speaker 2: let your Republican lawmakers know that this thing's got to
Speaker 2: get fast tracked. It's now or never, because when and
Speaker 2: if the Democrats take back over, the issue goes away,
Speaker 2: they will make it go away. You cannot trust the
Speaker 2: Democratic Party to do the right.
Speaker 1: Thing on the uap UFO issue.
Speaker 2: All right, So enough of my rant again, My hat
Speaker 2: is off to Representative Anna Polina Luna tim Bershett, Eric
Speaker 2: Burlison and their staffers that have really made all.
Speaker 1: Of this possible.
Speaker 2: I encourage all of you, all of those lawmakers that
Speaker 2: I just mentioned, to please hold the administration to account
Speaker 2: and don't let Arrow off the hook. Sean Kirkpatrick had
Speaker 2: a particular senator completely bamboozled, completely bamboozoled. Don't let John
Speaker 2: Koslowski or Arrow do the same thing to all of you.
Speaker 1: Hold them to account.
Speaker 2: Ask them where this where, this two year old, this
Speaker 2: historic to this historical report that's two years overdue.
Speaker 1: Ask them where that's at.
Speaker 2: Ask them what Arlow's solutions, the contractor that is running Arrow.
Speaker 2: You should also ask them what they're up to and
Speaker 2: ask them why they sent me a message on LinkedIn
Speaker 2: to apply for a job at Arrow. Where the desired
Speaker 2: qualification was qualifications was for me to have a background
Speaker 2: in information operations, information activities, and deception activities. So Members
Speaker 2: of Congress, you need to ask doctor John Koslowski why
Speaker 2: they tried to hire me and wanted me to have
Speaker 2: a background in propaganda. Because I tell you what, at
Speaker 2: the end of the day, I don't care if Arrow
Speaker 2: or the federal government came and offered me a half
Speaker 2: a million dollars to go work for them and to
Speaker 2: tow their party line.
Speaker 1: I can't be bought off at all.
Speaker 2: And I said it one time, and I'll say it
Speaker 2: again if something ever happens to me. It wasn't suicide,
Speaker 2: it wasn't a depression, it wasn't drugs, it wasn't a
Speaker 2: petty crime, it wasn't a car crash. Because unfortunately it's
Speaker 2: journalists and whistleblowers who get targeted by the CIA. And uh,
Speaker 2: and it's an American, it's frankly, Uh, it's it's perverse.
Speaker 1: It's disgusting.
Speaker 2: Uh. The way that the CIA is operating themselves is perverse.
Speaker 1: It's disgusting. It is the deep state. This ci A
Speaker 1: is the deep seat of the deep state deep state.
Speaker 2: And it's time we hold them to account and disintegrate them,
Speaker 2: put them back into some some form that where there
Speaker 2: is actually some true accountability. But anyway, thank you to
Speaker 2: President Trump for what you're doing on this.
Speaker 1: Please keep pushing the ball.
Speaker 2: Talk about the crash retrieval program, talk about what the
Speaker 2: CIA Office of Global Access is doing, Talk about what.
Speaker 1: The the illegality that.
Speaker 2: The defense contractors such as Northrop Grumming are up to
Speaker 2: talk about the targeting, the physical harassment and physical attacks
Speaker 2: against whistleblowers by these defense contractor of these security contractors
Speaker 2: that are working for the defense contractors to insulate the
Speaker 2: CIA from the bloody things that they are working on.
Speaker 1: It is time to do this. It's time to put
Speaker 1: America first.
Speaker 2: It is time to say fuck you to the deep State,
Speaker 2: fuck you to the CIA, and stand up for Americans,
Speaker 2: and stand up for the men and women that wear
Speaker 2: the uniform and put their lives on the line for
Speaker 2: this country, and especially for the whistleblowers who have given
Speaker 2: it all to right this wrong, whistleblowers who are on
Speaker 2: the verge of bankruptcy and have lost their security clearances
Speaker 2: all because of the CIA, the Deep State, the Pentagon.
Speaker 2: This shit's got to come to an end, and it's
Speaker 2: got to come to an end right now.