LIVE: DIA, AAWSAP & UFO Truths - Reaction to James Lacatski Interview | Eric Hecker

Transcript

[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] I want [music] you. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat.

[music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat Heat [music] [music] up here. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat up [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> $22 million for 5 years. That to me is not enough money to accomplish anything.

um other than bamboozling some folks into um >> thinking they're involved in a real program um and spending enough money so that they can say after um this program is taken off uh offline um what we're going to do is then we're going to run to the public with it and we're going to use this program to say this is proof of the government working on UFOs. That's that's what I hear when I hear this. like they knew what the gimbal and the go fast uh were and they just probably ours >> weren't and they just weren't telling the media. They're like >> this is where I think too is that they'll step up programs like if they have one project that's super secret our stuff, right? But super secret, right? What they'll do is they'll put together another task force and what they'll do is they'll they'll put them on task of trying to observe the stuff that we've made, but they'll tell that team that they're hunting for UFOs. >> Yeah.

>> And then that team is like, "Oh my god, look what we saw on the radar." And then the team that got spotted on the radar now has to make an adjustment because their UFO that wasn't supposed to be seen on a radar now just got seen on a radar. >> So this is this is where there's real programs doing real secret stuff and then there's real programs that think they're doing secret stuff but they're being bamboozled. are being hazed and then they're being doied and told that they're a UFO, you know, search team, but they're really, you know, finding the proverbial uh F-17s. >> So, audience is just listening. I'm going to read you something.

Beginning of chapter 9, at the conclusion of a 2011 meeting in the Capitol building with a US senator and an agency under secretary, Latsky, the only one of the book's authors present, posed a question. But this is where it gets good. He stated, meaning you, Dr. Latsky, that the United States was in possession of a craft of unknown origin and had successfully gained access to its interior. This craft had a streamlined configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight, but no intakes, exhaust, wings, or control surfaces.

In fact, it appeared not to have an engine, fuel tanks, or fuel. Now, there's a next part which I'll read in a minute, but what this is is you're officially allowed to tell us that the United States government has in its possession a craft of unknown origin and you are able to access the inside. Is that correct? >> The wording that you're you read is correct. Ah, you're going beyond the wording. >> No, I'm not.

I'm not. I'm asking you, did that meeting happen? >> And is it true? >> And it's true. >> Okay. So, you you're you're telling us you told us because you were allowed to tell us that our government has a UFO in its possession and has been able to access the inside of it, right? >> Yes. >> Well, that's you.

I was allowed to tell you. Let me show the back of the book. This is >> I know. I know. Hold up.

George, will you will you translate, George? >> All right. Let's try another tack. Um, how do we know it's a craft and not a doors stop? We accessed it. It has no engine. It has no wings, no no fuel.

It doesn't We don't know that it travels. Do we know it's a craft or it's just a a rock? >> George, you're you're going into the further discussion that occurred that day. >> All right. Uh, we can't we can't go there. But let me tell you, we're going to try to cover that in the future.

But it it's it's delicate. It's it's it makes it it makes described in here look primitive. >> This is killing me, Gabe. The more like every everything that he just said was everybody playing worth. So here's I think Laskkey was forced to get grilled.

He has to he has to honor his security clearances. And the way that that [ __ ] scumbag Jeremy just worded everything um was blatant and tactical um because there's nothing about what was just discussed when they said it's of unknown origin. That means they don't know if it's Japanese, they don't know if it's Russian, they don't know if it's Chinese, they don't know if it's from Venezuela. and Jeremy Jeremy Corbel is running with it and immediately then tries to switch it to UFO as if it's a [ __ ] alien thing not from this planet. So, as far as I'm concerned, uh Latsky and his crew came across humanmade technology, breached it, got into the hull, and yes, it was highly advanced >> Mhm.

foreign weaponry. What they're doing in a courtroom would be called leading the witness. And in this case, the witness is the audience, >> right? >> They're leading the witness. They're trying to paint a picture like this man dealt with an offworld craft and breached its hull and he can't say cuz it's delicate. That No, it's he just he also chose his words delicately.

>> Oh, yeah. He always We have enemies. We have enemies. Yeah, >> I can't discuss this man-made ship that's super advanced cuz it's a threat to us. That would scare the [ __ ] out of people to begin with.

Oh, and by the way, it's [ __ ] classified as [ __ ] Anyhow, all we're watching is the chess game play out as planned from many moves ago, >> right? Yeah. >> Cuz what we're not getting here is any any true information, right? We're not getting actionable intelligence, but we're getting we're getting this carnival barker in a beard um basically um leading the witness. The only the only thing that Jeremy Corbel tried to make it look like that guy said was that it was a UFO when the guy never said that. >> And I want to use that as a as a proper term. The public's yours, George's, and my testimony is contained in the books.

They are complete. I'll tell you in a moment how difficult [music] that was to do, but they are complete. That's everything that I have been approved to say condensed into what will be 1,200 pages. Uh, so those books are Skinwalkers at the Pentagon, Inside the US Government, [music] Covert UFO Program, Plug, Initial Revelations, the new book. >> Prove to say is another way of saying directed.

>> Yeah. And what's interesting is he's basically just said, "Look, anything I say on the Senate or House floor is going to be in these [music] books already. and the also approved future book let's say at four months 6 months the approved future book in four to six months >> right so this this goes right back to the NDAA and subsidized news he's approved to say it is another way of saying directed to say >> yes 100% these books could have been written by someone else and he was told put your name on this book read this book become familiar with it become a proponent of leading the witness by this book. >> Now that is a complete package. That's all I could ever say to the Congress and they can read it and know a hundred times more than they're ever going to get from hearings.

Okay. [music] Now, George had a good point on the next statement. These books are not written in the traditional sense. They're assembled. They are not about questions designed [laughter] that way.

Questionable flying saucer stories, paranormal tales, or fanciful descriptions of strange visitors from other worlds. They are not my beliefs, conjecture, or opinion. Nor are they attent the attentionseeking babble from the internet podcast. Just saying wrote them for me. >> I just think it's crazy to insinuate everything you could say is in the last book and coming out in the next book.

Like you're not going to test, you don't need to testify. It's in the books. Coming out of the woodwork, I don't even know those people. It's >> called controlled narrative >> blinding association and well why would I don't need to be in a situation where I have to answer questions under oath. I mean that's the book of [music] knowledge of the program.

In my opinion, you all are in the middle of a what I can only describe as a major and repetitive counter inelligence operation by unknown multiple operators or organizations [music] and for unknown reasons. Big question, what is so important about OAP or Kona Blue? Now, I use the past tense for Kona Blue. I shouldn't be using the past tense. What is so important? >> I don't know. I really the public >> Kona blue the proposal.

How could a proposal still be active? Eric, >> I don't know. I know you said earlier that they didn't move it forwards. Gabe, I'm I'm confused. There seems to be contradictions going on. >> So weirdations about either of those programs >> on the internet.

Who are you dealing with? who are you really dealing with there? Uh so >> [music] >> uh in any case, ask away >> CIA [laughter] right off the bat from from what you just said. And I think if I were to summarize in my language what you're saying is that you are realizing there is a sort [music] of human intelligence campaign that is going on in that it's prolific and that it's um doing a good job of trying to dissuade and move the public from understanding any core reality about UFOs. >> Did you hear the pride when he said that? Doing a good job. >> Okay. Exactly.

>> Cuz he knows he's not doing it. >> George and I know for a fact that this has been going on. We know that Arrow is a is a big part of it. And from what you just said, without you naming names or or or identifying specific organizations, it's very clear to me, and tell me if I'm wrong, that you believe Arrow to be more of a counter inelligence program than anything else. Right.

They're participating. Now, the individual whose email I read is very experienced in that area, but may honestly believe they have authorities. They're claiming well I I tell you the the there's some organizations in the intelligence community who claim all kind of authorities that they do not have. And so you have to be cautious when people's managers tell them that. And what are they going to do? Say, "Oh, no, we don't." No, they're going to as best they can not circumvent their managers but uh play it down because they don't have the human can be openly discussed because by who we have that okay and for those that are wondering what human is.

It's human intelligence. So this is the there's different kinds of intelligence collecting right Eric? There's you have signals intelligence and >> um sigant and yeah >> absolutely >> human intelligent. So this is the um where the rubber meets the road. This is absolutely >> I'm really happy that you brought this up too >> because this is playing with words also that we see in the community the pied pipers and stuff like that. Right.

So you're clarifying >> there is what they call human. Okay sigant. Right. So, correct me if I'm wrong, Gabe. Um, in the vernacular and legal ease, sigant would be nonhuman intelligence, correct? >> Right.

Yep. >> By definition. >> Yeah, pretty much. Yeah. You're Well, [snorts] I mean, you're >> It's a technicality, but I'm right.

>> Yeah. I guess >> right. There's human. Okay. There's human, >> right? It's a technical term and it's very specific, right? >> Sigant could [snorts] also be referred to as non human intelligence.

>> Column wrote it in the [music] rear portions of skinwalkers at the Pentagon. We he [snorts] suggested private money. Private money going in from multiple sources. And I can tell you now that caught people's eye. >> Mhm.

>> Okay. So, I mean, George, that >> Okay. So, Kona Blue is being run by Target. Is that what we're hearing here? >> Looking for private funding so that it can't be foyed >> and so that the fruits of the labors of that organization can now be moved towards the uh corportocracy versus the government. >> Same old.

are for the [ __ ] course. >> Just get we get the government to legitimize a desire, but then we distance ourselves from the government by getting private investment and contractors involved, which goes back to what I was saying earlier is that if you're barking up the tree of the government, they don't have the truth to give you. And here we are back for round two with Mr. Latsky. Eric, how are you, buddy? >> I am fantastic, sir.

Um, this is a double-edged sword. I'm looking forward to this, but it's like a a test of like uh like I feel like a sadist having to deal with this stuff. But that was a really that was a wonderful um recap of the last conversation that we had and I hope that it um you know um brings the listeners today up to speed with um the frustration with having to deal with these things. So um >> I've I heard >> I heard a couple of headlines in regards to the most recent interview, but just like this uh the last one you recaped, I'm coming into it pretty cold. So, I'm I'm >> as am I.

>> Yeah. I'm looking forward to just um you know, reacting to this um being a real human being. I think last time we spoke, Abe, I I I think we're on the same page that it was a it was um a decent amount of propaganda being shuffled. >> Oh god. Just I mean, the [ __ ] detector was I had to unplug it, you know, because it was just going on like the RTOR scale.

It it really was just a great demonstration of how you can use words to mislead people. >> Yes. Word selection. >> It's it's it's it's like dealing with lawyers. That's that's what I feel like.

It's like it's like we're dealing with a legal team and the way that they present things, the perception management and let's say this because it alludes to that and then people will assume that we mean this when we're really covering for that. >> Just a master class. >> Yeah, it's really it's it's um it's very interesting. Um, I used to, um, I used to live with a guy who was, um, from the Antarctic program and I worked with him up on the North >> and, um, he would oftent times, you know, when he got into a a pickle, so to say, in a I wouldn't say an argument, but we'd be having a dialogue about things >> and when he kind of got painted into a corner and didn't have anything else to say, he would say, "Well, at least it's a good study of of human nature." And it's like, well, yeah, you know, at least at least we're getting that. >> I was like, is agree to disagree.

[laughter] >> Well, it's almost like saying you're 100% right also, but I don't I don't have anything else to say to that. >> Don't have the capacity, right? >> Yeah. And that's that was what's what's really I hope people got out of that first summary that we did was that these people can imply things and we want so bad for the meaning to be there and Jeremy Corbel is an excellent example of that you know >> an unidentified craft a UFO you breach the hole of a UFO and then we hear through the description maybe it's not all that crazy. I mean, the advanced technology is is really amazing, but maybe it's not so extraterrestrial. In fact, maybe it's just unidentified.

>> Absolutely. Yeah. Unidentified just means we we don't know where it came from. >> Yeah. >> That does not mean it does not mean that it's not Chinese, Russian, Afghani.

It it can be any one of those things. >> Yes. >> But we don't >> know, >> right? Yeah. I did >> I did a little space yesterday covering uh the Matthew Libelsburgger case. Oh, your dog's just like mine.

He goes off when he when he wants. Uh but yeah, >> Holly's Holly's inbound apparently. So [laughter] >> uh Oh, want to give out a shot? Eversaur says, "What's up, weirdos? What's up, Eversur? Good to see you. Thanks for coming back. Uh, yeah, they they know what it is, I think, too, Eversur.

I think they know it's either, but they can put that moniker unidentified and we fill in the gaps, right? We fill that stuff in of what that means. And the [clears throat] more imaginative, the more clickbaity you want to get with it, the crazier stories you're going to hear, right? Like you could probably find a stream right now that's talking about what did they see inside of the UFO and breaking down. You know what I mean? Just completely based on nothing on a statement that could mean anything. It's pretty crazy. Uh okay.

So let's uh we'll go ahead without further ado and get the Slatsky. I just want to So, Gabe, when was um when was this video that you're presenting today originally aired? >> Literally today at 12:00. >> Copy that. So, this is super fresh. >> Yes.

I'm going to have to move your guy over here because you are getting comments in your face. We don't want that. >> That's all right. throw the comments in my face. >> No, no, never.

Here we go. Okay. Oh, but now you're taking up half the screen. We can fix this. Don't worry, folks.

These technical issues, I'm on it. Some some say I'm a bit of an expert. >> Oh, you're pretty damn good at production, Gabe. I'm impressed. Just just so that you know uh just for fun uh we are currently simal casting on my XSpace as well as my YouTube.

So we're getting we're getting the word out uh far and wide. >> I love it because that is what it's all about. Um people need to hear all sides including our pessimistic reality based [laughter] opinions. Yeah, I wouldn't call it as much pessimistic as just reality based. I mean, >> right.

Um, you know, when the waiter brings you a [ __ ] sandwich, you do have the right to refuse. >> That's right. And and you've given some good talks on [ __ ] sandwiches. Uh, folks, if you go check out Deciphering TV or Eric's channels, u he's given some great examples of what a [ __ ] sandwich is and how to avoid them. >> It is a choice.

Yes, it is a choice, as a matter of fact. Okay. So, yes, this aired today, 12:00 pm Pacific Standard Time. Um, I have not So, full disclosure, I had it on earlier, but it was kind of running in the background while I was doing other stuff, so I wasn't really paying attention. I know there were supposedly a couple of bombs dropped.

Uh but again, we'll be the judge of that [laughter] and we'll see just how how big of a bomb it is or if it's just nonsense. Um all right, here we go. This is part two and y'all saw the summary from part one. If you didn't catch it, you can rewind and check it out and catch up to us. But here we go.

Oh, wait a minute. Oh, no. Apologies. See, when you're bragging about my production >> uh skills, >> you just [laughter] you did that on purpose because you're a humble man, >> right? I got to stay humble. Got to stay humble.

It's a great song, by the way. Okay, here we go. Second attempt. weapon. >> The following is part two of our interview with Dr.

James Latsky. >> I'm I'm asking you about this craft. I'm asking you, was it given to us? Was it gifted to us? Was it a crash? Or um >> You're going to get people mad at me for not answering when they know in advance, and so do you, that I can't answer. And neither could they. And neither could some of the people who are are going before Congress.

>> So, I mean, I'm sorry. I know we're like 10 seconds in >> right off the bat. Yeah. right out of the gate. You already know that I can't say you're asking it like this is absurd.

>> Thank you. Why Why are we pretending this is a impromptu interview? You know, even in interviews where you give them the questions first, uh it doesn't seem this staged. I mean, >> they're putting pretty tight restrictions on on it if they do go if they do go behind closed doors. I'm saying the >> the closed doors don't really matter in answering their question. >> Okay, here here's something you can't answer.

I imagine you can't answer to me if you if the craft had its own intelligence, if it was sentient in some way in and of itself. You're not going to answer that, I assume, right? So, I got one you can't answer. Last one, George, on this craft, but I just got to ask these or I'm not doing my job. You alluded that the UFO in the possession of the US makes uh the technology described in your other book initial revel revelations look primitive. What did what did you mean by that? >> It looks primitive.

>> Okay. But what what does that mean to you? >> To mess it it uh it's very advanced and that's all I can say. very very advanced and with worldwide repercussions. >> Okay. But like give me >> advanced Russian, advanced Chinese, um advanced Indian.

Sir, can you uh be more spec Oh no, you can't be more specific. Oh well, let me just lead let me lead the crowd into the direction that I want then. Here comes the Jeremy Corbel twostep. >> Yes, we it made our stuff look primitive. What do you mean by that? Primitive, [laughter] >> primative, >> uh, I don't know.

Uh, really old. [laughter] >> It makes it look the opposite of not primitive. Oh, Jeremy. Okay. >> An idea I can sink my teeth into of what that means.

When you say very advanced, I'm thinking, well, I've got an iPhone 17 and an original iPhone. There's a big difference. Are we talking product. Did he get money on that? >> Do superconductors advance different? [snorts] >> Absolutely. >> Absolutely.

>> Jim Lacowski, um you know, you said earlier in this conversation, I am for disclosure. >> See, that's the problem. And you you can see the difference between um the experience and the expertise in NAP and and Corbel where you know you don't ask close-ended questions if you want an open-ended answer especially not with these guys because that's exactly what they're going to give you is a close-ended answer. Absolutely. >> Yeah.

I mean, they're they're they're they're >> they're teeing up for the answers that they want and the speculations they're going to run with. >> Right. Right. And people are going to snip out questions and snip in different answers. I mean, there this is what happens.

And then that stuff becomes fact because it gets lost in the mess and people start reporting on that. So, this is what we're talking about, staying grounded and paying attention to words. If this was some crazy worldchanging interview, it wouldn't be happening on the Weaponized podcast, period. It would be happening on all of our TVs live breaking news. Uh, it would >> And if there's a courtroom, there'd be a lawyer saying, "Your honor, I object leading the witness." >> Oh, a hundred times over.

Yeah. If the American people had an attorney sitting in for them, that would be awesome, right? Okay. I'm sorry. I just uh Yeah. >> I'm not sure that has always been your position as Express.

Maybe it was, but I got a different impression. Do these books constitute disclosure? I mean these are this is >> in my opinion yes they are they they are the my disclosure and they are the public's disclosure remember the public paid $22 million for the information uh the resulting information from OAP is uh for the most well for for 99% is releasable but here's another nitpick it's not a nitpick it's a Fact, the government owns the reports. You've got to get it from the government and you've got to have it cleansed by the government and checked by the government for public release. I can't release to you the information. If I would, I'd get a big stapler and and and and staple all the documents together and give it to you.

And if if you wanted to try to interpret it, go ahead. It's going to be difficult. And that's also why by the way I broke up the technology portions into easy engineering degree, physics degree or PhD. And anyone who claims they understand all that is in those books for the technologies is fooling themselves. >> UFOs for dummies.

Um, so he's saying anybody, any of these folks that come out and say they've got it figured out as far as the science goes and the physics goes, they're not even close is what it sounded like to me. >> And and I think he also said something about his book is important. >> Yes, Skinwalker, the Skinwalker books, according to him and Knap, which uh Oh, yeah. Nap wrote that book as well. Uh, Skinwalker books are disclosure, ladies and gentlemen.

breaking hot off the presses. Uh what is it they say? This is uh >> Have you ever met an author that said, "Don't read my book. It's not that important." [laughter] >> Not a successful one. >> Uh but what is the deal? I mean, so he's saying these books are disclosure. What What do you say to that, Eric? I I think that's what an author would say about his disclosure book.

>> That That makes sense. That makes sense, right? >> Are there are there any other books that he can reference that he feels are on par with his book? That would that would be my question. You know, that he can't obviously be the only person out there that's doing due diligence and good research. I mean, >> I I often throw stones at people in the community, as you know. Um but there are no I've never heard [clears throat] >> but there are diamonds in the rough.

Like I I really feel that um Dark Journalist does really good research especially when it comes to Antarctica. >> I love his stuff. Yeah. >> I also feel that Walter Bosley does good research. I feel that Joseph P.

Fel does good research. So there are people that I can tip my hat to even when I'm mostly in the activity of throwing stones at people. So, you know, you know, for someone to write a book and say, "You need to understand that my book is important." It's like, >> isn't that >> it's the book, right? >> Yes. It's the end all. Like, we just say it's the end all say all when it comes to the topic and we'll just call it a day.

>> Yeah. Well, and that's the thing about disclosure and I think Eversur points this out. He says to me or her, I'm sorry, Eversur, I don't know. To me, disclosure is an official statement from president prime minister, not halftruth by intel agents. And that's a a great point.

To other people, disclosure has already happened. Right? So, there's a whole gambit of what disclosure actually means and are we going to even know it when we get it? Have we gotten it already? Unfortunately, I think a precedent has been set in regards to presidents and prime ministers is that this dilemma is unfortunately over their heads, which is why we don't get them communicating on the topic. >> Right. Yeah, you're absolutely right. I that's uh one thing I know >> they're they're temporary help in the equation.

>> Yeah. four fouryear rotation. They're they're a temporary employee in regards >> to what Eisenhower warned us, you know, beware the military-industrial complex. That's a full-time ongoing position decade after decade after decade. Presidents are temporary labor that they don't have to deal with for too long.

So they don't >> Yes. Yes. And Simean, Jim Simean himself, the the quote unquote retired CIA agent that helped run two the stars in the ground. Uh he said that um it's not even since Eisenhower, they haven't even given a president a real briefing um on this subject. They give them [ __ ] briefings.

>> Yeah. I mean, hence the warning. Thanks, Eisenhower. I mean, I appreciate the warning, but you're right. like that.

He he he gave us foreshadowing, >> but he knew that it was going to be outside of the office of the presidency. So, he gave us the warning and lo and behold, here we are many decades later suffering under this um you know, equation of secrecy. >> Yeah. >> At super high levels, monopolized technology. That's the thing right there.

It's monopolized technology and they will use this whole entire UFO story shiel as a smokeokc screen for as long as they can to cover the proverbial asses >> of the corporations that are monopolizing the technology. These are these are rogue factions in a so far is that they are operating without the oversight of the government which is the servant of the people. So we the people um you know have elected servants that are supposed to keep these things in check. If they can't, right, supposed to. If they can't keep them in check, they are rogue factions and they have massive amounts of technology that we the people are not privy to.

That's a very problematic situation. >> I uh I agree. [laughter] Um I think it's something we all need to be make a little adjustment here. It's something we all need to be aware of. And oh [ __ ] Like the whole thing with disclosure being in a book.

How like I wonder how many authors have said that before? How many how many times have we seen an author say this is it? This this is the book. this disclosure is in this book. >> I I would I would say that disclosure can't fit in one single book. >> But I would also say that that is that activity of disclosing has been going on for a very long time. And this is something that I've been saying for years.

There was a a publishing company called Adventures Unlimited Press, AU, and before the internet, >> they were like the clearing house, so to say, of all alternative information that you could say was disclosure oriented. All right. >> Okay. contemporarily. I do not believe that I have seen anybody come forth publicly that is not simply regurgitating stuff that has been previously published by Adventures Unlimited Press.

I'm old enough to have done research for long enough that what I'm seeing going on is just simply plagiarism that most people aren't a muted, buddy. You're muted. [laughter] Uh you're muted in StreamYard if that helps. here. Let me see if I can undo it probably.

Let me see. Oh, it says I can't do it because you muted yourself. This is why we live stream, folks. So you can enjoy these fun little hiccups here. [laughter] >> I I have no idea how >> There he is.

There he is. I'm doing a button. >> Where'd you lose me at? >> Uh, no. I don't know because I was I was looking for >> No worries. So, what I was getting at was that a lot of the stuff that we see, not even a lot.

I'm going to say everything that we see presented today is regurgitated and plagiarized. So, when people talk about disclosure being in a book, it can't fit in one book singularly. But there have for many decades been people trying to publish uh chapters of the truth, so to say. There was a publishing company called Adventures Unlimited Press that prior to the internet, this was the clearing house of where you went to get um alternative information. So all the topics that we're discussing were available and the players today that are the actors in this circus of disclosure are regurgitating information from decades ago.

And that's nothing new under the sun. And the problem is is that the um the audience >> is not doing due diligence. They're not doing the research. So when somebody goes and grabs information from a book from 30, 40 years ago and plagiarizes it and then presents it to the community as if they're a researcher that found new information. Well, technically the information checks out as true >> if you do the research, right? But then what they're not telling you is that this information has been in books for decades at this point.

>> So they're trying to play the role of the modern-day researcher and disclosure specialist. Um but technically they're a plagiarist >> and this is this group >> and a narrative controller. >> Adventures Unlimited Press. That's the outfit. >> So and they've been around for how long? >> Almost my whole life.

>> Almost your whole life. And they've been doing they've been doing this your whole life. >> Absolutely. Alternative information, you know, when you talk about um David Childress's work, when you talk about ancient aliens, um >> all of this, every single bit of the conversations that we the people are having today and these fake champions of the truth are simply regurgitating information from decades ago. Uh Brad Olsen comes to mind.

He's a guy that I've I've met on these tours. Um, he's a regurgitator of Adventures Unlimited Press content. >> Like the people that the people that are brand new to the conversation are like, "Did you hear that there were Nazis in Antarctica?" [laughter] >> Right. >> Like as if that's new content. >> Yeah.

But it's new to them. >> Exactly. It's new to them. And so they use that excitement and all that stuff and they go out there and push it out and they get a whole new group of people >> getting into it. >> Yeah, that's interesting.

I I had looked into uh maybe doing like a AM radio station for a while >> and there were these sit there were these companies that did something similar. So like if I wanted to do a paranormal AM radio station, right? I could sign up with this company that literally has tens of thousands of hours of pre-recorded >> alien stuff and when I'm not when I'm not, you know, doing it, I just play that and it's licenses to all that. But it is it's just the same stuff that they were talking about in the ' 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the '9s, and it's just repackaged and >> Yep. >> it's even the same people in some >> Yeah. put put new bumpers on the front and back end, you know, a modern commercial in your uh commercial breaks.

>> And yeah, there'll be a sea of new people that never heard this content before. And you um are presented as a champion of the truth. Um just like Jeremy Corbel. I mean, that's that's what's going on, what we're witnessing right now. Well, and I so one thing I think it is important to there's a difference between like genuine excitement and pushing for honesty and disclosure and then like misleading people.

And I I don't know where Jeremy is on that path. I really don't. I don't know if he's just the useful idiot or if he's part of it. You know, >> I can appreciate that it might it may be challenging to know, right? >> Yeah. >> Um but here's where a red flag comes up.

>> Um if you're pumping out information that's decades old and you're not giving references like a bibliography, >> that's called stealing. That's called plagiarism. >> Yeah. Yeah. So it is it that that to me is the litmus test.

It would be one thing if you were being very genuine and you said to the audience, I appreciate that you are youthful in the topic and in your lives. Um but there's very important information that I want you to know that's been around for a very long time. I got it from this book, this book, and this book. And these are the qualified researchers that have been doing it for many decades. And it's only because I can stand on the shoulders of those giants to speak to you today about this topic.

>> Yeah. >> To not do that, to try to steal the thunder, >> the labors of the people that have toiled at this for decades before you >> and act like it's your work. >> He can go [ __ ] himself with that [ __ ] That's just that's just disingenuous thievery. It's called being a plagiarist. >> The risks that were taken, right? It's not like all these did all these folks did this without some kind of >> decades many decades ago people died for doing this >> right >> these these were the veterans of cognitive warfare.

>> Yes. And >> so in in a way it would be um stolen valor. >> Yeah. And you you this is not like uh like um conspiracy porn like this really happened, right? Like people researching UFOs were really murdered. Um and it's happened multiple times over the years.

Uh, and so it's just it's just one of those interesting data points where it's like you're not sure what it is, but there's definitely something going on there. Um, are they getting too close? Are they stirring up too many problems? I don't know. But we listen to Latsky talk how careful he is. And it makes you wonder, is he just scared? >> I think he's being very tactical in his word selection, which is probably why he was tapped for this role because he showed proficiency. >> Um, >> to wear the collar and the leash and know how much of a line he was given and when to, you know, pull back.

Yeah. Well, yeah, obviously he is he's been able with kind of the crazy things that he said so far. Uh, and I guess they're not crazy. Um, more shocking things that some of the more shocking things he said so far, he's pretty much been able to show the receipts. Um, but yeah, what a DIA intelligence official.

What's the game? You know, why why are you coming out with it now? What's what what what are we doing here? >> Yeah. If I remember correctly from the last time we spoke, he had mentioned that um he wasn't necessarily the author of the book per se, but that it was assembled. So I I gather um that he is like um in many ways the the CEO of a corporation, not necessarily the worker or the producer um but the but the public face of said entity, >> right? >> He's doing he's doing the public PR. There was a there was information assembled and it's his job to represent it publicly. >> Yeah.

Yeah. I clearly and he does a good job at it, right? He does a good job at hanging just enough out there to get these guys all worked up. >> He does a good job of knowing the length of his leash. >> Right. Right.

And when you have people believing They're reading between the lines, then you can imply a lot of [ __ ] without saying it. Right. This is how the mob operates. >> Yes. And this is where the Jeremy Corbel um tactical to practical aspect shows up is that's what he's doing is he is the spin doctor who is taking um one set of words coming out of Latsky's mouth mincing them up enough to cause enough confusion to tolerate the audience going what I think they're saying is this.

>> Yeah. Yeah. And and they buy it hook, line, and sinker. Right. Right.

>> Because if you have to leave it up to what the audience thinks you've said, you haven't said enough. You haven't clarified enough. And you haven't given any actionable intelligence. You're just alluding to things. >> Yeah.

Yep. Absolutely. >> You're you're leading the witness. What you're not doing is giving the facts. >> Ever says a Canadian ulfologist ufologist died in his kitchen last year.

He had a YouTube channel exposing the moon. That's interesting. Um >> I exposed my moon many of times and I'm still alive. >> Many of road trips. Uh I It's interesting when I opened my um reporting line for the first time, right? I have a a UA a UFO um UAP reporting line.

And when I first dropped it >> Nice. >> Yeah. Yeah. When I Well, when I first dropped it, I swear. So, in the first two nights, I got like three I think it was three or four call three calls all from people in the south all claiming that the moon was moving around and doing things the moon shouldn't be doing.

And it was three different people from the area codes that looked like three different states. But I just I didn't get into it. I didn't, you know, because I was like with the moon moving, whatever. But I just thought it was so interesting. The very night that I released it, I got two calls and then the next night I got a call about it.

>> What are the odds of you dropping that line and getting three calls within 48 hours that are saying the same thing? Tell me tell me that you realize that that was some sort of faction trying to mess with you. >> Absolutely. That crossed my mind. Yeah, that's why I didn't go farther with it. But I just I just >> Holy factions operating Batman.

>> Right. Right. And they're all from the south. Yeah. Um but I just thought >> saw the moon walking funny across the sky when I finish my moonshine.

>> I did. >> You want to go live tomorrow with me, Mr. Gabe? I got all of them there. >> Yeah. And I got two of my cousin sister wives that can corroborate it.

>> That first cousin sister's pretty good looking. I might have to show up for >> she's my favorite too. >> I got us derailed. But I just I thought that was interesting when I hear about the movie. >> That is that is actually really interesting that you have that um that line.

That's impressive to me. It's it's uh it's cool and it does speak volumes how it was received at the onset. part par for the course with the factions. >> Yeah, exactly. But I I did I do so so far I've I've um promote not really promoted it but put it out there.

Oh, it's probably been five or six months. Uh but in that time I have one person that I've been working with uh because of that line who has just uh but he is terrified to come forward and share them. So, I'm hoping one day soon he'll come forward and and share. >> Is that Drew Bellisando? [laughter] >> No, I will not give any clues because he he is legitimately scared of the men. >> I know.

I'm just teasing. I'm just teasing. Yeah, I I'll tell you I the Men in Black thing I thought was just another lore silly thing, but the way this gentleman talks about him, he's very concerned about >> Yeah, there's something to this stuff. >> Yeah. Yeah.

All right, so uh Okay, I think I got us derailed enough. Let's bring it back to Latsky here. Um yeah, we've made it a whole four minutes in without tearing him to shreds already. >> There you go. >> Here we go.

All right. >> If you could screen the >> only other people >> I can. Yes. >> These reports are gathered from OAP. They're investigated.

They're checked out and vetted. Incidents, uh, experiences, things of that sort from the official DIA program. Um, they are approved through the Doppser process. You are given permission to make this public. It is a form of disclosure whether >> Yes, it absolutely is.

It may not be going as fast as people like, but do you really want to buy a war in peace or rise and fall of the Third Reich? How much would that book cost? I mean, it can't be it can't it has to be in a digestible amount. >> Somebody had to say yes to allow this. Are you amazed that you're allowed to continue and and spill some of this stuff, make it public? because you would think there's got to be people somewhere, maybe an arrow, who are not uh all that thrilled that it's coming out. >> I I don't know if that's really the case. It's it's what comes out and the detail of what comes out.

Jeremy had said that before. It's the It's like talking about a nuclear weapon and then having the design blueprints and the and the uh fuel for the weapon. There's there's a big big difference there and I can only say some I mean I think this interview I'm saying much more than the first one but the thing is it's all still hasn't crossed the line and they'll be but I've got to ask what the line is about future >> f things because >> because you're telling us UFOs we have one we're reverse engineering it but can you describe the inside can you talk about your personal experience with spacecraft, how you breached the hole. You don't know if you can say those things yet, but certainly they want us to know that much. Not the nuclear codes, but the fact nuclear weapons exist.

Same thing about UFOs. >> Yes. I believe it'll go in the same way. >> Yeah. >> Uh and the thing is is that now there's some of this the public has to the public scientists have to participate in.

As I said, Kona blue was a compartment reputed to be for uh uh recovered technology. Okay. And then there's Kona Blue the program which was in essence first described in uh and I'm pointing up to a book sitting up there, Skinwalkers at the Pentagon, >> right? Because the the private investment of money, we know that OSAP's not going to be repeated. We know that it is. There's no way that's going to be repeated.

That that that focus on the paranormal and UFOs. So, you got to learn now and then move on. You you can't say, "Well, uh I'm going to fund uh another uh OSAP, too." No. And uh if anyone thinks that that was the plan, well, they're wrong. >> Is there anything that you were told you can't say this about that craft? Uh did you try to say more and through the DOS process they said nope that crosses the line? >> No, no, I didn't try to say more more because I know the rules and what they'd really deny.

Um I uh >> so he tried nothing and then doser approved what they wanted >> ment uh walkers at the Pentagon. >> That's the thing is like >> yeah pause this for a second. Yeah he he so he literally just said he didn't try to get out any truth. That's that's technically what he just said. He put no effort into getting out anything.

And this is a Doppser approved project which basically means this is the information that the government wants people to um believe in. I I mean I'm not even going to go with saying that this is accurate or true because last time we spoke also we had an appreciation for the um NDAA that was signed under the Obama administration which tolerated the subsidizing of the news Gabe which I believe this is what we're witnessing a thousandfold. This is manufactured content that is not necessarily true at all. Right. >> I don't I I don't believe there's anything about this that has to be true.

This could be the subsidizing of the news a thousand%. Change my mind. >> It's uh No, I can't because I think that you're right. Um >> a book is news media, right? >> Dos are approved means that the government wanted it out. This guy just said that I didn't put any effort into trying to get forth out any information because I know the way things work and apparently what he knows won't be approved.

So this guy's not a whistleblower. He's not an author. He is just simply putting his name on a book that was dopper approved, which means doser written, >> right? He's he's a complete on the up and up, play by the rules guy. Um, >> yeah, he's a he's a he's a barking dog on a short leash. That's his job, >> right? And the government needs guys like that, don't get me wrong.

I mean, it's uh it's important to have guys like >> they've been using them for many decades, >> right? Right. As far as manipulating the media, y'all have to understand like Obama made it legal for the media to propagandize us, not to lie or >> to subsidize the news, >> right? To straight up try and manipulate the way you view and think about things. Not providing facts, providing facts with caveats. It's dangerous [ __ ] And take a look. This is a short video I made.

This was from the [ __ ] 70s. So this is when it was supposed to be illegal to propagandize our people. And listen to what our CIA was doing to us. >> They're saying is to disseminate propaganda to influence people's minds. And this is a major function of the CIA.

400 journalists cooperating with the CIA. Uh >> 400 journalists cooperating with the state. >> 400. And I'm sorry, did you have a time period for when Mr. Stockwell was making this statement? >> Uh I think this was it was either early 80s, late 70s, right in there.

Um >> so this was back when it was still illegal for the government to subsidize the news. Now that it's legal, I wonder um what that crew compliment has gone up to in the uh deception category, >> right? And now, well, I'm just going to let this play out here. >> Names in the business to consciously introduce the stories into the press. >> Well, give me a concrete example of how you use the press this way, how a false story is planted, and how you got it published. Well, for example, in my my war, the Angola war that I helped to manage.

Uh, >> now he says he helped to manage the Angola war. That's because there was no Angola war. >> Onethird of my staff public facing ironically it's called covert action inside the CI. Outside that means the violent part. Uh, I had propagandists all over the world principally in London, Kinshasa and Zambia.

We were we would take stories which we would write and put them in the Zambia Times. We had the complicity of the government of Zambia, Kenneth Kunda if you will, to put these false stories into his newspapers >> which our government has now given our intelligence community its >> but after that point the journalists them out and send them to a journalist on our payroll in Europe, Reuters and AFP. uh the management was not witting of it. Now, our contact man in Europe was and we pumped just just dozens of stories about Cuban atrocities, these Cuban rapists. Uh in one case, we had the Cuban rapists caught uh and tried by the Oimbundu maidens who had been their victims.

And then we ran photographs. >> It was just completely fake. They made up this story about the girls that were raped >> getting to try the guys that raped him and all this stuff and it was like, "Yeah, yeah, it was all bullshit." >> Yeah. And if you can't get it directly into the American uh media mechanism, you just first get your foot in the door by finding a country that you can in this capacity is uh Zambia. So now, you know, once it's a legitimate article over there, well then the American press could be like, "Oh, this just in from Zambia news department." >> Exactly.

>> Yeah. This is this is this is a total con job. >> This is from the Zambia whatever press and then they cover it like it's an actual legitimate story. If anybody thinks that at this stage of the game that the disclosure community in the greater social network webs is not wholly infiltrated, you have got your head so far up your ass at this point it's not even funny. [clears throat] >> Right.

Right. And that doesn't mean give up. And that doesn't mean >> Of course not. It means fight harder. >> It means fight harder.

Be more [snorts] critical. be on the be on the attack that when these conj Yeah. Be vigilant. um apply scrutiny, demand evidence, actionable intelligence, not this incessant um unsubstantiated speculation that we're that we're witnessing in this conversation today between Jeremy Corbel um you know leading the witness of the proverbial audience through Latsky by by mincing his words, not taking them at very literal al face value for all the possibilities that they could mean, but very much trying to cast in a particular light what Corbel wants them to mean. >> Right.

Right. And what so many people that follow Corbel and that whole narrative want it to mean, right? It's it's everyone involved. It's this whole narrative. >> I I look at these big equations, right? like like there's some there's some faction, right, that came to Latsky and was like, "Here's what we need you to do. We're going to assemble this book and you're going to have to become familiar with it and you're going to need to attest to the information in the book.

But because we know that you can, we want to make sure that you never speak outside of the lines of what is specifically assembled in this book. Um, but what we're going to do is we're can we're going to connect you with these other people. So, you obviously have NDAs and clearances that you have to maintain. So, you can't speak, you can't go out of your lane. But what we're going to do is we're going to connect you with these dudes that don't have NDAs and don't have clearances and they can say whatever the [ __ ] they want.

>> That's right. >> And we'll connect you with them. So when you talk to them, make sure that you follow the battle lines that you're obligated to follow. Um but don't just simply just don't knock them down when they take great liberties with what you've said. Now, you know what? >> Just let them just let them do their thing.

>> You know what this reminds me of? Have you heard about this chat that was revealed on X? You heard about this? >> I have heard about that. It's quite the joke in my eyes. >> It's pretty amazing. You have all the uh the big swingers. Eric Davis, Gary Nolan.

Um [clears throat] Oh god, hold on. Let me pull it up and I'll I refer to these things as name anyone. >> This is what we call the cool kids club. Do you want to be in the cool kids club game? >> Brandon Fugal. >> Yeah, you can be Nolan.

How put off >> Jacques J Stratton. >> Super cool kids club. Leslie Keane, right? So, yeah, you get >> I feel cooler just when you read the names off. >> Exactly. You get invited to this special chat that are doing exclusive drops of information.

How are you feeling as like a a podcaster, right, who's trying to get your show going or I mean, you're feeling [ __ ] plugged in, right? You got the exclusive. >> That's what they think. But then what winds up happening is it's just a bunch of BS and people patting each other on the back and then doing info drops where they say this is the this is the super secret stuff just so just so you know and you're in the know but like because you're in the cool kids club I'm trusting that you won't ever actually go public with it >> right >> because it's cuz it's a [ __ ] [ __ ] sandwich. >> It's a total [ __ ] sandwich. They're convincing the people that it's, you know, the [ __ ] sandwich with cheese and it tastes really good.

But what it's really doing is putting everyone on a leash um and and shutting them up and and giving them test. It's a test. >> You know, they give them bait. You know, we're going to we're going to throw um a [ __ ] sandwich on the table here and see if anybody um runs outward with it. >> Right.

And I did some thinking about the Leslie Keane VIP dinner. So they would have these >> conferences and then they would get like seven to 10 of the upper echelon podcasters, right? The podcasters that are doing really well. They would bring them back to this exclusive dinner where it was just Leslie Keane, a couple of her folks, and the rest of these podcasters where she would tell them, "Hey, the end is nigh. The end is coming. NASA knows that we're going to get attacked or struck by something or something's going to happen and we're all going to die." And this is the secret.

And it got me to thinking like even if you don't release that secret like let's say you sit on it as they all have and you don't say anything that's still going to influence you in such a dramatic way. Like if you think the end is coming every question you ask, every interview you have, every piece of information you get is seen through that filter. >> Yeah. I mean there's it's all it's all Shannon. I mean the last time I went to a big ass VIP dinner was the um the 2023 Greer event where we got redte teamed by you know Jake Barber and Fred Baker.

Fred Baker sitting at my table for dinner with me and now this guy's trying to act like it never happened and I call him out every time I see him speaking publicly and he gives me grief and you don't understand how much we support you. It's like, "Bro, by all means, at any point in time, stop redteaming me and show me any evidence of you supporting my effort." >> Yeah. >> You know, it's just a tactic that like this guy redteamed me, so now when I see him making comments publicly, yeah, I jump his [ __ ] because this guy came at me. >> And then his response >> his response to me giving him crap is, "You don't understand how much we're trying to help you." And it's like, you're that's correct because I see no evidence of you trying to help me. >> Right.

Exactly. Oh my god. What a bunch of [ __ ] jokers. Um JD77, he's a fan of the show. He's also uh somewhat of a neighbor who has sent me images of orbs that he's actually seen.

pretty freaking crazy. So, uh, thanks for tuning in, JD. Glad to have you here. Um, always good, uh, always good to know you're out there doing the thing. Uh, he's sent some pretty crazy stuff.

I'll share later. Um, all right, let's get back to this uh this Latsky Joker here. Here we go. In other words, take this out type of adjustment. And I'm not talking about just names and academic institutions that we can't say this.

>> We can't Here's something for Jeremy. We can't say this at that at this point, but we did >> in the f in the books further on. It's a, you know, it's like inch by inch. You're making it. >> Yeah.

And you can't eat the whole whale at once. >> No. I And look, I really appreciate it. I mean, I see it as a heroic thing that you're making these books and pushing each time to get a little further. I I don't I think people don't.

>> Okay. So, I think what this goes back to is his belief in controlled disclosure. So, he believes that disclosure should happen, but it should be very controlled. And apparently, he should have a big hand in what gets released and when and to who. I I think that seems to be the common position of the um rich oligarchy militaryindustrial corporation complex folks that are involved in the equation.

That very much seems to be their position on this is that they believe for some reason the catastrophic disclosure can't be handled by the majority of the people on this planet. I am diametrically opposed to that position. I believe that the majority of people on this planet absolutely can handle the truth. The problem is the minority that have been deceiving the majority for years >> um would wind up receiving justice for their deception. So the the catastrophe of disclosure um would only fall on the shoulders of the deceivers who would get the justice they deserve.

And I think when we the people, the majority, find out all the shenanigans that they were up to, it would most likely lead to them dying. >> Yeah. which is why the minority are propagandizing the majority that we can't handle full disclosure, >> right? >> When it's the exact opposite. >> Yeah. >> They the minority, the deceivers cannot handle the justice.

>> That would be the broad sword swung at >> terrified. Terrified. terrified of the majority of people understanding what the minority have been up to. So they try to pretend. Um I'm I'm sorry, but just looking at the history of the world and humanity, um humanity is damn adaptable.

>> Yeah, I like JD's take. We can handle anything these days. I mean >> that's I agree with that. We can we can handle anything. I wholly believe that we the people, the majority of the average folk on this planet are wholly adaptable and will adjust accordingly and will apply justice liberally.

>> Yep. >> When we find out who the guilty parties are, I think it's just the guilty parties that are terrified of being found. >> Yeah. And you can always smell it in the air when the uh when the guilty parties are nervous. I'll just put it that way.

in the air. You can feel it justice. >> You start seeing these really interesting posts about information that came out and your hand in it. And uh it's kind of weird how that works. Um what I thought was funny was that this gentleman called out so that chat we just looked at from X, this gentleman just called out the person that exposed the chat.

Now the person that exposed the chat is not a journalist. He's just a person that got invited into the chat. And apparently he had had enough of whatever was going on there, which I can't wait to hear more about, and decided to expose the chat. And this person uh got all upset and said uh I'm not going to name any names, but they got upset and said, "Well, this person is disclosing classified chats. They could get in big trouble for this >> classified chat.

If you're releasing classified information on an exch, you deserve to get in trouble for releasing classified information on X chats. Like, how stupid could you get? >> That's ridiculous. Gabe, where's the classified section on X here? I'm sorry. I didn't >> I didn't quite see that when I Is that what I got involved with when I started spending $7 a month towards Elon Musk? I didn't realize >> that I got levels of classification. Um, was there was there um one of those lie detector tests? I mean, what we had TSSCI? I mean, I I mean, I got a blue I got a blue check.

Does that Does that mean that I'm supposed to have some level of [laughter] >> so crazy. All right, here I'll let this guy go on here. This is just nuts. >> Understand that or they're very frustrated that you are take your oath seriously. But something you just mentioned that I think is a big point of yours that you haven't that we haven't really um pushed on at this point.

I mean, you basically ran the X Files for the US government. I mean, it was it was pretty wild. There were wild things that occurred, but you said it best. She said a study focused solely on UFOs on v on various unknown nuts and bolts type craft flittering around in the skies over military bases and facilities would never get to the heart of a much larger and complicated mystery. And I think what you were trying to say to us is if you just think you're going to study UFOs, you're going to be smacked with reality.

The reality is the UFO phenomenon is just shrouded and covered with what you would call I don't know the the good word abnormal aspects of reality. >> Yes. Yes. That you've got to look much further than nuts and bolts. Now can you study nuts and bolts and use it for a a levitating craft would be t tremendous.

Doesn't have to be a fast craft. Uh, but a levitate a levitating airliner, think about the the where it could go everywhere in the world. It wouldn't need an airport. >> But don't don't you think we've already >> I mean, I don't tell a story very often. But that one experience that I had when I was younger was a triangle craft.

It had three white lights on each corner, one light on each corner, and then it had a red light in the middle. And it I was on a field. I was with my sister. We were star watching. It was the middle of the summer.

And uh came up. I'm not a good estimate of height, but it was high up, but not so high that you couldn't make out what it was. I mean, it's clearly a black triangle with these lights on it. And it it wasn't moving very fast. It was moving kind of slow.

And then it almost came to what looked like a like a total stop, made a 90° turn, and took off going the other direction. And that is It wasn't super fast. It was just like they had total control of the craft is what it seemed like. So, it's interesting to hear him mention that. >> The thing that I found interesting in this last little segment was and and I can't recall the guy's name, but um they just stated that Latsky was the head of what we commonly refer to as the X-Files.

I'm I'm sorry. Weren't Weren't we previously told that that other dude from the FBI was the guy that was in charge of the X-Files? So, which which one is it? >> Well, >> do you know the other guy that I'm talking about? I can't think of his name. He he he looks like an Indian guy to me. Um but I can't think of his name right now. >> In charge of the FBI.

>> Well, no. He was an FBI member that we had already been told publicly for many years that this was the guy that was the guy that was really in charge of all of the >> Xiles has got us John Duza. >> Thank you. That's the guy. Yes.

So, we've already been told John Duza was the guy that was in charge of the XFiles. I guess now we're being told it's Laty. So, I guess you know what are you going to do? >> It's a different guy now. >> Yeah, that's the thing. We have so many intelligence agencies and then splinter groups.

Like I think there's probably a few guys like that. I mean >> I I I believe probably >> I believe that there was some sort of X-Files situation. What I don't believe is that we're um being presented publicly anybody that's been associated to it. I think this is all an act. I think this is all a script.

I think this is stage craft perception management and this is this is a sherrod. These are these are not for people. >> It is. Yes. Uh he does I from what I understand he presses him a little bit on his legacy program knowledge or involvement.

>> You mean Jeremy Corbel the actor presses him? >> Yes. Presses him. >> Checking Smoking Man from X Files. He presses him on um whether he had knowledge on the legacy program. >> What the hell is I'm sorry.

What's Jeremy Corbel's title to me as a like as I'm I'm sorry. I'm I'm ignoring him. >> What is Jeremy Corbel's profession? What does he do? What's his what's what's going on right now? >> Well, so he I believe he has a journalism credential. >> How from who? >> Okay. Um, >> the unconfirmed journalist.

>> Unconfirmed journalist. I could probably confirm it though. And also a real estate >> former Joe Rogan guest. Is that what we know so far? Former guest of Joe. >> Documentarian.

Yeah. George. >> Oh, that's right. He used to live on Bob uh on um uh Jim Leer's John Leer's couch, right? He's a former homeless guy that lived on John Lear's couch. I remember that part.

[laughter] >> Yeah. Yeah. So, you know what I'm talking about. >> Um, but >> yes, this this is the Jeremy Corbell. I forgot I I was trying to recall his credentials in this conversation.

So, former former homeless guy that lived on John Lear's couch. Um, obviously for good intentions. Um, and then, uh, Bob Lazar, enthusiast and former guest on the Joe Rogan podcast, who's a comedian that pretends to be an intellectual contemporarily, >> and um, Yes. And also a quantum jiu-jitsu master. >> Oh, I would quantum jiu-jitsu the [ __ ] out of him.

>> [laughter] >> Let me see. So, my AI did not find evidence of formal journalism education or long-standing experience of mainstream news outlets. >> And we all know AIs are infallible, right, K, >> right? Oh, yeah. That's that's why I preface it with AI. >> I know.

I'm just teasing. So many people typically credential their AIs as being so accurate, you know. >> Oh, god. I know. take >> under rigorous scrutiny.

I've discovered the lattice work of reality. >> I think of my AI research as like that piece of [ __ ] car, you know, like it'll get you there, but sometimes it'll give you some problems. [laughter] >> I think of it like if you're on the job site and you get jammed up and you ask the apprentice what you think you should do next, >> right? Yep. Basically, uh, Eversur called it here. Filmmaker is what they stress on.

So, >> Oh, okay. His biography emphasizes his artist and filmmaker background rather than a classic journalism track. >> So he's a creator of fiction for a living. >> Some would say it's fiction. Yes.

>> Right. That's if we choose our words correctly, >> right? And Nap is kind of I know like his his mentor sort of. >> Um all right. So let's keep going here. This is uh he achieved that.

Like we hear about all these people on military bases seeing triangles and you're doing this study OAP to try to figure out the physics of how to do that. Do you think it's already been achieved by the US government or it hasn't? And that's why OAP had a lot of value. >> It hasn't been achieved to its full extent. >> I mean he just asked like eight questions at once. By the way, that's where uh a suggestion fronted by Senator Reid went into was I actually asked about your very question.

Can we can we just cut through all of this and do what we can do right now and check out this type of craft to the point of using all the money? just it's like it's like >> putting all your chips on one because I said the breakthrough would be tremendous if we can just pursue that. Um that wasn't funded either. Okay. It was difficult. >> You know, Senator situation >> where people were turning down the money.

>> Can we fund the truth? No, that wasn't funded either. >> Turning down the money again. Well, one of the one of the big revelations I think from part one was that Kona Blue, what we may be looking at is a modern-day legacy type program where Kona Blue went from proposal to actual program but under private entities. So, it's almost like they're just doing what they did previously with the legacy programs. That is that's literally always been the case is my understanding.

>> Yeah. >> Is that the conversation gets started um with um public monies and public servants, >> right? >> And then they realize there's no way that we can operate this because the people have oversight of the government because the government is in service to the people. So the only way, right, supposed to be. So the only way that this can function with complete plausible deniability is to do a little quarterback sneak. And what we're going to do is dip the ball over into the private sector that is um free from the Freedom of Information Act, >> right? and can >> promise them a bunch of wealth and they promise us exclusive access and >> well not even promise them wealth just give them the ball so that they can operate in an unregulated capacity.

>> Mhm. >> And they have inf Oh, you muted again. Oh, you muted, buddy. You're muted in StreamYard. >> Dopey ass app.

>> There he goes. All right. Yep. I'm sure it is. >> Yeah, it's all good.

Um yeah, I was just saying that this is um the problem is that the the private sector has the infinite wealth and the lack of oversight. So what what what ball gets started rolling on the field so to say in the government where the conversations initiate they immediately get pulled out of the government pulled into the private sector because technically the government only limits how much money can be invested as a client to the corporations because they have to account for the taxpayer dollars going into a direction which makes it subject to freedom of information and oversight. But if they can say, "Well, we never funded that program." >> It's word selection to make people think that the activity stopped. >> What that really means is that it left the government sector, went to the private sector, now it's wholly unregulated, not possible to be um freedom of information acted, and has infinite wealth available to invest in it as a monopolized technology. that's operating without oversight and unregulated.

>> Right. And this may be why we're hearing about FBI involvement. Um there's been some whispers of an FBI investigation into this because of all of the [ __ ] that seems to be going on. >> It's really challenging because again, if it's not a known tech and there is no oversight, I mean I mean I >> and if it's classified that makes it harder. I hate to say this, but if there's no laws against it, it's not illegal.

>> Yeah. Yeah, that's a that's a fair point. Um, >> that's what I mean when I say unregulated, people don't get that. If it's unregulated, really means there's no laws pertaining to it at all. These companies can do whatever the [ __ ] they want.

>> Yeah. If I mean if you came up with a new technology, Ishkabibble technology, >> right? >> If there's no law against Ishkibble technology, >> do what you want. >> You can do whatever you want with it. >> Well, Steve Long, let me see. He's he's he's typing out here.

This looks like an important point he's wanting to make. So before Biglo's OAP investigated the Illinois black triangle case, Biglo's NIDs investigated it and other big black deltas as NIDS called them. NIDs concluded in O2 the Black Triangles were DoD lighter than air blimps created by Air Force Material Command and Air Mobility Command. Two years later in November04, NIDS retracted this without any explanation and disbanded. Then a few years later, OAP stated up, looks like he ran out of room there, but uh OAP stated maybe it was correct.

I'm not sure what he meant there, but so big black triangles were lighter than air blimps operated by Air Force Material Command. Wow. Then a few years later, OSAP started up. Okay. >> Remember last time when we were talking about the um the large craft, the companies I tried applying to up here like Yeah.

This stuff >> this stuff's been around >> for decades and it's just on the back burner of public perspective. >> Absolutely. >> But I mean, I've I've applied to companies 10 years ago that provided these services. I think one of the one of the best avenues for research that I have found to what is available technology and programs is simply looking for jobs in Alaska. I mean 10 years ago I was applying to jobs in in the remote bush of Alaska that were hosted by the DoD, now the Department of War.

But previously, the Department of Defense was looking for employees to work in the remote Alaskan bush to um install um um and Gabe, you were in the military, so you know about like forward operating fuel locations like fuel depots. >> Yeah. >> Right. So they were building these all over the state of Alaska for the last 10 years. The DoD was hiring for welders, plumbers, all types of tradesmen to build these forward operating fuel depots throughout the state of Alaska.

>> Now, it's not necessarily that, you know, Gabe, that's a great question. Why would the Department of Defense need to prepare to have all of these fuel depots peppered all over the state of Alaska? Unless they were already planning to need to refuel all of their vehicles in all of these remote locations. But why would they need to do that, Gabe, if there wasn't a war coming, Gabe? Russia. I mean, that's >> I mean, >> Russia's pretty close geographically, right? >> I I can appreciate that we are the line in the sand when it comes to all Arctic um military endeavors. >> What do you think it is? I I absolutely believe that we're um being set up for more conventional war type activities.

I am concerned that the state of Alaska will be proverbially thrown under the bus that some sort of an invasion activity will be tolerated in this state exclusively. >> No. >> Yes. So imagine if you're in the lower 48, Gabe, just hypothesize with me a little bit here, right? >> If all of a sudden all of the lower 48 was watching news about the invasion of Alaska militarily, >> do you think anybody would pause after the COVID debacle if all of a sudden they laid down the law and like these are the rules and regulations. We are in a state of war.

Alaska is being invaded and we have to we have to do these things to prevent what's happening way over there from happening over here. Yeah, that's that's interesting. Uh there would be a lot to manage because there'd be a lot of militia groups, there would be a lot of Yahoos, right? Um, they've been waiting for this moment their whole life to use their arsenal. I I don't know how that would go. That would be >> Hold on one second.

Because because you just said that, I'm going to >> I'm going to go grab some uh paraphernalia. >> Uhoh. >> Just because because of the conversation that we're having, I find this highly pertinent. Give me about 27 seconds. >> Don't worry, buddy.

We'll listen to this madman here for a minute. Doesn't that seem a bit odd? A minority >> leader and and then a former majority leader of the Senate >> and they're turning down new money. Isn't that odd? Why would they be do it's going back to that final statement I made? What is it about OAP and Kona Blue that somebody has to poo poo on it and degrade what is and and ridicule and laugh at it? Why? Why is that? And it's not one or two or three people. It it permeates the public. It certainly permeates um I had some doozy of arguments with people at the Pentagon.

I'm not telling you. And you know I could have but I knew what they were going to do as soon as they learned anything. And but that's where my statement comes. I was a perfect example back then of people assuming authorities and wanting knowledge they had no need to know and had no business knowing and they wouldn't accept no for an answer. You you make the an impassioned argument in the new book about the necessity for not trying to separate UFOs from paranormal.

I mean that's >> that's like an anchorage group. >> That's correct, sir. >> Right on. I like that. Uh, one of the best ways to exercise your freedoms is to um join your local militia, support your local militia, or in lie of doing either one, start a local militia.

>> I don't I don't play games. So, the conversations that we're having are very real to me. Um, Anchorage Citizens Militia >> is mine. >> You you founded it there. >> That I stepped it up, sir.

That's fantastic. Yeah, that's how to >> that's how we the people roll is that a well- reggulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state is the first half of the second amendment. People focused all too often on the second half. >> Yeah. Well, and people get it's uh it's one of those things where you it's it's your right to defend your neighborhood.

Your >> It's your obligation. It's not a right. It's an obligation, Gabe. >> Right. Well, >> let's not play games here.

>> Some people don't look at as an obligation, though. >> I understand that. And I would call them cowards. >> [laughter] >> Well, I've often thought like we should do a mandatory service thing where if you're a pastor, that's the militia. Okay, join the militia.

>> That's that's the militia. Your local neighborhood. If you cannot be a responsible citizen for your direct neighborhood, that would be your obligation, right? Literally, Gabe, the block that you reside on. >> Mhm. You should be integrating with that community, making sure that you have enough food for your family, right? In case of an emergency, how much food is in your household for your family members to survive? How much medical supplies do you have for your family to survive? Those are priorities, right? You have to first and foremost be self-sufficient.

And then once you gain that level, then you need to start to network with the community. There's, you know, first level, second level, third level of triage type stuff. Um, I'm sure like you were in the military. I'm sure you have a certain amount of medical training. Um, you know, uh, >> limited.

I would limited, right? But tourniquet application and things like that, but you know, that you be trained up on them, right? I got certified as a stop thebleleed instructor by the Red Cross, which means that I can train people on on how to apply tourniquets and stop major hemorrhaging. >> Nice. >> Right. Like these are things that anybody can learn, right? Heaven forbid you get into a car accident, any kind of incident that happens in the regular world. This is just standard stuff, right? Anytime things go wrong, the number one cause of death is soft tissue damage, which means bleeding out.

Bleeding out happens in three to five minutes. Well, I learned in the state of Alaska, right? In the state of Alaska, more often than not, if you get injured, help is more than 3 to 5 minutes away. So, if you're not skilled in tourni tourniquet application and how to pack wounds and and and soft tissue damage until more help can come, you're a nonuseful body. M so I think it's very important that there's certain skill sets that people engage with as a community and then and then in addition to that you should be able to also defend yourselves. So anytime there's an emergency first and foremost as I'm sure you probably learned from the military comms communications is priority.

So every every community right off the bat should be able to figure out a way >> that if things go south, how do we communicate >> because if we can't communicate, we don't even know what we're up against and how to help each other. >> Once you have communications down, it gets down to logistics and resources. >> Yeah. When there's disasters and stuff like that, communications typically just takes a dive because the network gets kind of over overrun. Um >> Right.

Exactly. So, >> if there was an earthquake in your neighborhood, if there was a forest fire, everybody's going to be calling 911. We know these things will get taxed. We know that they technically will not actually function or they can be shut off by the powers that be. So, you don't even actually have control over that.

If in an emergency you want to use your cell phone, but the powers that be are going to say, "We've already determined that the system will be too taxed in an emergency situation." So, we have massive amounts of access that we will just immediately cut off so that the emergency responders can use it. And a lot of people go, "Well, that's fantastic because they have to let the emergency responders do their job." Well, that's fantastic until you're trying to find out where your kids at, >> right? Or you have an emergency yourself. >> Well, then you're in the emergency. If there's an earthquake or forest fire, you're in the same emergency, but your access to communications will be totally totally compromised. >> Yeah.

So in any real emergency, >> what are people prepared to do? To provide their own communications, >> to provide their own medical resources, to have water supplies, food supplies, every single thing that you would need on your block in your community. Neighbors helping neighbors. This is what the militia of old was. This is the militia of old that George Washington was the general of that overcame the obstacles of the tyranny of the crown. General Washington was a militia man.

>> Mhm. >> Yeah. He didn't believe in a standing army, right? He thought it should be a militia. >> The militia was just the was just the people. We the people >> and that's what that's what got us freedom.

They've managed to tie militias to, you know, racism and terrorism. >> They've turned it into a porative term. >> Right. Right. And so people are naturally uh scared and and back away from them.

>> Right. They like to say that the militia folks are crazy. They're anti-government. That's that's somebody trying to cast in a bad light. The militia is for the people.

That's what it is. for the people. It is we the people for the people. Neighbors helping neighbors when things go wrong in the neighborhood. >> Yep.

And a bugout bag and an alterate uh way to communicate is uh important to have. Uh you just never know. Um >> and when you need it, it's good to have it. >> Yeah. It's basically like a little I don't know what your I don't know what your rate or rank was in the military, but I'm sure that you guys had like, you know, you know, you had your uniform of the day, but then you also had like your your kit, your gear for whatever you were you were you infantry riflemen.

>> Yeah. I was uh communications, so radio. >> Oh, so you totally understand the value of communications. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah.

I mean, imagine imagine the crew compliment that you were working with if if you as the communications guy failed. Yeah. So, it wouldn't be, >> you know, how many people that negatively impacts, >> right? Yeah. Yeah. You gotta be able to you got to be able to talk for sure.

>> Especially like if shit's going down. >> Hell yeah. Yeah. If you're taking enemy fire and they're like, "Gabe, get the radio up." And you're like, "Yeah, sorry. I'm screwing up." They're going to have a problem with you.

>> Yeah. That's not going to be good. [laughter] >> Oh my gosh. All right. Let's get back to these jokers here.

>> Well, how it started. you were interested in Skinwalker Ranch. You had an experience there yourself. And no matter how weird things got for for the investigators, these intelligence folks who would go to the ranch maybe uh feeling like they could put an end to these mysteries and and speculation about werewolves and and things like that, but you you didn't. I mean you you believe that they are intrinsically linked and you can't separate one from the other and and expect to understand either.

Can you uh elaborate on that a little bit? Why those things are linked? Why we can't just separate separate why why they're linked? I'm not sure. But I do know that uh OAP investigators were instructed to and when I say investigators I don't mean people back in the building. I mean, in the field, we're calling >> still listening. I'll be right back. >> We're saying move slowly because you'll learn a lot more occurred around a UFO sighting than just the sighting.

and and and the MUON investigators who may have been through the door first to talk to these people, then followed up by Bass personnel, they knew that they should be asking more about what is termed the paranormal. They knew it. But it's hard to realize that to volunteers in the field who think I want to discover the propulsion method for the UFO or I want to find the uh the body lying [laughter] that they took off without lying in the field. I want that. I don't want to go into the uh uh strange in order to uh and it's but it's not strange.

>> It's not >> it's always been there. >> The connection has always been there. >> It's always been there. And the thing is is if there's someone trying to teach us something, they must be just shaking their heads by now, just saying, "Man, these guys are stubborn. They just don't get it." So the thing is is but what to get you know we have to figure that out but you need money to do some of that you know you can't just say oh back during the contract there was a good argument for I don't want to call it the department of the paranormal but something that got more than a measly $22 million you know let's divert a h 100red million let's divert 150 million by the way those were to the plans.

You know, Senator Reid was going to move up very high, but and expand in the same way. We weren't going to chase flittering UFOs all around the countryside. Uh because you saw that the uh I think you're reading behi between the lines in for example in Brazil. Brazil had some very successful encounters and discussions, but for the most part it was like, gee, we're just kind of I don't want to say wasting our money coming down here, but you notice we didn't go hack. The the thing is you you send investigators there, they have this hitchhiker experience.

It follows them home. They see werewolves and other strange phenomena. It spreads through their families. The fact that these people like PhD scientists, seasoned intelligence officials, uh, who go to the ranch and have these experience see werewolves, dino beavers, Bigfoot type thing. That can't be comfortable for them uh, to admit what they saw because it sounds so crazy.

And it's so easy for critics of OAP to say exactly what people like Arrow have said. Oh, it's a ghost hunt. It's werewolves. It's goofy. Haha.

Um, it's easy to say it leads, right? You follow the evidence. >> Yes. You got to have nerves of steel. And uh, and I can tell you not everything has come out. Not everything at all.

Uh, because some people's real names have been discovered, a number of them. And uh we only put things in not that that uh were super wild, but would have probably had people trying to track them down. We did have at least one group try to track, oh my gosh, you've changed the names and the locations. We want to reinter these people. Well, they don't want to be reinterviewed unless they search you out and and we were very sensitive to that.

Also, there were some pretty straightforward, I think, threats of uh of lawsuits that uh that uh uh Doppser warned us about. You know, try to mask their identity. Yeah, you're telling the truth, but you don't have to tell the public too much or they'll be camping on their doorstep and people don't want that. And don't tell too much. You don't want the >> basically a uh >> right, you know that there are other locations other than the ranch in the country.

I mean, they could exceed the the examples as the ranch. You don't want people stomping there. They could talk about more than doser approved >> and uh disturbing the uh the homeowners and I put that in the plural because some have more than one. I mean I I was gratified by the way that oh skinwalker and that whole area. I mean, I have seen people go there um because it's not just Skinwalker anymore.

Like they that ranch has sold parts of it to other people and there's other people that own parts of that ranch now. There's uh oh gosh, I'm not going to recall the name now because it's important, but one's called like >> Was it Ryan Burns? >> Yeah. What's it called? Space something Ranch. And um there's >> that guy interviewed me a couple of times and and he joined forces with what I would call are the bad actors. >> H see and I don't think they do that on purpose.

I think >> Oh, I do. I think you're just being too polite. You're a kind-hearted person and I think that these people are absolutely um doing this all on purpose. >> Man, that sucks. That sucks.

I cuz I do I like to think like people mean >> you're a nice guy, Gabe. I totally get that. I get that vibe from you. Like you want to believe that everybody's genuine and and doing the things and and trying to help. I I totally get that.

>> Yeah. >> But I'm I'm I'm just going to be the pendulum swinging in the other way of of of reality. >> Probably Yeah. is is that there's there's a high probability that this is just contrived, >> right? Well, it's I mean, it's so clear what they're doing here is is if not scripted very well planned, right? Like the major points, the parts that were supposed to be controversial, they knew exactly, >> which the word contrived fits appropriately. And then and then the words collusion and conspiracy would be synonymous terms that also fit very appropriately.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, let's let's watch some more uh contrived conspiracy here >> that uh Mr. Fugal Brandon uh Brendan Fugal is that's pronounced correctly admitted that he's definitely referencing were uh >> his employees. He doesn't know if it's Brendan or Brandon >> sitting approximately where I was in the living living room and have seen things.

>> Uh what what does that mean? Why why I had my back to the what is basically the front door, the kitchen door? Do they have more than one door than the one door? Uh uh and uh why did it happen right there? The only thing convinced me was that there was more to this than meets the eye. better talk to Senator Reid about this. We need some money to at least investig in investigate the military aspects of this. >> Yeah. And why why you stepped away, he did actually uh admit that the 22 million was pretty much a nothing burger.

>> Oh, yeah. I was I was listening as well and and that's what that's what we discussed last week also >> is that $22 million in the grand scheme of this is is nothing. >> It's a joke to them. Yeah. Like it's just enough to make a small little blip >> to make to make some propaganda.

>> Y >> it's certainly it's certainly not doing any brass tax research or applying any real tools, materials, and resources to tackle any problem. It was a paperwork pushing propaganda machine from day one. >> Right. It was so the press could say Pentagon is funding UFO research. Oh, Steve's got it.

Blind Frog Ranch. Um, butts up against Skinwalker Ranch. Yep, you got it. Um, and that's the one where I like I know. >> Yeah, thank you.

I I know I've had conversation with with folks that have had experiences there. Um, and it's, you know, they say it's just as uh strange areas, just as much strange activity goes on there as does the ranch. I mean, it's right next door. So, all right, here we go. >> Holes being deployed on American soil.

That would be of concern. So, [laughter] >> however, there is a fake story out there. The one about the fight between Bigalow guards and aliens with lasers. Now, that that and and the guards won. I mean, auto fully automatic weapon might dissuade even someone with a laser.

So, but that was a fake story. But did it get traction? >> Singular a >> Yeah. Yeah. That the fake stories often get get traction. Um so hey, just right off the cuff here, um >> hold on a second.

Jeremy Corbel just said the fake stories often get traction. >> You were read into and involved in a legacy UAP program before OAP. Do you deny that? >> I can't speak to that. >> Wait, so I'm sorry. Can you please rewind that, Gabe? That was very important.

>> A Q clearance. >> I can't speak to that >> a little further. Bro, >> concerns. >> Only thing he convinced me was that there was more to this than meets the eye. Better talk to Senator Reid about this.

We need some money to at least investig investigate the military aspects of this. >> Right. If if there are craft coming out of port holes being deployed on American soil, that would be of concern. So, [laughter] >> however, there is a fake story out there. The one about the fight between Bigalow guards >> and aliens with lasers.

Now, that that and and the guards won. I mean, auto fully automatic weapon might dissuade even someone with a laser. So, but that was a fake story. But did it get traction? Now, is he referring to the underground base shootout story where the guy lost his finger or something? >> I'm not sure which story specifically he's referring to, but he is at the very least >> referring to this is why I was joking before a story singular as if it's the only one. Right? So he's now directly saying that there was propaganda released a fake story which is what we were discussing last week and in this conversation earlier is that they're subsidizing the news.

They're releasing propaganda. It is disingenuous. It's a lie. However you want to put this stuff, whatever blows your hair back, it's a [ __ ] sandwich. Okay.

Oh yeah. So yeah, >> so this up until this point it's it's clarifying there's a [ __ ] sandwich, but this conversation gets worse really fast. >> Yeah. Talking about legacy >> watch. >> Yeah.

Yeah. The the fake stories often get get traction. Um, so hey, just right off the cuff here, um, you know, through some investigative journalism over the years, I came to understand that you were read into and involved in a legacy UAP program before OAP. Do you deny that? >> I can't speak to that. The only other clearance I had was >> uh, uh, >> I'm sorry.

What was that game? >> Clearances. >> Yeah, you you could deny it if it wasn't true. But saying, >> right, he's not denying his singer can't speak to that, which is technically an admittance of the association, right? >> He could have he could have very easily said, "No, that's not true." If it were not true, >> but instead because of proper word selection, he said, "I cannot speak to that." So, back to this whole OAP being a propaganda machine. And what this gentleman just said is that he was part of a program prior to ASAP, OAP, whatever you want to call it. Um, I would say that this goes back again to prove what I've said previously is that the OSAP program and the minimum minimal amount of monies invested at $22 million was just simply a propaganda leg of other programs that were not allowed to know about and this [ __ ] $22 million investment in OAP.

And what everything in these three dudes is saying right now is um disinformation to lead us away from the programs that they are not willing to discuss, which are not approved by Doppser, which are not discussed in the assembled book. What we are watching is a circus. This is all total [ __ ] Yeah, it's amazing that that um it's just amazing the attention it's getting and the fact that people are taking it as at face value legitimacy. I tell you I anybody with any link to those legacy programs in my opinion should be under intense scrutiny. um until we figure out what's until we can separate fact from fiction because some of the stories we've heard about what those folks may have been involved in is pretty shady [ __ ] >> Yeah.

Well, we absolutely should work on separating fact from fiction, but the only thing that we're being presented by folks on the on the regular, including these three knuckleheads that we're looking at right now, is unsubstantiated speculation that they're trying to present as fact when it sounds more like manufactured fiction, >> right? Or >> because they're not basing it in any reality other than trust me, bro, I got the credentials. >> Well, it's it's a it's a fact, but then none of the details, right? So, we have an unidentified ship, but that's all we're going to tell you, right? Oh, >> right. That's all we're going to tell you, >> right? But they're speculating that it's something off-world when in reality due to word selection. Um the probability of it just being something manmade from this planet that we can't identify the source >> of it specifically to which nation state of manufacturer leaves it in the category of unidentified >> right and and >> flying object right there's There's preferred ambiguity terms that are being applied lest we are less ambiguous and say things like, "Oh, well, it turns out there's a foreign nation state that has a level of advanced technology that's a thousand years beyond ours." Um, what kind of debaca would that lay at people's feet? In reality, Gabe, like what would be more threatening to the people right now? If we were completely on the up and up if we just simply had the option to state there are aliens in the cosmos or there are three other nation states that are so technologically advanced that there are probably a thousand years ahead of us. Which do you think would scare the American public more? I would say the nation state.

>> So that would be more likely that they would want to cover that up, right? >> I would think so. >> Me too. >> I would agree with you. >> That feels more real, right? >> Right. It feels more real and threatening, >> right? >> Yeah.

Because we can appreciate more so that those foreign nation states with advanced technologies may be more apt to work against our best interests than the unknown of a theoretical alien species that's been around for millions of years that never gave us a [ __ ] problem. >> Right. Yeah. Oh, but by the way, listen to Jeremy Corbel and all these other Fed agents and and [ __ ] agents um try to convince us that the threat is off world, not on world. >> Well, and here's the thing.

This is what's brilliant is like they don't even have to necessarily do that. They present it in this way and they know there's enough content creators out there. >> Yes. that are going to fill in all those gaps with everything they know they're going to fill. >> Absolutely.

God already knows what they're paying them >> as they all deny being paid, >> right? And after you find them in a chat together, >> I'm not I don't I'm not concerned with your clearances. I'm concerned specifically with the question of if you were involved with >> and read in to a legacy UFO program before OAP and I asked you to if you would deny that, >> is your response still I can't speak about that? >> I can't speak about that. Okay, I can't speak about that. >> But, you know, it's public knowledge to state that what clearances I had. >> Okay.

>> Yeah, >> we know two ways about that. But as to the programs they applied to, that's a different story. And that's why you're getting a slow roll on some of the uh people coming in to testify, it's like, oh, okay. >> Say I'm a fed on a short leash without saying I'm a fed on a short leash >> and are read into it and and it's currently read in. I can't talk to Congress.

Yeah, that would allondo said that. David Grush said that. Dylan Borland said that. Everybody that has a knowledge in these special access program. I'm just going to re-emphasize to everybody out there, um, including Ge Gabe, how come Jeremy Corbel's never reached out to me again? Anybody? Anybody? Anybody? Cuz >> because he doesn't I I I have I have no NDAs.

I have no leash on me. And what he just iterated is that all of these people can't actually talk and they're whistleblowers. So, um I mean by all means everybody um crush Jeremy Corbel's inboxes comments and ask him why he refuses to engage me cuz I think his answer you would find very interesting. >> I guess yeah, I guess it only counts if something's flying in the sky. I don't know.

Um >> I saw a UFO at the South Pole Station in Antarctica. Would he be disinterested in that topic? >> Oh, he would be super interested, I'm sure. Um, >> I've been public on him for years. How come he hasn't reached out? >> Would you do an interview with him if he asked? >> Oh boy, would I do an interview with him? >> Oh boy, would I? because he would record it on his end and I would record it on my end and I would release the entire interview to the public while he um did his theatrics and edited version. >> He would be terrified to engage me.

Um which is why he's never engaged me. I'm not scared to dialogue with him. He's terrified to dialogue with me. That's how that's how this equation works in disclosure and why most people aren't familiar with my information because it's not spotlighted and I'm not pedestalled because if I was to engage with these [ __ ] douchebags, I would show them for the fools and feds that they are. >> Yeah.

Yeah. And they don't want that. They can't have that. Um, they need people that are going to join the team and promote >> and join in the back channel chats and listen to the [ __ ] sandwiches and all of that stuff. You're You know the drill, Gabe.

You're >> Oh, yeah. >> You're a kindhearted person that's learning very fast >> um that things are worse than you had hoped. >> Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely.

And I think I think a lot of people are, you know, I think a lot of people are starting to figure out like >> Yep. I think a lot of people were pieed and they wanted the best and they wanted to believe everyone. I to I completely get that. >> And then you and then you get a government that won't even tell you what drones flying over New Jersey are. >> Right.

But Right. So then what do you what what do you do? What do we do? What do all of us do when we realize that the lies and the deception, the disinformation and the disingenuous players, the stage craft, the actors were ongoing for decades and way more than we ever expected. So that's that's that's where we're at is people are waking up to things are and were way worse than they could [snorts] have imagined. >> Yeah. >> That's where that's where we're at right now.

People are learning. We're waking up. >> Yeah. And and I think it's a good thing. Maybe we're just reaching this age where the information's coming in some cases faster than it can be blocked or altered or narrated.

Uh and so we're seeing bits and pieces of the truth kind of come through and seep through and >> yeah, >> people are turning away from the mainstream, you know, messaging and and that kind of stuff. So >> I I think the safer the safer position for people to operate from now is I have been bamboozled and things are and have been worse than I could have possibly imagined. Now what do I and what do we do? That's the that's the safer direction to operate from now >> than to have, >> you know, fallen for all of the other um that we've all learned about previously. You know, everybody had all this in so many ways. Well, theium failed >> and we're learning that the deceptions and the liars were more prevalent and the [ __ ] sandwiches were more hardily served.

We had been eating them up, pretending they were delicious. >> Yes. >> But but here we are today now knowing we have been bamboozled. Mark Twain said something to the effect I'm so bad with butching and paraphrasing quotes, but Mark Twain said that it's it's it's easier to bamboozle people than to convince them that we have been bamboozled. >> And that's where we are today.

It's to it's absolutely the truth. He was such an astute mind. So we we have to respect that we have been bamboozled as much as that sucks and we don't want to admit it. >> We've been bamboozled on so many levels for so long. >> Oh yeah.

>> It's a hard it's a hard jagged little pill to swallow. Thanks a lot more. >> Um >> Yep. So keep that in mind folks as we're progressing through this. Congress needs to be >> this is a this is a planned out thought out thing uh that these these guys got together and decided to do um and they all have their own reasons their own motivations um and I don't think any of them are to get the public to the truth to be honest able to hear those statements which is a very difficult thing.

That's why some of the closed door briefings haven't happened because they wouldn't be they wouldn't progress anything. Anyway, next question. I >> agree. >> Um, has there to know been any contact at a government level with any non-human intelligence beings? Yes or no? >> I can't make a statement on that. >> Do you know? >> I can't make a statement on that either.

Oh, that's a such [ __ ] This is such [ __ ] >> You had said u earlier, >> what's the point of asking people questions that they can't answer? >> Uh that was that was because you leave it hang out there bo totally totally leaving the witness. >> You also have said there about the leaks of some of the OSAP documents that there were attempts to track them down and get them back. Can you elaborate on either of those? Did didd follow up and and and remove the false information and did was DIA the one that went after the leaked or or publicly illegally released? >> Well, I don't know that they ever went after things. It's, you know, there's also the philosophy that if something leaks, don't bring attention to it. And that's why I said there was a concern that there was something in the 500page document roughly 500 page that called the 10-month report but we just pulled them back from everyone who we thought had a copy but didn't realize people were passing them around.

And the other thing was what was your second question >> about the false documents that have been entered under the record. DoD >> uh did somebody did they take an action remove them? >> My opinion, no they haven't. No, they haven't at all. Now again, it may be don't rock the boat and draw attention to things, but it wasn't classified information as far as I was concerned. It was just flatout false information that had been put into uh into uh well you don't put it into it put on into electronic form.

>> Yeah. You said that last time said every specialist counter intelligence officer that's their job. You have that person either assigned to you or you bring him in and there's a source of forged documents because we were talking about that. Well, I'll just tell you, George and I have had pushed on us numerous times these yet to be released quote unquote Zodiac documents, an alleged program that is an alleged legacy program which George and I never bought when we see this information pushed on us. We're not buying it.

Um, is that a UFO legacy program that's been claimed? Um, or is that disinformation? >> I couldn't comment on that. Right. But is there disinformation out there? Plenty, right? Well, copy that disinformation. Copy that. >> There was something on George's I was going to say about >> Oh.

Oh. on the stuff where I mentioned uh uh with DoD, even with DIA, I'm going to have to say that I think it was deliberate false information put in there. Deliberate. >> Pause this, please. >> Uh dist again.

I I >> How many times can we hear these disinformationists talk about there being disinformation seated into the community? Holy cow, Gabe. I mean, seriously. >> Yeah. >> I mean, they're literally >> the community. >> They're saying exactly what I'm saying is that there's disinformation.

I'm coming from an angle of experience. I've I've I've spoken in skiffs. This has been my experience is that there's feds involved that are disseminating false information and now we're hearing a fed and a a Joe Rogan podcaster experiencer homeless person that slept on John Lear's couch. I mean these this is the pot calling the kettle black when they're both the pot and the kettle. I mean what the what the [ __ ] going on right now? >> Damn.

This is total ridiculousness. They're to me it feels like they're positioning themselves for being the UFO guys for the next >> The only true thing that they're saying is that we know that there's [ __ ] being sown in the disclosure community >> and they know that because unadmittedly they're the ones doing it. >> That's the only truth >> in it, >> right? They they are it. That's the only That's the only thing that I'm hearing right now is that they're wholly cognizant of crap being spewed within the community because they're the ones spewing the crap. So, I will agree with them in that truth that they're speaking.

They are correct. When they talk about disinformation being sewn into the disclosure community, that part is true >> because they're the ones doing it. >> Yeah, absolutely. That's a part of it. >> They are it.

They are it. >> Yeah, they are it. I mean, it >> they're getting all the coverage, >> right? They're getting the mainstream coverage. They're getting the attention. Um, and that's where the focus is when people >> Jeremy Jeremy Corbel apparently has the privilege to engage whistleblowers.

Um, >> Right. Which is so weird, >> right? He Right. It's It's extremely weird that he operates from this power position, right? >> Yeah. He's >> Gabe, you're you're a very intelligent person from my experience. you're familiar with my experience and and my information and where I've traveled with that.

>> Mhm. >> Explain to me why Jeremy Corbel has never reached out to me to engage my information with how he presents himself to the community. Make it make sense. >> I can't. It doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make any sense. >> Should he not have reached out to me already? >> Oh, absolutely. I mean, >> I'm pretty accessible. You You reached out to me and I responded and you interviewed me, >> right? I mean, that's their shtick, right? Is they are the whistleblower guys. You know, they're they'll go down protecting you.

They are, you know, you can trust them. This and that, the other. But yeah, the fact that there was not even >> And I'll I'll even go so far as I'm not the only whistleblower they've ignored. >> Oh, I'm sure. >> Right.

I mean, there there are other whistleblowers that spoke at the exact same event that I spoke at in June of 23, >> right? >> That have been ignored. >> They want a certain kind of whistleblower. >> Correct. They want fake ones that are compromisable. That seems to be par for the course in my experience is that there are whistleblowers that are wholly manufactured as part of the stage craft and then those ones get attached to and spotlighted and pedestalled for the community to then bicker about the value of their information because again they only have unsubstantable intelligence.

It seems that the whistleblowers that have actionable intelligence are the ones that are chosen to be wholly ignored. It's the weirdest [ __ ] thing. >> It's interesting how that works. Right. >> Right.

>> All right. Let's go back to this. >> The public's going to your listeners uh are going to have to weigh in on that because I don't want them to burden on you because I'll have probably a thousand opinions. But why? What was the purpose when other things counterdict it? Is it simply confusion for the sake of confusion? That is a a counterintel technique. Just have the enemy so confused they don't know what's going on.

>> Well, is that what's going on with Yankee Blue? Have you heard about this? How everybody, including yourself, has been duped? So you, Dr. Lowsky, have been duped about the UFO reality? Yankee blue clone of blue gets confusing. >> So has Lazando that it was all a ruse from the Air Force called Yankee Blue where they put some photos up at Area 51 of of saucers and started this whole wave of UFO disinformation. Do you have any knowledge of that being a disinformation campaign obviously perpetrated on the >> No, no, I do not. But I remember in my uh I remember what was a humorous incident on uh done as a joke and it clearly came across as it uh on April Fool's Day.

There were photos, very good photos being passed around of uh of uh a certain country having a UFO at one of their air bases. And it was shocking that this was but it was April Fool's. People finally realized, wait a minute, today's April 1st. >> Yeah, you're going to be a great You're going to be taking out of context there. Let's let's back up.

You're talking about something that's obviously fake. It was on April Fools. What I'm talking about more more obviously fake stuff >> right now. Why in the middle of this interview that's supposed to be about serious events, why are you bringing up what you knew was a fake event on April Fool's? >> Jeremy, let me tell you about the April Fool's UFO fake information event right now, >> right? So people can clip that and say, "Look what Kasi said about this UFO, man." And leave out the fact that it was an April Fool's joke. >> Right.

But regardless, like you and I are hearing this in its entirety, and look how Jeremy uh Corbel responds to this stuff as he tries to move that ball in the proper direction. He's a pro. He's a pro. >> Oh yeah. Oh yeah.

>> He's absolutely a good job. >> Okay. But you understand >> the Yankee Blue narrative is that everybody's been fooled. >> I've heard of it. Everybody's been fooled for decades with this and that that's the source of all of this UFO nonsense.

But then again, there's you ran a program on this. >> So Kona Blue is legit Yankee Blue Yankee Blue narrative. It doesn't add up, by the way. >> Uh I don't I don't think they're they're claiming an extent of a program. I wouldn't I wouldn't say that they uh they uh wouldn't do something like that.

That's a test case, but I would uh uh and see how certain military especially military police respond near weapon sites. [snorts] But the thing is to uh claim, you know, don't claim too much when you're trying trying to do a counter inelligence effort. Don't say it's been going on for years, right? Everybody's been duped. >> Yeah. They made a mistake that it's been a decadesl long shenanigan.

Yeah, I think that was a mistake to that. You know, don't don't get too fancy with with your fake story. Always came right. >> Yeah. You know, this major newspaper published these >> limitations to how fancy you can get with your fake stories.

>> Story is it's all made up. It's all counter intelligence by the Pentagon and CIA. Among the things that they uh addressed were uh nuclear incidents and uh Arrow went along with this. Hey, we didn't find any evidence of any kind of problems or incursions by UFOs that interfered with nuclear nuclear weapon systems or missiles. That was one of the projects that you initiated at OSAP.

It was project northern tier to look at those historic incidents. The claim now is that somebody just brought some EMP technology, a big bulky machine out to the front gate of this nuclear missile base. No one seemed to have noticed it and they are what took these out. Um, [clears throat] >> let's see. At an ICBM base, >> yeah, seem to, >> you know, you'd think that the security forces would see something like that, but you did go back and look at those original incidents.

You talked to counter intelligence people at AFOSI who said, you know, we didn't do all these. Uh, now Arrow is wiping uh wiping this off the map saying none of this AFOSI has to be completely honest with them and not lie either. >> Forget that they were not us. And you you also know that there was a more recent incident that has not been made public. Correct.

>> Right. Recent is is some time ago but has not been made public. And that's uh some not as long ago as 1970s. No, no, no, no. We're talking about in terms of a a number of years, but not more than 20 years.

I I don't know when this is going to air, but um George and I have been uh informed by multiple independent sources that the largest incursion in American history of UAP at the day we're recording happened about a month ago in Texas over a military installation. And um I know you're out of it now, but have you heard of that new recent incursion that is not public yet? I I haven't heard heard it. Uh uh >> Oh my god. Can you speculate anymore, Jeremy? >> Was still aware of what the various programs were doing. Uh >> but there was heavy interest in UAPs back then.

Now that had long have I been retired? Almost 10 years now. >> Gabe, did you know that back in the day people were interested in UFOs? >> Real you had to study them. You were had high up information on them. So this idea that we're just testing an EMP back in the 60s and that's shutting down nuclear weapons is in your point would be nonsense. Correct.

>> Nons from my point of view it would be nonsense. If it's real I'd be very surprised. And by the way it's real meaning it was EMP fake out on everybody. You'd be surprised. >> I'd be very surprised if it was an EMP fake out.

And by the way technologies were the 60s and 70s. There were a lot of bright ideas and a lot >> what what what the [ __ ] was that word salad going on right there? >> Yeah. Um this is so weird. So they expand on a story they know is fake and they [snorts] tries he tries to pressky like that was that was rather pecular to me. that what he's he's he's trying here's my my perspective on this.

>> He's trying to make words come out of Lacatsk's mouth. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. He needs this guy to say, "I saw a UFO. I went in.

There were aliens in there. You know, we smoked a blunt together." Whatever. You you wouldn't believe that there's a technology that if back in that time period they were trying to test the means and ways of nuclear systems for advantages that could begin. You would you wouldn't believe that, right? No, I wouldn't believe that. Like this is >> that's nonsense.

>> Right. back to the whole idea of it. If this was an actual court case, there would be somebody stepping up going, "Your honor, I object." Leading the witness. >> Yes. Steve made another good comment here.

He says, >> "Literally doing Corbell is doing everything he can to try to draw out the words from Latsky's mouth that he wants the public to hear." >> Yep. I don't see how Steve said just said that multiple military people were fooled by fake UFO stuff until they realized it was April Fool's Day, but Jeremy wants to completely [laughter] skip over that. >> Right. So, regardless, we have like an ongoing situation of military personnel. >> Yes.

being bamboozled, right? Which is what we discussed last time in the in the last time we watched one of these interviews. >> Mhm. Mhm. I had said that for every legitimate program that exists that requires secrecy, there are going to be five or six [ __ ] programs, >> right, >> that are surrounding the legitimate program which we learned they now have said that these programs do exist, which is what they call hazing of personnel, right? which they try to delegitimize by making it out as if it's a singular [snorts] person that got as by the term that they like to use hazed. As if one person got bamboozled.

Back to what um Mark Twain said earlier. It's easier to bamboozle people than to convince them they've been bamboozled. I am going to um double down on there are many departments, right? So for every singular secret department that is required that has thousands tens of thousands of personnel involved in a legitimate secret program. There are five or six ancillary programs meant to insulate that program that each department has as many people being [clears throat] now hazed bamboozled. Now, that's again, I'm still wait to be fair, I'm still waiting on the evidence from that report because >> Mhm.

That's a that was a pretty bold thing for the Washington Post to say. >> I get that. And that's what unfortunately unfortunately this is what this is what everybody wants is like the government to come out and admit the truth when they're the ones providing the five and six layers of deception. >> Right? >> You're you're barking up the wrong tree. If you want if you're if you're basically begging the liars to tell you the truth, it's like it's how do I put this? It's like being the wife in an abusive marriage.

Right. Right. >> If you're going to keep begging the husband who's beating you to stop beating you while he's beating you, guess what you're going to get? >> More beatings, >> right? >> Relationship, >> right? You're you're in an abusive relationship with the government right now that's six layers deep and you're trying to beg them for the truth when they've invested trillions of dollars in lying to you. >> And it's not you're not going to get what you're asking for. Please honey, please stop beating me.

>> Right. And it's such a it's such a multiaceted issue. I mean, if the truth is it's all of our tech, then we want to be careful about what gets out there because we want to protect that information. >> Um, but God, it there's just so many layers, you know, if it's if the tech is so good, are they using it against us and we don't even know? >> Yes. >> And there's no oversight.

>> Yes. So that's the problem. I think >> if bad people have access to things, history has shown us that they will do with it what they want until such time we stop them. >> So now the question is is what do they have and who has it? And at that point, we will learn what they're doing with it because it's it's in that fashion unregulated technology to which those that possess it can do with it whatever they want. >> Yeah.

>> Until we stop them, which is the whole point of regulations and oversight, right? is to make sure that the people that have access to things don't do with it whatever they want. >> Yeah. >> Right. But now if you had access to technologies that were a thousand years more advanced than what everybody else in the population knew about, you would then have privy to do with it what you want until such time people figured out what you were up to and then worked against what your interests were by providing oversight to the unregulated activities. you were involved with, >> right? Unless I was in a very powerful breakaway civilization whose only communication with the normal world is with, I don't know, like a few people in the intelligence community or something.

>> Understood. If that breakaway civilization that you were involved with in this hypothetical situation was wholly noble, which would be questionable, right, from the perspective of other people outside of your engagement, right? But even and I and I'll even be open to the possibility that that currently exists that there are aspects and breakaway civilization folks that are noble and trying to do the right thing but all possibility existing always and leaving it on the table. We cannot negate the reality that there are also breakaway civilization aspects that are the opposite of what you presented. The pendulum swinging in the other direction that are completely nefarious, unregulated, monopolized technologies that will do whatever they want until we the people um provide oversight and regulation to the activities that they're already engaged with that are occurring. Yeah, absolutely.

I mean, and there's, you know, there's where we get stories like fa could the face beers be a part of this group? Um, you know, abductions are abductions related to this, you know, that whole dark side that >> uh you know, it's >> my my current belief is all possibility exists always, right? >> That's that's that's reality, right? All possibility exists always. And what I'm learning through I'm I'm 50 years old. My life experience being what it is, what I have observed is bad people organize much faster than good people and take great liberties with the options available to them without having any moral obligations to their decisions. They simply just do what they can, >> right? Yeah. Abs.

I mean, they don't get in those positions of power by playing nice and by playing. >> Correct. And and and and by operating by morals, >> right? They get there by doing what they got to do. If that means sticking on some throats. Yeah.

>> Absolutely. Cutting off heads. >> Yep. Stepping over people on the ladder of life. And I can tell you all most of them didn't work out, but they were some, you know, there was a uh a considerable input into the strategic defense initiative in the 80s, surprisingly from the 60s.

They were real thinkers back then, even with their slide rules. Um, they were real thinkers. They were very innovative. So, I wouldn't I wouldn't doubt someone claimed it was an EMP device from the uh from the 60s. Good cover story, but uh there were a lot of fancy uh ideas back then that never panned out.

Do you think that we have biologics of NHI like has been you told me that what David Gush said tracks he said that we have biologics that came with some of these craft or crashes. Um, did you ever experience? >> I I have no knowledge and we were only looking at the technology aspects. >> Whoa. >> Other than the mechan than the uh health aspects to humans, >> right? No, that's amazing. You just answered me that I have no knowledge.

So now I have to compare all your other answers to when you just directly said I have no knowledge. [laughter] That's awesome. Well, the thing is is to say you have knowledge about a a component of a program that you we've clearly listed what we studied. We we're being honest that we didn't leave out the biologics. No, that was not part of our mission.

That wasn't DIA's mission. >> There was Yeah. There were a couple things DIA didn't want done. They didn't want done space launches. I mean, we were requested to do that and I said, "Where are we going to get the money for that, right?" >> Uh, >> let me ask you this, Dr.

Latsky. You know a heck of a lot, more than any of the rest of us, and have studied this for a long time, have been involved at the highest levels. Is there anybody, and I'm just kind of following up to what Jeremy was asking about, has there been any contact, direct contact with nonhumans? Is there anybody that knows the answer to this for sure, where they're from, why they're here, how long they've been here, what their agenda might be. You know, we have a lot of different ideas. Does anybody know? >> I I don't know.

I don't know. I probably couldn't answer if I did know. Uh the fact is is uh you know where you're getting so much information from me and I've mentioned this to you before because everyone I know in the uh UFO community the experts are getting up there in years. You know I'm getting up there and I'm in the middle of the pack. So unless this information is transferred over to younger people it's going to be lost.

Let me assure you, just because things can reside in electronic form forever doesn't mean that they will. People can put the push the delete button very quickly. In fact, that's what I'm afraid may have happened to DIA with all of the OSAP documents. Whoa, what's this? This doesn't belong here. It did maybe a few years ago.

Delete. >> So, they're not answering. They're not lying when they say we can't find it necessarily. I mean, they might be, but >> necessarily they're not lying at all >> ex except for except for they've been told exactly where they do reside on a classified server and they currently do reside there and they're denying it. So, that that's a problem that that I've navigated behind closed doors of Congress.

A lot of that was put into a place from what I understand and they should have access to it, but they're denying it. Well, they they should unless somebody has has uh screwed around with the files. They were in an I left them when I retired in an unusual location for them, but uh and I asked one of my colleagues to see if she could uh check into it and apparently the uh the files had been locked up. >> Oh, yeah. I'm sorry.

I miss the OAP files separate. I was thinking more of uh a lot of what George brought back from Russia. My bad. The off might be hard to find. Yeah.

>> Yeah. Well, that was part of the records are are uh translation of them. Uh that was electronically stored. I mean, when I to say stored, I used to push uh shopping carts of paper down to be scanned in. I was one of their best customers with us.

You know, Arrow has done an admirable job of discrediting all kinds of UFO cases, famous incidents. They seem to take their cues from some of the more outspoken debunkers on social media platforms. They'll put out some theory and then a couple years later it's, "Oh, yeah, that's that's exactly what happened." >> I know. I've seen the same thing. >> Uh the the one thing they're having trouble with though, for sure, is tic tac.

It's we're coming up on the 21st anniversary of that tic tac incident. the very first case that OAP investigated, they haven't been able to wipe that one off the map yet, but there's a lot of implications that, oh yeah, that was secret technology that we've been testing and we're it's still secret. Um, you know, it it's going to be a grand day when we finally unleash that stuff, unccork it, and and use it. But here we are 21 years later. If it's our technology, it's it's not our technology, is it? >> No, it it's not.

I mean, I don't know that officially, but it there are other things that were not uh not discussed in the full descriptions that occurred that uh uh would have that implemented on aircraft if if if if we had that technology. We would have had that implemented on aircraft if we had that technology. Are you talking back then? Are you talking about someone said you talked about something like orbs associated with the Tik Tok? >> Oh, no, no, no, no. I'm talking about electronic warfare, >> right? >> Systems to detect them. >> Yes.

>> Yeah. The ability to to jam uh actively jam certain platforms, that kind of thing is what you're talking about. >> Yeah. They just weren't available back then. >> So So the tic tac is not Loheed Martin.

Definitively the tic tac is not Loheed Martin technology from 2004. or like >> not that I'm aware of. >> Yeah. Yeah. Not that anybody's aware of.

Um, as a rocket scientist, can I ask you something? [laughter] >> And as a propulsion expert, >> you're going to try. Go ahead. >> I'm going to try. I'm going to try. Okay.

No, this is simple. This is You can answer you can answer this. This is um I'm just curious what you think of the three eye atlas debate that's going around and everybody well not everybody one particular Harvard scientist named Avi Lobe is talking about how you know and I like his open-mindedness I do that it might be have unnatural characteristics more tending towards um you know intentional propulsion from an extraterrestrial you know visitation when you look at the three eye atlas >> so they're focusing on um uh airplane platforms as being the highest level of technology in this conversation. >> Mhm. >> If we were to look at human technologies that we know currently exist, if we were to talk about off-world capacities, >> Mhm.

Airplanes and flying objects that we're familiar with um would have no capacity to operate off world in the idea of let's just say different pressures. So if you wanted to take a platform and move it off world um where pressures and temperatures are variable. >> Mhm. >> There is a technology that's man-made that has that capacity contemporarily. Do you know what it is, Gabe? >> I do not.

Submarines. >> Oh yes. Yeah. Submarines gets into like >> So when you start >> they're they're airtight. They can deal with differences in temperature and pressure and flows.

The greatest technological advancement that we as mankind have created are submarines. H right. If you were to go to another planet and you wanted I mean obviously Gabe there are different pressures to consider on other planets. An an airframe is designed to function in the nonchanging atmosphere of this planet. It is not the testament to what man has accomplished technologically.

Submarines are. When I was in the submarine service, one of the things that they harped upon, which was just stated, as a matter of fact constantly, was that so I was familiar with the Los Angeles class submarines, and my understanding was that they were the greatest testament to man's advancement technologically. that most men will know nothing about. And all of the conversations that we're seeing in the UFO world are about what airframes can do and what they can accomplish and what they can do and what they can accomplish pales in comparison. This is so great.

You have submarines popping up right now. >> This is what's really going on. We were taught in the submarine service that we were the research and development arm for NASA. That anything >> I've heard about that relation before. Yeah.

>> Anything a submarine can do um exceeds what even can happen in space because in space you have, how do I put it? constant of non-changing that in the oceans >> temperatures, pressure, and flow are constantly changing variables that a submarine has to be able to deal with. There is not another platform in the technology of men that exceeds what a submarine can do. I can't believe you have all of this submarine stuff playing right now as I'm saying this. Was this just >> Oh, yeah. Pulled it up for it.

Yeah. >> Oh, okay. Good on you, bro. You're awesome. So, this is this is what's going on.

What a submarine can do is amazing. And what's not being brought up in the conversation, and I know this sounds crazy to folks, but submarines are not obligated to be in the water exclusively. Yeah, that's pretty uh interesting. Meaning like maybe one of these could get launched into space. Uh maybe a type of these >> or or All of them.

Again, all possibility exists always until we prove otherwise. One of the things that I learned from my short term in the submarine service is that the only person on a submarine that knows exactly what that submarine is up to is the captain. the rest are compartmentalized and suffering under um that compartmentalization to believe what they're being told. Um potentially uh the navigator and the sonar crew may be more aware of what's going on but then would suffer under their NDAs and and all kinds of threats that can come into play if they were to dulge what aspects of the mission that they understood to be going on. So yes, what you're what you're showing right now on the screen, um there's a high potential that that level of technology affords us a submarine and not only having the ability to dive in the oceans and deal with all of the physics that exist down there, but also the simplicity for them to rise up out of the ocean into the atmosphere and then go beyond that into other environments where temperatures, pressures fluctuate.

I don't know of any other man-made technology that has the ability to operate in those environments. Airframes do not seem to be able to do it. submarine platforms seem to be designed exactly for that. >> Yeah. Well, it's is it possible? I mean, in the description they gave of the craft, no wings, no tails, uh nothing like that.

Makes you wonder if the, you know, quote UFO they found was indeed something uh from under the ocean. I mean, they don't really specify. Um, and then you know there's so many reports nowadays of USOS um, and uh, theories of underwater bases. Um, so yeah, a lot of that stuff a lot of that stuff going around lately. Makes you wonder for sure if uh, you know, maybe that is the tech that they're talking about.

We always think space and we always think air. But yeah, it could totally be underwater. So Steve says, uh, let's see. Lowkey just admitted he doesn't know any of the real secrets. Uh, which means just like everyone else, when it gets down to brass tax, he simply believes in things he's heard.

has never seen the proof, right? And what he's what he's willing to say he did see, he doesn't expand on it at all. And he blames classification. But why would they let him say you could you can say you breached the hole of a UFO, but you can't say anything about about it? Expand on it at all. It's almost designed to mislead people. Uh, let's see.

Steve says there's uh different transmedium tech on submarines. Have you heard about this? >> Say that again. >> Steve says it's important to note that subs carry different trans medium tech. That's interesting. >> Yeah, I would say that's inherent to the design.

>> Oh, interesting. So the sub the Louisville has long been suspected of being seen and involved in the Nimmits event. I know that there has been theorized basically that the pill the tic tac was essentially um a balloon that was released from a submarine. And when whoever was operating the balloon realized that the pilots had noticed the balloon, they cut it loose and then went underwater. That's why they saw the disruption of the water down below and then it was acting strange because it was basically a a balloon being circled by fighter jets.

Um, so >> well, if you try to simply take a balloon and submerge it at great depth, um, you're going to find that extremely challenging and it's going to bring you into the technology that a submarine is. So, trying to compare a balloon to a submarine, we're talking two different things. Um, and the submarine wins as being the greatest testament to the advancement of man's technology that most men will know nothing about. >> Yeah. Well, the sub well the sub basically I think the sub deploys the balloon is the idea and the balloons can go as high as I forget how high they can go really high and basically with the cameras on them spy nearby land at >> I guess that begs the question of is is said balloon deployed when the submarine is surfaced >> I think >> or if it's under understood which then makes it much less of an advanced technology because it's operating in standard atmospheric pressures, >> right? >> Which brings us back to the um situation of a submarine being able to operate at great depth and not in standard atmospheric pressures, which is again a testament to man's level of advanced technology.

If we're going to go to other planets, what are the odds, Gabe, that the um pressures even on the surface or in the atmosphere are similar to what we are at on Earth? So, we have to have technologies, systems, airframe platforms. I mean, what's what's the right terms now, right? um technologies that can function in great fluctuation of temperature, pressure, and flow. And there's only one technology that mankind has created that can do that thing, and that technology is referred to as submarines. >> Yeah, they're pretty pretty amazing piece of machinery, that's for sure. Um, I think this is Okay.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is an example of how it works. So, like here would be the cabin. They would deploy this high alitude balloon, I guess, using a parachute. That's and that's how high it can get. Like it's like above the clouds in this picture.

Um I'm not sure what that's an image of. I think that's an image of the actual hardware. But here's a look at I guess a breakdown of the hardware. And then here's all the different kinds of systems uh for underwater drones and navigation. It's pretty crazy all the different systems there are.

>> This is pretty interesting. And all of these technologies are things that apparently have the ability to work in the environment like a aforementioned submarines. >> Yeah. So this this I I will I will suggest to the general audience that what we're looking at here is more >> um highlevel advanced technology than what we would consider standard airframes that operate in the regular atmosphere. Yeah, pretty crazy.

Eversaur says, "Uh, the Nimmits was a balloon. The Nazka mummies are paperier-mâché and the Earth is flat." [laughter] >> I'll agree with everything except the Earth is flat. >> Yeah, you lost me if the Earth is flat. Uh, but I know I know the mummies from what I >> That whole 8020. >> The [laughter] The little mummies are definitely fake, like the little baby ones.

But some people uh the larger ones, I don't know. Uh I just don't I frankly I don't know enough about it and I just haven't wasted the brain cells on it yet. Uh okay, getting back to Latsky. Here we go. Atlas narrative that's being put out into the media.

And as a rocket scientist and propulsion expert, do you think that is a natural comet or that's maybe irregular by um you know orientation to the sun or by materials or do you think that is possibly some mother ship coming to Earth? Just curious. >> My opinion is people are going to criticize me either way, but I think it's doubtful. It's almost like something we would do, Star Treky, like pre-star Trek, >> pre-enterprise. It's just like really, you're going to coast the universe and a big rock. But, you know, one of the a competing theory these days, it's popping up everywhere, is that the moon is a satellite, not a a natural satellite, but a satellite.

you know, crazy ideas, like you said earlier, they spread so fast. Everything just spreads fast. So I I have read what you're referring to and read a couple articles on it and it's just like I've got uh that the the transfer of information to the younger folks is more important to me because you know shoot it's 10 years since I retired and then until I spoke with Senator Reid and George and uh and uh column there in Las Vegas and Bob Bigalow. It took me four years just to come to a decision to write the book. I was just saying simply this is out of control.

We've got to put down the facts. And then then I realized, gee, we got to keep on putting down the facts. That's we put down the facts. And now people, I think, are slowly coming back to, oh, okay, these guys weren't bluffing us. This is what they really did.

We didn't like, and I love those opinions. we didn't like this part of it or we didn't like that part of it cuz that's the whole upcoming discussion. That was a a fairsized discussion. We can't and we can't afford this. >> You know, we haven't even talked about some of the the content of the your new book, but this is >> new insights new book.

>> I mean, there's a heck of a lot of stuff packed into this book. UFO cases that really have not been discussed in the public that you guys ran to ground. I mean, you really did a number and and went back to the original uh information and witnesses and and put this together. Are there any that jump out at you that you'd like to share with our audience on this program? UFO in particular? >> There are three uh cases where there was closeup observation. There was the one in Kansas where the teenagers uh and a police officer both.

>> Okay. So, now they're two rehashing uh rehashing old cases, talking about his new book. So, I think we've covered the revelations, quote unquote revelations. Um you know, the big thing obviously Kona Blue was an active privately funded program. Uh, arrow is a disinformation operation.

>> Hell yeah. >> Breach the whole of a UFO. Um, possible ties to the UFO legacy program if there is one. Uh, and he says clearly that the tech the UFO technology is not our technology. But what they don't specify is who is our So, >> right because they they refuse they refuse to clarify, >> right? Or as our human beings, they not expand on that.

And I think that was on purpose. >> Absolutely. Because they in in the war of the nation states, >> Mhm. >> which is in in so many ways its own stage craft. What they cannot yield to um if it exists is that other nation states possess technology that exceed ours.

If that were to ever present itself, which I'm sure it has >> because we can't always be um the king of the mountain. There have to be >> there have to be times where we've lost the lead. But what they certainly cannot tolerate is letting the general public know the time periods for which we are floundering technologically and some sort of airframe or submarine platform somehow gets down somewhere. They're certainly not going to then um scream from the mountaintops, hey, guess what we just figured out? This particular nation state blows us away in this technological capacity which is a complete and entire threat to our national security. So what we will say is there's NHI which is which we discussed last time non >> signals >> nonhuman this nonhuman [snorts] intelligence that we've gathered that is thoroughly concerning to us.

>> Yeah. which we will now hire Jeremy Corbel to run with and present that NHI as off-world tech versus that of a foreign adversary because one is obviously more threatening to the general population than the other, >> right? We the people of our nation can appreciate the terror if other nation states possess technology that far surpasses ours. It seems much less threatening, albeit peculiar, of the existence of off-world folks possessing this technology because precedent has already been set. If there's off-world folks and off-world technology that have been around for eons, well, they've never made an on toward threat. It goes back to like what Greer says, which I don't even necessarily agree with, but Dr.

Greer is of the position that if these off-world forces wanted to wipe us off the face of the earth, they could, which I I can kind of agree with that. Like his angle is that they're all good or they would have wiped us out. I don't necessarily believe that they're all good, but I can yield to that if there is off-world folks and technologies that are millions of years more advanced than ours, the possibility and probability of them having the capacity to wipe us out, I would say, certainly exists. And if they haven't, precedent has already been set, >> right? I think if if there's distant travelers that literally had to travel the just vastness that we know space is to get to us, which means they had to develop some type of advanced propulsion system that [snorts] Yeah. That the fact that they were able to create that technology alone, I think demonstrates that that they would be able to if they wanted to just rid the planet of humans.

>> I I would agree with that. >> Yeah, I would agree with that. But like >> Yeah. So I get I get um Dr. Greer's >> Yeah.

In a in a certain breath I can I can smell what he's cooking, right? That like >> But I'm not sure I agree. >> Right. And I'm not completely there either because I I feel that things I think of the movie Halfbaked like it's more complex than that. >> Right. Exactly.

It always is. >> Yeah. That I I there could be a lot more going on. So the advancement of technology that's available I would say affords there to be an off-world potential that we could be wiped out in a way that we can't even comprehend and will be like a blitz creek. >> Yeah.

But the fact that we haven't there's there's something to be said for that and I don't want to begin to pretend to um pontificate on knowing >> all the wise and wherefors of why we haven't there's there's a lot of complexity >> that life affords. Um, you know, may for all I know, the planet itself is the Garden of Eden that other people need. I mean, looking around the cosmos, we are certainly very different from all of the other planetary bodies out there. And maybe the fact that we happen to reside here, um, it has much less to do with us versus the Garden of Eden we reside in, >> right? that we are just >> we're protected by proximity that nobody's going to >> proverbly nuke us or anything else >> that would hinder the garden. >> Yeah.

Yeah. That well that's kind of like that uh the threebody problem. >> I've never seen that yet. People keep recommending it to me. Well, they the idea is that um like if there's another intelligence out there [snorts] that they would be so much more advanced >> um that they would just come and take over kind of like the Indians got taken over in the New World.

um like we would just be so far behind them technologically that it would of course they would just come and take over. And so kind of the the theory in that book, I think it's called like the dark forest premise or something where it's the cosmos are so big, the safest thing for us to do is to stay tucked away in this tiny little dark forest and not make noise because if anybody were to find us, it would most likely be a predator and and we would end up uh >> and and again, I can smell what you're cooking, but I'm going to go back to the halfbaked hypothesis. I suspect it's more complex than that. >> I think that most I think most of the things that we can think of from the limited perspective that we've had the ability to observe >> don't allow us to understand a big enough picture to truly dial in what's going on. I mean, I can appreciate everybody wants to answer all of these questions, but I feel that our purview is so limited that we're we're not really currently in a position to answer the questions we beg.

>> Yeah. All right, I'm going to bring it back home here. What are your final thoughts on these Lacatsky claims? Let me let me just go through them. So, Kona being an actively funded program, thought on that? I believe that um Kona Blue by whatever its original mission statement was is a continued operation by whatever its current definition is. >> Yeah.

And and uh that would mean privately funded and outside of the purview of um oversight. >> That would make the most sense. >> Yeah. Uh, arrow is a disinformation operation. I bet I know how you feel about that one.

>> Oh, you muted yourself again. Oh, I think there's a delay. Yeah. Muted in StreamYard. Ah, take that, Streamyard.

I'm back. Okay. So, I just said, uh, place your wager before I answer on that one. >> Yeah. Right.

Yeah. Have an idea of your thoughts on Arrow being a disinformation shopper because you had personal interactions with Arrow. >> Yeah. Arrow is 100% a um disinformation faction. Yes, I have had personal experiences with them.

I testified in this gift in June of 23 and they absolutely lied to the public when they gave their general summary report. I know that because I testified and I know what they came out with publicly was contradictory to the statements that I gave them. So I I stand here in defiance of Arrow as a faction [snorts] claiming to do good. I obviously represented my crew from South Pole Station and testified that there were um folks, myself included, that were suffering from what are referred to as anomalous health incidents, Havana syndrome, the symptoms thereof. When they gave their summary report, they were very clear and concise when they said that they had reports of victims of Havana syndrome from every single continent except for Antarctica.

That's a lie. I >> I clarified to them the Antarctic problem and aspect to this equation and they chose to lie about it. Those are the facts of the matter. >> And why that's not and hasn't been a huge story. It's just it's so obvious.

It it's it it shows the narrative being played in the mass media that's currently the internet. I mean, we have all these dudes. I mean, Gabe, you see what's going on in this community. We have >> Absolutely. >> We have clip artists.

I call them clip artists now, >> right? >> That engage the Louzando contact. Tim, they'll these guys will clip anything under the sun as long as it's the approved narrative. I engage with these people, you engage with these people. But similar to how I questioned why uh Jeremy Corbel won't engage me or my information, I lay this same thing at the at the feet of the clip artists in the community, the XSpace hosts, right, that are the clip artists. Why is it that they will clip and create AI content for the folks that we all agree are lying? >> Mhm.

>> Right. They'll make AI videos of Jeremy Corbel and um Luwellando, but they don't engage my information. You don't you don't see me being put in AI videos. You don't see people clipping my videos. It's It's not happening, >> right? >> There's an agenda going on.

>> Yeah. It's It's um >> people would much rather hear cool stories about aliens than stories about energy weapons. These are clip artists that have told me that they're going to clip my stuff and put it out there, but they just can't yet because they're too busy with, you know, the new headline and like, so I hear this all the time, right? We're going to get to your stuff. We're going to get to your stuff. Don't worry, bro.

Trust me, bro. We're going to get to your Oh, you muted yourself again. He must be you must have a button near you or something. >> I'm not touching anything, bro. Um but so like >> it could be this app.

Yeah, >> it's all good. Um so like when I hear people say like, "Dude, I'm going to clip your stuff. Trust me, bro." Like I've heard that from all these clip artist a bunch of times, right? It's the same thing as being on a job site, right? I'm a tradesman, right? If you're a general contractor and the window guy says like, "Hey, I'm going to be there. I'll be there on Tuesday and then Wednesday he's not there and then Thursday he's not there and then you call him the next week and he's like oh dude I have this thing I have an excuse like listen to me trust me I'll be there if somebody keeps telling you they're going to do something and they don't do it how many times do you believe them before you just say you know what I now realize you're full of [ __ ] you're you're not delivering on the things that you say you're going to do. And that's what I get from the general community, right? I engage with people you like, Gabe, I've engaged with you.

You're a good person. You've delivered on the things that you've said. I've engaged with you. Not everyone is like you, Gabe. There's a lot of people >> There's a lot of people that I communicate with that give me false promises that don't deliver.

What is that about? Do you think >> you tell me, Gabe, all I can say is >> what I'm learning is these people are full of [ __ ] Right? If a clip artist says to me, Eric, I appreciate what you're doing. I support what you're doing. I'm going to clip your stuff. I'm going to I'm going to put out a video about you. And then they don't do it.

And then I challenge them. I go, "Hey, what happened? What's going on?" Oh. Oh, dude. I got so busy. You know, you got to understand there was a big story going on.

I'm going to clip your stuff. I'm going to get to it as soon as I can. Cool. Appreciate it. Do it when you can.

How many times do I have that conversation with someone who never delivers before I just simply say, "You're full of [ __ ] guy. It ain't happening." Right. Like if you're doing work in your house, Gabe, if you're if you're calling the plumber and the plumber's like, "Totally, dude. I'm going to renovate your bathroom." >> Yeah. >> Right.

And then one week he doesn't show up and then he gives you whatever his excuses are. And then the next week he doesn't show up and he gives you whatever the excuses are. And then how many weeks go by, Gabe, before you're just a fool. >> Just a couple. >> Right.

So this is this is this is again this is my experience as a whistleblower, an experiencer, somebody who's testified in skiffs engaging with people in this community, people that you know >> Mhm. >> that are clip artists. >> It's it's crazy that Yeah, I never understood why. Well, no, I think I do understand it. I think it's the topic.

It's directed energy weapons. I think they scare the [ __ ] out of people. I think covering it scares the [ __ ] out of people, >> right? They would rather they would rather deal with the unsubstantiated speculations and the con jobs um versus the brass tax reality and verifiable actionable intelligence. Now, with that being said, I would say it begs the question why, right? Yeah, it's a good question. It's a good question >> because I'm I'm standing here in defiance of all of this [ __ ] because I'm someone who's walked the walk.

I'm someone who has experienced. I'm somebody who has testified in two skips. I'm have I happen to have um the documentation to prove the things that I've speculated. Um, >> yep. >> But there's a lack of engagement for my information and a preference [snorts] to clip the [ __ ] out of and AI generate a whole bunch of content from the other direction.

And I'm just going to call it how I see it. It looks like a big giant co-intel pro. It totally could be. It totally could because you know we don't know with certain people this could be their way they make their income. You know what I mean? >> Apparently they have no other jobs other than attempting to generate income off the internet, >> right? And they could have people saying, "Hey, 500 bucks for a video about this.

Hey, 500 bucks for a video about that." >> And and we would never know, right? >> We would never know. >> We would never know. They never have to admit to it. And they could deny it till the cows come home and say, "How dare you accuse me of that?" And it would say, "Well, I mean, you don't have a job off the internet, >> right? You got >> And you're not looking for one." >> Yep. Yep.

You got to survive somehow. >> Yeah. I mean, everybody's got to pay their bills, which I'm not going to deny, >> but if your income is generated off of the community of disclosure, you have obligations to manufacture content. And at that point, I would say your level of compromisability goes through the roof because you have to now oblige yourself to the avenue of income that is most prolific, >> right? What's going to get the most clicks? That's what it's all about, >> right? I mean, [snorts] I imagine you have a real world job, Gabe, and I appreciate what you do as a hobbyist here. Um, but I would speculate that if you could not generate an income in the real world and you had to turn your hobby into your primary source of income to feed your children.

>> Mhm. >> That if somebody wanted to start cutting you checks and it afforded you the ability to feed your children, >> Yeah. you'd be [clears throat] you'd be compromisable, which is one of the things that I criticize this disclosure community about is that nobody wants to discuss the compromisability of individuals, >> right? >> So, I I appreciate what you do as a hobbyist for the truth is supported by your realworld work. >> That to me makes you less compromisable. >> Yeah.

I think for me it's important, you know, to always have like this is uh something I'm doing out of passion. >> Yes. >> Um so making money off of it, getting famous, none of that. >> How much money did you make off of YouTube last month? >> Nothing. >> Exactly.

>> Exactly. How much money did you make off of X last month? >> Yeah. Nothing. >> Right. Exactly.

Like I know these things, right? and and and you function that way because you have a real world job, right? So now think of all the clip artists and content creators out there that admittedly have no real world job >> and pride themselves, right? And they'll say, "What I do online is content creation for you. Please donate so that I can get the credits to clip more stuff for you cuz I'm here for you. Yeah. >> Hold on a second, [ __ ] [laughter] >> You don't have a [ __ ] job. >> Yeah.

>> Right. It's a whole different world. I like I'll even respect like I get it. Like like you're a human being. Like you got kids to feed, right? If you didn't have an outside the internet job, I understand you're going to do whatever it takes to feed your kid.

you're certainly going to be more susceptible to >> you're going to be more compromisable, right? If it came to the end of the month and you didn't have your current income stream, >> if somebody was like, "Dude, I got an idea for the next Gabriel Speaks situation." >> Yeah. And for and for 10 grand, if you could talk about this, we would like to have a business relationship with you. >> Right. >> I get that you're compromisable at that point. Not like I'm not really technically knocking you for it, but I'm being realistic that that situation exists.

>> Well, it is. Yeah. And it is, you know, it is what it is. We we can't put our head in the sand and pretend like that's not a real thing because it definitely >> right. So all I'm really getting at is that when we have all of these content creators and clip artists on the internet who admittedly have no real world jobs, >> right? >> Yeah.

>> How do we not bump them up on the chart of compromisability? It's just being realistic. >> Yeah. Well, >> you're you're less compromisable because you have a private source of income. That's a fact. If you didn't have that outside source of income, your level of compromisability quotient would go up, >> right? Even if even if it's not like um int my level of being able to be duped would go up, right? Because I want >> Absolutely.

that I because I I need that money and so sure. Yeah. >> Um yeah, it's a great point, man. And I think I think we see that a lot. I >> I think it's I think it's rampant in the internet circles where we see content creators, clip artists that are admittedly not working outside of the internet and their AI algorithms and applications.

Um, but they'll tell you like, I'm working really hard to get you new content and if you like the clips that I've been creating for you, you know, that's not free. So, you know, we need you to help out by donate. Listen, I I, as you know, I've started making clips. I've turned on to you. >> I found free ways to make clips.

>> Yeah. >> So, these guys that are like, "This stuff isn't free. That's not actually true either. Like I'm this is what I'm learning by delving in all of this stuff that I never wanted to delve into is that a lot of what these people saying is also not true because I'm finding avenues where you can clip stuff for free. I' I've even I've even engaged wellknown clip artists.

when I told them the information that I had, they're like, "Oh, I I didn't even know that." >> And it's like, "Dude, like, you don't even have an outside job. This is your primary function, and you didn't know what I figured out. Like, I'm like, call me a boomer [ __ ] but how is it that I just one uped you, >> right?" Yeah. There's there's all kinds of free stuff you can like OBS is completely free. You can download OBS and use it and program it however you want.

There's a free version of Streamyard. Um, so there's many ways like to do it and not spend a lot of money. >> Yep. >> Um, >> and and with that even being said, Gabe, I'm going to bust your chops for not engaging the Opus Clips platform because it's free ammo for you. >> Opus Clips.

Yeah. I don't uh you are going to turn me on to that. I'll start. >> Dude, you have no idea how awesome it is. like you like I'm I'm going to hammer down on you for this >> because it it has really it has grown my social platforms >> to like some somebody else like like I I will admit like I'm not I'm not into this stuff.

I don't enjoy it. I don't want to engage it, but I I have a mission, right? And somebody that I'm friends with like hammered down on me was like, "Dude, you don't understand. For what you're trying to do, you have to do this." And I engaged. And when I engaged, that person was right. >> Okay.

Yeah. I know. >> It's free. It's like like you you were in the military, right? Like >> if you had a gun and somebody could provide you free ammunition, >> right? Okay. This is this is what opus clips is.

Opus clips is free ammunition. So, I appreciate you already have ammo that you're getting in other directions that cost you a certain amount of in uh uh of monetization, so to say. Like, you're already paying for certain things that give you a certain amount of clipping ability, >> right? >> Okay, that's fine. That's ammo you're already paying for. I'm offering you an avenue of an other ammo stream that's free.

Why would you not use the free ammo? >> Is there something about it in particular you really like? >> Uh, it's awesome. >> It's super easy and it's free. Like straight up super easy. >> Okay. >> And free.

Like I don't want to I don't want to jam up your whole space on this, but dude, Gabe, I would I will I will talk to you for this on hours on and off air. Um I will do I will do I will do Zoom chats with you. I will show you the value of this. >> This is free ammunition you're not taking advantage of. >> Nice.

We will check it out for sure. >> Um so on the screen we do cover news here too. It looks like they are debating the funding bill. Uh oh boy. So >> yeah.

Now, is it just me or does this Hakee Jeff guy creep you out? He kind of creeps me out a little bit. >> I've heard this name before. >> He's just weird. I think he might be a hybrid [laughter] >> probably. >> I don't know.

I don't know. Uh but anyway, okay. So, we'll wrap this up here. Um there is two more things. Your thoughts on if he the way he answered the legacy pro program question he said I can't speak.

>> Yeah. >> What are your thoughts on him and the legacy UFO program? The way he answered >> controlled narrative par for the course. This is how they answer. It's it's controlled narrative. It's perception management.

Whatever words you want to get comfortable with. This is deceivers. >> Yeah. >> That are limited. >> No, you muted again.

This app hates you today. There he goes. >> I have no idea how that's happening. >> Me neither. I'm not touching anything.

Like literally >> weird. >> This is on hardware. I'm not even touching a mouse, a keyboard, nothing. >> I'm Yeah, I'm sure it's the software. >> Yeah.

Um but my thoughts on um [ __ ] What was your question again? >> UFO possible UFO legacy program involvement. >> Deception across the board. It's always been deception. We're we're barking up the wrong tree if we want the truth. These factions have been deceiving us for decades.

and to have the false presumption that if we ask them for the truth enough they're going to give it to us. I mean there there in lies the problem with disclosure is I'm going to be frank that level of stupidity is the problem. >> Yeah. Well one of them right I mean >> yeah one of them for sure. Yeah.

One of them. Yes. Yeah. I wouldn't say it's all of them. It's it's one of them.

>> Yeah. It adds to the complexity of the problem. If you want to beg the factions that have been lying to you for decades to please, please can you stop lying to us tomorrow? >> Right? And they're like, well, Doppser has decided that this is the amount of truth that we can disclose to you today. And we have an author of a book that was assembled, not by him, but an assembly for him to be the mouthpiece of. >> Yes.

>> This is the truth. you'll be afforded today. If you have any questions, please ask Jeremy Corbel because he will lead you in the right direction. Don't >> question if it's a cliff for lemmings. Trust us.

It is all of the truth that you are prepared to handle because we have calculated the amount of truth that you are prepared to handle. Anything more would be catastrophic and it would be a disclosure that we, the culprits of deception, are not prepared to handle. Don't think for a half a second [laughter] that you can handle this truth. It is you, those that want the truth that can't handle it. It is not >> amazing.

It is not the deceivers, we that have concerns about the truth being wielded for fear of justice being applied to us, the minority, by you, the majority, with the torches and pitchforks. >> Yeah. Yeah. they can. I mean, it's it's just they want control disclosure and he wants to sit on top of the mound and pick and choose what can be disclosed.

He wants to decide for humankind what we can know and what we can't know. >> Well, and and this is where it gets into it's it's this is really wild, dude. Like it's like I this is I think of so many like as we're adults now Gabe and I use that term really loosely. >> I use that term really loosely. [laughter] >> We're not adults.

We're children in adult uniforms. >> The rules that we lived by in the playground are the same rules. We just try to pretend and there's now laws >> that prevent playground shenanigans from being applied in real life. >> What we're witnessing is simply a a a king of the mountain fight like what we're familiar with in the schoolyard. >> Yeah.

>> Where there were no rules. You just got to the top of the mountain. If you got a bloody nose, if you cried, like nothing mattered. It's it's whoever made it to the top of the mountain is the king of the mountain. That's that's life, >> right? >> Yeah.

>> But now here we are as children in adult suits. King of the mountain is still going on contemporarily. There are many many factions that are fighting each other with the technologies with the information that some have and others don't. But regardless, the fight to be the king of the mountain exists. And we the people, the majority are trying to be the king of the mountain for truth.

And we want it. But there are particular factions that are in the throws of this same war of king of the mountain. And they have more information, and they have more technology. But there's many of those factions and everyone's vying to be king of the mountain. And the minorities are the ones with the greatest amount of information and technology while the majority is still in the fight but not properly armed against the minority.

Like that's that's the current state of the union. So >> the noble thing to do is stay in the fight. >> Absolutely. And that's what we got to do, right? That's what all of us got to do. Don't >> let someone else like uh Colonel Nell tell you disclosure is over, >> right? >> And don't let someone like Jim Matsky tell you he's going to control the >> the disclosure that Colonel Nell said was over never began.

That was that that in and of itself is disinformation. >> It was a manipulation. It was Yeah. Absolutely. Yep.

>> Y >> like Yeah. So there's there's more to be learned. There's more to be had. And the fight is not over when it comes to vying to be king of the mountain. >> That's right.

>> We the people are the majority. And although we may lack in knowledge and truth and technology, we're still the majority. Like good >> good wins over evil. That's a that's an a it's a truth. >> Um and it's it is a truth.

It's a very serious truth that I I believe in wholeheartedly, which is why I I fight the battle that I fight because I'm I'm not a pessimist. >> As as much as things look as much as things look dark and insurmountable, I stand in defiance of that look. >> Right. >> Yeah. And I believe I believe I can be king of the mountain.

I believe I can lead a team to be king of the mountain because I believe that I can motivate a majority that can overcome all the technological advancements and all of the deceptions of the mind. nice to filter out all the deceptions and all the [ __ ] >> It would be it would be it would be it would be amazing. And that day will come. That's what that's what I do know. I know that day will come.

And whether it happens in my life or my greatgrandchildren's life, um I know that day will come. The only thing that I can do is be a a light, a beacon in the darkness for the time period for which I exist to stand defiantly against the darkness. >> Yeah, that much that much I know in Yeah, absolutely. >> Nobody's nobody's going to burn my light out. >> [ __ ] no.

That ain't ever happening. All right, thank you for joining me again, Eric. Uh this was uh another great space on Latsky and another lesson on pay attention to what is said and how it's said. Uh don't do what these guys want you to do and read between the lines because that's where falsehoods and fake narratives are born. >> Absolutely.

>> Yeah. So thanks again for joining us. I'm going to take us out on a little snippet from an old Twilight Zone episode. You all might be familiar with it. Was called Serve Man.

>> Oh yes. >> It's a great old Twilight Zone. >> I'll take us out on that. You all have a great night. >> Absolutely.

Gabe, thank you so much for having me. >> Absolutely. It's been a blast like always. >> Unadorned. >> Incredible and yet so terribly real that even while they're happening, we live with them and digest them and assimilate them.

We were preoccupied with the hands on a clock when we should have been checking off a calendar. The world went on much as it had been going on with a tentative tiptoeing alongside a precipice of crisis. There was Berlin to worry about and Indochina and Algeria and all the other myriad problems major and minor that somehow had lost their incisive edge of horror because we were so familiar with them. And then >> that's when we first heard that they had come. >> That's when we should have prepared ourselves for any eventuality.

But we didn't. Instead, we milled around like frightened farm animals. Respectfully submitted for your perusal a cannon. Height a little over 9 ft. Weight in the neighborhood of 350 lb.

Origin unknown. Motives therein hangs the tail. For in just a moment, we're going to ask you to shake hands figuratively with [music] a Christopher Columbus from another galaxy and another time. This is the Twilight Zone. >> Ladies and gentlemen of the Earth, we greet you in peace and friendship.

We come from a planet far beyond this galaxy, a planet far more developed than Earth. But we come as friends. Our intentions are honorable. We desire above all things to help the people of Earth >> to establish embassies here and in the near future to set up reciprocal visits between Earth people and cannam. Although we know your language, our own methods of communication are mental rather than verbal.

>> Precisely why have you chosen this planet for your visit? It has come to our attention that Earth has been plagued by both natural and unnatural catastrophes. All of which could easily be acted upon and prevented. We are here to help you. >> Are we to assume that there is no ulterior motive? >> Well, there is nothing ulterior in our motives. Nothing at all.

You will discover this for yourselves before too long simply by testing the various devices which we will make available to you. We ask only that you trust us only that you simply trust us. >> Perhaps you watched this initial questioning. Most people on Earth did. And surely some of the questions asked by your representatives must have been identical to more than a few of your own.

Because as a race, we are unaccustomed to charity. Brutality is a far more universal language to us than an expression of friendship from outer space. They were 9 ft tall enigmas who descended on us like locusts. But nobody was counting or worrying except perhaps a few professionals whose job it was to second guess. [snorts] In a sense, I was one of these, a decoding specialist for the United States government.

And this is where I got into the act. >> That that cannon or whatever it is he calls himself walked off and left this book yesterday at the UN. The White House seems to feel that if we can decipher what this book says, we can find out what these cannons are up to. >> We've licked the title anyway. >> What does it say? To serve man.

I hope so. I fervently hope so. Please check your guest visas. This is flight number 267 from Earth to our planet. But it's an entire planet bigger than China.

Besides, it's an opportunity to spread peaceful coexistence through an entire galaxy. Stand aside, please. I have diplomatic visa. They tell me they have an annual temperature of 76° on their planet, and the sun never goes down. It's just one big holiday when you get there.

They've even got a form of baseball or something like it. Leagues and everything just like we've got. And the whole trip, billions of miles. Only takes just a few days. >> Man, I don't think I'll want to come back once it gets there.

>> And their clothing, it's it's a metallic substance, just beautiful. Kind of like a spun gold. My sister wrote me. She says the day you land, they take you on a conducted tour of all their shops, and you can pick out as much of it as you want. >> We will be taking off in 3 minutes.

>> Mr. Chambers, don't get on that ship. The rest of the book, it's a cookbook. How about you? You still on Earth or on the ship with me? Really doesn't make very much difference because sooner or later will all of us be on the menu. The recollections of one Michael Chambers, [music] or more simply stated, the evolution of man, the cycle of going from dust to dessert, the metamorphosis from being a ruler of a planet to an ingredient in someone's soup.

It's tonight's Bill of Fair from the Twilight Zone. [music] >> [music]