David Grusch Fox Interview, Age of Disclosure, Sandia, Current Research, & QnA - UAP Gerb Live

Transcript

Okay, let's see. We should be live. I'm just going to wait for it to see if the stream pops up on the second monitor. >> And when it does, we'll we'll get started. Let's see.

Still no >> refresh. Okay, we are live. Hey, what's going on everybody? It is Gerb, and I'm joined here by the excellent Rob Jones and Kermit. Two of my greatest friends in real life. Uh, two of the best researchers I know.

They're back by popular demand. You guys love seeing these fellas on with Live. We always have great discussions. Um, as we launch into today, the the little bit of preamble here. We're going to mainly talk about uh Dave Grush's new interview on Fox News that has really made some waves.

Of course, that was recorded all the way back in September. Um, we're going to be talking about the Age of Disclosure, kind of not necessarily giving our review like stating, you know, a score out of 10 and talking about the video production, but more dissecting the content themes, maybe motus behind various testimonies within the documentary. We'll be talking a bit about the Sandia doc. We'll be talking about current research and we will also be speaking about uh a Q&A towards the end. And you guys know when we start talking about questions, we'll ask you to prompt them in all caps.

If you want to direct them to a specific person, just put our name in there. I'd like to thank uh Scrums and Griff. They're helping mod the chat today. Uh huge shout out to them. Before we get started, because people are already flooding the chat and we'll wait for some people to join in.

Let's just answer these already great super chats and then we're going to start diving in. Is that all right with you guys? >> Yeah, absolutely. >> All right. >> And just a a shout out to the folks at Gabe Super Chats. We really appreciate your support.

Um, everybody who's here, thank you very much. >> Yeah, as always, thank you. Can I ask David if he's seen a UFO UAP go invisible from the left to the right or if he's heard of members uh witness that. Well, thank you for your support. And uh if I could ask if I could ask him, I'll I'll ask him.

Thank you, Rich. Thank you for the $3. You are the goat, my friend. Kevin, thank you so much for the super sticker, my friend. Man, you guys you guys honor us.

Hey, already one for Kermit. Let's we might as well you might as well answer this one before we dive in. Kermit, how did the legacy program misappropriate over 101 $1 trillion? That seems like an accounting nightmare. If you can keep that that short and then we'll get on to our focus discussion, by all means. >> Um, a lot of different ways and over 80 years, man.

Uh, a trillion dollars is a lot of money. it like look it's not an amount of money that was spent all in one go. This program's been going on since the 1940s at least. So and then you know funding operations of people it's expensive. So and if you have thousands of people working on a program something like that.

Yeah that's that's expensive. So, mix of government contract fraud, a mix of illicit drug trade, some type of trafficking operation potentially. Um, and then also some private money, too. Uh, it's a mixed bag. And yeah, it is an audit nightmare.

It's an audit nightmare. If I if I could just add on to that like you know these public private partnerships there you could look into things like the the CIA's air America program in or in the or pardon me in the uh in Southeast Asia like there's any number of examples that you can look to for the mixture of public and private funds with both front companies carveout companies and things like that where the federal government has mixed both public and private funds in order to to do things. So, there's no shortage of examples. >> Yep. And don't forget about carryover funds, too.

That back in 1994, 1995, the NRO got busted after their uh declassification in 1992 for having between three and five billion dollars in carryover funds in just two years. Two close series. Thank you for the 10 bucks, my friend. We should have a good time today. And Petri Petri, thank you so much, my friend.

I very much appreciate it. Fat Rodents, thank you. I'm I'm glad you're here. I recognize you. And last time, Jimmy, thank you so much.

This is the absolutely the dream team. So, with that being said, guys, let's uh let's start in, of course, uh two days ago, November 21st, uh Fox aired a special with uh David Grush. Uh this was about an 8 minute segment. U had to fit a bit of a time frame, pretty short. There was actually some content with that that in that interview that didn't make the cut and I'm hoping Fox will start to release that over time, but not necessarily groundbreaking things.

I think Fox and uh Brett Bayer chose the most clippable um kind of biggest moments of the interview, but there's some other interesting data there. Of course, uh in my opinion, at least when Dave Grush speaks, there's a lot of reason to listen. So, I I just hope over the next couple of weeks, um Fox begins releasing more of that interview and talks about different things. But so 8 minutes why don't we start with you Kerm and and just give me your preliminary thoughts of the uh interview with Dave Grush and his first appearance really u of course we saw him at the hearings and so forth but his first speaking appearance in quite a while. >> Yeah.

Well I guess just to confirm real quick though this was aired this was I guess recorded September. >> This was recorded >> whilst we were sitting in the hearings on September 9th. This was recorded. >> Oh wow. Yeah, because I do remember Gush leaving the room at some point for the hearing.

Dang, he went to go talk to Brett Bayer right then and there. >> This has been sat on for a little over two months. I know some people have said like, "Hey, it's being suppressed." I think Brett Bayer and Fox likely saw the opportunity with the age of disclosure coverage to uh put Grush there as well just to really kind of expand the UFO NHI uh that sort of topic. But keep going, Kurt. Yeah, I obviously I think moving the timeline of when it came out that made perfect sense also just because at that time as well there was another uh national event that kind of took the country's attention.

Uh rest in peace Charlie Kirk. So I yeah I think it all kind of worked out it worked out for the best in the end. Truly, I think it did. And it was it was so funny for me because like on Friday I get off work I watch uh the Age of Disclosure documentary and I'm like okay and we're going to talk about that later. But then right after seeing the Gush Fox special and I'm like this is this is this is very interesting.

This is very interesting. So it was it was good to see the man out there on uh on on national TV. Rob, >> I you know, I would say one of my favorite things about the entire David Grush interview is something that seems like a lot of people completely glazed over. It's the calculation. The calculation that David made in terms of how he made an appeal to the president's both vanity and narcissism.

>> I don't even pretend to be a supporter of any administration whatsoever. Um, I I want to preface that beforehand, but one of my favorite things is the fact that David Grush was willing to make a very clear appeal to President Trump's uh desire for legacy and desire for popularity. Um, it's wonderful. He made a great calculated decision and credit to Fox who initially did not play that interview which was filmed when we were in DC. Initially, my understanding was that interview was supposed to play during the day that Charlie Kirk, unfortunately, >> it was happened.

>> It was supposed to play the 10th. >> You know, we're going to glaze past that. >> But now, the fact that it played when it did is to the greatest effect we could possibly have asked for. Uh, it's when we have the most public pressure, we have the most public sentiment in regards to this. And he made an appeal to and and please forgive me if you have any sort of political leanings left or right.

It made an appeal to somebody who is somewhat of a a narcissist. And and while he may be somewhat of a narcissist, that appealed to his desire for legacy, his desire to be the greatest president ever. Take that for what you will, but I think it was a very smart play on David's part. >> Yeah, I agree with you there. I mean, um, we all know at that time, I think it was 400 p.m.

4 to 5:00 p.m. Mountain, so, uh, 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. Eastern. You know, Trump sitting there with his Diet Coke watching Fox News. Uh, so I think it was a brilliant play for Dave Gush to kind of leave the next steps in the administration's court.

U, earlier in the interview, he said that the previous administration had been unresponsive to him um, during his ICIG complaint and so forth, pretty unresponsive. And he then prompted Trump and the admin to make the next move, stating that um Trump was pretty aware of at least some of the baseline facts of this topic and likely at least understanding of the existence of legacy programs. If you think back to Trump's appearance on uh JRE, this was of course one of the best moments. I think this was in 2024. Remember when Trump talks about the people coming down from space and of course he's mentioned uh the subject a few times.

So it seems like he does have a bit of an interest in this topic. So, I think it is uh very interesting that Dave Grush then prompts the admin to make the next move. I'm also glad he laid to rest a lot of the kind of thoughts people had. Hey, does Dave Grush have firsthand knowledge? Is he just relying on the claims of the 40 plus witnesses he debriefed? But he makes it pretty um he makes it pretty clear here that he was partially clear to some of the operations of the legacy programs and has seen specifically >> uh maybe deceased maybe live biologics reports. >> Yeah, absolutely.

And the fact that he was able to clarify that was a really big portion of the interview to me. Um, you know, he he specifically mentioned, I think, and to quote, um, you know, it wasn't just intelligence report or wasn't just oral testimony from individuals, right? He was privy and was partially read into intelligence reports from those programs, which is a very big deal. There's a huge difference between oral reports from individuals and actual intelligence reports that were generated from intelligence gathering in those programs. >> Yeah. Yeah.

Um and I think that this has kind of been answered before the statement. If you think back to the 2023 House hearings uh featuring Grush, Fraver, Graves, um Representative Moscowitz was asking Grush a series of pretty poignant questions. This comes right after Moscowitz is talking about misappropriation of funds and how do these programs get funded. And of course, David Grush's history is in the NRO National Reconnaissance Office and NGA, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. In fact, right before he left federal service, I think he was a senior geospatial analyst at the NGA and was also liazison to the UAP task force for both the NRO and NGA.

Uh, from that line of questioning by Moscowitz, Moscowitz asks basically, hey, are there highdefinition satellite photos? You know, the NRO runs spy satellites. You can assume this is imit or imagery intelligence or sig signals intelligence. Moscowitz asks if there's um imagery or an intelligence that depicts UFOs. Dave Grush says yes. And he also kind of shares many people's sentiment that he's confounded as to why much of this is still classified.

But then Moscowitz says have you ever observed kind of overhead intelligence collection of crash retrievalss or crashed vehicles? And to that Dave Grush says I'm going to have to answer that. Uh I can't answer that in an open se session. So, I think that was a pretty interesting clue back then, too. So, it seems like he's been exposed to the crash retrieval side and the biologic side with firsthand knowledge. >> Yeah.

Well, I mean, he did specifically mention in the interview that he had been shown images or photographs specifically of biologics at that point, um, which seemed to be indicated by him that they were also part of those same intelligence reports that he referenced. So I have a high degree of confidence in regards to that. >> So what do you guys think of his statement um when Bayer asks him about NHI intent and activity and he says that we as humans have seen a mixed bag of of non-human intelligence behavior essentially. I mean, personally, I I see that as the way that I've always kind of seen this entire thing is Earth is sort of a battleground, a sort of a neutral space. It feels like there are multiple factions both at play within the NHI realm and the human realm in terms of disclosure uh for what's going on.

I don't really know what those factions are. I don't think anybody really has a great idea what those factions are. However, there are multiple. They are not the same. Uh, and we would be foolish to ascribe any sort of intent to any of them without further knowledge.

>> What do you think, Kermit? >> I mean, there's more than one thing going on that that genuinely tracks. Um, but I guess back on the grush bit, not to not to kind of go back on the previous conversation though, but he also did mention he had access to adversarial program intelligence as well, which that was uh >> that was interesting to hear from from the big guy about Oh yeah, I've I've seen like China or Russia or whoever's program as well. Like we have we have data on that too. Um, so more than one different pro this more than one program is not just the United States. It's also more than one non-human intelligence as well.

like there's some type of uh I think with the origins and like attributing the origins and intent like there's a lot of different intents to the point where it's like okay they can't all be they can't all just be this can't all just be one faction or one non-human intelligence you know what I mean >> Steven Greer love and light >> it's a lot of [ __ ] going on pardon my French a lot of [ __ ] going on >> I mean I would also point out that like there's it's hard to ascribe human motives to nonhuman in intents. >> So, I I don't want to begin to be the guy who tries to assume whatever is going on in somebody else's brain, whether it's a human or an alien, who knows? >> Yeah. And you know, without moving to age of disclosure yet, just an interesting parallel, Ker, you talked about that David Grush has inferred knowledge on adversarial programs. Of course, in the age of disclosure, specific references made to Russia recovering a tic tac back in 1989. Um, that came with, I think it was four deceased biologics.

And what's kind of interesting about that, I've I've come into that same retrieval event and some stuff I've done um and some people I've talked to. So, that's actually pretty interesting. That's like two self-confirming things that I've I've come across with that Russian Tic Tac retrieval. Well, that's very interesting because we also I mean we heard about that event from Davis when we interviewed him at Soul, right? Um so yeah, very very interesting and then they just kind of shut it down and then also 1989 the CIA said like hey program's over like give back your stuff and then locked keeps the thing like there's just so many >> Well that's nonsense 1989. >> Yeah.

Well, >> that's a that's a just, you know, we we can talk about motive and intent, but you know, the the pro materials likely were not handed in uh under order in 1989, but uh >> no, when Dave Gush is talking about NHI intent kind of thinking through and giving various reasons. I I do like his idea for kind of the uh zoo or sorry, the the zoo paradox of the the Fermy paradox or the the why am I blanking here? what's the full name for the zoo theory of um observing non-human intelligences are kind of here to observe and and interfere as little as possible. That kind of seems to be a little bit of the case bar some weird stuff such as interfering with our nuclear platforms and of course subjects like abductions which a lot of people kind of skirt from speaking about. But I I I do enjoy that >> to to the folks in the chat when we refer to soul we mean so o the soul >> soul foundation. Yeah, symposium.

>> Now, it was briefly mentioned previously. Um, there's just been a couple questions in chat regarding that. We're not referring to Soul, South Korea. >> We're referring to the Soul Symposium that we all attended last year. Yeah.

>> Not the one in Italy this year, the one in San Francisco last year. >> So, >> yeah. And that one of course kicked off so much discussion because you know we'll talk about it as we talk about age of disclosure but with um Eric Davis really kind of opening up and discussing his knowledge or what he wants to talk about about uh crash retrieval programs. >> Yeah. >> So what else do you guys have? Um yeah please please.

Oh, no. I just wanted to point out that like we we have privately discussed that it is entirely possible that Eric Davis has some form of non-disclosure agreement both with the aerospace corporation and with whatever other government organiza organizations that he's been associated with uh in which he can't discuss certain aspects of the program and is required to lie about certain things. Um, this is not an indictment on Eric Davis. This is not an indictment on any sort of national security official, but it is something that we should mention that non-disclosure agreements can require things of that nature and should be kept in mind at all times. >> Yeah, especially if you're read into an unacknowledged special access program, a USP.

Um, there's there's protocol if if you risk exposing the program. One of those kind of firewalls is to deny existence of the program or knowledge of contents of the program. So when Eric Davis talks about there's no such thing as ARV, which you know he said to my face while you guys were in the room, which I vehemently disagree with. I I think that is likely a program protection strategy. And like Rob said, that was information that was gleaned whilst Davis was at the Aerospace Corporation and FFRDC or the Air Force Research Lab, AFRL, which if you remember back to soul 2024, the AFRL is where Davis said he got the vast majority of very firm concrete evidence of the existence of legacy programs, >> right? And and I would also mention that like within the context of us discussing the aerospace corporation and his time within special access programs, >> he was extremely adamant with us that he never got access to the program.

And I believe that those statements, which you can go back and look at on the American Alchemy video that Kermit and I filmed, and Gerb Thenvir and Missileman were were there to perform the actual um pardon me, the actual um you know, the actual questioning. I I don't think that he was actually telling us the truth, but that's specifically because I think that he was bound by a non-disclosure agreement to do so. >> Yeah. And you you can argue the ethics of that. Um I want to bring this up again because I think it's so interesting.

I I think it was said in the interview, but it was followed up on as we were leaving. Um when we were talking about ARV, of course, I have a little I actually this is the notebook I'm using now. It's got a little flux liner on it. was a a gift from somebody with some some knowledge of the programs. And I brought this up to Davis.

I said, "Hey, have have you heard of stories like the flux liner of Mark McCandish and Brad Sorenson?" And he basically said yes, he'd heard of it. Um they thought there was nothing to the story, but that Howal Putoff had interviewed the primary witnesses there. I I tried to chase that down and continue to push on that, but got nothing, which was pretty frustrating to me. You know, one thing I'd like to point out really quickly is somebody in the chat mentioned uh that an NDA can't require you to lie. Yeah, it can.

>> Yeah. For Yeah. For special access programs and uncknowledge special access programs. Deny deny part for the course is to deny the existence or deflect introduce disinformation. So that it's uh it's it's unfortunate.

There there are also some pretty gnarly NDAs that are tied to some people with um knowledge of this subject. I mean, I'm unfamiliar with similar NDAs, but I I've encountered people who have uh NDAs that are built for a duration of time that are structured to outlast that person's life. So, the NDA technically expires, but it's going to expire long after this individual with information dies. >> Right? And you can argue all day as to the legality of such NDAs, but whether or not those are legal is completely beside the point. the enforcability of the NDA by you know force of action or physical force is really all that matters.

Uh or whether it's through clawback terms in in terms of like financial restitution where you could somehow claw back everybody's profits from a program they were involved in if it was done through an employee stock ownership program or something of that nature. Um, you know, there's all kinds of ways you can really [ __ ] somebody. And to think that it's all completely legal or or all under some legal framework you're already like familiar with is a little bit foolhardy in my opinion because given my experience working through this subject there are so many different layers of legality regarding you know the program national security and other things of that nature that you know you can't even begin to understand the types of things that the government could do to you if they wanted too, >> right? There's there's also offices that I think are deeply entwined in the legacy programs and these are pretty much program protection structures like the DARPA security and intelligence directive and uh such institutions can use any means necessary to deal with insider or outsider threats and I I'm not trying to be dramatic there but I think there are cases where if somebody is considered enough of a threat to a pro the program they will be neutralized >> and I think in age of disclosure uh actually it's >> specifically goes on record loose specifically goes on record saying that people have been murdered in order to specifically silence uh you know uh voices regarding the legacy program. And if Lou is willing to say that, I would say that it is probably true. Um Lou is a counter intelligence uh you know, one of the most senior counter intelligence experts in the entire United States.

>> Um is probably in a very unique position to be able to say yes or no to that. And the fact that he was willing to say yes to that, I think was a a credit to to him as a person. I don't completely agree with everything that Lewis said, I think there's a certain degree of of disinformation in some of the things that he said because his definition of disclosure is different than maybe you or mine. And that's a discussion that we maybe should have here on the stream. >> Yeah.

>> But the fact that he was willing to say that is important. >> Yeah. I I think you're right. I think maybe we should launch into that as we shift towards age of age of disclosure. There's a big elephant in the room for many people and that's Lou essentially being the protagonist and I have my huge issues with that as well.

But I think we can kind of form nuanced perspectives and kind of approach the documentary maybe on a claim by claim basis or interviewe by interviewee basis or even if Alzando was saying stuff assess those claims independently because uh Lou is a lifelong counter intelligence individual. I do think he's filtering a limited disclosure for a certain faction that likely involves the OSAP crew and Chris Melon and this likely has origins back prior to TTSA to the stars academy and uh seems to be interested in a sort of limited disclosure without implication of some serious crimes uh as well as in-depth discussion of derivative technologies or ARVs uh and then some other subjects that are seemingly missing. So maybe we could all give a bit of a disclaimer about how we approach the documentary with our mindset before we launch in. >> Kermy, you want to go first? >> Yeah, I'll say like my first watch through of Age of Disclosure. It very much felt like the L show.

It very much felt like the the sorry music. There were a couple times where he just like he starts shouting and I'm like, why are you yelling at me, man? Like why? >> Somber. >> What am I supposed to do about it? I'm just I'm I'm here after work. I'm just watching the thing. like why are you screaming at me about this? Um which I mean on one side I can understand and appreciate you know because Lou's been Lou's been talking about this since 2017.

So he's been a public person in this space for almost a decade and I'm sure like being in that long-term like yeah like it does elicit kind of some emotional like hey like why don't the [ __ ] we do this? Like I've I've seen stuff I know these things and like no one up the chain of commands taking it seriously. Um, but when I think about it, it's like, you know, in the more of the researching the guy, maybe maybe the research wasn't all that great, but in the more that you research him, it's like it wasn't all just a tip and aap, you know what I mean? And there's a little bit more to his story and kind of what he did for the government up until like it was just, oh yeah, you know, I was just working in counter intelligence and then I get a call to run the UFO program. It's like really it was it was all that. And also like further the whole admission or you know the kind of the the retelling again of like oh yeah I've resigned from the government in protest like that was a big reason why it's like well that but also you had a [ __ ] of a boss Gary Reid who just made like office culture just terri like there's multiple reasons why people leave but just kind of this you know retelling of it like I get it from the sense of you're making a disclosure documentary but also you know the this the story as as it's kind of understood from research which is just kind of like it's it's there's a lot of moving parts to this stuff, you know what I mean? Um, so I don't know. It just it it felt like loop propaganda for like the first 40 minutes of the documentary.

Felt like, you know, got the soaring music, got the, you know, sitting in the Jefferson Memorial, you know, I and I get it. I get it. I do truly. And game recognizes game. And I'm not gonna I'm not going to sit here and disrespect that.

But you know like I got to I got to say the parts that I that I was concerned with you know and it's and I think it's the part of like >> you know there is kind of a there is a retelling of the story. It's kind of like narration. They're they're trying to provide a narrative basically and the narrative that they are trying to provide it it leaves out kind of greater details and context and I think that's what a lot of people in the UFO community are a little bit >> skeptical of or they there's a lot of push back from that. But you know a lot of this is narrative building. You know a lot of people with a lot of different narratives until Trump goes up onto the microphone and says hey uh putting this all out there like the Epstein files then I I I don't know.

It's going to be like whoever has the best narrative and then whatever the cards are, the cards are. So, >> I mean, another thing to keep in mind is that that narrative is sort of specifically crafted in Age of Disclosure by the individuals that were featured. Um, as a as an amnesty narrative where amnesty should be provided to individuals. >> Yeah. >> I I'm going to say for the record that I don't believe in amnesty.

I don't believe in amnesty for crimes against the United States people or against people of the entire world. I don't believe in amnesty for murder. I don't believe in amnesty for crimes against humanity. And I'm of the opinion that individuals who perpetrated those, whether it was under the guise of national security or anything else of that nature, they're criminals. >> Yeah.

I think it's a tough pro. >> I think it's a tough problem because for those who have been culpable in legacy programs, you you must ask when and where do you prosecute? What level of crime? Because if you have an industrial security specialist who maybe has uh roughed up and assaulted Americans for stumbling upon a sensitive area of Dougway proving ground and have committed some serious assault, beat the crap out of somebody or something similar. Do you prosecute them? Uh do you mainly focus on the blue collar crimes, the white collar crimes? Where and when do you prosecute? Because if you are somebody who's been involved in the DARPA security intelligence directive and have tried to get people killed, you should go to prison. There's no question about that. If you have been an accountant in the legacy programs and maybe you cooked some books and and done some things you shouldn't have, I'm not so sure if if uh jail time is really what's for you.

>> Just cooperate with the federal authorities. And trust me, accountants, if you're watching, you'll be fine. Just just cooperate with Cash Patel and his men. >> And I do need to say this. I, you know, as we talk about age of disclosure, I I do think that um Lu Alisando has had exposure uh and to the UFO legacy programs in a a direct capacity.

I I do think he has had exposure in the programs and I do think since 2017 or when he quote unquote left federal service, he has wished for some transparency, but not total. That's why this is such a difficult thing to tackle. It's a a big gray area to me. I I I think u Lou has history in the legacy programs and then he's pushed for partial transparency. So it's difficult to analyze what and where we should look for his statements.

>> So let's with that out of the way um you know like we said it's not a complic it's kind of a complicated documentary to tackle seeen as we have to assess the claims then kind of assess who's saying the claims and um you know where else can we find similar statements. So give me your guys overall thoughts on the documentary. um not like the quality in the videography, but do you think it was effective in its messaging? Of course, the documentary is split into uh b three or four parts. >> Uh the subject, the legacy program, NHI intent, and I think one other part I can't specifically remember. >> Well, my first my first thought is that I didn't like the fact that there was a threat narrative woven throughout it.

Um, you know, it very much felt like a national security threat narrative where, you know, we have multiple individuals that are trying to advocate for what ex what amounts to limited amnesty and uh continued secrecy in some respect. I will say that like I mentioned before, people have different definitions of what disclosure is to them. I think that Lou Alzando's definition of disclosure is a limited disclosure to the United States people and the people of the world that there is non-human intelligence that they are among us and that there is something else going on. There are advanced technologies beyond the the scope of what the the human people are capable of and that we have some knowledge of that. Whereas my definition of disclosure is complete government disclosure of the unconstitutional and unlawful programs that have been propagated over the course of the last 80 years in the United States.

So >> Kermit, you looked like you wanted to say something. >> Yeah. No, I generally like it was a very effective documentary. It was very effective. I think the like bipartisan nature of it like having like Carson, Andre Carson, Bett, James Clapper, Marco Rubio, like you have two sides of like the upper echelon of national security power both talking about this.

Like I I don't know if you could pick anybody better than James Clapper. I don't know if you could pick anyone better than Marco Rubio. And then look how that's turned out because now Marco Rubio is Donald Trump's national security adviser. This is like it's like stars of a line, window of opportune moment because I know that this was this was a documentary in the works from like 2023 and then look how it's all played out and now Marco Rubio is like that you know he's he's up there and I found his comments particularly interesting him going back and forth with Eric Davis about the revolving door in the Pentagon how programs that like they start with knowledge within the Department of Defense and then through the revolving door they move over to the contractors but then there's no one there to replace within these Department of Defense agencies. That's like they they know about this stuff because their bosses, the people that left, they were just like, "Oh, I'm not going to tell them about this because I'll be able to run this off books at the new corporation.

I'll make more money." I I don't know what the real thing is there, but them just talking about the revolving door and talking about that mechanism which is very much a real thing and it's also probably how this thing is kept so off books that like you have all these like high up people either in CIA or wherever that like they have limited knowledge experience like very few people know about it but also like you know the SEC def like he doesn't know about it you know what I mean like that that revolving door mechanism is so important to this and like just hearing it from the horse's mouth. I'm like that's >> I was clapping. I literally I was clapping at this point in the documentary. And then also I thought the witnesses that we haven't seen before in the UFO community yet, haven't come forward, haven't spoken until this documentary, I thought they were super effective. Like the the Vandenberg uh witness, the guy that had a close >> Yep.

Um the other guy who was an Air Force officer and he had a close encounter with the UAP talking about how there's like a 25% fatality rate among the population if you have a close encounter with these things within the first seven years. Like that was just >> Yeah, that was just a crazy ass statistic to drop like during the Yeah. Like these things are highly like these are highly dangerous objects which wow like it it it really it really like undermined the point of like this is a very real thing. There's also you can start to understand the reasons why the coverup would happen. Even from like a normie perspective, you can kind of start to understand how messy this can kind of get.

I think Dared Farah did a fantastic job and I I know I said earlier it's like it's the Lu show and all that, but also the L show is kind of how he started this train. You know what I mean? Like that was the New York Times, that was 2017, the ATIP videos, them linking like this it's it's all thanks to Lou truly. You know what I mean? So it's like just because you know from my perspective because it's like I've been in this for for years you know I've been in you know in the UFO conversation for two years you know and it's like I've heard so much about Lou and then here he is whatever but it was all in all it was highly effective I look >> so I think go ahead Rob >> I just want to point out really quickly like before we move on from that um you know there's a lot of things that have happened in the last like couple days but specifically I want to point out that like there's a moral purity argument versus pragmatic necessity, right? Um when you look at people like Rubio, there's a lot of people that will say like, "Oh, well, he's conservative. I'm super leftwing. I'm going to point that out right now." Like my politics not a side.

I'm super left-wing. I don't necessarily agree with the current administration. But what I will say is this. You're free to wait three more years and gamble on whoever the next set of individuals that are in office are or you can try and produce your own action. You can try and work with the pieces that are on the board currently because we very rarely get to handpick our champions in this world and often we need to use the pieces that are on the chess board that we have available.

You know, whether you feel Rubio's involvement was bad or his involvement was good. Um, you know, I I would say that his testimony and what he said in the documentary was extremely powerful and was extremely well-worded in the sense that he's going to get the attention of the regular people and of people who are more concerned about like the government oversight issues in regards to all of this. Now, I you can have your own questions about what he's done so far as national security adviser and so on, but I I will say that at least his representation in the film was positive. So, >> yeah, I mean I I think Rubio is a pretty interesting person to speak about. This is why I almost think u Dave Greser's 8minute interview is almost more effective.

He prompts the admin, hey, your move uh your time to move. Uh Marco Rubio has extensive knowledge on this subject and it's not just the existence of a legacy program. It's specific firsthand testimony of individuals who have either worked in legacy programs or have been exposed to them since 2017 to 2023 specifically. He was briefed numerous times. So even in the age of disclosure, he is maybe he's subject to some NDAs around that or he just doesn't want to go that far.

But Marco Rubio is very well in tune with this subject. So that's why I prefer David Grush's interview where he's prompting the entire admin to make the next move. Yeah, I I completely agree. I think that it's also sort of silly for anyone to look at what David Grush did in that interview as some sort of endorsement of the executive branch or anything like that. I I think that it's a calculated play on his part and I think he's one of the smartest people involved in with the entire disclosure movement.

It was incredibly well calculated to, you know, be able to make that appeal to the the sort of narcissism and legacy that uh President Trump is absolutely, you know, interested in having. There's nothing wrong with wanting to have a legacy. There's nothing wrong with wanting to be known as the greatest president of all time. If you made it to the [ __ ] office, for God's sake, you want to be the best. Let's be the best.

And and if you could trick him or not maybe not necessarily even trick him, convince him of the reality, which I think all of us in chat would agree that the greatest president of all time would be the one who reveals the NHI reality. Um, if you could convince him of that, that would be an unequivocally good thing. >> Yeah, Gush's actions are a move on a chessboard. You also have to think he's been working as a staffer for the House and the House Armed Services Committee. If he doesn't see enough uh enough gumption or enough ability or power there to really make a move on unveiling legacy programs or proposing effective legislation or interrogatories or subpoena, what's the next step? Actually move up to the admin level to try to affect change.

So, I think um just a guess maybe he's at that point where he uh Dave Grush realizes the next step is to actually try and and and provoke the admin and work with the admin to get something done. But let's actually So, I'm trying to think about how the heck we break this down. Um the documentary, we could talk about moments, we could talk about chapters, we could talk about people. There's so much we could uh talk about. Let me put a poll in the chat, too.

I actually want to see if um if people who watch the the documentary if they thought it was effective or or what. So, let me let me figure out how to put a poll in the chat. >> I have a good first question in case we're looking for >> for time. This is coming from uh a dear friend of mine, dear friend of mine on X loophole. Great man.

>> Uh so, first question Lou and others peripherilally talking about imminent something coming narrative again. Do you think that this is an actual event or is this pre or is this pressure merely fear of competition from China? >> I I have not seen any evidence to suggest there's like an imminent invasion or or or time frame in which we as the human race need to move to counter an NHI threat. I I have seen zero evidence for that or even credible testimony that I've taken to heart. Did you guys have the chance to catch the Dan Farah Joe Rogan documentary? He he had a pretty interesting kind of tidbit. He talked about how he spoke with some guys on the inside and he was like, "Yeah, basically like they are not going to like roll this stuff out unless like nuclear weapons are on the table.

like they're not they're not going to use this technology and they're not going to wheel it out so to speak until we're in like a nuclear war scenario which is uh pretty great because then it's because then if you take it back to the idea of oh something's imminent and they're kind of hinting at this is like the imminent mean the imminent means like nuclear war is going to happen that's is that is that the imminent I I don't know and I would like to not think that we're about to go to war but >> I don't No, I I think the imminent thing might be the whole like 2027 and beyond looming threat. I I can't remember off the top of my head, but I do think that um some individuals like Lou may have inferred like a coming uh challenge for humans or something similar, which I've seen nothing to support that. >> I I haven't seen any evidence whatsoever to support a threat narrative. Um you know, you can you can roll out whatever it is that you want, but I've never I've never seen it. I really haven't.

Um, and in regards to what Warpig said with the with the super chat there. Yeah, absolutely, dude. But I'm also smart enough to be able to understand that not everything revolves around left or right-wing politics. Uh, and there is a greater interest in regards to humanity and our survival as a species. I don't really like play politics when it comes to that.

>> And we'll we'll get to the super chat. We'll pull them up. I know we're behind, guys. Trust me, we will we will get to some. I I need to kind of there's a couple elephants in the room, at least from my perspective on age of disclosure.

And there was one I would like to um maybe talk about now from Eric Davis to Halpoff to Lu Alzando to Gary Nolan. Surprisingly, these people were listed as ATIP members, advanced aerospace advanced aerospace threat identification program. Uh I am still of the mind that the ATIP program wasn't even was not real. uh that this was a a cover program and this was not a real funded program. So that that to me was um very frustrating to continue to watch.

I think it would have been far more appropriate and honest to list somebody like Eric Davis and how put off as OAP scientists as well as J Stratton or sorry not Jay Stratton as well but Eric Davis now put off as as OAP individuals. Did you guys catch that? The frequent use of ATIP throughout the documentary? >> Yeah. No, I that struck me as odd because they didn't really mention OAP like at all. >> Not at all. Not once.

Not once. >> Not really a mention of Harry Reid either, which it's like, hey, that was >> He was mentioned a little bit at the end. Uh there was a there was like one or two clips of him. >> It was the Schumer bit. It was the bit when Senator Schumer was given a shout out to Harry Reid, but no mention no mention of the impetus of like what started ATIP, which was $20 million of earmarked funding from Senator Harry Reid to create OAP.

And then that's how that's how we get into this whole chicken and the egg story, you know. >> Yeah. Well, that's what folks say. uh that some of that money went to uh ATIP. I I still have of them the mind that ATIP was not even a funded program and was a white world cover program for the Osap program.

There were some uh there were some slides kind of released a bit ago pretty recently that also supports my my theory here. There were some OSAP slides. There's one quick mention to ATIP. Um do you remember these slides they released alongside the Bigalow Advanced Aerospace Space Studies documents, the 10-month report, the Tic Tac report? This was a couple months ago. One of those documents was a slide deck about OAP and it talks about ATIP being a white world kind of cover program for OSAP and other things and that is at least what I have been exposed to as well that ATIP was not in fact a real program.

>> Yeah. >> Yes. >> It was merely a just a slang term for a group of people that were operating independently as sort of a semi like task force type thing >> under the National Security Council. >> Yeah. It's not really like an official program whatsoever.

It's just a slang term for a group of people operating. >> Yeah. And this uh somebody in the chat earlier said like what about Tom Dong and TTSA? This was uh highly likely, you know, an an ATIP hangout program started by Lou Alzando, Chris Melon, and some other individuals connected to OAP um to kind of carry over a legacy program that was something called Project Forum outlined in the Biglo Advanced Aerospace Space Studies documents, which talked about kind of an influence campaign to um to gather influential folks in California and have them start talking about UFOs and aliens and start to get more people interested in disclosure. And I think that's what TTSA was. So interesting that they bake in the plan of a scop into the topic that everyone thinks is a scop.

>> This this of course is a another great topic. Um this was the biggest grind of my gears and it's it's going to talk about uh it's going to take a lot of kind of unpacking this the section on the legacy program. The entire documentary is framed that there is one monolithic legacy program. Uh, and for the people because we have 50% of people have watched it, 50% of people have not. Um, uh, essentially Lu Alzando outlines the quote unquote legacy program.

This involves a the CIA dire the CIA at the very top, specifically the CIA's Directorate of Science and Technology. Below that, there are three equally level characters as outlined by Lou. uh it is the Air Force, the defense-industrial-based prime contractors, and the Department of Energy. This to me is a grave not just simplification of legacy programs, not just a way to lay it out for the layman, but an egregious mistruth and an absolute program protection strategy and outright lie. That itself grinded my gears more than anything else.

I think even anybody with a passing interest in the subject of legacy programs understands there are numerous numerous siloed programs and not one monolithic program that solely involves the CIA's DS&T that solely involves the DOE defense industrialbased prime contractors and air force. That to me is almost comical. Where's mention of the Navy? Where's mention of the Army? Where's mention of the NRO, the NSA, the FFRDC's, the NNSA, uh entire DIIB infrastructure? This is not a simplification. This is a misdirection. For example, why is the office of naval research or uh yeah, office of naval intelligence not implicated? I don't know.

Perhaps you should ask Jay Stratton who has a background in the office of naval intelligence. >> He was the head of sphere in the '9s. >> Yeah. Uh and specifically Davis and Lou state that the um deputy director of CIA DS&T controls the entire UFO crash retrieval legacy program portfolio. This would be individuals like Glenn Gaffne, like Doug Wolf.

That is nonsense. And this isn't to say that the uh CIA DS&T isn't imperative to legacy programs. The DS&T I talk about it in almost every single one of my videos and it's spawn off the office of global access. I think that the OGA and the DSNT DS&T are one of the most imperative institutions to legacy programs, but they are not the program manager or as Lou likes to say the headquarters. I think that is an outright lie.

What do you guys think? No, I think it's a I think it's an absolutely outright lie. And I if you were to look into like things like what Eric Davis said to us where the majority of crash retrievals are maritime and yet you look at >> the presentation that was given in Age of Disclosure where it was completely left out that the Office of Naval Intelligence or the Naval Underwater Reconnaissance Office Nuro was completely not mentioned. It's a little bit absurd if you think of it in that sense. Um, but again, this was a film designed to educate the average people as to the reality of there being a secret government program and of there being a reality of NHI. So I try and take it in that sense where yes they did achieve their goals in those two senses but no they didn't achieve the academic goals that I would look for where I'm trying to look for absolute truth in what the government's doing.

There's a little bit of lie and a little bit of truth. >> I think those programs the programs not program could have been explained with more nuance. In fact I have a time stamp right here at 1 hour and 3 minutes specifically. Chris Melon directly refutes this legacy program structure by outlining stovepiped institutions that are um entwined in UFO legacy programs. I think it would have been admirable to talk about United States Department of Defense um compartments and offices and intelligence agencies serving as project managers, PMS with defense industrial-based prime contractors and other elements of the DoD uh working below them on such programs.

said, "Oh, the DOE and its 1954 atomic energy agreement and strange classification systems, these are used to obuscate some of the materials." I mean, there's some even sort of nonsense in what um Davis and Lou talk about with the Air Force. They say that specifically Air Force special forces are the teams that operate UFO crash retrievals. This to me isn't true. Uh from what I understand, this these are parallel J-C elements. And just as maybe the 24th special tactics squadron, a J-OC element of the air force is imperative to UFO Legacy Programs, so is the regimental reconnaissance company.

So is Devgrrew, Seal Team 6. So is the intelligence support activity, oh by the way, which Lou worked for. Uh, additionally to that, as far as I understand, for retrieval operations for the actual vehicles that are utilized to pry craft from the ground and take them to a secure staging ground before they can be transported across the Konis by the Office of Secure Transportation. This is the 160th Soar, the Nightstalkers, the Army's helicopter support element to J- Sock. Okay, this is the I think it's company A, first battalion of the 160th SOAR.

This is what I understand. They utilize CH47s to transport smaller craft that has crashed. This is not um this is not comparable to what is outlined in Age of Disclosure. And I will stand by what I say and what I think and kind of what I've been exposed to. And I will I will stand on that ground vehemently.

>> Absolutely. >> Sorry about the rant, guys. There's al there's also, you know, involvement by, you know, the NNSA where with regards to like Nest teams and tree teams. >> Yes. >> There's so many other elements that are involved and the legacy programs have the ability to task these elements.

They have the ability to task other elements of the Department of Defense in ways that, you know, it's not a topdown thing. Like I don't want to I don't want to rant too much, but I agree with you. >> It's not simple and it's not easy to break down. I mean, the structure of legacy programs is more complicated than any of us or probably even somebody like David Grush fully understands the long convoluted history of these programs probably beginning with the army. um of course with the Roswell Army airfield recovery.

And then I think it's I think in the documentary it is specifically Davis and Lou that talk about how the legacy program singular which is going to drive me nuts the whole time we talk about it found its footing when um the air force and CIA were established in 47 and started to intermingle. Okay. Well, if that's the case and legacy programs are a product of joint efforts between the Air Force and CIA, what about the intelligence agency that was created to consolidate uh intelligence between the CIA and the Air Force, the NRO? Or what about the same agency that was created to consolidate intelligence between the CIA and the Navy, the Nuro? It it's it it boggles my mind how some institutions are are are kind of left out here. It it really makes me mad. The Army Signal Corp, I see in the chat, Army Test and Evaluation Command out at Dougway proving ground.

Sorry, Ker. >> One one thing I I just want to point out before you before you say anything, Kerman, I'm sorry. I had a uh I was a nuclear propulsion engineer in the United States Navy for quite some time. And when I was in a school, which is the very first school you ever go to, my very first instructor was a petty officer first class machinist mate who worked on Nerwin, which is NR1. And uh anytime I would ever pull this individual about their time on Nerwin, he would just say, "It's a research platform.

We researched things." >> And that was a neuro vessel that was used by the neuro. >> Yes. >> Kermit, what were you saying? Sorry, I Rob and I are both >> Yeah. No, it's fine. I just let the skits flow.

I was just going to say I felt bad for Dan Sherman because the NSA has the extraterrestrial communication uh program, which is interesting, but it's uh uh very very easily missed out on Lu Alzando's orc chart. I wish the ORC chart was that simple, >> you know? Like I I really I really wish it was. I wish it was just four. Oh, it's just these four groups. And then also like defense contractors just vague like, oh, >> let's not get into James Ryder, Lockheed Bard.

Let's not get into Northrup. Let's not get into, you know, specifics and names. Um because that's too much for the normie audience. I I guess. Yeah.

>> Well, that to me is even a mistruth. Maybe some deep deep legacy programs you skirt right from CIA or Air Force right to the defense industrial base primes like Loheed Martin, North Grumman. But again, I'll stand on business all day long here. From what I understand and what I have been exposed to, there is a step between DoDIC elements and DIIB prime contractors like Locker Northrup and this these are FFRDC's. This is the Sandia.

This is the Los Alamos. This is the MITER and I cannot stress MITER enough. MITER is probably from what I understand the the most important FFRDC in all UFO legacy program structure specifically with naval elements and undersea and transmedial capabilities. C can I ask you really quick GB just for the the purposes of our audience how what do you think about Battel Memorial Institute and where they fall into all of this? >> They are so Battel Memorial Institute is Institute is probably deeply entwined with um specifically biological research or maybe metallurgy. Okay.

I think that Battel is uh one of the most critical elements to the Dougway proving ground and the programs that are uh under under are are conducted out there at the West Desert Test Center under command of Army Test and Evaluation Command. Uh back in the Dougway project, I went through a lot of uh you know directors of the WDTC, West Desert Test Center and just some senior folks over there at the Dougway proving ground. Most of these people had Battel Memorial Institute in their background. And of course, UT Battel and other weird LLC's and spinout companies from Battel have worked uh or uh operate numerous FFRDC's. Battel also has a very provable direct capacity in in studying UFOs dating back to the 1940s with project STO and then their possible exotic metallergy studies where they may have studied shape memory alloys resulting from the Roswell crash.

But tells all over all over. I'd also like to point out for the chat uh if you're ever interested look into Battel Battel. Wow. Can't speak. Battel Memorial Institutees uh location at Fort Dietrich, Maryland.

>> Their >> Yeah. Their bio their bio uh weapons institute there in uh in Fort Dietrich. Just look into that and then look into the EBE leaker on Reddit. Oh, Fort Dietrich and Battel's FFRDC that works closely with um Dougway proving ground on joint CBRNE projects. >> Yeah, that's pretty and I know I know it sounds like probably from me specifically that I'm being very harsh on the documentary.

I still think that uh from from a lens if if you give most of the characters the benefit of the doubt, this is similar to James Fox the program which is uh sorry the phenomenon which is a good way to get an introductory uh understanding of of UFOs in general. I actually think this documentary was more effective than James Fox the program at actually uh introducing the the concept of UFO legacy programs. I don't know about you guys. >> Uh I mean I would agree. We were all at the premiere of the program and I think it was excellent, but this one kind of kind of shook me a little bit more.

I think that it's better for the average viewer. But >> yeah, I mean I think we saw what the doc was getting a review bombarded right before it was released. Um I know there were a couple uh pre-release negative reviews. Um, of course, us young fellas understand that numerous games, uh, video games and movies get kind of reviewbombed before they're even released from people not really liking the subject matter. So, that's kind of part for the course.

That's understood that that would happen. >> Some of that stuff came out, I want to say, in March and April because there was a screening of this film in South by Southwest or it was a film festival in uh, in Austin, Texas. So, a lot of the journalist people got to see it there >> along with Joe Rogan. >> Yeah, Joe did. He's been raving.

He's been raving about the the documentary. Um, let's start to maybe go through the doc, you know, it could be timestamps, it could be concepts, people, and just kind of talk about specific points that stuck out to you guys or interesting things you guys would like to recap. And let's start with you, Kurt. >> You're going to have to come back to me uh collecting my thoughts here. Uh, >> yeah, >> Rob.

Well, uh, all right. So, specifically, if you could rephrase the question for me, I was in the process of answering a chat question, which I am prone to do. >> Oh, no, no, you're good. We're just going to start bouncing around um talking about specific things we, you know, specific uh discussions in the film. We want to talk about specific witnesses, specific concepts, whatever you want.

This is kind of the open thing to bring up whatever you want about the documentary and we'll start just discussing it and continue to move through. I mean, overall, one of the main things that I found from the documentary is that the amnesty thing, like that was probably the biggest problem for me with the entire documentary was that the overall appeal for amnesty from the individuals involved. Um, I I want to say that a lot of this stemmed from Clapper, Alzando, and other like major national security individuals. Um, I'm not the hugest fan of it. Um, again, it's a nuanced subject.

In the end, if it facilitated a better situation for Americans, for people of the world to issue amnesty, I'd probably be able to see that, right? Like, please, by all means, anybody who's involved or or or invested in this, if you have an argument towards amnesty, feel free to light up my DMs. I'll be happy to talk with you about it. As it stands, I stand with David Grush in the sense that I don't see amnesty as something that's necessary. I think that people should fry for the crimes that they've committed. But >> I especially coming from the Clapper crew, there's a lot of talk of amnesty.

A lot of it. >> I especially didn't like John Brennan being featured. John Brennan, the father of the Tuesday morning kill list. All I'm going to say, this guy had a list and a meeting every Tuesday, >> every week for the entirety of his time in the Obama administration. Please don't quote me directly on that.

There's obviously some nuance to that time frame, but they had a list of individuals that needed to be deleted and they did so through drone strikes, through whatever other means. Question what you will or uh you know, say what you will about the necessity of such things, but I think that the morality of such is a little bit questionable and anybody who was willing to put that out as as their bread and butter and part of their legacy is probably not a great thing. Um, I'm not a big fan of killing people, even given the fact that I was in the military for as long as I was. >> So, here's also kind of another thing uh I want to talk about that I'm sure you guys will will love to jump into. And we we talked about it a little bit earlier, and that is the existence of ARV, alien reproduction vehicles, or derivative tech derivative technologies as the term I've kind of transitioned to start using.

But >> you know of of course kind of infamous for my channel is as we said Eric Davis telling me there's never been any uh successful derivation of technologies. No exploitation no ARB. That sort of sentiment is kind of reversed in the film. Uh numerous people talk about reverse engineered vehicles. What was pretty comical to me was u when Eric Davis and Halpoff are sitting right by each other in the same room uh interviewing together and Hal Putoff is talking about many craft and he says hey some of these craft might be the product of the legacy program and that was very comical to me as as of course Davis has been staunchly opposed to this as well as I I've seen I haven't watched the full Farah on Joe Rogan but he talked specifically about reverse engineered vehicles traversing our solar system and that's of course something that viewers of my channel have been exposed to all the way since Brad Sorenson's own words when he interviewed with Bill Scott back in 1990.

So, it was pretty interesting to see that. What' you guys think? >> Yeah, I thought having Davis and put off get interviewed together that was kind of interesting, you know, because uh I'm pretty sure I think Davis is uh he was How's protege, so that was that was kind of interesting kind of seeing that play out. But yeah, also just kind of admitting as well like, hey, yeah, some of this stuff might be might be ours. Like, what do you mean by that, big dog? Like, you've been very you've been very staunch on this whole thing of like, I don't know who a UAP Gerb is, and also there's no ARVs. Like, buddy, you've been saving it for the Faradock this whole time.

Like, you were you were bullshitting hours with you at home. >> Yeah. >> Last time I trust a scientist eating a salad, man. But, um, >> yeah, >> that was that was interesting. And then also replenishing salad.

>> Yeah. And then while we're while I'm kind of yapping, uh the clapper kind of admission as well, that was kind of strange, too. He's like, "Yeah, I know a lot of the stuff over and around like Area 51." >> Mhm. >> Like, okay, cool. Yeah, great.

Thanks, Clapper. Like, >> didn't he say he was also part of an Air Force effort to actually track UFOs? And back in 2021, he said similar things on a news program. >> Yeah. Well, one thing I would mention is that James Clapper at one point was oh my gosh, I forget his exact title, but essentially James Clapper performed a restructuring of the department of national intelligence at one point which was part of an integration effort by the depart or by the director of national intelligence and the overall DNI office in order to take all of the various different electron ronic intelligence sources that we have and to bring those together in an enterprise setting where multiple different intelligence agencies and intelligence customers would be able to to grab that data from a centralized repository uh for the purposes of like sensor fusion, data fusion and things of that nature. Um I I personally believe that this was integral to whatever we would describe as Immaculate Constellation.

Was that done in 2017 or between 2015 and 2017? >> This was between 2008 and 2012. >> Okay, that still makes sense. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. his immac I im I im I im I im I im I im I im I im I im I immaculate constellation established 2017 as a reactionary US appap to uh gauge uh gauge capabilities and and location of both non-human vehicles and ARV including basically an enterprise uh consolidation of overhead and kind of various intelligence gathering systems I think that's a great theory Rob >> right just something I've always kept in my head so >> so again maybe we could talk a little bit more more about the um adversarial programs and maybe kind of theorize different foreign crash retrievals and maybe um how foreign programs may work if we can even begin to try and theorize such things.

But again, Davis and others, I can't remember who else mentions a 1989 Russian tic tac crash retrieval. Uh I I I've been exposed to a very similar incident. But what was interesting to me is uh Davis in that in that crash retrieval event talks about biologics being recovered but also a directed energy weapon. Did you guys catch that? >> A do >> absolutely. >> That stood out to me as well.

>> I don't know what to think about that because that seems like a really absurd admission to make. Like if you're under any form of NDA and you have any form of classified information that you've been privy to, >> especially given that it's foreign intelligence. Um, >> if Davis drew that from United States foreign intelligence, I don't believe that he would actually be able to give that to us. I believe that Davis may have possibly gotten that from things that George Knapp got from Soviet Russia. >> Yeah.

>> Um, given his involvement in NIDS and Big Low Advanced Aerospace Space Systems, um, I I I really don't know where he got that information from. And it stands out as either something completely weird or just a total mcguffin to me. >> Yeah. It almost feels like to me he is kind of ex making that leap of logic and saying weapon system or perhaps the maybe there was an American asset in Russia that delivered some of this intelligence and is kind of making that leap that this is a weapon system. I mean, I'll recall Randy Anderson, the 18 Bravo Weapons Sergeant Green Beret, who you know, I've I've talked to, who I believe went down to what is known as the OffWorld Technologies Division under the Naval Surface Warfare Center crane, run by all of our favorite SIC, Science Applications International Corporation.

And uh there were two pieces of technology according to Randy Anderson, a green beret. one of it, one of which was a very odd sphere. The other of which seemed to be like a gauntlet type tech, maybe a wearable for a biologic that um was described as a weapon system only because recovery team experienced an energetic discharge of the technology during recovery. So perhaps there's a similar thing with that 1989 recovery. Not sure.

>> Who knows? Uh, I mean, I can't even begin to to think of what they would have had to have seen or experienced to classify it as a directed energy weapon, whether it was a discharge of the weapon or they somehow inadvertently activated it. Uh, it's hard to say. Um, it feels like a really weird piece of information to reveal given everything that all three of us have experienced with Eric Davis. Uh, extended conversations with him and his like relative guardedness when it came to operational details of anything revolving around either crash recovery or anything else like that. It almost to me felt like a piece of disinformation.

So >> it was like an addendum >> to the discussing the retrieval retrieval this this this. Oh, and then there was a a do on board, >> right? Like oh yeah, we totally found this weapon. We we can't interpret anything else from like these these craft. We haven't drawn any sort of uh you know conclusions from them. We haven't reverse engineered anything.

But you know absolutely we found a directed energy weapon and the Soviets have it. So we should be afraid. >> Yeah. Yeah. Did the I I think it did, but the doc talked about uh offensive capabilities against UFOs, right? I know Farah talked about us a humans accidentally discovering we could zap UFOs with EMPs resulting from nuclear explosions and high altitude tests, but there was a like very brief discussion about offensive capabilities, right? If I recall correctly, it was extremely brief.

Maybe like one or two lines, but you know, I don't I don't place a lot of weight in that aside from uh you know, what Daniel Alzando and Omega Point have put out in like the loose threads document >> Empress. Yeah, Project Empress specifically. So, you know, aside from that, I don't know very much actionable info on that front. So, I'm hesitant to like really talk in in detail about it because I don't want to be the guy to express this info. No, there there seems to be a pattern that that is worth studying that maybe back in the the late 1940s post World War II with the project lashup radar arrays which were set all across New Mexico to protect against Soviet bomber attacks there was like a weird high-powered microwave byproduct from those radar arrays that um down to craft you know possibly the Aztec craft or others and that similar technology was harnessed in 1983 with the Star Wars program or strategic defense initiative to act offensively.

against UFOs with like super high powered microwave or Xway X-ray weaponry physics. This is not my thing. I I I won't begin to be able to explain why that is plausible or uh we should take look at that with skepticism, but interesting. >> Well, you say skepticism. However, is anyone in chat familiar with what's referred to as a sigma compartment? Feel free to sound off if you are.

anybody, you know, here in the here in the video chat, either of you, have you heard of that? >> Yes, I'm I've heard of the sigma compartment. Yes. Yes. >> Okay. So, what a sigma compartment is is a sigma compartment is a DOE specification for specific types of compartmentalized information within their secure or special nuclear material.

Right? So, >> it's like their version of SEI. Sorry. Sorry to cut in, but it's it's like their version of >> Yeah. So, I'm gonna provide a link in the chat to those that are involved. Um or those that are interested, I should say.

Um and and sigma compartments are a very very set of class or a very very specific set of classification categories um that the Department of Energy uses to classify specific types of special like restricted data or formally restricted data. Um, one of the most important things that I found within those, um, is there is what's called national asset materials. Has anybody ever heard of that? >> No. >> Oh, man. That's funny because DOE >> the DOE claims to say that nothing has ever been categorized as national asset material and yet they made a regulation in 2009, two weeks after Harry Reid sent the letter requesting special access or special access program uh classification for Kona Blue aka the OAP program.

uh the DOE revised their uh revised their uh their regulations and specifically designated a portion of materials as what's called national asset materials. Now a national asset material is a material that is crucial to the national defense. They are not specific about what that means. It is very weird and vague. However, um I would urge all of our viewers to look into what a national asset material is.

I want to point out that I currently have a series of let's see 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 nine freedom of information requests in place for this uh to the nuclear nuclear regulatory committee. Um I have de or I have foyers into the CIA directorate of science and technology. I have foyers into the Defense Intelligence Agency, uh, SAPCO, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, uh, the DOE itself, and the National Nuclear Security Agency as well, uh, regarding national asset materials. Uh, this is what I believe, um, David Grush was alluding to when he referred to special nuclear materials because they are a subset of special nuclear materials. Um, I would advise everyone involved, uh, everyone watching to look into that.

Just saying >> that is fantastic, Rob. >> That's crazy. >> Absolutely fantastic. And I I I think that that is a great uh that's kind of a great hit on how the Department of Energy specifically and their kind of legacy classification systems from the 1954 atomic energy agreement are uh pretty much a baseline of of various terms and classifications to offiscate UFO materials and information. I would also be very intrigued and implore people to look at the National Forensics and Material Analysis Program, the NF map.

But okay, Kermit, your turn. Discussion of the dock. >> What do you want to >> Oh, wait. I'm I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry.

>> Go ahead, Rob. >> I missed a specific point that we wanted to to roll back to. Rustybot 4279 in chat specifically asked what do they mean about directed energy weapon? Is it like the Indian Durga 2 or Russian? And I'm not going to attempt to to speak to that. But specifically, when we talked about a directed energy weapon, one of the things that I wanted to mention is during the Star Wars Defense Initiative under the Reagan administration, one of the specific things that's mentioned in definitions of a sigma classification are nuclear directed energy weapons. That's sigma classification 13 manufacturing and utilization information and output characteristics for nuclear energy converters directors or other nuclear directed energy weapons.

And when I say this, when I say nuclear directed energy weapon, I mean nuclearped lasers that are specifically powered by either actual explosives or specific reactors that are designed to pump lasers. Yeah. Okay. I'm not going to get into the specifics of that. If you'd like, please feel free to jump into Gerb's discord and ask any one of the number of uh, you know, militaryindustrial complex as experts that jump into that chat that like to answer those questions.

There's a guy named Diodon who's really cool in chat. He's probably gonna kill me for mentioning his name, but there's a lot of folks who understand the physics of things like that. But it literally involves utilizing nuclear weapons and then capturing the radioactive energy and and and energy output from those weapons in order to power high powered directed energy weapons. It's a concept that's been around for quite a long time and has been worked on for quite some bit. And Rob, is this under the lethality and target hardening program and particle beams weapons program of the SDI? Yep.

>> Yeah. A concept I've been exposed to is that th those specific parts of the SDI don't originate with 83 and and Reagan, but actually date back to an ideal of President Eisenhower, specifically about offensive capabilities against UFOs, which Eisenhower and the UFO lore that I comport to some folks. But yeah, I mean that's a Rob Jones gold nugget of gold for you folks in the chat. So, I I hope folks are listening and taking notes. Let's um let's keep going with the discussion of the of the doc, too.

What stood out to you, Ker? >> In Age of We're still in Age of Disclosure. >> Yeah. Yeah. Any anything in Age of Disclosure you want to talk about? >> I mean, um I want to know more about what Jay Stratton was talking about with like I've seen with my own eyes like alien beings and stuff. Was that only skinwalker ran stuff? Because Oh, well, sorry.

Um, Dan Farah talks about in his Rogan docu in his Rogan uh podcast, he said, "Yeah, something I didn't want to talk about in the documentary was that a lot of these people that were investigating this stuff, they would start to see like orbs and things over their house, like interacting with their families and stuff." And it's like, how do you approach that? How do you put it in the documentary? Like, what's the goal of it as well? just it's very interesting that that was admitted but Dan Farah does talk about it with Rogan. So I guess it is kind of acknowledged to an extent but like what's going on there and also >> hitchhiker effect stuff right? Yeah. I mean, hitchhiker, I think, is it's a mixed bag of things, right? Yeah. >> Things hitchhiker those things. >> I wanna I want to specifically point out what you said with mixed bag of things.

>> People say the phrase hitchhiker effect. I want to also point out that it's possible that the things that people characterize as orbs could be an intelligence capability, like an ISR capability. So, you know, if you experience something associated with potentially an American ISR platform that happens to exhibit exotic technologies, right? Let's say you see a black triangle in the sky and you have some sort of time dilation effect or something like that and then later on you see blue orbs in your home. I don't want to necessarily characterize that as the paranormal. I think that it's completely possible that, oh [ __ ] we we have a a pervasive sensor capability around these platforms.

We noticed that you witnessed our platform. So now we're going to send a different sensor capability to your home to interrogate whether or not you have additional information regarding that platform. >> That's interesting. >> That's a possibility. >> It's possible.

And speaking of ISR, which is of course intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, uh we have agreed that we cannot begin to kind of understand or comprehend an NHI motive. That's talked about in Age of Disclosure as well. Dave Brush talks about that. But in the age of disclosure, Luis Alzando directly says that N present NHI are performing ISR on humans. I think that's a bit of a leap to make.

I I don't know specifically if you can state that NHI is doing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. I think that if you were to lean towards like the more Lovecraftian view of alien intelligence and the the weirdness around more advanced intelligences than ours and let's just make the assumption for now that like whatever alien intelligences that we're dealing with are far more advanced than ours currently. um ascribing motives of the to them is kind of foolhardy because we can't begin to understand the weirdness and the motives of like something more advanced than us. Just say it. So, did you guys catch this? Was 54 minutes and 29 seconds into the documentary.

I think it was Davis speaking about it, but uh there was discussion made to George W. Bush considering partial disclosure in the early 2000s. That's that's new to me. I've never I've never heard such a thing before. I have heard of of plans for limited or partial or even full disclosure specifically in the late uh 2000s, 2009, 2010 with the Air Force specifically, but no, that was completely brand new to me.

Well, I mean, I think I think you, myself, and Kermit were all privy at least to one discussion that involved a a a conference, if we'll call it that, in like >> I think this is the same event is what I'm Yeah, >> I think that's the same one. >> Basically, like it was during Bush's administration. There was like a conference that was called somewhere in Virginia. They didn't want to tell him it was organized by the White House, but it was organized by the White House. And the question was, the president has information about crashed vehicles and aliens and is weighing the options of telling the public.

>> Can we talk about the different risks associated with that? And they all went through and they like that's what Hal put off is saying with like the lists and they put economic, social, cultural, all the different kind of societal risks involved with it. And they said the cons outweighed the pros. So it was like not a good idea. >> I think it was that same event that they talked about. Yeah, >> I think you're probably right.

It was between 2003 and 2005, I think they said an age of disclosure. So, I think I think you're right on the money. >> And of course, >> what's interesting about that event, sorry to cut you off. >> No, no, please. >> Um, the organizer of that event, like a big a big kind of skeptic point of this event was like, well, it actually wasn't organized by the White House.

Because what had happened was the organizer who was a connected guy who would do those types of think tank kind of discussions for groups such as the White House, he got told by this like senior White House official like, "Hey, this is what you got to do." But then he goes back and he's like, you know, they had this discussion. So, he's kind of excited thinking that there might be a option of disclosing this. So, he goes back to the guy says, "Hey, can can I get an update about like this UFO thing?" And the senior guy goes, "I don't know what you're talking about." like straight up deny that they even had the like he even came to him a couple months before. So I I forget that guy's name, but he uh he passed away a couple months ago. Uh the guy that organized that particular event.

But >> well, I think that with uh if speaking about White House stuff, I would specifically be interested in and I I mean myself, I would specifically name the National Security Council as as kind of these interested parties. There was also, of course, and we were exposed to this when we talked to Davis at Seoul about um George HW Bush uh not being read into legacy programs as a president but being a sitting CIA director. And there's discussion of presidents having partial readin uh to complete non-access. And I I do agree with that point that some presidents have had some exposure or read into baseline levels of the legacy programs while others have just been completely sidestepped. And it seems like some presidents have been uh retroactively let in a little bit on on just a little bit of what's going on after their presidency.

And I I think the best example of that is probably Obama. But if you guys were to wager um if you guys were to wager what presidents post JFK had at least some official briefing into not just UFO legacy programs but just the existence of NHI and presence of NHI. What presidents would you guys wager? >> I would say uh Nixon definitely because he showed Jackie Gleon a UFO and he went crazy and built a UFO house. So that's that has to happen. LBJ maybe if he was involved in the Kennedy assassination, but that's like I don't that's a rabbit hole.

Uh Ford probably not. Gerald Ford probably not. Carter I think they told him the stuff and then I think that's the incident of like he wept basically but he was one of those like useful idiots that they were like not going to tell him the whole thing. Um I think Reagan knew some details from Star Wars probably. He probably knew some [ __ ] We knew Clinton was interested in UFO conversations, but I I don't think he was given the whole story because also >> I think he tried to get access.

>> Yeah. But also the Clinton family like Hillary also has a very kind of interest. She has an interest with disclosure and all that. Like she was like >> at that at that time given the fact that they were on the heels of the HW Bush administration >> end of the cold war too. Yeah.

>> Right. I don't think that the Bush family or George HW Bush given his experience as a CIA director and everyone else or and everything else, I don't think that they were willing to provide access to the opposing party at that point. >> Yeah. >> So, yeah, >> I do think Hillary was trying to prop herself up as the disclosure president for her 2016 campaign in conjunction with >> Yes, that was evident from the Wikileaks emails. Yes.

>> Podesta, Lou, OAP, I I think there was a coordinated effort there. >> Yeah. Well, we have receipts for that. Like that's not a conspiracy. Like that's based on like actual >> Yeah.

Go to the Wikileaks and look at John Podesta's emails with Bob Fish about the defense support program and Fast Walker specifically. That's what something that I have always loved. >> Yeah. >> Do you agree to point out >> specifically about Jimmy Carter is that I think that Jimmy Carter was not necessarily denied access for like dumb reasons. I think Jimmy Carter was denied access because he had an interest in exposing.

Um Jimmy Carter I think was a very very extremely savvy naval officer. He was a naval nuclear officer and is to my understanding one of the more competent um military minds that's ever been a member of the executive branch. So just >> there's I have a very specific theory as to why Carter was not told about the aliens. >> Please. And it's going to sound insane, but just hear me out.

>> So, guy from Georgia, how does he get to become the president of the United States? Like, how does he get that much political capital? Well, largely it's because of his time as governor of Georgia, which Georgia at the time was going through desegregation, Jim Crow, like all that stuff was going away. You had the Civil Rights Act. However, you still had this like white kind of racial minority that was still clinging on to kind of those days. And Carter during his uh governor run, he basically ran as like a normal traditional white Democrat of like we're going to kind of keep segregation and we're going to keep our traditions and values and stuff. When he gets into office, he wins the election, he gets into office, he completely turns page.

He stops messing with the segregationist. He stops messing with the white Democrats like that. like he's kind of seen as like a divisive figure, but on like the national stage, he was seen as this like great guy that was able to like desegregate Georgia and kind of get everything to where it is today. Like Carter is actually an extremely consequential figure for like southern politics and all that because of it. That's kind of what launched his career to become president.

So then from Legacy's perspective, especially if you've been doing hoodrat illegal [ __ ] you probably don't want to trust a guy who like literally it's it there's receipts of like him just turning page. So you might tell him some stuff, but then he's going to turn around the next thing like, "Oh yes, during the briefing this is very serious." And then he'll be the first guy to go up to the podium. You know what I mean? Like I think they're kind of psychologically evaluating the presidents. Like there's like the people that I've said previously that I think were briefed like there's you can also kind of look into their psychological profiles. like they would kind of be the ones that you you would probably tell them some hood rat stuff because like they've they've they've seen a thing or two, right? Like they've done some hood rat things as well.

>> So that's my that's my ramble. >> I think that's a sound theory. I mean I >> also think I know I know you kind of uh skipped by Lyndon B. Johnson LBJ, but I I definitely think he had exposure to the legacy programs as well. I I think there's a little bit of actionable data there specifically around the Kexsburg uh case in um December of 1965.

Uh LBJ had a close relationship with Dr. Eric A. Walker uh who of course admitted he was president at present at the 1965 Kexsburg incident. Dr. Eric Walker, I'm not going to go through this, but everybody knows that Robert Sarbacher named him when talking about 1950s UFO crash retrieval groups.

Um, Lyn Johnson, the day I kind of went through his um, presidential logs the day after Kexsburg, I think this was December 10th, and he had a series of interesting meetings at his White House in Texas or wherever he was, a secondary location of some pretty consequential figures, some with connections to UFO programs, including James Webb as well, which I I found pretty fascinating. Um, so that's that's an interesting thing to go back and look in the Kexsburg video, but yeah, Lyn Johnson is definitely interested. This is a note to those in the chat. This is the same James Webb that the James Webb Space Telescope is named after who was also very horrible person >> uh who worked for the who worked for NASA and was a major NASA administrator. A lot of people have a lot of really negative stories about James Webb.

I'm just going to put that out there. >> So, this this might be a good way to kickstart Kermit here with one of his rants. >> Oh, boy. At 55 minutes and 40 seconds into the film, uh, Lou Alzando says that the Vatican specifically has undeniable proof of non-human intelligence. Kermit, what are your thoughts? >> Okay, that point in the documentary, I kind of had like a like a code flip in my head, a brain flip in my head, like a switch.

I don't know what it is, a light bulb, whatever. And don't don't call me a religious nut job, but just what if, right? the the longest running amount of intelligence, all the crazy stuff that they don't want to talk about and they have a wealth of information on what that sounds like to me. I'm not going to say like they think it's all demons, but what it sounds like to me is it's the demonic possession and that kind of side of the house and all the story and intelligence that the Vatican has collected over thousands of years. Like there is like there is actionable intelligence that they have on this side of the realm. Now, we can call it demonic possession because that's what the Vatican classifies it as, but there is like supernatural text.

There's like evidence of supernatural within the Vatican. That's a true statement. It's an unfalsifiable claim because it like the Vatican, they would agree with that. And then the UFO people were all saying, "Oh, well, they have all the stuff." Well, it's like, but what what is what is that stuff? So, I mean, does the Vatican have like a flying saucer in the basement? Probably not. I don't think so.

I don't think that the Vatican has like a USPap. I don't think that they have like scientists underneath the Vatican or like elsewhere like doing >> they might have artifacts though. >> Yeah, they could have artifacts >> for sure. They have tons of old [ __ ] there. They have a lot of old stuff.

But to say that like oh they're somehow like the quarterback of the CIA legacy program team. Like I I I don't think so. They might be religious adviserss and I think that would be smart. Like, hey, if you're someone working in this type of stuff, like, wouldn't you want to call upon some type of spiritual advice? Like, they have the most amount of data on this that you could think of. Like, if you're CIA, you probably want to have some type of relationship with the Vatican on this issue, would you not? Like, that's especially if you are working with demons.

Like, you want some priests in the room. Like, does that not make sense? So, >> so do you think that might fuel the First of all, I see a ton of people in the chat are talking about magenta. I think all three of us are very firm believers in the magenta. to happen. >> Do you think they're with the Catholic Church that that that might feed the kind of militarism of what Lou and Stratton claims is the Collins elite? Some pretty high level DODIC guys that are obsessed with um you know, angels and demons explanations for UFOs and really kind of inserting their religious beliefs into the subject possibly.

I mean, look at from my perspective, like the the religious kind of perspective and at least the the tradition as it is, like it it it helps to kind of understand it because it's like it's it's hard to have a frame of reference for the supernatural if you don't believe in the supernatural to begin with. >> You know what I mean? Like, so for me talking about this and for me to engage in this topic and to research it, like it's not like I'm not stuck up on step zero, you know what I mean? But further like let's let's just be very specific about what we're calling it here because in the religious text like it is demonic like it is like there is a negative kind of angle with it. You know sometimes there's fallen angels there's like a bunch of different kind of hierarchy of beings if you will but it's it there's a very specific context for it. And so for guys that might be working in this type of stuff and they are kind of worried about that kind of meta angle of it then yeah like I can see that this would be a concern to them. And then also like you know stuff of pe of these things showing up to people's houses like the hitchhiker phenomenon.

Like that's kind of diabolical like that that is like it's a show of force. It's kind of menacing. Like it why would you do that? Like if you're an intelligent species from across the galaxy. Why are you stalking the deputy scientific and technology director at CIA? Like that's just a little weird. Like stop being a stalker, you know? Um so just a lot of questions.

It opens up a can of worms. And I think that I think maybe at the top they kind of use that as kind of the way of just shutting down the conversation and saying, "Well, it's all just demonic, so shut up." You know, like you're not you're not supposed to talk about this. But I I I still don't think that's a good answer. So that connection with the Vatican for US intelligence in the Vatican could realistically date back to around 45 when you know likely which pope was it in 45? >> Pope uh Pope Pius >> my man Pope Pius back channelneled that the Nazis had control of the 1933 Magenta Italy lenticular crashed disc. I just want to point out that that that relationship exists even to the modern day because I just want to point out that a certain deputy to director of Arrow has indicated to multiple podcasters and multiple people that have been given interviews that Arrow communicated with the Vatican in some way, shape or form.

I'm not going to expound upon that too much because I don't want to directly quote what was said, but I know from multiple sources that this was said uh and and was specifically asked to be off the record. >> Um which is a [ __ ] weird thing if you ask me. >> Yeah. Why would you throw that in and ask somebody to like keep it off the record? Phillips and Kirkpatrick both did a lot of sketchy things with podcasters off the record of of telling them telling people things including Sean Kirkpatrick trying to tell various podcasters. There were a myriad of u Yankee Blues in different US DoD compartments.

A bunch of different Yankee Blues which at the same time Tim Phillips was going around talking about one Yankee Blue. So even these Aerost Stooges can get their story straight. I I I want to point out that I put out numerous foyers with regard to Yankee Blue and I've never received anything back. I've always re received a response that there are no responding records whatsoever for Yankee Blue exist >> including somebody we're familiar with that seemingly posted a fake fake Yankee Blue document that didn't have the correct classification on it. >> Can I ask a quick question? So, if they're claiming that Yankee Blue is a hazing program, and if it's a hazing program, wouldn't that mean that it's like not an official program of record? Like, they don't have to keep nor should they keep documents or retain documents related to this because it's they're saying it's hazing.

So, it's not a legit program. Like, what is to gain from doing a FOYA? I'm just >> I'm going to tell you, as somebody who's personally got in trouble for hazing, you don't keep records. >> Yes. So, it just confirms that it's hazing or it confirms like or is it just not a real program? I I don't >> Well, Yankee Blue is just nonsense. It's a red created Yes.

It's a half-hazardly created cover story to try and explain away every single firsthand legacy program testimony. Just like Tim Phillips was trying to infer that most Arrow whistle you UFO whistleblowers that came to Arrow tried to recite Kona Blue as existence of legacy programs which is nonsense to me. >> Okay, I I'd like to respond to the chat just really quickly. Um, ignoring abductions. Abductions are the elephant in the room.

>> That's the biggest elephant in the room of this entire subject. And and you absolutely can't ignore abductions. And I think that abductions are one of the scariest things that anybody involved with disclosure uh is afraid of because that would also sort of broach the subject of agreements which is the other scary thing. Agreements is scary and this this was touched on in age of disclosure as well. Davis doubled down on the 1964 Hollowman Air Force Base landing where elements of the Air Force and CIA DS&T met with non-human beings from three landed craft.

>> Yeah. >> Which I think dates have bounced around between 54 and 64 if I'm not wrong before. But always Hollowman seems to be the Air Force base. And sometimes I think people say that Edwards was the location where agreements were made as well. >> Yeah.

>> Let's see. I I had um I had another thing. So maybe we can talk about this a little bit as well. I know we touched on it a little bit more a little bit earlier with the structure of legacy programs at 1 hour at 1 hour 11 minutes and 30 seconds in the documentary. Uh how put off uh states directly that and this is kind of a running theme in people who talk about UFO legacy programs um that the programs have been shifted into defense industrial-based prime contractors, the Loheed Martins and Northrup Gruminss for secrecy.

I disagree with this strongly, but I want to see what you guys think because this is something that Eric Davis and Halpoff have propagated for many years now that the programs essentially exist only in contractors. Now, I heavily disagree with this, but I'd like to hear your guys' take. >> I mean, it's it's a plausible explanation. I also think that if the goal is to get kind of attention, then I would say the contractors probably have a little bit more of the pie than I think they did originally. And I don't know how much of it they do now.

Like maybe like is it all corporate managed facilities? Are they just sending hired help? Like what's what's this what's the substance of the relationship with these contractors in the program? Like that's anybody's guess. Um I I think the revolving door mechanic which I think I talked about previously like >> that that kind of explains it it explains it from kind of the normie kind of context of it of like okay you have this program but then how does it how does it get covered up within the government? Oh well then all these people go to the contractors. Okay so now it's all at the contractors. It's all at the contractors which isn't that's not a true statement to make. Um I I I don't know.

I I really I really don't know. Um, I think that I think also like the eminent domain provision as well and like kind of having to talk about that as well in the movie and it's and it's good on them that they that they talked about this specific provision, but you know, setting up the idea that like yes, like they kind of have the bag and oh actually like this wasn't this eminent domain provision was not on accident. Like this is why we're doing this. because well there's these contractors that have kind of inherited the material and then they can use kind of their corporate powers to be like no no no like f off it's our stuff now like we'll sell you two billion dollar bombers with the paint on it. >> Can I point out that eminent domain could also be used as a tool to take uh material from one part of the government to another? Yeah, it there could be a legacy program in the NSC that could strip out materials from a program held in the DS&T.

Also, that the revolving door uh while it's true and like what Rubio says, you will find much more fruit if you look at departments within the office of the under secretary of defense and the office of the director of national intelligence revolving door between individuals that have worked in various compartments there and the MITER corporation. That's the revol. That is the biggest revolving door I have ever found. All of these cats go to MITER. All of them.

Donald, a great example. Donald Kerr, deputy director, CIA, DS&T, uh, NRO leader, director of EG&G, director of Los Alamos, MITER Corporation. Uh also if if if these programs are primarily held within defense industrialbased prime contractors while those contractors engage with the programs likely in carveout contracts there is far less program protection structure than if these programs are held in the custody of still federal elements that are still protected by DOEIC and DARPADID on a in a more hands-on level than just a contractor being engaged in a carveout contract. So there's far less program protection in just the defense industrial base. Sure, there might be unique NDAs and unique systems to keep things secret, but there's far less program protection, which is the crown jewel of legacy programs, how you keep the programs protected.

>> Yeah. One thing that I think is important to to point out is that there's a couple different iterations in the modern era of like how these programs work. I believe that there are certain programs that have been rested free from the the federally funded research and development center and university associated research center um you know management which a as we've discussed numerous times we believe to be the core management of the quote unquote legacy program at least the you know th those project managers people that utilize like what Eric Davis talked about in the Wilson Davis memo uh that Admiral Wilson ran into uh where you have certain project managers that run these things as FFTs >> and they utilize the the the threat of of national security and these bigot lists in order to contain these programs. Um I I think there's also portions of that program like what I mentioned in my paper a while back that uh have been taken from that that architecture and moved almost entirely private. um you know what they're doing now, God only knows.

But I think there's a variety of different iterations at this point. Um just based on the ability of certain private institutions to keep things so private it's not even funny. So yeah, great work with that by illustrating how Veritoss Capital may have tried to slice themselves out a piece of the pie from Kona Blue. And you you list all the elements Robert Cardio, Lohei Martin, EIG about the lengths with sufficient capital, a private firm could go to carve out various components and try to get their hands on either materials or access, >> right? And I want to point out that like when it comes to a private entity attempting to do anything like that, you can't just have capital. You can't just have the ability.

You also have a have to have a demonstrated loyalty which is something that like for example Veritoss Capital was very very capable in their their ability to demonstrate uh when they took on companies like MZM >> um and washed reputations. >> I don't want to get into that. I don't want to get into that and I'm going to glaze over that really quickly. I I want I want to state that there are a number of private corporations that uh private equity firms like Veritas Capital have been capable of taking on, washing the reputations of uh and then making them without even materially changing any of their operations or changing the illegal stuff that they did. Um they've they've made them again viable for government contracts without really doing anything other than just making them look better.

So >> yeah. >> Yeah. And and kind of like you outlined the lengths these the private capital groups are interested parties to get their foot in their door of legacy programs not just to be signed as a on as a contractor maybe working on a piece of unique metal but to actually command some facet of programs or be engaged in the programs like Veraritoss Capital had to bring over through Paraton Robert Cardo who was head of the NGA um DDNI more than more >> and David Gres's boss. Yes. Yeah.

More likely than not, >> Duchain. They brought him on too, >> right? More likely than not involved in the um in the Kona Blue blockage of materials. >> Yeah. >> So, all of the duels I have found photos of together at certain events with Mary Sturdivant. >> Yeah.

Wasn't Brennan there as well in that 2016? >> John Brennan was also in that photo that I found. >> Yes. >> Yikes. at the international or the uh the oh my god the INSA >> meeting I forget exactly what it stands for off the top of my head. It's not international but >> um the intelligence and national security uh association.

>> So here's an interesting one we'll talk about and then we'll go through some of these super chats and get back on topic because we're uh I have my chat rolled up to the last super chat I've looked at and it's at 5:05 p.m. So we'll have to we'll have to get through those. >> Gosh. Uh but at at um 1 minute 26 at 1 hour and 26 minutes into the video, this is going semiviral. I think uh Lou says that he and Dave Grush were uh targeted by wet works operations um hit operations by a nebulous committee of 27.

As far as I understand that this is uh true information from what I understand. Um I it's not as simple as >> Yeah, it's not as simple as just like >> Dave and Lou working together, but I I like um I don't know who any of the 27 are or anything like that, but I do think there's truth to that statement. >> But you've heard the number 27 from sources. >> No, no, no, not not the number 27, but there were targeted what works operations >> again at that time frame against those people. Not nothing on the 27.

I don't I never heard anything about structured 27 individuals. >> Okay. Now that >> that's what was like confusing to me about the statement is I've never heard the reference to the number of 27 individuals anything like that. I don't want to apply any weight to that unnecessarily. Um but absolutely targeted wet works operations.

Yeah. >> Could I tell you who like would be individuals in that? Yeah. But not like a committee of 27 or how such a committee would be formed um or why there would be a committee of 27 people to begin with. Uh >> seems like Majestic 12 has grown a lot. >> Yeah.

Up to 27 in name, too. >> They've added 15 people. >> Well, it's like a you know, I think there might be some problems with the Wilson Davis notes. I fundamentally believe that Admiral Thomas Wilson was denied access into the program. So, I I will stand on business there as that is something I believe happened.

>> You know, the watch committee, a very small select number of people, three people. So, you know, if if that's true, which I think there's some some weight there, um very small number of people are are tip of the spear for project gatekeeping in house, uh that 27 people might be signed on to perform wet works against um one intelligence officer and one counter intelligence officer is is surprising to me. >> Yeah, I I would I would also find that surprising. It feels like a little bit of a lar if you ask me, but >> I would think this would be >> I don't know. The number 27 isn't it? I have no idea where that comes from.

So, it's just >> I think this would be >> a handful of titled people in program protection agencies and that's it. I don't think there would be 27 total people including the men who were ordered to take out the hit or possibly approached to complete this hit. I I do not I'm not sure if 27 total people would be involved. my my understanding from conversations in Huntsville, conversations elsewhere, uh, both online and with certain individuals, I don't believe there'd nearly be that many people involved in a decision like that. I feel like it would be anywhere between like three to like six people max, maybe one or two like operational individuals who would go out and do a thing domestically.

You know what I mean? >> I agree. Ker, do you have anything to add? >> I just don't think we should get hung up on the number. Um >> Yeah, that's fair. >> I was I was uh I was memeing about the Majestic 12 thing. Um >> yeah, >> but yeah, I mean it's anyone's guess as to who those people are and what kind of agencies they they're responsible for.

Um I don't know. just like a t a targeted hit on other Americans for this. Like it's just that's that's messed up, man. Like that it really is. And I'm >> I I do feel bad for a lot of these guys who've had to go through this.

Like it's like literally it's targeted government harassment and they're >> they're trying to whack you. Like literally like that's that's what they that's what they convened on. And you know, we were also talking about John Brennan as well like with the Tuesday kill list as well. like these these are these are some pretty pretty nasty people, you know, and getting tangled up in this in this web for real. Like it's I don't know.

I guess it's easy for me for my uh position in a in a gaming chair in uh in my apartment, but it's it's like real life and it's not it's not really funny, you know? Like these people have been like they've been seriously messed up. Like people have showed up to their houses like this isn't >> Yeah. >> This isn't this isn't fun at games, you know? and then it skips it just shows up to Kirk Patrick's house and then that was that was funny. He was in the bushes. >> Even on Brett Bayer, uh Dave Grush said he was physically threatened both professionally and in his personal life before his IG ICIG complaint.

So, if these two timelines kind of line up, there was possibly an individual or a small group of individuals that was interested in stopping Dave Gush before he could even file his complaints to the intelligence community inspector general, which that is horrifying because if he had if if that wet works operation was successful and carried out, none of us here would know the name Dave Grush. None of us would know why he was killed. He would just be another veteran statistic of a of a lost veteran, which is just repugnant to think about. Indeed, so is the seemingly coordinated effort to uh tarnish the name of David Grush again before his Brett Bayer interview came out. I've been uh I've been pretty disgusted to see that.

I'm sure you guys have as well on um on Twitter recently, specifically from Green Street trying to um call David Grush unstable and um then all the cronies there on Twitter kind of run with that and it's it's pretty sad for me to see that. >> Yeah. So, let's go through these super chats and then maybe if if if you guys want, we'll start um we'll start getting to some questions. Would you guys like that? >> Absolutely. I would love that.

>> Do you mind if I take just two minutes to step away? I got to deal with a pet issue. I'll be right back. >> Yeah, please. We'll start reading through the super chats and then um if you guys start have been questions, please put them in all caps. And if you have uh if you have specific questions for one of us, just say our name.

I'm sorry. I'm cracking up at a comment I saw that said you you should go join Piggy because he looks so tired. >> Sleepy Joe. Yeah, I saw that one. I saw that one.

>> Okay. Uh Rich, thank you so much. Please do a live stream with Polarity. Sure. I like Polarity.

Josh is um he loves talking about, you know, more conspiracy related stuff. I I know Josh. He and I have DM'd a few times. Seems like a really nice guy. >> This is Griff.

Hey, Griff. Thank you. UFO wolves. We are wolves. Uh do you think similarly structured legacy programs are in other countries? What could a Chinese or Russian legacy program look like? I think we I think I tried to talk about that, but it it kind of failed.

I I don't think we not even having a basic understanding of Russian politics or Chinese politics, I can even begin to try and structure how their defense departments work. >> I'm sure it's laid out in the thread three documents, but I don't think those have been posted yet, which still like where are those? >> Yeah. Okay. Uh thank you very much, my friend. official Diodonax.

Thank you so much. I very much appreciate it. Let's scroll down. Man, we are so behind in the chat. >> That's all right.

That's >> for a minute. >> That's why our idea with these lives with three people was to do this when we have stuff to talk about. Not just to sit around every, you know, third day or something, but when we're getting together with these with stuff to talk about, it's really going local Jay. Hey. Hey gang.

I'm the dude in the Discord who was at the AODD screening in Q&A on Saturday. I appreciate your insight into that legacy program as depicted in the movie. Wasn't totally accurate structure with respect. That is a very cute cat. Rob and local HJ, if you're still in the chat, let us know um some of the interesting things from from the premiere.

I'm sure some of the people in the film were there and maybe tell us a little bit about the Q&A here. I'm sure people would love to hear it. >> Okay, one say before uh before we say anything else, Local H is a really cool dude. uh he was within or he's a he's a member of the r/ufos discord and he's a cool guy. Um he's got a lot of really good uh you know things he tried to ask at that Q&A session.

Unfortunately I don't think he got the chance to ask all of them but >> real War Pig, thank you my friend. I know you and Rob were um chatting in the comments a little bit ago. Thank you so much. >> Okay, we're catching up. Real War Pig again.

Thank you again. How do you know how I know Rob is a lefty? He told us, "Did you say you were left-handed?" >> No, I said that I'm more leftwing oriented than wing oriented. >> It's not really a big deal because there's no partisan politics when it comes to disclosure. It's a human issue. It's not a political issue.

>> Yeah. >> Like when it comes down to it, it's we're one nation. I'm I'm a United States sailor and I swore to serve and defend the United States Constitution. That's all that matters. >> Let's see.

Oh, scrums. This is a great question. Maybe as we start to get to the questions, we can start with this. Thank you so much, man. What would disclo what would be disclosure for each of you? It's a it's a tough question.

I mean, for me, I have had very I have had as confident as one could be with secondhand information. I am I am that confident on um like the legitimacy of of legacy programs and so forth. My next step, my ultimate goal in life and what would solidify me uh to be the happiest man on earth is to go to the hanger, go to the underground locations at Dougway, go to the hangers at Pax River, go to the hangers at the Edwards 412 and physically see a recovered vehicle at an alien reproduction vehicle. That is what is left for me in my life. What about you guys? >> I'm going with you to that to that, by the way.

>> I'll pick you up in the TR3B. >> Word word. There's also some uh there's also potentially some spots over by my place as well. So, they might give me an East Coast tour potentially. I don't know.

Feds hit me up. >> I don't specifically know of a spot near your place that we need to go look at, but I will elucidate that in the private comments. >> We'll take this offline. >> Yeah. For me, disclosure means something completely different.

It means something different than what my friends think. It means something different than what Lou Alzando thinks. Um, for me, disclosure is complete government official confirmation of crimes against the United States people, regarding a long-standing 80 plus year disinformation campaign against the United States people, managing perceptions uh, regarding the actual reality of nonhuman intelligence that's been interacting with human beings throughout all of history. >> Yeah. Um, it would involve the admission of crimes against the United States people and the admission of an ongoing cover up program as well as the revelation of advanced breakthrough technologies that have been suppressed.

All three of those things are integral to disclosure in my opinion. >> I agree with you there. I think that's nuanced. Recently, Chris Ramsey of Area 52 made a tweet that said, "I'd rather talk to a farmer about UFOs and aliens than a government official." I, as much as I love Chris, I don't agree with that. I agree with you, Rob.

I think a global disclosure is an open kimono of legacy programs including exploitation, storage and reverse engineering of non-human vehicles and the crimes that have commiti been committed to keep that secret as well as the structure of such programs. >> I I agree. I love the term open kimono. Just [ __ ] rip it open and let us see the goods. >> There'd be a lot of societal baggage with that size, you know? We just >> Well, let's let's go here.

Uh Park John, thank you so much. making an experience. Make an experience of your channel. We need people to come out and historical data is good, but we need regular Joe's to move the needle. Maybe we could do that in the Discord.

>> I'll make you one. >> I'll make you one right now. >> Yeah, sounds great. >> Blux Wave capacitor, thank you so much. The word national security was used a lot.

Do you think there could be another patriot type of motivation ascribed to disclosure? Absolutely. Yes, >> you need to the structure of legacy programs are geared towards what David Gish said asymmetric asymmetrical warfare advantages and feudalistic dominance. Uh an open kimono catastrophic disclosure right off the bat revealing our derivative technology capabilities is a huge national security concern. Absolutely huge. So I I think there there are valid national security concerns, but there's still intelligent ways to have full disclosure.

>> Yeah. Not to con not to be a conspiracy theorist real quick, but with disclosure and the idea that like you know there's more to the human potential and all that. What if it is the uh impet the the prelude for the government to be like okay we need to have an understanding of who all in our citizenry are like experiencers who has uh certain psychic abilities like creating those types of registries. I don't know. Does that come with disclosure? >> DARPA is super interested in that apparently.

>> DARPA. >> DARPA. >> As me as much as I can possibly tell people as whenever DARPA's brought up, go look at the security and intelligence directorate. >> Yeah, this is a good one because this is actually a great thing for us to discuss. I don't think we've talked about before on a live.

Thank you so much, Cat Zaj. where the program did a better job than AODD was featuring Chris Melon's another signal chat. Quote, "We now know the management structure and security control systems and the ownership of the CR, etc." Talking about um the legacy programs. This signal chat exchange was from Chris Melon and an unnamed individual within either the DoD or IC and reference was made to the 1953 Kingman, Arizona crash retrieval as well as a gatekeeper for some segment of Air Force programs who it was senior executive service, right? It was an SCES2. Am I Am I on the money there? I am Am I forgetting? Do you guys remember? Okay.

>> Yeah. I'm going to have I'm gonna have Scrums post this in chat. I'm going to send it to him right now. >> Okay. Please folks in chat can check this out.

SCS2 Air Force gate that >> Yeah, because that I I agree with you there. That was a that was a pretty pretty interesting one. And Ker, you post that. >> I'm just gonna I'm gonna read specifically like from that signal chat because I have it pulled up. Um there's an unknown SCES2 and Chris Melon um that are exchanging signal chats.

The the SCS2 says, quote, uh, "Blank and I are making huge progress getting into the crash retrieval program. He plans to meet with you at some point. The blank would be slack jawed if they found out what we know now." Chris Melon replies, "Something something 45 versus something else. We never get to see the other side of that." And then the the official says, "Right now, we haven't gone that far back. We're dealing with the recovered UAP that landed in Kingman, Arizona in the 50s.

We're vacuuming up info as redacted gets read in. We now know that the management structure and security control systems and ownership of the crash retrieval. Uh we also know who recovers landed or crashed UAPs under what authorities. We also know that a still highly classified memo by a secretary of the United States Air Force in the 1950s is still in effect to manage or maintain the cover on UAPs. We also know the SCES2 who is the Air Force gatekeeper name redacted.

So all that being said there there's a considerable amount of back and forth information that's being passed there. There is an investigative process underway. >> That was intriguing because that was response to Sean Kirkpatrick leaking a signal exchange between him and Chris Melon. Correct. >> Yes.

>> Right. >> Come on. These guys are 60 70 years old. that leaking leaking chats is not is not >> real housewives of UFOs, man. I love it.

>> Which Kirkpatrick is always at the center. >> Thank you very much, my friend. Have you ever looked into Richard Banderick? I know Rob has. I Rob probably has the best basis for Banderick. I I have not specifically spoken to him, though I would like to.

>> I've reached out to him. He hasn't responded to me, unfortunately. Um, I have a couple of friends who have reached out to Richard Vanderick and he's a little bit non-committal on uh discussing details of the non-governmental organization that he worked for in the 1980s. my personal and again I want to I want to point out that this is just a personal assertion um based on Banderick's testimony when he was on the Ecosmic Futures podcast with Anna Brazy Anna Brady Ez um last year uh and his description the the National Science Foundation presentation that he gave that I was actually in the Zoom call for >> Oh yeah I believe >> I believed What Richard Banderick is referring to is his time potentially working for Palo Alto Carrot Labs. >> Interesting.

>> Just I would advise anybody to search Isaac PAC documents uh on Google. Uh you will find pretty rapidly what it is I'm referring to. And I believe it to be a pretty significant leak that's never really been disproven. There's been one person that tried to take credit for that leak, but they have no other art assets they can point to that even approached the level of quality or detail um that are within that leak. It it seems to be based on what it is.

Uh yes, carrot c uh to hypertonics 709 in the chat. Um I would highly recommend anybody look into that. Again, I can't speak to the validity of that link, but it does serve to reason based on everything that I've been able to gather that that's what Banderick is referring to, especially given the fact that he used graphics from that exact leak within his National Science Foundation presentation. >> Wow. So, so local HJ, thank you again, my friend.

And yes, this is what we were uh kind of put on as an addendum to discussion of the Vatican. Uh according to Gush specifically, Pope Pas directly back channel information of the recovered craft of the Americans and there will be some interesting stuff coming out more on Magenta soon. So, uh I was um recently I went out of town to go do uh an an interview. It it should be pretty good. It's it's a good one.

It's a lot of fun. It's like four hours. But the in what did the person involved in? >> If you don't mind me asking, >> I'll I'll leave it to to him to it wasn't it wasn't I some people have been saying, "Oh, did you go on on on Joe?" No, it's not Joe Rogan. Although that'd be a dream, but we just talk about MMA the whole time, but this is a this was a fun one. It's going to be a great episode.

But this specific person is going to have new information on um on some of the magenta stuff. It's going to be really intriguing. So, I cannot wait to see that. >> Looking forward to it. >> Very exciting.

This is This is a content creator you did an interview with. >> Uhhuh. Yeah. So cool. Yeah.

>> So Steve Owens, thank you. No NHI threat. Ignoring abductions. Why? Kind of as Rob eloquently said, abductions are kind of the elephant in the room. And what seems to be a recent phenomena is um I I think I agree with Rob that a lot of people don't really like to talk talk about abductions or there's fear or worry with abductions that uh you know humans are powerless to stop such things or a possible brooch of agreements.

>> Right. I I want to expound on that and just say that the government is probably not going to ever reasonably, in my opinion, address abductions because it would also involve addressing any potential agreements that were made regarding uh allowing abductions to take place. Um, if you look at Dan Sherman's Above Black Project, Preserve Destiny, uh, the primary crux of his entire account, which he just did a very long form interview with Jesse Michaels on American Alchemy about that, um, which I would advise everybody to look into. Excellent. Dan Dan Sherman is one of those people that has never sought any sort of notoriety from his experience and in fact threw away a very significant national security career in order to get away from the program.

>> Um what he has described was a an intelligence program in which he was tasked with interacting with non-human intelligences in order to exchange information about said abduction program. Whether that's true or not, that's up to you to decide. I don't know whether or not it's true, but I will say it's very compelling. So, >> we'll see. Cody, an airline pilot tried emailing your Gmail.

I have a lead on an interesting video. What's the best way to chat? I will find your email and I'm so sorry. I'm kind of behind on that. Been super backed up, but thank you. Thank you so much again.

And I would say just as a backup uh and decod if you ever want to just jump into Gerb's Discord and reach out to me. I'm usually listed near the top of the Discord and the usernames. You can shoot me a message and I'd be happy to relay it if you can't get through via email. >> Yeah. So I got to be fully honest.

Sometimes I I can be uh a crapshoot to uh respond. I'm just always writing something or working on something. So I I promise I'll do better. And I'm so sorry. And thank you for reaching out again, my friend.

>> And also I'm currently unemployed. So if you ever want to throw me a message, I usually have the time to field it and I will throw it GB's way. So >> So Mr. Good Game says, "Is there Thank you, my friend. Is there any actual distance between the legacy program and disclosure agenda? Seems to me that the conflict between the two is mostly theater." I think in some cases there's distance, some cases there's not.

I think elements of legacy programs are actually are actually pro- limited disclosure or pro some transparency. And in my opinion, I think Lou Alzando is an example of that as I stated earlier, but I think the two often cross over. Sometimes they're very far apart. You know, we talked about Lou and Dave Grush possibly being the target of Wet Works. That would obviously be an element of the legacy programs that does not want disclosure.

So, I think just that that speaks to how siloed and kind of complex in the different factions within um within disclosure. What do you guys think? I mean, I think the legacy program at times has probably flirted with disclosure, and I think that's been evidenced based on kind of what's out there. Uh, there's been moments kind of where it was either toyed with or it seemed like the stars had a line for this stuff to come out or it seemed like a great time, but >> And then management changed. >> And then management changes. Exactly.

So, >> I don't know. Um, yeah, there's more I could say, but I don't want to sound more conspiratorial than I've already sounded on this uh live stream. >> There are 1,081 people watching and I'm sure every single one of them would like to hear what you would say. >> Oh, boy. >> Well, you know, I just, you know, rest in peace, Charlie Kirk.

But that did happen the day after the UFO hearing and there was an SIC plane in the air orbiting. I think uh Red Panda Koala dug this up. Shout out Shout out Red Panda Koala. He uh found flight radar of a chartered government plane that was just doing orbits around Utah Valley University that was contracted out to SIC like nothing weird where it might have been sorry LOS I think it was I think it was LOS one of those two >> same company. >> Yeah same.

>> Yeah. Yeah. So, I guess back to the question though, you know, management changes. There's all these, you know, it seems like, oh, they're gonna disclose this stuff and then all of a sudden management changes or sometimes they just do wild stuff potentially. I mean, I'm not saying they killed Charlie Kirk, but like they killed a lot of people over this stuff.

So, it's not it's not zero chance. It's not saying that they wouldn't do something like that. Um, so yeah, I I it's a very complicated game and it's >> it's nasty. >> I I want to say like right out that like, you know, I don't want to espouse any like major conspiracy theories with huge political events that have taken place recently. One thing that I will say is that that event absolutely negatively impacted disclosure in terms of our ability like specifically the three of us were poised to go have facetime with a number of lawmakers that day >> and security locked down every single building.

We were unable to go do any of the things that we wanted to go do. We had the opportunity lined up to go have some what I would feel like were very constructive discussions with um you know, Representative Jasmine Crockett, Representative Robert Garcia, Representative Eric Berles, and a few others. Um so yeah, that was a negative thing. Was it connected? I have no [ __ ] idea. But the first thing that I would want to point out is that when it comes to actual distance between the legacy program and disclosure agenda, that varies from human to human.

This is an extremely human experience for every single person involved. Whether you're a government employee, a contractor, or a regular citizen, everybody has a different definition of disclosure. Like I mentioned previously, Lou has his own definition of disclosure and his own definition of what is a reasonable disclosure under national security than I do. I personally feel that we should bust the whole thing wide open and just let it all hang out. But you know, other people are a little bit more uh, you know, conservative when it comes to that.

I'm not going to pass judgment on what's right or what's wrong, but I will say that there's a huge spectrum of what people mean. Well said, Anomaly Files. Thank you. I'm curious, why do you guys think that people say this uh doc is a distraction or just UAPs in general? Also, what would you rate the doc and Oscar worthy? Of course, talking about Age of Disclosure. I think that is a I'm I'm trying to think through that.

That's correct me if I'm wrong. That's in relation to kind of individuals who parrot the statement that the whole UFO subject is a scout out for something else. Correct. And now you got Steven Green Street saying, "I've never believed in uh Project Blue Beam more." Am I Do you guys think I'm >> That's how I'm interpreting that comment. Yeah.

>> Yeah. Yeah. I I >> Oh, it's a distraction from the Epstein files. You know, that came out this week, too. >> Anything is a distraction from the Epstein Files.

And look, if disclosure ends up being a distraction from the Epstein Files, you should send a thank you email to jeep Epsteinvacationgmail.com. Okay? Because if anything, you know, you should be willing to appeal to the narcissism of individuals within the executive branch for them to be able to cement their legacy by revealing this information. Um, but that being said, I don't think that the doc is a distraction at all. Is it Oscar worthy? As a film student, I would argue against that just because I'm really really critical of certain film making aspects and things like that. But hey, is it Oscar worthy? I think maybe a tough question.

What would you guys rate it out of 10? It's a really hard really hard question to rate a a documentary, especially something we're all so personally close to and so many people in this chat have uh are very partial to to rate the documentary. >> I would say it's not Oscar worthy personally, but that's just because I have a very high bar for what I would consider Oscar worthy. Um, very very few films that actually get nominated for Oscars, in my opinion, are actually worthy of it. Um, but that's me being snotty. So, the Oscars has kind of turned into favoritism as well recently.

Hopefully, they're kind of reverting back to normal kind of film making standards. But, um, I mean, look, I I would say it was a very wellput together film. I would put it up there probably a little bit beyond the program. I just think the testimony, the people, the level of people that were in that that was that was substantial and I think that that documentary is going to serve like stand on its own if that makes sense. Like it's something that >> it's very much a very current piece of the time.

It's got all the people that everyone kind of knows about. It's got some people that no one's really heard from before previously, but it all like it has a coherent message. It has a coherent kind of storyline and also it's a call to action, right? It's like kind of a wakeup call for the country. That's what this is. I'm showing this to my family members.

Like I'm going to show this to friends. Like I bought the film, whatever. I gave Dan Farah 25 bucks. Shout out Lou and Jay as well. >> I recommend people pay pay for it if you can.

It's it's worth supporting the the filmmaker Farah. And >> I think it's worth a watch. >> Yeah. But >> I don't know. I I guess if your if your expectation was like you were going to watch this film and then just be 100% convinced of aliens, like I'm sorry, buddy.

Uh this is a this is a marathon, not a sprint. And >> it's good that like in an hour and 50 minutes of time, it's able to synthesize, I think, the base reality of kind of what we've been talking about collectively for months, for years. It's able to synthesize it down into a digestible format that everyday Americans can watch. And it's like it's impactful. Like there's there's parts about it that's like it's really impactful.

And the skeptics have tried their darnest to like come out ahead of this and basically like oh well these people are crazy and oh it's got really bad reviews and oh it's just they don't have any evidence. It's like okay yeah bro. >> That's kind of what this whole thing is. Like we need administrative executive reform. like we need literally the president to step in and do something about this because nothing gets done in this country really unless it has the will of the president behind it at least from a government perspective.

So I think the way that they set up the premiere and Gush finally having his Fox like his Fox special as well like that was all it all worked out for the best because I think initially right like the plan was that it was going to come out in September, >> Crush was going to have his bit but then this doc documentary was going to come out in November. Like we knew that Age of Disclosure was going to come out in November since I want to say July or August. Like this has been for some time. >> No, we knew at Soul last year that it was going to come out like sometime within the year. >> Yeah.

Yeah. It was told to me at Soul that like it was going to be coming out like a year from then. >> Um but that was 2023. Big dog. >> Yeah.

>> Yeah. But but that was but that was November 2023. And then like I think initially the film was supposed to come out but they couldn't find a distributor. this back and forth. >> Yeah, I think Farah or people involved with the film made their own distributing company because it can be like a nightmare to to find a distributor.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. My bad. I'm getting my I'm getting >> here.

I I will just point out that like having your own distributing company and like the the deal that was selected was for maximal profit. To their, you know, to their credit, it's a capitalist society. You're supposed to make money or whatever, right? >> But, >> you know, that that was part of the rationale there. Um, I'm not going to condone or or condemn, but it was a choice. >> Yeah.

Before we move on to the next question, while we're talking about the subject of films, and maybe we can prompt this to the chat, we'll spend like 30 seconds talking about this and then move on. Have you guys seen the new actual um fiction movie, the the new film in theaters, Bugonia, which is stars Jesse Plums and Emma Stone, which is about a group of kind of us who kidnap a uh >> kidnap a female executive because they think she's an alien. I >> if you guys haven't seen that, I really I wanted to go see it. My wife and I literally like finally got the opportunity this this last weekend to go see it and it had been taken out of the theaters here. So, I'm going to have to wait.

Unfortunately, I I was really, really, really upset. I'm a huge fan of Yorgos Lanthamos, the director, and Emma Stone in general. His last movie, Poor Things, was absolutely like the pinnacle of like all films that year. It was one of the most amazing recreations of the Frankenstein story I've ever heard, uh, or ever seen. So, I would advise anybody to go watch all of his work, whether it's The Lobster, Poor Things, or I can't think of the other two films that he's done, but that guy's [ __ ] awesome.

>> Have you seen it, Kermit? >> I I have heard about this film. I have not seen it yet, though. >> Well, we'll get back on topic. I just recommend everybody if they can can see it. So Cameron says, "Dan Farah said that the respectable programs wouldn't show their hands unless there was a there was a for sure World War II.

Doesn't that mean that the programs are more powerful than the world's world power militaries?" I would say with a resounding yes. You need to understand that the legacy programs can harness defense industrialbased assets at will to use at their whim. Um yeah, what's up KM? Well, the reason the reason why they're gonna wait until World War II because they because actually Travis Taylor, he talks about this a little bit in the Dan Farah documentary. He's like, "Well, basically you could just put a nuclear weapon inside of one of these flying saucers and you could send it over your enemies." Like, this has been talked about since the beginning of the UFO conversation. The idea of putting a nuclear weapon >> Yes.

Prompt global strike. The idea that you can put a weapon inside one of the one of these things like it goes faster than a missile. it beats the missile. So, yes, if nuclear weapons are on the table and we got to do we got to bomb them real quick, we're going to use those types of assets and if they've kind of war game this out of like, oh well, we have this stuff and we're doing missions throughout the solar system, but we can't really tell the public because X Y and Z. So, like we're only going to show them like when we're literally flying over the United States with a nuclear weapon on our way to bomb Moscow or whatever like in the third world war.

It's like yes, like this is this is like the this is the crown jewel. Like this is this technology is like the the nuclear war crown jewel, you know? So yeah, I I caught that bit. It was very interesting. >> The other thing that I would point out is like when you're dealing with like one of one or like unique assets, uh there's a general hesitance to utilize it in anything other than a absolute emergency situation. Let's look at like something like the next generation um air dominance program uh which is the current program to create what's colloquially known as the F-47 fighter.

Um that program has been around has been flowing flying demonstrators since 2017. That's confirmed by multiple Air Force sources that they have had functional demonstrators and there are Google images by accident that have been revealed of these demonstrators parked at Area 51. Um these these pro these platforms exist and there are probably platforms far more secretive than those. But the problem is is they are so valuable because they represent such a great defense industrialbased investment in their production. I am talking billions and billions and billions of dollars to create a single airworthy platform that you would never ever even jeopardize this platform whatsoever by flying it into an opposing airspace uh in anything other than the most dire of circumstances.

So yeah, you wouldn't show your hand unless there was for sure a World War III and America was about to be nuked or something like that. >> That is a fantastic question. >> Yeah, >> Jonathan, thank you so much. I was glad to see Dr. Taylor from Skinwalker Ranch in the documentary.

Do you think Secretary of State Rubio will advise the president to take action on this issue now? Hopefully with the prompting of one, Mr. David Grush. What do you guys say? If anybody is to advise the highest levels of the admin, it would also be Rubio. >> I think the briefings have already happened. And that's kind of my interpretation of Grush's comments in the special reporting because it kind of seems that Trump's been made aware.

I think around August and September, I want to say he was made aware. And I think they've been just trying to figure out the right time to do it. And I think this has been rumored or corroborated by a couple other people, not including uh Ross Colt, who's kind of mentioned that the administration is highly interested, but they've just been kind of waiting for the right time and dealing with other national priorities at the moment. >> Yeah, I think there's a twofold way to look at this. I think that you could look at it that way that they're trying to look for the right time that the briefings have already happened or things like that.

You could also look at it this way. You could look at it as what we discussed previously, which is David Grush's attempt to potentially play to the uh the desires of the executive branch, the desires of our chief executive, which is to have a great legacy, to be liked, and whether you believe he's a narcissist or not a narcissist, I'm not going to even get into that. Um, you know, to play into that pride, right? Um, if I were David Grush and if I were in that position and I had a great public platform in order to say it, I would probably love to butter up the president and and and indicate that, yeah, oh, I'm sure he knows everything. Yeah, he absolutely knows all this stuff. He's capable.

He has this knowledge. Um, you know, I trust in him. I have faith in him. So on and so forth. Um, you could view it that way, too.

Either way, I think it's a great play. I I don't think that there's I don't think there's an issue either way. If he's already had the briefings, [ __ ] fantastic. If he hasn't had the briefings, >> let's talk like he has. So that way he then feels like, "Hey, why the [ __ ] haven't I had these briefings? Give me those briefings." You know what I'm saying? So >> yeah.

No, I I think that's a great way to look at it. >> Guys, remember as you put your questions in, please put them in all caps. >> Yes. >> Butter me up. Toxic farts, thank you so much.

I think I've seen you in the um uh in the night shift live streams, which shout out the night shift. I'm jealous. Ker's got the TR3B shirt. Shout out Clint out to Should have worn it. >> Shout out Xander.

You guys are great. >> But do you think MJ1 had his funeral last week? Specifically Dick Cheney. And I don't know if MJ1, but I do strongly believe Dick Cheney was uh at the tip of the spear of this stuff for quite a long time. What do you guys have to say on the alleged MJ1 or Mr. Dick Cheney? >> I don't know if he was MJ1, but I would say that, you know, as somebody who drastically altered the national security environment in our our country for what, 40 years of his career.

Uh he was uh you know, one of the youngest uh White House chief of staffs ever for Gerald Ford uh at what 35? He was 35 when he was chief of staff, which is like nuts. Like >> my goodness. >> It's It's mind-blowing. But as somebody who has had the access to the levers of power for that long, you have to at least assume that he was privy to some of those secrets. This is the I know that Rob saw this comment, the super chat, because I made eye contact with him when this popped up and I could see he had the most devious little smirk on his face when this popped up.

Ty, thank you so much. I joined late. I might have missed it, but was wondering what Rob's thoughts on Lazar. >> Rob, go ahead because you have a very you are very passionate about uh this your thoughts on Bob Lazar. So, let's hear it.

>> I I have, like you said, extremely passionate thoughts on Bob Lazar. I think Bob Lazar is a very curious figure in this entire lore. Um, I I think that Bob Lazar is not only a real figure within the lore, but is also a disinformation figure, much to his own chagrin. Um, I I think that when you look at the accounts of individuals like Bob Wazar, and I'm even going to point to Dan Beerish here a little bit. Um, look at their look at their relationships with Edward Teller and Edward Teller's involvement with Area 51 and nuclear programs.

Uh, Bob Lazar indicated that he was recruited by Edward Teller and so did Dan Burish. Uh, and when asked about these things, they were denied by Edward Teller in in very odd ways. And I I won't go into the details there, but one of my major beliefs is that Bob Lazar was utilized as someone who was a technically competent to potentially actually assist with a program or te technically competent enough to actually assist with a program while also having enough compromised at any given time. Uh I believe that he was brought in and again these are just my beliefs. Uh but I believe that Bob Lazar was brought in as a vector for outside um as a vector for information to be taken to the outside.

I believe that Bob Lazar was shown certain things that were real and certain things that were not. And throughout that process um I don't think Bob had any idea what was real and what wasn't. And I think he was a great asset because he could easily be disavowed if he said things they didn't like. Um especially given his history at Los Alamos National Labs. Uh his consistent history with you know um his firing at ll uh for using the phone system there in order to run a private business and a number of other things.

Uh it's it's a super nuanced like story when you get into all the details with Bob. Uh, I don't think he's a complete liar at all. I think that when Bob says things, I think he says what he actually believes took place, but I think he was shown things that weren't true, too. >> So, and I that I knew you would love that because that's a I think that's a very nuanced opinion over just the all Bob is nonsense or oh, I I believe everything Bob says, camp. This isn't a question, but this is more of a statement that I think is actually pretty interesting to talk about.

>> Uh, Hyper Tectonic says, when we were talking about Rubio, I think it's upside down. Upside down. Trump has pushed Rubio to talk publicly. That actually might be a sound theory. As we know, JD Vance and Tulsi Gabbard have all both talked about UFOs on media segments somewhat recently.

It is interesting to think that possibly um high levels of the admin have pushed these individuals to kind of put the feelers out of so to speak. Um this would also with Rubio most of age of disclosure was filmed before uh Trump took presidency. So that would probably have to date back to his previous administration too. >> Marco Rubio and Joe Rogan would be crazy. >> That would be that would be very crazy.

I I just want to say regardless of my political thoughts about Marco Rubio and as a former constituent of his because I live in Florida and he was my senator at one point. Um you know I'll withhold any any political leanings whatsoever when it comes to disclosure always. Um, I thought that his part in Age of Disclosure, especially the testimony and the statements that he gave about the human aspect of like, you know, knowledge about non-human intelligence and and there being a, >> you know, a real philosophical need for human beings to know the truth about reality, uh, was really powerful and I really loved what he did. I had a lot of respect for him after that. So, we kind of uh talked about this earlier and maybe it would just be important to state again because of course I think as the film ages, the Lou Alzando imminent quote at the very end of the film will probably catch on as a kind of a viral thing.

Is the uh 2027 the imminent threat that people are talking about? Uh I won't speak for you guys, but we said earlier that none of us have encountered sufficient or adequate evidence to support any 2027 or imminent kind of threat from NHI approaching this planet. I I personally do not believe that and I have seen nothing to to support that. >> The only imminent threat I'd say from maybe the program's perspective, from my side is um in the law as it is, >> they have to pass a full independent DoD has to pass the full independent audit by 2027. So, you know, maybe maybe if they're trying to make that timeline and then it's like, "All right, well, why are you guys missing a trillion dollars every year?" And then that gets revealed. I I don't know.

But, uh that's that's my only like when I was researching really really hard, it was 2027 being the the end of the DoD audit cycle or when they should be clean from an audit perspective. Yes. >> I mean, I think that's a great idea. I just personally like I don't believe the threat narrative at all. I've never been shown any evidence to support it whatsoever and I don't like fear-mongering in general.

Um I would point to what Dr. Lakaussky says uh where if the full breath of human potential were known, we would have nothing to fear. And I I tend to believe Dr. Lotsky. I think he's a very credible witness and a very credible individual when it comes to going on the record.

Um, and I I don't think that human beings really have anything to fear with this, but I also don't have any evidence to back that up. So, who the [ __ ] knows? >> Yeah. I like to think back to what Grush said on on Bayer that there's just a mixed bag of activity to only surround a a fear threat, especially like an impending doom. As we all know in the subject of UFOs, hard dates never is a really good thing that works out. So the whole hey 2027 thing I I personally do not ascribe or or per I guess I don't really care about it either.

I I got plenty of other stuff to do. >> Mhm. >> How about this? Do you believe this film is going to have a positive impact on the public's interest of UAP/NHI or will it vastly remain the same? The stigma around them is still the same as it was 30 years ago. >> Disagree. I don't think the stigma is the same at all.

I think there's a been a vast dissolution of that stigma over the course of the past eight years since 2017. I think that glowing auras and dark money was the the beginning of the crack in the dam. And when it comes to the efforts of all the different um you know uh non-governmental organizations that have been pushing for this uh when it comes to Americans for a safe aerospace uh the UAP disclosure foundation and many others um especially when you look at like the academic aspects of things that have been published like Kevin Can's efforts and any number of others there the stigma is dissolving in a very big way. Um, I think that the film already has had a positive impact just on the conversation that we're having right now. Uh, and when you pair that with uh the fact that [ __ ] I was out at dinner last night and I was sitting next to an Air Force facilities contractor uh downtown in the city that I live in and uh, you know, I started to talk about aliens to my wife and he nudges me on the elbow and says, "Hey, have you seen this movie that came out on Amazon last night?" and my jaw hit the floor.

So, I was like, damn, this this redneck ass dude sitting next to me already knows about this and like that's not a thing that, you know, he ever would have encountered. >> I think it's already moved the needle and it's going to continue to do so. >> Yeah, I'll say like it's release weekend, right? This this thing just hit the box office, so to speak, on Friday. I think as this gets more eyeballs and as it gets more attention then also if the executive let's say moves or speaks on such matters imminently saying within the next two weeks and then let's say age of disclosure goes on Netflix and other streaming platforms like it's just going to get more and more attention and it's going to get more and more eyeballs. So, uh, yeah, I I think this I mean, first off, it did a great job of summarizing kind of the whole topic as it is and kind of presenting a coherent kind of argument and a narrative there.

Um, and I I think it's going to be good for moving things forward. Yeah. >> Yeah. It's a it's a tough question because while I don't agree with some of the the motives of the the documentary and the players within the documentary, I do think this is going to bring new eyes to the subject and uh maybe you know, for for laymen who aren't really interested in the subject who watch this, maybe they reconsider the existence of a crash retrieval program. But again, for me, it's like a double-edged sword because I don't fully agree with the limited disclosure push or or the messaging of the documentary and some of the players and some of the huge problems I have like with the the ATIP stuff and some of the backpedalled discussion of reverse engineered vehicles and most specifically the completely in not purposefully incompetent outline of legacy programs.

So to me, it's kind of a mixed bag. >> Well, at least you can make videos about that, Gerb. That's not Yeah, but that's more for the lives. The videos I The videos I want to to to mean something. They got to be something I want to talk about.

>> The truth, brother. >> Videos are for hard information. >> Yeah. Yeah. Is there any validity to the rumor that Trump may disclose before the end of the year? People have said end of the year.

People have said he'll furlow it to the end of his administration. Same. I It's the most common thing in this subject. I don't really care or listen to deadlines, but gosh, I would sure hope so. Yeah, >> I think he'll say something before >> I think they say something before the NDAA uh goes through uh congressional I I forget the House process for it, but usually like it's decided in early to mid December and I would imagine he'd probably say something beforehand potentially to drum up support if that's kind of where we're going with this.

But yeah, >> I would just point out that would Trump allow Chuck Schumer to reveal that information before he did? >> No, he would. He had to >> That's why massaging the ego and and playing to the ego is such a great play by Dave Grush. I'd like to think that Trump spit out his diet coke while watching Fox News when uh Crush was on Bayer. Brady, thank you, my friend. >> Do aliens smell like sulfur from using our blood? I have no idea.

I have abs I wouldn't even know where to begin um tackling that. >> Begin to hypothesize on that. >> I don't know if um if there are extraterrestrials or nhi that actually use human blood. That is that is kind of a a frightening thought to me. >> But sulfur spell is also associated with uh demonic entities as well.

Just gonna put that there. >> That and pneumonia. Yeah. >> Yeah. Hmonia is the varia which I'm super excited for.

Uh James Fox's basically follow up to Moment of Contact. I don't know about you fellas, but >> James Fox is a very competent filmmaker and a great guy. So >> he's he's an awesome guy. >> What are your thoughts on John Ramirez and his recent comments on Project Unity? I have to state that project unity uh interview was recorded back in like 2022. So it is ve it is very old.

And what do you think about the Wi-Fi >> interview for many years? Jay sat on that interview for many years. much to the regrint of John Ramirez. So, I just want to point that out. >> And what do you think about the Y Files claiming Jake Barber is a SCOP? The Y Files has made some outstanding comments on whistleblowers recently and has basically tried to say if you don't go through the if you go through the DOSER process, you are not a whistleblower. I personally don't uh agree with that.

U I I don't really like that statement about from the Walls. Did he specifically talk about Jake Barber? Do you guys know? I personally I don't watch his content so I can't really speak to that. One thing that I would like like to point out about this question is that I have had extensive contact with John Ramirez. Um specifically we've only talked about non-classified uh CIA information that is within the public sphere and his experiences while working for the CIA. Everything that he has ever said about non-human intelligence or about his experience with non-human intelligence has always been framed in the in the structure of his own personal experience with them.

Never within like his own like career experiences. So I personally have a degree of confidence while speaking to John that I don't think he's ever really led me wrong. I take his personal experiences with a grain of salt because they are interpretable within the framework of a lot of different interpretations of non-human intelligence and I'll leave it at that. Um, but I'll say that I think that John's expertise in regards to CIA signals intelligence is without without a doubt. >> Yeah.

>> Yeah. I'll say like on the Y files comment though like yes it did seem it was a generality towards like Doppser approved whistleblowers which as we know like Jake Barber is a Dopster approved whistleblower to an extent that he had Doppser cleared statements like him and his group like they put out these documents tried to get them clear they had certain levels of information this that the other. Um, look man, my response to the W file stuff though, like, okay, bro, like you going to trust guys like Michael Moran and you're going to trust guys like uh I forget the the plumber that uh was out at the South Pole, Eric Hacker, like that level because it's like it's two sides of the coin, big dog. It's like either you can make these unsubstantiated claims and there's no evidence for it, period, at all. and you're just this guy saying this stuff and okay I worked at this base in Antarctica or like you do have like government documents you have a DD214 you are doster cleared to the extent of like they do approve those statements like there is a level of kind of credibility there so it's like yeah I get the whole like oh it's a scop because it's from the government but that's just like I don't know that's pthead conspiracy theory thinking you know like it doesn't really >> doesn't really make sense >> now with regards to Eric Hecker I don't believe that he actually did any of the things that he head.

And this is specifically based on some nuances of how he described his experience in the Navy. Uh because specifically he uses the term submarine service. We don't say that he's a submariner. He's either a coner or a nuke. One or the other.

He's used no slang terms that I would ever have heard from anybody involved in such service. And I will tell you that I had a career in such. And I'm going to leave it at that. Yeah, also if if you're a a whistleblower, good luck releasing class information and and see what happens to you. As we may have put some pieces together earlier, there's a a chance people were trying to u get rid of David Grush before submitting his ICIG complaint.

This is before he really went public. So, I mean, if if you're planning to release class information, you might be stopped before even thinking about doing such. Um, wet works is only one piece of the puzzle, too. if whistleblowers face numerous possibilities of of physical and professional harm, administrative terrorism, possible wet works operation, um loss of uh pension, uh some pretty sinister stuff that I've talked to people who have firsthand told me that they've been threatened with um very explicit things on to be charged with crimes with. So there's there's there's myriad ways of people can have their lives instantly destroyed um thinking about releasing information on this topic.

And just before we move on from this question, I just want to point out that um Jake Barber as a scop is a really like you can't say yes or no. I think that Jake came out and wanted to say some very real things. Um I think that Jake had some very real experiences. Whether or not his message was altered in some way, I can't say. I don't I don't really know.

There's a lot more nuance to it. So >> yeah, >> the Jake Barber that I will I mean the Jake Barber that went public on Ross Colart is not the same Jake Barber that individuals like Michael Herrera talked about in my interview with him as Jake Barber was the individual that took him to the range and this is well known at this point. These are two very different described people. Jake Barber's disclosures on Ross Goldheart and so on are not even like the tip of the spear of of other stuff that Jake Barber has claimed to operate in the program. So, it's it's a little it's a little shame the whole Skywatchers thing.

I understand why people are so frustrated with that because it almost feels like a bastardization of Jake's disclosures where he some like he somehow got amnesia when he went public and has to rediscover what it means to um you know affect nonhuman vehicles and and and and bring them into your vicinity to shoot them down. It it's the Jake Barber we got publicly is not the same Jake Barber that was going around behind the scenes. Red team and career. Certainly not the same Jake Barber I talked to in Huntsville, Alabama in June of this year. So >> So LML said this a bunch of times.

Have I reached out by Joe? No, but if he reached out to me and wanted to have me on, I'd go on a heartbeat. That'd be awesome. I'd love to work out with him and train jiu-jitsu with him as well. >> Yeah. And you guys would get a wonderful 5 and a half to 10 hour long episode all about MMA with no UFO content.

>> That that'd be hard. That'd be really hard. If any of you know Joe, let it let him know. I'd go out there in a second. Zack Beach, love your work.

Thank you for all you do. Thank you so much for supporting me, my friend. Tonukree, this one's to me. Have I been in touch with Michael Shrat? Yes, I have been in touch with Michael Shrat. I'm looking for other Okay, it's LML again saying, "Would I be open to having a conversation with Joe?" Yes, that is a big yes.

Post to any of you. Where do you stand on underwater UFO basis for NHI? We've seen more and more come out over the years, not necessarily the 4chan whistleblower, but what do you think of that as well? >> 4chan whistleblower is real. I think I think the vast majority of the stuff in that in that statement is is real. I I gotta be honest and I I I imagine we're all going to have the same opinion here on on NHI under basis that this is indeed a thing. >> Yeah, I agree.

>> And it's really disturbing. It's honestly terrifying. I This was even touched on a tiny bit in age of disclosure about um USO sightings, but at least a permanent or semi-permanmanent NHI fixture under the water. At least I personally think there's quite a bit of validity to this. And the 4chan whistleblower, the giant craft that frequents the Bermuda Bermuda area of >> Yeah.

the big thing that looks like a hamburger that makes UFOs to spec. >> What a There's a There's been a couple of those like random Reddit 4chan whistleblowers. The vast majority of them >> one >> Yeah, the EBE one. There's a couple that are well worth a second read. For every one of those there's like 10 people who say they were secret space program doing 20 and back and huge claims like that but every now and then you find a diamond in the rough.

Diodonics, thank you my friend. What type what would this type of nuclear power technology unlock due to our societ either I can't read right now. What would >> due to our current socioeconomic infrastructure? I think this would this would revol revolutionize human socioeconomic infrastructure overnight. The the revealing of non-human technology especially if humans have e reverse engineered or derived it to operate under human control which I strongly believe they have. So be massarian.

I don't think that free energy would unlock anything unless you have automated workforces. >> Rolling out such tech would be another a whole another uh quandry. free free energy actually might act might actually like crush a large amount of the like current like economic infrastructure unless of course you had the ability to translate that free energy into free work >> let's see that wait I have I have kind of a thought >> yes >> what if they already have the stuff plugged in >> we heard from Dylan Borland that he is aware of integration of this technology into redacted. What if >> what if they've already plugged some of these things into the power grid already and they just haven't told us about it and they're still charging us normal market rates for non-renewable energy and why haven't we gone to town on the power companies and demanded uh transparency from them? I I don't know. It's just that's a possibility.

You know, we've we've heard that >> then we're getting on board with that one, but getting majorly screwed. >> I think Borland was probably specifically talking about signature management capabilities. Yeah, specifically electrooptic cloaking. >> Uh but you know, back since the 1960s, the US Army Corps of Engineers was obsessed with trying to fit like small nuclear reactors to power dums. Who knows if there's power sources on UFOs that are powering the massive dumb under Dougway or similar places.

ing you're familiar with uh with Camp Century, the army base underneath the ice in Greenland that had one of the first nuclear reactors down there. >> Crazy stuff. >> Let's see. I'd like to get your opinion on on this one, guys. What's your thoughts on Amy Escridge and the people she called out? I think it's a significantly nuanced co topic that involves so many interpersonal aspects there that I don't really want to comment on Amy Esgridge.

I don't believe personally that she was specifically involved with like super crazy stuff. I just want to say that if I was going to look at a Huntsville scientist, I'd look at Ningley. >> Yeah. My heart goes out to the Escridge family though. >> Yeah.

Seriously, it's >> same. >> At the baseline of this, it's a tragic loss of life that >> it's horrific at the end of the day. >> I think a lot of like in-person investigation there. Like when we went down to Huntsville, we had conversations with a lot of people. Um I I think it's so significantly nuanced that I just don't want to get involved in it.

Um but I will say that like the Ning Lee thing is absolutely worth looking into. Uh Redstone Arsenal absolutely does advanced research and had Craas with TTSA and other organizations. When Ning Lee purportedly went black, she actually just went to go work for Redstone for 15 plus years. So take from that what you will. There's a lot of weirdness going on in Huntsville and it's basically intelligence community central.

Um I I feel like I'm drastically underqualified to comment on the mental health of an individual or their interpersonal relationships. >> Yeah. A similar comment because I think you've said this a few times. I personally I have no idea and I don't even want to begin to uh try and think through this because this is this is a pretty sinister uh concept at the end of the day and there's been so much Twitter drama around this specific uh quandry um with a couple channels with a couple uh Twitter accounts. I have no knowledge of this nor do I have any any theories.

>> If that were true that'd be the biggest case of friendly fire. Like what? That just come on. >> Well, um, so how about this, guys? Oh, wait. >> I'm just going to abstain from this one. Oh, abstain.

>> I don't I don't have any credible information. Two or four, and I don't want to theorize. >> Yeah. So, how about this, guys? We'll go to the top of the hour. We'll go for nine more minutes to um 10 p.m.

for you guys' time because I know it's getting late. So, we'll keep going through um a couple questions and and I got one more thing I want to talk about at the documentary, too. So, when you guys have questions, just roll them in all caps. Toxic fart again. Thank you, brother.

Thoughts on ACT, the Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Command, a naval major range and test facility base in the Atlantic. I think that Atech likely has uh intimate work with the Nuro. And if any undersea institution has the proximity to uh analyze and investigate that hamburger craft under the sea, it would probably be Altech. >> Yeah, I agree. They're super interesting.

I don't have enough actionable info to like really make a definitive statement on them, but damn if I'm not interested. >> Must be a great place to, you know, serve your country. You're out in the Bahamas, you know, you got the nice water doing some sonar booze. You got the big burger thing on the satellite that you're trying to withhold from NGA and NRO, you know, just having a lot. If >> you lose a missile in the water, it'll eat it up for you.

No big deal. You don't have to worry it anymore. >> It just gets taken away. >> If you get too close to it, it'll just zip away, retreat into the depths, come back. Best part about it is it makes UFOs and doesn't care when they crash or we shoot them down.

It's not going to try and come for them. >> Right. >> What an what an interesting statement. I And that kind of that kind of brings me to this. while these last questions roll in.

Um, I'll put off in Age of Disclosure. Let me find the exact timestamp um, so people can find this. >> This was this was really interesting to me actually because we've seen this talked about a little bit in open source, but but not very much. At an hour and 19 minutes, Hal speaks on uh, craft and this is talking about gravity bubbles and warp bubbles around craft gravitational distortion and he kind of confirms how put off does of craft that the interior of the craft um, there's space-time anomalies where where time passes at a different rate and there seems to be different uh spatial structures inside of craft. I I know we've heard that before of craft where the interior is supposedly the size of a football field.

Um if you think if if if you're a fan of Harry Potter and you think back to that little bag in Harry Potter 4 when when everybody goes to the tri- wizard or the Quidditch World Cup and inside of the bag is basically a whole tent that the entire Weasley family and everybody stays in. similar to that where you might have a a sedan sized eggshaped craft but the the interior is the size of the football field. That's intriguing and I I think that uh rumors of that >> techical term is an extradimensional space. >> Ah extradimensional space. >> I think um I think that's one of the points that was you remember back in 2023 Grush gave a a private a private talk that some people leaked details of.

I think that one of those details that kind of made its way out was talking about um craft where the interior of the craft seemed quite large. There was also a an article about this that came out back in 2023 that was deleted. I I'd like to reference it. I have the archive somewhere, but that's always been very intriguing to me. >> I like the term scrum mentions in the chat boat.

Bigger on the inside than the outside. >> Okay. Al Park John, what is the thing you would what do you think moved the needle the most outside outside of an invasion on the White House lawn? >> Uh, what do you guys think? statement and prosecution of crimes >> like a Nermberg trial type where large scale prosecutions >> technology demonstration of some type and like a Nermberg style like committee where we actually prosecute people for crimes against the United States people. I would say a joint investigation by DOJ, AFOSI, uh, Army CI, NCI, just all the people just going after >> RBC. >> And that that take a herculean effort, seeing as the DOJ can't prosecute the legacy program crimes.

>> So, we've heard I also want to see subpoenas going to corporations. I like, okay, contractors have this. Let's see some subpoenas. >> Yeah. The one problem with subpoenas is there's ways to wiggle out.

Uh >> there's two things that happen when a subpoena takes place. Generally, if you are subpoenaed by a congressional committee and you are involved in a special access program that's run by the executive branch, one of two things is going to happen. You either don't show up for the subpoena or you show up for the subpoena and you are advised by the executive branch to plead the fifth at all times. That's cool. Something that we did like post World War II, there was an army base that went out of control down here in the south and General Patton was the guy that was overseeing all the tanks there at this base and he got so irate with the situation he threatened to roll the tanks into the town.

And I think also Eisenhower too threatened to roll the tanks into Area 51 because he wasn't given the whole story. So like at a certain point, great. if you're not gonna comply with the the legal will of the president or the you know DOJ whatever um you we can do this the easy way or the hard way you know what I mean like there there's got to be at a certain point >> I like the hard way get David Grush with an interrogatory with a task force behind him and uh go sit in Donald Kerr's office and wait for him to get home >> yes >> give him a J team too >> yeah get a couple tier one guys get a couple Delta guys um guys who formerly worked on retrieval standing there Um, that'd be an pretty big oh crap moment. >> Yeah. >> Give him some air assets as well.

>> Who do you think are the most credible in the age of disclosure? This to me is a difficult question because while I think um folks like Stratton and Lou and probably Clapper have had direct exposure, firsthand exposure to UFO Legacy programs. I I'm not sure if the exact narrative they're pushing is is fully fully credible. So, I think that's a little bit of a tough question to answer. What do you guys think? Dan Crunchshaw playing he was in it barely like he had maybe two or three bits in there. Um so that was kind of interesting.

I would say >> yeah I don't really know. I think I think the first day witnesses like the pilots you know like people we've already heard from Dietrich >> Fraver Gra. >> Yeah. Uh Nasatelli like the folks from uh Vandenberg like the people that have actually seen stuff. I think there is like a level of you know they saw something they were trained observers and you know they saw something and they're not really there's not really much of a um there's not really much of an incentive for them to just come out and say oh this happened right like this you know this has caused some problems for some people um I know there's been a lot of back and forth and a lot of posting about some of the more political level people but I think as we've kind of talked about it's just good from the 30,000 foot view of you have both sides coming together you have it from the highest levels of different multiple different administrations like it's extremely impactful on the whole and you know I mean I you know I go with the I go with the pilots and like the people that have actually seen the stuff but you know it's not to discount the other folks that have been in this uh documentary >> Carl Nella nice Carl Nell is the most credible individual in the entire film.

I'm going to put it that way. >> You're not going to elaborate. You don't want to elaborate further on that? >> Nope. Don't want to elaborate further. I'm just going to say that Carl Nell is the most credible individual in the entire film in my opinion.

Um there's a lot of detail and nuance to that, especially given his behind-the-scenes efforts on trying to get uh the UAP Disclosure Act uh passed, his work with Kirk McConnell and any number of other, you know, things that he's done. Uh his experience with Army uh Foreign Material Command, uh Army Futures Command, uh the list goes on. his experience at Bell Labs. Um, you just look at the guy's resume at some point when you have the opportunity and it's just jaw-dropping. >> Yeah.

So, >> I think he has a lot more to say than he said. I I think it I think you could uh bet with your highest confidence that he has had extensive exposure to to legacy programs. >> Yes, >> we kind of >> Yeah. Like like ETH Paradigm mentioned, deputy CTO of Northrum. >> Yeah.

>> Come on. Kermit, what you were saying, too, I think there's some really actionable uh further avenues of research to study the biological effects of people who have been harmed in close proximity to non-human craft. I can't remember the individual on the UAP task force's name who was in the film that he said he had suffered biological effects. Do you guys remember that name? >> I do remember the person. I don't remember the name.

>> Okay. >> I know the person's name who experienced it. Um Mike Flity, if I'm not mistaken, >> but my understanding he was more on the OAP side than the UAP task force side. Okay, >> based on some things that I heard, uh I've personally met Mike a number of times both uh recently this year and I also spent some time with him at Soul. Great guy.

Awesome dude. Had no idea until I saw the movie that he was an actual whistleblower experiencer and and part of the program. So >> that's cool. >> That completely under wraps. So >> we've talked about this all throughout the video and and kind of start out with this too.

uh with all your research pointing to ARV, where do you stand on Eric Davis vehemently denying the existence unless I'm misremembering? I vehemently disagree with Eric Davis and think that's a program protection strategy and the entire age of disclosure is a complete rebuttal to Davis's comments with how put off and others and Farah on Rogan talking about the subject of ARV. So, um it seems like there's been a a flip of that narrative on its head. >> I just want to point out that um Jonathan in the chat mentioned that Mike was part of UAP task force. I I don't know which he was or wasn't. He indicated that he was.

I have no reason to disbelieve him whatsoever. I just heard that he also had something to do with OAP. That's all I meant. >> Kurt, thank you, my friend. I I very much appreciate that very much.

And Tesaw TTV, thank you so much for the super sticker. Guys, I think with that all being said, we'll probably try and wrap up here today. Do you guys have any closing remarks? I we're on three hours on the dot, so we've uh we we've had a quite a bit of discussion. So, do you guys have closing remarks? Donald Trump, if you're watching this, release the files, bro. What do you got to lose? Truly, it's not a distraction from the Epstein stuff.

In fact, the Epstein stuff might be related to the UFO stuff. But how are you going to be able to level with the public about the weird stuff in the Epstein files without talking about this, homeboy? Just do it, bro. Just do it. Call me. I'm on I'm on I'm on Twitter, Kerm Dog ENT.

You know where to find me. My DMs are open to verified accounts. I know you got one too, man. >> That's all I got to say. >> I mean, my only closing statement would be first of all that we're all on the same team.

I try and take partisanship out of it, and I think everybody should try and make an effort to do that. Um, we're on team human. That's the thing I try and always point out to people whenever there's like a disagreement or anything like that about like the reality of the situation or, you know, what evidence is valid or what whistleblower is true and what whistleblower isn't. We're all on the same team. And I'd just like to quote great Buffalo Bills coach Marv Levy uh and point back to all the history that you look at with the entire subject.

There's 80 years worth of cover up, but where would you rather be than right here, right now? This is the time. >> Amen. >> And with I guess what I have to say and and this factors into it, do we plan on going uh live more frequently? Yes, we do. We're just trying to figure out our schedule of how we want to do things. We are not the type of guys who uh who just want to come on here and and and chat without having much to say.

As you guys can see, uh I think you guys can understand why Rob and Kermit are such good in real life friends for me. Um they got very similar mindsets to me and we want to talk when we got something to say. So just let us figure out how exactly we want to parse things and you know we would ideally like to do a show about every two three weeks do a live and and talk about very targeted topics because as you guys see we had an 8 minute threat buyer interview in age of disclosure and we turn it into three hours and and we all know we could go another three hours. Um, outside of that, I got a the next couple of weeks, I got a very very very very exciting project coming up. I've uh told these fellas a little bit about it, but there it's it's one of my favorites.

Besides that, uh like I said, I was just on an interview out of state that should probably come out in the next three or four weeks. Um and I I absolutely cannot wait for for that to come out, too. So, with that being said, guys, thank you all so much for watching and um we will see you guys soon. Bye everybody. >> Bye everyone.