George Knapp Drops UFO Bombshell

Transcript

What's up? Patrick here with Vetted. Today we're talking about this. >> Now, of course, I've got some bones to pick with the movie um on factual reality. >> James Clapper is no friend of UFO research. When OAP was trying to become a special access program, what's not been made public is he fought tooth and nail to kill it.

Dave would have been a valuable addition to the movie. Why do you suppose he wasn't in it? I I I do think that he has a difference of opinion. He really thinks everybody should just open up and say what they know. For example, he thinks that if Lu Allezando was part of the Legacy UFO program that he should just say it. Go out on the limit.

Just say it. Yeah. I'm just going to say it, man. It it didn't seem like it was lost in translation. Um it seemed like they wanted you to believe that a that ATIP, you know, was correct and the New York Times had received the $22 million that funded this whole study and it just and and it ran for that long and that's just not true.

>> And I was glad to see uh Lou Alzando and Jay Stratton on the same stage even if they weren't entire being entirely truthful. But if you're making a movie and you're calling for disclosure and honesty and we want to know the truth, tell us the truth. We can handle the truth. We want transparency. You got to live up to that standard, too.

All right, betterers. Please hit that like button. That really helps out the videos. And of course, if you're not already subscribed, hit that subscribe button. All right, so what is this video about today? It's about the age of disclosure.

It's also about Jeremy Corbel and George Knap's bombshell revelations about the film and they gave a very, in my opinion, balanced review of the film, but they had a lot of criticism for it. A lot of which we're going to discuss in the film. Now, I don't want to just send the message that they were just attacking the film the whole time, and that's not the case at all. They had a lot of praise for the film, but again, they had some critiques, which I think is fair. And in today's video, we're going to go over that.

All right. So, I'm going to put a link down below to this wonderful episode of Weaponize that Jeremy and George put out with a great panel of online UFO influencers that you should be following as well. Uh, so let's dive into this. I am so happy that this movie exists. The ability of this movie to exist, it was wellmade.

A lot of people we know, a lot of people we've brought forward, you know, initially on this topic were shown and featured in such a cool light. It really is a huge endeavor to make a film like this. So, I congratulate Dan. I congratulate his whole team. I congratulate, you know, Jay Stratton, everybody.

Lou Alzando, people that participated. Now, of course, I've got some bones to pick with the movie um on Factual Reality. >> Let's pick some bones, Jeremy. Right, cuz there's a lot to discuss about this film. Things I've covered already in my review of the film, but I was very happy to see them point this stuff out as well.

It would have been really disingenuous and awkward if they didn't because I actually used clips from Weaponize of them saying things that contradicted stuff that was in the film, right? Big things. So, let's take this one red flag at a time. Let's start with David Grush. Why wasn't David Gush in the age of disclosure, right? Huge whistleblower. testified in July 2023, talked about nonhuman intelligence, right? Bodies, we recovered bodies, all of this.

>> If you believe we have crashed craft, uh stated earlier, do we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft? >> Biologics came with some of these recoveries. Yeah. >> Um were they I guess human or non-human biologics? >> Non. >> And then guess what? He's not in the film. Well, he's in the film, but he's not in the film, right? They use clips of him from his interviews with News Nation and testifying and everything, but he's not interviewed.

I always thought that was weird. In fact, I brought that up in my review of The Age of Disclosure. Why is David Grush not in this? Well, guess what? Now we know why. I'd love to um I'd love to ask you guys I mean we didn't see Dave Gush in there but we did hear from Dave Grush an interview Jeremy that you helped set in motion on Fox News and I'm I'm sure people look at this like it's all being uh co uh you know managed stage managed that the movie comes out and then Dave's on this and Fox does a week long of series and Bill Maher does interviews and it's all being manipulated by some invisible uh beings or something but but that interview happened a long time ago, Dave would have been a valuable addition to the movie. Why do you suppose he wasn't in it? >> Well, I I think he, you know, he definitely chose not to be in it.

I remember helping to make that connection with Dan so that they could have that conversation. You know, I think Dave has a kind of different tactic to getting out what he knows to be true. Dave is a true whistleblower. is not a managed message with with with Dave. Not that it is with the other guys, but it is at least authorized with with Dave.

You know, he really is working on a fundamental attitude that nobody has the right to hold this back. So, let let's go to his interview for one second. >> Yeah. So, let's talk about this Fox News interview as Jeremy's about to explain how that all came together and that's quite relevant. But the idea that David Grush is just thinking different things, right? right? He has a different viewpoint about this and how can it be so different that he would be like I don't want to be in this movie.

>> Yeah. I I helped in just trying to get uh you know him in touch with a network and a producer that would uh be able to hear what he had to say and treat it properly. I mean we could have done the same George but you know President Trump doesn't watch weaponized as far as as I know. So um yeah. So, David Gres talked again and I was really glad he decided to cuz he's not all over the media.

I I I do think that he has a difference of opinion and that's for him to talk about um when it comes to this stuff. You know, he really thinks everybody should just open up and say what they know. For example, he thinks that if Lu Alzando was part of the legacy UFO program that he should just say it. Go out on the limb and just say it. And um I so I think that's the difference of opinion.

I think um the the film would have had Dave participate if Dave had agreed, but I think that he was he's just on a different path. Am I explaining that uh clearly? >> Yeah, kind of. >> Yeah, Jeremy, you explained it well. But he's on a different path. So much so that he doesn't want to be in this film that's this big film for disclosure and all this stuff.

Something's not adding up here. And what about it is so different. So, in my opinion, it's like he thinks Lou Alzando was in the legacy program and needs to just come out and say it, but he's not, right? He's not saying any of that. He's dancing around it, which tired of all the dropping clues and breadcrumbs and this. It's like, who's falling for that? A lot of people.

But it's absolutely nuts if you really think about it, right? Just say it. Stop dropping breadcrumbs. It's it's a it seems like you're trying to manipulate by doing that, right? It's like I can say it and people can think it about me. I'll leave it ambiguous, but that didn't really happen, right? So, I think there's a lot more that Dave Brush thinks about this film and where it's going. It just doesn't want to talk about it.

People are being I just think they know that they knew this film was going to tell a wrong story, right? and not be as transparent as they're claiming to be. And again, we have a lot more to cover about this film of why it's not as transparent as you may think. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.

So, what did he say? What did he say in that Brett Bayer interview that was kind of um interesting to you guys? Because there's a few key things that I'm not sure if everybody really gets, but now that they said it, I'm going to spill the beans, too. What What did you hear? I think the bombshell for me at least is he said that uh well first of all obviously he said that he had some degree of access to one of to some of the legacy programs. He he he he was reading official intelligent reports which is completely different than interviewing uh legacy program witnesses. That's a totally different animal because he's being officially briefed into those programs by the official government, not speaking to people that were in the program. So I think there's a big distinction there.

So that would make him, in my opinion, a firsthand witness. I don't see how anyone could say he's a secondhand witness when he's reading the official US government intelligence reports that are highly classified, giving him information on these classified legacy programs. Believe it or not, we've recovered the vehicles um and we actually have physical proof. And I was actually uh partially cleared into some of those activities. It was beyond uh oral testimony provided to me.

I actually had partial access uh to the data and actually read the intelligence reports uh resulting from those programs. >> With your own eyes, you saw it. >> Yes. >> And then he said that he Brett Bearer asked him like, "Did you see photos?" And he's like, "Yeah, I saw photos." And then and the context of that was as I as I could tell was he saw photos of the beings from when they were retrieving the craft. >> Oh, you got that right.

That's been a hard thing to to bite a tongue about. You got that right. >> Yeah. So, he's a firsthand witness. I mean, he saw photographs of the beings.

I mean, okay, if you want to say it's a scop, fine. Then, then fine. If you want to go that route, then he's a firsthand uh witness of a scop. But he's a firsthand witness, period. >> Yeah, I agree, Ryan.

In official capacity, access to the briefings. He didn't say he just read them. They were visual as well. And that was always kind of intimated. If you really look back what David Gush said, you're right.

He is a firsthand witness because in official capacity he saw alien beings and those are the words those are the words that you know our government would use NHI wasn't so hip when these alleged photos were taken but he saw photos of beings bro >> and so okay now we're confirming that David Grush um has seen pictures of alien bodies like what what are we talking about >> because it's so um outside a normal person's world view to understand that there is um this biological sentience that have piloted these crafts that don't necessarily look 100% like you and I. Were there pictures? Were there >> there were Yes, there were. >> I mean, kind of doesn't really say that, but that's what Jeremy is saying, right? We can confirm that now. David Grush has seen pictures of alien bodies in an official capacity. But really, why does he keep calling them non-human? He doesn't know where they're from.

He readily admits that in this same interview. So, are they aliens? Are they what? They could be humans. If we don't know where they're from, how do we not know they're from Earth and they're not us? Again, you can't have it both ways if you ask me, right? And if you do know and you're not saying it, then David Gush would be guilty of the same thing he would be saying to Luis Alzando, right? Just come out and say it. Well, Dave, come out and say it, right? And I think maybe people are just running with this a little bit, but I don't know. Has that just been confirmed? David Grush has seen pictures of alien bodies in an official capacity.

If that is true, that is huge. But again, this is an interesting point that UFO Joe is going to bring up. He's also on the panel here talking about how I don't know how dangerous it is to rely on pictures in this day and age of disclosure. >> And so I agree with you. If that is true, then he is a direct firshand witness to internal government documentation where they call >> So I I will I will play devil devil's advocate.

I I agree with what you just said. The problem is in your interview with Laskkey, he said and I and he said it was on April Fools. He said there were there were photos that he saw that were going around of a craft from a certain country. It was a UFO that they had at one of their air bases. And he said it was shocking.

It wasn't obviously fake. It was identified as fake, but it was a good job. Then you have Kit Green when he talked to Dolan a few years ago saying he was shown photos of aliens and he said, "I was convinced they were real and I later determined in my opinion that they were fake. They were hoax." That was in a Pentagon facility where I had that briefing and then I had other non- Pentagon facility briefings that videos were sent to me and I determined all of those were hoaxes. He called it um what he had a word for it, active measures.

So, I'm not saying that happened with David Grush. I'm not saying that's what he saw, but I just want to include that for me. I want people who actually saw the craft with their own eyes, not a photo. Is a I don't know if you guys Is a photograph going to be enough for the general public if they do release photos of craft and bodies, or we are we going to need them to wheel it down, you know, the aisle during a hearing and say, "Here you go. Here are the people who examined the bodies.

Here are the reports. Here's the craft. Here are the people who examined the craft, who worked on it day after day for five years. This is why they believe it's a non-human craft. I think eventually that's what we'll need.

I don't think in my lifetime we'll see that. I could be wrong. I never thought we'd get to where we are right now. So, >> I mean, shout out UFO Joe and him and I really don't get along on Twitter. He doesn't like Betted or how I present things or anything, but to be honest, I do think he's a good guy.

I've seen the way he takes care of his dog and that means a lot to me. I you know that shows a lot about somebody if you ask me. Um but whatever. He doesn't like betted. Not everyone does and that's okay.

But you know, props to the guy brings up a good point and he actually brings up a lot of good points that I'm going to focus on in this video as well. And I kind of agree. The pictures just aren't going to be enough. And that's weird. And does that really make him a firsthand witness, right? Yeah.

You're a firsthand witness to your that you saw pictures, but you're not a firsthand witness to the actual bodies. Right? So firsthand witness doesn't mean anything. It loses all value at that point if that's how we're going to use it. Right? It's technically true, but it loses all value. So, okay, let me know what you think down in the comments of why David Grush wasn't involved and will David Grush come out at a later time and explain a little bit more of these differences.

They try to keep this stuff behind the scenes so that people think there's a a path forward, right? We're all on the same page, guys. Let's not people be worried. people. No, be more honest about the things you disagree with. People will take you more seriously actually, right? You don't need to have this facade because when you do that, that's what happens with age of disclosure.

You try to create this facade. Let's let's all seem like we're working together and we don't want to seem like we're falling apart, you know? Just be honest. Just be transparent. Now, let's move on to a different part of this interview. and honestly the age of disclosure as well and that is Dr.

Halputoff and Dr. Eric Davis, two scientists who are heavily featured in the age of disclosure, especially Hal Putoff. So is Eric Davis. I >> I would agree with the the other guys about the importance of Hal as a witness in this movie. Hal and uh put off and Eric Davis have said some of these things in the past.

Uh Joe, you will recall since you probably transcribed it, but they went on uh coast to coast with me back in 2018, three or four months after the New York Times article came out, and we started asking them about crash retrievalss and how many craft we might have, and Hal answered it, and it was a I asked them the question, there was a really long, it felt like two and a half months of a pause and then he he spilled something about it. It's great to see him where he's now free and able to describe more of the details. And Eric, of course, if you get him going, he'll tell you everything. >> Now, it's interesting what George says about the actor Eric Davis, especially because if we go back and look at a clip, thanks to UFO researcher Grant Lavak, Travis Taylor, who's also featured in the film, and he's also on the um Skinwalker Ranch show, right? He was part of the UAPF with Jay Stratton and all of that. And he's in the documentary, and Grant brought up this clip of Dr.

Travis Taylor talking about Dr. Eric Davis in a way that absolutely shocked me. I I will tell you this, Eric has a tendency uh to accept and believe uh stories from pseudo credible, you know, because of where they come from. Then he assume he assumes what they're telling him is a credible story without getting the back background data to prove their story. Uh, like if I told Eric uh that the moon that you know there were aliens on the moon, Eric would probably believe me, right? And I don't mean that as a discredit to Eric.

Eric is a uh he's trustworthy, very very trustworthy of people that he trusts. Uh so I I think what Eric needs to do is is find a better way to show proof than simply the story. >> I mean, so what what are we saying here? It's like what a underhanded compliment from Travis Taylor, right? Like now he's a great guy. He just believes every [ __ ] thing he's told. What the hell, you know? And this idea that that's basically how Dr.

Eric Davis gets his information. People he trusts tell him things and he just runs with it. No proof or evidence. And as a scientist, shouldn't he want some evidence and proof? Especially for outlandish claims. I mean, if I ask you, "Hey, what'd you have for dinner last night?" and you're like steak and eggs.

I'm not going to question it whether it's it's true or not cuz it doesn't matter if you're going to lie about that. Who gives a crap, right? I'm going to believe you. But if you tell me you saw an alien or there's an alien in your basement or something, hello. That's an crazy claim. That's why the whole extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Why? That's why that exists is for that reason. And people like Dr. Eric Davis and is all the stuff he's telling just things Howal Putoff told him or other people, right? Because they knew he'll believe it. He'll go tell people, right? He's very trustworthy. Now, he trusts the people he trusts according to Travis Taylor.

Now, we would have to also trust that Travis Taylor is saying the right thing about Dr. Eric Davis, right? Maybe that's not true at all. Maybe Dr. Eric Davis does get evidence or proof, right? Just to be give the benefit of the doubt here. I just think it's a very interesting thing for Travis Taylor to say.

And again, he's also featured in the Age of Disclosure. And look, the way that Dr. Hal Putoff and Dr. Eric Davis were featured in The Age of Disclosure might just shock you. Okay, so shout out to Clint Weldon from Night Shift Podcast for sharing that picture with me.

How hilarious would it be to see that whole documentary, but they're Muppets, right? or some people might say puppets on a string. Another point from Dr. Hal put off that I found to be interesting is something Dan Farah brought up as well, right? That the whole reason that they were able to do this documentary is because well it it's the power of many, right? Individually, a lot of these people may not want to say the things that they said, but hey, if you're in a film with other people saying things similar, I'll do it, right? Let's do it. We'll all do it together, right? because how put up's like I wouldn't do podcast and stuff alone but you know hey we'll get all together very insightful Dan >> I gota say also that Dan is absolutely brilliant in doing what he did because you know I would never go out on a podcast by myself to talk about something what I know many of the others here fall the same boat so he got the idea of saying look suppose we get 34 of you could come out at once arm and arm and then you answer yes. That video was taken at the New York City screening um just recently where they showed the film and I was just think it's like how put up it's like nobody thought of this before.

This doesn't make any sense and how put up has done plenty of interviews so I don't know what he's talking about. He said all kinds of things. Again, what are we talking about here? None of this adds up and something just smells off. I don't know what exactly, but something is just off. Now, let's move on to something that I found to be quite an important point.

Something that I mentioned in my video of the review of the age of disclosure, but something that UFO Joe here is going to bring up a great point that I absolutely agree with. Take a listen and then I'll explain. >> If people are new to this and they go, "Oh, this is really interesting." Interesting. I'm going to start digging deeper and then they discover Skinwalkers at the Pentagon and they discover OAP. They're going to say, "This movie isn't accurate." And I think Danny, you brought it up.

Something we know about, we know this isn't accurate. What else do we not know about that they're talking about is also not accurate. So, it's going to, you know, it's going to put that out there. And it's We want this. We want transparency and truthfulness.

And I understand not wanting to go there because it gets really messy with orbs and you know the biological effects and what Jay Stratton and his family experience. I get that. But you could have mentioned OAP the paranormal connection and said we're going to address somehow we'll address it in another movie. And I know Farah has said that in interviews he mentions OAP but for the movie it may create a credibility problem which we definitely do not need. Yeah, exactly.

And the point that I made in my video is, you know, if you're going to invite everyone to see your show, let's say you're a band, hey guys, come out and see my show, and you don't rehearse and you suck. Guess what? Nobody's coming back to see you, right? So, if we open the doors to the UFO community and say, "Come on in, guys. This is all happening." And then people come in and go, "Wait, this doesn't add up. That doesn't add up. This doesn't add up." Right? Screw this, right? What else are they lying about? Right? If you say at your party that Snoop Dogg is going to play and then people show up and and it's, you know, Snoop Dog with three G's and some other dude, you know, you're going to be like, "What the hell?" It's like you're screwing yourself.

So, you you it works on the front end to get people excited, but then when they come in, they go, "Wait, wait a second. This is all bullshit." Or, "What else are they lying about?" That's the whole point. It's like a thread you start pulling. Like, is the UFO community ready for quote non-believers to come into it and start asking questions and looking at all the evidence? Is it? >> Yeah. I'm just going to say, man, it it didn't seem like it was lost in translation.

um it seemed like they wanted you to believe that a that ATIP, you know, was correct and the New York Times have received the $22 million that funded this whole study and it just and and it ran for that long and that's just not true and that's you know I think that's okay in some ways like I'm looking big picture but George I wanted to know what you think because you reported on all this from the um embryionic stage >> and this point about OAP and ATIP is absolutely the point that I also brought up in my video, right? I mentioned I actually showed a clip from weaponized episode one of George Knap and Jeremy talking about this, right? And well, George is really going to lay it down in a way that much respect to George Knap for saying this because everything he says here I agree with. Well, again, I don't want to be a turd in the punch bowl or rain on the parade of the movie because it's a great movie and it it it is important, but that is a pretty glaring um omission and it kind of I was glad to see uh Lou Alzando and Jay Stratton on the same stage even if they weren't entire being entirely truthful. But if you're making a movie and you're calling for disclosure and honesty and we want to know the truth, tell us the truth. We can handle the truth. We want transparency.

You got to live up to that standard, too. And uh OLAP got the 22 million. That's the money that that Reed got for it. ATIP came later. It grew out of it.

It did not have a budget that we know of. Lu Alzando and J Stratton were involved in it, but they have had very vigorous, I'll put it that way, vigorous uh disagreements about what program did what and and who was in charge of what that they have expressed for a number of years. The fact that they've come together and found some common ground that both are able to agree on for purposes of the movie is probably a good thing. Having the movie out without a bunch of internal squables is good, but eventually Jay's going to have his book come out. I think it's still wrapped up in the Doppser process.

And I don't think it's going to tow the the line of the sequence of events that we heard in the movie. I just don't. and be because they aren't. And the people who were involved directly with ASIP, ALSAP, who were here in Las Vegas are not likely to come forward and raise a stink about it. They're just not.

But I can tell you they're they watch this and they were they were pretty upset about it. >> Okay. So, you we've done right for, you know, your friends that actually ran OAP and did all that work. It's got to feel like they're a little bit robbed, you know, not having that told that part of the story. >> Yeah.

Jay Stratton, you know, why are they lying about this? Right? Because Jay Stratton came into the fold later on to start the UAPF task force. Right? AIP, OAP, none of that is it's like it's all messed up. In the video, they just sent in the movie. They just send home the messages at it. They got the money invested just like the New York Times article, but they've been saying this is all wrong, right? But I think they just they try to keep a again a unified front to sort of sell the message.

Well, this does push disclosure forward and does get the conversation going, so let's just let it go. No. Again, it's not going to work. Everyone has to be transparent. Just like George said, you can't call it for transparency and then not be transparent.

We've got to call this stuff out or it makes no sense. And I think that was the whole point. Well, let's send home the message that Lu Alzando ran at and all this because otherwise, who wants to listen to him if he didn't run this secret UFO program, right? It's just kind of crazy to me. because Jay Stratton is still out there talking about this stuff again on Fox News. >> The best way I can say, Sean, is it's not from here.

Um, you know, I spent 20 20 years researching this topic, working this topic directly on behalf of the American people, and I did everything I could and did confirm that some some of the things that are seen are obviously, you know, completely terrestrial, whatever word you want to use there, you know, from uh potential adversary nations, from, you know, defense contractors and companies here, you know, commercial sources. Uh, however, there were still cases that we could not attribute to any nation on earth and that says a lot. >> By the way, they held that David Gush interview for three months that happened in September and they they released it with the Age of Disclosure release, right? Kind of making it seem like David Gush is enforcing it and then they got everyone else going on Fox News making it just seem like it's this unified front that's not really true, right? And Jay Stratton is so much more involved than people are thinking as Jeremy Corbel is going to bring up, but I have an even bigger point to bring up after that. >> But let's um maybe it's not like that it's a matter of truth. Maybe it's just a selective telling of a part of history.

I think it's a nicer way to say it because I think it is true. For example, another thing in the movie is when they say um it was it was Jay Stratton who who's he has been so straightforward about this and I really respect the way he talks about it, but he I think he was dancing around something. He says we bumped into the legacy program. I'm I'm sorry. I'm not buying that for one second.

I don't think he bumped into it. I I think that Jay Stratton uh you know had direct knowledge of the legacy program. I think Lou Alzando probably has a large history with the UFO thing that that is not public yet. >> Yeah. So, this is kind of crazy, right? Like Jeremy thinks Jay Stratton was in the legacy program and Lu Alzando and even David Gush thinks that.

And I think that's part of what David Grush has a problem with. And Jeremy's just being a little more diplomatic about it, which I understand. They don't want to be dicks to people they may consider friends. Totally get it. But I'm not any of these guys friends.

So, I'll say it. It's [ __ ] right? And when you hear, you know, for instance, people ask, "Why why isn't Jay Stratton testified, right? It's heavily featured in this film." I made a video about this a few months ago for the September hearings that happened, right? Why isn't Jay Stratton testifying? Because Eric Berles got asked about it because he's been working with David Grush. Hey, why isn't Jay Stratton testifying? And the answer that Eric Berles gave, Representative Eric Berles, who ran the hearing, you know, showed the Hellfire missile, all that, heavily involved in UFOs. When you hear the answer, and especially what Dave advised him on, I was shocked. So, check out a clip from this video that I made from a few months ago.

I'm going to put a link in the description so you can watch the full video, but this is going to piss you off. What's up, veters? Patrick here with Vetted. I saw this tweet last night. Does anyone else find it confusing and concerning that Jay Stratton is going on skinwalker cruises instead of skiffs and congressional hearings and that representative Berles said Grush told him he's not a person of interest for UAP information? Yes, Astral, wait till you see my video about this tomorrow. I've been thinking the same thing.

Well, tomorrow is today. And today we look in to Jay Stratton and why I'm going to convince you he should absolutely be testifying um in the UFO hearing. It's an outrage while he's not because by the end of this video you're probably going to be irate of why he's not even being considered. So let me convince you why Jay Stratton is so important to testify. Now, this is J.

Stratton here, right? As you can see, he's also known as John F. Stratton. So, he might be referred to that somewhere in this video. But before we get going any further, let's cover the viral clip of Eric Berles talking about J Stratton, which prompted Astral's entire tweet and me making this video entirely. Because up to this point, I'm thinking, yeah, they're working with J Stratton.

going to be having him testify like absolutely and then Representative Eric Berles says this. >> Hey Eric, how's it going man? Um I had a couple qu just two questions for you really. Have you and the task force have y'all spoken to Jay Stratton at all um since it was put together? >> No, we have not. >> Like wanted to look into since he's like Lou's boss and everything. Have y'all inquired about it? Is there a reason why you haven't specifically looked at J Stratton? Has he just not come across your desk or have you been is there any like mention of him at all? >> Yes.

I mean, he's his name has come up multiple times. It's not um it's not one of the ones that um Grush seems to see as a high-profile or somebody that is a priority. >> Uh not a priority. What? Again, I'm going to convince you in this video why he is absolutely a priority. Yeah.

So, he's just not really worth, you know, testifying. Wait, what? In that video, I explained that, you know, Jay Stratton is put at the top of like he's the, you know, this guy is is the the highest rated official or whatever to come out and talk about UFOs. He's this, he's that, he's that. He's heavily featured in age disclosure, all this stuff. And then he's we don't need to have him testify.

What? What? What are we talking about? This makes no sense. So, I highly recommend checking out that video because that point is bonkers, right? Especially if people are thinking, "Oh, he's actually in the UFO Legacy program." H Which begs the question, is the best way to hide? In plain sight, the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist, right? What if Jay Stratton, this is just my opinion, is part of this gatekeeping legacy program and in order to seem like he's helping the movement, he jumps in. Right? So, if he feels like he's part of the problem, then you secretly become part of the solution, but not really, right? A wolf in sheep's clothing. And people say, "Oh, he's working for the cause. He's not part of the cause.

He's working for the cause." Right? That's the best place to hide. And that may be happening. I guess again, why wouldn't they want him testifying? Now, this next point that gets brought up about James Clapper is quite interesting because James Clapper allegedly threw down a big bombshell in the movie. At least that's according to everyone that saw it. I saw it, too.

But I didn't I don't know. I mean, I guess it's like it's just there's no evidence provided, so I don't really know what value to give it. I I was really interested in uh Jim Clapper talking about a a UFO program studying UAP entering training ranges such as Area 51, maybe other training ranges. And my question is like what's actionable with that? H how can you have the former director of national intelligence uh and the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency he had a long Air Force career. I mean he's as mainstream and as credible as you get.

How can he get on this documentary? say there's a a UFO program funded by taxpayer dollars and yet Arrow, just as an example, our our UFO program in the Pentagon's put up by by Congress is saying there's nothing to see here. There's no evidence of extraterrestrials, as they like to put it, because they don't want to say non-human intelligence. And yet James Clapper is telling us, wait a minute, no, there's a UFO program. Well, okay. Well, if there's nothing to see here, then why is there a UFO program? Is it still going on? So, they're talking about a UFO program run in the '9s by the Air Force, Area 50, all this stuff.

People were like, "Oh my god." You know, James Clapper is saying it, right? I mean, even Jeremy really sends home the message here. Is a big deal. So, we had Clapper not only say there's a UFO program, he was not talking about OAP. We would or at any of that or even Kona Blue. He was talking about an Air Force study, an Air Force UFO tracking program.

Now remember, last Air Force program we're supposed to have was Project Blue Book. That's kind of an atom bomb because what? Arrow didn't find that. Didn't reveal that to the public. Huh. Weird.

Maybe they should have called James Clapper. So, that's pretty crazy to begin with. >> And look, I will admit this next clip I'm going to show you is also very weird. >> The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, calls me, "Mike, I need you to go through all of I need the team to go through all of NSA's holding all of its files, and I need everything that you have on UFOs." And I'm like, "What sir? You want me to do a review of our databases on UFOs?" And I'm literally thinking to myself, "Is this some kind of joke?" But, um, clearly it's not, which is reflected in the question. For a lot of people, this is, hey, what is going on out there? >> Look, I clearly there are phenomena occurring out there that both are visible and that we can't explain.

I I don't know what what what causes them. I don't know what they are. I don't know why. Um I never saw anything in my experience in the government 37 years both as an intelligence professional but also as a senior military individual. I never saw anything that led me to believe that there was some external i.e.

non-aterrestrial actor behind this kind of activity. But the flip side is I couldn't explain yet some of the activity. I just don't know. >> But again it's almost like that guy said it pretty clearly. I've seen no evidence that there that there's extraterrestrials or aliens or anything like that.

But we have seen things we can't explain. It's unidentified. Maybe that's all this program was just studying unidentified things. That doesn't mean aliens, right? It's like we just we can't call it unidentified and then we identify it. Unidentified anomalous phenomena, but we've identified it.

Unidentified flying objects, but we've identified it. Unidentified aerial phenomena, but we've identified it. What? Non-human beings, non-human sentients, right? Extraterrestrials, interdimensional, this, that, we got all these names. Ultraterrestrial, right? Like, but but we don't know what it is. But then what are you talk then why what are you if you don't know what it is? Then why are you saying it's non-human? You should say we don't know what it is.

Unidentified intelligence, right? Unidentified being. Like again, it's just a play on word. It's just it's just I don't know what the [ __ ] going on, man. Now, this next point that UFO Joe brings up about James Clapper is a good point and maybe something to consider. >> A a few years ago, he um did an interview.

I think it was on CNN and I think he mentioned how he may have been part of the problem of why more people don't know about this. I don't know if he was referring to what you just said, but yeah, he was out there. But that was one of his his few interviews. I think it's the only interview he had given on UAP before the movie. He should keep repenting then because it's really good to hear.

And George, he specifically mentioned that they were seeing UFOs over the test site over Area 51. So, he's not talking about our black projects. Just think about that for a second, right, everybody? He's he's not talking about our black projects. He's talking about some foreign technology, something that's not ours. UFOs over Area 51.

Can you imagine, George, why there might be UFOs over Area 51? Must be secret programs that planes were building or something. I read in the Wall Street Journal it was all made up. They made up the whole thing. They they started that rumor because they had some fake UFO photos and everybody fell for it. So maybe Clapper is one of those who fell for it, too.

>> And guess what, Joe? I found that CNN interview. >> So next month, a government report is expected to be made public on the sightings of UFOs. As the former director of national intelligence, I think there there have been a lot of theories about UFOs, what do you make of these revelations? What might this be? Have you seen any yourself? What do you make of this? >> Well, uh, first, I think it is kind of, uh, there there is logic to the intelligence community addressing this since the intelligence community has a lot of practice of dealing with ambiguity and less than complete facts. And secondly, I think it's it's really important that the whenever we uh witness such phenomenon that it is recorded and documented uh for the future uh when we may have gather more information and have a better understanding of uh what's what is what's transpiring. Uh could there be life out there? Sure.

Uh as as huge as the universe is, we you know, we you really can't reject that possibility. So I think this is a good thing. The transparency uh I expect this report will be filled with ambiguity as well and people uh depending on their leanings will extract what they want out of this report. >> How it always goes right where there is amb ambiguity people can pull what they want from it. But it is it does sound like it is you know something that we haven't seen before this type of transparency around this topic.

Yes. And you know, I'm not sure why that is. Uh the only reason for uh to me for classification would be if there's some sensitive method that uh data relating to u so-called UFOs was collected. But other than that, I don't know why we haven't been more transparent about it in the past. And and I I'm I'm part of that crime, I guess.

uh and my former capacities were uh you know I didn't I I didn't insist on more transparency with respect to this issue. >> Now this next part that George Knap brings up I was not expected to hear but it may explain a little bit more of that end part of that CNN interview. >> Let me add a little other element here. James Clapper is no friend of UFO research. When OAP was trying to become a special access program, what's not been made public is he fought tooth and nail to kill it.

He was whispering to I think Ashton Carter at the time was the secretary of defense and and of course it did get killed, but he was adamant about this is useless, worthless, no value here, kill it. And it was killed, but uh it's I don't think that's ever come out before as far as I can recall. But it's interesting now he's out on the forefront of spilling the beans. So, it sounds like James Clapper was never a friend of UFOs, but then all of a sudden he is. Is he just, you know, feels bad about it now, or is this just a new way to cover things up? Again, pretend like you become part of the solution when you're really part of the problem cuz clearly there's a precedent for him being part of the problem.

I mean, he readily admits it and George Knapp reveals this never beforeheard public admission, right? And James Clapper seemed to be involved with this stuff. Why didn't he want that to happen with OAP back in the day? He thought it was [ __ ] and now he doesn't. Something's not adding up. And look, even Chris Melon gets involved on this. He released a video with the Disclosure Fund, I think it's called, uh, this program or something or company or I don't even know what it is that he's involved with.

They keep changing their names. I I don't know what's going on. Um, he brings up the James Clapper stuff and yeah, I admit it's kind of interesting. >> Just today, Chris Melon, he had a video put out in the uh I think it was the Disclosure Foundation and he he was calling for people to testify under oath to to the Congressional Armed Services and Intel committees, four different highle people or three different people from the Air Force. one person who's um Don Merik, I don't know how to pronounce his last name, the deputy director for science and technology at the CIA.

So the so to me if if this film is going to count, then it really has to be actionable. So Congress should be inspired uh to do something, subpoena people, do what what what public citizens cannot do. You you have all the momentum now now that this film came out, so do something actionable. That's what I think about it. Now look, let's take a look at a little highlight from that video that Chris Melon put out.

I'm going put a link in the description to the full video so you can put it out. And look, I have to admit, um, you know, he does make some interesting points about the Air Force. You know, I don't know. >> My name is Chris Melon. I spent approximately 20 years in the US intelligence community, uh, both in the Defense Department and on Capitol Hill with the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The other day, I had the opportunity to see the new UAP documentary, Age of Disclosure. And after reflecting on it, I prepared a few remarks that I hope will be of assistance to Congress. In the new UAP documentary, Age of Disclosure, we learned that the Air Force had a secret program to track UAP in the vicinity of Area 51 and other sensitive military facilities in the 1990s. This report comes from none other than General James Clapper, former director of US Air Force intelligence and former director of national intelligence. Does that secret Air Force UAP program continue to this day? Where is the data? What did the Air Force learn? Why is it that Air Force F-22s, despite having greatly superior sensors, did not report UAP operating in DoD training areas off the East Coast when Navy F-18s were routinely detecting and reporting UAP on the same ranges? Why is it the USS Princeton radar data from the Nimttz case disappeared after US Air Force officers visited the ship? In fact, there are many similar cases where Navy data was removed by US Air Force personnel.

Why is it the Air Force never reports UAP detected by its strategic radar systems? It is time for Congress to put the chief of staff of the US Air Force, the Secretary of the Air Force, and the Director of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations under oath in a secure hearing room to get to the bottom line. >> Again, I just don't know what's going on. You know, when we say there's a UFO program, we just immediately go, "Oh, alien program." But then they don't call it that. And if it was, you know, it's like we can't use the word unidentified because as soon as you say unidentified in the UFO community, people it's it's aliens. But again, to me, there's UFO the acronym and then there's UFO the word.

And I think when people use UFO the word, they mean aliens. But there's also an acronym unidentified flying object and we don't know which one people are using when they use it. But I will admit there's some interesting things about the Air Force there that Chris Melon brought up. So I don't know. All right.

Now, this last part of the interview that I'm going to cover, again, link in the description to go watch the full weaponized uh podcast. There's so much more that I didn't cover and I highly recommend checking it out. It was a great conversation. And I have to admit all the whole panel, everyone had really great points and I really enjoyed listening to it. So shout out to all those guys.

Now this next part is very interesting because Jeremy is going to bring up a point about the UFO community that has always stumped me. >> George, remember this James Fox? He was, you know, going out on a limb to make a documentary about a being. I remember him. He was really scared about it. It's going to kill my credibility in the UFO world as a filmmaker.

And we're all do it, do it. But even as a as a filmmaker documentarian on this, James Fox was having those heart palpitations. He's going to start getting into beings into aliens, you know, and now we're in a different place where we're having these conversations about creatures, about pilots, and we'll get into that a little bit later today. But it's kind of neat how we're now facing it. We're getting past the uh the stigma, right? Is that what you're saying? >> Yeah, absolutely.

And and I don't know if it's if it's stigma. I think it's stigma, but it's also I always wonder why did these people I felt like whatever was they felt like they maybe they would get in trouble talking about certain things. >> Oh yeah. Biologics being off the table for a lot of people and also just not a lot of people are exposed to that within these programs. It's a very small thing.

>> Yeah. >> It's like the history of UFO world. You know, for so long people were willing, eupfologist types and UFO organizations were willing to agree these craft in the sky are coming from somewhere else, but don't tell me they're flown by somebody else. Uh, you know, some aliens or something. We don't want to hear that stuff.

And abductions, that was a verboten topic for a long time at a mon conference or something like that. That's just crazy talk. So now when you want to follow the evidence where it leads, that exposure to these craft and and beings really do happen, that people get sick, serious injuries are caused by it, and that they start seeing werewolves and stuff. You know, I I can understand people not being willing to talk about it. Even the folks who are at Skinwalker, they kept some of that wrapped up for a long time, as as crazy as it sounds.

>> You know, I've always found that kind of funny that there's certain limits you can go to with this community, right? Like an example I always give I just find hilarious is like people will be like you know remote viewing that's such [ __ ] man how can you talk about remote view you idiot you idiot so anyway interdimensional time traveling aliens wait what uh that's okay to bring it like we're all under the umbrella crazy here I don't know there is no lying to me like what are you talking like we can talk about UFOs but not if there's some pilot I mean that's stupid what are we talking All the claims are crazy, but it is an interesting point. Like let's say people that claim to have been taken by aliens, right? That's definitely something very interesting that I do think is, you know, worth talking about. And I think there are some interesting points about why maybe some of these points don't get brought up, right? Even if you think it's crazy or not, but something like people that have been taken, right? Some of them come to the conclusions they have for maybe not the right reasons. Joe Rogan recently talked about this on a recent episode and I found what he said and his guest to be rather interesting >> like that you can lead someone to believe something happened that didn't happen. >> Yeah.

This is what Jolly West was some of the stuff that he was >> this is what's really u do you know who John Mack is? >> John Mack. >> John Mack was uh I believe he was a psychiatrist at Harvard. um he got really obsessed with alien abduction stories >> and he wrote a book called Abduction and it was all hypnotic regressions of people that have been abducted by aliens allegedly and they all had very similar stories >> but the real controversy from skeptics has always been like what were these sessions like? Did you >> leading questions? >> Yes. Yes. Did you lead them to believe what and also there was a precedent.

Um, so do do you know the Betty and Barney Hill story? Okay. Betty and Barney Hill were an interracial couple in New Hampshire, I believe, in the 1950s where the very first UFO abduction story and they had an experience on a highway. They saw a thing. They lost time and then they couldn't sleep. They had all these real problems and they they both wound up going to uh a hypnotist and separately had the same story.

separately had the same story about being taken aboard a craft and being manipulated. All these >> the problem is then that story gets out into the zeitgeist. Yeah. >> Right. And then you have hypnotic regression where people tell very similar versions of that story >> and it becomes a thing where like even if the the original Betty and Barney Hill story was real now that becomes a possibility in your mind that could have happened to you and then you get hypnotized and someone says, >> "Do you see any beings in the room with you?" Yes, I do.

>> Do they are they short with large heads and large black eyes? They are. like what are the questions like how did you lead them into this hypnotic regression of alien abduction? >> And I think a very similar thing took place during the European kind of witch craze in the 17th century. >> These preachers would go around to different communities talking about witches and demons. And so as soon as they left in the weeks following there's a huge uptick in witch accusations and supposed demonic possessions. Is it a coincidence that right after they're as soon as it's brought to your consciousness, oh, I I think you might be a witch or all these accusations start spreading around.

Obviously, it's like a suggested thing that they picked up from attending these religious rallies. >> Of course. Yeah. There's always been an issue with hypnosis and, you know, trying to get people's memory back, right, through hypnosis, right? Because they do get led to believe certain things. I've seen it myself.

I've seen clips of it, right? And I'm not saying none of those stories are true. I'm just saying I think a lot of people have been led to believe they've been taken by aliens when they haven't at all. How does that help? Right? How does that help? And people can be susceptible to this. And anyone that doesn't admit that is just crazy. No, no, not me.

I'm I'm my story is real. Okay. Well, any proof or evidence? No. I know what I saw. All right.

Well, guess it's just for you then. Don't expect other people to believe it if you don't have anything to prove it. Sorry. What are we supposed to do here? We can't let emotions rule us here, right? We've, you know, not saying we shouldn't feel emotions because we're not robots, but we have to put the standard of evidence and proof at the very top. If this is the greatest discovery in the history of mankind, then it should be the greatest evidence or proof in the history of mankind.

At least that's my opinion. Because look, people do go out of their way to deceive. But like that point that I brought up before, if you put out an ad for your band and you don't rehearse, it's not going to end well. >> Interesting. >> Well, the real problem was when someone pretends and you catch them pretending like that, then you're never going to trust them again.

You could fail. You can fail and [ __ ] up. You could think you got it right and you got it wrong and you just, oh, [ __ ] But if you pretend, if you if you lie, if you show deception, if you pretend you're something that you're not, and they find out like like Ellen, you know, she's a nice lady. She's all dancing. Meanwhile, she's [ __ ] screaming at people and mean.

Yep. >> You know, that's like, "Oh, you were lying." >> Exactly. People come into the UFO community now that the doors been wide open and people are going to come investigate more and they start finding holes and they start They're never coming back. then we'll be worse off than when we started. So, let me know your comments down below, y'all.

Uh link in the description to the weaponized episode as well as to rent a disclosure if you want to check it out. And I really appreciate everyone tuning in. We'll see you guys on the next one. Remember, everyday is a gift, y'all. Peace.

>> Hi. Um, I'm Tesha McKenna and I kind of stumbled upon your channel on YouTube, Vetted, and um, yeah, I see the little message you have underneath um, the recent video on the age of disclosure about leaving a message about UFO ET experience. Well, I have two. Um, the first experience I had, I was in the 10th grade. Um, I couldn't sleep.

I don't I It was a hot night. It was end of summer, hot night. And I I remember just looking around my room and it's like, oh, if I do a twist knot with my curtain, um, it'll allow airflow to infiltrate better into the room with the ceiling fan. And so, um, just another thing, too. I'm originally from out in the country near the lake of Lake Erie.

Um there's a nuclear power plant in um Port Clinton, Ohio. Um so I don't know like after hearing some of this stuff about UFOs and nuclear weapons and stuff, I just wonder if this incident is correlated to the nuclear power plant because I didn't grow up too far from that nuclear power plant. Anywh who, I couldn't sleep and I was doing a twist knot with the curtain and you know just kind of staring out of my window and I see someone trespassing and I was like who trespasses? I was like ew. They they look disportionate like they look like they need to you know eat some food. They look malnourished.

their head was large for their body and it was and they were just like they were observing the backyard. Um like the toys and stuff from my little siblings and it turned its head and it freaked me out. Um it it it was not a human. Um I don't know what humans eyes glow in the dark. Um, and they were they appear as large on their large head and yeah, we made eye contact and um, like looking back on it, I think it was all so scared because I can't even describe this maneuver.

Like I just don't know how you go from ground level to a in a tree that's well above a one-story house. Like he didn't leap or anything from my memory. It just went and it's weird. I knew exactly where he was going to go and because the eyes were glowing like it's like dude I can still see you. You're not well hidden.