BONUS SEGMENT WITH UAP TASK FORCE MEMBER LENVAL LOGAN

0:11 Speaker 1: All right, we are here for the members only segment. We do this with our in studio guests as a thank you to our members. We want to always try to do this bonus segment if we can in person as a benefit to those who pay, and you know, help us literally keep the lights on, keep Gene in the lifestyle he's used to. He's actually a huge diva. A lot of people don't know this exclusive huge diva, super diva. We have to buy a new chair irradiant AC system that he needs and a lift, a power lift for the stairs when he ultimately well won't get into that logan.

0:54 Speaker 1: You are a guest this week and it was amazing, such an amazing talk. This is where we kind of get to do a little rapid fire and I hope you don't mind. First off, you requested an analysis on the Siria video and this is you know, something that you know most people would at least know. Can you walk me through why that one crossed your desk and what made you flag it for this kind of review.

1:24 Speaker 2: So when anything comes to anybody can jump on whichever project they want to that you know, you may have like five things come through a day and you may go through each one preliminary for like, take like five minutes on each one and then go back to the ones that you know, you go no, no, oh, yes and whatever. But after you pick one, now it's all of a sudden, what are you looking for? So what you do is you sit there and say, dude, I'm not a video analyst, could you exploit this video? So what they'll do is they'll say change the contrast and the brightness and all these different things, different modes so that you can tramp pull out something unique about the target that you're looking at.

2:05 Speaker 2: So in this case, I was looking for anything to give me some indication it was a balloon because they were just moving nice and steady. But that's kind of like a balloon. But is there anything because never seen a balloon shape like that? All right,

2:24 Speaker 2: obviously in a weird place for something to be that large, And it's just you know, because I was thinking, what if this was a balloon that floated off from a bazaar or something like that, What could this What would this balloon really look like? You know? What was what was it? Originally? Was it the shape of a batman or some weird thing? And it got deflated or whatever. And the more we tried to attack it, the more we kept coming back with nothing. So we said, okay, it's maintaining. There was no violent movements with it or anything like that.

2:56 Speaker 2: You know, usually when you see balloons clump together, one of them is moving a little differently from the other because there's not enough air or gats in it and whatever. This thing just kept going. So I said, somebody fully exploit that video. Let's take a look at it. Let's see what we can find. And there was no dramatic Mama, well ah, I found you, but there was enough there to compel us to say, this goes in the yes bin until we can determine more. And we can. And once it's in the yes bin, what we can do is we can sit there and compare it to other things.

3:31 Speaker 2: Whereas we put it in the no bin, it's piece we consider trash.

3:36 Speaker 3: So it just goes right. Okay, his name is Frank, but.

3:43 Speaker 1: So actually Veto had a question and speaking of why you, well, why don't you come up and present yourself? And that's what this is for. Here here take this one. So he wants to show you a couple of videos. I'll put them on screen right now.

4:10 Speaker 2: Mm hmm.

4:12 Speaker 1: These are also jellyfish type.

4:14 Speaker 2: UFOs, jellyfish, octopus, whatever you want to call them. Yeah, that's the electric pink if you wouldn't mind send me that later. Yes, it's like.

4:33 Speaker 4: Two different angles of the same weird looking.

4:38 Speaker 1: This is over New York City. There was New York City.

4:44 Speaker 2: So what's your question?

4:46 Speaker 1: He just wanted to show you the.

4:51 Speaker 4: Numerous jellyfish videos.

4:53 Speaker 2: Okay, most of the ones look like either the one that Jeremy Corbels saw or it looked like something that was in the wall. Now on the unclassified side, I've seen that several times, and I wanted to confirm. What I wanted was one that was the way I did things. This is gonna sound weird.

5:12 Speaker 1: Hold on mic in.

5:14 Speaker 2: Yeah, the way I did things, and this is gonna sound a little weird. Is I would first try to see if we saw it in the classified system, and then I would look for anything similar on the unclassified system, because that would also give us a reason to be able to talk about it in the open and get more impus because we don't talk about the classified one. We just talked about the unclassified one, and everybody tells me what they saw. But then what we started doing. We said, okay, we've seen some unique things in the class in the unclassed world, do we have anything like that inside our own system that fits that profile?

5:50 Speaker 2: And so we'd go back and forth between the two and try to see which one would really step up and be the unique one, and that seemed to be the best way to go.

6:02 Speaker 4: Was COR's video.

6:04 Speaker 2: The one in the water was there were several that were in the water. One looked like it was this weird frothing circle that was moving and it was maybe about ten feet across, and then there was another one that it was maybe more like in the area of like forty feet, but there was something in the middle as well, moving and we weren't quite sure what it was, but someone kept saying, this is a jelly fish, this is a jelly fish. This is a bunch of jellyfishes. So we went along with that. But when the one that you just showed me were it's more like an octopus in the sky and stuff like that, we were looking for those, and if I recall, we didn't see any.

6:42 Speaker 2: So we were trying to figure out if those were real, if there was were fake or whatever. But what I can do is I can put that into my drop, and what my drop does will tell me if there's any AI involved in that video at all.

6:55 Speaker 1: Okay, that.

7:00 Speaker 2: Was like maybe thirty forty feet length.

7:04 Speaker 1: Length wise length wise forty feet.

7:07 Speaker 2: I think it's been a while, so I don't remember the exact number. I'd have to, yeah, because it was just hanging in like, you know, and that's what I'm thinking. I need to go back and take a.

7:18 Speaker 1: Look, because a lot of people thought it was like if it was something like was it someone in like one of those you know, new jet pack things. No, forty feet is way too big.

7:29 Speaker 2: We look, we looked at those things trying to figure out if jet packs would act differently, they would sound differently and everything. The thing that actually saw that, the one that Jeremy Corbell, I think, was like a dirigible with sensors on it. So he's got acoustic sensors as well, so we could hear gunshots and all that other stuff. So if there was if that had a jet pack hit it, they would have picked that up right off the bat.

7:53 Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, right right, who so the four K for the jet you talk about who in government? Or Military Industrial Complex or whatever has the authority to release that footage, and what is stopping them it would.

8:14 Speaker 2: Be the president and the president probably because he hasn't seen it now that Jeremy Corbella has released it.

8:20 Speaker 3: The idea was, yeah, but that's not the HD stuff, No.

8:23 Speaker 2: But the fact that some of the stuff is well, the tranches will will some of the stuff that we've seen come out in the tranches that are coming out, and I don't think any of them will see the light of day.

8:35 Speaker 1: Hmm. So you don't think any of the stuff that you've seen in four K or even just.

8:42 Speaker 2: Everything that I've seen come out in whatever version of it you may think of, it seems that it could be. It's ambiguous the best, all right, there is nothing there. There is nothing going to come out from government. And I will say that with the utmost authority that I have in my base on what I think. There's nothing that's going to come out of the government that's going to be a smoking gun, because because you take away all doubt at that point, Okay, you need you need the doubt.

9:17 Speaker 3: You know, you need that little bit of yes, like yeah, because.

9:23 Speaker 2: As long as you have the doubt you can put the toothpaste back in the two.

9:30 Speaker 1: Yeah, yes, yes, right, just like there's no money in the cure for cancer, but for the disease, there's a.

9:48 Speaker 2: They signed the oath and everything. It's that there there is more money in having it is better, more profitable for them to have you keep coming back and asking for for more help instead.

10:00 Speaker 1: Of just well then then what do you think of these guys like how put off.

10:04 Speaker 3: Who or go?

10:07 Speaker 5: You know?

10:08 Speaker 1: And and you know I'm not trying to come at at you, of course you know this. I mean this was total respect because I know you talk to these guys, but like how and Eric Davis or doctor Davis, I give him respect. When they're seemingly always where the money is right, whether it's you know, NIDS and Big Low or any task force that they you know, any government project, it seems that they're double dipping to a degree, and a lot of these guys are double dip.

10:42 Speaker 2: Seems a double dipping the way I say it is you.

10:46 Speaker 1: Don't think that working for the government on one hand and then being a face of disclosure is double dipping.

10:56 Speaker 2: No, No, here here's why. Okay, The reason why we know what we know is because when we were working for the government, we had access. Okay, it's not about the money, because the government pays peanuts, you know, compared to really what's going on out there. But now all of a sudden you're at the point where you're asking them do you support disclosure? They're all for it, all right, but they're trying to just like Loud, they're also trying to stay within their NBA right. They're not trying to bake their vale because once you break your valt, you're done, your persona non grata.

11:29 Speaker 2: You know. Look at Dylan and others, you know, they'll tell you their lives have been ruined by all this because they came out and said what they were going to say. You know, I had a lawyer come to me and said, hey, Logan, we need you to testify. I was like, about what there's like about what you did in the test force. Hell no, I said, that's all classified. They're like, well, you should come because it's about the people and everything. I was like, well, then you stand up there and you tell them what you know.

11:54 Speaker 2: He goes, I don't know anything. I was like, must suck to be you, then, you know, because they want me to stay up there even now. Think about it. When all Dylan, all those guys stood up in front of Congress, right, Congress accused him of saying, so you haven't seen any of this firsthand? Right, And they all said, well, Dylan did, all right. But when they talk about the Legacy program, like David Grash and whatever, and they said, well, did you see the spacecraft in the hangar where it's controlled by us and whatever?

12:29 Speaker 2: And he's like, well, I could talk about it in the skiff and blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. All right, And the answer is, for the most part, the thing is that they're asking for, the answer is no, right, right. But then Congress turns back around, and what did they tell you? They're on the news telling you, well, you know, we saw this thing, and I could go right back to him. Did you see it firsthand? They would tell you no. Right. And as for the double dipping, the thing is, you know these guys are they've got expensive taste.

13:01 Speaker 2: No, I'm kidding them.

13:03 Speaker 2: The idea is they got to find a way to live. So people come to them and ask them, hey, will you be willing to support this? Do this?

13:10 Speaker 4: Do this?

13:11 Speaker 2: Yeah, but just don't go beyond your NDA. But it is good to have a person that has been in the government looked at all the stuff that's there, and now he's able to tell the difference between what's real and the bullshit that comes across on the unclassified world. So I don't look at it as double dipping. I just look at that.

13:27 Speaker 1: As surviving or bridging the gap maybe, yeah, right between the classified world what's unclassified, and then you with civilians.

13:38 Speaker 2: Think of it this way. You, for the on the classified world, you have a very fine out amount of information coming in that is more than likely very very accurate because the chain of custody, the providence, all that other stuff. Right. But then on the civilian side, when you're dealing with all the commercial entities, you don't have that chain of custody, that providence ever. All right, Yeah, but you got a lot of information that's coming towards you. So you get to see both sides of it and then help one side.

14:08 Speaker 2: You could be helping the government by saying, hey, this thing was also seen on the civilian side. And now and you know, because one of the really interesting things that I came up with, all right, is I kept asking why aren't we looking at some of the things on the civilian side, and someone said, well, we got the best data. Whatever. I said, No, listen to me, if you see it on the classified side. Let's say the octopus study just showed me, if we see it on the classified side, right, and we've only got a minute, and we see that thing on the on the classified side, But a civilian now has fifteen minutes of coverage of the exact same thing.

14:50 Speaker 2: Now it's showing me things that I did not know about from the classified video. Wow, okay, and that opens up a whole new area for us because now I don't have to go to that pilot and go, hey, sir, if you engage this. We only saw it for minutes to just watch out for this. But if I got it for fifteen minutes, and now I see it does something, sir, you might want to be careful because we've noticed that if you do this, it'll do this. If you do this, it'll do that. So both sides feed each other. So I don't see it as double dipping or anything like that.

15:19 Speaker 1: I can't. You know, that's a compelling points. It really is a compelling point. And again I think to some degree we do need that bridge right from inside like people that are inside. It's just I start to get worried that, like I mean, because I don't know how much you're paying attention to this. But right now there's been like this fracture in the community and it's you know, Alisondo's taken a lot of heat right now, you know, and you know uap gurb and.

15:53 Speaker 2: Some of it is some of it, I have to say, is deliberate. They are trying to build fractures, okay, because when we're building fractures, we're not looking at the problem of course. All right, So I don't know you ap Ger have never met the man, don't really care too whatever. I know Ross. I like Ross. I trust Ross. But Ross is a reporter and he's got certain things that he needs to do, especially for his producers and whatever. Not that Ross is doing anything underhanded or anything, although everything needs to be you know, triple checked and whatever.

16:25 Speaker 2: Now it would be useful. It's like when Lou's book first came out Eminent a right, everybody was coming to me, Hey, hey, there's something going on between Lew and j. There's something going on between Lew and J. And I'm like, what, what, what's going on? Talk to someone talked to me. So finally I was like, I went to lou and I went to Jail. I was like, what's going on? He said, we have a different opinion on something. That's it. All we have is a I said, so, why are these people making it out like the end of the world.

16:56 Speaker 2: And I said, guys, it looks like there's a like there's a breaking the matrix. We've got to find a way again. He said, Logan, it's just two old guys with egos, nothing to worry about it. It wasn't a big deal to either one of them, right, But the world was making it out like he was the end of the world. And I was like, okay, let's move on. People.

17:15 Speaker 1: Well, that's a huge problem in this community. It is the craving for headlines.

17:22 Speaker 2: Every day, the noise that I told you about.

17:25 Speaker 1: Right, the noise of the everyday minutia, right when there's not some break. We're lucky enough where this stuff's in the news like a little bit more, a lot a bit more. I mean, Fox News are starting to remind me of Coast to Coast.

17:39 Speaker 3: Yes, but.

17:41 Speaker 1: So we are lucky in that regard. But also i'd argue again like you had said, presidents are talking about this shit, like, I think we're past the point of like confirmation. There's your disclosure, right, So we got the disclosure.

18:00 Speaker 2: What we don't have because they left it out as they said, there's something flying around in the skuys, but we don't know what they are. That's the part that has not given us confirmation. They could say we know what they are, they're friendly their foe. There, you know what?

18:14 Speaker 1: All right, I get right, they're leaving it ambi ambiguous at best.

18:19 Speaker 2: And it's better. It's better that way, kind of like what Gene was saying.

18:22 Speaker 4: Right.

18:23 Speaker 1: So, but for people like us who have seen things.

18:25 Speaker 2: Yes, we don't need we don't need that.

18:29 Speaker 1: We don't need Trump. So I think that's and and there's a lot of people in this community that operate off of blind faith in the stories, and I actually have That's why I feel like, you know, people that haven't had a sighting, they're always like a little bit like shy of saying it right, and it's like no, no, no, no, I actually have more respect for that because you're operating in a on a on a real evidence based scenario, right, Like you're you've looked at the situation and you've decided there something there, and you're operating on that ideas like that, you're searching for the truth.

19:05 Speaker 1: I've seen something. It's easy for me to believe, yes, right, I know what I saw.

19:10 Speaker 2: Yes, But the human being is very complex because here's what I will tell you, there are more of us that have had something extraordinary happen to them than there are people that have not had any extraordinary I agree, but there are so many grifters, even us that have had an experience. We don't trust what a lot of people are saying because we can't relate, or we look at something and we can sit there and go, that's bullshit because of these things or that came from this individual, and I know that person lies.

19:47 Speaker 2: We're looking for a reason to purpoo everybody else's I think it's human nature to want to put ourselves up high and attack everybody else. But if you just come into this with a little bit of grace and a little bit of humility, you can look at it and go, Okay, there's more of us than there are them. And what we've got to do is we've got to help them that haven't had the.

20:05 Speaker 1: Experience transition into this new era.

20:09 Speaker 3: What would.

20:11 Speaker 1: A couple more questions, and we'll wrap up here. What would you say to the nineteen ninety version of yourself in the active duty who's about to go see who's about to get on that plane and see that craft? Well, what would you tell him about the moment that he needed?

20:33 Speaker 2: I would tell him to docu write down everything that he saw, be more prepared for it. I mean, as as I started getting older, I started saying, why didn't I write that down? And I have a pretty good memory. It's not specific to all the definitive parts of it's not photographic, but it's a good enough memory that I can remember things from way back when and I can put context to them and sit there and say, Okay, now I got to put some analysis to this. Was this the same thing as that? I mean, it's an easy jump to go, oh this triangle?

21:09 Speaker 2: Was that triangle? But if you'd see it, do something different. Like we've all seen the trip or heard about the triangles with the three white corners and the red dot in the middle. So what happens when you don't see the white the red dot of the middle. Is that something else? Or is it something.

21:28 Speaker 3: It's the same thing, is it utility?

21:31 Speaker 2: Or with all the triangles, with all the saucers, we were getting them mixed up. Forever, everything was just a flying saucer, you know, until all the shapes came. I have a really good friend that took a look at it. He was he was he wasn't part of the task force, but when we were showing him some of the stuff because he was gonna help, and he goes, well, how about that? He said, it looks like the Aliens don't use the same contractors either, you know, to builders base.

21:56 Speaker 1: Ironically, that is my last question to you a thing about that. So that's very odd that you bring that up just spontaneously. God so yeah, so yeah, right, So you would tell yourself to write down the details, because again, this is nineteen ninety You didn't have a cell phone in your pocket to pull out and record this. It was a very different time. So you would have tried to write down every detail.

22:25 Speaker 2: Between my mouthfuls of cheese steak out, I been trying to get as much the information down.

22:29 Speaker 1: I would probably put the cheese steak down, Yeah, and wrote dude.

22:34 Speaker 2: Cheese steaks were highly coveted back then.

22:36 Speaker 1: But it was still gonna be there.

22:37 Speaker 2: It's not going to be there, so why do you want to take that chance? But I'd be sitting there trying to get as much information, even if I have to give my pen to the other, to the guy, other guy in the cheese steak can let him put his cheeksteak cheese steak down and say, okay, let me tell you what I'm seeing.

22:51 Speaker 3: I love it.

22:52 Speaker 2: But the idea would be I try to tell myself, take a deep breath, figure.

22:57 Speaker 1: Out what exactly observe? Yeah, start to start the process.

23:01 Speaker 2: Yeah, what exact time did you see it? What exact time did it end? Which way was it going when you last saw it? Which way was it going when you first saw it? First saw it? About? What altitude were you because I don't know what else I'm assuming you know, between thirty and thirty thirty and thirty five thousand feet.

23:17 Speaker 1: That's where commercial gest.

23:19 Speaker 2: Yeah, we're you know, we're coming down over over Europe, over England, you know, dropping down in altitude? What are we doing? Did when we landed? Could I have gone to the pilot's cabin and go, hey, did you see that.

23:33 Speaker 1: You didn't do that?

23:34 Speaker 2: No, no, I I just sat there and I was like, Oh, when I get to my new base, I'm gonna get right in on some shit. Yeah, this is gonna be cool.

23:43 Speaker 1: You didn't think to ask the pilot.

23:45 Speaker 2: Nope, damn load. And then I get to my unit and they're looking at me, like, what are you talking about? I said, the thing that's out there doing this, you know, the weird stuff, and they're like, we don't know what you're talking about. Now, in retrospect, I think my weapons and Tactics officer knew everything that was going on in Belgium because back then that would have been reported through NATO channels.

24:10 Speaker 3: Okay, oh, something.

24:13 Speaker 2: Usual flying around in the airspace around Belgium and whatever. Clear the airspace, be careful because I used to work in Aby Triple C and we used to, like I told you, we used to do quin close air sport. Yeah, and from time to time it wasn't always us bringing in a tens. It was us clearing a corridor for the army to launch artillery to just clear out an area, right, and we say, okay, we're gonna be firing for effect. From thirteen hundred to thirteen oh five. Everybody cleared this corridor. You stay on that side, You stay on that side.

24:48 Speaker 2: This thing goes from seventeen thousand feet to twenty three thousand feet. Don't fly in this area, and that's it. And then we watch all the aircraft just kind of separate, right, and then they just start firing, and then they said they were done, and then we're like, okay, airspace is now open, and everybody would come back. But when you're doing all that stuff, you have to coordinate with everybody because it's command and control, right, So if there's something unusual in your airspace, you're not gonna sit there and just go, oh, just keep flying all willy normal and everything.

25:17 Speaker 2: You're gonna say, hey, there was something in this airspace at this time. We believe it to be this. Can anybody confirm denying whatever, Oh it was in Belgian airspace. Let's go to the Beljics and see if they can give us any additional data containing to that, or if it's in Germany or whatever. But the thing was, we didn't know, you know, so that would have been like a blind call out to everybody. Anybody that saw this whatever in the sky, please send in sorry, please send in a report and let's see what we got and go from there.

25:48 Speaker 1: Man, if only that's how it was. But yeah, yeah, please hold on. You know, do you mind recording him so I can put that in. This is producer producer cam.

26:13 Speaker 6: So first of all, would you agree and if not, why.

26:27 Speaker 7: When it comes to disclosure that there will not be anything that comes out that is not in the best interests of the United States Government and preserving the institutions of the United States government.

26:41 Speaker 2: I would agree. I would agree with you one hundred

26:46 Speaker 2: and One of the things is, you know, we have to make sure our government looks good. I mean I I can tell you all kinds of stuff that would sit there and you would be like, yeah, I agree, I agree. But at the end of the day, if it's something on a national scale, which this would be, right, we the US, we can't look bad. And one of the things I thought was really interesting when when the Task Force first came out and everything, first thing I thought was, why is everybody looking to the US to be the one that's going to answer everything?

27:20 Speaker 2: You know, what about England? What about Russia? Are they watching us? Going? Hell, let's see what the US, does you know everybody seems to have this, Well, America is the one that's got got got their foot all in this, you know. I think some of the cartoons one of the Girl, one of the Pixar movies where the girl's gigantic and they're talking about an alien came down and the guy, the fictional newsman goes and the UFO landed in America. We're all UFOs land, you know, And you know there were teasing this, you know.

27:52 Speaker 1: See I don't like that notion though, because clearly talking to you, that is simply not the case. It's this, it's it's another there. What it is is it's another misunderstanding of the public. Yes, on the topic of UFOs. It's a misconception, it is.

28:13 Speaker 2: But the other side of that coin is those are the countries they pretty much either they're beholding to the US or they follow what the US.

28:21 Speaker 3: Does, right, you know, their government Stretton.

28:25 Speaker 2: I think James Fox told me. He says kind of like again the joke about things always landing in the US. The other side of it is, whenever there's a story about a UFO overseas, it always ends with it. There was an air force C one thirty that took everything and flew away in the distance, you know, and.

28:42 Speaker 1: You're like, and I won't disagree with that. I think probably most countries would be like fuck fuck, like fuck, we don't have the resources for this. Call the US, call the.

28:55 Speaker 2: US or the or the US just says, hey, one of our aircraft with some days just material, just crashing your breath. We'd like the authority to come in there and pick it up. Just around the aircraft, don't touch anything. We'll take care of the rest.

29:07 Speaker 1: And then and then you're in good with the US. You're in good with the US. You just gave them a UFO. Yes, yeah, you get some usaid. Do you know what I'm saying?

29:17 Speaker 2: Yeah?

29:17 Speaker 4: The second question for you as an analyst, putting on.

29:23 Speaker 2: Your analytical hand, yes, sir.

29:26 Speaker 1: So.

29:27 Speaker 5: A number of key individuals involved in this issue often make statements to the effect of the truth around UFOs. The truth around UAP would be so destabilizing to the nation, to economies, but particularly it would be destabilizing to individuals.

29:59 Speaker 2: You mean, like the Epstein and that.

30:01 Speaker 8: Yeah, well, I mean, you know, whatever they're whatever they include.

30:08 Speaker 2: But you're familiar, you know, I mean, am.

30:10 Speaker 5: I categorizing it correctly that essentially people can't handle Part of the reason this needs to be kept secret is that people can't handle it.

30:20 Speaker 2: And the first question I would come back would say, how do you know you're handling.

30:24 Speaker 9: It so exactly number And that's point number one that I say that a lot myself. I'm like, well, I see these guys, and you know, judging by what I see, I'll be all right.

30:40 Speaker 4: But for me, the bigger question is that.

30:46 Speaker 5: They have this understanding of let's just call it, you know, this catastrophic, shocking revelation that most people can't handle. But they're also takking about getting it out into the public.

31:05 Speaker 4: Right.

31:06 Speaker 5: So it's this is people aren't going to be on the list, but it needs to be out in the poplink.

31:12 Speaker 4: But their actions behind the scenes are.

31:14 Speaker 5: They start investing in and creating their own technology companies. So from an analytical standpoint, what does their response to this idea that the information that they're privy to is so out there and so severe that the public can't handle it. Their responses invest in technology as opposed.

31:46 Speaker 4: To I don't know.

31:48 Speaker 5: They starting an NGEO that works with governments and social organizations to help people overcome all of these things that they know they're going they allegedly know they're going to.

32:00 Speaker 4: Be having problems with. They're not investing any time and effort in that.

32:05 Speaker 5: So would you, you know, how would you assess that?

32:09 Speaker 2: And how would you personally? I think when they come up and tell you that it's gonna be catastrophic, I don't think it's gonna be catastrophic. I think that's just about control, because if you scare people, fear seems to have a very interesting effect on people, especially for the masses. Individuals are pretty smart. Individuals as a group are pretty stupid, all right, you put them together. I mean, all you need to do is get a crowd together and say something, you know, something bad, like bomb or whatever, and there's no it's illegal, that's right, But there's no thought anymore.

32:46 Speaker 2: That's just a reaction.

32:48 Speaker 8: You know.

32:48 Speaker 2: You get a you get a drone that goes over and sprays the crowd with water cooling trying to cool them down whatever. But someone's gonna say accident, you know whatever. It's all about control from that point of view, and it gives those individuals. In my opinion, I don't know much, but it gives those individuals a chance to take whatever technology they want to manipulate it, whatever the way they want, to make millions from it.

33:14 Speaker 6: All right, last question, I appreciate your patience with boss.

33:20 Speaker 5: So the last question is there are a number of journalists who talk about the information that they've received from insiders and their sources, and sometimes that information is very particular that you know, it's statements made by a whistleblower inside of the skiff, that that information was passed on by somebody in the office that conducted that.

33:55 Speaker 4: Interview, and all the rest of it.

34:00 Speaker 5: My question is, when the journalists are doing that, aren't they inherently risking that source because and correct me if I'm wrong, it's not like this five thousand people who.

34:18 Speaker 4: Are in the skiff.

34:21 Speaker 5: That that is, the people who have access to that information that they are conveying may not be more than five to seven individuals.

34:33 Speaker 4: Never mind, it.

34:34 Speaker 5: Might not have been more than three or four that were actually in the skiff at the time those things were set.

34:42 Speaker 4: So it seems to me at least that from.

34:46 Speaker 5: A counterintelligence perspective, these journalists are putting these sources at risk and based on the offices that they're talking about. You'd think those people would be smarter.

35:00 Speaker 2: Yes, then that yes, So.

35:03 Speaker 5: How is the public then supposed to discern is the journalists.

35:09 Speaker 7: Speaking of their ass versus actually has an insider who is in the room asking these questions.

35:19 Speaker 2: Okay, so here's what I would tell you. The journalists don't the journalists. They say what they're gonna say, because it's about the trust in the bond that they've earned with their audience, and their audience either believes them or not. But when you're talking about what's going on behind some of the closed doors and things like that, they have to be very particular in how they mask it and what they say. I'll give you an interesting example. I just told you that individuals are smart, crowds are stupid.

35:53 Speaker 2: All right. Jason Sants when he came out, he came out because James Fox accidentally left.

36:05 Speaker 1: His name upon the board on a clapboard.

36:08 Speaker 2: Right, Everybody was looking for who this.

36:11 Speaker 1: Sky was because it's a j Sands, Jay Sands.

36:15 Speaker 2: But everybody was looking for who this guy was. And they had pictures of all these guys, all right, and not one of them came close, all right, not one of them, I think there was like seven eight pictures. They were just looking for anybody in the government named Jay Sands, and everybody wanted to be the first one. So now they're all circular reporting and jumping on top of each other, and they didn't know who it was until Jay Sands came out himself and said I'm Jay Sands. I'm the one that you're looking for, and then everybody was like oh, and then people started attacking him and going in that direction.

36:47 Speaker 2: Okay, right, So what I would say, it's all about control, it's all about fear. And when these individuals are coming out to say I heard this from my sources, all right, what you should be doing is you should if you hear your favorite reporters saying his sources, you should be keeping a track record on how well his sources have been right to figure out what's what's gonna happen and make an assumption that this person is right or wrong. But there is no you can go ahead, yeah.

37:26 Speaker 5: And you know, I mean, I'll pick something randomly. Jerryman Corbet saying that telling Matthew Brown that when you were in the skiff, you said this and that and that came from that came from my source.

37:44 Speaker 4: In the O d N I.

37:46 Speaker 2: Right, that's not.

37:47 Speaker 4: A big group of people.

37:49 Speaker 2: Nope.

37:50 Speaker 4: And so if I'm the d.

37:51 Speaker 10: N I, and maybe maybe I'm just old fashioned, you know, maybe I come well, I came up about a generation after you in the military, so or less than a generation.

38:04 Speaker 4: You know, our service records overlap.

38:07 Speaker 5: But if I'm the O d N I and I hear on a podcast somebody that was in the skiff with Matthew Brown picked up the phone and called Jeremy Corbell, I would assume the O.

38:21 Speaker 11: D and I pretty has a pretty good idea of who was in that skiff, Yes, and would probably be obligated to launch it, to.

38:36 Speaker 12: Launch a counterintelligence investigation and see somebody probably go to jail realistically if they took information that was inside a skiff conveyed it to a reporter.

38:51 Speaker 4: Quick. Just for the record, was Matthew Brown skiff that skiff? It was?

38:58 Speaker 2: But he's given he's given you an example.

39:00 Speaker 1: No, no, no, but he had said it was. The story though, the one that came out on the podcast was you have everything right. You just said Matthew Brown was in the skiff, But it was Borland that was in the skiff, and then they conveyed that Borland had given him Project Rubik's Cube.

39:17 Speaker 4: I was talking more about Matthew.

39:21 Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, okay, I see what you're saying.

39:28 Speaker 13: Sorry, but you know, and again not that we would see somebody getting tired, right, they wanted to have a public you know, firing of this individual. But it sort of behooves logic that somebody in that kind of position would make such a move.

39:49 Speaker 5: Knowing that those consequences exist. And not only that, but people would do it over and over again because somebody like Jeremy constantly says, my sources.

40:02 Speaker 4: In this tells me that right once we're Moorland. He does it once with this.

40:07 Speaker 8: So that either says, really my analytical read, either you're full of shit and you're making up that sources tell you something, or that there is.

40:22 Speaker 12: Such incoonfidence in the office of the in the ODN.

40:26 Speaker 4: I that.

40:29 Speaker 8: So there's there's all of those things that a skiff's supposed to do.

40:34 Speaker 4: Doesn't matter because you can.

40:38 Speaker 2: I think I can help you here. One, there's an assumption that everything that is said in the skiff is classified and it's not all right. So there's that. Two you got to go. Is the thing that they're particularly talking about. Is it classified right? And to what level right? Especially if it's you know, you know, grave damage is really grave? Do you know all the stuff that they tell you? Now, the other side of the coin is if I'm an OD and I and Matthew or Dylan are in an area, the other question is how many people are in that skiff when that thing is set, because now that would probably set off an investigation that says we've got fifteen people that we need to monitor to figure out what the hell is going on that may or may not happen, you know, because depending on what's going on, we've kind of set up the military kind of like James Orwell's nineteen eighty four, where we're all watching each other.

41:31 Speaker 2: Okay, we're looking for each other to make a mistake in somebody else to get ahead. But the question is what is being said, how it's said, is it classified, who's got the responsibility? And how many people are there? And then the OD and I probably just gets a report that says all these people were in a room when such and such a X, Y and Z, and then they're going to have to make a decision on who who's the you know, who's the proper ci guy to go investigate this and to what level and all those other things.

42:02 Speaker 2: So there could be a lot of things that are in play that we don't know about.

42:06 Speaker 5: But just and just to be argumentative, just from a professional a standard of professional by what you're saying is that, you know, somebody said, if I'm inside of the skiff and somebody in there just thinks on an asshole, that it's all right for them to leave the skiff.

42:27 Speaker 4: And pick up a phone and call a reporter and say, yeah, that jeans thicker is a real asshole.

42:34 Speaker 2: Here's what he said.

42:35 Speaker 4: Classified.

42:37 Speaker 2: It could be on either side. But first of all, that should not be going on all right. But depending on what was said and where it pertains, and as long as they don't believe it will come back on them. People some people will talk other people they're you know, the people I was around for, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't talk.

42:57 Speaker 1: All right, Are we are we surprised?

43:00 Speaker 2: Yeah?

43:02 Speaker 1: Is it surprising to anybody?

43:05 Speaker 4: One?

43:05 Speaker 5: More text that came in from a gym, and Jim wanted to ask, with all of your experience in error, with all of the assessments.

43:14 Speaker 4: That you've been able to make.

43:16 Speaker 5: That you've constantly been into all of this classified information.

43:24 Speaker 4: What's your favorite color?

43:27 Speaker 2: Favorite color is black? Yeah. Yeah, So I'll leave you with this one. I leave you with this one bit of information type your mother. Yeah. So there's there's one thing I've been trying to get everybody to realize, and that is several of us in the community we all believe joking here, we all believe there was a deliberate attempt around the world to go to schools from the late nineteen fifty to the late nineteen nineties.

44:08 Speaker 1: Gifted program.

44:11 Speaker 2: Some say it's the gifted programs, some say it's not. But the idea is I think so, I think there's two programs. I think the Gifted program is something internally that might have been us trying to figure out who's what we're whenning how can you? Yeah, yeah, but I think this one.

44:31 Speaker 14: You've heard of mon talk, yes, yeah, I know, stranger things and all those Yeah yeah, but the other side of this was just a deliberate attempt just to show up to schools and let themselves be seen.

44:47 Speaker 1: And oh, you're talking about the Nhi not even that. Oh Okay, I'm sorry.

44:53 Speaker 2: There's just been an attempt where these things show up at schools so kids see them, they land, they step out of the craft, the kids see them, and now it's like.

45:02 Speaker 1: Oh yeah, like the aerial school, Just.

45:04 Speaker 2: Like the aerial school, but in you know, England several times, France several times, Switzerland several times, Australia, Africa, different places, all these places, there was some type of deliberate attempt to reach out to the kids. Now, maybe it could have been that while they were in around those kids, they could have activated stuff to move them up to a higher vibrational level to wait, maybe where the gifted program could have said, hey, get that kid. Whatever. But the thing is there was a deliberate attempt and we don't know what for, but we're the assumption, the guessing hypotheses theories is that they wanted themselves to be seen so that when they probably come back, this is not an ontological shock to those individuals because they're already being prepared, they've already seen them, they've already accepted things.

45:56 Speaker 1: You know that this you're gonna have like an ambassador.

45:59 Speaker 2: Right, it could be one of those kids. We don't know, all right, but the fact that there was a deliberate attempt and some people are saying it's going to start over again. I'm like, okay, how do you know that. Don't get any you know, people are guessing whatever. But the fact that it was done once definitely means it could be done again.

46:16 Speaker 1: Well, you know It's weird to me is that, like I said, every culture they always have this story of beings that either came from the sky or benevolent ones came, yeah, came after disaster like quet sequado. Like there's so many difference. You know, yes, stories, but you know.

46:42 Speaker 3: They always don't know and this is what I'm saying, or.

46:47 Speaker 1: They're always saying they're going to return. And clearly documented evidence has suggested a ramp up in sightings in interactions over the past one hundred ninety years. Right, could we argue that either we're able to record more whatever it is, there's been more interaction. And what if they were always talking about this time when we reached the AI, when we reach the nuclear again, they know they're not working on linear time like we are, right, so they know exactly when they're coming back.

47:22 Speaker 2: They're just waiting, Yeah, convergence, So things coming together at exactly particular particular time. You know, AI, there's the wars going on, all these different things, and maybe you know it's pulls itself up and say hey, I'm your savior whatever, and yeah, we don't know, we don't. But the idea is, we're noticing things now, and the idea is to document these things so that we're ready or as ready as we can be.

47:52 Speaker 1: I agree, and I think you're helping getting the word right world ready again. I'll put the link for your app in the description below. Thank you for doing this rapid section anytime, so I'd love to I'd love to follow up when you pull it back in. I'd love to follow up when possible, you know, keep continuing to start.

48:15 Speaker 2: Getting data in the app. There's gonna I I truly believe there's gonna be some compelling data in there. And then the idea is to share the word, get the word out, and you know, come talk to you and say hey, because it could be as simple as hey, I've got this video. It's available on my app for everybody to see. Please review it and let me know if you've seen something like this before, come forward, talk to us. Whatever was your experience just you saw it, or was there something that happened after, you know, And it could be something as simple as that, it could be something else, you know, you know that other people have experienced.

48:54 Speaker 2: But the idea is we've got to start documenting things. And the US is it's probably in a bad place because we're such an open society. We get to open our kimono, and but the Russians and the Chinese don't because there are more of a more controlled society. So we have to figure it out as we go.

49:11 Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree. Couldn't have said that better myself actually, So we will see you soon. Thank you again for doing this. Thank you for your service to this country. Thank you, Jean, Thank you veto other puppy logan, great job you laid around wonderfully today into the studio Ghost. We'll catch you next time, Fred, Fred, Yeah, we'll catch you next time. I'll stay humble, stay kind, and most supportantly stated