UNITED STATES HAS BREACHED THE INSIDE OF A UFO- Jim Lecatski- Colm Kelleher & George Knapp- SPECIAL PRESENTATION

0:00 Speaker 1: Okay, but the real men in black? Are we talking

0:03 Speaker 1: about humans or non human intelligence? So what is the

0:06 Speaker 1: real men in black compared to just government agents being,

0:09 Speaker 1: you know, interrogating people.

0:12 Speaker 2: I think there's enough evidence in the literature to indicate

0:16 Speaker 2: that the phenomenon may be associated with some cases of

0:22 Speaker 2: what we call men in black.

0:25 Speaker 3: But what are they?

0:28 Speaker 4: Secrets?

0:29 Speaker 5: Cover ups and strange phenomena.

0:31 Speaker 1: UFOs and ideas that challenge reality itself, all these mysteries,

0:36 Speaker 1: all this time, We're ever going to get to the

0:38 Speaker 1: bottom of these.

0:39 Speaker 5: My name is George Knapp. I dig into news stories

0:42 Speaker 5: that others can't or won't.

0:44 Speaker 1: I'm Jeremy Corbel, and for some reason people tell me

0:47 Speaker 1: things they probably shouldn't.

0:50 Speaker 3: And this is we weaponize.

0:55 Speaker 1: All right, you guys, welcome to weaponize. We had some

0:57 Speaker 1: technological problems. I'm going to blame that on George Napp.

1:00 Speaker 1: But we have a great episode with doctor James Lukatski

1:03 Speaker 1: doctor Colin Kelliherb talking about the UFO programs and their

1:08 Speaker 1: new book which is inside the US Government cover UFO

1:11 Speaker 1: program Initial Revelations.

1:13 Speaker 3: So jumping on in with all you all, here we go.

1:17 Speaker 6: Jim Mkatski.

1:19 Speaker 7: It's so great to have you and column here to

1:21 Speaker 7: talk about as APP for the benefit of our audience

1:24 Speaker 7: that does not understand the difference between ASAPP and a TIP.

1:28 Speaker 7: Your new book inside the US government covert UFO program

1:31 Speaker 7: initial revelations really draws a distinction. And it's not bashing

1:36 Speaker 7: a TIP. It's not going after lou Elizondo or showing differences,

1:41 Speaker 7: But there were distinct differences between those two programs. Can

1:44 Speaker 7: you outline for our audience, those who are not aware

1:47 Speaker 7: of what each of those acronyms mean, what the difference was.

1:52 Speaker 8: Well.

1:53 Speaker 6: The Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications Program was basically created

2:02 Speaker 6: between myself and Senator Read at the Defense Intelligence Agency.

2:08 Speaker 6: It was a twenty two million dollar program. It had

2:13 Speaker 6: the capability of going five years. We completed our objectives

2:18 Speaker 6: in two years. You might say it was test of

2:24 Speaker 6: various components of a UFO UAP paranormal research program. Right

2:31 Speaker 6: from the beginning. It included all aspects of both the

2:35 Speaker 6: UFOs and the paranormal in relationship to UFOs. It was

2:43 Speaker 6: a contract that would put out on the Internet. It

2:46 Speaker 6: had a quick turnaround because of the funding mechanism. The

2:50 Speaker 6: first year was ten million dollars. The second year was

2:53 Speaker 6: twelve million dollars and gut it out. We had numerous

3:03 Speaker 6: interested parties who wished to bid on the contract, but

3:07 Speaker 6: following the regulations, it first had to go to small businesses. Well,

3:13 Speaker 6: the only small business we found small businesses that were

3:17 Speaker 6: capable of bidding on it, but they chose not to.

3:22 Speaker 6: Bob Bigelow's bass created specifically and that was so important

3:27 Speaker 6: to DiiA specifically to address our needs in this program.

3:33 Speaker 8: And when I say needs, we.

3:35 Speaker 6: Used a new method of putting out this request for proposal.

3:40 Speaker 6: We did not tell the contractor the bidder what to do.

3:46 Speaker 6: We said, this is what we wanted achieved, how would

3:51 Speaker 6: you do it? And that's how this program was created

3:55 Speaker 6: and had specifically all the right components.

4:00 Speaker 1: Let me back up a little bit, just for our listeners,

4:02 Speaker 1: people that are listening, and also just for the visual

4:04 Speaker 1: audience here, doctor Lekatski. First of all, in December twenty seventeen,

4:10 Speaker 1: the world learned that there was a UFO study program

4:14 Speaker 1: and that was funded for twenty two million dollars. They

4:17 Speaker 1: heard that that program was called a TIP. But what

4:20 Speaker 1: you've told us is that no, you ran the program.

4:23 Speaker 1: The DIA for studying UFOs and it was called Awest

4:27 Speaker 1: Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program. So you're talking now

4:33 Speaker 1: about a government study, a UFO program studying all the

4:37 Speaker 1: physics and the nature of UFOs up to date. And

4:41 Speaker 1: so you're kind of coming forward with these books with

4:44 Speaker 1: doctor kellaher and George Knapp, and you're laying it out

4:48 Speaker 1: for people.

4:48 Speaker 3: This is what we did, this is how we did it.

4:51 Speaker 1: We don't want it to get messed up, you know,

4:54 Speaker 1: we want to tell you what happened.

4:56 Speaker 3: It's a big deal. It's a big.

4:58 Speaker 1: Deal that you're speaking to us right now, as you know,

5:01 Speaker 1: someone from the DIA who studied the UFOs. So, I

5:05 Speaker 1: guess the question for me, you know, for me, very

5:08 Speaker 1: simple audience kind of might want to know, is that

5:11 Speaker 1: when that came out December twenty seventeen and you didn't see,

5:15 Speaker 1: you know, your program named there. I mean, what is that?

5:18 Speaker 1: What does that feel like? Are you doing this because

5:20 Speaker 1: you want to clarify the record to the.

5:22 Speaker 6: Public exactly, and we stated that clearly and skin Walkers

5:27 Speaker 6: at the Pentagon we want to clarify the record. Now

5:30 Speaker 6: we're giving the details of the record. Now the thing

5:34 Speaker 6: is is a tip. The name itself. I did not

5:41 Speaker 6: create that name, but it was created for a specific reason.

5:45 Speaker 6: I don't think that's ever been printed. It was done, yes,

5:49 Speaker 6: since Senator Reads's letter asking for special access program. That's

5:53 Speaker 6: been out in the press for what five years now?

5:57 Speaker 6: But where did the need for different name come from?

6:02 Speaker 6: It came from which took me by surprise when I

6:05 Speaker 6: saw the funding someone in other words, the notification of

6:11 Speaker 6: funding that yes, DIA was getting this money. It was

6:16 Speaker 6: on a piece of paper that had highly classified programs

6:20 Speaker 6: listed on the rest of the paper, and someone in

6:24 Speaker 6: Congress put secret on the program name. And it's very

6:30 Speaker 6: abbreviated contents that were on that document. I did not

6:36 Speaker 6: want to get us crossways with any security considerations. I

6:41 Speaker 6: wanted a different name. Now, I believe that who we

6:46 Speaker 6: called Axelrod or perhaps Luellason, or perhaps some of their coports,

6:52 Speaker 6: and maybe all of them came up with the name

6:54 Speaker 6: a tip. That name would have been a great problem

6:59 Speaker 6: for DIA. Because OSAP routed the money to the Defense

7:04 Speaker 6: Warning Office of da period, it had to be that name.

7:10 Speaker 6: So the contract may have been called that too, because

7:15 Speaker 6: that's what we put the open solicitation that can still

7:20 Speaker 6: be found on the internet. And I've repeated in skin

7:26 Speaker 6: Walkers at the Pentagon of a concise amount of material

7:31 Speaker 6: as to what we requested. But that's where the name

7:35 Speaker 6: a tip came from. A tip was something that was

7:40 Speaker 6: necessary to be proceeded with on military cases. Lou handled

7:47 Speaker 6: that I was not proven because it was mainly spun

7:51 Speaker 6: up as I was getting ready to retire. I will

7:55 Speaker 6: say this though, that when I left, all of our

8:00 Speaker 6: references were electronically specifically scanned in electronically at DiiA. Now

8:08 Speaker 6: I can't say what happened in the years since I

8:11 Speaker 6: retired in twenty sixteen. It could have been at they're purge,

8:16 Speaker 6: but they weren't physical records. So I don't see why

8:20 Speaker 6: there is a problem and people asking for them except

8:25 Speaker 6: for the fact, and this is why these books are required.

8:30 Speaker 6: Most of them were proprietary. Remember they were monthly reports

8:35 Speaker 6: from the contractor and specialized studies. They had people's names,

8:43 Speaker 6: contractor names, the facilities that were being bought and constructed,

8:53 Speaker 6: They had security information. They had all of this and

8:58 Speaker 6: I have already told I wasn't asked to have these

9:03 Speaker 6: documents clean for release. But the proprietary information is so much,

9:10 Speaker 6: I said preemptively, I wouldn't take on that job. It's

9:15 Speaker 6: just too much. We're doing it in this manner so

9:19 Speaker 6: the public knows what went on in that program within

9:24 Speaker 6: the constraints of security. I hope that answers your question.

9:28 Speaker 6: Because a TIP was a specialized, small program. It had

9:34 Speaker 6: access i'm sure to funds that I also had access to,

9:38 Speaker 6: but use on this program of where we can go

9:40 Speaker 6: out and let's say, review facilities at DIA. I used

9:47 Speaker 6: them to review missile contractors, in other words, so I

9:52 Speaker 6: could learn the nuts and bolts. But money i'm sure

9:55 Speaker 6: was available for a TIP nowhere near twenty two million dollar.

10:00 Speaker 3: That's really helpful.

10:01 Speaker 1: So George, we're talking about that, like how ATIP kept

10:04 Speaker 1: its legs because it was heroic an attempt to kind

10:07 Speaker 1: of continue it. The fact there was money available wasn't

10:11 Speaker 1: out of the twenty two million, and we're making that clear.

10:14 Speaker 1: It was misreported in the New York Times. You know, however,

10:18 Speaker 1: it is nice to know that, you know, somehow how

10:20 Speaker 1: they got, you know, any funding to do the work

10:22 Speaker 1: they were doing.

10:24 Speaker 6: Yes, and I was aware of some of the programs

10:27 Speaker 6: that the cases that they were looking into, and I

10:31 Speaker 6: can say without going into detail because it's classified endeavor.

10:38 Speaker 6: I was fascinated by one of their cases because it's

10:42 Speaker 6: a repeat from the sixties. And if you go through

10:47 Speaker 6: our databases, you're going to see cases where people playing

10:51 Speaker 6: Wait a minute, I saw the same UFO when I

10:54 Speaker 6: was twenty years younger, and those cases kind of fascinate me.

10:59 Speaker 6: How how can that be? At least are we talking

11:03 Speaker 6: about time machines? Well, what are we talking about? But

11:08 Speaker 6: you will find that another fascinating point of our huge

11:12 Speaker 6: database is it would be the equivalent of us going

11:16 Speaker 6: out for a drive in our car and every car

11:19 Speaker 6: and truck we meet on the road is of a

11:21 Speaker 6: different design. I mean to me that that's an interesting

11:26 Speaker 6: insight because when people make up charts and we have

11:29 Speaker 6: a nice one of all the configurations of the UFOs,

11:35 Speaker 6: and those are main configurations, like triangle. There are very

11:40 Speaker 6: many variants of triangles, it's like, how can this be?

11:47 Speaker 6: I mean, it's like, certainly we're doing things exactly the opposite.

11:51 Speaker 6: In the auto industry, every suv looks like every other suv.

11:55 Speaker 6: You have to look at the name badge in order

11:58 Speaker 6: to tell what what brand is. That I like it

12:02 Speaker 6: or I dislike it, but right now I like them

12:06 Speaker 6: all mainly because they all look alike.

12:09 Speaker 8: In the UFO is totally the opposite.

12:13 Speaker 7: There's one particular UFO design that gets discussed in the

12:18 Speaker 7: book that you reveal and if you blink.

12:22 Speaker 4: You'll miss it.

12:23 Speaker 7: But it's maybe the most controversial and important piece of

12:28 Speaker 7: information that this book conveys. You say something at the

12:32 Speaker 7: beginning of chapter nine about a craft of unknown origin

12:36 Speaker 7: that our government access finally access the inside. Can you

12:41 Speaker 7: share with us what's in the book and is there

12:44 Speaker 7: anything else you can add to that?

12:46 Speaker 6: Well, what's in the book is an exact statement of

12:50 Speaker 6: the event that occurred in the let's say, in a

12:57 Speaker 6: congressional facility. There was more to it, considerably more to

13:04 Speaker 6: that discussion about what this situation was. We can't go

13:10 Speaker 6: into that because it's and when I mean Colin and I, yes,

13:17 Speaker 6: we know about it. People are interested in it, I'm

13:21 Speaker 6: quite sure. But security has to trump everything else. A

13:27 Speaker 6: lot of things can be said this book, as with

13:30 Speaker 6: Skinwalkers at De Pentagon, I keep flashing. The book basically

13:37 Speaker 6: was reviewed by the Department of Defense, were released and approved.

13:41 Speaker 6: The wording that's in it the wording. If we varied

13:45 Speaker 6: that wording, we get back. This was a seven month review.

13:49 Speaker 6: This was quick. DoD on Skinwalkers at the Pentagon took

13:54 Speaker 6: fourteen months to review that book, and there was I

14:02 Speaker 6: agree with all of the changes on both of these

14:04 Speaker 6: books I agreed with except for one. I made the

14:08 Speaker 6: fatal mistake of complimenting the help from a non DoD organization,

14:16 Speaker 6: and it was WHOA, we can't do that. We've got

14:19 Speaker 6: to align that out. And so that was the only

14:23 Speaker 6: thing that was a straight line OUTDOD helped us reward

14:27 Speaker 6: things by their security regulations, and so you're getting as

14:32 Speaker 6: much as we can, say, Jeremy.

14:34 Speaker 3: Hold on, hold on, hold on.

14:36 Speaker 1: So for our audience, this listening is George is dropped

14:39 Speaker 1: in Adam Baum because it was dropped.

14:40 Speaker 3: In the book. So audience is just listening.

14:42 Speaker 1: I'm going to read you something beginning of chapter nine,

14:45 Speaker 1: at the conclusion of a twenty eleven meeting in the

14:48 Speaker 1: Capitol Building with a US Senator and an Agency under secretary,

14:52 Speaker 1: let Katski, the only one of the books authors present

14:56 Speaker 1: post a question. But this is where it gets good,

15:00 Speaker 1: he stated, meaning you, doctor Lakatski, that the United States

15:04 Speaker 1: was in possession of a craft of unknown origin and

15:08 Speaker 1: had successfully gained access to its interior. This craft had

15:13 Speaker 1: a streamlined configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight, but no intakes, exhaust, wings,

15:21 Speaker 1: or control surfaces. In fact, it appeared not to have

15:25 Speaker 1: an engine, fuel tanks, or fuel. Now there's the next part,

15:29 Speaker 1: which I'll read in a minute. But what this is

15:32 Speaker 1: is you're officially allowed to tell us that the United

15:36 Speaker 1: States government has in its possession a craft of unknown

15:38 Speaker 1: origin and you were able to access the inside.

15:42 Speaker 3: Is that correct?

15:44 Speaker 8: The wording that you're you read is correct. Ah, you're

15:49 Speaker 8: going beyond the wording.

15:51 Speaker 3: No, I'm not, I'm not.

15:51 Speaker 1: I'm asking you did that mind happen?

15:54 Speaker 3: And is it true? And it's true?

15:58 Speaker 1: You're telling us you told us because you were allowed

16:02 Speaker 1: to tell us that our government has a UF on

16:04 Speaker 1: it's possession and has been able to access the inside

16:07 Speaker 1: of it. Right, Yes, well.

16:12 Speaker 8: I was allowed to tell you.

16:14 Speaker 6: Let me show in the back of the book.

16:15 Speaker 3: This is George. Yes, we translate George.

16:20 Speaker 7: Let's let's try another tack. How do we know it's

16:23 Speaker 7: a craft and not a doorstop? We accessed it. It

16:26 Speaker 7: has no engine, it has no wings, no, no, no fuel.

16:29 Speaker 2: It doesn't. We don't know that it travels.

16:32 Speaker 7: Do we know it's a craft or it's just a rock?

16:36 Speaker 6: George, You're you're going into the further discussion that occurred

16:39 Speaker 6: that day. All right, we can't. We can't go there,

16:44 Speaker 6: but let me tell you we're going to try to

16:47 Speaker 6: cover that in the future. But it's it's delicate. It's

16:51 Speaker 6: it's it makes it. I've described and here look primitive.

17:00 Speaker 3: Of Why is it delicate? Why is this topic?

17:03 Speaker 1: The United States government has a uf PHONEUS possession and

17:05 Speaker 1: we've been reverse engineering it.

17:07 Speaker 3: You've done admitted. Why is it delicate?

17:11 Speaker 8: The details you I'm old school.

17:15 Speaker 6: I'll use the term I won't use the term adversary

17:19 Speaker 6: competitor as the as the way we describe we are

17:24 Speaker 6: surrounded maybe not surrounded, but hopefully uh not so by

17:31 Speaker 6: our enemies and our enemies. You can be sure they're

17:35 Speaker 6: listening to this show right now. You can be sure

17:39 Speaker 6: that they were monitoring us out. You can be sure

17:43 Speaker 6: that perhaps they had employees, hopefully not in GIA, but

17:51 Speaker 6: in the contractor part that was we're giving out information

17:57 Speaker 6: for I am, I am I know that. So the

18:02 Speaker 6: thing is is we can't say anything more than what

18:05 Speaker 6: we've been approved to say. And there's insight to this,

18:10 Speaker 6: but I want to, I want to, I want to

18:13 Speaker 6: shift it just slightly, but it shows my point. Skinwalkers

18:18 Speaker 6: at the Pentagon and Initial Revelations, if I might use

18:21 Speaker 6: the shorter title on this new book has not what

18:26 Speaker 6: I would call zingers in it, but has some interesting

18:31 Speaker 6: doors that have not been even mentioned.

18:36 Speaker 8: One why was this program started?

18:40 Speaker 3: Two?

18:42 Speaker 6: Why was this program ended? And we've raised this partially

18:46 Speaker 6: and skin Walkers at the Pentagon did it end? Also,

18:52 Speaker 6: we had a chapter in skin Walkers at the Pentagon

18:54 Speaker 6: where we met with a high level Brazilian official at

18:58 Speaker 6: a meeting, started introducing some of our cohorts, and no

19:03 Speaker 6: one ever asked us.

19:05 Speaker 8: Why did you have that meeting? What was so important

19:08 Speaker 8: about that meeting?

19:10 Speaker 6: You know, there's a lot of material in there that,

19:15 Speaker 6: as Kit Green, Doctor Kit Green, one of our consultants

19:18 Speaker 6: on the OFFSET program, said, read between the lines that

19:24 Speaker 6: applies both to skin Walkers at the Pentagon and Initial Revelations.

19:29 Speaker 6: Read between the lines. Now you may come to the

19:32 Speaker 6: wrong conclusions. And I can tell you on the topics

19:35 Speaker 6: I just raid read. You don't have enough information to

19:38 Speaker 6: come to the correct answers.

19:42 Speaker 1: Okay, so so why sorry, go ahead, go ahead, Jeremy. So,

19:45 Speaker 1: so why why did the you're asking one big question

19:48 Speaker 1: people should ask is why was the UFO program started?

19:51 Speaker 1: Maybe you can't tell the full story, but give us

19:53 Speaker 1: a hint. Why was the UFO program started? You said,

19:56 Speaker 1: that's important.

19:59 Speaker 6: I can't do that without without documenting more in getting approval.

20:05 Speaker 3: I mean, you just can't do that. I know, Jeremy.

20:09 Speaker 6: You and I have met previously several times, and you

20:13 Speaker 6: want the bottom line. But the bottom line may not.

20:17 Speaker 6: Let me just give you the bottom line may not

20:20 Speaker 6: be what you anticipate. In other words, there may be

20:24 Speaker 6: no bottom line. There may be multiple bottom lines. And

20:31 Speaker 6: we've got a lot of work. You know, if ARROW

20:34 Speaker 6: is going to move forward from this point, they've got

20:37 Speaker 6: a lot more work to do.

20:39 Speaker 1: Why One of the questions that you pose to us

20:44 Speaker 1: just now was why was the program started? Okay, you

20:48 Speaker 1: can't answer that. But another question you're saying people should

20:51 Speaker 1: ask is why did you do all the defense intelligence

20:55 Speaker 1: reference documents? So can you answer that? Why did you

20:59 Speaker 1: do all those past intelligence reference documents?

21:02 Speaker 8: And the answer is no, I can't answer that.

21:04 Speaker 6: Because that that would that that would be an answer

21:08 Speaker 6: that would just floor people.

21:12 Speaker 8: Really, yes, the real answer.

21:16 Speaker 6: And by the way, I I don't know whether there's

21:21 Speaker 6: ever been real criticism, but they're kind of has by

21:24 Speaker 6: the nature of some of these topics. We solicited the

21:29 Speaker 6: input for the topics for the thirty eight papers from

21:33 Speaker 6: Air Force Intelligence, CIA, naval intelligence, and ground intelligence. That

21:43 Speaker 6: those are the topics they chose to do, but they

21:47 Speaker 6: were completely legitimate at the time, and by the way,

21:51 Speaker 6: they're pretty close to state of the art right now. Okay,

21:56 Speaker 6: So that's one thing I would like to say about

21:59 Speaker 6: the timing of our program, or the timelessness. If this

22:06 Speaker 6: program ast you know, the physics would have been different

22:09 Speaker 6: back in the in the fifties and sixties, or if

22:12 Speaker 6: this was being done in the two thousand and seventies

22:16 Speaker 6: and eighties. What is being covered in this book and

22:21 Speaker 6: what an Arrow has been mandated to do by Congress

22:25 Speaker 6: is timeless. In other words, you will be doing the

22:30 Speaker 6: same thing regardless of the time frame. It's just that

22:34 Speaker 6: I'm sure configurations, if there are any further configurations there

22:39 Speaker 6: could possibly be of craft will be available in the future.

22:43 Speaker 6: But you know, triangles have been seen back into the sixties,

22:47 Speaker 6: and I'm sure we'll be seen into the future. Flying saucers.

22:53 Speaker 6: Even craft that look like something from the Jetsons have

22:57 Speaker 6: been seen, you know, the alling saucer with a big

23:01 Speaker 6: bubble on it with with occupants. That's all the same.

23:05 Speaker 6: In other words, if if if you look at as

23:08 Speaker 6: At and study what's in aus At and try to

23:10 Speaker 6: answer some of the questions, you're you're you're not wasting

23:19 Speaker 6: your time. In other words, there there there there's a

23:24 Speaker 6: timelessness to it.

23:28 Speaker 3: All right.

23:28 Speaker 1: So we hit some we hit some technical problems, which

23:32 Speaker 1: is not strange for us, but we got we got

23:35 Speaker 1: George Knapp here on the phone, and we're just getting uh,

23:39 Speaker 1: you know, back down to the point. So George was

23:40 Speaker 1: asking you help me. This guy Lakatski, he's being a

23:43 Speaker 1: little dodgy as a reporter.

23:45 Speaker 3: I can't nail him down.

23:46 Speaker 1: We're talking about why these why our government would or

23:51 Speaker 1: why he can't talk more about this. So Jared, I

23:53 Speaker 1: don't know how about George.

23:55 Speaker 5: Well, Jim is the rocket Gibraltar. He's not going to

23:58 Speaker 5: answer that question for you. If he's decided not to

24:01 Speaker 5: answer it, he's not gone out. I was thinking maybe

24:04 Speaker 5: there's another way in we can go around the corner here.

24:07 Speaker 5: Let's start with column column. This book is so much

24:11 Speaker 5: different from skin Walkers at the Pentagon, and that was

24:14 Speaker 5: not an idle decision.

24:16 Speaker 4: Jim had used the phrase.

24:18 Speaker 5: Earlier in this conversation nuts and bolts, which you will recall.

24:23 Speaker 5: You and I were kicking around ideas for a possible

24:26 Speaker 5: title for.

24:27 Speaker 4: The book, and nuts and bolts.

24:28 Speaker 5: Came up, but we didn't think that having the word

24:31 Speaker 5: nuts in a UFO book was a good idea.

24:35 Speaker 3: You know. The point is, you know that.

24:38 Speaker 5: First Skinwalkers at the Pentagon had a lot of weird stuff,

24:41 Speaker 5: and people think, well, maybe we made a mistake by

24:44 Speaker 5: including all those stories of strange paranormal type events that

24:49 Speaker 5: were highly criticized, But in fact that was part of

24:52 Speaker 5: the focus of os APP. Why this different approach to

24:57 Speaker 5: this time? What distinction is.

24:58 Speaker 4: Being made here?

25:01 Speaker 2: Well, the critical part of ALLSAP that we tried to

25:05 Speaker 2: convey in skin Markers at the Pentagon was that there

25:09 Speaker 2: were two fundamental parallel tracks that ALLSAP ran on. The

25:15 Speaker 2: first one was the examination of UFO performance, and you know,

25:21 Speaker 2: the UFO performance part was getting all of the data

25:27 Speaker 2: from eyewitnesses plus deploying sensors into the field in order

25:32 Speaker 2: to gather data on the performance of UFOs. That was

25:37 Speaker 2: track number one, and track number two was what effects

25:41 Speaker 2: do UFOs have on humans? That was a parallel track

25:46 Speaker 2: that from the get go, ALLSAP decided unambiguously to run

25:51 Speaker 2: both tracks in parallel. Skin Walkers at the Pentagon focused

25:56 Speaker 2: a lot of its reporting on the second part, which

26:00 Speaker 2: is the effects of UFOs on humans, so that, you know,

26:05 Speaker 2: to summarize that book, we looked at a variety of

26:09 Speaker 2: effects on humans that included medical effects. We documented several

26:14 Speaker 2: medical effects, pathological effects, physiological effects you know, people people

26:21 Speaker 2: having weird metallic tastes in their mouth, sometimes hair loss,

26:26 Speaker 2: and a whole bunch of other things. We documented psychological effects,

26:30 Speaker 2: and then we also documented paranormal effects. So all of

26:34 Speaker 2: these under the rubric of you know, effects on humans

26:40 Speaker 2: were reported in skin Walkers of the Pentagon. A lot

26:43 Speaker 2: of the pushback that we got from that book was

26:47 Speaker 2: that these guys were using taxpayers' money to camp out

26:51 Speaker 2: on Skinwalker ranch and you know, basically document dogmen, dino beavers,

26:57 Speaker 2: and a whole bunch of other weird stuff, Whereas in

27:01 Speaker 2: fact that was only a very minor part of the

27:05 Speaker 2: entire ASSOP program. So the purpose of the second book

27:10 Speaker 2: is to balance that whole thing out, and so we

27:13 Speaker 2: we unambiguously focus the reporting on the initial you know,

27:20 Speaker 2: initial revelations. The second book on the nuts and bolts

27:24 Speaker 2: aspects of the UFO phenomenon, which was half of what

27:28 Speaker 2: OSOP was doing. So the purpose of the second book

27:31 Speaker 2: is really to look at the UFO performance angle strictly

27:37 Speaker 2: from the from only the performance angle, you know, things

27:41 Speaker 2: things like you know, lift propulsion, power generation, spatial temporal translation, configuration,

27:51 Speaker 2: a whole bunch of other aspects of UFO performance that

27:55 Speaker 2: is translatable into theoretical physics eventually into engineering. So that's

28:03 Speaker 2: really that.

28:06 Speaker 5: In the only other interview you've given about the OFFSET,

28:10 Speaker 5: you had said that the dirts essentially established.

28:14 Speaker 4: A baseline for analysis.

28:16 Speaker 5: It's a baseline of here's what humans are known to

28:19 Speaker 5: be able to do, here's what we think humans.

28:21 Speaker 4: Will be able to do in fifty years.

28:24 Speaker 5: And when we look at UFO cases that you do

28:26 Speaker 5: in great detail in this book, it is clear that

28:29 Speaker 5: this is technology that we certainly didn't have fifty years ago,

28:33 Speaker 5: that we don't have now, and it's not even clear

28:36 Speaker 5: we will.

28:36 Speaker 4: Have fifty years.

28:37 Speaker 5: Hence this is a nuts and bolts UFO book and

28:42 Speaker 5: it was a nuts and bolts UFO program.

28:44 Speaker 2: Correct, Yes, absolutely correct.

28:48 Speaker 6: Now. The thing is is there have been again on

28:53 Speaker 6: the internet. Because anything can be said on the internet,

28:56 Speaker 6: it seems.

28:57 Speaker 8: Factual or not.

28:58 Speaker 6: Well, one thing that it's not factual is d I

29:03 Speaker 6: a knew what it was getting into in regard to

29:07 Speaker 6: both aspects that column, uh to just describe to you

29:13 Speaker 6: and let me end my statement right here. We had

29:17 Speaker 6: no choice but to pursue both aspects.

29:24 Speaker 9: Why I said, I ended it again. Hey, let me

29:31 Speaker 9: tell you, Jeremy, you cannot compete with some of the

29:34 Speaker 9: offers that have been made to me. I'm joking now,

29:37 Speaker 9: but this is factual. Airplane tickets, UH, speaker presentations, UH,

29:46 Speaker 9: car rentals, hotel rooms pay for you just can't compete.

29:52 Speaker 1: With all that I've done that.

29:57 Speaker 3: But you know what always I am.

30:01 Speaker 1: I am way more handsome and way more charming than

30:03 Speaker 1: any of those.

30:05 Speaker 3: Just spill the thing.

30:06 Speaker 6: The thing is that the bottom line is what they

30:09 Speaker 6: all want. And then when I hear the phone of

30:11 Speaker 6: the being clunked on me, is when I say I

30:15 Speaker 6: cannot go beyond what is stated in the book. Now,

30:19 Speaker 6: of course, now there are two books. I can't go

30:21 Speaker 6: beyond that, because.

30:25 Speaker 3: That's okay. You gave us a great one.

30:27 Speaker 1: You told us US government is interested in UFOs is studying,

30:29 Speaker 1: UFOs has been studying UFOs is reverse engineering. UFOs has

30:33 Speaker 1: one and got inside of one.

30:34 Speaker 8: Oh, thank you, thank you.

30:36 Speaker 1: That's okay. So let me ask you about some current

30:40 Speaker 1: events here. I really want to get your opinion on this.

30:43 Speaker 1: So as we know, we're out in Congress and you

30:47 Speaker 1: saw like everybody else, and in fact, I mean, I'll

30:49 Speaker 1: spill the beans a little bit myself. We were hoping

30:52 Speaker 1: you were going to testify in front of Congress. You didn't,

30:55 Speaker 1: but David Grush did. So I want to ask you

30:57 Speaker 1: your opinion. Here's a guy who said that he was

31:00 Speaker 1: looking at reverse engineering programs, black budget programs and has

31:04 Speaker 1: provided a whistleblower statement through the Presidential Protection Act. Came

31:09 Speaker 1: forward and told us all these things that he believes

31:12 Speaker 1: them to be true from his investigations into forty witnesses,

31:16 Speaker 1: and that has been corroborated by being labeled urgent and

31:20 Speaker 1: credible by our Inspector General of Intelligence. What David Grush said, So,

31:25 Speaker 1: what are your thoughts on David Grush and what he

31:28 Speaker 1: said at that hearing.

31:29 Speaker 6: I don't know mister Grush, never met him. I was

31:36 Speaker 6: asked almost forbade him the same question by a congressional

31:41 Speaker 6: office to me a telephone conversation, and I said, I

31:47 Speaker 6: don't have a comment. What he's saying is credible. Now

31:51 Speaker 6: let me do say one thing that I never witnessed.

31:55 Speaker 6: And I don't know if Colin ever witnessed this, but

31:57 Speaker 6: I never saw any one I would consider illegal activities.

32:02 Speaker 6: I saw security procedures that are paramount, but not illegal activities.

32:08 Speaker 6: So I don't concur with that. But it's reasonable what

32:13 Speaker 6: he's saying. And that's what I told. Okay, it's reasonable.

32:17 Speaker 1: It's reasonable that we have UFOs reverse engineering, that there

32:21 Speaker 1: are biologicals, so they cover biologicals.

32:25 Speaker 8: Because I can't say anything about that.

32:29 Speaker 3: Why can't you say you don't know or.

32:33 Speaker 8: I can't say anything about that, Jeremy.

32:36 Speaker 1: Okay, No, that's great, that's great. So just another question,

32:40 Speaker 1: if you ever.

32:41 Speaker 6: Are loaded with questions because someone criticized me, gave me

32:45 Speaker 6: a three rating on skinwalkers at the Pentagon, why do

32:48 Speaker 6: they read this one. They said, it's textbook like. Well,

32:53 Speaker 6: in a sense they are. They are a learning instrument

32:57 Speaker 6: and one thing. And I don't know if I discussed

33:01 Speaker 6: this with you, Colin, but I was going to put

33:03 Speaker 6: like a textbook questions in the back of each chapter,

33:07 Speaker 6: what did you know? What do you think? And what

33:09 Speaker 6: do you just further? Now, I wasn't going to give

33:12 Speaker 6: an answer sheet to them, but basically, I think that

33:18 Speaker 6: people really need to delve deeper into the books they have.

33:22 Speaker 6: And you know, I personally love hard copies, but at

33:26 Speaker 6: some point it's going to be hard to flip back

33:28 Speaker 6: and forth. You obviously are well doing it well, Jeremy,

33:32 Speaker 6: I always had trouble on an electronic copy of flipping

33:36 Speaker 6: back and forth.

33:37 Speaker 8: I like hard copies.

33:39 Speaker 1: Well, yeah, for sure. Well listen, however you get the

33:43 Speaker 1: information out, it's great. So let me ask you this though.

33:45 Speaker 1: The big the big question with David Grash was they're like, well,

33:48 Speaker 1: he didn't see a ufone. Now you're in a meeting

33:50 Speaker 1: in the Capitol Hill and you're telling them we have

33:53 Speaker 1: a UFO, we've gotten inside of it.

33:54 Speaker 3: Did you see it? Your sound answer that okay, But

33:59 Speaker 3: if the answer was no, oh, you could answer that right.

34:02 Speaker 6: No, that goes back to something that occurred a similar question,

34:08 Speaker 6: very similar to your question, and wasn't asked by you,

34:11 Speaker 6: but it was asked to call him and he said

34:14 Speaker 6: we found no smoking gun. That is the standard answer

34:19 Speaker 6: word to give is. So I could say no, and

34:23 Speaker 6: it's still not be the truth. So the thing is

34:26 Speaker 6: is security is paramount. We followed the rules and there's

34:32 Speaker 6: a good reason, a good reason to follow them.

34:37 Speaker 1: Yeah, you can't tell me that good reason. We've talked

34:39 Speaker 1: about that. You can't give me a reason. You can't

34:42 Speaker 1: give me that good reason. But you're alluding to a

34:45 Speaker 1: really good reason why you can't tell me more about biologics,

34:49 Speaker 1: UFOs exploitation. You could only say what you said. I

34:53 Speaker 1: get that. I wish you could give me a good

34:55 Speaker 1: reason because it makes me very suspicious. It makes people

34:58 Speaker 1: like me very suspicious, Like what is it?

35:00 Speaker 4: Is?

35:01 Speaker 3: The reason? So dark? So dis.

35:05 Speaker 6: If you want my opinion on that, I see no

35:08 Speaker 6: darkness at all here. Basically, there was some considerable write

35:16 Speaker 6: ups on the Skinwalker at the Pentagon that our program

35:20 Speaker 6: was stopped due to religious concerns from the far right. Well,

35:25 Speaker 6: if there were, I knew nothing about that I saw

35:29 Speaker 6: no evidence of that being true. But people can say

35:34 Speaker 6: whatever they want on the internet, apparently, and that that

35:40 Speaker 6: was not that was not. I did not witness any

35:44 Speaker 6: of that, and I think that that's come up in

35:46 Speaker 6: some of these congressional here.

35:50 Speaker 3: Georgia saying somebody in.

35:52 Speaker 5: Skin Walker's at the Pentagon, and column has backed this up.

35:57 Speaker 4: In public statements. Both of you indicated that you.

36:00 Speaker 5: Were on the trail of reverse engineering, crash saucer, meta materials,

36:05 Speaker 5: weird stuff. You went knocking at different places and the

36:09 Speaker 5: door was slammed in your face. That sounds like you

36:11 Speaker 5: were looking for exactly what we're talking about right here.

36:15 Speaker 4: Is that wrong?

36:17 Speaker 6: Of course not that was part of the program. But

36:21 Speaker 6: I'm saying the door being slammed in our face wasn't

36:24 Speaker 6: because of suspected demonic activities within this at all. In fact,

36:33 Speaker 6: I would say there's evidence that this is something of

36:40 Speaker 6: a nature that well, I better not say much more.

36:46 Speaker 6: It's if full human capabilities were known to us right now.

36:52 Speaker 6: It is not such something that we need to fear,

36:56 Speaker 6: and I do not. I just don't believe it. Maybe

37:01 Speaker 6: I'm influenced by my Catholic faith. I don't know. But

37:04 Speaker 6: I'm optimistic. I think everything heads toward good.

37:10 Speaker 3: What do you mean by if full human capabilities were.

37:13 Speaker 6: Understood any Uh, We'll get into.

37:19 Speaker 8: That later, at some later point.

37:21 Speaker 6: But our capabilities is call him well knows, he's probably

37:25 Speaker 6: an expert in all of these areas more so than

37:28 Speaker 6: me is. Our capabilities are are are have never been

37:37 Speaker 6: fully revealed, and we're still learning. We've done a long

37:41 Speaker 6: way to evolve.

37:42 Speaker 3: Still, George, what were you saying?

37:46 Speaker 5: Well, there are two questions I've asked, and neither one

37:49 Speaker 5: of them were answered. But the first one was were

37:52 Speaker 5: the dirts established as a baseline, because that's.

37:54 Speaker 4: What has been said before. They were a base.

37:59 Speaker 6: That's still other babilities are yes, through baseline.

38:03 Speaker 2: Well, they're a baseline, but also the purpose of them

38:09 Speaker 2: was to project forty to fifty years out in the

38:12 Speaker 2: future in terms of the best known project projections by

38:18 Speaker 2: the sort of the best people at hand. So they

38:21 Speaker 2: were a baseline, but they were also projecting into the

38:25 Speaker 2: future so that there would be an attempt to look

38:28 Speaker 2: at UFO performance and then mary those to the projections,

38:34 Speaker 2: the baseline projections.

38:37 Speaker 5: All right, Well, the second part of the question was

38:39 Speaker 5: do we not in fact reporting skinwalkers at the Pentagon

38:42 Speaker 5: that you guys went knocking on doors asking about these materials,

38:46 Speaker 5: the materials, and I'm assuming we're talking about crash saucer

38:50 Speaker 5: type stuff that was part of what the best Plant

38:55 Speaker 5: was modified to receive. That was part of the contract

38:57 Speaker 5: that where you were, you were asked to paired to

39:00 Speaker 5: receive your materials that you never got and you went

39:03 Speaker 5: looking for them and that's when the door was slammed

39:05 Speaker 5: in your face. Colum am I characterizing that incorrectly.

39:09 Speaker 2: Well slightly because the people who were moving forward on

39:16 Speaker 2: that were not They were working with the ASSOP program,

39:20 Speaker 2: but they weren't part of the allstop program.

39:25 Speaker 4: And George incorrect that you guys are looking for stuff.

39:30 Speaker 8: Remember George's multiple doors.

39:34 Speaker 6: There are always multiple ways of doing things. So just

39:38 Speaker 6: because a door was slammed in our face, Uh, is

39:44 Speaker 6: that a common expression that we're using? Is that all

39:48 Speaker 6: we can say? Remember, I and Colin became this are

39:55 Speaker 6: experts at taking higher classification material and describing it at

40:01 Speaker 6: lower classifications. There is no contradiction between the two. It's

40:07 Speaker 6: just that the lower classification isn't complete. And I can

40:10 Speaker 6: tell you there's a lot of material here in both books.

40:15 Speaker 6: It's not complete and it can't be at this point.

40:19 Speaker 5: Okay, well we've dodged the question. Yeah, pursuing this material?

40:26 Speaker 4: Were you trying to find this?

40:28 Speaker 6: You know there's part of your question is there's material

40:38 Speaker 6: and there's material? Are you talking about material to be investigated,

40:44 Speaker 6: in other words, pieces falling off flying saucers or are

40:48 Speaker 6: you talking about full blown craft?

40:52 Speaker 8: You know, there's a big difference, and.

40:56 Speaker 6: I'm not so sure that I would ever characterize it

40:59 Speaker 6: that we were constructing facilities in order to look at

41:05 Speaker 6: full blown craft. I mean, again, we're talking about a

41:10 Speaker 6: commitment of money. Bob Bigelow went over well, over and

41:16 Speaker 6: well and beyond commitment to the contract. I mean we

41:19 Speaker 6: stopped tracking adia his losses at one point five million dollars. Now,

41:25 Speaker 6: is he going to be constructing large facilities? There's a

41:29 Speaker 6: lot of statements that have been made on the internet

41:34 Speaker 6: that partially ring true but ultimately aren't really true. I mean,

41:42 Speaker 6: that's a large commitment of money on his part, and

41:45 Speaker 6: as a contractor, he's responsible for having his supplying the facilities,

41:50 Speaker 6: not the government.

41:53 Speaker 3: Right, but didn't he revert? Didn't he retro fit big

41:57 Speaker 3: Low Aerospace?

41:57 Speaker 1: I mean, doctor Kelliher, maybe you could talk about this,

41:59 Speaker 1: but didn't he retrofit Bigelder Aerospace in hopes to gain

42:04 Speaker 1: either some materials or full craft. You've already told us

42:08 Speaker 1: that we have a full craft that we got inside

42:10 Speaker 1: it that we've been reverse engineering within our government. Didn't

42:12 Speaker 1: he want to be part of that and get some altary.

42:15 Speaker 2: Part of the contract was that, you know, DA wanted

42:22 Speaker 2: a facility security clearance bestowed on some of the buildings

42:28 Speaker 2: associated with Bigeler Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, and so in

42:34 Speaker 2: order to be accredited to achieve that facility security clearance,

42:40 Speaker 2: a lot of retrofitting was necessary. So you know, the

42:44 Speaker 2: National Security Agency got involved, and all of these audits

42:48 Speaker 2: happened on a very regular basis. So you had to

42:51 Speaker 2: dot the eyes across the t's. That was a part

42:56 Speaker 2: of the requirements of the contract that we we have

43:01 Speaker 2: to perform. That's a very different thing from you know,

43:06 Speaker 2: building a hangar outside Wright Patterson Air Force Base in

43:11 Speaker 2: order to receive a craft. I mean, we were mandated

43:14 Speaker 2: by the contract in order to adhere to facility security

43:19 Speaker 2: clearance requirements.

43:22 Speaker 3: Okay, so let me let me just go one last time.

43:25 Speaker 1: So basically, David Grush, what he told us, you both

43:28 Speaker 1: feel that that information is credible?

43:30 Speaker 3: Right? Is that what you I knew implied.

43:32 Speaker 6: It gets credible. But I'm simply saying he worked with

43:37 Speaker 6: someone that I know and trust as the UAP Task

43:43 Speaker 6: Force leader, and I think you should take his statements now,

43:50 Speaker 6: whether whether whether or not, if we could just take

43:55 Speaker 6: a moment here, I have observed to call him something

43:58 Speaker 6: that is I'm looking at it, particularly in regard to

44:03 Speaker 6: UFOs and the parent normal. There are people who have written,

44:13 Speaker 6: have talked about things they are absolutely wrong about, but

44:20 Speaker 6: they totally believe it. I mean, you can't call them liars,

44:26 Speaker 6: they totally believe it. Now, how many of those people

44:30 Speaker 6: that David Grush came across are fit in that category?

44:35 Speaker 6: I could name a list of them right now, but

44:37 Speaker 6: I won't. I mean, obviously I respect their opinions, but

44:44 Speaker 6: I know what they're saying is false. So it's a

44:49 Speaker 6: phenomenon now. I certainly hope that does not spread across

44:53 Speaker 6: all topics on the Internet, because we're in big trouble

44:55 Speaker 6: if that's the case, because that means people are it's

45:01 Speaker 6: delusional the correct word. I'm not a psychiatrist or a psychologist.

45:05 Speaker 6: I don't know what it is.

45:07 Speaker 1: Yeah, but hold on because we don't have grash here

45:10 Speaker 1: to talk about. He talks about program names. He talked

45:14 Speaker 1: about program names. He talked about holding locations of UFOs,

45:18 Speaker 1: which you've already admitted that we've got them and we've

45:20 Speaker 1: been exploiting them. So he's talking about things that are

45:23 Speaker 1: very tangible and physical people that worked on UFOs those programs.

45:26 Speaker 3: So part of the forty witnesses that came more to him.

45:30 Speaker 1: Are people that actually work on these legacy UFO programs,

45:33 Speaker 1: which he says exists. We've talked about it all, the

45:36 Speaker 1: four of us have talked about it. We know UFO

45:38 Speaker 1: legacy programs have existed, whether or not you can talk

45:41 Speaker 1: about it or not, we know that they existed. So

45:44 Speaker 1: just to give you know, kind of looking at what

45:47 Speaker 1: he said, he's saying that there are individuals with direct,

45:50 Speaker 1: firsthand experience. It's not opinions that can be wrong or

45:53 Speaker 1: right about. It's whether or not these programs existed, and

45:55 Speaker 1: we have these crafts we've been working on.

45:57 Speaker 6: Okay, and I have seen in multiple cases what I

46:01 Speaker 6: would call can only call forged documents.

46:06 Speaker 1: Okay, so there's another thing we should talk about. So

46:09 Speaker 1: you have what do you mean by that?

46:11 Speaker 6: The forged there there, there, there there, There are documents

46:16 Speaker 6: talking about programs, uh that are not legitimate.

46:22 Speaker 1: Documents within intelligence servers, within your industry. There are forged

46:29 Speaker 1: documents inside of our government's inte you know, or what

46:33 Speaker 1: are you talking about just on the internet?

46:35 Speaker 3: Are you talking.

46:39 Speaker 1: Really? How how could that happen? Forged documents with inside

46:43 Speaker 1: our intelligence agency?

46:46 Speaker 6: Uh?

46:47 Speaker 8: They even cover this on an X Files episode.

46:50 Speaker 6: Every special access program has a counter intelligence officer. That's

46:57 Speaker 6: their job. You know, it's it's their job. So you know,

47:03 Speaker 6: you might say, well wait a minute, gym and the

47:05 Speaker 6: column or counter intelligence soft nom or not. You know,

47:08 Speaker 6: there's no reason to be but if you're in a

47:11 Speaker 6: program you have you have that person either assigned to

47:16 Speaker 6: you or you bring him in. And there's a source

47:22 Speaker 6: of forged documents right there. Have your read your listeners

47:26 Speaker 6: and readers go back through the UFO history and you'll

47:32 Speaker 6: see fingers pointing to others that again I won't name them,

47:37 Speaker 6: that hey this is all fabricated, and.

47:42 Speaker 1: Yeah, like Rick Dodi, that's what you're talking about. Maybe

47:45 Speaker 1: you can't say, oh, hold on. Here's George, Here's George.

47:48 Speaker 1: He's gonna say sorry, Go ahead, George.

47:50 Speaker 5: Which counter intelligence officer wrote this in skin Markers at

47:54 Speaker 5: the Pentagon?

48:00 Speaker 6: Fifty three?

48:01 Speaker 5: Yeah, Nasha Mover and Jim Bell began knocking on doors

48:05 Speaker 5: beyond DHS to connect with quote the keepers of the

48:09 Speaker 5: secrets in at least two other agencies.

48:12 Speaker 4: In these meetings, which took place June.

48:14 Speaker 5: July twenty eleven, Sasha, Jim and colleagues were treated rudely

48:19 Speaker 5: and harshby Bell and.

48:21 Speaker 4: Mover were repeatedly told no and hell no.

48:24 Speaker 5: This left them convinced that advanced technology was sequestered under

48:30 Speaker 5: government supervision at aerospace contractor facilities. As a result, the

48:35 Speaker 5: DHS facilities to HARP, Department of Homeland Security officials became

48:39 Speaker 5: very hesitant and even fearful of moving forward. Perhaps these

48:43 Speaker 5: two only belatedly realized the unique, game changing and earth

48:48 Speaker 5: shattering nature of the biggest secret ever kept by the

48:51 Speaker 5: United States is that counterintelligence stuffer?

48:54 Speaker 4: Did you two guys write that?

48:57 Speaker 6: Well, we wrote that and was approved by the Pentagon

49:00 Speaker 6: and by DHS. But the thing is is that that's

49:04 Speaker 6: not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about playing out

49:07 Speaker 6: and out forged documents that are shown as proof of something,

49:11 Speaker 6: and it's been applied to us, app too that there

49:17 Speaker 6: are documents. I want to emphasize something I said on

49:22 Speaker 6: my first and only interview. It was a closed program.

49:26 Speaker 6: It operated very similar to a SAP. The director, the

49:32 Speaker 6: director of Analysis, and my office chief and of course

49:38 Speaker 6: division chief knew about this program. No one else did.

49:43 Speaker 2: Now.

49:43 Speaker 6: I was also protected by the stovepipe nature of that.

49:48 Speaker 6: I did not have to address political type questions. I

49:54 Speaker 6: was insulated. But they were too. There was no one

49:59 Speaker 6: else else. People in the surrounding cubicles didn't know. Nothing

50:04 Speaker 6: was purposely being hit. It was a closed stovepipe system

50:10 Speaker 6: and it needed to be.

50:12 Speaker 8: It needed to be operated that way.

50:15 Speaker 6: What I'm talking about here is documents that have risen

50:21 Speaker 6: up in the meantime that are out and out forgeries. Again,

50:28 Speaker 6: I'm not saying why this was done. I'm saying officially,

50:31 Speaker 6: if this was a counterintelligence effort.

50:35 Speaker 8: It probably wasn't a very good one.

50:38 Speaker 6: But the thing is is there there's phony material out there,

50:43 Speaker 6: and I we have no reason to do that. And

50:47 Speaker 6: that's why you know, we were questioned in the review

50:51 Speaker 6: of Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. Why did we list all

50:54 Speaker 6: the references? Why because we have a real reference. Is

51:00 Speaker 6: whether or not, you know, people can see that because

51:04 Speaker 6: of all the material that's the proprietary information in those

51:07 Speaker 6: references is another situation. But the thing is is we live.

51:13 Speaker 6: We we have our references, and they're not fabrications. They exist,

51:19 Speaker 6: and they exist both in and outside of diat What I.

51:27 Speaker 4: Was trying to get into is a mass.

51:30 Speaker 5: During that period, you confronted the keepers of the secrets.

51:33 Speaker 5: You were on the trail of what the keepers of

51:35 Speaker 5: the secrets have?

51:36 Speaker 4: The biggest secret in the history of.

51:38 Speaker 5: The US government is how we described it in this book.

51:42 Speaker 5: What do we tell we're talking about bits and pieces

51:44 Speaker 5: of mental Here are your crew, your team offs app?

51:49 Speaker 4: Was us on the trail of that stuff? Right?

51:51 Speaker 10: I mean?

51:52 Speaker 4: And are we wrong about that? Is that counterintelligence?

51:55 Speaker 5: Or did you come to believe that we really do

51:58 Speaker 5: have this stuff?

52:00 Speaker 6: Well?

52:01 Speaker 2: I can tell you, George that as you know, those

52:05 Speaker 2: events in twenty eleven occurred after the OSSAP program was

52:11 Speaker 2: shut down, so ASSAP was officially sort of stopped in

52:17 Speaker 2: terms of funding being received in September of twenty ten.

52:24 Speaker 2: By December of twenty ten, we had a ninety day

52:27 Speaker 2: no cost extension and at that stage the program was over.

52:32 Speaker 2: There was a lot of interaction between different departments and

52:36 Speaker 2: different agencies subsequent to that regarding additional funding. What you

52:41 Speaker 2: are referencing in the skin Walkers at the Pentagon occurred

52:46 Speaker 2: after the ASSAP program officially was terminated, and it involved

52:52 Speaker 2: a lot of negotiation and back and forth between different organizations.

52:57 Speaker 2: One of those organizations that we worked with was DHS,

53:02 Speaker 2: as it says in that book, and those those elements

53:06 Speaker 2: within DHS did their own version of due diligence, and

53:10 Speaker 2: that's what's being referenced in that book.

53:13 Speaker 1: I think what George is getting at is that you

53:15 Speaker 1: guys have already explained that you have gone off, you know,

53:20 Speaker 1: after the people that are guarding these secrets that you did,

53:24 Speaker 1: find that they're storing this stuff somewhere else. I mean

53:27 Speaker 1: is that, George, is that your your point is that

53:29 Speaker 1: they've already said.

53:30 Speaker 5: I think that they believe that those goods exist somewhere

53:35 Speaker 5: hidden in the bawels of defense contractors by the elements

53:38 Speaker 5: of the US government.

53:39 Speaker 4: They think they're real.

53:41 Speaker 5: The period that column is describing is when Jim and

53:44 Speaker 5: Colum and some of their colleagues were trying to find

53:46 Speaker 5: a new home for a version of US.

53:48 Speaker 4: That is that correct.

53:50 Speaker 2: That is correct.

53:52 Speaker 1: So on one hand, you're telling me there's this info

53:55 Speaker 1: even within intelligence servers and systems where you can cover

53:58 Speaker 1: up your programs. But you're also tell me UFOs, our

54:01 Speaker 1: government knows that's why you did all those dirds, and

54:04 Speaker 1: that we have them. We've been inside of one of them.

54:07 Speaker 1: You've admitted it.

54:07 Speaker 6: Now.

54:08 Speaker 1: I don't know that anybody from from ADA, from your

54:11 Speaker 1: level of the intelligence agency running a UFO program, has

54:14 Speaker 1: ever admitted publicly before that we have a UFO and

54:18 Speaker 1: have been inside of it, have been able to get

54:20 Speaker 1: inside of it.

54:20 Speaker 3: That's a big deal, you guys.

54:23 Speaker 8: Well, that still doesn't address Georgie's question.

54:27 Speaker 3: You know, you're not addressing any of those questions. We're

54:32 Speaker 3: not okay, hi to your dodgy.

54:37 Speaker 5: No, Maybe we take a different tack and try to

54:41 Speaker 5: talk about the book and the general chairman, maybe and

54:44 Speaker 5: try to circle back. We've mentioned about Arrow a couple

54:48 Speaker 5: of times, Jim, you and Colin have both said in limited.

54:52 Speaker 4: Number of interviews that you you believe.

54:54 Speaker 5: That the data warehouse that was established by US app

54:58 Speaker 5: the biggest UFO data warehouse in existence that we know

55:01 Speaker 5: of that it was now it was subsequently being put

55:05 Speaker 5: into use by US government agencies.

55:08 Speaker 4: Is ERROW one of those agencies?

55:10 Speaker 5: And if it is, have they reached out to you

55:13 Speaker 5: and column.

55:14 Speaker 1: Or can you say, because Arrow using the database that

55:18 Speaker 1: you guys created from AWSAP the largest UFO database in history.

55:23 Speaker 1: Jacques Vallet worked a lot with you guys on that

55:25 Speaker 1: is Arrow using that.

55:26 Speaker 3: Have they reached out to you about that.

55:30 Speaker 6: On that particular issue, No, they have not, But I

55:36 Speaker 6: know that the originator of you know, the lead of

55:43 Speaker 6: the UAP task Force from whence.

55:47 Speaker 8: Arrow evolved, did have it.

55:50 Speaker 6: So as for using it, it's it's more of a

55:56 Speaker 6: tool to get broad trends. I mean, obviously my broad

56:00 Speaker 6: trend observation, as every car on the road is different

56:04 Speaker 6: if you look at the UFO database. Uh.

56:08 Speaker 8: In other words, models don't.

56:11 Speaker 6: If there's if multiple craft are seen at the same time,

56:15 Speaker 6: yes they can be duplicates, but in general everything is different.

56:21 Speaker 8: That's something you use the database for. Also, what do you.

56:26 Speaker 3: Make of that? What do you make of that? In general? Sorry?

56:28 Speaker 3: But what do you make of that?

56:29 Speaker 6: What you make of that? I mean there there's some

56:32 Speaker 6: indications of what I could say, but but I won't

56:36 Speaker 6: say yet. I don't. I think that that's odd. And uh,

56:40 Speaker 6: why is everything dissimilar? You know you have to that's

56:46 Speaker 6: you have There are a lot of things that you

56:47 Speaker 6: have to question here. Why did why have? I mean

56:54 Speaker 6: in regard to Skinwalker Ranch, you've seen nothing yet thing

57:00 Speaker 6: I mean, Uh, you'd be flabbergasted at some of the

57:05 Speaker 6: occurrences there. And yes, there is documentation for these why

57:11 Speaker 6: what for? For what purpose? And and uh, I think

57:16 Speaker 6: it's very dangerous to commit to an answer, uh that

57:20 Speaker 6: someone knows the solution or what's occurring.

57:24 Speaker 8: I think it's why is it?

57:27 Speaker 2: I can also going back to George's question, I can

57:32 Speaker 2: answer that also from my perspective. You know, as you

57:37 Speaker 2: know George, the transition that occurred between the U A

57:43 Speaker 2: p t F and the various iterations of the U

57:47 Speaker 2: A p t F, that the transition to A O

57:51 Speaker 2: I M S G, and then ultimately to A A

57:55 Speaker 2: R O occurred under a completely different leadership and completely

58:01 Speaker 2: different circumstances than the original UAPTF. So I was I

58:10 Speaker 2: was interacting with members of the ua PTF on a

58:14 Speaker 2: sort of a consultant informal consultant basis, and I know

58:18 Speaker 2: for a fact that they had access to the the

58:24 Speaker 2: electronic version of the ASAP database. However, the transition that

58:30 Speaker 2: that occurred in the leadership of the u a PTF

58:34 Speaker 2: was very abrupt, as we know, and the you know,

58:38 Speaker 2: the the transition that ultimately led to the formation of

58:41 Speaker 2: the AOI MSG was very abrupt, and the leadership transferred

58:48 Speaker 2: into the USDI. So once the leadership transferred into the USDI,

58:55 Speaker 2: AOI MSG ultimately became a r O. And under those

59:00 Speaker 2: two leaderships of the USDI, I have no personal knowledge

59:08 Speaker 2: that the full ASSOP database was used by AOIMSG or

59:15 Speaker 2: by AAR, but I do know it was used by UAPTF.

59:22 Speaker 5: I think we're dodging another bullet here. I was trying

59:25 Speaker 5: to figure out if Arrow had reached out to you guys.

59:27 Speaker 5: Jim indicated that Arrow has not reached out about the database,

59:31 Speaker 5: but they didn't say he doesn't say whether Arrow has

59:34 Speaker 5: reached out at all. I would think there are a

59:36 Speaker 5: few people in the world that have more expertise on

59:38 Speaker 5: this issue than Column and Jim, And I'm just curious.

59:42 Speaker 4: If I were running Arrow, I would want to talk

59:44 Speaker 4: to you guys.

59:45 Speaker 5: Have they reached out and tried to just establish a

59:47 Speaker 5: line of communications.

59:48 Speaker 6: Or are you able to say the reach out was

59:52 Speaker 6: on an unclassified network?

59:55 Speaker 8: I would give you the answer yes for me.

1:00:01 Speaker 3: Was it doctor Kirkpatrick, you guys, or was it somebody

1:00:05 Speaker 3: from his office?

1:00:05 Speaker 6: Oh? Now here, Jeremy's getting back to Uh, it was

1:00:10 Speaker 6: it was a person from his office in a position

1:00:16 Speaker 6: to reach out. I can say that that as based

1:00:20 Speaker 6: on his background and his position, it was a proper contact.

1:00:24 Speaker 8: Yes.

1:00:27 Speaker 1: So so you guys, the OFFSET program is the largest

1:00:31 Speaker 1: acknowledged UFO program to the to the public, to the

1:00:35 Speaker 1: American public. But we know there were other and our

1:00:38 Speaker 1: other UFO programs, and we'll get into the r other

1:00:40 Speaker 1: because on camera you guys talked with me about that.

1:00:43 Speaker 1: This study continues, we'll get into that. But as far

1:00:46 Speaker 1: as legacy UFO programs, like what is your understanding of that?

1:00:50 Speaker 1: Like David Grush talked about it, it's now public that

1:00:53 Speaker 1: there were these things. Have you ever had experience with that? Jim,

1:00:56 Speaker 1: have you been part of a of a UFO program

1:00:59 Speaker 1: a legacy I.

1:01:01 Speaker 8: Couldn't say yes or no on that.

1:01:03 Speaker 6: What I can say is that I am describing that

1:01:07 Speaker 6: which I was involved with, and that was AWSAP, And

1:01:11 Speaker 6: I have always said you must do what ASAP did.

1:01:16 Speaker 6: You've got you have no choice but to do all

1:01:20 Speaker 6: aspects of what ASAP did. Now you might call it, well,

1:01:24 Speaker 6: is that fortunate we did the right things? Well, actually,

1:01:28 Speaker 6: looking back, yes it was. I'm kind of surprised. We

1:01:31 Speaker 6: did what you need to do. But any program that

1:01:35 Speaker 6: is truly looking into UAP paranormal has to do what

1:01:40 Speaker 6: we did and what we did and now I'll put

1:01:46 Speaker 6: in another thing or may still be going on.

1:01:51 Speaker 1: Okay, So so as far as future looks at the

1:01:54 Speaker 1: UFO topic, the know ASAPP it ended in the form

1:01:57 Speaker 1: that we know it. But you have said to me

1:02:00 Speaker 1: and George on camera, we just haven't put that footage

1:02:02 Speaker 1: out yet, both of you, that the program continues just

1:02:05 Speaker 1: under a different guy. It's a different name. So that's

1:02:07 Speaker 1: what you're saying.

1:02:08 Speaker 8: You're saying that too, Arrow.

1:02:11 Speaker 3: Look, I know, no, don't play with me with the

1:02:14 Speaker 3: ERAW thing. It's got to be something. Now, what was it?

1:02:17 Speaker 6: What is it? Chapter Chapter two. The comparison between the two.

1:02:22 Speaker 6: The only difference between us APP and what has been

1:02:26 Speaker 6: mandated by Congress for Arrow is the high cost sensors.

1:02:32 Speaker 8: We couldn't afford that. Now we describe in the book.

1:02:36 Speaker 6: In chapter in chapter what is it eighteen the integrated

1:02:41 Speaker 6: sensor package. Yes, we had our own design for a

1:02:45 Speaker 6: sensor package. And there are other other individuals entities that

1:02:55 Speaker 6: were interested in placing their own sensor packages us.

1:03:03 Speaker 3: Like NASA, like another agency like who.

1:03:06 Speaker 8: No, I can't say, he'd say.

1:03:11 Speaker 6: Would have been the same equipment, while they may have

1:03:13 Speaker 6: had resources that we did, and ours was kind of

1:03:17 Speaker 6: something we could place at multiple locations experience.

1:03:22 Speaker 1: Okay, so let me just ask you. Both of you

1:03:24 Speaker 1: can answer this. This is just your opinion. So we

1:03:26 Speaker 1: know that Project Blue Book ended in nineteen sixty nine

1:03:29 Speaker 1: and they said nothing to see here and move on.

1:03:31 Speaker 1: We do not believe that the UFOs pose a national

1:03:34 Speaker 1: security threat. We now know that that was a lie

1:03:37 Speaker 1: just because of AWSAP. Even if you don't admit another

1:03:40 Speaker 1: legacy program, we know that we were studying UFOs and

1:03:43 Speaker 1: funding it.

1:03:44 Speaker 3: Well, let me ask you this.

1:03:45 Speaker 1: That excuse that was given back in nineteen sixty nine

1:03:48 Speaker 1: with the closing a Project Blue Book that they don't

1:03:50 Speaker 1: believe there's any national security threat. I can't imagine a

1:03:53 Speaker 1: world where the DIA would be funded for the Defense

1:03:56 Speaker 1: Warning Office for something like AWSAP if they didn't believe

1:04:00 Speaker 1: that there was a national security threat. So my question is,

1:04:03 Speaker 1: to you, do you believe UFOs represent a national security threat?

1:04:11 Speaker 8: Well, lack of knowledge always can I mean directly a

1:04:20 Speaker 8: direct threat?

1:04:23 Speaker 3: Well is a direct That's why there's.

1:04:25 Speaker 6: Something that you can do something about or not do

1:04:28 Speaker 6: something about. Or there's so many qualifiers to this question

1:04:32 Speaker 6: and to the answer. It's almost like we're getting into

1:04:35 Speaker 6: an endless Uh.

1:04:40 Speaker 2: Well, I can I can step in here because that

1:04:45 Speaker 2: question has been posed to me multiple times. And you know,

1:04:50 Speaker 2: threat has two components. One is capability and the second.

1:04:56 Speaker 2: And we had they also program generated gobs of data

1:05:01 Speaker 2: on UFO capability. We generated almost nothing on UFO intent.

1:05:08 Speaker 2: And unless you have both, and I was lectured pretty

1:05:12 Speaker 2: strongly by one of the one of the consultants to ASSAP,

1:05:17 Speaker 2: you cannot make the case that without without data on intent,

1:05:25 Speaker 2: you cannot make the case that these objects are a

1:05:31 Speaker 2: threat to national security. What you can say is that

1:05:34 Speaker 2: they are a threat to human health, and we made

1:05:38 Speaker 2: that statement in at the end of the ASSAP program.

1:05:43 Speaker 2: We we generated a fairly large summary of all of

1:05:48 Speaker 2: the data that pointed in that direction, including medical injury cases,

1:05:53 Speaker 2: including a lot of pathological cases and physiological cases. And yes,

1:05:58 Speaker 2: we did say that UoS are a threat to human health.

1:06:02 Speaker 2: Are they a threat to national security?

1:06:05 Speaker 3: We do not know.

1:06:06 Speaker 2: We did not assimi accumulate any data regarding UFO intent.

1:06:13 Speaker 3: I'm going to pull George here.

1:06:15 Speaker 1: George, so reading their book, you know over the last

1:06:18 Speaker 1: few days they talk a lot in the book, you

1:06:21 Speaker 1: guys talk a lot about cholaris in Brazil and how

1:06:25 Speaker 1: for decades that human beings were being physically harmed to

1:06:29 Speaker 1: the point of death, so from UFOs, and that they're

1:06:33 Speaker 1: military studied. It is this like a case and that

1:06:36 Speaker 1: also asap you're going to reveal in a future book

1:06:39 Speaker 1: did actually do an in depth investigation about claris. So

1:06:42 Speaker 1: my question is, okay, maybe not national security, but in

1:06:45 Speaker 1: this case, the UFOs, we're fucking people up. They were

1:06:48 Speaker 1: hurting them to the point sometimes to death. So you're

1:06:53 Speaker 1: are you telling me with your book and all this

1:06:55 Speaker 1: information that UFOs do pose a physical threat a lot

1:06:59 Speaker 1: of times to people like in Brazil.

1:07:00 Speaker 10: Yes, yes, absolutely, and and that's and that's one of

1:07:05 Speaker 10: the reasons that we were trying to complete the database

1:07:08 Speaker 10: in regard to Brazil, and UH, it's simply that that

1:07:14 Speaker 10: if that was occurring here in the US, let me

1:07:18 Speaker 10: tell you, every day you'd see a front page article.

1:07:22 Speaker 6: Uh that did not occur. But you know, there's there's

1:07:25 Speaker 6: I don't want to go into something I'm unfamiliar with.

1:07:28 Speaker 6: It is an aw sap in nature, but there's there's

1:07:31 Speaker 6: current problems now in in uh in South America. You know,

1:07:37 Speaker 6: and you probably know more about that, Jeremy about uh

1:07:41 Speaker 6: what appeared to be again threats. H.

1:07:46 Speaker 3: Yeah, you hear that, but you know it's not as study. Yes,

1:07:50 Speaker 3: you guys.

1:07:51 Speaker 6: Clariss and UH and the surrounding areas correct.

1:07:55 Speaker 1: But that so anybody, yeah, anybody that reads your guy book.

1:08:00 Speaker 1: Just so our audience knows. Basically, there's a bunch of

1:08:03 Speaker 1: dedication of pages into these bizarre events in Brazil.

1:08:07 Speaker 3: They were studied by the Brazilian.

1:08:09 Speaker 1: Military where these UFOs for decades were harming, murdering, burning,

1:08:15 Speaker 1: messing up human beings.

1:08:16 Speaker 3: This is not just like oh, these great space brothers.

1:08:19 Speaker 1: This is something that there was really devastating these communities

1:08:22 Speaker 1: and left them in terror.

1:08:23 Speaker 3: So I suggest people check this out.

1:08:27 Speaker 2: I would agree with you, Jeremy, and I think even

1:08:31 Speaker 2: beyond the Brazilian cases, I think we accumulated enough cases

1:08:36 Speaker 2: within the United States to say that you know, if

1:08:40 Speaker 2: you're in the wrong place at the wrong time in

1:08:43 Speaker 2: terms of proximity to UFOs, in terms of proximity to

1:08:47 Speaker 2: blue orbs, that you can come off the worst. You'll

1:08:51 Speaker 2: have a lot of symptoms that mimic radiation sickness. For example,

1:08:57 Speaker 2: you know, metallic tastes in the mouth, sunburn, earn your hair,

1:09:02 Speaker 2: stars falling out. We documented these cases, and if you

1:09:06 Speaker 2: add that to the events in Kolaris, you can make

1:09:10 Speaker 2: the statement that UFOs are really bad for your health.

1:09:17 Speaker 5: I would also ask you, you know, I think the

1:09:19 Speaker 5: strength of this new book is the is the examples

1:09:22 Speaker 5: that you guys use that we use to document and

1:09:27 Speaker 5: demonstrate certain principles why why, engineering principles, physics principles, of.

1:09:33 Speaker 4: How strange this technology is, how advanced it is.

1:09:36 Speaker 5: One of the cases that comes up is a military case,

1:09:39 Speaker 5: and i'd remind our listeners that you know, the tic

1:09:42 Speaker 5: TAC case was an asapp a BASS investigation.

1:09:45 Speaker 4: It started with ASTAP.

1:09:47 Speaker 5: Later on, iterations of other UFO programs looked into it,

1:09:50 Speaker 5: but OSTAP started that investigation off and you had another

1:09:54 Speaker 5: investigation into a military encounter at Lincoln Heat. Colin, can

1:09:59 Speaker 5: you share with our listeners what are some of the

1:10:01 Speaker 5: details about the Lincoln heat case and what stood out

1:10:04 Speaker 5: that made it interesting to you?

1:10:07 Speaker 2: Well, I think it was mostly because it was a again,

1:10:12 Speaker 2: it was a military uh uh situation with R the

1:10:17 Speaker 2: R A. F. Lakenheath got got a bunch of known

1:10:24 Speaker 2: unknown signals regarding something that needed to be checked out.

1:10:31 Speaker 2: There were two two fighter jets that came very very

1:10:35 Speaker 2: close and personal with an object that had no aerodynamic

1:10:39 Speaker 2: surfaces that looked like basically, uh, you know, the raw

1:10:44 Speaker 2: ingredients of a meteor. It was tracked both on the

1:10:49 Speaker 2: ground and by the fighters and they they made several

1:10:54 Speaker 2: passes with this and they had communication, constant communication with

1:10:58 Speaker 2: ground control, and you know, the upshot of this thing

1:11:01 Speaker 2: was that an object was flying it did not seem

1:11:06 Speaker 2: to react to their presence. They came up close and personal,

1:11:10 Speaker 2: they had visual confirmation, they had radar confirmation, you know,

1:11:14 Speaker 2: in other words, instrumented and censor confirmation of this object.

1:11:19 Speaker 2: And it was a nowhere near as spectacular as the

1:11:24 Speaker 2: Dick DAC but it was certainly an unknown flying object

1:11:30 Speaker 2: in the vicinity of r f R A f Lakenheath

1:11:33 Speaker 2: and very similar to you know, one of the things

1:11:37 Speaker 2: that we sort of focused on in the book was

1:11:43 Speaker 2: correlating some of the some of the aspects of UFO

1:11:48 Speaker 2: performance like lift and propulsion, power generation, spatial temporal translation.

1:11:55 Speaker 2: And we we generated a bunch of different cases from

1:12:01 Speaker 2: the historical literature. And you'll notice a lot of those

1:12:04 Speaker 2: cases are old cases. So one of the things that

1:12:08 Speaker 2: you know, a lot of modern cases are thrown up

1:12:12 Speaker 2: against is you know, these could be drones, these could

1:12:16 Speaker 2: be you know, these could be sort of you name it,

1:12:20 Speaker 2: either commercial drones or Chinese spy drones or whatever. But

1:12:26 Speaker 2: you know, back in the nineteen fifties or nineteen sixties,

1:12:30 Speaker 2: a lot of these cases are pretty pristine. And you know,

1:12:34 Speaker 2: I'm thinking, for example, of the RB forty seven case

1:12:37 Speaker 2: that we cite in this book, which is an absolute

1:12:40 Speaker 2: classic case that Brad Sparks investigated and a lot of

1:12:46 Speaker 2: write ups. AI double A actually did a write up

1:12:49 Speaker 2: on it, and this was a classic case of RB

1:12:53 Speaker 2: forty seven aircraft down in Texas Louisiana area that was

1:12:59 Speaker 2: flying electronic countermeasures equipment and had this visual sighting instrumented

1:13:06 Speaker 2: sighting radar sightings of of this UFO that essentially outgone them,

1:13:13 Speaker 2: out maneuvered them. And this was all the way back

1:13:15 Speaker 2: in July of nineteen fifty seven, so you cannot say

1:13:19 Speaker 2: this was a Chinese high speed drone. And the level

1:13:23 Speaker 2: of documentation on that case really is illustrative of the

1:13:28 Speaker 2: properties that we cite in the ASSOP study regarding Lift.

1:13:34 Speaker 4: Kim kit Lekaskey, same sort of question.

1:13:37 Speaker 5: I know we're sort of hair splitting here on the

1:13:39 Speaker 5: terms of national security threat. But when you have these

1:13:43 Speaker 5: unknown objects dancing around over our basic Lincoln.

1:13:46 Speaker 4: Heath or interacting with the in the area of the.

1:13:50 Speaker 5: Nimits in the Princeton, flying around with impunity, it's not

1:13:54 Speaker 5: attacking US cities. It's not using laser beams to wipe

1:13:57 Speaker 5: out New York or Washington, DC.

1:14:00 Speaker 4: So maybe it's not.

1:14:01 Speaker 5: Considered a strategic threat, but it certainly has to be

1:14:03 Speaker 5: considered of interest to our national security interests when it

1:14:07 Speaker 5: shows such an ongoing fascination with military facilities, personnelity equipment.

1:14:15 Speaker 8: Don't go yes, But the thing is is.

1:14:23 Speaker 6: We're investigating them, probably properly now It's true that the

1:14:31 Speaker 6: Lakenheath incident did not involve near collision one since two

1:14:41 Speaker 6: thousand and fourteen fifteen perhaps involved more of that, but

1:14:46 Speaker 6: again probably not delibered. So yes, you should be investigating that.

1:14:52 Speaker 6: It's more or less interference in flight. You certainly wouldn't

1:14:57 Speaker 6: want an airliner to have one of these be sucked

1:15:03 Speaker 6: into an engine intake. They're they're rather large relatively speaking,

1:15:10 Speaker 6: So yes, it should be investigated. And that's why I

1:15:17 Speaker 6: believe ARROW exists right now, is that's a starting point

1:15:22 Speaker 6: as for investigating many of these civilian cases. It needs

1:15:28 Speaker 6: to be done. Doesn't need to be done by the government.

1:15:34 Speaker 6: I believe the contractors are fully capable, but there needs

1:15:38 Speaker 6: to be certainly a database that needs to be upkept

1:15:43 Speaker 6: and also constructed properly. I think column hasn't mentioned this yet,

1:15:48 Speaker 6: but we do mention in this book. More than mention.

1:15:52 Speaker 6: It's a couple of chapters. The Valie Davis system of categorizing.

1:15:57 Speaker 6: You know, you can have a database and it's a

1:16:00 Speaker 6: bunch of data. Unless it's categorized properly and be able

1:16:04 Speaker 6: to be searched on. Then then you can see trends.

1:16:11 Speaker 6: And that's what that's what we did with the Capella database,

1:16:18 Speaker 6: the Capella Bass database. So yes, it's huge, but it's

1:16:23 Speaker 6: it is searchable.

1:16:26 Speaker 3: I want to read something from your book.

1:16:28 Speaker 1: So when you talk about future work in your book,

1:16:31 Speaker 1: you make eight suggestions, a couple of which are established

1:16:34 Speaker 1: a data facility liaison, you know, for operations, collect and

1:16:39 Speaker 1: analyze uncorrelated target data, which would be from like Norad right.

1:16:44 Speaker 1: This is something that a friend of mine and George

1:16:46 Speaker 1: is a journalist named Chris Sharp, has really dug into,

1:16:50 Speaker 1: which is he's getting information from them.

1:16:51 Speaker 3: Well, we don't keep any UFO data.

1:16:54 Speaker 1: We do keep uncorrelated target data, though where do they

1:16:57 Speaker 1: put that? So you would like to see all that

1:17:00 Speaker 1: come in be able to analyze what they call unincorrelated data,

1:17:03 Speaker 1: which is things that do propel through the sky with intention,

1:17:07 Speaker 1: but we don't. We can't correlate it to our own craft.

1:17:10 Speaker 1: So you'd like to see that data come in in

1:17:12 Speaker 1: future studies. But one thing you said, it would you

1:17:16 Speaker 1: when you guys gave the eight different suggestions for future work,

1:17:20 Speaker 1: you talk about collection of oral and written histories.

1:17:25 Speaker 3: Now let me just read you what you wrote. Two sentences.

1:17:28 Speaker 1: It says collect under appropriate security caveats, oral and written

1:17:34 Speaker 1: histories from individuals with first hand exposure to apparent exotic

1:17:41 Speaker 1: technologies and or circumstances surrounding the same. This would include

1:17:46 Speaker 1: seeking out and contacting military and civilian personnel, scientists and engineers,

1:17:52 Speaker 1: and companies that they already have had access to first

1:17:55 Speaker 1: hand data concerning novel technologies. So in writing that, you

1:17:59 Speaker 1: got to know that there are corporations, companies, military individuals

1:18:03 Speaker 1: who have direct first at experience in this exploitation program

1:18:07 Speaker 1: or programs.

1:18:08 Speaker 6: But you're reading something exactly that was in the both

1:18:14 Speaker 6: proposal and which I don't think will ever be released,

1:18:19 Speaker 6: the proposal from BASS and also the program planning documents

1:18:24 Speaker 6: for the startup of us APP.

1:18:26 Speaker 8: That's direct wording from that. That was a hope that

1:18:30 Speaker 8: we could do that.

1:18:31 Speaker 6: So I wouldn't I wouldn't say, in other words, I

1:18:34 Speaker 6: wouldn't put too much of well, that's a that's a

1:18:38 Speaker 6: statement based upon knowledge, but a statement based upon desire.

1:18:43 Speaker 8: In other words, that those are exact words from the document.

1:18:48 Speaker 6: I should say. You know, since SATP Skinwalkers that Tenagon

1:18:54 Speaker 6: was a compilation document. It was written on our new book.

1:19:01 Speaker 6: We tried to keep with editing. Of course, we needed

1:19:04 Speaker 6: the editor edit the grammar and the spelling. We tried

1:19:09 Speaker 6: to keep as close to the original language that was

1:19:13 Speaker 6: in our documentation that DIA received. And the reason for

1:19:19 Speaker 6: that is I want your listeners and the readers of

1:19:23 Speaker 6: this document to understand they're in the same management shoes

1:19:28 Speaker 6: or position that we were. This is the document that

1:19:33 Speaker 6: really came in. So I wouldn't put too much into

1:19:36 Speaker 6: the statement you read because it was used as a plan.

1:19:43 Speaker 6: And as I said, these plans never came to fruition,

1:19:48 Speaker 6: mainly because one, the core items were completed in the

1:19:52 Speaker 6: two years, and two.

1:19:56 Speaker 8: It would have required more money and more personnel.

1:20:00 Speaker 3: To do them.

1:20:01 Speaker 1: Okay in five five, fine, But Jim, like, do you

1:20:08 Speaker 1: think the American public deserves to know about the ultimate

1:20:12 Speaker 1: reality the fact that there are appear to be non

1:20:15 Speaker 1: human intelligence flying spacecraft or something.

1:20:18 Speaker 8: And that's whys we're doing these books.

1:20:22 Speaker 3: We're trying so you believe the American public has a

1:20:25 Speaker 3: right to know within.

1:20:26 Speaker 6: The security limits. Within security limits, security comes first. But

1:20:33 Speaker 6: the thing is is national security comes first. But that's

1:20:37 Speaker 6: why we're assembling these books, and we're trying to accurately

1:20:41 Speaker 6: assemble them based on real references that may or may

1:20:46 Speaker 6: not be available to the public, but you're getting direct

1:20:51 Speaker 6: extracts from these these references.

1:20:56 Speaker 1: No, it's it's great. I just wanted to see where

1:20:58 Speaker 1: you stand on that UAP transparency or not. I mean,

1:21:01 Speaker 1: we've got a am, I a disclosure advocate.

1:21:04 Speaker 8: The answer is no.

1:21:07 Speaker 3: What's the difference in your difference is security?

1:21:10 Speaker 6: You know there's certain things. Oh and now, now if

1:21:14 Speaker 6: this involves security plus Because having come from the contractor

1:21:21 Speaker 6: world in the first half of my career, I can

1:21:25 Speaker 6: say if there's heavy investment of contractor capital, their overhead

1:21:31 Speaker 6: money into technologies, and they've been given these technologies, they're

1:21:38 Speaker 6: going to hang on to them. It's just like, hey,

1:21:41 Speaker 6: wait a minute, We've invested a lot of our personal

1:21:44 Speaker 6: resources into research.

1:21:47 Speaker 8: And that can apply to every topic.

1:21:50 Speaker 6: It's going to be difficult to pry loose technology when

1:21:55 Speaker 6: something's been given over and a private company has invested

1:21:59 Speaker 6: there money, their stockholders' money into research. So that's an

1:22:04 Speaker 6: entirely different aspect. But ours is security. We're trying to

1:22:09 Speaker 6: least for you.

1:22:09 Speaker 1: But but does it doesn't it drive you crazy? I

1:22:12 Speaker 1: mean I get it, there's security. I get it that

1:22:14 Speaker 1: private companies were given something, have invested a lot of money.

1:22:17 Speaker 1: But isn't this topic kind of bigger than these issues

1:22:20 Speaker 1: that those two issues, the fact that we're we might

1:22:23 Speaker 1: not be alone.

1:22:25 Speaker 6: WHOA, Yes, But I think that we can convey that

1:22:29 Speaker 6: through the proper method, and that's what we're trying to do.

1:22:35 Speaker 3: Okay, So you are trying to convey that in the

1:22:38 Speaker 3: proper way.

1:22:40 Speaker 5: I'm not.

1:22:40 Speaker 6: I'm not going out there and and and uh and

1:22:44 Speaker 6: interviewing with everybody, uh to say what I really feel. Uh.

1:22:52 Speaker 3: No, it was hard to get you to do this.

1:22:54 Speaker 3: I mean, I can testify, you're not.

1:22:57 Speaker 6: When people hang up on me when I say, can

1:23:00 Speaker 6: offer me all of is, But I'm not going to

1:23:02 Speaker 6: say anything more than what's been approved.

1:23:07 Speaker 1: So let me get back to George here. So George,

1:23:09 Speaker 1: what do you think you are we cracking the egg

1:23:11 Speaker 1: here with Jim and Collins not even.

1:23:13 Speaker 4: Coming not coming close. Let here's another tack we could take.

1:23:19 Speaker 5: Jim, doctor Caskey, you know, I believe that you have

1:23:23 Speaker 5: made it clear that you were in contact with Congress.

1:23:26 Speaker 5: I know that you were asked about testifying and you declined.

1:23:30 Speaker 5: Do you feel that telling Congress all of what you

1:23:34 Speaker 5: know would constitute a possible threat that you know, A

1:23:39 Speaker 5: mutual friend of ours, of mine and yours and columns

1:23:43 Speaker 5: has said it many times, you can't tell.

1:23:45 Speaker 4: Your friends without telling your enemies.

1:23:47 Speaker 5: Well, do you think that telling Congress the low down

1:23:51 Speaker 5: on things that you really know but can't say here

1:23:54 Speaker 5: would would represent a likely threat? That that would be

1:23:57 Speaker 5: that information would be linked to our adversary as enemies.

1:24:02 Speaker 8: That's my personal belief. I mean, there's two things I said.

1:24:07 Speaker 6: That's in response to your mention of Congress contacting me

1:24:11 Speaker 6: one and I repeated this to multiple folks. I don't

1:24:16 Speaker 6: want to get involved in what would appear to be

1:24:20 Speaker 6: a three ring circus right now. It's it's just it's

1:24:24 Speaker 6: too much for me. That's why I'm devoting and I

1:24:27 Speaker 6: don't want. I don't get involved in answering things in

1:24:30 Speaker 6: Twitter which I easily could, or read it which I

1:24:33 Speaker 6: easily could. I wanted to be documented in these DoD

1:24:37 Speaker 6: approved books. That's my method of saying what I have

1:24:42 Speaker 6: to say. Do I have a lot more that I

1:24:45 Speaker 6: could say and that will be seen perhaps if it's approved. Yes,

1:24:53 Speaker 6: I mean, I I can tell you with skin Walkers

1:24:55 Speaker 6: at the Pentagon, they had a number of comments that

1:24:58 Speaker 6: I felt were were legitimate security observations that it needed

1:25:05 Speaker 6: to be changed. But did the stories still come through? Absolutely?

1:25:10 Speaker 2: Yes.

1:25:11 Speaker 6: You mean, what's the old saying there's more than one

1:25:14 Speaker 6: way to skin a cat, whatever that means, But there's

1:25:19 Speaker 6: there's just there are multiple ways of doing it, and

1:25:23 Speaker 6: we're trying to calum and I and George are trying to.

1:25:26 Speaker 6: Now George is good at pushing, and so are you.

1:25:30 Speaker 6: You know, push the limits, push the limits. Well, we

1:25:33 Speaker 6: can write whatever we want, but if it doesn't get

1:25:36 Speaker 6: behind by dopster d O D review, then you know,

1:25:41 Speaker 6: we're kind of wasting our time. I think we know

1:25:44 Speaker 6: what our red lines not to cross. And going to

1:25:49 Speaker 6: Congress would be a red line to me personally because

1:25:53 Speaker 6: I talk too much. I say too much, but I

1:25:56 Speaker 6: purposely cut it off right here.

1:26:00 Speaker 1: I just well, what if you what if you were

1:26:03 Speaker 1: subpoena though, I mean, you know they're trying to do

1:26:05 Speaker 1: that in Congress. They're trying to subpoena people and say, hey.

1:26:09 Speaker 11: Doctor, you know you's about doctor the case?

1:26:17 Speaker 1: Okay, but hold on, if you're a subpoenaed and asked

1:26:19 Speaker 1: to tell and have to tell the truth, you're under oath, right,

1:26:25 Speaker 1: would you tell.

1:26:25 Speaker 6: The old phrase, let's cross that bridge when we come

1:26:28 Speaker 6: to it.

1:26:30 Speaker 1: Okay, George, I'm laughing so hard right now, George, I

1:26:34 Speaker 1: wish you were on video. So, George, I was thinking,

1:26:37 Speaker 1: do you have a I want to bring column into

1:26:39 Speaker 1: something that was written in the book. It sounds like

1:26:41 Speaker 1: something Calin has tried to answer from me before. It's

1:26:44 Speaker 1: about the nature of the phenomenon itself. So let me

1:26:46 Speaker 1: read that, George from the book.

1:26:48 Speaker 3: Cool. Okay, guys.

1:26:51 Speaker 1: So when we're talking about what we know about UFOs,

1:26:54 Speaker 1: George and I have talked about this a bunch of

1:26:55 Speaker 1: what do we know? Okay, we know that UFOs represent

1:26:58 Speaker 1: a huge amount of Y in a small amount of space.

1:27:01 Speaker 3: That's that's been proven. However, what do we really know?

1:27:04 Speaker 1: And you guys have something in your book that is

1:27:06 Speaker 1: just it's just a couple of sentences or one sentence.

1:27:09 Speaker 1: It was so profound to me and I want to

1:27:11 Speaker 1: hear you guys elaborate on it. It says everything works

1:27:15 Speaker 1: as if UAP were the product of a technology that

1:27:21 Speaker 1: integrates physical and psychic phenomenon and primarily affects cultural variables

1:27:28 Speaker 1: in our society through the manipulation of psychological and physiological

1:27:34 Speaker 1: parameters in the witness in the witnesses. Can you guys

1:27:39 Speaker 1: expand that's a huge statement, Can you expand on that?

1:27:44 Speaker 3: Well?

1:27:45 Speaker 2: I know that a lot of that that statement comes

1:27:52 Speaker 2: at least from my personal experience with spending hundreds of

1:27:57 Speaker 2: days on Skinwalker Ranch. And as we've gone over before,

1:28:04 Speaker 2: you know, Skinwalker Ranch had both nuts and bolts objects,

1:28:09 Speaker 2: shiny metallic objects. It also had a plethora of very

1:28:14 Speaker 2: unusual phenomena. There was a lot of evidence that was

1:28:18 Speaker 2: gathered and some that I saw personally involving the manipulation

1:28:25 Speaker 2: of perception. And so there's a lot of really good

1:28:31 Speaker 2: work and really good documentation regarding the manipulation of perception

1:28:36 Speaker 2: by people like Jacques Vallet. You know, even Whitley Strieber

1:28:41 Speaker 2: has written in his latest book there's a lot to

1:28:44 Speaker 2: do with manipulation of perception. So a technology that is

1:28:50 Speaker 2: both influential in terms of you know, leaving an imprint

1:28:55 Speaker 2: on the ground that you can extrapolate that this thing

1:28:58 Speaker 2: weighed two and a half tons to altering people's psychic makeup.

1:29:05 Speaker 2: There's really no contradiction there. I mean, you've got to

1:29:07 Speaker 2: be able to harness and work with ambiguity if you're

1:29:12 Speaker 2: working with the UFO topic at all, because putting them

1:29:15 Speaker 2: into one box, you know, the nuts and bolts box

1:29:19 Speaker 2: or only the psychic box, just doesn't work. You've got

1:29:23 Speaker 2: to you've got to balance the idea that a technology

1:29:28 Speaker 2: can manipulate human perception and even from a long term perspective,

1:29:33 Speaker 2: manipulate human cultural phenomena as well as you know, operate

1:29:39 Speaker 2: as a machine. So you've got to You've got to

1:29:42 Speaker 2: hold those two balls in the air, and if you're

1:29:45 Speaker 2: not capable of doing that, you should not be looking

1:29:48 Speaker 2: at UFOs.

1:29:50 Speaker 3: Yeah, it's you know a.

1:29:54 Speaker 5: Lot of people have filed Foyer requests. Uh, you know,

1:29:58 Speaker 5: based on skin Walkers. It depending on We listed all

1:30:01 Speaker 5: those reports that were produced by Osapp and Bass and

1:30:05 Speaker 5: you know there's some great stuff, as we know.

1:30:08 Speaker 4: But you know, people right to the d i A

1:30:12 Speaker 4: and the responses they get is we don't have it. Well,

1:30:15 Speaker 4: there is no such report.

1:30:16 Speaker 5: For example, there's an analysis that is referenced in skin

1:30:19 Speaker 5: Markers at the Pentagon about an analysis of.

1:30:23 Speaker 4: Tic TAC for example, that case and a few others.

1:30:27 Speaker 4: DA's answer is we don't have it. It doesn't exist.

1:30:31 Speaker 4: Do you suspect that those documents will ever be made public?

1:30:36 Speaker 6: That particular one, as you probably already know, it was

1:30:43 Speaker 6: a complete document analyzing a tic tac object and a

1:30:49 Speaker 6: spherical object, and it was done based on bass capabilities

1:30:54 Speaker 6: at the time. It actually is well, the way it

1:31:03 Speaker 6: was written was it had that plus background material on

1:31:09 Speaker 6: the tic tac and I would say that there was

1:31:14 Speaker 6: information in there that was personal information, not proprietary information.

1:31:21 Speaker 6: We were using commercial software. Will that document ever be released,

1:31:27 Speaker 6: I don't know. We can do pieces of it in

1:31:31 Speaker 6: a future book, but the analysis tool that was being

1:31:36 Speaker 6: used was state of the art at the time, and

1:31:38 Speaker 6: you need the color aspect of it well, as probably your.

1:31:42 Speaker 8: Listeners and readers know.

1:31:43 Speaker 6: Color is kind of expensive in any book, especially books

1:31:49 Speaker 6: that are reaching the size that we're doing. So will

1:31:53 Speaker 6: it reach They have the document, whether they destroy it,

1:32:01 Speaker 6: How do you destroy an electronic document? That's unclear whether

1:32:08 Speaker 6: they would be willing to go through removing the personal information.

1:32:14 Speaker 8: I don't know.

1:32:15 Speaker 6: I can't speak to that. The wording is probably wrong

1:32:20 Speaker 6: that the document doesn't exist. Yes it does. I mean

1:32:24 Speaker 6: you had it in your hand. But the thing is

1:32:28 Speaker 6: is as for the public ever seeing the full document. Again,

1:32:34 Speaker 6: there's the color problem.

1:32:37 Speaker 3: Well, hold on, hold on, said George.

1:32:38 Speaker 1: He just said, oh, does the document exist, meaning one

1:32:41 Speaker 1: hundred and forty plus page analysis of the TikTok that

1:32:44 Speaker 1: the world has never seen, generated by the spherical object. Yeah,

1:32:48 Speaker 1: generated and the spherical object generated by the DA you know, famously.

1:32:53 Speaker 1: George would have loved to given that, you know, as

1:32:55 Speaker 1: a submission to Congress famously. But the thing is is,

1:33:00 Speaker 1: Jim Jim Lukowski just said, George, you had that in

1:33:02 Speaker 1: your hands.

1:33:03 Speaker 3: It exists.

1:33:03 Speaker 1: So if the d i A Is telling us some

1:33:06 Speaker 1: document doesn't exist, but you had it in your hands, George,

1:33:09 Speaker 1: what does that mean for the fate of the document?

1:33:11 Speaker 1: Couldn't that just go out to the public. Then if

1:33:13 Speaker 1: they don't admit it exists, there's.

1:33:15 Speaker 6: The there's the problem of having that personal information in there.

1:33:22 Speaker 6: Someone has to scrub it.

1:33:24 Speaker 8: It is d i A's job.

1:33:27 Speaker 3: George would be willing to scrub.

1:33:28 Speaker 1: It, that's George, George, George. Okay, that was a rhetorical question, Jim.

1:33:34 Speaker 1: So George, just tell us what your thoughts are here.

1:33:37 Speaker 4: Well, I could not.

1:33:39 Speaker 5: It's not my document to release, and I wouldn't release

1:33:42 Speaker 5: it without permission from the people that allowed.

1:33:47 Speaker 4: Me to see it, So I just couldn't do that.

1:33:50 Speaker 4: But because if I were to do that, I would

1:33:52 Speaker 4: never get access to documents again of that nature. So

1:33:56 Speaker 4: I can't do it. But I'd be happy to do

1:33:59 Speaker 4: it if if somebody gave me the green light.

1:34:01 Speaker 1: Yeah, if people weren't going to have problems. Well, so

1:34:05 Speaker 1: column back to this basic thing. You've tried to talk

1:34:09 Speaker 1: with me before about the physical and the psychic nature UFOs,

1:34:12 Speaker 1: and you're saying, look, you got to be prepared for

1:34:14 Speaker 1: both if you're going to investigate this. But that statement

1:34:16 Speaker 1: that you guys wrote in your book, it really is

1:34:19 Speaker 1: something I think people really need to pay attention to.

1:34:20 Speaker 1: You're saying that everything works as if UAP were the

1:34:24 Speaker 1: product of a technology that integrates physical and psychic phenomenon.

1:34:28 Speaker 3: But then you say, and.

1:34:29 Speaker 1: Primarily affects cultural variables in our society through manipulation of

1:34:35 Speaker 1: psychological and physiological parameters. What do you mean manipulate cultural variables?

1:34:40 Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I'm obsessed with this quote.

1:34:43 Speaker 2: Well, do you want to take that gim because I've

1:34:45 Speaker 2: already answered it.

1:34:47 Speaker 11: Well, the cultural variables, don't we see that occurring right now?

1:34:58 Speaker 11: What do you mean your answer?

1:35:00 Speaker 6: You see that basically, Uh, there's a well, I got it.

1:35:08 Speaker 6: I got something to really reference and it'll it'll be

1:35:11 Speaker 6: another little bombshell of mind.

1:35:15 Speaker 3: But you're going to answer my question about a question.

1:35:18 Speaker 8: What is the purpose of the men in black?

1:35:21 Speaker 3: We that is a question.

1:35:23 Speaker 6: We have encountered the men in black, the.

1:35:27 Speaker 8: Legitimate ones you legitimate ones.

1:35:32 Speaker 2: You have?

1:35:33 Speaker 8: I didn't say me, but the answer the answer is yes.

1:35:39 Speaker 3: What do you mean? The legitimate people who are.

1:35:43 Speaker 6: Are are gaming gaming knowledge of the men in black?

1:35:48 Speaker 6: But what is the purpose of the men in black?

1:35:50 Speaker 6: Is it to draw attention away from the UFO phenomenon

1:35:55 Speaker 6: or using reverse psychology draw attention to it and the paranormal?

1:36:01 Speaker 8: Of course, what is the purpose?

1:36:05 Speaker 6: It could be They're polar opposites the answers that's always

1:36:10 Speaker 6: been the men in Black.

1:36:13 Speaker 8: Dissuade.

1:36:14 Speaker 6: Do they knowing human psychology?

1:36:17 Speaker 10: Do they?

1:36:17 Speaker 6: Or do they do exactly the opposite? They draw attention

1:36:22 Speaker 6: to the phenomenon. And that's what I mean in my

1:36:25 Speaker 6: answer to you, I wanted to use an example of

1:36:28 Speaker 6: manipulating cultural variables that they're drawing attention. Hey, this really exists.

1:36:36 Speaker 6: Now you can also go off on the side a

1:36:38 Speaker 6: little bit is say, are we in the realm, because

1:36:43 Speaker 6: I've talked to multiple people about this, are we in

1:36:46 Speaker 6: the realm of what we would consider demonic influence? Have

1:36:53 Speaker 6: we crossed into that that's a cultural variable too, operating

1:36:58 Speaker 6: at the same level. We We've got to consider all this.

1:37:03 Speaker 6: That's why I think this is such a wonderful topic

1:37:06 Speaker 6: because you've got all these things you still have to consider,

1:37:10 Speaker 6: and you know it's now I'm going to be long

1:37:13 Speaker 6: gone and call them. Probably will be long gone and

1:37:15 Speaker 6: you'll be long gone and they'll still be exploring all

1:37:18 Speaker 6: this and not have all the answers. But that's that's

1:37:21 Speaker 6: the manipulation from my point of view of Hey, get

1:37:27 Speaker 6: interested in this stuff. It's real, and don't just jokingly.

1:37:32 Speaker 6: You know, like the term dino beavers.

1:37:35 Speaker 8: You know, uh.

1:37:39 Speaker 6: That Juliet and Colum saw a dino beaver. No one's

1:37:44 Speaker 6: say any that's just created to make a joke about

1:37:47 Speaker 6: about our efforts. But this is a real phenomenon. Accept

1:37:53 Speaker 6: it as such and you'll see that that's was part

1:37:56 Speaker 6: of what d IA did. Collect. Data collect, data collect

1:38:00 Speaker 6: that the intel communities are great at doing that. But

1:38:03 Speaker 6: that's an answer to your question. And there's so many

1:38:05 Speaker 6: aspects of cultural manipulation, and I think it's positive manipulation.

1:38:15 Speaker 6: Using an eye again an old expression. The train has

1:38:18 Speaker 6: left the station. No, it hasn't. These books are proof

1:38:21 Speaker 6: of people can still get on the train. But those

1:38:25 Speaker 6: who laugh and joke don't bother getting on the train

1:38:29 Speaker 6: because you know, you just you're not learning anything from

1:38:34 Speaker 6: the experience.

1:38:38 Speaker 3: So George, doctor Katzie, just gave us a good answer.

1:38:41 Speaker 1: But I didn't notice when he was telling us that

1:38:44 Speaker 1: he said something about the real men in black and

1:38:46 Speaker 1: that he's actually met him or something.

1:38:47 Speaker 3: Can you just we can't let that go now that

1:38:50 Speaker 3: you set.

1:38:50 Speaker 6: To let it go, yeah, to let it go. But

1:38:54 Speaker 6: now the false men in black. Now, there was an incident,

1:39:00 Speaker 6: and I'm not going to go into the incident, but

1:39:02 Speaker 6: Colin is aware of this. There was an incident of

1:39:06 Speaker 6: a false man in black. And let's assume they were

1:39:11 Speaker 6: working for some government agency. What they've never known and

1:39:15 Speaker 6: never has been revealed, is the person they were interview

1:39:20 Speaker 6: obtained a gun. He was so afraid of them he

1:39:23 Speaker 6: was ready to shoot it out. If they made the

1:39:25 Speaker 6: wrong move, it would have been a disaster. It would

1:39:28 Speaker 6: have come back on us in some way. I'm sure

1:39:31 Speaker 6: because I was asking an interview once, what was your

1:39:36 Speaker 6: greatest fear during us up? And it was like, it's

1:39:39 Speaker 6: tomorrow and the next day, because there was always something

1:39:43 Speaker 6: that was happening that would come back and we had

1:39:46 Speaker 6: to fix. But we've never revealed that that this person

1:39:51 Speaker 6: was so afraid of the false man in black that

1:39:54 Speaker 6: he had a gun TechEd into his waistband under his sweatshirt.

1:40:01 Speaker 3: Were you guys the postman going into it? It was

1:40:05 Speaker 3: another governmental agency, we.

1:40:08 Speaker 6: Were We followed all the rules.

1:40:10 Speaker 8: We don't know, you don't know who.

1:40:14 Speaker 6: You can you can trace back so far, but you can't.

1:40:18 Speaker 6: If it was a counter intel operation by some organization,

1:40:23 Speaker 6: then it would could have. I mean, that was a

1:40:25 Speaker 6: bad decision on their part. Bad They shouldn't have pushed

1:40:30 Speaker 6: this fella to that point where he was ready to

1:40:33 Speaker 6: resort to violence in defense and he was in his

1:40:36 Speaker 6: own home being potentially threatened.

1:40:40 Speaker 2: Well, you know, I think there's a long history also

1:40:43 Speaker 2: of especially back in the sixties and seventies. I think

1:40:47 Speaker 2: everybody is aware of this, of the Air Force Office

1:40:49 Speaker 2: of Special Investigations having people out there trying to dissuade

1:40:59 Speaker 2: witness is from talking to the media threatening them in

1:41:04 Speaker 2: I think in the fifties and sixties threats we're much

1:41:08 Speaker 2: more overt than they would be now. But I think

1:41:11 Speaker 2: there's this multiple arenas of men in black, all of

1:41:18 Speaker 2: which are sort of mutually supportive in driving paranoia in

1:41:25 Speaker 2: witnesses and in the field in general. And a lot

1:41:30 Speaker 2: of these are multiple agendas for different reasons, and some

1:41:34 Speaker 2: of them are mimicking the real men in black, some

1:41:37 Speaker 2: of them are the real men in black. It's a

1:41:41 Speaker 2: I think it's one of these. I would class it

1:41:44 Speaker 2: as another example of what I call bidirectional mimicry.

1:41:48 Speaker 1: Okay, but the real men in black? Are we talking

1:41:50 Speaker 1: about humans or non human intelligence? So what is the

1:41:54 Speaker 1: real men in black compared to just government agents being

1:41:57 Speaker 1: you know, interrogating people.

1:42:00 Speaker 2: I think there's enough evidence in the literature to indicate

1:42:04 Speaker 2: that the phenomenon may be associated with some cases of

1:42:10 Speaker 2: what we call men in black.

1:42:12 Speaker 3: But what are they?

1:42:15 Speaker 2: Well, there are parts of the phenomenon.

1:42:17 Speaker 3: Okay, so not just government agents walking around.

1:42:21 Speaker 2: Well, there's government agents that are also at the same time,

1:42:26 Speaker 2: in parallel working on you know, on intimidating witnesses.

1:42:32 Speaker 1: I know, but I'm not talking about the government. I'll

1:42:33 Speaker 1: talk about what you're calling the real men in black.

1:42:36 Speaker 2: So you're like, I'm saying that they're part of the phenomenon. Okay,

1:42:39 Speaker 2: I think there's enough. I think there's enough data in

1:42:42 Speaker 2: the literature, especially if you go back all the way

1:42:45 Speaker 2: to the nineteen fifties to corroborate that statement.

1:42:51 Speaker 1: Even in the eighteen hundreds there was a phenomenon like that.

1:42:54 Speaker 1: If you read John Kill's Trojan Horse Operation Trojan Horse,

1:42:58 Speaker 1: there's in the eighteen hundreds there's version of the men

1:43:01 Speaker 1: in buck Well. George, I am highly frustrated, as always

1:43:04 Speaker 1: when I talked with doctor Kellaher and doctor mcatsky.

1:43:07 Speaker 3: So what do you think, George, where does this go

1:43:09 Speaker 3: from here?

1:43:11 Speaker 4: Well, there's a lot of great stuff in this book.

1:43:12 Speaker 5: I mean, you know, part of a lot of criticism

1:43:15 Speaker 5: that came at us from skinwalkers at the Pentagon is

1:43:18 Speaker 5: too much.

1:43:18 Speaker 4: Wu, It's just too weird. And I always thought, you know,

1:43:22 Speaker 4: I was proud.

1:43:23 Speaker 5: Of what we did with that, and because it followed

1:43:26 Speaker 5: the evidence where it led, and the people who were

1:43:30 Speaker 5: involved with os appt with Bass and some of their

1:43:33 Speaker 5: allies looked at this without self censorship. They didn't decide, hey,

1:43:39 Speaker 5: this is an interesting UFO case, but it's got this

1:43:42 Speaker 5: weird poltergeist aangle, so we're going to toss that out.

1:43:45 Speaker 4: They had the courage to.

1:43:46 Speaker 5: Include it because it was necessary to look at the

1:43:49 Speaker 5: big picture, and that was where we started. But the

1:43:53 Speaker 5: skinwalkers that depending on this book narrows down the focus,

1:43:56 Speaker 5: people have complained and griped and bitched and moaned that

1:43:59 Speaker 5: they want data.

1:44:00 Speaker 4: Here's some data.

1:44:01 Speaker 5: Here's the principles that are laid out in those brds

1:44:05 Speaker 5: that started off the OFFSET program, that the baseline projections

1:44:09 Speaker 5: of what we know now and what we hope will

1:44:11 Speaker 5: happen fifty years down the road, and that it has examples,

1:44:16 Speaker 5: real life examples, solid UFO cases from government files that

1:44:20 Speaker 5: were investigated and that remain really perplexing that in each

1:44:25 Speaker 5: of those cases, a gem and column have really definitely

1:44:29 Speaker 5: used to demonstrate a particular engineering principle, a physics principle,

1:44:34 Speaker 5: indicating that these things are real, that they are beyond

1:44:37 Speaker 5: our capabilities, There were certainly way beyond our capabilities when

1:44:40 Speaker 5: they happen, and that there's a genuine mystery here and

1:44:44 Speaker 5: it is again, I think, in very great detail demonstrates

1:44:48 Speaker 5: why this is a legitimate topic for investigation, that there's

1:44:52 Speaker 5: real things to consider, that there's physics and engineering, nuts

1:44:56 Speaker 5: and bolts, and the case after case that demonstrates that

1:45:01 Speaker 5: this is a legitimate inquiry as it.

1:45:03 Speaker 8: Can't very good.

1:45:08 Speaker 2: Totally agree, George.

1:45:09 Speaker 3: I guess we're on the right track. George. We're getting

1:45:12 Speaker 3: a double thumbs up here.

1:45:14 Speaker 1: Look, guys, I really appreciate I think if I take

1:45:17 Speaker 1: I have to kind of think about the people watching

1:45:19 Speaker 1: or listening to this. If I could take one thing

1:45:21 Speaker 1: away other than reading your book, which I suggest people do,

1:45:24 Speaker 1: but if I could take.

1:45:25 Speaker 3: One thing away that really struck me.

1:45:28 Speaker 1: It is the first time in history I think that

1:45:30 Speaker 1: we have somebody of your uh, doctor Katskiv, of your

1:45:35 Speaker 1: kind of depth within the Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency,

1:45:38 Speaker 1: and within the UFO program that you ran for the

1:45:42 Speaker 1: Defense Intelligence Agency that stated, and I quote, the United

1:45:47 Speaker 1: States was in possession of a craft of unknown origin

1:45:51 Speaker 1: and had successfully gained access to its interior interior. So

1:45:55 Speaker 1: you personally know about a UFO that we got access

1:45:59 Speaker 1: inside of. I have to assume, doctor Lakatski, that you've

1:46:03 Speaker 1: seen this bad boy, you don't got to answer me,

1:46:05 Speaker 1: but I'm going to make that assumption unless you tell

1:46:07 Speaker 1: me otherwise. You also say that this craft had a

1:46:11 Speaker 1: streamline configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight, but no intakes, exhaust, wings,

1:46:17 Speaker 1: or control surfaces. So if I had to take something

1:46:20 Speaker 1: away from all this, you've just made the admission that

1:46:23 Speaker 1: our government is reverse engineering. If we got inside of it,

1:46:26 Speaker 1: were reverse engineering UFOs.

1:46:31 Speaker 8: You see, I'm not speaking at all. I'm not going

1:46:34 Speaker 8: beyond what it was what you read from the book.

1:46:41 Speaker 3: Okay, well, thank you very much. I do appreciate that

1:46:44 Speaker 3: you did put that in the book.

1:46:46 Speaker 1: Look, we have doctor Eric Davis in the New York

1:46:49 Speaker 1: Times saying craft you know, not made here on Earth.

1:46:52 Speaker 1: There are individuals like you have come out and pushed

1:46:55 Speaker 1: the envelope a little bit, and I thank you for that,

1:46:57 Speaker 1: even if you can't speak further from the book that

1:46:59 Speaker 1: it's huge admission. That'll be the title of the YouTube

1:47:03 Speaker 1: video and that's a huge admission.

1:47:06 Speaker 3: What do you think, George.

1:47:07 Speaker 5: I'd also say this is that I know that people

1:47:10 Speaker 5: in the UFO world will be listening to this pulling

1:47:12 Speaker 5: their hair out.

1:47:13 Speaker 4: Because Jim is very careful and what he says.

1:47:16 Speaker 5: The fact is that that is why that is a

1:47:18 Speaker 5: big reason why he's been trusted with this Information Distartment,

1:47:21 Speaker 5: that he doesn't go blabbing and talk and reveal things.

1:47:24 Speaker 4: That he's not supposed to talk about.

1:47:26 Speaker 5: And that's why I suspect he will continue to be

1:47:29 Speaker 5: trusted by our government, and hopefully there's going to be

1:47:34 Speaker 5: a future investigation or maybe one underway right now that

1:47:37 Speaker 5: he would be allowed to know about. I know, it

1:47:40 Speaker 5: does get frustrating that we have the hair split and

1:47:43 Speaker 5: dance around certain of these cases and incidents and information,

1:47:48 Speaker 5: but you know, that's part of who he is and

1:47:51 Speaker 5: why he got that job, you know. So it's great

1:47:55 Speaker 5: always to talk with Jim on or off the record,

1:47:57 Speaker 5: and with Column of course, they've helped me understand this

1:48:00 Speaker 5: big white world so much, and even though they've shared

1:48:03 Speaker 5: things with me that I can't say publicly, it has

1:48:06 Speaker 5: helped me so much in understanding who else is completely

1:48:10 Speaker 5: full of cramp out there.

1:48:12 Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, for sure. Well, thank you guys so much.

1:48:15 Speaker 1: I mean, you know, I think that with the limited

1:48:18 Speaker 1: things you can say, people should read your book and

1:48:20 Speaker 1: start to understand a little bit more about what ASP

1:48:23 Speaker 1: did and how it did. It what the thought process was.

1:48:26 Speaker 1: I do appreciate that. And for you know, just coming

1:48:30 Speaker 1: on the show and for help guiding. As George said,

1:48:32 Speaker 1: you know what he knows is sometimes BS just from

1:48:35 Speaker 1: kind of getting to understand where you guys are coming from.

1:48:37 Speaker 3: So thank you for all this.

1:48:51 Speaker 6: Never had so few.

1:48:53 Speaker 3: I have so much to tell, but would say so

1:48:56 Speaker 3: that

1:48:59 Speaker 1: Following this webinized presentation of Jeremy Corbell, George Napp, Dark

1:49:03 Speaker 1: Horse Entertainment and Cadence thirteen studios available now for free

1:49:06 Speaker 1: on the Odyssey app or wherever you get your shows