Ex-Pentagon Official: The U.S Isn't Telling The Truth! Top-Secret UFO Encounters Finally Uncovered! They're Trying To Silence Us!
01:35:38 Share

We are absolutely not a universal and I know these things are real because I was asked to investigate uf urged to control the user space by these videos here. There's no question what you're saying .

and this more videos like this that you've been exposed oh yeah.

the last five because there are a lot of people that don't want us talking about this.

Should we be worried about this? Louis elizondo is a respected intelligence officer in former head of the pintado on's best airspaces identification program.

where he LED efforts to investigate UFO sighings and uni dentists ed al. There were real things that we were encounter over controlled user space by an unknown technology that Frankly could outperform anything that we had in our intent. And there is a big national security issue because there's potential for these things to be interfering with.

Our nuclear is evidence to suggest that they turned down on the nuclear facilities in russia.

right? Well.

that's a big deal. But has there ever been anyone sent to jail because theyve .

spoken about worse, my life has been threatened, many type taking huge risks, but I think we deserve the truth. So let's go to .

believe any first reports. I can tell you .

that we definitely have people that are now on us. Government, medical disability and f and then .

one of the rumors is that every fifty one they found UFO materials.

I cannot comment what area of fifty might not have all I can say that the government's position of material that doesn't look like it's made by us.

Do you have any theories as to .

why they might be visiting here? Oh, gosh. Sh.

well, why do I started? You eventually resigned.

I resigned in protest because.

Live, Steve, who what are you?

Wow, depends who you ask. I think to some people are probably a patric. To other people, i'm a father and a husband. And to other people, i'm probably the devil.

What's your professional C, V? What is your professional resume?

Say, went to college, went to the university of miami. I studied microbiology, imminent logy and parasitology. Consider myself a disciples of, uh, scientific method and scientific principles.

I then join the army, a united states army. I went in as enlisted. I had an opportunity to go in as an officer because of my education.

But the words of my father always rung in the back of my head. And he said, in order to be a leader, you must first know what that means to follow. And so I joined the army, is an a list soldier. R spent some time and deployment of korea, been to live a year in asia, was in military intelligence.

And then I was recruit very shortly there after into a special program where he became a civilian special agent, encounter intelligence, running investigation, supervise investigations throughout that america, south america, central america, and then spend the rest of my time out for nine eleven over in afghanistan, in the middle ast, primarily dealing with terrorism issues, running Operations against hesba and ice and other organizations. And then after probably several years of that, my wife got very kind of IT, miss too many birthdays, miss too many holidays. And he said, you really need to come back.

And more importantly, i'm afraid the next time you leave, you may not come back. We're losing some people over. They're quite a bit.

So I listen to my wife. I came back, took a superb job, and investigations were White terrace m. investigations.

And then from there I went to several of the three letter agencies. I worked for the N, C, I, X. National kind tells executive.

I work for the DNA, the direct of national intelligence, and IT was in two thousand shortly there. After that, I was asked to be part of a very interesting programme in the pentagon. What my cv is. I'm probably a jack of all trades, but an expert. Nothing have done a lot of things, mostly national security crimes, terrorism, espino h some countercurrent Operations, kind of arcos S A concert, cy missions, you said in two thousand.

one of eight, two thousand. And on you ask to come back to the pentagon to work on a particular project. What project was that so? Well.

IT wasn't the one, that one up being the project of everybody knows me for. So in two thousand eight, they asked me to run a program to help integrate national lel intelligence to with law enforcement, local and state law enforcement agencies. Now, why is that important? Because and then kind of lead to the next thing after nine eleven, people think here, nine eleven was was caused by by, unfortunately, some terrorists doing some bad things.

That was an effect. That wasn't the cost. The actual cost was us here in the united states not being able to share information with ourselves very well.

We had pocketed information at the CIA pocket of information at the FBI pocket of information at the department of defense when we we're sharing IT with each other. And thereby there was an information gap in intelligence gap. And the folks in nine eleven were able to do what they did, unfortunately.

So we learn that lesson by trying to create Better integration. So how do you take super secret information and get IT down to a little that can be consumed, unusable, without compromising sources and methods? So that was the problem I was able to come back and fix.

IT was shortly there after, as when I was visited by some individuals and had some conversations with some mother individuals about a program that I had no idea. That was I was ongoing, but I was and IT was a program involving the investigation, the government's investigation into U A, P. Or in the vacuum, you may call them .

uf hos who approached you. So there are two individuals.

one of them I can talk about. Other one is identity is protected. It's a nj threaten, who at the time was another intelligence official like me and another one of his colleagues, and they came to me and they try to ask me questions.

I had a blue badge, so I knew that they were cleared. They had the same security clear I had. We all worked in skips and is not in common when you need expertise in a particular portfolio or mission that you you outside of you find the right people to do this right job.

And so I was told that we're looking for somebody to run counter intelligence and security for this capability that they had. They didn't tell me what the capability was um and I was a kind of intelligence and security guy was an expert in him so after several conversations, a bit of a dance, if you will know, kind of like trying to figure each other out. They arranged for me to have a meeting with a individual.

And I met the what I would consider is the premier rocket scientist for the united states government. Now, when I say rocket scientist S, I mean little a rocket scientist. This is a gentleman who can tell you the fuel consumption rate of a first stage solid rocket motor booster.

He can tell you the the orbital velocity of a merve vehicle, multiple entry vehicle coming in from lower thora. I mean, the best of the best of the best, he was running a program, and I still didn't know what the program was. Body said, like you, we've been doing something, give a lot of money to do IT, right? And we're looking for somebody with me, with your skills sets.

And the name was doctor James, like, catchy and the epidium of iraqi scientists. And at the end of the conversation, I remember him looking at me over his glasses, and he said to me, what do you think about ufos? And so I thought for a moment, and I said to him, I said, I sorry, don't you said, well, what do you mean you don't believe in? You are force.

I said, no, I I didn't say that. You ask me, what do I think of them? And my response was, I don't, because I don't think about them.

I too busy, blue, chasing bad guys and trying to fix problems for the government. I never really had the luxury to think about them. And he said me, okay, that's fair. Fair enough.

But let me just warn you, don't let your and all that tic bias get the best of you because you may learn things here that will chAllenge any preconceived notion or narrative that you have about the topic. And so I left that meeting thinking to myself, is this a sort of psychological evaluation? Was that a serious question in our, and was very soon there.

After that, I learned the reality that the united states government was absolutely invested in a UFO investigative program, and, more important, that he was legitimate. IT was real. There were real things that we were encountering, over controlled user space, over sensitive military and installations by an unknown technology that, Frankly, could outperform anything that we had in our inventory.

So that was my, that was my introduction to know what is known as aip. The program had several iterations before, was under the contract vehicle, was called osap. My focus was specifically more on the nuts and bolts investigations of the U A.

P. Incursion into control user space in commerce by military aircraft of these things. We weren't really focused on civilians information, right? Wasn't like a grandma seeing some lights in the backyard.

These were, these were, well, to lack a Better term, closing counters by trained military pilots, trained of very, by the way, who can recognize a similar between su twenty two amid twenty five and an f sixteen from ten miles away, and make a split second decision, if is a friend of four. And what these pilots were encountering were also being backed up by by gun camera footage and and flare footage forward, looking in for red footage. And oh, by the way, that was being further picked up on radar data, airborne data, borne radar data and also base ready data, c, base rate data.

how you go from the project you were working on into eighty because I was the first way of meeting, right? I was like an introduction .

conversation. So there were a meeting before trying to. I background of skill sets IT wasn't until that, meaning with gym casi that the word UFO was used.

And how do I, how do I go about that? He is one who made the decision. That was his program.

I had nothing to do with. They just do IT. I didn't even know I was signing up for until after .

my meeting with him. So did he say to you, okay? Well, we'd luck you to come. This program, this eighteen programme s for advanced era space threat identification program right? Um and I hence, do you became the director .

or of that program? Yes so was a natural evolution of IT. Um initially I was just they were brought to provide tenor intelligence and security expertise. But as that program asset faded away, the the necessity, urgency of some of these encouraging was getting to a desperate IT was getting really there was a lot of these incursions happening. There was a big national security issue that that we were all recognizing.

And there were some elements in the government they were trying to kill the effort enough for reasons you might think, believe, IT or not, completely different. And so the decision was made to bring that up to the pentagon, up to where I was take IT out of dia defensive intelligence agency. And with the authority S I had, I was the director of national programme special management staff and so that was my job iran special access programs for for the White house and for the national security council and um we we put the programme of that are keeping IT out the the prime eyes of some of the folks that previously we were trying to kill the program.

So this program advanced era space through identification program, was really focused on investigating reports and incidents of U A P or uf s in military environment. So if there was a UFO flash U A P in a and in a military base, then this project would investigate what that was. Is that is a correct?

That's correct. So IT was only military focused. IT wasn't interested in civilian data. By the time we were running at at the pentagon, IT was really looking at, for example, nuclear Carrier strike groups that are encountering these things all the time.

IT would be, for example, on air force space or in navy base, or there was a special Operations, you know, on a particular patrol. And if they happen to encounter a wap, those type of reports. And I also want to emphasize here, we weren't looking for you of those.

You we were always coming into a situation with the understanding that they're some sort of project. There's a project answer to what this is, right? IT actually wasn't a UFO IT was a drown, a test fire of a missile.

IT was a drown and IT was a balloon. IT was whatever, whatever. Because are certain signatures and profiles that you can look very quickly determined that just convenient technology.

But there was a guideline that we use that helped us understand when something really was anomalous. When we really we're talking about, it's not our technology and whatever that is, it's probably not adversarial of foreign technology. So now we're getting into the real world of U A P.

That's anomalous.

What's the ap and identified anomalous phenomenon. So let me, if I can, for let me backtrack little bit. For years and years and years the term UFO on identified flying object was used. Um there were several reasons, but later on, the term as change to U A P and I stood for uni dense fied arial phenomenon and that's probably the last year you're in a half you're starting to see yet another definition of ap and identified anonymous phenomenon and there's a reason for that are happy to explain if you want. But the decision was made to change from UFO to ap.

I I read that IT was because a lot of these for the military passenger l stopped reporting their sightings because there was a stigma sociate with the time UFO correct.

So it's two reasons there is stigma and taboo is associated with the term because the moment you say UFO, people think ten foil had and you guys, yeah others on the mothership, no nonsense like that. But the reality is, is that this this was a real issue in national security issue for our nation and other nation to, by the way. But also, the term UFO isn't really accurate anymore.

So what do you mean by that? Well, I identified flying object. What is flying? Well, flying means you have four fundamental forces. You have thrust, lift, drag and weight.

And when you understand that, you can create wings and create lift, and that is the definition of flying, right? These things in heavens, they didn't have rudder, elevators, control surfaces, allons cockpits. And yet somehow they were able to remain a loft in our atmosphere.

So they weren't flying technically. So the name was change to anonymous and identified erie phenomenon because they are being seen the air. But then they realized, you know what, they're also being seen under water. There are also being seen in high altitude, possibly low earth orbit, so to say that their arial isn't even equity. So then is IT OK uni dense fied a Normal alist phenomenon to cover all the separate domains or environments that these things .

are being encountered in? Before you had the meeting regarding this project at the pentagon, what did you believe about U A P and flash UFO? S, I did.

I was never interested, even in science fiction as a kid.

Did you believe they were? If I don't ask you that I conception said, are U F S real? And I say UFO.

S, because that's what of social time? But what would you've said? Probably not.

But I mean, I would say that probably not I won't say for sure, not because I didn't know .

what about now kidding me.

I mean, yeah, it's these. I mean, don't take my word for our government, really, said IT. I mean, we you have a former director of national intelligence telling the world at these these things are real whatever they are you a former director, eight and a four president of the united states and we've know for a long time they're real.

And by the way, is not as our country there are other countries that are very forthcoming. Um there's countries in south amErica that i'm dealing with this for a long time. Japan just entered into a bilateral information sharing agreement with our country for the express purposes of sharing U A P information and data. China's interested rush is interested in this. Several european countries have a fairly robust capability, have had have a lot of information on this.

Was there a moment when your belief changed with every moment that you can remember you thought what you know what? What I thought about U A P was wrong?

sure. And what I often tell people, there's, there's, there's two types of individuals. The way that we process this information in one category, you have people that will sit there and say, I had this epiphany y this revelatory mom, or all of a sudden, oh my god, they're real right.

Are you kidding me? And there is another group of people, which I probably fall into that second category. The latter category, which is more of a slow progression and realization of what we're dealing with, is not a conventional technology, is not our technology, is something else.

At some point, the proponent of evidence is so overwhelming. Let me give an example. I am, I got my life in investigations, terris, spires, whatever.

And i've always been what I considered just the facts maam kind of guy, very, very data driven. I don't really care about in your windows and subsides and eu opinion, very much care about what the data says. What does what does the data suggest? In this case, this particular case, you have, I witness testimony.

You have a back to by gun camera footage. You have a back up by flare footage, you have a back to by radar information. You've got five, six, sometimes seven pieces of CoOperating centuriata. That's all reporting the same event at the same time, at the same place, under the same circumstances.

Now, if I was in a court of law and I was presenting this at his evidence, where well beyon reasonable, that the jury would have no choice but to convict, because the evidence is so the same collection sensor suite that we use to prosecute, win a war and forgive them an actor, but literally drop warheads and foreheads is the same. In, for me, is the same, same systems we're using to collect the data, the analysis vehicles for something. And so I know it's a very uncomfortable conversation to have.

I not saying it's not one of saying is that we have to deal with this, and it's not mean just telling you that this is our government. We know we've already we have laws now on the books because this topic is not so serious. We have whistle blowers ready to come out and testify before the american people.

Because this is so serious, we have set up and organizations specifically IT saw purpose is to investigate U A P. Because this topic is so serious. So this is not a flight of fancy here.

We're we're investing millions of dollars, taxpayer dollars, to try to figure this out. And interesting enough, I think when the investigated body first came, was was realized, was was created. There was his hope that in the first report, this other two hundred and forty three incidents that remain A I identified, but we're gona widdle them away.

What happened the next time they had a report? There was not three hundred. And what happened after that? Now eight hundred, the numbers going up, not down, that remain unresolved. And so we've got to have this uncomfortable conversation with ourselves.

You eventually left.

I did .

your that project blown or broadly, you resigned from working with the pentagon in the role that you are working with them. Why did you resign?

I resign because that's what you do when you can't fix the problem internally. My concern was that we were spending time in money on an issue that leadership didn't want to know about, that leadership didn't want to inform the boss. The then secretary of defense, general gin matters.

Um the details about was going on and there's reasons for that and we can certainly get out if you want. I understand them. I don't necessarily ree with them, but I understand them.

But at least here in in our country, when you can't fix a problem, you don't stay and make IT worse, you leave, you resign. And then if you still want to do something, you look from outside, but you don't create problems inside. And it's not that in common.

Is that because if you look just a year later, after I left secretary defense himself freezed. So I resigned in protest, but not out of disloyalty. I resigned because of my loyalty to this country and to this government.

And what is that protestor just to be the protest.

is that we weren't able to get the information and the help we needed with with this issue up to the right level of people. They were happy with us doing IT, but they don't tell the boss or wait minute. The boss needs to know.

We're having almost a media collision with our fighter pilots. We have captains and animals of navy ships asking us, what do we do about these things? Like, do an email, say, like you, we can keep these guys below deck forever.

What you want to do, they're all over the ship. And so a decision has to be made. What are we going to do about IT? And that decision has to be made by the top guy, the secretary defense. And for whatever reason, the upper land of leadership didn't want to tell the bonus we were getting on going into what to do about IT.

Now keep in mind these things are coming over our centive military installations as well, and there's potential for these things to be interfering with our nick equities that a big deal and nobody wants to have a conversation no way to make IT that's put this on the backtrack of of other national security shoes, right? Like terrorists, if you go to any airport in the united states today, or any train station, always here over the announcement, if, if you see something suspicious, say something reported. Well, that wasn't the case with these things.

In fact, people were told that report, yes, if you saw a UFO, you saw over a sense of military insulation, don't report IT because I think you're crazy. And that is dangerous. That is a dangerous mindset because of these things.

Had a russian star on the tail or a north korean tail number, this should be huge, but because you think didn't have a tail at all and didn't have any obvious entity propulsion and IT was cricket people would know about IT. IT was the worst cup secret. People like that.

We seem all the time, but we don't want to report IT. Well, you have to report IT. Well, there's no reporting mechanism.

okay? Well, let's create one. Well, we can create one because we need permission to do and this person need to be briefed up. Meanwhile, you're being told, no, you can't.

you can't. You can't. Why wouldn't they won a report this information? Why wouldn't they want the public to know? Why would they want the boss to know?

Well, I think is a statement tabo. Well, the several reasons. But I think superficially staging tabo, no one wants be known as that UFO guy ago.

I get IT, especially for a pilot, is historically you'd be taken off flight status and put behind a desk and you'd fly a death the rest of your career because people think you're mentally unstable could affect your security clearance. I mean, just all sort of things that can happen. Um and so people were being being reinforced not to report this information. Even civilian pilots today, if you talk to them y'll tell you quietly, yeah, we see things in the sky when I am reporting thing because I need a job. You know.

what did you say?

Oh my, what day? I mean, I videos, reports, photographs. I mean, we have there's videos that are so compelling in high definition that there's no question what you're saying. It's not our technology is not our technology and the capabilities are behind anything we can do. I'm happy to explain some of those capabilities you like.

But but when you look at this from a rational perspective, you only come to one outcome, but the only one can be the other one is so remotely possible that the mental gymnastic to get to that and we can go into that minute. It's absurd. And so let's go to live IT.

What makes these things unique? Because plains fly in U. P. And years, so that doesn't make a unique and know things go fast and what night.

So you have to an intelligence if you want to filter out data and and only focus on certain data, you have to create parameters. So we realized early on in the government that these things had five parameters, five observer ables, that made them stand out away from everything else. And so the first one was instantaneous acceleration.

So what is acceleration? IT is the change of city, right? IT is ability to change of velocity very quickly. And as a result, as a consequence, there are inertial forces that are experienced. So for us human beings, we express those the neutral forces as g forces.

So the force of grave is pulling on a equally at nine point eight minutes per second per second, and that that that experiences as one, a human being can withstand up to nine genes for a very short period time before you start having medical consequences, right? You have things like blackouts and read out and ultimately death to compare that to, let's say, standard technology. Um one of our most highly manuva aircraft mand manuva aircraft and me emphasize mand is an older aircraft is called the general dynamics f sixteen.

Built by general dynamics is the f sixteen and that at an unclassified level, can pull about seventeen G, S. Before you start having structural failure. Mean, wings snap off, right? The plane begins to disintegrate. Why you're flying IT.

What we are seeing, our objects are performing in excesses of two thousand and three thousand g forces, well beyond the healthy limitations of anything biological to understand, and certainly from a material science perspective, more than more than we have. There's advanced technology here, the second observer able this hypersonic velocity. So what is hyper sonics, hyper YSL ics? Are those speech in excess of mock five or above?

What to mark is the speed of sound, roughly seven hundred hundred and sixty seven miles an hour at sea level. So IT really fast. Now do we have technology that can do hyper sons? Sure, we do.

So we have one of the best examples is a lucky y twelve sr. Seventy, one of the wise, known as a blackboard IT, can get to about mark five, which is really fast. But at that speed, if the S.

R, seventy one wants to take a right here and turn, takes roughly half the state of ohio to execute that maneuver, we are seeing things is not doing mark five. We are seeing things doing in the excess of ten thousand, thirteen thousand miles an hour and executing immediate writing in turns and even one eighties, right? So that is another observer able that is significantly above and beyond anything.

We have another observable it's a bit of an oxymoron, but it's called low observably meaning you'll hear from the pilots lew I was there I saw but I can't describe IT didn't have wings and have rudder, a tail, anything, no river, its nothing uh and then also on the radar, you will get these nonsensical returns, these returns like it's there's some sort of active jamming or spooky going on. H with within the radar system, so low observable able. Now do we have observer able vehicles shop, for example, of b two bomber in the voucher.

These are stealth vehicles. Well, this is little more than that because it's actually also, with the human eye, very hard to discern. The forth observer able is something called train medium or multicultural dian travel.

So that means the ability to Operate in multiple domain ins, or more specifically, multiple environments. Now once again, do we have multidrug in vehicles? absolutely.

A sea plane is a perfect example of a multimedia vehicle. IT can fly and I can float. But let's face IT. A sea plane is neither a really good airplane or a good boat.

And why? Because there are design compromises that I have to be made in performance and design in order for th to Operate in multiple domains. And that's true with just about every technology we have, the more domains we want something to Operate in, the more sacrifices we have to make.

That's why submarine looks like a submarine. Could this design to be underwater in a plane looks like a plane, and a rocket looks like a rocket. Um these things can Operate in multiple different domain, can Operate air underwater and possibly in space. But you don't have that performance and design sacrifice that we have to do with our technology.

So is IT like a when you get this job, you get to see like a folder on a computer like i'm trying to understand what access you you you given everything I mean, you are you're seeing .

the investigations that we're done previously by other members of U A. P. You're seeing video, you're seeing photographs.

are seeing the historical reports. And if these classified, oh, absolutely very well. So the general public on't see these kinds .

of things and they haven't published rect classified.

okay. So it's videos, its photos, its various accounts. You know a lot of people talk about every fifty one when .

they talk about U F O S in such I .

think one of the sort of rumors is that at every fifty one they've found and um retained U F O material spacecraft eeta that they they ve studied to understand the technology so that they can introduce IT to the U. S. military. Is there any truth in that?

You, the U. S. Government, invest a lot of money in research, have a lot of test facility where we want to build the test things outside the prying eyes of of our enemies.

And so we create these test ranges for that purpose. We do also to think of this test ranges. Um you know I cannot comment on on what area fifty one might or might not have.

I would not be authorized to talk about that. All I can see is what isn't the public domain, which people already know. That is a it's a sensitive specifically where we we experiment with with thin .

because I was a gentlemen, I think from that works near area fifty one. Talk a little bit about this .

publicly .

bob desire. I he didn't know anything about bob desire to about two hours ago. So what is exactly is that that bob ZARA is claiming, well, to be very.

you probably have to ask bob. I I don't know, mr. R, i've never met him. I've never spoken to him. His claims were that he worked at a particular facility and he had access to and privy to what I recovered. vehicles. Crash reveals les, uh that was allegedly performed by the united states and acquired and brought there um that is what is in the public domain. Um I I cannot and will classified um is have .

you had to go through some process you there's a book in front of me called imminent, which is the book you've written says inside the pentagon fewer fos. What is the process and when you're writing books like this to get information needs so that you can share IT.

it's like birthing and elephant. Imagine if I was ever woman and had to give birth.

Um is they probably don't want you talking about these things.

There are a lot of people that don't want us talking about this um but there's also a lot to do. Um so you go through a process it's called dopa in the us. government. We lover acronyms IT stand for department of defense, office of prepublication and security review.

As a former defense official, if I want to write anything that has to go through a review process to make sure not classified, and I can talk about IT, that book went through an exhausted almost one year process through the government before they allowed me to published and even then they redacted. Portion tote, if you look there, you will see great up portion ons because I wanted americans to see what some people don't want you to see. And so these reductions are there by the government um and I IT is a very exhausted process.

But it's important because that what keeps us legal, that's what keep people like me not going to jail because you I go through the proper procedures. I'm not a leaker. I have never lead to classified information.

I will never discuss classified information and an author disclosure, something that that should be avoided at all times, I guess. So i'm a patron. I'm loyal to my country and not disloyal.

So there's a right way in a wrong way to do things. So if you want to write a book and you want to talk about things you're not sure you can talk about, you go through the stops for process. And that's exactly what I did, and that's how that book was able to be published. Otherwise right now, I would probably be in jail.

Is there a single most compelling piece of evidence that you will witness to as IT relates to your belief in U. F S, in U, A, P, S.

they were all significant. There wasn't that, oh, that's IT, because they were all compelling in their own way, whether go back to the U. S.

S. Limits incident in two thousand four or the roseville incidents in twenty fourteen and twenty fifteen. There was so much data every time you think you had one that was great that another would come and there was even Better. So mean.

you've got one on the front cover of this book there, right? What is this incident on the front .

cover of your book? Known the gingle incident. That is a video that was taken by F A teen. And you can hear the exacerbation. If you listen to the actual video, you can hear the pilot trying to discuss what IT is and then you also hear on the discussion of there's a whole fleet of them.

Look at the asa and oh, by the way, is going one hundred and twenty minutes against the wind at roughly twenty thousand feet. So it's not a balloon and you begin to see this this this vehicle oriented self in a ninety degree angle. Now if this was a plane, like here's your wings, you go into any Green angle, you lose altitude, right?

Because that's how the principles of lift work. That's not the case there. Think this is the video.

Free to people come and say. Going up against the wind. The winds are hunting point after the west.

What they do. It's not no as IT. I do know when the first thing and I was .

shot by two U S. Good fights of .

pilots and a lot more of those out there and a lot clear or two, but they are clashed.

So there's more videos like this .

that you've been exposed to.

Oh yeah, released them.

not released. why? Because of of sources of methods, because they remain classified, because how they were taken, where they were taken, under what circumstances, what technological capabilities we used to collect information the U.

S. Government wants to keep out of its out of the hands of its adversity. What are true capabilities are.

So let's say you're flying a mission over a denied area and you don't want the enemy to know that you're over IT, right? The last thing you want to do is release a video where you can look and say, no, we're in this location, and now the enemy knows, or we have this capability, or we can see this, this good. These are the technologies we have.

These videos here, ironically, are probably some of the least compelling videos. Now, people are all these are incredible. With these are the ones that are on classified that could be released.

The other one, some of these are so clear. The problem is, is how they were taken, the collection capabilities that we used to take them, where they were taken, under what circumstances of the meta data in the video. All that is a .

consideration OK. And do do the U. S. Government in the pension generally want people to believe that you are fos, U, A, P, S. Exist or not? I think it's both.

I think up until recently, nobody wanted to have this conversation. The problem is the government backed itself up after seventy years of denial into a corner. And he has to figure a way out. There are some elements now that want the conversation to occur. And so that's why you see converse getting engaged.

Why the creation of arrow but there are still elements, unfortunately, in the independent on I don't want this conversation to occur and they will continue doing what they can to discrete individuals and and launch this campaign against them. One of my colleagues, David Brooks, who was a decorated uh air force officer and a senior intelligence official, the moment he broke rank and went public about this topic, within twenty four hours, they released his medical records trying to describe him and they did IT illegally. Um so there air people there that definitely don't want this conversation to occur.

why? Well, there's lottery reasons why um you know back historically. Great question.

Let some. Can I impact a little bit, do you mother? okay. So let's start really at the heels of world war two, you have these food fighters that are being observed by light pilots, these luminous balls. I would follow them into combat areas.

And then after, particularly as we start developing in the atomic weapons, and we are releasing a lot of UFO of our controlled military airspace and over a cent of military installations, our research facilities. And so at the time you have this mindset, you have hide to the cold war, united states versus soviet union. And by the way, they had nukes instead.

We, right, you've got a real potential thread over there, and then you've got these other things over here. So as as a general in the panic, gon to say, look, I know these things are real, but they're not showing any over hostilities. Meanwhile, we've got this real issue over here, this real threat called sov union.

Let's focus on this thread and then we will worry about this other stuff later. The other part of that is the the mindset of look um it's really uncomfortable as a government have a conversation with its people about a problem that there is no solution for, right? We can see what they do, but there's not a thing thing we can do about IT. We can't stop what they're doing.

So do you really want to have a conversation with american people and admit a problem for which we all have a solution for IT, that governments are solution focused and that is not a great spot to be in, right? And it's, by the way, that the first time this happened, let's look at the youtube for examples, by plane, when we first built that, the CIA commissioned through lucky Martin skunk works, and we were flying that vehicle in contravention to a standing treaty we had with russia that we would not fly reman reconcile missions over russia, mainland russia, we were, but we built this plain to fly so fast and so high, we thought they couldn't detect us, right? And for a while we thought they could not, because we went unchAllenged until the russians were able to develop the surface to air missile S A two missile and successfully shoot one down.

And then, and only then did they admit to the world, we've been tracking these things since day one. The reason why they can talk about IT is because he didn't have a means to shoot IT down. So why admit a problem for which there's no solution until you have a solution? So that's another mindset depending on and then you had several studies done that we're commissioned by the U.

S. Government in the past that asked the question if we were to be honest and truthful about disclosure, about we're not alone in universe, these things are real, what would the consequences be? And the studies came back unanimous.

Ly, and you can do IT. The american people are not ready to have this conversation. It'll cause civil discord and IT.

It'll cause you upset the population and people lose faith in their religions and the economy may crash. You can do IT. And so the decision was made OK.

We're not going to do. In fact, we're going to actively suppressed information. We're going to stigmatized the heck out of IT. So bad that known what everyone even mentioned, the word UFO, and he was very successful.

That campaign to stigmatize this topic was so successful, in fact, that even now, it's hard to unwind the tape and have the conversation. And so there and lies part of the problem. Why doesn't the government parts? The government want to have this conversation.

Then you've got a legal issue, which is probably about the the biggest issue. Now you have elements in the government that we're making unilateral decisions not to inform congress and not to inform the president of the united states, right? That's illegal.

There are oversight committees that have a designated need to know on all intelligence matters, especially when IT comes to funding, right? We're spending billions of dollars on these projects. You've got to inform congress certain elements in the certain oversized committees like the senate committed intelligence.

They were being briefed to this. There's also this fear by some people on the inside, the government that, oh my gosh, I used to work on a secret uo program and i'm going to be in trouble now because, you know, we've been lined to congress. And so it's a little more complicated than than necessarily just a well, we want the truth. Be honest, it's not that easy .

to your knowledge has there ever been recovered um U A P O U F O materials what I can save what i've .

been allowed to say, which is yes, up until recently I wasn't even allowed to say that.

When did that change .

when that book are reviewed open to that point? I had signed documentation from the government saying, I will never discuss that ever.

What happens if you did?

Oh, jo, oh, that's why that book I had to go through the process, because what I run that book, I am allowed to talk about, I can go beyond that, but at least I can talk about that in the book. I talk about, yes, that the government's m position of material, exotic material, that doesn't look like IT to me by us.

Has there ever been anyone sent to jail because they've spoken about this subject matter worse.

worse and that that story has yet to be told? Yes, there are people who have had faced extreme disciplinary actions and and potentially worse.

the death penalty.

I'm not going to elaborate right now um because there's some things happening to try to put. This is why congress is working hard for whibley protections because we want people to feel safe to come out, have a conversation and right now, they don't feel very safe. Um they've seen some of the tactics and techniques that were applied to try to keep people quiet in the past.

Let me say this in general terms. People say, ah well the government would never kill anybody to protect a secret. Try going to every fifty one and look at the signs on that chambly fence where IT says, leather force authorized you cross our fence and they can kill you dead, kay. So the government can, under certain extreme cases, under certain extreme situations, in conditions, they can do whatever they need to do to protect national, national security. And they will.

Which department is that?

Because I can go into that conversation, unfortunately.

because people think of IT as maybe the C I. A or something.

But I elaborate.

unfortunate you, because I know very little about american. The government told departments in such, but obvious you most of the world knows about the like presidential associations and things like that so and I spoke to a few sei age and things like that cost before i've never really understood Frankly who would who would be making such an order and how those .

things don't leak you know well you know good question. Um luck we've we've done in the past another to be some pretty recently and another good case in point, and this has not attacking anybody. Um we have a drowned use drones to lethally kill people, americans and american citizens specifically and and and person's child without due process .

in the us .

not in the us. He was a us. citizen. He was suspected of being a terrorist.

And there's some other things i'm not going to go in there but um we as american citizens are are as amErica zen's as we are afforded something called due process under the love peace um and meaning you get your day in court no matter what and they've been americans where that hasn't been the case um they didn't get a day in court. Um someone made the decision to uh liquid them. Um you know there are examples of that happening. There's another one with with rose burbs the those who accused of selling the the atomic secrets the russian SHE giving you to them and if you know little bit about what happened with his wife, turns out that he was innocent and to .

his .

the hunger on her and him for for for aspinet. But because of the information that we had at the time, we was so sensitive we'd have to reveal a capability. So unfortunately, that looks like maybe we may have have done something that we knew we shall have done.

I wasn't around for that, so I can tell you definitively what happened. I can only tell you what what, what my understanding of IT is. I could absolutely be wrong, and I really hope I am. But IT turns out that, you know, there are. Extreme examples where we will take drastic measures to protect national security.

So in writing this book and talking about the subjects, you understand that there's some people that don't want you're talking about these subjects. So and you also understand that punishment for talking about these subjects in range from jail wise. So you know that I didn't say that.

I didn't say I wasn't scared. I mean, i'm taking huge risk. I my life has been threatened many times and it's very concerning for me.

It's a reason why I lived in wowing ing and i'm heavily armed and have now six german chapters yeah i'm very cautious and careful, but i'm also understanding I also know the left and right limits of the law, and i'm not going to break the law under any circumstances. I didn't this book is in a league. I'm authorized to talk about that book because I went through the proper processes of getting a reviewed, whether they like IT or not.

But yes, I am absolutely worried. You know, this is why i'm very careful when I say things, because I don't want to. I walk up to the line, I will not step over the line. I will not violate my security of and compromise national security for disclosure. And I don't think I have to.

I think the proof isn't the putting the fact that has been seven years and we've come this far in the conversation and I haven't on the jail and i'm still here to have a conversation, I think is indicated the fact that there is a right way in a wrong way to do. And I understand people want disclosure. I want IT now, but i've told people before there's a difference between doing things right and doing things right.

Now they're different, and we only get one chance to do this right. And so hopefull, we can have this conversation, this collective conversation, in a way where we don't have to be disruptive. No one has to be thread. No one has to go to jail. No one has to lose their jobs or anything like that.

You mention presidents. Anyone do presidents of the united states know about U. F. S?

Some do. Some do not. Unfortunately, there's a mindset by some people that think that politicians and presidents are temporary highs.

They here today gone in four years. So why brief them up on something? Especially if they have no military intelligence background.

It's a risk. So you know what? Don't breathe them.

Which presidents do you think we're aware of? U. F. And this these kinds of programs.

sure, well, we know for sure there were several no sure, for example, Carter was. But then how you know then? Well, because Carter was briefed, I know somebody who actually worked with Carter to get information on this topic.

I I will see the person's name, the person still alive. So I don't have permission to talk about that, but we know that for a fact and there's record of IT, but there's other presence like bill clinton who wasn't briefed but wanted to be brief. Ed, right? And so um and again, this is the crutch of the problem who's making the decision on what president gets a break on what doesn't that's that's nonsense.

President George bush senior was briefed when he was also the director of the CIA. So he was very well aware this topic but then there's other president that weren't. And so this is again this that is highlighting the very problem that I have who's making the decision to choose, who gets .

briefs in.

who doing for them. Obama has uh, recently stayed for the record that the U A P, our national security issue, not a threat, but an issue that there's something there that this isn't real, whatever they are, whatever IT is trump, recently, a former president, trump said, uh, we can half ago for the record when asked that he would be willing to release the UFO files and that he wanted to do IT in the past, but he faced fierce resistance.

I think about that statement for a minute. Who the hell is giving him resistance to releasing u. Files when you were the president? right? That is that is a very significant statement.

That is what needs to be fixed if the president himself can't get, or herself can get a brief ing. Who in the hell has the authority ties to make that decision? nobody.

What is that face resistance I trumps talking about.

I don't know .

you have fast, strong or do you .

think is ah, I think there is a huge amount of influences by the military industrial complex and they they IT is enormous business always husband, it's it's it's huge and is probably the world's largest business globally.

And why wouldn't the military industrial complex want those files .

to be released? Well, because they have to meet that the part of the part of the program some of these folks know had been a lot of their successes is being able to work super secret programme for the U. S.

government. And maybe there's technology that they all want release, maybe this capability that we had that we don't want to tell our adversaries. And there's a lot of reasons for IT, which you understand some of actually legitimate I can understand, I don't agree with, but I can understand .

how much you think the average person on the street notes about what goes on in depends gone and behind the scenes of .

the government. Rather, it's forget the government pending on how many parents they can tell you who's a quarter back of their favorite football team, and they can tell you their stats, but how many parents know who their kids sits, sits next to drink lunch or in second period math class IT. Government is, I mean, that basic facts, man, as humans, most of us, we suck.

We don't know anything. And we're so used to being force information by whatever outlet to sure we wanted tune into. You know, if i'm a liberal, I watch this, we conserve to watch that go straight, my echo chAmber, and, you know, just hear what I want to hear, and have people telling not only information that I, that they think I need to know, but even my opinion.

But what I should be about this is a much, much bigger issue than just U I. Foes and U A P. We as as as people have become extremely lazy and we we no longer are willing to ask the hard questions. We're not you are part of one program.

but you also references the second program called the legacy program. What is the legacy program?

IT is the traditional long held effort by the U. S. Government to study U.

A. P. People think ap was only programme in our step. Before that there was, there was blue book.

And before that was the legged program is the collaborate effort of individuals over the courses several decades that have been looking into this topic for the U. S. Government and by the U. S. government.

And OK just doing similar things to what I did.

Yes, moral, but much more well funded.

I wonder why they didn't fun that as well these days.

There was a reason for that, too, that I, eg. We need permission to talk about. There were some distractions in the early two thousands that lifted and shifted resources away from from efforts to something else public. I can figure out what this, what that was, but there was an enormous resource drain and refocusing in the early two thousands to focus on something else. And so I I heard you talk .

as well about this sort of different types of aliens person. Because when we think of aliens, we will reflect on movies that we've seen, and they have like the big heads and things like that, and maybe they like like White, tall, skinny, would like the big arms and the big legs and stuff like that. Is that what people in the pentagon consider aliens to be?

What we see in movies I can speak have of other people, I can speak on behalf of me. Um i've been very very careful not to to steer your type anybody or anything I think is important. We have to keep an open mind because when you say the word aliens, you are automatically presume that these things are from outer space.

They might not be. There's a lot of different options. IT doesn't have to be from other space.

What do you believe? Believe amongst us?

Well, that this left. Can I explore this with you this question? Okay, so it's not either or so. In the beginning of our conversation, I told you, I went to the university miami, and I studied microblog. Imminent logy is to appreciate.

Now, if you go to some anthropologists, they will suggest to you that modern human beings homosapien sapient, has been around roughly between one hundred, possibly two hundred thousand years. So on the twenty four hour clock, right? It's only the last two thousand years.

And IT was the greeks. I propose there were two fundamental life forms on this planet. And you were either a plant or you were an animal, and human beings were an animal. And so twenty four o clock, try to me.

And ten minutes ago, before midnight, well, I was three hundred years ago during the renal sance or the days of enlightenment, that we discovered an entire new life farm on this planet that's been here all along, and that that was neither planned nor animal IT was the world of fungus. And we pat ourselves and shoulder, say, we found a new life form in the twenty four o'clock. He's been probably the last, maybe ten seconds, last hundred and twenty years only, that we discovered for the first time the true dominant alpha life form on this planet.

And in fact, if you take all the plant and all the BIOS of every animal and all the BIOS of every fungus and added IT all together, IT still will not equal the biomass of this hidden, yet dominant life form has been on this planet all along. And IT wasn't until we could have the technology to curve glass and look through a little tube and famously shut the words, little bees, little bees. Did we discover the world of micro organisms? Okay, the true dominant life form on this planet that's been here all along.

In fact, it's inside of us. IT makes us up. It's pervasive everywhere. And we just discovered IT.

So when I say to people, you know, my people, how do you think from other space they can be from outer space into space? Or Frankly, the space between these things can be just as natural torn environment as we are? Maybe we're at the point now our technologically, we can start interacting.

Maybe they're from under the ocean. Look, less than ten percent of the ocean floor has been mapped. We know more about the surface of the moon than we do of our own oceans is impossible.

These things are just as natural to this planet as we are possibly. Or is IT possibly things are from somewhere else? Yes, that's possible too.

So we have to keep all options on the table until there are no longer on the table. We live in an infinitely, infinitely complex universe. See if I can.

And i've often used this before to try to help people wrap their heads around, around this. We perceive life through five fundamental, five fundamental census. And if we can touch a taste IT here, IT smell the other, we can interact with that.

We have no ideas there. Where I live on wye, ming, we have beautiful night skies and included night skies. And you can see all the havens, beautiful milky way, in front of you.

If you were looking at at that same night sky through a radio telescope, you would see something different. You would see nebula, you would see things that you can't Normally perceive. And the ultraViolet and inference spectrum and x ray, right? It's there.

You just can't perceive IT. It's just like if you had cell phone vision, all of us said, now you can see in wifi in five g, you would see an entirely different reality around you. So we perceive light.

We perceive life through a very narrow spectrum of visible light. And visible light spectrum in reality is most everything else kind of lies beyond that. And then you have a scale issue, you have a scalability issue. What I mean by scalability, we are a human being.

You and our having a lovely conversation here somewhere in some place on this planet revolving around an obscure star, an obscure part of the nokia galaxy, like it's a supercluster, other galaxies, the visible horizon from any direction we look at of light, the size of the universe, has been estimated to be between thirteen point six to thirty point nine billion lights, b. billion. What is a lighter? Lighter is the distance set of photon of light can travel in the course of a year.

And how fast is that? Well, light travel at roughly one hundred and eighty six thousand miles per second, or seven and a half times around our planet in one second, right? Really fast. Imagine how far that goes in a year, and I imagine how far that goes.

Thirteen point nine billion years, right? So we're in the middle, the universe here, or universal horizon in any direction of thirteen point nine billion light years, and in that direction another thirteen point nine. So you roughly twenty seven billion lightyears are crossing where in the middle? Now scientists are estimating that that's less than ten percent of the actual size of universe.

Universe actually much, much bigger than that. This is just the univer universal horizon because they expansion in the universe like this far will never reach earth. So now you're talking about a size one hundred billion light years.

And as small as we are, right in the middle is infinitely ally small back. Keep in mind, in our visible universe alone, visible, there are more stars than there are grains of sand and all the beaches in all the world. Think about that incomprehensible number.

And as small as we are now, humor me with this. Take one adam, one hydrogen en. Adam alv gorgeous number one times to tend to the negative twenty three.

Okay, that's roughly the same order of magnet be as we are to the universe. So we had this entire huge universe outside, and this entire universe inside every single human being. And we is in human beings can only interact with one or two orders of magnus de upper down.

Otherwise the universe is simply too big or too small. We just will never be able to know. And that is reality.

That's where most of everything lies. That's where most reality is. See the back there or insider everything in between.

So I guess my point is, every time when people say, well, you, the aliens, what does IT mean? What doesn't mean? Because most people say aliens and hollywood and little egg s running around, there's so much more to IT IT doesn't this is, this is us imposing a hollywood idea of what an alien should look like, and by the way, that I forget their anthropophagy values, right? They look like us and arms like us and eyes like us and eyes like us um because we view everything through anthropometric eyes to reason why we call our dogs human names and we treat them like humans because we treat everything as if they have human values, human motivation, human intent.

When we may be dealing with something completely different, this could be like artificial intelligence. It's just binary input in input out. We don't know. And so these are some of the questions we have to know really what we moving down this this pathway. This is why always tell people, look, all options have to be on the table until they are longer on the table because we simply don't know.

We also don't know what their intentions are and why they might be here. That's right. Why they might be visiting here, that's right. Do you have a any theories as to what their intentions .

might be rather as a whole range of theories? I mean, IT could be simply as like number on the african sangean. And we see the will to be some when a helicopter.

And not to make fun of you sit there, I said that when we darted on, what do we do? We need the helicopter. We come out.

We draw blood. We do test. You want to see its diet. And his migratory ory patterns is health.

And then what happens to will the beast wakes up, kind of growing, distorting ted stumbles over to the watering and holding, like, hey, billions. Not going to believe this. Me and this thinking out of the sky.

Also, weird self happened. I was being touched. I woke up in my bird. right? IT could be something as simple as that.

Do you believe in these reports? Because people do say that they were abducted by this is my point.

right? So so that's that's one. After the other option to be simply to monitor us um IT could be that we are getting very close to being able to replicate what they can do um and if that's a case, you know, maybe technological, were only one hundred, two hundred years bind.

And if that's the case, now all of us, son, we're gonna new neighbors, right? And that could be problems because our species very violent. We do about bad things to each other. Are we really ready to go out and meet our potential friends from at a time? I mean, we're pretty horrible to each other. So maybe not certainly, if I was them and we I knew we were getting close, I would probably pretty interested in, in what we're doing to as far as the abductions, you know I don't know what to tell you because i've never been abducted um i've had some some people that swear by but you know you can have a conversation about abduction and then say over here for peaceful reasons doesn't work that way.

Do you believe that the people that .

sweat by I believe believe that they are being truthful, that that experience they feel is real? I don't think they're lying um but the question is no what happened .

is the question .

yeah and and I I can't say because I wasn't there, but I can tell you that we definitely have people that i've had experiences where they are now on us government full medical disability in writing because I got too close to a ap that was a deliberate that they got injured or was IT just A A by product of the technology. They ve got too close to IT.

What does that mean? They got too close to IT. And you mention that this some people that are on U.

S. Disability allowance, so that being paid by the U. S. government.

And writing because they had A, A, U, P, they were involved in A U, P, encounter.

And what does that mean? U, P, encounter in that definition?

Well, that's going this way. Now here's a Better one. You go to the airport and i'm going to hop on a seven, thirty seven ago flight of later deal.

There's not a real threat there. I'm getting on a plane. It's safe selling the seat. Have a cocktail. You watch a movie, reading magazine.

Now, if I were to walk out onto the tarmac, onto the runway, that same with the same airplane is, and that airplane decides to spell up its jet engine chance, i'm going to be entered, i'm going to get burned, i'm going to lose my hearing. And possibly a lot worse, right? There are individuals, U.

S. Government service men and women. And there's also intelligence officials who have been injured by getting too close to A U A P, whether incidentally or or IT was delivery or not. The question is, was an injury sustained because was deliberate or was an injury sustained because IT was just a matter being too close to the technology? For example, as I putting your head in a microwave oven went, it's on probably not very .

good for you right now.

Those people spoken out absolutely .

what's like a good example.

There's an individual right now named jAmbers who who had his medical files classified in the U. S. Government, thankfully, because of senator late senator john mccain from arizona, forced the air force to release these files and as a result, he was able to get full medical disability because of an incident that involved h him in another individual in the U.

K. A, known as a random m forest incident or bent waters incident where there was a us joint us uh in U. K. Base and there was a UFO incident where this thing had landed in the in the forest and they went out to go to see this thing and they were injured and .

they were in the military the time.

therefore, special police or police officers.

They were injured.

They were injured, and that's not odd. There is a lot of people that have been injured right now that are under medical care by government doctors that in fact.

When they get their account, what happened or do they say that you ask?

I mean, there's some consistency without within some of the stories and then there's some divergence. It's like somebody who says been in a car accident, depending kind of car you're in, was a multiple car pileup. And where are you sitting in the car? You can have a slightly different experience.

So it's not once you at all you talk about how they there's been a lot of U A P sightings at nuclear technology facilities. yes.

And that is why this is a national security issue because they seem to be able to disable our nuclear capabilities. People say, oh, that's like thinking matches out of a kid's hands and it's, you know well, maybe but in russia, there's information to suggest you actually turn them on. So you we have to be really careful with that.

No, our nuclear triad capability is really the crown jewels of the U. S. government. And so if a country or an adversary has ability to interfere with a nuclear response that's significant.

is evidence to suggest that they turned down on the nuclear facilities in russia. yes. What is evidence when there there's .

evidence that there's actually A K G B report um that suggested that the one of their their places that actually turned on. In fact, there's a lot ir than you careful with x. So after the brilliant wall fell, there was this brief honeyman period between the soviet union in the us, where X, K, G, B officers were sharing information with us and our government. I think that's about I like to probably say about that, but there was some very interesting information that we're able to to see.

I was really interesting .

incident .

called the class instance, which was in one thousand nine seventy seven to one thousand nine seventy eight. And IT sounds did like A U. A P. Incidents that was witnessed by hundreds, thousands of people .

who was investigated officially by the brazil military under the command control of a four star general name, general cha, and he has explained before he passed away that even his own military personnel .

have been been attacked by by U.

A, P.

And what do they say? What was what they documents?

My goodness, a whole let me of things a lot of the locals recall being terrified by these things, being pursued by them, almost being like like a laser blast, if you can imagine, directed energy type injury. Um very provocative. Um some of the military personnel were injured as well. A lot of medical doctor's came in afterwards to look at the locals in the military personnel, validating the presumption that there was some sort of directed energy types damage, tissue damage to some of these people. And of course, then the fear kind of escalates into some of the other local law of some other things um but he was very well established by the brazilian military who also witnessed these encounters so it's not like just some people in a remote village um these were brazilian military officers who also vowed for and if I spoke to dozens and dozens of military officers all throughout that amErica and chili and peru and a why and you know they are reporting in some cases some very, very similar encounters. Not necessarily with coats but inside among themselves people who do not even know each other separated by different countries, are telling me they're same encounter in the same method gy of craft and how they were in some cases even try to engage in a dog fight and use cannas conventional guns um to no avail of course um and the report of that in tehran an incident believes next hundred seventy eight the tehran an incident with an fourteen tomcat where the pilot um his aircraft was disabled every time we tried to engage a target and then you know I superimposed that with here in hand fill all obama we have helicopters are that we were testing and something eight hundred eight s pilots reported U A P coming around their their helicopter of father were testing them and one he reported that he believed his his his helicopter was disabled and he went into an emergency situation I think he was an emergency order rotation situation and as soon as the U A P left he was able to regain control of his helicopter.

Should we be worried about this? No.

I don't think worried. I think we should be concerned because look from from a government perspective to determine the sense. I always say this is a national security issue but not a national national security threat, and there's a reason why.

So there's a very simple calculus to determine if something is a threat to capabilities versus intent. We have seen some of the capabilities. We have no idea the intent, no problem. So we don't know if it's if it's a threat.

And let me give you a little analogy here that might help going to put this I use this energy a lot to help illustrate what do I mean um i'm sure you live in lovely home. Let me ask you a question. Do you lock your front door before you go to bed? yes.

okay. And you I do to and I think most people, we don't expect anything bad that happen, but just had a precaution, right? And some folks may go the extra mile and decide, you know, you just make sure the windows are locked once in a while.

And, you know, I might even turn the alarm at at night because I can, let's say, you wake up on sunday morning to have yourself a nice hot cup of tea or coffee, and you walk downstairs and all of a sudden that you come downstairs one bright morning, you notice size twelve multi I boot prints on your living room carpet that we're not there the night before. Now no one has been hurt. Nothing's had a place.

But despite you locking the front door and checking the windows and turning on the alarm, there are now boot print in your living room floor that we're not there than I before. My question to use, is that a threat? My responses IT could be if I wanted to be.

So you should probably figure out how it's getting into the house. This is kind of the same analogy of these things that can come in and immediate unchAllenging to control U. S. Space of a sense of of military installations, potentially interfere with our nuclear equities and capabilities. We should probably figure what these things .

are with everything that you know in mind. Did everything you've witnessed seeing if you had to argue against yourself, you had to argue the case against everything that you believe to make the case that U. A, P, S. Don't exist, what exactly would you say? Well.

you can say they don't exist. We've really well beyond that. They're real, whatever they are.

But I could to make the argument that is far and other serial technology is russia, is china, right? They have the frog as technologically and have been able to execute this this plane wonderfully. And then the other option is dance all the grand hallucination.

So let's go down each argument. Let's go down the fact that maybe this is chinese technology, russian technology. After all, the chinese did send balloons over northern communist states by baLance, who knows how long and we have did anything about IT and attracted IT.

Um that means that for the last seventy years some country has been able to create a technology in secret that's so far advanced anything we have and by the way, deploy IT over the continent united states for seventy years, completely not attributed. Now where were we seventy years ago? Well, we're on the heels of, or bar tube.

We had just broken the sound barrier, and we had made IT into space. Yet where was china in the middle of famine? Where was russia? No Better than we were. So if this was chinese technology or russian technology back then, because we have the data show, goes all way back, this would be the greatest intelligence failure this country has ever faced, eclipsing that of even nine eleven.

Because despite the billions of dollars in the seventeen intelligence organizations over seven years, there is not a trace that these countries were able to develop this and and fly over our country and do IT what we're saying. So that's option one. Also temporary speaking, that type technology didn't exist back in one thousand and fifty nineteen and forty eight.

We not not by us anyway. So that would be like going into king touch tune for the very first time in the one thousand nine hundred and twenties and looking in there and all of a sudden discovering a fully assembled and functioning seven and forty seven doesn't make sense. Egyptians and have the technology back then.

So it's going to other options. So that would be the huge, biggest intelligence failure that this country's ever experience. And that's not a good option and very, very unlikely.

So the other options, this is not a mash holston ation. Everybody's crazy. So let's go down around hall for a second.

So some of the best and brightest in our intelligence community or department of defense, our top gun trained pilots who are who are trust to fly live mdi ans over cities, populated cities, fighting, win wars on our behalf, men and women who have their finger literally on the nuclear button, they're all crazy. They're all absolutely certified insane. We've got a bigger problem .

on our hands in new ap. What percentage of them have made reports of U A. P? You know it's .

hard to say percent because you don't know because the ones I don't report, there's no way to measure, right? You only know the ones that do report. So there's no way now we can tell you that people more, more reporting because they feel that it's safe, that they can report. But we don't have any metric right now that tells us who's not reporting because are not reporting.

We think about this hallucination rational um I remember many years ago, you know, I think I was in relation to uh physical halston ation the ghost and things like that. Here IT was relation to ghost. Someone said to me, they said, if really extremely improbable things never happened, then that would be a miracle.

Because just like the nature of probability means that most sort of predictable things happen most of the time. And then if you get done probability, there's this one side of IT, which is highly improbable. Yeah, exactly.

So like the bills ship of this side of IT is extremely improbable things. You know what's to think? Extremely probable. Example, what we start talking about, Andrew huberman. And then my phone rings in this Andrew huberman en.

And we go, oh my god, what are the ods of that being Andrew huberman? We are just talking about him. And the issue there is, we spoke about many people, and the phone never wrong.

But on the one time IT does we go, we connect the dots. In hindsight, we go bad as a miro, and we attribute meaning to that is IT not possible that if there thousands and thousands of these sightings, there's also billions of non sightings. So on that bell cover of probability there, this is, these are just the the unexplainable, highly improbable. Thousand incidents of, you know, maybe there were something on the camera.

maybe there were lights moment. But the problem is we're going back to the, to the the idea that there are multiple sensor systems collecting the same information at the same time, at the same circumstances, right? This isn't just one person like you're call oh my god, SHE out of the guy calls.

You've got multiple platforms for reporting the information at the same time simulator ously, right? So it's not just, oh, well, I saw atmosphere ic aeration the right are picking IT up, the gun cameras picking IT up, the flares picking IT up. And another rare assistants picking IT up.

And another rare. And by the way, other capable bodies, which I can't discuss here are also picking IT up. So it's real thing now, could IT be russian rocket on reentry that happened to use up all hydrogen, and now the booster rock is burning up? yeah.

But then you don't have these ninety degree turns. You don't have one hundred and eighty degree turns. You don't have something coming in, sitting at eighty thousand feet, then dropping out right above the surface of the water, hovering fifty feet, popping right back up again, that you can mention quantifiable and qualified data is.

I think, to what they call the titch incident.

that so the take, that's not the video, the titch, but a the take tech incident, are these objects that were detected at one point, one of the the Operators that IT was raining UFO s so the spy, when rather can, can detect a baseball size object at eighty thousand feet. Okay, very, very capable.

You had e to hockey at air platform and aircraft of flying radar system that we use to provide combat support, air support and and combat control for aircraft. So you have the ages class destroyed. It's basically like rogue class, I think have the U. S, S. Principle with the spy on right are one of the world's most premiere at the time, setting radar systems on the planet.

You have the e to hawkeye also picking IT up on, rather then you have the aircraft that could pick IT up on, rather then you have the I witnesses picking up, rather then you have to also the footage of flare footage picking these things up as well. Electro optics. Ally, so you're talking about something that is at eighty thousand feet, then within a blink of, and I has abilities, dropped down to fifty feet, and they go right back up again instantly.

And it's all being verified by very different senor system. Now in this particular case of convolution, a little bit because the pilot incident confirmed the title, but they didn't see a dropping out of eighty thousand and feet. I'm i'm kind of putting IT all together to make a little easier for people to consume.

But the the picture c incident wasn't really incident. IT was incidents over over a proc protracted period of time in in the early november time frame. So IT wasn't just one incident. There are multiple incidents, but it's referred to as the tick tac incident because the pilot actually reported seeing this White flying. What's been described as a lawing, what been described historical as a White flying beauty tank in this particular case was described as .

a White flying tik tech like the breath mt.

Tik tech. And they they sort go up, down, disappear over the horizon only later on within a few moments to be picked up on radar again sixty miles away at their time point where this post for one of view next. Um so you're talking incredible speeds, incredible accelerate, hypersonic velocity, entertaining acceleration, logs of ability, all the antigravity, all the the observer ABS and that is one that just one is publicly note there's a lot more of these things that been been happening.

How long will you, with this working on that project of the pentagon? A tip.

eight years.

eight years.

I'm all guy. This is great, not blood.

Let's talk about us one so whee p quickly when I on the home stretch of so block over. And this is where I would Normally share my key takes. But as I haven't been drinking for over a year now, I thought you might prefer to hear from a listener who's given up alcohol for the first time through this web.

So rocker, a chAllenge. Earlier this week, charlie from manchester, send me this message. The last few weeks have been so transformative while I haven't given up drinking for good woop. So bcc tober chAllenge has shown me just how much my body needs time away from drinking, especially during periods when I really need to perform. I've slept Better and I felt more mental clarity control each day. So brook tober is almost over, but your chance to learn more about your body is not if you're not yet a week member, go to join dot wop dot coms like CEO to free trial today.

This episode is brought you by global x since two thousand and eight, global x etf has been committed to empowering investors with unexplored intelligence solutions. Global x specialize in an exchange funds that offer exposure to the artificial intelligence ecosystem, including themes like data centers, robotics, semiconductors and cloud computing. To learn more about global access, entire sweet of etf from covered calls, fixed income, emerging markets and more, visit global x etf dot com.

What was like a, what's like a day in the life of someone working in a project that deals with U. F. S. At the pentagon? Like you come in in the morning, you get your coffee.

I had the two worst portfolios. Anybody could ever ask for the pennon. Um I was, I was like a para.

I had a two most unpopular portfolio. I was on one hand, I was working the U A P issue, UFO issue. On the other hand, I was also working one time of a bay issues.

Very politically charged, very untainted situation, but that was much up. So I had both those portfolios. And so every day was was like writing a tiger to work. And every day that tiger just wanted to rip you off and trade with the pieces and you just had a whole for dear life. Yeah IT was IT was stressed in twenty fourteen I was informed that I was put on the ice is how kind of kills for uh my work at involving going tana a bay um and of course, uh we had A U A P issue IT was IT was uncomfortable IT was uncomfortable times IT was uncomfortable time for for me um professionally I have wished on anywhere.

Anybody did you do IT I enjoyed the people.

I enjoyed the the the mission and and doing what I thought and what I think is right for our nation. But no, I mean, if if there was an easier job I could have, I probably would have done IT. But most of my job, I intended to be hand picked to do the jobs I had done. I guess someone, somewhere I thought I was doing a good job with other stuff, and they be kind of always bumping a new stuff.

How does your work with uf hos and your belief in these other, I was going to say, life forms, but just these other forms of, I don't know, activity that we can't explain.

because I hesitated on the word and is not believe in, I believe in possibilities. I don't know. I can't tell you definitively that I believe you know, life and then looks like this in other parts of the gala. I don't know, I don't know that have been this space, I can tell you, but we have to remain open to the possibilities and look at the data, the data speak for itself, and then draw conclusions based upon the data.

Did this understanding make your life more fulfill or feel more insignificant? Because I sometimes think of, when I spend time watching space movies and documentaries, and I see them flying to mars and then throw these black holes and stuff, IT reminds me how big and vast the university is. And all of that then makes me feel a few things, two things in at the same time.

One of them is like totally insignificant in the grand scheme of what's out there. And the technologies you've described in the way you've described them in part makes me feel quite significant because I like i'm just this tiny little grain of sand in this never ending beach. And I really do matter in the grand scheme of this. And in the second thing, which is a positive consequence of that feeling is kind of elevate your anxiety, I guess, like nothing really matters. There's nothing to worry about .

because very insight ful. Can I, can I ask you a favorite so you have other life front of you? Type in the words pale blue dot under google images, and I want you to tell me what you see.

O, K, i'll type in pay or blue dot.

Do you know what that is? Take a look at that. Blow up women. But easy.

A tiny dot of light. tiny. This is massive. I think that looks like and like the night sky, almost. And there's a tiny little dot of light.

You know what that is?

What is that?

That's the planet you live .

on that earth.

Every memory, every piece of history occurred on that tiny little insignificant ball hurling through the vast and vacuum of space. And that way of light is actually from the sun. And that was taken by one of our probes as he was heading out through the solar system. And I was told the turn back and take a picture that our home, how does that picture make you feel?

Tally, insignificant, irrelevant.

like I just don't matter. But but how about this? Yes, IT will make you feel significant. But you know what we can do make you realize just how special we really are, that little blue dot, the little engine that could, that's where we live, that our home, and that is real, and that is special.

So to answer your question, how does that make me feel? You can feel insignificant and still feel special at the same time. And that's why I wanted you to see that picture, because you're illustrating for me exactly the question you're asking me. And so in order to rather than just give you an answer, I wanted you to experience my answer and that is my answer.

What do your kids think of what you do these days? I don't know what I do.

My children are the greatest accomplishment in my life. They'll be nothing in my life that will ever come close to the achievement of being a father. Period, full stop.

So if nothing I will ever do that will come close to that. So IT doesn't really matter um what I do else and life, because that's the most import. Now what do they think about what I do? You probably have to ask them.

do they believe in U A P?

Is I believe they believe in data. I never told they believe in U A P.

But do they believe that we are alone in the universe?

That's a different question. Um let's well, you'd have to ask them for that. But but let me let let's break that down again because it's important we love going into these binary things either or kay, does life exist in the universe? Yes, this is living proof.

This planet. Kay, in fact, life is abundant. Life is everywhere on this planet. Even the place that we think could never be possible exist. IT is there and IT thrives. Um my my daughters are very open mind, but there are also independent thinkers.

I taught them, don't be like mom and dad if you don't want to be like mom and dad if we do something stupid don't do IT learn a less than um so we've never prescribe bed our children what to think of, what to believe, ever. It's been up to them um they are incredibly intelligent. They both have very successful careers uh and they think on their own and what they think is sacred and I don't everyone to interfere with that. I have always told them you don't not ask you to believe anything.

Do you believe we are learn in the universe?

We are actually not alone in universe.

We just Better hope the other life is kind, I guess.

See but there we go again is on me too. But but what is kind?

They don't .

have us that's different.

right?

right? Let's hope not event I would agree with that, that hoped you're not you know here for their own interest in not hours.

Why did you call the procurement .

of the open the first page there? When you get to the first written bachelor words, it's before the forward, it's what to say.

says you may be wondering why I titled this recommends the way itself sometimes is associated with another word, threat. Although at first gLance, IT may appear that this book focuses on the potential threat of an identified anonymous phenomena, U, A, P or U, F S. In the vacuum.

That is not my intent, according to some of the common definitions of the word, imminent IT usually means something is about to happen or impending or inevitable. This is precisely why I chose that. This title.

the invasion, is an imminent note.

That's kind of what i'm trying to check.

I know, but that's not my intent. We have a closing traditional .

past with the last guest leaves the question for the next guest not knowing who are going to be leaving IT. And the question that's been left for you is what is something you will once deeply afraid of that now you are no longer afraid of?

bear. Fear, not afraid of IT anymore. I used to be afraid of everything, afraid of the of combat, afraid of death, afraid of warm RAID of health care issues, RAID of other people for me, but rather people. It's a little deliberating to not be afraid take the old saying the only thing we have to fear is fear itself right? Um I mean clearly i'm still concerned there's concerned but actual fear and i'm over fifty years old brother.

There's nothing anybody can do to me that at this point of little of full life, and i've had more than my fair share, whatever do you if I spend the rest of my life IT doesn't matter, because I live such an incredible life, an incredible family doesn't really matter. Thank you. Thank you for .

your department and thank you for writing a book which give us very, very rare view into what happens inside the pentagon as a relate to the subject of U A P last uf hos. It's called inside the pentagon hand view foes eminent. And I highly recommend anybody that's interested in me subjects to read this, but a linked in the description below because it's fascinating.

You know, i'm certain ly someone that these are not alone in the universe. I have no idea what that means, what that looks like. And I think to really have a strong view, the way um to think that we're not alone or to think that you can perfectly articulate who is here with us is probably some form of navy and ignorance and probably you are the one in the .

same right the true drivers and the true skeptics. They're just on opposite and is a spectrum because no matter what information you give them, they're never gonna our narrative. So I I think you right .

I think generally, I think a Better position to take on all these subjects is to remain open minded and that's why was keen to have this conversation, because I just I like to remain open minded to information. And there so many times in history that we thought we had to figure out, we didn't. So to think we have to figure out now is, is, is stupidity, Frankly. So no.

thank you, my auto privilege. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Isn't this cool? Every single conversation I have here on the diversity, the very invite you'll know, I asked the guest to leave a question in the diary of a CEO. And what we've done is we turned every single question written in the diary of a CEO into these conversation cards that you can play at home.

So you ve got every guest we've ever had their question. And on the back of IT, if you scan that Q R code, you get to watch the person who answer that question. We're finally revealing all of the questions and the people that answer the question.

The brand new very two updated conversation cards are out right now at the conversation cards dot com. They sold out twice instantaneously. So you are interesting getting hold of some limited addition conversation cards. I really, really recommend acting quickly.