December 2, 2023 • 19 mins
A Momentous piece of legislation is currently being fought over in the halls of Congress, not that you would know that by watching the Mainstream Media.
Join Chris as he attempts to demystify the UAP Disclosure Act of 2023, currently on Congress's front burner and hotly contested by a few who would like to see it scuttled. Chris provides an overview of the Act and how it functions, as well as some of the astounding language it contains.
This groundbreaking legislation, backed by an unexpected bipartisan coalition, holds the promise to dramatically reshape our understanding of a potential non-human intelligence and technologies of unknown provenance.
Exciting stuff, enjoy!
Contact Us:
Twitter: @NotSoDeepShit
Facebook.com/NSDSChrisandSteve
Instagram.com/nsdschrisandsteve
Email: nsdschrisandsteve@gmail.com
Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE, LIKE and LEAVE A REVIEW for the show!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
a pretty significant piece of legislation currently
being battled over in Congressthat most people don't know
about the UAP Disclosure Act of2023.
The passage of this act couldunlock everything the government
knows about unidentifiedanomalous phenomena UAPs, which
used to be called UFOs but oddlyit's not getting much attention
(00:21):
.
So why is this legislationimportant and why is it being
almost completely ignored by themainstream press?
Let's dive in and find outChris here flying solo without
(01:07):
Steve this time around, but heand I will be recording an
episode together very soon, butin the meantime, I wanted to do
a deep dive on this UAPDisclosure Act of 2023 because
it's such an important lawthat's being currently fought
over in Congress and it's a hugebattle about it, and I'm
(01:30):
shocked that people don't knowabout it.
So I'm going to go through someof the aspects of it and I
think by the end of this, you'llsee that this is not what you'd
usually expect.
This is something quite out ofthe ordinary, but anyway, the
UAP Disclosure Act of 2023 wasintroduced of July of this past
(01:51):
year and is an amendment forwhat's called the National
Defense Authorization Act forfiscal year 2024.
The National DefenseAuthorization Act is something
that's passed every year byCongress, and what they do is
that funds the military andintelligence organizations for
the upcoming year, so prettymuch everything is in there that
(02:12):
money is going to be spent on.
So the intention of this act isto centralize all the
information in the governmentrelated to UAP unidentified
anomalous phenomena and increasepublic transparency around what
the government knows about itand encourage scientists to
(02:33):
finally get involved with thistopic, because up till now they
really haven't.
So the key sponsors of thislegislation are Chuck Schumer,
the majority leader in theSenate, and supported by a
bipartisan group of senatorsincluding Mike Rounds, marco
Rubio, kirsten Gillibrand, toddYoung and Martin Heinrich, so
(02:58):
there's a mix of Republicans andDemocrats all supporting this.
That alone should make this getmore attention, just because
that's so unusual right now it'snot generally what we see.
So here are some of the thingsthat this act is meant to do.
First of all, establish UAPrecords collection in the
(03:18):
National Archives.
So this act is meant to do thefollowing Establish a UAP
records collection in theNational Archives, pulling in
all the information from acrossthe government about what they
know about UAP and putting itall in one place, getting it and
(03:39):
cataloging it so it'ssearchable and then opening it
up to the public.
That alone is huge, the factthat finally they're going to
get all this information put inone place where we can all see
it and we can all see what'sgoing on.
Basically, I know there are alot of people out there that are
still skeptical about UFOs,uaps, and they're not really
(04:01):
sure that anything unusual ishappening and they often say,
well, this is probably Earthtechnology from another nation
spying, and they sort of dismissit as that.
But I think some of thespecific things in this
legislation, the specificwording they use, will really
(04:22):
come as surprise and possiblyeven shock to some people who
are less inclined to thinkthere's something about all this
.
So, first of all, the very factthat it acknowledges that the
government does have a lot ofinformation on UAP that they
haven't shared, that hasn't beendeclassified, and also that a
(04:45):
lot of it has been placed undersomething called the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954.
So the Atomic Energy Act of1954 was basically this law that
put anything having to donuclear because of nuclear
weapons and nuclear power andall that anything nuclear falls
(05:05):
under a different set of rulesas far as declassifying it like
you normally would.
So a lot of it isn't.
You're not able to get itthrough the Freedom of
Information Act.
You can't automatically.
It doesn't become automaticallydeclassified after a certain
amount of time, which is alsotrue of some cases, so that
(05:28):
Atomic Energy Act puts anythingunder it completely outside of
the scope of oversight for themost part, except for a very
limited amount whoever hasaccess to it specifically?
So that's huge.
You know the fact that there's aneed for this legislation, that
it points out that the currentlaws, as they exist, are not
(05:53):
adequate for giving the peopleproper visibility into what's
going on on this topic.
Also, wouldn't it make peoplethink, hey, other other topics
we're not seeing full visibilityon, but that's a matter for
another day?
Close observers you know itdefines what a close observer of
(06:14):
a UAP is and how it's the closeproximity to a non-human
intelligence.
The fact that this legislationtalks about a planned,
controlled disclosure campaign,that they actually want to
disclose the topic, but thatthey realize that it's sensitive
(06:35):
and potentially very impactfulinformation and has to be rolled
out carefully.
So it talks about this in thelegislation.
Think about that.
It's pointing out howearth-shattering this
information is and how we haveto be careful getting it out.
(06:56):
The very fact that it mentionsnon-human intelligence like this
is unprecedented, and itdoesn't just mention non-human
intelligence once.
The term is used in this UAPDisclosure Act 22 times.
It also repeats what's beencommunicated in a lot of the UAP
(07:21):
reports that have come out inthe past, is that there are
technologies of unknown originsoperating in our airspace, and
it talks about technologies ofunknown origin in that it's
referring to things that itdefines as Technologies
associated with UAPs that lackknown human manufacture or
(07:43):
design.
It's already talking aboutsomething completely outside the
norm.
So let's talk about non-humanintelligence, right?
It uses the term 22 times.
I'm gonna read a couple ofpassages where it uses that term
, just so you can see thecontext.
So so, first of all, thelegislation and, by the way, you
(08:03):
can go read this entirelegislation.
Just you know, google the UAPdisclosure act of 2023.
You're not going to find a lotof news stories about it,
unfortunately, which issomething I think we'll talk
about because that's that'spuzzling but you can find the
acted PDF.
It's on the Senate website.
You can basically find it toread through.
(08:26):
It's written in legaleselanguage, but this is in here.
I'm gonna read some quotes fromit.
So, non-human intelligence.
The term non-human intelligencemeans any sentient, intelligent
, non-human life form,regardless of nature or ultimate
origin, that may be presumedresponsible for unidentified
anomalous phenomena or of whichthe federal government has
(08:50):
become aware.
Huh, the the federal governmenthas another quote the federal
government shall exerciseeminent domain over any and all
recovered technologies ofunknown origin and biological
evidence of non-humanintelligence that may be
(09:10):
controlled.
That's significant.
And here's one more withrespect to unidentified
anomalous phenomena records,particular information in
Unidentified anomalous phenomenarecords, recovered technologies
of unknown origin andbiological evidence for a
non-human Human intelligence thepublic disclosure of which is
(09:33):
postponed pursuant to section1106, or for which only
substitutions or summaries havebeen disclosed to the public.
The review board shall createand transmit to the president
and to the archivist acontrolled disclosure plan.
So that one was a triple threat, because it in that passage,
(09:54):
right there, it mentioned, youknow, non-human intelligence,
unidentified anomalous phenomenaand a controlled disclosure
plan.
I Mean it.
You could go through this forhours.
There's a lot here.
It's the the entire act is 65pages, so there's a lot of
material here.
I've picked out what I thinkare the most interesting aspects
(10:19):
of the legislation, but there'sa lot in there.
It creates a review board,which I think is amazing, an
independent review board, whichis great because it's appointed
by the president.
I think they have to beconfirmed by the Senate, so, but
then they run independently andthey will get to decide into
(10:41):
which.
You know how quickly theinformation gets out, but the
intention is to have all theinformation come out, but they
as they said in that passageabout how that it could be
damaging, so they, they, thispanel is going to look at all
the info and will decide youknow, here we're gonna release
now these were gonna this, wehave to do this.
(11:03):
But my understanding is, fromreading the legislation, that
the bar of releasing it, there'san automatic presumption of
release for most of thisinformation.
As important as this legislationis, there are some elements
that are not particularly happyabout it and are trying to stop
it.
You could say that's true of alot of pieces of legislation,
(11:27):
but in most cases, the peoplethat are trying to stop it are
oftentimes just the other party.
Whichever party is offering thethe legislation, the other
party as opposed to it, foreither philosophical or
political grounds.
What makes this case unusual isthe fact that the legislation
(11:47):
is truly a bipartisan effort, aseverything related with UAPs
has been another reason why Ithink it's so confusing that
it's not getting pressed.
We hear a lot about all thefights and all the acrimony and
dirty political tricks and thisside is bad and that side is bad
(12:08):
, but we don't see a lot when,hey, they're working together to
try to do something that theyagree on.
In the House there are some topRepublicans who are opposed to
this.
One of them is Mike Turner.
He's a Republican from Ohio andMike Rogers, he's a Republican
from Alabama.
Now, mike Turner is interestingcase because a lot of his
(12:31):
campaign donors are defensecontractors.
There's some question about hismotivations in opposing this.
Mitch McConnell is supposedlyopposed to it as well, and the
Speaker of the House, mikeJohnson.
There's gonna be a fight overthis because it seems like some
leadership and some.
I think Mike Turner he may bein the Intelligence Committee in
(12:56):
the House, so I think he's gotsome juice to try to stop this.
In the very least, they'retrying to take certain aspects
out of it, most prominently theeminent domain.
They really don't like the ideaof the government being able to
seize back from privateindustry any materials related
(13:18):
to UAP or non-human intelligence, as it says in the Act, from
defense contractors or privateaerospace or wherever they were,
and they're put there, by theway, to keep them sort of
outside the government overviewprocess, which it also spells
out in this act.
So in the very least, they'regonna try to take that out.
The other provision thatthey're trying to nix is
(13:41):
reportedly the the review board,or at least change how the
review board is appointed,because you know, from the
perspective of the people whowant to stop release of any
information, well, if this actdoes go through, the next thing
you do is you pack the reviewboard with people who are
sympathetic to the, to notReleasing the information, and
(14:03):
then let them go about theirwork.
There's gonna be a fight overthis and and this fight is going
to happen quickly, because onthe 21st of December they vote
on the National DefenseAuthorization Act they have to
have this all closed out so thepresident can sign it and put it
into place for end of the year.
And, believe me, government maystop for a lot of things and
(14:25):
funding the government may notalways go through, but when it
comes to Money for the defenseand Pentagon, yeah, this is
gonna pass.
This Authorization Act is goingthrough.
The question is will the UAPdisclosure Act be in the
authorization and, if so, willit be in its complete form that
(14:46):
the Senate did pass it and nowit's waiting for the House and
they'd they have to Conferenceover it and all that.
The next few weeks are criticalfor getting this through.
So my ask of anyone listeningto this is is simply this if I
haven't convinced you that thisis important, do a little bit
more research.
But I I think I've made apretty good case that this
(15:08):
should really be passed.
It's talking about somethingreally huge.
That, if not true, if you'restill skeptical that there's
anything to this, well, thiswill end this.
This act will uncover that.
If this is all a smoke screen,if this is all a distraction, if
this is all Understandabletechnology, if this is all being
blown up out of proportion,whatever the lie is that some
(15:31):
people say, oh, there's no UAP,there's no non Human
intelligence, this is allnonsense Well, this act will
uncover that as well.
So we should all be for this.
So what you can do to help thisalong, if you agree that it is
important, is Reach out to yourrepresentatives.
You know I'm not usually onefor doing that, but I've
actually done it.
(15:52):
I've called them and, you know,talked to, left a message with,
you know, one of their staffers, but I've let, I've let my
representatives know that I wantthis act passed in its entirety
as Written, as proposed byChuck Schumer and a bipartisan
group of senators.
I Think this is important.
So that's what you can do andWe'll find out soon enough.
(16:15):
You know, end of this monthWe'll know whether this act
passes or if it gets shot downcompletely or if it gets
significantly changed.
But I'm gonna end with this.
Some of the people behind thescenes, some of them were out in
public.
Daniel Sheehan Among them.
(16:36):
He's a civil rights attorney.
Look up his name, danielSheehan.
He's been involved with some ofthe biggest civil rights cases
throughout the years.
It's particularly around apress being able to keep their
confidential sources Then youknow to themselves from the
government.
So he's been involved in a lotof stuff.
Well, he's very involved inthis and he stated quite
(16:59):
publicly on a podcast that Iheard the other day that if this
act doesn't pass, that's thecontrol disclosure.
The people who are behind thescenes that want this
information out are perfectlywilling to go the uncontrolled
route and uncontrolleddisclosure, or what has been
referred to in some cases ascatastrophic disclosure, which
(17:23):
is the information coming outwith no rhyme or reason, not in
organized fashion, not rolledout to people in order to soften
them up and and, and you knowmake them accept it.
Just dump it out there andPandemonium may result, which,
to be honest, I'm I'm actuallyfine with, because, in my
(17:45):
opinion, I feel like we need aslap out of out of what we're
doing.
I feel like we're justeverything is wrong and I think
a catastrophic disclosure eventwould be among the least
Destructive, catastrophic eventsthat could happen.
That would be a slap in theface and get us out of our
malaise as a planet.
(18:06):
This is coming one way oranother.
Look up the UAP disclosure actof 2023.
Look up some of what's beingwritten about it and what's
being said about it, maybequestion why your news sources
whatever those new sources youlisten to why they're not
covering this as, again, because, as going through it, we see
(18:29):
it's pretty significant reachout to your representatives, let
them know you want it passedand, yeah, let's get this over
the finish line.
I will have another update onthis when either this passes,
fails.
What goes on Beyond this, and,yeah, I think I'm gonna try to
do UAP UPDATES on a regularbasis, because there's a lot
(18:52):
happening and a lot is gonnacontinue to happen, you know,
into 2024, and I think this timenext year we will be in a very,
very different place as far aswhat the general view of this is
.
We'll see, though, and, yeah,steve and I will be back with an
(19:14):
episode soon, and I hope thiswas informative until next time.
a pretty significant piece of legislation currently
being battled over in Congressthat most people don't know
about the UAP Disclosure Act of2023.
The passage of this act couldunlock everything the government
knows about unidentifiedanomalous phenomena UAPs, which
used to be called UFOs but oddlyit's not getting much attention
(00:21):
.
So why is this legislationimportant and why is it being
almost completely ignored by themainstream press?
Let's dive in and find outChris here flying solo without
(01:07):
Steve this time around, but heand I will be recording an
episode together very soon, butin the meantime, I wanted to do
a deep dive on this UAPDisclosure Act of 2023 because
it's such an important lawthat's being currently fought
over in Congress and it's a hugebattle about it, and I'm
(01:30):
shocked that people don't knowabout it.
So I'm going to go through someof the aspects of it and I
think by the end of this, you'llsee that this is not what you'd
usually expect.
This is something quite out ofthe ordinary, but anyway, the
UAP Disclosure Act of 2023 wasintroduced of July of this past
(01:51):
year and is an amendment forwhat's called the National
Defense Authorization Act forfiscal year 2024.
The National DefenseAuthorization Act is something
that's passed every year byCongress, and what they do is
that funds the military andintelligence organizations for
the upcoming year, so prettymuch everything is in there that
(02:12):
money is going to be spent on.
So the intention of this act isto centralize all the
information in the governmentrelated to UAP unidentified
anomalous phenomena and increasepublic transparency around what
the government knows about itand encourage scientists to
(02:33):
finally get involved with thistopic, because up till now they
really haven't.
So the key sponsors of thislegislation are Chuck Schumer,
the majority leader in theSenate, and supported by a
bipartisan group of senatorsincluding Mike Rounds, marco
Rubio, kirsten Gillibrand, toddYoung and Martin Heinrich, so
(02:58):
there's a mix of Republicans andDemocrats all supporting this.
That alone should make this getmore attention, just because
that's so unusual right now it'snot generally what we see.
So here are some of the thingsthat this act is meant to do.
First of all, establish UAPrecords collection in the
(03:18):
National Archives.
So this act is meant to do thefollowing Establish a UAP
records collection in theNational Archives, pulling in
all the information from acrossthe government about what they
know about UAP and putting itall in one place, getting it and
(03:39):
cataloging it so it'ssearchable and then opening it
up to the public.
That alone is huge, the factthat finally they're going to
get all this information put inone place where we can all see
it and we can all see what'sgoing on.
Basically, I know there are alot of people out there that are
still skeptical about UFOs,uaps, and they're not really
(04:01):
sure that anything unusual ishappening and they often say,
well, this is probably Earthtechnology from another nation
spying, and they sort of dismissit as that.
But I think some of thespecific things in this
legislation, the specificwording they use, will really
(04:22):
come as surprise and possiblyeven shock to some people who
are less inclined to thinkthere's something about all this
.
So, first of all, the very factthat it acknowledges that the
government does have a lot ofinformation on UAP that they
haven't shared, that hasn't beendeclassified, and also that a
(04:45):
lot of it has been placed undersomething called the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954.
So the Atomic Energy Act of1954 was basically this law that
put anything having to donuclear because of nuclear
weapons and nuclear power andall that anything nuclear falls
(05:05):
under a different set of rulesas far as declassifying it like
you normally would.
So a lot of it isn't.
You're not able to get itthrough the Freedom of
Information Act.
You can't automatically.
It doesn't become automaticallydeclassified after a certain
amount of time, which is alsotrue of some cases, so that
(05:28):
Atomic Energy Act puts anythingunder it completely outside of
the scope of oversight for themost part, except for a very
limited amount whoever hasaccess to it specifically?
So that's huge.
You know the fact that there's aneed for this legislation, that
it points out that the currentlaws, as they exist, are not
(05:53):
adequate for giving the peopleproper visibility into what's
going on on this topic.
Also, wouldn't it make peoplethink, hey, other other topics
we're not seeing full visibilityon, but that's a matter for
another day?
Close observers you know itdefines what a close observer of
(06:14):
a UAP is and how it's the closeproximity to a non-human
intelligence.
The fact that this legislationtalks about a planned,
controlled disclosure campaign,that they actually want to
disclose the topic, but thatthey realize that it's sensitive
(06:35):
and potentially very impactfulinformation and has to be rolled
out carefully.
So it talks about this in thelegislation.
Think about that.
It's pointing out howearth-shattering this
information is and how we haveto be careful getting it out.
(06:56):
The very fact that it mentionsnon-human intelligence like this
is unprecedented, and itdoesn't just mention non-human
intelligence once.
The term is used in this UAPDisclosure Act 22 times.
It also repeats what's beencommunicated in a lot of the UAP
(07:21):
reports that have come out inthe past, is that there are
technologies of unknown originsoperating in our airspace, and
it talks about technologies ofunknown origin in that it's
referring to things that itdefines as Technologies
associated with UAPs that lackknown human manufacture or
(07:43):
design.
It's already talking aboutsomething completely outside the
norm.
So let's talk about non-humanintelligence, right?
It uses the term 22 times.
I'm gonna read a couple ofpassages where it uses that term
, just so you can see thecontext.
So so, first of all, thelegislation and, by the way, you
(08:03):
can go read this entirelegislation.
Just you know, google the UAPdisclosure act of 2023.
You're not going to find a lotof news stories about it,
unfortunately, which issomething I think we'll talk
about because that's that'spuzzling but you can find the
acted PDF.
It's on the Senate website.
You can basically find it toread through.
(08:26):
It's written in legaleselanguage, but this is in here.
I'm gonna read some quotes fromit.
So, non-human intelligence.
The term non-human intelligencemeans any sentient, intelligent
, non-human life form,regardless of nature or ultimate
origin, that may be presumedresponsible for unidentified
anomalous phenomena or of whichthe federal government has
(08:50):
become aware.
Huh, the the federal governmenthas another quote the federal
government shall exerciseeminent domain over any and all
recovered technologies ofunknown origin and biological
evidence of non-humanintelligence that may be
(09:10):
controlled.
That's significant.
And here's one more withrespect to unidentified
anomalous phenomena records,particular information in
Unidentified anomalous phenomenarecords, recovered technologies
of unknown origin andbiological evidence for a
non-human Human intelligence thepublic disclosure of which is
(09:33):
postponed pursuant to section1106, or for which only
substitutions or summaries havebeen disclosed to the public.
The review board shall createand transmit to the president
and to the archivist acontrolled disclosure plan.
So that one was a triple threat, because it in that passage,
(09:54):
right there, it mentioned, youknow, non-human intelligence,
unidentified anomalous phenomenaand a controlled disclosure
plan.
I Mean it.
You could go through this forhours.
There's a lot here.
It's the the entire act is 65pages, so there's a lot of
material here.
I've picked out what I thinkare the most interesting aspects
(10:19):
of the legislation, but there'sa lot in there.
It creates a review board,which I think is amazing, an
independent review board, whichis great because it's appointed
by the president.
I think they have to beconfirmed by the Senate, so, but
then they run independently andthey will get to decide into
(10:41):
which.
You know how quickly theinformation gets out, but the
intention is to have all theinformation come out, but they
as they said in that passageabout how that it could be
damaging, so they, they, thispanel is going to look at all
the info and will decide youknow, here we're gonna release
now these were gonna this, wehave to do this.
(11:03):
But my understanding is, fromreading the legislation, that
the bar of releasing it, there'san automatic presumption of
release for most of thisinformation.
As important as this legislationis, there are some elements
that are not particularly happyabout it and are trying to stop
it.
You could say that's true of alot of pieces of legislation,
(11:27):
but in most cases, the peoplethat are trying to stop it are
oftentimes just the other party.
Whichever party is offering thethe legislation, the other
party as opposed to it, foreither philosophical or
political grounds.
What makes this case unusual isthe fact that the legislation
(11:47):
is truly a bipartisan effort, aseverything related with UAPs
has been another reason why Ithink it's so confusing that
it's not getting pressed.
We hear a lot about all thefights and all the acrimony and
dirty political tricks and thisside is bad and that side is bad
(12:08):
, but we don't see a lot when,hey, they're working together to
try to do something that theyagree on.
In the House there are some topRepublicans who are opposed to
this.
One of them is Mike Turner.
He's a Republican from Ohio andMike Rogers, he's a Republican
from Alabama.
Now, mike Turner is interestingcase because a lot of his
(12:31):
campaign donors are defensecontractors.
There's some question about hismotivations in opposing this.
Mitch McConnell is supposedlyopposed to it as well, and the
Speaker of the House, mikeJohnson.
There's gonna be a fight overthis because it seems like some
leadership and some.
I think Mike Turner he may bein the Intelligence Committee in
(12:56):
the House, so I think he's gotsome juice to try to stop this.
In the very least, they'retrying to take certain aspects
out of it, most prominently theeminent domain.
They really don't like the ideaof the government being able to
seize back from privateindustry any materials related
(13:18):
to UAP or non-human intelligence, as it says in the Act, from
defense contractors or privateaerospace or wherever they were,
and they're put there, by theway, to keep them sort of
outside the government overviewprocess, which it also spells
out in this act.
So in the very least, they'regonna try to take that out.
The other provision thatthey're trying to nix is
(13:41):
reportedly the the review board,or at least change how the
review board is appointed,because you know, from the
perspective of the people whowant to stop release of any
information, well, if this actdoes go through, the next thing
you do is you pack the reviewboard with people who are
sympathetic to the, to notReleasing the information, and
(14:03):
then let them go about theirwork.
There's gonna be a fight overthis and and this fight is going
to happen quickly, because onthe 21st of December they vote
on the National DefenseAuthorization Act they have to
have this all closed out so thepresident can sign it and put it
into place for end of the year.
And, believe me, government maystop for a lot of things and
(14:25):
funding the government may notalways go through, but when it
comes to Money for the defenseand Pentagon, yeah, this is
gonna pass.
This Authorization Act is goingthrough.
The question is will the UAPdisclosure Act be in the
authorization and, if so, willit be in its complete form that
(14:46):
the Senate did pass it and nowit's waiting for the House and
they'd they have to Conferenceover it and all that.
The next few weeks are criticalfor getting this through.
So my ask of anyone listeningto this is is simply this if I
haven't convinced you that thisis important, do a little bit
more research.
But I I think I've made apretty good case that this
(15:08):
should really be passed.
It's talking about somethingreally huge.
That, if not true, if you'restill skeptical that there's
anything to this, well, thiswill end this.
This act will uncover that.
If this is all a smoke screen,if this is all a distraction, if
this is all Understandabletechnology, if this is all being
blown up out of proportion,whatever the lie is that some
(15:31):
people say, oh, there's no UAP,there's no non Human
intelligence, this is allnonsense Well, this act will
uncover that as well.
So we should all be for this.
So what you can do to help thisalong, if you agree that it is
important, is Reach out to yourrepresentatives.
You know I'm not usually onefor doing that, but I've
actually done it.
(15:52):
I've called them and, you know,talked to, left a message with,
you know, one of their staffers, but I've let, I've let my
representatives know that I wantthis act passed in its entirety
as Written, as proposed byChuck Schumer and a bipartisan
group of senators.
I Think this is important.
So that's what you can do andWe'll find out soon enough.
(16:15):
You know, end of this monthWe'll know whether this act
passes or if it gets shot downcompletely or if it gets
significantly changed.
But I'm gonna end with this.
Some of the people behind thescenes, some of them were out in
public.
Daniel Sheehan Among them.
(16:36):
He's a civil rights attorney.
Look up his name, danielSheehan.
He's been involved with some ofthe biggest civil rights cases
throughout the years.
It's particularly around apress being able to keep their
confidential sources Then youknow to themselves from the
government.
So he's been involved in a lotof stuff.
Well, he's very involved inthis and he stated quite
(16:59):
publicly on a podcast that Iheard the other day that if this
act doesn't pass, that's thecontrol disclosure.
The people who are behind thescenes that want this
information out are perfectlywilling to go the uncontrolled
route and uncontrolleddisclosure, or what has been
referred to in some cases ascatastrophic disclosure, which
(17:23):
is the information coming outwith no rhyme or reason, not in
organized fashion, not rolledout to people in order to soften
them up and and, and you knowmake them accept it.
Just dump it out there andPandemonium may result, which,
to be honest, I'm I'm actuallyfine with, because, in my
(17:45):
opinion, I feel like we need aslap out of out of what we're
doing.
I feel like we're justeverything is wrong and I think
a catastrophic disclosure eventwould be among the least
Destructive, catastrophic eventsthat could happen.
That would be a slap in theface and get us out of our
malaise as a planet.
(18:06):
This is coming one way oranother.
Look up the UAP disclosure actof 2023.
Look up some of what's beingwritten about it and what's
being said about it, maybequestion why your news sources
whatever those new sources youlisten to why they're not
covering this as, again, because, as going through it, we see
(18:29):
it's pretty significant reachout to your representatives, let
them know you want it passedand, yeah, let's get this over
the finish line.
I will have another update onthis when either this passes,
fails.
What goes on Beyond this, and,yeah, I think I'm gonna try to
do UAP UPDATES on a regularbasis, because there's a lot
(18:52):
happening and a lot is gonnacontinue to happen, you know,
into 2024, and I think this timenext year we will be in a very,
very different place as far aswhat the general view of this is
.
We'll see, though, and, yeah,steve and I will be back with an
(19:14):
episode soon, and I hope thiswas informative until next time.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.