Ep. #132 – Breaking Down the IG’s Evaluation of the DoD’s Actions Regarding UAP/UFOs - The Black Vault Radio w/ John Greenewald, Jr.

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
John Greenewald (00:06):
Hey, did you see the government's new UAP
report? Well, unless you hadexpectations of disclosure about
aliens, you might be pleasantlysurprised. Join me, John
Greenewald Jr. As we take a deepdive into what the report is all
about, leave and take a look atwhat they conveniently left out.
Stay tuned, you're about tojourney inside the black vault.

(00:55):
That's right, everybody. Asalways, thank you so much for
tuning in and taking thisjourney inside the black vault
with me, I'm your host, JohnGreenewald, Jr, founder and
creator of the black vault. Andtoday, we are going to deep dive
into that newest UAP report.Now, if you have no idea what
I'm talking about, about a weekago, there was a report that was

(01:16):
released by arrow, thegovernment's UFO investigative
office in the Pentagon, and theyneeded to get Congress by their
own legislation, they passed ahistorical report. Now that came
out. And to my surprise, it wasactually I would say more
thorough, and arguably evenbetter than I expected. Now, I

(01:37):
always keep my hopes fairly low.for stuff like this, just simply
for the obvious reason of theygenerally aren't going to
deliver what we want. And thatwould be the absolute truth. And
when you read through thisthing, albeit it is very
detailed, there's a lot to it, Iwas surprised that it was a lot
lengthier than I expected. Therewere quite a few let downs along

(01:58):
the way. So here's what we'regoing to do, we're going to dive
into the report. Now keep inmind as I go over this, it is
not an endorsement of what theUS government is saying or
claiming, unless I stateotherwise, I think that there's
a lot of evidence to thecontrary of what the government
is claiming. But I thinkoverall, I think they've skirted

(02:20):
some pretty important pieces ofinformation. So we're gonna go
over the report, we're gonna goover what they don't deal with
what they do deal with, what'swrong, what's right, what, what
do we think about the wholething. And as always, I'm
interested in what you think aswell. So if you are watching on
YouTube, if you're on the livestream, there is a chat room
active while this premieresplease feel free to take part

(02:43):
but also post your comments.That way we can see what you
think. Because I don't alwaysclaim to be right. When we dive
into these things, I try andgive as much context as
possible, labeled my opinionwhere applicable, but obviously,
I want to dive in with all ofyou guys together. Because we're
all on the same team here tryingto figure this out and make

(03:04):
sense of all of this because itis incredibly hard to do. So let
me go ahead then and get up thepresentation here. That way I
can kind of go over with youguys the report. Now, I'm going
to stress to you guys, I knowthat these deep dives aren't for
everybody, we are going to gointo some of the nitty gritty
details. And you're going toroll your eyes just simply

(03:26):
because you will not believe thegovernment you want to hear
something else. They're notgoing to give it to you. So let
me just again, say that upfront,this isn't an endorsement, but I
think it is important to lay thegroundwork of what the US
government is trying to claimwhat they are trying to say with
all of this, because it isimportant context to the grander

(03:48):
picture. Now the report itselfreport on the historical record
of US government involvementwith unidentified anomalous
phenomena. That's the report.Title, here's the first page of
it, just so you can kind of getan idea if you have not seen it.
Now forgive me here, I'm gonnamove one of my screens just as

(04:08):
we go, so I don't lose you. Andget my laser pointer up. Sorry
about that. So obviously, thisis the title page, like I
mentioned, and I want to showyou guys I won't read every
single word, but this is thetable of contents. Now the Table
of Contents gives a pretty goodidea of everything that they

(04:29):
cover. And as I alreadymentioned, fairly detailed. You
can see here, the differentsections, section one, the intro
section to the executivesummary. That's what we're going
to hang on quite a bit. I'lltell you in a moment why, but
we're going to stick around theexecutive summary for quite a
bit, scope and assumptions ofthe actual report and
investigation that went intothis section for accounts of US

(04:51):
government UAP investigatoryprograms since 1945, so they
went all the way back to 1945and work their way A to the
present day. Again, I'll givethem a little bit of credit
there, that's fairly impressive,because there's a lot to deal
with. And with that said, that'salso why I'm not going to go
over the whole report with youguys, even though that this is a

(05:13):
deep dive, it's 60 Plus pages orso for the total report, there's
references and citations, and soon. And there's a lot to read.
So in addition to this video, ifyou haven't already, read it,
take some time, if you'reinterested in this, you may not
buy into all of it. I don't I'lltell you that right up front.
But it doesn't matter. Take alook at all of the information

(05:34):
because there is much much morethan what I'm about to deal
with. In this video, I'm onlygoing to skim the surface and
talk a little bit about what Ifeel is, again, in my opinion,
the most important parts. So youcan see here when they go back
to 1945 They are literally goingall the way back to Project
saucer signed grudge twinklgrudge the reestablishment of IT

(05:57):
project bear that they talkabout you don't hear about that
a lot, the Robertson Panel, thedirt, the dirt into reporter
Durant report, Project Bluebook,all sorts of stuff is in this
history. So my kudos, becausethat's a lot, there's a lot
there. But I also must add, it'salso the government side of

(06:18):
this, the the the what they wantyou to believe about some of
these programs. And we'll alsodive into that as well when we
get to project Bluebook. But youcan see here just through the
table of contents all the waythrough the Roswell
investigations, there were acouple of different Roswell
explanations along the way overthe decades, that was in the 90s
in the 2000s. So they deal withall of that, and right up to all

(06:41):
SAP and a tip and then the taskforce, the UA P Task Force. And
then right up to arrow, you cansee over here, they deal with
NASA study, arrow, as Imentioned, and so on. So lots
lots in that section alone to goover. And I won't be going over
all of it. But just wanted togive you a rundown of what is
overviewed. In this report.Moving on Section Five

(07:04):
assessment of interview claimsof US government involvement in
hidden UAP programs, it kind ofgoes into what they heard
through witnesses and variousinterviews that they did, no one
is named in this report. Butthey did give everyone a number.
And later in the report, we'llgo over this section, they kind
of just give everybody just thata number and no name. So you

(07:27):
have to kind of fill in theblanks. Some you will be able to
others kind of a mystery, we cankind of all speculate and guess
on who some of these individualsare. But don't expect names. As
we go through here, we just haveto fill in the blanks. But you
can see here all the differenttypes of claims that they have
tackled in this section sixinvestigation into named US

(07:50):
government sensitive programs.Again, what they learned from
those just a lot here. And thiswas a little bit of a surprise
to me, you can see it just keepsgoing. This is more of of the
report table of contentcontents. Here's a section eight
here testing and development ofUS national security and space

(08:11):
programs most likely accountedfor some portion of UAP
sightings. And then it goes intoall sorts of different programs,
some of what you've likely heardof others, maybe not so much,
very cool history there. Butthat's where it starts to veer
away from, I think, a viableexplanation for a lot of these
cases, and rather, just getsinto fluff. And that historical

(08:33):
fluff is used to not only bulkup the report, but give Congress
and anybody in the generalpublic that reads this may be
something to fall back on. Andthey try and sell the
explanation that there's a lotof government secret programs
out there Special AccessPrograms, stuff you don't hear
about for decades, that couldapply to some UAP cases. And in

(08:55):
some cases, that's probablytrue, but not all. But they
spent a lot of time goingthrough all of these different
programs, trying to sell thatnarrative, and to be honest with
you, that's tried to be done fordecades with the US government,
and nothing has really evenstuck. In fact, when they try
and do that, like the CIA didwith the YouTube flights, they

(09:17):
generally just stick their footin their mouth by saying, hey,
remember all those 1950s UFOsightings? That was us? That was
one of their tweets that theytried years and years ago. And
when you actually look in thedocumentation, you realize it's
wrong. So this isn't a newnarrative for them. They've been
selling this for decades. Sadly,they just keep failing at it,

(09:37):
but they keep trying again andagain. So you got to give them
to you got to give that to themthat at least they're trying but
sadly kind of fallen flat onexplaining this away as top
secret programs.
When I said that we were goingto stick with the executive
summary for a bit I meant it andhere's why. When you have a
60 7080 100 or 300 page reportThat's a lot to go over. You

(10:01):
know, even for people like mewho love this stuff, sometimes
it gets a little bit tedious. Sowith a lot of government
reports, they create what'scalled an executive summary. And
this essentially takes the 60pages or so when it comes to
this report, or however many itmay be, and they shrink it all
down into something that's muchmore manageable, readable, and

(10:23):
won't take a whole lot of yourtime versus reading the entire
report. So I'm gonna hang outhere for a little bit in the
report and go over some of thesections and conclusions. To
give you guys an overview ofwhat narrative the government is
trying to sell you with thisreport. I believe that there is
evidence to support that theyare not completely accurate
here. But in fairness, I alsobelieve that there's evidence to

(10:47):
support that they are, and itall falls back on information
that's obtained through theFreedom of Information Act, in
some cases, information that'sbeen around for decades. Sadly,
this report just doesn't dealwith it. So you'll kind of see
as we go through here, thattheir stuff to support what the
US government is saying, andtheir stuff to combat what the

(11:08):
US government is saying. AndI'll try and deal with as much
as I can, in the in thetimeframe here for this
presentation. But diving intothe executive summary, you can
see here, it starts in sectiontwo. And for those that want to
follow along, you can go aheadand click on the link in the
show's description, whether it'shere on YouTube, or if you're
listening to the audio podcastversion. Arrow found no evidence

(11:32):
that any US governmentinvestigation, academic
sponsored research, or officialreview panel has confirmed that
any sighting of a UAPrepresented extraterrestrial
technology. This obviously wasthe biggest blow to those
wanting disclosure, that Davidgrush has been around during the

(11:53):
time that this report was beingwritten and researched. The 40
people that he claimed that hetalked to those people have been
floating around with stories,some of which may have talked to
arrow, we don't know again, thelist of names. But there's a lot
that people have wanted. So forthem to just start off saying
Nope, there's no evidence ofaliens kind of popped the

(12:15):
balloon, pardon the pun, ofquite a few people and their
expectations, their hopes, theirdreams, their wants their
desires, with reports like this,because as more of this happens,
as more of these reports arecreated and generated, and they
come out into the public realm.That balloon gets popped over

(12:37):
and over and over. And thatdisclosure dream that some
people have been claiming isunderway. Some people, even
former government personnel,claiming that disclosure is
underway and or happening as wespeak. This is not disclosure in
the way that many people havebeen preaching about. So that's

(12:58):
going to make some people cringea little bit. But this is the
claim that the US government ismaking in this report. They say
although many UAP reports remainunsolved, or unidentified arrow
assesses that if more and betterquality data were available.
Most of these cases also couldbe identified and resolved as
ordinary objects or phenomena.What's kind of frustrating about

(13:24):
lines like that is you don'tknow how to solve something if
you don't have the evidence. Sohow can you just say, Well, if
we had the evidence, we'd solveit. And it's not
extraterrestrial, it's notanything. Now, I should say, for
those who don't know me, I don'targue the E T hypothesis here. I
don't come at you and say it hasto be alien, because we can't
explain it. But if we're doing ascientific study, and cases

(13:48):
don't have viable data, what doyou do? Assume what that data
is, if you were to get it? No,of course not you figure out a
way to get it. And when you lookat UAV, UFO and UAP history, and
you go back now literallydecades, if you want to believe
the OS app stories, and thegovernment was really funding
UAP research, we'll deal withthat a little bit more in a bit.
But if you really believe allthose stories, right, and take

(14:10):
them for what they are and theirUAP studies, what did they do
for all those years and spent10s of millions of dollars? What
did they do? They still here in2024, issuing reports saying,
well, we just don't have gooddata. Well, what in the world
were all these investigativeprograms doing? Spending 10s of

(14:30):
billions of dollars like OSS, APthat we can prove? And when I
say prove, we know the moneywent there, whether it was
mismanaged or not, that's adifferent conversation. But
regardless if if they reallywere trying to investigate UAP
and UFOs What did they do withthat money? What did a tip do?
If you believe all the storiesthere that Luis Elizondo headed

(14:54):
this program within thePentagon? What did they do for
years according to his side ofthe story? It was from 2007, or
2008, again, depending uponwhich Interviewer You listened
to, all the way through 2017,that he was doing the a tip
program. So let's just say itwasn't even a program, it was a
portfolio and he didn't evenhave funding for it. And he was

(15:14):
trying to, to do something whenit came to UAP. What exactly did
they do? And I think those areall important questions, as
taxpayers look from the outside,in that 10s of millions of
dollars that we can prove havebeen spent, or people's times in
their free time, whatever,whatever the explanation is, we

(15:35):
still don't have data to lookat. So that's what's frustrating
about this is that we keephearing this over and over. And
if you know, your UFO history,when you go back to Bluebook,
they use some of the sameexcuses, that they couldn't
solve a certain number of cases,on paper, they claimed 701. But
if you look at it's probably amuch larger number. They lacked

(15:58):
data. And they even said backthen decades ago, if we had
data, we can solve these cases,from a scientific perspective,
how can you say that? Right? Ifyou don't have the data, then
you don't have the data, youcan't assume what the data is.
That's not science. That's justsimply an explanation, not a
investigation. So you have tolook at the difference there. So

(16:18):
I was frustrated to see thatright off the bat in the
executive summary here, that in2024, they are continuing that
line, that they can't solveamount of certain amount of
cases. But don't worry, if wehad more data, we probably
could. Well, those areassumptions that aren't fair to
make, because you don't knowwhat the data is clearly because
you don't have it. Arrow foundno empirical evidence for claims

(16:42):
that the US government andprivate companies have in
reverse engineeringextraterrestrial technology,
Arrow determined based on allinformation provided to date,
the claims involving specificpeople known locations,
technological tests, anddocuments allegedly involved in
or related to the reverseengineering of extraterrestrial
technology are inaccurate,additional claims will be

(17:05):
addressed in volume two. It thenstarts to go through a bullet
point list of some of the claimsthat they looked at, and
essentially the conclusions thatthey came out with. And these
are important to look at becauseagain, it did summarizes a much
lengthier explanation later inthe report. But they interviewed

(17:29):
about 30 witnesses or so forthis particular report and took
the main claims and this is kindof what they they dove into UAP
non disclosure agreements arohas found no evidence of any
authentic UAP related NDA orother evidence threatening
death, or violence fordisclosing UAP information. A

(17:52):
CIA official allegedly managedUAP experimentation, the named
former CIA official was notinvolved in the movement of
extraterrestrial technology. Thesame former CIA officer signed a
memo rejecting a claim made byinterviewees that he managed the
movement of an experiencedexperimentation on off world

(18:15):
technology. Now we can have ourguests on who the CIA official
is, maybe people are banteringor even figured it out. I
haven't seen it by the recordingof this. And yeah, I might have
a couple ideas. But as I startto read through this, whether
true or not, and you believe thegovernment or not, I don't know,
to be honest with you what theright way is here. I think it's

(18:36):
a mixture of both. But when itcomes to claims like this, I
kind of feel like these are thenames that we've come to know.
And that they say things to thegeneral public. And they say
them over and over, andsometimes for decades on end.
And when push comes to shove,and now they're under oath or
giving on the record statementsto a US government investigative

(18:57):
agency for the DOD. It's likethey back up and say, Oh, well,
no,
I never really, I never reallysaid that. I never really meant
that, or back off from the storyaltogether. Or maybe they've
made the claims more in private.And then again, when push comes
to shove, their name getsdropped to an investigative arm
like Arrow arrow says, Hey,what's the truth behind this?

(19:19):
And they go, no, no, that'smaybe a little misunderstanding.
I don't know. That'sspeculation. I'm label labeling
that speculation. But I think asI've read a couple of these
things, and some of which are inthis presentation as we move
forward, keep that in the backof your mind because it makes
you wonder these names that keepcoming around that have been
around for decades that findthemselves in these programs,

(19:42):
and the claims that they make inthe general public. When that
push comes to shove, are theybacking up to the US government
and going on actually, that'snot the way it is, and they back
off of it? Just something tokeep in mind. Alleged UAP
intelligence community documentAn alleged 1961 special national
intelligence estimate that wasquote leaked to online sources

(20:05):
suggest the Extra Terrestrialnature's The Extra Terrestrial
nature of UFOs. Is inauthentic.Yeah, pretty confident I know
what document that would be tolikely tied to the MJ 12 stuff.
Regardless, you know, a lot ofthese documents have surfaced
over the years. This is whatarrow was brought. And that

(20:26):
really surprised me as I startedgoing through this, that that's
what they spent their time on.Aliens present during a DOD
technology test. Arrow reviewedinformation related to an
account of an intervieweeoverhearing a conversation about
a technology test at a militarybase where aliens allegedly were
observing an arrow judges thatthe interviewee misunderstood

(20:46):
the conversation claimed that amilitary officer touched an
offworld craft. an intervieweeclaimed that an unnamed former
military officer explained indetail how he physically touched
an extraterrestrial spacecraftis inaccurate. The claim was
denied on the record by thenamed former officer who

(21:06):
recounted a story of when hetouched an F 117 Nighthawk
stealth fighter that could havebeen misconstrued by the
interviewee, though the namedformer officer does not recall
having this conversation withthe interviewee. So it's another
one of those instances wheresomebody goes to arrow and say,

(21:27):
Hey, I was told this by so andso. And then so and so goes in
there and arrow questions AMA,and they go no, I mean, I was
touching maybe an f1 17 stealthfighter but not UFOs. How much
of this is the intervieweesmistake? Or how much is this the
interviewee truly hearing whathe did, or she recollecting that

(21:48):
two arrow and then that personthat made the claim backs off?
So to me again, there's a coupleinstances where you you can't
help but think that that is apotential possibility. Test of
offworld technology andinterviewee claimed that he
witnessed what he believed to bethe testing of extraterrestrial
technology at a US governmentfacility almost certainly was an

(22:09):
observation of an authentic, nonUAP related technology test
that's strongly correlated intime, location, and description
provided in the intervieweesaccount. UAP disclosure study
interviewees claimed thatbetween 2004 and 2007, the White
House requested a researchinstitute in Virginia studied

(22:33):
the theoretical societal impactsof disclosing that UAP are
extraterrestrial in origin.Arrow confirmed that the study
was conducted, but it was notrequested by the White House.
Named companies allegedlyexperimenting on alien
technology, Arrow has found noevidence that US companies ever
possessed offworld technology.The executives, scientists and

(22:56):
chief technology officers of thecompanies named by interviewees
met with the director of ero anddenied on the record that they
have ever recovered, possessed,or engaged in reverse
engineering of extraterrestrialtechnology. experimentation on
alleged extraterrestrialspacecraft sample, Arrow has

(23:17):
concluded that a sample from analleged crashed offworld
spacecraft that arrow acquiredfrom a private UAP investigating
organization and the US Army isa manufactured terrestrial alloy
and does not represent offworldtechnology or possess any
exceptional qualities. Thesample is primarily composed of

(23:38):
magnesium and zinc and then itgoes on from there. In other
words TTSA and to the stars. Andwe can fill in that gap because
we know that to the starsAcademy of Arts and Science,
which has now been rebrandedinto the entertainment company
of to the stars media, foundedby Tom DeLonge. That's how Luis
Elizondo came and got introducedto the world. Chris Mellon was

(24:02):
involved with that, again, a lotof those names that you hear
over and over Dr. Howell putoff, who had ties back to all
SAP and Bigelow Aerospace.During the OSS AP days, fast
forward was part of TTSA stillis from what I understand, or at
least the last I checked anyway,but regardless, a lot of the
same names involved with thatorganization, they acquire a

(24:24):
piece of an alleged UAP shipfrom Linda Moulton Howe. If
you're not familiar, I did along interview with Linda.
Shortly after she sold thatpiece to the stars Academy for
what was reported as I believe$35,000. She goes into great
detail. Arrow got a hold of it.And they communicated with the
army which by the way, I'm goingafter through FOIA all those

(24:47):
communications between the armyand arrow, but they investigated
it and found that it wasabsolutely nothing extraordinary
whatsoever. They go On with someof their conclusions arrow
assesses that all of the namedindividuals or excuse me all of
the named and described allegedhidden UAP reverse engineering

(25:08):
programs provided byinterviewees either do not exist
are misidentified authentic,highly sensitive national
security programs that are notrelated to extraterrestrial
technology, exploitation, orresolve to an unwarranted or
disestablished program.Obviously, here, we're now
leaning towards the David grush,slash UFO whistleblower claims

(25:31):
that we've heard a lot about inthe last year, he claimed a lot
about this, that there's 40People floating around that he
talked to, that essentially ledhim to those conclusions,
whether you want to call ithearsay or not, there is still
no supporting evidence that'sbeen put forward by this with
whistleblower to support any ofthat, and I think that arrow,

(25:54):
although has not talked to Davidgrush, as far as I'm aware,
there's been a couple ofdifferent varying explanations
why, but it sounds like arrow inone story, did not get back to
David grush. That came from theCongressional hearing that David
grush took part in. The otherone was that David grush, did
not essentially trust arrow orDr. Shawn Kirkpatrick did not

(26:19):
want to get the interview done,because he didn't trust them.
Whichever way you slice it ordice it. It sounds like that
Arrow did interview people thatthat maybe came from David
Gratias List of 40. They lookedinto those claims, and they
couldn't verify them. Now,here's what I'll say. Would
arrow have access to that? Andin my personal opinion, the

(26:43):
answer would be no. It doesn'tmatter. That arrow has all of
this access, and they claim theyhave access, and the DoD really
wants them to have that answer.Let's play a hypothetical here.
If they really hadextraterrestrial exploitation
programs of technology that wasout of this world, you would not

(27:04):
hear from them. I just don'tthink you would. And I think
that people that have thosebeliefs that are coming forward,
I think some of them aregenuine. I think David grush is
absolutely genuine, conveyingthe information that he has. I'm
skeptical about the roots of hisclaims. And I still question why
he hasn't shown his doctorreview. I think that that is

(27:26):
crucially important to this. Butdespite that skepticism, I do
think that he's genuine, I thinkthat he did his investigation,
he he probably did talk to 40people, you probably recognize a
lot of the names that he talkedto, or you may not recognize
their names, but I bet you $1That that day spoke to people

(27:49):
that you recognized. And so Ithink that that genuine
conveying of the information isjust that it's genuine. But if
there's no concrete evidence toanybody, highlight, or
spotlight, I should say to thepublic, that we should have it,
the general public should haveit. None of that should be

(28:10):
classified. In my opinion.
You can't fight this. And that'swhat's frustrating. And I've
said it for years, even prior toDavid grush. Coming around, when
you highlight stories, that arejust that stories, you're going
to get traction from thesensationalism of it, but you're
not going to have it solidifywith the general public, and and

(28:34):
really coalesce into a movement.If you don't bring evidence
along with it. I posted onsocial media. A week or so ago,
when this report came out. And Isaid essentially, it's time for
the quote unquote,whistleblowers, and I put it in
quote, to become whistleblowers,without quotes. My entire point

(28:56):
there is that yes, we can labelwhomever we want as a
whistleblower with theirstories. But if they don't back
it up with actual evidence, wecan never show it to Sean
Kirkpatrick or arrow or anybodyinvolved, or show it to the
cameras on mainstream media andgo look, the US government won't
tell you, but we will. And Iwould absolutely, in my personal

(29:20):
opinion, bet $1, again, thatnobody who comes forward with
proof of extraterrestrialtechnology is going to be taken
away in cuffs for breachingtheir NDA or security clearance.
Because I don't believe thatit's justified to keep something
like that secret or classified.It's why I push as much as I do

(29:42):
on this particular topic withthe US government. There are
some cases away from UFO stuffthat I think should be
classified and remain so there'sstuff with UFOs that I actually
think sure I can understand whythat's classified like the
sensor system that might be froma class If I had platform or
radar or whatever detectionsystem sure I get it, that's

(30:05):
classified technology, andrightfully so. But the
technology that it's capturingif it truly is out of this world
shouldn't be classified at all.So it just shouldn't be. And so
somebody comes forward andproves to the world, right? They
change humanity. Imagine if theUS government, carted them off
away to Guantanamo Bay, andsaid, This is where you're gonna

(30:27):
be the rest of your life andlock the key and lock the cell
and throw away the key. I don'tbuy it, I really just don't.
Okay. So that's why I said,let's get those quote unquote,
whistleblowers to now bewhistleblowers come out, come
out with this information, andjust put it out there. Because
these stories are not getting usanywhere. It's not because I

(30:47):
don't want to believe them. It'snot because I want the mystery
to linger. It's, it's time, it'sjust time for the evidence, no
more talks, no more books, nomore private lectures to groups,
none of that. If you want tochange humanity, just change it,
come out with it. And Iguarantee then you would have a

(31:09):
movement, nobody is going to becarted away to jail for that.
And you will change humanity inthe process. But they're nowhere
to be found. They have thesecret groups and secret
beliefs. And according to somepeople, they leak their secret
breadcrumbs to bloggers andstuff like that. That's
ridiculously silly. Because ifthere's evidence floating out

(31:29):
there, now's the time,especially after a report like
this comes out. Arrow assessesthat the inaccurate claim that
the US government has reverseengineering extraterrestrial
technology, and is hiding itfrom Congress is in large part,
the result of circular reportingfrom a group of individuals who
believe this to be the case,despite the lack of any

(31:51):
evidence. The same thing thatmany of us have said, for years,
those that feel there issomething to these phenomena,
that there is something to thistopic, and I'm speaking about me
with that I believe that there'ssomething to this. But my
biggest fear was that the sametypes of people, do they really

(32:12):
have the keys to the cosmos thatthey know, all of the government
secrets and everything there isto know about extra terrestrial
technology and, and secretgovernment programs. And it's
all the small group of people?Or are those the storytellers
and the real story is hiddensomewhere else? That it's that

(32:33):
it's not within the reach of ofa podcast, or an upcoming book.
But rather, you have to fightfor that truth. And by fight, I
mean, seek it out. You have todo whatever legal means that you
can with the US government. Ihate the war rhetoric. So that's
why I wanted to correct thefight reference there. But every

(32:57):
legal way to do this, and if ifand if it's a whistleblower
coming out and giving thatinformation that should not be
legally classified. That's oneof those rare instances where
I'd support it, bring them out,let's see that information. And
yet, they're they're not there.It all routes to the same group
of people. So now, it's not metelling you that, right? It's

(33:19):
not mainstream media. Now, theUS government is saying to that
doesn't mean it's true. But Ihope that you guys recognize
that that this is problematic,that we hear those same people
over and over and over withtheir stories. And nothing has
ever proven. So now, thegovernment is congressionally
mandated to do this report. Andthey're hearing from the same

(33:42):
people coming to the sameconclusion that many of us have,
that a lot of these guys arejust spewing out stories. And
that's what's frustrating.Because they're not looking,
they meaning arrow, at the realinformation, the government
documents, the intelligencereports, and the data that we
know is there. Instead, they'refocusing on stories. And that's

(34:07):
what's frustrating for someonelike me, and I'll deal with that
towards the end of this on howmuch they really have missed.
Arrow notes that although claimsthat the US government has
recovered and hidden spacecraftback to the 1940s and 50s, more
modern instances of these claimslargely stem from a consistent
group of individuals who havebeen involved in various UAP

(34:28):
related endeavors since at least2009. What happened in 2009, all
SAP was stood up and wasunderway. Dr. Howell put off
Robert Bigelow, Dr. ColinKeller, her all of the names
that we're seeing today. Itseems like that's who they're
referring to here that they'rethe ones that are routed to the

(34:48):
stories. Many of theseindividuals were involved in are
supportive of a canceled diaprogram, and the subsequent but
failed attempt to re establishthis program under the
Department of Homeland Security.hauled Kona Blue. That's new
Kona Blue is new. Now we knewback in January, Dr. Shawn
Kirkpatrick had said that therewas this effort to get DHS to

(35:12):
continue us up. Now, in fairnessto James McCaskey, the DIA
scientist, who on again, on theDIA side headed OS app, they
brought that out, I believe inskinwalkers at the Pentagon
first, that there was an effortto get DHS involved. But no one
knew the name Kona Blue, and noone knew the extent of it. I'll

(35:35):
bring up Kona Blue later in theslide presentation, because it
does go in this report goes intomore detail. But I think I'm
going to hold off going intomuch detail on it. Because I
smell a deeper dive on KonaBlue, and what's going to come
out, I don't have that firsthandknowledge. I don't know exactly
what's going to come out. Butlet's just say I have a feeling

(35:56):
that there's going to be moredocumentation from DHS. I've had
a case since January for it. Wealso know that through Stephen
Green Street and the New YorkPost who was monitoring the
error website noted that Konadocuments may be added there.
They have removed that link. Butessentially it was like they
were editing a live page. And toSteven green streets credit

(36:20):
noted that that the report waslikely on its way out because
they had a dead link, but it wasprogrammed in and then this Kona
Blue reference with documents.So there was that as well. And
Shawn Kirkpatrick has alsoreferenced Kona Blue material
being released. So all of thesekinds of puzzle pieces are
fitting together that thatthere's going to be more to that

(36:42):
on what they wanted to do withcontinuing off SAP but failed to
do it because DHS said no,that's not of interest. Arrow
assesses that UAP sightings andreports of the sightings to US
government organizations andclaims that some UAP constitute
Extra Terrestrial craft and thatthe US government has secured
and is experimenting on anextraterrestrial technology have

(37:04):
been influenced by a range ofcultural, political, and
technological factors. Arrowbases this conclusion on the
following factors. The aggregatefindings of the US government
investigations to date have notfound even one case of UAP
representing offworldtechnology. None of the programs
mentioned by interviewees areUAP reverse engineering

(37:26):
programs, and all the authenticprograms have been properly
notified and reported toCongress through the
congressional defense and orintelligence committees. Arrow
has no evidence for the USgovernment reverse engineering
narrative provided byinterviewees, and has been able
to disprove the majority of theinterviews interviewees claims,
some claims are still underevaluation, curious, but what's

(37:48):
still under evaluation. Errordetermined that a piece of metal
alleged to be recovered from anoffworld spacecraft is ordinary
of terrestrial origin, andpossesses no exceptional
qualities.
So I'll say it again, if therereally is those UAP reverse
engineering programs, I don'tbelieve arrow would have access
to it. I believe they would stayin the black world, I believe

(38:08):
that they would not be put outto the public and quite possibly
Congress would be left in thedark as well. That is proven by
decade's worth of programs thathave not been told to Congress
or if they have, it's a verysmall select group of congress
that's made aware of these andtheir security oaths takeover,

(38:28):
that they are properly briefed,but they don't go to a press
conference or whatever, andstart talking about whatever
highly classified program theymay have been briefed on
privately. So whole point being,this is all silliness to me.
Because when you look atgovernment secrets as a whole
that goes back decades anddecades and decades, inside and

(38:49):
outside the UFO arena, there aresecrets here that I just don't
believe would come out, and anunclassified report all because
Congress says You better tell uswhat you did with UFOs and UAP.
I think that there's enoughevidence now to support that
there is a massive secrecy layerover this topic. And it is not
as easily dismissed, as thisreport wants to have us believe.

(39:13):
Again, I'm not preaching thealien narrative. But what I am
saying is that all of this fluffthat's in here are dealing with
those unsubstantiated stories,but the real stuff, the stuff
that does come out throughdocumentation throughout CIA,
DIA, NSA, so on and so forth.They just ignore it. They just
don't even deal with it. In thisbook. They deal with the cover

(39:33):
stories of Bluebook and grudgeand all of those UFO
investigative programs, but theydon't deal with the
documentation. Beyond that.That's what's frustrating.
Several factors domestic andinternational, most likely
influenced sightings reports inthe belief by some individuals,
that there is a sufficient proofthat some UAP represent Extra
Terrestrial technology. Soagain, they're just driving this

(39:56):
home over and over and overabout it's not alien. Since, but
they're not dealing with theactual information and evidence
that they have that has come outthrough FOIA and that people
like me have question forliterally decades. Arrow
assesses that some portion ofsightings since the 40s have
represented Miss identificationnever before seen experimental,

(40:19):
and operational space rocket andair systems, including stealth
technologies and theproliferation of drone
platforms. I showed you in thetable of contents, they show all
of these different programs, andso on and so forth. But what's
interesting is that you reallycan't attribute any of these top
secret programs to the militarysightings that have been

(40:40):
documented, like the tic tacencounter, even though I am
skeptical about that beinganything but a classified
platform being tested, theystill haven't explained it yet.
So I may be skeptical and saythat's likely what that is just
by the story and the evidenceand so on. But it hasn't been
confirmed yet. And you even goback to the Blue Book Day, some

(41:02):
of the bigger cases like theSocorro landing, that people
have theories on the one wherethere was a test of a lunar
lander. Another one was a hoaxfrom neighboring students. I
know people have theories, butthe government has never been
able to connect those dots. Sothey try and claim overall, hey,
this was us, or the large partit was us, but they don't deal

(41:25):
with the stuff again, from themilitary side. They kind of
gloss over that. And they wantthe general public to believe
these blanket responses. Oh, itwas it was just us. Don't worry
about that. And I go back tothat CIA tweet. They tried it
years ago with the utu. And yetnot a single major sighting,
from the mid to the late 50s,when they were flying, the utu

(41:47):
lined up to anything that theycould actually connect. But that
didn't stop them from trying. Sothat's why I always press look
at the actual documentation,look at the information that's
available. Don't listen to thesesilly reports, use these reports
to work backwards and see howthey came to these conclusions.
If evidence supports it, great.If evidence doesn't support it,

(42:10):
then even better, because thenyou get to see a little bit more
of that picture. And try alittle bit harder for the
evidence to support or refutewhat the government is saying.
If it wasn't obvious already,this was Volume One, there is
going to be a volume two. Sothis particular one that we've
been going over, it covers thefindings from 1945 to October,

(42:35):
the end of October and 2023.Last year. Essentially that's
their their cutoff date, so theyhave to cut it off somewhere,
then they deal with that, writethe report and then release it.
Volume Two will include anyfindings resulting from
interviews and researchcompleted from one November 2023
to 15, April 2024. So nowthey're going to they're going

(42:57):
to go back, then here we arealmost in April, what is it?
March 19. Once we get to midApril, then they're going to
start creating that volume too.So who have they talked to what
more information findings didthey make? Who knows kind of a
crapshoot to guess at thispoint, but that will then be
Volume Two, so much more modern.Hopefully they will deal with

(43:18):
the tic tac hopefully they willdeal with some of these other
cases. I know they're trying toexplain away the the go fast and
the gimbal. And in fairness,they might be right, that
science and the debate aboutglare and not glare and it's
going fast. No, it's not thatscience is over my head. I don't
even care to pretend to knowwhat they're talking about with

(43:38):
their calculations. All I knowis that it's a mess. And all I
know is that it's pittedskeptics, against believers and
everyone in between. Andeverybody just seems like
they're caught up in thosecases, arguing for months and
years on end about trying tosolve those particular cases.

(43:59):
It's almost not to soundconspiratorial, it's almost like
that's the plan. Like let thosethings leak. Because Have you
ever noticed that no one reallygot in trouble. They did their
investigation and into thosethree videos that came out. And
obviously the story wascompletely bunk, by the way that
I can comfortably say becausethe story we were originally

(44:22):
told about the FLIR, the gimbalin the end of 2017, and then the
go fast in March of 2018. Thestories behind those was just
bunk, how they came out why theycame out. Just not the same.
It's not the same story. But whywasn't anybody ever really held

(44:42):
accountable for takinginformation from the Department
of Defense? And according toChristopher Mellon, bending the
rules, then leaking out don'tmind my dog leaking out I agree.
Leaking how the information toChristopher Mellon in the
parking lot of the Pentagon.Those are stories that are being

(45:04):
told and documentaries andpodcast interviews by
Christopher Mellon himself, andthen conveyed by others with no
problem whatsoever. Imagine ifthey were to take information
about, you know, I don't want toget in too much trouble, but a
political figure of some kind ortheir family of some kind, and
then bent the rules to get thatout on a on a CD ROM package and

(45:29):
leaked it out to somebody tofeed to the media, in the
Pentagon parking lot. Do youthink that somebody would care
about that? And the answer isyes. But it's like with the UFO
and UAP stuff and the leaks thatnot only stopped with the FLIR,
the gimbal in the go fast, butrather went all the way for a
couple of years, where you hadvarious photographs that leaked

(45:51):
out that it seemed like therewas no problem. And then the
Pentagon would even say, oh,yeah, that's utilized by the UAP
Task Force. But but we can'tcomment past that. Really? Like
how does that not matter toanybody there. And yet, when
others are involved with leakinginformation on other topics, or
sneaking stuff out on a Discordserver, which I believe

(46:14):
happened, they're chargedimmediately, and they're gone
after? So what are we doinghere? Like, what is it with
UFOs? And UAP? That makes thePentagon go up that who cares?
It's leaking, yet all this otherstuff leaks, and all of a
sudden, you're like, boom, boom,boom, seeing investigation,
prosecution? What's going onthere? And again, it's like,

(46:34):
that's the intention keepeverybody screaming about
algorithms and glare and notglare? And is it turning? Is it
rotating? Is there really afleet of them or not, just keep
them busy over there, becausethey're not going to see what's
going on over here. And for me,that's the greatest trick of a
magician, I've talked about thatanalogy for years, look at my

(46:55):
right hand, so you don't seewhat's going on in my left. And
that is the absolute number onestrategy to government secrecy.
It's also why I call it thecounter intelligence value to
the UAP conversation, becauseyou have no idea what the
government actually knows orbelieves, what they have found
out or what they're stillinvestigating, you have no idea.

(47:16):
And then you've got all thesevoices that have come out. And
they've all got differentvarying degrees of their story.
Many of them work together. Buteven their stories don't align.
It's like they want to mess youup with your thinking. It's like
they want to mess the topic up.It's like they want to destroy
what has been built for decadesof those that have looked into

(47:37):
this topic and have come to theconclusion based on documented
evidence, official FOIAresponses, and even outside of
the government, theinvestigations that they've done
independently, have come to theconclusion for themselves. There
is something to this, yet theseother former government
officials come along,everybody's got all these
stories, nothing's backed up.And where are we at? We're with

(47:58):
where we're at is now we have areport that the majority of the
mainstream media just boughthook line, hook, line and
sinker. And they want thegeneral public to go, I guess
there's really not anything tothat UFO topic. And then you're
gonna see the decade, the coverup last for a couple of decades,
again, or half a century again,and then they're not going to

(48:20):
deal with it. And that's whyI've always been passionate
about pushing back on thesestories, because when they're
only stories, in the end, theywill hurt. And I believe that
this is a prime example of howthey have hurt. Moving on in the
report, they talk about ProjectBluebook, again, more in depth,
and then they go into theresults of all the varying

(48:43):
projects that they deal withfrom again, 1945 all the way
through all SAP a tip andbeyond. And they talked about
the results. And what was kindof interesting, if you didn't
catch up just from a historicalperspective, the project
Bluebook label is kind of thestance that the US government
has had had, for literallydecades, it became prior to 2017

(49:04):
when we found out about a tip,really the centerpiece to my
research, not because of bluebook itself. But because that
was the stance of the USgovernment. What you see on the
right of your screen, there isthe fact sheet on UFOs that the
US Air Force, and manygovernment agencies would send
out and they sent it out fordecades, trying to make anybody

(49:26):
like myself believe the findingsof project Bluebook and
essentially it's verbatim no youhave no UFO reported,
investigated and evaluated bythe US Air Force demonstrated
any indication of a threat tonational security. You can see
here that's pretty much verbatimnumber two, there was no
evidence submitted to ordiscovered by the US Air Force

(49:48):
that sightings representedtechnological developments or
principles beyond the range ofthen present day scientific
knowledge. You can see thatpretty much right there
scientific knowledge numberthree There was no evidence
indicating that sightingscategorized as on identified are
extraterrestrial vehicles. Lookat that. It's right there. So
what essentially they were doingthat because this is today's

(50:10):
report, you know, in 2024, thiswas created decades ago. It's
the same darn thing. Now, Idon't expect them to change the
findings and project Bluebook.But my whole point here is that
these facts that were conveyedon these fact sheets and sent
out again, to people like me,there were no supporting facts,

(50:31):
factual evidence to go alongwith those facts. They were in
quote, facts. They were justkind of made up. Because when
you actually look at theevidence, I'm not saying that it
was alien or extraterrestrial.So with that reference, excluded
on that there were clearviolations of military Aerospace

(50:52):
has training exercises, and whatcould be defined as a national
security threat. So the factthat they're still trying to say
that is ridiculous. So they're,they're going by the same
playbook, but the same evidencethat debunked blue book as a
true investigation. And rather,I just label it a explanation.

(51:13):
Because when you deep dive intothat history, and it is pretty
interesting, but when you deepdive into it, you realize it
wasn't a investigation, theywere simply trying to explain to
the general public, almostexactly like they are doing now.
Get the general public tobelieve what we want them to
believe, put forward thesestatements, these claims and

(51:34):
say, Hey, trust me, bro, weinvestigated it, we are arrow
and they said, No, they're notdoing any extra terrestrial
recovery programs, or there'snot this claim or that claim to
be supported. And we believethem. So they discount all of
the witnesses that came in,because they only came in with a
memorandum or on the recordstatement after their interview.

(51:56):
Then they go to the privatesector, and they go to these
aerospace companies say, Hey, doyou guys have a piece of
extraterrestrial technology? Andthe aerospace company says,
Well, no, we don't. And here'sa, here's a statement on the
record. And we'll sign a memostating that arrow believes them
but discounts the witnesses. Isthat fair? Not really, because
it's not scientific. It's anexplanation, the same playbook,

(52:21):
that blue book did from the 50s.And 60s, is being done today.
And you can see that they'reusing the exact same word from
DACA, from documents decadesago, to describe blue book then,
and they are still doing thesame tactic today. What's also
kind of funny, too, is when youall you got to do is factcheck.

(52:44):
Okay, again, I get so worked up,I guess you could say just
simply because they try and passoff the same stories over and
over and over. And when you lookat Roswell? Look, I don't know
what happened at Roswell. Idon't know if it was alien or
not. What I can prove beyond anyshadow of a doubt, is that their
explanations just don't makesense. If they really wanted to

(53:07):
explain it away, they wouldn'thave had to do so now like four
different times. And when youlook at their fourth
explanation, because it didchange from the weather balloon
to then the top secret mogulballoons, and they tried to
claim the flights lined up whenyou just hone in on this part of
the 2024 report. And they dealwith the Roswell investigation
inquiries. You can see hereit'll go through all the

(53:29):
different history and again,great history read it really
urge you to, they come up withthe same points, you know, that
they've tried to drill for, fordecades now. That the alien
bodies quote unquote, wereessentially these crash test
dummies that the US Air Forcewas using that those bodies that
were seen in a hospital becausewhy would you take a dummy to a

(53:50):
hospital, we're actuallyconnected to a 1956 KC 97
aircraft accident where 11 AirForce pilots were killed, and a
1959 man balloon mishap in whichtwo air force pilots were
injured. So what they were doingwas connecting those witnesses
that saw bodies within thehospital, maybe mangled humans,
I hate to say it that way butbeing either killed or injured

(54:13):
in these incidents. That wasthat was the dot they were
trying to connect to thesewitnesses that were coming
forward and the Roswellincident. But but the problem
was, and again, even in 2024,they still haven't dealt with
this, that the crash testdummies weren't invented until a
couple of years after Roswellallegedly happened anyway. So

(54:33):
what you're looking at there,Sierra Sam was the first crash
test dummy ever to be inventedby Alderson research labs, and
Ciara engineering company backin 1949. And those two incidents
if you caught it when I set it1956 and 1959. Those were
connected back to the 1947incident. Is everyone wrong? Did

(54:55):
they all get their dates wrong?They all misremembered. Sure
maybe or is This ridiculous isthis now explanation number
four, not as as truthful as theycould be. And I lean towards not
as truthful as they could be.Now, what's beyond the
historical perspective on this,they do go to what we hear about

(55:18):
a lot more nowadays. And that isall SAP and a tip. Some people
love this. And it's interestingto see how it is interpreted in
different ways from those whowant to believe certain things
about this. Now, I have stuckwith the facts. I hope you guys
know that with me when it comesto a tip and the claims that

(55:39):
have come out over the years,backed up by official
documentation when I try andmake a claim or refute a claim.
And I do my best to stay asfactual as I can. So when I got
to this section, I read it withgreat interest. And sure enough,
it actually deals with a verybig problem that has been around

(55:59):
for years when it comes to OSS,AP and a tip. And what is the
difference between OSS AP and atip? Was there a difference? And
I've pointed out that Dr. Howellput off in a lecture quite a few
years ago now
said that a tip was only anickname that OS app was the
actual program. And the $22million did not go to a program

(56:20):
called a tip. It went to all sapthe contractor bass that was all
part of Bigelow Aerospace run byRobert Bigelow. These are all
names and stories we've heardabout for years. But when you
dig into these claims, if youjust listen to how put off it
kind of makes sense because Iwould get attacked right from
people that would listen to howput off and they'd come to me

(56:40):
and say, John, you're sayingyou're not finding any aid tips
stuff, but this is why it's onlya nickname. It's not really the
program or SAP was the programthat was the UFO investigation
effort that everybody is talkingabout. But you have to admit
Luis Elizondo because LuisElizondo said no, no, no. Os app
was a program. And a tip was aprogram. I ran that program.

(57:04):
That's what Elizondo says. Sonow, Louise Elizondo, and Dr.
Howell put off, they completelycontradict each other. I pointed
that out for years. And yet, noone seems to those that want to
believe everybody, no one seemsto care about the contradiction.
They just say they're alltelling the truth, which can't
be true, but they just believeall sides. And I'm the bad guy

(57:24):
for actually questioning it. Butin this report, they deal with
it, and they say the followingnote on program names, the names
OS app and a tip have been usedinterchangeably for the name of
this program, including onofficial documentation. I'd like
OS up. A tip was never anofficial DoD program. However,
after Ossip was cancelled, theATEP moniker was used by some

(57:47):
individuals associated with aninformal, unofficial UAP
community of interest within DODthat researched UAP sightings
from military observers as partof their ancillary job duties.
This effort was not a recognizedofficial program, and had no
dedicated personnel or budget.Don't kill the messenger on

(58:09):
this, because I know I'm gonnaget hate mail and this part will
be clipped out and chopped up.And I'll be taken out of
context. But the governmentactually has supporting evidence
of this. When you look at allthe documentation that has come
out, it actually fully supportswhat the US government said,
that explains the confusion onthe whole aerospace versus

(58:29):
aviation debate. For those thathave been around this channel
long enough. I don't regret thatone bit. And the reason is, is
because I smelled back thenthere was a problem with the
name, that it turns out thatthat whole aviation versus
aerospace thing was absolutely adebate worth having. Why?
Because it actually led to this,that a tip was not a program at

(58:51):
all. It took a couple of years.But it actually was revealed
that Louise Elizondo himselfsent a letter to the to the
Department of Defense in thePentagon, namely the press
office, to get them to changetheir stance on his duties with
a tip. He conceded in one ofthose letters, that maybe you
shouldn't call it I'mparaphrasing here, but

(59:12):
essentially, don't call it aprogram, call it a portfolio, if
you will. In other words, hefinally conceded that this is
true, that it was not anofficial program. If it's a
portfolio that was doneunofficially, great. I really
wish that they would have comeout with that type of a story in
the beginning. I really do.Because I wouldn't have been as

(59:36):
skeptical I would have boughtit. I have reams of evidence to
show that there was something tothe UFO and UAP issue and that
it was being ignored. And ifLuis Elizondo had come out and
said, Hey, look, when I could Iwas running this portfolio,
would it call it whatever youwant at that point, but no one
really knew because no onecared. No one cared about this

(59:59):
issue, but I knew It wasimportant, I would be all over
that. That would be somethingthat would be completely
believable. But that's not whatwe were told. So now the
government has tried to makesense of this mess. And they're
coming up with the sameconclusions that many of us have
had for years that it was not aprogram. When I say there's

(01:00:19):
evidence to support this, thereare documents that have come
out, that used a tipinterchangeably with offset.
Why? Because Harry Reid did whenhe tried to get it in 2009 to
become a sap. That's what hereferred to it as as the
nickname. That's what theywanted to call us up. Within
dia, they then started talkinginternally using that acronym,

(01:00:43):
because that's how Harry Reidreferred to it. And it was the
advanced aerospace threat andidentification program. So they
had an and in there. So it waslike another variation of it. So
the documentation actuallysupports what the government is
saying here. And you'll see hereas we dive a little bit deeper
into the section, that there'seven more evidence to support

(01:01:06):
this section of the report.Although investigating UFOs
slash UAP was not specificallyoutlined in the contract
statement of work. The selectedprivate sector organization
conducted UFO research with thesupport of the DIA program
manager. We know for a fact thatthat's Dr. James McCaskey. Why,
because it was on the originalbid solicitation that was public

(01:01:29):
for all not classified andposted on the Internet back in
2008. Seeking out bids, theyonly collected bids for a couple
of weeks. And how many actuallybid on it. Just one? And you
guessed it, it was RobertBigelow. It was falsely reported
that Lockheed put in a bid aswell, how that came to pass and

(01:01:49):
why it was reported that way, Idon't know. But clearly, this
was only one bidder. That wasRobert Bigelow and bass OS app
slash a tip. So they're nowusing it interchangeably because
they find it the same, alsoinvestigated an alleged hotspot
of UAP and paranormal activityat a property in Utah, which at

(01:02:09):
the time was owned by the headof the private sector,
organization, or bass, includingexamining reports of shadow
figures that's in quotes, andquote, creatures and exploring,
quote, remote viewing, and,quote, human consciousness
anomalies. The organization alsoplan to hire psychics to study

(01:02:30):
inter quote, interdimensionalphenomena, believed to
frequently appear at thatlocation. Do excuse me, di a did
not seek nor specificallyauthorized this work, though a
DIA employee set up and managethe contract with the private
sector organization. In otherwords, yet again, this is

(01:02:54):
something that we've spokenabout for years right here on
this channel, what was official?And what was off the rails? Why
is this important? Because itputs everything that's happened.
And that's been claimed, since2017. About these programs into
perspective, what was official,and what was not all SAP was
officially a forward lookingAerospace Technology Research

(01:03:19):
exploration program that lookedinto 12 different types of
advancements. And these programshave been done before I found
another one called Projectoutgrowth, it happened about 40
years before OS app, whole pointbeing, these are not new types
of programs. This is somethingthat that happens, they want to

(01:03:40):
look into the future. What canour enemies have? What could we
have? How can we get there, soon and so forth? So what was
official? It was that what wasunofficial? Was this UFO UAP
invested paranormal, humanconsciousness anomalies, remote
viewing, and creatures thatveered completely off the map.

(01:04:03):
The documentation supports thefirst part of what I just told
you, the aerospace research theforward looking into 40 years
into the future, what type ofadvancements could they have
what are called from lift orpropulsion, or, again, there was
a list of about 12 of them. Thatis all supported. Nothing has
come out to support UAP orparanormal phenomena on these

(01:04:25):
ASA documents. Point being. Itputs everything into perspective
on what we've heard. And it alsoshould, it won't for some
people, but it should make usquestion some of the other
claims, because this is not whatwe were told. And at this point,
you can dismiss the governmentreport, but in this particular

(01:04:47):
section, evidence exists to backit up just does don't kill the
messenger. So with that said, itis right to question some of the
claims from those people thathave been around the same core
group With that the governmenthas found at the root of some of
these bigger claims, it's rightto question them. And don't ever
hesitate to do so. Don't beintimidated either. Because

(01:05:10):
there's a lot of people outthere attorneys included, that
will send you legal threateningletters. If you're digging into
documentation like this andpublishing them. That's a true
story. So don't hesitate toquestion because there is ample
reason to do so. Just prior todo these cancellation of the

(01:05:31):
program, the private sectororganization proposed as a new
line of effort to host a seriesof, quote intellectual debates
at academic institutes toinfluence the public debate,
which included hiring supportivereporters, and celebrity
moderators. I don't know whatthey were trying to turn that
into. But clearly, they weretrying to do something else. To

(01:05:54):
be honest with you, Iimmediately kind of thought of
the Soul Foundation and Dr. GaryNolan and what they're doing
with these intellectual debateson their end.
Obviously, he's tied into someof the same people in this
group. So is that a privatesector continuation of this? Are
they looking for governmentfunding to try and continue this
conversation? Who knows? But itwas a fascinating look inside

(01:06:18):
this era of all of these typesof claims, and what the
government has concluded. Soagain, I'm not here to say, Oh,
you got to believe thegovernment. But I hope you see
enough that you should questiona little bit more than how the
how much the general public hasbeen questioning in the last
seven years or so. The OSS havea tip contract with the private

(01:06:39):
sector organization producedexpository papers addressing the
12 scientific areas tasked inthe contract statement of work,
the scientific papers were neverthoroughly peer reviewed.
Instead, os app slash a tipreviewed a large number of
project Bluebook and privatecases, and conducted interviews
of UAP observers and conductedunrelated work on alleged

(01:07:01):
paranormal activities at theprivate sector organizations
property in Utah or SkinwalkerRanch. They you can even see
here that they didn't find anyUAP casework that was worth
mentioning by all sapper a tipwhy not? Where the $22 million
go. All saps last a tip wasterminated in 2012. Upon the
completion of its deliverablesdue to DIA and DOD concerns

(01:07:24):
about the project. After OS appslash a tip was terminated. Its
supporters unsuccessfullyattempted to convince DHS to
support a new version of theeffort dubbed Kona Blue, there's
Kona Blue again. So obviously,they didn't want to let this
contract go. They tried very,very hard to keep it going at

(01:07:46):
DHS, but obviously failed. Otherhistory that it deals with
foreign and academicinvestigator, investigatory
efforts, you see here that itgoes into the project manage, or
excuse me project magnet. Wewhich if you look at UFO history
has been around for quite a fewyears. But obviously this arrow
report goes into a lot of thoseefforts on foreign soil to look

(01:08:11):
into the UFO and UAP issue.Jumping to Section Five of the
report, assessment ofinterviewee claims of US
government involvement andhidden UAP programs, again,
didn't have any evidence in herethat they spoke with David
grush, or that David grush gavethem any undeniable evidence,
but essentially was talkingabout those claims that

(01:08:31):
circulate and route to Davidgrush and the 40 people that he
says that he talked to, you cansee here as of September
17 2023, Aro interviewedapproximately 30 individuals. So
we can have an idea now of howmany people aro talk to they
came up with two differentnarratives that they kept
hearing over and over with whatthey labeled as the primary

(01:08:53):
narrative, and then thesecondary narrative. The primary
narrative alleges that the USgovernment and industry partners
are in possession of and aretesting off world technology
that has been concealed fromcongressional oversight, and the
world since approximately 1964.And possibly since 1947. If the

(01:09:13):
Roswell events are included. Thenarrative asserts that the UAP
program possesses as many as 12extraterrestrial spacecraft.
These were the stories that theywere hearing and essentially
that narrative that formedformer CIA official involvement
and movement of alleged materialrecovered from a UAP crashed
tonight on the record arrowinterview and obtained a signed

(01:09:35):
statement from the former CIAofficial who was specifically
named by Arrow interviewees. Theformer official stated he had no
knowledge of any aspect of thisallegation. kind of curious
again, who that CIA officialcould be. The official signed a
memorandum for the record,attesting to the truthfulness of

(01:09:58):
his statements essentially theCIA A guy said, what he did put
it on paper and signed it. Ihave filed a FOIA for that MFR,
I'm not gonna let that go.aerospace companies denied
involvement in recoveringextraterrestrial craft. We've
talked about this a little bitin the beginning, Arrow met with
high ranking officials,including executives and chief

(01:10:18):
technology officers of the namedcompanies, all denied the
existence of these programs, andattested to the truthfulness of
their statements on the record.So all they had to do is put
something on paper and say, No,we didn't do it. And apparently
arrow believed them, which iskind of silly, because what
gives them the power to justsay, Oh, I'll sign a memorandum

(01:10:42):
for the record. And, and that'sall it takes. Because as far as
I know, there's probably quite afew witnesses out of the 30 that
did the exact same thing. So whyare they discounted yet? The
aerospace industry, whomeverthey are, because they're not
named? They signed? A memorandumand up well, yeah, none of those
claims are substantiated. Itdoesn't make sense. But I do

(01:11:04):
fall back on the thing. I'll saythe third time. If, if it was
really going on, I don't thinkif arrow knocked on the door of
Lockheed and said, Hey, are youare you doing guys involved in
the Extra Terrestrial crashretrieval programs? Or whatever?
And Lockheed goes, Oh, my gosh,we have to tell you guys now you

(01:11:26):
asked. Okay, here you go. Idon't see that happening. I
really don't know. Whether ornot a company like Lockheed
would have that in the privatesector. Or if it would be kind
of buried deep inside a militaryor government installation.
That's a topic for another day.But let's just assume that they

(01:11:46):
are, do you think arrow knockingon the door or picking up the
telephone and setting up ameeting would make it all just
kind of come out into the open?I don't I don't see it, you
know, it's just it's it's kindof laughable the way that that
is conveyed here in the report.And to be honest with you, I
would have loved to have been afly on the wall in that that

(01:12:07):
meeting, like when they set itup. And they obviously have to
take safeguarded precautionsbecause I'm guessing that they
had classified portions of theconversation. So you set the set
this up in a secure room, andthen you sit down and go, Okay,
so do you guys have any extraterrestrial I mean, like what
true or not, it just must havebeen like a, you know, a crazy

(01:12:29):
thing to be in the room towitness. Here's another fun
section. This is revisiting theto the stars Academy and the
piece of the alleged UAP stuff.sample of alleged alien
spacecraft is an ordinaryterrestrial metal alloy. Arrow
learn through an intervieweethat a private sector
organization claimed to have inits possession, material from an
extraterrestrial craft from acrash at an unloaded unknown

(01:12:51):
location from the 1940s or1950s. And it goes into the
various claims about it. Arrowand a leading Science Science
Laboratory concluded that thematerial is a metallic alloy
terrestrial in nature, andpossibly a United States Air
Force origin based on itsmaterials, I have filed a FOIA

(01:13:12):
the US Air Force origin reallykind of piqued my interest a
little bit. So I have filed FOIAas as you can imagine, on that
as well, seeking out thecommunications between aero the
Air Force, what scientificanalyses did they do on this, to
try and get it because when itcomes to the Army's agreement
through the credo, what's calledthe credo, and to the stars

(01:13:34):
Academy, that will likely beexempt. Because it may be
proprietary information,exempted under B four, which is
very frustrating, I've run intothat already with researching
the Krita. But regardless, thatmay be a roadblock. But if aro
obtains the piece and does theirown independent investigation, I

(01:13:59):
do not believe that should beexempt. And I will find it if
they try it. So it's no longerbecause it was obtained with
permission. It is no longerproprietary, because nobody
funded it from the corporateside, the US government did. So
whether or not I will get it ornot that will, we'll see. But my

(01:14:19):
whole point being is that Idon't believe they have any
legal ground to say, Oh, we weregoing to exempt this for
proprietary reasons or corporatesecrets or whatever. I believe
that that should be open. So Ihave filed for all of that. But
interesting to note that gotthat material, tested it and
came up with nothing. Here'sthat section that I talked about

(01:14:42):
where they revisit Kona Blue andgive a little bit more detail
and it was pretty interestingbecause I do kind of sense that
there will be more informationcoming out on this. So I'll do a
future video. But just to giveyou guys a brief overview Kona
Blue was brought to Arrow'sattention by interviewees who
claim him that it was asensitive DHS compartment to

(01:15:03):
cover up the retrieval andexploitation of quote, non human
biologics, Kona Blue traces itsorigins to the DEA managed OS
app slash a tip program
that quote non human biologics.There's only one guy that really
spearheaded the use of biologicsin the last year or so. And that

(01:15:23):
would be David grush. Is thisconnected to the claims that he
believes and that he's conveyedto Congress? Did someone go to
David grush and connect thisKona Blue program and claim that
it was a sensitive di d h scompartment to cover up the
retrieval and exploitation ofnon human biologics? Because if

(01:15:48):
that part is true, it connectsback to you guessed it, the same
small core group of people thathave made grandiose claims for
years and even decades aboutUFOs, UAP and aliens. They
always seem to be connected tothese types of stories. So the
fact that that is in quotes nonhuman biologics, and that is

(01:16:10):
something that we've heard fromfrom David grush. We can start
to piece together potentially,who his list of 40 is, and that
would probably include Dr. Halput off and those that were
surrounding the OSS app slash atip program. They turned around
and fed David grush. Thenonhuman biologics quote claim
that the Kona Blue program wascovering that up. Obviously, the

(01:16:34):
Kona Blue program didn't existon that level to cover it up. It
never was stood up. But ifthat's what he was hearing, in
fairness to David grush, heprobably heard it from people he
thought were legitimate. Thatspeculation there, but I found
it incredibly intriguing thatthe nonhuman biologics was in
quote, in quotes as connected toKona Blue and the DHS extension

(01:16:59):
of, or at least a proposedextension of aos app slash a
tip. When dia cancelled thisprogram, and supporters proposed
to DHS that they create and funda new version of OS app slash a
tip under a special accessprogram. This proposal codenamed
Coda blue, would restart UAPinvestigations paranormal

(01:17:19):
research including alleged humanconsciousness anomalies that's
in quotes, and reverse engineerany recovered offworld
spacecraft that they hoped toacquire. This proposal gained
some initial traction at DHS,DHS to the point where a
prospective Special AccessProgram or P SAP was officially

(01:17:40):
requested to stand up thisprogram, but it was eventually
rejected by DHS leadership forlacking merit. So obviously, it
got traction at DHS that reallypiques the interest of me simply
because you're looking at apaper trail there. Now, it's no
longer just a proposal or a onepage one off, but rather a paper

(01:18:03):
trail on who was interested inthis, why would they be
interested in it? Why would DHSwant to look into human
consciousness anomalies, and gofrom there, so those paper
trails are golden. I love stufflike that live for stuff like
that. It is critical to notethat no extraterrestrial craft
or bodies were ever collected.This meat material was only

(01:18:26):
assumed to exist by Kona Blueadvocates, and it's anticipated
contract performers. This wasthe same assumption made by
those same individuals involvedwith the OS app slash a tip
program. That obviously tiesright back to the same core
group of people. Those namesthat we've heard quite a bit
about, and even from in the lastseven, eight years, Robert

(01:18:48):
Bigelow, Dr. Howell put off Dr.Colum Kelleher, all the people
that were involved in thatoriginal offset program. Fast
forward to the Kona Blueproposal. That is what the
government is seeing all routesto those people get absolutely
no evidence exists, according tothis report. So I'll revisit my
statement one more time. It'stime for the quote

(01:19:09):
whistleblowers to becomewhistleblowers without quotes,
if Dr. Hal put off truly has thekey to unlocking the cosmos
here, and that he was involved,it's time to come out with it.
If any of the people that Davidgrush talk to you all the list
of 40 and I'm completely wrongthat Dr. Hal put off his on that

(01:19:31):
that list. That's fine. We knowDr. Eric Davis is by his own
admission, he's posted that onFacebook that he's one of those
people that fed David grushinformation. Then let David or
excuse me, let Eric Davis comeout and bring that information
with him. Time to become awhistleblower. Stop at the

(01:19:53):
Facebook posts. Stop at theseprivate organization lectures
where you hint Drop breadcrumbs.Stop teasing a book for years on
end. If there is somethingthere, and people are holding
the keys to unlocking this forus all, who are the gatekeepers?

(01:20:16):
The government. Maybe thisreport truly did convey the
roadblock all the way up to theroadblock that they met. And
they didn't know that they wereat a roadblock. And the doctor
how put off the doctor EricDavis says that Luis Elizondo
the David brushes, the list of40 witnesses, who then becomes
the true gatekeepers of thesecrets, the US government? No,

(01:20:40):
because I'm sorry, I don'tbelieve arrow would have the
access. There I said it, I don'tbelieve that they would be able
to get a Lockheed Martin to justcome clean and go, Okay, you
guys are asking, so we'll tellyou, it ain't gonna happen. So
the people that are dropping thebreadcrumbs, if they really do
have the secrets, those are thegatekeepers. And you don't need

(01:21:02):
to take my word for that. Justlook at the definition, they are
holding the secrets, if peoplewant to fall back that they have
security clearances, and thisthat and the other thing, fine.
But I will still give my opinionand say that there is no way
that the government will cartthem off. If they change
humanity, as we know it andprove that there are non human

(01:21:24):
biologics floating around in ouratmosphere, flying
extraterrestrial technology, andbeing reverse engineered in the
private sector. Not going tohappen, I just don't see it. So
now's the time, drop the quotesaround whistleblower, and become
a whistleblower. And bring theevidence, because after all
these decades of people makingthese claims, if they don't have

(01:21:47):
it, then it's time to just stop.Okay, it's time to just go away.
If you really have it, but youdon't want to show it, then it's
time to go away, if you reallyhave it, but you fear reprisal.
If you're not going to show it,then just go away. Because this
report stems from the same coregroup of people making these
claims. And this is where weended up. So no congressional

(01:22:09):
legislation is going to changethat. No government report is
going to change that. Nowhistleblower without backing up
their claims is going to changethat what do you need evidence.
And that's what they have to doto come out at this point. I
said it months ago, on socialmedia years ago, maybe even now,

(01:22:29):
it's time to put up or shut up.And that's it. Because there is
something to this topic thatwarrants further scientific
investigation, stop ruining theidea and concept that more
scientists will want toinvestigate this by just
conveying the stories that lackevidence, because any real

(01:22:49):
scientist, once you get theirattention, is going to look our
direction, right to theconversation that we're all
having. They're going to look atthose stories and realize their
stories. What is being put inthe spotlight above all else are
stories that lack evidence. Solet's prove it. Or get out of
the way. And let the scientistsand those that that really can

(01:23:13):
do a true scientific endeavor,move to the forefront of this
and take it to the next level.To get the data they need to
solve the mystery once and forall, or at least take a step.
Because those types of lectures,the podcast, the YouTube thing,
things, none of that pushes thisforward. It only pushes it

(01:23:34):
forward to the to the believersthat are already pushed forward
on their own. They don't need tobe pushed anymore, but they feel
like they're more validated.That's the only thing that comes
out of this when you actuallylack evidence, but still convey
your stories and write yourbooks, do your podcast and do
your YouTube videos. That's theonly thing that happens here.

(01:23:55):
Because Congress is losinginterest. I'm sorry, they just
are there's a dwindling numberof people that are talking about
this legislation isn't passingfor a reason. Probably because
it's not worded correctly. Noneof that stuff is happening the
way that it should. So it's timefor the evidence or just get out
of the way. There's enoughevidence to support that

(01:24:18):
scientists should be involvedthat I believe wholeheartedly,
but if you highlight thestories, they don't care,
they're just going to make funof it. I think it actually
started raining here. HopefullyI don't lose power as I'm
recording this Arrow.
Arrow has determined that modernallegations that the US
government is hiding offworldtechnology and beings largely

(01:24:38):
originate from the same group ofindividuals who have tied to the
canceled OS happy to program anda private sector organizations
paranormal research efforts.They are punching this over and
over and over. And I believethere's a reason for that. You
can see here in the nexthighlighted passage, I won't
read it all because it getsreally kind of confusing with

(01:24:59):
all the different numbers and soon. I told you they were no
names, but they rather gave theinterviewees numbers. And they
labeled the people that theythey talk to, you can kind of
see like the breakdown of whothey were. You see a couple of
them have repeatedly voicedthese claims and various public
and private venues, and theyhave petitioned Congress in

(01:25:19):
various capacities on UAPissues, they've not provided any
empirical evidence of theirclaims to arrow that could
absolutely very much be true.And all you have to do is look
at some of the names I'verattled off some of the names I
haven't rattled off, and look atthe contributions that they have
really cool stories, but theydon't back it up. And arrow is

(01:25:40):
telling you the exact samething. So dismiss arrow, and I'm
telling you the exact samething. Dismiss me look what the
government came came with. Pickone, right, dismiss us both look
what other people are saying,Look at what smart scientists
are saying that are outside ofthe UFO arena that have taken
the time to look in what do theysay stories, hearsay, you see a

(01:26:02):
lot of that over and over andover what is lacking evidence,
this breaks down all thedifferent types of people that
they looked at. I also want topoint out that they give a lot
of those different program namesand, and projects that they want
to attribute to UAP. And when Isay they the US government. And

(01:26:23):
you can see some of the stuffgoing back to the 1940s with the
Manhattan Project, that they'retrying to connect the excessive
secrecy behind some of theseprograms. And some of these
designs like what you see onyour screen now to UAP. In the
encounters that we've seen. Now,no, they're not trying to claim
it's 100%. But they are tryingto claim there's a big

(01:26:45):
connection. Well, like I pointedout earlier, and I'll point out
again, there is no evidence toconnect some of these bigger
cases that we've talked about,that are documented in
government files to some ofthese projects. They've tried
before. They failed before.They're trying it again, why
they think they'll succeed thistime. I have no idea. But that's

(01:27:06):
what they're trying to do,silly. But that's what it is.
Now jumped down to section ninethat conclusion to date, Arrow
has not discovered any empiricalevidence at any sighting of a
UAP represented offworldtechnology or the existence of a
classified program that had notbeen properly reported to
Congress. Look, the first partof that. Okay, we keep hearing

(01:27:27):
that over and over the secondpart of that, would arrow have
access to those programs thathave not been reported to
Congress? My guess would be no.So that to me is just kind of
like what it is what it is, Ijust kind of put that on the
backburner. I don't really lookat it much. But that being said,
that was their conclusion,right? All summed up in these
two paragraphs here. And theVolume Two is on the way,

(01:27:49):
hopefully, later this year. Solook, as I just kind of went
over, there are things in thisreport that absolutely are bunk.
They're silly. I think thegovernment is putting their foot
in their mouth in a couple ofthese areas, some of which I've
gone over. You look at thehistory, what they've talked

(01:28:09):
about, I dealt with Roswell, alittle bit, Project Bluebook,
you look at all the sillyexplanations, which by the way,
going back to the Roswell thing,I didn't point this out earlier,
they did not mention in thisreport that a lot of the
documentation was destroyedabout Roswell, the GAO came out
with that in their report, yetarrow conveniently leaves it out
of this report, just simplysaying, Oh, it's project Mogol,

(01:28:32):
balloons and so on. So again,doesn't really equate to alien
when you look at that, but itjust shows you how silly it is,
when you look at the evidence orthe lack thereof. And then you
see what the claims thegovernment is trying to make.
They don't really match up atall. But they go through a lot.
And I was very pleasantlysurprised when I saw that.
Because they did go into thatthat history. And it's

(01:28:54):
important, whether you're notyou believe it's a real
investigation, or you believethe findings of blue book and
all those programs. That'sirrelevant. It's important
history to understanding thetopic, and understanding how we
got here today. But what I wasalso surprised, but not
pleasantly surprised about waswhat they ignored. And it was

(01:29:16):
the fact that and this goes backto what I've said for years,
when you spotlight the stories,and you spotlight the stuff that
lacks evidence, when you putthat in front of somebody who
finally is taking theopportunity to look at it, and
you kind of essentially put allthat out front, and they look at
it and there's absolutelynothing to support it. What
happens, you get a report, likewhat we just went over stuff

(01:29:39):
that dismisses the grandioseclaims, which in some cases is
likely very warranted. But whatabout the stuff that they do
have the evidence that thegovernment has come clean about,
although sometimes you have tofight for it through FOIA and,
and appeals and lawsuits andlitigation. But when that
evidence comes out What happensto that, and in this report,

(01:30:02):
they didn't deal with it. Oneexample would be the fact that
it was about a decade where theUS Air Force that one military
branch that is surprisingly, mumand has been throughout this
whole conversation, playing verylittle role in the public part
of this conversation when itcomes to UAP. had on the books

(01:30:23):
through the late 90s, early2000s, all the way to the late
2000s a regulation to report anddocument unidentified flying
objects that their militarypilots were encountering. I have
documented proof that when Iwent to the one receiving end,
which was NORAD for theseservice reports, they said,

(01:30:45):
Well, we were not subject toFOIA, but they did look under a
NORAD regulation where they tryand mimic and honor the spirit
of the FOIA that they foundabsolutely nothing, no service
reports on UFOs. And the reasonwhy NORAD was not subject to
FOIA was because they're underCanadian control as well. So US
law didn't apply. Well, toquickly summarize the end of the

(01:31:07):
story, the Canadian governmentsent me hundreds of service
reports that went through NORADon unidentified flying objects.
My whole point, the US AirForce, and their history of post
project Bluebook ofinvestigating UFOs was not only
covered up, but on top of that,proven by the Canadian

(01:31:27):
government. Aero doesn't dealwith those types of things at
all. Why are military branchesand government agencies lying
about their UFO and UAPinformation? And why have they
lied for decades, if there'sabsolutely nothing to any of
these claims? That doesn't makesense. They also don't talk
about the intelligence filesbecause when you dig, even post

(01:31:50):
project Bluebook into the 70sand beyond, they talk about UAP
material being carried handcarried to somebody's office
within the CIA, that there wassome type of UFO something that
was connected to a case thatpiqued the interest of the CIA
internally. This documentactually goes on to talk about

(01:32:11):
an informal effort toessentially keep tabs on the UAP
conversation. This was yearsafter the US government
completed their investigation.And they maintained interest the
CIA was still actively involved.The National Security Agency has
hundreds of communicationsdealing with UFOs that blow well

(01:32:34):
past the project Bluebook eraand go through the 70s, the 80s
and the 90s, most of which areclassified top secret to this
day, when I tried to get thesefurther declassified and get
these redacted redactionslifted. There are hundreds of
these pages, the NSA lost eachand every one, at least so they

(01:32:56):
claim. So these redactions willstick forever. Doesn't matter
what congressional legislationis passed. It doesn't matter
what UAP Disclosure Act is, isis created. It doesn't matter.
According to the NationalSecurity Agency. It's all gone.
Anyway, the originals weredestroyed. And these redacted
with black and white out are theonly things that remain. What is

(01:33:21):
so secretive about theintelligence on UFOs that is
being collected around the worldsources and
methods Absolutely. redact that,is that all of this likely not?
So what is it that they'rehiding, but the NSA isn't alone?
You look at the DefenseIntelligence Agency, this is
only to have numerous pages thatare found within the CIA's files

(01:33:42):
of heavily classified UAP andUFO related material. I received
these in the late 90s. And thereare hundreds of them. I years
ago, did the exact same thingwith the DIA that I did, the NSA
requested what are calledMandatory declassification
reviews, to try and get all ofthese redactions lifted. By the

(01:34:03):
way, they didn't even use blackink, they use a razor blade to
cut out these pages andphotocopied pages with holes in
them because they didn't want towaste the ink. When I finished
the cases, and the MDRs got tothe end, you know what the DIA
said they lost each and everyone of their intelligence papers
on UFOs. So these documents herethat are keeping tabs on UFO

(01:34:26):
related information and evenhere, a UFO research
organization in China. They'reall gone. They're all lost to
history, no congressionallegislation, no UAP Disclosure
Act are going to bring theseback from the shredders, at
least are so they claim. Well,they make the government
actually come clean and sayyeah, we rely on for decades and

(01:34:47):
we actually do have all ofthese. Well, we can only hope,
but probably not. The reportalso didn't talk about the
excessive secrecy that remainsto this day. And if you ask me
it's a lot worse today than itwas decades ago. In fact, it's a
lot worse than it was just 10years ago. This is the security

(01:35:08):
classification guide likely hasbeen revised by now I've got
multiple cases for more recentversions. But regardless, I
expect something very similar tothis blacked out Top Secret, Top
to bottom. They do not want youto know why they are keeping UAP
and UFO information secret. Thisguide actually defines the

(01:35:31):
secrecy. This is what is used byour US government on UAP
information to say if UAPinformation is classified, and
today, everything is where doesit stem from this guide. But the
UAP report doesn't talk aboutany of that excessive secrecy.

(01:35:53):
In my opinion, not only is thissecrecy excessive, on top of
that they are employing tactics,including a law enforcement
exemption to take arrows filesand keep them secret. So if
they're not classified, or if Iby some stroke of luck, can
fight what's called a b1exemption classified because

(01:36:15):
it's secret or, or top secret,if I'm lucky enough to try and
fight that there's already asecond layer that they've put on
that stems from exemption Bseven, or a law enforcement
investigation. I have appealedthose on numerous occasions,
I've lost each and every one. Ialways like to highlight the
successes when it comes toappeals. But sometimes you have

(01:36:37):
to highlight the failures. Whydoesn't the report the one that
we just got this year, talkabout this excessive secrecy?
It's not all sources andmethods. It's not all classified
platform sensor technology. Andhow do we know that? Easy. When
a Russian jet decides to spraygas over one of our MQ nine
Reaper drones, we have a videocirculating our media like that.

(01:37:02):
They review it, they declassifyit, we see it in full, it's
crystal clear. It's beautifulfootage. And you see the Russian
jet go and spray fuel. What's mypoint? There is something about
UAP information that they don'twant you to see. They hide
behind the sources and methodsexplain explanation and
exemption. They hide behind thewell we can't tell you how our

(01:37:24):
classified platforms work. Theyhide behind that. But what they
don't want you to realize isputting the pieces together of
this puzzle that they'll showyou that Russian jet spraying a
highly classified platform likethe MQ nine, but they won't show
you anything about UAP. Why not?What's the difference? There is

(01:37:46):
no difference, or at least thereshouldn't be if we are to
believe what they're trying tosell. In this report. They also
don't talk about our spysatellites, how the fact that
the National ReconnaissanceOffice has a highly classified
platform called sentient, whichsees tic tac shaped objects very
much like the 2004 incident, butall the way into the last couple

(01:38:09):
of years. What are they seeingwhat software or what ability
within the sentient systemallows them to see and detect
these tic tac shaped objects?This was a highly classified top
secret briefing on one of thoseobservations. The report doesn't

(01:38:29):
mention anything like this, atleast not the public one. They
just want to pass off that it'snot extraterrestrial, and it's
not anything they can't explainif they have the proper data.
They clearly have the properdata. The data is there, seeing
these tic tac shaped objects,and yet, they don't deal with
that in the report, maybe volumetwo. They also don't deal with

(01:38:52):
the highly classified nature ofthis report and topic. So the
report is unclassified. Theygive it to the public, but they
don't deal with the real secrecybehind UAP. This is a
declassified also top secretmemo on unidentified aerial
phenomenon Now they call itunidentified anomalous

(01:39:13):
phenomena. You can see here it'sonly declassified because they
redacted almost every singleword. That's the secrecy that
this is on. That's the levelthat all of this is on. Why if
all of this is easily dismissed,and really does stem back to a
core group of people that arekind of creating these

(01:39:35):
cockamamie conspiracy theories,fine. I can understand that in
parts of the conversation, butthe report conveniently left out
the real stuff. The realinformation the real question
marks that people like me have.Sure we can argue all day long
about gimbal FLIR glare speed ofthe go fast whether or not Luis

(01:39:55):
Elizondo really headed a tipwhether or not David grush has
first hand and knowledge are notwhatever we can argue until our
face turns blue. The bottom linewith those arguments is we don't
know the answer at the end ofthe day. But the report doesn't
want you to look at this and askabout this. They just want to
deal with that greatest trick ofa magician. Look over here. So

(01:40:17):
you don't see what's going onover here. And that is exactly
what this report has done. Thatis exactly what they want you to
believe. There's nothing here.There's nothing to it, stop
asking questions, and stoplooking for answers. We've
explained it. We did it throughthe 1960s. The the project

(01:40:38):
Bluebook era we solved it. No,they didn't. evidence showed
otherwise. Why would they haveto change their story on
Roswell, so many different timeswire dates not matching up?
Well, they blame all thewitnesses. None of that makes
sense. So even though there's alot you can prove with this
report, and to give thegovernment credit, they did a
lot of homework on it. Theyconveniently left out the

(01:41:01):
information that you don't hearas much about, it's not as sexy
as somebody going up to Congressunder oath saying, Well, I heard
stories about non humanbiologics. That's sexy. That's
headlines, right? That's whatyou get in the spotlight. But is
that really what we need? Untilwe see the proof of that non
human biologic, let's look andask the important questions on
stuff we can prove and fall backon with actual evidence. That

(01:41:25):
doesn't mean it just has to staywith FOIA. FOIA is not
everything. A lot of my hatersalways say, John thinks FOIA is
everything. No, it's not. It'sjust what I love more than
somebody's story. And I stand bythat, but it's not everything.
And no one can ever cite whereI've said it. But it's a great
starting point. And I think thatwhen the government agencies

(01:41:47):
like the CIA, the DIA, the NSA,the Pentagon itself, all has
pieces of the puzzle that whenput together, negate this
report, it's worth asking about,and it's worth paying attention
to less about the stories moreabout the evidence. That's what
I'm all about. Listen, I hopeyou learned at least one thing
throughout this presentation.Obviously, as I said up front,

(01:42:10):
it is not everything. There's alot in this report, I urge you
don't just judge it on what Isay or, or what other
researchers say or media outletsor bloggers or whomever. Don't
read it for yourself. Take inwhat works for you when it comes
to information that you want tostick with or dismiss, whether

(01:42:35):
that means you believe thegovernment or not whether that
means that supports LuisElizondo or not, whether it
supports David grush or not,whether it supports the whole
offset movement or not, doesn'tmatter. Read it,
I really urge you, I'm a bigadvocate for people having
access to this information.That's why I run the black
vault. That's why in the linksbelow, here on YouTube, or if

(01:42:59):
you're listening on the podcastplatforms, it's under the black
vault radio, if you're notaware, you can get these types
of shows through those podcastplatforms. Look at the show
notes. I offer links. If youfound it worthwhile, please hit
the thumbs up button. I shootfor five stars on the audio
review. So please take a moment.It's a huge help to me offer off

(01:43:19):
of those reviews. I won't tellyou what to put but I do aim for
the five stars to do aim for thethumbs up. And if you are on
Youtube, you're new to thechannel. Please make sure you're
subscribed. Turn thenotifications on that way when
these videos do drop or I domore live streams. Take your
questions live, you'll benotified that said this is John
Greenewald Jr signing off. Andwe'll see you next time.

All Episodes

Ep. #132 – Breaking Down the IG’s Evaluation of the DoD’s Actions Regarding UAP/UFOs

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Ep. #132 – Breaking Down the IG’s Evaluation of the DoD’s Actions Regarding UAP/UFOs