October 23, 2024 • 55 mins
This week we speak with Tyler Zahradnik, who works with the New Paradigm Institute, about recently uncovered documents that point to NASA working against disclosure and therefore being apart of the UFO coverup.
About Director Darcy Weir
Diving into the chaos of UFOTwitter like a fearless spelunker, Darcy Weir is a documentary filmmaker who over the past two decades has chosen to explore some of the most intriguing topics of discussion today, including UFOs, Cryptids, and even Bitcoin. He has completed over 15 feature-length documentaries on these topics, all of which are available on Amazon Prime and Apple. His goal is to make the world of UFOs more accessible to the general public by shedding light on the subject in new ways. Enjoy fresh conversations with him on Twitter. Join the Twitter Space to share in the conversation.
Links
Amazon: https://amzn.to/3wHv7JJ
Apple TV: https://apple.co/3TlQQ2Q
https://x.com/occultjourneys
instagram/ darcyweirfilms
youtube/ @occultjourneys
About Andy Marcial
Andy is a researcher of 20+ yrs who was forced down the rabbit hole after very personal and life changing close encounters which started in Puerto Rico. His entire life, all he has done, is try to understand what he saw and why he went through what he went through. It changed him and showed him that there is an entire reality out there beyond human comprehension. It also drove him to reach out to others like himself because of how psychologically damaging this can be. He also recently leaked three Department of Homeland Security videos to the public, which were controversial, but officially recognized as UAP by Customs and Border Patrol in August of 2023. Andy doesn't do what he does for any other reason than to open the minds of anyone willing to listen and to show those affected by this phenomenon that they are not alone.
Links
instagram/ ny_uap_discussion
youtube/ @ufocompilation
About Director Darcy Weir
Diving into the chaos of UFOTwitter like a fearless spelunker, Darcy Weir is a documentary filmmaker who over the past two decades has chosen to explore some of the most intriguing topics of discussion today, including UFOs, Cryptids, and even Bitcoin. He has completed over 15 feature-length documentaries on these topics, all of which are available on Amazon Prime and Apple. His goal is to make the world of UFOs more accessible to the general public by shedding light on the subject in new ways. Enjoy fresh conversations with him on Twitter. Join the Twitter Space to share in the conversation.
Links
Amazon: https://amzn.to/3wHv7JJ
Apple TV: https://apple.co/3TlQQ2Q
https://x.com/occultjourneys
instagram/ darcyweirfilms
youtube/ @occultjourneys
About Andy Marcial
Andy is a researcher of 20+ yrs who was forced down the rabbit hole after very personal and life changing close encounters which started in Puerto Rico. His entire life, all he has done, is try to understand what he saw and why he went through what he went through. It changed him and showed him that there is an entire reality out there beyond human comprehension. It also drove him to reach out to others like himself because of how psychologically damaging this can be. He also recently leaked three Department of Homeland Security videos to the public, which were controversial, but officially recognized as UAP by Customs and Border Patrol in August of 2023. Andy doesn't do what he does for any other reason than to open the minds of anyone willing to listen and to show those affected by this phenomenon that they are not alone.
Links
instagram/ ny_uap_discussion
youtube/ @ufocompilation
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Two hundred years ago, two thousand years ago.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
This isn't going to work.
Speaker 3 (00:12):
She's picking up a massive object in this video.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Ships that might be closed.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
I can sense them in my vicinity, So I guess
I'm just very tuned in Bulkan.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
Head honcho walks out ear reveal. Yeah, the crowd goes, oh,
my God. Was to protect the secrets from the Air
Force that were not out there in public. So welcome back, everybody.
(00:47):
This is episode five of last Night on UFO Twitter,
and tonight we are going to be talking with Tyler
from New Paradigm Institute. Now, this is a really cool initiative.
It's a group that has been put together with the
help of many you know, UFO activists. Let's just say,
(01:13):
we've got so many interesting people involved with it. And
last week they did a really cool presentation which was
live stream and it had all the who's who and
the research of UAP and UFOs. Danny Shehan is one
(01:33):
of the head honchos there. Tyler has been working with
him for a while and something that Tyler posted on
his Instagram recently it really caught my attention, so I
wanted to have him on as a guest on UFO
(01:53):
Twitter night and basically discuss what his findings were with
this proof, these declassified documents that shows NASA was actually
involved in the UFO cover up in some way. So,
without further ado, I'm going to add Twitter to the
(02:14):
stage here. We do have Andy and Pastor Dale up
here on stage. Tyler's going to join as a speaker soon,
but before we have him, come up, Pastor Dale, could
you share some positive, inspirational.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Sort of story with us today.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
We like to kick off the show with Pastor Dale
just giving us a bit of a kick into the show,
so to speak.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Go for it.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
Thank you, Darcy. It's great to be here. And like
you said, my goal is to share words of hope,
words of wisdom, words of inspiration. And so let me
begin by saying, you are who you are. If you
are kind, then you kind. If you are loyal, then
you are loyal. If you are loving, then you are loving.
You are who you are. Today, there's a lot of
(03:08):
talk about spirit animals. Now. To be honest with you,
I'm not here to argue for or against spirit animals.
But if spirit animals do exist, I have no question
about what my spirit animal is. It's a dog. I
mean they call him man's best friend for a reason. Recently,
I heard a story of a missing man named Cody Johnson.
(03:29):
Cody had left with his dog Aften on Saturday, October
twelfth to go hiking in the woods of northwestern New York,
and he was reported missing on Sunday, October thirteenth. The
Lewis County Sheriff's Department started searching immediately for Cody, but
it didn't go the way they were hoping. On Wednesday,
October sixteenth, at around three point thirty five pm, Cody
(03:52):
was found dead in a heavily wooded area just off
the trail. It appears that he died of hypothermia. This
was the end of the story. It would leave us
feeling completely empty, But thankfully, there is more to this story,
and it proves that man is also dog's best friend.
When they finally found Cody's lifeless body, he wasn't alone.
(04:16):
Right by his side was his dog, Aften, standing guard
over his dead body. Often was loyal to Cody, not
just to the end, but even beyond the end, even
after death had claimed Cody's life. Often would not budge.
That's loyalty. You are who you are Aten was loyal.
(04:36):
You know, if I'm being honest, I have to admit
I love my dogs more than I do most people.
Some of you remember my German shepherd's Shadow dying of
cancer about twenty months ago. I mean, not really tore
me up. When Shadow was still alive, I would take
her outside with me at night. She would instantly be
on alert, and I knew she always had my back.
(04:57):
Why because she was loyal. Let me say it again.
You are who you are. Shadow, like Afton was loyal.
Let me ask you a question. It's just a question.
How loyal are you? How loyal are you to your family?
How loyal are you to your friends. We can learn
a lot about loyalty from Afton and from Shadow, especially
(05:20):
from Aften when no one was watching, often refused to
leave his master. He refused to abandon his owner. That's
what loyalty is. It's refusing to abandon those you love.
Let me shift this message to the UFO community. If
we're going to win the battle for disclosure, we can't
(05:40):
give up. And so let me ask this question, how
loyal are you to disclosure? Remember you are who you are.
I want you to think of all those who've gone
before us and who are not here anymore, People like
Stanton Friedman, Donald Keyhole, Bud Hopkins, and John Mack, just
to name a few. They are gone but not forgotten,
(06:03):
but only if we carry on with what they have started.
They have handed us to Baton and ask us to
go farther with disclosure than they did, and according to
Richard Dolan, we are going further than they did. Richard
Dolan said, something is different this time. Something is different
this time. Never have there been so many credible witnesses
(06:25):
in whistleblowers. But there's another thing that is different. It's
social media, with all of its platforms like x, Facebook, Reddit, Instagram,
TikTok and so on, its spaces, radio programs like Darcy
is doing right now. We are winning, but the question
remains will we win? Let me say that again. We
(06:47):
are winning, but the question remains will we win? The
question is can we be as loyal to the cause
of disclosure as often was to Cody and as Shadow
was to me? The question is will we stick it
out like Aften or will we cut and run? It's
all about lawyer. You are who you are. Let me
(07:08):
say that again. It's all about loyalty, you are who
you are.
Speaker 4 (07:14):
I love it.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Dale, Thank you so much for you know, those inspirational words.
Every week we have Dale start off the show. We
live in a world that is, you know, surrounded by
negativity and there's something horrible going on every day. Let's
just be honest, right, Well, when you have somebody like
(07:36):
Dale out there that is a good, good person, he's
got a good message. He wants people to be the
best people they are, you know, try to come out
and stand up for this subject and treat others well.
I think Dale really represents that and that's why we
(07:56):
always open up the show with him.
Speaker 4 (07:58):
So thank you again, and.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
You know, without further ado, I'd love to bring up
Tyler Zarodnik too, Am I pronouncing that properly?
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Yes, sir NICHU are cool.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
So Tyler, can you tell us quickly about your background
and what you've been doing with the new Paradigm Institute
and Danny Shehan and you were probably instrumental in that
stream last week and making sure all of these people
flowing in this live stream, you know with testimony was
(08:33):
just that was like fire man, So well done.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
Oh, thank you very much. Now, before we get too
deep into it. Just thanks for having me on the space.
I'm really grateful for the invitation as Andy in here.
If Andy's in her, I hope you're doing well, my friend.
I know it's been a little while since you and
I last spoke, and Pastor Dale, thank you for opening
the space with that perspective and that energy. I think
(09:00):
it's very refreshing and I'm really grateful for that. We
had a really fantastic live stream on Sunday that was
the inaugural Global Disclosure Day event, and it consisted of
over twenty seven presenters of researchers, former intelligence officers, investigative journalists, scientists,
(09:22):
and we were coming together as a human family to
advocate for UFO UAP transparency across the globe. And I
cannot take much credit for that live stream. I was
only responsible for coordinating who would be participating on email
(09:42):
and producing some of the videos that were in between
the speakers, and also putting together the final edit that
was just uploaded today on the new Paradigm Institute YouTube channel,
so if anybody didn't have a chance to watch it,
it's now available. It's over three hours long. And then
we actually included time stamps in the description, So if
there's anybody in particular that you want to listen to,
(10:04):
just open the description, you could hit the time and
you can go to that presentation. So it's really incredible
to see how far we've come with the New Paradigm Institute.
We only launched in November of last year, and since
that time we've reached tens of millions of people across
all of our different social media platforms, Reddit, x, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube,
(10:29):
our website, and we've had over eleven thousand people send
letters to their congressional representatives in the United States demanding
UFO UAP transparency, and parallel to that, at the international level,
we've had tens of thousands of people sign our petition
to have the UN address UFO UAP disclosure in a
(10:52):
serious way. And I'm just very grateful and very fortunate
to be deeply involved with the New Paradigm Institute and
also being able to work with Danny Sheehan on a
daily basis has been an absolute blessing.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Yeah, kudos to you man and all the work that
you guys are doing over there. It's looking really good,
and it's looking organized and professional, and the messaging is
really good. You know, I saw you at Contact in
the desert. You were working with Danny there. You know,
(11:27):
I just I really appreciate your work. Now, what we
wanted to talk about tonight with you about is something
you posted at on Instagram. I think it was just
last week, and it's these documents that you claim are
declassified documents that you guys got. I'm not sure if
(11:51):
it's Danny or somebody on your team that found these
documents or just yourself, but you know, I'm kind I
brought them up here.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
On my.
Speaker 3 (12:03):
Twitter page and I'm just going to kind of read
them aloud. The first page says Armed Services Patent Advisory
Board ASPAB Patent Security Category Review List prepared by ASPAB
(12:24):
Subcommittee Chairman HL Mourning, AMC JC Morris, Air Force, Bert Convey, Navy,
January nineteen seventy one. Now this is starting to look
like it's a patent restriction sort of document in which
(12:44):
certain branches of the military or government are allowed to
withhold certain things from the public, and in this case,
I think it's energy devices like electrical devices that could
(13:05):
be breakthroughs that would be you know, destabilizing, to say
the fossil fuel industry or something like that.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Yes, precisely.
Speaker 4 (13:15):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (13:15):
So it then goes on the short title is PSCRL
DASH I think one and it says Patent Security Category
Review List.
Speaker 4 (13:28):
This is the first edition.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
Of an ASPAB composite category review list of the categories
of inventions that should be made available in accordance with
thirty five USC one eight one. I'm assuming that's some
kind of law. It resulted with a review and revision
(13:51):
of the composite list previously used by the Patent Office.
The list was compiled by the ASPAB Subcommittee for Revision
of the Category List, comprised of representatives from the Army, AMC,
the Air Force and the Navy, with the cooperation of CE,
(14:14):
ae C, NASA and NSA that's the National Security Agency.
The assistance of mister Charles Pistorino, I hope, I'm Pistorino CE,
mister Anthony Campana ae C, mister Howard Mans NASA, and
(14:41):
mister John Utter Moole NSA was a significant value in
this compilation, approved by Chairman as PAB. And then the
second page it basically starts breaking down the types of
technology that would be withheld from the public.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
Yeah, and this is on page fourteen for anybody who's
interested in downloading the pdf. So it's page fourteen, items
eight and nine.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
So can you tell us where you found this document?
Is this part of the National Archive release or where.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
This No, this document has been declassified for quite some
time now. I had it in my archives for quite
a few years, but I just forgot about it throughout
all the other research that I was doing. And my
friend R. June, who is an investigative journalist at the
Pulse Media, he republished it about three weeks ago, and
(15:45):
it reminded me that I actually had this in my dropbox,
so I decided that it was a good time to
repost it. I just felt as though it was relevant
to all of the disclosure information that's been released and Simately,
what this is showing us is that there are restrictions
that are being imposed by agencies such as the US Navy,
(16:09):
the Air Force, the NASA, NSA, the National Security Agency,
that are prohibiting technologies such as solar panels, for example,
that have efficiency rates that are greater than twenty percent,
and energy conversion systems that have conversion efficiency is exceeding
seventy to eighty percent that are confiscated through national secrecy
(16:31):
orders because they are a quote threat to national security,
and that is information that I feel is vital the
public knows about because they have innovations that would immediately
eradicate the necessity for petroleum based energy conversion technologies on
the planet, and that that's the reason I felt the
(16:53):
call to share it.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
Well, it's a fantastic thing that you did bring this up,
because people are ways speculating, right like, what is it
that is being kept from the public in terms of
energy devices? And you know, is UFO technology somehow related
to that? So I guess we can just kind of
(17:18):
open up the conversation from there. But this is from
nineteen seventy one, folks.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
Yes, yeah, January of nineteen seventy one. I actually brought
this to Danny's attention three weeks ago, right before I
decided to publish it again because we're mounting this major
global initiative with the new Paradigm Institute to extract the
recovered UAP technology and material from these private defense contractors.
(17:48):
And what we're looking at here in this document from
January nineteen seventy one, we're talking about man made technology.
We're talking about solar panels. We're talking about devices that
are being created by engineers and physicists that are being
ruthlessly suppressed because they pose potential disruption to the current
(18:11):
global energy paradigm. And I was telling Danny that maybe
this would be a good option for us to get
the technology out to the public faster than us getting
the UFOs out from Lockheed Martin, and he seemed interested
in it. I haven't heard any feedback from him about
it quite yet, but if I did, I would definitely
(18:31):
share it in here. I was talking with our executive
director Sarah Nelson about it, and she said that we
need to undergo a process, an investigation where we can
actually find evidence of examples as to when they were
actually issuing national secrecy orders to sequester these types of technologies.
And there's actually one that comes to mind that I
(18:54):
don't have the specific details, so I won't speak about
it in here because I don't want to give you
guys information that isn't accurate. But I'm personally going to
undertake the initiative to figure out what technologies and when
we're suppressed through national security orders, national secrecy orders. That's
that's kind of a personal project of mine right now.
Speaker 5 (19:17):
Very cool, Darthy, if I don't if you don't mind,
Trumpet interject real quick. Do you remember when I when
we spoke the last time, when they first announced Immaculate Constellation. Yeah,
and I had given the breakdown of what it was exactly,
that it wasn't technically a program, that was more of
a group.
Speaker 3 (19:37):
Of different listening and recording devices in space and the
yeah round.
Speaker 5 (19:42):
Yeah, So if you don't, if you remember, It's interesting
that Tyler says this because in the explanation I gave
it mentioned the DRS being one of the programs that
NASA was involved in the seventies. And I believe that
what he's talking about is the d r S, which
is what they were assisting with the intelligence community for
(20:06):
uh data tracking and intelligence intelligence gathering.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
Yeah, yeah, it's all related.
Speaker 3 (20:13):
And I've always speculated that NASA is fully in bed
with the military industrial complex trying.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
To keep the whole idea.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
That we're not alone away from the public. And you know,
kai boshit poo poo. It ridicule anybody that comes forward
that seriously believes that. But yet they're you know, using
SETI and stuff like that as the scapegoat to their
(20:44):
real search for extraterrestrial life and SETI is a joke.
I mean, you look, you aim all of these dishes
into the sky and look out into the universe to
look for intelligent signals and life. And when you get
(21:05):
that signal, this civilization that you're hearing from is probably
dead by the time you send a signal back, you
know what I mean. It's like, we're talking thousands of
light years away sometimes, and you know, if you're traveling
at the speed of light in a ship, which is
near impossible by our conventional methods, we're talking about thirty
(21:32):
six human years per light year.
Speaker 4 (21:35):
So let's figure that out.
Speaker 3 (21:37):
How we going to connect with these folks with some
kind of radio telescope message and hope that they can
beam something back thousands of years later. It makes no sense,
but I think the whole argument is they're here, and
there are folks that are in the know about that,
(21:58):
and because they're here, we need to like somehow break
down that information silo and get it out to the public.
And look, Hey, the congressional hearings coming up in November.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
Who's who's going? You going, Tyler?
Speaker 2 (22:15):
I will definitely be there cool. I'll be filming.
Speaker 4 (22:20):
Cool cool, cool.
Speaker 2 (22:21):
I'm going to be there too, Oh amazing.
Speaker 3 (22:23):
Yeah, yeah, I'm gonna get in line. I'm going to
try and get some reactions from people in line and
and document the whole.
Speaker 4 (22:32):
You know, this is historic.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
This is the second Congressional hearing on UAP. God forbid,
it gets canceled for some second riot that happens at
the Capitol buildings. But you know, let's let's see cross
our fingers, hope all goes well, and just pray for peace.
Speaker 4 (22:53):
I guess right.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Yeah, that's that's a great recommendation. I have my optimism
about the hearing. And to circle back to the point
you made a moment ago, Darcy about NASA being some
kind of public facing instrumentality of the national security state
to stigmatize and downplay the nhi ET presence. I don't
(23:19):
think that NASA is truly in a position of power
that the public may believe that they're in in terms
of the frontier of space in space exploration. They are
certainly some kind of press relations appendage of the military
establishment and the national security state, because if they were
(23:39):
to actually come forward and share with the public that
we are in fact observing these objects entering and exiting
our atmosphere at speeds exceeding twenty thousand miles per hour,
and we don't necessarily have ways of intercepting them if
(24:00):
they were hypothetically hostile, it would just demonstrate to the
public that, as the old saying goes, the emperor has
no clothes. And I think that's ultimately one of the reasons.
There's actually six major reasons as to why the national
security apparatus are doing their very best to ensure that
this information does not come out to the public. I mean,
(24:22):
number one is the obvious reason of national security. Number
two being that the governmental authority structures on our planet
none of them have a credible plan, and also they're
considering the societal disruption as well. Also there could be
potential agreements between some of these groups of ets or
(24:43):
NHI that are visiting and coming from our planet. And
also they're covering up their own misdeeds. We're talking about
nearly one hundred years of clandestine, covert, illegal activity to
suppress this information, including framing, blackmailing, and trapping, financial entanglement,
and murder to keep this covered up. So NASA is
(25:06):
certainly not our ally I hope I didn't say that
too harshly.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
No, you're very straightforward and articulate with the way you
explain that, and you know it's not I don't think
you're trying to drum up fear or anything like that.
But I think you're just trying to say NASA looks
like they're this friendly scientific agency that's just doing studies
(25:37):
on all kinds of things from biology to space science
and you know, weather science and all that stuff, which
I know that they are doing. But I do agree
with you. They offer as a they offer like a
pr service for the Air Force, the Navy, and just
(26:00):
the press on mass like for CNN and Fox News
and all that stuff. They're gonna be this mouthpiece as
a official explanation of the way reality is or the
way science should be interpreted with regards to how we're
(26:21):
experiencing our reality. And so they are like putting a
governor on your ability to decipher the truth about this subject.
And because there's been copious amounts of UFO activity in space,
which is really supposed to be their frontier, because they
(26:42):
were the first to go up into space with mankind
and listening and recording devices and cameras and.
Speaker 4 (26:52):
All that jazz.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
They get to say because they are like the authority
on space, what's happened happening in our space, what's happening
in our airspace, both in our outer space, and.
Speaker 4 (27:07):
Probably you know, they don't.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Like the idea of this ocean phenomenon that people are
speaking about so much now in the UFO community and
in the press, that there's USO activity that's just as
rampant as in the sky.
Speaker 4 (27:26):
And I think.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
You're right, and I think like just the way that
you're going about publishing information to your Instagram and aiding
the New Paradigm Institute in getting new information out about
this subject is very crucial to this being taken seriously.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
So yeah, I really, I really appreciate it. I'm very
grateful for the kind words, and I would like to
just share a few examples that I've come across over
the years of NASA's direct interference with this information in
(28:11):
terms of the UFO UAP Truth Embargo. First, I would
like to share the testimony that many of you have
probably heard about in this group that happened in two
thousand and one at the National Press Club event with
the Disclosure Project and it was the testimony of Donna Hare,
who was a former contractor from NASA, and at this
(28:33):
press club event, Donna Hair asserted that NASA had been
involved in deliberately airbrushing UFO uap NHI craft from the
images the satellite imagery that they were documenting before they
would release them to the public. And apparently Donna worked
at the Johnson Space Center and she had a background
in photo imaging, so this gave her insight into that
(28:55):
entire process that NASA had to develop the images and
et cetera. And according to Donna, like I said a
moment ago, her colleagues were instructed to remove any evidence
of these objects from any imagery. So that's that's one
account that I think needs to be taken seriously because
Donna is an actual whistleblower. She didn't go through adopts
(29:18):
or process. She didn't go to the DoD and ask
if it's okay for her to say this, She didn't
go to NASA and ask for their permission to just
close that information. She came forward and stuck her neck
out there to get this information out. And that was
back in two thousand and one. And unfortunately, I don't
think Donna Hare is still around. I think she passed
away not that long ago.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
Yeah, yeah, she came forward with Greers first disclosure conference
at the National Press Club, right.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
Yeah, yeah, two thousand and one.
Speaker 4 (29:48):
Yeah, And that's that.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
I mean, that is an extremely powerful assertion to make
because the context they just set up a moment ago,
she was an actual whistle blower. And what we we
have in the current theater of UFO UAP disclosure right
now is we actually don't have whistleblowers. And I certainly
have the utmost respect for Grush in Alezondo and now
(30:12):
in Galadet and the other potential individuals from the military
and the national security apparatus who are going to come
out and testify. But these people are going through Dopster,
which is I'm most like, I'm probably going to butcher
the acronym, but it's along the lines of the Department
(30:32):
of Defense Strategic Office for Pre Publication Review, along those lines,
and essentially what that office is the individuals from within
the military and the federal government, the DoD they have
to go through Dopster to approve what they want to
share publicly. So the entire narrative that we're getting right now,
(30:54):
whether it's coming from Alizondo or grush Ornell or whoever else,
this is all tailor made and approved by the DoD
to craft a certain narrative. And the example I'm giving
here with Donna, she didn't go through dops hers, she
didn't go through NASA, she didn't go through the DoD,
she didn't go through her superiors, she didn't go through
her higher ups. She just entrusted the Disclosure Project with
(31:18):
protecting her identity up until that event, and she came
out and said what she said. So that testimony, I
feel was extremely important and powerful. And also at that
same event, this isn't directly related to NASA, but oh
I see Andy's hand is up. You want to go ahead?
Speaker 4 (31:33):
Andy? No, No, finish, finish.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Yeah, okay, I know this other witness doesn't directly relate
to NASA, but it relates to space activities. And I'm
sure everyone in here has watched the two thousand and
one Press Club event. That's really the event that put
me on this whole path of looking into disclosure, and
it was the testimony of Sergeant Carl wolf and Sergeant
Carl Wolfe was a former US Air Force sergeant and
(31:58):
at that same press club event, he is asserted that
while he was working at the National Security Agency, the
n s A, and this is at Leangley Air Force Base,
which is ironic because right now Lenggley Air Force Base
is being Yeah, yeah, I didn't I didn't even really
connect those dots. Yeah, they're they're being buzzed by the
Unidentified Aerial systems the u a S as they're called
(32:21):
by the Pentagon. Uh. He was, he was asserting, he
was claiming that he was shown photographic evidence of artifice,
artificial structures on the far side of the Moon. He
had a if I remember correctly, he had he had
a temporary assignment to a high security area that was
handling photographic equipment, and he had a colleague that had
a higher security clearance who was working on the Lumur,
(32:44):
the lunar orbiter program show him these images that had
these hexagonal geometric structures on the Moon. And I actually
have indirect experience with Carl because back in twenty twenty,
I was an intern at Moufon Headquarters when Moufon Headquarters
(33:05):
was located in Irvine, and I was sitting down in
the former executive director's office one day and I was
just helping with typical email work and I was digitizing
the archives at that time, and he got off the
phone and told me that Carl Wolf died and I
was I was pretty astonished. I was like, oh, what,
(33:25):
you know? What caused his death? How did he pass away?
And apparently he was going for a run in his neighborhood,
like the bike ride. That was a bike ride. Thought
I thought he was going for a run. That's what
I was told. He was going for a run. But
I didn't look any deeper into the case, so you
could be right about that. But he was outside exercising
in his neighborhood and he got hit by a vehicle.
Speaker 4 (33:47):
Truck, Yeah, yeah, truck.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
And I was told the description of the vehicle was
just a blacked out truck, just a big, you know,
a beefy vehicle. So, I mean, I'm not immediately claiming
that he was assassinated for what he said twenty years
prior to that, but it was definitely suspicious that Carl
Wolf who came out and said that the NSA and
(34:11):
NASA was hiding imagery of bases on the far side
of the moon. That was very suspicious for me. Yeah,
and I have I have one more example. Unless Andy
or anyone else wants to jump in.
Speaker 4 (34:24):
I'll just say, really quick, go ahead.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
The other person that got hit by a car and died,
who was kind of prolific in the community was doctor
Johnny Mack.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
Yeah, he did. I did talk to Danny extensively about
that because Danny and doctor John Mack were best friends.
They were close colleagues for over a decade. And actually
the whole inception, the original idea for the New Paradigm
Institute was doctor John Mack after he had the tribunal
(34:56):
at Harvard University when he released his book Abduction and
Danny had to provide him legal counsel against Harvard, they
brainstormed together and thought that they needed to stand up
or brick and mortar Physical Institute called the New Paradigm
Institute that would specifically address the science and the study
(35:17):
of human experience consciousness research UFO, UAP and the extraterrestrial
NHI beings. And unfortunately, when he did go to England,
he died in a motor vehicle accident. But it was
totally innocent. There was no nefarious play at work.
Speaker 4 (35:38):
Band came forward and said there's nothing, no foul play, right.
Speaker 2 (35:43):
Yeah, Danny personally carried out the investigation for John's death
and they concluded that it was just an honest mistake.
It was a drunk driver. Actually, not only was John
in Europe and he was not used to the vehicles
the aims being inverted, but also you had a drunk driver,
So it was just the the variables in that scenario
(36:07):
did not play out in John's favor, unfortunately. But we're
definitely forever grateful to John Mack because without his vision
and his courage to stand up for the contact these
and the abductees against one of the most highly accredited
universities in the world, you know, New Paradigm Institute wouldn't exist.
But to circle back to the NASA conversation, I was
(36:28):
back in oh, wait year was this? This was probably
twenty twenty as well. I was at a Muffon, Orange
County event in it wasn't Irvine, it might have been
coast to Mesa at the Coast of Mesa Library, and
there was a former employee of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
who's a planetary scientist named Marian Rudnick presenting, and Marion
(36:53):
told this story to us that one day when they
were at JPL and they were undergoing routine maintenance, they
actually found undeveloped film hidden inside of the floor that
was accessible for the maintenance workers is where a lot
of the fiber optic cables were being kept and other
equipment that they needed to maintain, and they took the
(37:16):
footage out and they actually developed it, and to their astonishment,
after they developed it, they found these very clear images
of UFO UAP craft in space. And Martin was totally
blown away by this, and I don't think he had
any experience with this topic prior to finding that film.
(37:38):
So he, you know, innocently called up to his superiors,
his higher ups, and explained to them what he found
in the floor, and he had that film developed, and
then he was immediately reprimanded. His higher ups were even
asking him what were you doing in the floor, and
he explained, well, I'm one of the maintenance workers here
at JPL.
Speaker 5 (37:57):
I was doing my job.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
I was, you know, I was inside the floor looking
at the fiber optic cables and et cetera. And they
told him not to develop the footage, not knowing that
he already did. And they said keep it in the container.
We're going to send someone over there tomorrow to pick
it up. And like clockwork, the next day at seven
thirty am, there was an individual who showed up to
(38:19):
JPL with no ID, no badge, no insignias, no uniform,
just wearing a gray suit and demanded that Marian gives
him the footage. And since the individual wouldn't present ID
or any credentials, Marion told him, well, I'm going to
call my higher ups first so they can confirm who
(38:39):
you actually are. And Marian picked up the phone and
before he was even able to get a sentence out,
they said, Marian, give him the footage. Do not asked questions.
You're going to give him the footage or you're going
to lose your job at JPL. So Marian did. He
handed over the footage. The individual got back in his
vehicle and left and that was the last time Marian
never saw those pieces of film that NASA was concealing.
(39:01):
So those are those are the main examples that I
have to come to mind where I'm thinking about the
involvement of NASA in the cosmic Watergate situation.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
Yeah, there's so many, and there's there's just like the missions,
the Moon missions and all the space missions that I
was looking at in this documentary series I did before
called Secret Space UFOs. There's a really prominent researcher that
kept coming forward and documenting all of the imagery and
(39:36):
and DAK motion picture footage from the Apollo space program.
His name is Luna Cognita, and he's a friend of mine,
and basically he compiled all this evidence and he found
that there were there were missions like Apollo seventeen, the
last mission that we theoretically, like in the public went
(39:59):
to the Moon and landed and observed and you know,
did missions. This was Gene Cernon was on that one,
and I think, who is the other guy, Alan Shephard,
I think, but that last mission, whole rules of the
(40:20):
Hasselblad footage were declared as lost. And the hassle Blad
is like the DSLR cameras that they were walking around
on the lunar surface with taking pictures of everything. And
if you think about the space program and how much
money was invested into going to the Moon and coming
back and all that investment, if you inflated it to
(40:45):
what the cost would be today, those pictures would be
worth billions of dollars in taxpayer money.
Speaker 4 (40:52):
Wow, and they lost all of it.
Speaker 3 (40:56):
They declared it was lost or destroyed. So that's the
type of agency NASA is. They can if they have
imagery or motion picture video from back in those days,
they could just say it's gone and the public has
no right to question if that's true.
Speaker 4 (41:16):
But and I do have.
Speaker 2 (41:19):
Oh yeah, actually, go ahead and apologies. I'm not trying
to interrupt. No, no, it's sure. We're here to listen
to you, bro, I was.
Speaker 5 (41:27):
I was only going to mention that I'm glad you
brought up the fact that, you know, these individuals are
coming forward so far like that are not whistle blows,
because that's very important that that name whistle blower get
thrown around all the time, that people don't understand what
it really means. You're right about you know, Uh, this individual,
the one forget her name, she really was a whistle
(41:48):
He went out of her way and said what she
said without approval.
Speaker 1 (41:51):
That is a whistle blow.
Speaker 2 (41:53):
You know, that is a real whistleblower. Brother, absolutely, yeah,
ed where where is the Edward Snowden?
Speaker 3 (41:59):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (42:00):
You know. At the same time, Yeah, where where is
the Edwin snowden of you.
Speaker 5 (42:06):
But my thing is right, people need to understand that
you really, you know, like you hit the nail on
the head with that. And I always think about it
all the time, which is one of the reasons why
I know that. You know, I respect what a lot
of these people are doing. Grush Lou, you know, I
do respect it, but I also have my doubts as
to why it's happening the way it's happening, especially when
(42:30):
we all know just how far they've gone to keep
this quiet. So now see that these people are being
allowed that's even more concerning. They're being allowed to talk
about it in this way, and it makes you wonder, Okay,
if this is a narrative that they're they're bringing out
and allowing to come out in this way for specific reason,
(42:50):
then what is that ultimate reason. So it's like we're
getting little little breadcrumbs and we're getting little pieces of
you know, taste of behind it.
Speaker 1 (42:58):
You know, it's I can speak to that. I want
to make sure this isn't a one sided conversation. There's
a lot of confusion when it comes to Dopster. But
what we have to understand, you say, they allow them
the reason they allow them is because if they didn't
on those things that are not classified, it would start
(43:19):
an investigation and they would bringing other people into investigator.
So a lot of people aren't talking about that. The
other thing is this whole idea that they're you know,
I want to make sure we understand that the narrative
is being controlled in the sense of by what's not
being allowed, and so I agree with with Tyler in
that sense. But whether it be lose book or whether
(43:40):
it be grecious testimony, they're not being told what to say.
What they're being told is what they can't say because
it's classified with the threat of putting them into jail.
And so I think we want to make sure that
people understand exactly what's going on, because there's, like I said,
people are starting to say things that are not accurate.
And it isn't that they are allowing them because they
(44:02):
want to give a false narrative out. It's this, there
are consequences if they don't allow things that are not
classified that automatically brings about a review.
Speaker 2 (44:13):
Yeah, they're definitely correct in that regard. There are a
lot of caveats and a lot of complexities to it,
but I think what we're working towards as a consensus
here is that there is the control disclosure that we
hear about, and there is certainly a narrative that is
(44:35):
being crafted by the DoD, the National Security Apparatus, the
transnational Security Elite, whatever name you want to ascribe to,
the current military infrastructure, the intelligence infrastructure that is concealing
this information. They are deciding what information is going to
come out by these individuals through the process adopts or
(44:57):
But what's very critical for us understand as well, is
that a lot of these very programs are illegal, illegal
in the first place, and they're unconstitutional, and they're operating
outside of constitutional oversight, and they're embezzling trillions of dollars
in taxpayer money. So even if they are threatening Alizondo
(45:18):
or Noll or Grush saying if you talk about this,
you're going to go to jail because it's a violation
of your NDA and it's a threat to national security.
And the third and the fourth that is all technically
null and void because the very programs themselves are illegal.
Speaker 1 (45:34):
You can ask a question, Tyler, is that the advice
that because Danny is Lou's lawyer, is that the advice
that Danny's giving Lou.
Speaker 2 (45:42):
I can't speak for Danny, and I can't speak for I.
Speaker 1 (45:45):
Would want to know because that's his lawyer, and I'm
just to be upfront, I'm friends with Lou. I'm friends
with many of his people in his group. You know.
I've tried to get Danny on my podcast a couple
of times. But to me, that would that happens, Sure,
that would be the And that's what I would ask
is just talk to Danny and see if that's the
advice Danny's giving Lou.
Speaker 2 (46:05):
Yeah. I I've spoken with Danny about it, and I
have friends with Lou. I'm very close with Carlnell. I've
spoken with Grush only on one occasion. But that's just
my personal opinion. That's just my own estimation of the situation.
If these programs are in fact illegal, whether you worked
on them and you signed an NDA and you took
(46:28):
a secrecy oath, whatever legal confines you're operating within in
regards to these programs, if they're illegal, that makes all
of those obligations null and void. They are illegal. They're
operating outside of presidential congressional public oversight. They're being funded
by tax paying dollars. So that that's my stance on it,
(46:52):
and that's really been my whole framework in approaching this topic,
my my introduction into this wash. My friend Michael Mozzola
produced the documentary back in twenty sixteen called Unacknowledged, and
I have a very brief background in the military, and
while I was in the military, I never thought about
(47:12):
this topic. But then when I got out of the military,
I found it to be intriguing. I had a security clearance,
but that's not really too special. There's millions of people
that have security clearances. But I had a basic understanding
as to how security clearances work. And then when I
watched Mozola's film that really broke down the unacknowledged special
(47:33):
access programs and the departmentalization of certain programs, I started
to understand and connect the dots. Okay, so a lot
of these programs aren't known about them. We're funding them,
we don't know about them. That's a major constitutional violation
that needs to be immediately addressed. And I actually, for
(47:54):
many years lost total faith in the entire disclosure process
in regards of going through the government, going through Congress,
working to get legislation passed. I absolutely thought it was
a total lost cause. After I saw that film and
after I started doing more research, because I realized that
our nation and our military, and our electoral process and
(48:17):
our governmental institutions and the authorities are undermined and they're
being controlled by these rogue agencies and groups and corporations.
That you could pass the law for sure, but they
haven't been following the laws to begin with, So what
use is the law? That was my stance on it.
So then I got really serious about the whole CE
(48:39):
five movement movement. The human initiated contact with the beings
were whichever domain that they're coming from, presumably extraterrestrial. You know,
we all have our opinions about that. That's actually when
I first really started talking with Andy back in twenty nineteen.
I think, Andy's when you and I first started really
yeah connecting. I was going out organizing expeditions to bypass
(49:04):
the National Security State, and I still feel very passionately
about that. I'm involved in the disclosure process with a
new Paradigm Institute, and we're on Capitol Hill. We want
to get our congressional representatives involved. We want to have
this legislation. We want to have disclosure in that way.
Speaker 1 (49:24):
I was going to say, I agree with you, Fonso,
parallel to that, it sounds like it is illegal. It
really is. But at the end of the day, isn't
that a question for lawyers to answer?
Speaker 2 (49:39):
Yeah, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a journalist to have
the background.
Speaker 1 (49:43):
That's why I mentioned Danny. Isn't he the one that
would answer that question and settle it once and for all,
Because I agree with you, it sounds illegal to me,
but I'd want some cover, and i'd want that cover
to be an actual lawyer to be able to say
it and if yeah, that's what.
Speaker 2 (49:59):
I can do. I've spoken with Danny for probably hundreds
of hours about this. At this point, him and I
are both in agreement that the programs that are harboring
and concealing the recovered non human presumably extra craft and biologics,
(50:24):
are unconstitutional and the League.
Speaker 3 (50:27):
Yeah, you're clipping up there a bit, Tyler. I don't
know if you want.
Speaker 2 (50:30):
To can you guys here me? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (50:32):
Yeah, you're you're breaking up just a bit. So, I
don't know if you want to switch to uh more
dedicated Wi Fi or something like that, if if.
Speaker 4 (50:41):
If I don't know.
Speaker 2 (50:42):
I'm actually gonna I'm gonna get off the Wi Fi
because it's been going on and off for the last
few days. Okay, cool, Okay, let me let me jump
off Wi Fi for a second.
Speaker 3 (50:50):
Yeah, yeah, no worries, but but we we're getting your message,
and I will just jump in real quickly that you know.
I often think that maybe the law that you and
I as citizens within a country are supposed to follow,
that law is really not supposed to be followed by
(51:13):
the DoD the intelligence agencies, you know, the sort of
upper enforcement agencies of countries, because they are the law,
you know what I mean, Like they're supposed to be
controlling disorder and protecting the country and protecting the economy,
(51:35):
therefore protecting the citizens right from in a perfect world, yeah,
in a perfect world. But I guess it's that abuse
of power that we're really looking at here from those
institutions that may actually be concealing so many truths from
us that our reality is really just stuck in this
(51:59):
like box of siloed information that we're allowed to believe
and allowed to know about. And I think like the
you know, National Security Act after nine to eleven and
stuff like that gave away the liberties and rights.
Speaker 4 (52:18):
Of many citizens.
Speaker 3 (52:19):
Within the United States Canada, we have stuff like that too,
Whereas you know, if the government really is worried about
you being a terrorist or something, they can start listening
to your conversations, check your emails, whatever they want. Right, So,
we live in a system where the law is there
to protect us, but the ones that enforce the law
(52:42):
are not. Seriously, they're not supposed to fall with themselves.
They make the law, and I think we need both
real whistleblowers that go against that law to try and
give us the best truth possible about our realction. But
we also do people do need people that worked within
(53:04):
the law at one point, like Lou, like David Grush,
who've come forward and said this is real, guys. I
was exposed to it with my former professional occupation, within
the law, within the you know, defense administration of our country,
(53:26):
and you know, this is something the whole world needs
to know about. So I do like the fact that
you brought that up, though, Tyler, that like, we need
to understand whether this is some kind of sanitized version
of the truth regarding UFOs or whether it is something
(53:47):
that you know altruistically. These men are trying to get
forward to the public. Now, before we go on, I
will say I'm coming down to the last this show
case gra It happens every Wednesday. I have different guests on,
we talk about different subjects. Please head over to Twitter
(54:07):
spaces and continue join in the conversation there. I have
a Twitter space open. I'm going to wrap on KGr
and we're gonna come back and just keep talking on
Twitter spaces.
Speaker 4 (54:20):
Hold up for a second.
Speaker 2 (54:29):
Two hundred years ago, two thousand years ago. This isn't
going to work.
Speaker 3 (54:33):
She's picking up a massive object in this video.
Speaker 2 (54:37):
Ships that might be closed. I can sense them in
my vicinity. So I guess I'm just very tuned.
Speaker 3 (54:42):
In Bulkan head. Honchow walks out ear reveal. Yeah, the
crowd goes, oh my God. Was to protect the secrets
from the Air Force that were not out there in public.
Speaker 2 (54:55):
So
Two hundred years ago, two thousand years ago.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
This isn't going to work.
Speaker 3 (00:12):
She's picking up a massive object in this video.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Ships that might be closed.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
I can sense them in my vicinity, So I guess
I'm just very tuned in Bulkan.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
Head honcho walks out ear reveal. Yeah, the crowd goes, oh,
my God. Was to protect the secrets from the Air
Force that were not out there in public. So welcome back, everybody.
(00:47):
This is episode five of last Night on UFO Twitter,
and tonight we are going to be talking with Tyler
from New Paradigm Institute. Now, this is a really cool initiative.
It's a group that has been put together with the
help of many you know, UFO activists. Let's just say,
(01:13):
we've got so many interesting people involved with it. And
last week they did a really cool presentation which was
live stream and it had all the who's who and
the research of UAP and UFOs. Danny Shehan is one
(01:33):
of the head honchos there. Tyler has been working with
him for a while and something that Tyler posted on
his Instagram recently it really caught my attention, so I
wanted to have him on as a guest on UFO
(01:53):
Twitter night and basically discuss what his findings were with
this proof, these declassified documents that shows NASA was actually
involved in the UFO cover up in some way. So,
without further ado, I'm going to add Twitter to the
(02:14):
stage here. We do have Andy and Pastor Dale up
here on stage. Tyler's going to join as a speaker soon,
but before we have him, come up, Pastor Dale, could
you share some positive, inspirational.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Sort of story with us today.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
We like to kick off the show with Pastor Dale
just giving us a bit of a kick into the show,
so to speak.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Go for it.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
Thank you, Darcy. It's great to be here. And like
you said, my goal is to share words of hope,
words of wisdom, words of inspiration. And so let me
begin by saying, you are who you are. If you
are kind, then you kind. If you are loyal, then
you are loyal. If you are loving, then you are loving.
You are who you are. Today, there's a lot of
(03:08):
talk about spirit animals. Now. To be honest with you,
I'm not here to argue for or against spirit animals.
But if spirit animals do exist, I have no question
about what my spirit animal is. It's a dog. I
mean they call him man's best friend for a reason. Recently,
I heard a story of a missing man named Cody Johnson.
(03:29):
Cody had left with his dog Aften on Saturday, October
twelfth to go hiking in the woods of northwestern New York,
and he was reported missing on Sunday, October thirteenth. The
Lewis County Sheriff's Department started searching immediately for Cody, but
it didn't go the way they were hoping. On Wednesday,
October sixteenth, at around three point thirty five pm, Cody
(03:52):
was found dead in a heavily wooded area just off
the trail. It appears that he died of hypothermia. This
was the end of the story. It would leave us
feeling completely empty, But thankfully, there is more to this story,
and it proves that man is also dog's best friend.
When they finally found Cody's lifeless body, he wasn't alone.
(04:16):
Right by his side was his dog, Aften, standing guard
over his dead body. Often was loyal to Cody, not
just to the end, but even beyond the end, even
after death had claimed Cody's life. Often would not budge.
That's loyalty. You are who you are Aten was loyal.
(04:36):
You know, if I'm being honest, I have to admit
I love my dogs more than I do most people.
Some of you remember my German shepherd's Shadow dying of
cancer about twenty months ago. I mean, not really tore
me up. When Shadow was still alive, I would take
her outside with me at night. She would instantly be
on alert, and I knew she always had my back.
(04:57):
Why because she was loyal. Let me say it again.
You are who you are. Shadow, like Afton was loyal.
Let me ask you a question. It's just a question.
How loyal are you? How loyal are you to your family?
How loyal are you to your friends. We can learn
a lot about loyalty from Afton and from Shadow, especially
(05:20):
from Aften when no one was watching, often refused to
leave his master. He refused to abandon his owner. That's
what loyalty is. It's refusing to abandon those you love.
Let me shift this message to the UFO community. If
we're going to win the battle for disclosure, we can't
(05:40):
give up. And so let me ask this question, how
loyal are you to disclosure? Remember you are who you are.
I want you to think of all those who've gone
before us and who are not here anymore, People like
Stanton Friedman, Donald Keyhole, Bud Hopkins, and John Mack, just
to name a few. They are gone but not forgotten,
(06:03):
but only if we carry on with what they have started.
They have handed us to Baton and ask us to
go farther with disclosure than they did, and according to
Richard Dolan, we are going further than they did. Richard
Dolan said, something is different this time. Something is different
this time. Never have there been so many credible witnesses
(06:25):
in whistleblowers. But there's another thing that is different. It's
social media, with all of its platforms like x, Facebook, Reddit, Instagram,
TikTok and so on, its spaces, radio programs like Darcy
is doing right now. We are winning, but the question
remains will we win? Let me say that again. We
(06:47):
are winning, but the question remains will we win? The
question is can we be as loyal to the cause
of disclosure as often was to Cody and as Shadow
was to me? The question is will we stick it
out like Aften or will we cut and run? It's
all about lawyer. You are who you are. Let me
(07:08):
say that again. It's all about loyalty, you are who
you are.
Speaker 4 (07:14):
I love it.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Dale, Thank you so much for you know, those inspirational words.
Every week we have Dale start off the show. We
live in a world that is, you know, surrounded by
negativity and there's something horrible going on every day. Let's
just be honest, right, Well, when you have somebody like
(07:36):
Dale out there that is a good, good person, he's
got a good message. He wants people to be the
best people they are, you know, try to come out
and stand up for this subject and treat others well.
I think Dale really represents that and that's why we
(07:56):
always open up the show with him.
Speaker 4 (07:58):
So thank you again, and.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
You know, without further ado, I'd love to bring up
Tyler Zarodnik too, Am I pronouncing that properly?
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Yes, sir NICHU are cool.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
So Tyler, can you tell us quickly about your background
and what you've been doing with the new Paradigm Institute
and Danny Shehan and you were probably instrumental in that
stream last week and making sure all of these people
flowing in this live stream, you know with testimony was
(08:33):
just that was like fire man, So well done.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
Oh, thank you very much. Now, before we get too
deep into it. Just thanks for having me on the space.
I'm really grateful for the invitation as Andy in here.
If Andy's in her, I hope you're doing well, my friend.
I know it's been a little while since you and
I last spoke, and Pastor Dale, thank you for opening
the space with that perspective and that energy. I think
(09:00):
it's very refreshing and I'm really grateful for that. We
had a really fantastic live stream on Sunday that was
the inaugural Global Disclosure Day event, and it consisted of
over twenty seven presenters of researchers, former intelligence officers, investigative journalists, scientists,
(09:22):
and we were coming together as a human family to
advocate for UFO UAP transparency across the globe. And I
cannot take much credit for that live stream. I was
only responsible for coordinating who would be participating on email
(09:42):
and producing some of the videos that were in between
the speakers, and also putting together the final edit that
was just uploaded today on the new Paradigm Institute YouTube channel,
so if anybody didn't have a chance to watch it,
it's now available. It's over three hours long. And then
we actually included time stamps in the description, So if
there's anybody in particular that you want to listen to,
(10:04):
just open the description, you could hit the time and
you can go to that presentation. So it's really incredible
to see how far we've come with the New Paradigm Institute.
We only launched in November of last year, and since
that time we've reached tens of millions of people across
all of our different social media platforms, Reddit, x, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube,
(10:29):
our website, and we've had over eleven thousand people send
letters to their congressional representatives in the United States demanding
UFO UAP transparency, and parallel to that, at the international level,
we've had tens of thousands of people sign our petition
to have the UN address UFO UAP disclosure in a
(10:52):
serious way. And I'm just very grateful and very fortunate
to be deeply involved with the New Paradigm Institute and
also being able to work with Danny Sheehan on a
daily basis has been an absolute blessing.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Yeah, kudos to you man and all the work that
you guys are doing over there. It's looking really good,
and it's looking organized and professional, and the messaging is
really good. You know, I saw you at Contact in
the desert. You were working with Danny there. You know,
(11:27):
I just I really appreciate your work. Now, what we
wanted to talk about tonight with you about is something
you posted at on Instagram. I think it was just
last week, and it's these documents that you claim are
declassified documents that you guys got. I'm not sure if
(11:51):
it's Danny or somebody on your team that found these
documents or just yourself, but you know, I'm kind I
brought them up here.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
On my.
Speaker 3 (12:03):
Twitter page and I'm just going to kind of read
them aloud. The first page says Armed Services Patent Advisory
Board ASPAB Patent Security Category Review List prepared by ASPAB
(12:24):
Subcommittee Chairman HL Mourning, AMC JC Morris, Air Force, Bert Convey, Navy,
January nineteen seventy one. Now this is starting to look
like it's a patent restriction sort of document in which
(12:44):
certain branches of the military or government are allowed to
withhold certain things from the public, and in this case,
I think it's energy devices like electrical devices that could
(13:05):
be breakthroughs that would be you know, destabilizing, to say
the fossil fuel industry or something like that.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Yes, precisely.
Speaker 4 (13:15):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (13:15):
So it then goes on the short title is PSCRL
DASH I think one and it says Patent Security Category
Review List.
Speaker 4 (13:28):
This is the first edition.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
Of an ASPAB composite category review list of the categories
of inventions that should be made available in accordance with
thirty five USC one eight one. I'm assuming that's some
kind of law. It resulted with a review and revision
(13:51):
of the composite list previously used by the Patent Office.
The list was compiled by the ASPAB Subcommittee for Revision
of the Category List, comprised of representatives from the Army, AMC,
the Air Force and the Navy, with the cooperation of CE,
(14:14):
ae C, NASA and NSA that's the National Security Agency.
The assistance of mister Charles Pistorino, I hope, I'm Pistorino CE,
mister Anthony Campana ae C, mister Howard Mans NASA, and
(14:41):
mister John Utter Moole NSA was a significant value in
this compilation, approved by Chairman as PAB. And then the
second page it basically starts breaking down the types of
technology that would be withheld from the public.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
Yeah, and this is on page fourteen for anybody who's
interested in downloading the pdf. So it's page fourteen, items
eight and nine.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
So can you tell us where you found this document?
Is this part of the National Archive release or where.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
This No, this document has been declassified for quite some
time now. I had it in my archives for quite
a few years, but I just forgot about it throughout
all the other research that I was doing. And my
friend R. June, who is an investigative journalist at the
Pulse Media, he republished it about three weeks ago, and
(15:45):
it reminded me that I actually had this in my dropbox,
so I decided that it was a good time to
repost it. I just felt as though it was relevant
to all of the disclosure information that's been released and Simately,
what this is showing us is that there are restrictions
that are being imposed by agencies such as the US Navy,
(16:09):
the Air Force, the NASA, NSA, the National Security Agency,
that are prohibiting technologies such as solar panels, for example,
that have efficiency rates that are greater than twenty percent,
and energy conversion systems that have conversion efficiency is exceeding
seventy to eighty percent that are confiscated through national secrecy
(16:31):
orders because they are a quote threat to national security,
and that is information that I feel is vital the
public knows about because they have innovations that would immediately
eradicate the necessity for petroleum based energy conversion technologies on
the planet, and that that's the reason I felt the
(16:53):
call to share it.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
Well, it's a fantastic thing that you did bring this up,
because people are ways speculating, right like, what is it
that is being kept from the public in terms of
energy devices? And you know, is UFO technology somehow related
to that? So I guess we can just kind of
(17:18):
open up the conversation from there. But this is from
nineteen seventy one, folks.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
Yes, yeah, January of nineteen seventy one. I actually brought
this to Danny's attention three weeks ago, right before I
decided to publish it again because we're mounting this major
global initiative with the new Paradigm Institute to extract the
recovered UAP technology and material from these private defense contractors.
(17:48):
And what we're looking at here in this document from
January nineteen seventy one, we're talking about man made technology.
We're talking about solar panels. We're talking about devices that
are being created by engineers and physicists that are being
ruthlessly suppressed because they pose potential disruption to the current
(18:11):
global energy paradigm. And I was telling Danny that maybe
this would be a good option for us to get
the technology out to the public faster than us getting
the UFOs out from Lockheed Martin, and he seemed interested
in it. I haven't heard any feedback from him about
it quite yet, but if I did, I would definitely
(18:31):
share it in here. I was talking with our executive
director Sarah Nelson about it, and she said that we
need to undergo a process, an investigation where we can
actually find evidence of examples as to when they were
actually issuing national secrecy orders to sequester these types of technologies.
And there's actually one that comes to mind that I
(18:54):
don't have the specific details, so I won't speak about
it in here because I don't want to give you
guys information that isn't accurate. But I'm personally going to
undertake the initiative to figure out what technologies and when
we're suppressed through national security orders, national secrecy orders. That's
that's kind of a personal project of mine right now.
Speaker 5 (19:17):
Very cool, Darthy, if I don't if you don't mind,
Trumpet interject real quick. Do you remember when I when
we spoke the last time, when they first announced Immaculate Constellation. Yeah,
and I had given the breakdown of what it was exactly,
that it wasn't technically a program, that was more of
a group.
Speaker 3 (19:37):
Of different listening and recording devices in space and the
yeah round.
Speaker 5 (19:42):
Yeah, So if you don't, if you remember, It's interesting
that Tyler says this because in the explanation I gave
it mentioned the DRS being one of the programs that
NASA was involved in the seventies. And I believe that
what he's talking about is the d r S, which
is what they were assisting with the intelligence community for
(20:06):
uh data tracking and intelligence intelligence gathering.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
Yeah, yeah, it's all related.
Speaker 3 (20:13):
And I've always speculated that NASA is fully in bed
with the military industrial complex trying.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
To keep the whole idea.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
That we're not alone away from the public. And you know,
kai boshit poo poo. It ridicule anybody that comes forward
that seriously believes that. But yet they're you know, using
SETI and stuff like that as the scapegoat to their
(20:44):
real search for extraterrestrial life and SETI is a joke.
I mean, you look, you aim all of these dishes
into the sky and look out into the universe to
look for intelligent signals and life. And when you get
(21:05):
that signal, this civilization that you're hearing from is probably
dead by the time you send a signal back, you
know what I mean. It's like, we're talking thousands of
light years away sometimes, and you know, if you're traveling
at the speed of light in a ship, which is
near impossible by our conventional methods, we're talking about thirty
(21:32):
six human years per light year.
Speaker 4 (21:35):
So let's figure that out.
Speaker 3 (21:37):
How we going to connect with these folks with some
kind of radio telescope message and hope that they can
beam something back thousands of years later. It makes no sense,
but I think the whole argument is they're here, and
there are folks that are in the know about that,
(21:58):
and because they're here, we need to like somehow break
down that information silo and get it out to the public.
And look, Hey, the congressional hearings coming up in November.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
Who's who's going? You going, Tyler?
Speaker 2 (22:15):
I will definitely be there cool. I'll be filming.
Speaker 4 (22:20):
Cool cool, cool.
Speaker 2 (22:21):
I'm going to be there too, Oh amazing.
Speaker 3 (22:23):
Yeah, yeah, I'm gonna get in line. I'm going to
try and get some reactions from people in line and
and document the whole.
Speaker 4 (22:32):
You know, this is historic.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
This is the second Congressional hearing on UAP. God forbid,
it gets canceled for some second riot that happens at
the Capitol buildings. But you know, let's let's see cross
our fingers, hope all goes well, and just pray for peace.
Speaker 4 (22:53):
I guess right.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Yeah, that's that's a great recommendation. I have my optimism
about the hearing. And to circle back to the point
you made a moment ago, Darcy about NASA being some
kind of public facing instrumentality of the national security state
to stigmatize and downplay the nhi ET presence. I don't
(23:19):
think that NASA is truly in a position of power
that the public may believe that they're in in terms
of the frontier of space in space exploration. They are
certainly some kind of press relations appendage of the military
establishment and the national security state, because if they were
(23:39):
to actually come forward and share with the public that
we are in fact observing these objects entering and exiting
our atmosphere at speeds exceeding twenty thousand miles per hour,
and we don't necessarily have ways of intercepting them if
(24:00):
they were hypothetically hostile, it would just demonstrate to the
public that, as the old saying goes, the emperor has
no clothes. And I think that's ultimately one of the reasons.
There's actually six major reasons as to why the national
security apparatus are doing their very best to ensure that
this information does not come out to the public. I mean,
(24:22):
number one is the obvious reason of national security. Number
two being that the governmental authority structures on our planet
none of them have a credible plan, and also they're
considering the societal disruption as well. Also there could be
potential agreements between some of these groups of ets or
(24:43):
NHI that are visiting and coming from our planet. And
also they're covering up their own misdeeds. We're talking about
nearly one hundred years of clandestine, covert, illegal activity to
suppress this information, including framing, blackmailing, and trapping, financial entanglement,
and murder to keep this covered up. So NASA is
(25:06):
certainly not our ally I hope I didn't say that
too harshly.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
No, you're very straightforward and articulate with the way you
explain that, and you know it's not I don't think
you're trying to drum up fear or anything like that.
But I think you're just trying to say NASA looks
like they're this friendly scientific agency that's just doing studies
(25:37):
on all kinds of things from biology to space science
and you know, weather science and all that stuff, which
I know that they are doing. But I do agree
with you. They offer as a they offer like a
pr service for the Air Force, the Navy, and just
(26:00):
the press on mass like for CNN and Fox News
and all that stuff. They're gonna be this mouthpiece as
a official explanation of the way reality is or the
way science should be interpreted with regards to how we're
(26:21):
experiencing our reality. And so they are like putting a
governor on your ability to decipher the truth about this subject.
And because there's been copious amounts of UFO activity in space,
which is really supposed to be their frontier, because they
(26:42):
were the first to go up into space with mankind
and listening and recording devices and cameras and.
Speaker 4 (26:52):
All that jazz.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
They get to say because they are like the authority
on space, what's happened happening in our space, what's happening
in our airspace, both in our outer space, and.
Speaker 4 (27:07):
Probably you know, they don't.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Like the idea of this ocean phenomenon that people are
speaking about so much now in the UFO community and
in the press, that there's USO activity that's just as
rampant as in the sky.
Speaker 4 (27:26):
And I think.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
You're right, and I think like just the way that
you're going about publishing information to your Instagram and aiding
the New Paradigm Institute in getting new information out about
this subject is very crucial to this being taken seriously.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
So yeah, I really, I really appreciate it. I'm very
grateful for the kind words, and I would like to
just share a few examples that I've come across over
the years of NASA's direct interference with this information in
(28:11):
terms of the UFO UAP Truth Embargo. First, I would
like to share the testimony that many of you have
probably heard about in this group that happened in two
thousand and one at the National Press Club event with
the Disclosure Project and it was the testimony of Donna Hare,
who was a former contractor from NASA, and at this
(28:33):
press club event, Donna Hair asserted that NASA had been
involved in deliberately airbrushing UFO uap NHI craft from the
images the satellite imagery that they were documenting before they
would release them to the public. And apparently Donna worked
at the Johnson Space Center and she had a background
in photo imaging, so this gave her insight into that
(28:55):
entire process that NASA had to develop the images and
et cetera. And according to Donna, like I said a
moment ago, her colleagues were instructed to remove any evidence
of these objects from any imagery. So that's that's one
account that I think needs to be taken seriously because
Donna is an actual whistleblower. She didn't go through adopts
(29:18):
or process. She didn't go to the DoD and ask
if it's okay for her to say this, She didn't
go to NASA and ask for their permission to just
close that information. She came forward and stuck her neck
out there to get this information out. And that was
back in two thousand and one. And unfortunately, I don't
think Donna Hare is still around. I think she passed
away not that long ago.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
Yeah, yeah, she came forward with Greers first disclosure conference
at the National Press Club, right.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
Yeah, yeah, two thousand and one.
Speaker 4 (29:48):
Yeah, And that's that.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
I mean, that is an extremely powerful assertion to make
because the context they just set up a moment ago,
she was an actual whistle blower. And what we we
have in the current theater of UFO UAP disclosure right
now is we actually don't have whistleblowers. And I certainly
have the utmost respect for Grush in Alezondo and now
(30:12):
in Galadet and the other potential individuals from the military
and the national security apparatus who are going to come
out and testify. But these people are going through Dopster,
which is I'm most like, I'm probably going to butcher
the acronym, but it's along the lines of the Department
(30:32):
of Defense Strategic Office for Pre Publication Review, along those lines,
and essentially what that office is the individuals from within
the military and the federal government, the DoD they have
to go through Dopster to approve what they want to
share publicly. So the entire narrative that we're getting right now,
(30:54):
whether it's coming from Alizondo or grush Ornell or whoever else,
this is all tailor made and approved by the DoD
to craft a certain narrative. And the example I'm giving
here with Donna, she didn't go through dops hers, she
didn't go through NASA, she didn't go through the DoD,
she didn't go through her superiors, she didn't go through
her higher ups. She just entrusted the Disclosure Project with
(31:18):
protecting her identity up until that event, and she came
out and said what she said. So that testimony, I
feel was extremely important and powerful. And also at that
same event, this isn't directly related to NASA, but oh
I see Andy's hand is up. You want to go ahead?
Speaker 4 (31:33):
Andy? No, No, finish, finish.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Yeah, okay, I know this other witness doesn't directly relate
to NASA, but it relates to space activities. And I'm
sure everyone in here has watched the two thousand and
one Press Club event. That's really the event that put
me on this whole path of looking into disclosure, and
it was the testimony of Sergeant Carl wolf and Sergeant
Carl Wolfe was a former US Air Force sergeant and
(31:58):
at that same press club event, he is asserted that
while he was working at the National Security Agency, the
n s A, and this is at Leangley Air Force Base,
which is ironic because right now Lenggley Air Force Base
is being Yeah, yeah, I didn't I didn't even really
connect those dots. Yeah, they're they're being buzzed by the
Unidentified Aerial systems the u a S as they're called
(32:21):
by the Pentagon. Uh. He was, he was asserting, he
was claiming that he was shown photographic evidence of artifice,
artificial structures on the far side of the Moon. He
had a if I remember correctly, he had he had
a temporary assignment to a high security area that was
handling photographic equipment, and he had a colleague that had
a higher security clearance who was working on the Lumur,
(32:44):
the lunar orbiter program show him these images that had
these hexagonal geometric structures on the Moon. And I actually
have indirect experience with Carl because back in twenty twenty,
I was an intern at Moufon Headquarters when Moufon Headquarters
(33:05):
was located in Irvine, and I was sitting down in
the former executive director's office one day and I was
just helping with typical email work and I was digitizing
the archives at that time, and he got off the
phone and told me that Carl Wolf died and I
was I was pretty astonished. I was like, oh, what,
(33:25):
you know? What caused his death? How did he pass away?
And apparently he was going for a run in his neighborhood,
like the bike ride. That was a bike ride. Thought
I thought he was going for a run. That's what
I was told. He was going for a run. But
I didn't look any deeper into the case, so you
could be right about that. But he was outside exercising
in his neighborhood and he got hit by a vehicle.
Speaker 4 (33:47):
Truck, Yeah, yeah, truck.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
And I was told the description of the vehicle was
just a blacked out truck, just a big, you know,
a beefy vehicle. So, I mean, I'm not immediately claiming
that he was assassinated for what he said twenty years
prior to that, but it was definitely suspicious that Carl
Wolf who came out and said that the NSA and
(34:11):
NASA was hiding imagery of bases on the far side
of the moon. That was very suspicious for me. Yeah,
and I have I have one more example. Unless Andy
or anyone else wants to jump in.
Speaker 4 (34:24):
I'll just say, really quick, go ahead.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
The other person that got hit by a car and died,
who was kind of prolific in the community was doctor
Johnny Mack.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
Yeah, he did. I did talk to Danny extensively about
that because Danny and doctor John Mack were best friends.
They were close colleagues for over a decade. And actually
the whole inception, the original idea for the New Paradigm
Institute was doctor John Mack after he had the tribunal
(34:56):
at Harvard University when he released his book Abduction and
Danny had to provide him legal counsel against Harvard, they
brainstormed together and thought that they needed to stand up
or brick and mortar Physical Institute called the New Paradigm
Institute that would specifically address the science and the study
(35:17):
of human experience consciousness research UFO, UAP and the extraterrestrial
NHI beings. And unfortunately, when he did go to England,
he died in a motor vehicle accident. But it was
totally innocent. There was no nefarious play at work.
Speaker 4 (35:38):
Band came forward and said there's nothing, no foul play, right.
Speaker 2 (35:43):
Yeah, Danny personally carried out the investigation for John's death
and they concluded that it was just an honest mistake.
It was a drunk driver. Actually, not only was John
in Europe and he was not used to the vehicles
the aims being inverted, but also you had a drunk driver,
So it was just the the variables in that scenario
(36:07):
did not play out in John's favor, unfortunately. But we're
definitely forever grateful to John Mack because without his vision
and his courage to stand up for the contact these
and the abductees against one of the most highly accredited
universities in the world, you know, New Paradigm Institute wouldn't exist.
But to circle back to the NASA conversation, I was
(36:28):
back in oh, wait year was this? This was probably
twenty twenty as well. I was at a Muffon, Orange
County event in it wasn't Irvine, it might have been
coast to Mesa at the Coast of Mesa Library, and
there was a former employee of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
who's a planetary scientist named Marian Rudnick presenting, and Marion
(36:53):
told this story to us that one day when they
were at JPL and they were undergoing routine maintenance, they
actually found undeveloped film hidden inside of the floor that
was accessible for the maintenance workers is where a lot
of the fiber optic cables were being kept and other
equipment that they needed to maintain, and they took the
(37:16):
footage out and they actually developed it, and to their astonishment,
after they developed it, they found these very clear images
of UFO UAP craft in space. And Martin was totally
blown away by this, and I don't think he had
any experience with this topic prior to finding that film.
(37:38):
So he, you know, innocently called up to his superiors,
his higher ups, and explained to them what he found
in the floor, and he had that film developed, and
then he was immediately reprimanded. His higher ups were even
asking him what were you doing in the floor, and
he explained, well, I'm one of the maintenance workers here
at JPL.
Speaker 5 (37:57):
I was doing my job.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
I was, you know, I was inside the floor looking
at the fiber optic cables and et cetera. And they
told him not to develop the footage, not knowing that
he already did. And they said keep it in the container.
We're going to send someone over there tomorrow to pick
it up. And like clockwork, the next day at seven
thirty am, there was an individual who showed up to
(38:19):
JPL with no ID, no badge, no insignias, no uniform,
just wearing a gray suit and demanded that Marian gives
him the footage. And since the individual wouldn't present ID
or any credentials, Marion told him, well, I'm going to
call my higher ups first so they can confirm who
(38:39):
you actually are. And Marian picked up the phone and
before he was even able to get a sentence out,
they said, Marian, give him the footage. Do not asked questions.
You're going to give him the footage or you're going
to lose your job at JPL. So Marian did. He
handed over the footage. The individual got back in his
vehicle and left and that was the last time Marian
never saw those pieces of film that NASA was concealing.
(39:01):
So those are those are the main examples that I
have to come to mind where I'm thinking about the
involvement of NASA in the cosmic Watergate situation.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
Yeah, there's so many, and there's there's just like the missions,
the Moon missions and all the space missions that I
was looking at in this documentary series I did before
called Secret Space UFOs. There's a really prominent researcher that
kept coming forward and documenting all of the imagery and
(39:36):
and DAK motion picture footage from the Apollo space program.
His name is Luna Cognita, and he's a friend of mine,
and basically he compiled all this evidence and he found
that there were there were missions like Apollo seventeen, the
last mission that we theoretically, like in the public went
(39:59):
to the Moon and landed and observed and you know,
did missions. This was Gene Cernon was on that one,
and I think, who is the other guy, Alan Shephard,
I think, but that last mission, whole rules of the
(40:20):
Hasselblad footage were declared as lost. And the hassle Blad
is like the DSLR cameras that they were walking around
on the lunar surface with taking pictures of everything. And
if you think about the space program and how much
money was invested into going to the Moon and coming
back and all that investment, if you inflated it to
(40:45):
what the cost would be today, those pictures would be
worth billions of dollars in taxpayer money.
Speaker 4 (40:52):
Wow, and they lost all of it.
Speaker 3 (40:56):
They declared it was lost or destroyed. So that's the
type of agency NASA is. They can if they have
imagery or motion picture video from back in those days,
they could just say it's gone and the public has
no right to question if that's true.
Speaker 4 (41:16):
But and I do have.
Speaker 2 (41:19):
Oh yeah, actually, go ahead and apologies. I'm not trying
to interrupt. No, no, it's sure. We're here to listen
to you, bro, I was.
Speaker 5 (41:27):
I was only going to mention that I'm glad you
brought up the fact that, you know, these individuals are
coming forward so far like that are not whistle blows,
because that's very important that that name whistle blower get
thrown around all the time, that people don't understand what
it really means. You're right about you know, Uh, this individual,
the one forget her name, she really was a whistle
(41:48):
He went out of her way and said what she
said without approval.
Speaker 1 (41:51):
That is a whistle blow.
Speaker 2 (41:53):
You know, that is a real whistleblower. Brother, absolutely, yeah,
ed where where is the Edward Snowden?
Speaker 3 (41:59):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (42:00):
You know. At the same time, Yeah, where where is
the Edwin snowden of you.
Speaker 5 (42:06):
But my thing is right, people need to understand that
you really, you know, like you hit the nail on
the head with that. And I always think about it
all the time, which is one of the reasons why
I know that. You know, I respect what a lot
of these people are doing. Grush Lou, you know, I
do respect it, but I also have my doubts as
to why it's happening the way it's happening, especially when
(42:30):
we all know just how far they've gone to keep
this quiet. So now see that these people are being
allowed that's even more concerning. They're being allowed to talk
about it in this way, and it makes you wonder, Okay,
if this is a narrative that they're they're bringing out
and allowing to come out in this way for specific reason,
(42:50):
then what is that ultimate reason. So it's like we're
getting little little breadcrumbs and we're getting little pieces of
you know, taste of behind it.
Speaker 1 (42:58):
You know, it's I can speak to that. I want
to make sure this isn't a one sided conversation. There's
a lot of confusion when it comes to Dopster. But
what we have to understand, you say, they allow them
the reason they allow them is because if they didn't
on those things that are not classified, it would start
(43:19):
an investigation and they would bringing other people into investigator.
So a lot of people aren't talking about that. The
other thing is this whole idea that they're you know,
I want to make sure we understand that the narrative
is being controlled in the sense of by what's not
being allowed, and so I agree with with Tyler in
that sense. But whether it be lose book or whether
(43:40):
it be grecious testimony, they're not being told what to say.
What they're being told is what they can't say because
it's classified with the threat of putting them into jail.
And so I think we want to make sure that
people understand exactly what's going on, because there's, like I said,
people are starting to say things that are not accurate.
And it isn't that they are allowing them because they
(44:02):
want to give a false narrative out. It's this, there
are consequences if they don't allow things that are not
classified that automatically brings about a review.
Speaker 2 (44:13):
Yeah, they're definitely correct in that regard. There are a
lot of caveats and a lot of complexities to it,
but I think what we're working towards as a consensus
here is that there is the control disclosure that we
hear about, and there is certainly a narrative that is
(44:35):
being crafted by the DoD, the National Security Apparatus, the
transnational Security Elite, whatever name you want to ascribe to,
the current military infrastructure, the intelligence infrastructure that is concealing
this information. They are deciding what information is going to
come out by these individuals through the process adopts or
(44:57):
But what's very critical for us understand as well, is
that a lot of these very programs are illegal, illegal
in the first place, and they're unconstitutional, and they're operating
outside of constitutional oversight, and they're embezzling trillions of dollars
in taxpayer money. So even if they are threatening Alizondo
(45:18):
or Noll or Grush saying if you talk about this,
you're going to go to jail because it's a violation
of your NDA and it's a threat to national security.
And the third and the fourth that is all technically
null and void because the very programs themselves are illegal.
Speaker 1 (45:34):
You can ask a question, Tyler, is that the advice
that because Danny is Lou's lawyer, is that the advice
that Danny's giving Lou.
Speaker 2 (45:42):
I can't speak for Danny, and I can't speak for I.
Speaker 1 (45:45):
Would want to know because that's his lawyer, and I'm
just to be upfront, I'm friends with Lou. I'm friends
with many of his people in his group. You know.
I've tried to get Danny on my podcast a couple
of times. But to me, that would that happens, Sure,
that would be the And that's what I would ask
is just talk to Danny and see if that's the
advice Danny's giving Lou.
Speaker 2 (46:05):
Yeah. I I've spoken with Danny about it, and I
have friends with Lou. I'm very close with Carlnell. I've
spoken with Grush only on one occasion. But that's just
my personal opinion. That's just my own estimation of the situation.
If these programs are in fact illegal, whether you worked
on them and you signed an NDA and you took
(46:28):
a secrecy oath, whatever legal confines you're operating within in
regards to these programs, if they're illegal, that makes all
of those obligations null and void. They are illegal. They're
operating outside of presidential congressional public oversight. They're being funded
by tax paying dollars. So that that's my stance on it,
(46:52):
and that's really been my whole framework in approaching this topic,
my my introduction into this wash. My friend Michael Mozzola
produced the documentary back in twenty sixteen called Unacknowledged, and
I have a very brief background in the military, and
while I was in the military, I never thought about
(47:12):
this topic. But then when I got out of the military,
I found it to be intriguing. I had a security clearance,
but that's not really too special. There's millions of people
that have security clearances. But I had a basic understanding
as to how security clearances work. And then when I
watched Mozola's film that really broke down the unacknowledged special
(47:33):
access programs and the departmentalization of certain programs, I started
to understand and connect the dots. Okay, so a lot
of these programs aren't known about them. We're funding them,
we don't know about them. That's a major constitutional violation
that needs to be immediately addressed. And I actually, for
(47:54):
many years lost total faith in the entire disclosure process
in regards of going through the government, going through Congress,
working to get legislation passed. I absolutely thought it was
a total lost cause. After I saw that film and
after I started doing more research, because I realized that
our nation and our military, and our electoral process and
(48:17):
our governmental institutions and the authorities are undermined and they're
being controlled by these rogue agencies and groups and corporations.
That you could pass the law for sure, but they
haven't been following the laws to begin with, So what
use is the law? That was my stance on it.
So then I got really serious about the whole CE
(48:39):
five movement movement. The human initiated contact with the beings
were whichever domain that they're coming from, presumably extraterrestrial. You know,
we all have our opinions about that. That's actually when
I first really started talking with Andy back in twenty nineteen.
I think, Andy's when you and I first started really
yeah connecting. I was going out organizing expeditions to bypass
(49:04):
the National Security State, and I still feel very passionately
about that. I'm involved in the disclosure process with a
new Paradigm Institute, and we're on Capitol Hill. We want
to get our congressional representatives involved. We want to have
this legislation. We want to have disclosure in that way.
Speaker 1 (49:24):
I was going to say, I agree with you, Fonso,
parallel to that, it sounds like it is illegal. It
really is. But at the end of the day, isn't
that a question for lawyers to answer?
Speaker 2 (49:39):
Yeah, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a journalist to have
the background.
Speaker 1 (49:43):
That's why I mentioned Danny. Isn't he the one that
would answer that question and settle it once and for all,
Because I agree with you, it sounds illegal to me,
but I'd want some cover, and i'd want that cover
to be an actual lawyer to be able to say
it and if yeah, that's what.
Speaker 2 (49:59):
I can do. I've spoken with Danny for probably hundreds
of hours about this. At this point, him and I
are both in agreement that the programs that are harboring
and concealing the recovered non human presumably extra craft and biologics,
(50:24):
are unconstitutional and the League.
Speaker 3 (50:27):
Yeah, you're clipping up there a bit, Tyler. I don't
know if you want.
Speaker 2 (50:30):
To can you guys here me? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (50:32):
Yeah, you're you're breaking up just a bit. So, I
don't know if you want to switch to uh more
dedicated Wi Fi or something like that, if if.
Speaker 4 (50:41):
If I don't know.
Speaker 2 (50:42):
I'm actually gonna I'm gonna get off the Wi Fi
because it's been going on and off for the last
few days. Okay, cool, Okay, let me let me jump
off Wi Fi for a second.
Speaker 3 (50:50):
Yeah, yeah, no worries, but but we we're getting your message,
and I will just jump in real quickly that you know.
I often think that maybe the law that you and
I as citizens within a country are supposed to follow,
that law is really not supposed to be followed by
(51:13):
the DoD the intelligence agencies, you know, the sort of
upper enforcement agencies of countries, because they are the law,
you know what I mean, Like they're supposed to be
controlling disorder and protecting the country and protecting the economy,
(51:35):
therefore protecting the citizens right from in a perfect world, yeah,
in a perfect world. But I guess it's that abuse
of power that we're really looking at here from those
institutions that may actually be concealing so many truths from
us that our reality is really just stuck in this
(51:59):
like box of siloed information that we're allowed to believe
and allowed to know about. And I think like the
you know, National Security Act after nine to eleven and
stuff like that gave away the liberties and rights.
Speaker 4 (52:18):
Of many citizens.
Speaker 3 (52:19):
Within the United States Canada, we have stuff like that too,
Whereas you know, if the government really is worried about
you being a terrorist or something, they can start listening
to your conversations, check your emails, whatever they want. Right, So,
we live in a system where the law is there
to protect us, but the ones that enforce the law
(52:42):
are not. Seriously, they're not supposed to fall with themselves.
They make the law, and I think we need both
real whistleblowers that go against that law to try and
give us the best truth possible about our realction. But
we also do people do need people that worked within
(53:04):
the law at one point, like Lou, like David Grush,
who've come forward and said this is real, guys. I
was exposed to it with my former professional occupation, within
the law, within the you know, defense administration of our country,
(53:26):
and you know, this is something the whole world needs
to know about. So I do like the fact that
you brought that up, though, Tyler, that like, we need
to understand whether this is some kind of sanitized version
of the truth regarding UFOs or whether it is something
(53:47):
that you know altruistically. These men are trying to get
forward to the public. Now, before we go on, I
will say I'm coming down to the last this show
case gra It happens every Wednesday. I have different guests on,
we talk about different subjects. Please head over to Twitter
(54:07):
spaces and continue join in the conversation there. I have
a Twitter space open. I'm going to wrap on KGr
and we're gonna come back and just keep talking on
Twitter spaces.
Speaker 4 (54:20):
Hold up for a second.
Speaker 2 (54:29):
Two hundred years ago, two thousand years ago. This isn't
going to work.
Speaker 3 (54:33):
She's picking up a massive object in this video.
Speaker 2 (54:37):
Ships that might be closed. I can sense them in
my vicinity. So I guess I'm just very tuned.
Speaker 3 (54:42):
In Bulkan head. Honchow walks out ear reveal. Yeah, the
crowd goes, oh my God. Was to protect the secrets
from the Air Force that were not out there in public.
Speaker 2 (54:55):
So
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.