John Greenewald: Since December of 2017, we have all been told a
story.
A story about a $22 million secret Pentagon UFO study. And
the man who ran it. But now, nearly four years later, a new
book has turned much of this story upside down. According to
this book, those original stories were all wrong. And what
we thought we knew is not the case. This new book, according
to page 160, anyway, aims to simply correct the record, we
found a lot. But doesn't mean should we dismiss the old claims
and make room for the new ones? Although not all of the original
claims are being challenged, which do we choose to believe?
And which do we choose not to believe? This is the story about
why for the past nearly four years, the saga that has
involved a tip, Asa UFOs, a ranch in Utah, infested by the
paranormal, and multiple former government personnel is still
riddled with confusion and lingering questions, even with
this new book that aims to correct the record. Stay tuned,
you're about to journey inside the black vault.
That's right, everybody. As always, thank you so much for
tuning in and making this your podcast or your live stream of
choice. I'm your host, John Greenwald, Jr, founder and
creator of the black vault.com. And I know that on this channel,
I've been a little bit quiet lately. For that I do apologize,
work has been a little bit crazy. And sadly, that does have
to take precedence over what I love doing. And that is creating
these videos and these types of presentations for all of you.
Now, for those who aren't aware, sometimes I will do behind the
scenes videos live. Now, if you're watching this live,
welcome, it's gonna be a lot of fun. If you're watching the pre
recorded version that drops later, that's a little bit more
professionally edited and cut together. Just know subscribe to
this channel. That way you get notified when I do the live
streams. And you can take part, any of those who are currently
watching live, you may see their questions come in, super chats
are open, it's a way to support this channel. And it helps me
get research like this done, it always isn't free to start
digging into some of this stuff. And some of those FOIA requests
do yield some high dollar price tags 100% of what comes in
through those super chats, go right into this channel and the
website to create this type of content. So if you do decide to
support, awesome, thank you for that. If you can't, don't worry
about it, everything is still free. But the biggest help that
you can give is spreading the word. Now today, what I'm going
to be going over is something that has been a hot topic in the
UFO world or on Twitter as some like to call it hashtag UFO
Twitter. And that is the new book skinwalkers at the
Pentagon. Now I want to show you guys this because this is a copy
that I purchased, I had posted on social media that I recommend
if you guys are interested, support the authors, there may
be some stuff that I go over today where you may question the
author's that's healthy, I hope that I don't offend anybody by
questioning some of the information. But in the same
respect, I support published authors. And so I've seen a lot
of people really start scanning and taking pictures and posting
things on social media that includes full chapters and stuff
like that. I don't support that what I do support are taking
quotes, which is what I'm going to do. And you may see some some
pages from the book, just know all of those pages are on the
Amazon free preview. So I am not showing you guys anything you
can't see for free on Amazon's free preview. But again, I want
to at least plug that ahead of time that I do recommend buying
the book if you want to know the full story. That's the only way
you're going to get it. You're not going to get it for me
because I don't go over everything. And you're not going
to see it on social media plus, it's not fair. So I do want to
give my show of support for those offers. Because what they
have done, and this is what I want to kind of go over here is
essentially bring one man forward that has yet to come
forward since December or arguably October of 2017. But
since this whole a tip story broke, now, we didn't know about
OS app until a few months thereafter. But essentially,
this was the man Dr. James lick, cat ski that ran a nother
program, not a tip, but OS app. In the Defense Intelligence
Agency, he has been Mumme, up until the last few weeks since
this book came out. So that to me is the biggest revelation
from this book, because now we're getting somebody side that
we have never heard before. But in that process, there has been
massive confusion that has reigned not only with the last
three, four years since since the New York Times and political
broke political broke the a tip story. But this doesn't help in
the sense to clear up all of that confusion. I'm not blaming
the book or the authors, but rather, I'm showing you guys,
everything is not cleared up as some want us to believe there
are still massive, massive amounts of confusion with all of
this. But then on top of that, there are still many questions
that have yet to be answered. So let me go ahead and bring up the
presentation that I want to do for you guys. And this will go
over why that confusion continues to rain when it comes
to OS app and a tip and why questions continue to linger
about OS app and a tip, because I see differing viewpoints here
that some want us to believe everything is transparent and
has been out there for years. There's just lazy people out
there that don't want to look at the facts. Well, I'm here to
tell you, I don't consider myself lazy. I'm a lot of
things, as some people will tell you, sadly, lazy is not one of
them, I'd love to put my feet up and, and not really do anything.
But rather, I dig in. And I follow as much as I can about
all of this. And there is a lot of it. So what I want to show
you guys today is why that confusion reigns, and the
questions continue to linger. So let me go ahead and get my
proper PowerPoint presentation here. Give me one second. Now
before I dig into some of that stuff, I want to tell you guys a
little bit about me personally on how I approach research, I
would say the criticism that I get, I love the praise, but I
also love the criticism, because it helps me become better. But
one point of criticism that some people don't like me over is
what they may call the minutiae of the stories, that they feel
that I nitpick that I go too far into trying to pick apart what
people say or what people do, or, you know, whatever it might
be. And for me the way that I approach these types of topics
and why I disagree with that criticism. And I want to kind of
give you guys a little bit of a visual representation on why I
do what I do, but how I do what I do. And that is why the
minutiae matters. Now I look into every topic, like a puzzle,
that's how I visualize it in my mind, for 25 years, I've run the
blackbolt. That's what I do. There are 1000s, sometimes 10s
of 1000s of pieces of that puzzle, and we put it together
to create a picture. Now some people out there, and this is
this is kind of my, I would say point of frustration sometimes,
and you'll see where I do get frustrated on social media, is
they're cool with the outer layers, right there. They're
cool putting the puzzle together. And if they see that
there's trees there, there's some leaves, maybe a building
back here. That's all that matters to them. And they feel
that they have the full picture because well what's in the
middle here, you know, grass, maybe another building, who
really cares, we have enough of the picture to believe that this
is an outdoor scene. And that's how they approach research.
Well, I'm different. I've got to put everything together because
when you do, and you put every single piece of the puzzle
together, another one usually emerges a full different
perspective of what you thought was there, when you just looked
at the outer layer. It's different. And those pieces of
the puzzle, the center, the minutiae, the little details,
when you start picking apart all of the stories and how everybody
talks about this or that when you put it together, a lot of
times and arguably most of the time, you get a completely
different picture as what you see here. So you don't have
everything you think one thing you have at all, you see
something completely different. That's how I've always
approached research. And that is what the black vault is all
about. Now credit to this amazing artist, oh leg shoe ply
IQ I probably have that pronounced incorrectly. Google
him. He's got some awesome stuff. I created the puzzle out
of one of his paintings. But again, that is the best visual
visualization and simplistic way of looking at how I approach
research. Now some of what I go over maybe review for some of
you who, like me, have lived and breathed this since October of
2017. Why I say October, not December. That is when Luis
Elizondo entered the scene. That was when he talked about an
aerospace Threat program that was identifying these types of
threats. But he never said a tip in October that was not broken
until December. That October press conference by to the stars
Academy introduced Lewis Elizondo to the world. And that
was where I became incredibly intrigued about what was rumored
to be this secret UFO program.
Fast forward, then from October to December of that same year in
New York Times, and political breaks the story December
16 2017, in my opinion, will forever change, you follow GE in
the sense that it created this firestorm of publicity for this
program called a tip, the reality that unidentified aerial
phenomena were being investigated by the US
government, or at least that's what we were told in December.
And since then, a lot of stuff has happened. You see that on
this channel, I try and cover it when I can, but also in the
mainstream media in the last, really in the last year and a
half, especially since that you UAP report came out. And so
that's why I say that it will forever change. You follow ge
the study of UFOs. And that's what these two articles were. As
we dig deeper, and look at the confusion and those questions,
I'm going to bring up something that upsets a lot of people. And
to be quite frank and blunt, I those that do get upset that I
bring this up, I don't care. And here's why it's those minute
details, the small details, and that was what I a tip actually
stood or stands for, in that in that New York Times article. And
the politico article, we were getting two different names for
what a tip was. So in essence, the confusion for those who were
paying attention to those small details started on day one. Now
some of you may not think this is a big deal. And this is one
of those things that again, upsets some people that I
brought up in the past, but continue to make reference to
because again, this is what started the snowball of
confusion. It was simple as a single word in the letter,
excuse me in the acronym of aerospace versus aviation, New
York Times reported advanced aerospace threat Identification
Program, Politico advanced aviation threat Identification
Program. Why does that matter? It's plain and simple. It's
research. When you look into something you need those names
to be accurate. And yes, FOIA offices if you don't have
keywords, right, or full names, correct. There is sometimes an
issue with that. And so yes, I brought that up quite early on,
because the Pentagon had said it was advanced aviation. I don't
regret that at all pushing that that point. And in fact, I'm
glad I did, because it really brought quite a bit more out
about the reality of a tip and what it was. And according to
the government, what it wasn't, it doesn't matter if you believe
the government or not, it doesn't matter if I believe the
government or not, but the pushing have that brought more
details out, including how it was funded. And I'll show you
that in a minute. But also some other details, as well. But
where it really got worse and dicey was all of these different
variations of the Name just beyond what politico in New York
Times had reported. But as these stories were being written, all
sorts of names emerged. And what was concerning to me was the
accuracy number one, but number two, how much care was going
into vetting these stories, what you're seeing on screen here,
the sources in the main sources for these articles, were the
main key players involved in the program. So my questions as time
went on, and this confusion began to really mount was Why
were there so many variations and why weren't anybody really
getting it right? Because all of these couldn't be right. So why
was there this confusion when their sources were those
involved was a careless journalism. I can buy that Was
it bad sources? I don't know. But that's why these issues were
being pushed. This was one of the first declassified documents
from the intelligence community that I got through FOIA. That in
fact, anybody got through FOIA, this is the first one ever, it
as well said aviation, this comes from a system called
Intellipedia. This is used by the CIA, the NSA, all of the
different arms of the intelligence community as a
whole. They use this. So again, even internally, referencing the
New York Times and the use of of an article that used aerospace,
they flipped it and said aviation why no one really
knows. Here is the statement I got in February of 2019, it took
that long for the DIA to finally say, while it was at DIA, it was
advanced aerospace. Now, again, I'll say it 1000 times, that
upsets a lot of people, this whole name debate, some people
say, Well, who really cares? My point was starting with all of
that is to show you that confusion started on day one.
And it has not gotten better, as it continues with the publishing
of this book. On top of the publishing of the book, they
laid, in my opinion, a bombshell when it comes to critiquing past
coverage. It's one thing for you know, peon John Greenwald to say
it and harp on the New York Times or whomever that got it
wrong. But when the OSS AP former director who has not been
disputed by the Pentagon, when that guy comes out and and
authors a book that said unquote, and I quote on page
156, for those who have the book, unfortunately, the ATF
details presented in these articles, and news programs were
actually those of OS app. And, in fact, many of those details
themselves were in error. Senator Harry Reid said himself
in the foreword to the book on page what is that 24 in Roman
numerals, The New York Times article created enormous
confusion by mistakenly linking the $22 million funding to the
small, informal a tip initiative, the 22 million was
specifically targeted only to OS app. A tip, as used by the New
York Times was not OS app, and OS app was not a tip, the $22
million was contracted through the Defense Intelligence Agency
into OS app to evaluate the threat potential of UAPs, not
$1. Of that some went to a tip, despite widespread statements
over the last several years.
PAGE 160 of the skinwalkers book says one of the purposes of this
book is to correct the record. So they are stating quite
simply, they want to set the record straight. And by doing so
they're saying pretty much everything that was reported was
mislabeled and wrong. Now, that's those are big claims to
make, because it wasn't just politico in New York Times that
reported it, the avalanche trickled to hundreds and
arguably 1000s of mainstream media outlets around the world
if they were all wrong. The question mark is how were they
all wrong? A lot of them were wrong because I call it copy and
paste journalism. They were just taking other articles and
jumbling the words and making it their own. In my opinion, this
is just an opinion. Insert graphic, you know, that says
John Greenwald's opinion. But I believe that the book is placing
blame without placing blame. They said on page 156. The main
source for The Times article was Lou Elizondo, who had recently
resigned who had recently up I apologize, I don't know how I
repeated that. The main source for The Times article was Lou
Elizondo, who had recently resigned from his Pentagon
position, and join T TSA and Director of Global Security and
special programs. Again, that was page 156. Now remember, in
the last slide, I said that all of the facts that they were
saying, as reported by The Times, and those articles were
wrong. So in essence, they're saying this was the source. So
the question mark is, how did the source not convey those
facts accurately? I'm not blaming Mr. Elizondo, by the
way, that's not what I'm saying. The book is, so that's what they
say. In the same section articles were wrong, and this
was their source. They didn't name anybody else. So was it
possible that not one but two articles that broke this story
from two major mainstream media outlets, both somehow
mysteriously got the same facts wrong? That doesn't make sense
to me whatsoever. So there's a lot of layers to that onion,
which we you know, have yet to see. As the story continued to
unfold even more confusion came out. This was a interview
earlier this year from With Robert Bigelow on mystery wire,
George Knapp credit to him for sitting down face to face with
Robert Bigelow and asking him some questions in that
interview. This is one thing Robert Bigelow said. I met Lou a
couple of times didn't, didn't really he didn't play a role in
our program in any way, in terms of who we ever reported to, or
whoever we discussed kind of things with. And then he goes on
to talk about James McCaskey, not by name, but referring to
him as the program manager. Now, in this interview, it is clear
that Louise Elizondo had no role in ITT OS app. And they didn't
communicate he was not somebody that they ever reported to, or
whoever we discussed the kinds of things with. Okay, fair
point, right. Until you start looking at what other people
said to the same journalist. This for me is caused to
question George Knapp in an interview back in 2018. June to
be exact. He sat down with Luis Elizondo, Luis Elizondo stated
when George Knapp asked this interaction between you and your
group and the OS app, Bigelow bass folks, conversations back
and forth. You got a general idea what they're doing. Luis
Elizondo, he replies in the affirmative. He says, Of course,
yeah, we didn't do anything without talking to each other.
How do you have those statements from two of these individuals go
hand in hand. You don't. One who's the billionaire who got
the funding from the DIA to do their program? said Lou
Elizondo, sure. Nice guy. We never talked, Lou Elizondo says,
Yep, we didn't do anything without talking to each other.
Those are not small details. That is a major conflict of
statement between two main players of this story who's
right and who's wrong? Well, we kind of don't really know. To
add even more confusion Dr. Hal put off we know him as being
involved on the bass side, he was a contractor through bass.
This was something that he gave to me in June of 2019. This was
about the Pentagon statement that Luis Elizondo had no
assigned responsibilities on the A tip program. So I wrote about
this extensively. Some people hate me for some of those
articles. Others,
I think, saw the value of digging in because what
happened? Well, we got Dr. Hal put off on the record as he
submitted this statement, and I'll read it in part. However, I
have no problem asserting that as an OS app, slash a tip
contractor and senior advisor. I continued to attend meetings,
provide briefings, gain access to videos, provide proposed
program plans, meet with staff, etc, all under the aegis of
Elizondo his leadership and responsibility for maintaining
continuity of the program effort and goals until he resigned.
Well, that's great. He's now vouching for him. The question
mark, however, is that basses contract didn't go after 2010.
Now it could be assumed that Dr. How put off stayed on if Luis
Elizondo took over in 2010. And we'll go over that timeline in a
minute. Dr. Hal put off then stayed on as a consultant. Okay,
I can see that kind of interesting that basses cut out,
but one of their contractors stays in. So that's interesting
how that may have unfolded. There's a lot of unchartered
territory there that I don't really see anybody talking
about. But I responded to Dr. Put off and said, Hey, can you
elaborate So are you saying that after 2010 You as either a bass
contractor or somebody who what didn't work for bass and then
later got a contract direct with the Pentagon to consult with or
do whatever you know, consult with or do whatever duties you
had with Luis Elizondo is a tip. Well, that could be true as
well. But James McCaskey said a tip was never funded. So then
the question mark is who wrote Dr. Hal put off statement a
paycheck. So pay based on this statement? If he stayed on,
there's got to be funding from somewhere. I mean, in my
opinion, and I don't fault anybody for this. You're not
going to volunteer your time. So my guess is who's paying? And
and that's where a lot of the layers when it comes to the
Pentagon's a tip side, start to come into question. Because if
bass was out how to doctor put off stay in, he never responded
to my follow up to try and figure out what happened. It
only got worse. We were told and we were, you know, shown
documentation. And I'll go over that documentation also in a
minute that aos app started. In 2008, after it was awarded to
bass, well, in a Dr. Hal put off lecture that he gave to a
conference in Las Vegas in June of 2018. He said the following,
people have trouble trying to get documents out of the
Pentagon by saying they want all documents on a tip. And they
have a hard time, because that wasn't the actual name of the
program. advanced aerospace weapon systems application
program is the actual name of the program. But a tip was the
nickname it went by. It began in June of 2007. The Defense
Intelligence Agency was concerned about the fact that
obvious observation had shown that advanced aerospace
vehicles, crafts or drones of unknown origin, were flying all
over the United States over waters, in fact, globally, as
was the case, did you catch it? It began in June of 2007. Now
that's more than a full year prior to money ever being
allocated to the OSS AP contract in August of 2008. So what
happened there now put a pin in that, because when I go over the
timeline, you'll see something else emerge that creates yet
another question. This was also echoed to George Knapp in a
mystery wire interview by Luis Elizondo, because that really
wasn't a quote, I should say, because that really wasn't that
started before I came on board, and therefore my knowledge of it
is a bit limited. So in essence, in 2007, the initial program was
called OS app program. It was that name for about nine months.
And that program was later refined, it was a bit of a
shotgun approach to the phenomena. So yet again, we have
a 2007 start date. But yet again, documentation and all
reporting contradicts that.
Now despite the controversy about the Pentagon saying no
Luis Elizondo had no assigned responsibility on the A tip
program, let's get beyond that and find out when he started.
And we all know for those who watched the History Channel
special, unidentified, they went over a lot of Elizondo his
background. And they said the following these are three
screenshots with the official transcript. These were taken, I
believe, through my press access to the History Channel where
they allowed us to screen ahead of time. I did not post these
until after the show aired, but that's kind of the screen you're
seeing. And then since then, I believe you can view this
publicly or at least you did for a while, but anybody can verify
this. They said in that show, which Luis Elizondo was
instrumental in the narrator says in 2009, Elizondo took over
the $22 million advanced aerospace threat Identification
Program. Well, that's entirely wrong across the board. Based on
all of the new details that have emerged. Luis Elizondo, which
you'll see in a second says, Well 2010, the $22 million,
according to James McCaskey never went to a tip. So yet
again, how did a television show that was working directly with
the sources get it wildly wrong? Now? Maybe the producers just
made a mistake and sure we can chalk it up to that. But was
there something else? Luis Elizondo in one of his interview
said the OS app program given the resources $22 million would
never be enough to really follow each and every down each and
every rabbit hole to do this conclusively, in my opinion,
anyways, so it was refocused to a tip I took over in 2010. So
yet another discrepancy on the timeline? What is going on? All
these details, by the way do mean an awful lot when you're
trying to figure out what the right story is? That timeline
defines money, where the money came from, who was involved, who
was calling the shots? And let's just face it, essentially, who's
telling the truth. Not everybody can be right. And all of these
little details sure people can get date dates wrong. It was now
what 11 going on 12 years ago ish, depending upon what version
you go for. So that's cool. You know, maybe some of these are
just all mistakes. But you know, when you're talking about
something this sensitive, in my opinion, and again, an opinion
here that I'd like to insert, we should take a little bit more
care. Again, I'm not saying who's right or who's wrong in
this presentation, but rather, pointing out the huge
discrepancies in the timeline, the story, the claims, the
facts, and what we've been led to believe. In a presentation
that was done to move on, this was edited to down a little bit
and put on to to the stars Academy of Arts and Sciences or
TT essays, YouTube channel. slides were shown by Luis
Elizondo. In one of those slides, you'll see the
highlighted purple one highlight was more emphasis 2008 oss AP is
formally changed to a tip by former program manager to focus
more narrowly on the five observables. And research of
advanced physics applications. But as we know, in the book
anyway, for those who read it, it was only said that it was a
nickname that a tip was never anything within the DIA. And
that the a tip that we know it was an unfunded, unofficial and
they use the word unofficial program operated out of the
Pentagon. So what happened in 2008, according to Mr. Elizondo
two full years, or at least close to two years, prior to him
taking over that a tip had already been morphed. And for us
to focus in on these five observables, that is not
checking out what the new information that has come
forward.
In 2009, this kind of reinforces that in 2008, a transfer to a
tip or a formal repackaging, so to speak likely didn't take
place. Excuse me, in 2009, this Harry Reid letter was written,
essentially trying to get SAP access or Special Access Program
status for what we refer to as a tip. But in the book, it kind of
shows that this was an introduction of the A tip word
that this was an unclassified way of referring to OS app,
which essentially took the spotlight off of this program
that they wanted to remain secret, and essentially created
a nickname they said in the book, and again, this is from
the free preview. based on preliminary data, a letter had
already been sent from Senator Harry Reid, to Deputy Secretary
of Defense William Linn on June 24 2009, requesting a SAP or
special access program for OS app. As detailed in chapter 10.
The decision to create the SAP was postponed but the urgent
need persisted. Oddly enough, the primary legacy of the letter
was the new unclassified nickname, The advanced aerospace
threat identification program or a tip created exclusively for
use within the unclassified letter. The ATA backronym, was
adopted much later to describe a small, unofficial effort within
the DOD to investigate UAPs encountered by the military. The
New York Times article in December of 2017, mistakenly
linked the $22 million in funding to a tip not OS app, os
app was the change. Offset was the official name of the $22
million program and was never changed. A tip was not a funded
program. Now that's completely contradictory to what we've been
told about how all SAP morph to a tip in 2008. Well, the book is
completely contradicting that narrative. And it isn't right.
What's interesting to point out about Harry Reid, is the
shifting of viewpoints when it comes to this because in 2009,
he had said in his letter that he had seen enough to try and
get what he was referring to as a tip, a SAP status. But years
later, he did an interview and a journalist asked him, were you
ever briefed on the findings of of the program? And were you
staying involved? In the New York Magazine article published
in March of 2018, the journalist says when the program was
running, was this something that you would be briefed on
frequently? Were you briefed on it ever? Harry Reid said no, I
left everybody alone. Nope. Journalists followed up, you
were never briefed. Harry Reid says that. That's not my style.
Nope. How is it that you as a senator would essentially go and
fight for SAP status on something which by the way, I
cannot find any example outside of this storyline of a sitting
US senator getting involved in a program that's already underway,
trying to request certain status in this in this manner. That
doesn't mean that it hasn't happened. That's just kind of
unorthodox. Once funding goes, Senators aren't generally
involved in the day to day business of Dia or NSA or CIA or
DOD or whomever. So the fact that he was involved shows you
that there was something else going on. He had obviously been
briefed enough, which by the way, I don't think I pulled it
but there's a quote about them briefing Harry Reid in the book,
I think so. You know, it shows that what version of his story
do you want to believe? Because as time goes on, we're getting
more and more information that is simply creating more and more
confusion and generating more and more questions than it is
answers.
In a mystery wire interview again, credit to George Knapp.
Yes, the name a tip. And this is from James McCaskey quote. Yes,
the name a tip was a nickname for OS app for certain security
reasons that we've put into the book. But the difference between
OS app with the nickname a tip at DIA, and a tip at the
Pentagon is quite distinct OS app had 22 million in funding it
covered military and civilian UFOs, yielding a massive
database. It also had a main contract and sub contracts. Now
a tip in the Pentagon, as described in the articles was
basically zero funded, looked at specific military UFO
encounters, and very important ones because they had film and
it had no contract. So getting back to how did this mix up
occur? I think it's not deliberate. It's not due to
authors to television personalities, etc. It's the
fact that we were running not an official app, but a closed
program. And he goes on and on. So is who's to blame for the
confusion? I'm not really sure. But when you talk about the key
players involved, none of them agree either. So we can talk
about the media in one breath. And that's fine. I've done that
on this channel before. And I've made extensive videos about the
horrible
the horrible reporting when it comes to this topic, but now
when you look at the actual statements from everybody in the
storylines, and and what comes out in books like this, and you
know, rumor has it there's more books coming. When you look at
all of that, and nothing matches up. What are we, as the general
public led to believe about this? Was this all kosher? and
up and up. And that brings me to my next section, which really
upsets some people. But it is something that truly puts all of
this into context. Now, for many years, I've talked about the
concept of a sweetheart deal. Now, essentially, in plain
English. What I mean by that is the fact that that OS app was a
creation, for bass, to get X amount of dollars in the tunes
of 10s of millions, if not a lot more, I don't believe that $22
million was supposed to be a cap, but 10s of millions of
dollars in a program that was catered for Robert Bigelow and
bass. Now, that happens in government and military. So I'm
sorry, it just happens, right? It's not something that I like
or dislike, but it's the reality of what's going on. But it also
puts into proper context, what it is that we're actually
dealing with, and what it is that we're actually talking
about. Now, one of the main things on why I get attached to
this is a lot of you who are watching this are into UFOs. And
you know, me as somebody who loves the topic, and I do, I
preface a lot of what I do with saying I believe the phenomena
is real, I believe it warrants scientific scrutiny, I believe
funding should be put forward to look into it. And I fully
support the UAP Task Force and its mission to try and uncover
what all this is. But in the same respect, I am a researcher,
and an investigator who has dug in for decades through the
Freedom of Information Act on information that goes well
beyond UFOs. And where I want to bring this up is this is a
crossroads for me. Because I take personal biases or I try
I'm only human, of course, I'm going to have, you know,
something that is within me that makes me lean a certain way. But
I truly try hard not to do that. And this is a crossroads for me,
because I want all of this to be real. And I look into it, for
the reason that I believe that there's something to the UFO
topic. But in the same respect, I look into a lot of government
waste, and wasteful spending. And through the years I've
gotten, you know quite a few different news agencies and
media outlets to cover documents that I've come out with on
various topics. A prime example was years ago, quite a few years
with one of those stimulus packages, how they spent $18
million for the recovery.gov website like how does a website
cost $18 million. And for it to be a disaster. Pro Publica also
had a lawsuit to get a lot of that stuff out. So So credit to
them as well involved in those stories. $16.7 million for
canned pork. And so I've got the FDA contract on all of that
craziness. $1.5 million for cheese, and it goes on and on.
So that's what I do. And this is where the concept of a
sweetheart deal whether or not it deals with UFOs or not comes
into play for me because that's who I am as a researcher and
somebody who looks into these topics. and looks at a $22
million dollar sign and whether or not this truly was
appropriated properly. And what if that $22 million went to the,
you know, let's say Office of Naval Intelligence for the UAP
Task Force or wherever, could that have been appropriated more
properly, where they don't focus on let's say cryptozoology stuff
and, and cryptids and dyno beavers, and some other stuff
that that that I can't say without laughing, that rather,
if you focused on the nuts and bolts aspect of this phenomena
that we know is real, what could that $22 million have purchased
elsewhere? So that's that crossroads for me. But I want to
deal a little bit with that sweetheart deal narrative,
because for years, I've talked about it as a possibility. And
you know, what, with the with the publishing of this book, and
now James McCaskey on the record, truly not third hand
information, but his words in a book with his name on it, I
believe now it's solidified,
solidified that it is a sweetheart deal. Does that take
away from results? Before I dig into this? No, of course not.
Where are the results? Is the question. So even though I don't
believe that it takes away from the results? My big question is,
where are those results? And if there was something yielded from
the $22 million, where is it? And if it's classified and
heavily classified at that, then they wouldn't be talking about
OS and a tip and writing books about it. Because the idea
concepts, and these findings and realities of dyno beavers, and
man like wolves or whatever, that if that all happened,
you're not going to be able to talk about that if it's highly
classified. So if it is unclassified, and they're able
to talk about it, where are the results? And that is one of the
biggest questions that we still have yet to answer when we get
into this concept of a sweetheart deal. Because if this
was truly a sweetheart deal, and the money was catered for Robert
Bigelow, and he doesn't want to share it, I'm not not saying
that. That's the reality. But where is everything? If that is
the reality, then we have a lot more questions than even I
thought about this whole thing. So anyway, concept of a
sweetheart deal. So these are some of the facts that we've
learned here in the last few years and some with this book as
well. We know that Robert Bigelow, this man over here owns
Bigelow Aerospace, and who created the subsidiary that we
know as bass as the one that got this contract. We know that
Senator Harry Reid is instrumental in that there's
there's really kind of no debating that. Robert Bigelow's
headquarters is in Nevada. And when this man Senator Harry
Reid, was the majority leader and was in the Senate, he was in
so for the state of Nevada. So these guys were obviously in the
same state and with the success of a billionaire who creates
jobs and creates money flowing into that state. This man here
is obviously very happy. So there is motivation for the one
to take care of the other. Now, the other two gentlemen that
don't get mentioned a whole lot, and we just hear again, third
hand information would be senators Ted Stevens and Daniel
Inouye, both of which are the late, they have both passed
away. So that's why I say most of what we hear is all third
hand information. And we don't really know the role. I'm sorry,
if any that they really played in getting that we just have to
believe and trust the book itself. We've learned that Harry
Reid's connection to Robert Bigelow goes back to the knids
days back to 1996 when Reid had attended one of the board
meetings for knids. And he was very impressed by it. Lots of
scientists, lots of you know, big names, not the tinfoil hat
people that I'm sure most politicians are scared of. These
were big people. That apparently is the root of Harry Reid's
interest in Robert Bigelow knids all things UFOs paranormal
Skinwalker Ranch, and it's routed back to 1996. Now we know
the connection then between Robert Bigelow and Harry Reid
extended far beyond friendship There were also in the tunes of
1000s of dollars worth of donations from not only Robert
Bigelow but also his late wife, Diane Bigelow, all under the
banners a lot of times under the Bigelow company's Bigelow
development aerospace LLC, and then probably extends farther
beyond this. I just don't know all the names of everybody. But
these are all verifiable contributions all through 2014
little bit before then a couple years later OS app was awarded.
And then these 1000s of dollars of donations from Robert
Bigelow, ironically, around the time that they were saying that
they were cutting the OS app funding, which is, you know,
probably just a coincidence. But obviously, again, a, a
relationship that extends far beyond the professions or just a
friendship that there were 1000s of dollars in donations that
were going forward.
Enter James McCaskey, he, again was the DIA scientist. He was a
rocket scientist, who in the leaked reports, that's really
how we knew his name before but nobody wanted to say his name.
He was on the leaked reports as being the OSS SAP program
manager. And so that also was a cause for confusion. Hey, what
about Mr. Elizondo didn't he wasn't he the manager? What is
this? And in the early days, that really caused a lot of
confusion since then, we got clarity, that Mr. Elizondo said
hey, we were two different programs. He led ASA or excuse
me a tip Elizondo led a tip in the Pentagon. LoCat ski was all
SAP at the DIA. Dr. McCaskey says the following on page 20
For those who have the book reading hunt for the Skinwalker
which is, by the way, the original book that was written
by George Knapp and I think Colm Kelleher, as well about
Skinwalker Ranch created quite a bit of hoopla many, many years
ago. So back to the quote I'm sorry reading hunt for the
Skinwalker back in March of 2007. Intrigued McCaskey. I read
the book cover to cover McCaskey says I was legitimately
interested in this as useful to the military and useful to my
particular group, which was looking at possible threats to
new weapons systems. That's what attracted my attention. So that
kind of gives a timeframe March of 2007. Luke Caskey gets a
personal interest into Skinwalker Ranch, specifically
this ranch in Utah that allegedly has all of this
paranormal activity. There's a little flowchart for you in
2007. This is from Senator Harry Reid, by the way page. What is
that 14 In the Roman numeral. In 2007. I received a telephone
call from Bob Bigelow regarding a letter he had received from
the Defense Intelligence Agency or dia, that also timestamps it
that law Caskey writes Robert Bigelow, and says I want to
visit Skinwalker Ranch. Bigelow immediately turns around and
calls his buddy Harry Reid to kind of have everything checked
out. As the story slash legend goes, if you want to call it
that, Luke Caskey, visits the the Skinwalker Ranch and
actually has which he recounts in the book, a paranormal
experience. And he's convinced at this point that money needs
to go to this research. Now again, keep in mind that this is
2007. According to the book, enter Harry Reid, Ted Stevens,
Daniel Inouye. That day, according to Senator Harry Reid,
on page 16 In the Roman numeral, quote, thus the advanced
aerospace weapon system applications program was
conceived senators Stevens anyway, and I allocated $22
million to get the program started. A government request
for proposal was put out, and Bob Bigelow's company secured
the bid was the $22 million that went to bass. According to the
Pentagon. This is how it was funded. The program commenced in
fiscal year 2008 with $10 million appropriated in the
defense supplemental appropriation Act. The first 26
reports were complete, completed by late 2009. The defense
Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2010, included an
additional $12 million for the program, and 12 additional
reports were produced. That's quoted from Susan Goff, Pentagon
spokesperson that culminated from dia statements and so on
and so forth. I'm putting her name because that was the last
time I received a version of it. But James could law from dia
also gave me portions of that even goes back to Adria Harris
from the Pentagon in early 2018. When I was communicating with
her back then,
Senator Harry Reid, also on page 16, as the United States Senate
Majority Leader I decided to meet in a classified location in
the United States Capitol with two key members of the
appropriations process. The two members of the Appropriations
Committee who controlled the dark money, the non public money
were Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and Democratic
Senator Dan Inouye of Hawaii. Now I'm bringing up this because
dark money has come up that the phrasing dark Money has come up
quite a few times when it comes to Harry Reid, and to be
blatantly honest with you. And I could be completely off base or
missing something big. I have no idea what the hell he's
referring to. When you talk about black budget program.
Sure. I have obviously know what he's referring to. Dark money is
something different and really doesn't have to do with
government spending, but rather, corporations, namely nonprofit
corporations, and how they donate to political campaigns.
Ironically, one of the biggest outspoken senators on dark money
was Senator Harry Reid himself. These two articles I pulled from
various years 2014 and 2015. Harry Reid says dark money in
campaigns threatens democracy. Another headline, Harry Reid
joins call for Obama to take action on dark money. Now, I
don't believe he's using the right phrasing. And it
completely contradicts the Pentagon and what they are
documenting in these fiscal year acts in the appropriations bills
on what Senator Harry Reid is doing. So I'm not sure what he's
referring to if there's something I'm missing, please
guys, help me out. I believe that maybe he's just erroneously
referring to black budget money. But even that doesn't make sense
because according to the Pentagon, they fully admit the
money was on the books. And they show where it came from. On top
of that Senator Harry Reid in this book said that he and the
two other senators allocated $22 million? Well, I would politely
argue that was impossible for him to do, he could get the
original money, or put it in a bill somehow. But there was no
cap. If you look at the documentation of what OS app was
all about, it was supposed to extend far beyond two years,
maybe even to five years and beyond. But after a review, in
2009, after the DIA had started it, they felt they were not
getting anything beneficial. So then the funding was cut after
that second year, George Knapp was the one that showed
screenshots of the first contract that was signed for
that first year, the total amount $10 million. It coincides
with what the Pentagon says, there's, in my opinion, no way
that Senator Harry Reid then could understand number one,
that they would get a second year because it was an option.
But number two, that it would be for the total of 12 million. So
Senator Harry Reid, or in my opinion, any senator for that
matter, or committee, or whatever, in 2008, or excuse me,
2007. I think he said in the book, they couldn't allocate $22
million, because the bills weren't even written yet. And
that money that came from those bills, wasn't even determined
yet. So for that whole portion of the story, and I know it
sometimes gets dicey and confusing when you start talking
about this level stuff. It shows that I believe Senator Harry
Reid is wrong. And I'm sorry, his use of the word dark money
makes no sense to the story. But he's used that so many times, I
had to point it out. And on top of that, Senator Reid was
against the true definition of dark money as a whole. Going
back to the idea of that that sweetheart deal. We know from a
statement that I got back in March of 2019, that there was
only one bidder on this contract that could have potentially
equaled 10s of millions of dollars, should the option go to
five years and beyond the fact that no other contractor would
try and bid on a public notice in 2008. Doesn't make really any
sense. Now, some have argued that that's normal, and that's
fine. Okay, so let's get beyond it. I won't I won't beat the
dead horse. But Bigelow Aerospace was the only bidder
that has never been disputed. It was reported, however,
erroneously that Lockheed put a bid in that also was wrong.
Senator Harry Reid has said in interviews, that he put the bid
solicit or excuse me that the government put the bid
solicitation out, and that bass got it because they were the
most qualified at the time. He never said they were the only
one. So what are the odds that this bid solicitation, which
I'll show you here, called the advanced aerospace weapon system
applications program goes out for public bids, and nowhere,
nowhere in that public bid solicitation is Skinwalker Ranch
mentioned, or, excuse me, our UFOs are paranormal mentioned,
which would make Skinwalker Ranch incredibly valuable to bid
on a contract like that saying, Hey, if you want to look in the
paranormal, we have the prime spot for you or whatever. None
of that was in the public bid solicitation. So what are the
odds that out of all of those corporations LLCs, or whomever
is clear to bid on a contract? The one person that actually
bids on it strikes the jackpot, because it's CEO, Robert Bigelow
has this invested interest in UFOs and paranormal. So we're
led to believe that OS app when it went out, withheld some of
those other details from the public bid notice, because some
have argued they were classified there say that they were
embarrassed by it. Yeah, pick your explanation doesn't matter.
But man did Robert Bigelow hit the jackpot when he just got
lucky, and was the only bidder that allowed him to do
paranormal funhouse research, or was he tipped off? Now? Let's
face it, he was tipped off. You can't get around that. If, if we
want to believe otherwise, that's fine. But there's no way
that a DIA scientist a year prior that then a year prior to
this contract being awarded calls, Robert Bigelow wants to
go to Skinwalker Ranch has a paranormal experience, comes
back sets the deals in motion to get word to Harry Reid $22
million, comes out of nowhere, and boom, this goes out for a
public bid. And voila, bass is the only bidder? No, the reality
is he was tipped off and this was catered to him. Another
thing emerged too, while looking at this book, and kind of going
over the documentation. Again, this is a copy of version number
three of the official notice for bid solutions solicitation.
Why I say version three is there are three versions not a whole
lot of difference. It changed a couple of little details, but it
really didn't change the scope of the of the program. They just
save all the revisions online, on the black vault, comm search
the search engine for OS app, you will be able to download all
of the different versions. I have everything archived. But
while doing this presentation, this was the date that you'll
notice here. Solicitation Issue Date, August 18 2008. That's
when it went out. That is when the DIA said, Hey, we want
solicitations for this bit. The due date was September 5. So
pretty tight, you didn't have a whole lot of time to submit for
this bid arguable on whether or not that standard or not, but
irrelevant for my presentation here. So we'll just call it
September 5. Those dates are also backed up by sam.gov or
which is now the find business opportunities website. Believe
sam.gov has been rebranded. But this is the archived version. So
September 5 was the due date. And of course, other websites as
well. All archives all verify September 5 was the due date.
Now why do I say that? Well, because the book has September
10. So that could just be a typo. But then in the appendix
on page 184. They talk about the proposals that bast submitted to
the Defense Intelligence Agency saying, hey, look, we're the guy
for you. They were submitted three days after the due date.
What happened? They're not really sure. But it's a
discrepancy worth noting, because the due date was done.
So nobody else was there. What happened? I? I don't know, I
really don't have an answer to it. But it's important
nonetheless. This was the statement of objectives. This
was the essentially what OS app was all about. This also is from
that version three document. No mention a paranormal, no mention
of, you know, UFOs or anything in that genre. It was all about
looking at advanced aerospace technology, and forward looking
into the 40 years into the future, looking at various lift,
propulsion, so on and so forth, on how things essentially could
progress. And that's what this was supposedly all about. In
that same document from the get go. The program manager or the
contracting officer was Dr. James McCaskey, the same guy
that visited Skinwalker Ranch and reached out to Bigelow
Aerospace the year prior. So, you know, it seems like it was
kind of set up and in the book goes into even more detail about
how Dr. McCaskey was instrumental in that. So if we
haven't really figured out that this was catered for bass and
Robert Bigelow yet, I'm not sure how else to put it. But this
book solidifies that fact. Now here's kind of a timeline of
events. Some points are review. Some points are new, but this is
how it all unfolded March of 2007 le Caskey read hunt for the
Skinwalker. The next month. McCaskey meets in the defense
warning office with Jonathan Axelrod believed Just a nickname
to talk about tales of the paranormal He is within the DWR
was within the DIA or Defense Intelligence Agency. Axelrod
takes the book to Iraq while deployed somehow that you know,
gets the ball in motion that all of this was, you know real. June
19 2007. McCaskey writes to Robert Bigelow on dia letterhead
to ask to visit his ranch. Now, remember when I told you to put
a pin in that doctor put off? Quote, and then later Elizondo
had a 2007 start date for us app?
That was all June of 2007, when they said that it started. So is
this the start of OS app? Did they did they already start
putting money towards Bigelow? Did they already choose him? Why
are multiple key players involved saying 2007 contract
wasn't awarded until more than a year later? And according to you
know, reports, they weren't aware of it. They were just the
lucky bidder. So how did all that happen? And how is it
connected? Not really sure, but it was an interesting date
correlation when going through the book. The next month, July
26 2007, McCaskey and Bigelow fly to Utah to visit his ranch.
Within 60 minutes of being on the property lockouts, he had
paranormal experiences seeing, quote, an earthly technological
device that had quote silently appeared out of nowhere in the
adjacent kitchen. It looked to be a complex, semi opaque,
yellowish, tubular structure that's page 39 and 40 for those
who have the book in 2007, as well, but it's an unknown month,
but we know that it's post LoCat skis ranch visit. Bigelow
briefed long term friend as the book calls him, Senator Harry
Reid on extraordinary history of UAPs at the UAP at the Utah
Ranch, excuse me, as well on the recent astounding experience by
a high level dia analyst on the same Ranch, it did not take long
to connect Jim McCaskey with senators Daniel Inouye, of
Hawaii and Ted Stevens of Alaska in a capital building meeting.
January of 2008. I tracked down the documentation, the
documentation from the Nevada secretary of state that shows
that Bigelow Aerospace advanced space studies or bass, as it was
formed as a domestic Limited Liability Company. In Nevada. It
was reported as well, Bass was set up only for OS app, the OS
app contract, if that's the case, seems like he had prior
knowledge. If that's not the case, heck of a coincidence.
August 2008. Os app bid solicitation notice is published
in the biz ops website. September 5, os app bids were
due September 8, bass proposal volumes one, two or three were
submitted. And September 22 2008, the OS app contract was
issued to bass. I know I spent a lot of time on the sweetheart
deal, but that frames what we are dealing with, and in my book
absolutely closes the deal. When it comes to the sweetheart deal,
argument, does that negate the findings? No. But where are the
findings? And that question still lingers to this day.
Those findings could be in the reports that a lot of people are
now referring to James the cat's keys chapter in chapter three of
the book, voluminous, high quality material more than 100
separate reports as detailed in appendix one was submitted to
the DIA in just over two years of the program's existence. In
addition, the 11 databases within the ASA bass data
warehouse, were delivered to dia while the massive holdings of
the original analysts journals, data and photographs remained in
storage. Now, those databases I'll talk about in a couple of
minutes, but we have yet to refer to them in this
presentation. In short, bass is said to have created 11
different databases all encompassing UFO, UAP, UFO
events, witness testimony, all sorts of material. That's what
those 11 databases are. But don't worry, I'll get to those.
A lot of those reports are probably spelled out in that
original bid solicitation notice. So a lot of it I'm not
sure is it being framed to be much more interesting than it is
these types of reports like, you know, management plans for
different tasks, travel reports, expenses, so on and so forth,
all due for contracts like this. But is that what he's talking
about with the hundreds of reports? I don't really know
because the only thing we do know, came through a Freedom of
Information Act request. I did and I know that the federal
Federation excuse me of American scientists or FAS, Steven
afterGood, to be precise, they as well had a case ongoing as
did I for the and I'll read it here. Are all communications to
and from the DIA with the Armed Services Committee in 2017 and
2018. Regarding the advanced aviation and at this time when I
filed that's how the government referred to it. Advanced
aviation threat Identification Program, or were referred to as
the advanced aerospace threat Identification Program, or
referred to as the advanced aerospace threat and
identification program. That was Harry Reid's version. The result
was a letter that was written to John McCain in January of 2018.
And this is where we discovered the reality of the dird reports.
And those dird reports where the 38 reports that were created
under the OS app contract, I'm going to read to you part of
this letter because one word is key. Based on interest from your
staff regarding the DIA is role in a tip, please find attached a
list of all products produced under the a tip contract for dia
to publish. The purpose of a tip was to investigate foreign
advanced aerospace weapon threats from the present out to
the next 40 years. And again, we know 38 reports were given. I
dug it up in the congressional record log. Also in April of
2018. They also punched the published word, a letter from
the chief Congressional Relations Division Defense
Intelligence Agency DoD transmitting a list of all
products produced under the advanced aerospace threat
Identification Program contract for the DIA to publish to the
committee of arms armed services. So I was able to kind
of dig up that this letter was referred to in official
congressional record, they received these three pages,
which listed all 38 reports. So that is a breakdown of the
published reports through a tip notice how the letter didn't say
all SAP now why not if a tip was just a nickname when it came to
dia on paper that meant nothing to really anybody when it came
to funding to a senator and so on. So is this the same thing
that they're trying to keep it secret? Or is there another
layer here that we haven't really understood, but OS app
was not involved? It should be noted, however, that this does
kind of coincide with the Pentagon's explanation that a
tip was the overall program. And the portion that was contracted
out was known as OS app. Now, according to McCaskey OS app was
the program a tip was kind of a nickname. And then when you talk
to Luis Elizondo OS app was a DIA program and a tip was a DoD
program.
You know, quite a few different definitions Dr. Hal put off also
just calls it a nickname. So who do you believe on that one? Not
really sure. But there's a lot of question marks here. Just
kind of a quick side note about some history here all SAP as a
whole as a program looking at forward looking technology and
what might be there isn't anything new. I had dug up this
program from 1972 called Project outgrowth, it was headed by a
Franklin B, Mead, and run through the Air Force Rocket
Propulsion Laboratory. In essence, they were looking at
major propulsion developments that may occur in the next 30 to
40 years. It was a forward looking program very much like
aw SAP and essentially what they were looking for. Were
advancements in propulsion, one of the same exact angles of
study for us AP, and how it make progress over the next 30 to 40
years. Ironically, os AP was labeled as through the next 40
years, do the math from 1972. You're looking at about 35 years
or so after project outgrowth, that OS app was essentially
conceived and born out. So it's a very interesting maybe just a
coincidence correlation that this program preceded OS app was
very much looking at very similar things and had a very
similar timeframe of 40 years looking into the future. You'll
see number nine here in the 1970s program was looking at
actually how you can propel a ship using your mind or
psychokinesis. They labeled it as movement of objects by mental
forces, although recent developments indicate small
object may be propelled by this technique. Too much basic
research is needed before this method can be considered for
propulsion applications. So they were looking at incredibly
fringe areas of science as well. And so now that the Pentagon has
kind of revamped their statement, did did Bigelow
insert UFOs in very much a similar fashion, and then that's
where the confusion comes from. Or was this that sweetheart
deal? And it was something else entirely on paper? It was, yeah,
let's do some research into lift and propulsion and so on and so
forth. Materials and whatever the other 3800 reports are. But
in reality, all that money went to paranormal, you know, cryptid
research, which is bizarre. A lot of you asked about Dr. Eric
Davis today, and whether or not you know, he's he really briefed
in a classified setting about offworld vehicles. I'll deal
with that in a second. But one interesting thing when when
looking at Project outgrowth, and Franklin Meade, as I told
you about, this is how tightly niched these these scientists
and this research is. And this may mean absolutely nothing. But
I kind of found it a little bit fascinating that this these
documents and programs were separated by decades, and
decades. Yet, when you start digging in, here is a ball
lightning study that was awarded to warp drive metrics. That is
the company for this man here, Dr. Eric Davis. Now we know that
he wrote five of those dirt reports I showed you all 38. He
had written five of them, he was contracted by his pal, doctor
how put off and for an untold amount of money. And he authored
these five derd reports. What's interesting about this ball
lightning study, though this was outside of OS apps, I had
nothing to do with that was written in 2003. But was really
interesting was the project manager on Eric Davis, his ball
lightning study, which was Franklin made the same guy that
did that OS app like program decades prior. And in fact, if
you continue to dig, you'll see that Eric Davis and Franklin
meet, then later, would author a document together about laser
light, crash propulsion. Now all of this is well over my head
when it comes to science. But very interesting that number 31,
on the 38 list was about laser light craft technology authored
by Dr. Eric Davis. So you can see how tightly niched all of
these people and these realms of research really were. And when
you dig, you see that they really are connected in the most
bizarre way. Now, back to your questions about did he briefed
Congress about offworld vehicles. Now, for those who
aren't aware I did a full video about offworld vehicle
technology, and the claims made by the New York Times and that
horrific
journalism job that was later corrected on numerous fronts,
they also made corrections that they never noted. I go through
that in the video. And I'll be honest with you, I do not
believe the claims by Eric Davis that he briefed in a classified
setting or otherwise, about offworld vehicles. He may have
had a meeting, he may have sat with a senator Congressman House
of Representatives, whomever, committee even and maybe had a
meeting. I don't buy that it was a class of in a classified
setting. And I don't buy that he was really driving the point
home about quote unquote offworld vehicles. Simply put,
the existence of offworld vehicles would be a highly
classified piece of knowledge. We all know that. There's no
getting away from it. If it wasn't an ace, a tip or a SAP or
whatever really did find it. And it was unclassified in nature.
You better bet your bottom dollar that Robert Bigelow Luis
Elizondo, James McCaskey, or any one of those players would have
talked about it and confirmed it by now. But they haven't all we
get are these shrouded, convoluted cloak and dagger
type, you know, fun stories that may allude to it, but we never
get the confirmation. So let's say it really does exist. The
government military has off road vehicles. Well, let's face it,
it would be highly classified and no, they would not be
talking about it or publishing it in the New York Times. And
the mess that became of that article with all of the
corrections. I think we can all dismissed the notion and no, I
don't believe Dr. Eric Davis is as connected as some people want
us to believe I wanted to address that though, because of
so many questions I got today on social media about it. Those 11
databases that were created, this is one of the last things
that I'm going to go over for you guys and timing wise, it's
working out pretty perfect. The data warehouse, that they
created these 11 databases, again, was a culmination of UFO
sightings and witness testimony, hopefully, you know, photos,
videos, whatever they may be, but just it sounds like a
massive amount of data. Now, where is that data? According to
the book, they turned at least part of it over to the DIA. But
the question mark is where is it now? Is it classified And if it
is, how can you classify something that came from the
general public? Which is what Dr. McCaskey said they were
looking into. So if I take a picture of video of a UFO, and
it's not a top secret aircraft, it is not taken by classified
technology and I am nowhere near a government or military, either
employee or enlistee? Can they classify it? And then the
question from or, excuse me, I think the answer to that
question would be no. So the now the question is, where is all
that data? And we have absolutely no idea. I was
unaware, and maybe I just missed it. That the number of databases
total 11. I was only aware of one and the one database or at
least the start of the database anyway, that I was well aware of
that really I don't see enough people talking about is the move
on database that that has collected for decades upon
decades.
Material and, and sightings and photos and videos, and so on and
so forth. Witness Testimony, but on top of that their personal
and confidential information, all went into this massive
database that was purchased by Robert Bigelow, back around the
2008 2009 timeframe. In fact, the actual contract that Bigelow
and move on signed with each other has no mention of a
government program, or Defense Intelligence Agency or so on.
All we learned from the leak of this contract by a move on
member the late Elaine Douglas. She brought this out in January
of 2011. Prior to ever knowing about OSS apparatus, or bass,
being involved with the government, we learned that it
was for the sum of $672,000 that move on God, it made payable in
12 installments of $56,000. That that is what Robert Bigelow got
into. Now, I want to point out because there's a lot to this
story. And I'm not going to go into all of it for a couple
different reasons. But I will point you to this website here
by Roger Glassell and Kurt Collins, I believe it's Kurt's
website, but the article itself, the Pentagon, UFO programs,
secret partner, they both authored that, and that is at
Blue, blurry lines.com. Look it up, they do a lot of research
and a big deep dive into it, I am not going to do the same. I'm
just going to brush the surface and ask you guys a couple of
questions. Because I think a lot of people are really not dealing
with this. Now we made a we were all kind of made aware of this
in 2009. And you'll see it's kind of a blurry picture. This
is the best image I can find of it this much younger and
skinnier version of myself. I was the emcee of musanze
International Symposium for about a decade. At the time,
this man here was James carry on. He was the international
director of move on. And here we have Robert Bigelow. And we know
Robert Bigelow had invested into move on, in turn, they created I
believe this was the origin of their star team, but essentially
they were looking for when those UFO reports came in, and the
photos, the videos, whatever. And they went into move on,
which was the number one place for people to report, guess who
had first dibs on them. Robert Bigelow, but what was not known
to the general public at the time, was that it was just being
funneled right back in to the Defense Intelligence Agency, a
military run intelligence agency. So that is one of the
biggest aspects to this story, that I think we should start
pushing on that how can a military arm of our intelligence
community, the DIA, want to get into watching what United States
citizens see then keeping that information but never informing
the general public? How much of this gets into very dicey areas?
And my first guess, would be a lot of it. Yet, I don't see a
whole lot of people talking about this. And to me, I will I
will just pose this question. Did the DIA even want this? If
this was not part of OS app, then what problems does this
create that taxpayer money through a private corporation
acquired all of that personal information? Now this gentleman
right here, James carry on who I've known for many, many years,
wrote a big expose a on this that has since been removed. But
you can find it here if you're watching the video on this
internet archive link Follow the magic thread was his blog.
Strange bedfellows was the article. Here's two things that
he wrote. Mr. Bigelow did not fund move funds work for bass.
Instead, quote sponsors that Bigelow revealed to John
Schuessler, who's the one of the founders of move on, but not to
other move on board members put up the money that sponsor the
Defense Intelligence Agency. So is this alleging that the DIA,
again, that intelligence arm of the United States military put
money into purchase all of that information? And if so, what
ramifications could occur from that? Another thing you wrote
during the project move on provided both historical move on
files, as well as current move on case files, including witness
information Tabas. To cover move on legally, the move on UFO
reporting form was modified to collect the witnesses permission
to offer their citing data to a third party, the only third
party being bass. But what happened before that
modification took place? All of those other people who felt that
government bad I see UFO I go to move on because they're good.
All of a sudden just had all of their information taken and
given right to the United States government. How is any of that
Kosher or Okay? And what makes sense is that the government
would not do this. Because another big problem about all of
this is that none of it fits into the purview of the defense
intelligence agency's mission. When you look at what the DIA
does, they don't investigate us properties in Utah that allege
paranormal activity. Because that's not what they do. They're
an intelligence arm that provides mostly foreign
intelligence on different types of countries, and so on and so
forth. So why would they care about this? Now, they argued
that it was the FBI, a domestic law enforcement agency, and they
tied in potential criminal activity that in turn, kind of
research some of that paranormal activity. Okay, I can see that.
But that's not the story. This is a military intelligence arm.
That, again, is the DIA. I don't want to go farther than that to
be blatantly honest, because there's way too much that you
can get into about the purchasing of United States
citizen information in relation to UFOs and UAPs, in what they
thought was a confidential submission to a corporation,
known as move on. I will let all of you start asking those
questions. But I hope what what this
presentation showed you is that there is a lot of unanswered
questions, and I didn't even scratch the surface. You can
look at the statements, interviews, and so on, have
quite a few of these key players. And you can see how the
stories have shifted over time. I call it like a fine wine. In
some areas, the stories get better with age. So what's going
on? Why? Why are we going through this? Now, some I saw
somebody mentioned on Twitter today, why does it matter at
this point, you know, we've got the UAP Task Force, and they're
looking at UFOs. And all of that is good. And you know what that
part is good. And if this is what this has, has kind of
morphed into, then great. I love that the taskforce is there, the
phenomena deserves that scrutiny and funding, as I said, but in
the same respect, we have to look at the root of all of this.
And we have to look at what really have we been told in the
last few years, and how not only this book, but simple research,
and looking into the claims by many of these people makes a lot
of this fall apart. Some of it are dead horses that we've beat
for a couple of years now, we'll probably never have answers.
Other parts of this stems from the publishing of this book, and
the revelation by a new voice, an old name, but a new voice
that is now in the ring. And some of the claims he has made
really throw a lot of this for the loop for a loop. And so when
we look at all of that, in the end, we have more questions than
answers. We have no idea what that program discovered. Because
in this book, I don't have any I didn't see any scientific test
results that shows that the DIA shows a DNA evidence of a dyno
Beaver, or the fact that there's some kind of portal within
Skinwalker Ranch or that you UFOs and UAPs are miraculously
skirting all of our coastal defense lines and somehow
appearing over this ranch. I don't see that. I see a lot of
speculation. I see some great scientists A heck of a lot
smarter than me. But where are the results? Because if the
United States taxpayer funded this, those results are ours.
And they're ours to share and nobody owns them. This was a
contract all SAP was a contract, not a grant. And with that being
said, there's no rhyme or reason if it's not classified, and it's
not a breach of personal confidential information, that
we should not see it. So this is what in my opinion, should
happen next. We need somebody that is intimately involved in
this to say that the results are classified the results. And if
they can't say that, why not? Because if they truly are that
classified, we wouldn't have ever heard about OS app or a
tip. And that is proven by history over time that highly
classified programs, whether it be stealth technology, drones,
whatever, the mere existence of a program that encompasses top
secret technology, classified technology, or whatever the mere
existence of it is classified, you wouldn't be talking about
it. So what is it, we need more clarity? And at this point, I
don't know who's telling the truth or not. I know who returns
my phone calls. I know who is nice, I but that doesn't make
them honest. But I know who is nice. I know who I found common
ground with. And I know who dodges me. I believe that these
types of questions that I put forward here in the last,
whatever it's been an hour and a half or so these types of
questions have to be answered. This is not as clear cut, as
some people want us to believe this is not as kosher, as some
people want us to believe. And it's not as clean as some people
want us to believe it is a mess. And it's a mess, because of the
main people and players involved that have come out with their
respective stories. And the fact that none of them align that
they all have contradicting information. And again, some of
those are dead horses, I've beat for quite some time. And some of
this is new, but it hasn't gone away. But I fall back on that
one point that I'll punch one more time before I say
goodnight. And that is if the United States taxpayer funded
this, then the results are ours. And if somebody wants to say
those results are there, but are classified, then let's get
together work as a team, and try and band together and get those
results out. If there are no results, then it was a waste of
$22 million. Because they were running around looking at dyno
beavers, and man like wolves, or whatever else. That all could be
very cool stuff. And I love that. But it's not dia money.
It's just not that would be better served with let's say,
the National Science Foundation or somewhere else. And that
portion of the research, should there be anything to be borne
out should be through those agencies, and scientific
findings should be shared with the general public. But instead,
we get these cloak and dagger type stories, convoluted
statements, and very few people want to talk but when they do
talk, they only talk to a very few people. And it ends up being
a mess in the end. Anyway. So that, to me, is why with OSs and
a tip, confusion reigns, and questions still linger. And
until we get some of those answers and until some people
want to talk, none of this is going away. And more, I believe
will come out and arise.
I will say this one last time. But I do believe that everybody
should have all the information possible. I only scratched the
surface. But I hope that this motivates other people to not be
afraid to ask questions. And in the last 48 hours of the
recording of this video, I've seen some big players and big
names essentially harp on people like myself and others who are
asking questions. Well, you know what, I mean, United States
taxpayer and I deserve to know the answers if it's not
classified or doesn't encroach on somebody's personal
confidential information other than that, I believe we all
should have the answers to this. And that is why I do what I do
is to get those answers. I hope you guys enjoyed it. Thank you
so much for sticking around. I'm sure I'll do a live asked me
anything ama video soon. But for now, this is John Greenwald, Jr,
signing off. And we'll see you next time.