John Greenewald: The advanced aerospace weapon system
applications program or OS app. Some believe it was a secret
study into the paranormal centered around a mysterious
place in Utah known as Skinwalker Ranch. The government
denies that allegation and labels it simply an aerospace
research program that where applicable, Drew research from
UAP material, but they maintain that the examination of
unidentified objects was not at all the purpose of the program.
Now, the government has released more than 1500 pages of material
on OS app. Prepare yourself for a deep dive into everything that
just got released, and how the media added to that Saga by
royally messing it all up. 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 taking this journey inside the black vault
with me. I'm your host, John Greenwald, Jr, founder and
creator of the black vault.com. And when I say journey inside
the black vault, at least tonight anyway, I truly mean it.
This is another deep dive I don't do these often. This is I
think maybe my second what I would consider Deep Dive. And
let me just say up front, a couple things. I know these
aren't for everybody. Number one, they're long, right? I get
it, I don't know how long this is going to turn out to be. If
you're watching the live version, and you're unsure, I
put it into the show description below. If it's not live, then
obviously you can see the length of the video. But diving into
these types of document dumps sometimes deserves the time to
do it. And that's what these videos are all about. But I will
go ahead and give you guys at least a little bit of a summary
here up top. So if you don't watch the full breakdown, that's
okay, you'll be able to at least get the summary. So I wanted to
say that upfront because this will kind of get detailed this
will go through all of the documents for the most part that
were released. About the advanced let me pull up the
visuals here. The advanced aerospace weapon system
applications program, they'll say that a few times FAST
acronym, or SAP, I was going to actually nickname this video or
snap but I figured that would pretty much upset a few of my
biggest haters out there and they would somehow make it into
a declaration of war. But all SAP is that acronym that we have
pretty much heard about here since the beginning of 2018.
Connected to the A tip program. That's the advanced aerospace
threat Identification Program. That was referred to by Harry
Reid, Senator Harry Reid is the advanced aerospace threat and
identification program, slight differences. And you'll see here
in a couple of minutes, how confusing all of that really
becomes. But anyway, this is a deep dive into some material
that came out in the last couple of weeks and got picked up by
the mainstream media. Now when I say mainstream media, the sun,
if you're not familiar with that publication, sometimes
questionable recording, or reporting, I should say not
recording, but questionable reporting. And although I don't
like really trashing media outlets, although I do harp on
them often for coverage on UFOs. I will say that this coverage
was not strong. And the reason I say that is it was not accurate
about what was going on. And what we were essentially all
seeing. This was the article that kind of led the way
Pentagon releases 1500 pages of secret documents about shadowy
UFO program after four year battle. Well, other than a wait,
I'm not sure what battle they're referring to. There were no
appeals needed for this yet, although I'll get into it later
that I ended up filing some appeals. The battle I'm a guest
guessing is again that wait time that that the journalist had
waited Mr. Perry waited for the documents to come 1500 pages of
secret documents is a little misleading. Sure they weren't
revealed before. But they were all unclassified, which is
always a key when looking at this type of information.
Because it really does. I would say outline the the magnitude of
the information there ends All of these records being
unclassified with the exception of one report, which we'll get
into in a few moments as well.
The secret is a little bit pushing it. But hey, look, I'm
not going to harp on the writing itself. I wanted to show you all
the headline, and what then created what I call the copy and
paste journalism effect. And that snowballed from there. A
lot of places picked it up. I saw Luis Elizondo on Fox News
times a couple times. I don't know if he appeared on any other
networks. I didn't see him on social media by the time I had
recorded this. But I did see again, a lot of media coverage
on this, a lot of media appearances by various UFO
experts, even experiencers. I saw Tom Reed that was that was
on, I believe, Fox News as well, I saw a video posted on
Facebook, so a lot of coverage to this particular report. And
when you dissect the sun article, which again avalanched
into so much other coverage, it essentially surfaced around one
single report. Not all 1500 pages were about UFOs. In fact,
none of them were this report, which was the only one to
mention. UFOs was the one that was kind of highlighted, and
most news agencies erroneously reported quite a few different
angles. But one was it was a 1500 page report. That was
untrue. 1500 pages of UFO related documents, that was
untrue, and it just kind of again, snowballed from there and
a lot of inaccurate reporting. But it was all based on this. It
was authored by Dr. Christopher Kitt green, most people refer to
him just as Dr. Kitt green, and I won't go into his whole
background and, and so on, because this video is going to
be long enough. So I'm gonna have to kick myself to not just
dissect every little thing. So I invite you all to research Dr.
Kitt. Green, he has been around the UFO field for many years, he
has connect strong connections to Dr. Howell put off and has
yet again, very questionable things that surround him as
well. Now, I don't want to make that as an insult to the doctor.
I don't mean it. But I know that a couple years back there was
quite a few headlines as well that Dr. Kitt Green was duped by
the hoax, Roswell alien video that he believed it to be real,
when it was not. And that actually kind of surprised me,
but gained mainstream coverage. So there's, there's a backstory
here. And again, I invite you all to look into it. That's not
meant to put him in a bad light, I'm sure people will attack me
for bringing it up. But rather, I wanted to bring up that
history to show that this wasn't a for those who aren't aware,
this wasn't a doctor who just appeared as part of this this
program and was somebody who was unknown, but rather quite the
opposite, that he was known to the UFO field, and was brought
in as one of many subcontractors to author some of these reports
under the SAP contract. And so what we'll get into the other
reports in a moment, but that's essentially what the news
reporting was about was, was on this one report, I believe it
only totaled like either 28 or 38 pages. Sorry, I didn't write
it down in my in my presentation here. But regardless, it was
well under 50 pages out of the 1500. And that was kind of the
only record that that talked about UFOs or UAP.
The part that was true about the reporting was the Defense
Intelligence Agency. Now this was the part of the intelligence
community that was the home for us up. Now we do know that that
through reporting, some of which was accurate, some of which was
not, the DIA was the one that held the contract for our SAP
and then sent it out awarded it to the contractor, Bigelow
Aerospace and his subsidiary bass. And that that part has
kind of resonated resonated in much of the reporting over the
last few years. So the DIA, which has been sorely
backlogged, when it comes to the Freedom of Information Act, was
just behind on file on processing the requests filed
for any OS app documents. Os app came out in the beginning of
2018. And that's when the majority of us started filing OS
app specific requests. So the son who framed the the story as
an exclusive, I'm not really sure where that came from, and
nor nor am I taking credit. There were a lot of people that
were getting these documents myself included in the last two
weeks. Why? Well, we all kind of filed somewhat around the same
timeframe. And this is how long it has taken for the DIA to get
to those requests, process the documents and start releasing
them. For the most part most people got shy of 1600 pages. I
think the exact page count was 15 174. And most people got that
other people that that narrowed their requests a little bit more
got a lesser page count. But the most broad, we got 1574 pages of
material that was all about us app. According to them, it was
everything. Or at least that's what through the foil letters
led us to believe. I disagree with that I have already filed
an appeal actually multiple appeals. Based on quite a bit of
evidence, we'll see if we get into it during this during this
presentation. But regardless, just know I have filed appeals
based on this. But they took those 1500 Plus pages, and
dumped them on their reading room after some of us had had
already had them for about two weeks. What happened next was,
of course, a big conspiracy. And I'll just go ahead and throw
this out there guys don't kill the messenger here. But I truly
believe based on conversations on the telephone, not not just
through email. But on the telephone with the Defense
Intelligence Agency, I could tell that the processing of
these requests was a mess. And what they were doing was
potentially cultivating a brewing conspiracy extravaganza
about RCEP. Now for those fans of this channel that have seen
some of my interviews, one of which was with Tony Blair Galia,
you'll see where that misunderstanding to someone who
really didn't have experience with the FOIA or dissecting what
he received, but just kind of assumed quite a bit. And he felt
that he got the DIA to admit to alien material, which was wrong.
And I believe through evidence, not even experience where I'm
trying to say, hey, he just was inexperienced No, with with
actual evidence to refute his claim it through it, you know,
blew it out of the water. But but that is a prime example of
what happens when there is, I would say, a slight carelessness
when filing or excuse me, when when processing the filed FOIA
requests, because they took those 1500 Plus pages, dumped
them on their reading room, put them all under the title
unidentified aerial phenomena. Now, why is this kind of
surprising? Why
does this even matter? Well, for the last few years, the
Department of Defense and the DIA has stood by that, although
eventually they admitted some of the material utilized UAP
information in their report, likely that Kitt Green report I
just showed you, the scope of the program had nothing to do
with UFOs and UAP. Now, again, don't kill the messenger. But
based on the evidence, I actually feel that's true. But
regardless, like take my opinion out of it, that's the DoD
stance, you can take that as as as you want. But that is the
Department of Defense's stance, it's been a messy message. I
will not defend their messaging. I don't endorse what they say.
But rather, that is what they say. So when they put this on
their reading room under unidentified aerial phenomena, I
thought, okay, their messaging has been really messy. And with
me, they have changed that message in the past. And I've
reported on that and written articles about I've done videos
about how they will say one thing, and then amend it later
on, and they'll change it. One time, they said, correct the
record, I think, is they the way that they refer to it as and and
that became kind of a mess in itself. While this was kind of
no different. I reached out the let me see, I think the day
after, or maybe the day of that this popped up that the
unidentified aerial phenomena tab popped up in their reading
room and had not existed before. And I asked the DIA is Public
Affairs Office, and also the Pentagon who generally speaks on
UAP issues? Hey, what's going on? Are you guys now changing
your tune? Can you please give me an amended statement? If so,
if not, what is going on? Because out of the 15 174 ish
pages, you only had less than 40 that that dealt with UAP and
UFOs. So and again, don't kill the messenger. You guys can
download all those documents. See for yourself. There's a lot
of stuff about advanced aerospace, but nothing about UAP
UFOs. So what gifts Why would you put it in that category? And
I wasn't accusatory or trying to say change it. But rather
seeking clarification if they were maybe going to post
something pretty soon that we didn't get everything. But they
were going to post something that would force them to
essentially alter their message and change some statements.
Well, I didn't hear back that day. The next day, something
strange happened. It disappeared. And you can See
here on the right side of the screen, the tab disappeared. I
then got a response from the Pentagon. No surprise there, the
DIA did not speak on their own behalf when it came to the UAP
issue, Susan golf a name that some of you very well know and
love is the one that speaks on UAP issues. She said the
following dia mistakenly selected UAP as the tab label
for those documents, we're working with them to change it
to a more accurate name. As we have said before, while the AOS
HAP contract allowed for research drawn from a wide
variety of sources, including reports of UAP. The examination
of UAP observations was not the purpose of a tip, nor the offset
contract, Susan golf Pentagon spokesperson. So what she called
as a mistake, essentially a mistake, it was changed now, by
the recording of this video, which is roughly about five or
six days or so since since that happened. They have not changed
it. Now I've programmed websites for over 25 years. And I know
that although coding can get complicated, all they had to do
were very few changes to essentially put this into
another folder or rename the current folder since that was
all that was in it meaning OS app material. Now, this is a
pure display of government logic. Why wouldn't you just
name it OS app? There's no confusion with that whatsoever.
You don't got to do UFO UAP unidentified aerial phenomena,
you don't have to do any of that. And if you made a mistake,
fine. You owned up to it. You made a mistake. Let's rename it.
Why wouldn't you just rename it awesome. Boom, done. Instead,
here we are looking at our watches gone? Where's where's
the beef? Where's
the data? Where did it go? Well, it's all gone. Now, don't worry,
because I went ahead and had already received it through FOIA
and put it online. But on top of that, and I'll highlight the
document later on. There was actually one document that
showed up in the reading room, that as far as I know. And I
checked with a few people, not everybody, obviously, because I
don't know the full list. But the few people that I know got
it through FOIA did not actually get this document why I'm not
sure. But I'll go ahead and highlight that to you guys as
well. But all that data on the DIA as I'm recording, this is
gone. But the link in the below description. If you haven't seen
it yet, go ahead and click on that it'd be able to download
everything. It's still there. So while we go through this deep
dive and go deeper into the documents that were released,
now that you have a bit of the backstory about how this all
kind of unfolded and the controversy that came along with
it. Not that there wasn't enough already. The OS app name itself
has been kind of an Enigma in this conversation. Now the
gentleman that you see on your screen here, Robert Bigelow, up
here, Luis Elizondo here Dr. Hal put off here Senator Harry Reid,
the late Senator Harry Reid here. And kind of the newcomer
in the conversation somewhat newcomer Dr. James McCaskey, a
name we've known for many years, never saw never heard from until
late last year, when he came out with the skinwalkers at the
Pentagon book authored by himself, Dr. Column Kelleher and
George Knapp. So these are the gentlemen that really have
spearheaded defining what OS app was. Robert Bigelow was the head
of Bigelow Aerospace and the subsidiary bass, he was given
the contract of offset by the DIA, Luis Elizondo didn't talk
about OS app until OS app became known. Then he said he didn't
want to talk about it, because he didn't have any part of it. I
can respect that. But there has been some controversy since
then. And some question marks about exactly did he have a role
in it? Did he not? So on and so forth? And yes, I do believe
that there are question marks depending on those quotes,
because I can see the social media bashing, as I say that,
that there's no confusion he has been open. It's not about the
fact that he has or has not been open, but rather, the
contradictions are palpable when it comes to his connection or
lack thereof to Ossip. But regardless, he has spoken of an
about it periodically, but says he played no role in it, and
generally doesn't like to speak to it. Doctor, how put off was
one of the main contractors behind it. He worked for bass,
and according to him was the one that created the topics. For the
reports the technical reports created under OS app, Senator
Harry Reid, he was the one that got the money. He was along with
Daniel Inouye and Ted Stevens. Those three senators were the
ones that essentially got the money over to the DIA to fund OS
app. The rest was history. And Dr. Lane. James McCaskey was the
DIA front he was the one that was the director of OSS AP on
the DIA side. Dr. Colum Kelleher who I did not picture here or,
because I won't talk about a much. But I know he's kind of
gotten on the scene a little bit with the publishing of this
book. And then prior, he was well known for his NIDS research
and so on. But Dr. Column, Kelleher was kind of known as,
essentially the director on the on the on the private sector
side,
the bass side for OS app. We'll go ahead and dissect all of what
those gentlemen did with OS app. And we'll see kind of who's the
closest with the definition now why am I laughing? Because the
definitions for OS app from these gentlemen differ. They
actually don't align. They contradict each other a lot.
This book here, not saying it's right or wrong, but really threw
a monkey wrench into the wheel of the story that I was actually
becoming more and more comfortable with Mr. Luis
Elizondo, kind of put a monkey wrench if you really read it,
and you really match up the claims. It kind of, I will say
messed it up. Now, I'm not saying it's right, not saying
it's wrong, but rather it messed it up. Nobody can. Nobody can
hide from that fact that the contradictions, again, are
incredibly palpable when you match up everything in this. Now
I'm gonna start with some of your favorite. The nevermind.
I'll start with, I'll start with the DOD. First, I was going to
make a joke I decided not to. But this is the stance on offset
from the Pentagon from the DOD. It's a little bit long, but for
the audio version, I think it's worthwhile reading again, this
is a culmination of numerous statements that the DoD then
combined for a kind of a massive statement about the program
massive is kind of an overstatement. But this is kind
of a very lengthy expose a of what a tip slash OSS AP was,
according to the DOD. The purpose of the advanced
aerospace threat Identification Program, or a tip was to
investigate for an advanced aerospace weapon system
applications with future technology projections over the
next 40 years and to create a center of expertise for advanced
aerospace technologies. The goal is to help understand the threat
posed by unconventional or leap ahead aerospace vehicles and
technologies that could have national security implications
for the United States. The program commenced in fiscal year
2008 with $10 million appropriated in the defense
supplemental appropriation act, dia awarded a contract to a sole
bidder, Bigelow Aerospace, advanced space studies or bass.
The contract was known as the advanced aerospace weapon system
applications program. Now, how do I read this as somebody who's
researched government programs, it's kind of straightforward.
I'm not saying it's accurate, I'm saying it's straightforward.
They are differentiating between a tip and offset how I how I
dissect this is through the defense supplemental
appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2008. A tip was created out
of that as a DIA program, obviously, oversight, which will
be at OSD. And part of that program created a contracts that
was sent out, awarded two bass, that part was known as the
advanced aerospace weapon system application program. Now, why I
dissect it like that, just so you guys are aware, and anybody
can verify this. There are various programs or essentially,
titles that are given to efforts in this example, a tip, and in a
budget, you have that on a line item. But underneath that, you
can have multiple contracts sent out under that portfolio, that
header that headline, that program name, whatever you want
to call it. But But essentially, there could be multiple, how I
dissect this is it's kind of no different except there's just
one contract that was known as OSS, AP, and other ones where
there's multiple, they would have multiple potential program
names. And again, that's not true. In every instance, I'm
just saying, if you look at budgets, you can see that kind
of stuff, where things are contracted out. And you'll have
different contractors doing different parts of a portfolio
or whatever you want to, again, call it, but that is slated to
have X amount of millions or 10s of millions or hundreds of
millions of dollars, and they contract out certain things. As
a result, that agency will get the deliverables from each of
those contracted agencies and outlets. They'll send the
reports back or research back or whatever that contract is. And
there you go. Then you have all this research done that's
collected by the agency. And this particular one a tip I feel
based on their outline here is just kind of that dia LEAD
program and initiative. And under that all SAP was created
to get these technical reports and they farm that out to bass,
and the rest was history.
Going back to the statement, this is from again the Pentagon
on offset. The contract goal was to study 12 technical areas
lift, propulsion control, armament signatures reduction
materials configuration, power generation temporal translation,
human effects human interface and technology integration. The
contract Dora identified and worked with academics and
scientists to produce technical reports and developing the
reports and exploring how to create a center of expertise.
The contract allowed for research drawn from a wide
variety of sources, including reports of UAPs however, the
examination of UAP observations was not the purpose of a tip.
The first 26 reports were completed by late 2009. The
defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Act for Fiscal Year 2010,
included an additional $12 million for the program, and 12
additional reports were produced. A total of 38
technical reports were delivered, the list is below.
All of the reports are either classified or marked for
official use only only a few have been released to the
public. Now we know that last part obviously isn't true. But
this was this was probably about eight months or so ago when this
when this was set out to the general public. But we know now
the reports have with the exception of one been released.
After review in late 2009, it was determined that the reports
were of limited value to dia the department terminated a tip when
funding for the program ended in 2012. Again, Susan golf Pentagon
spokesperson that is the DoD stance. One very quick note
before I move on these citations to the Defense Appropriations
Act and a supplemental appropriations bill and so on. I
have driven myself nuts trying to figure out what line item
they would come from. I can't find any I've asked the Pentagon
going all the way back to 2018. When that statement was first
sent out by then Pentagon spokesperson major Adria Harris
could not be successful that either pretty much fell on deaf
ears, I've stopped trying. Probably after about a year and
a half to two years of of trying and look through the bills.
There's hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages, couldn't
find anything. So I invite you all to look to try and deduce
it. It's not as easy as just trying to find references to a
tip or OS app or both. Rather, it's hidden in some other line
item. Who knows. Now that was the DoD stance and going back to
the to the screen of gentleman that I showed you and kind of
how everything differs. This is Dr. Hal put off. And when he was
lecturing in Las Vegas in June of 2018, he addressed the
difference between a tip and offset. Let me quote him, people
have had 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 system application program is the
actual name of the program. But a tip was the nickname it went
by. And again, that was Dr. Hal put off. So to him, it was
simply a nickname. This is also reflected in Senator Harry
Reid's 2009 letter. But I didn't get that from the DoD statement.
Again, it seemed like the eighth tip was kind of that umbrella
program with all that being the contracted out portion. Doctor
how put off says ATF didn't essentially exist. It was just a
nickname for our effort known as OS app. Fine, not saying it's
right or wrong, but that's his stance. Luis Elizondo addressed
this in July of 2018.
And he explained the difference between a tip and OS app in his
words, it would be disingenuous for me to simply say, well, a
tip is really all SAP. Well, it evolved from OS app, but it is
not OS app. And I think the documentation that is beginning
to come out into the public forum, people are beginning to
realize that no idea what documentation is referring to
other than some leaked documents and reports. And that's fine,
but it really didn't make, in my opinion, anything more clear,
but rather much more messy. But the point here is that he's
saying ASA Ossip, and a tip are not the same, they are
different, and he draws a distinct and firm line in
between the two during one of my interviews and conversations
with him. I asked Mr. Elizondo about the contradiction with Dr.
Put off and his labeling that it was a nickname. He said that
that was not accurate, didn't expand on it beyond that said it
wasn't accurate. So here we have people that were intimately
involved, according to them, but they don't even agree on what
the relationship between OS app and a tip really was. So that
forces us, the researchers, a curious minds, to essentially
seek other ways to try and figure that out. For me, it's
the FOIA, because when you're dealing with a primarily
unclassified program, and that's not just through evidence, which
evidence supports this, but for those who like to take Senator
Harry Reid at his word, he says, over 80% of it was unclassified
and open. And he said that to New York Magazine, I never
understood that nobody has ever asked him to clarify. But
regardless if that is true, 80 plus percent is unclassified.
Why is there that much confusion, and through FOIA, it
shouldn't be all that difficult, other than the extraordinarily
long wait times by the DIA, but it shouldn't be that difficult
to figure out. So that's what we did. And I say we just because
again, I know I'm not alone in this, nor am I trying to take
credit. So I want to make sure that others out there to name a
few Alejandro Rojas, Jack Brewer, Mark Sokoto, the those
are a couple names that are sticking out off the top of my
head, that are posting documents, there's quite a few
others. So there's nothing unique about one person getting
this but rather, this was sent to a lot of people in response
to their requests that were that were filed in various ways. So
what I did when I received those more than 1500 pages, I started
dissecting them. And by doing that, for me, the most
appropriate way to do it is how I'm going to dive even deeper
into the story with you all, and that is doing them and going
through them and going through them in chronological order. And
that's what I did first when I published them online, and so
what we'll do is we'll break them down in chronological
order. That's not how they were released. It was a pile of PDFs,
sent throughout numerous emails. And in my case, we're actually
sent through different FOIA cases. So I had to bring them
all together and make sense of it. And so I published them all
online. So that's what we're going to do, we're going to
break down all of that material right now. And I want to start
with the the research documents, there were 38 total. Now the
titles are what you're looking at on the screen. Now, it may be
a little too small to read. But don't worry, it's more of a
visual where this breaks down the 38 technical research
reports, or the dirts, often referred to as the dirts, the
Defense Intelligence reference documents. These are the product
of OS app. And this was revealed to me in a FOIA request in
January of 2019. Not the reports themselves, but rather the
titles. A lot of the titles had leaked before, but that there
was actually a difference in the leaked version. So so there were
there was a little bit of confusion there that was never
really addressed. So what leaked? I'm not sure it was for
the most part, the same. But there were differences and it
wasn't 100% accurate. This obviously was because this came
from the agency outlining to where this came from outlining
to Senator John McCain at the time it was written, what were
the products of OSS app, and that's what you see here.
37 of the 38 of what you're looking at have been released in
this 1500 Plus pages. This one here, if you can read it, number
37, I believe is the missing one. I have filed an appeal for
this. This is state of the art evolution of high energy laser
weapons. That was the title of that there were there was a
public version and unclassified version, excuse me, not public,
but an unclassified version and a secret version. So likely,
there weren't many, many differences other than maybe a
few more details in there with classified information at the
level of secret Other than that, the 37 other ones were released.
Now I'm not going to go through all of them simply because
that's a full video in itself, but I invite you to download
them. There's some highly highly scientific material in there.
And way over my head, I ain't gonna lie, so I'm not even going
to try. But regardless, they're there for you to download, all
of which are at an uncluttered to five level now officially
released, I'm going to come back to that slide actually, that's a
little bit out of place. So what I did on that page, again,
linked below, if you're watching on YouTube, if you're listening
on the podcast, find the show notes, you'll be able to go
ahead and download all of the dirt papers, all 37 of them in a
zip file, or one by one, whichever you prefer. On the
screen. If you're watching this, it will look like this. So
you'll be able to download everything. The one dirt that I
will talk about, however, is that Dr. Kitt green one, I want
to go back to it. I've already touched on it already. But what
I did not mention was that it had already leaked before. And
this was published by Popular Mechanics, and had already kind
of circulated a little bit. It wasn't the exact dird Be because
there were differences which I'm going to show you right now.
minor ones, but one of which I think was of note. But
regardless, the title was different. You can see here, the
official version anomalous acute and subacute field effects on
human biological tissues, versus the leaked version, clinical,
medical, acute and sub acute field effects on human dermal
and neurological tissues, obviously, much more of a
handful here. So my guess is this was a draft. That's what
I'm guessing that maybe what leaked was was one of those
first drafts or maybe this is what they sent to DIA and dia
maybe edited it down a little bit changed the title, I don't
know. And Dr. James McCaskey, I can't get a hold of him doesn't
return messages. So sadly, I'm just kind of left to speculate a
little bit, but regardless wanted to at least make note
that this had been around before as being published by the
Popular Mechanics. So what I did was I started comparing the two
just out of curiosity, the formatting was different, which
created a pretty drastic page count difference. But it appears
that there weren't major structural differences. except a
few that I noted here, the advanced aerospace weapon system
applications program or OS app, those references were actually
all taken out. And I don't know why this will obviously, if you
look at the list of 38 reports, definitely stuck out. Number
one, it it was the only one that dealt with UAP. It's the only
one that mentions it at all. And UFOs as well, deals with all
sorts of crazy stuff like radiation burns, and brain
damage, and all sorts of things that happen to the human body
after coming into contact with UFOs. Well, in the leaked
version, os app was referenced, I believe, four times, and the
official version, all the OS app references were stripped out.
Now the cover page remained. I'll show you the cover in a
second. But why why was that you can see here, the first one here
that showed you this is 23 of the leaked version 10 of the
official, the footnote strips out the OSS app reference.
Here's another one. Inside what is not addressed in this review,
again, this was from the leaked version. We are aware of claims
that some new and emergent systems may be intended to cause
harm, and thus even be an intended weapon system. We make
no attempt here in to validate any claims. That is certainly
the overarching goal of the advanced aerospace weapon system
applications program, but not of the study.
You didn't attempt to verify any claims in this study. That's how
I took that I don't I've read it 100 times trying to figure out
is he talking about claims of this being weapon systems? But
no, I think that regardless, even if he was maybe referring
to trying to validate claims being weapons systems are not.
It's clear, he didn't validate any of the claims. And as
someone on social media have pointed out, namely Stephen
Green Street, video journalist from the New York Post, host of
the basement office, I know he's coming out with a new season.
credit to him on on this level of digging, he went to the
sources that Dr. Kitt green used, and saw that a lot of them
I won't say all of them, but a lot of them were using National
Enquirer, and like an Australian Penthouse magazine, very
questionable sources to create such an extraordinary claimed
document about effects of UAP and UFOs. On the human body.
Would you jump to the National Enquirer and and and essentially
smart magazines to get your sources? Well, that's what this
report does. It cites reports that he's using as evidence and
And that is their sourcing. So when you trace back where the
stories are coming from, again, you have a lot of National
Enquirer and Penthouse magazine and Australia and so on
references, and Stephen Green Street made, I think it's like a
two minute video. And I was contemplating getting permission
to show it in this video I decided not to, because I think
there may be like some copyright issues that I didn't want to
deal with using it. But he uses different clips, and visuals and
so on and clearly shows how the Syria quote unquote serious news
coverage of this is missing a major piece of the story, which
is the sourcing. So he says it right here that he's not
verifying anything, any of the claims. And then when you go
back even further, you realize the claims likely can't be
verified. So does that give it scientific merit? I'm not a
scientist. So I'll let you guys decide. Going back to that
report, though. No attempt to validate these claims. That is
certainly the overarching goal of the OSS app, but not of the
study. You can see here in the official version that was
stripped out. So he just validate, no attempt here and to
validate any claims, see that here, and then a period, no
reference to Asa. I don't know why. It's an unclassified
document. And it's an unclassified program. So there's
really kind of no reason. Here's another one, the material does
not rise to the quality of the initiative of this advanced
aerospace weapon system application program, in which
this paper serves as one of several dozen analytical
examples, official version is stripped out. Now, why do I
point that out? Why do I think it's important? Well, for the
same reason, the Popular Mechanics felt it was important
to point out those references. And so for the fact that they
felt the need to in I believe, yeah, 2020. Popular Mechanics
felt the need to point out the references and numbered them on
four different occasions off SAP was mentioned, essentially
drawing the line between UFO and UAP research to OS app. How is
it that Popular Mechanics felt that it was important, but on
the official version, all of those were stripped to me there,
there seems to be a reason why I don't think that that's just
editing. And if it is, well, that's, that's great. I'm
looking forward to somebody saying that. But regardless,
though, what happened to the references? Was there an
intended separation between that report and OS app? I don't know.
But clearly, something was going on for them to strip out all of
the references. The only other dirt I will point out is the one
on the Drake Equation. Very interesting to put in there with
advanced aerospace technology. I don't have an explanation on why
doesn't mention UFOs or UAP. But obviously, calculating
intelligent life in the universe was the the aim of this. Why was
it in here? Don't know. It's interesting nonetheless. But
none of the other reports dealt with UFOs or UAP.
As I mentioned, they are on advanced aerospace technology,
and it very much matches up to the DoD is explanation of what
the scope was. So the majority will call it 35. of the 37. Were
exactly in the scope of what the DoD said OSAP was all about two
other ones. Absolutely intriguing. When you dig deeper,
the Drake Equation still a question mark for me, I don't
know. But the Kitt green one really makes you wonder, why our
National Inquiry, National Enquirer, and penthouse sourced
stories, finding their way into government research. I don't
know. And if you I was going to do a segment on this, and I
decided that, number one, it's beating a dead horse. But number
two, there's so much to it, to sit down and yet again, show how
the story has changed over the last three plus years. And when
the New York Times and politico led the charge on telling us all
about a tip, and $22 million, and bass and metamaterials this
and UFOs that now that the evidence is starting to surface,
it's a completely different picture. And I don't want to
name names because I'm not trying to make enemies here. But
when you look at some of the interviews that are done about
this and people with authority speaking on it, and and
essentially talking about how this was a UFO research program
three plus years ago, they were saying that, but now it's no
they couldn't say UFOs but it's the technology around UFOs. That
all sounds great, but that hasn't been the story. And in
fact that a tip $22 million thing. Well, according to Dr.
James McCaskey, the director of the ASA program, it was all
wrong. That money never went to a tip. He said that there was
some a tip that was in the Pentagon. That's Luis Elizondo
is connection. But it was his program that got the $22
million. And if you read skinwalkers, at the Pentagon,
which I have right here, it's been been been around my desk
for a while now, because I keep looking looking for things. When
you read that book, you realize that there are huge
contradictions. And so what people are doing, I think, in
this conversation is simply moving the goalposts, those that
are intimately involved in the programs, moving the goalposts
and changing their explanations, essentially, changing the
narrative to fit the evidence, but also those that have
followed the story, which is not helpful. Now, I opted not to do
a breakdown of all of that, because the believers that hate
me,
are simply still going to hate me. Nothing I produce, nothing I
put out there will change their mind and those that are
interested in the evidence. This is why I'm giving a short blurb
about it is that I invite you now that once we go through this
evidence, and you guys have a better understanding, as we go
through this deep dive of the documents, then you will be able
to juxtapose that evidence, and what people are saying, and if
you feel that the government and the intelligence community has
created a massive conspiracy and fraudulently created these
documents as a cover to hide and shield, what they wanted, which
was UFO research, then that's great. I would be very
interested in that. And the evidence to support that
conclusion? Or is it potentially that sweetheart deal thing that
I've talked about now for years, where money was allocated for
something aerospace research, to essentially take money from that
program, and do what certain individuals in the DIA and in
the private sector wanted to do? That is a huge possibility. It
happens all the time, I have a video on this very channel where
I really dug in. So in lieu of just doing that all over again,
and adding another hour to this video. I invite you guys to now
really, once we're done here, really digest the evidence, the
unclassified level across the board of what this all is, and
see what people are saying and see if it matches up. Because
still, I don't think it does, as I mentioned, and I'm going to go
back a few to a slide, forgive me clicking through this a
couple times. But before we get into the documents, I want to
show you one redaction that you're going to see a lot. So in
lieu of me going over it every time. You're going to see
redactions that are cited to 10, United States Code section 424.
That's disclosure of organizational and personal
information exemption for specified intelligence agencies,
namely, be one of that section for the DIA. In plain English,
what this is, is covering up connections, names, personal
information, anything that identifies things to the DIA,
this particular statute exempts the information, and it allows
them to omit it. To my surprise, the dirt authors are an example
of that in these documents, but the dirt authors had been
released before not via a leak, but rather my FOIA requests. So
why they felt the need to redact them. I don't know. That's one
of the silliness is of the FOIA. But regardless, that is what
you're going to primarily see. So I wanted to go over that in
the FOIA, which is five United States Code section 552. That is
exemption B, six, and B. Six is that personal information,
essentially, it's the same thing. But this gives them a
little bit more leeway to, to redact information to protect
dia assets, and people and so on. So as I mentioned, the
website that is linked below is all in chronological order
really helps make these documents make sense, but also
help you understand the picture. That's how we're going to, we're
gonna go through this. One of the first things that is on
there, the first thing was from August 22 2008. This was the
original contract solicitation, or the bid solicitation that was
put out there on the the Federal Business Opportunities website
or fbo.gov. Since then, it's been rebranded to Sam I believe
it is sam.gov. But that is one of the first documents that you
can download. It's been publicly available for some time, nothing
new to report here, but rather it's just was in the material
the DIA released. I was just talking about the silliness of
the full Get in some of the redactions, you can still on the
get through the Wayback Machine, the FBO site, but also on Sam,
you can actually find this to sam.gov. The point of contact,
who was the DIA person, Jennifer Silvestri. She's still listed on
there, you can see all this information you had on the foyer
release, they exempted all under that, that US Code that I had
referred to you guys over why they do that I have no idea.
It's publicly available information. I'm not hacking
anything doing anything sinister. It's open and public
to everyone. Yet they felt the need to redact it. Who knows
why. Next document in the dump was September 22 2008. This was
essentially the solicitation and contract order. For the bass
awarded contract you see here.
This was the one who got the bid. They got $10 million. You
can see that here. And what this document does is break down what
they had to do. And here's another page of that particular
form. Some of those redactions are silly, we know who some of
these people are just by publicly available information.
However, skipping down here, this is what the contractor or
in this case bass was supposed to deliver. So what they do is,
you can see here, please see continuation page for line item
details. Because there were a lot they broke it down into a
attached schedule. And this was going to outline what baths for
the $10 million. And yes, 10 million, don't worry, put a pin
in that, I'll get you to 22 million, but what they were
supposed to deliver for that. So the $10 million bought the DIA,
all of this that you see on your screen here that included
Bigelow Aerospace advanced Space Studies. Let me see here monthly
status reports from 22, September 2008, to 29, September
2009, project manage management plan for tasks. And then it
refers back to two other line items, research report for
tasks, so on comprehensive integrated threat assessment,
travel, accounting, appropriation, other direct
costs, which some of these line items, again, you can see our
blur redacted before as essentially protecting corporate
information so that his competitors can't go in and see
how they broke down the money. Option year. Yeah, so this, this
breaks down the monthly status reports. And that this first
contract was was gonna go you can see here for 2008 to 2009,
then the option year, the option was after the first year, they
can take an option to do one other one. And I believe by the
paperwork, they can do five total years. So it wasn't
supposed to be kept after the second year. But rather, they
just didn't see value in it. But it outlines that the first
option year would begin in 2009, and go to 2010, and so on and so
forth. So it goes on from there. What I want to outline for
excuse me profile on this particular document is down here
you see this page two of 51, page three of 51. There were
only these these essentially three pages in this contract,
the 51 page number, I'm not sure I appealed this as well. Because
if we're missing those 48 other pages or so where are they and
what did they say? So we have somewhat of an idea? Is it a
mistake? Did they use a template and this is an indicator of a
rushed process? Quite possibly, there's no way around that. But
and the reason why I say that is it ends halfway on the page here
and ends with other which most outlines like this do when it's
at the end. But pages four through 51 likely may be
something else entirely. So not a breakdown of their schedule
and reports and essentially the deliverables but something else.
I found some some examples of it. It's kind of unfair to try
and think that this would be exactly the same. So regardless,
I appealed saying, hey, it looks like you guys ignored these
pages and did not give them to me. So we'll see what what comes
out of that appeal. December 16 2008, this file comes up.
It's a PowerPoint presentation, advanced aerospace weapon system
applications contract status. The contract number you see
there H H M 402 Dash 08 Dash c dash 0072. That was known as the
identifier for OSS app. It's on the contract if you look at it,
and again dated 16 December of 2008 all unclassified and this
If you follow along the chronology was not too long
after just a couple of months after the OS app started, it was
awarded and started advanced unconventional aerospace weapons
system technical studies, threat projections through 2050
timeframe, not extrapolations of current technology, in the
following areas lift propulsion control, all of this is very
much the same as what we've already gone over. So all SAP
was supposed to be forward looking at at the technology of
the future.
Another page in that same slide presentation in December,
initial contract status brief was given to and then a name
redacted on 10 November, subject was raised by Senator Reid and a
meeting with redacted on 13th November. So just a couple of
months in Senator Reid is already showing interest in what
is going on with this program that he funded. I will say, but
I'm not saying that it just never happens. It's not really
common from what I've seen to have sitting senators like
follow that closely what's going on with a program on that level.
Now, let me stress on that level. Of course, they follow
developments, they get briefed themselves, sometimes they held
hearings, and so on. But in meetings like this four, out of
all of the classified and unclassified things that dia are
doing, he just happens to show interest in the one contract
that he helped fund that got awarded to the corporation that
was in his great State of Nevada. Coincidence? Again, it
leads into that sweetheart deal thing, why was he so interested?
Maybe it was just a curiosity, and that's fine before you sent
me hate mail. That that's fine. If it was just curiosity. All
I'm saying is there's not a whole lot of examples where
senators are doing just that, in these types of situations.
Bigelow Aerospace advanced Space Studies submitted complete
program management plans in the 12 technical areas on 21
November for dia comment and approval. So obviously the
contract was playing out. They were figuring out what those
dirt reports essentially what would become the dirt what they
were going to be. technical approaches being implemented by
contractor are established traditional techniques with an
intended scope of contract. Technical Report deliverables
will be under subcontract within two months and completed within
seven months. equal amount monthly payments to Contractor
have commenced and allowed for research subcontracts to be put
into place quickly, obviously, referring to the dirt authors,
difficulties and establishing a research effort from the ground
up, staff management consultants, clearances
facilities, is noted in this PowerPoint presentation as a
challenge. program management plans 12 PMPs are very good to
excellent. I wonder how they determine like what's very good
and what's Excellent. But I don't know that multiple reports
and each technical area within the contracted period. In
general, each PMP has two to four feasibility of technical
concept studies, suggested comparison of the aerospace
vehicle concept with observable data review literature for
recent concept proposed by academia and national labs,
information exchange with government contractors in the
aerospace and electronics sectors. So obviously, this
PowerPoint, I didn't go over every slide. So those are just
some mixed pages on some highlights. But again, you can
download the full presentation, but obviously at this stage of
the game, still ramping up, still figuring things out, still
moving forward. jumped to January 5 2009. This was a
different type of document in the dump. You can see the
highlighted section there, Senator Reed visit to redacted
five January 2009. So Senator Reid coming back to likely
somewhere in the DIA. If I were to venture a guess, by the way,
this is the defense warning office. One of those silly
things that I don't know why they redact but we do know from
the leaks that the defense warning office was the office
within the DIA that that led this effort. The purpose of this
particular memo to provide redacted with the current status
of the advanced aerospace weapon system application contract.
Should Senator Reid raise the topic. This obviously
establishes that read based on that previous document already
has this interest. He's already raising it just a couple months
and and obviously is showing a big interest. So before his
visit, looks like about three days before their briefing,
whomever is going to be involved in that Eating or at least one
of them about offset what they're doing. And just in case
that Harry Reid shows an interest in any raises the
topic, which I found interesting that they went to this level of
planning, because he probably indicated he was very interested
in it. Jumping down to the talking points, I'm skipping
stuff again that we've already kind of went over but I invite
you to read it all. Talking Points, reviewed the PMPs and
rated them as very good to excellent redacted granted bass
approval to proceed with the technical reports may be likely
McCaskey there, but obviously a name.
Facility clearance the Defense Security Service conducted a
site inspection on the bass facility on 17 December 2008.
The inspection was completed satisfactorily, and the facility
clearance process is expected to be completed shortly. Contract
is on track. The contract is currently proceeding on schedule
and within cost. The technical reports will be under
subcontract by February of 2009 and completed by the end of July
2009. So those were the the polling point that they wanted
to prepare for January of 2009. For reads visit fast forward to
May 4 2009. Here's another visit by Senator Harry Reid visit to
the director of the DIA and the same thing to provide redacted
with the current status of the advanced aerospace weapon system
applications contract. Should Senator Reid raise the topic. So
here months later, they remain prepared a lot of those things
and points and everything are the same. A lot of the same
background information anyway, Senator Reid sponsored language
in the July 28, supplemental appropriation bills so on and so
forth. And it breaks down everything. The same memo and
may 4 the establishment of a fiscal year 2010 University
grant program for advanced aerospace research and
experimentation, focusing on the best grad schools in the US has
commenced. That's pretty cool. Now I don't pretend to say that
I've listened to every single interview that those connected
to OS app have given. But that seems new to me. I don't know
that doesn't ring a bell. So I'm not entirely sure what that's
referring to or what they did at all. Again, back to the memo.
This contract is providing a unique opportunity for dia to
both understand very advanced aerospace related technology and
to determine its threat potential to the United States.
As the effort expands in the future with one worldwide
calibrated data collection to world class expert analysis
three, university and national lab collaboration for
information exchange with major aerospace and electronic firms
and five enhanced oni and Neysa cooperation. Dia will be the
integrating force behind the development of a center of
excellence in the area of advanced aerospace weapon system
applications. The continued support and guidance of Senator
Reid and Senator in your way is crucial to the success of this
endeavor.
noting here that on May 8, these two documents naval labeled
briefs you can download I'm just gonna go over one slight
differences which explains the page count difference, but
essentially they were advanced aerospace weapon system
application contract status reports or rather PowerPoint
presentations. You can see here again eighth may 2009. Overview
support for contract was mentioned by Senator Harry Reid
and a meeting with redacted on 13th November 2008. So clearly
they are continuing that awareness that Senator Harry
Reid is actively interested in this difficulty in establishing
a research effort from the ground up staff management
consultants, clearances facilities have been quickly and
successfully resolved. So remember that challenge that I
mentioned to you just months prior? Now it is listed as a
overcome challenge. The immediate way ahead, begin
publishing the 24 technical report deliverables as soon as
possible. Continue to build research database architecture,
initiate University national lab research grant solicitation
program, ensure that this special compartmentalize
information personal security clearances continue to be
quickly and successfully processed. And that Skiff
certification is granted Tabas begin processing of lower level
clearances through disco as part of focused counter intelligence
efforts. So this was their plan for the future as of May of
2009. Now remember, we've set up such a interest by Harry Reid
here the dirts haven't been delivered yet. But they're
saying let's do this fast. Now. Here we're going from May of
2009. To the next month, June 24 2009. This is the infamous
Harry Reid letter requesting SAP status for essentially OS app
which he nicknamed a tip or erroneously a ITP, which was
essentially copied and pasted to numerous other documents. But
how he broke it down advanced aerospace threat and
identification program, and then incorrectly put a ITP instead of
a tip. Regardless, though, that name kind of stuck. But this is
when He submitted his request to the Deputy Secretary of Defense,
namely William Lind the third to give it SAP status. Now, on a
side note, I'm not going to go too deep into that letter, but
I've done a full video breakdown on the mystery behind that
letter. There is a big story behind it, meaning, there's a
lot of detail and very weird occurrences about it. So make
sure if you're interested, I'll put that in the show notes
below. If you're interested in that letter, definitely take a
look. Because my research on that went well over a year or
two, trying to track it down. And I showed ample proof that it
seems like that That letter was just gone and just vanished. So
take that for what it's worth. I'm kind of following up on one
other lead. Hopefully I'll have an update for you guys. But
check out that video if you're interested. So that was sorry,
here's I flipped over I want to make sure I have the dates right
so that was June of 2009. Jumping to a PowerPoint
presentation contract status on August 24th 2009. performance by
Bigelow Aerospace advanced Space Studies has been excellent and
they are in full compliance compliance with aerospace
contract and then it gives the AAS HAP contract. Extensive
monthly status reports received 12 project management plans
received and executed 26. detailed research reports twice
the minimum requirement received by 30 June 2009. Reviews of
reports have been overwhelmingly positive, recommend that dia
should go forward with the option you're one with bass
subject to available funding $12 million for the continuation of
that contract by dia has been submitted in the fiscal year
2010 defense budget funding likely to be approved. Remember
I said I'd get you to 22 million. So you're number one 10
million year option year number one, technically, your number
two would be 12 million for a total of 22. Going forward in
that presentation contracting officer will extend this
contract through 30. September, in order to use fiscal year 2010
funds and option year one extension will be at no
additional cost to the government. I think that was
just a legal thing. That way they could keep bass going
through that timeframe to get to fiscal year 2010. And just
immediately continue with with the funding.
Bass has indicated that they are willing to operate at risk and
option year one until fiscal year 2010 funding arrives
essentially bass was saying, Hey, we're pretty comfortable,
you guys are going to get it and keep us on it was already stated
as such. So they were just going to keep going and that Robert
Bigelow would essentially front the bills until they would start
paying again from fiscal year 2010 funds, the funds the joys
of government funding and contracts. Option your one
deliverables. CLI and by the way is contract line item number so
that calls back to those contracts that I was talking
about. And the different breakaway line items 12 monthly
status reports 12 area management plans delivery by
June of 2010. Where I want to also note I appealed this as
well. Even though there are periodic PowerPoint
presentations inside dia, which is one of which we're looking at
now from August of 2009. These contracts stipulate that VAs was
supposed to be doing monthly status reports of their own and
submitting them to dia. So what you're looking at is the DIA
status report likely. This is a guess, created by James
McCaskey. He's very complimentary on bass. I think
that he wanted that contract to continue. But again, just just a
it's just speculation there. But I'm guessing he did the
PowerPoints that we're looking at now. But by the paperwork,
bass would have done monthly status reports submitted to dia,
that dia would take all of those and evaluate meaning McCaskey
and however many people he had working on this team, if any,
and then create these these status PowerPoint presentations
to give to his boss and essentially justify everybody's
paycheck. And why are they getting 10s of million Hands up
dollars. While this is why it's excellent, it's great. They're
they're fulfilling, there's no extra cost here. They're doing
this. They're doing that. It's all great fine and dandy. Let's
keep going. And so that's that's what I see here. But I appealed,
based on this evidence that none of those monthly bass reports
were released. Now I call them bass reports. But yes, they will
be subject to FOIA. Why? Because they are deliverables on a
government contract, not a grant. So they are not
proprietary information, in my opinion, and there is no
indicator here as much as others have tried to claim that some of
that information would remain proprietary. Would portions
remain exempt? Under B four? Yes, they would we see that in
the contract that was that I showed you guys on screen with
the before redactions, generally how the money breaks out. So we
know that $10 million went over there, it's taxpayer money, we
want to account for it in an unclassified setting, but how
then a private contractor divvies up that money, what they
spend it on and so on, there are protections under FOIA that
shields that so that way competitors can't come and spy
and, and so on and so forth. So that is kind of a quick
explanation of that. But but for the information to be entirely
untouchable by FOIA is untrue, if it is in the contract to be
delivered to dia, why, again, taxpayer money, you and I paid
for it if you're in America, if you're in the world, I know you
want to see it anyway. Same presentation, August of 2,024th
of 2009 program management issues redacted will be
transferring to redacted during fiscal year 2010. I am not sure.
Nor will I speculate with that is redacted due to economical
issues will not be transferring. So, I don't know if those are
people or potentially offices or what program will likely become
a sap by June of 2010. So obviously, whomever wrote this
assumed that the DoD would create a sap and knew that Harry
Reid had asked the Deputy Secretary of Defense about it.
Remember that letter went to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. So
how much did it circulate? We don't know. But whoever was
creating these PowerPoints knew darn well the request was in.
And he believed based on an assumption that was wrong. That
OS app would become a sap a special access program that
would essentially give it a lot more access than what I've
currently had. Best option appears to be to move, redacted
and program to redacted during this time.
can also assist redacted in his role as redacted. So we're not
we're not sure who this is. We can speculate, sure, but we have
no idea who these individuals are that are being protected
there. September 2 2009. Here's the amendment of solicitation or
the modification of a contract essentially, option year one.
This was the extension for the $12 million that went here, you
go to Bigelow Aerospace. And then you can see here the
checkmark, this supplemental agreement is is entered into
pursuant to the authority of so on and so forth. So it's a
little hard to read on my screen, I apologize. But here's
kind of the key takeaway. The purpose of this modification is
to a extend the current period of performance to 30, September
2009. Revise option your dates to be one October 2009 to 30,
September 2010. Remember how they said that they were going
to extend at no costs. Essentially, this was the
contract to then push it forward to 30. September, which was the
end of the fiscal year, get it into fiscal year 2010. And then
enter letter C here. Exercise option year one subject to
availability of funds, everybody was pretty confident that the
funds were going to be there. D there's a reference to law if
they are I'm not entirely sure what that is. Not important.
Funds are not presently available for this contract. The
government's obligation under this contract is contingent upon
the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for
contract purposes can be made. No legal liability on the part
of the government for any payment may arise until funds
are made available to the contracting officer for the
contract. And until the contractor receives notice of
such availability to be confirmed in writing by the
contracting officer. You lawyers out there will love all of that
word salad. And then finally, e all other terms of condition
remain unchanged. So plain English, extending the contract
getting additional funds and getting a second year or what
they labeled option. In year one, October 32,009. Here was a
information memo. That was a review of the advanced aerospace
contract deliverables. So now those first sets of dirts came
in. In the memo itself, as a reminder, you made this request
to redacted personnel during a 15 May 2009. Meeting with you
after your meeting with Senator Harry Reid. The goal of the
contract is to identify key technologies and physics
concepts that would support revolutionary aerospace vehicle
research and development. Contracted studies were designed
to provide a prioritized list of technologies concepts that then
would drive detailed focus searches into foreign aerospace
research and development, again, reinforcing this aerospace
research to create essentially these reports on what's
feasible, what could potentially harm us 20 3040 years from now.
So therefore, what should be we be researching? Fast forward in
the memo, eight reviews were performed by other authors
listed in the table? Five were performed by outside reviewers,
including three research staff members at Sandia National
Laboratories. So now, I don't know if you'd consider this
technically a peer review. But it was being reviewed by peer
scientific peers, five of which were, or excuse me, three of
which were staff members at Sandia National Labs. Yes, I
have filed FOIA cases there to try and track down what was what
was the connection was this outside of their official duty,
and they asked for a favor was this official? I don't know. I'm
not aware of anybody ever addressing that, but I'm going
after the documents nonetheless. So if you look a little bit
further into the same metal here October 30. Based on draft
budget guidance, Congress apparently will fund the
contracts option near one at 12 million in fiscal year 2010.
redacted, will use the 26th fiscal year 2009 technical
reports and having bass evaluate potential adversary exploitation
worldwide, select studies amenable to classified
experimental verification by bass and have bass conduct new
classified and unclassified studies with select academic and
industry partners. deliverables are expected in late summer
2010.
I don't see any, I'm just going to point it out. Even I'm not
going to beat the dead horse throughout this I've been trying
not to. But we're at October 32,009, numerous internal dia
documents, and PowerPoint presentations information memos
tying into visitors by a sitting United States Senator, namely
Harry Reid, who was not just kind of a nobody in the US
Senate. And yet not one mention of anything paranormal, Dyno,
beavers, cryptids Skinwalker Ranch UFOs UAAP. Nothing, but
rather exactly like the contract said, they were looking at this
aerospace technology to essentially create the center of
expertise, where we can look and say, okay, look, this seems the
most feasible that in 30 years from now China could have this,
Russia could have this arann could have this. So instead of
sitting back and waiting for it, we should research this. And
since this was a complete failure, we should not research
that. Essentially, this is what I'm taking away from all of this
research and all of this language on what they were
trying to accomplish. And ironically, about ish, 40 years
prior to OS app, there was something called Project
outgrowth. And project outgrowth was a nearly identical study,
looking at forward looking technology and what could
potentially we can see in the future, and so on and so forth.
Very, very similar to offset one of those things that was
researched and project outgrowth controlling a craft with the
power of the human brain. So this type of fringe research, if
it was that is not new, but there's no talk of it in the
status reports, or anything, but rather, it coincides with that
public vision of what OS app was. And when I say public, it
was publicly posted in 2008. And that's what all these documents
are kind of, in my, in my opinion, showing that memo also
had attached some of the reviews, I invite you to read
them, I'm not going to go through them, obviously glowing
reviews by whomever they chose to review, whether that was
planned or a true peer review. I don't know. This particular
document, we're going to assume it's November of 2009. This
particular one was not a member I said earlier in this
presentation. There was one that was not sent out via A FOIA this
was that document. I don't know why it could just have been an
oversight. I'm just not aware of anybody, including myself
getting it through FOIA, but it popped up on the reading room.
Now it's deleted, but I had snatched it and put it on the
website, so you will be able to download it in the link below.
Based on the information within it's probably about November
2009. In this timeframe, review of Special Access Program
request. Senator Harry Reid letter to the honorable william
Lind, the third Deputy Secretary of Defense, dated 24, June 2009.
That's the infamous Harry Reid SAP request letter. Key
takeaways from this memo, who was written for Miss Honi, or
honey Smith, who was the director of special programs
within the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for
intelligence. I won't expand on that yet. But maybe you guys can
start filling in the blanks on director of special programs in
Oh Usdi. Now it's called Oh, Usdi and s they have changed the
name. But regardless more on that at a little later date. Key
takeaways from the memo, we cannot find adequate
justification to establish a restricted SAP. So they looked
at Harry Reid's request, looked at what OS app was doing, have
no idea why he requested it. All of the eighth tip, or you can
see here the copy and paste a ITP referencing Harry Reid's
letter. We know that's wrong. All of the AI TP documents
delivered to redacted again, that's where I think DW O is
defense warning office during the first year, fiscal year 2009
were unclassified, as the contractor had yet to establish
a secure facility, and the employees were going through the
vetting process for their clearances. So that entire first
year, they didn't have the proper facility to essentially
house classified material or information.
That that's key, I think I have a slide for it, if not all
pointed out anyway. But just remember that I said that. In
the second paragraph of the reference, Senator very Harry
Reid CITES, quote, The identification of several highly
sensitive, unconventional aerospace related findings that
will require extraordinary protection. While the majority
of the unclassified reports do indeed discuss unconventional
aerospace technologies, we are unaware as to which, if any, are
so sensitive that they require the extra protection provided by
a restricted SAP, we can only assume that these statements are
in keeping with the security and counterintelligence concerns
that are the main focus of the senators letter. So the DA was
clueless on why Senator Harry Reid was asking for SAP status,
they couldn't find any justification for it whatsoever.
Obviously, ultimately shot it down. Here's another November
13 2009 memo very similar to the one I just read to you review a
special access program request. This was for a written for the
director of special programs, Office of the Undersecretary of
Defense for intelligence, likely the same person in that other
memo. Not sure if one was a draft. That's why it didn't come
out through FOIA and then they accidentally dumped it online. I
don't know still trying to figure all that out. But
regardless, still still pointing out here. Dia cannot find
justification to establish a restricted SAP we already went
through that, based on classification levels of current
projected program deliverables. There is insufficient grounds to
classify this open program and voc alternative or compensatory
control measures or establish a restricted SAP. So in other
words, they were looking at this goal and there's no reason for
any of that, even anything closely to a sap classifying
their overall program by derivative means is impractical
given Department of Defense regulation, DOD 50 200.1 Dash
our information security program guidance, no reports produced
thus far extracted, paraphrased or restated information obtained
from previously classified material. Future reports that
contain classified information will be marked and protected
according to the original classifying authority. In other
words, they get the request from Harry Reid, he says give it SAP
status. The reviewers look at all the information it's an
unclassified at this point across the board. There's no
reason for them to classify it, let alone give it SAP status.
They said moving forward if they do go to a classified level,
which they ultimately did with one report, there's still no
reason to justify that as a sap. Going back to the letter
classifying the overall program by original means is in
advisable. information contained in the report is not owned by
Produced by or for or under or control of the US government.
Dia cannot identify any damage that could result from
unauthorized disclosure of publicly available information.
Although the information can loosely be tied to one of the
eligibility criteria for classification, scientific,
technological or economic matters related to national
security, DIA is prohibited from classifying basic scientific
research. And its result unless it clearly relates to national
security, this requirement has not been met. So everything that
they saw was all scientific related, what they considered
basic, let me see to make sure I have that right. basic
scientific research, and all the results that came into it had no
national security risk whatsoever if it went out into
the public. What was also interesting was it it seems like
something that I've pointed out for years, that all the dirt
authors when they leaked out, and I have this in the link
below as well. It's a dirt Research Center, that not only
has all the dirt now, but also the related papers, that pretty
much across the board, the author's had very similar papers
already circulating around. And with Kitt. Green as the example.
What leaked was likely something he had already created or a
draft. So where did the $22 million go if what appeared to
be a lot of these people? The the author's already had the a
lot of this written, and they took what they had already
written, reworked it and out popped a dirt. Do they really
get like a million dollars for that? Or is there something else
going on? So when I read that, and they say that nothing, dia
cannot identify any damage that can result from unauthorized
disclosure of publicly available information publicly available,
meaning everything was already out there in the in the ether
already. Backing up classifying the overall program by original
means is inadvisable. information contained in the
report is not owned by Produced by or for or under control of
the US government. So the reports themselves how I dissect
that, and any attorney can correct me, the reports
themselves are going to be a product of the US government,
hence subject to FOIA. That's why we have them through FOIA.
And no outside corporate approval was needed. The before
exemption again, covers that corporate information. That's
the report itself. However, the information within how I look at
this was all publicly available. So therefore, since the authors
were creating a report at an unclassified level, using
sources, like the National Enquirer, and penthouse, no
light, well, kind of, but like that, where they were pulling
information from outside sources, those outside sources
being public, you can't classify that. Hence the unclassified
label. And then they justify it by saying nothing is connected
to any national security related matter. So you can still pull in
unclassified, publicly available information. But if you
attribute it to a classified something, then fine, the report
would be classified, yet, that is not the case here. So I know
that's a lot. But at least again, it's showing what the
weight of these reports really were to the DIA. And then it
becomes when you start seeing dissection like this internally,
it becomes much more clear why the DIA would say these are a
very little interest to the DIA. If you guys move it out to
another government agency, sure, we can maybe see some value over
there. And we'll get to those documents in a second where it
does cite that. But other than that the DIA had no. No
interest. Last paragraph in this memo. In this or last one I'll
read to you. In the second paragraph of his letter, Senator
Reid cites the identification of several highly sensitive,
unconventional aerospace related findings that will require
extraordinary protection. Although most of the
unclassified reports discuss unconventional aerospace
technology, DIA is unaware of the report containing
information sufficiently sensitive or vulnerable to
require extra protection with either accm or restricted SAP,
very similar to what I just read to you guys on the previous
memo, dia assumes these statements are in reference to
future phases of the program and highlights security and
counterintelligence concern, and so on. So again, I don't mean to
be repetitive, but you can see a lot of these documents very much
overlap. Fast forward now to November 19 of 2009. About a
week later, dia visit with Senator Harry Reid, this one was
at the Capitol building.
You can see in the memo event, objective or intent to provide
the redact acted with an overview of the redacted
authored I m, which is tab one, signed by the redacted in
response to a Usdi. Special Programs tasking to evaluate
Senator Reid's request to place the advanced aerospace threat
Identification Program under a restricted Special Access
Program. Also to prepare the redacted to address any
questions by Senator Reid on the quality and value of the
products produced thus far under the current contract, tab three.
So there's three tabs that are that are mentioned, there's like
attachments. They're not there, but you can easily deduce what
there are tab two would be his letter. tab three would be the
contract that we already went over, so on and so forth, jumped
down background information. Senator Reid's letter was
delivered to the depth SecDef, approximately one month before
all the draft technical reports from the contractor were
received by redacted again, likely the DW well, to our
knowledge, the senator did not receive copies of these draft
reports. Although he was aware of the general topic list. Thus,
we cannot find a direct link between the content of the
reports and his letter, redacted at the request of Usdi. Special
Programs evaluated Senator Reid's letter and could not find
any technical issues addressed in the reports that were
sufficiently sensitive to require the extra protection
associated with restricted SAP. Senator Reid cites the
identification of several highly sensitive, unconventional
aerospace related findings that will require extraordinary
protection. Senator Reid cites the identification of several
highly sensitive, unconventional aerospace related findings that
will require extraordinary protection. Although most of the
unclassified reports discuss unconventional aerospace
technology, DIA is unaware of which ones the senator believes
are sensitive. In other words, dia yet again was clueless a lot
of similar wording here. But obviously, a point that they are
stressing dia position based on the content of the delivered
fiscal year 2009. And expect fiscal year 2010 technical
reports, dia cannot find sufficient grounds under DoD
regulations to establish a restricted SAP. However, the
concerns that Senator Reid raises seem to suggest that the
security and counterintelligence issues are in regard to future
phases of this program, and not necessarily the current contract
effort. If this assumption is correct, then Senator Reid is
looking ahead to a research development and acquisition
effort that lies outside the DoD intelligence community's
purview. This, in turn would argue that any future efforts
beyond fiscal year 2010 When the current contract ends should be
moved under the appropriate DoD entity. I've spoken about agency
purview many, many times before. And going back to the allegation
of Dia at Skinwalker Ranch under our SAP and looking at UAP and
Utah and cryptids and dyno beavers and all that that the
book skinwalkers at the Pentagon alleges, that's not in the
purview of the DIA. And you can see here, they clearly state
that if Senator Harry Reid is taking us out beyond what it is,
and he wants that to be a research, development and
acquisition effort, essentially more on the lines of what we've
heard about our SAT, but just on different topics, like acquiring
UAP data and meta materials. And this that and the other thing,
it's clear, right hear that it would not fit into the purview
of the DIA. Now I'm stretching it there to try and, like get
you to a paranormal research program. I'm stretching that.
That's not what this says. But I mean, that's what it would be if
OSS, Apple was doing all of that. And so it's clear as day
here that the DIA is saying, hey, if that's what he wants,
meaning a research, development and acquisition program, that's
not us.
It's not our purview. So I'm glad to see that because I
wasn't off base with the idea that this type of a program
meaning what OS app is allegedly versus what it it is on paper.
It just wouldn't it's the DEA doesn't do that, especially on
US soil, even through a contractor. So it's a question
that I've asked for years, even to Mr. Elizondo, nobody can
answer it. Nobody could tell me why. And although I did an
interview with a gentleman who worked at Skinwalker Ranch, who
felt maybe there was Some weapon research there on him. That also
was a stretch, but maybe I can start to see something sinister
like that maybe huge maybe? I don't but I'm saying at the time
maybe. And yet nothing. Nobody's been able to answer that
question on how OS app as a paranormal research program, and
and and researching all of the aspects that they've said that
they've done, how that fits into the DIA is purview. And here in
my opinion, is proof of just that that was given to Senator
Harry Reid saying hey, look, that's not what this agency is
about. potential areas of concern in the same memo.
Senator Reid may insist upon keeping a tip efforts at DIA
during a time of considerable disruption to the redacted
assets, due to the BR AC move the and then about a line and a
half of redaction. These issues will make it very difficult for
dia to exercise proper program management. With the redactions
there, I really don't know what they're talking about, nor have
I really dug in to try and figure out what was going on at
this timeframe internally at DIA. But obviously, they were
noting that this was a big concern to even continue it. If
Senator Reid strongly desires the ATF to be placed under a
sap, then doing so within the DOD intelligence community would
be difficult to justify. However, if the focus of the
program were to become more RDA oriented than a sap would be
easier to justify under the current DoD 50 200.1 dash are,
essentially if the scope changed, they started getting
into many more developmental areas in declassified research,
then, yes, a sap may be justified. And that's what they
were saying here. Also, in November 2009, this was undated.
Senator Harry Reid's request to put the advanced aerospace
threat Identification Program under special access protection.
This was a packet that was given during that timeframe to the
deputy Deputy Secretary of Defense for that meeting that
they were having with Senator Reid. So essentially, this was
we'll call it a briefing packet and a lot of the attachments,
you can download it at the website that I link below. A lot
of those attachments we've already gone over, but it was
like a packet that was given to the DEP SEC def, which allowed
him to kind of see that overview. And you'll be able to
go through all of that. This was a data known likely mid to late
2009. I put them at the end because chronologically, I can't
tell you exactly where they fit. But this was another memo that
was released, very much going over a lot of what we already
have. You can see here, this was a breakdown of the advanced
aerospace threat identification program was first sponsored in
fiscal year 2008, defense supplemental appropriation act
by Senators read and anyway, with a $10 million ad, the
purpose of this congressional ad was to investigate foreign
advanced aerospace weapon threats from the President out
to the next 40 years and to build an infrastructure to house
the center of expertise on advanced aerospace technologies,
all of which, what we've gone over on numerous documents, that
seems to be very repetitive, and it is simply because the story
when it comes to those core details really didn't change
internally in these documents. There was never caught a
contract awarded and then something that came out and
went, hey, you know what, we were looking into this advanced
aerospace research, but these Donald beaver sound a lot more
interesting. So we're going to change the scope of the project.
None of that is indicated in any of these documents at all. And
see here on June 24, Senator Reid sent a letter to Deputy
Secretary of Defense Lynn requesting the DoD establish an
alternate compensatory control measure or SAP for this project.
Again, it these timelines are solidified throughout numerous
documents very much coinciding with each other. This last
paragraph, whoever wrote the letter is referenced here in
November 2009, Deputy Secretary of Defense Lynn
and I met with Senator Reid to discuss this program. At that
time, we determined the reports were of limited value to dia.
However, I did suggest that could be of merit to other
organizations and that upon the completion of the DIA contract,
the project could be transitioned to another agency
or component that are suited to oversee the project. So in
November of 2009, they were already telling Reid they
weren't interested. Now this obviously went into Missy all
through 2008 2009 Then fiscal year 2010. So they've let it go
that option year one, but the writing was on the wall, that it
was I'm gonna go kaput. Here's another unknown dated status
report, likely again, mid to late 2009. Again, more evidence
that monthly status reports were received 12 project management
plans received an executed a lot of which were not released, all
of which really were not released under FOIA. I have
appealed all of that contracting officer, you know, this is very
similar to what we've already went over. So I won't go over
again.
And yeah, finishing off very similar points to what we've
already said. Now, going back to you remember that line where I
said that there was an amendment and that amendment to the
contract of the original bid solicitation, there were three
different versions of the offset bid solicitation that you can
all download, you don't have to take my word for it. I'll link
the Wayback Machine link below as well, including I believe
that the sam.gov link is still active. And you can download the
different versions and the changes to that bid solicitation
as it morphed. Since it had been posted, meaning they can amend
things, they can add things that can change things, and so on.
One of the things that they changed in the chronology before
bass ever been on the program was to change that the bitter
whomever one of the prerequisites was that you had
to have an approved facility to house that classified
information. That was a requirement. But remember, those
documents said that bass had yet to receive that approval at all
for their facility in fiscal year 2009. So nothing was
classified. And in fact, if you recall, Robert Bigelow said he
spent his own money to modify his building, in what he says I
believe preparation for metamaterials are something that
he was supposed to get, but never did. All of that made it
seem like wow, he was really investing in this program, and
really wanting to essentially split the cost with the
government. In my opinion, that's a stretch now, because
now one of those amendments was changing that requirement to it
wasn't being required. And it was like how convenient for
Robert Bigelow, before he ever been on the program, that in
August, before he submitted the bid, they change that
requirement, then in this internal documentation, it
reinforces he didn't meet the requirement. He later did,
because he invested his own money. But that wasn't that was
under the guise that he did it to kind of help the government
know, he needed to do that. That was what he needed to do to get
into the classified creation of all of those reports. But what
all of those reports, then translated to was only one in
the 38 dirts. That's the one that's been withheld. Other than
that, he never created any, if option here to option, your
three, option, your four, if they all got executed, there
would be 10s of millions of additional dollars that could
have went in, and by him modifying his building and
getting that classified status, what then he could do was get
more money, but then potentially get a SAP status. And then he
would really be essentially sitting pretty in regards to
information access, financial access for contract extensions,
spending, and potentially have offset moved out of Dia into an
agency that it was more more appropriate for for that r&d
effort, and so on. And you can kind of fill in the blanks that
it potentially could go on for years if they accomplish what
they what they wanted to accomplish. So I'm ending it
there because it really shows what we've been told in a
different light. And remember, I say moving the goalposts. Well,
before that evidence came out, it kind of made it seem like he
was investing in this program with his own money. And he was
under the impression he was going to get material from the
government. But in reality that was a contractual obligation
that he did not meet and per historical evidence that anybody
can cite. They changed that requirement. Conveniently,
miraculously, coincidentally, weeks before he submitted the
bid. So yet again, even more evidence the writing was on the
wall that this was all created for him. So now I end you with
you on where is all of that UFO and paranormal study
information? I know we have the Kitt Green report, but
questionable sourcing at best and publicly available
information. The Drake equation, again, a wildcard. But
everything else fits exactly to what this aerospace research
was. So when you look at the recent interviews, I'll ask you,
and please, you don't have to agree with me. But do you feel
that they
are moving the goalposts? That what was the story in 2007, and
to 2008, or excuse me into 2017 2018 2019, about OS app in
2000, allegedly seven, 2008 and 2009. You've got all these
different stories and all these different years, and they've
morphed over time. What does that mean? A lot of people say,
well, the government is embarrassed about UFOs. Keep in
mind, that's the same government right now, that is getting a
task force that's been set up for quite some time now
disbanded for a bigger effort to investigate UAP. They comment on
UAP. Quite often, they have confirmed UAP videos that have
leaked to the government. It's the same government that people
say is embarrassed to talking about UFOs, that are seemingly
talking a lot about UFOs. So those two things can't go hand
in hand. Some may say, well, they want to cover up their lie,
we'll tell you what, they've already changed their tune on a
couple of different claims before, namely, they said now
they utilized UAP reports, but it wasn't the scope of the
program. So what is it is that the government they didn't want
to get caught in a lie? Or are they changing their their tune?
And so on and so forth? Why won't they just admit that OS
app did this? Or is there a deeper story? And I think that
that's what for me is the most important aspect of this is the
context of what OS app was all about. And when you get into I'm
not going to make the allegation directly. But when you get into
the conversation, and I believe we should have this conversation
about the misappropriation of funds, or a contract that was
given a certain header, and the reality was something else, we
need to talk about that because as much as I love UFO and
paranormal research, and I believe it should be funded, it
should be funded appropriately, because look what happened if
this is true, and they're that this was some secret effort, and
everybody has moved the goalposts, and they're fine with
it now that the evidence is just covered up or whatever. If it's
unclassified, then Bigelow Aerospace has it, they should
release it, because that will show the government is lying.
Right? Why wouldn't Why wouldn't he just do that there's no rhyme
or reason not to. Some have alleged it's proprietary, and
that they're hiding it in the private sector. Okay, well, we
know for a fact it's unclassified. So why not release
it? If he's interested in the transparency, that we should be
interested in seeing that transparency, and getting all of
the reports? Essentially, you and I paid for it if you're
American, and if you're outside of America? I know you want to
see it, too. So we should be able to ask who got taxpayer
money, where that information is and to clarify, because it's
unclassified. And if the government says that all SAP had
nothing to do with UFO or UAP research, Fine, let them say
that bass. I don't know if it's considered defunct now, I know
that nobody's really working for it. But Bigelow Aerospace, put
all that stuff out there. Put your label on it for all we
care. I personally could care less, if the research was solid,
and you did what you said. It's not classified. And if you want
to contradict that, fine, because if it is classified,
then we solidify the DIA absolutely lied to hit Senator
Harry Reid lied to their superiors, they fabricated
evidence, and it goes into deep allegations. So let's, let's
have that conversation. But yet no one wants to talk. But you
can buy a book that doesn't have the evidence that we need, has a
lot of claims. And I was told behind the scenes. Hey, John,
look at the back. There are tons of reports that you can FOIA and
that will prove everything. Well, guess what? I did FOIA
them, and so did a lot of other people. They're not there. Now,
I'm not taking the government at its word. I never do. I wrote
books about not doing just that. So I know that they lie. And I
know that they can obfuscate profusely. So that's why I'm
filing appeals. And I've already filed numerous appeals on this
very topic, but in the same breath, if I question one side,
I have to question the other. I was told to FOIA those reports
and they're just not there. Now, others argue well, their best
reports. Why aren't those same people asking why then bass
won't release them. They're not classified. They're just not
redact names. That's fine. redact dollar signs. That's
fine. But if this was funded by us that money, that's taxpayer
dollars, and if there's some legal loophole that people want
to fall back on, that they can hide from FOIA, and it's some
big cover up on the side of DIA. Well, guess what?
It still isn't classified. And bass slash Bigelow Aerospace can
give it to all of us, yet they don't. Why aren't the biggest
advocates for this being a paranormal research program?
Knocking on Bigelow's door going, hey, you know what,
let's, let's, let's figure this out. Let's put all those reports
out there onto the public realm and, and see what we can do. Get
the DIA talking about this. And if they don't, who cares?
Because now we have the information yet they won't do
it. All those unanswered questions have lingered for
years. So those that have preached about transparency and
wanting the government to say more, are the ones that are
working for the government, and apparently, part of the cover
up, whether it be as connected to the government, or whether it
be as connected to the corporate world? It's a cover up
nonetheless. Because where are the reports? So this book, that
lists a ton of them in the back didn't come out through FOIA.
And although I'm appealing for them, where are they? Bigelow
Aerospace has an opportunity now to shut people like me up that
have concerns over the narrative. And trust me, I want
to be proven wrong. I love this topic. Anybody who watches this
channel knows that I love this topic. Yet their mum, they don't
do interviews outside one or two very tight niche. Journalists
that that that do the interviews. Why not? I've
reached out, I've asked come on to my show. And we can figure
out what best way to take this and translate it into a FOIA to
get something of substance but nobody wants to do it. Why not?
I don't get it. This is the most secretive unclassified program
that I've ever come across. And that said, facetiously, if they
wanted to classify it, they would, but they didn't. Why not?
Nobody's asking that question. Why did they change the topic,
excuse me the bid solicitation that seemingly was written just
for Robert Bigelow, before he ever even bid on the contract.
Those people have lambasted me for years, putting out the idea
that he was likely the chosen winner of this months, and maybe
even much longer before the bid solicitation ever went out.
Those same people are ignoring the evidence. So I can ramble on
for a while now, but I'll end it. And I hope this gave you
guys some indicator of the official evidence than that's
there. And although I don't endorse it, although I don't say
hey, look, this is, this is the real story, and everybody else
is bunk. This is the level of evidence we need to prove or
disprove a story. So if this book wants to come out, and list
all these reports, and so on, and so forth, and say that all
of that contradicts the company line, the DIA line, the official
narrative, then show it, and I will absolutely be happy to
profile it for you. Forgive my sound effect there from my
email. I appreciate you guys tuning in to this very deep dive
on a very interesting topic.
I learned a lot myself doing these presentations, but I hope
you learned some as well. I will end it the way I started it. I
know these deep dives aren't for everybody. But if you're at this
point, I compliment you for sticking with a hour 45 ish or
so breakdown of these documents because it shows me you want to
know more. I don't expect you all to believe with every point
that I make. That's opinion. But rather I see now if you're at
this point of the video, that you look at the at the documents
and the evidence to make up your own mind. And that is what this
channel is all about. It's not about agreeing with me. It's
about looking up the evidence and making the opinions and
decisions on your own. So I wish you Godspeed on your journey
trying to figure out all of this because it's a mess. And until
next time until more information comes out. Please help the
channel by clicking on the thumbs up button making sure
you're subscribed, turn the notifications on and the biggest
help of all, is sharing the word. If you feel so inclined to
have a Patreon or other ways you can support 100% of all that
money goes right back into this channel and the research itself
to make all of this possible. So for those who decide to do the
latter, thank you but at the very least a thumbs up helps if
you're listening on the podcast version. Thank you for doing so.
Any review helps. I aim for five stars. I won't tell you what to
put but a For five stars, please please, if you have a moment,
click on those star buttons and let me know what you think. And
of course, I'm interested in your feedback post the comments
below, or you can contact me on the black vault.com Is John
Greenewald Jr signing off. And until next time, we'll see you
then.