John Greenewald: Hey everybody, John Greenewald, here with the
black vault.com. So if you haven't heard, and you are into
the UFO topic, and I know a lot of you are, tomorrow will be the
first congressional hearing on UFOs, or unidentified aerial
phenomena or UAP. As they, as they now want to call them, the
first hearing in more than 50 years. AD is amazing news,
something I'm super excited about. And I'll get to why I'm
also realistic, in addition to excited, but I think that this
is a huge milestone. And so if you have not heard that
interview, excuse me, that hearing is going to take place
tomorrow, May 17. At this point at the recording of this video,
because they changed the time, just just a couple hours ago,
from what I understand, it's going to start tomorrow at 9am.
Eastern. And that's 6am. My time here in California. Now I set up
a page on the black vault.com. If you are watching this on
YouTube, right now, you can go ahead and look at the link
below, I may throw this out on the audio stream as well, the
podcast version of the black vault, just to make sure
everybody is is updated on this because it is a huge
development. So if you're listening to an audio version of
this, just go to www dot the black vault.com. And that will
show you one of the most recent pages for watching the hearing
live. Now I set up my own page for this for this reason, they
are streaming it on YouTube through the congressional
committees webpage. However, if the stream breaks for any
reason, I'm planning ahead that that page will be updated in
essentially real time by me, I'll be sitting here waiting to
update it. Just refresh it. That way, you don't have to worry
about trying to figure out where the stream might be or what's
going on. I will try and keep all of that updated for you. And
on the page, including maybe some other videos as well, or
some surprises. I will as long as nothing big happens in the
sense technologically speaking on my end, likely will be live
streaming shortly after the the hearing itself, and hopefully
opening up the phone lines and stuff like that and having some
fun. So that's why that page is there. So again, go to www dot
the black vault.com. And it will shoot you right to it now.
Question is, what are we supposed to expect? And I'll be
honest with you, I get that asked a lot here in the last
week since the story broke? And I don't know, I'm not going to
pretend to have any answer for you here on this one. But happy
to just kind of put some thoughts out there out there.
Initially, when I first heard about it, I was pretty excited
about the idea of this hearing. But in the same respect
realistic, as I said earlier. And the reason why I said
realistic is we have to understand what exactly we are
dealing with. And beyond any shadow of a doubt we know that
the UAP topic, what is going on right now is not only of great
interest, but also on top of that highly classified. There is
a lot of secrecy around this. And I know a lot of people want
to say that that secrecy is lessening, I'm here to tell you
that from my experience and vantage point, through the
Freedom of Information Act and legal ways to access this
information. It has strengthened and it is not lessening. Now we
are hearing about it more. And that's fantastic. But that's
where I say we have to be realistic because that secrecy
is still there. And when I talk about the secrecy, especially
since late last year, I referenced something that is
called the security classification guide on UAP.
Essentially, what this is, is any particular topic has to have
proper authorization for it to be classified, meaning they
can't write a document and go, I'll call this top secret.
Rather there are procedures and manuals on how to define secrecy
levels, why they have the secrecy, what channels they go
to, whose authority is it under, so on and so forth. And I just
kind of a gut feeling two years ago, whatever it was, I felt
that with all of this talk, that there would be a guide on UAP.
It was later than revealed in the media that it likely existed
but it never got released. I got it through FOIA and it was very
telling on how secretive UAP information is. Now why do I
bring this up? Well, interestingly, the man who
approved it, let me pull up the screen here. I tweeted this out
last week for
of you who follow me on social media, the man who approved it,
this man here is Scott Bray. He is the director of Naval
Intelligence activity. And he will be the one that is
testifying one of two people testifying at the hearing
tomorrow. Now, he's the one that approved this guide. So what I
just went over with the security classification guide, here is
that actual cover page, and there was a lot in this manual
that is completely classified, and that they will not release,
I was able to get a heavily redacted version out. But sadly,
it really tells you very little, I invite you to look at that.
It's in the show notes on the podcast version, or here on
YouTube. Just go ahead and look below and you will see a link
directly to that security classification guide. So that's
the guy that he's going to be on Capitol Hill tomorrow.
Testifying. Here is the signature page as proof of what
I'm talking about. He approved that document. I do believe I
know who these names are, well, not the reviewer, I take that
back, but prepared by likely through Oh, and I, but still
trying to essentially work on that. And we'll see if that ever
comes to light. So we have some guesses on who prepared it. But
rather the approval is the man who is testifying tomorrow. So
what does that mean? In my opinion, the man who says we
should have the level of secrecy around UAP that we do is going
to be the one answering questions in a public hearing.
And I think with that fact, we have to understand that he will
do everything and anything in his power to keep it as general
and vague as he can. And the reason why I say that is he
doesn't want to declassify this material. Obviously, he approves
and supports the secrecy surrounding it. So as vague and
as general as they can keep it. That is what they are going to
do. Now Ronald Moultrie, who is the Undersecretary of Defense
for intelligence, he is going to be testifying as well. And
obviously, he's in a high enough position where secrecy just
comes along with the job. But Bray is the one that that
approved that secrecy, and I think that he will try and
maintain it. I think they're going to surround obviously, the
incursions on military installations. And they will
probably use that T word that not many people like threat.
Many, many times, drones may come up. Or they will kind of
generalize everything. And I hope Congress pushes back if
they do. And the reason is, is because out of the 144 cases,
that we know that they investigated through the report
released last year to the public, and echoed in the
classified version that I got partially released earlier this
year. Out of those 144 UAP cases, they could only identify
one and that was a deflating balloon. So we can argue drones
or adversarial technology or even classified technology. And
I'm taking a jab at some of the things that I've said myself
over the last couple of years. And I still stand by it, by the
way. But even classified technology, according to them,
could not peg a single case, to any of those definitions. So if
you start touting that in a public hearing, and if Congress
has done their homework, they need to push back and say, Wait
a minute, you guys are touting these likely theories yet you
could not peg a single case, other than that one deflating
balloon as any of them. And so they're going to be put a little
bit in a bind at that point, meaning the witnesses Scott Bray
and, and Moultrie that they're going to have to respond to that
if Congress decides to push the issue. But again, I think
they're going to stick very broadly speaking, and generally
speaking, now, if pushed, if the committee does, what they should
do, and really push these issues, that I think what we're
going to hear a lot of is, I can speak to that more in a
classified setting, or in the closed session. Now, I'm one of
those geeks that actually likes to watch these hearings. And
when you know that there was going to be a classified
session, following a public hearing, then you hear that
phrasing a lot. And I fear that if the committee does start to
push, they will start hearing that now. How do committees
react when they hear that and to be honest with you, they
essentially accept it. We will see if anybody doesn't want to
accept the shielding of the general public from this
information that may encroach into classified arenas. We'll
see how much they they will Push. I don't know, generally
they don't I mean, this is kind of a bipartisan, nonpartisan, I
should say issue, meaning no real one side of the aisle is
pushing it more than the other. So there's not really a vendetta
from let's say, the right side of the aisle or the left side of
the aisle where Republicans will maybe bash the witnesses or
Democrats will bash the witnesses versus the other side,
as you do and other types of more partisan debates. So this
could just be universally accepted, that it stays general
stays broad, the public, here's kind of what we did last year
with very broad stroke comments, I'll be at interesting
nonetheless, and very, very important. That's the realistic
way to approach this, that they're probably not going to
just bow down and go, Okay, Congress, we admit it's extra
terrestrial. And I think some people secretly have that and
even openly have that desire, that we are paving the way here
for some type of disclosure, quite the opposite. They will
keep that in a classified arena. And we'll see how that committee
approaches it and accepts it. And in many cases, they just do,
because they're not dodging the question. They're just putting
it into a closed session. And a classified setting, which we
know on the schedule follows the public hearing. So we already
know that's there. That's not me, just kind of making that up
that that is confirmed that they have a closed session after the
public hearing. So I think they're going to utilize that
they'll keep it behind closed doors. And Congress just doesn't
have the open authority to once they hear something in a
classified setting, come out to the come out to the microphones
and stand in front of the cameras and go, This is what we
heard. I mean, certainly they sometimes talk about a generally
speaking, and maybe we'll get some gems from that. But they
don't violate security oaths and clearances and classified
information themselves. So this may stay locked up primarily.
And and I don't fear that per se, I expect that. And I don't
think that we should just go oh, this is a waste of time. Because
even though we have to deal with that part in a realistic sense,
we also have to accept the triumph, that after decades of
secrecy and clear representation by irrefutable evidence of a
cover up, Congress is finally looking at this going, Okay,
let's get some people in here, let's start asking questions.
And one of those questions is likely going to be how are you
guys handling it. And although a lot of that information, if
you've paid attention is kind of public right now. Hopefully,
they'll give a glimpse at to exactly the extent that they're
going to exactly who they may be talking to. Will they have any
visuals or any you know, show and tell type, I highly doubt
it. I could be pleasantly surprised. But I doubt it. I
think, again, they will keep it generally speaking, but only
time will tell. So I look forward to watching all of this
with you guys, and hopefully joining you on the YouTube
channel for the black vault after the hearing tomorrow. And
if you want to keep updated on those channel notifications for
YouTube, just go to the black vault.com/live That will bounce
you to the YouTube channel. Make sure you are subscribed. And
make sure that you help the channel out by clicking the
thumbs up button if you do like the videos and the content that
you see there. So thank you for that. And of course I'll drop
this to the podcast stream as well. So if you're listening on
audio, reviews always help it really helps with the rankings.
That way more people can keep updated as you are doing
yourself. This is John Greenewald Jr signing off. And
we'll see after those hearings