Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
UAP Round Table - November 23 - David Grusch on Joe Rogan, The Schumer Amendment to the UFO NDAA Legislation and more!
456 Plays1 year ago
UAP Round Table - November 23 - David Grusch on Joe Rogan, The Schumer Amendment to the UFO NDAA Legislation and more
Dave joins Frank and Ash for the November edition of the UAP Round Table!
Recommended
Transcript
UFO Round Table Introduction
00:00:04
Speaker
The UFO round table. The UFO thinker in pursuit of the paranormal parkests.
Frequency of UFO Roundtables
00:00:20
Speaker
So welcome back to the monthly roundtable discussion. I hope everyone is well out there and whatnot. So we are back once again with Dave. How are you doing, mate? I mean, good form, Frank. Ready for, I mean, I tell you what, there's so much going on, Frank. We should have a weekly roundtable, not a monthly one. God, me head's spinning, man.
00:00:40
Speaker
I know I was actually thinking earlier on, you could probably do a daily show at this point and you'd have plenty to talk about.
Ash's Return and Recent Developments
00:00:47
Speaker
But also joining us is Ash back again. And it's been a little while since we've done a round table. You kind of did loads of them when I was on hiatus and then I don't think you were on the last one, but now we are reunited. So how are you doing Ash?
00:01:01
Speaker
Yeah, I'm glad to be back. It's good to see you guys. And it means a lot to catch up on. I'm so behind with everything going on, so looking forward to seeing what's been happening.
00:01:16
Speaker
I will get stuck in and to be honest with you, like we've been saying there, there's that much going on at the minute that, you know, it's difficult to keep on top of it all, really. I mean, even just today, there was about four articles, like pretty major articles that came out and I've not even had the chance to really dig into any of them. It's like a prank. I've read them all, mate. I don't know what to do.
00:01:39
Speaker
Yeah, but it's good. It's definitely what we want to see. But yeah, it's difficult to keep tabs on it all and filter the wheat from the chaff and all the rest of it. But you know, it's better to have an abundance of wheat and chaff than to have no wheat or chaff at all, I suppose.
00:01:58
Speaker
Let's get stuck
David Grush on Joe Rogan
00:01:59
Speaker
in anyway. So a big a big thing that's happened over the last couple of weeks is David Grush on the Joe Rogan podcast. Now, I've not actually had a chance to talk about this yet on the show at all, but.
00:02:15
Speaker
You know, there was a lot of disgust on the actual show itself. Like, as most people know, Joe Rogan's podcasts are long form. So this was like two and a half hours or so. And I'm not going to bother getting into a background on Grush here now.
00:02:32
Speaker
I think anybody who's not aware of him already, which I think most people will be, I did some episodes on the UFO Thinker podcast where I went into some pretty in-depth detail about his background and the claims that he's making and whatnot. And very importantly, why what he's saying is so compelling given the positions that he's held in his career. And I think personally, there's a lot of that at the moment of people coming forward with information and
00:03:00
Speaker
sources or whatever it might be, whether or not they're anonymous or whether or not they're actually coming out and stating the position publicly and putting the name behind it. A lot of the claims that are being actually mentioned are things that have been discussed quite a lot. And if you have a look on social media and things like that, people are saying, well, we already knew that. We've done it for 30 years, whatever. But I think the key thing and the point I've tried to make about Grush specifically
00:03:29
Speaker
is that the people that are coming forward now have got verifiable backgrounds, and that is kind of what makes the difference. Obviously, that's a lot easier to discern if they actually come forward publicly and put the name behind it like Grocery's Done. And a bit more difficult to discern whether or not it's on shaky ground if you don't have that. But the thing about Grocery's that we do,
00:03:58
Speaker
And personally, I felt like Grush gave a really excellent account of himself. He really came across well on the Joe Rogan show, that is. A pretty unbelievable composure, really, given that he was recording a podcast that he would have known.
00:04:16
Speaker
was going out to tens of millions. And it's quite an impressive recall of names and dates that he's got as well. And he'd obviously done some prep to get his facts in order, which is understandable. And I think most people would if they were walking onto the Joe Rogan podcast. And I thought he represented himself and the topic very well. And it's very important that, given the reach of that particular show. And I don't know how many views it's got right now,
00:04:46
Speaker
I saw somewhere the other day that some of the big UFO podcasts on the podcast episodes on the Joe Rogan show about UFOs have had like 50 odd million views. I think that was the one with Bob Lazar and there was another couple as well that are in that kind of numbers. When you think about the reach of that,
00:05:08
Speaker
it's quite amazing really i mean obviously the biggest ufo related specialist podcasts don't even come anywhere close to that kind of reach so if we're talking about somebody of that importance being on the biggest possible platform which pretty much eclipses the reach of even like major news
00:05:29
Speaker
publications and websites and things like that. You know, it's a pretty, I said the word historic to you, Dave, didn't know I remember chatting the other day. And I think that it is it's pretty undeniable, whatever you think of him, you know, and his claims and so on.
00:05:44
Speaker
It's pretty undeniable that it's a big moment for the UFO topic. And, you know, I think Joe Rogan deserves, you know, obviously he's done well for himself, Joe Rogan. He doesn't need a part in the bathroom meet to feel good about himself. But I do think that he deserves his his kind of, you know, the appreciation for what he's done for the UFO topic. And this grush thing being on the show there was kind of the latest in a long line, really. So
00:06:14
Speaker
I'd be interested to hear just some general thoughts from you guys on Grush on Rogan. There's a couple of points that I've pulled out as well that we can perhaps have a talk about afterwards, but just first of all, some general thoughts. What do you reckon, Dave? Anything you'd like to mention? Well, I mean, I think if we look at this part, sort of Grush on Rogan was sort of reasons to disclose if we're thinking about this all.
00:06:38
Speaker
been playing out before our eyes, really. And you're right, Frank, it was massive due to the mainstream audience. And you're right, I've not heard you say historic many times when we've been talking, but I did agree with you there. I mean, the thing in a long form interview, it allows you to cover a lot of ground, but they did. I mean, they went into a lot of areas. I mean, I'm thinking that, like you said, that many people who are listening to it, it's just amazing, really, for me. I mean, there wasn't loads that we knew, but there was a lot of extra detail. I mean,
00:07:06
Speaker
Firstly, he really laid into Turner and Rogers, which we might go on later, these people who were sort of denying, you know, looking to block the UAP Act and have sort of got special interests. He really spent to town on them. I was amazed how much he swore actually on the program. It was quite good, really. Well, it wasn't that good, but he was listening to it. It was almost as good as one of some of the old shows I thought actually when I was listening to it. But anyway, yeah.
00:07:31
Speaker
He sort of laid into them. He talks about conversations that he'd had with Reid and the possible link to Biden, which is very significant because he was linking the president then to direct knowledge of what had gone on. He also hinted at talking to somebody at a very, very highest level. Well, I thought that could have been Obama. There's been a bit of speculation about that because he was in the White House briefing these guys. So that's quite interesting as well.
00:07:58
Speaker
He also said, I think, what did he say, he had a brand Rubio and the other top level briefings, they know. So we said a lot of very specific things. He talked about his harassment, which was really frightening, which we might come back to talk about that.
00:08:13
Speaker
the
00:08:29
Speaker
he made, he really went on about the Lockheed connection in some detail and linked that to Lekatsky because Lekatsky hinted that there was some connection by RSAP started, the RSAP program that was the one that started it off again in the early 2000s, the secret program looking at the craft and Lockheed must have been the starter and there is a room, a Lockheed wanted to try and push for more disclosures to get more people working on the programs
00:08:55
Speaker
He was obviously clearly crashed his career, but the other thing is, it was really interesting.
Exploring UFO Origins
00:09:01
Speaker
He sort of confirmed, well, he did confirm, not sort of, but there was many types of different sort of pains. His first time he's really said that, he actually said there were different types of pains, which is quite interesting. And that hints at some, at least some level of ET origin for the crowd. And he sort of was talking about that, but he also said there were other origins as well.
00:09:23
Speaker
and he also again talks about NHI contact at a higher level. So if you think about our mainstream audience having that laid out quite methodically, and I thought, I agree with you Frank, I thought he was brilliant in the way he presented himself. He was brilliant at that congressional hearing as well, though you could see why he was a top dog in his field, you know, and a top performer because he's grasped, he's mental commander things, he's fantastic.
00:09:47
Speaker
But yeah, I thought for people to be listening to all that, God knows what they must have made of it, you know, somebody so credible. And it again shows what a lot of things have been doing over the past 30 years that we thought we'll do. We dismissed this. I haven't been that far from the mark. Obviously some things aren't, but a lot of the main core story as it were.
00:10:07
Speaker
about these retrievals, craft and all the rest of it seems to be pretty on the money. So I thought it was, in terms of getting the subject out to the mainstream, it was massive and it must have some sort of reverberation to mainstream media and to mainstream thinking. So I thought it was, it was historic Frank, I agree with you.
00:10:27
Speaker
Yeah, yeah, good points. And it's true about the different types of beans that he was talking about as well. I keep meaning to go back and find this bit. He keeps popping up into my head and then I've not got around to doing it yet because it's a long interview. But there was a bit, I think, where he was saying that he spoke to a physician who would examine one of the bodies. And he was saying, I can't remember the wording he used, but he said something along the lines of,
00:10:51
Speaker
He didn't know what to make of it, which sort of I didn't know where to start or something like that. The physician had said that to him. And if that's the case, that would certainly suggest that because he talks grushes talk before about different morphologies, you know, and and that at least some of them would resemble humans from the way he's talked about things. But there's these also kind of insane that that that physician who looked at some of the biologics as they referred to, if the some of them
00:11:19
Speaker
you know, a physician wouldn't even know where to start. That's kind of saying something. I mean, like it kind of stuck with me that, as I say, I need to find the specific bit and I'm probably going to clip it and put it on social media and stuff. But yeah, what an interesting thought. If you're a physician and you looked at a biological entity and didn't even know where to start, what does that what's that going to look like? You know what I mean? But what do you think, Ash? Have you had a chance to check it out? I know it's a bit of a long one, but
00:11:48
Speaker
No, and to be honest, I didn't know kind of how big that podcast was. I mean, I'd heard of it and obviously, you know, it's done something about Lausanne Town de Long and stuff like that in the past. Well, them sort of figures.
00:12:00
Speaker
I mean, that's just insane and kind of a bit of a big step up kind of on the Roscoe Fart News Nation, kind of when it first broke out,
Impact of Social Media on UFO Discourse
00:12:08
Speaker
then going from that kind of niche to sort of like Joe Rogan, 50 million listens and stuff to some of the UFO stuff. That's just incredible. When we listened to the Congress or watched the Congress hearing, that was like hundreds of thousands. Even that was like, wow, that's a lot of people watching this.
00:12:27
Speaker
To go from that to 51 million, tens of millions is just. Yeah, maybe that will open up a lot more to the mainstream, like Dave said. I can say I've not listened to it. It sounds like I need to. But reading what people have said about it, I've listened to it. The general consensus seems to be that it wasn't the best that Joe Rogan's seen the bit disinterested in parts, kind of look bored, sat there. And he's obviously not seen it.
00:12:56
Speaker
coming on that. What he said then about the precision, saying that about a body. I mean, if Gush can back something like that up, like he says he can with names and events and stuff, that's all we need, isn't it?
00:13:13
Speaker
If he can say, yeah, these doctors, and if that doctor then comes forward or whatever to say, yeah, I worked on his body, that's it done. I mean, how can anybody ever come back from that? So looking forward to hearing more about what was said. I was first reading about it last week or whenever it was, when it came out.
00:13:34
Speaker
People didn't seem too infused about it. It seemed to be a bit, yeah, there's nothing new. It's just, oh, the hash, Joe Rogan looked bored. So that's probably why I've not listened to it yet, just because kind of listen to other people, though we do know what people are like on social media, especially certain factions and certain people released stuff. There's kind of a war in factions against each other. So it's hard to know what is actually good or what isn't at the minute. Like I say, with all your stories coming out,
00:14:01
Speaker
daily. There's always, when you read the comments, it's just people arguing with each other rather than actually talking about the article. Talking about the person who's made the article, who's written the article or where the sources are, rather than talking about the actual information coming out. This is quite hard for people to kind of get an understanding of what's going on. It's actually at the top of the show because we concentrate on mainly on UFO stuff in the UK.
00:14:27
Speaker
And coming to the end of the year, all our sort of work, concentrations on, getting our database up to date, all this sort of stuff. So not being able to kind of follow what's been happening in the US. So the last couple of days
Skeptics and Evidence of UFOs
00:14:39
Speaker
I've been trying to catch up and it's just insane. Is that much information, disinformation? No one's actually saying this is kind of what's happening. So it's been hard on that point to really
00:14:52
Speaker
get a grasp of what's more interesting to hear more about what was said on Rogan by the sounds of it.
00:14:59
Speaker
Yeah, we'll go into a couple of the specific points in a sec. But I mean, from my point of view, I don't think Joe, Joe Rogan seemed bored as such. He actually seemed quite engaged. There's been a few episodes in the past where when he had Bob Lazar and Jeremy Corbell, it was it was very early on in the days of like the sort of like, quote unquote, friendship between Jeremy Corbell and Joe Rogan.
00:15:25
Speaker
And Joe Rogan didn't mince his words with Jeremy Cobell on that one. And he was just saying, what? What are you talking about, man? And that sort of stuff. Really pushed back pretty hard. And so Joe Rogan does do that if you think something is kind of BS or whatever on shaky ground. And he did a little bit of that with Grush. But the impression I got was that he was quite, well, two things.
00:15:51
Speaker
The first thing was that it was clear that they'd obviously spent quite a bit of time together before the show and they were both quite relaxed in each other's presence, which I believe Joe Rogan actually does regularly with his guests as well. They were usually because Joe Rogan has made an unbelievable amount of money these days. So he's got this crazy ranch in Texas where, you know, he's got like his own comedy club now. And I think when he has guests on the podcast, particularly big ones,
00:16:18
Speaker
i suppose maybe just as well i don't know i'm certainly not a buddy of joe's but he invited some out to his ranch and they spend the night and go for a meal and all this kind of thing so the impression i got wasn't supposed to do is body was just kind of listening and taking it in he did push back on certain things and like one thing that he did really.
00:16:38
Speaker
good job of i thought was going into specifically why grush can't talk about certain things any further and he really can just sit you know i asked to elaborate on that and i thought grush did a good job explaining why you could talk about certain things and couldn't go any further on others and whatnot and but yeah as i say. There will always be differing opinions as you say on social media depending on what what parts of it you look as well and but another interesting point you made about the doctor coming forward.
00:17:08
Speaker
What do you think solve the kind of questions that people have? If a doctor actually came forward and said, look, I worked on a legacy program and I've got these credentials as a medical professional and I saw a body and I can verify that it wasn't human. Do you think that would be enough to actually change people's
00:17:29
Speaker
Or would we have to literally have a picture of the body? And would that be enough? You know what I mean? It's like, where where is the line sort of thing that we that we have to cross with the certain parts of the UFO community and the wider public to in order to be able to sort of finally accept and reach that sort of like disclosure moment that we talk about? You know, do you think a doctor coming forward would do that or? I think it comes down again, like everything to the proof that can read it a few months ago.
00:17:58
Speaker
that claimed to have worked on the bodies and they had all this talking about the DNA and everything that came with it and he sounded like he knew his stuff and I think it came out that it was kind of not quite as high level as he tried to put himself to be and it was a fake account and all this stuff but if someone did come forward I mean it's just a proof so if we had the proof yeah I think it would be because if you've got proof that he worked on an alien body like the famous alien autopsy video
00:18:26
Speaker
That was proved something similar to be real.
Public Perception and UFO Reality
00:18:30
Speaker
And we had that evidence in front of us. And they said that they had to be off planet or to come not from this planet.
00:18:40
Speaker
I mean, surely for me that must be what we need. It's the Providence though, isn't it? I like all these things. If the bloke comes forward, I mean, Grush, he's different to all these other people because of the confirmation he's had from the Inspector General and all the rest of it. He's got pretty high level, he's gone on the road. He's about as credentialed as you get in terms of without actually showing anything.
00:19:08
Speaker
watch out so i think it's just a problem is generally of all these things can you prove documents right can you prove the video was the airport's confirm it,
00:19:17
Speaker
But ultimately, it'll take official confirmation for most people who go over it. I mean, some people, it'll never be enough. I mean, some people, by the logic they use on UFO Twitter, they wouldn't believe America existed unless they were actually standing on it. Do you know what I mean? It doesn't matter, but it's what the mainstream thing would be. And remember, there's another psychological barrier. The general public, I think, are probably getting to, a lot of people know there's probably something serious now.
00:19:44
Speaker
but actually admitting there's something to it is quite serious for your world view and all the rest of it and I think people are resistant to that until they see a big level of proof and I think there's a certain amount
00:19:55
Speaker
people wanted to be convinced but not really wanted to know or not, you know, so the proof has got to be quite big. So I think if a doctor comes for us and he works on it, he could be dead credentialed of people, it wouldn't really make much difference to a lot of people. I think if you had a lot of official documents and they were confirmed, that's fine. But I think, as I say, it needs official confirmation. Most people have weared at them from a respectable source. But I think for me, for grushing some of these other people,
00:20:25
Speaker
Clearly, there's something to it because they would have denied it otherwise. But I think it'll take the providence, as I say, sorry to repeat myself again. That's what I think it is. And we'll start grappling with this when we get nearer to the disclosure denouement, as it were. And these things do start getting official confirmation. Now, what will be enough? Is it a senior official? Is it a president? Who is it? And yeah, it's a good point. It's a really interesting point.
00:20:53
Speaker
Yeah, you know what it made me think of, Ash, when you were saying about the doctor, is I think the doctor coming forward with a verifiable background in a similar way to Grush, because again, for me, Grush having that verifiable background and that sort of massively makes it more compelling.
Need for Open-Source UFO Data
00:21:13
Speaker
But if you had a doctor coming forward, I think what the key bit would be would be to have
00:21:20
Speaker
Data that can be presented to the public for them to be able to do their own independent analysis like obviously joe blogs isn't gonna be able to do that but like other medical establishments around the world can perhaps access that data and then do their own analysis and once you start seeing various ones going oh yeah it's clear that this isn't.
00:21:40
Speaker
human or whatever, then perhaps you could get to that stage. Like, something that, that me and Dave talk about quite a bit is ancient civilizations. And there's been recently an academic study done on Gunnam Padang, which is actually scientifically peer reviewed paper and everything like that, which is actually verified that it's way older than anybody thought. And that has actually led to various long standing skeptics actually to come out and say, Oh,
00:22:07
Speaker
Yeah, all right, fair enough. This is now approved. And Ben from Uncharted X is doing some work on completely transparently doing some analysis on vases from Egypt and doing all these incredibly detailed studies on these vases and the construction of them and the accuracy of the cuts and angles and things like that. And doing it in a way where it's really quite something that perhaps
00:22:36
Speaker
people who are in the UFO side of things can perhaps use as a model because he's doing this, you know, the best kind of like facilities that you can get for the analysis of these objects and then providing all of their data like
00:22:52
Speaker
open source i'm not sure if that's the correct term but you know what i mean where everything that they gather as part of the investigation is made available to the public so they can replicate those results themselves and anyone who's got the time and energy to do it can can look into it perhaps that's you know a good sort of path that we might end up going down with ufo stuff at some stage
00:23:15
Speaker
I mean, when I watched Joe Rogan, you know, I thought he was, he didn't want to question him like he's done with Carvel and like he's done with, what's his name, Tonda Lodge and a few others. They didn't say it'd be much doubt, but he did look uninterested to me. He clearly believed Rush was credible.
00:23:33
Speaker
And the comments I read were pretty good. So I think it depends. I know you mean, though, there's always people knocking everything. And it depends where you jump on, what point you jump on on Twitter to see how things are going. And there's this really tedious group who just want to knock everything down for what their own reasons. Very weird, actually. There's more of them sort of popping up. But yeah, I thought that it was pretty good. But it's interesting how you perceive it as well, isn't it, I suppose.
00:24:02
Speaker
Maybe somebody else watches, not you Ash, but say somebody who's really against it all or something like that, tends to see it and just sees what they want to see. Maybe I thought he was more positive than he was, but I thought generally he treated him all right and there's not a question about whether he thought he was legitimate or not. But maybe he just had a big night out and he was a bit hungover. It's hard to say. That was one of the rumours as well, actually.
00:24:28
Speaker
Yeah, but it's I mean, it's just going back to we were saying about the size of the Joe Rogan podcast and the actual episodes now are only available on Spotify because Joe Rogan did some kind of crazy deal a few years back where Spotify paid him 100 million.
00:24:44
Speaker
to only have a show on spotify and no longer actually have the show on youtube but what he does so i'm not sure actually how you go about finding the actual episodes streaming numbers or whatever from spotify but on youtube i just had a quick check earlier and and
00:25:00
Speaker
on the joe rogan youtube channel they don't put the full episodes but they put clips which are like 10 minute clips and some of those clips have got 1.5 million 2 million and that's just a 10 minute clip from the episode which came out what 10 days ago or something so it's it's unbelievable the reach that it's gone to you know um
00:25:19
Speaker
But let's get onto a particular point, which is that Grush once again confirmed this thing about double digit crash retrievals and the same corresponding number for bodies.
Grush's Insights and Defense Contractors
00:25:31
Speaker
something, as you say, Dave, that he has talked about before, but I felt like he went a bit further down that path and that thing about the physician that I mentioned as well. And he also specifically referred to Lockheed Martin, which I think is new, because I don't think he's gone into that kind of detail before. And he even himself said that he
00:25:52
Speaker
He seemed surprised that he was even, those words were coming out of his mouth. There was a point where he sort of just like looked down at the ground. I can't believe I'm saying this. You know what I mean? But apparently, he was cleared to do so. And he's talked about having further dopser authorization, which is the, you know, the body that authorized him to say things, he has to run everything through them to get it cleared before he can talk about it in a book or a podcast or whatever.
00:26:18
Speaker
And he's talked about doing more Doppler authorizations since when he originally came out. So I was thinking perhaps that was one of the points that he's recently got cleared to say that he wasn't to begin with. And he seemed surprised as though it was a recent thing that he'd been authorized to talk about it. So pretty fascinating.
00:26:37
Speaker
Obviously, you know, Lockheed Martin is something that's long been discussed in terms of being a defense contractor that might be the ones that are holding the goodies, as it were. But were you surprised, Dave, that you said that? And I think everything seems to point up at Lockheed at this point. What do you reckon?
00:26:56
Speaker
Well I wasn't surprised because I've known it is or I've known it's a good chance it's Lockheed but what I was surprised if you remember Frank me and you were talking about what LaKatsky was going on about a week before about you know who was the contractor and what was the big thing that fired up that led to AUSAP and this clearly that from what he said Gus I was able to sort of see it was pretty much likely but the craft he was talking about this craft vehicle was at Royal Lockheed
00:27:23
Speaker
And that was what they were, and they were trying to divest themselves of some stuff. And this was the SAP they tried to set up around the R-SAP thing. Sorry, too many acronyms there, but essentially you could see a clear trail back to what the work they were doing in the sort of notice to try and set this stuff up. So that was really impactful to me. And I've never really been so clearly say, and we might, I may not, depending on time, get on to it later with this Chris Sharp article, but this talk about
00:27:50
Speaker
that apparently, when they recover the craft, they go straight into the private sector, straight away, big production, so there's no questions asked. So that's clearly been going on on Lockheed themselves, a very heavily implicated. Everybody thinks Admiral Wilson was speaking to Lockheed.
00:28:06
Speaker
And it's clearly not just Lockheed, there's loads of other ones, but yeah, it didn't surprise me at all, but I was surprised that you frankness, to be honest with you, Frank. Too many pranks in that sentence. But there you go. Yeah, well, frankly, I'm inclined to agree. I know you've not had a chance to check it out, Ash, but you find that surprising that there is such a clear kind of finger being pointed at Lockheed there.
00:28:32
Speaker
Like they said, like we do know that this stuff ends up in the hands of the private contractors that gets them out of the sort of government, kind of what they have to do with the FOIAs and all this stuff. They have, gives them plausible deniability as soon as they hand it off. We don't have that. And they're not lying when they, when they say that. With Lockheed Martin, so it's been one of the big ones with obviously GunTrop and the others. Um, they wouldn't, don't think it was surprised any of us.
00:28:59
Speaker
that they do have this stuff. There's a lot of people like with that article that's come out today. It's always been said that we've got these cross-retrievals that is in these places, these contractors have them. It kind of adds more smoke to the fire and it adds a bit more kind of credence to it that the television is just sort of saying it and sort of us kind of believing that this is happening.
00:29:25
Speaker
With Grosch we've got that extra bit of, it's all verified, he can prove it, he can say he's proved it. Not sure where F end up to with the skiffs or anything like that. I'm not sure if there's been anything I don't think there has on that side of it, but I guess it could come out in that and then that would be, we had to prove so it wouldn't like, yeah, I mean it makes sense, he wouldn't be as surprised to me or anyone really.
00:29:48
Speaker
you don't listen to you Ash talking about what I'm thinking a lot of stuff was coming out now it's like all the more dots are being joined you know you play those games where you do like an adventure game and more of the map becomes apparent as you as you play and do the different quests
00:30:03
Speaker
this is what this is like now you've got different points coming up of information, where I'll be more joined up much more quickly and it feels to me like the soft forces of disclosure, I sort of pushing this stuff and the cats comes out, brush comes out, we've got the solve foundation going on, other things going on, and we can see these things it would have took years earlier to be connected and even then we might not know,
00:30:26
Speaker
now we can sort of see some clear connections and so it feels like there's a little bit of, I don't mean any government coordinator, I feel there's a bit of activist sort of coordination about this now. Just as you were talking, you've given me that before. There just seems to be a lot of new people popping up on social media and accounts, groups, apps, organisations. There seems to be a whole lot of new ones that passed the last 12, 24 months, so just all these new kind of things being formed.
00:30:55
Speaker
that kind of all doing the same thing, all not working together, but they are kind of doing the same thing. It's weird, it is really weird to see.
00:31:04
Speaker
Yeah. One to keep an eye on as well, I suppose, isn't it? Because a lot of these new kind of groups, organizations and things like that, I'm sure there's plenty of them that have the best intentions and are actively pushing for transparency and whatnot. But we never know exactly what the motivations are, who's funding this stuff. And there could be attempts going on as well to sort of like muddy the waters. But
00:31:31
Speaker
It's funny, there's also groups that drop away and researchers and things that start to drop away. And so I know I've been around in the UFO world for a little while now, because there's been folks that have cropped up and disappeared. And we're still looking into all of this stuff. But I think you have to be prepared to be in it for the long haul, really, don't you, with this topic. But another thing that Grush was talking about,
00:32:00
Speaker
which is the reprisals against him, Dave, you sort of hinted at this before.
Whistleblower Harassment and Intimidation
00:32:06
Speaker
And he was saying that he was.
00:32:08
Speaker
He was actually targeted at his family home, which sounds, I mean, just really scary at the end of the day. He doesn't go into specifics because he said that there's an active investigation into it at the moment. But he does seem to suggest that there were some pretty horrific sounding intimidation tactics used against him. And he says it was multiple times as well, and it was coordinated with
00:32:31
Speaker
similar kind of things being done to other people that Grush was working with at the time. And he says he was basically left with the message that they can get to him any time they want to. And I sort of read between the lines there that they've gained access to the inside of his property when he was been asleep or something like that, and perhaps left a message of some type, which is definitely scary stuff.
00:32:59
Speaker
I'm hoping you've never had the MoD leaving cryptic messages in the aftermath of a UFO-identified event, Ash. Hopefully we've not had that kind of reprisal against you, but yeah, that kind of thing sounds pretty scary. What do you reckon, Ash? I mean, we've had Russians turn up. That was a really, really interesting night. Really? Yeah, I won't talk about it here, but yeah, we've basically turned down RT, which is like the biggest Russian
00:33:29
Speaker
news group and then we had unnamed Russians turn up at a couple of our events following. Wow. That is just all of it. I tell you guys the whole story another time. But yeah, I mean, you mentioned during the Congress hearings about intimidation threats and it felt like you had to kind of come forward for his safety, for his family's safety, to help me threaten. I guess he probably talked about it in a bit more detail by the sounds of it on Joe Rogan.
00:33:55
Speaker
And it's just, I mean, yeah, that's why he's pushing for the sort of the no pushback kind of laws and whistleblower laws for protection. And it's horrible that it's needed. You think that someone doing the job, someone's got the best interests of the public at heart, and they are basically trying to be silenced. It's horrific, really. I think when you're in that vibe, I think the
00:34:21
Speaker
from the experience of what's happened to people and what we hear, the best thing he can do is keep on going, though, Grush. Because if you did go quiet or whatever, who knows what would happen to him? I mean, he didn't. I thought at first he might have actually gone to his house and sort of stood over his bed, you know, with guns and stuff to scare him and his wife. But he's a big lad, Grush, and he's had combat experience. That's probably not the best idea, because I suspect he did an interview. The other guy in the meeting was talking and he said that he had a gun on his hip when he was interviewing.
00:34:50
Speaker
So he must be armed now. He must be prepared for something. So that's probably not the best tactic to go and do that sort of upfront stuff. It sounded pretty up close and personal, what they've done. But as I say, I think that the message of that is once you're on that road, which is a very brave road he's gone down, you've got to keep going. Because if you drop below the public's radar, then you are very vulnerable. I think I bet they'd love to do so much to him, to show him up. Because he really is.
00:35:17
Speaker
by far the best quality person with the credentials to come forward out of any of them and they can't lay a glove on him so it'd be very important if they could to shut him up they'd love to do that.
00:35:29
Speaker
And it comes back to all the people. You talked about Ash on Twitter. There's loads of new stuff that I think is dodgy you see on Twitter. There's a book come out recently by some block on UFOs, which is the clearest bit of dense information I've ever seen in my life. I don't mention anything. It's just obviously put up by whatever government agency. So it's really all happening. But the truth of it is, what these people really fear is exposure.
00:35:58
Speaker
Russia is probably no option now but to keep going and there's a few of the other people and it'll be interesting to see what happens if somebody just comes forward now. I might talk about later what would happen if somebody leaked and what would the trial be and would Danny Sheehan be defending them and all the rest of it. It's really very interesting but to get back to the point the intimidation is pretty horrible.
00:36:18
Speaker
God knows what they did. And I bet it wasn't anything nice. I mean, anything, you know, but we could, you know, you might think it's bad, but it was worse than what you could imagine, you know, without him actually physically laying hands on him, you know.
00:36:31
Speaker
Yeah. And one thing that he went into quite a lot more depth about as well was his own personal kind of like sacrificing some of his career. And it's a really interesting watch. You should definitely check it out when you're trying.
00:36:48
Speaker
But he really goes into that, like where his career was headed and how he's basically turned that down in order to do this. And obviously the opportunities that you get, as you know, Ash, if you make any kind of income in this topic, people come after you and say that you're a grifter and all the rest of it. But as we know, there's not really
00:37:12
Speaker
You know, it's not like some kind of land of opportunity where you can make millions. You know, all you've got to do is, you know, sort of like blow the whistle. And it's really not like that. What grushes turn down and what are these people who have been willing to come forward with information? You know, they actually really.
00:37:31
Speaker
do themselves in in terms of what they had going for them and they make that sacrifice because they believe that they're doing the right thing by coming forward and Grush is really clear about that and the reasons that he did it and some of the things that he's had a lot of criticism from various people as well.
00:37:50
Speaker
you know, with sort of dubious motivation for trying to discredit him, I would say. And he goes into a lot of the PTSD that he suffered with and how he admits to openly, he's had problems with
00:38:05
Speaker
with alcohol and things like that as a way of self-medicating for the problems that he struggled with. And he goes into the reasons of why he's had those problems as well, you know, things that he saw in service and close friends of his. And yeah, just from a personal kind of point of view, I think you get a really good sense of where he's coming from just on a human level kind of thing, which is really interesting. But just going back to another point that he makes, he goes into how
00:38:35
Speaker
Harry Reid told him that he was going to speak to Biden about this topic. So obviously we all know Senator Harry Reid.
00:38:46
Speaker
And he'd actually said to Grush specifically that he was going to have a phone call with Biden. Harry Reid himself was going to phone Biden and talk about this topic. And I would assume that that phone call took place, which is pretty crazy to think that the actual current president of the US has been having phone calls with a very high level politician, the Senate majority leader,
00:39:13
Speaker
former Gang of Eight member, Harry Reid, you know, I'd have loved to be a fly on the wall for that one. So what do you reckon of that, Dave? How do you think that conversation went between Harry Reid and Biden?
Political Implications of UFOs
00:39:26
Speaker
Well, I mean, I think we must assume Obama clearly knew something from his statement. So we've got to assume Biden went. But I think Biden's the old stage, he would have had some content there, but he's this sort of classic politician. So
00:39:40
Speaker
I think Biden knew about it, he probably wanted to do a favour for his mate Reid, but I suspect he's tried his best to sort of avoid it, but the key thing
00:39:52
Speaker
And he's done his best to avoid it until balloon gate. And then he realized he was looking weak as a president because he got out with people coming out of airspace. And then he sort of connected himself through Jake Rogers saying, oh, we've got a program. And again, I think you can see the White House connection to this, you know, the UAP disclosure act. So I think the important thing for me was there was a clear link to Biden knowing about this via read some time ago. And that to me was the important thing.
00:40:20
Speaker
the the the
00:40:34
Speaker
how the White House is going to react now because I think it could potentially be an election issue, it could be a winning issue, there's a few things going on and they'll have to make a calculation as to whether to drop it and try and bury it or to go with it. I'm surprised Trump's not gone for this issue because if you think about it,
00:40:54
Speaker
The courts are after him, he's trying to make the case as a massive state thing against him. This is perfect for Trump, isn't it? To sort of prove the deep state, they're all liars but yet he's not going for it.
00:41:06
Speaker
which makes me wonder about what his links are to Republicans and all the rest of it. Anyway, I won't go down that route, but it is an interesting thought. But yeah, getting back to Biden, I think, yeah, the interesting thing is it implicated Biden for me directly into the conversation and that he knows about it. Yeah, pretty fascinating to think Biden
00:41:32
Speaker
what he actually is aware of and the conversations that have took place behind closed doors. What do you make of that, Ash? Do you reckon we're likely to see Biden getting more stuck in in this topic? Do you think there's still too much of a stigma that, you know, they'll shy away from it as a major sort of like election issue at the minute? Yeah, I think for sure. I think there's a lot of other stuff going on at the minute where I think he has to be seen to probably trying to sort of deal with them, especially with going to be election coming up.
00:42:00
Speaker
I think is it next year or the year after? We're doing the midterms, whatever. It's always elections in America, since there's always presidential elections every year. Next November. Next November. I don't think it's going to be a priority kind of thing you hear concentrate on. They definitely have an interest. All the presidents seem to have had some kind of interest, like you say, apart from Trump.
00:42:23
Speaker
The past presidents, conspiracy theorists say Robert Kennedy was killed. J.I.K. was killed because he knew certain stuff I was going to tell. That's quite a big conspiracy theory. So they all do know stuff, I think, whether they publicly talk about it, like say, because of stigma and it could just isolate them, especially in a tough, in a tight kind of contest.
00:42:44
Speaker
And it could be like, say, the decided fact that they maybe both stay away from just to not take that gamble on that type of thing. Because it's like, it's big for us. A lot of views, but there's a lot of people. When you look at any comment section, when there's an article in any newspaper, the sort of general public comments are all still sort of taking the comments and stuff like that in America and over here.
00:43:07
Speaker
If there is still the kind of more general perception still, then yeah, we'll detain that gamble to come across as the UFO president.
00:43:19
Speaker
Yeah, I do tend to agree that we're a while off seeing this as a as an actual sort of like key point and election or even something that gets brought up by a presidential candidate. At this moment, I think we're still a little bit of a way off. I mean, like I was saying, let's say there's 50 million people listen to Joe Rogan.
00:43:39
Speaker
get a you know a full kind of dose of of grush you know what i mean that's 50 million people out of that 50 million only a percentage of those are actually going to absorb the information and take it on board so let's say you know for the sake of argument half of them people 25 million and there's how many in the us 380 million or something like that so it's like really how how much
00:44:03
Speaker
you know, the kind of like the window has got to shift in terms of public opinion, and that stigma has got to kind of gradually be worn down. I don't think we're quite there yet. But you know, what is it you you call it, Dave, the Overton window, is it? Yeah, it is definitely Overton window, that which is the commonly accepted political sort of
00:44:23
Speaker
differences or the window for which opinion varies. What's the right, what's the left, what's the window of common opinion? I mean, yeah, that's exactly it. I think that it might...
00:44:36
Speaker
concepts can change quite a lot. Balloon gate to refer to that again. You look out quickly that change, it all got very serious then. Depending on what's revealed, if it can make that crossover between the fringe, between a mainstream defense issue and some definite proof, it could very quickly become an issue. And if it does become an issue like balloon gate did, then they're all going to have to take a position on it. So I agree with it. It might not, you know, it doesn't look likely, but I do think it can change pretty quickly depending on the political context.
00:45:07
Speaker
It also is potentially a rabbit out of the heart for a politician as well, you know, and that's not to be underestimated. But I think you're right. I think we're a bit off that yet. But as the, what is it, Macmillan said, events, day by events. You know, what was the thing for what he did? Was it the economy? Was it the foreign policy said events? And what he meant was things happening that you're not prepared for. And I think
00:45:31
Speaker
This thing's happened on this UAP field, but they're not prepared for it. And God knows it's been a few happening recently, and it could change pretty quickly, I reckon. Yeah, definitely. So I think enough said about the Grush on Rogan for the time being. But I honestly would say to people, a lot of people have heard me talk about it. They've heard us talk about it on the round table. You might have seen the News Nation program where he sat down with Rush Coulter, various other bits and pieces.
00:45:59
Speaker
But if you've perhaps not heard that much about Groesch, or you've not seen some of them, or you've seen Bits and Bats, that Joe Rogan interview really is, you know, the best kind of summary and Groesch being able to give his own point of view. And I say it's two and a half hours long, but actually the first hour and a half is kind of the key bit. And after that, they sort of start talking about all the stuff and like cars and like there's one point they're talking about like a
00:46:25
Speaker
chimpanzee fishing and you know it goes a bit off onto a tangent but the first at least the first hour first hour and a half perhaps as well it's there's no editing so it's not as though you're getting snippets it's literally just you know Grush sat down just talking given his version of what's happened in a lot of detail so it's really well worth you know people checking out
00:46:49
Speaker
So yeah, so let's crack on with a couple of other bits and pieces then. So Schumer shenanigans. I like that. I wrote that on my notes earlier on. I thought I'd keep that in. So I've got a bit of a preamble to do and I can see Dave's relocating his recording situation as I say this. So it's perfect timing. So earlier in 2023,
00:47:17
Speaker
The current Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer alongside Senator Mike Rounds brought forward this proposal which was 64 pages in length to basically sort of bring about the disclosure of official information on UAP to the public.
UAP Disclosure Act of 2023
00:47:36
Speaker
It was called the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act of 2023. And the act was introduced as part of the National Defense Authorization Act NDAA, which is every year they pass this piece of legislation that authorizes all the funding for the US armed forces and outlines the budget and what the Department of Defense are going to be doing in terms of operations and so on.
00:48:01
Speaker
And one of the key things in this legislation was about eminent domain. It's a term that most people have never heard of and everyone's been talking about, which is
00:48:13
Speaker
The US government basically can essentially confiscate and take into their possession any UAP technologies that are revealed to exist. And another key thing was the creation of a presidential records review board, similar to basically the one that was put forward in 1992, I believe it was, related to JFK records.
00:48:40
Speaker
And in July, the Senate version of this particular bill, which included the UAP wording that I mentioned above, was actually approved in a 86 to 11 vote. Following that was a House vote that approved another version by a bit of a slimmer majority, but it still got through.
00:49:02
Speaker
And after each version of this bill went through, the two chambers had like a formal conference process to negotiate between the two versions of the bill as what usually happens. However, late last week,
00:49:19
Speaker
It came out that representatives Mike Turner and Mike Rogers were basically amongst those trying their best to eliminate or significantly change the wording in the UAP disclosure act during the negotiations in the NDAA conference.
00:49:39
Speaker
and these new developments which were actually first reported by our old Paul Chris Sharp of Liberation Times last week and later picked up by various other news websites such as The Debris and whatnot. These reports that were coming out indicated that Turner, who's the
00:49:58
Speaker
Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and Rogers, who's the Chair of the House Armed Services Committee, had basically got some support from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, and essentially all of this
00:50:16
Speaker
action that was taking place cast a bit of doubt as to whether this UAP disclosure act would actually make its way into the final version of the NDAA, which eventually gets signed into law by President Biden. And it's quite a departure actually, the last few years there's been a lot of discussion around this these types of legislation and they've basically sailed through with a few tweaks here and there.
00:50:41
Speaker
So I think I was kind of thinking and the way that people were discussing it this year that it was probably going to do that this year and it was going to be a thing. You know, I think we sort of or at least I don't want to speak for everybody, but I sort of almost took it for granted that it was definitely going to happen. But there's definitely some challenges to that.
00:51:01
Speaker
However, it's probably fair to say that all is not lost. And there's been a bit of an unprecedented effort by pro-disclosure politicians rising up in outrage at what's been going on. And the wider UFO community have had a bit of a push to engage in activism, contact representatives and stuff. Folks all over the US have been doing just that, contacting the representatives to demonstrate that there is public interest in this topic.
00:51:30
Speaker
to put pressure on to keep this legislation intact as it represents a big step forward in terms of signing something into law which lays out a road map for increased transparency on this issue, or at least
00:51:44
Speaker
demonstrates a commitment to doing that. For me, the really seriously concerning thing here is that the two most outspoken individuals who are part of these recent attempts to take this legislation down are Mike Turner, Mike Rogers, as I mentioned earlier. Mike and Mike, I think Grush described them as on Rogan.
00:52:10
Speaker
Presumably a reference to Mike and Ike, is it? These suites that they have in the States. Anyway, Mike and Mike. And the debrief actually published as part of their article about this. They actually published a chart of House Armed Services Committee members with their corresponding amounts that they received from defense contractors in the 2022 election cycle.
00:52:34
Speaker
And it's really quite astonishing. Right at the top of the list, you've got Mike Rogers, who received over $300,000 that year alone. And Mike Turner is, lo and behold, in at number five on the list as well. And interestingly, the bottom two on that list that received the least funding from these defense contractors are Mike Gallagher and Ruben Gallejo.
00:53:01
Speaker
to folks who have been very active in aggressively pursuing transparency on the issue. There seems to be a bit of a striking correlation here between those that are receiving the most funding from defence contractors, like, I don't know, maybe Lockheed and things like that. And they're totally against transparency for some reason, can't figure out what that might be. And on the other end of the scale, those who are receiving the least funding from defence contractors are very much the most outspoken in favour of transparency.
00:53:31
Speaker
So there seems to be a pattern emerging there. What do you reckon Dave? Yeah, you think like in Halloween you think the creatures finally dead and then they jump up and start attacking you again
00:53:47
Speaker
This was a bit like that, I thought. We thought the anti-disclosure movement had finally been put in the place, but actually they jumped up again and started to attack as some sort of returning zombie. So yeah, it's definitely the start of the fight back. And it's classically Thanksgiving is the time to do it, because you can do whatever they're going to do, and they're all off then for Thanksgiving. So this was a classic political
00:54:12
Speaker
ambush of that nature. Like you say, I mean, there's obviously some heavy hitters there. It's all funding related and it's clearly from aerospace and defense funding. And Mike Johnson, the new speaker who's renting an idiot really, had up the gear last long, he got sort of all into it because he's sort of, you know, some sort of puny political figure who's been cast into greatness because he was the only one who they could think of to agree on.
00:54:37
Speaker
And he's been at a Mitch McConnell, who presumably, you know, when he stopped sort of staring at space, sort of snapped back into action, said, we won't stop it. So it was amazing that they managed to do this in this way. But it's quite interesting. I mean, like you said, there's no case for them. Why would the objective transparency? There's no real case for it.
00:54:57
Speaker
And it's quite naked sort of influence, but it's pretty obvious to everybody. And this don't seem to care, because clearly funding counts for a lot. So, yeah, I mean, we thought it was sort of... The two things they feared, oh, yeah, the two things they targeted was the eminent domain, which is that thing where the government can sequester the sort of NHI technology that people have got.
00:55:21
Speaker
Which isn't a big deal really, because there's no reason why they can't do a deal where the government can look at it but people retain ownership. I've never thought that was a big issue, but what they really fear
00:55:31
Speaker
is the review panel and that's that this process in the UAP legislation where the systematic and they can't get out of it easily they've got to give the information up decade on decade of information and they decide if it's classified and it's classified by a body that aren't but they don't control and that's what they fear because that's how this orderly disclosure
00:55:52
Speaker
is gonna come about and they can't easily novel it and that's so obviously that's the target i think in many ways eminent domain was a faint so and basically tried to take that out the people are posing them so well why do you want to do that uh what's the reason can you justify actually said right we'll pull it all then that's apparently what happened and now we're seeing a bit of a fight back where they try to negotiate and what they'll do but
00:56:16
Speaker
It is. I think and I've said this before, but I think these efforts are massive overreach by these by these unelected bodies, the military and the aerospace contractors and particularly the military are going to shoot themselves
Influence of Defense Contractors and Political Skepticism
00:56:29
Speaker
in the foot. The idea are already massively implicated in lines of people covering stuff up, breaching the rules, you know, breaching the sort of congressional office and all the rest of it. So I think that they just paint themselves into a corner and the consequences going to be. And this is the other thing.
00:56:46
Speaker
if this act doesn't go through we get the orderly disclosure that everybody wants to buy the ministration wants and is the only really sensible option and we're gonna start saying we're so blowing leaks and we're gonna start seeing death by a thousand leaks i think the phrases and it's gonna be get very disorderly.
00:57:04
Speaker
But I think that entrenched into the position and they don't know what to do and they don't want to get out of it. They don't want to come clean. But all they can do is just keep playing this weird game of whack-a-mole and somehow the machine will stop. But I don't think it's going to stop. So yeah, it's a very odd situation. And one question for me is, if it does go down,
00:57:27
Speaker
would the president pass an executive order to get it back in? I mean, he could do that, I think. I mean, it'd be interesting to see what people think, what listeners think. But I think he could do that. And the main business of that UAP amendment act, following up, the main business will be done by November, the initial look at all the records, just ironically, after the presidential elections. So there you go.
00:57:54
Speaker
It could do a lot of work if the president does that, and I wonder if the White House may be thinking about doing that. Now that comes back to whether the president wants to dip his toe in the water or wants to leave it, you know, but that's an interesting one.
00:58:07
Speaker
And then again, I think the thing that people actually, the whistleblower's disclosing are coming out an uncontrolled disclosure. People getting really mad at this naked sort of suppression for no good reason. The article by Marek today said, what is the reason about this for this? There's no good reason. I think it's going to make things pretty interesting in 2024 and certainly not the calm path, but we're all predicting.
00:58:35
Speaker
Yeah, it's funny. It does seem to be kind of getting edging closer and closer towards direct presidential involvement, doesn't it? You know, like these various like review boards and things like that. And you just the it does seem inevitable at some stage, the president's involvement is going to be quite key. But I suppose the question is, are we
00:59:00
Speaker
at the stage where the president would openly get involved in this issue. And I don't think we're quite there yet. But at the same time, the obvious actions that are taking place to stop any efforts towards transparency. The more that that goes on, the more it's going to encourage whistleblowers to do things
00:59:23
Speaker
not exactly the wrong way, but there's a correct way of doing things and a process to be followed and that kind of thing. But obviously, the more things like this, which, you know, there's no question, it looks bloody dubious, doesn't it? At the end of the day, these politicians who've got clearly are getting money,
00:59:42
Speaker
you know openly as well because these are facts and figures and stuff that are available like it's not like a conspiracy theory that these are politicians who are getting money off defense contractors the same defense contractors that are supposedly holding the materials and they're they're actively fighting back against any efforts towards transparency with the public it doesn't look good does it and the more you see things like that happening
01:00:05
Speaker
The more it's tempting for people who've got information on the inside to come forward, in some cases it will be anonymously for various reasons, and in some cases it will be people like Grush, who are willing to set that personal sacrifice that it takes to be able to come forward and put your own name behind it.
01:00:23
Speaker
It's, yeah, as you say, Dave, there's kind of a, there's a path towards like a control disclosure by following them, them correct paths. And then there's also a bit of a worry and potential outcome as well of more of an uncontrolled disclosure sort of thing, a catastrophic disclosure, to kind of phrase. But what your thoughts on all of that, Ash? So I kind of have two kind of initial questions that kind of came to mind when you were reading out about
01:00:51
Speaker
And this probably comes, this is probably born from a lack of understanding of how the American kind of process works, the political system. And obviously on the face of it, these guys getting the money from the defense contractors, kind of clearly that they're the ones bringing it down. But my, guess my thought on that is, is it just because it's UAP or do they always kind of vote against
01:01:17
Speaker
this type of any kind of looking into defense stuff, any type of contract work, did it always try and vote it down or is it just a UAP kind of one that they're trying to vote down? So that's one sort of question I had. Another one is, again, it probably does not know how the system works. If it was voted in by like 85 to 11, whatever the numbers were in favor, how can two people have kind of so much influence over kind of bringing it down, if that makes sense?
01:01:47
Speaker
that that
01:02:01
Speaker
then if the defense people are funding them to that tune, say we want you to oppose this, that's what you do. So it's not, it's your way around. They'll sing whatever tune that you, the piper, they will pipe whatever tune, you know, the person is paying for basically. So that's, that's that. Now that's an interesting question you raise on the second bit because most people, it seems in Congress and the Senate are in favor of more transparency, but these two people actually have key positions. I think it's on the intelligence committee and the answers services committee.
01:02:31
Speaker
and they can they can stop the passage of the bill. Now the speaker certainly can because he's the one who's got the power. So just because of the way it works and what happens is they tend to negotiate on these bills what's going to be passed or not and those guys because of their positions on the different committees can effectively stop it passing or stopping going into the app which could stop the whole app going.
01:02:53
Speaker
so it's not very democratic it's just they've got key gatekeeper positions but we'll stop it going through so it's just the lucky and clearly the DoE and all the other non-disclosure people know all this they've been nobbling these acts since they've been coming out in this bit this is the bit we all fear when it comes to the reconciliation they call it when the two bills come together and all that this is when they put the fix in and nobble it and they've done it
01:03:19
Speaker
on all the UAP acts they pull various different things out and now they're just nakedly doing it on this. This is the most naked thing we've seen though. Well yeah that's essentially it but it's a good question because they're not only thwarting the will of the people you might argue, they're thwarting the will of the majority of both the Senate and the Congress and they're really sort of abusing the power and as I say that Speaker is just a puppet at the moment, absolute puppet.
01:03:45
Speaker
Let's just go back on the the first question I was asking. It was more so these so know the money is coming from defense contractors and they're being told to vote for this on behalf, basically on behalf of the defense contractors effectively. That's what's happening. But is it on? Is it just? Is it do they vote just against? Or is it just do I wear it properly? Are the defense contractor people?
01:04:15
Speaker
just against it just because it's UAP or do they usually vote? You usually kind of push back against this stuff, whether it's any kind of defence does not just UAP. No, well, normally they'll want to get the particular contract passed, they'll want more spending, they want things that will benefit their business, as will the military. But in this case, they're holding on to a load of material they don't want to release.
01:04:39
Speaker
And equally, the DOD people are holding on to a load of secrets they don't want exposed. So there's a bit of an unholy alliance, but they don't want it bringing you through. But normally, what they're in favor is influencing politicians who will sort of increase defense spending and not do anything that's going to upset their business. And they're very clever in the US. They put all these defense contracts in all the different states. So they've got a massive sort of blanket of power.
01:05:04
Speaker
across America. They've got a lot of different senatorial people of both parties. They've got a vested interest in defense spending, so it's a very clever and skillful operation.
01:05:16
Speaker
Does that answer your question, Ash? I'm not sure if I'm answering it right. Yeah, I think so. Basically, you've got a group of politicians who are in charge of a key phase of passing the actual legislation as to what the American taxpayer's money is going to be spent on with regards to defence issues in general.
01:05:42
Speaker
What budget is the military going to get and what is that exactly going to be spent on? And obviously the defence contractors have been causing up to these politicians who are in charge of actually making the final adjustments and debating the key points of that legislation.
01:06:01
Speaker
which is just dodgy in itself, really, if you think about it, isn't it? But normally, do you know what you were saying in terms of do they normally sort of vote things down or is it just things that are to do with UAP? I mean, I'm no expert in the past however many years of outside of UAP things to do with the NDAA.
01:06:22
Speaker
Basically, these particular key kind of gatekeepers who are getting this funding from defence contractors are essentially operating with the interests of those defence contractors in mind. So in previous years, it's a case of, well, we want however many million to be able to pursue this research project into a new missile. And obviously, you know, the defence contractors are going to want to do that.
01:06:47
Speaker
And the people who are there funding within these committees are going to vote for that to go through without any problem at all. They're going to grease the rails of various things to get them to go through, because that's what the defense contractors want. They want their funding to be authorized for the projects they're working on. It just so happens that in this particular case, it's something that is not favorable for the defense contractors if it gets put into place. Essentially, they don't want
01:07:13
Speaker
you know, any any prying eyes into what they're doing with these with these secret projects and that kind of thing. So in this case, it does appear, you know, because we don't know for sure exactly what's going on. But it certainly doesn't look good, does it? When I say, I mean, there's literally in that in that debrief article, it's really interesting graphic. It's it's a list of, you know, like a top, I think there's about 20 of them from from memory and right up there in the top two of the most
01:07:42
Speaker
a funding given to them by defense contractors is the two key figures. And right down at the very bottom, the lowest two is Gallagher and Galejo, who have been the most pro transparency. And when you see it in a graphic like that,
01:07:59
Speaker
It seems to point in one direction. There's no outliers, somebody who's really pro transparency and also happens to be receiving a vast amount of money from defense contractors. It does seem to be the case that that's what's going on there. I don't know if that makes it any clearer.
01:08:20
Speaker
I guess another final question is, how is that not bribery? It's bribery, Ash. That's exactly what it is. The American political system has been gradually eroded by the rise of lobbying, the only lobbying to run the campaigns. It's very expensive.
01:08:38
Speaker
And that's what you've seen. You've got the rise of lobbying. It's like ancient Rome, where all the powerful people used to harass the senators, you know, and deprive them all the rest of it. And this is very similar. There's a good argument that democracy is threatened.
01:08:52
Speaker
by these big industrial and different political interests, paying money to these campaign funds. Because there's no state support for any sort of campaigning, the mercy of who's got the money, which is not really what democracy is about, because America is such a mercantile country as its economy.
01:09:11
Speaker
this is seen as okay or more okay and it sort of represents sort of our economic factors are really at the point but it definitely an issue like this illustrates but it's very well one would argue anti-democratic because the politicians after they think well if i'm not in i can't do good so i'm gonna have to make a few compromises on my morals here but really
01:09:32
Speaker
ethically. And it is a big problem, it's a big problem generally in sort of western democracies, but in America it's a massive problem. That's why there are now 100,000 people could be shot on the streets and because the gun lobby is so strong and funds so many people, the fact of trying to restrict firearms is never going to happen. And that's a classic example of a democratic deficit, the lobby, it's not a political show this, but that's my view on it anyway.
01:09:58
Speaker
Yeah, it sort of does tap into that wider issue of corporations and very powerful companies and groups funding governments to get their own interests pursued, basically. I mean, it's kind of an issue in the UK.
01:10:18
Speaker
as well, but I think it's much more so an issue in the States. Like, well, we have it, don't we, where there's major contributors, you know, major donors to the Conservative Party or whatever. And obviously they give millions to the Conservative campaign in exchange kind of unofficially for favorable treatment for their company or whatever. Or, you know, like Rupert Murdoch has been sort of accused of that kind of thing. But I think in the States, like Dave was saying, it's probably even more so the case.
01:10:47
Speaker
The difference is, Frank, power's more centralised in the UK, but it's more fragmented in the US law. Individual politicians have got more power on laws, and so it's easier to get individual influence with counts. It's not as easy to influence an entire regime, government, because of the party system over there. Over there, it's sort of rife. I mean, the American economy's strong because of its sort of mercantile stance.
01:11:10
Speaker
And if it's done properly, it can really help having that kind of stuff. But in this case, people have always taken the easy option, and it sort of slipped for me into that sort of system that's got a lot of problems. So yeah, sorry, yeah. So I'm getting a little too political there, boy.
01:11:27
Speaker
Yeah, but there's obviously some wider issues there that we've touched upon. But in this particular case, it has infringed upon the push for transparency that obviously we all want in the UFO topic, hasn't it? We're forced to confront that particular aspect a little bit more than perhaps what we would do normally.
01:11:49
Speaker
But we'll see how it all plays out. But before we wrap up, I think it'd be good to get a little bit in about something that's happened just today, which it always
CIA's Role in UFO Crash Retrievals
01:12:01
Speaker
happens, man. There must be some kind of conspiracy against it whenever we record a pod where the summit big happens that day. Well, they knew Ash was back, and they said, Ash is back today. We must launch something big. And that's what's happened. The article comes out.
01:12:16
Speaker
But yeah, there's actually been quite a few articles like you were saying, Dave, does that Maric one? And there's been a few others that have not had a chance to even get close to reading just yet. But sorry, Dave, did you want to say something else there? No, no, you carry on. You carry on. Yeah. So so basically the thing that there's been various sort of like buckle up type of comments and things over the last few days and you know,
01:12:38
Speaker
something big's coming type of thing which you know does tend to happen with these things and obviously there's you know inevitably when you hype something up there's going to be some people who are disappointed in what eventually comes down the line as we've seen time and time again and we've talked about a lot on the pod. I always say I personally don't mind a bit of hype you know it's not bad is it at the end of the day getting excited about something even if it's not a complete world changer when it does arrive.
01:13:06
Speaker
But in this case, it is quite an important article, and it's an article in The Daily Mail that's just come out just today. And this is with Chris Sharp, Josh Boswell, who have been kind of co-authors on various UAP related articles for The Daily Mail over the last, I guess it's a couple of years now. And in this case, it was also co-authored by Matt Ford of the Good Trouble Show. Shout out to Matt Ford, bit of a friend of the show.
01:13:35
Speaker
What brilliant work he's doing. Fantastic. He is indeed. And they're always a very sharply dressed gentleman as well, which is always very much appreciated in my eyes. More so appreciated than Kirkpatrick because of all of the other aspects as well that come along with the smart dress sense. But anyway.
01:13:53
Speaker
The article was about essentially, and this came out about what, two hours or so before we started recording. So this is just a very surface level take, which is why we've kind of left it to the end here, but it's definitely worth discussing. And the article essentially is about the CIA's involvement
01:14:10
Speaker
in crash retrievals and the CIA basically have an office within the CIA that are in charge of actually conducting these these retrievals. Have you had a chance to read it through Dave? Have you got any any summary you can give on that? I have Frank yeah there's also Matt Ford doing a brilliant he's becoming a real force I asked him for a bit actually but he's so professional
01:14:38
Speaker
stuff he's doing but map four has done a bit of a show on it with chris sharp and josh boswell it's well worth checking out on his youtube channel so i'd advise everybody go through it in some detail but
01:14:49
Speaker
Essentially, there's a secret CIA retrieval team. The Office of Global Access, it's called. Sounds like something from Harry Potter, the Ministry of Magic, done it. But anyway, that's what it's called. They basically have got a secret tracking system that they use. The craft, apparently, that are flying around the cloaks. I'm giving a real, this is a big article I'm trying to do.
01:15:10
Speaker
shortly really. The craft are flying around the coke, they've got a tracking system that can track them, they're also able to bring them down or if they come down, they crash or whatever they land, throws the keys or we can bring them down apparently with this tracking system. They've got a system retrieval system but through this office we can go anywhere using special forces mainly or anybody who's
01:15:33
Speaker
who's available but clearly trained people to go and retrieve the craft. Apparently they've got nine of them. I don't know if it's since 2003, it wasn't too clear from the article, but certainly there's nine they know about. And these people are going around the world picking them up. This ties into what the Canadian MP was saying about the Five Eyes and intelligence cooperation and military's property to retrieve them. Ties into a number of things we've heard.
01:15:59
Speaker
And it's absolutely massive really, and it gives us this thing again of the CIA, the intelligence community, the DOE, because apparently what happens is once they pick them up, so it doesn't pass through the military, too much paperwork apparently, one source says, goes straight to private industry and straight to wherever they send them. You've got, as I say, you've got the CIA, who we've always thought was a big player in this, even though they tried to say they're not, and it's somebody else.
01:16:23
Speaker
the DOA in the private industry where it goes to and research on and also the US Air Force in charge of the tracking alongside the intelligence community. So you can see all those links there and I don't want to go into it too much but the fact that the craft of clothes is something we've also suspected for a long time and they can see them and they've got some tech to bring them down is also quite worrying but just shows how sophisticated this operation got and I think this is the first shot across the bowels
01:16:53
Speaker
but this legislation being threatened, and we've had a lot of talk about they don't want to see control disclosure, the consequences of catastrophic disclosure could be terrible, but the Seoul Foundation at the second day apparently put the fear of God into everybody, what would happen with an uncontrolled disclosure, which is why the review panel in the legislation set up how it is to consider all the things,
01:17:17
Speaker
and I think this is the first shot across the bowels and as Chris Sharpe said on a shot at the weekend, prepare for fireworks, there'll be other stuff than this coming out and so I think this is the start, this is very significant, some people have been having a go at it on Twitter but I don't know what people want really, this is a brilliant place of journalism you know, so I think it's fantastic and yeah, the article is very significant and I think it'll be the first of a few.
01:17:43
Speaker
Yeah, just just while you were talking, I just pulled it up. I just wanted to read out, you know, like newspaper articles generally have like a couple of key bullet points at the top. And so they are the the Office of Global Access, OGA, a wing of the CIA has played a central role in collecting alien spacecraft since 2003. I have to do a double take sometimes reading sentences like that in the Daily Mail, like a major public. It's just insane, isn't it, to think about
01:18:13
Speaker
Joe Rogan's just had David Grush on as a guest. Now I'm reading this in The Daily Manic. Is this real life? And then the next bullet point. At least nine non-human craft have been recovered by the US government, some wrecked from a crash and two completely intact.
01:18:31
Speaker
and the CIA has a system in place that can discern UFOs while they're still cloaked and special military units are sent to salvage the wreckage sources said. Now, on that point, the sources said bit, right?
01:18:46
Speaker
Obviously, everybody hates an anonymous source. We would all much rather it be a Dave Grush, who's willing to actually make that personal sacrifice and all the rest of it to come out and put his name on the line. But I think it's worth bearing in mind. Not everybody is in a position where they can do that, they're willing to do that. And there's a lot of complexities, I think, as well with anybody who's had involvement in this type of stuff. It's a pretty tough
01:19:12
Speaker
line to trade kind of thing, really. And you've got everything you do. You've got to be very careful not to say too much or you can put yourself in some very dubious kind of legal positions and whatnot. But a lot of people criticise kind of anonymous sources in journalism. And I never really paid much attention to this kind of thing before, I guess, about three or four years ago when I started reading more about UFOs and stuff like that.
01:19:39
Speaker
Ever since I have been interested in this topic, you start to look at other articles just on general BBC News and things like that, and you look at them in a slightly different way. And I always note now when they're talking about news stories on Sky News or BBC News or whatever,
01:19:56
Speaker
of what they're actually basing the information in the article on. And it's quite surprising how many times major articles on the BBC will base an entire article on one anonymous source. Like key ones, anything to do with the royals and politics is another one.
01:20:14
Speaker
And they'll just say, and a source who we can't name, you know, within the Labour Party has said that this is likely to happen over the next couple of weeks. And that's a major story on BBC News about, like, for example, Boris Johnson's going to fire somebody or something back in the day, or, you know, Rishi Sunak's going to make an announcement about this. And they do.
01:20:36
Speaker
entire articles, you know, front page articles on the BBC News website based off a source, interestingly as well. So what I'm saying is there is a precedent for that within journalism. It's not as though UFOs is the only subject that uses anonymous sources. It's pretty widespread amongst, you know, journalistic practice, if you will. And the New York Times
01:21:00
Speaker
being quite a well-known, renowned, reputable publication. They have a policy where certain kind of bombshell claims they won't publish unless they can back it up with an additional source.
01:21:16
Speaker
And I think generally speaking, if you're talking about something of particular importance, that's what they try to do to have more than one source to verify a piece of information. And the New York Times level organizations go out of the way to make sure they've got more than one source. And the key thing about this article is that it's actually based on three separate sources who are all verifying the information.
01:21:40
Speaker
So yeah, it's not ideal to have anonymous sources. We would all prefer to have Dave Grush coming out. But I think, you know, like we were saying earlier on, with these very sort of dubious attempts to shut down transparency legislation and stuff, there is inevitably going to be some people who don't want to come out.
01:22:00
Speaker
put their own name behind it but want to get the message out as to what their experiences of what's going on. I think that's what we're seeing with this and obviously time will tell in terms of whether or not more information comes out we may may well see people who are willing to put their own names on the line as well but i think.
01:22:19
Speaker
But with that kind of context, I think it's a pretty interesting step towards further verifying the way that Crossroads Rebels work. It's something that backs up a lot of what Grush has been saying and gives a bit more detail about how the actual mechanics of all of that work. So I found it very interesting. As I say, I've only read it over the last couple of hours, but that's my initial thoughts on it.
01:22:48
Speaker
How about yourself, because I know we didn't speak about this before recording, because it literally just came out. So I don't know if you've got anything you'd like to add on that. Yeah, well, I pretty much skim read it as we're waiting to record this because we had a bit of delay. So let's see what I'm thinking. I saw it being published. We had a quick of a quick skim. We don't like to spend too much time on this particular website. This so doesn't influence my ads and stuff that comes up. But I mean,
01:23:16
Speaker
I, maybe my cynical head took over, I don't know. I think it seems to be too exciting for me personally, but it does take quite a lot to be honest, based on UFO stuff. The anonymous sources of stuff I've had a problem with, Toby or no, I mean these guys,
01:23:33
Speaker
We've all been vetted according to the report. And we know these guys can't kind of break NDAs or do risk kind of possible criminal charges as well as the jobs and stuff. So yeah, totally fine with anonymous sources. It's just part parcel of this type of stuff. When you're talking about military and intelligence and stuff, it's just part of it. For me, it's the sources. It's more that this is kind of what the sources have been told, rather than the sources are actually involved in it.
01:24:03
Speaker
So again, it's that other kind of step where, similar to Grosch, where it's second-hand information being passed again. It's not that these sources aren't involved in it. It's what they've been told. So I guess it's, like I say, it's a waiting game, not a chance to read it properly or see any reactions on social media or anything yet properly. It can digest it a bit more. But that's my kind of initial cynical head, which always seems to take over in these things for some reason.
01:24:32
Speaker
Hey, nothing wrong with a bit of healthy cynicism, Ash. I think, you know, you're on the side of wanting to know more about UFOs and you just tread a bit more on the cautious side, which there's nothing wrong with that, mate. Ash, he's back. Ash, you've arrived, mate. We've missed you. We've missed you.
01:24:55
Speaker
Yeah, but I mean, I don't think there's too much more to add on it, really. It's a developing sort of, you know, situation. This could well be the first sort of step. And if indeed what's outlined in the article is the case, it's very likely that we will hear more about it, you know. And as I say, I think the more the pushback from the
01:25:19
Speaker
the anti-disclosure kind of politicians in the States, the more that happens and the more obvious it gets, I would suggest probably more folks with direct involvement will be prompted to actually come forward with their own stories.
01:25:35
Speaker
perhaps we'll see more firsthand kind of like witnesses as well because I think that's what we all want really isn't it like we want somebody to come forward and say ideally put the name forward as well. It's a big ask this but I think what we would all like really is for somebody who actually worked on
01:25:53
Speaker
you know, at the bodies or a craft or at least, you know, is able somehow to actually go into specific details from a firsthand perspective of what they've seen. But I think, you know, at this point, we're pretty bloody close to that, aren't we? You know what I mean? We're edging closer and closer to that and we'll see how it all plays out. But I think, yeah, anyone got anything else to add before we wrap it up?
01:26:22
Speaker
I've got one final thing I want you to imagine now that somebody you've like you said somebody comes forward a big whistleblower said I've had enough of this spills the beans to get charged and Danny Sheehan stands up to defend him and I want everybody to think about what his defense would be and whether he'd be successful there's an interesting fault for everybody to leave the show with
01:26:53
Speaker
Well, there we go. Story time with Dave, just to finish off. More of that next month. Yeah. Well, well, yeah, I mean, actually thinking about it next month is actually going to be the sort of like end of year, festive round table, I think, isn't it? Unless I've got me dates. Yeah, that is right. We did it last time, 27 for 28, something like that. It was really good. It's all kicking up.
01:27:17
Speaker
Ash can have his little party popper type thing that he had like last time. Oh, was that for the anniversary? I can't remember. But yeah, we'll definitely be doing that. A nice festive kind of like round table and perhaps we could do like a little mini award ceremony for the bombshell of the year. I think it's probably going to be grushes and it realistically the big sort of like the main thing. Not for now, is it Frank?
01:27:44
Speaker
We never know, there might be another one coming, yeah. We'll see what happens in December, right? You might even have to eat a mushroom on the 29th. Well, I think I'll be all right. I think I'm safe. Oh, Joe, you'll be there. Christmas out on. I'll do this for you, Frank.
01:27:59
Speaker
Yeah, maybe that'll be it. The King's speech on Christmas Day. Maybe King Charles will be the one to drop the bombshell, eh? We'll see. Can't see it somehow, but you never know. But yeah, well, I think we'll leave it there for now. Pleasure as always. And we'll look forward to seeing what we've got to discuss next month. A lot can happen in a month, especially at the moment. So who knows?
01:28:22
Speaker
We'll see. Cheers, everybody. It's been a pleasure. Thanks, Fran. Really enjoyed it. Great to be on with Ash as well. Cheers. Yeah, good to have you back, Ash. Nice one. See you next time.