Threats, Intimidation, Prosecution - The Daunting Risks For UFO Whistleblowers

As Congress prepares for an upcoming public hearing, "UFO World" is inherently impatient when it comes to getting straight answers. Those who follow the topic want the full truth and they want it now. For potential witnesses and whistleblowers, however, the risks of testifying to Congress about secret programs and military deceptions are all too real. In this compelling episode, George Knapp and Jeremy Corbell explore the daunting dangers that confront any insider who wants to tell Congress what they know. Attorney and lifelong UFO researcher Richard Beckwith, who has recently released a history of excessive secrecy and how it has affected the search for truth about UAP, explains why any witness who's held a formal security clearance must be very careful about spilling secrets, even to Congress. There are legal risks, but also significant real life consequences, even if the witnesses are never prosecuted for testifying. Also in this episode, aerospace executive and NASA consultant Mike Gold reveals the confusion surrounding recent allegations about an outbreak of "SCIF Flu" among previous congressional witnesses and why closed door briefings to Congress about UAP programs did not materialize. GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[email protected]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• Pick up Richard’s book titled Need to Know: The History, Law, and Practice of American Secrecy https://a.co/d/dfdRBpN ••• Watch Corbell's six-part UFO docuseries titled UFO REVOLUTION on TUBI here : ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://tubitv.com/series/300002259/tmz-presents-ufo-revolution/season-2⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Watch Knapp’s six-part UFO docuseries titled INVESTIGATION ALIEN on NETFLIX here : ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://netflix.com/title/81674441⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• For breaking news, follow Corbell & Knapp on all social media. Extras and bonuses from the episode can be found at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠WeaponizedPodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  UKG is the workforce operating platform with unified HR, payroll and workforce management. Built to solve the unique challenges of frontline work. Powered by People First AI and decades of labor data. UKG turns workforce intelligence into real-time decisions around staffing, pay, compliance and productivity. Enabling every worker to confidently take action as work happens. Because when work works, everything works. Learn more at ukg.com/work. UKG, HR, Pay and Workforce Management.

• 0:30Speaker 01

  New and exclusive holiday decor just launched online at The Home Depot. Check out the viral Grand Duchess collection with smart holiday lights you can control from your phone. Easily customize the twinkle across trees, wreaths and garlands to match your holiday vibe. Create stunning light effects, then switch it up with the tap of your fingers. Even the man in red will be impressed. Shop the holiday decor you want, online only, at homedepot.com.

• 1:01George Knapp?

  Employees at Groom Lake, loyal employees who'd spent their whole lives out there, kept secrets, started getting sick. And loyal Americans to the end, they would say, hey, can you at least tell us what we're exposed to so we can tell our doctors and they can treat us? They wouldn't.

• 1:17Speaker 03

  And the government just simply came back and said, we're not, we can't tell you. We're applying this mosaic theory. This could be used by our enemies and so we're not going to tell you. And I mean, basically, they just, and I think you even probably knew at least one or two of those guys personally and had interviewed them and knew exactly what they were up against. But again, that is what killed FOIA. And so while we're all arguing about this and having our congressional hearings, there are insidious human beings in a lab somewhere that may be very close to figuring out these propulsion secrets. Maybe they already have and there's a plan already in place.

• 1:58Speaker 03

  But it's a battle for disclosures so that these technologies can be released to benefit all of us.

• 2:08Speaker 03

  And between those people and the people that want to sequester this to themselves and dominate the whole planet and enslave all of us, that's really what it's about. I hate to be so grandiose, but ultimately, that's really what it's about. I always wonder what happens when, you know, let's say if we're a genetic experiment, or if there is something about us that is a product, what happens when the subject of the experiment becomes aware of the experimenters? Is it time to start over and wipe the slate clean?

• 2:48George Knapp?

  This is Weaponized. I'm George Knapp, hunkered down here in the cool confines of my Las Vegas bunker, joined by my friend and colleague Jeremy Corbell, hiding in places unknown. How's it going, Jeremy?

• 2:58Jeremy Corbell?

  It's great, man. Just got back from the desert, was just digging shit up.

• 3:02George Knapp?

  Are you still a law enforcement official out there in Pioneer Town?

• 3:06Jeremy Corbell?

  Officially, I gave the badge to my buddy out in Pioneer Town to make sure he's keeping Pi Town on lockdown, but I'm out there all the time.

• 3:13George Knapp?

  You know, the UFO world is on pins and needles, I think, waiting to hear some news about this next UFO hearing before Congress. You and I have been in contact with staffers there and committee members.

• 3:27Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, we're still in process. Again, this will be their announcement to make. I don't want to speak out of school. We provided six firsthand whistleblowers and witnesses, and we're going through the legal ramifications of who can say what publicly. It's really nice to bring people into closed-door briefings, but as you know, George, I'm kind of dogged about the idea that we have hearings where people can hear directly from people who observed or were in close proximity to the UAP, or in their professional capacity were involved somehow. And look, it's an uphill battle. There's a lot of legal restrictions, and everybody in Congress is doing their best. Rep. Luna, amazing job. Rep. Burchett, he's pushing. And Representative Burleson as well, throwing down hard this time. So

• 4:11Jeremy Corbell?

  I really hope, George, that the best individuals that we can legally bring forward in the hearings will come. They've chosen for sure three, and we're just going through those legal hurdles right now, and they will announce that. It's up to them to announce all of that, but it's coming, and I hope it's going to be as good as possible.

• 4:30George Knapp?

  You know, we understand the frustrations of people who want it all. They want it now. We want whistleblowers with hands-on experience, working at the craft, reverse engineering programs. And that's a, that's a tall order. I mean, there are difficulties for true whistleblowers. Whether they should ever come forward even to Congress, what are the legal ramifications? Can they be prosecuted? Or, you know, there are other ramifications that are worse than prosecutions. Bob Lazar knows that. Dave Grush knows that. What can happen to people's lives, their livelihood? I mean, they'll never work in classified programs again. They'll never get a security clearance again. So, you know, you have to worry about not only staying alive, but protecting your family, things like that. And, and so, you know, today, we're going to be walking around some of those issues

• 5:14George Knapp?

  with a longtime attorney who's written a book about secrecy, the growth of secrecy, and what protections there are for witnesses, right?

• 5:21Jeremy Corbell?

  That's right. We're going to have a quick update first by a friend of ours who wanted to tell us a little bit about SCIF flu. I think we can open with that and have him explain what you've been hearing online about people wanting to give classified briefings to Congress. And then, yes, we have a, I would say, a legal scholar who's really looked into this issue and be a great guest for today.

• 5:42George Knapp?

  Yeah, so there was a big brouhaha this past week. Joe Rogan, our buddy Joe, had Representative Luna on there to talk about progress and getting to the bottom of UFO secrecy and programs. And there were some comments made that really stirred the pot, and people are a little confused about the source of it. So, Mike Gold knows a heck of a lot about it, right?

• 6:05Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, so let's have him on to talk about, because I'm staying out of it. I think everybody's on the same team, fighting for the same thing. There seems to be a miscommunication, and Mike texted me up and called me up, and he says, "Look, I want to tell you what I know." So, we'll hear from him first, and then we'll move into the next part. So, listen, I've seen a lot of stuff going online right now. We have a hearing coming up, a new UAP hearing, and there's a lot of scuttlebutt going online. And my buddy, Mike Gold, gave me a call, and he says, "You know, look, I was there. I can kind of explain it, bring peace to the situation, at least understanding to the situation." So, Mike was going to tell us a little bit about the SCIF flu issue of people coming in to testify under classified settings, and kind of what the issue is that people are seeing with that.

• 6:48Jeremy Corbell?

  So, Mike, thanks for giving us the 411 and the information. How you doing? And what's going on? What is SCIF flu, and what are you seeing?

• 6:57Speaker 05

  The SCIF flu is a myth. Today, I hope to inoculate you against it. And thank you so much for having me on, Jeremy George. Always a pleasure to be on Weaponized. But I don't have any social media presence, really. So I'm very grateful for this opportunity to talk about what I think was really just a total miscommunication. And I'm grateful to have the opportunity to talk about the context here.

• 7:19George Knapp?

  So you've been through the process. You were a witness at the last hearing. Tell us what you know about who gets access to a SCIF and what the miscommunication was, how it started.

• 7:30Speaker 05

  Yeah. So first of all, again, a SCIF is where you go when you need to talk about classified information. And per the hearing, there are certain things that can't be described outside of a SCIF without people getting arrested. And that's why the members wanted to get a SCIF. And normally, it shouldn't be that difficult to get a SCIF. But I think other members of Congress were making it challenging for Congresswoman Luna, for Congressman Burleson, to go and get the SCIF. And that's why I give a great deal of credit for them to find the SCIF, to break through any challenges, and actually to make it happen. But the challenge that occurred here for the SCIF meeting, I believe this was in May, although the original

• 8:15Speaker 05

  meeting was supposed to be in April, that there were multiple attempts to get the SCIF. So I was going into the SCIF along with Lou and a number of others. But I think literally three times, we were told it was going to happen, and then it didn't. And that's easy enough for me, living in Washington DC. But for someone like Lou, who has to come in from Wyoming, you know, that is very, very challenging and expensive and costly for someone of their own dime to keep trying to come in, only have the meeting canceled. Now, that's not the members' fault. That's just the nature of trying to get the SCIF

• 8:54Speaker 05

  and some of the difficulties that they fixed. So finally, in May, we were able to secure the SCIF and move on with the meeting. But this only occurred after, I think- The two weeks beforehand, we were told the meeting would happen that week. It was delayed. We were told the meeting would happen the next week. It was delayed. And again, my memory may be a little foggy, but I want to think it was only about two days' notice that we had to go into the skiff. Again, easy enough if you're living in DC, but very difficult for people like Lou, Eric Davis, who did eventually make it, and kudos to him for doing so. But I hope that your listeners understand it just how difficult it is for someone to pick up in forty-eight hours.

• 9:39Speaker 05

  And Lou, obviously, as you heard, he had other commitments that he had to make. It's just very difficult. So we get to the skiff, and this was arranged by the UAP Disclosure Fund, some terrific people, everyone trying to do the right thing. And unfortunately, Chris Mellon legitimately had the flu, a really, really bad flu. Chris Mellon wanted to be there. He was providing information. I think he provided a bunch of memos or something, just in lieu of being there. He was very, very sorry, and he was legitimately ill. But prior to the meeting, there was a discussion of where is everyone else?

• 10:20Speaker 05

  And by then, the UAP Disclosure Fund team that had been arranging everything was no longer there. And then the question was asked, where is everyone? And someone described, well, there's the flu. Chris Mellon's out for the flu. And then someone said, well, what about the others? And I don't know if there was just a shrug, or someone had said everyone else is sick, but somehow it got communicated that the others weren't there because they were ill. And if you're Representative Luna, if you're the other members of Congress, I completely understand. That would sound very odd that everyone got sick. There's nothing that communicable among everyone.

• 11:06Speaker 05

  But obviously, that wasn't the case. Yes, Chris was sick, but it was just literally a matter of miscommunication that someone shrugged or didn't say the right thing. And then when I heard it told to the members of Congress that everyone was sick, I myself just took a pause and said, huh, that sounds odd. I don't think that's the case. But again, I hadn't organized everything, so I didn't know to step in or know that that it wasn't true. And then I didn't really think of anything of it because, you know, Eric had a lot to share. And obviously, I can't talk about what happened to Skiff. Oh, come on. You know, yeah, I I like this beautiful apartment. I don't want to spend the time in jail.

• 11:47Speaker 05

  Um, but I think what I can say is it was a very, very productive discussion. And again, I applaud Eric Davis for having the time to come in and talk. And I didn't really think anything of it, although I thought it was odd at the time that it was communicated that everyone was sick. I I thought that was weird. And then, as I listened to Representative Luna's interview on Joe Rogan, which was absolutely fantastic. She did an amazing job and, you know, really appreciate what Joe Rogan is doing to bring attention to this. Second, only to Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp. You know, he's doing wonderful things. And then I've watched online this, you know, debate or issue develop. And it's very unfortunate because I think Lou Elizondo was an American hero.

• 12:31Speaker 05

  He has done amazing work to bring disclosure forward. He flew to Washington multiple times to do this. And I would just ask for a bit of grace from the UAP community. And I know I may be tilting at windmills here relative to asking for grace or understanding from the internet. But I I know Lou, he's a really good person. He's trying to do the right thing. Is he perfect? No, I mean, guilty of that, but we all are. And Lou wasn't there to communicate what the issue was. Now, also, in Representative Luna's defense, when you work day and night and really struggle to get a Skiff

• 13:11Speaker 05

  and eventually get one, and then some of your prime people don't show up, I understand the frustration. She was justifiably upset. And then she gets this rationale, again, inadvertently saying everyone's sick. And again, she was very justifiably, I think.

• 13:31Speaker 05

  Annoyed, frustrated with that kind of response, the problem was it wasn't the truth. That I'm sure had it been communicated at that meeting that, hey, Lou tried to come twice. He had a commitment, he had 48 hours and just couldn't make it on that time. I'm sure Representative Luna and the others would have been understanding. Yet it was this inexplicable SCIF flu, which I think literally could have been due to a shrug or a miscommunication and the fact that those who organized it weren't in the room. That's what happened. So SCIF flu is false. There's no such thing. Chris Mellon had the flu, that was true, but the others didn't. So again, what I like so much about the UAP issue is how it brings us together.

• 14:16Speaker 05

  You had Democrats, Republicans coming in, working this issue. It's what I love about space exploration. We go to space not as Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans. And UAP unites us even further as humans. So let's not spend time fighting each other. We have far too many difficulties ahead of us for that kind of nonsense. Let's instead fight for the truth and stop fighting each other. That would be my plea.

• 14:46George Knapp?

  I wouldn't want to stir the pot and cause trouble anymore, but it does seem that higher ups, the power hierarchy in the House has thrown roadblocks in the way of this committee before. And it's done in a way, there are no fingerprints on it. So leadership can say, well, I didn't do it. I didn't do that. Somebody's doing it though, or does it not? Is that exaggerated?

• 15:09Speaker 05

  No, I think that's very true, George, and I don't want to speak for Representative Luna. But if her call might have been on the Joe Rogan interview or past statements she's made. She and Representative Burleson and others have been very clear that there are several members of the House and other committees that have thrown up roadblocks, whether it's to holding the hearings, whether it's to the UAP Disclosure Act, or whether it's getting into a SCIF, which is why, again, I applaud Representative Luna. She has been a warrior for the truth. And even getting something like the SCIF is difficult for just the reason that you articulate, George, that there are people who are pushing back. And I'd like to say this as well, that when you get these hearings,

• 15:55Speaker 05

  and I know people can often be disappointed that we didn't have the firsthand whistleblowers, we didn't get enough. Every hearing we have is another brick in the wall that defends us from the stigma. This is unfortunately going to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. And we need to thank and congratulate the members of Congress like Representative Luna and whistleblowers like Lou, as well as the incredible journalists like yourself and Jeremy, for helping us build this case. It is going to take a team. Let's not fight each other. Let's fight for the truth. And that's not to say that we shouldn't be cautious of disinformation or just bad info.

• 16:36Speaker 05

  And that's why I'm so grateful to Jeremy, how you and George spend years vetting people and vetting stories. That's very important, too. But again, we're all human. I think we need to proceed with a degree of understanding, a degree for grace, especially for American heroes like Luis Elizondo and Representative Luna. And while I'm on the topic of Lou, because why not, as long as I'm going all in causing trouble here, when there was a UAP Disclosure Fund event on Capitol Hill, not a hearing, but a great event on Capitol Hill, I know Lou caught a lot of flak for the image that

• 17:17Speaker 05

  he was showing. What I think got missed in the shuffle there is that Lou was showing that to demonstrate that pilots don't know where to go with UAP information. And that is so true and such a problem. And maybe he could have been more careful in terms of showing an example, but his point wasn't necessarily that this is real. He was trying to make the point that pilots didn't know and they were calling him. And you shouldn't be calling Luis Elizondo with that information. There should be a better process. And when I testified and when I was on Weaponized previously, and I'm not going to shut up about this until it happens, we have the NASA Aviation

• 18:00Speaker 05

  Safety Reporting System, ASRS. It's used to report anomalies for aviation safety. Hundreds of thousands of cases. It's been operationally For decades, it allows these reports on a confidential basis. It would take very little effort to include UAP in the ASRS system. And if we do that, every pilot, every crew, even every passenger will become a censor for UAP. And we can gather a huge amount of data. And when we talk about incremental progress, well, I know that's not a smoking gun, etc.

• 18:41Speaker 05

  These are important things that could be done to gather more data, get it in the hands of academics and move forward. And when I was on the NASA UAP independent study team, I was so frustrated with the fact that the FAA didn't know where these reports were going, who was collating them, or where they were. There's just complete confusion on the issue. You can go back to my questioning FAA officials on the record, on YouTube, when I was part of the team. So that's an extraordinarily important point that Lou is making. Ryan Graves, American for Safe Aerospace, has been pushing this. I'd like to see it in NASA authorization bill.

• 19:23Speaker 05

  And by the way, the interim director, I should say, the interim administrator of NASA is also the Secretary of Transportation. So this would be the perfect individual to implement a system where NASA has been gathering information on behalf of the FAA. I have high hopes for this interim NASA administrator. He has articulated an interest in UAP. And just as I've described, there's great crossover between transportation, FAA, and NASA in terms of gathering information and data.

• 19:58George Knapp?

  Jeremy spotted this. Jeremy started a story, a statement from the new NASA administrator. We can't tell if he was joking or not. Jeremy, remember that piece? It was the NASA guy asking about the alien briefing?

• 20:10Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, yeah, I, you know, I think it was kind of in jest, but he did say at the end, "Look, we need transparency on this issue." So I know that anytime somebody from NASA goes on the news and talks about wanting a briefing on UAP is a good thing. Like Mike is saying, you know, it's building a wall up against the stigma. But Mike, I'd love to, Mike, I'd love to hear your opinion. There's a guy at NASA talking about wanting the alien briefing. I know there was a little humor, but there was seriousness to it. Can you shed any light on that?

• 20:39Speaker 00

  UKG is the workforce operating platform with unified HR, payroll and workforce management. Built to solve the unique challenges of frontline work. Powered by People First AI and decades of labor data, UKG turns workforce intelligence into real-time decisions around staffing, pay, compliance and productivity, enabling every worker to confidently take action as work happens. Because when work works, everything works. Learn more at ukg.com/work. UKG, HR, Pay and Workforce Management.

• 21:09Speaker 05

  I'm cautiously optimistic that it was not a joke, particularly if you go back to Congressman Burlison in a hearing, asking the NASA interim administrator if he would work with Congress to develop information. Congressman Burlison asked if there could be a nonprofit, for example, that would go in and look at the NASA data. And the response from Sean Duffy was very positive, that he understood, wanted to work with NASA. So in addition to the comment that was made previously, there was a much more serious dialogue in Congress. And as you know, Jeremy, I think that is so important.

• 21:49Speaker 05

  If you go back to what I shared, the imagery that I presented, not at the hearing, but at the, I think it was in May, the event that UAP Disclosure Fund put on, just through a cursory review of the NASA archives, we had, from the surface of the moon, from an Apollo 17 astronaut, imagery of what looked to be a triangular spacecraft.

• 22:11Speaker 05

  At Redwire, our cameras were picking up an extraordinary lunar horizon glow, which is the literal definition of unidentified anomalous phenomenon in space. So there's a lot that we could learn by diving into the NASA archives. And I was very encouraged, maybe not necessarily by that comment, but by the colloquy that happened between Congressman Burleson and Sean Duffy, that NASA will get into this and help us get to the truth. So I'm more optimistic than ever.

• 22:42George Knapp?

  Well, I hope if he gets an alien briefing, that he'll spill some of the beans to you and you can have a conversation with us.

• 22:48Speaker 05

  Yeah, let me say I'm a little more pessimistic on him getting or even there being an alien briefing. I don't know what that is. I think that Secretary Duffy was just using that as shorthand for getting a briefing from his team on the issue. And let me be clear how serious this is and how fortunate we are to have Secretary Duffy, who is both the Secretary of Transportation and the head of NASA, because there's great crossover, particularly when it comes to the drone issue. As you'll recall, we saw the power of drones when Ukraine had drones coming out of shipping containers and trucks and devastated the Russian military. If we get in a fighting war with China,

• 23:31Speaker 05

  China will do to us what Ukraine did to Russia. So it's very important that we take the UAP issue seriously, not only because of the more extraordinary aspects, but because of the potential for drones to destroy infrastructure or military capabilities. So this is the time to take a look at it. And Sean Duffy, because of his dual-headed position, is perfectly suited to doing so. So I'm cautiously optimistic.

• 23:59Jeremy Corbell?

  What you're saying and what I'm hearing is, look, everybody is on the same page. They want to give this classified briefing. They want to go through this process and it just didn't work out. Rep Luna, Rep Virtut and Rep Burleson have really fought at this moment to get this next hearing going. I know because I've been working with all of them and all of Congress to get the best witnesses we can, who can legally talk about what they're doing. So thank you for clarifying, Mike. And, you know, let's see the next hearing coming up, early September, baby. It'll be exciting.

• 24:30George Knapp?

  Richard Beckwith must be, what I guess, is 95 years old to have done all the things that he lists in his varied background. He's an attorney. He worked as a government attorney, a city attorney in Wyoming where he lives. He's also a microbiologist. He's managed and directed programs, I think, in that field. He is a talented musician. He's worked in television and in news. So in his spare time, he wrote this book called Need to Know. It's sort of a broad look at the development of secrecy in the United States. It involves a lot of people, issues, and controversies that we are familiar with here, in particular, UAP. And of course, Richard has been around the UAP topic for a long time, both with, as an advisor to Dr. Stephen Greer and on the board of MUFON currently. Richard, welcome to Weaponized.

• 25:15Speaker 03

  Thank you very much, George. It's really an honor to be here. I appreciate you having me. I really do.

• 25:20George Knapp?

  You know, I think you start with, what I hope the book would start with, is the inherent tension and conflict between secrecy, excessive secrecy in particular, and democracy. I mean, in a democracy, we, the people, are supposed to participate. We're supposed to help make decisions that guide our country. And yet, so much of what goes on in our government is hidden behind a veil because of secrecy, often excessive secrecy. Would you agree?

• 25:47Speaker 03

  I agree. And that has persisted throughout history, and it will continue to persist. Because, as you both know, there's an absolute need for security and to keep some things secret. You cannot share all of your secrets with the world, and if you do that, then you are sharing them with your enemies. And in a world, especially a world like ours, we continue to have enemies, and/or perceived enemies, or perceived negative interests. And as a result of that, we must keep

• 26:26Speaker 03

  things secret. And our laws are designed to do precisely that, to provide authority for the government and its operatives to keep things secret. And honestly, I think that...

• 26:43Speaker 03

  When it comes to this particular issue, I have been in a room with the congressman. We were in a room with the congressman from Indiana. And there was a discussion about, you know, should, can we tell the people? And my response was no.

• 27:05Speaker 03

  For, for a lot of different reasons, but I think, you know, getting back to your original question, you know, secrecy will persist. It, it has persisted throughout history and it will continue until, until we as a civilization get to a point in time where we can all just completely trust each other.

• 27:26Speaker 03

  Good luck with that.

• 27:27Jeremy Corbell?

  Jeremy, you want to jump in? Yeah, I was really curious. So, reading through your book, one of the things that George and I have kind of run into the most is when we do reporting, we obtain and release things that were leaked to us. As journalists, we feel, and there is precedent that we have not only right, but duty to inform the American public, especially when there's illegal activity going on, which there is with the hiding of UAP technology and the knowledge, the basic knowledge of UAP origin. So you talk about in your book, something that you call, and other people call mosaic theory, and I think that's a really good place to start. You know, my understanding is it, and my experience with it, is it refers to kind

• 28:12Jeremy Corbell?

  of the legal and intelligence concept to justify withholding information from the public or public disclosure, you know, through the FOIA or something like that, in, in the context of national security. But if you can explain what mosaic theory is and how that inhibits or threatens the First Amendment, you know, that we use in journalism a lot, I think that's a good place to start for our audience to understand.

• 28:38Speaker 03

  Okay. Well, this has become a fairly well-known idea in journalism and in researching national security, and that is mosaic theory. And what mosaic theory has essentially done is it killed FOIA. Along with the state secrets privilege, the use of those two things together have pretty much killed FOIA relative to obtaining secrets about the kinds of things that, that we

• 29:06Speaker 03

  Deal with. So mosaic theory is the theory that although a particular piece of information may on its surface appear to be innocuous or unimportant, if placed into a larger mosaic or a picture, if you will, of a much greater scheme that's taking place, these little mosaics or these little pieces of information can be pieced together over time by an enemy or an adversary to determine what sorts of things you are working on. For example, the kinds of chemicals that you may be using in a particular experiment, the, you know,

• 29:49Speaker 03

  plans for what appear to be a very simple lever. All of these things can come under the veil of this mosaic theory. And so what they have done illegally is taken this mosaic theory. And, and whenever there's a piece of information that they even really feel uncomfortable with releasing, they can say that this, and they, what they do is they claim exemption one under the Freedom of Information Act, when they're, when the requests are made under FOIA, and they claim that exemption one. And because this piece of information, again, no matter how innocuous, can be placed into a much larger picture that can help them determine what we're up to.

• 30:30George Knapp?

  I ran into that head on in the early 90s regarding Groom Lake. I was looking for it. I didn't know, I didn't see it in your book, but employees at Groom Lake, loyal employees who'd spent their whole lives out there, kept secrets, started getting sick because they, nothing, excessive secrecy out there, nothing could leave the plant. They'd throw all these weird materials and spare parts and computers and everything into giant pits.

• 30:56George Knapp?

  Douse it with jet fuel and set it on fire and giant rolling clouds of this toxic smoke would cover the base. People started getting sick and loyal Americans to the end, they would say, hey, can you at least tell us what we're exposed to so we can tell our doctors and they can treat us? They wouldn't. It went to, eventually a couple of them died. Their widows filed suit. It was in district court here in Nevada. It went to the Ninth Circuit and then finally to the Supreme Court and KLAUS was part of that suit. In the end, they used the mosaic theory. We can't tell you what's poisoning you because somebody might be able to figure out what we're working on. It was outrageous, really.

• 31:37Speaker 03

  Yes, and I knew this was an issue that would be familiar to you, George, just simply because of those cases. And I think I may have touched on them a little bit in the book. And, and as you recall, they sued the federal government because, not because they wanted compensation for their injuries, but they simply wanted to know what they'd been exposed to. And, and the government just simply came back and said, we're, we're not, we can't tell you. We're applying this mosaic theory. This could be used by our enemies and so we're not going to tell you. And I mean, basically, they, they just, and I think you even probably knew at least one or two of those guys personally and had interviewed

• 32:18Speaker 03

  them and knew exactly what they were up against. But again, that, that is what killed FOIA. The, another thing that they use is something called the state secrets privilege, which I touched on a little bit in the book and, and well, quite a bit when I discuss FOIA. But the state secrets privilege also comes into play there. And basically, the government on the affidavit of a government individual or a government authority can come in and simply by affidavit say that, you know, the information that the defense or that, you know, that the defense may be requesting is, is classified and, and, you know, they're

• 32:59Speaker 03

  claiming the privilege based upon its association with national security. And quite often, suits are dismissed, or they're just simply unable to use that evidence. I think one of the cases that I, that I brought up in that regard was the Uh, the case of that bomber that was doing some testing of some sort of electronic equipment over Georgia in nineteen forty-eight. And it crashed. And the widows sued the air force because they wanted to, uh, you know, of course, be compensated and they wanted to know what happened to their, to their husbands.

• 33:40Speaker 03

  And as it turns out, they were again testing some sort of strange classified electric equipment and the government wouldn't tell them what it was or what they were testing. And they asked for reports. They wanted the crash reports and the air force wouldn't release them and they claimed that privilege. They were allowed to depose the widows or, or excuse me, to depose the pilots, uh, but they, the pilots, of course, weren't allowed to talk about whatever the thing was that was classified that they were flying around on the bomber, so.

• 34:15Jeremy Corbell?

  So, one of the things I wanted to talk to you about, so when George and I, when, when people leak information to journalists like UAP videos or even just testimony, the idea that we've had to face a bunch is that we're on our own to determine, in a lot of ways, we're on our own, you know, could this contribute to a mosaic revealing advanced technology or intelligence methods? And I kind of want our audience to understand, this is why it takes some time, sometimes years, to vet videos and also testimony. It's not about the authenticity of the videos or testimony, it's will we be doing harm by putting something out to national security? And it really does fall on us. That is something we've been told over and over by intelligence agencies.

• 34:57Jeremy Corbell?

  So we have to be very careful as we do this work to do no harm because it can justify restrictions or reprisals or that kind of thing. But the danger here as journalists that I see is that it can limit what whistleblowers can disclose, not just to journalists, but also in congressional hearings. It can, it can throttle that, just the fear of a mosaic theory case being brought against a whistleblower. And so that potentially, you know, chills free speech and free press activity. So I wanted to know from you, you know, we're kind of out here on our own as we receive stuff. But do you see that as a problem? You know, we have whistleblowers who want to testify at this next hearing.

• 35:39Jeremy Corbell?

  George and I have provided six now firsthand people. Now they're being selected by the great group of people that are that are looking to make this happen. But there is this lingering question. What can be said in a public forum? How much can be told? Will there be reprisals for simply testifying? Being asked as a patriot by your government, by Congress to testify. We're doing this dance of like, what can be done publicly? Does that track for you, that issue?

• 36:10Speaker 03

  Oh, it does. And in my opinion, they can't violate their security oaths. They, you know, if they've been involved in some kind of a special access program. And they may even know of some wrongdoing. They still have to follow the process like David Grush did in order to be what, you know, to be afforded the protections under the, I guess it would be the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act. So they can't just simply go to Congress and tell their secrets. They have to go through a process and they still, even then, as you know, as you are already aware, they are still subject to their security oaths. So they can still only go so far.

• 36:54Speaker 03

  They can only talk about what they're essentially authorized or what their interpretations of their security oaths allow them to. And so they're they're still bound by that unless unless they can find some way to get that completely waived. You know, I think that's been discussed by some of these folks that they, you know, they they still have this obligation under under their non-disclosure agreements under Form 312. And I think there may be some other NDAs out there. You yourself talked to Bob Lazar, who was under a non-disclosure agreement that was signed by President Reagan. And as I recall, that particular non-disclosure agreement.

• 37:37Speaker 03

  Allowed the government to overlook Mr. Lazar's constitutional right to due process. So essentially, when Bob signed on to the program, he waived his right to due process. Now, I'm not, not so sure how often that happens now because we have a specific forum that deals with non-disclosures. But, but nonetheless, I, I'm, I'm not sure how you get around that, especially when the powers that be that, that, you know, hold the reins behind those Form 312s are not so easily going to give up those secrets that they're protecting. So, I mean, now, under the law, under Title V, you can, anybody can go to Congress and

• 38:20Speaker 03

  essentially give them information. But that information cannot be classified information. And in my view, you know, without some sort of assurance that, you know, that they're not going to be prosecuted, I'd be, I would be reticent as a whistleblower myself.

• 38:40George Knapp?

  Yeah, there are a lot of reasons for that. The, the UIP Disclosure Fund put this out at the end of July. That's Chris Mellon, Kirk McConnell. And they said, "To date, no one appears to have been prosecuted or sued for sharing classified information with Congress behind closed doors." I'm assuming that means a skiff. So there's no case that we know of that anybody's been prosecuted, but there are consequences for people who even think about it. We talk to these guys on a regular basis. They're scared, they're scared because they know there's all kinds of other things that come, that could come from them sharing information, even if it's legal. David Grush is an example of it. The terrible things done to him, intimidation, death threats. I don't know if they've ever killed anybody, but they can certainly create enough doubt

• 39:25George Knapp?

  that people think twice, three times, four times about providing information about things that they think the American public and particularly Congress should know.

• 39:33Speaker 03

  And that's a really good point that you make there, George, because under the, these various whistleblower protection acts, I talk about one in particular under Title V, I think. In in the book, but there are others uh the that uh uh under which David Grush is included. And those protections under the whistleblower protection acts uh include protections for, you know, retribution at work, you know, having your pay cut, uh, you know, maybe maybe losing your position. But there really doesn't seem to be a lot of protections for guys coming to your house at night. And uh, you know, uh lurking around outside of your house and planting bugging devices

• 40:16Speaker 03

  and following your wife to work and calling you on the phone and and and and, you know, exhibiting the sort of intimidating behavior like the folks that uh that bothered Bob Lazar. You know, uh, so what are the where are the protections from that? Uh, I I'm not seeing that.

• 40:36Jeremy Corbell?

  In your book, you talk about, you know, the press's duty to kind of foster, you call it a marketplace of ideas where open debate uncovers truth, the central for public good. There's something you called, I think, also conscientious leaks to the press, noting that leaks often expose corruption. And this is something that George and I see all the time in our work is that people don't come to us just because they're excited to talk about UAP. They come to us because they have experienced absolute life-threatening reprisals, uh, attempts at uh, you know, offing them. And this is the reason why, uh, uh, at least perceived, if not actual.

• 41:17Jeremy Corbell?

  So this is why people come to us. So can you explain, you know, in America, the idea of conscient conscientious leaks to the press? And why that's so important for our um First Amendment and for holding government accountable? Because that's what we deal with.

• 41:34Speaker 03

  Well, I I have to say, I I think that that our society has in many ways, on many occasions, changed for the better because of conscientious leakers. Um, you know, in particular, you know, I I talked about Daniel Ellsberg a little bit in the in the book. And uh, his revelations regarding the Vietnam War and the manner in which it was being portrayed to the public versus the reality. Edward Snowden is another one. And now, from a national security perspective, you can make the argument that, you know, these guys are guilty under the Espionage Act for revealing national security information without authorization. On the other hand, you cannot ignore

• 42:20Speaker 03

  the changes in our society that resulted as a result of these leaks. You know, I think right after the issue with Edward Snowden, we had changes in surveillance. We had people being able to, you know, take their information out of the zeitgeist. I think there's actually legislation now in Europe that allows people to have themselves completely erased from the world wide web or something like that. But nonetheless, there have been some positive changes. And at least, at the very least, we're aware of what, in Edward Snowden's case, the NSA is doing and obviously

• 43:04Speaker 03

  still continues to do to this day. But as far as the protections for those folks, you know, that protection, you know, ultimately will have to come from legislation. There, you know, you can't hide them in your basement, you know, and, you know, bring them a movie every once in a while to watch. They have to live in the real world. And when they take the risks that they're taking in revealing that information, along with those risks come the consequences. And sometimes it does. But one of the good things that comes out of making it known to everyone is that if something does happen to them,

• 43:47Speaker 03

  then from an intelligence perspective, that adds legitimacy to their claims. And so it's best to just simply let them talk.

• 43:58Speaker 03

  I mean, from my perspective, rather than eliminate them. But you can also, at the same time, relative to their employment, their benefits and so forth, treat them as persona non grata. Kick them when nobody's looking.

• 44:13George Knapp?

  In your book Need to Know, you sort of describe the hierarchy of secrecy that exists now and how, you know, SAPs, Special Access Programs, even if you have a top-secret security clearance, you wouldn't have access to that. The USAPs, the unannounced Special Access Programs that really restrict it even further, and then USAPs, and, you know, I raise the question because Congress's job is to oversee where we're spending our money, what our executive branch is doing. They don't even get informed those things are real. It's supposed to be at minimum the Gang of Eight, the top members of Congress, but would your sense be that some of these SAP programs, Special Access Programs dealing with UFOs, that even the Gang of Eight is not being told?

• 44:59Speaker 03

  Yeah, not the entire Gang of Eight. There may be one or two individuals on the Gang of Eight, but I think the information that they receive, even if they get some inkling of the existence of the program, it either is, it was, it's just something along the lines of either a code number or a line number for the line item or a name of a program and how much it costs. You know, and they say, well, what's this for? And then the intelligence guy says, well, that's, we need that. But I agree with you, George. I know, I think that, especially when it comes to these waived, unacknowledged Special Access Programs,

• 45:40Speaker 03

  which have to be signed on either by the Secretary of Defense or the President, they may have these kinds of programs where they've been authorized to not say anything beyond that except to one, you know, to one or two individuals. So it's impossible to find out really exactly what they're up to.

• 46:04George Knapp?

  And those witnesses are told you gotta lie. If somebody asks you about it, even if it's Congress, it's your job to lie about it, deny it or not give them anything, right?

• 46:13Speaker 03

  That's, well, as you know, in your own investigations that when, when they were the guy, I keep getting back to Bob Lazar because I'm, I love the work that you guys have done with Bob, but you know, with Bob, they gave him instructions on, on how to lie on, and that continues to this day. It's part of the deception. You have to be able to, you have to be able to, to be deceptive about what you are doing if you are dealing with issues of national security. You have to, you have to lie to your wife. You have to lie to your kids, your parents, everybody in your life. And, and that can be really difficult. It can weigh on a person's mind. And I think that's also why they really keep close tabs on them to see when and if they start wigging out over it.

• 47:00Speaker 00

  UKG is the workforce operating platform with unified HR, payroll and workforce management. Built to solve the unique challenges of frontline work. Powered by People First AI and decades of labor data, UKG turns workforce intelligence into real-time decisions around staffing, pay, compliance and productivity, enabling every worker to confidently take action as work happens. Because when work works, everything works. Learn more at ukg.com/work. UKG, HR, Pay and Workforce Management.

• 47:30Speaker 01

  New and exclusive holiday decor just launched online at the Home Depot. Check out the viral Grand Duchess collection with smart holiday lights you can control from your phone. Easily customize the twinkle across trees, wreaths and garlands to match your holiday vibe. Create stunning light effects, then switch it up with the tap of your fingers. Even the man in red will be impressed. Shop the holiday decor you want, online only, at homedepot.com.

• 48:01Jeremy Corbell?

  You talk in your book about journalists serving as a vital kind of fourth branch of government with the inherent duty to expose hidden truths for public good. Can you explain what you meant by that, the fourth branch of government?

• 48:14Speaker 03

  Well, as we know, and this is not a term I invented.

• 48:21Speaker 03

  It's the part of our unelected social structure that allows people to tell the truth about things and the truth about wrongdoing and spread that word amongst others. Now, some would argue that the free press has not done a very good job. You know, we sort of look at the media and say to ourselves, well, you know, there really is a manipulation taking place there. Stories are changed or are embellished in order to, you know,

• 49:04Speaker 03

  bolster certain political ideas and points and so forth. But there still is real journalism taking place. That doesn't negate the real journalism that's taking place, especially when it regards issues like this. I think that the journalism that's taking place relative to UAPs at the level that you guys are conducting it is absolutely excellent. And it has to be done. This truth must come out. But it's necessary in a free society. It is sort of a check on all the other three branches of government because it is designed, or it's supposed to, from its inception, designed to inform the public about what

• 49:49Speaker 03

  the three branches of government are up to, because this is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And so that fourth branch of government's duty is to inform the people so that we can make real decisions about the world we live in and take certain courses of action.

• 50:08George Knapp?

  You know, the secrecy that takes place, it's for all kinds of reasons. There's legitimate national security concerns, including on the UAP issue. But we know that we can list a dozen examples of where secrecy is used to hide other stuff, crimes by the people involved in these programs, corruption, bribes. You know, I think a lot of what has gone on at the Nevada desert has not been revealed because as a congressional investigator told me one time, when this comes out, they'll go to prison. You know, when you, when you look at that, is there a way to pierce that veil? You write a lot about FOIA, the Freedom of Information Act in your group, but if they want to keep it secret, it's going to be kept secret. And FOIA won't do crap to get it out of there.

• 50:51Speaker 03

  No, FOIA is dead, as I mentioned, because of the state secrets privilege and because of Mosaic theory as well. Now, it doesn't work all that bad when you're talking about issues that don't relate to national security because although there are other potentially applicable exceptions, but when you want to talk about, you know, the mishandling of funds, you know, at some other government program that doesn't involve, you know, weapons or, you know, atomic energy or something like that, then FOIA works pretty good. But when it comes to things like this, FOIA is just absolutely dead. It seemed like there for a while, after it was passed in 1966, that there was sort of a heyday for a little

• 51:35Speaker 03

  while. And, and, and things did open up and, and some documents were retrieved relative to these issues. But, but as you know, the folks that are keeping this, these secrets are much better at it than, than we are getting them out. And so they figure out ways around that immediately. And of course, Mosaic theory and the state secrets privilege are, are perfect for that. But, but nonetheless, we have to continue to, to try to get that information out, even, you know, at, at great risk. There are, you know, one of the reasons that I wrote the book, I just simply wanted people to understand that that secrets aren't just simply kept because people want to keep certain

• 52:16Speaker 03

  things secret. There has to be authority provided by the government that allows them to keep things secret, that directs them to do so. And so, most of these folks are hiding behind the authority that has been granted to them by the government, which is great. Tremendous amount of authority to keep things secret. And they can always claim that this, well, and it's because of national security. Again, you know, that that big brick wall that goes all the way up to the sky and for miles each way, that you, you really can't get past that. And I don't know how you will, except that eventually secrecy, in my view,

• 52:56Speaker 03

  can also be a threat to national security. And, and we have to decide what, what our national security means. Are we willing to hand over these secrets and just simply allow a handful of individuals to control them on our behalf, trusting that they are going to do their best? Or are we going to force the nut to be cracked open so that the technologies gleaned from whatever they're studying and whatever they're learning from these things can be disseminated amongst humans and we can, you know, enhance life on our planet? There's a, as Jeremy and I talked about this the other day, there's a real struggle taking place here. And that's what I think this is about, George. It's not about, you

• 53:39Speaker 03

  know, I, I think honestly, the, the time that we're spending in Congress is, is great to, to try to get the information about this out. But it's not about governments anymore. It's about tech, it's about corporations and private interests that have this technology. That's been basically handed to them by the military. And so, they're not going to let that go anytime soon. And we can argue up and down about, you know, what, whether this section applies, or, or, you know, what, what can be done procedurally. But, you know, the law only works for those who are, who like to follow it and who think that it's important. But when you're talking about a technology, or perhaps a, a collection

• 54:22Speaker 03

  of technologies, the, the culmination of which can result in the

• 54:29Speaker 03

  Possessors of that technology being able to dominate the entire planet. Who cares about the law? I mean, we're talking about the grand prize, the, you know, the, the big, the big pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. That's, that is the prize. And so while we're all arguing about this and having our congressional hearings, there are insidious human beings in a lab somewhere that may be very close to figuring out these propulsion secrets. Maybe they already have, and there's a plan already in place. But it's a, it's a battle for disclosure so that these technologies can be released to benefit all of us.

• 55:12Speaker 03

  And, and between those people and, and the people that want to sequester this to themselves and dominate the whole planet and enslave all of us. That's really what it's about. I hate to be so grandiose, but, but ultimately that's really what it's about.

• 55:31George Knapp?

  You know, I'm thinking about what you mentioned there about secrecy can be counterproductive if, if it's excessive. It can erode trust in government on something like this, UFOs, UAP. There's a broad public interest in this. And they know something's not right. Obviously, the public who's following this knows they're not telling us the basics. They're not acknowledging that they're lying. There might be all kinds of reasons for it. Maybe a small group wants to control, that have the power from that technology, but also the money that it could represent. I mean, trillions of dollars if we could do in the energy sector what we think it can do. You know, I think about Area 51. So when we first started working on this, the government would not acknowledge they had a base there.

• 56:15George Knapp?

  Look, I've got photos that John Lear took right up against the edge of it. There are Soviet satellite photos of this thing. People could climb up on a hill and look at it, and they would not acknowledge it was there. And when you have a place that doesn't exist, you don't have to follow the rules or the law. There is no law out there. I just think, you know, it's so counterproductive to say, yeah, we don't have a base up there when people can see it. And the same thing on UAP. You know, damn good and well, there's something to this. Congress knows it now. They're digging in to get it, and they're hitting roadblocks every way. And I think it really is a danger to trust in our government, which is pretty damn low as it is.

• 56:51Speaker 03

  I agree, George, and it's gonna continue to get worse. You know, I was asked this at the MUFON Symposium last summer. I was very fortunate to sit on a panel with Robert Solis. And they asked the panel, you know, when the government was ever gonna, you know, disclose this information. And my response was, it's just like Charlton Heston's gun. They're not gonna disclose it until you pry it from their dead cold fingers. It's just not gonna happen. And then you can have all the hearings in Congress you want, but the gatekeepers, and I think, you know, some of us have may have some idea about who those gatekeepers

• 57:34Speaker 03

  might be, but those gatekeepers are not gonna let that information go. There is no altruism at the level of people that are safeguarding this information. There's a real lack of concern for fellow humans at that level. So, you know, I think the rest of us are sort of on our own until somebody, you know, cuts loose with, I think we're gonna have to force it, but how you do that, I don't know. You know, they've certainly done everything they can to stop any congressional efforts. But then what happens if Congress, you know, passes some sort of an act that, you know,

• 58:15Speaker 03

  like, say, you know, exerts eminent domain over the technology? Who's gonna go in and get it? You know, I mean, think about, think about Richard Dolan's, you know, breakaway civilization. I mean, maybe we'll go in there with our AR-15s and our 308s and we'll be met with something far superior to that, from our own fellow humans. I don't mean to make light of it, but, but, you know, I always laugh when I'm scared.

• 58:52Speaker 03

  Uh, go ahead, Jeremy.

• 58:54Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, well, we have a hearing coming up in September. I don't want to publicly say the date. I think people have guessed right online, which is great. But we have this hearing coming up. And for some of the people that we nominated to be able to be heard publicly, the reason why they're ready to come forward is because they have no other choice, or they feel they have no other choice. They have gone up the chain of command. They've tried to expose, you know, what it is they know, the illegalities, the threats to themselves. So some of these whistleblowers really feel they have no other choice. There's no higher stake but having your own life threatened. So now Congress has something they have to decide, which

• 59:35Jeremy Corbell?

  is, how, how forward do we go? Do we get people that were just witnesses to operational craft? Are we going to have a real whistleblower as an addition to, to that hearing? So knowing that some of these whistleblowers really feel they do not have another choice. They've tried everything. They feel in threat and in fear for their well being, their safety, and their lives. When it comes to the hearings in September, do the protections under the whistleblower protection act, does it directly apply to them doing this testimony if they are selected and decide to do it?

• 1:00:13Speaker 03

  If they have followed the procedures that are available to them under the applicable whistleblower protection act, then they should be afforded the protections that are provided for by the acts. So relative to the intelligence community, that would be the intelligence community whistleblower protection act, which was passed in 1998, I believe, and is a part of Title 50. Service members are protected by the Armed Services or Military Whistleblower Protection Act under Title 10, and civil servants are protected under Title 5. So as long as they've followed that process, but if they just showed up at the hearing and

• 1:00:58Speaker 03

  said, hey, man, I got a lot to tell you, I think there's going to be a problem. And they do so at grave risk to themselves without if they haven't, if they haven't followed the process.

• 1:01:08Jeremy Corbell?

  So what is following the process? To be clear to people that are thinking about coming forward, what is following the process?

• 1:01:16Speaker 03

  I thought you might ask me that question and I want to make sure that I give you an accurate answer, so I'm gonna, I'm just going to call up my, my little process sheet here, so, because there's a different process, all depending on what title you are under. So, if you're a civil servant who is a covered in employee under the whistleblower protection of 1989, which I spoke about in my book, then what you can report is, a protected disclosure would be law violations, waste, abuse, and safety dangers, and you can report that to the Office of Special Counsel, the Inspector General, or Congress, if classified, and

• 1:01:59Speaker 03

  that is under Executive Order 13526, which I talk about extensively in the book, and that's under Section 1.7. And you can also report retaliation, and you can file the complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, under Title V. And the Office of Special Counsel really is the body that works with the folks under the civil service. Now, the, under Titles 50 and Title 10, for intelligence community members, and members of the military, they have to go, the only possible place that they can go to is to the Inspector General

• 1:02:43Speaker 03

  in their particular branch of the intelligence community. And I think there are 18 different services in the intelligence community, so, different members, that, you know, so CIA, NSA, and so forth. But the intelligence community is covered under Title 50, and that section's 32, 34, and for Title 10, it's Section 1034. So, they have to go to the Inspector General. And then, and, and as you know, this is the same process that David Grush followed. And so, they go to the Inspector General, the Inspector General then has 14 days to...

• 1:03:23Speaker 03

  Give a response and in David Grush's particular instance, it was that the claims were urgent and that went on to the Secretary of Defense and ultimately to Congress. So that's if they can't get in front of Congress until they go through that process if they're in the intelligence community or if they're members of the armed services. So you've got to go through the you've got to go through the inspector general.

• 1:03:51George Knapp?

  A lot of people in UFO world suspect that the real secrets are stashed somewhere under the umbrella of the Department of Energy. That it would make sense there that the atomic secrets apparatus provides an extra layer of secrecy that can keep prying eyes away. Do you know about that?

• 1:04:10Speaker 03

  Well, I don't know about that.

• 1:04:14George Knapp?

  I mean, is that that what you let me rephrase the question. Would you would you say that made sense as a place to stack?

• 1:04:21Speaker 03

  Absolutely. Absolutely. I think that from the beginning, I think the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 created the Atomic Energy Commission and placed the whole atomic issue under civilian control with the exception of nuclear weapons, atomic weapons. And later that became the Department of Energy. And I think that whenever there's a potential for the involvement of nuclear materials, that the Department of Energy and back then the the Atomic Energy Commission was involved. And so I think that you probably have even

• 1:05:01Speaker 03

  talked to some folks who have been at alleged crash sites and and have been told that when they were there, they saw folks that had Department of Energy environment suits on that were marked with, you know, of course, that could all be a ruse. But I do think that there is some information out there that would lead us to believe that the Department of Energy and the formerly the Atomic Energy Commission had a lot to do with the investigation of UFOs, in particular UFO crash sites, because then they'd be exposed to. To the materials and they'd be able to perhaps examine them and that's and so forth and there is a there's a whole secrecy regime as you know within the within the Atomic

• 1:05:44Speaker 03

  Energy Act as well they talk about restricted data and so and they also have under the Department of Energy something called a Q clearance which isn't applicable across the board but just relative to nuclear energy and it falls just simply under the Department of Energy so I'm I'm sure that the DOE has may even have quite a bit of materials in its possession.

• 1:06:06George Knapp?

  The coincidence of the birth of the National Security State in 1947 CIA has created you know and all kinds of other things Department of Defense is is formally formed and the what happened at Roswell is is too too juicy of a coincidence for people to handle in a lot of sense that maybe the that crash had a part in the creation of the National Security State that is now expanded to places we would never would have imagined back then. Do you think it's related at all?

• 1:06:39Speaker 03

  Well certainly related in time and I think what it may have done is provided some additional impetus. I think they actually passed the act in in July maybe it was in in September but it certainly was coincidental wasn't it? But but to say but I think that they were already aware of the existence of these objects prior to the crash and so I so the Roswell crash itself may not have itself played a specific role in the National Security Act of 1947 but I think that the phenomenon of UAP UFOs certainly did play a role in the need to consolidate all these efforts and and sort of place everything under one Department

• 1:07:24Speaker 03

  of Defense. That was part of the impetus. I don't think it was necessarily Roswell itself but it certainly probably would have wakened a lot of folks up to say boy I'm sure glad we're working on this you know.

• 1:07:37Speaker 00

  UKG is the workforce operating platform with unified HR, payroll and workforce management, built to solve the unique challenges of frontline work. Powered by People First AI and decades of labor data, UKG turns workforce intelligence into real-time decisions around staffing, pay, compliance and productivity, enabling every worker to confidently take action as work happens. Because when work works, everything works. Learn more at ukg.com/work. UKG, HR, Pay and Workforce Management.

• 1:08:08Speaker 01

  New and exclusive holiday decor just launched online at The Home Depot. Check out the viral Grand Duchess collection with smart holiday lights you can control from your phone. Easily customize the twinkle across trees, wreaths and garlands to match your holiday vibe. Create stunning light effects, then switch it up with the tap of your fingers. Even the man in red will be impressed. Shop the holiday decor you want, online only, at homedepot.com.

• 1:08:38Speaker 03

  Jeremy.

• 1:08:39Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, I'm just curious, so, you know, from everything that you've done in this field, you've seen the hearings kind of build with each one that we've had. I know it's just another brick in the wall. It's gonna take, you know, it's a marathon, as they say, you know, not a sprint. But are you optimistic that these hearings have positive impact on kind of not only the zeitgeist of what's going on, but specifically tasking people within government to look deeper in and try to expose some of these hidden truths that have been hidden by them, you know, from the American public? Are you optimistic about these hearings that we've been holding?

• 1:09:16Speaker 03

  Well, Jeremy, I've been optimistic my whole life. And, you know, I always hope for the best and prepare for the worst. You know, so I've learned over the years, not necessarily to get my hopes up. I do have a lot of, you know, I do see a lot of changes. I see, you know, I have, you know, I started doing this back in 19, the late 70s, when I got to know Dr. Leo Sprinkle. And then later on, he and I and a group of folks, I was actually a former guy from SRI, a guy named Dr. Stanislav Ojak, formed a group called the Institute for Human Cosmic Interaction.

• 1:09:57Speaker 03

  And I know that was kind of a closed group with the idea in mind that we do the CE5 protocols and all that sort of stuff. So I've been, I've been doing this for a really, really long time. And, and my attitude has kind of helped me. Hope, hope for the best and prepare for the worst. In, in my view, it's a great thing. We certainly know a lot more publicly than we did, you know, many years ago. But what more do we really know? The government has existed, or excuse me, has, has admitted the existence of UFOs, but they have absolutely no evidence whatsoever that these things are from somewhere else.

• 1:10:38Speaker 03

  I, you know, whether or not we're ever, ever going to learn the truth of that, I don't know. But I'm, I do want to say this, that I think the truth of it is, is much, and you, I think, and again, I, I don't want to speak for you guys, but I think that the truth of this has sort of crept up on you folks as well, which is that what we're not just talking about little guys that are coming here from a planet orbiting Zeta Reticuli, or, or with necessarily just with people coming here from another planet. What we're, what we're talking about here is if these non-human intelligences have been here for

• 1:11:20Speaker 03

  a really long time, and perhaps even predate our presence on the planet, are they really aliens? Or are they a higher form of intelligence that we simply have not been able to interact with? And that we are starting to, you know, sort of wake up to as we evolve? And so this intelligence, this, this, this, this non-human intelligence, or these non-human intelligences that we're dealing with, may have all kinds of things to do with, you know, the manipulation of our genes, with our evolution, with where we may go in the future. I always wonder what happens when, you know, let's say if we're a genetic experiment, or if there is

• 1:12:03Speaker 03

  something about us that is a product, what happens when the subject of the experiment becomes aware of the experimenters?

• 1:12:11Speaker 03

  Is it time to start over and wipe the slate clean? So, you know, when we talk about disclosure and we talk about aliens, you know, it's one thing to tell people that, you know, there are aliens, you know, that we're being visited by some higher intelligence or some different intelligence from another part of the universe. That's one thing. But it's a completely different thing to tell them that they're the product of an experiment. And, and just, and, and one more thing about as far as, you know, disclosure. What exactly is, how is that going to take place? Because think about this for a second. What is disclosure going to do to culture and to society?

• 1:12:55Speaker 03

  Because there's something, it presents something that has never happened before. And that is that we all as human beings have an ego. And that ego places us in a specific place on our planet, in the universe, and in, in our culture and in society, and in our, in our local culture. And that is where we are. And then you wake up one day, and, and this is true for every human being on the planet. And then say every human being as they wake up one day is told that everything that you were told that places you on this planet and structured your ego is not true. And the restructuring of the ego of every human being on the planet

• 1:13:38Speaker 03

  simultaneously taking place, you know, relatively all at the same time. You can't predict the outcome of that.

• 1:13:45George Knapp?

  I have one more question, Jeremy, you can take it from there, but it's very important. I don't know what's in the water up there in Wyoming, but there are a number of UFO luminaries out there in the West. You mentioned Leo Sprinkle, who's passed on, but I saw a photo of you with Lou Elizondo, and I need to know, you as a musician, are you going to be performing at his new Honky Tonk?

• 1:14:05Speaker 03

  Well, I tell you, if Lou Elizondo asked me to play at his bar, I certainly would. I was, I made a living as a musician back in the eighties. So I'm a drummer and I can go right now. I got my stuff packed up and ready to go. As far, let me tell you that about Lou, and, and I'll, I'll stop talking. But I, I want to reiterate what Michael Gold said. I had an opportunity to spend some time with Lou after the Tic Tac videos came out because he came and talked to the board and spent a couple of days with us. And I got to spend a little bit of time with him in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, when we had the symposium and he spoke there. And Lou Elizondo exudes patriotism and love for his country.

• 1:14:45Speaker 03

  I would, now you've seen Lou, he's a tank, and I would be behind him all the way in any sort of battle for disclosure. Lou is a patriot and I have nothing but the utmost respect for him and the work that he's done. He is absolutely a true hero. And I'm ready to go right now up there to that bar and set my stuff up. They might not have a stage big enough for my drums, I'll ask them.

• 1:15:13Jeremy Corbell?

  Well, thanks so much, man. I really appreciate kind of walking us through some of this. I do want to make one comment, which is people talk a lot about the origin of these others, this presence that we call UAP, this phenomenon. The place where I get stuck, I have not made a decision on origin, maybe it's multiple origins, but like I wouldn't build a Ferrari if I didn't want to go fast. The issue I come up with is that a lot of the people that George and I have spoken with, who have had direct access to these technological programs, or they allege they do, and pretty much we're sure they do, is that these craft appear to be built to be able to travel amongst the stars. So if you're not doing that, why

• 1:15:55Jeremy Corbell?

  would you build the craft that appears to be able to do that? That goes all the way back to the Lazar story. And if these craft can traverse the stars, why would you make that if you're not doing it? So when you talk about extraterrestrial, or you talk about ultra terrestrial, being from here originally, it just doesn't add up to me that one of these options is that they're not from somewhere else, physically, in time-space. Just curious what your thought is on that, because I'm sure you've heard from people who have worked on some of these programs.

• 1:16:23Speaker 03

  Yeah, well, and I'm glad you brought that up, because I think it's difficult to attribute these things to one specific group. I think that Earth is the center of interest of a number of different civilizations, a number of different entities, that are on a number of different technological levels.

• 1:16:44Speaker 03

  So I think that we're not just talking about a few different species or even groups that are interested in us. I think that that we may very well be the subject of interest of a wide variety of intelligences across the spectrum that include individuals that that came, as Bob Lazar said in the materials that he was provided, that that come from Zeta Reticuli, that we in fact do have those things and you're exactly right, those craft exist. But I'm also saying that that that may not be the limit of what we're being exposed to. Because when we're talking about interdimensional beings, or maybe even beings that might exist in a universe that's just a,

• 1:17:25Speaker 03

  you know, some, you know, a frequency away from where we are, that we are, then that's that's a little bit different subject. But I think it's all of those things, or it's possible that it is all of those things.

• 1:17:37George Knapp?

  Yeah, Richard Beckwith, thanks very much. The book is Need to Know. There's great stuff in there. Also, a lot of it is UAP centric, but it expands to a much broader understanding of secrecy and how it's developed this way. I'll be talking to you again soon. And thanks for joining us on Weaponized. Richard Beckwith, that's a great guest. The book, we both read it now. It's really interesting. Packed with a lot of stuff that goes beyond just UFO related secrecy, but that is at the core of it. I hope that we'll be hearing a lot more from him.

• 1:18:08Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, definitely was a cool read to check out his book. Look, man, I'm just really pumped for the September hearings. I know they're going to be as good as humanly possible. We're still fighting, or not fighting, we're still kind of working all together to try to bring the best people forward. It's going to be a great September. One thing I wanted to mention, I haven't watched it yet, but I heard our friend Ernie Klein texted us and he's like, he just said, "I hate being right all the time." And it was about the about the mummies, which we were very dismissive of because we saw the little ones in Congress. But apparently Jesse Michaels made a really cool video where he deep dived into these, some of these mummies. So I'm going to keep an open mind because Ernie Klein is teasing the shit out of me.

• 1:18:52Jeremy Corbell?

  And I'm going to check out what it is that Jesse came up with, but I heard it's really good. I just haven't watched it yet. So I'm going to watch it actually right after this and I hear it's good.

• 1:19:00George Knapp?

  What I saw online is that Jesse is now quarantined because he came into contact with these mummies. So I want to watch it too. Ernie, if Ernie is vouching for it, I'll take a look. Anyway, I hope you're with Jeremy and I'll talk to you soon.

• 1:19:12Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay, talk to you soon, George.