Video yükleniyor...
Video Yüklenemedi
Practice makes perfect... lalo na sa photocard pull reactions! 😂 Good thing may CDO Idol Hotdog to keep me going !!! 🌭 #bini #biniph #idolxbini #IdolMeetsldol #cdoldolcheesedog #CDOldolHotdog #hotdog CDO Idol
187,835 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)
11 Yorum
run from a pisces like me1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol ily
gian1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol Ily luckyy
RedDeer.Games IR2 yıl önce
🔥 Think you can handle the heat? 🔥 "COOKING" will put your skills to the test! 🧑🍳 Run the best restaurant in the middle of the city, complete orders, learn new recipes, and improve your cooking skills. 🍳👩🍳 #NintendoSwitch Cook it now - here:
A :)1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol Cutee
ً1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol ILY PO
Aries1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol Cuteee🥰
shyra #soph ⋆౨ৎ˚⟡˖ ࣪1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol ILY LUCKY 🫶🏼
Sir Aloi_871 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol Early
joyyy1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol i love you, lucky!
axienaaa1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol cutieee
aintgj1 yıl önce
@CDO_Idol CUTIEE
!["If the truth were to come out...it would pull the rug out from under everything, the whole fabric of society would come unraveled." ~Herrington (allegedly) 🛸 Lying to Protect the UFO Cover-Up? 🛸 (I wanted to get this RLAP (REALLY Long-Ass Post, which is in two parts) out before Jesse Michels (AA) puts out his interview with Herrington. Watch the video I clipped from AA, read the transcript from a few other podcasts, and tell me if you think Friedman is lying. I just don't see it. Herrington denies any of this happened, so somebody IS lying, misremembering, or Herrington was pulling Friedman's leg about underground briefings, crying himself to sleep, and aliens. Using my judgment, and in my opinion: I believe Friedman.) "Aliens are real, they're here, and I've seen them." ~John Herrington, Former Secretary of Energy (allegedly) "My emotional take on this is that there is a darkness to this, and it's dangerous." ~Friedman If Disclosure happens... ⬇️ "We are in a God-fearing country. If you take that away, if you pull that out from underneath everyone, you're gonna lose a huge portion of the population." ~Herrington (allegedly) ~ (Just know that Herrington has denied (to Ben Schreckinger) that any of what Friedman claims, actually happened. And that includes having Friedman drive his car across the country. I'll include that in Part 2. And again, Jesse Michels recorded an interview with Herrington and that's about to be uploaded, so we'll see what he says there.) ~The Man Who Cried Himself to Sleep~ (I stole that from the Sound, Light & Frequency podcast) It’s the summer of 1981, and Brent Friedman (Brent Friedman) is eighteen and preparing to leave for college at UCLA in the fall. Before heading out, he takes on a cross-country drive - from the San Francisco area to Virginia, near Washington, D.C. - as a favor and a way to earn some extra money. The trip is for his former neighbor, John Herrington, who had lived next door to him during his childhood, from ages six to twelve. During those years, Herrington became more than just a neighbor - he was a father figure. (These quotes are from the Sound, Light and Frequency podcast: The Man Who Cried Himself to Sleep ⬇️) Friedman makes the drive and arrives in Virginia and meets up with Herrington, who says he's, "working at a very high-level in the Reagan administration" Friedman: "[Herrington] and Reagan were quite close." Bryce Zabel: "Am I correct in saying, though, that his actual job description at that time was the Assistant to the Undersecretary of the Navy?" Friedman: "I believe so, yes." (That does not appear to be accurate.) Friedman: "He did have an official title. I know that, at the time, he was working on something behind the scenes with the ABSCAM situation. But, what he ends up telling me is that he has a very high-level position and, in fact, his clearance is higher than the president's." (Herrington wasn't sworn in to Assistant Secretary of the Navy until October of 1981 and wasn't sworn in to Secretary of Energy until February of 1985. So what position allowed Herrington to have a high clearance and access to so much information, before the summer of 1981? In 1980, Herrington was the advance man for Reagan and his presidential campaign. What does an advance man do?) From Political Dictionary dot com... "The 'Advance man' is someone who makes arrangements and handles publicity for the candidate during a campaign. "The advance man travels to a location ahead of the candidate’s arrival and sets everything up so that things run smoothly for the candidate’s media appearance, or for whatever event the candidate is participating in." (Would an advance man be briefed about our country's biggest secrets? I don't think so. Is there a detail of this story that's missing? Maybe Herrington had some other job that required him to have access to all this information? I found this excerpt from The American Presidency Project website, which includes some further background info. on Herrington.) "In 1967 [Herrington] opened his own law office in Walnut Creek, Calif., specializing in real estate, corporate law, taxation, and contracts. He was recently involved in property management. "During the 1980 Presidential campaign, Mr. Herrington was a full-time volunteer advance man with the Reagan for President committee. Following the Republican National Convention he was named western regional director for advance. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ "[On May 6th, 1981] - The President...announced the appointment of John S. Herrington to be Deputy Assistant to the President for Presidential Personnel." According to AI (which pulled three sources), that position, "manages the selection, vetting, and recommendation process for political appointees across federal agencies. They oversee talent recruitment, security clearance coordination, and strategic staffing to fill executive branch positions with qualified individuals aligned with the administration's goals." (So, perhaps it was in that ⬆️⬆️⬆️ position where Herrington was thoroughly briefed, leading up to his conversation with Friedman?) ~~~ In the interview with Ross Coulthart (and in other interviews), Friedman said that when he went to Herrington's house that night... Friedman: "I saw him come home from work in a black Lincoln Town Car, with two Secret Service guys attending to him, a briefcase handcuffed to his wrist [which] was brought into the house, taken right into his office where the briefcase goes into a wall safe. He was a real estate lawyer when I grew up with him. "[Herrington] says, 'Let's you and I go out onto the veranda and catch up.' Now, when I was growing up, he was a strict Calvinist. He didn't drink, he didn't swear, and really fit. A man's man. Well, when I saw him that night, he looked haggard, he looked like he had the weight of the world on him. He also brought a bottle of Jim Beam out to the backyard and he was pouring himself what I later learned were two fingers, two little glasses, you know? "After we caught up on my life, I said, 'What is your job? What was the whole thing with the black Town Car and the briefcase?' He said, 'Oh, I can't talk about it. I'm working for the President in a special capacity and it's all highly classified.' "A couple of years earlier, our family had been contacted by, I believe it was either the CIA or the NSA, or something, and asked a bunch of questions about him, I guess as he was being vetted for this job. But we didn't know what the job was, we just knew that it was some government position and they wanted to know things about him. "Again, he was not forthcoming with what the job was, but the more I pushed him and the more he had to drink, he eventually said to me, 'Well, look, the fact of the matter is, you know, to get this job, I had to be briefed for a number of months in an underground facility in West Virginia.' And I was like, 'Wow, that sounds intense!' And he goes, 'Yeah, I used to cry myself to sleep every night.'" (I've been tweeting about this story for 4+ years, and anybody who hears that part can't help but wonder: What the hell did they (allegedly) tell him?!) Friedman: "Now, again, a man's man. When I was growing up, the thought of him crying once in his life was unthinkable to me. The idea of him crying every night, I was shocked. And I said, 'Well, what would cause you to do that?' And he said, 'Brent, this is not the world I thought I was bringing my daughters into.' "Now, think about that. You're 18 years old, and this man who you look up to, that you revere, is telling you this. All I could say was, 'Well, what about me? I'm in this world, too! I need to know something.' And he said, 'Well, I can't really go into that. This is like, highly-classified material.' And I said, 'John, I'm sitting here. Like, you've just put me...puts the edge. I need to know something.' "And he said, 'Well, okay, I'll tell you what. I know, when you were growing up, you were into science fiction and comic books and all that stuff. Well, aliens are real, they're here, and I've seen them.' And he said it with just the most casualness, like just throwing me a bone. Like, okay, can we stop talking now?" ~~~ (Was Herrington just pulling Friedman's leg since he knew of Friedman's interest in Sci Fi? Back in 2018, Zabel gave a lecture at the International UFO Congress, and he talked about this story.) Zabel: "This the quote that Brent gave me. Herrington said, 'There is alien life on Earth, I've seen it.' And Brent said, "Is it alive?" And Herrington said, "That depends." (Regarding the question of whether the alien life Herrington allegedly saw was alive or not, none of the current interviews with Friedman contain the Herrington answer, "It depends." Is that an accurate quote from Friedman or did Zabel get it wrong? If he really said, "It depends," that has the potential to make things even more interesting. ⬇️) ~Back to the Coulthart Interview~ Friedman: "And I kind of was taken aback, and I said, 'What do you mean? Are they alive?' And he said, 'Um, I can't say.' I said, 'You can't say, or you won't say?' And he said, 'I can't say.' (He couldn't say because he wasn't allowed, or he couldn't say because "it depends" on what one means by "alive"? I may be making this too complicated, and I hope Brent chimes in with some comments in the replies. Okay, he DID chime in and address it during the "Sound, Light & Frequency" followup podcast on March 22 entitled, "More on the Story — J.C. and Herrington.") Friedman: "Did he say he can't say because he didn't know, or...this is not a life-form as we know it? There's a lot of ways to interpret this." ~Back to the Coulthart Interview~ Friedman: "And I said, 'Well, okay, hold on a second. How is it that everyone doesn't know the truth?' And he said, 'Oh, lots of people know the truth. You can walk into any bookstore and you're gonna find all sorts of books that contain all sorts of truth. And right next to them, you'll find books that we published, that are full of lies and disinformation. And he said, 'There's a multi-billion dollar campaign to keep this covered up.'" (If that's true, what I wouldn't give to know which UFO books were put out by the government (or whomever is doing it) as disinformation and to lead us astray. Any channeled books?) Friedman: "And I remember in 1981, I was not a great student so I don't know that I ever heard this in high school. I don't think I'd heard the word billion before. I knew it sounded big, but I didn't even know what that meant." ~ From Coulthart's interview of David Grusch in June of 2023 Grusch: "There's a sophisticated disinformation campaign targeting the U.S. populace, which is extremely unethical and immoral. This has leaked like a sieve for decades, but it was a very sophisticated, disinformation campaign where, you know, they have allowed some of the truth to come out through some of their trade crafts. But they've disenfranchised people, they've stigmatized it, they made it like a, this total like wacky thing to talk about. So anybody who may come forward with that kind of information is looked like a, you know, total tinfoil hat guy, because it's a perfect amalgamation of disinformation to just make it look crazy." ~ (From the Sound, Light & Frequency podcast...) Friedman: [Herrington told me], "if the truth were to come out - and by the way, we don't know the full truth, but if what we knew were to come out - it would pull the rug out from under everything, the whole fabric of society would come unraveled." (Back to the "Reality Check" interview.) Friedman: "And I said, 'Well, you know, hold on a second. So you're telling me that there's aliens, there's a big cover-up. Is this never gonna come out?' And he said, 'Well, you know, maybe in our lifetime. Only if it has to, though.' "And I said, 'Well, I don't understand why.' And he said, 'We are in a God-fearing country. If you take that away, if you pull that out from underneath everyone, you're gonna lose a huge portion of the population. And if you do that on a global level, and you take away what people believe in, you are going to disrupt the one thing that holds the whole world together, which is the global economy.'" ~~~ In "The Age of Disclosure," we were told this: "One very distinctive moment for me was briefing then Secretary of Treasury, Steve Mnuchin. I got through my briefing, and at the end of the brief, he sat back in his chair and he said, 'You know, Jay, you may wonder why I asked for this briefing.' And he said, 'What are the economic impacts of the President going to the microphone and telling the world we’re not alone? I have to think about those kinds of impacts in order to prepare, if the President were to make that move.'" ~Jay Stratton ~ Friedman: "There's a key detail here that I think adds to this conversation. One of the things that did happen is, towards the end of the conversation, after I was processing all of this, I said, 'Well, I guess now I understand why you cried yourself to sleep every night.' And he goes, 'No, Brent, you don't understand. This stuff we're talking about here, this was day three. So, he was putting into perspective this alien thing, that we're trying to get to the bottom of, was this one small, little area that he had been disclosed about." (This is a new and important detail that I didn't have when I first started posting about the Herrington story in 2022. Back then, I thought Herrington cried himself to sleep every night, for weeks and weeks, due to information he was briefed on about aliens. But with these new details added, that doesn't seem to be the case.) Friedman: "And so, I think that's really the only way to make sense of his statement for me. Is that, the truth has to be about something much bigger than just non-human intelligence. I think it probably goes to the nature of reality itself." (I love the nature of reality discussion but there's really no way to know what made Herrington cry himself to sleep every night for two months unless he decides to surface and share that information with us. In the meantime, our minds will come up with all types of possibilities and scenarios... We live in a simulation, and there's no afterlife. Nazis still exist, rule the world with high-tech, and we have to do what they tell us or they'll wipe us out. We're going to get hit with a comet or asteroid in the near future and life will reset on this planet like it has in the past. Artificial Intelligence will rule the world in the near future and humanity will slowly die off. Feel free to add to this small list... ~~~ Coulthart: "Brent, have you gone back to John Herrington in the interceding years and tried to extract more from him? Because, I mean, what I can tell our audience is, I do know that a formal approach has been made to John Herrington by people from the Congress who are investigating this matter. And they've been unsuccessful in getting John to speak further on it. Have you had any further conversations with him since? I appreciate he's still alive, he's a very elderly man now. I can imagine, if he did sign some kind of secrecy oath, he's probably trying to protect you by not talking about it any further." Friedman: "Yeah, this is a sensitive area in that, you know, when Bryce and I talked about doing this podcast, or even before I talked to you, I really had to make a decision about, did I want to drag him out of the shadows, essentially? He was a family friend. Granted, you know, over the years, we kind of drifted apart, our families, but my mom still stayed in touch with them. And when I said that I was gonna do this, and I asked her at the time, you know, 'Can you put me in touch with John?' And she was adamant about, 'Leave the man alone. If he wanted to talk about this, he already would have talked about it.' And so, I really had to, then, at that point, make a decision: Do I wanna go forth and talk about this thing that happened? Or not?" (He already spoke about it, publicly, back to 2018, but not to this extent and not to such a large audience.) Friedman: "And I made the choice that I felt my story was important enough to put out there. And because it was also formative to how 'Dark Skies' came about, which led to the guy making us a deal proposal, I just felt like I'm gonna have to put all of this out in the open and take the consequences as they come. "So I have not spoken with John since then. I would have to then have a break in my relationship with my mom, she's really drawn a line in the sand. But, you know, honestly, I'm living in this world right now where, at any time, I would expect, possibly, him calling me and saying, 'What the hell are you doing?'" (There's an important detail of this story that Friedman did not share in the Coulthart interview and I will get to it in a second.) Coulthart: "You say it was day three, and he got told about aliens, but he was there for a hell of a lot longer than three days. What do you think it might be that he was told that is so confronting that the poor gentleman was crying himself to sleep at night?" Friedman: "Well, I'm gonna say this through the filter of what I knew about John Herrington. And he was an amazing father. And so, in my mind, anything where he felt that his daughters would not be safe would be something that would probably cause him to cry himself to sleep at night, right? The inability to protect your child would be haunting, would be devastating." (Speculate away.) Friedman: "And so, I think if you look at it through that lens, you have to think, okay, then this is...we live in a very tenuous situation where, seemingly, at any time, higher forces may be able to do things to our loved ones, right? And there's nothing we could do about it. That's what I take away from this. Now, how all of that happens, who these predatory forces are? I don't have the answer to that. But my emotional take on this is that there is a darkness to this, and it's dangerous." (I really have no idea what that could mean. What kind of higher forces? Human, bad actors? The intelligence behind the phenomenon, which is NOT about ET but more about non-physical beings John Keel labeled Ultraterrestrials?) ~This is from the Lehto Files podcast~ Friedman: "As he was being disclosed to, he used to cry himself to sleep every night. And if you think about it, I don't think any one of us, or anyone in your audience, if someone said, 'You know what? Aliens are real. They're here, we're not alone.' Would you cry? I don't think so. I think you'd be like, 'Okay, I know that. Like, now I feel vindicated.' Would you cry if somebody said, 'Oh, the aliens, they're hostile, and they could come and get us at any time'? No, you'd be like, vigilant. You'd be like, 'Okay, well, I gotta prepare for this.' What would make a man of such character cry every night? I think it has to be something bigger than aliens, and that we're not alone. I think it has to go to the nature of reality and that that we live in a very tenuous existence that is much more complicated than any of us can really comprehend. And when you are given that truth or when you're exposed to as much of it as possible to convey in words, it must be shattering. It must be shattering." (This is the part that I wish Friedman would have talked about in the Coulthart interview because I feel it's important. ⬇️ A reminder for readers: In the Coulthart interview, Friedman said, "I have not spoken with [Herrington] since [1981]. I'm living in this world right now where, at any time, I would expect, possibly, [Herrington] calling me and saying, 'What the hell are you doing?'" But, from the Sound, Light and Frequency podcast... Zabel: "Did you have any contact with John Herrington after this event in 1981?" Friedman: "Oh, that's a good question. No, not...in person. But, while we were in production on 'Dark Skies (which aired from 1996-1997),' I remember one day my assistant came in and said, 'Oh, you got something in the mail.' Which was weird because who would send mail to the production office for me? But I opened it up and it was one of those buck slips. Remember those kind of like, long vertical things? It said, 'From the desk of John Herrington.' "And he wrote out, in longhand: 'Congratulations on finally getting your story out there.' "And I thought, wow, I had never considered it because he said, 'Go ahead and tell your story, no one's gonna believe you.' But clearly he wasn't upset that I was, you know, had 'Dark Skies' on the air and it was inspired by our conversation." (If he clearly wasn't upset about Friedman getting his story out there, via "Dark Skies," which was inspired by their 1981 conversation, why is Friedman worried that he's gonna hear from Herrington any day, where he'll ask, "What the hell are you doing?" That question might be answered as we keep going.) Friedman: "But, it also made me realize, at that time, is it possible that he told me this story as part of the disinformation program? And, as hard as it is for me to admit that... Because this was a man that I trusted and I respected, I idolized to a certain degree. To think that he would, potentially, be using me - me, an 18-year-old kid who's, I'm nobody - as part of the disinformation campaign? It hurts to even think of that, and I don't believe it. But I have to acknowledge that that is one possible explanation." ~~~ I want to add one final thing from the SL&F podcast... Zabel: "I asked Grusch if he had ever heard of the name John Herrington. And Dave Grusch...looks at me and goes, 'Yeah, I've heard of Herrington." And I said, 'Well, what what do you know about him?' And I think he said something like, 'I really can't talk about that.' "This year, it's 2025, I get, first a message, and then a call from Ross Coulthart. And I believe I can say this because, you know, he didn't swear me to secrecy. It was a public...I mean, he was calling me to ask me something. He said that Grusch, who was now working for [Rep. Eric Burlison]" wanted Ross to ask me [Zabel] something. "And what Ross asked me was, 'Do you think your friend Brent would get in a car and drive John Herrington to Washington DC to testify?' "I almost fell off my chair when I heard that. And I also found the irony, which I'm sure you can find, which as an 18-year-old, you drove a car across America to DC, right? To get your briefing. And now, all these years later, they want you to drive the man who gave you the briefing to Washington, DC so he can give another briefing to Congress. Okay, that's interesting enough. "I said, 'I don't think Brent's probably going to go along with that, but I'll ask him. You know, I mean, it wasn't untoward for Ross to ask for that. I mean, of course, that's reasonable. But then he said, 'Well, what do you think his reaction would be if he was subpoenaed?' And I don't think he was talking about [Herrington], I think he was talking about you at that moment." (Why subpoena a second hand witness (Friedman) when you can get the real thing in Herrington? And why not fly an elderly Herrington across the country instead of having Friedman drive him on a several-day road trip? Were they afraid something might happen to him?) Friedman: "Well, I have to tell you, when you called me about that Ross conversation and the word subpoena was tossed out, I started to feel queasy at the thought of it. The thing is, I have no problem going under oath, right? But at that point, we had already decided we were going to do this podcast. And I thought, you know, if I'm gonna tell my story, my stories, honestly, I want them to be under my terms, right? For us, right? Not with congressional investigators. peppering me with things and making me look like an idiot, right? Which I can pretty much guarantee would happen." (I can pretty much guarantee that that would NOT happen. None of the hearings have been adversarial or made the witnesses look bad. The hardest question they could ask is: "Is it possible Herrington was making up a story to entertain you or feeding you disinformation?" And Friedman could say, "I don't think so, but I certainly can't rule it out.") Friedman: "And I thought, I wanna tell this story, I wanna tell a bunch of stories because, at the end of the day, this Herrington story is, effectively, the backstory of Sound, Light and Frequency. But there's much more to Sound, Light and Frequency than even just this story." Continued in Part 2](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2107369637843435897/amplify_video_thumb/2107369370691510272/img/FlE97xjCTqhdHGtM.jpg)
![Has the Identity of Gilbert Been Solved? The goal of the UFO intrusion, "was coincident with our having access to space." 🇺🇸👽 Is the U.S. Government Communicating with Aliens? 👽🇺🇸 Coulthart/Vallée/Gilbert Part 2 Coulthart: "So you find [Gilbert] very credible." Vallée: "I met him when he was 22." ~~~ Read Part 1 here: ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ~Is Gilbert's Real Name, Gary O. Langford?~ Coulthart: "So, Jacques, one of the things you say in the diary is that Gilbert shared the actual questions with you that he was asked to ask the being. What was the most important question that he was asked to ask?" Vallée: "I think he should answer that. I don't...I would have to make up, you know, an answer from what I know. No, I cannot put my finger on one." Coulthart: "To come another way at this. What was the most important answer that Gilbert said he got from the being?" Vallée: "I think the most important was that there was a willingness from...but I couldn't tell you whether that was from the being, you know, itself, or from the officers that he could...who had briefed him ahead of time. There was a willingness to communicate. That it wanted to establish communication with us." Coulthart: "Okay, that's very exciting. And I think one of the things you also plant in the book is quite a bombshell. You wrote that what Gilbert learned about the goals of the UFO intrusion may be the most insightful part of the entire episode. Can you tell me, sir, what did he learn about UFO-intrusion's goals?" Vallée: "I think he would say that it was coincident with our having access to space. You know, that the humanity as we know it is at a point of transition that is critical, where we can just as easily destroy ourselves as a result of it." (Just to play devil's advocate: If the UFOs and the intelligence behind them had "intruded" because they needed something from humanity, I don't think they would admit it. Let's hope it's just about them being worried that the dangerous humans were about to go out into the cosmos and they needed to keep an eye on us, or maybe help or guide us.) Coulthart: "Can you at least tell us were those goals that he described benign, hostile, or neither?" Vallée: "Well, with what we know of the technology, and today we know a lot more than we did five years ago, fifteen years ago, there would be no defense, essentially. It can appear at will [at] any point of the world, with very very large equipment." Coulthart: "Sorry, Jacques, just to clarify. I'm asking about what Gilbert's impressions were about the motivations for the beings making these intrusions to our planet. Was he suggesting that they were benevolently motivated, or hostile?" Vallée: "They never got to - to my knowledge, at least within his experience - they never got to a point of clarifying those those motivations. That the presence of the being and the fact that that being was cooperating indicates that on quote 'their' side, there was a willingness and a desire to establish a relationship. I think that's...that's all I know." Coulthart: "Right." Vallée: "Beyond that, he didn't know that much. I mean, he was just brought in and out." (Maybe "they" - or, at least one "they," if there are multiple intelligences here - are very concerned about humanity because they rely on us as a resource, and if we destroy ourselves, there goes their resource? Or, they care, out of the goodness of their heart? Or, some other, unknown, reason.) Coulthart:"Yeah, but you appreciate, Jacques, this is quite extraordinary information. Because here we have a situation where the person who's known by the pseudonym Gilbert, who you know personally, and you have corroborative documentation from that person asserting this exchange with a non-human entity. "This is somebody who's allegedly had direct communication with a non-human entity in a, presumably, U.S. government or maybe private aerospace facility, at the behest of the U.S. government, in a non-classified way, which is extraordinary in itself. Is what Gilbert learned, one of the reasons why you now say the phenomenon operates from what you call higher reality levels, reprocessing human consciousness?" Vallée: "No. That has been, to me, one of the most valid hypotheses, you know, for the last 50 years. And, you know, there was considerable work done in France, especially, but also in other parts of Europe and in the USSR on the subject. And that work, when we review it now, is consistent with that idea. You know, that this is at a different level." ~End Gilbert-related conversation between RC and JV~ (I can't wait until we hear from Gilbert. In the meantime, who is he or she? I asked ChatGPT to go to work, and this is what it had to say... My Prompt: Jacques Vallée says that he met Gilbert (a top psychic and remote viewer), his friend who claims he had a face-to-face encounter with a non-human entity in an underground government facility, when he (Gilbert) was 22. Do you best to help me figure out who Gilbert might be. The Answer... I dug into this pretty hard, including Vallée’s new September 15 interview. I think we can narrow “Gilbert” considerably, although I don’t think the public evidence is strong enough to identify him with certainty. The most important new information is Vallée’s statement that he first met Gilbert when Gilbert was 22 years old. Vallée also described him as one of the best psychics in the world, both today and across his career. In the same interview, Ross Coulthart directly guessed Keith Harary and Vallée said no. Ross then guessed Joe McMoneagle; Vallée noticeably declined to answer and said there were “two or three other names.” There are several other fingerprints from Forbidden Science 7. Gilbert was an old friend of Vallée's who recontacted him in 2021; Vallée calls him an extremely accomplished but discreet remote viewer. They had crossed paths in Central America and elsewhere over the years. According to Gilbert's account, roughly 20 years ago he was taken through official channels to a U.S. installation inside a small mountain, where he spent hours interacting with a more-than-six-foot-tall entity that appeared to emit light. Vallée says Gilbert kept detailed tables of the questions, responses, ambiguous responses and failures. Vallée considers Gilbert highly credible but has also explicitly acknowledged that he cannot independently verify that Gilbert was actually at the claimed location. My current shortlist looks like this: * Gary O. Langford — my strongest biographical candidate. Langford is surprisingly good. A declassified SRI report says his company was chosen because of his “long and successful remote viewing experience,” and another records him doing roughly 100 RV sessions in FY1987. Vallée definitely knew him: Vallée's journals put Langford in the SRI psychic program and record Vallée meeting with Edwin May, Gary Langford and others on the classified project in February 1987. Langford was also unusually discreet: publicly he became a physicist/systems engineer rather than a celebrity psychic. His background included government scientific/technical intelligence work. * And there is a new wrinkle I find very intriguing. Langford received his astronomy degree from UC Berkeley in 1969. Vallée's own diary puts Vallée at Stanford on July 1, 1969, right across the Bay. If Langford was the conventional college-graduation age, he could have been approximately 22 at precisely the time Vallée was entering the Stanford/Bay Area environment. I have not found Langford's birth date, so we cannot say yet that he actually was 22. But this is a lead worth pursuing. The big problem is that I've found no evidence yet putting Langford and Vallée together in Central America. * Edwin C. May — the strongest current “inside hint” theory, but I have serious problems with it. A researcher, Rhys Dalton-Morgan, recently claimed publicly that he knows Gilbert's identity and apparently embedded a clue in his wording; investigators interpret “engagED WIth aN MAY…” as EDWIN MAY. That's clever, but Dalton-Morgan hasn't publicly authenticated that interpretation or explained how he knows. May unquestionably had the classified access and a long relationship with Vallée. He became director of the government-funded remote-viewing program and had been at SRI since the mid-1970s. But there's a glaring problem: May wasn't known as a master remote viewer. He was principally the scientist running and evaluating the program, and in a 2024 interview he actually described himself as “not psychic at all.” Also, his B.S. was in 1962; if he was roughly 22 then, there's presently no evidence Vallée knew him that early. So despite the cryptic-name clue, I don't like May nearly as much from Vallée's actual description of Gilbert. * William G. “Bill” Ray — interesting dark horse. Ray was an actual elite military remote viewer, viewer/monitor 101 at Fort Meade and later commander of the unit. More strangely, Ray used the pseudonym “Liam” in remote-viewing discussions. Dalton-Morgan later used the phrase “lab in a mountain” — L.I.A.M. That has led some investigators to suspect another deliberately planted clue. Ray fits the military-access/master-viewer side extremely well. The problem is that I can find no established Vallée-Ray friendship, no Central America connection, and no evidence Vallée knew Ray when Ray was 22. So at present the “LIAM” clue is doing most of the work. * Joe McMoneagle — possible, but I think less likely than his fame makes him appear. Vallée refusing to rule him out is interesting. And Vallée clearly regarded McMoneagle as an exceptional military remote viewer. But McMoneagle's known entry into the SRI/Army remote-viewing world occurred much later than age 22. There also isn't a public Central America/Vallée connection that I've found. If Vallée's “I met him when he was 22” statement is precise, Joe becomes difficult to make fit. One candidate we can cross off is Keith Harary. Ironically, Harary is an almost perfect match for the age clue: he was born February 9, 1953 and graduated Duke in 1975, putting him at 22 right when he was entering that parapsychology/RV milieu. That's probably exactly why Coulthart guessed him. But Vallée flatly said Gilbert wasn't Keith. The clue I would attack next I think Gary Langford's age is potentially decisive. We know: Gary Langford → UC Berkeley astronomy degree, 1969 → Vallée is in the Stanford/Bay Area world, 1969 → Langford subsequently becomes an exceptionally successful but little-publicized SRI remote viewer → Vallée definitely knows/works with Langford later → Langford works in scientific/technical intelligence and classified environments → His analytical, highly structured personality fits the elaborate technical tables Vallée describes Gilbert producing. If we can establish that Gary Langford was born around 1946–47 and that Vallée met him around 1969, the “22” statement would suddenly fit in a way that I don't think anybody has demonstrated yet. Then there's the second test: Central America. Vallée was in San José, Costa Rica, for a paranormal conference in October 1985. Known attendees around Vallée included John Keel, Andrija Puharich, John Lilly, Salvador Freixedo and others, but none of those obvious names fits Gilbert—and most were dead before Gilbert recontacted Vallée in 2021. We need to reconstruct the complete roster, visitors and side meetings from that Costa Rica trip and search for Langford, May, Ray—or another young psychic we've overlooked. So, right now, if you asked me where to put our investigative effort, I'd put it on Gary Langford first. Not because I think we've identified Gilbert, but because he currently gives us the most interesting combination of elite remote viewer + extreme discretion + Vallée connection + classified technical background + potentially very interesting 1969/age-22 geography. And there's one more possibility I wouldn't dismiss: Gilbert may be a comparatively obscure SRI or government viewer whose name isn't on the usual Stargate celebrity list at all. Vallée's emphasis on how discreet he was may be telling us exactly that. I can go another level deeper on this and try to reconstruct Vallée's movements from roughly 1968–1985 against the biographies of Langford, May, Ray, McMoneagle and lesser-known SRI viewers, specifically looking for the moment when one of them was exactly 22. That may be the best way to crack it. My Prompt: "Please do!" I found something that materially narrows this down. After testing Vallée’s new “I met him when he was 22” statement against the actual timelines, Gary O. Langford becomes more interesting, while Edwin May, Joe McMoneagle, Bill Ray and Stephan Schwartz all become harder to reconcile with the clue. First, here’s exactly what Vallée has now told us about Gilbert. In the September 15, 2026 Reality Check interview, Gilbert is described as a master remote viewer, “one of the best psychics in the world,” with a long classified career and other military work. Vallée says Gilbert was brought into the alleged underground facility specifically as a specialist to probe whether the entity could respond psychically. Most importantly, Vallée says: “I met him when he was twenty two.” Vallée also says he has no independent proof Gilbert was physically at the facility, so the underground-entity story itself remains Gilbert’s uncorroborated account. Here’s what happens when we use 22 years old as a filter: Candidate Gary O. Langford When he was 22 years old Birth year still unknown publicly; received his Berkeley A.B. in 1969, suggesting he could have been about 22 What we can document about Vallée contact Vallée arrived at Stanford in 1969; definite later contact with Langford is documented Effect on hypothesis Intriguing fit; unresolved ~ Edwin C. May When was he 22 years old? Probably around 1962, when he earned his B.S. What we can document about Vallée contact? Vallée’s journal documents May at SRI by 1980, and frequent contact afterward Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit unless they secretly knew each other much earlier ~ Joe McMoneagle When was he 22 years old? 1968 What we can document about Vallée contact? McMoneagle was serving overseas; Vallée’s first clear journal reference I found to meeting him is 1988 Effect on Hypothesis Very poor fit ~ Stephan Schwartz When was he 22 years old? 1964 What we can document about Vallée contact? Documented Vallée/Schwartz social contact comes much later, in the 1970s Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit ~ Keith Harary When was he 22 years old? Around 1975 What we can document about Vallée contact? Chronologically quite plausible Effect on Hypothesis Eliminated by Vallée himself ~ Bill Ray Apparently early/mid-1960s What we can document about Vallée contact? No evidence found of a Vallée relationship at that time Effect on Hypothesis Poor fit so far ~ The Gary Langford coincidence is the one I keep coming back to. Langford received his undergraduate degree from UC Berkeley in 1969. Vallée’s own Forbidden Science chronology places him at Stanford on July 1, 1969, and biographical sources say he joined Stanford’s computer center that year. In other words, Vallée and Langford were suddenly in essentially the same Bay Area scientific environment at exactly the period when a normal-age 1969 college graduate would have been about 22. That does not prove Langford was 22 or that they met in 1969. I still cannot find a reliable public birth year for Gary Langford. That's the missing piece. But unlike the other leading candidates, the age clue does not create an obvious chronological contradiction. And Langford fits an astonishing number of the other clues. Vallée's journals identify him as a “photo analyst Gary Langford” involved in the SRI work. By August 1986 Vallée personally attended an SRI remote-viewing session with Langford as the subject; in February 1987 Vallée records meeting Ed May, Beverly Humphrey, Gary Langford, analysts and remote viewers. The surviving program record also shows that Langford wasn't some casual experimental subject. He participated in SRI remote-viewing work from the late 1970s onward, and a fiscal-1987 report records him participating in about 100 practice, exploratory, pilot and experimental sessions that year alone. Importantly, the source reviewing those records cautions that the experimental results were mixed; that distinction matters because we're trying to identify who Vallée regarded as an exceptional viewer, not establish scientifically that remote viewing works. Langford's conventional career may be even more significant. He wasn't a New Age celebrity. He's a physicist/systems engineer with a long technical résumé and later taught systems engineering at Stanford and the Naval Postgraduate School. That fits Vallée's repeated emphasis that Gilbert is discreet much better than someone like McMoneagle or Schwartz, whose psychic work became central to their public identities. There is another subtle thing I like about Langford: the methodology. Vallée describes Gilbert as keeping highly organized records of the alleged entity communication—questions, answers, ambiguous responses, failures, essentially a structured experimental data set. Langford's surviving remote-viewing work is unusually analytical and systems-oriented. That isn't identification evidence by itself, but temperamentally it fits Gilbert remarkably well. The McMoneagle problem The new age clue causes a major problem for Joe. McMoneagle was born in January 1946, making him 22 in 1968. Biographical sources place him overseas with the Army during this period; one account specifically puts him in Southeast Asia during the 1968 Tet Offensive. Meanwhile Vallée's own journal chronology has him in Saint-Germain, Edinburgh and New Jersey during 1968, before arriving at Stanford in 1969. More damaging still, Forbidden Science 3 gives us what looks like Vallée's introduction to McMoneagle on March 24, 1988: Ed May came over for dinner… bringing the best remote viewer in the Army, Joe McMoneagle. McMoneagle would have been 42, not 22. That wording isn't absolute proof they'd never met before, but it sure reads like Vallée was being introduced to him. So despite Vallée declining to answer Ross's McMoneagle guess, I now think Joe is substantially less likely than I did yesterday. Edwin May gets even weaker May earned his physics B.S. in 1962 and Ph.D. in 1968. He didn't become seriously involved in parapsychology until the mid-1970s. Vallée's diary has him dealing with May at SRI on November 6, 1980, and repeatedly thereafter. For May to be Gilbert, Vallée would apparently have had to meet him when May was approximately college age around 1962, years before May entered the psi field and when Vallée had only just arrived in America. I found nothing connecting them then. That makes the recent cryptic ED-WI-N MAY interpretation of Rhys Dalton-Morgan's (Rhys Dalton-Morgan) clue much less persuasive to me. It may be clever wordplay, but biography should trump wordplay. And the Costa Rica clue produced a surprise I reconstructed Vallée's October 1985 San José, Costa Rica trip because it initially seemed like the obvious “we crossed paths in Central America” event. Vallée's diary specifically mentions people including John Keel, Andrija Puharich, Charles Berlitz, Salvador Freixedo, Javier Cabrera, Enrique Castillo and others. There's even a surviving caption for a photograph of Vallée there with Keel, Freixedo, Berlitz and Castillo. But I can find no Gary Langford, Edwin May, Joe McMoneagle, Bill Ray or Stephan Schwartz associated with that meeting. That's useful negative evidence. It suggests that when Vallée says he and Gilbert crossed paths “in Central America and elsewhere over the years,” he probably wasn't simply referring to the famous 1985 Costa Rica conference—unless Gilbert attended privately or wasn't listed. That means Central America may ultimately be the clue that cracks this. Where I stand now My working order has changed substantially: Gary O. Langford → unknown/obscure SRI or intelligence viewer → Bill Ray → McMoneagle → Edwin May → Stephan Schwartz. And I'd put a sizeable gap after Langford—but not because we have enough evidence to say Langford is Gilbert. We don't. It's because Langford is the one named candidate for whom the age-22 clue could line up naturally with Vallée's life and who also checks the boxes of accomplished viewer, SRI connection, classified/intelligence environment, scientific background and unusual discretion. There's also something potentially very important buried in Vallée's wording. He doesn't merely say “I knew him when he was 22.” He says: “I met him when he was twenty two.” That's a datable event. If Gary Langford turns out to have been born around 1946–47, then we should immediately search Vallée's 1968–70 orbit—Stanford, SRI, Berkeley, computer-science circles, astronomy circles, parapsychology contacts—for their first encounter. If Langford turns out to have been born significantly earlier or later, we can probably cross him off. So that's the next key piece I'd want: Gary O. Langford's publicly documented birth year or evidence establishing his age around his 1969 Berkeley graduation, followed by any evidence of a Langford/Vallée connection before the SRI references we've already found. I would also search Vallée's less-famous Central American travel—not just the 1985 conference—for Langford or another government viewer. At this stage, Gary Langford is the lead I would pursue hardest. And this is substantially stronger than the case I had for him before we incorporated Vallée's “22” statement. If anything new from Vallée, Coulthart, Dalton-Morgan, or the “Gilbert” interview project surfaces, I can also monitor it and flag anything that changes this identification picture.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2104296127113974262/amplify_video_thumb/2104291783878619136/img/-dYYxAqu1enA0h9X.jpg)
!["What NewJeans Wanted to Say" [Full transcript translated to English] 240911 19:00 KST Hyein: Some of you might be surprised by this sudden meeting, but we wanted to share our thoughts and opinions about the recent events, so we prepared this session. First, I want to explain one of the reasons we decided to do this live. It's been hard to see many people who have worked with us continue to suffer from unfair demands and pressure even after our CEO was dismissed. It was frustrating to just stand by and watch these situations unfold, and we were very worried about our future as a group of five. Honestly, while preparing for this live, we were naturally concerned about the reactions we might receive afterward. We were also worried that people might mistakenly think that our CEO instructed us to do this, but I want to clarify that this live was prepared because we five members genuinely wanted to express our thoughts. We received help from directors we trust for things we couldn't prepare ourselves, like setting up the shoot and finding a location. It didn’t feel right for us to stay silent when everyone, including our Bunnies, has been stepping up to support us. Moreover, this is not just a matter of leaving it to the adults because it directly affects the lives of us five members. Since we're the ones going through this, we felt that it would be healthier to speak up ourselves than to do nothing, so we mustered the courage to do so. The main point of what we want to say today is directed towards HYBE. We've already had meetings with the current management to express our opinions, but after seeing what happened afterward, it feels like our concerns weren't clearly conveyed. It seemed like communication was blocked, so we felt that preparing this live was the only way to properly share our thoughts and feelings. Minji: I’m sure that today’s announcement has shocked many of the staff as well, as they were not aware of it, and I imagine everyone watching is quite surprised too. We’ve thought a lot about where to begin, but since the purpose is to express our intentions, we’ll try to explain as clearly as possible. Of course, due to contractual issues, we can’t share everything, but we’ll be as honest as we can. After it was decided that we would debut as NewJeans, our members spent a lot of time getting to know Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, both as a group and individually. At first, I had reservations and a certain fear towards the adults we were working with, but Daepyonim was the first person to approach us in a way that allowed us to open up, which was initially awkward but eventually built trust. From before our debut until now, we’ve been aware of various issues related to our debut schedule and other matters. However, working with Daepyonim made us feel good, and I believe that’s why we were able to debut successfully and continue our activities until now. Danielle: Naturally, we all want to continue working with Daepyonim. Even before debuting as NewJeans and through all of the time that we spent together with Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, all of us felt that the music we wanted to make and the kind of world we wanted to build together, our vision, was similar in so many ways. With Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, we were able to prepare each and every task with sincere hearts, and I believe it shows in our work. Putting our sincere effort into something is only possible because of the people that we're working with have trust in each other and have that same vision. Min Hee-jin Daepyonim is not only the person that produces our music, but someone who makes NewJeans who we are. She discusses even the smallest details with us and explains them in ways that we can understand clearly. NewJeans has a distinct colour and tone, and this was created with Min Hee-jin Daepyonim. She is integral to NewJeans’ identity, and we all feel that she is irreplaceable. Haerin: However, even after our debut, there have been many unfair and incomprehensible incidents that you might not know about, and these incidents have only increased over time. As some of you may know, recently, videos from our trainee days and private records, such as medical information, were leaked. When I first saw that, I was really shocked. It was hard to understand how our company, which is supposed to protect us, failed to manage and allowed such information to be leaked. Naturally, this situation has made us worry that other strange or false information about us might spread in the future. Although we, along with our parents and Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, have raised concerns about this to HYBE, they haven’t resolved the issue, nor have they taken any proactive measures. Then, in the midst of all this, our CEO was dismissed, and we’re left wondering whom we can trust and rely on. We’ve come to the conclusion that if we don’t speak out about this now, no one will know what we’re going through. After much discussion among ourselves, we finally decided to take this step. Hanni: Something happened to me recently. The 4th floor of the HYBE building is where we get our hair and makeup done, so a lot of other artists and staff come and go there. One day, I was waiting alone in the hallway, and some staff from another team passed by. We greeted each other, but when they came back out a bit later, I heard one of their managers say, “Ignore her,” right in front of me. I could hear and see everything clearly. Even now, I still don’t understand why I had to go through that. Minji: When I heard about what Hanni experienced, I was really shocked. How could a manager from another team tell their members to ignore one of us, and say it so loudly that Hanni could hear it? Such unimaginable words and behavior were directed at us, yet there was no apology, nor did they even acknowledge their wrongdoing. Of course, I’m worried about how many more similar incidents might occur in the future and whether we’ll be subtly ostracized without anyone there to protect us. Hanni: I hope no one else has to go through something like that, but since it’s already happened once, I can’t help but feel scared that other members might experience the same thing. I spoke to the new CEO about it, but since I didn’t have evidence and it was considered too late, they seemed to brush it off, making me feel like there’s no one left to protect us. It really felt like the concern for us was gone, and even though I was being honest, it made me feel like I was suddenly being treated as a liar. Before, Min Hee-jin, our previous CEO, used to take care of us a lot. But now, while the new people say they’ll help, it’s just been months of excuses... excuses... excuses... They keep saying that it’s something they can’t resolve. But this is something that I personally went through and experienced, yet they are trying to dismiss it as if it’s my fault. I’m worried and scared about what might happen next. Minji: Of course, I’m worried about our future, but what’s most frightening is that the work we’ve already created is being compromised. Seeing the people who have poured their lives into creating our work being treated this way makes it hard to understand how this could be happening. The new management said they would separate producing and management, but we’ve always worked differently from other labels, and we thought that our way was a good one. Now, Daepyonim can no longer approve all matters, and we’re left wondering how we’re supposed to continue working as we did before. The recent statement from the new management also didn’t make sense to me. If they really didn’t intend to interfere with our producing, then the recent incident with Director Shin Woo-seok should never have happened, and it should have been handled differently. We are the ones directly involved with the copyrights and likeness rights of our content, yet they’re making decisions without our consent. In their statement, they kept saying they were acting to protect us and prevent our anxiety, but why do they keep insisting on this when they haven’t considered our wishes? We don’t want any more unnecessary issues to arise, and we want them to show respect and consideration for Daepyonim and all the directors who have worked with us. The things they’re doing right now are not in our best interest at all. Hanni: Something we all find very important, something that plays a very important role in our team's colour and image is our media content and creative production. Despite saying that they would leave all the creative production to our now former CEO, Min Hee-jin, through official statements that I think a lot of you might have already read or seen, and also during our personal meetings, they infringed our content. Content that not only we worked really hard on, but also our staff who spent endless hours to produce and release them solely for our fans. And if they had any understanding about what type of team we are, and the type of content that we create, they would have thought more deeply for crossing the line that they set for themselves. Because of this incident, we realized that there's not much we can do to prevent these type of issues. Personally, the way that ADOR used to run was the business management and creative production was not separated and was factors that played and worked in harmony with each other. That's how it worked and it was perfectly fine. It was our way of working and it was our CEO's way of producing NewJeans' content, which a lot of you were able to enjoy and appreciate. But now that she's no longer CEO, these factors that should have continued to work together in harmony are now being seen as two different areas of work. Minji: Besides this, there are many other incidents we’ve experienced that are beyond my understanding—things that are frightening and uncomfortable. These incidents naturally make us question whether HYBE really cares about NewJeans, and there are clear signs of this. However, it’s hard to discuss everything today because we’re not sure how far things could escalate. We just hope you can understand a little of what’s been on our minds and why we chose to speak out in this way. Danielle: As I mentioned earlier, our dream was to perform the music we want to make with Daepyonim, and we were working very hard toward that goal. But now, we can’t do that, and the plans we’ve made might not come to fruition. As Hanni unnie said earlier, just like that, the content that we released solely for our fans, for our bunnies, was instantly erased. And I truly can't understand why anyone would do this to a group, or just anyone in general. We were just working hard for the present, so what did we do wrong? A week after Daepyonim was dismissed, we found out that we could no longer work with the director we’ve been working with all this time, and we’re extremely anxious because we don’t know what will happen to the staff who have always worked hard for us. If they really care about us, they should stop saying that they prioritize the artists and instead let us do the music we love in an environment where we can be genuinely happy. Is that really so hard to do? It’s hard to fully express what’s in my heart, but in the end, the five of us just want to continue our activities with Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, as we have done so far. Haerin: Personally, I want to continue working with the people around us who have helped me grow mentally and made me feel alive. However, I can't understand, nor do I think I should have to understand, why external forces are constantly obstructing and hindering us. I absolutely cannot comprehend what is truly in our best interest or what is supposed to help us grow. And I feel so sorry and heartbroken that our Bunnies, who found comfort in us and shared joyful memories with us, have to go through this ordeal and worry about things they shouldn't have to. We almost lost the work that symbolizes the relationship between NewJeans and Bunnies, and we don't want to lose anything else. I refuse to conform to or follow the values of the society those people belong to, and because I believe that direction is not the right one, I will not choose to go that way. Hyein: We found out about the CEO's dismissal through the news on the very day it happened. It was so sudden and unimaginable for all of us, and honestly, it was really difficult for us to process. As artists under HYBE, the company's unilateral notification made it clear to us that they don't respect us at all. In the midst of this confusion, we heard through our manager that the new CEO wanted to meet with us. From the very first action taken by the newly appointed Juyoung, it was clear that there was no consideration for us. He claimed to care for us, to prioritize NewJeans, but looking at everything that has happened, it's evident that his words were just that—empty words. HYBE’s actions, like publishing articles that painted us in a bad light just a week before our comeback, make us question how any of this is supposed to be in our best interest. Minji: It's already been half a year of unnecessary and exhausting discussions about us and NewJeans, and even as a third party, it must be tiring. As the ones directly involved, it’s incredibly uncomfortable for us. We still have music we want to make and goals we want to achieve together, but as things stand now, it’s heartbreaking to think that we might lose not only the work we’ve created so far but also the identity of our team. That’s what makes us feel so helpless. We held this live stream to express our feelings because we sincerely want this tiresome conflict to end. Hanni: Like how we have our own and individual thoughts and feelings, we have the choice to choose how we will react to each situation, and we are not going to follow HYBE's every order blindly. We are more than well aware that this is getting in the way of our work, and that we should be treated much, much better than how we are right now. And it's very hard to believe that they are truly sincere about wanting to help us continue, to be able to continue to work with our Daepyonim, Min Hee-jin Daepyonim. Despite her being in the midst of all this current legal conflict, she's expected to plan and creatively produce our future endeavours in just only two months, which I personally think makes no sense at all. We don't want to hear all the empty words of how they're going to help us continue to work with Min Hee-jin, Daepyonim. And all we want is this legal conflict to be resolved and have our working environment returned back to normal the way it was before. Hyein: The way HYBE is operating right now feels dishonest and wrong to us. Please, stop interfering. Reinstating our CEO and returning us to the original ADOR environment we had before, with familiar people, not strangers, would make things right. We’re not asking for special treatment; we just want everyone to do their jobs well in their respective places. We’ll do our best in our roles too. We sincerely hope our request is heard. Danielle: From a human perspective, I hope you stop harassing our CEO, Min Hee-jin. Honestly, she seems so pitiful, and HYBE just comes across as an inhumane company. What can we possibly learn from a company like this? So, I really hope you stop bothering our CEO. Minji: What we want is the original ADOR, where CEO Min Hee-jin leads both management and production. The reason we're making this request is because it's a way to coexist peacefully without conflict with HYBE. If our message has been conveyed properly, we hope Chairman Bang and HYBE make a wise decision to restore ADOR to its original state by the 25th. Thank you for listening to us. NewJeans: Thank you. #NewJeans_Never_Die #NeverForget](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1984476982139371912/amplify_video_thumb/1984475507128483846/img/or5JWbGEjrfvtzQY.jpg)
![[Behavioral Scientist's Analysis] NewJeans, Now Even Stronger, HYBE in Trouble I’ll listen again. Danielle: “Naturally, we all want to continue working with Daepyonim. Even before debuting as NewJeans and through all of the time that we spent together with Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, all of us felt that the music we wanted to make and the kind of world we wanted to build together, our vision, was similar in so many ways. With Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, we were able to prepare each and every task with sincere hearts, and I believe it shows in our work. Putting our sincere effort into something is only possible because the people that we're working with have trust in each other and have that same vision. Min Hee-jin Daepyonim is not only the person that produces our music, but someone who makes NewJeans who we are. She discusses even the smallest details with us and explains them in ways that we can understand clearly. NewJeans has a distinct colour and tone, and this was created with Min Hee-jin Daepyonim. She is integral to NewJeans’ identity, and we all feel that she is irreplaceable.” Danielle clearly stated this and also expressed it in English. So, in terms of the NewJeans issue, international fans who don’t have much information may not have had a clear perception of Ms. Min Hee-jin or how to view this issue. If you look at the comments, it was very poorly organized. In Korea, we now have clear information, so NewJeans fans, Bunnies, are cheering for NewJeans and supporting Ms. Min Hee-jin. It has become clearly sorted out like this. However, internationally, it hasn’t been clearly explained. But with Danielle explaining it so well in English, I expect that from now on, the international atmosphere will shift towards attacking HYBE, criticizing Bang Si-hyuk, and supporting Ms. Min Hee-jin and NewJeans worldwide. So, now that the artist has clearly stated their position and made it clear that the identity and assets of the NewJeans brand come from Ms. Min Hee-jin, regardless of any legal disputes or lawsuits, in the minds of the fans, NewJeans equals Min Hee-jin. And as for the current management of ADOR and HYBE, they will be seen as the ones attacking NewJeans and the mysterious people with no clear motive, such as Bang Si-hyuk. I think this will now be clear. Considering the nature of the entertainment industry, like many creative industries and the cultural industry, this is not manufacturing. Many things can’t be determined through legal processes like patents for ideas or lawsuits. The B2C market, or the market for services and consumption of an artist's brand, is driven by sensitivity. People consume it because of the emotional connection and enjoy it because of that sensitivity. So, what’s the point of winning a legal case? Even if HYBE were to win any legal case, do you think consumers wouldn’t boycott NewJeans’ music or other products afterward? I believe HYBE will be punished in some way for its actions towards ADOR and its current management. The way they are handling risk management is shortsighted, as they fail to understand people’s emotions. They seem to only rely on the advice of legal professionals and accountants, and their entire approach to this issue is so narrow-minded and misguided. It feels incredibly foolish to me. So, to summarize: NewJeans’ branding was done by Ms. Min Hee-jin. The identity and assets of the NewJeans brand were created by her, and we did it together because of her. Haerin: “However, even after our debut, there have been many unfair and incomprehensible incidents that you might not know about, and these incidents have only increased over time. As some of you may know, recently, videos from our trainee days and private records, such as medical information, were leaked. When I first saw that, I was really shocked. It was hard to understand how our company, which is supposed to protect us, failed to manage and allowed such information to be leaked. Naturally, this situation has made us worry that other strange or false information about us might spread in the future. Although we, along with our parents and Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, have raised concerns about this to HYBE, they haven’t resolved the issue, nor have they taken any proactive measures. Then, in the midst of all this, our CEO was dismissed, and we’re left wondering whom we can trust and rely on. We’ve come to the conclusion that if we don’t speak out about this now, no one will know what we’re going through. After much discussion among ourselves, we finally decided to take this step.” The current situation is shocking, but this is not just about this one incident; they’ve been continuously receiving unfair treatment from HYBE. The fact that they are saying this publicly now is truly shocking. They’ve been discussing these unfair treatments with their parents and Ms. Min Hee-jin while continuing their activities as NewJeans. They are saying that the unfair treatment from HYBE has been ongoing. It’s hard to understand as an outsider, but now the artists themselves have confirmed that there have been instances where the company has mistreated them. This is no longer a matter of speculation or exaggeration. NewJeans has officially admitted that HYBE has been continuously mistreating them. Moving forward, this changes the entire perspective on the issue. It’s no longer just NewJeans vs. HYBE or Min Hee-jin vs. Bang Si-hyuk. It’s hard to even imagine the reality of this situation. Now that the NewJeans artists have come out and said that HYBE has mistreated them, regardless of how HYBE tries to communicate going forward, they will now be framed as the ones mistreating NewJeans. How can they possibly shake off this perception now? I don’t think they can. Hanni: “Something happened to me recently. The 4th floor of the HYBE building is where we get our hair and makeup done, so a lot of other artists and staff come and go there. One day, I was waiting alone in the hallway, and some staff from another team passed by. We greeted each other, but when they came back out a bit later, I heard one of their managers say, “Ignore her,” right in front of me. I could hear and see everything clearly. Even now, I still don’t understand why I had to go through that.” I still don’t understand why that happened, even now. When I think about it, I feel like it was really ridiculous. This story from Hanni was so frustrating and absurd. Wow, what Hanni just shared is really shocking. She mentioned meeting an artist, and that artist's manager told them to ignore her. If this happened in middle or high school, people would probably dismiss it as childish fighting, but this happened among adults, and it's becoming a huge issue. Honestly, the NewJeans members aren’t sharing these stories to stir things up. They’re probably just speaking truthfully about their experiences and trying to be genuine with their fans, saying, “It’s time we express our stance honestly.” The timing and approach they’ve taken are actually perfect. They started by clearly explaining their motivations and why they’re speaking out, then moved on to using English to express what NewJeans’ identity is and the members' feelings, as well as their history with their manager. They made it clear how they feel about these situations. Now, they've started sharing more detailed stories. The way they’ve structured everything is so good because people remember stories more than abstract thoughts or philosophies. When you say, “This happened to me,” people are much more likely to remember that than vague statements. Hanni shared her unfair experience in such an honest way, and I think it’s going to spread widely. I can already imagine netizens trying to figure out which manager it was, which artist, and so on. This story will likely go viral. People remember stories like this because they stick in their minds. For example, remember when Bang Si-hyuk didn’t return NewJeans’ greeting, and it became a huge thing about face blindness? People don’t remember the details, but they remember that someone important didn’t greet them. It became a memorable story. Minji: “When I heard about what Hanni experienced, I was really shocked. How could a manager from another team tell their members to ignore one of us, and say it so loudly that Hanni could hear it? Such unimaginable words and behavior were directed at us, yet there was no apology, nor did they even acknowledge their wrongdoing. Of course, I’m worried about how many more similar incidents might occur in the future and whether we’ll be subtly ostracized without anyone there to protect us.” Hanni: “I hope no one else has to go through something like that, but since it’s already happened once, I can’t help but feel scared that other members might experience the same thing. I spoke to the new CEO about it, but since I didn’t have evidence and it was considered too late, they seemed to brush it off, making me feel like there’s no one left to protect us. It really felt like the concern for us was gone, and even though I was being honest, it made me feel like I was suddenly being treated as a liar. Before, Min Heejin, our previous CEO, used to take care of us a lot. But now, while the new people say they’ll help, it’s just been months of excuses... excuses... excuses... They keep saying that it’s something they can’t resolve. But this is something that I personally went through and experienced, yet they are trying to dismiss it as if it’s my fault. I’m worried and scared about what might happen next.” I want to make two points here. First, this is clearly “invisibility.” It’s not physical violence, but it’s about not acknowledging someone’s greeting, deliberately ignoring them, and so on. While it may not seem like a big deal, it still deeply hurts someone’s feelings. There’s been a lot of research on how these kinds of actions negatively affect an organization, spreading like poison and making people feel bad. It’s something we should really work against. The second point is about third-party justice. Hanni raised a legitimate concern, and it wasn’t handled properly within the company. This made Hanni, Minji, and others realize that the new management isn’t on their side. When others witness this, they’ll also realize that this company doesn’t have their best interests at heart. This realization leads to a loss of trust. People will remember these events, and once this perception sticks, it’s hard to change. It affects not just NewJeans, but also other artists who will think, “Oh, this is how HYBE treats people.” And it even affects the employees who work there. Minji: “Of course, I’m worried about our future, but what’s most frightening is that the work we’ve already created is being compromised. Seeing the people who have poured their lives into creating our work being treated this way makes it hard to understand how this could be happening. The new management said they would separate producing and management, but we’ve always worked differently from other labels, and we thought that our way was a good one. Now, Daepyonim can no longer approve all matters, and we’re left wondering how we’re supposed to continue working as we did before. The recent statement from the new management also didn’t make sense to me. If they really didn’t intend to interfere with our production, then the recent incident with Director Shin Woo-seok should never have happened, and it should have been handled differently. We are the ones directly involved with the copyrights and likeness rights of our content, yet they’re making decisions without our consent. In their statement, they kept saying they were acting to protect us and prevent our anxiety, but why do they keep insisting on this when they haven’t considered our wishes? We don’t want any more unnecessary issues to arise, and we want them to show respect and consideration for Daepyonim and all the directors who have worked with us. The things they’re doing right now are not in our best interest at all.” What’s worth discussing here is the perception of hypocrisy. People really dislike hypocrisy, and when you think about it, it makes sense. When humans are surviving, if there’s an enemy or a difficult environment, they overcome it as part of life. But the most dangerous situation is when you think someone is an ally, but they turn out to be an enemy. When you thought they were on your side but they stab you in the back — that’s when people are really upset. That’s why people hate it when there’s a discrepancy between outward appearances and inward intentions. It creates a near-hatred, especially when someone claims to be acting for your benefit but it’s clear that they’re not. This is what Minji is clearly pointing out — these people are hypocrites. New Jeans has already reached a conclusion internally: this new management team, in less than a month, has revealed themselves to be hypocrites. And they’ve shared this with the fans and everyone else. This isn’t just some interesting topic on a live broadcast; this will cause a huge impact, and I am certain of that. New Jeans has come to a solid realization — these people are not working for us. They are liars and hypocrites. Therefore, the new management can no longer properly lead the company. They will not be able to continue, and this system cannot be maintained. Why? Because the artist has called them out as hypocrites. The only way they can recover is by proving they aren’t hypocrites, but even then, that’s not effective — New Jeans would have to say it. But the chance of that happening is zero. In short, these people have been socially branded as hypocrites. The new management’s time is up. Less than a month, and their time is over. In the creative industry, especially in culture and the arts, content production — such as creating songs or music videos — cannot be separated from management. That’s how we’ve always worked, and it was good for us. Min Hee-jin was a remarkable creator and artist who understood all of this. The harmony between management and artistic decision-making brought about the incredible phenomenon of New Jeans. But now, they’ve created a system where that harmony can’t exist anymore. Moreover, the new management is culturally ignorant. They don’t understand art, music, or creativity. They have shown this clearly, especially with their mishandling of Director Shin Woo-seok’s music video and the associated fan content, like those on the Dolphiners YouTube channel. They’ve demanded to delete content without protecting the artists, or respecting the work of those who collaborated on it. Their management decisions show a complete lack of sensitivity or empathy. So once again, I say: "the new management’s time is over." Danielle: “As I mentioned earlier, our dream was to perform the music we want to make with Daepyonim, and we were working very hard toward that goal. But now, we can’t do that, and the plans we’ve made might not come to fruition. As Hanni unnie said earlier, just like that, the content that we released solely for our fans, for our bunnies, was instantly erased. And I truly can't understand why anyone would do this to a group, or just anyone in general. We were just working hard for the present, so what did we do wrong? A week after Daepyonim was dismissed, we found out that we could no longer work with the director we’ve been working with all this time, and we’re extremely anxious because we don’t know what will happen to the staff who have always worked hard for us. If they really care about us, they should stop saying that they prioritize the artists and instead let us do the music we love in an environment where we can be genuinely happy. Is that really so hard to do? It’s hard to fully express what’s in my heart, but in the end, the five of us just want to continue our activities with Min Hee-jin Daepyonim, as we have done so far.” Personally, they just want to be left alone—just "Leave us alone. Don't interfere; just leave us alone.” This is what they’re saying to both ADOR and HYBE. It's become clear now that HYBE and ADOR can no longer meddle with NewJeans, and I think things will flow that way from now on. The fans won’t stand still either. In entertainment, it’s not about titles like "I’m the CEO," or "I own shares." These are shallow understandings of what makes the entertainment business work. The real value created in this industry is the love and recognition from the fans. No amount of shares or CEO titles matter when that love disappears in an instant. NewJeans is asking to be left alone, and because of this, the new management of HYBE and ADOR can no longer act. I believe the future will unfold accordingly. One important thing I want to emphasize is that NewJeans is a unique group. They’re not just factory-produced idols. The distinctive nature of NewJeans’ music is felt by everyone who listens to them. For example, producer 250, who played a significant role in shaping the NewJeans sound, alongside other talented producers like those from the Banana Culture label, was brought in by CEO Min Hee-jin. This collaboration birthed the unique musical style of NewJeans, which many have come to appreciate. Their latest album, which incorporated elements like New Jack Swing, wasn’t just NewJeans making this music—it was 250's creative vision, drawing inspiration from 70s and 80s funk, R&B, and American black music, and reinterpreting them. If 250 no longer works with NewJeans, their music might become indistinguishable from other idol groups. The choreography, another element that set NewJeans apart, also contributed to their success. However, with the recent tensions, it's obvious that working with key figures like director Shin Woo-seok, who directed many of NewJeans' music videos, will become difficult moving forward. Director Shin wasn’t even interested in music videos before but was inspired to work with NewJeans after a conversation with Min Hee-jin. If Min Hee-jin and people like director Shin are ousted from ADOR, it’s inevitable that the core assets of NewJeans, including their distinctive musical and visual style, will vanish. This is not just a simple matter of one person being ousted—it’s about losing the core elements that made NewJeans what they are. WE STAND WITH NEWJEANS #버니즈_뉴진스와함께_준비갈완료 #방시혁_2주준다_민희진_복귀시켜라](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1836325806362235187/amplify_video_thumb/1836325301087072256/img/-KRorTRouoqNniiz.jpg)