Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
๐จ๐ชฟ Springfield, Ohio: ๐ ๐๐ฎ๐น๐ธ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ผ ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐น๐ถ๐๐ฒ๐๐๐ผ๐ฐ๐ธ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ต๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐บ๐๐น๐๐ถ๐ฝ๐น๐ฒ ๐ฟ๐๐ป ๐ถ๐ป๐ ๐๐ถ๐๐ต ๐๐ฎ๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ฎ๐ป๐ ๐ผ๐ป ๐ต๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ฝ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐๐ผ โ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ป๐โ ๐ต๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ถ๐บ๐ฎ๐น๐. โWe had a set of Haitians that showed up in the driveway, pulled in laying on the horn. ๐ง๐ต๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ด... show more
1,721,510 views โข 1 year ago โขvia X (Twitter)
9 Comments
Wow, weird how none of this stuff ever gets caught on video despite everyone having cameras in their pockets now.
Sorry but ABC said this isnโt happening.
I tried to tell people on Monday.
Yeah but the city manager said this isnโt going on and ABC news debunked this
Lived in the islands for a few years. Can confirm they use a car horn as a doorbell. And they steal chickens. And they mow their โlawnโ with a machete ( cutlas or โmachetteโ )
I can't believe no one has made a "voodoo economics" joke yet.
How dare her and the propaganda you're pushing, Taylor! You're putting the Haitians in danger! ๐ Never mind her, her families or her pets' security. This is what I've been told today with no regard for the locals security. The left will always stand with immigrants over Americans.
This is the video version of the Facebook meme that started it all lol. Where's the video? How about a police report?
They are going to keep coming back until they get shot.
!["What was in the middle of the hangar was an actual flying saucer. ~GR A Secret Revealed After 33 Years - Have We Cracked Gravity? "We got it from them." (Rogers retired in April of this year.) In 1992, Dr. Gregory Rogers, a chief flight surgeon (a physician who's responsible for the health of the aviation crew, including pilots) for NASA and an Air Force major who supported 33 space shuttle launches and was also an F-18 pilot, was at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (now called Cape Canaveral Space Force Station). He had a guide from EG&G with him but that doesn't seem relevant to what happened next. A major pulled him aside and said, "Hey Doc, I've got something to show you, I've got something even you have never seen." Josh Boswell broke this story in May. H/T: Sentinel News The major took him into an office with four computer stations, locked the door and closed the blinds. They both sat down, and on one of the computer screens, the major pulled up a video that showed a generic hangar. The screen had no markings on it. No classification markings, no location, time, date, etc. "What was in the middle of the hangar was an actual flying saucer." (This next quote isn't part of my video clip and is at 25:08 of the Chris Lehto interview.) "So I said, 'Where would we get a design like this?' And [the major] said, 'We got it from them (shows his thumb pointing up).' He did not explain what he meant, but obviously, he was referring to non-human technologies from off this planet." "There were two guys in lab cats to the bottom left, and then midway up the screen on the right side, there were three guys that looked like technicians in what I would call Tyvek suits, head-to-toe. And only their faces were shown. "And then some sort of a warning sound went off and everybody cleared out. And then, within a couple of minutes, the vehicle became active." "The vehicle itself was sort of a pearly white. There were no seams, rivets, windows, doors. Nothing that could be identified. It looked as though it was sort of a modified egg, if you just sort of shifted it around. "There was a tiny little area on top that protruded and there was a mast that came out. And on the mast, it looked like there were three umbilicals coming off." There were various, flat-black rectangles (horizontal and vatical). "I believe that these were made to monitor the movement of this craft." [Since] "it was perfectly pearly white, and it began to move, there was nothing there to show you that it was moving. So, just like any experimental aircraft, they put markings on it so you could monitor the motion. And that's what I believe these rectangles were. "There were electromagnetic discharges that told me that the vehicle had become active, and they were very peculiar. But I don't wish to describe them to anyone because, if this was a test-bed model, whatever the mechanisms were being used may still be active in more advanced craft, and I don't want to give out information that would be beneficial to those opposing the United States. But, as soon as it started to do this... (Video picks up again here. ๐๐ผ ) "...it just sort of lifted off the floor. The floor looked like a concrete floor with like, some sort of rubber matt that had been on top of it." "It lifted off, just like a feather. It rose about three feet in the air and then just hung there. The next thing that it does is that it rotates 360 degrees, clockwise. As it rotated across, I could see the writing, 'U.S. Air Force.' And then it had an American flight insignia just above that." "It completed a 360-degree circle, paused, and then completed a 360-degree circle counterclockwise, so that it was in the same position it had started in. It moved to the left and right, it moved forward and backwards. It's just like, you know, you're testing your controls, making sure you have everything working. "And then, it rotated to a 45-degree angle of attack, if it were flying and the 12-o'clock position (where the U.S. Navy and flight insignia was located) was going forward. This was amazing. Fixed-wing aircraft can't do this. A helicopter can go to a 45-degree angle of attack, but it's going to be moving forward and lifting. This thing did not do that. And so, this shocked me more than anything else, because it did not move one centimeter as it moved to what would be a 45-degree angle of attack. So that just blew me away. "Just about that time, there's a knock on the door. The guy hits the buttons to turn the computer and screen off, and he says, 'Don't tell anyone I showed you this!' "Well, I'm gonna go around telling somebody that you showed me a flying saucer? Well he goes to the door, opens it - we were both majors - and so this Lt. Colonel and two other guys came in. And so the Lt. Colonel said, "What's going on in here that you had the doors locked?" To see how they got out of this pickle, and why Rogers didn't turn in the major for showing him a classified video, watch the rest of the clip. "Along the way, I thought, 'I can't tell this to anybody.' I didn't even tell it to my wife for 15 years. But, as long as I was associated with the [DoD], I did not want to risk what the repercussions were gonna be as soon as I told this story. ~~~ How far have our reverse engineering efforts progressed? This is from my August of 2023 post. "There are people who say we have reverse-engineered them and are flying them. I never found any support for that. And found a lot of support for saying we canโt figure it out. If we do, it would be in some program at a higher security level.โ ~Michael Shellenberger ~~~ Former intel and defense contractor, and my friend, Michael Via, who I've interviewed multiple times, had his sighting of a silent, black, "majestic" triangle craft in 1992 in the Persian Gulf. He thinks it's our tech. ~~~ And then there's Nick Cook, the former aviator editor for Jane's Defence Weekly and a very respected, award-winning journalist, and author. His gut tells him that we (humans) may have cracked gravity. But he doesn't have the proof. "I found plenty of evidence the US had been trying, tho. I have no firm evidence now (who does?), but 20 years on from #THFZP, I think it is possible the antigrav issue has been cracked. Wish I could say this was more than a hunch, but this is all it is." ~Nick Cook A hunch. Possible. ~~~ And my favorite anecdote of all time, from another person I consider a friend. Retired Commander Will Miller: "I had a friend, a former military officer who worked with me. [He went to work at] the famous Groom Lake facility, Area 51 and he was out there for several years. As we all know, most folks that work out there have signed their lives away, never to disclose what goes on and for better or for worse, and this fella was no different. And over the three years I worked with him โ and he knew my interest in things extraterrestrial and my work with CSETI โ never once did he mention any of his work out at Groom Lake or any association between that and anything extraterrestrial. "And the day I was leaving the command, he took me aside and he said, 'You know, Will, some of the folks you talk with, maybe some CSETI researchers, may see objects that are doing, you know, Mach 9 and then suddenly make a right angle turn and you say, "Well, gosh, thatโs got to be an extraterrestrial craft."' "And then he looked at me and he said, 'But itโs not.' And he just turned and walked away." ~Commander Will Miller (Retired) My original post is here: ~~~ One thing that Dr. Gregory Rogers said to Lehto really jumped out at me: "And then, it rotated to a 45-degree angle of attack." Numerous witnesses have reported craft tilting up at a 45-degree angle right before they shoot off at a high rate of speed. I wrote a long thread on it (which I can't find) and Danny Silva wrote an article on it several years ago. Here's a thread from Willy Sam that covers some of that. And if you Google "UFO tilt up 45 degrees," you'll find more. Did we figure out something about UFOs and tilting up?](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1939420314737447294/amplify_video_thumb/1939387449588740097/img/Edi3P1nipVPwGc3I.jpg)
![๐ฅ LAP Alert ๐ฅ "I did this sort of spy thing where I changed hotel rooms and I changed taxis. I was making sure I wasnโt followed." ~Knapp Is Lacatski Lying to Us About the Craft and Breaching the Hull? ~ "If not for that [2017 NYT] story about AATIP and the problems that [Lacatski] saw with it, he would never have mentioned [AAWSAP]...I don't think, ever." ~Knapp (So, in other words...thank you from the UFO community, to the NYT, for getting it wrong? ๐) ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Should we listen to Dr. James Lacatski on UFOs, on the fact, or the idea, that our government has at least one, he's admitted, and we breached the hull? Should we listen to him, George?" George Knapp: "I know a lot of people have noticed that he's talked about his role in counterintelligence as part of the AAWSAP program. And because they equate counterintelligence with lies, false info., cover stories, misdirection. Aha! He's putting out a bunch of false info. a decade after he retired from government service." (I saw one person suggest that, and I thought it was a questionable take...) Grant Lavac: "Given that Dr. James Lacatski was the 'counterintelligence coordinator' for AAWSAP, how much confidence can we invest in the veracity of his public statements that 'at least one recovered craft of unknown origin, a flying machine with no wings, no engine, no fuel, and no fuel tanks' is in the possession of the US government and that they had 'breached the hull' of the UFO? In the context of the counterintelligence value of UAP/UFO, his comments in this most recent interview on WEAPONIZED (edited for brevity) only raise more questions for me." ~~~ Knapp: "A, it's not [Lacatski]. He's not out there beating the bushes. He's talked to us, but that's pretty much it. He's telling the full story as much as he can in a series of books. And I was co-author on two of those, not on this one. And, you know, I remember the first time I met him, it was in 2018." ~ (In April of 2019, Knapp shared that story, minus Lacatski's name, at UFO MegaCon. Knapp in 2019: "I thought today I would share with you, sort of the informational foundation that Iโve acquired. So, one year ago, I made this trip to Washington, D.C. at the invitation of Senator Harry Reid. It was St. Patrickโs Day, 2018 and I already knew a little bit about AATIP and AAWSAP and what theyโve been studying and where the money came from and how the program was created. I did this sort of spy thing where I changed hotel rooms and I changed taxis. I was making sure I wasnโt followed. And if there was ever actually, anybody following me, they must have thought I looked ridiculous because it was way over the top. "But I ended up having to meet with Senator Reid and some other people who were directly involved in these programs and they gave me a download. And I thought I knew a lot about these programs when I went there and realized that I only knew a little tiny bit. The purpose of this was to learn about these programs. We all know about AATIP, but in reality, there was something before that. "I sat down for a couple of hours with Senator Reid and other people whose names, they donโt want to be known. They brought me up to speed on how AATIP was created. How its predecessor was under way for a number of years. It coexisted for a long time. People in this room. People who investigate this topic may have suspected for a long time that there was some kind of a program that still existed. Weโve all heard that Project Bluebook was the end. 1969 it ended and the government was done with UFOs. They closed up shop. And the reason they closed it down is because there was no evidence that it involved national security. "And we all knew that was baloney because of the stories that weโve seen that are really well documented. For example, UFOs over nuclear missile bases. UFO encounters with the military installations and atomic facilities. Things of that sort the have been well documented over the years. There are cases that involved national security. So at the end of Blue Book, of course, this memo said, alright, any cases involving national security will continue to be investigated in the regular way. Well, what the heck was the regular way? We didnโt know. Well now we do know. At least a little bit of it." (Project Blue Book was shut down in December of 1969, but a few months earlier, in October, we had the Bolender memo, which noted that "reports of UFOs which could affect national security should continue to be handled through the standard Air Force procedure designed for this purpose." What standard Air Force procedure? The regular way? Where did those cases go? We still don't know what Bolender was referring to in that memo.) ~ Knapp in 2019: "And one of the regular ways was this program called AATIP. So I went on this trip. [and] I learned this stuff about AATIP. I had known a lot about it before but I got this briefing about this alphabet soup of different programs, how they began and what they studied. December 2017, the New York Times breaks this story about AATIP. Now, I had known about it for a long time because I lived in Las Vegas. I knew Bob Bigelow. I knew Harry Reid. Weโd talk about UFO stuff and what was going on. "So when I was told the New York Times was gonna break the story, Iโm kind ticked off about it. Because hey, Iโve been sitting on this for a long time. Why donโt I get to break the story? And they had to, one after another, gently remind me, 'You know. Youโre not the New York Times.' Which I had to admit! It was true. And if I had done the story, the Times had said that they werenโt going to do it if somebody else breaks it. So, if I had done it, itโd be another story from a UFO reporter. "The New York Times did it and they changed everything. Because they did it, wider organizations did it. Some of them took shots at the New York Times because The Times got the story and they didnโt. But that story was accurate, to a degree. But the story that it told was not the full story. AATIP, that we know aboutโฆthe AATIP that studies nuts and bolts saucersโฆcase of UFOs that have encounters with military units such as the USS Nimitz, that is studied by a group of people, Lue Elizondo was the head of it. "Itโs not so much a program as it was a loose network of intelligence officials in different agencies, including the Air Force and the Navy, CIA, DIA, DARPAโฆthere might be a couple of other agencies. But a case would come in from any one of their units [and] it would be shared with this group of people, analysis would be done, evidence would be looked at and then stashed in a draw and nobody ever sees it. Itโs not passed up the chain of command. "In 2007, that changed. One of the guys (Lacatski. ~Joe 2025) I met with in this meeting in Washington is the one who changed it. He had been in the same position that Lue Elizondo had been in. And his name is just not out there. He grew frustrated with what was happening with the phenomenon and he suspected that UFOs flying around the sky, buzzing our military units every once in a while, is not the full story. Even if you could solve that part of the mystery it wouldnโt solve the bigger part of the picture. "So he grew interested in Skinwalker Ranch and he had read the (Knapp/Kelleher โ 'Hunt For The Skinwalker') book. And after he read it, he called up Bob Bigelow and saidโฆactually, he wrote him a letter and said, 'Hey, can I go to the ranchโฆgo look around? Iโm with the DIA.' Bigelow says, 'Come on out to Las Vegas and Iโll take you there.' And thatโs what happened. He flew to Las Vegas. They flew on Bigelowโs jet. They went to the ranch. "This guyโs not there fifteen minutes and he has an experience. And Iโm not gonna go into detail. Iโm hoping that heโs going to maybe come forward at some point and describe his experience. But it was just for him. Of all the people in this room, in the encounter, he was the only one who could see it. Heโs the only one who had an angle on this thing that appeared. And heโs pretending that heโs not seeing it but itโs right out of the corner of his eye. And he doesnโt say anything until he leaves the ranch. And he gets off and he asks Bigelow if he had seen it. And he had not. The other people who had been in the room had not seen it. "He flies back to Las Vegas, goes back to Washington, D.C. and looks up Harry Reid and tells him about it. Now Reid had some experience in these matters that Iโll get into in a little bit. But as a result of that conversation, Reid, who had an interest in UFOs and had maintained that interest over many years โ and I can attest to that personally โ called in a couple of his friends in the Senate โ Daniel Inouye and Ted Stevens. They had a conversation in a secure room and they decided to provide some funding for a much broader study. Something that looked atโฆbeyond flying saucers, that looked at other paranormal aspectsโฆsupernatural aspects that we would not normally associate with aliens or ETs. Assuming that thatโs what this is, which Iโm not sure anyone knows for sure. And that is how AAWSAP was born. The Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program." ~~~ Knapp Yesterday: "The only reason [Lacatski] came forward, he was ticked off about how AATIP had been described in major media reports, and no mention had been given to the actual, real program. That one that had a $22 million budget, lasted 27 months, and which put together the biggest UFO data warehouse in history, that had written all these papers that still have not been released." (In the most-recent interview (Part 1) with Weaponized, Lacatski let it fly with his issues related to the 2017 NYT article: "The initial reporting...by the New York Times story in 2017 was totally inaccurate. Contrary to what some people claim, the authors knew my name and position at AAWSAP, yet never attempted to contact me. Likewise, the The Washington Post. POLITICO (laughs) contacted me within hours after the articles were published in the free publications, asking for my opinion. They knew my name, they had my phone number. Why didn't they contact me [beforehand]?" ~Dr. James Lacatski on Weaponized ~ Knapp: "So, Jim was a counterintelligence guy for AAWSAP, but in this role. He wasn't putting out cover stories or lies, he didn't put out anything. The world didn't hear that AAWSAP existed until years later, at least by that name. There was one statement made to the press about that program. It was by Robert Bigelow, whose company, BAASS, got the contract. A week after he signed it, he came on with me on Coast to Coast AM and said, 'We got this program dealing with UFOs, we have an unnamed partner, and we're excited to get going.' That was it. "Jim Lacatski wasn't putting out PR releases about AAWSAP. There was nothing. That was the last thing anybody said until the New York Times did the AATIP story, and then Jim Lacatski felt the real story was being covered up. If not for that story about AATIP and the problems that he saw with it, he would never have mentioned this. I don't think ever." (Well, then, thank you to the NYT journalists and editors for pissing off Lacatski!) Knapp: "You'll recall, AAWSAP, at the time that things went downhill, that the funding was moved away, they were trying to make it into a SAP, a Special Access Program. And if it had happened, we probably would never have heard of it. If it had happened, Lue Elizondo would have been the counterintelligence guy for AAWSAP, that he had already talked to Lacatski. "But Lacatski is not proclaiming the greatness of the program. He's not out there beating the bushes on podcasts and newscasts, other than with us, and he never put out in counterintelligence. His role, counterintelligence, meant something different for AAWSAP. The thing that DIA had told him was, 'Look, you know, it's not a rogue program. I know it gets weird into some of the phenomena that was at Skinwalker Ranch and other places. We don't care. Here's what we care about: Don't let the secret out. We don't want to see this on the front page of the Washington Post. We want it kept secret.' (John Greenewald was one person questioning whether AAWSAP was actually a prosaic program and Lacatski just decided to go rogue with a foray into UFOs and the paranormal.) Greenewald Tweet: "Did the U.S. government really sanction this, and if so, is this really how it was run? Or was this a rogue operation by a select few on the inside playing with Uncle Sam's coffers?" (Greenewald was quote tweeting a Greenstreet hit-piece video on AAWSAP. In his interview on Weaponized aired over the past few weeks, Lacatski said that former Deputy Director of AARO, Tim Phillips, also used the "rogue" word when describing AAWSAP. Did DIA really not know what AAWSAP was about? Did Lacatski go rogue and turn a program that was supposed to look at prosaic, advanced technology into one that studied UFOs and the paranormal? Here's an exchange from the 2023 interview Knapp and Corbell did with Lacatski and Colm Kelleher.) Kelleher: "The critical part of AAWSAP that we tried to convey in 'Skinwalkers at the Pentagon,' was that there were two fundamental, parallel tracks that AAWSAP ran on. The first one was the examination of UFO performance. And, you know, the UFO performance part was getting all of the data from eyewitnesses, plus deploying sensors into the field, in order to gather data on the performance of UFOs. That was track number one. And track number two was: What effects do UFOs have on humans? That was a parallel track that, from the get go, AAWSAP decided, unambiguously, to run both tracks in parallel. We documented psychological effects, and then we also documented paranormal effects." Lacatski: "Anything can be said on the internet it seems, factual or not. Well, one thing that is not factual is, DIA knew what it was getting into in regard to both aspects that Colm just described to you. And let me end my statement right here. We had no choice but to pursue both aspects." (That was a poor way of him saying: The claim that DIA was unaware of AAWSAP looking into all aspects of UFOs, including the paranormal, is NOT true.) Lacatski: "I want to emphasize something I said on my first and only interview. It was a closed program. It operated very similar to a SAP. The director, the director of analysis, and my office chief...and, of course, division chief, knew about this program. No one else did. Now, I was also protected by the stovepipe nature of that. I did not have to address political-type questions. I was insulated, but they were, too. There was no one else. People in the surrounding cubicles didn't know. Nothing was purposely being hid. It was a closed, stovepipe system, and it needed to be. It needed to be operated that way." ~~~ Knapp: "And so, Jim Lacatski took it on himself, put it in his own hands. He and Colm Kelleher interviewed all these people who applied for the jobs, the 50 full-time positions that they staffed, in a matter of months. They did background checks, they required security clearances for all those people, and they were worried about leaks. They didn't want information to get out. "They also were concerned about espionage by foreign players, by foreign companies, things of that sort. And some of that really did happen. As Jim has shared with us, there were a couple of phones that were transmitters that were found inside Bigelow Aerospace, inside the Bigelow, uh, facilities, and it was very alarming because they weren't sure who was doing it. I think they think it was a foreign government. I'm not going to say which one, uh, they suspected the most." (Lacatski said that the phones in question were made in China.) Knapp: "But, and then they also found weird frequencies emanating from Skinwalker Ranch. That's not strange, and there's a lot of unusual stuff that happens there, but it was some sort of a an espionage program that they believed was was not only looking at the ranch, but also at BAASS. "That was his primary concern. He was worried that the story gets out, because secrecy was of paramount interest to the heads of DIA and he's worried about the information getting out to the public. Because once it happened, then the knives come out in the Pentagon and within the intelligence community, which is kind of what happened. A memo was sent from Harry Reid's office, let other people know that AAWSAP existed, and that's when things started getting problematic." Corbell: "The bugging thing. So, it's not just like Bigelow Aerospace was tapped with something, he said, specifically, AAWSAP, right? So they were looking at that new UFO program. And I don't know how public this is, but he did say it was - not just him, other people have all said - it was multiple nations, multiple, different devices from those phones. And he also said that they worked with FBI, they had FBI liaisons looking at the ranch property, and also at Bigelow Aerospace. "Because, remember, they were supposed to receive a transfer of materials. That's why they reverse, reverse engineered (laughs), you know, they built everything to be able to hold SCIF-capable and material-capable property at that classification level. So, look, I think if we pull it back, the whole idea is, James Lacatski made a statement at some point that he was, you know, head of, or part of, or running the counterintelligence for AAWSAP. But his point was to keep AAWSAP itself secret from foreign nations. So then he has to keep it secret from the U.S. He did it. He did a great job. They actually kept it secret. That doesn't mean he's going out and creating false information to the public like he's been accused of. "So, should we listen to Jim Lacatski? That was like, you know, the main question. Oh, one second. He also identified that there is currently a counter-programming, counterintelligence operation going on to the American public, but not against the American public, by AARO." (In other words, spread misinformation to the American public so they can advance their goal of misinforming and confusing our adversaries who are always listening. National security! IMO, that's only acceptable if we're talking specifics related to propulsion, technology and weapons that can be used to give us a leg up on said adversaries. But everything else should come out and be made public. We shouldn't be told a bunch of lies about information we paid for and that could, potentially, give us some clarity about our species and other lifeforms on this planet.) Corbell: That was so clear in our interview with him that he said that, you know, 'Look, they're acting this way. They are telling you lies about AAWSAP and what happened.' And that's why he said, 'My books, I'm a government employee. This was paid by taxpayers. I'm trying to give you information.' And that's what his books are. "So it's clear from these rounds of interviews that we just had with Dr. Lacatski that he supports a controlled UFO disclosure. He made that very clear. So should we listen to what he has to say? I mean, he was a big dog, right, George?" Knapp: "He was the head of the largest U.S. government-funded UFO investigation in history, that we know of. He worked with Colm Kelleher, who was the boots-on-the-ground guy in Las Vegas. He worked with Jay Stratton. Stratton's role in the development of AAWSAP has not been really fully explored, but he's got a book coming out at some point, once it gets through the DOPSR process. But then we'll get additional information to buttress what Lacatski has said."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1991268528771748027/amplify_video_thumb/1990932248116539392/img/QA2EH0b-Bfna8TB4.jpg)
!["We had people around us that started having things happen. And not all of it was rosy. We didn't know that...it's gonna stay with you for maybe...years and years or the rest of your life." ~Mr. B. A Whole Lot of Not Rosy Robert Bigelow: "And so, it (survival of consciousness research) does have this aspect of things to be concerned about. And you know, I've told you that since we formed this institute (Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS)) in June (of 2020), all of a sudden, we had people around us that started having things happen. And not all of it was rosy, okay?โ (I really hope he give details in a future interview because I think it's important to know what happened. Just the formation of an institute that planned on studying consciousness caused phenomena to start taking place and some of it was negative in nature. To me, that's problematic. Did anybody get injured or sick, or were they just scared?) Bigelow: "So, I mean, this is family members, myself, my staff. And none of this we expected, we hadn't asked for anything, positioned anything, decided to do anything in this kind of research. Our whole intention to begin with was simply trying to get ourselves up to speed in the literature, after being away from this for so many years, focusing on [the] space world, right? That's been mainly what I've been doing - except for the Skinwalker Ranch thing for 20 years - is the space world...has been huge in my life to pursue. The legitimate, parochial kind of, you know, using fire engines, rockets to get you there (smiles). "So we didn't expect anything like this to happen." (Again, this is various phenomena that allegedly started happening once they formed BICS with the intention of studying consciousness (including life after death), and apparently, some of it was not good. Again, did anybody get hurt? Exactly how bad was it? Details are sorely needed.) Bigelow: "And so, this Holy Grail is different than the second Holy Grail. If the second one being the ET, is a little bit lower. And this first one: Is there any part of your consciousness that survives your bodily death? That's a big deal, that's a huge story, that's gigantic." (I'd push back and suggest that both Holy Grails may be connected or related and the 2nd one may not be ET at all. This other intelligence (which John Keel labelled, "Ultraterrestrials") may reside in, or be able to enter, the same realms we enter when we die. Thereโs strong evidence that psychic mediums can acquire information they had no way of knowing about via their five senses. But are they talking to the dead, or is something else going on?) ~~~Excerpt from Operation Trojan Horse by John Keel~~~ In 1866, a New Englander named William Denton declared himself to be the first modern contactee. He claimed to be in telepathic contact with beings from another planet, and he and his whole family later purportedly visited Venus and Mars. Denton wrote a series of books describing saucer-shaped vehicles in detail, which he thought were made of aluminum. (A commercial process for manufacturing aluminum was not invented until 1886.) He also told his audiences (he lectured widely) that the folks who rode around in aluminum airships looked very much like us. His narratives were, in many respects, identical to those of the modern contactees. Trance Mediums and Possession Trance mediums were nothing new in 1850. In the Bibleโs First Book of Samuel, Chapter 28 describes how Saul consulted a medium (โโฆ a woman that hath-a familiar spiritโ). Mediums acted as oracles in ancient times, and people with this peculiar gift appeared in each new generation. Such persons seem to serve as instruments through which the ultraterrestrials can speak to us directly, and they often come up with amazingly accurate prophecies of the future and precise details of events that could seemingly be known only to the dead relatives of the people who consulted them. Of course, when spiritualism became a national fad, a goodly number of charlatans and hucksters moved in. But most of the genuine mediums exercised their talents carefully and for free. They did not indulge in fancy hocus-pocus and did not need paraphernalia, such as spirit cabinets. They wereโand areโpeople who can apparently summon up unseen entities or alien intelligences and extract information from them. I am not a spiritualist myself, although I have attended a few sรฉances over the years, usually in the role of a scoffer and disbeliever. As a longtime amateur magician, I have been able to see through the frauds, but I have also been genuinely perplexed by some of the manifestations I have personally witnessed. (I recommend everybody read about The Scole Experiment or watch the documentary on YT about it. And...read the book, "Ghost Hunters" by Deborah Blum. Related links here: ) ~ Back to OTH... Essentially, a trance medium lapses into an unconscious state, and while in this condition, his or her body is taken over by some outside influence. This influence is usually a self-styled โIndian guideโ from โthe other side.โ Many mediums have been simple, uneducated people, but when in a trance state they have been able to talk foreign languages fluently. Scientists and clergymen have put countless mediums through severe tests over the years. At one group of sรฉances in the 1920s, sitters, who were all versed in different languages, grilled mediums in everything from ancient Chinese to Swahili, and the controlling entities not only conversed in those languages but corrected the sittersโ grammar! The daughter of Judge Edmunds, president of the Senate in the 1850s, gave incredible performances while in a trance, speaking fluently in Greek, Spanish, Polish, Latin, Portuguese, Hungarian, and several Indian languages. Because the sittersโand the mediumsโassume that they are dealing with residents of heaven, they ask mostly spiritual questions. Customarily, the โcontrolโ will announce that Mr. Blank is standing next to him and wishes to speak to Mrs. Blank, who is attending the sรฉance. Mrs. Blank excitedly begins to question her dead husband, Mr. Blank. How is life on the other side? Just fine, the control replies, a little bored, everyone lives in vine-covered cottages, and all is sweetness and light. Where did Mr. Blank hide his valuable gold watch before he died? Itโs wrapped in an old sock and buried under some papers in the bottom drawer of the old rolltop desk, the control answers. Sure enough, when Mrs. Blank gets home, she finds the watch exactly where the mediumโs alter ego said it would be. Try to convince Mrs. Blank that she didnโt talk with her dead husband! In many cases, the medium even begins to talk in a voice that sounds exactly like the dead Mr. Blank, uses his pet expressions, and even refers to things known only to Mrs. Blank, indulges in their private jokes, and so on. Occasionally, a deceased celebrity will โbreak through.โ Recently the late George Bernard Shaw made a tape recording in England that is now circulating in occult circles. Those who knew Shaw claim that it sounds exactly like him, uses his phraseology and vocal mannerisms, and displays his brilliant and distinctive wit. The trance phenomenon deserves extensive study because so many aspects of it are directly related to the contactee phenomenon. The contactees have been told a hundred different stories of what life is like on other planets. If you review the descriptions of heaven produced at the thousands of possibly genuine sรฉances, you will find the same contradictions. The entities will lie transparently at one point in the sรฉance, and a few moments later will come up with astounding information that could not be based upon simple trickery. The mediums themselves have always been aware of their controlsโ mischievous sense of humor. They speak of false shades and malevolent spirits who perform outrageous hoaxes. So the mediums and the professional investigators are always wary. The fact that a control can imitate George Bernard Shaw does not necessarily mean that GBS is doing the speaking from the spirit world. The fact that a control knows where Mr. Blank hid his gold watch does not necessarily prove that Mr. Blank is standing at his side โon the other plane.โ The medium generally remains completely inert while in the trance or โoccupiedโ state but in some instances can become quite animated and make gestures appropriate to whatever is being said. In a very real sense, the mediumโs mind has been blanked out, and his or her body has been completely taken over by the control. The medium has become a zombie of sorts, possessed by an alien entity, an entity who lacks a physical form of his own. Contactees often find themselves suddenly miles from home without knowing how they got there. They either have induced amnesia, wiping out all memory of the trip, or they were taken over by some means and made the trip in a blacked-out state. Should they encounter a friend on the way, the friend would probably note that their eyes seemed glassy and their behavior seemed peculiar. But if the friend spoke to them, he might receive a curt reply. In the language of the silent contactees this process is called being used. A used person can suddenly lose a day or a week out of his life. I have known silent contactees to disappear from their homes for long periods, and when they returned, they had little or no recollection of where they had been. One girl sent me a postcard from the Bahama Islandsโwhich surprised me because I knew she was very poor. When she returned, she told me that she had only one memory of the trip. She said she remembered getting off a jet at an airportโshe couldnโt recall getting on the jet or making the tripโand there โIndiansโ met her and took her baggage. She remembered nothing further after that. The next thing she knew she was back home again. It seems likely the same methods are applied to both mediums and contactees. In the case of the mediums, the mind control serves a useful purpose. It enables the entities to establish direct vocal communication with us and, in many instances, pass along worthwhile information. This process can also be destructive. A young man from Ithaca, New York, called me some time ago at the urging of William Donovan, president of Aerial Investigation and Research (AIR), to tell me of his close brush with death. One evening in the fall of 1967, he said, he left his home to drive to a meeting. For some reason he couldnโt explain, he got out of his car, went back into his house, and carried out several aimless actions such as picking up a book from a table and putting it on the shelf. โFinally, I said to myself, Okay, itโs time,โ he told me. He remembers leaving the house and again heading for his parked car. The next thing he knew he was in a hospital bed. He had apparently driven about four miles to a railroad crossing just in time to meet an oncoming train. His car was demolished, but he escaped rather miraculously with only a few minor injuries. If he had not gone back into the house and carried out those meaningless, time-killing chores, he would have avoided the train altogether. It is possible, of course, that the shock of the accident blotted out his memory of that four-mile driveโbut he couldnโt even remember putting the key in the ignition. This man had been active in investigating the UFO flap that took place around the radio telescope installations near Ithaca in 1967-68. In his book Passport to Magonia, Dr. Jacques Vallee, a NASA astronomer and computer expert, touches on all this. โIn the Soviet Union, not so long ago, a leading plasma physicist died in strange circumstances,โ Dr. Vallee states. โHe was thrown under a Moscow subway train by a mentally deranged woman. It is noteworthy that she claimed a โvoice from spaceโ had given her orders to kill that particular manโorders she could not resist. Soviet criminologists, I have been reliably informed, are worried by the increase of such cases in recent years. Madmen rushing through the streets because they think the Martians are after them have always been commonplace. But the current wave of mental imbalance that can be specifically tied to the rise and development of the contactee myth is an aspect of the UFO problem that must be considered with special care.โ So there seem to be both good and evil forces at work in this type of phenomenon. The good guys latch onto people with particularly receptive minds and turn them into trance mediums. The bad guys use the same methods to tamper with the minds of contactees and even to commit murders indirectly. Because incidents of these types can be traced throughout history, it seems probable that these forces have always been extant on this planet. When the good guys worked through mediums, they needed some excuse that we would accept. The answer seemed to be โcommunication with the dead.โ These communicative efforts led to the foundation of spiritualism, and the entities played the role to the hilt, using their complete knowledge of us and our individual lives to provide us with โproofโ of the existence of a spirit world. This is the same precise methodology being employed with the UFOs to build up support for the extraterrestrial thesis. We humans need acceptable explanations for unnatural phenomena, so โtheyโ happilyโand often humorouslyโsupply us with all the explanations we can handle. At the same time, they give us tiny fragments of the real truth, hoping no doubt that we will be able to digest them slowly. Ever so slowly. In earlier times it seems as if they made a complicated attempt to convey the truth to us through mediums and psychics, but we chose to misinterpret these efforts and placed them within the context of our primitive religious beliefs. We are still doing this, and they are going along with it because even misinterpreted communication is better than no communication at all. Religion may not be truth but may merely be a step on the long path of the real truth. Do the ultraterrestrials really care about us? There is much disturbing evidence that they donโt. They care only to the extent that we can fulfill our enigmatic use to them. The Reverend Arthur Ford is one of Americaโs best-known trance mediums. For most of his life he has served as an instrument for an entity who calls himself Fletcher. In 1928, Fletcher announced that Harry Houdini (who had died in 1926) was on hand and had a message which he wanted conveyed to his widow, Beatrice. The message was in a code once used by the Houdinis in a mind-reading act. This code was known only to the couple and had never been published or revealed to anyone. Fletcher, through Ford, was able to give precise details of this secret code, and Mrs. Houdini later confirmed that the message had to come from her husband. This was only one of Fordโs many coups. In the fall of 1967, Ford went into a trance on Canadian television and produced a message for Bishop James Pike from his deceased son. Bishop Pike, who was present at this televised sรฉance, avowed that the message seemed authentic and seemed to come from the familiar personality of his son. This well-publicized sรฉance launched a major revival of spiritualism in the United States. Reverend Ford travels in high circles but has never made any material gain from his peculiar gift. He gives freely of his timeโand Fletcherโs advice from the other sideโat sรฉances all over the country. Mrs. Ruth Montgomery, the well-known author and Washington reporter, tells of the time that Reverend Ford visited her in Washington and lapsed into a trance so she could ask Fletcher for some advice on his behalf. Reverend Ford was then in the process of moving and wanted to know what he should do with some of his things. Fletcher seemed totally disinterested in Fordโs problems, Mrs. Montgomery reported, and when she asked if Ford should visit a clinic for a checkup, Fletcher snapped, โHeโd better do something. If he doesnโt, I canโt work through him much longer.โ Although Reverend Ford had voluntarily submitted his person to Fletcherโs use for nearly half a century, the entity was apparently completely disinterested in his problems and welfare. This is, alas, rather typical. Even the most helpful entities seem more dedicated to the job of communicating than to any kind of involvement with those to whom (or through whom) they are communicating. The bizarre history of psychic phenomena is filled with Fletchers. Mrs. Montgomery, incidentally, indulges in automatic writing herself and has received constant messages for the past few years, many of which have been valid prophecies and stern advice meant to govern her future actions. There have been innumerable psychic hoaxes for the past 150 years, and many of these parallel the UFO hoaxes. In 1855, the Fox sisters confessed that their spirit rappings were a hoax. They said they produced the sounds by โsnapping their toes.โ Think about that for a moment. Snapping your toes so that it sounded like a rap on a wall or table would be a most remarkable talentโperhaps even more remarkable than the ability to communicate with the spirit world. I donโt believe I would pay ten cents to hear someone talk to a rapping spiritโbut I would happily pay five dollars to examine someone who could duplicate the rapping sound by snapping his toes. Later the two sisters said the confession was false, and they had been bribed to make it. "Mrs. Houdini was genuinely astonished and impressed by Reverend Fordโs messages from her husband, and she made numerous public statements to that effect, as well as signing various affidavits. But later, in the 1930s, she chose to deny it all for a time. Then, shortly before her death, she reversed her denials. In ufology we have to contend with teenagersโ hot-air balloons, and in psychic phenomena we have to worry about youngsters firing rocks at houses with slingshots and phony mediums levitating โspirit trumpetsโ with black thread. But there are many more UFO sightings than there are plastic balloons, and there are more poltergeists dumping rocks in living rooms than there are wild-eyed youngsters with slingshots. There are also more ultraterrestrial entities than either the occultists or the UFO enthusiasts dream of." ~~~Edit of the Bigelow Interview~~~ Bigelow: "I also, I was...I got very disturbed toward the end (of AAWSAP) about something that happened to some of the government people, and I realized uhh...holy crap." (Read, "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon." I think it's one of the most important UFO books in recent memory.) George Knapp: "Hitchhikers." Bigelow: "Umm... Well, yeah. You know. So, hitchhikers being that you take things home with you. Everybody took things home with them. I took things to my house. Things happened to my wife, and to me. Different things. So, everybody took things home. We all, you know, we did. But we didn't know that, gee, it was like, gonna be kind of permanent. You know, we didn't know that, you know? That it's gonna stay with you for maybe...for years and years or the rest of your life, who knows? "But the ones that bothered me a lot where anybody got hurt or really disturbed... Not that it happened on the ranch, it was when they left the ranch. As you say, hitchhikers. And these were government people and it affected them." Knapp: "In very dramatic ways, though." Bigelow: "Very dramatic ways. Very dramatic ways. You know, and there's a cousin to that that we're facing, but it's abated, at least for now. And this other survival topic, right? The very dramatic kind of things that we wanted to have reduced or stopped." (The "cousin" to the hitchhiker phenomenon features the not-so-rosy things he referred to early on in this clip. But at least it had abated at the time of this interview. Has it started up again?) Bigelow: "But going back to the government people, the buyer (Brandon Fugal) came along at the right time, I had decided I wanted to tone down..." Knapp: "Take this off your plate." Bigelow: "Yeah, take it off my plate, tone it down, and if necessary, just lock it up and forget about it. And next thing I know, you know, [Fugal] comes along and, you know, the rest is history." Knapp: "Before we leave this, though, the incidents that happened to you, to your wife, to Colm (Kelleher), to me, the, you know, you bring it home. How does everybody handle that? I mean, is it spooky at the time, and do you draw the connection that it's ranch related?" Bigelow: "Yes and no. If the events hadn't happened very often prior to the ranch, then it's not ranch connected. But they did happen." (I think he meant to say, if the events hadn't happened prior to him buying the ranch in 1996 and did happen once he made the purchase, then it would seem to be connected just to the ranch. But he says these anomalous events did happen before he bought it. Maybe some events were connected to the ranch and others were not? Or, this precognitive sentient phenomenon, as John Alexander labelled it, was able to know that Bigelow was going to purchase the ranch in the future and began interacting with him and his wife before he bought it?) Bigelow: "And [these anomalous events] did [happen], where we lived with my wife and I. We had a poltergeist event one time that was really fun and very different, and that was before I ever acquired the ranch. My wife was a very strong - and probably still is, in spirit - person. And so she took them in stride. She had a full manifestation of an apparition, a human-form apparition in the bedroom, and looking at her. "And this was a holy cow. And she happened to tell me, kind of like, 'Oh, well, while you were gone, this is what happened here, a manifestation of this.' I've heard this kind of thing many times through other people, and recently. And she felt the bed depress as there was a curiosity going on because the facial features were distinctive enough to be able to...as though, 'Who are you and what are you doing here?' Coming from the manifestation from the apparition, looking at her, right? "And torso up was kind of what was manifested. And being able to see and feel the mattress being depressed as it's looking at you, wondering, 'Who are you?' That kind of look on the face. 'What are you doing here?' You know, usually you think it would be the opposite direction. 'Who the hell are you?'" (Fully-formed apparitions have been reported over the last 150 years or so but many times only partial bodies are seen. In this case, Mrs. Bigelow only saw the apparition from the torso up. When Leslie Kean sat with physical medium, Stewart Alexander, she said she only saw a hand form. The alleged spirits will say that, many times, it takes too much energy to form a full body. Learn more about the Kean encounter here: ) ~ Knapp: "Was [Mrs. Bigelow] freaked out?" Bigelow: "No. No, she wasn't. There was a bar of light - so this was not normal in the survival research, but maybe in the ET - that was between her pillows. A bar of light. It wasn't coming in from shutters or blinds or anything from the room or any kind of other light source. You could cover, put the pillows down, and the bar would not be reflected on the surface of the object above it, on the second pillow. It only happened when you did this. And she did that and said, 'Oh, well.' I said, 'Well, what did you do?' "'Well, I went to sleep.' Went to sleep, so..." ~~~ (In January of 2012, NYT journalist, Ralph Blumenthal wrote an article about Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS). He ended it with this: ) "One personal footnote. Donโt ask me what happened on Jan. 4 at 5:45 a.m. as I lay sleepless, wrestling with this story. A tremendous bang jolted me and my wife and the dog upright. We found the glass door to our 12th-floor terrace completely spiderwebbed with cracks as if struck with tremendous force, but there was no sign of any projectile. Invisible moisture between the double panes? Or something else? There are things I donโt mind talking about and things I do mind talking about." (Was this prosaic or just more of the not-so-rosy phenomena Bigelow referenced? We need to know!)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1902142299288838169/ext_tw_video_thumb/1902092701014855681/pu/img/uet_Rn_7fhU0pn3Q.jpg)
![Well, friends, the interview the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial world didn't know they wanted has finally occurred. I appreciate The Glarer for having me on his program. We discussed Kate Peter, I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, both sides agreed as to the importance of civil debate and leaving people's families out of the fray and then Will helped Olivia and I move towards amicable discussion. Overall, a 10/10 way to celebrate the day towel become a YouTube partner. Here are my two favorite quotes from Will and myself; [Grant] "If any of you took 10 minutes --not on camera-- to talk to Lindsey Gaetani, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God I will defend that 'till my last day." [Grant] "I realized that there was just this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change โ I had to reflect that change in my actions." [The Glarer] "If you believe so much in Karen Readโs guilt, then the facts should speak for themselves. You shouldnโt have to bring peopleโs family members into it. [The Glarer] "But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself โ because of how smart you are โ that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion." Here's the full transcript: [Grant] Well, good afternoon towel friends. My name is Grant Smith Ellis and in addition to becoming a YouTube partner today I also decided to call into The Glarer's show. It was the collaboration that the world didn't know they needed but now they have. And if you'd like to listen to this fascinating conversation, related to new allegations as to Kate MafiaMasshole Peter being a PI in the orbit of the Aidan Turtleboy Kearney prosecution, as well as somehow both Will and I eventually coming to a discussion where I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, along with a closing segment about the importance on both sides of the Karen Read and John OโKeefe case of being mutually respectful, even if we have differences of opinion on those facts, you can do so right now. Will and I shared a belief that positive changes in the Karen Read and John O'Keefe trial world, at least in terms of that improving dynamic as to disagreeing without being disagreeable, are evident. So enjoy the conversation, folks. It was certainly an interesting one. [The Glarer] You're on โ who am I speaking with? [Grant] Hey, Will, it's me. I'm Grant... [The Glarer] โ hold on, I gotta give you applause, buddy. You made it. [Grant] Well, we certainly may have different views on the case, but I think we share respect for Jesus and we can talk bad about Kate Peter for sure. [The Glarer] Yeah, that we can do. Sure. Sure. So what's up, bud? What do you got to say? [Grant] Well, I think if people have been following me on X, they will know I've been yelling about Kate Peter taking an envelope of cash in the Chick-fil-A parking lot in front of me for months. And I feel vindicated as of the news of this weekend. [The Glarer] Okay. Okay, so wait a minute. That tracks. So the person who is in this sworn affidavit who claims to have seen Kate Peter with the manila envelope โ you're claiming to have seen her with the same envelope. Is that what you're saying? [Grant] It wasn't a manila envelope. Well, there's two pertinent facts. So Kate Peter and I met up for the first time โ I would say it was in the winter of 2024 โ in a Chick-fil-A parking lot somewhere on the South Coast, maybe near Raynham or something. Anyway, she came and got in my car and she was like, "Well, I'm waiting for someone in a white Toyota Corolla to drop me off money. We try to do it with cash so it doesn't leave a record." And I was like, "Well, this seems a little weird." And then the car pulled up. I didn't actually see the car. She got out, went over to it, came back into my car. It was a white envelope with a green thank-you card. She opened it. There were probably four or five hundred โ four or five fifties and a bunch of twenties. [The Glarer] Wow.... Okay, now Grant, I gotta ask you a tough question, buddy. I would be remiss if I didn't do that, all right? Now, a lot of people are thinking the same thing I'm thinking right now, which is: how can we believe you? Where's your credibility? Because you've lied about so many other things so easily. [Grant] Well, I would challenge that and say maybe you have different perspectives on me, but that should reinforce what I'm saying here. The Melanie Little and Alan Jackson Aruba thing โ I apologized for that on stream and in a post (because Melanie Little told people not to go after Lindsey's kids, and I found that honorable). [The Glarer] Fair enough. [The Glarer] You did apologize. Okay, so you apologized for that. Okay. [Grant] But I'm critiquing someone [Kate Peter] who would ostensibly be aligned with what I believe about the case, and I still believe what I believe about Karen being responsible for John's deathโ we don't have to get into it โ but I'm critiquing someone who supports that view. That should reinforce my credibility here. [The Glarer] Yeah, and MicroDots backs you up at least on this thing, you know, he says he believes you on this thing. I'm just saying โ dude, I've read what you've written. You're a talented writer, clearly. But I can honestly say I've got a whole community of people here โ a shit ton of people in this chat right now โ that I know would agree with me that if you made a habit of reporting the truth, you'd have support, you'd have readers, you'd have a whole audience. I'd be a fan! But your credibility is fucked with me right now, dude. You know, and I hate that, because I actually enjoy reading what you write. [Grant] I appreciate what you're saying. I think I would just say maybe it's smaller than your community, but I just got made a YouTube partner today. I'm actually celebrating that. I have a small community, people do support me โ maybe not as many as support your channel, but it's just people with different views consuming different content. [The Glarer] Yeah, but the thing is โ like, I'm content with my audience. My audience could be bigger, but I cuss a lot and I use words that offend people and I just don't kind of play by the normal YouTube game that most creators play when they grow, you know? And I'm okay with the rate at which my channel grows because I get to be myself. But I don't hold back and I don't play by these rules. So I get all that. But I mean, I'm not ethically doing anything wrong. If I were spreading misinformation or contributing to any spread of misinformation, I would have a problem with myself and what I'm doing. You see what I'm saying? Like, it's a little bit different. You're telling me that you're content with your audience being small because you like to make shit up? You know what I mean? [Grant] No, no. Because it's a new channel. That's why the audience is growing. Anyway, the reason I shake your hand is I do think you're authentic in your beliefs, even if we disagree. And well โ before I forget, one more thing about that Chick-fil-A parking lot cash that's actually important: when Kate got that money handed over, she told me it was for a donation drive to help other people offset babysitting costs or whatever nonsense. Someone sent a text message โ a family member of the person who paid her that cash โ and they put in writing that they sent the money for Kate's own expenses. So she lied to me in the car about what the money was for. Somethingโs up with that. [The Glarer] So she told you in the car that the money was for... [Grant] She said it was to pay for babysitters for people who need help and to donate to other people, which I don't believe. Like, of course not. Nobody believes that. [The Glarer] And then you found out โ through what โ that this money was actually for her personal expenses? [Grant] Eventually a text message got released from someone in the orbit of whoever paid Kate. It was a family member โ I don't know who it was. I've only seen the text message. I'm happy to reshare it on my X later. In that text message, it says โ quoting the person โ "I sent that envelope with my sister over to Kate. It was for her expenses" or something like that. So even that is evidence. [The Glarer] Wow. Okay, so you are strictly of the opinion, based on things you've seen yourself, that Kate Peter is absolutely being paid by the Commonwealth to spin narratives? [Grant] I'll give you one more piece of information, Will, and maybe you or your audience can track this down: I don't think Kate was involved in the Karen Read investigation directly, but I think starting in the fall of 2023 she worked for a private investigator named Marty Kraft. And I believe by proxy she was then retained to work on Aidan's case through that PI firm. [The Glarer] Okay, and then she just became the mouthpiece between the PI firm and the Commonwealth is what you're saying. [Grant] I will say a few things: I reasonably believe she does have direct contact with the DA and agents of the Commonwealth โ I've said that before โ and I also believe that she has favoritism towards specific witnesses in the orbit of this case. Not all of them โ specific witnesses. [The Glarer] Okay, well, I mean, we know who they are, but okay. [Grant] I will also say โ I think โ that your caller was prescient earlier, and they mentioned there might be some mutual blackmail. Well, we know that Lindsey Gaetaniโs phone extraction was manipulated to remove messages from Brian Tully to Lindsey and from Kate Peter to Lindsey. [The Glarer] ...what's your deal with Lindsey? [Grant] Hold, on let's pull it back first. First of all, I think there was a bifurcation: there's charges from October 2023 against Aidan and December 2023 against Aidan. One set of charges, from October of 2023, involved the Karen Read witnesses; the other set, from December of 2023, involved Lindsey. I don't think anyone set Aidan up in December 2023. I think he was just in love with Lindsey and it kind of got out of control. [The Glarer] Bro... [Grant] Well, but hold on, Will... [The Glarer] I'm listening... [Grant] I think that cell phone extraction goes right to the mutual blackmail point your friend talked about earlier. Someone, during the course of the Aidan Kearney investigation involving Lindsey, manipulated that cell phone extraction, and it could have only happened while it was in State Police custody. That is the whole โ that's everything right there because of Kate Peter is the only person who could have gotten Brian Tully to get Nick Guarino to manipulate that extraction while it was in State Police custody before Tully leaked it, by hand, to Aidan's lawyer. [The Glarer] Okay, so listen, Grant. Like, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding. Now, I think Lindsey was used. But come on, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding to try to set Aidan up. Like, you know this. [Grant] No, I disagree, because I've looked at the timeline closely. Aidan begged to go over there when his indictments got handed down in December. [The Glarer] Well, listen โ why? [Grant] Because he got charged in October, but the indictments for the October thing came down December 20th. [Grant] Then when did he beg to go over to Lindsey's? [Grant] I'm about to explain. December 21st, Lindsey tells him, "Hey Aidan, I just got a subpoena for a grand jury." Aidan's mind has gotta' start racing. "Why would there be another grand jury? Is it about me and Karen Read? What is this about?" So he begged her to go over there so he could find out. And that's โ like โ he looked at her phone that night to see the messages between her and Kate to try to find out about what this new grand jury was about. So no one set him up. He begged to go over there. [The Glarer] So you're just assuming that he begged to go over there based on...? [Grant] I know he begged to go over there. He was pleading because he wanted to find out what the new grand jury was. [The Glarer] The difference between you and Aidan is Aidan posts receipts, dude. But you don't. You get the difference? That's why Aidan has as much of a following as he has. [Grant] If you're asking for receipts of him begging to go over there on that day, I'm happy to provide those. I'll post them. [The Glarer] Then why didn't you do that already? [Grant] Well, I think because what I understand to be the evidentiary record from going to all the hearings is different than what people consume, because not everyone goes to every hearing. But I'm happy to do that. I have it all archived. [The Glarer] Okay, but the point is โ like MicroDots is saying โ that he was baited to go over there. So even if he begged to go over there under whatever circumstance, we have proof โ we've seen proof โ that he was baited to go over there based on false information that she was pregnant. [Grant] No. No. She was pregnant. [The Glarer] Oh my, Grant, bro... [Grant] Okay. I will swear on my God about that. [The Glarer] Hold on... [Grant] Well, to move on, I was going to give you some credit. I was going to say you might have been right that the subpoena issued to Lindsey, without her knowledge, could have been to bait Aidan. [The Glarer] But she wouldn't โ how do you explain the metadata on the pictures that she sent him of the sonogram, dude? [Grant] First of all, if you're talking about someone's pregnancy โ that's a medical issue, and to bring it up on air disgraces Jesus. [The Glarer] Oh, come on, Grant. [Grant] Let's not. [The Glarer] Alright, fine. We won't talk about that anymore. But let's face it, dude โ you're making excuses for this girl. And why? Like, do you have a crush on her? Is that what's going on here? And it's okay. [Grant] Oh, oh, please. When I first came into this case, I saw a woman walk into a courtroom, and I started listening to her story. And even in this conversation, there are multiple things I corrected where you were willing to say, "Okay, Grant, maybe that is what happened." And Lindsey doesn't have anyone out there who is voicing that for her, so I'm taking the opportunity to do it. [The Glarer] And do you wonder why she doesn't have anyone voicing things out for her, dude? [The Glarer] Because Aidan isolates people! [The Glarer] Get out of here with that. Stop. Again with the whole "it's Aidan's fault" shit, man. That's between you and Lindsey, dude. I'm asking โ like, I asked you why you think that. Nobody is going to bat for Lindsey. And I saw receipts. I heard a recording of her โ you're talking about somebody who I heard a recording of [that night with Aidan in December of 2023]. This is... Come on, Grant. [Grant] I was in the courtroom. I saw the people crying when that tape was played. And you know what I also heard, Will? I heard the original version of that tape that didn't have her consent to record, which is why Aidan got charged with felony wiretapping. [The Glarer] Okay, but you're not denying that she said that, right? [Grant] Listen, I have never been awake at 12:30 in the morning. I'm not a woman. I've never been confronted with that situation. I would never pass judgment on someone in that situation. [The Glarer] Every woman that I've ever heard express their opinion on it โ pretty negative, dude. Just saying. Pretty negative. Especially the moms. Especially the moms. [Grant] So I don't think any people talking in that way โ I don't think you've even met this woman. [The Glarer] You're right. I have not. I have not met her. [Grant] And if โ I don't know if she will ever do this โ but if any of you took 10 minutes, not on camera, to talk to this woman, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God, I will defend that 'till my last day. [The Glarer] Alright. Declared. Got it. I gotta' ask you one more question though. Why are you saying stuff about Olivia Nile โ Olivia Nile and her mom โ being paid agents for the defense? Come on. [Grant] Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I know that's Olivia Lamb. Okay? [The Glarer] Right, yeah, same person. Yeah, yeah. [Grant] Okay, so we all know Christina Lamb does boutique PR consulting for lawyers. She's good at it. Oliviaโs good at it. They should own it. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] What โ how is that proof, though? That Olivia Lamb is being paid by the defense in some way? You see the problem? [Grant] Hold on. That is an extrapolation some people may make. My argument is only that what she does looks like PR for the defense. I think Olivia hasn't been paid since last year. [The Glarer] But she's saying that's not even what she does, dude. [Grant] Okay, maybe it's not. But I think Olivia's contract ran up at the end of the first trial, if you want me to be very blunt with you. [The Glarer] Contract? [Grant] Mm-hmm. [The Glarer] But her mom doesn't even do that either โ what the fuckโs her mom got to do with it? [Grant] Well, why would her mom run some random boutique PR consulting firm for lawyers, and then Olivia just shows up with this extremely high-level acumen, rivaling lawyers? [The Glarer] But thatโs not what she does. She's saying that's not even what her mom does or what she does. [Grant] Okay, well, I looked at her mom's website. I archived it going back a few years, so I can post the screenshots again. And I know what she advertised herself as doing. [The Glarer] But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself โ because of how smart you are โ that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. That's what I think. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion. Because you state your opinions as though they're fact. And I think that's an ego thing. I don't even think it's malice. Itโs just ego. That's what it comes off as, anyway, dude. Because everything you say โ every time I ask you, "Where's your proof?" โ you explain how you came to your opinion. You give me a laid-out story. Go back and listen to this later on โ you'll see what I mean. [Grant] Well, I don't even doubt you, actually, that I'm firm in my convictions. If I'm not there to experience something, I do not know the truth. But I've seen the screenshots. I only found out Olivia Lamb was Olivia Lamb because I found an archived X post where she shared something very sentimental about her grandfather. I didn't like that. I didn't appreciate having to talk about that. But it became relevant because I wanted to know why she was involved in the case. I will listen to her tell me I'm wrong. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] Yeah, but you can't just, like, trap people into interviews by threatening to spread lies about them if they don't, bro. What kind of shit is that? [Grant] Nothing that I said about her grandfather, her acumen or her mother's work was incorrect... [The Glarer] But why are you even talking about her family, dude? Like, that's really low, man. Like โ that's... It's low, man. It's low. Her family didn't have nothing to do with this, man. She's doing this because she cares about it. And then people start talking about people's family members and shit. And it's like โ it comes off as a not-so-subtle form of intimidation, frankly, Grant. You know, trying to get somebody to shut up. [Grant] No, I don't want to do that. I want to learn about why she's interested in the case. [The Glarer] But you could see how somebody could see it that way, right? Because what if her family starts telling her, "Hey, stop talking about this. Why are we being brought into your shit because you're passionate about something?" What if her family does that and puts her in an awkward position? And then people are cheated out of some really good insight because of that. [Grant] My brother โ my brother who at four years old had a colectomy, three-stage, and is developmentally disabled as a result โ has a profile someone made mocking him on X. That's a profile that people I respect engage with. Usually I overlook that stuff because I don't believe the people engaging in it are trying to do that. And I hope people realize I'm not doing that to her. I authentically want to know why Olivia's covering this case. [The Glarer] That's all right. So โ but that's my point, Grant. I'm just saying, like, if you believe Karen Read is guilty, why not just stick to the facts? Because you don't see me going after anybody's family. You don't see Olivia going after anybody's family, talking about people's family and exposing their family and what they do. You know what I mean? That's not cool. I don't do that. And Oliviaโs saying that she will happily talk to you anytime about why she's interested in the case. You see what? That's my point. That's my point โ if you believe so much in Karen Read's guilt, then the facts should speak. Everything that you put out there โ the facts, the details of the case, and the way you interpret those facts โ that should be enough. You shouldn't have to bring people's family members into it. Come on. I feel like you're better than that. That's all. I still have faith that you're better than that. [Grant] Yeah. And I think that's the perfect place to end, because you've given me a lot of time and I share your sentiments. I think that is crucially important. You don't see me out there in the past six months or twelve months talking about Melanie Little, or Olivia or her parents anymore. [The Glarer] I have seen improvement, yes. I have seen it. [Grant] And let me just say why: because I came to believe that there was this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and that I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change โ I had to reflect that change in my actions. And that's why that happened. So that's it. That's how I feel. [The Glarer] Okay. Yeah, I mean, everybodyโs entitled to their feelings and opinions, man. We all are. But yeah, Iโm glad that we got this talk. I got to express some things I wanted to express to you. You were very receptive, and I appreciate you coming on and being respectful and being cool. And youโre welcome here anytime, Grant. I can see that we could talk about pretty much anything, and it's fine. That will always be welcome here โ no matter what we disagree on. So I appreciate you, Grant. [Grant] God bless, Will, enjoy the rest of your Saturday. [The Glarer] Have a good one. Alright, Grant, y'all. Alright, I'm gonna take another call. Let's do that.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1916273688736940311/amplify_video_thumb/1916261346590515200/img/hUvZMgeSmwtcpp9Y.jpg)
![So Jefferson Morley says that "the evidence does not support the notion that Lee Harvey Oswald killed the president." Jeff relies on the eyewitness account of one of the Parkland doctors who treated JFK at Dallas, Bob McClelland. And he says I failed in Case Closed to challenge Dr. McClelland's credibility. Below is an excerpt from CASE CLOSED, Chapter 13, โHe Had A Death Look: Parkland and Bethesda." Read it and decide for yourselves what you believe. And check my source notes, almost all based on my own interviews in 1992 with the chief attending Parkland doctors. It is their judgment of Dr. McClelland's account that is critically important. โHowever, some of the Parkland doctors who treated the President described a gaping wound in the rear of JFKโs head (the occipital region), not the right side (the parietal). If true, this not only contradicted the findings of the autopsy team but was evidence that the President was probably shot from the front, with a large exit hole in the rear of the head. Several Parkland doctors also thought they saw cerebellum, tissue from the base of the brain, on the stretcher or in the operating room. Yet, the autopsy photos of the brain show the cerebellum intact. If the Parkland descriptions of the cerebellum were true, this raised legitimate questions over the authenticity of the photographs of JFKโs brain, which showed no such damage. Robert Groden and Harrison Livingstone, in their book High Treason, devote more than thirty pages to highlighting this conflict between the Parkland and Bethesda descriptions of the head wound. However, it is questionable to rely on the Parkland doctors for any assertion about the head wound since, by their own admission, they did not examine it in detail. When Dr. Kemp Clark looked at the wound to determine whether the President could be revived, it was the first time it had been examined. โFrom what I read in later books, everyone looked at it in detail from the beginning, but that is not true,โ recalls Dr. Jenkins. โWe were trying to save the President, and no one had time to examine the wounds. As for the head wound, they couldnโt look at it earlier because I was standing with my body against it, and they would only have looked at my pants.โ83 โWe never had the opportunity to review his wounds,โ Dr. Carrico told the author, โin order to describe them accurately. We were trying to save his life.โ84 Dr. Adolph Giesecke agrees: โWe had no time to examine the wounds. That was to be done by a forensic pathologist, not by us.โ85 โI donโt think any of us got a good look at the head wound,โ confirms Dr. Perry. โI didnโt examine it or really look at it that carefully.โ86 โAnd when we realized he was dead,โ Dr. Baxter recalls, โnone of us had the heart to go and examine the head wound while Mrs. Kennedy was in the room. We all just made our way out of the room.โ87 โWhen things were over with,โ Dr. Jones says, โyou felt it was her time and you should get out of there and let her be alone with him.โ88 Dr. Baden of the Select Committee concurs: โParkland was not concerned with whether the bullet was going from front to back or vice versa, they were only treating the symptoms, not the wounds. Some of them could be good surgeons but lousy pathologists. A third of the time, an autopsy shows something was missed by the treating doctors at the hospital. In unnatural deaths, it is common for the treating physicians to mix up stab wounds and gun shots, and they are wrong half the time about exit or entrance. The Parkland doctors did not clean Kennedy offโthere is just no way they could have hazarded a real guess about that wound, since it was covered with blood and tissue. If they say they saw cerebellum, they are just wrong because the cerebellum was perfect. And if they say there was a large hole in the rear of the head, they donโt know what they are talking about since there is nothing there but the entry injury in the rear cowlick. The mistakes in judgments from Parkland are exactly why we have autopsies. โOne of the most important aspects of the Zapruder film, often overlooked by the critics, are the frames immediately after the President was shot in the head. Itโs very clear on the enhanced frames that there is a wound over the right ear, but the back of the head is clean. That film is incontrovertible evidence that there was no defect on the rear of the head.โ89 Yet mistaken descriptions of what the Parkland doctors did and saw continue to be published. High Treason asserts that some doctors examined the wound with a flashlight and that Dr. Jenkins picked the head up from the stretcher to show other doctors the extent of the rear wound.90 The eight principal doctors who attended to JFK on that day all told the author that such reports were false. Moreover, Groden and Livingstone cite early interviews and some testimony before the Warren Commission to support their hypothesis that the Parkland doctors saw a different head wound than the one described at Bethesda.* Yet the Parkland physicians, in their discussions with the author, were almost unanimous in supporting the autopsy findings that the massive exit wound was on the right side (parietal) of the Presidentโs head, not the rear (occipital), and that there was no sign of damaged cerebellum tissue. They insisted that the explainable differences in the wound descriptions between them and the Bethesda doctors have been exploited by conspiracy writers, who created a controversy where none exists. Some admitted that their early statements about the wounds, which they now consider to be mistaken, may have contributed to the confusion. Dr. Bill Midgett, who helped wheel the President from the limousine into trauma room one, says, โThe President had quite thick hair, and there was a lot of blood and tissue. All of us were so shocked โฆ and to have Mrs. Kennedy thereโnone of us stared very closely to see the wound. But it was more parietal than occipitalโthat much I could see. I did not turn the President over to look, but there was no cerebellum in that car or on the people.โ โWe did say there was a parietal-occipital wound,โ recalls Dr. Carrico. โWe did say we saw shattered brain, cerebellum, in the cortex area, and I think we were mistaken. The reason I say that is that the President was lying on his back and shoulders, and you could see the hole, with scalp and brain tissue hanging back down his head, and it covered most of the occipital portion of his head. We saw a large hole on the right side of his head. I donโt believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken.โ91 Dr. Giesecke also admits an error in his original testimony when he described the wound as more occipital. โI guess I have to say that I was wrong in my Warren Commission testimony on the wound and in some of my pronouncements since then. I just never got that good of a look at it. But, for instance, Lifton spent six hours with me trying to get me to say the wounds were like he wanted them. The truth is there was a massive head wound, with brain tissue and blood around it. And with that type of wound you could not get accurate information unless you feel around inside the hole and look into it in detail, and I certainly didnโt do that, nor did I see anyone else do that.โ92 Dr. Peters had said that the cerebellum was damaged. โI saw the photograph of the brain when I was in Washington for the Nova program, and I saw the cerebellum was depressed, but it was not lacerated or torn. It is definitely pressed down and that would be the damage I referred to in 1964.โฆ The only thing I would say is that over the last twenty-eight years I now believe the head wound is more forward than I first placed it. More to the side than the rear. I tried to tell Lifton where the wound was, but he did not want to hear.โ Dr. Jenkinsโs original report also stated he saw cerebellum. โThe description of the cerebellum was my fault,โ he says. โWhen I read my report over, I realized there could not be any cerebellum. The autopsy photo, with the rear of the head intact and a protrusion in the parietal region, is the way I remember it. I never did say occipital.โ93* โI did not really look at it that closely,โ says Dr. Perry. โBut like everyone else, I saw it back there. It was in the occipital/ parietal area. The occipital and parietal bone join each other, so we are only talking a centimeter or so in difference. And you must remember the President had a lot of hair, and it was bloody and matted, and it was difficult to tell where that wound started or finished. I did not see any cerebellum.โ94 Dr. Baxter agrees that it was difficult to determine the precise location of the wound when treating the President: โHe had such a bushy head of hair, and blood and all in it, you couldnโt tell what was wound versus dried blood or dangling tissue. I have been misquoted enough on this, some saying I claimed the whole back of his head was blown away. Thatโs just wrong. I never even saw the back of his head. The wound was on the right side, not the back.โ95 Dr. Jones makes the same observation, saying he did not even know there was a head wound for several minutes, and then finally realized it was a โlarge side wound, with blood and tissue that extended toward the rear, from what you could tell of the mess that was there.โ96 Dr. Giesecke agrees โthat the occipital and parietal region are so close together it is possible to mistake one for the other.โ97 The only Parkland doctors who still believe they saw a wound in the rear of the head, as well as seeing cerebellum, are Robert McClelland and Charles Crenshaw. โI saw a piece of cerebellum fall out on the stretcher,โ says McClelland, who claims he was in the best position of any of the doctors to view the head wound.98 He drew a sketch in 1967 for Josiah Thompsonโs book Six Seconds in Dallas, which showed a gaping wound in the rear of the head.99 โI am astonished that Bob would say that,โ says Dr. Malcolm Perry. โIt shows such poor judgment, and usually he has such good judgment.โ100 โI donโt think Bob McClelland was in the best place to see the head wound,โ says Dr. Peters. โHe wasnโt in that position the way I remember it, as he was on the other side of the table. As for Dr. McClelland saying he saw cerebellum fall out on the table, I never saw anything like that.โ101 โBob is an excellent surgeon,โ says Dr. Jenkins. โHe knows anatomy. I hate to say Bob is mistaken, but that is clearly not right. In 1988, when I went to the National Archives, the photos showed the Presidentโs brain was crenelated from the trauma, and it resembled cerebellum, but it was not cerebellar tissue. I think it has thrown off a lot of people that saw it. I guess a last point is that Bob and Groden [co-author of High Treason] are such good friends, I believe it has changed his attitude.โ102 โMcClelland may be a fine surgeon, but he is a lousy pathologist,โ says Baden. โI am sure he thinks he saw that, and has developed it in his mind. But his memory is just completely wrong, and the autopsy photos and X rays prove that.โ103* Dr. Crenshaw wrote a book in 1992 in which he claimed he examined the wound, that the hole was in the rear of the head, and that the cerebellum was lacerated.104โ Crenshaw, a junior resident at the time, arrived late at trauma room one and assisted for only a few minutes near the end. He was in no position to make the judgments he sensationally proclaimed in his book. In fact, his role was so minor that most of the other doctors do not even remember him. โI donโt remember Dr. Crenshaw in the room,โ says Dr. Ron Jones. โI donโt remember him in there at any time, but he may have been,โ recalls Dr. Jenkins. โNeither do I,โ says Dr. Baxter. โI feel sorry for him,โ says Dr. Perry. โI had thought about suing him, but when I saw him on television [promoting his book], my anger melted. He has to know that what he said is false, and he knows the rest of us know that. You have to pity him. What a way to end his career. His story is filled with half-truths and insinuations, and those of us who know him know he is desperate.โฆ He is a pitiful sight.โ A senior Dallas doctor who is a close Crenshaw friend told the author, โI think it is a bag of worms of ego, going over the hill, the last hurrah.โ While almost all the Parkland doctors who treated JFK support the findings of the autopsy team, their confirmation may not be as important as the studies conducted by subsequent panels of experts. The Clark and Rockefeller commissions, as well as the House Select Committeeโs medical panel, affirm the original autopsy conclusions about JFKโs head wound. The most detailed work was done by the Select Committee. All nine forensic pathologists agreed that the beveling of the skull and the damage to the brain meant the small rear hole in the Presidentโs head was an entrance wound.105 The exit hole was consistent with a wound caused by the two large bullet fragments found in the front of the Presidentโs car.106* SOURCE NOTES 83. Interview with Dr. Pepper Jenkins, March 10, 1992. 84. Interview with Dr. Charles Carrico, March 8, 1992. 85. Interview with Dr. Adolph Giesecke, March 5, 1992. 86. Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, April 2, 1992. 87. Interview with Dr. Charles Baxter, March 12, 1992. 88. Interview with Dr. Ron Jones, April 14, 1992. 89. Interviews with Dr. Michael Baden, February 1, 1992, and November 7, 1992. 90. Groden and Livingstone, op. cit., p. 46. 91. Interview with Dr. Charles Carrico, March 8, 1992. 92. Interview with Dr. Adolph Giesecke, March 5, 1992. 93. Interview with Dr. Pepper Jenkins, March 3, 1992. 94. Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, April 2, 1992. 95. Interview with Dr. Charles Baxter, March 12, 1992. 96. Interview with Dr. Ron Jones, April 14, 1992. 97. Interview with Dr. Adolph Giesecke, March 5, 1992. 98. Interview with Dr. Robert McClelland, March 9, 1992. 99. Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas, p. 140. 100. Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, April 2, 1992. 101. Interview with Dr. Paul Peters, March 10, 1992; Dr. Peters also drew a diagram that showed the doctorsโ positions around the table and provided it to the author. 102. Interview with Dr. Pepper Jenkins, March 10, 1992. 103. Interview with Dr. Michael Baden, February 1, 1992. 104. Charles Crenshaw, op. cit., p. 88. 105. HSCA Vol. VII, pp. 110, 115. 106. Ibid., p. 128. AND the Footnotes to that section *Although no one at Parkland saw JFKโs back wound, Dr. Pepper Jenkins later told Dr. John Lattimer that he had felt it with his finger when he positioned the Presidentโs head and neck to facilitate the passage of oxygen (Kennedy and Lincoln, p. 153). * After the autopsy, Humes and Boswell wrote their report from memory, without the benefit of the photographs or X rays. Robert Kennedy, who feared the public display of the X rays and photos would be offensive to the Kennedy family, reached an agreement with the Warren Commission not to publish the materials, and except for Earl Warren, the commissioners did not examine them. When the film was turned over to the custody of the National Archives in 1966, a metal box containing the Presidentโs brain was missing from the inventory, together with some tissue slides. Humes had given everything from the autopsy, including the brain, to JFKโs personal physician, Admiral George Burkley. โHe told me,โ said Humes, โthat the [Kennedy] family wanted to inter the brain with the Presidentโs bodyโ (Journal of the American Medical Association, May 27, 1992, Vol. 267, No. 20, p. 2803). The House Select Committee concluded that Robert Kennedy likely disposed of the material for fear it would become a lurid public exhibition (HSCA Vol. VII, pp. 367โ68). * In 1988, four of the Parkland doctorsโPepper Jenkins, Richard Dulaney, Paul Peters, and Robert McClellandโwent to the National Archives at the invitation of a PBS documentary show, Nova, about the assassination. They were the first Parkland physicians to see the autopsy photographs, and each confirmed the photos represented what they remembered seeing that day, including a picture of the rear of President Kennedyโs head, which shows no defect. It has been suggested that the reason the photo shows the rear of the Presidentโs head as undamaged is because the doctor (whose fingers are present in the picture) is holding a large flap of skin to cover the rear defect. โFalse,โ says Dr. Michael Baden. โThere is no flap of skin there. There is a bony protrusion from the right side of the head, but the rear is undamaged, except for the entry hole near the top of the skullโ (Interview, January 23, 1992). * High Treason asserts that Jenkins originally said JFK was shot in the chest. Jenkins laughed when the author read him the Groden and Livingstone charge. โI donโt know where they get this stuff from. We put tubes into the Presidentโs chest, but there were no chest wounds caused by anything else.โ * In his original report, McClelland said there was a wound to the left temple, one that does not show up on any autopsy X ray or photograph. This has caused some to charge that Kennedy was shot by a second gunman from another location at Dealey, and that the autopsy team either negligently or intentionally overlooked that wound. โIโll tell you how that happened,โ Dr. Jenkins explained to the author. โWhen Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, โWhere are his wounds?โ And at that time I was operating a breathing bag with my right hand, and was trying to take the Presidentโs temporal pulse, and I had my finger on his left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left temple as the wound.โ โ Crenshaw also said the autopsy photograph of the tracheotomy opening on Kennedyโs neck shows that it was larger than it had been at Parkland, implying that additional surgery might have been done between Parkland and Bethesda. โThatโs ridiculous,โ Dr. Malcolm Perry told the author. โI did the procedure. Tracheotomies are not pretty things, as speed is of the essence. Tissue can sag and stretch after death, but the photos I have seen look like the opening I remember making.โ * While the Select Committeeโs forensic panel agreed that a bullet had entered from the rear and exploded out the side of the Presidentโs head, there was a lone dissent. Dr. Cyril Wecht said that such a finding did not preclude a shot also entering from the front. Dr. Wecht believed that the large exit wound on the right side โcould hide an entrance wound at the same spot.โ In other words, just as Oswald fired from behind and his bullet exited the Presidentโs head, a front shooter fired into the wound created by the rear bullet. That is Wechtโs way of explaining why there is not another entry hole on JFKโs head. However, the X rays and photographs show no exit for a front bullet. The author raised the issue with Wecht, and he admitted that โthe question of where did a front bullet exit is a very good one.โ He first suggested that the front shot may have been a frangible bullet, which would have exploded upon impact in the brain. However, the X rays do not show any metal fragments in the brain from such a bullet, and when this was pointed out to Wecht, he acknowledged, โYes, thatโs true, there should be more fragments.โ Finally, he suggested that the front bullet may have been plastic, and penetrated the brain but did not exit. He argued that since the brain is not available for examination, his speculation is possibleโexcept that plastic bullets were rarely available until 1968, five years after the assassination. * The author viewed a video taken of the execution of a journalist by army troops in Central America. When the victim, who was lying flat on his stomach on the ground, was shot in the rear of the head, his upper torso and legs arched off the ground, in the opposite direction of the bullet. It was similar to the neuromuscular reaction JFK suffered. Also, when Governor Connally was struck in the rear shoulder by a bullet, he did not fall forward, but is clearly visible on the Zapruder film, his wounded shoulder pushing back into the car seat, toward the direction from which he was shot.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1907374209979842573/ext_tw_video_thumb/1907371183789539328/pu/img/H5emFOslkouoPfyv.jpg)
![Ch. 14 of NITRO: The Inside Story of Hulk Hogan's heel turn - #OTD 30 Years Ago (7/7/96)! AS DAY BECAME NIGHT at the Sullivan home, Bollea deliberated his participation in the pay-per-view. โEverybody was telling him that it was the wrong thing to do,โ Kevin Sullivan says. โHe was getting booed out of the arena, but they were all saying, โthis is gonna kill himโ.โ With no end to the discussion in sight, the wily booker casually suggested that Bollea and Young make use of his two guest rooms until the morning. โI isolated [them],โ Sullivan admits. โI was just afraid that at the last minute, he was going to use his creative control [clause] and pull out.โ If Sullivan could deliver Bollea to the arena by showtime, the finish of the match called for Hogan to star in the most dramatic of surprise endings. In a sequence devised by Kevin Nash, an unannounced Hulkster would shockingly interfere in the match, but only after the heels gained an unfair advantage through cheating. It would be a brilliant misdirection, Nash thought, as fans would instinctively believe Hoganโs appearance to be in support of the babyface team. โI knew there were gonna be 55 different ideas,โ Nash says, thinking back to the eve of the event, โ[so] I actually put a lot of thought into it. I called Scott [Hall] two or three days before that, and said โwhat do you think about this?โ โWe had to make it a 2-on-2 match with Lex Luger getting injured [during the match] and going out. We would cheat to get Macho [Man] in trouble and all of a sudden Hulk comes down, which of course would mean โok, here comes Hulk to make the saveโ. [Hall] said, โI love itโ.โ There was, however, the looming possibility that Bollea could reject his turn at the eleventh hour. Thinking ahead, Eric Bischoff developed a contingency plan in which Sting would play the role, ultimately revealing himself - despite not having prior experience with the WWF - as the โthird manโ instead. โI remember Eric came in to the locker room,โ recalls Marcus 'Buff' Bagwell, โand said [to Sting], โI wanna talk to you about somethingโ. I could hear them going over the idea, and then when they got done, Sting told me what they were talking about. He said that [Eric said], โthere are only two guys that could turn heel where it would really matterโ. That would be Hogan and Sting.โ โHe was offering Sting the job first, [as I recall], and Sting didnโt wanna do it. He didnโt really say it wouldnโt work, but he just said, โit doesnโt intrigue me. I donโt wanna do itโ.โ According to Andre Freitas, a special effects artist who worked in costume design and character development for WCW, the proposed Sting swerve was to involve the use of a doppelganger - or โphonyโ Sting - presumably in an effort to fool fans that the real character had switched sides. โThat was their original plan,โ says Freitas. โEric showed me a picture of Jeff Farmer (a lower-card wrestler) and said โcan you make him Sting?โ I told him that they have similar bodies...then we looked at Stingโs hair and Jeffโs hair...and talked about all that stuff. I did a head cast for [Farmer] and some prosthetic and test make-ups. But when they secured Hogan, we didnโt do [the angle].โ ----------- Amazingly, even as Bash at the Beach began, Bischoff continued to consider Plan B. โI remember walking by this perforated wall in the Ocean Center,โ divulges Nash, โand Eric said to me, โHulk is with Sullivan, and heโs not sure heโs gonna do it yetโ. It was up in the air.โ Meanwhile, viewers of the pay-per-view - and, for that matter, WCWโs own production staff - speculated as to the identity of the third man. โThey were trying to โworkโ everyone,โ asserts Jason Douglas, a WCW producer backstage at his first pay-per-view event. โโRocketโ (staff member Rick Sancher) came up to me - they were kinda testing me because I was new on the road - and said โhey, I think itโs gonna be [WWF wrestler] Bret Hartโ. I guess it was to see if I would leak something, and so I was just like โoh, cool, Bret Hartโ.โ In reality, aside from Bischoff, Bollea, Young, Hall, Nash and Sullivan, the turn would be concealed from everyone - even the announcers, according to orders from Bischoff - as to ensure their most realistic reactions. With less than an hour before the main event began, production staffer Woody Kearce discovered a revealing clue in the parking lot. A Hulk Hogan motorcycle had appeared mysteriously in one of the spaces, sparking another round of backstage conjecture. Finally, with what Sullivan recalls as โthirty minutesโ and Bischoff remembers as โforty-five to sixty minutesโ left on the air, Bollea belatedly arrived at the Ocean Center. The mood suddenly changed. Upon realizing that his star had been convinced, Bischoff began to relax. โOnce he got to the building, I recall a sense of calm,โ he reveals. โAll of the anxiety, all of the tension, all of the worry, all of the effort to make sure things stayed quiet...all of that just kind of dissipated. It was like fog lifting when the sun comes out - it all just went away. I was thinking, โit is what it is, thereโs nothing more I can do...so letโs just roll with itโ.โ To cement the turn, Bollea knew, he would have to deliver a monumental post-match promo to explain his actions. While typically, he enjoyed using Bischoff as a sounding board to rehearse interviews, the need for complete privacy - on this occasion - was unquestionably paramount. And so, away from prying eyes - and ears - the two met up in the most unglamorous of clandestine locations - a utility closet. In the midst of the run-through, Bischoff stopped to emphasize an important point: When you grab that microphone, I want you to say...โthis is the beginning of the new...world...orderโ. The phrase - โnew world orderโ - lingered auspiciously in the air. Bischoff surprised himself with the utterance, realizing slowly that the term encapsulated everything that the invasion storyline could represent. In 1990, then-president George H.W. Bush famously utilized the same expression in a speech to Congress, although its origin could actually be traced back to the 28th President, Woodrow Wilson. But if Bischoff was unsure as to the source of his spontaneous inspiration, perhaps the answer could be found closer to home - on the preceding Nitro, just six days earlier, announcer Larry Zybysko serendipitously made the following proclamation: โThis Sunday, I promise you, there will be a new world order of wrestlingโฆโ Fans at the Ocean Center waited anxiously to see if Zybyskoโs prophecy would materialize; for after all the hoopla, it was suddenly time for the main event. Before the opening bell, the audience was already on its feet for ring announcer@Michael_Bufferโs pre-match introductions. As Hall and Nash sauntered to the ring for The Hostile Takeover match, Buffer set the scene with theatrical aplomb: โLadies and gentleman, at this time, let me introduce the men whose plan and goal is to takeover the WCW with force and hostility. We were told there would be three of these interlopers, and I must apologize as I have been informed - as you can see - there are only two. Ladies and gentleman, introducing...the Outsiiiiiders!โ In a moment that played off perfectly on television, Stingโs entrance music began - and quickly ended - as โMean Geneโ Okerlund traipsed cautiously into the ring. After exchanging quizzical looks with Buffer and referee Randy Anderson, Okerlund confronted the Outsiders to get some answers, an inspired plot device designed to build the tension even further. โGentleman,โ began Okerlund, โif I could have your attention...I donโt have police protection with me at this time, but I wanna confront you in front of this full house here at the Ocean Center, and millions of others watching across the country and around the world. I donโt see three men here tonight. Where is your partner?โ Responding in a manner consistent with their WWF characters, Hall and Nash assured Okerlund that the third man was present - and ready. โLet me tell you something,โ announced a confident Nash, โwe got enough to handle it right now, right here.โ Once more, Stingโs entrance music blared from the arena speakers, this time preceding the man himself, accompanied by Luger and Savage. โHere we go!โ screamed color commentator Bobby Heenan as the wrestlers passed an unusually large contingent of security personnel on the entrance way. โThe war is on!โ Less than two minutes into the bout, Luger collapsed to the outside, a move in accordance with Nashโs plan to even the sides before the climactic reveal. โNow itโs two against two!โ yelled Heenan. After a brief delay, the concerned crowd looked on as Luger left the arena on a stretcher, leaving Sting and Savage alone to fight valiantly for WCW. As the match progressed, the contemptible Outsiders used every trick to stall their opponentโs momentum, until a revitalized Savage began a furious rally at the fifteen-and-a-half minute mark. The invaders were suddenly down, but not out - as with the referee distracted, Nash landed a low-blow to bring the Macho Man to his knees. All four men lay on the canvas, exhausted, as referee Anderson started a ten count. As Anderson yelled โONEโ, several rows of spectators rose to their feet. Within seconds, the reaction diffused from section to section, the noise level increasing with each passing beat. On the live broadcast, viewers at home caught glimpse of a familiar figure making his way down the ramp. โHulkamania!โ screamed Dusty Rhodes on commentary while Hogan walked methodically towards the ring. Noticeably, the Hulkster seemed oddly disaffected - even out-of-character - but after exchanging the briefest of glances with the crowd, he continued stride with the din reaching fever pitch. โWhose side is he on?โ bellowed Heenan, a question that seemed inexplicable given the history of Hoganโs on-screen persona. โWhose side is he on?โ repeated Heenan, who as longtime fans could recall, had opposed Hogan for years as a manager in the WWF. For that reason, the comment flew over the heads of most (but not all) viewers; meanwhile, the live crowd was cheering as if their team had won the World Series. Nash and Hall retreated to the floor as Hogan tore off his shirt, an apparent signal that the archetypal good guy was here to save the day again. โWhoโs bad now boys?โ taunted play-by-play man Tony Schiavone on commentary, confident that WCWโs honor was no longer in jeopardy. Savage lay prone on the mat as Hogan surveyed the scene. Above the cheapest of cheap seats, peeking through a curtain with palpable anticipation, was Eric Bischoff. โI knew that something big was about to happen,โ he recalls. โIt was either gonna be a big failure, or a big success.โ Seemingly out of nowhere, with his unsuspecting devotees enveloped in celebration, Hulk backed up to the corner. With the coldness of a serial killer, the once-honorable hero shockingly shoved referee Anderson, and executed his patented finishing move - the leg drop - to the helpless Macho Man below. The audience became completely, utterly unglued. โI was standing back with the announcers,โ remembers Michelle Baines, newly hired as a production assistant. โOne of the producers turned to me and said, โyou need to go to the backโ. โโI said, โwhat do you mean?โ โShe said, โitโs gonna get ugly real quickโ.โ โShe was right - the crowd turned ugly quick.โ In retrospect, it was clear that even as Hoganโs body approached the canvas - contact with Savage just milliseconds away - the gravity of the assault started to hit home. โWhat has he done?โ questioned a crestfallen Rhodes, โis he the third man? What the hell is going on here?โ Heenan was even more direct - โHulk Hogan has betrayed WCW! He is the third man in this picture!โ A breathless Schiavone could barely muster more than three words: Oh My God, he repeated. Oh My God, he continued, as Hogan high-fived a grinning Hall and Nash. The courageous Sting, stumbling to his feet to stop the injustice, was quickly dispatched, and in the coup de grace, Hogan tossed Anderson to the floor. Sardonically, he covered Savage for the pin, the contest now clearly a farce. โI hope you love it,โ a disappointed Rhodes wailed on commentary. โYou just sold your soul to the devil.โ The third man was a mystery no more, and Hall, Nash, and Hogan raised their hands in victory to a genuinely astonished audience. The immediate outrage, which first gave way to shock, was now inspiring unmitigated rage. Simultaneously, the evil trio continued to taunt, pose, and antagonize while the announcers lamented WCWโs future. As Sting and Savage hobbled back to the locker room, a visibly distraught Okerlund returned to conduct an explanatory interview, based around the one Hogan and Bischoff had mapped out earlier. โMean Gene,โ commanded Hogan, โthe first thing you need to do is to tell these people to shut up if you wanna hear what I gotta say.โ For the next four minutes, Hogan rationalized his turn with remarkable clarity. โThe first thing you gotta realize, brother, is this right here is the future of wrestling. You can call this the new...world...order of wrestling. These two men right here came from a great big organization up north, and everybody was wondering who the third man was. Well, who knows more about that organization than me, brother? I made that organization a monster. I made people rich up there. I made the people that ran that organization rich up there. And when it all came to pass, the name Hulk Hogan, the man Hulk Hogan, got bigger than the whole organization!โ Bischoff watched from his secretive seat in amazement - he had not seen, nor had anyone, this intensity of emotion on display at a wrestling show before. It was almost as if the assembled masses had lost themselves in the performance, perhaps even forgetting, if only for a moment, that they were witnesses to a pre-determined event. Hoganโs actions had ostensibly interrupted their critical faculties; in other words, they had suspended their disbelief by reacting to the incident as if it were real. Moreover, the shock was manifesting in the most volatile ways imaginable, as in an incident edited out of future showings of the pay-per-view, a rather large man, likely intoxicated, ran into the ring before being knocked down by Hall and Nash. Concurrently, a stream of debris rained down from the stands, with one object hitting Okerlund, and the rest filling the ring in a stunningly unique visual. Hogan continued as the trash piled up around him, even referencing Ted Turner in his diatribe: โBillionaire Ted promised me movies brother. Billionaire Ted promised me millions of dollars. And Billionaire Ted promised me world caliber matches. And as far as Billionaire Ted, Eric Bischoff, and the entire WCW goes, Iโm bored brother! Thatโs why I want these two guys here, these so-called Outsiders. These are the men I want as my friends. They are the new blood of professional wrestling, and not only are we going to take over the whole wrestling business...with Hulk Hogan, the new blood and the monsters with me, we will destroy everything in our path, Mean Gene.โ โLook at all the crap in this ring,โ responded Okerlund. โThis is whatโs in the future for you if you want to hang around the likes of this man Hall, and this man Nash.โ Hogan raised his finger as if to stop the interviewer midstream, the perfect line instantly coming to mind. โAs far as Iโm concerned, all this crap in the ring represents these fans out here,โ he boomed defiantly. โFor two years, I held my head high,โ ranted Hogan, alluding to his rather uninspired WCW tenure. โI did everything for the charities. I did everything for the kids. And the reception I got when I came out here, you fans can stick it brother! Because if it wasnโt for Hulk Hogan, you people wouldnโt be here. If it wasnโt for Hulk Hogan, Eric Bischoff would still be selling meat from a truck in Minneapolis. And if it wasnโt for Hulk Hogan, all of these โJohnny come latelysโ that you see out here wrestling wouldnโt be here. I was selling the world out, brother, while they were bumming gas to put in their car to get to high school!โ In closing, Hogan foreshadowed the future state of affairs in WCW with a prophetic preview of coming storylines: โWith Hulk Hogan and the new world organization of wrestling, brother...me and the new blood by my side...whatcha gonna do when the new world organization runs wild on you? Whatcha gonna do? What are you gonna do??โ Despite mistakenly bungling the โnew world orderโ phrase at the conclusion of his speech, Hogan still provided the perfect punctuation to a sensational heel turn. His promo, inarguably the most dynamic of his career, came across as strikingly authentic (โit felt real, because it was realโ,โ offered a proud Eric Bischoff upon reflection years later). On commentary, Schiavone - who most inspiredly suggested that Hogan had planned to double-cross WCW all along, since his debut in 1994 no less - added to the realism with some mournful final comments: โWe have seen the end of Hulkamania,โ he grieved. โHulk Hogan, you can go to hell! Weโre outta here. Straight to hell.โ ---- To the layman, there appeared an obvious explanation for the feverous crowd response that accompanied Hoganโs turn. Clearly, the element of surprise - one of the key elements of Nitroโs success - had been exploited to a masterful degree (โnobody on earth thought that the third man was going to be Hulk Hogan,โ highlights Nash). To Kevin Sullivan, however, there were several layers of story at play. โPeople thought that it was an invasion from the WWF,โ he begins, implying that the success of the angle could be correlated to its realism. โThey really bought into it, and when Hogan turned heel...they were sure of it. โSo while Hogan gets the credit for the reaction, it was [Nash and Hall] who set the whole thing up. Those guys built the foundation of heat, and when Hogan came down, it just blew up.โ โWe were red hot coming off WWF television,โ agrees Nash, โand then you had the biggest turn in the world on top of that. The biggest babyface of all-time finally turned heel!โ To the ever-meticulous Sullivan, always a keen observer of the nuances present in a wrestling angle, an often overlooked element was also noteworthy. โHe did it to Randy [Savage],โ the booker emphasizes, speaking of Hoganโs betrayal. โPeople knew there was real-life heat there. That helped out too, but everyone played an intricate part. โLightning...you canโt catch it in a bottle but one time.โ The above is an excerpt from the book, NITRO: The Incredible Rise and Inevitable Collapse of Ted Turner's WCW. Amazon USA: Amazon UK: Amazon Canada: Amazon Australia: 17+ Hour Audiobook Available at Audible and Apple Books Audible USA: Audible UK: Audible Canada: Audible Australia: Apple Books: Ultimate NITRO Bundle: Deep Cuts - Wrestling Stories in 60 Seconds! David Penzer AdFreeShows.com 83 Weeks with Eric Bischoff On This Day in WWE Allan Conrad the Mortgage Guy IandrewDiceClay WCW Archive Because WCW WCW4Life แดสแด
แด รแดแดส 90s WWE Secrets of WCW Nitro #WCW #nWo #HulkHogan #BashattheBeach #HeelTurn #Wrestling #WrestlingBooks #OTD #WWE #WorldChampionshipWrestling #Nitro](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2074461260037472650/amplify_video_thumb/2074458245859618816/img/LGSM61_LAq--YROA.jpg)
![[Behavioral Scientist's Analysis] NewJeans, Now Even Stronger, HYBE in Trouble Iโll listen again. Danielle: โNaturally, 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 NewJeansโ identity, and we all feel that she is irreplaceable.โ Danielle clearly stated this and also expressed it in English. So, in terms of the NewJeans issue, international fans who donโt 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 hasnโt 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 canโt 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, whatโs the point of winning a legal case? Even if HYBE were to win any legal case, do you think consumers wouldnโt boycott NewJeansโ 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 peopleโs 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: NewJeansโ 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: โHowever, 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 havenโt resolved the issue, nor have they taken any proactive measures. Then, in the midst of all this, our CEO was dismissed, and weโre left wondering whom we can trust and rely on. Weโve come to the conclusion that if we donโt speak out about this now, no one will know what weโre going through. After much discussion among ourselves, we finally decided to take this step.โ The current situation is shocking, but this is not just about this one incident; theyโve been continuously receiving unfair treatment from HYBE. The fact that they are saying this publicly now is truly shocking. Theyโve 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. Itโs 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. Itโs no longer just NewJeans vs. HYBE or Min Hee-jin vs. Bang Si-hyuk. Itโs 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 donโt think they can. Hanni: โSomething 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, โIgnore her,โ right in front of me. I could hear and see everything clearly. Even now, I still donโt understand why I had to go through that.โ I still donโt 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 arenโt sharing these stories to stir things up. Theyโre probably just speaking truthfully about their experiences and trying to be genuine with their fans, saying, โItโs time we express our stance honestly.โ The timing and approach theyโve taken are actually perfect. They started by clearly explaining their motivations and why theyโre speaking out, then moved on to using English to express what NewJeansโ 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 theyโve structured everything is so good because people remember stories more than abstract thoughts or philosophies. When you say, โThis happened to me,โ people are much more likely to remember that than vague statements. Hanni shared her unfair experience in such an honest way, and I think itโs 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 didnโt return NewJeansโ greeting, and it became a huge thing about face blindness? People donโt remember the details, but they remember that someone important didnโt greet them. It became a memorable story. Minji: โWhen 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, Iโm worried about how many more similar incidents might occur in the future and whether weโll be subtly ostracized without anyone there to protect us.โ Hanni: โI hope no one else has to go through something like that, but since itโs already happened once, I canโt help but feel scared that other members might experience the same thing. I spoke to the new CEO about it, but since I didnโt have evidence and it was considered too late, they seemed to brush it off, making me feel like thereโs 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 theyโll help, itโs just been months of excuses... excuses... excuses... They keep saying that itโs something they canโt resolve. But this is something that I personally went through and experienced, yet they are trying to dismiss it as if itโs my fault. Iโm worried and scared about what might happen next.โ I want to make two points here. First, this is clearly โinvisibility.โ Itโs not physical violence, but itโs about not acknowledging someoneโs greeting, deliberately ignoring them, and so on. While it may not seem like a big deal, it still deeply hurts someoneโs feelings. Thereโs been a lot of research on how these kinds of actions negatively affect an organization, spreading like poison and making people feel bad. Itโs something we should really work against. The second point is about third-party justice. Hanni raised a legitimate concern, and it wasnโt handled properly within the company. This made Hanni, Minji, and others realize that the new management isnโt on their side. When others witness this, theyโll also realize that this company doesnโt have their best interests at heart. This realization leads to a loss of trust. People will remember these events, and once this perception sticks, itโs hard to change. It affects not just NewJeans, but also other artists who will think, โOh, this is how HYBE treats people.โ And it even affects the employees who work there. Minji: โOf course, Iโm worried about our future, but whatโs most frightening is that the work weโve 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 weโve 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 weโre left wondering how weโre supposed to continue working as we did before. The recent statement from the new management also didnโt make sense to me. If they really didnโt 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 theyโre 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 havenโt considered our wishes? We donโt 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 theyโre doing right now are not in our best interest at all.โ Whatโs 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 thereโs 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 โ thatโs when people are really upset. Thatโs why people hate it when thereโs a discrepancy between outward appearances and inward intentions. It creates a near-hatred, especially when someone claims to be acting for your benefit but itโs clear that theyโre not. This is what Minji is clearly pointing out โ 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 theyโve shared this with the fans and everyone else. This isnโt 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 โ 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 arenโt hypocrites, but even then, thatโs not effective โ 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 managementโs time is up. Less than a month, and their time is over. In the creative industry, especially in culture and the arts, content production โ such as creating songs or music videos โ cannot be separated from management. Thatโs how weโve 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, theyโve created a system where that harmony canโt exist anymore. Moreover, the new management is culturally ignorant. They donโt understand art, music, or creativity. They have shown this clearly, especially with their mishandling of Director Shin Woo-seokโs music video and the associated fan content, like those on the Dolphiners YouTube channel. Theyโve 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 managementโs time is over." Danielle: โAs 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 canโt do that, and the plans weโve 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 weโve been working with all this time, and weโre extremely anxious because we donโt 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? Itโs hard to fully express whatโs 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.โ Personally, they just want to be left aloneโjust "Leave us alone. Don't interfere; just leave us alone.โ This is what theyโre 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 wonโt stand still either. In entertainment, itโs not about titles like "Iโm 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. Theyโre not just factory-produced idols. The distinctive nature of NewJeansโ 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, wasnโt just NewJeans making this musicโit 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 wasnโt 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, itโs 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 oustedโitโs about losing the core elements that made NewJeans what they are. WE STAND WITH NEWJEANS #๋ฒ๋์ฆ_๋ด์ง์ค์ํจ๊ป_์ค๋น๊ฐ์๋ฃ #๋ฐฉ์ํ_2์ฃผ์ค๋ค_๋ฏผํฌ์ง_๋ณต๊ท์์ผ๋ผ](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1836325806362235187/amplify_video_thumb/1836325301087072256/img/-KRorTRouoqNniiz.jpg)
