Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
Surreal... "Intelligence...and elected officials in our gov't have uncovered...a deeply-hidden UAP crash retrieval program, and they've been reverse engineering UAP." ~Farah "There's also the theory...that we have found their spacecraft, possibly, and we would reverse engineer it so we could learn." ~Bill Maher (I never thought I'd hear Bill... show more
92,920 views • 10 months ago •via X (Twitter)
0 Comments
No comments available
Comments from the original post will appear here
![👽🛸 Stratton: "It's Not from Here" and We Don't Know If It's Hostile - Plus: A PSYOP to Protect Us? And...God 🛸👽 (I'm behind on this but my posts take time, and I think many will find this interesting.) Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "Has the government been hiding the existence of UFOs from the people of this country? Here with more, the director and producer of this new documentary, Dan Farah, and the former director of the U.S. government's UAP Task Force, Jay Stratton. "Let me just tell you where I am: I am really curious about it. I've asked a lot of questions about it. I've been told...I've been given both sides in terms of the answer to the question. Some people swear it's true. Other people say, 'Nah, it's not true.' You know, like, Area 51, et cetera, et cetera." (Would be nice to know who's telling him it's true vs. not true.) Hannity: "I'm somewhat agnostic. I believe with God, all things are possible. If God created universes, within universes, within universes. Are we that arrogant to believe that there couldn't be life elsewhere that might be even more intelligent than we are? And we're not that intelligent sometimes." (I think it's interesting to see Hannity say he's agnostic about UAP/NHI, and has heard different things about about the validity of related claims - which feature a ton of anecdotal evidence, government reports, some photos, videos and radar, and current-day, high-level folks telling him they've seen classified data - but he doesn't question the existence of God? Where's the evidence for God and Jesus? Double standard. There's much more evidence for the existence of true-unknown, UFOs, than there is for God.) Hannity: "But what makes you think...why are you so certain?" Farah: "Well, look, I made this film in pursuit of the truth, to find the answers to those big questions. I interviewed 34 very-high-level government, military and intelligence officials, ranging from Marco Rubio to sitting senators to intelligence officials, admirals, generals. And collectively, they all broke their silence to reveal an 80-year cover-up of the existence of non-human intelligent life." (I really enjoyed "The Age of Disclosure" but the amount of people in it who we had never heard from before, on camera, and who "broke their silence" for this film, is just a handful of folks.) Farah: "And a high-stakes, secret Cold War race that the United States is in with adversarial nations to reverse engineer technology of non-human origin. And this has all been kept from the public, from Congress..." Hannity: "Can I interrupt you, Dan, one second?" Farah: "Yeah, yeah." Hannity: "Are you saying to me that Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed to you that not only do UFOs exist and life from some other location exists, but we are fully aware of it, and we are...there's almost a cold war going on that has never been revealed to the American people? Marco Rubio said that to you?" (That's what people may come away thinking if they just watch the film, so I'm glad Hannity asked that and Farah clarified.) Farah: "Rubio confirms on camera that UFOs, UAP, which they're now called, are in fact real. That's not a debate anymore. The only question now is: Who's controlling them? Where are they from? What is their intention? He says, on camera, that UAP are penetrating our most secure airspace, like our nuclear-weapons sites, military bases, and it's a major concern." (100% true, and it's nice to see a new, wider audience see and hear Rubio say that. But, he's been saying that, on camera, for over four years now.) Hannity: "Okay. Jay, where do you think this is coming from? Do we have any suspicion at all?" Stratton: "Well, the best way I can say, Sean, is it's not from here. You know, I spent 20 years researching this topic, working this topic directly on behalf of the American people, and I did everything I could, and did confirm that some of the things that are seen are obviously, you know, completely terrestrial, whatever word you want to use there. You know, from potential-adversary nations, from, you know, defense contractors and companies here, you know, commercial sources. However, there were still cases that we could not attribute to any nation on Earth, and that says a lot." (The follow-up should have been: "Jay, you claim some of this is, "not from here." In the movie, you say that you have seen non-human craft and beings with your own eyes. Can you explain that and share some details?) Hannity: "Do you both believe that they're hostile? Dan? Hostile forces, entities, if you will?" Farah: "I think that's to be determined." (Stratton nods his head up and down in agreement.) Hannity: "So we don't know for sure?" Stratton: "No." Farah: "We don't know what their intentions are." Hannity: "Jay?" (I REALLY wanted to hear Stratton answer the question about intent because his family, reportedly, went through a rough time with the phenomenon (Read "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon." Axelrod = Stratton) and, again, he says in the movie that he has seen non-human craft and beings with his own eyes. He helped start AAWSAP (2008-2010), created AATIP (in 2015) and was the director of the UAPTF (which began in 2020 and was replaced by AARO). Unfortunately, Farah had already started answering so we never heard about intent from Stratton. Big-time, missed opportunity.) Farah: "Look, I interviewed 34 military [and] government intelligence officials, Sean. They couldn't tell us any better than you could what the intention of non-human, intelligent life is, right?" (Stratton nods his head up and down in agreement. The question we all want to know: Do any of the people in The (alleged) UAP Legacy Program who have had access to ALL of the data have educated opinions about intent? If so, what are they?) Farah: "All we know is that this is a real situation, it exists. There are UAP penetrating our most sensitive airspace. It is a problem. And even if you can't wrap your head around the idea of it being non-human, intelligent life, what are the choices you're left with?" (Stratton nodded his head in agreement for all of that. ⬆️) Farah: "An adversarial nation like China or Russia that leapfrogged us, technologically, and is invading our most classified and protected airspace? That's not great, either. So, you know, no matter how you have to look at it to get your head wrapped around it, it's gotta become a serious conversation, a serious national conversation, a serious global conversation." (Stratton nods in agreement, again. He should have been the one doing most of the talking here because, besides the Q&A at the premiere during the SXSW festival, this is the only interview we have with Stratton since the movie came out. I'll link to the SXSW transcript in the replies.) Farah: "And, you know, the film reveals there has been a deeply-hidden, crash retrieval and reverse engineering program in the United States. China has one, Russia has one." (I would argue: Claims are made in the film but nothing is "revealed.") Farah: "There is, in fact, a high-stakes secret Cold War race. Rubio talks about this race, on camera, on the record, in the film. And makes it clear that if we don't get our act together as a nation, we're gonna wake up one day - to quote him - he literally says, 'We will wake up one day, and China will have beat us. And we won't know how they got there or when they got there, but we will be screwed.'" (Just to be clear: Nowhere does Rubio (or Rounds) say that they believe the U.S., Russia or China have a UAP crash retrieval program or that we're in a race to back engineer non-human technology. But what IS said...) Lue Elizondo: "Some of this UAP activity we are seeing here in the United States may actually be a result of a Chinese UAP reverse engineering program." Senator Rounds: "If Xi Jinping had access to this, if Putin had access to this, and they thought that we did not have access to similar capabilities than what they did, do you think for a second that they wouldn’t consider using it to achieve their ends of domination?" SoS Marco Rubio: "And if their approach to it is driven by science, and a desire to match what they think is ours, we’ll wake up one day and realize, I don’t know how they got there, but they got there ahead of us, and now we’re screwed." (To keep it simple: In other words, if China or Russia acquire advanced technology, no matter the origin, they will do everything in their power to reverse engineer it in an attempt to surpass us, technologically. Meanwhile, in the U.S., these alleged programs are hidden away with no congressional oversight and are so stove-piped that our top scientists and brightest minds, apparently, aren't able to be brought on board in an attempt to reverse engineer whatever we have in said programs. So, we've kind of handcuffed ourselves and slowed down any progress. Then again, we have have mixed messages on how much progress HAS or HAS NOT been made. Dr. Eric Davis in 2019: "The crash retrieval program is [a] very small program. It is not a massive, huge government infrastructure. It’s a very poorly-funded program and it hasn’t actually, probably hasn’t had any money for a while. I do know that the program was terminated in 1989 for lack of progress in reverse engineering, anything that they had, any of the hardware that they had. And they’ll resurrect it every, maybe so often, so many years go by and they’ll try it again. And they just don’t succeed because compartmentalization is a killer. Scientists cannot communicate with other scientists to get help." Dr. James Lacaski has said (on WEAPONIZED in 2025) progress has been made but, "it hasn't been achieved to its full extent." And Retired Naval Commander Will Miller told me in 2020: "It’s my firm belief that yes, we – the Russians, probably the Germans, and perhaps the Chinese have at least partial technologies (pieces), and most likely for the U.S. – entire operational craft. I believe we have our own trans-luminal velocity craft that can take us anywhere in space and time. Did we develop this technology independently? Probably not!" Which one is accurate? We also have Dylan Borland (2012 at Langley AFB), Daniel Gockerell (2006 at Eglin AFB), and others, saying they saw triangular (and other) craft with unique properties of flight. Did we back engineer those from UAP craft we acquired? Remember what Rounds said? "If Xi Jinping had access to this, if Putin had access to this, and they thought that we did not have access to similar capabilities than what they did, do you think for a second that they wouldn’t consider using it to achieve their ends of domination?" ~Senator Mike Rounds in AoD The PSYOP Angle: If the U.S. has not achieved any progress in reverse engineering this advanced tech (assuming we've acquired it) and China and/or Russia HAVE? And Russia and/or China suspect this? Wouldn't it make sense to pretend like we HAVE made progress? That would keep Russia and China from attacking us and achieving, "their ends of domination." So are the comments by Davis (lack of progress) accurate, and Lacatski and Miller (notable, but not full progress, and full progress) just doing their best to make China and Russia believe that we HAVE made progress, when, in reality, we have not? A PSYOP to protect our country and citizens? Or maybe we actually HAVE made progress? It's VERY confusing.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1998160320578429222/amplify_video_thumb/1998157634529353728/img/jWZXJhkIt81OuBnz.jpg)
!["Multiple members of Congress received a briefing from an agency task force (it's the FBI). All of that info. will be declassified, and the stuff that we saw [that] we can't explain." ~Luna (I think Luna did an excellent job on tonight's Real Time - Overtime with Bill Maher. Transcript and my thoughts below.) ~ Bill Maher: "The first question is for you. Do you think we are headed, Congresswoman, for a full disclosure and transparency about UAPs, which we used to call UFOs? I do. I mean, I think it was just this week, didn't they start a website for releasing this information?" Rep. Anna Paulina Luna: "From my understanding, they're gonna put it on the National Archives (website), but if they've booked the website... So I actually head up the Disclosure Task Force in Congress on Declassification of Federal Secrets. And what I will tell you is, there's something..." Maher: "So that's why you know so much stuff (audience laughs)? I see." Luna: "(laughs) I'm a nerd. In all seriousness, there's some things that we can't explain, and there is a problem with over-classification. But also, when you have duly-elected members of Congress being denied access, that's a problem, because we're supposed to be the, you know, check and balance on some of these agencies. And so, you'll see some interesting stuff. The federal government will ever come out and tell you what to believe." Maher: "I think they're here." Luna: "Well, there's definitely stuff that we can't explain." Maher: "I'm not shy about it." Paul Begala: "I'm still searching for intelligent life on Earth, so I'll be very (audience and Luna laugh)... I'm not into that." (Begala saying he's, "not into that" most likely means he's ignorant on the subject. IMO, anybody who takes the time to look at the decades of evidence, with an open mind, will be "into" the possibility that another intelligence is sharing this planet with us.) Luna: "I think we're in a big Universe." Maher: "Well, you may not be into that, but they're into you, okay?" Begala: "Ohhh." Maher: "I mean, whether you want [to] believe it or not, things..." Begala: "Why do they always put the probes there? If they're that sophisticated, can't they just like, scan us or something?" (Maybe they're trying to extract semen from a prostate orgasm to help with their hybrid/breeding program? Not a new theory.) Maher: "But, you know, but see, there's...okay. But if you want to be serious about it, there was an era where we heard a lot about probing. That ended." (Has it ended? I'd love to hear from experiencers and people like hypnotherapist/researcher, Yvonne Smith, who works with experiencers, to hear what people are saying about their experiences nowadays.) Maher: "Because, I mean, we never heard about any of it before we got nuclear weapons. Right after the nuclear bomb went off in 1945, suddenly, the aliens were like, maybe we ought to pay attention to these people." (Not exactly true.) Luna: "Well, there were reports of sightings and whatnot dating back into even, you know, for many, many, many, many centuries." Maher: "If you're talking about some of the stuff like what we see in the hieroglyphics and drawings, it could be, yes, it could be like they built the pyramids. That's true." (Absolutely no need to jump to the hypothesis that whatever is here (aliens?) built the pyramids. We just know that sightings and abduction cases go back to before the atomic age.) Luna: "Well, I think that there's a lot of theories, but based on what we're seeing, evidence-wise, there is one specific agency where multiple members of Congress, to include myself, received a briefing from. All of that information will be declassified, and the stuff that we saw in that briefing we can't explain." (Luna has spoken to Matt Laslo and others about being briefed by the FBI about UAP but the FBI effort was first reported in February 2025 by Politico: "FBI agents who are part of a secretive group investigating the surge of 'unidentified anomalous phenomena,' what the government uses to refer to UFOs... "The existence of the FBI’s informal working group on the issue has not been disclosed publicly before." Link to article in replies... ~~~ Maher: "But, I mean, if I can get back to the anal probing, um...." (Everybody laughs/smiles.) Luna: "Odd topic." Maher: "It seems like there was a time where they needed to do that to find out about if they...I mean, like so many people have this, almost the exact same recollection. Maybe it's some psychological phenomenon that we don't realize, but people, independently, seem to have this kind of vague memory, and (laughs) they lost a little track of time. Maybe it was the GHB (date-rape drug. ~Joe), I don't know (audience laughs). But, it seemed like the aliens were trying to find out: What makes these people tick? Who are these humans? And then, I think, they got that information. "And in the last ten, twenty, years, it's not been that. What it's been has been very, very serious people. I'm talking about military people, who are constantly saying, 'We see things we cannot explain. Either China has a weapon we don't know about, which is unlikely, or it's just something you're gonna have to tell me what it is.' (Very serious (including military) people have been reporting these things for decades. It's just getting a lot more coverage in the media now, and more people who have had access to classified data are speaking up.) Luna: "What we've seen in the briefings... And I actually asked this question to Secretary Clinton, as she was actually going to, had she won her election, be in charge of disclosure and actually releasing some of this information. And she thinks that the American people - I think this is one of the most bipartisan things in Congress, currently, and bicameral in the Senate as well - but we should be able to release the information that we have, specifically pertaining to this and let the American people decide what it is. "Look, some of it is balloons, some of it is drones, and then there's a portion of it that we can't explain where you have credible people from all walks of life confirming it. And I will tell you, based on the evidence that we have seen, there's something there." Maher: "And credible people, not just in the military, but in government, including Democrats." Begala: "I was struck by what President Obama said, and I agree with it. The vastness of the Universe is such that the arithmetic makes it pretty likely." Maher: "Right!" Begala: "And, the vastness of the Universe is such, it's pretty unlikely that we're gonna cross paths. And I think that's also true." (Well, as I've said (and others have, too), we don't know if "they" (whatever "they" turns out to be) are traveling any great distance to get here or need to "cross paths" with us. They may have been here the entire time and consider Earth their home, just like we do.) Begala: "I mean, it's just, it seems to... I'm a skeptic, but I like what you're doing, Congresswoman. Put it all out, let people decide. I'm a skeptic. Maybe you can persuade me?" Luna: "I think this gets into a deeper...if you have time listen to the Joe Rogan podcast I did. But this gets into a deeper discussion on where you are at ,spiritually. And I think there's just a lot that we have, and can't explain." (IMO, I don't think our spiritual beliefs or "where you are at, spiritually," has anything to do with what we're dealing with. As I've said before, I think the phenomenon is just part of the natural world that we don't yet understand or comprehend.) Luna: "But look, my biggest concern and why I got involved is because I had the Department of Defense at the time tell me that we were not allowed access, and I have the highest clearance possible." (She has a TS-SCI clearance. That doesn't mean she has access to, or is read into, every compartment where various Special Access Programs (SAPs) reside, or that she has a need-to-know for everything. Some feel every member of Congress should have access to everything. Others disagree. We've also heard about the DoE, which, supposedly, has their own levels of clearance. Also, in 2020, as I worked on my Wilson/Davis MegBlog, I made a cold call to someone who was the executive secretary of the Special Access Program Oversight Committee in the mid-90s.) ~Begin MegaBlog Excerpt~ "I spoke with a former military man mentioned in the Wilson/Davis documents who, in theory, also should have had access to every SAP during a specific portion of his time with the government. He told me, "that there may be levels of secrecy people don’t know about." ~End MegaBlog Excerpt~ ~~~ Luna: So if you have a duly-membered, elected-member of government - not just myself, but other members - being denied access, you have this aspect of then, who's really in control? If we're writing the checks, if you have the Pentagon failing audits...denying access, this is a problem. And so, there is this aspect of government transparency, going back to, how do we actually fix this country, and you have to start with transparency." Begala: "I'm with you on that." (Audience applauds.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2035280269792677983/amplify_video_thumb/2035257819856007169/img/8UUAdFHCewv1w8zI.jpg)
![🔥 Burlison to Trump: "Just waive [NDAs] completely for anything related to...non-human intelligence." 🔥 (Yes!!! He gets it. Burlison is one of the few Rs who will push (even if it's gently) the Trump admin on these issues. Make it right for whistleblowers like Grusch, Dylan Borland, Matthew and others.) Rep. Eric Burlison: "...the cost of pensions, their medical benefits, you know, etc. I think that, first and foremost, you got to make it right to those people. That will demonstrate to everybody else who wants to come forward that it's a safe place to come into. "And then I think what what Rep. Anna Paulina Luna is leading on is fantastic, in that making sure that the administration knows that there may be some times where these individuals who were working, you know, they were promoted into a system or a program. Sometimes...they're now inheriting things where they, where they realize, well, there's crimes involved in this. "And so, you know, they're kind of put in an awkward situation. Do they do their patriotic duty? What do they do? I think that providing some level of amnesty for them to be able to come forward is very, very important. And then, I finally think, also, that they need to waive the non-disclosure agreements on this topic. Particularly just waive it completely for anything related to the knowledge of life that's outside, you know, non-human intelligence. I mean, I don't see why we possibly should even allow that to be a top secret thing. "And so, if there's anything that's related to that, it should be waived. I think that that's what our ask is of this administration, as well as to continue digging into the private sector. I think that a lot of this information is in the in the hands of either the...or the archives of these federally-funded research and development centers and then further some of the some of the prime subs (subcontractors) that have been working on this topic. "And so I think that it's gonna take making it clear that to our major companies that we do business with, or do business with the United States, that it's okay to come forward. And I think that we're gonna have to have a discussion if they do have - if they're reverse engineering stuff that they got because it was from non-human intelligence - we need to make sure that we can have that conversation about intellectual property, so that those are the next steps."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2070156660132470811/amplify_video_thumb/2070153614874828800/img/pNcDajnAL8J3YoPR.jpg)
![[UAP], "were frying the equipment on the aircraft. Some of our most state-of-the-art technology." ~Luna (Note: Transcript is much longer than video clip below) 🤔 Luna: There Are No "Holy Shit" Videos That I've Seen That The Public Has Not 🤔 The 46 videos we requested, "have all now been declassified." ~Rep. Anna Paulina Luna "ALL 46 [videos] have not been released." ~Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell to Me (I'd like to get that clarified from Rep. Luna) "If they would release the things that I've seen, you would stay up at...you'd be up at night worrying about, or thinking about this stuff." ~Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office to Rob Finnerty And Burchett added that we'd, "come unglued." We also had this... "It was one of those moments where everyone in the room gasped. Everyone. Even the staffers who are like, the most skeptical people in the room just gasped when they saw that video. Because there's not a single aerial thing that can do something like that, that can pull that off." ~Rep. Eric Burlison (Has that video been released?) Compare that to what Luna said... Douthat: "Is there anything else out there (video-wise) that is like, a holy-shit moment?" Luna: "As far as a lot of the meat and potatoes that we've been able to see and gotten briefings on, it's, for the most part, been put out." (So nothing to keep us up at night or to make us come unglued, or...make us gasp. I appreciate her being level headed with that and not hyping it. So, what are Burlison and Burchett talking about? I have learned to see things for myself first before getting too excited about what others say about x, y and z. Some of those videos in the two releases ARE very interesting but nothing has kept me up at night or made me gasp. Do videos like that even exist? It's not the first time I've asked that question.) ~~~Extended Transcript from Segment~~~ Douthat: "You have had access, before these videos were released. In what context have you seen these videos before they were released? Luna: "So I went into the SCIF and...I went and actually observed and saw all the videos before they were released to go through, numerically, to make sure that those were the ones that correlated to the ones that we had actually put out in the request. So those have all now been declassified." Douthat: "All of the ones?" Luna: "Yeah, in the list." (Remember: Regarding the list of 46, Corbell told me that, ""ALL 46 [videos] have not been released.") Douthat: "But how did you get the list of videos in the request?" Luna: "We had a group that came forward, it was bipartisan, former whistleblowers from the intelligence community that had access to... I would compare it to something like YouTube that exists within the intelligence community. And they came up with the files, and they said you need to get access to these files and have them released. And so, before the order came out from the President, we had come up with this list. We had been getting push back, and then after [Trump] gave the green light for it, it was declassified, and those are now up and able to be [viewed] at the Department if War." Douthat: "And what do you think they show?" Luna: "Well, there's some interesting stuff. I think that they show UAPs. There has been one of the videos that has since been debunked to be actually the infrared that was picking up aircraft that was farther in distance, but the optics are kind of an illusion in that sense. So there's been one that's been debunked. But there are ones that they cannot explain. They've tried to cross-reference it with other data, and the way that these things are maneuvering are pretty wild. And so, again, I think that they show UAPs in some instances." Douthat: "Right. And you think that one reason to take this stuff seriously is that they correlate with direct-pilot testimony of the kind that you've heard, right. So it's not like, I'm just... Imagine the completely skeptical listener or viewer, of which there are reasonably many, who says, 'Okay, you have some number of videos, we don't know what they are, but if one of them turns out to be sort of some prosaic explanation, we can assume a lot of them will be.' So what else makes you think..." Luna: "In the specific incident of Eglin Air Force Base, which is where we had the pilot testimony and we were able to see some images, these things were frying the equipment on the aircraft. Some of our most state-of-the-art technology is getting completely fried." Douthat: "And this is something that pilots told you had happened to them? Luna: "Yes, yep. Now, the other issue is, sometimes pilots won't report because they don't want to be taken off flight status. So there's removing the stigma of if you're supposed to have safe flying. You want to also track national security issues. You have to be able to document this stuff. But when you have this type of stuff impacting military training, impacting flight operations, impacting our technology, it's a problem. "We should follow up, and then say, 'Okay, well, is this technology that, potentially, could be advanced tech from adversary nations? I don't, necessarily, think that's the case, because if that was true, we wouldn't be number one, currently. Some of this stuff that we're seeing is pretty wild. You saw the New York Times report (2017 and the Tic Tac ~Joe), and just how it's defying physics, if you will. But then the other aspect of, what can we as Congress do next? We can declassify. I don't think, you know, this aspect of people saying it's not enough..." Douthat: "Are there things that you've seen in a SCIF, or not in a SCIF, that are wilder than this (the videos that have already been released)? That would like, make the front page of the New York Times as, you know, no one can be skeptical anymore?" Luna: "No, I think the aspect of, do I have, you know, a location where there's a little green man on a slab in a fridge (laughs). I don't think I'm gonna get that (laughs)." Douthat: "Wait, we're gonna get to that. Just stick with the videos. Is there anything else out there that is like, a holy-shit moment?" Luna: "Well, I think that there's probably going to be some more release of other videos as well, other testimony. They're still combing. But, as far as a lot of the meat and potatoes that we've been able to see and gotten briefings on, it's, for the most part, been put out."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2064130794973774042/amplify_video_thumb/2063015130917732352/img/1I_Up7yZ_LcHIuXv.jpg)
![Important: Who is Opposing the UAPDA? "It's staff! And it's like, who elected you? You were not elected!" ~Burlison "I cannot believe that I am sponsoring the language that Senator Schumer also is sponsoring." ~Burlison ~ Burlison: "We're trying to get UAP Disclosure Acts put on the National Defense Authorization Act. We are facing difficulties, and I mean, it's so frustrating, because it's not members [of Congress]. I don't, at least, if it is members, they're not coming to me and saying, 'Hey, I'm not allowing your amendment.' "It's staff! And it's like, who elected you? You were not elected!' I mean, for you to be able to deny an elected official whose...my job is to answer to the people, and you're gonna deny me the ability to get this amendment, at least even offered, is unacceptable. "And so, right now we're trying to get that made in order, so that when it comes to the floor, at least we get an opportunity to have a vote on the UAP Disclosure Act! And then you'll know who supports it and who doesn't. "But I've gotta get the Intelligence Committee to approve that. And, so any help, André Carson, would be greatly appreciated. If you could lean on our chairman and others, that would be fantastic, but we've gotta get it made in order. And if we get out of the House, I think that we're halfway there. "And then we'll...I think we've got allies in the Senate, whether it'. And I cannot believe that I am sponsoring the language that Senator Schumer also is sponsoring (laughter and applause). But what's right is right, and truth is truth. And we're all Americans, and that's why this is such a common-sense thing. And the only thing that's gonna stop it is these staffers who are killing things behind the scenes in the cover of darkness. And so, that's what we're facing right now, so your help getting vocal on this is probably the only way we're going to get it done."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2070162401438441510/amplify_video_thumb/2070159937926496257/img/xshHdJR5VTlgVc3C.jpg)
!["If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world." ~EB Did Burlison See a Craft at the Location He Visited? Umm, No. (Long one here with a transcript and my comments in ( ). Work today so I was a little limited with this stuff. Looking forward to the Davis interview tomorrow!) In 2025, Rep. Eric Burlison spent "almost the entire day" with the White House staff as they negotiated various aspects of the Big Beautiful Bill. While he was there, he requested help with the UFO topic because the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets kept getting blocked and struggled to get access to certain information and locations. So, he asked for a White House-level briefing, "the same briefing the President... If you're taking the request, that's my highest request." (He didn't say if he ever received that briefing.) Burlison: "Furthermore, I would like to be able to have a green light to go visit some of these locations. And the gentleman that I was asking kind of smirked. And I said, 'Is this comical to you? I mean, do you think that I'm not a serious person?'" (I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? 😀 ) Burlison: "He said, 'No.' he goes. 'I just want to go with you.' And so, it turns out he did. He was able to go with me. He had to follow the proper channels as well. And we visited the first of many sites, hopefully. I'm gonna be cautious in talking about that because I don't want to jeopardize the ability to go to the remaining locations, if you will. I truly think that, for them, this was a test of whether or not this would become a circus for them. And so, I think that I'm just treading cautiously before I release too much information about what I've learned and where I went." (I understand not giving out the location to avoid a "circus" of UFO people trying to visit, but I don't see why he can't tell us what he learned right now. Hopefully, when all the visits are done, he can share the details with us.) James Fox: "Congressman, when you say you went to visit the site, are you implying that the alleged site that could, potentially, be housing non-human technology? Is that kind of what one is alleging here?" Burlison: "Yeah. Or, once did house non-human technology, right? Now, from my insights from Grusch and others, they had...it was pretty obvious that that first site that we were going to did not have active material, but, potentially, could have in the past. So what was important was to see the facilities and the structures, and to try to ascertain for A), first and foremost, did those facilities exist? And then were they designed in such a way that would have been, you know, one could easily see that that could have been utilized for reverse engineering." (Saying that a location/facility could have been utilized for reverse engineering craft not made by humans is not enough to make the waves we need to force the tidal wave of Disclosure. We need for Burlison (or someone else) to be able to visit a facility that has a craft there now, and folks working on it who are willing to speak about their experiences there. I don't see that happening any time soon.) Leslie Kean: "May I ask If the people at the site were cooperative and helpful for you?" Burlison: "Yes." Leslie Kean: "Or were they resistant to having you visit?" Burlison: "No, they were very cooperative. What I kind of interpreted from this is that a lot of what's happening today is that you have things that have happened in the past, and the people today, you know, you're talking about personnel that have changed over many times. And so, a lot of times they're not aware of the history of some of the things that you're talking about because that's not something that they're working on, currently. But they certainly were extremely helpful." (They were either not aware of the history or, they were, and lied about it. Can't rule that out. And the fact that they were helpful/cooperative doesn't really mean much. If you want to avoid unwanted attention, you put your best face on. Or, maybe they really were ignorant and wanted to do their best to help Burlison and the other folks? No way to know.) Burlison: "I had specifically wanted to meet with a particular individual that works at that location, and I actually expected them to turn me down, but was surprised that they actually arranged a meeting in a SCIF with the person that I requested. So, I do think that they're being cooperative." (Hopefully, when all of these locations have been visited, we get to learn this person's name. Full transparency, right?) Burlison: "And now that the President has [posted on Truth Social about UFOs], I think it gives everyone all the way down the line an understanding that this is to be taken seriously and to follow through." (We shall see.) Burlison: "On the way back after the visit, the White House staffer and the other person that had made it happen both said to me that they loved doing this. This was one of the funnest things they've ever done in their job, and that these other future site locations are not at all gonna be a burden to them. If anything, they're excited and looking forward to it." (Are we going to learn who those people are? Transparency? If not, why not? We pay their salaries.) James Fox: "I had a really quick follow-up question, Congressman. If you did find what you're looking for, is there a particular protocol, or what's the directive if you find what you're looking for?" Burlison: "If I find what I'm looking for, I'm gonna be very careful to protect any kind of national-security interest. But at the same time, I've been very clear that it is not the right of this country to withhold basic, fundamental evidence that we may or may not be alone. And so, if we have any kind of evidence of that, we should be telling the world and not holding back. And give as many details as possible, and release...be as transparent as possible without jeopardizing our secrets and national security. Or secrets that pertain...that our national security is dependent upon." (For now, keep the method of propulsion (energy source) secret and away from our adversaries and tell us everything else!) Burlison: "Well, I'm just gonna speculate, okay? If we have a type of technology that we have reverse engineered, that gives us a strategic advantage that our adversaries have not? I think that, for example, letting the world know that we have this craft, here it is, here's a photo of it, but you don't have to tell the world how exactly the...what you've reverse engineered, or how that operates." (Photos aren't going to cut it. If they exist, we need to see these craft (and bodies?) in person, with our own eyes. Put them in the Smithsonian and let us see all of it. And allow independent scientists to do their own analysis so we can verify that it's non-human or anomalous.) Burlison: "In the same way that when the nuclear bomb first was invented and utilized, the world knew, we revealed to the world that we have this capability, but we certainly are not gonna tell people how to make one and the specifics behind that. So, I think that for me, that's how I would answer that question. If you were asking me, 'What would you be willing to protect as far as national security?' That would be the nature of it. "Now, I think if the technology that's derived has nothing to do with changing our threat dynamic with an adversary, and it might benefit society and the world, by all means, let's release it. Let's let the world scientific minds utilize anything that we might have discovered. And so, that's where I personally stand." (But we all that it's not going to be that simple. Most likely (if this is all legit), we'll have craft and bodies, and the tech from the craft can give us an advantage over our adversaries, while at the same time, potentially, be used to change and improve the world and human condition. So what do we do? Keep it secret? Tell the world and take our chances?) Burlison: "I don't know, I couldn't tell you what Hillary meant by that." (EB was referring to the recent interview/deposition about Epstein where Hillary Clinton said that she would release UFO files but they would be "subject to any national security implications" and it should be done so that "no national security information is disclosed." She didn't get specific.) Burlison: "If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world. If we, you know, if what Eric Davis said to me - and now that was not in a hearing in which he had been sworn in, and I'm not saying that he was telling me a falsehood - when he said that there are four alien species - and that kind of went viral - I mean, if we, if we do have evidence of that, I want the world to know. I don't see why that would be of national security interest to withhold that from the world." (Unless, the people who have seen the bodies say something like, "Their skin is something that can be used as armor and we can't allow our adversaries to learn about that. Just trying to think of reasons why the gatekeepers will tell us that information needs to be kept secret.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2030480027666747596/amplify_video_thumb/2030373285926694913/img/_-25iW0LmiKeRcjI.jpg)
![Whitney Webb "It sucks to find out that the mob runs the world... [so] do you want to say, screw you guys, we're going to... get off your... slave plantation?... [because] we can't really keep losing money and rights without being so deep in a hole that we can't... climb out" This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), a contributing editor of Unlimited Hangout and author of One Nation Under Blackmail, is taken from an interview with Peter McCormack (The Peter McCormack Show) posted to YouTube on September 4, 2025. -----------------Partial transcription of clip-------------- "It's not just about burning it down, it's about putting something better in its place. Of course. And so I think the solutions there, you know, some people are like, oh, Whitney, your work is so demoralizing. Well, I'm like, yeah, it sucks to find out that the mob runs the world, you know, but the question is, or do you just want to let them keep running it because it bums you out, or do you want to say, screw you guys, we're going to build something else and get off your, you know, slave plantation? "And I am in the group of, I would like to build something else. I have three kids. I do not want them living in a world run by the mob. So what are you going to do about it? I mean, it starts locally, it starts with your community, because that's where we can actually affect change. Voting for left or right, blue or red. I mean, it's just this ping pong thing where nothing fundamental is changing. "And so to affect that change, we have to do it ourselves. And you think this would be a core American value? Individualism, individual responsibility. But a lot of people just don't care. And so, you know, that sucks. But I think those of us that do care need, to take steps to be as independent from the system as possible. Because every so often, this predator class, they do wealth transfers or they orchestrate and manufacture events and they make a big grab, not just for our money, but for our rights. And we're at the point where we can't really keep losing money and rights without being so deep in a hole that we can't climb ourself out. Can't climb out. "So what, what should we do before that happens? There is an important window of time to do something about it in our local community and for our families and our friends and our neighbors. And we have to do something because if we don't and that thing happens. Oh, well, I watched all these podcasts and learned about how corrupt everything is. But, you know, and I think they spend a lot of time trying to keep us distracted on all sorts of things and sucked into things that don't matter. So that we just don't give them the finger, basically. And that's what we really need to do."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1964385906242343049/amplify_video_thumb/1964383325117960196/img/k88I5h6VHXiZJjv1.jpg)
![Charlie Kirk educates Bill Maher on Christianity: “There are so many fine-tuning aspects to our existence that I think defy the idea that this is all randomness and all chance.” Charlie Kirk: “Is there any part of the Bible that you think is true?” Bill Maher: *Laughs* “There are shards of it that are, I’m sure.” Charlie Kirk: “So Jesus was a real person?” Bill Maher: “Well, that we don’t know. That is not definitive.” “I don’t know how it could be that so many intelligent people could wall off a part of their mind and believe in something that part of their mind must know is not true.” Charlie Kirk: “I have the same struggle. I don’t know how someone as intelligent as you [can’t believe Jesus is the Son of the Living God].”](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1914124150261657706/amplify_video_thumb/1914122841118711808/img/Z4RFJSqN_l0ZU6vl.jpg)
![I added a lot to this transcript and I'm not happy right now.. A Non-Human Intelligence on this Planet? "We're not aware of anything along that line that's ever been hidden from Congress" ~Rounds "I really don't believe that that is necessarily what's happened here." ~Rounds "We haven't seen that yet. It's not something that any of us have been able to, that I've been able to identify. I'm not aware of any of it." ~Rounds ~ Ross Coulthart: "If it turns out that, for example, the United States has recovered, incredibly, non-human technology, perhaps even craft and bodies, biologics, as some people assert. If that's true, and that has not been properly disclosed to Congress, and yet, by all accounts, billions, perhaps trillions of dollars have been expended on such a program, do you see any reason why on national security grounds that ought not to be disclosed to the public? That's the key issue. I mean, are you guys gonna cave at the last minute and say, 'Well, if we do have a flying saucer in a cave, it should not be revealed to the public for national security reasons.' Can you see any reason why that wouldn't be allowed to be revealed?" (That is THE question. Like I said the other day, Ross asks good questions and this is the one I really wanted him to ask.) Rounds: "Well, there are two items here. You do have a hypothetical. We're not aware of anything along that line that's ever been hidden from Congress, directly that we're aware of." (Have any witnesses made that claim? If so, how many? Look at how different Marco Rubio responded during his interview with Joe Khalil. Rubio: "Either, what [Grusch] is saying is partially true or entirely true, or...we have some really smart, educated people with high clearances and very important positions in our government, who are crazy, and are leading us on a goose chase." ~Senator Marco Rubio Full interview transcript: (What does Rounds think about Grusch or the other folks Grusch says have gone to the IG and who allegedly have hands-on experience with these NHI craft? Has Rounds heard form them?) ~ Rounds: "Also, the second part of it is, is we don't know if there was something out there, was it actually disclosed to some members of Congress who have continued to keep it quiet based upon their concerns about the release? We don't know it." (In 2002, Admiral Wilson told Dr. Eric Davis that politicians were NOT on the list of folks who were read in, or given access, to the alleged crash retrieval program. If that has changed, and certain members of Congress HAVE been read in, that doesn't change the fact that THE WORLD DESERVES TO KNOW if we share this planet with another intelligence. Stop using the, "It might be our tech" excuse.) Rounds: "So it really is a series of hypotheticals that you're asking me." (We all know that. That's why Ross phrased the question like that.) Rounds: "But let me continue on, because I think really, if I could put it in a simpler way... Let's just say that there had been a meeting or a contact with something that we didn't believe was from this world. Whether, you know, from another country, or from our own resources. At that point, you know, I think there's gonna come a time here in which the American public and people from around the world are gonna look at it and say, 'You know, it really would be crazy for us to believe that we really were alone in the world, or in the Universe, and that there is no other intelligent life form out there." (If what we're dealing with are extraterrestrials from another planet, I agree that the masses could say, "No shit! Not a surprise!' But what if it's something that doesn't have a physical body? As George Knapp has asked : What if they can see us but we can't see them, and they can watch us when we're in the bathroom or taking a shower? How would people handle that? Or, if they're time travelers from our future, back here to save us from some sort of cataclysm? Would that cause panic? Or, even if they were "just" extraterrestrials. Would people be able to handle Reptilians who might find human meat a delicacy, or Mantid beings who look like giant bugs? As Christopher K. Mellon said in 2015: "John Podesta said publicly, the American people can handle the truth. My question would be…if you don’t know what the truth is, how do you know they can handle it? What if they’re flesh-eating arachnids or something? Doesn’t seem to make sense to me” ~Mellon ~ Rounds: "But it would be a matter of how you would disclose it correctly, and in what would be one of the greatest announcements in the history of mankind, that we are not alone." (Is it the job of politicians or governments to withhold information until they figure out the proper way to disclose it? What if the information is scary and could cause panic? Would any government have a right to withhold that information from the people? I say, hell no.) Rounds: "I really don't believe that that is necessarily what's happened here. But, we do know - and this is the part that is so sensitive to us - there are some things that we can't explain out there." (Seems like we're back to square one. Holy shit.) Rounds "And that's the reason why I really got involved in this in the first place, is, if we know that there are technologies there that appear to do things that physically, we're just not sure how it's getting done. Biggest concern I had was, is it ours? Or does it belong to somebody else on this earth, one of our adversaries? Or is it really something that is out of this world? But in any of those events, two of the three would be very serious if we disclosed it to the American public because it would mean national defense issues are being broached. And that would be, it would be one of our adversaries' capabilities, or one of our own capabilities." (In other words, it may appear to be a technology from a non-human intelligence but we have to make triple sure it's not from an adversary or our own tech!!! There's always that chance! OMG! It seems like that will always be the excuse for not disclosing.) Rounds: "The third alternative, which I wouldn't be afraid of seeing some day... (Some day? That sounds far away. When? 2040? 2050?) Rounds: "But it can't. It can't. We haven't seen that yet. It's not something that any of us have been able to, that I've been able to identify. I'm not aware of any of it. But I know that there are things that we don't know how to identify today. Does that help?" (We've known that for a long time.) Ross: "It does, sir, it does." (It doesn't really help.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1939860994362417670/amplify_video_thumb/1939849275040473088/img/qMDMdsC4F-7B-RSa.jpg)