John Greenewald  0:20  
You. That's right, everybody as always. Thank you so much for tuning in and making this your live stream of choice tonight. I know this is totally last minute. That's generally how it goes with me nowadays, so hopefully you guys can hear me okay, because anything can happen on these live streams. As you all know, last week, when I was taking my son to his soccer practice, I was kind of stuck in a parking lot. The way the fields are positions kind of hard to some sometimes get get close to where he's practicing with all the different teams. So I did a an x space in the parking lot and and it was, it was fun. We had a great time. We had a great conversation. And some people wrote me they were bummed that they missed it, and asked if I would do one again via video through YouTube, and kind of include those audiences, because I know not everybody uses x so here we are. His practice was moved now to Tuesday this week, and my wife actually took him. So I'm here. I'm home and thought, hey, I got an hour, hour and a half to spare. Why don't we just throw the camera on and see what happens? So that's exactly what we're gonna do. There's absolutely zero plan. So this could be a very short stream if nobody wants to participate and have any questions on there. But what I did want to do is at least update you guys on a few things on the black vault, so that way you know what's going on. Because again, I know that my video updates are lacking. I wish I had more time in the day, my normal day job away from the black vault has me absolutely buried. I'm very excited for that problem, simply because it's a business I started about eight years ago. For those who don't know, because I think a lot of people think I do the black vault full time, I don't. I run a company that actually sells headphones and earbuds to schools and museums and so on. So I sell them in mass quantities, so not really consumer stuff, but rather more B to B. And started about eight years ago, and it just kind of took off. I ignore my dog back there, but that's what I do. And so it's a great problem to have, but the downside is I can't hang out with you guys as much as I want, which is not fun, because I absolutely love doing this. So last week in the x space, had a blast. Had a lot of people join in, and everybody had great questions. Stayed respectful, which is always a plus, and we had a good time. So I thought I would do the same this week here on YouTube. So thank you all. I know that it is broadcasting also on x as well, but obviously today I'm going to be pulling a lot of YouTube questions. My screen here, as more people get involved, will probably go pretty, pretty quick, because it does pull in the comments from x, from YouTube, Facebook gave me an error, so I have no idea if that's actually working right now. Sadly, I don't really use Facebook much anymore. There's just problem after problem with them. But that being said, at least YouTube, at least x I will do my best to get as many questions as I can. What I first want to do is this is kind of created quite a bit of we'll call it conversation on social media. So what I want to do is share my screen here, and then that way you guys can can see a little bit of what I'm talking about. So bear with me here. This is for for those who haven't seen it, the black vault. This is the main page for the mysteries category. Obviously, this is one of the more popular sections of the website. This is the main page itself. So this is where you'll see the most updates and the most recent editions. Sometimes archives are updated, sometimes they are brand new. But either way, you'll see various documents. I'll update the date when new things are added. There were some new FBI files added to the JFK assassination site. So you'll definitely want to check that out. But this is the main site. I've been asked a lot to do kind of a run rundown of the website, so forgive me kind of giving like the overview there of what the homepage is. But it's a huge site, and it's absolutely massive, so maybe I will do more of an overview and tour of the website, because for those who aren't aware, it's now got over three point what am I at here? 3.4 million pages of documents throughout all sorts of categories. The thing that you want to pay attention. To the most are two things. One is this FOIA document category here is going to break down all the different main categories of the black vault, so you'll be able to kind of navigate that way. There is a lot of misconception that I don't deal with stuff outside of FOIA. Let me just go ahead and pull this up really fast so you guys can see it. This is a completely different section to the black vault that has 1000s and 1000s of pages that has nothing to do with FOIA, although I've integrated some documents in there. But rather, it's just a, what I call a case file archive, because I get a lot of UFO sightings, UFO reports. I can't investigate them all, so I don't vouch for them, but I try and see what people are submitting, and they're kind of looking for a crowdsource feedback, you know, putting it out there. And that's what I've kind of done here, is built a website that has a ton of cases all around and what I've also done is created a global map where you can actually go around and, like, literally see what type of case it is, click on it, and you can go ahead and see all the information. So it's a big misconception that if it doesn't come from FOIA, I don't deal with it, as you can see from this global map, you guys will stay busy for quite a while going through all these different case files, and there's a ton there, none of which, again, very few. I do integrate the FOIA stuff at times, so it'll go on the map, and then that way people can kind of coincide various areas and hotspots, if you will. But that is something that you might want to take a look at if you're not aware of it, because it really is kind of a very popular part of the site, but I don't advertise it at all on social media. So if you kind of depend on social media to get those updates, definitely check that out, because I very rarely post anything from there. So that said, one of the big things that created quite a bit of discussion in this last week is this file here on Philip Corso. Now you probably recognize the name if you've been around ufology quite a bit here the last couple decades, and even though he still talked about it's not quite as much. But in the late 90s, he came out with this book, co authored by Bill Burns of the UFO hunter show, and called The Day After Roswell. And essentially what Lieutenant Colonel Philip Corso was talking about was how the US government was reverse engineering alien technology that he had first hand knowledge of. This was essentially played a played a role in it, had a hand in it. And the technology itself was then farmed out to the private sector, and that led to various advancements in our technology. And obviously it created quite a bit of controversy at that time, but the book ended up on the New York Times bestseller list, and I had started the black vault in 96 so it's been quite a long time. This was like 98 or 99 whatever it was. So it was a couple years after I had started, and I remembered the hoopla that this kind of created in the UFO conversation, because this was like the David grush of the time. I mean, there's no other way to look at it. He was a higher ranking military officer. Obviously had connections. Part of his background did pan out. He was connected to quite a few different things, worked in various places in the intelligence community. So there were certain things that panned out with him that impressed a lot of people, yet the claims were obviously fairly astronomical. They were huge. And there wasn't, obviously, really anything to back it up, or our world would have changed in the late 90s, but it ended up on the bestseller list and and there you are. Here we are in 2024 and although Corso has passed away, people periodically still talk about this. But this is one of those individuals that, again, is very reminiscent of the David grush of today, where he talked about all this stuff in the late 90s, talking about reverse engineering, talking about bodies. I don't I don't remember the book verbatim off the top of my head, but I don't remember if he used Nhi, non, non human intelligence. But obviously, was talking about aliens. Obviously talking about the exact same thing, and that was what his book was all about. It is telling me, sorry, this is one of those live things that my connection is unstable. If you guys can tell me if it is breaking the connection at all, which is really bizarre, because I have a pretty high, high, high bandwidth here hardwired. So let me know in the chat if you can, if I'm breaking up, because that would be not so so much fun to listen to. So anyway, back to the Corso thing. So you know, again, not not a whole lot of evidence to back it all up. Thank you. CR, you are good. I

appreciate that. Sounds good. It All right, awesome. I won't worry about it. The software sometimes gives alerts when there shouldn't have to be so Corsos book. You know, it's not something that I preach about a lot, but what I did a few years back was requested Philip corso's FBI file. And as you know, that's another one of the sections on the black vault. I recently, in the last couple of months, created this page. This is, this is a massive archive in itself. This is the FBI collection. Yes, there's a paranormal section, but there's just an insane amount of files just in this section alone. So if you guys are interested in that kind of history, definitely check this out. But you see astronauts, authors, American military, civil rights leaders, that kind of thing. And you go in and it just breaks down people, groups, individuals, and you can just it goes on forever and ever. So you want some reading material, there you go. So I go after these FBI files because they're fascinating. To look at the insight that you get is very helpful when trying to unravel people's backgrounds, people's history. Were they really in places that they said they were? Were they being watched by the FBI? And you know, I'm sure a lot of you, since we're talking about paranormal, like the paranormal topic, when you go into that particular section, you'll see that there's actually a lot of people like George Adamski that had files, and they had them for various reasons. And so to go in there and kind of see that is very illuminating. And so I did that with Philip Corso. And the first time I did it, it said there was no records that it came back. Now this is a for any FOIA person out there. This is one of the the top tips that I can pass on to you if you request FBI files. When it comes to FBI files, you have, obviously, various files, but when it comes to individuals, you have two types of files, a main file or a main index file and a cross reference. Now the main index file is just that. It's a main file on somebody subject of an investigation, and they could have a file of 10 pages, 100 pages, 100,000 pages, I've seen all of the above. So that is a main file, but there's a second thing called cross references. And cross references are essentially, let's say, Corso, for example, if he comes up in other investigations, but he's not the main subject of an investigation, those files mentioned in corso are considered cross references. Now it took me years to realize that if you just do a request for all documents on Philip Corso, they'll kick it back. If the only thing that exists are cross references, they won't tell you that, and they'll say, oh, sorry, John, we've got no records on Philip Corso. A couple of years go by, and I had reason to believe, just through research and people I speak with and I pay attention, that there was likely a file and I had a file name that pertained to likely Philip Corso. And I was like, Well, wait a minute, I got a no records response. So I went back to my original request, I think was like 2007 was like 2017 and and, yes, it took me that long. I never researched Corso when he came out. I mean, I just, I didn't care for the claims. I It lacked a lot. So I just was not going to devote my life to like researching it. And I didn't. But after the years went by, you know, come around 2017 I realized, Hey, I've never requested his file. Why not? We'll give it a shot. No records. Two years go by, find the reference to the other file. I was like, Well, wait a minute, let's what's going on here. So I go back, and I didn't ask for cross references. Now for quite a few years now, that language has been in my FOIA request template. So make sure that's my tip to you guys, the fact that I didn't say, give me all cross references, including main index files, so on and so forth. They said, no records, when in reality, there was, let me see the page count here, over 300 pages that were pertaining to Philip Corso primarily. I mean these cross references. It's not like his name was on one page and that's it. These were, I would argue, not even cross references. But semantics aside, make sure you guys add that language, because I learned the hard way many, many years ago that all those requests, if you don't say it, could absolutely mess you up in the end. So when I filed back in 2019 I said, I have reason to believe there's a file I filed in 2017 please don't close this. Please process again, and I'm including all cross references. Five years go by and I finally get these, these files, and it was fascinating. And the reason why it was fascinating, I won't go into a deep dive here, but essentially it gives the background of Philip Corso as an intelligence officer and how he was feeding information to the FBI. And this information that was being fed to the FBI, go figure was not panning out, and the FBI. Bi was investigating all these various claims right down to Lee R Harvey Oswald being an FBI informant, which then kind of tipped off the FBI. They were hearing that this Philip Corso guy, in addition to all the other information that he was feeding all around, was starting to spread these rumors that the FBI had Lee Harvey Oswald essentially on the payroll. And so the FBI gets involved, and you can actually download the transcript when Corso was interviewed about this specific topic. And again, this isn't it. I mean, you can see there's a long history of him feeding these stories, and it started upsetting the FBI, because they were just like that. None of this is really panning out. Corso was making accusations about politicians at the time. And it was, you know, quite tedious for the FBI to be dealing with the Corso claims, and in one particular part here, again, away from the Lee Harvey Oswald stuff, because that didn't pan out. And the FBI was like, Look, we don't know what to do with this anymore, that one agency that says another government agency has characterized Corso as a quote, Parasite who has never produced any intelligence through his own efforts, but has profited from information developed by dedicated government agents and investigators. So it was a really interesting look at how the government viewed Corso, but also how Corso was kind of taking these stories and making them much bigger. There was another one here about a defector that he had leaked information to the media but embellished the story, and these files go into that so not to again go into a deep dive, because there's a lot of of information in these files. It's a very interesting look into who, who and what Corso was. And some reacted very interestingly about this. You know, there's, there's certain voices out there that even recently, late in 2023 a couple well known investigators, you probably have recognized, the names of Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp kind of brought up Corso again and put the the notice out there. Hey, let's get a fresh look. Because they obviously, I think, believe them. I don't want to speak for them, but that was kind of the gist that I got from their from their show that they did, and they took footage that George had done with Colonel Corso, Lieutenant Colonel Corso, and put that out there as well. And and that's one of the things I love, like, despite me not believing really in all of this. You know, George Knapp has a ton of of that kind of stuff. He started this site called mystery wire. I wish they continued it, but they were digging up some of that archival footage. And you know what, regardless of what you believe is the truth of the matter, it's very interesting to see these types of videos. So those names are out there talking about Corso, but I published these files, and of course, it's crickets from them, not wanting to really deal with this. So it was interesting to see those who didn't react at all, like they just don't even touch it, while others feel like, well, the government is out to discredit this guy, UFOs, is hot, so they're going to take a jab at Colonel Corso. It's like, well, why 25 plus years later, after his book is long off the New York Times bestseller list, that all these documents come out? So it was, it was an interesting thing for me to kind of sit back after I published the article and see that reaction from everybody looking at the files and going, Oh, well, it's the government, so they're clearly making this up and attacking Corso. And it's like, Well, if that's true, why would you wait that long? And on top of all that, I had to fight to get these files. And by fight, I mean they like lied. They didn't lie. They were just sadly so by the book, when they could have gotten these files out in 2017 if not even well earlier. So the conspiracies about this doesn't make sense. But of course, people just kind of run with it. So if you're interested in that, read the article, at the very least, because I did kind of deep dive into the files themselves and pulled out some of the more interesting stuff. This was another one. Actually, Corso was talking about a weapon that he saw. This was yet another lead that he was sending to the FBI. And they just, they just didn't know what to do at that point, what to do with it, but the but the files span decades, and you can see that connection with Corso, so definitely worth a look. So let me go back to my other screen here, where the comments are posted. I am going to again do my best here with the either super chats, if any I don't see a window here, they usually get get logged on a separate screen. No big deal. I will do my best on the chats, because there's over 700 of you watching right now. So my screen goes pretty quick with the YouTube and Twitter comments. So let me just go back here and figure out

where some. Of these questions are Archangel reads questions fiber optic and alien tech, as per Philip Corso, that is, again, one of the claims of Corso. Yes. Do I believe that? No. And just speaking in more generality here, because there's been these claims over the decades for a long time, and Corso obviously is just one of many that have come out and talked about these things. And that's why I don't get as excited as others do when people like David grush come out and they had these stories and and they're saying these things. Yes, it's fascinating. Yes, it's interesting. Yes, he's got an amazing intelligence background, and yes, he seems incredibly reputable, but, that's nothing new, and that's what's interesting about seeing these Corso files, is because how many people has Corso and his book and his claims? How many people has he persuaded to believe him? And I don't know if grush was ever, you know, into the Corso thing, read his book or whatever. But obviously these stories have been around, and they're very similar, so you can't help but think that one definitely kind of helped feed the other, and then it just kind of keeps getting passed down and passed down. How many of of grush is sources, the 40 people that he interviewed, how many of them were potentially influenced by someone like Corso? Maybe none. Okay, so I want to put that out there before I get hate mail. It's possibly none. But in the same respect, it might be a lot, because when you get a UFO related book on The New York Times bestseller that's saying something that that that's that's a pretty big deal. So this book went around and was mentioned for years and years and years on various documentaries and so on. And although it's died off in the past, however many it still was very popular, and people still talk about it. So yes, that is one of his claims, one of many. And more generally speaking, I always get frustrated with these types of claims, because, number one, there's nothing to back it up. But number two, I think we, we kind of take away, we take away what humans have achieved over over the decades and over the centuries. You know, I think that we're, we're taking away what we have done as the human race and how we evolve. And not to sound cheesy about it, but it's like we have to give ourselves credit. I mean, we have this evolution of our intelligence that we've seen. We've gone leaps and bounds in the last 120 years. And I don't think just because we can't explain that, that we Yank away the credit to humanity and just go, it's got to be aliens. You know that they fed us this through either contact or an accidental crash, and so we reverse engineered it. I just that's so hard. That's a hard one for me to swallow, and, and, and I think that that's primarily just because I've got a family background in aerospace and aviation, of those that were directly involved in the evolution of that my grandfather, who I never knew, but worked set because, sadly, he passed away when my dad was late teens. I think it was early 20s, but, but he had worked on advanced rocketry that essentially went to the to the development into the Saturn five rocket and took us to the moon. So I have that personal connection where my, you know, my family history is, is involved in that. My My father worked on the space shuttle and and through his decades there at Rocketdyne, you know, definitely they advance their technology through human innovation. So it's not to repeat myself, just very hard pill for me to swallow, because sadly, I don't think we as the human race are getting enough credit. If aliens and extraterrestrials helped us somewhere cool, and I think that that would be great. I'd love to see it. But let's, let's get somebody to come out and whistle blow with some kind of of evidence. There was, yet again, another video clip that surfaced today, tying right back to Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp, teasing what sounds like a documentary and how they have a piece of material that's going to make waves. They kind of had like this makes make a splash, type of wording to it, essentially alluding that it may be from a UA, a UAS, you know, an underwater craft of some kind. I don't know if that's really what they were alluding to. But it sounded like it. Regardless, they end it with, we can't talk about it. We really want to, or George said he really wanted to. And I'm bringing this up just because it gets so frustrating that so many people have these stories and they don't want to tell you, and they can't, because of TV and. And it's like, come on, if you've got something, come out with it. Spill it. It's time. We're all ready. Because nobody wants another book. You know, that's a tell all. They want the actual evidence. They want the actual proof. And sadly, we just don't have it. We have these carrots being dangled and and it goes for years on end. So I think humans, we need, we need more credit for the technology that we have created. Outcast, Jeff, John, were you in an episode of UFO files as a policeman? Yes, I was. I've heard rumors that it's replaying. It was quite a few years ago. I was officer Val Johnson, actually, and and the story, I don't know. I may have told this on a live stream, so forgive me if you guys have heard this before, but I'll make it quick. It was an episode of UFO files. I was a producer and writer on that. We had created quite a few of those episodes, from concept to delivery. I was very proud to do that in my television career, where I, you know, created these episodes, pitched them, they sold, and we would go and do these one hour documentaries, and one of them was on trace evidence, and the now the late Ted Phillips. I had known Ted, Ted Phillips for years and years and years, and I was so excited to be able to work him into a documentary in a show, and this was before the not to age myself, because I'm cringing even explaining it like this, but it was when reality TV was really kind of budding. It wasn't popular at the time. Dog the Bounty Hunter was kind of that pioneer series through the A and E networks that really kind of paved the way for reality TV, but at this time, it was when History Channel was actually still history, and we were doing these one hour documentaries. So what I did was I kind of blended the two. I blended the traditional nonfiction documentary style programming with some reality spin, which was taking Ted Phillips to see the car that Val Johnson was driving. I think it was in the 70s. He was a police officer, and going down saw UFO. It hit his car, created damage on the hood and on the on the roof above his head while he was in the cab, and it was a pretty amazing story. And so the reason why this was in a trace evidence episode was that the car actually still existed decades and decades later, they had saved it and put it in a museum. So we had flown Ted Phillips, and of all the investigations that he had done over his ufological career, if you want to call it that, he had never seen Val Johnson's car, but he loved this case. In his own words, I believe on this show, he said it, it was one of his, like, top and most favorite cases, but he had never seen it. So we put him on a plane, and we flew him to, I think it was so Warren, Michigan, Minnesota. Gosh, I don't remember exactly where it is. You guys will probably be able to google it faster, and I can think about it. But regardless, we, we, we flew him out there and went to the museum. And what you see on camera, if, if you have seen the episode, is actually Ted seeing the car for the first time. So this kind of changed, because it became a pretty powerful moment. He got to meet the current sheriff, who happened to be on the force when Val Johnson was there. So it was a cool coincidence. Well, we wanted to recreate in the car because they allowed us to do it the Val Johnson case. We were doing these recreations. Well, we weren't planning that. We didn't think we'd be able to sit in the car, and these guys were so accommodating. So I needed to get an actor, and there was no way we could do that on the fly. So I was like, Well, okay, throw me in there and and I'll do it, because the the director couldn't do it. Obviously, our camera crew, they all had to operate. The sheriff, age wise was, sadly, he didn't fit, and the deputy refused. But the cool thing was, the deputy at the time, their uniforms were the exact same that they used in the 70s. And this guy was so cool, he stripped down and allowed me to wear his uniform, and that was costuming, and so we did the whole recreation in that. So sorry for the backstory, but it's one of my, my favorite ones from television. And Jeff, yes, that was me on there. And from what I understand, they also a and e is clipped that recreation we did, and they use it and other documentaries and stuff, which are not really supposed to do, but they do it nonetheless. And and, yeah, so you'll see me, see me in there, but the original was UFO files, and that was the case of Al Johnson, alright. So back to questions here.

Archangel reads again, Ted. Phillips was a genius. Yes, he absolutely was. One of the coolest parts of that show was actually going into where Ted worked in his office, and seeing all of his files and samples and so on and so forth. That was so cool. We got to shoot in there as well. And you know, for those who aren't aware, sadly, he did pass away, but such an amazing guy, I had loved being not only friends with him, but just able to talk to him through the years, and he had such a such a love for the evidence part, which you could see why he and I got along well, because he went out and he was all about that trace evidence. He wanted to go out and find that physical trace evidence so people would have a story. Yeah, that's all great. Was there something left on the ground? Can we test the dirt? Can we collect samples here, there, anywhere, and and that's what he would what he would do. And that was his. That was his focus. So, yeah, very, very cool guy to know and get acquainted with the work of grant Levac, one of my favorite people down under. Hi John, following on from Kirkpatrick, recent interview with Brian Keating and your reporting to date. Why do you think exemption b7 is being applied time and time again. EG, arrow, case file report. Great question. Just for those who aren't aware, here's kind of the backstory. I posted a clip. I'm not going to play it here, because I don't want people are always trying to attack me for various reasons. So I don't want a copyright strike, although Brian Keating has never done that, but I never want to stream somebody else's interview, but x, there's a little bit more flexibility to show clips like that. So go to my page on x, and it's as of the recording of this in the last day. And it was an interview that Dr Brian Keating did with Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, the former head of arrow. And I tried to get an interview with Dr Kirkpatrick, and it was a very respectful conversation, short nonetheless, but respectful. And he turned it down. He didn't want to do an interview, which is fine. I fully respect that. He essentially just kind of wanted to back away after the select few interviews he had done. Well, he never stopped doing them. He's doing these various interviews, most recent here in the last week with Dr Brian Keating, well, I follow what he says because he obviously was intimately involved with arrow. He was the director of it, and I have struggled to get information and documents and videos and photos from arrows investigations. And in this interview, this clip, Dr Brian Keating posted this clip of Kirkpatrick explaining that the classification issue is what is kind of holding the public back from seeing more that it's all because it's classified. And he talks about the, you know, technology, sensors, whatever. It's been a kind of an age old excuse that has been around now for, you know, probably a couple of years, and that is that it's, it's not UAP that's classified. It's the sensors and technology that takes the picture of the UAP or the video of the UAP, or whatever particular reading and data that's collected that's classified, well, that's BS, if you ask me, and that's easily provable. It's easily provable because those same sensors, like Reaper drones, etc, are one example off the top of my head is the the Russian jet that poured fuel, you know, sprayed fuel over one of our jets. And within like, 24 hours, the DoD had this video reviewed, declassified, and out to the world. Everybody can see it. And it's a beautiful shot of this Russian jet coming in, spraying fuel all over our drone in midair and taking off. And it was a big, you know, serious incident. You don't do stuff like that. And that video is fine to show from a top secret classified platform like the Reaper drone. And yet, that's no problem. But when it comes to UAP, it's like, Oh no, this technology. It's very secretive. That doesn't make sense to me whatsoever. So Kirkpatrick is obviously explaining this in his own way. But what he fails to bring up is a new tactic that surfaced last year, of them hiding UAP information under FOIA, exemption b7 now exemption b7 is essentially the, what we call the law enforcement exemption, something that could hurt a law enforcement investigation, something that could harm it in some way. Different subsections of b7 it could be law enforcement techniques so how they go out and and. Investigate certain things again for law enforcement reasons. Again, it goes a little bit more in depth, but that's the nutshell of what b7 is. So that introduced a very interesting tactic for them, meaning the DOD to hide UAP information. Because what I was doing was I was appealing, and in my opinion, making up a valid legal argument to win that this material can be sanitized, ie blurred, you know, if there's data on screen or coordinates or something like that, then blur it. I mean, they've been doing that since the Iraq War. So, you know, just get it out there and be done with it. So I felt I was making a valid argument. So all of a sudden, in one of my appeals, I had never seen this before, the original denial was for it being classified. When I appealed, I lost the appeal, but then they then they brought up another exemption. So it was like if I litigated, I then had to litigate, not only b1 which is the National Security exemption, but then I had to prove to the courts that b7 didn't apply, which was never in the original response. That may sound confusing, but the bottom line is this, I believe that I should have won that appeal. They know that I should have won that appeal, so they said, Okay, push back, deny it anyway, but introduce this as well. And then that was and b7 is a very tough thing to fight through appeal or litigation and and so what that essentially opens up for them is now the material doesn't even have to be considered classified. Now, it just has to be about UAP. And then I come along and request this information, and they go, well, sorry, we can't release that because of FOIA exemption. B7 yet again, more Bs, and it's near impossible to fight. And so Kirkpatrick, in this interview, completely omits all of that I know firsthand that he was likely involved in that decision, or knows very well about that decision. One of the two, it was done while he was there. He was done while he was the director. And I know that the arrow office, those that are involved in that are involved in the processing of these FOIA requests and the denial thereof. Some of the stuff that was locked out because of FOIA exemption. B7 was the testimony given by Robert Salas of the 1960s Malmstrom, instant incident, nothing classified about that wasn't in a skiff. Yet they exempted the entire thing. We know that there's a UFO organization called UFO X, and UFO x at that time, was communicating, by their own admission, posted it publicly. They had communicated with arrow. Well, look, anybody who says that they've communicated with a government agency like that, and it interests me, I am right there to find it, because then it becomes FOIA able, and even though you know you're sending it from a Gmail account or whatever, that that will be responsive to a point that'll be responsive to a FOIA request. So I go after that kind of stuff. I even have Bigelow Aerospace emails through FOIA when they communicated with the FAA. I bring that up because a lot of people don't believe me that you can get that stuff. You can you just know how to you just have to know how to do it and and that is, again, FOIA able. So I went after that the UFO X communications completely exempted under b7 so when I had written this original article, the Pentagon, of course, you know, was shunning me, and they didn't want to talk to me about it at all. So I have sent double digit numbers of follow ups to try and figure this out, and sadly, they will not give me an answer. And what I've been pushing on is what law enforcement investigation is this tied to? And they can't tell you. They won't even say that. We can't tell you. They just ignore it. So I have tried to get that for quite some time now, and sadly, it it's just falling on deaf ears. And Susan golf, who's the one that fields the UAP related questions,

I'm being essentially stonewalled. She finally, I actually haven't posted this yet. She finally responded after I tweeted out not to post exed out. I still don't even know I posted on x, which, again, is where I'm kind of most active. To see some of these updates that it had been like 14 or 15 months since I first started hounding them and double digit responses, double digit follow ups with very few responses. Miraculously, I followed up yet again, and then she responded, and then she says, Oh, can I have the FOIA cases that yielded this b7 like, well, you should have that from my 14 month ago. A question, but I gave it to her again, and I got a thanks, and that's it. I got ghosted again, and that was about, what, a week ago or so week and a half. So it's utterly ridiculous. And the fact that Kirkpatrick is doing this media round to go back to you grant and your question, for me, it's ridiculous. He's not. He's a private citizen at this point, I know that he works at a government lab, but essentially, when it comes to, like the Pentagon and stuff, he's he's doing these interviews as a private citizen, they're not official. There's nothing under oath. There's nothing official. There's nothing anything when it comes to to the Pentagon. So kirkpatrick's out there just blurting all this stuff. And I have a problem with that, just simply, because it's clear he's giving the wrong impression, and that interview convinced me of that he's giving the wrong impression to the general public about what Arrow did and why we don't see more UAP material. But it is absolutely false, and it's misleading, and it's 100% misleading because he has omitted the fact that they are not covering up everything because of classification. Sure that that plays a role, and we can drill down in that. And I'll bring up my appeal argument, which I believe is valid. But away from the classification, there's this whole other excuse and tactic that they are now doing that that, in my opinion, doesn't hold legal, legal weight whatsoever. But they will not say what law enforcement investigation arrow is not a law enforcement agency. I understand if, let's say a UAP incident occurred over, let's say a nuclear installation, which was criminal activity, trespassing, whatever, and they turn that over to the FBI. Absolutely, 100% I hate exemptions, but that is a valid b7 exemption, because if they were investigating who flew the drone, what were they doing so on and so forth, that is something that is legit. However, that is not what's going on with these exemptions and denials, and I can't get them to explain it to me. There have been a lot of rumors. Oh, there's, you know, the ICIG investigation, the DoD IG investigation. It's a massive investigation. Sadly, the hill, an op ed writer for the hill, has really, sadly, done an injustice with these types of rumors that are not based on anything. If he was able, and the hill was able to go out and get the Pentagon to say on the record, yes, these are exempted because of a law enforcement investigation tied to ICIG or whomever cool, that's awesome, but there are, there's nothing that backs any of that up. So it's just rumor and conjecture at this point, and they won't, they won't explain it, and it's just an absolute, very frustrating moment, which is, which is a shame, so we'll see what Kirkpatrick continues to say. I wish that he agreed to the interview I had respected that he didn't want to do anymore, and yet, here he is on his media tour. I'm waiting for the press release about his book, because I'm sure that is probably not too far around the corner. I don't have a problem with people writing books, but I think it's pretty clear that he has now been bit by this bug, that he may like the cameras. Sorry. I mean that that happens to people. It's, it's, it's not a jab against him, but it's clear that he likes this. It's clear that that he wants to keep doing it. He's not getting paid, as far as I know, to do these interviews. Nothing, as I said, is official. So what's going on? No need to shout the DR flay. I'm sorry. I don't know if my mic is too hot. Let me know I didn't see any complaints. But I'm also Italian, so I speak with my arms a lot, and I I yell. So sorry about that. I'll try and keep it low. Don't mess with the dog. I know he's he's back there. I could see him on my on my camera in there. All right, here. How's the Air Force Office Special Investigation been involved with UFOs, to your knowledge? Thank you for everything you do. Outlaw persona. You're You're very welcome. So thank you for that. How have they been involved? Well, I can tell you just more modern involvement would be the investigation into the leak of the FLIR gimbal and go fast videos. A lot of people don't talk about that. They want to say that it was officially declassified and released by the US government. All of that story that you read in 2017 and 2018 all of those claims in the podcast about them officially being released, that was 100% bunk. There is more than enough evidence to prove that afosi was the one that essentially, they're the investigative arm of the DOD. So when something like that happens, afosi kind of takes over, even though it's not a specific Air Force issue. They do kind of the investigations for those types of issues with the DOD, at least that's what I. Led to believe at that time, when I learned about the investigation, I do have those documents. You can get them. You can clearly see that the investigation went to to Luis Elizondo, his involvement, even though his name was redacted, it was obviously him. His name was on the paperwork to have a DD Form 1910 review. So you can kind of piece that together, that nothing happened, that they kind of it wasn't like a malicious leak, and plus, on top of that, it wasn't classified. Still requires a review, but those videos were considered unclassified. So when push came to shove, they originally thought that one of them could potentially be secret. It turned out that it wasn't, and so they didn't, they didn't do any type of penalty or repercussion or anything like that on Luis Elizondo or anybody involved. But it was clear that number one, there was never in an intention with the paperwork that Luis Elizondo filed to have those documents, or, excuse me, those videos, to the media. But the second revelation was, if the reviewer from the US Navy was made aware that the intention was to go to the media, the request would have been denied, and it would have went back to dotser, and they would have told dobster, no, that that's not what this is for. Originally, they were just going to use it internally for keeping track of drone incidents, not my wording, that that's actually Luis Elizondo that he was going to create an internal database of UAS encounters, not UAP, but UAS unmanned aerial systems, and that's what they were going to keep track of in my interview with Luis Elizondo directly, I mentioned this last week on the x space, he told me that he had no intention for those videos to come out. I was really floored by that, by that revelation from the interview. He said he didn't really even know TTSA had them, which is kind of mind boggling to me, and that he essentially learned in December, when we all did, when the New York Times published them, that to me, was completely out of left field. And you see my reaction, I generally have a handle when I do interviews and stuff, what somebody is going to say, just because I try and have background and be prepared so I can do follow up questions and so on. And that one floored me, because I was under the impression that he orchestrated it, filed the DD Form 1910 took it to TTSA. They, in turn, put it to the New York Times, and the rest is history. But according to him, No, and he even at one point said he would have advised against TTSA publishing them. Go figure. It just really kind of boggled my mind. But that is one modern connection to UAP from the afosi going backwards. Obviously, there's a lot of history there with like Richard Doty and some of the stuff he had done. I'm not as versed on that to sit here, so I don't, I don't want to go too much on a diatribe on that, just simply because I don't, I don't know the details. There's so many rumors when it comes to Richard Doty and so many accusations, some of which may be valid, others may be completely made up. I can be the first to tell you, the internet is ugly when it comes to rumors. I'm in no way defending him, or anyone for that matter, when it comes to that but rather speaking broadly, I just don't want to get into the rumor mill by maybe passing on something that isn't necessarily true. But I would invite you to listen to him when it comes to Richard Doty, because he appears in X spaces periodically. He pops in and talks about, I believe, you know, afosi issues and stuff like that. So, you know, that's a couple things to to look at. Did any of oh so dried dried mangoes. Love mangoes. Question, did any of Lieutenant Colonel Corso early claims ever prove true based on later FOIA, for example, I think Lee Harvey Oswald was indeed a paid FBI informant, as proven with official document release.

Yeah, there is a little bit of more of a backstory. But to the root with the Lee Harvey Oswald thing. I'll have to look back again, just because it's been a while since those documents have come out. I don't recall him being on the payroll of that. I believe that there was more of a CIA connection versus FBI, but don't quote me on that. It's been a couple years since those documents dropped, I've got them all on the black vault, as you saw on the screen I flashed earlier, but I don't recall if it was ever 100% determined when it comes to course, those claims being validated by FOIA when it comes to is more obviously astronomical claims the. No, I mean, there's, there's nothing there to authenticate that, but when you look into Corsos background, he obviously was, was in higher up positions. He obviously worked at various places that would give him access to highly classified information. So again, that's why I kind of reminisced it with, juxtaposed it with like David grush, where you have a highly cleared person who's worked at various positions, high up through various agencies, that's going to know a lot. So that stuff, yeah, will pan out to some extent with Corso. But that doesn't necessarily prove the bigger claims. And I think that history shows us that even though 123, or four. Things may may prove true about somebody's background. It doesn't mean that 6789, will be true as well. You got to research them independently. I'll give you a prime example, Boyd Bushman, who was a former Lockheed, you know, engineer, highly cleared, same deal. Whistleblower comes out talks about alien bodies. I know David Sarita, who, I think did a documentary or quite a few different video interviews with him. He was big on Boyd Bushman years ago, but when you look at Boyd bushman's claims, they kind of fall apart. The photo that he had of an alleged alien matched that of a toy that was being sold at Kmart at that time, and the whole thing was just rather hokey. And that's another example of me going after an FBI file on Bushman, and it came up and Bushman was under investigation for potentially selling secrets and having meetings that were catching the attention of the FBI. So it's a very interesting, yet again, backstory about somebody where you hear these Alien UFO claims, and then you look at some of their background and their history. And it doesn't always seem kosher. Why? For me, that is, that is an interesting thing is you always look for motive, if somebody's going out there with a story to try and make the government look bad. Yes, there's absolutely a possibility it's true, right? So that's number one, but number two, there's also a big possibility that they're lying. So what's the motivation? You know, what is, and that's what I look for a lot, is what motivates some of these individuals to have these stories, to have these claims and so on. And with Bushman, if he was angry, you know, that could have been motivation. I meaning Bushman, I'm angry that I was investigated for potentially, you know, selling secrets or whatever backstory there. Because if the FBI file exists, there's an even bigger story. You know, the FBI file is not everything, so there was probably a much bigger story. So is that motivation to just go out with a bang and make accusations against that very entity that you have become disgusted with that? That is a possibility, and that's why these types of files are always interesting. A lot of those that want to believe people like Bushman, Corso grush, regardless of what you think about them, if those individuals want to believe when contradicting information comes out, they immediately side with conspiracy. And the FBI is making all this stuff up. They're fabricating documents. I've been told that I'm on the government payroll. I mean, I'd love an extra paycheck. I ain't gonna lie, I could use it. You know, I've got two kids, so I would love to have an extra paycheck so these can but I don't. So these conspiracies are easier for people to believe, and that allows them to then accept that Corso was a storyteller, but it's like, well, the FBI just completely made all that up, the stuff about aliens and fiber optics and them taking this alien technology and feeding it into the private sector to help explode our tech industry. That's all true. It's like, well, no, it doesn't really work that way. I mean, you have to look at this from a logical, common sense point of view. So with with going deeper into the FOIA documents. Though I know that FOIA, we was utilized in parts for The Day After Roswell, but it's been decades since I've I've looked at that book. So I'm not going to pretend to tell you about specific documents when it comes to Corso, but I'm just talking about his bigger claims and what is lacking when it comes to that, and that, to me, is the more interesting part. I'm not going to dispute he was highly cleared and in various positions, but that doesn't that doesn't make everything else true. All right, so let's get back to some questions here. I'm probably way behind. Yeah, about 20 minutes behind. So forgive me, everybody. Um, Tommy, thank you for calling this out, regardless of our differences. You do good work with FOIA. I appreciate that. Tommy, yeah, and when it comes to differences, I don't, I don't mind differences with people. Somebody just said this the other day on social. Social media that they were not going to support me through Patreon anymore. And you know, I'm I'm not here to be in an echo chamber. I'm here to have dialog with people. I love learning from you guys. I love doing these types of streams, answering questions. I don't mind at all tough questions or disagreements, but in the same respect, you know, I can't do it just to get subscribers to Patreon. I don't do this to to make money. I try and get some offset of costs for supporting the black vault. It does get very expensive. I'm up to four different dedicated servers to just house the documents and the bandwidth and so on. So I look to try and offset that cost, but the but the money that comes in actually doesn't cover it. It's not I front the rest, so I don't take a paycheck and so on. Why I bring that up is it was kind of illuminating to kind of see somebody's reaction that that they want to support me because they want to hear certain things, but they don't want to hear other things, and they got mad that I pointed out about Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp meeting with Dave Navarro backstage at a concert, which is great. I mean, that's cool. That's her personal life. But Dave Navarro posted on Instagram, if you guys missed this, that he was essentially told, you know, secret information that he couldn't talk about. And then he gave a date in 2026 that something big was going to happen. And it was an exact date. And it's like, okay, you know, this is, this is the problem here. It's secret clubs of secrets and things that we can't tell you about, and so on. And I highlighted that, and the guy got mad and said, I'm unsubscribing and and so on. It's like, well, that kind of stuff has to be called out. And even if you disagree with me, that's okay. I'm I have no problem with that, but that's what this is all about, is not having an echo chamber. There's too many out there for me. I just, I just love the dialog, and love again, learning, but also helping where I can as well, and offering two cents when I can, if it's even worth that. But I love hearing two cents as well from others, and even if they don't agree. So I appreciate it, Tommy, thank you. It's good to see you, Grant. I know that I'm a little behind here, but you are very welcome as well. I appreciate your question. If you're not following grant. Definitely do so on, on X just search for his name there. I think his handle is his whole name, but I'm just going by memory there. Grant, I'm sorry I don't have your handle up top, but definitely look up grant. He does great work. He utilizes us FOIA, also Australia's Freedom of Information Act. So he does some great stuff. Steve, Hi, John. Did you ever file a FOIA, about the Nim, a logo crest that included a UFO, but was removed from the nim. A website. What's the status of that? FOIA, yes, I did. Sadly, it's still open. I'm going to pull it up here just so I can see when I file. But yes, I did file that. See if I can. Yeah, so that was filed back in 2022 and it is still open, so we'll see. But yeah, I was always curious about that, on how that happened. I mean, that's just kind of a big oopsy moment for for them to create a logo with a UFO in it. And to be honest with you, you look at all the imagery from various military branches and squads and stuff like that, there's a lot of occult imagery, you know, all seeing eye pyramids, stuff that's like, oh, wow, that's really conspiracy driven, but it just kind of is what it is. And I never really read into that. A lot others do. But for me, it wasn't even that big of a deal. It was the fact that they removed it and went, whoops, that was a big mistake. We never meant to do that. That was actually more intriguing. It's like, I would think you would just let it go. I mean, they were directly involved with UFO research. It was blasted on the UAP report and on the cover page that nime was part of the authorship of it. So it's like, well, what's the big deal? There's no really big deal for me, the big deal became the fact that they removed it. So, yeah, I'll, I'll write it down to to look at the case status and see if, if they'll give me a date or estimate. But, yeah, it's been open since 2022

sadly. Alright, let me see here. Encounters down under podcast. Has there been any insight, slash outcome from the research into soldiers who claim to have been affected by types of radiation from Close Encounters of crafts? I can tell you just right off the top of my head, because I've spoken to him many times. John Burroughs and the Rendlesham incident, there's, there's a big backstory there. A lot of people talk about the encounter itself, but I know that there was some medical issues and stuff with John. Another example, one of those things. I don't want to just start shooting from the hip and get something wrong, so I would look in. To John Burroughs that has one that has always stuck out to me as is having a direct medical effect from an encounter of some kind. Doesn't mean it was alien, but an encounter of some kind that he had an issue. So, yeah, I would, I would look into him. I know that there's other reports that, you know, kit green had had written the dirt that he did for the OS app contract through dia that talked about UAP encounter. So you may want to look at that one. I know that there was some controversy, though, with some of the sources that they used, the footnotes were like National Enquirer, literally. So when you use that as your you know, your your sources, and your, your kind of referencing back to National Inquirer, that that's not the greatest either, and I think it tied into a MUFON report, which is how that all kind of tied together. So take that as you will. It was just a little bizarre, but I know that he did quite a few of those investigations as well. So you might want to look at that. Me read this out loud. Hi John. Hi Polly rogerman. Hi John CBN 72 Abraham Lincoln, 1995 multiple tic tac incident. I don't seem to find info on it, but one of the but one of the witnesses, why? Well, Polly, off the top of my head, that's that's kind of nude to me, but that doesn't mean much. My brain could just be fried. It's going to be something obvious when I get off the live stream, but I will write this down and see what I can find out for you again, because that doesn't, that doesn't sound familiar to me, but again, could absolutely be be wrong. So I'm sorry I don't have more than that, but you piqued my interest with the reference. So I'll see what I can find out. Tom V first, thank you for the support. Assuming all alien counters have been faked, which event would you consider to be the best orchestrated? I lean towards Zimbabwe aerial school, but I'm new to this. That's a hard that's a hard one to speculate on, assuming that they're all fake. I I don't believe that that all alleged alien encounters are fake. Are they misunderstood, misidentified? You know that kind of stuff, possibly, is there a medical explanation, psychological explanation for other types of cases? Yes, I will not go into great detail, but I think I brought this up before, but here's a prime example of what I mean by that, of of sadly underage kids. We were doing a television show. We didn't know what we were getting ourselves into, and wound up at a house where kids were talking about aliens, but there was likely something else going on, and we had referred it was completely cut from the show. I refused to use any of it, and kind of referred to more psychologists, and I don't know what happened, but hopefully law enforcement got involved. So I don't want to go into great detail there, but my whole point is is, I'm not saying that that's true for a lot of them, but there are so many different possibilities for various aspects of these encounters. I don't think that all of them have been faked. I think that there are a variety, a wide variety of explanations for for these types of encounters and experiences, and some of which may be, I don't know. I'm not 100% believer on the abduction angle, but I'm open to it. I'd like to see more. I was always intrigued by the work of Dr Roger Lear. Roger and I had hosted a radio show together way back in the day before live streaming was popular and and he and I were at a small radio network in in Southern California, and we go to the studio every week. Had a lot of fun, but his work always intrigued me. It was why I did, you know, wanted to do the show with them. Although we did a lot of interviews and stuff, we got to talk a lot and got to know each other a lot better. He was actually one of the first ones that gave me an opportunity to speak at a MUFON group back when I was, I think I was 18 at the time, or 17 was my first lecture for a MUFON group. So that's how he and I met, but we did this radio show because I was so intrigued by his research, where he was taking these physical objects of some kind out of people, most of which would have these alien experiences that they would talk about. And it's like, Well, okay, an experience and talking about is one thing, but when you actually have something physical, that, to me, is something else. And they were finding some some interesting things through the years. Sadly, Dr Lear passed away, and I haven't really heard much about any of that type of research. I know Darryl Sims has been around for a little bit and and still talks about it, but it just kind of like died, and that always, that always intrigued me. Also, it's like, Well, where did. And where did his research go? Number one, because he took out, like, if I remember correctly, maybe 13 implants, or somewhere around there, and would do these surgeries and these things existed somewhere. But fast forward story, it was like, then, all of a sudden, didn't really hear about it anymore. And then that was it. Now we have, you know, whistleblower stuff. So it's like, Well, what happened to that? I mean, was it explainable? Great. I don't recall someone coming out and going, okay, you know, this is what all of these implants were. Sure there were skeptical responses to it, but I don't know. I mean, it was just one of those intriguing things that's just kind of fall into the wayside. I know some people got more into the UAP material that, like Tom DeLonge and TTSA tried to acquire, and that's cool, too. But what happened to those, you know, alleged implants? I don't have an answer for you. I wish, I wish I knew dead minds podcast, John, how many FOIA requests have you done that involved the USO phenomenon? I am curious to know more about reports involving underwater craft and sonar reports of such sightings, and your thought on it. I have done some. I did some to NOAA. I've done some to the Navy. Nothing really panned out. I think, if I remember correctly, I some of the USO stuff. Yeah, this navy one came up. No records, no records, no records. Yeah, a lot of them are just closed to absolutely nothing panning out, but they've talked about it publicly. So I'm I've got a couple requests still open. The problem is arrows denying everything. So if, if there are uso cases and they they went to arrow, they're exempt right now, so I can't get a hold of them anyway, which is a shame. But these go back, like the earliest uso one that I have in this particular database where I track everything was in 2009 and sadly, again, nothing, nothing came up in these 2014 I did some 2009 again, 2016 the Navy database in 2016 one of the databases I hit trying to find stuff that also came up negative. So, yeah, I mean, sadly, it's just you try and try and dig in, and when it comes to uso specific cases, sadly, there's just just not a whole lot there. Simon G farmer, I would really like some advice on doing my first FOIA with NASA on the UAP conference. Lead. Daniel Evans, but they have a bunch of different departments. Well, Simon, I can tell you that that is something that probably sounds a lot harder than it will be for you. I don't know exactly what you're looking for when it comes to the conference, whether it be handout material, emails about it, reports, visuals that were shown. I'm not really sure, but essentially how NASA works? Because, yes, there are quite a bit of components. If you're unsure where to go, you go to headquarters of any agency. Their their job is to then funnel it down to the component that has the responsive records. When you cite Dr Daniel Evans, they will know exactly where to go. Some are going to be processed through NASA HQ, while others will go to, you know, Goddard or Johnson or wherever in the respective Space Center components or whomever has control of the records. At quick glance at what you're going for, it'll probably be through HQ. So just, just file. Just go for it. Don't overthink it. That's that's my, one of my big tips as well. I

did some in the beginning here, but with FOIA, you know, don't overthink it. If you're ever in doubt, you essentially go to the main office for whatever agency that you're requesting from. In your case, NASA, and each one has essentially a main FOIA office. And they that's their job. They field 100% unless you know specifically it's a Goddard Space specific request, or or Kennedy, or wherever, you can file direct to there. But the safest is to just go to HQ, and then they will take it from there. You can always save a little bit of time by going to one of the components direct when you can, because not all agencies allow you to do that. But in this case, just file with NASA HQ, and they'll take it from there. Tanya the boss, NASA, is great with FOIA. I don't know if is great with FOIA and whatever government agency ever go together. But look, I don't have a huge problem with NASA. I think there, there's a lot of nice people over there, but sadly, they take a while, and and quite a few agencies take a while, so it gets frustrating, but I do separate the people from the agency most of the time, most not. All most of the time the FOIA people are great. It just takes a god awful amount of time to get some of the answers. I just passed, for those who may have missed it, broke my record that I never thought I would break. Of now more than 15 years for a FOIA. So this case is still open. So every day that passes, I break this record again and again and again. And it's over 15 years now. Previously it was 1514, and a half. This one is 15. So that's insane. The agency is the DOD. Specifically, it's called OSD, slash js, or Office of the Secretary of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff. They're the ones that field the quote, unquote Pentagon type requests, the DoD requests, and then they will either farm it out to one of the DoD components or the military branch if you sent it there, but should have sent it to the Navy or the Air Force, whatever. So that's, that's one of those kind of, quote, unquote, HQ Type places. But over 15 years, if you can believe it, so I've often looked back and went, Wow, I was a hell of a lot younger when I filed these things. And there will come a day, unless this is fixed miraculously, when it comes to FOIA processing times, I hope it's long in the future, but there will be a day that I will file a request and really start to ponder if I will be dead by the time that they actually process it and come out with it. Hope that is never true, but I will likely file until the day I die, because I love this. All right, so going through here, sorry, sorry, I know these live shows get tedious when I'm looking for the questions, hides and long graphs. John, do you know the names of the UFO programs between blue book and offs app slash a tip. Well, not necessarily program names. More so efforts to investigate UAP, the big one would be Air Force instruction, 10, 206, this was a Air Force specific document that required pilots to report UFOs, and it said unidentified flying objects. It didn't have any other acronym, but UFOs and this was something that was active and updated frequently through the late 90s and early to mid 2000s and UFOs never came out. So it wasn't a program name, but rather an effort to ensure that they were looking into these types of cases and investigating them. I've I definitely have told this story a couple times on this channel, so I won't go through it again. But the gist is, is that they go to NORAD per this instruction, and NORAD said we got nothing, and I was able to get hundreds of them through the Canadian government, because NORAD is is subject to both Canada and US control, so FOIA actually doesn't apply to NORAD, but I was able to get a answer from them through one of their FOIA equivalent regulations. So that being said, that was kind of not a dead end, but it was a huge revelation that they were covering up their effort, not necessarily program name, but effort to investigate UAP. And it's unclear how many through this time that they investigated. So that is, that is one thing that was in between the blue book era and ASAP, a tip, given that they're, if you want to call them UFO programs, I struggle giving them that label, but that's a different show. So that is one thing. The DIA the NSA, the CIA, they all had documents as well, not connected to programs, but rather keeping intelligence files on UFO cases. So you definitely have that throughout various intelligence agencies and and and even military branches of them looking at these files, not under a program umbrella, but they were that they were looking into it. That Air Force instruction, by the way, disappeared when the Huffington Post was highlighting some of my documents and doing a story on the black vault. They literally took the entire chapter out, rewrote it, republished the document, then called the Huffington Post back it was only a couple days after their phone call looking for information. So point there is that they will go to great lengths to cover up their UFO interest prior to the whole, you know, ASAP, a tip, post, era of Aoi, MSG, UAP, TF, LMNOP, whatever acronym you want to throw in there for their UFO investigation programs. Prior to that, they were going to great lengths to cover it up, and that was a prime, prime example. So yeah, when it comes to UFO specific program names. I would say no, but it was again those those efforts were absolutely there. Rick Robson, is there some FOIA release documents related to direct energy weapons, to UFO, harmful radiation reports, not, I hate to just say no, but with what you're looking for, I don't think that there is not any that are in the public realm anyway, not like that. Has arrow seen stuff like that. I would venture to guess maybe that it ties into the direct energy weapon kind of stuff, Havana syndrome. I've tried to get documents. So this is away from UFOs, but more specific to the Havana syndrome stuff is that a direct energy weapon, the DIA has heavily redacted the intelligence files that they have on the on the Havana syndrome, so it is really encroaching into classified territory when you get into those direct energy weapons and what intelligence they have on it, connecting to UFO, that adds an extra layer of difficulty to try and find out. Jimmy sikowski, hopefully I have that right. Jimmy John, do you think arrow has seen this 23 minute video Elizondo speaks of in his upcoming book imminent. Here's the problem with with rumors like that, they're rumors until they're not. So at this point, it's just a rumor. If this was a this is how secrecy works. And I believe that Mr. Elizondo will agree with me, if he were sitting here. He may not like my point, but I'm hoping, with his background, that he can see. What my point is with his intelligence background and his clearance, if you have a classified product of something that is classified, you can't go out and talk about it even in general terms, because the mere existence of certain things are classified in nature. They just are. That's just how it works. I use the self program example, when stealth was not acknowledged, if you had knowledge of it or worked on it and you were a cleared individual, you couldn't go out and just because you're not showing blueprints. But talk about stealth capabilities, or talk about

anything, when it came to it, can't do that. That's just not how it works. It's classified. It's so so by spilling the beans on that, you know you're encroaching into classified territory. If this 23 minute video exists, Mr. Elizondo has said that, number one, it exists. Number two, it's 23 minutes. Number three, it's UAP. Number four, it's, I think he said this was the triangle coming out of the water thing. So you are now describing one of two things, an unclassified product, so let's get it released right. Shouldn't be hard, or it's classified, and if it's classified, you shouldn't really be able to talk about it. That's my opinion. Now let's just say, if I'm mistaken, I will be I'm fine with that, I've offered 1000 times for people to prove me wrong on the whole classified in nature thing and so on, because I use the same type of analogies with David grush's claims about him doing, you know, hours and hours long of podcasts and interviews, but it's all tied to like, a select few pages, and that's it, that he got approved from doppser, but won't show them. There's a lot of issues that I have with that, but a lot of it comes from this classified background where, if you have something that is classified, even though you're not showing the blueprints or showing the photo of it, you can't just go around describing it and talking about the technology, or if, let's say, alien bodies are a highly classified thing within the halls of the US military and government, you just can't go out and talk about it. And if doppser knows this but approves it essentially, then a portion of it becomes declassified. It's just the way it is. That's how secrecy works. So even though then they couldn't release everything on alien bodies, they've now acknowledged that they exist. So then you have documents that will likely say the exact same thing, which then can be released, maybe not in full. They'll still be classified aspects of it. But again, that's that's how secrecy and classification works. The minute you see that little, that little pinhole of light, you start digging and digging and digging, and I've done that through FOIA 1000 times over, and you get results because you start chiseling away at that classification. But with this kind of stuff, there's never anything to go along with it. So again, I go back to it's one of two things, either it's unclassified, so let's get it or it's classified. So what makes you think that you can talk about it the third that not many people really want to put out there, and I'm hesitant to do it, but it's just made up. That's a possibility also. Now that's not to say Mr. Elizondo is making it up, but maybe he heard from someone else. I don't know. I. If he wants to go on the record and says that he saw this classified product of 23 minutes, and it's of UAP, of a black triangle or whatever coming out of the water, and he puts all those details out there, I want to know from him. Why are you able to talk about that? And again, if it's unclassified or declassified, the existence of it, great. Then. Then let's file a request and get it denied. So let's get one of those. We found the video, but it's classified, top secret, so we can't release it. Yes, I have responses like that. So they do do that, if you adequately describe something, but then they kick it back and say it's classified, that's still evidence that to me, then will prove that a 23 minute classified product exists. Then we can go from there. But until we have that, we just have these rumors. And that's what's very frustrating about these types of things, because, again, you have to just take it apart, drill down into the claim use common sense and logic and dissect it. That's what you have to do in this 23 minute video. For me, it has become more of a legend than reality. I hope I am proven wrong one day, but it is, to me, it's just an internet rumor and until somebody finally comes out with either it or it leaks, or whatever. Then, then that'll change my stance on it. But we've heard about this now for a couple of years, and it's I go back to that classification thing. Nobody asks those questions. I've never seen him ask that, but I hope somebody does. I hope I get the opportunity, because if he can prove me wrong, I am so happy to be proven wrong on that, because that then opens the door that this is real, that it is okay for him to talk about it, and the government hopefully will admit that it's there. And then again, we can just kind of go from from that point there. It's a step process. You'll you'll kind of notice that with me when, when I go through these things, because so many people want to go from here to here in one giant leap, and I don't do that. I take it one step at a time. You have to, you have to connect all the dots, and you need every piece of the puzzle to get the picture. If you go from here to here and you you just skip over everything because you can't get it, or you make up the middle. That's problematic. This 23 minute video is like that made up middle. It just it doesn't exist, but, but so many people latch on to it as proof of something, and that's where it becomes harmful to the conversation. So it's, it's, it's a legend, and that's that, sadly, that's all it is, right now, I hope that I am wrong, and I hope we some someday either see it or see sometimes of some type of glimpse that it's there. Goob, have you sorry my earpiece keeps falling out here? Have you ever foyed The Smithsonian for anything? Well, I have my database here. I think I have it. It is literally, it is a handful of times they they do honor FOIA, but they have kind of a different way that they process requests. So if you are looking into doing that, definitely look to see how they process it, because it is different than the federal FOIA. But they do have those records accession laws. I've done nothing of note. I've got some some logs and stuff like that, but nothing fun and exciting. So, yes, I foiled them, but nothing thrilling. Let me see. Flicks flux, I don't want to say that five times fast. Flix flux, do you know the names of service members? They come up over and over in regards to your requests. Is there a correlation of service members that you find interesting, or pattern like, Well, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that. If you mean like the the military members that that process the requests. I'm not sure if you if you're referring to that, if you are, it's not uncommon for some of my requests to go when it comes to the military request to hire ranking individuals, because I will be getting into classified documents, so they have to be cleared to read and review. So sometimes I do get letters from that. I think that's what you mean, but I I can't see any correlation between anything like that. No, there are some people that have worked in these FOIA offices, literally, for, like, decades that I've just come to know, and they know me, and they know what I do. And it's years and years. Other agencies have big turnaround where they've got new people all the time. You know, other times in the military, that's like, what their assignment duty is. So they don't even want to be there. They're not civilian. They're just like, they're they're stationed there. They get put on FOIA duty. You can tell when they hate they like they hate it. So you'll talk to somebody on the phone, maybe have a question about a case, and you just tell by their voice they just don't want to deal with humans. They don't care about you. They just want to get done with their job and move on, while others are very, very helpful, depending upon the agency. So, yeah, I mean, there's real, no correlation, though. Let me see here, going through cicada 3301 resonate is likely a CIA Easter egg hunt. I think I have documents on that, by the way. Yeah, you'll have to look on on the black vault. I Yeah, the NSA released stuff. So I do have stuff on cicada 3301 so definitely search. Use the search engine. You'll be able to find some stuff there. Might you might you might find of interest. Let me see here. Jimmy, cheers for your answer. John, appreciate your reply anytime. Jimmy, sometimes I wonder if I actually help or answer the questions that are asked. So hopefully it helped. I think I'm caught back up the grumpy C I S, O, what interaction have you had with Nick Pope? I've known Nick for years. I like Nick. I consider him a friend. I look with anybody in this field. It's not like we all agree on everything. So I'm not going to sit here and say I vouch and wholeheartedly agree with every person that I know personally, I don't, but when it comes to Nick, I got no complaints. I know there's always controversy about people. I despite me being entrenched in controversy, sometimes

I don't like it, like I just, I just enjoy speaking with people and learning and it's not always all about agreeing, and I think at the end of the day, we can all still be friends. Sadly, not everybody got that memo, and there's just a war going on with some people. But regardless, yeah, what interaction I've known Nick for years. I've interviewed him on various not only my show here, but various television programs that I've produced. And yeah, no, no complaints, if you were looking for those. In fact, I very much like Nick, and personally, very much get along with him. He may hate me for all I know. I don't sometimes I don't really know, but when it comes to me, I really like Nick. Yeah, Nick is legit. He's a top bloke. Smiley face. Beard or die. You're a stand up guy. John, a real patriot. And I appreciate you. Well, I appreciate you. Thank you so much for those kind words. And I think that that may be a stopping point. Oh, I just saw another one pop up, and I want to take this one. Do you think Mick West helps or hurts ufology from disclosure TV. I think that's this is a great question, and undoubtedly he helps it full stop. I have zero problems with Mick West involved in the conversation. Anybody who follows me on social media knows that I will sometimes go back and forth with Mick. We clearly have very different views on certain things, and I very much disagree with some of his stance on certain issues, yet there are other things where Mick is invaluable and is able to show through demonstration, his points, and I've also seen him admit When he's wrong and correct things. And I admire that. So despite my disagreement on however many issues we disagree on, I think he's important to this conversation, because somebody taught me years ago. I think it was on Reddit of all places, and it was the expression was essentially the truth is not going to be hurt by anything you throw at it. You can throw whatever you want at it over and over and over, and the truth's not going to get hurt. And I think that that was that so resonated with me, because it was like, yeah, why are people so offended by asking a question or by saying, Hey, you may think that this is an alien spaceship, but here's the technical capability of XYZ, and do a demonstration. If it disproves a story, why not? What like? Why not? If it doesn't disprove it doesn't that just help if Mick West put all of his time and energy into doing these experiments and was not able to adequately explain something, and his own admission, there has been times where he's done these experiments and they didn't quite produce the result he was looking for. But regardless, doesn't that just help and does nothing but help. And if he's wrong, even if he doesn't admit it, it's not going to hurt the truth. It's not going to hurt somebody's experience if they truly believe that they experience something. Mick West saying something should not hurt that person at all. I mean, they may get their feelings hurt for a second, but if they're strong in their beliefs, what's the big deal? For me, the people that push back against not only Mick, I'm speaking more broadly now, people like Steven Greenstreet, who Same deal. I mean, look, he says some some stuff that that Sure. Makes me cringe. Sometimes it's a little bit too pointed, but in the same respect, he's also doing his work in his way and the way that he knows how, and he's asking certain questions, and people hate that, the heat that I get for asking certain questions, people hate that. For me, it's more telling about the people who are so offended by that. It's more telling about them than it is about any of us that are asking important questions that need to be asked. And I think that it shows a weakness in belief when you get so angry at somebody trying to find answers in their own way, if somebody's rude or condescending. Sure that's something else that's lame. I don't I don't support that, but what I'm talking about are those that are actually trying to find answers. Everybody has their own respective ways. There's absolutely no reason that we should be pushing back on that. We can disagree. We can even ignore it. And here's a revelation, we can block it if we really, if we just are so put off by it, just turn it off. And that's it. Block the account, ignore it. You can, you can do that. But some of these people that have created this like online jihad against people that are quote, unquote skeptics and debunkers, it's awful, like some of these circles have gone into threats of physical violence against me. Personally, people have been banned from x for threats of physical violence. I've had to in the past. It's been a while, but, but, but report to to law enforcement about threats I've had my, you know, pictures of my house sent to me. So those types of things. Why? Like, what? Why are you so insecure that you have to start threatening people so it gets out of whack to your question about Mick, or anybody that is a skeptic, it's fine to me, doesn't bother me at all, and it only helps. And even though there's disagreement, I can disagree with it and still think it's helpful dialog. There are people like Mick, even, that I've conversed with, where we come from, opposite viewpoints, and at the end of the day, I'm happy with it. I've learned something. I learned somebody's point of view. Sometimes he may have a good point, but it challenges me and my beliefs. You know, there's certain things that I say that, that I think skeptics and debunkers are going to adamantly disagree with, but by Me conversing with them, not attacking, but talking with them. All it's doing, all it's doing is either strengthening my belief or making me questioning make me question it in a healthy way, and that's me personally. I'm not saying that's the right answer for everyone else, but that's what I do, and that's why I think that people like Mick are helpful and they don't bother me at all. It is the people that are rude, that are threatening, that are obsessive, that becomes a different category for me, those that that are so adamant that they are right and you are wrong, and they will get to an obsessive point that that's problematic. But I don't see that with with a lot of people, and if I do, then that's where I, you know, enjoy my block list, because I really don't care to converse with you. But if you have that healthy dialog, even if you sometimes get snarky, which I do as well. That's fine, whatever, but there's a line, and once you cross that line, that's where it becomes unhelpful. But if you don't cross that line, it all helps. I really believe that. So with that look, I appreciate it was almost 2000 of you watching right now through what looks like only YouTube and x so sadly, Facebook, I think, got spit out of this. So sorry all you Facebookers out there, but always have a blast talking with you guys really, really do appreciate it. I'm sorry that I don't do these more often. I want to, so hopefully there will be one day when I can, but until then, I do enjoy our time together. Thank you very, very much. As always, please subscribe and like the channel in the video. If you're listening on the audio version, I'll go ahead and drop this to an audio podcast. I'm always looking for honest reviews. It helps me out in the search engines and so on. It's also motivating to try and get in here a little bit more and record more for you guys, because always love your feedback on there. I aim for five stars in the audio here on YouTube. Please feel free to thumbs up the video. Share it if you're on X please pass the word that is the biggest help that you can give. As I said earlier, if you do decide to use the super chats or whatever, please know 100% 100 goes right back into the website. I don't take a paycheck. I don't go buy myself dinner. It does go right back into the website and supporting the three and a half million pages online that anybody can download for free. I do aim to keep the black vault free. I will never charge for it. It's a promise I made now an insane number of years ago when I started it in 96 and will plan to do. That if I ever choose to charge for it, I will shut it down, because there's no way I will will charge people to learn. So that said, if you do decide, please know that's where it goes to is the support of the site. Thank you very much. Really do appreciate it, and we'll see you next time. Thanks again. You.