Somewhere in the Skies - John Greenewald: The Black Vault, AATIP, and Behavioral Modification

Episode Date: December 10, 2018

On episode 86 of SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES, Ryan is joined by John Greenewald, the creator and moderator of The Black Vault. The Black Vault is the largest privately run online repository of declassified government documents anywhere in the world. With more than 2 Million pages of documents to read, on nearly every government secret imaginable, The Black Vault is known worldwide for getting down to the truth... and nothing but. Every document in its archive was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act Begun in 1996, at the age of 15, John Greenewald, Jr., began hammering the U.S. Government with FOIA requests to obtain information. The Black Vault is the result of that near two-decade effort. And today, we talk about how it all began, the most important documents he came across pertaining to UFOs, and then we do a deep dive into AATIP, the supposed Secret Pentagon UFO Program, and the critical observations John has come across in relation to the head of the program, Luis Elizondo. We wrap things up talking about a stunning amount of never-before-seen documents pertaining to the CIA's involvement in a Behavioral Modification program that involved mind control and other MK ULTRA-like experiments. Guest Bio: In 1996, John Greenewald, Jr. began researching the secret inner workings of the U.S. Government at the young age of fifteen. He targeted such groups as the CIA, FBI, Pentagon, Air Force, Army, Navy, NSA, DIA, and countless others. Greenewald utilized the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to gain access to thousands of records. He accumulated an astonishing number of documents on topics related to UFOs, the JFK Assassination, chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, and top secret aircraft. Over two million pages later, and the Black Vault website was created.Greenewald has been featured on television networks such as The History Channel, Discovery Channel, The Learning Channel, A&E, FOX, NBC, along with international networks such as the BBC (UK) and NTV (Russia) and many others. At the age of twenty-one, Greenewald published his first book Beyond UFO Secrecy in 2002. His book has recently been put into a second expanded edition, and was re-published by Galde Press in January, 2008. Website: TheBlackVault.com For the month of December, 50% of book sales, merchandise sales, and patreon subscriptions will be donated to The Women's Refugee Commission. Please consider supporting the show and helping this wonderful organization. Learn more, CLICK HERE Patreon: www.patreon.com/somewhereskies Website: www.somewhereintheskies.com YouTube Channel: CLICK HERE Official Store: CLICK HERE Order Ryan's Book by CLICKING HERE Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Instagram: @SomewhereSkiesPod Opening and Closing Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES is produced by Third Kind Productions, in association with eOne Entertainment SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES is sponsored by HelloFresh. To receive 50% off your first order, use promo code:... Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/somewhere-in-the-skies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Season's greetings everyone. I'm Ryan Sprague, the host of the Somewhere in the Skies podcast. And at this time of the year, I have a tradition to give to an organization that I firmly believe in. And that is the Women's Refugee Commission. The Women's Refugee Commission improves the lives and protects the rights of women, children, and youth displaced by conflict and crisis. They research their needs, identify solutions, and advocate for programs and policies to destroy. strengthen the resilience and drive change in humanitarian practice. There are currently more than 66 million persons forcibly displaced worldwide. So let's help make change this holiday season. For the entire month of December, 50% of new Patreon subscriptions, book sales, and sales of any somewhere in the sky's merchandise will be given to the Women's Refugee Commission. I'm so excited to have increased both the percentage and opportunities to help this amazing organization.

And by supporting the show, you will too. So head on over to Patreon and become a member at patreon.com slash somewhere skies. Buy the Somewhere in the Sky's book on Amazon. Just search for it by title or by name, Ryan Sprague. All Summer in the Sky's merch is available at tpublic.com. That's T-E-E-E-Public.com. And search for the Summer in the Sky's store. Thank you for helping.

And I'm wishing all of you a very happy holiday season and a bright new year. And now on with the show. Today on the show, we journey deep into the black vault with John Greenwald. The fact that Mr. Elizondo was out there and he's talking about this and it's open, that to me shows that this is a very, it's a real program. I have no doubt about that. But it's a very probably not so secretive program that some people want to believe. the secret UFO study or the Pentagon's secret UFO study that obviously hit the media, I think at this point is largely embellished.

This is Somewhere in the Skies with Ryan Sprague. Welcome to Somewhere in the Skies. I'm your host, Ryan Sprague. When I was first starting out as a young UFO researcher, I did what every naive researcher does. I basically wrote a broad letter to the White House, saying, Dear Government, please give me all your information you have on UFOs. Little did I know, getting information about UFOs from any type of officialdom

was much, much harder than I anticipated. And that's when I stumbled across the Black Vault. It completely changed the game for me. With more than 2 million pages of documents to read on nearly every government secret imaginable, The Black Vault is known worldwide for getting down to the truth and nothing but. Every document in its archive was obtained through the FOIA, or the Freedom of Information Act. Begun in 1996 at the age of 15, John Greenwald began hammering the U.S. government, with FOIA requests to obtain information.

The Black Vault is the result of that nearly two-decade effort. Today, we talk about what documents are most important. warning pertaining to UFOs, the rise and possible fall of ATIP and to the Stars Academy, and then Greenwald shares explosive news about a batch of documents he recently obtained in regards to behavioral modification and MK Ultra-like experiments undertaken by the CIA. I hope you enjoy. John, thank you so much for finally joining me on Somewhere in the Skies. Oh, it's my pleasure, man.

I'm excited to be here. Great. I've been waiting so long to do this. I've been a huge fan of your work for many years now. I've listened to countless interviews you've done, seen you on TV, and you are doing something in this field of quote unquote euphology and beyond that very few people are willing to do. And that's to dig deep into the documents that we have on these things. Sort of the only things we can put in front of people and say, look, these are facts. You can't really argue this. So I'm really excited to dive deep into that tonight with you. Yeah, same here. By all means, fire away. Any question you got. I love documents real quick, based on what you said. I love documents just simply because they, I've always said the documents don't lie. Even though they could contain a lie, what I mean by that is you don't need to take my word for what I say. I can slap the document in front of you and there's actual proof about, you know, this story or that story or this claim or that claim. Whether

or not, you know, there's lies within the lines. That's something else. But that's why I love documents because you just can't refute them being so official. That is a really, really good point. And for someone like me, I actually come from the other extreme. I rely solely on witness testimony, the people having these experiences. And, you know, that's kind of my ephology. And when people ask me, they're like, well, where's the data? Where's the evidence? And I tell them, that's not my thing. That's not what I do in this field. That's not my contribution. I like to interview people and get their testimony. And no, I can't back it up. I can't prove it. But sometimes that witness testimony is all we have to rely on to at least start to investigate and research something. So when you have

someone like me on one end of the spectrum and someone like you on the other, all we can hope for is that we meet somewhere in the middle. So I think that's what's beautiful about this field. Sometimes We both know that there's a lot of ugliness as well. That's right. But yeah, finding that common ground is important. So that's why I really wanted to bring you on today because there's some documents and not documents that I want to get into with you in a little while here.

But before we even get to that, I do want to ask you, you recently on your show, The Black Vault Radio, you had Jeremy Corbella, the filmmaker. I did. Yes. I recently interviewed Corbell as well right before, like you did, the film premiered, the Bob Lazar, Area 51 in Flying Saucers film. I did have the pleasure of attending the LA premiere here a couple nights ago.

And, dude, I mean, 1600 people showed up for this thing for a UFO documentary. Yeah, it was amazing to see those photos. I sadly am within driving distance. I just wasn't, you know, with kids, everything becomes a little bit more difficult with planning. I mean, you need to like have a six-month, you know, head start of planning and babysitter. So sadly, I didn't get to go. But I was excited to see the pictures and that you attended. And it must have been amazing to see that many people and Bob Lazar and George Knapp all on stage answering questions.

That must have been very, very cool. It was cool. And I will admit, I mean, there was a Q&A after with Bob, George and Jeremy. And it got a little heated, as it should. I mean, this story is extremely controversial. So that being said, you did see. the film. I have to ask you, man. It's out there in the public now, whether Jeremy likes it or not, the praise, the hate, somewhere between. What do you think of the film? Where do you personally stand

on the whole bizarre story? And maybe even, what did this film do for you, if anything? Well, let me first say this. I am friends with Jeremy. I have a lot of respect for him. As you know, I work in television as well and have made a lot of documentaries and work for History Channel, Discovery Channel, and I have a lot of respect for those who make programs and produce, because it's a lot of work, you know, I may not ultimately agree with the message by the end of the, you know, hour and a half or two hour, but I have a lot of respect for that. He's also very good at what he does. He has a great storytelling sense, and I complimented him when I did the interview with him, and I meant this, and I'll say it again now, he's got a knack for really

getting into the human element to these stories, which I'm sure just knowing. you resonates with you as well because there's people behind these stories and a lot of times you trash those people. We don't know if Bob Lazar is making this up or if he's just outright lying or if it really happened to him or if it didn't happen but he truly believes it. There's a lot of different possibilities here. But the point that I'm trying to make is Jeremy has this great ability to get into the human element to these stories. He did it with Skinwalker, showed, you know, the people around that ranch. He did it with this one.

So I have a lot of respect there. Now to your question, you know, the Bob Lazar story, I've been around this field since 1996, not to age myself, but I was 15 years old when I started. And the Bob Lazar story, it was something that I had heard about in the early days and have seen a lot of the research that has been done. I brought it up with Jeremy, and I think there are important questions that my buddy Stanton Friedman has brought up. and the research that he initially did.

I know Jeremy felt that there was a very negative attack by Stanton against Bob. And you know what? I don't speak for Stanton. Maybe there was. I'm not really sure. But at the end of the day, some of those questions are still kind of unanswered, and they're important ones. I think Jeremy hits some of them in the film,

like the telephone book question mark, which kind of helps support that he worked at Los Alamos. but did he? I mean, could he have appeared in that telephone book being a contractor with somebody that worked with Los Alamos? That is actually a possibility. So not necessarily working for the lab, but potentially a company that worked as a contractor or something like that. You know, there's a lot of different explanations. So, you know, was the film good? Absolutely. Was it worth seeing? Absolutely. Is it very cool to see Bob Lazard, no matter what you think of his story in 2018? Yeah, absolutely. But at the end of the day, for me anyway, I still have,

questions and you know I told Jeremy uh because I did bring up some of the skepticism and you know as as a as a filmmaker I didn't want to just blow his whole documentary and just say well Jeremy the kicker of your film was uh you know because that's just not not fair so I wanted to respect that in the interview but I put the invitation out there and he is excited to come back after people have had an opportunity to see the film and tackle some of those other questions some new questions that arose after that, that documentary, but also some ones that have been, you know, they've been kind of lasting for about 25, 30 years. And they still kind of remain unanswered. So, and I think Jeremy would agree with that. I, again, don't mean that negatively.

But I think that there are a lot of things that we need to deal with to really get to the point of believing the story behind Bob Lazar. Exactly. And, you know, I sort of feel the same way. I left the film feeling the same way I did about the story beforehand, and that's no slight against Jeremy whatsoever. It's such a contentious story to begin with. What really resonated with me, like you said, is that human element. Seeing Bob, understanding Bob, in hearing his own words, this story, you know, for someone like, let's say my girlfriend who went with me to this premiere, she knew nothing about the story. She always thought Bob Lazar was a con man, a grifter. And after viewing the film and then seeing him in person at the event, it completely changed her perception of him.

She's like, I actually genuinely think that something happened with him and that he saw what he says he saw. And I want to learn more about it. So right there, that kind of solidified it for me that Jeremy succeeded in terms of keeping the conversation going in terms of this and asking new questions. So like you said, I really hope he comes back on your show. you press him. I know, you know, the reviews and what reactions to the film have been very mixed. But for me personally, I think this is the strongest film he's done yet. I think he's growing as both a filmmaker and a storyteller. And I again, like Jeremy has said, it's gotten this story out to a whole new generation. I saw so many young people at this premiere. And that was enough for me to be like,

awesome. A new generation now knows the name Lazar. And let's say for just, you know, to play devil's advocate, it's all bullshit. At least we can now break it down again with new people, new eyes, and a fresh perspective. So. Yeah. And you've got no argument from me there. I think that the field overall, I mean, they do need the discussion. We need to talk. We need to ask questions. And one of my taglines for the black vault.com since almost day one has been discover the truth. And what I really truly mean by that is a challenge. challenged for people to discover what that truth really is, whether it be about UFOs or mind control or chemical weapons or, you know, I mean, I deal with a lot of stuff. Obviously, we're talking

about UFOs today, but I deal with a lot of stuff. And I put that challenge out there to people to really ultimately ask those questions and discover the truth. And when a documentary comes around against people talking, like you said, on both ends of the spectrum, I don't see it as a bad thing. I may not ultimately believe the, you know, Bob Lazar story, but, you know, what? It's getting people to ask those questions and maybe open up a book and maybe see, well, what goes against what Bob Lazar says? Well, this actually supports what he's saying. And again, it's just that challenge of people's own beliefs to get interested. Because let's face it, I mean, when you just keep hearing, I mean, I work in television, so I hate to trash it,

but you watch certain television documentaries and you see the same stuff, like over and over. And then, you know, you see the same stories. And what kind of, you know, it drives me nuts and I won't name names, but as as the years progress, quote unquote, new evidence comes out on cases that are like decades old. And it's like, well, wait a minute. Why didn't you remember that then or come out with this then or, you know, I mean, there's just certain questions that definitely arise when you, when you start retelling those stories. And for the most part, it gets a little bit silly and tiresome to get through it. But hey, we haven't heard from, and I said this in my show to Jeremy, and maybe he might disagree with me on it. But Lazare has just kind of largely

disappeared in this field, you know, and I don't mean just the person, in my opinion, more so the story, you know, it just kind of like, he came about. He was obviously global news 30 years ago, but then it just kind of died and then people moved on. So that refurb. freshman of that story. I think it's a good thing. I think it gets people talking. All right, Jeremy, he's gotten enough, enough, uh, acknowledgement on this episode. Yeah, let's not talk about that guy anymore. Yeah, really. No, he is a friend of mine as well. So, you know, of course I'm going to support his work. Do I agree with all of it? Absolutely not. But he's trying and that's all we can ask for in this field. So in terms of trying for some of my

listeners who may not be familiar with who you are, what you do. I never want to assume, you know, we're always gaining new listeners. Could you sort of explain to us the inception of the Black Vault and what it is, where it came from and where it stands today? Sure. Well, I briefly mentioned I started 22 years ago and I was a 15-year-old kid who was struck with curiosity about UFOs and ultimately the government connection. I made the very stupid. I made the very stupid decision when I was very young, although it ultimately led to one of the best decisions of my life to believe that if anybody was going to tell me the truth behind UFOs, it would be the U.S. government. And I really did think that when I was 15, because, you know, as I just

talked about where you see the same stories rehashed, even back then, Google wasn't even a thing yet. It was Alta Vista. And, you know, when you searched then, there was hundreds of thousands of pages on UFOs. Now it's like tens of millions. But you see the same stuff over and over. And I just, started researching using the Freedom of Information Act, U.S. government documents to see what I can get. I read about a document. I don't claim to discover this. This was written about for years. In fact, I think it came out before I was born about the 1976 Iran incident. And this was something that really piqued my interest, being that teenager with curiosity, the website that I found this one document on. There was nothing else. It was just this, if I recall, that they had this

four-page document on. And it really reads like an X-Files episode. I mean, it really, you know, it describes multiple UFOs shutting down various F-4-Fantam jets. It just was a really amazing story to read, again, from 1976. And it said it was an official U.S. government document, and I didn't believe it. I had never heard of what was called the Defense Intelligence Agency at the time or the DIA, and we all hear about the CIA or the FBI and, you know, nowadays, much more about the NSA. But DIA is, you know, back then was not really talked about that much. I thought, okay, this has got to be bunk.

And I filed that FOIA request and that four-page document came verbatim, word for word, into my mailbox. I read it. It was real. And I was hooked from there on out. I created the black vault.com back in 96. I modeled it after actually what I was looking for. So when I read that document and they said,

you can file this FOIA request, Freedom of Information Act request. I thought, you know, what the hell is that? I don't know what the hell that is. But hey, government's going to send it for me, send it to me for free.

Why not? And so I, you know, sent it off. When I realized it was real, I ran back to the internet and thought, okay, well, you know,

logged on on my AOL, 1.0 for DOS, I think it was. But looking for, anything else. And to be honest with you, there was nothing. So I modeled the blackball dot com after what I was looking for and what I was trying to find. It just didn't exist. And so I made it. And I just started scanning documents. I started filing the FOIA requests and started getting hundreds, which turned into thousands of pages on UFOs. And then I

expanded to everything else. Here we are 22 years later. I passed well over 2 million pages early this year. Wow. So, yeah, so there's two million pages of government documents on there to download. And it's all free. I mean, I don't charge for it at all. And people can go on and you don't even need to register. You just start downloading. And it's become fairly popular. I mean, it serves about 16 to 25,000 people a day, which are unique people. The hits is hundreds of thousands every day. But the number of people that log on to the website is about 16,000. to 25,000 depending upon the day of the week. And it's amazing. I mean, it's amazing to see how much interest people have in discovering the truth, you know, and logging on and downloading this

information, whether it be about UFOs or, you know, anything else. It is amazing to see those numbers that people actually do still care beyond their, you know, 75 word tweet or whatever the character limit is now, that they, that they care to read. And that's a very encouraging thing to see. But that's what the black vault is. And, you know, I have done it now for 22 years and probably won't stop anytime soon. I assume it wasn't an easy sort of, you know, bell curve. There was probably a lot of learning to do. I mean, I tried to request certain documents and I get back nothing because I would assume I'm, first of all, not doing the request correctly.

I'm not going to the right agency. And that's sort of something I learned from you. The only documents I've ever received were, again, about the Tehran incident, and I learned that from you. I knew where to go, what to specifically ask for. So how was that process in learning who to actually reach out to? You can't just say, dear government, tell me what you know about UFOs. It's just, it's not that easy. They don't necessarily have the time or the wherewithal to answer every request.

So if you're not putting the work in, they're not going to either. I correct in that? Well, by law, I mean, the process is, is, it sucks to learn. I'm just going to be blatantly honest with you. The process works, but it sucks to learn. And what I mean by that, there's a lot of, you know, different hoops you got to jump through. And it's, it's like playing a game that the government made up. They're making the rules. They're the referee. There's no instruction book. And you just kind of got to figure it out, you know, and you're trying to win. I mean, that's really the easiest way to describe it. By law, you are afforded the right that they need to respond.

Now, if you didn't work your request right, they'll reject it, and that's fairly frustrating. But you have to find the happy medium that you're descriptive enough that they will process your request, and ultimately you sent it to the right place. But not too descriptive where you file a request and you only get the 1976 Iran incident and document. And so you have to kind of skate that line that if you're too specific, you're missing out on stuff. If you're too broad, they'll reject it and tell you to go away, you know, or you'll have to, you know, refile. So there's definitely a learning curve. But once you kind of start using it, you realize that it does work. Some agencies, you're right, they won't say that they'll accept a request where you say,

give me everything you have on XYZ. but you learn how to ask for certain things and what type of program are you researching or what type of topic are you researching. You learn for different workarounds to that. I call them broad stroke requests. So a broad stroke request, give me everything on UFOs. Well, since so many people have done UFO requests over the years, many agencies actually will process that, like the CIA or the DIA. For the most part, they'll process it and give you everything because they've already done the searches, the documents. have been discovered before, but a lot of times they omit things, and you have to, again,

read between the lines to see how many pages are they withholding. And it really is like this giant tree that branches off. You file that FOIA request at your trunk, and it just branches off into multiple different FOIA requests, different directions to different agencies, and it just keeps going and going. So it's a learning curve. I'm not going to lie. but it's well worth it because you make discoveries in some cases that no one else has ever found before. Because those broad stroke requests will omit certain things, you've got to learn like what possibly could they omit. And you just have to dig and dig and dig until you finally get that little golden nugget. But one of my favorite lines in a movie was searching for a needle in a stack of needles.

And that's, here's some trivia. Do you know what movie that's from? At first, I didn't think it was real. I woke up to this blinding light, and I was transported to another place. Pluto TV! Then I heard a voice. Come with me if you want to live.

There were thousands of movies and shows, and they were all free. The truth is ours. It's just so beautiful. On Pluto TV, free streaming of Terminator 2, Fringe Arrow, the 100 NX files may cause excitement, loss of sleep, and sudden belief in extraterrestrials.

No credit cards or alien encounters necessary. Pluto TV, stream now, pay never. No, I have no idea. Saving Private Ryan. Yeah, I thought you were going to get that. But it really, it proves true to something like this where you're, you know, you're just kind of searching for that one document and a mountain of information. But when you find it, and in some cases where you find thousands of them, it makes it very worthwhile. I can only imagine.

And I mean, I came across one on your website that you've stated. is possibly the most important UFO document you came across in terms of the Air Force. Is this something that you could sort of run us through here, this Air Force instruction? Yes. The Air Force Instruction 10-206 is what I believe you're referring to. Yes, yep. In my opinion, this is one of, and I'm not trying to pat myself on the back, don't get me wrong, but I think it's one of the most important finds that has never been.

out in the UFO field and arena since I had discovered it back in 2000. It's been a long time. The short way to explain this is you have to understand what the government wants you to believe about UFOs, not what the government documents say, but what they want you to believe. And the nutshell version is that from 1947, the 1969, they investigated over 12,000 cases under Project Sign, Grudge, and Blue Book, and about 701 remained unidentified. Arguably, that number is much higher, but that's a different conversation. And so they did their due diligence. They did the scientific method.

They came up with nothing. They summarized Blue Book in a fact sheet. I call this the company line. So the company line is touted by every government agency out there. So if you take their word for it, you just kind of shut up and go away. What they want you to believe is that that investigation was the end of their interest in 1969, technically January of 1970, is when they closed Project Blue Book for good. Now, fast forward throughout every government agency that I went to, after I received that four-page government document on the Tehran incident, every agency had documents after 1969. This is key because obviously they're telling you in one breath that they have no interest.

I have one agency that actually highlighted no other government agency has ever taken an interest in UFOs since then, then being 1969 in the close of Blue Book. So they're very adamant about telling you they have no interest. And yet the CIA, the DIA, the DIA, the nation's intelligence agencies are collecting. UFO intelligence well after 1969. Now, without going into a three-hour diatribe here, the thought that I had, as I'm getting these not 10 or 12 or 100 or 200, but literally thousands of pages of UFO-related documents that should not exist, I figured that there had to be some type of manual of some kind.

Now, we do know and have known for decades about some of them. Some Air Force regulations and manuals outlined how to report UFOs through Blue Book, obviously rescinded in 1969. There was another one discovered called Janep 146. That was Joint Army Navy Air Force publication, or 146. That applied to not only the United States military, but Canada, talked about UFO reports well after 1969, and they called him Service reports, C-I-R-V-I-S. and it stood for communication instructions for reporting vital intelligence sightings. Now, again, none of this should exist if you believe the company line. And yet, here it was in black and white.

Now, it's believed that JanUp 146 was rescinded many years ago, post-1969, but still rescinded nonetheless. So I thought, okay, there's got to be something else. And I'm summarizing here years worth of research, so forgive me, I'm not trying to jump around too much. But what I discovered searching surveys was purely accidental in about 2000. And I did a search on Alta Vista. And I was surprised. And actually, I don't know why, but I printed out the original search results page because I figured it might be important one day. And I still have it. I'm coming out with a book in April and the publishing company asked me for a bunch of visuals.

And sure enough, while I was looking for a couple, I discovered that years ago, and it's been in my filing cabinet, untouched for like 15, 18 years now, the original search result page from Alta Vista, the last result on the page after searching for surveys was a reference to an Air Force instruction, 10-206. It's also referred to as Air Force Manual 10-206. Click on the link, it was broken. And I thought, well, that's weird. Why would an Air Force manual come up with surveys? And fast-forwarding, filed the FOIA request, got the actual instruction. And sure enough, in a manual that's dated well into the 2000s now, Chapter 5 was all about UFOs.

How to report them, where to report them to. And that may sound like not a big deal, but keep in mind, this is the very agency that invented the company line. There are the ones that said, we did this already, not interested, don't care, don't bother us. By the way, we have a manual that completely outlines and details how to report a UFO. Come on, you know, I mean, that's utterly ridiculous. But that's what they had. And, you know, I mean, I could keep going with the story. But that manual, in my opinion, is something that's very, very important.

Now, one last thing that I'll add on this, and I don't know if you want me to keep going with it, because the investigation still kind of continued. But when I discovered it in 2000, then it was 2001, because all of these FOIA requests take time. As the years went on, I did work it into a couple history channel shows that I had created and we sold them. and then I got to go on to produce and write some of them. I was able to work in this document because it was crucial to showing that present-day interest. But through this process, I was also able to prove that the manual was being updated and changed. Now, why is this important?

Because a skeptic could argue, well, you know what, John? Yeah, that sounds interesting at all. But 10-206 was a forgotten, lost. You know, it stayed on the books, but they didn't really care. You know, of course, that's going to be a skeptical reaction. I was able to prove that it was frequently updated all the way through about 2008, and UFOs never came out. Now, what that means is, is they never lost interest in a publication. They were actively editing, changing, altering, and yet UFOs remained.

my whole point with that is they had ample opportunity to delete that reference and go, well, you know what, this was a leftover from, you know, the 60s or whatever cockamamie reason they would want to bring up. Right. And so that was their out. And they never took it. They left UFOs in there. So I had worked it into some History Channel documentaries. It fared very well in there because obviously it was real.

And History Channel loves documents. So, you know, there was some great synergy there. And so about 2000, I don't remember the exact year, but this was about three years ago, four years ago, approximately. My friend Lee Spiegel from the Huffington Post, formerly, the Huffington Post, he's moved on. And in fact, it's a couple years more, sorry, is 2011. Okay. So he, and so again, I've worked it into documentaries. And so this is about 2011 was about 11 years after I had discovered it and had been a couple years in the documentaries.

And so Lee calls me and he says, hey, John, want to do an interview with you and the Black Vault? And I said, great, because he wanted to cover it in the Huffington Post when he was working for them. And one very frequently asked question during these types of interviews is what are the top five documents? So I love talking about the 1976 Iran incident. I love talking about, you know, Air Force regulation or manual 10-206. And I selected a couple others. 10-206 stuck out to Lee is something very important. And rightfully so, I mean, it is.

So he does what any good investigative journalists would do. He picks up the phone. He calls the Pentagon for comment. Nobody wants to talk to him. He leaves a message. A couple days go by. He's still working on his story. And they never return his call.

He's called a couple times. And I remember, I talked about this also. I had him on my show because it's such a cool story. But it was a Friday night. I was visiting my sister. And it was kind of late. And Lee's back east. He's in New York.

And he's a couple hours ahead, obviously. And so if it's late for me, it's really late for him. And it's a little odd for him to call. And he calls you, John, you're not going to believe this. And I said, what? And very quickly, I had walked Lee. through, even though I showed him the document, I walk Lee through downloading this Air Force Manual 10-206 from the Air Force. Talk about hiding it in plain sight, right? They have these

databases that you can use. And that was not around in 2000 when I discovered this thing. But since then, it was an Air Force Publications database of like every Air Force publication that was still on the books. That was key. And so I walked him through downloading it. And he was pretty impressed by that, that the Air Force has this on their website at this point in 2011. And anybody can download it. And so he goes back to download as he's finishing the story. And chapter five, which was all about surveys and specifically mentions UFOs was gone. And I heard, so he tells me this over the telephone.

And I'm not really by a computer. And I say, okay, to myself, I'm sorry. thinking he just messed up. Right. You know, he downloaded the wrong manual, clicked on the wrong link. So I said, Lee, let me get home. I'll double check. And sure enough, chapter five was gone. It was just completely erased and the new chapter five was about hurricanes. And to summarize this, the Air Force literally deleted the entire chapter, not one word or one line, the entire chapter about service about 48 hours after Lee's phone call that he was going to profile the black vault and the discovery of Air Force Manual 10-206. Wow. And it was like they kicked it into

overdrive to get that thing changed. And so now I filed a FOIA request for all of the change logs because every time a government manual is changed, there's logs. And I actually got that under the Freedom of Information Act. And I wrote about this in the book that's coming out next year, because I find it fascinating. The change log is full of spelling errors, meaning that it was incredibly rushed. That's my interpretation anyway. Incredibly rushed to get that out. And so the change log, they're just like frantically, oh yeah, we're not interested in this anymore and so on. And so they just rushed it. And 48 hours after his phone call, it was gone. So I have all the change logs, was able to show that they had ample opportunity to take that out.

The coincidence, the coincidence chance on that is what? I mean, how big do you think that that's just a coincidence? There's one thing to be conspiratorial, but that, like, that's astounding within 48 hours. I mean, wow. It's ridiculous. Yeah. Yeah, it really is. And I didn't mean to go on too long there, but it's an amazing story that, you know,

and kudos to leave. for spearheading, getting the, you know, the Pentagon to respond, even though the response was changing the manual, it shows the lengths they will go to cover up that interest. And that's what keeps me motivated to keep searching for more because you can't argue that. Going back to what I said, the documents don't lie. They may be lying about them, but the documents themselves, you can't go back and erase that history that they never had an interest in UFOs. Why? Because it's documented. And the fact that they tried to cover it up and ultimately possibly lie about the coincidence, because by the way, they did say it was just a coincidence.

That was their official response to Huffington Post. For them to say that might be a lie, but they cannot cover up the fact that they were actively editing and altering this publication. And never did they take UFOs out. And then all of a sudden a major mainstream organization wants to profile it and poof it's gone. It really is a testament to that cover up in my opinion. All right. So in terms of cover up, we have to touch on what's currently going on because you've probably brought forward some of the most, I'd say, revelatory things in terms of what's going on with this recent Pentagon, secret Pentagon UFO program that broke last year with ATIP. So I want to get an idea, someone who deals with documents all the time.

Of course, for a lot of us out there, this was extremely, it was sexy, man. It was exciting. It was like, oh, holy shit. The Pentagon's admitting they've been investigating UFOs in secret. We all thought Blue Book was it. Clearly, that's not the case with the things you've uncovered. But now we even have a more recent program, this A-TIP. So how did you initially feel when this story first broke?

The same as you did. Holy shit. Honestly, I mean, when I heard about it, I watched it live because I was dying of curiosity of what was going to happen. Was it going to be a joke the next morning or was this ultimately going to be something cool? And I watched that press conference in October, not December, not when it broke in December. And this will be the there's reason why I'm pointing that out. I watched, when I watched Luis Alizando for the first time in October, I really was like, wow, that's really, that's really cool.

You know, I mean, DeLong's been teasing and, you know, getting his hands in in certain areas, and you kind of scratch your head like, well, is this, is this star appeal? I mean, obviously, he's worth a lot of money and he's, you know, it's not like he's a nobody. So is he, is that how he's getting in? Does he really have something? Like, what's going on? And so I watched that press conference and Elizondo gets up there and I was impressed, you know, and immediately like that day, I think, I filed FOIA request to the Department of Defense or the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which is where Luis Elizondo is said to have worked for information on that program. Because I really thought like, this is it.

You know, 10-206 was deleted. They didn't have an interest, quote unquote. So I wanted to see how this played into the larger narrative. of what I had worked on, but also people that came along well before I was around, and we've collectively been working on this for decades and decades, trying to piece together what the military has, what the government says, so on and so forth. And so I waited. And my excitement started to turn to a little bit of skepticism simply because certain things started not to match up. And when December came around and there was actually a program name, I thought, okay, this is cool.

This is going to further show that maybe the government is lying about this because my initial requests were denied saying that there were no records pertaining to what Mr. Elizondo was talking about. Now, look, I have proven government lies time and time again. So that doesn't surprise me if they were lying. but something about the story started to not make sense. And come December, when that story broke in the New York Times and then obviously went global, I then had a project name. And to anybody who uses the FOIA, when you talk about a description of something, it's a heck of a lot different than actually having the program name.

Now, even though I had a guy going on the record testimony, I referenced it and, you know, talked about what this program was, which was this UFO study, it yielded a no records response. When I went back to them with the actual name come December, a story changed a little bit, and they said, well, that's under Defense Intelligence Agency purview, so it has to go over there. Now, just a very quick FOIA note, what that means is, let's say the CIA does a research program, and they create a report on that program, and they send it over the DIA for a analysis or the NSA for analysis, you know, just they share intelligence, not all the time, but they do. If you file a FOIA request to, let's say, the NSA and your FOIA request comes up

with that CIA report, the CIA is called the OPR or the Office of Primary Responsibility. What that means is the NSA cannot declassify a CIA document. So what they have to do is either forward your request over or they keep your request open. They send the document over to the the CIA for review. CIA reviews, it sends it back to NSA, and then NSA sends it on. All situations are a little bit different in that, but that's generally, generally how it goes. So they're saying that anything on A-TIP, the advanced, now this will bring up my first skeptical, the skeptical red flag.

I know exactly what you're going to say. Yeah. So it was reported as the advanced aerospace threat identification program, or A-TIP, A-A-T-I-P. Great. No problem. No argument for me. I don't, you know, it is what it is. It was in the New York Times. So I called at this point because I had the FOIA request filed and I called the press office. Now, I was working on producing a documentary that sadly I can't give you all the details, but I mean, it's the honest truth. That's why I called the press office. I've worked with them before in various networks like History Channel, like Discovery Channel, like National Geographic. So I had called over there and I was. working developing this program and producing a pitch. And so we were working on this story, and I felt that eighth would be a prime aspect to this specific story. And so I called the press office, and a very nice lady had answered, and I said, you know, hi, I'm so-and-so, this is what I'm working on. And I said, I'm just kind of curious, like, what you can give. Do you have any

press statements or anything about the advanced aerospace threat identification? program or atip. And she goes, oh, no, no, you mean the advanced aviation threat identification program? And I said, I said, well, I'm not going to argue with you, ma'am. I said, but it's all over the media as advanced aerospace. She said, no, no, no, it's aviation. You mean atyp. And that was actually the first time in, in mid-December when this all broke. I'm not claiming to be the first one. I'm not sure who is, But that was the first time I had heard that ATIP was, you know, the acronym was, that's how it was referred to by the military as ATIP. And that was like an official thing. But she was adamant about saying aviation.

So I thought, well, wait a minute. Well, wow, did the New York Times get this wrong? You know, like what did, what happened here? It sounds like semantics. But to the military, you don't get the name of the program that you're working on wrong. And I quickly realized that it was Mr. Elizondo that was saying the name apparently wrong. Now, I tried to find motive for the government to be lying about this. And there is none. I mean, like, why would they care if it's aerospace versus

aviation? Does he have motive to lie? Not really. Is he mistaken? Possibly. Could it be because he's not who he says he is? Possibly. Could it be he wasn't in the position he was in? Possibly. So that kind of set up a red flag. And I had reached out to to the Stars Academy and asked them, what division or what they call a component of OSD that he worked in. The reason why that's key is then they're telling me on one hand, the military is telling me on one hand, oh, this is a DIA program. But Mr. Elizondo says,

well, I worked for the office of the Secretary of Defense. And when I figured out what component he worked in, that was not DIA. Now, why is that important? Well, if there's a CIA program, you don't have Joe Schmo run it from NSA.

Right. Why? Because it's a CIA program. It doesn't, none of that started to make sense. So it's like, well, wait a minute. You can't have a DIA run program from somebody in another office. Now, in fairness, everything is all Department of Defense. So everything is under that umbrella. But so is the Army, so is the Navy. So is the DIA. So is the OSD. I mean, and the list goes on. So that really doesn't mean much. Again, when you drill down, it didn't make sense that he was heading this, you know, program from with the within the Pentagon, within OSD, and yet it was a DIA program. So, look, I can keep going, but it started the red flags, and I tried to reach out to the Stars Academy after the avalanche of media publicity that they received to ask for an interview. Not only was I producing that show, but I also wanted him to just kind of go on the record because his story was incredibly intriguing. Yeah.

And I felt the questions I had had easy answers at first. And so I reached out to them. And I was strung on literally for four months, if you can believe that, before they finally told me no. Okay. And I thought, look, I'm not Larry King. I'm not, you know, Tucker Carlson. I get that. Like that it, that's fine.

But there are these questions that I could help them reach an audience. that if given the correct answer, would probably be happy to invest. But I wasn't the only one starting to ask questions because then all of a sudden there were a lot more. And the story got a little bit weirder and a little bit more convoluted. And then I think the general public was starting to see a organization or a corporation in this sense that was claiming to end or want to end government secrecy around something. but all they were offering was more secrecy. They were releasing videos and blurring evidence and blurring documents and this and that. There could very well be an explanation for all that, and that's fine.

But I think that the general public started to grow with skepticism on whether or not these guys were truly doing what they claim they wanted to do. And I think that that's why they probably didn't reach their goal of $50 million. That was their original goal. They took off the counter, but it's estimated they raised about two and a half million, I think it is. And here we are. I mean, we're here almost a year from when the story broke of ATIP. But well over a year since to the Stars Academy was kind of formulated and reaching out. And, you know, there's been some really cool things like the videos.

But at the end of the day, like there's no context. We don't know what they were. And I've done a lot of FOIA requests on that kind of stuff. And there's a lot more red flags than what I brought up already. But I don't want to take over your show. No, no, not at all, John. I mean, this is very important because a lot of us researchers who were all for this when I first started, we are starting to taste that skepticism more and more. And I think another good point you brought up in previous interviews I've heard to give is the chain of custody documents.

Everyone's claiming like, well, this should be it. If we find out where the videos came from, we can then start to dig deeper. But tell us a little about, have you ever heard of this sort of a document, a chain of custody to UFO footage? They claim, no, I haven't to quickly answer. They claim they have chain of custody documents, quote unquote, chain of custody that prove the declassification of these videos that the DOD had released the three videos that to the Star Academy. has put on their website and ultimately, you know, broadcast on quite a few major networks and and so on. When I had talked to the Pentagon myself and asked them about those videos, I can say this because it's public record, but her name is Major Audricia Harris,

and she's one of the official spokespeople of the Pentagon. So I'm not talking about a paper pusher who happened to answer the phone and at some no-nameer who was just guessing. This is the actual major in the Pentagon. who gives the lines to the press that gives the official statements. When you see official statements in the New York Times or the Washington Post or wherever, generally it's her office that's giving them or her herself that is giving the statements. And I want to stress that because she says, we never released those videos.

We meaning the Department of Defense. And so that completely contradicts what Mr. Elizondo has said that the DOD release. them. Again, I have full faith that I will probably catch the government in another lie sometime in the next decade. So if that is what's going on here, then fine. They claim, meaning to the Stars Academy and Mr. Elizondo claims they have a chain of custody document that shows and proves that the DOD declassified and released those videos. That's what they've claimed. When you ask to see the evidence, they refuse to show you. The question is, to the stars refuses?

That's correct. Okay. They have never once released the chain of custody document, whatever that is. Now, I have, as I mentioned, collected 2 million pages. When a document is declassified, and this is true with videos, and this is true with photographs, there's no chain of custody document that proves a declassification. There are stamps that go on documents, photos, and slates that go on videos to show when it was reviewed, when the classification was downgraded. And there are record transmittal slips. And what those are, and I can show ample examples of them, is I, and I get a lot from the NSA, which happens to be DOD, by the way, is that when you file for a request of something that's never been out before, that's generally when I get them, when documents have never seen the light of day, they're declassette.

classified and sent to me, and on top of my FOIA response letter, on top of that is a records transmittal slip. And what that is, that's the only thing with a signature. And what that says is that the documents that are coming to me in the mail are considered unclassified. I don't have a clearance, so I can't get secret or top secret information, obviously. So when they send those things, it's to show that whomever grabs a hold of that envelope or packages the envelope or, you know, for whatever reason it's opened by someone else other than me. It shows that so-and-so is authorizing that that information is unclassified. Is that a chain of custody? Absolutely not. But it does show that the government sent that information to me and it's unclassified. So let's just

say they're kind of, you know, sexying this up a little bit. And that's what they have. Cool. I mean, If they just wanted to sexy it up and say it was chain of custody because that sounds cooler, fine. I'll still knock them for that because it's not accurate, but I'll accept that. They never have. And they've stood by that they have this evidence to prove to you what they say is true, but they won't show it to you. Why? Like, I don't get it. I can't figure out a reason, you know, a reason why.

and there are one in particular that's connected with to the Stars Academy who's said this public, Dr. Eric Davis, and he has apparently said now that the chain of custody document will never be released because there's sources and methods on it and that in itself is classified and they would never release it. And that to me was the nail in the coffin that they do not have what they say they have or, if they do, then they're in a breach of their security oath. I do not believe in the latter, but that's either what he is saying, or he's admitting that they would not have this. I don't believe that a document like that existed, but regardless, if it was classified, they would never have it, which means they're lying. If they do have it, and Dr. Davis is correct, and there are sources and methods on it, and this is some kind of elusive document, I have never ever, ever seen or heard of before, nor can I even find references to documents like this.

Because again, everything has procedures and manuals and, you know, regulations and so on. The procedure writing, the procedure writing procedures has a procedure manual. I had to think about that. But that's actually true, right? There's manuals on how to write manuals. So there's no reference that I could find that a document like that even exists. So honestly, I think they're getting caught up in their own lies. Delusion, yeah.

Yeah. And I honestly believe that. And the list just keeps getting bigger and bigger. And it's a shame. Like, I don't want to sit and just pick on them and say they're lying. I just wish that they would be a little bit more open with the public when they say that they're trying to stop the secrecy. Just none of this makes sense. Right. And I mean, the red flags just continue, John.

I mean, I want to circle back to Elizondo in just a second. But another big thing with these videos, too, is we're not seeing the complete videos. We have absolutely no context. Yeah, we get these little text on the screen from to the stars. This happened then. There's this. You're seeing it from this angle, from this camera. That's all cool.

But, I mean, we're seeing snippets of something that's clearly large. you know, broader in scope. And we're getting edited versions. And my big thing, which are the stars now is we're getting what they want us to see, what they want us to hear, and they're controlling the narrative to all of this, which if you're going to have a public benefit company, as Tom DeLong has sort of coined this, it's for the public. And we're paying for them to give us a quarter of the story.

So, and I don't mean me. I am not a financial supporter. I chose to stay away from that as an objective researcher and journalist. But it's interesting. And as in terms of the red flags, Elizondo. Now, I know you don't, you don't deal with documents that could be leaked and whatnot. You deal with declassified documents. Highly respect that. Do you have any opinion whatsoever on this supposed resignation letter of misconduct? Mr. Elizondo's. It wouldn't surprise me if it was real. I know people picked on it a little bit for spelling and grammar. Is that a red flag, kind of? But to be honest with you, I'm sure that that probably is a resignation letter of his, and it wouldn't surprise me. So I'm not going to argue it.

I will say this, though. I filed a FOIA request for the resignation letter and actually received a no-record's response. Okay. Now, I'll defend Mr. Elizondo on this one. this is a longer legal boring answer, but the short of it is, there is, and it's been fought and argued in the Supreme Court that under the FOIA, can you get a resignation letter? And the answer has been determined generally no. And this actually goes back to the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld during George W's administration,

just for a little bit of history for you. and the FOIA request flew in for that resignation letter. It was ultimately denied and literally went all the way to the Supreme Court to argue whether or not that in itself was a government document or that in itself was a personal document, which would be ultimately exempt from the FOIA. So just a little bit of history there for you. For you on the FOIA. Now, so I'll give him a pass on that. What I did, however, do is in addition to that, then file a FOIA request for emails from to BCC'd or C-SED James Mattis that contained the word Elizondo. Not a single one came up as responsive to my request.

Now, why is that? Now, we've been told that Mattis and Elizondo were friends, I've heard him say, in interviews, that he was reporting to him. him, if he was one of his, you know, higher-ups, you would think that a single email, at least one, would come up with his name and not a single one did. I don't talk about that that much, but I figured I'd bring it up now because I thought that might be a way to circumvent the Supreme Court decision that a resignation letter didn't, you know, fall under the FOIA. But if he emailed that letter, what's very interesting is that then I could put up an

argument that that would technically be a government document because it was sent to Mattis's government email address. And so that, so that was one of those ways that I was trying to kind of circumvent what had become case law to try and then go in and say, okay, well, maybe this will not only come up with his resignation letter, but maybe something else. Maybe somebody wrote Mattis totally unrelated to Elizando, but said, hey, did you hear what this guy Elizando is saying? And boom, that would come up under my request. And so you find these little tricks to kind of get around it. And according to the Office of Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, there is not a single email that comes up with the word Elizondo from January, and I did January

20 of 2017 when Mattis went in, I believe it was the day through the data processing the request. So if he was an active communication, active duty, and he was communicating at all with Mattis, which is kind of what we've been led to believe in some of the interviews, not a single email was brought up. And I was given to no records. So a lot of those types of red flags make me question, is he telling the truth? I'm not saying he's lying. I'm just questioning, why are all these things coming up as red flags? And then you do have the statements, by the way, that we haven't talked about. But you do. have the statements by the DIA that said ATIP was not a UFO program and it is being heavily embellished by the media. And so you have when you prove a government lie, because again, I know I've said it like three times now, it won't surprise me if it comes out there lying, but you generally don't have this absolute stern in writing statement. And I should also say Major Harris put everything that she told me over the telephone in writing. So I can prove that with an official record of A-Tip had that they have A-Tips name wrong, that they never released the videos.

And she put a couple other things in the email as well. But in essence, it was a firm in-writing statement that no one can contradict at this point. Now, whether or not if she was lying, okay, fine. but generally with government lies, they don't comment on things. Right. You know, I mean, like, that's because they don't need another example of them lying, right? And I'm not talking about just by me. I'm just talking about in the general consensus of the globe, the Pentagon doesn't need those problems.

So if all this was bunk and Elizondo was telling stories, generally the, you know, the government doesn't get involved. It's like the Corey Goods of the world, the Andrew Basiagos of the world. Like, does the government really have to hold a press conference and say, no, we did not go to Mars with Obama and so on? No, of course not. They leave it alone. However, with this, they put the firm statement out there. No, sorry, that's not the way it is. No, this is not real.

So obviously they're putting a statement that can come back and bite them out there, not just to me, but to multiple now. news agencies and they're putting it in writing. Generally, you don't see that when you catch the government in some kind of a lie. And they're really going out of their way to say atyp is not what we're being led to believe. If it comes out that they're lying, I would actually be surprised now just because it's gone to this point and to this level. The documents are largely, according to former Senator Harry Reid, the document, are approximately 80% unclassified. Now, he said that in an interview. I know George Knapp was present, I believe. And Harry Reid had said that verbatim, 80%. If that's the case, we're not dealing with a very

highly classified topic. There's classified aspects to it, but it's not very highly classified. And so I think that that furthers the proof that this is getting, you know, embellished. And I think I'll bring up Edward Snowden as my, you know, final thought and I'll pass it back to you. But I'll bring up Edward Snowden that when you start talking about highly classified programs, projects, research studies, and so on, you end up hiding in a hole in another country because it's classified. The fact that Mr. Elizondo is out there and he's talking about this and it's open, that to me shows that this is a very, it's a real program. I have no doubt about that. But it's a very probably not so secretive program that some people want to believe. The secret UFO study or the Pentagon's secret UFO study that obviously hit the media, I think at this point is largely embellished. And there's evidence to support that too. But it goes into, the heart of how ATIP came to be. And I found myself actually defending Mr. Elizondo on this, but the short of it is it had come out that the ATIP program was either born out of or also part of a program called Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Application Program. Now say that five times

fast. Ossap is how they were. AOLF. Yeah, there we go. It's a hell of a lot easier to say. When you read the actual contract bid for contracts, they post these on federal websites that big corporations can go and bid on, generally when they're classified, they never appear. You can still download the contract proposal for OSAP on the federal government's website from 2008. And when you read through it, it's like not even close to a UFO research program. You know, it's, I'll put it simplistic. It's like the government hires a corporation to make an apple pie and they turn around and they, you know, they, uh, they bake them a pizza, you know, and, and, and my whole point with being simplistic on that is you don't change a contract when you're awarded that contract. So that's why I believe that the UFO thing

is probably not entirely accurate because when you trace back what ATIP was all about and what ASAP was all about. It just doesn't, it doesn't fit. It just does not connect even in the slightest. And I mean, the last sort of thing I want to bring up in terms of this, John, is Elizondo's, how can I put this politely? His lack of knowledge of UFO footage, photos, his job assuming that he actually did. head this program about UFO studies, we're seeing hoaxed photos and CGI that he's sharing with the public. I mean, is this disinformation or just stupidity? It's just another red, there's so many red flags. I just, I don't know what to make of it anymore. And well, yeah, and I'm not either. Originally, just so your audience is aware, the, this all spawned from that original October

press conference where I believe Christopher Mellon was at the mic and they had a quote unquote UFO picture in the background they were talking about a certain event and it was a debunked photo of a mylar balloon now look we I know that you work in television when editors you know if they hired an editor maybe they were looking at stock footage they didn't realize they're not as privy to all this I never once I've tried to be so incredibly fair because it sounds like I'm just being a jerk by trash in these guys for the last hour. And honestly, I'm really not trying to be. I've never talked about that mylar balloon as evidence of anything. And I was on the air with Jimmy Church. And I know that it's bothered Jimmy. And Jimmy was kind of pressing me about it. And I said, look, man, I,

you know, mistakes happen. And there's enough red flags to let that go. However, then Mr. Elizondo, Tom DeLong, they fly to Italy. They do this, you know, presentation to some UFO group. of course it was kind of embellished i think on instagram or something by delong it kind of made it seem like it was some secret you know meeting and and and of course he's good at doing that yeah he's very good at doing that and and if it works for him cool but it's it's getting tiresome for a lot of people that you know really want to see if these guys are making a difference and getting involved and so on and so i somebody sent it to me that it had live streamed and recorded i didn't watch it live, but it was recorded.

And I thought, okay, that's cool. So I started watching a little bit. It's brutal to watch, only because Mr. Alizan is a great speaker, so I'm not going to take anything away from him. It's brutal to watch because you have a translator. So, like, you know, it's one or two sentences from Mr. Alizano, then you got to wait for the Italian. And then, you know, so it's brutal in that respect.

And, uh, but, but that being said, they came to a part about the 1952 Washington UFO sightings. And I knew from working in television, there's, there's a lot of, uh, one very misunderstood photo, which is largely attributed to the 52 sightings, which actually was taken much later. And the quote unquote UFOs are actually lens flare reflections from the lights on the ground and you can match all up. So the photos are real, but it's not from the 52 sightings.

And then there's a very overused CGI animation. And I know that only because a show that I was on camera with, a show called Unuselytube, Unsealed, they had used this very animation. And it's like the, you know, a good shot or a CGI of the, of the Capitol building with these like blue CGI UFOs going through the background. And look, I mean, you can look at it. It's obviously CGI. And it's used in television production and various productions, namely unsealed. I know for a fact that I was on camera for that that had appeared because I was talking through that segment.

And that being said, that was a screenshot behind Mr. Elizondo when he's talking about it. And he turns around, and I'm kind of paraphrasing, but he did say it this sternly. He's like, and that is an actual photograph of the actual event. And I mean, and he's pointing it to like this, you know, CGI still. And I, it was like a spit take. You know, you're taking coffee. You just spit it all over your mind. Like, what?

Why is that important? Well, this is the head. of the secret Pentagon UFO study, and he can't, let's just say DeLong made the PowerPoint presentation, and he had no idea, if you're heading a program like that, you should be able to look at it and go, well, actually, you know, that's probably a representation. That's not an actual photo. There's actually no known photos or videos of the 1952 Washington sightings that are legit. And yet he, you know, said, oh, this is absolutely real. It's like Jay Allen Heinek looking at a photo of the moon with its craters and saying, this is a UFO, right? That would just never happen. And yet here was

another example. So to go back to what you were saying about, like, is this disinformation? I don't play that game that often about disinfo and this is some kind of secret, you know, agenda to mislead the public. After I saw that, I honestly, that's what I started leaning towards. I'm not ready to make that claim. Don't get me wrong. But what other way is there to think when you have now a pile of red flags? And then on top of that, you have blatant, you know, we can call it misleading. We'll just call them mistakes, I guess.

But you have these just huge errors in public education. And these guys have the spotlight, you know, more than me, more than you, more than anyone out there in the UFO field. they have the spotlight. And to be honest with you, they've collected millions of dollars. I did not invest either, and I know you did not either. But they've collected money, millions of it, from people like you and I that are interested in the truth, that do want to know more. And they're out there misinforming the public, not caring, not doing their research. However you want to look at it, any of those scenarios is bad. and that's what they're doing.

And I think it's just, it's, it's, it's a shame. It really is. It is. And I mean, I, I, I was looking so forward to, to all of this, John. I really was. I thought this was going to be a big step forward. And every time I think that, it's just, it's three steps back. And those people who, who choose to ignore these things you've brought forward and the hesitancy of many others as well,

in terms of like their scientific research of you know possible alien tech or materials we have a lot of scientists coming forward and saying they're doing it all wrong like they're not this isn't the way you do this and then we have just everyone everyone is shouting from the rooftops be careful and the people who aren't being careful are probably the ones i'm going to be honest who put money into this and they're afraid to admit that they might have gotten a little in over their heads And I think that's what has happened with this group as well. I think they're in over their heads. Maybe DeLong had the best of intentions.

But honestly, man, it seems like he's kind of getting played and we're all sort of getting played at this point. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know what to say. I don't know either. I will say this. And I didn't mean to jump on you. But about Tom DeLong, I do believe he's genuine.

I do believe that, you know, taking away everyone else. I think Tom DeLong is a genuine person who believes too much, you know, that I think that he, I don't want to say he doesn't have the ability, because I'm sure he does, but I don't think that he puts in the investigation and the time that he should have and should, at this point, into some of the things that he says. And I think the embellishment of, you know, that kind of stuff is just silly of top secret meetings and, you know, taking a picture of a CIA notebook. and I mean, and some of the comments are brutal. I don't mean to laugh, but I mean, they have to notice. It's not just John Greenwald that's out there, you know, saying, hey, there's red flags. Like when you look at a post by, you know, Tom DeLong or even the To the Stars Academy official page and look at the comments. It's rough.

The YouTube, it's brutal. It really is. Like, I try and stay professional. Some of these people just go for the jugular and they don't care, you know. And it's sad. I think a lot of people have some great comments, but there's others that are just brutal. And I hope that they realize that this is a great community, but it's a community. And they call it a community for a reason.

And I've never been able to confirm if they really said this or not. But the consensus from what I understood in the early days was that they had risen above the UFO community and ultimately they divorced it. I kept hearing that D word, that they divorced the UFO community. and that they were ultimately above that, that they were going for, you know, obviously millions of dollars to be raised and they were going to have this aerospace division. And they were above us peons here in the UFO community. Again, I'm not saying that I found them literally saying that, but that was the consensus of why they weren't talking to not only myself, but others as well in the field that were asking questions that should be asked. I tried too, man. Yeah, I tried too.

I went to a book signing and I got in touch with the PR people and they said yes and minutes later responded back and said, sorry, never mind now. You know, so they probably looked me up and saw that I was in the UFO community. I wasn't a mainstream vice writer or whatnot. Yeah. But you know what's crazy is that shows like yours bring the audience that is more willing to pull out the checkbook and write that investment check. into their corporation. Why that the marketing people wouldn't say, look, this, you know, you may reach 10% of the people you will on Vice News, but the amount of people, the percentage of people that will invest in you if you, you know, are honest and have good answers,

the amount of the higher percentage will make it much more worthwhile. That's a good point. Yeah. You know, I mean, if you're, it's the basic fundamentals of marketing. Your flyer can reach a million people, but if the majority of them are interested, why did you just reach a million people? Right. But if your flyer reaches a thousand people of everyone who's interested, then all of a sudden that thousand people is a lot more powerful than a million. And yet they don't really quite understand that or understood that. But regardless, I think that these questions need to be answered. And here's the bigger point, too, that I'll make hopefully quickly. But the bigger point is less about the investments, less about, hey, Mr. Elizondo's making this up or Tom DeLong.

is easily swindled or, you know, hell put off is, is, you know, a secret covert government op or whatever the conspiracies are. Beyond all of that, I go back to the fact that they have the spotlight and people like you, people like me, we spend hours, days, weeks, months, years of our lives invested in this because it's a passion. For them, it has become a business. And I think what they need to do is realize that they owe the community a little bit more in the, the form of honesty. And if they're going to collect people's money like they did, they need to be truthful. And I fear, I truly do fear that it's going to backfire. And that if to the Stars Academy does have a slightly malicious intent and they're not really on the up and up that we hoped that

they would be, the next time somebody does get an important document or uncovers a real Pentagon secret UFO study, given that ATIP maybe isn't that, are they going to take us seriously? And that is ultimately what I think people are forgetting more than anything else is the longevity of this story and that if they are failing now, the media is not going to take it seriously tomorrow. Now, admittedly, are there more UFO stories? Sure, okay, we can say that. Some people even call it the to the stars or TTSA effect.

Do we want to call it that? okay, I guess. But I think people largely miss that UFO stories go viral, you know, whether they be about to the stars or not. So I think a more serious UFO story has a better chance of going viral and they make more money. So I think we have to take into that consideration because we've seen that for, you know, the last 10 years.

That's not all to the Stars Academy. But let's just give them the benefit of the doubt that they've ushered this new era in. My bigger question that leads into my point is why has the, the New York Times done eight follow-up stories since the December one. And they haven't. And honestly, I think the reason is, is because now that there's been time to research, maybe they jump the gun a little bit, they realize that it is not what they reported. So they're letting it die. There is no reason. I don't know if it's the number one story, but it's got to be damn near close of the most popular story on the New York Times website history because this thing was, I mean, let's face it,

it was insane the amount of attention that this got. They haven't done one follow-up? Come on. And there's only one explanation for that. And that is they ran the story, possibly prematurely, realize that the information was not accurate, so they're letting it go. They're, you know, if, again, basic fundamentals of marketing. If you have a, a great, you know, show with a great guest, will you never revisit that topic or that guest ever again? No, of course not. You're going to bring them back and you're going to, you do another show and you're going to, you know, again, basic fundamentals of marketing, you're going to make sure that you milk that as much as you can. I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but that's,

that's kind of like how that whole thing works. Yeah, it's logical, yeah. Yeah. And so for the New York times to get the amount of attention and never do a follow-up. The only major follow-up was an op-ed that was, you know, written by a to the Stars Academy board member published in Washington Post. Right. Look, and that's not all a bad thing, but why? Like, why wouldn't all of these newspapers do multiple follow-ups and they're not? And I think it's because now you do have way too many questions and red flags and documents. And one thing I'll add quickly about the freedom of Information Act and documents related about atyp. Again, I'm not trying to come off as pat me on the back for this, but I was able to secure

the only real document that has come out under the FOIA, not public record, because I know there's a congressional document, but under the FOIA that referenced atyp. And this came from the Intellipedia system within the national security agency. And Intellipedias like Wikipedia, you know, we all use that on the internet. the intelligence community uses the exact same infrastructure. However, it's internal written by people with clearances for the most part. There's three different systems of Intellipedia, and it's like Wikipedia, articles, references, information.

When I first filed a FOIA request in December, I received a no-record's response, not a single page in the entire Intellipedia systems in all three referenced A-TIP. months later, I actually was able to get a document declassified that did reference A-TIP and did come from the National Security Agency. It was from Intellipedia. They had updated it finally in late December, early January. And the acronym was Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program. Why is it important? because the New York Times was largely sourced for what this author who had a top secret clearance,

we know this because it was the top secret version of Intellipedia, they had a top secret clearance, they wrote about ATIP, despite using the New York Times as a reference, which said aerospace, they changed it to aviation. Now, why is that? In my opinion, because that's the real name. And so that is an official, that's the only one at this point. Will it come out that it is aerospace? Possibly.

And then, you know, a couple people that hate me for bringing up some of these points will attack me on Twitter and Facebook, I'm sure, and say, see, we told you. And that could very well be true. I'm not saying that it's aviation. All I'm saying is all the evidence points to that it is, and that negates Mr. Elizondo's testimony and ultimately questions who he says he is. So, well, you know, time will tell with that. Sadly, the Defense Intelligence Agency is largely backlogged on FOIA requests. That's the reason we don't have more documents. I don't believe it's a cover-up of any kind. I've dealt with the DIA for years and years now. They've always been backlogged, and it might be another year plus before something comes out,

not being a cover-up, but again, just because of the amount of backlog that they have. At this point, dude, all we can do is kind of sit back and see where this ship crashes. But I, maybe we'll get some good, you know, documentaries or TV shows out of it purely for entertainment purposes. So at the end of the day, that's what Tom DeLong is. He's an entertainer. And if this is going to be the way to get some cool UFO shit out there, I'm all for it. But the way things are looking, I don't know. I'm interested, but like you said, we may not know for a very long time if there's any documentation on this.

But I want to sort of wrap things up here in terms of documentation with something you recently obtained that you have been working your ass off for for a very long time. So let's move away from UFOs. It's depressing the shit out of me in terms of to the stars. And that's nothing to do with you. I need this pour a drink. Yeah. Yeah. Sip that whiskey, my man.

That doesn't have to do with you. It's the fact that there are so many red flags, and we need people to point those out. Or we're doomed. We're all doomed to live this delusion. So let's move to something that is real, is factual, is proven. And that is something pertaining to the CIA and this behavioral modification program. What did you find? How long did you fight for this, man?

and what can we take away from it? The story actually goes back to 1999, if you can believe it. And my connection to MK Ultra and mind control was aiming to get not only those documents declassified, but ultimately put online. And don't get me wrong, I was not the only one fighting for this. There was a laundry list of people that were doing so. And finally in about 2003, 2004, I was given a four CD-R-R-Wed. ROM set that what I was under the impression contained all 30 plus thousand pages that were

on mind control and MK Ultra. Now, obviously, that's a show in itself, but the CIA had largely destroyed by the direction of CIA director Richard Helms, the majority, or what he thought, all of the MK Ultra mind control experiments. The experiments were awful. A lot of times they were testing on people without their knowledge, ended up killing Dr. Frank Olson, who was a CIA scientist at the time, connected back to a test they did with LSD. It's really, it's an awful, but it's an amazing story. A documentary on Netflix that appeared in the last year or two called Wormwood is on that very, yeah, it's on that very topic.

And it was well done. They interview Dr. Frank Olson's son, Eric Olson, and to hear him talk about his dad and what he went through. And of course, the CIA labeled it as suicide, but there's a lot of question marks. Did the CIA throw him out of window? I mean, it really is a crazy story. So fast forward from 2004. So I dumped those four CD-ROMs on the Internet. And that's kind of my connection to MK Ultra.

I, for many years, was the only place to get them. They've been copied and put all over the place. But when they were first released, I had dumped them all online. And at the time in 2004, it was over 1.1 gigs of information. Now, nowadays, that's like, wow, I can download that in eight seconds. Back then, I mean, you know, this was 14 years ago. I was a little bit different. So I had dedicated servers to host all that.

I dumped it all online. And in a way it went. Well, in addition with those four CD-ROMs was an index, and the index was supposed to serve to show you all of the document numbers on all four CD-ROMs and break down what it was. I never went line for line. But fast forward to 2016, a researcher by the name of Oscar Diggs did go line by line and went through that entire 85-page index and matched up the thousands of images that were on all four CD-ROMs. ROMs and compiled a list of missing documents. He sent it to me and said, this is what I did. I was like, wow, that's pretty amazing, actually.

I cross-referenced it. It was about 308, possibly 309 pages. It was estimated to be a couple thousand pages, but there was no way for us to know for sure. I started spot checking it. The guy was right on. I mean, the documents were not there. So I filed a FOIA request in March of 2016

for those 308, 310. 309 documents. I had no idea that the CIA would push back and push back hard on getting a hold of those documents. And through the course of over two and a half years, it took me a long time to prove to the CIA that those documents were missing. They claimed they were on the CD. So I went back and actually triple checked and nothing was on the CD ROMs. Now, why am I saying this. Well, if they were not on the CD-ROM and I was able to prove it, they would give them to me for free because I paid for those CDs and I was told everything on MK Ultra was on it. They said, nope, they're on it, they're on it, fought. I finally had to create like a 95-page fax, literally,

a fax of 95 pages that broke down the entire directory contents of all four CDs. and prove to them that the documents were gone. All of a sudden, CIA changed their story. My FOIA case officer, they won't even tell me, and this is unheard of, he won't even tell me his first name, he won't even tell me who he is. And not the nicest person would not acknowledge then that I was right. He then said, the reason why you don't have those is they're on behavioral modification, not on MK Ultra or mind control.

And I thought, well, you know, that doesn't make sense. So to summarize, and again, this is going on for literally years, he then said, you have 4,358 pages that you need to pay for. Those were the missing documents. They were not on mind control, not on MK Ultra, but rather this behavioral modification. And so I crowdfunded it and Vice News covered it. My fight Newsweek covered it. I raised the money in like a day.

And so I, you know, I mean, it wasn't a ton of money, but the kind of stuff adds up, you know. And so I sent the check. Two and a half more months go by. They sent my check back with a stack of pages about 800 pages, all on mind control and MK Ultra. Their letter stated they made a mistake that the 800, you know, pages were mine for free. and then all of a sudden about 1,245 pages of that page count disappeared. They said now there's only 2,316. So, again, 1245 disappeared.

If that original 800, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, if that original 800 came out of that number, it's only 1245. If it didn't, it's over 2,000 pages that just vanished. Then they said it's 2,316 pages. So I had to write another check why they thought that they couldn't, you know, cash my first one and, you know, send me a check or something, at least process it or, you know, do something. I mean, this is going on for years. Finally, in the last two weeks, I actually got the entire stack of behavioral modification documents. And they're pretty extraordinary to look through.

They deal with hypnosis. They deal with mind-altering drugs, research that they were doing on mice, on dogs, animals, seeing what kind of effects that they can get. It's sickening in a way, but it's an amazing research to look into. I have reason to believe that the majority of these documents have never seen the light of day before. that there are project names in these documents that remain classified. This contradicts the overall narrative by the CIA that they've released everything on mind control, behavioral modification and so on. And yet in these documents are project names that they won't even tell you the names.

And so these are, I believe, kind of the tip of the iceberg to some really dark, sinister stuff that the, you know, that the government is doing. Oddly as well, 35%. There was 821 pages, which is about 35% of this release that dealt with, you guessed it,

MK Ultra and mind control that they still charged me for. And they lied yet again about what the documents contained. That's important because they charge me for them and they told me that I was not supposed to pay

for anything in regards to MK Ultra. So I have appealed that. And in a weird turn of events here, like literally in the last 48 hours, the CIA called me, left a voicemail like 6 a.m. almost on the button. And they, they refused to process my appeal. And they said that my case was closed, which actually, in my opinion, is a going against the law that I actually have appeal rights. Yeah. It's really bizarre. It really is. How can they do that? Yeah, I'm reason. I don't know. I mean, I wish I knew. I've called them back. And again, without, this is why I brought up that the guy won't even give me his name. I've talked to him before months ago. And it got heated on the phone. Like, I was trying to remain professional. I'm like, you don't understand. Like, I pay your paycheck. You know what I mean? Like, you're not doing me a favor here. This is your job. I don't get paid for this. I have wasted hours. hours and hours of my time, let alone the time that the original researcher did on his time, you know, on his time, you know, this isn't fun for me. And the guy was rude. I mean,

there's really no other way to put it. Well, it's the same gentleman that called back. He refuses to give his name. So when I call the hotline, they call it a FOIA hotline for the CIA. There is a nice gentleman that does answer the phone. I know what his name is. But he, like, you can't even get transferred to the guy's desk. Like, like they won't even, they'll say, okay, we'll pass it to your case manager, and he will call you. And it's like you're calling some dark bunker in Beirut, you know? I mean, like, that's how this one guy acts. And it's like, come on, man, you're a FOIA officer.

There's not a single agency where the officers don't give me their name. And so I was told the case was closed. So the nice gentleman on the phone told me, why don't you resend your letter? It will come in through the fax five feet from my desk. and I will take it up the chain of command, but don't make it an appeal. So I said, okay. And so I stripped out the appeal words. And we'll see if I get a response.

But to go back to your question, how can they do that? I really honestly don't know. I've talked to two FOIA attorneys that have become friends and acquaintances of mine in the last 20 years. And I very rarely try to bother them, but this was one that I reached out to both of them. Both of them agreed they cannot do this. So I am not an attorney, but I've learned enough about the law to kind of work my way around it. But these attorneys said, no, they can't do that. So what it is about these documents and, you know, the topic with the CIA, you could tell it really struck a nerve.

Yeah. Well, in the fact that a lot of the project names are still classified. I mean, that's not that uncommon. I mean, things remain classified for a really long time, but even after they're finished. but it could, you know, again, I don't want to get too conspiratorial. I mean, they're still going on. You mentioned I cut you off there. There's a missing document.

Yeah, John, this sounds a little odd to me. As the Krispy Chicken Sandwich from 7-Eleven, people always call me loud. And I'm like, yeah, I know. I'm crispy. Did you expect me to whisper? If you want quiet, going some soup and reflect. Like, I know I'm a handful. I'm bold, I'm juicy.

Throw some pickles and barbecue sauce on me, and baby I'm a whole. Oh, meal. And with seven rewards, I'm just $4. Quiet. No. Krispy, saucy, and $4? Very. Only at 711.

Valley through 62326 participating stores only while supplies last the app for full terms. Yeah. And that's with this particular one, you're right. The project names being classified is not necessarily that big of a deal. With this specific topic, it is a big deal simply because there have been congressional hearings. about a lot of this mind control, MK Ultra, you know, testing with drugs and stuff. So a lot of that was forced to be declassified. And the CIA has always maintained that they have released these records.

So let's say, you know, the Oscar Diggs, the original researcher who compiled this list, did not do that. I did not go after these documents and it has remained the four CD-ROM set. If you were to file a FOIA request, they would give you that same set. The reason why I bring that up is that is a largely incomplete document archive that the CIA is selling to the public. And yet they're doing so saying that it is complete. And why is that important? Because there is a huge amount of history in these thousands of pages that I just got that shows that it goes much deeper than what they claim is the whole story. You follow me on that?

Yeah. That for literally decades, they have said, Uh, you know, we, we, here's our full story. This is everything. We've compiled the CD-ROM set. Yet behind the scenes, I mean, look, it took this many years for somebody to finally look at that index and go line by line and realize it's far from complete. And then on top of that, project names that remain classified, that shows there's much more to this story. A lot more research needs to be done. And, and those classified project names, I'm trying to go after to see if I can get them, you know, declassified. But when you look at it, you realize these are just the documents that appeared on that original index. And the point that I make with that is that that's just that

index. There could be tens of thousands of other records on these classified project names that have never seen the light of day at all, ever, and may not for many years to come. Who knows? But there are probably a lot more pages to really show what they're doing. And you might be right. Maybe even to this day. Who knows? Yeah. Maybe we only scratch the surface. But I have just started looking at the documents on this, John, on your website. So, you know, wrapping things up here. Where can we find the website and your radio show? This is sort of a newer endeavor. You've brought the Black Vault to life online in podcast and radio forms. So please give those to us. before we leave here.

Sure, sure. And I appreciate that. So it's really easy. If you go to www. the black vault.com, once you enter the site, you go into the document archive. That'll give you all the government documents.

There is a, it's one of the, on the top image slider, you'll see a picture of an eagle, which comes from the CIA logo, and it's the Central Intelligence Agency behavioral modification collection. That's everything that we just talked about.

including the story, I give much more detail and, you know, show all the letters and everything. On the right-hand side of every single page, pretty much that you go to, you will see links to the radio show. So I do have a lot of fun with that and bring on, you know, fun guests. And I did one in the last couple of episodes where kind of what you and I chatted about with the original UFO research and A-Tip, it ended up being like two and a half hours long. I didn't mean for it. It was awesome.

I appreciate that, but I just kind of did a, you know, a real story and expose based on documents, you know, and the facts as we know it, all the way up to the claims of, you know, Mr. Elizondo and what the Pentagon says, what he says, how in some cases they, you know, collide and, and contradict each other. So I have fun in that respect doing that show. And it got got kind of a lot of, a lot of comments and download. So I wasn't sure how that would go over because generally I do bring guests on and let guests speak. And this was the first time I just kind of did an information only show. So you'll see that on the right hand side near the top. You'll see the logo for the Black Vault Radio. And then you can download all of the episodes. Again, you know, I sort of look at this whole topic with both skeptical eyes and open eyes.

But at the end of the day, when I visit your site and I read between the lines of these. documents, that's when I truly think there's something to this, there are things being hidden, there are things not being hidden, and somewhere in between those is, you know, I think that truth that both you and I are and so many other people are trying to look for. So I have learned so much tonight from this conversation, and I know it's only begun our conversation and the greater conversation to still be had on all of this. So once again, man, I have to thank you for coming on Somewhere in the Skies. Oh, I appreciate that, man.

Anytime. Anytime you want to have a chat, you know where to find me. That's it for this week's episode. Again, all of John Greenwald's work can be found at the blackfault.com. Please take a few moments to subscribe, rate, and review somewhere in the skies on Apple Podcasts. It helps us gain visibility and new listeners. We're on Twitter at Somewhere Skies and Instagram at SomewhereSkies pod. Please also subscribe to our growing YouTube. channel for exclusive video content. Just search for the Ryan Sprague chain. Thank you to HelloFresh,

the E1 Podcast Network, KGRA Radio, and most importantly, to you for listening. I'll see you here next week. And remember, keep your feet on the ground, but never stop searching somewhere in the skies. Somewhere in the Skies is produced by Third Kind Productions in association with the Entertainment One Podcast Network. To learn more, visit Entertainment One Podcast. com.