WEAPONIZED with Jeremy Corbell & George Knapp - Inside the DIAs Secretive UFO Investigation - Guests : Dr. James Lacatski & Dr. Colm Kelleher

Episode Date: October 17, 2023

The largest acknowledged UFO investigation ever funded by the US government (AAWSAP) was overseen by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The two men who managed the overall objectives and the day to day operations of AAWSAP, veteran intelligence analyst and rocket scientist Dr. James Lacatski and his colleague Dr. Colm Kelleher, helped compile the most comprehensive UFO database ever assembled. Among those 200,000 UFO cases and incidents were some stunning, seemingly inexplicable demonstrations of technology that appeared far more advanced than anything known to exist on Earth. In this episode, Lacatski and Kelleher spill details about the physics and engineering of UFO technology and shared a blockbuster revelation about a mysterious craft of unknown origin.  Pick up the new book "Inside the US Government Covert UFO Program" on Amazon here : https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CKP3YQRM  •••  GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at [e-mail]  For breaking news, follow Corbell & Knapp on all social media.  Extras and bonuses from the episode can be found at https://WeaponizedPodcast.com  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed-sponsored jobs. It gives your job posts the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications, and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this shelf will get a $75-sponsored job credit at Indeed.com slash podcast. That's Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply.

Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed-sponsored jobs. Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank. Okay, but the real men in black, are we talking about humans or non-human intelligence? What is the real men in black compared to just government agents being, you know, interrogating people? I think there's enough evidence in the literature to indicate that the fundamental

The phenomenon may be associated with some cases of what we call men in black. But what are they? Secrets, cover-ups, and strange phenomena. UFOs and ideas that challenge reality itself. All these mysteries, all this time. Are we ever going to get to the bottom of these? My name is George Knapp. I dig into news stories that others can't or won't.

I'm Jeremy Corbell, and for some reason people tell me things they probably shouldn't. And this is weaponize. All right, you guys, welcome to weaponized. We had some technological problems. I'm going to blame that on George Knapp, but we have a great episode with Dr. James Lekatsky, Dr. Colum Kelleher, talking about the UFO programs and their new book, which is inside the U.S. government

cover UFO program, initial revelations. So jumping on in with all you all, here we go. Jim Lekatsky, it's so great to have you in Column here to talk about ASAP. For the benefit of our audience, it does not understand the difference between ASAP and ATIP, that your new book inside the U.S. government covert UFO program initial revelations really draws a distinction. And it's not bashing atyp. It's not going after Lou Elizondo or showing differences, but there were distinct differences between those two programs. Can you outline for our audience those who are not aware of what each of those acronyms mean what the difference was.

Well, the Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications Program was basically created between myself and Senator Reid at the Defense Intelligence Agency. It was a $22 million program. It had the capability of going five years. We completed our objectives in two years. You might say it was test of various components of a UFO, UAP, paranormal research program. Right from the beginning, it included all aspects of both UFOs and the paranormal in relationship to UFOs. It was a contract that was put out on the Internet. It had a quick turnaround because of the funding mechanism. The first year was $10 million. The second year was $12 million.

And we got it out. We had numerous interested parties who wished to bid on the contract, but following the regulations, it first had to go to small businesses. Well, the only small business, we found small businesses that were capable of bidding on it, but they chose not to. Bob Bigelow's Bass created specifically, and that was so important to DIA,

specifically to address our needs in this program. And when I say needs, we used a new method of putting out this request for proposal. We did not tell the contractor, the bidder, what to do.

We said, this is what we wanted achieved, how would you do it? And that's how this program was created and had specifically all the right components. Let me back up a little bit just for our listeners, people that are listening and also just for the visual audience here. Dr. Lackatsky, first of all, in December 2017, the world learned that there was a UFO study program and that it was funded for $22 million. dollars. They heard that that program was called A-TIP, but what you've told us is that, no, you ran the program in the DIA for studying UFOs, and it was called Osset, Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program. So you're talking now about a government study, a UFO program, studying all the physics and the nature of UFOs up to date. And so you're kind of coming forward with these books, with Dr. Kelleher and George Knapp, And you're laying it out for people. This is what we did.

This is how we did it. We don't want it to get messed up. You know, we want to tell you what happened. It's a big deal. It's a big deal that you're speaking to us right now as, you know, someone from the DIA who studied UFOs. So I guess the question for me, you know, for me, very simple, audience kind of might want to know, is that when that came out December 2017 and you didn't see, you know, your program, named there. I mean, what does that feel like? Are you doing this because you want to clarify

the record to the public? Exactly. And we stated that clearly in Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. We want to clarify the record. Now we're giving the details of the record. Now, the thing is, is A-Tip, the name itself, I did not create that name, but it was created for a specific reason. and I don't think that's ever been printed. It was done, yes, in Senator Reid's letter asking for special access program. That's been out in the press for, what, five years now. But where did the need for a different name come from? It came from, which took me by surprise.

When I saw the funding someone, in other words, the notification of funding that, yes, DIA was getting this money. It was on a piece of paper that had highly classified programs listed on the rest of the paper, and someone in Congress put secret on the program name and its very abbreviated contents that were on that document. I did not want to get us crossways with any security considerations. I wanted a different name. Now, I believe that who we called Axelrod or perhaps L.A.Z. Or perhaps some of their cohort, and maybe all of them came up with the name ATIP. That name would have been a great problem for DIA because AASAP routed the money to the defense warning office of DIA, period. It had to be that name.

So the contract may have been called that too, because that's what we put at the open solicitation that can still be found on the Internet. And I've repeated in Skinwalkers at the Pentagon of, you know, a concise amount of material as to what we requested. But that's where the name A-TIP came from. A-TIP was something that was necessary to be proceeded with on military cases. Lou handled that I was not privy because it was mainly spun up as I was getting ready to retire. I will say this, though, that when I left, all of our references were electronically, specifically scanned in electronically. a DIA. Now, I can't say what happened in the years since I retired in 2016. It could have been that they're purged. But they weren't physical records. So I don't see why there is a problem

and people asking for them except for the fact, and this is why these books are required. Most of them were proprietary. Remember, they were monthly reports from the conference. and specialized studies. They had people's names, contractor names, the facilities that were being bought and constructed. They had security information.

They had all of this, and I have already told, I wasn't asked to have these documents clean for release, but the preparation, proprietary information is so much, I said preemptively, I wouldn't take on that job. It's just too much. We're doing it in this manner, so the public knows what went on in that program within the constraints of security.

I hope that answers your question, because ATIP was a specialized small program. It had access, I'm sure, to funds that. I also had access to but not used on this program of where we can go out and, let's say, review facilities at DIA. I used them to review missile contractors. In other words, so I could learn the nuts and bolts. But money, I'm sure, was available for ATIP, but nowhere near $22 million in two years. That's really helpful.

So, George, we're talking about that, like how ATIP kept its legs because it was heroism. in an attempt to kind of continue it, the fact there was money available, wasn't out of the $22 million. And we're making that clear. It was misreported in the New York Times. However, it is nice to know that somehow how they got any funding to do the work they were doing. Yes. And I was aware of some of the programs, the cases that they were looking into. And I can say without going into detail, because it's a classified.

endeavor, I was fascinated by one of their cases because it was a repeat from the 60s. And if you go through our databases, you're going to see cases where people claim, wait a minute, I saw the same UFO when I was 20 years younger. And those cases kind of fascinate me. How can that be? At least, are we talking about time machines? What are we talking about? But you will find that another fascinating point of our huge databases, it would be the equivalent of us going out for a drive in our car.

And every car and truck we meet on the road is of a different design. I mean, to me, that's an interesting insight because when people make up charts, and we have a nice one of all the configurations of UFOs, And those are main configurations, like triangle. They're very many variants of triangles. It's like, how can this be? I mean, it's like certainly we're doing things exactly the opposite in the auto industry. Every SUV looks like every other SUV. You have to look at the name badge in order to tell what brand is that.

I like it or I dislike it. But right now I like them all, mainly, because they all look like. And the UFO's totally the opposite. There's one particular UFO design that gets discussed in the book that you reveal, and if you blink, you'll miss it. But it's maybe the most controversial and important piece of information that this book conveys. You say something at the beginning of Chapter 9 about, a craft of unknown origin that our government

finally accessed the inside. Can you share with us what's in the book? And is there anything else you can add to that? Well, what's in the book is an exact statement of the event that occurred in the, let's say in a congressional facility. There was more to it. considerably more to that discussion about what this situation was. We can't go into that because it's, and when I, I mean, Paul and I, yes, we know about it. People are interested in it, I'm quite sure, but security has to trump everything else.

A lot of things can be said, this was, this book, as was Skinwalkers at the Pentagon, I keep flashing book, basically was reviewed by the Department of Defense for released and approved the wording that's in it, the wording. If we varied that wording, we'd get back. This was a seven-month review. This was quick. DoD. on Skinwalker's hit the Pentagon took 14 months to review that book. And there was, I agreed with all of the changes on both of these books. I agreed with, except for one, I made the fatal mistake of complimenting the help from a non-D organization. And it was, whoa, we can't do that.

We've got to align that out. And so that was the only thing that was a straight line out. DoD helped us reward things. by their security regulations. And so you're getting as much as we can say. Jeremy, hold on, hold on, hold on. So for our audience that's listening, George has dropped in Adam Baum because it was dropped in the book.

So audience is just listening. I'm going to read you something. Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is California's number one entertainment destination for today's superstars. Catch the Jonas Brothers return to the Yamava Theater stage on April 30th. The powerful vocals of Demi Lovato on May 17th.

and the signature Southern Country Rock of Eric Church on July 19th. Tickets on sale now at Yamava Theater.com, only at Yamava Resort and Casino, celebrating its 40th anniversary. You in? Must be 21 to enter. All new drinks are now at McDonald's, with refreshers like the strawberry watermelon refresher, and the mango pineapple refresher with popping boba, to crafted sodas like the Sprite Berry Blast,

with berry flavors and cold, foam. Who knew ice cold drinks could be so fire? Try them all now at McDonald's. Refreshers contain caffeine. Copyright 2026, the Coca-Cola Company. Sprite is a registered trademark of the Coca-Cola Company. Beginning of Chapter 9, at the conclusion of a 2011 meeting in the Capitol building with a U.S. Senator and an agency under Secretary, Lakatsky, the only one of the books authors present, posed a question. But this is where it gets good. He stated, meaning you, Dr. Lekatsky, that the United States was in possession of a craft of unknown origin and had successfully gained access to its interior. This craft had a streamlined

configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight, but no intakes, exhaust, wings, or control surfaces. In fact, it appeared not to have an engine, fuel tanks, or fuel. Now, there's a next part, read in a minute. But what this is, is you're officially allowed to tell us that the United States government has in its possession a craft of unknown origin and you are able to access the inside. Is that correct? The wording that you read is correct. Ah, you're going beyond the wording. No, I'm not. I'm asking you, did that mean happen? And is it true? And it's true. Yes. Yes. Okay. You're telling us, you told us because you were allowed to tell us that our government has a UFO in its possession and has been able to access the inside of it, right? Yes. Well, that's what I was allowed to tell you, let me show the back of the book. This is. I know, I know, but hold up. George. We use, we translate, George.

Let's try another tack. How do we know it's a craft and not a doorstop? We accessed it. It has no engine. It has no engine. has no wings, no, no fuel. It doesn't, we don't know that it travels. Do we know it's a craft or it's just a rock? George, you're going into the further discussion that occurred that day. All right. We can't, we can't go there. But let me tell you, we're going to try to cover that in the future. But it's, it's, it's, it makes, it makes, it, why is it. Why is it delicate? I've described in here look primitive. Why is it delicate? Why is this topic the United States government has a UFO in its possession and we've been

reverse engineering it? You've done admitted it. Why is it delicate? The details. I'm old school. I'll use the term, I won't use the term adversary competitor as the way we describe. We are surrounded, maybe not surrounded. but hopefully not so by our enemies.

And our enemies, you can be sure they're listening to this show right now. You can be sure that they were monitoring ASAP. You can be sure that perhaps they had employees, hopefully not in GIA, but in the contractor part, that was, we're giving out information for I am I am I know that so the thing is is we can't say anything more than what we've been approved to say and there's insight to this but I want to I want to I want to shift it just slightly but it shows my point skin walkers at the Pentagon and initial revelations if I might use the shorter title on this new book has not what I would call zingers in it, but has some interesting doors that have not been even mentioned. One, why was this program started? Two, why was this program ended?

And we've raised this partially in Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. Did it end? Also, we had a chapter in Skinwalkers at the Pentagon where we met with a high-level a Brazilian official at a meeting, started introducing some of our cohorts. And no one ever asked us, why did you have that meeting? What was so important about that meeting? You know, there's a lot of material in there that as Kit Green, Dr. Kit Green, one of our consultants on the OSSEP program said, read between the lines.

that applies both to skinwalkers at the Pentagon and initial revelations. Read between the lines. Now, you may come to the wrong conclusions, and I can tell you on the topics I just read, you don't have enough information to come to the correct answers. Okay, so why? Sorry, go ahead, Jeremy. Go ahead. So why did the, you're asking, one big question people should ask is why was the UFO program started?

Maybe you can't tell the full story, but give us a hint. Why was the UFO program started? You said that's important. I can't do that without documenting more and getting approval. I mean, can I assume. You just can't do that. I know, Jeremy, you and I have met previously several times, and you want the bottom line.

But the bottom line may not, let me just give you, the bottom line may not be what you anticipate. In other words, there may be no bottom line. There may be multiple bottom lines. And we've got a lot of work. If Arrow is going to move forward from this point, they've got a lot more work to do. Why, one of the questions that you posed to us just now

was why was the program started? Okay, you can't answer that. But another question you're saying people should ask is why did you do all the defense intelligence reference documents. So can you answer that? Why did you do all those defense intelligence reference documents? And the answer is no, I can't answer that because that would that would be an answer that would just floor people. Really? Yes. The real answer. And by the way, I don't know whether there's ever been real criticism, but there kind of has by the nature of some of

topics. We solicited the input for the topics for the 38 papers from from Air Force Intelligence, CIA, Naval Intelligence, and Ground Intelligence. Those are the topics they chose to do, but they were completely legitimate at the time and by the way they're pretty close to state of the art right now. Okay. So that's one thing I would like to say about the timeliness of our program or the timelessness. If this program, ASAP, you know, the physics would have been different back in the 50s and 60s. Or if this was being done in the 2007s and 80s, what is being covered in this book and what Arrow has been mandated to do by Congress is timeless.

In other words, you will be doing the same thing, regardless of the time frame. It's just that, I'm sure, configurations. If there are any further configurations there could possibly be of craft will be available in the future. But, you know, triangles have been seen back into the 60s, and I'm sure we'll be seen into the future. Flying saucers, even craft that look like something from the jet. have been seen, you know, the flying saucer with a big bubble on it with occupants.

That's all the same. In other words, if you look at ASAP and study what's in ASAP and try to answer some of the questions, you're not wasting your time. In other words, there's a timelessness to it. So we hit some technical problems, which is not strange for us. But we got George Knapp here on the phone, and we're just getting, you know, back down to the point. So George, I was asking you, help me, this guy, Lakatsky, he's being a little dodgy as a reporter. I can't nail him down.

We're talking about why these, why our government would, or why he can't talk more about this. So I don't know. Help me out, George. Jeremy. Well, Jim LaKatsky is the rock of Gibraltar. he's not going to answer that question for you. If he's decided not to answer it, he's not going to. I was thinking maybe there's another way in.

We could go around the corner here. Let's start with column. Column, this book is so much different from skin markers at the Pentagon. And that was not an idle decision. Jim had used the phrase earlier in this conversation, nuts and bolts, which you will recall, you and I were kicking around ideas for a possible title for the book. And nuts and bolts came up.

But we didn't think that having the word nuts in a UFO book was a good idea. The point is that first Skinwalkers at the Pentagon had a lot of weird stuff. And people think, well, maybe we made a mistake by including all those stories of strange paranormal type events that were highly criticized. But in fact, that was part of the focus of OSAP. why this different approach this time? What distinction is being made here? Well, the critical part of OSAP that we tried to convey in skin markers at the Pentagon was that there were two fundamental parallel tracks that OSAP ran on. The first one was the examination of UFO performance.

And, you know, the UFO performance part was getting all of the data from eyewitnesses, plus deploying sensors into the field in order to gather data on the performance of UFOs. That was track number one. And track number two was what effects do UFOs have on humans? That was a parallel track that from the get-go, OSAP decided unambiguously to run both tracks in parallel.

Skinwalkers at the Pentagon focused a lot of its reporting on the second part, which is the effects of UFOs on humans. So to summarize that book, we looked at a variety of effects on humans that included medical effects. We documented several medical effects, pathological effects, physiological effects, people having weird metallurgical. tastes in their mouth, sometimes hair loss and a whole bunch of other things. We documented psychological effects and then we also documented paranormal effects. So all of these under the rubric of, you know, effects on humans were reported in Skinwalkers of the Pentagon. A lot of the pushback that we got from that book was that these guys were using taxpayers' money to camp out on Skinwalker ranch and, you know, basically document dogman, dino beavers and a whole bunch of other weird

stuff. Whereas in fact, that was only a very minor part of the entire OSAP program. So the purpose of the second book is to balance that whole thing out. And so we unambiguously focused the reporting on the, on initial, you know, initial revelations, the second book. on the nuts and bolts aspects of the UFO phenomenon, which was half of what OSAP was doing. So the purpose of the second book is really to look at the UFO performance angle strictly from only the performance angle. You know, things like, you know, lift, propulsion, power generation, spatial temporal translation,

configuration, a whole bunch of other aspects of UFO performance that is translatable into theoretical physics, eventually into engineering. So that's really the second. In the only other interview you've given about offset, you had said that the DIRDS essentially established a baseline for analysis. It's a baseline of here's what humans. are known to be able to do. Here's what we think humans will be able to do in 50 years.

And when we look at UFO cases that you do in great detail in this book, it is clear that this is technology that we certainly didn't have 50 years ago, that we don't have now. And it's not even clear we will have 50 years hence. This is a nuts and bolts UFO book, and it was a nuts and bolts UFO program, correct? Yes. Absolutely correct. Now, the thing is, is there have been, again, on the Internet,

because anything can be said on the Internet, it seems, factual or not. Well, one thing that is not factual is DIA knew what it was getting into in regard to both aspects that column just described you. And let me end my statement right here. We had no choice. but to pursue both aspects. Why? I said I ended it.

Come on, man. Again. Hey, let me tell you, Jeremy, you cannot compete with, so the offers that have been made to me. I'm joking now, but this is factual. Airplane tickets, speaker presentations, car rentals, hotel rooms, pay for You just can't compete with all that. I can throw a steak dinner. They've already done that.

But you know what they always want. Listen, listen, I am way more handsome and way more charming than any of those other people asking you to spill. You know, the thing is that the bottom line is what they all want. And then when I hear the phone of being clunked on me is when I say, I cannot go beyond what is stated in the book. Now, of course, now they're two books. I can't go beyond that because it needs to... Oh, that's okay. You gave us a great one.

You told us U.S. government is interested in UFOs, is studying UFOs, has been studying UFOs, is reverse engineering UFOs, has one, and got inside of one. Okay, well, thank you. Thank you. That's... Okay. So let me ask you about some current events here. I really want to get your opinion on this.

So as we know, we're out in Congress, and you saw, like everybody else, and in fact, I mean, I'll spill the beans a little bit myself. We were hoping you were going to testify in front of Congress. You didn't, but David Grush did. So I want to ask you your opinion. Here's a guy who says that he was looking at reverse engineering programs, black budget programs, and has provided a whistleblower statement through the Presidential Protection Act, came forward and told us all these things that he believes them to be true from his investigations into 40 witnesses and that has been corroborated by being labeled urgent and credible by our Inspector General of Intelligence, what David Grush said.

So what are your thoughts on David Grush and what he said at that hearing? I don't know, Mr. Grush. Never met him. I was asked almost verbatim the same question by a congressional office to me, a telephone conversation and I said I don't have a comment what he's saying is credible now let me do say one thing that I never witnessed and I don't know if column ever witnessed this but I never saw any what I would consider illegal activities I saw security procedures that are paramount but not illegal activities so I don't concur with that but it's reasonable

what he's saying. And that's what I told. Okay, it's reasonable, it's reasonable that we have UFOs, we're reverse engineering, that there are biologicals associated with those practicals because I can't say anything about that. Why can't you say you don't know or? I can't say anything about that, Jeremy. Okay, no, that's great. That's great. So just another question about that, right? Have you ever? Have you ever? Are you loaded with questions? Because someone criticize me. Gave me a three rating on Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. Where do they read

this one? They said it's textbook like. Well, in the sense, they are. They're a learning instrument and one thing, I don't know if I discussed it with you, column, but I was going to put like a textbook questions

in the back of each chapter. What do you think and what do you just further? Now, I wasn't going to give an answer sheet to But basically, I think that people really need to delve deeper into the books they have. And, you know, I personally love hard copies, but at some point it's going to be hard to flip back and forth. You obviously are doing it well, Jeremy. I always had trouble on an electronic copy of flipping back and forth.

I like hard copies. Well, yeah, for sure. Well, listen, however you get the information. information out. It's great. So let me ask you this, though. The big, the big question with David Gresh was they're like, well, he didn't see a UFO. Now, you're in a meeting in the Capitol Hill and you're telling them, we have a UFO. We've gotten inside of it. Did you see it yourself? Can't answer that. Okay, but if the answer was no, you could answer that, right? No, that comes, goes back to something that occurred a similar question, very similar to your

question. It wasn't asked by you, but it was asked to call him. And he said, we, we found no smoking gun. That is the standard answer were to give. So I could say no, and it's still not be the truth. So the thing is, is security is paramount. We follow the rules, and there's a good reason, a good reason to follow them. Yeah, you can't tell me that good reason. We've talked about that. You can't give me a reason. You can't give me that good reason, but you're alluding to a really good reason why you can't tell me more about biologics, UFOs, exploitation. You can only say what you said.

I get that. I wish you could give me a good reason because it makes me very suspicious. It makes people like me very suspicious. Like what is it? Is the reason so dark? Is it so disturbing? I see, if you want my opinion on that, I see no darkness at all here. here. Basically, there was some considerable write-ups on the Skinwalker at the Pentagon that our

program was stopped due to religious concerns from the far right. Well, if there were, I knew nothing about that. I saw no evidence of that being true. But people can say whatever they want on the Internet, apparently. And that, that was. was not, that was not, I did not witness any of that. And I think that that's come up in some of these congressional areas. George Sansevati. In Skinwalkers at the Pentagon and column has backed us up in public statements, both of you indicated that you were on the trail of reverse engineering, crash saucer, meta materials, weird stuff. You went knocking at different places and the door was slammed in your face. That sounds like you were looking for exactly what we're talking about

right here. Is that wrong? Of course not. That was part of the program. But I'm saying the door being slammed in our face wasn't because of suspected demonic activities within this at all. In fact, I would say there's evidence that this is something. something of a nature that, well, I better not say much more. If full human capabilities were known to us right now, it is not something that we need to fear. And I do not, I just don't believe it. Maybe I'm influenced by my Catholic faith.

I don't know, but I'm optimistic. I think everything heads toward good. What do you mean by if full human capabilities were understood? Oh, we don't use any, any, we'll get into that later at some later point. But our capabilities, as Columwell knows, he's probably an expert in all of these areas, more so than me, is our capabilities have never been fully revealed and we're still learning. We've been a long way to evolve still. George, what were you saying?

Well, there are two questions I've asked, and neither one of them were answered. But the first one was, were the dourds established as a baseline? Because that's what has been said before. They were a baseline. Oh, yes, yes. By which we can measure. That's correct. Their capabilities are.

Yes, they're a baseline. Well, they're a baseline, but also the purpose of them was to project 40 to 50 to 50, to 50 years out in the future in terms of the best known projections by the sort of the best people at hand. So they were a baseline, but they were also projecting into the future so that there would be an attempt to look at UFO performance and then marry those to the projections, the baseline projections. All right.

Well, the second part of the question was, do we not, in fact, report in skin, at the Pentagon that you guys went knocking on doors asking about these materials. The materials, and I'm assuming we're talking about crash saucer type stuff, that was part of what the bass plant was modified to receive. That was part of the contract, that you were asked to prepare to receive certain materials that you never got, and you went looking for them, and that's when the door was slammed in your face. Pallum, am I characterizing that incorrectly? Well, slightly because the people who were moving forward on that were not, they were working with the Allsap program, but they weren't part of the Allsac program.

And remember George, am I incorrect that you guys looking for stuff? Remember, George, there's always multiple doors. There are always multiple ways of doing things. So just because a door was slammed in our face, is that a common expression that we're using? Is that all we can say? Remember, I and Column became this, are experts at taking higher classification material and describing it at lower classifications.

There is no contradiction between the two. It's just that the lower classification isn't complete. And I can tell you there's a lot of material here in both books. It's not complete. And it can't be at this point. Okay. Well, we've dodged the question again. Is you pursuing this material?

Were you trying to find this good? You know, part of your question is there's material in the, there's material. Are you talking about material to be investigated? In other words, pieces falling off flying saucers? Or are you talking about full-blown craft? You know, there's a big difference. And I'm not so sure that I would ever characterize it that we were constructing facilities in order to look at full-blown craft. I mean, again, we're talking about a commitment of money. Bob Bigelow went over well over and well and beyond commitment to the contract.

I mean, we stopped tracking a DIA, his losses at $1.5 million. Now, is he going to be constructing large facilities? There's a lot of statements that have been made. on the internet that partially ring true but ultimately aren't really true. I mean, that's a large commitment of money on his part. And as a contractor, he's responsible for having his supplying the facilities, not the government. Right. But didn't he retrofit Bigelow Aerospace?

I mean, Dr. Callagher, maybe you could talk about this, but didn't he retrofit Bigelow Aerospace in hopes to gain either some material? or a full craft, you've already told us that we have a full craft that we got inside it, that we've been reverse engineering within our government. Didn't he want to be part of that and get some of that material? Part of the contract was that, you know, DIA wanted a facility security clearance bestowed on some of the buildings associated with Bigel O'Arice Advanced Space Studies. And so in order to be accredited to achieve that facility security clearance, a lot of retrofitting was necessary.

So, you know, the National Security Agency got involved and all of these audits happened on a very regular basis. So you had to dock the eyes and cross the T's. That was a part of the requirements of the contract that we had to perform. That's a very different thing from, you know, building a hangar outside Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in order to receive a craft. I mean, we were mandated by the contract in order to adhere to facility security clearance requirements. Okay. So let me just go one last time. So basically, David Grush, what he told us, you both feel that that information is credible, right? Is that what you implied?

It's credible, but I'm simply saying he worked with someone that I know and trust as the UAP task force leader. And I think you should take his statements. Now, whether or not, if we could just take a moment here, I've observed to call him something that is, I'm looking at a particular. in regard to UFOs and the paranormal. There are people who have written, have talked about things they are absolutely wrong about. But they totally believe it. They, I mean, they, you can't call them liars. They totally believe it.

Now, how many of those people that David Grush came across are fit in that category? going. I could name a list of them right now, but I won't. I mean, obviously, I, I, I, I, uh, I respect their opinions, but I know what they're saying is false. So it's a phenomenon now. I certainly hope that does not spread across all topics on the internet because we're in big trouble if that's the case because that means people are, hmm, is delusional the correct word? I'm not a psychological. psychiatrist or psychologist. I don't know what it is. Yeah, but hold on because we don't have Grush here to talk about who we talk with.

He talks about program names. He talked about program names. He talked about holding locations of UFOs, which you've already admitted, that we've got them and we've been exploiting them. So he's talking about things that are very tangible and physical, people that worked on UFOs, those programs. Part of the 40 witnesses that came forward to him are people that actually worked on these legacy UFO programs, which he says exists. We've talked about it. All the four of us have talked about it.

We know UFO legacy programs have existed whether or not you can talk about it or not. We know that they existed. So just to give, you know, kind of looking at what he said, he's saying that there are individuals with direct first-hand experience. It's not opinions they can be wrong or right about it. It's whether or not these programs existed and we have these craft we've been working on. Okay. And I have seen in multiple cases what I would call, can only call,

forged documents. Okay, so there's another thing we should talk about. So what do you mean by that? There have been forged documents. There are documents talking about programs that are not legitimate documents. Within intelligence servers within your industry, there are forged documents inside of our governments and you know or what are you talking about just on the internet are you talking about both really what how how could that happen forged documents with inside our intelligence agencies

they even covered this on an X-files episode every special access program has a counterintelligence officer that's their job you know it's it's their job so you know it's their job so you You know, you might say, well, wait a minute, Jim and then call them our counterintelligence officer. No, we're not. You know, there's no reason to be. But if you're in a program, you have, you have that person either assigned to you or you bring them in.

And there's a source of forged documents right there. Have your listeners and readers go back through the UFO history. And you'll see fingers pointing to others that, again, I won't name them, that, hey, this is all fabricated. Yeah, like Rick Doty, that's who you're talking about, maybe. Can't say. Oh, hold on. Here's George. Here's George.

He's going to say something. Go ahead, George. Which counterintelligence officer wrote this in Skin Markers at the Pentagon on page one? Okay. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. He'll read it. 152.

Yeah, Sasha, Mover, and Jim Bell began knocking on doors beyond DHS to connect with, quote, the keepers of the secrets in at least two other agencies. In these meetings, which took place June, July 2011, Sasha, Jim, and colleagues were treated rudely and harshly. Bell and Mover were repeatedly told no and hell no. This left them convinced that advanced technology was sequestered under government supervision, at aerospace contractor facilities. As a result, the DHS facilities, the Department of Homeland Security officials,

became very hesitant and even fearful of moving forward. Perhaps these two only belatedly realized the unique, game-changing and earth-shattering nature of the biggest secret ever kept by the United States. Is that counterintelligence stuff, or did you two guys write that? Well, we wrote that and was approved by the Pentagon and by DHS.

but the thing is is that that's not what I'm talking about I'm talking about playing out and out forged documents that are shown as proof of something and it's it's been applied to ASAP too that their documents

I want to emphasize something I said on my first and only interview it was a closed program it operated very similar to a sap the director the director of analysis and my office chief and of course division chief knew about this program no one else did now i was also protected by the stovepipe nature of that i did not have to address political type questions i i was insulated but they were too they there was no one else people

and the surrounding cubicles didn't know nothing was purposely being hid it was a closed stovepipe system and it needed to be it needed to be operated that way what i'm talking about here is documents that have that have risen up in the meantime that are out and out forgeries again i'm not saying why this was done. I'm saying officially if this was a counterintelligence effort. It probably wasn't a very good one. But the thing is, there's phony material out there. And I, we have no reason to do that. And that's why, you know, we were questioned in the review of Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. Why did we list all the references? Why? Because we We have real references.

Whether or not people can see that because of all the material that's the proprietary information in those references is another situation. But the thing is we have our references and they're not fabrications. They exist and they exist both in and outside of DIA. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough.

Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your ocean front room. Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises.

It matters where you stay. Hilton for the stay. This summer, serve up the cookout classics. Oscar Meyer hot dogs and Heinz Must. grill up a dog, add classic yellow mustard, or loaded Chicago style. We all know it's not a cookout without Oscar Meyer and Heinz. I said, when I was confronted the keepers of the secrets. You were on the trail of what the keepers of the secrets have.

The biggest secret in the history of the U.S. government is how we described it in that book. What do we tell? We're not talking about bits and pieces of metal here. Are we, your crew, your team, ASAP, was on the trail of that stuff, right? I mean, are we wrong about that? Is that counterintelligence, or did you come to believe that we really do have this stuff? Well, I can tell you, George, that as you know, those events in 2011 occurred after the OSAP program was shut down. So OSAP was officially sort of stopped in terms of funding being received in.

September of 2010. By December of 2010, we had a 90-day no-cost extension. At that stage, the program was over. There was a lot of interaction between different departments and different agencies subsequent to that regarding additional funding. What you are referencing in the Skin Workers at the Pentagon occurred after the OSAP program officially was terminated. And it It involved a lot of negotiation and back and forth between different organizations. One of those organizations that we worked with was DHS, as it says in that book. And those elements within DHS did their own version of due diligence. And that's what's being referenced in that book.

I think what George is getting at is that you guys have already explained that you have gone off after the people. that are guarding these secrets, that you did find that they're storing this stuff somewhere else. I mean, is that, George, is that your point? Is that they've already said... Yeah, I think that they believe that those goods exist somewhere hidden in the bowels of the elements of the U.S. government. They think they're real. The period that Column is describing is when Jim and Collum and some of their colleagues were trying to find a new home for a version of Ossack. Is that correct?

That is correct. So on one hand, you're telling me there's disinfo, even within intelligence servers and systems where you can cover up your programs, but you're also telling me UFOs, our government knows. That's why you did all those durs and that we have them. We've been inside of one of them. You've admitted it now. I don't know that anybody from the DIA, from your level of the intelligence agency running a UFO program has ever admitted publicly before that we have a UFO and have been inside of it, have been able to get inside of it. That's a big deal, you guys. Well, that still doesn't address George's question.

You're not addressing any of those questions. We're not? Okay. Hi, do you're dodgy? Maybe we take a different tack and try to talk about the book in a general term and try to circle back. We've mentioned about Arrow a couple of times. Jim, you and column have both said in limited number of

interviews that you you believe that the data warehouse that was established by osap the biggest UFO data warehouse in existence that we know of that it was now there was subsequently being put into use by u.s. government agencies is arrow one of those agencies and if it is have they reached out to you and column or can you say because arrow using the database that you guys created from osap the largest UFO database in his Jacques Valle worked a lot with you guys on that. Is Arrow using that? Have they reached out to you about that?

On that particular issue, no, they have not. But I know that the originator of the lead of the UAP task force from whence Arrow evolved did have it. So as for using it, it's more of a tool to get broad trends. I mean, obviously my broad trend observation as every car on the road is different if you look at the UFO database. In other words, models don't, if there's, if multiple crafts are seen at the same time, yes, they can be duplicates, but in general, everything is different.

that's something you use the database for also what do you make of that what do you make of that in general i'm sorry but what do you make of that i mean there there's some indications of what i could say but i but i won't say yet i don't i think that that's odd and uh why is everything dissimilar you know you have to that's you have there are a lot of things that you have to question here. Why did, why have, I mean, on regard to Skinwalker Ranch, you've seen nothing yet, nothing. I mean, you'd be flabbergasted at some of the occurrences there. And yes, there is documentation for these. Why? For what purpose? And I think it's very dangerous to commit to an answer that someone knows the solution or what's occurring. I think it's a bit of...

I can also, going back to George's question, I can answer that also from my perspective. You know, as you know, George, the transition that occurred between the UAPTF and the various iterations of the UAPTF, that the transition to A.O.I. MSG and then ultimately to AARO, occurred under completely different leadership and completely different circumstances than the original UAPTF. So I was interacting with members of the UAPTF on a sort of a consultant, informal consultant basis. And I know for a fact that they had access to the electronic version of the OSAP database. However, the transition that occurred in the leadership of the UAPTF was very abrupt, as we know, and the transition that ultimately led to the formation of the AOMSG was very abrupt.

the leadership transferred into the USDA. So once the leadership transferred into the USDA, AOI MSG ultimately became AARO, and under those two leaderships of the USDA, I have no personal knowledge that the full OSAP database was used by AOIMSG or by AARO, but I do know it was used by UAPTF. We're dodging another bullet here. I was trying to figure out if Arrow had reached out to you guys. Jim indicated that Arrow has not reached out about the database, but he doesn't say whether Arrow has reached out at all.

I would think there are a few people in the world that have more expertise on this issue than Column and Jim. And I was just curious, if I were running Arrow, I would want to talk to you guys. Have they reached out and tried to just establish a line of communications or are you able to say? The reach out was on an unclassified network. I would give you the answer, yes, for me. Was it Dr. Kirkpatrick, you guys, or was it somebody from his office? Oh, now here, Jeremy's getting back to, it was a person from his office.

in a position to reach out. I can say that, that based on his background and his position, it was a proper contact, yes. So you guys, the OSAP program is the largest acknowledged UFO program to the public, to the American public. But we know there were other and our other UFO programs. And we'll get into the our other, because on camera, you guys talked with me about that this study continues. We'll get into that. But as far as legacy UFO programs, like what is your understanding of that? Like, David Grush talked about it. It's now public that there were these things. Have you ever had experience with that, Jim? Have you been part of a UFO program,

a legacy UFO program? I couldn't say yes or no on that. What I can say is that I am describing that which I was involved with and that was ASAP. And I have always said, you must do what ASAP did. You have no choice but to do all aspects of what ASAP did. Now, you might call it, well, was that fortunate that we did the right things? Well, actually, looking back, yes, it was. I'm kind of surprised we did what you need to do. But any program that is truly looking into UAP paranormal has to do what we did.

and what we did and now I'll put in another thing or may still be going on. Okay, so as far as future looks at the UFO topic, the Ossap, it ended in the form that we know it, but you have said to me directly, and George, on camera, we just haven't put that footage out yet, both of you, that the program continues just under a different guise, a different name. So that's what you're saying right there. Arrow. I know. Don't play with me with the arrow thing. There's got to be something else. What was it? What is it chapter, chapter two, the comparison between the two. The only difference between us app and what has been mandated by Congress for Arrow is the high cost sensors. We couldn't afford that. Now, we describe in the book in chapter, in chapter, what is it?

the 18, the integrated sensor package. Yes, we had our own design for a sensor package. And there are other individuals, entities that were interested in placing their own sensor packages with us. Like NASA, like another agency, like who? No, I can't say. You can't say. Okay.

I mean, I would have been the same equipment. Well, they may have. had resources that we didn't. Ours was kind of something we could place at multiple locations. Okay, so let me just ask you. Both of you can answer this. This is just your opinion. So we know that Project Blue Book ended in 1969 and they said nothing to see here and move on. We do not believe that the UFOs pose a national security threat. We now know that that was a lie just because of OSAP, even if you don't admit another legacy program, we know that we were studying UFOs and funding it. Well, let me ask you this. That excuse that was given back in 1969 with the closing

of Project Blue Book that they don't believe there's any national security threat. I can't imagine a world where the DIA would be funded for the Defense Warning Office for something like OSEP if they didn't believe that there was a national security threat. So my question is to you, do you believe UFOs represent a national security threat? Well, lack of knowledge always can I mean directly. A direct threat. Well, is it direct threat something that you can do something about or not do something about? There's so many qualifiers to the question and to the answer.

It's almost like we're getting into an endless. Well, I can step in here because that question has been posed to. me multiple times. And, you know, threat has two components. One is capability and the second is intent. And we had, the OSAP program generated gobs of data on UFO capability. We generated almost nothing on UFO intent. And unless you have both, and I was lectured pretty strongly by one of the consultants to OSAP, you cannot make the case that without data on intent, you cannot make the case that these objects are a threat to national security.

What you can say is that they are a threat to human health. And we made that statement at the end of the OSAP program, We generated a fairly large summary of all of the data that pointed in that direction, including medical injury cases, including a lot of pathological cases and physiological cases. And yes, we did say that UFOs are a threat to human health. Are they a threat to national security? We do not know. We did not accumulate any data regarding UFOs.

intent. I'm going to pull George here. George. So read in their book, you know, over the last few days, they talk a lot in the book, you guys talk a lot about Coleris in Brazil and how for decades that human beings were being physically harmed to the point of death. So from UFOs and that their military studied it. Is this like a case? And that also Ossap, you're going to reveal in a future book, did actually do an in-depth investigation about Claris. So my, my question, question is, okay, maybe not national security, but in this case, the UFOs were fucking people up. They were hurting them to that point, sometimes to death. So are you telling me with your book and all this information that UFOs do pose a physical threat a lot of times to people,

like in Brazil? Yes. Yes, absolutely. And that's one of the reasons that we were trying to complete the database in regard to Brazil. And, uh, It's simply that that, if that was occurring here in the U.S., let me tell you, every day you'd see a front page article, that did not occur. But, you know, there's, I don't want to go into something I'm unfamiliar with it, is an ASAP in nature. But there's current problems now in South America. You know, and you probably know more about that, Jeremy, about what appear to be again. threats. Yeah, you hear that, but you know, it's not as studied as what you guys were able to. Calaris and the surrounding areas, correct. But that. So anybody, yeah, anybody that reads your

guy's book, just so our audience knows, basically there's a bunch of dedication of pages into these bizarre events in Brazil. They were studied by the Brazilian military where these UFOs for decades were harming, murdering, burning, messing up human beings. This is not just like, oh, these great space brothers. This is something that was really devastating to these communities and left them in terror. So I suggest people check that out. I would agree with you, Jeremy. And I think even beyond the Brazilian cases, I think we accumulated enough cases within the United States to say that, you know, if you're in the wrong place at the wrong time,

in terms of proximity to UFOs, in terms of proximity to blue orbs, that you can come off. The worst, you'll have a lot of symptoms that mimic radiation sickness, for example, you know, metallic taste in the mouth, sunburn, your hair starts falling out. We documented these cases. And if you add that to the events in Coleris, you can make the statement that UFOs are really bad for your health. You know, I think the strength of this new book is the examples that you guys use, that we use, to document and demonstrate certain principles, why engineering principles,

physics principles of how strange this technology is, how advanced it is. One of the cases that comes up is a military case. And I'd remind our listeners that, you know, the Tick-Tac case was an OSAP, a Bass investigation. It started with OSAP. Later on, iterations of other UFO programs looked into it, but OSAP started that investigation off. You had another investigation into a military encounter at Lakenheat. Colin, can you share with our listeners what some of the details about that Lake and Heat case

and what stood out that made it interesting to you? Well, I think it was mostly because it was a, again, it was a military, situation with the RAF, Lakenheath, got a bunch of unknown signals regarding something that needed to be checked out. There were two fighter jets that came very, very close and personal with an object that had no aerodynamic surfaces that looked like basically, you know, the raw. ingredients of a meteor. It was tracked both on the ground and by the fighters. And they made several passes with this and they had communication, constant communication with ground control. And, you know, the upshot of this thing was that an object was flying. It did not seem to react to their presence. They came up close and personal. They had visual confirmation. They had

radar confirmation, you know, in other words, instrumented and sensor confirmation of this object. And it was a nowhere near as spectacular as the Tick-Tac, but it was certainly an unknown flying object in the vicinity of R.F. R.A.F. Lakenheath. And very similar to... You know, one of the things that we sort of focused on in the book was... correlating some of the aspects of UFO performance, like lift and propulsion, power generation, spatial temporal translation, and we generated a bunch of different cases from the historical literature,

and you'll notice a lot of those cases are old cases. So one of the things that a lot of modern cases are thrown up against, is, you know, these could be drones. These could be, you know, these could be sort of, you name it, either commercial drones or Chinese spy drones or whatever. But, you know, back in the 1950s or 1960s, a lot of these cases are pretty pristine. And, you know, I'm thinking, for example, of the RB-47 case that we cite in this book, which is an absolute classic case that Brad Spicer.

Farks investigated and a lot of write-ups, AIAA actually did a write-up on it. And this was a classic case of RB47 aircraft down in Texas, Louisiana area that was flying electronic countermeasures equipment and had this visual sighting, instrumented siding, radar sightings of this UFO that essentially outgun them outmaneuvered them. And this was all the way back in July of 1957. So you cannot say this was a Chinese high-speed drone. And the level of documentation on that case really is illustrative of, you know, the properties that we cite in the OSOP study regarding Lyft. Jim Kittlick-Lakaski, same sort of question. I know we're kind of sort of hair-splitting here

on the terms of national security threat. But when you have the... unknown objects dancing around over our base at Lakinheath or interacting with the in the area of the Nimitz and the Princeton flying around with impunity it made it's not attacking US cities it's not using laser beams to wipe out New York or Washington DC so maybe it's not considered a strategic threat but it certainly has to be considered of interest to our national security interests when it shows such an and an ongoing fascination with military facilities, personnel, and equipment, don't we just? Yes.

But the thing is, is we're investigating them probably properly now. It's true that the Lake and Heath incident did not involve near collision. the ones since 2014-15 perhaps involved more of that, but again, probably not deliberate. So yes, you should be investigating that. It's more or less interference in flight. You certainly wouldn't want an airliner to have one of these be sucked into an engine intake. They're rather large, relatively speaking. So, yes, it should be investigated.

And that's why I believe Arrow exists right now is that's a starting point. As for investigating many of these civilian cases, it needs to be done. Does it need to be done by the government? I believe the contractors are fully capable, but there needs to be certainly a database that needs to be up kept and also constructed properly. I think Colum hasn't mentioned this yet, but we do mention in this book more than mentioned. It's a couple chapters, the Ville-Davis system of categorizing. You know, you can have a database and it's just a bunch of data. Unless it's categorized properly and be able to be searched on, then you can see trends.

And that's what we did with the Capella database, the Capella Bass database. So yes, it's huge, but it is searchable. I want to read something from your book. So when you talk about future work in your book, you make eight suggestions, a couple of which or establish a data facility liaison, you know, for operations, collect and analyze uncorrelated target data, which would be from like NORAD, right? This is something that a friend of mine in Georgia's, a journalist named Chris Sharp, has really dug into, which is he's getting information from them.

Well, we don't keep any UFO data. We do keep uncorrelated target data, though. Where do they put that? So you would like to see all that come in, be able to analyze what they call uncorrelated data, which is things that do propel through the sky with intention, but we don't, we can't correlate it to our own craft. So you'd like to see that data come in in future studies. But one thing you said, when you guys gave the eight different suggestions for future work,

you talk about collection of oral and written histories. Now, let me just read you what you wrote two sentences. It says, collect under appropriate security caveats. oral and written histories from individuals with firsthand exposure to apparent exotic technologies and or circumstances surrounding the same. This would include seeking out and contacting military and civilian personnel, scientists and engineers, and companies that may already have had access to first-hand data concerning novel technologies.

So in writing that, you've got to know that there are corporations, companies, military individuals, who have direct first had experience in this exploitation program or programs about UFOs. Yes and no, but you're reading something exactly that was in the both proposal and which I don't think will ever be released, the proposal from Bass and also the program planning documents for the startup of ASAP. That's direct wording from that. That was a hope that we could do that. So I wouldn't say, in other words, I wouldn't put too much a, well, that's a, that's a statement based upon knowledge, but a statement based upon desire.

In other words, those are exact words from the document. I should say, you know, since SATP, Skin Walker's, the Pentagon was a compilation document, it was written on our new book, We tried to keep, with editing, of course, we needed to edit to edit the grammar and the spelling. We tried to keep as close to the original language that was in our documentation that DIA received. And the reason for that is I want your listeners and the readers of this document to understand. They're in the same management shoes or position that we were. This is the document that really came in. So I wouldn't put too much into the statement you read because it was used as a plan.

And as I said, these plans never came to fruition mainly because, one, the core items were completed in the two years. And two, it would have required more money and more personnel to do that. Okay. Fine. Fine. Fine. Fine. But Jim, like, do you think the American public deserves to know about the ultimate reality,

the fact that there are, appear to be non-human intelligence, flying spacecraft or something that look like them? That's why we're doing these books. We're trying. So you believe the American public has a right to know? Within the security limits. Within security limits. Security comes first, but the thing is, is national security comes first.

But that's why we're assembling these books and we're trying to accurately assemble them based on real references that may or may not be available to the public. But you're getting direct extracts from these references. No, it's great. I just wanted to see where you stand on that, UAP transparency or not. I mean, we got to crack the egg at something. I'm I have a disclosure advocate? The answer is no. What's the difference in your mind? The difference is security.

You know, there's certain things. Oh, and now, now if this involves security plus, because having come from the contractor world in the first half of my career, I can say if there's heavy investment of contractor capital, their overhead money into technologies, and they've been given these technologies, they're going to hang on to them. It's just like, hey, wait a minute,

we've invested a lot of our personal resources into research, and that can apply to every topic. It's going to be difficult to pry loose technology when something's been given over and a private company has invested there, money, their stockholders money into research. So that's an entirely different aspect. But ours is security. We're trying to at least. Yeah, but doesn't it drive you crazy? I mean, I get it. There's security. I get it that private companies were given something, have invested a lot of

money. But isn't this topic kind of bigger than these issues, those two issues, the fact that we might not be alone? Well, yes, but I think that we can convey that through the proper method and that's what we're trying to do okay so you are trying to convey that in the in the proper way i'm not i'm not going out there and and and interviewing with uh everybody to say what i really feel uh no it was hard to get you to do this i mean i can testify you're not in an improper way you can understand what people hang up on me when i say you can offer me all of this but I'm not going to say anything more than what's been approved. So let me get back to George here.

So George, what do you think? Are we cracking the egg here with Jim and Colin? Oh, not even coming. Here's another tack we could take. Jim, Dr. Ocaskey, I believe that you have made it clear that you were in contact with Congress. I know that you were asked about testifying and you declined. do you feel that telling Congress all of what you know would constitute a possible threat? That, you know, a mutual friend of ours of mine and yours and columns has said it many times,

you can't tell your friends without telling your enemies. Well, do you think that telling Congress the lowdown on things that you really know but can't say here would represent a likely threat that that information would be linked to our adversaries enemies. That's my personal belief. I mean, there's two things I said. That's in response to your mention of Congress contacting me. One, and I repeated this to multiple folks,

I don't want to get involved in what would appear to be a three-ring circus right now. It's just, it's too much for me. That's why I'm devoting. And I don't get involved in answering things in 20. Twitter, which I easily could, or read it, which I easily could, I wanted to be documented in these DOD approved books. That's my method of saying what I have to say. Do I have a lot more that I could say and that will be seen perhaps if it's approved? Yes. I mean, I can tell you with Skinwalkers at the Pentagon, they had a number of comments that I felt were legitimate security observations

that it needed to be changed. But did the stories still come through? Absolutely yes. You know, what's the old saying there's more than one way to skin a cat, whatever that means, but there's just a, there are multiple ways of doing it and we're trying to call them and I and George are trying to. Now, George is good at pushing and so are you. You know, push the limits, push the limits. Well, we can write whatever we want, but if it doesn't get by, by Dopster, DOD, review, then, you know, we're kind of wasting our time. I think we know what are red lines not to cross. And going to Congress would be a red line to me personally, because I talk too much. say too much, but I purposely cut it off right here. I just.

Well, what if you, what if you were subpoenaed though? I mean, you know, they're trying to do that in Congress. They're trying to subpoena people and say, hey, Dr. Lakey, you know, you've worked on. These are false rumors about Dr. Lakesk. Okay, but hold on. If you're subpoenaed and asked to tell the truth, you're under oath. First of all, right? Would you tell the truth? old phrase, let's cross that bridge when we come to it. George, I'm laughing so hard right now, George. I wish you were on video.

So, George, I was thinking, do you have, I want to bring column into something that was written in the book. It sounds like something column has tried to answer from me before. It's about the nature of the phenomenon itself. So let me read that, George, from the book, cool? Okay, guys, so when we're talking about what we know about UFOs, George and I have talked about this a bunch. What do we know?

Okay. We know that UFOs represent a huge amount of energy and a small amount of space. That's been proven. However, what do we really know? And you guys have something in your book that is just, it's just a couple sentences or one sentence. It was so profound to me. And I want to hear you guys elaborate on it.

It says, everything works as if UAP were the product of a technology that integrates physical and psychic phenomenon and primarily affects course. cultural variables in our society through the manipulation of psychological and physiological parameters in the witnesses. Can you guys expand? That's a huge statement. Can you expand on that? Well, I know that a lot of that statement comes, at least from my personal experience, with spending hundreds of days on Skinwalker Ranch. And as we've gone over before, Skinwalker Ranch had both nuts and bolts objects,

shiny metallic objects. It also had a plethora of very unusual phenomena. There was a lot of evidence that was gathered, and some that I saw personally involving the manipulative, the manipulation of perception. And so there's a lot of really good work and really good documentation regarding the manipulation of perception by people like Jacques Valet. You know, even Whitley Strieber has written in his latest book. There is a lot to do with manipulation of perception. So a technology that is both influential in terms of, you know, leaving an imprint on the ground

that you can extrapolate that this thing weighed two and a half tons to altering people's psychic makeup, there's really no contradiction there. I mean, you've got to be able to harness and work with ambiguity if you're working with the UFO topic at all. Because putting them into one box, you know, the nuts and bolts box, or only the psychic box, just doesn't work. You've got to balance the idea that a technology can manipulate human perception, and even from a long-term perspective, manipulate human cultural phenomena, as well as, you know, operate as a machine. So you've got to hold those two balls in the air. And if you're not capable of doing that, you should not be looking at UFOs.

Yeah. You know, a lot of people have filed FOIA requests, you know, based on Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. We listed all those reports that were produced by OSAP and Bass. And, you know, there's some great stuff, as we know. But, you know, people write to the DIA, and the responses they get is, we don't have it. There is no such report. For example, there's an analysis that is referenced in Skinwalkers at the Pentagon about an analysis of Tic Tac, for example, that case and a few others. DIA's answer is, we don't have it.

It doesn't exist. Do you suspect that those documents will ever be made public? Well, that particular one, as you probably already know, was a complete document. document analyzing a Tic Tac object and a spherical object and it was done based on Bass capabilities at the time. It actually is, well, the way it was written was it had that plus a background material on the Tic Tac. And I would say that there was information in there that was

personal information, not proprietary information. We were using commercial software. Will that document ever be released? I don't know. We can do pieces of it in a future book, but the analysis tool that was being used was state of the art at the time, and you need the color aspect of it.

Well, as probably your listeners and readers know, color is kind of expensive in any book, especially books that are reaching the size that we're doing. So will it reach? They have the document, whether they've destroyed it. How do you destroy an electronic document? That's unclear. Whether they would be willing to go through removing the personal information?

I don't know. I can't speak to that. I the wording is probably wrong that the document doesn't exist. Yes, it does. I mean, you had it in your hand. But the thing is, as for the public ever seeing the full document, again, there's the color problem. Well, hold on, hold on. So, George, he just said, oh, does the document exist, meaning 140-plus page analysis of the TikTok?

The world has never seen generated by the... Amisperical object. Generated by the DIA. Famously, George would have loved to given that, you know, as a submission to Congress famously. But the thing is, is Jim Lekoski just said, George, you had that in your hands. It exists.

So if the DIA is telling us some document doesn't exist, but you had it in your hands, George, what does that mean for the fate of the document? Couldn't that just go out to the public then? If they don't admit it exists? No, there's the, there's, there's the problem of having that personal information in there. Someone has to scrub it. It is DIA's John. George would be willing to scrub it? Oh, no, that's not.

George. George, okay, that was a rhetorical question, Jim. So, George, just tell us what your thoughts are here. I could not, it's not my document to release, and I wouldn't release it without permission from the people that allowed me to see it. So I just couldn't do that because if I were to do that, I would never get access to documents again of that nature. So I can't do it, but I'd be happy to do it if somebody gave me the green light. Yeah, people weren't going to have problems. Well, so, Colin, back to this basic thing.

You've tried to talk with me before about the physical and the psychic nature of UFOs, and you're saying, look, you've got to be prepared for both. if you're going to investigate this. But that statement that you guys wrote in your book, it really is something I think people really need to pay attention to. You're saying that everything works as if you AP were the product of a technology that integrates physical and psychic phenomena. But then you say, and primarily affects cultural variables in our society through

manipulation of psychological and physiological parameters. What do you mean manipulate cultural variables? I'm sorry, I'm obsessed with this quote. No one goes to Hank's first, spreadsheets. They go for a darn good pizza. Lately, though, the shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks Copilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales and costs

and help him see if he can afford it. Co-Pilot shows Hank where the money's going and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hank has a line out the door. Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets. Learn more at M365Copilot.com slash work. Well, do you want to take that, Jim, because I've already answered it?

Well, we see... Cultural variables. Don't we see that occurring right now? What do you mean? No, don't we see that? Basically, there's a... Well, I got something to really reference it. It'll be another little bombshell of mine.

But you're going to... answer my question without a question. What is the purpose of the men in black? We That is a question. We have encountered the men in black.

The legitimate ones. You have. You have. I didn't say me, but the answer is yes. What do you mean the legitimate men in black? There are people who are

gaming gaming knowledge of the men in black. black. But what is the purpose of the men in black? Is it to draw attention away from the UFO phenomenon or using reverse psychology draw attention to it and the paranormal of course? What is the purpose? It could be, there are polar opposites, the answers. It's always been the men in black dissuade. Do they? Knowing human psychology, do they or do they do exactly the opposite? They draw attention to the phenomenon.

And that's what I mean in my answer to you. I wanted to use an example of manipulating cultural variables. That they're drawing attention. Hey, this really exists. Now, you can also go off on the side a little bit is say, are we in the realm? Because I've talked to multiple people about this. Are we in the realm?

of what we would consider demonic influence. Have we crossed into that? That's a cultural variable too. Operating at the same level, we've got to consider all this. That's why I think this is such a wonderful topic because you've got all these things you still have to consider.

And now I'm going to be long gone and column probably will be long gone and you'll be long gone And they'll still be exploring all this and not have all the answers. But that's the manipulation from my point of view of, hey, get interested in this stuff. It's real. And don't just jokingly, you know, like the term dino beavers, you know, that Juliet and Colum saw a dino beaver. No one said anything.

That's just created to make a joke. about about our efforts but this is a real phenomenon except it as such and you'll see that that's what DIA did collect data collect data collect that the Intel communities are great at doing that but that's an answer to your question and there's so many aspects of cultural manipulation and I think it's positive manipulation using an I again an old expression, the train is left the station. No, it hasn't. These books are proven. People can still get on the train, but those who laugh and joke don't bother getting on the train because, you know,

you just, you're not learning anything from the experience. So George, Dr. Lackackackack just gave us a good answer, but I did notice when he was telling us that he said something about the real man in black and that he's actually met him or something. Can you just, We can't let that go. You have to let it go. You have to let it go. But now, the false men in black. Now, there was an incident, and I'm not going to go into the incident, but column is aware of this.

There was an incident of a false men in black. And let's assume they were working for some government agency. What they've never known and never has been revealed is a person they were interviewed, obtained a gun. He was so afraid of them, he was ready to shoot it out. If they made the wrong move, it would have been a disaster. It would have come back on us in some way, I'm sure, because I was asked in an interview once, what was your greatest fear during us up? And it was like, it's tomorrow and the next day because there was always something that was happening that would come back and we had to fix.

But we've never revealed that, that this person was so afraid of the false men in black that he had a gun tucked into his waistband under his sweatshirt. Were you guys the false men and black just like going into it? It was another government agency. No, no. We followed all the rules. We don't know.

You don't know who it was? You can trace back so far, but you can't, if it was a counter intel operation by some organization, then it would have could have. I mean, that was a bad decision on their part. Bad. They shouldn't have pushed this fella to that point where he was ready to resort to violence in defense. And he was in his own home being potentially threatened. Well, you know, I think there's a long history also of, especially. especially back in the 60s and 70s, I think everybody is aware of this of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations,

having people out there trying to dissuade witnesses from talking to the media, threatening them. I think in the 50s and 60s threats were much more overt than they would be now. But I think there's this multiple arenas of men in black, all of which are sort of mutually supportive in driving paranoia in witnesses and in the field in general. And a lot of these are multiple agendas for different reasons. And some of them are mimicking the real men in black. Some of them are the real men in black. It's a, I think it's one of these, I would class it as another example of what I call bidirectional mimicry.

Okay, but the real men in black, are we talking about humans or non-human intelligence? What is the real men in black compared to just government agents being, you know, interrogating people? I think there's enough evidence in the literature to indicate that the phenomenon may be associated with some cases of what we call men in black. But what are they? Well, there are parts of the phenomenon. Okay.

So not just government agents walking around? Well, there's government agents that are also at the same time in parallel working on, you know, on intimidating witnesses. I know, but I'm not talking about the government agents. I'm talking about what you're calling the real men in black. So you're like there is a phenomenon. I'm saying that they're part of the phenomenon. Okay.

I think there's enough, I think there's enough data in the literature, especially if you go back all the way to the 1950s to corroborate that statement. Even in the 1800s, there was a phenomenon like that if you read John Kills Trojan Horse, Operation Trojan Horse. In the 1800s, there's a version of the men in black. Well, George, I am highly frustrated, as always when I talk with Dr. Kelleher and Dr. Lackackackack. So what do you think, George? Where does this go from here? Well, there's a lot of great stuff in this book. I mean, you know, part of the, a lot of criticism that came at us from Skinwalkers at the Pentagon is too much woo.

It's just too weird. And I always thought, you know, I was proud of what we did with that because it followed the evidence where it led. And the people who were involved with OSAP, with Bass and some of their allies, looked at, there's without self-censorship. They didn't decide, hey, this is an interesting UFO case, but it's got this weird poltergeist angle, so we're going to toss that out. They had the courage to include it because it was necessary to look at the big picture. And that was where we started with the skin markers at the Pentagon. This book narrows down the focus. People have complained and griped and bitched and moaned that they want data. Here's some data. Here's the principles

that are laid out in those dards that started off the OSAP program, that the baseline projections of what we know now and what we hope will happen 50 years down the road, and then it has examples, real-life examples, solid UFO cases from government files that were investigated and that remain really perplexing. And each of those cases, Jim and Column have really deftly used to demonstrate a particular engineering principle, a physics principle, indicating that these things are real, that they are beyond our capabilities, that we're certainly way beyond our capabilities when they happen, and that there's a genuine mystery here. And it is, again, I think in very great detail, demonstrates why this is a legitimate

topic for investigation, that there's real things to consider, that there's physics and engineering, nuts and bolts, and case after case that demonstrates that this is a legitimate inquiry. That's my take on it. Very good. Totally agree, George. I guess we're on the right track, George. We're getting a double thumbs up here. Look, guys, I really appreciate.

I think if I take, I have to kind of think about the people watching or listening to this. If I could take one thing away other than reading your book, which I suggest people do, but if I could take one thing away that really struck me, it is the first time in history, I think that we have somebody of your, Dr. Lekatsky, of your kind of depth. within the intelligence agency, the defense intelligence agency, and within the UFO program that you ran for the defense intelligence agency that stated, and I quote, the United States was in possession of a craft of unknown origin and had successfully gained access to its interior. So you personally know about a UFO that we got access inside of. I have to assume, Dr. Lekatsky, that you've seen this bad boy.

You don't got to answer me, but I'm going to make it. that assumption unless you tell me otherwise um you also say that this craft had a streamlined configuration suitable for aerodynamic flight but no intakes exhaust wings or control surfaces so if i had to take something away from all this you just made the admission that our government is reverse engineering if we got inside of it we're reverse engineering UFOs you see i'm not speaking at all i mean i'm not going beyond what it was what you read from the book. Okay, well, thank you very much. I do appreciate that you did put that in the book. Look, we have Dr. Eric Davis in the New York Times saying Kraft, you know, not made here on

earth. There are individuals like you have come out and pushed the envelope a little bit, and I thank you for that, even if you can't speak further from the book, that is a huge admission. I mean, that'll be the title of the YouTube video. I mean, that's a huge admission. What do you think, George? I'd also say this, is that. But I know that people in UFO world will be listening to this pull of their hair out because GM is very careful on what he says. The fact is that that is a big reason why he's been trusted with this information to start with. But he doesn't go blabbing and talk and reveal things that he's not supposed to talk about. And that's why I suspect he will continue to be trusted by our government.

And hopefully there's going to be a future investigation or maybe one underway right now that he would be allowed to know about. I know it does get frustrating that we have the hair split and dance around certain of these cases and incidents and information, but, you know, that's part of who he is and why he got that job. You know, so it's great always to talk with Jim on or off the record, and with column, of course, they've helped me understand this big white world so much. And even though they've shared things with me that I can't say publicly, it has helped me so much in understanding who, else is completely full of crap out there. Yeah, yeah, for sure. Well, thank you guys so much. I mean, I think that with the limited things you can say, people should read your book and start to understand a little bit more about what ASEP did and how it did it, what the thought process was. I do appreciate that. And for, you know, just coming on the show and for help guiding, as George said,

you know, what he knows is sometimes BS just from kind of getting to understand where you guys are coming from. So thank you for all this. Never has so few, has so much to tell, but could say so little. This is a webinarized presentation of Jeremy Corbelle, George Knapp, Dark Course Entertainment, and Cadence 13 Studios. Available now for free on the Odyssey app or wherever you get your shows.