WEAPONIZED with Jeremy Corbell & George Knapp - The Fight For UFO Disclosure Is Just Beginning - Guest : Chris Sharp

Episode Date: December 12, 2023

Congressional efforts to force the disclosure of legacy UFO programs and secrets ran into a political buzzsaw this month. Sweeping legislation was largely gutted at the last minute by a few key committee chairmen with strong ties to defense contractors, the very same companies suspected of housing Special Access Programs involving UAP crash retrieval/reverse engineering.  Is this the end of meaningful disclosure efforts? Not even close.  In this episode, Jeremy and George review the plusses and minuses of the political infighting in Congress, why the fight will almost certainly continue, what might comes next, and check in with Liberation Times editor/publisher Chris Sharp, whose hard-hitting coverage of the disclosure legislation names names and identifies the opposition in stark terms.  Check out Chris Sharp's publication called Liberation Times : https://www.LiberationTimes.com  •••  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

No one goes to Hank's for his 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 to 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. 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 show 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. In this week's episode of Weaponized. One of the overwhelming positives, in my view, is confirmation that there is something to hide. You don't have this kind of opposition and getting Congresspeople to oppose this legislation without ever really explaining why they opposed it unless you've got something to hide. House Republicans are also attempting to kill another common sense, bipartisan measure passed by the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer making early incredibly inflammatory remarks about House.

leaders calling them out, in essence, by name, and talking about UAP disclosure on the floor of the Senate. Which I was proud to co-sponsor with Senator Rounds as the lead sponsor to increase transparency around what the government does and does not know about unidentified aerial phenomenon. Where is the New York Times? Where is CBS News? Where is the Washington Post? Absolutely.

And I would also mention as well, the DOE cannot deny that the arrow has in the United has to possession material of unknown origin. They cannot deny that. 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 weaponized. This is weaponized coming to you once again from an undisclosed location.

It looks like a bordello. It's like the movie The Shining. How many times do I say that? Yeah, man, this is a non-disclosed location. You know, we're on the road. Sometimes when we are doing our work, we have to travel for that. We're excited about everything we're doing. But this is the situation we find ourselves in.

But we wanted to talk this week with everybody because a lot's been going down. I've seen all over UFO Twitter the death of, of UFO transparency, the death of the legislation is kind of what everybody's saying. I feel bad because I don't feel that same way. And, you know, I'm an eternal optimist. But let's talk about that for a little bit. I can see why people are disappointed because the NDAA, the Schumer Amendment, the various incarnations of this legislation that would have moved disclosure way down the road.

You know, we all had very high hopes about it. And people are disappointed that these most substantial parts of that legislation were gutted at the last minute due to opposition from some key players that we will mention. But I don't think it's a total loss at all. I think it represents a lot of progress in that, you know, we've been speaking off camera with some of the people who were involved in that legislation. And their take is this would have been impossible. Five years ago, it would never have gotten as far. Two years ago, it would never have been discussed on the floor by the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who advocated openly for UAP disclosure and called people out, called out key members of the House for their opposition to this. So it's moved the goalpost way, way down the field would never have been possible just a few years ago.

The fact that it was even discussed and got this far is amazing, given how much opposition there was from the Pentagon, from the intelligence community, from defense contractors who spread around a lot of money. It's incredible that it was even possible. Right. So I think people kind of forget. So we had UFO or UAP legislation in the National Defense Authorization Act and also in the Intelligence Authorization Act. What happened was we call it the Schumer Amendment, but hold up a second.

It's Schumer Rounds, Mike Rounds, Senator Mike Rounds. I mean, we just got to give credit where credit is due. This is a dude that has personally championed everything we're reading. So Schumer is working with him, but he's a co-author on it. And I'll say behind the scenes has been kicking ass on behalf of UFO transparency. So we call it the Schumer Rounds Amendment. But what it was was like an additional, very powerful set of language to try to go against industry and rip this UFO, UAP technology out of their hands.

That's what it was trying to do. Now, not all of that language was killed. There are certain things like imminent domain, which we hear has been excluded from it. But some of it did make it in. So there were additional whistleblower protections that were taken out. However, the whistleblower protections that were already in there are powerful and vital. A lot of this is symbolic anyway. When you say, this is what we want and people say, no, no, no, we don't want to give that.

It's an omission in a sense that, you know, they got some good. They got the goods. And you've been saying this all along, which is that the closer you get to actually get in those goodies, the more pushback you're going to get. You know, we could vilify people. Mike and Mike, you know, et cetera. We can we can vilify people. But I don't know if that's the right path to do. I'm not sure. Sure, we know who our enemies are. But really, we're just seeing this pressure cooker of the whole world looking at UFOs and being like, this is now language that is being put forward in legislation. That is huge to me.

So even if we didn't get every detail of what we wanted, we fought super fucking hard to get as much as we could. Yeah, I mean, I think it's really significant that it was proposed in the first place, that the Senate Majority Leader and Senator Rounds were out in front trying to get this on. And much was accomplished. As you said, you know, you smoke out the enemies. That's exactly what we were told is that now we know where the opposition is. I mean, you could figure the defense contractors who supposedly have this stuff stashed away and, hey, were going to rear their heads. And it appears they did.

Now you know who's working with them to oppose this kind of disclosure and who the opposition will be going forward. That's major, that's major progress. And a lot of that is industry. We've talked to some folks that said, this is the first time that we are going against industry and trying to get, you know, this information out. And void was their pushback. So I understand why people are on one hand, like, we didn't get everything we wanted.

Well, those expectations, that was the everything. That was the 100%. But what we did get, I think, is really good. Now, part of the whole process was carrot and stick was if you tell us, we're going to let you have funding and keep working. But if you don't, you're going to be cut off. Now, I don't know. You know the CIA can get a bunch of money through other means than through Congress. We know that as a historic fact.

But it's symbolic to say, oh, no, you're not getting money if you don't fess up. From what I understand, there are. monetary restrictions that still made it in. We'll see when the final, final gets, first of all, solidified and then approved. But I'm just saying, man, we've got to look at the positive of what we've got so far. Otherwise, we're just going to stop fighting. One of the overwhelming positives in my view is confirmation that there is something to hide. I mean, that you don't have this kind of opposition, them pulling strings and twisting arms and getting Congress people to oppose. this legislation without ever really explaining why they opposed it unless you've got something to

hide. I think it's a tell. If you're playing poker, this would be considered a tell. We really do have something to hide, and that's why we're fighting so hard against it. So you've smoked out the opposition, you've confirmed that there really is something to hide, you've got legislation that so far is approved that will withhold funding for any kind of reverse engineering programs or efforts. Any government funding can't go there unless you tell Congress about it. That's progress. Whistleblowers and people that have provided tangible evidence of direct storage locations to non-human intelligence, craft or parts. We've talked to people that make those assertions. They are not publicly known, but they have done the right thing and some of them have testified

or done their ICIG complaints. We've talked to some of those people. like on this trip. Okay. I hear in their, some of their voices, this idea of like, well, we wish there were more protections

that were pushed through in the Schumer Rounds Amendment. But I also hear almost like a, a fuck you. Like what I hear is people that if they're pushed into a corner,

easy way or hard way, they're fighting for what they believe is their livelihood, their life, right? So I kind of feel like, no matter how this goes with legislation, it's a symbol, but people are going to do what they need to do.

People who don't pay attention really to Congress and how things work in Congress are understandably disappointed. They thought they were going to get it all. It's not how it works. I mean, there's some significant legislation in American history that have taken multiple sessions of Congress, multiple different Congresses before they were ever approved. The process is not perfect. It's give and take.

You're always negotiating. And what comes out of Congress is rarely absolutely. everything that we want, because that's the way the process works. The fact that this was discussed that it got this far is amazing just by itself, but it's not the end. The people who are proposing these kind of changes can come back again. And if between now and the next time this comes up on the floor, there are additional whistleblowers who come forward with additional information, testimony, maybe physical evidence, that gives the proponents in Congress more ammo the next time this comes around. It's not over. It's just the beginning of the fight. It is the beginning of the fight.

Now, I don't believe you deserve anything in life unless you fight for it. And the idea is to fight as as hard as you can because wherever you land is going to be further than if you don't fight or you feel apathetic. Now, I'm hearing all this stuff in this little microcosm of online of, oh, we've been gutted. And one of the voices that, you know, has kind of echoed that to me in private conversations is our good friend, boots on the ground, Christopher Sharp. And I love talking with him. So I want to bring him in because he is almost like a sounding board for what kind of online people are talking about with this legislation.

I'm going to flip him. I'm going to flip him. He gets all negative about this. I'm going to flip him. So we're going to get him on right now. We want to hear the word on the street from Chris Sharp about UFOs and legislation. And then... Yeah, I saw the title to his article.

I read this article, Operation Kill Bill. He's pretty down on this. I'm not sure if it's out yet, but not, that's okay. That's the title. I think so. Yeah, he's pretty, you know, he is, he is echoing what a lot of people are saying, which is that, oh, man, we just got gutted. Well, let's, let's have that conversation because I think it's healthy to.

Now, look, nothing's perfect. I'm not saying it was the biggest win ever, but I'm saying from your perspective, and my perspective of fighting this for a long time, it is astonishing what did get through in legislation and where the trajectory it's going to put us on. So let's get Chris on here and let's see what his perspective is. Chris Sharp is the founder and editor-in-chief of Liberation Times and has been one of a small handful of independent journalists who has been doggedly pursuing the UFO disclosure story in Washington, D.C. over the past few years. Chris, good to see you, man. I was wondering if it was

released yet, but we read a little article from your kill bill was the title, man, you seem really bummed out about this legislation. What's going on? Are you bummed out? about the legislation. Yeah, I went on a bit of a rampage of Bill Bill. Firstly, thank you also for having me on Jeremy, George. I need some cheering up. I went on a rampage. What can I say, you know, I succumbed to the misery that sometimes accompanies this

process, hey? But yeah, yeah, I'm really, really bummed out by it all, you know. You know, if we're going to look at it, for instance, we can see so many provisions that were in there, which are no longer there or just being watered down so much. It's just meaningless really. You can imagine Turner on the phone with some of his Lockheed colleagues, you know, saying, do we have the thumbs up? Yeah. No, no, no.

This needs to take it out. Do we have the fun? And you can't imagine the likes of Turner agreeing to something if it was going to endanger Lockheed Martin and other contractors, if that was the case, if the allegations are true. Like you and me know, he was running around like a madman, trying his best to remove the language. In public, he may fain uninterested amusement at the OAP topic, but he seemed like a man on a mission and deadly serious when he came to actually removing the language. So I think we do know that it's very, very serious for his cause. But if we just go in. Let's back up. Let's back up for a second.

So for people that are not tracking what's going on. So Chris, the internet is on fire, specifically UFO Twitter that we put up, we got really far with this legislation, everybody fought for it. And all of a sudden certain elements of this amendment, the Schumer and Senator Mike Rounds amendment was kind of cut down or negotiated to not be as powerful. What are some of the key things that were left out that people are kind of up in arms, about. What are the things that people are upset about? Tell us that. 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 Yamavatheater.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. Sure, the control disclosure campaign killed. The Independent Reviewable dedicated disclosure of UAP information and materials killed. The authority of eminent domain wielded by the US federal government over any materials or biological evidence of unknown or non-human origin killed. And those definitions are very, very important.

And they've also been killed the definitions of unknown origin and non-human origin as well, which was very, very specific, and they were very specific for a reason as well. New whistleblower, and witness protections, killed. Enforcement of subpoena, killed. Amnesty provision of the defence contractors and other entities in possession of the UAP related material involved in potential illegalities killed. So, I mean, we've got a lot that's been killed. I do know that there are some limitations of funds

within there, which is good, and that's a partial win, but it's nowhere near it was. It's nowhere as detailed it was in the initial language, and also it's only related to UAP, so a program, which is related to UAP. And the UAP, when you actually look at the definition that they're on about,

where they're referencing in the language, which was the National Defenseful Projects of 20203, that has nothing to do of non-human origin materials or unknown materials. It's simply, you know, UAP means airborne objects that are not immediately identifiable,

transmitting objects, merged objects, just stuff that you would see. So, you know, if I'm a contractor by Officer Global Access, you know, and I see a UAP on the ground,

like I recover it, well, actually, it may not be a UAP anymore because we know what it is now. It's a non-human craft. And it may not have those, observables because we just found it like this. So without the precise definitions and language and detailed language, there's so much

rubble room now for these contractors to squeeze their way out of, you know, accountability, unfortunately. Chris, one thing that was notable is that the two mics, or I guess it's three mics, who led the opposition to this, didn't really have any. grounds on which to oppose it. I mean, they never came out and said this legislation would cause irreparable harm. They didn't have a really strong argument. They managed to kill it without taking a position about why, right? Yeah, well, I was a really, really strange process because you remember Mike Johnson, the new leader of the House, he seemed to have Tim Burchett's

backing. And Tim Bergett actually said that he was for full disclosure. Okay, that's a little bit odd because he didn't seem to press for full disclosure or even the language that Tim Burchett had proposed. And then you saw Mike Rogers, the chair of the aisle services committee, who Representative Gates was praising saying he's definitely, you know, a disclosure advocate paraphrasing what he said. So I mean, it just really, it really confuses me that if they were so strong advocates for the cause, why didn't they do? anything. Why did they oppose the language? I mean, they had the power to push back on

representative turn and most definitely. And I saw, you know, a lot of people in the know, blaming all three of those guys and those had the power. And, you know, it doesn't matter how powerful Senator Schumer is being the leader of the Senate, you know, I think, you know, if there was a campaign to get legislators to oppose this successfully, they definitely They definitely targeted the key people. If we were to look for a bright side, I know we spoke to one of the people who was involved in the legislation looking for a bright side and what was salvaged in the legislation, they said in effect the opposition had no argument against it.

They may manage to defeat a lot of the provisions you're talking about, but without advancing an argument in opposition, they are in effect announcing to the world, this is real, this stuff is real. And although we're not going to get at it in this legislation, we now have announced everybody it's really there somewhere and they can go back at it in another future session of Congress. What do you think about that? Yeah, exactly. You know, you don't hear NORAT pushing back every year when it comes to December and tracking

Santa's sleigh, do you? So if this was all made up, they wouldn't be pressing so hard. I remember actually, I got in touch of Lockheed Martin a few weeks ago and I said, look, do you, do, there's these allegations that you have in your possession on human materials. Do you? Lockheed Martin? And they were like, any questions to do with you AP needs to go to the US government? I'm like, okay, do I also need to go to the US government to find out if you've got Sanchez-Slay as well? Just like, it's just preposterous answers. They can't even deny they have these materials in their possession. And like you said, I think this is the biggest acknowledgement, unspoken acknowledgement, that there are

is something there that they are trying to hide. I think that is one of the big silver linings. Also, I think one of the silver linings is that we know who the enemy are now, you know. One of my sources said that sometimes reconnaissance craft will fly over hostile territory and you can see all the radar installations pop up on the screen so they know where the radar installations are now. So we know where our enemies are now. And one more thing I'd add as well is that, look, this shumerary,

remember, it didn't come from nowhere. And there are two quick key questions to ask about this, because we know firstly that there was some consultation with the White House, you don't just throw President Biden's name in legislation without consulting him first.

Schumer has said in numerous interviews before that he speaks to the cheaper staff and makes four times a day, the president's cheaper staff, and he speaks to the president at least three times a week. So it's hard to see there not being any discussion about this and saying, oh, by the way, Joe, is it okay if I put your name in this language?

So look, there was consultation and we know that anyhow. And the key question for me is that we know the Senator Schumer had said that he was doing this partially due to the legacy of his good friend, Senator Harry Reid. But was that the only reason? Was it done proactively just for that reason? Or was it part of an agenda from the White House to get Schumer to push this language? Or was it or was it both? And I would say that if it was part of the White House's agenda to kind of use Schumer to push through this language, well, there could be repercussions for this pushback, I would say.

And the White House has now seen up front level resistance to this. And I just think it's very, very important because, I mean, the White House will have with its agenda things like climate change and potential new forms of energy that could potentially come from these technologies. I think it is in the best interest of the White House. It actually creates like a private public entity whereby contractors and government can work together on some of these materials for the public benefits. People need a little bit of grit to hunt this UFO thing. George's been doing this for decades. It's amazing to see this legislation coming into place. Of course, we didn't get everything and the house, too.

We didn't get everything we wanted. But there are some key things. I think there's some misconceptions. So, for example, that extended whistleblower information or the extended whistleblower protections, you know, honestly, there's enough protections is in place already from what I understand. People are encouraged under the right settings, you know, to come forward.

I don't think that was really going to be either make it or break it. I also know the funding restrictions that were and continued to be implemented. It's a symbol. It's a sign. It's the first time that I'm told. It's the first time that we completely took on industry about this issue. So now the flag has been raised. This is going to be a debate topic when it comes to our new elections.

It has to be, right? I mean, people get clicks when it comes to the UFOs, so they're going to talk about it. Or do you disagree? I think you touched upon a very great interesting thing in terms of debates. Yes, it does get clicks. I think News Nation, among other new sources, will continue covering it and repressing representatives. But I think you've really felt the key point. We're entering presidential election season.

And look, this was the National Defense Authorization Act that could have meant Biden, potentially being the president to oversee some form of confirmation. We don't know if he's going to win next year in an election. And by the time you have the National Defense Authorization Act coming through next year, 2025, it could be implemented by a different president.

And I think also, if Trump wins power again, I think that would be really, really interesting because you've got his former um uh ODNI DNI National Defense

Director of Intelligence John Radcliffe saying they actually were trying to release the UAP information before Trump was our supreme power basically

so uh you've got something it's quite unpredictable here and I would also mention as well in that a lot of the Republicans who are actually advocating for the UAP language were kind of like Trump Republicans, such as Lunar and Gates, for instance, and a lot of the Republicans who are actually anti-the-language were kind of like your more

establishment Republicans, such as Turner and Rogers, who have been there for years and years now. So you're actually kind of like seeing the UAP topic is kind of like a fracture point within the Republican Party as well. So I get feeling that it could be quite interesting in 20 or next year and the year afterwards. Yeah, I'd like to see, is this a voting issue? Because I suspect for most people it is not. It's bread and butter issues. It's national events, national security.

But UAPs is not something most people go to the polls to vote for. Now we've got a chance to see if they will. I mean, those guys that you mentioned, those names, they're on the ballot this year. If the people in their districts are serious about this and not, of them about UAP disclosure, they need to vote those guys out and make a change. I don't know if that'll happen. 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 oceanfront 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.

to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Welcome to Sephora. I'm looking for a perfume that's not too perfuming. I got you. Serum moisturizer or moisturizer syrup.

Let's get into layering. My concealer is making me look worse. Sounds like the wrong shade. Let's get you meshed. There's only one store that really gets what you're going for. Get beauty from people who get beauty. Only at Sephora. Hi, I, let's get you a basket.

Yeah, absolutely. I think it all comes part of transparency and oversight. You know, part of this like kind of like wider issue, which I think Trump really kind of like campaigned on. It's kind of like trusting government and a deep state. And these kind of topics resonate as well when it comes to the UAP topics. I haven't heard Trump mention anything so far about this topic, but you can bet you that Gates and Luna will be trying to pressure behind the scenes. Well, I will tell you, I read between the lines a little bit.

I know when David Grush was on the Joe Rogan podcast, he did say, you know, I've talked to people as high up as you can believe something to that effect. It doesn't take a leap of logic to know that probably one of the people that David Grush ended up speaking with in his official duties was President Trump. So if we make that assumption, which I think is a very solid assumption today, I think that the big picture here, if I just step back, the big picture here is that we have educated people, that people have fought for this, people have chosen to fight for this, like Senator Mike Rounds and other people that are unnamed at this time. And I think that we've educated the public to a point where this is something

you can't deny. This is no longer something that's super taboo and ridiculous. We have industry quaking in its boots. You heard Lockheed wanted to divest their N-H-I, non-human intelligence, UAP or UFO materials so they can put it out the back door, bring it back through the front door. We reported on that way before it was said by other people. That is true. You can take that to the bank. That's just one of these aerospace companies. So I'm just saying we've lit a fire. So you upload Twitter should kind of like self-congratulate a little bit that we got so far rather than saying, oh, we lost this, we lost that. Man, we have made fucking progress. And so here, it's not like we're going to take away all that legislation that's already there. We're going to

build on it. And the industry knows people are watching. I feel like we shot a flare up for UFOs We've normalized the conversation, and this is the paving of the road of what we need to do in the year to come. I am happy with where we landed, and I'm sorry if that goes against everybody's feelings right now, but we have made massive fucking strides, and we're going to continue to push. Chris, you know, the Liberation Times, your publication has been on the forefront of covering this stuff and all different aspects of it. A couple of other media outlets have. News Nation has been working really hard on it. You have the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer making early incredibly inflammatory remarks about House leaders, calling them out, in essence, by name, and talking about UAP disclosure on the floor of the Senate.

Where is the New York Times? Where is CBS News? Where is the Washington Post? How do they possibly ignore this stuff, which they have completely, you know, have sidestepped the whole controversy, the whole time it's been underway for weeks, months? Absolutely. I would just say the legacy media is dying bit by bit every single day now. And I just think they've lost the trust of the public. And look, you know, your friend Joe Rogan, you know, has like the biggest talk show in the whole globe now, you know, something that you had only thought, you know, about 20 years ago was only possible if you were on the television, you were signed up by a big network. So I think that this is the rise of independent media versus the older outdated media, which is compromised, unfortunately.

The fact in Washington Post and the New York Times didn't run with the Dave Gruff story is a real pity. And they're in a shadow of what they used to be back in the 60s and 70s, unfortunately. It shows such as yours, such as Joe Rogan's and others now, which are kind of like really, really breaking all these big stories. And when you look back in the history books, you're unfortunately not going to see much of the New York Times of Washington Post. Instead, you're going to be seeing the faces of George Neff and Jeremy Corbell, I think. Look, there are, I want to touch upon two national security issues.

And the way that people have obfuscated the UFO thing for a long time is saying, well, there's no national security threat that we have. So you saw it with the Conan Report. and stuff like that. And I get that. UFOs themselves, like, if this is the technology, it's far advanced and, you know, they want to do attack, they would. But what are the national security issues?

And I think there's two. One is, if other countries are working on this, which we know, Japan just, you know, said, we're going to take UFOs super seriously. By the way, we talked about a UFO swarm. We reported on a couple episodes ago the world didn't know about, and people haven't really picked up on yet. But we got that info from Japan. and then you look at other countries like China talking about using AI to study this,

we don't want to fall behind. So the national security issue is that the U.S., with these exploitation programs, which we know they have now, that they don't fall behind. That is a national security issue. If somebody else makes a technological leap forward, the other thing that I believe is a national security issue is if we keep getting fucking lied to because you're going to have people breaking from the fold within the intelligence communities doing it the wrong way

and bringing this information forward. So the fear of our intelligence agencies and the fear of our government should be if they don't level with the American and global public on this, the national security issue is people being lied to for so fucking long that they get to a point

where they're going to do an uncontrolled version of getting this information out, more leaks, that kind of thing. So I would argue, trust needs to be earned back right now, real quick or people are going to go left when you're asking him to go right. Catastrophic disclosure. There we go.

Something like that. I've heard that thrown around. I don't know what that means, but I get the idea. Yeah, yeah, people are angry right now. And I think we're going to see some of that uncontrolled catastrophic disclosure. We already saw it from one of my recent stories about an alleged retrieval program. I think we can see much more of that coming in the future. And look, I would also point out one thing that in the legislative.

legislation, UAP is defined as something that's not immediately identify for PAH. They could always say, well, actually, anything not immediately identifiable doesn't have to be non-human. You know, we may know what it is already. When these things enter the atmosphere, we may not identify them as UAP. We might identify them as non-human craft.

This is the thing. This is how they could actually get themselves out of it, you know, wriggle them, where, wriggle themselves out. And you've done that. You've been participated in the war of the words a lot. I've seen a lot of the correspondences where you go in between, you know, the Department of Defense and you try to nail them down and they really use these weasel worded things to try to not answer you. And that's what's so interesting. I think that's why you're fixated on not giving them any wiggle room. But I'm just going to kind of state one last time. I get it. I get it for people that started in UFOs and

2017 and they feel like they deserve the truth about this. The thing is, it's never been easy. You talk to George for how many decades, this is unprecedented and it is a foundational building block that was created with this legislation. Stop the complaining and put your energy to fighting, encourage people that with this new legislation moving into new elections, that this remains a topic, and we start getting answers. We are going to have leaks. We are going to have whistleblowers coming forward. We are going to see more congressional hearings with direct eyewitnesses. We are going to have people giving more information to the ICIG and complaints have already been filed. We have spoken with individuals who have filed those just this weekend. So all of this is

moving forward. What we need to do is make sure the general public people that are not fanatical about how interested we are, they understand the basics. What are the basics? You've been lied to that these craft that, by the way, are made by somebody. They're made by people. Even if the remote control, they're made by people from maybe somewhere else is what it seems like. But we need to get the general public up to date by popularizing the fact that smart people can talk about this, that it's not shameful. And we're doing a damn good job. So I think it's all positive in where we're going. Absolutely. And I would also mention as well, The DOD cannot deny that the ARRI has in its possession material of unknown origin.

They cannot deny that. I was surprised more media haven't picked up on that because that's a really, really big deal. They can't deny that, you know. It's, yeah, so I think that's quite interesting as well. But yeah, the public has been lied to. And I think we saw this week that there is a very, very big cover up where politicians actually are answering to the defense contractors, perhaps,

and the intelligence agencies is not the people that voted them into power, unfortunately. So you just go, I wonder, is this really what democracy is? 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.

Hey, Chris, while we have you here, you broke a really big story that got additional media coverage all over the world recently about a secret CIA operation to go out and recover crashes and engage in reverse engineering. Can you give us sort of a synopsis of where that stands and what the reaction to your story has been? Yes, so the Office of Global Access, when it was within, the CIA's director of science and technology, although I have since heard that it's kind of being moved around and hidden again since. But it actually undertakes and coordinates along with the operation section of CIA, retrieval missions involving landed and crashed craft of non-human origin and a work of J-Sox, So special operations, your Delta forces and your seal teams and stuff.

And yeah, they conduct these operations in foreign countries. And then, you know, they work with CIA offices to get this material out of their hands as quickly as possible and into private contractors. So it's a really, really big story. You know, these allegations came from multiple, multiple sources. They've been vouched by myself. They've been vouched by Matt Ford, my co-author, and Josh Boswell as well. The other authors are under daily mail.

And also, I would say there are probably a lot of members of Congress have vouched for the information as well. So the reaction has been very, very big all across the world. I won't go into too much detail, but some strange things have happened to Matt and I since we released the story. and seeing that we've made some people perhaps quite angry of in the CIA, I would say.

So yeah, it's certainly an interesting story. You might want to invest in some burner phones, as if your phone wasn't tapped already. You're not doing anything right if you're not pissing off some people. That's just how it is. And as our friend, I represented at Birchit would say, you know, that kind of thing lets you know you're over the target. Dadgum it.

Yeah, again, damn it. So look, man, I really appreciate, you know, the way that you do your reporting and we have you on here weaponized all the time because you're really on the forefront. You're really making those calls, trying to put it all together. You got your, you know, kind of eyes and ears to the, you know, the Twitterverse with your opos. I just, so I hear in you what you're kind of hearing online. And I know that's the sentiment. I just, I really want people to take a bigger look at this. step back, you know, you're feeling down about this. Pick yourself up and start fighting me. This is the

time. This legislation, however it ends up landing, is fucking historic and it's powerful. And we should use that and leverage that to make more noise about it. The fight is just starting. And we are on such good footing to have that fight that I think the efforts of complaining about it. You're pointing on it is one thing. But when people are like complaining about it, like this is how it's done. It is a fight. It is a process. Everybody's told you that, right? This is not a sprint. It's a marathon. That's true. There will be some more like really special marking points along this. If everything goes right where we, you know, we hear directly from people. But a lot of this is just going to be like boring and fighting, you know? This is the greatest evidence in a way that

there is something. So you can view it is kind of like, oh, everything's been killed. Or you could think, oh gosh, oh gosh, like they're fighting against this,

you know, this is all conspiracy and this is all made up and stuff. No way they're going to fight from that. As I said, you know, there's no way they're going to fight to, um, not disclose,

Santa's slay in a, in a hangar somewhere. No way they're going to fight for something that's not there. So, uh, I think this is kind of like the biggest go by the thing that we've got at at the moment to point towards a conspiracy. the fact that democracy has no oversight of this,

and democracy is kind of like being subverted in a way by aerospace contractors and special interests in intelligence communities. It just really kind of like it confirms all the suspicions that we've had for a very, very long time. And it's not just us that's had this confirmed now. It's a very, very top of your government in terms of the White House that has seen this firsthand. I can imagine numerous conversations,

between Biden, his cheaper staff and Chuck Schumer basically going over the extreme opposition, something that apparently isn't there. Look, Representative Turner can feign amusement and disinterests all we want, but

it was fighting very, very hard for something that's apparently not there. Well, all right, man, I appreciate it. Thank you so much. You'll keep up the good work. I think, you know, let's see where this lands, where the actual language when it's absolutely solidified and then it has to get signed. So there's a process.

But I think people are going to see it a little differently once the dust settles on this. So that's my hope at least. I think we're on really good footing to continue the work into the next year. Round one. This was round one of a prize fight. We landed some body blows and there's more to come. Yeah, absolutely. That's how I feel. Bye, Chris. Thank you. 100%. 100%. Take care. Thank you. I feel like we pep. up a little bit. See, I was going to flip you a little bit because you were devastated about this, man. And I'm telling you, I think we made more progress than people are letting on to. So we'll see where it goes. But I know you're going to be on the story. And I know we got some tricks up our

sleeves, try to do our best this year to get more information out. Okay. I was small in my face now. Thank you. We can. All right. Talk to you later, Chris. See, Chris. Look, man, I know it can be frustrating. I read it online. And Chris, I could see in his article, he was frustrated. I do really believe what I said, which is that I think that we've identified what the issue is. We've gotten so far with it. I think people need to step back and see that new legislation go through and be signed by the president. This is a beachhead. Okay.

You've got a strategic spot on the beach and you can build from there. It's like landing at D-Day, you know, Al-A beach and taking your invasion forces a little bit further out. It's a start. It's round one of a fight. This is the way our government works, you know. Politics is the art of the possible. Nobody gets everything that they want. Our government, to a large extent, is controlled by big industry.

The aerospace contractors spend a lot of money. So it's no surprise that they would wield influence over the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee because those big companies give them a lot of money. And they tell them what to do. And apparently they've done it. But, you know, you got big banks, big drug companies, big ag, big oil. Those guys fund the campaigns for members of Congress for the House and Senate, and they wield considerable influence. So it is amazing that we got this far at all.

It is obviously disappointing that the UAP disclosure advocates didn't get everything they want. But they got plenty. There was progress made here. It's a start. And it's encouraging because, as we've said already, A, we now know where the opposition is. and B, we know that there really is something to hide. They basically announced this to the world. Yeah, we've got it.

You can't see it. That, I would think, would instill great sense of confidence in the people who want this information out, and members of Congress who are trying to get to the bottom of it. And maybe it's going to take a couple more sessions of Congress, but progress has been made. Yeah, it sets the chess board. I mean, to be honest, like, I am not a political person. I never thought that politics would be a big role in my interaction with this UFO issue. I didn't want to be involved in talk, but it's been very cool actually kind of getting involved.

But I'm more of the path of the pirate here. There are people that have come forward to us already. We've reported on that. And people that are going to come forward. So I don't know. It's really nice to set this kind of groundwork so the public from a political standpoint can understand what's going on with these companies. But I'm not betting everything on this being done by our government and through government

process. I think some of this disclosure process or confirmation process is going to happen from people lovin UFO grenades, from putting stuff on the table that have to be dealt with by the public. That's how I feel is that this is just one path. to getting closer to this. Thinking about Harry Reid. So December 2nd would have been his birthday.

He died almost a year ago. He wasn't here for the holidays this year with his family. I reached out to his widow, his wife, and talked to her. And he's not here to see all this. But, you know, it's 34 years ago. He set these things in motion. And for 26 of those 34 years, nothing much was happening. All of it was underway behind the scenes.

But what's happened since then has been astonishing. The amount of progress in the last five, six years has been absolutely amazing. I'm glad that Senator Reid lived long enough to see some of that happen. I know he'd get a kick out of Senator Schumer, his chief aide, his chief supporter, his successor to carry the ball in his name. It's amazing. But, you know, it's a long fight. It's a long way to go.

But a lot of progress has been made. I'm encouraged by it. Yeah, I can tell you're encouraged, which is pretty cool, because you're not always in court. Yeah, I think there's kind of like a reset. So once this gets signed into law and once that dust settles, I think people are going to start applying pressure. Everybody wants to know, look, man, whatever technology this is,

somebody made it, like a person, how we want to define that being? A being, sure. So I think that if we can get to consensus reality on that, then the questions will fly, the pressure will come. There will be more leaks. There'll be more people coming forward. And I am so confident of that because we've seen the precursors to people coming forward, you know, privately. We've seen that.

And so I think once that testimony is official, however we need to do it, it's a big step forward. So I'm happy. Something also to be encouraged about is Arrow. Now, I know Arrow hasn't done much of anything. Arrow has been more of an impediment to UFO disclosure than anything. In large part because of the guy that was appointed did the job to hit up Arrow, Sean Kirkpatrick. That's right. He came in with a pretty nasty attitude.

about the UFO topic didn't seem to be open to hearing new information. We know that there have been whistleblowers who come forward to them, that he's been basically pretty dismissive of what they've told Arrow. We have a new head of Arrow, at least a temporary director, and interim director, Tim Phillips, this guy. You and I've heard some good things about the guy. We've heard great things about the guy. So if he at least is not opposed to getting to the bottom of it,

that's a big change. If he's actually actively going to pursue this and try to to solve some of this mystery, that's a major change from what we've had for the whole history of our old, like, two years, you know. Tim Phillips, the new head of Aaron. We've heard good things about you. Primarily, we've heard that he recognizes there's a problem. Maybe for those national security issues that I'm identifying, I'm trying to push this. People understand, if we don't get to ground zero on this, get ahead of it, we're in trouble technologically. But also, if we lose the trust of the American people, if they lose the trust, if they don't earn back the trust, then you're going to

have catastrophic disclosure. You're going to have people throwing UFO grenades. And I think that having somebody in charge of Arrow, Arrow itself is probably great. If you look at all the employees and everything, I think it's probably a great organization, but they need someone good at the helm who really wants to solve this problem. I have high hopes for Tim Phillips. I really hope that he accurately brings in the information and discloses what he can to the American public. And we'll see. He has to earn trust. But I'll be watching. We'll see. We'll be watching. But I'm very optimistic about this guy because of what we've heard privately about him. We'll get back to you about that. Yeah. And that's it for Weaponized.

That's it. Never has so few. Has so much to tell but could say so little. Following this in a Webinized, the 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.