Joe Murgia

Thanks to the Scientific Coalition of Ufology for organizing this conference and to Rob Freeman for holding his arms up for two and half hours to record this lecture!

(Transcript has been lightly edited for clarity. And any comments in parenthesis are mine)

Luis Elizondo: I’d rather this be a discussion, if possible, and kind of make it interactive. And at the end, any questions you have, let me know. A couple of ground rules, there are no ground rules. Whatever questions you have, I will be happy to answer any question that I can answer. If I don’t have the answer, I’ll tell you I don’t have the answer and I don’t know. If it requires an answer that’s sensitive or that would violate my NDA, I’ll tell you that and I won’t be able to answer. But at least you’ll hear it from me. And I will tell you that I can’t answer the question and you’ll know why. I wanna be as transparent and forthcoming as possible.

Also, before I begin, I would like to also extend a thank you to a few folks here. First of all, Mr. Rich Hoffman. Thank you for inviting us. I wanna let everybody here know that this is important to folks like Hal (Puthoff) and I. We do not get a speaking engagement fee to do this. We do this for free because we believe in what we’re doing. Because you believe in what you’re doing. So I wanna make sure that’s clear.

I also wanna thank Mr. Robert Powell. Thank you very much sir for all the coordination and everything. All the help so far. It’s been fantastic. Thank you.

Also, Mr. Morgan Bell. So, thank you very much. Mr. Joe Donato.  And, by the way, please give Angie my regards. She was a fantastic agent and I’m sure she’s a fantastic officer now.

I would also like to thank Mr. Alejandro Rojas and his very lovely wife over here. These folks are kind of the mavericks in their field.  And despite, until recently, a lot of the stigma that you all know surround this portfolio, they continue to do their jobs, day in and day out. And that says a lot.

I would also like to very quick, just a quick show of hands, if you’re comfortable, those who have ever served either in the military or worked with the U.S. government or are working in the US government in any capacity at all. Anybody at all. Quite a few people. I wanna thank you sincerely for your service. It is truly humbling. Thank you so very much.

And then of course, last but not least, an individual who I did not know. I only heard about her today. I do apologize for my ignorance. It is the passing of Ms. Karen King. That is certainly very unfortunate and sad news to hear. And especially for somebody who had contributed much to this field. I would also like offer my condolences, sincerely to her family, unfortunately…on her passing. 

So before I change any slides here, I would also like to thank you all. Last but not least. Certainly but not least. You’re really the reason why we’re here. Folks like Hal, myself and others. Because you all have been pursuing something that I only did for the last decade. Some of you have invested thirty, forty, even forty years of your life. And that is one hell of a commitment. That is a marriage. So, I wanna tell you sincerely from myself and from Hal and from others. And I’m very hopeful that forums like this are going to continue to bring this conversation to light. 

So with no further ado, let me go ahead and see if I’ve figured this out. I have to preface this: Hooked on Phonics did not work for me too well. I’m kind of limited from an automation perspective. So, let’s see if it works. It works. Okay. 

A lot of people ask me, so Lue, do you think Disclosure has occurred? And, I think it has occurred and I think it is still occurring. As I said before, I believe this is a process. It’s not an event. I’m also asked, well is this confirmation? Well, what does that mean? Because if you look at the word confirmation, that kind of gives the impression that there’s some sort of underlying narrative to begin with that you’re confirming. And I’m not sure we have that narrative yet. I think we need more data. I think we’re in the process of building that narrative. And we do that by using the scientific method and collecting evidence and materials and doing the proper analysis of this in a way that can be peer-reviewed and of course, repeatable. Right? That’s what science is all about. So, is this confirmation? In my opinion, and I’m gonna caveat that it’s only my opinion and I don’t like to give it very often. I don’t think this is confirmation because I don’t think we have a narrative yet. And I’m very wary of going down any avenue where we have some pre-conceived notion of what something might or might not be already. Until we have enough evidence to establish the facts. 

So, December 16th, you all know better than I do, what happened. The news got out and everybody was talking about it. I would like to share with some personal insight. I received a call from a very dear colleague of mine – he was still at the Pentagon – who works this effort, very, very closely. And so yes, read between the lines. When I say he’s working this, I don’t mean the past. Actively working this. So, that means, this effort continues. So, congratulations. It’s still going. And that, too will come out. Hopefully in a very efficient way, some time soon. But, I received a call from him very, very recently. Actually, it was this week. And he said, you know, Lue, it’s funny because a conversation that I had to have with you, just a year and a half ago, in a vault within a SCIF, (Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility, where sensitive/classified information can be discussed) in a TS/SCI (Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information) facility that’s SAP (Special Access Program) cleared and we had to whisper to have this conversation. I can now have this conversation in the open halls of the Pentagon. Imagine that. How far we’ve come. 

And so as we sit here today, I encourage you, look around. Look at all these pictures around you. You’re right now at the epicenter of where mankind, as a species, left this planet, and went somewhere else. Went to the moon. I was looking at some of these pictures. They’re profound. In one picture, you have a dirr road, with a few Model Ts and people walking along a dusty road. Just forty years later…forty years later, you have someone also walking on a dusty road but it’s not on this planet. It’s on the moon. And he’s in a spacesuit! So, things happen. And because of people like you and the scientific community, science fiction  becomes science fact. And so anybody who would look at you with some sort of maybe tilted smile or something like that and say, , “Oh, you’re talking about UFOs? What does that mean?” Well, we don’t know what it means but we should probably pay attention. Because it is real. Now, what it is and how…what [are] its intentions and all these other things? Well, that’s for smarter people than me to figure out. That’s beyond me.

But we have established the fact that they’re real. And we have also established the fact that from a national security perspective…and we’ll talk about this…I know some people are a little bit leery of the fact that I have always historically tied this to a national security threat. And we’ll get to that. But you now have people at the highest levels of the United States government and international communities of their governments, finally taking this serious. Applying real resources, real talent, real expertise to look a this and finally figure it out..what this means. So congratulations. 

I think this is an historic event for everybody. To have a forum like this where everybody can sit down and have an honest conversation about a topic that has been so fraught before with skepticism and taboo. You’ve achieved a lot. Keep in mind, just ten years ago, scientists still couldn’t agree whether or not the giant squid of the Pacific really even existed. Because no-one saw one on camera. And so finally, enough washed up on the beach and enough showed up on deep sea cameras where, now we realize, oh you know what? There really are sea monsters in the ocean. But, they’re actually a species. It’s actually part of nature. It’s not pseudoscience. It’s just…science. 

And so, my time at the Pentagon, working with some fantastic human beings like Hap Puthoff and others. We approached this, very much the same way. We approached this from a scientific perspective. We wanted to know what we could capture with empirical data, qualify and quantify it, so that we could go head and take that data and try to figure out what it is we’re dealing with. And so that’s really it in a nutshell. 

This occurred and my intention for leaving the Department of Defense, I would also like to clarify, it was not a matter of disloyalty. It was in fact loyalty. Why I left the Department of Defense in the first place. I am very, very loyal to the Department of Defense. It you look at my resignation memo, one of the very last things I told Secretary Mattis: You can always count on me to carry the water for DoD. I love my country. I love the Department of Defense. I believe in what we’re trying to accomplish. But, in order for me to accomplish and finish the very mission I was given – by the way, which I did not ask for – I actually had to leave my beloved department to finish that mission. So, if anybody has any speculation out there on why I left…I did not leave in bad blood. I left because I had to. Because it was the only way I was going to be able to get the boss who I was loyal to, who I served in combat with, to be able to pay attention. Because certain people that were minding him were not providing him the information. And in my opinion, the only thing more dangerous to a country – keep in mind, that department of defense mission is to protect its national borders – the only thing more dangerous than our ability not to protect our national borders and our people…is not to be able to have a conversation that that threat exists. And that is what I objected to. We couldn’t even have a conversation about it because of social stigma. And that is wrong. 

So, that is why I chose to to leave. And of course a lot of speculation came out as a result of that. Am I a spy for the CIA trying to fool people and do soft disclosure? As I’ve said before, look, at the end of the day, I’ll tell you no. But it doesn’t really matter because people are going to believe what they believe. At the end of the day, who cares? Because we’re getting what we wanted. You’re getting the information that was so squirreled away in these little, secret hidden compartments. It’s now coming to light. You’re now realizing, we were looking at aircraft forty years in the future. Because if you look at forty years ago in the past, what did we have? We had F-16s. We had F-14 Tomcats. We had F-4s. What do we have today? We have F-18s? We have F-16s. We have F-22s. We have F-117s. But they’re still jets. When you look at the DIA studies, I think it’s very evident what we were looking at. We weren’t looking at aircraft 40 years in the future. We’re going to get into a little of that right now. 

So this was the AATIP contract focus. And I also want to go a little bit into what AATIP means. Ad you see it up here: Aerospace. We’re not talking about aviation. We’re not talking about airplanes.We’re talking about things that have the ability to operate both in atmosphere environment. And no atmosphere environment! And you know what? Probably under water, too. Why is that important? Because these things are being able to perform in a way that we still don’t quite yet understand. We certainly cannot replicate. More importantly, they can do it in all virtual mediums. 

Let me digress for just one moment here and do a very brief – and I don’t wanna insult anybodies’ intelligence, I know pretty much everybody in this room knows more about physics, than I do. (I don’t ~Joe) 

As it was explained to me, let’s say this pen here, is an aircraft. An aircraft looks like an aircraft because it as to perform in our atmosphere. So, it has a nose. It’s got a tail. It’s got wings. It’s got control surfaces. It’s got an engine in the back. So a plane, pretty much looks like a plane. Yeah, it might be a B-2 versus a F-16. But it still is a plane. Where as a rocket, doesn’t have to fly really for very much time in our atmosphere. It’s in no atmosphere. So it has thrusters. It doesn’t have wings. It’s doesn’t have control surfaces. It has thrusters. It has chemical rocket motors instead of a jet engine because there’a no atmosphere. And yet a submarine looks complete different and actually uses buoyancy and a propeller to move under water. And that’s why a submarine looks like a submarine, a plane looks like a plane and a rocket looks like a rocket. For the most part.

And yet, these things we’re seeing, can operate in all these environments, without changing their physical attributes and still continue to perform the same way. Now for those of you who are scientists, you know the drive coefficients we’re talking about when you’re in water. You look at a torpedo – and I can’t go into details here – but anything above a moderate speed under water – the drag becomes so significant, that it’s almost impossible to overcome unless you use other technologies to reduce that friction. Okay? And yet these things, can perform, just as easy. We pick ‘em up on radar. We pick ‘em up on sonar. And we pick them up on everything in between. 

This was a contract focus. I’ve talked about this before. When this came out, more than a year ago, before the list of DIA studies was every released. And this is actual from the contract. Why is that important? Because the word “phenomena” is used. It doesn’t say aircraft, folks. It says “phenomena.” It’s in black and white. You can read it yourself in the contract. Black and white. Every word that we use is deliberate in the U.S. government. You know that from a contract, vehicle perspective. If you’ve ever been a COR – Contract Officer’s Representative – you know what I’m talking about. Words have meaning. They have legal meaning. So when you see that: “Investigate legitimacy of currently observed phenomena.” Investigate! That doesn’t mean just do studies, folks. That doesn’t mean sit back with a stubby pencil and just collect data. It’s investigate. It’s doing. It’s an action. 

So, and then ask the question: Are they achievable by current understanding of physics and engineering? Well if they’re aircraft then the answer’s yes! Unless they’re not. And then it says at the bottom: If not, what research is required to achieve it? Well, those are the studies that Mr. Puthoff helped get done for us. And several other very, very, very renowned scientists. Some of the best in the world, in their fields mind you. So that’s why you have the studies that came out. And again, it says in black and white: “Phenomena.” It does not say aircraft! So, anybody who tries to twist that narrative, I would encourage you to do a little reading. Or encourage them to do a little reading. Because it’s in black and white. 

So, this is a slide I put out before. But I can probably talk a little bit more now about it because al these studies came out. So let me briefly go over what the five observables were. You’re talking about an object…here’s out little airplane again. The first observable is sudden and instantaneous acceleration. What we’re talking about are the inertial forces that are exhibited by something. When it changes direction from Point A to Point B and possibly back to A again or C or whatever. There are internal, inertial forces that we can look at and we can actually measure to determine: Is it something that we know of?

So to put this in context, the human body can withstand, for a very short period of time, about 9 Gs, wearing a g-suit. Otherwise, very unpleasant things start to happen. Blackouts, redouts, etc…An F-16, albeit a little bit older aircraft. Anybody here from General Dynamics? No? Anyways, great aircraft. A little older. Still one of the most highly maneuverable aircraft we’ve ever built. Except [for] a few experimental ones. But they were unmanned. So, if that aircraft can go anywhere between 16 to 18 Gs before the material science aspect of the aircraft begins to break down. Meaning wings snap off. Okay? 

There are other things…missiles, that can experience much greater G-forces for a very short period of time. Again, a very short period of time. But what we’re seeing is a consistent and persistent ability to perform G-forces well in excess of 400 Gs. And that’s on the conservative side. Well beyond the healthy limitations of anything biologically certain to withstand. And by the way, this is not world according to Lue. This is actually documented. It’s been recorded. It’s real. You can see it yourself. And the Nimitz is just one, of many, many examples that I’m fairly certain are gonna come to light. And fairly soon. 

The next one is hypersonic velocity. So here’s our little airplane again flying in the atmosphere. And everybody knows what supersonic speeds are but when you’re talking hypersonic velocities, you’e talking about Mach 5 plus. (That’s 3836 mph+) That’s really fast, folks. Now, do we have aircraft that can do it? Sure. Heck, the space shuttle did it when it was going in chain of orbital velocity. But not the way we’re seeing it. And certainly not without the associate signatures. When you see the shuttle launch, baby you know it’s the shuttle. I mean, it’s loud, you see a smoke plume for miles and miles and miles. The Earth shakes. When an aircraft is going that type of speed, or a missile, you have het ablation or friction. You have atmospheric ionization. You have contrails out the back. You have acoustic signatures such as sonic booms that are very hard to get around and engineer around it. Okay? That’s why you have something like then B-2. It’s really stealthy but it’s not really fast. If you wanna be really fast, you’re probably not gonna be really stealthy. So it’s a tradeoff. That these things are performing hypersonic velocity in some cases…I have to be careful what I say. What I will tell you is that they have been officially clocked at over 13,000 mph. Unofficially, much, much faster. And by the way, these are through military capabilities. Okay? No, grandma saw some lights in the backyard. 

The third observable’s a little but of an oxymoron. Low observability, right? Well how the hell is that an observable? Well it is, believe it or not. The fact that you can’t see it, sometimes, is something that you can record. Sometimes, the absence of data itself is as just important as having data. If you see a hole in the picture, that means something is creating that hole. In very much the same way here. You’ll have the reports of the pilots, eyewtinesses…by the way, highly trained observers, all with top secret security clearances. By the way, trusted to fly live munitions over U.S. cities. Go and fight and win wars on our behalf. These people are trained to know a silhouette between a MiG-25, a MiG-29, an F-16 and a European Tornado. They know it. They know the difference between a drone, a quad-copter and a kite. And they’re telling you what they’re seeing is unlike anything they’ve ever seen before. But, oh wait! There’s more! Because what they’re reporting and seeing – you know, it’s this weird kind of silvery object that’s hard to see – is also being backed up by the electro-optical data. The cameras are seeing that same fuzzy, weird object, too! With this weird glowing aura, this halo around it. And oh, by the way, it happens to be the same thing that the radar is picking up, too. Simultaneously. And not just one radar. Many radars, at the same time, from different positions. Okay?

So you have spatial and temporal information all now coming together, telling you that you’ve got something there. You m ay not know what it is…it’s kind of hard to see it, but maybe that and the fact that it’s hard to see, in itself is an observable. Maybe it’s telling you something. There’s some physics there. Right? And you look at the desert. A hot desert on a hot day and you see that mirage effect? It’s kind of hard to see through. Are we looking at something similar?

And of course, as you can see on the right, these are some of the reasons why it’s important for us, from a DoD perspective, from a military perspective, a national security perspective. Because if I can do instantaneous acceleration or hypersonic velocity or low observability, that gives me the ability to understand thrust vectoring capabilities, g-force, neutralization, rapid deployment of a capability…first strike capability, right? So if I can go ahead and hit my enemy before they hit me, then that’s probably better. 

And then of course, stealth, low observability. The other two observables: multi-medium travel and positive lift, we’ll talk very briefly about that, too. I apologize on the right if it’s hard to see those. I didn’t get a chance when I was going between PC and Mac and back and forth on this. It dropped the color. But those are supposed to be yellow. 

Multi-medium travel. We talked briefly about that. An object that can perform just as easily in atmosphere, low Earth orbit – possibly beyond – and even under water. Now why would that be important for us? Well, strategic surprise! Military flexibility. Battle space dominance. I can fly. I can swim and I can do everything in between. That’s huge! But that again goes to a world of compromises. When we’re talking from an engineering perspective…for example when you look at a sea plane, right That’s a plane that can fly that can also kind of be like a boat. But a sea plane isn’t really…you know, it’s a amalgamation of compromises. It’s not really a great airplane. And it’s not really a great boat. It’s just kind of in the middle there because it’s gotta satisfy both. So there are those compromises. We don’t see those compromises when we’re looking at the UAP. Why is that?

And then of course, positive lift. The ability to defy the natural effects of Earth’s gravitational force. That, by the way, universally applies to us all. Now do we have technology? Sure. I mean…we have hot air balloons. That’s positive lift. We have lift, wings, right? Like an aircraft. We have the four coefficients you have to pay attention to: thrust, lift, drag, weight. 

You have a jet engine that can provide that thrust. You have a propellor engine that’s kind of a mechanical way of pushing the air, it you will. And then you have rocket engines, chemical engines. But really, those are only the four, real ways we know how to defy – for any real period of time – Earth’s natural gravitational force. Other than ballistic. Right? Like a mortar. Or just popping a missile out of a silo. Yet these things can fly at these incredible speeds and yet hover like a helicopter. Sometimes for a minute. Sometimes for hours. Sometimes for days. They can drop in from 80,000 feet down to 50 feet right over the water within less than couple of seconds. Two, seconds. You tell me. I was part of a lot of government programs. I have a good, healthy background in aerospace and protecting technologies…advanced technologies when I was a young, special agent. We still don’t have that capability. 

So you can see from a national security perspective, there are national security implications to this. Now, if you ask me as a human being, is it a national security threat? I think my answer to you is it could be if it wanted to be. It has the potential to be. I am not saying they’re a threat. What I’m saying is they could be, if they wanted to be. Or it could be if it wanted to be.

So, as a result, you pay your Department of Defense to protect this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. That’s what it says. You want a Department of Defense to consider this a potential, national security threat until it can prove it’s not. So that’s why in my job…look if this was a humanitarian thing and everybody was here for peace and sing “Kumbaya,” give it to the state department. Give it to an NGO (non-governmental organization). Give it to a USAID (United State Agency for International Development). That’s not DoD’s job. DoD’s job is to go fight and wins wars quickly. That is what you pay us to do. And so, that is why there was national security nexus. Because if it was anything other than national security, the DoD would not be involved. The Air Force wouldn’t be involved. The Navy wouldn’t be involved. Most likely the CIA wouldn’t be involved. DIA and everybody else. It is a national security issue. Is it a threat? I don’t know. But it is an issue, in my opinion.

But you know what? This effort didn’t start with AATIP. And I know that. And you know that. AATIP was just one piece of a long legacy of efforts that some people in this room were actually a part of. How incredible is that, right? So here we are today and we’re going all the way back. Some folks in this room were actually a part of Project Blue Book. Isn’t that something else? And here we are.

These are documents that were actually released by these organizations that talk about the same five observables. In fact, going back to the 1950s – early 50s, 1952 to be precise – officers described seeing a flying, white butane tank about forty feet. A flying lozenge. What does that sound like to you. Sounds like a Tic Tac to me. And these observables go all the way back to 1947! And they’re written in some cases by four-star officers. They’re written to and from J. Edgar Hoover! As high as it gets!

So, don’t look at AATIP and say, well AATIP brought all this out. Actually, we didn’t. We just continued the legacy of a lot of hard work. It goes well before that. We have known about these things for a long time. The only thing AATIP did, with the help of folks like Hal, (Puthoff) was be able to understand that these things fell into a category of observables, that then allowed us to try to figure out the physics. That is an accomplishment of AATIP. Unfortunately, I can’t take credit for it. The credit goes to that guy (points to Puthoff). But, that is something this office was able to achieve. And I do think that’s significant. Because once you understand the physics, you understand how it works. And if you understand how it works, then maybe you can replicate it. 

So, I encourage you at some time to take a look at some of these documents. Very, very interesting. Again, a lot of these are on recent FOIA. There’s a lot of them. I don’t expect everybody to digest all of it. But there’s enough there where anybody can look at these or even take these slides and blow ‘em up and see some of these examples. They’re pretty incredible. I’m sure some of you will do this anyways. Everybody always takes these briefings, they go through [them with] a fine-tooth comb, so I try to put a couple of Easter eggs in there once and a while so people can, you know (Elizondo and audience laugh). I shouldn’t have said that but it’s true. 

There’s a lot of history but you know what? It’s not only the U.S. folks! It’s foreign governments. They’ve got an interest, too! And some of these countries have actually admitted it! For some reason, they’re a little more forthcoming than we are. I don’t know why. I can only imagine why. But these are some of the organizations that are actually within their governments that are actually charted specifically to look at UAPs. From a scientific perspective, mind you. So you’re talking about money, resources and budgets and personnel that could be diverted to things like war on terrorism but they’re not. They’re diverted to the UAP phenomena. Because they think it’s important enough that they understand what they’re dealing with. And frankly, I don’t blame them. But guess what? It’s not just them. Here’s some more countries. 

So, I think when we have this conversation, we’re beginning to realize that this is. Not a U.S. phenomenon. This is not even a phenomena for this hemisphere. It is truly, a global phenomena There’s a gentleman I met in here from Peru. And you know what? They had one hell of an effort. A lot of interesting things happen in South America. Hal and I have had a debriefing with one individual in particular from a country down south. A very senior person. I still remember that debriefing. Very, very compelling. And it was an official, U.S. government debriefing, by the way. There’s a history here and this is a global phenomena. So why wouldn’t we look at it? I mean, our friends are looking at it. Some of our foreign adversaries are looking at it. Sure you should look at it. 

Now, there’s two things I’d like to, before we go to the next slide, talk about just briefly. National security threat. I heard someone else say this far more eloquently but let me see if I can recapture it very quickly. Hypothetically…

Sir… Senator so and so: “Lue, do you think this is really…I mean really, at the end of the day…is this really…is this really a threat?”

Elizondo: “Well, sir. Mr. Senator, we have two options. A) We have something coming into our air space, that we have no idea what it is, how it works and there’s not a damn thing we can do about it. And oh, by the way, it has the capability to bring, potentially, nuclear capabilities over the White House in two minutes. Or, B) It’s a mass delusion. Everybody is absolutely crazy. Thousands of DoD people who have top secret clearances – trained observers – who you trust to go fight and wins wars – with live munitions – over U.S. cities. They’re crazy. And by the way, some of these people have their finger on the nuclear button. Is that not also an issue? So either way, it’s a national security issue. It doesn’t matter what side of the aisle you’re on. It doesn’t matter how you feel about it. It is a national security issue. Those are the only two options. It’s real or it’s not. And either one is a national security issue. So, I think it’s important we look at it that way.” 

And so, then the next option is, ‘Well, Lue…you know, it’s a…” I won’t say who…the DoD scratches their head and they say, ‘Well actually, we think it’s Russian.’ (Elizondo smirks and audience laughs) Well okay, fine. You know what? Great. “So how long, have you known…DoD…that this was a Russian capability and you failed to inform Congress? Which, by the way, is law. What’s your answer now? Because okay, great…it’s Russian. Why haven’t you told me? And it’s been how many years? And they’ve had this capability the entire time?” So you see my point here. When you go down the logic train, it’s really not that illogical to have this conversation from a national security perspective. Because either way you look at it, it is a national security issue. 

But with come challenges, also come opportunities. We are in a room now where we have some of the greatest minds in this country, working together, to put human beings on the Moon. Coming in today, this morning, I was stunned to see a life-sized version of the Saturn rocket. Amazing! Amazing! One of the most powerful, fastest, machines mankind has ever built, ever, is standing right over there. Right in your backyard. Right? And let’s look at it. What happened during the last space race? A lot of things happened. A lot of industries came out of the last space race that we couldn’t even imagine. So my humble company, along with Hal and several other people like Chris Mellon, Steve Justice…We have a company that a lot of people kind of say, ‘Well…alright you, hold on. You ran AATIP and now you’re doing this TTSA. And okay, you’re trying to build something, you’re trying to study something…you’re also selling books and t-shirts? I’m confused.’ Well, it’s okay, You can be. But, it actually makes sense. But that’s a whole nother briefing. 

But what I’m here to tell you…these are kind of the three divisions we have: Field Operations, Science and Aerospace and Education and Entertainment. Now what the hell does entertainment and a rock star have to do with this? You got a platform, folks! Same reason you’re here today. We’re all coming here to have a discussion and have a conversation. In order to do that you gotta get the word out. Having a rock star and a musician, who understands how to push a message and is a little bit of a vanguard and maverick and doesn’t really care about breaking some of the rules that guys like me do worry about? Sometimes you gotta break a little china. And he knows how to break a lot of china. He knows also an individual who got to the highest levels of government whether you want to admit it or not. He got to Podesta. So, we have to give credit where credit is due. 

And part of this is like when Spielberg came out with his “Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind.” That was…I think we can look back and say, wow, that was a very monumental movie. It was done for entertainment but it was a monumental movie. And so, there are examples where science fiction has actually informed science fact. And science fact has informed science fiction. That’s done in entertainment. Let’s put an example: Gene Roddenberry. “Star Trek,” right? Remember they had the little tricorder, the little flip phone and all of a sudden Motorola thirty years later, we all got flip phones. They talk about the tricorder…kind of this thing that you look inside your body. Now we got CAT Scans. 

So, those are some examples where science fiction helped inform science fact. But let’s look at some examples where science fact informed science fiction in the entertainment industry. And then I won’t beat this horse to death too much. Apollo 13. A mission that almost became a national tragedy and disaster. But it wasn’t. It was a miracle. And thirty years later, you have Hollywood doing movie, with Ron Howard as the director, on Apollo 13. Right? To get that message out. So no different than anybody else trying to get their message out. No different than this (TTSA) organization. Here, we’re trying to get the conversation started. And what you saw on the History Channel? That is a start. You’re talking about a global audience of millions and millions of people where you can finally have the conversation. And by the way, what people say on camera, you can’t take it back. Once it’s said. Once it’s recorded, it’s there for posterity forever. So this is a way that we can have that conversation. And we can get people to have the conversation. People with access. People with expertise. People in the government. This is not a show…and by the way, 

If anybody wants to know how well you do financially doing a show after seven months like this, traveling the world internationally, working your butt off? I made enough…just so everyone…just put it on the table…I made enough to buy a decent lawnmower. Thats how much money I made. So I can now mow my lawn on a self-propelled lawnmower. So if you think this is some, get rich quick scheme? It’s not folks. Go play the lottery. You’ve got better chances of making more money doing that. You do this because you believe in it and once you see it, you can’t forget it. 

So this is our humble company. We talked about some of the innovations that came out. Profound innovations resulted from the last Space Race. Well, let’s take a look at a few of them. Portable life support systems. Micro-Scanners. Remote Medical Monitoring and Sensors. Memory Foam for Beds. Here’s just a small few examples. Let’s look at a few more. Cosmic Ray Shielding. We now use them on our satellites. Freeze-dried Food. I’m not sure that was such a great innovation. Portable Soil Vacuum. Reflective Foils we use now for thermal insulation. This goes on and on. Right? Human Prosthetics. Thank NASA. Actually, there were over 6300 innovations. Any of you have athletic shoes and go work out or do yoga? Apollo. Any of you had a CAT Scan in the last year? Apollo. LED Lights. Anybody who has ever seen an LED light or uses LED lights to try to save money indoor house. Apollo. Okay? Each one of these, in some cases, turned out to be multi-billion industries and NASA had no idea what was gonna come out of the space race. And here’s just a few, small examples. 

So, guess what? In my opinion, I think we’re at that paradigm again. I think we are at this paradigm where now we are faced with a new reality. And the sky’s the limit, folks. If you think that’s exciting, wait until you see what comes out of this. When you can manipulate space-time metric? Can you imagine what type of things we can do for mankind and humanity? And that’s just one.So, our company is focused to a great deal on the science piece and the aerospace on looking at this as a business case model that might work. 

Alright, so here’s the slide that everybody wats to talk about and see. All of those products that came out of the last space race required material science. Scientists, in some cases like you that are sitting in this room. We need your help. You don’t have the material. You don’t have the analysis. You don’t have the data. You got nothing! So this is why forums like yours are so important. You gotta have scientists, at the end of the day, to figure out just what the hell it is we’re looking at. What makes this material so special? Now in some cases, this material was told it’s special. Through analysis, guess what? Meh, not so special. But some of it, is absolutely special. I won’t point out which ones on that slide but there are some that are absolutely special and have been briefed to some very, very senior levels of this government. And they do remarkable and extraordinary things. And they’re built in such a way that to this day, we still can’t replicate them. To this day. So that should be very telling. 

Material science is a critical piece to this. We can’t just sit there and say, a ha, I told you so. That’s not what this is about. This effort is not about satisfying the natural curiosity of people who want to know right now. As I said before, there’s a difference between giving information right and giving it right now. Im not in the business of giving information right now. I’d rather give it to you, right. So, you have to do due diligence. You have to understand what it takes to do the analysis and to respect the scientific method. And to respect the people you’re working with   in government whether it e the legislative branch or the executive branch. You’ve got to give people time. You have been steeped, many of you in this, for decades. Some of these people are learning about this for the very first time. No kidding. They’ll scratch their head and say, ‘Wait a minute. That’s real?’ Yeah, it’s real! Imagine that. 

So, you gotta give them time and then they have to make decisions. Cause you can imagine, with something like this, there’s all sorts of agencies and organizations that have an interest in this. I can’t tell you which ones, unfortunately, but you can use your imagination. And it’s not just propulsion. There’s other organizations that can look at this, you know, and say…let’s say from an armor perspective. Right? I put x amount of pounds of armor on a vehicle that slow me down and weight me down. What if I didn’t have to have armor at all? What if I had a way with certain material where bullets didn’t matter any more? They didn’t do anything to me. 

So, we’re taking this step by step. I know people are hungry for information and data. I do believe it’s forthcoming. But it has to be done the right way. And by the way, let me caveat that, too because people say, ‘Well is the right way, your way?’ No, it’s not my way. It’s not my way at all. But we have to respect the people that are involved. We have to give them the flexibility and latitude to take this in and start making the right decisions. And you wanna always make sure that your executive branch and your legislative branch are duly informed. You don’t want one being informed and not the other. Politics aside. I don’t care if you’re a Republican, Democrat, Independent, you know, Tea Party, Don’t know. Don’t care. The bottom line is when you serve as a government servant like I did, it’s is our duty and responsibility to inform leadership and the executive branch.  Doesn’t matter who’s in charge. And in turn, you also have to make sure that the legislative branch is also informed. And you don’t want one being more information than the other. Cause then, they get mad. So, it takes time. It takes time. 

But now let’s recap very quickly the last year and four months. Just very quickly. Humor me for one moment. The New York Times came out and published a story that the program was real. DoD admitted it was real. They said they spent twenty-two million dollars on it. Three videos for the first time in U.S. government history, were released by the U.S. government, through the actual review process, of objects that they still say till this day, they have no idea what they are. And by the way, they were already analyzed. So, please don’t show me some sort of video game that some folk pulled off their PC and say look that’s IR flare. It’s not even a real picture. You’re looking at a video game, okay? Give me real data. We had the best of the best from the intelligence community that briefed me. And they said, ‘Lue, we haven’t a clue. This is some weird stuff.’ And by the way, you will see that we even had people from NTSB, on camera, analyzing. On camera! Same thing. Bingo! Not a clue. Fifty years of doing investigations for the NTSB. I’ve never seen anything like that in my career. For the record. On camera. 

So, I think it’s important as we build a compelling case that we can tell, keeping in mind that even the briefing I’m giving you today, there are gonna be people, maybe even if this audience, but they’re gonna be people, if this goes out. That are gonna scrutinize every single word I say. And they are waiting for me to mess up. One wrong word that violates my NDA and I go to jail. And you won’t see Lue for a very long time. So I have to be careful. I will not violate my NDA. Not because I’m afraid of jail. Just because, I’m a patriot. I don’t know what to tell you. I love my country. So I’m not gonna violate it. I am gonna try to have a conversation, in a way, that gets everybody involved, and that information comes to you the right way. 

Because this shouldn’t be coming from Luis Elizondo. It shouldn’t be coming from world according to Lue and this is…this is everything. Just bleh. It should be coming through the government channels. The right channels. Because, ultimately, that’s why I really left the Department of Defense. I wanted to fix it. I didn’t want to ruin it. These are good people. Most of the people in there are my friends. They’re foxhole buddies [who I was in] combat with. They’re good. They’re loyal. They’re patriots. Yeah, there’s dysfunction in the government. I got it. We all know. It’s there. But there’s also a lot of goodness. And so, I wanted to compel those in headship positions to fix the system. It’s not any one individual’s fault. Now are there little cabals in there that made my life a…(it seems like he wanted to say a living hell~Joe) very difficult? Yeah. Absolutely there were. And that’s another conversation. But they were not…they did not represent the government at large. And I think it’s important that I make that distinction. And I want the government to work to our benefit. 

Now? I’m a private citizen. Before? I was a servant of the people. Now the government serves me. And I wanna make sure it works. I wanna make sure it’s fixed. And so that’s what we’re doing. So that’s really what my effort has been the last year and a half. And so if we’ve been a little bit radio silence, I apologize for that. it’s not intentional. But there’s a lot of things going on behind the scenes. Just because you don’t see what’s on top of the water, there’s a whole lot going on underneath. So I ask for a little bit of patience and understanding. Which you’ve all been very patient and understanding. I think good things are coming. I think good things are coming this way. Yeah, they’re gonna be a little scary for some people. And maybe this is a conversation that is not only involving scientists like you and the curious but also maybe religious scholars. And philosophers. And government people. And academics, right? Why not bring them into the mix? Because at the end of the day, I don’t care if you’re a doctor, you’re a lawyer, you’re a cop, you’re a fireman, you’re a school teacher, you’re a student. This phenomenon affects every single one of us equally. And how we interpret this information may differ, depending where you come from and what your view is on life. But at the end of the day, we’re all affected equally so we should probably all have the conversation, together. In my opinion. Anyways. 

So with that said, let me go here. And before we go to questions – real quick – I would like to just point out one last thing. I was a government bureaucrat. I did some stuff before, in the intelligence community. I spent some time in some really bad situations overseas. But when I came into this program I didn’t ask for it. Someone asked me, because of my background in counterintelligence, to take the job. And so I did it. This is not something that I went just, ‘Yeah, I wanna do it!’ When they came to me and they finally had a serious conversation. They asked me…he said, “Lue, I wanna know what do you think about UFOs?’ I told him I don’t. I don’t think about it. Don’t know. Don’t care. I don’t got time. I don’t have the patience. I’m just…I’m worried about the enemy. Tell me who the enemy is and we’ll go get them. And so that’s probably why I was brought on in the beginning. And then later, the…my…the director who proceeded me, unfortunately was run out of the U.S. government because of this very caustic portfolio. A lot of stigma. 

And so, people like Hal and others who we had to rely upon after that director and I took it over…they’re really…they’re the real heroes of this scenario. I was just kind of the guy that could kind of keep everybody protected and keep it running. But at the end of the day, they were the ones doing the hard work. So, if there’s anybody to thank in this scenario, there’s a handful of people. My former director. I can’t say his name because I promised I would never. He has to make that decision if he wants to come out. But he’s certainly one of those heroes. Hal Puthoff is certainly one of those heroes. Another guy named Kit Green is one of those heroes. Another guy, that I can’t mention his name is one of those heroes because he is still fighting the fight in Washington. Right now. Today. Today. This moment. Running parts of this program. So, that’s encouraging. It’s alive and well. Now, is it called AATIP? I don’t know. I’d probably change the name, frankly. But other than that, it’s the same thing. Its exactly the same vehicle. You can call it a Lincoln or a Ford. It’s made in the same plant. It’s the same car. Different batch. 

So, anyways…with that, what I’d like to do, if its okay, turn it over to some questions cause I know you probably have more specific questions and I can’t anticipate what they are. So I’m gonna shut up and see if anybody has any questions. 

aatip, aawsap, Elizondo, lue, luis Elizondo, scu, uap, ufo

By admin

---

---