PayPal – firstname.lastname@example.org
“When you have material in your hands, physical evidence that you can analyze, there’s not a whole lot better than that to base and formulate an opinion off of. And so, from my perspective, that has always been the Holy Grail. And from my experience and my understanding of the situation, and my review of the documentation and the records, without going into detail, I am very confident that the United States government is in possession of some very exotic material.”
Transcription and audio comments by Joe Murgia – @TheUfoJoe on Twitter.
My Thoughts on Richard Dolan…
Luis Elizondo (LE): “We are only here and this far, in large part because of you. You’re a Formula One race team and yeah, you’ve got a really fast car. But a team only wins because you’ve got a great race car driver, you’ve got a great pit crew, you’ve got great sponsorship, etc, etc, etc. We are here, we’re winning because this is a team effort. And please forgive me because, as most of you know, I’m not a ufologist, I haven’t had a long history in this other than my work at the Pentagon. But I think most of us can sense that the times are changing and they’re changing in large part because for the last three years, and certainly, for decades, many of you have been engaged and fighting in the trenches on this topic. And I think this is a monumentous time for us, for this topic. And again, I just wanted to say, from the bottom of my heart, thank you very much for being part of this, and helping us all have this discussion in a collegial and collective way. Before we begin, I just want to…when you guys get to your questions, I want to say for the record, there are no off-limit questions. If I can’t answer something, it’s because I frankly don’t know the answer, or because I can’t talk about it, due to security issues. But I’m pretty confident we’re going to be able to, today, answer a lot of your questions. But again, I just wanted to say thank you, thank you, thank you for all that you’ve done. is really my my honor and sincere pleasure to be here with you today.
Richard Dolan (RD): I want to thank you for being here at this event. I mean, look, we’re in such an insane, crazy time these days in the UFO field and you are right at the center of it all. It’s really quite amazing. I know you did Tucker Carlson last night, you’ve been doing media events all week and doing more later this week. And to be honest, I feel lucky that we got you here for this. So, I thought, my God, I’ve got the busiest man in the UFO field here for this event. So I just want to thank you, Lue, for being here with us.
LE: We are here today and having this discussion and the world is paying attention. Not because of me, but because of you all. Because of the work and the effort you all have put into this. When I say you all, I mean every single person in the crowd today that has been following this topic for not just the last three years, but perhaps for the last three decades. And this has been a team effort and we’re only here today because of the work each and every one of you has put into this topic for so long. So my deepest and most humble appreciation and respect to you and our distinguished guests today and literally every single person in the crowd who has been carrying the torch on this topic.
RD: Well said and thank you, and it is a team effort, I absolutely agree. So I’m gonna jump into some questions and these are questions that I prepared and in the next segment after this, there will be questions that I have from members of the audience, and there’s quite a few. And I’ve looked them over, they’re very intelligent, good questions. And we might be able to get some spontaneous ones in as well. But I want to start with some of mine and look, I’m going to jump into something that’s going to be a little bit controversial and you’re just gonna have to deal with it best you can. And I understand your position. We’re going to get into a lot of these issues. But yesterday, some word got around about your potential interaction with some very exotic technology. I know you’ve heard all about this and I know you’ve already been taking strong issue with this. So I would like for you to say as much as you want to say about it, and I’m going to make it easier for you. We can back into this by mentioning two things first. So, your statements, you’ve made a few now, to Tucker Carlson, for example, about your knowledge of U.S. government acquisition of, let’s say, UFO artifacts, or UFO tech, maybe craft – a little nebulous about that – which, to my knowledge, you’ve now done twice on his program. And something, by the way that Dr. Eric Davis, privately confirmed after your first interview with Tucker, I think it was your first, maybe not, where you talked about: Have we acquired technology? You said, “Yes.” James Iandoli, who’s one of the speakers here, wrote to Eric Davis that night, and got a reply from Eric Davis, who said “Yes, absolutely. 1,000% correct.”
RD: And then also, the interesting story about Senator Harry Reid in the New Yorker just recently, in which Harry Reid was quoted as having been blocked from access to Lockheed’s ET technology, reverse engineering program. And, you know, Harry Reid, the next day, had to walk that back in a tweet, which I don’t think a single person in the world believed him.
Breaking away from Dolan/Elizondo Interview for related, background information.
Here’s exactly what Senator Reid said to The New Yorker…
“I was told for decades that Lockheed had some of these retrieved materials,” [Reid] said. “And I tried to get, as I recall, a classified approval by the Pentagon to have me go look at the stuff. They would not approve that. I don’t know what all the numbers were, what kind of classification it was, but they would not give that to me.” He told me that the Pentagon had not provided a reason. I asked if that was why he’d requested sap status for aatip. He said, “Yeah, that’s why I wanted them to take a look at it. But they wouldn’t give me the clearance.” (A representative of Lockheed Martin declined to comment for this article.)
In the accompanying podcast The New Yorker put online, journalist Gideon Lewis-Kraus (GLK) asked Reid about the subject of crash retrievals.
GLK: “One question that I have, has to do with this issue of potential, retrieved crash debris that was reported on last summer. It certainly seems like many of the figures you’ve described, like Lue Elizondo, he went on Tucker Carlson and Carlson said, ‘Do you believe that there’s compelling evidence that we have retrieved crash debris?’ And Elizondo said ‘Yes.’”
Senator Harry Reid: Well, I don’t know what he knows but he must know something I don’t know because I cannot confirm all that.
GLK: “Yeah, it doesn’t seem like anybody really knows of any but certainly, my guess is that you and I have both heard the same stories. There are these stories that circulate that some people, at least, find pretty credible and compelling.”
Senator Harry Reid: “Well, and that’s…I have no problem with that. I personally can’t confirm that and I think [if] people can come up with a little more clearer foundation on that, I’ll like it even more. But right now, I haven’t seen that.”
GLK: Did [the Pentagon] give you a reason for [not approving your request to go to Lockheed and see the materials]?
SHR: No, they didn’t have to. It was a yes or a no, and it was a no.
Reid’s “walked back” comments about The New Yorker story and Lockheed were published in the Las Vegas Sun on May 9th.
For years, Reid had heard rumors of Lockheed Martin possessing remnants of a crashed UFO. He sought clearance to access these remnants but was denied. A slew of national publications recently reported that Reid believes that the defense contractor possessed remnants. He corrects the record by saying, “I’ve never believed Lockheed had anything in that regard, even though a lot of people believe that – I don’t.”
As to whether any UFO fragments are stored away in some other government or contractor’s warehouse, Reid is doubtful: “I never heard of anything, other than some conspiratorialists. So I don’t think that they’re credible that they’re things from outer space.”
Reid also spoke to Max Moszkowicz (MM) on May 25th and he seemed to warm up again to the Lockheed issue.
MM: “There are some accounts of Lockheed Martin being in possession of extraterrestrial debris. I now you have in fact tried to get into that information and you were for some reason denied. Could you elaborate on that a little bit? Do you know for a fact they have extraterrestrial debris?”
Senator Harry Reid: “I thought that if they had something there, I’d want to see it. And so I went through the hoops necessary to get clearance, and they wouldn’t give it to me. Now, I’m not too sure that that would be the same answer today, maybe it would be. But I think we’ve made a lot of headway since that time of making sure that there’s transparency in everything we do in government.”
MM: “Do you think there is a correlation between what Lockheed Martin might or might not have and our advances in technology?”
Senator Harry Reid: “I think that there’s no question that we’re advancing in technology in many different parts of the scientific world. And I repeat what I said before, I think this is something the government must be transparent with and I’m not sure they have been.”
MM: “Do you have idea why the Pentagon denied you access to Lockheed Martin UFO thing? Have you ever heard an answer to that?”
Senator Harry Reid: “I think that they were afraid because no matter what answer I got, it would be like…are you still beating your wife? No matter what the answer was, it wouldn’t reelect well on the Pentagon.”
MM: Do you think there is Roswell debris in the hands of the United States government or from another incident before or after?
Senator Harry Reid: “As we talked in our conversation this morning, I tried to find out and was turned down. At the time, I wasn’t the leader of the Senate, I was just an individual Senator. And I think that withholding whatever information Lockheed has is not good for the country, if in fact they have any.”
My thoughts on Senator Reid and Lockheed…
And for those who missed it, here’s the comment from Dr. Steven Greer that caused a lot of controversy.
“Daniel Sheehan has also shared, and this is even more explosive, that Luis Elizondo has informed him that he in fact has been in a facility, where an actual extraterrestrial vehicle was stored. Now, why is that important? Because he’s all over the news…saying we don’t know what these are.” ~Dr. Steven Greer
Sheehan addressed Greer’s comments on Fade To Black with Jimmy Church after he was asked if those statements had been made by Lue to him.
Sheehan: “Well, what it is, is there were, uh…there is some information, some discussions that Lue and I had because I have been, and Lue will acknowledge this to you, that I have been pressing to find out how much it is that Lue intends to make public about what it is he knows and how far is he going to go to get the defense department to tell the truth. And in the context of those discussions with him, which are attorney/client, I’ve been trying to find out from him what the different issues are that are going to come up about…and there’s all kinds of information that people have about we have…Lue says often and so does Chris Mellon, that they’re convinced that we don’t have anything like this, like these craft that are being seen. You know, that travel at the speed of light and can come from 80,000 feet to 50 feet above the surface of the ocean, then slow hover, go into the ocean [and then] travel at 100 knots under the ocean. We don’t have any technology like that. And so, without broaching any attorney/client conversations I’ve had with Lue, I’ve pressed Lue on trying to find out whether or not he has been briefed in on any of the technology that we have. And one might assume, without my going into our particular conversations, one might assume that I would ask him whether he’s been briefed in on the efforts of the various cooperations, such as Lockheed Martin and Rockwell International and others, to back engineer and of the downed saucer information. That, of course, immediately raises the question of…has been Lue been (that’s not a typo) briefed in on whether there are any downed saucers and any material…I need to know what the potential areas are that he has been briefed in on and what levels of security ostensibly pertain to any of the information that he’s been given… And so, as you might guess, Lue and I have had that conversation. And so I did have that conversation with him about that question and some confusion arose as to whether…not between him and me, but among others, about whether he had seen any of these materials, whether there was some place where these materials were taken to…”
Church repeatedly asked Sheehan if he felt Dr. Greer had gotten ahead of himself by saying what he did (that Sheehan told Greer that Elizondo told him (Sheehan) he had seen an ET craft in a government facility) without first talking to Elizondo to confirm it, but Sheehan didn’t give a specific answer to that question. Listen to the entire exchange and then keep reading below to see what what Elizondo said to Dolan and judge for yourself what Lue has or has not seen with his own eyes.
As a reminder, on February 23rd, Elizondo was on Spaced Out Radio.
Dave Scott: “Has Lue Elizondo, the person, ever seen a gray being? Big, black eyes, skin color, silverish tone, maybe brown at times, four-feet tall to five-feet tall, almond-shaped eyes, a slit mouth, barely any nose, three fingers. Ever seen one?”
Luis Elizondo: “Lue Elizondo as a person has seen some pretty extraordinary things in his life. I don’t wanna prejudice the jury here. I’ve seen a lot of things in my life that have been very, very compelling. But in every one of those situations and in every case, I needed more data. You’re asking a great question and people are gonna say I’m being evasive and yeah, you’re damn right I am. I am being evasive on purpose.”
Back to Dolan and Elizondo…
Richard Dolan (RD): So, I’m mentioning those by way of letting you ease into this topic about the claim that you interacted or you were in the presence of exotic technology. I’m gonna leave it at that, because I’ve come to understand your position on this and you don’t agree with it. Will you please just talk about this, to the extent that you can.
Luis Elizondo (LE): Yeah, sure, Richard. I know there’s been a lot of ambiguity out there. First and foremost: No, I haven’t been to a facility, I don’t know where this came from. I know there’s all sorts of speculation to the innuendos. The bottom line: No, I did not tell Mr. Sheehan that I saw an intact craft. I have no idea where that came from. I couldn’t…you’d have to talk to Mr. Sheehan, if, in fact, he even said that, I don’t know. Secondly, I will tell you that the times that I’ve been asked officially about the U.S. government and the potential for it having in his possession recovered material? Yes, I’ve stated for the record, I do believe so. I have to be very careful going into specifics but that is certainly my understanding.
That’s the gold standard, right? When you have material in your hands, physical evidence that you can analyze, there’s not a whole lot better than that to base and formulate an opinion off of. And so, from my perspective, that has always been the Holy Grail. And from my experience and my understanding of the situation, and my review of the documentation and the records, without going into detail, I am very confident that the United States government is in possession of some very exotic material. And look, I think one only has to look at the relationship of certain government elements as they have entered into agreements with folks like (sounds like whatever he said there (folks like Lockheed?) was dropped or edited out) and others, where I think there’s there’s an understanding that, yeah, we as a government, we as a nation, need to explore and research and analyze and understand exotic material. Now, it may turn out that some of this exotic material is coming from a new prototype, let’s say Russian satellite, right? But it also may turn out to be something quite different. And that for me is where the juxtaposition comes into play, because we know what even exotic – by our definition – material looks like. And there are certain key aspects that allow us to determine whether something is terrestrial or non-terrestrial. Meaning, it originated here on this planet, or originated elsewhere. And there are certain isotopic ratios and variances that are common on this planet and in fact, common within our solar system. And that is how we know when something is coming from somewhere outside of our planet and possibly even the solar system because there are natural signatures, natural fingerprints that occur on material that is found here. Both naturally and even engineered. There’s telltale signs that we can see. Again, we have to be very, very careful beyond that.
What Does Elizondo Know?
RD: I want to ask you, because you just opened up a really interesting door. I’ve got a bunch of questions here I want to get to but you mentioned isotopic ratios. So are you suggesting, are you implying or are you stating, are you aware of artifacts that may be in the possession of military and government, private corporations, that are of isotopic ratios that are manufactured, but that are not from here?
LE: I am aware of exotic material that, so far, cannot be explained as being from here. Ultimately, I have to be very careful, I will not say emphatically that it’s not or that it is, because we need more analysis. And this is why initially, we entered into an agreement with a government element involving a CRADA agreement because there was enough there where it wasn’t just us, but there were other people that were pretty convinced that this material demands further research. And this research isn’t cheap, it’s expensive. You’re paying for a lot of man hours and a lot of equipment and expertise to look at something and you don’t conduct that type of analysis on tinfoil. That’s just not the way we do business.
And to get to that point, when you’re looking at something, let’s take this pen, for example. I know I use pen’s a lot in my analogies but they tend to be kind of convenient, I guess. So let’s take this pen, for example. Before you were to ever spend the kind of money going into any type of atomic analysis and research onto this pen, there are some things that you’re going to do. You’re first going to study – which is much less expensive – its physical properties and characteristics. You might look at its tensile strength, you might look at its physical properties, electrical conductivity, etc, right? Its melting points and whatnot. If you find enough uniqueness there, you might spend the extra money to begin to look at its chemical or molecular signatures, looking at the way it’s structured from a crystalline perspective and the way the molecules are organized and the way the chemical compounds relate to one another. And you can do further testing to determine whether or not this is something that we’re used to seeing.
If you find enough uniqueness there, then you go into the really expensive part of analysis, which is the atomic or nano-level analysis, where now you’re looking at the relationships of the atoms themselves. And looking at the electron valences to determine the isotopic structure and relationship. Now, why is that so important? Because in order for us now, even with today’s modern-day technology, what we called nano-engineering isn’t easy, it’s very, very expensive and there’s always some degree of imprecision. So, if you want to have an isotopic ratio of let’s say, 33%, 33%, 33%, you have to be very precise, on how you manufacture that and that level of precision costs a tremendous amount of money and resources and know how to do. And still yet, there are variances within that atomic structure. To get it perfect is, I’m not gonna say it’s impossible, but it’s almost impossible. And certainly, when you look at the temporal aspect of this, and when some of this material was collected, it becomes even more improbable that this material was naturally occurring on here. We know it was manipulated. The question is, how was it manipulated…
RD: I want you to clarify it and then I want to ask you something different, which is, I think, very important. I have a bunch of things I wanna ask. But it sounds like you are stating that you are aware of studies that at least currently, seem to indicate that there are technologically sophisticated materials with isotopic ratios that we don’t know how to explain. Is that is that fair?
LE: It is fair and furthermore, I’ll tell you that I personally briefed senior elements within the DoD construct on that material so it’s not just what I believe. That was actually briefed.
RD: Now, these materials, are these large, are these small, are we talking about part of a craft or we talking about something different that’s not recognizable? Or is it recognizable?
LE: Umm, well..great question, Richard. Let me take a pass on that one, only because I, I…
Large Pieces and My Sources Say #1
RD: That’s fine. That will lead to my next question because I think this will be helpful. The fact is, you’ve got security clearances, all the people around you, all the people that I’ve been trying to like, get to talk about the Davis/Wilson document, they’ve all got security clearances. It’s a real pain in the neck to try to get people to deal with that, because that is the reality. So can you talk about how the fact of you having security clearances affects the things that you can say to the public and how you say them? And the things that you know about that you can’t talk about, publicly? Because it is clear to me, that at least a number of your detractors… And I am not here just to like, blanket defend you, right? Because you’ve said things that I thought, okay, I don’t really…I’ve taken issue with some of the things you’ve said publicly about, “Well, we don’t know what these things are.” But I understand, I understand why. But I think some of your detractors don’t really have an idea of this situation that…you’ve got clearances. How does the fact that you’ve got certain clearances affect what you say and cannot say in public? Seems like an obvious question but please address it.
LE: It affects everything I say in public. Not some things. Everything. I have to thread a needle every single moment I open my mouth. I have to calculate what I’m saying, based upon an established, what we call an SCG – Security Classification Guide. Anything that is classified in the government falls underneath a security classification guide, and what we call an original classification authority. And I don’t think people really understand or appreciate what that means. That is the difference between going to jail and being in exile, like Edward Snowden, and not, and having this conversation. I have to be very cognizant of every word I say because if I crossed that line, where I now violate my nondisclosure agreement, this conversation comes to an immediate and abrupt end. You will never see me again, because I will either wind up in jail, or I will be sued to the point where I’ll have to wind up living probably in Antarctica with all the penguins.
It is very difficult for me because I feel like I’m in a boxing ring with one arm tied behind my back while my legs are shackled, and [I’m] blindfolded. It is very tough. But, this is why I said in the beginning, Richard, this is a process not…disclosure isn’t an event. And I think if you look at the last three years, I know people are impatient but we’ve come a really long way. We now have have former presidents of the United States coming out and Directors of National Intelligence, not just one, but two, and directors of CIA, and the media. Everybody now, to include foreign countries, is finally nodding their head saying, “Yeah. You know what? This is a serious topic. There’s enough information that we have been privy to, to recognize we need to do something about. Had I just come out day one and blurted everything out, I probably would have been been been labeled some sort of crazy, conspiracy theorist.
RD: Yeah, like me. That’s my domain.
LE: People say, “That guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about.” Every day, despite the overwhelming evidence, people still think I’m some sort of, I don’t know what you call it, disinformation agent. Whatever, get out of here. I don’t know how else to prove it to you. If you cannot see around you, the momentum that this topic and the seriousness and the respect that this topic has now been given by the mainstream media and our politicians and our elected officials, then you’ve been living under a rock for the last three years. And this isn’t because someone’s selling snake oil to you or someone’s coming out and saying, “It’s my way or the highway.” If you’ve noticed, I’ve never said this is my way. I just said, “Look, here’s the information, here’s the facts, you do with it what you want.” And I think, because I haven’t violated my nondisclosure agreement, it makes it very difficult for the authorities to shut me up. They can make my life difficult but they haven’t been able to shut me up. And that should be very telling that the method in which people like Chris Mellon and myself, Hal, Eric and others, have decided to have this conversation, is probably the right way to do it, because none of us want to violate our nondisclosure agreements.
Unprecedented! Plus, My Sources Say #2
RD: So to recap, I’m gonna give you my interpretation of your position, you tell me if I’m right or wrong here. So, when you’ve said things to the media, like, “These objects could be anything.” I mean, sometimes you’ve said this. “What if they’re Russian? What if they’re Chinese?” I would hear this and think, “There’s no way in hell this man actually believes this, but he says this because he’s in a box. You’ve got political people to talk to, you got the media, a dumbed down media that doesn’t understand anything and this is an attempt to open up a conversation, as well as…” I want to get into this idea of a potential threat in a moment. But these things that you say, sometimes, that will strike me as…I know that there’s much more here. Is it fair to say that you are in this box because of security classifications and your public position, dealing with the media establishment, just trying to get a conversation? Is that fair for me to think that?
LE: Yeah! I mean, look, let’s look right now at this wonderful group of people that we’re speaking with right now, in this forum. I guarantee you not a single person in this room agrees 100% with you or me on everything and they’re probably not gonna agree with each other on everything. That’s okay. But you’ve got a big enough roof that everybody can fit in and have the conversation. And that’s what we’re doing. You have to leave enough room in the conversation for other people’s opinions so they can get under the tent with you, right? Otherwise, it’s just you under an umbrella, and you’re not going to accomplish very much. In order for this to really work, it has to be a conversation that more than one or two people have. And to do that, you have to allow all the positions to be listened to. Everybody has to have their day in court, if that makes sense. Every voice, every opinion, whether we agree or disagree, should have their day in court, and allow us to have a, I think, a more collective conversation. Because at the end of the day, that’s what this really is about. If you are relying on the government to tell you what this is, you are flat wrong. Here’s the bottom line: The government doesn’t have all the answers. It didn’t have it with COVID, they didn’t have it with the war in Iraq, and they damn sure don’t have it with this topic. So, if you’re waiting there like a little duckling to be fed, you’re gonna be waiting a long time. The only way this is working is because we’re not waiting for the government. We’re pushing the government but we’re also doing this on our own and this is why I think this conversation is so important.
Feed Me, Government!
Luis Elizondo: And yes, you have to leave room under the tent for those folks who can’t process the idea that maybe this is from somewhere else and maybe it is foreign adversarial or maybe it is a drone. Because ultimately, during that conversation, they’re gonna come to a conclusion of their own. And that conclusion, is more than likely not gonna be drones or foreign adversarial. But you can’t really tell people conclusively, you have to think like me. That’s been the problem of ufology for all this time. Everybody’s narrative is the only narrative and that’s why nobody paid attention.
RD: I’m gonna come back to the idea of foreign adversaries and drones and so forth. But I want to jump into something else that’s actually even more front row center. There’s a lot of folks, I don’t know what percentage, but you definitely get criticism for raising the idea of a potential, alien threat. You’ve said this a number of times. Now, there are people who hate this, because some of them say the aliens that are visiting here are good and peaceful. There are definitely voices in the UFO field that say this. And that, therefore, it’s the military that’s ramping up fear and that you are essentially a part of a psyop, whether it’s for the CIA, or some intelligence, to ramp up fear of aliens, [a] fear-mongering campaign. And even people that don’t have an opinion on aliens, they’ll have enough of a distrust of the military industrial complex, and the generation of fear, as a psyop. So I want to ask you, I mean, my theory on why you did this, I’m just gonna put this out there. My theory has always been, as far as why you do this, not that you’re necessarily trying to ramp up fear, but maybe trying to get the attention of a completely intransigent Congress and media that just won’t listen to anything else. It’s kind of like why I wrote my two volumes of National Security State, where I talked about a lot of military confrontations. I didn’t think I was fear-mongering, either. But this is what I want to ask you: To what extent do you actually believe that these objects are a threat? And also, what is the deal with the higher ups that you have dealt with in the military? Do they genuinely think that the Tic Tac or any of these other objects are an actual, military threat? How do they respond to it and what do you actually think, in terms of a threat?
I’ll just take a minute to add in what Senator Harry Reid said today to Max Moszkowicz about UFOs being a threat.
“All the information I have, which is quite a bit, I think there has been no indication, whatsoever, that they’re harmful. It’s kind of scary, the be honest with you, but we’ve had no indication of there being reason to be afraid of them.”
~Former Senator Harry Reid
Luis Elizondo (LE): Wow, so good questions, Richard. Two different answers, okay? What I think and what the national security apparatus thinks are two different things, okay? Let me start with the national security apparatus. They look at things in terms of threat versus non-threat. Okay? And if they don’t know something is a threat, then they’re going to presume it is until they can prove it’s not. And that’s just due diligence. That’s the way we look at everything from earthquakes, hurricanes, climate change. I mean, this is not new. I don’t know why people say, “Well, why are they looking at it that way?” Well, because that’s the job of the government! That’s obvious! I mean, look at climate change, for God’s sake! People say, “Well UFOs aren’t a threat but climate change is.” Well…what?! What are you talking about?! We don’t have enough data to make that assertion. Now, what I believe might be different, okay, but let’s stay on this thread for a second. People who say definitively they’re not a threat, are just as guilty as those who say, they are a threat, definitively. It’s the same people, same crowd. You cannot tell me that those that are fear-mongering are any better or any less wrong than those people saying, “Oh, they’re here to give flowers and to give peace on Earth because I know.” How do you know? You want me to just take your word for it? You’re not taking my word for it. What makes you any more qualified to know what the intention of something is? And if you go back to the background and say, “Well, it’s not a threat because they would have already destroyed this by now,” I would turn around and say, “Well, Russia’s had nuclear weapons, and they would have destroyed us by now, too. Are they not a threat?” I don’t know! So I want to be careful with that line of logic, because, you know, that same crowd that says, “Oh, they’re not a threat, they’re not a threat.” My response is, you’re doing exactly the same thing as the other side is doing by saying they’re a threat. You’re just as damn guilty. You’re just not looking in the mirror. So, take a good, long, hard look in the mirror and ask yourself the hard question: How do you know any better than anybody else? The answer is, “Ya don’t.” So that’s the first thing.
The second thing is, what do I think? Well, I think…I’m a father of two and I think with any potential challenge, there’s always opportunities. And I don’t know why people…I have said this over and over again. I’ve said it in the TV shows, I’ve said it in my interviews, I’ve said it in my podcast, I’ve said it ad nauseum. Let me be perfectly clear: With every challenge comes opportunity. Okay? The same technology that we are seeing being displayed before us, could be used to propel mankind 1000s if not millions of years worth of technological evolution in a single generation. From energy to health care to you name it. Okay? So, that’s Luis Elizondo. But I’m also cautious, because I still don’t know if it’s a threat or not. Now people say, “Well, Lue really knows deep down inside.” You know what? Ya don’t. I’ve been very fair and honest on the way I think and anybody who says this is some sort of false flag to get a…I don’t know what the hell their reasoning is..maybe to get a government contract to build spaceships, who the hell knows.
RD: Yeah. I mean. there’s all kinds of reasons put out there. That’s true.
LE: The bottom line…they have no idea what they’re talking about, because they’re not me, okay? And they’ve never asked me, they’ve never spoken to me and so how they feel qualified to know what I know is absolute garbage. And by the way, if you subscribe to that, then, you know, I can’t help you. Go ahead, I mean, waste your money if you want to waste your money and, you know, watch some dude drop flares out of an airplane. I don’t know what to tell ya. I will say this and I don’t mean any disrespect to anybody here in this audience, okay? But this topic has been fraught with fringe and conspiracy theories for a long time. This is why I said, one of my hopes is to destroy ufology as we know it, and what hopefully coalesces afterwards, is a pure, scientific humanitarian effort to really seek the truth, right? And stop telling people a false narrative but seek the real truth behind what this is. But this topic has had a lot of fringe associated [with it] for a very long time. And honestly, there are people out there, what I call the hucksters and the charlatans who, in reality, are actually kind of serving a good purpose. And I know this sounds kind of weird for some people, but we actually need them. And the reason why we need them is because a lot of the fringe people will tend to gravitate to those individuals and folks like me don’t have to worry about them, I can remain focused on real disclosure.
So, a lot of the distraction out there of people saying, “I know what they want, I know what the think and I communicate” and all of that? Fine! If that’s the way you feel and you want to do that, go over on that side of the room and go talk to those people. That’s fine. I’m good with it. Because my focus is right here and right now. And if you open your eyes, you’ll see we are only here right now because we’re having a fair, rational conversation about this topic. And I’m not prescribing my narrative on what this means and I think that’s important because I will automatically pollute the waters if Luis Elizondo conveys what he thinks or feels or believes about a topic that I’m not qualified, yet. I have no idea! I don’t know what this means to humanity! And by me saying that I do, would be completely disingenuous. In fact, for anybody to come out there and tell you that is absolutely ridiculous. And the problem is, there’s a lot of vulnerable people out there that will glom on to that narrative, because maybe they feel a little insecure, maybe they’re a little scared, maybe this is a topic that makes them uncomfortable. I don’t know why. But there’s a lot of people out there being taken advantage of.
A Threat? Plus, Who’s Inside the Saucers and Triangles?
Richard Dolan (RD): Let me jump in. By the way, the idea of a potential threat, I’m actually, I think I have the exact same perspective that you have. So, I’m not even disagreeing with you. I happen to be a conspiracy theorist, or let us say, conspiracy analyst. I think that there are conspiracies and by the way, I push back against the notion when people try to dismiss conspiracy theories, but that’s just me.
LE: Richard, there are conspiracies. You’re absolutely right. But you said to yourself, you’re a conspiracy analyst. Okay? Not a conspiracy theorist. And there’s a big difference because an analyst is using real data to determine what a possible conclusion is. A conspiracy theorist is just pulling ideas out of thin air, and presenting them as facts. And therein lies the difference. I don’t see you as a conspiracy theorist. I think you’re absolutely right, I see you as a conspiracy analyst, which is why I’m having this conversation with you today.
RD: By the way, the phrase conspiracy theory, as far as I’ve been able to determine, was originated in a CIA memo from 1967. That’s a whole other story. That was in response to dealing with the dissenters about the Kennedy assassination thesis and the CIA wanted to disable that and smear these people as conspiracy theorists. Earliest example that I could find. Anyway, moving on.
I want to get into this whole thing about threat because the aerial encounters between the U.S….there’s a long history of US military pilots and UFOs. One thing that never comes up in the current conversation, not by anyone, it seems. It’s like UFOs all started with David Fravor, and the Tic Tac UFO in 2004. And I’m like, okay, first of all, there’s UFO encounters that go back through the 50s and 40s of exact, identical objects as the Tic Tac, in terms of performance, well recorded by U.S. military. But what I want to ask you is…we’ve got reports of pilots, sometimes even being lost (Lue shakes his head up and down as RD says this) during some of these encounters. We’re talking in the 40s and 50s. So my question is, when you were in AATIP, how extensive was this knowledge, within AATIP, of all of these, let’s say pre-Nimitz, pre-Tic Tac events? And if there was knowledge, what can you tell us about… Like, contemporary pilots? Did they have any knowledge of this history? Did your office have any knowledge of this history? Was there any understanding of the long history of these encounters? You know, because it didn’t start with David Fravor and the Tic Tac.
LE: Right, right, no, you’re absolutely right. And there’s two different questions you’re asking me. Were we aware of it? And was the general audience or populace that we were dealing with in the military construct aware of it? Two different questions? Yes, we were aware of it but it wasn’t very helpful to us. And the pilots that we were talking to and everybody else, and our leadership was definitely not aware of it. These were people who never had any understanding of previous UFO/UAP encounters. In fact, they had a hard time digesting the current UAP encounters that we were briefing them on. So, this was not, “Hey, well, this is common knowledge.” Yes, it’s common knowledge to you and your audience because you spent time researching this, but let’s not forget, 99% of the individuals out there, they’re just now getting acclimated to this topic. And so, it’s the same thing with our military leadership when I was in the government. Very few individuals in the military ever even considered this topic to be serious, let alone were aware of historical events. So AATIP, by definition, was really…at least towards the latter part of its existence, we were focusing on the here and now. Okay, yes, anecdotal stories are great but we don’t have any real fidelity of data other than reporting that’s…by this point. it’s considered a cold case. We were focused…
RD: If that is the case, so we can assume there’s a long history of UFO military encounters. It seems to me reasonable to assume that there would be some body that would be tracking this over the years but it sounds like you might be implying that you didn’t see…
Ross: A New UFO Documentary and Harper Collins Book!
A few quotes…
“The following is conjecture. Sources tell me that this is merely the tip of the iceberg. A group of four related, but separate, unacknowledged SCI programs tracing back to a 1947 Truman memorandum still exist and were housed, as of the 1990s, in major aerospace companies such as, for example: Lockheed, TRW, Raytheon, Aerospace Corp. etc. These would be expensive programs since the cost of secrecy can be several times higher than the research. The [AATIP] program has no relation to these four, much better funded, deep black ones. Indeed, the black programs collectively have budgets in the $10B ranch and up. Topics apparently include both reverse engineering and extraterrestrial biology. The AATIP did find the UFO crash retrieval program, via official channels, but was denied access to it because the AATIP itself is not a SAP. Senator Harry Reid petitioned the DoD to confer SAP status to the AATIP but the DoD denied his request.”
~Astrophysicist Bernard Haisch, PhD, 2018
“So when you’ve heard people talking about this – we’ve reported it a couple of times – that AATIP is one of several programs and I think that there are several underway right now. As many as four is what I’ve heard. I don’t know the names of the other ones.”
Max Moszkowicz: “Could it be that there have been programs running parallel without them knowing about each other’s investigations and not communicating with each other?”
Senator Harry Reid: “The answer is ‘yes’ and that’s one of the problems we have. We need correlation. We need to know what someone else is doing so we don’t duplicate it because there’s certainly enough questions that need to be answered. We don’t need people doing the same thing.”
Back to Dolan and Elizondo…
RD: Did you become aware, did you or any of your colleagues in AATIP or connected, become aware of any other groups that would be monitoring the UFO situation that you just did not have access to? Competing groups and that type of thing.
LE: We did not, no. There were no peer groups that were looking at this topic. This was my frustration, because everywhere we looked, it was mum’s the word. People were saying, “Well, nothing to see here. We have no idea what you’re talking about.” And we kept scratching our heads thinking there’s got to be somewhere else, even a legacy office that is or was looking at this. We knew anecdotally, there were other offices, at some point, looking into this. But it was complete echo when you would scream down the cave, “Hey, is anybody else here,” there was nothing. And that was part of my frustration because we quickly realized that we were kind of the central belly button for all this reporting and it started coming in only to us. And we certainly didn’t have the manning to do, at least from my perspective and my opinion, to be able to do a complete job and thorough job, because we just simply didn’t have the manning and the resources and the funding to do it. You need a lot more. And this is part of my frustration now that we need more money and more funding,
RD: Does it make sense to you that there would be no other organizations? I mean, when you look at the situation and how it is, and the long history of the encounters, does it make sense to you that there’s no other? I mean, you guys, you know, I don’t know how much funding you got. I mean, it was originally reported as $22 million, which is nothing and maybe it was more than that. But does it make sense to you that there would be no other, UFO investigative bodies or UAP investigative bodies that would have existed?
LE: Let me ask you the same question. I mean, house fires occur all the time, and you find out half the time a house fire occurs it’s because someone didn’t put batteries in a fire alarm, okay? And my question to you is, does it make sense that if you know your fire alarm isn’t working, that you don’t put batteries in it? Well, but people don’t. I mean, as crazy as that may seem, there’s probably some people in the audience right now that may have had a smoke alarm without batteries for quite some time. And yet, it’s a reality. And no, am I surprised that there wasn’t another organization or office in the government? Not really. I mean, surprisingly enough, I’ve seen a lot of dysfunction in the government. I don’t think it’s deliberate. It’s just, you know, it’s…no government is perfect.
Other UFO Programs?
RD: Let me ask you this: Have you ever cross come across evidence that supports the reality of an organization, whether we call it MJ12, or Zodiac? Are there any of these organizations that you’ve come across that you think could be…that you’ve heard of?
LE: Sure, absolutely.
RD: Okay, so. Zodiac, I want to ask about that because I’ve got reasons for asking. Is this something that you’ve come across?
RD: So, may I ask you what you can say about that?
LE: I cannot
RD: You cannot say anything about it?
LE: Unfortunately, I cannot comment on any aspects of, or any details or…you asked me if I heard of it. I cannot confirm nor deny any aspects of a program, if it did exist, with a name of zodiac,
RD: Gotcha. MJ-12?
LE: I’m gonna stick with the same headline. I cannot confirm nor deny.
RD: I’m not trying to throw you under the bus here but look, I just figured I had to ask. Zodiac is the name of an organization that has popped up from time to time, it’s not nearly as well known as MJ-12. However, it is one that some of the researchers, myself and a few others, have looked into. And I have personally become convinced that it’s the real thing. It’s very, very little known. So I’m glad…thank you at least for answering to the best of your capability on that. I’ll just leave it at that.
MJ-12 and Zodiac
(Note: When I mentioned what Will Miller found out about MJ-12 from an Admiral Wilson staffer (aide), I meant to say Wilson/Davis blog and not Wilson/Davis notes. However, it’s also brought up by Wilson in the WD notes. He says Oke Shannon called Miller and confirmed that such an organization exists)
Richard Dolan (RD): Tom DeLonge, thickly stated on Coast to Coast AM, this was a couple of years…a while ago actually when “Sekret Machines came out, he was told by his original advisors that gravity had been cracked, that anti-gravity vehicles had been built. He actually said that the TR-3B was real and was built by Lockheed Skunk Works. So let me ask you, whether then in AATIP, or now, in a private capacity, when you are searching for explanations of UAP or UFOs…do you have a position or have you ever come across any evidence for human built craft, using maybe field propulsion or some kind of anti gravity or any kind of exotic tech or anything along the lines of with Tom DeLonge was saying? And you, of course, you know Tom very well. So what are your thoughts about that?
LE: I’m gonna let Tom DeLonge answer for Tom DeLonge. I have no idea in what context Tom DeLonge was referring to. I can tell you that, yeah, the U.S. government and other governments spend a lot of money on advanced technology and some of it is what we consider exotic. But is it exotic as in beyond next-generation exotic? No. That’s a completely different type of terminology for exotic. I am not aware of any type of U.S. government technology that is currently employing some sort of re-engineered, off-world technology. I’m not aware of that. I am aware of advanced technology, which I’m not going to discuss here. But I’m not aware, I think what you’re alluding to, is there any type of, like you say TR-3B? Certainly not that I’m aware of, or anybody that I know of and I have pretty significant access. That doesn’t mean we don’t have advanced technology, because we do, we’ve got some really advanced technology. But really advanced technology isn’t necessarily off-world technology. Two different…
(ICYMI, scroll back up and listen to my audio of: “A Threat? Plus, Who’s Inside the Saucers and Triangles?“)
Richard Dolan (RD): Look, I’m asking you these questions and, you know…one of the reasons I asked earlier about security clearances and how it might affect you is, because the fact is, I mean, you have to forgive me for saying this, but when you’re…some of these questions puts you in a difficult position. I understand that, I think that people watching understand that as well. And so, I just have to take all of that in consideration. And with that in mind, I’m going to ask another direct question that you probably won’t be able to deal with but I’m just gonna do it anyway because I feel like I have to. And that concerns the Wilson/Davis notes. And actually, I’m not going to expect you to confirm it, because I can probably already tell what your position might be. However, I’m just going to point out a few things. Not one person close to that document, maybe other than Wilson himself, has denied it. So Hal Puthoff hasn’t actually never really denied it. Eric Davis really never denied it. They both gave very circumspect statements, which did not deny the document. And in fact, Davis was even more forthcoming and assertive about its authenticity. In my opinion, he came just shy of saying, “Yeah, I wrote it.” But making it clear, I think that he absolutely…(laughs) I know that he did. And I’ve said many times that someone very very, very, very close to all of this personally showed me the notes in 2006. Everyone knows he’s knows it’s true. You know the players involved. What are you able to say about this document?
LE: Let me say this: Eric Davis and Hal Puthoff are national treasures. Let me be crystal clear with this: Eric Davis and Hal Puthoff are some of the finest human beings I’ve ever had the privilege and honor to serve with. These individuals are national treasures for our country. I trust them implicitly. I have never, ever in my entire career ever known either one of them to state something that was false, or contradictory. I will not comment on the alleged, Wilson documents. But what I will do is attest to the veracity and credibility of Dr. Hal Puthoff and Dr. Eric Davis. They are top-notch credible human beings.
RD: I agree, actually. So, look, I just had to ask, I really wasn’t expecting anything. What you said was was fine and pretty much what I was…I would have been surprised if you’d been able to go beyond that. And I’m just gonna say for the benefit of everyone here, you don’t have to say a word on this and then we’ll go to the next question. But I am quite, quite, quite persuaded and convinced, in fact and I would say I even think that I know, that all the people around that, including Dr. Puthoff and Dr. Davis and everyone else who’s seen it, they feel that they are completely unable to talk about this publicly. And they’ve got their reasons. I don’t know if I agree or don’t, but I definitely understand that they feel their stakes are very high and they just can’t, they just can’t. And I get it. It’s frustrating to me. I would like us to be able to move forward because I know that document is real. I’ve got a million reasons for knowing it’s real. And until that document is confirmed, until someone who’s able to make that statement can say, “Yes, it’s absolutely real,” we’re going to have a lot of these trolls and skeptics out there just completely slowing the conversation down and preventing a real, you know, faster speed forward motion on investigating this, which I think needs to be done in terms of achieving some kind of genuine disclosure. Okay, that’s my little editorial, I’m gonna stop and move on.
Wilson/Davis, Belief. Plus…My Sources Say #3
Richard Dolan (RD): Let me ask you a different question. I want to talk about the president, whether it’s Trump or Biden. Let’s talk about President Biden. Are there any efforts that you are aware of to convince President Joe Biden to use his powers as commander in chief to order the military, let’s say, to seize evidence which may have been previously provided to private corporations, or just is locked away in secrecy? Maybe issue an executive order? First of all, is it possible for a president to even do that? And if it’s possible, is there any conversation or possibility that this could be used as a tool?
LE: So, here is part of the problem. A president can order whatever the heck they want. It doesn’t mean they’re necessarily going to do it or listen, okay? Presidents do a lot of things and it doesn’t always happen. Let’s look at President Obama when he ordered the closure of Gitmo. It didn’t happen. In fact, he based his second presidential campaign around that he was going to do it. So, the president only has so much power. Now in theory, they should be able to but in reality, it’s not so easy, especially when you’re dealing with a big bureaucracy. And that, for me, is the problem. This is exactly, Richard, why I’m doing what I’m doing. You hit the nail on the head. Look, the senior executive officer for our country, who is legally elected to represent the American people, should be the final say so within the executive branch of what is done. And when that doesn’t happen, it is a failure, it is a breakdown of the very democracy that we all have subscribed to, right? That is protected and codified in our Constitution, as a representative government. And so, therein lies the problem, that even if you have the authority to do something, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to get done.
I don’t care if you’re a Democrat, or you’re Republican, or you’re an independent, or anything in between, the bottom line is, whoever the people elect to be their representative…this is the same with Congress. This is why I gets so frustrated when Congress (audio dropped out so I filled it in with something that made sense) isn’t responsive to the will of the people. I don’t give a damn if you’re liberal or conservative. You have been elected by your people to do a job and if the government is not being responsive to the will of the people, then it no longer is representative of the people. Now you’re in a situation where you have a government that is, by definition, illegitimate, because it’s not serving in the best interests of their people. It’s serving in the best interests of itself and we forget that the purpose of government is to serve the people, not the other way around. This is where my frustration…this is why I get up every morning and do what I do. It doesn’t matter if it’s UFOs, or terrorism or anything else, the bottom line is the government is enjoined to do what the people say and when it doesn’t, we’ve got a much bigger problem on our hands. That to me is the greatest threat of all: Government is no longer responsible to the responsive to the will of the people. And so that is why you see me railing the way I do, because there’s no reason why we can’t be truthful about this topic. There’s no reason why we have to whitewash the data and have to pretend like there’s nothing to see here, folks. There is absolutely something to see here, folks, and we need to figure it out, collectively.
Danny Sheehan, Marco Rubio and Dr. Eric Davis
RD: This is a perfect lead-in to what I’ve been wanting to get into, which is you Danny Sheehan and the Inspector General’s (IG) office. So, Danny Sheehan is now your attorney, he’s representing you. I’m friends with Danny myself, I have a lot of respect for Dan Sheehan and I’d like to know if you can give some backstory to all of this. This is connected to the Inspector General’s of the Pentagon’s recent statement that they’re looking into the process behind the current UAP Task Force, right? And I know, it has become known that this is connected to you and it also connected to Danny Sheehan being your attorney. Can you shed some light on this? Can you just talk about this entire process? Why are you connected to this and why did you need to take Danny as your attorney?
LE: Sure. Well, first of all, Daniel Sheehan for those who…I mean, he doesn’t need any introduction, he’s a legend. But in case if people in your audience who don’t know his his academic vitae and his background. He is probably one of the greatest constitutional attorneys this century and probably last century. He has participated in some of America’s greatest landmark cases to include Watergate, the Pentagon Papers, Silkwood, Oliver North. You know, there’s a reason why they call him the people’s advocate. It is because he’s really, really good at what he does. And so, when you are taking the topic of the century, and you are going up against the government, toe to toe, I want an attorney of the century to represent me because this is not going to be an easy battle. Now, does Danny subscribe to everything I think and do I subscribe to everything Danny thinks? Absolutely not. Danny is entitled to think whatever the heck he wants to think. It is his right, it his privilege, he can have his own opinions, he can have his own thoughts, just like I can. And it’s important that people should recognize that Danny and I don’t see necessarily eye to eye on everything but what we do see eye to eye on is the necessity for the government to be transparent on this topic. And so, we are very much aligned in that way. We are locked up to hit from that perspective. I don’t give a darn who he’s represented in the past on this topic, just like he doesn’t care about me, and who I worked for, on this topic before. We both want the same thing and I think the American people want the same thing.
RD: Can you connect this to the UAP Task Force and the Inspector General’s office?
LE: Yeah, so that’s what I’m getting to now. So, I’m sorry, I don’t mean to ramble, but it’s important. You’re asking me questions and I don’t want to just give a quick sound bite because I think it gets lost in translation when I do that. So I’m going a little bit more in detail here but I was going to get to that next. So what is the IG? First of all, it’s an evaluation, it’s not an investigation, first. The Inspector General of the Department of Defense is doing an evaluation on the last three years of how the Pentagon has dealt with the UAP topic. So you can fill in the blanks what that means. There’s probably some people that are getting pretty annoyed with the Pentagon’s flip flopping and lack of communication on this topic, especially as it relates to now dealing with Congress. So I applaud the DoD for doing it. It is a prudent measure to do. Now, the question is, is there another IG request for some sort of inquiry or investigation? What I can tell you is simply this: I have been told by the Department of Defense that I should not discuss or elaborate specific questions that were asked of me as part of any DoD investigation. So, with that said, it should be pretty clear what role, if any, Mr. Sheehan and/or myself, have had recently with DoD IG.
RD: Alright, so don’t answer but I’m just gonna offer my provisional assessment that you…I don’t know…were there concerns perhaps about the upcoming UAP Task Force and as a result of issuing a request for an investigation, you might have needed legal protection? I’m just gonna put that thought out there. You can say yes or no or you don’t have to comment.
LE: Look, it’s not just me that needs legal protection, it’s this topic, okay? We’re talking about truthfulness and transparency of the U.S. government. We’re talking about a decade, if not decades, worth of obfuscation and cover-up. This is a problem. And by the way, anybody who has reported this in the past, was punished, was penalized because of this. So yeah, this is a problem. Someone needs to do something. Someone needs to represent those who lost almost everything, doing the right thing. I don’t appreciate people being punished for doing the right thing. I’m not that guy. You know, I’ve been through two wars, to protect people. I’ll be damned if I’m gonna let someone in our government suppress and hurt good Americans and patriots and keep them from talking about a topic that isn’t within their purview to keep secret, anyways.
The only person I’m aware of who was hurt and punished is Elizondo’s predecessor, JL, who I wrote about here. I’d like to know who else had their career ruined and hopefully, one day, the people who did that will pay the price. Elizondo wrote about it on his Medium page.
In fact, my AATIP predecessor’s career was ruined because of misplaced fear by an elite few. Rather than accept the data as provided by a top-rank rocket scientist, they decided the data was a threat to their belief system and instead, destroyed his career because of it.
Although in private each confided to me they knew the phenomena was real, it still contradicted their view of the world and their beliefs. Therefore, they viewed the effort as an affront to their religious narrative and belief system.
To be clear, these were some of the most incredibly competent and loyal patriots I have ever had the privilege to work with, and their motivations were sincere. Several were dear friends despite my disagreement that UAP were demonic in nature.
Richard Dolan: I want to ask something…this is actually quite relevant for a lot of these topics we’ve been discussing. So is it fair to say that there are factions or groups within the Pentagon or in the intelligence community that do not support what you’re doing and that are actively opposing any kind of information on UFOs coming out? Is that fair to say? Are you dealing with opposition like that?
LE: Oh yeah! Every single day, my life has… Richard, one day, we could probably sit down and have a hell of a conversation about everything that’s been done to me, trying to muzzle me. And as I’ve said before, the one thing people should learn by now? The more you try to muzzle me, the louder I’m gonna bark. I don’t take kindly to bullies. There’s a reason why I was a bouncer getting my way through college and tried to pay the bills. I really don’t like bullies and I really don’t like bullies who hide behind the American flag and pretend they’re doing the right thing and are being patriotic. That’s not patriotic. That’s exactly what I fought on the battlefield, people trying to oppress other people’s free expression and thought. I won’t tolerate that in war and I damn sure won’t tolerate it within my government.
RD: Are you able to speculate or talk at all – I’m thinking the answer might be no, but I’m just gonna ask – the UAP Task Force that’s being worked on? Is there anything at all that you are able to say about this process, currently? What people might realistically want to expect? What’s going on here? Limitations that the Task Force might be dealing with? Is there anything that you’re able to talk about or is there nothing that you’re able to talk about?
LE: Yeah. Underfunded, under-resourced, lack of authority. You know, I’m getting the the impression now, talking to some friends along the Beltway, that this report is going to be rather benign. And it’s a shame because I did a survey with Twitter. It got more than 1000 responses on what people wanted out of the UAP Task Force. And I’m going to tell you right now, I got it to the right people. And, you know, if not even one of those concerns are addressed, then we’ve got a problem. I remain concerned that we are going to do the politically correct thing, the bureaucratically correct thing, and not the patriotic thing, which is to deliver to Congress what they asked for and frankly, what they deserve. I am concerned because what I’m hearing is not matching up with what we said we were going to deliver.
RD: Oh, boy. Well, that’ll be a nice, little, fun outcome when the report is released and it’s a big, nothing burger, perhaps or compared with what people are expecting. I wonder what the repercussions of that will be? But you’re you’re implying that they may not be given access to the…
LE: Well, let me also say for the record: It’s not the UAP Task Force’s fault. We should not blame the people in the UAP Task Force, they are doing the best that they can. I know these individuals personally, they are good human beings, they are patriotic, they are trying their best to deliver what has been asked. But between us, and probably, I guess now everybody else: I think they’re facing a lot of the same bureaucratic challenges that I faced three years ago, six years ago, seven years ago, when I was an AATIP. And this is what’s killing me. I can’t believe we have come this far and yet those those bureaucratic hurdles are still there. Why haven’t these people been fired?! What’s going on? We know there’s a problem now, we know these things are real and yet we’re still allowing certain people in the Pentagon to stonewall the conversation! And this is, to me, this is unfathomable! And this is why you see me kind of animated because, as time goes on, I’m getting increasingly frustrated by the fact that there are pockets of resistance in there that haven’t been routed out. They should have been smoked out three years ago. What the hell are they still doing there?! Get out!
RD: Well, by bureaucratic resistance, this sounds very much like what Harry Reid was talking about when he was quoted in the New Yorker. Tried to get to Lockheed, blocked. Can’t get into it. So is it a matter of security clearances, like these guys in the Task Force, they can’t get access to the areas within the Pentagon or elsewhere, that they need to?
(Pretty sure Elizondo was speaking about the folks who think this is demonic, ruined JL’s career and do not want us studying UFOs or related phenomena)
LE: Look, there’s a lot more going on here. There’s definitely some shenanigans being played. I’m not gonna [put] the cart before the horse, I’m not gonna say anything right now but as this story unfolds, you guys are going to notice that there’s some people playing some funny games. I know who they are, I’m not going talk about them right now. That will hopefully at some point, be provided to the right authorities, and hopefully, they’ll do the right thing and I’ve got to let the process at least try to work.
My Sources Say #4: 180 Day Report, 2019 Pyramid/Sphere and Holloman
RD: I want to jump to your time in AATIP a little bit and maybe just some knowledge of some of the more famous UFO incidents that we’ve talked about. So like, Tic Tac. Kevin Day. I really like Kevin [and] I’ve had an opportunity to talk to him on a number of occasions. I have a very high regard for him. Kevin Day claimed at one point that they were up to eight pairs of jet fighters performing intercepts on the Tic Tacs. Can you confirm or corroborate if that was the case and was there any additional evidence that might have been acquired? Was there more gun camera videos obtained that we don’t know about? That type of thing, relating to the Tic Tac encounter.
LE: So the Nimitz incident now, we’re going way back in time. Forgive me, we’re almost pulling back 20 years. I don’t know completely everything Kevin Day saw only because we were looking at the macro picture, we were looking at the battle space, per se, rather than the individual pieces on the chessboard. If he says that is the case, then I have no reason to believe otherwise, that’s not the case. I find every single one of these individuals highly credible. All their information matches up, whether it’s the pilots or the radar operators, or the E-2 Hawkeye folks or everybody else, I have no reason to question their credibility. I think you’re absolutely right. Let’s not forget here that Kevin Day also went to Top Gun, he went to Top Gun as a radar operator, and he has trained like the Top Gun pilots, but in this case, on radar systems, to identify everything from a baseball at 80,000 feet to an Su-22, or a MiG-25. They’re that good. And so, if he’s telling you something happened, then again, I’ve got no reason to believe otherwise, that isn’t the case.
RD: So, do you know if there have been any high-res video, visual, thermal images…videos of the Tic Tac that have been obtained? Are you aware of anything else? I think it was Kevin…it was one of the guys on the Nimitz, I think, who talked about records being confiscated, data being taken by anonymous guys in black suits, and what have you, Have you come across any information that there’s…I think I might have even heard you say this, that there’s a lot more video evidence than what exists. And do we know if there’s more of the Tic Tac specific incident that are out there?
LE: Let me say what I’ve said before. I gotta be very careful because I don’t want to get myself in trouble with anybody. I would like to come back next year maybe to your forum and not do it behind a jail cell. I know for certain there is more video and photographic evidence of UAP encounters with U.S. defense systems. There are some that are much higher fidelity, and much more compelling, as far as photographic and video evidence. That’s probably as far as I can go regarding that specific question.
RD: So, I believe that you have said in interviews – and this is going off of…I’m not exactly 100% sure, but I’m pretty sure that you might have said – that someone mysterious and unidentified from elsewhere in the DoD, beat you to the punch a couple of times, collecting records of radar or optic data, or electronic data, or even physical debris as evidence of UAP encounters, before you got there to investigate. Now, the fact is, if you did say that…that mo is identical to what Project Blue Book investigators, years and years ago, said many times. So who were these agents? Where do they get the authority to supersede yours, if this happened? I mean, your authority came directly from the Secretary of Defense, so how would that have been the case? And, I’m wondering, what might have been reported in the interactions with these beings when you…I’m trying to think how I want to ask this. Do you have any evidence that these operatives were in fact…what can you say about this?
LE: I will tell you that, in my experience, there were some elements that were interfering with our capabilities to collect and analyze data and information. This kind of goes to the whole, I guess, the speculation of some sort of secret government, society or Men in Black or whatnot. I haven’t had any encounters. Now, I will say without going into much detail, I did have a very, at one point, a very close colleague of mine, that told me emphatically that that body exists but I haven’t had any encounters and I suspect if it does exist…
RD: Wait, that there’s a mysterious like, let’s say, quasi, Men In Black type organization that is out there that is acquiring UFO data?
LE: You can call it whatever you want. Another organization that’s doing some type of similar work and maybe on the black side of the house, black operations. I don’t want to feed any more conspiracy theories because, frankly, I don’t really know. But I did have a colleague share with me that they were convinced that there was an element within the government that did do that type of stuff and would intimidate people. I haven’t had any personal experience. It’s probably because either, one…I’m considered too reckless and they know that I would completely and probably, if they came into my front door, I’d shut the door behind him and try to interrogate them. Or, I’m too stupid. Maybe I’m too much of a loose cannon, possibly, maybe. I don’t know why. If there is that secret organization, again, I’ve never come across them, they’ve never tried to intimidate me, personally. But again, that that could just be because maybe I’m not worth their time? If it does exist.
Men In Black? WTH?
RD: I want to ask you about the 2019 encounters off the coast of California, if you don’t mind? So, is there anything about those…we’re talking about Catalina Island and the islands right off of the southern coast of California, that we’ve learned about in July and August of 2019. So is there anything about them that makes you either believe or doubt that these objects were either Russian, American or Chinese? And I include Americans, like black budget, exotic, whatever. But Russian and Chinese or anything beyond…what is your assessment? And I just want to add one other thing, the second part of this. Some of these objects were hovering over the bridge and flight decks of the vessels, and was there an attempt made to capture or shoot any of these down? And anything else you can say about this?
LE: Umm. I have my own personal opinion. Uh…
RD: Can you share that?
LE: Let me say this, though, I will say this. If the Russians or Chinese suspect that we are looking at UFOs, they will probably take advantage of that and probably start sending drones over because they probably realize we may have a hard time identifying them. So, therein lies the problem because, as time goes on, I think we can anticipate, definitely, increased drone activity. Both from the hobbyist, like quadcopters, and whatnot and misidentifications, to potentially real, foreign intelligence collection using very sensitive ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) platforms, very capable, ISR platforms. And so therein lies part of the problem. Once you show an enemy a vulnerability, and you announce that vulnerability, the enemy that you have will absolutely exploit it. So therein lies the problem, because, today you may see something that is truly anomalous and then tomorrow, because of that, you’ve made that announcement, that proclamation, now you do have a real drone problem, because they’re going to insert themselves into that information gap, because you’re really not quite sure what you’re dealing with. And that’s probably the biggest issue I have. Are all these things UAP? No. Are all these things drones? No (laughs). It’s a mixed bag and that’s why we have to be careful because we are going to, by necessity, see more and more. Look, the more we look at the sky, the more things we’re going to see in the sky and the more we’re going to misidentify those things. Just like the new Starlink, right? A lot of people are seeing these satellites…I just saw them last week up in Wyoming.
RD: Thanks, Elon Musk. Yeah, they’re amazing.
LE: Yeah, 54 of these things in a line, and the very next thing, people at the shopping center were talking about seeing a line of UFOs and it was just Starlink.
RD: It causes many, many mistaken UFO reports. But back to the the so-called drone encounters. I mean, does it seem realistic to you, that the Russians or Chinese would actually be able to have drones that could come right up to these Navy destroyers, which are equipped with incredible, electronic detection systems, and just like…appear. Because as far as we’ve been able to learn, that seems to be the case. Like, whatever these things were, just…boom, came right there.
LE: I’m not going to address foreign capabilities. What I’m going to do instead, is have a conversation on common sense, okay? Here’s a drone, here’s our pen, Sorry but that’s what I got. Here’s our drone. Kinds of drones. You have drones that can fly really far, and they can fly fast, using wings. Those drones that fly really far and really fast don’t have a real loiter capability, they don’t usually hover. They can hover, but you’re either really good at flying far or you’re really good at hovering. Those that hover, don’t have as long as what we call loiter capability as those that fly on a fixed wing, right? And so, therein lies the problem. Either you can hover for a short period of time or you can fly for a long period of time. But, in order to get to a bunch of Navy ships that are 100 miles off the coast, you either have to fly there or you have to launch from somewhere close by. And these things, unless they are GPS controlled and would be able to follow a ship, I’m not gonna say it’s not impossible (He meant “not possible”), but you have to have someone operating, you have to have someone flying, you have to have an infrastructure. So for every drone you see flying, you have to have an operator, you have to have batteries, you have to be on a certain frequency, there’s a lot of things. You have to have a base for it to land and a base for it to take off. In the open ocean, you’re limited. You can’t just pop out of the water, you have to expect that you’re gonna have to launch from another boat, right?
And so, it’s interesting when people say, “Oh, they’re some drones over the aircraft.” That may be a prosaic explanation, but when you really look at it, you look at what is required to have something that can hover over the flight of a boat for hours at a time, and not a single one of these have been shot down, not a single one of these have ever been recovered from the ocean, not a single one of them has had a mechanical issue, not a single one has been able to be intercepted.
RD: It seems insane.
LE: And by the way, we have helicopters on these ships and not a single one has been caught by one of our helicopters or aircraft. You know, okaaaay. But you really got to do a lot of mental gymnastics then, to prove to me that that is some sort of drone technology. I’m not saying it’s impossible. What I’m simply saying is you’ve got to build a case then to prove that. Because at this point, that’s a greater feat than saying it’s a UAP. Really. Because at that point, it’s, “Okay, well, we’re really talking about something then that, if a foreign adversary has, is really incredible.”
RD: There was just a very long article in The Drive, The Warzone, about a month ago – I think it was a 10,000-word piece, very long – that made a spirited defense of the Chinese drone, Russian drone hypothesis, as opposed to UFO.
LE: Well, he’s right, though. Tyler Rogoway is absolutely right. There are technologies that are advancing on a daily basis by our foreign adversaries that could very well, very soon, if not today, be confused as a UAP. He’s right. They are…
RD: And he suggested the drones could have been launched from a nearby vessel, under disguise. I’m not sure if he brought up the submarine hypothesis. I mean, he had his own way of trying to say, “Well, these could have been launched relatively close by.” I wasn’t sure how realistic that seemed to me and it doesn’t seem like you think it’s realistic, either from what you were saying.
My Sources Say #5 -Shoot ‘Em Down?
(Lue’s Internet connection dropped out so Dolan spoke for a while as they figured it out)
RD: I’m glad that we had him on here and he’s been able to say as much as he can. This whole idea of the alien threat, maybe I’ll have him wrap this up one more time. Because this, to me, is the biggest, number one criticism that I constantly hear levied against him. And, as someone…I nearly wrote a very detailed history of false-flag events. In fact, I did a tremendous amount of historical research on false flags. And I’m just not seeing this as a false flag and I think that the analysts who say that it is, haven’t really provided any evidence that I consider to be noteworthy or credible. All I get is predictions that this is going to happen, there’s going to be an alien invasion and it’s going to be a false flag. The only thing that I would say to support them is this: I don’t believe that there’s going to be an alien invasion scenario but if there is an alien invasion scenario, then yes, I would say that that’s probably a false flag. So I will go that far and give that as my personal opinion. So I wouldn’t rule it 100% out and I certainly would not rule out all kinds of spin and deception. I think that’s the rule that we can expect in the event of…the more that this discussion is up for public conversation in the future about UFOs.
Q & A…
RD: Alejandro says to you, Lue: First, thank you very much for your service, Luis. After everything you have read, seen and heard, do you believe the phenomenon is extraterrestrial?
LE: Alejandro, I believe that there is more and more compelling data that is leaning towards this phenomenon, either all or in part, being something that is…may not be from here. I have to be very careful not to be definitive but the data is beginning to look more and more like it’s not from here. And that’s not just because of what we’re seeing now but to what Richard has said in the past, that there’s historical data. And [it’s] one thing is to replicate one or two of maybe five of the observables nowadays, but that simply wasn’t possible thirty, forty years ago.
RD:. So you did not actually say extraterrestrial, which I thought was interesting. And it reminds me, Eric Davis, I’m sure more than once, strongly seem to indicate his opinion that we’re dealing with a kind of high-level presentient, super advanced intelligence that I’m not sure he said was extraterrestrial, either. And I know John Alexander, who is also kind of involved in that circle of individuals, seems, by his statements, to think something similar. Is that fair to say that you lean in that direction that it’s beyond ET? Or like, shall we say interdimensional? Are you going in that direction?
LE: No, I don’t know yet. I think most of the people who’ve been involved in this for a while, I think, can rationally look at this and say, “Look, there’s a very good indication that this is not our technology.” The problem is from there, it really becomes the great unknown. And we really, truly don’t have enough data, yet to suggest origins. I think there’s just enough of an argument to say they are from some other planet as it is from some place right here on Earth that we are just now, either interacting with, or realizing that there’s a whole nother reality being superimposed right on top of this one. I just simply don’t think we have enough data, yet. At least I, in my own mind, don’t have enough data, yet where I have a conclusion either way. I think we’re pretty confident right now it’s not from here, whatever it is. When I say here, I mean, built by us. But beyond that, I just don’t know.
My Sources Say #6 – Ultraterrestrials?
(Note: Source didn’t use the word ultraterrestrials)
Richard Dolan: I’m gonna ask a question on request from Greg. So Greg asks you Lue, your colleague Dr. Hal Puthoff, has stated that his interest in UFOs began during the SRI, CIA remote viewing program – this was back in the 70s – when psychics frequently described encounters with UFOs during remote viewing sessions. To your knowledge, has any correlation been found between anomalous, mental phenomena, aka psi phenomena and UFO experiences? Did AATIP or or AAWSAP investigate a potential connection between the two phenomena? That’s quite interesting.
LE: Yeah. Well, I think it’s clear that AAWSAP did. I can’t speak cogently on AAWSAP because I was really more involved in AATIP. Let me share with you a little saying we used to have in the program: You don’t find AATIP, AATIP finds you. And that seems to be pretty consistent. It seems kind of…I mean, we’ve all kind of chuckled when we first heard it but the longer we were involved with the portfolio, the more that serendipity really seemed to be rather prevalent. And almost bizarrely, so. Even the most staunchest of, I guess, skeptics, would come around and say, “You know, yeah, there’s a lot of really weird things that are associated with this.” You can call it a coincidence if you want. It could just be that, coincidence. But again, there’s a reason why we used to say that, that you don’t find AATIP, AATIP finds you. There seems to be a lot of individuals who’ve had interesting experiences in the past, that, for some reason, became part of the AATIP portfolio. I certainly don’t want to talk about other people’s experiences so I’ll leave it at that. But as time continues, I think maybe some of that will be will be expressed, over time, by more people that come out of the shadows.
Question from Daniel: If you were to hypothesize what organization might be the most likely to finally let the cat out of the bag about having found crashed UFOs or recovered UFO parts, would you suggest the DoD the CIA or some other unidentified government agency?
LE: Daniel, that is a great, great question. I think, ultimately, the responsibility to reveal that information, to be made public, would fall upon the shoulders of the Office of the President of the United States. Ultimately, that is the individual that’s responsible for the entire executive branch. It’s pretty clear to us that there are pockets within the U.S. government that has bits and pieces of this information. The problem is I’m not sure any one particular agency or organization has a complete, comprehensive picture in totality of this topic, nor do I think they have the authority necessarily. You have CIA, which falls under Title 50 authorities, you have DoD, that falls under Title 10 authorities, then you have DHS, and all these organizations operate under different title authorities. And so, let’s look at, for example, the defense contractor community like the big Lockheeds, the Boeings and the Northrops of the world. These are organizations that have huge defense contracts to work for the Department of Defense, but they also have other contracts with organizations like the CIA, and DHS. And so, I don’t think it’s up to any one particular agency to reveal that. I think what’s happening right now is exactly the right way to do it. Where you have the DNI, the Director of National Intelligence, who will be providing ultimately a report. Of course, it’s originating from DoD, but it’ll go up to the DNI for her stamp of approval, and then it’s going to go to Congress. And that’s basically representative of the entire intelligence community, not one particular agency. And I think that’s the way to do it. I don’t think it’s going to be one agency that’s finally going to step up and say, rather sheepishly, “Okay, guys, it was us.” I don’t think that’s gonna happen. I think we’re gonna have a more affirmative statement from a more senior level.
RD: I’d like to tack on to Daniel’s question and just restate it a little bit. So, let’s say…forget authorized to reveal any information. Let’s say you’re an investigator and you’re you’re rooting through the United States government bureaucracy, the entire government bureaucracy. So, there are a couple of things on this question that were not mentioned. I’m thinking Department of Energy, there’s CIA, there’s Space Force, there’s the Army, there’s the Navy. In other words, like if you’re going to hunt around through that bureaucracy, where do you think you might be best served by focusing…
LE: I’d have probably about four to five agencies in mind. I would start with the United States Air Force for historical data. I would go to NORAD, I would go to the CIA, I’d go to Space Command, I’d go to Space Force, I would also then go to FAA, I would go to the DHS, from a more border perspective. And I would go to Navy, I’d probably go to NOAA, believe it or not. There’s a Department of Energy. So I think we’ve got probably a handful, ten or twelve agencies that would probably have the lion’s share of information if I were to be rooting around, as you say, trying to find information on this.
RD: You know what’s amazing about that? That you mentioned, like ten or twelve agencies. In other words, there is UFO data scattered throughout those departments but each, presumably, is very deeply buried within high levels of classification, I would assume.
LE: Which have their own SAP constructs and their own security processes. And this is why 180 days is nowhere near long enough to provide a comprehensive report to Congress. It takes at least eight or nine months just to get the right read ons to even get access to the data. Forget about doing an assessment. And then once you do the assessment, you’re looking at another year (the rest was cut off).
RD: So I want to read this question by Martin. What is the route to disclosure for the existence of alien technology, knowing that the incentives to keep it secret, financial and strategic, are so great to those in possession of the technology? And is there an incentive that could outweigh the benefits they currently have, that might encourage them to release the knowledge that they have, albeit slowly, and in a controlled way?
LE: I think we’re supposed to be doing exactly what we’re doing. We need to continue to apply excruciating pressure on the system, via our legislative branch, our executive branch, our media, our public outreach, and with our international friends and allies. So, first of all, we continue to turn up the heat. Two, we offer some sort of amnesty for those individuals who are part of legacy programs that now feel there may be some sort of culpability, or perhaps some sort of legal responsibility towards this. Because let’s face it, there were probably some people’s careers who suffered and a lot of people who should have known things, didn’t and were kept in the dark. So, I think we need to offer some sort of amnesty, blanket amnesty for anybody who may have been involved in that, so that information can come forward. The problem is, I’m not sure that’s really doable, because you can’t stop any…look, anybody can sue anybody for anything. Whether they’ll win or not, is a different story. But there there are companies that have gone bankrupt, many of them, because they’ve been sued for no reason. And they went bankrupt just trying to protect themselves in court. So, there’s nothing stopping private citizens from suing other individuals and I think therein lies part of the problem. You can apply some sort of amnesty while serving as a government official, but you can’t stop people from from suing each other. And so, the question is, how do we protect individuals who may have been involved in some of these efforts in the past from being persecuted like that? Whether you like it or not, I’m not going to go there. But I would start with some sort of amnesty.
RD: I think that’s a that’s a great idea and I hadn’t thought about the personal lawsuit element of it, I have to honestly just say. I kept thinking, well, if you have institutional protection…
LE: Huge liability, huge liability.
RD: It sure could be, yeah. And even if the lawsuits may be deemed without merit, you still have a huge hassle. I mean, there could be people with deep pockets…
LE: Look, let me give you an example. You have, let’s say, a pilot who reported this and all of a sudden, they lost their flight status, they got depressed, and all of a sudden they got kicked out of the military, lost their entire career because they reported a UAP. And now they’re homeless, right? And so you had a stellar career and just because you did the right thing, now you’re homeless and your entire life is in ruins, you have a failed marriage, your kids left you and you’ve had to declare bankruptcy, and you literally lost everything. How do you assess the value on that? And then you multiply that decades, right? And over how many people had to suffer? I mean, you’re looking at something that is very, very significant, indeed. Now, there is liability there, so how do we fix that? How do we make everybody whole?
RD: Yeah, actually, I recall a conversation I had well over a decade ago with someone who had a lot of knowledge of this situation, and in fact, told me explicitly about the danger of lawsuits. In that context, he was talking about military contractors who might have felt locked out or unfair competition type things. But there’s just so much potential for lawsuits if this were to come out, so it’s very good point. I’ll add one thing to what you’ve said to the question, even though it was really directed to you. I would just say I think that the process of obtaining some kind of UFO disclosure, however difficult it is, is maybe one of the last attempts we have to reclaim some sense of control over our government. I mean, you were talking about working the media, working the political system, and everyone knows it’s pretty much broken. The media is broken, the media is controlled, so establishment oriented, and it’s in bed with so many high-level powers to begin with. No one trusts it, they don’t trust political system and for good reason. So what is the answer to that? Is the answer just, throw it out, have a revolution, start over? Well, I fear that, I think that’s a bad idea. And so what are we left with? Some way that we can attempt a process of reclaiming some level of sovereignty over these institutions. Congress remains a great idea, it’s just become so utterly corrupt. And same with the media.
So, I think, an opening in terms of genuine truth that gets a public conversation started on this subject, could at least conceivably provide fresh life into some institutions. As long as we’re really willing to do some kind of housecleaning and changing some laws. It could be the last best chance we have for reclaiming some sense of true, democratic rule to republican rule and true sovereignty of citizens. I’m just going to leave it at that.
Question from Nicolas: How much of the recent trend, conflating extraterrestrials, UAP and even include SETI – so bringing those together – with the paranormal, spiritual, is a psyop to discredit the former – that is UFOs, ETs – in contrast to an organic, valid, intellectual evolution. I’m actually not sure I understand this question now that I’m reading it.
LE: Well, let me see if I can if I can add something to that. I may not be answering it but let me take a stab at this. Look, whenever you’re dealing with something that is unknown, and this is true in the intelligence field, as well, or anything else…we tend to put into that vacuum [and] fill-that-void, with what we think. And that’s just human nature, we do that all the time. And one thing you’re seeing right now is the overlapping of the UAP issue or topic with the paranormal and then that of consciousness. And let me, if I can, just dissect that for a moment because I think it is a good question. I wrote an article a couple years ago about the definition of paranormal. And to many people the UAP topic falls into the category of paranormal. Well, what is paranormal? Well, paranormal just simply means outside the normal envelope or understanding of what normal is. And so therefore, in the world of science, which is a world I come from, originally, by me education, everything by definition in science is paranormal until it becomes normal, until it becomes standard, until it becomes routine. The notion that the Earth was not the center of our solar system was paranormal until Galileo presented it. And unfortunately, he suffered for it.
But everything, the cell phone, the computer that I’m using right now to have this communication across the world with you folks, forty years ago would be considered pretty darn paranormal and yet now we consider it routine. So, let me answer with that. And then furthermore, as far as human consciousness, people say, “Well, these things are controlled by consciousness.” Well, maybe they are and maybe they’re not. But isn’t everything, technically, by definition, a matter of consciousness? I’m a human being, you’re a human being, we’re having this conversation but there is a mental process that is occurring between us having this conversation that involves human consciousness. Everything, the way I look at this pen and recognize this as being a pen versus a piece of paper or anything else, is not because my eyes are seeing it or because my hands are feeling it. It’s because the conscious brain is processing that data and creating an image. And not only an image, but is creating a thought and not only a thought, but it’s creating a conversation. And that conversation is two ways. And that entire effort going on, that mental effort is part of human consciousness. The fact that I’m awake and I think therefore I am. So, if there is a UFO in the sky, I don’t think it’s a far leap to say that, “Yeah, it’s controlled by consciousness.” Because when I’m in my car, my automobile and I’m driving to the gas station, I am literally driving my vehicle using human consciousness, I have a deliberate purpose to drive my car on a highway while maintaining the speed limit, while maintaining safe distance to get to the gas station to fill my car up. That is, by definition, a conscious process that is occurring. And we all do it every day. So, I’m not sure it’s a far leap to superimpose that, when they see something flying in the sky and it’s they say it’s controlled by consciousness, that really may not be far off from the truth. So again, I don’t know if I answered your question, but it was an honor trying anyways.
Question from Cynthia: Will UFO/UAP craft technology be available to me, as a consumer/adopter, in the next 10 years?
LE: I sure hope so. This is one of the reasons why I remain optimistic because the last time we were faced with something like this was the great space race. We had this adversary in the great Cold War, which actually was pretty hot, to be honest with you. And we had this great competition with the then Soviet Union and they launched this artificial satellite called Sputnik and it launched the great space race and ultimately resulted on us landing on the moon, just some 10 years later. But why is that important? Well, beyond the accomplishment of just landing on the moon, there were over 6,200 leaps of industry practices and innovations, that wound up improving mankind as a whole. For example, the LED light bulb, for example, the CAT scan, for example, Velcro, for example, Tang, believe it or not. My kids would argue that’s probably the greatest invention. There’s a whole laundry list of technical innovations that have actually originated as part of this competition, and resulted in helping mankind, helping humanity. And I see very much the same promise here. If we can all finally realize to just get along for a little bit, and stop fighting each other. And I don’t mean that just as nations, I mean that even as UFO groups, and ufology and stop trying to tell people what to think. If we could really apply some really good academic rigor and scientific expertise on this topic, I have no reason to believe that we can’t…we might be on the precipice of a new Renaissance and how wonderful that would be if that was the case?
RD: Oh my goodness. The sciences involved in UFO tech, UAP tech is just off the charts and I would say totally revolutionary. I will talk about this in my next lecture tonight so it’s something I’m personally interested in as well. So, thank you for answering that.
Question by Michael: Lue, when you spoke at the 2018 MUFON conference, you mentioned, “theological differences of opinion” between yourself as head of AATIP and other high-level decision makers, that limited what you could accomplish. Could you elaborate on what these theological differences are or were and how they influence American or military policy on UFOs?
LE: I’m not qualified to speak on other people’s behalf so I’m just gonna speak on my behalf and offer a rare opinion, which I don’t usually do. A lot of people, when they heard that comment, they automatically assumed that I wasn’t a spiritual person, I wasn’t a religious person. And actually, I’m deeply religious. I don’t wear my religion on my sleeve. It’s a personal thing for me. But I’m deeply religious. But I try not to allow my own, personal theologies to interfere with the pursuit of the truth and I think that’s important. And the individuals who I had conflict with, they had an issue. Their theological belief system prevented them and tried to prevent us from looking into this topic. And at the end of the day, I can’t say that they’re right, I can’t say that they’re wrong. I just disagree. The way I tend to look at life is, it’s okay to ask the questions. And in fact, you may be surprised that most of the time, the answers actually will reinforce your theological or philosophical belief system. All it does is just open up your mind and remove some of those biases and those obstacles that we’ve had to begin with, to begin to realize the grandeur nature of the Universe, and and how epically wonderful it really is. And every time we superimpose our own beliefs and fears onto something, we stunt human evolution, we stunt our growth as a society and I think that’s very dangerous. Yeah,
RD: I just want to add onto this and ask you…because when I first read the question, I thought you might have been speaking metaphorically, like there were philosophical differences. But it occurs to me that this could be theological. And I just want to ask you, are you referring to the fact…I mean, within the U.S. military, there are many individuals who, of course, were very conservative and many conservative Christians happened to be in the United States military. A number of years ago, Nick Redfern wrote a book about the so-called Collins Elite, which is essentially what he identified was a group of religious Christian, perhaps evangelical Christians within the military that see UFOs as demonic. Now, is that what you’re kind of referring to, indirectly?
LE: That’s precisely what I’m referring to. Look, radicalism is radicalism. It doesn’t matter if it’s Islam or Christianity, or Judaism or anything else.
RD: So there’s a certain percentage of people within the military and intel community who do believe in UFOs but they think that they’re demonic entities. That’s essentially…
LE: Yes, but before we go and persecute them, let me ask each and every one of you to look in the mirror because within ufology itself, we have that same level of bias and persecution occurring right now but it’s not necessarily religious. It’s almost a cultist. There are people out there that are pushing a narrative that don’t want you to ask the hard questions because it’s a threat to their narrative, and what they believe and what they have been pushing on other people. So before we go throwing stones and say, “Oh, look, the government, they’re bad,” let’s make sure first we look in the mirror and point at ourselves and say, “Hey, am I guilty of doing the same thing?” because the UFO community is just as guilty as a government for having these radical ideas? I just want to make sure we’re fair, that’s all.
RD: I just want you to know, I am personally not condemning those individuals for that belief system but I just think it’s helpful and important to know that it exists and that this is an actual issue, apparently, within UFO analysis, even within the world of the government, it sounds like. This is a rift.
LE: It is. It’s a human condition, it’s not a government condition, it’s a human condition, we’re all subject to it. And I would recommend people, before we start throwing stones at people like that, I prefer to throw an arm around them instead and try to have a good conversation with them before I do anything else.
RD: Well, the interesting thing, it seems to me, is how it might affect policy decisions, or even decisions about how to study or analyze this and make sense out of it. I wouldn’t know how to resolve that, actually, if you’ve got a faction that says these are demonic and we need to…how do you fight something you think is demonic, first of all. And for that matter, there’s a lot of this phenomenon that actually does seem very, very bizarre. I mean, you’ve got stories go back to Jack Parsons, and incanting a female deity in the deserts of Nevada back in 1947. And you’ve got all of the kinds of stories of portals. You got Eric Davis talking some really crazy stuff about what happened at the Skinwalker Ranch. There’s Marley Woods, which is another place where there’s some bizarre portal type activity. There’s probably many others. I want to ask you this question. I just want to ask this because I’ve heard this rumor and I want to know what you have to say about this. Is there a reason or is there a faction within the military that is absolutely terrified, and I mean scared like, we don’t know how to deal with this, in terms of this phenomenon appearing in a kind of, I don’t know, almost like, we don’t know how to control it? I mean, there’s reason to think there may be portals and entities coming into dimensions. I mean, we’ve all heard about the Skinwalker Ranch. Is it true that there are elements of the military that are afraid in not knowing how to deal with us?
LE: Well, I can’t speak on behalf of the military but I can speak on behalf of a person that we’re all afraid of things we can’t control or understand. That’s why most people don’t…only a few of us like to sleep in total darkness. I happen to be one of those weird people that I prefer to sleep, I like the shadows, I like the darkness but most people are very uncomfortable by it. And that’s a human thing. We’re genetically wired to be that way. That’s why we fear the unknown. That’s why a lot of people like to have a nightlight, why a lot of people get scared at night, but not in the day because your five senses, your sight is extremely limited. I don’t necessarily think it’s just a military thing. Yes, there are people in the military that are terrified but there are people in the military that are terrified by a lot of things.
RD: All right, fair enough, fair enough. I just thought maybe there’s something going on here that we want to know about. So anyway, is Joseph available and able to unmute his microphone? Is Joseph here? If not, I’m just gonna keep asking everyone’s question.
LE: I really hope I haven’t scared everybody away.
RD: You’ve terrified them!
LE: Anybody out there, please ask me a question.
Question from Joseph: Your History Channel show, “Unidentified,” was a great introduction for my friends and family. Any news on a season three? Would season three have more details on underwater incidents?
LE: So before just just answering yes or no. Look, Chris Mellon and I did the History Channel program…we knew is going to be a temporary thing. We weren’t looking at it as an enduring capability. It was one of our five pillars of effort, which is public engagement, right? And frankly, probably the most important part of anything that we do is making sure that the public is aware and completely transparent on what we’re doing and how we’re trying to do it. “Unidentified” was a great experiment because none of us are actors. I’m not an actor, I’m not a TV personality, I’m not talent. Chris isn’t. We’re old government-type bureaucrats and operators. So it was a wonderful experiment. I think if the appetite is there, and there is utility in us presenting more information to the public, then yes, we will absolutely do it. And if that’s something that people want us to do because they liked it, and it was an effective way of communicating data and facts, then we’ll certainly open to open to do that. We’ve had lots of offers but we really haven’t taken a pulse of of people out there to see if this is something they’d like us to do.
Question from Michael: Thank you for your work on this immensely important issue, you obviously bring a great deal of expertise and experience to the table. My question relates to the possibility of leveraging the world’s problems with climate change to compel disclosure from the government. As Richard and you have pointed out a number of times, UAPs do not use fossil fuels, and their energy and propulsion systems, once revealed, will spell the end of the antiquated and polluting energy systems upon which we’ve relied for the past 150 years or so. Despite the tremendous self interest on the part of fossil fuel producers in maintaining the status quo, given the desperate state of the world’s climate and environment, is there now an opportunity to force or compel disclosure. Could an argument be made to the legislators that disclosure is not necessary now for the public interest but it is now absolutely necessary to save the planet?
LE: There’s a little bit of speculation there. We are presuming that whatever these UAPs are using is clean technology. We know it’s not fossil fuel. But we have to be careful not jumping to the conclusion that whatever it is they’re using as a power source, isn’t equally as destructive. And let me give you an extreme example here, which is probably not the case, but just to show you my logic. What if it turns out in order to generate that type of energy to do what it’s doing, you needed all the water on the planet and destroy and mine out the hydrogen to do it, right? Probably not a very green technology if you have to destroy a planet’s environment just to do that. Now, do I think that’s the case? No, probably not. But I just want to make sure we’re clear here that we are presuming or assuming, we are speculating that whatever’s behind this technology is likely green technology because it’s not fossil fuels. But we have to be careful being definitive about that because we you simply don’t know yet enough about the technology to say conclusively that it is a green technology. I tend to personally, I tend to agree with you. I think it probably is but we we don’t know that, yet, for sure. So if it turns out that we can we can demonstrate that it is a green technology, then yes, we absolutely could use that and use global climate change as a predicate for that. And that’s something certainly that the United Nations, I’m sure, would take up and lead the charge on. But again, we’re not, yet quite 100% sure. And so I just want to make sure, playing devil’s advocate, I don’t want to be a buzzkill. I’m not trying to poo poo your idea, I’m just simply saying, we need to approach this really open minded, we cannot let our bias get the best of us because it’s really easy to run down that rabbit hole and say, “Let’s do this, because it’s gonna save the planet,” when in reality, we’re not entirely certain. Could very well be, but again, not sure.
RD: I want to follow up and just ask you, in your opinion. So there’s a couple of different free or breakthrough energy solutions that people talk about a lot with UFOs. One is zero-point energy, which of course, Hal Puthoff, who you know well, has been looking into for many, many years. There’s nuclear fusion, which is, you know, another holy grail of clean and abundant energy. And nuclear fusion is not the same as what we do now with vision. Even Lately, I’ve been looking into the phenomenon of EVOs, which was explored by Kenneth Shoulders. I think that’s quite interesting. My question for you is, do you have a front runner that you think either that these objects use in terms of energy, or that we, conversely, that we in our civilization, could be using either secretly – not sure that you believe that we’re doing secret breakthroughs. I do – or at least that we might get in the future? So what’s our best bet? Or what’s the most likely solution, in your opinion.
LE: You don’t have to agree or disagree, but you can look at some of the recent patents by Salvatore Pais at PAX river, Navy and see definitively that the U.S. government is interested in alternative energy solutions. That’s a fact. Whether it turns out to be that or not, I mean, some people said anti gravity and the cashmir effect and all sorts of other things. I do think there are other forms of energy because we know it exists like dark energy, for example. That’s a reality. You can’t see it, we can’t measure it but it’s there. Just like dark matter. We just don’t have a scientific means for really studying it right now.
RD: I’m not even sure if we really know what it is. I mean, I know it’s been hypothesized because there’s no other..
LE: Right. Exactly my point. And the (indecipherable) nature of the expansion of the universe and how it continues to expand and go faster and faster. Something’s behind that. So there are all sorts of neat, little loopholes within the Universe, if you know where to look, to observe that there are alternate forms of energy. There are some hypotheses, some very good hypotheses that have been put forward that seem to be quite possible. I don’t want to expand on those, yet but in AATIP we looked at this. The DIRDS was part of that effort that they were looking at during the early days of AAWSAP and then later on in AAATIP. So put simply, yes.
Question from Scott: Three or four books, or more, if you care to elaborate, on UFOs, that were recommended or passed around among you and your friends, co-workers/interested parties in the Pentagon? Was or is there a class…say, the history of UFOs, taught by someone from any agency to interested parties in the classified community who want to know? Where and how did you personally amass your background on UFO history, particularly pre-21st century?
LE: There were no necessarily real books on the history of UAPs that were recommended to me. In fact, I deliberately stayed away from a lot of that, and same with my staff, just so we could try to remain fair and objective when collecting the data.
RD: Too bad they didn’t give you my books. That would have been nice.
LE: But the books that we did have access to were probably books that would bore most people They were books on advanced propulsion, on optics, and light energy. So they weren’t necessarily books about UFOs, they were books about theoretical physics. Something, you certainly wouldn’t want to curl up with next to a warm fire one night and read. These are very, very technical books, very, very heavy in mathematics and scientific principles. But they allowed you to work out the mathematics needed, if you wanted to try to replicate some of this stuff. And notice I say mathematics, not necessarily science, okay? Mathematics. And so those were the books that primarily, I and a lot of our staff relied upon. I had a recent podcast where I actually took one off of my bookshelf and showed folks, this is the kind of stuff that we were reading.
As far as my background and my history in UAPs? Sad to say, I don’t know a whole lot. I know a little bit, I guess. But I’m sure there’s a lot of folks in this room right here that probably know a lot more about the history of UAP study than I do. Sad to say, I’m kind of new to this ufology thing. I know, people find it hard to believe, “You were part of AATIP, you ran AATIP.” That doesn’t mean I was into ufology. I was into national security and I studied UFOs, but I didn’t know much beyond what we were observing and what we were collecting. I don’t have the deep knowledge and expertise that you all have and that Richard has and other folks in the community. And I don’t know if that’s good or bad. You know, it probably makes me ignorant in many ways but it also might make me objective in other ways. It’s not that I have anything against it. I just, quite frankly, it wasn’t helpful at the time to our endeavors, because we were really focused on the military collection of data, not civilian eyewitness accounts. And I know that sounds hard for a lot of people to hear. And you say, “Well, why wouldn’t you want that information?” It’s not that we didn’t want it. We just couldn’t use it, because we’re falling under DoD Title 10 authorities so our focus had to remain military, not civilian. I couldn’t even put the name of the eyewitness, if they weren’t a military eyewitness, I couldn’t even put them into a database. That’s illegal. That’s a collection retention and dissemination of U.S. person’s information that is very, very regulated. And if I put that into an intelligence database, I’m in violation of an intelligence oversight. So a lot of people don’t know those little nuances, but that’s what keeps you safe. So that type of data just wasn’t helpful for us for that program.
RD: I’m just gonna point out something. I’m glad that this question was asked because it reminded me of something I’ve been wanting to say for the longest time, which is…I mean, I’ve noticed, as well, like there’s a complete lack of historical UFO knowledge. I’m not saying from you, personally, I’m not accusing you. But I’m just saying in the general public conversation on UFOs, it is really truly as if, wow, the first UFO sighting was Fravor and the Tic Tac UFO in 2004. And I just want to say, there are extremely, well-documented United States military encounters with objects exactly, and I mean exactly described as a Tic Tac, going back to the 50s and 40s.
LE: Richard, I’ve got a book about that thick. You’re absolutely right. And by the way, it’s useful. It is now being used in a way that I think is very helpful to the cause.
RD: It should be. I mean, there’s conversations going on, like Rogan, and I mean, I’m glad that people like him talk about UFOs. But the fact is, I mean, I’ve got a ton of cases from the 1940s over from like Los Alamos and from the Hanford nuclear facility, and Oakridge like, Atomic Energy Commission sites. Many of them in which it is extremely well documented by declassified military reports, that objects that nobody could explain were hanging out, loitering, doing things over these very sensitive installations, where no one was just supposed to be allowed to do that. In the case of Los Alamos in the late 40s, we know for a fact that there was serious, high-level military and scientific conferences, classified conferences being held over what the hell is happening over Los Alamos. And we happen to know this. And there’s so much more going on with this. And the fact that we don’t have video that’s released. I mean, we know that there was gun camera footage taken, we just don’t have access to it. But we’ve got the reports, we’ve got outstanding testimony. And I think it hampers our understanding of this, when you’ve got a lot of people saying, “Well, the Tic Tac might have been a black budget.” Well, okay, so maybe, maybe no. But even if it were, how far back are we gonna go to say, “Yeah, we invented 10,000 mile per hour instant acceleration craft with no means of propulsion in the 1940s. Are we gonna say that?
LE: It’s utter nonsense, you’re right, Richard and this is part of my frustration. This has been going on for decades.
RD: That’s correct. And so, but my personal frustration, one of them, I suppose, is that one never hears…and again, I can’t criticize you, you go on Tucker Carlson, you’re there for five minutes and you got to get out. But there’s just no opportunity, particularly within the mainstream corporate media, for this conversation to come out, the fact that this has been going on for generations. And so that just gives a different tone to the phenomenon in general. And I just feel like the history has been siphoned out of this phenomenon in the public conversation.
LE: We’re gonna get there, Richard. So we have to remember that we’re asking the American public and the world to grab ahold of a speeding train that’s already doing 100 miles an hour. And that’s a lot to ask of somebody. So what we need to do is kind of get them up to speed. And then, once they say, “Wow, this is incredible,” then we say, “Well, you haven’t heard the incredible part about it, yet. Watch this. Right? Boom!”
RD: UFOs are strong medicine. They are strong medicine, that’s so true.
LE: Right. And so, I understand your frustration. I think that is part of our shift into second gear and into third gear, as I’ve often referred to. That is the socialization of the topic that it’s real. And then once we acknowledge that it’s real, then we can start going into the, “Look how long it’s been real for,” right? “And here’s what we know, and what we don’t know.”
RD: Yeah, exactly, exactly. I agree fully with that. In fact, you may not have heard, but my previous lecture that I just gave earlier today, I mentioned a number of levels of disclosure, and actually sixteen levels of disclosure. And that’s really what we’re talking about, step by step. As I identify it, we’re at level three maybe going into level four, so we have a long way to go.
Question from Ron: At what point will your concern for humanity override your loyalty to non-disclosure agreements?
LE: It won’t and it doesn’t have to. The safety and concern for humanity is directly tied to my oath. I know it sounds like they are opposing each other but my oath to protect sensitive information is really not an oath to the government, it’s an oath to you, it’s an oath to the American people. And if I break that oath, even one time, then it’s meaningless. It’s like having a relationship with a spouse. Well, if I cheat on my spouse only one time, then it’s okay. No, it’s not. It’s not. It’s a compromise. It’s an oath I’ve made to myself, it’s an oath I made to you. I can never break that oath. And that’s why we are doing what we’re doing the way we’re doing it because we can still have a conversation. It’s a lot harder, by the way. I mean, believe me. I tell people, I used to be six foot four and long blonde hair before I started this job. I tell people, I’m only 27 for God’s sake. But in reality, it’s a lot of extra work to do it this way, but in the end, it’s the right way. For me to break my oath…you can’t break the law, to protect the law, in essence, is what I’m trying to say. And so for me, I take that oath very seriously, I will never violate that oath. Now what I will do is go right up to the line. And what I will do is work the system, so I don’t have to violate that oath. And yes, there’s a way to do it. It’s not easy. And it takes a lot and there’s no guarantees but it’s been three years, and we’ve done it this way so far, and look where we are with the conversation. So, I don’t think I have to break my oath, I don’t think I need to. Look, if I broke that oath, guys, I’d have zero credibility. Because if I’m gonna break my oath for that, then I’ll break my oath with everything else. I’ll break my oath to tell the truth to you. So, you’d never be able to trust me again. Yeah, you might get an answer but you’d never trust me again. It’s not worth it. I can’t do that.
Question from Laura: I’m wondering if you have ever, or do you currently, have any contractual agreements with any aerospace industries or defense contractors such as the DOCPER?
LE: Uh, Laura. (laughs) Great, question (laughs). Yeah, I’m not prepared right now to discuss any affiliation that I might have with the U.S. government. Not because of me, it’s out of respect for the government. I’ve often said, if you want to know if I have any affiliation with the government, ask the government. And yes, I know people have and yes, I know the government’s come back and said, “There’s nothing to see here, folks.” So, okay, if that’s their storyline, then that’s their storyline. But don’t be surprised if that storyline changes. I want to be very careful, I don’t want to put the government and any kind of bad spot so I’ll leave it at that. Great question. Obviously, you’ve done some homework but unfortunately, that’s a question that I’m going to abstain from, at least at least for this conversation.
RD: Laura, that was a boss question, I’m just gonna say.
LE: Yeah, you had me squirming (laughs).
RD: It’s well done.
Question from Raphaela: Please don’t give up the fight, really. I’ve been waiting for a long time to have someone like you, Mr. Elizondo, to come into the scene. So my question is, as you stated, I’m trying to watch all the interviews that you”re making on YouTube so I pretty much have all these questions. But this is one that is really important for me. So as you said, we are in the announcement phase of this phenomenon, which makes total sense. Would it make sense to start building an official curriculum for civilians, enabling us to be officially recognized as competent on this matter and be Ambassador on our territory and within society? Because I come from a small town and I know that having someone that is close to you will make it more comfortable to have this question. Thank you very much.
LE: Bellissimo! Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, yes, yes! I have said before, we must, we must have academia with us. We must have scientific community with us. We are working very hard trying to professionalize the study of this topic. It is not easy, but we are slowly making progress. I personally am an industry partner with academia in the state of Florida, where I’ve given talks to institutions in aerospace, along with some of my colleagues. A wise man once said, “The greatest nation is but one generation away from utter ruin.” And what they simply meant was, the greatest national security asset any country could ever have, isn’t oil, it isn’t gold, it isn’t weapons, it isn’t natural gas, it isn’t timber, it is the youth. It is the next generation. Because, if you don’t invest in that, everything else doesn’t matter. And so, precisely for the reasons you said, we need need global attention, we need a global emphasis on our academic institutions.
We’re beginning to see academics coming out such as Avi Loeb from Harvard. We have some academics finally poking their head, out of the hole and beginning to have the conversation. I would love to have a discussion with students in STEM: Science and Technology and Engineering and Mathematics, all coming together. I want to have grants from the National Science Foundation, where we put kids through school to study the hard sciences and maybe come back and do an internship on advanced propulsion. That is precisely what is needed for this to move forward. I would love to see organizations like Microsoft put in grants or Elon Musk and put in grants for people to begin to pursue these new frontiers in science, this new renaissance, if you will. A new awakening of academia and science into the great unknown. Wonderful, wonderful questions. Thank you so much for asking me. I am absolutely passionate about that. It is needed, perhaps, more than anything else. Thank you.
Question from Sean: I feel like in UFOlogy or this topic, it’s quite natural for people to put the cart in front of the horse. What would be your best advice for continuing the momentum and not getting overwhelmed with all the back and forth on theories. “60 minutes,” the excitement was tangible, especially for UFO Twitter. So what my fear is, if this report comes and it’s kind of a nothing burger, as you kind of hinted at earlier, how do we keep the morale up?
LE: Well, we’ll do it exactly the way we’re doing it now. This report is just that, it’s just a report. We need to continue to maintain pressure in any way that we can. And they’ll be more reports, I can assure you, because I don’t plan on going anywhere. Unless you plan on going somewhere. I think you guys keep doing exactly what you’re doing. Look, #UFOTwitter, is becoming an amazing tour de force. What started off as this kind of ragtag coalition, has has become an activist group. It has materialized into something more than its constituent parts, and people are listening and people in the media – and I know that for a fact because they told me – are looking to you for insights. And where should they go next? And what should they do to learn more about this? You’re now helping change the landscape, you’re teaching a hungry audience, and they’re looking to us, they’re you’re looking to you on to take this information and how to behave. And you have a choice. We can go down the rabbit hole and begin to fight amongst ourselves and try to push our narratives and become petty. Or we can rise above that, like everybody in this room right now and have an intelligible conversation. And we can agree to disagree, but all agree that the topic is most important and this is a topic that’s bigger than any one of us and this is a topic that shouldn’t be hijacked by anybody. Unfortunately, by virtue of me being here having this conversation with you, there are people out there that are absolutely going apoplectic. They are rolling around, screaming, teeth gnashing and going to be claiming I’m a disinformation agent or yada, yada, yada, and all that other nonsense. I don’t care. That’s just white noise. To me, that’s exactly the problem with ufology of what it was. This is different. This is a movement and a movement has just created for the first time in its history, a PAC – a political action committee. That was just reported today by Bryan Bender in Politico. This is what you are achieving. This isn’t me. I’m on the team but I’m not doing this by myself. I can only do what I’m doing because you are doing what you’re doing. And yes, every little song that you make, it grabs people’s attention, it opens their heart.
Sean: They’re useless without beautiful material like yourself, sir.
LE: When I appreciate that, but unfortunately, I’m about as attractive as a cement truck.
Question from Gary. Can you offer any wisdom or insights to people who might struggle with the enormity of this subject on a spiritual or religious or mental health level?
Lue: Yeah, Gary, my suggestion to you is that this is nothing new. We have been here before, time and time again, as a species. If history has anything to teach us, this is part of human evolution. This is precisely what I’m supposed to do. It’s no different than when man first stared at the depths of the ocean and contemplated sailing across the horizon and there were stories of sea monsters and kraken and everything…and lots of reasons why he or she shouldn’t sail over the horizon, to include you’ll fall off the Earth. And yet, here we are. We did it. Here we are thousands of years later and we realize that some of those stories, indeed, were true. That there are sea monsters, there’s great white sharks and blue whales and giant squid of the Pacific. But we now realize they’re just part of nature. And so I’m not sure if fear is necessary. I think every time we fear something, we learn something new.
Look, let me give an analogy I gave my daughter and I don’t want to digress but this is important for me because you’re asking me a philosophical question. I remember sitting with my daughter one day and we lived on the Chesapeake here in DC for a long time. And we were watching the blue crabs and she said, “Daddy, how do those blue crabs get so big?” And I said, “Well, sweetheart, they have to grow. And every so often, they have to break out of their shell and they have to molt. And that process has to happen.” And she said, “Well, dad, is it painful? I said, “Well, I’m sure if you ask the crab, that process is very painful. But that’s part of growth. And sometimes you have to break open the shell, in order to grow. Otherwise, that thing that is protecting you winds up becoming your prison, and you can’t grow. And so this process of molting is nature’s way, in order so you can get bigger and stronger.” And very much when you’re approaching the UAP issue, I think it’s the same way. Or any issue, any paradigm moment of mankind, where we are forced to break out, break open out of our shell that that’s holding us in, and it’s uncomfortable it is and it’s scary sometimes and you feel vulnerable. But at the end of the day, it’s necessary if you want to grow, if you want to expand your mind, you want to evolve as a species and evolve as a human being. Not sure if that makes sense but that’s that’s my philosophical position.
Question from Mike: Is it apparent to you that the phenomenon is specifically attempting to apply pressure through presence in order to get inside our decision cycle to force us to disclose to each other, while preserving human self agency?
LE: Wow, great question. Yes, it’s possible that there is a provocation, an increased frequency being deliberately done to force us into some sort of decision making process. I don’t know for sure but it certainly would seem that way if we look at this from an anthropomorphic perspective and the way that we think as human beings, certainly that could be an indicator.
Jay from Project Unity: The Society of Catholic Scientists is going to be holding its 2021 conference in Washington, DC, and it’s going to be on the subject of non-human intelligence. And I just kind of wanted to get your general thoughts on what this might mean and also whether or not you feel this conference has been bolstered by the issues that have emerged since 2017.
LE: I’ll make this very succinct. Congratulations, you’re succeeding.
Lynda: On the new PAC that was announced today, the UFO PAC, can you tell us more about it?
LE: I don’t know a whole lot about it, Lynda other than we have, right now, some significant media coverage on it. I don’t have a whole lot of information. I know there’s some top journalists that are covering it and apparently the PAC is the first of its kind and it’s pretty serious in its attempt to further this cause. But unfortunately, I don’t have any more information than that.
RD: I would love to know more about that. I mean, my old pal Steve Bassett was trying to do this kind of thing for years, but you need money, you need backing, you need institutional support.
Lynda: Lue, are you on the team?
LE: Ma’am, I am not on the team. Negative. I have not been asked (or added?) At least not, yet.
Question from Jerry: I’m an academic and I’m concerned that my students are really ignorant about this. College students. All of this is going on and they don’t know anything about it. Now, I’m trying to teach them but I’m just astonished. I wonder if you ever get frustrated by the opposite of panic. My whole family’s from Arizona, they’ve never…well, my family has but Arizona has never heard of the Phoenix Lights, most of them. I can’t believe how much is out there and how apathetic people can be. Do you have any take on that?
LE: Every day I’m frustrated by the apathy but not just on this topic, on a lot of topics. On how we treat each other, homelessness, you name it, issue du jour. Yes, I’m always frustrated. I think we need to be patient while maintaining resolve. This is an awfully big pill for people to swallow all at once. You cannot digest an elephant all in one bite. So I guess my suggestion would be as an academic, continue to be persistent, but also be patient and understanding because this is a new paradigm for us and people need time to adjust and absorb.
RD: I’ll pass. People have heard me talk about my dystopian view of the future for humanity so I’m just gonna let that one ride.
Question from Thomas: Can you speak on any knowledge you may have on the alleged, crash retrieval of any object that may pre-date Roswell? Recently, this was investigated by Jacques Vallee and he released a new book, entitled “Trinity: The Best Kept Secret.” I’m just curious if you have anything you’d like to add, as far as incidents that may have occurred that predate Roswell?
LE: I mean, look, it’s not just the U.S.. There’s a very interesting memorandum that was written by Mussolini on an alleged crash in Italy in the 1930s. I won’t go into a whole lot of detail, but we’re looking into that quite a bit. Working with our Italian…
RD: Roberta Pinotti did a lot of research on that and honestly, very good.
LE: Absolutely! It absolutely does. Very, very compelling. I’m not surprised. How about that?
RD: By the way, I just downloaded Jacques Vallee…Paola Harris is his co-author, by the way. Paola is lovely. And this looks like a very interesting case to me. I think a couple of people were already trying to dismiss it and I just don’t understand why. It looks like it’s a decent case. It took place, supposedly, August 15, 1945, very close to the Trinity site where the first atomic bomb was detonated. The witnesses were, at the time, two young boys aged nine and seven. But, you know what? That’s old enough to be a decent witness and they recounted this to, I think to Paola and there’s a lot of detail there. And to me, it strikes me as at least 50% plausible, probably more.
Kit Green, The Lake and 1930…
Question from Maury Island Fan: You mentioned that you don’t find AATIP, AATIP finds you. So what happened to you that made AATIP find you.
LE: Wow! I think we need a few more hours for that and probably a couple of beers or a bottle of wine. You know, I don’t talk about my personal experiences, not because I don’t want to, it’s because I don’t want to prejudice the jury. At some point, I’ll probably share.
RD: The rumor mill has it that you had some experiences while working with Robert Bigelow back in the day.
LE: Uh, you know, I umm, at some point I’ll probably have that discussion but I think we’re too early in the process of disclosure and I don’t want my personal experience to be any type of distraction to what we’re trying to accomplish.
Question from John: I saw a video on TTSA, where you picked up an artifact from Ohio from a private individual and drove it back. Why did you not compromise that person’s identity? Why did you think that would have anything to do with a UAP?
LE: Because the individual had indicated to us and then provided us some analysis that was, at least superficially, interesting. And then when we looked at additional analysis, there was enough information there that corroborated portions of the individuals testimony. And, for me, I don’t really give a hoot about the source of anything, as long as it’s legitimate. And if it’s worth flooring, I mean, sometimes you have to cast a wide net to catch a fish. You know, hopefully you catch more fish with a wider net, and then you throw back the ones you don’t need. But that’s why we did that.
Question: Should we find technology that could actually end the debate, would it help in getting people to take thing more seriously? Would you know where to look if you were given that authority?
LE: Well, I think we already have found that material to end the debate. The question is, will that material see the light of day? You know, of course, the proof is in the pudding. If you have something that you can demonstrably demonstrate is not from here and it comes from somewhere else, and it’s been manipulated and designed in a purposeful manner, then done, that’s it. That’s the Holy Grail. And so, it’s part of my intent to, if that material is indeed unique, to have it looked at by the right people and then have that conversation with the American people and everybody else.
Question: Would you know what door to knock on to find it?
LE: I do. I believe I do.
My Sources Say #7 – Guam, UAP, Crash Retrievals and Special Forces
RD: I would like to emphasize, Lue, before you leave, which is maybe in a minute, you’ve been fabulous. First of all, I just want to thank you on behalf of everyone here, Lue Elizondo. You’ve been just a wonderful guest. And I’m rather amazed that we were able to get you here in the midst of this incredible ramp up of information. When I asked you to participate in this, I mean, there was already a lot of information on UFOs coming out, but I mean, it’s, like just ramped up so extreme and we were able to get you here in the midst of your very busy schedule. So for that, I want to thank you. And I just want to point out…
LE: Richard, you and your guests are just as important as any guests that I could ever be in front of, okay? So that’s one thing, hopefully, you all know about me. There is nobody more important or less important. We’re all in this together.
RD: Thank you. There are wonderful, brilliant people here and we’re very lucky.
LE: We are.
RD: I just want to point out before we leave, you have, to my mind, I’m just going to take this away as my interpretation. I say that you have essentially confirmed the reality of acquisition of genuine, UFO tech, UAP tech, whatever you want to say. That it appears, your ability to speak between the lines and to honor your security agreements, which are very important, that you have nevertheless given a strong indication that highly, highly, exotic technologies are being studied right now that apparently the people studying them, believe are not from here. And that’s the impression that I’m getting from you. I don’t see any reason to change that and you’ve actually said quite a lot more than that. But I just want to put that out there and thank you for helping bring the conversation as far as it has gone in the public domain. Researchers like myself and many others, we’ve known, or we’d like to think we’ve known, all along there has been crash retrievals and deep secrecy but try getting that out to the public realm, it’s been very difficult. And you and your colleagues…Chris Mellon and the others, have made a very significant contribution to the public conversation.
LE: Well let me thank you very much, I don’t think I deserve that credit but thank you. But let me put this onto you folks. It is my my sincere privilege and honor to be speaking with each and every one of you here today. It could be very much you up in this chair and me down there, asking questions. I hope you really know this, that we are a team. I don’t look at myself in any way in charge of, or leading anything. I look at me and I look to my right and look to my left, and I see an army of folks like you that are willing and have the same heart that I do, and desire to know the truth and to speak the truth, right? And I want to make sure that that’s clear with everybody in the audience because every single person in this is valuable. You have a part. And even if you don’t realize your part yet, you probably will. So, hang in there and continue to fight the good fight. Beware of those individuals that want you to follow a specific narrative and not listen to anything or anybody else. I would encourage you to go out and listen to anybody and everybody else, I’m not going to tell you who you can’t listen to you. You should talk to anybody and everybody and then, wherever you think your place is, then go there. But it has been an honor and privilege to be with you here today and I really, sincerely hope we can do this again. And you know, if any of you ever out in Wyoming, swing by. I’d love to have a cup of coffee with you, my treat. So again, thank you very much.
RD: Thank you, Lue Elizondo. What a treat.