Can I get a yeah, hey, man, we're calling all beings. I'm your host DJ, and guess what party people, we're getting the.
Band back together. Man, I'd be cla I'd have my hands up right now, but Haarah has decided. Yeah, there she is. Hanah has decided that she wants to be here, and I'm not in a position to tell her otherwise. Welcome back to calling all beings.
It has been a good long time since we've been together, approximately a month till we were all together for mister James I and Doley James.
I'm the praise his name. I am totally so here is my co conspirator, Hara.
You start messing with the computer and then the deal's off as far as you be in here.
Uh hi, Harah, that's what Julie says. There she goes, all right, remember the cab you're telling you're gonna sit in until Courtney gets here? Is that? What's up? All right?
So welcome back to my brother who I got to spend an hour with last night learning how to do something that you guys always get to see him do, which he makes look so effortless in Canva. And that is, of course at a wave soul, my man, money, Nathan.
What's going on everybody? Man, it has been a minute since we've been together.
It's good to see you guys and catch up. I can't wait to get into this discussion.
I know everybody enjoyed reading the book, and it's gonna be a It's gonna be a good one.
It it really is. Man, We're gonna be about to get up into it. Hello, Philip Smith, Benji in the building. We haven't seen Benji in so damn long. But before we get to all you people in chat, we're gonna get to the beautiful face I just saw that you guys aren't seen, and that is at study of U A. P. D.
Can I get hi? All right? Here we go?
Right? Yeah? Well I got the whole crowd is whole crowd. Thank you crowd.
You are quite welcome.
Deb.
I mean I can see you in an open night somewhere in Baltimore, you know, doing some sort of a reading and then getting an applause.
What do you think about that?
Deb, A little snap of fonts.
I could do it. I could dig it.
Yeah, okay, you know.
Book right now, Deb, that's kind of the that the book is talking to us.
It's speaking to me, speaking to me the way the crime then spoke to a super Procter and Canton. So ah, So we're gonna get into louel Zando's book Imminent and this was in my opinion, now standing book. But before I get to my commentary, we're going to start off with money, Nathan. We're gonna go to Debs and eventually, eventually we're gonna go to Montana Slash, Alaska's own Slash, Pennsylvania's own Courtney Marcossani.
But for right now, money please, sir.
Initial thoughts, Yeah, Well, I enjoyed the book a lot.
Lou has been a figure of a lot of attention in the.
Community and he's he's dominated the spotlight in many ways for the last several years. And since he had his last show on the podcast circuit, which was our show, he's now back on the circuit. Before he took off, he spent some time with us, which was really nice
you have a chance to chat with him. And before that show, I recall him just seeming like he was kind of relieved and excited to take a break, and I can understand why he had been basically pounding the pavement of the UFO circuit and the and the media circuit for some time, trying to drop the interest, trying to get the effort underway, to get the spotlight turned
onto this topic in an official capacity. And I think he felt like he had gotten far enough in that journey to to take a break and work on the book and finish that effort. And so it's nice to see that the fruits of all of his labor have only come to fruition and the publishing of this book.
I enjoyed reading it. It was very easy to read.
I think he did a great job just writing it. Generally, it gave me a good insight or a better insight into kind of who Lou is as a person, his journey and his professional career. What he's you know, what he values, what he's what he's kind of focused on from a mission oriented perspective.
You know.
I think it human him and it also just maybe brought this topic closer to him than a way that I hadn't seen it before. Like you kind of if you talk you're listening to Lou and talking with him, you get the sense that he's just he is kind of a UFO guy.
But in this book, it comes out more.
Clearly to me that he really wasn't a UFO guy, not much at all, and he you know, kind of landed into this, and even to this day, while he feels a strong compulsion to you know, kind of get focused on this topic, it's it's clear.
To me that he's not really a ufologist.
He's not someone that has read all the UFO books and done all of the UFO deep dives and that kind of thing. So his knowledge of UFO lore isn't as deep as you know, someone like a Richard Dolan,
for example. But his passion for this is pretty clear, and I think that comes in large part from his government service, his service of the people through those government agencies, and what he sees as kind of an abuse of power and abuse of of the of the money that has been kind of funneled away into these programs for many, many decades. And the public has a right to know what the government knows about this.
So I really enjoyed it.
I'm looking forward to getting y'all's thoughts on it as well. So who want to go to next you?
What were your thoughts on the book?
Okay? So, as DJ knows, I am not easy to impress. And he teases me about this, I'm I'm really just been trying for years impressed.
Amazing I got from this.
Book wasn't in a like or story. That's what I got from it, Like that was the bigger thing. It was a personal story about his journey and some of them knowledge that he picked up along the way was shared with us. And the fact that he did it this way, he has clearly stated, has now given him license to talk about the topics that were covered in
this book with the permission from the Pentagon. So I think that was the bigger purpose behind the book, to just say, look, if I had this in writing with that permission, now I can talk about it, and I can just say, having met Lou, I decided instead of reading the book, I wanted to hear him, you know, I wanted to hear his book. And again, I feel like that was the bigger part of it. It was him. It's about him and his journey. So I appreciated it.
And so that far.
But you know, as far as his journey, what about that journey? Uh, did you think was something that you didn't anticipate knowing in terms of what he went through? What was illuminated in terms of his journey for you.
You know, I think we knew a lot of it because he had shared it, but his personal experiences in childhood, he had not shared his experiences with his family. He had not shared and he really humanized himself for the people who were listening or reading his book. And you know, that's actually a really good tactic if you think about it, because people then recognize this is another person just like me who has knowledge and is doing something about this topic.
Maybe I too, with knowledge, can do something about the topic.
So people connect to him inspired you in the way that you thought, okay, if he can kind of the way like kind of phrase ever inspired me?
Yeah, And I actually felt like, of course he had information that right, But I feel like he went along a similar journey in terms of getting knowledge on this topic when he described and how surprising that was, and you know, sort of like sort of the shock about about how much there was right that was like something I went through.
You're you're coming in and out, Deb, I'm maybe thinking this.
Was written by really important people, people within the government. He went through that and.
Two, hey, Deb, Deb, can you hear me? Oh man, we lost her. Yes, deb all.
Right, what we'd like you to do is if you would restart your computer and then come back to the studio and in the meantime, I know it's going to be difficult, but you'll miss my very very.
Incisive analysis, initial analysis of the book. But what would you do that because you were losing you like right now, restart? Thank you? Okay? She in a bit.
Nathan as I said, I'm sorry having trouble holding this one in the biggest surprise for me is finding out that, uh.
Lou is a Jew like me. I'm sorry, everybody, you deserve something better.
Take away.
My takeaway is that Lou is a Jew like like myself. Uh. And then he's talked about wearing a yamica and going to temple. So yeah, that's my No, I'm just kidding that.
I mean, it's not it's not a small point, particularly if you have that shared background. You know, I think that that that gives you another insight into his you know, his personality, what motivates him, you know, the kind of culture that he grew up into certain degree, So yeah, I mean, I think it's kind of kind of neat that he shared that with everybody.
And he said he was. He said that he had previously said on podcasts that he was a man of I don't know if he said deep faith, but that he had faith, Am I am I couching?
That about right?
Yeah, yeah, that's about right. Yeah, he's referred to that he has a faith, but it's not necessarily a specific you know, religiosity, right, Okay.
Yeah, So it was very surprising that louis the Jew. God bless you, Lou Mazle my brother. So anyway, uh but now I think, to me, really what I saw was a lot of detail about how things went down that we didn't know. Like what he did was in my opinion is we had a lot of pieces of his story, and we also had a lot of suppositions that turned out to be correct. But what we didn't
have is how the pieces came together. And he gave us some specificity on how those pieces were assembled from from soup to nuts.
Basically from the beginning.
And and we we supposed, you know, what was it like when he left, and what was it like when he got there, and how long did he actually serve at the Pentagon? So a lot of those things, and then you spoke about last night when we were on the phone, that he was the senior official that was part of the program.
He was the ranking official.
So that's why he would have referred to himself as the director. I mean, it's a reasonable thing to say, because you're either what are you, You're the branch chief, You're either you know, flight chief, brand chief, you know you're that. You know, you have to have some sort of title when you're the ranking person. So maybe director wasn't maybe on his performance report, but it was reasonable for him to assume that because he was in command.
He probably palmed for the money program objective memorandum that's where you basically ask for money. But in his case, I think he got money from Harry Reid, you know, which was a roundabout way of getting you know, money,
rather than the POM. Because normally what would happen in the Palm is if you're part of the Pentagon and you're starting a program, like you, Nathan, they gave you the head of a program, and so you put together a budget with you know, your folks that run your team, probably similar what you're doing now, and then you submit that budget and then like for example, I'm just gonna use as sok as an example, just be because that's.
What I know. Then within.
Our branch or our function, like a three T, they would look at and say, okay, of I just got fourteen budgets of that, I like these ten. I think these ten meet the priorities of the command and me. So those are gonna then go up to the command level and so then the command.
So then the command level they're gonna look at it and.
Say, Okay, of those ten that you gave me, I like eight, and these others are gonna fall below the cut line.
They're gonna be unfunded. There's another unfunded you first, or unfunded requirements.
Because you said I have a requirement to study UAPs. I need to be able to have a travel budget to go and engage these different witnesses that have seen these I need to be able to bring scientists in. I'm gonna have so much budget to high government civilians, but I also need to take the different pot of money and higher contractors because the budget won't allow me to staff ten civilians. So I'm gonna get let's say six civilians and four contractors or whatever rate whatever.
So that's kind of how that would go.
Uh and so Lou probably didn't get that right off the bat, but he got money without having to go to announce to the Pentagon, Hey I need a PALM for this UAP program. This is what we're doing. So he went the back route. He went the Yeah, so that's a POM. I think it's program objective memorandum and you can google that, folks that are out there for the POM and everybody. Everybody the Army does it, every Marine Corps, all the does it, Air Force, Base Force, we all do that stuff.
So anyway, well, Bunny, because this is the line of questioning that I wanted to get into on the show tonight, and that's getting your experience with some of this part of the way the world works that I have no visibility to, and that's government funding of these kinds of programs,
how the money is allocated or utilized. And then for someone with his you know, access with his tickets right that they've referred to like that, you know, he's got access to all of these different kinds of sources of
intelligence and differing systems within the Pentagon. We heard just last night on The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford, he had a guest on who had been a part of the UAPTF, and she was talking about there was a kind of a chat room essentially, which I think you've mentioned to me before, where if you have a certain clearance, you can just get into this chat room and anything that is of the same level of classification, then anybody can basically, you know, partake in that kind of intelligence.
If they have access to that chat.
Room, they have access to the similar kind of intelligence
that is that is in that space. And so when I read the book and him kind of talking about how he is bootstrapping this program in the in the kind of period after AWSAP and continuing in that effort, the image I have of him is really using the resources at his disposal, not necessarily financial, but the resources at his disposal because of his access to continue pursuing leads and collecting information and vetting information through the other
analysts that are that are at his disposal. And so it's it's an unofficial sort of effort, but it still involves very official resources. So it's it's just it's interesting to me how that all works. And I was wondering if you could add some additional you know, kind of color to that or if I got something wrong and what I was just explaining, you know, please do correct me.
Well, which which which party? What's the sort of finite question there if you were to form that into yeah.
How did I guess? My question is is it? Is it common or is it uncommon? Let's put it, let's kind of go down this track. Is it common or is it uncommon?
For someone of his seniority who has official program budgets and official responsibilities under the organization that he is reporting into.
Is it common for those kinds of individuals.
To have other efforts that they get engaged in, whether they be efforts that they themselves are are driving, or that others may include them into, Like they may come somebody from another program, may may come to you requesting intelligence, information, data sharing, whatever it may be. So how common is it that that someone.
Might have.
Kind of an interest in efforts and resources and devotion to, you know, to programs that maybe are not exactly on the books, that are a little bit unofficial.
So this, this one is a little bit adam a wheelhouse because I haven't been read into things that are like, say, example, the programs that I was read into that were special access are programs that are known that they exist, but the details inside the program and who, when, how, what where that's not known, But that the programs exist is known. These guys are involved in programs that are unacknowledged, like he said that at one point I believe he said
when he talked to Semivan. It might have been he said, this is the first person I've spoken to outside of our program that I admitted to you know what we were doing. So it so this is a little you know, this is a little far afield. So I would say it's not that common. But his charge, he had to have been given a charge, like he talked about that moron Gary what's his name, the guy who, yes, sexually.
I don't know, harassing women and so forth.
Yeah, sexual impropriety with subordinates and so forth. So he had to receive that charge from somebody, and then it was a question of where was he going to get funding from. In general, you have to be very specific about the money that you're asking for and what it's going to go to.
Although I did hear, I don't know if it was.
In Lou's book or one of the other folks say that there are SAPs that are funded where the Gang of Eight know that they're funding these SAPs and they don't know exactly what's going into them.
And that's you know, that should be obvious to all of us.
Because we all know that there are programs that are going on that nobody that's elected knows where that that money is paying for it, So you know what I mean. But b Lou, obviously, now the other thing you talked about additional duties. There are a lot of dudes like Dave Grush is an example where the UAP Task Force was an additional duty that he had that was stacked on to the NRO and the NNGA places that he worked at and analyzed intelligence for. So that was an
additional duty. And some of these other folks also on Low's team, it may have been an additional duty as well. But it's something you do because you know, you want to be part of a team that's doing something important and you're going to apportion a part of your day to work on that stuff when you're in between your other stuff, and those guys were probably there, you know, ten hour a day at least, maybe more, maybe twelve.
Lou said that he wasn't in particularly good health at that time, and I'll bet you that he was probably overweight.
He was probably sitting behind a desk a lot.
And now what you see is a sort of really healthy trim loo that looks like he's working out a lot because he's not sitting behind a desk.
For twelve hours a day. M Yeah, yeah, I don't did that answer it? I don't know, No, no, no, it did.
I mean it's very helpful because you know, coming from the private industry where where that's all. That's all I know is you know, you're on a team, you've got responsibilities, and you're doing those things and that's just what you do.
And and the government.
World that that he's describing, at least this was the impression I had, is that he's officially tasked to certain responsibilities and programs, but because of his level of access and expertise and professional experience, he also kind of gets brought into other efforts that aren't necessarily like officially printed somewhere.
But their efforts that are that are maybe.
Kind of side projects or tangential projects to other official projects that that he gets involved in. And so this this a tip effort, right that that was a program and then not a program, and you know, there's been so much debate about that, you know, kind of meeting that horse to death. But the the officialness of a tip. I got the sense from the book that it was, you know, just very much kind of a.
Something that he was carrying the torch for.
He was championing that in a kind of quasi official capacity, not necessarily you know, something that was officially printed on letterhead for example.
I just found it interesting.
Yeah, he didn't. He didn't tell a lot of people about it. If he sought out intel, he wasn't telling them what they were working on. That became clear when he talked about how his meetings with Christopher Mellen, his meetings with Jim Sammy Van so all these people that he probably sought intel if they if there were sightings or data that were out there that were on some of these SharePoint sites or on on Zipper or Jaywick's, he probably he gained access and looked at those things
and then sought out those those witnesses. But he didn't acknowledge everybody, So it probably wasn't what they would call
a program of record, which is an acknowledge. A program of record is when you you know, you're going up for the palm and you're palming for money for a program of record, except for what we talked about those SAPs, that that there are certain special access programs that not everybody in your command that people know that you're gonna palm for that, but they can't they may not have the clearance to know what what's involved in that.
I want to get to Deb.
But that's another fascinating aspect of this to me, is that you can be someone nested within another hier hierarchical chain of command and you might have access to some things that your superiors may not have access to, Like you might be read in on some projects that they're not or working on something that not everybody in your h you know, in your decision tree necessarily read in on.
I find that interesting.
Yeah, Deb's, oh, thank you so much, bro man. Let's let's get this super chat up here real quick.
From Space Oddities, great David Bowie album, Go ahead, Nathan.
Yeah, so thank you, Space Audities. So his book really sells the thought that there's not enough government oversight and transparency is needed. Yeah, I think that's one correct. He's beating that drum pretty loudly, and you know, it really ends the book with a call to action for folks
to kind of raise the alarm about this. I mean, we heard even just as recently as earlier this week when again on Matt Ford's The Good Trouble Show, he had Chris Mellan on, and Mellan was saying that even members of the Gang of Eight who are supposed to have been read in on these programs often just decline reading the entire program, like they don't really want to
know what these programs are doing. And so that is a huge oversight issue, you know, if you've got the access and just saying, you know, I don't have the time to look at it, or I don't want to know what we're doing because I want to have deniability to what we're doing. You know, these are serious problems. We're talking about a lot of a lot of money in public trust.
Yeah, I'm going to let deb go because it's just it's an extreme level of patriotism encourage but go ahead, debs.
Okay, So can you hear me?
Okay, yes, ma'am.
Okay. I literally had to minimize stream so I cannot see you guys as long as you can no, because that was the only way to get the computer to stop wigging out. It's been freaking out since we started. That's okay, if if the intelligence community wants to be on my computer with me, we can share AnyWho. So I really I had to go back to a couple
of things that I was excited to jump to. One was you know this this book also highlights that there is a lot more information that the government has, including videos, of course, and this has been said to us many times, but I'm glad that Mellon has also now come out and just straight said it, because at some point in the past he had messaged that was one of his concerns. The government has so much more information, why aren't they
sharing it? So I'm excited that that's now out, that he's out there saying it too, along with Lou that was part of some of his campaigning for this book. I'm also concerned about something Nathan was kind of hinting at about, you know, when he's talking about how some of these things were done. As someone who isn't as familiar with specifically the Pentagon, right, things like changing name and making it more vague so that you get funding kind of like had me worried and I'm okay to do.
Oh we've lost again.
Even though it's a good question though, you know, ahead, you know, I think DJ, maybe you can speak to this. You know, the fact what you're saying is that it seemed concerning that some of these programs might be morphing into other efforts that may or may not be officially articulated somewhere or sanctioned. And how often does that happen? I mean, this is a good question just generally for
the public to understand. If if the Congress apportions money to a project, and the Pentagon gets a big allotment of cash to spend on a you know, how often is it that during the.
Course of those activities, the the scope.
Of the project, or the nature with the activities that are being performed, that those things might change from what they were they were assumed to.
Be when they were initially stood up.
I imagine that that's kind of often, right, because sometimes you're just you know, you have a mission that you're given, and in the course of pursuing that and completing it, you realize, well, I've also got to do this, and I have to do that, and now we have to change the nature of our of our strategy in order to achieve that goal.
This is really interesting.
This is something that we need to earmark for when we have our next conversation with loup is this specific question is what is his understanding of how this funding is unfolding? How many of these how much of funding for say Area fifty one, and so you know you have an entire facility that's dedicated to secret projects, So within that pot of money, how many of those? How many things are being done there that are funded but that are unacknowledged and that would be something that I
would have to be happening. And how many SAPs are there that are unacknowledged that the Gang of Eight knowingly funds. And then the question would be how many SAPs are
are funded that they don't know about? And that is that's a question that we would have to ask to Jim, we would have to ask to Dave Brush, or we would have to ask to lou But it's obviously going on, especially when you have some very very expensive facilities, and we have we us we have a pretty darn good idea of some of the things that have happened there and at those facilities, and we are pretty sure that Congress is not aware of that they're funding all of
those all of those programs. So some of those programs they're probably aware that they're funding, because obviously we have a runway there, we have air traffic control, we have basically building on base because some of the people don't go home every night. Some people go and they'll stay for four days a week or five, you know, and then they'll they'll go home on the weekends. Some people
come back and forth every day. So there's a lot of cost in running facility like that, and obviously legislators are aware of that. But the question is how many programs are going on there that they're funding that they're not aware of, and that we would have to ask to somebody with a little more insight than myself.
Yeah, well, all that discussion aside. I mean, I wanted to get into that because I am fascinated by just kind of the inner workings of the Pentagon and these kinds of programs, and it does connect with I think a lot of people's questions around the UH the official capacity of these programs like OSAP and ATIP and you know, who ran them and what what mandates were they given or not given to do, you know, whatever they were they were doing.
So it's an interesting conversation.
But to get into the book kind of more specifically, you know, he takes the reader through, you know, really kind of his own journey, I think. But he begins the book early on talking about this incident that we've heard about in Brazil, this Cholaris incident, and you know, it's it's one of those UFO stories that is really quite alarming.
You know.
What I found interesting is just the stories he chose to include in the book and those that he didn't include in the book. And I guess the Cholaris one kind of checked a couple of boxes for him. One that it you know, it demonstrated that there is a potential capacity to do harm. Whether or not these entities, whatever they are are, actually have ill intent human beings just broadly is an open question, but clearly they have
the ability to do so, to to harm people. You know, there's no mention in the book of the aerial school incident, which wasn't like that at all. You know, the children in Zimbabwe basically saw the craft and had a pretty benign interaction with it. And it left a big mark on their lives just in terms of psychologically and whatnot. But certainly no physical harm was done to the children during that incident, and that's not mentioned in the book.
Of course, there are many other examples that we could provide that were or not included in this story, but Kolaris fits really well with I think the underlying theme of a lot of why he's raising the alarm is that we need to take this seriously because we don't want to be caught basically with our pants down if something bad happens and then we had to tell the American public. Yeah, well, we kind of knew about this, but we didn't really want to. We didn't want to
share this information with you. We didn't want to share information with our best scientists were yeah, we would be you know, we were hoping it would just kind of go away and not be an issue. And he's saying that that's not an acceptable stance for for the government to take. So, yeah, I want to come back to deb on that. I mean, deb this this kind of speaks just to the overall theme of the book. What is your take on on that approach to to the
UFO topic. Broadly that he's kind of claiming this, you know, potential threat narrative.
What are your thoughts on that. I don't know, if we have, we've lost Yeah.
So okay, No, I'm I'm here, ish like I'm battling the strange computer issue, but I'm here. So I think this is actually one of the things. I keep going back to the fact that we're talking of about there are things in our airspace and in our water, and we don't know what they are, and we don't know who they're from. And the people who argue like the UFOs are nonsense, So believe that if you want. But do you care about our safety?
Do you.
Care about knowing what's going on around us? Do you care about our national security? Because if you do, they're doing the right thing with this. And I think this is more Melani's stance too, actually, like really pushing that, like we need to be prepared for whatever this could be.
Now.
I do think News sort of addresses this as this looks to me like sort of reconn like they're doing something a little sketchy here. Okay, they're like hanging around our military, they're hanging around our nuclear acids. Right, either way, yes, there's now a motorcycle going either way like that is a huge part of this and anytime someone's trying to stop them from doing that, from trying to find out what's going on, I'm like, don't you care about national security?
I can't believe they don't, So yeah, I am okay with the threat narrative.
DJ, what do you think about that?
Is the threat narrative the right place to start in getting this conversation kind of off the ground with the wider public.
Well before I answer that, I just want to say to everybody in the chat, we have you start and after me we'll get to and we'll read your chat. So thank you for putting those there, and also thank you Space Oddities for that twenty dollars blessing.
That is awesome. This is going to be the first year that cab with all our software, pays for itself.
Thanks to you guys. So it's gonna be great because we've been footing the bill for the last few years. Anyway, Okay, so I don't know if it's necessarily the place to start, but I think it's if we're in a pizza pie, it would be a slice of the pie and then we can sort of debate on what size the pie should be. And Lou spoke about that in there, and he's you know, he used to use the analogy of you saw muddy footprints when you came down from sleeping.
And we've also talked about ISR.
And this is something you'd hear on Nathan's show and on Nathan's show with x Y Academian liminal frames is that we'll often take, weill anthropomorphize the intention of UFOs and we'll say, Okay, they must be doing this because we as humans look at it this way. So we're gonna take that and we're just gonna paste that, copy that, and paste that onto UFO intention, when in fact, in most, if not all cases, but most cases, we have no idea what they're thinking and what their intention.
But he talks.
About the way that they have moved in certain areas and how they've reacted to certain things that we did, and that it's clear that they're performing ISOR and this could be maybe the only and I've struggled with this throughout the history of CAB, that this could be the only place where when you look at intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance that something that's moving, that has senses that can sense who you are, what you are, and what you're
doing and then react to you. The very bare minimum we can interpret that that is a form of ISR, and I'm comfortable that may be the only place that I'm comfortable ascribing something that we do as humans to them. It's what the Kolara situation, that it became aggressive and showed as Nathan you were talking about, that is something in deb you also spoke about it something we have to pay attention to because we can't.
Assume that all of them are friendly.
As much as one of us may have had an experience that was benign and was maybe pleasant and was maybe inspiring, you know, like Exo's experiences, Right, that doesn't mean that they're all like that, And.
You have to you know that.
It's just like people will say they'll see bigfoot and they'll say, oh I saw Bigfoot. People say that they're brown, but the one I saw was clearly had red hair, oh well, and had a round head as opposed to the conical head. Okay, so does that mean they all have to look like that? Because the one you saw had an ape like face and a conical head.
And had brown hair, or.
Is it possible that there's a different kind of a bigfoot with that looks different and has a more human face and so forth. Some of them look very Native American, so same goes for UFOs. We can assume that some of them are very friendly, and we believe that because we have spoken with credible individuals that have had experiences
that have been inspiring. You know, James iin Doldie, it's never had a bad experience, but he is open to the possibility that somebody else has had experiences that aren't like his. He has a great James has a great perspective on this. So let's read some of these chats real quick and then we'll and then we can we can follow up. But these people have been so kind, So Eli, Eli, m is it mcinness? Okay, Debs, you're gonna read? Or Nathan, what do you what do you want to do here?
I can, I can try, I can, I can see the screen. Okay. He also points out the government shouldn't be in control of the entire conversation.
On I'd say that's his entire mission in leaving the government. That was his whole point. We have here Nathan.
Yeah, so from space oddities, from what Lou says, it is more than just the earmarked money. But in black projects, the sky is the limit. There is no limit to what they spend. Yeah, this is you know, again, the allegations that we've heard from people like Lou and David Grush is that there's just a lot of money flowing into these programs.
No one knows how much money is there.
The Pentagon can't pass an audit where's all the money going? And everyone has heard stories of government waste in terms of you know, the three hundred dollars hammer or whatever it might be.
You know, these kinds of things do happen.
It's just it's the responsibility of our elected officials in our republic to keep tabs on this kind of spending. And if if we've got a situation where even known programs are over are going way over budget, and we're funding them in imperpetuity just with a blank check like that, this really isn't something that is is tenable from from a long term you know, financial stability standpoint. So you know,
it's a huge concern. Let alone, if we're talking about you know, funding reverse engineering, crash retrieval clandestine activities, that that our elected officials have no idea that that these things are being committed in the name of the United States or the United States interests or private industry, having access to materials and contracts that you know that no one knows about, and having you know, that technological advantage.
Over their competitors.
And there's a whole host of issues that are brought up around this kind of extreme secrecy under under UAP.
So a really really valid point.
Someone can fact check me on this. But at one point they had said that our defense budget alone was higher than the next seventeen countries after US. So somebody in fact check me on that because I could be wrong or that that information could be dated. Lou also mentioned funds being misappropriated for intend appropriate, yes, for due to wording and bills. Yeah, and this is what I was alluding to, uh Eli, But you know again, I have to defer when when it's a dude like Lou.
That's what I thought. I had said to the cabbies a couple of years ago.
I said that they're signing off on these bills, but and they're naming the bill, They're naming the funding that the program this, but it's actually funding that. That's the only way I could see that they're doing it. And apparently Lou if you're quoting Lou there, that that must be what has happened, because there's you know, how many unacknowledged SAPs can you have? Where before Congressman's beyond the Gang of Eight would say, hey, you know, WTF what's going on here?
Here's the one for you, Dan.
From our lovely Julie. If you have telekinesis or poultric ice activity, then you should really try to not get highly emotional during those player of times. I am oh also known as in my.
Opinion, Yeah, that must be something you guys have been talking about in the chat. Let me know, Star something else if you see something else that Oh, here's something from Benji.
Let's get to Benji.
A question for DJ, with your experiences and perspectives from YESAF, what are the chances that these are indeed Russian, Chizing, Iranian or anymore air craft infhone gap.
So yeah, I've spoken about this extensively.
It you know, it depends on I can't, you know, paint with a broad brush, but I can say that craft that are displaying one of these observables. I've said in conversations, you know, hundreds of times with cabbies and on air that I don't believe that that technology has been that technology to the extent that hell put Off obviously has drawn up something that makes sense and has you know, drew all those equations on the board. I
believe that that that's the case. That there may be an understanding of how they're doing it, but actualizing that and being able to create that and then being able to.
Fly that I think is a completely different strata.
And I don't think that the craft that are displaying these five or six observables are something that is human made at this point. I think there may be replicas that look like that that they may use for different reasons, But I don't believe these silent craft are moving around and doing the things that lou described in that long dissertation, which is very fascinating that he went through with hol So that that's my opinion, and I'm pretty comfortable in that one, Nathan, go.
Ahead, take it away.
And but in additions, and.
Yeah, yeah, I'm.
Going to minimize again and see if that works. But I just I just don't know how many times we have to hear someone say it, you know, like the same thing. But these are not human made, Like, these are professionals who work around this topic and they're they're literally paid and need to look at these human made objects constantly and every facet. There's like every every fasted of the government, the military, professional billions dead.
We're losing you. But I just to carry that point forward. There's an anecdote in there where Lou talks about bringing in aerospace guys. I think he brought in. He doesn't say who they brought in, but they brought in people like from skunk works type folks, and when they showed them what they were looking at, they were like, yeah, man, that's not you know, guys that are working on the next generation of aircraft that none of us. I don't
know about them. I don't know what they are. That those are the type stuff that's tested at at Area fifty one.
And also he spoke about the test range. Remember I said to people, Ah.
They're flying these UAPs all over suburban Virginia and Des Moines, Iowa. And it's like and Lou said, yeah, we have test ranges hundreds of miles of test ranges. We do that, we don't run those tests. And he explained it exactly like I explained it to you.
Guys.
You are taking a risk if if you take a UAP and if you take one of these craft and you fly it against a fighter squadron that doesn't know it's coming, somebody can be killed very very easily. I mean, we just lost CV twenty two guys over there in Japan that crashed into the ocean.
I mean it is a huge, huge deal when you have.
A Class A mishap and God forbid that you do that in a test when there's no reason to do that, because these tests are very you know, Nathan, you're you're a methodological kind of a dude, and test when you do flight test and you bring a group in and you sit everybody down in these briefing rooms, and you guys go through months to produce these test cards. Everything is scripted. These are the car and you give those folks. These are the test cards we're running today. This is
what we're looking for. This is the outcome. Let us know what you see based on these test cards. So after you do your after takeoff checklists, I want you to pick up these test cards. We're gonna say fights on, and then you guys are gonna start going through those cards and only those cards. And when we finish those cards, you come and land, and now we're gonna debrief for five times longer than you just flew to talk about what you saw, what was the sigan, you know, all
the different things. So it's a very very scripted event, and it builds and gets more and more complex. I've only done it, I think once in my whole career. Was I part of something like that once. I mean, there are dudes that do that. That's like their job. I was kind of like a fill in, if you will. Anyway, that's how test goes.
It's not something like, hey, let's go fly the ticktack in there and see what these two Navy F eighteen folks do. Because Fraver could have hit that, and he actually tried to.
At one point he he pointed his aircraft at it. That could have been fatal.
So yeah, anyway, that's yeah, No, I completely agree.
But I've watched a couple of YouTube videos on engineering and aeronautics and I feel like I'm kind of a specialist now.
Yeah, of these things.
Man, you ready, we're gonna get Nathan over to flight test squad n and Egglin and you're gonna be running the next test man.
You know.
Just you know, that's the anthurdity there that we're dealing with.
It's that, you know, everyone's got all this information at their fingertips, and so there's the illusion of knowledge and expertise that we can gain through very very minimal effort. And when you think about you know what Malcolm Gladwell reference to the ten thousand hours people are familiar with that, You know, ten thousand hours are doing something to become an expert at that thing.
You know.
Is it a hard and fast rule, No, but it's a pretty good approximation. And if you've been doing anything for ten thousand hours professionally or personally, if that's you know, maybe you're an exercise fan or something, if you've been doing it for that long, you do develop some expertise in that and you do know how to do certain
things way better than others do. And people come to you, in fact, they pay you for that expertise, right, And so I just get I get exhausted when we continue to have more and more individuals who have been close to this information, who have been trained and accessing and understanding and analyzing this kind of data and coming to the same kinds of conclusions, and we hear those conclusions over and over again, and then you know, the folks from the internet just saying, well, yeah, I mean I
think that they just you know, they just don't know what they're talking about, and it's all just the it's a circular reporting, and they just it's all fantasy, firestars, fireside stories that they just like telling each other, Like, I just if that's how the government works, where all of these paid professionals, thousands of hours, millions of dollars of training goes into these individuals' lives and they're all just kind of winging it because they, you know, sort
of believe certain things, like it's not how things it's just not.
How the war world works, folks. I'm sorry.
So anyway, that rant aside, what I was very interested in in this book that I wasn't necessarily expecting was lou talking about his personal experience with remote viewing. So that that's one thing I didn't think he would speak to directly in the book, even though he had long been rumored that he had experienced as a remote viewer too. He brought up the orbs in his house, so he's had a very personal, close upfront contact with something anomalous in his own home. His his wife saw it, his
daughter saw it, you know. So we've got his word that he saw these things, and we've we've also been introduced in this conversation that hasn't necessarily come forward before other than through things that David Grush has alleged alluded to, and that are things like abduction and you know, human
experimentation or implants. These are topics that he brought up in the book that I think if we were to rewind a few years ago, we would not have expected to see that in a book from someone like Louel Azando. And that tells me this is where we are now in the conversation, that he's much more comfortable talking about these kinds of things, because if anyone has watched his podcast in the past, he wouldn't touch these subjects, he wouldn't go near them. But now he's openly talking about
them in the book. So I wanted to get y'all's thoughts on that part of it.
As first of all, let me just say one thing to Benji, if you would restate the question that you have up there have starred those two. If you would just restate that, we'll get that answered for you and Debs.
You talked about Lou and.
Uh oh a good night and on e T. Thank you for stopping by. I appreciate you. B appetite.
Deb you've talked about Lou and remote viewing years ago.
Yeah, it was something that kind of showed up in a previous book about the aw Set program that Lou had kind of revealed that he had done some remote viewing at that dinner that he also mentions in his book where he met a whole bunch of people. He didn't they didn't say in the all Set book, which I believe with skin walkers at the Pentagon, they didn't mention the general coming to talk to them about the Brazilian cases Kolaris, but they did talk about his remote viewing.
And you know, I think that people forget that people can have their own other paranormal experiences or they and everyone does. By the way, just about everybody has a paranormal experience at some point, and they can have their own spiritual beliefs and their own religious beliefs and all those things. And it's still separate from their expertise on this subject in my opinion. But yes, he has revealed before, it has been revealed before that he could remove you.
Yeah, he has clearly he saved that for his book. He's been asked about it before and he declined to answer that question.
And the guy is you know, it was really interesting.
He said a lot of people say that I'm a conspiracy theorist on this and that he said, I'm a scientist. How many of you guys have degrees in scientists. I was getting a medical science degree in advance of possibly going to med school.
But he said that.
He said that, and it seems like he was very intelligent to hold certain things back for his book, which brought a huge amount of anticipation amongst us in the public for his book. And you got to see, I think this other kind of what I'm thinking about Nathan is you got to see his vulnerability in him talking about his childhood and and picked on and when he
decided to fight and stand up for himself. He spoke about the frailty he went through with his wife and coming home and telling his wife what he did, and that he quit, and how his daughter supported him. He also came how what makes him feel heroic, his time in combat, his titles as special agent, him being willing to put himself in the target in the sort of in the sights of Islamic terrorists by going interviewing down at Guantanamo.
So he takes you.
Through his successes, his failures, his frailties, where he felt he had charge, where he felt he had no charge, and he was sort of given to the whims of those above him. And he basically took you through everything you got to see. I think a three hundred and sixty degree lou in my opinion, family man, everything father.
Yeah, I agree, a pretty comprehensive perspective on the man, his career, you know, his motivations, all that kind of thing. I found that We talked about the remote viewing and I found it interesting. You know, he shares the anecdote of where he was brought in to talk to Jim Lukatski. You know that that first time in Lakatski's kind of asking him, what do you think about UFOs, and He's like, well, I don't think about them at all.
You know, I've got my focus on these other things.
And you know what I'm interested to know from a you know, from lou himself, from from his personal experience, you know, what was his own journey like going from being as someone who before that moment had experience with something like remote viewing that you know, very publicly people would say this is paranormal, you know, wu wu stuff, but he clearly had been trained in that, and he himself believed and believed that it works. So he got he was that kind of person when he met Jim Lakatski.
And then you know, here Lakatski is kind of like pulling the curtain back even further and saying, you know, we'll keep an open mind about UFOs. Like, I just wonder, from Low's own personal journey, what that, what that's been like to go from kind of these successive kind of mind bending reality changes. You know, it's quite interesting and weird too that, in my opinion, that he didn't necessarily make room for UFOs even though he'd already made room
for remote viewing. I understand, you know, certainly, how that could be. But it's interesting to me that that he you know, just never really thought about them. So yeah, I wonder what you guys thought about that. You know, how do you think his remote viewing experience and that the training and his experience just with remote viewing has impacted his journey into the uf UFO UAP topic.
Well, that's hard to say right there as far as how it impacted. But what I can say is that he said that he didn't he didn't think about UFOs, which is not saying that he wasn't necessarily open. And by the way, Benji and George, we're gonna get to both of your questions after.
We're gonna get to both your your questions after this. But I don't know that he was closed off to the idea. He just said I don't think about him, which we could say about I mean, you could probably say that about about everyone in your office. You know, they might be like, I don't think about it. I
don't know if you have the discussions at work. So I don't know that he seems like the type of guy that's open to listening and hearing before he just runs his mouth that something's not real or it's fake. He doesn't seem like he's that type of guy. I think it's just something that he didn't think about. And the interesting thing he said about remote viewing is he said he felt that any of us could do it.
Debs.
He also talked about the science behind it, and he tried to explain it in scientific terms, which is something that he's applied to the UAP topic as well. He's trying to understand it in the nuts and bolts terms. So obviously there's more to UAP than that, but you can see that that's not his real house with it. So with remote viewing, he's explained it as basically being quantum and that tries to under like that's not necessarily so much in the book, but is from conversations he's
had about remote viewing. He's tried to explain it in scientific terms. So I think that's where those two connect for him, Like he's like, this is something that other people don't understand, but there could be science that can explain it, and this is the science that I think explains it. And it's the same thing for him with UAP. But I have to agree with there are lots of
things that we don't think about and focus on. So it's not like big d All for him to not have been paying attention to UAP like I don't think about pain points like yeah, now.
You are, I'm thinking about him right now.
I mean that you bring up just the point is spot on, right, And I think this goes to something that is attributed to lou and maybe attributed to him unfairly.
And that's that, you know, because he has some knowledge about UFOs, he has all the knowledge about UFOs, right, And I think this book and your comment there demonstrate that that's not the case, that that, just like the rest of us, he comes at this subject from a particular perspective, his own unique background, his framework of understanding reality, and he's interpreting and is actively still trying to interpret
this phenomena through that lens of understanding. So, you know, he was trained as a scientist and went through you know, undergrad experience as a scientist, and he went through the military as an analyst, and all these kinds of skill sets that he brought. Well, why wouldn't he be using those skill sets and those frameworks to understand what this might be be? Now, then the question becomes is are those frameworks actually helpful understanding what what this might be?
And I think that that is the open question that's why we need more folks from different disciplines, different walks of life, different perspectives, all working together to try to understand this, because it may be that just this kind of one kind of approach, traditional type of approach to understanding isn't going to be adequate enough to really get to the bottom of what this is.
He I mean, clearly he wants to understand it from electro mechanical physical standpoint. He also, and you guys would have to help me with this quote.
That quote is that, you know, magic is just something that we just don't understand yet, you know what I mean. Like, he understands that our science may or may not explain it, but he wants to try to explain it. But he doesn't have the hubris to think that our physics can explain everything they can do.
He just thinks.
That that that how Putoff may have figured out how they do it, and and that's you know, that's good. And there may be all other aspects of them from an electrical, mechanical, physical, aeronautical perspective that they haven't figured out yet, but they've figured out the part about how how they you know, or I shouldn't say they figured it out. They think they understand how they're able to move and the time dilation and all the sort of things that happen inside the craft so that they don't
get smushed when they accelerate. It as something that should destroy a human body. So he's he's very The other thing that's interesting about the guy is he whenever he talks about colleagues, whether it's Steve Justice or Gary or a Gem or any of these people, he always acts like, there,
you know, significantly smarter than he is. Again, news for you, man, this guy is really smart because he's open to being wrong, and he he wants to know, and he doesn't paint himself as an expert in any of these things that he discusses. He basically says that he's like a sponge trying to learn about it. Let's get let's get to some of these questions. I'm gonna read the first one and we'll go to Nathan and then Debbs. So, all right, Benji brother.
Uh. Something that was brought up to me from an employee at Northrop.
What if they have to fly the crafts to the test ranges on occasion, but we don't have any crafts like that all I can say about that, Benji is I don't know the types of craft they have, So each craft would have to be an individual. Now if you're talking about they meaning they and why they seem to show up in Nevada, like Jason Sands, who, by the way, I had a great phone conversation with Jason Sands not too long ago. We can get him on the show like what he saw and others have seen
out of Area fifty one. Richard what's his name again?
Help me? Rick?
Rich Rick Doty has had sightings out there when he was out there with OSI. So I don't know if you mean those craft as far as craft that that are that are mimics, I mean i'd have to you know, each case we'd have to look at individually, see it, hear it, watch it, see its characteristics, and then we can talk about is this something that is being flown by another intelligence or being operated or something that's being operated by humans? And do we know that humans can't operate it?
I don't know that. I don't know that they can't. I just you know, there's a lot of.
Mental gymnastics that have to happen in terms of, uh, what you would have to think to tell the craft for it to interpret, and there's just more questions than we have answers.
But great question. Uh, let's get to George. Go ahead, Nathan, please, George.
Yeah, thanks George.
So Lou said in an interview on TOW that he doesn't meditate and he drinks too much coffee. Remote viewing requires meditation, does it not. That's a good question. I think there aren't any art. Yeah, there aren't any hard rules about how to remote views.
You know, per se.
I think there are there are guidelines, there are you know, we certainly you have certain practitioners who say that if they do certain things they get better results by you know, not drinking or not drinking coffee or getting good sleep or.
Whatever it is.
You know that they have their own kind of uh you know, pre pre remote viewing, pre flight checklist as you will, that they go through that they have found to be successful. But I think that that's in many ways, just like like an athlete has a pregame ritual. You know, these are things that help them get dialed in into the zone that they need to be in to perform
at the level they want to perform at. And I don't think it has to be a hard and fast rule that you know, you don't drink alcohol or don't meditate, to be able to promote you more successfully. I could, you know, maybe that will one day be proven scientifically to our satisfaction. But in my experience with people who do this, I don't think it's a hard and fast rule per per se. And we also don't know that maybe when he was doing it, he was doing less of those activities.
Yes, please, yes, please?
What what kind of meditation? Because there are multiple and not all of them are straightforward as sitting and humming or listening to a mineral Institute tapes. You know, there's actually quite a huge variety, including just the act of driving is a form of meditation for some people. So yeah, sorry, I just had to throw that out there, because if you if you look into the brain wave stuff, there are several several types.
I agree with you, deb, I think they're from the little that I know of me of the meditation modalities I know about and the little that I've heard of remote viewers talk about. It's a little bit of a different headspace because you're more engaged, you're looking around the room, you're you know, you're writing on a piece of paper, whereas a lot of forms of meditation are about clearing
your mind of anything and and creating. And I'm sure, Nathan, you've talked about it with Darren ad nauseum, so I'm sure.
I had no because the best one is actually analyzing something. The ones that the Shallolin monks use to reach the gamma state in their brain, they're analyzing things. They're not trying to clear their mind at all. They're focusing on a problem.
So there you go.
So you're gonna read this one depth, So keep your your singing voice on for this one.
How do you feel about lou using remote viewing as cruel and unusual punishment on a detainee at Guantanamo? Is this not against the Geneva Convention? Should I answer this one first?
Or you guys want to Yeah, go ahead, go ahead, and I'll come in.
So I, first of all, I'm not sure that they thought that that actually would work. First of all. Second of all, they presented as people standing near the bed. I don't know if that's exactly cruel and unusual. People have dreams like that. I don't think that they consider those dreams to be cruel and unusual. I think this is a little bit worded, a little harshly. So what do you guys think.
Well, the Geneva Conventions I don't think addresses something like remote viewing. There are some very specific things that can
be done in captivity and can't be done. And so yeah, I think there are certain types of detainment that have unfolded that I would say would violate the Geneva Conventions and they were not let us say enemy combatant to you know, like, so there are different rule sets when you're captured as a card carrying military member by another card carrying military then, and I've been through training for that. I've been through peace time detention, like if you're kidnapped.
I've also been through if you're kidnapped by terrorist group and what that might look like and what might you have to exercise in order to survive that environment. And all three of those are are different because the goals of all three are different rules set.
In some cases there's no rules.
But I believe they they they probably at Guantanamo, I think that they were operating under the Geneva Conventions, which means no you know, waterboarding and no putting people wet in a very cold room and these kinds of things. So I think, I, I, I don't know that Lou engaged in that, but that would be something that we could potentially ask him if he comes on.
Nathan.
Yeah, I think.
This particularly part of the book definitely raised some eyebrows from from readers that, you know, one he put this in writing that this is something that he, you know, he and other colleagues did, and and that it seemed to have the intended effect that they wanted, which was really kind of changed the the intent or perspective of this particular individual and what they were planning to do or wanting to do harm to the the United States or its interests or whatever. You know, I think you
can have ethical qualms with it. I don't see, you know, I could totally understand people that would have an ethical issue with with the use of what amounts to kind of psychotronic a psychotronic warfare technique in this instance, And I could see someone taking issue with that, And I understand why why they would take issue with it. Is it a violation of an individual's autonomy and personal sovereignty?
Like I mean, it certainly absolutely could be perceived that way, So you know, I I do think it it raises some questions.
I think people.
Again, I've said this many many times, I said DJ last night. People have elevated Lou Elizondo so much that he's in many ways kind of become this untouchable person from critique by his most ardent supporters.
He's like kind of the third rail of euthology.
You don't want to touch it because you'll get light electrocuted if you if you raise any kind of critique of of Elezondo. But I don't think he's even he's asking for that himself. If you hear him talking in his interviews, he says, you know, I'm not definitely not Yeah, he's not perfect. I don't want to be doing this forever. I've made mistakes, you know. I don't think that he is asking people to hold him to a standard that that he himself can't actually achieve. So it's I wish
we would stop doing that. I think that it's just it's okay for people to have, you know, legitimate rational concerns about things that Lou Elezondo has said or done. I think it's okay to have those perspectives, okay to talk about those things. I don't need to detigrate someone for having those perspectives.
You know, everyone's got a right to their own opinion.
If you kind of flip that and go on the attack onto somebody, well then I, you know, I take that from a different perspective. You know, I think that it's it's one thing to have, you know, opinions about something, but it's another thing to go after somebody aggressively and you know, kind of helm them or harass them for their particular behavior that you just so happen to disagree with. Yeah, these are matters that maybe aren't necessarily for us to decide. Quite frankly, he said.
Last I heard was listening last night on the way back from work, and he said in the book, he said, I am not okay with people attacking others on my behalf. That is not attacking someone in their family is not okay, And I don't want people to do that on my behalf. He's very clear about that. I'm gonna answer this one for for George. And this is the problem that we run into, George, and we've talked about this many many
times on this show. People will have an opinion about somebody like Lou, and they're gonna look for information that they don't believe him, they don't trust him, and they're gonna look for any sliver of information that supports the thought that they already have about the guy. How can I find something that supports that this guy is a liar who's not who he says he is. And I'm gonna look for any mistake that he's made. And I
will tell you, Joe Rogan has found this out. When you are talking for three hours a week or fifth fourteen going on fifteen years, you are gonna make some gaffs and say some things, and you're gonna go home and you're gonna go like this, and your wife is gonna go like that to you and go, man, you really screwed up and said something stupid and you really
just ran your mouth too much. My wife could walk in here right now and do that with me, with the amount of shows that I've done, and she'd be right. The thing what you need to understand about Lou is, regardless of what you think about the guy, and if you have doubts about him, the guy quit his job making a lot of money and security and retirement and four oh one k that he could still be working there now.
This dude is younger than me and I'm still working. He could still be there now and just increasing his retirement every year that he goes on.
He's been gone since twenty seventeen. Man, he's lost a lot of money over this. And when he tells you, I was on this damn program, this UFO program, I don't care what Lukatski says. He was part of a UFO program, and Harry Reid said it, and other people that he mentions in the book have substantiated that he was part of this program. Whatever, I don't care what you want an acronym you want to put to it. He was a GS fifteen, which is as high as
you can go in the general service scale. He was a GS fifteen in charge as the lead guy in this program. Nathan said, maybe he didn't have the title of director. Maybe that wasn't written down anywhere because it was an unacknowledged program, a program that wasn't even a program of record.
But he was. He was part of this UFO program.
Obviously, you've heard that from Fraver, You've heard it from k Hill, you've heard it from PJ.
You've heard from Alex. Yep, we went there and we talked to lou. How do you think that happened?
How many hell put off? Let's not forget I.
Mean there's so many.
I mean Jim semi Van you know, you know, director of Field Operations for the CIA. For goodness sakes, he is who he says he is, and he was part of the program, a UFO program, and I couldn't care less what the name of it is or was. It's
not material to the discussion. And now if I tell you something and you choose not to believe me, I invite you not to believe me because I have not put my future on the line for UFOs, nor will I ever, because I don't have the courage that Elizondo has or Dave Grush has, like that combat courage.
Sure, go to war and gone deployments.
I've been on twelve of them, and some of them I didn't even have a uniform on. No problem with that, but the courage to give up my livelihood over UFOs, I am not doing it. I don't have that courage of conviction like those dudes do. They did it, and that's why you should believe Elizondo that he at least
was ahead of a UFO program. Whatever the letters are that constructs it is completely immaterial and not helpful to understanding who he is, what he did, and why we can have the discussion that Nathan said that we can have now that we could not have had had he not done that along with Christopher Mellen, we could not have had these discussions. We wouldn't be we would be in we would still be in the quote UFO closet
talking about this at work. I've talked about her work the other day, and these guys know where I work.
Yeah, yeah, I think you've made a really you know, passionate plea and excellent points.
That are worth reiterating.
And you know, we just we owe luel Isondo a deata gratitude. You know, is he a perfect person?
No?
And and and keep in mind, like we've got a lot of we're talking about shadowy UFO programs. You know, we're not talking about you know, they're in the playing light of day. You know, a lot lots of people know about them. They're they're highly recorded and documented. A lot of these things are not well documented, even they're kind of kept off the books.
In many regards. So you know, it doesn't surprise me.
That we've got some you know, sort of different narratives in print that that that kind of conflict with each other.
Would I like it to be clear? You know, absolutely.
You know I've been I've read those books, and I've had the same questions. You know, I'm like, wait a minute, this book said this and this one said that, and which one is right and which one is the right order? And you know there there are historians who are going to kind of sort that out and and answer those kinds of questions. But I think to DJ's point, he's got S I T. G. Skin in the game and
your money where your mouth is. You know, he's now I'm listening right, He's been out there more than anybody, and uh, you know, and and he's taking hits every time he goes out. You know, it's not like everybody's like great lou. You know, he's taking every every time. You know, he's he's kind of in the cross heres of a lot of hate and doubt and whatnot, but he keeps coming back. So I think that says a lot about his character. It's just not easy to do.
And I look I'm applauding him in this regard, but I also you know, I have personal you know, concerns too, Like I think again, my point is we're all that way. Human beings are complicated. Let's give each other the space to be complicated. You know, you allow yourself to be complicated. Let's allow others to be complicated. I think that's only fair.
And you know I have to say it, and I think, uh, and there people have missed this, but he had to protect all SAP when he first came out.
He couldn't use he didn't say ASAP, right.
He couldn't ease because it wasn't unclassified, and he still had to consider his security clearances, and you know he was trying to keep that, you know. So there there are certain things that he was curtailing for the public and probably still is.
So yeah, I figured out last night. I did some math and figured out loosely. He Nathan and I we went over some of the numbers. He lost about one point four million dollars UH in salaries. Since since he left, he's obviously recouped some of that, but he said that, uh, we know what his salary was, and he mentioned that when he went to work for UH to the Stars Academy that it was a lot less than what he was making. So I'm gonna guess, I'm gonna throw a number at you that is based on nothing.
It's probably one hundred grand.
They probably offered those guys one hundred grand each, and that is well below what an SES would have made.
In Christopher Mellen.
I have no idea what the pay scale at the CIA, but it's probably similar your government employee. It's probably similar to what Christopher Mellen was making. And and Lou obviously was making about one hundred and ninety thousand dollars a year UH in that area of growth. So so yeah, he probably lost about one point four million dollars in and recouped maybe, you know, maybe half that.
So I don't know.
Anyway, great points, guys. What else we got before we close things down for the evening?
Yeah, I mean, I want to just maybe we wrap here by kind of getting our thoughts on whether or not we think this book has helped push the conversation forward. And you know, I'd like to hear from Deb. You know, Deb, but what do you think about that? What's the reaction?
I feel like it's very hard when you know all of the data that's in a book to say this could make a big difference, you know, Like I feel like I already knew a lot of what was in this book. The only thing I didn't really know was his personal history related to his family. He was very careful about using cases that were in the public eye rather than disclosing classified cases. You may have noticed that.
And of course, because of you know, the community and the research that we do, we knew about all those cases that he mentioned. So I feel like as far as going, oh, that's brand new news that happen, but as far as hey, I was the guy working with you know, these government programs and trying to get this information to the public, you know, that could be relatable to people who are not familiar with these cases, and that might bring some more people into wanting to know more.
I think what I'm waiting for is what most people who are in a similar situation to myself. I'm waiting for people who I'm not going to tell about the book to tell me about the book, you know, like my family. If they pick up on it and they start talking about it, then I'll be excited, and I'm just waiting for it. You know, I want to see if that makes a shift. I'd like to see that.
Yeah, I think that's right. It I mentioned before that he brought us some things.
In the book that I didn't expect him to bring up, and I think that that is a signal that it reflects that we are moving into a place where the stigma is a lot less than it was a few years ago, and that we're and you're seeing that in
the media appearances that he's been making as well. When he's going on these morning shows and stuff and he's talking with the folks for thirty seconds or whatever it is, he doesn't have much time to talk with them, but the reaction is much more one of fascination, of curiosity of I wish we had more time to talk to you about this. I mean, one of the hosts I recall saying, you know, I always knew this was true.
I always believed that this was true.
You know.
So you're getting more.
I think public reaction that is it is positive that this is something that is very likely to be true. We've heard recently that he might be at one of the UFO hearings that is reported to be coming up later this month.
That would be really quite interesting.
People have been dying to get him, you know, in front of Congress publicly did to hear what he has to say.
Uh, you know, I do think this is moving the needle.
But you know, look, the needle movement isn't It's not only one of those things where it just kind of jumps forward and all of a sudden, you know, we've we've had this monumental shift. I think this is just a part of that gradual movement where this continues to uh you know, sde into the public consciousness, the public awareness, and and Lou you know, is leading leading the charge in that regard. You know, he's he's putting his neck
out there and he's going for it. So I think it's big, maybe not as big as many of us would have hoped. We would have hoped for maybe some new awesome stories that we had never heard before.
Like you said that, we're we're not getting that kind of thing.
But from the from a public facing standpoint, I think it's a really really solid effort.
And unfortunately I'm gonna have to go dark before I go light again.
But so George, you can see here it's what I said earlier, is that you're looking for information that's going to support what you already think about Lou. So the math doesn't even work out to him being worth that much. Like in terms of what he would have made as a retired major and what he would have made in government service, it would be really and with two children going to school and a wife and living in in where do he live in Maryland?
I think he lived in Maryland. And to thank you, thank you love.
I know it's like a beautiful place to a mass twenty six point two million. But if you're watching idiots like Manny that did a three hour dosing documentary on Lou, or Jimenez or Green Street and these morons that just want to again people that have no skin in the game right, put your where's your money? Did you put any money? Does your mouth have any money in it? Or you just talking crap like guy on the corner just talking crap. Show me when you put some money
in the game. And that's what Lou did. So someone's saying he has twenty six I have no idea what his net worth is.
But wherever you got that.
I guarantee they don't know what his net worth is unless they have eyes into his four oh one k and if he has, like I use Morgan Stanley, if they got eyes in his account, you know, like, how would I know what Nathan's worth? How the hell could I possibly know? The only thing I know more about Lou than I know about Nathan is his salary is
public minus the locality fee. Well, even that, I could see the locality pay that he would have had at every stop he worked at, so I would know his gross pay at every stop.
So I don't know how he would have amassed that.
I have no idea, But wherever you got it, I guarantee they don't know. And they're throwing it out there because they want you to think that this is a get rich quick scheme, which is absurd when you see what this man did.
Yeah, it's stupid.
I don't know why money becomes this huge divisive factor so much in this topic, because frankly, I you know, when I was a kid, I was made to go to church, and I never one time when my mother was handing over money to the donation basket, thought this
impacts whether or not I believe the priest. You know, like that's like what is going on like and then and the fact that there are so many people on this topic who cannot accept that people actually do work, and when you do work, you get paid like they I don't like, I will never write a book for free.
Like I got it. I hope he makes a ton of money off this.
Really no, it is absurd, deb It's but you have to understand is that when people want to tear somebody down, they need a vector, they need to find new way. They're like, Okay, he has a top secret SSBI clearance and polygraphs, and he was a GS fifteen, and he had an army career and was an intel and he served under mad Dog Madison.
So where can I get him? Oh, he's a grifter.
Clearly he's he's an arm of the government who's coming out to try to you know, all these kinds of things. So that's that's the reason why that people do this. That that's the reason why people do this is they want to they have to find a way.
So they go, oh, he's a grifter. You hear these idiots scrub you.
Know, content creators say it all the time, call peoper grifters when really, you know, usually when you're saying that somebody. It's really it's really you that's doing that, but you're accusing somebody.
I have never called anybody.
A grifter, despite that they had were monetized on all their platforms. We've never picked on anybody for that. We're like, hey, man, awesome, we just did it ourselves. So I but as far as the book, because in answer to your question, Nathan, I went dark.
Now I'm gonna go light.
Yeah, Julie, who's in library science, major authors rarely get rich, that's for sure.
That's for sure. So here's the thing.
I believe lou is the highest ranking official government official because he's the equivalent what do you say, is it a colonel or one star general being a GS fifteen. I think it's like a bird colonel, kind of like Carl Nell that rank. He's the highest ranking official to write a book. Other people have given interviews and all this, but I can't think of a government person of a
higher rank that has written a book than Alizondo. I think he stuck his neck out there to get those videos released, which started the conversation, and I don't think nothing that he's said in there. I mean, I think there were some anecdotes of a real world incidents with pilots and and so forth that I hadn't heard. So there's a couple of those that were kind of neat
and juicy. But it wasn't nothing he said in there was earth shattering or nothing that you know, Debs and Nathan and Courtney would not have known or heard about before. I think you guys have heard a lot of those things. I've heard some of those things. But the highest ranking official to come out and write a book, I think is noteworthy. And and he's definitely once again he's leading
the charge. Now, will there be another guy? Will Dave write a book you know, and spend a year going through the adoptster process?
Anyway? I think again, Nathan, you know, like and what.
Actually, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna use the analogy you use because people will jump all over that.
But it was a Brillian analogy. He's not a perfect person. He doesn't say he's a perfect person. He doesn't want you to think he Actually he is very self affessed, effacing and self deprecating. In his humor. He puts his he puts others above himself.
He talks about a brilliance of Hew put Off and Eric Davis and Jim sam Van and Steve Justice and h Gary Nolan. And by the way, he has a totally different pronunciation of kada pattatment than what Gary.
Uh. That's my biggest problem with him right.
Now is his different pronunciation of kada patainment than what Gary Nolan.
Taught us and made sure that. Uh.
One of our guests was no deb I want you to say it.
He was. He's a professor. What can I say? He was trying to teach me.
I know, beautiful, right, I know you should be a professor yourself.
So yeah, I think I think it was brilliant what he did. And I'm just hoping that a wider audience reads it and then with that they can put more pressure on legislators because they've read this. Hey, you know, I read this book by this guy says he's a Pentagon guy.
What are we doing about this?
Because there's nobody who would listen to that audiobook and go he sounds like a Nutter.
So I think we're in a great place, Nathan, in terms of that.
Of the disclosure movement, he I think he did it again in terms of he made another step forward that everybody else can now follow.
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's a great effort for sure.
And well, you know, we're wrapping the show and I just wanted to, you know, thank our listeners and our viewers for kind of going along this conversation with us. We got some great questions from the audience. Hey, Mick, really appreciate you joining us. Hey, Mick, you know, this is an important conversation to have, and I think all of the perspectives are worthwhile and valid.
And I.
You know, when we talk about people that are disenfranchised, you know, I understand why.
Right, we've been on.
The perceiving end of decades of disinformation, misinformation. There are noted actual grifters and euthology that have taken advantage of people, and you know, have fleeced people of money and their hopes and their time and their passion.
And look, no human being wants to be made a fool.
Right.
If you've ever felt like a fool, you don't want to feel it again, right. So, and if you felt like a fool a lot, you've got your guard up and you've you've developed a very thick skin and shell so that you're not going to get hurt again, and people who have had that kind of life experience. You know, I understand why you are naturally very skeptical of this kind of information, of these kinds of individuals, because it's
difficult to trust them. And I think it's okay, it's totally okay to kind of suspend your us for a little while until we get better information. And that's I hope that you can, you know, sort of at least support that effort that we get, you know, as much effort as we can into getting to the heart of what is really going on here, that we can get some greater transparency into into this issue, because it's it's
been plaguing the American public for a long time. And and if if these insiders are just all making it up and all consumed by some fantasy story, well that's a story in and of itself, right, that's a huge problem that we need to kind of address within our within our government. So I think that's something we can all get behind. Eli, thank you so much for that supersticker. Really appreciate it.
Elive, thank you so much for the blessing. We really do appreciate it.
It's really awesome for cab. We're getting closer. My browsers not function. Can you drop off the imminent link?
Uh?
Yes, I can do that. It just takes me a second before we close the show.
Debs.
Yeah, I just I'm absorbing some of the things that we've gone over, and I think we need to just highlight some underlying themes. One of the themes is he is a human being, just like everybody else. Let's let's get past this messiah thing that some people get into or this villain thing that people get into. For him, He's just a human being like everybody else. He shared a very honest, from his perspective portrayal of what he went through, and he even admits that he doesn't really
know everything, just like everyone else in the government. And I think, you know, we just have to you know, we can carry on thinking the way we want to, and he gives us permission to do that. He even says that, like, you know, think what you want, but we have to focus on sort of like the underlying statement, something wasn't working right in our government really to this topic, whether you believe it was NHI or foreign adversaries, that was a risk, and they are doing something about that.
Loui's doing something, Crash just doing something, Melon's doing something, Sami A Van so on. A lot of very intelligent people who have a lot of experience that expertise to offer are coming forward and telling people something is wrong and something needs to be done about it.
So I want to throw in one more thing to add on to that, since you mentioned Semi Van, and I just for you and Nathan and our folks in the chat. That link that Nathan put up right there, That is the tiny link right there. If you click on that, it'll get you into Amazon and get you the book. And also you can get the audible link from there. And for a lot of us obviously, the audible is.
Very very helpful, so we can use it during our commutes and so forth. Oh there you go, lose YouTube channel. Thank you, Jules, Jim, Semmi Van. I want.
I want you guys to try to imagine being a CIA officer, senior officer at his level, and going into work and reporting that you were essentially.
Abducted by UFOs. I can't. I can't tell you how difficult that would be. I I just can't.
Huge.
I mean, Nathan, can you imagine saying it to your boss.
No, and like, yeah, and the stakes for me are way lower than they are for Jim.
So yeah, it's a huge deal.
And they believed him, and they brought in somebody, some guys to come in there and interview that free him out. Guys. And you know, I work in.
A facility that is is kind of is pretty secure, and I saw I saw something like that the other day. There was a DV in the building and guys showed up that didn't have the didn't have the the badges on that that they would need to have, so I knew and they were security for that individual. So these things happened, and that's what Jim described, And it's an incredible amount of courage. I can't imagine telling your boss that and him not thinking you're alone. But that's how much they trusted him.
Yep. Powerful.
Yeah, thank you everybody. Jules.
You you know, it's really irritating that you're the smartest person in the room every time and that you're able to contextualize every damn thing. Where did you go to contextualization school? Do you have a degree in it? Can you please tell me? Is it an Indiana thing? What's going on?
God?
Bless Indiana for you, Jules, thank you. And so yeah Jessica who popped in earlier. It looks like she's packing to move, but we made her a new mod so you should see miss Jessica and b She former Army veteran, former e O D by the way, like if you make a mistake, things go boom. And she told me
her deployment dates. I think she served from nine to seventeen and she does some veterans volunteer stuff and she's going to be a guest on for True Crime for the True Crime stuff next week actually Saturday, two days from today. Anybody who's interested in cab TCU, we're having on Mike Crawford of the Young Jerks. Jerks is spelled very coolly j u rks, which I think is really cool. And Mike is going to talk about Karen Reid trial and Sandra Birchmore. There was just a huge arrest in
the Sandra Birchmore case. They rested the police officer who, how.
Do I say this, groomed her from a teenager and impregnated her and then killed her because his wife was having a baby and he didn't want to have four babies. So he killed her and her baby. So it's very difficult stuff. But we will talk about it on keb TCU very difficult content.
So yeah, Julie's been following it. Julie now is an expert in Karen Reid and Sandra Birchmore. Is that a surprise, Nathan, Nope, not at all. Yeah, she jumps in the chat and she's asking like these super in depth questions when I have panelists on who are from Massachusetts, and Julie spent five minutes to figure the case out. So anyway, love it, I know, deb Thank you so much girlfriend.
Yeah, I'm glad I got through some of my technological glitches.
You. I salute you. So awesome to have you on and money Nathan as well, Man, I got to talk to you last night, so I missed you. Guys. Context the contextual answer.
You are, I know, Jules, you might as well revel in it, man Flowers and you know all right, love you guys, Love everybody in the chat on behalf of Nathan Debs.
This is DJ saying peace out, one love, We'll see you down the road. And guess what another cab episode is just around the bend.
S