Alien Technology in US Private Industry Since WW2 The Legacy Program

Show video

This is a program that goes back to the Second  World War, at least. There have been retrievals   since, allegedly, according to Grusch. Well,  the first retrieval he knows about was in 1933,   which is allegedly the Magenta Italy Italian UAP  craft, which was allegedly returned or recovered   by the Americans in 1944 with the assistance of  the Vatican and brought back to America. And if   that's true, that's what Mr. Grusch is alleging.  If that's true, one can only hope that it's   investigated and that people get to the bottom  of it. In collaboration with the Vatican? Yes,  

the Vatican interceded to assist in handing the  technology over from the vestiges of the Italian   government at the end of the fascist Mussolini  regime and handing it over to the Americans as   the Americans moved into Italy at the end of  the Second World War. So that doesn't mean   that there's something inherently Christian about  this. It just happened to be where the Vatican is,   like there's something geographical about it. You  know, it's funny, I've spent a large part of my   career revealing the horrible, sordid history of  sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. So I'm not  

a fan of the way it's conducted itself with  its treatment of children. But one thing I   will applaud the Catholic Church on is that it's  long had a very progressive attitude towards the   notion of a non-human intelligence. And I think  10 years ago, the Vatican astronomer, they do   actually have a Vatican observatory in Italy. He  spoke publicly about the notion that essentially,   whatever species we are of intelligent being, we  are all God's children. And I think the Vatican   knows an enormous amount about the phenomenon.  And one person I commend you speak to is Diana   Walsh Pasolka, who's written a terrific book  called American Cosmic. And she's got a new  

book coming out that I've been privileged to  preview. I think the Vatican is well aware   of allegations that the planet has been shared  with a non-human intelligence for a large part   of humanity's existence. And I'm told that some of  the best archives and information historically on   this is stored in the Vatican. The other word that  stuck out to me was the, with the legacy program,   like there's a single one. This to me sounds  like this would be a multi-department and a   multi-program program. So why is there just one? I  think it's a euphemism that's become quite common   inside the program as it's called. It's called  the program. That's the euphemism that people  

have used to it. And I think those of us who are  passing comment on it have referred to it often as   the legacy program, because essentially, it's been  a continuing program that never stopped operating   throughout the Cold War. And it continues to  this day. One of the issues, though, and you   quite rightly make this point is that it's now  fragmented. I think the allegations of my sources,   not just Mr. Grusch, that this program is now  administered across different private aerospace   companies. Notably, one of them, of course,  is Lockheed Martin. I think those companies   should be asked directly whether they have had  or have possession of non-human technology,   that at one stage was in the possession of the US  government. And are they going to be obligating  

their requirements to respond under the new  legislation that's coming up before the Congress?   It's going to be very interesting to see what they  say. Because I think that one of the one of the   big issues here is, and I say this as somebody  who's trained in intellectual property law,   they might rightly think it's their property. Why  the hell should they have to account for this to   the US government? If they've spent the money and  done the work in the last 6070 years on trying to   develop this technology? What business is it of  the US Defense Department or the US government   if they were properly vested this material or if  they recovered it themselves? Why should the US   government have any right over it? I'm kind  of on their side on this, you know, frankly,   if Elon Musk develops antigravitic propulsion,  based on a recovered piece of technology,   why the hell should he have to account for it to  the US government? What business is it of theirs   if they've been so incompetent as to hand over  this technology invested into private aerospace,   then I'm kind of on side. I'm a big fan of private  enterprise and capitalism. I think that the profit   motive drives some of the best innovations in  technology. If I was a private aerospace company  

that's responsible to my shareholders, I'd be  getting my lawyers briefed and ready for a big   fight with the Congress. What business is it of  theirs? I'm kind of with them in a way really,   you know, bottom line is if Lockheed Martin has  a flying saucer hidden in a cupboard somewhere,   and if they've spent billions of dollars  on trying to develop that technology,   why should they be putting up being bullied by US  Congress? What business is it of Congress? If some   president in the past made the decision to divest  the US government of this technology or to take it   out of say the Department of Energy 50, 60 years  ago, why would they completely divest themselves,   the government completely give this technology  up and not say, hey, private industry, you have   great technology to investigate this technology.  Let's work together. That's a very good question,   Curt. One explanation that I heard is that there  was concerns that the Department of Energy in   particular was going to be brought under the  control of various regulatory agencies, notably   the Government Accounting Office, the GAO. And I'm  told that at one stage, the GAO was asking some  

very shrewd questions about monies and expenditure  relating to the program and a decision was made to   divest that technology from the DOE into private  enterprise. And unless proper contracts were drawn   up at the time that required that this technology  remained the property of the US government, well,   frankly, my friend, if I was a clever IP lawyer,  I would be saying, stuff the US government. This   is us. We're one of the world's top aerospace  companies. Why should we have to hand this over?  

I'm kind of sympathetic with them. And I think  if they came out publicly and actually said that   and said, yeah, we've got this technology, but  it's none of your bloody business. Piss off,   leave us alone. We're spending the money. We've  got the scientists, we're spending the DOE. If   the US government was stupid enough to go off and  fight wars in the Middle East in the last 10, 15,   20 years and not spend money on a Manhattan-style  project to back engineer alien technology,   then it's their fault. I mean, I think we're  actually a very interesting point here where the   implications of this extraordinary legislation,  where clearly what's going on behind the scenes   here is the Congress is pissed off. It's upset  that it's asked, it's demanded, it's already  

required under the NDAA laws that people come  forward with evidence of UAPs. And they know it   exists. They know that evidence is there. That's  what's driving this legislation. The reason why   Senator Gillibrand is pushing for aerospace  companies or private corporations to be forced   to reveal whether they've got objects of non-Earth  origin or exotic UAP material is because they've   got witnesses who've already told them about it.  And if I'm, I don't know, let's just say Lockheed   Martin and they've got a flying saucer sitting in  a cupboard somewhere, they might think, well, hell   guys, that one there, we recovered it ourselves  from Guatemala a few years ago. Why the hell   should we tell you about that? It's none of your  business. We're a private company. Free enterprise   is what made America great. Stick that in your  pipe and smoke it. These loopholes characterize  

the States and perhaps Canada, maybe Australia. Is  this something that's occurring worldwide? Because   I don't imagine that these loopholes exist  in Russia or in China, and I don't see why   it wouldn't leak. And you did mention that some, I  don't recall exactly what, but some parts of this   have leaked, but I don't know if it's related to  this. Anyway, what do you say to that? Let's deal   with your country. I know for a fact that Canadian  scientists are actively involved in working and   collaborating with the United States on retrieved  non-human technology there. Let's just see if any  

of your media now go out and ask questions about  it. I don't think they will, because they'll be   cowed. One reasonable thing to do would be to go  to a press conference and ask the Canadian defense   minister, with the cameras rolling, minister, what  inquiries have you done as a result of the letter   from Larry Maguire, a member of parliament who  told you that he is aware of a reverse engineering   program with which Canadian scientists have been  collaborating through your DRDC for decades with   the US government? Is she going to answer that  question? She should. Now, let's deal with   Australia. I've spoken to very senior people in my  government who've told me they know nothing about  

any Australian involvement in reverse engineering,  and I think that's true. I think that there have   been individual military personnel, mainly from  our special forces, who have collaborated in   retrievals. I've spoken to people who've alleged  to me that they've been involved in retrieval   operations. I do believe that it's possible  that technology has been tested on Australian   territory or over our sovereign waters without  our knowledge, and I'm investigating that at the   moment. I enjoy eating home-cooked meals, but I  intensely dislike the requisite trip to the store   for ingredients. I enjoy eating home-cooked meals,  but I intensely dislike the requisite trip to the  

store for ingredients. So HelloFresh is a boon  after these sometimes eight-hour-long podcasts.   To make it even better, go to hellofresh.com  slash theoriesofeverythingfree, and use the code   theoriesofeverythingfree, that's all one word,  and then you get a free breakfast for life at   hellofresh.com slash theoriesofeverythingfree.  Let's deal with the UK. I think the UK knows a  

lot more than Canada or Australia. It's been a  very active member of the Five Eyes through the   foreign material program because there have been  retrievals in the United Kingdom and in Europe,   I am told. It is alleged to me. I don't know  that for sure, but the allegation that has   been put to me, and that includes British special  forces personnel, is that there have been active   operations crash retrievals even within the  last few years. This has been an ongoing issue.  

And people may say, oh, well, how come these  things are crashing? If these are such advanced   technology, why are they crashing so much? Often  they're not crashing, they're just retrieved. We   don't know the circumstances in which they  came to be where they are. But I'm told,   it has been alleged to me, that on occasion there  have been fully functioning technologies recovered   with no visible damage to them. Now, under  the foreign materials program, as is detailed   in the Larry Maguire letter, which is the  secret Five Eyes agreement for the recovery,   normally of foreign adversary technology like  Russia or China, like the latest MIG or the   latest rocket system and things like that, it's  happening a lot at the moment inside Ukraine. I'm   told that through that FMP, the foreign materials  program, there have also been very controversial   and very secret recoveries of what people believe  is non-human technology. But if you're a soldier,   a special forces operative, and you're cleared to  be involved in a retrieval operation like that,   the level of knowledge that you have is limited  to your utility. It could very well be they've  

just been standing there with a rifle, making  sure nobody comes on scene while scientists and   officials move in and remove whatever it is. So,  it may very well be they have no direct knowledge   themselves as to exactly what it is. And they're  open to the accusation that what they're talking   about might just be a Russian satellite or a  Chinese drone or something like that. This is  

why this needs to be investigated. Because one of  the things that I am aware of is that there is an   intelligence take, there is distribution of Five  Eyes intelligence now, and it's become much more   routinized than it ever used to be. And within  the last few years, there is now intelligence   sharing on UAPs within the Five Eyes Alliance.  And I've spoken to people in Australia who've   told me that they've seen some of this take. Very  senior people. And our intelligence community. And   when I've said to them, should we discount this  claim of collaboration inside the Five Eyes on   alleged retrievals, they've giggled and said, no,  I wouldn't. I wouldn't put it past the Americans   at all. And one of the phenomena that's quite  common here in Australia, one of the things that  

I've reported on as a journalist reporting on the  intelligence community, has been it's been a long   standing practice for Australia, Canada, and New  Zealand as kind of junior partners of the Five   Eyes Alliance, to do plausibly deniable favors  for their big brother allies in the US and the   UK. And so during the Cold War, it's now public  information that Australians, New Zealanders,   often collaborated with the Brits or the Americans  to bug or to tap foreign embassies or foreign   adversary companies, countries, buildings, and we  did plausibly deniable favors for our friends. I'm   told also that we've been involved in retrievals  of and quite rightly so it's a good thing that   we've been doing this retrievals of Chinese and  Russian and North Korean technology, you know,   we're keeping tabs on our potential enemies. But  I'm also told because I've had chats with people   who've been involved in these operations that  there have been retrievals where what's being   retrieved is obviously far more controversial.  And I think the Brits know a lot more about this,  

because they've been more actively involved. And  there is a high level of collaboration between the   UK and the US on this issue. But it's interesting,  because certainly the parliamentary oversight   committees in the United Kingdom that I've engaged  with, they're not aware of this. So again, there's  

a there's an accountability issue here. If British  military or intelligence have been involved,   I don't think their parliamentary committees  know about it. And frankly, I think they   should. I mean, I'll give you an example. I did  a story in 1994, that's how old I am, about how   operatives of our Australian Secret Intelligence  Service, our equivalent, if you like of the CIA,   assisted the British government in bugging Kuwaiti  government offices, after the first Gulf War,   to procure a trade advantage to win contracts  against which Australia was competing. And the   operatives that were involved in that operation  told me how they were paid cash by the Brits,   and told not to tell their Australian masters  what they'd been doing, bugging Kuwaiti government   offices to help the British win contracts against  the Australians. And there was a Royal Commission  

of Inquiry, which essentially is a bit like  a grand jury investigation, which looked into   this issue, and the whole issue of plausibly  deniable favors by our intelligence community   to assist Big Brother allies, the UK and the US  was brought to the fore. Another incident that I   became aware of when I did the story in 1994, was  that when the Chinese government was negotiating   with the British about the handover of Hong Kong  back to China, Australian government operatives   were involved at the behest of the British SIS in  bugging Chinese government offices in Hong Kong,   so that they could negotiate a strategic advantage  in the negotiations with the Chinese. And imagine   the consequences for Australia if we'd been  caught by the Chinese and doing that kind   of high level spying. I mean, the blowback would  have been enormous. And so I raised in my story,   the issue of why we were doing these plausibly  deniable favors. This is the same thing that's   been going on with UAPs, because Larry Maguire,  in his letter to the Canadian Minister of Defence,   specifically raises how he's concerned that  upcoming public announcements will be coordinated   between AUKUS, which could damage Canada's  credibility with our allies. And AUKUS, it's not a   very well known agreement, but it's the Australia,  UK, US agreement. And what it is, is essentially  

a collaboration defence agreement, which is  essentially targeting, providing Australia   with nuclear submarine technology. It's bringing  Australia into the nuclear world, controversially,   huge controversy in Australia, we're spending $400  billion on nuclear attack submarines, probably the   Virginia class American submarines in the next  20 to 30 years. Now, I know, my Prime Minister   in Australia, and my Defence Minister, and the  heads of our intelligence services in government   do not know about the crash retrieval program,  if it exists. The Australian crash retrieval or   the... No, no, no, no, the US Canadian crash  retrieval collaboration. If I was Australia,  

and I'm about to spend nearly half a trillion  dollars on weaponry, which is supposedly the top   of the line weaponry in the world, I would expect  as a Five Eyes ally partner to be brought into the   loop on the fact that the US is potentially  sitting on vastly more superior technology.   I would expect that it would be a legitimate  question for my government to be asking, are we   being sold a lemon? Are we being sold technology  that will be superseded within five to 10 years,   if and when the American government finally admits  the truth of what this alleged crash retrieval   program involves, alleged technology that is  capable of extraordinary energy from the vacuum,   extraordinary propulsion systems that  are capable of instantaneous velocity,   the performance characteristics manifested in the  five observables. That's a technology I would want   in preference to a nuclear attack submarine. And  so, this is why this is relevant to agreements  

like the AUKUS agreement. Are members of the Five  Eyes alliance who have historically been treated   as and patronized as junior partners, are they  being locked out of information and knowledge   that ought properly to be being shared with them  to assist them in making decisions about their   future national security? That's why this now  matters. I'm not trying to drive a wedge between   the Five Eyes partners, but I have had discussions  with people in my government in Australia where   I have said, look, I know stuff that Canada is  allegedly involved in, and you may not want to   ask about it. But I think there is the beginning  of a realization now in my government in Australia   that they haven't been told the whole story. I  suspect, for example, that there are facilities in  

Australia that have been used for experimentation  with some of this technology by the US government   as places like Groom Lake and Area 51 became  more and more scrutinized and hot. Vast, empty   areas of Australia and our ocean are beautiful  places to practice technology. And in my book,   In Plain Sight, I start the book by talking about  an extraordinary sighting, multiply corroborated,   where a gigantic black triangular craft hovered  silently over two policemen and a civilian woman,   and did performance parameters, performance  characteristics far beyond known human technology.   And that's a technology that has been seen by  multiple witnesses that I've since spoken to.  

Clearly, something was operating over Northwest  Australia back in the early 90s, that has never   been properly explained. And clearly, the  Americans knew about it and tried to shut   people down from talking about it. And so it's  funny, and I obviously get frustrated with stories   like this one in our national newspaper, where the  whole issue of alien conspiracies are mocked. And   you know, there really are references to little  green men, that sort of nonsense. And it's this  

kind of belittling ridicule that ignores the fact  that there is an abundance of evidence, no longer   circumstantial, to suggest that there is something  going on. The Pentagon has admitted the reality   of the phenomena. It has admitted that there is  an anomalous phenomena, possibly intelligently   controlled, doing things, showing performance  parameters that we cannot explain. Multiple,  

hundreds, thousands of witnesses have seen  objects doing things that are apparently craft,   under intelligent control, showing performance  parameters that just cannot be explained within   known human technology. There is an intelligence  source by the name of David Grusch, who has come   forward and courageously spoken out for the first  time publicly, saying that he is aware of a crash   retrieval program that has been illegally kept  secret from the American public. He's also   alleged, by the way, bodies, and some journalists  seem very shy about even discussing that issue,   because they're worried and confronted that people  may find it so ontologically shocking that they   don't want to talk about it. This is real. These  allegations are being made. They should be being   investigated. That's all David Grusch wants.  About that triangle, do you think that we have   the ability to operate? Forget about reverse  engineer. I'll refer you to, again, one of the  

episodes of Need to Know, www.needtoknow.today.  I interviewed a former British Special Forces   soldier called John Chapman. He's a former British  para very highly trained British soldier. He was   literally in combat in Ukraine in the very early  days of the battle around Kiev in April last year.  

He was with a group of Navy SEALs, Special Forces  soldiers from all over the world, an international   battalion that was fighting behind Russian lines.  And in the interview that he did with me, he and   his colleagues described seeing firstly, three  strange lights appear in the sky in the night   sky. And then all of a sudden, a triangular craft  winked into existence. And the way he's described   it, it appeared to be operating as some kind  of surveillance and reconnaissance platform. It   silently moved above the battlefield, literally,  as they're getting watered. They're looking up,   and they're describing it. They're seeing it.  They're absolutely categorical that they saw   it. I've corroborated that this was seen. Some  kind of triangular surveillance platform was  

being used on the battlefield, clearly monitoring  Russian positions in the very early days of the   Kiev offensive by the Russians. I don't know who  that was, but something was taking an interest.   And that platform, that triangular object has been  seen by multiple witnesses all around the world.   Now, I know people love to dismiss all this as a  wacky conspiracy theory, and they love to sort of   push the idea that this is just a conspiracy  theory, and it's pushed by crazy people with   little green men agendas. That's no longer the  case. This is being rationally suggested by sober   men and women at a very high level in the American  governments, both in Canada and the US. I've had   conversations with people in your government. You  know, they privately admit to me that they know  

something's going on, but they're frightened  of asking. You know, it's almost like, well,   we kind of assume it's in the national good, so  we're not going to push any harder. But I think   that's what the people who've been hiding this  all these years have been playing on. I think   there have periodically been people inside the  US government who have an oversight role. One of   them is perhaps Admiral Tom Wilson, the Wilson  document, as we've discussed previously, Curt.   And I think people have stumbled across the issue  from time to time. And I think they've bought the  

line that this is a national security imperative  and that they shouldn't push any harder. If you   enjoyed this toll clipping, then the full video  is linked in the description. Don't forget to   follow Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal  on Spotify for exclusive content and in-depth   discussions. Your support on Spotify helps us grow  and to reach more curious minds like yours. Check  

out the link in the description and join the core  toll community on Spotify today. See you there.

2024-09-19

Show video