and allow us to address wrongdoing
Maybe it noticed us after we noticed it.
Um, at that point, the only people that would be awake is us, those of us that were doing operations
I was getting, well, my next question is you, you teased us.
Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and thank you so much to each of the witnesses that have come before us today.
Before us today, the federal government has had a long-standing over-classification issue in general.
They don't see the ability for us to come together really on much of anything.
It allows for all types of conspiracy theories instead of us actually making the investments that we need to make to get the information and actually make the information.
The reason that I wanted to focus on making sure that we answer some questions specifically around the protections of those that are willing to come forward is because the only way that we can make this government actually work for all of us is if no matter where you are in this federal government, you feel as if you are safe when you come forward with information of any issue.
We get a little wrapped up in a lot of things, but the government has something and they need to turn it over to us.
We pay their dadgum salary, you pay our salary, and you ought to get more out of us than you do.
I think they're just trying to run the clock out on us, really.
They'll poke us a little and they'll make jokes to us and try to pull us off the target, but I think we know where we're at.
And that's why they're firing at us, because we are over the target.
And they do that to keep us from FOIA, correct?
I think they've been lying to us and to you and the rest of the world, and they're still doing it.
And we were able to talk these folks into providing us information that otherwise we would never have seen.
The first thing that happened, when I talked about this after getting back and going through the files and things and sifting through it, the Russian physicist who had helped us be introduced all these people wrote back and said there was a huge eruption, that there was the real right, far autocratic,
And eventually, the story was spun where the Ministry of Defense officials who gave us this information were described as ufologists who said there was nothing really significant to these files.
There was an incident in October of 1982 over an ICBM base where ufos popped up, was observed over this base where the missiles are pointed at us, United States.
And that's what you see in the video itself is when the watch stander is slewing in and kind of showing us what we're looking at.
And I think that it's my, our responsibility, especially when we're seeing that we have a government that is blocking, actively blocking information from us.
So, not, not an elected official, but someone in staff blocked us.
And it took 14 months for us to get Dobser approval for him to release two sentences on
And I also wouldn't have come forward without the people that paved the way for us in, you know, the first congressional hearing.
One of the big questions, I think, for many of us is why do you believe that the federal government refuses to be transparent about
don't. We're there to do our mission and do what's told of us, right? So I think what would be important
you know, I think many of us are kind of picturing the scene, you walk out in the flight line,
that this involves the US government? Whatever you saw involves the US government?
those of us that were doing the ops. Security forces in uniform or contract?
Nusatelli, if this were sanctioned by the US government, even though you have a clearance,
Like does the US government make these kind of acts? They make accidents, mistakes like this?
standing here. Does that sound like something that the US government would do? Uh, no, sir.
objects would be operating in and around our bases or during training exercises. So it would lend us,
would lend you to believe that the US government had no, had nothing to do with whatever it is you saw.
into Arrow. And I would encourage us. Oh, I'd be happy to send maybe a subpoena to Mr. Kilpatrick.
program. I cannot give those publicly. So I'd encourage us, Madam Chair, to have that SCIF, that SCIF meeting if we can. And then, Mr. Borland, again for you. He testified that you withheld certain sources and methods from Arrow due to mistrust. Can you give us some specifics that led you to believe they were misrepresenting the truth? Well, as I said already, what I said about scientific methods, scientific control, extraterrestrials, I mean, I know what I've seen. I know what I know. And I know it's
But they have the high ground, the people that don't want us to take it seriously dismiss it, discredit the witnesses, come up with a cover story.
That seems to be what some of our witnesses have told us over the years.
Okay. So and also in regards to immunity, which to Mr. Borland's point, we are going to be doing a motion to ask for immunity for you and a few other people to come into a skiff and tell us what you know without being subject to the Espionage Act, etc.
Thank you, ma'am. So that's just kind of an update. But as a task force, because we're not a full subcommittee and there are certain authorities that haven't been granted to us probably because they don't want us to have it.
I know for sure that they had conversations about it, and I know we did reach an agreement to try to lessen the possibility that us detecting a U.S.
And I worry too that in the wrong hands that they do that. They keep it from the rest of us because they're so invested in whatever energy sources we have here that their billionaire buddies are going to profit.
They tell their best scientists and engineers get in there and work on it. And they've been doing it for a very long time. Might have a headstart on us here.
And so it does bring, um, give us reasoning to provide investigative inquiry into these