reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 notes that the last administration was not transparent on the issue, but with the task force created, they have guided members within what they're cleared for. He asserts that they have encountered alien beings and recovered vehicles, with physical proof, and that he was partially cleared into those activities, having read intelligence reports from those programs. Speaker 1 reflects that online discourse about encounters and videos is plentiful, and asks if there is belief that the US government knows about alien beings coming to Earth. Speaker 0 responds that he doesn’t like to characterize where they came from, but they are definitely some kind of nonhuman sentience. He claims to have recovered vehicles and physical proof and says he had partial access to the data and to intelligence reports. He confirms seeing with his own eyes according to his account. Speaker 2 says NASA speaks for itself and claims transparency with data, and asks whether to believe David Crush or if he is lying, and where the evidence is. Speaker 0 asserts that members of the current administration are very aware of this reality and the current president is knowledgeable on the subject. He trusts the president’s leadership and believes the president has assembled a team; he says if Trump wants to be the greatest president and the most consequential leader in world history, he certainly has the knowledge, capabilities, and understanding of some of these sensitive government transparency issues. Speaker 3 says he has access and has had meetings with very smart people who believe there is something out there, and it makes sense there could be. He is not convinced himself. He asks if the person believes one, that he knows, and two, that he’s open to transparency on UAPs. Speaker 0 reiterates that the president is very well informed on the issue, and avoids revealing more than the president might want to reveal. He notes a role to cover this up through administrations. Speaker 1 asks about years of threat and testimony. Speaker 0 says he was physically threatened even before submitting his intelligence community inspector general report under the previous administration, and sought legal protection because of professional and personal fear. Speaker 1 asks about recovering pilots or remains and whether that was seen with his own eyes. Speaker 0 confirms there were pictures and says yes, there were remains. Speaker 1 questions whether the origin is from another planet or outer space, and if it is interdimensional, seeking clarification. Speaker 0 explains he has talked to many veterans of the program and keeps an open mind on origin. He acknowledges an extraterrestrial hypothesis but does not usually go there because he did not see the data, and he is not conversant in the high-confidence theories the US government has. He is not aware of any remains or signs of extraterrestrial beings or technology by his department. Speaker 3 says the US government knows, but asks whether other governments know. Speaker 0 says they know and have their own programs, and notes that two and a half years ago the US has been in an arms race with peer competitors like Russia and China, who have their own programs. He says he was able to view intelligence discussing adversarial programs and will leave it at that. Speaker 3 states that they’ve recovered things, and Speaker 0 confirms, noting there were bodies and physical remains. They discuss whether the motive or intent of the visitors was peaceful or not, acknowledging a mixed bag of activity and motive. They consider whether Earth’s genetic material could be a reason for visits, even jokingly proposing Jurassic Park as a tourist attraction for genetic material on Earth.

In 1967, I was on the USS Liberty when it was attacked by Israeli forces, resulting in casualties. The attack involved Mirage Jets, napalm, and torpedoes. I believe it was not accidental, as we intercepted classified messages. I think Israel planned the attack, and our government may have known. On this Memorial Day, I remember the fallen crewmen and hope for accountability.

The speaker says they will hold a press conference at the Triangle, but thinks it is more appropriate that everyone be present and ready to proceed. They note that more than a dozen crew members of the USS Liberty are there. The speaker says they stood on the floor of the House and honored the crew for the first time, stating the crew deserve recognition and closure. They emphasize that the crew will not be with them forever, referring to the age of those who were 21 in 1967 and noting that the passage of time places them around 80 years old. The speaker adds that some of the crew members still have dozens of pieces of shrapnel in them, which caused a problem at metal detectors, and calls the individuals brave. They say the recognition should include those who have already passed away and those who died fifty nine years ago that day. The speaker concludes that they did this on the floor of the House and will take questions afterward, including “hard questions” directed to the crew.

Jim Ferguson welcomes Canadian guests Dean Allison and Sean Buckley to the show. Sean Buckley describes himself as a constitutional lawyer with 31 years of practice, often representing companies and practitioners facing government efforts to shut down their work related to natural health products/dietary supplements under a pharmaceutical drug model. He says that when COVID began, he and his wife Theresa were lead organizers of the National Citizens Inquiry, with him acting as lead counsel and personally calling over half of the witnesses. He is also president of the Natural Health Product Protection Association, which he describes as a citizen watchdog, and says he has been involved with the “Alison inquiry” as part of setting it up. Dean Allison says he has been elected since 2004, reelected eight times, and is a Conservative Member of Parliament in Ontario, about half an hour from Niagara Falls. He chairs committees and is currently chairing a major/special projects committee joint with the Senate reporting back to Parliament on progress. He says he met Sean when Sean came to Ottawa in October and that they discussed possibilities after his experiences with public concerns he hears from constituents. Allison explains that, as an MP, his job is to listen to constituents’ stories and advocate for them regarding government programs. He describes growing censorship in Canada and says that it creates a chill on discussing topics government does not want discussed. He argues that constituents can speak privately about injuries, lockdowns, and related issues, including vaccine injury programs, but that public discussion is frowned upon or discouraged. He says one goal of the inquiry is to give people permission to tell their stories publicly so they can talk with family, friends, and colleagues about what happened—especially when they believe the government does not want it discussed—and to create a public conversation through which healing and progress can occur. Jim Ferguson references Canada and international freedom efforts, including convoy-related activities, and asks what motivated Sean to build and advance the inquiry and how support from sitting MPs fits into the project. Sean says his primary motivation is COVID-19 vaccines, which he claims are still being given to children starting at six months of age. He frames this as culpable homicide or criminal negligence in his view, saying his motivation is “to stop harming people.” He describes a “health crisis,” saying many Canadians are harmed by the vaccine and that people are not being treated properly because Canada cannot admit vaccine-caused injury while the official narrative says the vaccines are safe and effective and that harm is caused by long COVID. He says some Canadians believe that messaging is wrong and that, in his account, medical doctors who might speak publicly about vaccine harm could face professional discipline or lose the right to practice. He adds that vaccine-injured people are denied medical treatments because those treatments are not approved for vaccine injury, and he describes long waits and emergency ward delays. He emphasizes that he is not describing “anti-vaxxers,” but people who were injured, sometimes after being coerced or threatened, and he says they need their stories listened to and medical care provided. Ferguson asks when red flags first appeared for Sean. Sean says he had already been “hardwired” from past experience not to trust Health Canada. He describes earlier legal experiences and, during COVID, says he recognized what he considered fraud related to vaccine approval processes, including claims that animal studies failed in a way that made him believe approval was wrong. He recounts his belief that the world moved into “lockstep” and says he observed fear and coercion that he thinks pushed people to comply. Ferguson asks Dean about what he saw and whether he faced pressure for speaking out. Dean says he encountered pressure within his party and leadership and gives lockdowns as an example. He describes lockdowns as deadly for small businesses and says leadership treated concerns as provincial rather than within his responsibilities. He says he received calls from constituents including families and individuals affected by lockdown rules, such as students and nursing students forced to stop education and older truck drivers who had allergic reactions and were denied exemptions even when they had previously had adverse reactions to other vaccines. He describes rules that he calls “insanity,” such as families unable to take children outdoors to parks. Dean says he questioned government decisions, followed money, and believed that leaders did not always have people’s best interests at heart. He says he saw political pressure to maintain a unified front and that legislation and narratives limited what could be discussed publicly. Ferguson connects this to broader issues of censorship. Dean argues that across Canada and other countries there is increasing censorship and legislation that sets “the cage” of what people are allowed to discuss, and he asks why people are not allowed to challenge government. He claims mainstream censorship and political narratives began in COVID. He adds that MPs and opposition roles require holding government accountable. He says people should be able to talk publicly about stories received through emails, voice mails, and letters, and that these constituents have been marginalized or called names. Sean expands by arguing that mainstream media is necessary for the narrative to function, and he describes Canada as having government-linked and homogeneous messaging, citing CBC as a government broadcaster and suggesting that government and pharmaceutical advertising influence media. He also states that, in his account, public trust in public health cannot be restored without a discussion because large portions of populations in other countries believe vaccines caused serious harm. He says mainstream media pushback has been “vicious” toward those raising concerns, and he uses examples from Canada’s past blood-supply scandal to argue that public trust can be restored only after acknowledging and fixing issues. He claims people are suffering and that Canada’s healthcare mismanagement leads to inability to properly treat those harmed. Ferguson then raises assisted suicide/MAID, describing horror at injured vaccine recipients and some veterans being offered it. Dean says conservative MPs introduced private members bills aiming to address concerns, arguing the policy expanded beyond its original purpose. He says guardrails have loosened over time, and he describes MAID being offered even to people who come forward with poverty issues rather than terminal conditions. He argues this affects the most vulnerable, including seniors in nursing homes, disabled people in group homes, and teens with mental health challenges. He says he wants rollbacks, restricting access to protect those who are struggling and cannot make stable, fully informed life-ending decisions. He also claims MAID is being driven by cost-saving logic and describes further concerns around incentives and system pressures. Ferguson asks about British financial conflicts involving Moderna. He says that a Guardian journalist exposed an alleged £/USD-scale investment by then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (stated as $500,000,000) into Moderna and further described contracts in the UK via a shell company. Sean says he was not previously aware of this and references allegations that Justin Trudeau may also have invested or been involved financially. Dean responds that conflicts of interest and lack of accountability are issues in Canada and other Western democracies and frames this as institutional rot and moral decline. Later, the conversation turns to Alberta potentially considering independence or separation. Sean says he lives in Alberta and describes historical oil policy and energy market changes, including a 1973 national energy policy which he says tanked Alberta’s oil industry and caused anger. He describes equalization as money being pulled from producing provinces and given to poorer provinces, which he says has fueled long-term resentment. He says COVID-era federal overreach was another “last straw” and may have ignited renewed separatist sentiment, though he says he does not know if a referendum will happen. Dean says he would prefer Alberta stay in Canada but understands the frustration. He says Alberta’s resources have not been allowed to develop and that federal equalization and lack of conversation contribute to anger. He argues that developing Alberta’s resources helps manufacturing in Ontario and that addressing these two issues could reduce tension while keeping Alberta in the country. Sean and Dean discuss the “Alison inquiry.” Sean says the inquiry will be live-broadcast from Parliament Hill on September 8–11 and will allow MPs to listen to vaccine-injured persons’ stories through questioning and engagement. Sean says mainstream media and the government message have not allowed such conversations publicly, but that public interest has spread. He adds that the inquiry is being funded by volunteers because MPs are not given a budget, and he says costs include flying witnesses and housing them, with some witnesses needing extra recovery time. He provides where to go for donations: he says alisoninquiry.com will appear, but the donation-related web address referenced is COVID testimony, and there is a donate tab for a not-for-profit corporation created to take and disperse funds. He says he is contacting witnesses to ask whether they can cover travel costs because many cannot, and he says many are afraid to testify. Dean says a core challenge he sees is people feeling alone because they are not allowed to talk publicly. He gives an example of a constituent injured long ago who has joint pain and receives prescriptions without understanding and cannot get help because doctors won’t acknowledge the issue. Dean argues that open conversation helps people realize they are not alone and can help reduce unanswered questions and enable better care. He also says the government admitted vaccine injury exists via a vaccine injury program, describing a low compensation rate compared with numbers the government admits—stating that 252 out of a potential 60,000 were compensated (0.4 percent). In closing, Sean emphasizes that the inquiry may be “life changing,” that medical professionals should not be afraid to have the conversation, and that restoring confidence in public health requires dialogue and acknowledgment of harm and injury. Dean reiterates support for giving people permission to speak publicly, expanding conversations, and improving compensation and treatment systems so it never happens again.

The speaker was questioned about his duty station on the USS Liberty as a scene leader and member of the forward repair party. He saw two torpedoes aft but not the one that hit the ship, and believed the ship would sink. An admiral threatened the speaker, stating that if he repeated one word about the USS Liberty and who attacked it, he would end up in Leavenworth or worse. The speaker questioned why they were left alone. The speaker felt betrayed and worthless after the encounter, comparing it to the attack and worse than heartbreak. Another speaker stated the admiral knew everything and wasn't a nice man. 28 of the 34 people killed that day worked for him.

The speaker describes two competing, ongoing pressures around a موضوع they’re discussing. They say: “It’s been independently discovered for other times. He said, it has been said, it has been suppressed every single fucking time. And he said, I don’t think they’re gonna suppress it this time. He said you’re in the clear.” They claim “they obviously know about you” because they’ve had “multiple protective and threatening interactions with various agency affiliations.” The speaker explains that if the person hasn’t had a US government agent come to them to say, “stop. Shut the fuck up. Stop. Shut the fuck up,” then “they’re gonna let you do it.” They assert that “they’re waiting,” with “SSP motherfuckers” twiddling their thumbs, wondering, “Is Amy not gonna publish soon? God. We’ve been influencing this bitch forever.” The speaker notes that “on the other side of the fence, there’s multiple parties looking at each other like, didn’t we tell this bitch three years ago that we kill people for this? Is she not listening?” They emphasize the persistence of warnings: “What is she doing? She’s still doing it? We told her we were gonna kill her three years ago.” The speaker describes two persistent scenarios in their life: one where people say, “do it. Do it. You’re the one. Do it.” and another where “multiple people” tell them, “they’re gonna kill you. Don’t do it. They’re gonna kill you.”

The speaker mentions that the information has been discovered independently four times before, but has been suppressed each time. However, this time they believe it won't be suppressed. They mention having interactions with various agency affiliations, both protective and threatening. They state that if the US government hasn't intervened and told them to stop, then they are allowed to proceed. There are people waiting for them to publish, while others are questioning why they haven't been silenced yet. The speaker feels torn between those encouraging them to proceed and those warning them of potential harm.

The speaker mentioned that some people were inside the Capitol and the SSA responded. The speaker was personally involved in these conversations and questioned why they couldn't be shown the 11,000 hours of available video footage. The reason given was that there might be undercover officers or confidential human sources in the videos whose identities needed to be safeguarded. The speaker then mentioned Mr. Allen experiencing retaliation.

A friend of the speaker, now deceased, conveyed a sequence of decisions and reactions related to military aircraft and orders. The friend said that after the aircraft were sent off, they were recalled by Washington from McNamara. Even before they hit Horizon, they were called back. After reconfiguring, another volley was sent up. Then Johnson got on the phone and said, you better, turn those g d planes around. The speaker quotes the claim that, “I don’t care if, every sailor on that ship gets hurt or whatever killed, but they left us out left us out there to die.” The speaker asserts that “that’s what our government wanted. That’s what Israel wanted.”

Flying the Star of David. "We thought they were coming there to help us. No. They were coming there to kill the rest of us and sink our ship." They fired five torpedoes at us, four missed by the grace of God. "One did hit, a little bit." Forward midships, 25 American sailors, marines, National Security Agency, CIA personnel were blown to bits in the blink of an eye. The torpedo lifted our ship out of the water, slammed it down, and stopped on the starboard side. We had "three life rafts left for a crew of 294 souls." They shot them all up; "When we put the life rafts over, they shot two out of the water and took one aboard their boat as a trophy of their kill. The Israelis did." They circled the ship, machine gunning anything that moved. They sent troop-carrying helicopters to finish this off, then left. "They couldn't sink us like they planned with the blessings of, our government, LBJ, from his government onto the Biden government, and all congresses in between have never lifted a finger to, to get an investigation." We've been hollering for fifty six years because they're afraid of fending their ally.

Speaker 0: Agreed with an Israeli request to stop the distribution of a book that contains some pretty damning information about the Israeli secret service, the Mossad, if it is true. Speaker 1: The most sensational claim in the book involves this bloody day, the Beirut Marine Barracks bombing. The book says Israeli agents kept vital information from US Marines that might have saved the lives of 241 Americans killed here. Israeli government sources deny this account. But according to the book, an Israeli informant saw a Mercedes truck being fitted with secret panels for explosives. Israeli troops were told to be on the lookout for the truck. But the book says the Israelis intentionally gave the Americans only a vague warning, not mentioning the kind or size of vehicle. The book says Israeli intelligence was willing to let the terrorists succeed to protect their sources and out of contempt for US intelligence. It says agents withheld information on US hostages for similar reasons. In Toronto today, the author was under a court ordered gag not to discuss the book or the case. Speaker 2: You see, there's two restrictions. There's one restriction that I can't talk about what I learned or have done in the Mossad, and the other restriction is I cannot talk about anything that's in the book. Speaker 1: Israeli officials confirm that Viktor Ostrovsky worked for the Mossad in the nineteen eighties. Alarmed by the contents of the book, they got it temporarily blocked in Canada and The United States. Speaker 3: It's a position of the Israeli government that the information contained in the book could very well lead to the identification of employees of the Mossad and could jeopardize their lives. Speaker 1: But the book's introduction says it does not name active agents and gives only initials. It does say that more than two dozen senior Israeli agents routinely gather intelligence in The United States. Late today, the book was put out for sale in New York after the court lifted its restraining order. The publishers claimed victory, but the Israeli embassy said it will still pursue its action against the author. John Martin, ABC News, Washington.

Jorge Pabon, known on air as JP, reveals his identity on national television after decades in shadow. He describes a career in the United States Army focused on special classified UFO and space programs, including work related to moon bases and underground ocean bases. He states his full name, rank, and service details, sharing documents (redacted in parts) to verify his background: he was a 91 Juliet quartermaster of chemical repairs, dealing with water purification, and he also served as a translator in the Army. He explains he knew three languages (Spanish, Portuguese, and another) and that he was a paratrooper attached to the 7th Special Forces Group, though not a Green Beret. He clarifies his rank as E-4 during that period. Discharge and disclosures: Pabon left the Army in August of the previous year. He signed non-disclosure agreements, with certain restrictions remaining; he has received a “green light” to talk about some topics from contacts connected to Washington, though the channels and specifics are not fully disclosed. He notes growing calls for disclosure, including videos and officers’ testimonies, and he anticipates more soldiers like him coming forward in documentaries about their experiences. Prior encounters and witnesses: Before enlisting, Pabon was approached by individuals in tactical gear who urged him to take photographs of unusual aircraft (including TR-3B-type triangular craft). He was repeatedly approached by “white hats” who told him when to look up and photograph ships. He faced two opposing forces: one encouraging disclosure and another urging secrecy or intimidation; at times he and his family were pressured or harassed as a consequence of his disclosures. He states that hundreds of thousands of soldiers worldwide have seen similar phenomena and that others in his network are cautious about coming forward due to security and spiritual implications. UFO sightings and military projects: Pabon describes a range of experiences, including a significant pre-military sightings period with cigar-shaped craft observed in Tampa and Orlando, often near helicopters. He sent photographs to Dr. Michael E. Sala and other outlets; the Tampa Bay Times and others discussed his work without naming him. He recalls being approached by both supporters and suppressors of disclosure, with some encounters including armed individuals in tactical gear who questioned or escorted him. Underwater arcs and extraterrestrial bases: A central claim is the existence of massive, ancient arc ships—underwater “arcs” or cities—scattered around the world, including near Bermuda, Puerto Rico, Venezuela, near India, and Antarctica. He describes arcs as immense, city-like structures with multiple levels, capable of movement between air and water, and reportedly housing diverse personnel from multiple nations and even other species. He asserts the arcs are ancient, far more advanced than current human technology, and contain departments for different regions (e.g., Pacific arcs). These bases purportedly facilitate collaboration among humans and various extraterrestrial groups, including Nordics and other beings. Transportation and operations: Missions to arcs involve multi-branch and international collaboration, with personnel from the Army, Navy, and other services, sometimes deployed via Osprey, Black Hawk, or C-130 aircraft, to water-adjacent sites where ships lower into the water and reveal arc facilities. He describes landing on a navy-type ship that houses arcs and can extend underwater; ducts and elevators move personnel to arc interiors with unfamiliar materials and technologies. He emphasizes that the arcs are self-contained bases with the ability to move rapidly underwater. Beings and contact: Pabon reports encounters with Nordics, “ant people” (ant-like beings with large eyes and distinctive hair-like projections), and occasional gray entities observed at distance. He claims some beings can change appearance to blend with humans. He suggests a hierarchical structure among ETs, with Nordics involved in training or coordinating certain activities with human forces, including pilots and Artemis Accord participants. He links interdimensional and spiritual dimensions to the phenomena, describing experiences of consciousness, presence, and a sense of ships as living or alive. Personal perspective and beliefs: He discusses the intersection of faith and ufology, noting his Christian background and the complexity of interpreting these experiences as spiritual or demonic, but maintaining openness to a broad spectrum of phenomena, including interdimensional aspects and ancient AI-like technologies. He mentions the Monroe Institute and gateway experiences as contextual references for understanding interdimensional communication. He asserts a belief that the United States has access to advanced technologies—potentially borrowed through collaboration with Nordics and other groups—and that global cooperation among nations is part of these programs. Locations and additional claims: In addition to Puerto Rico, Bermuda, and Atlantic sites, Pabon mentions Antarctica as a locus of high technology and space-relevant radio-frequency systems. He references Alabama as a site where Nordics allegedly trained pilots connected to Artemis Accord activities. He recounts Brazil as an early personal contact point where an arc allegedly appeared near Cardos Novas, leading to a transformative personal experience. He claims a Brazilian arc has been publicly recognized as the Arc of Brazil. Closing perspective: The interview underscores a belief that disclosure may occur in phases, with multiple arcs and interactions across nations and a variety of ET groups. Pabon emphasizes the personal risks he and his family have faced, the complexity of the network surrounding disclosure, and his hope that public exposure will advance understanding of these phenomena.

A few weeks ago, I received a life-changing letter from Philip Turney, a survivor of the USS Liberty attack on June 8, 1967. At 20 years old, he witnessed the brutal assault on their clearly marked American ship by Israeli forces, despite prior identification and requests for protection. The attack lasted 25 minutes, resulting in significant casualties and damage. Attempts for U.S. assistance were thwarted by high-level officials, prioritizing relations with Israel over American lives. After enduring the attack, survivors faced a cover-up and threats against their silence. Turney emphasizes their story as a crucial truth that must be shared, urging support to reveal the facts about the tragedy and the injustices faced by the crew.

"What we put up with the attack on the USS Liberty that everyone's so afraid to talk about, clearly targeted on purpose by a country we're supporting, Israel, and it's somehow shameful to say that." "For example, during the twelve day war, such as it was with Iran, during that short conflict, there are a bunch of Israeli Defense Force officers in the Pentagon that week." "And during that week, ask anyone who works at the Pentagon, they enraged American Pentagon staff by just barging into meetings, giving orders, making demands, and nobody did anything about it." "How can a foreign military officer barge into military headquarters, even if invited, barge into a meeting and start demanding, we want this, we want that, you need to get on this." "The more you allow that kind of deeply unhealthy behavior, the more you're going to get."

Phil Turney, 77, describes receiving a letter that recounts his role as a 20-year-old during the USS Liberty attack on June 8, 1967. He says the USS Liberty’s American flag flew while in the Mediterranean Sea, with “A g t r five” painted on the bow, port, and starboard sides, and “USS Liberty” written on the stern. He states they were overflown by Israeli reconnaissance aircraft on June 7 and again on the morning of June 8, and that the IDF positively identified the ship as American and friendly. He says they requested a destroyer escort twice before entering the Mediterranean and were denied, and that their captain assured them the ship was clearly marked as American and therefore had nothing to fear. He claims they remained twelve and a half miles off the Sinai Peninsula in international waters, and that they felt secure because Israeli reconnaissance aircraft were marked with the Star of David. Turney describes an air attack beginning at about 2:00 p.m. using French-made Mirage and Mistral jets painted black with no markings, lasting about twenty-five minutes. He says the jets destroyed transmitting antennas and watertight doors above the waterline, killed and maimed firefighters and sailors, and that his radio man took one antenna offline, ran a long wire, and sent an SOS that was picked up as far away as Vietnam. He says jets sent to aid the ship were recalled: first by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, then again by Lyndon Baines Johnson, who is quoted as saying he did not care about a few dead sailors and would not embarrass Israel, ordering a return to base immediately. Turney asks how they could have known who was attacking them if the ship did not. He claims the IDF dropped napalm on the bridge of the ship and that three motor torpedo boats approached, with one torpedo hitting the starboard side. He says the attack continued for another hour and a half, destroying all but three life rafts, shooting two out of the water, and taking one aboard their boats as a trophy. He says IDF helicopters sent troops armed to board the ship later left without finishing the boarding. Afterward, Turney says the ship had over 821 rocket and cannon holes and over 5,000 armor-piercing bullet impacts, napalm burning the ship, and a 40-by-40-foot torpedo hole that caused the ship to list badly to starboard. He states they waited seventeen hours for help and that help was about forty minutes away but they were left to die. When the USS America and the USS Davis arrived, he says they took wounded for care. He recounts Admiral Kidd boarding days later and an immediate cover-up, stating they were ordered to never speak of the attack to anyone and faced fines, imprisonment, or worse. Turney concludes that survivors are “the biggest whistleblowers” in the country, that they have been smeared, and that Israel did the murdering while the US government did the covering up. He asks for support to “save America” by telling the facts and ends with “Respectfully, Phil Turney, the president of the USS Liberty.”

Moneypenny, who identifies as British, explains she does not profess to understand the American legal system and notes the British system is harsh. She says that if a high-ranking, medal-awarded UK military figure who used to be a jet pilot and who worked in UK military intelligence came forward with evidence of a misdemeanor involving the death of many people, that matter would be investigated. She says she is stuck and wants to appeal to Pam Bondi and possibly Cash Patel. She describes a US military member who used to be a pilot, who worked in sensitive intelligence, who had visited the Diego Garcia Military Base, and who had a level of clearance allowing him to explore the base, and who was aware of the Black Navy and operations requiring senior sign-in. To her, that individual sounds like someone who would be taken seriously. She questions why information from someone of that caliber who has spoken out, who is recorded speaking out, who has given corroborating evidence and named others, and who can tell where a seven seventy-seven airliner with two hundred thirty-nine souls on board went and how the operation took place, down to the mechanics and the people involved, is not being taken seriously or investigated. She frames this as murder. She notes there are two hundred thirty-nine people on board and thousands of friends, family, and others who have dedicated time to examining the case over the past eleven years, including herself. She mentions videos that potentially reveal some information, but Ashton Forbes, who holds those videos, has been given letters from the American military or American department stating that, in matters of national security, they cannot confirm any of the detail. She reiterates that this decorated military veteran, a former jet pilot who flew into Diego Garcia, who served in Iraq, and who has performed impressive military work for the United States, has spoken out and is on record. She says she will send the video and asks why nothing is being done and why nobody is investigating. She says she does not understand how the United States can overlook this, and she expresses anger on behalf of all those people aboard and their friends and families, many of whom are Chinese and Malaysian. She demands that something be done about this. She adds that she is a nobody, and that she will put this on social media and wait for a bloody good explanation as to why nobody is taking this seriously, because she considers it inhumane. She hopes the Trump administration, among others, would not allow something inhumane to occur, and she ends by expressing that she hopes others agree.

A survivor from the USS Liberty recounts the 1967 attack by Israel in waters off the Sinai Peninsula. Thirty four of my crewmen were killed and a hundred and seventy one wounded. He says Mirage jets strafed the ship, napalm was dropped, and four Israeli torpedo boats circling the vessel fired five torpedoes total, with one hit. The ship sustained a hole in the side, about 50 feet by 30 feet. He notes that all men in the gun mounts were killed and a torpedo hit the communications spaces, leaving many wounded, supposedly by an accident. He says he intercepted messages that Israel had sent, some highly classified at the time, and that these were forwarded to the government. He asserts, "And I know the Israelis, this is my opinion, planned the attack on us, and they know it too. And I believe our government knows it too."

One speaker states they jump at the sound of a horn and turn pale. Another speaker questions why a group would scramble four hours before an attack. Maintaining nuclear deterrents demands control. There was a plan to bring Russia into a potential third world war. One person states they elevated to battle preparedness level one in the entire fleet. Another speaker claims they were minutes from this happening when orders came from Washington to stop the attack. One speaker claims they were six minutes from World War Three, which would have been worse than anything in history. Another speaker tracked down David Ness, the acting ambassador in Cairo, who received urgent messages to evacuate the embassy and destroy secret materials because Cairo was going to be attacked in reprisal for the Liberty. The Navy was preparing a message.

The speaker says they plan to hold a press conference at the Triangle, but believes it is more appropriate to do so when everyone is present and ready. They report that more than a dozen crew members of the USS Liberty are there today. The speaker says they stood on the floor of the House and honored the crew for the first time, and that the crew “deserve this recognition” and “closure,” because they will not be with the speaker forever. The speaker emphasizes that many of the crew members were 21 years old in 1967 and are now around 80, noting that the exact ages vary (with an example of 86). They add that at least one of the crew members still has dozens of pieces of shrapnel, which caused issues with metal detectors. They call the crew “brave individuals” and say they deserve the truth and recognition. The speaker also states that the honor extends to crew members who have already passed away, including those who died fifty-nine years ago on that day. They say they recognized both the living and the dead by doing so on the floor of the House. They conclude by saying they will take questions, including “the hard questions” directed to the crew members.

The speaker says the U.S. government covered up “murder against America on the high seas” and that officials “wanted us all dead to start a war.” They claim their ship was the most sophisticated in U.S. naval history and lists personal and unit decorations, including a Medal of Honor, Navy Cross, Silver Stars, Bronze Stars with a V, Purple Hearts, Combat Action Ribbons, and the Presidential Unit Citation “by that scumbag LBJ.” They describe combat conditions, saying the mess decks were full of broken and wounded people and “a sea of blood.” They were told to go to sickbay and help Doc, who was wounded in the abdomen and both knees while wearing a life jacket. The speaker helped operate, rubbed Doc’s feet after Doc asked to have his socks taken off because his feet were hot, and Doc reportedly told them to “cut him open,” asking whether the speaker thought he would live. The speaker said they told him “No,” and that Doc was cut open, his insides handled, and he died “right then.” The speaker says Doc was sewed up with a couple stitches and “put… over the side,” and that this repeated “all night.” The speaker says they contacted the FBI and CIA, and wrote every congressman and senator, but they received responses saying they were “full of shit.” They say the situation had been going on “ever since day one,” and conclude that “we the people” must bring together Americans to understand “the truth about what the history is already,” rather than relying on mainstream media or alternative networks.

- What we put up with the attack on the USS Liberty that everyone's so afraid to talk about, clearly targeted on purpose by a country we're supporting, Israel, and it's somehow shameful to say that. - And until we have some self respect, not anger or hate, but just dignity, it will continue in June. - there are a bunch of Israeli Defense Force officers in the Pentagon that week. - they enraged American Pentagon staff by just barging into meetings, giving orders, making demands, and nobody did anything about it. - How can a foreign military officer barge into military headquarters, even if invited, barge into a meeting and start demanding, we want this, we want that, you need to get on this. - The more you allow that kind of deeply unhealthy behavior, the more you're going to get.

The speaker recounts an encounter with high-ranking naval officers during an incident investigation. They were boarded by Captain Ward Boston and Admiral Isaac Kidd. The admiral “came in through the stars on his on the table,” a striking image of his presence, and he spoke to them as if he were a father figure, saying, “talk to me just like I'm your dad.” The speaker describes it as a great relief, feeling reassured by the admiral’s demeanor. The group shared their account in detail, telling the admiral exactly what they saw and believed. They described torpedoes and torpedo boats being shot up, and they mentioned Dave Palm dropping on their slip ships, among other specific observations. The admiral appeared to understand the situation, looking at the speaker and acknowledging that he “could see that he knew it.” This acknowledgment seemed to convey that the admiral grasped the gravity of what had occurred. After listening, the admiral spoke again, delivering a stern warning. He put his “best stars back on me” and said, “listen. Don’t you ever breathe a word to anybody about that.” The warning emphasized severe consequences for disclosure, with the speaker noting that “you many of the guys got fines, but I they they told me fines, imprisonment, or worse.” The exchange underscored the sensitivity and potential repercussions of discussing the events, even as the officers appeared to understand and validate their observations.

Speaker 0 recalls the public back-and-forth around MKUltra: initial discussion about it breaking, followed by lawsuits where the CIA and the federal government said it did not exist, then later statements that it does exist but they were no longer doing it. Speaker 0 asks which “lie” to believe. Speaker 1 frames the issue from the perspective of a senior CIA officer in the 1950s, describing the mindset that other people must be doing similar work, that the organization would “fall behind” if it did not, and that no one is looking over their shoulders. Speaker 1 says their job is to address that lack of oversight. Speaker 1 emphasizes “urgency and total secrecy,” adding that if any current research is occurring and it is conducted at a comparable level of secrecy to original MKUltra, it is “very deeply secret.” Speaker 0 comments that it will be hard for Congress to act “when there’s a dadgum compromise.”

I served on the USS Liberty in 1967 when it was attacked by Israeli forces. 34 crewmen died, 171 were wounded. I believe the attack was planned, not accidental. The Israelis strafed us with jets and torpedo boats. Our ship had 50 caliber machine guns, but many men were killed. The torpedo hit the communication spaces. I think Israel and our government knew about the attack. I remember the fallen crewmen every Memorial Day.