This episode is supported by Clear Protein. And
I've got to say, this one really surprised me.
Most protein powders, thick, chalky, and you
have to choke them down with some milk. Clear
is totally different. It's a whey protein isolate
that mixes clear and water. More like a sports
drink than a heavy shake. You still get 20 grams
of protein per serving with zero sugar, zero
lactose, and none of that bloated feeling you
get from traditional shakes. The flavors are
actually good too. Strawberry Watermelon and
Wild Blue Raspberry are my go -tos. It's been
perfect for after workouts or even just that
midday pick -me -up when you don't feel weighted
down by food. And because you're a listener,
you get 20 % off your order, the best discount
they offer anywhere. Just head over to Clear
Protein and use code zero signal at checkout.
That's clear with a K, clearprotein .com, code
zero signal. The second Reaper lines up for the
kill. The weapon, a Hellfire missile. Battle
proven, precision guided, and the kind of solution
that ultimately ends problems. The missile fires,
it hits, and then nothing. No fireball, no wreckage.
The object keeps moving as if physics simply
stepped aside. Tonight we're going into the hearing
room where lawmakers rolled the video. You will
hear frustration from the members. You will hear
what the clip appears to show, and you'll hear
testimony hinting at recovered craft, not built.
Thank you everyone. It takes such great courage
to come forward and we acknowledge that. And
I hope that you see that we are taking that seriously.
Thankful for what you're doing today. I'm also
very thankful for previous witnesses that had
come forward. I see Matthew Brown in the audience.
He courageously stepped forward and was as a
witness. I encourage everybody to look and seek
his testimony. I want to thank the people that
came in our first hearing, Ryan Graves, David
Gru, David Fravor. And in our second hearing,
Admiral Gallaudet, Lou Elizondo, and Mr. Gold,
and the many others that have come forward. We
hear you and it's time that we enough is enough.
It's time that we take action. Look, I'm not
jumped to the conclusion that I believe that
there are aliens coming from another planet,
but I'm open to that. And I think that it's my,
our responsibility, especially when we're seeing
that we have a government that is blocking simply
blocking operation from us. Just last night,
I tried to get an amendment onto the national
defense authorization act that fit in the during
this of that bill to have UAP disclosure and
conveniently. It was named non -germane, mostly
deemed by staff, not even an elected official.
This is the kind of stuff that we repeatedly
see. Last year, we were blocked by someone in
house administration from being able to receive
a full briefing from Arrow. So not an elected
official, but someone in staff blocked us. And
I've had it. Enough is enough. You just heard
something rare in Washington. A thank you layered
over a warning. Pilots, Intel officers and investigators
got name -checked. People who for years have
risked careers by stepping into the light. Brian
Graves talking about metallic orbs pacing Navy
fighters off the East coast. David Fravor describing
a tic -tac -toe that out accelerated anything
we could fly. And David Grush. alleging crash
retrieval and reverse engineering buried under
classification. The message from the chair wasn't
something we hear you and we're being blocked.
Now, why does this matter? because it reframes
the whole conversation. For decades, the government
reflex with UAP wasn't curiosity, it was containment.
The playbook was, dismiss pilots as mistaken,
bury radar tracks under sources and methods,
and promise that someone behind the scenes will
look into it. But when a member of Congress says
on mic that unelected staffers quashed a briefing
and marked a disclosure amendment non -germane
before debate, that's not just inertia. That's
active gatekeeping. Now, let's be fair. There
are reasons to protect sensitive If sensor specs,
engagement roles, or platform capabilities are
baked into a video, You can't casually drop that
onto the internet. Sources and methods matter.
A secrecy is supposed to protect the nation,
not protect the narrative. When lawmakers themselves
are saying, we're not being allowed to see this
video. You've crossed from necessary protection
into accountability failure. Now think about
the posture the public has been asked to hold
for years. On one hand, there's nothing here.
And on the other hand, we can't show you what's
here. That contradiction burns trust. The pilots
aren't anonymous now. The radar techs aren't
anonymous. The incidents from the Nimitz off
San Diego to the East Coast Gimbal video. aren't
whispers, they're logged, timestamps, censored,
recorded, and that creates new obligations. If
the government wants public confidence, it has
to treat the public like adults, admit what it
knows, admit what it doesn't, and stop pretending
curiosity is the enemy. So when the congressman
says enough is enough, he's not just venting,
he's setting the stage for what comes next. However
limited, rolled in public form, where everyone
has their own reaction. That clip isn't a read
it leak. It isn't a rumor. It's Congress saying,
watch this with us. And that's where we go next.
The date is specific. October 30th, 2024. The
platform is specific, MQ -9 Reapers. The munitions
is specific, a Hellfire. You don't need to be
a munitions expert to know the headline. When
a Hellfire hits you, you don't shrug it off,
which is why this footage, if it shows what it
appears to show, is a problem. I want to cue
up a video that I've been given. And before it
starts, I'm going to describe this was taken
October 30th. of 2024. This video is of an MQ
-9 drone tracking an orb or this object off the
coast of Yemen. You'll see that another MQ -9
launched a Hellfire missile. You cannot see that
drone and I'm not going to explain it to you.
You'll see exactly what it does. Let's pin down
what we just heard. An MQ -9 Reaper. long endurance,
high altitude, stacked with sensors, tracks a
spherical target over water. A second Reaper
off -frame launches a Hellfire. If you have never
dug into the hardware, here's a quick tour. Fire
refers to the AGM -114 family, laser -guided
on radar -guided missiles with range suited for
close air support and counter -insurgency, carrying
warheads that defeat armor, vehicles, and fortified
points. Over decades, variants rolled out, shaped
charges, blast frag, even the R9X, the kinetic
version designed to minimize collateral damage,
but you know the common thread is brutal efficiency.
You put warhead on a target, target has a very
bad day. Now in engagement like the one described,
several things happen at once. Targeting sensors
track position and velocity, the missile rides
guidance, laser energy or radar cues to the aim
point. Fusing determines detonation, impact fuse
when you physically hit, or proximity fuse if
you're engineered to air burst near the target.
If it's an R9X, you're expecting kinetic energy
and slicing blades. not an explosion plume still
devastating and contact then there are mundane
failure modes a seeker can lose lock the warhead
can fail to detonate the missile can miss by
a meter which at speeds is still close on video
and optical illusions are real camera parallax
can make two objects in the same frame appear
to intersect when they're separated in depth
prussian artifacts can smear edges so you infer
a hit But all those mundane explanations get
weaker if the operators and analysts who touch
this footage with access to raw sensor feeds
and telemetry are saying, no, this was hit. Remember,
Reaper engagement is not a single shaky camera.
You can have multiple sensors in play, electro
-optical, infrared, laser designators, metadata
timestamps. If the full package shows a Hellfire
reaching an aim point and registering a contact,
and that object then maintains course, you're
in territory that abands new explanations. Maybe
the object isn't a spear at all, so much as an
emission of bright sensor bloom, a hot signature
that looks like a ball. Maybe the missile impacted
something adjacent, a decoy, a wake effect, so
the target you see is in a target the missile
actually hit. These are real possibilities and
definitely should be tested first. But if you
burned through those, the data still say contact
without consequence. Then you're in the realm
of material science or field effects we don't
publicly own. Think about the plasm sheets. that
could disperse blast energy or metamaterials
engineered to channel shockwaves around a form
or active countermeasures that detonate a fuse
prematurely out of phase. You know, those ideals,
sci -fi, until you remember how much classified
R &D never sees daylight. The question is really
simple at that point. Who has it? Because if
a nation state has it, we just watched a deterrence
problem in 1080p. And if no nation state has
it, we're not in a normal arms race story. That's
why this footage matters. It's not a lights in
the sky anecdote. It's kinetics. A weapon met
an object and that weapon lost. Mr. Knapp, do
you have any, have you heard about... events
like this occurring, and what information might
you have? I have heard about this event. Jeremy
Corbell and I talked about it in one of our episodes
a while back. We did not have the video, though.
There are servers where there's a whole bank
of these kind of videos that Congress has not
been allowed to see, that the public hasn't been
allowed to see. Occasionally some of that stuff
gets out in the wild and it comes our way. It
should be going to you. The public should be
seeing this stuff. And why you're not allowed
to, I don't know. But that's a Hellfire missile
smacking into that UFO and just bounced right
off. And it kept going. It kept going and it
looks like the debris was taken with it. It kept
going. If you've ever done battle damage assessment,
you know how alien that sentence sounds. And
if a strike, analysts look for signatures, fragmentation,
heat, shock, plume, secondary explosions, and
velocity vector. If a target is still there after
impact, it's unusually not unchanged. Its path
jitters. Its shapes distort. Its thermal profile
spikes. The description we just heard says the
opposite. The orb maintained course in what looked
like debris struck with it. Let's be rigorous
and list the counter reads. First, near miss.
The missile passed close, detonated, and the
camera angle fooled the eye. Second, fuse failure.
A dud. Third, wrong model. If it were a R9X,
kinetic with slicing effect, you would expect
a big blast, though you'd still expect some kinetic
consequence on contact. And fourth, post -production
artifacts. But in a congressional setting, that
would be a scandal by itself. Now stack the pattern
claims. People saying there are servers full
of similar videos. Cases trapped behind classification.
Lawmakers themselves barred from seeing the raw
feeds. If that's hyperbole, fix it with transparency.
Declassify one full sensor to strike assessment
package, even with sensitive bits blurred and
let independent experts review it. If it's not
hyperbole, then the context shifts. One anomalous
video is curiosity. Dozens or banks of them is
a capability. Here's a frame I use to stay sane.
Treat this like a lab result. You can't replicate
it yet. You don't declare new physics on day
one. You document, you isolate variables, you
invite replication, and you try to break your
own conclusions. But you also don't shove the
microscope in a closet because the slide made
you a little bit uncomfortable. If this is a
strike event with no effect outcome, that's not
a UFO campfire story. That's a military problem
statement. One more angle. If an object is contested,
airspace can nullify our strike. What was it
doing there? Cognizance? Signaling? Testing our
response? If it's human tech, it's a dominant
display. If it's not human tech, then the display
is the point. You can't hurt me. Either way,
it resets assumptions about imposing the rules
of the air. All roads ultimately lead to the
same place. You can't leave this as a one -off
viral clip. Either show it as a mirage with data
or treat it as if it's real. and adapt doctrine
accordingly. What the hearing did by rolling
the video was force that choice into public view.
And then the conversation took a sharp turn from
objects at a distance to objects up close. Hatsky
came to you. With government possession of NHI
craft and how they ultimately gained entry. Can
you testify to the veracity of that claim? Dr.
Lukatsky is an honorable man who served most
of his career with the DIA, a very trusted high
level rocket scientist and intelligence analyst
who inspired the OSAP program. As I said earlier,
in full disclosure, I've co -written two books
with him. He drops on myself and our other co
-author out of the blue and it took 14 months
for us to get dops or approval for him to release
two sentences on that. He said this craft we
had managed to get inside of it. It had no wings,
no rotor, no tail. It had no fuel tanks. They
didn't know how it flew. or how it was operated.
It clearly looked like it was aerodynamic. He
would not go further. He's a by -the -book guy.
And until he gets clearance to say more about
that, I don't think we're going to hear much
more. But it's not ours. It wasn't ours. We didn't
make it. We didn't know who made it and how it
was built and how it operated. We've got at least
one. And I don't know. I think that's enough
confirmation that we do have. And Leslie, Mr.
Borland, in the classified realm, have you been
exposed to undeniable confirmation of NHI technology?
And then my second question is base systems involved
in any way with reverse engineering exploitation
of non -human intelligence craft? Yeah, we're
going to have to have a conversation to skip
for that, whether I'm legally even allowed to
answer that and whether you're even allowed to
hear it, sir. The testimony moves that discussion
from what do we see? to what do we touch? The
name you heard Dr. James Liktaski. is associated
with a defense intelligence program that, according
to open reporting, examine unconventional airspace
signatures and related phenomena. In accounts
cleared for publications, he's cautious, measured
wording, minimal data, and yet the two sentences
attributed to him land like a hammer. We get
inside a craft. No conventional controls, no
fuel tanks. It flew and it wasn't ours. Let's
parse that for a second. No wings, no rotors,
no tails. Rolls out the alphabet soup of drones
and airframes in common inventories. No fuel
tanks implies either a power source we don't
recognize or a structure where fuel isn't stored
in a way we would call a tank. If it flies and
it isn't ours, we're left with two options. Someone
else on earth has silently sprinted past us or
the origin is non -human. Both are extraordinary.
Both require extraordinary evidence. And that's
where classification walls rise. We're told there's
more to say, but not here. There are legitimate
reasons for closed sessions, protecting identities,
sources, sensor specs. There's a difference between
protecting how we know something and whether
we know it. If a craft exists in government custody,
the public doesn't need the blueprints to be
told the fact of the possession. Conversely,
if no such craft exists, say so plainly. and
provide mechanisms for independent verification
that doesn't boil down to trust us. What would
proof even look like in a domain soaked with
disinformation? Chain of customary documentation
spanning decades, materials analyzing show isotopic
ratios or lattice structures not achievable within
our known industrial complex, high -resolution
imagery tied to timestamp telemetry, multiple
cleared witnesses willing to testify under penalty
of perjury. If a program is truly operating as
a wave sap so classified that even normal oversight
can't see it, that's a constitutional problem,
not just curiosity. Lawmakers will have to decide
whether they accept we can brief you as an answer
to a question of this magnitude. Now let's bring
it back to the orb and the hellfire. If you can
walk inside an object that flies without fuel
tanks, and then you watch a strike that doesn't
produce expected damage, those aren't separate
stories, they rhyme. And the rhyme is your assumptions
about flight, energy, and control are incomplete.
So where does that leave us? with a responsibility
to talk like grownups, to omit uncertainty without
hiding behind it, to list alternative explanations
without using them as a shield, and to demand
that the people who have the unblurred data step
forward long enough to show the nation what it
actually owns or what it's actually facing. A
Hellfire missile. meets a glowing orb, and does
nothing we can measure. In the same room, witnesses
hint at craft with no wings, no tanks, no familiar
physics, and not ours. Maybe the video fools
the eye. Maybe a rival has climbed a ladder we
don't talk about. Or maybe this is exactly what
it looks like. The public's first sanctioned
glimpses of a reality we've been trained not
to see. If it's a miss or failure, publish the
analysis. If it's adversary tech, brief the nation
honestly. If it's something else, in the limbo
and treat treat citizens like partners in truth,
not spectators in a managed reveal. This is Zero
Signal, conspiracy shorts. New shorts drop often.
Our deep dive long form episodes land Tuesday
at 6 a .m. I'm David Green. Subscribe, share
this with someone who still thinks UFO just means
lights in the sky. Until next time, question
everything.