miércoles, 14 de septiembre de 2022



SONIA GUPTA: ¡Hi! Welcome to a new interview for codigooculto.com and AEnigma YouTube channel, and as you can see, here sitting next to me is Mr. Christopher Mellon.


SG: Thank you for being with us today.

CHRISTOPHER MELLON: My pleasure. Thank you.


SG:Thank you sir so first thing… well kind of all my questions are kind of, on your opinion. That's what matters to me the most, so first of all, first is…do you know,and I mean it for sure, if some UAPs are of non-human origins?


CM: I do not.


SG:Okay so it's just your thesis so to speak.


CM: I think the hypothesis… there's a lot of data consistent with that hypothesis I think it's a very credible hypothesis in some cases it's the only explanation I know of that makes sense. In the Nimitz case for example, what that craft was doing is so far beyond anything that we can even conceive that we can't… It's not ours, it's not American, it's not Russian, it's not Chinese… So it makes sense that it would be from some other civilization but we can't say we have absolute proof yet.


SG:Okay, do you see like viable from the standing point of the intelligence community that a phenomenon like UAP that's been taken place for more than 70 years and studied by the USAF at least for 22 years, to be still unknown today by the Government and that there is no more study material than that. I mean this has been going on for too long, how is it possible that a government has not been studying it?


CM:That's a great question. I mean it's been astonishing to me that we haven't been studying this.Our Government made a decision deliberately during the Cold War to try to discredit this issue and stop people from taking it seriously. Tostop writing about it, they wanted the public to stop being interested because they thought the Russians could take advantage of that issue in a war. So the Robertson panel in 1953 a CIA panel made that recommendation and our Government took it on board. The Air Force tried very hard to discredit this issue and convince the public that there was nothing to this, soif there was an effort, it was very very secret and when I worked in the Pentagon and when I worked at the intelligence committee at Capitol Hill,you didn't even talk about this because people would you were afraid people would laugh at you if you even mentioned it.


SG:Do you think it is reasonable, if they do have information, at least some videos,I mean than the ones we saw thanks to you, to keep, them to keep that information on UAPsfor national security reasons they said,if some of them… releasing just one of them would mean to resolve the mystery?


CM:So a couple of things uh one I think they should be sharing more than they are. The videos that I gave to the New York Times and the Washington Post, there was an investigation by the Air Force afterward and they determined they did not damage National Security and they confirmed they were truly unclassified. I know they have many other videos like that, I've seen some of them myself and I don't understand the inconsistency why… how they can justify keeping these other ones classified when those not only did not damage National Security, they help National Security because they got us finally interested acknowledging that there's an issue and helped the government make progress in trying to close these gaps in security and find out who's coming into our airspace.That was important progress, even if you only were interested in National Security and not science. That was valuable progress. So I disagree with the classification policy right now.

In some cases the sources of information do need to remain classified. We have some capabilitiesthat were developing great cost and expens that provide very, very valuable important worth fighting information that we need to protect and preserve but there's many other sources of things like these videos they could be released and if they were released I think it would help science and it would be good foreverybody.


SG: Andthose video you said you’ve seen, doyou think any of those prove theET hypothesis?


CM:No they don't. They're not definitive; they're not definitive at all.


SG: Okay, is it possible that the US government has the definitive answer and it's not showing it,releasing it to the public?


CM:I believe there is more compelling information. I know… I'm convinced, let me put it that way, that there is definitely more compelling information that remains classified. Some of it for good reason, but I think if everything… if the other information that the UAP office has, that they're briefing Congress behind closed doors, if all of that information went public there would be a greater respect, appreciation for the Extraterrestrial hypothesis it would strengthen that hypothesis.


SG: And does the US government have any departments, any departments on uh sorry on the U.S governments, do they have any technological materials from ET…


CM:That's what we're trying to find out. So there are people that tell me that the answer is yes, people who are credible. There are other people who are equally credible who tell me no and so that's partly why Congress is enacting new legislation to put in place a legal procedure to protect people, so if you were part of a program like that and you've signed a bunch of secrecy agreements after that legislation is enacted you'll be able to come forward without fear of prosecution and provide that information to this organization into Congress.


SG: But when that happens, if that happens,that information they are going to get is going to remain secret…


CM:It depends, it depends. Initially it likely would remain classified but Congress has never received confirmation that this is true, if they do,then that's a new game, it's a new day and they will have to have a discussion among themselves -do we keep the secret,do we think the public should know, do we approach the White House and talk to the President and do we advise him to make it public-. And also the more people know… the information is so red hot, that if that information begins to circulate it could also leak into the public domain. There's a greater chance that it could go public, but you're right,it won't necessarily go public right away.


SG: The issue is that if that information remains secret ufology itself can't advance; only the U.S government is going to advance, but ufology is going to remainstationary.




SG: So why would that matter to us in such case?


CM:Yeah, it might not. I mean it's possible that… it's possible the US government has that information and it'll remain secret for decades to come. That's a possibility. Nevertheless, we're making huge progress and there's a much greater chance than ever before of more information being made public and also don't forget there are groups like The Galileo Project at Harvard, independent, outside of the government that are conducting their own studies and they plan to make everything public like standard scientific procedure. So more scientific organizations around the world and more governments are doing more of their own studies and inquiries so there are various sources of information, not just the government.

It's so far… when I got involved in this issue; nobody took it seriously at all. Now we're talking about –Oh my gosh! Maybe we're gonna find out we actually have proof- maybe we're going to be able to say, even if we don't have proof, we're now using the apparatus, all the satellites and all the sensors are being used now to start collecting. So even if there is no (unintelligible) we may discover now that we're looking. We may find new information that proves this. One of the things that I have suggested, that I've repeatedly asked the Congress  to ask the Defense Department is: what about anomalies in space? They keep talking about UAPs in the air. What are we seeing on orbit and what are we seeing in space? Because if we're seeing anomalies there, and that isn't necessarily proved, but if that information even is released to the public, nobody can say it's helicopters or Chinese lanterns or that kind of thing. And once again, that's another big step forward that takes us closer to the truth, because that's very hard to explain if we're seeing maneuvering intelligently controlled objects in space.




SG: I'm completely unrelated question. I'm sure you know about this ,but I want to have your opinion, what do you think on Lacatski’s affirmationson ‘Skinwalkersat the Pentagon’?


CM:Which allegations in particular?


SG: Yours and Lue’s basically.(The ones about you and Lue).


CM:I mean they… I know those people, I know all those people. I think uh Dr Jacques,and Hal Puthoff, and Colin Kelleher, and Dr. Eric Davis… and I've discussed all these things with them.They're good people there,that were doing serious research, they did not enjoy… they did not have a big budget, did not get any support from the Pentagon writ large they were doing the best they could with what they had. There seemed to be some serious anomalies that they identified. It's very hard for anybody, including them, I think to know quite what to make of all this and when I talk to them about it they don't have a clear theory -oh this is what's happening-. They have stories,they have data, they had information about anomalies that are very hard to explain and understand and I think it's worth pursuing research on all those things.


SG: But what can be done on a department or an office without funds?


CM:Right. So there's a private group there now that has its own funding and there's a TV show around it and uh I know Dr. Travis Taylor a little bit as well, I hadsome communication with him so this is another example of private researchers collecting data and information. I think people in other parts of the world are seeing some similar things. I've seen some indications lately that another group, a couple of other groups had been finding similar sorts of anomalies with their own instruments in other areas so I think it’s so radical, it's so strange, difficult to process and understand, it's going to take a while to make sense of this but the good news is that there's activity going on, efforts being made to do that.


SG: Well, I'm guessing, if you have an office without funds, as I said, perhaps you can collect data but you won't be able to analyze it properly, you don't have the funds to…


CM:Are youtalking about AATIP or are you talking about DOD?


SG: AAWSAP and AATIP, yes.


CM:They're dead.


SG:I know.


CM:Yeah. So the government now is getting much more money to do these things.


SG: Well since I was speaking about Lacatsky’saffirmations, he was referring to the time period between 2012 and 2017.




SG: So that's why I'm guessing what Lou was able to do…


CM:See here's what's different. So what happened then was the Senate Majority Leader earmarked 22 million dollars to do research. He thought the Pentagon was going to make a good faith effort to study UAPs and they didn’t, they gave the money to a contractor, then they just said goodbye to the contractor, right? So what's happening now is totally different. Now we're getting the Army, Navy, Air Force, National Reconnaissance Office, DIA… all those people are starting to collect information and report it and they've got huge budgets and Congress is also doing some funding specifically directed at this topic so it's a totally different ball game now. There are more resources, much more resources and it's not as much a question… we need some specific resources but there's a tremendous amount…The expensive thing is the instrumentation. So we have multi-billion dollar satellites that are already built, deployed, and they're up there and now they're starting to use them. So if you think about that level of funding, if you think about the amount of resources that involved, that is being tapped into now, it's huge.


SG: I see, well thanks for your honesty Sir. Now, I wanted to touch as well on To the Stars Academy issue so… um sorry I had it here. What happened to it first of all?


CM:Well, first of all… I guess I justgotta say I was an advisor to To the Stars; I was not an officer of the company, so I can't really speak for them…


SG: ¡Oh! I just wantedyour opinion.


CM:But I think basically what happened was the company didn't have enough money to do its entertainment, education mission and research. So they had to prioritize and Tom correctly in my view decided to focus on where his greatest expertise was which was music, movies …


SG: Entertainment.


CM:Entertainment and that sort of things. Now his, as I understand it, his goal is still if he gets enough money and has enough success to then start funding research again, but for the time being you know he's got to get his foot on the ground and get the company up and stable and generated revenue.


SG: Well that's reasonable. Now, this next question… I'm asking this really respectfully, okay? But I wanted to have your opinion, what do you think about those affirmations some people are saying that's To the Stars Academy was operating like kind of as Trojan horse for some intelligence program to get its foot in the ufology scenario.


CM:Yeah I mean…that's silly. It’s nonsense.


SG: Silly!


CM:Yeah, I mean the funny… Soyeah there's no… I can see why some people would think that because I have intelligence background, Lue has an intelligence background,and Semivan has an intelligence background. We were sort of outliers in our community looking for anopportunity to collaborate and Tom created this organization and you know,I wasn't getting paid, I wasn't on payroll but Lue was able to get paid to do what he does and to get a job. There was no money coming from the government, if there were you know, they would still be doing that research, right?


SG: But there was some private funding I believe, right?


CM:Well, It was a private company, but there was no funding from…I mean the reason they had to stop doing all the UAP stuff and research isthey didn't have enough money. If they were a Trojan horse for the government,that wouldn't have been a problem.


SG: Okay, okay.


CM:The government could have easily written checks for that, right?


SG:The thing is that they started off like really really strong, and now some peoplethat we're rooting for them are like kind of disappointed.


CM:Sure I totally understand that. I totally understand that.The company raised a lot of hopes and expectations and didn't deliver on those.I don't think there's any way around that. Tom still wants to do that and if his company is successful enough I think he will, but the people have this idea, and this has come up several times this weekend, that there's some secret group out there at the intelligence community that's pulling all these strings and there's a process they're controlling it.


SG: It is getting stronger, yeah.


CM:So let me try to explain what's actually been going on. So everything that has happened today has been from the bottom up. It's been from troublemakers and activists like Lou and me. We snuck these videos out, and I took them to the New York Times. Nobody insome secret organization was asking me to do that or telling me to do that. I went to my old friends at the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Senate Armed Services Committee and I suggested they asked for an unclassified report on UAP because there wasn't enough support in Congress for funding or an appropriation.That was the easiest thing that could be done that would help keep momentum going and keep the issue in the eye. So all this stuff has been coming from troublemakers and the bottom-up,there's no evidence of any kind of outside influence or program or anything like that and it disappoints me when people say that. It's like what do they think I've been doing? I've been devoting my life to five years of this working almost full time and so when I hear that it's really disappointing to me because then people think that –no, this wasn't Chris Mellon- you know, I've been spending my own time and money. This has cost me a lot of money. I travel at my own expense. I've been doing… I've been on this campaign to try to raise awareness out of this and some people want to make me look like I'm just kind of you know tool in some secret organization or something and if anybody has any information to support that, I would want to see it


SG: Well I completely understand that on a human level. Of course you should be disappointed. But I also think it's a good thing that people are critical thinkers so to speak and they make questions, which is what we need to be doing always.


CM:It's totally valid. I can understand why people think that, because it's so shocking that this is happening,right? And so a lot of people think –Oh! It must be happening because there's some control or the government wants to do it-Everything that's been happening every step of the way has been despite the Pentagon, not because of it, and despite the government. And if you look step by step at everything that's happened, take anything: the unclassified reports,the legislation on Capitol Hill, the video leaks… They investigated those leaks and I could have gotten in big trouble and I was nervous about that. I wouldn't have been nervous if I had been doing it on behalf of the government, right?


SG: I see. Well, thank you so much.


CM:That's all I can say I know people aren’t going to necessarily believe that butthat's the truth of the matter.


SG: Yeah I know that perhaps I didn't make the normal typical questions but I think those were really reallyinteresting to know your take on them so thank you very much.


CM:Fair questions, absolutely fair questions. You're very welcome.


SG: Thank you sir.


CM:Thank you for asking these tough questions. They'reon people's minds and it's good that I have an opportunity to try to address them so I appreciate that.


SG: As I said, I've been in contact with some researchers here and they kind of were all wondering the same things so I’m conveying here what many people are asking.


CM:I work closely with… I stay in pretty close ties with some of the people at the Pentagon and I can tell you they have been pushing back on the legislation. You know, Lou has filed a grievance with the government, right?


SG: Yes, I know.


CM: If he was working for the government, he wouldn't be filing a grievance, he wouldn't need to be. He's been feeling attacked by the government, by the Defense Department and so forth and the other thing is that I don't like about that is that we want to encourage people to be activists and get involved and if people think -oh well it's already being run by some secret office somewhere- then they don't have to do anything.The reason we're making progress is because people are engaging and I want to encourage people to continue to do that so we can keep the progress going.


SG: That’snice. We’re going to leave it here. Thank you again Sir, it’s been a pleasure.


CM:You’re very welcome, very welcome.



No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario