James Fox Reveals UFO Whistleblower Statement

Show Transcript

Filmmaker James Fox has released a written statement from a congressional source about a whistleblower. The source says that the whistleblower testified to three congressional committees and to Arrow and that his military background was fully vetted. The same statement says investigators could not confirm parts of his testimony. Fox and the whistleblower also showed the Air Force records on camera for the first time.

And then in a separate interview, researcher Nathaniel Gillis argued that UFO encounters, hauntings, and possession cases may involve one intelligence that changes its appearance for each witness. Hey Ufologists, I'm Christina Gomez and this is your UFO News Update. So James Fox and Jason Sands appeared together on the Julian Dury podcast. Fox says he accidentally revealed Sands' name before Sands planned to go public, and he brought Sands to answer his critics.

Fox said he met the congressional source face-to-face several times and that the source asked for the statement to be read exactly as written. Take a listen. And he says, if you say blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, you might as well quote my name directly. So I said, please keep as written.

Yes, I will. Okay. From a congressional source who was aware of his testimony, Jason Sands. Jason testified to three congressional committees and Arrow as a whistleblower.

His military and intelligence community background, clearances, and assignments were fully vetted. We were not, however, able to validate some details of his extraordinary testimony. However, Mr. Sands' testimony did provide significant insights that were later validated by multiple military witnesses.

And who gave you this statement again without saying the actual person? It was a congressional source. The source didn't say which insights were confirmed or who the military witnesses are. Sands held up photos from his service, and one shows him training an airman at Black Mountain on the Nellis Test Range.

He said co-workers inside that building saw the objects on the day the 1994 NILUS UFO video was recorded, and he also showed his yearly Air Force performance reports. One highlighted entry says he served on three highly sensitive special project missions at the Secretary of the Air Force level. And the report lists Nellis Air Force Base and covers 1992 to 1993. Sands joined the Air Force in 1985 and then retired in 2007.

He said he brought the reports to answer a critic who claimed nobody in a special access program could leave every two weeks without others noticing. A special access program is a classified project with tighter limits on who can know about it than a standard secret clearance. Sands also said he had not finished his pre-publication review when his name came out, and that review is handled by the Defense Office of Pre-Publication and Security Review, known as DOPSER. Now, let's be very clear.

DOPSER does in fact check what a person says. It checks only whether classified information would be released. So the review applies to anyone who holds or has held a government clearance document and it covers both fiction and non-fiction books that are written. He then described what he believes should and should not be released.

There's a difference between a weapon system from a technology, be it from our own making or exotic retrieval kind of stuff, where that needs to stay classified. The disclosure should be that, yeah, we do have other things that we don't know where they come from, or we do know where they come from, and these are the entities and Yeah, people need to kind of know about this because it's a big deal for us as a race to just realize that we're not alone in this universe. A witness reported an object with a strange flight pattern in one of the UFO files. Arrow said it matched the sightings to a real classified U.S.

program because the witness gave a fairly exact time and place. In the other, a witness said he overheard talk of aliens watching a military technology test. Arrow concluded he misunderstood the conversation, and that means Arrow rejected the alien explanation while confirming that a witness in its files saw real secret activity at the time and place he reported. The congressional source says Sands' background checks out, and Arrow says the object was ours.

Both positions are now on record. But if a witness's service records are verified, should that give other claims more weight, or should each claim be judged only on its own evidence? Well, you tell me. Fox said he checked witness claims against his own field research, including Varginha, and he also relies on intelligence contacts who refused to meet with him for years.

After eight months on the Sands case, he asked them this. Well, I was really frustrated. I remember this happened to a couple of people I was talking with. Did it happen or did it not happen, in your opinion?

Please, do you think it happened or not? And they're like, we think it happened. And Christopher Mellon was one of these people who said that? I'm not saying any names, but we think it happened.

And I was like, okay, all right, well, based on that, I'm going to report on it. And I'm going to hope that me reporting on it will encourage other people that were potentially there. Chris Mellon was named as one person that was possibly consulted, and he could be misled. Julian also asked whether sources might be using Fox to shift attention away from human-made technology.

Fox answered that the way to settle it is sworn testimony. If you're enjoying the episode, then subscribe for daily UFO news so you don't miss the next update. Fox said Sands and others are asking for immunity so they can give details without breaking their security oaths. He named Hal Puthoff among the people who have come forward.

And then on the Camp Gagnon episode, researcher Nathaniel Gillis argued that UFO witnesses may not be seeing these objects as they are. He said a camera and a human eye can record two different things at the same moment. He cited a case from Stanford researcher Gary Nolan. A mother in France photographed a craft while driving with her children, and the photograph showed a metallic star-shaped object.

But the children described something different. It's hiding its form. It's trying to convince you, at least in this particular case, that it's from another planet. It wasn't.

It was something completely different. So there are cases like that. But my colleague Steve Mayer and I, what we're trying to do is we're looking for seams in the dreams. instances where the phenomenon glitches in and out long enough for these experiencers to regain free will and their own autonomy to push back.

Now, the reason we're doing that, the reason this is germane in the conversation is because it's not just entities that are weaponizing our perception of them. UFOs are too. Gillis also cited investigator Trey Hudson. Hudson's team watched a colleague in the field who looked normal to their human eye, but then on a thermal camera, the same person showed up as an orb.

He also addressed physicist Eric Davis and made a related point in a lecture at Contact in the Desert describing entities that take a fixed form only once a person looks at them. Gillis applied the same idea to abduction cases. And he pointed to research by the late Dr. Carla Turner.

Dealing with the interface is fascinating. Dr. Carla Turner, in her book, Into the Fringe, she's dealing with multiple abductees, one of which was Pat and her sister Rose. Both of them were abducted at the same time, but they had different descriptions of the entities that abducted them.

Gillis said the problem also goes beyond what witnesses see in the sky. UFO research relies on radar, video, and photos, but no instrument can measure what these objects or beings intended. He points to the hitchhiker effect described by the National Institute for Discovery Science and by researchers James Lukatsky and Colm Kelleher. People who investigated Skinwalker Ranch reported apparitions and strange activity in their own homes, sometimes hundreds of miles away.

Gillis said similar reports come from people connected to the Lawrence Livermore and the Los Alamos laboratories, and that some affected families later developed health problems. Host Mark Gagnon said a common explanation for abduction reports could have to do with childhood trauma that could lead the mind to replace a painful memory with an alien one. And he noted that memories recovered under hypnosis are hard to trust. Gillis agreed that there are probably many cases like that, but he also said the reverse happens when witnesses who suffer real encounters and their memories are softened to cope with it.

Whatever we're dealing with, is incredibly deceptive and in many ways it's self-serving. And a lot of this, and I'll get crucified for this, is it cannot be quantified as simply demonic. Gillis and Fox approach the same problem from two opposite ends. Fox wants to test witnesses under oath, and Gillis questions whether witnesses can trust what they see in the first place.

The Sands case sits between the both of them. A congressional source says his background is verified, but his main claims are not. Arrow says a witness in its files saw a real classified program and misread it. And then Fox also asked Congress to grant witnesses immunity and to put them under oath.

Gillis argued that even honest testimony may only capture the form an encounter took, but not its source. Which would do more for disclosure? Sworn testimony from witnesses like Jason Sands or better censored data from the field? Let me know your thoughts in the comments.

I'm Christina Gomez, that is it for today. I will see you again tomorrow at 12pm PST for another UFO news update. Be safe and remember, keep your eyes.