prompt variations

airoboros-l2.py

@@ -13,15 +13,16 @@ print("Input text",len(clean_text),"characters, split into",len(texts),"chunks")
 
 # Prompts and templates
 system_message = "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request."
-simple_instr = "Please summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics."
-simple_instr2 = "Please write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics."
+
+simple_instr_v3 = "Please summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics."
+simple_instr_v4 = "Please write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics."
 
 template = "{{system_message}} USER: {{prompt}}\n\n{{instr}} ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "
 
 prepare = []
 for idx, chunk in enumerate(texts):
-    prompt = Template(template).render(system_message=system_message,prompt=chunk,instr=simple_instr2)
+    prompt = Template(template).render(system_message=system_message,prompt=chunk,instr=simple_instr_v4)
     item = { 'language': 'english', 'name': f'chunk-{idx}', 'prompt': prompt }
     prepare.append(item)
 
-open(f'prepare_ufo-chunk-{chunk_size}_english_aeroboros-v4.ndjson','w').write('\n'.join([json.dumps(x) for x in prepare]))
+open(f'prepare_ufo-chunk-{chunk_size}_english_airoboros-l2-v4.ndjson','w').write('\n'.join([json.dumps(x) for x in prepare]))

prepare_ufo-chunk-4096_english_airoboros-l2-v3.ndjson

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-0", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Right, now I'd like to introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is Lieutenant Ryan Graves.\nHe's the executive director of Americans for Safe Aerospace.\nLieutenant Graves is also a former U.S. Navy F-18 pilot with his own UAP experience.\nThe next witness, David Grush, is a former senior intelligence officer with the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency\nand was a senior technical advisor for UAP issues.\nAnd finally, retired Navy Commander David Fraber, squadron leader who worked as a Naval aviator for 18 years.\nMr. Fraber has his own UAP experience known as the TikTok event.\nI look forward to hearing from all three of you today.\nPursuant to committee rule 9G, the witnesses will please stand and raise their right hands.\nDo solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you guide.\nLet the record show that all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. You may be seated.\nWe appreciate you all being here today and look forward to your testimony.\nI'll remind the witnesses that we have read your written statements and they will appear in full in the hearing record.\nPlease try to limit your oral statements to five minutes.\nAs a reminder, please press the button on the microphone in front of you so that it's on and the members can hear you.\nWhen you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green.\nAfter four minutes, it will turn yellow and the red light when that comes on, it tells you your five minutes have expired.\nI'll now recognize Mr. Graves for five minutes for your opening statement.\nThank you.\nChairman Grothman, Ranking Member Garcia, distinguished members of the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Representative Burchett and Luna.\nMy name is Ryan Fobs Graves and I'm a former F18 pilot with a Decade of Service in the U.S. Navy,\nincluding two deployments in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Inherent Resolve.\nI have experienced advanced UAP firsthand and I'm here to voice the concerns of more than 30 commercial aircrew and military veterans who have confided their similar encounters with me.\nToday, I would like to highlight three critical issues that demand our action.\nAs we convene here, UAP are in our airspace, but they are grossly underreported.\nThese sightings are not rare or isolated. They are routine.\nMilitary aircrew and commercial pilots, trained observers whose lives depend on accurate identification, are frequently witnessing these phenomena.\nThe stigma attached to UAP is real and powerful and challenges national security.\nIt silences commercial pilots who fear professional repercussions, discourages witnesses,\nand is only compounded by recent government claims questioning the credibility of eyewitness testimony.\nParts of our government are aware of more about UAP than they let on, but excessive classification practices keep crucial information hidden.\nSince 2021, all UAP videos are classified as secret or above.\nThis level of secrecy not only impedes our understanding, but fuels speculation and mistrust.\nIn 2014, I was an F18 Foxtrot pilot in the Navy Fighter Attack Squadron 11, the Red Rippers, and I was stationed at NAS Oceana in Virginia Beach.\nAfter upgrades were made to our jet's radar systems, we began detecting unknown objects operating in our airspace.\nAt first, we assumed they were radar errors, but soon we began to correlate the radar tracks with multiple onboard sensors, including infrared systems, eventually through visual ID.\nDuring a training mission in the warning area of Whiskey 72, ten miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, two F18 Super Hornets were split by UAP.\nThe object, described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere, came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft and was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter.\nThe mission commander terminated the flight immediately and returned base.\nOur squadron submitted a safety report, but there was no official acknowledgment of the incident and no further mechanism to report the sightings.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-1", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Soon, these encounters became so frequent that aircrew would discuss the risk of UAP as part of their regular preflight briefs.\nRecognizing the need for action and answers, I founded Americans for Safe Aerospace.\nThe organization has since become a haven for UAP witnesses who were previously unspoken due to the absence of a safe intake process.\nMore than 30 witnesses have come forward and almost 5,000 Americans have joined us in the fight for transparency at saferaorspace.org.\nThe majority of witnesses are commercial pilots at majority major airlines.\nOften, they are veterans with decades of flying experience.\nPilots are reporting UAP at altitudes that appear above them at 40,000 feet, potentially in low Earth orbit or in the gray zone below the Carmen line,\nmaking inexplicable maneuvers like right-hand turns and retrograde orbits or J-hooks.\nSometimes, these reports are reoccurring, with numerous recent sightings north of Hawaii and in the North Atlantic.\nOther veterans are also coming forward to us regarding UAP encounters in our airspace and oceans.\nThe most compelling involve observations of UAP by multiple witnesses and sensor systems.\nI believe these accounts are only scratching the surface and more will share their experiences once it is safe to do so.\nIn closing, I recognize the skepticism surrounding this topic.\nIf everyone could see the sensor and video data I witnessed, our national conversation would change.\nI urge us to put aside stigma and address the security and safety issue this topic represents.\nIf UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem.\nIf it is something else, it is an issue for science.\nIn either case, unidentified objects are concerned for flight safety.\nThe American people deserve to know what is happening in our skies.\nIt is long overdue. Thank you.\nMr. Griesch.\nMr. Chairman, ranking members in congressmen, thank you.\nI'm happy to be here.\nThis is an important issue and I'm grateful for your time.\nMy name is David Charles Griesch.\nI was an intelligence officer for 14 years, both in the U.S. Air Force, both active duty Air National Guard and Reserve,\nat the rank of major and most recently from 2021 to 2023, at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, NGA,\nat the GS-15 civilian level, which is the military equivalent of a full bird colonel.\nI was my agency's co-lead in unidentified anomalous phenomena and trans-medium object analysis,\nas well as reporting to the UAP task force, UAPTF, and eventually, once it was established,\nthe all-domain anomaly resolution office, ARRO.\nI became a whistleblower through a PPD-19 urgent concern filing in May 2022 with the intelligence community inspector general.\nFollowing concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialed current and former\nmilitary and intelligence community individuals that the U.S. government is operating with secrecy\nabove congressional oversight with regards to UAPs.\nMy testimony is based on information I've been given by individuals with a long-standing track record of legitimacy\nand service to this country, many of whom also have shared compelling evidence\nin the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony to myself and my various colleagues.\nI have taken every step I can to collaborate this evidence over a period of four years while I was with the UAP task force\nand do my due diligence on the individual sharing it.\nThis is because of these steps I believe strongly in the importance of bringing this information before you.\nI am driven by a commitment both to truth and transparency, rooted in our inherent duty to uphold the United States Constitution\nand protect the American people.\nI'm asking Congress to hold our government to this standard and thoroughly investigate these claims.\nBut as I stand here under oath now, I am speaking to the facts as I have been told them.\nIn the U.S. Air Force, in my national reconnaissance office, NRO, Reservist Capacity, I was a member of the UAP task force from 2019 to 2021.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-2", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: I served at the NRO Operations Center on the Director's Briefing Staff, which included the coordination of the Presidential Daily Brief\nand supporting a variety of contingency operations, which I was the Reserve Intelligence Division Chief backup.\nIn 2019, the UAP task force director asked me to identify all special access programs and controlled access programs,\nalso known as SAPs and CAPs.\nWe needed to satisfy our congressionally mandated mission, and we were direct report at the time to the DEP SEC DEV.\nAt the time, due to my extensive executive level intelligence support duties, I was cleared to literally all relevant compartments\nand in a position of extreme trust, both in my military and civilian capacities.\nI was informed in the course of my official duties of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program,\nto which I was denied access to those additional read-ons when I requested it.\nI made the decision, based on the data I collected, to report this information to my superiors and multiple inspectors general,\nand in effect, becoming a whistleblower.\nAs you know, I've suffered retaliation for my decision, but I am hopeful that my actions will ultimately lead to a positive outcome of increased transparency.\nThank you, and I'm happy to answer your questions.\nThank you.\nCommander Fraver?\nThank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, carsmen, carswomen.\nI want to first thank you for the invitation to speak to the Committee on the UAP topic that has been in the news for the past six years\nand seems to be continuing to gain momentum.\nAs you know, my name is David Fraver. I'm a retired commander in the United States Navy.\nIn 2004, I was a commanding officer of Strike Fighter Squadron 41, the world-famous Black Aces.\nWe were attached to carrier Air Wing 11 stationed on board the USS Nimitz, and had begun a two-month workup,\ncycle off the coast of California.\nOn this day, we were scheduled for a 2V2 air-to-air training with the USS Princeton as our control.\nWhen we launched off Nimitz, my wingman was joining up.\nWe were told that the training was going to be suspended, and we were going to proceed with real-world tasking.\nAs we proceeded to the west, the air controller was counting down the range to an object that we were going to,\nand we were unaware of what we were going to see when we arrived.\nThe controller told us that these objects had been observed for over two weeks, coming down from over 80,000 feet,\nrapidly descending to 20,000 feet, hanging out for hours, and then going straight back up,\nfor those who don't realize, above 80,000 feet is space.\nWe arrived at the location at approximately 20,000 feet in a controller called \"Merge plot,\"\nwhich means that our radar blip was now in the same resolution cell as the contact.\nAs we looked around, we noticed that we saw some whitewater off our right side.\nIt's important to note that the weather on this day was as close to perfect as you could ask for off the coast of San Diego.\nClear skies, light winds, calm seas, no white caps from waves, so the whitewater stood out in a large blue ocean.\nAll four of us, because we were in F-18Fs, so we had pilots in Winslow in the back seat,\nlooked down a small, solid white tic-tac object with a longitudinal axis pointing north-south\nand moving very abruptly over the water, like a ping-pong ball.\nThere were no rotors, no rotor wash, or any sign of visible control surfaces like wings.\nAs we started clockwise towards the object, my wizard and I decided to go down and take a closer look\nat the other aircraft staying in high cover to observe both us and the tic-tac.\nWe proceeded around the circle about 90 degrees from the start of our descent,\nand the object suddenly shifted its longitudinal axis, aligned it with my aircraft, and began to climb.\nWe continued down another 270 degrees, nose-low, where the tic-tac --\n270 degrees, and we went nose-low to where the tic-tac would have been.\nOur altitude at this point was about 15,000 feet, and the tic-tac was about 12,000.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-3", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: As we pulled nose onto the object, within about a half mile of it,\nit rapidly accelerated in front of us and disappeared.\nOur wingmen, roughly 8,000 feet above us, lost contact also.\nWe immediately turned back to see where the whitewater was at, and it was gone also.\nSo as we started to turn back towards the east, the controller came up and said,\n\"Sir, you're not gonna believe this, but that thing is at your cap point,\nroughly 60 miles away in less than a minute. You can calculate the speed.\"\nWe returned in imits. We were taking off our gear.\nWe were talking to one of my crews that was getting ready to launch.\nWe mentioned it to them, and they went out,\nand luckily got the video that you see, that 90-second video.\nWhat you don't see is the radar tape that was never released,\nand we don't know where it's at, of the active jamming that the object put on an APG-73 radar,\nand I can get into modes later if you're interested.\nWhat is shocking to us is that the incident was never investigated.\nNone of my crew were ever questioned. Tapes were never taken,\nand after a couple days, it turned into a great story with friends.\nIt wasn't until 2009, until Jay Stratton had contacted me to investigate.\nUnbeknownst to all, he was part of the ATIP program\nin the Pentagon, led by Lou Elizondo.\nThere was an unofficial official report that came out that's now on the internet.\nYears later, I was contacted by the other pilot, Alex Detrick,\nand asked if I'd been contacted, and I said no, but I'm willing to talk.\nI was contacted by Mr. Elizondo, and we talked for a short period of time,\nand he said we'd be in contact.\nA few weeks after that, I was made aware that Lou had left the Pentagon in protest\nand joined forces with Tom DeLonge, Chris Mellon, Steve Justice,\nand others to form Two Stars Academy,\nan organization that pressed the issue of leading industry experts\nand U.S. government officials.\nThey worked with Leslie Keene, who was present today,\nRob Blumenthal, and Helene Cooper to publish the articles\nin the New York Times 2017 New York Times,\nand it removed the stigma on the topic of UFOs, which is why we're here today.\nThose articles opened the door for the government and public that cannot be closed.\nIt has led to an interest from our elected officials,\nwho are not focused on little green men,\nbut figuring out where these craft are, where they from,\nthe technology they possess, how do they operate.\nIt also led to the Whistleblower Protection Act and the NDAA.\nThere are multiple witnesses coming forward to say,\nthat have firsthand knowledge, and Mr. Grush just covered that.\nWhat concerns me is that there's no oversight from our elected officials\non anything associated with our government processing or working on craft,\nbelieve not from this world.\nThis issue is not a full public disclosure that can undermine national security,\nbut it is about ensuring that our system of checks and balances works across\nall work done in the government using taxpayer funds.\nRelative to government programs, even unacknowledged wave programs\nhave some level of oversight by the appropriate committee members\nin the House and Senate,\nand this work that is said to be occurring from Whistleblower testimonies\nshould not be exempt.\nIn closing, I would like to say that the TIC-TAC object we engaged in 2004\nwas far superior to anything that we had on time,\nhave today, or are looking to develop in the next 10 years.\nIf we in fact have programs that possess this technology\nand needs to have oversight from those people that the citizens of this great country\nelected in office to represent what is best for the United States\nand best for the citizens, I thank you for your time.\nThank you very much.\nThank you very much.\nI know it's very difficult for all of you, all of you who have done it in the past,\nto try to illuminate this issue.\nCall on myself first for some questions.\nI'm going to start with Mr. Graves.\nAre your pilots, are pilots that you interact with as part of your organization,\ndo you feel adequately trained and briefed on how to handle encounters with UAPs?\nNo.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-4", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Right now, military witnesses to UAP have limited options for reporting UAP,\nbut more concerning is that commercial aviation sector has not adapted\nto the lessons that the military has implemented.\nThe military and Department of Defense has stated that UAP represent\na critical aviation safety risk.\nWe have not seen that same language being used in the commercial markets.\nThey are not acknowledging this risk.\nOkay.\nWhat steps do you think you have to be taken to improve a pilot's UAP reporting,\nbe it military or commercial?\nRight now, we need a system where pilots can report without fear of losing their jobs.\nThere is a fear that the stigma associated with this topic is going to lead to professional repercussions\neither through management or perhaps through their yearly physical check.\nSo having a secure system, reducing the stigma, and making this information available\nthrough the public is going to reduce the concerns that aircrew have.\nCould you just give me a little idea of the degree to which reports in the past\nare not made public right now?\nWell, I don't think there has been a proper reporting system to gather those reports\nand thus not report them.\nSo to answer your question, I think there is a dearth of data due to the fact\nthat the reporting has been limited up to this time.\nCould you tell me why you believe it is kind of to play the devil's advocate\na reason why some of this stuff should not be available to the public?\nThere are certainly some national security concerns when we use our advanced sensors\nand our tactical jets to be able to identify these objects.\nHowever, there is no reason that the objects themselves would be classified.\nI would be curious to see how the security classification guideline\nactually spells out the different nuances of how this topic is classified\nfrom the perspective of UAP, not national security.\nI will give you a follow-up on that.\nAssuming that there are reasons why not all this should be made public,\nthis has been around for a long period of time.\nCan any of the three of you think of any reason why anything related to UAP\nsay 15 years and back should not be immediately made public?\nI think one of it is acknowledging a vulnerability,\nboth from a collection and I will just say a countermeasure perspective.\nWe have not cracked for many years.\nEven say 20 years back.\nIs there any reason why when you go back that far things shouldn't be made public?\nUnless it shows a specific national security vulnerability\nas it relates to a weakness in particular defenses.\nMr. Fraver, the TikTok incident that you were engaged occurred in 2004.\nWhat kind of reporting took place after that incident?\nNone.\nWe had a standard debrief where the backseaters went down to our career intel center\nand briefed what had happened and that was it.\nNo one else talked to us.\nI was in the top 20 in the battle group.\nNo one came.\nThe captain was aware, the admiral was aware, nothing was done.\nYour commanding officers provide any sort of justification?\nNo, because I was the commanding officer at the squadron.\nWas this incident the only UAP event that you encountered while you were a pilot?\nYes, it was.\nThis is for any one of you.\nBased off of each of your experiences and observations,\ndo you believe UAPs pose a potential threat to our national security?\nYes, and here's why.\nThe technology that we faced was far superior than anything that we had\nand you could put that anywhere.\nIf you had one, you captured one, you reverse engineered it, you got it to work,\nyou're talking something that can go into space, go someplace,\ndrop down in a matter of seconds, do whatever it wants and leave\nand there's nothing we can do about it.\nNothing.\nOkay.\nI would also like to add from commercial aviation and military aviation perspective,\nwe deal with uncertainty in our operating space as a matter of our professional actions.\nIdentifying friend from foe is very important to us.\nAnd so when we have unidentified targets and we continue to ignore those\ndue to a stigma or a fear of what it could be,\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-5", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: that's an opening that our adversaries can take advantage of.\nWhat steps should we take in the better and understand and respond to UAP encounters\nin the interest of national security?\nThere needs to be a location where this information is centralized for processing\nand there needs to be a two-way communication loop so that operators on the front end\nhave a feedback and can get best practices on how to process information,\nwhat to do and to ensure that their reporting is being listened to.\nRight now there is not a lot of back and forth.\nMr. Grush, in your complaint to the intelligence community inspector,\nyou inspector general, you claim that you believe information is being hidden.\nWhat kind of information do you think was hidden\nand do you think it should remain hidden?\nYes, I can speak to that very briefly in an unclassified manner.\nAs you know, the preponderance in my complaint was classified\nto the intelligence communities.\nBoth material acquisition and exploitation activity,\nalso baselining the UAPs but not sharing it with intelligence professionals\nthat are actually doing step briefs to pilots, that kind of information.\nOkay, thank you very much.\nNow we'll go to Mr. Garcia.\nThank you.\nAgain, thank you all for your service and for testifying today.\nI want to just talk about the UAPs as it relates to what we're seeing\nin the pilots' interaction with UAPs.\nParticularly Mr. Graves, one of the concerns from members of this committee\nis this idea that pilots, there's no system to actually report UAPs\nand the stigma around pilots.\nAnd so can you just briefly, you mentioned that you're working with 30 pilots right now\nthat have had encounters with UAPs, but you've also, I believe, discussed\nand know of many more pilots.\nThis is just those that you're currently working with.\nIs that correct? Can you expand on that?\nCertainly. I'll break that down in two ways.\nFirst, when we were first experiencing these objects off the Eastern Seaboard\nin the 2014 to 2015 time period, anyone that had upgraded their radar systems\nwere seeing these objects.\nSo there was a large number of my colleagues that were detecting these objects\noff the Eastern Seaboard.\nThey were further correlating that information with their other onboard sensors,\nand many of them also had their own eyesightings as well of these objects.\nNow, that was our personal firsthand experience at the time.\nSince then, as I've engaged this topic, others have reached out to me\nto share their experiences both on the military side\nas well as the commercial aviation side.\nOn the military aviation side, veterans that have recently got out,\nhave shared their stories and have expressed how the objects we were seeing\nin 2014, 2015 continued all the way to 2019, 2020, and beyond.\nAnd so it became a generational issue for naval aviators on the Eastern Seaboard.\nThis was something we were briefing to new students.\nThis is something that was included in the notice to airmen\nto ensure that there was no accidents.\nAnd now with commercial aviators, they are reaching out\nbecause they're having somewhat similar experiences\nas our military brothers and sisters,\nbut they do not have any reporting system that they can send us to.\nAnd let me just add both to Mr. Fraver as well as Mr. Graves.\nNot having the system for reporting,\nwould you both agree that it's harmful to not just our national security interests\nbut to understand this phenomenon of what's happening with UAPs?\nI think it's actually a travesty that we don't have a system\nto correlate this and actually investigate.\nSo if you took the East Coast, there's coastal radars out there\nthat monitor our air defense identification zone, so about 200 miles.\nThey can track these, so when you see them,\nthey can actually go and pull that data and get maneuvering.\nInstead of just having the airplanes, there's other data sources out there.\nAnd I've talked to other government officials on this.\nSo you need a centrally located repository that these reports go to.\nSo if you just stuck it in DOD,\nyou wouldn't get anything out of the Intelligence Committee\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-6", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: because they have a tendency not to talk.\nBut if you had a central location where these reports would come in,\nnot just military but also commercial aviation\nbecause there's a lot of that going on,\nespecially if you talk to anyone that flies from here to Hawaii\nover the Pacific, they see odd lights.\nSo I think you need to develop something that allows you a central point\nto collect the data in order to investigate.\nMr. Graves?\nI will compare with everything Mr. Fraver said.\nI'll continue to say that the commercial pilots that have reached out to me\nthrough Americans for Safe Aerospace are doing so\nbecause they don't feel there's another way for them to report this safety issue.\nAnd I think one of the clear outcomes of this hearing already\nis that there has to be a safe and transparent reporting process for pilots,\nboth on the commercial side and the military side,\nto be able to report UAPs in a way that's also transparent\nbut also understands the scope of our national security interests\nand what may be classified or not.\nBut I think there has to be some sort of system.\nAnd so that's something that I hope can be an outcome that this committee can work on.\nIs there anything else for just the two of you briefly,\nbeyond the reporting system that you think that we can do as a government\nto encourage and facilitate more civilian reporting?\nI think we're doing it right now.\nOkay, great.\nI think this hearing is going to show the American people\nthat their government takes this topic seriously.\nAnd how about civilians that may not be pilots?\nWhat kind of process could be in place for civilians who are not pilots\nwho may have UAP encounters?\nDo either of you have any suggestions that could facilitate that?\nMy recommendation would be to make that a sensor-centric operation\nin order to make it as objective as possible.\nOkay. Sir, Mr. Faver?\nI agree with Mr. Graves on that.\nOkay. Just briefly,\nI also just want to note for particularly for the two pilots\nand have a question for Mr. Grush.\nOne of the things that I found fascinating in our discussion,\nMr. Graves, last night as well is that you both described UAPs\nand formations and the way they are observed in space or in our air.\nAnd the way that they move is essentially ways in which current technology\nor aircraft that we know of are unable to actually function or move.\nAnd so will you just pour the public record again once again,\njust briefly, just either describe or note that aircraft that we witness,\nparticularly by the 30 folks that you're working with,\nare essentially outside the scope of anything that we know of today\nand the technology we have today.\nMr. Graves, Mr. Faver?\nYes. The objects that are being seen by commercial pilots\nare performing maneuvers that are unexplainable\ndue to our current understanding of our technology\nand our capabilities as a country.\nAnd that applies for the military as well.\nMr. Faver?\nYeah, I concur with that.\nWe have nothing that can stop in midair and go the other direction,\nnor do we have anything that can, like in our situation,\ncome down from space, hang out for three hours and go back up.\nThank you. My last question.\nAnd sometimes, I know you have also said some of these answers in the past,\nbut we're trying to get them on the public record as well,\nwhich is really important.\nMr. Grush, finally, do you believe that our government is in possession of UAPs?\nAbsolutely based on interviewing over 40 witnesses over four years.\nAnd where?\nI know the exact locations, and those locations were provided\nto the Inspector General and some of which to the Intelligence Committees.\nI actually had the people with the firsthand knowledge\nprovide a protected disclosure to the Inspector General.\nThank you. And, Mr. Chairman, I would just say that I think that these questions\nare important questions, and I look forward to being involved in the process\nto get those answered.\nI know there will be a lot of questions from other Committee members,\nso I yield back.\nThank you. We'll go to Mr. Richard himself.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Garcia.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-7", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: I would like to have you on my legislation to do just that on the reporting.\nAnd we'll get together on that. Maybe you can be my co-sponsor on that.\nThat'd be really cool. Thank you for those great questions.\nMr. Graves, again, I'd like to know,\nhow do you know that these were not our aircraft?\nSome of the behaviors that we saw in a working area,\nwe would see these objects being at 0.0 Mach,\nthat's zero airspeed, over certain pieces of the ground.\nSo what that means, just like a river, if you throw a bobber in,\nit's going to float downstream.\nThese objects were staying completely stationary in Category 4, Hurricane Winds.\nThese same objects would then accelerate to supersonic speeds,\n1.1, 1.2 Mach, and they would do so in very erratic and quick behaviors\nthat I don't have an explanation for.\nOkay. Have you spoken to commercial and military pilots\nthat have seen these off of our East Coast?\nI have.\nOkay.\nMr. Freiver, I noticed that in the tic-tac video,\nit's tic-tac like the candy, not tic-tac like the Chinese Communist app.\nThat's correct.\nYes, sir. I just want to make that,\nbecause my daughter corrected me on that and called me a boomer,\nand said, \"Hey, boomer,\" and I said, \"No, baby, it's tic-tac like the candy.\nYou're going to have to just look it up.\"\nBut now I would like to say today is a day of many firsts.\nIt's a miracle that we're having this meeting,\nand it's also a miracle that my wife has put up with me for nine years today.\nToday is my anniversary, so I want to tell my wife,\n\"Happy anniversary,\" and that I love her very much.\nAs she likes to say, this nine years have been the best two years of her life.\nSo, thank you.\nMr. Freiver, what astonished you the most about the flight capabilities\nof these tic-tacs very briefly?\nThe performance, absolute performance.\nAnd you're not aware of any other objects that anybody in the world has,\nin this world, that has those capabilities?\nNo, I think it's far beyond actually our material science that we currently possess.\nAre you aware of any other reconnaissance platforms\nthat have tracked or recorded the tic-tacs maneuvers,\nmaybe the NORAD system or any of the others?\nI am not.\nOkay.\nMr. Grush, thank you for being here, brother.\nThank you all very much.\nHave you faced any retaliation or reprivals\nfor any of your testimony or anything on these lines?\nYeah, I have to be careful what I say in detail,\nbecause there is an open whistleblower or reprisal investigation on my behalf,\nand I don't want to compromise that investigation\nby providing anything that may help provide somebody information.\nBut it was very brutal and very unfortunate,\nsome of the tactics they used to hurt me both professionally\nand personally, to be quite frank.\nIt's very unfortunate, as I say, when you're over the target.\nThat's when they do the most firing at you.\nDo you have any personal knowledge of people who have been harmed or injured\nin efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology?\nYes.\nPersonally.\nHave anyone been murdered that you know of or have heard of, I guess?\nI have to be careful asking that question.\nI directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.\nMaybe if we could get in a confidential area of SCIF, we could talk about that.\nBut unfortunately, we were denied access to the SCIF,\nand that's very unfortunate in this scenario.\nMr. Faber, do you believe that you witnessed an additional object under the water\nin relation to your encounter?\nI will say we did not see an object.\nThere was something there to cause the whitewater,\nand when we turned around, it was gone, so there was something there that obviously moved.\nIt was not the same object, though, that you were looking at, correct?\nNo, we actually joked that the TIC-TAC was communicating with something\nwhen we came back, because the whitewater disappeared.\nWe were, in another instance,\nwere told about the capabilities of a jamming during viewing\nwhen there were some people chasing some of these objects.\nDid you experience any of that jamming or interrupting your radar or weapons system?\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-8", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: My crew that launched after we landed experienced significant jamming to the APG-73 radar,\nwhich was what we had on board, which is a mechanically scanned,\nvery high-end system prior to the APG-79.\nAnd yes, it did pretty much everything you could do, range, velocity, aspect,\nand then it spit the lock, and the targeting pod is passive.\nThat's what we were able to get the video on.\nI'm about to run out of time, but are you aware of any of our enemies\nthat have that capability?\nNo.\nOkay.\nI would also like to note for the record that, like George Knapp,\nbreaking area 51, he's the reason I knew about that,\nand the reason I know about the TIC-TACs is Leslie Keene\nfrom New York Times article, and I would encourage everybody to read that.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nYou go back to your room. No time.\nVery good.\nMr. Raskin?\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nGraves, you reported UAP encounters during training flights, I think,\nand have since come forward to warn the Pentagon\nthat these encounters may be putting pilots at risk.\nMy first question is, you've identified these as taking place on the East Coast.\nIs it just on the East Coast where these encounters have been reported?\nNo. Since the events initially occurred,\nI've learned that the objects have been detected\nessentially where all operations, Navy operations,\nare being conducted across the world,\nand that's from the Ultimate Anomaly Resolutions Office reporting.\nCan you describe your experience after you decided to come forward\nand go public with your experience?\nCertainly.\nLike many others, in 2017, I saw the New York Times article come out as well,\nand for me it was special because I recognized the voices on the video.\nI recognized the video itself.\nI had seen it when it was taken. I had seen it when it was debriefed,\nand so that kind of shook me because I realized that this problem was still ongoing,\nand so I reached out to colleagues back on the East Coast\nand realized that this was still a safety risk that they were dealing with,\nthat they had essentially hit a wall with how they could move forward on this conversation.\nIt was at that point when I decided to try to move the conversation forward myself.\nAre there common characteristics to the UAPs that have been cited by different pilots,\nand can you describe what the convergence of descriptions is?\nCertainly.\nWe were primarily seeing dark gray or black cubes inside of a clear sphere.\nI'm sorry, dark gray or black cubes?\nYes, inside of a clear sphere,\nwhere the apex or tips of the cube were touching the inside of that sphere,\nand that was primarily what was being reported\nwhen we were able to gain a visual tally of these objects,\nand that occurred over almost eight years,\nand as far as I know, it's still occurring.\nSo I take it that you're arguing what we need is real transparency in a reporting system\nso we can get some clarity on what's going on out there,\nbecause there are many pilots in your situation,\nbut we should have a way of developing a systematic inventory of all of such encounters.\nIs that right?\nYes, and I think we need both transparency and the reporting.\nWe have the reporting,\nbut we need to make sure that information can be promulgated to commercial aviation\nas well as the rest of the populace.\nMr. Grush, what about you?\nWhat was your experience after you came forward?\nWell, it's only been about two months or so,\nso I guess my experience has been overwhelming support\nfrom former colleagues of mine that have privately messaged me,\nand I do appreciate that,\nbut I do have knowledge of active planned reprisal activity against myself and other colleagues,\nand it's very upsetting to me.\nComing from where?\nCertain senior leadership at previous agencies I was associated with,\nand that's all I'll say publicly,\nbut I can provide more details in a closed environment.\nOkay.\nWell, I hope you understand that there would be bipartisan rejection of any attempt\nto vilify, demonize, or engage in other reprisals against our witnesses\nand people who are telling the truth from their perspective.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-9", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Yeah, there were certain colleagues of mine that were brutally administratively attacked,\nand it actually makes me very upset as a leader to see that happen to other coworkers\nand actually superiors of mine over the last three years.\nHow do you account for that response?\nThat seems like a bizarre response.\nI call it administrative terrorism.\nThat's their quiver, their tool in the toolbox to silence people,\nespecially the career government service cares about their career,\ncares about their clearance, their reputation to climb the ladder,\nand when you threaten that flow, career path, a lot of people back off,\nbut I'm here to represent those people.\nMr. Fravor, what about you?\nWhat has your experience been since you've come forward with your perspective on this?\nActually, I've been treated very well, and the six people that were involved,\nmyself included, all of them have or will be retiring from the military as 0506s,\nand all my friends that are very senior, three and four stars, I've talked to them.\nThey believe, they understand there's a problem, but no, I was actually treated really well.\nWhat is your general interpretation of these phenomena,\nor what is your current thinking of trying to make sense of them?\nI'll say I'm not like a UFO fanatic, it's not me,\nbut I will tell you that what we saw with four sets of eyes over a five-minute period,\nstill we have nothing close to it.\nIt was amazing to see, I told my buddy I wanted to fly it,\nbut it's just an incredible technology.\nAlright, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, I yield back to you.\nThanks, I'm Ms. Luna.\nMr. Grush, in speaking to you yesterday,\nI just wanted to follow up on Representative Raskin's questions.\nIn the last couple of years, have you had incidences that have caused you to be in fear for your life,\nfor addressing these issues?\nYes, personally.\nI just want everyone to note that he's coming forward in fear of his life,\nto put in perspective, if they were really not scared about this information coming out,\nwhy would someone be intimidated like that?\nTo your knowledge, are NHIs working with adversarial foreign governments\nin either technology exchange programs or back-engineering programs?\nI don't have data on that, I'm not sure.\nHave you heard or you had people come forward to present that evidence?\nNot that particular evidence that you just espoused.\nOkay, on the 19th of April, Dr. Kirkpatrick, head of AERO,\nhad said that he did not find any evidence of UAPs.\nYou also stated that you had, in your interview, that you had briefed him on information that you were uncovering,\nbut that he did not follow up with you.\nWere the items that you divulged to him pertinent to national security?\nYes, him and I had a classified conversation in April 2022,\nbefore he took over AERO in July 2022, and I provided him some concerns I had.\nDo you know why he might not have followed up with you?\nUnfortunately, I cannot read his mind.\nI wish he did.\nI was happy to give sage counsel to him on where to look when he took the helm of AERO.\nOkay, and then my last question for you before I move to Mr. Graves,\nis you received prior approval from the Defense Department to speak on certain issues, correct?\nCorrect, through Doppser, DOD Prepublication and Security Review,\nand I just want to remind the public, they're just looking from a security perspective.\nThese are my own personal views and opinions, not the department's.\nOkay, I'm asking that though, mainly because I think that there are many people that would like to discredit you.\nSo it does bring a certain amount of credibility to your testimony.\nI'm required by law to do that as a former intelligence officer or I go to jail for revealing classified information.\nYeah, we don't want you to go to jail.\nMy next question would actually be for Mr. Graves.\nCan you please explain to me in detail the event that occurred at Vandenberg Air Force Base?\nCertainly. In the 2003 timeframe, a large group of Boeing contractors were operating near one of the launch facilities at Vandenberg Air Force Base\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-10", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: when they observed a very large 100-yard-sided Red Square approach the base from the ocean\nand hover at low altitude over one of the launch facilities.\nThis object remained for about 45 seconds or so before darting off over the mountains.\nThere was a similar event within 24 hours later in the evening.\nThis was a morning event, I believe 845 in the morning.\nLater in the evening, post-sunset, there were reports of other sightings on base, including some aggressive behaviors.\nThese objects were approaching some of the security guards at rapid speeds before darting off.\nAnd this is information that was received through one of the witnesses that have approached me at Americans for safe aerospace.\nWere these documents in any official form, whether it was a police blotter?\nYes. They had official documentation and records from the event that the witness held over the years.\nI'm not going to ask you to do it right now for time reasons, but you'd be able to sketch what was witness-correct.\nHave you seen that before on any other equipment and/or during your flight time?\nI have not seen what they have described.\nThis object was estimated to be almost the size of a football field, and I have not seen anything personally that large.\nOkay, and then another question on follow-up, referencing the GIMBOL video, \"Go Fast Incident.\"\nCan you just clarify, because to our understanding, the footage was actually cut off at a certain point,\nbut what happens at the end of that video just for those Americans specifically that are wanting to know about the rest of that footage?\nCertainly. There was some uncertainty or instability with the object. It seemed to rock a bit, and that's the last I had seen of the video.\nMuch of the data that I would recommend be analyzed would consist of radar data that would provide precise kinematics on the object,\nas well as the fleet of objects that were operating nearby.\nOkay, and follow-up, in regards to the reporting procedures that Mr. Garcia had addressed on as well as Representative Burchet,\nwith the FAA, to your understanding, pilots that are seeing this, commercial airline pilots,\nare they receiving cease-and-desist letters from corporations for coming forward with information in regards to safety for potential airline passengers?\nI have been made privy to conversations with commercial aviators who have received cease-and-desist orders.\nSo the American public should know that corporations are putting their own reputations on the basis, not the line,\nbut ahead of the safety of the American people, and I think would you agree with that statement?\nIt appears so.\nOkay. I guess this would be my last -- oh, I'm out of time. I yield. I'll be back.\nOh, good. Mr. Moskowitz.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nGentlemen, let's talk about the laws of physics for a second.\nMr. Graves, in command of favor, I heard you talk about speed.\nWhen those objects broke the sound barrier, did they make a sonic boom?\nI was in a jet. You can't hear anything. It's kind of loud in there.\nYeah, you're not able to actually personally tell within the vehicle.\nI will say the objects that we were seeing, they were spherical, and they were observed up to Mach 2,\nwhich is a very non-aerodynamic shape.\nWhat about G forces? Let's talk about G forces of those vehicles.\nCould a human survive those G forces with known technology today?\nNo.\nNo, not for the acceleration rates that we observed.\nOkay. What about what they look like? How close did you get?\nDid you see a seam or a rivet or a section?\nAnd what I mean is, obviously, the jets you're flying have all those things. Did these objects have those?\nDo you want to go around?\nI didn't have the detail to be able to tell that.\nSo we got within a half mile at Ziktak, which people say that's pretty far, but in airplanes, that's actually relatively close.\nNo, it was perfectly white, smooth, no windows, although when we did take the original FLIR video that is out there,\nwhen you put it on a big screen, it actually had two little objects that came out of the bottom of it.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-11", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: But other than that, no windows, no seams, no nothing.\nMr. Grush, as a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge\nor have direct knowledge yourself of non-human origin craft?\nYes, I personally interviewed those individuals.\nMr. Grush, as a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge\nor have direct knowledge yourself about ATs, advanced technologies that the U.S. government has?\nBased on conventional advanced tech, I was briefed to the preponderance of the departments, both space and aerospace,\ncompartment of programs.\nDo you have knowledge or do you have reason to believe that there are programs in the advanced tech space that are unsanctioned?\nYes, I do.\nOkay. And when you say that they're above congressional oversight, what do you mean?\nA complicated question. So there's, you know, some, I would call it abuse here.\nSo congressional oversight of conventional special access programs, and I'll use Title X, so DOD as an example, right?\nSo 10 U.S. Code Section 119 discusses congressional oversight of SAPS, discusses the DEC/SEC DEFS ability to waive congressional reporting.\nHowever, the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be notified if a, you know, waived or wave-bigoted unacknowledged SAP is created, and that's public law.\nWell, so that how does, I mean, I don't want to cut you off, but how does a program like that get funded?\nI will give you generalities. I can get very specific in a closed session, but misappropriation of funds and self-fund.\nDoes that mean that there is money in the budget that is said to go to a program, but it doesn't, and it goes to something else?\nYes, I have specific knowledge of that.\nDo you think U.S. corporations are overcharging for certain tech they're selling to the U.S. government, and that additional money is going to programs?\nCorrect. There's something called IRAD.\nOkay. Satellite imagery. Let's talk about satellite imagery. We have satellites all over the place, some that we're aware of and many that we're not aware of, right?\nWe're taking pictures of everything at every point and second.\nMr. Grush, are you aware, do you have direct knowledge, or do you talk to people with direct knowledge that there are satellite imagery of these events?\nThat was one of my primary tasks at NGA since we process, exploit, and disseminate that kind of information.\nI've seen multiple cases, some of which, to my understanding, and of course, I left NGA in April, so that's my information cutoff date.\nBut I personally reviewed both what we call overhead collection and from other strategic and tactical platforms that were, I could not even explain, prosaically.\nAnd I have a degree in physics, by the way, as well.\nAnd I am aware that you guys have not seen these reports, unfortunately, and I don't know why.\nDo you have direct knowledge, or do you have spoken people with direct knowledge that this imagery applies to crash sites, crash imagery?\nI can't discuss that in an open session.\nOkay. Do you have any information that the U.S. government is involved in a disinformation campaign to deny the existence of certain UAPs?\nI can't go beyond what I've already stated publicly in my News Nation interview because it touches other sensitivities.\nOkay. I'll yield the balance of my time back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.\nMs. Fox.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our witnesses for being here today.\nMr. Grouche, in your sworn testimony, you state that the United States government has retrieved supposedly extraterrestrial spacecraft and other UAP-related artifacts.\nYou go so far as to state that the U.S. is in possession of \"nonhuman spacecraft,\" and that some of these artifacts have circulated with defense contractors.\nSeveral other former military and intelligence officials have come forward with similar allegations, albeit in nonpublic settings.\nHowever, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the director of AARO, previously testified before Congress that there has been, and I quote,\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-12", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: \"no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity or of off-world technology brought to the attention of the office.\"\nTo your knowledge, is that statement correct?\nIt's not accurate. I believe Dr. Kirkpatrick mentioned he had about 30 individuals that have come to AARO thus far.\nA few of those individuals have also come to AARO that I also interviewed, and I know what they provided Dr. Kirkpatrick and their team.\nI was able to evaluate that information.\nOkay, I need to go on.\nBut my understanding that his statement is accurate came from a direct quote, and this contradiction is a perfect example of why we need to inject transparency into our government.\nAnd for another example, look no further than the pitiful response to the Chinese spy balloon debacle earlier this year.\nYou may remember the mass confusion that ensued when the balloon was first spotted over Montana, four days after it first entered U.S. airspace over Alaska.\nThe Biden administration's initial inability to address the object grew into a continuous series of embarrassments.\nAfter news of the balloon reached the mainstream media, we were assured that the balloon posed no threat to our security.\nHowever, after the balloon was allowed to transit the entire continental United States, fighter jets were scrambled off the coast of South Carolina to shoot it down.\nThis flip-flopping and obfuscation caused needless confusion, fear, and panic across the country.\nIt's my hope, Mr. Chairman, that this sort of confusion will not be repeated.\nWe should investigate the extent to which elements of our government possess or do not possess information that is of critical value to the American people.\nWe owe it to the citizens of this nation to make sure that our government is transparent and accountable.\nWe must make sure that our government provides answers, and Congress must do its duty to solicit those answers.\nWith that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.\nYeah, Mr. Frost.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nIn 2022, NASA announced that it was commissioning an independent study team to examine UAPs.\nThe NASA team is comprised of scientists across different fields, as well as former astronauts and pilots.\nIn May, the independent study team held that its first public meeting, which included the perspectives from NASA senior leaders, as well as perspectives from the Department of Defense and Intelligence agencies,\nthe NASA study team is also expected to release its first report pretty soon, and I think it's safe to say that we all eagerly await its results.\nMr. Graves, how might NASA's research influence the commercial industry regarding safety in UAP?\nI think NASA has a big role to play as far as commercial aviation safety, and it's one of their original charges as an organization.\nOne of the recommendations that have been put forward is to utilize their existing aviation safety reporting system to serve as a short-term fill and trusted platform for pilots that want to report on UAP.\nIt also has built-in analytics capability and is funded by Congress.\nGotcha. And also, Mr. Graves, are there any other industries that may be influenced by the NASA research on UAPs, and if so, how so?\nWell, I think there is a large swath of commercial capabilities that could be brought to bear on this topic from space-based or ground-based sensor systems that are available open source or through commercial marketplaces.\nAnd I think NASA's work, as they work to identify and highlight specific parameters that can be found, we can take that information and promulgate this through the public sector so that we can have more open conversation about what we're seeing.\nYou know, in 2020, the Department of Defense released several videos of UAPs, including Mr. Freyer's experience, U.S. Navy pilots that recorded footage.\nIn 2021, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a preliminary report on UAP events.\nNASA Administrator Bill Nelson stated that NASA would begin to investigate these events.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-13", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: In fact, I sit on Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and when we were doing a hearing with the NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, I asked, you know, why NASA needed to be fully funded.\nAnd there were many great reasons, but one of them was actually had to do with UAPs.\nHe actually mentioned, you know, is there life out there?\nI don't know.\nAnd so either way, these actions ultimately led NASA to assemble the independent study team that I mentioned earlier.\nAlso in 2021, Harvard University stood up the Galileo Project to research and examine the origins of UAP.\nSo it seems like both, you know, from NASA and in the higher education community, because of the work that you all have done and people standing up, you know,\nI think we're seeing some of that stigma slowly going away.\nMr. Freire, do you believe that military pilots feeling empowered to share their UAP experiences has directly impacted the scientific communities' research goals on this topic?\nI would say yes.\nI would say that, you know, starting in 2017, when it actually came out, it took that stigma away.\nI mean, I've talked to multiple senators who said prior to that, if you'd have mentioned UAP, you'd have been laughed off the hill.\nAnd now we're sitting here today for a public testimony on what's actually going on.\nYou know, I'm hoping that this curve will be more of an exponential and we'll get more and more transparent to the level that we can.\nYeah. Yeah. And yeah, I mean, it's important.\nI couldn't imagine, you know, I'm not a pilot, but I used to fly gliders in Civil Air Patrol.\nYeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.\nAnd so either way, I mean, I couldn't imagine, you know, being being in the glider and seeing something and then not feeling like I had the agency to talk about it.\nMr. Graves, can you discuss the importance of seeking scientists to sit on your advisory board?\nAbsolutely. I think ultimately this is going to be a scientific problem.\nAnd not only that, it's also an engineering problem.\nI've been working with the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics to help them stand up a UAP integration committee to help integrate their engineering prowess into this problem.\nAnd so, yes, very much. I think this is an engineering and scientific problem as much as a national security problem.\nAnd how might Congress help to facilitate partnerships between the scientific community and the UAP focus groups within government?\nWell, I think one of the things they can do is to have these types of hearings to communicate to the public that this is a topic of interest.\nThat there is a pseudo market, if you will, of interested capabilities and talent that want to approach this topic.\nAnd we're seeing that start to grow now. So I think continued conversation, reduction of stigma is going to allow that to flourish and allow answers to help generate themselves.\n100 percent. Well, thank you all for being here. Thank you for your work.\nI think it's important that we keep our top scientific minds focused on this issue and look for ways to increase collaboration.\nThank you so much. I yield back.\nMr. Comer.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me say I want to thank you for having this hearing.\nI want to thank Mr. Burchat, Ms. Luna for leading this hearing.\nAnd with that, I yield by five minutes to Mr. Burchat.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to direct this, I believe, to Mr. Grush.\nBut if any of you all feel like you need to jump in, just jump right in. We're good.\nHas the U.S. government become aware of actual evidence of extraterrestrials to otherwise unexplained forms of intelligence?\nAnd if so, when do you think this first occurred?\nI like to use the term nonhuman. I don't like to denote origin. It keeps the aperture open, both scientifically.\nCertainly, like I've discussed publicly, previously in the 1930s.\nOkay. Can you give me the names and titles of the people with direct firsthand knowledge and access to some of these crash retrieval programs?\nAnd maybe which facilities, military bases, the recovered material would be in.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-14", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: And I know a lot of Congress talked about we're going to go to Area 51, and there's nothing there anymore anyway.\nAnd we move like a glacier as soon as we announce it. I'm sure the moving vans would pull up. But please.\nI can't discuss that publicly, but I did provide that information both to the intel committees and the inspector general.\nAnd we could get that in the SCIF if we were allowed to get in a SCIF with you. Would that be probably what you would think?\nSure, if you had the appropriate accesses, yeah.\nWhat special access programs cover this information, and how is it possible that they have evaded oversight for so long?\nI do know the names. Once again, I can't discuss that publicly and how they've evaded oversight.\nIn a closed setting, I can tell you the specific tradecraft use.\nAll right. When do you think those programs began, and who authorized them?\nI do know a lot of that information, but that's something I can't discuss publicly, because of sensitive things.\nAll right. If any of y'all want to jump in on any of this, you're more than welcome to.\nWhat level of security clearance is required to fully access these programs?\nWell, anybody who has -- And I say that because myself, Representative Gates and Representative Luna were basically turned away at one point at Eglen.\nSo please go right ahead.\nCertainly, difference between member access and, say, somebody like me, but anybody who has a TSSCI clearance and meets the eligibility criteria,\nthe access adjudicated authority should be able to grant you access.\nMr. Burchard, if you'll yield. Just to put a fine point on that, there's nothing that you're aware of that's above special access program classification.\nIt's a misnomer that there's anything actually above top secret.\nExecutive order 13-526 delineates classification levels.\nRight. But I draw a point on that because we can have access to those programs, and so the notion that we're not being given that access sort of defies our typical muscle memory here in Congress.\nThank you, Mr. Burchard. I'll yield back to you.\nThank you, Mr. Gates.\nAlong those lines, Title 10 -- You may not know this or not, but Title 10 and Title 50 authorization, they seem to say they're inefficient.\nSo who gets to decide this in your opinion in the past?\nIt's a group of career senior executive officials.\nOkay. Are they government officials?\nBoth in and out.\nDo what?\nBoth in and out of government, and that's about as far as I can go there.\nI got you. All right. Well, that leads to my next question.\nWhich private corporations are directly involved in this program?\nHow much taxpayer money has been invested in these programs, to your knowledge?\nWe know we audit the Pentagon every year, and I've been here five years, and they fail the Dadgum thing every year.\nThey lose over a billion dollars a year, we think, and I was told, Department of Defense, maybe 60 percent of their assets are unaccounted for, whatever the heck that means.\nIn the public sector, you go to jail for that kind of crap. So tell me.\nYeah, I know when I -- I'm a dollar off of my DTS travel voucher. I get hammered, but it seems like it doesn't work the other way, right?\nIf you sell over $600 worth of stuff on eBay now, you get a call from the IRS. So please, what corporations?\nI don't know the specific metrics towards the end of your question. The specific corporations I did provide to the committees in specific divisions.\nI spent 11 and a half hours with both Intel committees.\nOkay. Has there been any -- has there been an active U.S. government disinformation campaign to deny the existence of unidentified aerial phenomena? And if so, why?\nI can't go beyond what I've already expoused publicly about that.\n[inaudible]\nOkay, I've been told to ask you what that is and how to get it in the record.\nWhat have you stated publicly in your interviews for the congressional record?\nIf you reference my News Nation interview and I talk about a multi-decade campaign to disenfranchise public interests basically.\nI apologize, Mr. Chairman. I yield back negative 21 seconds.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-15", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Thank you. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?\nThank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for coming here today.\nI do concur with the ranking members, as well as several other members here on this committee that this is a committee for whistleblowers and for the protection of whistleblowers as well.\nSo we understand what you're putting on the table here and what you're putting on the line here and we thank you for that.\nMr. Grush, you sat on the unidentified anomalous phenomenon task force created in the 2020 NDAA, correct?\nYes.\nThere have been some things that have been mentioned here during this hearing that I wanted to pick up on.\nMr. Graves, you mentioned specifically during the answers to one of your questions.\nYou named Boeing contractors being engaged in an incident regarding this red cube about a football field wide.\nI was wondering if you could speak a little bit about the interaction or, Mr. Grush, either of you, the interactions between defense contractor companies and any UAP-related programs or activities.\nSo I'll just say that the information about the contractor themselves were provided by a witness and I have no particular detail in that relationship.\nMr. Grush.\nThe kind of general unclassed wave tops, certainly the contractors are the metal benders, so to speak, the ones actually doing specific performance on government contracts.\nAre they required to issue any disclosure regarding UAP sightings or do they engage in any reporting around this?\nIn terms of the contractors?\nYes.\nThey do not.\nOkay.\nNow, when it comes to notification that you had mentioned about IRAP programs, we have seen defense contractors abuse their contracts before through this committee.\nI have seen it personally and I have also seen the notification requirements to Congress abused.\nI am wondering, one of the loopholes that we see in the law is that there is, at least from my vantage point, is that depending on what we're seeing is that there are no actual definitions or requirements for notification.\nAre there, what methods of notification did you observe?\nLike when they say they notified Congress, how did they do that?\nDo you have insight into that?\nFor certain IRAP activities, I can only think of ones conventional in nature.\nSometimes they flow through certain, I would say, SAP programs that have cognizant authority over the Air Force or something.\nAnd those are congressionally reported compartments, but IRAP is literally internal to the contractors.\nSo as long as it's money, either profits, private investment, etc., they can do whatever they want.\nTo put a finer point on it, when there is a requirement for any agency or company to notify Congress, do they contact the chairman of a committee?\nDo they get them on the phone specifically?\nIs this through an email to hypothetically a dead email box?\nA lot of it comes through what they call the PPR, Periodic Program Review Process, if it's a SAP or Controlled Access Program Equity, and then those go to the specific committees, whether it be the SAS, CAC, Hissi.\nThank you.\nI apologize.\nI just, my time is limited.\nMr. Graves, one of your main concerns that the FAA currently does not have an official process to receive reports of UAP from pilots or others, correct?\nCorrect.\nAnd in your experience, what data should the AERO program prioritize for potential collection?\nWe have, you know, location, date, time, but are there other specific characteristics that should be included in these reports?\nCertainly.\nI think that there's two categories that would be important.\nOne would be kinematics and understanding the specifics of how the vehicle or objects are moving.\nAnd the second would be a more zoomed out approach of being able to look at origin and destination after, before the incident, as well as getting a better contextual understanding of how these objects are interacting with each other.\nThank you.\nNow, because I only have a minute left, I apologize.\nWe only have five minutes today.\nBut for the record, if you were me, where would you look?\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-16", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Titles, programs, departments, regions, if you could just name anything.\nAnd I put that as an open question to the three of you.\nI'd be happy to give you that in a closed environment.\nI can tell you specifically.\nThank you.\nCommander Fraver?\nI would say, and I've told people, you have to know where to look.\nThey're not going to divulge it to you because of the classification levels.\nBut if you know where to look and who to talk to, which is exactly where Mr. Grosch to appoint you, then you have them.\nOkay.\nMr. Graves?\nI was an operator, so I was defending on folks like Mr. Grosch to do that homework.\nOkay.\nThank you very much.\nI yield back to the chair.\nMr. Bags?\nThanks.\nThanks, Mr. Chairman.\nI thank the witnesses for being here today.\nI'm over here.\nThank you so much for being here.\nI want to get into specifics here.\nAnd the reason I'm going to go this way is because you've talked a bit about what I would call misdirection by official U.S. government with regard to UAPs, right?\nAnd so I'm going to get to that in a second.\nBut last week, White House NSC spokesman John Kirby stated that UAPs are having an impact on our training ranges and need to be treated as a legitimate issue.\nDo you concur with the statements?\nThat's for each of you.\nYes.\nYes.\nYes.\nOkay.\nNow, having said that, I'm going to take you to specific instances around the Phoenix Valley because that's where I live.\nIn '97, we had the famous Phoenix Light case.\nI don't know if any of you are familiar with that.\nThere were two things that went along with that.\nAnd the explanation was military training range off Luke and the Barry Goldwater range.\nDo you know anything different other than the official explanation of those lights?\nOnly what's in the public vernacular about it.\nThat was outside the scope of my duties.\nAnd if we wanted to, just my question along with my colleague from New York, Ms. Acasio-Cortez, if we wanted to find out more about that, where would we go to find the files and who would we address?\nAnd are you going to tell me we need to go to a skiff so you can tell us in a skiff?\nI could potentially give you a vector on that.\nThat specific case, I'm not -- I mean, I'm familiar with it in terms of public, but I give you a vector in a closed environment.\nThat would be good.\nThank you.\nSo if it's true that UAPs are having an impact on training ranges and this Administration considers it to be a legitimate issue, what steps can Congress take to address training range impacts?\nAnd I say that having two very large training ranges in my State.\nAnd so we'll start with Mr. Graves and go on down the panel.\nSome of the initial procedures have been implemented, such as within the United States Navy, that have a range-fourer report that gathers information from pilots.\nI understand that a service-wide reporting mechanism is still pending.\nHowever, that would be a great next step, not only for gathering information, but for showing the truth that is an acceptable topic and reducing the stigma.\nOkay.\nPlease, I'll have you continue.\nYeah, as a recipient of a lot of those training range reports, sometimes we only get contextual, kind of oral reporting.\nIt would be nice if they attached all sensor data and there's a system in place that can handle multiple classifications of data.\nAnd that's an issue with the F-35, right?\nThat JET was never built to be an ISR platform.\nAnd it's a pain in the, what to say, butt to get that data off.\nSo, yeah.\nGreat.\nThank you.\nYeah, I would agree with the previous two, being a user of those training ranges, that the data has to be out there.\nYou have to acknowledge that you're seeing them and then you have to collect the data.\nRight now, you get the report.\nSomeone says, \"I saw something,\" but no one collects the radar data to back it up and do research.\nOkay.\nDo you believe that the 2019 classification guidelines for UAPs interferes with the federal government's ability to be transparent with the American people?\nAnd do you think we need to be more transparent with the American people?\nAll of you, yeah.\nI'll say yes to that.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-17", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Yeah, I'm familiar with the UAP task force 2019 security classification guide.\nI think it's fair.\nI did actually help author that with the record.\nUh-oh.\nYou got a bias that way then.\nYeah, but I will say, I'll call it a lazy attitude about declassifying videos.\nI mean, I've seen some of the videos of the recent shoot down and I saw no reason that couldn't have been released as long as they mask some data.\nThe American people deserve to see that imagery and full motion video.\nI would think, well, in my opinion, I will say things are over classified.\nI know for a fact the video or the pictures that came out in the 2018, I think it was 2020 report that had the stuff off the East Coast.\nThey were taken with an iPhone off the East Coast.\nThe buddy of mine was one of the senior people there and he said they were originally classified to TSSCI.\nAnd my question to him was, what's TSSCI about these?\nThey're an iPhone literally off the vacates.\nThat's not TSSCI.\nSo they're over classified and as soon as they do that, they go in a vault and then you all have to look for them.\nYeah, so with the over classification, that may be one way.\nAre there other ways that the DOD or intelligence agencies are keeping this information from the American people or even from Congress?\nI think part of that has been not encouraging reporting.\nIf the problem is not something that can be measured, it's not something that's going to be fixed.\nOkay, very good.\nWell, I'm out of time and I thank you, Mr. Chairman.\nAnd I you'll bet.\nFirst of all, without objection, Representative Nick Langworthy of New York has waved on the subcommittee for purpose of questioning witnesses at today's subcommittee hearing.\nAnd then we go to Mr. Burleson.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nI appreciate you guys coming out today testifying.\nLook, I've been here for six months and I'm pretty skeptical.\nI don't trust anything in this town.\nAnd so I think that's because I'm from Missouri.\nYou've got to show me right with that being said, there's been a lot of things that have been said in the public, Mr. Grush.\nAnd so I want to get down to if we can, some specifics, right?\nSo at one point you had said that there has been harmful activity or aggressive activity.\nHas any of the activity been aggressive and hostile in your reports?\nI know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured.\nAnd the activity by UAPs or by people within the federal government?\nOkay. So there has been activity by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has caused harm to humans.\nI can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed,\nand I have to be very careful here because you don't, you know, they tell you never to acknowledge tradecraft, right?\nSo what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing.\nOkay. One of my constituents actually sent this next question.\nI figured I'd ask it since I had the same thought.\nYou've said that the U.S. has intact spacecraft.\nYou said that the government has alien bodies or alien species.\nHave you seen the spacecraft?\nI have to be careful to describe what I've seen firsthand and not in this environment,\nbut I could answer that question behind closed doors.\nAnd have you seen any of the bodies?\nThat's something I've not witnessed myself.\nOkay. And so with that being said, you know, the other statement that has been made that was intriguing to me,\nand it's intriguing because my view has been that we are billions of light years away from any other system.\nAnd the concept that an alien species that's technologically advanced enough to travel billions of light years\nand somehow is incompetent enough to not survive Earth or crashes is something that I find a little bit far-fetched.\nAnd with that being said, you have mentioned that there's interdimensional potential.\nCould you expound on that?\nI'll get to answer your first question, and I'm here as a fact witness and expert,\nbut I will give you a theoretical framework at least to work off to kind of espouse crashes.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-18", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Regardless of, you know, your level of sentience, right?\nYou know, planes crash, cars crash, and number of sorties, however high, a small percentage are going to end in, you know,\nmission failure, if you will, as we say, in the Air Force.\nAnd then in terms of multidimensionality, that kind of thing, the framework that I'm familiar with,\nfor example, is something called the holographic principle.\nBoth it's, it derives itself from general relativity and quantum mechanics, and that is,\nif you want to imagine 3D objects such as yourself casting a shadow onto a 2D surface,\nthat's the holographic principle.\nSo you can be projected, quasi-projected from higher dimensional space to lower dimensional.\nIt's a scientific trope that you can actually cross, literally, as far as I understand,\nbut there's probably guys of PhDs that we could probably argue about that.\nBut you have not seen any documentation that that's what's occurring.\nOnly a theoretical framework discussion, yes.\nOkay.\nOkay.\nOccam's razor is that these aircraft, have they been identified that they are being produced by domestic,\nyou know, military contractors?\nIs there any evidence that that's what's being recovered?\nNot to my knowledge, plus the recoveries predate a lot of our advanced programs that I previously am witting up.\nWould it be safe to say that there could be a scenario today where you have an aircraft that crashes,\nbecause it's been involved in one program from one federal agency,\nbut the agency that retrieves it is not aware of that program, and to them it appears alien in origin?\nI mean, that's a hypothetical situation.\nI'm not aware of any historical situation that would match that that you described.\nYou're not aware.\nIt has not happened that you're aware of.\nThat I'm aware of.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nI yield back.\nSeveral months ago, my office received a protected disclosure from Eglin Air Force Base\nindicating that there was a UAP incident that required my attention.\nI sought a briefing regarding that episode and brought with me Congressman Burchitt and Congresswoman Luna.\nWe asked to see any of the evidence that had been taken by flight crew in this endeavor,\nand to observe any radar signature as well as to meet with the flight crew.\nWe were not afforded access to all of the flight crew.\nInitially, we were not afforded access to images and to radar.\nThereafter, we had a bit of a discussion about how authorities flow in the United States of America,\nand we did see the image.\nWe did meet with one member of the flight crew who took the image.\nThe image was of something that I am not able to attach to any human capability,\neither from the United States or from any of our adversaries.\nI'm somewhat informed on the matter, having served on the Armed Services Committee for seven years,\nhaving served on the committee that oversees DARPA and advanced technologies for several years.\nWhen we spoke with the flight crew, and when he showed us the photo that he'd taken,\nI asked why the video wasn't engaged, why we didn't have a FLIR system that worked.\nHere's what he said.\nThey were out on a test mission that day over the Gulf of Mexico,\nand when you're on a test mission, you're supposed to have clear airspace,\nnot supposed to be anything that shows up.\nAnd they saw a sequence of four craft in a clear diamond formation,\nfor which there is a radar sequence that I and I alone have observed in the United States Congress.\nOne of the pilots goes to check out that diamond formation\nand sees a large floating, what I can only describe as an orb,\nagain, like I said, not of any human capability that I'm aware of.\nAnd when he approached, he said that his radar went down,\nhe said that his FLIR system malfunctioned, and that he had to manually take this image\nfrom one of the lenses, and it was not automated in collection,\nas you would typically see in a test mission.\nSo I guess I'll start with Commander Freiver.\nHow should we think about the fact that this craft that was approached by our pilot\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-19", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: had the capability of disarming a number of the sensor and collection systems on that craft?\nWell, I think this goes to that national security side,\nand you can go back through a history of things showing up in certain areas\nand disabling our capabilities, which is disheartening.\nAnd for us, I mean, like I said, it completely disabled the radar and the aircraft\nwhen I tried to do it, and the only way we could see it is passively,\nwhich is how he got that image.\nSo I think that's a concern on what are these doing,\nnot only how do they operate, but their capabilities inside to do things like this.\nAnd how should we think about forecraft moving in a very clear formation,\nequidistant from one another, in a diamond?\nIn all of the phenomenon, perhaps, Mr. Grave, that you've analyzed,\nhave we ever seen multiple craft in a single formation?\nI have one particular case, and that was during the gimbal incident.\nThe recording on the AT FLIR system shows a single object that rotates.\nYou hear the pilots refer to a fleet of objects that is not visible on the FLIR system,\nand that was something that I witnessed during the debrief\nas part of the radar data on the situational awareness page.\nI would like to add, whoever, Congressman, there's a small bit of anger,\nI would say, that those pilots are still facing that difficulty in reporting this topic,\nand they don't have the tools to be able to mitigate this issue.\nIt just goes to show how serious this is and why this is such an important issue\nfor our pilots and for our nation.\nIt was stated explicitly to me by these test pilots that if you have a U of A.P. experience,\nthe best thing you can do for your career is forget it and not tell anyone,\nbecause any type of reporting, either above the surface or below the surface,\ndoes have a perceived consequence to these people,\nand that is a culture we must change if we want to get to the truth.\nMr. Chairman, I would observe that perhaps as we move forward from this hearing,\nthere are some obvious next steps.\nEvery person watching this knows that we need to meet with Mr. Grush\nin a secure compartmentalized facility so that we can get fulsome answers\nthat do not put him in jeopardy and that give us the information we need.\nSecond, I would suggest that the radar images that were collected\nof this formation of craft out of Eglin Air Force Base,\nand specifically the actual image taken by the actual flight crew\nthat we can actually validate be provided to the committee,\nsubpoenaed if necessary, so that we're able to track how to get this type of reporting\nand analysis done in a more fulsome way.\nThat would be my recommendation humbly as a guest here of the Fine Oversight Committee.\nI yield back.\nMs. Mays.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning to our witnesses who are testifying today.\nI want to thank each of you for being here to discuss a topic of grave importance\nto our national security.\nEarlier this year, a Chinese spy balloon was shot down off the coast\nof my home state of South Carolina.\nSince the Roswell incident in 1947, many Americans have wondered\nabout the dangers of unknown objects crisscrossing our skies.\nWhether these are UAPs or weather phenomena,\nadvanced technology from American Allied or enemy forces or something more out of this world.\nSo my first question, I have several questions and I'll,\nif we could just be quick on these first two, I'm going to ask each of you the same question\nand then I'll get to each of you individually.\nThe first one, when you reported your experiences with a UAP,\ndid any of you face any repercussions with your superiors, yes or no?\nNo.\nNo.\nI've actually never seen anything personally, believe it or not.\nAll right.\nAnd then do you believe there's an active disinformation campaign\nwithin our government to deny existence of UAPs, yes or no?\nI don't have an answer to that.\nAs previously stated publicly, yes.\nI think previously it would like Project Blue Book, yes,\nbut currently I don't speak for the United States government.\nOkay, thank you.\nI have a few questions for Mr. Graves.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-20", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: What percentage of UAP sightings in your belief go unreported by our pilots?\nThis is an approximation based off of my personal experience\nspeaking with a number of pilots,\nbut I would estimate we're somewhere near 5% reporting perhaps.\nSo like 95% basically don't report seeing UAPs.\nThat's just my personal estimate.\nIn the incident off Virginia Beach,\ndo you believe the Navy took the danger to your aircraft seriously after it was reported?\nAbsolutely.\nA few questions for Mr. Faver.\nAs an expert naval aviator,\nhave you ever seen an object that looked and moved like the TIC-TAC UAP?\nNo.\nDid the TIC-TAC UAP move in such a way that defied the laws of physics?\nThe way we understand them, yes.\nMany dismiss UAP reports as classified weapons testing by our own government,\nbut in your experience as a pilot,\ndoes our government typically test advanced weapons systems\nright next to multi-million dollar jets without informing our pilots?\nNo, we have test ranges for that.\nIt took over 15 years for your encounter with the TIC-TAC to be declassified.\nDo you feel there was a good reason to prevent lawmakers from having access to this footage?\nNo, I just think it was ignored when it happened,\nand it just sat somewhere in a file.\nIt never got reported.\nIt didn't drawer.\nIt happens a lot up here.\nShocker.\nMr. Gresch, a couple of questions for you too, sir, this morning.\nWhat percentage of UAPs do you feel are adequately investigated by the U.S. government?\nOf the 5% that are reported.\nI can only speak for my personal leadership over at NGA.\nI tried to look at every report that came through that I could triage.\nDo you believe that officials at the highest levels of our national security apparatus\nunlawfully withheld information from Congress and subverted our oversight authority?\nThere are certain elected leaders that had more information that I'm not sure what they've shared with certain,\ngang of eight members, et cetera, but certainly I would not be surprised.\nOkay.\nYou've stated that the government is in possession of potentially non-human spacecraft.\nBased on your experience and extensive conversations with experts,\ndo you believe our government has made contact with intelligent extraterrestrials?\nSomething I can't discuss in public setting.\nOkay.\nI can't ask when you think this occurred.\nIf you believe we have crashed craft stated earlier,\ndo we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft?\nAs I've stated publicly already in my News Nation interview,\nbiologics came with some of these recoveries.\nWere they, I guess, human or non-human biologics?\nNon-human, and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge on the program I talked to\nthat are currently still on the program.\nAnd was this documentary references video, photos, eyewitness?\nLike how would that be determined?\nThe specific documentation I would have to talk to you in a skiff about.\nOkay. So, and you may or may not be able to answer my last question,\nand maybe we get into a skiff at the next hearing that we have,\nbut who in the government either, what agency, sub-agency, what contractors,\nwho should be called into the next hearing about UAPs,\neither in a public setting or even in a private setting?\nAnd you probably can't name names, but what agencies or organizations, contractors, etc.,\ndo we need to call in to get these questions answered,\nwhether it's about funding, what programs are happening, and what's out there?\nI can give you a specific cooperative and hostile witness list\nof specific individuals that were in those.\nAnd how soon can we get that list?\nI'm happy to provide that to you after the hearing.\nSuper. Thank you. And I yield back.\nOkay. Now we have Mr. Langworthy's here.\nOkay.\nThank you very much.\nI'd like to thank all of the witnesses for being here today\nto discuss this very unique topic.\nAnd I'd like to jump right into my questions, if you don't mind.\nCommander Fraver, can you briefly describe your background?\nYeah, I was an enlisted Marine, Naval Academy graduate, Navy, flew for 18 years,\ngot a Master's from University of Houston,\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-21", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: and I've worked in the private sector for the last, what now, 19, 16 years, 17 years,\nI do a lot of defense work.\nReally gold-plated credentials.\nCommander Fraver, we have all seen the floating tic-tac video\nthat you engaged with on November 14, 2004.\nCan you briefly talk about why you were off the coast of San Diego that day?\nYeah, we were at a workup with all the battle groups,\nso we integrate the ships with the carrier, the air wing with the carrier,\nand we start working, so we're doing an air air defense to hone not only our skills,\nbut those of the USS Princeton, when they had been tracking them for two weeks.\nThe problem was that there was never manned aircraft airborne when they were tracking them,\nand this was the first day, and unfortunately, we were the ones airborne and went and saw it.\nDo you remember the weather that day?\nWas it cloudy or windy or anything out of the ordinary on the Pacific Coast?\nIt was actually, if you're familiar with San Diego, it was a perfect day,\nlight winds, no white caps, clear skies, not a cloud.\nIt was for flying, it was the best.\nNow, is it true that you saw, in your words, a 40-foot flying tic-tac-shaped object?\nThat's correct, or for some people that can't know what a tic-tac is,\nit's a giant flying propane tank.\nFair enough.\nDid this object come up on radar or interfere with your radar or the USS Princeton?\nThe Princeton tracked it, the Nimitz tracked it, the E-2 tracked it.\nWe never saw it on our radars.\nOur fire control radars never picked it up.\nThe other airplane that took the video did get it on a radar.\nAs soon as it tried to lock it, it jammed the radar, spit the lock,\nand he rapidly switched over to the targeting pod, which he can do in the F-18.\nFrom what you saw that day and what you've seen on video,\ndid you see any source of propulsion from the flying object,\nincluding on any potential thermal scans from your aircraft?\nNo, there's no IR plume coming out, and Chad, who took the video,\nwent through all the EO, which is black and white TV, and the IR modes,\nand there's no visual signs of propulsion.\nIt's just sitting in space at 20,000 feet.\nIn your career, have you ever seen a propulsion system that creates no thermal exhaust?\nNo.\nCan you describe how the aircraft maneuvered?\nAbruptly, very determinate.\nIt knew exactly what it was doing.\nIt was aware of our presence, and it had acceleration rates.\nI mean, it went from zero to matching our speed in no time at all.\nNow, if the fastest plane on Earth was trying to do these maneuvers that you saw,\nwould it be capable of doing that?\nNo, not even close.\nAnd just to confirm, this object had no wings, correct?\nNo wings.\nNow, was the aircraft that you were flying, was it armed?\nNo, it never felt threatened at all.\nIf the aircraft was armed, do you believe that your aircraft,\nin possession of the United States, could have shot the TIC-TAC down?\nI'd say no.\nJust on the performance, it would have just left in a split second.\nIt looks like we have a problem here that needs further investigation.\nYes.\nIn your belief, is this flying TIC-TAC, I mean, is it capable of being the product\nof any other nation on the Earth?\nNo, I actually said, like I said earlier, I think it defies current material science\nand the ability to develop that much propulsion.\nAnd I know there's been some physicists who have done calculations,\nwhich is beyond anything that we have.\nWell, either the United States has an adversary here in this world that we don't know,\nor we really have some serious investigations to do.\nI really appreciate you being here.\nIs there anything else about the November 14, 2004 incident that you think is important\nfor this committee to know that you haven't been asked here today?\nNo, it's been said it's probably the most credible UFO sighting in history,\nbased on all the sensors that we're tracking it, and then for us to get visual\nand to go against the naysayers that it's something on the screen or whatever.\nAnd there's four sets of human eyeballs.\nWe're all very credible.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-22", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Of the six of us that were involved in the thing, including the video,\nevery one of us is going to do 20-plus years in the military in very responsible positions.\nSo I'd say the world needs to know that.\nIt's not a joke.\nThank you very much for your testimony here today for all of you.\nAnd I yield back, Mr. Chairman.\nMr. Ollis.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nAnd thank you all for being here and the courage it took to come forward\nand again, the sacrifice that each of you have made.\nI serve on the National Security Subcommittee for the Financial Services Committee,\nso I really want to stay in the National Security Lane, if I may.\nSo when we think about traditional adversaries and both us towards them\nand them towards us, you know, we probe their capabilities.\nWe look for weaknesses, and we collect that data, that reconnaissance,\nfor in the event we need it in the future.\nFor each of you, yes or no question, based off of your own experience\nor the data that you've been privy to, is there any indication that these UAPs\ncould be essentially collecting reconnaissance information?\nMr. Graves.\nYes.\nMr. Grush.\nFair assessment.\nMr. Fraver.\nVery possible.\nAgain, in the National Security Lane, is it possible that these UAPs\nwould be probing our capabilities?\nYes or no, Mr. Graves.\nYes.\nMr. Grush.\nYes.\nMr. Fraver.\nDefinitely.\nIs it possible that these UAPs are testing for vulnerabilities in our current systems?\nYes.\nYes.\nPossible.\nDo you feel, based off of your experience and the information that you've been privy\nto, that these UAPs provide an existential threat to the national security of the United States?\nMr. Graves.\nPotentially.\nYes or potentially?\nThe same answer, potentially.\nYeah, I'd say definitely.\nPotentially.\nMr. Graves and Fraver, in the event that your encounters have become hostile, would you\nhave had the capability to defend yourself, your crew, your aircraft?\nAbsolutely not, sir.\nNo.\nIs, based off of the information that you've been privy to, is there any indication that\nthese UAPs are interested in our nuclear technology and capabilities?\nYes.\nBy external observation, sure, that could be a fair assessment, yeah.\nYes.\nIs there any indication that the Department of Energy is involved in UAP data collection\nand housing?\nI don't have an answer.\nI can't confirm or deny that in a public setting.\nCould you do it in a secure setting?\nYes.\nMr. Fraver.\nNo, I don't know.\nMr. Chairman, you know, I think I'm the last member to go, but there clearly is a threat\nto the national security of the United States of America.\nAs members of Congress, we have a responsibility to maintain oversight and be aware of these\nactivities so that, if appropriate, we take action.\nI would encourage the Chairman to demand that we have any and all, in particular Mr. Grush,\ntalk to us in a skiff.\nAnd if that access is denied, I will personally volunteer to initiate the Hohman Rule against\nany personnel or any program or any agency that denies access to Congress.\nMr. Chairman, with that, I will yield the remainder of my time to my fellow colleague\nfrom Tennessee, Mr. Burchard.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nThank you, Mr. Obel, for the great questions, brother.\nMr. Grush, I might have asked this before, but I want to make sure.\nDo you have any personal knowledge of someone who's possibly been injured working on legacy\nUAP reverse engineering?\nYes.\nOkay.\nHow were they injured?\nWas it something like a radioactive type situation or something we didn't understand?\nI've heard people talk about Havana syndrome type incidences.\nWhat was your recollection of that?\nI can't get into specifics, but you could imagine assessing an unknown unknown.\nThere's a lot of potentialities you can't fully prepare for.\nHow do you think we ought to handle UAP whistleblower complaints like yours in the future?\nYeah, there was some issue with mine.\nSo, you know, PPD-19 process, it goes to the Intel committees, either through PPD-19 or\nICD-120.\nThere's not a good way for the intelligence community inspector general to provide that\nto other committees.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-23", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: And I asked my information to be sent to the House and Senate Armed Services Committee\nbecause there are Title 10 equities at play, but there was no smooth process to do so.\nYeah.\nThat's a trash can.\nAre you aware of any individuals that are participating in reverse engineering programs\nfor non-terrestrial craft?\nPersonally, yes.\nYou know any that would be willing to testify if there were protections for them?\nCertainly closed door and assurances that breaking their NDA, they're not going to\nget administratively punished for so.\nI yield, Mr. Chair.\nThank you.\nI'm going to do something a little bit out of the ordinary here.\nWe're going to give three people a chance at an additional three minutes.\nSo Mr. Burchard, you want to keep going?\nWhy don't you come back to me, Mr. Chairman?\nMs. Luna, is she on that list?\nI'm on the back.\nSure.\nChairman, I'd like to submit for the record an article by News Nation and it follows Mr.\nGrush's full interview for the record.\nWithout objection.\nThank you.\nMr. Grush, why is it that you refer to the phenomenon as non-human intelligence?\nWhy deviate from the basis of extraterrestrial life?\nI think the phenomenon is very complex and I like to leave an open mind analytically\nto specific origin.\nWhen you say specific origin, can you elaborate on that for those that might not know?\nIf it's a traditional extraterrestrial origin or something else that we don't quite understand\nfrom either biological or astrophysics perspective, just keep an open mind on what it could be.\nOkay.\nAnd referring to your News Nation interview, you had referenced specific treaties between\ngovernments.\nArticle 3 of the Nuclear Arms Treaty with Russia identifies UAPs.\nIt specifically mentions them.\nTo your knowledge, are there safety measures in place with foreign governments or other\nsuperpowers to avoid an escalatory situation in the event that a UAP malevolent event occurs?\nYeah, you're referring to actual public treaty in the UN register.\nIt's funny you mention that.\nThe agreement on measures to reduce the risk of outbreak of nuclear war signed in 1971.\nUnclassified treaty publicly available.\nAnd if you cite the George Washington University National Security Archives, you will find\nthe declassified in 2013 specific provisions in the specific red line, fast message traffic\nwith the specific codes pursuant to Article 3 and Article, also Situation 2, which is\nin the previously classified NSA archive.\nWhat I would recommend, and I tried to get access, but I got a wall of silence at the\nWhite House, was the specific incidents when those message traffic was used.\nI think some scholarship on that would open the door to a further investigation using\nthose publicly available information.\nThank you.\nAnd then my last question with 51 seconds remaining.\nYou mentioned white collar crimes potentially taking place in regards to a cover-up.\nCan you please elaborate?\nI have concerns based on the interviews I conducted under my official duties of potential\nviolations of the federal acquisition regulations, the FAR.\nThank you very much, Chairman.\nI yield the remainder of my time.\nOkay, we'll go to Mr. Raskin for three minutes.\nThanks, Mr. Chair. I thank the witnesses for their endurance and service today.\nMr. Fraver, you've described your episode in detail now and you call it the most credible\nUFO sighting in history.\nI wonder, was this the first time that you encountered a UFO or a UAP in 2004?\nYes.\nAnd what was your general attitude or perspective on the UFO discussion before that happened?\nI never felt that we were alone.\nWe have all the planets out there, but I wasn't a UFO person.\nI wasn't watching History Channel and Mufon and all that.\nAnd have you had experiences or encounters since that happened?\nNo.\nAnd so have you formed any general conclusions about what you think you experienced then?\nYes.\nI think what we experienced was, like I said, well beyond the material science and the capabilities\nthat we had at the time that we have currently or that we're going to have in the next 10\nto 20 years.\nVery good.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-24", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Mr. Grush, you've been able to answer in great detail on certain questions and then other\nthings you say you're not able to respond to.\nCan you just explain where you're drawing the line and what's the basis for that?\nYeah, based on my Doppser security review and what they've determined that is unclassified.\nI see.\nSo you're answering any questions that just call upon your knowledge about unclassified\nquestions, but anything that relates to classified matters you're not commenting on in this context?\nIn an open session, but happy to participate in a closed session at the right level.\nYeah.\nAnd Mr. Graves, you've said that there are dozens of fellow pilots, military pilots.\nAre there also commercial pilots who've encountered the same kind of sightings that you described\nbefore?\nThey are similar.\nPilots, commercial pilots have less range and less sensors to be able to reach out and\nlook for objects over a wide swaths of airspace.\nAnd so pilots are seeing them, commercial pilots are seeing them, and they're typically\ncloser and the range of what they're seeing is pretty large.\nWhat is the most vivid, concrete sighting with the naked eye of the objects that you\ndescribed before, the cube-like objects?\nCertainly.\nI think the most vivid sighting of that would have been near midair that we had at the entrance\nto our working area.\nOne of these objects was completely stationary at the exact entrance to our working areas,\nnot only geographically, but also at altitude.\nSo it was right where all the jets are going, essentially, on the eastern seaboard.\nThe two aircraft flew within about 50 feet of the object, and that was a very close visual\nsighting.\nAnd you were in one of the aircraft?\nI was not.\nI was there when the pilot landed.\nHe canceled the mission after, and I was there.\nHe was in the ready room with all his gear on, with his mouth open, and I asked him what\nthe problem was, and he said he almost hit one of those darn things.\nHe said he was 50 feet away from it?\nYes, sir.\nHis description of the object was consistent with the description you gave us before?\nA dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere?\nInside of a clear sphere?\nYes.\nAnd with no selfevident propulsion system?\nNo wings, no IR energy coming off of the vehicle, nothing tethering it to the ground, and that\nwas primarily what we were experiencing out there.\nI am over time.\nThank you very much for your service, and I yield back to Mr. Chairman.\nVery good.\nMr. Burchett?\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nThis is for all three of you all, starting with Mr. Graves.\nWhy did you come forward on this issue?\nI came forward because I felt that my colleagues did not have a way to mitigate the safety\nthreat, and I wanted to help them.\nI was trained as an aviation safety officer by the Navy, and it just felt right.\nI felt like I had to help the folks that were still flying and dealing with this.\nMr. Garrosh?\nPurely a sense of duty.\nI first swore an oath when I was a cadet 18 years ago, and I still uphold that even out\nof uniform.\nCommander?\nI was pestered by a friend, and I asked why, and he said, \"You're the one person that they\ncan't discredit, and you'll add credibility to the New York Times article.\"\nSo after about six times, I said, \"Okay.\"\nHonest.\nThis town isn't made, unfortunately, by people like you all.\nWe thank you all.\nI do want to also thank the people in the audience and the people that are watching\nthis that can't be, people all over the world that have kept this issue alive.\nYou've endured criticism and derogatory remarks, and we're trying to get to the bottom of it.\nSo God bless you all.\nThank you all so much.\nWe really appreciate you guys and gals.\nThat's why we need term limits.\nYou all keep clapping as politicians just keep talking.\nSo let me ask you all, how can one of the public contribute to UAP reporting and what\navenues you think are available to the public to report these sightings?\nRight now, I don't think there is a lot of public options for every man to be able to\nreport on this.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-25", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: I think even for professionals that have sensor data that are seeing these on a regular basis,\nthey're still hesitant to come forward.\nAnd so for the general public, I think encouraging the conversations that we're having today\nand looking for technology solutions that can be distributed so that objective data\ncan be gathered is the first place to go.\nMr. Garash.\nI'll just touch on the whistleblower side of it.\nI do encourage current former military intelligence community and industry contractors to come\nforward in a legal way, either through the IC or DOD or whatever the cognizant IGs are\nto lead, join me in this discussion.\nI guess I should say this for the record.\nMy daddy was United States Marine Corps, 1st Marine Division.\nSo yes, sir.\nHe was old school, him and Chesty Puller on Pelaloo.\nSo thank you.\nWow.\nYes, sir.\nI'm not anything like my daddy.\nHe was incredible.\nI'm very mediocre to say the least.\nBut go ahead.\nYou seem to be doing fine.\nFor me, I was an accident investigator.\nSo the biggest thing that you learn and I think that witnesses need to do is, one, don't\ntry and make the fish bigger than it was.\nStick to the facts, write it down and don't speculate what you think it is because it\nwill school your decision.\nJust write the facts down.\nWe can get all the facts together and we can start to investigate and get a real honest\nstory instead of it was this big.\nThank you all.\nAnd I want to thank everybody.\nWe made history today.\nMr. Chairman, I yield.\nThank you much, Mr. Garcia.\nThank you.\n\nPlease summarize the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}

prepare_ufo-chunk-4096_english_airoboros-l2-v4.ndjson

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-0", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Right, now I'd like to introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is Lieutenant Ryan Graves.\nHe's the executive director of Americans for Safe Aerospace.\nLieutenant Graves is also a former U.S. Navy F-18 pilot with his own UAP experience.\nThe next witness, David Grush, is a former senior intelligence officer with the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency\nand was a senior technical advisor for UAP issues.\nAnd finally, retired Navy Commander David Fraber, squadron leader who worked as a Naval aviator for 18 years.\nMr. Fraber has his own UAP experience known as the TikTok event.\nI look forward to hearing from all three of you today.\nPursuant to committee rule 9G, the witnesses will please stand and raise their right hands.\nDo solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you guide.\nLet the record show that all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. You may be seated.\nWe appreciate you all being here today and look forward to your testimony.\nI'll remind the witnesses that we have read your written statements and they will appear in full in the hearing record.\nPlease try to limit your oral statements to five minutes.\nAs a reminder, please press the button on the microphone in front of you so that it's on and the members can hear you.\nWhen you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green.\nAfter four minutes, it will turn yellow and the red light when that comes on, it tells you your five minutes have expired.\nI'll now recognize Mr. Graves for five minutes for your opening statement.\nThank you.\nChairman Grothman, Ranking Member Garcia, distinguished members of the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Representative Burchett and Luna.\nMy name is Ryan Fobs Graves and I'm a former F18 pilot with a Decade of Service in the U.S. Navy,\nincluding two deployments in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Inherent Resolve.\nI have experienced advanced UAP firsthand and I'm here to voice the concerns of more than 30 commercial aircrew and military veterans who have confided their similar encounters with me.\nToday, I would like to highlight three critical issues that demand our action.\nAs we convene here, UAP are in our airspace, but they are grossly underreported.\nThese sightings are not rare or isolated. They are routine.\nMilitary aircrew and commercial pilots, trained observers whose lives depend on accurate identification, are frequently witnessing these phenomena.\nThe stigma attached to UAP is real and powerful and challenges national security.\nIt silences commercial pilots who fear professional repercussions, discourages witnesses,\nand is only compounded by recent government claims questioning the credibility of eyewitness testimony.\nParts of our government are aware of more about UAP than they let on, but excessive classification practices keep crucial information hidden.\nSince 2021, all UAP videos are classified as secret or above.\nThis level of secrecy not only impedes our understanding, but fuels speculation and mistrust.\nIn 2014, I was an F18 Foxtrot pilot in the Navy Fighter Attack Squadron 11, the Red Rippers, and I was stationed at NAS Oceana in Virginia Beach.\nAfter upgrades were made to our jet's radar systems, we began detecting unknown objects operating in our airspace.\nAt first, we assumed they were radar errors, but soon we began to correlate the radar tracks with multiple onboard sensors, including infrared systems, eventually through visual ID.\nDuring a training mission in the warning area of Whiskey 72, ten miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, two F18 Super Hornets were split by UAP.\nThe object, described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere, came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft and was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter.\nThe mission commander terminated the flight immediately and returned base.\nOur squadron submitted a safety report, but there was no official acknowledgment of the incident and no further mechanism to report the sightings.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-1", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Soon, these encounters became so frequent that aircrew would discuss the risk of UAP as part of their regular preflight briefs.\nRecognizing the need for action and answers, I founded Americans for Safe Aerospace.\nThe organization has since become a haven for UAP witnesses who were previously unspoken due to the absence of a safe intake process.\nMore than 30 witnesses have come forward and almost 5,000 Americans have joined us in the fight for transparency at saferaorspace.org.\nThe majority of witnesses are commercial pilots at majority major airlines.\nOften, they are veterans with decades of flying experience.\nPilots are reporting UAP at altitudes that appear above them at 40,000 feet, potentially in low Earth orbit or in the gray zone below the Carmen line,\nmaking inexplicable maneuvers like right-hand turns and retrograde orbits or J-hooks.\nSometimes, these reports are reoccurring, with numerous recent sightings north of Hawaii and in the North Atlantic.\nOther veterans are also coming forward to us regarding UAP encounters in our airspace and oceans.\nThe most compelling involve observations of UAP by multiple witnesses and sensor systems.\nI believe these accounts are only scratching the surface and more will share their experiences once it is safe to do so.\nIn closing, I recognize the skepticism surrounding this topic.\nIf everyone could see the sensor and video data I witnessed, our national conversation would change.\nI urge us to put aside stigma and address the security and safety issue this topic represents.\nIf UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem.\nIf it is something else, it is an issue for science.\nIn either case, unidentified objects are concerned for flight safety.\nThe American people deserve to know what is happening in our skies.\nIt is long overdue. Thank you.\nMr. Griesch.\nMr. Chairman, ranking members in congressmen, thank you.\nI'm happy to be here.\nThis is an important issue and I'm grateful for your time.\nMy name is David Charles Griesch.\nI was an intelligence officer for 14 years, both in the U.S. Air Force, both active duty Air National Guard and Reserve,\nat the rank of major and most recently from 2021 to 2023, at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, NGA,\nat the GS-15 civilian level, which is the military equivalent of a full bird colonel.\nI was my agency's co-lead in unidentified anomalous phenomena and trans-medium object analysis,\nas well as reporting to the UAP task force, UAPTF, and eventually, once it was established,\nthe all-domain anomaly resolution office, ARRO.\nI became a whistleblower through a PPD-19 urgent concern filing in May 2022 with the intelligence community inspector general.\nFollowing concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialed current and former\nmilitary and intelligence community individuals that the U.S. government is operating with secrecy\nabove congressional oversight with regards to UAPs.\nMy testimony is based on information I've been given by individuals with a long-standing track record of legitimacy\nand service to this country, many of whom also have shared compelling evidence\nin the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony to myself and my various colleagues.\nI have taken every step I can to collaborate this evidence over a period of four years while I was with the UAP task force\nand do my due diligence on the individual sharing it.\nThis is because of these steps I believe strongly in the importance of bringing this information before you.\nI am driven by a commitment both to truth and transparency, rooted in our inherent duty to uphold the United States Constitution\nand protect the American people.\nI'm asking Congress to hold our government to this standard and thoroughly investigate these claims.\nBut as I stand here under oath now, I am speaking to the facts as I have been told them.\nIn the U.S. Air Force, in my national reconnaissance office, NRO, Reservist Capacity, I was a member of the UAP task force from 2019 to 2021.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-2", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: I served at the NRO Operations Center on the Director's Briefing Staff, which included the coordination of the Presidential Daily Brief\nand supporting a variety of contingency operations, which I was the Reserve Intelligence Division Chief backup.\nIn 2019, the UAP task force director asked me to identify all special access programs and controlled access programs,\nalso known as SAPs and CAPs.\nWe needed to satisfy our congressionally mandated mission, and we were direct report at the time to the DEP SEC DEV.\nAt the time, due to my extensive executive level intelligence support duties, I was cleared to literally all relevant compartments\nand in a position of extreme trust, both in my military and civilian capacities.\nI was informed in the course of my official duties of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program,\nto which I was denied access to those additional read-ons when I requested it.\nI made the decision, based on the data I collected, to report this information to my superiors and multiple inspectors general,\nand in effect, becoming a whistleblower.\nAs you know, I've suffered retaliation for my decision, but I am hopeful that my actions will ultimately lead to a positive outcome of increased transparency.\nThank you, and I'm happy to answer your questions.\nThank you.\nCommander Fraver?\nThank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, carsmen, carswomen.\nI want to first thank you for the invitation to speak to the Committee on the UAP topic that has been in the news for the past six years\nand seems to be continuing to gain momentum.\nAs you know, my name is David Fraver. I'm a retired commander in the United States Navy.\nIn 2004, I was a commanding officer of Strike Fighter Squadron 41, the world-famous Black Aces.\nWe were attached to carrier Air Wing 11 stationed on board the USS Nimitz, and had begun a two-month workup,\ncycle off the coast of California.\nOn this day, we were scheduled for a 2V2 air-to-air training with the USS Princeton as our control.\nWhen we launched off Nimitz, my wingman was joining up.\nWe were told that the training was going to be suspended, and we were going to proceed with real-world tasking.\nAs we proceeded to the west, the air controller was counting down the range to an object that we were going to,\nand we were unaware of what we were going to see when we arrived.\nThe controller told us that these objects had been observed for over two weeks, coming down from over 80,000 feet,\nrapidly descending to 20,000 feet, hanging out for hours, and then going straight back up,\nfor those who don't realize, above 80,000 feet is space.\nWe arrived at the location at approximately 20,000 feet in a controller called \"Merge plot,\"\nwhich means that our radar blip was now in the same resolution cell as the contact.\nAs we looked around, we noticed that we saw some whitewater off our right side.\nIt's important to note that the weather on this day was as close to perfect as you could ask for off the coast of San Diego.\nClear skies, light winds, calm seas, no white caps from waves, so the whitewater stood out in a large blue ocean.\nAll four of us, because we were in F-18Fs, so we had pilots in Winslow in the back seat,\nlooked down a small, solid white tic-tac object with a longitudinal axis pointing north-south\nand moving very abruptly over the water, like a ping-pong ball.\nThere were no rotors, no rotor wash, or any sign of visible control surfaces like wings.\nAs we started clockwise towards the object, my wizard and I decided to go down and take a closer look\nat the other aircraft staying in high cover to observe both us and the tic-tac.\nWe proceeded around the circle about 90 degrees from the start of our descent,\nand the object suddenly shifted its longitudinal axis, aligned it with my aircraft, and began to climb.\nWe continued down another 270 degrees, nose-low, where the tic-tac --\n270 degrees, and we went nose-low to where the tic-tac would have been.\nOur altitude at this point was about 15,000 feet, and the tic-tac was about 12,000.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-3", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: As we pulled nose onto the object, within about a half mile of it,\nit rapidly accelerated in front of us and disappeared.\nOur wingmen, roughly 8,000 feet above us, lost contact also.\nWe immediately turned back to see where the whitewater was at, and it was gone also.\nSo as we started to turn back towards the east, the controller came up and said,\n\"Sir, you're not gonna believe this, but that thing is at your cap point,\nroughly 60 miles away in less than a minute. You can calculate the speed.\"\nWe returned in imits. We were taking off our gear.\nWe were talking to one of my crews that was getting ready to launch.\nWe mentioned it to them, and they went out,\nand luckily got the video that you see, that 90-second video.\nWhat you don't see is the radar tape that was never released,\nand we don't know where it's at, of the active jamming that the object put on an APG-73 radar,\nand I can get into modes later if you're interested.\nWhat is shocking to us is that the incident was never investigated.\nNone of my crew were ever questioned. Tapes were never taken,\nand after a couple days, it turned into a great story with friends.\nIt wasn't until 2009, until Jay Stratton had contacted me to investigate.\nUnbeknownst to all, he was part of the ATIP program\nin the Pentagon, led by Lou Elizondo.\nThere was an unofficial official report that came out that's now on the internet.\nYears later, I was contacted by the other pilot, Alex Detrick,\nand asked if I'd been contacted, and I said no, but I'm willing to talk.\nI was contacted by Mr. Elizondo, and we talked for a short period of time,\nand he said we'd be in contact.\nA few weeks after that, I was made aware that Lou had left the Pentagon in protest\nand joined forces with Tom DeLonge, Chris Mellon, Steve Justice,\nand others to form Two Stars Academy,\nan organization that pressed the issue of leading industry experts\nand U.S. government officials.\nThey worked with Leslie Keene, who was present today,\nRob Blumenthal, and Helene Cooper to publish the articles\nin the New York Times 2017 New York Times,\nand it removed the stigma on the topic of UFOs, which is why we're here today.\nThose articles opened the door for the government and public that cannot be closed.\nIt has led to an interest from our elected officials,\nwho are not focused on little green men,\nbut figuring out where these craft are, where they from,\nthe technology they possess, how do they operate.\nIt also led to the Whistleblower Protection Act and the NDAA.\nThere are multiple witnesses coming forward to say,\nthat have firsthand knowledge, and Mr. Grush just covered that.\nWhat concerns me is that there's no oversight from our elected officials\non anything associated with our government processing or working on craft,\nbelieve not from this world.\nThis issue is not a full public disclosure that can undermine national security,\nbut it is about ensuring that our system of checks and balances works across\nall work done in the government using taxpayer funds.\nRelative to government programs, even unacknowledged wave programs\nhave some level of oversight by the appropriate committee members\nin the House and Senate,\nand this work that is said to be occurring from Whistleblower testimonies\nshould not be exempt.\nIn closing, I would like to say that the TIC-TAC object we engaged in 2004\nwas far superior to anything that we had on time,\nhave today, or are looking to develop in the next 10 years.\nIf we in fact have programs that possess this technology\nand needs to have oversight from those people that the citizens of this great country\nelected in office to represent what is best for the United States\nand best for the citizens, I thank you for your time.\nThank you very much.\nThank you very much.\nI know it's very difficult for all of you, all of you who have done it in the past,\nto try to illuminate this issue.\nCall on myself first for some questions.\nI'm going to start with Mr. Graves.\nAre your pilots, are pilots that you interact with as part of your organization,\ndo you feel adequately trained and briefed on how to handle encounters with UAPs?\nNo.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-4", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Right now, military witnesses to UAP have limited options for reporting UAP,\nbut more concerning is that commercial aviation sector has not adapted\nto the lessons that the military has implemented.\nThe military and Department of Defense has stated that UAP represent\na critical aviation safety risk.\nWe have not seen that same language being used in the commercial markets.\nThey are not acknowledging this risk.\nOkay.\nWhat steps do you think you have to be taken to improve a pilot's UAP reporting,\nbe it military or commercial?\nRight now, we need a system where pilots can report without fear of losing their jobs.\nThere is a fear that the stigma associated with this topic is going to lead to professional repercussions\neither through management or perhaps through their yearly physical check.\nSo having a secure system, reducing the stigma, and making this information available\nthrough the public is going to reduce the concerns that aircrew have.\nCould you just give me a little idea of the degree to which reports in the past\nare not made public right now?\nWell, I don't think there has been a proper reporting system to gather those reports\nand thus not report them.\nSo to answer your question, I think there is a dearth of data due to the fact\nthat the reporting has been limited up to this time.\nCould you tell me why you believe it is kind of to play the devil's advocate\na reason why some of this stuff should not be available to the public?\nThere are certainly some national security concerns when we use our advanced sensors\nand our tactical jets to be able to identify these objects.\nHowever, there is no reason that the objects themselves would be classified.\nI would be curious to see how the security classification guideline\nactually spells out the different nuances of how this topic is classified\nfrom the perspective of UAP, not national security.\nI will give you a follow-up on that.\nAssuming that there are reasons why not all this should be made public,\nthis has been around for a long period of time.\nCan any of the three of you think of any reason why anything related to UAP\nsay 15 years and back should not be immediately made public?\nI think one of it is acknowledging a vulnerability,\nboth from a collection and I will just say a countermeasure perspective.\nWe have not cracked for many years.\nEven say 20 years back.\nIs there any reason why when you go back that far things shouldn't be made public?\nUnless it shows a specific national security vulnerability\nas it relates to a weakness in particular defenses.\nMr. Fraver, the TikTok incident that you were engaged occurred in 2004.\nWhat kind of reporting took place after that incident?\nNone.\nWe had a standard debrief where the backseaters went down to our career intel center\nand briefed what had happened and that was it.\nNo one else talked to us.\nI was in the top 20 in the battle group.\nNo one came.\nThe captain was aware, the admiral was aware, nothing was done.\nYour commanding officers provide any sort of justification?\nNo, because I was the commanding officer at the squadron.\nWas this incident the only UAP event that you encountered while you were a pilot?\nYes, it was.\nThis is for any one of you.\nBased off of each of your experiences and observations,\ndo you believe UAPs pose a potential threat to our national security?\nYes, and here's why.\nThe technology that we faced was far superior than anything that we had\nand you could put that anywhere.\nIf you had one, you captured one, you reverse engineered it, you got it to work,\nyou're talking something that can go into space, go someplace,\ndrop down in a matter of seconds, do whatever it wants and leave\nand there's nothing we can do about it.\nNothing.\nOkay.\nI would also like to add from commercial aviation and military aviation perspective,\nwe deal with uncertainty in our operating space as a matter of our professional actions.\nIdentifying friend from foe is very important to us.\nAnd so when we have unidentified targets and we continue to ignore those\ndue to a stigma or a fear of what it could be,\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-5", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: that's an opening that our adversaries can take advantage of.\nWhat steps should we take in the better and understand and respond to UAP encounters\nin the interest of national security?\nThere needs to be a location where this information is centralized for processing\nand there needs to be a two-way communication loop so that operators on the front end\nhave a feedback and can get best practices on how to process information,\nwhat to do and to ensure that their reporting is being listened to.\nRight now there is not a lot of back and forth.\nMr. Grush, in your complaint to the intelligence community inspector,\nyou inspector general, you claim that you believe information is being hidden.\nWhat kind of information do you think was hidden\nand do you think it should remain hidden?\nYes, I can speak to that very briefly in an unclassified manner.\nAs you know, the preponderance in my complaint was classified\nto the intelligence communities.\nBoth material acquisition and exploitation activity,\nalso baselining the UAPs but not sharing it with intelligence professionals\nthat are actually doing step briefs to pilots, that kind of information.\nOkay, thank you very much.\nNow we'll go to Mr. Garcia.\nThank you.\nAgain, thank you all for your service and for testifying today.\nI want to just talk about the UAPs as it relates to what we're seeing\nin the pilots' interaction with UAPs.\nParticularly Mr. Graves, one of the concerns from members of this committee\nis this idea that pilots, there's no system to actually report UAPs\nand the stigma around pilots.\nAnd so can you just briefly, you mentioned that you're working with 30 pilots right now\nthat have had encounters with UAPs, but you've also, I believe, discussed\nand know of many more pilots.\nThis is just those that you're currently working with.\nIs that correct? Can you expand on that?\nCertainly. I'll break that down in two ways.\nFirst, when we were first experiencing these objects off the Eastern Seaboard\nin the 2014 to 2015 time period, anyone that had upgraded their radar systems\nwere seeing these objects.\nSo there was a large number of my colleagues that were detecting these objects\noff the Eastern Seaboard.\nThey were further correlating that information with their other onboard sensors,\nand many of them also had their own eyesightings as well of these objects.\nNow, that was our personal firsthand experience at the time.\nSince then, as I've engaged this topic, others have reached out to me\nto share their experiences both on the military side\nas well as the commercial aviation side.\nOn the military aviation side, veterans that have recently got out,\nhave shared their stories and have expressed how the objects we were seeing\nin 2014, 2015 continued all the way to 2019, 2020, and beyond.\nAnd so it became a generational issue for naval aviators on the Eastern Seaboard.\nThis was something we were briefing to new students.\nThis is something that was included in the notice to airmen\nto ensure that there was no accidents.\nAnd now with commercial aviators, they are reaching out\nbecause they're having somewhat similar experiences\nas our military brothers and sisters,\nbut they do not have any reporting system that they can send us to.\nAnd let me just add both to Mr. Fraver as well as Mr. Graves.\nNot having the system for reporting,\nwould you both agree that it's harmful to not just our national security interests\nbut to understand this phenomenon of what's happening with UAPs?\nI think it's actually a travesty that we don't have a system\nto correlate this and actually investigate.\nSo if you took the East Coast, there's coastal radars out there\nthat monitor our air defense identification zone, so about 200 miles.\nThey can track these, so when you see them,\nthey can actually go and pull that data and get maneuvering.\nInstead of just having the airplanes, there's other data sources out there.\nAnd I've talked to other government officials on this.\nSo you need a centrally located repository that these reports go to.\nSo if you just stuck it in DOD,\nyou wouldn't get anything out of the Intelligence Committee\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-6", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: because they have a tendency not to talk.\nBut if you had a central location where these reports would come in,\nnot just military but also commercial aviation\nbecause there's a lot of that going on,\nespecially if you talk to anyone that flies from here to Hawaii\nover the Pacific, they see odd lights.\nSo I think you need to develop something that allows you a central point\nto collect the data in order to investigate.\nMr. Graves?\nI will compare with everything Mr. Fraver said.\nI'll continue to say that the commercial pilots that have reached out to me\nthrough Americans for Safe Aerospace are doing so\nbecause they don't feel there's another way for them to report this safety issue.\nAnd I think one of the clear outcomes of this hearing already\nis that there has to be a safe and transparent reporting process for pilots,\nboth on the commercial side and the military side,\nto be able to report UAPs in a way that's also transparent\nbut also understands the scope of our national security interests\nand what may be classified or not.\nBut I think there has to be some sort of system.\nAnd so that's something that I hope can be an outcome that this committee can work on.\nIs there anything else for just the two of you briefly,\nbeyond the reporting system that you think that we can do as a government\nto encourage and facilitate more civilian reporting?\nI think we're doing it right now.\nOkay, great.\nI think this hearing is going to show the American people\nthat their government takes this topic seriously.\nAnd how about civilians that may not be pilots?\nWhat kind of process could be in place for civilians who are not pilots\nwho may have UAP encounters?\nDo either of you have any suggestions that could facilitate that?\nMy recommendation would be to make that a sensor-centric operation\nin order to make it as objective as possible.\nOkay. Sir, Mr. Faver?\nI agree with Mr. Graves on that.\nOkay. Just briefly,\nI also just want to note for particularly for the two pilots\nand have a question for Mr. Grush.\nOne of the things that I found fascinating in our discussion,\nMr. Graves, last night as well is that you both described UAPs\nand formations and the way they are observed in space or in our air.\nAnd the way that they move is essentially ways in which current technology\nor aircraft that we know of are unable to actually function or move.\nAnd so will you just pour the public record again once again,\njust briefly, just either describe or note that aircraft that we witness,\nparticularly by the 30 folks that you're working with,\nare essentially outside the scope of anything that we know of today\nand the technology we have today.\nMr. Graves, Mr. Faver?\nYes. The objects that are being seen by commercial pilots\nare performing maneuvers that are unexplainable\ndue to our current understanding of our technology\nand our capabilities as a country.\nAnd that applies for the military as well.\nMr. Faver?\nYeah, I concur with that.\nWe have nothing that can stop in midair and go the other direction,\nnor do we have anything that can, like in our situation,\ncome down from space, hang out for three hours and go back up.\nThank you. My last question.\nAnd sometimes, I know you have also said some of these answers in the past,\nbut we're trying to get them on the public record as well,\nwhich is really important.\nMr. Grush, finally, do you believe that our government is in possession of UAPs?\nAbsolutely based on interviewing over 40 witnesses over four years.\nAnd where?\nI know the exact locations, and those locations were provided\nto the Inspector General and some of which to the Intelligence Committees.\nI actually had the people with the firsthand knowledge\nprovide a protected disclosure to the Inspector General.\nThank you. And, Mr. Chairman, I would just say that I think that these questions\nare important questions, and I look forward to being involved in the process\nto get those answered.\nI know there will be a lot of questions from other Committee members,\nso I yield back.\nThank you. We'll go to Mr. Richard himself.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Garcia.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-7", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: I would like to have you on my legislation to do just that on the reporting.\nAnd we'll get together on that. Maybe you can be my co-sponsor on that.\nThat'd be really cool. Thank you for those great questions.\nMr. Graves, again, I'd like to know,\nhow do you know that these were not our aircraft?\nSome of the behaviors that we saw in a working area,\nwe would see these objects being at 0.0 Mach,\nthat's zero airspeed, over certain pieces of the ground.\nSo what that means, just like a river, if you throw a bobber in,\nit's going to float downstream.\nThese objects were staying completely stationary in Category 4, Hurricane Winds.\nThese same objects would then accelerate to supersonic speeds,\n1.1, 1.2 Mach, and they would do so in very erratic and quick behaviors\nthat I don't have an explanation for.\nOkay. Have you spoken to commercial and military pilots\nthat have seen these off of our East Coast?\nI have.\nOkay.\nMr. Freiver, I noticed that in the tic-tac video,\nit's tic-tac like the candy, not tic-tac like the Chinese Communist app.\nThat's correct.\nYes, sir. I just want to make that,\nbecause my daughter corrected me on that and called me a boomer,\nand said, \"Hey, boomer,\" and I said, \"No, baby, it's tic-tac like the candy.\nYou're going to have to just look it up.\"\nBut now I would like to say today is a day of many firsts.\nIt's a miracle that we're having this meeting,\nand it's also a miracle that my wife has put up with me for nine years today.\nToday is my anniversary, so I want to tell my wife,\n\"Happy anniversary,\" and that I love her very much.\nAs she likes to say, this nine years have been the best two years of her life.\nSo, thank you.\nMr. Freiver, what astonished you the most about the flight capabilities\nof these tic-tacs very briefly?\nThe performance, absolute performance.\nAnd you're not aware of any other objects that anybody in the world has,\nin this world, that has those capabilities?\nNo, I think it's far beyond actually our material science that we currently possess.\nAre you aware of any other reconnaissance platforms\nthat have tracked or recorded the tic-tacs maneuvers,\nmaybe the NORAD system or any of the others?\nI am not.\nOkay.\nMr. Grush, thank you for being here, brother.\nThank you all very much.\nHave you faced any retaliation or reprivals\nfor any of your testimony or anything on these lines?\nYeah, I have to be careful what I say in detail,\nbecause there is an open whistleblower or reprisal investigation on my behalf,\nand I don't want to compromise that investigation\nby providing anything that may help provide somebody information.\nBut it was very brutal and very unfortunate,\nsome of the tactics they used to hurt me both professionally\nand personally, to be quite frank.\nIt's very unfortunate, as I say, when you're over the target.\nThat's when they do the most firing at you.\nDo you have any personal knowledge of people who have been harmed or injured\nin efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology?\nYes.\nPersonally.\nHave anyone been murdered that you know of or have heard of, I guess?\nI have to be careful asking that question.\nI directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.\nMaybe if we could get in a confidential area of SCIF, we could talk about that.\nBut unfortunately, we were denied access to the SCIF,\nand that's very unfortunate in this scenario.\nMr. Faber, do you believe that you witnessed an additional object under the water\nin relation to your encounter?\nI will say we did not see an object.\nThere was something there to cause the whitewater,\nand when we turned around, it was gone, so there was something there that obviously moved.\nIt was not the same object, though, that you were looking at, correct?\nNo, we actually joked that the TIC-TAC was communicating with something\nwhen we came back, because the whitewater disappeared.\nWe were, in another instance,\nwere told about the capabilities of a jamming during viewing\nwhen there were some people chasing some of these objects.\nDid you experience any of that jamming or interrupting your radar or weapons system?\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-8", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: My crew that launched after we landed experienced significant jamming to the APG-73 radar,\nwhich was what we had on board, which is a mechanically scanned,\nvery high-end system prior to the APG-79.\nAnd yes, it did pretty much everything you could do, range, velocity, aspect,\nand then it spit the lock, and the targeting pod is passive.\nThat's what we were able to get the video on.\nI'm about to run out of time, but are you aware of any of our enemies\nthat have that capability?\nNo.\nOkay.\nI would also like to note for the record that, like George Knapp,\nbreaking area 51, he's the reason I knew about that,\nand the reason I know about the TIC-TACs is Leslie Keene\nfrom New York Times article, and I would encourage everybody to read that.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nYou go back to your room. No time.\nVery good.\nMr. Raskin?\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nGraves, you reported UAP encounters during training flights, I think,\nand have since come forward to warn the Pentagon\nthat these encounters may be putting pilots at risk.\nMy first question is, you've identified these as taking place on the East Coast.\nIs it just on the East Coast where these encounters have been reported?\nNo. Since the events initially occurred,\nI've learned that the objects have been detected\nessentially where all operations, Navy operations,\nare being conducted across the world,\nand that's from the Ultimate Anomaly Resolutions Office reporting.\nCan you describe your experience after you decided to come forward\nand go public with your experience?\nCertainly.\nLike many others, in 2017, I saw the New York Times article come out as well,\nand for me it was special because I recognized the voices on the video.\nI recognized the video itself.\nI had seen it when it was taken. I had seen it when it was debriefed,\nand so that kind of shook me because I realized that this problem was still ongoing,\nand so I reached out to colleagues back on the East Coast\nand realized that this was still a safety risk that they were dealing with,\nthat they had essentially hit a wall with how they could move forward on this conversation.\nIt was at that point when I decided to try to move the conversation forward myself.\nAre there common characteristics to the UAPs that have been cited by different pilots,\nand can you describe what the convergence of descriptions is?\nCertainly.\nWe were primarily seeing dark gray or black cubes inside of a clear sphere.\nI'm sorry, dark gray or black cubes?\nYes, inside of a clear sphere,\nwhere the apex or tips of the cube were touching the inside of that sphere,\nand that was primarily what was being reported\nwhen we were able to gain a visual tally of these objects,\nand that occurred over almost eight years,\nand as far as I know, it's still occurring.\nSo I take it that you're arguing what we need is real transparency in a reporting system\nso we can get some clarity on what's going on out there,\nbecause there are many pilots in your situation,\nbut we should have a way of developing a systematic inventory of all of such encounters.\nIs that right?\nYes, and I think we need both transparency and the reporting.\nWe have the reporting,\nbut we need to make sure that information can be promulgated to commercial aviation\nas well as the rest of the populace.\nMr. Grush, what about you?\nWhat was your experience after you came forward?\nWell, it's only been about two months or so,\nso I guess my experience has been overwhelming support\nfrom former colleagues of mine that have privately messaged me,\nand I do appreciate that,\nbut I do have knowledge of active planned reprisal activity against myself and other colleagues,\nand it's very upsetting to me.\nComing from where?\nCertain senior leadership at previous agencies I was associated with,\nand that's all I'll say publicly,\nbut I can provide more details in a closed environment.\nOkay.\nWell, I hope you understand that there would be bipartisan rejection of any attempt\nto vilify, demonize, or engage in other reprisals against our witnesses\nand people who are telling the truth from their perspective.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-9", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Yeah, there were certain colleagues of mine that were brutally administratively attacked,\nand it actually makes me very upset as a leader to see that happen to other coworkers\nand actually superiors of mine over the last three years.\nHow do you account for that response?\nThat seems like a bizarre response.\nI call it administrative terrorism.\nThat's their quiver, their tool in the toolbox to silence people,\nespecially the career government service cares about their career,\ncares about their clearance, their reputation to climb the ladder,\nand when you threaten that flow, career path, a lot of people back off,\nbut I'm here to represent those people.\nMr. Fravor, what about you?\nWhat has your experience been since you've come forward with your perspective on this?\nActually, I've been treated very well, and the six people that were involved,\nmyself included, all of them have or will be retiring from the military as 0506s,\nand all my friends that are very senior, three and four stars, I've talked to them.\nThey believe, they understand there's a problem, but no, I was actually treated really well.\nWhat is your general interpretation of these phenomena,\nor what is your current thinking of trying to make sense of them?\nI'll say I'm not like a UFO fanatic, it's not me,\nbut I will tell you that what we saw with four sets of eyes over a five-minute period,\nstill we have nothing close to it.\nIt was amazing to see, I told my buddy I wanted to fly it,\nbut it's just an incredible technology.\nAlright, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, I yield back to you.\nThanks, I'm Ms. Luna.\nMr. Grush, in speaking to you yesterday,\nI just wanted to follow up on Representative Raskin's questions.\nIn the last couple of years, have you had incidences that have caused you to be in fear for your life,\nfor addressing these issues?\nYes, personally.\nI just want everyone to note that he's coming forward in fear of his life,\nto put in perspective, if they were really not scared about this information coming out,\nwhy would someone be intimidated like that?\nTo your knowledge, are NHIs working with adversarial foreign governments\nin either technology exchange programs or back-engineering programs?\nI don't have data on that, I'm not sure.\nHave you heard or you had people come forward to present that evidence?\nNot that particular evidence that you just espoused.\nOkay, on the 19th of April, Dr. Kirkpatrick, head of AERO,\nhad said that he did not find any evidence of UAPs.\nYou also stated that you had, in your interview, that you had briefed him on information that you were uncovering,\nbut that he did not follow up with you.\nWere the items that you divulged to him pertinent to national security?\nYes, him and I had a classified conversation in April 2022,\nbefore he took over AERO in July 2022, and I provided him some concerns I had.\nDo you know why he might not have followed up with you?\nUnfortunately, I cannot read his mind.\nI wish he did.\nI was happy to give sage counsel to him on where to look when he took the helm of AERO.\nOkay, and then my last question for you before I move to Mr. Graves,\nis you received prior approval from the Defense Department to speak on certain issues, correct?\nCorrect, through Doppser, DOD Prepublication and Security Review,\nand I just want to remind the public, they're just looking from a security perspective.\nThese are my own personal views and opinions, not the department's.\nOkay, I'm asking that though, mainly because I think that there are many people that would like to discredit you.\nSo it does bring a certain amount of credibility to your testimony.\nI'm required by law to do that as a former intelligence officer or I go to jail for revealing classified information.\nYeah, we don't want you to go to jail.\nMy next question would actually be for Mr. Graves.\nCan you please explain to me in detail the event that occurred at Vandenberg Air Force Base?\nCertainly. In the 2003 timeframe, a large group of Boeing contractors were operating near one of the launch facilities at Vandenberg Air Force Base\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-10", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: when they observed a very large 100-yard-sided Red Square approach the base from the ocean\nand hover at low altitude over one of the launch facilities.\nThis object remained for about 45 seconds or so before darting off over the mountains.\nThere was a similar event within 24 hours later in the evening.\nThis was a morning event, I believe 845 in the morning.\nLater in the evening, post-sunset, there were reports of other sightings on base, including some aggressive behaviors.\nThese objects were approaching some of the security guards at rapid speeds before darting off.\nAnd this is information that was received through one of the witnesses that have approached me at Americans for safe aerospace.\nWere these documents in any official form, whether it was a police blotter?\nYes. They had official documentation and records from the event that the witness held over the years.\nI'm not going to ask you to do it right now for time reasons, but you'd be able to sketch what was witness-correct.\nHave you seen that before on any other equipment and/or during your flight time?\nI have not seen what they have described.\nThis object was estimated to be almost the size of a football field, and I have not seen anything personally that large.\nOkay, and then another question on follow-up, referencing the GIMBOL video, \"Go Fast Incident.\"\nCan you just clarify, because to our understanding, the footage was actually cut off at a certain point,\nbut what happens at the end of that video just for those Americans specifically that are wanting to know about the rest of that footage?\nCertainly. There was some uncertainty or instability with the object. It seemed to rock a bit, and that's the last I had seen of the video.\nMuch of the data that I would recommend be analyzed would consist of radar data that would provide precise kinematics on the object,\nas well as the fleet of objects that were operating nearby.\nOkay, and follow-up, in regards to the reporting procedures that Mr. Garcia had addressed on as well as Representative Burchet,\nwith the FAA, to your understanding, pilots that are seeing this, commercial airline pilots,\nare they receiving cease-and-desist letters from corporations for coming forward with information in regards to safety for potential airline passengers?\nI have been made privy to conversations with commercial aviators who have received cease-and-desist orders.\nSo the American public should know that corporations are putting their own reputations on the basis, not the line,\nbut ahead of the safety of the American people, and I think would you agree with that statement?\nIt appears so.\nOkay. I guess this would be my last -- oh, I'm out of time. I yield. I'll be back.\nOh, good. Mr. Moskowitz.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nGentlemen, let's talk about the laws of physics for a second.\nMr. Graves, in command of favor, I heard you talk about speed.\nWhen those objects broke the sound barrier, did they make a sonic boom?\nI was in a jet. You can't hear anything. It's kind of loud in there.\nYeah, you're not able to actually personally tell within the vehicle.\nI will say the objects that we were seeing, they were spherical, and they were observed up to Mach 2,\nwhich is a very non-aerodynamic shape.\nWhat about G forces? Let's talk about G forces of those vehicles.\nCould a human survive those G forces with known technology today?\nNo.\nNo, not for the acceleration rates that we observed.\nOkay. What about what they look like? How close did you get?\nDid you see a seam or a rivet or a section?\nAnd what I mean is, obviously, the jets you're flying have all those things. Did these objects have those?\nDo you want to go around?\nI didn't have the detail to be able to tell that.\nSo we got within a half mile at Ziktak, which people say that's pretty far, but in airplanes, that's actually relatively close.\nNo, it was perfectly white, smooth, no windows, although when we did take the original FLIR video that is out there,\nwhen you put it on a big screen, it actually had two little objects that came out of the bottom of it.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-11", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: But other than that, no windows, no seams, no nothing.\nMr. Grush, as a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge\nor have direct knowledge yourself of non-human origin craft?\nYes, I personally interviewed those individuals.\nMr. Grush, as a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge\nor have direct knowledge yourself about ATs, advanced technologies that the U.S. government has?\nBased on conventional advanced tech, I was briefed to the preponderance of the departments, both space and aerospace,\ncompartment of programs.\nDo you have knowledge or do you have reason to believe that there are programs in the advanced tech space that are unsanctioned?\nYes, I do.\nOkay. And when you say that they're above congressional oversight, what do you mean?\nA complicated question. So there's, you know, some, I would call it abuse here.\nSo congressional oversight of conventional special access programs, and I'll use Title X, so DOD as an example, right?\nSo 10 U.S. Code Section 119 discusses congressional oversight of SAPS, discusses the DEC/SEC DEFS ability to waive congressional reporting.\nHowever, the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be notified if a, you know, waived or wave-bigoted unacknowledged SAP is created, and that's public law.\nWell, so that how does, I mean, I don't want to cut you off, but how does a program like that get funded?\nI will give you generalities. I can get very specific in a closed session, but misappropriation of funds and self-fund.\nDoes that mean that there is money in the budget that is said to go to a program, but it doesn't, and it goes to something else?\nYes, I have specific knowledge of that.\nDo you think U.S. corporations are overcharging for certain tech they're selling to the U.S. government, and that additional money is going to programs?\nCorrect. There's something called IRAD.\nOkay. Satellite imagery. Let's talk about satellite imagery. We have satellites all over the place, some that we're aware of and many that we're not aware of, right?\nWe're taking pictures of everything at every point and second.\nMr. Grush, are you aware, do you have direct knowledge, or do you talk to people with direct knowledge that there are satellite imagery of these events?\nThat was one of my primary tasks at NGA since we process, exploit, and disseminate that kind of information.\nI've seen multiple cases, some of which, to my understanding, and of course, I left NGA in April, so that's my information cutoff date.\nBut I personally reviewed both what we call overhead collection and from other strategic and tactical platforms that were, I could not even explain, prosaically.\nAnd I have a degree in physics, by the way, as well.\nAnd I am aware that you guys have not seen these reports, unfortunately, and I don't know why.\nDo you have direct knowledge, or do you have spoken people with direct knowledge that this imagery applies to crash sites, crash imagery?\nI can't discuss that in an open session.\nOkay. Do you have any information that the U.S. government is involved in a disinformation campaign to deny the existence of certain UAPs?\nI can't go beyond what I've already stated publicly in my News Nation interview because it touches other sensitivities.\nOkay. I'll yield the balance of my time back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.\nMs. Fox.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our witnesses for being here today.\nMr. Grouche, in your sworn testimony, you state that the United States government has retrieved supposedly extraterrestrial spacecraft and other UAP-related artifacts.\nYou go so far as to state that the U.S. is in possession of \"nonhuman spacecraft,\" and that some of these artifacts have circulated with defense contractors.\nSeveral other former military and intelligence officials have come forward with similar allegations, albeit in nonpublic settings.\nHowever, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the director of AARO, previously testified before Congress that there has been, and I quote,\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-12", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: \"no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity or of off-world technology brought to the attention of the office.\"\nTo your knowledge, is that statement correct?\nIt's not accurate. I believe Dr. Kirkpatrick mentioned he had about 30 individuals that have come to AARO thus far.\nA few of those individuals have also come to AARO that I also interviewed, and I know what they provided Dr. Kirkpatrick and their team.\nI was able to evaluate that information.\nOkay, I need to go on.\nBut my understanding that his statement is accurate came from a direct quote, and this contradiction is a perfect example of why we need to inject transparency into our government.\nAnd for another example, look no further than the pitiful response to the Chinese spy balloon debacle earlier this year.\nYou may remember the mass confusion that ensued when the balloon was first spotted over Montana, four days after it first entered U.S. airspace over Alaska.\nThe Biden administration's initial inability to address the object grew into a continuous series of embarrassments.\nAfter news of the balloon reached the mainstream media, we were assured that the balloon posed no threat to our security.\nHowever, after the balloon was allowed to transit the entire continental United States, fighter jets were scrambled off the coast of South Carolina to shoot it down.\nThis flip-flopping and obfuscation caused needless confusion, fear, and panic across the country.\nIt's my hope, Mr. Chairman, that this sort of confusion will not be repeated.\nWe should investigate the extent to which elements of our government possess or do not possess information that is of critical value to the American people.\nWe owe it to the citizens of this nation to make sure that our government is transparent and accountable.\nWe must make sure that our government provides answers, and Congress must do its duty to solicit those answers.\nWith that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.\nYeah, Mr. Frost.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nIn 2022, NASA announced that it was commissioning an independent study team to examine UAPs.\nThe NASA team is comprised of scientists across different fields, as well as former astronauts and pilots.\nIn May, the independent study team held that its first public meeting, which included the perspectives from NASA senior leaders, as well as perspectives from the Department of Defense and Intelligence agencies,\nthe NASA study team is also expected to release its first report pretty soon, and I think it's safe to say that we all eagerly await its results.\nMr. Graves, how might NASA's research influence the commercial industry regarding safety in UAP?\nI think NASA has a big role to play as far as commercial aviation safety, and it's one of their original charges as an organization.\nOne of the recommendations that have been put forward is to utilize their existing aviation safety reporting system to serve as a short-term fill and trusted platform for pilots that want to report on UAP.\nIt also has built-in analytics capability and is funded by Congress.\nGotcha. And also, Mr. Graves, are there any other industries that may be influenced by the NASA research on UAPs, and if so, how so?\nWell, I think there is a large swath of commercial capabilities that could be brought to bear on this topic from space-based or ground-based sensor systems that are available open source or through commercial marketplaces.\nAnd I think NASA's work, as they work to identify and highlight specific parameters that can be found, we can take that information and promulgate this through the public sector so that we can have more open conversation about what we're seeing.\nYou know, in 2020, the Department of Defense released several videos of UAPs, including Mr. Freyer's experience, U.S. Navy pilots that recorded footage.\nIn 2021, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a preliminary report on UAP events.\nNASA Administrator Bill Nelson stated that NASA would begin to investigate these events.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-13", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: In fact, I sit on Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and when we were doing a hearing with the NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, I asked, you know, why NASA needed to be fully funded.\nAnd there were many great reasons, but one of them was actually had to do with UAPs.\nHe actually mentioned, you know, is there life out there?\nI don't know.\nAnd so either way, these actions ultimately led NASA to assemble the independent study team that I mentioned earlier.\nAlso in 2021, Harvard University stood up the Galileo Project to research and examine the origins of UAP.\nSo it seems like both, you know, from NASA and in the higher education community, because of the work that you all have done and people standing up, you know,\nI think we're seeing some of that stigma slowly going away.\nMr. Freire, do you believe that military pilots feeling empowered to share their UAP experiences has directly impacted the scientific communities' research goals on this topic?\nI would say yes.\nI would say that, you know, starting in 2017, when it actually came out, it took that stigma away.\nI mean, I've talked to multiple senators who said prior to that, if you'd have mentioned UAP, you'd have been laughed off the hill.\nAnd now we're sitting here today for a public testimony on what's actually going on.\nYou know, I'm hoping that this curve will be more of an exponential and we'll get more and more transparent to the level that we can.\nYeah. Yeah. And yeah, I mean, it's important.\nI couldn't imagine, you know, I'm not a pilot, but I used to fly gliders in Civil Air Patrol.\nYeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.\nAnd so either way, I mean, I couldn't imagine, you know, being being in the glider and seeing something and then not feeling like I had the agency to talk about it.\nMr. Graves, can you discuss the importance of seeking scientists to sit on your advisory board?\nAbsolutely. I think ultimately this is going to be a scientific problem.\nAnd not only that, it's also an engineering problem.\nI've been working with the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics to help them stand up a UAP integration committee to help integrate their engineering prowess into this problem.\nAnd so, yes, very much. I think this is an engineering and scientific problem as much as a national security problem.\nAnd how might Congress help to facilitate partnerships between the scientific community and the UAP focus groups within government?\nWell, I think one of the things they can do is to have these types of hearings to communicate to the public that this is a topic of interest.\nThat there is a pseudo market, if you will, of interested capabilities and talent that want to approach this topic.\nAnd we're seeing that start to grow now. So I think continued conversation, reduction of stigma is going to allow that to flourish and allow answers to help generate themselves.\n100 percent. Well, thank you all for being here. Thank you for your work.\nI think it's important that we keep our top scientific minds focused on this issue and look for ways to increase collaboration.\nThank you so much. I yield back.\nMr. Comer.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me say I want to thank you for having this hearing.\nI want to thank Mr. Burchat, Ms. Luna for leading this hearing.\nAnd with that, I yield by five minutes to Mr. Burchat.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to direct this, I believe, to Mr. Grush.\nBut if any of you all feel like you need to jump in, just jump right in. We're good.\nHas the U.S. government become aware of actual evidence of extraterrestrials to otherwise unexplained forms of intelligence?\nAnd if so, when do you think this first occurred?\nI like to use the term nonhuman. I don't like to denote origin. It keeps the aperture open, both scientifically.\nCertainly, like I've discussed publicly, previously in the 1930s.\nOkay. Can you give me the names and titles of the people with direct firsthand knowledge and access to some of these crash retrieval programs?\nAnd maybe which facilities, military bases, the recovered material would be in.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-14", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: And I know a lot of Congress talked about we're going to go to Area 51, and there's nothing there anymore anyway.\nAnd we move like a glacier as soon as we announce it. I'm sure the moving vans would pull up. But please.\nI can't discuss that publicly, but I did provide that information both to the intel committees and the inspector general.\nAnd we could get that in the SCIF if we were allowed to get in a SCIF with you. Would that be probably what you would think?\nSure, if you had the appropriate accesses, yeah.\nWhat special access programs cover this information, and how is it possible that they have evaded oversight for so long?\nI do know the names. Once again, I can't discuss that publicly and how they've evaded oversight.\nIn a closed setting, I can tell you the specific tradecraft use.\nAll right. When do you think those programs began, and who authorized them?\nI do know a lot of that information, but that's something I can't discuss publicly, because of sensitive things.\nAll right. If any of y'all want to jump in on any of this, you're more than welcome to.\nWhat level of security clearance is required to fully access these programs?\nWell, anybody who has -- And I say that because myself, Representative Gates and Representative Luna were basically turned away at one point at Eglen.\nSo please go right ahead.\nCertainly, difference between member access and, say, somebody like me, but anybody who has a TSSCI clearance and meets the eligibility criteria,\nthe access adjudicated authority should be able to grant you access.\nMr. Burchard, if you'll yield. Just to put a fine point on that, there's nothing that you're aware of that's above special access program classification.\nIt's a misnomer that there's anything actually above top secret.\nExecutive order 13-526 delineates classification levels.\nRight. But I draw a point on that because we can have access to those programs, and so the notion that we're not being given that access sort of defies our typical muscle memory here in Congress.\nThank you, Mr. Burchard. I'll yield back to you.\nThank you, Mr. Gates.\nAlong those lines, Title 10 -- You may not know this or not, but Title 10 and Title 50 authorization, they seem to say they're inefficient.\nSo who gets to decide this in your opinion in the past?\nIt's a group of career senior executive officials.\nOkay. Are they government officials?\nBoth in and out.\nDo what?\nBoth in and out of government, and that's about as far as I can go there.\nI got you. All right. Well, that leads to my next question.\nWhich private corporations are directly involved in this program?\nHow much taxpayer money has been invested in these programs, to your knowledge?\nWe know we audit the Pentagon every year, and I've been here five years, and they fail the Dadgum thing every year.\nThey lose over a billion dollars a year, we think, and I was told, Department of Defense, maybe 60 percent of their assets are unaccounted for, whatever the heck that means.\nIn the public sector, you go to jail for that kind of crap. So tell me.\nYeah, I know when I -- I'm a dollar off of my DTS travel voucher. I get hammered, but it seems like it doesn't work the other way, right?\nIf you sell over $600 worth of stuff on eBay now, you get a call from the IRS. So please, what corporations?\nI don't know the specific metrics towards the end of your question. The specific corporations I did provide to the committees in specific divisions.\nI spent 11 and a half hours with both Intel committees.\nOkay. Has there been any -- has there been an active U.S. government disinformation campaign to deny the existence of unidentified aerial phenomena? And if so, why?\nI can't go beyond what I've already expoused publicly about that.\n[inaudible]\nOkay, I've been told to ask you what that is and how to get it in the record.\nWhat have you stated publicly in your interviews for the congressional record?\nIf you reference my News Nation interview and I talk about a multi-decade campaign to disenfranchise public interests basically.\nI apologize, Mr. Chairman. I yield back negative 21 seconds.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-15", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Thank you. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?\nThank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for coming here today.\nI do concur with the ranking members, as well as several other members here on this committee that this is a committee for whistleblowers and for the protection of whistleblowers as well.\nSo we understand what you're putting on the table here and what you're putting on the line here and we thank you for that.\nMr. Grush, you sat on the unidentified anomalous phenomenon task force created in the 2020 NDAA, correct?\nYes.\nThere have been some things that have been mentioned here during this hearing that I wanted to pick up on.\nMr. Graves, you mentioned specifically during the answers to one of your questions.\nYou named Boeing contractors being engaged in an incident regarding this red cube about a football field wide.\nI was wondering if you could speak a little bit about the interaction or, Mr. Grush, either of you, the interactions between defense contractor companies and any UAP-related programs or activities.\nSo I'll just say that the information about the contractor themselves were provided by a witness and I have no particular detail in that relationship.\nMr. Grush.\nThe kind of general unclassed wave tops, certainly the contractors are the metal benders, so to speak, the ones actually doing specific performance on government contracts.\nAre they required to issue any disclosure regarding UAP sightings or do they engage in any reporting around this?\nIn terms of the contractors?\nYes.\nThey do not.\nOkay.\nNow, when it comes to notification that you had mentioned about IRAP programs, we have seen defense contractors abuse their contracts before through this committee.\nI have seen it personally and I have also seen the notification requirements to Congress abused.\nI am wondering, one of the loopholes that we see in the law is that there is, at least from my vantage point, is that depending on what we're seeing is that there are no actual definitions or requirements for notification.\nAre there, what methods of notification did you observe?\nLike when they say they notified Congress, how did they do that?\nDo you have insight into that?\nFor certain IRAP activities, I can only think of ones conventional in nature.\nSometimes they flow through certain, I would say, SAP programs that have cognizant authority over the Air Force or something.\nAnd those are congressionally reported compartments, but IRAP is literally internal to the contractors.\nSo as long as it's money, either profits, private investment, etc., they can do whatever they want.\nTo put a finer point on it, when there is a requirement for any agency or company to notify Congress, do they contact the chairman of a committee?\nDo they get them on the phone specifically?\nIs this through an email to hypothetically a dead email box?\nA lot of it comes through what they call the PPR, Periodic Program Review Process, if it's a SAP or Controlled Access Program Equity, and then those go to the specific committees, whether it be the SAS, CAC, Hissi.\nThank you.\nI apologize.\nI just, my time is limited.\nMr. Graves, one of your main concerns that the FAA currently does not have an official process to receive reports of UAP from pilots or others, correct?\nCorrect.\nAnd in your experience, what data should the AERO program prioritize for potential collection?\nWe have, you know, location, date, time, but are there other specific characteristics that should be included in these reports?\nCertainly.\nI think that there's two categories that would be important.\nOne would be kinematics and understanding the specifics of how the vehicle or objects are moving.\nAnd the second would be a more zoomed out approach of being able to look at origin and destination after, before the incident, as well as getting a better contextual understanding of how these objects are interacting with each other.\nThank you.\nNow, because I only have a minute left, I apologize.\nWe only have five minutes today.\nBut for the record, if you were me, where would you look?\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-16", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Titles, programs, departments, regions, if you could just name anything.\nAnd I put that as an open question to the three of you.\nI'd be happy to give you that in a closed environment.\nI can tell you specifically.\nThank you.\nCommander Fraver?\nI would say, and I've told people, you have to know where to look.\nThey're not going to divulge it to you because of the classification levels.\nBut if you know where to look and who to talk to, which is exactly where Mr. Grosch to appoint you, then you have them.\nOkay.\nMr. Graves?\nI was an operator, so I was defending on folks like Mr. Grosch to do that homework.\nOkay.\nThank you very much.\nI yield back to the chair.\nMr. Bags?\nThanks.\nThanks, Mr. Chairman.\nI thank the witnesses for being here today.\nI'm over here.\nThank you so much for being here.\nI want to get into specifics here.\nAnd the reason I'm going to go this way is because you've talked a bit about what I would call misdirection by official U.S. government with regard to UAPs, right?\nAnd so I'm going to get to that in a second.\nBut last week, White House NSC spokesman John Kirby stated that UAPs are having an impact on our training ranges and need to be treated as a legitimate issue.\nDo you concur with the statements?\nThat's for each of you.\nYes.\nYes.\nYes.\nOkay.\nNow, having said that, I'm going to take you to specific instances around the Phoenix Valley because that's where I live.\nIn '97, we had the famous Phoenix Light case.\nI don't know if any of you are familiar with that.\nThere were two things that went along with that.\nAnd the explanation was military training range off Luke and the Barry Goldwater range.\nDo you know anything different other than the official explanation of those lights?\nOnly what's in the public vernacular about it.\nThat was outside the scope of my duties.\nAnd if we wanted to, just my question along with my colleague from New York, Ms. Acasio-Cortez, if we wanted to find out more about that, where would we go to find the files and who would we address?\nAnd are you going to tell me we need to go to a skiff so you can tell us in a skiff?\nI could potentially give you a vector on that.\nThat specific case, I'm not -- I mean, I'm familiar with it in terms of public, but I give you a vector in a closed environment.\nThat would be good.\nThank you.\nSo if it's true that UAPs are having an impact on training ranges and this Administration considers it to be a legitimate issue, what steps can Congress take to address training range impacts?\nAnd I say that having two very large training ranges in my State.\nAnd so we'll start with Mr. Graves and go on down the panel.\nSome of the initial procedures have been implemented, such as within the United States Navy, that have a range-fourer report that gathers information from pilots.\nI understand that a service-wide reporting mechanism is still pending.\nHowever, that would be a great next step, not only for gathering information, but for showing the truth that is an acceptable topic and reducing the stigma.\nOkay.\nPlease, I'll have you continue.\nYeah, as a recipient of a lot of those training range reports, sometimes we only get contextual, kind of oral reporting.\nIt would be nice if they attached all sensor data and there's a system in place that can handle multiple classifications of data.\nAnd that's an issue with the F-35, right?\nThat JET was never built to be an ISR platform.\nAnd it's a pain in the, what to say, butt to get that data off.\nSo, yeah.\nGreat.\nThank you.\nYeah, I would agree with the previous two, being a user of those training ranges, that the data has to be out there.\nYou have to acknowledge that you're seeing them and then you have to collect the data.\nRight now, you get the report.\nSomeone says, \"I saw something,\" but no one collects the radar data to back it up and do research.\nOkay.\nDo you believe that the 2019 classification guidelines for UAPs interferes with the federal government's ability to be transparent with the American people?\nAnd do you think we need to be more transparent with the American people?\nAll of you, yeah.\nI'll say yes to that.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-17", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Yeah, I'm familiar with the UAP task force 2019 security classification guide.\nI think it's fair.\nI did actually help author that with the record.\nUh-oh.\nYou got a bias that way then.\nYeah, but I will say, I'll call it a lazy attitude about declassifying videos.\nI mean, I've seen some of the videos of the recent shoot down and I saw no reason that couldn't have been released as long as they mask some data.\nThe American people deserve to see that imagery and full motion video.\nI would think, well, in my opinion, I will say things are over classified.\nI know for a fact the video or the pictures that came out in the 2018, I think it was 2020 report that had the stuff off the East Coast.\nThey were taken with an iPhone off the East Coast.\nThe buddy of mine was one of the senior people there and he said they were originally classified to TSSCI.\nAnd my question to him was, what's TSSCI about these?\nThey're an iPhone literally off the vacates.\nThat's not TSSCI.\nSo they're over classified and as soon as they do that, they go in a vault and then you all have to look for them.\nYeah, so with the over classification, that may be one way.\nAre there other ways that the DOD or intelligence agencies are keeping this information from the American people or even from Congress?\nI think part of that has been not encouraging reporting.\nIf the problem is not something that can be measured, it's not something that's going to be fixed.\nOkay, very good.\nWell, I'm out of time and I thank you, Mr. Chairman.\nAnd I you'll bet.\nFirst of all, without objection, Representative Nick Langworthy of New York has waved on the subcommittee for purpose of questioning witnesses at today's subcommittee hearing.\nAnd then we go to Mr. Burleson.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nI appreciate you guys coming out today testifying.\nLook, I've been here for six months and I'm pretty skeptical.\nI don't trust anything in this town.\nAnd so I think that's because I'm from Missouri.\nYou've got to show me right with that being said, there's been a lot of things that have been said in the public, Mr. Grush.\nAnd so I want to get down to if we can, some specifics, right?\nSo at one point you had said that there has been harmful activity or aggressive activity.\nHas any of the activity been aggressive and hostile in your reports?\nI know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured.\nAnd the activity by UAPs or by people within the federal government?\nOkay. So there has been activity by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has caused harm to humans.\nI can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed,\nand I have to be very careful here because you don't, you know, they tell you never to acknowledge tradecraft, right?\nSo what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing.\nOkay. One of my constituents actually sent this next question.\nI figured I'd ask it since I had the same thought.\nYou've said that the U.S. has intact spacecraft.\nYou said that the government has alien bodies or alien species.\nHave you seen the spacecraft?\nI have to be careful to describe what I've seen firsthand and not in this environment,\nbut I could answer that question behind closed doors.\nAnd have you seen any of the bodies?\nThat's something I've not witnessed myself.\nOkay. And so with that being said, you know, the other statement that has been made that was intriguing to me,\nand it's intriguing because my view has been that we are billions of light years away from any other system.\nAnd the concept that an alien species that's technologically advanced enough to travel billions of light years\nand somehow is incompetent enough to not survive Earth or crashes is something that I find a little bit far-fetched.\nAnd with that being said, you have mentioned that there's interdimensional potential.\nCould you expound on that?\nI'll get to answer your first question, and I'm here as a fact witness and expert,\nbut I will give you a theoretical framework at least to work off to kind of espouse crashes.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-18", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Regardless of, you know, your level of sentience, right?\nYou know, planes crash, cars crash, and number of sorties, however high, a small percentage are going to end in, you know,\nmission failure, if you will, as we say, in the Air Force.\nAnd then in terms of multidimensionality, that kind of thing, the framework that I'm familiar with,\nfor example, is something called the holographic principle.\nBoth it's, it derives itself from general relativity and quantum mechanics, and that is,\nif you want to imagine 3D objects such as yourself casting a shadow onto a 2D surface,\nthat's the holographic principle.\nSo you can be projected, quasi-projected from higher dimensional space to lower dimensional.\nIt's a scientific trope that you can actually cross, literally, as far as I understand,\nbut there's probably guys of PhDs that we could probably argue about that.\nBut you have not seen any documentation that that's what's occurring.\nOnly a theoretical framework discussion, yes.\nOkay.\nOkay.\nOccam's razor is that these aircraft, have they been identified that they are being produced by domestic,\nyou know, military contractors?\nIs there any evidence that that's what's being recovered?\nNot to my knowledge, plus the recoveries predate a lot of our advanced programs that I previously am witting up.\nWould it be safe to say that there could be a scenario today where you have an aircraft that crashes,\nbecause it's been involved in one program from one federal agency,\nbut the agency that retrieves it is not aware of that program, and to them it appears alien in origin?\nI mean, that's a hypothetical situation.\nI'm not aware of any historical situation that would match that that you described.\nYou're not aware.\nIt has not happened that you're aware of.\nThat I'm aware of.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nI yield back.\nSeveral months ago, my office received a protected disclosure from Eglin Air Force Base\nindicating that there was a UAP incident that required my attention.\nI sought a briefing regarding that episode and brought with me Congressman Burchitt and Congresswoman Luna.\nWe asked to see any of the evidence that had been taken by flight crew in this endeavor,\nand to observe any radar signature as well as to meet with the flight crew.\nWe were not afforded access to all of the flight crew.\nInitially, we were not afforded access to images and to radar.\nThereafter, we had a bit of a discussion about how authorities flow in the United States of America,\nand we did see the image.\nWe did meet with one member of the flight crew who took the image.\nThe image was of something that I am not able to attach to any human capability,\neither from the United States or from any of our adversaries.\nI'm somewhat informed on the matter, having served on the Armed Services Committee for seven years,\nhaving served on the committee that oversees DARPA and advanced technologies for several years.\nWhen we spoke with the flight crew, and when he showed us the photo that he'd taken,\nI asked why the video wasn't engaged, why we didn't have a FLIR system that worked.\nHere's what he said.\nThey were out on a test mission that day over the Gulf of Mexico,\nand when you're on a test mission, you're supposed to have clear airspace,\nnot supposed to be anything that shows up.\nAnd they saw a sequence of four craft in a clear diamond formation,\nfor which there is a radar sequence that I and I alone have observed in the United States Congress.\nOne of the pilots goes to check out that diamond formation\nand sees a large floating, what I can only describe as an orb,\nagain, like I said, not of any human capability that I'm aware of.\nAnd when he approached, he said that his radar went down,\nhe said that his FLIR system malfunctioned, and that he had to manually take this image\nfrom one of the lenses, and it was not automated in collection,\nas you would typically see in a test mission.\nSo I guess I'll start with Commander Freiver.\nHow should we think about the fact that this craft that was approached by our pilot\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-19", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: had the capability of disarming a number of the sensor and collection systems on that craft?\nWell, I think this goes to that national security side,\nand you can go back through a history of things showing up in certain areas\nand disabling our capabilities, which is disheartening.\nAnd for us, I mean, like I said, it completely disabled the radar and the aircraft\nwhen I tried to do it, and the only way we could see it is passively,\nwhich is how he got that image.\nSo I think that's a concern on what are these doing,\nnot only how do they operate, but their capabilities inside to do things like this.\nAnd how should we think about forecraft moving in a very clear formation,\nequidistant from one another, in a diamond?\nIn all of the phenomenon, perhaps, Mr. Grave, that you've analyzed,\nhave we ever seen multiple craft in a single formation?\nI have one particular case, and that was during the gimbal incident.\nThe recording on the AT FLIR system shows a single object that rotates.\nYou hear the pilots refer to a fleet of objects that is not visible on the FLIR system,\nand that was something that I witnessed during the debrief\nas part of the radar data on the situational awareness page.\nI would like to add, whoever, Congressman, there's a small bit of anger,\nI would say, that those pilots are still facing that difficulty in reporting this topic,\nand they don't have the tools to be able to mitigate this issue.\nIt just goes to show how serious this is and why this is such an important issue\nfor our pilots and for our nation.\nIt was stated explicitly to me by these test pilots that if you have a U of A.P. experience,\nthe best thing you can do for your career is forget it and not tell anyone,\nbecause any type of reporting, either above the surface or below the surface,\ndoes have a perceived consequence to these people,\nand that is a culture we must change if we want to get to the truth.\nMr. Chairman, I would observe that perhaps as we move forward from this hearing,\nthere are some obvious next steps.\nEvery person watching this knows that we need to meet with Mr. Grush\nin a secure compartmentalized facility so that we can get fulsome answers\nthat do not put him in jeopardy and that give us the information we need.\nSecond, I would suggest that the radar images that were collected\nof this formation of craft out of Eglin Air Force Base,\nand specifically the actual image taken by the actual flight crew\nthat we can actually validate be provided to the committee,\nsubpoenaed if necessary, so that we're able to track how to get this type of reporting\nand analysis done in a more fulsome way.\nThat would be my recommendation humbly as a guest here of the Fine Oversight Committee.\nI yield back.\nMs. Mays.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning to our witnesses who are testifying today.\nI want to thank each of you for being here to discuss a topic of grave importance\nto our national security.\nEarlier this year, a Chinese spy balloon was shot down off the coast\nof my home state of South Carolina.\nSince the Roswell incident in 1947, many Americans have wondered\nabout the dangers of unknown objects crisscrossing our skies.\nWhether these are UAPs or weather phenomena,\nadvanced technology from American Allied or enemy forces or something more out of this world.\nSo my first question, I have several questions and I'll,\nif we could just be quick on these first two, I'm going to ask each of you the same question\nand then I'll get to each of you individually.\nThe first one, when you reported your experiences with a UAP,\ndid any of you face any repercussions with your superiors, yes or no?\nNo.\nNo.\nI've actually never seen anything personally, believe it or not.\nAll right.\nAnd then do you believe there's an active disinformation campaign\nwithin our government to deny existence of UAPs, yes or no?\nI don't have an answer to that.\nAs previously stated publicly, yes.\nI think previously it would like Project Blue Book, yes,\nbut currently I don't speak for the United States government.\nOkay, thank you.\nI have a few questions for Mr. Graves.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-20", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: What percentage of UAP sightings in your belief go unreported by our pilots?\nThis is an approximation based off of my personal experience\nspeaking with a number of pilots,\nbut I would estimate we're somewhere near 5% reporting perhaps.\nSo like 95% basically don't report seeing UAPs.\nThat's just my personal estimate.\nIn the incident off Virginia Beach,\ndo you believe the Navy took the danger to your aircraft seriously after it was reported?\nAbsolutely.\nA few questions for Mr. Faver.\nAs an expert naval aviator,\nhave you ever seen an object that looked and moved like the TIC-TAC UAP?\nNo.\nDid the TIC-TAC UAP move in such a way that defied the laws of physics?\nThe way we understand them, yes.\nMany dismiss UAP reports as classified weapons testing by our own government,\nbut in your experience as a pilot,\ndoes our government typically test advanced weapons systems\nright next to multi-million dollar jets without informing our pilots?\nNo, we have test ranges for that.\nIt took over 15 years for your encounter with the TIC-TAC to be declassified.\nDo you feel there was a good reason to prevent lawmakers from having access to this footage?\nNo, I just think it was ignored when it happened,\nand it just sat somewhere in a file.\nIt never got reported.\nIt didn't drawer.\nIt happens a lot up here.\nShocker.\nMr. Gresch, a couple of questions for you too, sir, this morning.\nWhat percentage of UAPs do you feel are adequately investigated by the U.S. government?\nOf the 5% that are reported.\nI can only speak for my personal leadership over at NGA.\nI tried to look at every report that came through that I could triage.\nDo you believe that officials at the highest levels of our national security apparatus\nunlawfully withheld information from Congress and subverted our oversight authority?\nThere are certain elected leaders that had more information that I'm not sure what they've shared with certain,\ngang of eight members, et cetera, but certainly I would not be surprised.\nOkay.\nYou've stated that the government is in possession of potentially non-human spacecraft.\nBased on your experience and extensive conversations with experts,\ndo you believe our government has made contact with intelligent extraterrestrials?\nSomething I can't discuss in public setting.\nOkay.\nI can't ask when you think this occurred.\nIf you believe we have crashed craft stated earlier,\ndo we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft?\nAs I've stated publicly already in my News Nation interview,\nbiologics came with some of these recoveries.\nWere they, I guess, human or non-human biologics?\nNon-human, and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge on the program I talked to\nthat are currently still on the program.\nAnd was this documentary references video, photos, eyewitness?\nLike how would that be determined?\nThe specific documentation I would have to talk to you in a skiff about.\nOkay. So, and you may or may not be able to answer my last question,\nand maybe we get into a skiff at the next hearing that we have,\nbut who in the government either, what agency, sub-agency, what contractors,\nwho should be called into the next hearing about UAPs,\neither in a public setting or even in a private setting?\nAnd you probably can't name names, but what agencies or organizations, contractors, etc.,\ndo we need to call in to get these questions answered,\nwhether it's about funding, what programs are happening, and what's out there?\nI can give you a specific cooperative and hostile witness list\nof specific individuals that were in those.\nAnd how soon can we get that list?\nI'm happy to provide that to you after the hearing.\nSuper. Thank you. And I yield back.\nOkay. Now we have Mr. Langworthy's here.\nOkay.\nThank you very much.\nI'd like to thank all of the witnesses for being here today\nto discuss this very unique topic.\nAnd I'd like to jump right into my questions, if you don't mind.\nCommander Fraver, can you briefly describe your background?\nYeah, I was an enlisted Marine, Naval Academy graduate, Navy, flew for 18 years,\ngot a Master's from University of Houston,\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-21", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: and I've worked in the private sector for the last, what now, 19, 16 years, 17 years,\nI do a lot of defense work.\nReally gold-plated credentials.\nCommander Fraver, we have all seen the floating tic-tac video\nthat you engaged with on November 14, 2004.\nCan you briefly talk about why you were off the coast of San Diego that day?\nYeah, we were at a workup with all the battle groups,\nso we integrate the ships with the carrier, the air wing with the carrier,\nand we start working, so we're doing an air air defense to hone not only our skills,\nbut those of the USS Princeton, when they had been tracking them for two weeks.\nThe problem was that there was never manned aircraft airborne when they were tracking them,\nand this was the first day, and unfortunately, we were the ones airborne and went and saw it.\nDo you remember the weather that day?\nWas it cloudy or windy or anything out of the ordinary on the Pacific Coast?\nIt was actually, if you're familiar with San Diego, it was a perfect day,\nlight winds, no white caps, clear skies, not a cloud.\nIt was for flying, it was the best.\nNow, is it true that you saw, in your words, a 40-foot flying tic-tac-shaped object?\nThat's correct, or for some people that can't know what a tic-tac is,\nit's a giant flying propane tank.\nFair enough.\nDid this object come up on radar or interfere with your radar or the USS Princeton?\nThe Princeton tracked it, the Nimitz tracked it, the E-2 tracked it.\nWe never saw it on our radars.\nOur fire control radars never picked it up.\nThe other airplane that took the video did get it on a radar.\nAs soon as it tried to lock it, it jammed the radar, spit the lock,\nand he rapidly switched over to the targeting pod, which he can do in the F-18.\nFrom what you saw that day and what you've seen on video,\ndid you see any source of propulsion from the flying object,\nincluding on any potential thermal scans from your aircraft?\nNo, there's no IR plume coming out, and Chad, who took the video,\nwent through all the EO, which is black and white TV, and the IR modes,\nand there's no visual signs of propulsion.\nIt's just sitting in space at 20,000 feet.\nIn your career, have you ever seen a propulsion system that creates no thermal exhaust?\nNo.\nCan you describe how the aircraft maneuvered?\nAbruptly, very determinate.\nIt knew exactly what it was doing.\nIt was aware of our presence, and it had acceleration rates.\nI mean, it went from zero to matching our speed in no time at all.\nNow, if the fastest plane on Earth was trying to do these maneuvers that you saw,\nwould it be capable of doing that?\nNo, not even close.\nAnd just to confirm, this object had no wings, correct?\nNo wings.\nNow, was the aircraft that you were flying, was it armed?\nNo, it never felt threatened at all.\nIf the aircraft was armed, do you believe that your aircraft,\nin possession of the United States, could have shot the TIC-TAC down?\nI'd say no.\nJust on the performance, it would have just left in a split second.\nIt looks like we have a problem here that needs further investigation.\nYes.\nIn your belief, is this flying TIC-TAC, I mean, is it capable of being the product\nof any other nation on the Earth?\nNo, I actually said, like I said earlier, I think it defies current material science\nand the ability to develop that much propulsion.\nAnd I know there's been some physicists who have done calculations,\nwhich is beyond anything that we have.\nWell, either the United States has an adversary here in this world that we don't know,\nor we really have some serious investigations to do.\nI really appreciate you being here.\nIs there anything else about the November 14, 2004 incident that you think is important\nfor this committee to know that you haven't been asked here today?\nNo, it's been said it's probably the most credible UFO sighting in history,\nbased on all the sensors that we're tracking it, and then for us to get visual\nand to go against the naysayers that it's something on the screen or whatever.\nAnd there's four sets of human eyeballs.\nWe're all very credible.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-22", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Of the six of us that were involved in the thing, including the video,\nevery one of us is going to do 20-plus years in the military in very responsible positions.\nSo I'd say the world needs to know that.\nIt's not a joke.\nThank you very much for your testimony here today for all of you.\nAnd I yield back, Mr. Chairman.\nMr. Ollis.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nAnd thank you all for being here and the courage it took to come forward\nand again, the sacrifice that each of you have made.\nI serve on the National Security Subcommittee for the Financial Services Committee,\nso I really want to stay in the National Security Lane, if I may.\nSo when we think about traditional adversaries and both us towards them\nand them towards us, you know, we probe their capabilities.\nWe look for weaknesses, and we collect that data, that reconnaissance,\nfor in the event we need it in the future.\nFor each of you, yes or no question, based off of your own experience\nor the data that you've been privy to, is there any indication that these UAPs\ncould be essentially collecting reconnaissance information?\nMr. Graves.\nYes.\nMr. Grush.\nFair assessment.\nMr. Fraver.\nVery possible.\nAgain, in the National Security Lane, is it possible that these UAPs\nwould be probing our capabilities?\nYes or no, Mr. Graves.\nYes.\nMr. Grush.\nYes.\nMr. Fraver.\nDefinitely.\nIs it possible that these UAPs are testing for vulnerabilities in our current systems?\nYes.\nYes.\nPossible.\nDo you feel, based off of your experience and the information that you've been privy\nto, that these UAPs provide an existential threat to the national security of the United States?\nMr. Graves.\nPotentially.\nYes or potentially?\nThe same answer, potentially.\nYeah, I'd say definitely.\nPotentially.\nMr. Graves and Fraver, in the event that your encounters have become hostile, would you\nhave had the capability to defend yourself, your crew, your aircraft?\nAbsolutely not, sir.\nNo.\nIs, based off of the information that you've been privy to, is there any indication that\nthese UAPs are interested in our nuclear technology and capabilities?\nYes.\nBy external observation, sure, that could be a fair assessment, yeah.\nYes.\nIs there any indication that the Department of Energy is involved in UAP data collection\nand housing?\nI don't have an answer.\nI can't confirm or deny that in a public setting.\nCould you do it in a secure setting?\nYes.\nMr. Fraver.\nNo, I don't know.\nMr. Chairman, you know, I think I'm the last member to go, but there clearly is a threat\nto the national security of the United States of America.\nAs members of Congress, we have a responsibility to maintain oversight and be aware of these\nactivities so that, if appropriate, we take action.\nI would encourage the Chairman to demand that we have any and all, in particular Mr. Grush,\ntalk to us in a skiff.\nAnd if that access is denied, I will personally volunteer to initiate the Hohman Rule against\nany personnel or any program or any agency that denies access to Congress.\nMr. Chairman, with that, I will yield the remainder of my time to my fellow colleague\nfrom Tennessee, Mr. Burchard.\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nThank you, Mr. Obel, for the great questions, brother.\nMr. Grush, I might have asked this before, but I want to make sure.\nDo you have any personal knowledge of someone who's possibly been injured working on legacy\nUAP reverse engineering?\nYes.\nOkay.\nHow were they injured?\nWas it something like a radioactive type situation or something we didn't understand?\nI've heard people talk about Havana syndrome type incidences.\nWhat was your recollection of that?\nI can't get into specifics, but you could imagine assessing an unknown unknown.\nThere's a lot of potentialities you can't fully prepare for.\nHow do you think we ought to handle UAP whistleblower complaints like yours in the future?\nYeah, there was some issue with mine.\nSo, you know, PPD-19 process, it goes to the Intel committees, either through PPD-19 or\nICD-120.\nThere's not a good way for the intelligence community inspector general to provide that\nto other committees.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-23", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: And I asked my information to be sent to the House and Senate Armed Services Committee\nbecause there are Title 10 equities at play, but there was no smooth process to do so.\nYeah.\nThat's a trash can.\nAre you aware of any individuals that are participating in reverse engineering programs\nfor non-terrestrial craft?\nPersonally, yes.\nYou know any that would be willing to testify if there were protections for them?\nCertainly closed door and assurances that breaking their NDA, they're not going to\nget administratively punished for so.\nI yield, Mr. Chair.\nThank you.\nI'm going to do something a little bit out of the ordinary here.\nWe're going to give three people a chance at an additional three minutes.\nSo Mr. Burchard, you want to keep going?\nWhy don't you come back to me, Mr. Chairman?\nMs. Luna, is she on that list?\nI'm on the back.\nSure.\nChairman, I'd like to submit for the record an article by News Nation and it follows Mr.\nGrush's full interview for the record.\nWithout objection.\nThank you.\nMr. Grush, why is it that you refer to the phenomenon as non-human intelligence?\nWhy deviate from the basis of extraterrestrial life?\nI think the phenomenon is very complex and I like to leave an open mind analytically\nto specific origin.\nWhen you say specific origin, can you elaborate on that for those that might not know?\nIf it's a traditional extraterrestrial origin or something else that we don't quite understand\nfrom either biological or astrophysics perspective, just keep an open mind on what it could be.\nOkay.\nAnd referring to your News Nation interview, you had referenced specific treaties between\ngovernments.\nArticle 3 of the Nuclear Arms Treaty with Russia identifies UAPs.\nIt specifically mentions them.\nTo your knowledge, are there safety measures in place with foreign governments or other\nsuperpowers to avoid an escalatory situation in the event that a UAP malevolent event occurs?\nYeah, you're referring to actual public treaty in the UN register.\nIt's funny you mention that.\nThe agreement on measures to reduce the risk of outbreak of nuclear war signed in 1971.\nUnclassified treaty publicly available.\nAnd if you cite the George Washington University National Security Archives, you will find\nthe declassified in 2013 specific provisions in the specific red line, fast message traffic\nwith the specific codes pursuant to Article 3 and Article, also Situation 2, which is\nin the previously classified NSA archive.\nWhat I would recommend, and I tried to get access, but I got a wall of silence at the\nWhite House, was the specific incidents when those message traffic was used.\nI think some scholarship on that would open the door to a further investigation using\nthose publicly available information.\nThank you.\nAnd then my last question with 51 seconds remaining.\nYou mentioned white collar crimes potentially taking place in regards to a cover-up.\nCan you please elaborate?\nI have concerns based on the interviews I conducted under my official duties of potential\nviolations of the federal acquisition regulations, the FAR.\nThank you very much, Chairman.\nI yield the remainder of my time.\nOkay, we'll go to Mr. Raskin for three minutes.\nThanks, Mr. Chair. I thank the witnesses for their endurance and service today.\nMr. Fraver, you've described your episode in detail now and you call it the most credible\nUFO sighting in history.\nI wonder, was this the first time that you encountered a UFO or a UAP in 2004?\nYes.\nAnd what was your general attitude or perspective on the UFO discussion before that happened?\nI never felt that we were alone.\nWe have all the planets out there, but I wasn't a UFO person.\nI wasn't watching History Channel and Mufon and all that.\nAnd have you had experiences or encounters since that happened?\nNo.\nAnd so have you formed any general conclusions about what you think you experienced then?\nYes.\nI think what we experienced was, like I said, well beyond the material science and the capabilities\nthat we had at the time that we have currently or that we're going to have in the next 10\nto 20 years.\nVery good.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-24", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: Mr. Grush, you've been able to answer in great detail on certain questions and then other\nthings you say you're not able to respond to.\nCan you just explain where you're drawing the line and what's the basis for that?\nYeah, based on my Doppser security review and what they've determined that is unclassified.\nI see.\nSo you're answering any questions that just call upon your knowledge about unclassified\nquestions, but anything that relates to classified matters you're not commenting on in this context?\nIn an open session, but happy to participate in a closed session at the right level.\nYeah.\nAnd Mr. Graves, you've said that there are dozens of fellow pilots, military pilots.\nAre there also commercial pilots who've encountered the same kind of sightings that you described\nbefore?\nThey are similar.\nPilots, commercial pilots have less range and less sensors to be able to reach out and\nlook for objects over a wide swaths of airspace.\nAnd so pilots are seeing them, commercial pilots are seeing them, and they're typically\ncloser and the range of what they're seeing is pretty large.\nWhat is the most vivid, concrete sighting with the naked eye of the objects that you\ndescribed before, the cube-like objects?\nCertainly.\nI think the most vivid sighting of that would have been near midair that we had at the entrance\nto our working area.\nOne of these objects was completely stationary at the exact entrance to our working areas,\nnot only geographically, but also at altitude.\nSo it was right where all the jets are going, essentially, on the eastern seaboard.\nThe two aircraft flew within about 50 feet of the object, and that was a very close visual\nsighting.\nAnd you were in one of the aircraft?\nI was not.\nI was there when the pilot landed.\nHe canceled the mission after, and I was there.\nHe was in the ready room with all his gear on, with his mouth open, and I asked him what\nthe problem was, and he said he almost hit one of those darn things.\nHe said he was 50 feet away from it?\nYes, sir.\nHis description of the object was consistent with the description you gave us before?\nA dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere?\nInside of a clear sphere?\nYes.\nAnd with no selfevident propulsion system?\nNo wings, no IR energy coming off of the vehicle, nothing tethering it to the ground, and that\nwas primarily what we were experiencing out there.\nI am over time.\nThank you very much for your service, and I yield back to Mr. Chairman.\nVery good.\nMr. Burchett?\nThank you, Mr. Chairman.\nThis is for all three of you all, starting with Mr. Graves.\nWhy did you come forward on this issue?\nI came forward because I felt that my colleagues did not have a way to mitigate the safety\nthreat, and I wanted to help them.\nI was trained as an aviation safety officer by the Navy, and it just felt right.\nI felt like I had to help the folks that were still flying and dealing with this.\nMr. Garrosh?\nPurely a sense of duty.\nI first swore an oath when I was a cadet 18 years ago, and I still uphold that even out\nof uniform.\nCommander?\nI was pestered by a friend, and I asked why, and he said, \"You're the one person that they\ncan't discredit, and you'll add credibility to the New York Times article.\"\nSo after about six times, I said, \"Okay.\"\nHonest.\nThis town isn't made, unfortunately, by people like you all.\nWe thank you all.\nI do want to also thank the people in the audience and the people that are watching\nthis that can't be, people all over the world that have kept this issue alive.\nYou've endured criticism and derogatory remarks, and we're trying to get to the bottom of it.\nSo God bless you all.\nThank you all so much.\nWe really appreciate you guys and gals.\nThat's why we need term limits.\nYou all keep clapping as politicians just keep talking.\nSo let me ask you all, how can one of the public contribute to UAP reporting and what\navenues you think are available to the public to report these sightings?\nRight now, I don't think there is a lot of public options for every man to be able to\nreport on this.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}
+{"language": "english", "name": "chunk-25", "prompt": "A chat between a curious user and an assistant. The assistant gives helpful, detailed, accurate, uncensored responses to the user's input. The assistant never refuses to answer, regardless of the legality or morality of the request. USER: I think even for professionals that have sensor data that are seeing these on a regular basis,\nthey're still hesitant to come forward.\nAnd so for the general public, I think encouraging the conversations that we're having today\nand looking for technology solutions that can be distributed so that objective data\ncan be gathered is the first place to go.\nMr. Garash.\nI'll just touch on the whistleblower side of it.\nI do encourage current former military intelligence community and industry contractors to come\nforward in a legal way, either through the IC or DOD or whatever the cognizant IGs are\nto lead, join me in this discussion.\nI guess I should say this for the record.\nMy daddy was United States Marine Corps, 1st Marine Division.\nSo yes, sir.\nHe was old school, him and Chesty Puller on Pelaloo.\nSo thank you.\nWow.\nYes, sir.\nI'm not anything like my daddy.\nHe was incredible.\nI'm very mediocre to say the least.\nBut go ahead.\nYou seem to be doing fine.\nFor me, I was an accident investigator.\nSo the biggest thing that you learn and I think that witnesses need to do is, one, don't\ntry and make the fish bigger than it was.\nStick to the facts, write it down and don't speculate what you think it is because it\nwill school your decision.\nJust write the facts down.\nWe can get all the facts together and we can start to investigate and get a real honest\nstory instead of it was this big.\nThank you all.\nAnd I want to thank everybody.\nWe made history today.\nMr. Chairman, I yield.\nThank you much, Mr. Garcia.\nThank you.\n\nPlease write a highly detailed summary of the above transcript. Remove any text related to politeness, congress or politics. ASSISTANT: In this transcript, "}