Diana Pasulka Pushes Back In New New York Times Interview

Name: Diana Pasulka Pushes Back In New New York Times Interview
Uploaded: 2025-07-28T16:33:20+00:00
Duration: 16 min 38 s
Channel: Vetted

Vetted

2 days ago

Patrick discusses Diana Pasulka's new interview with the New York Times.

SUPPORT VETTED:

+ JOIN YOUTUBE MEMBERSHIP: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1VfNwcNXSvCy8bNnFzqkpA/join

+ JOIN PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/VettedUAP

+ BUY MERCH: https://vettedshow.myspreadshop.com

+ SUBSCRIBE TO CLIPS CHANNEL: https://www.youtube.com/@VettedClips

SOCIAL MEDIA:

+ DISCORD: https://discord.gg/pcZ3k3dm4D

+ TWITTER: https://twitter.com/VettedPodcast

PLAYLISTS:

+ DAILY VIDEOS: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSA-phE0E4jIc3cZY5TA7VPBQz19PuybW

+ INTERVIEWS: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSA-phE0E4jINxtsMy3MPO6oqvK4D9NKj

SOURCE LINKS:

https://youtu.be/D7n4nctI60c?si=44ZZU2NB0eCYlDjc

___________

VETTED Hosted By Patrick Scott Armstrong

+ WEBSITE: http://www.vetted.show

#aliens #uap #ufonews #ufos #ufo #disclosure #alien #uapnews #orbs #nhi #news24 #news

Category

🗞

News

Transcript

Display full video transcript

00:00What's up, Vedders? Patrick here with Vetted. I am in Sedona on the road. You might hear my dogs walking around. My apologies.

00:09We are recording here for the documentary in Sedona. It's been wonderful. A lot of great stuff, to be honest with you.

00:15I think a lot of people are going to be surprised of what I've partook in. Is that the word? Partaken in?

00:22And, yeah, it's been very exciting. There's still way more to come. Let's just get to this video. What do you say?

00:30Diana Pasolka recently went on the New York Times. They have, I guess, an interview show that they put on.

00:42An opinion piece from the New York Times. And Diana Pasolka sat down and it was very, very good.

00:50Because these aren't the type of interviews she normally does, right? Typically, this is someone very neutral in the topic.

00:56So it was actually a great conversation. But there was even some pushback. Take a look at this.

01:01Yeah, okay. So I have a question. Public information is, yeah, go ahead.

01:03Yeah, I have a question for you. So the people who are the whistleblowers, are these not also people who are part of our government and employed by our government?

01:12Yes, no, they are. Yeah, okay. So what's the difference then? So we have, I agree.

01:16Okay, no, that's fair. Yeah, I agree with you. Well, wait, wait, wait.

01:18Betters, please hit that like button. That really helps out the videos. And of course, if you're not already subscribed, hit that subscribe button, y'all.

01:24I'm trying to get to 100,000 subscribers before the end of the year. All right. Roll clip number one.

01:31I want to stick I want to stick with your biography for a minute, right? You mentioned earlier that once you started researching this subject, you started getting communications from people inside the government or inside the aerospace industry. What what form did those communications take?

01:48Correct. Okay, so when I started the research for American Cosmic, I said, Okay, this is going to be pretty easy, because we have the internet here, and we have all of this data. And it's pretty obvious what's happening. And about a year after I started to do this, I would get emails. And oftentimes, people that I knew, would reach out to me and say, So and so got a hold of me. This is a person who works at this company, there's space related research.

02:16And they would like to talk with you. Are you comfortable talking with them? People who emailed me, again, were from legitimate aerospace companies, and were interested in seeing the research that I did about angel contact events and things like that. So then I began to share information with these people. And, you know, I had read Jacques Vallée's books and so forth and other people's books. And I recognized that I

02:46I might be identified as a person who could spread disinformation. So that was always on my mind as well, as I was, you know, working with these people. At this point, these people didn't care if I was going to ever publish anything again, they were just interested in what I had done. And they wanted to look at it. So and they they had actual jobs doing this work. So that was eye opening for me.

03:08All right. So this next part is the interviewer here is going to focus on one particular part that Diana Pasolka said, which is, they were doing these kind of jobs quote, right? So he's he's actually a really good question, because he digs into what exactly does Diana Pasolka mean by these people were, you know, doing this, right? They were part of the UFO squad. You know what I mean? Like, you know,

03:38so it's a really good question, because it's something normally people would just pass over, right? In a normal, you know, UFO podcast interview, the interviewer is not going to stop to ask this question. It's really good. But Diana Pasolka's answer is also really good. Again, this is a really good conversation.

03:53Without obviously betraying confidence is when you say they had jobs doing this kind of work. What does that? What does that mean? They were employed by NASA or Northrop Grumman or someone like that, to research aerial phenomena, like their job was director of aerial phenomena research?

04:13I mean, what do we mean? Yeah, they wouldn't have a title like that. So they at this point, you know, this is pre 2017, when Leslie Kane and Blumenthal, you know, okay, the New York Times article

04:25pre 2017, again, for the audience is when the New York Times published stories about military pilots encountering aerial phenomena. And it sort of opened an era of new debate about these things. But sorry, go on.

04:38So yes, that's right. So this is pre 2017. This is around 2013 to about that time period. And they have, you know, various titles, they have, quote unquote, day jobs, as say, a mission controller at Cape Canaveral, and things like that. And they would say, they would say this, and almost all of them called it this, they said, my, my hobby job, they would call it their hobby. And so they would

05:08some of them would go to places that they called crash retrieval places. And they would look for debris from UFO crashes. And then they would, you know, they would find scientists who would be able to look into the debris and find out if it was anomalous.

05:28So this is the type of research that they were doing. Some of them worked with astronauts, trained them, and so forth. So it was various types of people and jobs.

05:40But their hobby jobs, as you call them, these are, these are, this is off the books work, the US government is not paying them to do the research you're describing, they're doing it on their own.

05:51I don't actually know that. But that's what they, you know, imply, that's what they mostly said. They mostly said, this is something I'm interested in, because I made a differentiation. Yeah, okay. Yeah. Okay. All right. So as you can see, this is a really good conversation between these two. And, you know, this idea of the people that Diana was speaking to, was it, you know,

06:17were they talking to her about UFOs and the phenomena through a work scenario, right? It's work-based or it's private-based, right? Personal-based, right? And then using their title and credentials to sort of get meetings and have contacts and maybe even infer that this is government work, quote, unquote.

06:40So, but really, it's just, you know, a side hobby, right? Which all of us have, right? So, and does that necessarily take away from the importance or the validity of it? Right? It's another question to ask. So let's continue the conversation. Here's the next part.

06:55Okay, so go on. So you had this kind of contact with them. This is all before the Times reported on these things. So how did that develop to the point where you, you took the idea that there's an objective reality here seriously?

07:08Even after writing American Cosmic, I was, I still was not a non-believer. And I wouldn't say I wasn't a disbeliever, but I was on, you know, I was open to being convinced. Okay? I was open to being convinced. And there were a lot of scientists around me. I was in embedded research. Okay?

07:33So I was part of their community. And, and still am actually. And so, you know, this afforded me an insight into their lives. And their lives were basically dictated by this type of study.

07:50So some of them had constrained lives. And what I mean by that is that, you know, they had security clearances and things like that. So in a sense, it was, they were most likely part of intelligence communities, too.

08:06And when they would reach out to you, they would send you an email?

08:09Sometimes it was an introduction. So after the first few emails with certain of them, I got an introduction from an experiencer to a person who I met at a conference, which was an American Academy of Religion conference.

08:23And, you know, so I met this person publicly, like in a public space. Because, you know, I wasn't used to talking to people like this for most of my life. And anyway, it was, I got an insight into the lives that they led. And I became convinced that the government was definitely doing something related to this, whether or not it was actual UFOs.

08:51I honestly don't know. But I know that it's something that is definitely these people are involved in doing. And it's part of a secret program. And that was something that was that came out in the 2017 New York Times article.

09:08That there was there's this secret these programs are Yeah, there are there's a government program studying this UFOs, right?

09:15Right. But the official line of all these entities has been the US government doesn't have, you know, a secret program that for instance, has a lot of material that we think is from other planets or anything like that. Right?

09:30There's no correct. So what you're so what you're talking about is, in effect, private information.

09:37You have private reasons to think that the US government effort goes beyond just collecting data and videos and trying to resolve anomalies.

09:47I mean, this has been stated by people who are affiliated with the military. So it's not necessarily private information to me, or to people who have been watching the news.

09:58All right, so this next part. All right, so please leave your comments down below. Let's continue with the video. So this next part is where it kind of gets a little spicy. All right, between the interviewer and Diana. Now, respectfully, so might I add. And in fact, to some extent, Diana may like this kind of interview, right? Gets a little pushback gets to, you know, really.

10:24Because once you get a little pushback, you get a little more passionate, and then you really want to make your point. So you really think about it. You know, it's kind of a little fire starter, right? Essentially. So Diana, to some extent, may appreciate this. But let's dig into this. And you can see where the disagreement is from Diana and the point that the interviewer is trying to make.

10:49My understanding is that there's a set of people, including former Defense Department officials, various people who have said, one, consistently, there's a bunch of aerial phenomena that we don't understand, that our pilots see, that we have video of. Some of the video has been released. Some of it, as far as I can tell from my own private conversations, is classified.

11:10But that's sort of publicly stated, that there's some things we see in the sky that we don't understand.

11:17Then we have also publicly stated that, look, the U.S. government, you know, we research this stuff.

11:23We've set up sort of dedicated groups that are researching it.

11:26But their public statements are limited to, you know, we're trying to resolve anomalies.

11:33We don't know anything about secret programs.

11:35Then you have, starting after 2017, a set of whistleblowers or would-be whistleblowers who have come forward, who have testified before Congress, who have written books,

11:47saying, actually, the U.S. government, people in the U.S. government know more about this than the public statements are letting on.

11:55There are secret programs.

11:57There are, you know, materials held by defense contractors that people think come from other worlds.

12:03These kind of things, right?

12:04So I'm just trying to distinguish between those two layers.

12:07Yeah, okay, so I have a question.

12:09Public information is...

12:10Yeah, I have a question for you.

12:11So the people who are the whistleblowers, are these not also people who are part of our government?

12:17And employed by our government?

12:18Yes, no, they are.

12:19Yeah, okay, so what's the difference then?

12:21So we have...

12:21Okay, no, that's fair.

12:22Yeah, I agree with you.

12:24Well, wait, wait, wait.

12:25Diana's about to make a really good point here in response to what the interviewer is bringing up.

12:32And I think it's something we can all relate to, and that is the, you know, confusion around this topic, right?

12:40Just for your average, everyday person.

12:42Forget just being a whistleblower or someone coming out that works for the government that has information on this,

12:47or wants to get involved or whatever, right?

12:49Just your average, everyday person like you, like me, right?

12:53The confusion around this topic, it can stop us in our tracks, right?

13:00It can dissuade us from getting too deep into things.

13:04It can dissuade us from even wanting to know more information about it, right?

13:09Take a look.

13:10Yeah, I have a question for you.

13:11So, the people who are the whistleblowers, are these not also people who are part of our government and employed by our government?

13:18Yes, no, they are.

13:19Yeah, okay, so what's the difference then?

13:21So we have...

13:21Okay, no, that's fair.

13:22Yeah, I agree with you.

13:24So...

13:24Well, wait, wait, wait.

13:25So, this is what's confusing, and I think we should be rightly confused here, because I believe that this confusion keeps people from wanting to do the research.

13:37Because you have the government, right?

13:40You have the whistleblowers who are working for the government, and people who have written the books, like Lou Elizondo, had been working for the government in one of these programs, says this is still happening.

13:51And we also have people like Tim Gallaudet, who's a rear admiral.

13:57You have Colonel Carl Nill, stating that, you know, there's no doubt that this is happening, that aliens exist, or, you know, that this phenomena exists, and we're studying it.

14:10So, you have those people coming out, and then you have another part of the government who's coming out and basically denying this.

14:17So, it's very confusing to a person who wants clarity.

14:21And as for me, I try to stay out of it.

14:25So, I'm not on any side.

14:27I'm watching this happen, just like you are, and just like other people are.

14:32And, you know, I might have more insight into what's going on, you know, because I know several of these people on both sides, you know, both on the part where people are basically saying it's all, you know, not real.

14:49I know those people.

14:50And I know the people who are saying that it's real.

14:52And it's definitely something that's not transparent.

14:56It's definitely not transparent.

14:58All right, y'all.

14:58Hope you enjoyed today's video.

14:59I'm going to leave a link down below to the New York Times video interview.

15:05Again, it's really, really good and well worth watching the whole thing.

15:08It's only about an hour long.

15:10And this is one I highly recommend watching.

15:13Diana does a great job, and so does the interviewer.

15:15It's a great conversation.