Latest / Drawn of History / Joe Rogan Experience _2065 - David Grusch(M4A_128K)

Transcript

Joe Rogan Experience _2065 - David Grusch(M4A_128K) · Drawn of History

• 0:04
  Speaker 1: The Joe Rogan Experience.
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day.
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: What's up? How are you, man? Hey, good, good.
• 0:15
  Speaker 2: Thanks for coming here. Appreciate it.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no, it's a pleasure.
• 0:18
  Speaker 2: You've been on a whirlwind sort of tour. I guess
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: we should start from the beginning.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: So, first of all, lay out to people what your
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: job was with the military and how this all started
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: for you.
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah. So I was an intel officer in the
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: Air Force for 14 years, seven active, seven reserve. Then
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: I kind of had like a parallel tract in the
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: civilian intel world when I became a reservist. And ultimately,
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: I got brought back in civil service in a government
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: way at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency a couple years
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: ago at a senior level. So I was a major
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: in the Air Force and a GS-15 at NGA, which
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: is like a full bird colonel equivalent civilian employee. You know,
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: I'm very humbled that I was able to kind of
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: get that kind of job. But my career mostly, I
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: didn't even really think about this topic. UFOs were not
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: on my radar. I wasn't really a believer. I was
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: agnostic about it. Most of my career, I did a
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: lot of behind the door special access program, technical type activities.
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: I was kind of a space intelligence expert, a cyber
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: intel expert. And like I said, this was not on
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: my radar at all. You know, I would joke with
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: my buddies because I used to handle the presidential daily
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: brief for the National Reconnaissance Office director in my military
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: capacity as a reservist. And I was well clear to
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: hundreds and hundreds of compartmented programs. And, you know, the
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: joke was like, when are we going to get the
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: read on? For the crazy shit. And that never happens.
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: And I do remember the day that I really can
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: remember that I was like, huh, what's with this UFO stuff?
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: I was briefing a senior person at the CIA into
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: a couple hundred special access programs. So I was at
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: the headquarters at the agency. And, you know, after the
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: indoctrination I was giving to the senior person, This person
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: who worked with Lou Elizondo previously was like, yeah, Dave,
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: have you ever heard of this guy, Lou Elizondo? He's
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: running some UFO program at the Pentagon. We all think
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: he's crazy. And I'm like, I don't know who this
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: guy Lou Elizondo is. And I don't know of any
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: kind of UFO program. So that sounds nuts to me.
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: But lo and behold, and that was like early 2017.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: And lo and behold, in December 2017, that New York
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: Times article came up that named the AATIP program and
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: the OSAP program, so Advanced Aerospace Weapons Systems Application Program,
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: and the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program being the other acronym.
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: And I was like, holy shit, wait, that's that guy
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: Luis Elizondo that I heard about. Ah, you know what,
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: I think I have heard of OSAP. When I was
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: a lieutenant, I used to read these reports from the
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: Defense Intelligence Agency on black holes and stuff. And I
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: was like, oh, that's like stupid. Why is the DIA
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: looking into black holes, time warps? It just didn't make
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: any sense to me back in like 08, 09 when
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: I was a lieutenant. And all of a sudden I'm like, well,
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: maybe there's something to this UFO thing. I'm not saying
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: I was like a believer either way on the subject,
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: but this was a topic of concern apparently for the Pentagon.
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: And in 2018- I started doing kind of my, what
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: I call my open source literature review. Like, let me
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: spin myself up on this topic, watching Chris Mellon, Lou Elizondo,
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: Leslie Keen, all these people talk about the subject and then,
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: you know, just trying to understand. So what is this
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: with UFOs? Has this been going on for a while?
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: The answer is yes. Like Foo Fighters, sightings of weird
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: stuff in antiquity, et cetera, which we can get into later. But, uh,
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: and so early 2019 comes along. And my boss at
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: the national reconnaissance office and kind of my air force
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: major capacity forwarded me an email from the, what became
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: a stood up in like, I guess it was 2018,
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: which was the unidentified. Well, it was aerial now anonymous,
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: anonymous Philomena task force, UAP task force. So the UAP
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: task force director sent my boss an email saying, Hey,
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: we're looking for a rep to the task force. And
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: as like any good officer, I was like, well, I'll
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: put it on my performance report. Hey, I was on
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: a task force and, you know.
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: That would look good.
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: And I being well cleared and also a bachelor's degree
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: in physics, a master's in intelligence analysis. I'm like, you
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: know what? I'll figure out what the shit is. It's
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: either going to be weather shit. Maybe it's an adversarial program.
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: Maybe it's like a US program. People are misidentifying on
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: rare occasions. So fuck it. I'll go see where the
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: data takes me. And, you know, early 2019 or so,
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: I joined the UAP Task Force.
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: And then.
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: I started, you know, interviewing pilots, flag officers, you know,
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: general officer equivalent type Navy folks. And, you know, they
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: were seeing some really crazy shit. And like a, you know,
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: event that I talked about previously publicly in a YouTube
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: video on the Yes Theory channel. You know, there was
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: this one 30 year senior Navy officer that, you know,
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: he was going to work sober, no predisposition for fantasy,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: all that kind of stuff. Cause I interviewed the individual
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: for a couple hours and he saw this, you know,
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: crazy triangle hover over his car going to work at
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: a certain Naval facility. And it like blew his mind.
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: He was serious, um, the paint on his car turned
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: milky white after the incident. So that's, to me, that
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: sounds like ionizing radiation. So like ultraviolet, just like how your,
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: your headlights get all foggy over time. If you park
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: your car out in the sun, same phenomenon just happened,
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: you know, within 24 hour period. And I'm like, whoa,
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: if this is true and the, the oral testimony and,
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: you know, crazy radar data that I saw when I
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: was on the task force, um, stuff making turns that
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: didn't make any sense. Well, holy shit, what is this
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: stuff then?
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: This anomaly with his paint, is this documented? Is this photographs?
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: Yes, I saw photographs. It was documented, yeah.
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: And is there a conventional explanation?
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: I mean, based on what he described, something to rapidly
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: ionize his paint like that within a day, I can't
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: think of anything off the top of my head in
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: terms of some conventional explanation. Aerospace technology. And this was
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: a certain facility in the continental U.S. This was not overseas.
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: So it's not like our adversaries flying some spooky thing
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: in U.S. airspace.
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: So this thing hovered over his car for how long?
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: A couple minutes while he was traveling at about 60
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: miles an hour. So it was pacing his vehicle.
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: How far away from his vehicle?
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: Mm-hmm. probably a couple hundred feet in altitude. It was
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: less than a thousand feet, which is also bad because
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: from an airspace perspective, pilots would know this. Anything under
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: a thousand feet? No, unless you get special clearance and
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: you only do that over controlled airspace, like a military
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: test ranges, right? People fly low.
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: And that kind of thing. So is he on, what
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: kind of a highway is he on?
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: A conventional civilian highway.
• 7:49
  Speaker 2: So anyone could have been on it. Yes. It just
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: happened to be this guy. Um, Did he have any
• 7:55
  Speaker 2: other experiences with this thing?
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: No. This was like a once-in-a-lifetime thing. He kept it
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: to himself for a couple years, but then he– his
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: task force came out.
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: What was his name?
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: I don't– he's an individual still on that.
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: Let's call him Bob. Yeah. Did anybody say to him, hey, Bob,
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: what the fuck happened to your car?
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: You know, that's a good question. I don't remember if
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: people asked him about his car. So he took pride
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: in his car, so it actually was probably more upsetting
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: to him personally.
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: What kind of car was it?
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: It was like a Toyota or something.
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: Okay. Yeah. So all of a sudden his Toyota's fucked.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: Okay. And so did he have to report this? Is
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: it something that.
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: He did not report it to my knowledge to anybody.
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: It wasn't until he reported it to us about five
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: years later that it happened.
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: So.
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: Are these kind of experiences something that a lot of
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: these pilots are embarrassed about discussing or have apprehension about
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: discussing because they could be ridiculed?
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: Yeah, a lot of people that are on flight status,
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: they don't want to be sent to the psych, right?
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: You know, there's a whole aerospace physiology kind of empire
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: in the military. And, you know, if you're an operator or,
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: you know, a guy, a missile key turner, you're on
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: what they call a personal reliability program, you're taking, like,
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: you know, Tylenol, you got to report it. If you
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: have a fever, you got to report it because you're,
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: you know, in control of nuclear weapons when you're on duty. So, yeah.
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: And so this idea of being predisposed to fantasy, that's
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: also something that they sort of talk to these people
• 9:31
  Speaker 2: about or try to get a gauge of.
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. These are people that are very sober minded.
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: I mean, this individual was early in the morning going
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: to work, not under the influence of anything. And that
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: person had a, Similar clearance is mine, no TSSCI. So
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: we've gone through top secret, sensitive department of information clearance.
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: And just like myself, I've been through multiple polygraphs in
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: my career. So did this individual. So.
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: Does he have any idea or any theories about why
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: this thing was following him?
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: No, that's what freaked him out the most because he
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: didn't have any experience in his life like this. It
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: like totally blew his mind when he looked out his
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: moonroof and then looked out the side of his car
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: door and saw this 300 foot triangle. It was like
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: pre-dawn sky, but it was darker than the pre-dawn sky.
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: And it had this like plasma edges. Like it was
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: like purplish glowing edges in these three lights that had
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: like these omni-directional, like almost like pool lights. You know
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: how there's, you can't really tell where the light source is.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: And it was totally trippy. And that's just one example
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: of many anecdotal with some evidence, you know, pilot stories. Uh,
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: and that's what made me dig deeper. And I started,
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: you know, cultivating my network, like has the government studied
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: this before? This wasn't just OSAP and ATIP and blue
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: book and all this shit in the past, right? There's,
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: this seems serious. So like, certainly the government has looked
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: at this and, you know, I went to search for
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: that program and that's what I ended up whistleblowing on.
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: Right. So when you, what was, how did you initially
• 11:12
  Speaker 2: discover this program and like, what was your first encounter
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: with the information?
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: A very senior individual in the Intel community came to
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: me when, uh, I guess I was asking a lot
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: of questions cause I'm a very inquisitive guy. And it
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: was like, Hey, we, I need to introduce you to somebody. Uh,
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: you know, he, listed that certain person's academic credentials, which
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: were beyond reproach, you know, PhD level education, clearance, resume
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: was insane. I'm like, well, okay, sure. I'll, I'll talk
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: to this person. And, and I ended up meeting that
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: person in a, you know, uh, uh, top secret facility. And,
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: you know, he started the discussing like, Hey, there was
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: a program. I was on it. And, you know, we
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: were reverse engineering crash material that we've recovered over the decades,
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: you know, and he's like, I'm not joking, you know, and,
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: you know, we know what we're telling you because you're,
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: you have, you guys have to report to the deputy
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: secretary of defense in Congress on this matter.
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: And we were, we were actively briefing like a secretary Esper,
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: deputy secretary Norquist, you know, um, other cabinet level folks, right.
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: And it's like there's an oversight issue because you're the
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: UAP task force. You should be read into this stuff because, like,
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: why spend the taxpayers' dollars looking at stuff that we
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: already have data on?
• 12:41
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: And that spooked me, and that was, like, fall of 2019. And,
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: you know, I don't take a guy's word for it.
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: I'm like, you know what? Myself and my trusted colleagues
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: that had a lot, a lot of special accesses like
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: me You know, we cultivated our network and we ultimately
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: interviewed about 40 people or so all the way up
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: to multi-star generals, directors of agencies, mid-level guys that literally
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: touched it, worked inside of it, all the stuff. They
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: brought intel reports for me to look at, you know, documents.
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: And in a lot of that, I could cross verify
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: with other oral sources at my high-level colleagues who I
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: talked to, and it checked out. Especially when I had
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: enough information on, and I know who specifically to ask, like, hey, well,
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: I went right into this. I'm on the UAP task force,
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: and we went to those, I'll call them gatekeepers for
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: the lack of a better term, and they basically said,
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: fuck you to me and my colleagues.
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: So why were these other people willing to discuss this
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: with you?
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: Well, they determined I didn't need to know. I was
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: already cleared at such a high level handling presidential material
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: and everything. It's like Dave needs to know. And they
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: felt that coming to us, it was a form of
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: a protected disclosure. They felt that they weren't really violating
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: anything because, you know, we were the, I'll call it
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: the investigatory body for the Department of Defense and the
• 14:20
  Speaker 1: intelligence community and Congress at the time. And they, you know,
• 14:24
  Speaker 1: you are allowed to, you know, disclose to a government
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: official in an official capacity. And I, you know, did that. And,
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: of course, I protected those people. And do you know,
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: I took those people, a lot of them, and I
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: brought them to the Intelligence Community Inspector General when I
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: filed my complaint. Because I don't want people to, you know,
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: hear it from a secondhand source, you know, people call
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: it hearsay, whatever. Though I have some firsthand knowledge I'll
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: eventually talk about someday. I'm trying to get it cleared.
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: But through security processes. So they could hear it and
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: hear the details like, you know, who, what, when, where, why,
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: where the shit is, who's in control of it, what
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: are the cover programs, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: and that's what deemed my complaint credible and urgent in July, 2022,
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: which is a, so that my complaint, Yes, was about
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: reprisal too. I filed that separately eventually to the Department
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: of Defense Inspector General. That's an ongoing investigation, but it
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: was my congressional oversight UAP crash retrieval allegations that was
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: deemed credible and urgent. It was sent to the Director
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: of National Intelligence, and then it was sent to the
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: Congressional Intelligence Committees around that time, July of 2022. And
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: I eventually... went to Congress in December of 2022. And
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: it's a crazy story why I took so long. It's
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: fucking nuts. But I provided total about 11 and a
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: half to 12 hours of classified testimony to the congressional
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: staffers and their lawyers for both the House and the Senate.
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: And I went full open kimono. I mean, I told
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: them as much as I could within my time slot,
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: if you will.
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: So- This is obviously very compartmentalized. Yes. Where there's only
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: a few people that know about this information and they're
• 16:18
  Speaker 2: not allowed to discuss it with other people. When did
• 16:21
  Speaker 2: this all start? I mean, is this out of Roswell?
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: Is it predate that? Like, when did they first realize
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: that there are things that cannot be explained or can't
• 16:33
  Speaker 2: be explained through conventional means?
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, the program goes back a ways. The precise...
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: Beginning of it, I can't talk about, but I did,
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: because security stuff, but I did talk about publicly the
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: 1933 retrieval, and I did that tactically, and I ran
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: that through the security approval office because I wanted to
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: show that this is much older, and it's international. It's
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: not like a U.S.
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: Thing.
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, this stuff is landing or crashing around the world,
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: and unexpected countries... I've had this happen, and that's why
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: I picked that because I thought that was an interesting case.
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: And then, of course, Pope Pius XII and the Vatican
• 17:15
  Speaker 1: were involved back-channeling it through the OSS, which became the
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: CIA later, to FDR. And that's how the U.S. knew
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: something weird happened in Italy during, well, right before World
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: War II.
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: So this was 1933 was the first documented?
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: That is the earliest one I can talk about, yeah.
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: There's something that predates that?
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: You could infer that.
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: You could infer that.
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: So this 33-1 you said was in Italy?
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah, magenta. So I'm bad at geography. I think that's
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: like Lombardy region. It's like northern, northwest Italy.
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: And what's the story behind it?
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: So basically it looked like it crashed, right? The original
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: shape most likely was like a lenticular– disc-like craft, you know,
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: with like two dinner plates.
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: What does lenticular mean?
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: So like two dinner plates, you know, smushed together, right?
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: The hump. And there's like a, you know, like a
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: bubble on top.
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: The classic.
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: Classic. Like that. Like that.
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: But it looks like when it hits, the edges broke off.
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: So it became this like bell or acorn shaped thing.
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: And there was nothing in it. It was like just
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: an artifact. You know, there was no biological remnants, if
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: you will. So it's so funny because the Italians were
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: so confused. They actually called up the Germans and they
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: were like, is this one of your Wunderwaffe? Like, what
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: the hell just crashed in northern Italy? Mussolini. And this
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: is all publicly available information because some Italian researchers found
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: all these original documents that some people were sitting on
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: for years in Italy. You know, they put a gag
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: order on the press, et cetera.
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: And yeah, Mussolini.
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: Asked the Germans to come down. Of course, the Germans
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: came down and they were like, that is not ours,
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: but let's look at it together. So that's kind of
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: perhaps a tertiary reason the kind of Axis powers got together.
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: I'm not saying that's like the reason, but I think
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: the Italians and the Germans were so intrigued with what
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: they found from like an artifact perspective. There was at
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: least some scientific and military collaboration during the war. The
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: details of which I'm not sure of, but I know
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: people that know that specific event that are currently still
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: intel officers within this program in detail.
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: So was there witnesses to the crash or some sort
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: of an understanding that something had crash landed and then
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: they discovered it?
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I forget the precise details. discovery. I don't know
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: if it was like local police officers or local farmers
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: found it in the field, something like that. I don't
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: want to misspeak.
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: I'm.
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: I assume some of the Italian researchers might have some
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: fact witnesses that can orally say, oh, yeah, my great-grandfather
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: found it or something like that. But I don't remember
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: off the top of my head.
• 20:08
  Speaker 2: And what was the scale of this vehicle?
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: It was probably like 20 feet by 10 feet, something
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: like that.
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: Not super huge, but kind of big. Do they think
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: that this was a drone? Do they think that this
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: was occupied?
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: There was nothing in it. So if it was piloted,
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: if you will, by some sentience, I mean, you're Your
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: guess is as good as mine, so.
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: Hmm. So what happened to that vehicle?
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: So we knew where it was being stored at a
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: particular location after the crash, and then the military came
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: in and we grabbed it towards the end of the war,
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: you know, 1944, 1945, because, like I said, Pope Pius
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: XII already kind of let FDR know. Why did the
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: Pope get involved?
• 20:56
  Speaker 2: Because it's in Italy? Well, well.
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: Interestingly enough, there's like a whole history of human intelligence
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: prior to World War II and old money, the Vatican,
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: the Italian mob, kind of the old country boys did
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: a lot of informal intelligence collection for the U.S. And
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: there's probably some books you can read on it, but
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: it's really interesting. You know, human intelligence collection wasn't really
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: formalized until the Office of Strategic Services, the OSS, which
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: became the CIA in 1947. You had Paul Mellon and
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: all these other affluent guys of all these old money
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: families that basically created the CIA. So that's probably the
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: reason why.
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: So this thing that was recovered, this was the first
• 21:46
  Speaker 2: documented one that the United States had access to?
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: I can't get into if it was the first or not,
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: but It was an early one.
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: Very early.
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 21:55
  Speaker 2: So it's almost 100 years ago. Yes. And so they
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: take this thing and then they bring it where? Yeah,
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: I can't get into those details. Can't get into that. No.
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: So they bring it somewhere in the United States. And
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: was the attempt to try to back engineer this thing?
• 22:12
  Speaker 2: Was the attempt to try to understand what it was? Yeah.
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: I mean, first of it, obviously, it's understanding the situation, right?
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: What do we have our hands on? And- And like
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: I've said in some other videos and stuff, you know,
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: that we took the Manhattan project secrecy and overlaid it
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: on this issue because that secrecy worked well for atomic
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: bomb developments and whatnot. And, and certainly this whole program
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: in a nutshell, if I were to like summarize the
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: 90 plus years of history, it is a reverse engineering
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: program to garner some kind of insight. Uh, and of course,
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: Not a lot of the things that we've learned from
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: it are directly ripped off the technology we found, but
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: it has inspired other innovations that made its way into
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: other U.S. classified programs over the year for national defense reasons.
• 23:05
  Speaker 1: It's a myriad of different things.
• 23:07
  Speaker 2: The UFO folklore is that this is where fiber optics
• 23:11
  Speaker 2: were discovered first.
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm not going to break the seal on anything
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: we've discovered or anything like that, and... Yeah, it's a
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: place I can't go to. How limited are you in
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: what you can discuss and what you can't discuss? And
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: why do they let you discuss any of this? Yeah,
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: so anything sensitive that I want to say as it
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: relates to, like, U.S. government activity, whether it be intelligence stuff,
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: military stuff, et cetera, I have to submit it through
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: what they call DOPSR, DOD Office of Pre-Publication and Security Review.
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: That is something anybody who's been an intel officer, anybody with, like,
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: a clearance– has to submit that kind of stuff. Now,
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: obviously if you're writing a book about gardening, you don't
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: have to, but if you're going to talk about anything
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: military and intelligence related, you have to submit. So it's
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: kind of a catch 22 for this office, right? They're
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: only looking at it from a security perspective. They're not
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: vouching for it or anything like that. And that's like
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: any author, right? They could write a book about Navy
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: SEALs and they're not vouching for the story. They're vouching
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: that you didn't say any nasty code words or You
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: didn't burn a specific ongoing classified program. And for them,
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not in their OODA loop, but certainly
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: it's a catch-22 for them where if they want to
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: redact and they propose a redaction, they're like, hey, Dave,
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: you can't say these sentences. You can rewrite it and resubmit.
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: You know, we can't necessarily tell you what agency said
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: to redact it, but you're not allowed to say this.
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: They would be basically self-certifying there's a there there. So...
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: In my opinion, probably the policy is like if it
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: has to deal with the subject, we're not saying anything.
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: We're not proposing any redactions. As long as he's not
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: burning a conventional program, we kind of have to allow
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: him to exercise his First Amendment rights. So I think
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: it's like a catch-22 for that office is kind of
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: the long– or the short of the long answer.
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: So this is essentially one of the very early ones, 1933.
• 25:09
  Speaker 2: How many– crash retrieval incidents have there been?
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: It is double digits. Uh, there's specific numbers. I do know, however,
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: I can't discuss that. I know it sounds like, Oh,
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: I'm being coy or whatever, but you know, this show,
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: any other interviews I do, right. You know, Ford intelligence
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: services are watching and it's like, I'm not here to
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: help Russia and China calibrate their intelligence collection. Like, Oh,
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: Dave said it's this number. We missed a couple.
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: Shit.
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: Let's put it out for the KGB, SVR, and GRU
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: are now going to hit the streets to try to
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: figure out which ones they missed. So I'm here to
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: protect national security, and I'm just trying to put all
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: the general topics out there for public conversation to hold
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: our government accountable, really. Because I'm here as a fact
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: witness because we have a constitutional oversight issue because this
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: program has not been reported to Congress in the appropriate way.
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: And I can get into a senator I talked to
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: that has died recently, so I can explain to you
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: why I'm so sure. Besides what I read, which we
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: can get into what intel reports I read, I did
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: get some stuff cleared. So During my investigation, I'm like,
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: you know what? I need to talk to somebody at
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: the highest levels, right? So and this will give you
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: an idea of the kind of people we talk to.
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: And this is the only one I'm going to talk
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: about using their name because they died two years ago.
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: So in spring 2021, I actually flew with a couple
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: of colleagues of mine to Las Vegas. And I met
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: with Senator Harry Reid about nine months before he died.
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: And of course, he's a private citizen now. And I
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: wanted to brief him on topic and I wanted to
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: get his kind of thought leadership on it because, you know,
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: he was a gang of eight member, right? You know,
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: which is the top most cleared senators and congressmen. He
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: was the majority leader, for God's sakes, of the Senate.
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: And I knew, you know, he helped sponsor the OSAP
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: program that I mentioned and where they looked at Skinwalker
• 27:24
  Speaker 1: Ranch and some other things. And I wanted to understand, like,
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: what does Harry Reid actually know? Like, why did he
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: You know, give $ 21 million to DIA and Bigelow Aerospace
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: for this. So I'm sitting there in Harry Reid's living room,
• 27:41
  Speaker 1: you know, right next to him with some other witnesses
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: that were there with me. And he straight up says,
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: he's like, yeah, I knew we had UFO material. I
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: was denied access for decades. I tried to get access
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: and then he explained some of his efforts during OSAP.
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: And I was like, holy shit, did the former majority
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: leader just say that he just confirmed this to me
• 28:05
  Speaker 1: as well? You know, I was already talking to these
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: amazing high level people, but I have Harry Reid literally saying, yes,
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: we have material. And, you know, he knew it was non-human.
• 28:16
  Speaker 2: Did Harry Reid have personal experience with this?
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: I don't know if he's had any personal stuff in
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: his personal life.
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: I mean, did he see it? Did he witness?
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: He said in terms of seeing the material himself, he
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: said he was denied access for years. Decades was his term.
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: And he actually told me on behalf of me, he
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: was going. So he had like a weekly call with
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: President Joe Biden at the time. And he straight up
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: said to me he was going to talk to President
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: Biden about this issue. literally. And then what he was
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: telling me about OSAP, I was like, holy shit, I
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: have like 20 other people that told me this, dude.
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: So the real history, what fucking OSAP was, because I
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: think there's a lot of people out there that think
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: they were looking at ghosts, Skinwalker Ranch. Yes, they went
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: to the ranch as a secondary and tertiary objective. But
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: the real reason, so like there's a document that came
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: out a couple of years ago through FOIA from the
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: Defense Intelligence Agency. There was this special access program request
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: that Harry Reid, you might have seen this, I think,
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: like George Knapp and company have reported on this, that
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: he sent to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, William Lynn.
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: And it was asking for one of the most serious
• 29:40
  Speaker 1: saps you can ask for, what they call a bigoted
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: waived special access program. So waived means it's limited congressional reporting.
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: That is a class of special access programs. And bigoted
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: means it's like by name. And it's like, it was like,
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: you can read the FOIA document. It was like, you know,
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: Harry Reid, James Inhofe, Lou Elizondo, et cetera. And I'm like,
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: why are you asking for the most serious sap to
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: be created for a program that ostensibly is looking at
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: Skinwalker Ranch and stuff? And it doesn't make any sense.
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: So what really happened there, and Harry Reid, God bless
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: his soul, made this disclosure that A couple of weeks
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: after we met in the New Yorker, and you can
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: look this up, I think it was like a May
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: 2021 New Yorker story where he says, I knew for
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: decades and he made this disclosure, not me. So I'm
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: going to say the name of the contractor. Harry Reid
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: said this. You know, we knew that Lockheed Martin had
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: this material for decades. I tried to get access and
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: I was denied. And specifically with the Lockheed Martin stuff,
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: he was talking about during the OSAP program. And for
• 30:49
  Speaker 1: the people who are on this program, I submitted this
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: shit to the officer, got this cleared. So don't freak out,
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: but I'm telling the truth here. Um, so Lockheed Martin
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: wanted to divest itself from this material at a specific facility.
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: That's known to me that I provided to the inspector general, um,
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: like street address, all that shit.
• 31:09
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: And the idea was if they made a catcher's mitt,
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: a security catcher's mitt for this shit, you know, most
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: serious sap possible. the contractor and the other government customer,
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: which was the central intelligence agency, um, for that specific
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: Lockheed material. And it was shit that they recovered from
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: like the fifties and stuff. And it was like bits
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: and pieces of, of, of, of like hall structure, shit
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: like that. And, um, uh, so they were going to
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: tech transfer it. And the 21 or $ 22 million was
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: actually for Bigelow aerospace to build out, you know, facilities
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: in Las Vegas and material analysis equipment. And I've seen,
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: I have, I saw the staff meeting slides. I saw
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: the paperwork, like there's a paperwork trail I've seen on
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: this shit. And I talked to the people involved in
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: this program. And, you know, even Jim Lakatsky who ran
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: the program, who's a retired DIA officer, PhD in engineering,
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: even made this disclosure in his book, Skinwalkers at the Pentagon,
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: page 152 to 153. And he also made a disclosure
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: in a couple of weeks ago, I think it was
• 32:20
  Speaker 1: on Weaponize podcast with Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp, where
• 32:25
  Speaker 1: he's like, yeah, we had a whole craft and we
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: broke into the hall and we gained access. And he
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: ran that through the same security process as I did.
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: And so Jim Lekatsky, who ran this program, is also
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: going on the record that he is aware, personally aware
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: of intact vehicles and everything. But So they gained access.
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: What does that mean? And by what method did they
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: gain access? The way he wrote it in his book,
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: I can only infer it sounded forcible. So through some
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: kind of, you know, means, I don't know if it
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: was like CO2 laser or something. I don't actually know
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: how they gained access, but imagine it was not permissive access.
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: They like broke into the damn thing.
• 33:06
  Speaker 2: So this thing is essentially sealed and it's some sort of,
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: what was the shape of this thing?
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: Uh, he, Lukatsky didn't disclose the shape on this particular
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: vehicle as far as I recollect.
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: What about the dimensions?
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: I don't believe he did in his book. Uh, but
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: I think it's like chapter 11 in his new book
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: or something. I glanced at it, but he did make
• 33:28
  Speaker 1: that disclosure on video as well. And I do encourage
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: both the AERO office, which is the DOD's UAP task
• 33:36
  Speaker 1: force successor and Congress to ask Dr. James Lukatsky to
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: come in for classified testimony because The disclosure in his
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: one book that he wrote with Colm Kelleher, George Knapp,
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: and in the second book, well, the guy saying he
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: has close personal knowledge, he needs to go to Congress.
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: So I, you know, I don't know James Lukatsky, but
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: I do encourage him to be a fact witness. Uh,
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: but going back to that transfer with Lockheed, long story short,
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: can't get in all the nuanced details, but basically the CIA, uh, said,
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: fuck you to DIA and Lockheed, and it was totally killed.
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: So Harry Reid's request to get the material transferred to
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: the OSAP program was totally killed because of bureaucracy and
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: kind of fiefdom stuff. So they used that money, and
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: then they wrote those defense intelligence reference documents, the DIRDs,
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: as a lot of people who's familiar with it are
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: listening will know about. And then they did look at
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: Skinwalker Ranch because They thought that studying kind of the
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: more woo-woo phenomenon aspects of this, and I've never been
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: to the ranch, so I've never experienced the ranch for myself,
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: but obviously I think we both know a bunch of
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: people that have been to the ranch and have seen
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: some trippy stuff, or at least alleged that. They thought
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: that they would be able to gain currency with the program,
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: in this case CIA, to unlock the key for the
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: Lockheed Martin stuff. Which actually, I'll tell you right now,
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: it's so weird to say that, but I ran that
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: shit through security. To me, it's like an out-of-body experience
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: to talk about that kind of detailed sensitivity, stuff like that.
• 35:22
  Speaker 1: But basically, they studied the ranch to gain favor, to
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: be like, hey, look at all this stuff we're figuring out,
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: this paranormal stuff that's somehow connected to the phenomenon on
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: the ranch. But ultimately, they never gained favor with the
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: government customer. And then the program kind of died a
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: slow death because of a lot of politics in the Pentagon.
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: So that's kind of the long but short of it
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: with the OSAP program that, you know, I wanted to
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: make sure the public knew it's not what you think
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: it was. There was some other stuff behind the scenes that,
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: you know, I wanted to speak truth to power on.
• 35:56
  Speaker 2: So this particular vehicle that they had recovered from the 1950s,
• 36:02
  Speaker 2: what was the source of it? Where did they find it?
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: Those details, I did not get cleared.
• 36:11
  Speaker 2: So they have in possession this thing. They gain access
• 36:15
  Speaker 2: to this thing. And what do they report once they've
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: gained access to it?
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: Oh, those details, I do not know. That's probably a
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: question for Dr. Lekatsky. I presume he knows those details.
• 36:26
  Speaker 2: I don't know. So this thing is housed somewhere.
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: It is, yes.
• 36:32
  Speaker 2: Currently. Currently.
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: It may still be in the same location that I
• 36:37
  Speaker 1: know about.
• 36:37
  Speaker 2: Yes. And how many people have access to this and
• 36:42
  Speaker 2: how did they prevent this information from being released?
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: I mean, you know, it goes back to the compartmentation
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: and kind of the ecosystem of secrecy in this community. Right.
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: You know, only a limited amount of people, you know,
• 36:56
  Speaker 1: at least at the time, you know, on Lockheed Martin's side.
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: And Lockheed Martin was complaining basically like, look, like the
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: secrecy is ridiculous. We can't even bring the right engineers.
• 37:07
  Speaker 1: Like imagine you're like a hot engineer, hot shot engineer.
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: You might be hot too.
• 37:13
  Speaker 2: I don't know.
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: But that, you know, you're fresh out of grad school.
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: Maybe you're like the best PhD electrical engineer. You want
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: to do cool shit. You want to publish an IEEE.
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: You want to like, you know, climb the ladder corporately,
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: you know, and that kind of thing. a Lockheed Martin
• 37:29
  Speaker 1: executive comes to you. Yeah, dude, uh, you're gonna, I
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: can reach into something really crazy, but you're never going
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: to publish papers on it. You're never going to be
• 37:39
  Speaker 1: able to tell people what you worked on. And it's
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: probably not the most career enhancing, but if you want
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: to work on something cool, but I can't tell you
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: cause it's unacknowledged until you sign this piece of paper,
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: non-disclosure agreement. Um, uh, uh, Sorry, but here's the raw deal.
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: And a lot of people are like, fuck you, no.
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: And it's not like Lockheed Martin could broadcast this to
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: universities like, come work for us. You'll work on crazy shit.
• 38:10
  Speaker 1: But that is very akin to a lot of other
• 38:13
  Speaker 1: black programs in the government that are outing knowledge and nature.
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: You don't know what you're signing up for until you
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: get bred in. And I've been briefed to a lot
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: of that kind of conventional stuff in my career.
• 38:23
  Speaker 2: So that's one of the problems that Bob Lazar, and
• 38:28
  Speaker 2: I'd love to get your take on Bob Lazar, one
• 38:30
  Speaker 2: of the things that he talked about was that science
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: can't really operate in a vacuum. When you separate the
• 38:37
  Speaker 2: metallurgists from the propulsions experts, from the biological experts, and
• 38:43
  Speaker 2: they're not allowed to communicate with each other, and they're
• 38:45
  Speaker 2: not allowed to bring in other experts to have different.
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: Well, that was the frustration that I had some friends
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: that I've known my entire career, like almost 14 years, right?
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: I literally know them personally. I had a relationship with them,
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: but they ended up, you know, spilling the beans where,
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: you know, look, we're on the program. I'm an engineer
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: for X, Y, and Z. We can't even cross talk
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: across like the cubicles for God's sakes. Like I can't,
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: I'm looking at material X doing some X-ray diffraction testing
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: on it, which is like shooting a stream of electrons
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: and seeing how it bends and looking at the atomic arrangements.
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: I can't even like, cross-talk that with another aspect of
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: the program. This is like ridiculous. And that's kind of
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: their frustration. Yeah, I knew you were probably going to
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: ask me about Bulbasaur. I figured as much.
• 39:36
  Speaker 2: Why did they do that though? If everybody was already
• 39:38
  Speaker 2: sworn to secrecy, everybody already has NDAs. It seems the
• 39:41
  Speaker 2: most effective way of reverse engineering or at least gaining
• 39:45
  Speaker 2: an understanding of how these things are structured.
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: Well, that's exactly how Manhattan was, right? People working on
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: the fuses for the bomb didn't necessarily know it was
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: going to a nuclear weapon. And I've seen this kind
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: of compartmentationist, obtuse secrecy in other programs, and it is
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: debilitating for progress. And honestly, as a former fiduciary of
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: the taxpayer dollars, it's not the best modus operandus to
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: do it that way. And very few people kind of
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: had that top-down, could look across the silos and see
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: what was going on. It just became very dysfunctional, and
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: they were afraid of people being too cross-briefed into the
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: different silos for counter-espionage, counter-intelligence. You've got to remember, a
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: bulk of this program was done during the Cold War,
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: and we were afraid of Russian spies, Soviet moles, and
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: so we made it ultra-locked down. but to the detriment
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: of national security. And that was one of the crazy
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: things that got me that I wanted to whistleblow on
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: because I'm like, this is so stupid. Like we should
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: be making more progress on this.
• 40:49
  Speaker 2: Were there any breaches that you're aware of where foreign
• 40:52
  Speaker 2: agents were able to gain access to materials or an
• 40:54
  Speaker 2: understanding of what we know?
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: So I'll tell you about some Intel documents I read
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: that kind of obliquely answers that question.
• 41:03
  Speaker 2: So There was a.
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: Sense of human-derived foreign intelligence that I read. So I
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: had access to kind of the AATIP, OSAP classified archives.
• 41:14
  Speaker 1: And I was like thumbing through everything. And there were
• 41:17
  Speaker 1: some other people who were bringing me documents to evaluate.
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: And I'll never forget, I had, I want to say,
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: stolen by the U.S. intelligence assessment from a certain foreign
• 41:29
  Speaker 1: adversary discussing the U.S., reverse engineering program. And I was like,
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: and that was actually another, like, what the fuck? And,
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: and so I had an adversary also confirmed this program
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: literally because of exfiltrated intelligence. And so they certainly had
• 41:49
  Speaker 1: a limited knowledge, at least fact of that the U
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: S had a program like this, a particular adversary. And
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: actually I was like, well, I want more. Like, I
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: know who wrote this, literally, or who got it, right,
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: on behalf of the United States government. So I went
• 42:05
  Speaker 1: to that certain agency through the approved and official way.
• 42:08
  Speaker 1: And this is kind of part of the merriest reprisals
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: against me. The agency was like, oh, yes, we have
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: what you're looking for, Dave. You're going to need to
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: sign a one-time read-in to something. You know, come visit
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: us to, you know, go to the vault and read it, right?
• 42:26
  Speaker 1: You know, hard copy. Mm-hmm. But yes, we have what
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: you're looking for. And ultimately, from what I was told
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: by friends in higher places, my request kind of went
• 42:36
  Speaker 1: up the flagpole at that agency. And all of a sudden,
• 42:41
  Speaker 1: the agency ghosted my boss and I for like two months.
• 42:45
  Speaker 1: And then when I really pressed them hard to gain access,
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: because I'm like, I have a need to know. I
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: need to evaluate this intelligence for fucking Congress. And they
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: debriefed me Uh, from all my accesses over in that
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: other sister agency and made up some bogus excuse. Like
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: I shouldn't have been briefed anything in the first place, literally.
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: And basically gave me an administrative middle finger, like persona
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: non grata. Don't ever fucking ask us about that shit again.
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: And I, I I'm sure the person who made the
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: oops that told me they had what I was looking
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: for probably got admonished and slapped on the wrist. because
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: I never heard from that person again, even though it
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: was somebody I actually used to work on occasion with.
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: So that was also another way I knew I was,
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: you know, there was a lot of smoke and fire
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: because I, you know, had stuff like that happen to me.
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: So this, but knowing that our adversaries were aware of
• 43:50
  Speaker 2: this reverse engineering program, are we aware that, Of their
• 43:54
  Speaker 2: reverse engineering programs.
• 43:56
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 43:57
  Speaker 2: Which countries?
• 44:00
  Speaker 1: You could probably guess.
• 44:01
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: And you wouldn't be, it won't be too shocking.
• 44:04
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: But I won't acknowledge what the U.S. may know.
• 44:06
  Speaker 2: Right. So are we aware of numbers in terms of
• 44:11
  Speaker 2: like at least a rough estimate of how many are
• 44:14
  Speaker 2: available to these other?
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 44:18
  Speaker 2: How many?
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: That's like super sensitive.
• 44:19
  Speaker 2: But there's more than one.
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: Yeah. You can read into that.
• 44:23
  Speaker 2: You can read into that.
• 44:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 44:24
  Speaker 2: And has anyone made any progress?
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I can't get into if we've made progress, if
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: they've made progress, cause that's like straight up some national
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: security stuff. But like, I want the, just to be clear,
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: I want the us populace to learn a lot of this.
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: And this is why, you know, another reason why I
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: went public is like, I need to call everybody out.
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: I'm not here to admonish the entire government mind you.
• 44:51
  Speaker 1: But there is an element of the U.S. government and
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: its clear defense contractor base that, you know, we have
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: a three branch of government oversight issue. Like going back
• 45:01
  Speaker 1: to Harry Reid, Harry Reid didn't even get access. I
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: fucking talked to myself to confirm that. And he said
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: he was going to go talk to Biden because I
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: think there needs to be a disclosure plan. And this
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: goes back to what's currently in legislation right now. That's
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: super fucking important because 90 something. 90 some odd percent
• 45:23
  Speaker 1: of this should be open for public discovery, public analysis
• 45:29
  Speaker 1: and academia. This should be like, at very least, true
• 45:33
  Speaker 1: nuclear programs such as nuclear physics, you study in a university.
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: Nuclear weapons, classified, because that makes people in the pink mist.
• 45:43
  Speaker 1: That's really sensitive. We don't need everybody to know how
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: to do that. So, I think the stuff that is
• 45:49
  Speaker 1: like legit weapons related stuff, that's like straight up national
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: superiority stuff.
• 45:54
  Speaker 2: Sure.
• 45:55
  Speaker 1: Reasonably classify that. But, but this, these programs, we need
• 46:01
  Speaker 1: a change. And that's why you saw the Schumer amendment, right?
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: And I think you might've read that on air or
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: something in a previous episode, if I remember correctly, you know,
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: Chuck Schumer. And I knew about the amendment a couple
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: of months before I went public. And that's kind of
• 46:15
  Speaker 1: another reason why I did what I did. I'm like, Fuck,
• 46:19
  Speaker 1: I'm like the only guy that kind of has the
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: opportunity to do this. I know what's in the chute,
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: so to speak, that Chuck Schumer and his staff had
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: with the Schumer amendment, which is 67 pages of literal
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: we want to disclose. And I'm like, I have to
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: spike the football by going public because, you know, I
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: can read the tea leaves on the hill. And I
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: think that they were hesitant to do anything without being
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: able to point to something publicly. And I'm like, I'll
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: be that fucking guy and just send it. Um, and,
• 46:51
  Speaker 1: and then of course, a month after I went public,
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: I guess I pushed Chuck Schumer over the ledge. And
• 46:58
  Speaker 1: I do know he talked to the white house about
• 47:00
  Speaker 1: the amendment too. Cause not like Chuck Schumer is gonna
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: propose groundbreaking legislation like that without talking to the national
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: security advisor or president. Like I imagine he did so. And,
• 47:12
  Speaker 1: you know, so you have the 67 page amendments, right?
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: It's called the UAP disclosure act of 2023. known as
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: the Schumer Amendment, co-sponsors were Young, Gillibrand, Rubio, Rounds, yeah,
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: and Young. And, you know, kudos for those senators for
• 47:29
  Speaker 1: stepping up to the plate because they know this is real.
• 47:33
  Speaker 1: I know what meetings they've had with certain other individuals
• 47:35
  Speaker 1: that are, you know, even more credible than myself. And
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: so this act, which is like super important, is currently
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: in conference as we speak in Capitol Hill. So, The
• 47:48
  Speaker 1: amendment is wrapped in something called the Fiscal Year 2024
• 47:53
  Speaker 1: National Defense Authorization Act. So that is the act that
• 47:56
  Speaker 1: funds the military basically every year, right? So it's an
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: amendment within this bill. And the act is really long,
• 48:04
  Speaker 1: but the main meat of it is about halfway through
• 48:07
  Speaker 1: the act, it talks about a presidential panel or agency,
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: which is nine person, and a controlled UAP disclosure plan
• 48:16
  Speaker 1: that's six years in length, conceivably from 2024 to 2030.
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: And this panel, and you can read this, this is
• 48:23
  Speaker 1: public law, anybody can read this. They want scientists, economists,
• 48:27
  Speaker 1: you know, sociologists, etc. It's kind of like who you
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: would want to help craft the plan for the president.
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: And this whole bill was actually built off the JFK
• 48:39
  Speaker 1: Records Act, which I know like, they're like, well, they
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: never released all the records. Well, we put some teeth
• 48:44
  Speaker 1: in the bill, some eminent domains, some other stuff, the
• 48:47
  Speaker 1: you know, kind of force the issue. Now, granted, the
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: chief executive, the president has the final say. The panel
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: can't compel the executive to do it. But like, I
• 48:56
  Speaker 1: hope the president does. And I support that. But so
• 49:02
  Speaker 1: the Senate already passed it. They're chill with this. This
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: is like, we're good to go. And and but there's
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: pushback in the House right now that is, you know,
• 49:11
  Speaker 1: part of my language, fucking ridiculous. So they're saying, for one,
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: it's duplicating the DOD arrows office activities. They're doing good things.
• 49:21
  Speaker 1: They're looking at UAP reports, trying to figure out what's
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: balloons and air trash and what's weird stuff. And of
• 49:27
  Speaker 1: course they are doing an historical review to try to
• 49:31
  Speaker 1: understand the U S's history on this too. But the
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: problem is with that agency, it it's within the DOD
• 49:38
  Speaker 1: and IC, not above the So you have an issue
• 49:40
  Speaker 1: reaching into Department of Energy, other cabinet-level agencies. You need
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: a presidential-level panel that can declassify stuff, reach into other agencies,
• 49:53
  Speaker 1: and tell certain secretaries, we're coming in, we want your
• 49:56
  Speaker 1: stuff under presidential authority. So what's happening in the House,
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: from what I'm told from people on the Hill that
• 50:04
  Speaker 1: are working the issue right now, You have the chair
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: of the House Intel Committee, Mike Turner, who's blocking this
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: from Ohio, Dayton, Ohio area. Right, Pat?
• 50:14
  Speaker 2: Weird.
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: Right, Pat, meaning Wright-Batterson Air Force.
• 50:18
  Speaker 2: Yes. Yeah.
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: And Mike Rogers, which I'm kind of surprised, from Alabama,
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: who's the chair of the House Armed Services Committee. So
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: I have a problem with Mike and Mike right now.
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: So Mike Turner, now remember, I... went to his committee
• 50:33
  Speaker 1: in December of last year. He wasn't there, but his
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: staff and lawyers were. And of course he goes on
• 50:40
  Speaker 1: Fox Business after the hearing, doesn't use my names like
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: this whistleblower. He has no idea what he's talking about.
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: I'm like, really? Tell me, Mike. Have you ever been
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: an intel officer or served in the military? Oh, wait,
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: you've been the mayor of Dayton, Ohio. You were voted
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: most corrupt person in Congress a couple years ago and
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: Pull up his PAC donors. Who are his biggest donors? Lockheed, Raytheon, Boeing. Okay. So,
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: and first of all, if you thought you needed more
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: information or wanted to talk to me personally, why didn't
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: you call me back when I reported to your committee? So,
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: and furthermore, besides blocking the bill, I'm sure you're familiar
• 51:22
  Speaker 1: with like Representative Tim Burchette of Alabama who And he's
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: been very outspoken on the issue. We may not agree
• 51:29
  Speaker 1: with everything Tim says about conventional stuff. That's, you know, here,
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: no there. But, you know, he's been a champion on
• 51:35
  Speaker 1: the oversight committee. And he was, you know, one of
• 51:37
  Speaker 1: the members that I testified in public under oath regarding this. So, like,
• 51:44
  Speaker 1: and Mike Turner is looking to fund, according to staffers
• 51:48
  Speaker 1: I've talked to last two weeks, an opposition candidate for
• 51:52
  Speaker 1: Tim's reelection in 2024. So why is Mike Turner.
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: Going out of his way to destroy the career of
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: a courageous Tennessee representative on the oversight committee. And why
• 52:05
  Speaker 1: are you blocking a bill? And it's not going to
• 52:07
  Speaker 1: cost much, a couple million a year max, you know,
• 52:10
  Speaker 1: for the panel, which is like vaporware in U.S. government speak, right?
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: If there's nothing to see here, why are Mike Rogers
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: and Mike Turner in the House blocking this bill that is,
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: in my opinion, the most important thing legislation for in
• 52:26
  Speaker 1: transparency in American history. If there's nothing to see here,
• 52:30
  Speaker 1: if I'm fucking crazy, multi-star generals I talked to are crazy.
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: The Intel docs that I read are incorrect. They're fucking
• 52:36
  Speaker 1: forgeries or passage material or something like that. Good friends
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: of mine that worked on the program are bullshitting me
• 52:43
  Speaker 1: in some consorted operation against me and my colleagues that
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: it would be totally crazy to even conduct that because
• 52:51
  Speaker 1: I took precautions. Then why don't we just pass this
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: And see what happens.
• 52:57
  Speaker 2: And what do you think the answer to that is?
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: Special interests want to keep the genie in the bottle,
• 53:02
  Speaker 1: even though the toothpaste is coming out of the tube.
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: And I think it's like a death rattle in this
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: industrial complex that doesn't want change. And I'm not here
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: to be some total adversary. I think there needs to
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: be a truth and reconciliation process on this issue. I'm
• 53:19
  Speaker 1: not here to throw people in jail. I'm not here
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: for big contractors involved to lose money. I think this
• 53:26
  Speaker 1: would be a boon. And I think the leadership in
• 53:28
  Speaker 1: these companies need to think about this, where if we're
• 53:31
  Speaker 1: more open with this, you can hire people, you can
• 53:35
  Speaker 1: push the subject into undergraduate, graduates, and postdoctoral programs of
• 53:41
  Speaker 1: research to study this in an unclassified, just like nuclear physics.
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: And This answers a fundamental question for humanity.
• 53:53
  Speaker 2: Are we alone?
• 53:54
  Speaker 1: Or what happens when we die? Well, I don't know
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: about that. But are we alone? Well, the answer is
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: we're not alone. And I know that with 100% certainty,
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: which as an intel officer, you never say 100%. But
• 54:08
  Speaker 1: all things pointed towards, based on the people I talked to,
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: like Harry Reid, and I use him as an example,
• 54:15
  Speaker 1: but I talked to the highest... of the high people
• 54:19
  Speaker 1: you could possibly talk to to catch my drift. So
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: unless all them are lying and they're covering up something else,
• 54:26
  Speaker 1: which I don't even know what it would be at
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: this point, because the phenomenon is real. It's been going
• 54:31
  Speaker 1: on for thousands of years. People have been seeing strange
• 54:34
  Speaker 1: things and not everybody's mass hallucinating. So that's kind of
• 54:38
  Speaker 1: my long diatribe about what's happening.
• 54:39
  Speaker 2: What do they think these things are? The people that
• 54:43
  Speaker 2: you talk to.
• 54:44
  Speaker 1: So they specifically, the people on the program that handle
• 54:48
  Speaker 1: the material, that were in executive level briefings with Intel
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: community leaders and other folks over the years, last 20
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: years or so, they did use the term extraterrestrial, ET
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: or whatever. Okay, that isn't a possible origin, but the
• 55:05
  Speaker 1: Schumer Amendment, if you read it, it specifically uses non-human intelligence, NHI,
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: very deliberately because... We want to catch everything because what
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: if some of this stuff is not ET and they're
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: going to use that as an escape clause? Like, well,
• 55:19
  Speaker 1: this stuff that we don't even know if it's extraterrestrial,
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: so this doesn't apply. So that's why we wanted to
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: be as broad as possible. I mean, besides ET, I mean,
• 55:28
  Speaker 1: a lot of it would be my own personal opinion.
• 55:33
  Speaker 1: I think we have a couple conceivable buckets and I'm
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: using the work of Jacques Vallee, other people that have
• 55:44
  Speaker 1: thought deeply on the issue and how the phenomenon has
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: changed since antiquity. It showed itself in a different way.
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: Like a good example is like witches sitting on your
• 55:55
  Speaker 1: chest phenomenon with paralysis and medieval and enlightenment era became
• 56:02
  Speaker 1: this alien abduction phenomenon in the modern era. And is
• 56:07
  Speaker 1: it the The recipient and their analytical overlay, cognitively seeing
• 56:15
  Speaker 1: the phenomenon based on a modern interpretation, you know, inside out,
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: or is the phenomenon, this is like Jacques Vallee's book
• 56:23
  Speaker 1: passport to Magnolia Magnolia. Can I pronounce it right? 1969,
• 56:27
  Speaker 1: where he talks about the phenomenon seems to like masquerade
• 56:31
  Speaker 1: itself as different stuff over the years. But, you know,
• 56:35
  Speaker 1: we've seen roughly the same stuff. You look at the
• 56:38
  Speaker 1: Foo Fighters of World War II. There are declassified Air
• 56:42
  Speaker 1: Force OSI reports from the 50s. People can Google the
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: talk about flying butane tanks with the same measurements, approximately
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: what we saw in the 2004 Tic Tac incident, but
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: they called it flying propane or, you know, butane tanks
• 56:57
  Speaker 1: in the 50s. So from a morphology or in the
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: Air Force intel, we call it vis recce, visual reconnaissance,
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: like they basically look the same and we can back
• 57:08
  Speaker 1: azimuth that you know, decades, if not hundreds of years
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: in the past, you know, wheels of Ezekiel, right? They're
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: seeing these like disc type objects, right? And unless Ezekiel
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: is a trip in, or this is an allegory or
• 57:22
  Speaker 1: fable in the, in the Bible, you know, let's say
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: the event happens just like the, in the Vedic texts,
• 57:28
  Speaker 1: you have the battles, the blue people in the battles
• 57:32
  Speaker 1: in the sky that sound like nuclear and directed energy weapons.
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: Like what's going on there. I mean, maybe that's a
• 57:37
  Speaker 1: Graham Hancock or Randall Carlson type thing. They know more
• 57:41
  Speaker 1: than I. So there is a real phenomenon that origin undetermined,
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: but it's trippy and sometimes it presents itself in like
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: a non-corporeal form too. Orbs, balls of energy, they don't
• 57:58
  Speaker 1: appear as like some kind of bipedal hominid like some
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: people have espoused. So I think that might be Call
• 58:07
  Speaker 1: it interdimensional, call it shadow biome, crypto terrestrial. I mean,
• 58:11
  Speaker 1: there's a lot of different theories. What are the primary theories?
• 58:14
  Speaker 2: The primary theories are from another planet or from another dimension.
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: I think those are the primary. I mean, there's certainly
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: origins that we probably can't conceptualize as humans because we're just,
• 58:27
  Speaker 1: our meat is stuck in 3D and we don't understand
• 58:30
  Speaker 1: and our IQs are only so high. So there might
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: be some origins that we don't.
• 58:34
  Speaker 2: Understand in terms of like interdimensional travel. Yeah.
• 58:38
  Speaker 1: I mean, obviously, you know, if you talk to mainstream physicists,
• 58:41
  Speaker 1: they say like crossing dimensions physically is kind of a
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: trope of sci-fi. And, you know, I, that's why I
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: used an example. And I know some physicists don't like
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: me talking about this theory, but it is a theory,
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: you know, like, so the holographic principle, which was originally
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: conceived to explain how information is encoded in on an
• 59:04
  Speaker 1: event horizon of a black hole, which is a distance
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: away from the singularity of a black hole where if
• 59:09
  Speaker 1: you cross it, you're fucked because you're going to get
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: ripped to shreds or you're not coming back. And that
• 59:16
  Speaker 1: principle talks about how information basically from higher dimensional space
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: can be encoded in lower dimensional space. And the easiest
• 59:25
  Speaker 1: example is like us casting a shadow on a sidewalk, right?
• 59:30
  Speaker 1: Three-dimensional object, 2D shadow on a sidewalk. If you lived
• 59:35
  Speaker 1: in two-dimensional space, Flatland, you'd be tripped out. What the
• 59:38
  Speaker 1: fuck am I seeing? But they just don't know that
• 59:42
  Speaker 1: it's really just a person in higher dimensional space. So
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: is some of the, I mean, obviously we have physical
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: material that's in three-dimensional space that we've recovered, but at
• 59:50
  Speaker 1: least maybe some of the phenomenon is really operating in
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: higher spatial dimensions but is either being projected or quasi-projected
• 59:59
  Speaker 1: into our 3D plus time space, which is really trippy
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 1: to think about, but we literally do it on a
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 1: day-to-day basis like casting shadows. So, and that might be
• 1:00:08
  Speaker 1: some of what we're seeing too, but I mean, I
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 1: presume we know more. The people I talked to did not... uh,
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: espouse they had full knowledge either. Like I said, the, the,
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 1: the normal colloquialism was to say ET or extraterrestrial.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 2: Could you dumb down this concept of interdimensional? Like what
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 2: I know in physics, they have theorized that there are
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 2: multiple dimensions other than those that we can currently detect.
• 1:00:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And a lot of that is based off of
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 1: like large, this is my bachelor's degree talking. I know
• 1:00:42
  Speaker 1: there's going to be like some physicist who has a PhD.
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 1: He's like, Oh Dave, you, But but basically, you know,
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 1: from high energy particle collisions and based on the deflection
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 1: angles and all the stuff, what happens when the particles collide,
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 1: you know, confirm certain theoretical frameworks about extra spatial dimensions. And,
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 1: you know, I can't speak with any real authority on
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: precisely how that works. But a lot of whether it
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: be string theory or quantum mechanics are based off of
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: higher spatial dimensions. And, um, you know, so that is
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 1: a mainstream physics, uh, theoretical framework. That's not like wacky
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 1: or loony or anything like that. So, uh, but that's basically, uh,
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 1: a possibility, but like I said, like, we don't really
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 1: have a good theory. If you, if you work, if
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 1: you lived in like 5d space, for example, it's almost like, um,
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 1: Remember the ending of the movie Interstellar, right? Where he's
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: pushing the books. He's like in a Tesseract, you know,
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 1: which is like a four to five D structure, but
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 1: he's trying to interact with 3D space. And of course
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: he like leaves that space to come back to his
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 1: daughter many years later at the end of the ending
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 1: of the movie. Great movie. But so that's a way
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 1: to conceptualize it in something you may have watched in film.
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 1: It's kind of like the ending of Interstellar. Oh yeah. Yeah.
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: There you go.
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Which is based on what? Like what theory?
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: So the physicist Kip Thorne was the very famous guy.
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 1: He was a big black hole and wormhole guy. I
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 1: think it's Caltech or somewhere in California. Kip Thorne actually
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 1: did all the physics equations and everything for Christopher Nolan
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 1: to make sure that they were conceptualizing and visualizing black
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: holes and wormholes and all that stuff correctly in the movie.
• 1:02:37
  Speaker 1: We saw the halo around the black hole when they
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: were coming in with the ship and everything. That's actually
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 1: based off of real physics models that Kip Thorne did
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 1: the calculations for, which is pretty cool, actually, that Christopher
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: Nolan took it to that level.
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 2: So this idea that these beings, or whatever you want
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 2: to call them, exist in some other dimension, do we have...
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know what you can say about this.
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 2: Do we have an understanding? Do we have any sort
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 2: of communication with these beings that give us some sort
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 2: of an understanding or a map of this?
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the interaction stuff, it's a sensitive area. There were
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: multiple very senior people that were concerned about talking about
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: that kind of stuff with me. I mean, that is certainly...
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 1: As nuts as it sounds, that was a real subject
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 1: of conversation. Even it sounds like something out of Star
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: Trek First Contact.
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 2: But it doesn't if you have vehicles.
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So it's like once you realize the phenomenon's real,
• 1:03:41
  Speaker 1: then you realize we've recovered artifacts and biologics or dead pilots,
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: if you will, even though it's kind of creepy to
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 1: even think about that in your worldview. You don't think
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: they were ever... you know, alive sometimes too.
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 1: And I'll, you know, I'll leave it at that only
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 1: because I, you know, that is something, you know, the,
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: the president and his cabinet needed to disclose this in
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: a controlled manner, going back to that amendment, you know,
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 1: I'm not here to, uh, you know, push the subject
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 1: in an improper way. And that sounds like, why don't
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: you just do it, Dave? Like there's a lot of
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 1: secondary and tertiary ramifications, socioeconomically, theologically, our relationship geopolitically with
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 1: our allies and adversaries. This is not rip off the Band-Aid.
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 1: And it's simple. There's a lot of complex stuff behind
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 1: the scenes that need to happen. And that's why I'm
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 1: laying out all the general stuff that needs to be
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: talked about during the disclosure process. But I should not
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 1: be the one disclosing. And it would be highly inappropriate
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 1: because I care about the health of the United States
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 1: and its people and national security for me to do so.
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: So I know there's people that are like, oh, why
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 1: doesn't Dave say X, Y, and Z? It's like, this
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 1: is serious. This is not like, haha, let me tell
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 1: you a good story. I'm a serious guy. I ruined
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: my fucking career doing this. I was going to make
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 1: Lieutenant Colonel in the Air Force this winter. I was
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 1: on track to be a flag officer equivalent civilian in
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 1: my career. I spent 18 years in uniform, if you
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 1: count the cadet time, right? My whole adult life was
• 1:05:24
  Speaker 1: serving as an intel officer. But I wanted to see,
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: and I'm 36, right? Older millennial. I wanted to see change.
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: So I'm throwing the flag out and I'm here to
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 1: hold the government accountable to do the right thing in
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 1: a manner that is mature and thorough because I don't
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 1: begin to say that I know everything, all the different
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 1: ramifications of saying certain things publicly. I don't know all
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 1: the answers to that. And that's why I have to
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 1: be careful because I don't even know I'll call it,
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 1: you know, collateral damage effects to use kind of a
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 1: military term, what may happen of certain things in detail
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: that are revealed that I might not know the ramifications
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 1: thereof because there's something that I'm not privy to. So
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 1: this is like a serious, this is not like a
• 1:06:11
  Speaker 1: fun situation. This is like humanity changing, hopefully in a
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 1: good way. But this is like, you know, quite serious.
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 1: And I you know, risked my personal and professional life
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 1: and personal life because things have happened to me to
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 1: be public like this. And, you know, I swore an oath, but,
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 1: you know, myself and my generation, you know, want to
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: see it change.
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 2: Can you discuss the things that have happened to you personally?
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So a lot of the stuff I have to
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 1: be purposely vague because there's an open inspector general reprisal
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 1: investigation on my behalf, and I'm not here to compromise
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 1: the investigation by tipping off my antibodies that may be
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 1: watching right now. But, you know, when I really started
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 1: looking into this, I mean, they came after me so
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 1: hard to try to revoke my clearance, um, ruin my career,
• 1:07:05
  Speaker 1: kicked me out of my agency. And they accused me
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 1: of everything you could possibly think of with like no evidence. Uh,
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: for example, at first they, they wanted to say, Oh, Dave,
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 1: you have mental health stuff you didn't report to us.
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 1: We're concerned because we think you might have an ongoing
• 1:07:26
  Speaker 1: mental health issue. I'm like, what are you talking about?
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: I reported that I had PTSD from Afghanistan in my
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 1: military service several years ago, and I sought help for that. Like,
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 1: I'm not ashamed of that. You know, I'm high-functioning autistic,
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 1: and I didn't know that until my early 30s, and
• 1:07:44
  Speaker 1: how I processed trauma, I didn't really understand until many
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 1: years later. And, you know, I sought help for that.
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: And they were trying to say that, like, I had
• 1:07:54
  Speaker 1: some secret mental health problem that I haven't been reporting to.
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: So I had to go through this whole process. Three
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 1: agencies at the same time investigated me for that, which
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: I don't even know if that's like legal. They tried
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: to say that I like mishandled classified, all this other stuff.
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 1: It was insane. Apparently I was under criminal investigation for
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: a couple months and I didn't even know that and
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: nor did they interview me, but they made a, uh,
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 1: finding with no evidence they tried to use against me
• 1:08:24
  Speaker 1: that I had to spend money to basically litigate and
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: maintain my employment and my clearance, which I did for
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 1: the record. I maintained my clearance. I resigned with full accesses.
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 1: I'm just debriefed now, but I maintained my top secret
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: eligibility and I left with my own accord. And of course,
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: they ruined one of my boss's careers in another agency.
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 1: They walked him out of the building and revoked his
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 1: clearance and terminated him as a show of force after
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: they were going after me. And um, I feel sorry
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 1: for that certain individual. And they came after coworkers of mine.
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: I can't get into who, what, when, where, and why
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 1: to protect their identities and their own process. But so
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 1: that's what happened to me professionally. And then what happened
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 1: to me personally was very disturbing, um, So I have
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 1: to be very vague about this because ongoing investigation, but
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: I think you'll understand what I'm saying, is they showed
• 1:09:30
  Speaker 1: my wife and I they can touch me at any time,
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 1: two times. And it was very disturbing. It was in
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 1: conjunction with some other people getting a message like that
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 1: that are, let's say, publicly well-known, some that aren't publicly well-known.
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: And of course, I immediately reported that to, you know, counterintelligence,
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 1: federal law enforcement local to me because it wasn't criminal,
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 1: but it was like a fuck you to me. And
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 1: this was right before I filed my whistleblower complaint. Now,
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 1: I don't know who did this, you know, an entity
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 1: who did X, Y and Z to my wife and I.
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 1: Identity unknown, but it fucking happens. And I provided that
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 1: documentation to a couple of special agents and. I just
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: knew that it was getting serious. And, you know, as well,
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 1: first of all, I'm the kind of person I'm, I'm
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 1: from Pittsburgh, you know, like steel town, I'll take shit
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 1: from people. And I decided, fuck it. I'm going to
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 1: file an inspector general complaint to protect myself. I don't,
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 1: I'm in fear for my safety. You know, my wife's
• 1:10:37
  Speaker 1: an air force veteran too. And, you know, very strong individual,
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: but you know, as a man, you don't, want to
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 1: put your family at risk. And, you know, did certain
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: other measures, which I won't talk about to protect myself,
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 1: you know, physically. And I could not believe that that
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 1: was happening to me. No kidding. And I knew I
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: needed to do something internally. And then when I saw
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 1: the writing on the wall, uh, earlier this year. And
• 1:11:07
  Speaker 1: of course I knew about the Schumer amendment, like I
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 1: mentioned earlier. And I knew I'm like, you know, I,
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 1: I got to do this for my own protection because
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 1: me leaving the federal service, cause I resigned my air
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: force commission. I totally threw that career away, um, to
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: do what I thought was the right and patriotic thing
• 1:11:23
  Speaker 1: to whistleblow on this, you know, and I, you know,
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 1: swore my oath 18 years ago. And that sounds hokey,
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: but I believe You know, integrity first, service before self,
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 1: and excellence all we do. That's the Air Force motto.
• 1:11:36
  Speaker 1: And I'm like, this is not going to help me personally. Like,
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: love talking to you. I like spreading this message because
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 1: it's the right and ethical thing to do. But this
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 1: is a nightmare for me. I don't want to be public.
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 1: I've served the country in clandestine and covert operations for
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 1: 14 years. I've done technical intelligence for some of the
• 1:11:57
  Speaker 1: most high-profile takedowns in U.S. history. I shouldn't even be here.
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: But I am because I want to see change. I
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 1: saw something unethical and unmoral. I want to make sure
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 1: I hold that element of the government accountable. And it
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 1: was the right fucking thing to do. And I get
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 1: kind of emotional about that because, you know, my career
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: has been service and sacrifice. And, you know, I had
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 1: two friends of mine die. And I've talked about this
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 1: publicly before. And I, you know, I'm segueing a little bit, but.
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: the suffering of the American intelligence officer is something that
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: for their service of their country. And when I'm talking
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 1: about this subject, obviously people don't realize the kind of trauma, uh,
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: Intel professionals go through. So first of all, I had
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: a friend six months after I got back from Afghanistan,
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 1: his name is captain Dave Lyon. There's a park in
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 1: Peterson space for space named after him. I remember seeing
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 1: his coffin come off the plane. So, um, I saw
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 1: him die. That fucked me up for a number of years.
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 1: And that's what gave me a lot of my problems
• 1:13:06
  Speaker 1: that I ended up dealing with. But then I remarried.
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 1: And then my best man, Captain Ben Hiney, Air Force
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 1: Intelligence Officer, Air Force Special Operations Command.
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 2: I've known him for years.
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: He's my closest friend, best man at my wedding. And
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: then 28 days later, Uh, unfortunately he suffered from depression
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 1: and it was, you know, he, as his best friend,
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: he didn't even confide in me. You know, I remember
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 1: chit chatting him to chatting with him on the phone
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: one day, about 28 days after he was my best man.
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 1: And I, he didn't tell me anything was wrong with him.
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 1: And a few hours later he walked in his backyard
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 1: and shot himself. And, you know, I gave his eulogy, um,
• 1:13:48
  Speaker 1: at his, at his, um, at his funeral. And that really, uh,
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 1: you know, really affected me. And with what Ben experienced,
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 1: which I can't get into all the stuff he did, obviously,
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 1: but imagine being the guy that decides that that person
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 1: is bad. Fire the hell fire. That person is now
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: pink mist. They're dead. You just played God. Let's go
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 1: back to, you know, the wife and kids at the
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: end of your shift. And a lot of that, you know,
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 1: I did the same kind of thing. I did a
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 1: lot of stuff overseas that involved interrogations and, you know,
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: ops that you had to decide if a target is
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: bad enough where you're going to affect their life forever
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 1: and their family's life forever. And that's the silent suffering
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 1: of intel professionals, especially during the global war on terror,
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 1: which was, you know, 21 years or so. And, you know,
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: the trauma and the mental health problems that people have
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 1: get from being an intel professional in an operational environment.
• 1:14:53
  Speaker 1: People think like special operators, pilots, et cetera, you know, army, Marines,
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 1: ground pounders, and they certainly have their own trauma, but
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 1: it's this weird insidious, am I in a video game?
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: Is this real trauma that intelligence professionals, and I just
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: wanted to highlight that during the show because that was
• 1:15:12
  Speaker 1: just a near and dear to myself. So people are
• 1:15:16
  Speaker 1: aware of the service of military intelligence and civilian intelligence
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 1: professionals that have to make really tough decisions for the
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 1: country that, um, affect people's lives on the receiving end,
• 1:15:28
  Speaker 1: you know?
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 2: So. Was there a concern while you're going through all this,
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 2: that if you didn't come out with this, that we
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 2: would be stuck in the same sort of loop for
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 2: a long, long period of time and no one would
• 1:15:42
  Speaker 2: ever have access to this stuff, that they would continue. Yep. Yeah.
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 1: And that, you nailed it on the head is, you know,
• 1:15:49
  Speaker 1: I think my generation, once it changed the under 40 generation,
• 1:15:53
  Speaker 1: their parents went to war, their older brothers went to war.
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 1: We're fighting two dangerous proxy wars right now, which is extremely, um, stupid.
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 1: I mean, you know, the better way of saying it,
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 1: be quite frank. And I can give you my own
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 1: assessment on that if you want. But, uh, like we're
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 1: in this loop, we're not progressing in a healthy way, uh,
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 1: as a civilization, you know, it's becoming more divisive, whether
• 1:16:17
  Speaker 1: you're on the left or the right, you know, people
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 1: aren't even looking up. All they care about is Tik TOK,
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 1: you know, we're creating potentially dangerous artificial intelligence. You know,
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: I even saw that in my government service and I
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 1: think humanity's kind of stuck right now and we need
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: to change. And this subject is like one of the
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 1: only unifying ontologically shocking, but I would think generally unifying
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 1: topics where Where if announced by the U.S. and other
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 1: major powers that have knowledge in a controlled manner, that
• 1:16:53
  Speaker 1: this could change humanity for the better, make us look
• 1:16:56
  Speaker 1: inside ourselves, become less divisive, and care maybe a little
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: less about superficial things. So that's kind of my philosophical
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 1: motivation to do what I did.
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 2: And you're confronted with one of the biggest mysteries in
• 1:17:14
  Speaker 2: human history. Yeah. Which is, are we alone? And it
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 2: seems like at least some people have the answer to that.
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 1: 100%. I mean, the people I talked to certainly did.
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 1: And they had close personal knowledge. And the intel reports
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 1: I read, you know, literally indicated that as well, like
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 1: I talked about earlier. And it just... So it's like
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: this caste system. I call it dudes with SCI clearances
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 1: do not have an embargo on reality.
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 2: So.
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 1: It's a caste system of, you know, people in government
• 1:17:46
  Speaker 1: and outside of government in the industrial complex that run
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 1: this stuff under little oversight. And, you know, I remember
• 1:17:53
  Speaker 1: some of the people who denied us access. They were like,
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 1: you know, I don't know what you're talking about, but
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: if I did, why would you have a need to know?
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 1: And I'm like, well, why did you have a need
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 1: to know? You're just some multi-star general.
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 2: You're a human being.
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 1: You're a human being. You're not better than me.
• 1:18:11
  Speaker 2: I mean.
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 1: Who determines need to know on a humanistic question? It's
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 1: like basic fact of life. Why are we classifying fact
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 1: of life at this day and age in 2023? It's insane.
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 2: And the answer to that would be national security.
• 1:18:31
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's obtuse national security, right? So, like, why we
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 1: classify stuff. It's called Executive Order 13-526, right? Section... 1.4
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: sections E and F are why we classify science stuff,
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: why we classify nuclear stuff. It's like a one-liner. It's
• 1:18:48
  Speaker 1: very vague. And are you saying these basic facts should
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 1: be classified? Are you saying that this fits in this bill?
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 1: And you notice the Schumer Amendment, if anybody reads it,
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 1: awkwardly calls out the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, right?
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 1: And they're basically treating this as nuclear secrets because it
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 1: gives off nuclear radiation. Because if you look at the
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 1: ultra-vague definition of special nuclear material, which is Section 51
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, it says anything
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 1: that gives off a sizable amount of atomic energy. Literally,
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 1: that's what it says. Well, what's sizable is And what
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 1: legal gymnastics are you saying this stuff, which is obviously
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 1: not a, well, who knows, maybe it is a nuclear weapon.
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: And you're saying this is a us nuclear secret. You're
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 1: transclassifying it into a nuclear secret, which I understand maybe
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 1: at first why they did that. And I'm not admonishing
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: the hard decisions that presidents and other folks did. many
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 1: years ago when this was more of an enigma and
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: we wanted to lock it down, figure it out, and
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 1: then see what we're going to do. But there's never
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: been a disclosure plan. I always ask that to these
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 1: super senior people I talk to. Was there a plan?
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: Any kind of plan at all? And they're like, no, never.
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 1: We tried to muddy the waters back in there. You know,
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 1: tried to put it out there and test the populace,
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 1: but there was never any cogent plan. I mean, people
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 1: think the government is like this fine oiled machine. They
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 1: have plans for everything. Well, I guess sort of, but like,
• 1:20:36
  Speaker 1: it's not. I mean, look at the war on terrorism.
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 1: We left Afghanistan. No general officer, Mattis, Petraeus, McChrystal, I
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 1: call them the failed generals. People, loud them, but really
• 1:20:47
  Speaker 1: themselves in the Obama administration, Bush administration, except, you know, Trump, whatever.
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 1: Nobody had a cogent plan for success. And we were
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 1: fighting people who are Much less of an adversary than
• 1:21:01
  Speaker 1: one of our peers or near peers. We couldn't even
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 1: win that war. Like, what the fuck are we doing?
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 1: But these protracted endless wars, let's be real, it's good
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 1: for the industrial complex.
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 1: And I'm not admonishing the whole industrial complex, for the record.
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: We need national lethality. We need weapons to kill bad
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: guys because there's evil people in the world. Sure. But
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 1: you've got to control some of it.
• 1:21:27
  Speaker 2: Well, that's a part of the problem with people that
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 2: have secrets. It's like once you have secrets and a
• 1:21:33
  Speaker 2: part of your identity is the holder of those secrets
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 2: and part of the culture of these industries is that
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 2: they are the ones that have the access to that.
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and I saw that in conventional really black programs
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 1: I was a part of in my career. It was
• 1:21:51
  Speaker 1: almost like you got that secret society vibe where it's like,
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 1: if you're a career government servant, your salary's not that great,
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 1: but knowledge is your currency. And what makes you special?
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 1: What rice bowl do you control? And I remember getting
• 1:22:08
  Speaker 1: read into some stuff that like, it was like the
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: president and very limited number of people getting read into.
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 1: And I was one of them because I was operating
• 1:22:15
  Speaker 1: a certain thing for a certain op. And, oh, you're
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 1: part of the club, you know, like only 30 people
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 1: are cleared or whatever. And I'm like, I don't get
• 1:22:26
  Speaker 1: off on this shit. It's so weird. But like these
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 1: like lifers and I hate to, you know, talk so
• 1:22:33
  Speaker 1: matter of fact about it, but like, it just, it's
• 1:22:35
  Speaker 1: kind of disgusting to me because it's like this, like, uh,
• 1:22:38
  Speaker 1: it's weird. It's just like a weird, like Gnostic cultish thing. And,
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 1: you know, I lived that community for 14 years of
• 1:22:45
  Speaker 1: my career.
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 2: And people really do enjoy having information that other people
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 2: don't have access to.
• 1:22:49
  Speaker 1: I was like, I got a secret. And like, That's
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 1: why I whistleblowed. Okay, so I know this shit's real.
• 1:22:55
  Speaker 1: I know we're not alone. We have stuff. No shit.
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 1: Am I going to sit on my ass for 30,
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 1: 40 years? I'm an old man. I look back like, ah,
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 1: I had that secret. I knew about it, but I
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: didn't do anything. So I couldn't just keep that secret
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 1: because I thought it was just perverse and wrong that
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 1: the people don't even at least get to know the basics.
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 1: It's insane.
• 1:23:20
  Speaker 2: So when it comes to these, I'm going to bring
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 2: it back to these actual entities.
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:23:26
  Speaker 2: Do we know or would you have an understanding of
• 1:23:29
  Speaker 2: how many of them we're talking about and the variety
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 2: of them?
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah, there is a variety and we have a certain
• 1:23:36
  Speaker 1: number of different things. But the like. total numbers of
• 1:23:42
  Speaker 1: like what's interacting with us on earth. I mean, nobody
• 1:23:44
  Speaker 1: knows that.
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 2: And I mean, there's an understanding of some that they
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 2: do believe are interacting with us. And there's a variety
• 1:23:51
  Speaker 2: in terms of there's, there's variables. Yeah.
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 1: I talked to people who are familiar with, uh, the
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 1: biological analysis and everything. So we have some idea, not
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 1: a complete picture because it's like, you know, you know,
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 1: you're looking at it. It's like, well, I don't even
• 1:24:06
  Speaker 1: understand the physio physiology at all. It's like, what the heck?
• 1:24:09
  Speaker 1: It's like way different.
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 1: So, Um, we have at least a description of this physiology. Yeah, no,
• 1:24:16
  Speaker 1: I was in, I was in the room when, uh, uh,
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 1: be careful. I don't want to, uh, I was in
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 1: Washington DC with a very, uh, number of senior people
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 1: that work for members of Congress, put it that way. Um,
• 1:24:35
  Speaker 1: when I was still in government and I brought the
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 1: people who worked on that stuff. to the hill. I mean,
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 1: this is why the members were so confident to put
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 1: out the Schumer amendment and stuff. And I was like,
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 1: please explain. And, um, they went into all those details
• 1:24:53
  Speaker 1: and stuff. And I remember, you know, uh, some, some
• 1:24:56
  Speaker 1: of the professional staff members were like, Whoa, like, like
• 1:25:00
  Speaker 1: they were like in G lock.
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: Cause I mean, it like a total world bubble, um,
• 1:25:06
  Speaker 1: got burst right there for a lot of people. And
• 1:25:09
  Speaker 1: so we have some idea. It's not a complete picture.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's just like, but you're not even bringing
• 1:25:14
  Speaker 1: in the right people. Like I think about my friend
• 1:25:17
  Speaker 1: and colleague, Dr. Gary Nolan, which I started the Soul
• 1:25:21
  Speaker 1: Foundation nonprofit with. I mean, he's like, you know, Nobel
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 1: level biologist, virologist. Like he's the guy that you would
• 1:25:30
  Speaker 1: want on it, but he's not on it. So I
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 1: think we can make a lot of progress in our understanding,
• 1:25:35
  Speaker 1: once again, if this is more broadly studied. Um, in
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 1: an open environment.
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 2: You're aware of the Nixon, Jackie Gleason story?
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 1: Vaguely. Uh, I, I stayed away from ufology because I
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 1: had these contemporary people that were inside. I could check
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 1: all their credentials, where they worked, et cetera. Um, But
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: I'm vaguely familiar where, what was it, like Nixon brought
• 1:26:02
  Speaker 1: Jackie Gleason to some facility and showed him some stuff
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 1: or something like that?
• 1:26:06
  Speaker 2: Yeah, supposedly that's the story. And it's very hard to
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 2: determine the origin of the story or whether or not
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 2: it's real. It came from, there's a story about one
• 1:26:14
  Speaker 2: article that was supposedly public. Was it Vanity Fair? And
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 2: you can't find the story. But Jackie Gleason, by all accounts,
• 1:26:24
  Speaker 2: was obsessed with UFOs. And even built a home in
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 2: upstate New York that looked like a flying saucer.
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 1: Oh, really?
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:26:33
  Speaker 1: That's cool.
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 2: This is the house. He had this house constructed supposedly
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 2: after he had this meeting with Nixon. So Nixon, supposedly
• 1:26:43
  Speaker 2: they were drinking. Jackie Gleason and Nick Nixon are tying
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 2: one on. And Nixon's like, you want to see some shit?
• 1:26:51
  Speaker 2: And they fly. to wherever this base is. And he
• 1:26:55
  Speaker 2: shows them these frozen biological entities and this retrieved vehicle.
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 2: And then Jackie Gleason becomes a fanatic, obviously.
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 1: That's crazy.
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 1: I mean, not crazy, but that's interesting that a president
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 1: would do that to an uncleared celebrity friend of his. Like, oh,
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 1: let me just show you the most sensitive shit our
• 1:27:16
  Speaker 1: country has.
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 2: I don't know.
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 1: That's kind of crazy to me. People are obsessed with celebrity.
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 2: You know, there's even world leaders, you know, kings and
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 2: queens of, you know, they've always been obsessed with famous people.
• 1:27:29
  Speaker 2: And Jackie Gleason at the time was incredibly famous and
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 2: also beloved. Right.
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: So this is my pal and, uh.
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 1: I'm drunk.
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 2: You want to see some shit? You know, I get it.
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 1: I want to hang out with Nixon if that's how
• 1:27:42
  Speaker 1: it was like, man. Well, I bet he was probably wild.
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 1: I bet he was.
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 2: Like that in a lot of ways. You know, I mean,
• 1:27:48
  Speaker 2: Hunter S. Thompson famously recalled his, uh, Yeah, there's the
• 1:27:52
  Speaker 2: two of them meeting together. Famously recalled sitting in the
• 1:27:56
  Speaker 2: backseat of a limo with Nixon talking about football. And
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 2: he's like, God, if I didn't think he was a
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 2: piece of shit, I actually kind of like him. Oh,
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 2: that's funny. We're just talking football. Look, nobody in that job,
• 1:28:09
  Speaker 2: nobody as a president is going to be loved by everyone.
• 1:28:11
  Speaker 2: And I'm sure Nixon has positive qualities. And if Jackie
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 2: Gleason liked him, I'm a giant Jackie Gleason fan. It's
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 2: probably fun to hang out with.
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:28:20
  Speaker 2: And if you're drunk... And, you know, you're the president.
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 2: And also we're talking about the 1970s. Right. So this
• 1:28:28
  Speaker 2: is a different world. You know, like even if you
• 1:28:31
  Speaker 2: tell anybody who the fuck's going to believe you, you
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 2: don't have you can't get on TikTok. Like, what are
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 2: you going to do? How are you going to get
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 2: this information out?
• 1:28:37
  Speaker 1: Oh, exactly. And that's kind of how, you know, in
• 1:28:39
  Speaker 1: my personal opinion, you know, how the program was protected, right?
• 1:28:43
  Speaker 2: Forever.
• 1:28:43
  Speaker 1: Make it crazy. Right. So if anybody leaks anything or,
• 1:28:48
  Speaker 1: you know, has an unauthorized disclosure.
• 1:28:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: People are going to think you're fucking nuts.
• 1:28:52
  Speaker 2: Of course. Yeah. Yeah.
• 1:28:55
  Speaker 1: But there are.
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 2: actual reports that we have biological.
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 1: Remains yes oh yes yes how many it's up there
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 1: uh as well just like with the and.
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 2: They vary there's different kinds do we have an understanding
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 2: you don't have to answer where of where they came from.
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 1: Nobody i talked to expoused any specific origin to me
• 1:29:25
  Speaker 1: we may know that but I'm not aware of anything,
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 1: so I don't know.
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 2: Are there reports of some kind of interaction with these
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 2: things where they're giving information or discussing the, the problems
• 1:29:40
  Speaker 2: of humanity and possible solutions or explaining why they're here?
• 1:29:46
  Speaker 1: Interactions was a sensitive subject that my, uh, interview subjects
• 1:29:52
  Speaker 1: did not want to get into. Uh, I suppose that
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 1: there's probably detailed documentation of those interactions that goes into
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 1: a lot of the stuff you're asking. I truly don't
• 1:30:02
  Speaker 1: even know the answer to a lot of that.
• 1:30:04
  Speaker 2: Is there discussions amongst these people that there have been
• 1:30:09
  Speaker 2: these sort of meetings?
• 1:30:10
  Speaker 1: There was water cooler talk with some people I talked
• 1:30:14
  Speaker 1: to on the program. I love water cooler talk. Yeah,
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 1: they're like, hey, bro, guess what I overheard in some
• 1:30:18
  Speaker 1: weird meeting, you know.
• 1:30:19
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:30:20
  Speaker 1: And but that is the problem with that is it's
• 1:30:22
  Speaker 1: like secondary information. Right. And I'm so anal retentive unless
• 1:30:26
  Speaker 1: that person told me I had close personal. I touched it, whatever. Like, cool. Well,
• 1:30:32
  Speaker 1: you're coming to the inspector general or I'm going to
• 1:30:34
  Speaker 1: at least give them your name because that's what you
• 1:30:36
  Speaker 1: told me. And obviously I did that. So those people
• 1:30:40
  Speaker 1: who physically were there were on the program, did the
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 1: thing I brought to the inspector general. Are there discussions of.
• 1:30:49
  Speaker 1: interactions with live beings? Uh, there was some water cooler
• 1:30:54
  Speaker 1: talk about that kind of thing, but, but you know, I,
• 1:30:57
  Speaker 1: I don't even want to get into it because it's like, uh,
• 1:30:59
  Speaker 1: there were some details provided to me, but it's like,
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 1: it's secondary. And I, I don't know if that's like
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 1: the telephone game. And I don't know if it was
• 1:31:08
  Speaker 1: hyperbolized in any way. Um, you know, in the break room,
• 1:31:12
  Speaker 1: so to speak. So I just, I'm so anal about
• 1:31:14
  Speaker 1: making sure what I say is accurate. I don't, you know,
• 1:31:16
  Speaker 1: I don't know.
• 1:31:17
  Speaker 2: So, yeah. Do we have an understanding? I mean, if
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 2: there have been these discussions, do we have an understanding
• 1:31:24
  Speaker 2: of when they first took place?
• 1:31:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, some specific events were mentioned to me, and I
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 1: provided that information in a classified setting.
• 1:31:33
  Speaker 2: And how far back do they go?
• 1:31:36
  Speaker 1: Pretty far back. It's pretty weird. Yeah.
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 2: Well, one of the stories from Roswell that's fascinating to
• 1:31:41
  Speaker 2: me is that Eisenhower had the wreckage flown to Wright-Patterson
• 1:31:46
  Speaker 2: Air Force Base. in two separate jets in case one
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 2: of them crashed.
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 1: There has been some public testimony. So General DuBose, there
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 1: were some old timers that at least, you know, did
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 1: some videos in like the 90s. Like I'm Brigadier General Exxon.
• 1:32:07
  Speaker 1: Here's what I heard, whatever. I mean, that's out there
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 1: in the open source. So, yeah.
• 1:32:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah. And there was always a discussion of Hangar 18. Right.
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 2: Have you ever heard of Hangar 18?
• 1:32:19
  Speaker 1: There's a lot of hangers. For whatever reason, I think
• 1:32:22
  Speaker 1: it was maybe a movie. Was there a movie, Hangar 18? Well,
• 1:32:24
  Speaker 1: you know what's funny? Speaking of senators being denied, there's
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 1: a video in the late 80s of Senator Barry Goldwater
• 1:32:32
  Speaker 1: of Goldwater-Nicholsack famed, right? He was a two-star general in
• 1:32:36
  Speaker 1: the Air Force Reserve. And literally, this video is on YouTube.
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 1: It's hard to find, though. But Jesse Michaels on American
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 1: Alchemy said, put together I think a short video yesterday
• 1:32:47
  Speaker 1: and there's like a section in there where he actually
• 1:32:49
  Speaker 1: has that Goldwater interview but General Goldwater's like yeah one
• 1:32:53
  Speaker 1: day I called Curtis LeMay who's a very famous Air
• 1:32:56
  Speaker 1: Force General and was like General I heard that there's
• 1:32:59
  Speaker 1: this room that you you know have UFO material and
• 1:33:02
  Speaker 1: Barry Goldwater exposes in this interview like yeah and LeMay
• 1:33:06
  Speaker 1: got madder than hell at me and told me never
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 1: to fucking ask about that again I might have added
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 1: the F word in there just for For fun. For fun. But, yeah,
• 1:33:17
  Speaker 1: it's bad. I was in the military too long. My
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 1: wife tells me to be careful of my language all
• 1:33:22
  Speaker 1: the time around my niece and nephew. But even Barry
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 1: Goldwater knew that we had UFO material. He asked General
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 1: LeMay when he was in the Air Force, and General
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 1: LeMay basically told him to fuck off. And that is
• 1:33:37
  Speaker 1: a literal interview you can Google. So a lot of this, like, people...
• 1:33:44
  Speaker 1: disclosing fact of has really been out in the vernacular
• 1:33:47
  Speaker 1: for a long time, but nobody really cared because everybody
• 1:33:52
  Speaker 1: was just kind of desensitized from the whole subject and
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 1: thought it was wacky. And I'm not the first former
• 1:33:58
  Speaker 1: government official to confirm that you have Goldwater and all,
• 1:34:01
  Speaker 1: all these other Harry Reed who made the same disclosure
• 1:34:04
  Speaker 1: to the New Yorker a month after I talked to
• 1:34:07
  Speaker 1: him in person.
• 1:34:08
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:34:08
  Speaker 1: Mellon has said stuff. Uh, Lou Elizondo said, uh, you know,
• 1:34:13
  Speaker 1: he believes we have material on, I think it was
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson a couple of years ago. Um, so there's
• 1:34:20
  Speaker 1: certainly been other officials. Now I'm just trying to, spike
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 1: the football and take it all the way to the
• 1:34:26
  Speaker 1: end zone here and and luckily we have a congress
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 1: that's mostly motivated minus mike rogers and mike turner you're
• 1:34:33
  Speaker 1: on you're getting cool in your stockings i'm gonna make
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 1: sure your office gets cool and um uh you know
• 1:34:40
  Speaker 1: they they want change too and they realize it's time
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 1: for a change and uh presumably you know chuck schumer's
• 1:34:47
  Speaker 1: talked to Jake Sullivan and President Biden. And you know
• 1:34:51
  Speaker 1: who's in the White House right now is John Podesta.
• 1:34:56
  Speaker 1: He is the green energy czar or something like that
• 1:34:59
  Speaker 1: in the White House. But, you know, John Podesta, shout
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 1: out to John Podesta in the White House. He has
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 1: an axe to grind on this issue, too, because remember,
• 1:35:09
  Speaker 1: he tweeted at the end of Obama's second term, you know,
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 1: my biggest failure was not to have Obama released the
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 1: UFO file and made the same kind of statement with Clinton.
• 1:35:21
  Speaker 1: So certainly if Mr. Podesta is listening in the White House,
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 1: you know, I'm here to help. You know, I hope
• 1:35:26
  Speaker 1: that you're championing this within the executive office of the president. And,
• 1:35:31
  Speaker 1: you know, the other, speaking of people like Goldwater, who've
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 1: made some weird non sequitur kind of admissions, there's a
• 1:35:40
  Speaker 1: John Stossel interview of Mike Pompeo, the former CIA director,
• 1:35:46
  Speaker 1: About two years ago or so, you can find it
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 1: online where Pompeo talks about the JFK file and like
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 1: dismisses it or something about like there's no boogeyman here.
• 1:35:55
  Speaker 1: But then he quickly says, oh, I've seen the UFO
• 1:36:01
  Speaker 1: file too and we have bigger problems. But– at least
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 1: the way it was edited, John Stossel didn't even follow up,
• 1:36:09
  Speaker 1: at least the way the final cut was. I'm like, dude,
• 1:36:11
  Speaker 1: if I was John Stossel, I'd be like, what do
• 1:36:13
  Speaker 1: you mean, Mike Pompeo? You've seen the UFO file and
• 1:36:17
  Speaker 1: we have bigger problems. And UFO file, the way I
• 1:36:20
  Speaker 1: interpret that is a long existing file or briefing document
• 1:36:27
  Speaker 1: or something that he had access to. So I think
• 1:36:31
  Speaker 1: the former CIA director, Mike Pompeo, should probably clarify what
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 1: he said. two years ago. Next, if anybody interviews him next,
• 1:36:38
  Speaker 1: ask Mike that question. What did he mean?
• 1:36:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah, we have bigger problems. Well, we certainly have bigger
• 1:36:44
  Speaker 2: problems in terms of our current existence, specifically with what
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 2: you were talking about earlier, the proxy wars and collapse
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 2: of society as we know it, which it seems.
• 1:36:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I feel for the Ukrainian and the
• 1:36:57
  Speaker 1: Israeli people, you know, I'm not taking any particular side,
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 1: but certainly the People forget U.S. aid in these wars.
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 1: What's the, like, most expensive thing if you've studied phases
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 1: of conflict? It's the reconstruction costs after the conflict. So
• 1:37:12
  Speaker 1: are we in it for, like, triple-digit billions, like the
• 1:37:16
  Speaker 1: war on terror? I mean, certainly the Israeli conflict is
• 1:37:21
  Speaker 1: a great distraction because, you know, like, Russia is very
• 1:37:24
  Speaker 1: tight with Iran, right? And personal opinion, you know, this
• 1:37:28
  Speaker 1: is just my own personal opinion, but I'm sure they—
• 1:37:31
  Speaker 1: commiserated and was like, can you start a two front war?
• 1:37:34
  Speaker 1: Cause we would like to win in Ukraine. And, uh,
• 1:37:37
  Speaker 1: this will distract the U S because Israel is a
• 1:37:40
  Speaker 1: long time, you know, Middle East ally. So, uh, it's brilliant.
• 1:37:44
  Speaker 1: It's brilliant.
• 1:37:45
  Speaker 2: Public opinion. I mean, the, the, The virtue signalers on
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 2: social media have essentially completely forgotten about Ukraine. It's all
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 2: about Israel and Palestine.
• 1:37:56
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you don't even see it. And I understand, you know,
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 1: what the National Security Council determination was that they've discussed publicly,
• 1:38:03
  Speaker 1: where there's kind of like trying to drain Russia's military
• 1:38:07
  Speaker 1: capability and annexation of Ukrainian territory because they don't want
• 1:38:14
  Speaker 1: Russia's sphere of influence to further Enter that caucus region
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 1: and stuff. But yeah, it's funny. Like you said, it's
• 1:38:21
  Speaker 1: like you don't even talk about Ukraine. It's all about
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: Israel now which is a horrible conflict on both sides.
• 1:38:27
  Speaker 1: It's unfortunate. Without a doubt.
• 1:38:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah. It was a very interesting statement, though, that we
• 1:38:35
  Speaker 2: have bigger problems. So even if we do, this seems
• 1:38:38
  Speaker 2: to be like a– this is such a human question
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 2: because it's one of the biggest mysteries of obviously, you know,
• 1:38:48
  Speaker 2: there's the Fermi paradox. Where are they, right? And if
• 1:38:51
  Speaker 2: you look out into the cosmos, if you've ever gone
• 1:38:53
  Speaker 2: on a clear night and you look out and you
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 2: realize those are all stars and those stars are all
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 2: surrounded by planets and there's literally hundreds of billions of them.
• 1:39:03
  Speaker 1: In the Drake equation, you can calculate what probable sentient life.
• 1:39:08
  Speaker 1: And I've been an amateur astronomer since I've been a
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 1: kid and I've never, crazy enough, I've never seen anything remarkable.
• 1:39:16
  Speaker 1: I've seen some stuff that could have been ball lightning
• 1:39:18
  Speaker 1: and some satellite passes that weren't registered, uh, online. Um,
• 1:39:24
  Speaker 1: what do you can, you could actually check to see
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 1: if there's going to be like an iridium flare or
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 1: something like that. And maybe that was a satellite pass,
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 1: maybe not, but I've never seen in my personal life,
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 1: never seen anything weird. Uh, and it's funny, you mentioned
• 1:39:38
  Speaker 1: the Fermi paradox and it's like, well, where are they?
• 1:39:41
  Speaker 1: And okay, well, You know, if you're sentient life, you're
• 1:39:44
  Speaker 1: certainly going to have sophisticated cover concealment and deception techniques.
• 1:39:49
  Speaker 1: It goes back to like what Jacques Vallée' s work is where,
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 1: you know, the phenomenon presenting itself in different ways, but also.
• 1:39:56
  Speaker 1: I live in the mountains of Colorado, right? So there
• 1:39:59
  Speaker 1: is a mountain lion den about 10 miles from my
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 1: house in Colorado, literally. There are lower predatory sentience. I'm
• 1:40:09
  Speaker 1: higher predatory sentience. And I'm using this as a device
• 1:40:12
  Speaker 1: or an analogy for NHI and us. Well, on a
• 1:40:18
  Speaker 1: day-to-day basis, I don't care what a mountain lion is doing.
• 1:40:22
  Speaker 1: I may hike in that area to explore. But day
• 1:40:26
  Speaker 1: to day, I'm afraid of it and I don't care.
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 1: And think about what humans might be, unfortunately, to some
• 1:40:33
  Speaker 1: of these higher sentience where this monkey has a nuke.
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 1: Holy shit. Keep them in the cage. We don't want
• 1:40:39
  Speaker 1: to go anywhere near them. And so people think that
• 1:40:42
  Speaker 1: there would be some kind of open contact with some
• 1:40:46
  Speaker 1: higher sentience that is either visiting Earth or from another
• 1:40:49
  Speaker 1: dimension or whatever the origin is. But they probably don't care.
• 1:40:56
  Speaker 1: They're probably neutral at best and maybe actually fearful of
• 1:40:59
  Speaker 1: us in some sense. Or we're the progeny of, you know,
• 1:41:03
  Speaker 1: personal opinion, progeny of some experiment. And it's almost like
• 1:41:09
  Speaker 1: living in the matrix, but it's not like an actual simulation.
• 1:41:11
  Speaker 1: It's like we want the simulation to go. We don't
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 1: want to intercede because we want to see what, you know,
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 1: Homo sapiens sapien 2.0 is going to do after the
• 1:41:21
  Speaker 1: great flood or something like that.
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:41:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 2: That's one of the more fascinating ideas is that we're
• 1:41:27
  Speaker 2: some sort of a product of genetic engineering.
• 1:41:31
  Speaker 1: I honestly would not be surprised. I don't know that
• 1:41:34
  Speaker 1: to be true.
• 1:41:35
  Speaker 2: We're so different than everything else is here. So different.
• 1:41:39
  Speaker 2: So beyond different. I mean, there's not another primate that
• 1:41:42
  Speaker 2: is even reasonably close. I mean, there's speculation amongst primatologists
• 1:41:50
  Speaker 2: and there's a not even speculation, they believe that chimpanzees
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 2: in particular have entered into the Stone Age. So they're
• 1:41:59
  Speaker 2: at the beginning of the Stone Age. They're using tools,
• 1:42:01
  Speaker 2: you know, and there's obviously some learned behavior. Like there's
• 1:42:05
  Speaker 2: some footage of orangutans using spears to hunt fish with.
• 1:42:10
  Speaker 1: Oh, interesting.
• 1:42:10
  Speaker 2: Have you ever seen that?
• 1:42:11
  Speaker 1: No, I've not.
• 1:42:12
  Speaker 2: It's cool as shit. There's an orangutan that's hanging on
• 1:42:15
  Speaker 2: a branch over a river or a body of water
• 1:42:19
  Speaker 2: and he's stabbing at fish. With spear. Huh. Which is incredible.
• 1:42:24
  Speaker 2: I mean, they're using tools. I mean, we know they
• 1:42:27
  Speaker 2: use tools to extract termites and the like.
• 1:42:31
  Speaker 1: Look at that. Oh, that's crazy.
• 1:42:33
  Speaker 2: How crazy is that? I mean, he's clearly hunting. I mean,
• 1:42:37
  Speaker 2: he's going fishing in Borneo. I mean, that is, you know,
• 1:42:43
  Speaker 2: at the very least, a distant cousin of us. Some,
• 1:42:49
  Speaker 2: you know, intelligent... primate that is to figure out a
• 1:42:52
  Speaker 2: way to use tools. How long would it take an
• 1:42:54
  Speaker 2: orangutan to become a human being? How many millions of
• 1:42:58
  Speaker 2: years are we talking about of evolution? But it seems
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 2: to be that process has started.
• 1:43:02
  Speaker 1: Interesting.
• 1:43:02
  Speaker 2: But why are we so fucking different than everyone else?
• 1:43:05
  Speaker 1: Yeah, like are we a product of Darwinian evolution or
• 1:43:08
  Speaker 1: what is it, punctuated equilibrium is obviously another theory. And
• 1:43:10
  Speaker 1: I'm not an anthropologist by any means. I've watched some
• 1:43:14
  Speaker 1: Netflix episodes.
• 1:43:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, me too. A lot of YouTube.
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 1: But yeah, we seem to be oddly.
• 1:43:20
  Speaker 2: Advanced.
• 1:43:21
  Speaker 1: Advanced. And we seem to dispossess other skills. I mean,
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 1: it goes back to like the Stargate program, right? You know,
• 1:43:29
  Speaker 1: with the declassified by Clinton and sensibly canceled, I guess,
• 1:43:33
  Speaker 1: in 96, you know, where you had people trained in
• 1:43:36
  Speaker 1: remote viewing and like there was feedback loops to confirm
• 1:43:40
  Speaker 1: what they saw was real and, um, you know, either
• 1:43:42
  Speaker 1: satellite imagery or human sources where they sketched out a
• 1:43:45
  Speaker 1: room of where there's hostages and the They got a
• 1:43:48
  Speaker 1: hostage out and they're like, and this is a real story, actually.
• 1:43:51
  Speaker 1: And they're like, did you have a source in that room?
• 1:43:54
  Speaker 1: How do you know where all the corridors were and everything?
• 1:43:56
  Speaker 1: I was like, no, actually, Pat Price.
• 1:43:59
  Speaker 2: Remote viewed you.
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 1: And he's like, what the fuck? So there's something going
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 1: on there. And that's like Gary Nolan, you know, has
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 1: studied a lot of this stuff. Very famously, he's pointed
• 1:44:11
  Speaker 1: out the caudate patinum in the brain, right? It's this
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 1: horseshoe shaped thing in the middle of your brain. that
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 1: if he's done MRIs and CAT scans, and I hope
• 1:44:19
  Speaker 1: I'm not butchering his work. Gary might, you know, slap
• 1:44:22
  Speaker 1: me later, but it lights up with people who have
• 1:44:27
  Speaker 1: those kind of skills. They have like an overactive caudate
• 1:44:31
  Speaker 1: patinum in the brain. And it's like, okay, well, is
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 1: it a transceiver of some sort? I'm guessing that's the case.
• 1:44:37
  Speaker 2: Is it an emerging property of human beings as we evolve?
• 1:44:40
  Speaker 1: Exactly. And we're seeing just a few human beings that
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 1: have this stuff. And then if it is a transceiver,
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 1: Where's the information? Is it in a higher spatial dimension
• 1:44:50
  Speaker 1: or how are they extracting? How are they able to
• 1:44:53
  Speaker 1: basically be non-locality, right? They're able to like project themselves
• 1:45:00
  Speaker 1: somehow their consciousness to a, and this is a declassified
• 1:45:05
  Speaker 1: example from Stargate, a Russian missile base. sketch the crane
• 1:45:10
  Speaker 1: and where the silos are, what the status is. You know,
• 1:45:14
  Speaker 1: satellite comes over, takes a picture, and it's exactly the
• 1:45:16
  Speaker 1: way they sketched it. How'd they do that? Like, it's
• 1:45:19
  Speaker 1: certainly real because there is a feedback loop. Now, there's
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 1: a lot of charlatans in the psychic space and all that, but, like,
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 1: at least that government program, and I've talked to, you know,
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 1: Hal Putov and people who actually ran that program at
• 1:45:34
  Speaker 1: SRI for the CIA, then DIA and the Army, and...
• 1:45:38
  Speaker 1: That seems to be– men who's staring at goats, right?
• 1:45:41
  Speaker 1: The George Clooney movies, the famous movie based on the
• 1:45:43
  Speaker 1: Stargate program seems to be legit as far as we
• 1:45:48
  Speaker 1: can measure from a feedback perspective.
• 1:45:50
  Speaker 2: What was the explanation for the discontinuation of that program?
• 1:45:55
  Speaker 1: Oh, gosh. I'm not a scholar on that. Something Russell
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: Targ or Hal Pudov or one of those guys could
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 1: explain if it was just they got caught up in
• 1:46:05
  Speaker 1: the bureaucracy or what. I don't remember.
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 2: Yeah. So the idea of that being an emergent property
• 1:46:14
  Speaker 2: of human beings as we evolve has always been fascinating
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 2: to me because there's certainly something that goes on with
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 2: human communication other than we make sounds that represent objects
• 1:46:27
  Speaker 2: and physical things and that the other person interprets those
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 2: sounds and understands it. There's Communication between human beings.
• 1:46:35
  Speaker 1: That's acoustic communication. Like the symbol rate, if you will,
• 1:46:39
  Speaker 1: is really slow. Like if you weren't able to consciously communicate,
• 1:46:43
  Speaker 1: you know, AKA, you know, the hokey term like telepathy. Right. Um,
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 1: and it's funny because that's, uh, what a lot of
• 1:46:52
  Speaker 1: people expose that have had, you know, alleged contacts, right.
• 1:46:55
  Speaker 1: A lot of the people that Dr. John Mack at Harvard, uh,
• 1:46:59
  Speaker 1: studied over the years where they felt like they were
• 1:47:01
  Speaker 1: getting hit with like a QR code. It was like
• 1:47:04
  Speaker 1: instant knowledge or they heard like somebody speaking to them
• 1:47:09
  Speaker 1: non-verbally in some way that they couldn't even conceptualize through,
• 1:47:13
  Speaker 1: you know, acoustic communication, uh, or talk if you will.
• 1:47:16
  Speaker 1: And it's the same thing like, um, book proof of
• 1:47:20
  Speaker 1: heaven by Dr. Eben Alexander MD. I remember reading it
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 1: when I was in Afghanistan and I was like, this
• 1:47:24
  Speaker 1: is a crazy experience. This medical doctor has necrotizing fatty
• 1:47:28
  Speaker 1: fasciitis of the brain, uh, He has a near-death experience
• 1:47:31
  Speaker 1: and he gets this like crazy, like the feelings of love,
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 1: other stuff. It's a really interesting book. It's like a
• 1:47:36
  Speaker 1: scientific take on a doctor's own near-death experience. But when
• 1:47:40
  Speaker 1: he came back and somehow the fasciitis didn't eat away
• 1:47:45
  Speaker 1: his brain and he was cognitively normal, he tried to
• 1:47:48
  Speaker 1: write down what information or facts of the universe he
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 1: learned during his NDE and He couldn't even put it
• 1:47:58
  Speaker 1: in English. It was like crazy. He didn't know how
• 1:48:00
  Speaker 1: to translate it into our language. It was just there
• 1:48:03
  Speaker 1: was no like adjectives, if you were adverbs, et cetera,
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 1: that could describe the knowledge that he knew like natively
• 1:48:11
  Speaker 1: when he had that near death experience. It's a really
• 1:48:13
  Speaker 1: fascinating book. Um, and he talks about the disease he
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: had and his, uh, physiological condition at the time. Really interesting.
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 2: What was he able to discern from that? Like what was,
• 1:48:24
  Speaker 2: what was the overall message?
• 1:48:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it was like this, like the, you know, there's
• 1:48:27
  Speaker 1: the message of love, which is positive, but it was
• 1:48:30
  Speaker 1: like this interconnectedness. Everybody is kind of connected in a
• 1:48:35
  Speaker 1: way that, um, that, they don't really realize, I mean,
• 1:48:40
  Speaker 1: you think about, this is getting really trippy. Uh, a
• 1:48:44
  Speaker 1: lot of thoughts with people who are smarter than me.
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 1: I like to talk to them about this kind of
• 1:48:48
  Speaker 1: stuff where if you're say, you know, higher dimensional sentience, right?
• 1:48:53
  Speaker 1: The act of creation. So active creation for 3d beings
• 1:48:57
  Speaker 1: is having a baby, right? It's producing another three dimensional object. Well,
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 1: if you're in five dimensional space or even I guess
• 1:49:04
  Speaker 1: four dimensional physical space, what if act of creation is
• 1:49:07
  Speaker 1: creating other conscious realities and other universes and the act
• 1:49:11
  Speaker 1: of creation is creating the universe where you, me, Jamie, whatever,
• 1:49:20
  Speaker 1: we might be connected to the same, um, I'll call
• 1:49:24
  Speaker 1: it universal consciousness or a, a higher dimensional sentient life
• 1:49:30
  Speaker 1: force or life form. I know that sounds like really
• 1:49:32
  Speaker 1: out there, but when you think about it, um, There's
• 1:49:36
  Speaker 1: a lot of other theologies out there that basically espouse that.
• 1:49:39
  Speaker 1: I have a very good friend of mine who's PhD level,
• 1:49:43
  Speaker 1: kind of higher up in the Mormon church. And basically
• 1:49:45
  Speaker 1: the Mormon theology is kind of like that. The Mormons
• 1:49:48
  Speaker 1: say you were once with God or like God, but
• 1:49:52
  Speaker 1: then you were sent down to like a lower plane
• 1:49:54
  Speaker 1: of existence. And that's literally what I'm talking about right now,
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: but just in a secular sense. So maybe... Uh, yeah,
• 1:50:02
  Speaker 1: we're all created beings from, and this, you know, this
• 1:50:04
  Speaker 1: doesn't like hurt Christian theology, whatever. It's actually kind of
• 1:50:07
  Speaker 1: enforcing the fact there's a creator and we're literally created
• 1:50:11
  Speaker 1: in the image of a creator, literally. And that's kind
• 1:50:15
  Speaker 1: of what life really is. It's like, think about, it's
• 1:50:18
  Speaker 1: like a weird 3d plus time, temporal sensory experience for
• 1:50:24
  Speaker 1: a higher dimensional sentience. You're here to experience time in
• 1:50:28
  Speaker 1: this weird linear fashion and to experience Yourself divorced from
• 1:50:34
  Speaker 1: yourself to gain knowledge and to report back is maybe
• 1:50:39
  Speaker 1: what life is. And that's just kind of my own
• 1:50:40
  Speaker 1: personal theology as a summation of just during COVID, I
• 1:50:45
  Speaker 1: was really bored. And that's what I was looking at.
• 1:50:49
  Speaker 2: Well, I extrapolate that to the creation of AI. And
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 2: I think if you think about human beings as something
• 1:50:56
  Speaker 2: that creates things, I think ultimately we create a new life.
• 1:51:02
  Speaker 1: Exactly what if higher sentience is creating some kind of
• 1:51:05
  Speaker 1: artificial intelligence, call it like a Commander Data from Star
• 1:51:08
  Speaker 1: Trek Next Gen, right? Not even really, it's made in
• 1:51:12
  Speaker 1: the image of the creator in some sense, but it's
• 1:51:14
  Speaker 1: not even, and that's what might get sent into these
• 1:51:19
  Speaker 1: long endurance missions. And of course, people are like, well,
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 1: why would they come here so far to crash, et cetera,
• 1:51:29
  Speaker 1: or are they crashing on purpose? Do you know that
• 1:51:31
  Speaker 1: for a fact? Or are they crashing by accident? And
• 1:51:35
  Speaker 1: what if they're like von Neumann replicating probes, right? You
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 1: can Google that. But, you know, what if they're just throwaway,
• 1:51:43
  Speaker 1: which von Neumann probes are just like throwaway spacecraft? Like, yeah,
• 1:51:47
  Speaker 1: they're just, we send it out. We don't really care
• 1:51:49
  Speaker 1: what the mission success is. Or they're seeding us. Or
• 1:51:53
  Speaker 1: as Jacques Vallée says, it's like, you know, here's the key.
• 1:51:56
  Speaker 1: Can you unlock the cage kind of thing?
• 1:51:59
  Speaker 2: Right?
• 1:51:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:52:00
  Speaker 2: And it seems that it would be a long, I mean,
• 1:52:03
  Speaker 2: if you think about biological evolution, so long, lengthy process.
• 1:52:08
  Speaker 2: And if ultimately that led us to the creation of
• 1:52:11
  Speaker 2: a technology that's far superior in terms of its capabilities
• 1:52:15
  Speaker 2: of understanding and thinking, that seems to be what's happening.
• 1:52:19
  Speaker 2: And that's one of the reasons why so many people
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 2: are concerned about the term artificial intelligence is a very
• 1:52:25
  Speaker 2: strange term because it's not artificial. It's intelligence.
• 1:52:29
  Speaker 1: It's silicon-based instead of carbon-based, right?
• 1:52:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah. It doesn't have blood and tissue and cells, but
• 1:52:34
  Speaker 2: it has something that's superior. It also has something that's
• 1:52:37
  Speaker 2: much more scalable, right? We have a very obvious biological
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 2: limitation in terms of evolution. If you look at evolution,
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 2: and we turn back to the orangutans that are fishing,
• 1:52:49
  Speaker 2: they're obviously learning new things. And those new properties, those
• 1:52:54
  Speaker 2: new things, we assume will be encoded in their genetics
• 1:52:57
  Speaker 2: and then passed to their children. Do you have children?
• 1:52:59
  Speaker 1: No, I have three dogs. We went the fluffy, I'm
• 1:53:02
  Speaker 1: a fluffy dad.
• 1:53:03
  Speaker 2: The problem is dogs don't learn from, well, they do,
• 1:53:06
  Speaker 2: but one of the most bizarre things about children is
• 1:53:10
  Speaker 2: that they have properties that are clearly, it's hard to say, right?
• 1:53:17
  Speaker 2: Because my children obviously have the example of my wife
• 1:53:21
  Speaker 2: and myself, and they obviously see a lot of how
• 1:53:25
  Speaker 2: we live our life and you know, discipline and hard
• 1:53:29
  Speaker 2: work and creativity and all those things. But there's also,
• 1:53:33
  Speaker 2: they seem to have gifts that are, they seem to
• 1:53:37
  Speaker 2: be clearly genetic.
• 1:53:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:53:39
  Speaker 2: And artistic gifts that just seem extraordinary, that are unusual,
• 1:53:44
  Speaker 2: that I had when I was younger, that I was
• 1:53:46
  Speaker 2: an illustrator. I have a young daughter that's just extraordinarily
• 1:53:50
  Speaker 2: good at art. Really?
• 1:53:51
  Speaker 1: Used to illustrate?
• 1:53:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:53:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:53:53
  Speaker 2: That's what I wanted to do. I wanted to be
• 1:53:54
  Speaker 2: a comic book illustrator.
• 1:53:55
  Speaker 1: Oh, interesting. Interesting. Yeah.
• 1:53:57
  Speaker 2: Um, but then I have this other daughter that's super
• 1:54:01
  Speaker 2: gifted athletically. Like she can learn things really quickly. It's extraordinary. It's,
• 1:54:06
  Speaker 2: and it's weird. And, and also this drive that she has.
• 1:54:10
  Speaker 2: I had a drive from poverty and from, you know,
• 1:54:14
  Speaker 2: a lot of like stuff that was wrong with my
• 1:54:17
  Speaker 2: childhood that seemed to be, I had this need to
• 1:54:20
  Speaker 2: prove myself. She doesn't have any of those problems, but
• 1:54:24
  Speaker 2: she also has this insane drive that It's weird. It's
• 1:54:28
  Speaker 2: a weird discipline. It's extraordinary. That seems to be very
• 1:54:31
  Speaker 2: different than most kids. And I just think that's an
• 1:54:35
  Speaker 2: emerging genetic. I think there's something encoded in whatever you
• 1:54:40
  Speaker 2: are as a human that as you replicate and as
• 1:54:42
  Speaker 2: you have children, they have that. They have some of that. Yeah.
• 1:54:56
  Speaker 2: But there's so much chaos. There's so much. I mean,
• 1:54:58
  Speaker 2: you could breed with a dumb person. You could find
• 1:55:01
  Speaker 2: a hot dumb person and have a baby with them.
• 1:55:03
  Speaker 2: Now your kid's fucked. And we see that. Obviously, some
• 1:55:07
  Speaker 2: people are just born with brains that just don't work
• 1:55:09
  Speaker 2: that well. It's just like I'm sure you've met some
• 1:55:12
  Speaker 2: dull-minded people and you try to talk to them about
• 1:55:14
  Speaker 2: things and there's no one there. You're right. So, okay,
• 1:55:18
  Speaker 2: good luck. And good luck with whatever children you have
• 1:55:21
  Speaker 2: and whatever. What are they going to have?
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 1: What tools do they have? Yeah, we're genetically encoding things.
• 1:55:26
  Speaker 1: artificial intelligence now. I think that's where you were going.
• 1:55:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah, where I'm going with it, these biological limitations that
• 1:55:32
  Speaker 2: we have, it's very clear that we're essentially dealing with
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 2: a Model T as opposed to a Tesla, which is
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 2: just insanely superior to these ancient vehicles. We create technology.
• 1:55:46
  Speaker 2: I've always said this. If you looked at the human race,
• 1:55:49
  Speaker 2: if you were some sort of an outside observer and
• 1:55:51
  Speaker 2: you stumbled upon this thing that occupies this planet, this
• 1:55:55
  Speaker 2: this apex predator of this planet, he would say, what
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 2: is this thing doing? What's making technology? All the other
• 1:56:01
  Speaker 2: things that it does.
• 1:56:02
  Speaker 1: It does all these.
• 1:56:02
  Speaker 2: Other things, but what do these things generally motivate? What
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 2: do they move towards? They move towards the advancement of
• 1:56:11
  Speaker 2: technology and innovation. There's a constant aspect of human beings.
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 2: If you trace us back to the earliest civilizations, to
• 1:56:20
  Speaker 2: what we have today, things constantly improve unless something goes
• 1:56:23
  Speaker 2: horribly wrong. unless there's some sort of a natural disaster
• 1:56:26
  Speaker 2: or some sort of a genocide, if something doesn't happen
• 1:56:31
  Speaker 2: to these creatures, what do they do? They consistently make
• 1:56:35
  Speaker 2: better things. Well, that, if you extrapolate, if you follow
• 1:56:39
  Speaker 2: that to its natural progression, well, what is that going
• 1:56:41
  Speaker 2: to get to? Well, once they've invented computers and once
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 2: they've invented devices and once they've invented things that enhance
• 1:56:49
  Speaker 2: their personal understanding of the world around them, which we
• 1:56:51
  Speaker 2: already have now with phones, we already have with the internet,
• 1:56:54
  Speaker 2: We already have with our ability to communicate with each other.
• 1:56:56
  Speaker 2: The newest, latest Android phones that are coming out will
• 1:57:01
  Speaker 2: translate natively on your phone in real time in conversation.
• 1:57:05
  Speaker 2: So you could be speaking Portuguese to me. I would
• 1:57:08
  Speaker 2: hear it in English on a phone call, which is
• 1:57:11
  Speaker 2: fucking wild.
• 1:57:12
  Speaker 1: It's crazy. That's like universal translator in Star Trek, literally.
• 1:57:15
  Speaker 2: Yes, literally, literally. Well, that is a real thing now.
• 1:57:19
  Speaker 2: And to use Google Translate, it's native to the latest
• 1:57:22
  Speaker 2: Android operating system. You could, if you just sit down
• 1:57:29
  Speaker 2: and said, well, where's that going? Well, it's going to
• 1:57:31
  Speaker 2: something way more sophisticated and way more capable than we
• 1:57:36
  Speaker 2: are biologically with our limitations. Our monkey bodies, we are
• 1:57:41
  Speaker 2: the ancestors or the people that emerged from that distant cousin,
• 1:57:47
  Speaker 2: that orangutan that's using a stick to hunt fish. We're
• 1:57:51
  Speaker 2: going in this direction.
• 1:57:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:57:53
  Speaker 2: What would be the most logical way we would completely
• 1:57:57
  Speaker 2: accelerate that? We create something that does what we do,
• 1:58:00
  Speaker 2: but does it way better.
• 1:58:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah. It's almost like to permanently harbor our consciousness eventually, right?
• 1:58:04
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:58:05
  Speaker 1: That kind of makes sense. It does make sense.
• 1:58:07
  Speaker 2: And there's a sort of understanding of that that leads
• 1:58:10
  Speaker 2: to this fear of our demise that everyone, you know,
• 1:58:14
  Speaker 2: Elon's openly discussed this. Sam Altman and I were talking
• 1:58:18
  Speaker 2: about it. What OpenAI is doing, what ChatGPT4 versus ChatGPT5,
• 1:58:25
  Speaker 2: which is going to be insanely superior. Well, what is
• 1:58:28
  Speaker 2: ChatGPT15 going to do? You know, is that going to
• 1:58:30
  Speaker 2: be the president of the world? You know, are we
• 1:58:33
  Speaker 2: going to bypass government and just say, you know, it's obvious, like,
• 1:58:38
  Speaker 2: this administration is incredibly corrupt and flawed and influenced by
• 1:58:42
  Speaker 2: the military-industrial complex. It's not good for the world. It's
• 1:58:44
  Speaker 2: not good for the environment. We need something that is
• 1:58:48
  Speaker 2: far superior that doesn't have all these motivations. What would
• 1:58:51
  Speaker 2: that be? That would be an artificial intelligent creator that
• 1:58:54
  Speaker 2: we– or creation, rather, that we use to govern life.
• 1:58:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:58:59
  Speaker 2: I mean– That sounds nuts, but I think that's probably
• 1:59:03
  Speaker 2: a better solution than humans with all of our fucking
• 1:59:06
  Speaker 2: flaws and issues and greed and envy and all the
• 1:59:09
  Speaker 2: things that we have. That would be a better version
• 1:59:12
  Speaker 2: of it. But what are we saying then? Are we
• 1:59:14
  Speaker 2: saying that we're obsolete?
• 1:59:16
  Speaker 1: Are you programming empathy into it, though?
• 1:59:19
  Speaker 2: Probably not. Probably not, which is terrifying. But we will
• 1:59:23
  Speaker 2: become obsolete. Or we will merge... And if we merge,
• 1:59:28
  Speaker 2: it will completely change what we are. And I think
• 1:59:32
  Speaker 2: that's very likely what's going to take place. I think
• 1:59:35
  Speaker 2: the initial stages will be some sort of merging with technology.
• 1:59:39
  Speaker 2: And then from that merging, it will essentially realize, well,
• 1:59:43
  Speaker 2: why are we even fucking around? This new thing is
• 1:59:47
  Speaker 2: so superior. And it doesn't have all the pitfalls. It
• 1:59:50
  Speaker 2: doesn't have all the problems. It's not short-sighted. It's not
• 1:59:53
  Speaker 2: going to drain the ocean of fish so that we
• 1:59:56
  Speaker 2: can make sushi. It's going to do something that's going
• 1:59:58
  Speaker 2: to be far more aware of all of the different
• 2:00:05
  Speaker 2: effects of each individual act and how we affect everything
• 2:00:10
  Speaker 2: around us and what is net positive and what is
• 2:00:12
  Speaker 2: net negative and how to avoid all these things. I
• 2:00:16
  Speaker 2: really firmly believe that we are this biological caterpillar that
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 2: is making a cocoon. to create the electronic butterfly. And
• 2:00:26
  Speaker 2: we don't even know what we're doing while we're doing it.
• 2:00:28
  Speaker 2: We're just doing it. And I think materialism is also
• 2:00:31
  Speaker 2: baked into that. One of the main problems with human
• 2:00:33
  Speaker 2: beings in terms of the ridiculousness of our actions, we're
• 2:00:37
  Speaker 2: so materialistic. People are constantly wanting to get the newest, latest,
• 2:00:41
  Speaker 2: greatest thing. What's the motivation behind that other than social status? Well,
• 2:00:45
  Speaker 2: the motivation is that that's what fuels innovation. If we
• 2:00:49
  Speaker 2: all just stopped right now and said, hey, you know what?
• 2:00:53
  Speaker 2: iPhone 15 is pretty fucking dope. We don't need to
• 2:00:55
  Speaker 2: make new iPhones. Let's just keep it. fixing those and
• 2:00:58
  Speaker 2: just like exist the way we are right now. And
• 2:01:01
  Speaker 2: let's clean up the air and let's clean up the ocean.
• 2:01:04
  Speaker 2: Let's clean up the sea and clean up the rivers
• 2:01:06
  Speaker 2: and clean up the forest. Like, let's just fix the earth.
• 2:01:09
  Speaker 2: And then, no, we don't do that. No, I want
• 2:01:11
  Speaker 2: iPhone 16. You know, when is the iPhone going to
• 2:01:13
  Speaker 2: be able to communicate completely just with satellites? We don't
• 2:01:16
  Speaker 2: have to worry about cell phones.
• 2:01:17
  Speaker 1: Well, it's almost like a drug addiction, right? They did
• 2:01:19
  Speaker 1: studies where people receiving in text messages is the dopamine
• 2:01:22
  Speaker 1: rush too. So it's almost like an artificial... drug addiction
• 2:01:27
  Speaker 1: you're fueling because you want the more responsive tech more
• 2:01:31
  Speaker 1: integrating with your make easier so you can get your
• 2:01:35
  Speaker 1: fix quicker and more efficiently or something like that I.
• 2:01:38
  Speaker 2: Don't know and why I mean why would fucking staring
• 2:01:41
  Speaker 2: at a stupid cell phone give you a dopamine rush Well,
• 2:01:44
  Speaker 2: it does.
• 2:01:45
  Speaker 1: It does.
• 2:01:45
  Speaker 2: I'm not a biologist. And you get addicted to your
• 2:01:49
  Speaker 2: goddamn phones. And then why would it be that we
• 2:01:52
  Speaker 2: would innovate and create things like Instagram and TikTok that
• 2:01:56
  Speaker 2: are insanely addictive to the point where you look down
• 2:02:00
  Speaker 2: and you've spent three hours staring at nothing. Nonsense. Why
• 2:02:05
  Speaker 2: is that? It ensures continual use of this device until
• 2:02:10
  Speaker 2: it lures you into this ultimate integration.
• 2:02:12
  Speaker 1: Well, it's right where there's people at Meta, I guess now,
• 2:02:15
  Speaker 1: or Facebook, you know, where they actually have a whole
• 2:02:17
  Speaker 1: team of scientists on how to make their apps more addictive, right? So....
• 2:02:22
  Speaker 2: Demons.
• 2:02:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:02:24
  Speaker 2: Fucking demons.
• 2:02:24
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't use social media. I have never tweeted
• 2:02:26
  Speaker 1: in my life.
• 2:02:27
  Speaker 2: Really? That's amazing.
• 2:02:28
  Speaker 1: I mean, I have, like, I used Facebook back in
• 2:02:31
  Speaker 1: the day when it first came out when I was
• 2:02:33
  Speaker 1: going to college.
• 2:02:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 1: I don't have Instagram. I've never tweeted in my life.
• 2:02:41
  Speaker 1: I don't intend to because you don't want to get
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 1: sucked into that mind virus, which is like people responding
• 2:02:47
  Speaker 1: to you and you have to feel like you have
• 2:02:48
  Speaker 1: to respond back. I don't even touch it.
• 2:02:51
  Speaker 2: Well, I'm very aware of those traps, so I don't
• 2:02:54
  Speaker 2: do that. I used to, but many years ago I
• 2:02:57
  Speaker 2: stopped interacting with people because I just realized like overall
• 2:03:01
  Speaker 2: it's negative. Like there's positive aspects to it. It's great
• 2:03:04
  Speaker 2: for people that like you and they're fans. It's great
• 2:03:07
  Speaker 2: that you're an actual human that you interact. Occasionally I'll
• 2:03:10
  Speaker 2: comment on a post like that's really awesome. Congratulations. That
• 2:03:12
  Speaker 2: kind of stuff. But then I get the fuck out
• 2:03:14
  Speaker 2: of there and I don't read any responses. And I
• 2:03:16
  Speaker 2: found that that's the very best way to mitigate all
• 2:03:19
  Speaker 2: the negative aspects of social media. But then you're also
• 2:03:23
  Speaker 2: dealing with algorithms. You're dealing with things that recognize what
• 2:03:27
  Speaker 2: makes you more likely to engage. And so those things
• 2:03:30
  Speaker 2: are constantly showing you the things that you engage. And,
• 2:03:33
  Speaker 2: you know, it's not necessarily even positive. It's just whatever
• 2:03:37
  Speaker 2: you engage with. It's what's coming your way. Whether it
• 2:03:39
  Speaker 2: could be cool stuff, like maybe you're just like really
• 2:03:42
  Speaker 2: into muscle cars and it shows you a lot of
• 2:03:43
  Speaker 2: muscle cars. Or it could be like murder. Like, I
• 2:03:46
  Speaker 2: see a lot of murder on Instagram.
• 2:03:48
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:03:48
  Speaker 2: It's fucking crazy.
• 2:03:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm a car guy, so, like, my feed is like, oh,
• 2:03:53
  Speaker 1: do you ever think about this mod for your Ford Bronco? Yeah. Oh,
• 2:03:56
  Speaker 1: those lights look nice.
• 2:03:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:03:57
  Speaker 1: I'm going to wire that shit up next week, you know, so.
• 2:03:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I get those too, yeah.
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 1: It's bad.
• 2:04:01
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I have a problem with that. I have a
• 2:04:03
  Speaker 2: car problem.
• 2:04:04
  Speaker 1: Yeah, my wife doesn't allow me to have the good
• 2:04:06
  Speaker 1: stuff anymore, so I have to, you know. Keep it
• 2:04:09
  Speaker 1: under a certain price. That's good.
• 2:04:11
  Speaker 2: That's good. I'm more actually interested in old stuff than
• 2:04:14
  Speaker 2: I am in new stuff. You like rat rod stuff, right? Well,
• 2:04:17
  Speaker 2: I like muscle cars. Very specifically 1960s muscle cars. Those
• 2:04:21
  Speaker 2: are my favorite because what they are to me is
• 2:04:24
  Speaker 2: it's a toy that you could drive.
• 2:04:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:04:27
  Speaker 2: It's like a ride that gives me immense pleasure to
• 2:04:30
  Speaker 2: just drive around in. It's really fun. I don't even
• 2:04:33
  Speaker 2: have to go fast. It's just going fast. around in
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 2: a 1970 Chevelle, just driving it. It's hard to describe
• 2:04:41
  Speaker 2: for someone who has never experienced it, but it's just
• 2:04:45
  Speaker 2: so engaging, and it's like you're on this drug. It's
• 2:04:51
  Speaker 2: like everything, you feel all of it, and you're engaging
• 2:04:56
  Speaker 2: all of these senses.
• 2:04:57
  Speaker 1: It's very tactile, very mechanical. Yeah, I totally understand that.
• 2:05:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, the only kind of old cars I like
• 2:05:02
  Speaker 1: are like... black Lincoln, Lincoln continental suicide doors from the matrix.
• 2:05:07
  Speaker 1: I remember seeing that when I was a teen, when
• 2:05:09
  Speaker 1: the matrix came out, I'm like, that car is bad.
• 2:05:11
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:05:12
  Speaker 1: It's like totally. I want like to have whatever Morpheus drove.
• 2:05:15
  Speaker 2: They're art. They're essentially art. It's, it's, it's, it's functional art.
• 2:05:19
  Speaker 2: Like you could, it's a piece of art that you
• 2:05:21
  Speaker 2: could actually drive around in. Yeah. And it gives you
• 2:05:24
  Speaker 2: this very bizarre sensation. But the point is like, That's
• 2:05:29
  Speaker 2: not most people. Most people want the newest, latest, greatest thing.
• 2:05:33
  Speaker 2: And there's a motivation to get the newest, latest, greatest
• 2:05:37
  Speaker 2: thing that I think, if you just follow that up
• 2:05:40
  Speaker 2: to its logical conclusion, it's going to create life. It's
• 2:05:44
  Speaker 2: going to create, I mean, how many films have been
• 2:05:47
  Speaker 2: made about this? Ex Machina and all these different films.
• 2:05:51
  Speaker 1: That's right.
• 2:05:52
  Speaker 2: That's what we're going to do. I mean, there's no
• 2:05:55
  Speaker 2: way we're not going to do that. If I had
• 2:05:59
  Speaker 2: to bet on one thing, if the human race doesn't
• 2:06:01
  Speaker 2: get wiped out by a meteor or a nuclear war,
• 2:06:04
  Speaker 2: we're going to fucking do that. We're going to make
• 2:06:06
  Speaker 2: a life form, 100%. And it's going to be almost
• 2:06:10
  Speaker 2: instantaneously able to figure out all the flaws in its
• 2:06:14
  Speaker 2: own personal programming and make a much better version of itself.
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 2: If it's sentient, if it has the ability to make decisions.
• 2:06:19
  Speaker 1: Well, I think we're close. I mean, I think I
• 2:06:21
  Speaker 1: saw some stuff. There's like a open AI fiasco going
• 2:06:24
  Speaker 1: on right now. There's rumor that they might have cracked
• 2:06:26
  Speaker 1: artificial general intelligence, right, AGI. And that's frightening. I mean,
• 2:06:31
  Speaker 1: it was like, was it Sam Altman, I think, you
• 2:06:33
  Speaker 1: were talking about. I think there's like the board of
• 2:06:35
  Speaker 1: open AI. There's some shuffle. I was just reading.
• 2:06:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they just removed him and brought him right back. Well,
• 2:06:40
  Speaker 2: they removed him, but then apparently the shareholders were like,
• 2:06:43
  Speaker 2: what the fuck are you doing? And there was so
• 2:06:45
  Speaker 2: much outrage that they're trying to bring him back. Like, instantly.
• 2:06:50
  Speaker 2: But Elon had a very good point. Like, what was
• 2:06:53
  Speaker 2: the motivation behind that? And when you think about the
• 2:06:55
  Speaker 2: implications for humanity as a whole, because this is such
• 2:06:58
  Speaker 2: an emerging technology that's so overwhelmingly powerful. What happened? Like,
• 2:07:05
  Speaker 2: what's going on? Like, I think this is one of
• 2:07:07
  Speaker 2: those things where, like, we need to know, like, what
• 2:07:09
  Speaker 2: was the motivation behind your decision?
• 2:07:11
  Speaker 1: And if it was.
• 2:07:12
  Speaker 2: that he was holding back information about the actual creation
• 2:07:17
  Speaker 2: of artificial general intelligence. That it's already happened. And that
• 2:07:21
  Speaker 2: he's like hesitant. Because he's a little cagey in how
• 2:07:25
  Speaker 2: he talks about stuff. When I was talking to him about,
• 2:07:28
  Speaker 2: you could tell, it's like a little bit like, he
• 2:07:31
  Speaker 2: kind of knows that he is at the forefront of
• 2:07:35
  Speaker 2: this technology that worst case scenario replaces us.
• 2:07:42
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And, you know, going back to is a program
• 2:07:46
  Speaker 1: with any kind of empathy, et cetera, depending on if
• 2:07:48
  Speaker 1: it handles critical. I guess the thing I saw in
• 2:07:50
  Speaker 1: the government, because I did a lot of cyber stuff
• 2:07:54
  Speaker 1: in my career, is as AI gets more advanced, you know,
• 2:07:59
  Speaker 1: you create. create, say, offensive cyber tools that literally have
• 2:08:04
  Speaker 1: a mind of their own. And if, say, theoretically, you
• 2:08:08
  Speaker 1: release that on some target, and you might not be
• 2:08:11
  Speaker 1: able to touch that target again, say it's a one-time, whoop,
• 2:08:14
  Speaker 1: you put it in there, well... How do you control it?
• 2:08:17
  Speaker 1: It's almost like Skynet and the Terminator. I hate to
• 2:08:19
  Speaker 1: use that analogy, but that was my fear when I
• 2:08:22
  Speaker 1: was working at certain agencies working on offensive cyber tools.
• 2:08:25
  Speaker 1: I'm like, oh my God, this is not good. And then,
• 2:08:28
  Speaker 1: of course, with cyber, right, it's the attribution. Actor attribution
• 2:08:33
  Speaker 1: is the biggest thing. How do you know it was, hypothetically,
• 2:08:38
  Speaker 1: Russia that used the cyber weapon to attack you? It
• 2:08:41
  Speaker 1: could have been another actor masquerading as that foreign power
• 2:08:44
  Speaker 1: using tactics, techniques, procedures. IP proxy operations to hide where
• 2:08:49
  Speaker 1: it was coming from. So it's like you have non-kinetic
• 2:08:54
  Speaker 1: fires that can potentially create mutually assured destruction because you
• 2:08:59
  Speaker 1: could take out critical infrastructure, blow up the power grid, etc.
• 2:09:04
  Speaker 1: No radiation, but potentially no attribution or can confuse the
• 2:09:11
  Speaker 1: attributes and such that you don't even know who to
• 2:09:13
  Speaker 1: go to war with. It's really scary to me. It
• 2:09:15
  Speaker 1: is scary.
• 2:09:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:09:16
  Speaker 1: That's just my own.
• 2:09:17
  Speaker 2: It's already happening with social media.
• 2:09:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:09:19
  Speaker 2: I mean, think about how many troll farms there are
• 2:09:22
  Speaker 2: on social media that are just stirring up discontent. I mean,
• 2:09:25
  Speaker 2: it's an active program that we know that Russia uses
• 2:09:29
  Speaker 2: that is trying to undermine democracy and try to keep
• 2:09:32
  Speaker 2: people fighting with each other. And it's been very effective.
• 2:09:35
  Speaker 2: And if you look at social media, it's just fucking chaos.
• 2:09:37
  Speaker 2: It's just people yelling at each other. Particularly Twitter or X,
• 2:09:40
  Speaker 2: you know, and Facebook. It's like a lot of what's
• 2:09:43
  Speaker 2: going on. One of the studies showed that out of
• 2:09:46
  Speaker 2: the top 20 Christian sites that are on Facebook, 19
• 2:09:50
  Speaker 2: of them are run by Russian troll farms. So if
• 2:09:53
  Speaker 2: we know that that on a relatively rudimentary scale, if
• 2:10:00
  Speaker 2: you look at the impact of social media versus the
• 2:10:03
  Speaker 2: impact of artificial intelligence, they're already doing that. what's the
• 2:10:10
  Speaker 2: goal and how to manipulate consciousness and how to manipulate
• 2:10:14
  Speaker 2: influence and how people think about things and what the
• 2:10:17
  Speaker 2: public opinion on things are. It's already very effective. You
• 2:10:22
  Speaker 2: would imagine that a creation of artificial intelligence would radically
• 2:10:27
  Speaker 2: accelerate that. 100%.
• 2:10:28
  Speaker 1: I remember the deepfake stuff was a real problem for
• 2:10:33
  Speaker 1: my old community because we're like, shit, you could really
• 2:10:36
  Speaker 1: fake some stuff. And you gotta develop algorithms to make
• 2:10:38
  Speaker 1: sure you can analyze, oh, hey, that is fake. Because
• 2:10:41
  Speaker 1: you've seen some of the deep fakes where it's like
• 2:10:43
  Speaker 1: Obama or Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Tom Cruise guy. Holy shit.
• 2:10:48
  Speaker 1: That is crazy. You're gonna be able to bring actors
• 2:10:51
  Speaker 1: from the dead back at this point. You're gonna have
• 2:10:53
  Speaker 1: like Cary Grant doing a musical or whatever.
• 2:10:57
  Speaker 2: Bruce Willis, who has some sort of degenerative neurological condition,
• 2:11:05
  Speaker 2: Sold his likeness for the ability to make commercials and
• 2:11:09
  Speaker 2: all sorts of other things. Like he's essentially saying he's fading, unfortunately.
• 2:11:15
  Speaker 2: And now he will give this thing, which is this property,
• 2:11:20
  Speaker 2: which is Bruce Willis, this famous person. And they will
• 2:11:23
  Speaker 2: be able to create versions of him. Starring in films.
• 2:11:27
  Speaker 1: Oh, and certainly if you train an AI model, just
• 2:11:29
  Speaker 1: like Chad GPT, you could actually get almost like what
• 2:11:32
  Speaker 1: they would normally say, what their knowledge.
• 2:11:35
  Speaker 2: A hundred percent.
• 2:11:36
  Speaker 1: And it's almost like having a permanent historian too. You
• 2:11:39
  Speaker 1: could like, you know, if you want to talk to
• 2:11:41
  Speaker 1: Clint Eastwood about his films in the sixties after Clint Eastwood,
• 2:11:44
  Speaker 1: you know, passes, you know, may he live forever, but like.
• 2:11:48
  Speaker 2: That would be crazy. It'd be really interesting. I mean,
• 2:11:50
  Speaker 2: he might actually be able to give you advice. He
• 2:11:52
  Speaker 2: might be your personal advisor. I know. That'd be cool.
• 2:11:55
  Speaker 2: I mean, that's probably one of the things that's going
• 2:11:56
  Speaker 2: to come out of this. But when we think about empathy,
• 2:12:00
  Speaker 2: we also think about just human beings and the way
• 2:12:05
  Speaker 2: we communicate and interact with each other. Empathy is very important.
• 2:12:08
  Speaker 2: And also compassion and forgiveness. All these things are very
• 2:12:12
  Speaker 2: important qualities because we recognize that we're very flawed. But
• 2:12:16
  Speaker 2: when you create something that is not flawed, then the
• 2:12:21
  Speaker 2: need for empathy, the need for all these things that
• 2:12:23
  Speaker 2: we attach to human emotions and human reward systems, they'll
• 2:12:27
  Speaker 2: no longer be a significant issue because you're going to
• 2:12:30
  Speaker 2: be dealing with something that operates on a higher plane.
• 2:12:32
  Speaker 2: It might be the answer to all that ails us,
• 2:12:35
  Speaker 2: which is so terrifying for us because we recognize that
• 2:12:39
  Speaker 2: what we derive, the joy that we derive from love,
• 2:12:43
  Speaker 2: from companionship, from friendship, from community. It's like a key
• 2:12:47
  Speaker 2: component to life on earth for us. But it's also
• 2:12:51
  Speaker 2: because we recognize that without that, we are the Mongols.
• 2:12:55
  Speaker 2: Without that, we're Nazi Germany. Without that, you know, we're Hamas.
• 2:12:59
  Speaker 2: We're whatever the fuck we are that we recognize as
• 2:13:01
  Speaker 2: being like evil or dangerous or horrible about humans. That
• 2:13:07
  Speaker 2: when we think about the worst case scenario for human beings,
• 2:13:10
  Speaker 2: we always think about things like the Holocaust. We think
• 2:13:13
  Speaker 2: about What is the worst acts that human beings are
• 2:13:16
  Speaker 2: capable of with our current programming and our biological flaws?
• 2:13:21
  Speaker 2: Like what are the worst things we can do to terrible,
• 2:13:23
  Speaker 2: awful things? Well, if we don't have those problems, if
• 2:13:27
  Speaker 2: we no longer have envy, we no longer have greed,
• 2:13:30
  Speaker 2: we no longer have evil, we don't have any of
• 2:13:33
  Speaker 2: those properties. They don't exist anymore. We just have this
• 2:13:37
  Speaker 2: new form of consciousness that's far superior.
• 2:13:41
  Speaker 1: That's an interesting parallel because you have, you know, you're
• 2:13:45
  Speaker 1: no longer maybe apex sentience if you have artificial intelligence,
• 2:13:49
  Speaker 1: you know, governing certain things.
• 2:13:50
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 2:13:51
  Speaker 1: And I think that's also kind of this psychological issue
• 2:13:55
  Speaker 1: with this UAP issue where we might not be the
• 2:13:59
  Speaker 1: apex predator. We may be that mountain lion. Yes. And
• 2:14:04
  Speaker 1: we're going to have to be comfortable knowing that we're
• 2:14:08
  Speaker 1: going to be vulnerable and There's people far superior that
• 2:14:11
  Speaker 1: may have malevolent intentions. Maybe not. I don't know. And
• 2:14:16
  Speaker 1: almost be humbled the fact that like, sorry, we're not
• 2:14:19
  Speaker 1: the smartest of God's creation. And that might be really
• 2:14:22
  Speaker 1: hard for a lot of people to process. And I
• 2:14:24
  Speaker 1: think that's probably certainly, I would imagine, one of the
• 2:14:29
  Speaker 1: deliberations they must have done years ago. We're like, oh,
• 2:14:31
  Speaker 1: we can't disclose because, you know, people are not going
• 2:14:33
  Speaker 1: to feel comfortable in that worldview.
• 2:14:36
  Speaker 2: 100%. And they're not. And then I wonder if these
• 2:14:41
  Speaker 2: things that we're experiencing are the natural progression of what
• 2:14:45
  Speaker 2: happens when you do seed life on planet or you
• 2:14:49
  Speaker 2: do accelerate biological life. You do have some sort of
• 2:14:53
  Speaker 2: a genetic intervention where you take this thing that has
• 2:14:56
  Speaker 2: emerging intelligence and you accelerate it. And that that thing
• 2:15:01
  Speaker 2: will in turn, with all of its desire for innovation
• 2:15:04
  Speaker 2: and creativity, and also all of its desire to control
• 2:15:08
  Speaker 2: resources and have power and have influence, that it will
• 2:15:13
  Speaker 2: eventually lead to the creation of what we're seeing, that
• 2:15:18
  Speaker 2: these things are the next stage of this process. And
• 2:15:22
  Speaker 2: that maybe we're dealing with one form of that next stage,
• 2:15:27
  Speaker 2: but there's another stage that's a million years more advanced
• 2:15:29
  Speaker 2: than that, that's far superior, that doesn't even have a
• 2:15:33
  Speaker 2: biological limitation in terms of physical space, that it exists
• 2:15:37
  Speaker 2: completely in some other undetectable realm that no longer thinks
• 2:15:44
  Speaker 2: about biological limitations of life and death and communication. It
• 2:15:48
  Speaker 2: exists completely in some other space, that that's what these
• 2:15:52
  Speaker 2: things are. And then I always wonder when there's a
• 2:15:56
  Speaker 2: crash or when there's a body or when there's this
• 2:15:59
  Speaker 2: and that, and people say, well, if they're so advanced,
• 2:16:02
  Speaker 2: why are they crashing? Well, hold on. What version are
• 2:16:07
  Speaker 2: we looking at? We're not saying there's one thing that's
• 2:16:09
  Speaker 2: visiting us. If there's one thing that's visiting us and
• 2:16:12
  Speaker 2: we know where this one thing is, we could say, oh, well,
• 2:16:14
  Speaker 2: that thing, it deals with a completely different solar system.
• 2:16:17
  Speaker 2: The sun is vulnerable. It doesn't have asteroid clouds. It
• 2:16:19
  Speaker 2: doesn't have all these different things where it's like it
• 2:16:22
  Speaker 2: doesn't have a planet that has super volcanoes. Maybe life
• 2:16:25
  Speaker 2: evolved in a more stable environment and it allowed it
• 2:16:28
  Speaker 2: to get to a far greater place. technological level but
• 2:16:32
  Speaker 2: not the ultimate yeah.
• 2:16:35
  Speaker 1: We might be testing the extent of their adaptability and
• 2:16:37
  Speaker 1: like i said are they crashing by accident right mission
• 2:16:41
  Speaker 1: failure or on purpose right so and then of course
• 2:16:45
  Speaker 1: with the far distances and everything i mean if they're
• 2:16:49
  Speaker 1: traveling here through some kind of space-time metric engineering construct
• 2:16:52
  Speaker 1: you know um The distances are not as vast as
• 2:16:56
  Speaker 1: you think, right? It could be going through some kind
• 2:16:58
  Speaker 1: of traversable wormhole or something like that where it's like
• 2:17:01
  Speaker 1: a walk down the street for them. It's not a
• 2:17:03
  Speaker 1: thousand light years.
• 2:17:04
  Speaker 2: Well, just think about communication. Communication used to be you
• 2:17:09
  Speaker 2: had to get in front of someone and you had
• 2:17:10
  Speaker 2: to talk to them. So you had to know their language.
• 2:17:12
  Speaker 2: You had to either nonverbal or verbal communication. You had
• 2:17:15
  Speaker 2: to figure out a way to say things to them.
• 2:17:18
  Speaker 2: That's no longer the case. Obviously, with this new Android
• 2:17:21
  Speaker 2: operating system, it translates, but Also, the fact that you
• 2:17:25
  Speaker 2: could have a fucking FaceTime call with someone in Japan
• 2:17:29
  Speaker 2: right now and you instantaneously can communicate back and forth,
• 2:17:33
  Speaker 2: which is insane.
• 2:17:34
  Speaker 1: That's a vast distance, but for us it's like stupid.
• 2:17:36
  Speaker 2: It's like easy. Vast distance and instantaneous. I mean, I
• 2:17:41
  Speaker 2: was just in Scotland and I was FaceTiming my daughter
• 2:17:45
  Speaker 2: back home.
• 2:17:45
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:17:46
  Speaker 2: Fucking crazy. You're nine hours by plane and you're having instantaneously. communication,
• 2:17:51
  Speaker 2: which is wild shit but that's just that's fucking That
• 2:17:58
  Speaker 2: that's like pong, you know, that's that's Morse code That's
• 2:18:02
  Speaker 2: like it's very primitive in terms of what if you
• 2:18:06
  Speaker 2: physically can be in these places instantaneous. Yeah, I And
• 2:18:10
  Speaker 2: why would we assume that that's not eventually going to
• 2:18:12
  Speaker 2: be on the menu? Yeah.
• 2:18:14
  Speaker 1: It's just like the conventional propulsion stuff. We're not using
• 2:18:18
  Speaker 1: an Elon Musk starship to get here. It's like they're
• 2:18:20
  Speaker 1: doing something else.
• 2:18:21
  Speaker 2: We talked to someone from the 1800s and he said,
• 2:18:23
  Speaker 2: you're going to go to Nevada? Jesus Christ. You know
• 2:18:25
  Speaker 2: how far that is on a wagon?
• 2:18:28
  Speaker 1: That's months, man. But no, you fly to Vegas, it's
• 2:18:30
  Speaker 1: two hours.
• 2:18:31
  Speaker 2: It's fucking easy. We know that now.
• 2:18:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:18:36
  Speaker 2: Why would we assume that there's a limitation to that advancement?
• 2:18:40
  Speaker 1: I don't think there is. Yeah, and of course, a
• 2:18:43
  Speaker 1: friend of mine, Eric Weinstein, certainly... We don't even have
• 2:18:47
  Speaker 1: the right theoretical frameworks right now. He has his own
• 2:18:51
  Speaker 1: geometric unity theory, and he's way smarter.
• 2:18:53
  Speaker 2: Than I am.
• 2:18:54
  Speaker 1: He's too smart.
• 2:18:55
  Speaker 2: He's confusing. Yeah. He starts talking, and you're like, slow down.
• 2:18:58
  Speaker 1: It's so funny. If he calls me, I'm like, you've
• 2:19:01
  Speaker 1: got to call me in the morning after my 24-ounce
• 2:19:03
  Speaker 1: Monster Energy drink, or I can't even keep up, man. Yeah.
• 2:19:08
  Speaker 2: He's on another level. He's got some unique theories himself
• 2:19:12
  Speaker 2: about where all this stuff is coming from. And it's...
• 2:19:15
  Speaker 2: It's all very, very, very interesting and intriguing, but also
• 2:19:20
  Speaker 2: makes sense. All of it makes sense, including being visited.
• 2:19:24
  Speaker 2: You know, I had this conversation with Neil deGrasse Tyson. Like,
• 2:19:26
  Speaker 2: why would they be interested in us? I'm like, what
• 2:19:28
  Speaker 2: the fuck are you talking about?
• 2:19:29
  Speaker 1: We're super interested. Yeah. Neil, I mean, obviously he's a
• 2:19:32
  Speaker 1: fine science communicator, kind of the successor of kind of
• 2:19:36
  Speaker 1: the Carl Sagan kind of thing. I think Carl Sagan
• 2:19:40
  Speaker 1: was a little bit more open-minded. Yeah. I like Carl better,
• 2:19:43
  Speaker 1: by the way.
• 2:19:43
  Speaker 2: I'm more of a fan.
• 2:19:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:19:45
  Speaker 2: I wish he was still alive. I love to smoke
• 2:19:47
  Speaker 2: weed with that guy. He's really into weed.
• 2:19:48
  Speaker 1: Oh, really?
• 2:19:49
  Speaker 2: Yeah, really, really into it.
• 2:19:50
  Speaker 1: I remember my aunt gave me Cosmos by Carl Sagan
• 2:19:54
  Speaker 1: when I was in middle school. And it was that
• 2:19:55
  Speaker 1: book was from the 80s. But that book tripped me out.
• 2:19:59
  Speaker 1: And I was like, I want to study science. And
• 2:20:01
  Speaker 1: I read, it was Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking.
• 2:20:04
  Speaker 1: And I read those two books when I was like
• 2:20:06
  Speaker 1: in eighth grade. And I was like, this is trippy.
• 2:20:09
  Speaker 1: I want to study astronomy.
• 2:20:10
  Speaker 2: This is insane.
• 2:20:11
  Speaker 1: But I ultimately used kind of my technical background to learn.
• 2:20:15
  Speaker 1: be a spook, you know, for the government. But I
• 2:20:18
  Speaker 1: still observe. I have a big telescope and I live
• 2:20:20
  Speaker 1: like super dark skies in Colorado. And I still have
• 2:20:24
  Speaker 1: that boyhood fascination of the cosmos. Now, ironically, I found
• 2:20:29
  Speaker 1: out something else that kind of confirms that the cosmos
• 2:20:32
  Speaker 1: is not lifeless. And, you know, God paints with a
• 2:20:35
  Speaker 1: broad brush as like the Vatican has espoused a couple
• 2:20:38
  Speaker 1: of years ago when they said this is okay with
• 2:20:40
  Speaker 1: their theology.
• 2:20:41
  Speaker 2: I have a theory that the universe itself is God.
• 2:20:45
  Speaker 1: That's like what I was talking about with the multidimensional
• 2:20:49
  Speaker 1: creator creating universes.
• 2:20:51
  Speaker 2: I think we have a very limited idea of when
• 2:20:54
  Speaker 2: we say God, when God created the heavens and they're like, right.
• 2:20:58
  Speaker 2: But what are we saying? I think it's the universe itself.
• 2:21:01
  Speaker 2: I think it's one thing. And that this one thing,
• 2:21:06
  Speaker 2: it seeks to create these things that continually push the envelopes.
• 2:21:12
  Speaker 2: and maybe gods themselves eventually. I think if you extrapolate
• 2:21:16
  Speaker 2: from our ability versus the ability of an amoeba and
• 2:21:20
  Speaker 2: you continue to move that along, what does that do? Well,
• 2:21:23
  Speaker 2: it's going to be able to create universes. There's already
• 2:21:26
  Speaker 2: been like theoretical papers that have been written about The
• 2:21:30
  Speaker 2: creation of other things like black holes, other things like
• 2:21:35
  Speaker 2: a universe. What is involved in the creation of a universe?
• 2:21:39
  Speaker 2: What is involved in the Big Bang? Can that be replicated? Well,
• 2:21:43
  Speaker 2: not now, but if AI becomes sentient and AI eventually
• 2:21:50
  Speaker 2: makes far greater versions of itself, If it keeps doing that,
• 2:21:54
  Speaker 2: what are the limits.
• 2:21:56
  Speaker 1: Of its potential? Creates the matrix.
• 2:21:58
  Speaker 2: Literally. Literally creates a simulated environment that's indiscernible. You can't
• 2:22:05
  Speaker 2: tell the difference between that and regular life. Well, maybe
• 2:22:07
  Speaker 2: because there is no difference. Maybe that is, I mean,
• 2:22:10
  Speaker 2: that's the theory of simulation theater.
• 2:22:13
  Speaker 1: Yeah, simulation theory, yeah, familiar. And that is a possibility
• 2:22:16
  Speaker 1: because the universe seems like a little too perfect. It's
• 2:22:21
  Speaker 1: a little strange, very created to me. So just like
• 2:22:25
  Speaker 1: we're in the Goldilocks zone, perfect temperature, like it's.
• 2:22:29
  Speaker 2: Just real weird. How about the Big Bang itself? What?
• 2:22:33
  Speaker 1: What happened?
• 2:22:34
  Speaker 2: Something smaller than the head of a pin for no
• 2:22:37
  Speaker 2: known reason. becomes everything. Okay.
• 2:22:41
  Speaker 1: And what's the universe expanding into? It's like a quantum
• 2:22:44
  Speaker 1: foam or whatever the heck the latest theory is that's
• 2:22:47
  Speaker 1: like beyond me.
• 2:22:48
  Speaker 2: And then it perhaps just retracts back down to that
• 2:22:52
  Speaker 2: infinitely small thing and then expands again. And that this
• 2:22:55
  Speaker 2: is an endless cycle and that we're just so limited
• 2:22:58
  Speaker 2: because of our biological limitations or our life and death
• 2:23:02
  Speaker 2: is such.
• 2:23:02
  Speaker 1: A small little tiny blip.
• 2:23:05
  Speaker 2: It's so minuscule in terms of just the overall known
• 2:23:10
  Speaker 2: life of the universe. And then you have the James
• 2:23:12
  Speaker 2: Webb telescope that's, you know, there's people that question the
• 2:23:16
  Speaker 2: actual length of time that occurred between the big bang
• 2:23:20
  Speaker 2: and now that maybe it might be far longer. And
• 2:23:22
  Speaker 2: there's people like Brian Keating that say that's not, that's
• 2:23:24
  Speaker 2: not correct. It's just a, a lack of understanding of
• 2:23:28
  Speaker 2: what we understand currently about the creation of galaxies.
• 2:23:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Cause I mean, obviously the length of the age
• 2:23:34
  Speaker 1: of the universe keeps on getting older and older. And
• 2:23:36
  Speaker 1: a lot of that's because of the, the Doppler fit
• 2:23:38
  Speaker 1: Doppler shift, right? The red shift as the galaxies are
• 2:23:41
  Speaker 1: accelerating away. Um, you know, we can calculate what the,
• 2:23:46
  Speaker 1: what their origin point probably was and how long it
• 2:23:48
  Speaker 1: took for them to speed up like that.
• 2:23:50
  Speaker 2: Right. And only based on our current understanding. Yes. Which
• 2:23:54
  Speaker 2: is obviously at least fairly limited in terms of what
• 2:23:57
  Speaker 2: its potential is.
• 2:23:58
  Speaker 1: Well, yeah, like we still don't quite understand the origin
• 2:24:01
  Speaker 1: of the moon. The moon is at the right location
• 2:24:03
  Speaker 1: that causes solar and lunar eclipses. It's like the right
• 2:24:07
  Speaker 1: apparent size to block out the sun. It's like super weird.
• 2:24:11
  Speaker 1: Same thing with like Mars. We're not sure like what
• 2:24:13
  Speaker 1: happened there where Mars, you know, had some probable life
• 2:24:18
  Speaker 1: on it. Either a proto planet hit it or there
• 2:24:20
  Speaker 1: was some kind of impact there. That vaporize stuff and, like,
• 2:24:24
  Speaker 1: who knows?
• 2:24:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Who knows? And this is just this little tiny
• 2:24:28
  Speaker 2: neighborhood that we're looking at. It's like we are in
• 2:24:31
  Speaker 2: our backyard looking for evidence of, like, life in Africa.
• 2:24:37
  Speaker 2: You know? I mean, like, you're not going to figure
• 2:24:38
  Speaker 2: it out here. We're just looking at it at such
• 2:24:42
  Speaker 2: a small scale in terms of what we could potentially
• 2:24:46
  Speaker 2: discover or potentially observe.
• 2:24:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:24:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I often wonder, you know, when we're seeing... especially
• 2:24:53
  Speaker 2: with the idea of UAPs, UFO crafts, we're seeing a
• 2:24:57
  Speaker 2: version of what we will become or something like us
• 2:25:01
  Speaker 2: becomes if given enough time.
• 2:25:02
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's like Dr. Mike Masters at Montana State.
• 2:25:08
  Speaker 1: He literally postulates, you know, he says time travelers, we
• 2:25:12
  Speaker 1: could debate time travel, but Like he thinks it might
• 2:25:14
  Speaker 1: be like a advanced form of Homo sapien is what
• 2:25:17
  Speaker 1: we're seeing coming back.
• 2:25:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:25:19
  Speaker 1: Like a breakaway civilization. And we're coming back to see
• 2:25:21
  Speaker 1: an older version of ourself that was left on Earth
• 2:25:23
  Speaker 1: or something like that.
• 2:25:24
  Speaker 2: Well, the way we would visit like North Sentinel Island
• 2:25:27
  Speaker 2: and visit those people that are trapped on that island
• 2:25:29
  Speaker 2: that are uncontacted. Yeah.
• 2:25:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. And then a lot of... And there's also
• 2:25:35
  Speaker 1: like cargo cult religions and stuff. You know, the South
• 2:25:38
  Speaker 1: Pacific in World War II, they worshipped the P-51 and
• 2:25:41
  Speaker 1: stuff like that. They thought those were UFOs, but really
• 2:25:44
  Speaker 1: they were just us, you know.
• 2:25:45
  Speaker 2: But we were probably alien to them. Oh, 100%. I mean,
• 2:25:50
  Speaker 2: just look at how Cortez looked to the people that,
• 2:25:54
  Speaker 2: you know, had no idea that people could ride horses. Right.
• 2:25:57
  Speaker 2: What the fuck is going on? These guys are riding horses?
• 2:25:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:26:00
  Speaker 2: These are gods.
• 2:26:01
  Speaker 1: These white guys coming in.
• 2:26:02
  Speaker 2: What the heck? They come on a ship in the
• 2:26:05
  Speaker 2: ocean and they ride horses?
• 2:26:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:26:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Exactly. It's all based on our limited understanding. And
• 2:26:13
  Speaker 2: for someone, whether it's the federal government or whether it's
• 2:26:16
  Speaker 2: military contractors, for someone to have key elements that could
• 2:26:22
  Speaker 2: give us a better understanding of this whole picture. It's
• 2:26:28
  Speaker 2: really inexcusable to not relay that to all of humanity.
• 2:26:34
  Speaker 2: So this is too much information to be secret. It's
• 2:26:37
  Speaker 2: too important. If it is real, it's too important for
• 2:26:43
  Speaker 2: someone to have access to just because they have power
• 2:26:46
  Speaker 2: and money and influence. It seems insane.
• 2:26:49
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's the whole primer for what I did.
• 2:26:52
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's... I think I'm a pretty moral and
• 2:26:56
  Speaker 1: ethical person. I just could not live with myself if
• 2:26:58
  Speaker 1: I didn't try to make a difference, even though it
• 2:27:00
  Speaker 1: was very uncomfortable, personal privacy, and professional and personal health
• 2:27:05
  Speaker 1: was at risk.
• 2:27:07
  Speaker 2: It also seems like the public understanding and appreciation of
• 2:27:11
  Speaker 2: these things, particularly after the 2017 article in the New
• 2:27:14
  Speaker 2: York Times, has changed. There's been a shift. Whereas before,
• 2:27:17
  Speaker 2: if you would talk about UFOs or the idea of
• 2:27:19
  Speaker 2: extraterrestrial life, you were automatically lumped into this group of
• 2:27:23
  Speaker 2: people that believes in Bigfoot. It's like you're in the
• 2:27:27
  Speaker 2: Loch Ness Monster. You're kind of a loon who likes
• 2:27:29
  Speaker 2: fringe things because you've probably got problems in your own
• 2:27:32
  Speaker 2: life you're not addressing, and so you're distracted. It's like
• 2:27:34
  Speaker 2: a gambler or something like that. You're just like distracting
• 2:27:37
  Speaker 2: yourself with this craziness in order to ignore the the
• 2:27:41
  Speaker 2: reality of existence itself which is so complicated and difficult
• 2:27:44
  Speaker 2: to manage and then i think that if we had
• 2:27:48
  Speaker 2: a better understanding of the the overall scale of of
• 2:27:53
  Speaker 2: the potential of life in the universe based on what
• 2:27:56
  Speaker 2: we know, like physical evidence, undeniable physical evidence that shows
• 2:28:00
  Speaker 2: us that we're not alone. That would be a massive
• 2:28:05
  Speaker 2: change in just the overall shift of consciousness on earth.
• 2:28:10
  Speaker 2: If we could understand that these territorial disputes that we have,
• 2:28:15
  Speaker 2: which are almost always over resources or over land or
• 2:28:19
  Speaker 2: over religions and ideologies, If we could understand that these
• 2:28:23
  Speaker 2: are nonsense in the vast scope of the universe itself.
• 2:28:27
  Speaker 2: And this is the, what is that effect that the
• 2:28:31
  Speaker 2: people that get into the space station have and astronauts?
• 2:28:35
  Speaker 1: Oh, the overview effect. The overview effect, yes. William Shatner
• 2:28:39
  Speaker 1: had that when he went up in the Blue Origin thing.
• 2:28:41
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sure. I'm sure everybody has it. I mean,
• 2:28:44
  Speaker 2: I'm sure it's just like you go like, oh, my God, like,
• 2:28:46
  Speaker 2: what are we doing? Like, this is one.
• 2:28:48
  Speaker 1: And that's how I felt. I mean, like, after I
• 2:28:50
  Speaker 1: found all this stuff, I could have continued my career,
• 2:28:52
  Speaker 1: you know, made lieutenant colonel here this winter, made senior
• 2:28:55
  Speaker 1: executive service in a year or two, did national security stuff.
• 2:28:58
  Speaker 1: But I'm, like, sitting in my office, and I'm like,
• 2:29:02
  Speaker 1: there's better things for me to care about than Russian
• 2:29:06
  Speaker 1: troop movements. Like, we're not alone.
• 2:29:10
  Speaker 2: This is insane.
• 2:29:11
  Speaker 1: Like, I have to, like, blow the whistle on this.
• 2:29:14
  Speaker 1: This is insane. Because certainly... The people we talked to
• 2:29:18
  Speaker 1: are not lying. And the documents I meticulously went through,
• 2:29:22
  Speaker 1: they were not forgeries. They were not deception material. So
• 2:29:25
  Speaker 1: it's just like I have to do something.
• 2:29:27
  Speaker 2: I'm sure you've seen those Freedom of Information Act disclosure
• 2:29:30
  Speaker 2: papers from the CIA from– God, it was like the
• 2:29:34
  Speaker 2: 1950s where they're detailing all the various forms of life
• 2:29:39
  Speaker 2: that we know are currently– that currently exist and– You
• 2:29:44
  Speaker 2: remember that, Jamie? We pulled up that document. Do you
• 2:29:46
  Speaker 2: think you could find it? Jamie will find it. But
• 2:29:50
  Speaker 2: it's like 1950-something where they were discussing these things.
• 2:29:53
  Speaker 1: Interesting. Yeah, I'm not sure which ones you're talking about.
• 2:29:55
  Speaker 1: I'd have to see them.
• 2:29:56
  Speaker 2: It's pretty weird stuff because if they knew about this
• 2:29:59
  Speaker 2: in the 1950s, how did they know?
• 2:30:01
  Speaker 1: Well, there was CIA docs about consciousness and weird remote
• 2:30:05
  Speaker 1: viewing stuff. I mean, besides the Stargate program. that were
• 2:30:09
  Speaker 1: released in the FOIA reading room on CIA's website, too,
• 2:30:12
  Speaker 1: that are pretty trippy. We're like, wow, CIA is looking
• 2:30:15
  Speaker 1: into some really interesting stuff. I mean, they're a hardcore
• 2:30:19
  Speaker 1: intel agency. What's going on there?
• 2:30:21
  Speaker 2: But it makes sense that they would kind of have
• 2:30:23
  Speaker 2: to find out if that's bullshit or not. Like, you
• 2:30:26
  Speaker 2: can't ignore that if you're really doing your job. If
• 2:30:29
  Speaker 2: your job is intelligence, like, OK, like. Let's look at this.
• 2:30:32
  Speaker 1: Or it's an aspect of the phenomenon because it's like
• 2:30:35
  Speaker 1: a reach out from the crash retrieval program. Like, hey,
• 2:30:38
  Speaker 1: I need you to look into some weird stuff because
• 2:30:40
  Speaker 1: it might be the key unlock for something that we
• 2:30:42
  Speaker 1: got in a warehouse. Yeah.
• 2:30:44
  Speaker 2: Whoa.
• 2:30:45
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:30:46
  Speaker 2: Yeah. So as it stands right now, what? What's the
• 2:30:51
  Speaker 2: future for this stuff? What's the future for these disclosures?
• 2:30:54
  Speaker 2: And what are the bottlenecks?
• 2:30:57
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean, certainly from the governmental process, you know,
• 2:31:00
  Speaker 1: as long as the House doesn't kill the Schumer Amendment,
• 2:31:03
  Speaker 1: and I'm, you know, that's why I'm discussing it here
• 2:31:05
  Speaker 1: with you, because if they don't pass it, it's going
• 2:31:08
  Speaker 1: to be the greatest setback to humankind in U.S. history, literally.
• 2:31:14
  Speaker 1: So the presidential panel gets involved. and paneled about 90
• 2:31:18
  Speaker 1: days or so after the passage of the bill. So
• 2:31:22
  Speaker 1: by Christmas, as long as it doesn't get killed, we'll
• 2:31:25
  Speaker 1: be in the National Defense Authorization Act. Panel will be formed, say, February, March.
• 2:31:33
  Speaker 1: Then they have a 300-day process to develop an initial
• 2:31:36
  Speaker 1: plan for the president. And I don't know if Chuck
• 2:31:40
  Speaker 1: Schumer and his staff were being kind of crafty or whatever,
• 2:31:44
  Speaker 1: but the 300 days, if you actually do it out,
• 2:31:47
  Speaker 1: It's like the election. So I don't know if they
• 2:31:50
  Speaker 1: want to make it an election issue, which certainly if
• 2:31:53
  Speaker 1: this act doesn't pass, I think it needs to be
• 2:31:55
  Speaker 1: an election issue because the senior executive needs to rule
• 2:31:58
  Speaker 1: on this if Congress can't get their shit together, to
• 2:32:00
  Speaker 1: be quite honest. And we have a plan out to
• 2:32:05
  Speaker 1: 2030 where this stuff starts getting rolled out. Knock on wood,
• 2:32:07
  Speaker 1: perfect storm. Things could get delayed. But then in parallel,
• 2:32:11
  Speaker 1: and that's kind of why I helped found the Soul
• 2:32:15
  Speaker 1: Foundation with Gary Nolan and Dr. Peter Scafish, who's an
• 2:32:17
  Speaker 1: anthropologist as well, is we wanted to figure out the
• 2:32:22
  Speaker 1: STEM outreach. We wanted to figure out the public policy,
• 2:32:25
  Speaker 1: national policy to advise the U.S. and its allies on
• 2:32:28
  Speaker 1: this issue. And we're happy. Like I said, I'm not
• 2:32:32
  Speaker 1: here to slap the government in its entirety and admonish everybody.
• 2:32:36
  Speaker 1: I think there needs to be a truth and reconciliation process.
• 2:32:38
  Speaker 1: But I think our foundation, we want to be like, OK, well,
• 2:32:41
  Speaker 1: bring us in as a think tank if you know,
• 2:32:45
  Speaker 1: based on my experience and experience of my colleagues, like
• 2:32:47
  Speaker 1: you have an issue with X, well, let's figure out
• 2:32:49
  Speaker 1: how to roll this out and how to, you know,
• 2:32:53
  Speaker 1: incentivize the national science foundation to look in this, make
• 2:32:56
  Speaker 1: this like, you know, it's dual use, right? You might, um, uh, develop, uh,
• 2:33:02
  Speaker 1: a unique, uh, scientific, uh, process that actually works well
• 2:33:07
  Speaker 1: with nanobiology or something like that, but it also has
• 2:33:09
  Speaker 1: dual use with UAP. So there's parallel tracks. I mean,
• 2:33:13
  Speaker 1: there's public discovery. There's like the Galileo Project with Avi Loeb, right,
• 2:33:17
  Speaker 1: that they're trying to, on their own, collect techno signatures,
• 2:33:22
  Speaker 1: which is, I applaud that. I mean, obviously the government
• 2:33:25
  Speaker 1: knows a lot about that, but we don't want to
• 2:33:27
  Speaker 1: obviously rely on the U.S. government to do all the
• 2:33:30
  Speaker 1: work for us and also to be honest. So I
• 2:33:33
  Speaker 1: think having a parallel track and, you know, Galileo Project,
• 2:33:37
  Speaker 1: Soul Foundation, Ryan Graves has his own foundation as well
• 2:33:41
  Speaker 1: for pilots and people who've seen unique things to provide
• 2:33:45
  Speaker 1: that data to people. So I think you got to
• 2:33:47
  Speaker 1: have those dual tracks. And, you know, hopefully, we can
• 2:33:50
  Speaker 1: create a tsunami event where the US government, its allies,
• 2:33:53
  Speaker 1: and maybe our adversaries. But really, if the US government
• 2:33:57
  Speaker 1: doesn't get their house in order here, I mean, you
• 2:34:01
  Speaker 1: could have uncontrolled disclosure events, such that either maybe the
• 2:34:05
  Speaker 1: non human intelligence is like, yeah, let's do it. Or,
• 2:34:09
  Speaker 1: What if one of our adversaries decides to disclose and
• 2:34:12
  Speaker 1: they become the messiah figure on this and we lose
• 2:34:16
  Speaker 1: sovereignty or national supremacy in that regard from an open
• 2:34:21
  Speaker 1: and honest civil society perspective? But I think the governments
• 2:34:25
  Speaker 1: were getting close, I think. We're certainly closer than we've
• 2:34:29
  Speaker 1: ever been before.
• 2:34:30
  Speaker 2: Just the fact that they brought you in to have
• 2:34:32
  Speaker 2: these conversations.
• 2:34:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I'm still advising the U.S. government on this.
• 2:34:39
  Speaker 1: And I'm trying to carefully message this, put all the
• 2:34:43
  Speaker 1: broad things on the table. And I'm not trying to
• 2:34:46
  Speaker 1: be coy. I'm not trying to conceal anything. But it's
• 2:34:49
  Speaker 1: like there's real national security and collateral damage with just
• 2:34:53
  Speaker 1: releasing this willy-nilly. And I'm just trying to get the
• 2:34:56
  Speaker 1: government to get a plan together here. and just be
• 2:34:59
  Speaker 1: open and honest with the people of the world, really.
• 2:35:02
  Speaker 2: And there's still the bottleneck with these military contractors that
• 2:35:06
  Speaker 2: allegedly have access to these things.
• 2:35:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and to those guys, and I know some of them,
• 2:35:12
  Speaker 1: and the individuals that hold the keys... like this is
• 2:35:16
  Speaker 1: a boon. Like this is, don't look at it like
• 2:35:18
  Speaker 1: you're going to lose money. This is a recruiting opportunity. Yes,
• 2:35:23
  Speaker 1: you're going to have to let other people in the
• 2:35:25
  Speaker 1: cookie jar. That's how a fair and free society works.
• 2:35:28
  Speaker 1: And they should be able to compete for work. And
• 2:35:30
  Speaker 1: because that was one of the main, I talked to
• 2:35:32
  Speaker 1: some individuals that were in an informal session for a
• 2:35:35
  Speaker 1: previous administration on should we disclose or not for a
• 2:35:37
  Speaker 1: certain former president. And really insightful what they told me.
• 2:35:42
  Speaker 1: And one of the biggest issues impasses to disclosure wasn't
• 2:35:46
  Speaker 1: the ontological shock from a socioeconomic or theological perspective. It was, well,
• 2:35:51
  Speaker 1: there's some white collar crime. We violated the federal acquisition regulations.
• 2:35:55
  Speaker 1: We sole sourced this work to some big companies for decades.
• 2:35:59
  Speaker 1: Contractors are going to litigate this to the Supreme Court
• 2:36:02
  Speaker 1: saying they lost billions of projected income because they didn't
• 2:36:06
  Speaker 1: get the bid on the work. And it's going to
• 2:36:08
  Speaker 1: be this like liability disaster for the U S government.
• 2:36:13
  Speaker 1: And the problem with that is, is like, I understand that,
• 2:36:15
  Speaker 1: but like, that's why you need to have a truth
• 2:36:17
  Speaker 1: and reconciliation process. It's almost like, uh, the truth and
• 2:36:20
  Speaker 1: reconciliation commission and post-apartheid South Africa, where people who committed
• 2:36:25
  Speaker 1: like murder came in and was like, this is what happened.
• 2:36:29
  Speaker 1: Here you go. And you know, they don't get convicted
• 2:36:31
  Speaker 1: of those crimes. And I'm not saying, I mean, people
• 2:36:33
  Speaker 1: who've committed murder as it relates to this subject, okay,
• 2:36:35
  Speaker 1: we should probably hold them accountable, but For some of
• 2:36:38
  Speaker 1: this stuff, there needs to be a process where we
• 2:36:41
  Speaker 1: kind of mitigate some of those unfortunate legal issues. But
• 2:36:45
  Speaker 1: that was one of the main issues a certain group
• 2:36:49
  Speaker 1: for a reasonably recent administration came up with and advised
• 2:36:54
  Speaker 1: that president, hey, look, there's going to be a lot
• 2:36:56
  Speaker 1: of Supreme Court stuff. Let's not be that guy. So
• 2:37:00
  Speaker 1: it's like that's the barrier? That's the reason? Come on. Well,
• 2:37:05
  Speaker 1: it's ridiculous.
• 2:37:06
  Speaker 2: It makes sense, though, that they would think that way,
• 2:37:08
  Speaker 2: because I do believe that lawsuits would emerge from something
• 2:37:11
  Speaker 2: like that.
• 2:37:12
  Speaker 1: Oh, certainly. And it's and also it's like the government
• 2:37:15
  Speaker 1: admitting that we can't protect its citizenry. You know, you know,
• 2:37:19
  Speaker 1: these non-human intelligence, you know, want to do something to you. Sorry,
• 2:37:23
  Speaker 1: we don't have any countermeasures to that. You know, it's
• 2:37:24
  Speaker 1: like this, you know, there's a social contract between the
• 2:37:27
  Speaker 1: citizens and the government. We can protect you. et cetera.
• 2:37:30
  Speaker 1: And like, in this case, it's like, it's an enigma.
• 2:37:33
  Speaker 1: But I think this is almost like, you remember like
• 2:37:35
  Speaker 1: after 9-11, I was in high school when 9-11 happened and,
• 2:37:38
  Speaker 1: you know, people were afraid of dirty bombs, terrorists. We
• 2:37:42
  Speaker 1: didn't know what was going to happen next. We lived
• 2:37:44
  Speaker 1: in fear, but like, you know, we banded together and,
• 2:37:47
  Speaker 1: the presence of fear and apprehension and unknowing what the
• 2:37:51
  Speaker 1: world was going to be. And we made, made it
• 2:37:54
  Speaker 1: through it. Now, I mean, that's a coarse analogy to this,
• 2:37:56
  Speaker 1: but I, uh, people just have to think in that mindset,
• 2:38:00
  Speaker 1: like it's going to be a little scary. It's not
• 2:38:02
  Speaker 1: going to be like Kumbaya. Let's, let's, uh, move the
• 2:38:04
  Speaker 1: shit to the Masonian and check it out. It's going
• 2:38:06
  Speaker 1: to be, there's some, you know, awkward and, uh, things
• 2:38:11
  Speaker 1: we're going to have to address sociologically, I guess.
• 2:38:13
  Speaker 2: Are you optimistic about how all this lays out?
• 2:38:18
  Speaker 1: I am. I mean, it's kind of like when I
• 2:38:21
  Speaker 1: was testifying in the public hearing, oddly bipartisan in a
• 2:38:24
  Speaker 1: good way. I had AOC and Matt Gaetz agreeing on something,
• 2:38:28
  Speaker 1: and they were smiling at each other. That's crazy.
• 2:38:30
  Speaker 2: This is crazy.
• 2:38:31
  Speaker 1: I'm like, look, there's AOC, there's Matt Gaetz, there's Tim Burchette.
• 2:38:35
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's people, Garcia, people that wouldn't see eye
• 2:38:38
  Speaker 1: to eye on most subjects.
• 2:38:39
  Speaker 2: Because it's such a human issue.
• 2:38:40
  Speaker 1: Because they want to know the truth, too. And I
• 2:38:42
  Speaker 1: don't think the leaders in Congress... want to be told
• 2:38:47
  Speaker 1: that they're second-class citizens. I mean, a lot of presidents
• 2:38:49
  Speaker 1: weren't briefed to everything. Some presidents knew a lot more
• 2:38:52
  Speaker 1: than others, and I have a pretty good beat on that.
• 2:38:55
  Speaker 1: And it's like, wait, the chief executive that also forms
• 2:38:59
  Speaker 1: foreign policy, you don't tell them about ostensibly a foreign element.
• 2:39:03
  Speaker 1: So how do they, as chief of state, how do
• 2:39:06
  Speaker 1: they form foreign policy when you don't fully brief them
• 2:39:09
  Speaker 1: on a foreign element? It's like classifying the existence of Russia. Right, right.
• 2:39:14
  Speaker 1: So you're actually... you know, non-constitutional by not allowing our
• 2:39:19
  Speaker 1: commander in chief all information, uh, sometimes, you know, and
• 2:39:24
  Speaker 1: I don't know what Harry Reid talked to Joe Biden.
• 2:39:27
  Speaker 1: I mean, it was certainly the substance that I mentioned here. Uh,
• 2:39:31
  Speaker 1: and I, I hope that Joe Biden has been briefed
• 2:39:33
  Speaker 1: on the program, so to speak. Uh, at least I'm,
• 2:39:37
  Speaker 1: I'm giving him an oral unclassified briefing right now, I guess,
• 2:39:39
  Speaker 1: if he hasn't been in, you know, I'm happy to,
• 2:39:42
  Speaker 1: You know, talk to Jake Sullivan or Avril Haines, and
• 2:39:45
  Speaker 1: Avril Haines, if she's not briefed, like, she's supposed to
• 2:39:49
  Speaker 1: be briefed to all intelligence in the country. It's 50 U.S. Code,
• 2:39:52
  Speaker 1: Section 3024. Director of National Intelligence has allowed everything from
• 2:39:58
  Speaker 1: all federal agencies that's intel-related. Well, ma'am, if you don't
• 2:40:02
  Speaker 1: know what I'm talking about, we have a problem because
• 2:40:05
  Speaker 1: you're not being briefed by CIA director and some other agencies. Yeah.
• 2:40:12
  Speaker 2: Well, listen, David, I really appreciate what you've done. I
• 2:40:16
  Speaker 2: think you've done a great service to humanity just by
• 2:40:22
  Speaker 2: taking a stand and communicating these ideas and letting people
• 2:40:26
  Speaker 2: know how much of this is real. And, you know,
• 2:40:30
  Speaker 2: you've opened up a world of discourse that probably would
• 2:40:34
  Speaker 2: not have existed if you hadn't done that.
• 2:40:36
  Speaker 1: Thanks. Yeah. I mean, this was not easy.
• 2:40:38
  Speaker 2: I'm sure. I appreciate it. Thank you very much for
• 2:40:40
  Speaker 2: being here.
• 2:40:41
  Speaker 1: Thanks.
• 2:40:41
  Speaker 2: And good luck in the future.
• 2:40:44
  Speaker 1: Thank you.
• 2:40:44
  Speaker 2: Thank you. All right. Bye, everybody. Bye.