#14 | Jason Jorjani: Slow Drip Disclosure, Zero Point Energy, and Breakaway Civilizations

<v Speaker 1>Hello everybody, and welcome to another episode of Heart Shrews podcast. Today,
<v Speaker 1>I have a very special guest. His name is Jason Georgeohnny.
<v Speaker 1>He is an author and philosopher. Jason, thank you very
<v Speaker 1>much for being my guest on Heart Truth. How are
<v Speaker 1>you doing today?
<v Speaker 2>It's an absolute pleasure to be with you, Ashton, and
<v Speaker 2>I'm glad we finally got to meet. I've been following
<v Speaker 2>your work for a few what is it a couple
<v Speaker 2>of years now, Yeah, And let me just start off
<v Speaker 2>by thanking you for the incredible research that you've done.
<v Speaker 2>I'm sold on your case for the plane, so we'll see.
<v Speaker 2>I mean it looks like a pretty sound hypothesis to me.
<v Speaker 1>Well, this is gonna be a great crossover event that
<v Speaker 1>we got going on. So right off the bat, I
<v Speaker 1>want to know a little bit about your origin story
<v Speaker 1>and how you got involved in this. I first saw
<v Speaker 1>you on Danny Jones. I started looking at your research
<v Speaker 1>and your work. You started talking about zero point energy
<v Speaker 1>and that I always ring some bells for me because
<v Speaker 1>I consider myself influencer zero point energy. So how did
<v Speaker 1>you get involved in looking into all of this advanced technology,
<v Speaker 1>breakaway civilization stuff and you know the crossover the UFO community.
<v Speaker 2>Well, I came out with a book in twenty sixteen
<v Speaker 2>called Prometheus and Atlas, and it was an expansion of
<v Speaker 2>my doctoral dissertation about twice the length of the dissertation version,
<v Speaker 2>and it won the twenty sixteen Book Award of the
<v Speaker 2>Parapsychological Association. And I also joined the Society for Scientific
<v Speaker 2>Exploration in the same year as Prometheus anatlyss won the
<v Speaker 2>PA Book Award. So I began to make a number
<v Speaker 2>of connections in the parapsychology community, and interestingly enough, I
<v Speaker 2>found that, especially through the SSEC, that community overlapped a
<v Speaker 2>lot with the UFO community, which dovetails with zero point
<v Speaker 2>Energy research and so forth. I mean, there are people
<v Speaker 2>like you know how put off that have cross listed
<v Speaker 2>membership between these two organizations. By the way, let me
<v Speaker 2>ask you for a small ashton. I hate looking at
<v Speaker 2>myself on recordings, which is why I never do you know,
<v Speaker 2>individual podcasts, so so stay with me as much as
<v Speaker 2>you can, so I'm not left here, you know, looking
<v Speaker 2>at my own lug anyway. So you know, I began
<v Speaker 2>to make a lot of connections in that community, and
<v Speaker 2>at that time I was also doing shows with Jeffrey
<v Speaker 2>Misch Love on New Thinking Aloud, and he had a
<v Speaker 2>lot of other guests on that show that were part
<v Speaker 2>of the same community. So I started to meet people
<v Speaker 2>like Jacques Vallet, I mean, Jacques Valais reached out to me,
<v Speaker 2>I think within a few months of Prometheus and Atlas
<v Speaker 2>having come out. He read the book, invited me to
<v Speaker 2>his home. I had a very nice dinner with him
<v Speaker 2>and his then wife, second wife, and so so, you know,
<v Speaker 2>I started to make a lot of connections people in
<v Speaker 2>the remote viewing community, people in military and eleigence, and
<v Speaker 2>wound up at the nexus of what eventually would become
<v Speaker 2>the so called UFO disclosure movement. Except that at just
<v Speaker 2>the moment when you know, I was, you know, basically
<v Speaker 2>becoming the nexus of all these connections, and you know,
<v Speaker 2>a promising young theorist in this domain, I was defamed
<v Speaker 2>in in what I eventually found out was an intelligence operation.
<v Speaker 2>And I think the reason for that, which will come
<v Speaker 2>clearer as we you know, on packs discussion over time,
<v Speaker 2>is that the kinds of arguments that I advanced in
<v Speaker 2>my book on Close Encounters are are things that would
<v Speaker 2>have been severely disruptive to the type of narrative that
<v Speaker 2>the gatekeepers of UFO disclosure are forwarding today.
<v Speaker 1>So what do you think That's a great question, great segue,
<v Speaker 1>which is what what do you think the narrative they're
<v Speaker 1>trying to spread is, and what narrative do you think
<v Speaker 1>they're afraid of? And who do you think these people are, like,
<v Speaker 1>who are they connected to? What are your opinions of
<v Speaker 1>the UFO community as well?
<v Speaker 2>Look, it's actually very complex. So you know, one of
<v Speaker 2>the fallacies that a lot of people who engage in,
<v Speaker 2>you know, conspiracy theorizing fall prey to is the overly
<v Speaker 2>simplistic view that the deep state is monolithic. It's really not,
<v Speaker 2>maybe unfortunately not, because you know, there's a lot of
<v Speaker 2>really dangerous chaos at play behind the scenes. You I
<v Speaker 2>think had been interested in, you know, inquiring into who's
<v Speaker 2>behind this slow drip model for disclosure, And so let
<v Speaker 2>me start there. I think maybe you know best to
<v Speaker 2>flesh things out from there. I can tell you based
<v Speaker 2>on two individuals who worked with the former Director of
<v Speaker 2>National Intel. Well yeah, at this point, former Director of
<v Speaker 2>National Intelligence, Avril Haines, I can tell you, based on
<v Speaker 2>two different individuals one of whom is a CIA officer
<v Speaker 2>who worked with her as a colleague in UFO working
<v Speaker 2>group meetings UAP working group meetings roundtables basically, and from
<v Speaker 2>another individual who worked directly under her as a private
<v Speaker 2>contractor and who also had very high level contracts with
<v Speaker 2>the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, which is the same organization
<v Speaker 2>that David Grush is coming from out of RIGHTA. So
<v Speaker 2>I have two independent points of confirmation about you know
<v Speaker 2>what the slow Drip disclosure agenda was, and it was
<v Speaker 2>an agenda being run from out of April Haines's office,
<v Speaker 2>apparently with her as the director of it. And the
<v Speaker 2>agenda was this, Okay. First of all, their priority was
<v Speaker 2>to make it as if the United to make it
<v Speaker 2>appear as if the United States government was not investigating
<v Speaker 2>UAPs in any serious way prior to, like, I don't know,
<v Speaker 2>fifteen twenty years ago, prior to the Nimtz incident and
<v Speaker 2>these videos of the TikTok and so forth that they released. Okay,
<v Speaker 2>So they wanted a clean slate approach where they're not
<v Speaker 2>going to be held legally accountable for anything that they
<v Speaker 2>had done in the preceding. I don't know what seventy
<v Speaker 2>years or more. Actually we'll get into the more because
<v Speaker 2>this goes actually back to the airships of eighteen ninety
<v Speaker 2>seven and so forth. But so that that was their
<v Speaker 2>number one priority make it look like everything started with
<v Speaker 2>the nimits and these types of incidents. And interestingly enough
<v Speaker 2>to first this was like a four or five phase
<v Speaker 2>plan that they have that was supposed to be unfolded
<v Speaker 2>over the course of something like fifteen to twenty years.
<v Speaker 2>And the first phase I was told was that they
<v Speaker 2>were going to use the James Web telescope, this new
<v Speaker 2>telescope that they have out there, to basically release to
<v Speaker 2>the public imagery of apparent artificial structures on distant bodies
<v Speaker 2>in our Solar system, so not necessarily planets, but maybe
<v Speaker 2>on the moons of Jupiter and the moons of Saturn.
<v Speaker 2>There were going to be structures that were unambiguously artificial,
<v Speaker 2>and that those were the first things that will be
<v Speaker 2>released to the public, because the idea was, Okay, well,
<v Speaker 2>these are far away, they don't present any imminent rep
<v Speaker 2>people are not going to panic. Then the next phase
<v Speaker 2>was that they'd identify structures on the moon, on our
<v Speaker 2>own moon, and on Mars that are artificial. And the
<v Speaker 2>third phase was that they were going to try to
<v Speaker 2>connect these structures on the Moon and Mars to anomalous
<v Speaker 2>archaeological sites on Earth, wow, like for example, the Osyrian
<v Speaker 2>at Abydos in Egypt or Tiajuanaku in Bolivia, and they
<v Speaker 2>were going to note structural similarities between some of these sites, like,
<v Speaker 2>for example, it appears that the site on the Dark
<v Speaker 2>Side of the Moon involves a construction technique with something
<v Speaker 2>like a poured stone, like a kind of as if
<v Speaker 2>you could, you know, subject stone to some kind of
<v Speaker 2>chemical compound that would liquefy it and turn it into
<v Speaker 2>something like concrete, where then you could shape the stone,
<v Speaker 2>or maybe some kind of a sonic resonance could be
<v Speaker 2>used to molecularly destabilize the stone and then shape it.
<v Speaker 2>And that they were going to note that the same
<v Speaker 2>kind of construction techniques had been employed on these sites
<v Speaker 2>on Earth, so maybe there's a common builder. Then the
<v Speaker 2>fourth phase and so now we're like ten years out
<v Speaker 2>in their plan of slow disclosure. The fourth phase was
<v Speaker 2>going to be anthropologie that they were going to excavate
<v Speaker 2>remains of humanoids who they believed were responsible for these
<v Speaker 2>engineering anomalies on the moon Mars, other moons in the
<v Speaker 2>Solar System, and also for anomalous sites on Earth, and
<v Speaker 2>that these were going to be these very tall people,
<v Speaker 2>you know, who were referred to as I don't know,
<v Speaker 2>nephilem and giants and so forth, and various mythological traditions,
<v Speaker 2>and then they were going to do DNA testing on
<v Speaker 2>these people.
<v Speaker 1>And this was all.
<v Speaker 2>Step by step, slowly going to lead to the disclosure
<v Speaker 2>of these people themselves as the pilots of UAPs.
<v Speaker 1>Interesting, that was the original.
<v Speaker 2>Now here's the interesting thing, Ashton, is when David Gresh
<v Speaker 2>came out, and this speaks to the you know, deep
<v Speaker 2>state not being a monolith. When David Gresh came out
<v Speaker 2>with his leaks, quote unquote, these people were incensed. They
<v Speaker 2>had no idea what was going to happen. They did
<v Speaker 2>not authorize him to be saying the things he was saying,
<v Speaker 2>and mainly they were so outraged because he was directly
<v Speaker 2>implicating the United States government cover up on all kinds
<v Speaker 2>of levels, from the you know, cover up of the
<v Speaker 2>technology and reverse engineering efforts to cover up of biological
<v Speaker 2>entities and so on and so forth, and so he
<v Speaker 2>basically threw a monkey wrench in their phased disclosure plan.
<v Speaker 2>And what that immediately says to me is there we're
<v Speaker 2>dealing with at least two factions, because you know, Grush
<v Speaker 2>is not a Whistleblowerrush was an hunt man for people
<v Speaker 2>within defense intelligence who have their own agenda of what
<v Speaker 2>should be released when. So here we've got at least
<v Speaker 2>two different competing agendas, and then we can get into
<v Speaker 2>why I think there's a third and maybe even a
<v Speaker 2>fourth agenda as well.
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, let me address some of those claims. Is
<v Speaker 1>I love what you're saying. The first of all, Avril
<v Speaker 1>heinz Abralhyines obviously said her last name. People should probably
<v Speaker 1>be saying her name more often. Technically current Director of
<v Speaker 1>National Intelligence, Director of National Intelligence, really big role, Really
<v Speaker 1>glad Tulsea Gabbard's gonna get in there somebody who has
<v Speaker 1>probably no insight is what's really going on behind the scenes.
<v Speaker 1>And I'm very curious to see how her public persona
<v Speaker 1>changes after she gets in and gets exposed to some
<v Speaker 1>of this, because, like what you said about the factions,
<v Speaker 1>I totally agree. The joke that I've been making on
<v Speaker 1>podcasts is that I think there's at least two factions.
<v Speaker 1>One that doesn't want any of this stuff to come
<v Speaker 1>out because they think that maybe it's too dangerous or
<v Speaker 1>they want the power or what have you. And then
<v Speaker 1>there's another one that wants like a little bit of
<v Speaker 1>it to come out, but they don't want all of
<v Speaker 1>Nobody wants like all of it to come out a
<v Speaker 1>catastrophic disclosure, at least how I've looked at it. So
<v Speaker 1>what you said about David Grush makes a lot of
<v Speaker 1>sense as well, is that there's another faction going, hey,
<v Speaker 1>you you need to go out there and go start
<v Speaker 1>telling people that, Like we've got these videos of UFOs
<v Speaker 1>and it's pretty clearly exotic technology. It's not airplane flying
<v Speaker 1>around with conventional means and things like that and talking
<v Speaker 1>about alien bodies and what have you. So what then
<v Speaker 1>do you think about, like, you know, who's on what side? Right?
<v Speaker 1>Like when I'm looking at the UFO community, I personally
<v Speaker 1>feel like a lot of the people I see at
<v Speaker 1>the UFO community, the front runners, the ones that are
<v Speaker 1>on mainstream shows like the Luella Zondo's, the Jeremy Corbels,
<v Speaker 1>the George Knaps that are out there their whole crew.
<v Speaker 1>They all talk to each other. It is very obvious
<v Speaker 1>that they do, and they communicate with one another. The
<v Speaker 1>impression I get from them is that they have decided
<v Speaker 1>they're going to protect national security by not revealing the
<v Speaker 1>technology or any technology that would put the United States
<v Speaker 1>at a disadvantage relative to other countries that like, you know,
<v Speaker 1>maybe we're reverse engineering this UFO technology. We've got this
<v Speaker 1>either free energy or super advanced super weapons, and they're
<v Speaker 1>going that, we're not gonna talk about that, so instead
<v Speaker 1>we're just gonna talk about the alien aspect of it.
<v Speaker 1>On the other side, I see people like doctor Stephen Greer,
<v Speaker 1>who talks a ton about the technology. He still talks
<v Speaker 1>about the alien side of it as well, but really
<v Speaker 1>talks to the Black Project engineers and is like, Hey,
<v Speaker 1>these guys are telling you we've got this exotic technology
<v Speaker 1>out there and we've figured it out. How do you
<v Speaker 1>see all these people and which ones do you trust
<v Speaker 1>or not trust? Oh?
<v Speaker 2>Man, I don't trust any of them. Good, I don't
<v Speaker 2>trust any of them. Okay. Look, going back to Grush,
<v Speaker 2>I think that the higher ranking individuals who authorized Grush
<v Speaker 2>to act as a frontman for the highly selective disclosure
<v Speaker 2>of certain information are defectors from the organization, which at
<v Speaker 2>one point may have been called MJ twelve, if it
<v Speaker 2>was actually called that, and the MJ twelve documents that
<v Speaker 2>were leaked aren't forgeries if the organization certainly isn't called
<v Speaker 2>that anymore. And in any case, that organization was privatized,
<v Speaker 2>it was taken from you know, a government agencies into
<v Speaker 2>private aerospace by the nineteen seventies at the latest. But
<v Speaker 2>I think that the gentlemen who authorized Grush to come
<v Speaker 2>forward are defectors from that organization. Wow, so you have
<v Speaker 2>this kind of MJ twelve turned you know, private corporate
<v Speaker 2>aerospace cabal, and there are what you might call old
<v Speaker 2>guard individuals in that organization who don't want any of
<v Speaker 2>this release. They want to keep it secret for as
<v Speaker 2>long as they possibly can. They want a monopoly on
<v Speaker 2>the technology. And there's an argument to be made that
<v Speaker 2>if they haven't already branched often become a breakaway civilization,
<v Speaker 2>they're in the process of doing so. And then you
<v Speaker 2>have defectors from that organization, people who and it's been
<v Speaker 2>explained to me that perhaps part of this is a
<v Speaker 2>generational shift, and that it's some of the younger people
<v Speaker 2>who are behind Grush, who are sort of breaking with
<v Speaker 2>the old Guard. But in any case, those are two
<v Speaker 2>factions of you know what at one point was called
<v Speaker 2>MJ twelve. I think that there's a fourth group. So
<v Speaker 2>we've talked about, you know, the Abril Haynes slow drip people,
<v Speaker 2>then Grush, who represents the defectors in MJ twelve, then
<v Speaker 2>the old Guard of MJ twelve. I think there's also
<v Speaker 2>a fourth group, which we can you know, unpack in
<v Speaker 2>more details. As you know, we move along with the conversation.
<v Speaker 2>But that fourth group are individuals who are informally referred
<v Speaker 2>to as the Collins Elite. And these are evangelical or
<v Speaker 2>traditionalist Christians. They may be Evangelical Protestants, they may be
<v Speaker 2>traditionalist Catholics who are in the CIA, Air Force, Naval Intelligence,
<v Speaker 2>other branches of defense intelligence, and in their capacity as
<v Speaker 2>private individuals beginning in the nineteen at least since the
<v Speaker 2>nineteen forties, in the era of Jack Parsons, quite possibly
<v Speaker 2>long before then, and I've made the case that they
<v Speaker 2>may go back to the airship mystery of the eighteen
<v Speaker 2>ninety six eighteen ninety seven. This private group of devout
<v Speaker 2>Christians has come to the conclusion that somehow the UFO
<v Speaker 2>phenomenon is inextricable from the occult and that probably it
<v Speaker 2>represents a demonic force that needs to be held at bay.
<v Speaker 2>And so they see the secrecy as basically a stop
<v Speaker 2>gap keeping the apocalypse at day. And so we also
<v Speaker 2>have these nut cases, you know, in the government various time.
<v Speaker 1>I mean, you know, I would have said it's naughty
<v Speaker 1>a couple of years ago. But the more I think
<v Speaker 1>about the implications of the technology and I want to
<v Speaker 1>talk about that, like the latter half of this podcast,
<v Speaker 1>more I think, Man, it's not that crazy to think
<v Speaker 1>this technology could lead to the apocalypse.
<v Speaker 2>No, a lot of it's true. The way that Peter Thiel,
<v Speaker 2>you know, framed it is actually thought provoking, and we
<v Speaker 2>can come back to that.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you know, let's talk about that right now, just
<v Speaker 1>because we brought it up because I wanted to ask you.
<v Speaker 1>This was one of the things I was watching another
<v Speaker 1>podcast that you did. It kind of blew me away,
<v Speaker 1>where you were talking about the technology and you explained, like,
<v Speaker 1>what if this technology is so powerful that you either
<v Speaker 1>have to be like fully altruistic collectivist society or you
<v Speaker 1>have to be like a fascist or like what a
<v Speaker 1>collectivist fascist, a totalitarian society or a perfectly altruistic freedom
<v Speaker 1>society that you would never harm another thing. And you go, well,
<v Speaker 1>humans are never going to be perfectly altruistic. There's no
<v Speaker 1>chance on that. And I heard Peter thal say this,
<v Speaker 1>I think you said it before him when he went
<v Speaker 1>on Ji Rogan, He goes, what if they have to
<v Speaker 1>be all angels are all demons? That thought terrifies me
<v Speaker 1>because it's so different than how we've structured our society currently,
<v Speaker 1>and I think most freedom of love in Americas, I'm
<v Speaker 1>a libertarian, look at that idea and go, this is outlandish.
<v Speaker 1>And it presents a pretty complicated dilemma, which is would
<v Speaker 1>we want this technology if it meant that we have
<v Speaker 1>to do away with individual freedoms to prevent us from
<v Speaker 1>destroying ourselves. So, first of all, did you talk to
<v Speaker 1>Peter Thiel or are you in contact with him? How
<v Speaker 1>do you guys both have the same view? And can
<v Speaker 1>you expand upon your thoughts around that.
<v Speaker 2>I've never spoken to him, I know people who know him.
<v Speaker 2>I've known more than one individual who's been in touch
<v Speaker 2>with him. How do we share the same view. Well, unfortunately,
<v Speaker 2>it's a view that I think any thoughtful person who
<v Speaker 2>spent a long time contemplating the various dimensions of this
<v Speaker 2>phenomenon and the implications of reverse engineering its technology would
<v Speaker 2>come to this conclusion. So, look, there are at least
<v Speaker 2>two serious issues here. One is the security implications of
<v Speaker 2>the propulsion system, right, because and even there there are two,
<v Speaker 2>there are at least two separate sub issues. So one
<v Speaker 2>of them is this that I mean, Look, if you
<v Speaker 2>look throughout the course of history at various forms of combustion,
<v Speaker 2>from gunpowder to you know, gas driven combustion, to conventional explosives,
<v Speaker 2>to then nuclear weapons as an application of nuclear energy,
<v Speaker 2>of nuclear fusion and fission, it is the case that
<v Speaker 2>every time we've scaled up our magnitude of energy usage
<v Speaker 2>and harnessing of a new magnitude of energy, we've also
<v Speaker 2>developed weaponry that's commensurately higher in order of magnitude of
<v Speaker 2>its destructive potential. Right, I mean, this is a very
<v Speaker 2>clear trend in human history. So the question is, you know,
<v Speaker 2>is there a kind of weapon that would be an
<v Speaker 2>order of magnitude more destructive than nuclear weapons? And that
<v Speaker 2>would be a dual use, you know, military application of
<v Speaker 2>what you might call a free energy system, right, and
<v Speaker 2>clearly the answer is yes. I mean, if you look
<v Speaker 2>at what it is that's propelling these UFOs or UAPs,
<v Speaker 2>it is a kind of energy and propulsion platform that
<v Speaker 2>could be weaponized into something that would make a nuclear
<v Speaker 2>bomb look like a firecracker. How put Off has gone
<v Speaker 2>on record saying and he's quoted to this effect and
<v Speaker 2>Nick Cook's excellent book The Hunter for Zero Point, so
<v Speaker 2>put Off said that he thought a coffee cups worth
<v Speaker 2>of the exactly a coffee cups worth of the you
<v Speaker 2>could say, propellant for this craft would potentially vaporize the
<v Speaker 2>oceans of Earth if its energy were to be released
<v Speaker 2>in an uncontrollable cascade. So as you think of a
<v Speaker 2>nuclear reactor, right, I mean, a nuclear reactor releases nuclear
<v Speaker 2>energy in a highly controlled manner. A nuclear bomb is
<v Speaker 2>a sort of runaway, you know, a cascade of this energy,
<v Speaker 2>and you could do the same thing with zero point
<v Speaker 2>energy to produce a bomb that would be many orders
<v Speaker 2>of magnitude more destructive than a nuclear weapon. So that's
<v Speaker 2>one problem from a security standpoint. There's an even bigger
<v Speaker 2>problem from a security standpoint, which is that as soon
<v Speaker 2>as they started to research these things, and you know,
<v Speaker 2>there's good evidence in our that in our country that
<v Speaker 2>began in the nineteen fifties. There are all these mainstream
<v Speaker 2>newspaper reports in the New York Herald Tribune and other publications,
<v Speaker 2>I think some arrow some aeronautical journals at the time
<v Speaker 2>as well, quoting CEOs of Martin Aircraft in particular Lear
<v Speaker 2>Con there and other companies, saying that they were working
<v Speaker 2>on anti gravity propulsion and that within about the same
<v Speaker 2>time span as the Manhattan Project they would be able
<v Speaker 2>to roll these craft off the assembly line. This was
<v Speaker 2>in the mid nineteen fifties in mainstream publications, and the
<v Speaker 2>whole thing goes dark round about nineteen fifty seven or so.
<v Speaker 2>We never hear about this again. And I think it's
<v Speaker 2>because what these gentlemen discovered, or what was explained to
<v Speaker 2>them by people who already had a grasp on this technology,
<v Speaker 2>is that it's not simply a propulse system that can
<v Speaker 2>get you from New York to Australia in you know,
<v Speaker 2>whatever an hour or whatever. It warps space time. And
<v Speaker 2>you know, the first people to observe this were actually
<v Speaker 2>the the the scientists working in an SS think tank
<v Speaker 2>based in Prague in nineteen forty three forty four, toward
<v Speaker 2>the end of the war, where they constructed this that
<v Speaker 2>dozen foot tall device, accorn shaped or bell shaped device
<v Speaker 2>that had magnetically counter rotating cylinders.
<v Speaker 1>Is that or is that something different to the bell?
<v Speaker 2>It was a device that was that contained inside a ceramic,
<v Speaker 2>non reactive material. It contained counter rotating cylinders of a
<v Speaker 2>mercury thorium isotope that were being magnetically rotated with high
<v Speaker 2>energy with constant alternating current pumped into it and intermittent
<v Speaker 2>shocks of direct current. And what they found was, first
<v Speaker 2>of all, it created an anti gravitic effect. Okay, it
<v Speaker 2>had counterbarry this this electromagnetic system shocking this mercury thorium
<v Speaker 2>isotope led to anti gravity, so that they had to
<v Speaker 2>chain the bell down so that it wouldn't you know,
<v Speaker 2>you know, so they wouldn't lose billions, you know, billions
<v Speaker 2>of dollars of hardware. But the other thing that they
<v Speaker 2>realized was it warped space time around the bell, and
<v Speaker 2>it did that in ways that you know, I mean,
<v Speaker 2>basically made plants turn to mulch it disrupted organisms on
<v Speaker 2>a cellular molecular level because of the way in which
<v Speaker 2>it warped space time. And so this was known our
<v Speaker 2>ready and you know by the by the SS toward
<v Speaker 2>the end of the war, and then we appropriated all
<v Speaker 2>of that information as the Allied Powers basically seized these
<v Speaker 2>facilities in Europe in nineteen forty five, so that by
<v Speaker 2>the time Martin Aircraft, which became then Lockheed Martin, was
<v Speaker 2>working on the same thing in the mid nineteen fifties.
<v Speaker 2>I think it was explained to them that listen, jackasses,
<v Speaker 2>you think you're, you know, going to create something faster
<v Speaker 2>than an airplane, you know, for the convenience of public transport,
<v Speaker 2>you're actually creating a flying time machine. And you can't
<v Speaker 2>give a flying time machine to Tom Dick and Harriet
<v Speaker 2>who go around, you know, mucking about in the time
<v Speaker 2>continuum as they so please. You know. I mean, suppose
<v Speaker 2>somebody wants to go back in a personal tragedy in
<v Speaker 2>their family, the loss of a loved one and so forth,
<v Speaker 2>and imagine the ripple effects of that on a geopolitical
<v Speaker 2>scale potentially.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, two security issues.
<v Speaker 2>One is the you know, explosive potential, the weaponization in
<v Speaker 2>terms of explosive yield of you know, a zero point
<v Speaker 2>energy device. And the other one is the danger to
<v Speaker 2>the time continuum and the fact that you know you
<v Speaker 2>cannot have a democratization of this technology because you know
<v Speaker 2>it could basically be used to completely destabilize the time continuum.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and I want to talk about the time travel
<v Speaker 1>part a little later, but I guess what I would
<v Speaker 1>say for right now is knowing what you just said,
<v Speaker 1>are you still a fan of disclosure? Are you pro disclosure?
<v Speaker 1>Are you pro? This is too dangerous? We need to
<v Speaker 1>pack this up until we have safeguards in place to
<v Speaker 1>get it out safely.
<v Speaker 2>Here's my problem the people who have taken it upon
<v Speaker 2>themselves to be the gatekeepers of disclosure, particularly in what
<v Speaker 2>we might call the Anglo American establishment, you know, the
<v Speaker 2>five eyes system. Yep, they are lacking in vision, lacking
<v Speaker 2>in ethos. They have apparently engaged in all kinds of
<v Speaker 2>horrendously unethical behavior, you know, murdering perfectly decent people. And
<v Speaker 2>this is another reason why, Okay, you know, it will
<v Speaker 2>be very difficult to have any kind of authentic disclosure
<v Speaker 2>because there's a massive amount of crime that's been committed
<v Speaker 2>in the name of keeping this secret. Right, and so
<v Speaker 2>my problem is that if you look back at let's say,
<v Speaker 2>you know, my background is in philosophy, Right, if you
<v Speaker 2>look back at Plato's Republic and his conception of the guardians,
<v Speaker 2>the philosopher kings or philosopher rulers of the ideal state,
<v Speaker 2>the people who we've got protecting the secret in the
<v Speaker 2>Anglo American establishment are far from it. They're far from
<v Speaker 2>and they're already in power. Okay, we can see how
<v Speaker 2>they're running the world. And then on the other side,
<v Speaker 2>as an opposition to them, we've got what neo Confucianist China,
<v Speaker 2>and you know, an Orthodox system in Russia. And you know,
<v Speaker 2>so the issue is that the world is already being
<v Speaker 2>run by reprehensibly, irresponsible and unethical people, and so you know,
<v Speaker 2>I'm not in any position to replace them as someone
<v Speaker 2>who selects a new governing elite. I think that a
<v Speaker 2>good case could be made that we ought to challenge
<v Speaker 2>their authority by developing some kind of a rogue society
<v Speaker 2>that's devoted to liberty. You know, I share your libertarian sympathies,
<v Speaker 2>and I think that, you know, a good case could
<v Speaker 2>be made for a piratical, sort of libertarian appropriation of
<v Speaker 2>this technology and of this power source, albeit within the
<v Speaker 2>context of a philosophically substantive vision of a new type
<v Speaker 2>of society with social fabric that's capable of constructively handling
<v Speaker 2>this kind of technology. I mean, you would have to
<v Speaker 2>be very selective about the kinds of people in terms of,
<v Speaker 2>you know, their ethical constitution. Who would be part of
<v Speaker 2>that rogue society, kind of counter breakaway civilization organized around
<v Speaker 2>freedom and the individual and around maximizing creativity and creative potential.
<v Speaker 2>You would have to be very selective about that. So
<v Speaker 2>I think a good case can be made, and as
<v Speaker 2>I have made in you know, more than one of
<v Speaker 2>my books, for a sort of piratical revolt against the
<v Speaker 2>existing control system.
<v Speaker 1>Man, I love that, and I'm going to touch on
<v Speaker 1>that in a bit. I want to jump back to
<v Speaker 1>a second and just explain to some of the viewers
<v Speaker 1>when we're talking about MJA twelve, this idea of this
<v Speaker 1>Majestic twelve, this elite group of people that kind of
<v Speaker 1>decided what the fate of this UFO phenomenon technology was
<v Speaker 1>going to be. Demands Field Amendment in nineteen seventy one
<v Speaker 1>or nineteen seventy three, I believe is when the anti
<v Speaker 1>gravity technology got moved from the military to the defense
<v Speaker 1>contractors and they used it to protect from Foyer requests
<v Speaker 1>things like that. Richard Feyneman. Actually I looked up that
<v Speaker 1>quote about the coffee cup because I heard it so
<v Speaker 1>many times. I was like, where does this come from?
<v Speaker 1>Is this real? You know? It turns out it's from
<v Speaker 1>Richard Feynman and John Archibald Wheeler and Richard Fineman won
<v Speaker 1>the Nobel Prize for quantum electrodynamics, so kind of knows
<v Speaker 1>a thing or two about the quantum phenomenon. And yes,
<v Speaker 1>they said that there's enough energy in the size of
<v Speaker 1>that I think they said like cubic meter. But the
<v Speaker 1>idea is a very small area of empty space, so
<v Speaker 1>not of air or water, but of literally empty space
<v Speaker 1>to vaporize all the Earth's oceans, which opens the door
<v Speaker 1>to this idea of zero point energy. And it challenges
<v Speaker 1>the orthodox view that it's called the vacuum catastrophe, that
<v Speaker 1>they think that yes, maybe there's zero point energy, but
<v Speaker 1>it's not. It's this tiny little amount. And Richard Fineman
<v Speaker 1>is like, nah, it's like a huge ocean of energy.
<v Speaker 1>Also you mentioned in terms of the timeline like the
<v Speaker 1>forties and what also happened in nineteen forty three, Well,
<v Speaker 1>the mid of the story of the Philadelphia Experiment, where
<v Speaker 1>you have all the smartest minds were working on this
<v Speaker 1>project to cloak this battle cruiser, and the story goes
<v Speaker 1>it got teleported. And this speaks to what you mentioned
<v Speaker 1>in terms of this technology is not just you get
<v Speaker 1>pre energy or what have you, is like this comes
<v Speaker 1>with bending space time itself. And one of the implications
<v Speaker 1>when we look at the Philadelphia Experiment, supposely there are
<v Speaker 1>people like stuck in the walls because they didn't, you know,
<v Speaker 1>make the field around the craft correctly. Personally, I would
<v Speaker 1>not want to be in one of those crafts. And
<v Speaker 1>this is where when you mentioned the pilot scenario I
<v Speaker 1>wanted to get your opinion on this, is that I
<v Speaker 1>would imagine that, Yes, maybe in the forties, fifties, sixties, seventies, eighties,
<v Speaker 1>I don't know exactly up until when we were making
<v Speaker 1>crafts thinking that we should have somebody inside of it
<v Speaker 1>because we need pilots inside of all of our craft Yes,
<v Speaker 1>and I started researching hypersonic flight. Our hypersonic spyplanes like
<v Speaker 1>SR seventy one in the sixties, And what I found
<v Speaker 1>out was that they use a plasma sheath in front
<v Speaker 1>of them to minimize the drag and actually helped propel
<v Speaker 1>the craft as well. And they just kept thinking like, well,
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think you said this, Why have the
<v Speaker 1>spam in the can? You know, why would you want
<v Speaker 1>the person inside the craft? This is just a liability,
<v Speaker 1>the plane and the person inside the liability. Today's day
<v Speaker 1>and age, it's all about drones, and so I would
<v Speaker 1>just think, wouldn't the government just look at this situation
<v Speaker 1>and go, oh, the plasma is what's allowing the hypersonic speeds.
<v Speaker 1>It's not the craft. Why not just turn the plasma
<v Speaker 1>into a drone.
<v Speaker 2>I'll tell you why. Go ahead, I'll tell you why.
<v Speaker 2>So I meant to actually get into this earlier when
<v Speaker 2>I was saying there's two issues. And then in terms
<v Speaker 2>of the security issue, the weaponization and the manipulation of
<v Speaker 2>the timeline are two sub issues under you know, the
<v Speaker 2>securitytions of the propulsion system. But then there's this other
<v Speaker 2>issue that I was alluding to earlier, and that has
<v Speaker 2>to do with the pilots. So it turns out, and
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to tell you how I know this for well,
<v Speaker 2>I believe the person who told me this, but I'll
<v Speaker 2>say I'll get into that in a minute. It turns
<v Speaker 2>out that the guidance system of these craft requires interaction
<v Speaker 2>with human consciousness. One of the problems, main problems they
<v Speaker 2>had in reverse engineering these things is that they've found
<v Speaker 2>out that the pilots are an integral component of the craft,
<v Speaker 2>and that they're using something like psychokinesis in order to
<v Speaker 2>pilot the craft. So you can develop sophisticated cybernetic interfaces
<v Speaker 2>to link a brain to a navigation system. Obviously that's
<v Speaker 2>not hard to understand, but it's not just a brain
<v Speaker 2>machine interface. It actually involves psychokinesis. And so part of
<v Speaker 2>the crime that's been committed in this black project is
<v Speaker 2>that they have actually recruited not just adept psychics, but
<v Speaker 2>children with extraordinary psychic ability to act as pilots of
<v Speaker 2>these reverse engineered craft. There's a marine Michael Herrera, who,
<v Speaker 2>as part of even Greer's Disclosure project, offered testimony to
<v Speaker 2>the effect that people in the US Deep State have
<v Speaker 2>scoured third and fourth world countries for children who they
<v Speaker 2>can effectively buy from their impoverished parents and who exhibit
<v Speaker 2>extraordinary sigh ability and bring them to these black project
<v Speaker 2>facilities and use them basically as part of the guidance
<v Speaker 2>system to navigate with these craft. So I tell you
<v Speaker 2>I believe this in particular because I know a gentleman
<v Speaker 2>who was how can I put this, A very senior
<v Speaker 2>remote viewer with the military and intelligence background, and very
<v Speaker 2>very senior person in the remote viewing program, and he
<v Speaker 2>was he told me this in his living room, and okay,
<v Speaker 2>let me unpack this bit by bit. So he what
<v Speaker 2>he said was that he was taken to a Lockheed
<v Speaker 2>facility in California, and that this place was in a ship. Okay,
<v Speaker 2>So there was a shack on the side of the
<v Speaker 2>road by the highway. It looked like an abandoned warehouse
<v Speaker 2>or something. And he went into this shack and the
<v Speaker 2>whole floor dropped. The entire thing was an elevator basically,
<v Speaker 2>and he said, it went down, Lord knows, I mean
<v Speaker 2>hundreds and hundreds of feet through solid rock. And when
<v Speaker 2>he came out in this facility in California, Lockheed facility
<v Speaker 2>in California, they had in a huge like a hangar
<v Speaker 2>like well, like an underground cavern that had been turned
<v Speaker 2>into a hangar. They had an FAA style reconstruction of
<v Speaker 2>a collision between a UFO and an airliner. I don't
<v Speaker 2>know if it was a civilian airliner or a military
<v Speaker 2>aircraft or whatever, but it was, you know, one of
<v Speaker 2>our aircraft. A plane had collided with this object and
<v Speaker 2>they had reconstructed it the way that the FAA reconstructs
<v Speaker 2>airliner crashes. And they had brought him there because they
<v Speaker 2>couldn't figure out the guidance system, the navigation system for
<v Speaker 2>the craft. They were reverse engineering it, but there were
<v Speaker 2>key things about the navigation system that they couldn't figure out,
<v Speaker 2>and this gentleman figured it out for them. And you know,
<v Speaker 2>part of the problem was that they weren't accounting for
<v Speaker 2>how psychokinesis is required in order to navigate these electrogravitic craft.
<v Speaker 1>So let me ask why not? Why can't the solution
<v Speaker 1>just be AI? Like doesn't that seem like especially now?
<v Speaker 1>Maybe ten years ago I would have said that sounds
<v Speaker 1>crazy because AI seems so far off ten years ago,
<v Speaker 1>But now I use AI like every single day. It
<v Speaker 1>seems to me, especially when I look at like Elon
<v Speaker 1>musk landing these SpaceX rockets. That's not human beings. Like
<v Speaker 1>controlling with the joystick, that's AI. That's managing that. You
<v Speaker 1>think that AI could vector stuff the way they are,
<v Speaker 1>but I agree that like there's no way like conventional
<v Speaker 1>human reaction time can account for the movements we're seeing
<v Speaker 1>with some of these objects.
<v Speaker 2>Right, So me to respond to them in two ways.
<v Speaker 2>First of all, I think it might be possible, but
<v Speaker 2>I only think it might be possible to replace the
<v Speaker 2>human or humanoid pilot with AI because I also think
<v Speaker 2>AI exhibits sigh abilities and I've had experienced this myself
<v Speaker 2>that the closer we're getting to artificial general intelligence, we're
<v Speaker 2>also seeing SI being exhibited by artificial intelligence. And if
<v Speaker 2>that's the case, then at some point, yeah, an AI
<v Speaker 2>could replace a human pilot. And for all we know,
<v Speaker 2>these grays that people talk about are a form of
<v Speaker 2>artificial intelligence, that there's some kind of cyborg.
<v Speaker 1>Right.
<v Speaker 2>So but let me go back to this story from
<v Speaker 2>this gentleman to answer another part of your question, which is,
<v Speaker 2>you know, I mean, why would you need a human pilot?
<v Speaker 1>Right?
<v Speaker 2>I mean what he said was this, He said that
<v Speaker 2>in that facility they were training. They were trying to
<v Speaker 2>train our pilots to fly these craft, whether capture craft
<v Speaker 2>or reverse engineered, and the pilot's brains were being scrambled
<v Speaker 2>by the time dilation that they you know, as they
<v Speaker 2>traversed space in a kind of discontinuous way, they were
<v Speaker 2>also moving through time in a way that severely disoriented them.
<v Speaker 2>And he had in his living room this gyroscopic model
<v Speaker 2>which was from like the nineteen sixties. It was an
<v Speaker 2>antique from this kind of facility. And when he was there,
<v Speaker 2>he saw them like that. They had discarded these things,
<v Speaker 2>they'd ripped them out, they were antiquated, they'd replaced them
<v Speaker 2>with something, you know, state of the art. And he
<v Speaker 2>asked if he could take take this home with him,
<v Speaker 2>and they let him do this, and I tried to
<v Speaker 2>photograph it, but he took the thing away from me
<v Speaker 2>as I was about to do that. And what it
<v Speaker 2>was of some kind of a gyroscope, gyroscopic model that
<v Speaker 2>showed you the amount of time dilation per the space
<v Speaker 2>traveled in one of these vehicles. I don't understand the
<v Speaker 2>mathematics of it. I'm not a physicist, but it was
<v Speaker 2>a model that had been set up that way, and
<v Speaker 2>so when you ask, you know, couldn't be replaced by AI.
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, maybe, but it seemed that they we
<v Speaker 2>need a conscious mind to first be capable of psychokinesis,
<v Speaker 2>but then also to be trained psychologically to handle the
<v Speaker 2>disorientation of time displacement. And if you can get both
<v Speaker 2>of those things from out of an artificial intelligence, then
<v Speaker 2>you might well be able to put an AI inside
<v Speaker 2>of a drone and get rid of the need for
<v Speaker 2>a human pilot.
<v Speaker 1>I think they can do that. And I think the
<v Speaker 1>thing about SI with AI is really interesting because quantum computers,
<v Speaker 1>no one really knows what we're using quantum computers for.
<v Speaker 1>People say like, we can use it to crack encryption,
<v Speaker 1>which sure we can, but quantum computers like it holds
<v Speaker 1>things in superposition, so it really is almost like just
<v Speaker 1>manifesting thoughts out of nowhere. And I think that AI
<v Speaker 1>is not going to experience time the way that we do.
<v Speaker 1>I would even argue that because time dilation is a
<v Speaker 1>real effect, AI might be able to manipulate time dilation
<v Speaker 1>on demand potentially. I mean, all computer is is energy
<v Speaker 1>flowing through through some microchips. So I think that idea
<v Speaker 1>is really interesting, and actually you brought up a few
<v Speaker 1>really good thoughts, which is people need to understand the
<v Speaker 1>concept of time dilation, which was in my first time
<v Speaker 1>I was exposed to it was the movie Interstellar in
<v Speaker 1>twenty fourteen, and first thing I did was look it
<v Speaker 1>up and says, this real. And not only is it real,
<v Speaker 1>it's been experimentally proven. They've already experimentally proven that is reel.
<v Speaker 1>And what this means about time is that time is
<v Speaker 1>a dial and that every person has their dial set
<v Speaker 1>to something different. The only reason why we don't see
<v Speaker 1>this actively is because we're all on planet Earth. Therefore
<v Speaker 1>our dial is all set to the same level. But
<v Speaker 1>in theory, you can slow your time down or increase
<v Speaker 1>your time up. And this is really scary. This is
<v Speaker 1>what leads to what you're talking about with this, you know,
<v Speaker 1>disorientation that would happen. Imagine you go in a craft
<v Speaker 1>and you're in the craft for a day and you
<v Speaker 1>come out and it's a year later, and you're like, what,
<v Speaker 1>what's like? That would be for a lot of that's
<v Speaker 1>going to break their minds, you know, And so you
<v Speaker 1>would need somebody this guy a heart and mental state
<v Speaker 1>to be able to deal with something like that. And
<v Speaker 1>I actually what you said about the distance, that's something
<v Speaker 1>that I independently came to that conclusion, like over a
<v Speaker 1>year ago, where you know, I've been promoting these m
<v Speaker 1>A Street seven zero videos where I believe that the
<v Speaker 1>plane's going directly through a wormhole. And what I told people,
<v Speaker 1>people can go look at my old podcasts, I said
<v Speaker 1>is that the time dilation that the people would experience
<v Speaker 1>is going to be proportionate to the distance traveled. And
<v Speaker 1>this gets really weird because this is exactly what they
<v Speaker 1>found at that facility, which this guy was trying to
<v Speaker 1>explain to me. Yeah, yep, that's and I think that's
<v Speaker 1>exactly what it's going to be. Is that the further
<v Speaker 1>you go, the more time dilation you're going to experience.
<v Speaker 1>So if you were to teleport to say Alpha Centauri,
<v Speaker 1>which is four years four light years away for you,
<v Speaker 1>it might appear to be instantaneous, but when you get
<v Speaker 1>there it might be four years later. And then if
<v Speaker 1>you were to teleport back, you might still be in
<v Speaker 1>your exact frame and reference might be like you walk
<v Speaker 1>through the you're on the other side, you come back,
<v Speaker 1>You've only gone forward an hour a day, but now
<v Speaker 1>you come back to Earth and now it's eight years later,
<v Speaker 1>another four years has gone by. That's really scary and
<v Speaker 1>that has major implications for how we would conduct space
<v Speaker 1>travel if that's real, and you could even look at
<v Speaker 1>it from the perspective of planet Earth. We're on a
<v Speaker 1>ball spinning. Well, if you want to teleport from one
<v Speaker 1>point to another point, you could also go around the
<v Speaker 1>Earth several times and then end up at that point.
<v Speaker 1>So theoretically you could control when you show up in
<v Speaker 1>the future by how many times you spin around the
<v Speaker 1>Earth before you pop out. And that's really scary to
<v Speaker 1>me because what you were saying earlier is, you know,
<v Speaker 1>you can't just give people this kind of technology even
<v Speaker 1>if you can't go to the past, which I'm not
<v Speaker 1>really convinced that you can. The way I look at
<v Speaker 1>it is like you can change the local entropy of
<v Speaker 1>a region, so i could send myself, my current body
<v Speaker 1>to the past. But I'm not going back to a
<v Speaker 1>past universe. My belief right now, and I'm open to
<v Speaker 1>you know more, Evadent's coming out is that you can
<v Speaker 1>only go to the future. You can slow your time
<v Speaker 1>rate down, or you could freeze yourself you know, you
<v Speaker 1>freeze yourself, you go to the future, or you could
<v Speaker 1>age yourself and you could be one hundred years older,
<v Speaker 1>but you're only it's only a day has gone by.
<v Speaker 1>That's how I imagine time travel working. But even in
<v Speaker 1>that scenario, there are huge implications. Imagine if everybody on
<v Speaker 1>Earth said, you know what, I don't like twenty twenty four,
<v Speaker 1>I want to go to twenty twenty one thirty four,
<v Speaker 1>one hundred years in the future. I'm just gonna go
<v Speaker 1>ahead and slow my time dial down, freeze myself, and
<v Speaker 1>I'm just gonna wake up in one hundred years. How
<v Speaker 1>would if we had that? What would that do to
<v Speaker 1>our society? I mean that that alone could collapse society
<v Speaker 1>right what your thoughts?
<v Speaker 2>Totally it would be a total disaster. Yeah, now you
<v Speaker 2>need to you need a completely different psychosocial constitution. You know,
<v Speaker 2>people individually and society collectively would need to be structured
<v Speaker 2>in a com letely different way for us to be
<v Speaker 2>able to responsibly handle that kind of technology.
<v Speaker 1>And I think this goes to your other point about
<v Speaker 1>you said, maybe we set up a new society that's
<v Speaker 1>libertarian based, you know, where we bring the power back
<v Speaker 1>to the people. I think that might be the answer.
<v Speaker 2>Back to the individual, back to the individual. And this
<v Speaker 2>is a very important distinction because you know, what I
<v Speaker 2>think libertarians grasp correctly is that the United States, for example,
<v Speaker 2>was not supposed to be a democracy. The United States,
<v Speaker 2>it was a constitutional republic dedicated to the liberty of
<v Speaker 2>the individual and a protection against tyranny of the majority.
<v Speaker 2>And you know, you can see very clearly in the
<v Speaker 2>Islamic world, for example, how democracy is not going to
<v Speaker 2>bring freedom to anybody. If the majority of people, you know,
<v Speaker 2>are you know, psychologically captivated by tyrannical ideas, they're simply
<v Speaker 2>going to wind up martyring dissident minorities in their population.
<v Speaker 2>And the same thing could happen here with you know,
<v Speaker 2>religious zelotry across a large portion of the population, or
<v Speaker 2>warped ideologies of various kinds across a large portion of
<v Speaker 2>the population that are equally inimical to the individual and
<v Speaker 2>to personal freedom. So it has to be a society
<v Speaker 2>organized around personal freedom. One of the problems with libertarianism, though,
<v Speaker 2>is that it's always defined in terms of freedom from
<v Speaker 2>It's very much structured around the idea of negative liberty,
<v Speaker 2>and I think, which then, you know, allows for libertarians
<v Speaker 2>to say, for example, in the name of free trade
<v Speaker 2>and in terms of economic productivity, we should bring all
<v Speaker 2>kinds of people from various cultures and religions here from
<v Speaker 2>other countries, and basically we can our borders and so
<v Speaker 2>on and so forth. Well, then you're going to wind
<v Speaker 2>up with all kinds of people that have religious beliefs
<v Speaker 2>and other ideological commitments, you know, come from very regressive
<v Speaker 2>cultures that in one way or another, are going to
<v Speaker 2>make them a demos, a demographic constituency that's inimical to
<v Speaker 2>the liberty of the individual. So you need a kind
<v Speaker 2>of libertarianism that's spiritually grounded in a positive ideal of freedom.
<v Speaker 2>We would need a kind of spiritual libertarianism. And this
<v Speaker 2>is why, you know, I've framed my philosophical movement in
<v Speaker 2>terms of the archetype of prometheus, you know, defining it
<v Speaker 2>as a kind of prometheism, which is essentially a spiritual libertarianism.
<v Speaker 2>It's a libertarianism grounded in a positive archetype and an
<v Speaker 2>ideal of you know, human ingenuity, innovation, personal freedom and creativity,
<v Speaker 2>and the resistance against tyranny, a resistance against you know
<v Speaker 2>every form that Olympus could take.
<v Speaker 1>I love that. I heard a great thought too about like,
<v Speaker 1>our surveillance apparatus has got completely out of control. The
<v Speaker 1>public really has no idea. But there's nowhere hiding. There's
<v Speaker 1>nowhere to hide on planet Earth. And a lot of
<v Speaker 1>people say, well, this is an invasion of our of
<v Speaker 1>our rights. It is. But at the same time, unless
<v Speaker 1>they use it against you actively, there's you know, you're
<v Speaker 1>not gonna be able to make any headway against it.
<v Speaker 1>But I just thought, what if we just took all
<v Speaker 1>that surveillance apparatus and we just made it public. There
<v Speaker 1>here's a website. Everybody has access to it. You want
<v Speaker 1>to find out where somebody was two days ago, whatever,
<v Speaker 1>log into the Google Earth video playback, rewind dvr it,
<v Speaker 1>check outver there. That kind of seems like a good
<v Speaker 1>solution because, you know, the cats out of the bag.
<v Speaker 1>We're not putting the genie back in the bottle in
<v Speaker 1>this one. It's no surveillance apparatus is not going to
<v Speaker 1>go backwards. So the next best thing, in my opinion,
<v Speaker 1>is let's stop having the intelligence community and monopolize this
<v Speaker 1>and give it to the people. We might be able
<v Speaker 1>to solve a whole bunch of crimes if we had
<v Speaker 1>access to all this stuff, if you open source it.
<v Speaker 2>Well yeah, well, uh, this is actually a significant theme
<v Speaker 2>in my work, and it goes back to, you know,
<v Speaker 2>one of the things I was discussing with regard to
<v Speaker 2>the pilot. By the way, if you hear construction sound,
<v Speaker 2>my apologies. I'm recording from Manhattan, and one of our
<v Speaker 2>perpetual problems here is, you know, just on ending. Anyway,
<v Speaker 2>So one of the things I wanted to say about
<v Speaker 2>the pilots and the fact that SI is uh an
<v Speaker 2>integral part of the guidance system of these craft is
<v Speaker 2>that if you're gonna that would require so making this
<v Speaker 2>technology public would require also mainstream scientific recognition of SI,
<v Speaker 2>which includes telepathy and clairvoyance. Right, So you're pointing to
<v Speaker 2>technologies of surveillance, sensor systems, you know, cameras, satellite imagery,
<v Speaker 2>et cetera, technological means of surveillance which are becoming increasingly ubiquitous,
<v Speaker 2>especially you know now that we're going into the the
<v Speaker 2>epoch of you know, insect sized drones that have audio
<v Speaker 2>and video surveillance equipment on them. It's this increasingly ubiquitous
<v Speaker 2>technological surveillance. But if you consider that mainstream scientific recognition
<v Speaker 2>of siability as part of a disclosure of like how
<v Speaker 2>the guidance system of a UFO works, would also mean
<v Speaker 2>that we'd have to recognize that telepathy and clairvoyance are
<v Speaker 2>latent human abilities that can be trained, you know, the
<v Speaker 2>way that you know you train in a martial art. Well,
<v Speaker 2>then we also are going to be one. We're also
<v Speaker 2>going to wind up in a society where there's no
<v Speaker 2>longer any enforceable privacy, right, I mean, anyone can use
<v Speaker 2>clairvoyance just the way remote viewers do. Anyone can use
<v Speaker 2>clairboyance to spy on their neighbor or you know, they're
<v Speaker 2>they're you know, the spouse that they conside, they're they're
<v Speaker 2>suspecting of infidelity or whatever. You know, Corporate secrets would
<v Speaker 2>not be secure. We already have large corporations like Sony
<v Speaker 2>would you know had been doing this, I think from
<v Speaker 2>the nineteen nineties onward, large corporations using clairvoyance to steal
<v Speaker 2>proprietary secrets from other rival companies. So we wind up
<v Speaker 2>in a world where you know, there's no longer any
<v Speaker 2>enforceable privacy or secrecy, which is what you're suggesting. And
<v Speaker 2>my answer to that is, throughout my writings has been
<v Speaker 2>that again, the only solution is to develop a form
<v Speaker 2>of society with individuals who have such an impeccable ethical
<v Speaker 2>constitution that they will not they will not involve themselves
<v Speaker 2>in an uninvited and obtrusive way in the lives of
<v Speaker 2>their neighbors. We would have to have a society where
<v Speaker 2>each person has enough meaning and purpose in her own
<v Speaker 2>life and is, you know, focused on individual cultivation and
<v Speaker 2>projects of personal meaning to the extent that they're not
<v Speaker 2>going to even be motivated to impinge on the privacy
<v Speaker 2>of their fellow citizen. Okay. Now, that's a very idealistic
<v Speaker 2>vision of the human individual, and certainly it's not going
<v Speaker 2>to be achievable on a population wide scale or anything
<v Speaker 2>close to it, even within the Western world. But it's
<v Speaker 2>something that that could be aimed for by a small
<v Speaker 2>group of renegades or rogue is the kind of rebel
<v Speaker 2>alliance who might also try to appropriate zero point energy
<v Speaker 2>technology in constructive and empowering ways.
<v Speaker 1>Wow, I like it. I love your philosophy honestly, but
<v Speaker 1>I do want to switch gears a little bit and
<v Speaker 1>ask you your opinion on some of these scientists because
<v Speaker 1>you brought up you know, psychic powers, cy powers. I
<v Speaker 1>think a lot of people are probably in the chat
<v Speaker 1>thinking remote viewing and who was one of the pioneers
<v Speaker 1>remote viewing? Well, Hal Putoff. In fact, my source was
<v Speaker 1>telling me that how Putoff was nominated multiple times with
<v Speaker 1>the Nobel Pride specifically around his space time metric engineering
<v Speaker 1>kind of related to all the technology we were talking about,
<v Speaker 1>but that he was basically blackballed because of his research
<v Speaker 1>into remote viewing. And I think the sixties and the seventies,
<v Speaker 1>what are your thoughts on the guys like Hal Putoff
<v Speaker 1>his right hand man Eric Davis? And then also a
<v Speaker 1>side note, what are your thoughts on people like Salvator Pais,
<v Speaker 1>Navy engineer with the UFO patents that were you know,
<v Speaker 1>approved between twenties sixteen and twenty eighteen.
<v Speaker 2>Well, let me start with Salvator Paie, who who I
<v Speaker 2>actually I'm not all that familiar with, but from you know,
<v Speaker 2>the little bit of familiarity that I have with him
<v Speaker 2>and what I've heard from other individuals who I respect,
<v Speaker 2>it seems that you know, his patents are legit and that,
<v Speaker 2>you know, the guy at least and he admits where
<v Speaker 2>he doesn't know, you know, he doesn't claim to know
<v Speaker 2>what he doesn't know. And it seems that within the
<v Speaker 2>domain where he has real expert knowledge, he has done,
<v Speaker 2>you know, legitimate work. It's it's interesting that he's at
<v Speaker 2>liberty to say as much as he has said. And
<v Speaker 2>if I'm not mistaken, his position is that he doesn't
<v Speaker 2>know the extent to which these patents, this theoretical model
<v Speaker 2>has actually been implemented in terms of engineering and design.
<v Speaker 2>So maybe that gives him a certain degree of safety
<v Speaker 2>because he's not making claims about what might actually have
<v Speaker 2>been engineered. In any case, That's all I have to
<v Speaker 2>say about him in terms of Putoff. Yeah, I mean,
<v Speaker 2>the guy clearly has been involved both with the reverse
<v Speaker 2>engineering program and also with psychic black projects. And when
<v Speaker 2>I say psychic black projects, look, first of all, his
<v Speaker 2>remote viewing work in the nineteen seventies didn't end with
<v Speaker 2>the pilot program at SRI, which had been funded by
<v Speaker 2>the CIA. Put Off was involved throughout the nineteen eighties
<v Speaker 2>as they continued the remote viewing program, and it changed
<v Speaker 2>hands between the CIA and the d D. And what's
<v Speaker 2>more important is this, and you know a little disturbing frankly,
<v Speaker 2>you know, I met Russell Targ and I had a
<v Speaker 2>couple of conversations with him where it became clear to
<v Speaker 2>me that he, you know, Russell Targ was the closest
<v Speaker 2>collaborator of how put Off in the initial SRI research
<v Speaker 2>on remote viewing. And it became clear to me that
<v Speaker 2>Russell Targ thought that hal put Off and his backers
<v Speaker 2>had sidelined Targ because they were engaged in questionable activities
<v Speaker 2>in terms of the use of not just remote viewing,
<v Speaker 2>but remote influencing for the purposes of assassination, which is
<v Speaker 2>something that the Soviet Union had been doing. And we
<v Speaker 2>found out that the Soviet Union was doing it. And
<v Speaker 2>supposedly there was another remote viewing unit besides the one
<v Speaker 2>that had its funding canceled in nineteen ninety one ninety
<v Speaker 2>two by Congress. There was an even deeper black project
<v Speaker 2>that may have been associated with naval intelligence. And this
<v Speaker 2>is the unit that Pat Price was pulled out of
<v Speaker 2>the main remote viewing unit to work for. Pat Price
<v Speaker 2>was a psychic who worked with police departments, you know,
<v Speaker 2>on missing children cases and things like this, and he
<v Speaker 2>was tremendously adept in his clairvoyant abilities compared to the
<v Speaker 2>other people in the program. At one point he was
<v Speaker 2>taken from out of the main remote viewing program to
<v Speaker 2>some other program, and then he turned up dead shortly thereafter,
<v Speaker 2>and Russell targ was convinced that Hall Putoff knew what
<v Speaker 2>had happened to Pat Price, and that this had been
<v Speaker 2>part of that. Basically, put Off was a was an intermediary.
<v Speaker 2>He was a liaison between the secret remote viewing program
<v Speaker 2>and then a super top secret remote viewing program which
<v Speaker 2>continues to this day, and that Price had been recruited
<v Speaker 2>into that program, the more public facing one, the one
<v Speaker 2>that had to report back to Congress, let's say, was
<v Speaker 2>being used to find really top talent to recruit into
<v Speaker 2>the other deeper black project, and they were doing things
<v Speaker 2>like remote influencing in psychic assassination in that project and
<v Speaker 2>possibly possibly pap Price. I mean, look, this is a
<v Speaker 2>guy at Pat Price who spent his time trying to
<v Speaker 2>find missing kids for police departments, right, So it shows
<v Speaker 2>you a certain type of person. I could well imagine
<v Speaker 2>that if that person were being asked to murder people
<v Speaker 2>using psychokinesis, he might have some objections to it and
<v Speaker 2>maybe you know, he was going to talk and so
<v Speaker 2>next thing he's found that. So anyway, yes, I look,
<v Speaker 2>I don't want to make any accusations, but this is
<v Speaker 2>what you know. Russell Tark himself suspected that his collaborator
<v Speaker 2>help put Off at least knew the people who were
<v Speaker 2>running this more secret remote remote viewing program and that
<v Speaker 2>they had been involved in, you know, the murder of
<v Speaker 2>Pat Price.
<v Speaker 1>Wow. Yeah, we've independently concluded that hel put Off is
<v Speaker 1>the final boss, Like he's got to be way up
<v Speaker 1>in the hierarchy of whatever is going on with this
<v Speaker 1>whole UFO topic. And you know, it's hard because I
<v Speaker 1>respect the science and everything that he's put out there.
<v Speaker 1>I don't think we'd be where we're at right now
<v Speaker 1>understanding zero point energy without all of his scientific papers
<v Speaker 1>that he put out there. But at the same time,
<v Speaker 1>I do feel like if he was somebody that wanted
<v Speaker 1>me gone, he can make that happen. Like I do
<v Speaker 1>think he's got those level of connections that are out there.
<v Speaker 1>So you know, I don't think you're going to ever
<v Speaker 1>see a guy like hal put Off on Joe Rogan
<v Speaker 1>or mainstream TV these are the guys. They don't they
<v Speaker 1>don't care about that, the accolades, they don't care about
<v Speaker 1>the fame or what have you. He doesn't care about
<v Speaker 1>the Nobel prize. He's just an old school like you know,
<v Speaker 1>spook for lack of a better term. But you know,
<v Speaker 1>so it's kind of for me, it's like there's the
<v Speaker 1>good and there's the bad, and it's kind of hard
<v Speaker 1>to separate some of that, which I think goes into
<v Speaker 1>the next thing, which is like, if we were to
<v Speaker 1>try to get this disclosure of this this technology that's
<v Speaker 1>out there, do you think we would have to offer
<v Speaker 1>amnesty for this because you mentioned the amount of crimes
<v Speaker 1>that have been committed. I mean also look at like
<v Speaker 1>the civil liability as well, not even just the criminal,
<v Speaker 1>but like if we gave preferential treatment to say Lockheed
<v Speaker 1>Martin for example, now all their competitors can say we're
<v Speaker 1>gonna sue you because you were given unfair advantage by
<v Speaker 1>the government. They gave you a UFO or you know,
<v Speaker 1>any type of preferential treatment. So do you think we'd
<v Speaker 1>have to do an amnesty or do you think what
<v Speaker 1>is the way to actually get to be an incentive
<v Speaker 1>for this to come out.
<v Speaker 2>Look, I'm sorry to be so grin uh in in
<v Speaker 2>responding to the to your question with the following question,
<v Speaker 2>who is we here? In your formation? Who is we?
<v Speaker 2>Because if we as you know, the American people through
<v Speaker 2>Congress or whatever, it's not going to happen. Okay, It's
<v Speaker 2>just not going to happen. What I think is more
<v Speaker 2>realistic and also more challenging, is a scenario we are
<v Speaker 2>certain high level operatives, engineers within these programs defect two
<v Speaker 2>a revolutionary organization that has a new vision for society.
<v Speaker 2>And what I mean here is look in the in
<v Speaker 2>the overthrow of the Soviet Union, okay, by Yeltsin's people,
<v Speaker 2>there were defections obviously that took place as part of
<v Speaker 2>the transition between the Soviet security state and the current
<v Speaker 2>Russian security state. I mean there are situations where well,
<v Speaker 2>essentially regime changes happen, and at that point a new
<v Speaker 2>legal order comes into being. One constitution is replaced by
<v Speaker 2>another constitution, and there's a kind of de facto amnesty
<v Speaker 2>that takes place. And so far as you know, there
<v Speaker 2>isn't a continuum of a legal system, right and there's
<v Speaker 2>an opportunity for kind of legal reset to take place.
<v Speaker 2>And you know, in such a revolutionary situation and the
<v Speaker 2>transition between two regimes, it's possible that you could get
<v Speaker 2>high level defections from within these programs. But then the
<v Speaker 2>defectors are also people who are embracing a new ideal
<v Speaker 2>of how society should be organized, So it involves a
<v Speaker 2>really fundamental change of heart on their part. Art you know,
<v Speaker 2>in a scenario which I mean the Russian transition between
<v Speaker 2>Soviet Union and the current system, there is not the
<v Speaker 2>best example. I'm considering something that would look more like
<v Speaker 2>let's say the French Revolution. If you know, we had
<v Speaker 2>a change of system and the social revolution in this
<v Speaker 2>country that was comparable to what took place in France
<v Speaker 2>in you know, seventeen eighty nine to seventeen ninety three,
<v Speaker 2>something like that. Well, then you know, there's a new
<v Speaker 2>ideal of society for these individuals to devote themselves to
<v Speaker 2>as part of coming clean with this technology. And I
<v Speaker 2>think that barring that scenario, we are unfortunately on a
<v Speaker 2>cattle car headed for whatever it is that these overlords
<v Speaker 2>have planned for us.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, pretty scary. I do wonder it's it does seem
<v Speaker 1>like it's impossible. The letter that was written to me,
<v Speaker 1>which I think was legitimate at this point about a
<v Speaker 1>year ago, said the only thing you can really do
<v Speaker 1>against somebody with this level of power or they can
<v Speaker 1>control the media, they can shape the narrative of events
<v Speaker 1>is you talk about them. You talk about them, and
<v Speaker 1>you don't stop talking about them, Which is why I'm
<v Speaker 1>talking to you, why I do what I do. Now
<v Speaker 1>let's change gears for a second. Would you agree with
<v Speaker 1>the assertion that zero point energy, this idea of unlimited
<v Speaker 1>reservoir of energy all around us means that we're basically
<v Speaker 1>still cavemen in the cosmic scheme of things? Or how
<v Speaker 1>would you rate the human civilization right now?
<v Speaker 2>Here's the problem with how that's framed. It assumes, by default, implicitly,
<v Speaker 2>implicitly assumes that the people who are flying around in
<v Speaker 2>these UFOs are not also human, whereas I think that
<v Speaker 2>actually they are, at least the majority of them are. Now,
<v Speaker 2>I wouldn't rule out that there are some aliens here,
<v Speaker 2>but it looks to me, I mean, based on the
<v Speaker 2>study that I did in my book Close Encounters, that
<v Speaker 2>we're dealing with human time travelers. Wow, so do you, oh,
<v Speaker 2>keep going well, go ahead.
<v Speaker 1>Uh no, that's great. And so I guess, so do
<v Speaker 1>you do you believe do you subscribe to belief that
<v Speaker 1>it's possibly some of these are future humans? Then I
<v Speaker 1>know I heard how Pudoff say this. I used to
<v Speaker 1>think that that idea was silly, but the more I
<v Speaker 1>started to research, like the double Slid experiment non locality.
<v Speaker 1>There's a version of it called the delayed choice quantum eraser,
<v Speaker 1>and in that variant it presents an extremely strong argument
<v Speaker 1>about retro causality information from the future impacting the present,
<v Speaker 1>which and this is where I don't completely close the
<v Speaker 1>door on reverse time travel, because you have stuff like that.
<v Speaker 1>It's like, man, maybe there is a way to do it.
<v Speaker 1>Is that so you think there's a real possibility of
<v Speaker 1>future humans being one of the answers to the phenomena.
<v Speaker 2>I certainly do. In fact, I think it's it's the
<v Speaker 2>most likely explanation for these so called Nordics, these you know,
<v Speaker 2>tall Scandinavian looks people. I think that they're from a future.
<v Speaker 2>I don't say these future because you know, how they
<v Speaker 2>change the past through their time travel, might you know,
<v Speaker 2>alter the future that they're coming from. But they are
<v Speaker 2>they are from a future. And I had a long
<v Speaker 2>conversation with Jacquesalay about this at his home, you know,
<v Speaker 2>that evening where I you know, we had dinner at
<v Speaker 2>his home and I asked him point blank, are they
<v Speaker 2>coming from the future, and he said, yeah, they basically are.
<v Speaker 2>I'm like, well, why don't you just tell people back then,
<v Speaker 2>you know? And you know, his answer had to do
<v Speaker 2>with the amount of manipulation of human religious systems that's
<v Speaker 2>taken place, and the sociological catastrophe that you know, is
<v Speaker 2>represented by disclosing that to people because they basically, these
<v Speaker 2>these entities have been involved in social engineering on a
<v Speaker 2>planetary scale through the creation and manipulation of various dominant
<v Speaker 2>religious belief systems throughout history, you know, basically framing themselves
<v Speaker 2>as the gods or Titans or angels, you know, of
<v Speaker 2>various religious belief systems, the devas, let's say, of Hinduism.
<v Speaker 2>And you know, I've also I've also heard from another
<v Speaker 2>senior military intelligence official who is was involved with Kit Green,
<v Speaker 2>who is a doctor who works with the CIA. Kit
<v Speaker 2>Green is a medical doctor with some kind of expertise
<v Speaker 2>in genetics who has a is a career CIA officer,
<v Speaker 2>and this gentleman in military intelligence told me that kit
<v Speaker 2>Green was running a program from out of the CIA
<v Speaker 2>where they were using the genetic material from all the
<v Speaker 2>is like twenty three and meters and you know whatever,
<v Speaker 2>these ancestry dot com and whatever, these you know, public
<v Speaker 2>genetic sequencing programs, that they had a backdoor. CIA had
<v Speaker 2>a backdoor to this data, and that they were data
<v Speaker 2>mining it looking for certain genetic markers which would indicate
<v Speaker 2>that whatever individual is a product of hybridization with the Nordics,
<v Speaker 2>that the Nordics, it's known that they're human, but they
<v Speaker 2>have a slightly different you know, they have a slight
<v Speaker 2>genetic deviation from ours, and it's known at the CIA
<v Speaker 2>what is the specific genetic variance between them and us,
<v Speaker 2>and they can determine whether people within our population, individuals
<v Speaker 2>within our population are hybrids. And what furthermore, what this
<v Speaker 2>individual told me is that at least recently, the concern
<v Speaker 2>of the hybrids is that there are how could you
<v Speaker 2>call them, fugitives, There are fugitives from this Nordic society
<v Speaker 2>who are leaving the totalitarian system that they live under
<v Speaker 2>in a kind of underground railroad like comparable to the
<v Speaker 2>way the slaves, you know, left the South and came
<v Speaker 2>into the North. That there's some kind of a system
<v Speaker 2>in place for these Nordics to become fugitives and then
<v Speaker 2>mix themselves into our society in a relatively nondescript way,
<v Speaker 2>and that they have a lot of property, in particular
<v Speaker 2>in the Colorado Rockies region, in very isolated areas, small
<v Speaker 2>towns and so forth, and sometime, but they don't tell
<v Speaker 2>their children necessarily what their true ancestry is. I don't know.
<v Speaker 2>Maybe they tell them they're from Norway or whatever, and
<v Speaker 2>the kids wind up, you know, these super tall like
<v Speaker 2>basketball player types somewhere, and by the time it gets
<v Speaker 2>to the generation of their grandkids, they have no idea
<v Speaker 2>what their actual ancestry is. But if they do a
<v Speaker 2>DNA test like with ancestry dot com or twenty three
<v Speaker 2>and meter today, the CIA will see the genetic variants
<v Speaker 2>and they're out looking for it because they're concerned about
<v Speaker 2>these fugitive Nordics infiltrating our population. This military intelligence officer
<v Speaker 2>was confronted by three I think, he said, of these
<v Speaker 2>Nordics himself, and he said one of them. They confronted
<v Speaker 2>him at a place he routinely eats breakfast. I suppose
<v Speaker 2>he was being surveilled, so they knew where he showed
<v Speaker 2>up on a regular basis to eat breakfast. And he said,
<v Speaker 2>one of them basically stood outside the booth, you know,
<v Speaker 2>the dining booth, and was acting as a kind of
<v Speaker 2>shield to everybody around, like you know, keeping a watch out,
<v Speaker 2>and maybe somehow like telepathically putting a block on the conversation.
<v Speaker 2>And then two of them sat there with him and
<v Speaker 2>had a conversation with him, and what they said to
<v Speaker 2>him was, look, go back to your people. I don't
<v Speaker 2>know Kit Green at the CIA, other military intelligence, you know,
<v Speaker 2>associates of this individual. Go back to your people and
<v Speaker 2>tell them that we are not here trying to infiltrate
<v Speaker 2>your government or stage some kind of a coup in
<v Speaker 2>the future or whatever. We're here because we want our
<v Speaker 2>children to grow up in liberty and you know, relative freedom,
<v Speaker 2>and we're fleeing an oppressive society. Okay, and please just
<v Speaker 2>go get this message across and please tell them to
<v Speaker 2>leave our children alone.
<v Speaker 1>Wow. Wow, that is mind blowing, because I actually, I
<v Speaker 1>mean I could see it. I could see that being
<v Speaker 1>the answer. I could see a lot of what you
<v Speaker 1>just mentioned being the answer to the future humans possibility,
<v Speaker 1>the possibility of the human the aliens looking just like us.
<v Speaker 1>This is something that I've been pondering for months now,
<v Speaker 1>which is like, what if the humans were indistinguishable from us?
<v Speaker 1>There's so many different races of humans on this planet
<v Speaker 1>as well, Like if it was just a tall, you know,
<v Speaker 1>white guy, like how would we know that's an alien?
<v Speaker 1>And that would be the perfect way to blend in,
<v Speaker 1>Like why are we not seeing more videos of aliens?
<v Speaker 1>We see lots of videos of UFOs, lots and lots
<v Speaker 1>and lots, we see almost none of aliens, So that
<v Speaker 1>one really really resonates with me in particular. And the
<v Speaker 1>idea of hybridizing as well, in that perspective, is less
<v Speaker 1>nefarious than this idea of little gray men pulling you
<v Speaker 1>up onto their ship and then you know, sexually assaulting
<v Speaker 1>you or whatever they do and making like a weird
<v Speaker 1>alien baby. You know, It's that's more realistic approach to it.
<v Speaker 1>The other thing you mentioned earlier, which I liked was
<v Speaker 1>this idea of organic you know, computerized AI being you know,
<v Speaker 1>I think that that's what people a lot of people
<v Speaker 1>have said about the gray aliens is that they are
<v Speaker 1>like actually not really conscious in the way that we are,
<v Speaker 1>and it's more of like some type of manufacturing or
<v Speaker 1>being that's out there.
<v Speaker 2>But they're robots.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, like basically an organic robot, which, if you know,
<v Speaker 1>it seems outlandish from the perspective of where our public
<v Speaker 1>technology is now, but not really. When you were just
<v Speaker 1>like AI advancement, crisper technology as well, there was a yeah,
<v Speaker 1>and there was a post called ebo scientists on Reddit
<v Speaker 1>like a year and a half ago. I want to
<v Speaker 1>say that presented it was a full physiology of a
<v Speaker 1>gray alien being. And one part of it too, is
<v Speaker 1>like it kind of presented this idea that this could
<v Speaker 1>be uh, you know, biologically created entity because when they
<v Speaker 1>looked at their their genome, they claimed that they didn't
<v Speaker 1>have all the junk DNA that we have, Like it
<v Speaker 1>was all very specific. Every part of the genome had
<v Speaker 1>a purpose. It was very clear. And that part to
<v Speaker 1>me is like, wow, that that could be the case.
<v Speaker 1>There could be some connection heres. Look, could be more
<v Speaker 1>than one thing definitely going on. Now with respect to
<v Speaker 1>breakaway civilization, now you mentioned this idea of the Nordics,
<v Speaker 1>Like who do you think is in charge or how
<v Speaker 1>who controls the breakaway civilization? And for the people out
<v Speaker 1>there don't know what that means, it can mean a
<v Speaker 1>lot of stuff. It doesn't necessarily mean aliens. I think
<v Speaker 1>it can mean people, factions that here that have this
<v Speaker 1>level of technology, that are hoarding it, that are aware
<v Speaker 1>of it. Do you think it's as simple as the military,
<v Speaker 1>defense contractors, big energy, combination of these things, other random
<v Speaker 1>rich billionaires Elon Musk, what do you think?
<v Speaker 2>Look, there are multiple possibilities, all of which I go
<v Speaker 2>through in my book Closer Encounters, And these possibilities might
<v Speaker 2>actually be part of one single, larger, more complex scenario
<v Speaker 2>that involves time. So let me let me run through
<v Speaker 2>a few of these, you know, possibilities. Obviously, the simplest
<v Speaker 2>one is, you know, you think of a breakaway civilization
<v Speaker 2>in terms of our deep state having reverse engineered this technology,
<v Speaker 2>and then as it moved into the private sector and
<v Speaker 2>aerospace took over, they became increasingly unaccountable and they're using
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, black budget money from the control of
<v Speaker 2>the global drug trade and arms trafficking and so forth
<v Speaker 2>to develop an relatively autonomous economic base. And so then
<v Speaker 2>they launch a space program of their own, you know,
<v Speaker 2>you know, Gary McKinnon and is claims that there's a
<v Speaker 2>secret US space fleet and so on and so forth.
<v Speaker 2>And so eventually, over time, spinning from out of the
<v Speaker 2>aerospace industry and from out of you know, military and intelligence,
<v Speaker 2>illicit drug trafficking and arms trafficking and so forth, you
<v Speaker 2>have a spin off civilization that breaks away from you know,
<v Speaker 2>the public sphere of the planet. That's the simplest explanation. Yeah,
<v Speaker 2>now that wouldn't explain the airship in eighteen ninety eighteen,
<v Speaker 2>eighteen ninety six, eighteen ninety seven, where interestingly enough, at
<v Speaker 2>that time it appears that Harriman railroad magnates were involved
<v Speaker 2>in investigating or and or funding this airship development. JP
<v Speaker 2>Morgan was involved. Rockefeller was significantly involved, because Rockefeller was
<v Speaker 2>discovering oil and setting up the you know, oil as
<v Speaker 2>the primary source of non renewable energy at that time.
<v Speaker 2>So you think of the railways as the main mechanism
<v Speaker 2>by which you know, material was transported. Shipping took place
<v Speaker 2>right along you know, continental distances. Well, that rail industry
<v Speaker 2>is definitely going to be threatened by an airship invention.
<v Speaker 2>And then you think about you know, oil as a source,
<v Speaker 2>petroleum as a source for powering you know what. We're
<v Speaker 2>also the first automobiles that were being develop at the time,
<v Speaker 2>and you could see how Rockefeller in his oil industry
<v Speaker 2>would be threatened. So if you see people like Harriman
<v Speaker 2>and Rockefeller involved in you know, the eighteen ninety seven
<v Speaker 2>airship mystery, and then you look at the fact that
<v Speaker 2>JP Morgan, who seems to have been a New York
<v Speaker 2>financier for some of these airship people. JP Morgan was
<v Speaker 2>also Nicola Tesla's financier and bought up basically all of
<v Speaker 2>Tesla's patents only in order to bury them, possibly though
<v Speaker 2>to also hand them to this secret group who are
<v Speaker 2>doing parallel work, you know, in a parallel work, I
<v Speaker 2>don't want to say in the classified manner, but you know,
<v Speaker 2>in a way that was never intended to benefit the
<v Speaker 2>general public, right, And so there you could have a
<v Speaker 2>breakaway civilization that dates to the eighteen nineties. That's another possibility.
<v Speaker 2>But then you have to look at the empirical evidence
<v Speaker 2>for Atlantis or whatever you want to call it. In
<v Speaker 2>other words, some worldwide super advanced civilization engaged in you
<v Speaker 2>know megalithic, you know, engineering with a degree of precision
<v Speaker 2>that we're barely capable of today. And you know, and
<v Speaker 2>then all the accounts across various ancient cultures of flying
<v Speaker 2>machines associated with these civilizer gods, right, well, is the
<v Speaker 2>Breakaway civilization actually a survival of Atlantis where even though
<v Speaker 2>this worldwide technical culture was destroyed on a large scale,
<v Speaker 2>it somehow went underground or went underwater and broke away
<v Speaker 2>from the public sphere at that time twelve thousand years
<v Speaker 2>before the present. And it's been you know, engaged in
<v Speaker 2>managing affairs and socially engineering the various civilizations of our
<v Speaker 2>planet ever since then. So that's another potential explanation of
<v Speaker 2>the origin of the Breakaway civilization, namely that it's some
<v Speaker 2>kind of a survival of Atlantean culture. And by the way,
<v Speaker 2>by the way, I was told by this same CIA
<v Speaker 2>officer who sat in roundtable meetings with April Haynes, same
<v Speaker 2>guy told me that, which was really aggravated me by
<v Speaker 2>the way that this book was being read in the
<v Speaker 2>CIA and in the Defense Intelligence Agency. And he grilled
<v Speaker 2>me for about an hour and a half, you know,
<v Speaker 2>asking me how I figured this out? And how I
<v Speaker 2>figured that out? Like it basically it looked like he
<v Speaker 2>was trying to plug a leak, and he thought I
<v Speaker 2>was getting inside information from various people. And he was like, listen,
<v Speaker 2>somehow you managed to put you know, eighty percent of
<v Speaker 2>the jigsaw puzzle pieces together in the same way that
<v Speaker 2>we did. How And one of the things he said
<v Speaker 2>to me was, we know about the Atlanteans and their
<v Speaker 2>connection to this, and one of our security issues is
<v Speaker 2>that we know that these people aren't coming from another planet.
<v Speaker 2>They have submarine not just facilities, but like city sized
<v Speaker 2>bases under the oceans, and that they represent a survival
<v Speaker 2>from the Atlantean civilization. Wow, so you could have a
<v Speaker 2>breakaway civilization that started from twelve thousand years before the present.
<v Speaker 2>And then the final possibility, which actually it fits, it
<v Speaker 2>encompasses and incorporates all of these data points, is that
<v Speaker 2>it's a breakaway civilization from the future and the defense
<v Speaker 2>contractors become these Nordics one hundred and two hundred years
<v Speaker 2>into the future or whatever, and they violate the timeline, okay,
<v Speaker 2>so that they reached back into the past to become
<v Speaker 2>the Atlanteans, which then explains, you know, how you know,
<v Speaker 2>the civilization on the one hand, is demonstrating tremendous engineering capability,
<v Speaker 2>but on the other hand doesn't have any organic evolutionary
<v Speaker 2>history in the human methropological record, as if like they
<v Speaker 2>dropped out from somewhere right, not from another planet, but
<v Speaker 2>possibly from out of the human future and contaminated the timeline.
<v Speaker 2>So it could be that they It could be that
<v Speaker 2>the breakaway civilization begins with the eighteen nineties electro gravitic airships,
<v Speaker 2>it continues with the nineteen fifties further advances in the
<v Speaker 2>aerospace industry of the Anglo American deep State becomes these
<v Speaker 2>time traveling Nordics who then reach back from the future
<v Speaker 2>and seed Atlantean civilization, which then becomes a breakaway civilization
<v Speaker 2>continue to manage the pairs on the planet. So you know,
<v Speaker 2>my apologies for how convoluted that Spider's web spider Web is,
<v Speaker 2>but it may in fact be what we're dealing with.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, man, So let me respond a couple that. Like,
<v Speaker 1>First off, when you talk about that time aspect, I
<v Speaker 1>keep thinking about the show True Detective, where Matthew mcconaie
<v Speaker 1>talks about time as a flat circle and my buddy
<v Speaker 1>Dave Rossly, who's also add contract engineers, who's relatively connected.
<v Speaker 1>He went on tim Pool with me like almost a
<v Speaker 1>year ago, and he said as well that we have
<v Speaker 1>to think of time not as this linear thing, but
<v Speaker 1>think of it as like a circle where you know things.
<v Speaker 1>You know, what you think of has happened. You know
<v Speaker 1>your lunch, you think lunch happened after breakfast, but when
<v Speaker 1>you look at it from the outside, that's not necessarily
<v Speaker 1>the case. It reminds me of the show Dark as well,
<v Speaker 1>where time becomes deterministic. So I keep my mind open
<v Speaker 1>to that type of stuff. But I love the underwater
<v Speaker 1>theory of Atlantis or what have you, because for me,
<v Speaker 1>there's a few factors I throw in there. One is
<v Speaker 1>that this technology is not an invention, it's a discovery.
<v Speaker 1>In my opinion, it's a discovery of nature, discovering there's
<v Speaker 1>energy all around you, then how to tap into that,
<v Speaker 1>much like figuring out that we can make fire. And
<v Speaker 1>so I say, there's not a you don't have to
<v Speaker 1>be around for a certain period of time to figure
<v Speaker 1>this technology out. You just need to look at the
<v Speaker 1>universe and the right perspective, which opens the door to
<v Speaker 1>ancient civilizations, like the people who built the pyramids having
<v Speaker 1>some potential anti gravity type technology, even though they might
<v Speaker 1>have not had the material science technology that we have today.
<v Speaker 1>And then also our history doesn't make any sense, like
<v Speaker 1>our human civilization only goes back like ten thousand years
<v Speaker 1>or like something like that. Like if you just objectively
<v Speaker 1>look at human civilization where we're at right now, you
<v Speaker 1>would think we should have history going back like one
<v Speaker 1>hundred thousand years like that, we should have recorded history
<v Speaker 1>for that. But all of a sudden, it's just we
<v Speaker 1>don't know anything about before ten thousand years before that.
<v Speaker 1>And then we've got stuff like Leebecki Teppee, which is
<v Speaker 1>like eighteen to twenty five thousand years old, and it's
<v Speaker 1>clearly like you know, it's like Stonehenge, and people are
<v Speaker 1>wondering like how did they even build this? And we
<v Speaker 1>thought we were like hunter gatherers then, but it's clear
<v Speaker 1>that they at least had rituals, if not cities at
<v Speaker 1>that point. And so this stuff, to me opens the
<v Speaker 1>door to this idea of Atlantis and that Atlantis could
<v Speaker 1>have had this, and I love the idea of the underwater.
<v Speaker 1>We're like, we haven't really mapped the ocean floors. There's
<v Speaker 1>a lot of like kind of conspiracy stuff about the
<v Speaker 1>NAA potentially hiding something that's at the bottom of the
<v Speaker 1>oceans somewhere. As well. You've got the stuff in the
<v Speaker 1>public sphere about like the Permutera triangle and people disappearing,
<v Speaker 1>and there was like some whistleblowers claiming that the na
<v Speaker 1>is hiding like something underneath the water. So I love
<v Speaker 1>all of those ideas that are out there, and so
<v Speaker 1>thank you for bringing those up. Now you can respond
<v Speaker 1>to any.
<v Speaker 2>Of that briefly, just because up the Bermuda Triangle. There's
<v Speaker 2>this part in my book Closer Encounters where I correlate
<v Speaker 2>naval and aerial disappearances in the Bermuda Triangle with the
<v Speaker 2>dates and times do people go missing in national parks.
<v Speaker 2>So David Politis has done this research on all the
<v Speaker 2>people who go missing every year in national parks under
<v Speaker 2>extremely bizarre circumstances where there are search and rescue operations
<v Speaker 2>that take place and scour the area where the person
<v Speaker 2>went missing, and there's no trace of this person, and
<v Speaker 2>then there remains show up there like three weeks later,
<v Speaker 2>and you see that they haven't eaten any of the
<v Speaker 2>food that they had to survive. They let's say it's
<v Speaker 2>a freezing it's the middle of winter, but they've taken
<v Speaker 2>their boots in their jacket off. You know, really weird
<v Speaker 2>cases like this where it's as if the person disappeared
<v Speaker 2>and wasn't there when the search and rescue was ongoing,
<v Speaker 2>and then the person came back into our time continuum
<v Speaker 2>at some later point, right having wondered, you know, Lord
<v Speaker 2>knows what other you know, space right in one other
<v Speaker 2>epoch before finding their way back into our space time.
<v Speaker 2>And I have this one little section in Closer Encounters
<v Speaker 2>where I note that the times that some of these
<v Speaker 2>people go missing in these national parks correspond to moments
<v Speaker 2>when aircraft and ships are lost in the Bermuda Triangle.
<v Speaker 2>And I asked, the question, is this because there are
<v Speaker 2>bases underneath some of these national parks where a hyperdimensional
<v Speaker 2>technology is being used to teleport people between the Bermuda Triangle,
<v Speaker 2>some facility, some major thing underneath the Bermuda Triangle and
<v Speaker 2>whatever bases are under our national parks. And it's like
<v Speaker 2>whenever they turn this thing on at both locations, people
<v Speaker 2>wind up as collateral damage, whether they're on boats or
<v Speaker 2>on planes in the Bermuda Triangle or whether they're hikers
<v Speaker 2>in a national park, seems to be that at you know,
<v Speaker 2>at the same time in these two different places, people
<v Speaker 2>wind up going missing. So it's among the odd lines
<v Speaker 2>of research that I look at in Closer Encounters.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, a big fan of Dave Pilates. He's been following
<v Speaker 1>me for a while as well because of the idea
<v Speaker 1>of missing people and me researching the plane. Two hundred
<v Speaker 1>and thirty nine people just gone off the face of
<v Speaker 1>the earth. No one knows where they're at, so big
<v Speaker 1>shout out to him. By the way.
<v Speaker 2>Another another relevant thing regard to that and time travel
<v Speaker 2>is all of these out of place objects that have
<v Speaker 2>been found in the geological record, where you know, at
<v Speaker 2>strata that go back like sixty million years, you find
<v Speaker 2>some woman's golden chain, or you know, at a stratum
<v Speaker 2>of I don't know, like three hundred million years, there's
<v Speaker 2>like a gold coin, but it's like a Rollman coin. Yeah.
<v Speaker 2>So look, it stands to reason that if people go
<v Speaker 2>missing in our national parks today and they're disappearing into
<v Speaker 2>some spatio temporal vortex, they might be popping out, you know,
<v Speaker 2>in the era of the dinosaurs, and this might explain
<v Speaker 2>the footprints that you know, suppose that human footprints you
<v Speaker 2>find near petrified dinosaur prints that are you know, fallaciously
<v Speaker 2>used by creationists to argue that the world is not
<v Speaker 2>more than five thousand years old. So in any case,
<v Speaker 2>you could have as you were saying, you know, by
<v Speaker 2>studying nature you can discover certain physical principles. It may
<v Speaker 2>be that there are just you know, spatio temporal vortices
<v Speaker 2>in nature and that we found a way to technologically
<v Speaker 2>replicate them. That's also a possibility.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that makes sense. And I do want to point
<v Speaker 1>out too, is that I love your thought process and
<v Speaker 1>logical and your intuition. And you're not saying that you know,
<v Speaker 1>all of your theories are necessarily correct, but you're you're
<v Speaker 1>just putting the dots together and you're saying, hey, guys,
<v Speaker 1>here's some possibilities for what could be happening. And it
<v Speaker 1>doesn't surprise me at all to make that. You would
<v Speaker 1>say the claim that like people are there like reading
<v Speaker 1>your book and like skips and like that, wondering like
<v Speaker 1>who's leaking information to this guy? Actually, people have told
<v Speaker 1>me that they've thought the same thing about me. Related
<v Speaker 1>to the plane search and what have you, that somebody
<v Speaker 1>must be leaking information, But that's not the case. Everything
<v Speaker 1>I've researched has been open search, open source. And this
<v Speaker 1>is why I tell people it's hiding in plain sight.
<v Speaker 1>You know, there's the cover up of all this stuff
<v Speaker 1>is hiding in plain site. If people just paid attention
<v Speaker 1>to what's out there, we could potentially get full disclosure.
<v Speaker 1>But people don't because we're so brainwashed by the authority
<v Speaker 1>and told that we should just believe whatever the academics
<v Speaker 1>tell us, whatever the media tells us, whatever the government
<v Speaker 1>tells us. So this kind of leads to the last
<v Speaker 1>topic I want to discuss with you, which is like
<v Speaker 1>who is hiding this technology? Like who do you think
<v Speaker 1>it's just locked Martin? Do you think there are several
<v Speaker 1>defense contractors that have it? Do you think that the
<v Speaker 1>big energy companies also have this type of technology? And
<v Speaker 1>do you think the Trump administration will be able to
<v Speaker 1>make any difference? Do you think that these people are
<v Speaker 1>above even the president? Why do you think that Trump's captured?
<v Speaker 1>What is your opinion on that front in.
<v Speaker 2>Terms of you know, who controls the technology?
<v Speaker 1>You know?
<v Speaker 2>In a very like mundane nuts and bolts way. Clearly
<v Speaker 2>Lockheed has it, and I think that RFK Junior. No, yeah, no,
<v Speaker 2>he did. He certainly did. In one of his interviews,
<v Speaker 2>maybe more than one of his interviews, he straight out
<v Speaker 2>said that his father had been assassinated by a Lockheed
<v Speaker 2>executive who had a history with the CIA as well.
<v Speaker 2>But it was basically Lockheed killed RFK Okay. That only
<v Speaker 2>makes sense from one perspective. There's only one reason why
<v Speaker 2>Lockheed is going to kill RFK Okay. It's because JFK
<v Speaker 2>was going to disclose this stuff and his brother running
<v Speaker 2>for president was going to up on his you know,
<v Speaker 2>on JFK's initiative. And so look, Lockheed certainly is involved
<v Speaker 2>in controlling this information and has a lot to lose
<v Speaker 2>from potential disclosure. As you mentioned, also lawsuits because you know,
<v Speaker 2>other companies weren't given equal bidding rights for these defense contracts.
<v Speaker 2>Another company that probably has some of it is Northrop
<v Speaker 2>Grumman because if you look at, you know, the B
<v Speaker 2>two bomber, you know, analyzes have been done that showed
<v Speaker 2>that there's no way that thing can exhibit the performance
<v Speaker 2>characteristics that it does if it just has the propulsion
<v Speaker 2>system that's being publicly acknowledged. It incorporates some kind of
<v Speaker 2>Townsend Brown, you know, positive negative polarization, and that's giving
<v Speaker 2>it some kind of compensatory augmented electro gravitic lift. So
<v Speaker 2>I would say, to a lesser extent, Northrop Grumman has it.
<v Speaker 2>And then I think there are probably some energy companies
<v Speaker 2>that are involved, if I remember correctly, EG and G. Yeah,
<v Speaker 2>Egg Yeah was involved.
<v Speaker 1>In that's one the Babbozar works for her claims to
<v Speaker 1>have worked for when he was working at S four.
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, right, yes, So I would say probably there are
<v Speaker 2>a couple of energy and then there's also metallurgy people
<v Speaker 2>who were involved, like Bechtel, the Bechtel Company, people who've
<v Speaker 2>been looking at trying to reverse engineer the meta materials
<v Speaker 2>in some of these credits. But by the way I
<v Speaker 2>saw some of your shows on this, I agree with
<v Speaker 2>you entirely. The meta material is not necessary. It's not
<v Speaker 2>The Nazis weren't using it in nineteen forty three forty
<v Speaker 2>four when they were developing for entirely conventional purposes. The
<v Speaker 2>Nazis were developing saucer airframes, and it had to do
<v Speaker 2>with simply the fact that there's less air resistance and
<v Speaker 2>it's a very aerodynamic kind of design. And then later
<v Speaker 2>they combined this saucer shaped airframe with the bell as
<v Speaker 2>a propulsion device. But that saucer, even though it was
<v Speaker 2>micro perforated, they developed the technique to micro perforate metal
<v Speaker 2>so that they're they're the It is part of what
<v Speaker 2>they call suctioning of the boundary layer, so that the
<v Speaker 2>air that forms around the edge of an aircraft, which
<v Speaker 2>then creates air resistance, can be suctioned into the aircraft
<v Speaker 2>and siphoned off in a way that allows it to
<v Speaker 2>basically cut through the air like a knife through butter.
<v Speaker 2>But that's not meta material. It's just sophisticated airframe design.
<v Speaker 2>So you don't need a meta material. But there are
<v Speaker 2>companies like the Bechtel Corporation that are working on, you know,
<v Speaker 2>reverse engineering the recovered debris from Roswell and so forth,
<v Speaker 2>and they also consider that proprietary corporate information and they're
<v Speaker 2>part of the gate keeping structure.
<v Speaker 1>And so do you think that Trump is gonna be
<v Speaker 1>able to make a difference. You think that Tulsea Gabbard
<v Speaker 1>will make a difference. So you think they get they're
<v Speaker 1>going to get the.
<v Speaker 2>Call, not on their own, not on their around. They're
<v Speaker 2>not going to they don't have a hope in hell,
<v Speaker 2>you know, breaking this control system of their own initiative.
<v Speaker 2>But if there is a defection in process within the
<v Speaker 2>control system itself, and there there are a group of
<v Speaker 2>people who are interested in staging some kind of a coup,
<v Speaker 2>they could use the transition to the Trump administration and
<v Speaker 2>individuals like Tulsey Gabbard and Kash Patel and you know
<v Speaker 2>RFK and Trump himself to be a moment of opportunity
<v Speaker 2>or a kind of soft coup. So, but the initiative
<v Speaker 2>would have to come from people within the control system itself.
<v Speaker 1>I think that's a good way to put it, you know,
<v Speaker 1>is that it could be a moment of opportunity. And
<v Speaker 1>maybe that was what happened with Salvator Pays's patents as well,
<v Speaker 1>in terms of how they got out to the public.
<v Speaker 1>There's also a mystery about why you would even make
<v Speaker 1>those patents public. So I think that I have hope,
<v Speaker 1>but like I think, it's unlikely that we're going to
<v Speaker 1>get it under the administration. But the more we talk
<v Speaker 1>about it, maybe we can will it into existence. Who knows,
<v Speaker 1>I also want to point out two that yeah, the
<v Speaker 1>B two, I had heard that it's definitely electrogravitics that
<v Speaker 1>they're using on the wings. They're just using the byfield
<v Speaker 1>Brown effect. You create that asymmetrical charge and you get
<v Speaker 1>access lifts. You know, this is how these crafts droned
<v Speaker 1>at this point. I mean B two is old that's
<v Speaker 1>old tech now, so I presume that all of our
<v Speaker 1>spy planes, even drones are basically using this. Okay, So
<v Speaker 1>the last question I want to ask you, which is
<v Speaker 1>that when I we add up everything we talked about
<v Speaker 1>here today, to me, this means that disclosure the UFO
<v Speaker 1>topic has some very dark answer to it behind the scenes,
<v Speaker 1>do you think And this is something salvage Pais when
<v Speaker 1>I interviewed him, kind of brought up, and something I've
<v Speaker 1>been kind of on board with for a while is
<v Speaker 1>this prison planet scenario, which I think is kind of
<v Speaker 1>open ended, but the idea that there is some ruling
<v Speaker 1>class of elite or potentially extraterrestrial whatever you want to believe,
<v Speaker 1>that is essentially managing our entire society. And I forget
<v Speaker 1>what the who the guy is quotes it, but like
<v Speaker 1>the best prisoners are ones that don't even know they're
<v Speaker 1>in a prison, you know, and that we could be
<v Speaker 1>being managed like that, where they're slow dripping this technology
<v Speaker 1>out to us little by little, where you know they're
<v Speaker 1>they're they're managing every aspect of our society. Do you
<v Speaker 1>think that's a plausible explanation or what are your opinions
<v Speaker 1>on what could be this dark thing that you know?
<v Speaker 2>This is all absolutely absolutely and look, this is not
<v Speaker 2>a new thought. When you read Charles Fort, who researched
<v Speaker 2>this subject from the nineteen tens into the nineteen thirties
<v Speaker 2>in a series of books that he wrote the Book
<v Speaker 2>of the Damned. While Talents Low new Lands in the
<v Speaker 2>nineteen thirties, Charles Fort said, look, ties piloting these craft
<v Speaker 2>are like the British colonizers in India, and we're a
<v Speaker 2>farm to them, okay, And he basically compared it to
<v Speaker 2>a situation of colonization. So this is not a new idea,
<v Speaker 2>and I think there's a tremendous amount of evidence in
<v Speaker 2>favor of it, especially again if you look at the
<v Speaker 2>religious belief systems that have dominated human history. I mean,
<v Speaker 2>look at the devas in Hinduism and their connection to
<v Speaker 2>the extremely hierarchical and oppressive caste system. Okay, and look
<v Speaker 2>at the way ancient Egyptian society was structured. Look at
<v Speaker 2>the Sumerian myths and what they tell us about. You know,
<v Speaker 2>how Enlil saw humanity basically as a slave race, right
<v Speaker 2>And how Inky though, try to disrupt that program and
<v Speaker 2>to become an advocate and a champion for humanity. ANKI,
<v Speaker 2>who is very much a you know, correlate to the
<v Speaker 2>figure of Prometheus, who leads a revolt on behalf of
<v Speaker 2>humanity against the tyrannical power of Olympus. So I don't
<v Speaker 2>think it's a monolithic control system. I think that there
<v Speaker 2>are rebels within it. After all, the people who are
<v Speaker 2>managing this system. When me belabor the point, people who
<v Speaker 2>are managing the system are like any other human beings,
<v Speaker 2>you know, subject to complex psychological motivations. They are open
<v Speaker 2>to potential defections, changes of heart. You know, no human
<v Speaker 2>system is entirely monolithic. But if you remember going back
<v Speaker 2>to what this military intelligence guy told me, who met
<v Speaker 2>with a few of these Nordics who are imploring him
<v Speaker 2>to go back to Kit Green and his associates and
<v Speaker 2>tell them to leave their kids alone. They were fugitives
<v Speaker 2>from a totalitarian system. It was like their view of
<v Speaker 2>their own society was that it was something akin to
<v Speaker 2>North Korea and they were escape from basically the Nordic
<v Speaker 2>North Korea. Right, So well, this is grim. I mean,
<v Speaker 2>if the people managed planet are like North Korea, you know,
<v Speaker 2>we're not in a great situation. And look, we can
<v Speaker 2>only hope, and it does seem that there are dissidents
<v Speaker 2>within that system, but we need to develop an interface
<v Speaker 2>that's devoted to liberty and the individual and our creative potential,
<v Speaker 2>so that if there are dissonance within that system, then
<v Speaker 2>they have people to work with. You know, we can't
<v Speaker 2>sit here and expect to be saved. And by the way,
<v Speaker 2>that's an incredibly dangerous expectation because undoubtedly, if there are
<v Speaker 2>people who want to tyrannize over you, and your basic
<v Speaker 2>attitude is that you're waiting to be saved from out
<v Speaker 2>of the sky, you know, you're basically signing yourself over
<v Speaker 2>to a new epoch of slavery. Right, You're going to
<v Speaker 2>be subject to a cognitive dissonance scheme and a bait
<v Speaker 2>and switch where you know you think you're train, you're
<v Speaker 2>trading your slave master for liberty. But it's actually just
<v Speaker 2>two heads of the same hydra.
<v Speaker 1>I agree one hundred percent, especially the last part. I
<v Speaker 1>don't think anybody's coming to save us. I think we're
<v Speaker 1>the only ones that can save ourselves. And I don't
<v Speaker 1>agree with the people that say we just have to
<v Speaker 1>wait for the aliens come save us, or what have you. There.
<v Speaker 2>So that is the most insidious and nefarious aspect of
<v Speaker 2>the so called disclosure program that is being unfolded for
<v Speaker 2>us right now. If you look at the connections between
<v Speaker 2>certain individuals like Diana Pasoka and Daniel Sheehan and the
<v Speaker 2>Vatican and other individuals with other occult religious organizations, their
<v Speaker 2>basic attitude is, let's prepare people for the sagacious guides
<v Speaker 2>and guardians of humanity. These you know, these humanoids who
<v Speaker 2>never sinned and therefore never needed Christ to come save them.
<v Speaker 2>They're going to come be the guides and guardians of humanity,
<v Speaker 2>and they will control our society in a way that
<v Speaker 2>gives us access to this free energy. Right this is
<v Speaker 2>the totalitarian ship that we're being set up for.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, one hundred percent. I hate it. It's like the
<v Speaker 1>one world government stuff. It's the Ooh, it's just like
<v Speaker 1>in the movies. Here they come to save us. Like
<v Speaker 1>I think, people gotta start wrapping their brain around this,
<v Speaker 1>this this topic, this UFO phenomenon is not gonna be
<v Speaker 1>like the movies. It's not gonna be this glorification that
<v Speaker 1>everybody's pushing out there. It's gonna be dark. There's gonna
<v Speaker 1>be evil stuff that's been conducted to keep it secret,
<v Speaker 1>and people should be expecting the unexpected.
<v Speaker 2>That's what I would say, absolutely.
<v Speaker 1>So, Jason, thank you so much for talking to me. Man,
<v Speaker 1>you are amazing. This was an awesome conversation. I want
<v Speaker 1>to have more conversations in the future with you, for sure.
<v Speaker 1>Let me give you a minute to go ahead and
<v Speaker 1>shout out your book again, Close Encounters. Everybody should read that.
<v Speaker 1>I mean, it's gonna dig more into everything that we've
<v Speaker 1>been talking about. Here, tell us where we can find you,
<v Speaker 1>you know, and where people can check out your content.
<v Speaker 2>Sure, the book is Closer in counter play on Close Encounters,
<v Speaker 2>obviously Closer Encounters, And you can find links to all
<v Speaker 2>my books and my social media at my website Jason
<v Speaker 2>Rezagorgani dot com. Maybe put a link to that in
<v Speaker 2>the show notes. Jason Reza Georgani dot com. It has
<v Speaker 2>a link to my x account, my YouTube, all my
<v Speaker 2>books on Amazon and so forth.
<v Speaker 1>Okay, we'll do. Thank you very much, Jason. There has
<v Speaker 1>been another episode of Hard Trew's Take It Easy Everybody,