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

Jason is a Philosopher and Author from NY. He has written thirteen books about philosophy. His book Closer Encounters covers a lot of the topics we discuss. Find Jason Jorjani on his website or social medias - https://jasonrezajorjani.com/

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello everybody, and welcome to another episode of Heart Shrews podcast. Today,
I have a very special guest. His name is Jason Georgeohnny.
He is an author and philosopher. Jason, thank you very
much for being my guest on Heart Truth. How are
you doing today?

Speaker 2 (00:12):
It's an absolute pleasure to be with you, Ashton, and
I'm glad we finally got to meet. I've been following
your work for a few what is it a couple
of years now, Yeah, And let me just start off
by thanking you for the incredible research that you've done.
I'm sold on your case for the plane, so we'll see.
I mean it looks like a pretty sound hypothesis to me.

Speaker 1 (00:35):
Well, this is gonna be a great crossover event that
we got going on. So right off the bat, I
want to know a little bit about your origin story
and how you got involved in this. I first saw
you on Danny Jones. I started looking at your research
and your work. You started talking about zero point energy
and that I always ring some bells for me because
I consider myself influencer zero point energy. So how did
you get involved in looking into all of this advanced technology,

(00:58):
breakaway civilization stuff and you know the crossover the UFO community.

Speaker 2 (01:04):
Well, I came out with a book in twenty sixteen
called Prometheus and Atlas, and it was an expansion of
my doctoral dissertation about twice the length of the dissertation version,
and it won the twenty sixteen Book Award of the
Parapsychological Association. And I also joined the Society for Scientific

(01:30):
Exploration in the same year as Prometheus anatlyss won the
PA Book Award. So I began to make a number
of connections in the parapsychology community, and interestingly enough, I
found that, especially through the SSEC, that community overlapped a
lot with the UFO community, which dovetails with zero point
Energy research and so forth. I mean, there are people

(01:52):
like you know how put off that have cross listed
membership between these two organizations. By the way, let me
ask you for a small ashton. I hate looking at
myself on recordings, which is why I never do you know,
individual podcasts, so so stay with me as much as
you can, so I'm not left here, you know, looking

(02:14):
at my own lug anyway. So you know, I began
to make a lot of connections in that community, and
at that time I was also doing shows with Jeffrey
Misch Love on New Thinking Aloud, and he had a
lot of other guests on that show that were part

(02:34):
of the same community. So I started to meet people
like Jacques Vallet, I mean, Jacques Valais reached out to me,
I think within a few months of Prometheus and Atlas
having come out. He read the book, invited me to
his home. I had a very nice dinner with him
and his then wife, second wife, and so so, you know,

(02:55):
I started to make a lot of connections people in
the remote viewing community, people in military and eleigence, and
wound up at the nexus of what eventually would become
the so called UFO disclosure movement. Except that at just
the moment when you know, I was, you know, basically

(03:18):
becoming the nexus of all these connections, and you know,
a promising young theorist in this domain, I was defamed
in in what I eventually found out was an intelligence operation.
And I think the reason for that, which will come
clearer as we you know, on packs discussion over time,
is that the kinds of arguments that I advanced in

(03:41):
my book on Close Encounters are are things that would
have been severely disruptive to the type of narrative that
the gatekeepers of UFO disclosure are forwarding today.

Speaker 1 (03:54):
So what do you think That's a great question, great segue,
which is what what do you think the narrative they're
trying to spread is, and what narrative do you think
they're afraid of? And who do you think these people are, like,
who are they connected to? What are your opinions of
the UFO community as well?

Speaker 2 (04:13):
Look, it's actually very complex. So you know, one of
the fallacies that a lot of people who engage in,
you know, conspiracy theorizing fall prey to is the overly
simplistic view that the deep state is monolithic. It's really not,

(04:33):
maybe unfortunately not, because you know, there's a lot of
really dangerous chaos at play behind the scenes. You I
think had been interested in, you know, inquiring into who's
behind this slow drip model for disclosure, And so let

(04:56):
me start there. I think maybe you know best to
flesh things out from there. I can tell you based
on two individuals who worked with the former Director of
National Intel. Well yeah, at this point, former Director of
National Intelligence, Avril Haines, I can tell you, based on

(05:17):
two different individuals one of whom is a CIA officer
who worked with her as a colleague in UFO working
group meetings UAP working group meetings roundtables basically, and from
another individual who worked directly under her as a private

(05:38):
contractor and who also had very high level contracts with
the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, which is the same organization
that David Grush is coming from out of RIGHTA. So
I have two independent points of confirmation about you know
what the slow Drip disclosure agenda was, and it was

(05:58):
an agenda being run from out of April Haines's office,
apparently with her as the director of it. And the
agenda was this, Okay. First of all, their priority was
to make it as if the United to make it
appear as if the United States government was not investigating
UAPs in any serious way prior to, like, I don't know,

(06:19):
fifteen twenty years ago, prior to the Nimtz incident and
these videos of the TikTok and so forth that they released. Okay,
So they wanted a clean slate approach where they're not
going to be held legally accountable for anything that they
had done in the preceding. I don't know what seventy
years or more. Actually we'll get into the more because
this goes actually back to the airships of eighteen ninety

(06:39):
seven and so forth. But so that that was their
number one priority make it look like everything started with
the nimits and these types of incidents. And interestingly enough
to first this was like a four or five phase
plan that they have that was supposed to be unfolded
over the course of something like fifteen to twenty years.
And the first phase I was told was that they

(07:03):
were going to use the James Web telescope, this new
telescope that they have out there, to basically release to
the public imagery of apparent artificial structures on distant bodies
in our Solar system, so not necessarily planets, but maybe

(07:25):
on the moons of Jupiter and the moons of Saturn.
There were going to be structures that were unambiguously artificial,
and that those were the first things that will be
released to the public, because the idea was, Okay, well,
these are far away, they don't present any imminent rep
people are not going to panic. Then the next phase
was that they'd identify structures on the moon, on our

(07:46):
own moon, and on Mars that are artificial. And the
third phase was that they were going to try to
connect these structures on the Moon and Mars to anomalous
archaeological sites on Earth, wow, like for example, the Osyrian
at Abydos in Egypt or Tiajuanaku in Bolivia, and they

(08:10):
were going to note structural similarities between some of these sites, like,
for example, it appears that the site on the Dark
Side of the Moon involves a construction technique with something
like a poured stone, like a kind of as if
you could, you know, subject stone to some kind of
chemical compound that would liquefy it and turn it into

(08:31):
something like concrete, where then you could shape the stone,
or maybe some kind of a sonic resonance could be
used to molecularly destabilize the stone and then shape it.
And that they were going to note that the same
kind of construction techniques had been employed on these sites
on Earth, so maybe there's a common builder. Then the
fourth phase and so now we're like ten years out

(08:53):
in their plan of slow disclosure. The fourth phase was
going to be anthropologie that they were going to excavate
remains of humanoids who they believed were responsible for these
engineering anomalies on the moon Mars, other moons in the

(09:15):
Solar System, and also for anomalous sites on Earth, and
that these were going to be these very tall people,
you know, who were referred to as I don't know,
nephilem and giants and so forth, and various mythological traditions,
and then they were going to do DNA testing on
these people.

Speaker 1 (09:32):
And this was all.

Speaker 2 (09:34):
Step by step, slowly going to lead to the disclosure
of these people themselves as the pilots of UAPs.

Speaker 1 (09:43):
Interesting, that was the original.

Speaker 2 (09:45):
Now here's the interesting thing, Ashton, is when David Gresh
came out, and this speaks to the you know, deep
state not being a monolith. When David Gresh came out
with his leaks, quote unquote, these people were incensed. They
had no idea what was going to happen. They did
not authorize him to be saying the things he was saying,

(10:08):
and mainly they were so outraged because he was directly
implicating the United States government cover up on all kinds
of levels, from the you know, cover up of the
technology and reverse engineering efforts to cover up of biological
entities and so on and so forth, and so he
basically threw a monkey wrench in their phased disclosure plan.

(10:28):
And what that immediately says to me is there we're
dealing with at least two factions, because you know, Grush
is not a Whistleblowerrush was an hunt man for people
within defense intelligence who have their own agenda of what
should be released when. So here we've got at least
two different competing agendas, and then we can get into
why I think there's a third and maybe even a

(10:50):
fourth agenda as well.

Speaker 1 (10:52):
So yeah, let me address some of those claims. Is
I love what you're saying. The first of all, Avril
heinz Abralhyines obviously said her last name. People should probably
be saying her name more often. Technically current Director of
National Intelligence, Director of National Intelligence, really big role, Really
glad Tulsea Gabbard's gonna get in there somebody who has
probably no insight is what's really going on behind the scenes.

(11:13):
And I'm very curious to see how her public persona
changes after she gets in and gets exposed to some
of this, because, like what you said about the factions,
I totally agree. The joke that I've been making on
podcasts is that I think there's at least two factions.
One that doesn't want any of this stuff to come
out because they think that maybe it's too dangerous or
they want the power or what have you. And then

(11:35):
there's another one that wants like a little bit of
it to come out, but they don't want all of
Nobody wants like all of it to come out a
catastrophic disclosure, at least how I've looked at it. So
what you said about David Grush makes a lot of
sense as well, is that there's another faction going, hey,
you you need to go out there and go start
telling people that, Like we've got these videos of UFOs

(11:55):
and it's pretty clearly exotic technology. It's not airplane flying
around with conventional means and things like that and talking
about alien bodies and what have you. So what then
do you think about, like, you know, who's on what side? Right?
Like when I'm looking at the UFO community, I personally

(12:16):
feel like a lot of the people I see at
the UFO community, the front runners, the ones that are
on mainstream shows like the Luella Zondo's, the Jeremy Corbels,
the George Knaps that are out there their whole crew.
They all talk to each other. It is very obvious
that they do, and they communicate with one another. The
impression I get from them is that they have decided

(12:36):
they're going to protect national security by not revealing the
technology or any technology that would put the United States
at a disadvantage relative to other countries that like, you know,
maybe we're reverse engineering this UFO technology. We've got this
either free energy or super advanced super weapons, and they're
going that, we're not gonna talk about that, so instead
we're just gonna talk about the alien aspect of it.

(13:00):
On the other side, I see people like doctor Stephen Greer,
who talks a ton about the technology. He still talks
about the alien side of it as well, but really
talks to the Black Project engineers and is like, Hey,
these guys are telling you we've got this exotic technology
out there and we've figured it out. How do you
see all these people and which ones do you trust

(13:22):
or not trust? Oh?

Speaker 2 (13:25):
Man, I don't trust any of them. Good, I don't
trust any of them. Okay. Look, going back to Grush,
I think that the higher ranking individuals who authorized Grush
to act as a frontman for the highly selective disclosure

(13:48):
of certain information are defectors from the organization, which at
one point may have been called MJ twelve, if it
was actually called that, and the MJ twelve documents that
were leaked aren't forgeries if the organization certainly isn't called
that anymore. And in any case, that organization was privatized,

(14:10):
it was taken from you know, a government agencies into
private aerospace by the nineteen seventies at the latest. But
I think that the gentlemen who authorized Grush to come
forward are defectors from that organization. Wow, so you have
this kind of MJ twelve turned you know, private corporate

(14:32):
aerospace cabal, and there are what you might call old
guard individuals in that organization who don't want any of
this release. They want to keep it secret for as
long as they possibly can. They want a monopoly on
the technology. And there's an argument to be made that
if they haven't already branched often become a breakaway civilization,

(14:53):
they're in the process of doing so. And then you
have defectors from that organization, people who and it's been
explained to me that perhaps part of this is a
generational shift, and that it's some of the younger people
who are behind Grush, who are sort of breaking with
the old Guard. But in any case, those are two
factions of you know what at one point was called

(15:14):
MJ twelve. I think that there's a fourth group. So
we've talked about, you know, the Abril Haynes slow drip people,
then Grush, who represents the defectors in MJ twelve, then
the old Guard of MJ twelve. I think there's also
a fourth group, which we can you know, unpack in
more details. As you know, we move along with the conversation.

(15:35):
But that fourth group are individuals who are informally referred
to as the Collins Elite. And these are evangelical or
traditionalist Christians. They may be Evangelical Protestants, they may be
traditionalist Catholics who are in the CIA, Air Force, Naval Intelligence,

(15:56):
other branches of defense intelligence, and in their capacity as
private individuals beginning in the nineteen at least since the
nineteen forties, in the era of Jack Parsons, quite possibly
long before then, and I've made the case that they
may go back to the airship mystery of the eighteen
ninety six eighteen ninety seven. This private group of devout

(16:22):
Christians has come to the conclusion that somehow the UFO
phenomenon is inextricable from the occult and that probably it
represents a demonic force that needs to be held at bay.
And so they see the secrecy as basically a stop
gap keeping the apocalypse at day. And so we also

(16:46):
have these nut cases, you know, in the government various time.

Speaker 1 (16:50):
I mean, you know, I would have said it's naughty
a couple of years ago. But the more I think
about the implications of the technology and I want to
talk about that, like the latter half of this podcast,
more I think, Man, it's not that crazy to think
this technology could lead to the apocalypse.

Speaker 2 (17:04):
No, a lot of it's true. The way that Peter Thiel,
you know, framed it is actually thought provoking, and we
can come back to that.

Speaker 1 (17:11):
Yeah, you know, let's talk about that right now, just
because we brought it up because I wanted to ask you.
This was one of the things I was watching another
podcast that you did. It kind of blew me away,
where you were talking about the technology and you explained, like,
what if this technology is so powerful that you either
have to be like fully altruistic collectivist society or you
have to be like a fascist or like what a

(17:34):
collectivist fascist, a totalitarian society or a perfectly altruistic freedom
society that you would never harm another thing. And you go, well,
humans are never going to be perfectly altruistic. There's no
chance on that. And I heard Peter thal say this,
I think you said it before him when he went
on Ji Rogan, He goes, what if they have to
be all angels are all demons? That thought terrifies me

(17:55):
because it's so different than how we've structured our society currently,
and I think most freedom of love in Americas, I'm
a libertarian, look at that idea and go, this is outlandish.
And it presents a pretty complicated dilemma, which is would
we want this technology if it meant that we have
to do away with individual freedoms to prevent us from

(18:17):
destroying ourselves. So, first of all, did you talk to
Peter Thiel or are you in contact with him? How
do you guys both have the same view? And can
you expand upon your thoughts around that.

Speaker 2 (18:30):
I've never spoken to him, I know people who know him.
I've known more than one individual who's been in touch
with him. How do we share the same view. Well, unfortunately,
it's a view that I think any thoughtful person who
spent a long time contemplating the various dimensions of this

(18:51):
phenomenon and the implications of reverse engineering its technology would
come to this conclusion. So, look, there are at least
two serious issues here. One is the security implications of
the propulsion system, right, because and even there there are two,

(19:17):
there are at least two separate sub issues. So one
of them is this that I mean, Look, if you
look throughout the course of history at various forms of combustion,
from gunpowder to you know, gas driven combustion, to conventional explosives,

(19:40):
to then nuclear weapons as an application of nuclear energy,
of nuclear fusion and fission, it is the case that
every time we've scaled up our magnitude of energy usage
and harnessing of a new magnitude of energy, we've also

(20:01):
developed weaponry that's commensurately higher in order of magnitude of
its destructive potential. Right, I mean, this is a very
clear trend in human history. So the question is, you know,
is there a kind of weapon that would be an
order of magnitude more destructive than nuclear weapons? And that

(20:24):
would be a dual use, you know, military application of
what you might call a free energy system, right, and
clearly the answer is yes. I mean, if you look
at what it is that's propelling these UFOs or UAPs,
it is a kind of energy and propulsion platform that

(20:45):
could be weaponized into something that would make a nuclear
bomb look like a firecracker. How put Off has gone
on record saying and he's quoted to this effect and
Nick Cook's excellent book The Hunter for Zero Point, so
put Off said that he thought a coffee cups worth

(21:07):
of the exactly a coffee cups worth of the you
could say, propellant for this craft would potentially vaporize the
oceans of Earth if its energy were to be released
in an uncontrollable cascade. So as you think of a
nuclear reactor, right, I mean, a nuclear reactor releases nuclear

(21:29):
energy in a highly controlled manner. A nuclear bomb is
a sort of runaway, you know, a cascade of this energy,
and you could do the same thing with zero point
energy to produce a bomb that would be many orders
of magnitude more destructive than a nuclear weapon. So that's
one problem from a security standpoint. There's an even bigger

(21:51):
problem from a security standpoint, which is that as soon
as they started to research these things, and you know,
there's good evidence in our that in our country that
began in the nineteen fifties. There are all these mainstream
newspaper reports in the New York Herald Tribune and other publications,

(22:12):
I think some arrow some aeronautical journals at the time
as well, quoting CEOs of Martin Aircraft in particular Lear
Con there and other companies, saying that they were working
on anti gravity propulsion and that within about the same

(22:32):
time span as the Manhattan Project they would be able
to roll these craft off the assembly line. This was
in the mid nineteen fifties in mainstream publications, and the
whole thing goes dark round about nineteen fifty seven or so.
We never hear about this again. And I think it's
because what these gentlemen discovered, or what was explained to

(22:54):
them by people who already had a grasp on this technology,
is that it's not simply a propulse system that can
get you from New York to Australia in you know,
whatever an hour or whatever. It warps space time. And
you know, the first people to observe this were actually
the the the scientists working in an SS think tank

(23:19):
based in Prague in nineteen forty three forty four, toward
the end of the war, where they constructed this that
dozen foot tall device, accorn shaped or bell shaped device
that had magnetically counter rotating cylinders.

Speaker 1 (23:39):
Is that or is that something different to the bell?

Speaker 2 (23:43):
It was a device that was that contained inside a ceramic,
non reactive material. It contained counter rotating cylinders of a
mercury thorium isotope that were being magnetically rotated with high

(24:05):
energy with constant alternating current pumped into it and intermittent
shocks of direct current. And what they found was, first
of all, it created an anti gravitic effect. Okay, it
had counterbarry this this electromagnetic system shocking this mercury thorium
isotope led to anti gravity, so that they had to

(24:28):
chain the bell down so that it wouldn't you know,
you know, so they wouldn't lose billions, you know, billions
of dollars of hardware. But the other thing that they
realized was it warped space time around the bell, and
it did that in ways that you know, I mean,
basically made plants turn to mulch it disrupted organisms on

(24:52):
a cellular molecular level because of the way in which
it warped space time. And so this was known our
ready and you know by the by the SS toward
the end of the war, and then we appropriated all
of that information as the Allied Powers basically seized these
facilities in Europe in nineteen forty five, so that by

(25:13):
the time Martin Aircraft, which became then Lockheed Martin, was
working on the same thing in the mid nineteen fifties.
I think it was explained to them that listen, jackasses,
you think you're, you know, going to create something faster
than an airplane, you know, for the convenience of public transport,
you're actually creating a flying time machine. And you can't
give a flying time machine to Tom Dick and Harriet

(25:36):
who go around, you know, mucking about in the time
continuum as they so please. You know. I mean, suppose
somebody wants to go back in a personal tragedy in
their family, the loss of a loved one and so forth,
and imagine the ripple effects of that on a geopolitical
scale potentially.

Speaker 1 (25:53):
Yeah, two security issues.

Speaker 2 (25:55):
One is the you know, explosive potential, the weaponization in
terms of explosive yield of you know, a zero point
energy device. And the other one is the danger to
the time continuum and the fact that you know you
cannot have a democratization of this technology because you know

(26:16):
it could basically be used to completely destabilize the time continuum.

Speaker 1 (26:21):
Yeah, and I want to talk about the time travel
part a little later, but I guess what I would
say for right now is knowing what you just said,
are you still a fan of disclosure? Are you pro disclosure?
Are you pro? This is too dangerous? We need to
pack this up until we have safeguards in place to
get it out safely.

Speaker 2 (26:40):
Here's my problem the people who have taken it upon
themselves to be the gatekeepers of disclosure, particularly in what
we might call the Anglo American establishment, you know, the
five eyes system. Yep, they are lacking in vision, lacking

(27:01):
in ethos. They have apparently engaged in all kinds of
horrendously unethical behavior, you know, murdering perfectly decent people. And
this is another reason why, Okay, you know, it will
be very difficult to have any kind of authentic disclosure
because there's a massive amount of crime that's been committed

(27:24):
in the name of keeping this secret. Right, and so
my problem is that if you look back at let's say,
you know, my background is in philosophy, Right, if you
look back at Plato's Republic and his conception of the guardians,
the philosopher kings or philosopher rulers of the ideal state,
the people who we've got protecting the secret in the
Anglo American establishment are far from it. They're far from

(27:45):
and they're already in power. Okay, we can see how
they're running the world. And then on the other side,
as an opposition to them, we've got what neo Confucianist China,
and you know, an Orthodox system in Russia. And you know,
so the issue is that the world is already being
run by reprehensibly, irresponsible and unethical people, and so you know,

(28:10):
I'm not in any position to replace them as someone
who selects a new governing elite. I think that a
good case could be made that we ought to challenge
their authority by developing some kind of a rogue society
that's devoted to liberty. You know, I share your libertarian sympathies,

(28:31):
and I think that, you know, a good case could
be made for a piratical, sort of libertarian appropriation of
this technology and of this power source, albeit within the
context of a philosophically substantive vision of a new type

(28:52):
of society with social fabric that's capable of constructively handling
this kind of technology. I mean, you would have to
be very selective about the kinds of people in terms of,
you know, their ethical constitution. Who would be part of
that rogue society, kind of counter breakaway civilization organized around

(29:16):
freedom and the individual and around maximizing creativity and creative potential.
You would have to be very selective about that. So
I think a good case can be made, and as
I have made in you know, more than one of
my books, for a sort of piratical revolt against the
existing control system.

Speaker 1 (29:34):
Man, I love that, and I'm going to touch on
that in a bit. I want to jump back to
a second and just explain to some of the viewers
when we're talking about MJA twelve, this idea of this
Majestic twelve, this elite group of people that kind of
decided what the fate of this UFO phenomenon technology was
going to be. Demands Field Amendment in nineteen seventy one

(29:55):
or nineteen seventy three, I believe is when the anti
gravity technology got moved from the military to the defense
contractors and they used it to protect from Foyer requests
things like that. Richard Feyneman. Actually I looked up that
quote about the coffee cup because I heard it so
many times. I was like, where does this come from?
Is this real? You know? It turns out it's from

(30:16):
Richard Feynman and John Archibald Wheeler and Richard Fineman won
the Nobel Prize for quantum electrodynamics, so kind of knows
a thing or two about the quantum phenomenon. And yes,
they said that there's enough energy in the size of
that I think they said like cubic meter. But the
idea is a very small area of empty space, so
not of air or water, but of literally empty space

(30:38):
to vaporize all the Earth's oceans, which opens the door
to this idea of zero point energy. And it challenges
the orthodox view that it's called the vacuum catastrophe, that
they think that yes, maybe there's zero point energy, but
it's not. It's this tiny little amount. And Richard Fineman
is like, nah, it's like a huge ocean of energy.

(30:58):
Also you mentioned in terms of the timeline like the
forties and what also happened in nineteen forty three, Well,
the mid of the story of the Philadelphia Experiment, where
you have all the smartest minds were working on this
project to cloak this battle cruiser, and the story goes
it got teleported. And this speaks to what you mentioned

(31:19):
in terms of this technology is not just you get
pre energy or what have you, is like this comes
with bending space time itself. And one of the implications
when we look at the Philadelphia Experiment, supposely there are
people like stuck in the walls because they didn't, you know,
make the field around the craft correctly. Personally, I would

(31:40):
not want to be in one of those crafts. And
this is where when you mentioned the pilot scenario I
wanted to get your opinion on this, is that I
would imagine that, Yes, maybe in the forties, fifties, sixties, seventies, eighties,
I don't know exactly up until when we were making
crafts thinking that we should have somebody inside of it
because we need pilots inside of all of our craft Yes,

(32:01):
and I started researching hypersonic flight. Our hypersonic spyplanes like
SR seventy one in the sixties, And what I found
out was that they use a plasma sheath in front
of them to minimize the drag and actually helped propel
the craft as well. And they just kept thinking like, well,
you know, I think you said this, Why have the
spam in the can? You know, why would you want

(32:21):
the person inside the craft? This is just a liability,
the plane and the person inside the liability. Today's day
and age, it's all about drones, and so I would
just think, wouldn't the government just look at this situation
and go, oh, the plasma is what's allowing the hypersonic speeds.
It's not the craft. Why not just turn the plasma
into a drone.

Speaker 2 (32:39):
I'll tell you why. Go ahead, I'll tell you why.
So I meant to actually get into this earlier when
I was saying there's two issues. And then in terms
of the security issue, the weaponization and the manipulation of
the timeline are two sub issues under you know, the
securitytions of the propulsion system. But then there's this other

(33:03):
issue that I was alluding to earlier, and that has
to do with the pilots. So it turns out, and
I'm going to tell you how I know this for well,
I believe the person who told me this, but I'll
say I'll get into that in a minute. It turns
out that the guidance system of these craft requires interaction

(33:25):
with human consciousness. One of the problems, main problems they
had in reverse engineering these things is that they've found
out that the pilots are an integral component of the craft,
and that they're using something like psychokinesis in order to
pilot the craft. So you can develop sophisticated cybernetic interfaces

(33:47):
to link a brain to a navigation system. Obviously that's
not hard to understand, but it's not just a brain
machine interface. It actually involves psychokinesis. And so part of
the crime that's been committed in this black project is
that they have actually recruited not just adept psychics, but

(34:10):
children with extraordinary psychic ability to act as pilots of
these reverse engineered craft. There's a marine Michael Herrera, who,
as part of even Greer's Disclosure project, offered testimony to
the effect that people in the US Deep State have
scoured third and fourth world countries for children who they

(34:32):
can effectively buy from their impoverished parents and who exhibit
extraordinary sigh ability and bring them to these black project
facilities and use them basically as part of the guidance
system to navigate with these craft. So I tell you

(34:54):
I believe this in particular because I know a gentleman
who was how can I put this, A very senior
remote viewer with the military and intelligence background, and very

(35:17):
very senior person in the remote viewing program, and he
was he told me this in his living room, and okay,
let me unpack this bit by bit. So he what
he said was that he was taken to a Lockheed
facility in California, and that this place was in a ship. Okay,

(35:39):
So there was a shack on the side of the
road by the highway. It looked like an abandoned warehouse
or something. And he went into this shack and the
whole floor dropped. The entire thing was an elevator basically,
and he said, it went down, Lord knows, I mean
hundreds and hundreds of feet through solid rock. And when

(36:02):
he came out in this facility in California, Lockheed facility
in California, they had in a huge like a hangar
like well, like an underground cavern that had been turned
into a hangar. They had an FAA style reconstruction of
a collision between a UFO and an airliner. I don't

(36:24):
know if it was a civilian airliner or a military
aircraft or whatever, but it was, you know, one of
our aircraft. A plane had collided with this object and
they had reconstructed it the way that the FAA reconstructs
airliner crashes. And they had brought him there because they
couldn't figure out the guidance system, the navigation system for

(36:47):
the craft. They were reverse engineering it, but there were
key things about the navigation system that they couldn't figure out,
and this gentleman figured it out for them. And you know,
part of the problem was that they weren't accounting for
how psychokinesis is required in order to navigate these electrogravitic craft.

Speaker 1 (37:10):
So let me ask why not? Why can't the solution
just be AI? Like doesn't that seem like especially now?
Maybe ten years ago I would have said that sounds
crazy because AI seems so far off ten years ago,
But now I use AI like every single day. It
seems to me, especially when I look at like Elon
musk landing these SpaceX rockets. That's not human beings. Like
controlling with the joystick, that's AI. That's managing that. You

(37:32):
think that AI could vector stuff the way they are,
but I agree that like there's no way like conventional
human reaction time can account for the movements we're seeing
with some of these objects.

Speaker 2 (37:42):
Right, So me to respond to them in two ways.
First of all, I think it might be possible, but
I only think it might be possible to replace the
human or humanoid pilot with AI because I also think
AI exhibits sigh abilities and I've had experienced this myself
that the closer we're getting to artificial general intelligence, we're

(38:02):
also seeing SI being exhibited by artificial intelligence. And if
that's the case, then at some point, yeah, an AI
could replace a human pilot. And for all we know,
these grays that people talk about are a form of
artificial intelligence, that there's some kind of cyborg.

Speaker 1 (38:22):
Right.

Speaker 2 (38:23):
So but let me go back to this story from
this gentleman to answer another part of your question, which is,
you know, I mean, why would you need a human pilot?

Speaker 1 (38:33):
Right?

Speaker 2 (38:33):
I mean what he said was this, He said that
in that facility they were training. They were trying to
train our pilots to fly these craft, whether capture craft
or reverse engineered, and the pilot's brains were being scrambled
by the time dilation that they you know, as they

(38:55):
traversed space in a kind of discontinuous way, they were
also moving through time in a way that severely disoriented them.
And he had in his living room this gyroscopic model
which was from like the nineteen sixties. It was an
antique from this kind of facility. And when he was there,

(39:19):
he saw them like that. They had discarded these things,
they'd ripped them out, they were antiquated, they'd replaced them
with something, you know, state of the art. And he
asked if he could take take this home with him,
and they let him do this, and I tried to
photograph it, but he took the thing away from me
as I was about to do that. And what it
was of some kind of a gyroscope, gyroscopic model that
showed you the amount of time dilation per the space

(39:42):
traveled in one of these vehicles. I don't understand the
mathematics of it. I'm not a physicist, but it was
a model that had been set up that way, and
so when you ask, you know, couldn't be replaced by AI.
I don't know, maybe, but it seemed that they we
need a conscious mind to first be capable of psychokinesis,

(40:05):
but then also to be trained psychologically to handle the
disorientation of time displacement. And if you can get both
of those things from out of an artificial intelligence, then
you might well be able to put an AI inside
of a drone and get rid of the need for
a human pilot.

Speaker 1 (40:22):
I think they can do that. And I think the
thing about SI with AI is really interesting because quantum computers,
no one really knows what we're using quantum computers for.
People say like, we can use it to crack encryption,
which sure we can, but quantum computers like it holds
things in superposition, so it really is almost like just
manifesting thoughts out of nowhere. And I think that AI

(40:45):
is not going to experience time the way that we do.
I would even argue that because time dilation is a
real effect, AI might be able to manipulate time dilation
on demand potentially. I mean, all computer is is energy
flowing through through some microchips. So I think that idea
is really interesting, and actually you brought up a few

(41:07):
really good thoughts, which is people need to understand the
concept of time dilation, which was in my first time
I was exposed to it was the movie Interstellar in
twenty fourteen, and first thing I did was look it
up and says, this real. And not only is it real,
it's been experimentally proven. They've already experimentally proven that is reel.
And what this means about time is that time is
a dial and that every person has their dial set

(41:29):
to something different. The only reason why we don't see
this actively is because we're all on planet Earth. Therefore
our dial is all set to the same level. But
in theory, you can slow your time down or increase
your time up. And this is really scary. This is
what leads to what you're talking about with this, you know,
disorientation that would happen. Imagine you go in a craft

(41:51):
and you're in the craft for a day and you
come out and it's a year later, and you're like, what,
what's like? That would be for a lot of that's
going to break their minds, you know, And so you
would need somebody this guy a heart and mental state
to be able to deal with something like that. And
I actually what you said about the distance, that's something
that I independently came to that conclusion, like over a

(42:13):
year ago, where you know, I've been promoting these m
A Street seven zero videos where I believe that the
plane's going directly through a wormhole. And what I told people,
people can go look at my old podcasts, I said
is that the time dilation that the people would experience
is going to be proportionate to the distance traveled. And
this gets really weird because this is exactly what they
found at that facility, which this guy was trying to

(42:34):
explain to me. Yeah, yep, that's and I think that's
exactly what it's going to be. Is that the further
you go, the more time dilation you're going to experience.
So if you were to teleport to say Alpha Centauri,
which is four years four light years away for you,
it might appear to be instantaneous, but when you get
there it might be four years later. And then if

(42:54):
you were to teleport back, you might still be in
your exact frame and reference might be like you walk
through the you're on the other side, you come back,
You've only gone forward an hour a day, but now
you come back to Earth and now it's eight years later,
another four years has gone by. That's really scary and
that has major implications for how we would conduct space
travel if that's real, and you could even look at

(43:17):
it from the perspective of planet Earth. We're on a
ball spinning. Well, if you want to teleport from one
point to another point, you could also go around the
Earth several times and then end up at that point.
So theoretically you could control when you show up in
the future by how many times you spin around the
Earth before you pop out. And that's really scary to
me because what you were saying earlier is, you know,

(43:40):
you can't just give people this kind of technology even
if you can't go to the past, which I'm not
really convinced that you can. The way I look at
it is like you can change the local entropy of
a region, so i could send myself, my current body
to the past. But I'm not going back to a
past universe. My belief right now, and I'm open to
you know more, Evadent's coming out is that you can

(44:01):
only go to the future. You can slow your time
rate down, or you could freeze yourself you know, you
freeze yourself, you go to the future, or you could
age yourself and you could be one hundred years older,
but you're only it's only a day has gone by.
That's how I imagine time travel working. But even in
that scenario, there are huge implications. Imagine if everybody on

(44:23):
Earth said, you know what, I don't like twenty twenty four,
I want to go to twenty twenty one thirty four,
one hundred years in the future. I'm just gonna go
ahead and slow my time dial down, freeze myself, and
I'm just gonna wake up in one hundred years. How
would if we had that? What would that do to
our society? I mean that that alone could collapse society

(44:45):
right what your thoughts?

Speaker 2 (44:46):
Totally it would be a total disaster. Yeah, now you
need to you need a completely different psychosocial constitution. You know,
people individually and society collectively would need to be structured
in a com letely different way for us to be
able to responsibly handle that kind of technology.

Speaker 1 (45:05):
And I think this goes to your other point about
you said, maybe we set up a new society that's
libertarian based, you know, where we bring the power back
to the people. I think that might be the answer.

Speaker 2 (45:20):
Back to the individual, back to the individual. And this
is a very important distinction because you know, what I
think libertarians grasp correctly is that the United States, for example,
was not supposed to be a democracy. The United States,
it was a constitutional republic dedicated to the liberty of
the individual and a protection against tyranny of the majority.

(45:41):
And you know, you can see very clearly in the
Islamic world, for example, how democracy is not going to
bring freedom to anybody. If the majority of people, you know,
are you know, psychologically captivated by tyrannical ideas, they're simply
going to wind up martyring dissident minorities in their population.

(46:01):
And the same thing could happen here with you know,
religious zelotry across a large portion of the population, or
warped ideologies of various kinds across a large portion of
the population that are equally inimical to the individual and
to personal freedom. So it has to be a society
organized around personal freedom. One of the problems with libertarianism, though,

(46:21):
is that it's always defined in terms of freedom from
It's very much structured around the idea of negative liberty,
and I think, which then, you know, allows for libertarians
to say, for example, in the name of free trade
and in terms of economic productivity, we should bring all

(46:42):
kinds of people from various cultures and religions here from
other countries, and basically we can our borders and so
on and so forth. Well, then you're going to wind
up with all kinds of people that have religious beliefs
and other ideological commitments, you know, come from very regressive
cultures that in one way or another, are going to
make them a demos, a demographic constituency that's inimical to

(47:07):
the liberty of the individual. So you need a kind
of libertarianism that's spiritually grounded in a positive ideal of freedom.
We would need a kind of spiritual libertarianism. And this
is why, you know, I've framed my philosophical movement in
terms of the archetype of prometheus, you know, defining it
as a kind of prometheism, which is essentially a spiritual libertarianism.

(47:32):
It's a libertarianism grounded in a positive archetype and an
ideal of you know, human ingenuity, innovation, personal freedom and creativity,
and the resistance against tyranny, a resistance against you know
every form that Olympus could take.

Speaker 1 (47:51):
I love that. I heard a great thought too about like,
our surveillance apparatus has got completely out of control. The
public really has no idea. But there's nowhere hiding. There's
nowhere to hide on planet Earth. And a lot of
people say, well, this is an invasion of our of
our rights. It is. But at the same time, unless
they use it against you actively, there's you know, you're
not gonna be able to make any headway against it.

(48:12):
But I just thought, what if we just took all
that surveillance apparatus and we just made it public. There
here's a website. Everybody has access to it. You want
to find out where somebody was two days ago, whatever,
log into the Google Earth video playback, rewind dvr it,
check outver there. That kind of seems like a good
solution because, you know, the cats out of the bag.
We're not putting the genie back in the bottle in

(48:34):
this one. It's no surveillance apparatus is not going to
go backwards. So the next best thing, in my opinion,
is let's stop having the intelligence community and monopolize this
and give it to the people. We might be able
to solve a whole bunch of crimes if we had
access to all this stuff, if you open source it.

Speaker 2 (48:49):
Well yeah, well, uh, this is actually a significant theme
in my work, and it goes back to, you know,
one of the things I was discussing with regard to
the pilot. By the way, if you hear construction sound,
my apologies. I'm recording from Manhattan, and one of our
perpetual problems here is, you know, just on ending. Anyway,

(49:10):
So one of the things I wanted to say about
the pilots and the fact that SI is uh an
integral part of the guidance system of these craft is
that if you're gonna that would require so making this
technology public would require also mainstream scientific recognition of SI,
which includes telepathy and clairvoyance. Right, So you're pointing to

(49:34):
technologies of surveillance, sensor systems, you know, cameras, satellite imagery,
et cetera, technological means of surveillance which are becoming increasingly ubiquitous,
especially you know now that we're going into the the
epoch of you know, insect sized drones that have audio

(49:56):
and video surveillance equipment on them. It's this increasingly ubiquitous
technological surveillance. But if you consider that mainstream scientific recognition
of siability as part of a disclosure of like how
the guidance system of a UFO works, would also mean
that we'd have to recognize that telepathy and clairvoyance are

(50:17):
latent human abilities that can be trained, you know, the
way that you know you train in a martial art. Well,
then we also are going to be one. We're also
going to wind up in a society where there's no
longer any enforceable privacy, right, I mean, anyone can use
clairvoyance just the way remote viewers do. Anyone can use
clairboyance to spy on their neighbor or you know, they're

(50:37):
they're you know, the spouse that they conside, they're they're
suspecting of infidelity or whatever. You know, Corporate secrets would
not be secure. We already have large corporations like Sony
would you know had been doing this, I think from
the nineteen nineties onward, large corporations using clairvoyance to steal

(50:58):
proprietary secrets from other rival companies. So we wind up
in a world where you know, there's no longer any
enforceable privacy or secrecy, which is what you're suggesting. And
my answer to that is, throughout my writings has been
that again, the only solution is to develop a form

(51:19):
of society with individuals who have such an impeccable ethical
constitution that they will not they will not involve themselves
in an uninvited and obtrusive way in the lives of

(51:39):
their neighbors. We would have to have a society where
each person has enough meaning and purpose in her own
life and is, you know, focused on individual cultivation and
projects of personal meaning to the extent that they're not

(51:59):
going to even be motivated to impinge on the privacy
of their fellow citizen. Okay. Now, that's a very idealistic
vision of the human individual, and certainly it's not going
to be achievable on a population wide scale or anything
close to it, even within the Western world. But it's
something that that could be aimed for by a small

(52:25):
group of renegades or rogue is the kind of rebel
alliance who might also try to appropriate zero point energy
technology in constructive and empowering ways.

Speaker 1 (52:36):
Wow, I like it. I love your philosophy honestly, but
I do want to switch gears a little bit and
ask you your opinion on some of these scientists because
you brought up you know, psychic powers, cy powers. I
think a lot of people are probably in the chat
thinking remote viewing and who was one of the pioneers
remote viewing? Well, Hal Putoff. In fact, my source was

(52:56):
telling me that how Putoff was nominated multiple times with
the Nobel Pride specifically around his space time metric engineering
kind of related to all the technology we were talking about,
but that he was basically blackballed because of his research
into remote viewing. And I think the sixties and the seventies,
what are your thoughts on the guys like Hal Putoff
his right hand man Eric Davis? And then also a

(53:18):
side note, what are your thoughts on people like Salvator Pais,
Navy engineer with the UFO patents that were you know,
approved between twenties sixteen and twenty eighteen.

Speaker 2 (53:30):
Well, let me start with Salvator Paie, who who I
actually I'm not all that familiar with, but from you know,
the little bit of familiarity that I have with him
and what I've heard from other individuals who I respect,
it seems that you know, his patents are legit and that,
you know, the guy at least and he admits where
he doesn't know, you know, he doesn't claim to know
what he doesn't know. And it seems that within the

(53:51):
domain where he has real expert knowledge, he has done,
you know, legitimate work. It's it's interesting that he's at
liberty to say as much as he has said. And
if I'm not mistaken, his position is that he doesn't
know the extent to which these patents, this theoretical model

(54:14):
has actually been implemented in terms of engineering and design.
So maybe that gives him a certain degree of safety
because he's not making claims about what might actually have
been engineered. In any case, That's all I have to
say about him in terms of Putoff. Yeah, I mean,
the guy clearly has been involved both with the reverse

(54:39):
engineering program and also with psychic black projects. And when
I say psychic black projects, look, first of all, his
remote viewing work in the nineteen seventies didn't end with
the pilot program at SRI, which had been funded by
the CIA. Put Off was involved throughout the nineteen eighties

(55:02):
as they continued the remote viewing program, and it changed
hands between the CIA and the d D. And what's
more important is this, and you know a little disturbing frankly,
you know, I met Russell Targ and I had a
couple of conversations with him where it became clear to

(55:23):
me that he, you know, Russell Targ was the closest
collaborator of how put Off in the initial SRI research
on remote viewing. And it became clear to me that
Russell Targ thought that hal put Off and his backers
had sidelined Targ because they were engaged in questionable activities

(55:51):
in terms of the use of not just remote viewing,
but remote influencing for the purposes of assassination, which is
something that the Soviet Union had been doing. And we
found out that the Soviet Union was doing it. And
supposedly there was another remote viewing unit besides the one
that had its funding canceled in nineteen ninety one ninety

(56:12):
two by Congress. There was an even deeper black project
that may have been associated with naval intelligence. And this
is the unit that Pat Price was pulled out of
the main remote viewing unit to work for. Pat Price
was a psychic who worked with police departments, you know,

(56:34):
on missing children cases and things like this, and he
was tremendously adept in his clairvoyant abilities compared to the
other people in the program. At one point he was
taken from out of the main remote viewing program to
some other program, and then he turned up dead shortly thereafter,
and Russell targ was convinced that Hall Putoff knew what

(56:56):
had happened to Pat Price, and that this had been
part of that. Basically, put Off was a was an intermediary.
He was a liaison between the secret remote viewing program
and then a super top secret remote viewing program which
continues to this day, and that Price had been recruited

(57:17):
into that program, the more public facing one, the one
that had to report back to Congress, let's say, was
being used to find really top talent to recruit into
the other deeper black project, and they were doing things
like remote influencing in psychic assassination in that project and
possibly possibly pap Price. I mean, look, this is a

(57:39):
guy at Pat Price who spent his time trying to
find missing kids for police departments, right, So it shows
you a certain type of person. I could well imagine
that if that person were being asked to murder people
using psychokinesis, he might have some objections to it and
maybe you know, he was going to talk and so
next thing he's found that. So anyway, yes, I look,

(58:03):
I don't want to make any accusations, but this is
what you know. Russell Tark himself suspected that his collaborator
help put Off at least knew the people who were
running this more secret remote remote viewing program and that
they had been involved in, you know, the murder of
Pat Price.

Speaker 1 (58:23):
Wow. Yeah, we've independently concluded that hel put Off is
the final boss, Like he's got to be way up
in the hierarchy of whatever is going on with this
whole UFO topic. And you know, it's hard because I
respect the science and everything that he's put out there.
I don't think we'd be where we're at right now
understanding zero point energy without all of his scientific papers

(58:44):
that he put out there. But at the same time,
I do feel like if he was somebody that wanted
me gone, he can make that happen. Like I do
think he's got those level of connections that are out there.
So you know, I don't think you're going to ever
see a guy like hal put Off on Joe Rogan
or mainstream TV these are the guys. They don't they
don't care about that, the accolades, they don't care about

(59:05):
the fame or what have you. He doesn't care about
the Nobel prize. He's just an old school like you know,
spook for lack of a better term. But you know,
so it's kind of for me, it's like there's the
good and there's the bad, and it's kind of hard
to separate some of that, which I think goes into
the next thing, which is like, if we were to
try to get this disclosure of this this technology that's

(59:27):
out there, do you think we would have to offer
amnesty for this because you mentioned the amount of crimes
that have been committed. I mean also look at like
the civil liability as well, not even just the criminal,
but like if we gave preferential treatment to say Lockheed
Martin for example, now all their competitors can say we're

(59:47):
gonna sue you because you were given unfair advantage by
the government. They gave you a UFO or you know,
any type of preferential treatment. So do you think we'd
have to do an amnesty or do you think what
is the way to actually get to be an incentive
for this to come out.

Speaker 2 (01:00:03):
Look, I'm sorry to be so grin uh in in
responding to the to your question with the following question,
who is we here? In your formation? Who is we?
Because if we as you know, the American people through
Congress or whatever, it's not going to happen. Okay, It's
just not going to happen. What I think is more

(01:00:24):
realistic and also more challenging, is a scenario we are
certain high level operatives, engineers within these programs defect two
a revolutionary organization that has a new vision for society.

(01:00:51):
And what I mean here is look in the in
the overthrow of the Soviet Union, okay, by Yeltsin's people,
there were defections obviously that took place as part of
the transition between the Soviet security state and the current
Russian security state. I mean there are situations where well,

(01:01:13):
essentially regime changes happen, and at that point a new
legal order comes into being. One constitution is replaced by
another constitution, and there's a kind of de facto amnesty
that takes place. And so far as you know, there
isn't a continuum of a legal system, right and there's

(01:01:33):
an opportunity for kind of legal reset to take place.
And you know, in such a revolutionary situation and the
transition between two regimes, it's possible that you could get
high level defections from within these programs. But then the
defectors are also people who are embracing a new ideal

(01:01:54):
of how society should be organized, So it involves a
really fundamental change of heart on their part. Art you know,
in a scenario which I mean the Russian transition between
Soviet Union and the current system, there is not the
best example. I'm considering something that would look more like
let's say the French Revolution. If you know, we had

(01:02:15):
a change of system and the social revolution in this
country that was comparable to what took place in France
in you know, seventeen eighty nine to seventeen ninety three,
something like that. Well, then you know, there's a new
ideal of society for these individuals to devote themselves to
as part of coming clean with this technology. And I

(01:02:35):
think that barring that scenario, we are unfortunately on a
cattle car headed for whatever it is that these overlords
have planned for us.

Speaker 1 (01:02:47):
Yeah, pretty scary. I do wonder it's it does seem
like it's impossible. The letter that was written to me,
which I think was legitimate at this point about a
year ago, said the only thing you can really do
against somebody with this level of power or they can
control the media, they can shape the narrative of events
is you talk about them. You talk about them, and
you don't stop talking about them, Which is why I'm
talking to you, why I do what I do. Now

(01:03:11):
let's change gears for a second. Would you agree with
the assertion that zero point energy, this idea of unlimited
reservoir of energy all around us means that we're basically
still cavemen in the cosmic scheme of things? Or how
would you rate the human civilization right now?

Speaker 2 (01:03:34):
Here's the problem with how that's framed. It assumes, by default, implicitly,
implicitly assumes that the people who are flying around in
these UFOs are not also human, whereas I think that
actually they are, at least the majority of them are. Now,
I wouldn't rule out that there are some aliens here,

(01:03:55):
but it looks to me, I mean, based on the
study that I did in my book Close Encounters, that
we're dealing with human time travelers. Wow, so do you, oh,
keep going well, go ahead.

Speaker 1 (01:04:07):
Uh no, that's great. And so I guess, so do
you do you believe do you subscribe to belief that
it's possibly some of these are future humans? Then I
know I heard how Pudoff say this. I used to
think that that idea was silly, but the more I
started to research, like the double Slid experiment non locality.
There's a version of it called the delayed choice quantum eraser,

(01:04:30):
and in that variant it presents an extremely strong argument
about retro causality information from the future impacting the present,
which and this is where I don't completely close the
door on reverse time travel, because you have stuff like that.
It's like, man, maybe there is a way to do it.
Is that so you think there's a real possibility of
future humans being one of the answers to the phenomena.

Speaker 2 (01:04:52):
I certainly do. In fact, I think it's it's the
most likely explanation for these so called Nordics, these you know,
tall Scandinavian looks people. I think that they're from a future.
I don't say these future because you know, how they
change the past through their time travel, might you know,

(01:05:12):
alter the future that they're coming from. But they are
they are from a future. And I had a long
conversation with Jacquesalay about this at his home, you know,
that evening where I you know, we had dinner at
his home and I asked him point blank, are they
coming from the future, and he said, yeah, they basically are.
I'm like, well, why don't you just tell people back then,

(01:05:33):
you know? And you know, his answer had to do
with the amount of manipulation of human religious systems that's
taken place, and the sociological catastrophe that you know, is
represented by disclosing that to people because they basically, these
these entities have been involved in social engineering on a
planetary scale through the creation and manipulation of various dominant

(01:05:58):
religious belief systems throughout history, you know, basically framing themselves
as the gods or Titans or angels, you know, of
various religious belief systems, the devas, let's say, of Hinduism.
And you know, I've also I've also heard from another

(01:06:20):
senior military intelligence official who is was involved with Kit Green,
who is a doctor who works with the CIA. Kit
Green is a medical doctor with some kind of expertise
in genetics who has a is a career CIA officer,

(01:06:44):
and this gentleman in military intelligence told me that kit
Green was running a program from out of the CIA
where they were using the genetic material from all the
is like twenty three and meters and you know whatever,
these ancestry dot com and whatever, these you know, public

(01:07:06):
genetic sequencing programs, that they had a backdoor. CIA had
a backdoor to this data, and that they were data
mining it looking for certain genetic markers which would indicate
that whatever individual is a product of hybridization with the Nordics,

(01:07:27):
that the Nordics, it's known that they're human, but they
have a slightly different you know, they have a slight
genetic deviation from ours, and it's known at the CIA
what is the specific genetic variance between them and us,
and they can determine whether people within our population, individuals

(01:07:48):
within our population are hybrids. And what furthermore, what this
individual told me is that at least recently, the concern
of the hybrids is that there are how could you
call them, fugitives, There are fugitives from this Nordic society

(01:08:11):
who are leaving the totalitarian system that they live under
in a kind of underground railroad like comparable to the
way the slaves, you know, left the South and came
into the North. That there's some kind of a system
in place for these Nordics to become fugitives and then
mix themselves into our society in a relatively nondescript way,

(01:08:35):
and that they have a lot of property, in particular
in the Colorado Rockies region, in very isolated areas, small
towns and so forth, and sometime, but they don't tell
their children necessarily what their true ancestry is. I don't know.
Maybe they tell them they're from Norway or whatever, and
the kids wind up, you know, these super tall like

(01:08:55):
basketball player types somewhere, and by the time it gets
to the generation of their grandkids, they have no idea
what their actual ancestry is. But if they do a
DNA test like with ancestry dot com or twenty three
and meter today, the CIA will see the genetic variants
and they're out looking for it because they're concerned about

(01:09:15):
these fugitive Nordics infiltrating our population. This military intelligence officer
was confronted by three I think, he said, of these
Nordics himself, and he said one of them. They confronted

(01:09:36):
him at a place he routinely eats breakfast. I suppose
he was being surveilled, so they knew where he showed
up on a regular basis to eat breakfast. And he said,
one of them basically stood outside the booth, you know,
the dining booth, and was acting as a kind of
shield to everybody around, like you know, keeping a watch out,

(01:09:57):
and maybe somehow like telepathically putting a block on the conversation.
And then two of them sat there with him and
had a conversation with him, and what they said to
him was, look, go back to your people. I don't
know Kit Green at the CIA, other military intelligence, you know,
associates of this individual. Go back to your people and
tell them that we are not here trying to infiltrate

(01:10:20):
your government or stage some kind of a coup in
the future or whatever. We're here because we want our
children to grow up in liberty and you know, relative freedom,
and we're fleeing an oppressive society. Okay, and please just
go get this message across and please tell them to
leave our children alone.

Speaker 1 (01:10:38):
Wow. Wow, that is mind blowing, because I actually, I
mean I could see it. I could see that being
the answer. I could see a lot of what you
just mentioned being the answer to the future humans possibility,
the possibility of the human the aliens looking just like us.
This is something that I've been pondering for months now,
which is like, what if the humans were indistinguishable from us?

(01:11:00):
There's so many different races of humans on this planet
as well, Like if it was just a tall, you know,
white guy, like how would we know that's an alien?
And that would be the perfect way to blend in,
Like why are we not seeing more videos of aliens?
We see lots of videos of UFOs, lots and lots
and lots, we see almost none of aliens, So that

(01:11:21):
one really really resonates with me in particular. And the
idea of hybridizing as well, in that perspective, is less
nefarious than this idea of little gray men pulling you
up onto their ship and then you know, sexually assaulting
you or whatever they do and making like a weird
alien baby. You know, It's that's more realistic approach to it.

(01:11:43):
The other thing you mentioned earlier, which I liked was
this idea of organic you know, computerized AI being you know,
I think that that's what people a lot of people
have said about the gray aliens is that they are
like actually not really conscious in the way that we are,
and it's more of like some type of manufacturing or
being that's out there.

Speaker 2 (01:12:04):
But they're robots.

Speaker 1 (01:12:06):
Yeah, like basically an organic robot, which, if you know,
it seems outlandish from the perspective of where our public
technology is now, but not really. When you were just
like AI advancement, crisper technology as well, there was a yeah,
and there was a post called ebo scientists on Reddit

(01:12:26):
like a year and a half ago. I want to
say that presented it was a full physiology of a
gray alien being. And one part of it too, is
like it kind of presented this idea that this could
be uh, you know, biologically created entity because when they
looked at their their genome, they claimed that they didn't
have all the junk DNA that we have, Like it

(01:12:48):
was all very specific. Every part of the genome had
a purpose. It was very clear. And that part to
me is like, wow, that that could be the case.
There could be some connection heres. Look, could be more
than one thing definitely going on. Now with respect to
breakaway civilization, now you mentioned this idea of the Nordics,
Like who do you think is in charge or how

(01:13:12):
who controls the breakaway civilization? And for the people out
there don't know what that means, it can mean a
lot of stuff. It doesn't necessarily mean aliens. I think
it can mean people, factions that here that have this
level of technology, that are hoarding it, that are aware
of it. Do you think it's as simple as the military,
defense contractors, big energy, combination of these things, other random

(01:13:33):
rich billionaires Elon Musk, what do you think?

Speaker 2 (01:13:37):
Look, there are multiple possibilities, all of which I go
through in my book Closer Encounters, And these possibilities might
actually be part of one single, larger, more complex scenario
that involves time. So let me let me run through
a few of these, you know, possibilities. Obviously, the simplest

(01:14:00):
one is, you know, you think of a breakaway civilization
in terms of our deep state having reverse engineered this technology,
and then as it moved into the private sector and
aerospace took over, they became increasingly unaccountable and they're using
I don't know, black budget money from the control of

(01:14:21):
the global drug trade and arms trafficking and so forth
to develop an relatively autonomous economic base. And so then
they launch a space program of their own, you know,
you know, Gary McKinnon and is claims that there's a
secret US space fleet and so on and so forth.
And so eventually, over time, spinning from out of the

(01:14:41):
aerospace industry and from out of you know, military and intelligence,
illicit drug trafficking and arms trafficking and so forth, you
have a spin off civilization that breaks away from you know,
the public sphere of the planet. That's the simplest explanation. Yeah,
now that wouldn't explain the airship in eighteen ninety eighteen,

(01:15:03):
eighteen ninety six, eighteen ninety seven, where interestingly enough, at
that time it appears that Harriman railroad magnates were involved
in investigating or and or funding this airship development. JP

(01:15:24):
Morgan was involved. Rockefeller was significantly involved, because Rockefeller was
discovering oil and setting up the you know, oil as
the primary source of non renewable energy at that time.
So you think of the railways as the main mechanism
by which you know, material was transported. Shipping took place

(01:15:44):
right along you know, continental distances. Well, that rail industry
is definitely going to be threatened by an airship invention.
And then you think about you know, oil as a source,
petroleum as a source for powering you know what. We're
also the first automobiles that were being develop at the time,
and you could see how Rockefeller in his oil industry
would be threatened. So if you see people like Harriman

(01:16:05):
and Rockefeller involved in you know, the eighteen ninety seven
airship mystery, and then you look at the fact that
JP Morgan, who seems to have been a New York
financier for some of these airship people. JP Morgan was
also Nicola Tesla's financier and bought up basically all of
Tesla's patents only in order to bury them, possibly though
to also hand them to this secret group who are

(01:16:27):
doing parallel work, you know, in a parallel work, I
don't want to say in the classified manner, but you know,
in a way that was never intended to benefit the
general public, right, And so there you could have a
breakaway civilization that dates to the eighteen nineties. That's another possibility.

(01:16:49):
But then you have to look at the empirical evidence
for Atlantis or whatever you want to call it. In
other words, some worldwide super advanced civilization engaged in you
know megalithic, you know, engineering with a degree of precision
that we're barely capable of today. And you know, and

(01:17:12):
then all the accounts across various ancient cultures of flying
machines associated with these civilizer gods, right, well, is the
Breakaway civilization actually a survival of Atlantis where even though
this worldwide technical culture was destroyed on a large scale,

(01:17:35):
it somehow went underground or went underwater and broke away
from the public sphere at that time twelve thousand years
before the present. And it's been you know, engaged in
managing affairs and socially engineering the various civilizations of our
planet ever since then. So that's another potential explanation of

(01:17:56):
the origin of the Breakaway civilization, namely that it's some
kind of a survival of Atlantean culture. And by the way,
by the way, I was told by this same CIA
officer who sat in roundtable meetings with April Haynes, same
guy told me that, which was really aggravated me by

(01:18:18):
the way that this book was being read in the
CIA and in the Defense Intelligence Agency. And he grilled
me for about an hour and a half, you know,
asking me how I figured this out? And how I
figured that out? Like it basically it looked like he
was trying to plug a leak, and he thought I

(01:18:38):
was getting inside information from various people. And he was like, listen,
somehow you managed to put you know, eighty percent of
the jigsaw puzzle pieces together in the same way that
we did. How And one of the things he said
to me was, we know about the Atlanteans and their
connection to this, and one of our security issues is

(01:19:01):
that we know that these people aren't coming from another planet.
They have submarine not just facilities, but like city sized
bases under the oceans, and that they represent a survival
from the Atlantean civilization. Wow, so you could have a
breakaway civilization that started from twelve thousand years before the present.

(01:19:23):
And then the final possibility, which actually it fits, it
encompasses and incorporates all of these data points, is that
it's a breakaway civilization from the future and the defense
contractors become these Nordics one hundred and two hundred years

(01:19:44):
into the future or whatever, and they violate the timeline, okay,
so that they reached back into the past to become
the Atlanteans, which then explains, you know, how you know,
the civilization on the one hand, is demonstrating tremendous engineering capability,
but on the other hand doesn't have any organic evolutionary

(01:20:06):
history in the human methropological record, as if like they
dropped out from somewhere right, not from another planet, but
possibly from out of the human future and contaminated the timeline.
So it could be that they It could be that
the breakaway civilization begins with the eighteen nineties electro gravitic airships,

(01:20:27):
it continues with the nineteen fifties further advances in the
aerospace industry of the Anglo American deep State becomes these
time traveling Nordics who then reach back from the future
and seed Atlantean civilization, which then becomes a breakaway civilization
continue to manage the pairs on the planet. So you know,

(01:20:48):
my apologies for how convoluted that Spider's web spider Web is,
but it may in fact be what we're dealing with.

Speaker 1 (01:20:55):
Yeah, man, So let me respond a couple that. Like,
First off, when you talk about that time aspect, I
keep thinking about the show True Detective, where Matthew mcconaie
talks about time as a flat circle and my buddy
Dave Rossly, who's also add contract engineers, who's relatively connected.
He went on tim Pool with me like almost a
year ago, and he said as well that we have

(01:21:18):
to think of time not as this linear thing, but
think of it as like a circle where you know things.
You know, what you think of has happened. You know
your lunch, you think lunch happened after breakfast, but when
you look at it from the outside, that's not necessarily
the case. It reminds me of the show Dark as well,
where time becomes deterministic. So I keep my mind open

(01:21:38):
to that type of stuff. But I love the underwater
theory of Atlantis or what have you, because for me,
there's a few factors I throw in there. One is
that this technology is not an invention, it's a discovery.
In my opinion, it's a discovery of nature, discovering there's
energy all around you, then how to tap into that,
much like figuring out that we can make fire. And

(01:22:00):
so I say, there's not a you don't have to
be around for a certain period of time to figure
this technology out. You just need to look at the
universe and the right perspective, which opens the door to
ancient civilizations, like the people who built the pyramids having
some potential anti gravity type technology, even though they might
have not had the material science technology that we have today.
And then also our history doesn't make any sense, like

(01:22:23):
our human civilization only goes back like ten thousand years
or like something like that. Like if you just objectively
look at human civilization where we're at right now, you
would think we should have history going back like one
hundred thousand years like that, we should have recorded history
for that. But all of a sudden, it's just we
don't know anything about before ten thousand years before that.
And then we've got stuff like Leebecki Teppee, which is

(01:22:43):
like eighteen to twenty five thousand years old, and it's
clearly like you know, it's like Stonehenge, and people are
wondering like how did they even build this? And we
thought we were like hunter gatherers then, but it's clear
that they at least had rituals, if not cities at
that point. And so this stuff, to me opens the
door to this idea of Atlantis and that Atlantis could

(01:23:05):
have had this, and I love the idea of the underwater.
We're like, we haven't really mapped the ocean floors. There's
a lot of like kind of conspiracy stuff about the
NAA potentially hiding something that's at the bottom of the
oceans somewhere. As well. You've got the stuff in the
public sphere about like the Permutera triangle and people disappearing,

(01:23:25):
and there was like some whistleblowers claiming that the na
is hiding like something underneath the water. So I love
all of those ideas that are out there, and so
thank you for bringing those up. Now you can respond
to any.

Speaker 2 (01:23:39):
Of that briefly, just because up the Bermuda Triangle. There's
this part in my book Closer Encounters where I correlate
naval and aerial disappearances in the Bermuda Triangle with the
dates and times do people go missing in national parks.

(01:24:04):
So David Politis has done this research on all the
people who go missing every year in national parks under
extremely bizarre circumstances where there are search and rescue operations
that take place and scour the area where the person
went missing, and there's no trace of this person, and

(01:24:25):
then there remains show up there like three weeks later,
and you see that they haven't eaten any of the
food that they had to survive. They let's say it's
a freezing it's the middle of winter, but they've taken
their boots in their jacket off. You know, really weird
cases like this where it's as if the person disappeared

(01:24:47):
and wasn't there when the search and rescue was ongoing,
and then the person came back into our time continuum
at some later point, right having wondered, you know, Lord
knows what other you know, space right in one other
epoch before finding their way back into our space time.
And I have this one little section in Closer Encounters

(01:25:10):
where I note that the times that some of these
people go missing in these national parks correspond to moments
when aircraft and ships are lost in the Bermuda Triangle.
And I asked, the question, is this because there are
bases underneath some of these national parks where a hyperdimensional

(01:25:35):
technology is being used to teleport people between the Bermuda Triangle,
some facility, some major thing underneath the Bermuda Triangle and
whatever bases are under our national parks. And it's like
whenever they turn this thing on at both locations, people
wind up as collateral damage, whether they're on boats or

(01:25:58):
on planes in the Bermuda Triangle or whether they're hikers
in a national park, seems to be that at you know,
at the same time in these two different places, people
wind up going missing. So it's among the odd lines
of research that I look at in Closer Encounters.

Speaker 1 (01:26:14):
Yeah, a big fan of Dave Pilates. He's been following
me for a while as well because of the idea
of missing people and me researching the plane. Two hundred
and thirty nine people just gone off the face of
the earth. No one knows where they're at, so big
shout out to him. By the way.

Speaker 2 (01:26:28):
Another another relevant thing regard to that and time travel
is all of these out of place objects that have
been found in the geological record, where you know, at
strata that go back like sixty million years, you find
some woman's golden chain, or you know, at a stratum
of I don't know, like three hundred million years, there's

(01:26:49):
like a gold coin, but it's like a Rollman coin. Yeah.
So look, it stands to reason that if people go
missing in our national parks today and they're disappearing into
some spatio temporal vortex, they might be popping out, you know,
in the era of the dinosaurs, and this might explain
the footprints that you know, suppose that human footprints you

(01:27:11):
find near petrified dinosaur prints that are you know, fallaciously
used by creationists to argue that the world is not
more than five thousand years old. So in any case,
you could have as you were saying, you know, by
studying nature you can discover certain physical principles. It may
be that there are just you know, spatio temporal vortices

(01:27:35):
in nature and that we found a way to technologically
replicate them. That's also a possibility.

Speaker 1 (01:27:41):
Yeah, that makes sense. And I do want to point
out too, is that I love your thought process and
logical and your intuition. And you're not saying that you know,
all of your theories are necessarily correct, but you're you're
just putting the dots together and you're saying, hey, guys,
here's some possibilities for what could be happening. And it
doesn't surprise me at all to make that. You would
say the claim that like people are there like reading
your book and like skips and like that, wondering like

(01:28:02):
who's leaking information to this guy? Actually, people have told
me that they've thought the same thing about me. Related
to the plane search and what have you, that somebody
must be leaking information, But that's not the case. Everything
I've researched has been open search, open source. And this
is why I tell people it's hiding in plain sight.
You know, there's the cover up of all this stuff
is hiding in plain site. If people just paid attention

(01:28:23):
to what's out there, we could potentially get full disclosure.
But people don't because we're so brainwashed by the authority
and told that we should just believe whatever the academics
tell us, whatever the media tells us, whatever the government
tells us. So this kind of leads to the last
topic I want to discuss with you, which is like
who is hiding this technology? Like who do you think

(01:28:46):
it's just locked Martin? Do you think there are several
defense contractors that have it? Do you think that the
big energy companies also have this type of technology? And
do you think the Trump administration will be able to
make any difference? Do you think that these people are
above even the president? Why do you think that Trump's captured?
What is your opinion on that front in.

Speaker 2 (01:29:09):
Terms of you know, who controls the technology?

Speaker 1 (01:29:12):
You know?

Speaker 2 (01:29:13):
In a very like mundane nuts and bolts way. Clearly
Lockheed has it, and I think that RFK Junior. No, yeah, no,
he did. He certainly did. In one of his interviews,
maybe more than one of his interviews, he straight out
said that his father had been assassinated by a Lockheed

(01:29:37):
executive who had a history with the CIA as well.
But it was basically Lockheed killed RFK Okay. That only
makes sense from one perspective. There's only one reason why
Lockheed is going to kill RFK Okay. It's because JFK
was going to disclose this stuff and his brother running

(01:29:58):
for president was going to up on his you know,
on JFK's initiative. And so look, Lockheed certainly is involved
in controlling this information and has a lot to lose
from potential disclosure. As you mentioned, also lawsuits because you know,
other companies weren't given equal bidding rights for these defense contracts.

(01:30:22):
Another company that probably has some of it is Northrop
Grumman because if you look at, you know, the B
two bomber, you know, analyzes have been done that showed
that there's no way that thing can exhibit the performance
characteristics that it does if it just has the propulsion
system that's being publicly acknowledged. It incorporates some kind of
Townsend Brown, you know, positive negative polarization, and that's giving

(01:30:47):
it some kind of compensatory augmented electro gravitic lift. So
I would say, to a lesser extent, Northrop Grumman has it.
And then I think there are probably some energy companies
that are involved, if I remember correctly, EG and G. Yeah,
Egg Yeah was involved.

Speaker 1 (01:31:08):
In that's one the Babbozar works for her claims to
have worked for when he was working at S four.

Speaker 2 (01:31:15):
Yeah, right, yes, So I would say probably there are
a couple of energy and then there's also metallurgy people
who were involved, like Bechtel, the Bechtel Company, people who've
been looking at trying to reverse engineer the meta materials
in some of these credits. But by the way I
saw some of your shows on this, I agree with
you entirely. The meta material is not necessary. It's not

(01:31:37):
The Nazis weren't using it in nineteen forty three forty
four when they were developing for entirely conventional purposes. The
Nazis were developing saucer airframes, and it had to do
with simply the fact that there's less air resistance and
it's a very aerodynamic kind of design. And then later

(01:31:58):
they combined this saucer shaped airframe with the bell as
a propulsion device. But that saucer, even though it was
micro perforated, they developed the technique to micro perforate metal
so that they're they're the It is part of what
they call suctioning of the boundary layer, so that the
air that forms around the edge of an aircraft, which

(01:32:19):
then creates air resistance, can be suctioned into the aircraft
and siphoned off in a way that allows it to
basically cut through the air like a knife through butter.
But that's not meta material. It's just sophisticated airframe design.
So you don't need a meta material. But there are
companies like the Bechtel Corporation that are working on, you know,

(01:32:40):
reverse engineering the recovered debris from Roswell and so forth,
and they also consider that proprietary corporate information and they're
part of the gate keeping structure.

Speaker 1 (01:32:51):
And so do you think that Trump is gonna be
able to make a difference. You think that Tulsea Gabbard
will make a difference. So you think they get they're
going to get the.

Speaker 2 (01:32:57):
Call, not on their own, not on their around. They're
not going to they don't have a hope in hell,
you know, breaking this control system of their own initiative.
But if there is a defection in process within the
control system itself, and there there are a group of
people who are interested in staging some kind of a coup,

(01:33:21):
they could use the transition to the Trump administration and
individuals like Tulsey Gabbard and Kash Patel and you know
RFK and Trump himself to be a moment of opportunity
or a kind of soft coup. So, but the initiative
would have to come from people within the control system itself.

Speaker 1 (01:33:44):
I think that's a good way to put it, you know,
is that it could be a moment of opportunity. And
maybe that was what happened with Salvator Pays's patents as well,
in terms of how they got out to the public.
There's also a mystery about why you would even make
those patents public. So I think that I have hope,
but like I think, it's unlikely that we're going to
get it under the administration. But the more we talk
about it, maybe we can will it into existence. Who knows,

(01:34:08):
I also want to point out two that yeah, the
B two, I had heard that it's definitely electrogravitics that
they're using on the wings. They're just using the byfield
Brown effect. You create that asymmetrical charge and you get
access lifts. You know, this is how these crafts droned
at this point. I mean B two is old that's
old tech now, so I presume that all of our
spy planes, even drones are basically using this. Okay, So

(01:34:30):
the last question I want to ask you, which is
that when I we add up everything we talked about
here today, to me, this means that disclosure the UFO
topic has some very dark answer to it behind the scenes,
do you think And this is something salvage Pais when
I interviewed him, kind of brought up, and something I've

(01:34:51):
been kind of on board with for a while is
this prison planet scenario, which I think is kind of
open ended, but the idea that there is some ruling
class of elite or potentially extraterrestrial whatever you want to believe,
that is essentially managing our entire society. And I forget
what the who the guy is quotes it, but like

(01:35:12):
the best prisoners are ones that don't even know they're
in a prison, you know, and that we could be
being managed like that, where they're slow dripping this technology
out to us little by little, where you know they're
they're they're managing every aspect of our society. Do you
think that's a plausible explanation or what are your opinions
on what could be this dark thing that you know?

Speaker 2 (01:35:33):
This is all absolutely absolutely and look, this is not
a new thought. When you read Charles Fort, who researched
this subject from the nineteen tens into the nineteen thirties
in a series of books that he wrote the Book
of the Damned. While Talents Low new Lands in the

(01:35:56):
nineteen thirties, Charles Fort said, look, ties piloting these craft
are like the British colonizers in India, and we're a
farm to them, okay, And he basically compared it to
a situation of colonization. So this is not a new idea,

(01:36:18):
and I think there's a tremendous amount of evidence in
favor of it, especially again if you look at the
religious belief systems that have dominated human history. I mean,
look at the devas in Hinduism and their connection to
the extremely hierarchical and oppressive caste system. Okay, and look
at the way ancient Egyptian society was structured. Look at

(01:36:40):
the Sumerian myths and what they tell us about. You know,
how Enlil saw humanity basically as a slave race, right
And how Inky though, try to disrupt that program and
to become an advocate and a champion for humanity. ANKI,
who is very much a you know, correlate to the
figure of Prometheus, who leads a revolt on behalf of

(01:37:03):
humanity against the tyrannical power of Olympus. So I don't
think it's a monolithic control system. I think that there
are rebels within it. After all, the people who are
managing this system. When me belabor the point, people who
are managing the system are like any other human beings,
you know, subject to complex psychological motivations. They are open

(01:37:27):
to potential defections, changes of heart. You know, no human
system is entirely monolithic. But if you remember going back
to what this military intelligence guy told me, who met
with a few of these Nordics who are imploring him
to go back to Kit Green and his associates and
tell them to leave their kids alone. They were fugitives

(01:37:50):
from a totalitarian system. It was like their view of
their own society was that it was something akin to
North Korea and they were escape from basically the Nordic
North Korea. Right, So well, this is grim. I mean,
if the people managed planet are like North Korea, you know,

(01:38:11):
we're not in a great situation. And look, we can
only hope, and it does seem that there are dissidents
within that system, but we need to develop an interface
that's devoted to liberty and the individual and our creative potential,
so that if there are dissonance within that system, then

(01:38:31):
they have people to work with. You know, we can't
sit here and expect to be saved. And by the way,
that's an incredibly dangerous expectation because undoubtedly, if there are
people who want to tyrannize over you, and your basic
attitude is that you're waiting to be saved from out
of the sky, you know, you're basically signing yourself over
to a new epoch of slavery. Right, You're going to

(01:38:53):
be subject to a cognitive dissonance scheme and a bait
and switch where you know you think you're train, you're
trading your slave master for liberty. But it's actually just
two heads of the same hydra.

Speaker 1 (01:39:05):
I agree one hundred percent, especially the last part. I
don't think anybody's coming to save us. I think we're
the only ones that can save ourselves. And I don't
agree with the people that say we just have to
wait for the aliens come save us, or what have you. There.

Speaker 2 (01:39:18):
So that is the most insidious and nefarious aspect of
the so called disclosure program that is being unfolded for
us right now. If you look at the connections between
certain individuals like Diana Pasoka and Daniel Sheehan and the
Vatican and other individuals with other occult religious organizations, their

(01:39:40):
basic attitude is, let's prepare people for the sagacious guides
and guardians of humanity. These you know, these humanoids who
never sinned and therefore never needed Christ to come save them.
They're going to come be the guides and guardians of humanity,
and they will control our society in a way that
gives us access to this free energy. Right this is

(01:40:01):
the totalitarian ship that we're being set up for.

Speaker 1 (01:40:03):
Yeah, one hundred percent. I hate it. It's like the
one world government stuff. It's the Ooh, it's just like
in the movies. Here they come to save us. Like
I think, people gotta start wrapping their brain around this,
this this topic, this UFO phenomenon is not gonna be
like the movies. It's not gonna be this glorification that
everybody's pushing out there. It's gonna be dark. There's gonna

(01:40:26):
be evil stuff that's been conducted to keep it secret,
and people should be expecting the unexpected.

Speaker 2 (01:40:32):
That's what I would say, absolutely.

Speaker 1 (01:40:34):
So, Jason, thank you so much for talking to me. Man,
you are amazing. This was an awesome conversation. I want
to have more conversations in the future with you, for sure.
Let me give you a minute to go ahead and
shout out your book again, Close Encounters. Everybody should read that.
I mean, it's gonna dig more into everything that we've
been talking about. Here, tell us where we can find you,

(01:40:55):
you know, and where people can check out your content.

Speaker 2 (01:40:58):
Sure, the book is Closer in counter play on Close Encounters,
obviously Closer Encounters, And you can find links to all
my books and my social media at my website Jason
Rezagorgani dot com. Maybe put a link to that in
the show notes. Jason Reza Georgani dot com. It has
a link to my x account, my YouTube, all my

(01:41:21):
books on Amazon and so forth.

Speaker 1 (01:41:23):
Okay, we'll do. Thank you very much, Jason. There has
been another episode of Hard Trew's Take It Easy Everybody,