Speaker 1: Governments classify information for I mean, it's really one primary.
Speaker 2: Reason at its core.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they believe the public just isn't ready to see it,
or maybe that we shouldn't need to see it exactly.
Speaker 2: It could compromise national security, operational secrets, that kind of thing.
It's the compact we all sort of.
Speaker 1: Accept, right, It's the definition of the state's monopoly on
sensitive information. Yeah, but today we're diving into a premise
that is I think far more unsettling than just simple secrecy.
Much more what happens when that information is finally officially
released decades later, you know, after the threat has theoretically passed,
and it still makes absolutely no sense.
Speaker 2: That's the ultimate information paradox.
Speaker 1: We're talking about documents where the incident is confirmed, the
paper itself is authenticated by the agency that created it.
Yet the official file gives you zero logical, conventional explanation
for what's inside.
Speaker 2: And that's where you move completely beyond the realm of
simple conspiracy theory. You land squarely in this space of documented, verified,
official ambiguity, and it forces you to confront this idea
that in these specific, really profound instances, the state may
know what happened, but they fundamentally do not know why
or how.
Speaker 1: So the core secret wasn't the event.
Speaker 2: No, the core secret was the government's own utter lack
of comprehension.
Speaker 1: Welcome to thrilling Threads. Today, we're taking a deep look
at a stack of sources detailing exactly this phenomenon. We're
talking official reports, CIA files, Pentagon memos, cold war logs
that were just never meant for the public.
Speaker 2: And these records detail events and technologies that remain officially unidentified, unexplained,
or i mean straight up inexplicable according to our current
scientific models.
Speaker 1: So our mission today is for you, the listener, to
quickly and thoroughly grasp the specific confirmed facts detail in
these reports.
Speaker 2: And to understand the deep, unsettling implications of that official ambiguity.
We're not just summarizing here. We're going to be analyzing
the historical, the technical, and frankly the moral context of
these strange, strange documents.
Speaker 1: We're looking for those specific aha moments, you know, those
details that sound like they're pulled from high concept science fiction,
but are confirmed historical facts, signed and sealed in government archives.
So let's start this unpacking at the very boundary of
human consciousness itself with a program dedicated to exploring the
seemingly impossible. So we begin with the Central Intelligence Agency,
the CIA and a program that many have heard of,
but maybe you don't know the full details about. It's
called Project Stargate.
Speaker 2: And for anyone unfamiliar with the full context, this wasn't
some minor backroom study. This was a real program, so
serious one, oh yeah, funded by the CIA in the
late nineteen seventies early nineteen eighties, designed specifically to test
the viability of psychic abilities for gathering intelligence.
Speaker 1: The term they used was remote viewing, right, And.
Speaker 2: What needs to be emphasized here is that this was
operational research. This wasn't just theoretical. It was a direct
response to intelligen suggesting the Soviet Union was heavily invested
in similar psychic or psychotronic programs.
Speaker 1: So it's classic Cold War. They're doing it, so we
have to do it.
Speaker 2: It's the typical Cold War one upmanship. Yeah, the US
felt compelled to match a potential threat, even one that
sounds this outlandish. We're talking about US taxpayer money funding
operational research into whether agents could psychically perceive data that
was geographically or and this is key chronologically inaccessible, and.
Speaker 1: The government confirmed all this. It's not a secret anymore.
Thousands of pages were declassified, establishing that the program was real,
that dozens of people were trained as viewers, and that
the CIA invested serious methodological resources into this whole endeavor.
Speaker 2: Indeed, and you know, while the vast majority of the
documentation is, let's be honest, pretty dry.
Speaker 1: Yeah, lots of methodology reviews, failed.
Speaker 2: Targets exactly, internal debates about statistical significance. But there is
one specific session transcript from nineteen eighty four that acts
as a lightning rock for the entire paradox of this program.
It just defies all known rational explanation, and yet it
was still archived as legitimate intelligence data.
Speaker 1: Let's get right into it. The nineteen eighty four Mars session.
This is where the verifiable facts start to sound like
a fever dream.
Speaker 2: It really is. So a remote viewer who was only
identified by a program number to maintain anonymity. It was
brought in for a session, and as per protocol, the
viewer was given a sealed envelope.
Speaker 1: Right, they don't know the target. That's the whole point
of the text.
Speaker 2: Correct. Inside the envelope is a set of geographic and
chronological coordinates. The viewer has no idea what they are.
The task is simple, describe what you.
Speaker 1: See, and the official transcript, which is now public record,
details the viewer's experience. It starts with this almost immediate
sense of desolation.
Speaker 2: And massive ancient structures. The viewer describes them as pyramids
and these huge shelters built deep into the ground, almost
like they were designed to withstand something catastrophic.
Speaker 1: The specificity is what's so jarring. It's what prevents you
from just dismissing it. The viewer detailed thin atmospheric conditions,
intends cold and structures that look like they were designed
for and I'm quoting here, towering humanoid figures.
Speaker 2: And a civilization that was actively dying a collapse of
some sort, maybe from environmental change or some kind of conflict.
It's all in the transcript.
Speaker 1: And then comes the moment, the part that makes this
entire document a piece of unsettling history. After the detailed
description was rendered and recorded, the session supervisor breaks the
seal and reveals the target that corresponded to those coordinates.
Speaker 2: And it wasn't a modern Soviet missile silo.
Speaker 1: No, it wasn't a current political hotspot or a terrorist
training camp.
Speaker 2: The target was Mars, approximately one million years in the past.
Speaker 1: Just let that sink in Mars a million years ago.
Speaker 2: That chronological parameter alone, just justsed it places the session
completely outside of any known scientific or intelligence framework. We
are talking about the United States government attempting to psychically
access deep geological history on another planet.
Speaker 1: Think about the magnitude of that request. I mean the
viewers describing non human intelligent beings, their environment, their architecture,
their downfall. And the CIA, arguably the most rigorous intelligence
body in the world, didn't halt the session and declared
a fantasy or a psychotic break.
Speaker 2: No, that's the central, unexplainable aspect of this. They recorded
the data, treated it as a functional session, and completed
the formal archival process.
Speaker 1: They didn't discard it.
Speaker 2: It was archived identically to sessions that were aimed at,
say locating hostages or spying on Russian facilities. It was
treated as a piece of intelligence data, no matter how
extreme that needed to be kept.
Speaker 1: And when these files were finally declassified, the agency confirmed
the authenticity of the documents. They confirmed the session happened
exactly as written.
Speaker 2: That the supervisor did, in fact, asked someone to look
one million years into the Martian past and then formally
logged the result.
Speaker 1: And here's the ambiguity. They offered no official explanation for
its existence, for its content, or why on earth they
kept it for decades.
Speaker 2: So we have to analyze the implications of that decision
to archive it. Why would the government spend time and
resources on this, and why would they archive a detailed
description of an ancient Martian civilization unless some part of
the intelligence community treated the result as legitimate data that
required preservation.
Speaker 1: The implications are almost philosophical. If they archived it, it
suggests that their internal methodology for deciding what was useful
psychic data was well, it was far wider than simple
target verification. They weren't just checking if it was right
or wrong.
Speaker 2: They were logging range exactly. If you peel back the layers,
the true fear might not have been the Martian civilization itself.
The fear might have been the confirmed capability of the viewer.
If they had already validated this person as capable of
accessing any sealed coordinate, geographic or temporal, then the extreme
nature of the Martian coordinate just becomes a test of
the outer limits of that range.
Speaker 1: Fundamentally changes their perception of history, doesn't it. If the
government even theoretically validates the ability to access the past,
then history is no longer a fixed, settled record. It's
potentially accessible, exploitable data. That is the truly unsettling implication here.
Speaker 2: And in the intelligence world. The mere potential for an
adversary to possess that capability, or for you to possess it,
necessitates documentation. They classified their own belief and the possibility
of psychic time travel, and now we are left holding
the evidence of that internal belief.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's pivot sharply from the psychological battlefield of the
mind to the terrifyingly real battlefield of covert operations. We're
moving from untraceable knowledge to untraceable.
Speaker 2: Action, physical, lethal, political warfare designed to be absolutely silent
and deniable.
Speaker 1: Yeah. This next set of documents forces us to confront
the extreme secrecy surrounding US intelligence operations in the mid
twentieth century. We are examining specific instances where the state
created mechanisms for play plausible deniability that just they pushed
the boundaries of law and.
Speaker 2: Reality, and we start with something that sounds like it's
out of a spy movie, but it is one hundred
percent real.
Speaker 1: The heart Attack gun. This is in folklore. This came
out during the nineteen seventy five US Senate investigation into
intelligence misuses, specifically the Church Committee hearings.
Speaker 2: Right. These hearings were established to uncover just how far
intelligence agencies had strayed from their mandates, and the CIA
was forced to disclose several covert assassination tools.
Speaker 1: And the efficiency and I think the simplicity of this
specific weapon are just chilling.
Speaker 2: It truly is a document of profound moral ambiguity. So
the weapon was internally referred to as the heart Attack gun.
During the congressional testimony, they described and even demonstrated the
mechanics in harrowing detail. It was designed to fire a
specialized projectile, a dart, but a.
Speaker 1: Very specific kind of dart. It had to be solid
enough to be fired from a gun, but it had
to vanish upon impact, no evidence precise.
Speaker 2: The dart was frozen and composed of a toxin which
the reports often identify as being derived from shellfish. It
was engineered to deliver this toxin deep into the bloodstream
of a target.
Speaker 1: And crucially, the dart would dissolve almost instantly because of
body heat. It would leave no trace of the delivery mechanism,
no entry wound, no foreign object for a corner defined.
Speaker 2: And the function of the toxin itself was the final
layer of deniability. It was specifically designed to induce cardiac arrest.
Speaker 1: Perfectly mimicking a natural fatal heart attack, right correct.
Speaker 2: The ultimate weapon of deniability. An autopsy performed afterward the
standard procedure would show no signs of poisoning, no trace
of a projectile, no external trauma. The medical examiner would
certify the death as a natural cardiac event.
Speaker 1: We know from the declassified testimony that the CIA admitted
the weapon existed. They showed its mechanics to the committee.
They confirmed testing had been successfully conducted. It was a
verifiable operational capability.
Speaker 2: But what defines the paradox here, the piece of information
that remains eternally classified is the one question everyone.
Speaker 1: Has was it ever actually used?
Speaker 2: Was it ever used in an operational context to assassinate
a foreign leader or maybe even a domestic target, And
that history is locked away. We know the intent. We
know the engineering, and we know the successful testing, but
the historical application, the final moral accounting, is permanently classified,
and that leaves this massive void in the historical record.
Speaker 1: We're left only with the certainty that the state created
the perfect tool for untraceable murder without ever confirming whether
they actually pulled the trigger. That uncertainty itself is a
powerful mechanism of control.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, And if that level of individual assassination capability is disturbing.
Speaker 1: The concept of state sponsored mass domestic terror is well,
it's even.
Speaker 2: Worse, which brings us directly to Operation Northwoods.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Operation Northwoods is arguably one of the most morally bankrupt
documents ever officially released by the US government. I mean
it moves beyond covert foreign operations and into explicit, high
level planning to attack US civilians for political gain.
Speaker 1: Give us the context, When was this drafted and who's
behind it?
Speaker 2: So Northwards was a classified proposal drafted in nineteen sixty
two by the US Department of Defense. This is a
height of Cold War tensions. The Cuban crisis is simmering,
but what makes it so terrifying is its origin. It
was signed by Lyman Lemnitzer, the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff.
Speaker 1: So this wasn't some back of the envelope concept from
a low level.
Speaker 2: Analyst, not at all. This was a formal proposal, debated
and signed at the absolute highest military echelon, and.
Speaker 1: The plan's objective was to manufacture a pretext, a reason
for military action against Cuba. They felt President Kennedy needed
overwhelming public support and international justification for an invasion to
topple Castro.
Speaker 2: And to create that pretext, the plan outlined a series
of what are called false flag operations.
Speaker 1: For the listener, a false flag is an operation where
an action is deliberately carried out by one party, but
it's designed to look like it was carried out by
someone else exactly.
Speaker 2: In this case, US military forces would conduct acts of
terrorism and then blame Cuban forces for them.
Speaker 1: And the specific proposed actions detailed in the official document
are They're truly chilling.
Speaker 2: They planned to stage attacks in American cities. They talked
about sinking refugee boats carrying Cubans who were seeking asylum
in the US.
Speaker 1: And hijacking aircraft and blaming all of these incidents publicly
and vehemently on the Cuban regime. The goal was to
create a manufactured consensus for war through manufactured domestic terror
and grief.
Speaker 2: The documents confirmed they even considered faking a Cuban attack
on the US base at Guantanamo Bay, which would have
involved destroying US military equipment and creating fach casualty lists.
Speaker 1: It reads like a movie script that would be rejected
for being too extreme, too unbelievable. Yet the sources confirmed
the document's reality, its accuracy, and its high level approval.
Speaker 2: And it was declassified decades later in the nineteen nineties
as part of the JFK Assassination Records Review Board efforts.
Speaker 1: The only thing that stopped this plan from potentially resulting
in the mass murder of US citizens was President Kennedy.
Speaker 2: He explicitly and immediately rejected the proposal. But the central
ambiguity here isn't the rejection. It's how close the plan
came to being approved, and, maybe more importantly, the institutional
culture that allowed such a radical, domestically focused plan to
be formally drafted and signed by the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs in the first place.
Speaker 1: Doesn't the very existence of the plan signed at that
level suggest that during the Cold War, a fundamental breakdown
of American political and moral guardrails was considered acceptable.
Speaker 2: That is the chilling takeaway. The architects of this plan
held the highest military responsibility in the country, and their
official recommendation was calculated mass deception and murder to achieve
geopolitical aims. That level of institutional disregard for human life,
even if it was ultimately rejected by the President, it
speaks to a deeply unsettling reality within the halls of
power during the Cold War.
Speaker 1: And the ambiguity is the lack of institutional explanation for
the drafting itself. Not why Kennedy rejected it, but why
limitits are signed it.
Speaker 2: We've never gotten one.
Speaker 1: All right, Let's shift our focus to the ultimate existential threat,
the Cold War and nuclear weapons. We move from targeted,
covert chaos to system wide automated annihilation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the documents here focus on systems that were designed
to maintain control and terrifying reports that detail catastrophic losses
of that very control.
Speaker 1: This segment really deals with the architecture of global.
Speaker 2: Destruction, and we have to begin with the Soviet Union's
classified nuclear failsafe known internally as Perimeter, but universally dreaded
in the West as the dead Hand system. This is
automation taken to its most extreme, irreversible and terrifying conclusion.
Speaker 1: This system was the absolute last resort. So explain to
the listener what made dead Hands so different from a
conventional retaliatory system, which usually requires multiple human approval.
Speaker 2: So dead Hand was specifically designed as a tertiary response system.
It was built for the scenario of effective decapitation.
Speaker 1: Meaning a first strike has already happened.
Speaker 2: An overwhelming first nuclear strike that has wiped out the
entire Soviet command structure, the Politburo, the General staff, the
conventional military chain of command. The system, relying purely on technology,
would be the final word in an apocalypse, so.
Speaker 1: It was designed to function when no humans were left
to authorize the response. What were the trigger conditions? How
did it know to activate?
Speaker 2: The system used a highly sophisticated set of sensors to
detect overwhelming evidence of a nuclear strike. We're talking massive
synchronous radiation spikes across huge territories, severe seismic activity consistent
with groundbursts, widespread communication blackouts suggesting command centers were.
Speaker 1: Hit and even sharp atmosphere pressure change with all of
it all at once, And the terrifying detail confirmed by
declassified reports is the automated response. If those conditions were met,
the Perimeter system would automatically authorize and launch a full
nuclear retaliation.
Speaker 2: Crucially, yes, it required no human approval. It was designed
to act when the humans capable of command were presumed
to be dead. The first stage was launching special command
missiles that would fly over the country and transmit launch
codes directly to every surviving missile, silo and submarine that
could still fire.
Speaker 1: It was designed to guarantee mutual assured destruction even if
the entire USSR leadership was.
Speaker 2: Gone exactly, and the true horror, which was revealed in
the documents declassified after the Soviet collapse, is that, once activated,
the system could not be easily shut down. It operated
outside the normal command structure and relied entirely on complex,
pre programmed logic, and officials admitted it had been fully
operational for years.
Speaker 1: But the paradox we were looking at here is the
official ambiguity around the operational logs. The full logs of
this system are still unreleased.
Speaker 2: Which leaves us with the chilling unknown. How close did
it come to triggering? We know from partial reports that
several Cold War incidents suggested false censor readings nearly activated
the dead hand.
Speaker 1: So imagine a massive geomagnetic storm from the Sun, or
a flock of migrating geese registering on radar as a
missile attack, or just a simple software glitch.
Speaker 2: If even a handful of technical anomalies had the potential
to bypass human judgment and initiate global destruction, that tells
us the stability of the entire Cold War equilibrium was
far more precarious than the public ever understood.
Speaker 1: It's the difference between human error and systemic failure.
Speaker 2: Exactly the state knows the system was flawed, that it
was dangerously vulnerable to environmental or technical misinterpretations, but they
will not disclose the specifics of those near fatal errors.
The knowledge that civilization hung on the thread of a failsafe,
that itself frequently experienced near failure. That is the uncomfortable
truth the government keeps classified.
Speaker 1: And while control systems are meant to maintain order, the
records concerning unaccounted nuclear material confirmed just how chaotic things became.
Oh yeah, we're constantly assured that governments tracked nuclear weapons
and radioactive materials with extreme perfect precision, the ultimate level
of accountability.
Speaker 2: That premise of perfect precision is completely shattered by the
numerous classified reports filed regarding missing or unaccounted for nuclear
material throughout the Cold War. And we're not talking about
misplaced paper clips here.
Speaker 1: No, we are discussing weapons grade components that were just
lost in the system.
Speaker 2: The sheer scale of loss is astonishing. When portions of
these reports were declassified, it became clear that while some
incidents were explicable you know, transportation accidents, lost aircraft carrying nuclear.
Speaker 1: Payloads, right, things you can explain away.
Speaker 2: Many others were far more difficult to explain and critically
were never resolved. In several documented cases, nuclear material potentially
facile cores or material capable of being fashioned into a
crude device, was listed as missing with no confirmed recovery.
Speaker 1: That goes way beyond an accounting error. This is material
capable of massive destruction just going into an unrecoverable void.
Speaker 2: And compounding the problem where these secondary reports detailing unexplained
radiation spikes, they were detected in locations where no weapons
were known to be deployed, tested.
Speaker 1: Or stored, which suggests one of two things. Either material
was present where it should absolutely not be, or perhaps
material is tested where it should absolutely not be.
Speaker 2: And here is the official evasion. We have to focus on.
The declassified files often ended so vaguely using terms like inconclusive,
ongoing investigation or they just stopped abruptly with no final conclusion.
Governments declined to comment on these specific gaps, which means
there is no complete public accounting of every reported loss
or unexplained radiation event.
Speaker 1: So we're left at the evidence that the government's lost
control of the most dangerous materials on the planet, and
the only knowledge they are willing to share is the
fact of their own failure to account for it.
Speaker 2: The distinction between we won't tell you where the material
is and we genuinely don't know where there are is
material is is the difference between controlled secrecy and sheer
systemic failure, and the ambiguity in these declassified files suggests
it was a mix of both. The state classified its
own systemic failure to maintain nuclear accountability.
Speaker 1: Now we arrive at what is probably the single largest
cluster of unexplained documents. It spans decades, multiple nations, and
multiple layers of sensor verification. We're talking about confirmed encounters
with objects that, according to official logs, define known physics
and conventional explanation. These are the UAPs.
Speaker 2: It's so crucial that we established the high credibility of
these sources right from the start. We are talking about repeated,
multisensor documented encounters involving highly trained personnel, not just you know,
anecdotal sightings. The paradox here is that the government is
confirming the anomaly but refusing to provide the explanation.
Speaker 1: Let's focus first on the US Navy encounters that occurred
between twenty four and twenty fifteen off the Pacific coast.
These were not isolated flashes of light. These were consistent,
often daily encounters happening near military training zones, sometimes for years.
Speaker 2: Ocsional high level pilot reports, which are mandatory after an anomaly.
High resolution forward looking infrared or FLR footage and internal
Navy briefings de Penagon later confirm the authenticity of all
of this documentation and footage, solidifying these incidents as historical fact.
Speaker 1: So the specific facts the listener needs to grasp are
the physics defying capabilities of these objects, which the government
officially labeled unidentified aerial phenomenon, describe the maneuvers that violate
known aeronautical science.
Speaker 2: Okay, The documents detail four primary maneuvers that just break
our current understanding of propulsion and inertia. First, they were
observed accelerating from extreme altitude, say eighty thousand feet, down
to sea level in a matter of seconds, as impossible
to achieve that kind of acceleration in Earth's atmosphere without
immediate structural failure or massive heat generation is impossible with
any known technology. The g forces alone would tear a
part any known airframe, let alone any biological entity that
might be inside.
Speaker 1: Okay, what's second.
Speaker 2: Second, they were capable of sustained hovering without any visible
propulsion system, no wings, no jets, no rotors, violating every
principle of lift. Third, they traveled at documented hypersonic speeds
Mock five or greater without producing the requisite sonic booms, which.
Speaker 1: Implies some form of energy manipulation that alters the air
pressure around the object, a technology far beyond our current grasp.
Speaker 2: Right, and Fourth, and perhaps the most disturbing from a
logistical standpoint, they appeared to drop into the ocean without
slowing down. They transition seamlessly between atmospheric flight and submergence,
a trans medium capability without a splash, without debris or
any visible reaction to the immense shift and density.
Speaker 1: The government confirmed these facts. They confirmed the objects were
under intelligent control, yet they maintained the efficient label unidentified.
Speaker 2: This is the masterpiece of evasion we talked about. They
proved the unknown as real, but they offered no interpretive framework,
no bridge from the anomaly to knowledge.
Speaker 1: Let's move across the Atlantic. We had the infamous Rendalscham
Forest incident in the UK from December nineteen eighty near
raf Bentwaters. Initially this was dismissed publicly, Yeah.
Speaker 2: But the official truth surfaced years later in the form
of what's known as the Halt Memo.
Speaker 1: Lieutenant Colonel Charles Halt, the deputy base commander, a high ranking,
highly credible witness.
Speaker 2: Exactly his memorandum, which was suppressed for years but eventually declassified,
details his team's investigation of the event. He described a
glowing metallic object maneuvering silently through the trees, emitting beams
of light down to the ground, and later performing these
acrobatic maneuvers in the sky before splitting into multiple airborne objects.
Speaker 1: But what moved this beyond just a visual sighting and
into hard physical evidence.
Speaker 2: The physical component was keyation readings were taken at the
landing site by Halt's own personnel, and they were officially
recorded as being significantly above background levels, concentrated right in
the area where the object was reported to have settled.
Speaker 1: So this wasn an a hallucination. It left a measurable
physical trace.
Speaker 2: And the military never disputed the memos authenticity once it
was declassified, but their official stance was just bureaucratic paralysis.
They concluded that no threat was identified. The question of
the object's identity, despite the documented physical evidence and a
high ranking military witness, remains officially unanswered. They confirmed the
event occurred, but classified the identity of the physical object
that caused it, and this.
Speaker 1: Pattern of internal acknowledgment versus public dismissal is systematically confirmed
by the vast document release from the UK Ministry of Defense.
For decades, the mad maintained a public stance that they
did not seriously investigate UFOs.
Speaker 2: And then between twenty eight and twenty thirteen they released
over one hundred and fifty thousand cages of files.
Speaker 1: And what do the internal assessments revealed that contradicted their
public denial.
Speaker 2: The internal analysis contained a massive contradiction. Memos from intelligence
analysts explicitly acknowledged objects that displayed acceleration, maneuverability, and stealth
capabilities beyond known technology. The analysts admitted in their own
internal documents that some sightings could not be attributed to
known aircraft, atmospheric phenomena, or sensor errors. They confirmed the
existence of craft superior to anything they possess.
Speaker 1: So internally, their top analysts confirmed that genuinely unidentified physics
defying craft were real in operating in UK airspace, posing
a technological mystery, if not an immediate threat.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, and yet the final public conclusion of the entire
modern investigation was that UFOs posed no threat and were
not worth further study, and the dedicated desk was shut down.
Speaker 1: The contradiction between the internal findings and the public dismissal
was never explained.
Speaker 2: No, it highlights a conscious, deliberate, high level decision to
minimize a confirmed anomaly to the public while internally acknowledging
its reality and superior capability.
Speaker 1: Now we turn to perhaps the most extreme and difficult
to categorize document in the UAP cluster, the Siberian petrification incident.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this report is so strange that its mere existence
in the archives is the paradox we have to examine.
Speaker 1: This specific incident appears in the little known CIA document
based on alled Soviet intelligence reports from the nineteen fifties.
So we have to view this through a lens of
extreme skepticism about the events themselves.
Speaker 2: But with one hundred percent certainty regarding the CIA's decision
to archive it.
Speaker 1: Right, the sources convoluted a CIA translation of an extreme
Soviet claim, but the content is scientifically impossible describe the
alleged event.
Speaker 2: Okay, so the extreme claim states that villagers observed a
low flying disc shaped or spherical object. Soviet soldiers were
then dispatched to investigate the site and allegedly fired at
the object, initiating some kind of confrontation.
Speaker 1: And the result, according to this report, sounds like something
out of a horror film.
Speaker 2: The object emitted an intense flash of light, and afterward
the Soviet soldiers were found turned into a stone like substance,
suggesting some form of instantaneous petrification rather than conventional trauma
or burning.
Speaker 1: The crucial point for our discussion is the CIA's handling
of this report. The agency did not verify the account,
nor could they have, But they also didn't dismiss it
as a hoax or as Soviet propaganda or a fabrication.
Speaker 2: No, it was translated, meticulously logged, and archived in official
intelligence files, where it remained classified for decades.
Speaker 1: Why why preserve an unverified and scientifically extreme report like that?
If it was clearly false? Why not label it as
known Soviet disinformation and just discard it? The unanswered archival
decision is the true mystery.
Speaker 2: That decision suggests a fascinating aspect of intelligence methodology. When
you're dealing with an adversary, you have to log and
analyze not just what you know is true, but what
the adversary claims is true, or what you fear they
might be capable of. Is our crime? Not necessarily because
the CIA believed the soldiers turned to stone, but because.
Speaker 1: The report represented a potential threat factor exactly.
Speaker 2: A terrifying novel and extreme capability that needed to be
logged just in case similar reports ever surfaced. They classified
their own fear of a potential Soviet black project capability that.
Speaker 1: Makes a strange kind of sense. The decision to archive
unverified extreme claims alongside confirmed US military reports suggests the
intelligence apparatus operates on a spectrum of possibility where even
the scientifically impossible has to be logged just in case.
Speaker 2: It's the ultimate better safe than sorry policy applied to
physics and biology.
Speaker 1: Finally, let's turn to the Australian Joint Operations Report from
nineteen seventy one. This is a story of extreme sensitivity
and accidental disclosure.
Speaker 2: Yes, it was a classified document compiled by Australian officials
detailing joint operations and intelligence sharing with the US. The
critical detail here is that the report was accidentally declassified
and archived publicly for a period of time before officials
realize the gravity of the leak.
Speaker 1: It focused on aerial surveillance programs, intel sharing agreements, and
highly restricted projects that were clearly not meant for public consumption.
But the truly critical terms, the words that forced a
desperate attempted reclassification, were references to two specific.
Speaker 2: Phrases, recoveries and specialized access programs.
Speaker 1: In the intelligence community, those terms are highly sensitive. They
are almost code words specialized access programs often refer to
extremely compartmentalized, black budget operations.
Speaker 2: And recoveries is the term routinely associated with the retrieval
of non conventional, often non human, crash debris or materials.
Speaker 1: So the document suggests, through these explicit references, that Australia
was aware of and actively involved in sensitive activities. Activities
involving recoveries far beyond simple observation or reporting of lights
in the sky. It hints at a deep, sustained collaboration
on material retrieval or maybe even reverse engineering.
Speaker 2: Once the contents were noticed, official scramble to reclassify the document,
citing national security, but it was too late. The file
had already been cataloged publicly by the National.
Speaker 1: Archives, and to this day no official clarification or explanation
for those explicit, highly sensitive references to recoveries has ever
been issued. It remains publicly available, unanswered and unexplained, a verifiable,
declassified glimpse into a classified collaboration that we are clearly
not meant to understand.
Speaker 2: The paradox is that the document is real, the terms
are official, and the explanation is non existent. Hashtag tag outro.
Speaker 1: So let's try to synthesize the core thread that runs
through this entire collection of declassified documents. We've covered psychic
time travel, undetectable toxins, automated nuclear triggers, and objects that
deflung gravity, inertia, and atmospheric physics. The common, profound thread
is this official confirmation of extraordinary facts, often scientifically impossible,
followed by immediate official silence or profound confusion regarding the
actual explanation.
Speaker 2: And what's so fascinating is the irony this presents for you,
the learner. We have documentation proving that the government knew
something momentous happened. The psychiccession took place, the dead hand
was armed, the UAPs flew, but the knowledge they retained
was utterly incomplete. The secrecy wasn't just about hiding the
event from the public. It was often about hiding the
lack of understanding within the government itself.
Speaker 1: They classified their own incomprehension. The ultimate revelation is that
the official reality verified by these archives is far stranger
and more uncertain than the official fiction we are usually given.
Speaker 2: We have established that governments have officially acknowledged objects and
capabilities that fundamentally break our current scientific understanding of physics
and biology.
Speaker 1: So, if these declassified documents confirm that the truly unknown
is real, but the most powerful organizational structures on the planet,
the military, the CIA, the DoD cannot explain it, what
does that imply about the actual boundaries of human knowledge itself?
Speaker 2: If the US Navy confirmed hypersonic silent vehicles dropping into
the ocean, what secrets are still rightly classified? Because the
full truth would fundamentally alter our reality, our technology, our history,
or perhaps our place in the universe.
Speaker 1: That is the thought we leave you with today. We
have the proof of the impossible in official files. So
which of these reports, the psychic session, the heart attack gun,
the flaws of the dead Hands system, or the physic
defying UAPs that handed recoveries do you find the most
profoundly unsettling? And why head over and let us know
your thoughts and comments. Thank you for joining us on
Trilling Threads.