Speaker 1: Imagine the crisp, thin air of a late February morning
in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Speaker 2: Right right at the base of the mountains, exactly.
Speaker 1: The Sandy Mountains. The jagged peaks are looming in the distance,
casting these long, sharp shadows over quiet suburban streets.
Speaker 2: It's a very picturesque, quiet place.
Speaker 1: It really is. And you know, a sixty eight year
old man steps out of his home. He is incredibly fit,
mentally sharp, an avid trail runner who literally just crushed
a sixty mile bicycle ride the previous weekend.
Speaker 2: Sixty I mean that's not a casual Sunday ride, No.
Speaker 1: Not at all. But this isn't just any local retiree
heading out for a morning stroll, right, This is a
highly decorated retired Air Force major general.
Speaker 2: A man who honestly held the keys to the kingdom.
Speaker 1: Yeah, a man who once controlled a two billion dollar budget,
a guy who oversaw America's most intensely classified space and
weapons systems. He steps out of his house and well,
he simply vanishes into thin air, just gone, completely gone,
no trace, no clear direction of travel, just a quiet
suburban street and a terrifying, gaping void where one of
the most knowledgeable men in the United States military used
to be welcome to thrilling threads.
Speaker 2: Glad to be here for this one. It's a wild case,
it really is.
Speaker 1: Today we are unpacking the truly baffling disappearance of Major
General William Neil McCasland. And just so you know, we're
drawing our facts directly from a really comprehensive video transcript
published on the News Nation YouTube.
Speaker 2: Channel, right, the one titled missing UFO Expert Retired Air
Force General search continues backscroll.
Speaker 1: That's the one. We're going to examine, the bizarre physical clues,
the top secret Pentagon programs, the whispered historical connections to
the nineteen forty seven Roswell crash, and like this frantic
multi agency search that is strangely quiet on the public
relations front.
Speaker 2: To share volume of anomalies in this single disappearance is staggering.
Speaker 1: Obviously, staggering is the right word. We aren't just looking
at a missing person's case here.
Speaker 2: No, definitely not. We are looking at an event that
sits right at the intersection of national security, advanced military technology,
and well some of the most enduring mysteries of the
modern age. Yeah, because when you introduce the acronym UFO
into any missing person's case, the signal to noise ratio
just drops dramatic.
Speaker 1: Oh absolutely gets so money, right.
Speaker 2: So our goal today for you listening is to really
sift through that noise. We need to look at the
very grounded implications for national security.
Speaker 1: And examine what happens mechanically when a man whose brain
holds the nation's darkest secrets suddenly just disappears off the board.
Speaker 2: Exactly because you really have to understand who Major General
mcaslin actually is.
Speaker 1: Right, because his resume is essentially the beating heart of
his entire mystery. It is according to the News Nation source,
up until twenty thirteen, General mcaslin was the commander of
the Air Force Research Laboratory, or the AFRL, which is huge, massive.
We are talking about the organization directly responsible for advanced
military technology, bleeding edge science, highly classified space systems, all
of it.
Speaker 2: And he worked on special programs at the Pentagon too.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The source explicitly notes that these were projects so classified,
so deeply buried that many high ranking officials inside the
United States government never even got to see them.
Speaker 2: Most elected officials wouldn't even know the acronyms for these programs.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this because to me, you look at
this resume and I'm instantly thinking of the director of
a real life Men in Black agency.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's literally what it sounds like, right, but stripped of.
Speaker 1: The Hollywood exaggeration. What does managing a two billion dollar
black budget actually entail on a day to day basis?
Speaker 2: What's fascinating here is the sheer bureaucratic and structural isolation
required to manage that kind of portfolio.
Speaker 1: Like just the logistics of keeping a secret that big.
Speaker 2: Exactly. To understand Mchasm's reality, you have to understand special
Access programs or SAPs.
Speaker 1: SAPs.
Speaker 2: Yeah, in the world of intelligence and military defense, a
standard TOPS secret clearance is just the baseline.
Speaker 1: Wow, just the baseline.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's merely the entry ticket that says, you know,
the government trusts you not to commit treason. Above that
information is fiercely compartmentalized, So.
Speaker 1: You don't just get to see everything once you.
Speaker 2: Have a badge, not at all. You only get access
to a specific program if you have a verified, absolute
need to know. And within SAPs there are further divisions. Likewise, well,
there are acknowledged SAPs, where the existence of the program
is known, but the details are classified.
Speaker 1: Okay, so people know it exists, just not what it does. Right.
Speaker 2: Then there are unacknowledged SAPs or usaps.
Speaker 1: So no one even knows those exists exactly.
Speaker 2: The very existence is a closely guarded secret. And at
the very top there are waved usaps.
Speaker 1: Waved usaps.
Speaker 2: Yeah, these are so sensitive that they are exempt from
standard congressional reporting requirements, like only a handful of committee
chairs are ever briefed, often just verbally.
Speaker 1: With verbally no paper trail.
Speaker 2: Basically none. And General mcaslin wasn't just read into a
few of these programs. As the commander of the AFRL
and a former director of Special Programs inside the Pentagon,
he was the architect and the overseer of many of them.
Speaker 1: That is wild.
Speaker 2: He was managing a two billion dollar budget dedicated strictly
to things the public does not know exist, things like
what well, whether that is directed energy weapons, hypersonic glide vehicles,
or advanced satellite surveillance architectures.
Speaker 1: I mean two billion dollars funneled into projects that legally
don't exist to the public eye.
Speaker 2: It's a massive responsibility.
Speaker 1: And here is the kicker, the detail that sends this
whole story into overdrive.
Speaker 2: A location.
Speaker 1: The location, the Air Force Research Laboratory is based at
Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio.
Speaker 2: Right Patterson.
Speaker 1: Yeah. If you look at the lore and the documented
history of the American military, Right Patterson isn't just another base.
Speaker 2: No, it's legendary.
Speaker 1: Historically, it is intrinsically linked to Project Blue Book, which
was the US military's official decades long investigation into UFO
sightings starting in the nineteen fifties and for generations, Wright
Patterson has been rumored to be the absolute repository, the
literal storage facility for exotic materials.
Speaker 2: Materials allegedly recovered from the nineteen forty seven Roswell incident.
Speaker 1: Exactly, you take a guy who commands that base and
you put him out in the civilian world.
Speaker 2: It's a huge liability.
Speaker 1: Think about what you would do if you were holding
secrets that could shift global power.
Speaker 2: You'd be paranoid.
Speaker 1: You wouldn't just retire to plant roses. You would be
hyper aware of your surroundings every second of the day.
Speaker 2: The psychological burden of carrying that kind of knowledge is immense.
Speaker 1: It has to be exhausting.
Speaker 2: It is when you possess that level of classified information,
compartmentalization becomes your entire personality.
Speaker 1: Oh, that makes sense. You can't ever really turn it off.
Speaker 2: You can't. You are trained to guard your thoughts, to
monitor your surroundings, to assume you are a high value
target at all times. Intelligence officials actually refer to this
as having a god's eye view of US strategic capabilities.
Speaker 1: A god's eye view.
Speaker 2: Yeah, McCaslin knows what our satellites can see. He knows
the exact material composition of our newest stealth platforms.
Speaker 1: He knows everything.
Speaker 2: He knows exactly how far ahead of our adversaries we
truly are, or perhaps more terrifyingly, how far behind we
might be in certain sectors.
Speaker 1: Wow, I hadn't thought about that, knowing our weaknesses exactly.
Speaker 2: The human brain is not naturally designed to hold a
vast repository of lethal secrets while simultaneously trying to reintegrate
into mundane suburban life.
Speaker 1: No, it really isn't. You're basically a walking, breathing vault
of national security.
Speaker 2: A vault that just went completely missing, Which.
Speaker 1: Makes his disappearance on February twenty seventh, near the Sandia Mountains.
So incredibly jarring.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the details of the day he vanished are just bizarre.
Speaker 1: The facts presented by News Nation regarding the timeline and
his medical state are incredibly.
Speaker 2: Conflicting, very contradictory.
Speaker 1: Almost immediately after he vanishes, authority's issue with silver alert.
When you hear silver alert, the immediate association is an
elderly individual, maybe someone suffering from Alzheimer's or dementia, who
has wandered off and gotten confused.
Speaker 2: It inherently suggests cognitive vulnerability exactly.
Speaker 1: It paints a picture of a frail person. Yet, according
to investigative journalist Ross Colthart, who has been intimately following
this case.
Speaker 2: And he's a very credible journalist.
Speaker 1: Very credible according to him, and according to mccaslyn's own wife,
Susan and his close friends, the general was the furthest
thing from cognitively or physically vulnerable.
Speaker 2: Right remember the bike ride.
Speaker 1: Yes, we're talking about an incredibly fit, mentally sharp individual
who had just cycled sixty miles the weekend prior to
his disappearance.
Speaker 2: The application of a silver alert in mccaslyn's case immediately
ruffled feathers.
Speaker 1: It needs no sense.
Speaker 2: It created a massive contradiction in the public narrative because
a silver alert is a specific bureaucratic and public safety tool.
Speaker 1: Okay, so how does it actually work.
Speaker 2: It is designed to mobilize the community rapidly to look
for a vulnerable senior citizen. It triggers highway signs, localized
media broadcasts, and an immedia awareness.
Speaker 1: Campaign like an Amber alert, but for seniors exactly.
Speaker 2: But the mechanics of a silver alert require specific criteria
to be met, usually a documented medical condition that impairs
cognitive function.
Speaker 1: And that's exactly where the News Nation correspondent Alex Capriel
dropped a massive twist.
Speaker 2: Oh the brain fog comment.
Speaker 1: Yes, local sheriffs announced for the very first time that
mcaslyn had actually been experiencing what they described as brain
fog for the last several.
Speaker 2: Months, which is such a vague term it is.
Speaker 1: They claimed he required medication for this condition, though they
were quick to add that he showed absolutely no signs
of depression, behavioral issues, or suicidal ideation.
Speaker 2: Just brain fog.
Speaker 1: Just brain fog. Let's look at this logically, how does
a man suffering from debilitating brain fog enough to warrant
a statewide silver alert safely navigate the complex cardiovascular and
spatial awareness demands of a grueling sixty mile bike ride.
Speaker 2: He doesn't. You can't safely ride in traffic for sixty
miles if you are cognitively impaired.
Speaker 1: It just doesn't track to me. It feels completely disjointed.
I have to wonder if this is a classic case
of bureaucratic maneuvering.
Speaker 2: What do you mean by that?
Speaker 1: Is it possible that when a deeply classified, high value
individual goes missing, local authorities use medical issues as a
convenient lever, like a way to rapidly justify a massive
search without causing a public panic about a kidnapp general.
Speaker 2: That is the exact friction point between public safety protocols
and national security reality. It has to be right, Yeah,
when a person goes missing the first forty eight hours
or the golden window, local law enforcement needs a mechanism
to throw every available resource at the problem immediately.
Speaker 1: Helicopters, search dogs, volunteer g rids, all of it.
Speaker 2: Right, Issuing a silver alert might simply have been the
most efficient bureaucratic lever the local authorities could pull to
bypass standard waiting periods for missing adults.
Speaker 1: Because normally you have to wait what twenty four hours.
Speaker 2: Often, yes, they needed a justification, and the existence of
a prescription medication, even for something as vague as brain fog,
provided the necessary checkbox to activate state resources.
Speaker 1: That makes perfect sense.
Speaker 2: It's a loophole, it is, But we must evaluate this
against the physical reality of the environment. He supposedly wandered
into the Sandia Mountains. The Sandia Mountains are unforgiving. The
terrain is jagged, the elevation changes are drastic, ranging from
five thousand to over ten thousand feet, and the temperature
drops rapidly.
Speaker 1: It's not a casual walking.
Speaker 2: Path, not at all. However, a man who regularly runs
those trails, a military man trained in survival, does not
simply succumb to the elements on a routine morning without
leaving a trace exactly.
Speaker 1: Even if he got hurt, right.
Speaker 2: He experienced a medical episode like a twisted ankle, a
heard issue, or sudden cognitive decline, he would leave physical
evidence a.
Speaker 1: Discarded jacket, a distress call, broken brush from a fall, or.
Speaker 2: Ultimately a body easily found by the massive search grids.
The absolute absence of him in that environment deeply contradicts
the wandering off due to brain fog theory.
Speaker 1: Which leads us directly to the physical mystery, the breadcrumbs
that lead straight into a brick wall.
Speaker 2: The evidence of the house is the most baffling part
of this whole case.
Speaker 1: Let's look at exactly what was left behind and what
was taken. According to the News Nation broadcast, First, he
left his cell phone at home.
Speaker 2: Okay, unusual but not impossible.
Speaker 1: Second, he took his twenty three to eight caliber revolver
with him.
Speaker 2: Now that changes things.
Speaker 1: And third the bombshell that completely derails the narrative. The
police originally thought he was wearing a specific pair of
hiking boots and a shirt, right.
Speaker 2: They put that out in the initial reports.
Speaker 1: I did, But those items were actually found inside his home.
The authority stated unequivocally, there are absolutely no shoes missing
from his house.
Speaker 2: None, none. So he left barefoot.
Speaker 1: Here's where it gets really interesting for me. He leaves
his phone.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I can rationalize that sometimes you want to unplug and
just be in nature here.
Speaker 2: People do that.
Speaker 1: But you leave barefoot and you pack a revolver barefoot
and armed, doesn't scream fugue state to me, not at all.
It screams a violent disruption of routine. Think about the
physical sensation of walking out of your suburban home, onto
the pavement and into the rugged New Mexico foothills without
shoes while clutching a handgun.
Speaker 2: You'd feel the rocks the cold immediately.
Speaker 1: You don't grab a close quarters weapon and run out
the door without shoes unless the thread is already at
your threshold.
Speaker 2: This raises an important question, what specific mechanical event interrupts
the deeply ingrained routine of a highly regimented retired military
officer so violently that he leaves his home barefoot but armed.
Speaker 1: It has to be something immediate.
Speaker 2: Former FBI special agent and former Navy Seal Jonathan Gilliam
offered crucial insights on this in the News Nation broadcast.
Speaker 1: Oh Yeah, his analysis was spot on.
Speaker 2: When you analyze that specific cluster of physical evidence, the
absent phone, the present weapon, the lack of footwear, you
are forced to analyze the mechanics of a disruption.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the gun.
Speaker 2: Let's look at the firearms. Specifically, a point three po
eight caliber revolver is not a hunting weapon. It is
not a wilderness survival tool. It has a short barrel,
limited range, and low ammunition capacity.
Speaker 1: It's for self defense.
Speaker 2: It is explicitly designed for concealed close quarters personal defense.
The choice to take that specific weapon implies he was
anticipating a threat within arm's reach, not a mountain lion
on a trail.
Speaker 1: Exactly. If he was planning a hike, he would take
a different tool. He took the tool you use when
someone is kicking in your door.
Speaker 2: Precisely, this cluster of evidence points heavily toward a hurried,
hostile abduction originating from inside or immediately outside the home.
Speaker 1: Wow inside the home.
Speaker 2: Imagine the sequence of events. He is confronted unexpectedly. He
doesn't have the seconds required to put on shoes.
Speaker 1: He just reacts.
Speaker 2: He grabs his weapon for defense, but is ultimately overwhelmed, incapacitated,
and extracted before he can discharge it.
Speaker 1: And what about the phone?
Speaker 2: The phone is left behind, either because the extraction team
forced him to drop it to prevent GPS tracking, or
simply because it was irrelevant in the split second life
or death reaction he had to make.
Speaker 1: You're not grabbing your iPhone if someone is.
Speaker 2: Rushing you exactly. Alternatively, investigators must consider the mechanics of
deliberate staging. Deliberate staging, did an extraction team take his phone,
leave his boots, and intentionally manufacture a confusing, contradictory crime scene.
Speaker 1: Oh wow? To throw everyone off.
Speaker 2: By leaving the boots inside and taking the man, you
force the police to spend days trying to solve a
bizarre riddle rather than immediately pursuing a kidnapping.
Speaker 1: Protocol that is incredibly dark.
Speaker 2: If you are a man like mcas un trained in
operational security, you do not break your routine by accident.
Every action is purposeful, so it was forced. The physical
evidence scene is either the result of a catastrophic ambush
or a surgically staged misdirection.
Speaker 1: I lean toward the ambush, honestly, but the idea of
a surgically staged misdirection is chilling.
Speaker 2: It implies a highly professional team.
Speaker 1: It implies a level of sophistication that your average criminal
just doesn't possess, and that brings us to the massive
looming shadow over this entire.
Speaker 2: Case, the extraterrestrial element.
Speaker 1: Yes, now, before we dive into this, I want to
make something crystal clear to you, the listener. During this discussion,
we're going to mention a couple of highly recognizable political figures.
Speaker 2: We have to it's in the source material.
Speaker 1: We are strictly reporting the chronological facts, leaked documents, and
claims presented in the News Nation's source material. We are
maintaining absolute political impartiality, completely neutral. We are not endorsing
any political viewpoint left or right. We are simply laying
out the exact sequence of events that the journalists and
experts debated on the broadcast.
Speaker 2: That distinction is critical because the extraterrestrial angle in this
case is not derived from fringe internet forums.
Speaker 1: It's not just people making stuff up online.
Speaker 2: No, it is tethered directly to documented political and military correspondence.
Speaker 1: Right. According to the broadcast, General mccaslyn's name appeared prominently
in the leaked twenty sixteen emails between John Podesta, who
was Hillary Clinton's campaign manager at the time, and other
high level.
Speaker 2: Officials real verified emails for context.
Speaker 1: These emails reportedly discussed detailed conversations with McCaslin and another
Air Force general regarding a clear structured intention to declassify
and release UFO secrets to the American public.
Speaker 2: This was a serious conversation happening at the highest levels.
Speaker 1: This was a plan that was apparently anticipated to unfold
under a potential Clinton presidency. So we know, as a
matter of doctors commanded historical fact, that mccaslyn was viewed
by high level political operatives as a primary source.
Speaker 2: He was the guy.
Speaker 1: He was a key player with a wealth of protected
information regarding UAP Unidentified anomalist phenomenon disclosure.
Speaker 2: And then look at the current timeline.
Speaker 1: Fast forward to the present day. Mccaslyn vanishes mere days
after President Trump announced a directive to release government records
tied to UFOs and extraterrestrials.
Speaker 2: The timing is undeniable, it really is. It is the
kind of timing that immediately generates friction between different analytical philosophies.
Speaker 1: Which we saw clearly on the broadcast.
Speaker 2: In the News Nation report, we see two entirely dueling
perspectives on how to interpret this timeline. On one side, you.
Speaker 1: Have Ross Coulthart, the investigative Journalists.
Speaker 2: Right, a journalist with deep sources in the intelligence community.
He describes this sequence of events as an alarming synchronicity.
Speaker 1: Alarming synchronicity.
Speaker 2: Culthart has boots on the ground. He has physically walked
the trails around mccaslyn's home. He knows that McCaslin was
deep respected by a specific faction of government insiders who
are actively pushing for UAP disclosure.
Speaker 1: So people wanted him to talk.
Speaker 2: From Colthart's perspective, the logic is straightforward. The disappearance of
the very man who holds the keys to write Patterson's
historical secrets immediately following a presidential directive to open those
vaults is far too coincidental to ignore.
Speaker 1: It feels like a movie plot.
Speaker 2: In his view, it suggests a proactive, extreme measure to
silence a primary source before he could be compelled to
testify or release classified data.
Speaker 1: But then you have the complete opposite end of the
spectrum provided by doctor Avi Lobe.
Speaker 2: Yes, the Harvard professor.
Speaker 1: A Frank B. Baar, Junior Professor of Science at Harvard
University and a brilliant astrophysicist. Lobe comes on the broadcast
and completely unequivocally dismisses the UFO link.
Speaker 2: He shuts it down entirely.
Speaker 1: He aligns perfectly with mccaslyn's wife, stating that this disappearance
has absolutely nothing to do with aliens, and.
Speaker 2: His reasoning is very grounded.
Speaker 1: And Load's argument is intensely practical. Root in material science.
He argues that even if mcaslyn had access to retrieved
materials from the nineteen forty seven Roswell crash, that technology
is essentially eighty years old.
Speaker 2: It's archaic by modern standards.
Speaker 1: From a modern scientific and military standpoint, an eighty year
old retrieved artifact wouldn't be relevant enough to warrant assassinating
or kidnapping a retired two star general today.
Speaker 2: Low believes the reason for his disappearance is likely completely mundane.
Speaker 1: Or at worst tied to modern human engineered weaponry, not
flying saucers.
Speaker 2: Load's argument requires us to look at the mechanics of
technological advancement. Howso, his point is that even if a
non human craft crashed in nineteen forty seven whenever metallurgical
or propulsion secrets it held have either long since been
integrated into our modern black projects, or they remain so
far beyond our current physics that they are practically.
Speaker 1: Useless, like given a smartphone to a caveman.
Speaker 2: Exactly therefore silencing an old man about an old crash
doesn't provide enough torategic value to risk a high profile
abduction on US soil.
Speaker 1: I understand lobes logic about the technology being old, but
I actually want to push back on his premise.
Speaker 2: Oh really, How so.
Speaker 1: Lobe assumes the only value McCaslin holds is the raw
data of the nineteen forty seven crash. But what if
the value isn't the old technology itself.
Speaker 2: But the cover up the political fallout.
Speaker 1: Yes, if a government has been lying to the global
public bypassing congressional oversight and illegally funneling trillions of dollars
into unacknowledged black projects for eighty years, the political and
legal fallout of that revelation would be catastrophic.
Speaker 2: People would go to prison exactly.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the economic systems might fracture. Mchasm wouldn't just be
revealing old metal. He would be revealing the greatest systemic
fraud in human history.
Speaker 2: That's a compelling point.
Speaker 1: Silencing someone to protect the institution of the cover up
seems highly plausible to me, regardless of how outdated the
original technology is.
Speaker 2: It shifts the motive from scientific to political survival.
Speaker 1: But even setting that, the timing still bothers me.
Speaker 2: The timeline of the presidential announcement.
Speaker 1: Right, if a rogue agency or a shadowy group was
going to abduct someone to silence them about appending declassification,
wouldn't you execute that operation before the president makes the
massive public announcement.
Speaker 2: You'd want to be ahead of the news cycle.
Speaker 1: Doing it days as to the announcement just shines a massive,
glaring spotlight on the exact secrets you are supposedly trying
to keep hidden. It feels entirely counterintuitive to basic operational security.
Speaker 2: That is the precise logical hurdle that counterintelligence analysts look
for when evaluating theories.
Speaker 1: That's sloppy, right.
Speaker 2: A post announcement abduction is reactionary, messy, and loud. It
draws the global media, like news nation, right to the
doorstep of the missing man.
Speaker 1: It guarantees everyone is watching.
Speaker 2: Synthesizing Lobe's practical scientific worldview with the highly speculative theories
of the UFO community requires us to look at utility
and misdirection. Misdirection who is essentially saying, look at the physics,
look at the timeline of technological advancement. While the UFO
angle is sensational, deeply romanticized, and historically tied to mccaslin's
former command at right Patterson. It might actually serve as
a highly effective distraction, a distraction from what from a
much darker earth bound reality. The sheer noise of the
alien theory, the Internet sleuths, the UFO podcasts, the conspiracy
forums might obscure the more terrifying truth of human on
human espionage like a smoke screen. Exactly if you are
a foreign intelligence service, you couldn't ask for a better
smoke screen.
Speaker 1: That is exactly where my mind goes. The alien theory
is flashy, it grabs headlines, but the human threat is terrifyingly.
Speaker 2: Real and very current.
Speaker 1: Stripping away the roswell mythology for a moment, we are
still left with a man who, as the source states,
has a wealth of information and a storied career handling
the most sensitive secrets of the Department of Defense.
Speaker 2: He's a walking hard drive of defense secrets.
Speaker 1: We have to explore the mechanics effect perpetrated by foreign adversaries,
specifically nations like China.
Speaker 2: Or Russia, nations who would love to have a shot.
Speaker 1: With him right who might be looking to extract highly
classified modern technological information. During the broadcast, Ben Hansen, a
former FBI agent and UFO investigator, made a point that
really stuck with me.
Speaker 2: What did he say?
Speaker 1: He said that when you hold a top secret clearance
of that magnitude, you don't just work a job. You
are playing offense and defense for the rest of your life.
Speaker 2: Offense and defense for life is non metaphor. It is
the literal operational reality of the intelligence community.
Speaker 1: You never truly retire, you don't.
Speaker 2: The secrets locked inside General mccaslin's head are the crown
jewels of American.
Speaker 1: Defense, bleeding edge stuff.
Speaker 2: We are talking about advanced material science, autonomous drone swarming capabilities,
directed energy weapon schematics, and the absolute architecture of our
satellite surveillance network.
Speaker 1: To a foreign intelligence service, extracting the that knowledge is
worth almost any geopolitical risk for RUSS.
Speaker 2: Coulthart goes so far as to call this a grave
national security.
Speaker 1: Crisis, and he's not exaggerating, No.
Speaker 2: And Jonathan Gilliam adds as chilling operational detail. If this
is a case of industrial espionage or a state sponsored
extraction by a foreign power via human.
Speaker 1: Intentional intelligence operation. Right.
Speaker 2: If that's what this is, there will be no ransom demand.
Speaker 1: They aren't get asked for ten million dollars.
Speaker 2: They don't want money, they want the asset. They want
the mind. Once they have extracted the information, the individual
becomes an absolute liability and is entirely disposable.
Speaker 1: It's a horrifying thought. It means the clock isn't just
ticking on finding him. It's likely already run out.
Speaker 2: It's very possible.
Speaker 1: But this espionage theory leads to one of the biggest
points of contention, highlighted in the News Nation video. His friends,
his colleagues, and journalists like Coulthart are incredibly puzzled by
the FBI's approach.
Speaker 2: Because the FBI is being so quiet.
Speaker 1: Exactly we're talking about a mapive local search, helicopters, sheriffs,
volunteers walking gridlines. But the FBI's public posture is extremely
low key.
Speaker 2: They're barely issuing media releases.
Speaker 1: They are not grand standing at press conferences. For a
man who holds the nation's deepest defense secrets, the FED
seem to be playing it incredibly cool, almost to the
point of apathy.
Speaker 2: It seems strange on the surface.
Speaker 1: Why would the premier federal law enforcement agency act like
this is just another missing hiker.
Speaker 2: If we connect this to the bigger picture, the FBI's
behavior makes perfect mechanical sense from a counterintelligence standpoint. Really,
how so, a low key public profile often correlates directly
with a high intensity, deeply classified investigation occurring behind the scenes.
Speaker 1: So they are working, just not talking.
Speaker 2: Think about the geopolitical stakes involved. If the United States
government publicly announces that they believe a retired major general,
the former head of the Air Force Research Laboratory has
been successfully abducted from US oil by a foreign.
Speaker 1: Adversary, Oh, that'll be a disaster.
Speaker 2: They are admitting to a catastrophic, humiliating breach of domestic security.
It broadcasts immense weakness.
Speaker 1: The public panic would be insane.
Speaker 2: More importantly, it alerts the adversary that we know exactly
what they've done, potentially accelerating whatever timeline they have for
extracting information from the general or moving him across borders.
Speaker 1: Right, It's like deploying a digital Faraday cage around the
entire investigation.
Speaker 2: That's a great analogy.
Speaker 1: The local cops are making noise outside the cage, keeping
the press busy with Silver alerts and search dogs. But
inside the cage, the FBI has completely locked down the
signal to prevent foreign adversaries from knowing we are onto them.
Speaker 2: They are managing the public narrative to protect the classified hunt.
Speaker 1: Exactly, by keeping the public narrative focused on a silver
alert and a localized missing person search in the mountains,
the FBI can quietly deploy their elite counter intelligence and
cyber tracking teams.
Speaker 2: Without tipping their hand to inner national players.
Speaker 1: They're allowing the adversary to believe they have gotten away.
Speaker 2: Cleanly, which is often the only way to track them.
This dual track approach loud local search, silent federal hunt
is standard operating perfuture for a breach of this magnitude.
Speaker 1: And they are using every technological tool at their disposal,
which requires us to look at the mechanics of the
physical and digital search currently underway.
Speaker 2: Search efforts are massive.
Speaker 1: The source material goes into exhaustive detail about this physical search.
Local state and federal authorities are throwing the kitchen sink
at the Sandia Mountains.
Speaker 2: We are talking about helicopters, drones equipped with advanced sensors,
and specialized canine units trained in tracking human scent.
Speaker 1: But despite this massive deployment of resources, the results are baffling.
The authorities have received dozens of tips but absolutely no
confirmed sightings none. More importantly, the sheriff explicitly stated that
there have been no heat signatures detected in the foothills.
Speaker 2: That is a critical detail.
Speaker 1: Let's break down the technology here. When they deploy forward
looking infrared FLIR from helicopters or drones, how sensitive is it?
Because the public assumes it's like a magic camera that
just sees through trees.
Speaker 2: FLR operates by detecting infrared radiation, which we perceive as heat,
and translating it into a visual thermogram. It doesn't see
through objects, but it detects the minute temperature differentials between
an object and its ambient environment.
Speaker 1: Okay, so it compares heat levels.
Speaker 2: The sensitivity or immissivity detection of modern military and high
end law enforcement FLR is astounding.
Speaker 1: How astounding are we talking?
Speaker 2: During a cold February night or early morning in the
Sandia Mountains, the ambient temperature of the ground, rocks, and
vegetation drops.
Speaker 1: Significantly, right, it gets freezing out there.
Speaker 2: A human body maintaining a core temperature of ninety eight
point six degrees creates a massive glaring thermal bloom against
that cold background.
Speaker 1: Must light up like a beacon.
Speaker 2: A modern FLR system can pick up the body he
of a rabbit hiding under a bush from one thousand
feet in the air.
Speaker 1: A rabbit.
Speaker 2: Yes. The fact that multiple passes with thermal drones and
helicopters cannot find the thermal bloom of a human being
in that environment strongly suggests mechanically speaking, that he simply
isn't there to be.
Speaker 1: Found if he's not emitting heat in the mountains. He's
not in the mountains exactly. And it's not just the
physical searches coming up empty, it's the digital void.
Speaker 2: The digital void is the most alarming part.
Speaker 1: Jonathan Gilliam heavily emphasized the importance of digital forensics in
the broadcast. In today's world, it is almost impossible to
move without leaving a digital wake.
Speaker 2: You're always pinging something.
Speaker 1: Gilliam noted that investigators will be pulling data from neighborhood
mesh networks, the ring doorbells, the nest cameras, the street surveillance.
Speaker 2: Everyone has a camera.
Speaker 1: Now they will be using cell tower triangulation and analyzing
the pings of other phones that were in the area
at the exact time the chaslym vanished.
Speaker 2: They are using scent dogs starting from his house too,
trying to.
Speaker 1: Track the visible trail as skin rafts he leaves behind
from the moment he walked out the door. I have
to admit I am an utter disbelief.
Speaker 2: It's hard to wrap your head around think about.
Speaker 1: Your own digital footprint. Today. Our refrigerators know what groceries
we need. There are cameras on every porch, satellites overhead,
automated license plate readers at every intersection, and a constant
mesh of cellular data surrounding us.
Speaker 2: We are constantly tracked.
Speaker 1: How does a person, especially a high profile person, vanish
without leaving a single digital trace. It feels practically impossible.
Speaker 2: It is exceptionally difficult, which is exactly why the digital
silence is so loud evading. Modern tracking isn't something an
average person suffering from brain fog can do by accident.
Speaker 1: No, definitely not.
Speaker 2: When a phone connects to a network, it performs a
handshake with the nearest cell tower, registering its IMEI number.
Speaker 1: Even if he left his phone behind.
Speaker 2: Even if mcaslyn left his phone behind, investigators are looking
at the SS seven network data, the signaling protocol used
by cell networks, to see what other phones entered his
neighborhood grid during that narrow time window.
Speaker 1: So they are looking for the kidnappers phones.
Speaker 2: They are looking for burner phones or foreign registered simcards.
As Gillian suggested, if mccasln left without his phone and
his shoes, and the neighborhood cameras caught nothing and the
thermal drones see nothing, we are forced to look at
two highly polarized extremes regarding his disappearance.
Speaker 1: Two extremes, okay, the first extreme being that he suffered
a catastrophic medical event or an accident, literally steps from
his door.
Speaker 2: Right falling into a blind spot of technology, and.
Speaker 1: Is tragically concealed by the immediate environment in a way
searchers have simply overlooked.
Speaker 2: Which given the tech, is highly unlikely. But the second extreme,
the second extreme, is what keeps bringing us back to his.
Speaker 1: Resume, Yes, the resume. The second extreme is that he
was taken by absolute professionals.
Speaker 2: A highly coordinated.
Speaker 1: Team, a team that conducted extensive pre operational surveillance, a
team that knows exactly where the camera blind's spots are
in that specific suburb.
Speaker 2: A team that knows how to deploy localized signal jammers
to spoof or shield electronic signals during the extraction.
Speaker 1: A team that executed a snatch and grab so rapidly
and so cleanly that it didn't register on the neighborhood's
digital trip wires.
Speaker 2: To orchestrate an extraction in a suburban environment, leaving a
man barefoot, but removing him entirely from the grid requires
a level of operational sophistication that points directly back to
state sponsored intelligence or a highly trained rogue element.
Speaker 1: It is the application of military grade tactics on suburban soil.
Speaker 2: It's terrifying when you think about the precision.
Speaker 1: The precision required for that is terrifying. It means they
were watching, they knew his routine, they knew his vulnerabilities,
and they struck in the exact window where the digital
net was thinnest.
Speaker 2: They waited for the perfect moment.
Speaker 1: So what does this all mean. Let's pull these thrilling
threads together.
Speaker 2: It's a lot to process.
Speaker 1: We have a man who commanded the Air Force Research Laboratory,
a keeper of a two billion dollar black budget, and
potentially the secrets of Wright, Patterson and Rosswell.
Speaker 2: We have a deeply contradictory timeline, a sixty mile cyclist
supposedly suffering from vague brain fog.
Speaker 1: We have the sheer absurdity of the physical evidence, a
left behind cell phone, a point three po eight caliber
revolver taken into the wilderness, and his hiking boots his
shoes left sitting inside the house.
Speaker 2: We have the undeniable synchronicity of his disappearance aligning with
presidential directives on UFO disclosure, and.
Speaker 1: The very grounded, very terrifying reality of international espionage and
digital evasion.
Speaker 2: It is a profound puzzle, it really is. And as
we conclude our analysis of these sources today, I want
to leave you the listener with a final chilling thought
to mull Over, please do something that the mechanics of
the physical evidence heavily imply but the official narrative shies
away from. We look at the missing shoes, the absent
digital footprint, the lack of thermal signatures in the mountains,
and we ask, how did.
Speaker 1: The That's what everyone is asking.
Speaker 2: But what if we're asking the wrong question? Entirely What
do you mean? What if the complete absence of evidence
isn't a sign of an old man getting hopelessly lost.
What if the silence, the missing shoes, and the invisible
digital trail are actually the hallmark signatures of a perfectly
executed professional extraction. Oh wow, What if we aren't looking
at a missing person's case at all, but a ghost
protocol playing out in plain sight.
Speaker 1: That thought is going to keep me up at night.
The idea that the lack of clues is the clue.
Speaker 2: It changes everything.
Speaker 1: It changes the entire perspective of that quiet morning in Albuquerque.
The silence isn't an accident.
Speaker 2: It's a weapon, a very effective weapon.
Speaker 1: And we want to know what you think. We've looked
at the mechanics of the contradictory medical reports, the intense
reality of the espionage theories, and the wild UFO synchronicities
surrounding right Patterson.
Speaker 2: There are so many angles here.
Speaker 1: Now it is your turned away in. Do you think
General mccaslin's disappearance is a tragic all? Be it incredibly
bizarre medical emergency of a man wandering into the unforgiving
Sandia Mountains?
Speaker 2: Or is it a chilling surgically executed case of international
espionage aimed at extracting our nation's most classified defense tech.
Speaker 1: Or is it something deeper, tied to the darkest secrets
of the Air Force Research Laboratory and the legacy of Roswell.
What is your stand.
Speaker 2: We'd love to hear your theories.
Speaker 1: Leave us a comment below and let us know what
you think. Thank you for joining us on thrilling threads,
where the truth is always stranger than fiction. Keep pulling
the threads and we will see you next time.