1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,240 Speaker 1: Welcome back to the deep Dive. Our mission here is 2 00:00:03,319 --> 00:00:06,440 a pretty simple, really we take all this complex, high 3 00:00:06,440 --> 00:00:09,839 stakes information that's shaping our world and we just we 4 00:00:09,919 --> 00:00:12,560 try to distill it, boil it down, exactly, boil it 5 00:00:12,599 --> 00:00:15,720 down into those core nuggets of insight. You need to 6 00:00:16,079 --> 00:00:17,000 cut through all the noise. 7 00:00:17,160 --> 00:00:21,960 Speaker 2: And today the noises it's louder than ever on this topic. 8 00:00:22,039 --> 00:00:26,160 Speaker 1: It really is. Today we are diving, i mean headfirst 9 00:00:26,199 --> 00:00:29,480 into a subject that has I think we can say 10 00:00:29,960 --> 00:00:34,320 formally and irificably moved from the margins right into the 11 00:00:34,359 --> 00:00:36,399 center of global national security. 12 00:00:36,079 --> 00:00:36,920 Speaker 2: Without a doubt. 13 00:00:36,960 --> 00:00:40,600 Speaker 1: We're talking about these incredible high level confirmations and the 14 00:00:40,640 --> 00:00:43,880 well the incredibly confusing government narratives that are coming out 15 00:00:44,240 --> 00:00:46,119 around recovered non human technology. 16 00:00:46,200 --> 00:00:49,560 Speaker 2: It's an intellectual landscape that has just been completely transformable. 17 00:00:49,560 --> 00:00:51,880 I mean for generations. You and I both know talking 18 00:00:51,880 --> 00:00:55,159 about UFOs or flying saucers was a career enter It 19 00:00:55,200 --> 00:00:57,679 was a guaranteed way to get dismissed, to be labeled 20 00:00:57,679 --> 00:01:01,719 a crank. But our source material today, and we're mainly 21 00:01:01,799 --> 00:01:05,200 drawing from commentary by the investigative journalist Michael Schellenberger on 22 00:01:05,239 --> 00:01:07,879 News Nation, it shows us that the old way of 23 00:01:07,920 --> 00:01:13,640 doing things, That institutional denial from Washington DC. It's basically failed. 24 00:01:13,959 --> 00:01:14,519 Speaker 1: It's broken. 25 00:01:14,599 --> 00:01:17,799 Speaker 2: It's broken. The narrative battle is now public. It's fierce, 26 00:01:18,359 --> 00:01:21,719 and it's it's completely unprecedented in its gope. 27 00:01:21,760 --> 00:01:23,640 Speaker 1: Okay, so let's unpack that. We have to start with 28 00:01:23,680 --> 00:01:27,079 the can blast, right, the core claim that frames this 29 00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:30,480 entire deep dive, the hook the hook s. Shellenberger is 30 00:01:30,560 --> 00:01:34,480 discussing testimony, testimony given by a very high level official 31 00:01:34,680 --> 00:01:37,040 in a recent documentary, and we are talking about a 32 00:01:37,079 --> 00:01:38,519 startling public assertion. 33 00:01:38,680 --> 00:01:40,159 Speaker 2: I mean, it's about as blunt as it gets. 34 00:01:40,200 --> 00:01:44,760 Speaker 1: The US government has recovered non human technology, craft, material, artifacts, 35 00:01:44,799 --> 00:01:48,239 you name it, and is currently engaged in these highly classified, 36 00:01:48,560 --> 00:01:51,640 maybe decades long efforts to reverse engineer it. 37 00:01:51,879 --> 00:01:53,760 Speaker 2: And that claim, I mean, just pause on that for 38 00:01:53,799 --> 00:01:56,599 a second. If it's true, it represents the single most 39 00:01:56,680 --> 00:02:00,680 significant technological development in all of human history, three periods, 40 00:02:00,719 --> 00:02:04,159 full stop. But for our purposes today, for analyzing the 41 00:02:04,200 --> 00:02:07,760 shift in the conversation, the truth of the technology itself 42 00:02:07,840 --> 00:02:10,439 is almost it's almost secondary. 43 00:02:10,960 --> 00:02:12,479 Speaker 1: That's a fascinating way to put it. 44 00:02:12,520 --> 00:02:16,319 Speaker 2: Why, Because the real story here is the institutional gravity 45 00:02:16,639 --> 00:02:19,960 of who is making these claims. Now it's no longer 46 00:02:20,080 --> 00:02:23,520 just a you know, a lone whistleblower risking their career 47 00:02:23,560 --> 00:02:28,520 in the shadows. It's now a powerful, established figure lending 48 00:02:28,599 --> 00:02:32,840 their name, their reputation, their institutional authority to this narrative. 49 00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:36,400 Speaker 1: And that specific figure that Schollenberger keeps coming back to, 50 00:02:36,479 --> 00:02:39,680 the one lending all this gravity, is Senator Marco Rubio. 51 00:02:39,840 --> 00:02:42,280 Right now, for most people listening, you know, Rubio is 52 00:02:42,280 --> 00:02:45,560 a well known senator, public figure. But what our sources 53 00:02:45,599 --> 00:02:49,080 reveal about his specific role and his institutional weight that 54 00:02:49,240 --> 00:02:51,800 is absolutely critical to understanding why this is being called 55 00:02:51,800 --> 00:02:52,800 a historic statement. 56 00:02:52,840 --> 00:02:54,919 Speaker 2: Precisely, this is why we all have to sit up 57 00:02:54,919 --> 00:02:57,039 and pay attention. If we were talking about a claim 58 00:02:57,120 --> 00:03:00,520 made by say a newly elected junior senator or some 59 00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:01,639 pundit on TV, you. 60 00:03:01,560 --> 00:03:04,319 Speaker 1: Could dismiss it. Political theater, you could dismiss it. 61 00:03:04,840 --> 00:03:09,599 Speaker 2: But Schellenberger he zeros in on Rubio's specific standing, his 62 00:03:09,680 --> 00:03:13,800 connections within the foreign policy and crucially the intelligence establishment. 63 00:03:13,879 --> 00:03:16,199 Speaker 1: Okay, so what is that standing. Let's get specific. 64 00:03:16,360 --> 00:03:19,000 Speaker 2: We are talking about someone who sits on the Senate 65 00:03:19,039 --> 00:03:22,520 Select Committee on Intelligence and he often serves as. 66 00:03:22,319 --> 00:03:24,840 Speaker 1: The vice chairman, which is not a small role. 67 00:03:25,000 --> 00:03:27,800 Speaker 2: It's one of the most powerful oversight positions in the 68 00:03:27,960 --> 00:03:32,000 entire government. That position grants him access to intelligence that 69 00:03:32,120 --> 00:03:35,719 is so far beyond what even most cabinet secretaries ever 70 00:03:35,800 --> 00:03:36,479 get to see. 71 00:03:36,599 --> 00:03:39,840 Speaker 1: So access isn't just about reading a memo that comes 72 00:03:39,840 --> 00:03:40,800 across your desk. 73 00:03:40,719 --> 00:03:43,879 Speaker 2: Not at all. It's about participating in the oversight, in 74 00:03:43,919 --> 00:03:46,800 the policy discussions where this material is evaluated, where it's 75 00:03:46,800 --> 00:03:50,360 budgeted for. These are the secret programs, the so called SAPs. 76 00:03:51,080 --> 00:03:53,680 So if Rubio is making this claim, he is doing 77 00:03:53,759 --> 00:03:56,719 it from a position of profound, direct knowledge about the 78 00:03:56,759 --> 00:04:00,039 structure of these classified programs and the veracity of the 79 00:04:00,080 --> 00:04:02,159 intelligence assessments that feed into them. 80 00:04:02,280 --> 00:04:05,879 Speaker 1: He's not just repeating something he heard. He's seen the receipts, 81 00:04:06,000 --> 00:04:06,759 so to speak. 82 00:04:07,000 --> 00:04:10,159 Speaker 2: That's the implication. And Schellenberger didn't stop there. He went 83 00:04:10,240 --> 00:04:14,039 even further in trying to contextualize Rubio's power. He called 84 00:04:14,120 --> 00:04:16,720 him and this is a quote arguably number three in 85 00:04:16,759 --> 00:04:18,319 foreign policy after the president. 86 00:04:18,680 --> 00:04:24,079 Speaker 1: Wow, Okay, that that is an explosive claim about institutional power. 87 00:04:24,439 --> 00:04:27,279 Speaker 2: It is, and it's designed to make the listener understand 88 00:04:27,360 --> 00:04:31,040 that this testimony, this confirmation is coming from the absolute 89 00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:33,680 core of the US national security apparatus. 90 00:04:33,720 --> 00:04:37,000 Speaker 1: It's the closest thing we have to a genuine political 91 00:04:37,120 --> 00:04:39,879 endorsement of this entire recovered craft narrative. 92 00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:42,720 Speaker 2: It is. But what really drives on the political and 93 00:04:43,399 --> 00:04:47,879 historical weight of this is this sebecific comparison. Selenberger uses 94 00:04:48,079 --> 00:04:51,079 one to validate that number three status exactly. He compared 95 00:04:51,160 --> 00:04:54,839 Rubio's stature and the alleged dual roles he plays in 96 00:04:54,839 --> 00:04:57,079 influence and policy to Henry Kissinger. 97 00:04:57,279 --> 00:04:59,079 Speaker 1: And that is not a name you just throw around 98 00:04:59,160 --> 00:05:03,560 lightly center analogy. That's doing some heavy heavy lifting. 99 00:05:03,720 --> 00:05:05,759 Speaker 2: Far more than just name dropping. We have to remember 100 00:05:05,759 --> 00:05:06,839 who Henry Kissinger was. 101 00:05:06,920 --> 00:05:10,639 Speaker 1: Institutionally the architect of so much Cold War policy right. 102 00:05:11,040 --> 00:05:14,800 Speaker 2: He served simultaneously as Secretary of State and National Security Advisor. 103 00:05:15,199 --> 00:05:17,519 That was between nineteen seventy three and nineteen seventy five. 104 00:05:18,519 --> 00:05:22,120 That dual role, it represents a near total monopolization of 105 00:05:22,279 --> 00:05:24,079 US foreign and security policy. 106 00:05:24,240 --> 00:05:27,240 Speaker 1: He was defining the goals as National Security Advisor. 107 00:05:26,959 --> 00:05:29,839 Speaker 2: And then executing them on the global stage as Secretary 108 00:05:29,839 --> 00:05:33,040 of State. He was both the strategist and the lead diplomat. 109 00:05:33,240 --> 00:05:37,120 Speaker 1: Kissinger was the ultimate inside player, a figure whose influenced. 110 00:05:37,199 --> 00:05:39,879 I mean it defined an entire era. He shaped everything 111 00:05:39,920 --> 00:05:45,040 from detente with the Soviet Union to opening relations with China. 112 00:05:45,079 --> 00:05:46,480 Speaker 2: His word was literally policy. 113 00:05:46,600 --> 00:05:47,319 Speaker 1: It was policy. 114 00:05:47,600 --> 00:05:50,920 Speaker 2: So when a journalist of Schollenberger's stature uses that comparison, 115 00:05:51,360 --> 00:05:53,720 they aren't just saying Rubio is influential. 116 00:05:53,839 --> 00:05:54,800 Speaker 1: No, It's much more than that. 117 00:05:55,000 --> 00:05:58,000 Speaker 2: They are saying that Rubio's alleged confirmation of recovered non 118 00:05:58,120 --> 00:06:00,480 human technology carries the weight of someone who has their 119 00:06:00,480 --> 00:06:03,600 fingers on every single major global security level. 120 00:06:03,759 --> 00:06:07,079 Speaker 1: The implication, then, is if a person like that, with 121 00:06:07,160 --> 00:06:09,720 that kind of capital, is willing to risk it all 122 00:06:10,399 --> 00:06:13,959 their reputation, their political future, their entire career to. 123 00:06:14,000 --> 00:06:17,240 Speaker 2: State publicly that the US has recovered alien technology and 124 00:06:17,360 --> 00:06:19,199 is trying to reverse engineer. 125 00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:21,519 Speaker 1: It, then the intelligence backing up that claim must. 126 00:06:21,439 --> 00:06:24,120 Speaker 2: Be terrifyingly compelling. It has to be airtight. 127 00:06:24,399 --> 00:06:28,000 Speaker 1: It effectively yanks the entire conversation out of the domain 128 00:06:28,079 --> 00:06:33,759 of fringe belief completely and implants it firmly, squarely in 129 00:06:33,839 --> 00:06:36,160 the domain of critical national security policy. 130 00:06:36,519 --> 00:06:41,199 Speaker 2: The historic moment isn't the discovery of the craft itself. Necessarily, 131 00:06:41,279 --> 00:06:45,480 it's the public acknowledgment of the discovery by an official 132 00:06:45,600 --> 00:06:46,800 of this political stature. 133 00:06:46,920 --> 00:06:50,720 Speaker 1: We have officially moved beyond just asking are they real? Yes, 134 00:06:50,800 --> 00:06:54,160 and we're now debating the geopolitical consequences of what are 135 00:06:54,199 --> 00:06:54,920 we doing with them? 136 00:06:54,959 --> 00:06:58,160 Speaker 2: And that transition that's the primary focus of this deep dive. 137 00:06:58,399 --> 00:07:01,240 We're here to analyze the sie mix shift in how 138 00:07:01,279 --> 00:07:05,920 official Washington is talking about this and the deep public 139 00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:08,040 conflicts that are now erupting as a result. 140 00:07:08,120 --> 00:07:10,240 Speaker 1: Right, Because this isn't a unified message, not by a 141 00:07:10,240 --> 00:07:10,759 long shot. 142 00:07:10,959 --> 00:07:14,600 Speaker 2: The historical context confirms this is serious, because we're tracking 143 00:07:14,600 --> 00:07:18,560 the movement from UFO discussions being treated as you know, 144 00:07:18,839 --> 00:07:23,800 purely speculative tinfoil hat territory, a footnote to be laughed at, 145 00:07:23,879 --> 00:07:27,920 right to becoming the subject of very serious, very non 146 00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:32,800 partisan congressional hearings with whistleblowers. 147 00:07:32,000 --> 00:07:35,000 Speaker 1: And crucially, those whistleblowers are testifying under. 148 00:07:34,800 --> 00:07:36,399 Speaker 2: Oath, under threat of perjury. 149 00:07:36,519 --> 00:07:39,120 Speaker 1: That puts everything into a legal framework. It's not just 150 00:07:39,160 --> 00:07:40,240 telling a story anymore. 151 00:07:40,279 --> 00:07:43,600 Speaker 2: It is, and it's a framework that these official denials, 152 00:07:43,639 --> 00:07:48,079 which are often phrased in these highly specific, defensive ways, 153 00:07:48,120 --> 00:07:49,560 now have to contend with. 154 00:07:49,800 --> 00:07:54,240 Speaker 1: The implication then of having someone of Rubio status confirming 155 00:07:54,279 --> 00:07:58,199 the narrative is that the intelligence that supports those sworn 156 00:07:58,240 --> 00:08:01,399 testimonies is now being inutionally validated. 157 00:08:01,160 --> 00:08:04,040 Speaker 2: Validated at the highest levels of oversight, which leads you 158 00:08:04,120 --> 00:08:05,839 to ask, I mean, you have to ask. 159 00:08:05,759 --> 00:08:07,279 Speaker 1: What kind of internal battle must have. 160 00:08:07,199 --> 00:08:10,360 Speaker 2: Been fought, exactly what kind of political or intelligence war 161 00:08:10,680 --> 00:08:14,800 was waged behind the scenes for someone of Rubio's institutional 162 00:08:14,839 --> 00:08:16,399 weight to finally go public with this. 163 00:08:16,920 --> 00:08:21,600 Speaker 1: It suggests that the pressure from the whistleblowers, from journalists 164 00:08:21,639 --> 00:08:26,000 like Schallenberger, it must have become so immense that the 165 00:08:26,120 --> 00:08:30,920 old structures of denial, that institutional inertia. 166 00:08:30,600 --> 00:08:32,600 Speaker 2: Have finally fracture. The dam broke. 167 00:08:32,759 --> 00:08:35,440 Speaker 1: The dam broke. So the story this revelation is as 168 00:08:35,519 --> 00:08:38,240 much about the politics of secrecy as it is about 169 00:08:38,240 --> 00:08:39,279 the technology itself. 170 00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:43,720 Speaker 2: It's the ultimate institutional drama. Really. You have the old guard, 171 00:08:44,120 --> 00:08:47,360 represented by the deep military intelligence state that wants to 172 00:08:47,399 --> 00:08:50,639 maintain absolute secrecy and control over what might be the 173 00:08:50,679 --> 00:08:53,159 most powerful information in human history. And on the other 174 00:08:53,200 --> 00:08:55,799 side you have this new coalition. It seems to be 175 00:08:55,879 --> 00:08:59,399 driven by oversight figures like Rubio and some high ranking 176 00:08:59,480 --> 00:09:03,120 intelligence directors, and they're acknowledging the seriousness of it all. 177 00:09:03,159 --> 00:09:06,159 Speaker 1: Maybe because they see the danger, the danger of trying 178 00:09:06,200 --> 00:09:09,559 to control something that major global rivals are also allegedly 179 00:09:09,639 --> 00:09:10,240 chasing after. 180 00:09:10,480 --> 00:09:12,039 Speaker 2: I think that's a huge part of it, and that 181 00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:15,600 inherent conflict, that tension, drives us directly into the heart 182 00:09:15,639 --> 00:09:18,039 of the matter for today, the battle of narratives, the 183 00:09:18,120 --> 00:09:22,240 battle of narratives, where these conflicting messages from the highest 184 00:09:22,320 --> 00:09:27,159 levels are creating just mass institutional dissonance. 185 00:09:27,240 --> 00:09:29,519 Speaker 1: And that dissonance it's toxic. 186 00:09:29,679 --> 00:09:34,240 Speaker 2: It's toxic to public trust, it's toxic to national security cohesion. 187 00:09:34,720 --> 00:09:37,799 It's impossible for an informed citizen to look at this 188 00:09:37,879 --> 00:09:43,000 and reconcile two fundamentally contradictory positions coming from two branches 189 00:09:43,039 --> 00:09:44,960 of the government that are supposed to be working together. 190 00:09:45,080 --> 00:09:48,639 Speaker 1: So let's define the sides in this battle. Schellenberger identifies 191 00:09:48,679 --> 00:09:52,000 what we can call the pro disclosure coalition, this group 192 00:09:52,039 --> 00:09:55,240 of high level officials who are taking the claim seriously right. 193 00:09:55,120 --> 00:09:58,720 Speaker 2: They're agreeing to be interviewed, They're moving the official narrative forward, 194 00:09:58,799 --> 00:10:00,200 even if just by inches. 195 00:10:00,279 --> 00:10:02,559 Speaker 1: So who are we talking about specifically? Who is in 196 00:10:02,600 --> 00:10:03,240 this coalition? 197 00:10:03,600 --> 00:10:06,480 Speaker 2: The list is well, it's formidable, and their simple inclusion 198 00:10:06,480 --> 00:10:10,679 in the documentary is, as Schellenberger argues, itself, a major statement. 199 00:10:10,799 --> 00:10:13,600 Speaker 1: It's an action. The act of participating is the message. 200 00:10:13,639 --> 00:10:16,480 Speaker 2: Precisely, we're talking about the President, the Vice president, the 201 00:10:16,519 --> 00:10:19,879 Director of National Intelligence, the DNI, and the Secretary of State. 202 00:10:20,399 --> 00:10:23,480 Speaker 1: Okay, so this isn't just some political windo addressing this 203 00:10:23,679 --> 00:10:27,200 is the core of the executive branch and the intelligence community. 204 00:10:27,480 --> 00:10:31,399 Speaker 2: When the DNI agrees to engage on this subject, even tangentially, 205 00:10:31,840 --> 00:10:36,000 they are signaling to the entire intelligence community, all seventeen agencies, 206 00:10:36,600 --> 00:10:40,519 that this information must now be prioritized and processed seriously, 207 00:10:41,000 --> 00:10:42,600 regardless of where it came from. 208 00:10:42,919 --> 00:10:45,799 Speaker 1: And the willingness of these officials to even comment, it 209 00:10:45,879 --> 00:10:50,080 suggests a fundamental shift in perception right inside the executive 210 00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:51,200 and intelligence branches. 211 00:10:51,240 --> 00:10:53,399 Speaker 2: They're putting their credibility on the line. I mean, think 212 00:10:53,399 --> 00:10:54,679 about the Secretary of State. 213 00:10:55,080 --> 00:10:58,919 Speaker 1: Their entire job is managing the foreign policy implications of 214 00:10:58,960 --> 00:11:01,200 American power into technology. 215 00:11:00,720 --> 00:11:03,440 Speaker 2: Right, So if they believe this technology is real, they 216 00:11:03,480 --> 00:11:06,120 are signaling that it now affects our relationships with our 217 00:11:06,159 --> 00:11:08,840 allies and more importantly, with our rivals. 218 00:11:09,159 --> 00:11:13,000 Speaker 1: It moves the issue from being a scientific curiosity. 219 00:11:12,559 --> 00:11:14,600 Speaker 2: Something for the lab coats to figure out to. 220 00:11:14,559 --> 00:11:19,600 Speaker 1: Being an active policy shaping factor. Their participation is an 221 00:11:19,600 --> 00:11:21,919 implicit endorsement of the gravity of the subject. 222 00:11:22,159 --> 00:11:25,759 Speaker 2: It confirms that it's consequential, it's legitimate, and it places 223 00:11:25,799 --> 00:11:29,600 it firmly in the domain of policy and strategy. It's 224 00:11:29,600 --> 00:11:34,519 an override of decades of internal skepticism and frankly ridicule. 225 00:11:34,720 --> 00:11:38,360 Speaker 1: Okay, so that's one side the pro disclosure coalition. But 226 00:11:38,480 --> 00:11:42,840 standing in stark, almost defiant opposition to them is the 227 00:11:42,879 --> 00:11:44,120 Defense Department, or. 228 00:11:44,240 --> 00:11:48,080 Speaker 2: As Schollenberger referred to them, very starkly, the Department of War. 229 00:11:48,039 --> 00:11:53,039 Speaker 1: And their position is described as consistent, almost dogmatic for years. 230 00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:58,360 Speaker 2: Absolutely their consistent line, which they repeat with just unwavering discipline, 231 00:11:58,440 --> 00:12:02,399 is this there's no eviden of extraterrestrials. 232 00:12:01,480 --> 00:12:05,440 Speaker 1: And that denial that phrase has been the default setting 233 00:12:05,440 --> 00:12:08,200 for the military industrial complex for what fifty sixty seventy 234 00:12:08,240 --> 00:12:08,879 yars at least. 235 00:12:08,960 --> 00:12:13,159 Speaker 2: But here's where the institutional analysis becomes so critical. Schallenberger 236 00:12:13,240 --> 00:12:15,840 highlighted the extreme specificity of their rebuttal. 237 00:12:15,960 --> 00:12:18,279 Speaker 1: This is the absolute core of it, the definitional loophole 238 00:12:18,279 --> 00:12:20,519 we have to dissect. Yes, The journalist noted that when 239 00:12:20,519 --> 00:12:22,879 he pressed the Defense Department on this, they refer back 240 00:12:22,919 --> 00:12:26,480 to a specific report and they underscore their deliberate, almost 241 00:12:26,600 --> 00:12:28,200 legalistic choice of terminology. 242 00:12:28,399 --> 00:12:32,879 Speaker 2: The word is extraterrestrials. Extraterrestrials, and that choice of words 243 00:12:33,320 --> 00:12:34,960 it's everything, It's the whole game. 244 00:12:35,200 --> 00:12:37,879 Speaker 1: So why why is that one word so important? 245 00:12:38,240 --> 00:12:41,480 Speaker 2: Because the core claims coming from the whistle blowers and 246 00:12:41,519 --> 00:12:45,120 from high level officials like Rubio, they often use a different. 247 00:12:44,919 --> 00:12:47,519 Speaker 1: Term non human sources, non human sources. 248 00:12:48,159 --> 00:12:54,320 Speaker 2: So by rigorously, repeatedly and exclusively denying the existence of extraterrestrials, 249 00:12:54,759 --> 00:12:59,679 the Defense Department maintains a very precise, legally defensible denial 250 00:13:00,159 --> 00:13:02,600 that does not actually refute the claims being made by 251 00:13:02,600 --> 00:13:04,480 the DNI or by Senator Rubio. 252 00:13:04,639 --> 00:13:07,799 Speaker 1: It's an incredible piece of linguistic maneuvering. Let's really explore 253 00:13:07,840 --> 00:13:11,440 the implications of this. Yeah, if you deny extraterrestrials, you 254 00:13:11,480 --> 00:13:15,000 are only denying one possible origin story, one of many. Yes, 255 00:13:15,159 --> 00:13:18,600 you're denying that the technology comes from outside Earth's solar system, 256 00:13:18,720 --> 00:13:21,159 driven by biological beings from another planet. 257 00:13:21,360 --> 00:13:23,360 Speaker 2: Little green men in a flying saucer. 258 00:13:23,519 --> 00:13:26,799 Speaker 1: Right, But the term non human sources is so much 259 00:13:26,840 --> 00:13:30,960 more expansive. What if this denial is just a strategic smokescreen, 260 00:13:31,240 --> 00:13:33,200 a way to tell a truth. It isn't the whole truth. 261 00:13:33,519 --> 00:13:37,799 Speaker 2: The possibilities they implicitly leave open are I mean, they're 262 00:13:37,840 --> 00:13:42,440 both fascinating and deeply complex. If it's non human technology 263 00:13:42,559 --> 00:13:45,519 but it's not extraterrestrial, well what on earth is it? 264 00:13:45,679 --> 00:13:49,000 Speaker 1: You're forced to consider these other non alien origins that 265 00:13:49,080 --> 00:13:53,120 would still fundamentally rewrite our understanding of physics. 266 00:13:52,679 --> 00:13:55,559 Speaker 2: And reality exactly. For example, you have the theory of 267 00:13:55,799 --> 00:13:57,480 interdimensional origin. 268 00:13:57,279 --> 00:14:00,200 Speaker 1: Right, the idea that these objects could originate from a 269 00:14:00,240 --> 00:14:04,360 parallel space or a different dimension that just intermittently intersects 270 00:14:04,440 --> 00:14:05,440 with our own reality. 271 00:14:05,600 --> 00:14:08,080 Speaker 2: In that case, they would be non human absolutely, but 272 00:14:08,120 --> 00:14:11,000 they would not be extraterrestrial. They wouldn't have traversed light 273 00:14:11,080 --> 00:14:13,240 years of space in a physical craft. 274 00:14:13,600 --> 00:14:16,399 Speaker 1: So the Defense Department could stand up and truthfully say 275 00:14:16,639 --> 00:14:19,519 there are no space aliens, while knowing full well that 276 00:14:19,559 --> 00:14:23,039 they are reverse engineering technology from a radically different physical 277 00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:24,159 reality right next door. 278 00:14:24,320 --> 00:14:26,840 Speaker 2: Or consider the temporal hypothesis. 279 00:14:26,200 --> 00:14:28,279 Speaker 1: Technology from our own future. 280 00:14:28,240 --> 00:14:30,799 Speaker 2: From our own distant future, recovered from a crash in 281 00:14:30,840 --> 00:14:34,480 the past. Again, this would be non human in the 282 00:14:34,519 --> 00:14:37,320 sense that it doesn't belong to our current human civilization. 283 00:14:37,720 --> 00:14:39,559 It's from a different when, not a. 284 00:14:39,480 --> 00:14:41,720 Speaker 1: Different where, and the denial would still hold. 285 00:14:41,720 --> 00:14:44,320 Speaker 2: The denial holds perfectly. Or you know, going back to 286 00:14:44,360 --> 00:14:47,120 some of the older theories, maybe it's an advanced intelligence 287 00:14:47,120 --> 00:14:49,960 that originates from deep within the Earth itself, the oceans, 288 00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:51,039 the mantle. 289 00:14:50,759 --> 00:14:52,919 Speaker 1: The crypto terrestrial intelligence. 290 00:14:52,440 --> 00:14:56,519 Speaker 2: Right, non human but entirely terrestrial. By sticking to their 291 00:14:56,639 --> 00:15:02,159 very specific denial of extraterrestrials, the OD maintains its operational 292 00:15:02,200 --> 00:15:07,039 secrecy while technically not lying about that one very narrow definition. 293 00:15:07,200 --> 00:15:10,240 Speaker 1: So it creates this bizarre situation where the civilian government 294 00:15:10,320 --> 00:15:13,399 and the intelligence community are signaling this is the most 295 00:15:13,440 --> 00:15:15,639 profound technological reality. 296 00:15:15,159 --> 00:15:19,000 Speaker 2: We face, while the military signaling our specific, decades old 297 00:15:19,000 --> 00:15:20,559 cover story remains intact. 298 00:15:20,799 --> 00:15:23,399 Speaker 1: Move along, and the public, who is caught in the 299 00:15:23,440 --> 00:15:27,639 middle of this just here's noise or worse, they assume 300 00:15:27,679 --> 00:15:31,039 it's a massive cover up fueled by incompetence or even. 301 00:15:30,840 --> 00:15:35,960 Speaker 2: Malice, and that contradictory message that is the core of 302 00:15:36,000 --> 00:15:41,440 the problem, Schollenberger identified it fosters what we're calling institutional dissonance. 303 00:15:41,679 --> 00:15:43,440 Speaker 1: It's not just two people disagreeing. 304 00:15:43,639 --> 00:15:49,200 Speaker 2: No, it's two massive government organizations using precise, weaponized language 305 00:15:49,279 --> 00:15:54,039 to simultaneously deny and affirm the same ultimate phenomenon, the 306 00:15:54,120 --> 00:15:56,440 recovery of radically advanced technology. 307 00:15:56,600 --> 00:16:00,639 Speaker 1: And according to the journalist, this just it cannot stand. 308 00:16:01,039 --> 00:16:05,639 The institutional confusion is so profound, so dangerous, that it 309 00:16:05,720 --> 00:16:07,960 necessitates intervention from the very top. 310 00:16:08,240 --> 00:16:11,480 Speaker 2: The President needs to address this issue directly, that's the argument. 311 00:16:11,519 --> 00:16:13,919 Address it to the American people to resolve the chaos, 312 00:16:13,960 --> 00:16:15,759 regardless of what the ultimate truth is. 313 00:16:15,720 --> 00:16:17,639 Speaker 1: Because the ambiguity itself is the threat. 314 00:16:17,759 --> 00:16:20,600 Speaker 2: The current level of ambiguity breeds public distrust on a 315 00:16:20,600 --> 00:16:23,360 massive scale. If the Secretary of State and the Director 316 00:16:23,399 --> 00:16:26,679 of National Intelligence are acknowledging the seriousness of this, and 317 00:16:26,759 --> 00:16:29,879 yet the Pentagon is still maintaining a denial based on 318 00:16:29,919 --> 00:16:31,559 a definitional loophole. 319 00:16:31,279 --> 00:16:33,799 Speaker 1: Then the public is forced to conclude one of two things. 320 00:16:34,080 --> 00:16:37,600 Speaker 2: Either a vast conspiracy is ongoing, or the United States 321 00:16:37,679 --> 00:16:42,320 government is so fractured, so broken, that it cannot coordinate 322 00:16:42,399 --> 00:16:45,759 a basic truth statement on what could be an existential topic. 323 00:16:45,960 --> 00:16:49,840 Speaker 1: The need for clarity, then is paramount, and Schellenberger offers 324 00:16:49,879 --> 00:16:53,039 the required alternative to this chaos. He says, Look, if 325 00:16:53,080 --> 00:16:55,080 the claims about recover technology are in. 326 00:16:55,080 --> 00:16:59,399 Speaker 2: Fact false, if Rubio and this entire coalition have somehow 327 00:16:59,440 --> 00:17:03,320 been miss led by flawed data by old intelligence, then. 328 00:17:03,240 --> 00:17:06,200 Speaker 1: The President has to definitively step forward and reveal that 329 00:17:06,279 --> 00:17:10,039 the entire story is and this is his word, a delusion. 330 00:17:10,400 --> 00:17:13,400 Speaker 2: And he even specified the nature of that potential delusion. 331 00:17:13,480 --> 00:17:16,279 He called it a kind of circular reporting based on 332 00:17:16,359 --> 00:17:18,839 this information from the fifties and sixties. 333 00:17:18,480 --> 00:17:20,880 Speaker 1: Which provides a perfect off ramp, doesn't it. It's a 334 00:17:20,880 --> 00:17:23,640 way for the Defense Department's denial to make complete sense. 335 00:17:23,799 --> 00:17:26,160 Speaker 2: It's the get out of jail free card. If this 336 00:17:26,400 --> 00:17:29,480 entire recovered craft narrative is just an echo chamber old 337 00:17:29,880 --> 00:17:34,160 false intelligence reports being repeatedly reclassified and revalidated by different 338 00:17:34,160 --> 00:17:36,759 compartmentalized units over decades. 339 00:17:36,319 --> 00:17:38,759 Speaker 1: A bureaucratic myth that took on a life of its. 340 00:17:38,559 --> 00:17:42,319 Speaker 2: Own exactly, then the commander in chief must officially step 341 00:17:42,359 --> 00:17:45,640 in and extinguish that narrative, put it to bed once 342 00:17:45,680 --> 00:17:46,400 and for all. 343 00:17:46,519 --> 00:17:50,039 Speaker 1: That, to me is the real policy dilemma here. The 344 00:17:50,119 --> 00:17:52,079 government has to choose a lane. 345 00:17:52,119 --> 00:17:52,839 Speaker 2: It has to. 346 00:17:53,359 --> 00:17:56,599 Speaker 1: Either we have recovered epic defining technology and we need 347 00:17:56,640 --> 00:17:59,279 a unified national security response to it, or. 348 00:18:00,319 --> 00:18:03,799 Speaker 2: A significant portion of our highest level political and intelligence 349 00:18:03,880 --> 00:18:07,519 leadership is actively being fooled by a seven year old 350 00:18:07,559 --> 00:18:09,079 internal intelligence failure. 351 00:18:09,200 --> 00:18:12,599 Speaker 1: And both of those realities are terrifying in their own way, 352 00:18:12,880 --> 00:18:15,279 and both demand presidential clarity and resolution. 353 00:18:15,559 --> 00:18:18,720 Speaker 2: The stakes are just incredibly high regardless of which reality 354 00:18:18,759 --> 00:18:21,799 is true. If the government confirms the technology is real 355 00:18:22,160 --> 00:18:25,920 and necessitates an immediate global policy shift, everything changes. 356 00:18:25,920 --> 00:18:27,680 Speaker 1: And if they confirm it's a delusion. 357 00:18:27,400 --> 00:18:30,759 Speaker 2: Then it necessitates a massive, painful overhaul of our intelligence 358 00:18:30,799 --> 00:18:35,519 assessment and counterintelligence security to prevent such a catastrophic institutional 359 00:18:35,559 --> 00:18:38,279 failure from ever happening again. They have to ask how 360 00:18:38,319 --> 00:18:39,440 this was allowed to happen. 361 00:18:39,759 --> 00:18:42,079 Speaker 1: What's fascinating here, and I want to really underline this 362 00:18:42,599 --> 00:18:45,960 is that the urgency we are discussing is derived purely 363 00:18:46,000 --> 00:18:50,400 from the government's own conflicting rhetoric. It's not the opinion 364 00:18:50,440 --> 00:18:51,680 of the journalist himself. 365 00:18:51,839 --> 00:18:53,599 Speaker 2: He is very clear on that point. 366 00:18:53,680 --> 00:18:56,680 Speaker 1: He made sure to clarify. Schellenberger stated he doesn't have 367 00:18:56,720 --> 00:19:00,960 secret clearance, which means his entire analysis is based on 368 00:19:01,039 --> 00:19:03,680 what the officials themselves are saying and doing. In public. 369 00:19:04,119 --> 00:19:07,640 Speaker 2: That journalistic distance is crucial. It keeps the focus entirely 370 00:19:07,680 --> 00:19:10,720 on the institutional dissonance, not on belief. 371 00:19:10,640 --> 00:19:13,160 Speaker 1: Right, he argues, and I think we agree that it 372 00:19:13,200 --> 00:19:16,759 doesn't matter what an individual journalist or you or I believe. 373 00:19:17,079 --> 00:19:19,559 Speaker 2: What matters is the institutional position of the people who 374 00:19:19,599 --> 00:19:22,319 actually run the government, the DNI, the Secretary of State, 375 00:19:22,359 --> 00:19:27,599 the Vice President. Their involvement, their words, legitimize the fear 376 00:19:27,640 --> 00:19:30,799 that we are operating under a state of profound official confusion. 377 00:19:31,279 --> 00:19:34,519 Speaker 1: And as serious as that domestic confusion is, the implications 378 00:19:35,480 --> 00:19:39,279 they just zoom out far, far beyond US borders. No, absolutely, 379 00:19:39,279 --> 00:19:42,400 they move us into the territory of genuine global security 380 00:19:42,440 --> 00:19:45,839 and conflict. And this is where the source material drops 381 00:19:45,880 --> 00:19:47,319 the second major bombshell. 382 00:19:47,599 --> 00:19:49,480 Speaker 2: It expands the playing field dramatically. 383 00:19:49,559 --> 00:19:53,039 Speaker 1: It moves us from a domestic squabble to a global 384 00:19:53,119 --> 00:19:54,480 technological free for all. 385 00:19:54,559 --> 00:19:58,279 Speaker 2: This is where it gets really interesting because the documentary 386 00:19:58,319 --> 00:20:01,400 that Schollenberger is referencing it claims that the US is 387 00:20:01,440 --> 00:20:02,799 not operating in a vacuum. 388 00:20:02,839 --> 00:20:03,920 Speaker 1: Here, We're not alone. 389 00:20:04,079 --> 00:20:07,359 Speaker 2: If this technology is real and has been recovered, the 390 00:20:07,400 --> 00:20:11,400 effort to reverse engineer it is not some secret American 391 00:20:11,480 --> 00:20:15,359 solo project. It's a global arms race, a secret global 392 00:20:15,559 --> 00:20:16,160 arms race. 393 00:20:16,240 --> 00:20:20,279 Speaker 1: The narrative suggests that the recovery of these artifacts, these 394 00:20:20,319 --> 00:20:23,480 craft is not a uniquely American phenomenon. 395 00:20:23,680 --> 00:20:27,960 Speaker 2: No, specifically, the key geopolitical actors cited as participating in 396 00:20:28,000 --> 00:20:30,920 this secret high stakes reverse engineering. 397 00:20:30,480 --> 00:20:31,559 Speaker 1: At Russia and China. 398 00:20:31,680 --> 00:20:35,039 Speaker 2: Russia and China, the claim is they have also found 399 00:20:35,039 --> 00:20:37,000 craft and are also reverse engineering. 400 00:20:37,240 --> 00:20:39,400 Speaker 1: If that claim is true, I mean, just think about that. 401 00:20:39,640 --> 00:20:42,799 If it's true, then the entire dynamics of twenty first 402 00:20:42,799 --> 00:20:46,279 century global conflict are being rewritten in secret right now. 403 00:20:46,400 --> 00:20:49,799 Speaker 2: We're not talking about hypersonic missiles or next gen stealth bombers. 404 00:20:49,920 --> 00:20:53,400 We are talking about a competition for physics defying technology. 405 00:20:53,839 --> 00:20:59,119 Speaker 1: And Schellenberger explicitly characterized this activity as a secret arms 406 00:20:59,200 --> 00:21:03,799 race happening internationally. This elevates the issue from a niche 407 00:21:03,799 --> 00:21:05,119 intelligence debate. 408 00:21:05,039 --> 00:21:08,720 Speaker 2: Into the primary, unacknowledged geopolitical concern of our time. 409 00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:12,440 Speaker 1: Let's dedicate some real time to analyzing the security implications 410 00:21:12,440 --> 00:21:17,599 of this because historically arms races, you know, the naval 411 00:21:17,640 --> 00:21:20,240 competition before World War One, the nuclear race of the 412 00:21:20,240 --> 00:21:23,960 Cold War, they were defined by a certain kind of logic. 413 00:21:23,720 --> 00:21:28,240 Speaker 2: Mutually assured destruction, relatively predictable physics. We knew what a 414 00:21:28,240 --> 00:21:30,480 bomb did, we knew how a missile flew. This is 415 00:21:30,839 --> 00:21:34,240 This is fundamentally different. Also, the nuclear arms race was 416 00:21:34,240 --> 00:21:37,480 defined by energy release and delivery systems, right, but it 417 00:21:37,559 --> 00:21:41,440 all operated within known physics, Newtonian and relativistic physics. 418 00:21:41,440 --> 00:21:41,720 Speaker 1: Okay. 419 00:21:42,160 --> 00:21:46,039 Speaker 2: A reverse engineering race for non human technology implies competing 420 00:21:46,079 --> 00:21:49,920 for a breakthrough in propulsion or energy generation or material 421 00:21:49,960 --> 00:21:52,839 science that operates on principles we do not yet understand. 422 00:21:52,960 --> 00:21:56,279 Speaker 1: You're talking about things like zero point energy, gravity manipulation, 423 00:21:56,440 --> 00:21:58,400 maybe even instantaneous travel. 424 00:21:58,240 --> 00:22:02,559 Speaker 2: Things that sound like science fiction but would become military reality. Now, 425 00:22:02,599 --> 00:22:05,319 imagine the stakes of a race like that. Okay, If 426 00:22:05,480 --> 00:22:10,519 China or Russia achieves a successful breakthrough, first, let's just 427 00:22:10,559 --> 00:22:13,880 say they figure out stable anti gravity. 428 00:22:13,440 --> 00:22:14,839 Speaker 1: Propulsion, what have is the next day? 429 00:22:14,920 --> 00:22:18,440 Speaker 2: The next day, they would instantly render every aircraft carrier, 430 00:22:18,559 --> 00:22:22,440 every bomber, and every strategic nuclear deterrent system the US 431 00:22:22,480 --> 00:22:24,640 possesses functionally obsolete. 432 00:22:24,440 --> 00:22:27,079 Speaker 1: Just gone militarily worthless. 433 00:22:27,160 --> 00:22:31,640 Speaker 2: They would possess absolute, unchallengeable military dominance over the entire 434 00:22:31,720 --> 00:22:32,960 planet overnight. 435 00:22:33,160 --> 00:22:37,119 Speaker 1: The security implications are staggering because of the potential jumping capability. 436 00:22:37,279 --> 00:22:39,359 It's not linear, it's not the next step up. 437 00:22:39,440 --> 00:22:43,119 Speaker 2: It is exponential. We are talking about leapfrogging the next 438 00:22:43,160 --> 00:22:47,359 five hundred years of conventional technological development in a single breakthrough. 439 00:22:47,440 --> 00:22:51,680 Speaker 1: If a nation masters a technology that allows for silent, instantaneous, 440 00:22:51,720 --> 00:22:54,160 and invisible deployment of force anywhere on. 441 00:22:54,079 --> 00:22:58,480 Speaker 2: Earth, all concepts of deterrence of border security, they just collapse. 442 00:22:58,519 --> 00:23:00,000 They become meaningless. 443 00:22:59,720 --> 00:23:02,160 Speaker 1: And the secrecy of it all just makes a threat worse. 444 00:23:02,200 --> 00:23:06,079 Speaker 2: It exacerbates it immensely. Unlike the Cold War, where the 445 00:23:06,200 --> 00:23:08,880 US and the Soviet Union could monitor each other's nuclear 446 00:23:08,920 --> 00:23:11,839 tests and missile deployments with satellites. 447 00:23:11,359 --> 00:23:13,400 Speaker 1: And spies, we had eyes on them, they had eyes 448 00:23:13,440 --> 00:23:13,920 on us. 449 00:23:14,119 --> 00:23:17,000 Speaker 2: Right, this is an arms race that's supposedly taking place 450 00:23:17,319 --> 00:23:20,200 entirely behind closed doors, hidden not just from the public, 451 00:23:20,240 --> 00:23:23,799 but apparently hidden even from parts of the US government 452 00:23:23,880 --> 00:23:26,640 itself because of this extreme compartmentalization. 453 00:23:27,000 --> 00:23:30,880 Speaker 1: The instability is inherent in that lack of transparency. If 454 00:23:30,920 --> 00:23:33,599 the US government, or let's be specific, the Department of 455 00:23:33,640 --> 00:23:37,759 War is still publicly denying the very existence of the 456 00:23:37,759 --> 00:23:39,599 technology being sought, how can. 457 00:23:39,480 --> 00:23:43,920 Speaker 2: They possibly accurately assess the threat level posed by Russian 458 00:23:44,119 --> 00:23:46,200 or Chinese progress in the same field. 459 00:23:46,400 --> 00:23:46,839 Speaker 1: They can't. 460 00:23:47,319 --> 00:23:50,480 Speaker 2: They're fighting a secret war while publicly pretending the weapons 461 00:23:50,519 --> 00:23:55,200 don't exist, which means a unified, coherent threat assessment is impossible. 462 00:23:55,279 --> 00:23:59,079 Speaker 1: This internal dissonance, this split personality, it places the US 463 00:23:59,119 --> 00:24:01,160 at a severe, strictrategic disadvantage. 464 00:24:01,240 --> 00:24:04,759 Speaker 2: It has to. While the DNI and the intelligence community 465 00:24:04,880 --> 00:24:07,440 might be aware of the severity of this global competition, 466 00:24:08,000 --> 00:24:11,119 the military branch that is responsible for designing and deploying 467 00:24:11,119 --> 00:24:15,599 our defenses, the Defense Department, is simultaneously locked into a 468 00:24:15,680 --> 00:24:17,599 seventy year old denial paradigm. 469 00:24:17,880 --> 00:24:19,839 Speaker 1: So what does that suggest? I mean there are only 470 00:24:19,920 --> 00:24:20,680 two options, right. 471 00:24:20,920 --> 00:24:25,440 Speaker 2: It suggests either massive organizational failure where information is deliberately 472 00:24:25,480 --> 00:24:27,720 siloed to keep one hand from knowing what the other 473 00:24:27,839 --> 00:24:31,880 is doing. Or or it's an unprecedented level of strategic denial, 474 00:24:32,359 --> 00:24:36,240 a deception operation designed to fool our global rivals. But 475 00:24:36,319 --> 00:24:39,119 if it's the latter, the collateral damage is the American 476 00:24:39,160 --> 00:24:42,920 public's trust and the cohesion of our own national security apparatus. 477 00:24:43,079 --> 00:24:44,279 You're fooling your own people too. 478 00:24:44,480 --> 00:24:48,559 Speaker 1: Let's pivot back to Shallenberger's argument about urgency. He argues 479 00:24:48,599 --> 00:24:53,119 that this situation demands serious consideration because the alleged reality 480 00:24:53,160 --> 00:24:57,039 of this arms race contrasts so sharply with how UFOs 481 00:24:57,079 --> 00:24:58,319 have been dismissed for so long. 482 00:24:58,519 --> 00:25:01,960 Speaker 2: Right, the threat isn't just the technology itself, it's the asymmetry, 483 00:25:02,440 --> 00:25:05,519 the asymmetry of knowledge and the asymmetry of official response. 484 00:25:05,680 --> 00:25:06,519 Speaker 1: What do you mean by that? 485 00:25:06,680 --> 00:25:09,680 Speaker 2: If the US is truly in a technological race against 486 00:25:09,720 --> 00:25:13,920 China and Russia over artifacts that could redefine warfare, then 487 00:25:14,000 --> 00:25:18,920 the military's adherence to the no evidence of extraterrestrials line 488 00:25:19,319 --> 00:25:21,759 becomes a profound liability. 489 00:25:21,200 --> 00:25:22,799 Speaker 1: Because it hobbles your own response. 490 00:25:23,319 --> 00:25:26,119 Speaker 2: It means key parts of our own defense architecture might 491 00:25:26,160 --> 00:25:29,480 be funded, designed, and deployed based on an incomplete or 492 00:25:29,559 --> 00:25:32,640 even a deliberately misleading threat assessment. 493 00:25:33,079 --> 00:25:36,720 Speaker 1: Think about something as simple as resource allocation the budget. 494 00:25:36,799 --> 00:25:40,079 Speaker 2: How do you justify budgeting billions of dollars for reverse 495 00:25:40,119 --> 00:25:43,720 engineering a technology you can't publicly acknowledge your studying? How 496 00:25:43,720 --> 00:25:46,359 do you staff these programs? How do you train personnel 497 00:25:46,440 --> 00:25:49,400 for a confrontation with technology you deny exists? 498 00:25:49,880 --> 00:25:53,799 Speaker 1: The dissonance creates enormous inefficiency and risk. You're fighting with 499 00:25:53,839 --> 00:25:55,319 one arm tied behind your back. 500 00:25:55,400 --> 00:25:58,039 Speaker 2: And this feeds right back into why the institutional weight 501 00:25:58,079 --> 00:26:00,480 of that pro disclosure coalition is so vital. 502 00:26:00,599 --> 00:26:02,640 Speaker 1: The DNI, the Secretary of State. 503 00:26:02,720 --> 00:26:05,480 Speaker 2: When they engage with this subject, they are implicitly trying 504 00:26:05,519 --> 00:26:09,559 to override the traditional military gatekeepers. They are attempting to 505 00:26:09,720 --> 00:26:12,880 force the acknowledgment of the reality of this global arms 506 00:26:13,000 --> 00:26:16,599 race into the highest policy making tiers of government. 507 00:26:16,720 --> 00:26:18,960 Speaker 1: The argument being made then is that the status quo 508 00:26:19,039 --> 00:26:21,519 is just fundamentally unstable. It can't last. 509 00:26:21,759 --> 00:26:25,039 Speaker 2: You cannot sustain a situation where the highest levels of 510 00:26:25,079 --> 00:26:29,240 civilian and intelligence leadership are signaling this is an unprecedented 511 00:26:29,319 --> 00:26:32,480 technological discovery and geopolitical contest. 512 00:26:32,279 --> 00:26:35,279 Speaker 1: While the Department of War insists move along. Nothing to 513 00:26:35,279 --> 00:26:39,440 see here, only intergalactic space aliens, which again they're not 514 00:26:39,480 --> 00:26:40,359 even seeing, right. 515 00:26:40,400 --> 00:26:43,920 Speaker 2: It's a non denial denial, and this internal conflict it 516 00:26:44,039 --> 00:26:48,079 compromises our position globally. How so our allies, particularly in 517 00:26:48,200 --> 00:26:51,079 NATO or in the Pacific, they must also be grappling 518 00:26:51,079 --> 00:26:53,440 with these claims. They see what we see, of course, 519 00:26:53,720 --> 00:26:56,640 so if the US, their primary global security partner, is 520 00:26:56,720 --> 00:27:00,960 broadcasting these wildly conflicting narratives. One can firming the arms race, 521 00:27:01,039 --> 00:27:04,799 one denying the source. It completely undermines international policy coordination 522 00:27:04,880 --> 00:27:06,920 at a time when cohesion is needed most. 523 00:27:07,319 --> 00:27:10,640 Speaker 1: The sheer political audacity of the contradiction is what makes 524 00:27:10,640 --> 00:27:14,599 this moment so unique. It's not just a difference of opinion. 525 00:27:14,960 --> 00:27:18,960 It's a difference in reality definition being propagated by major 526 00:27:19,079 --> 00:27:19,799 bodies of the. 527 00:27:19,799 --> 00:27:22,799 Speaker 2: Same government, and it demands resolution, which is where we 528 00:27:22,880 --> 00:27:25,559 have to bring this discussion full circle. We have to 529 00:27:25,599 --> 00:27:27,039 synthesize this paradox. 530 00:27:27,079 --> 00:27:30,359 Speaker 1: We've laid out the historical confirmation by high level officials 531 00:27:30,559 --> 00:27:31,559 like Rubio. 532 00:27:31,400 --> 00:27:35,480 Speaker 2: The internal policy split represented by that definitional. 533 00:27:34,799 --> 00:27:37,759 Speaker 1: Loophole, and the resulting secret arms race with our major 534 00:27:37,799 --> 00:27:38,680 global rivals. 535 00:27:38,759 --> 00:27:40,319 Speaker 2: It's a perfect storm of confusion. 536 00:27:40,359 --> 00:27:43,039 Speaker 1: We are living in a moment that is defined by 537 00:27:43,200 --> 00:27:47,000 staggering paradox. You have these high level officials agreeing this 538 00:27:47,119 --> 00:27:50,799 is serious, that non human technology has been recovered and 539 00:27:50,839 --> 00:27:53,279 that a reverse engineering program is happening as part of 540 00:27:53,319 --> 00:27:55,599 a global technological scramble. 541 00:27:55,279 --> 00:27:59,000 Speaker 2: And juxtaposed directly against that, you have a specific years long, 542 00:27:59,319 --> 00:28:02,200 carefully where denial from the Defense Department. 543 00:28:01,880 --> 00:28:05,039 Speaker 1: A denial which is arguably only possible because of the 544 00:28:05,160 --> 00:28:10,680 very specific terminology they employ, denying extraterrestrials while remaining totally 545 00:28:10,720 --> 00:28:12,880 silent on non human sources. 546 00:28:12,759 --> 00:28:16,880 Speaker 2: And the result is narrative chaos. The choice you're left 547 00:28:16,920 --> 00:28:20,000 with is binary, and it's terrifying either way. 548 00:28:20,079 --> 00:28:21,079 Speaker 1: What are the two choices. 549 00:28:21,319 --> 00:28:24,720 Speaker 2: Either the most powerful intelligence and foreign policy officials in 550 00:28:24,759 --> 00:28:28,799 the country are participating in a massive, costly and dangerous 551 00:28:28,799 --> 00:28:32,839 delusion based on half century old misinformation. 552 00:28:32,440 --> 00:28:36,000 Speaker 1: Which would mean an institutional security failure of epic. 553 00:28:35,759 --> 00:28:40,319 Speaker 2: Proportions, or the technological breakthrough of human history is being 554 00:28:40,359 --> 00:28:43,480 confirmed by the people who manage global security, while the 555 00:28:43,519 --> 00:28:48,799 public remains confused by institutional stonewalling driven by narrow semantics. 556 00:28:48,920 --> 00:28:52,200 Speaker 1: The conversation, as Schellenberger noted, it has to shift now. 557 00:28:52,319 --> 00:28:54,599 It has to move away from speculation. Clearly, we're not 558 00:28:54,640 --> 00:28:57,519 here to endlessly speculate on how the technology works or 559 00:28:57,519 --> 00:28:59,880 where the craft came from. He says, that's a distraction, 560 00:29:00,240 --> 00:29:00,839 and he's right. 561 00:29:00,920 --> 00:29:03,440 Speaker 2: The power lies with the people who run the government now, 562 00:29:03,519 --> 00:29:07,119 the current executive and intelligence branches. They have the ability, 563 00:29:07,160 --> 00:29:10,440 and I would argue the institutional obligation to tell the 564 00:29:10,480 --> 00:29:12,200 public what the reality. 565 00:29:11,839 --> 00:29:15,079 Speaker 1: Is the era of just asking questions is over. Now 566 00:29:15,119 --> 00:29:17,839 we demand a singular, coherent answer. 567 00:29:17,720 --> 00:29:20,599 Speaker 2: And that answer has to come from the highest office. 568 00:29:20,680 --> 00:29:23,279 It has to be a presidential level statement, because the 569 00:29:23,279 --> 00:29:25,720 integrity of governance itself is now at stake. 570 00:29:26,160 --> 00:29:28,680 Speaker 1: If the President, the Vice president, and the Secretary of 571 00:29:28,759 --> 00:29:31,559 State are engaging with this narrative, they have to be 572 00:29:31,559 --> 00:29:32,519 the ones to finalize it. 573 00:29:32,720 --> 00:29:35,279 Speaker 2: The public needs to know. Are we in a secret 574 00:29:35,440 --> 00:29:39,799 arms race for revolutionary tech that threatens to destabilize global power? 575 00:29:40,480 --> 00:29:44,640 Or has our entire official apparatus been compromised by a 576 00:29:44,759 --> 00:29:50,039 decade's old circular lie that's wasting vast resources in political. 577 00:29:49,599 --> 00:29:52,480 Speaker 1: Capital and the risk of maintaining this silence this dissonance 578 00:29:52,920 --> 00:29:55,880 is that we may lose this arms race entirely. 579 00:29:55,599 --> 00:29:57,359 Speaker 2: And not because of a lack of genius or a 580 00:29:57,440 --> 00:29:59,039 lack of resources. 581 00:29:58,440 --> 00:30:02,559 Speaker 1: But because of institutional denial and cognitive dissonance. We cannot 582 00:30:02,559 --> 00:30:06,039 effectively fight a secret global technological war if half of 583 00:30:06,079 --> 00:30:08,160 our own government insists the enemy doesn't. 584 00:30:07,960 --> 00:30:10,039 Speaker 2: Exist, or at least doesn't exist in the way we 585 00:30:10,160 --> 00:30:11,079 usually define them. 586 00:30:11,279 --> 00:30:15,680 Speaker 1: That high level conflicting messaging is the single biggest operational 587 00:30:15,720 --> 00:30:17,799 threat to effective governance on this issue. 588 00:30:17,880 --> 00:30:21,920 Speaker 2: It creates a vulnerability, a vulnerability that Russia and China, 589 00:30:22,039 --> 00:30:24,799 if they are indeed engaged in this reverse engineering effort, 590 00:30:25,079 --> 00:30:28,960 are surely exploiting. They must be leveraging the US government's 591 00:30:28,960 --> 00:30:30,440 self imposed confusion. 592 00:30:30,720 --> 00:30:34,319 Speaker 1: It's just an amazing and frankly a precarious position for 593 00:30:34,319 --> 00:30:36,480 a society to be in. It really is. It is 594 00:30:36,680 --> 00:30:39,599 so we've established, based on these sources, that we are 595 00:30:39,680 --> 00:30:44,799 living in a moment where major global powers, the US, Russia, 596 00:30:44,960 --> 00:30:49,720 China are allegedly involved in a secret existential arms race 597 00:30:50,119 --> 00:30:52,279 over recovered non human technology. 598 00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:54,519 Speaker 2: This is being confirmed by some of the most powerful 599 00:30:54,559 --> 00:30:55,480 people in the US. 600 00:30:55,359 --> 00:30:58,160 Speaker 1: Government, while another key branch of that same government denies 601 00:30:58,160 --> 00:31:01,319 it entirely, creating massive institutional instability. 602 00:31:01,440 --> 00:31:04,359 Speaker 2: The pressure for resolution is immense, and it is only growing. 603 00:31:04,720 --> 00:31:08,000 The longer this state of paradox persists, the greater the 604 00:31:08,119 --> 00:31:09,440 risk of a strategic failure. 605 00:31:09,519 --> 00:31:11,920 Speaker 1: And that failure could be anything. It could be losing 606 00:31:11,920 --> 00:31:14,759 the technological race, or it could be the complete collapse 607 00:31:14,799 --> 00:31:16,480 of public faith and governance itself. 608 00:31:16,519 --> 00:31:17,839 Speaker 2: Either one is a catastrophe. 609 00:31:17,920 --> 00:31:19,720 Speaker 1: So this is the final thought we want to leave 610 00:31:19,759 --> 00:31:23,200 you with today. Something pretty profound to mull Over especially 611 00:31:23,200 --> 00:31:27,440 given the geopolitical stakes we've discussed. If the highest levels 612 00:31:27,440 --> 00:31:30,920 of our government are openly split on whether the most 613 00:31:30,920 --> 00:31:35,240 profound technological discovery in human history is real or a 614 00:31:35,319 --> 00:31:37,079 decade's old delusion. 615 00:31:36,799 --> 00:31:39,880 Speaker 2: A delusion significant enough to still command the attention of 616 00:31:39,880 --> 00:31:42,839 an official being compared to Henry Kissinger. 617 00:31:42,559 --> 00:31:47,119 Speaker 1: What level of evidence or which single official figure would 618 00:31:47,160 --> 00:31:50,200 it truly take for you to feel fully informed? And 619 00:31:50,640 --> 00:31:53,319 maybe more importantly, what do you believe is the biggest 620 00:31:53,440 --> 00:31:58,480 risk of having these deeply conflicting, potentially globally destabilizing messages 621 00:31:58,839 --> 00:32:00,400 persist in the meantime. 622 00:32:00,640 --> 00:32:03,680 Speaker 2: Think about the implications of that secret arms race, the 623 00:32:03,720 --> 00:32:06,920 potential for a world power to gain absolute dominance through 624 00:32:06,960 --> 00:32:11,079 non human technology, and the consequences of our own government's ambiguity. 625 00:32:11,200 --> 00:32:12,960 Speaker 1: Leave a comment and let us know your stand We'll 626 00:32:12,960 --> 00:32:16,079 be tracking them on this this unprecedented moment of institutional 627 00:32:16,119 --> 00:32:18,680 revelation and denial. Thanks for diving deep with us. 628 00:32:18,759 --> 00:32:19,599 Speaker 2: We'll see you next time.