Dan Farah | The Magnificent Others with Billy Corgan

Summary

The Magnificent Others with Billy Corgan

Episode: Dan Farah | The Magnificent Others with Billy Corgan
Date: December 24, 2025

---

Episode Overview

In this spellbinding episode, Billy Corgan sits down with producer and filmmaker Dan Farah to explore the revelations behind Farah’s record-breaking new documentary. Together, they dig into stunning claims of government coverups, credible testimony from high-level officials, and the implications of humanity’s relationship with non-human intelligent life. The conversation ranges from technology races to spiritual musings, all rooted in the landmark disclosure movement that Farah’s film catalyzes. This episode is vividly candid, philosophically rich, and offers both the curious and the skeptical a rare insight into the state of UAP (Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena) research and revelation.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Documentary's Groundbreaking Claims

[01:25–02:19]

• Elevator Pitch: Farah’s film draws on interviews with 34 high-level military, government, and intelligence officials who allege an 80-year coverup of non-human intelligent life by the US government, including a covert technology race against adversaries like China and Russia.
  • “There has legitimately been a cover up of non human intelligent life. It’s real. It’s a real situation at this point.” (Dan Farah, 03:46)
• The credibility of sources is emphasized—senior senators, intelligence leaders—who have much to lose and nothing to gain from fabrication.

2. How the Film Landed Such High-Powered Voices

[02:21–03:26]

• Farah leveraged his producing background (notably on Ready Player One with Spielberg) to establish credibility, slowly building trust over a year with insiders before more doors opened.
  • “Whenever you can say that, you know, you worked with Steven Spielberg...people generally take you serious and will hear you out.” (Dan Farah, 02:50)

3. Timeline: Human Contact with Non-Human Intelligence

[04:45–05:59]

• The "first major event" relayed by Farah's sources was a UAP crash and retrieval in Italy in WWII, followed by Roswell in the US. This led to the launch of the so-called “Legacy program”—a secretive crash retrieval and reverse engineering effort.

4. Unanimity Among High-level Sources

[06:18–06:43]

• Despite different backgrounds and no prior consultations, the interviewed officials privately corroborated each other's claims.
  • “I interviewed all these people who had no relationship...they were all saying the same thing in private conversations.” (Dan Farah, 06:18)
• The film’s credibility stems from collective risk-taking by reputable figures.

5. Governmental Disclosure Momentum

[08:51–09:36]

• Senator Marco Rubio emerges as a strong proponent for disclosure, initiating classified and public reports, as well as the UAP Task Force.
  • “Rubio is the muscle behind all of this.” (Dan Farah, 09:36)

6. Skepticism and the Changing Definition of Evidence

[07:33–08:31]

• Farah contends that no credible counterarguments have emerged—detractors cite lack of evidence, but the bar for proof remains unreasonably high in the public eye.
  • “You could put a 4K video...and half the human population would be like, oh, that’s AI...These people all took real risk to share what they lawfully could.” (Dan Farah, 07:52)

7. The Nature and Intent of Non-Human Entities

[12:29–14:19]

• Both Corgan and Farah embrace the complexity and moral ambiguity of potential contact—there may be “good” and “bad” civilizations, and our rapid nuclear progress has likely intensified external attention.
  • “There’s a lot of intelligent life in the universe and some is good and some is bad...maybe some view us as a problem.” (Dan Farah, 12:29)
  • “We’re still acting like we were coming out in World War II...We’re a violent species...” (Dan Farah, 14:19)

8. The Cold War for Reverse-Engineering Technology

[17:12–18:56]

• The US, Russia, and China are in a competitive rush to decode alien technology, with past fleeting cooperation now supplanted by rivalry.

9. The Public’s Right to Know

[18:56–20:03]

• Farah asserts society is now ready for presidential disclosure, citing historical analogies to the space race, but with even greater stakes.
  • “I think we’re at a point now that this film is out there, where the President can more comfortably step to the microphone and tell the world we’re not alone in the universe.” (Dan Farah, 18:56)

10. The Legacy Program: The True Government in the Shadows

[29:09–30:09]

• The so-called “Legacy Program” has operated with misappropriated funds at immense scale, keeping Congress and even presidents out of the loop.
  • “This isn’t like 50 guys in a room. This is a significant operation that has had billions of dollars in funding...more like a trillion dollars since the 40s.” (Dan Farah, 29:09)
• Senators and intelligence officials have only recently pierced this veil due to the heightened tech race stakes.

11. Terminology, Rebranding, and Stigma

[31:43–32:49]

• The move from “UFO” to “UAP” was both a pragmatic and PR decision, aiming to shed the “giggle factor” and encompass unidentified phenomena in all environments, not just airspace.

12. Competing Theories: Four Hypotheses

[43:22–44:43]

• Congressman Gallagher articulates four possible explanations:
  1. Adversary leapfrogged US tech
  2. Rogue US government tech group
  3. Non-human intelligence
  4. "All of the above"
• Farah now leans most heavily toward a combination: “there is non human intelligent life here...some of what we see is made by our secret program...and some...by adversary secret programs.” (Dan Farah, 44:07)

13. Spiritual and Supernatural Implications

[55:59–57:02]

• Farah and Corgan touch on the resonance between UAP encounters and historical/religious supernatural accounts, speculating that religious texts may preserve misunderstood records of contact.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Coverups and Heavy Hitters:

  “34 people putting their reputation and their name on the line, their credibility on the line, their ability to provide for their families. These guys all have clearances...These people all took real risk to share what they lawfully could.”
  — Dan Farah, [08:04]

• On Disclosure’s Tipping Point:

  “How can you win a technology race if...99% of the scientists in America don’t even know it’s real?...You have to get academia and the scientific community to understand this is real.”
  — Dan Farah, [31:08]

• On Stigma:

  “You start your conversation off with ‘UFO’...the little green men joke...this cultural ridiculous, you know, unjustified stigma led to the giggle factor. So...rebrand this...Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.”
  — Dan Farah, [32:06]

• Ants in the Treeline Analogy:

  “The ants in the tree line in your backyard could be there for generations...Until circumstances change. Like, what if you wake up one day and the ants have figured out how to get under your door and now they’re in your house, they have gotten smarter. They have figured out how to get to a new place. That’s a problem for you now.”
  — Dan Farah, [34:55]

• Governmental Secrecy:

  “Congress has been kept out of the loop. The White House has been kept out of the loop.”
  — Dan Farah, [29:47]

• Presidents Left in the Dark:

  “Rubio breaks down in the film how even presidents are on a need to know basis about this...they’re viewed as temporary.”
  — Dan Farah, [50:45]

• On Personal Encounters:

  “I have only seen one thing with my own eyes...I saw what looked like a satellite moving slow...and then this thing just rocketed off. And satellites don’t do that.”
  — Dan Farah, [46:59]

• Reflections on Religion & UAP:

  “It’s hard to go down this road and not find similarities between UAP events...and certain things that are in the Bible...Maybe at some point things that are written about the Bible were actually just...experiences with life from elsewhere.”
  — Dan Farah, [56:17]

---

Major Timestamps and Segment Guide

• 00:00–01:25: Playful banter on aliens (good vs. bad), rapid grounding for the documentary focus.
• 01:25–03:46: Dan Farah’s summary of his documentary; landing government heavyweights for interviews.
• 04:45–06:18: Historical timeline of crash retrievals; birth of the “Legacy program.”
• 08:51–09:36: Senator Rubio’s role; mechanics of governmental disclosure.
• 12:29–14:19: What motivates “aliens” and what nuclear weapons have to do with UAP spikes.
• 17:12–18:56: Global great power rivalry and limited collaboration on UAP technology.
• 18:56–20:03: Call for presidential announcement and lessons of the space race.
• 29:09–30:09: Deep dive on the scale and scope of the “Legacy program.”
• 31:43–32:49: Why terms matter: moving from UFO to UAP.
• 43:22–44:43: Four working hypotheses, and where Farah lands.
• 46:59–48:30: Both guests share personal UAP sighting stories.
• 55:59–57:02: Philosophical and theological implications; is the paranormal just the poorly understood “normal” of higher intelligence?
• 57:52–59:51: International military attitudes (including Russian navy stories); reasons for confidence in the mounting evidence.

---

Tone and Atmosphere

The conversation is candid, searching, at times conspiratorial, but always anchored in the gravity and complexity of the subject. Farah is methodical and sincere, Corgan openly philosophical and creatively inquisitive, with both displaying deep respect for factual rigor and for the unsolved mysteries at the heart of the UAP revelations.

---

For anyone fascinated by the new openness around UAPs, government secrecy, or the grand sweep of human existence in the cosmos, this episode is essential listening—a rare, honest look at a topic hurtling from the fringes to the center of public discourse.

Transcript

[A]

UAP activity over Area 51 is in fact real.

[B]

There's good aliens and there's bad aliens. And the good aliens keep the bad aliens in check.

[A]

There's a lot of intelligent life in the universe and some is good and some is bad.

[B]

Yeah. Here's the question. Are you afraid?

[A]

There's definitely, definitely some stuff that's been said to me that is concerning to say.

[B]

That's all I need to know. I don't need to know.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Dan Farah, thank you very much for being here. We're here to talk about your great documentary.

[A]

Thank you.

[B]

It's a documentary.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Is that fair?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

I always want to call it a film because it has a filmic family to it, but it's a documentary. Never sure when people are going to see these, but in this moment we're taping, it's just kind of come out recently, right?

[A]

Yeah, November 21st. So a couple, couple weeks ago.

[B]

So November 21st, 2025, you just broke records. You're doing really, really well. So. So I think it's unfair because I've seen a couple people reviewing your film and they've basically given the film away. I know it's a documentary and I know you want people to talk about it. So what I want to try to do is more have a discussion around the topics.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

That the film raises. But I want people to watch the documentary. That's the whole purpose. But I have my own curiosities. So let's start here and maybe it's best. Why don't you summarize for people watching. Let's call it the, you know, the, the two, three sentence elevator pitch of what your film is.

[A]

Yeah. So I interviewed 34 very high level military, government and intelligence officials who collectively broke their silence to reveal that there's been an 80 year cover up of the existence of non human intelligent life. And on top of that, elements of the US government have been involved in a secret war, a cold war, a technology race with adversarial nations like China and Russia to reverse engineer this technology. There's, there's insanely profound consequences here. And while all that sounds extraordinary to the average person, the people I interviewed couldn't be more credible. It's senior senators from both sides of the aisle.

[B]

I was surprised. Sorry to interrupt. I was surprised. Like there's Marco Rubio, there's James Clapper. I mean these are big heavy government people. This is not like you pulled out the guy who was in the military 14 years ago and he's maybe got an Ax to grind or he's got a story to tell.

[A]

These are like people with a lot to lose.

[B]

These are heavy hitters you got. Yeah.

[A]

And from both parties, you know, like, let's start there.

[B]

How do you get people like that in the film? That seems to be a heavy lift just from a movie producer point of view. I'm sure you wrote down a list.

[A]

Of people, but totally, totally a lengthy process. So I started by first getting introductions to a few intelligence officials who had been, who were tired at the time, but in the past had worked day to day on this topic for the government. And I spent at least a year forming relationships with this small little group of people.

[B]

So what's your pitch? If I'm a, if I'm a government official, that's a skeptic. And who are you? What's your pitch?

[A]

Well, at the time, my way into it was, you know, I had, I had had some success, fortunately as a producer. I was one of the producers on Ready Player One, which Steven Spielberg directed and was a big successful film. And you know, I think whenever you can say that, you know, you worked with Steven Spielberg, who's in my opinion the greatest filmmaker of all time, I think, you know, people generally take you serious and you know, will hear you out. And then from there it's just, you know, can you develop trust with someone or not? And, and so my entrance was these few intelligent officials and once I started to socialize what I wanted to do, they started opening doors for me.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

And then one door led to another.

[B]

Wow.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So let's start here. And again, I want people to watch the film. So I'm going to sort of just rummage around these topics because I'm personally interested. Give me your general take on what you believe, knowing what you know or what you think you know, if that makes any sense.

[A]

Just in general about this topic. Yeah, I mean, look, I think, I think those, those two headlines nail it there. There has legitimately been a cover up of non human intelligent life. It's real. It's a real situation at this point. No, no, Look, I have 34 people in my film. Not a single one of them are like debating whether this is real. They're way past that. This is real. Now it's time we got it. Catch the public up of the base facts and we got to put a lot more resources and brain power towards this needs to become a national priority like terrorism was after 9, 11.

[B]

Okay, but you know, I assume you're a US citizen, so as a citizen of the US like myself. Okay, so you're sitting there in your easy chair like anybody else would go and okay, well, where does this go? And the reason I'm asking the question is do you believe there's. You think this is a recent phenomenon? Do you believe it's a long standing historical phenomenon? You know, of course we've all seen ancient aliens and stuff like that. Like, where do you sit on that time curve?

[A]

I mean, all I can really take seriously is what I've learned from my journey making this movie. And what everyone I interviewed made clear to me was the first major event was during World War II where a UA crashed UAP was retrieved.

[B]

Is this Rosworth overseas?

[A]

In Italy, specifically.

[B]

Yeah. There's the other. There's another American incident that doesn't get as much attention, but yeah, so like the first, the first during, During World.

[A]

War II, the first incident I was told about was when the US and allied troops took Italy. Apparently a recovered crashed UAP was found in an Italian hangar and was. We took possession of it.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

And then apparently the first major event in the US was Roswell. And that around then is when the program that's talked about in my film, it's known as the Legacy program. It's a deeply hidden UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program. Apparently that's when it was formed right after Roswell. And this has been a really active.

[B]

Program for 80 years.

[A]

And there's been apparently a lot of activity since Roswell all over the world, which really coincides with us starting to mess with atomic weapons.

[B]

So there. Let's. I hate to summarize the people you talk to in the film, but the general belief is about 80 years ago here, it's, it's, it's a real thing. There were other stories, other phenomenon, but what we know based on our. Okay, so, so that's your. You're kind of on that. Well, if these people are saying it, and I've got enough linearity here.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, the wild thing, man, was like, I interviewed all these people who had no relationship. They had different worldviews, they were not lined up ideologically, politically, for sure. But they were all saying the same thing in private conversations. Many of them had never talked to each other.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

And so I had the benefit. Imagine, you know.

[B]

Yeah, I get it.

[A]

You sit in the seat, you do 2,000 interviews, and what if everybody says the same thing? You're like, okay, sure.

[B]

I'm a believer. And what I mean by that is I tend to start from belief and work backwards. I know, that's very unusual. So when people ask me, I'm like, it's so obvious to me there's something. So I've always worked for that. So. But I am curious because you're strong presents such. I. Sorry. Your film presents such a strong case for what is something that's been on the public's mind for a very long time which is are they here? You know, like it's obviously been the topic of very lots of cultural things. Movies, television shows, books. Yeah. Heck, you know, you can go outside of Roswell and there's the tourist spot, you know, with the alien pointing and all that. But what at this point because you've. The film's been out long enough and you. I'm sure you showed it to plenty of people before it came out. What's the counter skeptical argument that you're getting at this point?

[A]

I'm really not getting any.

[B]

Really?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

I mean honestly, no one's doing the. Are you being worked like this is just another version of counter. And with the cal. Counter Intel Pro or whatever.

[A]

The, the only, the only comments like that I've seen are on social media from people that I know are bad actors. There's a number of people who are just legitimate paid back.

[B]

Give me like what a bad actor take would be.

[A]

No, they'd be like there's no evidence. It's like, okay, well what's your definition of evidence? In my opinion, you could put a 4K video of a real UFO hovering over a nuclear weapon site taken from a security camera on a classified military base and half the human population would be like, oh, that's AI that's visual effects. That guy made ready player one. He's good with visual effects. You know, that's what the response would be. But 34 people putting their reputation and their name on the line, their credibility on the line, their ability to provide for their families. These guys all have clearances. You act crazy and you tell lies. Yeah. In a public setting you're going to lose your clearance. You're not going to be able to get have a job. These people all took real risk to share what they lawfully could.

[B]

Especially like you look at Senator Rubio. He certainly has a political future.

[A]

I think that could be one of.

[B]

He could easily said I'm not going to go on the record about any of this. I think that's that, that, that to me lending not, not because I love Marco Rubio other than just like, well he wouldn't be opening his mouth if there wasn't something here. So I think that's where you winning.

[A]

He was a very strong force behind all of the last seven years moments for the disclosure effort. He was the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He really led the charge behind the scenes on bringing whistleblowers in to learn what they had to share. He was responsible for pushing into the coronavirus relief bill legislation that required a classified report to Congress from the intelligence community about this and a public report.

[B]

Have they been doing those reports?

[A]

Yeah, yeah. And then he also was the muscle behind the scenes for getting the UAP task force formed, which was the largest whole of government. UAP investigation, which Jay Stratton was asked to build and run.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

Rubio is the muscle behind all of this.

[B]

I'm not trying to put you on the spot, so I hope you understand the way I'm asking the question. It's cool you're meeting all these people and I'm sure somebody at some point whispered some stuff in your. That said, look, you can't put this in the film, but yeah, there's gotta be some of those. So I'm not trying to ask you to divulge any information that's not in the film because that's the choice that you made. But did anybody tell you anything that made you go, if that's true? That scares the bejesus out of me.

[A]

It's definitely, definitely some stuff that's been said to me that is concerning to say.

[B]

That's all I need to know. I don't need to know.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

I tend to approach. I tend to approach the, the issue or the subject of, of alien life here on Earth. It seems, it's self evident to me with how many planets and stars there are, there's certainly something. Even if it's a sea anemone and some acidic sea on Mars, it doesn't matter to me. I just, I. I've always accepted there's gotta be something going on. But the idea of like, let's call it Earth presence, I tend to approach that as a discerning person and as an artist because it's a fascinating subject, because it does lend itself to biblical tale all the way to like human story. It certainly fits very well with a weirdo like me. But the reason I'm telling you all this is not to just blab on. It's. At some point I had to come to like a philosophical, spiritual conclusion even, even if it's not based on fact. And part of that was based on talking to psychics and, and people who, who view the, the alien issue from the prism of like, let's call it a greater cosmology.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

That lends itself to the idea that if God is the supreme, you know, super unbelievable entity, well, wouldn't there be other acts of creation? And at some point when those actors, creation kind of run into each other? No different than at some point there were people living in Asia and there were some people living in the Americas and they, they met over the Bering Strait or something.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

They view it from that prism. I don't mean. I'm not saying I believe it or don't from the standpoint of I had to come to a conclusion like, oh, that makes sense to me. And the best one I ever saw was or heard was because like anybody who has a good imagination, you can certainly lean into the scary part of aliens. And I've met people that have been abducted. I've had my own issues that I don't want to talk about, but I've certainly had enough encounter in life to think something weird went on with me. So the way, the best way I've heard it explained is, and I'm going to say it's Chicago style. There's good aliens and there's bad aliens, and the good aliens keep the bad aliens in check. Do you have any thing you want to add to that?

[A]

I definitely my, my takeaway 100% from all my research and going down this rabbit hole is that there's a lot of intelligent life in the universe and some is good and some is bad. Yeah. And. And maybe it's less black and white is good and bad. Maybe some have benign intentions towards us and some don't. You know, maybe some view us as a problem. Maybe some view us as the equivalent of the ants in the treeline. We don't matter to them at all. You know, they don't think about us. We're just there.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

You know. Yeah.

[B]

How does an elephant view an ant?

[A]

Yeah. But certainly there is some subset of life from elsewhere that is paying a lot of attention to our nuclear progress and paying a lot of attention to our nuclear weapon sites, sites that are involved in the nuclear process.

[B]

Do you have any theory on let's call it the why.

[A]

Yeah. So, I mean, look, a number of the people in my film reveal that their educated hypothesis, which I think makes a lot of sense, is that they're monitoring our technological progress because it's the harnessing of energy is the key to their breakthrough technology and how their crafts do what they do. And so when we cracked the Atom. We started on this trajectory over the last 80 years where, like, here know we went.

[B]

Maybe that's why they started showing up.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, we went from. We went from cracking the atom to, like, now we're like, you know, creating black holes in labs and doing wild stuff that 10 years ago sounded like something out of a comic book. Right. So the people I interviewed feel like we're on a trajectory to either be already doing what they're doing in our black programs or on the verge of doing it. And now suddenly they have to contend with us. And at the same time that we've developed technologically, we haven't developed morally, we're still acting like.

[B]

No, we're going backwards.

[A]

Yeah, we're acting the same way we were coming out in World War II. We're threatening sovereign nation to invade sovereign nations. We're threatening nuclear war. We're violent. We're a violent species who, if you're a more advanced species that has watched us, you know, go from, you know, many, many, many years of no real progress to in a blink of an eye, relatively.

[B]

Yeah. And they're. If you're. If you're. If they have the ability to deal with time differently than we do, from sticks and stones to where we're at really isn't a long time. Yeah.

[A]

Blink of an eye for, you know. And anyway, the point is, the people I interviewed think that we are now at a place where we are a problem for more advanced species, or.

[B]

I read this theory, which is using the same parlance, the good aliens want to keep us from blowing ourselves up.

[A]

You know, the only logic flaw with that, which I've heard as well, is they didn't stop us from dropping the bomb on Japan.

[B]

That's an interesting.

[A]

You know, they didn't stop us from vaporizing hundreds of thousands of people in an instant. They didn't stop any of the war since. They didn't stop any of the, you know, nuclear, you know, proliferation.

[B]

Okay, let me throw another one at you. I saw a thing again. I'm just. This is all my. My inner artistic riffing. The thing I saw was something along the lines of, like, aliens are bound by the same laws of karma as we are. That's an interesting take. Have you ever heard that one?

[A]

No. No.

[B]

That they would be tempered with the same set of subset spiritual rules, meaning they're. They're. They're at some level, they have some consciousness that their actions have some effect on what happens to them in the afterlife or whatever the afterlife is. It's it's again, all food for thought. It's even worthy thinking. Because if it truly is, let's say. So here's one version of a supposition. You have alien race or races with superior technologies that have the ability to do all sorts of things that we don't have the capability of doing. They may not be operating in a binary morality of good or bad. There might be a third or fourth or fifth version that we can't even comprehend because we don't live within the parameters of a different subset of time. A subset of like, even, like life and death.

[A]

Yeah. And they.

[B]

And there may not even be a religious overlay like we have, where it's like, gotta worry about hell.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Their version might be truly just scientific.

[A]

Yeah. They're also my. There's a lot of what ifs. But, like, something obviously I've thought about and other people thought about is while they have more advanced technology, clearly maybe there's things we have that they don't have. You know, maybe these human qualities like love or like a soul or rock music or rock music specific.

[B]

They're coming. They've come for the rock. Assuming again, it's a lot of ifs, if government or governments know, and there seems to be some collusion on some level between governments, because you would assume that Russia, even though they're in an adversarial position geopolitically to the US at the SO is. Well, China's supposed to be our friend. Who knows? But they would be in possession with a lot of the same information. There's this idea, and I'm sure you've heard it, which is like, yeah, they fight out here, but behind the scenes, they have to have some sort of collusive effort to be on the same page about. I know you're saying they're in a hostile race for technology, but at the same point, there has to be some understanding about who's fair and who's friendly and who's not.

[A]

A lot's been explained to me on this. And so my understanding is that there was a point in time where Russia and the US shared information on this topic. And there was. There was more of an understanding now. And, and that communication broke down over the last last decade or so. Interesting. And. And so it's much more competitive now. But. Well, the biggest concern is China. From what I. From what I've been told.

[B]

Sure. I, I feel that too. So I guess what I was after was, let's say again, playing a game. She knows, Putin knows. You know, I can't think of the guy who's running UK at the time. Our current president knows. Like, they know. They know enough and they know more than we do. Do you feel, personally, especially as a US citizen, citizen, do you believe the public has a right to know, or do you believe. You sort of buy that this information needs to be kind of doled out in pieces?

[A]

I think we're at a point now that this film is out there, where the President can more comfortably step to the microphone and tell the world we're not alone in the universe. Age of disclosure 2. Age of disclosure 2.

[B]

We're into the sequel already.

[A]

Perhaps. Yeah. And I think.

[B]

Tell me you're not thinking about it.

[A]

Oh, I'm thinking about it. I'm not the only one thinking about it, I bet.

[B]

Congratulations.

[A]

Thank you. But the other thing that I think is important about that moment, it's not just telling the public we're not alone in the universe. I think a sitting president needs to tell the public that the US intends to lead the way and why and, like, what's at stake. So if you go back to the last big technology race, the space race, Kennedy did that big speech and said, we're going to win the space race. And here's why. He says technology, space technology specifically says, like nuclear technology before it has no conscience of its own. It's up to man whether it's used for good or for evil. And so it's important, it's critical that the US play a role in making sure it's used for the betterment of mankind and not to create, you know, a new sea of war. That was his whole. That was the whole speech. That was the context that was, you know, I think the same context is here, but on. On steroids.

[B]

So I could see the opening of Age of Disclosure, too. It's Kennedy standing there at the lectern. Sorry, I'm already. I'm already directing your film. You did a great job. I find myself wondering, because I certainly see what's going on in what I call a post truth age, the age that we're in now, the digital age, where even if somebody like a US President stands up at a microphone, I feel like a lot of people don't even want to know. And I don't mean they don't want to know like they want to stick their fingers in there. They just don't really want to deal with the consequence of what that information would lend itself. And then you touch in the film about sort of people getting into the spiritual, religious question of what would happen if you suddenly say, yeah, there's these people. Does that change the interpretation of the Bible and all this type of stuff? Is that a fair paraphrase of what.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, I think, you know, Congressman Carson. Andre Carson, Democrat from Indianapolis, he makes a great point in there. He says he thinks it's difficult for people to, like, wrap their head around this because it challenges their beliefs, it challenges their sense of reality.

[B]

Do you think. Sorry to interrupt you, but do you think that. Do you think the. Okay, tomorrow somebody gets up and everybody believes it?

[A]

Yeah, right. I personally don't think at this point in time, in 2025, people are going to lose their. And start jumping out of windows or questioning all their beliefs. I just don't see that as something that will happen. It's not in the film. But Congressman Burchett, who's in the film, made a point in the interview that it just didn't end up in the final cut. But he said. He said, hell, he's like, I don't believe it would wreck religion. He says. He says, I believe Jesus died for aliens, too. Like, that's his outlook. He's like, you know, it's. You know, maybe mankind is all over the place. You know, maybe there's all different kinds of mankind.

[B]

I'm gonna take a cynical position for a second. This is more. I'm. I'm interjecting my own beliefs, and I'm sure I'll irritate somebody with this, but this is just how I feel. And maybe it's because I've been behind the wizard's curtain in media for. I'm getting close to 40 years now.

[A]

Wow.

[B]

35, 37, depending who you ask. I'm very, very skeptical of the way. And maybe it's because I've just done too many marketing campaigns. The way suddenly somebody flipped a switch somewhere, and here comes all this information. Is any part of you skeptical on the timing or the sort of, like, why now? Part of it all?

[A]

No. Because, look, one of the things that I unpack in the film is the narrative of how we got here. You know, it started with a very small group of people. I mean, in a nutshell, I'll give it for the audience, like the minute version, but. Well, over a decade ago, an intelligence official named Jay Stratton and another intelligence official named Jim McCaskey were working at the DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency. Their job is to know about advanced aerospace threats, right? And they start seeing these reports of what we used to call UFOs, UAP. They go all over the Pentagon and the intelligence community trying to find what they assume must be a UFO office somewhere, someone who handles this stuff. Right. And they couldn't find one. And they were shocked. They're like, how is there no office that handles this? As far as they could tell, there had been nothing since the closure of the Air Force's Project Blue Book. And so they were like, well, we can't just let these, these advanced aircraft operating our airspace go undealt with. We have to start a new program. So they started a program that was called osap.

[B]

And was that government funded? Because I was. I was, yeah. So OSAP1, maybe you dressed in the film, but I was found myself curious because I know where you're going, so I'll let you finish. But I was curious like, so they started a program, but like, who gave them authorization to start?

[A]

So OS app, the funding was appropriated by Senator Harry Reid and some of his colleagues, but Harry Reid was the point Senator. He was the Senate Majority Leader at the time, and he was the muscle behind getting funds appropriated to them.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

OSAP looked into UAP and the phenomenon in general on behalf of the US Government with a lot of taxpayer money. And at a certain point, the funding got pulled and there were some mysterious forces behind the scenes that were blocking their progress. And then Jay and Lou and a couple other people basically kept the effort going with a new effort that they called a tip. And aatip was at one point the codename for OS app. So that's why they just organically used it as the part two. Right. And they kept that going, bootstrapping it without real big funding. They were bootstrapping this investigation, continuing their investigation. Right. And that went on for a while. And every time they tried to raise alarm bells within the Pentagon about these real issues like UAP invading our military base airspace, our nuclear weapons airspace, significant national screw threats, they kept getting blocked by bureaucracy and stigma. And so they eventually made this plan where one guy's going to go public, make a bunch of noise in the media, the other guy's going to stay behind and catch that newfound interest that comes from Congress seeing it in the media, then paying attention, finally, then going to the Pentagon for answers, and Jay will be there to catch that. Right. And so they made this whole plan to bring out disclosure, and that really kind of got into the public eye. End of 17, Lou Elizondo went public, made a lot of noise in the media, really took a lot of the arrows, and Jay moved the ball forward internally. It's still in the government. And then the New York Times ran a big story, which is how a lot of people heard about this. That was 2017. And then from 17 on every year, small group of people pushing the ball forward. A big uphill battle leads to hearings. There's been several hearings. There's been several key moments where whistleblowers go and tell people like the senators on the Senate Intel Committee, the senators on the Senate Armed Service. Been a process. It's not like a quick, like, moment. It's a lot of moments.

[B]

So you see it as an organic process. Right time. Right people. And it's sort of these doors have slowly cracked open.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, it's.

[B]

It's.

[A]

It's been a marathon, not a sprint.

[B]

Well, that's somewhat comforting. I mean, just the. The, you know, The. The public person in me, again, I'm going on my own experiences. I just. Something about it seems a little too clean, a little too. And again, I have no information. I'm just going on gut instinct. And my gut instinct is if I see James Clapper in there, if I see Rubio in there, and then suddenly these doors are cracking open. Okay. After 75 years of silence, if we use your. Not yours, but the date you sort of cite this World War II date, it just feels all a little too, like. Feels like a marketing rollout. Does it make sense the way I'm putting it?

[A]

Well, the backstory that I was just summing up is like a, you know, over a decade process.

[B]

No, I get that. I'm. I. I'm not trying to put you on the spot to answer a question. I'm more just riffing you with you. That. That I love. I love that this information is finally coming out. It. It's always struck me as like, again, back to Chicago language. Yeah, duh. Like, since I'm a little kid, I'm like, of course there's fricking aliens.

[A]

It's like, here's how I would look at it. If disclosure was like, uphill battle, or let's just say a war. Right?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Then all these little wins, like the plan J and Luke put in place, the New York times article in 17, each hearing, each whistleblower who speaks up. If those are all little battles, enough of these key battles needed to be won before someone like Rubio and Clapper would participate in a film like this and break their silence with what they can lawfully.

[B]

And again, not trying to argue with you. We're just having a conversation. I agree with you, and that makes sense to me, but here's where I go like, okay, but wait. Those are the same forces, obviously different people in different times, but those are the same forces that shut it down before. So somebody in the line, who knows, or a collective had to say, okay, now we're going to let it happen. Because every other time it started to happen organically, they ran Counter Intel Pro. Again, I'm no spooks. I don't know the language. I'm using them. I've watched too many TV shows. The point is we've had X Files, we had movies in the 50s about, you know, people from outer space. My point is there were. There has been an organic fascination in the American culture for at least 100 years with the idea of aliens and alien incursion. And every other time it bubbled up to an organic level of interest. It was always somebody came in who was very skilled or collective, wider. We came in and pulled that back down.

[A]

Yeah, well, that's still happening. Don't, don't. I don't.

[B]

Okay, that's helpful information.

[A]

Yeah. I don't want to confuse the matter. So my film reveal the people in my film reveal the existence of a deeply hidden program called the Legacy Program that has gatekept and covered all this up for years and kept it from public, Congress and even sitting presidents. That is.

[B]

That's the way to land. Just that fact alone is mind blowing.

[A]

That's the way to land. And this isn't like 50 guys in a room. This is a significant operation that has had billions of dollars in funding. Multiple people have told me, what do they call it?

[B]

Off the book fund? What's the name they use? The Black. Black.

[A]

Well, it's just misappropriated funding.

[B]

Okay. Yeah, you talk about it in the full.

[A]

You know, billions of dollars a year can be supposed. Might be intended to go one place and it goes somewhere else. Yeah, Multiple people have told me, you know, in my research that the number overall is more like a trillion dollars since the 40s. So you're talking about a significant operation. A lot of people, their full time job.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And so Congress has been kept out of loop. The White House has been kept out of loop. And so people like Rubio for example, or Gillibrand, who, because of their positions on, you know, the Senate Armed Services Committee or the Senate Intelligence Committee, have been able to uncover what's been going on. They're chasing information just like the public, but they have the ability to get it right.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

And so I think where we have landed and what led to them wanting to Participate in the movie is. I think a lot of people who have uncovered the truth with the access they have have realized how real and heightened this race is. We are in with adversaries like China.

[B]

So that's. That's one hook.

[A]

So that's the weight off their shoulders is tell the world because we need the US to take it seriously.

[B]

Is it? Is it. If I'm reading what you're saying, is it? Yes. It's been clandestine and. Yes. But now it's reached a sort of tipping point where the. Where the arms race, for lack of a better word, of who might get access to certain technologies.

[A]

That's literally what it is.

[B]

Okay. So at least it satisfies the cynic in me to say, if there's any motivation to open it up, well, then that's the motivation. Does it make sense? No. Like now we have to open.

[A]

That is like, that is.

[B]

Okay, so great. So we're on the same page.

[A]

That's that thing that's like causing that tipping point.

[B]

Okay, good. Of that satisfies the cynic. And you see what I'm saying.

[A]

Oh, yeah. I mean, how can you win a technology race if, you know, as one of the guys in my film says, if 99% of the scientists in America don't even know it's real? You know, that's wild. You know, so you have to make it. You have to. You have to make the public understand the base facts. We, everyone I interview was like, you have to get academia and the scientific community to understand this is real.

[B]

Well, that's going to be difficult because they've just spent the last 75 plus years telling them that. Don't even mention, you know, even the rebranding of the word UFO to UAP is interesting. Again, the marketer in me goes, oh, that's interesting. Somebody made a decision somewhere to do so.

[A]

Jay Stratton. And I'm one of a few people who's read his memoir that's coming out early next year. It's amazing. He's the guy who made the change. He was running the UAP task force.

[B]

And so he made a conscious decision.

[A]

Yeah. Because he found it challenging to brief people about this in government that didn't know anything about it. When you're, when you start your conversation off with ufo.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Because of the stigma in our country. This.

[B]

The little green men joke.

[A]

Cultural ridiculous, you know, unjustified stigma led to the giggle factor. And so he was like, we've gotta, like, rebrand this. You've gotta talk about it in A more serious way. And on top of that, they were finding that, you know, UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object. But there is an immense amount of data, very credible data of UAP operating under the oceans. Yeah, like. Like a crazy amount. And so flying doesn't really cut it as a description. So UAP stands for Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. So it covers all mediums. So whether the activity is in the ocean, space, or sea, it checks all the boxes.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So it actually makes a lot of sense to change it.

[B]

Thank you for indulging me. I love this topic.

[A]

So me too.

[B]

I could talk about.

[A]

Bring it on. Yeah.

[B]

Okay, good. So I'm going to give it my own label here. I call it the superiority principle. Here's my superiority principle.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

And it's. It's similar to what I said before, but slightly different take on it. If there is an alien entity, whether they're dematerializing from another dimension or materializing from another dimension, whether they're living under the ocean and they've been here the whole time, I don't care. Let's just assume there's somebody. And even to call them somebody might be too broad a word. There's an entity that has the ability to foist a technology and make stuff happen, whether it's shutting down nuclear missiles in the middle of America, whether it's flying at blinding speeds. You talk about all these things in the film. Well, the logic in me goes, well, if, if, if they have this technology, well, they could get rid of us at any point that they want. So I tend to land on the, on the benign side of the equation. Again, we talked about good aliens, bad aliens, but the idea is my. Is like if they wanted to get rid of us, they would have gotten rid of us by now.

[A]

But here's my counter to that.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

Because it could go either way.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

But the thing that a number of the people I interviewed talked about with me and it changed my perspective, is that opinion that they haven't done away with us yet, so they must be good, doesn't factor in the variables of how we have evolved. Right. Like the analogy. There's a senior scientist in my film who's worked on a lot of classified UAP programs. He makes a great analogy. He says the ants in the tree line in your backyard could be there for generations. Your family doesn't think twice about them. The ants aren't a threat to you. You're not a threat to them. You do not care about the ants at all.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And that can go on for generations, until circumstances change. Like, what if you wake up one day and the ants have figured out how to get under your door and now they're in your house, they have gotten smarter. They have figured out how to get to a new place. That's a problem for you now. Like, circumstances changed very quickly in that analogy. Right. And so now you have. You're at a crossroad. What are you going to do? Are you going to sweep up the ants and bring them back to where they came from? Are you going to try to communicate with the ants? Say, hey, stay out there, or are you just going to kill the ants?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So there's all these, you know, you got to really think through, like, how circumstances could change and not just base someone's intention on what the circumstances have been.

[B]

Yeah, no, it's very rational. I still land on the. Look, if it's like I used to use this analogy, and I don't want to say the sport because I don't want to give anybody ideas, but, like, because I play concerts. Right. Security, by and large, is a wonderful idea, but it actually doesn't work with math. It works on the idea that force is there if needed. So you can have 10,000 people in a room. Well, if 10,000 people in a room want to rush in one direction, the 14 or 24 or 68 security guards, and the barrier between them is not going to stop them. So it's an impression. So my impression is if you have a superior entity and they want to disrupt or change the course of human life or extinguish it, they're going to do it whether you want them to or not. So I just don't get caught lost in the existential question. I'm not saying that just to give my opinion. I'm saying it because I want to know where you. Here's the question. Are you afraid?

[A]

No, I, I think, just like you said, I think that if a far superior and advanced species wanted to cause great harm to us, they could. Right?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

But I don't think that's a reason not to be prepared for. I think you got to stay, hope for the best, plan for the worst is the best way.

[B]

We're on the same page because it's, it's, it's like when you hear people talk about what if a comet is heading towards Earth? Do we have a plan? And I think even Elon Musk chimed in at some point about we should have a plan in case there's, you know, we, we don't want to extinguish life. Because a rock just happens to hit the Earth and it's going to cause devastation. Like the. Is it Volstock or something where they had that. You know what I'm talking about in. In Russia and the forest for like 10 miles is flat. And so. So lot. The. The logical thing should have been, in my estimation, we should have just sort of figured this out when we figured it out in the 20th century, pick your date or before and just got on with it. So the. In. I always approach it from my perspective, and again, somebody's going to get mad at what I'm saying, but it's just like, to me, it's awfully childish. And look, your film deals with really serious subjects with really serious people. So I don't mean to make light of it, but from my perspective, it's just like, duh, let's just get on with it.

[A]

Well, look, there's a lot of good things that can come out of leaning into this.

[B]

Please tell, because I'm waiting.

[A]

So, like, the. The scientific progress that could come out of this. You know, the senior scientists that I interviewed in my film, these are guys who have worked on classified UAP programs for the government, and they talk in detail about the technology that UAP are displaying.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Basically, like the things they can do are result of a technology, technological breakthrough that they have cracked. And if we crack it, we could solve the energy crisis. We could, you know, find ourselves with the ability to do interstellar travel. You know, we could expand our horizons. We. There's. Rubio made a great analogy in my interview with him.

[B]

That's.

[A]

It's not in the film, but I'll just tell you what he said. Maybe I'll put it on the Internet one day. He says when he thinks about what's possible here in terms of technological advancements, he thinks about the space race. It was a single mission, get to the moon, but off the back of it, something like 35,000 inventions came about that were useful in everyday life. There's a laundry list of these things, things that people take for granted now, where it's like, where'd that come from? Oh, off the back of the space race. Right. And so he says, who knows what will come out of this, you know?

[B]

Well, you know, in. In 2001, the great Kubrick film, of course, the, you know, the. The through line is that, you know, whatever the aliens drop or whoever drops it helps man evolve quicker. Do you have any landing on or any sense of that? They've been seeding technology all along. And that maybe they're just feeding us like you feed a child. You don't give them a toy they can't play with.

[A]

Yeah, maybe. I mean, something I didn't get into in the film just simply to keep it at a reasonable runtime, but it was fascinating was that some of the craft of non human origin that had been recovered were crashes like we talk about. There's this crash retrieval program. But some of them were almost like gifts. They were found outside military bases in perfect condition.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And, you know, when multiple intelligence officials told me about some of these events, it's hard not to get your imagination going on what the intention could be there.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Is it is one of the senior scientists in the film says, you know, is that something that's only happening here? Or are the gifts placed at average hill nations and it's survival the fittest. Is it. Is it a giant IQ test? Like, what is.

[B]

Who's the. Graham. Graham Hancock, maybe? Graham Hancock, right. He's.

[A]

Well, no, the guy who says in my film is Hal Puthoff.

[B]

No, no, I'm saying I'm sure you've seen Grant Hancock's work because, you know, and Sitchin talks about in his books this idea that, you know, they've been here all along and they're almost like, for lack of a better analogy, parents to a child, kind of giving us stuff along the way to kind of tweak our progress technologically and maybe even socially. Hence, you know, all the appearance of all these megaliths all over the world with the same architectural sort of foundations. People taking vast leaps. Technological leaps.

[A]

Yeah, maybe even.

[B]

I was reading recently, it was sort of interesting. And I'm not asking you to subscribe. This is just theoretical. The idea that, you know, all of a sudden Egypt makes this huge technological leap during the time of the pharaohs. But the other thing that people don't realize is at some point that technology went out of their system. That whatever happened happened for a particular period of time. And then they lost the ability to use those technologies. If you subscribe. That they gained a technology, that there's a. There's a. There's a. There's evidence of no technology. Technology. And then people grappling with the loss of ab to marshal the technology and kind of stitching together what they can. Like whoever they had there that knew how to run stuff, they lost those people or they lost their tradition or war wiped out certain information. And so that. Actually Egyptian culture went like this in those times because they lost the ability to harness whatever they'd harness. Now, maybe it was just organic. They discovered how to make a battery or whatever. It's certainly conceivable. Anyway. Yeah, no, it's fascinating if you can remember. Sorry to put you on the spot, but there's this moment where a gentleman's talking. He's talking about the four hypothesis. Can you just. Do you remember talking about.

[A]

It's like, oh, Congressman Gallagher.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

In the big open room. He's in the middle.

[B]

Yeah. But it's something about. We have four hypotheses, and so the fourth hypothesis is all of the above. So it's really three.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. So Congressman Gallagher, who is no longer in Congress, actually he left and he was a young rock star of Congress. When I interviewed him, he was actually the chair of the House Intelligence Committee on China and a rising star in government, but he decided to leave for family reasons. He makes a point that in his opinion, there's four explanations. Either one, a foreign adversary has leapfrogged us technologically by many, many years. And if so, they not only leapfrogged us by many years, but they did it a long time ago, you know, and that would be the greatest intelligence failure in, you know, human history. Number two, there is a rogue group within the United States government military intelligence community that is using taxpayers money and has basically cracked technology in ways that seems like science fiction to the average person. And they've kept it to themselves. And we don't know what their intentions are, but they're using it for their own benefit and it's being funded by taxpayers money.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

Also would be biggest intelligence failure in human history. Or C, we're dealing with life from elsewhere. And he says, whether that's extraterrestrial or interdimensional or they've been here all along. And then four, he says, or everything.

[B]

All of the above.

[A]

All of the above.

[B]

Okay, so the reason for the setup is. Is what's your hunch?

[A]

I, I think that based on what everyone I interviewed says and goes on the record saying, like I haven't told officials in film saying, putting the rep on the line saying they've seen non human beings with their own eyes, they've seen craft with their own eyes. So my takeaway is 100% there is non human intelligent life here. They are operating here, and they have been operating here a long time now. I do think that some of what we see is made by our secret program, and some of what we see is made by adversary secret programs. And then some of it is not human intelligent life.

[B]

And I think that I hadn't considered. But that makes a lot of sense.

[A]

I think it's a complicated landscape.

[B]

Yeah. Because sometimes I've seen where people are talking about things they've seen outside of Area 51 that they initially ascribe to alien technology, and then seven years later, here comes the US government rolling out some new plane or so. There does make a certain sense.

[A]

But that said, one of the really interesting moments in the film is when I interviewed General Jim Clapper, who was the head of Air Force Intelligence. He was also the Director of National Intelligence and the head of a lot of other agencies. Very, very credible guy. His resume reads like a Marvel superhero character.

[B]

He's a spook.

[A]

Spook.

[B]

Is that a fair estimate? In music, we say he's a musician. Musician.

[A]

There you go. And. And when I interviewed him, he was in his 80s, and he had never spoken publicly about this topic, but he felt it was important to participate in the film and share what he lawfully could. And one of the significant things he says is that UAP activity over our sensitive military bases and training sites where. Where we train our pilots is in fact real. And he says, most notably Area 51. So he goes on the record saying that UAP activity over Area 51 is in fact real. And I thought it was a really key moment in the film because globally, I would say UFO activity, UAP activity over Area 51, is considered the epitome of conspiracy. Right. Largely people think that's bs, it's not real. And so here was this guy who ran Air Force Intelligence and was in the senior leadership for the air force for 32, 2, 33 years, saying, no, that's real, and said it super serious. It's a really powerful moment. The film, as you watch it, after he says it, he kind of sits there and thought for a second like, yeah, I just. I just said it. Yeah. And he also, in that same moment, goes on the record saying that when he was running Air Force intelligence in the 90s, the Air Force did in fact have a program to investigate uap, which is really significant because the Air Force consistently says they haven't had a program to investigate UHP since Project Blue Book.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Wow.

[B]

Have you. I'm sure you've been asked this 20 times, but have you ever encountered any UFO phenomenon yourself?

[A]

I have only seen one thing with my own eyes, and it was not in some big dramatic experience.

[B]

I was.

[A]

I told this story on Joe Rogan recently. I was out at Ojai, just a weekend getaway. Beautiful, dark skies and we were laying out on a golf course at night, just looking up at the stars, and I saw what looked like a satellite moving slow. I was convinced it was a satellite, just a normal satellite. And then this thing just rocketed off. And satellites don't do that.

[B]

What you call in your film instantaneous acceleration.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

The reason I bring it up is because I have a similar experience. The Pumpkins were playing New Orleans somewhere around 1994, and one of the band members called said, you got to come to my room. And we were looking out over the water. I guess it's the bay or Gulf of Mexico. And we watched for at least 20 to 25 minutes. Something that was throwing off a lot of color, looked about a mile out into the water, and it would sit there and just kind of do. You know, I've seen similar footage where it's like. It looks like. It's almost like a. It's hard to explain. You've seen it? Yeah. And. And then this thing would take off like a rocket, like moving at speeds that were. I mean, it was just like. Like, you know, to illustrate. It was like you'd be watching it go like this, and you'd see it start to accelerate, and it would just go. But what it made it interesting is it would return at a similar speed to the exact spot. And it did over and over again. And we watched for over 20 minutes. Wow.

[A]

In 1990.

[B]

To where it became routine, where it was like, it didn't do anything but that. But the entire time, you're like, what am I watching? Of course I want to remember this. And over and over again, this. That acceleration. Boom, come back. Boom. Take off. It would shot up, come back down, and just went on.

[A]

It's crazy.

[B]

So I was like, okay, at least have seen instantaneous acceleration. Who knows what it was. A uap, to use your parlance.

[A]

By the way. There's a lot of activity in that.

[B]

Part of the world. Really?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Any. Any supposition on why?

[A]

No, no.

[B]

They like shrimp. Okay, we're almost done. Thank you. Tell me if I'm saying this wrong, because I want you to say it where you're comfortable. If. If there was a suppressing force for over 70 years, they knew something, and they suppressed that information. And to your point, they actively went out and told people to shut up. They threatened people, and there's intimations that they killed people who was doing the suppressing.

[A]

So in my film, a number of the intelligence officials I interview go on the record saying that the Legacy program consists of elements of the CIA, the Air Force, the Department of Energy and major defense contractors. Now, to be clear, it doesn't mean these entire entities are in on this. It just means elements of these different groups are in on it.

[B]

But even like. Sorry to interrupt, but it's like, who makes the call, Bob, we want you in the pro. You know, I'm saying, like, I mean, it can't be. If it was just one wizard behind the curtain, we could kind of put. But there's obviously been multiple wizards behind this curtain.

[A]

So some of the intelligent officials in the film say they break down the role each of these organizations play in this, and they describe the CIA as the quarterback of it, you know, operational control.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And then they specifically say someone with a certain job title at that agency.

[B]

Oversees this, but basically above the presidents, because they're not telling the presidents what's happening. Right. That's the general.

[A]

So, you know, Rubio breaks down in the film how even presidents are on a need to know basis about this. They might be told some base details or told it's going to go in this direction, but, you know, they're just this. They're viewed as temporary.

[B]

Does that. It blows my mind. Maybe I'm, you know, I grew up.

[A]

Oh, yeah.

[B]

It was shocking to hear.

[A]

I mean, I interviewed. I was the one doing all the interviews. I'm sitting this close to Rubio saying this. It's extraordinary.

[B]

It's kind of. I guess I find in a way more frightening than the idea of aliens is this idea that there is somebody, we don't know who they are or some people, a group that are making decisions that we have no say in this.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And that at some point, following the lead of the thing that at some point 80 years ago or before they got in the room and said we have to do. Not only do we have to do something that on paper seems illegal. Right. We're going to work around the Congress, you know, constitutional authority. If the president's the commander in chief and the president doesn't know.

[A]

Well, one, you know, I've had a lot of conversations obviously, about this, separate to what's on camera in the film. But there's always the possibility that a president put this in motion, you know, that a president in the 40s said.

[B]

So maybe Eisenhower turned to somebody and said, you got to do this. And, oh, by the way, the next guy or the next girl can't know.

[A]

Well, if there's a presidential otter, it just stays on the books. So we might uncover that a president puts this in motion in the 40s. And everyone involved in this has just been doing their job.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And there is no, there is no.

[B]

Oh, so it's not technically illegal.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. It's actually highly unlikely that it's illegal. It's highly likely.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

That they checked all the boxes legally to do this. The other thing to remember, and I think it's important, anytime we talk about this, this, this operation known as the Legacy program, I do not think these people are villains, just to be clear. Like, I think these are people that were put in a very unique situation where there's no playbook and they were told, hey, it's in the best interest of the nation to go about things this way.

[B]

So, so now what?

[A]

I think we've gotten to a place where it's ramped out of control and where there needs to be a course correction.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And I think what's happening now is very real high level conversations about how do we get these people to come clean and say what they have learned. So, and, and, and to do that you really gotta give whether it's. I don't know if the correct word.

[B]

Is immunity, amnesty or immunity.

[A]

They're technically different. Right. But, you know, some level of forgiveness and put the past in the past for the greater, the interest of the greater good.

[B]

I'm asking you to speculate, but what do you think if you're, if you think you're on the good side of the, the equation here? It's, it is legal. I've been drafted in this program. I can't tell my wife, I can't tell my kids. I can't talk about this. What do you think those people are telling themselves that. What's their inner rationalization? That they're the good guy or the good girl in this?

[A]

I mean, I think it's the same logic that any intelligence or military official tells themselves, like if you sign up to join the army and you get sent to war, you don't get to weigh in on whether we should be at war.

[B]

It's duty, and if it's good for.

[A]

America, you committed to a service. Right. So I think that that is what's been going on. I do think that a lot of those people who are involved feel like these fundamental truths they're aware of, like we're not alone in the universe, should be known by other people. And I think that's why you see, you read in the newspaper that whistleblowers are going and talking to senior senators in classified settings and telling them what they know. I personally have learned of a lot of very high level whistleblowers who have gone and had private conversations with certain specific senior leadership that, you know, never get in the press. Like it's a real situation that's playing out.

[B]

Okay. Yeah. Two more things here. Rightly so. Your film deals with it from a pragmatic organizational government, you know, let's call it the infrastructure of authority. And the, and the, and the gravitas of, you know, this is the US government and we're adversarial things and all this. But do you believe personally or even professionally is not the right word? Just as somebody who's put all this together into one cogent package, do you believe that the spiritual part of the equation needs to be considered? And when I'm. What I mean by that is not how does this affect my view of Jesus? Does the consideration that we might be dealing with something more akin. And you do briefly touched on that in the film. I don't want to make it as simple as angels or demons, but that our perception of the supernatural, there might be an overlay here that's a far broader question that actually does get to the heart of the military question, which is trying to decide sort of like the order of the cosmos. Does that make sense? A very broad question.

[A]

No. Yeah.

[B]

Yeah. Okay, good.

[A]

I do think that a lot that has been sort of like couched as, or like put in a box as like supernatural or, or paranormal. I think a lot of that is of the same as this.

[B]

Right.

[A]

All one of the same.

[B]

It does kind of seem to explain stuff.

[A]

Yeah. And then which essentially when I say all the same, I mean like life from elsewhere, you know, just life that we haven't understood yet. Right. Whether that means interdimensional extraterrestrial. Been here all along, you know, crypto terrestrial, they call it. There's a lot of different options. And in terms of religion, look, it's hard, it's hard to go down this road and not find similarities between UAP events and activity and certain things that are in the Bible. Right. So maybe, maybe at some point things that are written about the Bible were actually just, you know, experiences with life from elsewhere.

[B]

I can never say it.

[A]

Right.

[B]

It's the Mahabharata or whatever. It's the, it's. It's like an Indian spiritual text. There's talk about flying beings in there. There's of course, Zeke's wheel and the pillar of fire. And so it's interesting to postulate. Okay. Last thing. It's a personal thing. I was in a relationship with somebody back in the day. And they'd been a Russian national but had immigrated and at some point some family had come over from what was the former Soviet Union. And I found myself sitting across from a gentleman who'd been a rear admiral in the Russian navy, didn't speak a word of English. And so I'm, you know, I'm elbowing my, my partner at the time saying, will you please ask about aliens?

[A]

Awesome.

[B]

And, and I got the, you know, like, don't put him on the spot. And I was like, I gotta ask. I mean, the guy's sitting across from me and this would have been over over 20 years ago. And, and so finally the question is asked in Russian. And so, you know, my first reception of what the gentleman is saying is just his demeanor. And so, da, da, da, da. And he goes, and I'm thinking, I'm going to get this. Well, you know, we don't know. And no, what he said is, oh yeah, every day he goes, it's so common, our encounters with off world technology or whatever. He goes, we have to have codes and things, otherwise we're going to blow each other up. He goes, it's so normal, it's not even a big deal. So not to over explain it, but his demeanor was so relaxed. And I didn't know what he was saying that when I put his demeanor together with what he actually said, translated, I was like, like, wow, that was the first time I was like, okay, I'm not crazy because the way I feel, which is, it's obvious, but here was somebody who deals with it on a very high governmental level.

[A]

So the experience you experienced was, was what it was like for me going down this rabbit hole.

[B]

That's kind of why I brought it up.

[A]

I have 34 people in the film, but I also spoke to dozens of other people who weren't comfortable going on camera for one reason or another. Some people actually felt like they told me that their lives would be in jeopardy if it did. But I had so many sources that are extremely credible people. You look at these people's resumes and you're just like, it's like a movie character. It's insane, right? Like one high level position after another and they're telling you these extraordinary things and it lines up with what every other credible person you're talking to is telling you privately, you know, and then some of them share it publicly. There's clearly a there there. It's a real situation.

[B]

Okay, well next time we talk age of disclosure 2.

[A]

Let's see what happens.

[B]

Thank you so much.

[A]

Thanks, man. I appreciate it.

[B]

Thank you.

[A]

You too. It was awesome.