Video wird geladen...
Video konnte nicht geladen werden
๐ ๐๐จ๐จ๐ค๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ซ ๐ง๐จ๐ง-๐ฌ๐ญ๐จ๐ฉ, ๐ข๐ง๐๐ข๐ง๐ข๐ญ๐ ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ญ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก๐จ๐ฎ๐ญ ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ซ๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ? Look no further! ๐ผ Enter ๐๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐๐ฆ๐๐จ๐จ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ซ. You might know it as an auto-refill feeder built for Bambu Lab printers. But that's just the beginning... ๐ ๐ It also ๐ฐ๐จ๐ซ๐ค๐ฌ ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ฉ๐ฉ๐๐ซ-๐๐๐ฌ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ฌ. (You're welcome.) โ Run 2 spools... show more
13,470 Aufrufe โข vor 3 Monaten โขvia X (Twitter)
0 Kommentare
Keine Kommentare verfรผgbar
Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt
รhnliche Videos
![Just in $AMD Anush "Speed is the moat"|ROCm๐๏ธ In the race to define the future of AI, what's the one advantage that truly lasts? It's not proprietary tech, argues Anush Elangovan Elangovan, VP of AI Software at AMD , but the sustainable speed of innovation. He explains why AMD is rejecting the "walled garden" model for its open source ROCm stack, betting that an open community flywheel is the key to victory. Listen to understand how this open strategy is designed to out-innovate closed systems by empowering developers to solve everything from frontier-model challenges to the mundane, everyday problems that define the "last mile" of AI. AMD ROCm Software: Part 1 Transcript [00:00:00] Andrew Zigler: Joining me is Anush Elangovan, VP of AI software at AMD. And when people talk about AI compute, the conversation often stops at hardware specs, but it's more than just physical chips that win the game. It's also the software ecosystems supporting them. [00:00:18] Andrew Zigler: The prevailing strategy in the industry has been to build something like a walled garden. You know, something closed, proprietary locks, developers in. But AMD is betting on an entirely different play, open source acceleration, and with rock, their open source AI software stack. AMD is building not just hardware parity, but an innovation flywheel that's powered by the community with interoperability and the freedom to scale without all of that pesky lockin. [00:00:48] Andrew Zigler: And in this world, speed is your moat and how fast you can innovate while your platform remains open, flexible, and standardize across all of its applications. That's what we're gonna explore [00:01:00] today. So Anush, I'm really excited to have you here. Welcome to Dev Interrupted. [00:01:04] Anush Elangovan: Thanks for having me. Uh, super excited to chat about it. [00:01:07] Andrew Zigler: Amazing. Well, let's go ahead and dive right in with kind of what I laid it out with in the beginning, the idea of the moat and it being about speed. I wanna unpack that a bit because that came from you when you and I first spoke. And I, and I want to know, you know, how do you define speed inside of AMD beyond just things like hardware, benchmarks. [00:01:27] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So when we typically talk about speed, everyone's like, Hey, hardware benchmark specs, right? Like, uh, memory bandwidth or, or flops. And that is one important part of it, uh, AMD does very well. With that, we do have, a, a very good history of executing on that axis. [00:01:47] Anush Elangovan: But when I say speed is the moat, it is about, uh, how we prepare, how we build the muscle to run the race for a long time and run it fast. And it is [00:02:00] not about a single point in time that you've, you've beat some you know, benchmark and, and you declare victory. It's about building the ability to consistently develop and deliver. [00:02:13] Anush Elangovan: Both hardware and software innovation at scale and do it fast, right? Like, you know, we we're increasingly getting to a point where models come out and they're, uh, you know, a year or two ago it was like, Hey, they work on AMD on day zero, which is great, but now they are performing on AMD the day it releases, right? [00:02:32] Anush Elangovan: So, what does it take to Prefetch where the industry is going? Be prepared to intercept. At that point is what you know, I, I refer to as you know, the, the speed factor in, in creating this mode, right? And the mode is just shed all things that hold you back and run as fast as you can. [00:02:53] Anush Elangovan: Uh, because the pace of innovation that is, uh, being seen in, in AI [00:03:00] industries is just. Amazing. Right? And it's like, it's transformational at at how you generate electricity. It's transformational as at how you build data centers. It's transformational at how you deploy compute, networking. It's transformational at what kind of use cases you, you know, uh, use AI for. [00:03:17] Anush Elangovan: Uh, and for that, you need to be prepared to, see what comes tomorrow and be prepared to run the race tomorrow. [00:03:23] Andrew Zigler: Yeah, it's a really great perspective because it highlights that it's not just like a checkpoint that you run through. I like how you called out, like it's not just hitting that benchmark or being the best in class at that moment, in that snapshot, it's about having a. The throughput and about having that dedication to the idea and continuing to deliver on it. [00:03:43] Andrew Zigler: It's not just crossing the threshold, but it's also being the engine. And that's what, that's what protects a business. That is the moat, because the moat is that innovation layer, the faster and more, uh, future forward. That you can work and think, [00:04:00] you know, the better. Uh, we, we talk a lot about like future forward work styles. [00:04:04] Andrew Zigler: Like what are the things I could be doing right now today that are gonna be like, way more useful tomorrow? Let, let's abandon those, workflows that are older and that kind of like, that translates into. An advantage when you work that way. You know, what kind of things have you learned working with, uh, like across all spectrums of people who would use ROCm, right? [00:04:23] Andrew Zigler: You have like the developers, but then you also have the enterprises and you have this large span of adoptees, right? So what is the, what does that look like that you learn? [00:04:32] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, so, so the way I look at it is there are gonna be pockets of different, uh, you know, cadences, right? Like, so people who are deploying in enterprises, for example, right? The validation and how long it takes for them to deploy an LLM that's secure. It's, with guardrails, et cetera, maybe longer. [00:04:52] Anush Elangovan: but you still have to go through the process and you have to be prepared to like, walk that walk to deploy an enterprises. That doesn't mean it's [00:05:00] not fast, that's as fast as you can do for that industry, right? And if you are deploying AI in healthcare, right, it's, it's got its own, uh, cycle. [00:05:07] Anush Elangovan: but in each one of these, you want to see how, like, go down to the essence of what is it that you actually have to do. And, you know, I, I, I like how you framed it. It's like it's, you shed your prior assumptions of how things are done, right. And, and you kind of build up from a, uh, first principles, uh, approach to say, this is how I could use AI to unlock, whatever I'm doing. [00:05:33] Anush Elangovan: And, and, some of it, you know, it's good to really step back and look at. Just question every part of it, right? Like right now you're getting chat GPT and, Gemini competing for like, math, olympiads and, and, uh, college, uh, reasoning, uh, tests. Right? And, and those are like that, that is amazing and increasingly like complex tasks that they're trying to do. [00:05:58] Anush Elangovan: But there may also be like. [00:06:00] More mundane things that AI could, could get applied to. Right? And, and so when we think about shedding old ways, you wanna shed it not just in like the tip of the spear. It's like, you know, I'm gonna see what's the frontier model. It's also, it could be something as simple as. [00:06:18] Anush Elangovan: How do you choose a, a movie, uh, you know, like a recommendation system, right? Or, or, uh, an automated, uh, flight, uh, rebooking system. So the moment, you know, your flight is late, uh, right now it's a notification, right? It's like, oh, you got a text message saying your flight's late. And I got that like three times this week. [00:06:38] Anush Elangovan: But anyway, uh, and, and, and, and, I was just like, okay, so if I were to rethink this. All this MCPs that we have that should be hooked up into an MCP that says, your flight's delayed. Here are your options. If you want, you know, these are the paid options. Yeah. Here are the free options. This will get you back into your you know, Toronto airport [00:07:00] tonight. [00:07:00] Anush Elangovan: Or if you stay, here's a hotel plus this, plus this, plus. It's just like, go ahead is all I should say. Versus now I'm like, okay, can someone, you know, can I call a travel agent? Can I do this? Can I go online and log into And you know, so we gotta fundamentally rethink even those like small, nuances of, things that we do that can be automated out and AI is really, really good at doing something like this, right? Maybe I just explained an AI startup idea right now. Somebody should just start that. [00:07:29] Andrew Zigler: I think you did. Yeah, you definitely did. Someone, one of our listeners is definitely going to lift that off of you. I, I, I, you know, I hate being on the receiving end of those. You feel a little helpless and then you have to like, follow the whole flow. So I know what you mean. Like I, I like how you called out that the build and this like. [00:07:45] Andrew Zigler: Where speed is your moat and the innovation layer is protecting you, is what makes you better than your competitors. How you scale that and you bring that to market. So by understanding the problems that you're solving, uh, throwing away those older assumptions, but also [00:08:00] recognizing that like. We're building every single day, new things and new ways of using stuff that we're still figuring out the implications of. [00:08:08] Andrew Zigler: And so when you have a lot of velocity and you're introducing a lot of new ideas, and maybe you have that workflow now that automatically rebook your flight off of your late flight text message, and uh, I know I would certainly use it, but you know, what kind of philosophies guide the way that y'all think about building this ecosystem to manage that stability while letting folks. [00:08:29] Andrew Zigler: Play with the speed and the assumptions and the airplane re bookings. [00:08:34] Anush Elangovan: so, so I think, you know, we need to peel one layer down, right? and the philosophy is, Hey, we, we just discovered electricity, right? And you know what we're gonna do? We are gonna make motors, uh, or dynamos, right? Like engines. Uh, sure. We don't know if it's gonna be a Ferrari that you're gonna make, or it's a a a a dump truck. [00:08:57] Anush Elangovan: That's good for doing this. But let's [00:09:00] let, which is also required, right? You need a dump truck. You need a garbage truck. And, [00:09:04] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. You need the [00:09:04] Anush Elangovan: course you need, uh, a Ferrari for a midlife crisis, right? So, [00:09:09] Andrew Zigler: precisely. [00:09:10] Anush Elangovan: But, but my, uh, point is what do we build next? And, uh, and this is what I meant by like, okay, let's, let's take those baby steps to build the. [00:09:20] Anush Elangovan: Infrastructure that's required that we know we'll have to use, right? So, so if I just discovered electricity, okay, great. Now one, how do I save this electricity and how do I use it? So there's battery technology, so you need to do something like that, right? Like so. But then you also want to make it into an actionable thing. [00:09:37] Anush Elangovan: You want to make it for like automobiles, or you wanna use it for, you know, powering, uh, entire cities. So it is that transformational. So, uh, AI is that transformational. So, if you distill down, it'll, it'll come down to how do we think about, what we can do with this this fundamental technology that, We may not be aware of what it [00:10:00] is gonna unlock next, but at least you know the next step is clear, right? It's like a dense fog, you know, it's gonna be like, it, it's the right path. You see the light, but it's kind of like out there and, and the steps you're taking are concrete and you're like, okay, this is good. [00:10:16] Anush Elangovan: I, this is better than where I was or where we were. So we are moving forward. So you can build with the. Intuition from what you see in the short term and a tactical view, but towards what you think the future is gonna be. [00:10:28] Andrew Zigler: Right. You almost like we're all in this like fog of war, right? And like you said, you're reaching out and you're trying to step through it. You could think of it too, as like you're in the dark and your hands are up in front of you and you know that. You're, you're not gonna run your face into a wall because your hands are out in front of you, but you're not gonna maybe do much better than that. [00:10:45] Andrew Zigler: So that's kind of like, I think the eco, the, the industry, the world that we find ourselves in, uh, and we all have to, then this becomes the power of an ecosystem, of a group of people working together to create that layer of, [00:11:00] uh, of establishing the [00:11:01] Anush Elangovan: exactly. And I, I, I just, instead of, you know, saying fog of war I describe it as like, you're in this. Beautiful valley with like a morning, uh, fog that's in. You can smell the flowers. You, you hear the birds. You are like, okay, it's, we are in like, uh, utopian paradise and yes, I just need to like, continue the walk, right? [00:11:24] Anush Elangovan: and then move forward with that, conviction that you're in the right spot. [00:11:27] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. So let's talk about that ecosystem world. This nice, I love how you describe it, this grassy side of a hill in the morning that's covered in some mist and maybe we can't see 30 feet in one direction, but it sure is a beautiful hill and it smells nice. And so we're all here. And why is, in that world, why is. [00:11:44] Andrew Zigler: You know, open source, their strategic advantage that y'all are going for in the AI hardware market. And, and then how does like ROCm turn that into wins for people within that ecosystem? [00:11:56] Anush Elangovan: you know, the, the way we look at it is this, is kind of like how I view [00:12:00] AI and the ecosystem, right? But, but it is for everyone to enjoy. Uh, and so we do want to make sure that. You know, it is, uh, beneficial for everyone. [00:12:09] Anush Elangovan: The ecosystem can come in and, and innovate. It's an open innovation engine. and uh, it is very different from, you know, having a walled garden with, Hey, only I know how to do this and I'm gonna do it and throw it over the fence and you can use it or keep walking, right? So we'd like to be good citizens that way, but also. [00:12:30] Anush Elangovan: Uh, it is self-fulfilling in a way, right? Like it, the, the pace at which we innovate with open source is unmatched. Like, you know, our serving engines are like VLLM and, and sg l. Those things, uh, those frameworks are like super, super aggressive in terms of how fast they come out with features and how fast they can you know, get performant models out. [00:12:52] Anush Elangovan: And that compared with what, uh, you'd get from, you know, the likes of like T-R-T-L-L-M or something is always lagging, right? Because you [00:13:00] just can't keep up with you know, 200 commits a week just on one particular model to get that model really performant [00:13:06] Andrew Zigler: And, and, and in that world where, you know, everyone can enjoy the winds of this, what kind of customer stories or innovation stories have really stood out to you and excite you about building and creating this place for developers? [00:13:19] Anush Elangovan: Yeah. So I think the parts that are super exciting for me are when when we get to see a customer that is first skeptical. Then they start a little like, okay, fine, we'll give you a chance. Uh, we do a simple, uh, POC and then they're like, huh, this seems to work. Yeah, we told you it works. [00:13:42] Anush Elangovan: You don't have to change one line of code. Really? Yes, no need to change one line of code. Okay, let's try a production workload. So then they try it. Oh, you're more performant than the competition. Yes. We're more performant than, than the competition. So how much does it cost? And we're like, oh, it's your TCO is better with, uh, [00:14:00] AMD. [00:14:00] Anush Elangovan: So again, they're like, wow, okay, good. So now how do we deploy at scale? And then we go deploy it at scale. And when they give a thumbs up on that and they say, this is good, right? That's when you know, you, you see it go full circle from like, oh, we, we've never heard about AMD to like actually deploy to tens of thousands of GPUs In the order of a few months, right? It, it, it really is fascinating to see and very exciting and invigorating to [00:14:28] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. At like a great exposure to a lot of interesting problems. And, and then people using the infrastructure, the, the technology available to solve those problems. Really specific problems by the way, that's often why they're bringing their data and AI to it, uh, is because it is really specific and important for them. [00:14:45] Andrew Zigler: And there's a, a lot I think that other engineering orgs can learn and even emulate from AMD's success and, and having this open source ecosystem and it causing this acceleration within. You [00:15:00] know, uh, customers and enterprises that use and adopt the tools and, and, and that creates an advantage. And that goes back to why we're talking and like the real thesis of our conversation today. [00:15:10] Andrew Zigler: So how do you think engineering leaders that are listening to this and obviously tapping into this great success AMD has from an open source flywheel, how do you think other, other folks building in the same space can foster that open, first, that open source oriented culture in order to, you know, accelerate their innovation goals? [00:15:29] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So the startup that um, was acquired by AMD we, we built, I mean, we started off doing iot stuff and you know, smart ring and all that, right? But in the, the end of like, uh, and not the end, the last six years of the company was building ML compilers. [00:15:47] Anush Elangovan: And ml, ML compilers are like super, uh, complicated, sophisticated, advanced algorithms, dah, dah, dah. but it was all open source, right? So our VCs were like, wait, what do you mean your core [00:16:00] IP is open source? And um, the speed is the moat applied even then, right? It was just like, yes, if you have an idea that. [00:16:08] Anush Elangovan: Because someone saw this idea that you are, they're gonna be able to catch up, then you probably have the wrong idea anyway. But if they are, you know, you execute and they're gonna catch up, that you should assume they're gonna catch up. Right? So you gotta move forward. So keeping it open source is super important. [00:16:25] Anush Elangovan: But also to your question on like, you know, the learnings from an AMD standpoint, right? If there are, hard problems, I'd say dig in and work through it, right? Like there's no way but through it, right? That should be the simple mentality. And more, uh, frequently than not. you'll see that you'll just make it through in a, in, in good form. [00:16:52] Anush Elangovan: But if you doubt it and you're like, oh, I don't know if I should commit, if I'm, I, you know, what should just commit to do the right thing [00:17:00] every step, right? Every step, and just keep taking one step in front of the other. And in no time you'll see that you'll be running. Right. And, and yes, the first few steps will be like, yeah, everyone's complaining about your software quality. [00:17:15] Anush Elangovan: Everyone's complaining about this and that, and it doesn't work. And, and a few steps in, you know, you get, you get the hang of all the complaints that are coming in. You get the feedback loop. You're like, okay, what, what are you prioritizing again? One step in front of the other, right? You just keep knocking that out and then you get to a point where you're, it just becomes second nature, right? To do the, to do the right thing. And, and then yes, if someone gives you two options, you'll be like, fine. This is, uh, you know, there's always the resource trade off. There's always a human capital trade off, but what's the right thing to do? of course, I, I'm pragmatic about what we choose, but, but if the right thing for your long-term success is dig in, go first, principles, make it [00:18:00] happen. [00:18:00] Anush Elangovan: Well. Then just go for that. There's, there is no shortcut to [00:18:04] Andrew Zigler: acknowledging, you know, how it aligns with your mission, your core company goals, and what you're looking to achieve. And, and I, I love how you rightfully called out that in the open source world and you know, you have your technology that you've built, what you think is your moat upon, right? [00:18:22] Andrew Zigler: It's your code and, and to open source that, or to just make it where anyone could peer in is, you know. Scary in one regard, but two, it just kind of feels like you're handing away your throne room in some kind of sense, a very direct feeling sense. But the ultimately, you were really right to call out, and this is something I think about all the time, that the real power there is still the speed This the speed. [00:18:42] Andrew Zigler: That was the moat at the beginning of our conversation. It's the speed in combination with your. Very specific domain understanding of what you're building and what you're creating, and your new role as the steward of that world and how people plug into it, which [00:19:00] has frankly, a lot more influence and power than lording over a closed. [00:19:04] Andrew Zigler: You know, repository or an ecosystem, and like you said, like throwing things over the wall. Sure. There, there might be people always on the other side of that wall, but you're not gonna have a great connection with them. You're not gonna be able to really clearly understand them. I, I like your metaphor of the side of the field of the mountain a lot more. [00:19:23] Andrew Zigler: But, but in the, in this world, you know, where. That speed is, is the power and, and open source is just one way that you can harness that speed to get really far ahead and to innovate. , There's other parts of this equation that you can be experimenting with too, and I'd love to pick your brain about them as a software leader and, and, and one of them is about looking forward and kind of understanding that future that we're all building towards and beyond today's models and hardware. [00:19:48] Andrew Zigler: You know, what do you see as the next major bottleneck or opportunity in the AI compute space? As, as you know, enterprises and folks start to get a little more mature about what's available to [00:20:00] them. [00:20:00] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, I think, the bottleneck and opportunity is, uh, what I'd call, call walking the last mile of ai. Right. Uh, and like I I, I gave you an example, uh, previously, but, but it's similar to that. It's like there are cases where Humans have so many, uh, things to do in your day. You know, like the, if we sit down and actually had a customer focus like, okay, these customers lives, I'm gonna save four hours of this customer's life. And if you actually sit down and look at all of that, it'll be. Easily automatable, easily you know, uh, applicable, uh, for ai, right? [00:20:39] Anush Elangovan: Like, but then making it happen is gonna take a little bit, right? It's like maybe it's, uh, paying your utility bill, right? Or something like that, right? Or, or, your healthcare explanation of benefits. Uh, like, I'm sure you get an explanation of benefits, and I'm like, I, I don't even know what that thing is. [00:20:55] Anush Elangovan: It's just like EOB and like. [00:20:57] Andrew Zigler: it's a big, a big old PDF. Yeah, [00:21:00] exactly. [00:21:01] Anush Elangovan: Like, like, I'm like great straight to the, uh, shredder, right? And but that could be, you know, automated with the ai, right? It, it, it'd be like, Hey, the summary of this thing is you went and visited this day. Everything is okay. Everything is paid for, so don't worry, it's not a bill. [00:21:17] Anush Elangovan: That again, the same, uh, thing, but the sense of what that information overload is could be. Digested by ai, uh, accumulated over time and retrieved when you need it. Like, I don't, I actually don't even need to know this EOB right now, unless of course, whenever I need to know it, that maybe, you know, like for some benefits I need to figure out what do, what did I do over the past year and how do I apply it? Source:](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1994972575768727743/amplify_video_thumb/1994972220930621440/img/_5CCZJyz89oDfqQJ.jpg)
![The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason โจ๐พSaaStr.Aiโจ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't wantโwho who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropicโs and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We needโeveryone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big eventโthey've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may becomeโso the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any roleโsales, marketing, engineering, product, QAโthey're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and saysโit's it's it sounds Captain Obviousโbut like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AIโyou do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these teamโall the brute forcers out thereโeveryone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubledโwell if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hireโnow there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, thereโnow there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This isโyou think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give youโwant hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell youโpick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGCโI don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. Aโthis is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And Iโbut the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I justโlike you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he saidโJason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it appliesโI'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it'sโ [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and Iโpretend he's not hereโI said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we areโand thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure outโI wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember IโI guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if youโI can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's overโlike you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And Iโthis is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent lifeโand this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's pointโif in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folksโI'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COOโhe's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2036795243681423518/amplify_video_thumb/2036794127560613888/img/52_cdbzzL6_foTSI.jpg)
!["Those monopoles... the 5G on buildings... that's the telecom staking their environment... [it's the] claim [that] they own you, they're going to surveil you...[and the FCC's] opened...the exact bandwidth that is actually weaponized... [and was] used in a theater of war in Iraq" This clip of Reinette Senum (Reinette Senum), a former mayor of Nevada City, California, is taken from an episode of the Children's Health Defense (Childrenโs Health Defense) series Financial Rebellion posted to Rumble on November 20, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So what we're seeing is, and I'm trying to give some visuals to people, is that this is a chain to, that's going to ensure enslavement. And really they've just got one last link, that's it left, which is scary, but it's also the Achilles heel. And that's where we can really just draw the line and drop the gauntlet. And that link are, are these cell towers, the actual antennas being just popped up everywhere? Because they've got that framework, the infrastructure is there, those are those lines or they're underground. They just need to be able to put the antennas up without any interference whatsoever. "What people also don't realize there's a lot of really nefarious little things in the small print. But when a county or a city actually gives a contract to the telecoms and passes it, what people don't realize is those contracts are generally for 25 years and more than likely it'll be even longer than that because it's just, usually it's consent item. They just, you know, with one, you know, you know, one fell swoop, they just approve everything on the consent items. There's no discussion, no public discussion, no anything, no environment views. And then they add a different type of antenna. "So when those poles, those, those monopoles or the 5G on buildings, whatever, that's the telecom staking their environment. Their, their real estate claim. This is essentially vertical real estate. And the reason why they want to claim it and oversaturate it is because when they stake that claim, they own you, they're going to surveil you, they're going to spy on you, they're going to control you. They're going to take all that data where you're shopping, where you're spending, who you, where you're driving, what you're doing, all of your whereabouts, all of that data, they're going to collect it. "What we do know too, and you have to ask, why would the FCC do this? Was just a few years ago the FCC opened up a bandwidth, okay, so you have this spectrum and they only allow so much of this bandwidth to be sold and auctioned off to the telecoms. And what they did was a few years ago is they opened it up to the millimeter wave, to the exact bandwidth that is actually weaponized, is militarized, is used in a theater of war in Iraq. "We have a couple examples of what it can do. In 1991, military was celebrating. This is so phenomenal. We use the Millimeter wave. And what we did is we actually supplanted the, the voice of Allah into the soldiers and the farmers and the ranchers down below on the ground in Iraq. And we told them to give up their arms, put up their hands and you know, turn themselves in. It was a great it was a great win. It's like, wait, you did what to them? "Then I had another roommate of mine who's a former Air Force flight surgeon saying, oh yeah, we used to fly, you know, above Middle East and we would shoot down a beam of 5G and we would scramble the brains of anyone down on the ground. And then the foot soldiers would come along after that and shoot and kill anybody who was moving or looked alive whatsoever. And I had asked her, I said, well, this is horrific. Exactly what would that experience be to somebody on the ground? Well, they just hear a lot of static and they would then just drop dead because we just scrambled their brains. This, this is, these are the frequencies that the FCC put on the market. "Now the telecoms have this available to them. Why? Why would they ever allow this? Okay, so there's that piece. So they stake their claim, they're there for at least 25 years, but actually it's going to be longer. They have complete control and they are monitoring everything. And if they want to, they can do a slow cook or they can target. And that's the difference with the millimeter wave is... the millimeter wave actually targets the phone, it targets the person. Whereas 3G, 4G is just ubiquitous. As you send out the signal, you pick it up or you don't. There's that piece. "The other hidden piece that people do not realize is that in most of all these telecom contracts with the counties and the cities, basically they say, okay look it, you can use whatever kind of technology you want. You can go for 3G, 5G, 10G, 20G, we don't care as long as the antennas look like the original antennas when the, the whatever was installed. So that could be any kind of technology. So it could be a weaponized technology which is now what we are seeing already. And there's nothing you can do about it. "And while... they may have it on the agenda to vote on, generally there's no notification. People have no idea. Again, it's under consent items, which means there's probably 10, 20 other agenda items. They just vote all one fell, you know, swoop, just like what we kind of saw with Congress the other day. And, and it's done. There's a switch, and you have no idea. So this is also a Trojan horse. "And I try to say to people, when I look at cell towers, I see it as a towering Trojan horse for the military industrial complex, the surveillance state, the whole digital dystopian, you know, prison that we're talking about. This is the only way they can do it. The only way they can do it is by having these antennas everywhere. And while they do have satellite, there's more wiggle room there. But this is how they're going to do it. What's happened now is the FCC and congressional members, are paving the path where nobody can stop it."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1991577983438798931/amplify_video_thumb/1991574682924118020/img/NTYvMXYc_eFldB2V.jpg)
!["How do you know you can trust what [a non-human intelligence is] saying?" ~Bigelow Bigelow/Knapp 2: If I Was President, I'd Tell the World We Have Non-Human Craft and Bodies "The President that took on the challenge of Disclosure and of confirmation...is gonna go down in history as having really accomplished something." ~Bigelow Do China and Russia also have non-human bodies and craft? "Oh yeah, freaking yes!" ~Bigelow ~ "You've opened up Pandora's box." ~Bigelow ~ 17:44 (I'm using the KLAS YT video for time stamps. As you'll see, I add a lot to these, so they take forever to put together.) George Knapp (GK): "Would you guess - based on what you know about the topic and how it's been handled over the decades - would you guess that [Trump] had been briefed, or that any other presidents have been briefed? You know that Bill Clinton was not, even though he expressed an interest in it. So at some point, the President has to be told, 'No, we can't tell ya.'" Robert Bigelow (RB): "I think Bush Sr. knew quite a bit because he was the head of the CIA." (Dr. Eric Davis says Bush. Sr. told him some interesting things, including that he (Bush) was partially briefed in 1976 about the alleged 1964 Holloman AFB landing and meeting, and more, when he first became the director of the CIA in 1976. Watch Davis explain it, here. ) ~ RB: "I think Nixon did." (We have the Jackie Gleason story, where Nixon allegedly snuck away from his Secret Service detail and took Gleason to see non-human bodies at Homestead Air Force Base. But that was a claim from his ex-wife, and Gleason, who died in 1987, never said anything about it, on the record. The controversial Larry Warren (Rendlesham) claims Gleason told him the same story, but that's it.) Bigelow: "I think Eisenhower did. So, it's kind of hit and miss over historic...over the period of history as to who has and who hasn't." 18:20 Knapp: "Can you tell us what would be in the briefing document that you left behind? Was it cases? Here's a wave of UFOs, here's a case, here was a crash. Anything like that?" Bigelow: "Yeah, I related conversations I have had with General De Brouwer, who was the chief of the Air Force for Belgium. And there was a very interesting flap that was about 18 months long (1989-1990) with triangular craft. And he was in command of all the Air Force, and he really chased the heck out of these. "And he told me, he said, Bob, 'I'm just burning fuel, and it makes no sense.' He said, 'We're gonna stop because we're not getting anywhere. All we're doing is getting closer, you know, photographs and things, but we're not getting anywhere. We're not getting any information that is really valuable for us to understand anything.'" (I wonder if those were OUR triangles? If so, it's still a solid case/flap of anomalous craft. Dick D'Amato was a longtime (18 years) senior staffer for Senate Democratic Leader Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia.) "Dick D'Amato has returned from Belgium where he met with Colonel De Brouwer, a 'very interesting fellow.' Dickโs conclusion, again, is that the triangular objects are very plain human craft. ~Jacques Vallรฉe's Forbidden Science Volume 4 - November 1992 And then we have this... Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "We hear about all these people on military bases seeing triangles, and you're doing this study, AAWSAP, to try to figure out the physics of how to do that. Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAWSAP had a lot of value." Lacatski: "[three-second pause] It hasn't been achieved to its full extent." Video... ~~~ RB: "And I gave [Trump] other examples of where large amounts of witnesses were involved, and so that he could read about these particular [incidents]. And, of course, the one with Fife Simington in '97 was so interesting. Because there you had a governor who was an actual witness, and he made a joke of it on and brought a guy in an alien suit on stage because he was scared to death." GK: "It's the Phoenix Lights case." (Great case for Bigelow to show Trump.) RB: "The Phoenix Lights, which weren't just lights, it was actually friggin' craft, and it came from northern Arizona. I think it started, actually, in southern Nevada, is where the craft began. In the Henderson area (not far from me. ~Joe), I think, somewhere in there. And, so you see this huge triangular craft, gigantic craft, going slowly, and [Symington] was scared to death. "But finally, fast forward 10 years later, and he confesses that he was an eyewitness, but he didn't know what to do. So he was there at a point in time when the dynamic of disclosure could have been forced, and actually, confirmation could have been from a governor of the state like that. He was a credible guy. "So we've had many [incidents] like that in the early 50s, flying over the White House and the Capitol building. We've had so many of those. So, in my report, I included a lot of very dramatic, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt kind of witnesses of exhibitions." GK: "Did you share with him anything about your knowledge of a classified program?" RB: "No." GK: "You got a Top-Secret security clearance, right?" RB: "Yeah" GK: "It was for the AAWSAP program for BAASS." RB: "Right." GK: "Operated under the DIA." RB: "Yeah." GK: "You learned a lot during that program. It's the largest accumulation of UFO info. of any government-funded UFO program ever." RB: "Yeah." GK: "You didn't tell him about it." RB: "It wasn't credible enough, I felt, for him." (Someone on here watched this interview and told me that Bigelow said the AAWSAP data wasn't credible. That is NOT what he said. Not credible enough for Trump, is what he said. And if you read "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon" or listen any of Lacatki's interviews where he talks about UFOs being under a paranormal umbrella, I think Bigelow made the right decision for an 11-minute briefing for someone (Trump) who seems to be struggling (at least in public comments) with the reality of the basics.) RB: "[The AAWSAP data is] just something pertaining to me. And whereas, these other examples are historic, and they're in a lot of literature, they're very famous. The amount of witnesses were huge. We operated under a private situation with the Skinwalker Ranch, and he wouldn't relate to...well, we all had hitchhikers, we all took things home with us. You know, we all saw a lot of stuff. Whether it was at the ranch or where we lived, it didn't make any difference where in the United States we lived. We saw a lot of things, but that wouldn't be relevant for him to be able to relate to that, right?" GK: "Well." RB: "So, why talk about it?" GK: "Yeah, I mean, you know, you're kind of jumping into the deep end of the pool when you get into hitchhikers and skinwalkers." RB: "Yeah." GK: "Maybe for your first big conversation on this topic, that might not be the place to go." RB: "No, you know. And I couldn't even...if he said, 'Oh, I need a beer (Knapp laughs),' I couldn't even give him something to drink. You know, maybe stronger than that. So, I didn't wanna do any, you know." 22:15 GK: "You used the term non-human intelligence in the sentence you gave him. Hey, try this as you're climbing aboard Air Force One. Say that to media, and then, you know, close the door." RB: "Right." GK: "You said non-human intelligence, not ET. Are they the same, and did you share anything with him about what you think it is?" RB: "Well, there have been reports of humans on board, right? But the non-human are more interesting. I mean, if a human's on board and he or she has free reign of the craft, that's pretty damn interesting, right? And you don't know where those people are when they're not on board." (I wonder what cases he's talking about? Travis Walton reported seeing humans with non-humans and John Keel wrote about humans being seen onboard craft.) ~ Bigelow: "But the other ones are...some are scary, you know? It's not surprising, that, in the Universe, everything is [not] gonna look like us. Every intelligent organism is [not] going to look like us. But you have to have... It's also a matter of respect for any really intelligent animal or creature, whatever it is, right? And the more advanced, the more respect because you don't know what they know, and you don't know the future. And they may know. They may know more than just the now." (In interviews (which I can't find right now), Bigelow has hinted at an unstoppable, not-so-rosy future for mankind. Have people in the Legacy programs told him that the NHI have warned us about our doomed future or some cataclysmic event? Or, has Bigelow encountered these non-humans (or humans) and had them make claims about our future?) ~ 23:34 GK: "If you were to have a second conversation with him, would you explain that ET is one idea, but it's not necessarily the only option for a non-human intelligence that's out there?" RB: "You have to tell me first how much time do I have with the second conversation?" GK: "[laughs] Let's make it an hour. You have an hour with the President. What would you tell them about who they are, who they might be?" RB: "Umm... So, I would try to get into the complexity of the relationship. That once you've had confirmation, you know, you've given that text of that little sentence I wrote and quoted there, and you start to go down the path of disclosure, where it's more than than just FLIR videos, and you're seeing other things that are much more crystal clear, you know, in video. "Or, legitimate people in places that you recognize these people, and they're around something, or with some thing, or somebody that's a holy cow, that's wow, you know. That's a very dramatic kind of disclosure about something landing on the lawn somewhere, you know." (I have no idea what he's talking about. Anybody else able to decipher that? Is he saying that there's evidence (that he's seen?) of people that we know (a President or head of state?) hanging with a non-human or next to a downed or landed craft?) RB: "So I think what I would have spent time doing is talking about, how do you establish: You've been in 80 years of denial as a nation, and the world. We have countries who are very upfront, and others that are also in denial. Now you wanna pivot 180 degrees. How do you start that relationship? How do you do that? "And it's not as though that we've ever been in control. We haven't been in control of anything, ever, for this 80 years of modern history. Nothing. We have no ability to control anything." GK: "That's a tough thing to tell the President, right? I would think that would be a tough thing for a President to accept." RB: "Well, you're giving me an hour to talk to him, you said." GK: "[laughs] Yeah, okay." RB: "So I'm using my hour." GK: "All right." 25:46 RB:" So, yeah! So, that's a really intriguing thing is: How do you do that, where do you start? And into a relationship? And I would say more like, well, I would wanna start with, the biggest question I would ask, I would say, what I wanna get from them is... My first question is: What are the chances we are gonna survive ourselves? That we are not going to annihilate ourselves. "Because they already are familiar with a whole lot of other species on a lot of other worlds or other planets. So, chances are they have a pretty good idea of percentage." (That assumes a lot, since we have no idea how long they've been around, what they've seen, or where they're from. Unless...Mr. Bigelow has seen evidence that relates to those questions or heard it from folks who work in the Legacy programs?) RB: "And it's not that we're a spiritual species. You talk to people that have near-death experiences; they're changed for the rest of their life. They've become a spiritual person of a caliber that they've never been. "Well, we're a long way, as an average, from that category, from that level. There are monsters among us, as human beings, and they're angelic people among us. So we are a danger to another species, we're potentially the Klingons. We have a technological maturity that is not just going on a line, but it's vertical and it's segmented because it's jumping. "And meanwhile, our spiritual maturity just bumps along the bottom, you know? So, we look at the 20th century; 60 million people were killed. Are we ever gonna get beyond that? So, the thing of it is, we know so little about how to have a relationship. I'm not in any position to really advise, except for the few ideas I have as to where to start, and the how is really super important. 27:49 "It's not gonna be like a 'Close Encounter of the Third, Kind,' which was a really cool movie. And it's not gonna be because of SETI. You know, it's gonna be by some other kinds of means that you're embarking on. And I'm interested in that kind of research." 28:06 GK: "We go back to your meeting with the President. You walk into the Oval Office, they clear off the Resolute Desk, you spread out your seven piles of stuff, and you start making a presentation about each one, in particular about ET, non-human intelligence. You can't say what he said to you. Can you say whether he asked questions? Was he curious?" RB: "He was distracted by other things. So, he also asked me... He did ask questions, but he asked questions about other stuff that wasn't necessarily just on what I was talking about." GK: "He's getting your input on other things going on in the world." RB: "Yeah, yeah." 28:49 GK: "If you had to make a guess, would you guess that you got through to him on this issue? I mean, he hasn't stood in the doorway of Air Force One and made those remarks yet, but he has taken some pretty dramatic steps on this topic since you met with him. Do you think you made a dent?" RB: "Don't know. I advised him on something that I can measure, and he hasn't taken my advice so far on what I suggested to him, on a totally different, unrelated subject. But so far, he has not taken my advice." GK: Well, somebody seems to have got through to him, because he's been taking steps that we're seeing real results. I mean, people are either..." RB: "Well, I'm talking about an unrelated subject altogether. So, yes, there there are a couple of different task forces that are involved. So, there is an initiation of an activity in this subject, [but] it remains to be seen, though, that he gives actual presidential confirmation. I don't, I haven't... Maybe you're more aware than I am. Has that been...has he done that?" GK: "Not, not really. Nothing like what I'd call confirmation. But that's really what you're talking about. I remember us having a conversation in 2008, right after you had signed the contract with DIA for BAASS to run [AAWSAP]. And you made the case then that what we need is not Disclosure; it's confirmation." RB: "Yeah." 30:25 GK: "For somebody like the President, I'm not sure if it could be anyone less than the President that steps forward and says this, and it carries the same kind of weight." RB: "Yeah. It's a big appetizer. You know, you're looking for the entree, and where's the dessert in this whole buffet? But the confirmation is a huge appetizer to start with, and that's why I started with that in my conversation with him. Is, pushing him to try and make a confirmation. And maybe he wants to get personally more comfortable?" (I have said that I want the entire enchilada NOW, but I'm also a realist, and would take a simple confirmation that somebody else is on this planet with us. That SHOULD wake up the mainstream media and masses, but no guarantees since Trump is so controversial and people might just ignore it, IF he ever did it. I've also said that I'd surround him with people like Schumer, Rubio, Rounds and Gillibrand in order to show that it's bipartisan. And a few firsthand whistleblowers who say they worked hands on, IN one of these alleged Legacy UFO/UAP programs.) 30:57 Bigelow: "And, you know, he will go down in history for a lot of things, for better or worse, that people are on both sides of the fence about him and so forth. But he's involved in so many different things and has been, that I don't know what his legacy is gonna be, I really don't. "He has an opportunity, in this serious subject, to build a legacy using this as part of the blocks, part of the brick and the structure...the content of a structure that is very unique. So, you can have all the political programs that you want, and so forth, and nobody is gonna really remember those as time goes by, as the decades fade away. "Nobody can remember Benghazi and Afghanistan and Iraq, different kinds of things, and that's just recent history. You know, the world goes so fast. But the President that took on the challenge of Disclosure and of confirmation, and actually built a satisfactory conclusion of a relationship between human beings and that subject is gonna go down in history as having really accomplished something. And if it's handled right, it can be done successfully." (To me, it's a no brainer. His presidency would go down as one that changed the world and our species. Or course, I'm sure he has people in his ear telling him that confirmation would cause societal disruption that we're not prepared to handle, and that THAT would be his legacy.) (32:21) GK: "A lot of Presidents have made comments, often after they're out of office, on this topic. 'Yeah, gosh, I'm real interested in that.' Or, 'Wouldn't that be something?' Or, 'I think aliens could exist.' Something like that. But nothing like what you're talking about, which amounts to confirmation, saying, 'It's real. They're here. We gotta figure it out,' and stopping it there, not disclosing..." RB: "Well, the dialogue, the ability to learn something from them is huge. What can we do for you? I mean, that's where...one of the first things I would ask is, not just, are we going to survive ourselves? Yeah, that's pretty damn important. That's like, probably number one, you know? "But close behind that is: Okay, we've been aware of you for a long time, and the government's never admitted it. But us as a public, we know it, and we're really curious. Is there anything that we can do for you? Not just what can you do... I loved what John Kennedy, what he said famously: Don't ask what the country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. That huge. So that's giving them a kind of a respect that they deserve." (Do they deserve respect? I'm not so sure. It all depends on if they're upfront with us and tell us their true intentions. Of course, how do we know they're telling us the truth? Why have you (or some of you) been abducting us against our will, and injuring some of us? See Jim Semivan's abduction story with his wife. "I don't think [the phenomenon] cares whether it does harm. I think it may go out of its way not to do harm, but, if it does harm... "I had a hole in the back of my neck, and my wife...unexplained bleeding for 17 days." ~Former CIA Officer, Jim Semivan to Engaging The Phenomenon ~ 33:33 GK: "If you were President, would you announce that yes, we've got crash retrievals, yes, we have reverse engineering programs, and yes, we've got bodies?" RB: "Yeah, because the rest of the world already knows that. The people that count in Russia and China already know." GK: "Because they've got their own." RB: "Oh yeah, freaking yes! Yeah! They've had their missiles shut down, they've had their missiles activated. You know, depending on which country you're talking about." 33:56 GK: "Have you considered the political fallout for a President? Let's say it's Trump, because he might be the guy that would do it and just cast his fate to the winds. But, he makes an announcement: 'Yeah, they're here. Yeah, we've got programs. Yeah, we've got crashes, we've got bodies. That's as far as I'm able to go right now.' What happens to him, politically? Is he able to get anything else done?" RB: "That's more than I would have said, for him to say. What you just said." GK: "That goes too far." RB: "I wouldn't advise him to say, initially, what you just said." GK: "You just say, non-human intelligence, been here a long time, and leave it at that." RB: "Yeah, that one sentence is a starter because it's a huge canon. You've opened up Pandora's box, in terms of, 'Oh my gosh, what's gonna happen?' Okay. So now, you can categorize and segment into topics. And you need time to do that, and it needs to be digestible." ~ โI have met with people who I know are in the know. One of them told me the truth is indigestible.โ ~Jim Semivan to James Iandoli ~ RB: "And it needs to be not packaged in a scary kind of way, and it can't be packaged in a way that you're divulging what you shouldn't be divulging. You know, other countries aren't, so there's reasons to have national secrets. There really are. I mean, that's kind of like common sense, right?" (Well, David Grusch claimed that some other countries aren't divulging for a specific reason." Grusch on Yes Theory: "So there are certainly friendly governments, both across the pond and say, local to where we...our landmass, that are for this. And a lot of them know that they got a raw deal with the U.S. because they were, basically, part of the secrecy, through kind of agreements like, bilateral, unilateral agreements. And they're like, you know, they kind of wanna be, 'Release me!' Like, you know, because they they do realize it was a bad deal. "With the ecosystem secrecy, some people, one of their arguments is like, 'Well how would they keep the secret?' I'm, like dude, I was cleared to some of the most nation's most sensitive programs, I used to handle the PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing). You know, I had full access to most DoD activities. And most of the stuff, BROAD programs that were enduring, have NEVER leaked. "So the U.S. and its allies are very good at keeping secrecies, to include programs that are, let's say, global in nature. And really, it's been leaking like a sieve in some weird way for many decades. Now it's been mixed in with some BS in ufology and stuff, but the general gist of it's actually been out there for a long time. It has been leaking in some sense, so." ~ 35:06 GK: "We don't want the Russians and Chinese and maybe other adversaries to know how far along we are, or are not, in configuring this out." RB: "Absolutely. Especially of that. I think that the relationship (with he phenomenon) thing is a mankind relationship. It's not just for America. When you are embarking as a President on trying to initiate a solemn relationship, you're not doing for U.S. of A. only. "And so, the...and then we probably can do a show on communication (with a non-human intelligence), but it's really complex because, who are you going to have initiate it? Are you going to have politicians initiate? Are you going to have military people? Because everybody has kind of their own mindset. Are you gonna have a bunch of lawyers initiate it? Are you gonna have scientists only, initiate it? (And what if we're dealing with more than one non-human intelligence? Who do we communicate with? And what if it's one intelligence pretended to be multiple? How would we even figure that out?) "[Hynek] cited the 'poltergeist' phenomena experienced by some...after a close encounter; the fact that some witnesses develop psychic abilities after an encounter. 'Do we have two aspects of one phenomenon or two different sets of phenomena?'" ~J. Allen Hynek ~ RB: "And how do you know to whom you're talking? You know, how do you know you can trust what they're saying?" (I'm so glad he said that. We don't, and we don't.) RB: "Because it depends on the form of communication, and what are you asking for in the way of proof or demonstrations to establish trust, both ways, in the communication process?" "Because, we haven't had that happen before. It is totally new ground, and frankly, we need The Others' help. We need the help of The Others to help, to guide us." (Firs off, it MAY have happened within these Legacy programs. And, if we don't know who we're talking to, or if we can trust them, why would we enlist the help of The Others? Doesn't seem to make sense to me.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2087243559091261706/amplify_video_thumb/2087241641329561600/img/dSAd4v8WLh8yq8Qw.jpg)
![I asked Grok to summarize the overview I provided of the ongoing war between Karen Read and Aidan Kearney, in particular the section wherein I deploy the Manhattan Project to explain why Karen used better compartmentalization than Aidan (thus setting herself up for victory). The Manhattan Project Analogy: Ah, the Manhattan ProjectโGrant drops this as the "archetypal example" of compartmentalization, using it to explain why no one (not even insiders) sees the full picture in ops like Karen's or Aidan's. It's not just history; it's a blueprint for why leaks like this recording hit so hard. Here's Grant's breakdown, paraphrased and expanded for context: Historical Setup: During WWII, the U.S. raced to build the atomic bomb. Led by J. Robert Oppenheimer at Los Alamos, NM (desert isolation for secrecy), it involved ~130,000 people totalโbut zero full-picture access for most. Goal: Win the war without leaks (or Japanese spies spotting it). Core Mechanic: Siloed Knowledge: Los Alamos: Elite scientists (e.g., Oppenheimer) handled core R&D. Even here, info was need-to-knowโe.g., Operation Paperclip Nazis like Wernher von Braun (V-2 rocket guy) worked alongside possible communist sympathizers, but no one knew the endgame. Oak Ridge, Tennessee: The "production" hubโa secret 20,000-person "government town" (still exists today). To hide from aerial recon, they draped canopies over the entire site to mimic forest. Workers (engineers, laborers) toiled in ignorance: Example: A guy feeds a single punch card (1940s code line) into a massive green computer. He doesn't know what it codes, why, or even the machine's purpose. Just: Insert, output, repeat. Multiply by thousandsโboom, uranium enrichment without risk. Why It Worked: "You do that with all the people working on a project that's very top secret (except for a select few high up)." Weak links? Minimal. One leak doesn't topple it. Ties to the Drama: Grant flips this to modern players. Aidan's Version: Rudimentaryโparalegals like Olivia/Tina handle PR/logins but don't see the "full picture" (e.g., his flip risks). Meredith O'Neill becomes the leak about the recording played for her at lunch because she is smart and she does eventually see too much (just like Lindsey Gaetani before her). Karen's Mastery: Pro-level. Her finance/academia fam (Bentley University ties) screams gov recruitment pipelineโacademia as "front" for talent scouting (e.g., intel via international money flows). She "understands the apparatus" (DNI hierarchy), so she deploys limited hangouts/double agents like Natalie. Result: Aidanโs recording "signal flare" to Alan Jackson and David Yannetti (his flip threat) gets mirrored by Karen's public nuke after the recordings and Read's messages to Flipperhead are releasedโeroding Kearney's base without directly exposing Karen's crushing blow. Grant's Point: Kate Peter/Tully are "children" at this; Karen's moves (e.g., burning Aidan now) only make sense through this lens. It's not emotionโit's chess: "If you show Karen Read anything less than respect, she's gonna fucking own you." Grant wraps by noting Karen's parasocial "complex" (stronger than Aidan's "brand") gives her leverage. He admits partiality ("I think she's responsible for John's death") but respects her ops savvyโpossibly from her dad or self-taught intel. **Transcript: Grant's Analysis on Karen Read's Tactical Maneuvering and Compartmentalization** [Warning against crossing Karen Read] Grant: ListenโI would have told you this. I probably said it on stream before. You are out of your mind if you fuck with Karen Read. Likeโit's one thing if you are like on her level and matching wits with herโlike she's gonna grudgingly show you respect. I'm telling youโI've seen it in her eyesโbut you can't fuck with her, and you certainly can't threaten her. I would not do that. I don't know who the fuck her parents know. I don't know who she knows, but broโlike it's politics. She's smarter than you. Don't threaten her. What the fuck? And that is somethingโlike if you show her anything less than respect, she's gonna fucking own you. And that's what she did. Because the respectful way to do it would have been like a diplomatic meeting. And they must have been at a point where Aidan couldn't get that. So he did the most disrespectful thing possible where he tried to like corner her through like extortion almost. That's what it sounds likeโalthough Aidan denies it. Thatโlistenโforget about like how a normal person would react. When you're talking about a very influential operator like Karen Readโwho has this very savvy understanding of the public mindโyou're fucked. Because she's gonna know immediately what you just did. And she's gonna counter it with the thing that's gonna hurt you the most. What's gonna hurt Aidan Kearney the most? His support being dwindled down to only his core loyalists. And if he's rightโand you'll hear it in the conversationโif Aidan Kearney is right, that most of who he is is because Karen Read and her supportโoh my goodness, folksโlike thatโthat means that Karen controls whether Aidan can continue this fight. If Karenโwhen sheโthat's why I want to listen to this whole conversationโthere's no doubt in my mind she's pulling his support and pulling the rug under him because she's afraid that either he cooperated or he's going to cooperate. If she pulls the rug from himโokay, listenโhe might be able to escape the criminal charges, but do you think Aidan Kearneyโa man who thrives, in my opinion, on attention, numbersโfrom knowing that your words are impacting someone or the platform is reaching peopleโdo you think he's going to enjoy being in a position where heโthe very people who made himโand it wasn't just Karen; it was her supportersโnow loathe his existence? And heโnot just thatโthey are like tactical operators. Clearly Karen knows how to do counter intelโespecially if she sent Natalie as a double agent to get information from the state police using Kearney as leverage all the way back in 2023. She understands the world of intel. I don't know howโI think it's her dad. I'm pretty sure becauseโand it could be her tooโbecause like you don't get involved in the world of international finance on a fuckingโlikeโwhat is itโthe sort of leisurely level. It's not a pastime. You either do it because likeโyou're really fucking good at making money from the stock marketโorโand these two weren't; they're not that wealthyโor you're giving information to the government. Why do I say that? Because the world of international finance is the most valuable intel sector you could possibly imagine. You can commit or try to commit any number of international crimes if you're threatening the United States of America. But I guarantee you're moving money around to do it. So who's the best possible sources for that? High-level financial people. So I don't know if either they were a Jasonโand they were also academics. Okay. And a lotโwhat folks have to understand is when Iโwhen people say like academiaโit does not mean that you are just smart. Anyone whoโwho's good at studying could become a professor and be in academia. What a lot of folks should understand is that academia is a front for the government. It has always been a front for the government. Where do you think they headhunt from? Academiaโwell likeโat the higher you get up the academic ladderโall you're really doing is getting more and more involved in the government. I'm not saying anything that anyone involved with this does not know. Like high-level academics are involved with the government. That's like the backbone of our system. Now a lot of the actual educationโI think it's gotten a little out of hand with some of these majors, some of these colleges and universities who are offering [them]. That's not the point. The point is to create aโcurate a talent pool to make the United States stronger. And a lot of it is government recruitment. Okay. And so Karen Read being all the way up at the top at Bentleyโwhich is a very interconnected university with the government, trust meโthat just makes me think she understands thisโwhether she was a Jason. Listenโyou can understand what the intelligence community does without being in it. I'm not in the intelligence communityโI just report on the government. So I kind of see how it all works. You can understand it without being in it. But if you're in itโlet me just tell you right nowโif anyone Karen Read knew professionallyโthrough family or otherwiseโis in the governmentโand I'm not talking about a special agent like in the FBI or, you know, a case officerโI'm talking about in the apparatus of control. Okay. In the directorate of national intelligence somewhereโthere's a hierarchy. All right. If she knows anyone who understands all thatโthat's why she was able to pull this off. Because it's notโthat's why I'm not fawning or being gratuitous. I don't necessarilyโI'm not partial to Karen Read. I think she has liability for John's death. What I am is cognizant of what she's capable ofโso I can understand what's going on. A mind like that, okayโdoesn't just do PR. PR was not going to help Karen Read here. Natalie and her PR and all that stuffโnone of that was going to work. What Karen Read needed was counter intel and intel knowledge. [Explanation of compartmentalization via the Manhattan Project] When I say compartmentalizationโwhat you all have to realize is I'm talking about how the Manhattan Projectโthat's like the archetypal example of compartmentalizationโhow the Manhattan Project to develop the bomb that won the war for the United States in World War IIโhow that worked. The way that that worked is you had Los Alamos, okay, in New Mexico with Oppenheimer and whatever the hellโsome of the Operation Paperclip peopleโwhich I'm not very happy with. We took Otto von Braunโwho developed the V2 rocket for the Nazis. We brought him over via Operation Paperclip. We implanted him at Los Alamos with fucking Oppenheimer. I'm pretty sure it was like a communist sympathizer. Anywayโwe sent them down to Los Alamosโthe actual research scientists working on the core of the bomb. But to develop a nuclear bombโyou need 20,000 people at the time working simultaneously on production. You're not going to do that at Los Alamos. One: why would you ever expose them to the inner workings of the tech? It's nuclear material. You are not going to have 20,000 people around it. That's why it was in the middle of a desert. Third of allโthey would know too much. So what did they do? Okayโlook up Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Oak Ridge, Tennessee is a townโit's a government town still to this day. It's one of the mostโit's not as top secret as it used to be. But back in the dayโlike during World War IIโthey put fucking canopies over the whole thingโ20,000-person townโcanopies over all of it. So it would just look like trees from the air in case the Japanese managed to come and bomb us. They never didโthank God. But anywayโat least on the mainlandโobviously they got Pearl Harbor, and we're still upset about that. But the point is Oak Ridge, Tennessee, okayโit had people employed across a number of disciplines, all rightโand they would go intoโI'm giving you an exampleโone guy would go into a room, all right, and he would walk up to a giant computer. It was an old computerโwe're talking the '40s hereโit was a big computer, like a big green box. He would take a punch card. Okayโthis is how you used to codeโwrite computer codeโhe would putโtake one punch card with one line of codeโput it in the machineโtake it outโput it down. He had no idea what he was doing. He didn't know what the punch card had on it. He didn't even understand what the machine did. That's compartmentalization. He's likeโyou do that with all of the people working on a project that's very top secret. So if you're thinking as Karen ReadโAidan Kearney does like a rudimentary version of itโeven Tully does a rudimentary version of itโand Kate Peterโcompared to Karen ReadโKaren Read, Alan Jacksonโwhateverโunderstand the intelligence community. I don't fucking know how, but they do. So they compartmentalize. That's how they have pulled this whole thing off. They compartmentalizeโno one ever really saw the full picture. When youโif you are a schematic mind like thatโwhen you do something like reveal that Aidan Kearney has sent you a recording of conversations between you because you want the public to know that Aidan is doing this to youโyou are tactically sabotaging him. Why you do that at this momentโwhen you are an expert in counter intelโthus requires that level of understanding. You cannot just say, "Oh, I don't like Karen Read; she must be a moron." Noโif you want to understand why she's actingโyou have to think about her tactical intelligenceโbecause then you can reconstruct what the goal of this move is. It can only be designed to kneecap his support. I meanโwhen I say kneecapโI'm not talking Tonya Harding beating the woman at the ice rink. I'm talkingโyou can make it so this man's numbers are lower than Kate Peter talking about Cyraxxโlike 2,000 views of video, if that, all right. That's what it will come down to. And she wants him to feel that. I think that it's a little bit likeโit's 97% tactical. It seems to be that this is the moment where she feels he needs to lose all his supportโlike right now. Secondโit feels a little like a little personalโlike it's not just that she's causing him to lose all his support. There are ways to do that without doing this. I believe what Karen's really done here is she's taken the one thing from Aidan that gives him the strength to keep going day to dayโwhich is his public persona and imageโhis supportโher support. And so he can go around saying all he wantsโ"I owe it to Karen; she made me"โdo you think that's how he really feels? Or do you think he feels that he's the only reason she's where she is? Nowโif that's how they each feelโyou're at a stalemate. Aidan thinks he's the reason Karen got to where she is. Karen thinks that she's the reason Aidan has support and is known in the region. Who's right? Who's right? That's what this conversation is going to be about. And I'm telling youโKaren's right. Karen has more support than Aidan Kearney. Okayโit's just a basicโyou can look at the numbers. Karen has more support than Aidan Kearney. Karen has more loyalists. KarenโI don't even understand the complex, okayโbut her parasocial complex that she's created is stronger. You might call it a brandโI think that degrades the insidious nature of it. I call it a parasocial complex. That is stronger than Aidan Kearney's. [Transition to the conversation with greetings] So what we're going to listen to right now isโoh, hello, Francesca Towel. Ohโa lot of folks are coming in. Hello, Rose Water. Hello, Maureen. It's great to see you all. Hello, J.I.5. We're going to listen to this conversation. I'm going to explicate it for you. I think you have enough background to get it nowโbut just be awareโwithout this backgroundโthat would have made no sense whatsoever. I promise you. **Aidan:** Am I on? **Host/Other:** You're on. **Aidan:** So who are you? Who is this? **Chris:** Don't worry about it. It doesn't matter who I am. **Aidan:** Well, it does. You're some fucking kangaroo court motherfucker talking about her. What the fuck do you know about anything? **Chris:** Well, I know exactly what you've been doing. **Aidan:** Soโwell, what the fuck are the sites you're talking about? Noโnoโrecitesโwhat you talk about? Noโreceipts. I've got to shit up. Let's see him. Let's fucking see your receipts. **Lily:** Hang on, Aidanโyou know me. I'm the host. I'm Lily. **Aidan:** Yes, Lily. Hi, Lily. How are you? I'm sorry. I'm just wondering... **Lily:** I know you may not know Chris, but you know me. And so I just wanted to say hello. **Aidan:** Yeah, no, but... Grant: Oh, I also want to let you know this comes with a warning. They use very vulgar language. Some of them are from Commonwealth realms countries. So the language they're using is not as offensive as it would be if you used it in America. Aidan uses some very offensive language. This is for the purposes of analysis and commentary. I do not condone, endorse, promote, or otherwise suggest anyone engage in the use of this language. I personally don't like it. I use the F word from time to time, okay? And maybe like the S wordโbut I do not say some of the terms they're going to useโespecially because one of them is very offensive, okay, to women. And I'm sorry ahead of time that he uses itโbut you should hear Aidan's true colors. **Aidan:** This koala motherfucker is up here making shit up, running his... [Recap of text messages and setup for listening] Grant: So what you have to realize is these texts you're seeing on the screen got released because of this conversation. You're going to hear Joe Flipperhead talking about them. Now in the text messages, you can see Joe reaches out to KarenโJoe Flipperhead. And Karen's going to say she's trying to bounce back, but life is not quite happening. "Had a falling out with Aidan as everyone eventually does. Found out Aidan's been taping our phone conversations and sharing them with people and then telling everyone he doesn't understand how I blew him off for Howie Carr. Some anonymous person sent David and Alan a 33-minute phone call I had with Aidan that was all recorded without my knowledge. That was my final straw. He's done a lot of sneaky stuff with me, but this is above and beyond." And then Joe Flipperhead's like, "Do you want your side out there? If yes, I'm with you. If not, all goodโjust let me know. Have a good weekend." Karen says, "Sure. I told many people my side. This is the last straw. Would never and have never betrayed him. Meanwhile, he has put me in harm's way in a huge way multiple times." Okay, so we're going to listen. "Okay, okay, all right, all rightโno trolling. We shouldโwe should be banning people like that. You have been banned. You have been banned. No trolling. Absolutely no trolling. Now gaslighting and manipulative subversion is the hallmark of a lot of the forces in the orbit of this case. So none of that. We have a lot of Blue Wall of Towel friends here. Don't stand for that. Hello, Christy Mack. Great to see you. Hello. Stay tuned, Wendy. Hello, Bunny. Hello, F.B.I.โmy friend, F.B.I. DOJ corruption survivor. And hello, Meredithโwhich is not Meredith O'Neill. This is Meredith the Towel friend. It's great to see you all. And as I said, if you see anybody trolling in the chatโnow is not the day for it. Towel's health is not well. And I think there are a lot of people who want to undermine the agency of the unheard and the vulnerable in this situation. There are a lot of people who want to gaslight right now because where this is going is explosive. And furthermore, we're about to listen to the conversation. So what you're going to hear in this conversation is it's going to be Aidan Kearney and Joe Flipperheadโwho's named Nickโand a guy named Chris who Aidan Kearney calls a koala. They're going to be talking about what we just talked about. But rememberโthese text messages haven't been released. So Aidan doesn't actually know they're coming. He's being told of this and going on an X Space and reacting in real time. Now I'm going to pause from time to time, and I'll try to flesh out some of the less clear parts. But as we read through the transcript and as you see this all, I think it will be clear to youโclear to youโthe implications. So let's listen."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1972993638146670728/amplify_video_thumb/1972991333062090752/img/HvGNy_3gMvcvFhAY.jpg)
![Well, friends, the interview the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial world didn't know they wanted has finally occurred. I appreciate The Glarer for having me on his program. We discussed Kate Peter, I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, both sides agreed as to the importance of civil debate and leaving people's families out of the fray and then Will helped Olivia and I move towards amicable discussion. Overall, a 10/10 way to celebrate the day towel become a YouTube partner. Here are my two favorite quotes from Will and myself; [Grant] "If any of you took 10 minutes --not on camera-- to talk to Lindsey Gaetani, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God I will defend that 'till my last day." [Grant] "I realized that there was just this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change โ I had to reflect that change in my actions." [The Glarer] "If you believe so much in Karen Readโs guilt, then the facts should speak for themselves. You shouldnโt have to bring peopleโs family members into it. [The Glarer] "But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself โ because of how smart you are โ that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion." Here's the full transcript: [Grant] Well, good afternoon towel friends. My name is Grant Smith Ellis and in addition to becoming a YouTube partner today I also decided to call into The Glarer's show. It was the collaboration that the world didn't know they needed but now they have. And if you'd like to listen to this fascinating conversation, related to new allegations as to Kate MafiaMasshole Peter being a PI in the orbit of the Aidan Turtleboy Kearney prosecution, as well as somehow both Will and I eventually coming to a discussion where I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, along with a closing segment about the importance on both sides of the Karen Read and John OโKeefe case of being mutually respectful, even if we have differences of opinion on those facts, you can do so right now. Will and I shared a belief that positive changes in the Karen Read and John O'Keefe trial world, at least in terms of that improving dynamic as to disagreeing without being disagreeable, are evident. So enjoy the conversation, folks. It was certainly an interesting one. [The Glarer] You're on โ who am I speaking with? [Grant] Hey, Will, it's me. I'm Grant... [The Glarer] โ hold on, I gotta give you applause, buddy. You made it. [Grant] Well, we certainly may have different views on the case, but I think we share respect for Jesus and we can talk bad about Kate Peter for sure. [The Glarer] Yeah, that we can do. Sure. Sure. So what's up, bud? What do you got to say? [Grant] Well, I think if people have been following me on X, they will know I've been yelling about Kate Peter taking an envelope of cash in the Chick-fil-A parking lot in front of me for months. And I feel vindicated as of the news of this weekend. [The Glarer] Okay. Okay, so wait a minute. That tracks. So the person who is in this sworn affidavit who claims to have seen Kate Peter with the manila envelope โ you're claiming to have seen her with the same envelope. Is that what you're saying? [Grant] It wasn't a manila envelope. Well, there's two pertinent facts. So Kate Peter and I met up for the first time โ I would say it was in the winter of 2024 โ in a Chick-fil-A parking lot somewhere on the South Coast, maybe near Raynham or something. Anyway, she came and got in my car and she was like, "Well, I'm waiting for someone in a white Toyota Corolla to drop me off money. We try to do it with cash so it doesn't leave a record." And I was like, "Well, this seems a little weird." And then the car pulled up. I didn't actually see the car. She got out, went over to it, came back into my car. It was a white envelope with a green thank-you card. She opened it. There were probably four or five hundred โ four or five fifties and a bunch of twenties. [The Glarer] Wow.... Okay, now Grant, I gotta ask you a tough question, buddy. I would be remiss if I didn't do that, all right? Now, a lot of people are thinking the same thing I'm thinking right now, which is: how can we believe you? Where's your credibility? Because you've lied about so many other things so easily. [Grant] Well, I would challenge that and say maybe you have different perspectives on me, but that should reinforce what I'm saying here. The Melanie Little and Alan Jackson Aruba thing โ I apologized for that on stream and in a post (because Melanie Little told people not to go after Lindsey's kids, and I found that honorable). [The Glarer] Fair enough. [The Glarer] You did apologize. Okay, so you apologized for that. Okay. [Grant] But I'm critiquing someone [Kate Peter] who would ostensibly be aligned with what I believe about the case, and I still believe what I believe about Karen being responsible for John's deathโ we don't have to get into it โ but I'm critiquing someone who supports that view. That should reinforce my credibility here. [The Glarer] Yeah, and MicroDots backs you up at least on this thing, you know, he says he believes you on this thing. I'm just saying โ dude, I've read what you've written. You're a talented writer, clearly. But I can honestly say I've got a whole community of people here โ a shit ton of people in this chat right now โ that I know would agree with me that if you made a habit of reporting the truth, you'd have support, you'd have readers, you'd have a whole audience. I'd be a fan! But your credibility is fucked with me right now, dude. You know, and I hate that, because I actually enjoy reading what you write. [Grant] I appreciate what you're saying. I think I would just say maybe it's smaller than your community, but I just got made a YouTube partner today. I'm actually celebrating that. I have a small community, people do support me โ maybe not as many as support your channel, but it's just people with different views consuming different content. [The Glarer] Yeah, but the thing is โ like, I'm content with my audience. My audience could be bigger, but I cuss a lot and I use words that offend people and I just don't kind of play by the normal YouTube game that most creators play when they grow, you know? And I'm okay with the rate at which my channel grows because I get to be myself. But I don't hold back and I don't play by these rules. So I get all that. But I mean, I'm not ethically doing anything wrong. If I were spreading misinformation or contributing to any spread of misinformation, I would have a problem with myself and what I'm doing. You see what I'm saying? Like, it's a little bit different. You're telling me that you're content with your audience being small because you like to make shit up? You know what I mean? [Grant] No, no. Because it's a new channel. That's why the audience is growing. Anyway, the reason I shake your hand is I do think you're authentic in your beliefs, even if we disagree. And well โ before I forget, one more thing about that Chick-fil-A parking lot cash that's actually important: when Kate got that money handed over, she told me it was for a donation drive to help other people offset babysitting costs or whatever nonsense. Someone sent a text message โ a family member of the person who paid her that cash โ and they put in writing that they sent the money for Kate's own expenses. So she lied to me in the car about what the money was for. Somethingโs up with that. [The Glarer] So she told you in the car that the money was for... [Grant] She said it was to pay for babysitters for people who need help and to donate to other people, which I don't believe. Like, of course not. Nobody believes that. [The Glarer] And then you found out โ through what โ that this money was actually for her personal expenses? [Grant] Eventually a text message got released from someone in the orbit of whoever paid Kate. It was a family member โ I don't know who it was. I've only seen the text message. I'm happy to reshare it on my X later. In that text message, it says โ quoting the person โ "I sent that envelope with my sister over to Kate. It was for her expenses" or something like that. So even that is evidence. [The Glarer] Wow. Okay, so you are strictly of the opinion, based on things you've seen yourself, that Kate Peter is absolutely being paid by the Commonwealth to spin narratives? [Grant] I'll give you one more piece of information, Will, and maybe you or your audience can track this down: I don't think Kate was involved in the Karen Read investigation directly, but I think starting in the fall of 2023 she worked for a private investigator named Marty Kraft. And I believe by proxy she was then retained to work on Aidan's case through that PI firm. [The Glarer] Okay, and then she just became the mouthpiece between the PI firm and the Commonwealth is what you're saying. [Grant] I will say a few things: I reasonably believe she does have direct contact with the DA and agents of the Commonwealth โ I've said that before โ and I also believe that she has favoritism towards specific witnesses in the orbit of this case. Not all of them โ specific witnesses. [The Glarer] Okay, well, I mean, we know who they are, but okay. [Grant] I will also say โ I think โ that your caller was prescient earlier, and they mentioned there might be some mutual blackmail. Well, we know that Lindsey Gaetaniโs phone extraction was manipulated to remove messages from Brian Tully to Lindsey and from Kate Peter to Lindsey. [The Glarer] ...what's your deal with Lindsey? [Grant] Hold, on let's pull it back first. First of all, I think there was a bifurcation: there's charges from October 2023 against Aidan and December 2023 against Aidan. One set of charges, from October of 2023, involved the Karen Read witnesses; the other set, from December of 2023, involved Lindsey. I don't think anyone set Aidan up in December 2023. I think he was just in love with Lindsey and it kind of got out of control. [The Glarer] Bro... [Grant] Well, but hold on, Will... [The Glarer] I'm listening... [Grant] I think that cell phone extraction goes right to the mutual blackmail point your friend talked about earlier. Someone, during the course of the Aidan Kearney investigation involving Lindsey, manipulated that cell phone extraction, and it could have only happened while it was in State Police custody. That is the whole โ that's everything right there because of Kate Peter is the only person who could have gotten Brian Tully to get Nick Guarino to manipulate that extraction while it was in State Police custody before Tully leaked it, by hand, to Aidan's lawyer. [The Glarer] Okay, so listen, Grant. Like, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding. Now, I think Lindsey was used. But come on, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding to try to set Aidan up. Like, you know this. [Grant] No, I disagree, because I've looked at the timeline closely. Aidan begged to go over there when his indictments got handed down in December. [The Glarer] Well, listen โ why? [Grant] Because he got charged in October, but the indictments for the October thing came down December 20th. [Grant] Then when did he beg to go over to Lindsey's? [Grant] I'm about to explain. December 21st, Lindsey tells him, "Hey Aidan, I just got a subpoena for a grand jury." Aidan's mind has gotta' start racing. "Why would there be another grand jury? Is it about me and Karen Read? What is this about?" So he begged her to go over there so he could find out. And that's โ like โ he looked at her phone that night to see the messages between her and Kate to try to find out about what this new grand jury was about. So no one set him up. He begged to go over there. [The Glarer] So you're just assuming that he begged to go over there based on...? [Grant] I know he begged to go over there. He was pleading because he wanted to find out what the new grand jury was. [The Glarer] The difference between you and Aidan is Aidan posts receipts, dude. But you don't. You get the difference? That's why Aidan has as much of a following as he has. [Grant] If you're asking for receipts of him begging to go over there on that day, I'm happy to provide those. I'll post them. [The Glarer] Then why didn't you do that already? [Grant] Well, I think because what I understand to be the evidentiary record from going to all the hearings is different than what people consume, because not everyone goes to every hearing. But I'm happy to do that. I have it all archived. [The Glarer] Okay, but the point is โ like MicroDots is saying โ that he was baited to go over there. So even if he begged to go over there under whatever circumstance, we have proof โ we've seen proof โ that he was baited to go over there based on false information that she was pregnant. [Grant] No. No. She was pregnant. [The Glarer] Oh my, Grant, bro... [Grant] Okay. I will swear on my God about that. [The Glarer] Hold on... [Grant] Well, to move on, I was going to give you some credit. I was going to say you might have been right that the subpoena issued to Lindsey, without her knowledge, could have been to bait Aidan. [The Glarer] But she wouldn't โ how do you explain the metadata on the pictures that she sent him of the sonogram, dude? [Grant] First of all, if you're talking about someone's pregnancy โ that's a medical issue, and to bring it up on air disgraces Jesus. [The Glarer] Oh, come on, Grant. [Grant] Let's not. [The Glarer] Alright, fine. We won't talk about that anymore. But let's face it, dude โ you're making excuses for this girl. And why? Like, do you have a crush on her? Is that what's going on here? And it's okay. [Grant] Oh, oh, please. When I first came into this case, I saw a woman walk into a courtroom, and I started listening to her story. And even in this conversation, there are multiple things I corrected where you were willing to say, "Okay, Grant, maybe that is what happened." And Lindsey doesn't have anyone out there who is voicing that for her, so I'm taking the opportunity to do it. [The Glarer] And do you wonder why she doesn't have anyone voicing things out for her, dude? [The Glarer] Because Aidan isolates people! [The Glarer] Get out of here with that. Stop. Again with the whole "it's Aidan's fault" shit, man. That's between you and Lindsey, dude. I'm asking โ like, I asked you why you think that. Nobody is going to bat for Lindsey. And I saw receipts. I heard a recording of her โ you're talking about somebody who I heard a recording of [that night with Aidan in December of 2023]. This is... Come on, Grant. [Grant] I was in the courtroom. I saw the people crying when that tape was played. And you know what I also heard, Will? I heard the original version of that tape that didn't have her consent to record, which is why Aidan got charged with felony wiretapping. [The Glarer] Okay, but you're not denying that she said that, right? [Grant] Listen, I have never been awake at 12:30 in the morning. I'm not a woman. I've never been confronted with that situation. I would never pass judgment on someone in that situation. [The Glarer] Every woman that I've ever heard express their opinion on it โ pretty negative, dude. Just saying. Pretty negative. Especially the moms. Especially the moms. [Grant] So I don't think any people talking in that way โ I don't think you've even met this woman. [The Glarer] You're right. I have not. I have not met her. [Grant] And if โ I don't know if she will ever do this โ but if any of you took 10 minutes, not on camera, to talk to this woman, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God, I will defend that 'till my last day. [The Glarer] Alright. Declared. Got it. I gotta' ask you one more question though. Why are you saying stuff about Olivia Nile โ Olivia Nile and her mom โ being paid agents for the defense? Come on. [Grant] Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I know that's Olivia Lamb. Okay? [The Glarer] Right, yeah, same person. Yeah, yeah. [Grant] Okay, so we all know Christina Lamb does boutique PR consulting for lawyers. She's good at it. Oliviaโs good at it. They should own it. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] What โ how is that proof, though? That Olivia Lamb is being paid by the defense in some way? You see the problem? [Grant] Hold on. That is an extrapolation some people may make. My argument is only that what she does looks like PR for the defense. I think Olivia hasn't been paid since last year. [The Glarer] But she's saying that's not even what she does, dude. [Grant] Okay, maybe it's not. But I think Olivia's contract ran up at the end of the first trial, if you want me to be very blunt with you. [The Glarer] Contract? [Grant] Mm-hmm. [The Glarer] But her mom doesn't even do that either โ what the fuckโs her mom got to do with it? [Grant] Well, why would her mom run some random boutique PR consulting firm for lawyers, and then Olivia just shows up with this extremely high-level acumen, rivaling lawyers? [The Glarer] But thatโs not what she does. She's saying that's not even what her mom does or what she does. [Grant] Okay, well, I looked at her mom's website. I archived it going back a few years, so I can post the screenshots again. And I know what she advertised herself as doing. [The Glarer] But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself โ because of how smart you are โ that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. That's what I think. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion. Because you state your opinions as though they're fact. And I think that's an ego thing. I don't even think it's malice. Itโs just ego. That's what it comes off as, anyway, dude. Because everything you say โ every time I ask you, "Where's your proof?" โ you explain how you came to your opinion. You give me a laid-out story. Go back and listen to this later on โ you'll see what I mean. [Grant] Well, I don't even doubt you, actually, that I'm firm in my convictions. If I'm not there to experience something, I do not know the truth. But I've seen the screenshots. I only found out Olivia Lamb was Olivia Lamb because I found an archived X post where she shared something very sentimental about her grandfather. I didn't like that. I didn't appreciate having to talk about that. But it became relevant because I wanted to know why she was involved in the case. I will listen to her tell me I'm wrong. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] Yeah, but you can't just, like, trap people into interviews by threatening to spread lies about them if they don't, bro. What kind of shit is that? [Grant] Nothing that I said about her grandfather, her acumen or her mother's work was incorrect... [The Glarer] But why are you even talking about her family, dude? Like, that's really low, man. Like โ that's... It's low, man. It's low. Her family didn't have nothing to do with this, man. She's doing this because she cares about it. And then people start talking about people's family members and shit. And it's like โ it comes off as a not-so-subtle form of intimidation, frankly, Grant. You know, trying to get somebody to shut up. [Grant] No, I don't want to do that. I want to learn about why she's interested in the case. [The Glarer] But you could see how somebody could see it that way, right? Because what if her family starts telling her, "Hey, stop talking about this. Why are we being brought into your shit because you're passionate about something?" What if her family does that and puts her in an awkward position? And then people are cheated out of some really good insight because of that. [Grant] My brother โ my brother who at four years old had a colectomy, three-stage, and is developmentally disabled as a result โ has a profile someone made mocking him on X. That's a profile that people I respect engage with. Usually I overlook that stuff because I don't believe the people engaging in it are trying to do that. And I hope people realize I'm not doing that to her. I authentically want to know why Olivia's covering this case. [The Glarer] That's all right. So โ but that's my point, Grant. I'm just saying, like, if you believe Karen Read is guilty, why not just stick to the facts? Because you don't see me going after anybody's family. You don't see Olivia going after anybody's family, talking about people's family and exposing their family and what they do. You know what I mean? That's not cool. I don't do that. And Oliviaโs saying that she will happily talk to you anytime about why she's interested in the case. You see what? That's my point. That's my point โ if you believe so much in Karen Read's guilt, then the facts should speak. Everything that you put out there โ the facts, the details of the case, and the way you interpret those facts โ that should be enough. You shouldn't have to bring people's family members into it. Come on. I feel like you're better than that. That's all. I still have faith that you're better than that. [Grant] Yeah. And I think that's the perfect place to end, because you've given me a lot of time and I share your sentiments. I think that is crucially important. You don't see me out there in the past six months or twelve months talking about Melanie Little, or Olivia or her parents anymore. [The Glarer] I have seen improvement, yes. I have seen it. [Grant] And let me just say why: because I came to believe that there was this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and that I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change โ I had to reflect that change in my actions. And that's why that happened. So that's it. That's how I feel. [The Glarer] Okay. Yeah, I mean, everybodyโs entitled to their feelings and opinions, man. We all are. But yeah, Iโm glad that we got this talk. I got to express some things I wanted to express to you. You were very receptive, and I appreciate you coming on and being respectful and being cool. And youโre welcome here anytime, Grant. I can see that we could talk about pretty much anything, and it's fine. That will always be welcome here โ no matter what we disagree on. So I appreciate you, Grant. [Grant] God bless, Will, enjoy the rest of your Saturday. [The Glarer] Have a good one. Alright, Grant, y'all. Alright, I'm gonna take another call. Let's do that.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1916273688736940311/amplify_video_thumb/1916261346590515200/img/hUvZMgeSmwtcpp9Y.jpg)
![INDIGOS ARE NOT HERE TO ASCEND A reminder to all Guardian Alliance warriors: you aren't here to 'qualify' for the next dimension. Do not mistake yourself as one of the humans and other abductees who were captured and held hostage on this battlefield since the Human Elohim Project began. You are the ones who came to set them free. You're not 'making the shift now', ahead of those humans & hybrids who are under the ascension process: you're here to show them how to embody higher awareness through example. So don't be depressed if you're still here; when you know for certain others have already moved forward since the opening of the Stellar Activation (ascension) Cycle on 12/21/2012. For the abductees we're here to enable escape, they are locked-in to the ascension process until they have gone through all 5 densities and all 15 dimensions. Each density has 3 dimensions. Density 1 covers dimensions 1, 2 & 3. That's where you are now, here to get the stragglers into density 2, to move up through dimensions 4, 5 & 6 on their journey. Once they've completed the 15th dimension, the final level of density 5, they will 'Kryst' their avatar out of that time matrix and return to the interstellar communities where they will be able to choose which time matrix they might want to enter into next. Or not; because manifesting inside a simulation is not mandatory. Many of us don't choose to have a physical avatar at all anymore, because after a certain number of manifest journeys, there really isn't much to gain from all that anymore. You are eternal and have been at this game for a very, very long time. You can choose to just 'be' Prime Creator and observe, or even assist those in the game if you wish. No one forces you into a mortal, fragile body if you don't want to. [For more about the ascension process, see my article: ๐15 LEVEL TIME MATRIX] Indigos are not here on the same journey as the abductees. You are a tactical, front-lines mil unit that enters battlefields like Navy Seals, or Airborne Rangers. In their case, they have very sparse tools to help breach enemy lines and can be considered an army of 1. Only the bravest men on earth would ever consider that role. In your case, only the bravest warriors across the cosmeias would ever attempt your mission. Because unlike armed soldiers in battle gear, you arrive on the field as an infant, naked, mind-wiped and abandoned. On the other side of enemy lines. Your role is not for everyone. Your job is to retrieve the POWs so they can resume their ascension journey that was arrested when they were all taken hostage 560m years ago. None of them should have been here in the 3rd dimension longer than about 2 1/2 years, and all of them should have mastered out of the Gaia time matrix after no longer than 33 years in total. That is their journey, not yours. Once your mission is over, you don't go to the next level, you simply leave. Or stay if you choose. But you don't have to qualify for anything, as long as you fulfill your contract by doing what you said you would do; free the hostages. Even if you already embody 7th dimensional awareness, you're not going to disappear from this level like the prisoners are once their cells resonate with the next dimension. I was told on no uncertain terms in 2018 at the safe house speaking to the keeper 'Many have already left. The ascension window is wide open, all they have to do is reach the next level of awareness', going on to say 'they simply vanish from this plane as if they were never here'. The keeper explained those who remain have the entire database of their loved one or someone they know who resonated with the next level, erased from their memory to avoid panic in a 'left behind' scenario. So there is no way we (the foot soldiers) have of keeping track of how many have already ascended. But the top levels of this conflict do. You will not be vanishing this way. Because you are the extraction team itself. For more about your role in this rescue operation, see my article: ๐INDIGO MISSIONS. THE ALPHAS Wolf packs have an alpha leader that protects the whole group from attacks. The old, weak, infirmed & the very young pups. But the amazing thing is that alpha isn't at the head of the pack. That's where the most fragile travel, because predators never confront the ones at the lead of groups, they prey on the very back of any herd to pick off the slowest, least powerful. Which is why wolves travel oppositely from normal game and their strongest & most fearless remain solitary at the back of the line so he can visually see the entire group and protect them from outside exposure. If another predator tries to cull the group, they will face the herd's most apex force. That's us, the guardian alliance. Not breaking the trail, but overseeing everyone's safety so no one gets left behind which gives the entire group the confidence to keep moving forward. It is your presence behind them that lights the way for them to reach the exit door. Without your strength they can count on, very few, if any, would ever make it through Armageddon, which is a process to separate the wheat from the chaff so the aether knows what is the best stage for each person left on this simulation field to go to next. [For more about this process, see my article: ๐THE SEPARATION] You will be here until every single one of the prisoners who have a chance to raise their awareness to make the shift, has. Then, at the final second of separation where Particle Tara makes the full transition away from Antiparticle Tara (where all the low-frequency invaders and low-frequency abductees who were just unable to overcome the elaborate brainwashing programs to resonate with the next level of awareness finally vanish from your world), you will simply be in the next dimension with your group. That's when your next phase of your mission kicks in and you help them to build the 4th dimension. Your job is far from over after merely breaking them free of this bondage, because leaving them all abandoned in the wreckage of what is left of Particle Tara would be like delivering your rescue party into the jaws of yet another hostage scenario. They must understand how the 4th dimension even works, have industry set up so they can produce wholesome products instead of loosh-farm poisons and without you to help, that's a level that might take them a trillion years to reach on their own. You are the 4th dimension is so many words. As for the next level: it has already been established. What I mean by that, is time is not linear. Every dimension within the time matrix is mapped out, played out, recorded and then replayed on a never-ending loop. We STEP INTO that loop when weโre ready, as the path through has already been ironed out in the simulation. So you can think of time and events much like a Blockbuster Video store with 10,000 movies to choose from. Then inside each movie, there are 1000 scenes. You can simply pop the video into a player, zip to the scene by the lake and instantly you are there. Nothing about that scene hasnโt already been filmed and recorded. And it never stops playing out in the aetheric field. You are there RIGHT NOW in every possible scenario you could ever find yourself in, given your set of potential possibilities in a human body that is this tall and that strong or that fragile, etc. If it COULD happen, it already has happened and stored in the akashic records (the Blockbuster store), sitting there waiting for you to reach for that movie, then choose that scene and press play. I was told directly that not only is the full 4th dimension established, but it runs all the way from the 4.0 through to the 4.99 interdimension (think of this like from caveman to George Jetson eras), and โit is this generation who successfully established itโ. Which simply means, that after 26 times weโve battled for ascension during previous Stellar Activation Cycles and lost, it is on this attempt when we finally succeeded. What that means in real terms, is that as long as each of us on the ground do our jobs successfully as is already recorded in the akashic records, this is the battle where we win. So step forward with confidence that we did this. We win. It is already over except for the physical process of living it out. You are the ones we are relying on to take up the rear of this exodus. And don't make the mistake of assuming you are merely following the herd: by keeping everyone in your sights, you give them all the strength to keep moving, because they know they have your watchful eye at their backs. Every single one of you are Alphas. No weaklings volunteered to enter behind enemy lines here, abandoned, mind-wiped and attacked since the day they are born. Only the most courageous across the cosmeias signed up for this penultimate battle, armed with absolutely nothing but your wits and willpower alone (and a few clair abilities we smuggled in with us to help us navigate the field). I'm not here to blow sunshine up your skirt, but when I tell you all you are Alphas OF the Alpha warriors, I mean you are the ones poets write songs about across the ages. Never forget you had this since before you were born and knew you could pull it off. Don't ever second-guess yourself on this legendary hero's journey that will still be taught about in schools a million years from now. You're here because only the toughest rawhide could have ever signed up for your mission and survived. The ones willing to brave everything. All alone on the trail. That's you. - On X, to search for my articles, simply type in the name of the piece, enter one space, then from: plus my username in parenthesis such as shown here: CASTING THE APOCALYPSE (from:iontecs_pemf) Off-site, you can look up any of my writings through this link below for my other more than 150+ recent articles and many thousands of comments on X, regularly updated thanks to Justin LINK: ๐ This message will only be seen by your eyes if not shared, and if you want to reference this article again later, you will need to cut and paste it in your own notes off line, as it will surely be erased. This is the most accurate translation of these events I am aware of at this time.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2087984511036629262/amplify_video_thumb/2087948674748014592/img/MC8T4Y6qYw4362M0.jpg)
9:38
Sensitive content
INDIGOS ARE NOT HERE TO ASCEND A reminder to all Guardian Alliance warriors: you aren't here to 'qualify' for the next dimension. Do not mistake yourself as one of the humans and other abductees who were captured and held hostage on this battlefield since the Human Elohim Project began. You are the ones who came to set them free. You're not 'making the shift now', ahead of those humans & hybrids who are under the ascension process: you're here to show them how to embody higher awareness through example. So don't be depressed if you're still here; when you know for certain others have already moved forward since the opening of the Stellar Activation (ascension) Cycle on 12/21/2012. For the abductees we're here to enable escape, they are locked-in to the ascension process until they have gone through all 5 densities and all 15 dimensions. Each density has 3 dimensions. Density 1 covers dimensions 1, 2 & 3. That's where you are now, here to get the stragglers into density 2, to move up through dimensions 4, 5 & 6 on their journey. Once they've completed the 15th dimension, the final level of density 5, they will 'Kryst' their avatar out of that time matrix and return to the interstellar communities where they will be able to choose which time matrix they might want to enter into next. Or not; because manifesting inside a simulation is not mandatory. Many of us don't choose to have a physical avatar at all anymore, because after a certain number of manifest journeys, there really isn't much to gain from all that anymore. You are eternal and have been at this game for a very, very long time. You can choose to just 'be' Prime Creator and observe, or even assist those in the game if you wish. No one forces you into a mortal, fragile body if you don't want to. [For more about the ascension process, see my article: ๐15 LEVEL TIME MATRIX] Indigos are not here on the same journey as the abductees. You are a tactical, front-lines mil unit that enters battlefields like Navy Seals, or Airborne Rangers. In their case, they have very sparse tools to help breach enemy lines and can be considered an army of 1. Only the bravest men on earth would ever consider that role. In your case, only the bravest warriors across the cosmeias would ever attempt your mission. Because unlike armed soldiers in battle gear, you arrive on the field as an infant, naked, mind-wiped and abandoned. On the other side of enemy lines. Your role is not for everyone. Your job is to retrieve the POWs so they can resume their ascension journey that was arrested when they were all taken hostage 560m years ago. None of them should have been here in the 3rd dimension longer than about 2 1/2 years, and all of them should have mastered out of the Gaia time matrix after no longer than 33 years in total. That is their journey, not yours. Once your mission is over, you don't go to the next level, you simply leave. Or stay if you choose. But you don't have to qualify for anything, as long as you fulfill your contract by doing what you said you would do; free the hostages. Even if you already embody 7th dimensional awareness, you're not going to disappear from this level like the prisoners are once their cells resonate with the next dimension. I was told on no uncertain terms in 2018 at the safe house speaking to the keeper 'Many have already left. The ascension window is wide open, all they have to do is reach the next level of awareness', going on to say 'they simply vanish from this plane as if they were never here'. The keeper explained those who remain have the entire database of their loved one or someone they know who resonated with the next level, erased from their memory to avoid panic in a 'left behind' scenario. So there is no way we (the foot soldiers) have of keeping track of how many have already ascended. But the top levels of this conflict do. You will not be vanishing this way. Because you are the extraction team itself. For more about your role in this rescue operation, see my article: ๐INDIGO MISSIONS. THE ALPHAS Wolf packs have an alpha leader that protects the whole group from attacks. The old, weak, infirmed & the very young pups. But the amazing thing is that alpha isn't at the head of the pack. That's where the most fragile travel, because predators never confront the ones at the lead of groups, they prey on the very back of any herd to pick off the slowest, least powerful. Which is why wolves travel oppositely from normal game and their strongest & most fearless remain solitary at the back of the line so he can visually see the entire group and protect them from outside exposure. If another predator tries to cull the group, they will face the herd's most apex force. That's us, the guardian alliance. Not breaking the trail, but overseeing everyone's safety so no one gets left behind which gives the entire group the confidence to keep moving forward. It is your presence behind them that lights the way for them to reach the exit door. Without your strength they can count on, very few, if any, would ever make it through Armageddon, which is a process to separate the wheat from the chaff so the aether knows what is the best stage for each person left on this simulation field to go to next. [For more about this process, see my article: ๐THE SEPARATION] You will be here until every single one of the prisoners who have a chance to raise their awareness to make the shift, has. Then, at the final second of separation where Particle Tara makes the full transition away from Antiparticle Tara (where all the low-frequency invaders and low-frequency abductees who were just unable to overcome the elaborate brainwashing programs to resonate with the next level of awareness finally vanish from your world), you will simply be in the next dimension with your group. That's when your next phase of your mission kicks in and you help them to build the 4th dimension. Your job is far from over after merely breaking them free of this bondage, because leaving them all abandoned in the wreckage of what is left of Particle Tara would be like delivering your rescue party into the jaws of yet another hostage scenario. They must understand how the 4th dimension even works, have industry set up so they can produce wholesome products instead of loosh-farm poisons and without you to help, that's a level that might take them a trillion years to reach on their own. You are the 4th dimension is so many words. As for the next level: it has already been established. What I mean by that, is time is not linear. Every dimension within the time matrix is mapped out, played out, recorded and then replayed on a never-ending loop. We STEP INTO that loop when weโre ready, as the path through has already been ironed out in the simulation. So you can think of time and events much like a Blockbuster Video store with 10,000 movies to choose from. Then inside each movie, there are 1000 scenes. You can simply pop the video into a player, zip to the scene by the lake and instantly you are there. Nothing about that scene hasnโt already been filmed and recorded. And it never stops playing out in the aetheric field. You are there RIGHT NOW in every possible scenario you could ever find yourself in, given your set of potential possibilities in a human body that is this tall and that strong or that fragile, etc. If it COULD happen, it already has happened and stored in the akashic records (the Blockbuster store), sitting there waiting for you to reach for that movie, then choose that scene and press play. I was told directly that not only is the full 4th dimension established, but it runs all the way from the 4.0 through to the 4.99 interdimension (think of this like from caveman to George Jetson eras), and โit is this generation who successfully established itโ. Which simply means, that after 26 times weโve battled for ascension during previous Stellar Activation Cycles and lost, it is on this attempt when we finally succeeded. What that means in real terms, is that as long as each of us on the ground do our jobs successfully as is already recorded in the akashic records, this is the battle where we win. So step forward with confidence that we did this. We win. It is already over except for the physical process of living it out. You are the ones we are relying on to take up the rear of this exodus. And don't make the mistake of assuming you are merely following the herd: by keeping everyone in your sights, you give them all the strength to keep moving, because they know they have your watchful eye at their backs. Every single one of you are Alphas. No weaklings volunteered to enter behind enemy lines here, abandoned, mind-wiped and attacked since the day they are born. Only the most courageous across the cosmeias signed up for this penultimate battle, armed with absolutely nothing but your wits and willpower alone (and a few clair abilities we smuggled in with us to help us navigate the field). I'm not here to blow sunshine up your skirt, but when I tell you all you are Alphas OF the Alpha warriors, I mean you are the ones poets write songs about across the ages. Never forget you had this since before you were born and knew you could pull it off. Don't ever second-guess yourself on this legendary hero's journey that will still be taught about in schools a million years from now. You're here because only the toughest rawhide could have ever signed up for your mission and survived. The ones willing to brave everything. All alone on the trail. That's you. - On X, to search for my articles, simply type in the name of the piece, enter one space, then from: plus my username in parenthesis such as shown here: CASTING THE APOCALYPSE (from:iontecs_pemf) Off-site, you can look up any of my writings through this link below for my other more than 150+ recent articles and many thousands of comments on X, regularly updated thanks to Justin LINK: ๐ This message will only be seen by your eyes if not shared, and if you want to reference this article again later, you will need to cut and paste it in your own notes off line, as it will surely be erased. This is the most accurate translation of these events I am aware of at this time.
W.R. Schock, QBD
26,274 Aufrufe โข vor 2 Tagen
