Charlie Robinson (00:02.166)
Well, it's my great honor to have with us the executive director of Paradigm Research Group, Steven Bassett. It's great to meet you, Steven. How are you?

Steve Bassett (00:12.255)
Charlie, I'm fine. Nice and snug in my office. Little winter storm came through, no big deal. We almost never get them now. Once in a while, it's okay.

Charlie Robinson (00:23.288)
Well, you saw, I'm in Denver. So if you were watching the football game, you saw how snowy it is here. I say this as a treat for me to speak with you because you don't know it, but you played a huge role in my first book. I wrote a book in 2017 called the Octopus of Global Control and the format of that book.

is that it features 700 quotes from 500 different people who had a front row seat to some of the most important events in our history. And one of the quotes, you know, I'm not supposed to have favorites. They're, you know, it's like kids. I'm supposed to love them all equally, but it's not really the case because there was one quote in particular that jumped out to me and I've talked about it quite a bit. It'll, it, people will find it in the introduction to my book and it's from you.

And I'd like to read it because it really sets the pace and the tone for my book. And I think it's appropriate for everybody just looking at the current world that we're in. So I'm going to read it from the beginning. It's a couple of paragraphs, but I think people will appreciate it. And I've read this before. imagine if the truth was a huge jigsaw puzzle, a big box with 20,000 pieces, and it is the truth, the absolute truth.

It is a picture of the world as it really is. You come into this world, you get an education, you're handed this box, and the idea is to put all the pieces together. And if you put all the pieces together on this huge table, it will be the truth about the world that you live in. So you set about to do that. All good. A wonderful thing. Except there's a problem. It turns out the government that you are living under

has made a decision to interfere with this truth process. It's a political decision being made for political reasons to serve the state, almost never the citizens. So the government has taken a whole bunch of these pieces out of your box and has thrown them away. They're missing. Well, that's a problem, but it gets worse. They've grabbed a bunch of pieces from another box, another puzzle, and thrown them into your box, to your puzzle.

Charlie Robinson (02:46.582)
And now you have to put this thing together with an idea that what you are going to find is the truth. That is an almost impossible situation and it is extremely effective to serve the state.

Charlie Robinson (03:02.7)
That's the reason why that is in the introduction to my book is self-evident and and I'd love for you to comment on this because I have been waiting to talk to you for almost a decade.

Steve Bassett (03:04.287)
forgot about that quote.

Steve Bassett (03:13.429)
Well, first of all, email me that quote. Wherever it is, I'm sure I can't find it, but I like it, I wanna use it again, so email me that quote if you don't mind, Technically, we're still solving that puzzle, but boy, we have put a lot of pieces together without question. It's a pretty thorough picture, but it's missing some things here and there. And there are still,

some pieces in the pile that we're working from that are pulled from somewhere else. They're bogus. But not many. We've been able to call out a lot of the bogus implants, I guess you could say. And we've been able to find some other pieces that were not there and put it together. So what we have is a pretty much representative

puzzle of the truth in front of us, enough that we can now call for the president to disclose and the president can disclose without shocking anybody. But it took 80 years. Now, that's a long time to work on a puzzle. I read an article recently about a woman, that's all she does. These huge puzzles, all the time. then she, I don't know, she laminates over them and then she puts them up in the wall.

Their whole house is just filled with these giant pieces. That's great. I get it. Excessive compulsive behavior, yet totally harmless. Well, this is bigger than all the puzzles she's put together. And it took 80 years to do it. And we're finally done. And so the metaphor stands, except I'll add this. There are other puzzles that our society is trying to put together.

that we're trying to understand about what is happening in our country, in the world, and so forth. And those are being interfered with too. And so what is really needed is to make a decision as a society that no more messing around with our jigsaw puzzles. You're not allowed to do it anymore. Just don't do it, okay? And as we get the truth together, then we'll act accordingly.

Steve Bassett (05:36.937)
But that is probably not going to happen until the national security threats that are still imminent around the world that we have established and seem can't give up. Hotspots and war spots. Hotspot refers to a place that could start a nuclear war, to be honest with you. But then there are warm spots where they may not launch a nuclear war, but lots of people are getting killed until we address that.

then the states are going to continue to mess around with the truth in service to those policies. That's where we are. What are the odds that we can truly transform out of this reality? Low. Except that there is a paradigm shift on our doorstep, which, boy, it's as big as it gets. And it's so powerful. Should we flip that switch? It might open a pathway to actually

deciding that we don't want to live that way as a civilization anymore. And of course, the switch I'm talking about is disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence, which is the confirmation of that presence, which we can safely call technologically advanced non-humans now for those that just flinch when they hear extraterrestrial, but trust me, that's where it's going to be. Put your money on that, on what's polymarket.

We're close. And so after 80 years, and it's really kind of sends chills up my spine to think that after 80 years, we're right there and we could get that confirmation tomorrow.

Charlie Robinson (07:23.726)
fascinating time to be alive and in staying with the jigsaw puzzle metaphor because you spend 80 years you're working on those edge pieces you know you're trying to get the framework and so that and then after you do that then the puzzle it starts to accelerate a little bit more once you get some of that you get an idea of at least where the edges are you can work in and and so I understand if you go back to the Roswell situation back in the 40s from there

People were starting to ask questions. Well, maybe there is something else out there. Fast forward to where we are now. Those discussions have already been had. The information is out there. People have seen things. People are asking questions. Maybe if they don't know, if they haven't seen something, somebody they know has seen it. And the conspiracy theorist label that they tried to slap on people in the 60s has whittled away a little bit. It lost its power. What is the state of you?

UAP disclosure in the country right now. You say that this is the best it's ever been. Are we a couple different decisions away in Congress from this? Or is this one person that needs to push it across the finish line? How many people are working on this? I don't see any of this from my vantage point. You do. You know how many people are involved in working on this. To the outside world, it maybe seems like a fringe thing, but I'm assuming that you have a

pretty tight group of people, lawyers, people with advanced knowledge of this that are pushing for us. It's a much bigger push than people realize.

Steve Bassett (08:59.846)
Well, there's an activist movement and I'm at the center of it, I think, along with others. By the way, you say Vanish Point, where are you based?

Charlie Robinson (09:08.258)
I'm in Denver.

Steve Bassett (09:11.923)
Okay, Denver, center of the country. I lived there, by the way, for 10 years. It's a great place. Back then, it was even better. Okay, fine. So I'm two blocks from the White House, and I'm on social media every day, and I log in the media coverage every day. As of now, I have logged in and read 17,000 articles from the professional press.

Right, the press, not bogs or little newsletters. talking about professional media, 17,000. So that means I have a little better picture. can the average person out there do that? No, they can't. They're gonna rely on kind of what turns up in the mainstream media. And the mainstream media has up until recently been remiss. The coverage really is not getting underway until after 2000.

But to answer your question, we are, first of all, go back to the puzzle. We have put a lot of pieces together. We have identified certain pieces that are not supposed to be in the box and we've thrown them out. All right. And of course we're recognizing that some pieces are completely missing. They were pulled out as we move forward. So that kind of slows it down.

But even if we were to get rid of every bogus piece and put every other piece in there as best we could, there would still be very substantial holes in this puzzle, though the fundamental picture would be there. We're not alone. There's an extraterrestrial presence. The rest of those pieces, the completion of the puzzle, which we want to do, that is what the post-disclosure era is about. That is what the UAP Disclosure Act is about. Because, and that act,

which is still only half done. There's been several efforts to complete it. It is the fundamental act we need. It's the necessary tools that we need. Probably might be finished, completed. The rest of the act might be in place before disclosure. But because disclosure I think is so possible now.

Steve Bassett (11:30.365)
It may be after disclosure. So if we get disclosure from the president, say on a Monday, the efforts to get that act completed will immediately be launched in Congress. And so maybe within a week or two or three weeks, the rest of the UAP Disclosure Act would be in place. Okay. And that's the engine that's going to bring it all out in a proper way, in responsible way, without any shenanigans to the world, to the American people. And that process, which will take two, three, four, five years, fills up the rest of the puzzle.

And then at some point, they can mount that puppy up on a big wall somewhere and people can take photos of it and go, here's the truth of the world now. And actually the world going back at least 80 years. All right. So that's one thing. The other point is that where we have gotten that's different from where we were when I entered the field in 1996, 30 years ago as of...

the 16th of this month is this.

Over those 30 years, I have tried to assess progress and regression on this issue. So if it's falling back, I would point that out. If it's moving forward, I'd point that out. If there were some imminent possibilities over the next year or so, I would say, look, this is good and so forth. I've never predicted it would happen on a certain day. I would say it's very favorable right now. It's very favorable this year. If this happens, I try to not...

Play profit, because I am not a profit by any means. If anything, I err on the side of optimism, which you have to do if you're an activist in a major movement. You can't err on the side of pessimism. People will just walk away. And what do you got? Activists succeeds based upon the optimistic sense amongst a large number of people in society that ultimately you're going to get it, hopefully sooner than later.

Steve Bassett (13:35.315)
You cannot have a successful activist movement without that, unless the government just completely concedes the whole thing. So that has been the case. What's different now? It's not simply that I think it could happen this year, but I can say something and have been able to say something since over the last five months, really, maybe four months, is that

For the first time since I got in the field, and really the first time as far as I can tell going back to 47, the President of the United States could step out tomorrow in whatever format that the President chooses, confirm the technologically advanced non-human presence from somewhere, confirm that they have technology that we have captured and that we have been studying and so forth without any significant disruption.

It would not cause a upheaval, it would not cause a political crisis. It would be almost for huge numbers of people, anti-climactic, not only in the United States but around the world. This is the first time I could say that. And then the question would be why? And the answer is pretty straightforward. Every big event, whether it's a wedding or a serious birthday, right?

or a major announcement, a declaration or whatever, every single major event needs some preparation. Right? If you're going to hold a wedding with 500 guests and you decide to throw it together in a couple of days, it's going to be a disaster. You have to prepare. And the best analogy that I use, forgive me if you've heard this before, is the inauguration of a president, which I like because of the connection. We could just inaugurate the president

at a bedroom in the White House, just put a Bible out there, he or she puts their hand on it and claims to defend the Constitution, etc. They're president, right? It doesn't have to be done out in front of the Capitol with a couple thousand people and all the benches and the scaffolding and flags waving. It doesn't have to be that way. Why do we do it? Because it's so important that it needs pageantry. It needs visibility.

Steve Bassett (15:52.659)
It needs participation because it's obviously watched by millions and millions of people. And so to properly inaugurate a president, you must have all of that. You must build all of that scaffolding and preparation and raise a lot of money because of how important it is. The disclosure of the ET presence, if I may, is more important than the inauguration of any president. It's more important, frankly, than anything I can think of.

Charlie Robinson (16:17.381)
yeah.

Steve Bassett (16:21.545)
without getting into religious histories. It is massive. It is almost unmeasurable. And so for the president to do it, that scaffolding has to be built so that it can be done right and responsibly. We've been building that scaffolding for 80 years, but in the last seven years, most, the majority of the work to complete it has taken place. And while there's still a few

planks missing and a couple of items here and there, it is sufficiently in place to do what has to be done, to inaugurate a president or rather to end the truth embargo. And what is the scaffolding I'm talking about? Is it wooden planks? No. We needed a number of things that had to be done in order to do this. And most of that is in the last seven years. One of the things though was public awareness.

basic awareness, regardless of your opinion, about the core subject. Are we alone or not alone? And that public awareness has been building for 80 years. And I assure you, it is at unprecedented levels in terms of the number of people that believe the phenomena is real worldwide, huge percentage. The number of people that think it is non-human is a growing percentage. And the number of people that feel they're not being told the truth by their government is a massive percentage, up in the 80, 90 percent.

So that has been done. And there has been so much information out in terms of books and of course the social media as well as podcasts and all of the advancements in world communication. The information that people have been able to read to develop an understanding of it, not just a decision whether it's true or not true, is massive. And so the overall knowledge base is way, way above where it used to be. And then, but we have that, that's important.

Charlie Robinson (18:13.508)
Yeah.

Charlie Robinson (18:21.679)
Mm-hmm.

Steve Bassett (18:22.261)
But we needed more. We needed legislation. We got it. The first legislation ever was passed in 2020 for 2021. Since then, there's been four and there's a couple pending. We had to have that. We needed congressional hearings. Well beyond the two modest hearings or briefings that took place in 66 and 68. I mean the real deal. We've had about nine...

briefings or hearings in front of members of Congress up on the Hill. Three of them were major. Then there's been several private events that were held up there, substantially. So we got that. We needed a much higher level of media coverage, particularly of the political aspects. Boy, in the last seven years, since 2017, which is eight years now, I have logged in 9,000 articles.

the largest by far of any eight-year period. I mean, it's just huge. 9,000 articles on this, and of course, a great deal of them are covering the political process. So we've got that. We needed witnesses to come forward in larger numbers. Witnesses have turned up from time to time over the last 80 years. You can go back and chronicle them. But again, not a critical mass. We needed a critical mass of witnesses. Well, the hearing process and other processes have resulted in scores of witnesses coming forward.

Some of them are known, some of them have talked privately to members of Congress. We don't know who they are, but we know that they've come forward. The number is quite substantial. And a substantial number have actually testified in front of hearings. So we've got that. And I say witnesses. Do we need whistleblowers? Well, they're basically witness plus, but they're not critical. We don't need a bunch of people coming forward, violating their oaths and risking life in prison or anything.

We just need witnesses that can speak to the issue without violating their agreements. But we've had some that have been whistleblowers. We've got that. Okay. We need members of Congress. We need members of the administration, sitting members of Congress and the administration, to speak to the issue. Wow. In the last few years, we've had more of that. Prior to that, almost nothing. And in the last seven years, my Lord,

Steve Bassett (20:43.925)
A dozen or more members of Congress or the administration easily have spoken to the issue in what is now a far broader public reality. In other words, they go in front of a podcast with 23 million subscribers, right? They go online and say it, and it's immediately archived. So it's available to anybody in the world. Just go to YouTube and find it. None of that was even possible prior to 1995. But there wasn't much of it anyway. And so we needed these individuals to come forward, like Tim Burchett.

Eric Berlison, Anna Polina Luna, Nancy Mase, Chuck Schumer, Mike Rounds, Kirsten Gillibrand, Andrew Carson, right, Carson, and so forth. To go in front of the public and matter of factly essentially make it clear that there is this reality, there is this presence, we've got that, all right? In other words, except for a missing piece of the UAP Disclosure Act.

And also we need a higher level of public engagement, which we've got that. We've got organizations and nonprofits and what have you. In other words, 95 % of that scaffolding is in place. We don't need the last 5%. And when you factor in that we are fully aware that the issue of, quote, technologically advanced nonhumans here and sequestered and reengineered tech,

We know for a fact, I can say it, that it is in play within the administration right now of the United States, the White House, the White House administration. We have absolute confirmation of this in many ways. just take, I can go into it if you want, but frankly, just, you know, do a little research. So we have that. And so when I say the President of the United States,

Charlie Robinson (22:29.784)
Yeah.

Steve Bassett (22:39.487)
could hold a press conference, give a private statement in the Oval Office on camera, or even attend a major event that is known that millions upon millions of people worldwide will be watching, and as a little surprise, in the President's statements, confirm it, which would be non-traditional way to do something like that. When I say it could happen tomorrow, I am serious.

I'm not being overly optimistic. I'm not pressing, you know, that I'm absolutely serious. It can absolutely happen tomorrow. That is where we are now. And this is a message I'm trying to get out. And the more people get that message, the more people are ready for that statement. And the more people that are ready for that statement, it is easier for the administration and the advisors to the president to support. So it's like a...

know, a self-heating process, right, reinforcing process. And so that's where we're at.

Charlie Robinson (23:42.703)
I've been told my entire life if we had disclosure, it would be very difficult on the religions of the world. They would have some soul searching to do. There would be conflicts. Maybe that's the case. Maybe not. I always thought that maybe our relationship or the American government's relationship with high tech and how they had used that over 80 years to take this advanced technology, hand it over to these

skunk works, semi, you know, non, not governmental, not necessarily private somewhere in between to say, right, defense contractors that can take this technology and do something with it. Who is really against disclosure? Would it be the defense contractors that have this high tech and say, well, you know, we had a monopoly on this, on this.

Steve Bassett (24:19.337)
Defense contractors, defense contractors.

Charlie Robinson (24:35.663)
transformational technology and now you're going to announce it to the world and now everybody kind of has it and that's a problem with us. We know how dangerous the military industrial complex is. We don't need Eisenhower to warn us about it, though he did. And we've watched that play out for a long time. So what is the barrier to disclosure? Who's the group that doesn't want it?

Steve Bassett (24:58.965)
Well, one day, I'd love to be the lead on this, one day somebody's put three, four, five, six, eight, maybe $10 million into a documentary that will, like with Ken Burns' Civil War, essentially paint the entire picture of the Truth Embargo. Not every sighting and all that kind of stuff, no, the Truth Embargo, starting with Truman's decision to change the story about Roswell by General Ramey.

and cover that whole thing as a documentary, not as part of a 20-hour series called Taken. It was kind of mentioned there a little bit. You could kind of see it by Steven Spielberg, which is cool. I recommend people watch that. That's a major documentary. It would be hard to do and expensive, boy, I'd like to be involved in it. It's incredibly complex because to really understand that, you have to get into the entire history. I boil it down.

this way. The fundamental reason why there has been adequate opposition to the world knowing the truth of this, certainly the American people, is national security.

but not trivial national security. We're always worried about national security, right? We don't want a bunch of people getting into our fishing waters and stealing our fish. That's kind of a national security matter. Or flying anything over our airspace without a transponder. That's not good. And you want to invade. That's an issue. I get it. There's always been that. I'm talking about national security at an existential level, and I'm talking about the nuclear arms race.

which got underway virtually as the beginning of the modern era of the UEP phenomena. So they were born fraternal twins and have been living, they're now 80 years old, right? Both of them a little, well, they kind of look like me because I'm 80 years old, They're rough around the edges. And so the entire time that the matter of how to handle the ET presence, as I like to refer to it, and the tech re-engineering underway,

Steve Bassett (27:15.571)
has been underneath the mutual assured destruction umbrella that at any moment somebody could make a terrible mistake and a lot of nukes are going to be launched and civilization is going to be set back, God knows how long, and create human suffering on a level never seen before. And human suffering, as you look back in history, has had some real good runs. I mean, there some times you're going, my God, I couldn't live 20 minutes.

Charlie Robinson (27:38.841)
Yeah.

Steve Bassett (27:44.065)
And it's a serious matter. so huge numbers of people that work in the military intelligence complexes of many nations have always been making the decision, is this issue and the truth behind it a risk? Should it be come out to the nuclear mutual assured destruction umbrella? Right. Will it make it more likely or less likely that something could happen?

And when you're dealing with something that existential, it's easy to go, it's too risky. Can't do it, can't do it, can't do it. That's number one. Okay, above all. And it's worth mentioning that all of the people in government, whatever the level, whether they were politicians or they work over the Defense Department, intelligence agencies, whatever, scientists, that are operating under that premise. They're basically good people. They're not evil, they're not the enemy.

They believe that it's a risk to the world. This is a jolt, a paradigm shift that we cannot predict the consequences. And as a result, we are going to have to keep this embargoed. Now, I will add this. So again, let's not piss on these people. Let's not give them a hard time. They really are feeling they're doing the right thing.

Now, the fact, of course, is that this policy had a shelf life that finally expired. And so the mistake is not operating from that premise. It's just that they kept doing it too long. They went too long. They should have started moving away from it sooner. And then it started to become a liability. All right? So that's one group of people. That's a big group. And then you have... So they honestly believe it's a risk. And it's a risk on a number of levels.

Okay, it's not simple. And then you have a much smaller group of individuals who are in the defense contractor world, all these companies, very large companies that are paid billions and billions and billions of dollars to address and deal with the technology needed to protect our nation and other matters, who feel...

Steve Bassett (30:06.611)
that the end of the truth embargo would significantly impact this situation they have, which is highly favorable. It's like printing money, right? And there's a reason that the Department of Defense can't do an edit and come up with a full understanding of about five trillion or something, I the number. So this is callous, this is self-serving. Let's not rock the boat. Let's just keep it going like that, it's working for us.

Why change? All right, that group is a much smaller group, but it's not trivial. And when Chuck Schumer put the eminent domain component into the first submission of the UAP Disclosure Act, he got their attention. And so there's that. There's a very small group of people within our government, and not just focused on our government. You want to get to other nations, it gets too complicated, who are strongly religious, even fundamental, and they are objecting to altering the situation.

because for religious reasons. Okay, fine. It's a small group. Okay, but then there's that. And I suppose we could go on, but that is the best answer I can give to, and there is a group, and this, not, it's like, want, you know, I think I would like to have disclosure, but not under this president. So let's wait until a president-elect gets in. And then when that president comes in, the other group,

Charlie Robinson (31:11.781)
Mm-hmm.

Charlie Robinson (31:32.4)
Right.

Steve Bassett (31:37.161)
are going, you know, I'd like to have disclosure, not under this president. And so there is that political component that for some, again, a small group, and I should mention that of all the issues that the human race has faced in its long history of political history, no issue has ever turned up that is less partisan than this. It is as nonpartisan as you can get recognized as such. And so you have its extraordinary nonpartisan

Charlie Robinson (31:42.446)
Mm-hmm.

Steve Bassett (32:07.237)
aspect matched against those individuals which you just discussed that are kind of holding back. But the deciding factor is the opinion of the world's people, the citizens of nations. And that is moving increasingly toward the disclosure side in massive numbers. And so at this point, the opposition is simply outmanned and only able to hang on.

by the strength of their classification schema and other things they can do. And it's clear that that is eroding very quickly. And once again, when you add it all up, the solution or the answer you get is that we are now today at a place where any number of heads of states could come forward, the political consequences would be positive, almost certainly in any case, I don't care which government.

the people would be able to deal with it quite well, and the immediate benefits to that country and that head of state would be profound, legacy and everything else, and we'll move forward. That is where we are. I truly believe that. I'm going to say it and say it and say it. Now, if something happens, and there are a number of things that could happen, a nuke use that puts us really on the edge of nuclear war,

where everybody is literally waking over the day wondering if it could happen, I mean that close, then I would easily say no. No. It's highly doubtful that any head of state is going to step out on that. Though I could make a case why they should, assuming they wanted to call me up. I never get calls from heads of state or their administrations. I don't know why. But overall, something like that, I changed my view. But at this point, no. That's where we're at. So all I can say is get ready.

Charlie Robinson (33:50.704)
Right.

Heh.

Charlie Robinson (34:04.577)
It's it's Trump to polarizing of a president, know This information is so shocking and so important and deeply critical to humanity But Donald Trump has a and I'm I'm not on the right team or the left team I don't like either of them but but he has a cartoonishness to him that almost feels like boy, you know, like I I don't want to pick, know, you get disclosure when you get it if you get it at all

I don't know that I can be picky and say I want that president, but not this one. But Donald Trump himself, because of the polarization of him, how does disclosure look with him as opposed to say, quite literally, any other president besides him? Is he the wrong guy to do it?

Steve Bassett (34:56.415)
First of all, dispel any thoughts of, want disclosure, but I want it under a president I like. Just completely put that aside, okay? It's not relevant. Secondly,

There is no head of state out there of, and what I call the major heads of state. And we'll just focus on the nine nuclear nations, which are, whether you like it or not, the most important nations in terms of how things go, right? There are some nations which are, they have some pretty substantial, I hope I, am I still moving? Have I stopped? Hang on, forgive me.

Charlie Robinson (35:39.678)
you're good.

Steve Bassett (35:41.013)
Okay, I'm back. There are some nations that are not nuclear nations, but they have substantial impact because of economy and so forth, but overall it's the nuclear nations. And, you know, that's China and Russia and India and Pakistan. It's Israel, France, the UK, the United States.

Steve Bassett (36:01.679)
And every head of state of those nations has cartoons made about them all the time. All right? All the time. And so you don't get to be a head of state of any of these nine nations without having the political cartoonists, whether they're neutral or whether they're the other side politically, of really giving you a hard time. So they're all, quote, cartoonish. All right? So we can dispel that.

And so then the question comes down, how would disclosure go if it's this president or that president? Well, I don't know. This is an AI. This is an area where AI could really help. And maybe I'll do that. essentially, and I've been using a lot of AI lately, and I'm using Gemini, which is considered one of the best. And while I'm not anywhere into it like some people out there, I mean, really, I mean, I'm way late to the game, but I'm getting there.

And I could put a question into like six or seven AI platforms, right? What would be the difference of a disclosure announcement and confirmation of the extraterrestrial presence by this head of state, that head of state has, and I'd probably get an answer, right? About, well, it be like this, be like this. Okay. So I'm not AI. So I can tell you, it's impossible to really, you know, can sort of speculate about maybe go this way, go that way, but boy.

It's tough. So here is what I can say with confidence, right? It's not very deep, but it's basic. And Christopher Mellon recently said something almost identical in an interview. Christopher Mellon being one of the key members or key individuals involved in the disclosure process in 2017, and worked with the Senate, worked with...

DIA and so forth, has a very substantial background, is this. The head of state, and it's going to have to be one of the major nations, the head of state of a small island in the Caribbean, that's not going to do it, but the head of state that comes out and formally ends this truth embargo, which is simply more than saying we have extraterrestrial presence, we have

Steve Bassett (38:25.065)
technology, that's all. You don't have to go into much more detail than that. That's disclosure, capital D, as I defined it 25 years ago. We'll have executed one of the, if not the most important act by a head of state in the history of the human race. Going right back to caves. know, whatever. There were no heads of state back then. Going back to the beginning of the civilization post-flood. That's a significant legacy. So they'll get that. The head of state will get prizes.

and accolades from around the world, certainly a Pulitzer Prize, a Peace Prize, whatever the hell, guaranteed lot. All right? Okay. That is for certain. The nation that the head of state is serving will clearly have a significant more gravitas and or latitude of action in the post-disclosure era, having been the nation that finally ended this embargo.

So there's that, all right? And we'll lead in a number of areas. And clearly, if the head of state is of a, basically a democratic country, nation, as opposed to a ideological controlled state, by the way, one of the nuclear powers is Korea. Or in general, a...

much more authoritarian state. I think it will certainly go little different. And so some aspects of the first year after disclosure would be different in that case. So you can sort of make that distinction, though I really can't say. Keep in mind, if Xi Jinping disclosed tomorrow, unless the advisors in the White House are all in the basement on ketamine, they

They had better get the president out fast, right, to confirm it as well. And so it'll be a very much international process going forward, but each nation will decide what they want to bring forward and when from their files, from their activities. And there will be a little competition. So that's about as far as I can go. I mean, I could start trying to get into minutiae, but man, it's too much. mean, there will be thousands of books written.

Charlie Robinson (40:26.332)
Right.

Steve Bassett (40:54.271)
thousands and thousands of books. Well, they'll be audio books or rather, yeah, they'll be audio books or whatever. They'll be kindle books, Paper is pretty much be gone. But there'll be thousands of books written about all of this, about all of the nuances and what happened, who did this and who did that post-disclosure. My God. And they'll continue to pour forward for probably a number of decades and continue to be written through the end of this century.

It is the most profound event in human history at a time when we have more people able to listen to more stuff more often than at any time in history. And so the audience for those books is in the billions. And so when you got a subject this profound and an audience in the billions, if you're not writing a book, you are making a grave error. I should have written a couple of books by now, but I have issues. Could I get my act together and get a book out if we get disclosure tomorrow?

Charlie Robinson (41:36.498)
Yeah.

Charlie Robinson (41:47.791)
Heh.

Steve Bassett (41:52.965)
I'll probably just go on AI and say, I want to write a book. Here's the subject. Okay. Start pouring it out, baby. And then I'll edit it, right? I'm trying to make it mine. I don't know. But that will happen post-disclosure to try to explain it all to future generations. I just want to have as many years post-disclosure to engage with it, to enjoy it as possible, which is why I'm making change in my diet and

other adjustments to my life that I hope will extend me a couple years, I'll be fine. Do I need to meet an ET? I don't think so. I'd love to be certainly here if coping contact takes place. However, that would be kind of great. That's part of my personal goals right now. But ultimately, disclosure is what I hope to live to see. And if that happens, that I die the next day, no problem.

Charlie Robinson (42:49.492)
How do we disclose this information? How do you rectify the fact that you're gonna have maybe 40 % of the population potentially becoming unhinged or losing their, I don't know, their guidance, their bearings, kind of going off the deep end with something like this. We've seen that unfortunately people behave poorly

in large groups and sometimes with information that blindsides them. We could use COVID as an example. We saw how things devolved rather quickly. What's the psychological component of prepping the general public? And I don't mean the knowledgeable, the people who are deep thinkers. I'm talking about maybe the people who aren't quite so thoughtful and they're

Steve Bassett (43:30.537)
Hmm.

Charlie Robinson (43:44.912)
Examining this and maybe it's a challenge to their religious beliefs and they're unsure how to feel about this Who's going to settle them down? Who's going to take who who steps in and and talks to the masses and says this is this is fantastic This is great. We're all going to be fine. This is this is going to be a good thing Don't freak out. We're going into a new paradigm and And and we need you guys to all you know

keep it together for this. How does somebody manage this process?

Steve Bassett (44:19.541)
All right, well, let's get the proper perspective here. 40 % of the people are not gonna become unhinged, okay? Maybe 1 % of the population, unhinged is a strong term, okay? Unhinged is when you're running around naked in the street, screaming at the sky. And there are people doing that, but no, no. And as far as being prepped, oh, that cake is baked.

Charlie Robinson (44:35.027)
You

Steve Bassett (44:49.109)
We just need to take it out of the oven. Prepped? 80 years? You know, the first sci-fi films with ETs started turning up actually in the 40s, right? With some of those Flash Gordon thingies, right? Believe it or not, because sci-fi was still as infant stage, the modern era. By 51, they started running, they started showing films with ETs in them. They may have looked human in a lot of cases, but quickly they weren't.

There's been now, I don't know, 600 films with extraterrestrials generating billions and billions of dollars of revenue and funds for the film industry. The number of views of these 600 films is probably in the trillions. I mean, it could be a trillion, a hundred billion, easily. The number of views where a person has sat down and watched one of these movies in the trillions, that's over the last 80 years. And then, of course, there's been huge amount of media coverage.

Right? Going back to the beginning. Well, certainly back. Well, yeah, the e-media coverage goes back all the way to 1947. I've logged 17,000 articles basically, but most of those are in the last 30 years, 40 years. As you go back, the articles are not available to be found. Right? The only way you could really log in articles is I'd have to start going to newspaper offices and going through microfiche and getting a copy and then...

putting that copy up on my server and whatever, I just can't do it. But I have read that in the early days of the modern era of UAP, 47 and forward, when we had just a couple of networks, no internet, some radio, but lots of newspapers. I mean, huge numbers of newspapers. Every city had one, the big cities had two, three, four.

that in the first years, 30,000 articles were turning up in these newspapers around the country on this kind of thing that was happening. And most of them may still be on Microfish if you dig and find them. I know somebody that did a little search there came up, they may be gone now. But I believe what I've read, was easily 30,000. So these articles are turning up all over. But now understand, they're in this newspaper and that newspaper.

Steve Bassett (47:14.325)
Some, I'm sure, turned up in some of the major newspapers. But without all the rest of the infrastructure we take for granted, it wasn't going to coalesce into a national consensus, but it was out there. And that's just English language. All the stuff I've put together, 17,000, is only English language press. can't search or find foreign language because you have to the right terms. God knows how many thousands of articles have touched on this subject in non-English.

press and on English around the world. don't know. So we're prepped. We're very, very prepped, I assure you. And then there's the documentaries too, which actually get into the subject matter and the availability. It's not just that this stuff has been done, but the availability. You could do a doc back in 1988, right? And unless you got nominated for Academy Award, God knows how many people might have seen it, maybe 500, who knows?

Now you do a doc, it goes up on a streaming platform, it might be seen by as many people as think it's cool. And so the world is totally prepped, except for some of the deepest regions of the Amazon jungles, Sentinel Island in the Indian Ocean, some people living in the Antarctic that never leave, whatever. We're so prepped it's ridiculous. All right, so we can put that aside. And so I am not concerned.

Charlie Robinson (48:24.847)
Yeah.

Steve Bassett (48:40.017)
about how the public is going to handle the post-disclosure era, is could dawn tomorrow, I am concerned how the institutions will deal with the post-disclosure world, which is a whole other matter. And in many instances, these institutions I'm referring to,

knew long ago about the ET presence. So when disclosure happens, it's not like they're going to be caught by surprise and trying to then figure out, what do we do now? they've been gaming what they would do long ago. So when the gun goes off, they're fully, they have all platform and they're just going to take off, get a hit start. This troubles me.

Which is why in the in the last days of the truth embargo, it's important that as many people learn as possible as my job as a populist political activist and that the political infrastructure learn as much as possible and that organizations Start being formed particularly nonprofits that can raise money And that's starting to happen

made that we've not seen before, PRG is hoping to participate in that, to form the organizations that will, by definition, compete with the, how would you say, already prepped institutions, whether they be business, particularly in the areas of defense and energy and what have you, whether they be political think tanks.

and so forth, that have always known it's true, but weren't gonna tell you, but they got a good idea what they're gonna do about it, and so forth. And so when you see organizations like the UAP Disclosure Fund, the now recent Disclosure Foundation, the Soul Foundation, and other groups of substantive people, almost all in every case 501c3s, New Paradigm Institute, State of the World Forum.

Steve Bassett (50:49.685)
And there are others, and I need to get a list of these and promote this out to my email list, which you can subscribe to at my website paradigmresearchgroup.org, that these institutions are forming and getting money. And so they hopefully will then be able to have an influence to counter the influence of some of these institutions who I'm not so sure are going to have our interest at heart once this shift, this world-changing event takes place.

Charlie Robinson (51:12.383)
Yeah.

Steve Bassett (51:19.507)
And that's just our country. Other groups are forming, and I think around the world, but not to the degree happening in the US. And so that's what I'm concerned about. That's the post-disclosure world. I wish I could say I had 20 years there because when you talk about the activist movement, the disclosure activist movement, which has been growing and so forth for all these decades. Let me get this up.

Charlie Robinson (51:33.013)
Thank

Steve Bassett (51:49.245)
It's got away from me, one moment. I've got to get this over here. Come on, where are we? There we go. Forgive me. The activist movement post-disclosure will completely overwhelm what we've seen. In other words, the amount of activism needed in a post-disclosure world, essentially to address the political, scientific, social implications

of every single aspect of the history of the truth embargo and the reality the deep presence has known. Every single one them is going to need an activist engagement. so hopefully we will see post-disclosure the most comprehensive broadband activist movement in the history of the human race, global, international, almost every major country, et cetera.

That's what we need to have. If we don't, if we just sit back and go, what will be will be, that could be a colossal error. There's a number of huge mistakes we can make post-disclosure. I assure you, I'm not gonna bring you down by talking about them, but there is a wild card in this game, quality game, that may significantly mitigate these concerns. And that is...

as I've said it a thousand times, my strong feeling is that aside from our agenda, and we do have agendas in place post-disclosure, the ET has an agenda as well. And I believe open contact is on that agenda. And I think it's soon after disclosure. How soon? I don't know, but the only measure, the only criteria that I can apply to when would we open disclosure after disclosure is

how long would it take for pretty much the whole planet to get up to speed? Meaning everybody goes, oh, okay, they're here, right? And oh, okay, I need to learn about this. And I start reading and studying and watching docs, particularly the leadership matrix, and get pretty much up to speed. Meaning, okay, I got it, I know what's going on, I see the history. How long would that take? And it wouldn't take that long because of the nature of the world right now. And so, and there'll be a pretty strong motivation to do it. And so in a relatively short amount of time,

Steve Bassett (54:13.653)
We would be pretty, you know, the governments of the world, the people that matter, scientific community, we'd be pretty much up to speed. Hey, okay, I got it. At which point, obviously, common sense, open contact by the extraterrestrials would be almost anti-climatic. Meaning, okay, they want to talk to us. Okay, what do you want to talk about? How are we going to communicate? Whatever. I'm not suggesting that you're all going to come on down, we're going to have a big get together. Maybe they're all going to be at the UN, sitting there. No, it could be non-

not in-person communication, but a communication that is recorded, can be transmitted, and the world's people would actually be informed about it. Meaning, in a sense, they're communicating to the entire world through the various authorities. It doesn't have to be every nation. It just could be four, five, six major nations. As long as that communication is truthfully conveyed, we're now in the post-open contact era. And that...

is a situation that completely changes the equations in terms of how we're going to deal with the post-disclosure era and avoiding making any particularly bad mistakes, I think, assuming that the intentions of the ETs in this correspondent is righteous and not manipulative.

Because if they wanted to post disclosure in an open context situation, they could mislead us, play around with us, and so forth, and actually push us in an area, a place we don't want to go. I don't think that'll happen, but you can't rule it out. So that's how I feel about

Charlie Robinson (55:52.339)
Yeah.

Charlie Robinson (55:57.63)
Let's wrap up with this. I'm curious, what is the role of Paradigm Research Group in a post-disclosure world? Obviously, your strategy has to change a little bit, and hopefully we get there. What's PRG 2.0?

Steve Bassett (56:14.837)
Look, because I felt disclosure was close, and I should have maybe done this sooner, I converted PRG, paradigm research group, from a sole proprietorship for almost, I don't know, how many years? 28 years. I did this in 2024. I should have probably done it sooner, but I started off as a sole proprietorship because I had no idea what to expect from the government as I went out mucking around and...

As a sole proprietorship, you have the maximum protection in a sense. I mean, if you could raise millions and millions of dollars, it wouldn't matter what you are, you could hire lot of lawyers, but as a sole proprietor, you're basically simply a citizen operating under the First Amendment. And you have free speech and all that. And if you can raise some money or, you know, if people give you money, it's taxable, but I never got much money, so I didn't have much of that problem to worry about.

It's hard to get rid of you other than one day you just have an accident. So I just stayed a sole proprietor. Because if you go nonprofit, there's a lot of ways the government can mess with you if you are a nonprofit causing them problems. But I finally converted to a 501c3 nonprofit in 2024 because, well, it's a whole different era now. And I wanted to be able to raise tax deductible funding.

But fact is, I'm a very small entity. A lot of supporters, colleagues and so forth, but I'm small. And I'm a populist activist operating from a small platform. The only way I could expand that platform really, because I'm just not in business and I don't sell merchandise, would be get a very substantial tax deductible contribution in PRG. However, as a...

As a political activist and a disclosure ethicist, my principal role post-disclosure is going to be doing what I've always done, talking too much and trying to relate the issue not to the academics, not to the hot shots, but to the general public as a populist activist. And so I can continue to do that, maybe hold some events. I would love to hold some more X conferences, but they do require funding.

Steve Bassett (58:39.445)
and so forth. There are other organizations that have, who are more substantive with backgrounds that allow them to raise money. And so the New Paradigm Institute is now probably the major, I think, activist organization. It's doing everything you're supposed to do. It's developing chapters, Citizens for Disclosure chapters. Eventually in every state of the country, they're able to put out information and so forth.

And Danny Shan, who is the chief counsel and one of the directors, has a huge history of dealing with complex political issues, as well as the Congress and so forth and so on. And that's happening. And then I mentioned these other entities like the UAP Disclosure Fund and so forth. These entities are going to have clear and obvious roles post-disclosure. I was just... If I have any complaint about...

the scope of paradigm research groups role once the event finally happens. It's on me because I have two couple of flaws that I just never overcame. One, I'm really not good at self-promotion. It just not comes natural to me and it bothers me. I'm not good at raising money, which is just one of those things. And so, and I kind of,

You know, someone that likes to kind of work alone in a way. It's great to have colleagues, but putting together an organization wasn't there. So I've kind of limited in that sense my role. could, again, but I have enough post-disclosure. Probably the most important thing I could do in the time I have left would be through the Hollywood Disclosure Alliance. Now, the Hollywood Disclosure Alliance is the second organization that I...

founded, but in this case I co-founded it with Daniel Arari, a Hollywood publicist of many, many years. And this has been a successful launch. mean, it's two years on. The Hollywood Disclosure Alliance has now got 250 members growing quickly. And it's unique in a sense. Half of them are UAP people, founding members, and the other half are

Steve Bassett (01:01:00.597)
content creating people which we call Hollywood founding members. I'm in the business creating content and the other is I'm in the business of you know learning about engaging researching the AP issue though some are in both camps and it was the HDA was set up to just Network them as much as they wanted to network by putting their bios up letting them who they are holding events bring them together

Other than some dues and occasional for charging for an event. We're not in we're not in business We're not getting pieces of deals that are put together. No, the HTA does not do any of that so if if a fan I see a UAP founding member get the member gets involved with a Hollywood disclosure founding member or Hollywood founding member and ends up doing a film or documentary that makes 50,000 100,000 to 300 thousand dollars or whatever great HTA doesn't get any of that

Charlie Robinson (01:01:57.301)
Gotcha.

Steve Bassett (01:01:58.099)
And it's happening. Content is being created. The executive director and founding member of that, and I have, you know, basically my, I am a California resident, have been off and on my whole life. I'm in a position to advise. In other words, I would love to be able to advise any content creating situation regarding any aspect of the issue, but particularly the truth and barbless history and

the activism and so forth. are plenty of colleagues that can get into the minutia of various events and proof and what have you. And so as an advisor to content being created, particularly out of Hollywood, I think I can definitely be of help. So there's that. So that's it. But more importantly, I'm just willing to help everybody.

Charlie Robinson (01:02:43.529)
Yeah

Charlie Robinson (01:02:47.016)
If anyone wants a consultant for their film, mean, I don't know why you wouldn't be the first person that they would reach out to you. mean, maybe didn't write the actual book on it, but as far as I'm concerned, know, you are somebody in my research who has always been right over the target with regard to this information. And disclosure is, it just changes everything.

and for people who are slowly waking up to the possibility of this and maybe are interested in learning more about this. What's the best place that you can send people to support your work, to get on the mailing list? I'm on the email mailing list as well. The best place for people to find your work.

Steve Bassett (01:03:36.245)
Sure. Look, those that really want to get into this, here's the short course. One, go to paradigmresearchgroup.org. Up in the left-hand corner of every page, there's a Subscribe. Hit it and subscribe. Okay? For anybody out there that over the years has unsubscribed, but then have gotten re-interested again, I can't put you on. And once you unsubscribe from my constant contact list,

I can't put you back on, you have to resubscribe. if you want to get back on, resubscribe. And then in terms of Hollywood Disclosure Alliance, obviously you can go there and learn whatever you want. If you've got a content creating background and you want to create contact on this subject matter, if you are a researcher, activist, whatever, that have been addressing this issue in a serious way.

He'd like to be a member of the Hollywood Disclosure Alliance. There's information on the site to tell you who to get in touch with. And you could very well be a member. It's not open just to the general public, but it is open to people in the two genres and so forth. There's that. You definitely need to join the New Paradigm Institute. So go to newparadigminstitute.org. They've got a number of things you can sign up for. Their mail list, Citizens for Disclosure, do that.

Check out the Soul Foundation, check out the UAP Disclosure Fund, the UAP Disclosure Action Fund, I think it is. Also, that's the other one that just formed, the Disclosure Foundation. Google, you know, Google and use AI to try to identify other organizations. Almost all of them are non-profits. And support, fund. One of the...

Chief reason, one of the reasons the disclosure process has taken so long is the very successful campaign by the government in using many tools to demean, undermine, stigmatize the whole issue and everybody in it. They succeed. I call it creating an intellectual ghetto. And so that made it difficult for anybody to engage the issue. But particularly...

Steve Bassett (01:06:03.583)
people, philanthropists, whether institutional or individual. So if you have a great deal of money and you really want to help organizations, there's an endless group of organizations trying to do good. And they fund them. You can name them all. Over the last 80 years, they've gotten trillions of dollars in funding. But when it comes to this issue, the people that want to fund and donate to good causes just

didn't want to go there because of the stigma. If they fund this issue, it would stigmatize them and undermine the work and the support they're providing to these other causes. So they just didn't do it. The amount of what I'll call philanthropic contributions to this issue in 80 years is, it's a thimble.

compared to a giant oil vat, you one of those oil storage vats, okay, I mean, it's practically nothing. When for the government? That's changing. It's clear that many people, many organizations, people, whatever, who have made great wealth, God bless them, the stigma is basically gone and they're starting to lean into the idea that I think I want to support this. Naturally, I love to be on that list.

Okay, but I know organizations that are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars and so forth, which is another reason why the truth embargo is collapsing. Because if you haven't noticed one of the hallmarks of certainly the first world countries, but certainly the United States, is that we created a vast billionaire class. And you know.

whether you like billionaires or not, they are donating, they donate huge sums of money. And as this issue becomes less stigmatized, that vast funding source is going to start heading our way. And my God, if you're the truth embargo guys inside the government, you don't want to have to stare down a fully funded Death Star, a fully operational Death Star.

Charlie Robinson (01:08:20.81)
Yeah.

Steve Bassett (01:08:22.611)
that the disclosure movement would be if we started getting a couple hundred million dollars in funding. And so that is happening as well. And so I don't want to limit what PRG could or could not do post-disclosure or any organization, but I would suggest that the extent institutions, particularly the ones that have known about this issue for a long time and ready to rock and roll, whatever their intentions are,

They are going to be competing against some pretty well-funded organizations that have been and will continue to serve the interest of the American people, the United States, and even the planet. And that's a prospect that I am looking forward to and I hope and will enjoy to see unfold.

Charlie Robinson (01:09:15.264)
What an amazing time to be alive and paying attention and focused on this amazing topic. That's Stephen Bassett, everybody. You can check out his work at paradigmresearchgroup.org. Make sure to sign up for his newsletter. If you want to connect with me, macroaggressions.io is the website for that. Thanks, everybody. We'll talk to you again soon.