The Portal Wiki

Cobalt and Baby Blue-on-Blue

Revision as of 06:18, 12 October 2025 by Pyrope (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Cobalt and Baby Blue-on-Blue is a metaphorical framework developed by Eric Weinstein that describes interactions between institutional state actors (termed Cobalt Blue) and civilians or non-institutional actors (termed Baby Blue) when the latter inadvertently interfere with, uncover, or challenge covert or sensitive state operations. The term extends and adapts military language—particularly Blue-on-Blue (friendly fire)—to describe asymmetric encounters between classified power structures and the general public in information or governance domains.

Cobalt-Baby-Blue-on-Blue.png

This framework was popularized in informal discourse to explore epistemic asymmetries, informal censorship, reputational control mechanisms, and the state's response to unsanctioned civilian inquiry into protected operational or narrative domains.

TerminologyEdit

  • Cobalt Blue (or Cobalt): Symbolizes the hardened core of institutional power—military, intelligence, security, or state actors operating under secrecy or classification protocols.
  • Baby Blue (or Baby): Denotes civilians, researchers, government or military personnel without clearance, journalists, or private actors lacking institutional affiliation or access to classified channels.
  • Blue-on-Blue: Originally military jargon for friendly fire, here generalized to intra-institutional communication or conflict.
  • Cobalt-on-Baby: Occurs when a state or institutional actor suppresses, misdirects, or retaliates against a civilian who approaches or uncovers sensitive material.
  • Baby-on-Cobalt: Occurs when a civilian, often unwittingly, interferes with, exposes, or disrupts an ongoing covert operation or classified narrative.

OriginEdit

The Cobalt and Baby Blue-on-Blue framework was shared publicly by Eric Weinstein on Episode #1945 of the Joe Rogan Experience in February, 2023.

So this is how they deconflict Blue-on-Blue. But, you see, you and I are also blue. We're having a conversation, and we may be stumbling on something the government doesn't want us to know, which is what happened when Covid maybe spilled out. ... So this is how they play keep-away from the rest of us where they tell each other what they're doing, and the rest of us can't know what's going on. Now, when you say Blue-on-Blue, there's a situation that I want to give a name to because it doesn't have a name, which I'm going to call Baby-on-Cobalt and Cobalt-on-Baby. Baby and Cobalt are two forms of blue. Cobalt is government and Baby is like civilians, like you and me. What happens when a civilian stumbles on one of these operations? They're not allowed to use these systems. All right. I called up the South Florida I think Case Explorer, had a half an hour conversation. They were telling me all sorts of stuff, and I said, "I'd like to hear about Jeffrey Epstein". Like, "who's calling?" "I'm a private citizen". "This call will be terminated in five seconds." And then they hung up on me. So I realize, okay, ordinary human beings cannot use these systems. I think a lot of what's going on is that we keep tripping over government operations in the Cobalt sector, but we're Baby Blue. And they don't have any system for figuring out how to get rid of a civilian who stumbles on, like, a drug smuggling operation. I'm like, okay, so Jeffrey Epstein traffics your daughter. What do you do if he's an intelligence asset? You don't know. You just want the creep away from your kid. So you file a complaint or whatever. Now you've got a situation where they don't know what to do because you've got a civilian and you've got some sort of super secret, dark thing that isn't supposed to exist.

My claim is that “conspiracy theorist” is basically Cobalt-on-Baby. In other words, the government warning a private citizen, get away from that thing. Okay? We will start to destroy your reputation if you do not cease and desist. But there's no plan. So, if you were the guy who figured out D-Day, you’re like. “Wow. These are—there's a huge increase in the inflatable balloons—I think that they might be tanks. There's no troops under that Army designation.” You'd be a threat to this incredible operation because you have free speech and nobody knows how to shut you up. Right?

So consider that none of us know the answer to: what does the government do when private citizens start to figure out statecraft narratives are bullshit? So, for example, Jeff Sachs was called in to supervise the investigation into the origin of Covid at The Lancet, and he puts in place all of the people who were involved with this through Peter Daszak. He later figures out, oh my God, I just put the foxes in charge of the henhouse. And he blows the whistle. So what if we have like a, since the 1970s, a 45-year-old workaround of the Biological Weapons Convention in Wuhan, we've created this thing called One Health and the EcoHealth Alliance, we took over as a hippie charity. And if you ever take a look at the board of advisors of EcoHealth Alliance, it's wildly overpowered, including my old mentor, who was the head of the Sloan Foundation and the head of the National Science Foundation. None of you guys look at the board of directors. Crazy.

We keep tripping on these official statecraft narratives. That's why they won't let us question the Zelensky stuff. They won't let us question the origin of Covid. They won't let us question the vaccines. They won't let us question whether there are therapeutics. These are all Cobalt-on-Baby things. "It's horse dewormer. What's wrong with you people? You're all lunatics. You're pathological losers." Okay, I get it, you're just destroying my Wikipedia entry because I keep asking questions, because, actually, YOU need to have a timeout. YOU'RE out of control. I'm fine. But YOU'RE going to turn this into pathologizing when you pathologize people who've seen the truth. Now you've got a real problem. You gaslit American citizens because you couldn't do your effing job. Really? That's interesting. Did you kill anyone? Did you do wet work? Did you do Digital Wetwork? What did we just find out from the Twitter files? Right? How many times did I say, "I'm being throttled", "I'm being manipulated"? The government doesn't want to take responsibility. We have this, what is it, the GEC that's from the State Department, we have CISA inside of the Department of Homeland Security. These people are creating fake conversations on Twitter. They're creating fake reports about the Hunter Biden laptop to influence the election. We didn't have a free and fair election and it had nothing to do with ballot stuffing or mis-counting. So I believe that partially why we're not talking is that we've done so many bad things around UFOs that we don't want to come clean.

- Eric Weinstein on JRE #1945

Theoretical BasisEdit

The model is rooted in contemporary concerns about:

  • Information asymmetry between the state and public,
  • Epistemological opacity in national security and public health governance,
  • State-driven narrative enforcement, particularly in online and media ecosystems.

It provides a framework for understanding non-transparent interactions where formal institutional mechanisms (such as courts or FOIA processes) are unavailable or ineffective.

DynamicsEdit

Baby-on-CobaltEdit

Describes civilian-initiated contact with classified operations, often accidental. This includes:

  • Independent researchers identifying covert logistics patterns,
  • Journalists investigating illicit networks involving state-linked actors,
  • Whistleblowers unintentionally uncovering dual-use programs (e.g., biodefense research).

Baby-on-Cobalt scenarios frequently trigger Cobalt-on-Baby responses, as institutions lack procedural capacity to absorb unsanctioned discovery without compromising secrecy.

These encounters also reflect a failure of deconfliction—an internal process typically used by state and military actors to coordinate operations and avoid cross-interference. However, no analogous mechanism exists to "deconflict" institutional secrecy from public transparency, resulting in reactive or improvised responses when civilians enter protected operational domains.

Such encounters are often described by civilians as highly disorienting: they may uncover anomalous patterns, inconsistencies in official accounts, or direct physical artifacts, but find no institutional pathway for inquiry or verification. In some accounts, even credentialed individuals—such as PhD-level scientists—report being delegitimized, ignored, or subtly threatened when pursuing research areas that may intersect with black programs or classified research domains.

Cobalt-on-BabyEdit

Describes state-initiated action directed at civilians who have entered or approached classified operational space. Typical mechanisms include:

  • Narrative suppression (e.g., discrediting alternative hypotheses about the origin of a pandemic),
  • Labeling and delegitimization (e.g., branding individuals as "conspiracy theorists"),
  • Digital containment (e.g., de-platforming, algorithmic suppression),
  • Institutional stonewalling (e.g., abrupt denial of access to investigatory tools or databases).

Examples and IllustrationsEdit

  • Epidemiological Investigations: Civilian researchers raising alternative theories on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 (e.g., lab-leak hypothesis) were subject to narrative containment and reputational attacks, particularly prior to broader institutional reevaluation.
  • Intelligence-Linked Criminality: Public inquiry into figures alleged to have state protection (e.g., Jeffrey Epstein) often encountered bureaucratic stonewalling or media discrediting, illustrating the containment dynamic in Cobalt-on-Baby form.
  • Digital Information Control: Programs operated by entities such as the Global Engagement Center (GEC) or CISA have been cited in public reports (e.g., Twitter Files) as coordinating with platforms to limit reach of unauthorized narratives—blending digital wetwork with narrative management.
  • Scientific Obfuscation and Narrative Layering: Some interpretations of the Cobalt–Baby dynamic include the use of public scientific narratives to obscure classified research. For example, Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz alleged that fundamental fields of mathematics and physics have been strategically classified and removed from the scientific research community to preserve compartmentalized programs. In this view, statecraft narratives are not only political but epistemological—shaping what is researchable, publishable, or fundable in public science domains.

Mechanisms of EnforcementEdit

  • Image Cheapening: Reduction of a civilian actor's perceived credibility through ridicule, misrepresentation, or selective framing, often intended to delegitimize their status or findings.
  • Reputational Sanctions: Modification of public perception through press, academia, or online platforms (e.g., Wikipedia edits, social media bans).
  • FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt): Strategic injection of ambiguity or concern into public narratives to discourage inquiry or engagement with sensitive topics.
  • Digital Wetwork: The non-lethal neutralization of civilian actors through algorithmic suppression, throttling, coordinated deplatforming, or metadata manipulation.
  • Displacement of Inquiry: Shifting focus away from sensitive domains by labeling them as settled, fringe, or conspiratorial.
  • Institutional Gaslighting: Systematic denial of observable phenomena or evidence by authoritative sources in order to disorient, discredit, or destabilize civilian observers. This form of enforcement includes the use of banal or dismissive explanations ("Venus," "weather balloon") despite contradictory evidence or testimony, often targeting individuals with relevant expertise. It is considered particularly corrosive in scientific contexts, where it may erode trust in public institutions or suppress alternative lines of inquiry. Some critics claim that entire scientific fields have been intentionally stalled to obscure underlying classified research.
  • Epistemic Policing: Use of credentialism, expertise framing, or institutional consensus to marginalize dissenting knowledge claims.
  • Access Denial: Restriction from tools, data, or channels required to further inquiry (e.g., federal databases, scientific publishing channels).

Interpretive ImplicationsEdit

The Cobalt–Baby framework is used not to imply conspiratorial behavior per se but to theorize the structural and operational limits of public inquiry under conditions of managed secrecy. It posits a fundamental procedural vacuum in modern liberal-democratic systems when civilians encounter classified activity.

This vacuum is partly attributable to the absence of a public-facing deconfliction protocol—no institutionalized way to resolve collisions between legitimate civilian inquiry and sensitive statecraft. In military and intelligence contexts, deconfliction ensures operations do not interfere with one another; no such safeguard exists when the interference comes from the public domain.

The model also captures the state's lack of clear doctrine for reconciling open-society values (e.g., free speech) with the maintenance of covert capabilities—especially when technological diffusion and investigative tools become more accessible to civilians.

On XEdit

 
Eric Weinstein

I have been told that “Sources and Methods” of the IC must be protected by any means necessary.

That is likely the most parsimonious explanation for why the Epstein case never resolves. Something seems to happen to everything and everyone who could clear it up.

5:10 AM ¡ Dec 19, 2021
 
Eric Weinstein

Is this a conspiracy theory?

Well, think about it like this. When the Intelligence Community is doing its job properly it’s supposed to generate conspiracies for the public good. So saying the IC is a conspiracy factory isn’t a conspiracy theory; it’s part of a job description.

5:10 AM ¡ Dec 19, 2021
 
Eric Weinstein

Further, we definitely have an “Event Deconfliction” system to make sure that local law enforcement & district attorneys don’t bust & prosecute undercover federal agents, screwing up our secret programs. Events are called “Blue on Blue.”

So that isn’t a conspiracy theory either.

5:10 AM ¡ Dec 19, 2021
 
Eric Weinstein

Additionally, the use of honey traps, honey pots, and kompromat are all well known as tools of the IC, as is disinformation.

None of that is conspiracy theory either.

The only thing you can object to as irresponsible conspiracy theory is the assertion that this may apply here.

5:10 AM ¡ Dec 19, 2021
 
Eric Weinstein

I submit this to you that “This likely is the best explanation of all the improbable things that keep happening which keep us from learning the truth in this case.”

This isn’t remotely tin foil hat territory. This looks like state protection of the Sources and Methods of the IC.

5:10 AM ¡ Dec 19, 2021
 
Eric Weinstein

@keith44beat It has been extended. I learned about its extension into event deconfliction while researching how we keep different branch’s of government from tripping over each other when working in “need to know” operations. I had thought it meant just what you’d think as you said it.

5:34 AM ¡ Dec 19, 2021


Related PagesEdit

Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/index.php?title=Cobalt_and_Baby_Blue-on-Blue&oldid=23006"