History Repeats
55:03 Share

It's tourney time. And with FanDuel's dog of the day, you can get a daily profit boost during the college conference championships to bet on any underdog. So get ready to celebrate some upsets. No one saw that coming. Except for me, baby. 21 plus and present in select states. Opt-in required. Minimum plus 100 eyes required. Bonus issued is non-withdrawable profit boost tokens. Restrictions apply, including token expiration and max wage or amount. See terms at sportsbook.fanduel.com. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER.

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. It's tax season, and we're all a bit tired of numbers. But here's one you need to hear. $16.5 billion. That's how much the IRS flagged for possible identity fraud last year. Now here's a good number. $100 million. That's how many data points LifeLock monitors every second. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it. Guaranteed. Save up to 40% your first year at LifeLock.com slash podcast. Terms apply.

This is Need to Know. Real talk about the reality of unidentified aerial phenomena. From Australia, Ross Coulthart. From the U.S., Bryce Zabel.

Well, it's time for another dose of Need to Know. Certainly, Ross and I would like to start a show just once saying, you know, the mystery has been solved. The government's come clean. Transparency abounds. And we know everything. And we're going to brief you on it. But of course, that is not happening at least this month. And it may not be happening for a while. And that's because presidential politics here in the United States has pretty much sucked all the oxygen out of the nation right now as we discuss politics.

the campaign. It's been a little crazy. We'll get to that in a minute. The other thing we're going to do today is play a little game since one of the things that bothers both Ross and I is that people that are trying to sort of divert attention always try to run the game where they make it sound like, well, this just recently started. But of course,

It hasn't recently started, so we're going to play the anniversary game. It's 2024. We're going to jump back to 1944 and move up every 10 years for the anniversaries and just tell you a few things that have happened in those years. So that's about it for right now. Let me bring in my partner across the ocean, Ross Coulthard. Ross, I have to say, knowing what I know about your schedule, you have been in America more than I have in the last month. Now you're safely back in Australia. How's it feel to get back home?

It's bloody cold down under at the moment, Bryce. What would it be? About 30-something Fahrenheit and really, really cold. I must say I'm missing – I was shooting in Arizona in the last month and I'm missing that heat, that beautiful dry heat that you get in the desert.

It's quite interesting. It's quite different from the heat we get down here in Sydney. You get a very humid heat in Sydney, but in the desert, it's like 112, 114 degrees. And you know it's hot, but you don't know how hot it is.

You know, at the beginning of my career, I was an anchorman in Tucson. And I remember I'd moved there from Oregon. And one of the things I noticed immediately is I was getting these headaches because I was still a general assignment reporter. And I would go out in an air-conditioned car, go to whatever the event I was covering, which meant going outside, then going back into air conditioning, then going back outside to get to the... There's just a lot of in and out. And man, I mean...

that's pretty hot there. And I think for us, it was like 108 was more normal. I think it's gotten hotter, if you can believe it, since those days, as you pointed out.

If I can say one cool thing I saw, I saw some pretty amazing cave art in the desert in Arizona. It's really interesting. I know the theme of this show this week is going to be that, you know, history goes around, you know, what goes around comes around again. And it's very interesting to see in the cave art represented by Indigenous Native American Indian people the extraordinary imagery that does suggest a knowledge of history

other beings and possibly other craft. That kind of thing is true all over the world. I know that you and I have talked about it. If we ever turn this thing into a TV show, one of the things we'd like to do is take everybody out to see the indigenous people and get their opinion in Australia and do the same in the United States. And I think that people would find that both the

both indigenous cultures in your country and mine tend to agree that there's been something going on over the years. So it's very interesting. And I would love, I assume that something that you saw that cave art will soon be on News Nation. Is that too big of an assumption? It'd be part of a broad theme in that area. Yes, my friend. Yes. Yeah. Very good. Listen, among the things, you know, coming up, we,

I mentioned it at the beginning. I mean, it would be nice to think since every other year that we've been doing this, sometime in the summer, the National Defense Authorization Act gets some kind of UFO legislation put into it. And that's not happening as much right now as I understand it. But you've been covering it a little more deeply than me. Where do we stand in Washington, D.C. at this very moment?

Okay, so at the moment, it's only draft legislation. It's proposed legislation. And interestingly, a lot of this new legislation has come from a different corner, Senator Ron Wyden, who's not known for being an outspoken UAP advocate.

And look, it's fair to say that the legislation that's being proposed before the Senate is a bit of a rebuke to RO, the Pentagon's UFO Investigation Office, and Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, its departing boss, because it's clearly taking seriously the possibility of existence of a non-human intelligence. And it would recommend changes to the Intelligence Act for fiscal year 2025, which

that would cut funding for any activity involving UAPs, UFOs, protected under any form of special access or restricted special access limitations that haven't been already reported to Congress. So it's a mandating reporting to Congress law change.

And it would also require, and this is the really good part, a government review by the government's accountability office, the GAO, of the effectiveness of Arrow, the Pentagon's UFO office. As we know, Arrow did a very limp, very ineffectual report into a number of things just recently, tried to completely play down the existence of NHI. It's not going to wash NHI.

But, you know, obviously there are people in the Pentagon and the intelligence community who are trying to hose down this issue and the run up to an election and turn down the barometer. And I think the response from Congress quite notably has been to try and get this GAO review, like a government accountability office review of the effectiveness of Arrow. And that's that's good news.

But this is only draft legislation. So we really have to see whether Congress has the numbers to back this legislation, get it through the Senate and then get it through the House. As we know, the previous Schumer Amendment, which was proposing this Presidential Records Review Board that would have been a very far-reaching and broad change to the whole laws relating to UAP oversight,

Those laws were stymied after the intervention of Ohio Congressman Turner and led essentially to the neutering of laws that would have allowed Congress to have much tighter control.

over whether or not there was going to be UFO transparency in this year. I think, sadly, even if these new laws do come into effect, they're only going to come into effect in next year. And there's a hell of a lot of ifs, as we all know. There seems to be an election on in your country, which I'm not allowed to talk about. You are.

And we will in just one minute. I just wanted to say, you mentioned Ron Wyden. I take a little pride there. I'm an Oregonian, and he's from Oregon. And he's been a great leader in that state for as long as I remember. I remember –

I think he was on the city council or something like that. Now he's, of course, a U.S. senator and he's making progress. The thing is, you mentioned the Schumer Amendment, and this will tie into your political assessment in just a moment. I saw Schumer in the hallway the other day, yesterday, I believe, and they were asking him about Biden, of course. And like I said, we can get into that in a minute, but.

He kept just saying, he said three times in a row, he had message discipline. I'm behind Joe or words to that effect and to avoid answering a question. And I was watching that thinking, okay, this guy has such message discipline that it's kind of silly on something as important as who should be nominated by the party, you know, to run in the election. He's sticking to this little talking point and basically with a smile, a goofy smile on his face the whole time.

Yet this is the guy that also doesn't have a problem standing in the hallway talking about non-human intelligence. So I'm thinking, that's odd that you could talk about that, but not the presidential race.

The thing is, just to wrap a bow up on what you were saying, it does certainly seem to me that what happened last year is that Schumer Amendment did get gutted. It had some things in it, including the eminent domain provisions and some of the other things you just mentioned that got watered down as it got toward the National Defense Authorization Act. And I think you were right to say that.

if those things couldn't get through last year in 23, they're not getting through this year in 24 when there's an upside down presidential election going on like this one. So I think,

There are lots of people, my take, anyway, is that there are lots of people in Washington, D.C., who are, in fact, when they're not talking about Biden and Trump, are, in fact, talking about UAP and what really should happen. But none of them plan to do anything about it this year. It's going to be a 25 kind of issue. And again, even that issue will depend upon who gets elected come November. I mean, that's my assessment. Do you concur or do you debate?

Okay, I'm going to step very carefully and delicately into the field of American politics. All right, let's do it. I've learned my lesson. I've been spanked mercilessly by our audience about talking about anything pertaining to certain political candidates. So as I understand it, very, very vaguely, there are two people running for the presidency right now in the Democrats and the Republicans, and I won't even mention their names.

But what are the implications? Well, firstly, I don't think anything's happening before November. There's no move from Congress. I've spoken to people in Congress and it's quite clear everything is shelved until after the election. And if a certain candidate from the Republican side does win, if Donald Trump does become president, it's a huge uncertainty, really, what the implications of that are for disclosure.

If Joe Biden does somehow manage to retain and stand as president or whoever his replacement is, that's also an uncertainty because, frankly, I think whatever happens, there's going to be changes in congressional leadership.

And I think we really have to wait and see what's going to happen. And when the dust settles, you know, who are going to be in charge of the key congressional committees? Who's going to have the ability to push legislation through the House? And more importantly, with the declining international situation, if we do find ourselves, God forbid, in either a confrontation with China and the South China Sea or Russia or the Middle East,

What are the implications of that for American strategic defence in terms of a willingness by the Defence Department and the intelligence community to talk openly and honestly about what they really have in their cupboards in Area 51? I think there's just too many uncertainties right now to be in any way certain about what's going to happen. What I can say is...

is I do think we're heading into an incredibly unstable period. There's a lot happening. I would love to hope, my friend, that there might be an October surprise. Wouldn't it be great if somebody came out before the election and definitively said what we all hope to be said, which is, you know, there is no doubt at all about the existence of a legacy program, a retrieval program and a reverse engineering program.

Wouldn't it be great if somehow there was a sudden public statement by very senior officials making statements like that? But can you see that right now? No. First of all, there'd have to be another debate. I don't know if there will be another debate. And even if there is another debate, I don't know who would be in it at this point. I mean, just to get this out of the way, we had to literally pause our comments on YouTube because they were getting so...

sort of nasty. And the only thing I would say to people before we pursue the presidential analysis a little bit is just because we talk about

The fact that Trump is the Republican nominee and Biden so far looks like he's going to be the Democratic nominee doesn't mean that we've endorsed anybody or not endorsed anybody. And the other part of it is, even if we did, don't we all need to learn how to respect and appreciate differing opinions from our own? So I would just ask everyone listening to this to join with us in trying to be

in a very volatile timeframe that we're living in, but just a little more open to letting other people state their opinions without, you know, maybe it's just trolls. I don't know, but it just got so personal and so aggressive that it kind of made me, it made me a little sad that it had to be that way. Now I will say one thing that I said last time that set everybody off, you had gone on to your little, um,

It was kind of an extended rant. It included the F word, I think. And it was about how Biden wasn't up to the job and so forth. And I said I was just trying to change the subject, but I chose my words inappropriately, I guess, because I said, well, he looks clear enough to me, but let's move on.

And boy, it looks clear enough to me, certainly came back in some of those comments that I was talking about. But also, they came back to me when I watched the debate. I mean, you know, listen, there's just no way to watch that debate and not think, well,

frankly, that the Democrats ought to swap Biden out. If they're smart, they will do that. I kind of hope they do. And also that it wasn't the highest form of debate that America's ever produced at the presidential level. And I think a lot of people, while the news really is Biden's failure to really be present in the moment,

It was also something where you watched it and you kind of thought, wow, is this really the best America's going to offer in 2024 at a time when there's so much violence in the world and there's so many potential catastrophic events waiting around the corner for us? And as everyone who's listening to this knows, we're even not alone. We're just not alone. There's somebody else here. And this is our best foot forward. I just reject that. So

Listen, if both parties swapped out their nominees, I'd be happy. But clearly, I do have to say it's probably time for Joe to go. Yeah. Well, whatever happens, whichever candidate it is, I hope...

Whichever person it is that wins in November shows a spine and realizes that the best way to bring the world together right now would be to basically acknowledge the existence of a non-human intelligence. Or should I say, I'm increasingly actually uncomfortable with that term non-human intelligence because, you know, if it is future human, or at least in part, it's us. So let's just say advanced intelligence.

or advanced, technologically advanced intelligence. Because non-human intelligence could mean a dolphin, as some people have pointed out. Yeah, and it's... There was a really cool... I'm sorry, but did I not see something in that legislation where the phrase wasn't non-human intelligence, but it was non-human technology? Or am I... No, there's both. There's NHI, non-human intelligence, and non-human technology. Non-human technology...

To be uttering from the lips of normally cautious people in the halls of the U.S. Congress strikes me as pretty bold. Non-human technology? This is the thing I find so frustrating about all of this is it's the inability of...

in mass media to realise the awesome portent and significance of what we're talking about here, that we really are in a new era where government is admitting formally the fact that there is an anomalous phenomenon it cannot explain that is doing things outside known human science, outside known terrestrial science. And it's really interesting because there's

Whatever it is, it appears to be intelligent. It appears to be showing the five observables or even the six observables, if you include the biological observable. And I think at what stage does a responsible political leadership realize that if there's one issue, if there's one issue you could take the world to in November and seize the public imagination and show leadership on,

it would be acknowledging the existence of a non-human intelligence, or at least the existence of an advanced, technologically advanced intelligence, whatever that intelligence is. And I think it's just sad that in the confusion and maelstrom of American politics, there wasn't an opportunity in the debate for that question to be asked.

And it's a reflection of the lack of spine in so much of the media. And I think also a lack of imagination, a lack of, you know, complete inability to realize the significance of what's actually set out in this legislation. By the way, one thing about that legislation that is significant, if it gets through the full Congress, is it would effectively target what are called IRADs, which are essentially...

There are forms of funding being used largely in private aerospace to fund any UAP activity which isn't reported to Congress. It's a funding method used by aerospace companies as a way of

funding DOD projects through overhead cost rates. And it's being seen, I'm told, as one of the loopholes. IRADs are one of the loopholes that have been used to fund the legacy UAP program. And so this piece of legislation is very interesting. It's drilling down into a technique used by private aerospace companies and the Defence Department to spend money where they shouldn't.

And, uh, uh, it's tightening the screws, if you like on, um, accountability and look, we don't know whether it's going to get through. I, I'm not holding my breath, but, um,

You know, the simple fact is that everything could change after November. I mean, if there really is a new broom in the public service in the US under a new presidency, if that happens, you know, it's almost impossible to predict who are going to be on the congressional leadership, the committee leadership. And, you know, I think tragically, if the Schumer legislation hadn't been blocked last year...

we would possibly be in a different situation. You might have seen Joe Biden going to this election as a disclosure president, but I think that opportunity has been missed. No, no, that's gone. By the way, just...

because we like to do this. You mentioned IRADS. Tell us what an IRAD is. I'm going to have to look that up, my friend. I do this all the time. You know, we fall into the lingo and then, you know, people who are listening are like, what? What is that? So while you're looking up that, I'll just I have one thing I just wanted to say, which is what's that?

Independent Research and Development. I knew it was research. Independent Research and Development. Okay. Yeah. And so they've often squeezed overheads out of existing defense budgets to go into IRADS, Independent Research and Development.

And I'm told, and apparently the Congress has learned, that that's where a lot of the money has been squeezed out. I have to tell you, Russ, I have learned a lot more about how the U.S. government operates since we started doing Need to Know than I was ever taught in high school. I mean, in high school, you were lucky to get the three branches of the government in your head. And now, of course, we got IRADS and AROS and things like that. The one thing I just wanted to say is this.

So as we said, we are going to talk about anniversaries in a minute. I spent the last month celebrating my 40th anniversary with my wife, which was – Congratulations. Thank you. And I will say this. It's interesting because when I married Jackie 40 years ago, I knew a little bit about UFOs. I had that semi-final.

famous argument with Carl Sagan in a parking lot at PBS. So I was aware of the issue, but it wasn't for about three years after we got married where I started to get deeply into it and writing a lot about it. And I think Jackie could not be blamed if she said, what are you doing here? And there were a number of years where she said, you know, I'd appreciate it if you could write about it, but not take positions on it. Just, you know, uh,

either report journalistically or write a movie or a TV series about it, but you have to be an activist. And I, I think she's been, uh,

very generous with me over the years because I guess now I am an activist. I am an activist for transparency. I'm an activist for the idea that it is time to level with all of us, with whatever we know. And I think that the thing that I also celebrated a rather major birthday a month ago, and I'm not even going to tell what that one was, but it made me pause and reflect,

Because a lot of people I know, and now it includes me, say, I would just like to know the semi-truth about this thing before I pass on. And I just want to say to everybody, it is okay to be angry now. As we are going to show you, this has been going on for a very, very long time. And if you're just a little bit pissed off, that's absolutely relevant and acceptable. Because this has been going on all of my lifetime and then some.

And the idea that it would continue to go on and on is just outrageous to me. And I'm fed up, as I know many of you are who listen. And I hope that the people we do know, some people in government and in the Defense Department do listen to this show.

And I hope if you're listening, you understand the frustration that we all have. We don't know exactly what the truth is, but we know it starts with we're not alone. And we would like somebody to honestly just own up to that and let this process begin. And it's just been too damn long. So that's kind of my take. Now, the one thing I did want to ask you, Ross, was we were talking about

All the things that might happen. There's been something that involved your country and mine, and that is there's an Australian researcher that has exposed this whole Five Eyes meeting about the Arrow, the all-domain anomalous resolution office. And I don't think I'm quite as hip to all the details of it as you might be, but I think it's an important story.

Yeah, there's a good mate of mine, Grant Levesque, who's done some great FOI work in the United States where he's basically found out that our Australian Defence Department was lying, lying through its teeth because they initially denied any knowledge of any meetings involving conversations with its Five Eye Alliance partners about UAPs.

And the Five Eyes, for anybody who doesn't know, is an extremely important intelligence alliance that goes right back to World War II. It was essentially initially a signals intelligence alliance where Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the US and the UK collaborated on spying on signals, on communications of the Japanese and the Germans and the Italians. But

But it's since broadened into a much broader alliance. And I've known for a while that Australians are collaborating with United States military on retrievals, on attempts to retrieve not only foreign nation technology, Russian, Chinese, potential adversary technology,

but also, on occasion, non-human technology. Big call, yes, but take it or leave it. It's happening. And I've spoken to Australian military personnel who tell me that they've been involved in some of these recovery operations.

And what's really interesting is Australia's chief of defence force gave evidence before a parliamentary committee last year where essentially they denied any knowledge of any such meetings. Now, I actually suspect that this is a case of a screw up rather than a conspiracy. I actually don't think the Australian Defence Department knew what its left hand was doing.

And my understanding is an inquiry was made initially very half-heartedly of the Australian embassy in Washington, D.C., and a denial came back that there were any such Five Eyes consultations. But it came back eventually that the Defence Intelligence Organisation was involved. That's Australia's equivalent of the DIA, the Defence Intelligence Agency.

And it was involved in a secret Five Eyes meeting in Washington, D.C. in May last year with all the other Five Eyes nations. Now, why is this significant?

Because it was essentially a briefing by Arrow on UAPs. And the thing that's most interesting to me as someone who studies classifications and knows a little bit about how things are protected, how secrets are protected, is that one of the security classifications that was used was TK, Talent Assets.

And that's very, very significant because it means that whatever was being talked about at that meeting, it was classified under a terminology of classification that covers surveillance satellites and reconnaissance aircraft.

And so whatever it is, they were discussing feed from American spy satellites, TKs, Talent Keyhole Protected Information. And so we don't know what was transpired at this meeting, but there are people I'm talking to very, very covertly inside Australian intelligence who tell me that there has been a definite shift in attitude in the official halls in Australia's Defence Department,

What was once spurned and laughed at, the issue of UAPs, is now being taken much more seriously. And I think it's because they've realised their colleagues, the Yanks, are taking it very seriously indeed.

Here's what that raises as a question for me, since we like to speculate sometimes about what path might a greater transparency or semi-disclosure or confirmation take. When you think about the Five Eyes and those five countries collaborating on intelligence gathering, and even now, as you point out, discussing this in terms of UAP, my question is, people always like to assume...

Even though we know it's a global issue, people tend to think, well, the U.S.,

could just start disclosure. But could they really? In other words, if the US wanted to talk openly about something that has been so tightly wound for all these years, wouldn't we in the Five Eyes arrangement have to go to our collaborators in Australia and New Zealand and the UK and Canada and get everybody to sign off on that? Or is that not a realistic thought?

Well, or alternatively, the corollary to that is, is it possible that disclosure could come from somewhere else other than the United States? I mean, if I was Putin and I knew that the president is flat out lying in the United States right now about what the government knows about UAPs, it would be a wonderful way of wrong footing the American government, the British government, and indeed the Australian government by pointing out that the public are being lied to.

And you could actually say, if they're lying to you about that, what else are they lying to you about? So, yeah, I mean, I think...

What's driving a lot of this, I'm told, behind the scenes is a paranoid fear inside the US military defence and intelligence community that essentially the Chinese or the Russians, if we make any kind of an admission at all, are going to steal the march on us. That it will lead to a push for public disclosure and transparency that will inevitably see some of these well-protected secrets being leaked online.

And God forbid, I really hope this isn't the case, but if it is the possibility that we have weaponry that we're not revealing, technologies that we're not disclosing until and if there is a confrontation with potential foreign adversaries, God forbid that the moment of non-human intelligence disclosure is the moment when we lead ourselves to Armageddon. Well, first of all, let's remember that

It is the pot calling the kettle black if Putin gets to admonish the West for not disclosing about UFOs, because he hasn't really done it. With one exception that was kind of famous, back when Putin couldn't run for office every time and just take it over, he had to let a guy named Medved, I believe, take over for him. And that guy...

famously, I don't know if it was off mic or on mic, but he basically went on and said, oh yeah, we're looking into this thing and it's very real. So, I mean, there have been... The problem with that is that he made it sound like semi tongue in cheek that he might've been taking the piss and having a joke and nobody ever followed up with him and said, are you serious?

Do you ask a Kremlin boss, are you serious? You should go interview Medved when you give that to News Nation. Hey, are you ready to have a little fun at this point? Yeah, let's rock. Okay, so here's the thing. Ross and I came up with this idea where we might just sort of make a point but have kind of a little game out of it, which is –

Again, we are concerned that people, because of the inherent coverage of what's going on now, what's in DC, blah, blah, blah.

that people sort of go, oh, yeah, I remember that thing about the Nimitz and then blah, blah, blah. And it sounds like it's a very recent phenomenon. And we just want to point out that's not true. So it is now 2024, folks, right? So let's go back in the time machine 80 years. Let's go to all the anniversaries that end in four and just –

Throw out a few things that we can remember that actually happened out of hundreds that happen every year. So if you go back 80 years, that puts you in 1944. And that's the easiest one around. And I'll give that to you, my friend. Well, the one that leaps into my head in 1944 is the Magenta Italy incident.

handover of the Magenta flying saucer from the Italians under the defeated Mussolini to the Americans. All done very covertly and still, of course, the subject of great disputation officially. It's not something that's officially acknowledged by the US government, but we do know that David Grush in his interview with me admitted that he's aware of a crash in 1933 in Magenta in

and that the handover of that craft after the fall of Mussolini took place in 1944. I'll take that's fascinating, by the way. It's less able for us to other than taking Grush's word and a few other talks about it over the years to say for sure that happened. But we can definitely for sure say that the other thing in 1944 is that they started seeing these Foo Fighters,

American pilots and, frankly, Axis pilots all started seeing these lights tracking them around, and it became a thing, Foo Fighters. And that certainly defined the last year or so of the war. And then there were even reports of these things over in the Pacific Theater as well. So

So 1944 is kind of, you know, we tend to think 1947 with Roswell and the Kenneth Arnold thing and what was sort of the initial beginning. But 1944 was a pretty big, as you point, call out. What with the potential crash wreckage coming into U.S. possession and also the Foo Fighters. So let's let's jump forward to 1954.

Which, by the way, I'll just admit it, that was the year I was born. So you can do your own math, folks, if you want to. He was actually born on May 17th, which actually was the birthplace

Brown versus the board of education. So I always thought that was a cool thing to be born under, but okay. Here's just a couple of things from 1954 that, that strike me. I know that in October, there was a soccer game. You're talking about Italy. There's a soccer game in Italy with 10,000 people there. And it was reported in the newspapers and people have talked about it for years. Uh, there was a soccer match and they saw this egg shaped UFO over the section. And, uh, again, uh,

Everybody saw it. There's pictures of all these people looking up at the sky as this thing crosses over. Just a couple of other things. One of the things that always struck me. Yeah, go ahead. No, I'm actually fascinated by that Florence case because it was an egg-shaped object forming acrobatic maneuvers seen, as you say, by 10,000 people.

And essentially, you know, I don't know why things like this don't get more attention. You know, 10,000 people look up during a football game and see egg-shaped objects doing acrobatic maneuvers clear as day over their heads. You know, the whole play was suspended and 10,000 people stood and watched the

And apparently there was a silvery filament substance that fell from the air that day and covered the stadium like stringy snowflakes on a warm day. And it's never been explained. And even the BBC has reported it with the usual tongue in cheek. But the thing that really gets me is why do these stories just come and disappear? That is interesting.

Carp launch, anomalous objects, no visible means of propulsion, no observed relationship to any known aerial craft that are known to the human arsenal at the time.

And it just comes and it goes. And we just move on. People go, oh, yeah, I saw a flying saucer today at the football stadium. And then they go home. Well, my friend, that's why we're here. Because if you just look at the regular media, that is what happens. Maybe every 10 years they'll put out an article, but they don't really. And they should. I mean, this thing happened. It did happen. A couple of other things, by the way, that happened in 1954. Just...

On March 5th, some French fighter pilots took a picture. So this is a famous picture. I don't know how to pronounce this. R-O-U-E-N? Ruin? Ruin? Ruin. Ruin. Okay, my French is not so good as yours. Okay.

But what's interesting is the image that was captured by that French fighter pilot is a near match for the photos that were taken in 1950 in McMinnville, Oregon, that were documented. The Trents, a couple of a farming couple, took just two pictures. They're on film and they are considered they've been looked into by McDonald's.

many people over the years, and they're considered to have stood the test of time. So that meant that in the 50s, there was at least this one kind of craft at that time that was out there and was making everybody a little confused. And by the way, if we want to add in the esoteric of 1954, this one's purely in the rumor category. But Dwight Eisenhower, under the cover of going to see a dentist,

in Palm Springs was reputed to have allegedly gone to Edwards Air Force Base where he saw alien bodies and debris. Now, there's been people talking about that for years. That is not one I'm going to go to the mat on, but it is interesting to note that people have talked about it.

And then my final 1954 thing goes back to Nathan Twining, who was the guy that wrote the so-called Twining Memo in 1947 that stated, and this is a quote, the phenomenon is something real and not visionary or fictitious.

which is really kind of a clarion call from 47. But in 1954, he was speaking at an Armed Forces Day dinner in Amarillo, Texas. And he basically said, and this is another quote, the Air Force has the best brains in the country working on the flying saucer problem, which I thought was interesting. So if that part was true,

That goes back to 1954. That's 70 years ago. We had thousands of people working on this, the best brands in the business. I wonder what they cooked up. I wonder what they didn't share with us.

Look, this is the thing that annoys me is that so far, you know, a lot of what we've talked about in this list, it's notable that a lot of them are overseas for a start. So the idea, the mythology that this is a uniquely US phenomenon is dispelled. But also, as we're emphasising here, the fact that it's not a recent event. UFOs aren't something that have just suddenly bobbed up out of the custard. This has been around for 80 plus years and, in fact, has been a feature of human history going back millennia.

Let's go to 1964. Yeah, let's do that. Lonnie Zamora. Tell me. I mean, that's basically, isn't it? I mean, if you're going to talk about anything in 64, I wouldn't even add anything. Lonnie Zamora, this cop who goes and sees a landed UFO in 1964 in Socorro, New Mexico, which-

Of course, New Mexico is such a hotbed. I'll let you run with some of the details. But, you know, this guy saw something. It stayed with him the rest of his life. He was freaked out by it. And he actually saw occupants standing around outside this vehicle.

Two small humanoids, not large enough to be normal human adults. But when they saw Lonnie driving up in his cop car, they hopped back into their craft. Apparently, there was a short blast of some kind of emission to get the craft off the ground, and then it took off in the blink of an eye.

There was also a symbol that he drew, which it's very hard to describe. It's kind of like an inverted pyramid, which over the years, a lot of people have attached significance to because it apparently bears some resemblance to the symbols that were seen on the side of a craft allegedly seen in Rendlesham in the Suffolk Forest in 1980, Christmas 1980. And so there's...

The Socorro story to me is compelling because Lonnie Zamora went to his death always adamant that what he saw was real. And there was also physical traces found on the ground of burned grass, burned soil. Something incredibly hot had been on that landscape shortly before the craft took off.

it had physical trace elements to it. And I would say to people, if you remember Jane Fox's excellent documentary, The Phenomenon, you can actually see some great film of Lani Zamora where he retells that story. And Lani Zamora,

Sure doesn't look to me like a guy that's just making up stuff and blowing it out his backside just to get on TV. He was not happy about that. And I remember when I was producing Dark Skies, we wrote an entire episode about it called Hostile Convergence. And so we did a really deep dive into that thing. And frankly, yeah.

You know, what we picked up on is in the aftermath of this landing, all kinds of people from the media, including Dr. J. Allen Hynek, showed up there. I mean, Socorro became kind of like a rock festival for a week following it as everybody in the world came to talk about it. But again, as you point out.

From any mainstream point of view, it just poof, it's gone. But it wasn't gone, folks. It happened. It was covered. And now it's gone. So it's not gone to us. Now, my friend, I'm going to give you the privilege of talking about 1974 because I know you are a huge Beatles fan. Yes, I am.

I listen, uh, people know that, um, and by the way, this will be the 50th anniversary, 1960, 74 rather of when John Lennon saw that famous UFO outside his, uh, penthouse apartment in New York city. And this isn't the Dakota, by the way, people often think that this is a place down by the East river where he was living with his girlfriend at the time. He was separated from Yoko Ono at that moment. And, um,

He was up there working on, I think, the album art for his Walls and Bridges album. And he saw this UFO. He called her to come out and look at it. They both observed this thing for between 10 and 15 minutes each.

And it was basically had a red light at the top. It kind of slanted down like an inverse cone with burnished metallic look. And then it had these lights circulating on the bottom of it, a kind of a crazy thing. And, um,

We had done a little bit more on this, Ross, in one of our earlier shows, which I looked at the other day. And first of all, the audio is out of sync and so is the video. So next month, look how far we've come. Look how far. But next month when it is actually the anniversary, I hope to talk a little bit more about it. And one thing I just want to put out there, because we do have a certain amount of reach now. We have a number of people that do pay attention to what we're talking about here.

One of the things that always struck me, and this goes to the consciousness angle about the whole UFO issue, is here John Lennon and May Pang watch this thing 10 to 15 minutes, going slowly down the East River before it gets to the end. And then it turns sideways, which was not reported back then, but is now reported. And then it zooms off.

Yes, they did call the police or they had a friend call the police and they had a friend called the newspaper and the police said, yeah, we've had a few reports. And the newspaper said, yeah, we've had a few people call in about it. But I would think if you had something, he said this was the size of a Lear jet. So something that size going down the East River at nine o'clock at night on August 23rd, 1974, would have probably gotten more people seeing it. So I just put this out there.

I'm still looking for a witness besides John Lennon, somebody who might have been 20 years old then, they'd be 70 now. I'd like somebody to get in touch with us, and I'd like to hear your story, because I think this is such an important story because—and this is the because for me—

I know John Lennon took his share of drugs and I know he was kind of a rebel and admittedly when he saw this, he was naked. So it's easy to make a joke about the whole thing. But

He talked about it on his Walls and Bridges album. He wrote, I saw a UFO, and he put that on the album. He talked about it instantly the next day with the people in the media, and he described where it went. And he talked about it till the end of his life. He wrote a song about it.

This guy did not give this up. So if this was some kind of performance art, like a bed in for peace, like he was famous for doing with Yoko, then he would have long ago given it up. But he did not. He went to his death thinking about it.

Now, you've been appealing for witnesses to the Lennon case, and I've actually spoken to witnesses who were witness to what we're going to talk about that happened 40 years ago in 1984, which is the Hudson Valley sightings. Yes. And I've recently been doing a bit of a dig into that, and it fascinates me that just north of New York, of course, is the beautiful landscape of

otherwise known as the Hudson Valley. It's where I'd live if I lived anywhere near New York. Manhattan's too busy for me. And it's gorgeous countryside. But it was also in 1984 the scene for a spate of sightings of gigantic craft, in some cases football fields-sized craft, boomerang-shaped, triangular-shaped discs,

All of a sudden, there was this outspate of activity up the Hudson Valley, and most of it reported adjacent to or near known nuclear facilities. Never explained, but a multitude of witnesses, many of whom still recall to this day what they saw. It was so widely reported, too. Excuse me. It started, by the way,

In 83, but it really, really picked up intensity in 84 and a couple of other 84. By the way, that would be a good show for us to talk about because there's so many witnesses. Excuse me. Two other quick things that happened in 84. One of them was the Hestel in Norway incident.

sightings that amazed everybody. And if you want to look up H-E-S-S-D-A-L-E-N on Google, you'll see the pictures. And what they do is they're so wild, but they raise the idea that possibly UFOs aren't all structural.

And some of them are the intelligent use of lighting effects of a light phenomenon. And then the other thing is back in our esoteric category. On December 11th of 1984, Manila Envelope arrived at the home of TV producer Jamie Shandera in Burbank. And inside it, it had a roll of film. But it was like a roll of film inside an envelope, inside an envelope, inside an envelope.

undeveloped film. They went and developed it. And what they found was a document. And the document was stamped top secret, magic eyes only, magic spelled M-A-J-I-C. That document inside it was called Briefing Document Operation Majestic 12 Prepared for President-Elect Dwight Eisenhower Eyes Only.

This is the so-called majestic document dump that started this whole idea that there might have been a program called Majestic 12 or Magic 12 or MJ 12. And people have tried to knock it down over the years. Other people have said that they think it's authentic.

I was good friends with Stanton Friedman, who spent the majority of his... Well, no, he looked into everything. But he spent many, many, many hours trying to verify these documents. And he came away with the feeling that they were authentic. And I have talked to him for hours and hours about it. I also think they're authentic. Now, I wouldn't bet my home or your home on it, but I think...

It's clear to me that whether it was called Majestic 12 or some other name, there had to be some kind of control organization that has allowed this situation to maintain itself all this time. And all I can say is Majestic 12 has been very, very good to me. I put it in official denial. My first movie, I made Dark Skies. Literally, the main set of Dark Skies was the Majestic 12 organization.

So I've enjoyed it as a dramatic thing, but I also happen to think it's authentic and real and that they aren't making that up. But that clearly was something. And now, by the way, for a really big one, folks, just jumping back 30 years to 1994, and we have the aerial school landing, which is incredible.

in the last, I'd say, three or four years, gotten so much attention. This is where a landed craft, and this is in, is it Zimbabwe? Is that, Ross, do I have that right? Is it Zimbabwe? Yeah. Okay. This thing lands. There's all kinds of school children there and teachers, and they all go see it. They see birds.

occupants come out of it that communicate with them about the state of the earth and how we need to do a better job with it. And what's been fascinating is not only were these kids interviewed by John Mack, who, by the way, had his book Abduction published in 1984, he went there and interviewed all these kids

These are kids who are not part of a grand conspiracy. They all told the same story about what happened. And for several documentaries that have been out in the last few years, including The Phenomenon, those kids...

30 years later, as adults, went back to the location and told their stories again, and nobody retracted anything. They were all like, yeah, it happened. So it was kind of an amazing story. And I, again, urge anyone, just look it up, Ariel, A-R-I-E-L, Ariel School Encounter, and you will have your mind blown. It's a mind-blowing idea.

Now, I think we've made our point, Bryce, but just for the sake of time and to be very, very brief, if we go to 10 years and 20 years ago is Nimitz. So you've got the Nimitz in 2004, the Tic Tac, and of course, the gimbal go fast on the East Coast in 2014 with the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

It's pretty shocking. And the thing, the thing I want everyone to understand is you and I sort of did this just because it seemed fun. It's like,

We sort of said, what if we do this? And we both went, well, that'll be fun. And I got to tell you, we could have done the whole show about it. We could have done an entire week on incidents because, for example, I just want everyone – I show these a lot, but these are Richard Dolan's two books, UFOs and the National Security State. If you go through Dolan's books –

Hundreds and hundreds, I guess my lights went out here, hundreds and hundreds of these events have sightings and so forth happening every year. And we could do this next year in 2025, looking back, 2026, it could go on forever. But given that I now look like I'm in a dark cave...

I think I'll be quiet. By the way, I was out in our blazing sun, and I think my sunburn is pretty obvious right now. You, however, look like you're just out there gardening in the cool weather.

It's bloody cold down here. So listen, the lesson from today's show is those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it. Yes. I've got a horrible feeling. God forbid, I hope in 50 years' time you and I aren't sitting here going, disclosure is just around the corner, right? Well, I've got to tell you, Ross, if I'm here in 50 years' time,

Then there's been some medical breakthroughs. That's all I can say. And I pray for those breakthroughs, but I'm also impatient. I would like this to be resolved. But I can see a couple of codgers like us in 50 years going, wow, back in the day. But, you know, listen, it's been fun doing this. This may not be the year where we get actual disclosure or new profound legislation passing, but I think it is teeing us up for it.

a year that'll be very interesting in 2025 and i i've got my fingers crossed on that yep and on that note i think we'd probably better call it a day for this show for this week and we'll see you again soon see you ross take care and thanks for everything everybody