Robbie Graham, Hollywood and UFOs Expert

Welcome to the USA Think Tank Craigio with your host Alejandro Rohan. Hello, and welcome to UFO Think Tank Radio. This is your host Alejandro Roja, and I'm very happy to be here with you all today. I want to start up with sorry, uh, you know, a little bit of sad news. But I someone who needs some help. As you all know, I started this show, and I used to live in Denver, Colorado,

so you can probably know where I'm going with this. Yes, unfortunately, a friend of mine, her daughter, was involved with the shootings and actually a mutual friend of this friend of mine. In fact, I think I had Heidi on the show because she's a mutual friend of Stan and Lisa Romanek. And in fact, you know, I had a show a year or two ago where I brought in just witnesses, just third parties who said they have experienced something around Stan Romanic and I'm pretty sure she was on that show.

But anyway, Heidi is just a beautiful person. If you're one of the Colorado people, you know who she is. She's a wonderful person and her daughter is as well. And unfortunately she was hurt really bad in the shootings the other day. Why I mentioned this is because they could use some

help. And if you go to the UFO Think Tank, Facebook or any of the facebooks including Stan Romanex, Lisa Romanex, my other Alejandro Rojas on my personal one, you'll be able to see some information there about Sarah and how she's doing an update. She's doing much better. It was actually really scary up until yesterday, really and now she's doing better. But you'll see a donate now button there. If you can help out, that would be

wonderful. And and you know, especially for those of you who know the family, you can go see how they're doing. So I just wanted to start up and mention that. Otherwise other news, last week, I had mentioned the twenty five percent off for radio listeners for the Cosmic Exploration Conference. So really this is a huge discount, and this is it's going to be

your chance to register, so you'll want to do this. There's only like a little more than a week left because I'm doing this discount till the end of the month to help get things rolling as far as the things that need to get taken care of. So really you're going to want to register as soon as possible. Just use the code when you're checking out U T T that is you T T and that talks. I have updated a couple of

them, and they're of course really exciting. For instance, psychologists professor of psychologists run Western is going to be talking about the sociology of hidden events. So essentially this is really interesting. In the eighteen hundreds, there were meteors, the meteorites that were happening, and people were denying that that happened. You know, oh that's not true. You know how we all know how

people can be that denying this phenomenon exist. So he examined that, he examined more recent demonstrations of phenomenas which were proven to be real and how society reacted. And then of course he examines the UFO phenomena and the state of denial we're in. And this is a gentleman who himself does even though he's at Harvard Graduate got his PhD at Harvard, He you know, believes that there is something to this phenomena and I he essentially subscribes to the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

But he's going to talk about how that relates to today and where we are in the whole process of accepting you know, hidden events. So this is going to be extremely fascinating amongst the other talks, which of course will also be fabulous. In fact, Lee Spiegel's going to talk about something he never has he was on the show of course last week. He's going to get into the details about the UN initiative from the seventies because the UN actually

was looking to do some set up a UFO group. In fact, with Granada they actually passed the decision to set up a group, you know, least talk about that part. But he's going to talk in detail about what the scientists and the special witnesses involved had to say. So that's going to be really great. Let alone all the other great speakers and a very rare chance to meet this Belgian general on the brower to talk about the wave in

the nineties. So lots of good stuff. Check out the website cosmicex dot com for the latest and then go ahead and register use the code utt and you will get the phenomen little discount. So that's what's going on there. Otherwise, UFOs in the news. I've been so busy and it feels like there's so much going on that I haven't really noticed that there haven't really been too many news stories in the last week. In fact, this is one of the weeks with one of the fewest news stories, uh out there.

I've noticed. One of the new stories, at least something I wrote about on the Huffington Post so you can be aware, is Thomas Jane. So, Thomas Jane was the actor in the hung TV series. He was in He was the lead in the Executionery. He played the comic book hero guy. He was the what else was he in? He was in Deep Blue if you saw that with these sharks and that killed people essentially, Hello cool. Jay was on that movie too, So this is a he's a really

big name act he's a great actor. He's a lot of fun and all the stuff that he's in. And I think I told you guys about this before, how he's really into the topic, and how he retweeted my tweets or tweeted me, you know, a while ago after the Moufon conference. So I wrote a little bit about that because he has tweeted the conference. So I've been in touch with him a little bit. He's excited about the conference. He was looking for something with more scientists and academics, and so

was I obviously, and that's why I put together a conference. So Thomas Jane, hopefully we'll make it. He's going to be shooting a movie of course, in the fall, a busy guy hanging out with all the stars

in Hollywood. But if he can, he's going to make it. And from what I hear from my friends, I told you guys last weekend about a benefit that La Movefon and Orange County Moufon had for doctor Roger Lear and Thomas Jane, I guess showed up there so to the LA one just to show you how interested he is in this topic, which he is very So that's pretty exciting. We'll possibly, if not probably have some movie stars at

the conference. Other news include and list people wrote about this. And here's another story in the Telegraph in the UK, and this is the Edinburgh University which they're talking about. You know. The stories read that they're offering a degree on alien life and making it seem like a UFO's and aliens. It's actually a free course that you can't take and it is called an Introduction to Astrobiology and the Search for Extraterrestrial Life. So it does sound very very fascinating.

It sounds like a lot of fun, and it looks like, you know, some SETI stuff along with the other sciences searching for extraterrestrial life, but doesn't look like it's so much a UFO oriented, which would be kind of fun. Also, of course, speaking of SETI, there is also a story in Forbes about a project to look for lasers. So essentially these

guys are looking for flashes. So they're thinking perhaps that an extraterrestrial civilization out there could be using lasers to communicate, and so we should look out there

for some lasers and see if they're trying to communicate with us. This is an observatory in Sydney that they write about, and they write that actually, in December two thousand and eight, they did have a spike that was anomalous and the guy wrote down in the margins of the readout for this is this EG And later when they went to look for this signal again, they were unable to find it. Thus they concluded that they dismissed it as spurious.

This is the exact wording the scientist uses, because if they can't detect it again, they can't be for sure that it is repeatable and it is extraterrestrial, so they had to write that off. But a very interesting story by

Forbes. You'll need to check that one out. And another story is about another English gentleman or an English academic, and this is out of London, Oxford, and this is a scientist who says, essentially, he's just saying, and people are paying attention, you know, and it's kind of interesting just it's such a hot topic and academia and of course on television and everywhere else. But he is saying that perhaps, or he bets that we will

find life, possibly even intelligent life, within the next century. So he's saying that most likely within the next century, we will discover life and even possibly intelligence. Of course, many of you who listen to the show will probably agree or at least of the belief that will probably just make that discovery much more recent than that in the near future. And of course some of you believe that we've already made this discovery, and perhaps you yourself have made

that discovery, and that would be very interesting email me the details. But of course we have people on the show who have at least do believe they have met extraterrestrial civilizations themselves, and of course that's all very very interesting.

So that's some of the news. Of course, if you want to read more about the news, you can go to Ufdailynews dot com and you can go to the UFO news feed, and that's where you're gonna see daily updates of the headlines out there, or you will be able to look at the news on the front page. Of course that's updated occasionally, whereas the news feed updated every day. Another story out there actually has to do with our guest. Well, I forgot to tell you all about and this is exciting,

this is really cool. So last week we did our little forum on Chase Brandon, the CIA guy, and Grant Cameron talked about a gentleman named Robbie Graham, and of course I've talked about Robbie before also, and this is a gentleman based out of the UK who runs a website called silver Screen Saucers and he is an expert on extraterrestrials and Hollywood and UFOs, so the

whole Hollywood perspective. He even has he's a doctoral candidate at the University of Bristol, so he's researching a PhD in examining Hollywood's historical representation of UFOs and potential extraterrestrial life, so he's examining it in a sociological way. However, he is a firm believer as well that there are there is something to the UFO phenomena. It sounds like, and we'll talk to him a minute that he subscribes to the extraterrestrial hypotheses, but is open to other ideas as well.

So this is really interesting. He's an expert on Hollywood, which is great, and being an expert in Hollywood, he has actually been familiar with Chase Brandon because Chase Brandon was CIA's Entertainment lays on, which meant that Chase Brandon's job was to go work with movies and stuff like that. So we'll talk to him about that. We'll talk to him how he got onto this

stuff, and we'll talk to him all about Hollywood and UFOs. And he's got this great story up now, which I tweeted and put up on the Facebook there, which is a little bit about Thomas Jane, but also about other celebrities and UFOs and the kind of stuff I write about sometimes because it's really interesting to me. I think it's a lot of fun when the cool kids are, as he says in his story, coming out of the closet on their UFO beliefs, which is happening more and more. What's going on

here? People? So let's talk to Robbie about all of this exciting stuff. I am really excited to be able to talk to Robbie Graham from the UK and the gentleman who runs Silver Screen Saucers. Hello, how are you Alejandro? I'm good? Thanks, How are you good? Good? I am really excited to be talking to you because of course we've kind of emailed back and forth over the last probably a couple of years, and it's been a lot of fun, and there's been all this interaction, so it's always

fun to finally be able to talk to someone live. Yeah, it's great, Thanks very much. So getting into a little bit of your background, you're currently a doctoral candidate, so you're working for your PhD and this is for the University of Bristol at a very unique topic. So your PhD is actually going to be around Hollywood's historical representation of UFOs and extraterrestrial life. Is that correct? That's right, that's the topic. It's actually done through two

different departments. It's gone through the film department and it's also done through cultural studies, so I have two different advisors, one to oversee the cultural dimension and one to oversee the film film side of things. So it's kind of complicated, and it means I've got two people to answer two rather than one, so I have to justify things especially well. But no, it's great.

It's it's been going on for a couple of years now. Actually, I'm currently in a one year requested leave by absence from the pH D, which they very kindly granted me in order to be able to write a populist book on the subject of UFOs and Hollywood. So Bryce Sable and I got in touch last year and we decided that we would start to work together on

a project looking at Hollywood and UFOs, which would be dual pronged. It would consist of a book silver Screen Sources, Sorting factors from fantasy in Hollywood UFO movies written by myself, and then that book as it's being written, will be adapted by Bryce for a potential TV documentary series which will share the name. So this is something that's going to be developing over the next year or two, and yeah, hopefully that's all going to come to fruition.

The book's coming along nicely and I hope to have it finished by very early next year. Great, well, that's really exciting and he's a perfect guy to getting to partner up with on this. However, I guess getting back to the University of Bristol, I would imagine that this was something in their catalog where you could choose to go and do this, pursue this a degree. I would imagine you proposed it, and if so, how did they

take that? What did they say? Well? Love, how most PhDs work, I mean with PhDs is generally the case that the student will propose the idea and they will have to pitch it and sell it essentially to the apartment. And if the department deems it to be viable and will get go ahead and you can you can go ahead and write your thesis. Of course, you, as I said before, you you have to undergo a lot

scrutiny during the writing process, planning process. I mean, you spend a whole year really just planning, planning what you're going to do before you even put pen to paper so to speak. Yeah, it was a should a slightly controversial topic UFOs for obvious reasons. And that said, I have had, you know, support, I've had to really make clear that this is not necessarily a rather not strictly a thesis about UFOs. It's not looking at

it's not looking at solving the mystery of the UFOs. It's not seeking an answer to the UFO riddle. It's looking at Hollywood's representations of an objectively real phenomen regardless of what forces are behind that phenomenon. And it's looking at how Hollywood ties that phenomenon to the idea of extraterrestrial life and visitation, and the extent to which Hollywood's representations of UFOs and et life will actually impact our own

perceptions and expectations of first contact. So those are the things I'm interested in.

It's a largely cultural study. At the same time, it does encompass the political dimension of the phenomenon as well, and it takes into account the government's longstanding historical interest in UFOs and look at UFO secrecy, and it looks at government involvement in the filmmaking process and the extent to which the Department of Defense and CIA have sought to influence the content of Hollywood ufoth in productions right and culturally, I mean, or at least especially from a film perspective,

it seems to be a very valid topic because so many films are centered around this topic exactly. There's been a boom, really an explosion in the popularity of uffhone movies, of films that depict sxterrestrial visitation and first contact scenarios in the past decades, since really late nineties and right through to present day, with the likes of Battleship and Prometheus and The Watch which is coming up in many many others. I've counted over forty titles that meet the criteria for my

PhD and that have been released just in the last ten years. So forty ufone movies, major ufhone movies. Those are the ones that have received theatrical release. I'm not looking at straight to video TV things. I'm looking at

big budget or medium bridget Hollywood productions. So just as you say there's been about forty in the past decade, they're all listed on my blog, and I will be looking at all of those in the book and in the PhD, and so yeah, there's a lot to get your teeth into and then you know, that's the same nothing of the hundreds that have been produced since nineteen fifty. So yeah, it's absolutely a valid topic to look at from

a film studies perspected, very little has been written on this subject. Most of what had been written relating to flying source of films has been really couched in kind of Cold War studies, sort of looking at the idea of the other on screen. You know that the blobs and the pods they represent communism and fear of the other, and they represent fear of the bomb and teenagers.

But most people and whilst that's a valid reading of these many of these films, and whilst that is the preferred reading of some of them, the underlying inspiration for all of these films, let's not forget, was not teenagers or blobs or pods or the bomb. It was literally flying sources. Was this flying source of craze that swept the United States and the world during the

late forties and into the fifties and throughout the Cold War and beyond. It was these sightings of disc shaped objects of flying sources that really kind of fueled Hollywood's screenwriters to produce this kind of material. Of course, then they laced it with the sort of other readings and so so yeah, but I'm not so concerned the traditional film studies readings, And in fact, I'm going to be suggesting that we really need to get to the court the core of of

what has inspired these films. Then we need to sort of acknowledge that that the UFOs are real. And lets you know, I kind of acknowledge that very quickly and were so we can move past that fact. And I just about got my supervisors to get on board with that. Really, you know, we're not suggested the autos are lizard men or they're not. They're not you know, some kind of Independent day style invading force. They're not even

et or you know from from Spielberg's iconic movie. They are literally, just when identified, playing objects in a strict ex sense. So let's look at that first and then and then let's see what we project onto that phenomenon and what part Hollywood plays in our in our understanding of expectations of what actually lies got behind the phenomenon. So you had to be pretty motivated to be able to tackle this, to be able to be courageous enough to probably approach the

university with this idea. What was it that motivated you to pursue this? Excuse me? Well, I've been interested in UFOs going back to my teenage years. I became very interested when I was about fourteen. I've always been interested in weird scenes, ghosts and paranormal phenomena, but I suppose UFOs always held particular for me. And then when I was about fourteen fifteen, I am just for some reason bought a book on the subject. I don't know

what compelled me to do it, probably the hypnotic for the cover. And it was actually Bill Hamilton's nineteen ninety six book Alien Magic, which is a very thin volume and it makes for an entertaining read, but it's not particularly scholarly. But for a fourteen year old boy, it was absolutely captivating and it just hoogs me completely. And you know, from then I just bought all the literature from all the big names and just consumed it very very quickly.

And I suppose I got to that age seventeen, sixteen, seventeen, and I thought, it's just become so frustrating. Anyone who's ever looked at the subject for any amount of time, who's just becomes incredibly frustrated because you feel a certain sense of powerlessness. What can I do about this? You know, even if it's true, even if it's weird, even if we are being as it did, what can I do about it? Especially when you're sixteen, seventeen years old, I suppose the answer is not a lot.

And so because you feel quite disempowered. And then, of course, college got in the way, and I started to become obsessed with the film as an academic pursuit, and so the UFOs kind of got put on the back burner. And then as I started to pursue my academic career, so to speak, I gradually came back to UFOs by my early twenties, and I realized that I couldn't really forget about it because one thing or another would keep dragging me back in. And so naturally, my interest in UFOs and

my passion for film merged. And by the time I, you know, by the time I'd finished my master's degree and started thinking about PhD, I you know, it made sense that I should do a PhD that combined the two interests. And so that's that's how it's come about. It seems completely natural to do it for me. Yes, I was a little bit wary about whether or not it would be accepted. In fact, to be honest, I was very surprised that the proposal was accepted. I felt that it

was a strong proposal. But again, when when you're dealing with with UFOs, and when you're talking about the subject in a way that's not entirely abstract and cultural, where you're actually starting to deal with nuts and bolts issues, it becomes very tricky. So but thankfully they accepted it. And I am still having to tread a very fine line with the approach that I'm taking,

But you know, it's it's going ahead, it's going going well. And as I say, it's the thesis that I'm writing will will timately be translated into a into a populist book, which would be the full screen sources. So the PhD might make for rather dry reading, as I'm sure most species do, will be rather more interesting. It's exciting that it is going to be in a book. Excited. I'm really excited about that. So in your research, yeah, from when you started until now, I guess what

how long has that been and how has your view on this topic? Changed? If it has well since since a teenager, or since I started the PhD, I since you started the PhD. My views haven't changed to great extent. I suppose to change a little bit since I started the PhD. My views, I mean since looking at somebjects obviously my back when I was the teenager, and my views have changed quite dramatically, But they haven't changed a great deal. Since I began the pH D. It's opened up more

opportunities for me. I've had the chance to meet some very interesting people, and so my view has changed slightly. I mean my I very rarely actually express my personal opinion on the subject, to be honest, not even on my blog or an interview that I usually play the role of the academic and just kind of try and speak in strictly objective terms and splick to hard facts

and intimate detail about you know, very specific historical cases. And but you know, I think anyone who reads between the lines and anything I write will probably detect that I am a proponent of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. I think that's the most valid hypothesis sort of for the phenomenon has reported over the years.

I do think that it goes Johns the et H. However, I think that the you don't have to think that the your government is involved in the cover of Obviusly, the US government is involved in the cover up and has been for many decades, and historically they've treated the subject with great sensitivity and their own documents to show this, So there's no great stretch there. But I don't think that the US government has all the answers on this subject,

as many people would like to believe. I think that in many respects, the US government is actually fairly clueless about UFOs, not in all respects, acually, stress only in certain respects. I think that objects have been recovered by the US military and of the militaries around the world. I believe obviously they have the RCT knowledge of the subject. They have more knowledge than us in certain respects, but probably not in others. And I think ultimately they're

probably clueless as to what's going on. How possibly can can anyone really understand

the full complexity of this completely baffling phenomenon. You know, you're dealing with apparently multiple agendas, You're dealing with things that really people struggle to put into words, that you know, so I think that if you're dealing with intelligence is from from one or more, you know, Star Systems, then I don't know, it just seems it seems inconceivable that anyone can really have a full picture of what's going on here, why we're being visited, what the

end goal is if there is one, you know, what's going to happen today, what's going to happen tomorrow. And I think that overall there is a great deal of uncertainty within the power circles who have influence on this subject.

And I think that, well, we can get into the slater if it's relevant, but I do think that we're starting to see evidence of that uncertainty, and I think you're starting to see some steps towards preparing for worst case scenarios on as as regards to disclosure if we use that term, Okay, interesting, I'm glad we talked about that to kind of lay that down

that that'll be good going forward, kind of having your view. So then having said that, I guess this might be a good chance to just get right into some of what you've been writing about lately, which is Trace Brandon. Of course, we had Grant Cameron and San Friedman and Li Spiegel. On last week I had a forum with those three and Grant talked about something that you initiated really with this email to the CIA, where unfortunately they didn't

answer many of your questions. What were the natures of the questions you were asking and related to their response? Well, yeah, this is sent shortly after Brandon had made his public statements on the twenty third of June, when he made him on Coast to coast. And I should note that I've been

looking at Brandon since two thousand and eight. He's figured in my research and work for several years in his capacity as the former liaison to Hollywood for the CIA, And so anyone who's really looked at post nine eleven Hollywood propaganda will have come across Brandon's name. And most people who work in Hollywood today who have spent any time in Hollywood, you know, at any level of seniority, would have probably cross paths with Brandon, who's a very influential guy in

Hollywood, right. And I was just going to say, that's one thing I did want to ask about because when you ran across this, of course, and even now, there are people out there who unfortunately just haven't really bothered to do enough research or questioning his existence whether he really worked for the CIA. That for you was not in question because you already knew of his

existence. Ask someone for the CIA with the entertainment. I mean, he's probably one of the best known, what usually one of the best known CIA operatives of the last thirty years. And it was his role to be. It was his. It was his, you know, it was his job to be to be that. He was the public face of the CIA for upon years. Vega ten years in his role as the elo Entertainment LEAs on

Officer. He was appointed to that role in nineteen ninety five. He was answerable to the Director of Central Intelligence and to the head of the Public Affairs Office. But he had a great deal of autonomy within that role, and he made contact throughout Hollywood, and he had a great deal of influence, and a lot of that influence, it has to be said, was covert, despite the fact that he was working supposedly open and public fashion. Most

of the films he worked on he went uncredited. Most of the TV shows he worked on, he went uncredited. So the video film so audiences would go into a film I wouldn't have any idea that Brandon had had any influence or the CEI had had any influence over that film at all. So it's a little bit undemocratic and vague sinister because we don't really know the nature of

the changes that he's made. But we do know that he's been involved in those films because he's admitted to it, but won't really elaborate on what he you know, what his involvement was, or he'll have information from the filmmakers himself after the fact saying yes, Jas Brown in involved on you know, he would phone us up and suggest this storyline or that storyline, or say, well, you know how back into this dialogue or take that dialogue out. So it was all kind of a lot that was lost the books.

So it's interesting from that perspective. But yeah, Brandon is the real deal. You know, he walks through walk he talks to talk, and he's he's a thirty five year veteran of the CIA. Twenty five years before the twenty five years before his position at Yellow as a Yellow Sorry, he was in the elite clandestine Service. He you know, he's operated in dozens and dozens of countries around the world. You know, he's kind of like a James Bond of self style, so he was only doing Bond type figure.

And yeah, so he he reported to Bill Clinton, he was a presidential briefer. Certainly has walked in some very interesting circles throughout his career. So yeah, so that's why I played Oswell statements. In fact, I knew that he was going to make these gossbel statements before he even made them. Really yeah, but I can't really say how I know that. What I knew about I knew several weeks before. But he's he can be the leading to this other people months in advance, but he hadn't. He wasn't so

explicit about it as he was on the coast to coast. So I was actually surprised at how explicit he was on the coast to coast, I'll have to say. But Brandon was of interested to me and my writing partner, my frequent writing partner, doctor Matthew Alford, because he was a figure in the case of the screenwriter Gary Devaure, who disappeared in extremely suspicious circumstances in nineteen ninety seven, and we wrote an article about this, and Matthew has

made a film about it that should be coming out next year. It's a very very interesting case, indeed, and you can find more information on the internet. But Brandon was very good friends with Gary Devare, and we have reason to believe, very good reason to believe that Gary Deare himself a screenwriter who worked on film's farm of Schwarzenegger and Van Dam and all, that he

was a cisset himself. So we've been looking at Brandon for a long time, and so when he made these statements, we were very, very interested. And the questions that we've put to the CIA after Brandon's interview were really the questions, to be quite honest, that should have been asked during that interview. John Wells, who was interviewing Brandon, sat there in near total silence. Brandon just made drop these bombshells, and there was really no follow

upon it. George Norrey put that to right to some extent in his follow up interview that he conducted recently. But we wanted to put some direct questions to the CIA, and these same questions we put to Brandon, but he did not reply to us, despite the fact that he had already been in contact with my colleague Matthew Wilford prior to this, and had had a friendly exchange with him, But when we put these direct questions to him, he

didn't reply. So these are the questions that we put the CIA, and slightly more to CIA, we wrote was mister Brandon's interview on Coast to Coast on June twenty thirty vement well, and were the comments he made during this interview subject to prior approval by the CIA Publication Review Board TRB Two. Does mister Brandon's assertion that that the CIA currently has in exocession proof of extra dress or visitation which we threat he claims to have seen while working in his capacity

as ELO constitute a disclosure of classified information? If so, is he subject to legal penalties or other action as a result of this disclosure? If not, why not? Three? Is mister Brandon still under contract with the CIA in any capacity? We know the answer to that. By the way, he is still under contract with the CIA by his own admission. In fact, he is currently the senior intelligence consultant to the Intelligence Division of THEAE Systems,

which is the defense giant. So defense corporations actually have their own intelligence wings which may come as a supplies to many and these intelligence wings consult with various governments around the world our issues of security and procurement and things like that. And so Brandon is a headhunter. I really expect how this intelligence division of BAE Systems and in that capacity he has tried to skill to the US

government and the CIA. Or are there any circumstances under which members of the public, academics, journalists, for example, might be granted limited access to the historical intelligence collection, which is where Brandon claims to have see the Roswell

bots. In other words, is it possible for the public to independently verify mister Brannan's claims regarding Roswell materials in the HIC Number five, as an extension of the above question, what CIA communication policies are in place to provide the public with an opportunity to respond to and inquire about materials observed, excusing materials observed and statements made by former CIA opportunity concerning the roles all matter that may

be seemed to communicate classified intelligence or national security information in the public forum. And number six, if I having used the public verification of mister Brennan's claims,

I'm not available at this time. We asked that the CIA officially comment on his statements, either either confirming or denying their veracity, and then we specified that these questions are not in the context of his fictional book, but in the context of his factual statements that he made un quickly on Coast to Coast. Their response came a week later after I'd had to send them a reminder email, and they replied with exactly the same replied word for word that

they gave Billy Cox of the Whold Tribune. And their reply was, which I don't have institution been unfortunately, but it was essentially they said, off the record, so obviously it's not of the record, and I've come back to say it, off the record, we will not answer any of your questions. Basically, we were and they kind of said that they can't answer this question for that reason. They can't answer this question for that reason,

et cetera, et cetera. They said, on the record, you can use this one sentence, and then they gave us a sentence but we used in our article and that Billy Cox also used in his, which was basically that, oh gosh, I can't even what it was now, but it was. It was basically it was a very polite dismissal of Brandon's claims without directly branding and the liar. Uh And so yeah, you know, we haven't published what they've said to us off the record, but it wasn't anything

explosive. It was all just we cannot will not answer the questions. So it kind of does raise questions in itself. You know, we put these, we put these, We put these questions to the CIA's Public Affairs Office, whose job is to liaise with the public and in an open way. So but everything you asked them, they reply with off the record and then they say, you know when, we won't answer your questions anyway, So

they're not really a great deal of use. And I've made other inquiries to the c I A p a O on other issues prelate the UFOs, and every response I've ever given me has begun with the phrase off the record. I think it's just standard procedure. I don't think there's anything inspiratorial about that. I didn't stand the procedure. I think they always reply with off the

record. But it's just it's kind of useless really as a as a public right, and why stay off the record when they really don't have an authority to uh, to enforce that you could, they don't have and they don't.

Well, I think I think why they might do it, and it's a speculation, is that they are they know they can't enforce it obviously, as you say, but what they can do is pay attention to whether or not they researcher heeds their requests, right so so so for example, I would have published the off the record statements, which I haven't done, although I alluded to them there. They might take notice of that and then therefore be less reluctant to be, you know, cooperative with me in future.

I'm just gonna still being so that I think they want to feel out individual searches as to how cooperative they can be. Right. Interesting, And their statement was they found nothing in the agencies holding to corroborate mister Brandon's specific claims.

So, like you said, that's right, they didn't. And I was gonna say, what did you see about your explanation of Brandon here in the history that you've given, which is really helpful because it's insightful for people who don't understand so much who he was and what he did is that is

how public a figure he would be. I mean, what I think is interesting is you can go to I put in, you know, the Entertainment Layson officer for CIA, and a site comes up and they have a site called Entertainment Industry lays On and it's almost like a little Hey, if you're making a movie, give us a call and we'll help you with your movie. If it's about CIA, well we'll give you information about our procedures, tell you what you can use and can't, and we'll also give you tours.

I mean, they're really enticing you. Hey, let us get involved with what you're doing. So I'm sure a lot of movies must have done

that, and so well. The CIA involvement in Hollywood goes back decades, goes back to the nineteen fifties, but their involvement prior to nineteen ninety five was covert, and it wasn't until nineteen ninety five that they decided that because the media representations of the agency had for so long been so negative, what they decided to do was to try and put that to rights by encouraging the entertainment industry to openly thea's kind of in a mutual way with the agency in

order to who kind of want well, in order to from the CIA's perspective, in order to put out a very positive, flattering image of the CIA in order to boost recruitment and retain personnel, which is much the same as what the Department of defensers in Hollywood. The their goals in Hollywood officially are to boost recruitment and retain personnel through positive portrayals of what they do. So

it's kind of they don't call it propaganda, but it is propaganda. Although it's it's it's propaganda that can only be achieved with the complicity of Hollywood. It's not forced upon Hollywood. You know, they sign, they sign a

contract. It's worrying how many how many filmmakers just do this without batting an eyelid, you know, yeah, let's sign a contract with the Department of Defense, to sign a contract with the CIA, you know, without really giving mu support to what effect that will have on their film in terms of

artistic integrity. And because with the do o D they sign away well a great deal really that the Depominent Defense has huge script control throughout you know, from from from day one and they can control things right through to through to

the editing stage and even into the marketing stage. The same as with the CIA, although the CIA has less to offer filmmakers and the Department of Defense because the d o D offers filmmakers, you know, cool tanks and helicopters and troops and that boosts the reality, to boost the realism of the film. But it also cuts the cost for the filmmakers because they don't have to create create all that stuff in the computer. They can choose it literally,

But the CIA don't have all that stuff. What they can what they can offer really is just advice, and they can offer access to their language headquarters, uh and to you know, they can film the CIA ceel on the ground and it just adds to the realism and things like that and they get but but really what they're offering is advice. They're offering one or more CIA

personnel to present throughout the shoot and the script writing process. Really they try to exert as much influence as they can be for the script is even written. They like to buy their own admition. They like to try and mold ideas before end is put to paper, so that they you know, they know what kind of film they're getting involved with and what the end product will be, so they are lefinitely in that capacity. They're free to to suggest

changes. The filmmakers don't have to go along with those changes. They can reject them, but if they do reject them, then the CIA will pull out and they will lose their support. So essentially they do have to you know, they do have to go with those changes, and in almost all cases, all filmmakers do go just you know, they take on board the recommendations are made to them by by the state, right, and so you

get a huge influence from from the government in Hollywood. So and we'll get more into that, but kind of getting back to what you've been writing about in this and kind of along the line to what Grant has been writing.

Given what you have just told us, I mean, when I read your stories, that looked like you guys were certainly of the opinion that this was and you wrote this in your questions, that they're most likely was some sort of collaboration in that Chase had let the CIA know that he was going to come forward with these statements. And you know, from an outsider's view, such as mine, and I think a lot of the public you would be like, well, you know, not necessarily. I don't know why that

would happen, But he could have been independently doing what he's doing. But given like what you've just explained, where it's his job to kind of vet what is publicly being said about the CIA inside of the entertainment industry, he in particular would have a sensitivity around what would be going out being said about the CIA, and he would then because I get this feeling he's kind of playing dumb about this. Oh, I didn't know it would be such a

big deal. Well, he had to have known, and he would have been the person to best know it would be a big deal, and that he probably should get that information okay before he said something. Now I can see from your perspective much better. Chase Brandon knew well in advance the fallout of his statements. He knew what would happen, he knew the media reaction, he knew how it would all play out, and he knew you know

that he would be faced with difficult questions. But he was going to make these statements regardless, and he's continued to make these statements despite the fact that the CIA has officially and naturally dismissed his claims. I mean, what else are they going to do. They can't confirm them. So but despite the fact that they have dismissed his claims, he's still making these claims and he's

gone more mainstream with his claims. He gave up interview just last week to BBC Radio UH and they were much more direct in their questioning of him, and it was quite interesting. But what you're seeing in his interviews is that he is consistently putting across three or four points, and it seems that that's what he's trying to do here. He's trying to hammer home two or three or four points that he wants people to accept. One Roswell happened. It

was real, it was extraterrestrial. There is a craft or there was a craft rather and that's the key. That's the key, thinking that there was a craft, there were bodies. Two. Don't blame the CIA. It was the Air Force who covered it up, which is true. Well, you know, to an extent, CI I would have been involved obviously after the fact. CIA wasn't in existence at the time the OSS was. But CIA would have become involved after the fact. Uh, but he said,

don't blame the CIA. They weren't involved. And this is a crime of the past. If there is a crime at all, is a crime of the past. It's a crime that rests with people who've been in their grades for decades. No one in the CIA today currently really understands the implications of significance of what happened. It was well, the evidence, if it exists anywhere in its physical form, is kind of lost under sixty five years worth of storage dust. And you know, it's just a vague institutional memory now.

And it's kind of like, so if the do do hiss the fan regards, you know, some kind of UFO events in the future, don't point to the CIA and say you knew about rolls up, because yes, we knew that, we didn't really understand it, and we weren't the one who initiated the cover up. We were just you know, we only had very limited information about it. And no one really knows what's going on either one that this is the absolutely bizarre scenario that he's putting out of and obviously

it's the most historically significantly together. No one really pays that much attention to it, and no one really understands it. It's just kind of lost, lost in the storage warehouse, like in Raiders of All Stark, which is what he keeps saying, keeps trying to conjure this image of this this disc somewhere probably packed up under a million boxes in a story in you know, Hunger eighteen somewhere, but that no one. But the point is is that

there's no active cover up. It's not an ongoing effort to deceive the public. It's just something that no one really understands and knows about, and the few people who do know about it don't really know what to do with it. So that's that's the other point he's putting across. The other point of the different point he's putting across throughout all of this is that the CIA is entirely cuture, utterly uncorruptible. You know, it's it's the savior of of

of America and of mankind. And I wish you know what he what he was employed to do is the public place of the agency is to put that image across. So he's selling that image as well. But he and then he's you know, he's saying yes, what happens. Those are real, but really there is no active cover up of it anymore. And so it's kind of like, you know, you could look at it as a limited hangout, this idea where certain information is disclosed in a very controlled way,

in a way that best serves the agency controlling it. Uh, you know, perhaps with the expectation that more might be disclosed down the road. But for now, this is going to have to do, and this is the way we're going to do it. It's difficult to say, I couldn't. I can't say conclusively what what is motivating Brandon here. I can say with

a high degree of confidence that he is not acting autonomously. He will absolutely not have gone on radio and made those unequivocal, unequivical statements without first of all giving a heads up to his his pals at the CIA and also to

his his employees at THEA Systems, you know, the Defense Giant. I mean, how I just imagine if you're if you're the CEO BAS Systems, and you wake up on the you know, the twenty sixth or whatever of June twenty twelve, and you see that you're your your senior intelligence consultant has just declared Roswell to be an extraterrestrial event, right, but usos are real,

And I mean, what are you going to do. You're going to say, well, why are you're going to be not surprised because he's already given you the heads up and you've given him permission, or you've actually told them to say in the first place, you know what people that you're associates to have orchestrated this in the first place, you're not going to be surprised. Or two you're going to think, oh my god, he's a completely canon or he's insane. We're gonna have to fire him. Well, Finry,

I know he hasn't been fired. And you know, regardless of his current position at BAE, he is still tied to still and if he still keeps close company on a personal level with Cia top Brass. He was good friends with d Cis for years. It's his world. He's the only world

he knows. He you know, you never really leave the agency when you've been in it for that long at the right level, and but that's his world, and you don't all of a sudden and he knows how sense to youfhoe are of anyone who's ever read a book on the subject or seen an episode of The X File knows how sense of your foes are. And so he's not going to go on radio and make those unequivocal statements without first of all, having had approval from either CIA, Top Brass or some of the

control groups somewhere. It's interesting too, especially when you outline exactly what he's saying. I say, I said he was playing dumb, and I don't mean that, you know, as I phrase to call him names, rightything, And he's kind of he's playing innocent, which is exactly kind of like you're describing what he's trying to pursue, perceive the CIA as is kind of innocent in all of this. You know, hey, you know what was the air force that did all of this cover up? Which is kind of

interesting. And he's careful in sticking to these points that don't contradict, which it does seem to me, at least from listening to him, that he is well versed in a lot of the riswell the details of the investigation.

And it's one of the things I wanted to ask in like last week, was do you see any holes and problems with your research and what he's saying, And he said no, because he has been careful to not add anything to the story that is certainly something that can be dismissed or is outside of the realms of what's part of the research is you know exactly what to say. And if you listen to his interviews in fault and listen to them second and a third time, which I've done, and I know there's a done

like Grant and others, they are fascinating. He's a master at what he does. He really knows how to play the media, how to construct a sentence in order that the question that you've asked is completely lost within seconds and forgotten that lost it, and then he'll come back and answer the question that he wants to answer, just much like a politician. Right, he knows

exactly how to handle the media. And yeah, but he nevertheless, he is in a difficult position, and he must have known that it was going to get a bit tricky. But he is in a difficult position because now people asked us him to us slightly more pressing, more complex questions about the nature of these claims and also about the legal consequences of those claims Billy Cox for an excellent piece just to get the days ago on his blog, you

know, suggesting that Brandon be subpoenaed and an investigator to these claims. I mean absolutely, I mean these are remarkable claims, but because of the laughter and surrounding UFOs, it's really just pushed to the side, and you know, no one really pays much attention to it. Steve Bassis currently got his

his disclosure petition online. Students his Investigate Brandon's claims petition online in the context of the Roswell incident, and it points out, of course that the Brandon's statements directly contradict the White House's of official policy on on the UFOs, which is that to date, there has never been any evidence collected by the U S Government which suggests that the UFOs are extraterrestrial and extraterrestrials have ever business of

us. That's the official statement put out by the Abamon in the strass I believe was it last year or the this year? Last year? I think, And you know, so they're on the record with that now, and that's what Steve Bassett's a petition last year a cube if nothing else, and so based on that position. Now you can say, well, hang on

a minute. You're saying there's no evidence, yet one of your former high ranking guys, decorated, highly respected CIA official, actually says that you do have evidence, and that evidence is sitting as we speak in a historical intelligence collection at the CIA. It's so show us, it does very difficult questions. So I don't think that's heard the last to Brandon that I think I

think there's more to come. I don't think we'll have anything particularly explode, anything more explosive than he's already said, but I do think it will hear them also, of thing, what I think, what I've said previously as to what this is just my take on it. I can't back this up. My my feeling on this is that Brandon is acting under orders and the goal here is partly limited hangout, partly disinformation, and the haut mean that term no excuse me, excuse me, so limited hangout is the relief of

it. It's like an intelligence term. Is the limited release of information sensitive, potentially explosive information that you put out there to the public because you fear that there may be a greater disclosure to come, which could be more damaging in order to control. It's basically like a controlled leak, a very controlled leak, and it's spun in such a way that it kind of absolves the

agency responsible of any wrongdoing. And so there's that element to it. So Brandon's sort of confirming to people that Roswell was real and it was alien And I mean, you know, we didn't necessarily need Brandon to tell us that, because there's a great deal of evidence suggest that anyway. So based on that apparently truthful statement that he's made, what he's hoping to do is gain our trust. And this is also part of the limit to tang Out as

well. The person who leaks the information is expected to gain the public's trust so that they can then control our perceptions in the long run. So by making that statement, a lot of people go, well, he must have telling the truth. And indeed, Grant Cameron's current opinion poll that he's got online suggests that most people believe that Brandon is telling the truth as he knows

it. So he's already gained people's trust. So what we'd like you to do then is to believe what else he has to say in the future, be as a genuine whistleblowers as an autonomous leader. But I don't believe he is at all. I believe that this is part of a much more sophisticated operation here, And the bigger goal I think is yes, Brandon wants people to read his book, but not strictly for commercial purposes. As a pointed

out before, I don't think Brandon needs to be worrying about money. If he's a senior intelligence consulting for multi billion dollar defense corporation, he's going to be earning probably more in a month than what he would earn in a year off his book if his books all the exceptionally well, so it's not a huge I don't think there's a huge financial motivation behind the book. But I think the book is political. Put the motivation as political, and the book

was, as a matter of fact, vested by the CIA. They checked it and asked him to change material that was contained in the book. Brandon has said that the book contains real material, real information, excuse me, and he's insisted that people read the book quote between the lines, and that there's a great deal of fact to be found in the book what he wants. But he's basically said obviously it's had to be published as fiction in order for it to be vetted by the CIA, because is not going to publish

it a fact. But what he wants to do, he wants people to do is read the book as fiction, as fact disguised the fiction, if that makes sense. He wants people to see it as the real deal. And I think that is that that's the that's the goal, and the book is actually fiction. I think that the book which I've read, is it's just a paranoid fantasy. It's disinformation. But people will read it a fact now or largely factual, based on on his statements regarding ro as well.

And that's the danger. I think people are going to pick up the book. It's going to sell really well, and people are going to go, oh my god, this is what's really going on because this guy told us now, and so we know that we know exactly how the CIA has being we know, you know, you know how we look covered up, we know what the agendas are at play here, and you know, as far as the books concerned, I think it's I think it really is fiction.

I think it's fantasy, but Brandon wants us to read it as fact, and indeed the CIA wants us to read it fact because they betted the d thing getting worked up because it just annoys the hell out of it. Right, Well, there's some really good points there. And given that you have seen what Brandon's involvement has been in the entertainment industry in the past, what do you think if he is, you know, working with the CIA,

what do you think they're doing here? Do you think they're trying to control the story the UFO kind of mythology, or do you think they are I think Grant was kind of thinking maybe they're trying to slowly disclose to get the truth out, But obviously, like what you're saying there also there is some

not non truth here. I think that as far as and this is what I'm kind of proposing in my in my academic work, is as far as the government's interest in managing media representations of your both it's not so much about debunking or acclimating as it is about perception management. And it's so it's not so black and white necessarily, And I think you know, a lot of

people are confused. They'll sort of say, well, this film, you know, this project seems to be acclimating us, you know, the Good Life Soviet For example of Robert em Andega case of the seventies, it seemed to be acclimating us. For the Ward Kimball case of the Disney one of the fifties, you seem to be efforts to acclimate us to us a reality, but then others seem to be trying to debunk the subject. And how

do we account to this? It's not you know, the phenomenon itself is constantly evolving and constantly changing, and the perceptions of those in control in government are also changing and ship you know, constantly shifting as the phenomenon evolves, and so their approach with God's to media is also changing. So we're not just seeing debunking or demystifying, le or acclimating. You're actually just seeing a

more subtle program of perception management. It's always constantly trying to tweak how we perceive this phenomenon. You can't. Ultimately, it's impossible to debunk UFOs through media, and the CIA would have realized this very quickly in the nineteen fifties because you know, how do you debunk something that continues to spectacularly manifest itself

around the world on a daily basis. You can't debunk it. People know it exists, people keep seeing it, people keep recording on cameras and documenting it. It obviously exists. So you can't debunk it. But what you can do is manage how people perceive the phenomenon, and you manage it according to your own interests. And so that's the CIA's interest in manipulating media.

As far as your fos are concerned, it's about perception management, and it's never it's not necessarily to a cut, whether it's acclamation or debunking, and often it can be both. Of course, disinformation, as we know, includes both fact and fiction in order to make it effective. So so Brandon's core statement here it was all was real. I don't think many people who've looked at you know, who have looked at the case would dispute that.

And there's a great deal love and suggested that there was, that there were non human entities involved in that, in that recovery. So Brandon's kind of confirming that, and I see that that allows to trust him and it puts him in a position of authority. And what happens then is that we are more inclined to believe what he has to say about the UFO subjects in the future, and we're more inclined to accept that his book is actually fact labeled

to fiction. And I think that's dangerous because I do think that the book

is is real disinformation. I think so if if you want to break it down, I suppose I view his statement about Roswell on Coast to interview and to the interviewers as being the limited hangout, partial disclosure in a very safe way, and his book is is uh is another another issue entirely, but his statements are made to actually encourage you to read the book, and then what the c I wants you to understand about the phenomenon is in the book

got cham so all very complicated, so which kind of makes sense because what what I'm thinking is, of course, is CIA is also kind of if this is a concerted effort, that it is just more than Brandon that they're also kind of trying to make their spin in that it's almost like they're they're a great maybe the air Force, you know, they've got so many leaks,

there's so much information coming out that the airpace realize it. Yeah, yeah, it they can't contain it, and so they're already doing their own damage control to say, you know, so if this does come out, if something does come out, CIA can still wash their hands there. It'll still look like the good guys. That's it. It's about constantly covering their

backs, you know. And all of the agencies, all of the branches of the military intelligence, our practice in any government, are all actually remarkably self serving. They're not. You know, the Air Force couldn't care less if the CIA was lynched over this subject, and the CI I couldn't care less if the Air Force was esp Actually the way it's always been, these agencies are both self serving. They often don't share information with each other,

and they're kind of like states within states, especially the CIA. So the CIA doesn't care about blaming the Air Force for ogwell you know, at the Air Force's problem. The CIA wants to cover its own back. And I think that's what you're seeing here. It is constantly about making sure that the public proceeds is phenomenon in a way that best it's them in the event that the crap should hit the fan. And I do think that that you're seeing.

Going back to what I was saying earlier, I think there are signs that there's preparedness that now, in whatever form it might take, because what we're seeing, what we've been seeing over the last four or five years, is many, many, many countries governments around the world starting to release unmass

thousands and thousands of UFO files. So you've had the UK, France, You've had Canada and New Zealand, half a dozen South and Central American countries, and all these files are coming out, and military officials, government officials have started to make statements on the issue in a very open way, if not explicitly stating that it's extraterrestrial, although some military officials have stated that from

Central and South American countries. You're starting to have publicly accessible UFO investigations websites set up in Chile, for example, and you've got that France has had once so many years. Now what you're seeing is an effort on the part of each of these respective governments too appear to the public to be open and

to be competent with regards to FOS. What the nightmare scenario for any government, especially the US government, because they have the most to lose, because they's the most to hide is that tomorrow morning, you know, a UFO decides to show up mothership to dial over over New York. Right, it hasn't happened to date, obviously, But if you're if you're in the national security apparatus, it's your job to be worried about such a thing, you

know, especially if you're keep keeping close tabs on UFOs. You're going to have to plan for that. No matter how unlikely it turns out to be, you have to at least have that injured in the back of your mind. And I imagine that's the kind of scenario that keeps people up at night. And so what do they do? How can they how can they prepare

for that? Well, all they can do really is is try to manage how people perceive the phenomenon beforehand, and they can try to put out an image of themselves that it's not going to get lynched, you know, when when im falls apart. So what you're seeing is in these other countries, as they say thousands of five being released, we're just doing several hundred more files released just last week in the UK. And what it's doing is it's

showing to the public that one we are not negligent in our duties. We have taken the phenomenon seriously for decades. We've looked at it, we've analyzed it. We'd not drawn any solid conclusions. We don't rule out that these things could be extraterrestrial. We're all clear about that. They aulsod. We do not rule out that they could be alien, but we've not got any direct proof of it. They say, so, look, we're not covering

up because here are filed. So we've released these thousands of five too, So you can't accuse us of being involved in a cover up, and you can't accuse us of being competent or negligent. So it kind of covers their back. So you know, if stuff were to happen tomorrow in a disclosure disclosure style, then the UK government would be in a fairly respectable position. They could say, gosh, isn't this a surprise? We were wrong,

but at least we weren't complicitly in a cover up. Where and then I think you said for many of the many of the other governments, the US government is is well that. I think their total silence on the subject is rather telling. You know, they don't say anything on the subject unless they're you know, unless you put there, you know, twist their arm behind the back, that they won't say anything. And even then they say the most mundane things, which is to be expected. Well, they are in

a pickle. What are they? You know, they have to prepare for these kind of scenarios. So I just think that that things like the Brandon statements and other disclosures leaks statements along similar lines over the years are part of, as gad Camera suggests, a controlled disclosure program. How effective that's going to be, I don't know, but really they don't have many options. What else can they do? Mm hmm? And I think, you know, a lot of this is bumbling. Also in that CIA I think is

a little more controlled. They have a little they know better what they're doing. But when it comes to like the Air Force, I mean they're one agency, the CIA that has a lot of procedures. They have a you know, a more control over everything that everybody's doing in their group because they're

a smaller groups. It's supposed to like the Air Force, which you have generals all over the place, and you have you know, colonels and what have you, and base commanders and you have all of these many many people, so it's much more uncontrollable, which was a bit of according to some of the early researchers in this build. You know that the CIA was trying

to take over the UFO subject because of that issue. They were saying, you know, you guys are too unruly because there's such big organizations, let alone the government itself which all has these groups, and with all this infighting and who knows what, there's a lot of people that don't know anything, no doubt, a lot of even high ranking military officials who I believe,

you know, they don't know anything. Let you do. Yet you do have some people and in fact, you know, I've heard these stories again and again where, for instance, one person is working with an intelligence organization and they're bound to secrecy there while at the same time they're answering to a superior officer over here who they cannot tell them everything they know or everything they're working with. It's other intelligence organization. So it's so complicated, and there's

all of this this. I think that's a lot of a bumbling going on where they're probably I wouldn't imagine, and I don't know what you think that other than CIA, who have probably has their stuff together pretty well. There probably isn't some overall plan. There's just too many different groups and it is

too unruly that there's different people trying different things here and there. And I agree, agree, and I think I agree, and I think that goes a long way towards accounting for the different strategies that seem to to you know, whether apparent in in in the in the government's involvement in media over the

years with regards to this subject. You know, one minute, are trying to acclimate us select to trying to debunk, but you'll find that there's different branches of the government involved in different films and perhaps they have different agendas. You know, it's a divisive issue. I always say, you know, the UFO issue is a divisive issue, especially not only you know, not only within within the UFI community, but also I expect within the corridors of

power. And we know that going back to the to the to the forties. You know when when the Air Force Round Project sign it's Socioffore Investigations program, you know, the original offices there concluded that UFOs were interplanetary, and then you know you had the sector of the Air Force order, all those reports burned, and then you had other people suggesting, no, it was Soviet. People were saying, yeah, it was, it was actual phenomena,

and it's saying it's you know, it's extraterrestrial. It's a phenomenon that divides opinion, and I expect that that's the case today especially. We have to consider, as largely points out, that it's something that only a small handful of people have any real access to because of the compartmentalization of the secrecy. So it's it's impossible to know what's going on in the cord as of

power with regards to this subject. We can only speculate. I don't think that speculation is always entirely beneficial, but you know, there are signs and there are patterns emerging with regards to disclosure efforts, to apparent disclosure efforts, and we can start to piece together a picture. And and the Chase Brandon testimony seems to be another another piece in that in that picture, in that puzzle. And so we'll just see how how it develops over over the next

few weeks or months. I did want to ask you a lot more about UFOs and entertainment, and we didn't get to that because it got taken up with Chase, which has just been a lot of interesting stuff, and so

I'll definitely need to have you back very soon to talk about that. But I did want to touch on one other thing you mentioned which is really interesting, which is that Chase did consult with Bill Clinton did some consulting with Bill Clinton, which is interesting because of course we all know that Bill Clinton was really interested in UFOs, in Roswell in particular, so it makes you wonder if there was some talk with these two on that topic. And beyond that,

Bill Clinton, most likely because of his interests. The Air Force came out with these documents saying, oh, no, there's nothing to it. Of course, we're familiar with these big case studies that they put out, and Clinton has since said that he pretty much buys it that you know, they told me there's nothing to it, so there's nothing to it. Always with that caveat though that you know that that someone could be holding secrets from me. Still yeah, but yeah, Clinton, Clinton's the same, He

always sticks to that line. He has to obviously maintain the official position that it's that it wasn't alien but he always has to say, has that caveat where he says, but I don't know what people are beholding from me. People don't tell me everything. And he also occasionally adds that you know, obviously it's probably life in the universe that he might one day find it, So he always dropped in the hints. I mean, his his position on

the subject is very clear. So that's interesting itself. But one last thing I'll add quickly on the Chase Planet thing is is Grant said it before, but I'd like to clarify as well that his bop his Roswell box story where he claims to have seen his box containing materials and files in the Hi C

I don't buy that for a minute. I think that's a concoction, which isn't to say that the essence of what he's said isn't true at Roswell as it was extra trustal, but I don't buy how he came across this material for a minute. It's not remotely plausible that you would have all of this

material in a relatively low security location and all together in one box. You know, it would be compartmentalized, it wouldn't be that accessible, it wouldn't be it wouldn't be labeled Roswell, so it would probably have a numerical numerical identification. And you know it's he's using that as a device. It's a

storytelling device. It's it's you. If Bundling genuinely does have not had the first time knowledge of Roswell or second Halund knowledge of Boswell, then it will have probably been amassed over several decades through conversations with people here and there in CIA at various levels. And maybe he's seen some documentation in this facility of that facility, but he can't talk about that because that is classes like that

would be breaching us securities, that would be implicating other people. So what he can do is he can condense all of that information into this neat little story where he saw this was well boxing. It's all contained, no,

So it's a storytelling devices. It's just a neat way to deliver this core truth to the public in a way that doesn't incriminate anyone, right and following that, it's almost also a signal to anybody really in it who has been in the CIA, who's been in this collection of books, which is what this historical area seems to be that they would know that that part of his story is not accurate, so they would know that this is something else going

on. Yeah, really interesting. Yeah, And my final it's very it's very it's very well thought out, very well, as is everything, as is everything that Chase Brandon do. My final question would be, uh, just a perception. It's difference in perception from the United States to the UK. I mean, how does the UK interact to all of this material? Is you know, of course you see the Sun out there with some pretty

wild staff. Daily Mail's kind of the same thing. But you do see stories in Telegraph and things like this rarely these days in the Guardian it seems, which they used to cover a lot more stories. But how does the UK in general, you think, take this stuff? How does the UK news media or how does the UK publish a bo back to it? The news media has in the last few years started to treat the subject a bit

more seriously, it has to be said, oftent. In terms of broadsheets, the Telegraph is by far the best newspaper for serious reporting on UFOs. They they you know, they consistently report on all of the UFO file file releases. They report on UFO sightings and incidents and testimonies, and they more often than not do it very you know, you know, could have straight on. They don't. They don't couch it in silly language, and it's

it's straight on, it's to the point and it's respectful. That's something that's quite interesting I find. And the Telegraph is the best selling broadsheet in the UK. The Sun, I mean, the Sun will always go after UFOs that they'll feature anything with your phos is it because they know it sells.

But it's problematic with the tabloids because anytime the word UFO appears in a tabloid, it de regimizes as the subject, just simply through its association with the with the with the you know, with the tabloid, with the trash and press. So regardless of how seriously it's reported in that paper, which is not usually not very people will just come away with the impression it's just another

Sun Sun's story and it's all Monson's. It's you know, big fort eight, my baby touches us, you know, and so so so the media are covering it more than they have done in a long time. There is earlier a week goes by now that one of the newspapers, broadsho tabloids will not feature at the UFO story, and often they'll be several a week, so it's there the public are fully aware of it. I think that there is people starting to treat the subject more seriously, both in the news media.

I'm just out on the street, people are i think quite accepting the fact that there are and identified flying objects, and just because of what we've been seeing in terms of scientific discoveries lately and announcements, I think that more and more people are starting to get used to the idea that we're not the only ones in the universe. Regardless of the UFOs take those out of the equation. People are starting to think, well, perhaps we're not alone in

the universe. After all, we're told now that there's at least one planet for every star in the galaxy, so you know, one hundreds of billions of planets in our galaxy alone. It starts I think it really seem inconceivable that we could be alone, and of course that the effect area that people start to think, well, maybe UFOs could be alien after all. You know, if we're definitely not alone, then maybe we should start looking at

this more seriously. So yeah, it's much the same as everywhere. I think there's probably a greater percentage slightly of people who would be completely dismissive of the subject, but there is a large percentage as well who treated seriously and who are very open minded. And the press coverage obviously, you know mid my season, the whole other conversation. But the press, you know,

the press can report what it's allowed on the subject. You know, if I, for example, wanted to well, you know, I say, I submitted my article on Brandon to which are around the sixth of July to I mean about twenty newspapers in the US and UK and Canada, and not one of them wanted it. Even the Roswell Daily Record turned it down. And I offered them for free in person, like the so we don't so we don't even want pain, and they didn't even want it. And you

know, this is the this is the newspaper that broke the story. This is on the sixty pis anniversary. And so it's a subject that that most people, regardless of government interference in the news media, most people won't touch at the barge pole anyway, because they just know how to contextualize it, especially if you're treating it seriously. That if I were to have written the

story very in a very choky fashion, they'd have probably accepted it. But when you treat it seriously, they don't really know what to make of it, and they think, maybe this is a bit risky, or maybe it's just seems I don't know, people aren't going to like this and or respond to it in the right way, so they just leave it. They don't really really know what to do it or where to place it. And that's

the problem that you know that we've had the media for decades. I do think it's gradually getting better, but there's still a great deal that needs to be done. Ultimately, there can never be anything really explosive on the subject. Are really insightful, shall we so? In terms of analysis, because

there are type points within the news media as there are in Hollywood. You do have government influence in these institutions, as Carl Bernstein documented floly with the CIA in the news media in America in the seventies, and that was from the fifty through to the seventies. It was completely infiltrated by the Central Intelligence Agency. Urgency had four hundred journalists looking for every branch of American news media. All right, well, thank you so much for being on Robbie.

It's great to talk to you. I love the website Silverscreensaucers dot com and of course everybody can see the link, and I've been reposting a couple of your stories that you've offered, and so people can go to my website and have links back to your site there also. But it's been great talking to you, and really you this has been so insightful. You've really changed. You've made this Brandon thing much more complicated for me. I'm glad to hear

it. Well, thanks very much having me on the show. And yeah, I hope to talk to you again in the future. It is always so much fun to do an intercontinental interview with someone way out there. Just the technology is so cool. Anyway, great to talk to Robbie. And

the website it's Silverscreensaucers dot blogspot dot com. You can find his site by either googling silver screen Saucers, going to Silverscreensaucers dot bogspot dot com, or you could go to ufodaily news dot com and there's some stories there that he has posted and there are links back to him there. I just posted his story that he posted today on Facebook and on Twitter, so check it out.

And of course the movies are so much fun you can imagine, and if you're into entertainment and movie and UFOs, then you're gonna love his website. And I'm so excited about his future projects and definitely need to have a mom to talk more about UFOs in Hollywood because we talk so much about Chase because it's such an interesting story. Anyway, it was great to have him on. Thank you, Robbie. I forgot to mention that I was on Chasing UFOs. Well I did mention that before, but the episode came out

and there wasn't much of me in the show. But that's okay, and it is kind of funny because people keep back to me about you know, the if you saw the show, there was a Chinese lantern they got and they played it up like everybody was freaking out and wondering what it was. And actually it was quick. Somebody saw the red light. We flipped the camera could see it was a Chinese lantern. Done deal. So all of that getting excited was really these guys we saw the military dropping some flares,

and that's what they were getting all excited about. That's why at one point James goes, look there's another one, you know, and of course there's only one Chinese lantern, so that part kind of didn't fit completely. So that's how that all went down. But it was kind of cool because we did see a lot of jets and stuff in that camera they had was incredible. But Jason and I got cut. They didn't even use one line from

Jason. I don't know if they even showed his face. Well they did, I guess when we were outside of the car, but that's about it anyway. Thank you so much for joining me at UFO Think Tank Radio. Be sure to visit ufodaily news dot com go cash in on the twenty five percent off at the Cosmic Exploration Conference. It's going to be absolutely amazing and you all have a wonderful evening. I will talk to you next week.

People enjoy my Clothes, music, Island Maneuvers from Tours Minutes, Audio Smooth, U Joes, Yes,