A

Hi everybody, this is Michael Ryan. We are on summer hiatus, but for the rest of the summer we are going to play the Best of UFO Talker Podcast. So enjoy today's episode and as always, if you have a question or comment or something you would like to say to us, send your email to ufotalkerell.net foreign. You are listening to the UFO Talker podcast. Come with us as we explore UFOs from the past and the present. With insightful discussions, interviews and reviews, we will add our voice to the mysteries that have been seen in our skies and oceans for all of human history. Now, here is our host, Michael Ryan. Welcome everybody to the podcast. This is season 2, episode 8 from Studio 7H here in Ontario, Canada. On today's episode we have an interview with Gary Hazeltine about the OSI interrogations of servicemen in the Rendlesham Forest incident. But first I want to talk about a few things. The first thing is last week there was a glitch on the release time of episode seven last week. So that's never happened before. It was supposed to have been released at 4am Eastern Daylight Time and for some mysterious reason it didn't get released till 6.50am Eastern Daylight Time. And that's I had to manually release it. So no one knows exactly what happened. They're just calling it like the ghost in the machine. So hopefully that doesn't happen again. So there are a lot of people who listen right at exactly 4am so to all those people, I apologize, we're not sure what what happened, but hopefully that will never happen again. And now on to my update on my blog. So you know, my blog, it's almost a running gag now. So you know in life, you learn things in life, right? And after you learn, you make sure those things never happen again. So for those of you that have been following this saga, which that's truly what it is now. So the blog has actually been written for many weeks now. But the technical part of getting the blog matched up with my website, which you would think would be very, very simple. And I think most of the time it is, but for reasons beyond my comprehension, it is taking a bit longer. So now the lesson I have learned is never to announce something that you don't have full control over until you know it will definitely come. So I can tell you the blog will come out, but I'm not going to tell you when right now because that is part of the ongoing saga. So it'll almost be anti climatic now when it, when it comes out. But I am Working on it. Trust me, it will get there. And hopefully the wait will be well worth it. Well, I think it is, anyways. So I don't know if everyone saw this in the news from a few days ago, and it looks very hopeful. It was Representative Tim Burchette. I saw him on News Nation talking about this. But in he says in the next several weeks or before Christmas, he is actually going to get into a skiff about all the information that Grush talked about in his testimony. So if you recall, there was lots of questions that Grush couldn't answer because it, you know, hadn't been approved by Dopser and it was classified, so he couldn't talk about it in open session of Congress. So he kept saying, you know, I can't talk about this. And Representative Tim Burchett said, well, we'll have to get into a skiff. So, you know, that was a while ago now. So the good news is he is going to get a skiff, and he thinks it could be in a few weeks or certainly before Christmas. So that is potentially very, very interesting. Now, I know there's a lot of people out there that are saying, what is a skiff? And to be honest, I didn't know exactly what it was until I researched it a bit. In the US gif, which stands for Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, it is an enclosed area within a secure building. And these are usually government buildings, but in an emergency, they can be almost anywhere, like somebody's house or a hotel room or something like that, which seems unusual because you don't think of that being very secure. And it's a place where, you know, highly sensitive, classified information will be viewed or discussed. And in this enclosed area, there are absolutely no cell phones, no cameras, no personal electronic equipment, no smartwatches, just nothing that could be used to record or photograph any of the documents or any. Any of the things being talked about. Now, one interesting thing is for people who do not have the security clearance to see this. So believe it or not, that will be some of, some or all of the representatives from Congress that are actually going to look this. Look at this. Like Tim Burchette, they are actually restricted from any public disclosure of what they see, even if you're a senator or you're in the House of Representatives. So that is curious, because now these senators or representatives who can see this now, they will know, but they won't be able to talk about it. So I'm not sure how that is much better. They all spoke about how great it would be once they got into the skiff. But, you know, it looks like we won't. The public won't be able to find out anyway. So, you know, we will just have to take their word for whatever they're they're looking at. So I don't know if that's a big step forward or not. But like Representative Tim Burchett mentioned, you know, so if the Pentagon and places like that, if they don't want certain information out, you know, because they've been hiding information for many, many decades now, I'm. I'm skeptical that even in a skiff they are going to see everything or learn everything that there is to learn. I'm just skeptical of that. For people who've been invested in keeping this stuff very, very secret for a very long time, are they going to want to let people like Timbershett see it? But on the face of it, it looks very promising. So we'll see what happens in the next few weeks. I mean, we're definitely getting a lot closer to finding things out that, you know, I. A few years ago, I just thought, no, this would never happen because that's kind of the way it's been for decades and decades. So that is very interesting. Something to look forward to in the next several weeks. And now I want to give my shout out, as I do every week, to a small town or city where I have listeners or a listener sometimes. And this week's city or town is Bar Harbor, Maine. And as I do with all the places that I give a shout out to, I actually go online and look at some videos and read about it. And mainly it's very interesting because you learn about places that you know you've never heard of or things like that. So Bar Harbor, Maine, I've actually heard of that many times in my life. I've never been there, but it's. That's unusual because the population is only 5,089 people. So for such a very small place, it's kind of odd that you would. That a lot of people have heard of this name before, but after having watched a few videos on Bar Harbor, Maine, it is certainly a stunning and very picturesque place. That is for sure. It's right on the Atlantic Ocean in Maine and the main street and just everything around it, very quaint, just amazing. Looks like a great place to. To visit. And it nearby is the Acadia national park. That looks stunningly great. The Abbey Museum, which has a lot of first nations history in it, that looks incredible as well. And it has several great restaurants And I want to make note of the Mount Dessert Bakery. So that looks very good. That would be a place I would be stopping once we we got to Main street in Bar Harbor, Maine. And some of the notable people who've come from Bar harbor are writer and Hollywood writer and producer David E. Kelly. And he's done many, many famous shows like LA Law, Chicago Hope, Ally McBeal and on and On. He's done many things, so he's from there. And also David Rockefeller is from Bar Harbor. So very good company that such a small town has produced these kind of people. So there's my shout out to my listeners in Bar Harbor, Maine. And as always, I would love to hear from you or any listeners anywhere. We will be right back after this message.

B

Will we ever find out the mystery behind unidentified flying objects? For over 75 years, the mystery has been just beyond our grasp, showing itself when we least expect it and when we are not prepared for it to enter our lives. Military pilots, astronauts, scientists, police officers and citizens all being faced with with the unknown and the unexplained craft of all shapes and sizes, silently hovering, turning colors, flying at speeds that are not humanly possible. Over time, some of us have witnessed these objects. Some of us have touched these objects. Some of us have been harmed by their unknown energy source. Some of us have been abducted by the beings who can appear from nowhere. Will we ever find out the mystery behind unidentified flying objects? What is going on behind the closed doors of government? Are they hiding the biggest secret? Or is it like a giant puzzle with only a few of the puzzle pieces giving us a glimpse of something we will never understand? Maybe Captain Edward J. Ruppelt was right. Only time will tell.

A

My next guest is Gary Hazeltine, who was in law enforcement for 30 years. Six of those years were with the Royal Air force police and 19 of those years as a detective constable. Since 2002, he has run a database for police UFO reports in Great Britain. He is a vice president of icer, which is the International Coalition for Extraterrestrial Research. And he is the author of the book Non Human, which is the investigation of the Rendlesham Forest incident. Gary, welcome back to the podcast.

C

It's always a pleasure. Thank you very much, Mike.

A

I know Gary was on an episode from season one last year about Rendlesham, and it was almost four hours, four hours long. So I actually got a lot of response from that show and a lot of people later said they felt that was the definitive podcast on your book.

C

I was asking about that. So you've answered my question so well. I'm pleased if people think that, you know, five years of research, reinvestigation and I don't think a book could have approached reinvestigation of a major case in quite the same way. And lots of people have remarked that it's kind of a forensic analysis of all the incidents. And you know, I am humbled by many of the reviews that I've received.

A

I know it, I mentioned it in our, our last show. It is an absolutely stunning piece of work because I honestly can't think of another book that approaches it as kind of a police investigation and really goes to the the length it did to make sure all the facts were correct and all those things. So, yeah, amazing book which I can highly recommend.

C

I'm honored by your

A

I just want to read something here first that I have prepared because this will set up our our what we're about to talk about on today's podcast, we're going to take a look at the Air Force Office of Special Investigations and how its agents have interrogated some of the military personnel connected to the Rendlesham Forest incident. But beef I want to set this up a little bit. I want to talk about a 1975 U.S. senate committee that was headed by Senator Frank Church. Now his committee was formed to investigate and abuses by the CIA, nsa, FBI and the irs. And Frank Church, who is a senator from Idaho. So they actually found a lot of abuse. But one of the more interesting finds was Operation MK Ultra, which was a secret project of drugging and torturing unwitting US citizens and even some Canadian citizens as part of human experimentation on mind control. And it was only by a clerical error that we that the public ever found out about this because in 1973 then CIA Director Richard Helms, he ordered all of the MK Ultra files destroyed. But because of this clerical error, about 20,000 files were not destroyed. And that begs the question, if 20,000 files weren't destroyed, how many hundred thousands were were destroyed and stuff we will never know about. The stuff we found out about was bad. So and so the US Air Force of Office of Special Investigations, or OSI as it's commonly called, they have actually turned up in a lot of UFO cases I've read over the years. You know, they're always kind of in the background and no one ever highlights them. But when I was putting this together, I thought, oh, they've come up a lot in many, many cases over the years. And if you look on their website, there's a website for the osi and they list their mandates and there's many mandates they have. One of them is very telling and one of them is to protect national secrets. And that is very interesting, especially the in what we're going to talk about today. So, Gary, the first thing I want to bring up is in your book non human, there's 4 or 5 of the military guys that talk about this interrogation they had. But probably the most interesting one is Sergeant Adrian Bastinza. And he had quite a lot to say about his interrogation. I wonder if you could tell us what you had found.

C

Yeah, you're right. Of the Rendles and witnesses, we know of at least four who, shall we say, were interrogated as opposed to being interviewed about what they'd seen and why. I say interrogation is because they were invariably threatened in some way. And in the case of Sergeant Jim Penniston, who was the first night witness to the first night landing, which would be the night of the 25th into the 26th of December, he was with John Burroughs, but Jim Penniston was the one who got closest. And he described this small triangular craft sat at or near the ground approximately 3 meters by 3 meters in terms of length and width and approximately 2 meters high at its highest point, described it as glass, like to the touch, warm. There were lights illuminating within that seemed to move independently. And there were also etchings on it, like etchings on a windscreen. There were some symbols. So when he was interrogated, he said he had following his sighting, I mean, he was very reluctant, as all the witnesses were, to describe exactly what they'd seen. And he was particularly reluctant because he was in a sense the first major witness to see something. And he didn't see lights. He saw something what he described as structured, physical. You could touch it and he couldn't find any insignia from, you know, the States or from Russia or East Germany or as was at the time of the Soviet Union. So he was a craft of unknown origin to him. And he said that he had multiple debrief interviews initially with the osi. And he's kind of changed his story over time and has come out with a lot more stuff in recent years that he never mentioned when he first came out in the late 90s. So you've got to maybe ask a question as to why he didn't mention stuff before. But one of the things he said in recent years is that the OSI were involved in the COVID up from the off. And he basically agreed to go with the COVID up. But that's not what he said for a long time. He said for many, many years that he was subjected to maybe 10 or 12 interviews in the days, weeks following his involvement in Rendlesham. And it was harsh. He was threatened. He was told, draw it again, draw it again. And they wanted to know about the craft and what he'd seen. And he kept being asked to draw it, draw it again. And at one point he was even given sodium pentothal, an injection, a true serum, for want of a better word, to try to get him to reveal more. And that is very kind of similar to what the original military whistleblower had said of the case, which was Larry Warren. He'd said he, he'd had multiple interrogations, initially osi, and then he said that even at one point there were different agencies coming in. He didn't know who they were, but they were different from the initial interviewers which were osi. And he said even at one point there was a naval commander, an officer there from the Navy, US Navy, that had come in, I think even the uk, it was UK and Navy had come in. So very, very kind of strange. Larry Warren will say he was given an injection of something that may have been sodium pentathol, sodium amethyl, some kind of, again, true serum. But the one that describes, in a sense, the most palpable fear and effect on them is, as you mentioned earlier, Sergeant Adrian Bastinza, who, when I interviewed him in a four and a half hour transatlantic phone call and then interviewed him on Skype video and recorded for about 75 minutes, he went into great detail about his interrogation. And I think I might have said it in the show that we did that there's a page in the book where he is just in free recall and I'm not interrupting. And he's on about his, his interrogation and how he was forcibly taken in a vehicle by big guys in plain clothes, you know, big burly guys, if you kind of think of a gangster scenario or some kind of heavies who are like one either side of you. He was taken, he said, to the base photo lab and then taken beneath the base photo lab into an underground facility, which a lot of people, people like Colonel Holt have always denied that there is. But he and Larry Warren said they would take beneath the base photo lab to an underground facility with a long corridor, darkened corridor, and then put into like a cell type of room that had a screen at one end and, and the. He was told to sit down. These two men were on either side of the back of his chair. As if he was a prisoner and someone was speaking from behind the screen. He couldn't see who it was, but he felt very, very threatened. He was told, bullets are cheap. His family, his father worked for the government and his family were being surveilled in the United States because of his obviously involvement in this incident. And he was, his father was, you know, his mum was saying, you know, your dad could lose his job and was putting pressure on him. They were saying, bullets are cheap. They at one point, you know, clearly made it clear to him that he could be killed if necessary. And in his palpable speech that he came out with, he said, I was so disgusted. He said, I joined the Air Force to protect my country and serve, and here I am being treated like a criminal. I've done nothing wrong and they're threatening me with my life, they're threatening my family, surveilling my family, putting pressure on his family members. And he said, I was so disgusted, I wanted to walk away from the Air Force to go absent without leave. Airwall, we would say in the uk, absent without leave, dessert. In all in general terms. And the way he put it over, I think, is one of the most powerful sequences in the book. And there's just no justification for that. And even Colonel Holt has made statements, public statements, saying that, you know, several of the witnesses involved were subjected to very harsh treatment by unscrupulous agencies. He didn't specify, but almost certainly the Air Force Office of Special Investigation would have been involved right at the off and in relation, you know, and it throws up a lot of things because there's quite a lot of inference to missing evidence. And what I mean by that is apparently the Air Force Office of Special Investigation, if they interviewed you, it was routinely audio recorded. So where are those audio tapes now? Bear in mind the US Air Force say there is no documentation by the Holt memorandum, which I think is an absolute outright lie. You know, Adrian Bastins also said that he submitted a three page statement and he. And he asked for a copy of it and they told him, yeah, you'll get a copy. But he never did. So again, what happened to that statement? Another witness who we've not talked about is Ed Kabanzak, who was the driver for Sergeant Jim Penniston. Right from the off, he gave a statement, he was told and threatened. You know, you saw lighthouse, you said, no, I didn't see light. You saw lighthouse. And then they produced a written statement that was part of a batch that is allegedly from him. And yet he will publicly say that he didn't write that statement. So there's clearly some shenanigans going on about the so called evidence. And I think there is a wealth of material that did exist, probably still exists, but we'll never get to see it because of the nature of the secrecy involved in the case.

A

Certainly what you've just talked about is a part of the book which when I read it for the first time, it really, really almost shocked me. And I even thought this could be almost like a separate book when you read this, because something, when I was reading the test, the interview of Sergeant Bestenza, you could, it was, as you were reading it, like you're saying, it was almost palpable, his disgust, his fear, something. He mentioned in your book that when he was being interrogated, he had a bright white light in front of him and they had ordered him not to look anywhere else but towards this light. And he said, he thought in his mind, like, where's my lieutenant? Where's the base commander? They should be here backing me up. And when, when these gentlemen took him, he, he wasn't sure who they were. And he said, who are you? And they wouldn't, they just said, shut up, get in the car. And later he said in your book that I am, I'm a sergeant in the United States Air Force and I'm being treated like a common criminal. And so many kind of, what I, what I mentioned at the top of the show, this is like a technique almost of trying to either wear down a witness or change a witness's story. Like something you mentioned where they kept repeating, you didn't see anything.

C

Yeah.

A

This is odd because I have a personal interest in the, the JFK assassination. And in one of the books I read on that, they talk about agents who got witnesses right then and there, like an hour after it happened. And they were taking some of the witnesses that were on the street and they were telling them that you didn't see that you saw this. And when I read your book, I thought, wow, this is amazing because this is the same tactic. These people, OSI or whoever they were, it's a tactic that is being used not just for UFOs or in Rendlesham, but anything all over the place. And because of your vast police background, if you could tell my listeners, you know, in a, in a, at least in, in Britain, when you interrogate a witness, how far can you go? Like, is this common or is what's it like to be interviewed in Britain if you're, you know, not just a Serious crime, but any crime.

C

Well I think you've got to make a clear distinction in the UK about we wouldn't say interrogation but I guess if you were involved in terrorism then you, there are specialist terrorism UK police units that would interview you in a, probably a totally different style and that would probably, you know, be very harsh compared with the regular police. I, whilst I was involved in one particular big terrorism case, the London bombings where I was a specialist interviewer of first responding British transport police officers to three or four bombings, what was called the London bombings of the underground. Three of the four explosions, three were underground in underground railway stations. I was involved in interviewing first responding police officers and trying to plot all the positions, what they'd seen, trying to gain positions of terrorists and blah blah, blah. So that was really fascinating but I've never been part of like a proper anti terrorist squad and I would imagine that there is a lot more leeway given to harsher forms. I mean what we would recognize as interrogation. But in terms of the British police, you know, there are a lot of rules now. It's changed from the way it was in the 70s, the 60s and 70s and even into the early 80s, it's completely new rules. So for the general police detective, you know, you have rules and you, it would get thrown out if you, if you're too harsh with a suspect, even if it's a murderer, if you were deemed to be too aggressive, the interview could get thrown out. So there's lots of rules now that protect the rights of the individual. But of course we're talking about 1980 and I think it's a long time ago and I think the rules were very different there. And clearly these agencies that come in, whether it be any form of MK Ultra or something like that, they're schooled in sheer terror and invariably that terror works. And especially you know, if you're told you lose your pension, you go to prison if you say anything. It's a very powerful deterrent for getting people, whether it be police officers or certainly in the military, you have a hold over them and it's a very powerful weapon and I'm sure to a degree it still goes on, but you'd hope not quite as it was in 1980.

A

And especially when, you know, especially like with Sergeant Bestenza, he had done nothing wrong. It's not like

C

I think the real frustration and it, and it's a part, you know, there's probably been about 50 to 60 English speaking major documentaries done, you know, over the 40 odd years since the Rendlesham and none of them really focus for any length of time on if at all on the interrogations, you know, and yet they still managed to get in virtually everyone, but maybe they saw the lights of the lighthouse, you know. So it's really about the way programs are put together on this subject. And we know that there's always been a bias and, and hopefully with all the developments that's currently happening in the States, that stigma and that farcical. Oh, we've got to even it up for the skeptic. Well you don't do that. You don't, you don't, you know, a cookery program. You don't have an anti cook there, do you? Can't cook on a, let's say furniture or whatever, an auction house. You don't have an anti auction house saying it's a load of rubbish. It's just the fact that the UFOs were stigmatized following the Robertson Panel remote in 1953. Use the media to debunk it. And it's been such a successful program that was taken on board by pretty much the western world and flourished for nigh on 70 years and we're still suffering with that. But I, I think hopefully things changing now and, and we will get much more fairer reporting. I, I don't know if you've seen the, the recent four episodes of the, the new Steven Spielberg series Encounters. Yes, yeah, and that was in very, very good. But again there was a couple of really big mistakes. They had one on the Ariel School and they got 60 odd witnesses who said it's this school children, blah blah blah, brilliant testimony. And then for some reason they've inserted a guy who I've never seen in any of the documentaries before who say no, it was all made up and the kids all made it up. And clearly his body language was like you're lying and you've just been added to the program. And I thought that that just actually spoiled the program. And so you still get a knit now but hopefully things will get better. I do think that as we approach this major disclosure moment, I think we are in a disclosure period, but I think we're still, we're getting close to this acknowledgement by the US government that we are dealing with something non human. I think we'll talk about that later on with the Chuck Schumer legislative proposed legislation. Yes, if that was the person and, and that becomes law then when we were there in all but name. But the media have not yet jumped over and the world has still not recognized It. Because the media aren't telling them to recognize it. And so we're not quite there, but we're edging towards it.

A

I just, Just before we leave the interrogation part there, you know, it's probably what you have found throughout all of your investigations. Sometimes there's always little clues in some of these interviews, and there can be easily overlooked. And one of them was in your book. It had a interview that was done by Larry Fawcett.

C

Yeah.

A

Had interviewed Sergeant Bestenza. Yeah. And in that interview, there's a little tiny clue in there. And it. I've seen this clue before in other cases not related. And I. Because I was looking at this angle, this really stood out for me. And Sergeant Bestenza said in that Larry Fawcett interview that he had been shown a film of UFOs throughout history. And the person that was interrogating said, this is why we're so interested in it. And their films of things he had never seen before. Not publicly anyways. And I thought, okay, this is interesting because I could. I almost overlooked that the first time I read your book. And I have actually seen this in two or three other cases where it doesn't make sense. And there's a famous Canadian case where witness had seen a craft and had seen a bean. And some people from the Military showed him eight by tens of UFOs that he said he had never ever seen on TV or anywhere else. And they were talking like, this is them and this is what they look like. And at the time I read that case, which is from the 70s, I kind of glossed over it because I thought, oh, well, I don't know, the guy was dreaming or he's got confused or whatever. But there's actually four or five cases like this where the interrogators are showing the people information that you think, why are they showing them this? There's. They're not asking for it, but they're kind of saying it's real. It's very odd.

C

Well, they actually. That reminds me that Larry Warren, the original military was blocked. He said he. When he had his interrogation, that he was shown the same film. And. And basically Larry Warren goes into. Into a bit more depth. He mentions in his book Lefty Scare, and he will say that he was shown clips of foo fighters from the Second World War. Then it went through to the Vietnam War and there's a UFO just emerging from the ground coming up. And it was pictured as it came up through the forest tops. Then he said there was. I think there was Korean War or Korean War, then Vietnam and then he said even to space. So I guess that's maybe another tactic is, is to say look, we need your cooperation because we are facing this and it's so frightening we can't admit it. And that's why it's a cover up. So there is that side to it as well.

A

I just. So we're going to leave the, the Rendles from forest interrogations which I'm sure we're going to talk about again someday because it is a big, big topic.

C

Just before we move on. I've always believed that one day there will be either a big TV series, drama series or a big Hollywood feature film about what happened at Reynoldsham. You know, I wrote a script, worked with Colonel Holt for seven years on it. It's not happened yet because basically it's so complicated. There's four different shifts, there's literally hundreds of moving witnesses. There's no one person that pulls it all together. And Hollywood likes a hero like Harrison Ford. So that's why it's not happened yet. But I do think it will happen and I think that if you actually get to that stage, I'm sure that the, that when the scenes of the interrogations would be included in the aftermath and I think it would only be then with proper actors showing it the depth, the kind of treatment that they suffered, which I think is a crime, they shouldn't have been subjected to that no justification whatsoever that I think in a film people would then realize the gravity of what these unfortunate witnesses who got involved in something beyond their control

A

suffered I guess since the last time we spoke, which was last, last year in season one. Certainly a huge development has occurred and I'd like to get your thoughts on it is the David Grush and his, you know, testimony before Congress and also what he has said publicly in a few interviews. Now what do you make of all that?

C

I think it came out of nowhere for the vast majority. Apparently he was certain people knew that it was going to come out. Then it comes out in, I think it was June. And then he was interviewed at the congressional hearing in July. But his testimony was superb. The initial interview with Ross Coulthard was very illuminating. I mean it only kind of echoed what more serious researchers have thought for a long time. That is that some UFOs had been recovered and that if you did recover a UFO craft and bodies, certainly with the craft you'd try to re engineer it because whoever was able to recreate the engineering and the machinery would be the most powerful nation on the earth. And I think that's exactly what the United States have either attempted to do or have done. But it's all very classified and it was, you know, most people thought it had gone out to private aerospace companies and everything Grusch said seemed to corroborate that. Now unfortunately, I think a lot of the world woke up at the congressional hearing and I think it was a major, major success in terms of, not for the UFO community but in terms of the wider world. A lot of people dipped into it from the wider skeptic world and were impressed. Testament of the pilots, Ryan Graves and obviously David Fravour and obviously Grush. Now Grush, you know, he, he was the central of the three sat middle his testimony saying we have got recovered bodies, recovered craft and they have been reverse engineered to a degree. Now all the mainstream press would just jumped on the fact that yeah, there was a congressional hearing and this guy said, this intelligence guy. What they didn't stress for me is how qualified David Grush was, you know. And I kind of waited for all the people to attack him debunking. And in the end nobody could. Because what people didn't realize because the mainstream people, mainstream press didn't explain well enough is that he was cleared to presidential classification in the sense that he would take across to the White House documents that would then be passed to the President's Chief of staff who would then brief him on UFO matters, ufo, UAP matters. So you can't really get any higher than that. And that was not really given the proper treatment that it should have been by the mainstream. And I think that's still because the legacy of the stigma, the mainstream media in my experience still want to believe that we're talking about its foreign adversary, that is China or Russia. Well, if you listen to the people like Chris Mellon, Luis Elizondo, etc. We're talking less than 1% chance that that is because of the technological maneuvers that has been described. The right angle, turning, incredible incident accelerations, vertical ascents, descents, trans medium abilities, etc. We can't do anything like that. And you talk to all the top, top people. I mean there was the, the Navy guy who came out recently and he, he was interviewed by Ryan Graves and that interview, Admiral, I can't think of his name. And he, he absolutely, when he's interviewed by Ryan Graves and I would advise anybody to look it up on the Internet, he's absolutely clear we're dealing with something that's non human, off world. And he is an Admiral, and he's coming from the naval side of things and, and he was superb. It's one of the best interviews I've heard from somebody of his high rank. He's very illuminating, go seek it out. But he's absolutely certain we're dealing with something off world. And it's only a matter of time before there is an announcement that we're dealing with a non human intelligence, whatever that is. And there's lots of possibilities, but it's non human. And so I think, I think we're, you know, we are edging really closer to a paradigm shift and yet the media are still dragging their heels and you know, they're not giving you all of the facts. And this is what I've learned over the years of doing documentaries, is that the press give you some of the facts, but they don't give you all the facts. They don't overtly lie, they just don't give you all the information. And that's the key. And, and in a sense, part of the reason why I did the book through detectives eyes is to give you all of the evidence in which you can make an assessment, not some of the evidence, which is what books generally do. There's a bias. Whereas I wanted to present all the evidence and say, look, there you go. This is how I see it based on the evidence. And that is the clever twist of the media. They don't give you all the information.

A

Well, one thing that you, one thing I definitely want to ask you or get your opinion on, and also another thing to highlight that you would appreciate is when Grush testified before Congress. So now if you lie under oath in the US in front of the Congress, that's a federal offense.

C

Yeah.

A

So now that ups the game for people who were saying, oh, he just wants to be famous or something like that, well, now it's a crime, he'd go to prison.

C

But again, the mainstream media didn't pick up on that fact. He was under oath with a, a possible five year jail sentence for perjury if he did so if he told lies, they didn't play that up. And that's the very clever subtle twist that the media don't give you that information because if they did in all of their pieces, and whether it be TV reports or in big newspaper articles, they didn't give you that information. So the public still don't really know how good a witness David Grush was. And I think that's part of the skill of downplaying the subject.

A

Well, the question I want to Ask you is, you know, because of your many years as a detective, you get to view people in a unique way. You kind of. I think a lot of cops that I have spoken to over the years, they get almost a radar where they can tell almost right away if someone's lying or making it up just because of the way they're, they put their arms or the way they talk or the where they look.

C

Non verbal communications.

A

Yeah. So when you look at Grush, from your opinion being a detective for so long, how does he come off to you?

C

He comes across very well. I mean people jumped when he initially came out. People were saying, well, he's on the artistic side spectrum. But apparently he'd said to George Knapp and Jeremy Caldwell, yeah, I've got, I'm on the autistic spectrum. But what has that got to do with the fact that he had a super military career, decorated veteran, and then he had a, an absolutely super intelligence career? You know, somebody who has a problem would not be cleared to the presidential briefing level. Exactly. That's what I'm saying. It's the context. So for me he came across in the cool Tad interview, you know, very matter of fact, careful as to what he could say because of his obviously his dopser requirements. But his body language is good and obviously we talked about it just before we came on air about that. He'd done a couple of recent documentaries on the Internet where he's basically hung out with people who wanted to talk to him. And it's shown the very personable side, you know, the fun side and the I guess the ordinary David Grusch side. And he comes across very well, just a normal guy, but obviously clearly has got a story to tell. And the big story is that the, you know, we went into, we had the congressional hearing and then we had the summer recess. So there was a huge momentum of build up with the aftermath of the hearing. It was on news channels all the time and you thought, wow, this is really good, let's get another hearing before Christmas and we're going to be close. And then of course you have the summer recess, Congress goes into recess, then they come back and you're thinking, okay, first thing that's going to happen is that Tim Burchett is going to there with Congresswoman Luna. They're going to say, right, we want to get David Grusch in the skiff. And here we are now in the middle of October. And as far as I'm aware, David Grusch has not been in a SCIF facility so that he could brief the other members of the Congress. Now that just strikes me as being incredibly wrong about the system, I guess you'd have to call it in America the judicial system. It can't be right that you've got somebody who is a whistleblower saying, I can tell you about all the firsthand direct witnesses, but I can only do it in a secure facility. Now that was the thing that came out, the congressional hearing. He had to say it on literally over a dozen times. I can't answer that now, but I can do in a special facility. Well, why, I cannot think legally why anybody would prevent Congress from actually doing that. Surely there would be a facility straight away after the summer recess. Right. We'll get Rush in and then we'll relay this back. Now, the only reason it's not happened is because I think that the summer recess allowed the intelligence community to kick back, cause problems. They do not want this information to come out. That is the only logical conclusion you can give as to why he's not being his gift. Because people do want to button down, nail this down, slow this release of information out. I don't think they can stop it, but they want to slow it. Too much has come out. There's a domino effect. Too much has come out. But they are doing their damnedest, the intelligence community in all its various forms, to stop the momentum that was building with that Congressional Hill here. And so far they're doing a good job because there's no justification for not having that information there. And unfortunately, I go back to the mainstream press, they should be all over this like a rash, saying, why hasn't David Gross been in a skiff? Why members of Congress, why Speaker of the House, why President? There should be questions for the President, for the chief of staff, there should be questions. If you think about what happened with Watergate, then it was a slow trickle and then it was wall to wall. Now, you know, reporters go in deep dives to get in information, true information. Well, where are these reporters doing the deep dives now? They're nowhere to be seen as far as I can see. And it is clearly showing that there is still this bias from the media to either play ball with downplaying the subject from on high or that they know something that we don't. But I think the media are letting us down. Big staff. It does not make sense that facilities are not being opened up to get these first hand witnesses. I mean, we've been told in recent months by various reporters just last, in the last two or three weeks, that there are now over 30 or 40 firsthand witnesses who have now given testimony, firsthand testimony, have been involved in craft retrieval programs with ET Whatever, have gone on the record now to the intelligence community Inspector General. Now, the press should be all over this, and they're not. And I wonder why not.

A

Well, something that is, I find really funny, almost comical, is, you know, so Grush gets interviewed by Ross Colfart, and he's, you know, he says something that I'm gonna say 15 or 20 years ago that would have stopped the world, like for a guy to say that we have crash saucers and we have aliens. But in this news cycle or this world that we're in now, it just seemed to get. Make news for about a day. And then the news moved on. And I thought, okay, so they just announced. He just said that for the last 80 years, the US has had crashed UFOs and aliens. And now it's like in other news.

C

Yeah, absolutely. It's a crazy situation because at times the mainstream media are doing serious articles and serious news coverage, and they are saying, you know, if this is true, it's the biggest story in history. But it's like they're on the brink and they're frightened to dip the toes into the water and go down the line of saying, look, we. You know, we. We demand. We need more answers. And. And they're just not putting the pressure on that's needed.

A

I. I have a little more faith in the. The Chuck Schumer legislation that he attached to. I think it was a defense bill.

C

Yeah. Ndaa, National Defense Authorization act, the fiscal basis.

A

He want. So he wanted to. In his legislation, he wanted to create a board or a panel to declassify government documents about UFOs. And then I think he also said President Biden would appoint nine people on this panel and they would review the information and they would, of course, not let things out that would harm national security. But I thought that was a lot more promising than any of the other things happening in the US Government.

C

No, I mean, as far as I'm aware of, when Chuck Schumer went on camera and revealed his proposed legislation, it was, I think, about 12 days. I think it was. I think it was July 14, and the congressional hearing was July 26. So it was before the hearing. And for him to do that, having, I believe, never gone on camera to talk about UFO as UAP before, I was like, I was shocked by his involvement. It turns out he was a big friend of Senator Harry Reid, who Obviously passed away recently and he I think had clearly with the, when you read the legislation it's clear that he is, he knows what's coming. You would not introduce a legal bill written in legal jargon. And bear in mind in the police you have to learn criminal damage acts, theft act and whatever. You kind of know how a legal document, a law is phrased and it had already been done. So clearly prominent people have legally thought a way to deal with the disclosure process and dealing with the aftermath of revealing this evidence. And the Chukchua legislation is arguably incredible because if that passes and it will be signed off by President Biden around late December of this year, it's called the UAP Disclosure Act. Now you cannot get anything clearer than that. We're not talking about lights in the sky anymore. We're talking about over I believe 20 references in the proposed legislation to non human intelligence. And it talks about creating this nine person board, blah blah blah, and that there is basically a panel to decide stuff that should routinely be released on this subject now. And there's various different dates involved in the various different sides of the, the legislation. But it's incredible legislation for somebody that's followed the subject. Now since my own childhood cycling at the age of 16 and I now 63, so 47 years, there has never ever been anything like the time there is now in terms of making a breakthrough. And if this legislation, and I mean if this legislation, legislation gets through and parts are withdrawn and unredacted taken out because of pressure from the intelligence community, if it was to be signed off and becomes law, effectively you have got disclosure, noble name. And I think that's maybe when the press might just have to jump feet first and say were into a different world and take it and report on it much more. They surely can't keep sitting on the fence, which is what they are with the reporting. They're not actually doing their job, which is investigative journalism. They're not following the leads, they're not giving it due diligence and real major coverage. And yet I think that if the Chuck Schumer legislation passes and we're talking about a UAP Disclosure act and it says it can be referred to as that, then to all intents and purposes that's what we've got into a disclosure world and that's how close we're getting. So I think this next few weeks, while there is this, you know, the intelligence community appear to be kicking back big style. They clearly want to slow this disclosure process down. It's coming. I'M absolutely certain of that now it's coming. I think Louise Alizondo in just in recent days said, you know, by the, by the spring of, or early to mid 2024, we'll be there thereabouts. That may well be true, but I, there is also talk from Congressman Tim Burchett that they may. Well, he's been told that they can have not another like Armed Services Committee meeting or Select Committee, but they can have another hearing before Christmas and this time they'll look to call people who were involved in the COVID up basically and call the Inspector General. I mean, if the Inspector General has been briefed by all these witnesses, how could he then reply to a query from Senator Congressman Tim Burchett that he'd actually done nothing with the Grush material? It's clearly a play on words because he'd apparently let in his reply, left out the word investigate. And so people are saying, well, we know for a fact that there's been investigation. People like Ross Toltide will be saying, yeah, I know for a fact that there's been an investigation about Grusch's claims and all these people have come through now, gone on the record and given testimony. So there's something bubbling away. It's a question of when that will burst. But if the chuck tumor legislation, it does become law within what, six, eight weeks, then I think we're getting very, very close to a tipping point.

A

Well, Gary, next I want to bring up something that you've been working on for over 20 years and that is your database on police UFO reports in Great Britain. If you can tell us a little bit about that or how that came about actually.

C

Yeah, of course. Basically, I, in, in January 2002, I created and launched an unofficial national police database for UK police officers to record, collate their sightings. A lot of it was direct testimony, but a lot of it was also historical in the sense of, you know, I'd read in books about UK police officers. I had a big archive of newspaper articles and there were lots involving alleged police sightings. So I kind of came up with the idea, cutting a long story short, to create this database. It went public in January of 2002 and it was actually the thing that's led me to speaking to you now indirectly, because it was that that introduced me in terms of public UFO research and having gone public with this article that launched the database called Proof of police reporting UFOs in a magazine called UFO Magazine, which was then a UK printed magazine, with the editor of Graham Birdsall who sadly passed away. But it was a well known magazine, it went worldwide and, and straight away I got responses from mainly retired police officers who came forward. Initially, a lot of them wanted to remain confidential, but as long as they checked out with me and I was satisfied who they were, then I would give them that confidential status. And that's basically the stance that I have with anybody that comes to me now, whether it be a pilot, a military person. I check them out. If they are who they say they are and they say, I don't want my details out, but the story can go out, then that's fine. I'm happy to make them a confidential source. But the database began in 2002. It had maybe six, seven cases involving a dozen police officers, UK police officers. But now, all these years later, we are more than 550 cases involving over 1,000 British police officers. And it's actually going to be the, the subject of my next book, which is going to be about the police cases because, you know, I want to do a history of UK police sightings. And so that's going to be the next focus after Non Human, my book on Renaissance.

A

Well, I've looked at the website many times and it's amazing or I'm always amazed at the quality of the reports by these British police officers. And many of them, you know, you would imagine they're just kind of lights in the sky, but a lot of them are very close. You know, what would be called an incredible encounter by anybody. And you, you just can't believe there's so many of them. And it's amazing that these guys would kind of, I guess they do it when they're retired, but they're less likely to say it when they're on duty because it might affect their career.

C

Well, this is synonymous with anybody who holds. Because of the stigma that's been attached to UFOs over the decades. I mean, I obviously I became known for doing my work with police officers, but I would get stories from members of the public calling me members of the military, serving and retired. So over the years I've heard from literally all walks, even people who run, you know, children's creches or play school, that kind of thing. And they've said, I could never tell you this publicly because if this came out I'd lose my reputation and the school would have to close and, you know, my job was gone. So that's how powerful the stigma that we've had to deal with, and in particular with police officers and the military is. There are Two things. One, a fear of ridicule, which is what the stigma was all about, ridiculing people. And two, a perceived fear that it would affect their careers. And it's very palpable. And we go back to Reynolds from whatever people have been, you know, you can go to prison, bullets are cheap, that kind of thing. When people are saying that to you and you realize just how powerful the machine is, then there's no reason why people, you know, plenty of reasons why people don't say anything for fear of that, losing their pensions, you know, and things like that. And I would say that in terms of the police sightings that's on the database, the majority are on duty sightings but are reported later. There are many very good newspaper reports that captured things at the time where multiple officers then give statements to the press, that's fine, but what, what you find is that a police officer who has a sighting on his own, he will not tell a colleague for fear of that ridicule or getting out and him getting some kind of reputation as a ufo. No, I mean, when I created the database, I was a serving detective and it came out in the run up to release the database, my, my force, I was with the British Transport Police and, and I was based at the time at Leeds, fifth biggest city in the uk And I remember we just got computers and the Internet and it was a, it was an early form of the, it was an intranet, it was, it was like a little Internet service for the British Transport police officers and staff. And so people had said walking club and it was just like a hobby section as we got used to the beginnings of social media, you'd have martial arts club. And then I thought, let's go for it, UFOs. And I remember putting 10 factual things about UFOs and yes, I got some right ribbon. But I also suspected that I would get some proper information and privately I received quite a few emails saying, look, can't say this in open environment, but yes, when I was in the military I saw this, or when I was on duty as a PC, I saw this. And so I knew that I'd tapped into something and I don't do as much work the police officers now because of my work with doing UFO Truth magazine, which is an online easing that I retired from the police in 2013 to create and launch. So that's now been going 10 years. It's BI monthly, it's 96 pages and it's a PDF that goes all around the world, readers in many, many countries. So that's what my focus is now. So I have less time to devote the police cases. Whereas at one time when I was in the, in the police that was my main focus out of police environment. And so I would hunt for the cases much more than I do now but I still get them. And, and one of the things that you'll find on the database is that there aren't all the cases that I talk about. I say 550 cases. Well there's probably 450 cases on there if you to add them up. Not that anybody does, but that you'd find that it doesn't match the numbers that I actually say. And that's because I've keeping these cases back for the book because I know that when I put them on the database other people will just lift the information and put them into other books.

A

Yes, yes.

C

So some of the cases that I've got now, a lot of them I've not been putting on for years until I did the, did the police book. Now the irony is the police book was finished in draft. 60% of the book was done five years ago. And then I got diverted by the Rendlesham reinvestigation that took five years. So in theory the police book should have really been out five, six years ago. And now I'm going to go back and go back to it in light of having done the non human book on Reynoldson. So it's, it's like I want to finish it off and now that I've done one book I can do another book.

A

Before we wrap this up, I just want to mention that I'll put a link to Gary's book in the show notes and also a link to his police UFO database site and the ICER website. And Gary, as always this has been fascinating, enlightening and I just. You're an amazing guest to have on for sure.

C

Thank you very much.

B

Here are the Canadian civil aviation anomalies for the week of October 16th through October 20th, 2023. On October 16th, a privately registered Eronica 11 BC that was on a flight from Campbell River, British Columbia taxied and departed in the dark with no lights. On October 17, a Kissock Aerial Survey Piper PA31 350 flying from Vancouver, Boundary Bay, British Columbia was conducting photo work at 4,500ft in Victoria Terminal Control Unit Class C airspace and reported observing a large drone flying in the opposite direction approximately 500 to 1,000ft above them, approximately 12 miles west of Victoria, British Columbia On October 19, an Air Canada Bombardier BD500 Dash 1A11 flying from Denver, Colorado to Toronto International Airport on final approach for Runway 24L, reported flying over a remotely piloted aircraft system 500ft below them. Airport authority and regional police were notified there was no impact on operations and all flights proceeded to their destination without further incident.

A

Well, that's our podcast for this week. Please share, follow, subscribe and do all of those good things to help spread the word about UFO Talker. And if you can and you're on Apple podcast, it would be fantastic if you left us a positive review because that affects the logarithm and makes it able for more people to hear the podcast. And until next time, this is Michael Ryan. Keep watching the skies.

B

You have been listening to the UFO Talker. If you have any questions or comments on this episode, you can email us@ufotalkerl.net or visit our website at ufotalker ca. You can support UFO Talker by using the Buy Me a Coffee app with links on our website and in the show notes. We appreciate every listener. Thank you for your support. This has been a Michael Ryan production.

C

30 that's a wrap.