Gerald Celente warns of a global equity meltdown by year-end, blaming systemic capitalism failures post-2008 (TARP, QE) and unchecked market manipulation by figures like Mario Draghi and Mark Carney, while predicting gold could spike above $2,000/oz. Peter Robbins then challenges Nick Pope’s Rendlesham Forest UFO narrative, exposing Colonel Charles I. Halt’s 2010 smear campaign—falsely labeling Larry Warren as "unsuitable"—despite his honorable discharge and later high-security roles. Robbins insists on debunking misinformation over sensationalism, defending Warren’s claims of binary code coordinates (first documented in a 1982 FOIA release) amid skepticism from callers, who question whether the controversy undermines UFO credibility or distracts from deeper truths. [Automatically generated summary]
I bid you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon, wherever you may be around the world, each and every time zone covered by this program, Midnight in the Desert.
Actually, we're going to do a lot tonight, but I'm going to start out by beating the great conspiracy machine out there.
Do you remember I said there's something strange going on about September?
Right?
All right, if you're near your computer or your smartphone, do me a favor now, right now.
Just go to Google and type 9-23-15 into Google.
By the way, I will credit my associate producer, John, and Dr. J, actually, with this.
And this will freak you out.
There's no two ways about it.
Now, as you may know, CERN is getting ready to do an experiment, possibly on that date, according to some, which could be to create a black hole, or it could be to create a black hole and a wormhole.
We're not sure.
Either way, most physicists will admit that there is some universal risk to what they might be doing.
Not much, maybe, but some universal risk.
So by now, you've probably Googled 9-23-15, and you see all the Armageddon end-of-world, end-of-times-like articles that are written in there.
Now I've got another job for you, and this one may, well, it may freak you out completely.
If you have Google Maps or you have Google Earth, I don't care which, try this.
Go to Google Maps or to Google Earth and in the search box, type in 9-23-15.
Got that?
9-23-15.
Either into Google Earth or Google Maps.
And I will wait a moment so that you have an opportunity to be properly freaked out.
What's going to come up, it just doesn't seem right.
But what's going to come up is going to be, if you're on a map, you're going to see the location of, guess what, CERN in Switzerland.
If you go to Google Earth and you put in that date, I mean, it shouldn't want dates at all.
But anyway, if you put in that date into the search place where you ought to put, you know, longitude and latitude, it's going to come up with a picture of CERN, the CERN labs in Switzerland.
And if that's not enough for you, a ham radio friend today told me that right, I guess, on the front lawn of the CERN facility, they have a big statue.
And that statue is Sheba the Destroyer.
What kind of statue is that to have in front of CERN?
Sheba the Destroyer.
My goodness.
So anyway, you can have a little fun or fear over all of this.
It is freaky.
There's no two ways about it.
Shiva the Destroyer.
So the Internet is, as I told you, going absolutely berserko over September.
And now, tonight, perhaps you see why.
All right, well, also going berserk and mostly down are the world's stock markets.
And it's serious enough that I thought we should have somebody who knows what the hell they're doing in this area on, and that would be Gerald Salente.
Gerald is a pioneer trend strategist, founded the Trends Research Institute in 1980.
He is author of the national bestseller Trends 2000 and Trend Tracking, Far Better Than Megatrends, Warner Books, and publisher of the Internationally Distributed Quarterly Trends Journal.
For more than three decades, Salente has built his reputation as a fearless teller of the truth.
We can use those, right?
An accurate forecaster and an analyst whose expertise crosses many arenas, from economics to politics, health, science, and more.
Good, we can ask him about Trump.
More important, Salente is pure political atheist.
Is there such a thing?
Unencumbered by political dogma, rigid ideology, or conventional wisdom, Salente, whose motto is think for yourself, observes and analyzes the current events, forming future trends, seeing them for what they are, not as what he would like them to be.
He'll be with us for this hour, and then we're going to talk to Peter Robbins about the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident.
So everybody, sit tight.
Coming up in a moment, Gerald Salente.
A little rock, if you will, actually Yusko to take us into a break and then Gerald's up while the markets are down.
unidentified
Music by Ben Thede At the terror in each step, and in each sup.
Well, some people are saying they don't see it, but I'm telling you, Google Earth, type in up there in the search box, 9-23-15, and you're going to be staring right at Stern.
What's going on there is that when you see their exports, for example, decline over 8% in July, it's because the United States and the Europeans aren't buying things.
And if the Americans and the Europeans aren't buying things, China's not making them or exporting them.
Now, let's overlay this and we'll see where it's going.
But again, you have to start building all this on to what's going on.
And that is there's a global slowdown because China's not making things because the world has no money.
You know, if we had said this, if we were talking four years ago, and I'd say to you, you know, Art, there's a huge gap between the rich and the poor, and you have a 1% that's controlling.
Here, I'll give you a true number.
85 people in the world, 85 are worth more money than half the world's population.
The point I'm comparing to is that they always throw you.
Matter of fact, I have it right here.
And every day I read both the New York Times, Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, plus tons of other stuff, but hard copy.
Here, this is from the front page of Saturday's New York Times.
Now, remember, the market started sinking really bad on Thursday, Friday.
Here's the headline.
Here's the headline across the front page of the business day.
This week's market sell-off may not be such a bad thing.
And then the very last line this guy writes, he says, in the meantime, the best response for most investors trying to grapple with the latest bout of volatility is to take a deep breath.
Actually, too big to fail by bailing out the big multinational banks and all the others that they saved, that's called the merger of state and corporate powers, which a not very fond Paisano of mine, Mussolini, called it fascism.
So now let's go back to Too Big to Fail.
So what did they do after that?
Well, then we had TARP, and then we had Obama's plan, and then we had a new thing that nobody ever heard of, and you and I have been around a while.
How about quantitative easing?
And then there's another one.
We're both old enough to remember when people had a thing called savings accounts.
They put their money in the bank, and they got interest on it.
All of this cheap money created the bubbles for the equity market.
These are facts.
This isn't speculation.
It's not a conspiracy theory.
It's a fact that you're looking at merger and acquisition activity because you're borrowing money for nothing at levels now that are surpassing all-time records if they stay on track for the rest of this year.
You're looking at the stock buybacks that major companies borrow money for nothing, they buy back their stock, and they drive up the prices.
They didn't only do it in America, they have a different name over there in Japan.
We'll call it Abe Nomics.
Go back to China, after the panic of 08, they dumped in trillions to boost their economy.
You look what's happening over there in Europe with Draghi.
Oh, by the way, Mario Draghi, former head of the Goldman Sachs gang's European division, is now, of course, the president of the European Central Bank.
Mark Carney over in the UK, formerly in Canada, former Goldman Sachs guy.
Robert Rubin, the guy that worked under Clinton, that deregulated the Glass-Steagall Act, that prevented banks from becoming the casinos that gamble.
They weren't allowed to become commercial banks and investment bank investment banks.
They gamblers.
Rubin, Goldman Sachs.
The man that officially killed capitalism with Too Big to Fail.
Before you get there, having described all of that, Jerry.
We had not done what they did.
And by that, I mean not allowing these institutions to go like dominoes, which they could have, even you must admit that.
They could have gone down like dominoes.
If they hadn't come in with all this money and all this help, and I know the effect that it has, and I know how you feel about it, but what would have been the bottom pain involved would have been pretty severe, wouldn't it?
Well, yeah, but that period of decline that you're moving over quickly would have been pretty damn steep and painful, and it would have been a lot longer climb back.
So it only helped those, again, that have profited from the boosting of the equity markets, which are very different from the real world.
And you saw, and it is the other thing when I talk about, you know, it's almost a neo-feudal society where you have different rules for the economic elite and the political nobility.
And again, I'm not making this up.
What did they, they convicted.
They didn't accuse.
They convicted six banks of felony charges for rigging the LIBOR rates, the currency rates that trade at $5.3 trillion a day and for rigging the LIBOR, the interest rates.
And then when they take you to jail, by the way, now under Obama, they passed that law where they could do anything they want to you.
Anal searches, heavy cavities.
That's what's happened, again, in this country.
I'm not making that up.
And so what I'm saying is with this decline of what used to be capitalism and a move toward a different system, a lot's changed with it.
So going back to the economy, we are in, you asked me, will it continue?
On August 6th, we do, as part of the subscription for the Trends Journal, we do Trends in the News broadcasts each Monday through Friday.
On August 6th, I began it, and it's on YouTube.
People could go there.
We posted that one up there.
I began it by saying, I usually don't make these kind of forecasts or put a time limit on it, but I'm forecasting that we're going to have a global equity meltdown before the end of the year.
And I paused and I said, and sooner rather than later.
I've been in this business since 1980.
I have never seen a summer like this.
The summers are usually quiet.
Everybody's on a vacation state of mind.
You can say that there's volatility in the markets in a very quiet period.
Well, you know, it's happening because of low volume.
That would be the excuse, but volume is at very high levels.
I said, read the headlines, listen to business news, broadcasts across the Western world.
Financial fingers are all pointing to China as the culprit for both sparking the global equity market meltdown and for keeping it going.
The first shot across the Dow when it was trading some 2,000 points above Tuesday's close was blamed on the People's Bank of China for cheapening its currency.
Quote, China risks clash with the U.S. as 1.9% devaluation surprises market.
Financial Times.
12 August to 2015.
Omitted from the headline blame game in FT and other business news coverage was that U.S. equity markets, as I've mentioned to you before, had been downtrending since late July.
Yet as the global stock plunge accelerated over the next few weeks, with the yuan devaluation story fading from the news, the business media then blamed the sell-off on China's economic woes and how its slowing economy was impacting the global economy.
In fact, even Republican President frontrunner Donald Trump weighed in by warning that, quote, China's taking our jobs.
Usually, when this begins to happen, gold immediately shoots up in price.
Now, strangely, over the last couple of days, it didn't really look today, but over the last couple of days during the big dives, gold's, frankly, stayed kind of stable.
And again, being not, again, not a conspiracy theory, but as I mentioned to you before, you're seeing a sell-off.
You're seeing the Brazilian real, for example.
It's down 36% against the dollar in a year.
You're looking at the Australian dollar down 20%.
Across the board, numbers like that.
Now, let's suppose you live in Brazil, and you're looking at your currency devaluing like crazy, inflation skyrocketing, and gold is based in dollars.
So as your currency is declining and you're owning gold, wouldn't you like that?
My belief is that considering the facts, and the fact is convicted of felonies for rigging LIBOR and Forex, it is not in the bank's interests, it's certainly not in the government's interests of any of these big nations or the declining ones, to see gold prices skyrocket as their currencies are plummeting.
Here's my forecast.
We have said from the beginning that the bottom of gold is around $1,000 to $11.50.
And that's when gold began to tumble back in 2000 and late 2011.
We're also saying that when it goes up, it's going to skyrocket up.
It doesn't pay to take gold out of the ground after $1,000 an ounce.
It's not like being in the oil industry where you have to keep pumping this stuff out because you've got to keep things going and you're flooding the marketplace with it.
This is a different buy.
And also, we're in a period now where your biggest consumers among them were China and India.
And now as all of these economies are going down, so too are the purchases of gold.
So our forecast is that gold may have a little rough period now, but when we see it go up, it's going to spike up, and we are forecasting it's going to go well above where it was in 2011 when it was, I think it was about $1,927.
We think it's going to go well past $2,000.
$2,000, by the way, when it hit $850 back in 1980, adjusting for inflation, it should be at about $2,200.
People are getting out of the way of these guys dressed in black, and they're doing it in droves and droves, and they're headed toward Italy, and maybe even the guys in black are headed toward Italy.
You know, they're doing lousy, and they're going to keep doing terrible because this is the other thing.
They call it austerity measures, and it goes back to what I was talking about at the very beginning.
We're too big to fail.
Here's the deal.
The French, the German, and the Netherlands banks made bad deals by loaning the Greece government all this money.
They can't pay it back, so they're saying to the people, well, you have to pay it back.
And they're just banks.
And then, by the way, I mentioned Mario Draghi before.
I mean, yeah, Draghi.
Mario Draghi, the head of the former head of the Goldman Sachs Division of Europe, now European president of the central bank.
He was the guy that, when he was with Goldman Sachs, that cut the deal to get Greece into the Eurogroup, that's with the currency, when they were not suited to be in it.
I think it's, you know, as I look at it, you know, I think of it as when you think of the founding fathers and you look at the age of them, they weren't kids.
And I think it's really up to us that have been around a while.
I was thinking, you know, how long I've known you, and I mentioned I've been in the business since 1980.
What I knew in 1980, what I knew in 1990, I look back and it's I didn't really know that much.
And as I keep getting older and keep learning more, I believe I know more.
And believe me, tonight you've been the Ed Dames of the financial world, no question about it.
There is, I've been uninterested in politics for so long.
I stopped doing it back, well, long ago, many years ago, decades.
However, now we have Donald Trump and love him or hate him, which is what most people do, one or the other, he is interesting, and he's interesting to watch, and the Republican Party is kind of fun to watch, too, because I don't know, it's like they're a worm being attacked, and they're wiggling all around.
And the other part of it is he knows what he's doing.
I began my career, by the way.
I used to run political campaigns in Westchester County, and New York was at that time the richest county in the U.S. And I was the assistant to the Secretary of the New York State Senate at 23.
I was also chief government affairs, specialists of the chemical industry in D.C. and Chicago.
Yeah, and as I said, if the election were held now, he would win.
It's difficult to say what's going to happen between now and, I mean, look how early they're starting this thing in 2016, November.
But as the cards are playing now, he has no competition.
These guys, you know, and I mentioned here, I worked up in the Senate.
It was the worst job I ever had.
I'd be talking to my buddy at the back of the chamber, and a senator would walk in, and my friend would leave me and follow the senator like a little puppy dog to his desk, pull out his chair, push it in, and help him sit down.
And my friend would come back, and I'd say, hey, man, what's the matter?
The cat can't sit down by himself.
He needs some help.
And they'd say, you know, Gerald, if you have that kind of attitude, you're not going to get very far over here.
Coming up, Peter Robbins, Rendleton Forest and the UFO that landed there.
I'm Art Bell, and this is Midnight in the Desert.
unidentified
I'm out across the big new ocean Yeah, we're living in, in the modern world Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh The darkest people we have Oh, sea and dawn, heartache Sea and dawn, all of the way Nothing but a heartache ever did
From the Kingdom of Night in the High Desert, this is Midnight in the Desert with Art Bell.
Well, it's one of the best-known UFO incidents in world history.
I guess right up there with what happened in Roswell.
Peter Robbins is an investigative writer specializing in the subject of UFOs.
He has been involved in the field more than 35 years as a writer, researcher, investigator, lecturer, activist, and author.
A regular fixture on radio shows in the U.S. and U.K., Peter has appeared as a guest on and been consultant to numerous TV programs and documentaries, spoken on UFOs-related subjects for local, regional, national, and international conferences, public service groups, assorted schools, universities, business libraries, and scientific organizations.
Peter is the co-author of the British bestseller, Left at Eastgate.
That was a good one.
A first-hand account of the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident.
Its cover-up and investigation, as well as the author of Deliberate Deception, a case of disinformation in the UFO research community.
Best kind of capsule description I can give you is on three consecutive nights between Christmas and New Year's, 1980, a series of UFO events happened over and around a highly secured pair of NATO bases, RAF Bentwaters, which had been leased to the Americans since World War II, and RAF Woodbridge, its sister base and RAF base about seven or eight miles away.
The bases are located in Suffolk, East Anglia, which is about 70 miles or so northeast of London to locate it in the southeast of England.
On the first night, the main event involved two gentlemen who are fairly well known now from all of their appearances, the fact that they had a book come out last year that they wrote with Nick Pope called Encounter of the Rendlesham Forest.
John Burroughs was an airman first class and member of the law enforcement police.
Jim Pennison was a sergeant and a member of the security specialist, the security police on base.
John observed a light go down in the woods from the east gate of RAF Woodbridge.
It did not indicate a crash.
There was no ground concussion, explosion, fire.
It was a very tense moment in the Cold War.
He radioed in for permission to investigate.
Sergeant Pennison came along with Airman Kabanasak.
Kabanasak was also a security cop, and he drove Jim and John into the forest to the degree that the vehicle could travel.
They moved in on foot and encountered a machine of undetermined origin.
Well, number one, Jim in 2010 stated publicly something that he has felt privately for 30 odd years, which was when he touched one of the markings on the craft, a code downloaded into his head, which he believes is a message from the intelligences who were responsible for the event.
I respectfully disagree with him on that.
He feels that time travelers from the future contacted him at that moment with a message for humanity.
Well, it is the coordinates, longitude, and latitude of six Locations, mystical locations around the world, including Sedona, Arizona, a mythical island, a sunken island off the coast of Ireland.
A temple in China, a temple in Greece, and two other locations, and a kind of stilted message that, with respect, sounds for me like kind of clips out of a science fiction movie dialogue.
Nick Pope, who wrote the book with them, ponders whether or not it's a message within a message, and perhaps that will be broken someday and within that and something about the longitude and latitudes.
And in fact, if you Google allegedly also a binary coded message, which Jim writes in their book, 24 hours later, he remembered all the thousands of ones and zeros.
And I'm not being facetious here.
I mean, autistic people can hold extraordinary numbers in their head, not that he's autistic, but just that the human mind's amazing.
It is.
But that he remembered all of them, wrote them out in 16 pages of notebook paper, got them right, and experts have been working with them.
And who am I to say it's wrong?
Although, again, I think, with respect, that this is something that was put in his head to create the impression, to create a bit of a shiny object in a slideshow to take the attention away from the more stoic, boring.
Nick, who is the lead writer on the book, says it's a secret he kept for 30 years, but then we learn that he talked about it in hypnotic regression as early as 1994.
And John Burroughs says that he never told him about it until October of 1997, which is 29 years and nine months later.
We tend to, when we tell a story again and again, sometimes we embellish some aspect of it because we always feel like we have to, every time we do an interview or write another book, we have to add something special.
I really feel that Jim received some kind of programming.
All these guys were messed with, to use Charles Hall's term.
They were all worked over in terms of stuff put in their heads after they were witnesses.
What was done to them was unconscionable, frankly.
And I think Jim was made to believe that this had happened.
And I think it was a contingency plan.
There are probably many in place for taking attention away off of, gosh, if we ever have a really full-scale UFO military situation, we've got to have things that will effuse it, confuse it, stir the pot.
Again, sort of the equivalent of your Kim Kardashian or your, you know, a shiny object to take your attention away from the more hardcore actual physical evidence, the credible witness accounts supporting each other, et cetera, the kind of evidence you could bring into a court rather than a very sincere.
And again, who am I to say?
But this is the key event on the first night that Penniston and Burroughs have a genuine, absolutely real, I have no doubt, encounter with a machine of undetermined origin, under intelligent control, missing time, memory lapses.
And we understand that, first, remember this is three separate nights with different things happening on each night involving different base personnel and civilians in the area who are also catching parts of this.
At one point, several Woodbridge, the nearest town, police officers kind of wander in and out of the scene.
So it's a bit of a chessboard here.
And yes, there are radar reports confirmed from this period of time from a number of military and civilian radar objects in the area.
You've got Ed Kvanasak, who is watching it from a distance.
The lights were seen in the sky.
Again, this one, we have the impressions in the soil.
We have elevated beta and gamma radiation counts.
Even though it's so minuscule, it's like 10 times the amount in the surrounding area.
The area is studied very carefully the next day.
The second night, one of the main things that happens is one of the few female personnel, a sergeant named Bonnie Tamplin, it's temperate night, even though it's December, window rolled down in a military vehicle, and I guess a variation on what we would call an orb flies into the cab.
And She has a big problem with it.
It shakes her up tremendously.
She's taken off active duty.
Lights are seen in the sky.
But moving into the third night, we have, I guess, depending on your point of view, the two main events.
Earlier on the third night, remember this is between Christmas and New Year's, there are parties going on off base, especially for the officers.
And a sergeant, I'm sorry, a Captain Bruce England, who is associated with the deputy base commander, Lieutenant Colonel Charles I. Halt, approaches Mr. Halt at a party, and he says they're back.
Halt, who had been skeptical, but open to Penniston and Burroughs' account, decides to leave the party, gets into his field clothes, pulled together a contingent of, I believe, six individuals.
They head out into the forest with night scope and other equipment.
And at a certain point, and Mr. Halt, Colonel Halt at the time, has a microcassette recorder, which of course in 80 was like state of the art.
And if anything's going to happen, he wants to record it.
And indeed, it's now probably one of the best known audio clips in the realm of, you know, texture for UFO documentaries, radio openings and closings.
And what happens is he and his men observe an unknown coming in directly over them.
It was first played in early 1985 in then the fledgling 24-hour news station, CNN's, very first three special reports.
They've now done who knows how many hundreds.
But Ted Turner, who of course owned it, he authorized Chuck DiCarl, a great tech and military reporter who you may be aware had quite a brush with death earlier this year.
He and his wife were accosted, and he had to kill the guy who was attacking him.
Chuck is one of the best newsmen I've ever met, and he is recovering, but he was badly injured.
Well, they either passed over, landed, were observed in the area, picked up on radar on three consecutive nights right between Christmas and New Year's.
Yeah.
You know, there were other episodes in this part of England.
It's a very loaded piece of real estate with quite a history, and they've continued.
But these series of events form the Rendlesham Forest incident.
Oh, as far as I'm concerned, in terms of new evidence, which we'll get to shortly, one remarkable series of photographs, which do constitute genuine new evidence for sure.
We have a series of photographs that, well, might as well do it now.
Yes.
My co-author, Larry Warren, a great guy who has been a dear friend of mine through the course of now 28 years.
And we don't have anybody in terms of being a whistleblower, standing up for what's right, taking a tremendous amount of heat for 35 years, and a lot of that on his own before other witnesses came forward to cut to the chase.
On the morning of the event that he was involved in, which was the second event on the third night, he had picked up a new instomatic camera and, you know, 110 film.
Some of your listeners may be too young to know about analog photography.
But in the old days, we would buy a roll of chemical film and you'd run it through a camera to see how it worked.
And he was doing that that day.
And at a certain point, I mean, they were heading back to base.
He and some guys had been into Ipswich, the nearest small city.
And they stopped and he took a snapshot of an A-10 fighter aircraft landing in the distance.
It is a really pretty mundane snapshot.
And I had seen it, you know, more than a quarter century ago among many dozens of pictures he took at that time.
And Larry, over the time that we've been on Facebook, as we are, every couple of weeks or month or two, he posts a bunch of service-related snapshots.
Well, last August, he posted this picture art.
And one of our buddies in England pointed out, you know, it could have been a crack in the emulsion or dust on the original photo, that there was a dot in the sky above the A tent.
And another friend of ours, Robert Martins, blew it up, quite a bit of optical knowledge.
And what he saw in the enlargement absolutely made my jaw drop.
I couldn't believe what I was looking at.
For decades, Larry has described the craft that he and the men with him faced on the ground in a farmer's field called Capel Green in the Rendlesham Forest on the third night.
And there's a very particular aspect of the configuration.
You know, if you do what you do or what I do, you have hundreds and hundreds of people giving you this is what the craft looked like kind of reports over the years.
And most of them don't stick in your mind.
But there was a structural detail where on the bottom, at each edge, it kind of hooked around.
It was just sort of an elegant little detail.
And he did his first drawing of it in 1982.
In fact, in the home of Betty Andreason.
It ended up in the biggest tabloid in the world the following year when the story broke.
And he did kind of a magic marker type drawing in 85.
And he also did a drawing as if you were in the air looking down on the scene in Capel Green.
You know, the go-to guy on this for the past 30 odd years has been Bruce McAbee, optical physicist, the absolutely most respected photo analyst in the history of UFO studies.
When you go to my website, folks, artbell.com, right up at the top, you'll see a picture of Peter Robbins who looks like some kind of Chicago mobster, actually.
But Bruce said, whatever it is, it's a real what's it?
It's up there.
This is, you know, in the old days, if you tried to fake something, it wasn't the elegant details with Photoshop.
The first thing we'd look for with a 10-power magnifying glass was the cut-out edge of the paper where it had been glued down on the photograph.
I mean, it was pretty rudimentary stuff.
Whatever it is, it's the real deal.
And then again, our friend Robert Martins in England did this graphic schematic, accounting for distortion in the air and things.
You see the drawings Larry did.
You see the schematics.
You see the shape of it.
And you know, this is not your standard UFO.
And the last thing I include was a screen grab from March of something that looks like it came out of the same factory up on Alpha Centuria wherever over Wisconsin, just, you know, six months ago, whenever.
This, for me, was just a reminder that real evidence, this is not a time-sensitive matter.
Recently, I had the last bit of the original soil that I had taken from the site of Larry's event and had it, I sent it back to the original chemist who had done the work, who is a very distinguished scientist.
I'm glad I still stay in touch with him.
I'm going to see him this weekend at a big conference called Experiencers Speak in Portland, Maine.
And Matthew Moniz, just when he got the old sample.
Here's Duncan, who's wormholing from New Zealand, who says, Rendlesham is compelling.
I work in IT, and one part of the case that I would question is anybody's ability to not only recall binary code, but recall it in such accuracy that it would result in the message that was revealed.
And the way I've trained myself to investigate and the people I've worked with, dear Bud Hopkins, who was my friend for 35 years and who I worked as his assistant for about half that time, a great no-nonsense New York City police officer named Pete Mazzola, who is also a very great role model for me.
You begin with the most mundane, everyday explanation, and you investigate it fully.
If it doesn't pan out, you go on to the next.
And after a while, you may have something interesting.
It's not as sexy.
It's not as romantic or exciting.
But I have a lot of, I just don't believe it, that it was time travelers from the future.
It seems tremendously more logical to me that this is what was put in Jim's head.
If you were in a courtroom and you were on trial for murder, your attorney, if he could manage to take the cop who was testifying against you and prove that cop lied once, then he can make the argument successfully to the jury that the whole thing is not worth validating.
It's baloney because he lied.
Lie once, lie twice, lie three times.
I'm not saying he lied.
I'm just saying if you don't believe it, then you can make that extension.
I believe on a very deep level, although as Nick writes in the book, in public, he's adamant about this, but he has his doubts in private.
He should have his doubts in private.
It's totally untenable, and it's another thing that I do not like about that book, that Nick goes to great lengths to explain it in any number of ways, but never once even pays lip service to the possibility that this is an implanted thought and part of a programming operation to take attention away from the serious evidence that, again, isn't quite as sexy or tabloid-oriented or potentially sensational.
It's also taking the attention of a lot of people who are caught up on almost time travel this and time travel that.
A lovely topic, fascinating, do shows on it, but let's stay focused on what we have in way with real evidence.
It happens all the time in the history of mind control, brainwashing, or just implanting subtle thoughts.
So for me, part of what happened to these guys is certain things were put into their heads to obfuse, confuse their actual memories so that when they started to talk about them, they would be perceived as a crackpot, somebody who was a bit unhinged, somebody with mental problems.
And part of that has really helped cast doubt on otherwise extraordinarily well-documented military testimony of so many of these guys.
Well, you have to thank Larry Warren for that and our friends in England, Mick Sayre and Robert Martins, Mick for discovering it and Robert for laying it out schematically for us.
But it's a wonderful thing to remember about evidence.
In certain areas, it's frozen in time if you can unearth it.
It's as fresh, important, and supportive of your case as anything you can find at the moment that the thing happens.
And I have a small circle of friends that I've been talking to in this manic five weeks that I have been working non-stop, investigating, researching, fact-checking, lining up my documents.
I've been in that place that writers dream of.
At the same time, I wish to all that's holy that it would have been any other subject.
This has not been a pleasant period of time for me.
And although, hey, it's great to be back on your show, or it's great to be back in contact with you.
I hope I'm invited back as a guest again.
But this is not a fun night for me.
It is a very important night in terms of what we're going to be discussing, but it's not pleasant.
It's not nice.
It's simply the truth.
And I discussed this a little bit with a colleague on a small radio show the middle of August in Glasgow.
So it didn't really get out there.
I have only shared the working manuscript with a handful of people, including you.
And I'm now working with my editor and publisher to tighten it up.
And what we're going to talk about tonight is kind of rough stuff.
Well, I guess because it's an important truth for me, certainly, as somebody that's been involved on and off, but to a great degree on, in work on this particular case for 28 years.
Nick, last year, in his book, which really is his book, John and Jim, you know, are the secondary authors, even though it's their story, and the book is called Encounter in the Randlesham Forest.
In it, Nick, who had been a good friend, and I will always wish him well personally, but he pulled something that I found pretty abhorrent.
Namely, he weaves a thread of information throughout the book that I was able to, it jumped out at me because I wrote, co-wrote the book that he was addressing in his derogatory comments.
Well, if you have read the book that Larry Warren and I read, there's like any book, a nonfiction book, there's certain information that's only available in that book.
At about a dozen times in his book, he makes reference to that information with reference to my co-author, Larry Warren, but he does not supply the proof that we have to back it up.
He makes Larry appear like kind of a lone wolf who has no one to back him up.
He consciously leaves out the evidence that would negate his allegation.
And all in sort of a poor Larry, we know he's a troubled fellow and he's a loner kind of sensibility, which I really resented.
And what I was able to do was establish that he had the information and in each case chose to either exclude it or distort it in a manner that, again, was deliberately deceptive.
It really formed a pattern where everything that touched on our book, which was credited once, but cited 10 or 12 times, and Nick says that, no, it's all, all of the credits are in there, but they're not.
For example, regarding the suicide of a man after this event, Nick refers to it as a rumor that nobody could back up.
Well, Larry was one of the first two responders on the scene where this young man had blown his head off.
And it kind of radicalized my co-author, to put it mildly, he knew this kid.
He had had a great deal of trouble in the debriefing.
And the person who picked up on it and kind of championed trying to get to the bottom of it was not Nick.
Well, certainly he wasn't in the MOD at the time.
But the deputy base commander, Charles I. Hall, dismisses it.
But in fact, a former chief of staff of the Ministry of Defense, a legendary guy named Admiral Lord Peter Hill Norton, a tough son of a gun who thought most everybody in UFOs were bollocks, unless you were okay with Timothy Goode,
because Timothy Goode, ace writer and researcher on UFOs in the UK, he not only respected, but he wrote the foreword to his, I guess, most popular and influential book, Above Top Secret.
And Larry and I met with Hill Norton.
He took Larry's case very seriously.
It was Larry who broke the story to Hill Norton, again, a former chief of staff of the Ministry of Defense, that in 1980, we had nuclear ordnance at RAF Bentwaters.
He was not aware of it and went on to confirm it and went ballistic.
And this is sort of dismissed in their book.
Nick is fair in asking us to consider Larry's feelings.
At one point, he discusses an allegation that is very true, and he says Larry's lone witness, completely ignoring the fact that we have testimony from two other Air Force witnesses in the book that back up Larry's confirmation of what he saw.
This is dirty pool, and it is intentional, and it's a shame because, again, as a person, I like Nick Pope.
Well, I think, again, starting with the most mundane in a way, he is a career man in the MOD.
He loves his country.
He is loyal to his government.
He is a loyal servant of the Queen of England, if that's the right terminology.
I mean, he takes it seriously, and I'm not being facetious here at all.
I respect him for it.
And in 1997, when our book came out in its first edition, it was June of 97.
America, UK went UFO crazy.
Nick's first book was coming out that same summer.
We stayed at his house guest.
He helped us actively to promote our book, even though it was competing with his book, because he believed in it that much.
And what ultimately happened is our book went to the top 10 bestseller list.
And I'm proud to say for several, well, either a month or so, we were several points ahead of John LeCarre's newest novel, which was very surreal to me.
But I think over the years that passed, Nick regretted giving us that help because when that book became popular, this minor scandal broke around the American nuclear treaty violation with the United Kingdom.
Larry Warren and Peter Robbins have done an excellent job in blowing the lid off a UFO case that could be bigger and more sinister than Roswell.
There is much in this book that Will make you angry and rightly so.
It raises serious questions about just how far certain people will go to prevent the truth about UFOs ever becoming public.
The book is meticulously researched, gripping, provocative, and will undoubtedly lead to some long overdue questions being asked at the highest levels.
This is a sensational book, and no matter what the skeptics and debunkers may say, this story is not going away.
He won't face me simply because I went to a great deal of trouble to establish in each case evidence that proves, I think, for any rational reader of deliberate deception, especially if they compare it to their reading of Encounter in the Rendlesham Forest, that he really has no defense, and it's embarrassing.
I've got a lot of friends who are well-known colleagues.
I go out of my way to nurture those friendships.
And I'll tell you the truth, they're a lot more important to me than what I'll laughingly call my career in UFO studies.
However, I have a pretty strict code that I go by, and it has to do with telling the truth.
We all make mistakes, but when you go out of your way to distort, to lie about, to completely twist the facts in a manner that I feel crosses an ethical line and misleads people and sometimes hurts people, you know what?
The truth is more important than why can't we all get along in kumbaya?
And if, let's face it, the outside world is looking at grown-ups that devote their lives to the study of UFOs and other things like that as one step away from being, you know, kind of sideshow entertainment.
My goodness, they actually believe in this stuff and all.
And we're all supposed to present a common front, you know, look nice on TV, speak properly, present ourselves accordingly.
I do.
However, I think, and it makes me a bit wistful and unhappy because I've had to do it again very recently.
I'm probably going to develop a reputation as somebody who's a bit of a troublemaker.
When I just want to get back to the work that I was doing, which is fascinating and not attacking anybody because it doesn't have to do with people completely going out of their way to deceive, to attack, to demean, and to disinform, to disinform.
And basically, the second half of our show tonight, this is a topic that we have to tackle.
And I frankly wish it was any other way, but I'm not going to avoid it.
And it is the main reason that, I mean, we can go on and talk about other aspects of Rendlesham or the state of UFO studies, but I have an important story that I've been developing as an investigative writer 12 hours a day.
Essentially, as in many major cases, there are disagreements.
Colleagues come at it with different theories, agendas, what have you.
But there are certain things that we can all agree are factual, if they can establish themselves.
And for me, I think in terms of courtroom quality evidence, obviously in esoteric studies, we don't always have that luxury.
But last month, something happened that did set me off.
And I had a lot better things to do with my time, but life sometimes puts you in a spot where you've got to take an action that you'd rather not.
Last month, the former deputy base commander of RAF Bentwaters, a now retired United States Army Colonel named Charles I. Halt, gave a talk in Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, which is the town closest to where all these events happened.
And he had been invited back to speak about his experiences, and tickets were sold.
And I was coming back the day that he spoke, which was on the 11th of July.
I had just flown back to New York City from Roswell, where I had been for a week.
And I had business there, so I didn't get to really look at the video of his presentation until about the 14th of the month.
And to say it distressed me would be an understatement.
Well, the first, I guess it was two hours or so, all the first part was what I would have hoped it would have been.
You've got an officer, a commanding officer, who was not only involved in a command position, deputy base commander of a major air base at the time of an extraordinarily important UFO incursion, but got caught up as a witness as well, an actual eyewitness, has actually made statements once he had stepped out of the service that whatever he and his men saw that night was not made by any government on earth.
How can you not applaud somebody like that?
He has become part of what we'll call our UFO research community.
He speaks at conferences.
He's been on documentaries, television radio show.
Very good.
You should be aware that his name comes up, I think, about 50 times in Left at East Gate, and never is anything ever said disrespectful or condescending or mean-spirited, or certainly as far as I'm concerned, inaccurate.
For the last half hour of his talk, he simply switched gears and he directed every comment, dozens and dozens of data points at my co-author Larry Warren, at who is the whistleblower, who is the person that broke this case wide open, made the situation happen that it went totally worldwide in October of 1983.
Well, I can spend the rest of the show literally going over them point by point.
My point is that when I listened to it, being very familiar with a book that I co-wrote, and at points he says on page 67 of Left It Escape, or Warren said this, but in fact it was this, I recognized something that not only shocked me, but threw me for a loop.
And I felt I had to document it, which was, and let me just say one thing here.
I'm sure at the beginning of your show, you have a disclaimer that, you know, the views of your speakers are not those of the broadcast company or Art Bella company.
I'm just going to repeat that right now so everybody knows, because if anybody's going to get in trouble here, it's going to be me.
What I'm about to say is purely my view based on extremely substantial evidence that I've spent some time on.
Well, the deal is that if he said 40 things relative to Larry Warren, the book, and myself, 37 of them, and I'm cutting an abstract here, were completely untrue.
He stood on that stage and he told those people in that audience one thing after another after another that was not true.
Charles Holt wants you to think that he was literally booted out of the Air Force as unsuitable.
In fact, not only was he not unsuitable, but he received a 3910 discharge, which means that the Air Force has broken its contract with the individual and is at fault.
And so that individual has the right to leave the Air Force with 100% honorable discharge with no blemish against their name because the Air Force screwed up.
I can tell you how that happened and what happened.
But also, would the Air Force have Taken a gentleman, a security specialist who was undesirable and unsuitable, and three weeks after the event, make him part of a very small, highly select contingent that was flown to West Germany to meet the American hostages returning from Iran and supply them security.
And also, keep it absolutely top secret, because as you may remember, it was crucially important to the incoming Reagan government that that news be released immediately as the president was sworn in.
In March, that same three months after the event, he was chosen to be honor guard for Wing Commander Gordon Williams' testimonial, secure general officers' parking, be part of his security detail, and his driver.
Also, while he was in the 81st Tactical Security Cops, they received a group commendation.
In no way, in no way was he unsuitable or undesirable.
That's what this man wants you to think.
I'd call that egregious.
Moving on.
Here he says, for those of you who have read Left at East Skate, I'd like to give you some updates and some potential corrections that Mr. Warren and his co-author can put in their book.
If you go to page 39, he said the base was on alert.
The base was not on alert.
We were at a party, a social event.
There was no alert.
Well, Charles Halt and some of the officers may have been at a party, and that's very nice.
It was between Christmas and New Year's.
But if you go to the international news section or the front page of any major American newspaper or European one, you will see what the crisis was, and it was major.
The Soviets had massed a huge number of troops on their border with Poland because of the pro-democracy movement that was emanating out of the Gdansk shipyards.
The fighter aircraft, the A-10s, the 48 A-10s that were stationed at RAF Bentwaters weren't their art.
They were in West Germany at forward operating locations because if the Soviets rolled over that border, we were in a shooting war.
There was a tremendous alert going on at those bases, bases all over England and all over Europe.
The fact that he was at a party does not matter.
If you go to page 42, and this is Charles Halt's words, he claims, Larry, that we had his captain at the motor pool.
There were no captains at the motor pool.
There were two security police captains, something, and Verano.
Guess where they were at?
They were at the party.
Well, they were at the party.
But after he left the party, they left the party.
And this is a quote from a letter that was sent to us after he read the book by Captain Mike Verano.
And I'd be happy to go on to other topics and return to this show with Colonel Hall, except that every point that I'm making here, it's not a dispute art.
That's why I'm publishing around it in about a week and a half and just wanted to let your listeners know that this was going to be fully documented in written form.
Well, let's find out what the listeners think about this and whether they think it's a good idea, whether it's productive, or whether it's just going to harm everything that's already harmed enough, frankly, in this whole area.
So what I would like to do is invite you all to call.
Maybe it's not hitting you the way it's hitting me, but I think I've described, frankly, how it's hitting me.
So anybody willing to call, willing to discuss this, let's do it.
It is controversial.
Here's our number, area code 952-2-225-5278.
I want to know how this is hitting all of you.
Again, area 952-225-5278.
And of course, the Skypes, North America at MITD 51, and outside of North America, the rest of the world, at MITD55.
I'm going to break here, giving you an opportunity to chime in.
Maybe these are critically important details to the whole thing, but I'm not sure displaying them in this manner is productive.
You tell me.
I'm Art Bell.
unidentified
The less I say, the more my work gets done.
Because I'm living, and still the death is a freedom.
In that darkest time, between dusk and dawn, from the high desert, it's Art Bell's midnight in the desert.
Well, it's not bigger than the crash that set everything off.
What it is, is it's 34 and a half years old rather than 68 years old.
Almost all of the principles are alive, are there to be questioned, to give testimony.
The evidence is multiple.
It's not, I think we're comparing apples and oranges here.
One is the seminal case in UFO history.
The other one is the most active, important one we have to work with today that has parts of everything that we look for in a UFO investigation in one case with credible witnesses, lots of actual scientific and documentary evidence.
Yeah, I think personally it's more important to discuss the actual event for people who aren't aware of it as much as others than to just talk about two different sides arguing about the subject.
Because, I mean, it does sound like it's a very significant event.
It's very interesting.
Personally, I think there's two possibilities that, you know, I don't think throwing out the whole time travel aspect is a good idea because it's a very interesting one.
And the other one could be maybe it was a secret military test to see how the base would react to an occurrence of that type.
Well, in that, for those folks that have been looking at this case, examining it, reading about it, visiting the area, networking with other people, these things have all come up.
For most people, the way to really begin to appreciate the depth of this case is to begin to read the available literature on it.
There are a number of great documentaries on it.
You can visit the area itself.
If you download the free book that I put online last year, it has over 300 pages of data, military documents, letters, memos, maps.
You can become something of an authority and examine that data for yourself.
And I apologize to everybody who is not familiar with this.
What I should do is now that folks know that I have an issue with this and that I will be responding to it in print.
We'll be out in a week or so.
I'll send you folks the link and you can put it online and read it for yourself.
Yeah, let's take these questions.
Larry Warren was A security police officer involved on the third night who decided that what was not even the event itself, but what these men were put through after the fact to frighten them, to keep them quiet, to confuse them, resulted in lifelong post-traumatic stress for many of them.
Ask Penniston, ask Burroughs, ask Adrian Bostinza, who's going to be doing an interview for the first time ever on radio the night after this.
Larry decided that when he left the service, suffering angry, anomalous health problems, that he had to find a way to make it public.
And he left with an honorable discharge.
And then in late 1982, he met a couple who introduced him to, and I'm sure you remember this name, Art, Larry Fawcett.
Larry was a Connecticut State police officer who was also a UFO investigator.
And he partnered up on an important book called Clear Intent, which was one of the first books to talk about the cover-up and was actually the first book in print with something on the Rendlesham event.
The first book on Rendlesham came out within a month or so in England called Sky Crash.
Well, Larry Warren did an extensive series of interviews with Larry Fawcett.
And Fawcett and his writing partner, Barry Greenwood, a ufologist and archivist, put that information into the form of a Freedom of Information Act action.
That FOIA resulted in the release of a single-page document on Air Force Stationery, even though it minimized the events, it redacted it, it made it in two days into three, written two weeks after the fact.
For many years, until the Ministry of Defense started to release information on it, that was the only piece of paper officially confirming the event, and it was written and signed by the Deputy Base Commander, Lieutenant Colonel Charles Halt.
That paper found its way to England, and on October 2nd, 1982, it exploded on the front page of the biggest tabloid in the world with Halt's name all over it.
Larry also, but under a pseudonym, and that hurt his career tremendously.
And Warren, my co-author, is the man who is responsible for getting this story out.
Well, I guess I'm going to parrot something someone said earlier about are we looking back at ourselves with this event occurring?
And Mr. Robbins, you were saying some people were abused or manipulated mentally or emotionally.
And I'm just curious as to why this would occur in the first place.
And I think I'm thinking about this art because you had a guest on earlier, a different show, but basically he was able to communicate past the speed of light.
Do you recall this show art with using DNA and well I recall, yes, a guest talking about DNA in technology not yet developed.
unidentified
Right, and you started that show about talking about quantum mechanics or quantum physics.
These are theories, and it's fascinating, but it's actually mind-blowing at the same time, right?
Right.
Okay, so kind of just summing that up very, very basically, but I'm thinking if we're communicating already or have the potential to communicate differently as we have up to this point other than using radio waves,
and we're having visitors from other universes visiting us, I'm kind of confused in the sense of are we communicating already or are we this is where it just blows my mind where we're trying so hard over decades and decades to communicate to see what's out there,
yet we're being visited by beings that are not like us, or are we looking back at ourselves already that they're already here?
I do understand that people thinking about all this can kind of get confused and get off base.
And again, Peter, I'm just blown away at all the problem that goes on with ufology or the study of ufology or however it is you want to put it, the rancor is difficult to deal with.
From the high desert, I'm Art Bell, and this is Midnight in the Desert.
unidentified
Midnight in the Desert Midnight in the Desert
Midnight in the Desert doesn't screen calls.
We trust you, but remember, the NSA, well, you know.
Peter, I'm going to read you one screen of my latest messages right now.
Okay?
Here they come.
From Chuck.
You're right, Art.
Your guest is being argumentative.
Sounds like a crybaby.
And it gives him a weak, defensive tone.
Not good.
Hope you can stick to the subject for the rest of the show.
From Andrew, Art, glad you feel the same way.
Sent a message earlier on here.
Then you express the same feelings on the air a few minutes later.
I was excited for a classic UFO landing discussion, but what we got used for is his petty fight.
Thanks for speaking up.
Or from Jocko in New York City, Art, sounds like this guy's going to cry.
What a baby.
Totally discredits himself.
Let the accused, which isn't him, defend themselves.
Or D, initial only.
Hey, Art, I got to say it for old time's sake, this guest bonk.
Mary, I hate to be negative, but this guy seems like a whining, pretentious pop.
Scott in Andover, well, I'm enjoying the show tonight.
I don't feel a good use of airtime, though, to discuss nitpicking between Lieutenant Colonel Haltz and Mr. Robbins.
Mark says, I think the dispute being aired right now is not necessarily compelling radio, but it is very illustrative of the noise in this field that muddles the waters so badly.
How much is disinformation and how much is ideological head-butting?
And finally, Allison, that's where my screen ends at the moment, what I heard was petty, depressing, and unprofessional, or not professional.
Let me tell your guest, please tell your guest to air his dirty laundry elsewhere.
Most people don't want to hear this kind of thing.
And you should be aware that Larry Warren and I were barred from going to that conference when Charles Hall said all the things about him that were untrue.
Well, I have some criticism of that then because there was a very popular video game that came out in November of 2007, which a plot point has basically that exact same scenario playing out.
First of all, Art, you really should have Jim Penniston and John Burroughs on the show.
I'm talking, you know, as an outside investigator of not even their case.
If that's the case, one thing I do not believe is that Jim created this.
I think he's a true victim, and I think he either believes this happened to him or he's so involved and invested in it that it's very difficult to back out now.
I personally am very interested in Rendlesham down to the details.
I've read every book and so forth, including Georgina Bruni's book.
What I'd like to see is Mr. Bell lead a discussion between the parties and see if that leads to a reconciliation or that would be the ideal goal, even if it's not.
Well, Jay, the point being reconciled or whatever reason is it's not although hold on one head guys one at a time you're both talking okay and thank you um i'm almost done peter then you could go on and dig out the new or more people who've seen the ufo i'd like to see more witnesses dug out and i'm then i have a second question but your turn peter thank you yeah um basically um charles hall did what i've been accused of doing he barred the person that
He spent half an hour attacking from entering the room and was told, Larry was told, I was told if we showed up, I was given dispensation later because I said I'd behave myself if I went.
But we were told that, and John Burroughs as well, we would not be allowed in the room.
both talking advisor if we showed up caller hold on peter finish please sure um All I'm saying is that I would love to be a part of any forum where I could sit down and discuss these things with Nick Pope, with Colonel Hall.
They will not sit down with me, and I'd certainly.
The first question was, on Dr. Jay's show, just prior to your show, a congressman was on, and I called in, and he said, the congressman said that there's been a new development that Sergeant Penniston has reached an agreement with the government that the government would give Sergeant Penniston his medical records in exchange for Sergeant Penniston shutting up.
And there's one thing of infighting and bickering and people disagreeing.
It is another thing, and this is my only basic premise, when one person steps into a public forum, bars the other person that they're going to attack, and then spends half an hour and says dozens and dozens of things about them that are untrue, which I will establish in detail with actual court-level evidence in this simple book called Hault in Woodbridge.
I guess that's all I should have said, and we should have gone on to another topic.
Well, yeah, I mean, it sounds like a breakup in high school where one person's telling one side of the story at the end of the other one's telling the other one.