Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 25, 2015 - Art Bell

02:14:06

Art Bell MITD - Peter Robbins Rendlesham Forest

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	From the high desert and the great American Southwest, 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.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Great to be here again tonight, folks.
	Two rules for my show.
	No bad language.
	No bad language.
	Don't need it.
	And only one call per show.
	Now, I want to start out tonight.
	Actually, we're going to do a lot tonight.
	But I'm going to start out by feeding 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.
	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.
	9-23-15.
	Either into Google Earth or Google Maps.
	And I will wait a moment so that you have a 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 You know, 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.
	Sheba 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 Cilente.
	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, Sollente 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, Celente is pure political atheist.
	Is this such a thing?
	Unencumbered by political dogma, rigid ideology, or conventional wisdom, Celente, 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 Cilente.
	A little rock.
	if you will, actually Yusko to take us into a break and then Gerald's up while the markets are down.
	At the terror in each sip and in each sip, will you partake of that last off a cup?
	or disappear into the cluttered trash.
	Wanna take a ride?
	Your conductor Art Bell will punch your ticket when you call 1952-
	Call Art, that's 1952-225-5278.
	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 gonna be staring right at CERN.
	Voices calling, voices crying.
	great bumper to start this out with.
	All right, so here is Gerald Cilente.
	Hi, Gerald.
	Hello, Art.
	Well, so it's been a while, huh?
	Yes, it has.
	When did we last talk?
	It had to be a couple of years ago, but I was thinking back.
	I believe we began talking probably in the early 90s, late 80s, early 90s.
	Sounds about right.
	All right, I don't have to ask you if China's economic woes are behind all this decline.
	I can clearly see that China is behind just about all of it.
	Is that fair?
	That's not the way we see it, actually.
	Bucking the trend, huh?
	Well, first it began with China blaming them for devaluing their yuan, and that was early in August.
	But what was going on before that happened was the equity markets in the States, for example, they were down six days in a row.
	And yet China's devaluing their Yuan because they're not exporting product.
	And when you saw their Shanghai index collapse in July, they started doing everything they could to try to pump it up.
	So going back to the export issue, Lowering the value of their currency is not going to do much to increase exports, and here's why.
	There's a global depression going on.
	China is merely the canary in the global equity mine.
	You know, you're scaring me.
	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.
	My God, almost everything I buy says made in China.
	That's right.
	But you again look at what's going on in the U.S.S.A., and that is we have You saw the new numbers that came out recently about wage income.
	It was the lowest since they started recording it.
	It came in at 0.2%.
	Ah, but we're at almost full employment!
	Of course.
	And you know what full employment adds?
	We don't want to be a working ambulatory?
	How about a... I love the term hospitality sector.
	Isn't that a nice one?
	Yeah, is that what they're calling it now?
	Hospitality?
	Waiters, bartenders, and making beds in hotels.
	Prize with that.
	Yeah, so what's going on is that you have all of these commodity rich nations.
	Australia, Brazil, Russia, Venezuela, Colombia, Bolivia, Go around the world.
	Look at commodity prices.
	Right now, the Bloomberg Commodity Index, two weeks ago, it was at 13-year lows.
	Two weeks later, it's at 16-year lows.
	Commodities across the board are selling for What they were selling for in 1999.
	Let's ask about oil.
	It's below 40.
	Where is oil going to go before it's over?
	It's going... I don't know how low it will go, 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.
	Gerald, if China's not making stuff anymore, how are we going to have stuff?
	Well, they'll keep making it.
	They're just not going to make enough of it to keep their economy up.
	And their housing bubble is burst.
	So everyone's blaming China.
	China's economic woes.
	China's lowering the yuan.
	Again, China is only reflective of what's going on around the world.
	Currencies are crashing.
	If you live in Russia, you've just seen your currency, it's about 36 Rubles to a dollar a year ago, now it's over 70.
	The dollar is doing pretty well, though.
	The dollar is doing okay because the rest of the currencies are crashing because they're export-rich nations.
	Not far from us there's a place called Mexico.
	You're looking at the peso at 1993 levels.
	Take a trip up to Canada.
	Very, very resource-rich Canada.
	Now their Canadian dollar is at 2004 lows.
	They are in a recession.
	There's a global recession going on.
	Anybody that wants to add it up, it's all there in front of us.
	But nobody wants to call it what it is.
	And you don't even have to believe me.
	You could go back to the World Bank and the IMF, Both of them lowering the growth rate for 2015 back to 2009 levels.
	That was a few months ago.
	It's gotten a lot worse.
	All right, Dow's down 1800 points in the last five sessions.
	Now, it looked like it was going to be up 400 to 600 this morning, and they started out well.
	By the time the day was done, down another 205.
	Forecast for me, is this going to continue?
	It sounds like you're saying it will, or will it rebound?
	I mean, everybody's, you know, all the talking heads are saying, don't worry, keep your money in the market long term, everything will be fine.
	What do you say?
	The fire in the North Tower is under control.
	Go back to your offices.
	That's what they said at 9-11.
	When the South Tower was in flames.
	Yeah, are you?
	Wow.
	So you're comparing this to the economic 9-11?
	You pick up the New York Times this weekend.
	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.
	The market started sinking really bad on Thursday, Friday.
	Here's the headline.
	Here's the headline across the front page of Businessday.
	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.
	Oh yeah, that's what they're all saying.
	Now, here's the story on top of that, right behind it.
	Take some deep breaths and don't do a thing.
	So, let's, again, let's just look at the facts, and these are the facts.
	The facts are that following the Panic of 08, they killed capitalism in the United States.
	Officially.
	They actually kind of did, yeah.
	Four words killed it.
	Too big to fail.
	In capitalism, there's no such thing.
	You rise and fall on your own merits.
	Actually, Too Big to Fail, by bailing out the big multinational banks and all the others that they saved, that's called a 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.
	Well, yeah, that's an old-fashioned idea.
	You put money in the bank today, you know.
	Exactly.
	You get nothing back.
	Well, you get minus.
	I mean, they give you a quarter of a percent, but, you know, the bank fees take that and more.
	So, what happened?
	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 Abenomics.
	Go back to China, after the panic of 2008, they dumped in trillions to boost their economy.
	Oh yes.
	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 banks.
	They were gamblers.
	Rubin, Goldman Sachs.
	The man that officially killed capitalism with Too Big to Fail, Henry Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs.
	So, it's bankism.
	It's not capitalism.
	It's gone.
	Going back to what's going on around the world.
	Well, wait a minute, before you get there, having described all of that, Jerry, if 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?
	It would have been pretty severe, wouldn't it?
	No.
	You would have had the too-big-to-fails would have failed and others would have picked up the slack.
	There would have been a period of decline and then a normal growth that would have followed.
	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.
	For the financial people, but not for the rest of us, because when you look at real median household income, when adjusted for inflation, we are back to 1990 levels.
	median household income, when adjusted for inflation, we are back to 1990 levels.
	I'm very well aware. 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, they didn't, accused, they convicted six banks of felony charges for rigging the LIBOR rates, the currency rates that traded 5.3 trillion dollars a day, and for rigging the LIBOR, the interest rates.
	How many people went to jail, Art?
	No, nobody.
	You can't send a corporation to jail.
	You can't send the people that rigged the markets that gave the orders to do it.
	You can't send them to jail either.
	But you don't go over that yellow line.
	I know.
	You'll go five miles over the speed limit.
	Where'd you come from?
	Go straight to jail without passing go, I know.
	Get out of your car.
	Let me see your license and registration.
	Put your hands on the roof.
	When they say get out of the car, you know you're in trouble.
	And then when they take you to jail, by the way, now under Obama they passed that law, Well, they could, you know, do anything they want to, anal searches, heavy cavities, you know, 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 can go there, we posted that one up there.
	I began it by saying, I usually don't make these kind of forecasts and 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.
	It is, actually, yes.
	Well, how's the VIX, by the way?
	Well, it's been, you know, the last couple of days it was, you know, off the charts again.
	So, what we're looking at is this is very abnormal to go through a summer like this.
	These things usually don't happen.
	until later in September and people they start reviewing things you know
	what a Christmas sale is going to look like, how much products been being
	bought you know what are the shipping, you know you start looking
	closer and then you can see things shaking out around October
	for this to be happening at the heat of the summer is very very strange
	some of it is the fault of China again I would only say
	and a matter of fact I'm I'm writing the piece
	today for tomorrow's we do a trends monthly and here's what I wrote
	I wrote about... We're going to get it ahead of time.
	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 U.S.
	as 1.9% devaluation surprises market financial times.
	12 August 2015.
	Admitted 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, have been down-trending 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 front-runner Donald Trump Weighed in by warning that, quote, China's taking our jobs, they're taking our money, they'll bring us down, we have nobody that has a clue.
	He basically, I think, said, I told you so.
	So anyway, we go on.
	So we're going to talk about him.
	But they did two other things.
	They allowed retirement funds to be, I believe, invested now in China, right?
	They are putting pension funds in.
	They pumped in over $200 billion into the equity markets.
	They're banning short selling, trying to keep the equity markets... Yeah.
	Matter of fact, they may blow your brains out if you short sell, because they said that they... I'm serious.
	I know you are.
	They said it would be a violation.
	The police would be after you.
	They also, when the markets started going down in late July, Yes.
	They ripped off about half of the trade.
	They weren't allowed to trade half the stocks.
	All right, got a break here.
	Stay right where you are.
	We'll be back, Gerald Salente.
	Well, let's read this one.
	Ah, they're hitting us.
	and on. From the high desert, it's Art Bell's Midnight in the Desert. Now, here's Art.
	Well, let's read this one.
	Ha ha. Ah, they're hitting us.
	Doom and Gloom show, huh? How retro.
	Next you're gonna tell me the world as we know it is going to turn upside down on Y2K.
	Oh wait, nothing happened.
	Well, you know why it didn't happen?
	This is such a bogus thing.
	Yeah, it didn't happen.
	It's because we warned everybody and they fixed it.
	If nobody had done anything about Y2K, it would have been a horrible mess, but they fixed it because we screamed bloody murder.
	And then nothing happened, so then you blame us.
	And yeah, this is kind of, I don't know, warmly reminiscent of doom and gloom of all sorts.
	Gerald Celente.
	And I really did figure he was going to come on and say, oh, everybody, relax.
	Take it easy.
	Take a deep breath.
	401k is fine.
	No problem.
	So yeah, it's retro, but it's cool.
	Gerald, welcome back.
	Thank you.
	Good to have you.
	So let's see where to go.
	Oh, China also.
	Yes, they are, and they want to keep doing it.
	As a matter of fact, in my talking about going into a deeper recession, I just did an op-ed piece for USA Today.
	So if anyone goes to the USA Today website and hits opinion, It says right there, world sinks deep into recession, opposing view, and it's my piece about how I see things going.
	And yes, China is, they're lowering their interest rates, they're lowering their reserve ratios, they're doing everything they can to try to pump the market up.
	Sure.
	And it's not working.
	And here's the thing about this, by the way.
	Actually, they're following our model.
	They're following our model to an extent, but these guys are rookies.
	They're new at it.
	And when this thing was collapsing, I mean, the commentary was scathing about how they were handling this.
	And then, of course, Christine Lagarde, the head of the IMF, came out and said, well, it's perfectly fine for them to be doing these things.
	And I started thinking to myself, oh, yeah, it's okay to rig the markets.
	We have a plunge protection team sitting right there on Wall Street, right on the floor of the Federal Reserve.
	Yeah, let's rig the markets.
	If things get too bad, then we're going to calm things down so we can control it.
	I mean, again, let's not call this capitalism.
	It's like going to the casino, the house is losing, and they change the rules!
	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, frankly, stayed kind of stable.
	How come?
	Yeah, well, I'm a bit puzzled by it, too.
	And again, being, 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 $1000 to $1150, and that's when gold began to tumble back in 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.
	was about nineteen hundred twenty seven dollars we think it's going to go well past two thousand
	because two thousand by the way when they did
	eight fifty back in nineteen eighty adjusting for inflation it should be at about uh... you know twenty two
	Wow.
	All right.
	Let's cover, there is a very serious migrant crisis overseas.
	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.
	What's going on from that point of view?
	Actually, I just got back from... I was in Italy.
	I was also in other parts of Europe.
	And throughout Italy, they're used every way you say.
	They're migrants.
	It's more than just the guys in black.
	It's the guys dropping the bombs.
	You go back to... Look what's going on in Macedonia.
	And again, just reading the information and taking it for what it is.
	And they're saying that most of them are... And everybody sees... These are kids.
	To families.
	These aren't, you know... Oh, I understand.
	Yeah.
	And where are they coming from?
	Iraq?
	Hey, how about that war in Iraq, huh?
	Afghanistan?
	Eh, it's only the longest war in American history.
	Hey, how about Syria?
	Assad has to go.
	So the countries that have destabilized all these areas, the people are flooding out of, now go over to Libya.
	When Gaddafi was in, he made a deal with Italy and the others.
	That he'll keep people from flowing out of Tripoli.
	They're not going to get out through... But he got paid for it.
	Qaddafi has to go.
	So they got rid of Qaddafi.
	Now that whole area is in turmoil.
	Where are they coming from?
	They're coming from Mali.
	They're coming from Eritrea.
	They're coming from Somalia and Sudan.
	This is... This... They call it migration there.
	I've mentioned before about declining economies.
	They're coming from Ghana.
	They're coming from Angola.
	They're coming from Nigeria.
	All these resource-rich nations are now going bust.
	Now, go south of the border.
	By the way, as long as we're jumping around, how is Greece doing?
	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 Netherland 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 Euro group, that's with the currency, when they were not suited to be in it.
	They cooked the books to bring Greece into it.
	Well, I'd rather have them there than here.
	So now, going back to the migrant crisis, you're going to start seeing the same thing happening out of Venezuela, out of Colombia.
	Actually, it is happening.
	The immigration crisis here in the U.S.
	is fed not as much by Mexico as it is from Central and South American countries, in truth.
	And as these currencies and commodities continue to decline, and as these countries go down deeper, the people are going to leave.
	And where are they going to come?
	They're going to come here.
	Exactly, and into Europe.
	Now, just think of this number.
	They say that we inhabited the Earth, for argument's sake, 100,000 years ago.
	thousand years ago. So from a hundred thousand years to 1900, it took all of
	that time to put 1.6 billion people on the planet.
	100 years later, we have, what, 7.2 billion?
	We do.
	Where are they going to go?
	I have no idea.
	So now you have wars going on.
	Oh, and going back to the commodity prices and how they're declining, take a look over there in Saudi Arabia.
	They need oil to beat $100 a barrel to balance their budget.
	When the Arab Spring broke out in 2011, they dumped a ton of money into their economy to quiet the people down.
	Now Saudi Arabia is floating bonds, trying to keep going.
	They're also floating bonds and dropping bonds in Yemen.
	They are.
	And that's not being reported.
	Yemenis have done nothing to the Saudis.
	They want to put back the government that they were imposed upon them.
	And the United States is involved in this too.
	I'm mentioning this because you have four million Yemenis living in Saudi Arabia.
	There's a humanitarian crisis going on that's not being reported there.
	They also work in the oil fields.
	You're going to start seeing destabilization from all of this declining oil, from all of these oil-rich Arab nations.
	And I love it.
	They call it a kingdom, you know, an emir.
	Yeah, you know what happened, Art?
	Once upon a time, a princess kissed a frog and the frog became a king.
	How about calling him dictator, set up by the English after World War II?
	Here, here.
	Well, there's one thing, Gerald.
	You and I are old.
	Soon we will die.
	It will not be our problem.
	It will be the problem of our children.
	And boy, are they going to have a big one.
	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.
	Right.
	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.
	Sure.
	What I knew in 1980, what I knew in 1990.
	Yeah, I look back and it's like, I didn't really know that much.
	And as I keep getting older and keep learning more, I believe I know more.
	And so I believe it's up to us.
	It's called wisdom.
	Yeah, I know.
	They don't like to say that in America because the elderly aren't looked upon very By the way, every day I thank the ancestors for my being, my breath, my body, my brain, my blood, and my bones.
	Very eastern of you.
	Well, it was very everybody up until things started changing.
	It was always a deep respect for the ancestors.
	And I really think it ended with our generation really killed it.
	I mean, there was no such thing as teenagers in the 30s.
	They didn't call kids teenagers.
	And things weren't youth-oriented.
	I mean, what did they call them in the 30s?
	Kids, I guess.
	Kids.
	Yeah, all right.
	Listen, I can't resist.
	I know you forecast politically as well.
	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, what, 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 It's 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 I wonder how this is going to all shake out.
	You're a trends guy, what do you say?
	You know, I'm a New Yorker too, and if you go down from Wall Street to Columbus Circle to Fifth Avenue to the West Side, there's Trump everywhere.
	Oh yeah?
	I'm going to give you my theory and then you can tell me if I'm right or wrong, okay?
	I think this is simply, when you look at Trump's support, it's the American people so damn angry they're ready to burn it all down, politically.
	And that's essentially what Trump represents.
	Burn it all down.
	It's part of it.
	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 in New York, which 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 specialist of the chemical industry in D.C.
	and Chicago.
	Okay, that all said, what's going to happen?
	I've been around.
	So what I'm saying is that these guys that he's running against, they're boys.
	These are the guys you hated in high school and college that wanted to be class president and head of the student council.
	So when I'm talking about Trump, this guy, you know, he's driven, this guy knows what he's doing as far as doing deals.
	These guys are no match for him.
	And you're 100% right.
	When you look at the polls over the years, what does Congress have, like a 17% approval rating?
	He's turned this whole thing upside down.
	And again, I would not vote for him.
	I have a lot of things I don't like about him, but I believe at this point, if the elections were held today, it would be President Trump.
	Matter of fact, I also drew the analogy between him and Berlusconi in Italy.
	Another billionaire, when things were going down, the people looked for a billionaire, thinking that they're going to get rich too, and this guy knows what he's doing.
	Well, we'd have a pretty First Lady.
	Yeah.
	What would he be like if he actually got his, what I guess his wish is, and he became president?
	What do you think he'd be like?
	Just what you see.
	And I believe he'd be Tyrant Trump.
	Tyrant Trump?
	Yeah, he'd be just like a Berlusconi.
	Look, I mean, he's talking about bringing guys in like, uh, Icahn.
	Oh yeah?
	Carl Icahn.
	Carl?
	Yeah, oh, wonderful.
	I think he wants to put him in charge of China and Japan, actually.
	I mean, another deal-maker.
	These guys make deals.
	They don't build... It's not a manufacturing-driven country anymore.
	When you look at where the money is... Yeah, but he might make good deals.
	He may make good deals, and that's going to be his card that he's dealing.
	And again, we... Our Spring Trends Journal, the cover was, Cowards, Liars, Freaks and Fools.
	Welcome to the Presidential Reality Show.
	Now, this, when we wrote it, it was before Trump got into it.
	Now you have a reality show champion playing in the presidential reality show.
	These guys are no match for him.
	No, they aren't.
	I mean, you know, he says that Bush is boring, and frankly, compared to Trump, Bush is boring.
	Now, it may be, in the end, President Bush again.
	But, you know, he's right.
	I mean, the guy is exciting.
	He's fun to listen to.
	It's fun to imagine somebody with those kind of cojones running things for a change.
	And so, what a phenomenon.
	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 to you 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 had come back, and I say, hey man, what's the matter?
	The cat can't sit down by himself?
	He needs some help?
	And they say, you know, Gerald, if you have that kind of attitude, you're not going to get very far over here.
	I say, you got it right, man.
	I'm not going to suck up to get my way up.
	That's what this parties are!
	These are boys!
	All right, listen.
	We're coming to the end of this program.
	I want to give you a chance to promo whatever you want to promo.
	Well, of course, the Trends Journal.
	And go to our website, trendsresearch.com.
	And it's not only the Trends Journal, which is 54 pages, full color, no ads, digital and print, highest quality, and it's history before it happens.
	And we also have a Trends Monthly, a Trends This Week, and every weekday, Trends in the News, and... Alright, we know that people are having a difficult time.
	There's a discount request page there.
	We try to make it available to everyone so that we can help them prepare.
	Survive and prevail in these coming times.
	Well, my daughter's college fund is going down because it's tied to the market, so I'm not happy about what's going on.
	Is it buy, sell, or hold?
	I don't know.
	I can't say.
	But again, I don't give financial advice, but I'm bullish on gold.
	All right, gotcha.
	Thank you, buddy.
	Thank you for being on.
	Great being back with you.
	Take care.
	Gerald Celente.
	All right, coming up, Peter Robbins, Rendlesham Forest, and the UFO that landed there.
	I'm Art Bell and this is Midnight in the Desert.
	And I'm across the big blue ocean Yeah, we're living in
	In the modern world Ooh, ooh, ooh
	In the modern world Love is here for you, friend
	I'm seeing us Heartache
	Tears run All of the way
	Nothing but a heartache From the Kingdom of Nigh in the High Desert
	This is Midnight in the Desert with Art Bell Please ring Arts Bell at 1952-225-5278.
	That's 1952.
	Call Arts.
	Alright, switching gears now.
	You know about Rendlesham, right?
	No?
	Well, it's one of the best-known UFO incidents in world history.
	It goes 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 US and UK, 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.
	It's cover-up and investigation, as well as the author of Deliberate Deception, a case of disinformation in the UFO research community.
	No!
	Disinformation and ufology?
	It can't be!
	Um, so, uh, Peter Robbins, welcome.
	Hey, stranger, long time no speak.
	It's been a while, hasn't it?
	It has.
	I saw you just had a sort of a problem there with your Skype before we connected.
	Indeed.
	We'll hope it doesn't return.
	Well, if it does, I went through this once before last week, Peter, where it was like Diane and coming back, Diane and coming back.
	Oh, no.
	Yeah, so if that happens... You got my number.
	Yes, I'll give you a landline call.
	All right.
	It is great hearing your voice again, and a lot of people, frankly and honestly, don't know what Rendlesham Forest is all about.
	It's been a long time.
	Tell us, give us a brief description of actually what you know of that happened.
	The 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, an 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 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 Penniston came along with Airman Kamanosak.
	Kamanosak 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.
	Okay, so we have three guys now.
	Yeah.
	Who have gone toward this thing that didn't look like a crash, but a landing instead.
	Yeah.
	Into the forest they go.
	They get up to it and they find what?
	Well, Kubanisac stays with the vehicle.
	He's watching them from a distance.
	I see.
	It's in various treatments.
	They're the ones to have on the show to confirm it, but tapering up triangular looking craft with the appearance of black glass.
	They observe, Jim observes, that there are markings, symbols, hieroglyphs, whatever you want to call them.
	Uh, the two of them have missing time.
	They're not, um, everything is not accounted for, but the machine leaves impressions in the soil, which are documented the next day.
	Plaster casts are taken.
	Um, well, wait a minute.
	Hold on.
	We've got these witnesses staring at this damn thing, right?
	Okay, so they have missing time, which means maybe they don't remember, but before we talk about impressions, we've got to talk about liftoff.
	I mean, does it take off?
	What happens?
	Well, number one, Jim, in 2010, stated publicly something that he has felt privately for thirty-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 are 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.
	What is that message?
	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.
	I hope one of them isn't CERN.
	I don't think so.
	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 I have my problems with this aspect of the story.
	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.
	I have my problems with this aspect of the story. I do too, and I'm
	just hearing it.
	I haven't actually heard this before.
	I've heard about the sighting, I've heard the witness reports, but I've never heard this, they put a message in my head thing.
	Oh yes.
	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 trying to, I'm not being facetious here, I mean, autistic people can hold extraordinary numbers in their head, not that they're 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... Alright, well I hate to ask this, but I'm going to ask it.
	Is it something that he said on the spot happened, or is this something that he mentioned much later?
	We get two things on that.
	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.
	Yeah, I say this because, look, we're humans.
	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'm not saying that's the case here.
	I'm just saying that's human.
	In Jim's defense, I don't think it is the case.
	I really feel that Jim received some kind of programming.
	All these guys were messed with, to use Charles Halt'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, etc.
	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.
	Why is this craft picked up by radar?
	I mean, it's coming down in a very military-type place, right?
	Well, that is a great question.
	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.
	Right.
	At one point, several Woodbridge, the nearest town, police officers kind of wander in and out of the scene.
	Right.
	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 operators in the area.
	Glad to hear you've got that.
	Now, you said that it landed and there were impressions in the ground.
	You haven't told me much other than what apparently was a sort of a mind wipe, except for what they downloaded to him.
	So there's how much witness testimony is there on the ground of Oh my God, I saw it!
	Well, number one, you've got John and Jim, you've got Ed Kvanisak, 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 ten times the amount in the surrounding area.
	Right.
	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 Penison and Burroughs' account, decides to leave the party, gets into his field clothes, pulls 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 shows, 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-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 DeCarlo, a great tech and military reporter who you may be aware
	uh... had quite a brush with death earlier this year he and his wife were
	accosted and he had to uh... uh...
	kill the guy who was uh... attacking him chuck is one of the best
	newsman i've ever met me is recovering but he was badly anyway he was dispatched
	he was dispatched The bad guy was.
	Chuck was authorized to do what amounted to a mini-documentary for CNN.
	Hold it right there.
	The only reason I bring it up is because that's where the tape of Col.
	Hall recording this thing goes.
	Peter, hold on.
	Get a break.
	Stand by.
	Once you get Peter started, It takes more to stop him.
	Anyway, we're gonna take a break.
	Midnight in the desert.
	I'm Mark Bell.
	We're talking about Rendlesham.
	and the great american southwest this is midnight in the desert exclusively on the dark matter
	digital network to call the show dial 1-952-CALL-ART that's 1-952-225-5278
	my guest is peter robbins we're talking about rendlesham the rendlesham forest ufo incident
	now a lot of people feel believe me very strongly about this
	Bobby in Coachella sends through the wormhole, great topic art, every bit as important as Roswell, if not more.
	So, Peter, people feel very strongly about this.
	Don't they?
	Yes, yes.
	Again, I've given you a capsule of the most important aspect of the first night.
	John Burrows and Jim Penison are your best guests for that.
	Second night transpires, and on the third night again, the deputy base commander... When you say third night, do you mean they landed every night?
	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.
	All right.
	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.
	Alright, before we go any further, Peter, we've got a bunch of photographs, I believe, at Artbell.com that we put up for you tonight.
	What is up there?
	Are there some shockers?
	I sent over a bunch of photographs to your amazing producer, Redacted, and I'm not sure which ones you're referring to.
	No, I'm asking you, are there shockers in those photos?
	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, Okay, well that's really big stuff.
	So, people will be going to the website artbill.com.
	When they get there, what are they looking for?
	Well, we have a number of documents.
	We have a series of photographs that, well, might as well do it now.
	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 Instamatic camera, And, you know, 110 Films, 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 Basie 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.
	Right.
	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'd post a bunch of service-related snapshots.
	Well, last August, he posted this picture.
	And one of our buddies in England pointed out, you know, could have been a crack in the emulsion or dust on the original photo, that there was a dot in the sky above the A10.
	And another friend of ours, Robert Martens, 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 the 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 Andreasen.
	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 Caple Green, that showed part of that detail.
	Anyway, the thing in the sky above this A-10 aircraft... I'll be damned, I see it now, I'll be damned.
	Alright, it is there, folks.
	You can see the A-10, and then you can see what appears to be a dot, but boy oh boy oh boy oh boy, if you blow this up, as he has, What you have... You know the go-to guy on this for the past thirty-odd years has been Bruce McAbee, optical physicist, the absolutely most respected photoanalyst in the history of UFO studies.
	I'll be darned.
	Retired now, writing books.
	Let me tell everybody how to get there.
	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.
	Thank you.
	Click on that, and then you'll get to these other photographs.
	Man, oh man, look at that, above that A-10.
	So if you want to see it start now.
	Okay, go ahead, Peter.
	Again, we don't have the negative.
	It may turn up someday.
	You know how these things are.
	But Bruce said, whatever it is, it's a real watch it.
	It's up there.
	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 Martens 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 Centauri or wherever, over Wisconsin, just, you know, six months ago, whenever.
	This, for me, was just a reminder that real evidence, this is 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 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... I'm sorry, Peter.
	I've got to do it to you again.
	I've got a break.
	I've got a break, Bill.
	I take it personally.
	I'm sorry.
	Hold it right there and we'll be back.
	We've got about a seven minute break.
	Have some coffee.
	No.
	Wait.
	Don't.
	Just sit there.
	We'll get right back to you.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Bell is midnight in the desert.
	I'm sure you believe that it's all a made up story.
	You wanna take a ride?
	Your conductor, Art Bell, will punt your ticket.
	When you call 1952, call Art.
	That's 1952 225-5278.
	I will indeed.
	That's 1952-225-5278.
	I will indeed.
	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, it's verging on the biggest level of chance.
	Any comment on that, Peter?
	Only spot on.
	I couldn't agree with them more.
	This is a big problem for me 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.
	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, other things were put in other people's heads.
	Okay, here's a problem, Peter, here's a problem.
	If you were in a courtroom and you were on file for, you know, 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 don't believe he's lying.
	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, you know, 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, you know, time travel this and time travel that.
	Sure.
	A lovely topic, fascinating, do shows on it, but let's stay focused on what we have in way with real evidence.
	And I'm not saying that something could not have been implanted that he would be made to remember.
	Exactly, it happens all the time.
	Sure.
	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 on
	hinge, 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.
	That's right.
	No, it's a very well-documented story.
	It's a very well-documented story.
	So, I think it's every bit as big as Roswell, and I think that some of what you have brought us tonight is very important.
	Some people are going to love these photographs.
	My goodness.
	Well, you have to thank Larry Warren for that and our friends in England.
	Uh, Mick Sayre and Robert Martins for 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 come unearth it.
	It's as fresh, important, and supportive of your case as anything you can find at the moment that the thing happens.
	Alright, so I want to thank you for breaking it here tonight.
	I mean, that's just wonderful that you would bring it to us.
	I take it that people in the UFO community in general have had a sneak peek at what you're dropping on us tonight, right?
	No, they haven't.
	Really?
	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, Art.
	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, but, you know, we didn't get in this business... No, I'm set for rough stuff.
	When you say rough stuff, you mean I mean, I mean, naming names, saying things about people that are not nice, just true, documenting everything I say.
	All right.
	Why do we need to do that?
	I mean, why?
	OK, lay it out.
	Yes.
	Why?
	Well, I guess because it's 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.
	And, you know... All right, let's cut to the chase.
	You're in some kind of tangle with Pope, right, Nick Pope?
	Oh, it's minor compared to this.
	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.
	Yes.
	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.
	Larry, derogatory in what manner, please?
	Well, if you have read the book that Larry Warren and I read, there's, like any book, a non-fiction 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 distorted 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're 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 a 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, we were good friends for many years, I can only guess at why he decided to do this.
	And your guess is what?
	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.
	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 as his house guests.
	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 Le Carre'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.
	And that's the most mundane possibility.
	So then this comes down to what, in your view?
	Jealousy?
	No, no, that, um, he helped us.
	Yeah, I got that.
	Right.
	And then, then, then apparently was... That embarrassed his government.
	Then was sorry that he helped you?
	Well, I think in retrospect he definitely was, because it was an embarrassment to Her Majesty's government, and to the Ministry of Defense.
	And the one quote that I'd like to read tonight, and we'll take all of 20 seconds, is from the back of our first edition, so you and your listeners can understand how he felt about our book when it came out.
	Go ahead.
	This book is dynamite.
	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, the story is not going away.
	Nick Pope, Ministry of Defense.
	Things change.
	Sorry about that.
	No problem.
	So, alright, so... If we amp it up, though, maybe he was asked, maybe he was ordered.
	I don't know.
	You know, he's retired from the Ministry of Defense, but let's not be naive here.
	There are certain positions and organizations that you never fully leave.
	You're an asset in place, a member of the Old Boys Network, A friend of the family, you know, and you can be called upon for favors.
	I don't know.
	I'd settle for the most regulation thing, and I'm sorry that he felt compelled to do it.
	Because it shattered a really good sense.
	Obviously, you're hurt.
	Do you want a debate with him over this?
	Oh, yes, I'd love to.
	You would?
	But he's turned down ten opportunities so far.
	He won't face me simply because I went to a great deal of trouble to establish in each case evidence that proves, and 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'd love to be against it.
	I want to, if Nick will agree to it, I'd love to do it, but here's the thing that I want to lay on you and you can
	go ahead and comment. Ufology has a lot of problems.
	Um... of the... of the...
	Of the kind we're talking about right here.
	I don't call myself a ufologist.
	With people, whatever you call yourself, I don't care.
	Investigative writer.
	That's fine.
	All right.
	But among people with interest in ufology.
	Yeah.
	How's that?
	Lots and lots of friction like we're hearing described tonight.
	Yeah.
	And you know it doesn't lead anywhere good.
	It ends up damaging everything.
	Now, Rendlesham is absolutely one of the most important cases we could even talk about.
	There's no case more important that the research community has to work with?
	Absolutely true.
	So you're sort of damaging things when you do this, right?
	Yes and no.
	For anybody that knows me, and you've got people in your audience That know me.
	I'm sure, yes.
	I am an almost pathologically nice person.
	I care about people.
	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 To disinform to disinform and basically the second half of our show tonight This is the topic that we have to tackle and I frankly wish it was any other way, but I'm not going to avoid it
	Well, I don't know how much further you've got to go than you've gone.
	Oh, we haven't even started yet, Art.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	That serious, huh?
	Yes, sir.
	Boy, I wish Nick was here.
	Oh, it doesn't have to do with Nick.
	No?
	Not really.
	No, it has to do with somebody else.
	And, um...
	It is the main reason that, um... 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 for 12 hours a day.
	You've got it.
	All right.
	Hold tight.
	All that, I guess, coming up next.
	I'm Art Bell.
	This is Midnight in the Desert.
	Don't you feel it's coming day by day?
	People, you better come along I'm a-happy, come on, say
	Oh Taking you from today into tomorrow
	This is Midnight in the Desert with Art Bell To call the show, dial 1-952-CALL-ART.
	That's 1-952-225-5278.
	Indeed, Peter Robbins is my guest.
	That's 1-952-225-5278.
	Indeed, Peter Robbins is my guest. He's all fired up, that's for sure.
	It's about the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident, one of the biggest in the world.
	And apparently there's a big dispute going on about it.
	And so back to him.
	It's all yours, sir.
	Yeah.
	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.
	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, He gave a talk in Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, which is the town closest to where all these events happened.
	Right.
	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.
	It distressed you, why?
	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 and radio show.
	Very good.
	You should be aware that his name comes up, I think, about 50 times in Left at Eastgate and never is anything ever said Disrespectful, or condescending, or mean-spirited, and certainly as far as I'm concerned, inaccurate.
	Okay, so what did Charles say that is so bad?
	Yeah.
	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, 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?
	Comments of what nature?
	Well, I can spend the rest of the show literally going over them point by point.
	My point is that when I listen to it, being very familiar, with a book that I co-wrote and at points he says on page
	67 of Left at East Gate, where 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 all right let me just say one thing here I
	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 Bell and Company or whatever.
	No, no, no.
	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... Well, look, at this point you're all public people anyway, so what's the deal?
	Well, the deal is that if he said 40 things relative to Larry Warren, the book, and myself, 37 of them, and I'm, you know, 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.
	Alright, let us at least understand a couple of points, specific things that you're talking about.
	That were said in the book that he said were untrue.
	I want to understand something important in that category for this to even be worth it.
	So you want me to start to cite the examples?
	No.
	I want you to take the most egregious examples and give us an idea of what you're talking about.
	Yes.
	Sure.
	I'm quoting here when I give the statement because I don't want to paraphrase what he says.
	The sound quality wasn't great, but these are the statements and then my response to it.
	Referring to Larry, he was unsuitable.
	He was literally booted out.
	Unsuitable?
	Unsuitable in what way?
	Well, exactly.
	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 a hundred percent 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.
	That's right.
	In March, that same three months after the event, he was chosen to be honor guard for Wing Commander Gordon Williams' testimonial, secure General Officer's 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 Eastgate, 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 Ferrano.
	You know, Peter, I was at the motor pool.
	Yeah.
	You know, Peter, this seems to me to be a dispute between the two of you.
	And I don't know whether it's of much interest to my audience or not for you to get on the air and fire back at somebody.
	Fair enough.
	I understand discussing Rendlesham, but to just get on here and have a dogfight, what's the point?
	Especially when the other dog's not here to fight.
	Fair enough, 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.
	Yes, it is.
	Well, it is, but it's based on my being able to establish that he was not truthful, and that we've been able to establish in every case that Larry was.
	For example, in his case, and or your case right now, Saying it does not make it so.
	Or at least, you know, you can't prove it to me.
	Fair enough.
	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.
	Fine, well if you want a forum to get together and go at it with HALT or whoever you want to go at it with, fine.
	But I just don't see that you're gaining anything by doing this on the air right now.
	Really, I don't.
	And I'd be honored to return to the show with Hall, Mr. Hall, and with Nick Pope.
	I think you're going to find that they will both demure and not want to do this on the air or any other place.
	Well, let's find out.
	Yes, by all means.
	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.
	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 MITD-55.
	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 Dallin.
	In the darkest time between dusk and dawn, from the high
	desert, it's Art Bell's Midnight Now, here's Art.
	Here I am.
	Alright.
	So once again, for those of you who want to comment, I'm just giving you my perception.
	This seems to me to be a useless dogfight.
	Without the other dog around.
	Public number 952-225-5278.
	Skype at MITD51 for North America, and MITD55 for the rest of the world.
	And again, here is Peter Robbins.
	I'm sorry, Peter, but that's the way I read it.
	I feel used, kind of, like you're using me to just sort of blast away here, and I don't like it.
	I appreciate that, and I'm sorry you feel that way, Art.
	Look, it's your show, and it's my first time back as a guest, but... Yeah.
	All right, all right, hold on.
	I'm going to take some calls.
	I mean, let's see how the audience feels about it.
	Amy, on Skype, you're on the air.
	Hi, Art.
	Thanks for having me again on the show.
	Okay, back off a little bit.
	You're very loud, Amy.
	Back away a little bit.
	Sorry.
	Okay.
	I just wanted to know how this dispute is so critical to the suggestion that Rendlesham could be bigger than the Roswell incident.
	Okay.
	It's a great question.
	I think the main thing that we're dealing with here is the seminal event that set the whole modern age of UFOs Into motion, and I take Roswell very seriously.
	I have a lot of respect for the folks that have done the work on it.
	I was a consultant to the city for two years.
	Now, don't you feel that this dispute, airing it like this, just does the whole Rendlesham thing damage?
	No, but I would respect the fact that if other people do, then we should turn our remaining attention to other things.
	Well, that means if you're arguing over the facts of the case, I'm sorry, I have to disagree with you there.
	These are not arguing over the facts of the case.
	It's he said, she said.
	These are arguing over presenting information to an audience that's simply not true, repeatedly.
	Okay, but saying that and then just getting into a dogfight over it, that does compromise the case itself.
	I don't think so.
	I think it compromises the human beings that are involved in points of view on the case.
	Caller, what do you think?
	Well, I just want to know how it could be bigger than the Roswell incident.
	That's all I want to know.
	To finish the thought... Go ahead, answer that question, why don't you, Peter.
	How could it be bigger than Roswell?
	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 principals are alive.
	I think we're comparing apples and oranges here.
	One is the seminal case in UFO history.
	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. But,
	you know, it's not a contest who's bigger.
	Okay, alright, that answers it. Hello there on the phone, you're on the air with Peter
	Robbins.
	Thank you.
	Hey, this is Tom from Florida.
	Yeah, I think it's, 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 it, you know, I don't think throwing out the whole time travel aspect is a good idea because Interesting.
	Interesting.
	one and uh... the other one could be maybe was a uh...
	and i'm not secret military test the c how the base would react
	to an occurrence of that type interesting
	you can't move on out or can you uh...
	who were any of us to say what is there isn't one it comes down to it
	For me, these are entry-level questions.
	They've been batted around for decades now.
	Entry-level?
	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.
	All right, all right.
	And come up with your best judgment.
	All right.
	Next, on the phone, you're on the air.
	Oh, hello, is this Art Bell?
	It is, hi.
	Wow, you're not a mirage, you actually are the real thing emerging from the desert.
	Yes, you're right, I'm the real thing.
	Well, I guess because I'm one of those people who are not familiar with this event, and very quickly, Mr. Robbins, you mentioned that Larry Warren is a whistleblower?
	Yes.
	And if he is a whistleblower, what did he state or do or say that would cause such consternation amongst the military?
	That's a great question 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 Vicenza, 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 is 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 Skycrash.
	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 Freedom of Information Act action.
	That FOIA resulted in the release of a single-page document.
	On Air Force Stationary, 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.
	Right.
	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.
	That's how he became the whistleblower.
	Yes, the whistleblower.
	Does that help you, Connor?
	Or did it confuse you?
	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 Is this 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?
	Well, I recall, yes, a guest talking about DNA in technology not yet developed.
	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?
	Do you understand what I'm saying?
	Not really.
	But you said it with conviction.
	I'm not exactly sure what you said.
	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 the ufology, or this 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.
	Thanks for watching!
	Absolutely gotta love it.
	Alright.
	Not gonna love so much what's coming up.
	Midnight in the Desert doesn't scream calls. We trust you, but remember, the NSA, well,
	you know. To call the show, please dial 1-952-225-5278.
	That's 1-952-CALL-ART.
	Gotta love that one. Absolutely gotta love it. All right.
	Not gonna love so much what's coming up.
	I get messages on computer as I do the program. Peter, I'm gonna read you one screen of my
	latest messages right now.
	Sure.
	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.
	Uh, glad you feel the same way.
	Sent a message earlier on here, then you expressed 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, uh, is his petty fight.
	Thanks for speaking up.
	Or from Jocko in New York City.
	Alright, sounds like this guy's gonna cry.
	What a baby.
	Totally discredits himself.
	Let the accused, which isn't him, defend themselves.
	Or D, initial only.
	Hey Art, I gotta say, for old time's sake, this guest bonk.
	Mary, I hate to be negative, but this guy seems like a whining, pretentious bop.
	Scott, in Andover, while I'm enjoying the show tonight, I don't feel a good use of airtime, though, to discuss nitpicking between Lt.
	Col.
	Faltz 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.
	Your guest is making the other guy look better, and it kind of probably gets worse from there.
	What do you think, Peter?
	Well, I think I made the wrong decision to take the course that I did on the show, and I'm sorry I've disappointed your listeners.
	Well, I think it's just that, you know, a lot of people think it's unfair when the other guy isn't there.
	Oh, I agree.
	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.
	How could they bar you?
	He stipulated that Larry Warren would not be allowed in the hall if he showed up even with his 20 pounds.
	And that's a fact that is documented.
	So, that's the cost to get in, £20, right?
	Yes, that's what they charge.
	Well, he should have tested it then, bought his £20, laid it on the line, and see if they actually bartered.
	It was made very clear to us, Art.
	And you can check that out with Mr. Halter, the conference organizer.
	I'm not going to argue with any of this, because I can't.
	Twin Cities, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	The aspect of the story where the person touches the crap, or whatever it is, and starts receiving this information.
	Right.
	When were those claims first made?
	Well, publicly, they were made on the night of December 28th, 2010, at a small conference we had in Woodbridge, England.
	And this was how long after the incident?
	30 years almost to the day.
	30 years?
	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.
	Maybe you think it was stolen from a video game?
	Quite possibly.
	Well, just exactly, basically exactly the same thing.
	An alien artifact, the person touches it and he starts having these visions that and basically it sounds basically the exact same thing.
	Yeah, okay.
	Got it.
	Thank you.
	First of all, Art, you really should have Jim Penniston and John Burrows 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.
	Maybe it's it look it's really hard to buy into anything that suddenly pops up 30 years later
	Skype Lewis you're on the air Peter. Thank you I'm sorry.
	I would like to respond to Mr. Bell's question and ask a question based on new testimony on Dr. Jay's show just prior to your show, Mr. Bell.
	I'm a big fan of Peter's and I agree with him.
	He's pathologically nice based on my experience.
	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 agreed upon at any point.
	Well, that's a much better idea than a one-sided I agree.
	I agree.
	Well, Jay, thank you, and I couldn't agree more.
	Hold on.
	Hey, guys.
	One at a time.
	You're both talking.
	Thank you, Jay.
	I'm almost done, Peter.
	Then you can 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 then I have a second question, but your turn, Peter.
	Thank you.
	Basically, 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.
	You don't really know if you're barred until you show up with the money and try.
	you don't really know if you're barred into your show up with money and try
	uh... my my second on the day we were told and say a little bit about the
	other day on hold you're both talking about it if we showed up
	car hold on peter's finish please
	Sure.
	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... We'll find out.
	Okay, I'll tell you what, Peter.
	We'll find out about that.
	The second 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 Sgt.
	Penniston has reached an agreement with the government, that the government would give Sgt.
	Penniston his medical records, in exchange for Sgt.
	Penniston shutting up.
	Now those are my words.
	Alright, now, do you know anything about that?
	Are you aware of that?
	No.
	No.
	Okay, well.
	Let's, I don't know, let's go here.
	Wherever here is, you're on the air, on the phone.
	Hi.
	Yes, hi.
	I want to ask a question regarding the UFO.
	Mr. Robbins is not very forthcoming with his information and that is... What is he not forthcoming about?
	You're trying to cause problems in the community.
	You're very undercard to understand.
	Okay, well so are you though.
	What am I doing to cause a problem?
	You don't have facts to back up what you say.
	Oh no, I do have facts to back up what I say.
	Very much so.
	What, where do you... Let's get specific.
	Caller, get specific.
	What are you talking about exactly?
	Yeah, he's gone.
	He's gone.
	That's all right.
	We'll just move on because he didn't have anything to back up what he was saying.
	Hi there.
	You're on the air.
	Art, it's great to hear you back.
	Good to be here.
	Thank you.
	Two things.
	Number one, great stance last night about your announcement about the radios stations and everything.
	Shout out to the Art Bell of Midnight in the Desert fans on Facebook.
	I'm talking about you right now.
	Right.
	If I wanted to go this route tonight, Art, I'm disappointed with tonight's show.
	I would have stayed home with my wife today and watched The Young and the Restless.
	It's just, you know, you say you're a writer, you've had plenty of time to write this stuff up, your issues with this guy, could have gave it to Art, you could have put it on his website and said, hey, read this, and could have went on about other things.
	I'm just, I'm disappointed.
	To me, it does a disservice to the whole I don't know the whole field, and it's not the right way to do it.
	You know, there should be here people to dispute this.
	If these are really important facts... I'm sorry.
	If these are really important facts, then Pope should be here, Halt should be here.
	I agree.
	Otherwise, it's just a smear fest.
	Well, that's what I'm responding to, a smear fest that happened.
	everybody thinks that they're being smeared or misquoted or lied about or
	whatever everybody feels that way and they've got their own version of the facts
	and what i think is that it's still being talked about over and over and over and
	if you provide those facts online or like you said you lied to the public or you could have done that
	there will be a book out on this in about a week and a half alright well then... everything in it
	I'm sorry I even said anything more than that.
	Okay, then in a week and a half the truth can be known, right?
	Indeed, yes.
	That would have been the time to do this, in my opinion, in a week and a half.
	You're right.
	It was a bad judgment call on my part, and we should have done a show on another subject.
	We should have.
	Jason, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	Great to talk to you.
	I just wanted to give a shout-out before I talk to you about Dark Matter News being awesome tonight.
	Thank you.
	Your guest seems to me like a sort of politician of UFOs.
	Every time somebody brings up a question Well, that's what he came on tonight to talk about this grudge.
	No doubt about it.
	And it's just weird radio.
	It's the weirdest radio I've heard in a long time.
	Well, radio is all kinds of things.
	Sometimes weird.
	It's awesome.
	You do it the best.
	Thank you very much for the call.
	I appreciate it, and let me move on to the phone.
	You're on the air with Peter Robbins.
	Hi.
	Hi, Art.
	Always a pleasure to talk to you.
	You're the master of the late night format.
	Thank you.
	You kept your cool very well, I would not have.
	Nobody really wants to hear a chicken fight live on the air when there's only one chicken.
	This Rendlesham Forest incident has been talked about a lot.
	It's on the Internet.
	It's everywhere.
	I would have liked to delineate points that are very hard to understand.
	Maybe some facts that are not well known by the public.
	For example, the binary code that telepaths into his brain.
	And that was talked about many times.
	I would like to hear something about that.
	And I can still hear something about that.
	What I do not want to hear is any more chicken fights.
	I've got enough chickens of my own.
	All right, so the binary... Thank you, caller.
	The binary code decoded said roughly what here?
	Hello, Peter?
	Once again, you really are talking to the wrong person.
	All I have is out of the book.
	It is a series of six longitude and latitudes of mystical locations around the world, a number of but no message to mankind, no message to mankind
	8100, so no message to mankind beyond these locations No.
	Nick Pope theorizes that there may be a message within the message, and that someday the experts will crack it.
	My feeling is it is what it is, and it's a shiny object that's taking attention away from more serious aspects of the case.
	Okay.
	On the phone, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hey, Peter.
	Yes.
	Peter?
	Yes.
	Listen.
	I want to give you the benefit of the doubt.
	Even if he was smearing you or lying about things, isn't it more beneficial for the UFO community that you said gets little respect anyway, if you focus your thoughts and your actions on what you can control, which is your work and the positive impact you can have?
	I have focused my thoughts on my work for 35 years.
	I have had a positive impact.
	I will have this e-book coming out very within the next week and a half or two weeks, and people can come to their own conclusions after they read it.
	Well, the problem I have with it is the infighting.
	It's the constant infighting.
	With everybody's devices, that's when it tears the whole thing apart.
	Well, you know, I agree with you 100%, 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 Fault in Woodbridge.
	I guess that's all I should have said, and we should have gone on to another topic.
	No kidding.
	Well, yeah, it sounds like a breakup in high school where one person's telling one side of the story and the other one's telling the other one.
	Kind of, yeah.
	Let's move on.
	New caller, you're on the air.
	Hello?
	Yes, hi.
	Hello?
	Yeah, hello.
	Am I on the air?
	You certainly are.
	When you hear that boing sound, that means you're on the air.
	I want to stay anonymous.
	I don't like getting in fights.
	I think Peter's a great guy, and I think you're beating a dead horse.
	You've said enough derogatory things about him.
	I haven't said anything derogatory.
	Ma'am, I have simply repeated what people have either written on the internet or have said here on the air.
	That's it.
	Well, anyway, I'm glad you're back.
	I think you're the all-time greatest, and it's just much happier that you're back on the air.
	I met him, and he's a very honest, sincere man, and I think, you know, he's just trying to bring his truth to the public, and I think, you know, he's really gotten bashed, but I'm just... I also knew Chuck DiCaro in his early days when he worked in New Orleans, and I know he worked on that Rendlesham documentary.
	Yeah.
	And then he kind of disappeared.
	He never did really get into ufology, and I don't blame him, because he would be a real fighter.
	If he did, he wouldn't put up with the foolishness that goes on in the field.
	Yeah.
	I'm just wondering, I know he got recently shot and he had to kill somebody.
	That's really sad.
	Yes.
	But he was defending his life.
	Yes, he did.
	And his wife.
	And he's doing a lot better.
	And he is a great guy and a terrific newsman as well.
	I wouldn't wish it on my best friend.
	Let him do whatever he's doing with his life.
	on the Rundle some information?
	I wouldn't wish it on my best friend.
	Let him do whatever he's doing with his life.
	It really is.
	Guys, listen, I'm sorry.
	I've never been so badly attacked for trying to tell the truth as I have been tonight, so please leave him alone.
	I know, I understand.

▲