Sarah Westall and Daniel Liszt dissect dark journalism, exposing how six media conglomerates suppress truths like the 2008 crash and Goldman Sachs' bailout while ignoring a $16 trillion Federal Reserve allocation. They critique the erosion of press freedom, citing the Freedom of the Press Index ranking the US 39th globally, and detail corporate manipulation involving Monsanto, aspartame, and black budgets funding secret space programs. Ultimately, the discussion argues that concentrated power threatens sovereignty through trade deals like TPP and hidden technologies, urging public engagement via alternative media to reclaim control before elites consolidate future infrastructure. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Beyond The Official Story00:09:18
Hi, this is Dark Journalist.
I had the pleasure of being on Sarah Westall's Business Game Changer show today.
The following is the full video broadcast of the show where we discussed alternative media, deep politics, and the Secret Space Program conference I'll be hosting this fall in Austin, Texas, along with former Assistant Housing Secretary Catherine Austin Fitz and investigative reporter Linda Moulton Howe.
I hope you enjoy it.
Hi, Daniel.
Welcome to the program.
Hi, Sarah.
It's great to be here.
Well, I love having you here.
I had you here before, and I had a lot of people with interest in our interview because of just the interesting stuff that you've brought forward the last time.
And you focus on dark journalism.
And for our listeners, I know we're going to have a lot of new listeners today.
What is dark journalism?
Well, it's an excellent question.
Dark journalism is.
Basically, I see that it has to take the full spectrum of what is out there and not just the official story or the secondary kind of conspiracy theory.
So, a long time ago, I decided from analyzing news that I would split it up into three different categories.
The official story would be the main category, then, the secondary part would be researchers who would take different aspects of the story and start to deconstruct the official story.
Because very often the official story would have holes in it.
And then finally, the third piece was what I call the wild story or junk conspiracy, which was intentionally thrown out there to throw everyone off and to keep supporting the official story.
So the secondary story, which is often called the conspiracy theory, is this kind of dark journalism where people look at incidents like the crash of the economy in 2008.
The official story on it was.
Well, there were some derivatives guys out there, and they got in there and they mucked up the financial works, and here we are.
There were just a few people that were doing this crazy stuff.
A few bad actors, right?
But as it turns out, some really good financial researchers went in there and said, actually, a lot of this was planned, and a lot of this was due to reckless investing, and some people were making money off this crash.
And that became a kind of conspiracy theory, but actually, in truth, it was.
Based on sound research, and so therefore, it had more grounding in reality.
And then the third thing that came up was people were saying all these wild things about, well, they need the money for FEMA camps, or, you know, they're really taking it out there.
And you find a lot of those stories are fueled by the same forces that put out the official story in the first place to kind of confuse the issue.
And so, dark journalism gets to the total picture.
It's something where we need to look at the full spectrum in order to get real answers.
We can't be afraid to go there.
And it's kind of what journalism used to be, right?
Because now, Mainstream journalism won't ask these questions, whereas before they used to.
You still hold yourself up to the same, you know, very high standards.
If there isn't a good source, if it doesn't make sense, it's not journal.
It's still journalism, it's real journalism, but you're going after alternative ways of looking at it.
Exactly.
You're using real journalistic rules, but you're not under the control of any particular company.
And, you know, as we know, the media has been consolidated largely by six different corporations controlling every radio station, every newspaper, every TV, cable station.
So you're not going to get a whole lot of variety in terms of news reporting.
That's only happened in the last 20 years.
It's really crazy.
And I think a lot of people have noted, a lot of the mainstream people, not the media, but the regular person down the street, are all noticing that.
And I think that's why.
Alternative media is really taking off because the average person is saying, Well, wait a minute, why aren't you digging into the fact that the stock market went crazy right before 9 11?
You know, the same stocks that dropped?
Or why aren't you looking into the fact that when you bailed out the insurance companies, the people that you ended up bailing out was Goldman Sachs?
You know, that kind of stuff.
There's just what's going on?
And the people want to know.
Well, there's a real awakening, and a lot of it's due to the internet, and we're starting to get more information.
There are some dangers, of course, with being overloaded with information without a good filter.
And that's where you need something like a dark journalism to take a look at it and be able to say, well, you know, we've debunked the official story, but also the junk conspiracy story has been debunked too.
And right in the middle is the real deal.
So that's a very important thing to do, especially with the bombardment of information that we have right now with the technology, you know, everybody on their phone getting news, getting Facebook.
Well, anybody can be a journalist, right?
And it's not.
It's true.
Yeah.
To be a true journalist, you have rules of journalism.
And to be a professional journalist, you have to approach things a certain way so that you can debunk something.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Well, you were talking about 9 11.
And the original story around 9 11, it turned out over the years that there were a lot of holes in it.
Right now, they have in Congress, there's this bill to get these pages released that show Saudi involvement with some of the hijackers.
That just wasn't brought out at the time, but the story was there.
And that was 14 years ago.
So we can see how long these things take.
You know, at the same time, you had people saying, well, there were no planes, you know, and really far out.
Exactly.
But what about the planes that we saw?
Yeah.
So you can see how you need something that understands how absurd the official story is going to be and gets into the real research, but doesn't go so far overboard that it's going to lose focus.
And I think very often, like I said, I call it third force because you have the official story.
You have the secondary follow up story, which is often called the conspiracy theory.
But then that third force that comes in is not always just individuals and somebody who's a citizen journalist trying to figure it out and throwing wild ideas out there.
Sometimes those stories are planted by the same forces that don't want you to look at the official story.
I think that's an important point.
So it's sort of not falling for it, I guess, is important.
And being able to understand.
Yeah, it's hard to know the difference.
You have to make sure the source is vetted and it makes sense, right?
Yeah, well, we've both worked in the media.
You know, when you're around people who do that, also, you have to understand them in a particular way.
They're human.
You know, they are beholden to certain interests.
You know, I very often make a point about Boeing, and Boeing is one of the main advertisers for Meet the Press.
It doesn't make any sense because, of course, people who watch Meet the Press don't want to go out and buy an Uzi.
So, why would they be supporting them that way?
So, we have to understand that in those newsrooms, these aren't, you know, Necessarily the most ethical people.
They have to make certain types of decisions based on their own personal interests at that level as a network.
And very often it's not in the public interest.
So, you know, we have to have a way to hold that kind of medium system accountable because over and over again they've proven that they will not follow up on the real story.
And in some cases they'll obfuscate the real story and try to really hold out people who are exposing the real story and really.
You know, smear them to the public.
So we can see that that whole system of media is in great need of reform.
Yes, and I think that people are starting to realize that.
The sad part is for so long until the financial crisis, people still trusted it.
And so we were sheep being fed things that people trusted, and now the trust is eroding, which it's scary for a lot of people, but the trust eroding is a healthy thing.
If someone doesn't deserve the trust, then the trust eroding is healthy.
If the trust erodes to somebody who does deserve the trust, then that's an unhealthy erosion.
But, you know, because you want to follow trustworthy people and leaders who are trustworthy deserve our respect and allegiance.
But the ones that aren't, and when a system isn't trustworthy, it's important that the people stop trusting it.
Funding Reverse Engineered Tech00:11:59
And so that's why I love what you do.
But you're getting into all sorts of neat things.
You're hosting the Secret Space conference that's happening here pretty soon.
Can you tell us about that?
Yeah, tell me about that.
Yeah, it's very exciting.
Basically, this is a conference that is taking place in Austin, Texas, the weekend of October 31st.
And it's going to have speakers who have spent a lot of time researching what is referred to as the secret space program.
And often, this is the same idea or notion as a breakaway civilization.
And the premise, really, of it is that along the line there, during the normal development of the space program, certain technology was developed that was kept from the public.
And over time, they've been developing this technology while the public program has been going into massive debt.
You may have noticed that NASA can't even really go to the moon anymore.
We haven't gone there since 1971, which is very unusual because, of course, there were many lunar trips expected and they just never materialized.
Well, I think what's so unusual about it is how much technology came out of that program and how much it helped our industry.
Yes.
And so the investment into it, we got back five.
Or, I don't know.
I know there's studies out there somewhere, but it's just so obvious that so much of the technology that came out of that helped our industry, helped our country.
So it was clearly a good investment.
So, what happened?
And I think this points to it, right?
Yeah, no one really has been able to answer that question officially.
All you hear about is like, oh, budget constraints.
Recently, there was a very interesting interview where they were taking pictures on series.
And one of the Cameras that they were using, they said what they were getting fuzzy images because it was a low budget camera.
Well, this is very fascinating.
So you have enough money and strength of will to send these spaceships out there to take pictures of these planets and these moons, but then you have low budget cameras that go on them.
So, I mean, it's a very unusual situation.
And I think as far as the space program is concerned, we have to come to the realization that there's just two totally different realities.
There's the public perception, And there's this whole other program.
Now, a lot of whistleblowers have come out about this program, and you do have to sort between those details.
But when you tie in many things over time, like UFO sightings, like astronauts coming forward and saying, well, we've witnessed these anomalies, we've witnessed these other ships landing.
That's something I have a clip in one of my episodes of Gordon Cooper, who's probably one of the most well known astronauts.
And what he was saying basically was that.
You know, they knew in the 50s a lot about this whole other development that was going on out there, and they didn't know who was doing it.
So, you know, was this an off world culture visiting here?
Was something else going on?
Whatever it was, it was there and they were interested in it.
Well, where are they doing it?
Where were they doing the research?
Well, they say that they're aware of this other development going on.
Yeah, where was it going on with this other?
Well, this is a very fascinating thing because when you trace a space program, you'd think you'd be able to, you know, if somebody's launching a rocket, you'd be able to watch it.
Obviously, the kinds of technology that were being used is something very much worth looking into because if it wasn't using conventional rocketry, it was using something else.
So, um, You know, what's interesting, and there's a lot of aspects to this.
For example, one of the speakers we have on the show is Walter Bosley, and he's an author who covers something called the airship mysteries of the 1890s that's the late 19th century, where there were floods of reports of these airships that were flying around.
Well, there's proof of activity of companies that were developing technology in that era in Germany and in New York City.
Well, and I suppose it would be more obvious back then, too, because now Yes, there would be nothing up there to compare it with.
Well, yeah, now we have stuff up in the air all the time, so you don't really think anything of it.
But back then, they didn't have that.
So when there was stuff up in the air, it would have been something that people really took notice of.
Well, it's interesting because going back to Gordon Cooper for a minute, he said that, you know, even before he became an astronaut, when he was flying during the war, that he had seen, you know, they called them Foo Fighters in the day, but he had seen a lot of anomalous aircraft.
Flying around with them, and nobody knew.
They thought it was a German development at the time.
And the Germans, of course, as far as we know, thought it was some kind of secret weapon.
So nobody knew who was flying it or what it was.
So this becomes a great mystery, but who was flying that stuff?
And there are all kinds of implications about it because there's a lot of rumors and testimony about reverse engineered craft, which is one of these things crashing and the government getting a hold of it and re engineering the technology and creating a whole industry with it.
One of the most famous guys who talked about this was Philip Corso, who was an ex intelligence officer, retired.
And he said that they developed whole industries out of the things that they redeveloped when some of these crafts would go down.
They never concluded on the inside there necessarily where those were coming from.
They were some kind of off world development, in his opinion.
Interesting.
So, who are you going to have?
It sounds like you just have a lot of really great sources of information that are going to be coming to this conference.
Who are some of the People that are going to be speaking there.
Oh, it's highly specialized for this, actually, which I'm really excited about because I don't think there's really been a conference about this really before because it focuses a lot on the technology and the secrecy around the technology and what kind of impact that has on our future and on the economy.
So we have speakers.
The main speaker is Catherine Austin Fitz, interestingly enough, who's a financial expert.
And she, of course, is the former assistant housing secretary under Bush I, and she worked for the Clinton administration also.
And her great study has been the black budget, which is the money that's allocated off the books, as it were, by the government.
And they steal money from different agencies to make this happen.
And, you know, it's kind of like something they keep under wraps for years and years.
And then it comes out what they were working on.
But she decided that this issue that had become so taboo about, you know, UFOs and some of the sightings, like the Phoenix Light sighting, which had just large craft, it sat over a city for a long period of time.
The Air Force never came up with any explanation about it.
And even the governor of Phoenix decided to come out and say, you know, these guys need to give us an answer on this.
And like 10,000 people saw it.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
Well, they were actually sky watching that night because there was a comet coming out.
So it's really perfect timing to get a mass sighting like that.
But one of the fascinating things that she decided was that, you know, if these things are being developed and if we are flying them, they would take trillions of dollars to develop.
So if you have trillions of dollars of hardware flying around, you have to find out where that money flow is going.
Where's it coming from?
Where are they getting the money to do this?
And so she has investigated the black budget and.
The secret space program being linked with this idea of UFOs.
So, you know, some people come down on it and say it's a human development.
The military has this advanced equipment that they're putting up there, they're putting in the skies.
People see it and they think this is a UFO.
But really, it's just advanced military craft.
Or there's something very bizarre going on, which is we're being visited by another culture, which as they do more and more exploration in space, they're deciding, well, actually, a lot of these planets could support life.
So, we could be looking at off world visitors with it.
So, the conference doesn't answer that, but we present what is the technology involved?
What would it take to create these craft and these sightings?
What kind of industry would be required on the ground to make it?
And what, you know, so it aims to get at the truth by giving you the facts.
I was going to say a little bit back to the black budget there's a black budget on the official government budget that is called the black budget.
But you're talking about a black budget that's off the books.
It's completely off the books.
Yeah.
This would be the black, black budget.
And a lot of people, you know, it's talked about out there, but nobody really knows the size of it.
And it's like the Donald Rumsfeld thing where he said there's $2.2 trillion, something, $2.1, $2.3, I can't remember exactly.
Million, billion, or trillion.
Yes, you have to go to trillion.
Go to trillion.
But that's what's missing.
And then that was right before 9 11.
And then it disappeared from the media because the other story was big.
And so there's that money that people are talking about.
And I can't, you know, I've done a lot of research trying to find people that really understand it.
And that's what's so fascinating.
If Catherine Austin Fitz is going to really, because I know she's been in the inside, she has a lot of inside knowledge of the budget and where this money is going and a lot of great resources.
So she can come forward at this conference and really dive into that black budget and where the money's going.
That would be absolutely fascinating.
Because it's not easily available.
And yeah, and so to have an inside source just telling you that, because it's obvious that you would need a lot of money to make something like this happen.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, we've looked at researchers in the past who've been spectating, sort of looking into it, wondering what's going on.
And that's a whole lot different than someone who has controlled money inside a federal budget and understand how that works, understand how things are allocated.
You know, what kind of paper trail there is, et cetera.
So I think it's pretty major that she stepped forward to do this.
And I think it's really fascinating when they audited the Federal Reserve once, and there were $16 trillion that were allocated to different banks around the world, and it was just a one time audit.
And we can't get underneath, we can't see what's going on, we can't audit it again.
And that was the only time it's been audited since 1913.
And so, what's really going on with our money?
I just think it's fascinating to be able to learn some of the information from somebody that's been able to see it.
But do they think it's.
Even Bloomberg said it was time for the Fed to be audited in a real full way.
I mean, it's just the mainstream is getting on board with that.
Well, because that's ridiculous.
Because if we're responsible as U.S. citizens for what they're doing, and if they give out money, the debt is still back on us, it'd be like running a business and not knowing what your books are.
How many business people would be okay with that?
Well, that's how we operate as a country.
We don't know our books, and we can't audit it.
I don't know a single business executive that would be okay with that.
So I don't know why we're okay with that for our own country.
But do you think that it is just the United States that this money is coming from?
Or do you think it's a worldwide kind of deal?
No, it's definitely an alliance, and it's a worldwide alliance, and there are different factions to it for sure.
Accessing Advanced Space Programs00:04:39
You know, Joseph Farrell, who is also going to be at the conference, uses the term coalescence of interests, and I think that that's an important one to keep in mind.
And not necessarily thinking of them as one whole unit or one whole cabal that's controlling things, but as different pieces that maybe even fight each other.
But certainly they have one general basic interest, which is to keep this system hidden.
And the system, we're talking about finance now, but what is available in space that relates to our economy, to the markets, to business?
There's asteroid mining, there's space tourism, there's a variety of things.
One of the more fascinating ones is that companies are now sending their data out into space, which means, of course, that it's protected by the Air Force and free from hackers, but also free from the oversight.
Oh, interesting.
Yeah.
Well, but, you know, I did an interview, and it's going to air here in a few weeks, with somebody who's fighting aging, and they're so close to being able to lengthen the telomeres, which is a foundational step into lengthening our life.
And, you know, Harvard study did it with mice, and they're able to actually, yeah, they're able to actually take old age mice.
And turn them young again, young adults.
They couldn't reproduce to being able to reproduce again.
And they're very close to being able to go into human trials with some things.
But the problem is, we need to expand past our Earth.
You know, we need colonization.
We need to be able to colonize elsewhere.
I mean, if that's a real issue, we either have to, I mean, we have some major issues that we have to deal with.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
That's an excellent point about how the medical part would tie in with that also.
And this gets to one of the key points on the conference, by the way, which is.
This whole idea of a breakaway civilization.
So, you know, to simplify it, the idea is that at a certain point, this breakaway civilization has access to advanced technology, they have access to advanced science and advanced medical care.
So, when we think of it like that, their space program is an extension of that.
But the only problem with all this is that they're doing it all with the public's money, and we don't get to see any of the benefits of it.
It's going to a very small, narrow corridor.
Some of those companies that are getting benefits for going into space early, you know, and I'll point out Bigelow Aerospace, those companies have great ties to the government and they're obviously getting this corporate treatment, you know, roll out the red carpet and put them out there because they are signing on to whatever this breakaway civilization is all about.
So I think it's important to look at them and to size up what it is that's going on there.
In other words, that has to become transparent.
Space has to become transparent.
By the way, there were recent reports about China and India deciding, you know what?
We have to put our own space weapons deployment into space.
So, this is becoming something which can't be avoided anymore.
It can't be sort of laughed off.
Ha ha, they have a breakaway civilization.
I mean, it's out there, it's happening.
We have to be able to look at it legitimately as news people and not be afraid because NASA says it's not happening.
Well, not be afraid to actually look at what's going on and if there's facts out there.
You shouldn't be laughed at for trying to look at the truth.
The truth should never be a joke.
That's true.
Yeah.
And I think that's important.
And I think you make a good point where if our public funds are used to.
To do something, you know, to build this whole thing.
Think of how prosperous we would be as a society if the funds that were truly ours were given to the people and not given to others.
You know, it comes down to all the debt that we have.
So the money for banking, you know, all the interest that we're paying and all the money that goes elsewhere but not back to us.
And we wonder why we're not just completely flourishing.
Absolutely.
Well, if you think about it, one of the things that they mentioned about the bailout, you know, we were talking about the 2008 crash.
But when they did the bailout, that money that went to mostly foreign banks, by the way, who were in this chain with American banks of complete derivatives dependence, really bad scene.
But most of that money would have paid, not even the full amount, would have paid off all the mortgages in the country.
Yeah.
Can you imagine if everyone's mortgage was paid off and how prosperous, yeah, every mortgage, how prosperous we'd be?
You could pay off every mortgage and do some kind of energy.
Nazi Programs And Foreign Banks00:03:23
You know, get a new type of energy launched throughout the whole country, both do both things, and then we would be independent and prosperous going forward, yeah.
Well, instead, we're bailing out foreign banks, we're bailing out foreign banks, and we have NASA, you know, billions of dollars in debt.
I mean, does that seem a little bit unusual?
It just seems very unusual.
Like, what is really going on?
Because, and that's why I love that you're digging into this stuff.
Uh, who else is there besides Catherine Austin Fitz?
Well, we have Joseph Farrell, who's an Oxford scholar, and he has an incredible series of books about the breakaway civilization.
And it's called the Giza Death Star.com, his website.
But Giza Death Star, that series of books, is really fascinating because it explores the idea that there's advanced technology tied over from a Nazi international group after the war that left with certain technology.
And sold that technology off to different countries.
And that whole end of it, the kind of Nazi advanced programs, is a very interesting aspect to look at.
Because, of course, we used many of the Nazi scientists after the war to develop the space program in the first place.
And the Russians got a few, of course, which helped them a lot.
But we got, you know, von Braun and some of the really hardcore characters.
But his exploration goes deeper and says that there was a kind of technology the Nazis were working on and that they had at the end of the war.
That's what they left to South America with.
And there are very tantalizing stories there in history, like Admiral Byrd, who decided at a certain point that he was going to visit the South Pole and do all these explorations.
And he found that there were unusual crafts and things there that were flying around.
He couldn't explain what they were.
Was it a Nazi base?
And that's where that whole mythology came from.
But rather than jumping onto that, what Farrell has done is really backtrack where did the technology come from in the first place?
And so he's a fascinating speaker.
Linda Moulton Howe, who many people would be familiar with through Coast to Coast AM, she's an investigative reporter for them.
And she also is the star and producer of Ancient Aliens, which is a TV program that you see on the History Channel.
It's been on about six seasons, a very popular show, which explores this idea of off world visitors.
But her work now, she's been doing this for about 35 years.
So she adds a great deal from this other area, which is kind of like, What kind of an impact would an off world culture have on ours?
If they came here, one of their crafts crashed, we reverse engineered the technology and got this big boost out of it.
What kind of sociological ramifications would happen from that?
And so, you know, she's really fascinating.
That combination, though, of Catherine Austin Fitz, who's been in the government and knows money really well, Farrell, who knows the deep roots and the history of the developments of the technology and the advanced technology.
And then Linda Moulton Howe, who deals with the off world aspects.
I think it's a devastating combination for a conference to really portray the different aspects of how this could have come about.
Lifting Filters On Area 5100:15:21
How many different speakers do you expect to have?
Well, this is the thing the list of speakers is growing.
Right now, we have seven speakers, and it's going to be probably about 10 by the time we're finished.
And there are some interesting surprises that we can't announce until after Labor Day, but certainly it's going to be a fascinating show.
And I think that as opposed to a show that's really going to Kind of float a number of ideas out there with no real thread.
I think you're really going to walk away from this after two days and say, where's all this money going?
What is the secret space program?
And, you know, how does it affect my day to day life?
It's going to answer some of those questions.
Well, and it starts to get because there are some big questions when the crash of 2008 and then the audit of the Federal Reserve and then all this money that's missing.
It's like, what is going on?
And who would possibly need this much money?
And it's It's very, and then the NASA being pretty much neutered, for lack of a better word.
I mean, they're just, it's ridiculous that NASA isn't in debt and not doing anything, essentially.
They're pretty much doing nothing.
I mean, I shouldn't say nothing.
They're not doing very much for what they could be doing.
And, you know, they did a probe go out to Pulido, which was fascinating.
Yeah.
But the first thing they did when they opened it up is laugh at the people who thought Area 51 was.
You know, some space program or whatever.
At first, they made some joke about Area 51.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And it was when they first announced the Pluto thing, it was their whole press conference.
And it was just so obvious that they were trying to, you know, downplay some other thing.
I mean, why would they open up the Pluto space or the Pluto conference with a joke about.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
You know, I thought that was very interesting.
We've talked about this before, which is there's a kind of media manipulation that if I can put a curtain around certain ideas.
You won't even go there.
Well, if it's a joke, if anybody who does that is a joke and should be laughed at, then you won't want to go there, the average person.
Yeah, the problem is a lot of those kinds of approaches that we see coming from the mainstream on that don't hold up very well.
And I think more and more it's coming to that point where people are making up their minds in polls that UFOs are certainly.
That there's something, some other thing going on, whether it's man made or off world technology, there's something.
Because there's too many people coming forward and saying they've seen stuff.
You know, astronauts and presidents.
We've had two presidents now that have come forward and said they've seen something.
We've had generals.
We have the government of France that have said this is real and have come open on it.
So, other governments are far more ahead in terms of, you know, by comparison with the United States, forget it.
I mean, Brazil has an actual commission that studies it.
So, you know, they're way ahead of us on that.
Russia is, of course, way more open about, you know, they have a lot of.
But they talk about it and they're not afraid to talk about it.
And the French study you mentioned, which is Cometa, they put out comprehensive 25 years worth of information about these studies, about the different sightings, what they concluded they were, and they concluded that it was completely anomalous.
They didn't know what it was.
So, leading to this suspicion that it's off world technology.
They just don't know.
I mean, at least they didn't make something up.
They came and said, We don't know, but this is the facts.
Well, our programs were based on, like Project Blue Book and things like that.
Based on developing a certain result.
So they went through the facade of going through the investigation only to come to the same conclusion.
Oh, you know, it's not a national security threat.
More than likely, most of the cases are just the planet Venus or something, which becomes kind of trite after 50 years.
And this is where I think the alternative media is important.
The alternative media has a lot of backbone that the mainstream media doesn't have because the mainstream media is backed by corporate money.
So they can't say certain things because it would be not in the corporation or the government's interest for the public to know about these things.
So, we have to kind of lift the filter when we look at news reporting around the topic to understand it.
So, like you said, something like Area 51.
Well, oddly enough, back in Area 51 times, 1991, that whole period of time when Bob Lazar came out and said, well, they had these craft in these hangars, and that's what it was all about at Area 51.
And for years, the government didn't even acknowledge the base, even though they wouldn't let anyone within 5,000 feet of it.
Obviously, there's something there, right?
And should the average person know about it?
You know, I don't know.
But if there's significant funds going that's filtering out, we should know about that, right?
Yeah, yeah.
Well, the thing is, eventually, in court documents, the government had to admit that the base existed.
You know, so this is how, you know, that's 20 years later, 2012, that case came up.
So we see, are we going to wait 20 to 25 years to find out everything about what's going on with our money, et cetera?
Here's another strange thing, though, when you consider the amount of sightings that are out there.
And I'm glad we're talking about this because really the craft part is very important.
Because, you know, a lot of people say, oh, that's just the government and it's experimental military technology.
Fine.
But of course, we've had the U2 program and we had programs like that that were secret from the public.
But after a while, the public finds out.
I mean, we've been seeing UFOs and reporting this stuff since the 40s, okay?
I mean, it's 70 years later.
Don't you think we would know what it was by now?
I mean, there's been no.
You would think that they'd be studying it.
You know, is it.
Is it just man made stuff or what?
I know there's some camps, like you were saying, that it's all just man made stuff.
And other people, but why are we seeing it all the time?
And why is it that they have this technology that is crazy good?
You know, they go super fast, stop on a dime, and go another direction.
Things that we can't do that we don't think we can do.
Yeah, certainly.
And here's the thing now people, the new excuse in the media is oh, well, with drones, you know, it was probably just a drone.
Well, I'm sorry, we've only had drone technology since the late 90s.
What about all those sightings for years and years before?
So, certainly, I think what it gets to is there's a real almost schizophrenia between the public position on these things by the government and the official institutions and the media and what we see on the ground, what researchers can pick up on in an ostensibly free society.
Well, and that's what's sad is because it used to be that the media was.
Well, I don't know if we're ever truly free because you're always going to have agendas and the businesses are.
The newspapers are owned by businesses and people and things.
So, people are people.
But we were much more free.
The truth was valued.
The truth was considered what we all tried to go after.
And we really respected the truth.
And now they've been able to call people who are trying to find the truth truthers and make fun of people trying to find the truth.
How absurd is that?
Yeah, right.
So what's next?
If you want to breathe air, you're a breather.
I mean, when you can convince people to laugh at people because they're looking for the truth, Then we have really gone off the deep end.
And so if we can reel this back in and say, let's bring this back to common sense journalism and say, let's look at some of this stuff.
And if there's $2.2 trillion that Donald Rumsfeld says is missing, that's more than twice what Congress all came together when they bailed out.
Congress came together and they voted on $900 billion being given to the banks.
They made this huge deal out of it and Congress had to vote on it.
And all of a sudden, well, that's more than twice.
What they voted on for the $900 billion, the $2.2 billion that was, or trillion that was missing.
So, how can we just blow off $2.2 trillion, but the $900 billion stopped the government, and that's all we focused on for two weeks?
You know, I mean, we have to operate in some basic common sense ways, you know?
Yeah, you have to have kind of a baseline to work from.
And this is the thing they're constantly blurring that.
You know, and this is the thing, they have the third rail where you can't go near certain issues.
Now, but this is a media problem because you almost expect the government and the institutions to do it because they have things to hide.
The corporations certainly would want to keep the advantage of whatever technology they developed.
So you can almost appreciate it, but the media has no excuse because the media is a vital arm of how American society operates.
Exactly.
Yeah, when they start obfuscating, when they start hiding, you know, and their main objective in life.
Yeah.
We can't function.
It's like taking a whole branch of the government away.
It's part of the balance structure.
It is.
And we've recently had comments by Jimmy Carter, former President Carter, which I think were really fascinating, saying that the United States was becoming an oligarchy.
And this is a very powerful statement from an ex president.
You do not hear that.
And I think his full quote just came out.
And I think people are still absorbing that because what is it that's going on?
And this is corporate control over the media.
I mean, I do recall that the media was more independent even 15 years ago.
Now it's really just one big thing.
And a lot of these guys in the media, you know, I was watching an interview with Chelsea Clinton on MSNBC, and the news reporter who was interviewing her was saying, you know, will your parents please adopt me?
Ha ha, you know.
But it's that coziness between the media and the politicians, which is really absurd.
So, how can you ever function in a society?
You're never going to be able to.
You know, if you want to go golfing with the president, you're never going to be able to really criticize him exactly.
Yeah.
And so just like we have those incredible dinners that they do every year, the White House throws this ridiculous dinner and all the press people come and they make jokes and they make films and all this stuff.
You know, I understand encouraging relationships between politicians and the media, but it's gotten beyond the beyond.
Even Tom Brokaw, okay, who is like, you know, a hardcore news guy, NBC, member of Bilderberg even.
And he comes out and says, you know, it's looking bad.
It's looking bad.
It's a piece of candy, yeah.
It's like, you know, the Kardashians and JLo are at the White House dinner parties.
I mean, come on, this is getting.
This is problematic.
Well, you know, press, what is it, the Freedom of the Press Index?
It came out.
The United States has dropped quite a bit in the Freedom of the Press Index.
We're down at like 39.
Yes.
That's pretty far down.
Reporters Without Borders puts that out.
And it's really interesting to see we're so low.
And we just can't keep a republic.
You can't keep a free society functioning without it.
So that's why people like you are.
Are so needed.
So, what else are you doing?
What else are you digging into besides the Secret Space Conference?
Well, right now, the Dark Journalists show, you know, we've been working on some really fascinating issues.
We just had a show go out about Jade Helm, which I think is very important.
This is a military exercise that's been carried out in four states, the largest military exercise on American soil.
And no good press coverage of it, unfortunately.
I know, that's crazy.
You can only hear it on Alex Jones' show, and then a lot of the people.
Don't take it seriously.
Won't take it seriously, yeah.
Well, and it's fascinating because, of course, that's a cycle that feeds itself too because, you know, the mainstream media won't talk about it.
Alternative media, certain aspects of it start to freak out about it and go too far, but nobody knows what the real truth is.
So this is the weird polarization that we're seeing.
That gets back to your different segments that you were talking about at the beginning.
Yeah, and I think what you can do with this look, it's very simple.
Texas legislators.
The governor of Texas came out and said, We want to observe the troop movements now.
That's the power of the alternative media.
These guys heard about it and they said, I'm the governor.
I want to watch what's going on here.
And a lot of the things about Jade Helm are unusual.
They didn't have any official release for the public.
The logo got out and it was a very mysterious logo that had a lot of people questioning it.
But it's this kind of secrecy around these things.
Well, what are they doing?
What is it supposed to be?
Well, the idea, the.
Basically, the idea is that it's supposed to be training for the types of wars that they've been fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.
But unfortunately, there's not a lot of desert in the part of Texas that they're doing it in or in the other Western states.
So that doesn't really add up so well.
But certainly, that kind of massive military exercise, there should be more information about it.
There should be more coverage on it.
And, you know, we don't want to blow their cover if they're up to doing maneuvers.
But if you're going to have, you know, basically tanks and helicopters operating in normal.
Public land, then you're going to have to spill your beans about what you're up to.
A little bit.
People want to know what you're doing.
Is it, I mean, is the military running the country now?
What's going on here?
So I think it's legitimate.
And a lot of people say, oh, Jade Helm, you know, it's an internet myth.
These people are freaking out about it.
And they made, in the, I found this fascinating.
In the press, they made fun of the governor for bringing up the whole topic.
You know, I mean, it's, he's the governor's thing.
Of him.
You see, that gets back to the fact that they make fun of somebody for wanting to know what's going on.
Yeah.
And that is ridiculous.
If there's one thing that we need to change, you cannot make fun of people for trying to find the truth and trying to make things better.
So if the governor is the one that leads the state, why would he be made fun of for trying to understand what's going on in his state?
Well, that's a fascinating thing.
Yeah, you have the same problem with chemtrails or geoengineering.
Where people see these trails everywhere.
They're very different from an airplane's comm trail, which is the regular gas that lets out and the condensation trail that hits.
So, what happens is people have been taking photographs of this, observing it.
In certain areas where it happens, they notice certain types of toxic metals that go up.
So, whatever it is, by the way, this is a worldwide thing that's going on, but that's not talked about.
It's ultimately untouchable in the media, which is absurd because everybody knows that it's happening.
Well, if they're photographing it and people are questioning it, what is going on?
Why would a good journalist not want to find the truth and figure it out?
Truth Behind Chemtrails00:05:41
I'll tell you, because his editorial director told him he can't.
I know.
I'm sure that's the reason.
But my point is that just shows what we said before about the freedom of the press.
Absolutely.
And the freedom of the press index, so how we dropped so far.
And the scary part is I hope we don't keep dropping farther because it reminds me of Afghanistan, where the Taliban was ruling Afghanistan.
They showed him on television and he was saying they still have control.
He was being videoed and he was on the Afghanistan television saying that they still have control of the government, but the United States Army was two blocks away taking over the whole city.
So it was just he was lying.
There was another guy like that who's really famous.
His name was Baghdad Bob.
And he used to give press conferences in Iraq when we were like bombing the heck out of it.
Actually, some of the bombings were shaking his press conference, and he was still like, We're doing fine.
We drove the Americans out.
So that is state control TV.
I mean, that's what it could happen.
Yeah, we're in control.
Meanwhile, they're storming your camp.
Just turn it off quick.
So, what's going to happen in a situation like that is these guys, as long as they're being paid, they'll tow the company line.
But public pressure is very important.
And one of the things that I've noticed lately, which is a real result.
Of alternative media pressure, which is aspartame got removed from Diet Pepsi.
Now, you might say, What's up with that?
You know, why is that a big news story?
Well, aspartame was developed by a company.
Donald Rumsfeld was actually the CEO of the company before he became defense secretary.
And it was an alternative to sugar.
And it had incredible studies around it that it was cancer causing, et cetera.
And somehow they sort of rifled this thing through the FDA.
And aspartame got in everybody's sight.
Well, the FDA turned it down multiple times, didn't they?
Say it was cancer or whatever.
And then somehow it got.
Through, anyways.
Somehow it got through.
But of course, the Reagan and Bush administrations were very close with Rumsfeld, so I'm not too surprised.
There was a lot of control there.
But they took it out, they removed it, and their official version was not because it's cancer causing, but because the public's impression of it is that it's bad.
And all of these news stories came out and said, why Pepsi's decision is so bad.
They're bowing to public pressure.
It's like, can we get real about this?
And there's this new thing I think that's going on in the media where they're saying, hey, we have to go where the science leads us.
The science.
Well, if the science is bought and paid for, especially on aspartame, where there's tons of studies in the opposite direction, then obviously, you know, we need something beyond what you call science.
Well, yeah, the science should do it, but it should be clean science and the real.
It's back to the truth again.
Yeah, it has to be the real deal.
What happens very often Monsanto, for example, was the target of this study where part of their Roundup was causing the destruction of the bee colony.
And this was really fascinating.
Yeah, there is a big B issue.
Yes, and it is very important.
What can become important to our food chain?
Yes.
But Monsanto, interestingly enough, bought the company that did the anti study.
And that was the end of that.
They snuffed up the company.
They bought the company.
So this is the nature of the problem.
So we're in the.
And there's always going to be problems like this, but that's why you need the alternative media.
Yeah, well, it is.
It's whenever you get too top heavy in one direction or another, you know, they talk about the 1%.
That's extremely dangerous to have that much power concentrated in one spot.
And it's the same thing with the corporations.
If they have that many friends in the political scene, they can get away with anything.
But the aspartame part shows that the public pressure made them take it out.
It makes a difference.
Yeah, absolutely.
And that is the alternative media because the mainstream media didn't give a damn about it.
Well, more people are listening and watching alternative media than they are regular media now, based on.
I mean, you have to look and see what stat you're looking at.
No, the numbers have grown dramatically.
In the last two years, incredibly.
And I think a lot of that has to do with, you know, people can really have the throughput now to get video.
And I think that makes a big difference.
People just want the truth and they don't, it's not funny.
They want to know what the truth is.
And there's nothing that you should be ashamed of for wanting to know the truth.
It's just so obvious.
But how can people get more of, see more of your work and see your, because you do so many great shows.
You do what, about a show every couple weeks?
Yes.
Yeah, we're doing two shows a month.
We're probably going up to three shows a month shortly, but they're really in depth.
You know, some of those interviews are three hours long, and they go pretty hardcore into the subject that we'll get the expert talking about.
And we have guests like Catherine Austin Fitz, like Jim Mars, who's a best selling author, and Defense Minister Paul Hellier came on the show.
And he's a Canadian that's like the Vice President of Canada came on the show and talked about this stuff.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's basically Deputy Prime Minister.
And He basically was saying, you know, not only is he very hardcore about the financial issues, and he was incensed about TPP and a lot of the things that went down with that Trans Pacific Partnership deal, and some of the deals that are going through Canada, which, you know, they're giving up their sovereignty to these, you know, kind of multinational corporations in these deals.
Public Money For Private Space00:04:45
And one of the things that he pointed out, though, which I think was very important, was that these politicians, Need the pressure because they need the public support because they can't do anything on their own.
They're in a weakened position.
That's exactly why it's important for people to be getting the truth.
You get a better government when there's public pressure because then the politicians have the power to do and face off against these financial powers that they're holding to.
Good people getting into Congress can't do anything unless the people aren't aware of what's really going on.
It just doesn't work.
Well, they become, I think the public becomes.
More knowledgeable, more engaged when it's something that directly impacts them.
And this is why it's a challenge when you say, oh, the secret space program, an average person on the street will be like, how does that impact me?
But when they understand that the finances are being drained out of the public budget to support this thing that is largely going to be in the hands of private corporations working in space, developing a whole infrastructure up there with public money, then it might start to occur to them that their children's future has been sabotaged.
And that's a very important.
And where are the benefits going to go?
Is it going to go to our country?
Is it going to go to just wherever the wealthy live?
I mean, that's why there needs to be transparency.
Are our children going to benefit from this?
Or is it just going to be China that takes over the world?
I mean, I don't know.
Right.
Yeah, absolutely.
And, well, like we were talking about, China and India have developed very robust financial programs to funnel money into space, also.
So, a lot of things are going on up there.
And what about the whole idea about space weapons?
I mean, you know, we had Star Wars in the 80s, and that was Reagan's program to put satellites out there, like Zap missiles that were coming in.
But largely, we decided to retreat on paper from the idea of space weapons.
But here we go again with the secret space program developing a whole different infrastructure.
So, I think the emphasis should be, you know, the idea of this breakaway civilization.
They have the ability to funnel this money through the deep black budget out of programs like NASA that have been paid into with our public funds.
And what is it that they're doing?
Certainly, there's a lot of whistleblower testimony that they have large scale infrastructure out there and very advanced technology, and the public has nothing to do with it and certainly doesn't benefit from it.
So, those are the hardcore issues.
And I think in the Secret Space Program Conference and on the Dark Journalist Show, those are the things we go after.
And I think that's.
That's the kind of information that can really make an impact in society.
Because when average people get that information, they're no longer living in that day to day bubble, nine to five bubble, go to work.
And where else are you going to get this information?
And worst case, you're going to come out having more knowledge on topics that you weren't exposed to before.
And I'm excited.
I'm going.
I'm going.
I want to hear people talk.
Yeah.
So, how can people get tickets if they want to go?
You can go to the secret space program.org website, and there are right now early tickets available at the best price and a very inexpensive for two day conference.
It's right outside of Austin, which is a fantastic country, very accessible, you know, 20 minutes from the airport.
I mean, this is going to be one heck of a weekend, and I really encourage everyone to go because not only do you have the amazing speakers who've spent, you know, years studying this, but you also get The theme there that we need to be looking at, which is what happens with all the stuff being secret?
Why are these people so secretive?
What is the deal with the advanced technology?
Could it have a big impact on our world, which is oil dominated?
Well, is some of this secret technology far beyond the oil economy and they don't want to share that with the public because it would crash all their profits?
I mean, we have to answer these questions because I think that's going to set the tone for where the country goes in the next decade.
And are we just going to show up one day and have robots flipping burgers and driverless?
Cabs and all that?
Or are we going to understand where this whole wave is coming from?
I think it's very important as citizens in the country and really of the globe to understand what the ruling powers are doing.
And you can only get that with the alternative media, in my opinion, now.
Inside Majestic Twelve Secrets00:01:59
Well, yeah, fascinating.
Okay, well, I'll have your information up on my website so that people can know how to get there.
And I'll make a link to the space conference and also to your website where they can get to your shows, which are absolutely fascinating.
I appreciate that.
Well, and even like the Kennedy one that I just watched, you interviewed the Nixon, the Watergate.
Yes.
Lawyer.
Douglas Caddy.
He was the Watergate lawyer, and he came forward with some amazing revelations.
And we talked.
That is a three hour interview.
And they actually picked it up on Coast to Coast AM radio and did a special on it because he dropped some amazing revelations in that interview.
And he wanted to talk to you, from what I understand.
He approached you and said, I really want to bring this information forward.
He did.
And I thought it was a very brave thing to do.
And this is a guy who's really shown up in history, walking.
Into the Watergate scandal the way he did, and knowing E. Howard Hunt, who was a CIA super spy, often associated with CIA assassination programs and really deep black projects.
So, for Caddy to have all this knowledge and to come forward, I think, at this point after he's retired, this point in his life, and to really share these things, which really have a lot to do with what we've been talking about today about Majestic 12 and some of that breakaway technology.
And some of the things that have been done on the inside about that.
I think this is fascinating, and I'd like to see more people of his caliber coming forward.
And it's very encouraging when they do.
And certainly, I was impressed with what he had to say.
Well, I think that's great.
That's wonderful.
Well, thank you so much for joining us today, Daniel.
And like I said, I'll have all your information up on my webpage.