Investigative Researcher/Writer PETER ROBBINS- The Mystery of the Moon, Mars & UFOs

LEGENDARY UFO Investigative Researcher/Writer PETER ROBBINS- The Mystery of the Moon, Anomolies On MArs, And UFOs Seen through History. Gods, Demons, angels. Are they all one in the same thing? In This Exclusive 1-1 Filmed at the Largest ufo conference in the world, "Contact in the Desert"- you will be thrust into the world of the unknown- kick back and relax. Its going to get interesting...

LINK THREAD—https://allmylinks.com/total-disclosure
 
Subscribe to the channel on YouTube—— www.youtube.com/@totaldisclosure
 
Support TY and TDP Studios directly VIA PayPal (No FEES)— https://www.paypal.me/TDPstudios767?locale.x=en_US
 
YOUTUBE MEMBER—-https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCy2Cra7aLAAMVxkA9rSYCxg/join
 
PATREON MEMBER—https://www.patreon.com/Total_Disclosure?
fan_landing=true&view_as=public


Follow On X—- Www.X.com/@DisclosurePod


Instagram—- www.instagram.com/DisclosurePod


Facebook----Facebook.com/@ty.totaldisclosure


EDITED BY KARI LINDSAY(SPOOKY)—www.x.com/@firesoftruth


CONTACT TDP DIRECTLY to inquire about being a guest on the program. [e-mail] for details 

THIS IS A TDP STUDIO's Production. 


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/total-disclosure-podcast--5975113/support.

CONTACT TDP DIRECTLY For Collaboration, Use of Segments/clips, or any other media produced by “TDP” —[e-mail]

Special Thank you to all of our PODCAST/YouTube Channel Members for your continued support, and dedication to seeking the truth, together. We can’t do this WITHOUT YOU!

-COPYRIGHT-2020-

Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Total Disclosure Podcast Copyright 2020 and … segments, early access to interviews, and a yearly gift autographed by yours truly!thank you in advance now, Let's explore the unknown together! =============================================================================

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:10):
Testing one two three four.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Okay testing one two three four, where both of our
audios are coming in clean levels are good. Today on
total disclosure, we're at contact in the desert. I'm super
excited to be here, and today we're joined by a
highly respected voice in the world of UFO research, a
man whose work has helped shape the modern disclosure on

(00:34):
government secrecy, non human intelligence, and the mysteries just beyond
our reach. Peter Robbins is a veteran investigative writer, author,
and lecturer best known for his decades of meticulous research
into the UFO phenomenon and the powerful institutions that keep
secrets from the public eye. From his co authored work

(00:55):
Left at Eastgate examining the infamous Randelson Forrest incident, who
is powerful critiques of disinformation in the UFO field, Peter
brings a depth of knowledge and credibility you can match. Ay,
we're diving into one of the most compelling controversial topics
in ufology, the move.

Speaker 3 (01:12):
The secrets of Mars all of it.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
Is it simply a lifeless satellite like they say?

Speaker 3 (01:17):
Or is there more to the story.

Speaker 2 (01:18):
Could NASA be hiding what they truly have discovered during
the Apollo missions, or astronauts witness to unknown crafts or
artificial structures that defy explanation.

Speaker 3 (01:27):
I want to welcome my friend Peter Robbins. Thank you, sir.

Speaker 1 (01:30):
What pleasure to be here.

Speaker 3 (01:31):
Pleasure.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
So I've always been I've always been fascinated with with
with NASA the Apollo missions because I think it's it
really is. Our greatest achievement as a species is to
leave our planet and step foot on a celestial body

(01:52):
that is not our own, that takes serious advancement. But
why are they hiding what's really up there? Or how
is it that the Moon became classified in the first place.

Speaker 1 (02:05):
I can't tell you definitively because I don't know, But
based on my time and research, I guess I can
make better educated guesses than a lot of folks. And
the dynamic is much the same as what we see
in the historic narrative of the UFO cover up going
back to nineteen forty seven officially, which is those people

(02:27):
in power, the folks that move the chess pieces around
that determine what happens. See, this is potentially uncontrollable in
terms of the results of the information released. Study after
study has been done, many of them made public on
the possible implications of full disclosure, sociologically, theologically, in terms

(02:51):
of world economies, in terms of our technologies. At the
heart of it are a series of hardcore lies and
sometimes lies biomission. We can not tell the truth as
easily by simply not stating what is the important central
fact withholding information can be as equally devastating to the

(03:12):
truth and just lying about it. So for a moment,
let's put ourselves in the place of some of these
secret keepers. Our earliest missions to the moon, very simple,
certain locations and back we go. And then Mars. NASA
has relied on Hasselblad optical technology, absolutely terrific optics, wonderful cameras,

(03:36):
and I have no idea of the number, but certainly
some hundreds of thousands of photographs have been cataloged. Let's
think for a moment of the job of a certain
caduret of people who work for NASA who are first
have the security clearance to review these photos looking for

(04:00):
problematic anomalies, things that simply shouldn't be there. And I'm
talking about in real human terms, spending X number of
minutes on a very fine first class eight x ten
glossy photograph with a ten power loop and just looking
like a jeweler's loop, because if it's much larger magnification,

(04:22):
it will be distorted. And the time and the attention
that it takes to do that and cover every micrometer,
things are going to be glossed over. Sometimes folks mean, well,
but you attired at the end of the day. And first,
it's an impossible job, as would be like declassifying our

(04:43):
tens and tens and tens of millions of secrets. We
don't have the human power to do it. And in
the course of the decades, surprising number of problematic images
have been released and NASA's policy is simply either never
to comment on them or it's a point I'll be
making in my presentation tomorrow. A very understandable human condition

(05:06):
we call paradolia, right, which is that tendency of us
folks not just to see, but to want to see
that profile on the mountainside, a recognizable image on a
tortilla chip, you know, a dog barking in the wood.

Speaker 3 (05:21):
Green Jesus in a cloud.

Speaker 1 (05:23):
Clouds definitely right, and more often than not they are
just that. But there's a point where logic, probability and chance, organization,
random meetings, you go into a territory beyond it where
it really might be what it appears to be.

Speaker 2 (05:45):
Right, It's almost easier for it to be the more
outrageous of the claims, because then the debt, the the
de bunkings are either just not commenting like you said,
or you know, just talking it up.

Speaker 3 (06:00):
To some sort of psychiatric.

Speaker 1 (06:04):
Trick of the eye belonging to believe.

Speaker 2 (06:06):
Also, so exactly that and that, and I have a
real problem with some of this stuff because you know,
it's almost like putting a classification on top of a
snail and saying that we have no we can't know
that snails exist. If there are structures and and there
are remnants of even if it's inhabited or not. If

(06:27):
there is some sort of dark side of the moon
structural city or something, this would the implication of that
would change human history.

Speaker 1 (06:38):
And not only is that the case, but it's not
just on the dark side of the moon.

Speaker 2 (06:43):
Right, People like Ingoswana and remote viewers have been looking
at the moon.

Speaker 3 (06:46):
And then why haven't we been back.

Speaker 2 (06:47):
Since the sixties, seventies, seventies, I'm sorry, Yeah, there's a
lot of questions there and why we know that NASA
has been caught air brushing photos.

Speaker 1 (06:57):
You bring up a very interesting point. When I began
to get involved in this project, and for me, my
professional life has been a series of ongoing self assigned projects.
What determines them is my level of interest as an
independent researcher. You know, in the equivalent and you're doing,
you follow that divining rod of your own interest and

(07:19):
where dips you follow. And with the exception of the
world of UFO abduction studies, which is where I began,
where I keep coming back to, and the talk that
I would have done on Thursday had my flight arrived
on to.

Speaker 3 (07:35):
Come on airlines get it together.

Speaker 1 (07:38):
This subject, although not directly you know, caddying cornered into
UFOs is of course, the implications are obvious. And one
of the things that has led me into is studying
aerial photographs of an ancient city from three thousand years

(07:58):
old in Iraq Or is an extraordinary decayed city in
the mountains in Peru that predates Machu Pichu. And you
look at these aerial photographs, and then you look at
certain photographs of Moon and Mars and it seems to
be the exact same configuration, the same deterioration, the same organization.

(08:25):
When I show these things, I have to say, I'm
not a geologist. I don't know. You know how rock
wears down over millions of years? Can it mimic these
organized structures? We're certainly not talking about a surface made
of crystals that grows at right angles and that kind
of thing. But my feeling is the most logical, the

(08:52):
most boring, the most mundane explanation for a mystery is
often what it is. But it's not very sexy, it's
not very exotic, and it's it's a process that a
lot of folks would rather not go through. My feeling

(09:13):
is kind of inspired when I was twelve years old
by Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes deductive reasoning. You begin with
the most mundane explanation, you explore it fully. If it
doesn't pan out, you take one step up to the
second most boring explanation, and you work your way through.
If you go through logically all of these possibilities and

(09:35):
you don't have an answer, that's when things get exciting,
and when you can proceed with relative confidence that you're
really in unexplored territory, as opposed to just, oh my gosh,
you know, this might just be and I've got to
examine it like that. Gosh, isn't it exciting being me
doing what I do?

Speaker 2 (09:55):
I oftentimes I've wondered, are these crowds, are these UFOs?
Are they the remnants of either a loss civilization, or
are they time travelers from the future?

Speaker 3 (10:12):
And honestly, I don't think at this point it matters.

Speaker 2 (10:17):
First is getting the admission and the admission that it's
real and that they are real, and if that comes
with you know, also if on the day of disclosure,
you know, we're not alone. And by the way, on
the backside of the moon, there's a city, and there's
also on Mars, and we just you know, we had
to do it for national security. Okay, you know what,

(10:38):
Let's move forward and let's let's start building on that.

Speaker 3 (10:41):
What do you think do you think the world is
ready for this?

Speaker 1 (10:45):
That is a great question, and I've debated it formally
with colleagues for some time. Many of us who have
been in the field for years, you know, we're surrounded
by like minded people who have their own point of feeling.
I am ready personally for this abstract concept of disclosure,

(11:05):
which I think is more process, although who knows, someday
there may be that official announcement by leaders around the world.
It's happening right now, it's happening every day, and it's
progressing three seven nine people at a time, one country,
one state, the other. I have the same curiosity you

(11:28):
do in terms of if, and I'll paraphrase the late
great Stanton Friedman here, the question is not, are these
things that we're talking about, these anomalous formations seemingly that
look unnatural and certain objects that our rovers are literally

(11:53):
coming right up through and seeing on Mars is Are
these things fifty years old or fifty million years old?

Speaker 3 (12:05):
Right?

Speaker 1 (12:06):
It's very I'm not equipped to know how one would
date them unless there are series of photos going back
fifty years where there have been passes over, say, the
same part of the moon, and if one studied them together,
one might see, oh, they added a wing onto this
house or something the equivalent. But I'm not aware of

(12:27):
anybody who has access to that level of materials.

Speaker 2 (12:30):
I don't know if you saw this, but there was
a structure on Mars that it looked you know how
right angles don't occur in nature, most you know is
a general rule of them. Right angles don't occur in naturally.
But there was this perfect square on Mars. And after

(12:55):
Joe Rogan started talking about it and put light shed
light on it, then when people started looking at it again,
it seemed someone had eroded it to make it look
less interesting.

Speaker 3 (13:08):
So again, who who do you think?

Speaker 2 (13:11):
Because NASA is obviously reporting to somebody, NASA is being
overseen by, whether it's an intelligence agency, the cabal, whatever
you want to call it.

Speaker 3 (13:22):
Again, why I.

Speaker 2 (13:26):
Cannot understand unless the secret was so paradigm shifting that
maybe the the occupants of these UFOs are maybe they
had some hand in creating us. And you know they
were from Mars and a cataclysm happened. There's evidence of
a huge scar on Mars. So what if our life
started there and had to come here but they didn't

(13:49):
want us to know?

Speaker 3 (13:52):
Have you? Do you think about these things?

Speaker 1 (13:53):
In this area of study? One of the conundrums is
anyone you, myself, you, somebody off the street, or somebody
with fifty years experience can say it's my proposition that
X is Y and that this happened and x number

(14:14):
of years ago and this amount of light years and
under this proved me wrong. Also, uphology is not like
legal or medical practice, where if you act in appropriately,
the bar association or the AMA will suspend your license.

(14:35):
Right you know, oh gee, you weren't accurate about your predicted.

Speaker 2 (14:45):
I think people in this community, the UFO world, they're
very They don't want to be wrong because they think
that will damage everything else that they've said. So they
it's almost like they avoid being wrong, like it's the plague.

Speaker 3 (15:00):
What we're dealing with here is.

Speaker 2 (15:01):
One of the most complex. The U and UFO and
UAP stands for we don't know right. So I think
we need to be humble with with being able to
be wrong and move on when the data suggests it.

Speaker 1 (15:14):
I couldn't agree with you more and for me personally,
if I do make an error, I make a point
as much as the point I was trying to make
of having made the error in public, it's kind of
poignant that I've been acknowledged for that. I think over

(15:37):
acknowledged when one would think or hope that most people
do admit to errors, but especially in our culture, and
never more than now. Real men don't apologize, you know,
making mistakes and admitting it's for sissies, and people forget.
I'm a tough guy. I'll get through this somehow. People

(15:58):
forget that I through the pooch. But you asked it
a question. As far as origins, it may be any
and all. I think the most romantic notion for me
is time travelers from our future. It's a shape of
science fiction. It's such an exciting, complex possibility. I discount

(16:20):
it almost completely, and of course I can be completely wrong.
It's ironic that over the decades the extra terrestrial hypothesis
has become like the most conservative one. Interdimensionals a presence
that's always been with us. I have very little doubt
that there are locations below bodies of water and deep

(16:43):
within the Earth that are basis, for lack of a
better term, we're also probably dealing with a myriad of
other intelligences like our human race. It's a pretty big
tent of types and tendencies, many of If we're correct
in our basic assumption that we are being sharing our

(17:06):
space visiting visited by other intelligences, they may again be
as varied as we are in terms of temperament and goals.
Some of them may be you know, welcome the space brothers,
kind of we want to bring you into what we'll
call the Federation, or absolute pathological monsters who understandably feel

(17:32):
that as the dominant species on this little planet, which
may be more significant and important to numbers of them
than we imagine. They may have a pre existing relationship
with this little body of spec shooting through cosmos of
thirty thousand miles an hour, predating ours. I sometimes think,

(17:53):
perhaps in the spirit that we routinely now do gene
splicing and other advanced technique crisper, that perhaps were somebody's
master's project gone horribly long, and they've come back to
correct it and get a better grade. Stanton Friedman used
to joke that Earth is where they sent people from

(18:14):
other planets. The regions go to prison. Yea, you stay
there for nineteen years and you realize how good you
had it here. And I'm only half joking all of
this stuff. You know, we have to be able to
joke about because it is so deadly serious. But to
keep it affused, to keep the pot stirred, to keep
us in the research community, barking and arguing and debating

(18:38):
each other while the hands that move the puppet strings
continue to do it just like conventional politics.

Speaker 2 (18:46):
And I want to round out, you know, because we
have limited time, and I would love to have you
on the actual podcast one day so.

Speaker 3 (18:55):
We could do a long form you know, I'll fly
you into Boston.

Speaker 2 (18:59):
However, one of the cases that really I connected with
when I was younger was.

Speaker 3 (19:05):
The Rendalssom case.

Speaker 2 (19:06):
You've extensively worked in looking into what happened there?

Speaker 3 (19:13):
Would you say that that.

Speaker 2 (19:16):
In your if you could give me the elevator version
of the Renderssom Force case, could what.

Speaker 3 (19:23):
Would you say about it? What would you say occurred
that night?

Speaker 1 (19:26):
Well, those nights, it was a series of two or
three nights. Yes, And we're talking about a period of
time between Christmas and New Year's nineteen eighty, very close
proximity to a major American air base in Suffolk and
a sister base active with the RAF at the time. Yeah.
I spent nine years of my life to the exclusion

(19:49):
of literally everything else, studying, learning, interviewing, traveling back to
the UK, ultimately publishing, ultimately having a book published with
my co author, who had alleged that he was a
military witness to this. The book To Digress for a
Moment did no better and no worse than most of

(20:11):
your books to hear, but in part because it really
had become the most important, significant, published, talked about case
in the history of the United Kingdom. And by chance
it was published after ten years in the UK in

(20:33):
June of nineteen ninety seven, the fiftieth anniversary of everything.
It became a smash top ten bestseller. Wow, and it
brought my co author and I on a one month
fourteen city speaking tour. And I think I've been back
about twenty times since. But the case is real. There

(20:56):
are very good first hand witnesses, military and civilian. There's
a cadre of writers and researchers that have delved into
this over the decades. And I continued on for another
fifteen years or so, at which point my former co
author's account began to fall apart and then disintegrated. He

(21:21):
was in the Air Force, he was on location, he
was deployed in the forest that night. But the story
was confabulated, borrowed, and he was a brilliant narcissist sociopath And.

Speaker 3 (21:37):
Unfortunately they come with the territory.

Speaker 1 (21:39):
Well, I joke with people sometimes that if I've ever
been fooled to that degree by anyone else in my life,
I have no idea, because they were that good at it.
And for me professionally, it was a terrible hit, but
I dealt with it by telling the truth about what
had happened and lost a paramount of credibility for a

(22:03):
while before I gained it back again the case itself.
At this point, after such an immersion in one particular
series of events, I am still not sure whether it
was a genuine in contact event with extraterrestrials interdimensionals, whether

(22:29):
or not there was an aspect of it that was
a psio that men involved were processed to believe, to think,
to feel that X had happened, or that it had happened,
and that Her Majesty's government went great lengths for many

(22:52):
years saying that whatever it was, and this is a
direct quote, it was of no defense significance, which is
incredibly arrogant. But you don't know what you're talking about.

Speaker 2 (23:02):
And when Bentwaters, I mean that's a stronghold, or you
know that that area and one of the large, like
you said, one of the largest bases, and you know
is rumored that there was nuclear nuclear with more than rumors.

Speaker 1 (23:20):
Yeah, what had happened was by virtual or treaty with
the UK at the time, we were not supposed to
have any nuclear ordinance in the UK. Not only did
we have it, it was being held in the weapons
storage area at Oria Bentwaters, which is filled with nuclear bunkers.
It's an area that I first looked at through a

(23:42):
fence from several hundred yards away in nineteen eighty eight,
and that many years later, after the base was decommissioned,
I had an opportunity to get into and go into
and it was quite an unforgettable day for me. We
have verification now from officials or lack of denial, that
we had a lot of nuclear ordinance there at that pace.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
So whatever John Burrows and Peniston, whatever they see, whether
you know, whether it's it's again, I get the who
I think will come. So, whether they're from the future,
from the past, they're the grays, the whatever, it doesn't
whatever happened to John Burrows and Peniston, it was real

(24:27):
enough to them where there were actual effects and then
the the The account is very similar with Okay, there's
physiological effects in relation to nuclear technology, so it checks
all the boxes in its military. So it's you know,

(24:49):
you we tend to give military and veterans like you know.

Speaker 1 (24:53):
A bit of a law enforcement witness.

Speaker 2 (24:57):
Right, They're they're they're a little bit more credible than
just your average Joe on the street, just because the
government again does train these people to be observant.

Speaker 1 (25:04):
Or their local police departments.

Speaker 3 (25:06):
Right, yes, exactly.

Speaker 2 (25:08):
So again, what do you think the connection is there?
Because if if if I was a betting man and
there was an apocalyptic scenario, it would happen at our
nuclear sites.

Speaker 3 (25:25):
Right, And isn't it odd that these UFOs, what if they.

Speaker 2 (25:28):
Are from the future coming back to stop or at
least observe something that went wrong at one of these sites,
they seem to be visiting.

Speaker 3 (25:38):
All of them.

Speaker 1 (25:39):
Well, again, anything is possible, but I tend to downplay
that idea. Let's just sub shoot regular alien life forms
as opposed to time travelers who again have some kind
of pre existing relationship with this mass. That's interest, We

(26:05):
the dominant species, are the biggest threat to that we
are our own worst enemy, and that if we continue
to go as we are, And now there seems to
be a national mandate to full speed ahead and crash
course to non renewables and more nuclear energy. I think, well,

(26:30):
I can tell you for a fact that for many
years I believed that John Burrows and Jim Penison that
they had been misled, that they had been affused, because
that's what my co author felt, and I had come
to have cause to believe him. And when his case

(26:52):
really fell apart as an individual, it was then that
I realized that John and Jim, to the best of
their knowledge, we're not only telling the truth, but we're
very courageous in doing so. And then there's Deputy based
Commander Charles Eye halt right his life I helped to

(27:15):
make a little less pleasant for about twenty years. And
when this fell apart, I contacted him to apologize and
his response was, essentially, either you and Larry conspired to
create this hoax. And when it started to fall apart,

(27:36):
you know, like a rat leaving a sinking ship, you
deserted your buddy or nobody in upology has been played.
You were so naive, you were so fooled that it's
like record breaking. And I said, let me assure you.
It was the second two months ago. I sat down
with Charles Halt for the first time in thirty years.

Speaker 2 (27:57):
Wow.

Speaker 1 (27:58):
And we we were in New Jersey at a small
UFO conference, but we talked it out and his wife
had died about six weeks before. Charles friends call him Chuck,
now I do too. He was a gentleman. I always
thought he was. He was heroic in his own way.

(28:20):
Deputy based commanders are essentially commanders for day to day operation.
This fell to him, the heat fell to him, the
bad publicity fell to him. He was doing his best
to manage an emergency situation at a major American air
base and I was a bit of a pest thinking
I was muckraking journalist. And Charles was again very gracious

(28:46):
in the way that he accepted my apology. Again, it's
a very important case. I have removed myself from it.
Plenty of other places for me to work and look.
And the impact for me was I didn't I was
invited to speak at a conference in England for five
years and tell people realize what had happened, that I

(29:08):
had done my best to turn things around. And I've
been back a couple of times in the last few years.

Speaker 3 (29:13):
Well, that recording of Charles I mean, that's.

Speaker 1 (29:18):
The real deal. It comes from He's coming tortoise.

Speaker 2 (29:31):
Now.

Speaker 4 (29:32):
I don't want.

Speaker 3 (29:39):
It.

Speaker 2 (29:39):
Gives me the chills listening to it because it's you
don't military men again, they conduct themselves a certain way.

Speaker 1 (29:46):
Hear that. Not only that you not only hear the
stress in the voices, but it's so well documented in
terms of we know every man that he was out
there with. Their voices are recognizable, we know who they are.
For the record, if you read left it es Gate,
the first hand account of the Rendelssohn forest story. The

(30:08):
thing that was the most shattering for me in all
my research was on our very first research trip there,
which I thought would be our only one. I thought
it would be done in a year or two, not
six miles from the site of the events that Larry
alleges that he was involved in. On our very first
night of our very first visit to the locale, we

(30:31):
had a multiple UFO incident siding that went on for
an hour and a half. At the time, I best
technology was micro cassette recorders, and wherever I went I
had two of them, new batteries tapes ready to go.
I recorded this our reactions for an hour and a half.

(30:53):
I spent several months checking transcribing and then checking this
transcription because because the wind was ripping across the top
of the mic and there's a lot of distortion, and
I knew once we published, you know, I'm the one
that's doing the transcription, and it was so shattering to me.
I mean, we had everything from star sized UFO zigzagging

(31:16):
to fully articulated discs to a disc dropping down into
the rentals from Farce and lighting it up like one
hundred kleag lights. I went into shock, but hyper observant shock,
and everything was recorded. And I realized at that point,
after seven months of working with my co author and
having a number of times where there were problems, but

(31:38):
I was able to chalk it off to PTSD and
possibly mucked around with the military or by them, as
opposed to being a pathological liar and an alcoholic and
looking to be famous for something. You know, I can
see that now, But at that point, we're having this
happen in front of us, right and I realize, you

(32:00):
know what, You've either got to take this guy's word
for it or not, and if you do, you'll understand
you didn't have PTSD. But you read a few papers
on it. It fits your idea of it. You know,
all of a sudden you're an authority on it. And
it was so convincing to me that it was, you know,

(32:20):
another fifteen years that it caught up. But again the
fact is what happened there was of defense significance. It
was a tremendous human significance. And again there are good
people working on it now. You should talk to Nick
Pope about it also because he's in that unique position

(32:40):
of having gone from an official in the Ministry Defense
to having co written a book on the events with
Jim and John, and I realize now it's a much
more valuable and important way than it was when I
wrote a book taking a d and Nick being Nick

(33:04):
is very gracious and accepting my apology when things came
to shove.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
Well, I I again, I want to say I've told
you this off air, But I think guys like me
and the newer people into this that are entering the
field in different you know ways and media platforms, investigative aspects,
citizen journalism, we have very big shoes to fill with

(33:31):
with how you guys have taken the ball to the
twenty yard line. And now we get to across the
finish line, and you know, I think you got again.

Speaker 3 (33:40):
Like I said, we have.

Speaker 2 (33:41):
We're standing on the shoulders of giants, like guys like
Stan Friedman, like yourself.

Speaker 3 (33:44):
Like Steve Bassett, Bob Salis, you know, Bob Jacobs.

Speaker 2 (33:49):
All these people have worked tirelessly for the better part
of their lives trying to get disclosure.

Speaker 3 (33:57):
And like I.

Speaker 2 (33:58):
Truly, I don't know if it will from a president
standing at a podium, but it might come from citizen journalists,
citizen scientists working together and putting the pressure.

Speaker 3 (34:09):
Because we the people, we own this land. The government
just works for us.

Speaker 1 (34:14):
You've got it. So but many of us have drank
that kool aid, idealize and revere our so called leaders. Yes,
and many of them have forgotten that they work for us.

Speaker 3 (34:31):
Yeah, I don't think they.

Speaker 2 (34:34):
I don't think George Washington had career bureaucrats in mind
when they were creating this nation. So that was never
supposed to be a thing. You're supposed to do your
time in government and then go back to the sector
that you were in before and enjoy yourself. Somewhere along
the line, people were like Oh, this is a cushy job,
and I get a pension. So that's where the problem lies.

Speaker 1 (34:55):
You're absolutely right.

Speaker 3 (34:56):
That's where the problem was meant to be a career.

Speaker 1 (34:59):
It was meant to the mark of service and of
a limited duration.

Speaker 3 (35:04):
Yes, so I truly.

Speaker 2 (35:06):
And you know, Congressman Burchett is a good friend of mine,
and he supports term limits. And he's a guy who
has enough to benefit from if he could just keep
his position for the rest of his life. Right, So
I like that, And again I want to I'd love
to have young, longer form podcasts. You are such a
wealth and knowledge and the rendless forest. I just want
to ask you this, the Rundoers Forest. It sounds like

(35:29):
you something happened that night, beyond a reasonable.

Speaker 1 (35:32):
Doubt in trying to put it together after the fact.
When I met Larry in eighty seven, although we met
briefly in eighty four, shortly after he'd come forward this
during the so called Westchester triangle overflights. Originally it came
forward under a pseudonym and then used his own name.

(35:55):
I think what may have happened is that there was
an event on the third night. Larry maintained that there
were over forty men involved surrounding a craft, not a
single one of whom has come forward to verify it,
except in a very a partial way, and then a
withdrawal and then a complete silence. An another security police

(36:19):
officer named Adrian Bestinza, who was Larry's roommate and who
for personal reasons, made it very clear to him family
exposure and the like, that he was never going to
talk about what happened, and that if Larry wanted to
take his story and put it forward as his own,
it was okay with Adrian. I don't know if that's happened,

(36:41):
but I think it may have. So he had the
story wild as it was, and a personal belief that
it had happened. Also, although he appropriately made a great
many enemies with his lies and deceptions and threats to people,

(37:02):
he may well have had contact experiences as a boy.
Both Bud Hopkins and I extensively interviewed Larry's mother, a
lovely woman, very grounded Boston family who had very very
insistent memories of being on board a craft and memories

(37:23):
of an event or two that she had shared with
Larry when he was younger. So that added complexity. To
the case on somebody that many people want to demonize
and don't want to believe there's a partial truth to it. Unfortunately,
if one reads our book now, there are hundreds of
parts that I'll always be proud of, But even within

(37:45):
a paragraph or sentence by him, there may be an
exaggeration of confabulation or complete life, and unless I was
there to verify it, I can't attest to it. So
it's a non fiction book filled with a fair amount
of fiction.

Speaker 2 (38:02):
Sometimes, like I said, and this is full circle here,
you're humble when you were wrong, and you take responsibility,
and it's time we move past right and we do the.

Speaker 3 (38:12):
Next right thing, and the next right thing and the
next right thing.

Speaker 2 (38:15):
And I don't know if you believe in date, fate
or destiny, but every time I've done, every time I
just do the next right thing, I end up in
the right spot or where I'm supposed to be.

Speaker 3 (38:27):
And that's led me right here to you right now.
And I really want to say thank you for doing this.

Speaker 1 (38:32):
It's a terrific interview. Thank you, thank you, sir.

Speaker 3 (38:34):
So again, I'd love to dive deep into these topics.

Speaker 2 (38:38):
We only have limited time here, but I think we could. Definitely,
I would love to sit down with you.

Speaker 1 (38:44):
Absolutely, I'll be glad to do a show with you.
And when you have time, just go to YouTube type
and meanwhile here on Earth and you will get several
hundred shows that will pop up.

Speaker 2 (38:55):
Yeah, so we'll put the link in the description for
this and I'll put a little QR code that will
bring you right.

Speaker 3 (39:01):
To that website.

Speaker 1 (39:03):
All right, yeah, and let's say in touch and again,
I'm you know you start to chat with me yesterday.
Every time you do a conference, especially like this size,
and somebody comes up high, I'm you know, with the media,
it's like okay, maybe yes, maybe no, And I don't
know what you call the media.

Speaker 2 (39:21):
But so thank you guys for joining us today at
Contact in the Desert.

Speaker 3 (39:25):
I'm here with Peter Robbins.

Speaker 2 (39:26):
He's gonna have to head back to his booth, but
we're gonna get the next person in here and continue
our coverage of Contact in the Desert twenty twenty five
Event Horizon.

Speaker 3 (39:37):
Thank you guys. Make sure I did that. Like, share
and subscribe.

Speaker 2 (39:40):
If you're listening, follow on your favorite podcast platform and
leave us a review. It's free, takes two seconds and
it really helps.

Speaker 3 (39:47):
At that Pesti algorithm. We'll see you next time.

Speaker 4 (40:00):
An Internet, an Internet as independent, independent Internet, and sent it.

Speaker 1 (40:31):
And sent

Speaker 4 (40:36):
And inte