Joining me to discuss the current state of UAP disclosure and current events, such as whistleblower Matthew Brown, is Vinnie Adams. Vinnie is a U.K. based UFO/UAP researcher, with over a decade of research experience. He is the founder of Disclosure Team, a social media platform and podcast covering many aspects of the UFO phenomenon including the latest news, case studies and interviews. Vinnie had appeared at various UFO (UAP) conferences such as the Roswell Incident and Echo Conference in Paris, France. In June 2024 Vinnie appeared in the BBC documentary series 'Paranormal: The Village That Saw Aliens'. Visit Vinnie's YouTube Channel "Disclosure Team" https://youtube.com/@realdisclosureteam
Subscribe, like, and share your thoughts below. ☕️Please help the YT channel grow. SUBSCRIBE, like, comment, and click the YouTube Notification Bell so you don’t miss a show. Thank you! https://www.youtube.com/mysticlounge
HALF LIGHT documentary: https://tubitv.com/movies/678744/half-light
Matthew Brown Interview on Weaponised: https://youtu.be/4n_bRtnIP14?si=qqXLOov7NgMJAvxm
#uap #ufo
Subscribe, like, and share your thoughts below. ☕️Please help the YT channel grow. SUBSCRIBE, like, comment, and click the YouTube Notification Bell so you don’t miss a show. Thank you! https://www.youtube.com/mysticlounge
HALF LIGHT documentary: https://tubitv.com/movies/678744/half-light
Matthew Brown Interview on Weaponised: https://youtu.be/4n_bRtnIP14?si=qqXLOov7NgMJAvxm
#uap #ufo
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Welcome back to Coffee and UFO's everyone, thank you for
joining us tonight. I have a special guest, Vinnie Adams.
He is the host of Disclosure Team. You can find
him on YouTube at Real Disclosure Team and all his
videos at Real Disclosure Team slash videos. He does amazing
interviews with some of the best sources in contemporary UAP
(00:38):
studies and activism and ongoing news. So if you want
to keep up with it, this is the guy that
you want to follow for sure. I'm really excited to
find out a little bit more about Vinnie his background,
how he got into t UAP.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
But before we discuss more with.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Avinny, just a friendly reminder that this podcast is rebroadcast
on the on X network every Thursday night eleven pm
Pacific time, two am Eastern Standard Time on Friday mornings.
If you want to follow the podcast, you can go
to Instagram it's at Coffee and UFO's podcast, and on
(01:17):
X formerly known as Twitter, you can go to at
Paranormal Underscore now and on Blue Sky it's Coffee and
UFO's podcast as well. And of course the old Facebook
page is still there under Mystic Lounge, which I still
post on occasion.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, it's been a little a little on and off.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
With me with the with the podcasting because I, like
I mentioned before, I have a writing project that I'm
kind of focused on.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
So we've got this week.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
Next week we have another episode, and then we may take.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
Off one more week. I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
I'll let you know in social media whether we get
that week filled. I've never written a book before, and
it's like it's it is not easy. It is a challenge,
especially with the ongoing news that's happening. I have to
keep going back and like re editing a chapter because
I'm like.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Oh my god, there's new information.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
But that's okay, that's cool because it's kind of fun
taking the challenge of countering the debunker. So we'll talk
a little bit of that too with Vinnie right now.
Welcome to coffee, new phones, cheers.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
How are you.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
I'm good, Alan, Thank you so much. I'm ready looking
forward to this conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Awesome, me too, man, I'm so glad you came on.
Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Are you a coffee drinker?
Speaker 3 (02:40):
I am very much big coffee drinker. I mean I
say big, it doesn't mean I drink a lot of it.
But yeah, I have to start my day with a
good coffee.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Yeah, I mean that's my first thought when I roll
out a bit, it's a coffee downstairs. And then I
started thinking about everything else. Yeah, but it's two am there,
so I'm sure you're not drinking coffee right now.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
No.
Speaker 3 (02:59):
I did think about it, just you know, with the
theme of the show and everything, but I thought that's
just not a good idea.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Bridge too far. Yeah, awesome, So let's find out about you.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
I've been listening to your podcast and watching your videos
for a while, but how did you even get started
or interested in the UAP space in the first place.
Speaker 3 (03:17):
Yeah, that's a really good question. It goes right back
to my childhood. You know. I was born in the
late seventies so early eighties. So many great sci fi
movies instantly sparked that curiosity about aliens, with movies like
ET and Close Encounters and space with Star Wars and
things like that, and so you know, I was already
kind of tuned into that big thinking. But then I
(03:40):
suppose it came more in my twenties. I started discovering
a lot of fringe subjects and books and things like that,
and so I went down this windy road of dabbling
with different subjects from ancient Egypt to philosophy and things
like that, and I eventually landed on UFOs and my
(04:00):
my first part of call really was researching declassified documents.
I'll probably go back about fifteen years now, so I
would have been in my thirties by the time I
took it super seriously, and so it would be late nights,
like later than it is right now, just in front
of my computer looking at documents, just digging as deep
as I could, jumping down so many rabbit holes, and
(04:22):
it kind of just escalated from there. Really, you know,
COVID hit and that kind of is when I kind
of really dove in, started to do things publicly, and
then it hasn't really stopped ever since. You know.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
It's interesting there are a lot of new minds on
this subject during and after COVID. I don't know if
it's because we had spare time, you know, but people did,
They get really got into it because the time it
couldn't have been better. I mean, by the time the
New York Times article in twenty seventeen came out. Leading
up to twenty twenty, I mean there was a kind
(04:52):
of a three year crescendo because it just kept getting
more and more interesting. Wasn't just an article. There was
there was actual activity of the formation of the task
Force to GOP task force. You had the Navy creating
new rules and regulations for submitting reports of UAP, and
so I think a lot of people came to the
subject and like, oh, this is.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Really a real thing.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
When you were growing up, how would you compare your
experience with talking about the subject. I don't know, you know,
twenty years ago versus today.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Yeah, twenty years ago, I just really had no knowledge.
It was all extraterrestrial and space aliens to me. You know.
It was only when I started researching seriously I'm going
to say around twenty and nine or twenty ten kind
of era, that I realized it was so much more
than that. And the one thing I will say is,
leading up from twenty ten through to the twenty seventeen
New York Times article, the subject was very stale. And
(05:47):
that's not to discredit anyone that was doing good work
in it. It didn't feel like there was any kind
of progression at all. It was a little bit repetitive,
and so I see these two sides of time being
in the subject. There's the pre twenty seventeen and post
twenty seventeen where we've you know, seen things ramp up
and escalate so much in the past sort of seven eight,
(06:09):
eight years. It's been great.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
Yeah, no, it has been great. I think that everyone
even now that we have these moments where it feels
like a plateau's but.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
That doesn't last very long.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
It really doesn't, because like recently, you had Christopher Brown,
you know, come out, Matthew Brown, Sorry, Matthew Brown, come out.
And I know you watched all three of those episodes.
I've only gotten through two and a little bit. What's
your take on Matthew Brown? Do you think he's a
sincere legit whistle lower?
Speaker 3 (06:41):
I do, yeah, from what I've seen. You know, my
initial instincts are that he you know, he saw what
he says he saw, you know, he was in the
position to see that information. I know George and Jeremy
always do a great job of you know, they don't
just dumb information out there on a whim. They sit
back and they take that time, They vet people, they
vet information. You know, They've got great sources and so
(07:05):
you know, I tip my hat to them for biding
their time, and obviously they felt like the time was right,
and Matthew himself would have felt like, now is the
time where I want to put my name and my
face out there, because it can't be easy to come
out publicly after working in the positions he did and
you know, saying the things that he's saying. So yeah,
really really credible individual and I hope that by him
(07:28):
coming forward it gives fuel to the people that can
actually use this information and action action. I hope we
get some progress with that.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
I might be reading between the lines a little bit,
but Matthew seemed to really elude a dependent relationship with
David Crush as far as feeling comfortable with coming out
and being a whistleblower. And you know, there's this critique
(07:57):
that we see, especially by the likes of Steve Stephen Greenstreet.
Where's David Grush's article that he promised? Why hasn't he
come to a skiff and you know, shared with a congress.
I I think it sounds to me, and again may
be breathing between the lines, it seems to me David
(08:21):
Grush is waiting for more backup it seems to me
he doesn't want to just keep going out on his own.
And now that Matthew's out, and Matthew alluded that there
were more that wanted to come out as well, I
don't know.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
Maybe there's safety in numbers.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
I mean, that surely is a big part of it.
I mean, Grush did actually finally get into a skiff
two days ago with Arrow, So you know, it's what
we wanted to happen the last couple of years has
finally happened. It's you know, the balls rolling in that
direction as far as Grush. But you know, you say
that that we have to read between the lines. We do. Unfortunately,
there are so many gaps in what we know as
(08:59):
the general public to what happens behind the scenes when
it comes to this subject, because we're dealing with such
highly classified information that unfortunately we're just not able to
see the full picture. And so it's very easy for
certain people in certain areas. The debunkers will fill in
their gaps with debunking, you know, and the believers with
(09:19):
other things and everything else in between. And so it
is a really difficult subject when you try to put
together a full puzzle and you just haven't got all
the pieces. There are going to be some real gaps,
but strength in numbers absolutely. David Grush always said that
he'd spoken to forty plus whistleblowers and you know, now
we're we have been hearing about they're ready to come
forward and things like that. But you know, if I
(09:41):
was a whistleblower, you think looking at the way that
David Grush has been received in the last couple of years,
hasn't been you know, that enticing. Let's say, for some
people to want to sleep, it's got to be nerve wracking.
So I trump put myself in their shoes, and you
know it is going to be a slow process unfortunately
as far as public information goes. But you know, we
got to do it right. There's only going to be
(10:02):
really one real chance to get this done without pushing
it back many years in my opinion.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yeah, having to do it right. You just kind of
rung a bell when you said that. You know, you've
spoken to to luel Zando. You know, Lou you know,
what's your take on the the images that he's put
out that people have critiqued him for. Like one was
like that the chandelier image which I'll just pop up
because I have that. So, like there's this chandelier image,
(10:28):
which you know, like as a move on and field investigator,
that's the kind of basic thing that like you're able
to call out pretty quickly. Yeah, you know that, that's
one of the first things you think, like, oh, did
somebody take this picture from inside a building? Is it
a refraction from a light, you know, post outside that
that kind of thing. And then there was the second
one recently, which he didn't actually claim was.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
A really UFO.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
He was just show you, displaying it as an example
of what someone took a picture of. A pilot took
a picture of you know what, was it nineteen seventy something.
I think I can't remember what year it was.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
I'm not sure what year it was.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Yeah, yeah, but and saying oh, this is interesting, you know,
this is the kind of stuff that we look into.
But the fact that he even put it out there
without and I don't know, I guess I think that
you would think that lou would know, especially as a
counter intelligence you know, you know, officer, that he would
(11:28):
know how people process information.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
So what's your what's your take on that?
Speaker 3 (11:35):
Yeah, I mean I think the timing definitely wasn't right
for that last photo in the setting that it was.
It was a really important event with so many great
panel members giving such great information in that setting on
Capitol Hill, and so I think it Lou should have
known what the community's reaction would have been like, even
with the caveats that he gave. He should have known
that it would have maybe overshadowed some of the other information.
(11:58):
So that I think there was a genuine mistake there
on his part. You know, there's no real reason to
you know, he could have highlighted the point that he
was making without showing the photograph. I think it was
a spur of the moment thing that I think, in hindsight,
I think he probably does regret.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Yeah, I do have to kind of wonder if I know,
they say, once you're an intelligence community, you're always in
the intelligence community, you know, like my father's you know,
says once your marine, you're always a marine kind of thing.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
So you but.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
He is in a different world now, he is operating
in a different way. Especially if you read his you know,
book Imminent, you really get this sense of transition from
government worker to my life's been kind of turned upside down,
and now I have to embrace this new lifestyle, this
new lifestyle that people critique Lou of living, which I
(12:53):
think is kind of absurd. But so I think that
maybe is it possible that he's just kind of his
guard down and just because this is this is kind
of how he's making a living.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Now, Yeah, I mean, it's it's hard to say, you know,
you know, I do know Lou, but I don't know
the reasons why he makes certain decisions, you know, I
just don't I think, you know, I look at the
big picture. He brought a lot of people to this subject.
He brought Congress to this subject. He's done some great work.
He's not you know, he's human like the rest of us. Sure,
(13:27):
you know, could he be trying? Could he be counterintelligence?
Still to some degree? Absolutely, because we don't genuinely know
everything about everybody, and that, you know, it's really difficult.
It's really hard to say. You know, that photograph, that
last one, I think it had. It did muddy the
waters slightly, it did take the the event in a
(13:48):
slightly different direction. So yeah, you know, hopefully it doesn't
happen again.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
That's what we said last time. So hopefully, hopefully we
don't have a third time. The Chuddy and Chat said.
I would suspect that the Alexander made a much better
living working for the FEDS than writing books about UFOs.
I think there's a lot to be said about that.
There's nothing that a steady paycheck exactly.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
You know, we knew his position that there's a certain
pay grade for that kind of position and a very
you know, lucrative pension and everything like that, which he
you know, gave up, you know, for the reasons that
he gave. So, yeah, you got to give it to
him for that.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
Yeah, have you ever seen a UFO before?
Speaker 3 (14:29):
No, I haven't, not a genuine UFO. I've seen strange
lights which I definitely can't be you know, we couldn't
figure out what they were. But but not you know,
not an object, not a metallic sphere or a disc
or anything like that.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
I would absolutely love to Yeah, that was my experience
too when I was about twelve years old. You know,
so lights behaving in ways that shouldn't be behaving in
in you know, nineteen ninety one or two, well, you know, especially,
And that's what I love about It's funny you were
talking about the UFO study being kind of stale, and
that's true. So but now we're at this kind of
(15:05):
an inflection point of the old the older it is,
the better it is, and the newer the technology is,
the better it is, and everything else in between is
really questionable, you know. So it's like it's funny, it
was just I just picked up this old, this old book.
This is you know, you're familiar with Philip Class indeed, yeah, yeah,
(15:28):
world class debunker. But I wanted to read this and
get and just see things from his perspective, because when
you look at all these old cases, there's always something
new to discover.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
I think, you know, at least on a personal.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
Level, very much. So, you know, the good good thing
that also I found with the post twenty seventeen and
the wrapping up of the subject that it's it's breathed
a new life into old cases as well, because there
are certain cases now with all this high around the
subject and the legitimacy of it a bit more in
the public eye, is that you can compare new cases
(16:06):
and go back into the historical record and see old
cases in a whole new light because you can actually
almost cross reference certain cases and go, oh, well, that
old case makes more sense because it relates almost to
something that we're seeing in the modern times and that
and you know, through these down periods that we do
still get every now and again. It's the perfect time
for me personally to go back and just brush up
(16:28):
on some of them old cases that I used to
research when I first started, you know, many years ago.
And so it's like this revolving kind of circle of
you know, just keeping that knowledge fresh and not forgetting
about the old stuff because it is so important to
the overall study.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Well, speaking of the new stuff, I think you have
an episode with Heavy Lube coming up soon, right, Yeah,
so what should what should we expect? What's in that conversation?
Speaker 3 (16:55):
Obviously av He said it's kind of the first interview
he's done in the UFO community since he was a
panel member at the May first event. And you know,
he's talking about, you know, how he would, you know,
want a billion dollars for a really serious UAP study
that's not on the same vein as the Galileo project,
but more focused on on the UAP themselves, And so
we touch upon that a bit. Abby's just always really
(17:19):
great to listen to. You know, I always have to
mentally prepare myself for speaking with him because he speaks
in such depth about you know, astrophysics and astronomy and
things like that. But yeah, it's really interesting interview people
that I think are gonna like it. Abby's just a
really a great guess. So that's going to come out tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
That's awesome. I look forward to it.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
And he also has a good sense of humor too,
he does, and it's in his books, so it's great. Yeah,
And I think that's a great way to communicate this
subject because people either think.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
It's you know, weird power normal.
Speaker 1 (17:52):
Or you know, it has to be hard science, but
you know, you can be kind of somewhere in between
have fun with it a little bit.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Definitely I did that. In one question, I asked him,
you know, about his presentation at the panel, and he
gave that very scientific answer, and then I followed it
up by asking him, you know, well, Eric Davis was
sat almost next to you, and he's a you know,
a reputable scientist, but he was saying some very out
there things about you know, this subject, and so I
asked Avi what his thoughts were, and you know, he
(18:18):
doesn't hold back. He's like, you know, stories are good,
but it's not enough for me. You know, I need
that hard evidence in the data. So you know, it's
great to kind of I almost knew that's how he
was going to answer it, but I wanted to put
it to him anyway. So yeah, it's great. He has
that real good skeptic side of him. But he's so
very open to this subject. And we need so many
more people like that.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
We do.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
We have more now that are public and prominent, yes,
but but the truth is, I mean, especially in like
the sixties, you know, you did have some prominent scientists,
even Carl Siegan in the early years, you know, was
quite interested in the UFO subject in CIA had Kit Green,
and then there was this like gap of decades and
(19:01):
now we finally have some big names like you know,
doctor Gary Nolan and Abby Loebe, you know, doctor Kevin Kanuth.
I've interviewed he and I and I love I know,
I just geek out about this like probably every episode.
But did you ever see the video at the Soul
conference that Kevin Kanuth presented.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
Maybe that particular event.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
So what what he what he presented was research based
on the researcher from years ago, but you know, kind
of updated it. And he was explaining scientifically how that
spooky thing we see in the movies where a UFO
comes near a car and the car goes out, you know,
and then magically goes back on and forever. You know, Oh,
(19:50):
that's so ridiculous, that's absurd, that's just paranormal magic whatever. Well,
he actually presented exactly how an electri you know, nionizing
like electromagnetic energy can actually affect the starter of a car,
the older cars particularly. Yeah, And I just love that stuff,
(20:10):
you know, because it's like you said, it's it's if
you're patient enough, if you wait long enough, like David
Garsh is gonna come out, he's going to go into
a skiff and it doesn't. It doesn't do us any good.
I don't think to have people in nay saying in
between and constantly and you know, for some I would
say whining.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
You know, I right? Is that is that a good descriptive?
What about you?
Speaker 1 (20:35):
So, you know, things get a little bit more difficult
to accept, I think when it becomes anecdotal. So do
you think that the the Immaculate Constellation program, even with
you know, Matthew Brown's you know love and page paper submitted.
(20:57):
Is that enough, like, is there is there enough that's
tangible there or that you accept it as a possible
real UAP recovery program.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
I think there's enough there for people with the power
to act on it. There's something for them to work with.
So if it turns out that it's an avenue, they
go down and leads to a dead end, so be it.
You know, we regularly hear from people who have seen
UAP videos on networks such as the Cippernette or Jaywix
within the Department of Defense, so that the avenue directly
within the DD already. These other things that get added on,
(21:29):
like immaculate constellation are just more things to help, you know,
and to finally get that information to the members of Congress.
It is really important. And as this process keeps going,
it seems that a lot of naysayers, let's say, have
already made their mind up about these things, and we're
not even maybe not even close to the finish line yet.
(21:50):
I'd like to think maybe we're getting there. So for
me personally, I certainly won't make up my mind on
anything at this point other than there is something that
is worth the of this investigation. This subject is worthy
of being taken seriously, and I think it's healthy to
be open minded about it potentially being an HI and
not just top secret military technology. So, you know, if
(22:14):
I can't speak on behalf of the debunkers, I don't
know what drives them some of them to be the
way they are, but it certainly doesn't detract from my
thinking or my work, my direction. Let's say.
Speaker 1 (22:28):
Yeah, I think for me, my concern is not you
or I, but the people that get turned on to
it and then get turned off very quickly because of
the debunkers, do you know, So I feel like we
lose minds that should be on the subject, that could
participate because they get turned off, you know, by what
(22:50):
the debunkers are saying, And a good debunker is really
effective and making you feel stupid for believing something. And
like I call out Green Street name, I don't, I
don't mind anymore, you know, he just he does that,
you know, he kind of writes things, present things in
a way that's kind of like shaming you, yeah, for
even even thinking about this as a possibility. And and
(23:14):
so that's why I try to work against the Democra
to some degree, or I'm trying to not because I'm like, oh,
I hate the demoker. It's because these other people that
were losing that I think, you know, deserve to be
involved and learn about this too.
Speaker 3 (23:28):
Yeah, I mean that it does attract certainly. You know.
The thing is that I tend to ignore that that
hardcore debunker. I think I don't have the energy or
the time even to kind of interact or even go
against them. I know that there's a close fine line
between being a skeptic and a debunker. I'm friends with
some very big skeptics. But the way they deliver their
(23:53):
side of the argument, let's say, and it's not even
an argument, their their thoughts and their opinions is healthy
and it's done in how the way. And I've had
many conversations with people like that, and at the end
of the day we'll still you know, be friendly with
each other. And I think that's healthy, you know. But
when it comes to the it crosses over into that
extreme debunking and like you said, make people feel like
(24:14):
they're doing something wrong almost I just don't have time
for it. And as much as I could sit there
and call them out on it and stand up to it.
They won't change. I don't think you know, they're not
going to listen to me. They've already made their minds up.
That's who they want to be, how they want to
be perceived. They obviously get something from it. I said,
just let them do it. They'll get bored eventually.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
I thought green Seak was going to get bored. He
posted like a couple of weeks ago that he's done
with it, and then he just kept going.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
Yeah, that's the thing. You know, I just ignore it.
If I don't see it, you know it. You know,
it's not going to affect me, because it does frustrate
me to see it, and it frustrates me to see people,
especially if people are directly getting bullied, which does happen,
and to know, I mean, that's just just not on.
But you know, we're all grown ups here. I think
at the end of the day, we can we can
(25:05):
handle ourselves.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
There is a certain irony about it because they they
seem to just keep going at it right and and
but the critique of the UFO enthusiast or investigator researcher
a podcast or is that you guys are obsessed and
you can't stop.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Neither, can you going? Do you know?
Speaker 1 (25:27):
And and I do kind of wonder if there's like
a you know, just a subconscious attraction to the subject,
even if you are highly skeptical of it.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
I just don't know that. I mean, they must be quite
miserable to act that way day in and day out,
and that's what I can't wrap my head around. And
I just think, you know, look, I wish them all
the best, and if they've got something going on that
makes them that way, I don't know, you know, yeah, what.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
Do you What do you know about the S four
movie that's supposed to come out with about Bubblazar. Apparently
this is supposed to be kind of groundbreaking and really
really insightful.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
Yeah, so it really focuses on that specific time, that
quite short amount of time that Bobblazar allegedly worked at
S four on the craft, let's say. And so you know,
I spoke with Luigi venda Telli, the director and executive producer.
Great guy. I think he has put a lot of
hard work, his heart and soul into this project. So
it's going to be really interesting to see how this
(26:29):
differs from any previous work on Bubblazar, notably Jeremy Corbell's documentary.
But they've also kind of brought in this modern technology
to create this virtual reality model, let's say, of S four,
which by the sounds of it, is going to be
very in depth and you'll be able to take this
virtual tour around the facility that even Bob himself is saying,
(26:49):
you know, they've nailed it. They've got it almost to
the to the point where he feels like he's back
there again. Yeah. And I think then there'll be a
companion book as well to come out with it. So
I think it's great telling a story again that we
kind of think we may know, but with new technology
and and you know, some of the people that they've
interviewed for it, old friends of Bob's that we may
(27:10):
not have heard from before in recent times, may may
just add a little bit of something to the story.
Whether it sways anyone. And I'm kind of on the
fence still with this whole story. Well we'll see, you know,
but again it's I'm open minded to it because it
can't be proved one hundred percent one way or the other,
so I have to keep it on the proverbial table
(27:30):
of course.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
Well to find out find that video of Luigi Vendadelli
and other interviews, go to h I posted right here.
It's at Disclosure Team on YouTube. Let me just drop
that on the comments, guys, and it's also in the
show description as well. Then of course you can just
follow on x at Disclosure Team X and on Instagram
(27:53):
Disclosure Underscore Team. Okay, I have to ask you this
question because I'd see it, you know, discussed online and
there I think there is something to it, you know,
is there something about News Nation and covering the u UFO.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
UAP topic in the way that it that it does.
Speaker 1 (28:17):
Because it seems like you can compare it to any
other station and no one covers it. I mean, it's
it does huge numbers covering the UFO and u AP topic.
Do you think that there is anything behind News Nation
that that motivates this for the purposes of disclosure or
(28:39):
do you think it's just a good business model?
Speaker 3 (28:41):
Yeah? I tend to think, you know, the majority of
that would lean towards it being a good business model.
They really understand the way that people consume news these days,
that it's you know, it's online and it's not just
these old networks that you know, may have ties to
money from elsewhere. Let's say, you know, I see it
like that. I think it's just a really good way
(29:03):
of you know, pushing the envelope when it comes to
journalism and still trying to be like old school, but
in a new way. You know. It's it's not independent
as other journalists we have in this community. I think
it rides that balance in between, and it does it
really well, really well.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
Yeah, I g guess it's a good point because if
you look at legacy media, the conspiracy there always was.
They're not covering it because the people behind the scenes
are telling them not to cover it. And now you
have news Nation who is covering it and the conspiracy
is behind the scenes are making them cover it.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
It's like one is it right?
Speaker 3 (29:38):
You're always going to get that, I think with any
kind of media outlet. But yeah, I just see it
as just a sign of the times.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Really yeah. So do you think there's any kind of crossover.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
Do you believe in anything related to power normal or
other you know, high strangeness activity.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
With relating to UAP. Yeah, I mean it's it's certainly possible.
I think. I think when I look at the UFO subject,
and you know, if NHI is real, which I believe
that there is some reality to it, obviously, I think
that if we were to find out the truth, it
would be so far beyond what we may have even conceived,
so far as in some of the theories and hypotheses,
(30:17):
that it really does paint a picture that the whole
paranormal subject falls right in there with this this subject
as well. I think that would just make the most sense,
rather than it being completely separate entities pun intended. I
think it does seem like there really could be some
relation there, especially like when you look at ghosts and
apparitions and things like that.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
I think I fear and you know, I have, you know,
a couple of friends in this community that very much
so believe that something like gray aliens or whatever are
demons are you know, because you know they're either religious
or Catholic or something like that, and so that's kind
of how they interpret it. I don't you know obviously
that way. Do you think that there is a danger
(31:02):
in that or do you think that that's reasonable to consider.
Speaker 3 (31:08):
I don't think as a danger to that at all.
I think people ascribe their own names to these things
because they fit into a certain framework of how they
maybe have been brought up or things that they believe
in when it comes to religion and that, and again
I think there's definitely some connection between you know, religion
and history and the history of religion that that fits
(31:28):
into this. So I think focusing too much on the
labels maybe just going a bit too far, maybe because
we may they may just interpret certain things that someone
else may call it grayly and a demon. Yeah, I think, yeah,
I don't think it does too much damage necessarily.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
M So what do we need to do next step
or not doing to you know, kind of bring in
disclosure or just study the subject in general.
Speaker 3 (31:59):
I still think public awareness is one of the most
key things. And it's the same cliche speak with your family,
speak with your friends, make it a normal everyday conversation.
I mean, I look here around me in the UK
and we still have the tabloid newspapers are the ones
that cover the subject and it's still little green men
in the X files, whereas over in the US it's
(32:21):
kind of shifted away from that in recent years. And
so over here it's really about not allowing that stigma
to be the kind of main source for everyday folk.
It's about legitimizing it through just everyday conversation and bringing
awareness to what is happening these days that there are
congressional hearings in the US, it's being taken seriously by
(32:42):
the government, and so you know, I've found that by
having those conversations myself that people are very open to it.
They just haven't wanted to talk about it through fear
of ridicule. So I think people need to just don't
be afraid to bring it up at the dinner table
and you might be pleasantly surprised.
Speaker 1 (32:58):
Yeah, And I think that's actually good way to ease
people into it, to just maybe not have a full
blown conversation about Betty and Barney Hill on the first conversation.
But you know, if you can say, oh, hey, did
you hear that Congress is having a hearing or you know,
a closed door hearing with a UFO whistleblower, Oh no, yeah,
(33:21):
oh it's in the news. It's it's real, okay, And
then don't overdo it, you know, just but I think
it's a good way to like just say, hey, this
is something that serious people are looking into and I
know there are a lot of uh, stage there's a
lot of stagecraft in politics, and I know there are
politicians who say, don't know that the country Singapore exists, sadly,
(33:46):
but those who do get those positions, they they are
serious people. They are you know, you know, worldly, you know.
Speaker 2 (33:56):
Smart people.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
You don't you don't get those positions in Congress, no
if you're not. And so I think that's important to emphasize.
Speaker 2 (34:10):
Is Arrow.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
Not beholden to Congress.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
I mean they should be, They're mandated to do certain
things by Congress. But you know, in the past ten
years with doctor Seawan Kirkpatrick and I think the interim
director Tim Phillips, it didn't seem like they were doing
what they should have been doing. I think just this
week with the Arrow meeting with David Grush, it seems
(34:39):
that David Grush kind of in the conversation gave so
much more than arrows ever given. And so they really
need to buck their ideas up. But I think John
Kosloski so far has given us a hint that maybe
he's different to what we've seen previously. I mean, I
still look back to the UAP Task Force and the
progress that we got through them. That was a great
(35:00):
agency and they were doing great work, and we need
to get back to that, you know. But again it's
people like Senator Gillibrand who need to really buckle down
and make sure that Arrow are doing this, and we
don't hear from us so much anymore. I was always
really hopeful that we'd see more things come from the
Senate as well, maybe hearings, more hearings through the Senate
with the Armed Services Committee and the Intel Committee, but
(35:23):
we haven't. Unfortunately, it's now almost fallen on the House
and the Oversight Committee there to kind of be pushing
this subject forward. So I'll take anything really, you know,
it's all a win at the end of the day
that they're taking this seriously at all. And even this week,
you know, we've had many different things happen. We had
the skiff meeting with Arrow and Grush, We had doctor
Eric Davis finally get in a skiff with Berlison, and
(35:46):
then today I think the UAP Caucus members met with
the FBI for a briefing where they saw a new
UFO video from the FBI that even Arrow hasn't seen.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
Interesting.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
Three major things happening in one week. As much as
we don't hear much about this publicly, it's certainly encouraging
to hear about it and to know that the work's
being done to set up for when we do get
the next necessarily like public hearing or something like that.
So yeah, yeah, I think people need to understand that
the work is being done.
Speaker 1 (36:17):
Yes, And even though I mean, Jilbrian, you know that's
my state, you know, we're really appreciated the work that
she's done. And Schumer, Shuck Schumer. You know, last year
we went out outside of his his office.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
In the city.
Speaker 1 (36:30):
You know, I just you know, stood there, held a sign,
but you know, it was just nice to show your
presence and show your support for the cause. I really
appreciate it. But you know, it is politics, and these
are careers, and you know, the politics in the US
right now are kind of just off the charts. So
I think I think in that if, if ever there's
a time for them to kind of like take a
(36:50):
break from it and focus on, you know, what's going
on in government, then that makes sense that that's why
we're having kind of a down down period. So you know,
AOC is most likely in the challenge Schumer. So I'm
sure the Democrats are like shuffling behind the scenes figuring.
Speaker 2 (37:08):
Out like, oh my god, what are we gonna do?
Speaker 1 (37:10):
Uh, So there's gonna be all this realignment of power
and so that that's gonna be really fascinating to see
where that goes, because you remember that that first hearing
with Crush AOC was hardcore.
Speaker 2 (37:22):
Follow the money, file.
Speaker 1 (37:23):
The money, Follow money, And I think, like, even if
she doesn't believe in it, like that's.
Speaker 2 (37:27):
The way to go.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
Like following that money trail, I think is really just
it's like the easiest thing to do, and you don't
have to think it should be but you don't have
to think about fantastical ideas or super secret this and that.
Speaker 2 (37:40):
Just follow the money and it should take you there hopefully.
Speaker 1 (37:44):
But you're right, You're right, that's not always the easiest, Yeah, because.
Speaker 3 (37:49):
Now, and I think it comes down to as well,
because people contacting their representatives. We've been saying it for years,
and you know, we've still got so many more members
of Congress to get on board with this subject. You know,
you know, we've got to be realistic as well. We
live in the real world. Things are happening in this
in this world every single day, and Congress's focus is
elsewhere most of the time. And you see people say,
(38:10):
but this is the biggest story of all time. But yeah,
it is. But we've got to make them aware of
it first for them to start to open it seriously.
And again it's it's yet another process that we need
to kind of get into gear. So you know, I think,
you know, if people are fed up with it, then
you know, it's unfortunate that they feel like that. But
it is going to take time, and it's going to
(38:31):
take people just keep stepping up to the plate. We
need that to happen. We've come so close to having
you know, more languages implemented through the NDAA. We got
so close and it's been rejected. But it doesn't mean
we need to stop there. We need to keep doing
it because we can get there. I do believe it,
just we just need that that just keep pushing.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Yeah, obviously we've made some major inroads and progress forward.
And yeah, so the whistle blower protection isn't ideal, but
I guess technically it's better than you know, where it
was now. According to Matthew Brown, behind the scenes, there
(39:12):
is now a resurgence of suppression of the of the
topic of UFOs and kind of the shaming, like you
don't talk about it's now a taboo subject. Again, that
that's worrisome because that that's what's kept us where we
are for decades in the first place. Do you think
(39:36):
that we can we can find our way out of
it organically without you know, an NDAA amendment in the
next bill, or you know, can we can we do
it solely through the media.
Speaker 3 (39:49):
Yeah, I think we can. I think that will take
it a lot longer. I think that we would just
have to kind of go round it and take a
long arch, which would take you know, much much longer
than a direct route through the NDA, of course, But
I am an optimist, so you know, for better or worse,
I don't know. At this point, you can't.
Speaker 1 (40:08):
You can't do what you're doing if you're not an optimist.
Speaker 3 (40:10):
Like, yeah, very true, very true. So yeah, I think
there are still different routes that we can take. Yeah,
it's just it's just keeping the momentum and not giving
up or being too disheartened when things like when the
NDAA failed, you know, it was disheartening, but then you
have to pick yourself straight back up and say you look,
you know we're gonna get Knox. We're gonna get pushed back.
There's always been pushed back behind the scenes. You know,
(40:32):
we've done it before, we've we've we've got around it,
and we'll get through each brick wall as we come
to it.
Speaker 1 (40:37):
Yeah, and scientists will come along as as well. Scientist
is a funny thing. And you know, I love Neil
deGrasse Tyson, but also he sometimes really irks me, you know,
with his ultra ultra I wouldn't even call it ultra skepticism.
It's just he doesn't he doesn't really doesn't seem to
really take the time to study the subject. You know,
it's kind of surface level, you know, kind of like
(41:00):
Fitzpatrick when I think was it Mick West was interviewing
him and he like clearly was was lacking didn't understand
the tic TAC I think it was the tic TAC
video they were talking about, and it was like he
was clearly kind of ignorant. It's like whoa, you know,
how does that happen? But for instance, with the controversy
(41:21):
over the these red shift lights in the distant galaxies
that they've recently discovered which either won Either the Big
Bang is wrong and it's much much much older than
we thought, or those galaxies were formed you know, much earlier,
you know, like two hundred million years or something like that.
(41:43):
And so scientists are now like kind of slugging it out,
you know, and trying to figure out like what happened
and why is this happening? And but fundamentally the Big
Bang theory can you know, still hold holds together. But
that's the way science is. And I am encouraged by,
like we mentioned earlier, these other science just coming forward
and kind of pushing the subject because eventually, if you
get enough good minds, you know, chipping away at it,
(42:04):
we will we will get get to the center of it.
Speaker 3 (42:08):
Yeah. Absolutely, And I'd rather have scientists arguing about UAP
than not looking at it at all, because you know,
it will they'll push each other to keep going and
keep studying it and want to prove the other wrong.
Let's say. You know, so it's great that we have
people starting to switch onto it in in academia and
in the scientific community. And then we've got great think
tanks like the Soul Foundation full of some wonderful people
(42:28):
within ex government x you know, this and that and
science mixed in there as well. You know, we're getting
some serious papers written, some some op heads and that.
Again really great minds and this. You know, it does
seem to be progressing. We get more and more people
coming forward each year, you know, with interest. Is it enough? No,
it's definitely not enough, but it's encouraging and speaking with
(42:49):
people like Avi, you know he you know, he speaks
to people every day about this subject, and you know,
it's surprising how many people have such high regard are
genuinely curious about the subject. So yeah, I'm I'm encouraged
by it all.
Speaker 1 (43:02):
The UFO form appearance formation underwater off the coast of California,
what's your take on that? Was that just an image
processing problem from a Google satellite or because it was
there and then it kind of just seemed to disappear?
So what's your take on that?
Speaker 3 (43:23):
Yeah, I don't think there's any grand conspiracy behind it,
to be honest. Yeah, if I don't have much evidence
for anything, well maybe I should rephrase THATCXU. We would
have much evidence for anything at all in this subject,
to be fair. But it's very easy to latch ontour
to think of it as a conspiracy. It's it's too
easy to do that, and so I pulled myself back
(43:44):
from doing that. And I think coincidence comes first for me.
It's just something that happens, you know.
Speaker 1 (43:51):
Yeah, do go out and spend time just looking at
the stars and waiting to see something, or.
Speaker 3 (43:58):
I don't because unfortunately here in England, nine times out
of ten or ninety nine times out of one hundred,
the skies are just very much overcast. Yeah, I do
love looking at the sky, and whenever I'm abroad anywhere
that the skies are nice, I'm mesmerized by.
Speaker 2 (44:15):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (44:16):
I love it. I love the idea of it. But yeah,
it's very disheartening every day when I look out my
window and it's just great skies and cloudy.
Speaker 1 (44:23):
I'm laughing because we're currently experiencing your weather.
Speaker 3 (44:27):
It's just like I really, yeah, oh my god, this.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
Happened last year too, just rainy days after rainy days
and overcast and it's like, oh my gosh, what happened
to spring? You know, we might get like a couple
of days or one or one day here or there,
or the sun, but oh my god, it's just constant.
Speaker 2 (44:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (44:46):
And we lived in New York City for a while
and that was one thing I really missed was being
able to just step outside and you know, look at
the stars at night. You know, if there was some
kind of you know, the Persians or some kind of
you know event, meteor event, I'd step outside and this
just pointless, Like you can't you know, with the pollution
(45:08):
and the overcast of the city, like it was just impossible.
So we love it now in Hudson Valley where we
can actually you get some air, get some clear skies.
Speaker 3 (45:16):
Nice.
Speaker 1 (45:16):
Yeah, that's fantastic. You know, are you Are you a
spiritual person in any way?
Speaker 3 (45:28):
I'm not directly spiritual, and I think my years in
this subject have really opened me up to that kind
of side of things. But it's not something I've really
delved into practicing or even researching. But you know, making
friends and so many connections in the community with people
that are kind of more on that side of things,
it's you know, it's allowed me to kind of say, okay,
(45:49):
well this is a part and parcel of this subject.
I come from that very nuts and bolts background, and
I realized that just by staying in the nuts and
bolts only. I'm I'm I've got tonal vision. I'm not
opening myself up to the peripherals where there's more information
and things to kind of add to this this whole puzzle.
So you know, yeah, I find it just as fascinating,
(46:10):
and I'll have interviews with people that are more on
that kind of side of things. So yeah, definitely open
to it.
Speaker 1 (46:17):
Yeah, I do find it interesting. You know, as a
ignostic slashed atheist, you know that I'm totally open to
the whole spiritual side of things because because you know,
there's some you know, things like panpsychism and all these
other philosophies that where it's like, well, maybe the fundamental
nature of reality is consciousness or what have you, and
so that all these high strangeness things are really as
(46:39):
strange as we think they are. We just don't understand
the fundamentals. And I ask you that because I I
do think that there seems to be something connected to
consciousness with a lot of these UAP experiences. If you
(47:01):
could have the opportunity to experience something like a Jake
Barber or you know, a Betty Hill like would would
would you be willing to do that or is that
something that that frightens you.
Speaker 3 (47:15):
The unknown frightens me a little bit. It's the same
when people ask me if I've tried CE five and
I answer no, I haven't, because it's because we don't
fully understand what's behind UFOs and uh. I think calling
something in that you don't know has just as much
potential to be as dangerous as it is wonderful. So
(47:38):
I always err on the side of caution just to
because I don't know. I think it's it would be
wrong with me to do that. I just I just
feel like it's not right for me at this time,
you know. But it's like I do want that sighting though,
I want to see something spectacular, I want to feel
something spectacular. When you think about the Jake Barber story
(47:59):
where he sees the amazing object that he's picked up,
but he has that almost spiritual feeling, that that overwhelming
feeling of like that like the feminine love kind of feeling.
I think he kind of almost described it as and
it didn't sound bad necessarily, but then it could just
as easily be something almost identical, but that you do
(48:19):
feel fear at the same time as well.
Speaker 1 (48:22):
So yeah, why do you think you feel that what
do you think that comes from that desire to kind
of have that experience to see a UFO or what
have you.
Speaker 3 (48:32):
It's just that because I'm such an advocate for disclosure
and I feel that, you know, a lot of people
that are experiences or witnesses to these things, they've already
had their disclosure. They don't need that full capital D
disclosure because for them, they've seen it, they know it's real.
Like I believe it's real, but do I know it's real?
Not one hundred percent. I need that that object in
(48:54):
the sky I've just seen has just given you know,
I want that. You know, it won't necessarily change what
I do, but just give me that boost something, It
will give me something that that may I'm not saying
it's missing necessarily from me, but it's like curiosity just
need it fulfilling.
Speaker 1 (49:11):
Because it's like you're forever on the edge, right, It's
it's so close, yeah, yeah, yeah, because there's enough, there's
enough evidence to make you think that it seems like
there very could well be extraterrestrials or NHI. What have
you visiting here and doing things? But you can't say
you like you just can't get there. So I understand
(49:34):
that that desire because even the UFO that I that
I saw, it was essentially a light in the sky
when I was a kid, right, you know, I didn't
see the metallic side. I didn't you know, see you know,
a glowing egg.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
Sure, right, oh you know.
Speaker 1 (49:51):
Actually when I ask me about that too, m h.
I have some suspicions about the Jake Barber video, not
the Jake Barber video, but the video that that Ross
Coulhart included in his original News Nation interview with Jake.
Speaker 2 (50:07):
It was kind of misleading.
Speaker 1 (50:08):
It was misleading because that wasn't the video that you know,
Jake had actually taken. And I've recently kind of rewatched
that video again, and initially I was on the side
of like, yeah, it looks like it's a heavy object.
Speaker 2 (50:22):
But I just kept thinking about it.
Speaker 1 (50:23):
I was like, I don't know that that could have
been a balloon, Like if it was, what's your thing?
Speaker 3 (50:32):
Yeah, I mean I guess it could be. Yeah. And
again it comes down to I don't spend that much
time worrying too much about individual videos. I still try
and like pull myself away from that and look at
the bigger picture look at Jake's testimony and story. Yeah
it didn't. It didn't help the way that that was
put out at the time. It certainly didn't. But I
(50:55):
quickly moved into listening to Jake and being very about
the work that Skywatcher and the team that are doing.
I think I think there should be more to come
from that that hopefully, Yeah, it.
Speaker 1 (51:07):
Is really fascinating, and I know Gary Nolan had some
insight into that. Yeah, we got to witness some of it,
So hopefully that drives more study because if they have
figured something out, that's interesting. But back to your point,
even if it's not like a CE five where you're
putting out your things, if they're using some kind of
technology to call these things down, is that not dangerous
(51:29):
as well?
Speaker 2 (51:30):
Because even if they're not.
Speaker 1 (51:34):
Intentionally here to harm us, we hear about all these
accidental UFO encounters, you know, John Burrows being kind of
radiating you know, uh, you know, Betty Cash. I mean,
like people have been really harmed because of these things,
even if it's not intentional.
Speaker 2 (51:50):
So I'm with you on that.
Speaker 1 (51:51):
I definitely have some serious concerns about calling down UFOs.
Speaker 3 (51:56):
Yeah, it's scary when you think about those cases, you know,
the cash Landern case. You know that was I not
want to be there at that time, as much as
I'd want to see that amazing shaped object and yeah,
everything that went on there. But yeah, yeah, it's funny.
But you know, the sky Watching team, they've put themselves
in this position. They're willing to do the work. It's
great that they've got the technology side of things, and
(52:16):
they're bringing in the psionics team as well, so you
kind of get both sides of the of something we've
not seen in one complete package before. So that excites me.
I like the way that they've presented things. They've they've
given us these really glossy, highly well produced YouTube videos,
which kind of feeds the people online that say we
want more, we want more when they get to watch
(52:37):
these well crafted videos. But then you know the studies
are being done as well. They're being as transparent as
they can be. You know, it'd be nice to hear
a bit more about the proprietary technology that they're using,
the dog whistle for example, But yeah, yeah, you know,
I understand they've got to maybe hold some things back
for now. We'll see how things look six twelve eighteen
(52:57):
months down the line.
Speaker 2 (52:59):
Sure.
Speaker 1 (52:59):
Yeah, and if they include more you know, sensors, having
more of a multi platform sensor system that can corroborate,
then that would really be helpful to.
Speaker 2 (53:12):
Vinnie. If you can leave us with any thought, what
would it.
Speaker 3 (53:16):
Be, I'd say to people, just keep having the conversation,
people watching as well. If they feel like they want
to do more, they can. I think, you know that
we need more voices, whether it be just more interactions online.
I like it when people reach out to me all
the time, and I try and speak to as many
(53:37):
people as they can, and I think it just you
know people. I don't want people to feel so separated
that from others in the community. I think, yeah, I
try not to use the cliche we're all in this together,
we should all work together, because I know it's not
that straightforward, but I think we are strength in numbers.
So I will use the contact your representatives. I think
that's still vital sure to that sort of angle of
(53:59):
just closure, that that course of action that we need
to continue on. But I think as well, just be curious,
be I've been minded, and be kind. Yeah, I think, yeah,
even to the debunkers, Yeah, why not you know, kill
them with kindness.
Speaker 2 (54:14):
That's right, all right? Cool Vine.
Speaker 1 (54:16):
I love that and actually reminded me it's about it's
about that time that I email my representatives again, you know,
like you said, like every once in a while, just
send out an email and just remind them, like, hey,
this matters to us. Yeah, it's important. It doesn't take much,
you know, just a sentence.
Speaker 3 (54:30):
Doesn't you know there are so many members of the
House that haven't kind of come on board yet. We
need them all on board. The more, the more, the merrier.
Speaker 1 (54:38):
Yep, exactly, all right, Vinnie, thank you so much for
being on Coffee and UFOs.
Speaker 2 (54:43):
I really appreciate it.
Speaker 3 (54:44):
Thank you, Allen really really enjoyed that.
Speaker 1 (54:46):
Okay, and everyone, please go to Vinnie's YouTube channel at
Real Disclosure Team for just numerous great, great interviews. If
you are a fan of Coffee and UFOs, please subscribe,
comment down below, like and click the notification bell so
you don't miss upcoming or unexpected videos. And if you
(55:08):
listen to the podcast. Wherever you listen to your podcast,
please give it a good rate and review because all
that really helps grow the podcast and the platform. As
a special thanks to Margie k and Race Hobbs. Just
going to send you guys my love. I really appreciate
all the support you give me here a coffee and
(55:28):
UFOs on your on Nex network and to the rest
of you out there, thank you for your ongoing support
over these years. I really really appreciate it. In the meantime,
be some love and live in the mystery.
Welcome back to Coffee and UFO's everyone, thank you for
joining us tonight. I have a special guest, Vinnie Adams.
He is the host of Disclosure Team. You can find
him on YouTube at Real Disclosure Team and all his
videos at Real Disclosure Team slash videos. He does amazing
interviews with some of the best sources in contemporary UAP
(00:38):
studies and activism and ongoing news. So if you want
to keep up with it, this is the guy that
you want to follow for sure. I'm really excited to
find out a little bit more about Vinnie his background,
how he got into t UAP.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
But before we discuss more with.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Avinny, just a friendly reminder that this podcast is rebroadcast
on the on X network every Thursday night eleven pm
Pacific time, two am Eastern Standard Time on Friday mornings.
If you want to follow the podcast, you can go
to Instagram it's at Coffee and UFO's podcast, and on
(01:17):
X formerly known as Twitter, you can go to at
Paranormal Underscore now and on Blue Sky it's Coffee and
UFO's podcast as well. And of course the old Facebook
page is still there under Mystic Lounge, which I still
post on occasion.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, it's been a little a little on and off.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
With me with the with the podcasting because I, like
I mentioned before, I have a writing project that I'm
kind of focused on.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
So we've got this week.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
Next week we have another episode, and then we may take.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
Off one more week. I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
I'll let you know in social media whether we get
that week filled. I've never written a book before, and
it's like it's it is not easy. It is a challenge,
especially with the ongoing news that's happening. I have to
keep going back and like re editing a chapter because
I'm like.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Oh my god, there's new information.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
But that's okay, that's cool because it's kind of fun
taking the challenge of countering the debunker. So we'll talk
a little bit of that too with Vinnie right now.
Welcome to coffee, new phones, cheers.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
How are you.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
I'm good, Alan, Thank you so much. I'm ready looking
forward to this conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Awesome, me too, man, I'm so glad you came on.
Thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Are you a coffee drinker?
Speaker 3 (02:40):
I am very much big coffee drinker. I mean I
say big, it doesn't mean I drink a lot of it.
But yeah, I have to start my day with a
good coffee.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Yeah, I mean that's my first thought when I roll
out a bit, it's a coffee downstairs. And then I
started thinking about everything else. Yeah, but it's two am there,
so I'm sure you're not drinking coffee right now.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
No.
Speaker 3 (02:59):
I did think about it, just you know, with the
theme of the show and everything, but I thought that's
just not a good idea.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Bridge too far. Yeah, awesome, So let's find out about you.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
I've been listening to your podcast and watching your videos
for a while, but how did you even get started
or interested in the UAP space in the first place.
Speaker 3 (03:17):
Yeah, that's a really good question. It goes right back
to my childhood. You know. I was born in the
late seventies so early eighties. So many great sci fi
movies instantly sparked that curiosity about aliens, with movies like
ET and Close Encounters and space with Star Wars and
things like that, and so you know, I was already
kind of tuned into that big thinking. But then I
(03:40):
suppose it came more in my twenties. I started discovering
a lot of fringe subjects and books and things like that,
and so I went down this windy road of dabbling
with different subjects from ancient Egypt to philosophy and things
like that, and I eventually landed on UFOs and my
(04:00):
my first part of call really was researching declassified documents.
I'll probably go back about fifteen years now, so I
would have been in my thirties by the time I
took it super seriously, and so it would be late nights,
like later than it is right now, just in front
of my computer looking at documents, just digging as deep
as I could, jumping down so many rabbit holes, and
(04:22):
it kind of just escalated from there. Really, you know,
COVID hit and that kind of is when I kind
of really dove in, started to do things publicly, and
then it hasn't really stopped ever since. You know.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
It's interesting there are a lot of new minds on
this subject during and after COVID. I don't know if
it's because we had spare time, you know, but people did,
They get really got into it because the time it
couldn't have been better. I mean, by the time the
New York Times article in twenty seventeen came out. Leading
up to twenty twenty, I mean there was a kind
(04:52):
of a three year crescendo because it just kept getting
more and more interesting. Wasn't just an article. There was
there was actual activity of the formation of the task
Force to GOP task force. You had the Navy creating
new rules and regulations for submitting reports of UAP, and
so I think a lot of people came to the
subject and like, oh, this is.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Really a real thing.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
When you were growing up, how would you compare your
experience with talking about the subject. I don't know, you know,
twenty years ago versus today.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Yeah, twenty years ago, I just really had no knowledge.
It was all extraterrestrial and space aliens to me. You know.
It was only when I started researching seriously I'm going
to say around twenty and nine or twenty ten kind
of era, that I realized it was so much more
than that. And the one thing I will say is,
leading up from twenty ten through to the twenty seventeen
New York Times article, the subject was very stale. And
(05:47):
that's not to discredit anyone that was doing good work
in it. It didn't feel like there was any kind
of progression at all. It was a little bit repetitive,
and so I see these two sides of time being
in the subject. There's the pre twenty seventeen and post
twenty seventeen where we've you know, seen things ramp up
and escalate so much in the past sort of seven eight,
(06:09):
eight years. It's been great.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
Yeah, no, it has been great. I think that everyone
even now that we have these moments where it feels
like a plateau's but.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
That doesn't last very long.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
It really doesn't, because like recently, you had Christopher Brown,
you know, come out, Matthew Brown, Sorry, Matthew Brown, come out.
And I know you watched all three of those episodes.
I've only gotten through two and a little bit. What's
your take on Matthew Brown? Do you think he's a
sincere legit whistle lower?
Speaker 3 (06:41):
I do, yeah, from what I've seen. You know, my
initial instincts are that he you know, he saw what
he says he saw, you know, he was in the
position to see that information. I know George and Jeremy
always do a great job of you know, they don't
just dumb information out there on a whim. They sit
back and they take that time, They vet people, they
vet information. You know, They've got great sources and so
(07:05):
you know, I tip my hat to them for biding
their time, and obviously they felt like the time was right,
and Matthew himself would have felt like, now is the
time where I want to put my name and my
face out there, because it can't be easy to come
out publicly after working in the positions he did and
you know, saying the things that he's saying. So yeah,
really really credible individual and I hope that by him
(07:28):
coming forward it gives fuel to the people that can
actually use this information and action action. I hope we
get some progress with that.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
I might be reading between the lines a little bit,
but Matthew seemed to really elude a dependent relationship with
David Crush as far as feeling comfortable with coming out
and being a whistleblower. And you know, there's this critique
(07:57):
that we see, especially by the likes of Steve Stephen Greenstreet.
Where's David Grush's article that he promised? Why hasn't he
come to a skiff and you know, shared with a congress.
I I think it sounds to me, and again may
be breathing between the lines, it seems to me David
(08:21):
Grush is waiting for more backup it seems to me
he doesn't want to just keep going out on his own.
And now that Matthew's out, and Matthew alluded that there
were more that wanted to come out as well, I
don't know.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
Maybe there's safety in numbers.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
I mean, that surely is a big part of it.
I mean, Grush did actually finally get into a skiff
two days ago with Arrow, So you know, it's what
we wanted to happen the last couple of years has
finally happened. It's you know, the balls rolling in that
direction as far as Grush. But you know, you say
that that we have to read between the lines. We do. Unfortunately,
there are so many gaps in what we know as
(08:59):
the general public to what happens behind the scenes when
it comes to this subject, because we're dealing with such
highly classified information that unfortunately we're just not able to
see the full picture. And so it's very easy for
certain people in certain areas. The debunkers will fill in
their gaps with debunking, you know, and the believers with
(09:19):
other things and everything else in between. And so it
is a really difficult subject when you try to put
together a full puzzle and you just haven't got all
the pieces. There are going to be some real gaps,
but strength in numbers absolutely. David Grush always said that
he'd spoken to forty plus whistleblowers and you know, now
we're we have been hearing about they're ready to come
forward and things like that. But you know, if I
(09:41):
was a whistleblower, you think looking at the way that
David Grush has been received in the last couple of years,
hasn't been you know, that enticing. Let's say, for some
people to want to sleep, it's got to be nerve wracking.
So I trump put myself in their shoes, and you
know it is going to be a slow process unfortunately
as far as public information goes. But you know, we
got to do it right. There's only going to be
(10:02):
really one real chance to get this done without pushing
it back many years in my opinion.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yeah, having to do it right. You just kind of
rung a bell when you said that. You know, you've
spoken to to luel Zando. You know, Lou you know,
what's your take on the the images that he's put
out that people have critiqued him for. Like one was
like that the chandelier image which I'll just pop up
because I have that. So, like there's this chandelier image,
(10:28):
which you know, like as a move on and field investigator,
that's the kind of basic thing that like you're able
to call out pretty quickly. Yeah, you know that, that's
one of the first things you think, like, oh, did
somebody take this picture from inside a building? Is it
a refraction from a light, you know, post outside that
that kind of thing. And then there was the second
one recently, which he didn't actually claim was.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
A really UFO.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
He was just show you, displaying it as an example
of what someone took a picture of. A pilot took
a picture of you know what, was it nineteen seventy something.
I think I can't remember what year it was.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
I'm not sure what year it was.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Yeah, yeah, but and saying oh, this is interesting, you know,
this is the kind of stuff that we look into.
But the fact that he even put it out there
without and I don't know, I guess I think that
you would think that lou would know, especially as a
counter intelligence you know, you know, officer, that he would
(11:28):
know how people process information.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
So what's your what's your take on that?
Speaker 3 (11:35):
Yeah, I mean I think the timing definitely wasn't right
for that last photo in the setting that it was.
It was a really important event with so many great
panel members giving such great information in that setting on
Capitol Hill, and so I think it Lou should have
known what the community's reaction would have been like, even
with the caveats that he gave. He should have known
that it would have maybe overshadowed some of the other information.
(11:58):
So that I think there was a genuine mistake there
on his part. You know, there's no real reason to
you know, he could have highlighted the point that he
was making without showing the photograph. I think it was
a spur of the moment thing that I think, in hindsight,
I think he probably does regret.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Yeah, I do have to kind of wonder if I know,
they say, once you're an intelligence community, you're always in
the intelligence community, you know, like my father's you know,
says once your marine, you're always a marine kind of thing.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
So you but.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
He is in a different world now, he is operating
in a different way. Especially if you read his you know,
book Imminent, you really get this sense of transition from
government worker to my life's been kind of turned upside down,
and now I have to embrace this new lifestyle, this
new lifestyle that people critique Lou of living, which I
(12:53):
think is kind of absurd. But so I think that
maybe is it possible that he's just kind of his
guard down and just because this is this is kind
of how he's making a living.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Now, Yeah, I mean, it's it's hard to say, you know,
you know, I do know Lou, but I don't know
the reasons why he makes certain decisions, you know, I
just don't I think, you know, I look at the
big picture. He brought a lot of people to this subject.
He brought Congress to this subject. He's done some great work.
He's not you know, he's human like the rest of us. Sure,
(13:27):
you know, could he be trying? Could he be counterintelligence?
Still to some degree? Absolutely, because we don't genuinely know
everything about everybody, and that, you know, it's really difficult.
It's really hard to say. You know, that photograph, that
last one, I think it had. It did muddy the
waters slightly, it did take the the event in a
(13:48):
slightly different direction. So yeah, you know, hopefully it doesn't
happen again.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
That's what we said last time. So hopefully, hopefully we
don't have a third time. The Chuddy and Chat said.
I would suspect that the Alexander made a much better
living working for the FEDS than writing books about UFOs.
I think there's a lot to be said about that.
There's nothing that a steady paycheck exactly.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
You know, we knew his position that there's a certain
pay grade for that kind of position and a very
you know, lucrative pension and everything like that, which he
you know, gave up, you know, for the reasons that
he gave. So, yeah, you got to give it to
him for that.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
Yeah, have you ever seen a UFO before?
Speaker 3 (14:29):
No, I haven't, not a genuine UFO. I've seen strange
lights which I definitely can't be you know, we couldn't
figure out what they were. But but not you know,
not an object, not a metallic sphere or a disc
or anything like that.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
I would absolutely love to Yeah, that was my experience
too when I was about twelve years old. You know,
so lights behaving in ways that shouldn't be behaving in
in you know, nineteen ninety one or two, well, you know, especially,
And that's what I love about It's funny you were
talking about the UFO study being kind of stale, and
that's true. So but now we're at this kind of
(15:05):
an inflection point of the old the older it is,
the better it is, and the newer the technology is,
the better it is, and everything else in between is
really questionable, you know. So it's like it's funny, it
was just I just picked up this old, this old book.
This is you know, you're familiar with Philip Class indeed, yeah, yeah,
(15:28):
world class debunker. But I wanted to read this and
get and just see things from his perspective, because when
you look at all these old cases, there's always something
new to discover.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
I think, you know, at least on a personal.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
Level, very much. So, you know, the good good thing
that also I found with the post twenty seventeen and
the wrapping up of the subject that it's it's breathed
a new life into old cases as well, because there
are certain cases now with all this high around the
subject and the legitimacy of it a bit more in
the public eye, is that you can compare new cases
(16:06):
and go back into the historical record and see old
cases in a whole new light because you can actually
almost cross reference certain cases and go, oh, well, that
old case makes more sense because it relates almost to
something that we're seeing in the modern times and that
and you know, through these down periods that we do
still get every now and again. It's the perfect time
for me personally to go back and just brush up
(16:28):
on some of them old cases that I used to
research when I first started, you know, many years ago.
And so it's like this revolving kind of circle of
you know, just keeping that knowledge fresh and not forgetting
about the old stuff because it is so important to
the overall study.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Well, speaking of the new stuff, I think you have
an episode with Heavy Lube coming up soon, right, Yeah,
so what should what should we expect? What's in that conversation?
Speaker 3 (16:55):
Obviously av He said it's kind of the first interview
he's done in the UFO community since he was a
panel member at the May first event. And you know,
he's talking about, you know, how he would, you know,
want a billion dollars for a really serious UAP study
that's not on the same vein as the Galileo project,
but more focused on on the UAP themselves, And so
we touch upon that a bit. Abby's just always really
(17:19):
great to listen to. You know, I always have to
mentally prepare myself for speaking with him because he speaks
in such depth about you know, astrophysics and astronomy and
things like that. But yeah, it's really interesting interview people
that I think are gonna like it. Abby's just a
really a great guess. So that's going to come out tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
That's awesome. I look forward to it.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
And he also has a good sense of humor too,
he does, and it's in his books, so it's great. Yeah,
And I think that's a great way to communicate this
subject because people either think.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
It's you know, weird power normal.
Speaker 1 (17:52):
Or you know, it has to be hard science, but
you know, you can be kind of somewhere in between
have fun with it a little bit.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Definitely I did that. In one question, I asked him,
you know, about his presentation at the panel, and he
gave that very scientific answer, and then I followed it
up by asking him, you know, well, Eric Davis was
sat almost next to you, and he's a you know,
a reputable scientist, but he was saying some very out
there things about you know, this subject, and so I
asked Avi what his thoughts were, and you know, he
(18:18):
doesn't hold back. He's like, you know, stories are good,
but it's not enough for me. You know, I need
that hard evidence in the data. So you know, it's
great to kind of I almost knew that's how he
was going to answer it, but I wanted to put
it to him anyway. So yeah, it's great. He has
that real good skeptic side of him. But he's so
very open to this subject. And we need so many
more people like that.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
We do.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
We have more now that are public and prominent, yes,
but but the truth is, I mean, especially in like
the sixties, you know, you did have some prominent scientists,
even Carl Siegan in the early years, you know, was
quite interested in the UFO subject in CIA had Kit Green,
and then there was this like gap of decades and
(19:01):
now we finally have some big names like you know,
doctor Gary Nolan and Abby Loebe, you know, doctor Kevin Kanuth.
I've interviewed he and I and I love I know,
I just geek out about this like probably every episode.
But did you ever see the video at the Soul
conference that Kevin Kanuth presented.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
Maybe that particular event.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
So what what he what he presented was research based
on the researcher from years ago, but you know, kind
of updated it. And he was explaining scientifically how that
spooky thing we see in the movies where a UFO
comes near a car and the car goes out, you know,
and then magically goes back on and forever. You know, Oh,
(19:50):
that's so ridiculous, that's absurd, that's just paranormal magic whatever. Well,
he actually presented exactly how an electri you know, nionizing
like electromagnetic energy can actually affect the starter of a car,
the older cars particularly. Yeah, And I just love that stuff,
(20:10):
you know, because it's like you said, it's it's if
you're patient enough, if you wait long enough, like David
Garsh is gonna come out, he's going to go into
a skiff and it doesn't. It doesn't do us any good.
I don't think to have people in nay saying in
between and constantly and you know, for some I would
say whining.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
You know, I right? Is that is that a good descriptive?
What about you?
Speaker 1 (20:35):
So, you know, things get a little bit more difficult
to accept, I think when it becomes anecdotal. So do
you think that the the Immaculate Constellation program, even with
you know, Matthew Brown's you know love and page paper submitted.
(20:57):
Is that enough, like, is there is there enough that's
tangible there or that you accept it as a possible
real UAP recovery program.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
I think there's enough there for people with the power
to act on it. There's something for them to work with.
So if it turns out that it's an avenue, they
go down and leads to a dead end, so be it.
You know, we regularly hear from people who have seen
UAP videos on networks such as the Cippernette or Jaywix
within the Department of Defense, so that the avenue directly
within the DD already. These other things that get added on,
(21:29):
like immaculate constellation are just more things to help, you know,
and to finally get that information to the members of Congress.
It is really important. And as this process keeps going,
it seems that a lot of naysayers, let's say, have
already made their mind up about these things, and we're
not even maybe not even close to the finish line yet.
(21:50):
I'd like to think maybe we're getting there. So for
me personally, I certainly won't make up my mind on
anything at this point other than there is something that
is worth the of this investigation. This subject is worthy
of being taken seriously, and I think it's healthy to
be open minded about it potentially being an HI and
not just top secret military technology. So, you know, if
(22:14):
I can't speak on behalf of the debunkers, I don't
know what drives them some of them to be the
way they are, but it certainly doesn't detract from my
thinking or my work, my direction. Let's say.
Speaker 1 (22:28):
Yeah, I think for me, my concern is not you
or I, but the people that get turned on to
it and then get turned off very quickly because of
the debunkers, do you know, So I feel like we
lose minds that should be on the subject, that could
participate because they get turned off, you know, by what
(22:50):
the debunkers are saying, And a good debunker is really
effective and making you feel stupid for believing something. And
like I call out Green Street name, I don't, I
don't mind anymore, you know, he just he does that,
you know, he kind of writes things, present things in
a way that's kind of like shaming you, yeah, for
even even thinking about this as a possibility. And and
(23:14):
so that's why I try to work against the Democra
to some degree, or I'm trying to not because I'm like, oh,
I hate the demoker. It's because these other people that
were losing that I think, you know, deserve to be
involved and learn about this too.
Speaker 3 (23:28):
Yeah, I mean that it does attract certainly. You know.
The thing is that I tend to ignore that that
hardcore debunker. I think I don't have the energy or
the time even to kind of interact or even go
against them. I know that there's a close fine line
between being a skeptic and a debunker. I'm friends with
some very big skeptics. But the way they deliver their
(23:53):
side of the argument, let's say, and it's not even
an argument, their their thoughts and their opinions is healthy
and it's done in how the way. And I've had
many conversations with people like that, and at the end
of the day we'll still you know, be friendly with
each other. And I think that's healthy, you know. But
when it comes to the it crosses over into that
extreme debunking and like you said, make people feel like
(24:14):
they're doing something wrong almost I just don't have time
for it. And as much as I could sit there
and call them out on it and stand up to it.
They won't change. I don't think you know, they're not
going to listen to me. They've already made their minds up.
That's who they want to be, how they want to
be perceived. They obviously get something from it. I said,
just let them do it. They'll get bored eventually.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
I thought green Seak was going to get bored. He
posted like a couple of weeks ago that he's done
with it, and then he just kept going.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
Yeah, that's the thing. You know, I just ignore it.
If I don't see it, you know it. You know,
it's not going to affect me, because it does frustrate
me to see it, and it frustrates me to see people,
especially if people are directly getting bullied, which does happen,
and to know, I mean, that's just just not on.
But you know, we're all grown ups here. I think
at the end of the day, we can we can
(25:05):
handle ourselves.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
There is a certain irony about it because they they
seem to just keep going at it right and and
but the critique of the UFO enthusiast or investigator researcher
a podcast or is that you guys are obsessed and
you can't stop.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Neither, can you going? Do you know?
Speaker 1 (25:27):
And and I do kind of wonder if there's like
a you know, just a subconscious attraction to the subject,
even if you are highly skeptical of it.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
I just don't know that. I mean, they must be quite
miserable to act that way day in and day out,
and that's what I can't wrap my head around. And
I just think, you know, look, I wish them all
the best, and if they've got something going on that
makes them that way, I don't know, you know, yeah, what.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
Do you What do you know about the S four
movie that's supposed to come out with about Bubblazar. Apparently
this is supposed to be kind of groundbreaking and really
really insightful.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
Yeah, so it really focuses on that specific time, that
quite short amount of time that Bobblazar allegedly worked at
S four on the craft, let's say. And so you know,
I spoke with Luigi venda Telli, the director and executive producer.
Great guy. I think he has put a lot of
hard work, his heart and soul into this project. So
it's going to be really interesting to see how this
(26:29):
differs from any previous work on Bubblazar, notably Jeremy Corbell's documentary.
But they've also kind of brought in this modern technology
to create this virtual reality model, let's say, of S four,
which by the sounds of it, is going to be
very in depth and you'll be able to take this
virtual tour around the facility that even Bob himself is saying,
(26:49):
you know, they've nailed it. They've got it almost to
the to the point where he feels like he's back
there again. Yeah. And I think then there'll be a
companion book as well to come out with it. So
I think it's great telling a story again that we
kind of think we may know, but with new technology
and and you know, some of the people that they've
interviewed for it, old friends of Bob's that we may
(27:10):
not have heard from before in recent times, may may
just add a little bit of something to the story.
Whether it sways anyone. And I'm kind of on the
fence still with this whole story. Well we'll see, you know,
but again it's I'm open minded to it because it
can't be proved one hundred percent one way or the other,
so I have to keep it on the proverbial table
(27:30):
of course.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
Well to find out find that video of Luigi Vendadelli
and other interviews, go to h I posted right here.
It's at Disclosure Team on YouTube. Let me just drop
that on the comments, guys, and it's also in the
show description as well. Then of course you can just
follow on x at Disclosure Team X and on Instagram
(27:53):
Disclosure Underscore Team. Okay, I have to ask you this
question because I'd see it, you know, discussed online and
there I think there is something to it, you know,
is there something about News Nation and covering the u UFO.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
UAP topic in the way that it that it does.
Speaker 1 (28:17):
Because it seems like you can compare it to any
other station and no one covers it. I mean, it's
it does huge numbers covering the UFO and u AP topic.
Do you think that there is anything behind News Nation
that that motivates this for the purposes of disclosure or
(28:39):
do you think it's just a good business model?
Speaker 3 (28:41):
Yeah? I tend to think, you know, the majority of
that would lean towards it being a good business model.
They really understand the way that people consume news these days,
that it's you know, it's online and it's not just
these old networks that you know, may have ties to
money from elsewhere. Let's say, you know, I see it
like that. I think it's just a really good way
(29:03):
of you know, pushing the envelope when it comes to
journalism and still trying to be like old school, but
in a new way. You know. It's it's not independent
as other journalists we have in this community. I think
it rides that balance in between, and it does it
really well, really well.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
Yeah, I g guess it's a good point because if
you look at legacy media, the conspiracy there always was.
They're not covering it because the people behind the scenes
are telling them not to cover it. And now you
have news Nation who is covering it and the conspiracy
is behind the scenes are making them cover it.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
It's like one is it right?
Speaker 3 (29:38):
You're always going to get that, I think with any
kind of media outlet. But yeah, I just see it
as just a sign of the times.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Really yeah. So do you think there's any kind of crossover.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
Do you believe in anything related to power normal or
other you know, high strangeness activity.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
With relating to UAP. Yeah, I mean it's it's certainly possible.
I think. I think when I look at the UFO subject,
and you know, if NHI is real, which I believe
that there is some reality to it, obviously, I think
that if we were to find out the truth, it
would be so far beyond what we may have even conceived,
so far as in some of the theories and hypotheses,
(30:17):
that it really does paint a picture that the whole
paranormal subject falls right in there with this this subject
as well. I think that would just make the most sense,
rather than it being completely separate entities pun intended. I
think it does seem like there really could be some
relation there, especially like when you look at ghosts and
apparitions and things like that.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
I think I fear and you know, I have, you know,
a couple of friends in this community that very much
so believe that something like gray aliens or whatever are
demons are you know, because you know they're either religious
or Catholic or something like that, and so that's kind
of how they interpret it. I don't you know obviously
that way. Do you think that there is a danger
(31:02):
in that or do you think that that's reasonable to consider.
Speaker 3 (31:08):
I don't think as a danger to that at all.
I think people ascribe their own names to these things
because they fit into a certain framework of how they
maybe have been brought up or things that they believe
in when it comes to religion and that, and again
I think there's definitely some connection between you know, religion
and history and the history of religion that that fits
(31:28):
into this. So I think focusing too much on the
labels maybe just going a bit too far, maybe because
we may they may just interpret certain things that someone
else may call it grayly and a demon. Yeah, I think, yeah,
I don't think it does too much damage necessarily.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
M So what do we need to do next step
or not doing to you know, kind of bring in
disclosure or just study the subject in general.
Speaker 3 (31:59):
I still think public awareness is one of the most
key things. And it's the same cliche speak with your family,
speak with your friends, make it a normal everyday conversation.
I mean, I look here around me in the UK
and we still have the tabloid newspapers are the ones
that cover the subject and it's still little green men
in the X files, whereas over in the US it's
(32:21):
kind of shifted away from that in recent years. And
so over here it's really about not allowing that stigma
to be the kind of main source for everyday folk.
It's about legitimizing it through just everyday conversation and bringing
awareness to what is happening these days that there are
congressional hearings in the US, it's being taken seriously by
(32:42):
the government, and so you know, I've found that by
having those conversations myself that people are very open to it.
They just haven't wanted to talk about it through fear
of ridicule. So I think people need to just don't
be afraid to bring it up at the dinner table
and you might be pleasantly surprised.
Speaker 1 (32:58):
Yeah, And I think that's actually good way to ease
people into it, to just maybe not have a full
blown conversation about Betty and Barney Hill on the first conversation.
But you know, if you can say, oh, hey, did
you hear that Congress is having a hearing or you know,
a closed door hearing with a UFO whistleblower, Oh no, yeah,
(33:21):
oh it's in the news. It's it's real, okay, And
then don't overdo it, you know, just but I think
it's a good way to like just say, hey, this
is something that serious people are looking into and I
know there are a lot of uh, stage there's a
lot of stagecraft in politics, and I know there are
politicians who say, don't know that the country Singapore exists, sadly,
(33:46):
but those who do get those positions, they they are
serious people. They are you know, you know, worldly, you know.
Speaker 2 (33:56):
Smart people.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
You don't you don't get those positions in Congress, no
if you're not. And so I think that's important to emphasize.
Speaker 2 (34:10):
Is Arrow.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
Not beholden to Congress.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
I mean they should be, They're mandated to do certain
things by Congress. But you know, in the past ten
years with doctor Seawan Kirkpatrick and I think the interim
director Tim Phillips, it didn't seem like they were doing
what they should have been doing. I think just this
week with the Arrow meeting with David Grush, it seems
(34:39):
that David Grush kind of in the conversation gave so
much more than arrows ever given. And so they really
need to buck their ideas up. But I think John
Kosloski so far has given us a hint that maybe
he's different to what we've seen previously. I mean, I
still look back to the UAP Task Force and the
progress that we got through them. That was a great
(35:00):
agency and they were doing great work, and we need
to get back to that, you know. But again it's
people like Senator Gillibrand who need to really buckle down
and make sure that Arrow are doing this, and we
don't hear from us so much anymore. I was always
really hopeful that we'd see more things come from the
Senate as well, maybe hearings, more hearings through the Senate
with the Armed Services Committee and the Intel Committee, but
(35:23):
we haven't. Unfortunately, it's now almost fallen on the House
and the Oversight Committee there to kind of be pushing
this subject forward. So I'll take anything really, you know,
it's all a win at the end of the day
that they're taking this seriously at all. And even this week,
you know, we've had many different things happen. We had
the skiff meeting with Arrow and Grush, We had doctor
Eric Davis finally get in a skiff with Berlison, and
(35:46):
then today I think the UAP Caucus members met with
the FBI for a briefing where they saw a new
UFO video from the FBI that even Arrow hasn't seen.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
Interesting.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
Three major things happening in one week. As much as
we don't hear much about this publicly, it's certainly encouraging
to hear about it and to know that the work's
being done to set up for when we do get
the next necessarily like public hearing or something like that.
So yeah, yeah, I think people need to understand that
the work is being done.
Speaker 1 (36:17):
Yes, And even though I mean, Jilbrian, you know that's
my state, you know, we're really appreciated the work that
she's done. And Schumer, Shuck Schumer. You know, last year
we went out outside of his his office.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
In the city.
Speaker 1 (36:30):
You know, I just you know, stood there, held a sign,
but you know, it was just nice to show your
presence and show your support for the cause. I really
appreciate it. But you know, it is politics, and these
are careers, and you know, the politics in the US
right now are kind of just off the charts. So
I think I think in that if, if ever there's
a time for them to kind of like take a
(36:50):
break from it and focus on, you know, what's going
on in government, then that makes sense that that's why
we're having kind of a down down period. So you know,
AOC is most likely in the challenge Schumer. So I'm
sure the Democrats are like shuffling behind the scenes figuring.
Speaker 2 (37:08):
Out like, oh my god, what are we gonna do?
Speaker 1 (37:10):
Uh, So there's gonna be all this realignment of power
and so that that's gonna be really fascinating to see
where that goes, because you remember that that first hearing
with Crush AOC was hardcore.
Speaker 2 (37:22):
Follow the money, file.
Speaker 1 (37:23):
The money, Follow money, And I think, like, even if
she doesn't believe in it, like that's.
Speaker 2 (37:27):
The way to go.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
Like following that money trail, I think is really just
it's like the easiest thing to do, and you don't
have to think it should be but you don't have
to think about fantastical ideas or super secret this and that.
Speaker 2 (37:40):
Just follow the money and it should take you there hopefully.
Speaker 1 (37:44):
But you're right, You're right, that's not always the easiest, Yeah, because.
Speaker 3 (37:49):
Now, and I think it comes down to as well,
because people contacting their representatives. We've been saying it for years,
and you know, we've still got so many more members
of Congress to get on board with this subject. You know,
you know, we've got to be realistic as well. We
live in the real world. Things are happening in this
in this world every single day, and Congress's focus is
elsewhere most of the time. And you see people say,
(38:10):
but this is the biggest story of all time. But yeah,
it is. But we've got to make them aware of
it first for them to start to open it seriously.
And again it's it's yet another process that we need
to kind of get into gear. So you know, I think,
you know, if people are fed up with it, then
you know, it's unfortunate that they feel like that. But
it is going to take time, and it's going to
(38:31):
take people just keep stepping up to the plate. We
need that to happen. We've come so close to having
you know, more languages implemented through the NDAA. We got
so close and it's been rejected. But it doesn't mean
we need to stop there. We need to keep doing
it because we can get there. I do believe it,
just we just need that that just keep pushing.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Yeah, obviously we've made some major inroads and progress forward.
And yeah, so the whistle blower protection isn't ideal, but
I guess technically it's better than you know, where it
was now. According to Matthew Brown, behind the scenes, there
(39:12):
is now a resurgence of suppression of the of the
topic of UFOs and kind of the shaming, like you
don't talk about it's now a taboo subject. Again, that
that's worrisome because that that's what's kept us where we
are for decades in the first place. Do you think
(39:36):
that we can we can find our way out of
it organically without you know, an NDAA amendment in the
next bill, or you know, can we can we do
it solely through the media.
Speaker 3 (39:49):
Yeah, I think we can. I think that will take
it a lot longer. I think that we would just
have to kind of go round it and take a
long arch, which would take you know, much much longer
than a direct route through the NDA, of course, But
I am an optimist, so you know, for better or worse,
I don't know. At this point, you can't.
Speaker 1 (40:08):
You can't do what you're doing if you're not an optimist.
Speaker 3 (40:10):
Like, yeah, very true, very true. So yeah, I think
there are still different routes that we can take. Yeah,
it's just it's just keeping the momentum and not giving
up or being too disheartened when things like when the
NDAA failed, you know, it was disheartening, but then you
have to pick yourself straight back up and say you look,
you know we're gonna get Knox. We're gonna get pushed back.
There's always been pushed back behind the scenes. You know,
(40:32):
we've done it before, we've we've we've got around it,
and we'll get through each brick wall as we come
to it.
Speaker 1 (40:37):
Yeah, and scientists will come along as as well. Scientist
is a funny thing. And you know, I love Neil
deGrasse Tyson, but also he sometimes really irks me, you know,
with his ultra ultra I wouldn't even call it ultra skepticism.
It's just he doesn't he doesn't really doesn't seem to
really take the time to study the subject. You know,
it's kind of surface level, you know, kind of like
(41:00):
Fitzpatrick when I think was it Mick West was interviewing
him and he like clearly was was lacking didn't understand
the tic TAC I think it was the tic TAC
video they were talking about, and it was like he
was clearly kind of ignorant. It's like whoa, you know,
how does that happen? But for instance, with the controversy
(41:21):
over the these red shift lights in the distant galaxies
that they've recently discovered which either won Either the Big
Bang is wrong and it's much much much older than
we thought, or those galaxies were formed you know, much earlier,
you know, like two hundred million years or something like that.
(41:43):
And so scientists are now like kind of slugging it out,
you know, and trying to figure out like what happened
and why is this happening? And but fundamentally the Big
Bang theory can you know, still hold holds together. But
that's the way science is. And I am encouraged by,
like we mentioned earlier, these other science just coming forward
and kind of pushing the subject because eventually, if you
get enough good minds, you know, chipping away at it,
(42:04):
we will we will get get to the center of it.
Speaker 3 (42:08):
Yeah. Absolutely, And I'd rather have scientists arguing about UAP
than not looking at it at all, because you know,
it will they'll push each other to keep going and
keep studying it and want to prove the other wrong.
Let's say. You know, so it's great that we have
people starting to switch onto it in in academia and
in the scientific community. And then we've got great think
tanks like the Soul Foundation full of some wonderful people
(42:28):
within ex government x you know, this and that and
science mixed in there as well. You know, we're getting
some serious papers written, some some op heads and that.
Again really great minds and this. You know, it does
seem to be progressing. We get more and more people
coming forward each year, you know, with interest. Is it enough? No,
it's definitely not enough, but it's encouraging and speaking with
(42:49):
people like Avi, you know he you know, he speaks
to people every day about this subject, and you know,
it's surprising how many people have such high regard are
genuinely curious about the subject. So yeah, I'm I'm encouraged
by it all.
Speaker 1 (43:02):
The UFO form appearance formation underwater off the coast of California,
what's your take on that? Was that just an image
processing problem from a Google satellite or because it was
there and then it kind of just seemed to disappear?
So what's your take on that?
Speaker 3 (43:23):
Yeah, I don't think there's any grand conspiracy behind it,
to be honest. Yeah, if I don't have much evidence
for anything, well maybe I should rephrase THATCXU. We would
have much evidence for anything at all in this subject,
to be fair. But it's very easy to latch ontour
to think of it as a conspiracy. It's it's too
easy to do that, and so I pulled myself back
(43:44):
from doing that. And I think coincidence comes first for me.
It's just something that happens, you know.
Speaker 1 (43:51):
Yeah, do go out and spend time just looking at
the stars and waiting to see something, or.
Speaker 3 (43:58):
I don't because unfortunately here in England, nine times out
of ten or ninety nine times out of one hundred,
the skies are just very much overcast. Yeah, I do
love looking at the sky, and whenever I'm abroad anywhere
that the skies are nice, I'm mesmerized by.
Speaker 2 (44:15):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (44:16):
I love it. I love the idea of it. But yeah,
it's very disheartening every day when I look out my
window and it's just great skies and cloudy.
Speaker 1 (44:23):
I'm laughing because we're currently experiencing your weather.
Speaker 3 (44:27):
It's just like I really, yeah, oh my god, this.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
Happened last year too, just rainy days after rainy days
and overcast and it's like, oh my gosh, what happened
to spring? You know, we might get like a couple
of days or one or one day here or there,
or the sun, but oh my god, it's just constant.
Speaker 2 (44:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (44:46):
And we lived in New York City for a while
and that was one thing I really missed was being
able to just step outside and you know, look at
the stars at night. You know, if there was some
kind of you know, the Persians or some kind of
you know event, meteor event, I'd step outside and this
just pointless, Like you can't you know, with the pollution
(45:08):
and the overcast of the city, like it was just impossible.
So we love it now in Hudson Valley where we
can actually you get some air, get some clear skies.
Speaker 3 (45:16):
Nice.
Speaker 1 (45:16):
Yeah, that's fantastic. You know, are you Are you a
spiritual person in any way?
Speaker 3 (45:28):
I'm not directly spiritual, and I think my years in
this subject have really opened me up to that kind
of side of things. But it's not something I've really
delved into practicing or even researching. But you know, making
friends and so many connections in the community with people
that are kind of more on that side of things,
it's you know, it's allowed me to kind of say, okay,
(45:49):
well this is a part and parcel of this subject.
I come from that very nuts and bolts background, and
I realized that just by staying in the nuts and
bolts only. I'm I'm I've got tonal vision. I'm not
opening myself up to the peripherals where there's more information
and things to kind of add to this this whole puzzle.
So you know, yeah, I find it just as fascinating,
(46:10):
and I'll have interviews with people that are more on
that kind of side of things. So yeah, definitely open
to it.
Speaker 1 (46:17):
Yeah, I do find it interesting. You know, as a
ignostic slashed atheist, you know that I'm totally open to
the whole spiritual side of things because because you know,
there's some you know, things like panpsychism and all these
other philosophies that where it's like, well, maybe the fundamental
nature of reality is consciousness or what have you, and
so that all these high strangeness things are really as
(46:39):
strange as we think they are. We just don't understand
the fundamentals. And I ask you that because I I
do think that there seems to be something connected to
consciousness with a lot of these UAP experiences. If you
(47:01):
could have the opportunity to experience something like a Jake
Barber or you know, a Betty Hill like would would
would you be willing to do that or is that
something that that frightens you.
Speaker 3 (47:15):
The unknown frightens me a little bit. It's the same
when people ask me if I've tried CE five and
I answer no, I haven't, because it's because we don't
fully understand what's behind UFOs and uh. I think calling
something in that you don't know has just as much
potential to be as dangerous as it is wonderful. So
(47:38):
I always err on the side of caution just to
because I don't know. I think it's it would be
wrong with me to do that. I just I just
feel like it's not right for me at this time,
you know. But it's like I do want that sighting though,
I want to see something spectacular, I want to feel
something spectacular. When you think about the Jake Barber story
(47:59):
where he sees the amazing object that he's picked up,
but he has that almost spiritual feeling, that that overwhelming
feeling of like that like the feminine love kind of feeling.
I think he kind of almost described it as and
it didn't sound bad necessarily, but then it could just
as easily be something almost identical, but that you do
(48:19):
feel fear at the same time as well.
Speaker 1 (48:22):
So yeah, why do you think you feel that what
do you think that comes from that desire to kind
of have that experience to see a UFO or what
have you.
Speaker 3 (48:32):
It's just that because I'm such an advocate for disclosure
and I feel that, you know, a lot of people
that are experiences or witnesses to these things, they've already
had their disclosure. They don't need that full capital D
disclosure because for them, they've seen it, they know it's real.
Like I believe it's real, but do I know it's real?
Not one hundred percent. I need that that object in
(48:54):
the sky I've just seen has just given you know,
I want that. You know, it won't necessarily change what
I do, but just give me that boost something, It
will give me something that that may I'm not saying
it's missing necessarily from me, but it's like curiosity just
need it fulfilling.
Speaker 1 (49:11):
Because it's like you're forever on the edge, right, It's
it's so close, yeah, yeah, yeah, because there's enough, there's
enough evidence to make you think that it seems like
there very could well be extraterrestrials or NHI. What have
you visiting here and doing things? But you can't say
you like you just can't get there. So I understand
(49:34):
that that desire because even the UFO that I that
I saw, it was essentially a light in the sky
when I was a kid, right, you know, I didn't
see the metallic side. I didn't you know, see you know,
a glowing egg.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
Sure, right, oh you know.
Speaker 1 (49:51):
Actually when I ask me about that too, m h.
I have some suspicions about the Jake Barber video, not
the Jake Barber video, but the video that that Ross
Coulhart included in his original News Nation interview with Jake.
Speaker 2 (50:07):
It was kind of misleading.
Speaker 1 (50:08):
It was misleading because that wasn't the video that you know,
Jake had actually taken. And I've recently kind of rewatched
that video again, and initially I was on the side
of like, yeah, it looks like it's a heavy object.
Speaker 2 (50:22):
But I just kept thinking about it.
Speaker 1 (50:23):
I was like, I don't know that that could have
been a balloon, Like if it was, what's your thing?
Speaker 3 (50:32):
Yeah, I mean I guess it could be. Yeah. And
again it comes down to I don't spend that much
time worrying too much about individual videos. I still try
and like pull myself away from that and look at
the bigger picture look at Jake's testimony and story. Yeah
it didn't. It didn't help the way that that was
put out at the time. It certainly didn't. But I
(50:55):
quickly moved into listening to Jake and being very about
the work that Skywatcher and the team that are doing.
I think I think there should be more to come
from that that hopefully, Yeah, it.
Speaker 1 (51:07):
Is really fascinating, and I know Gary Nolan had some
insight into that. Yeah, we got to witness some of it,
So hopefully that drives more study because if they have
figured something out, that's interesting. But back to your point,
even if it's not like a CE five where you're
putting out your things, if they're using some kind of
technology to call these things down, is that not dangerous
(51:29):
as well?
Speaker 2 (51:30):
Because even if they're not.
Speaker 1 (51:34):
Intentionally here to harm us, we hear about all these
accidental UFO encounters, you know, John Burrows being kind of
radiating you know, uh, you know, Betty Cash. I mean,
like people have been really harmed because of these things,
even if it's not intentional.
Speaker 2 (51:50):
So I'm with you on that.
Speaker 1 (51:51):
I definitely have some serious concerns about calling down UFOs.
Speaker 3 (51:56):
Yeah, it's scary when you think about those cases, you know,
the cash Landern case. You know that was I not
want to be there at that time, as much as
I'd want to see that amazing shaped object and yeah,
everything that went on there. But yeah, yeah, it's funny.
But you know, the sky Watching team, they've put themselves
in this position. They're willing to do the work. It's
great that they've got the technology side of things, and
(52:16):
they're bringing in the psionics team as well, so you
kind of get both sides of the of something we've
not seen in one complete package before. So that excites me.
I like the way that they've presented things. They've they've
given us these really glossy, highly well produced YouTube videos,
which kind of feeds the people online that say we
want more, we want more when they get to watch
(52:37):
these well crafted videos. But then you know the studies
are being done as well. They're being as transparent as
they can be. You know, it'd be nice to hear
a bit more about the proprietary technology that they're using,
the dog whistle for example, But yeah, yeah, you know,
I understand they've got to maybe hold some things back
for now. We'll see how things look six twelve eighteen
(52:57):
months down the line.
Speaker 2 (52:59):
Sure.
Speaker 1 (52:59):
Yeah, and if they include more you know, sensors, having
more of a multi platform sensor system that can corroborate,
then that would really be helpful to.
Speaker 2 (53:12):
Vinnie. If you can leave us with any thought, what
would it.
Speaker 3 (53:16):
Be, I'd say to people, just keep having the conversation,
people watching as well. If they feel like they want
to do more, they can. I think, you know that
we need more voices, whether it be just more interactions online.
I like it when people reach out to me all
the time, and I try and speak to as many
(53:37):
people as they can, and I think it just you
know people. I don't want people to feel so separated
that from others in the community. I think, yeah, I
try not to use the cliche we're all in this together,
we should all work together, because I know it's not
that straightforward, but I think we are strength in numbers.
So I will use the contact your representatives. I think
that's still vital sure to that sort of angle of
(53:59):
just closure, that that course of action that we need
to continue on. But I think as well, just be curious,
be I've been minded, and be kind. Yeah, I think, yeah,
even to the debunkers, Yeah, why not you know, kill
them with kindness.
Speaker 2 (54:14):
That's right, all right? Cool Vine.
Speaker 1 (54:16):
I love that and actually reminded me it's about it's
about that time that I email my representatives again, you know,
like you said, like every once in a while, just
send out an email and just remind them, like, hey,
this matters to us. Yeah, it's important. It doesn't take much,
you know, just a sentence.
Speaker 3 (54:30):
Doesn't you know there are so many members of the
House that haven't kind of come on board yet. We
need them all on board. The more, the more, the merrier.
Speaker 1 (54:38):
Yep, exactly, all right, Vinnie, thank you so much for
being on Coffee and UFOs.
Speaker 2 (54:43):
I really appreciate it.
Speaker 3 (54:44):
Thank you, Allen really really enjoyed that.
Speaker 1 (54:46):
Okay, and everyone, please go to Vinnie's YouTube channel at
Real Disclosure Team for just numerous great, great interviews. If
you are a fan of Coffee and UFOs, please subscribe,
comment down below, like and click the notification bell so
you don't miss upcoming or unexpected videos. And if you
(55:08):
listen to the podcast. Wherever you listen to your podcast,
please give it a good rate and review because all
that really helps grow the podcast and the platform. As
a special thanks to Margie k and Race Hobbs. Just
going to send you guys my love. I really appreciate
all the support you give me here a coffee and
(55:28):
UFOs on your on Nex network and to the rest
of you out there, thank you for your ongoing support
over these years. I really really appreciate it. In the meantime,
be some love and live in the mystery.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2
Season Two Out Now! Law & Order: Criminal Justice System tells the real stories behind the landmark cases that have shaped how the most dangerous and influential criminals in America are prosecuted. In its second season, the series tackles the threat of terrorism in the United States. From the rise of extremist political groups in the 60s to domestic lone wolves in the modern day, we explore how organizations like the FBI and Joint Terrorism Take Force have evolved to fight back against a multitude of terrorist threats.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com