Speaker 1: Now here's a highlight from Coast to Coast AM on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: Welcome back to Coast to Coast AM.
Speaker 3: Scott Carlin is staying with me on for this next
Speaker 3: hour and the following, and also joining us is director
Speaker 3: James Fox. He has recently had a new UFO documentary
Speaker 3: called The Program Which I Watch, which is phenomenal. It
Speaker 3: goes behind the congressional hearings to leave skeptics astounded by
Speaker 3: new assertions from a growing cross of high level insiders
Speaker 3: who insist there is definitive proof we are not alone.
Speaker 3: Welcome James, thank you for being here.
Speaker 4: Oh, Lisa, thank you so much for having.
Speaker 3: Me on, And welcome back Scott, thank you for joining
Speaker 3: me again.
Speaker 5: Thanks Lisa, Hey, James, Hey, Scott.
Speaker 4: Good to hear you. Boys.
Speaker 2: Call reunion is happening this evening.
Speaker 3: You know, Scott, I have a quick question for you
Speaker 3: about the role of media and for you as well, James.
Speaker 3: How important do you think it is for media to
Speaker 3: be covering these this area of UAPs in mainstream media?
Speaker 3: Do you think that we have been complicit with not maintaining,
Speaker 3: with maintaining the secrecy that the government has said is illegitimate.
Speaker 3: Do you think that we have not done our job
Speaker 3: of bringing more now, of course on this show coast
Speaker 3: to coast, but in mainstream media, other mainstream outlets, do
Speaker 3: you think that we've not done our job?
Speaker 4: Do you want me to take a first stab at
Speaker 4: that or go for James? Go for it, James, I'm
Speaker 4: going all in on this one.
Speaker 2: You do it.
Speaker 6: So you know, I've been on Larry King nine times.
Speaker 6: I was just thinking about that, and I've been on
Speaker 6: you know, Fox and CNN and MSNBC and Nightline and
Speaker 6: Dateline with previous films. The last time I got any
Speaker 6: mainstream real coverage was with the Phenomenon. Now, granted there was,
Speaker 6: you know, the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid participated in
Speaker 6: the film Who's the Household Name? You know, we recently
Speaker 6: come off the heels of the New York Times article
Speaker 6: that that exposed the previously secret Pentagon UFO program. But
Speaker 6: since then, having like gone a little further, I did
Speaker 6: a film called Moment of Contact. Excuse me about it,
Speaker 6: an alleged UFO crash in Brazil. Not one mainstream media
Speaker 6: outlet touched it.
Speaker 4: I got it. I did another films, most recently.
Speaker 6: The program, and other than a few, barely any mainstream
Speaker 6: coverage whatsoever. And I'm thinking to myself, this is so
Speaker 6: strange because you get, you know, a president's sexual pecadillos,
Speaker 6: and and it's like it's all hands on deck with
Speaker 6: all the news organism, the.
Speaker 4: Various news organizations.
Speaker 6: You get uh, you know, a high level uh you know,
Speaker 6: intelligence officer like David Grush testifying under oath to a
Speaker 6: bipartisan group of lawmakers that we have definitive proof that
Speaker 6: we're not alone. You think that's so significant and so profound,
Speaker 6: not just the United States but globally, that we owe
Speaker 6: it to ourselves to take it down. But they've done
Speaker 6: basically nothing other than News Nation News Nation's really been
Speaker 6: doing some great coverage, but not a lot more.
Speaker 3: What would be the headline could it? Would it be
Speaker 3: we are not alone? How does this change the way
Speaker 3: we live live our lives now today? I mean, would
Speaker 3: that maybe alert some people like today our lives are
Speaker 3: going to change because we are not alone? I mean,
Speaker 3: what would it take? What would you see? The headline
Speaker 3: would be there, Scott, what would be the name of
Speaker 3: the show.
Speaker 5: Well, you know, it's just a catastrophic, tragic, you know,
Speaker 5: abdication of the first principles of what you know, journalism
Speaker 5: and a free press should be. And they've just completely
Speaker 5: ignored the story for a lot of you know, a
Speaker 5: lot of different reasons.
Speaker 1: And you know, the.
Speaker 5: Headline would be, you've been lied to for eighty years.
Speaker 5: You've been it's been obfuscated by the press who hasn't
Speaker 5: covered it. There's a you know, a devout complicitness there.
Speaker 5: But the headline ultimately is that the government the military
Speaker 5: have known about this for decades, for decades, and have
Speaker 5: you know, psyoped us put this information out there, stigmatize
Speaker 5: the subject. Gas lit gas lit, gas lit us. And
Speaker 5: the problem is they've dug themselves such a deep, epic,
Speaker 5: long term hull to come out of it now and
Speaker 5: ultimately reveal, Yes, you know we have had We've been
Speaker 5: retrieving uh, non human intelligence vehicles since World War Two.
Speaker 5: Yes we've covered biologics. Yes they are with us today.
Speaker 5: Yes they have technology and are able to penetrate our
Speaker 5: most secure and nuclear military airspace at will. There's nothing
Speaker 5: we can do about it. We don't know where they're from,
Speaker 5: we don't know why they're here, we don't know what
Speaker 5: they want. But we're now admitting that this is the case,
Speaker 5: that that can't happen. And the problem for the press
Speaker 5: is they're almost in the same place because there's zero
Speaker 5: institutional knowledge in these organizations, because they've ignored the story
Speaker 5: for decades. For them to get up to speed and
Speaker 5: be able to report on it with context, with you know,
Speaker 5: real clarity, it's almost impossible at this stage. I mean,
Speaker 5: they should start, they can start tomorrow, but it's a
Speaker 5: long game of it's a long game of catchup. And
Speaker 5: the headline is we screwed up, the government screwed up,
Speaker 5: and you, the public, you know, have been the screw ease.
Speaker 5: You've been, you know, left out of the biggest story
Speaker 5: in humanity. And independent people like Ross and James and
Speaker 5: News Nation, Leslie Kane and other people Jesse Michael's other
Speaker 5: people out there who are doing real, real, real hard
Speaker 5: hard work to bring the story story out and that's
Speaker 5: that's where it's being told and that's where that's where
Speaker 5: the public needs to find the truth today.
Speaker 3: Yes, and in terms of the program, movie and also
Speaker 3: the phenomenon, how do you feel that they're being received
Speaker 3: by the public. Now, there's a whole different set of
Speaker 3: responses and comments and wonderful support that's coming in through
Speaker 3: the public.
Speaker 2: How did that go for you, James with the program movie?
Speaker 6: Well, you know, it's incredible because you know, you've got
Speaker 6: this lack of mainstream coverage, and the public interest in
Speaker 6: the phenomenon is so vast. You know, people are curious
Speaker 6: and it's one of the few topics that that transcends
Speaker 6: politics and transcends religion, borders, and there's a there's a
Speaker 6: real thirst for credible information on the topic. And and uh,
Speaker 6: you know, as someone who's cranked out a number of
Speaker 6: UFO documentaries now U a p over the.
Speaker 4: Last thirty years. Uh, they they all perform incredibly well.
Speaker 6: And and I and I'm always shocked at how you know,
Speaker 6: one would expect the executives to take notice, you know,
Speaker 6: more than than they than they than they previously had
Speaker 6: in my opinion, because.
Speaker 4: We've been doing this.
Speaker 6: The program is the most independent release I've ever done
Speaker 6: in my life. And we were stuck at number one
Speaker 6: for the first six weeks on documentaries on.
Speaker 4: Apple and Amazon.
Speaker 6: Uh, you know, so there's clearly a tremendous interest within
Speaker 6: the public.
Speaker 4: It just shocks me that mainstream media hasn't hasn't.
Speaker 6: Followed up right, I mean, what was the name of
Speaker 6: the former ic i G who has provided all the
Speaker 6: classified information?
Speaker 4: Uh?
Speaker 6: Thomas Monheim, according to David Grush. And it's amazing to
Speaker 6: me that the you know that, here we go, we
Speaker 6: got this guy testifying under oath. You know that the
Speaker 6: you know that there's obviously classified information that he's unable
Speaker 6: to share publicly, that he'd given all the details necessary
Speaker 6: to verify his claims to the former ic IG. I
Speaker 6: didn't see any mainstream media outlet try to get him,
Speaker 6: you know, interviewed, bring him in maybe to testify. There
Speaker 6: was just there was no effort whatsoever. And he was
Speaker 6: sitting there saying, I've given all the classified details to
Speaker 6: verify my claims.
Speaker 4: To the ic i G.
Speaker 6: And yet the mainstream media did nothing with it.
Speaker 5: Shocking And not only that, James, if you recall the
Speaker 5: report that the Inspector General had to pass up to
Speaker 5: the House and the Senate Select Intelligence committees. Basically his
Speaker 5: initial comment was he deemed David Grusha's testimony urgent, incredible
Speaker 5: and incredible, yep, urgent, incredible.
Speaker 3: And so in terms of that, if it is urgent,
Speaker 3: incredible and the public is responding those are usually if
Speaker 3: you see any other type of YouTube video or TikTok
Speaker 3: or news story that would be covered, and you're right,
Speaker 3: it could be porcupines, it could be anything. But this
Speaker 3: has all the ingredients for something that should be covered
Speaker 3: in a repetitive way on mainstream media, and it absolutely isn't.
Speaker 2: So there'll take Yeah.
Speaker 6: I'll tell you something else as well. You know, I
Speaker 6: waited a long time. I don't think unfortunately Stanton Friedman,
Speaker 6: the nuclear physicist.
Speaker 4: Slash UFO researcher, was alive to see it.
Speaker 6: But finally sixty minutes did a segment on UFOs and
Speaker 6: I think it was one of their best most popular
Speaker 6: segments in history. It's not number one, it was definitely
Speaker 6: number two. And the New York Times article in twenty
Speaker 6: seventeen with the secret previously classified government or Pentagon UFO
Speaker 6: program one of the most popular.
Speaker 4: Stories that they ever did. And where's the follow up stuff?
Speaker 4: You know, like, you make these incredible claims and then
Speaker 4: there's no follow up.
Speaker 6: You know, it's incredibly popular, there's a massive interest.
Speaker 4: It's just sucking to me.
Speaker 3: So is it because that these claims that do not
Speaker 3: have validity behind them? Is there a way, maybe not
Speaker 3: to verify that the claims are actually true. What would
Speaker 3: be if there was absolute evidence that the government is
Speaker 3: in possession of non human intelligence and spacecraft, and we
Speaker 3: were able to see that in the public. How would
Speaker 3: that change what the audience views or how the audience
Speaker 3: views it. How would that change the way we live
Speaker 3: our lives?
Speaker 4: Scott, you want to.
Speaker 5: Well, listen, you have seventy years of obfuscation of this
Speaker 5: story being constipated in the public, you know, in the
Speaker 5: public arena. And it's a little like that scene in
Speaker 5: the movie Network. I don't know if anybody remembers that
Speaker 5: film when Howard Beale has called into the conference room,
Speaker 5: the chairman of the Network, and he berates them and says,
Speaker 5: mister Beale, you are screwing with the primal forces of nature.
Speaker 5: Well trust me. The institutional forces that have been embedded
Speaker 5: inside the intelligence community, inside private aerospace dark op programs
Speaker 5: for decades and decades are highly skilled at making sure
Speaker 5: this story does not get told the way it needs
Speaker 5: to be told and does not come out the way
Speaker 5: it needs to needs to come out. That is that's
Speaker 5: what's holding it. You know, what's holding it back? And
Speaker 5: listen back in the fifties when this really was a
Speaker 5: thing around Roswell and that time they felt the public
Speaker 5: really couldn't handle this information. We all saw what happened
Speaker 5: when Orson Wells and the Mercury Theater broadcast The War
Speaker 5: of the World's and there was, you know, there was
Speaker 5: panic following a radio show that people misinterpreted as a
Speaker 5: you know, as a live you know, live broadcast. And
Speaker 5: back then, in fact, we don't think the public can
Speaker 5: handle this, this this information and that has that mentality
Speaker 5: has sustained itself for seventy some odd years. And the
Speaker 5: reality is, Lisa, I think the public and most people today,
Speaker 5: I think the pup believed the public can handle it.
Speaker 5: As a matter of fact, Jake Barber said something. I
Speaker 5: thought it was a completely brilliant reframe of the subject.
Speaker 5: You know what what people were afraid of for years
Speaker 5: was ontological shock. Suddenly having your world views shattered by
Speaker 5: some events, some realization, some reality that that hits everybody
Speaker 5: in the back of the head. He basically said. He says,
Speaker 5: I don't think we're on the verge. We're at risk
Speaker 5: of oncological shock. He says, I think we could potentially
Speaker 5: be on the verge of oncological relief that at some
Speaker 5: level we all know this is probably true, that there's
Speaker 5: other entities, there are other beings out there, the other
Speaker 5: there's other life, and the fact that they may be
Speaker 5: among amongst us in some way will give some of
Speaker 5: us a relief. It'll crouse some anxiety questions. Well, you know,
Speaker 5: there'll be a lot of you know, ramifications and reverberations
Speaker 5: of this, but at the end of the day, it'll
Speaker 5: be Okay, we've kind of known this intuitively for a
Speaker 5: long time. We're now beyond that. Now, what does it mean?
Speaker 5: How do we get some context? What do we do
Speaker 5: with information? That's where the real you know, that's where
Speaker 5: the real work begins, and we're we're getting close to
Speaker 5: that day. In my opinion, we're getting very close to that.
Speaker 3: I think the evidence the listenership of this audience of
Speaker 3: coast to coast that has been around for decades with
Speaker 3: millions and millions of listeners every night, because there's a
Speaker 3: common theme of experiencers in this audience and our connected
Speaker 3: family of an audience here who connect with each other
Speaker 3: off the air and come on the air as well
Speaker 3: to connect. It's definitely this is a lot of evidence here.
Speaker 3: But I did also like what Jake Barber said in
Speaker 3: the interview about ultra terrestrial from here. He says they
Speaker 3: live in parallel dimensions and can see the future, and
Speaker 3: that is something that humanity has always been fascinated with.
Speaker 3: Is the future? What does the future look like? What
Speaker 3: is my future going? To mediums and psychics and people
Speaker 3: that can predict the future with astrology and things, it's
Speaker 3: it is definitely a fascination. What if there was a
Speaker 3: you know, that was more of the perspective here rather
Speaker 3: than the fear around it and the terror around it.
Speaker 3: I don't know, James, do you have an opinion on that?
Speaker 6: You know, it's funny, I see going back what Scott
Speaker 6: was just talking about. You know, also there's the Robertson
Speaker 6: panel that happened in the early nineteen fifties. After the
Speaker 6: two consecutive weekends in July of nineteen fifty two, when.
Speaker 4: The capital was buzzed, the White House was buzzed.
Speaker 6: They scrambled military jets to intercept these things. They flew
Speaker 6: rings around our fastest jets. Fascinating story. And then they
Speaker 6: you know, in fifty three they put together with the
Speaker 6: help of the CIA, the Roberson Panel, and they adopted
Speaker 6: that policy of ridicule and it just stuck.
Speaker 4: It was incredibly effective.
Speaker 6: I think it's changing a lot more now. But you know, people,
Speaker 6: I'll give an example like I got an next door
Speaker 6: neighbor here on the East Coast who's been sitting on
Speaker 6: a story for forty years because his own wife laughed
Speaker 6: at him. And there are millions and millions of people
Speaker 6: like him.
Speaker 4: All around the world.
Speaker 6: World. Guy know this because I investigate UFOs for a
Speaker 6: long time, that people that are dying to tell their story,
Speaker 6: that are holding it, you know, that know it's true
Speaker 6: because they've seen it with their own eyes. The case
Speaker 6: in point, my extra neighbors very interested in what I do,
Speaker 6: and he was as Kimmy Pepper and me, with lots
Speaker 6: of questions.
Speaker 4: And then finally, after a couple of years, I.
Speaker 6: Said Jack, I said, Jack, you are so you're a
Speaker 6: next level interesting why And he goes nineteen eighty Green
Speaker 6: Bush Road.
Speaker 4: I drive. It's like it was yesterday, and there's millions
Speaker 4: of those people around the globe. Those people aren't panicking.
Speaker 4: They know it's real.
Speaker 6: They've seen it, you know, the ranchers and and people
Speaker 6: in rural areas that have seen this stuff.
Speaker 4: They know it's real. So I think the government has
Speaker 4: to kind of get over the get over themselves.
Speaker 6: I mean, I know they're gonna have to reveal their
Speaker 6: vulnerabilities by revealing, you know, what they do know, because
Speaker 6: they're gonna have to reveal what they don't know.
Speaker 4: And that and that I.
Speaker 6: Think has been the reluctance for a for a broader,
Speaker 6: more wide, sweepy acceptance and acknowledgment of the phenomenon.
Speaker 2: Well, you were at the congressional hearings, right.
Speaker 4: I was, yes, And what was.
Speaker 2: The opinion in the room.
Speaker 3: Was it more skeptical or was it more inquisitive or
Speaker 3: did it just depend on the individual?
Speaker 4: Oh?
Speaker 6: It was very inquisitive, not skeptical really at all. I
Speaker 6: Mean there was like one congressman I think that basically
Speaker 6: was like I need to see the evidence, you know,
Speaker 6: but definitely intrigued. I mean you've got you know, military
Speaker 6: folks with credentials and backgrounds and all and clearances with
Speaker 6: evidence making incredible assertions, and again like even if you
Speaker 6: don't believe it, the implications are so profound that we
Speaker 6: have to chase it down. We have to follow through
Speaker 6: because it's so significant and so profound.
Speaker 4: How could you not follow up? You know, you've got high.
Speaker 6: Level military officials making these incredible assertions that you know,
Speaker 6: with global implications. So and I think, quite honestly, I
Speaker 6: think it would have a I think it's exactly what
Speaker 6: humanity needs right now, is you know, I think it
Speaker 6: would really unite all of us, and we'd have a
Speaker 6: more view of ourselves, a more realistic view of ourselves.
Speaker 6: Is one one race, one species, one planet.
Speaker 4: That's been something I've said for decades, and I believe
Speaker 4: it to be true.
Speaker 1: Listen to more Coast to Coast AM every weeknight at
Speaker 1: one a m. Eastern and go to Coast to coastam
Speaker 1: dot com for more