Speaker 1: Now here's a highlight from Coast to Coast AM on
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio and welcome back to Coast to Coast. Lots of
Speaker 1: things happening in the year twenty twenty two with UFOs,
Speaker 1: but what about twenty twenty three? What will it fare?
Speaker 1: Kevin Randall with US has more than forty five years
Speaker 1: experience studying the UFO phenomenon and all various incarnations. His
Speaker 1: training by the Army and the Air Force provides him
Speaker 1: with a keen insight into the operations and protocols of
Speaker 1: the military, their investigations into UFOs, and into a phenomenon
Speaker 1: that has puzzled people for more than a century. He
Speaker 1: appears weekly on our program with updates on UFO activity,
Speaker 1: and his latest book is called Understanding Roswell, which we'll
Speaker 1: talk about as well. Kevin, welcome back. Yes, it's been
Speaker 1: a long time since I talked to you. George. Do
Speaker 1: you think twenty twenty three is going to be a
Speaker 1: breakthrough for us in the field of upology. I would
Speaker 1: like to say yes, I would like to be positive,
Speaker 1: but given the history of the UFO phenomenon, I think
Speaker 1: that we're going to just see the same thing as
Speaker 1: we've seen for the last seventy five years. I call
Speaker 1: it twenty two point oh. General Twining was the officer
Speaker 1: at the Air Material Command in nineteen forty seven when
Speaker 1: the first sightings were seen here in the United States,
Speaker 1: and he wanted to establish a priority project with an
Speaker 1: investigation into what was going on because they really didn't know,
Speaker 1: and it was supposed to be transparent, but it was
Speaker 1: a classified project. They said. The name was Project Saucer,
Speaker 1: really Project sign and that sort of thing. We moved
Speaker 1: now into this environment, we're in the same point we
Speaker 1: were at that time. The government, the military, the Congress
Speaker 1: seems to be interested in UFOs, and yet we seem
Speaker 1: to see the same sort of dodges that we saw
Speaker 1: back then. They promised a lot of things, and then
Speaker 1: the road sort of shifts and we don't get the
Speaker 1: information we need. So I think that's where we're going
Speaker 1: to stay in twenty twenty three. We're not going to
Speaker 1: see a lot of progress. Kevin, with the late step
Speaker 1: and Friedman gone. Now, I really believe this has pushed
Speaker 1: you way to the forefront of the Roswell case. You
Speaker 1: were tops anyway, but you're almost standing alone out there.
Speaker 1: What do you think happened in July of nineteen forty seven.
Speaker 1: I'm leaned toward the extraterrestrial. I think when we peel
Speaker 1: away all the nonsense that has surfaced about it, and
Speaker 1: there's been a lot, and I've contributed some of it myself,
Speaker 1: simply because you interview people you think they're telling you
Speaker 1: the truth, you learn later that they're not really as
Speaker 1: honest as you would hope to have been. But when
Speaker 1: we boil it down to the basics, there are just
Speaker 1: some things are inexplicable. We have no trust real explanation
Speaker 1: from what fell at Roswell Air Force explanation of Project
Speaker 1: Mogul simply doesn't work. And what I do not understand
Speaker 1: is the skeptical community is supposed to be questioning everything.
Speaker 1: If you have a good siding, they question the research,
Speaker 1: they question the methodology, they question the other. When you
Speaker 1: moved to the other side of the coin, when you
Speaker 1: have an explanation, they don't question it. Project Mogul, which
Speaker 1: is the balloon arrays that was supposedly launched in New
Speaker 1: Mexico in nineteen forty seven that caused the debris field.
Speaker 1: When you look at the documentation, it says there was
Speaker 1: no flight number four. It never flew, it didn't go,
Speaker 1: so it couldn't have dropped the debris, and yet they
Speaker 1: never questioned that they accept that as legitimate. So I
Speaker 1: look at the case and I say, I have seen
Speaker 1: no terrestrial explanation that explains all the information that we've
Speaker 1: gathered about the Roswell case. There's just something missing from that.
Speaker 1: There may be some kind of classified project we don't
Speaker 1: know about, but I can't imagine what it would be
Speaker 1: after fifty years that would harm national security if they
Speaker 1: announced it. One of the logical things was the five
Speaker 1: or ninth bomb group in Roswell, New Mexico, was the
Speaker 1: only atomic strike force in the world at the time. Now,
Speaker 1: according to the information I've been able to find, and
Speaker 1: this came from Jesse Marcel Junior and in people atomic
Speaker 1: bomb at that time, that the size and shape, the
Speaker 1: look of it was classified, and so had they inadvertently
Speaker 1: dropped a mock up as they were practicing with the
Speaker 1: atomic bombs because they were huge, that would have been
Speaker 1: something to cover up in nineteen forty seven, But in
Speaker 1: today's environment, who cares if they don't look like that anymore.
Speaker 1: The information that you would gather by seeing it would
Speaker 1: be of no use to anybody. And we actually have
Speaker 1: reports of them dropping actual atomic bombs on places. I
Speaker 1: think they dropped one in Albuquerque in nineteen fifty seven,
Speaker 1: and we know about that stuff. So we have no explanation,
Speaker 1: a trustrial explanation that had been offered that I'd find
Speaker 1: reasonable to explain the Roswell case. And that kind of
Speaker 1: shifts us into the extra trust real are we still
Speaker 1: waiting for reports from NASA to Congress or did we
Speaker 1: get everything we were expecting. We're not getting much of anything.
Speaker 1: I didn't think. Remember, they were supposed to produce a
Speaker 1: big report in June of what twenty twenty one, June
Speaker 1: twenty one, it was like nine pages, and we just
Speaker 1: absolutely useless. And then he said, well, we're going to
Speaker 1: update it in ninety days, but they never did. And
Speaker 1: then we move into twenty twenty two and they're supposed
Speaker 1: to be doing this, that and the other thing, and
Speaker 1: we get may we get that briefing at the Pentagon,
Speaker 1: and like many others, I signed on and watched the
Speaker 1: whole eighty minutes of the briefing, and they really the
Speaker 1: two people being interviewed didn't seem to know much about UFOs.
Speaker 1: The congressmen and women who were interviewing them seem to
Speaker 1: know more UFOs than they did, and we're supposed to
Speaker 1: be getting more information, but it just never seemed to come.
Speaker 1: I did a book called UFOs in the Deep State,
Speaker 1: and I tried to explain how you can get an
Speaker 1: order from the government, the president, for example, and not
Speaker 1: respond to it. And what you can do is just
Speaker 1: delay it by saying, you know, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: pieces to this thing. We've got to pull them all together.
Speaker 1: Let's get a comprehensive report to you, and we will
Speaker 1: get it to you in the xt number of weeks.
Speaker 1: And somehow it just never gets done. And the next thing,
Speaker 1: you know, the guy who was asking for that, he's
Speaker 1: now out of a government and somebody else moves in.
Speaker 1: So there's always all kinds of ways to dodge the
Speaker 1: questions and delay the information. And that's what we're seeing today.
Speaker 1: We're supposed to get this information, but it didn't show up.
Speaker 1: We're in that point where there just simply is nothing
Speaker 1: being forwarded to us. Is it's of any benefit to us?
Speaker 1: Kevin did you know, the late Apollo astronaut edgar Mitchell.
Speaker 1: I had met him once or twice. I didn't really
Speaker 1: know him at a personal level, but yes, I had
Speaker 1: had an opportunity to meet with him. Sure I knew him,
Speaker 1: knew him well, and he has told me he under
Speaker 1: any circumstances over the years before he passed away, that
Speaker 1: we were being visited by intelligent extraterrestrials. And he admitted,
Speaker 1: he said, George, I never saw anything going to the
Speaker 1: moon or anything like that. That didn't see anything on
Speaker 1: the moon. But I've been told by people and government
Speaker 1: that I trust that we are being and have been visited,
Speaker 1: and I believe the guy. There's no reason to not
Speaker 1: believe him that. The thing is, I've worked with top
Speaker 1: secret material when I was an Air Force officer in
Speaker 1: an Army officer, I worked with that, and I understand
Speaker 1: how these things work, and I understand how if you
Speaker 1: don't have a need to know, you're not supposed to
Speaker 1: share it with other people and that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: But there also comes a point where you're dealing with
Speaker 1: professionals at the highest levels, and they do tend to
Speaker 1: share a little bit of information even though they know
Speaker 1: they're not supposed to do that if you ask a
Speaker 1: direct question. I think Barry Goldwater was a good example
Speaker 1: of that. He had some inside information and he asked LeMay,
Speaker 1: General LeMay to see the blue room that's alleged it
Speaker 1: Wright Patterson Air Force Space where they've kept this extra
Speaker 1: crust and material. And I've actually got a letter from
Speaker 1: from Goldwater explaining that it was the only time that
Speaker 1: Lemier every got mad at him and told him not
Speaker 1: only not only no, but hell no, and never asked
Speaker 1: me again or I'll have your court martialed. So there
Speaker 1: is some secret going on there that is at the
Speaker 1: highest levels classified, and there's very little talk about it
Speaker 1: outside the core of the people you know. So I
Speaker 1: have no doubt that that people that Edgar Mitchell knew
Speaker 1: would have shared information with him if he asked the questions.
Speaker 1: Thinking here's a guy we can trust with that information. Kevin,
Speaker 1: what got you involved in all of this? I always
Speaker 1: blamed my mother. Blame it on mom, huh. She was
Speaker 1: a science fiction fan, and she read the science fiction
Speaker 1: books which deal with alien civilizations and interstellar flight and
Speaker 1: all of that sort of thing. In fact, she took
Speaker 1: me a movie when I was a little kid Earth
Speaker 1: versus the Flying Saucers, and that kind of sparked my interest,
Speaker 1: and so it kind of grew out of there. And
Speaker 1: from that point on I would read the books about
Speaker 1: UFOs from the people that you you know, I'm sure
Speaker 1: you know, like like of course Brad Steiger, Sure, who
Speaker 1: became a very good friend. By the way, you missed
Speaker 1: him too, Yeah, absolutely, Frank Edwards books. Frank I think
Speaker 1: wrote more from memory than he did from notes, so
Speaker 1: he often oftentimes got things wrong. The report he did
Speaker 1: on the Roswell case in Flying Saucers Serious Business, it's
Speaker 1: just like a page half a page. He gets virtually
Speaker 1: everything wrong other than there was a rancher involved in
Speaker 1: It was something that fell in Roswell, New Mexico, and
Speaker 1: the Air Force explained it as some kind of balloon
Speaker 1: with a device hanging from it. But he got most
Speaker 1: of the facts wrong. But the real point is he
Speaker 1: was talking about Roswell back in nine, nineteen sixty six,
Speaker 1: and so I mean that all kind of sparked my
Speaker 1: interest in UFOs, and I of course became a science
Speaker 1: fiction fan as well. So it's sort of a double
Speaker 1: lammy there. Kevin Brandall with us. We'll take calls with
Speaker 1: Kevin next hour about UFOs and ufology. Jump on board, Kevin.
Speaker 1: It seems like things have changed dramatically over the years.
Speaker 1: We used to have a lot of abduction cases. We
Speaker 1: used to have a lot of reports of landing pod evidence,
Speaker 1: burned out spots and stuff. We don't get those anymore.
Speaker 1: How come you've Carl Flock and I used to talk
Speaker 1: about that before he passed away, and it was always
Speaker 1: it seemed like the UFOs had come gathered the information
Speaker 1: that they wanted, they picked up samples of the flora
Speaker 1: and the fauna, and then they took it back to
Speaker 1: their home world so they could studied at link, not
Speaker 1: unlike what we would do in some environmental studies that
Speaker 1: we do, and that might explain part of it, But
Speaker 1: we also had noticed that that tendency that we don't
Speaker 1: have the same kind of robust cases that we used
Speaker 1: to have. Kathleen Martin just announced that she was no
Speaker 1: longer associating with uphology, but had taken her research in
Speaker 1: a different direction. I've had some correspondence with her about
Speaker 1: her moving into other arenas and the other thing that
Speaker 1: strikes me about the abduction phenomenon. If it was as
Speaker 1: widespread as it was reported, it would seem to me
Speaker 1: that there would be a lot more UFO sightings going
Speaker 1: on as well, and I think we didn't see that
Speaker 1: sort of thing, and the logistics kind of get in
Speaker 1: the way, So it makes you wonder, is there some
Speaker 1: kind of interdimensional phenomena going on accounts for some of
Speaker 1: this stuff. Listen to more Coast to Coast AM every
Speaker 1: weeknight at one am Eastern and go to Coast to
Speaker 1: Coast am dot com for more