top of page
  • Writer's picturevisions13

Transcription of selected sections of Ross Coulthart's interview by Jimmy Church on Fade to Black

We are well beyond the flippant and frankly ridiculous observations that some people have made in the debunking world that this is all nonsense and easily dismissed, the Neil deGrasse Tysons, all of the other scientists who choose to take an extremely unscientific, un-objective, total subjective way of approaching this issue, just dismiss it out of hand and say 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - frankly we're not going there until somebody provides us with the proof'. We are now at a stage where the proof has been provided. the United States has acknowledged there is a reality here, there is an anomalous phenomena that cannot be explained or at least that's their official position. I don't believe that frankly, I think they know a lot more than they're letting on.

There is a rapacious hunger, a demand from congressmen/congresswomen, senators to get to the bottom of this because frankly they know they've been lied to and I don't often call is as a journalist that something's been a conspiracy because we're taught as investigators not to believe in conspiracy, normally it's a screw up. But I think a decision was made during the Cold War that for national security reasons they decided not to reveal the full extent of what the US Government knows. And I know because I'm talking to them, there is a faction inside the US defense and intelligence community that wants you, all of us, to know the truth.

We've had congressional hearings and the public was dissembled and lied to and officials obfuscated and avoided questions as they're doing now and they got away with it for another sixty years. And they'll do that again if they can if they can get away with it. And I suspect it's because some people in the defense establishment know that there's going to have to be a reckoning and they don't want to be around when that happens. I think it was done possibly for the best reasons but throughout the forties and the early fifties, until the time of the Washington flyover, incontrovertibly an historical incident that was recorded on radar, seen by many thousands of people, anomalous phenomena, solid objects moved across the skies over Washington - they didn't land on the White House lawn - but they put on over two weeks one hell of a display for the United States Government and its military, I don't think it's any coincidence that from that moment on things began to change. A decision was made inside the US national security establishment simply to shut down this issue from public comment. And they chose a very powerful weapon. They know that you Americans don't like being told that you're not allowed to know something, they know that you're very good at digging out secrets, so they used the most powerful weapon of all...ridicule, mockery. And they laughed at it. They treated the phenomenon with derision and it worked. And for much of the last sixty years that's how media have treated this subject matter.

I know for a fact there are attempts to track and indeed bring down whatever these phenomena are and they've been using tracking technologies since at least the 1950s. They've know the signals that allow them to detect and predict where these things are going to be. I'm told this has been happening.

There's a growing Twitter troll community that has a swipe at people like me who confine themselves to what they are allowed to talk about by referring to confidential anonymous sources. And a lot of people have been having a swipe at me saying 'Oh that Coulthart guy keeps in claiming he's spoken to such and such a source. Why doesn't he just name the source?' And to me it's a fundamental misunderstanding about investigative journalism that's defined how American journalism operates for much of the last hundred years - confidential sources are part and parcel of modern journalism, they are essential. And the reason why is because for people to talk to me is arguably in breach of their national security oath. There is a very very strict constraint on people's freedom to talk about this issue. There are people in the US Government, most notably in the US Air Force who are trying to shut this issue down and that's why this Congressional hearing is so revolutionary because not only are we having public hearings. they have been private hearings since 2018. And many of the representatives and senators who are now asking questions, are asking questions informed by what they've already seen and that's why they're so wound up about it, because they know stuff you and I don't know.

There is technology that is being used for the detection of underwater objects which we use as part of your strategic nuclear defense that is very, very important. It's not just acoustic - it's electromagnetic. And that's all I can say. Basically the US is way ahead of Russia on this and I can completely understand why sources, means and methods cannot be revealed. But it's real and they do have incredibly good data on what's being seen underwater. And I know, because people have told me what's been revealed about it - I know that certain members of Congress and senators are aware of this.

I've been quite struck in recent weeks by how there's a growing number of anonymous Twitter accounts that are running very much the same line pushing scepticism, pushing a 'why is anybody flogging a dead horse on this issue'; 'how much longer are they gonna go on about this stuff?' Somebody's trying to influence the narrative. And a lot of them are names I don't see. I've been quite lucky I guess to be able to draw a very engaged and interested Twitter audience on social media and particularly through the podcast that I'm doing with my friend Brice Zabel Need to Know.Today We're getting a lot of people who are for the first time intellectually engaged, people who tell us they've never been interested in this subject matter before and they're feeling they can engage because what we're trying to do is engage with this in a journalistic way, like you do , a rigorous journalistic way, well you objectively come in and assess the facts, one of the things I've often been very impatient about is for example the way the UFO community treated the absolute nonsense that that individual Anjali presented earlier on this and last year. I don't know too much about that individual but basically I heard their assertions about alien beings hidden inside a mountain and going down a tunnel that was dug through a hill, I thought well give them the benefit of the doubt, I'll believe it when I see it. But until that point there's absolutely no point in giving it fuel, giving it air because one of problems is there's a lot of the community on UFO Twitter who only exist because there's something to talk about and there's an impatience - you're actually one of the last interviews I'm going to be doing for quite some time, because I'm withdrawing from public commentary just so I can have the time to start addressing the mountain of information I've been getting from people. I'm still going to be doing my podcast with Bryce on Need to Know.Today but we're largely going to confine ourselves to what we produce, and this is because frankly a lot of UFO Twitter is eating itself. As soon as Lue Elizondo does what frankly he's achieved which is momentous, who would have thought three or four years ago, when TTSA pushed this former counter intelligence official onto a stage and presented him to the world, who would have thought that we'd be looking at hearings in the Congress where officials were being called to give evidence? Whatever you think of Lue Elizondo, whatever you think of Christopher Mellon, that is a momentous achievement. And by all means exercise skepticism, by all means ask hard questions but one of the most specious pieces of bullshit I've seen in a long time, was a documentary that was put out called Who's Lue? Ultimately it was obviously just a titbit of dirt job by somebody who frankly postured as an investigative journalist, presented a huge amount of information but behind all the smoke there wasn't enough fire at all. I couldn't see any substantive material. I watched it and sat through what was I think an interminable two or three hours of nonsense. And essentially what it was, was a hatchet job on one person who's done a momentous amount to raise public awareness about the issue of UAPs. And it's interesting because I just wonder whether the UFO community realizes what it's doing, because it takes courage for public officials to come forward. Not only is the issue of sitting outside the comfort zone of your national security oath and speaking about things that are probably borderline beyond what you should be talking about because you've been working in the secret world for so many years, there's also the issue of engaging on a subject that everybody ridicules. I've felt the same way in the mainstream media, I've copped abuse and denigration from colleagues in the mainstream media who frankly, some of them have had the decency to ring me and apologize in the last few weeks since they've seen the hearings before the Congress. They've gone actually do you know what Rosco, this is for real, you're not just making this up, this is for real.'

But I'm really struck by the fact that the community that represents people who are engaged and collaborating and researching this issue, by far the vast majority are people who are intellectually engaged, interested and who welcome a skeptical rejoinder.

For example there's a lot of people who keep on attacking Nick West who sadly has strayed a bit close to becoming a debunker rather than a skeptic in recent weeks, but most of the time I really admire Nick West. We need people like Mick West. You need skeptics. You need a skeptical rejoinder. We do get things wrong. It's easy to operate with a confirmational bias and see patterns that aren't there or things that don't quite make sense. The vast majority of the community is doing exactly the right thing - it's embracing and welcoming into it people who are coming in to the subject matter new for the first time And the one thing I'm very proud of is through a community of people I've made friends with, there's Facebook Messenger groups that I belong to, I'm subscribing to information groups that have been incredibly helpful, positive and collaborative, they're a wonderful community of intelligent people who recognize there is an anomalous phenomena here that cannot be ridiculed, shouldn't be dismissed and should be engaged with and investigated.

But at the same time this is happening there is this nasty little troll audience that is going 'look at me, look at me, I'm being nasty, I'm saying horrible things about people because basically I want to stay relevant.' And that frankly is absurd. The way they can stay relevant is by continuing to provide quality analysis and doing through research. And there is this weird troll audience in social media that frankly think it's a good idea to pull down people like Elizondo for example and they constantly insinuate that he's a dark force for the deep state and he's doing some kind of dirty work for the Government as a counter intelligence agent. If you're going to make claims like that - prove it. Give me the evidence - I'd love to hear it. If you think you've got evidence that proves Lue Elizondo continues to work as an operative of the US intelligence community, then prove it.

I notice somebody made a big song and dance the other day about how Lue was described by Daniel Sheehan, his attorney, as continuing to work for Space Command and to advise them in UAPs and everybody went 'There's the deep state, there it is. That's your evidence' What an amazingly good idea to hire Lue Elizondo to advise them on UAP! What could be wrong with that - seriously? Isn't it a fantastic thing that they're relying on somebody with his expertise to give them that advice? Full marks. It represents a little open mindedness by Space Command that frankly I'm not seeing in other government agencies.

It's clear to me from the research that I've done that there are two factions operating at the moment inside the military industrial establishment of the US. There are a bunch of mainly religious nutters who are evangelical Christians who think you and I will be offended by what they believe are demonic entities that are behind whatever this is. I've got no idea what they're talking about. But people have actually said to me that a large part of this is driven by religious convictions, particularly inside the US Air Force. And it's interesting because when I've engaged with people inside the US Air Force, quite often I'm asked 'Are you Christian?' And I was raised Christian, I went through boys boarding school in New Zealand and I think if anything puts you off Christianity it's being sent to a boarding school and having to go to church every day. But I have raised my children with the moralism and beliefs of Christian religion and I think Jesus probably was a real person. But I don't define the way I see my world through a Christian perspective. I'm open to all religions and I think a lot of them say pretty much the same thing. And isn't it interesting what they do say? Because they're all talking about a super intelligence that it benevolently directed towards humanity that responds to our entreaties, to our prayer; that guides us through our life and essentially asks us to maintain a moral character throughout our life, that has been here and was integral in our creation. Is that vastly different from our notions of a super human alien intelligence?

I actually think we shouldn't be vilifying these people - I think the reasons why this is being kept secret were in the era, laudable, they thought they were doing the right thing. The trouble is the reasons no longer exist, the reasons for cold war secrecy can no longer be justified. But I don't think we should vilify people unless they continue to lie, I think they should be given an opportunity to just tell the truth. And if they want to put the best possible spin on that and explain their motives about why they've lied to the American public - and they have - then good luck to them. But they should be given the opportunity to tell the truth. But by golly, if anybody lies to the Congress, if anybody continues to deceive and manipulate and dissemble and obfuscate, I reckon they should be tied to the back of a Humvee and publicly tarred and feathered and vilified. This is their one chance because frankly this is a truth that has been withheld from the American public and the world for decades.

Ross Coulthart on Fade to Black

344 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page