ABC's "Seeing Is Believing"
UFO Special

From Larry Clark
It was an odd presentation...almost two different shows.
The 1st hour gave a fair overview of the history, presented cases objectively with eye witnesses, and showed what a sham Project Blue Book was and the motivation behind it. The animation of the Illinois case was well done and well integrated with the actual 911 tapes.
The 2nd hour was full of misinformation and cast the phenomenon in a quasi-fantasy, quasi-cultist light. The word 'belief' was repeated like a mantra to create the impression that advocates of the phenomenon are 'believers' rather than inquirers.
Roswell? Why didn't you discuss the Cash-Landrum incident, or Shag Harbor, or any number of well documented cases?
No physical evidence? Why didn't you mention Ted Phillips physical trace database of several thousand items gathered over 40 years, or the EMF effects database?
Abductions? Why didn't you obtain alleged implants from investigators such as Darrell Sims and subject them to rigorous analysis and report the findings? Are they made from elements with isotopes not common to this planet? Do they respond to the presence of certain frequencies?
Do they suggest sophisticated construction? Are they a hybrid physical/organic mechanism? Given the money spend on travel and filming you certainly could have afforded some money to establish or dismiss these claims.
As an example of what happens to this phenomenon:
I have a copy of the original NICAP report that was written by a state trooper for an incident that occurred in NY in the '60s. A commercial pilot of a plane flying from Albany to Syracuse saw a glowing disk pass him going in the direction of Albany and called back to the airport. It was picked up on radar as it came over the airport, and was seen by a small private aircraft. It then shot north towards Saratoga.
Shortly afterwards people in the Malta area were calling the police reporting a strange light moving around the area. A state trooper was dispatch and came upon the object. What he said in his NICAP report was when he located the object it was hovering stationary above the ground. He parked his car and got out and could see it was solid. It remained there for 45 minutes until a 2nd object arrived, hovering next to it. Then both shot off in different directions.
However, being interviewed by the news media several days later he claimed not to know what the thing was or that he had viewed it closely for a considerable length of time. It was just a fuzzy light seen by people from a distance, and refused further interviews since then.
Likely he was told to 'play down' the incident. And this sort of incident, involving a sequence of time, multiple witnesses, ground, air, and radar combinations is not unique.
It would have been a more objective presentation if you had ended it with what was presented the 1st hour, or objectively pursued the subject in areas that may have been uncomfortable for viewers. The 2nd hour made the overall show a shallow and deceptive presentation on the subject.
Larry Clark
From James Neff
I certainly didn't expect The Peter Jennings/ABC UFO Special to be anything but a seriously watered down version of the apparently profitable UFO programs one sees on The History Channel/Discovery Channel. That's really all this is... bottom line. A way to make a buck. ABC saw how the ratings were for UFO oriented programs on these cable and satellite channels and decided they needed to jump into the act and get some of that advertiser green. And why not? They had nothing to lose. There was never any intention by the producers to seriously look at UFOlogy, just to use it as a means to an ends. The same way they do anything and everything else that hits that screen. If it's not going to make a dime, they aren't going to do it. Period. They wouldn't waste their time. Likewise, the History/Discovery channel...even the Sci-Fi Channel... produces material along these lines just to make a buck. I don't think these goomers are bright enough or even motivated enough for there to be any grand 'conspiracy' behind it. All the decisions bottom line on green, on ratings and maintaining the status quo is only there because it makes a nice, clean bedrock for everything they want to do in the future. This won't be the last UFO special we see. There will now be droves of them. Everyone who got the books out and saw the ratings will convince a producer somewhere to pump out more UFO specials for a little piece of the pie. It's all terribly boring, when you get right down to it. Borning, predictable pablum for the masses.

From Douglas Herman
Peter Jennings is just a media whore.
Sherman Skolnick called them "media whores" -- those people in the limelight with hundred dollar haircuts and ten cent brains. Long live the Internet, where frauds and whores are shown the proper disrespect and fake "news" is lambasted and villified as the treason it is.
Douglas Herman - USAF veteran

From James Walker
That UFO special was such a thinly-researched superficial, rehashed, original load of crap that I can't believe it was put together by some "veteran reporter". Any bright Ivy league college student could have thrown that together on an all-nighter. Peter Jennings, his staff, and ABC news shoud be embarassed. I want a refund for 2 wasted hours of my life.

From Lea MacDonald
You fly with it, you die with it.
I couldn't have been more disappointed in the Jennings UFO documentary the other night. Despite the hype that lead up to the special it fell well short of even a high school effort. We all know that there is significantly better evidence than what was presented yet Jennings either missed it or deliberately skirted presenting it. Why?
One could argue that it was yet another conspiracy to support the status quo against a second conclusion it was simply a poorly done documentary. Jennings covered a lot of ground, unfortunately, it was all ground that had been well traveled before. I was waiting to hear excerpts of the brave souls that made statements at the National Press Club but none were profiled - yet these people served in government positions. Why then would Jennings not use their testimony to offset the air force's ridiculous report, Roswell, Case Closed? To date, the air force has proffered a couple conflicting stories of what happened in Roswell from crash test dummies - time compression, and project Mogul. When it became apparent that the crash test dummy incident happened a couple years *after* Roswell, the air force simply changed their story.
Jennings's profile of Peter Davenport, a man whom I consider to be infinitely more intelligent and articulate than Jennings, was less than flattering and extremely poorly done. So too was the Jennings profile of Stanton Friedman. Mr. Friedman has more than ample material gleaned from archive searches to satiate the staunchest critic yet Jennings did not cover any of it.
The Jennings documentary leaves open two possibilities now. One, because it was so laughable, other main stream media organizations will leave it as a harpoon in the side of Jennings, yawn and move on, or two, they will see it as a real opportunity to do another documentary that could easily eclipse the Jennings piece thereby presenting themselves as an authority who finally broke the story.
The old axiom, "If you fly with it, you die with it," fits the Jennings piece perfectly. I hope that Jennings death is quicker and more merciful than the two-hour ordeal he dragged us through.
Jim Mortellaro
I think people are forgetting something important here. This show was not for those who are in the field. The show was for the masses. Scores of millions of viewers are NOT in the field. They want to see a show, not an apologetics treatise on the proof of Roswell or for that matter, anything else.
You people make the mistake of thinking (or worse, believing) that this show was for you, the Intelligencia. Well, think again. It was for those millions of viewers who know little to nothing about the phenomena. You are a fly dropping in the soup when compared with the rest of the world ... those who would scoff, or say, "Maybe, maybe not." For those viewers, this was a major revelation.
My two cents.
From Leon Jackson
To Peter Jennings:
You blew it. What could have been a turning point in revelations about UFO's turned into a mockery of the veracity of millions of Americans and people all over the Earth. I trust the words of Gordon Cooper more than I do Peter Jennings.
Leon Jackson
Coalgate, Ok
From Sonia
Jeff, have to agree with the comments of Kevin Timmons and Gordon Douglass (below). Jennings is an illuminati spokesperson and on their payroll for years. Why would he want to shed 'light' on UFO's? No, this 'special' was put on for some reason other than to enlighten the public. You can bet ABC is paying close attention to the comments viewers are mailing in. They can thus feel the lay of the land and take it from there.

From Gary Jacobucci
Hi Jeff - the way this 'Special Investigation' was presented, and the reaction to it, are a mirror of the Jennings/ABC special on the JFK assassination from November 2003:
ABCNEWS will air a two-hour special, Peter Jennings Reporting: The Kennedy Assassination " Beyond Conspiracy, on Thursday, Nov. 20. (
One review from:
I've received many e-mails asking me about the Peter Jenning's special on the John F. Kennedy assassination on ABC. Basically, the program did little else but offer a rehash of old, discredited lone-gunman arguments. The special essentially ignored the mass of new evidence that has come from the files that were released by the Assassination Records Review Board in the 1990s. It also ignored the work of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) regarding Jack Ruby, his Mafia ties, and his suspicious actions before and after the assassination. The program relied heavily on the spurious computer animations of Dale Myers and on the biased, problematic research of Gus Russo and Gerald Posner. Even people who knew little of the JFK case when they watched the show have commented to me that it was obvious from the outset that the program was very one-sided.
From Jerry Kirkegaard
Just about what I expected. I did not time the segments but it seemed that more time was spent with Bell and SETI.
What I came away way with was this: white wash, joke, purpose? Journalism? - no way.
On a scale of one to ten - ten being highest - I would rate Jennings and the Special somewhere below ZERO.
From Gordon Douglass
Jeff - Peter Jennings did exactly what he was supposed to do. Why should anyone be disappointed?
From Kevin Timmons
I have been hearing a lot of speculation and anticipation surrounding tonights Peter Jennings UFO special. Some people are hoping that it will bring UFO's into the mainstream to be taken seriously by more people. Some people are ridiculing the fact that Peter Jennings and ABC have chosen to focus on this subject. Unfortunatley I haven't heard anyone indicate that they recognize this special for what it is. The Emperor has no clothes.
Extra Terrestrial life is a reality. To disbelieve that fact is to be a naive little child still clinging to the notion that the earth is the center of the universe. But that is not the issue here. ABC didn't suddenly decide that it was time to bring UFO's out of the shadows. Wasn't Peter Jennings the same journalist who did the piece on why the conspiracy theories are wrong? Tonight's special on UFO's will do just what a lot of people hope it will. It will bring UFO's into the focus of a greater number people and cause many of them to give the subject more serious thought. It will indeed lift some of the stigma surrounding UFO's. It will open the minds of people and many of them will believe. However, this is not a change in the paradigm. It is a change in the agenda. There is a reason why they call television broadcasting programming. The Illuminati or whatever you want to call them are playing their trump card. This is their end game. The entire human race is about to be duped.
Reagan let the cat out of the bag when he made the statement that the countries of the world would put aside their differences and join as one if they were suddenly confronted by a force from outside this world. The machine is manufacturing a new enemy. The controllers behind the curtain need aliens to be real. They have to become real before we can learn to fear them. They have to be real before we learn to hate them. They have to be real before we will surrender ourselves to those who would defend us. They have to be real before they can become a tool in the trade of deception.
One could use the events surrounding the 911 tragedy as a template for what is to follow. Create an enemy, introduce him to the people through the media, attack your own people and blame the actions on the enemy, use the incident to further and enact your agenda. Only this time it won't just be the United States that is betrayed. This time it will be the whole world. You are going to be hearing more and more about aliens. There will be new evidence...more and more credible sightings. People will witness incredible technology. But all the while there will be a perception building that there is something hostile about these aliens. This of course will be a worldwide phenomenon. Then one day they will come. There will be nothing else in the media for a long time. Still remaining vague and mysterious they will attack us using a technology never before seen on this earth. Perhaps a ray weapon right out of Buck Rodgers. When that happens, just as Reagan predicted, the world will join as one. This will happen almost overnight. The United Nations will truly become the ruling body of the world. All the people will become it's subjects. All the armies will become it's sceptor. We will defeat the aliens of course. Even assume their technology for ourselves. The world will be saved. Perhaps no one will notice that the Illuminati dream of one world government will have become a reality. Maybe it won't matter to anyone that a small ruling group now controls the world and all the people have become it's tennants. Most of us will be to busy mourning the dead. The aliens were very powerful. We are lucky that half of us survived. Still in shock and exhausted, as our recovery begins so will our servitude.
Their won't be any websites about conspiracy. The internet was destroyed in the war. Few people will ever hear anyone suggest that the aliens weren't aliens at all. That their technology was nothing more than the true extent of what our own technology has become after 100 years behind the walls of suppression. Those who wish to control the world only had to uncloak the machines that they have stolen and hidden from us. Wonders that inventors and brilliant men created that we never saw. Maybe no one will ever know that they brought out their machines and killed half of us while assuming control of the world. They had questioned whether or not to procede with this plan but 911 had been too easy. The world was ripe for the picking and they harvested it. Nothing in life is complicated. It is all very simple. Complication is nothing more than a mechanism to obfuscate the obvious.
From Doug
Dr. Michio Kahku was more open minded than Jennings. The Dr. cautioned to be fair in the analysis admitting that we may not have all the answers.
From Donald Hart To:
I had a new insight from your special I wish to share:
1. SETI would, of course, belittle UFOs. They have a financial interest in keeping them "out there."
2. To the person who said "show me one scrap," look in the vaults at Wright-Patterson Air Force base. Why would they keep scraps of weather balloons? Why would they have soldiers keep everyone away at gunpoint whenever some scrap collecting has to be done. And why would the FBI or whoever show up to confiscate someone's picture, never to return them if they were pictures of "swamp gas?"
3. But the most important insight was when someone reported about sleep paralysis being the culprit to imagination, then it explains perfectly what the alleged "virgin Mary" experienced with the angel. She was experiencing the exact same thing. Ask the expert about that!
4. Finally, substitute the belief in religion in place of ET's. Religion has much less evidence for it than ET's and UFOs do. Why don't you do a special on that fallacy while you're at it?
Your experts say belief in UFOs are not enough, they are untrue without evidence. I want you to acknowledge that religion is untrue without hard evidence on the exact same suppositions. This is nothing more than saying why should we belief the President when he claims there are WMD (UFOs) in Iraq? No difference!
Donald Hart
From David Billingsley
Here/s something else in addition to the poor presentation. The ads were mostly per-inquiry ads for records and household goods.Either they could not sell the show to their normal prime time advertisers or maybe Jenning's production company had to buy the time from the network and sell the ads themselves. A truly bizzare two hours indeed.
From DL Harvey
I did not watch it closely and in the second hour I watched as much Trump as I watched Jennings. But on this superficial level I am inclined to be positive about it. It did not pan the subject and the first hour was actually interesting. Maybe too much was expected. I do have to ask why so many people think Jennings had much to do with point of view or content.
From Dennis Balthaser
The anticipation is over and all of us that seriously research the subject of Ufology now have our own views of how the ABC special played out. I noticed that for the first 12 hours after the show aired on February 24th on ABC, most comments on the various Internet lists were less than complimentary about the show.
Sweeps weeks are important to the TV networks and I believe airing a show about UFOs with someone as well known as Peter Jennings was not a coincidence. ABC was looking for big numbers in the ratings, which they didn't get. UFO shows are popular with the general public, if for no other reason than the majority of the public believe UFOs exist. Unfortunately, the general public is unaware of all that is taking place with this subject, by many researchers on a daily basis, and when a show such as the Peter Jennings show last night is aired, the opportunity is there to inform the public objectively, and honestly and I didn't sense that happening during the two hour show. Several times I thought the show was headed in the right direction, only to have it fall flat by comments from those that will never believe or agree to accept the facts.
The animation used was to me, done well and I had heard that all animations were confirmed with witnesses to assure they were as accurate as possible, so for that I compliment ABC. The sad thing for this two-hour show is the fact that the animations were better than the script that was used.
Living in Roswell as I do, and continuing to be a "staunch" supporter of the Roswell Incident as a researcher, I was particularly disappointed in ABCs presentation of the Roswell Incident. Stanton Friedman, nuclear physicist, and the original civilian researcher of the incident was not given adequate time. Stan was not able to mention MJ-12, the blacked out government documents he's obtained, or any of his years of devotion to the subject, while Karl Pflock, ex-CIA employee and debunker was allotted too much time. There was no fairness in this segment. The Mogul balloon theory has been dismissed as a cause for several years, but that was conveniently omitted, and in fact given as the cause of the Roswell Incident. The crash site shown was finally shown as the real crash site on the Foster ranch, which was re-assuring to see. The carnival atmosphere for the anniversary of the Roswell Incident each year I suppose is necessary for attracting visitors to Roswell, but not necessary for a serious attempt at explaining UFOs in a TV documentary.
In the discussion about Project Blue Book nothing was mentioned about Roswell not even being included, or the fact that hundreds of cases in Blue Book are still not resolved. The Blue Book was then, and still is nothing more than a public relations "stunt" to pacify the public, which will continue, as proven by the four excuses given for Roswell in the past 50 plus years.
Prior to the show being televised I had read that an interview segment with Harvard professor and author Dr. John Mack, had been omitted from the show, however a professor (Dr Clancy), from Harvard was allowed to cast her views against what Dr. Mack and Budd Hopkins have devoted so much time and effort to. Fair---I don't think so.
The law enforcement officers, commercial pilots and certain retired military personnel were given an opportunity to share their experiences fairly openly, and their combined comments were to me some of the strongest evidence of proof that something mysterious is flying around in our skies, that no one thus far has been able to explain. Hopefully the military or government will come down on Jennings for airing those portions in the show, so he might finally know there is a lot more to this, than he reported last night.
SETI representatives were allotted way too much time during the show trying to convince themselves that a civilization hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ahead of us in technology would be using something as primitive as radio signals to contact us. Seth Shostak of SETI was presented as "the knowledgeable one" on UFOs, with hardly anyone realizing that Stanton Friedman destroyed his thinking and comments recently on a nationally broadcast radio show debate. Did anyone hear the SETI people say anything of scientific value? I didn't.
On the abduction segment in the program, no mention of Barney and Betty Hill was given, and those experiencers that did share their ordeals were immediately put down as being victims of sleep paralysis.
The astronomer who blatantly stated that "eye witness testimony was a low form of evidence", woke me up from the boredom I was watching. Is it any wonder that most of those that experience something choose to not come forward? Thank goodness our judicial system doesn't work like that.
One of the few highlights of the show to me was near the end when physicist Michio Kaku, explained how time travel can be possible with worm holes and bending time, asking the scientist and astronomers not to be so quick to reject the possibility of travel in the universe. Perhaps it's time for them to quit looking into their telescope's and start looking at the sky from their backyard, like thousands of witnesses have.
For me and many others that take the subject of Ufology serious, the anticipation for the Jennings special fell extremely short. It was probably entertaining to the general public, but certainly won't change many views about it. For us that devote hours of time and resources to researching this subject nothing new was presented, and in fact some of the same biased opinions were continued. Did it help us understand what our place in the universe is---No. Did it reveal the cover-up used by the military and government for 58 years ---No. Did a two-hour special cover the most important aspects of the 58 years---No? Did it give credit to the pilots, military, and law enforcement officers that shared their experiences---No? Did it give serious respected researchers such as Stanton Friedman and Bud Hopkins a fare review---No?
In closing, I want to thank Mr. Jennings and ABC for giving me the opportunity to continue doing my research and in some small way through my web site, editorials, TV and radio interviews and an occasional lecture, I'll be able to share my research with the public in a manner that allows them to reach their own conclusions. I don't anticipate a follow-up by Jennings or ABC. They had their chance and "blew it."
From Jeffrey Ritzmann
Mr. Siegel's "review" of this program is generally what we've come to expect from folks who time after time fail to see, research, and acknowledge the evidence that proliferates the UFO enigma. Anyone, who truly does their homework into this long standing mystery will come to realize that there remains, after all these years a true and solid unknown element. While I find the large part of his review rather humorous, there is a constant that runs through so called "debunkers" essays, and that is pure and simple personal attacks. Not serious questioning on credibility, on evidence, or on UFO witnesses accounts of what they see.
This is an issue that admittedly, the UFO research community has failed to address in relation to those who flatly refute their information. Very rarely will you enter into a debate of any kind with a "debunker" where you won't hear the word, "nut", "moron" or have it implied that you or your witness is a "hillbilly". It's a symptom of an individual who refuses to accurately research the information, the witness, etc., and I don't personally believe that's ever going to change.
The bottom line, is that they ultimately lose the argument because they resort to personal attacks that concretely prove they have no real basis for their argument.
I can recall a debate of about 4 emails regarding an astronauts sighting of objects he saw in space and has been fairly vocal about. Now, lets face the facts, these men and women are highly trained in space flight, and science. Many have had multiple flights. There are more than a few who have seen UFO's and have openly admitted it to the public. When I wrote the "authority" on space flight about these sightings, it took all of one email to say "yeah well ______ is quite a space "experiencer". To imply in such a fashion that you could deduce this astronaut is somewhat of a "goof" and doesn't know what he's talking about.
You're kidding me right?
We're talking about an astronaut, vs. a man who has *never* been in space, ever. He's not an astronaut, he's an "expert". Does anyone see the absurdity? I can tell you after 20 years in this field of study, it's completely typical. Time after time, debate after debate, a "debunker" will tell you it's purple when he can't even see in color.
The UFO community is always clamoring for more "scientists" and "hard core scholars, institutions" for a deeper look into the mystery but we do have to realize that even if MIT did a serious inquiry into can bet "debunkers" would try to say MIT or those involved with the study were "a little out there" or as Mr. Siegel put it, "sad" or "bored". The fact is, there *are* scientists looking into UFOs, some at the pinnacle of their field, but it will little matter what they find using a debunker's line of logic (if there is any) and reasoning of the core facts.
The bottom line is, as much as we in the field hate to admit it, a fringe element of individuals in our study. But, are they not in every facet of any interest? Science, music, literature, philosophy? You can find them everywhere, in anything. The difference is, in our chosen field of study, a debunker, or at most instances, the media, will always gravitiate to these people.
I got the general feeling in reading Mr. Siegel's review that he's not a big fan of the sensationalism in the report. UFOs don't need to be sensationalized, but one has to also understand the media rating machine, and look past that. Again, debunkers wont comment on the message in the opera, they'll say they hate the music. But that's assuming they even paid attention.
The bottom line is, in all the time UFO's have been researched, and investigated there have always been people who chose to refute the idea and dismiss the evidence. We as researchers and just interested people, have come a long way in being critical and seriously finding methodologies to improve our study. It's high time to upgrade our outlook on "debunkers", and see that these are people who don't comment of relevant evidence, don't truly study all the facts, and resort ultimately to personal attacks if all else fails. There are a few that do in truth debate facts in an intelligent manner, and bring forth true issues that need to be rethought by the UFO researchers. The rest...well, could they not hold up their one way mirror at their own debunking community and see themselves as the "fringe element" of their own point of view.
~Jeff Ritzmann
From Gary Levitan
Dear Peter:
As someone who's worked in ad agencies writing for ABC and your programs, in particular, I must say the UFO presentation was a cautious, politically correct, serious piece of journalistic drivel.
You're better than that. Much better.
Everyone knows the visitors are here, have been here, and will continue to be here.
Where were the first-hand accounts of physical alien contact? Where were the government whistle blowers?
Those arrogant few who control information want "the rest of us" to be ignorant of our inter-gallactic past, present, and future.
It only seems like science fiction because our lives are a fiction. It is a battle to keep us uninformed.
Fortunately, this will be the year that changes everything. As a new "vibe" washes away the old. And replaces it with a shining avalanche of truth.
Thank you, Gary Levitan
P.S. Speaking of Truth: Will you be covering the new Bush scandal? This Jame Guckert alias Jeff Gannon alias Johnny Gosch MK Ultra-male prostitute-fake reporter-Valerie Plame-CIA disaster will spell the beginning of the end for the Bush regime.
Please be on the right side of this one.
From Ted Twietmeyer
Peter Jennings has finally cracked the mainstream television network facade. It was about 4 years ago, that a former air force friend of mine told me that the government was about to begin full disclosure. Of course, everything with the government takes nearly forever. We both believed however, that since the government is using every possible resource to use "their" technology
that the actual technology will never be released.
Also covered on the show was the (obligatory) story about how the term "UFO" came about. I'll not say another word about that here.
Jennings in his inimitable style, can narrate with precision and not create any infliction in his voice. Many civilians that witnessed the Arizona UFO event testified on camera about what they witnessed. It was a massive vehicle that hovered over Phoenix, and triangular according to some located in the right geographical area that could see it.
A side note: I've always thought that "Pahrump" was the sound of a beat up, rusted-out-fender-flapping '69 pickup truck makes going over a deep gopher hole in the year 2000. Seeing Art brought back a few memories to me as his guest on his show in Feb. 1998, when Richard Hoagland and I were discussing what really happened the morning of the Challenger "accident." The interview scared Art so bad, that my name isn't listed on his website at all. Remember Art, YOU invited me that day !
Art Bell was interviewed as well. Having talked with Art outside of his radio show the day before in 1998 and some days later after the show, Art comes across as a sincere man who is most curious about everything unusual. He seeks the truth and is also a great showman. Art knows how to hook his audience into suffering through endless breaks. Guests on his show have to endure them as well, since interviews are performed in real-time. Art is about the same in private as he is on his radio show. On the Jennings special, Art spoke about the encounter he and his wife Ramona had back in 1997. Although not completely described during Art's interview, Art has periodically re-tells his story on the air of a black triangle that blocked out a large part of the sky above his car. This happened some distance from his home on a highway to Pahrump, NV. This type of footage-on-the-floor interview editing is very common in the broadcast industry. They speak to someone for an hour, and keep 5 to 30 seconds of footage.
A recurring vehicle discussed on the Jenning's special was black triangles. One fascinating aspect of triangles, is that in the UK under the secrets act ALL media is forbidden to speak about them or refer to them in any way. This law was not touched upon in the Jennings special, and perhaps understandably so. His focus was about sightings in the USA, and whether or not UFOs exist. Maybe in the next special perhaps he will talk about government dictums to shut up the press in America and other countries. Perhaps, but not likely.
Dr. Frank Drake was interviewed, who is none other than the famous author of the famous Drake equation about certainty of life in the universe. However, the Drake equation which was perhaps Frank's pinnacle of thought, was never discussed. In the middle of the special, SETI mouthpiece Seth Shostak also spoke and he discussed SETI. Most readers already know about the vain, pointless, foolish (among other unprintable adjectives) attempt by SETI to pickup alien life signals. Apparently Seth's group was behind the door when the information about the 100+ engineers, technicians, former military and others that Dr. Greer already has as witnesses was handed out. Shostak stated "why would we build all the complex equipment and antenna arrays if we knew they were already here?"
And why wouldn't they build it all? Look at pointless (and fruitless) hot fusion research SETI. Both are just "busy- work." Perhaps Shostak should be talking to Dr. Greer, found of CSETI and learn what he really needs to know. There has been a very tight lid on everything ET, including crashes. The air force has "cleanup crews" at the ready for crashed vehicles, which can be anywhere within an hour or less. Again, Shostak would laugh at that thought, too. But the time is coming when it will ALL come out, with or without the blessing or permission of world governments.
LET'S NOT FORGET ROSWELL (Can we, please? please?)
Think Roswell was left out? Say it isn't so! I suffered through it, ONLY because I was writing this review. Otherwise it would have easily made me flip the channel.
Jennings (credits list him as Sr. editor) expects an audience consisting of mainstream, ignorant, C3 (Coffee-Cup-Coddling) news-channel-watching-yuppies that laugh when someone on the other side of the earth even *thinks* they have seen a UFO. And the eyewitness hasn't even said anything to anyone yet. We can thank the government for this pathetic mainstream mentality, a mentality which now they *appear* to be trying to change. Time will see if that is the purpose of this special, or if it's just another govt. experiment to test the public reaction. I personally think that this show is more of the latter.
Short clips from Leonard Nimoy's series "In Search Of" episode about Roswell, and Robert Stack's "Unsolved Mysteries" about UFO's were also included. The few people still around that really know about Roswell spoke about aliens and bodies, with an obligatory clip from the "X Files" was tossed in for good measure. Peter noted that on the 50th anniversary of Roswell 8 years ago, 65% of Americans told a Time Magazine poll they believed in saucers and aliens. The nasty little BS disinfo project known as "Project Mogul" was not left out. That pathetic psychological warfare doesn't even deserve a discussion here. Mogul was a fitting name for that project. Some years ago there were three-way light bulbs for a home lamp stand with a mogul base. And they were considered odd-ball sizes, too...just like the concept of Mogul as an explanation for Roswell.
Unfortunately, the show flatly labels Roswell as a "myth" according to Peter's own words. Jennings bought the Mogul story hook, line and sinker, and fortunately it was the worst conclusion he stated on his special. This is odd, considering the number of witnesses involved who have come forward over the years. Too bad that colonel Corso's testimony was not included post-humus. Perhaps Roswell is still "too sensitive" a subject for mainstream to expose.
Abductions were covered, and abductions were defended by Jennings on camera in his intro into the subject. Some abductees testified of their personal experiences. One man choked up when trying to talk about the worst part of it, stating that "it was too personal (i.e., terrible) to talk about." Yes, we know it is when probes are inserted and every part of you is violated, including the most private thoughts in your mind. Abductions can be likened to doing an autopsy on a living person. But earth technology based autopsies aren't as invasive, as they doesn't reveal anything about a person's thoughts. Nothing like the mental invasion and mind rape advanced ET beings can do.
Grays were described and sketches illustrated. Bud Hopkins did an on camera regression of a man who described the event. Personally, I have seen some past Hopkins regressions and he has suggested to hypnotized people what they were seeing. But Hopkins is an artist and not a psychologist or psychiatrist by training, so perhaps one can understand that oversight. Hopkins showed several sketches of classic grays people describe, which is quite true.
Several abductees described a "very, very ugly, insect-like being which is very tall" (7ft. according to one witness) which forced intercourse upon them. Another woman described a baby that was shown to her during one abduction, which was hers but she was not allowed to take it. This is not an uncommon story from women who have been inseminated, sometimes several times in their life. Perhaps all of us should keep a can of Raid duct-taped to our side before going to bed? The thought of being raped by an insect being is about as repulsive as it gets.
A sleep disorder was discussed, that supposedly can create this. Doctors testified that this is the result of emergence from REM sleep, while the motor paralysis retains control. One "expert" stretched this out in a long winded (I should talk!) explanation how this creates an abduction experience, with completely incredible statements rationalizing the abduction experience. Witnesses spoke about how terrified they were, and KNOW it is real. Clearly these "experts" require a mental enema.
Or, is this another ill-fated effort to cram the genie back into the bottle? Maybe no one told the "experts" that full disclosure is underway and that aliens, UFOs and abductions are all too painfully real. If these experts were abducted, they would probably have a nervous collapse because their "rational mind" could not find a way to "rationalize" what they have experienced. Considering that abductions are now numbered in the millions, this must have happened many times already.
Jennings explored the concept of a civilization millions of years older than ours. And, how interstellar travel would be far different than that shown on clips from "Star Trek." Einstein and his "speed of light" limitation theory were discussed as well.
It was discussed that "many believe that because we cannot go there then they cannot come here." Michio Kaku thankfully brought more sanity to the table, about opening one's mind to a civilization a million years ahead of ours. He also talked about wormhole travel, and how such civilizations could use such a technology to travel interstellar distances. Michio defended the fact that many sightings must be real and cannot discounted. Powerful words from a mainstream theoretical physicist. Kudos to him for doing that!
Art Bell stated a profound thought when said on the show that "When you see something like that, your life is never, ever the same." How true that is. My thought here - most Rense readers have either observed their own UFO, or know a family member or friend that has. How any scientist can discount this as fiction, can only mean they are on someone's payroll or they still have their head buried in the sand - while their butt is up in the air still getting kicked. One would think it would be quite sore by now and they would wake up, but they don't.
Jennings also discussed how authorities won't take your UFO report, but will tell you to call the National UFO Reporting Center. This consists of Peter Davenport flying solo in this work. He has accumulated numerous sketches and reports, and when the phone rang took a call that came in on camera. One was a scientist in Florida making a report and numerous other calls.
I think the scientist's phone call was staged for the benefit of the camera. Think about the statistical possibility of that happening, the very day the cameras were there. And how many scientists call him, or would dare to risk their standing in the academic community? The odds boggle the mind.
Yet how can any skeptic blow off such a huge body of UFO eyewitness accounts? Perhaps it depends on who signs their paycheck, or the lack of one. Davenport stated he is "searching for that one report" to elevate ufology to a higher level.
Peter Jennings concluded that only contact will resolve the mystery. Brainwashed Shostak wants "a ball point pen from the dashboard or a seat cushion to prove they are real." Talk about displaying ignorance on national television...
In conclusion, one can state that Jennings' report was quite thorough, covering the entire gamut of the ufology field. It was one of the most sincere attempts at presenting facts I've seen in years. It clearly had the blessing of those in control of the media, for it to be presented. Of that there is no doubt. Those that think this isn't true, need to look at the history of television. Shows such as Jennings' special were NEVER on before, for 2 hours during prime-time. However, because certain facts were completely debunked or were not covered, it appears more as a trial test on the public consciousness to see how the public will react to full disclosure. If this is true, then full government disclosure may be coming soon.
What will be most interesting, will be to see if there is a follow-up to this show and what the content will be. Especially since they have now covered all the obligatory "boiler plate material."
Ted Twietmeyer
From Matthew Jenkins
The program was designed to pull people off of the 'fence'. Those that aren't at all open minded about the subject wouldn't have tuned in, anyway... so the only folks watching are those that are hip to what's going on and those that have reservations, but still remain somewhat openminded. 'One of the country's most respected reporters', I heard that repeated on the ads for it broadcast on GCN (if you haven't had a chance, listen to a recording of that commercial: it's textbook 'programming'. It's so obvious.). He brought a legitimacy to the proceedings for those approaching the fence. He's the last of the Big 3 anchors of the last 20 years... one that still has his 'integrity', anyway.
Whether willing or unwilling, he's a tool of the system. As was this disinfotainment special.
I really appreciate your program. You do a great service to us all.
From Michael James
Dear Peter,
I wanted you to know how disappointed I was in the UFO Special that aired tonight. The first hour was OK...and then "sleep paralysis" ?? and "Roswell was a myth." ?? Project Mogul wasn't even around in 1947. Your millions spent on the show did not produce accurate information.
About SETI: they are sending "radio waves" to beings that communicate telepathically??? SETI is a JOKE, a total waste of time.
You made it sound Stanton Friedman and Kevin Randle were just "out to make money selling books".
You should spend your time in Iraq.
Mike James
Regina, Saskatchewan
PS: Don't breathe in Iraq though, as you probably haven't heard that the depleted uranium from the ammo causes cancer.
From William Hand
The Peter Jennings UFO special on ABC was overall very under researched, very narrow minded, quite short in length, and barely touched the tip of the iceburn when it comes to the most stunning evidence that extraterrestrials are visiting our planet.
Countless extraordinary cases were not even mentioned by this program. Instances where nuclear missles were remotely turned off by UFOs, in which UFOs were captured by the space shuttle, instances where energy pulses were seen shooting at these UFOs in orbit, even other cases in which craft were captured on radar while being chased by jets, the numerous Mexico City sightings of the 1990's to present day, the UFO's encounted by the Belgium Air Force that were seen by so many, the Kecksburg case, the Rendalsham Forest incident, many high level government/military witnesses to the coverup, and so many other important aspects to the UFO phenomenon were not even considered!
For goodness sakes, the entire MJ-12 issue was not even discussed!
Additionally, skeptics were given lots of time to talk but Ufologists that could have easily refuted their claims (like the Pheonix lights were just flares) were not even interviewed. Also, they did not even interview city council woman Francis Barwood who went on a single person CRUSADE to get to the truth about the Pheonix lights only to have the Governer of Arizona announce an emergency press conference to bring out two of his goons dressed in kooky alien costumes to try and belittle all the eye witnesses who saw a huge solid object. His quote was, "You guy's need to stop taking this stuff so seriously."
However, what *really* upset me the most was his complete bashing and debunking of the Roswell UFO crash. Instead of doing any real research into Roswell he basically refused to question anything the Airforce said, labeled all Roswell researchers as "gold diggers", claimed that no one can be certain if Jesse Marcel was even telling the truth, and that all new witnesses were frauds that were just jumping on the bandwagon!
Here are a few of Peter Jennings quotes from the show or at least as close as I can remember them:
"The myth of Roswell."
"There is not a shred of credible evidence that an alien ship crashed."
"There are no credible witnesses of bodies."
"There was lots of money to be made, but your book had to have even more grandious claims than the previous one."
"Many more witnesses came out of the woodwork to jump on the bandwagon."
"They (speaking of anyone who believes roswell was the crash of an alien space craft) cling to a myth that in Roswell the answer to alien life was answered, but it was *not*!"
Peter Jennings complete and utter contempt for even the possibility of an alien space craft crashing at Roswell clearly shows during the segment. Additionally, he disrespects witnesses by basically ignoring all of them and not mentioning one name other than Jesse Marcel (and briefly his son) which he gives no signifiance and in a way even belittles.
The TRUTH of the matter is that there are many credible witnesses of the Roswell incident, they came from all walks of life (from rancher Mac Brazel all the way to general Author Exon), all have unique perspectives to the event, and show something EXTRAORDINARY happened that could NOT have been any type of weather balloon, mogul balloon, or even a string of weather balloons.
Want to read about these witnesses? Then read the statements of many, many witnesses to the Roswell Incident at the following internet address
Does he need some more evidence that Roswell happened?
Well too bad he did not take the time to zoom in on the telegraph that was in General Ramey's hand while he posed for photos infront of the switched weather balloon JUNK! If Peter Jennings had bothered to zoom into that letter (he showed the general non-zoomed photo during the special) he could have almost clearly read the following:
among other readable portions of the telegraph!
Wanna read it for yourself? Go to the great website of David Rudiak at and take a look!
An incident involving nothing more than a mere weather balloons (that would have been easily identifiable by Jesse Marcel and everyone else on base without question) would not have VICTIMS, that apparently were harmed by a WRECK, and would be shipped in a DISC!
Peter Jennings ignored and basically refused to even mention the testimony of NUMEROUS witnesses to the Roswell Incident. But one that he did not mention, in particular, really ticks me off!
The name is Col. Philip J. Corso co-author of, "The Day After Roswell."
Col. Corso was as solid and credible of a witness as you could find. He was a decorated military officer and had a military career that many would dream of having. His testimony is basically two fold:
1) In 1947 while on watch at a military base he came across a couple large crates that were under high security. After another soldier had reported taking a peak he opened them and saw two very bizzare bodies of what he would later realize were EBEs or extraterrestrial biological entities from the Roswell Craft.
2) In the 1960's he was assigned to the Foriegn technology division of the pentagon. The general that was his supervisor gave him access to a filing cabinet that contained photos, documents, sketches, debris samples, and all kinds of info on the crash of an ET space craft outside of Roswell NM.
Col. Philip J. Corso before his death signed sworn affidavits to the above, wrote his book about his experiences (that Senator STROM THURMOND wrote the forward to KNOWING FULL WELL what the content was about, but then when his staff realized what he did they ordered it be yanked), gave many interviews about the above events, and went on the radio to tell the world of what he saw, read, and knew.
No one in the military, not one living soul, has officially declared him to have lied, misled anyone, or even to have hallucinated the whole story.
Peter Jennings COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY ignored Col. Corso's testimony!
Obviously, if Peter Jennings had done any *real* research into Roswell they would have discovered his book, his testimony, and his sworn affidavits. But obviously they brushed his testimony under the rug just like they did EVERY SINGLE other witness to Roswell (except Marcel and his son).
I highly urge everyone to read the book, "The Day After Roswell" and read yourself about the man that Peter Jennings did not want the world to hear about!
Another part of this UFO special that I found repugnant was his obvious lack of research into new physics research that could allow for FTL travel, allow for gravity manipulation, alter the properties of inertia itself, and extract unlimited energy from the vacumm to allow for ET's to travel basically anywhere they want (without having to harness the power of entire stars).
Want to read more about the above? Then why don't you read up on websites such as....
Tom Bearden's website at
American Antigravity at
Yes, they talked about wormholes... big deal! People are working on devices that tap energy from the vacumm, manipulate gravity itself for propulsion, and even generate beams of gravity to retract or push away objects. Want to learn more and read the scientific abstracts about these experiments? Go to the above sites!
To sum it up, this UFO special was nothing special at all. Peter Jennings showed his true colors to the world by following the Air Force's line and refusing to even look at the Roswell witnesses (the many credible witnesses and of course Col. Corso), repeatedly calling those who seriously study UFO's "true believers", refused to look at the telegraph in Ramey's hand, ignored so many of the amazing incidents that have occured in the UFO phenomenon, and only reported a small handful of not even the best cases indicating ET's are visiting our planet.
He took a cursory glance at UFOs, towed the mainstream party line on the entire subject, refused to admit any type of coverup, refused to take a solid position himself other than just saying he remains skeptical, and ignored one very important principle.
If you have a thousand or a million black crows and then find one white crow you have just PROVEN that not all crows are black.
I have a VERY important question for Peter Jennings...
Perhaps Peter Jennings is a true skeptic at heart, perhaps he is just ignorant of the vast majority of UFO data, or maybe this show was all he was allowed by the powers that be to raise public awareness of these issues.
It is even possible that Peter Jennings knows more and accepts more than he presented on the program.
But overall, the show was not much of special, and in my opinion did little to advanced the cause of exposing the truth about ET's visiting our planet.
I ask once more... When will you admit to a WHITE CROW, Mr. Jennings?

From Judy
Hi Jeff,
This is what I wrote yesterday...
'Art Bell Lends UFO Expertise To Peter Jennings' Television Special'
NEW YORK -- Tomorrow night, Coast to Coast AM weekend host, Art Bell will be seen lending his UFO expertise to ABC's primetime special, Peter Jennings Reporting: UFOs - Seeing is Believing
Art Bell...huh? Guess it's going to be a dud
From Sher
I am miserably disappointed with the show. The much hyped "investigative" look at UFO phenomena started out quite promising but then it seems to turn dismissive about halfway through -- as soon as the show moved on beyond sightings to Roswell, abductions, etc....
What was that ridiculous brush off of the Roswell crash? Of COURSE, it has been turned into a money making circus and of COURSE there is much questionable "evidence" . But is it journalism to dismiss it all, every witness, every bit of credible research with a broad brush as huckster "mythology"? Stan Friedman was particularly set up, it seems to me, to be brushed off -- how rude!
When they were dragging out that tired old " dream paralysis" crap and saying it can explain every detail of abductions -- EXCUSE ME.. did they even once mention any PHYSICAL EVIDENCE associated with abductions? Scars, scoop marks, bloody noses? Or what about the cases involving abductions of several people who remember seeing each other? (Did they SHARE the same sleep paralysis fantasy?) Or the fact the abductees have often reported UFO sightings during NORMAL WAKING hours? Perhaps I missed something, but I don't think these things were mentioned.
I came away thinking the Jennings' message was this: yes, there are some strange things in the sky that might be extraterrestrial. But if you think one of these things has crashed, or if you think some creatures inside these UFOs could make contact with humans, well, that's just a myth and there's no evidence...the same old , old bull. (But I have to say it was nice to see Peter Davenport in the flesh, so to speak, and at least they didn't make fun of him.)



This Site Served by TheHostPros