I checked this out and verified it and this is Larry's show for this coming Friday, not Thursday as some have reported.
Post this information in other forums if your a member elsewhere around the Internet and lets get a good number of emails into Larry. The numbers of responses previous to the show might mean something more to him than just the email.
This is the address where you can email the program beforehand with your questions or statements.
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.lkl.html

Here's a blip from the Larry King website for Friday.



Wired Blog Network
By Sharon Weinberger
lNovember 05, 2007

Not that little green men ever go out of style, but there must be something about elections that brings them out in force. Noah recently wrote about presidential hopefuls promising to get to the very bottom of the alleged alien cover-up. Earlier this year, I wrote about an investigation into spooks penetrating the UFO community (the people who investigate aliens, not the aliens themselves). And then there was that very disconcerting image of the unidentified object standing behind President Bush at a press conference.

True, it hasn't quite risen to the level of New York Times or Washington Post Op-Ed pages, but Larry King will take on the burning issue of aliens and national security this Friday. "High-ranking military officials and government personnel from around the world discuss close encounters with UFOs," a CNN promo reports. "Is national security on the line?"

Original Source: Wired
http://blog.wired.com
Larry King Live
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/
Larry King Live email address for questions
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.lkl.html
;D ;D ;D

Well this sounds like it could be interesting. Thanks for the heads up. I hope it's not geared to make believers out to be wingnuts.

He's gonna get himself killed.

Sincerely,
Peter Jennings.

Funny how he died of cancer, like many others who were too involved. Larry King won't ever die, because he's a REPTOID. LOL.

In all seriousness, that thing behind Bush was already revealed to be a hoax by the guys who put it on YouTube not long ago. I hope Sharon Weinberger didn't take that seriously, cuz I sure didn't.

As for the candidates promises, they'll say anything to get your vote. Remember George Bush Sr. saying "No new taxes"? And what did he do as soon as he was elected? Gave us new taxes. And you can thank Richard Nixon and his croanies for the current health care crisis in America. They're all crooks.

I suspect after the airing of that show there will be even more videos on IdiotTube...I mean YouTube, of Larry King flicking his tongue, maybe they might even edit in a shot of him catching a fly with it LOL.

Also remembering George H. W. Bush, Sr., as head of the CIA, he was the person who withheld UFO documents from then, President Jimmy Carter, after Carter promised to release such documents if elected to the presidency.

Yeah that's right. They dismissed his sighting as being the planet Venus. Reagan said he saw something while on a flight too. But then he was also hired to make a record discussing how socialized health care was a communist idea back before he became president.

Larry King asks the dumbest questions.

Seinfeld vs. Larry King

Praise Jerry!!!

Yeah he does sometimes. When you've been around as long and talked to as many people as he has, I guess it gets difficult to come up with new things to ask.

But honestly I always thought that Seinfeld was a stupid show anyway. I guess Larry thought the same.

He did!?!

Wow, that is quite a feat. Especially considering that his term as CIA Director ended the day Jimmy Carter took office.

I guess Bush was controlling the CIA from behind the scenes after that, huh? He stopped Stansfield Turner from giving those documents to Carter, huh?



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You're cute.

But, Jimmy Carter wanted to release other UFO documents that did not pertain to his sighting.

UFOs have had national security implications and some were very serious as was the case involving some of our nuclear missiles. A former base of mine, Hill AFB, UT, was involved in the investigations since it had obligations toward the Air Force's Minuteman missiles. I was assigned to that base upon my return from an overseas tour in Vietnam where I had my first UFO sighting.

Interesting enough, I was sent back to Southeast Asia TDY from Hill AFB a few months later to yet another base in Thailand for a short time and then flew on to the Central Highlnads of Vietnam for a total time of two months, where several months after I left that base and returned to Hill AFB, another UFO overflew the area in the Central Highlands, so I missed having another sighting.

Eventually, I was assigned to another base in California that has had its share of UFO sightings as well and is recorded in Project Blue Book, and that is where some of my compartiots were assigned who were stationed at RAF Bentwaters, UK, and they had UFO stories to tell me as well that took place at their base in 1980.

Carter himself dismisses his sighting; he does not believe it was an alien craft.

He also says that the stories about the CIA refusing to give him information about UFOs are untrue.

But don't take my word for it. Let the former President himself tell you...

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/skepticsgu...nfo.asp?pid=105

I have a question for Larry King's guests:

Is there one bit of evidence you claim proves the existence of aliens visiting the Earth that cannot be explained as something mundane, or is otherwise incontrovertible?

You failed to listen to the interview Bruce because in their title they misconstrued everything he did say. And they changed the tense that he said it in. He still believes the same thing he did last week. I listened to the interview three times because I had to in order to write a response to someone about their comments. I started to write the following in someones blog and I got a little busy so I haven't sent it but more importantly it's real rough and I don't have the time to clean it up right now but here it is. Excuse the mess. At least you'll get the idea as to what the Skeptics Guide Clownage did to Carter.

By all accounts, Carter is such an important personage; do you honestly think that you would ever hear him state that he was positive it was an alien spacecraft? I just listened to the interview again and he states, "back then I didn't believe in alien spacecraft". He says nothing at all about what he believes today and instead stated, "back then". He also stated, "we didn't know what it was" simply because they didn't. What person who sights a UFO knows for absolute certain what it was they say unless it bit them in the face. My thoughts come from his 'somewhat raised voice' attempt to explain to the interviewer so that he would understand better that it was most certainly was not Venus. At this point Carter stated, "26 others besides himself were outside of a school at a Lions Club meeting when they saw this UFO (very bright light in the western sky that changed from white to blue to red) much brighter than a star and we (the party of 26) know what Venus, Mars, Jupiter look like and so forth and many of us have telescopes." Instead, the Skeptic Guide's website stated, "Former President Jimmy Carter, speaking candidly on a recent episode of "The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe," flatly dismissed claims that in 1969 he witnessed an alien spacecraft." No he did not flatly dismiss anything. They completely misconstrued what he said. What Carter stated was, “I have never thought that there were extraterrestrial beings from outer space or anything but it was a UFO, an object”. He was talking past tense and well before he saw the UFO. Once again they misconstrued his words. Also, the Skeptics Guide website stated, “Though he did see a mysterious light in the sky, (which he didn’t, he saw one object with three lights) Carter described it as a UFO only because "it was unidentified, it was flying, and it was an object." This is very untrue as well. He did not ever state such in the interview or even a derivative of what they’re claiming here. I cannot even imagine how they got Carter on there to begin with. Carter himself even offered the information about the AFB there in South Georgia as well, but then also stated in the same sentence that what they saw made no engine noise whatsoever. In other words he was making a statement that he really didn’t feel that these lights were coming from Fort Benning. He offered this information because they never asked. He had nothing to hide and he never denied seeing a UFO in the whole interview. Does one ask an ex-president for an interview and then misconstrue the findings to suit their own needs? Unfortunately, what will come of this now is that articles such as yours (The Debris Field) and others who run this will probably last the test of time on the Internet however, that podcast (Quicktime) can disappear in a heart beat - then what? No offense because I'm being hypothetical here but it's not the first time ufology itself has become it's own disinformation officer.

Go here and you'll see what I mean. Frank Warren did an article on it today too. Scroll down to second article centered in page.
http://frankwarren.blogspot.com/
Also, go here...
SKEPTICS AT THEIR WORST
http://aliencases.conforums.com/index.cgi?...;num=1194287515
.

I think that you are a bit behind the power-curve.

I don't know how recent this is but here is what Jimmy has to say: http://youtube.com/watch?v=f9ZoKfYCNlM

Basically he saw something, but he doesn't believe in ETs.

Actually, you're the one who's behind.

According to Carter himself, no such thing happened.

Listen to the above link.

LMAO!!!!

but remember this is Larry Queen. He's a has been for about a decade now. He's got nothing to loose.

Actually, Carter did make that promise and I have often warned people about those skeptical websites.

People still watch Larry King?

http://www.greatdreams.com/peterjenningsdefrauding.htm

I watch him on occasion when he has something or someone interesting on the show. I am guarded on this UFO discussion on LKL though. A few months ago, he had Stanton Friedman, Buzz Aldrin etc talking about Roswell and the one Apollo Mission. And that one skeptic guy from some magazine kept butting in like some loud mouthed rude know it all. And LKL was making it all sort of like "we're all bonkers for have even seen a UFO" with his facial expressions etc.

Just cut the BS, hold off on the d@mn green men blow up dolls, the dumb alien ship cartoons and just run the show AND with out the arrogant rolled eyes, and laughter. I would find it far better if he could just run ONE UFO episode without the RIDICULE

Hopefully THIS TIME he will be a PROFESSIONAL host.

Yeah, jesus the guy's ego just because Larry asked him if his show had been cancelled..

somebody recorded the show for us ?

would be great

So what we can learn here is that Jerry Seinfeld is kind of a dick. Green?

here's a clip on
youtube

I just finished watching this show. I will edit out the commercials, convert it and upload the preview to watch online AND the LINKS to download the entire show in WMV format.

I'll try to have it done tonight, but more likely will have it complete by tomorrow morning.

The only thing worth doing about this show is to simply forget it. It was a waste of time. I started to record it but forgot to get off PAUSE. Once the show was underway my wife noticed that my VCR's counter was not changing so that's when I realized my mistake. But I decided to tape the repeat at midnight. I watched the show and changed my mind about recording it, it would just be a waste of a good videotape. It stunk to high hell. Nothing new was heard. The graphics that were obviously on a loop were awful with a lot of hoaxed photos and footage and no one making any comments about any of them. The guests were boring repeating ad nauseum the same thing we've heard for years. Even Skeptic McGaha was a bore. Shirley McLane proved that she is America's #1 metaphysical nut case. All in all, a failure.

Go here if you missed last nights Larry King Live program. One video - no commercials. Go to bottom of page
http://aliencases.conforums.com/index.cgi?...00&start=15

Ahhh! you beat me to it.

Well I provided this for anyone interested:

Watch 4 minute preview online HERE
Or from this LINK

In the video info, you will also find these download links to the entire show:

Download part 1 here (wmv format, 106 megs):
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=8VHV0M4J

Download part 2 here (wmv format, 105 megs):
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=1W8NXBVF

Well, I thought this show overall was FAR BETTER than the last UFO show LKL had back in July 07 - now that one ticked me off.. Larry was much better at hosting the show in a professional, non-ridicule manner THIS TIME.

BTW, Monday is a holiday.. Veteran's Day.. and they are holding some UFO conference some where this on MONDAY. Does anyone have further info about this?

Thank you for posting the video.

Cheers for the link. Would like some information about this ufo conference, which is happening on monday. Rendleshem case has always stood out for me, and still needs answers that dont mention the "lighthouse" lol. Did not like the footage they were showing, i mean come on! billy meier!!!! the only decent footage they showed when the mexican footage. I just hope people start to take this subject seriously, and try and leave their ignorance and arragonce at the door. The debunker James did himself no favours and is a pure example of someone talking crap in my opinion.

Yes I agree, why were they showing so many crappy videos ?

I found the show pretty good and the debunker needs to be fired LOL !! Bad , bad debunker- no milkbone for you !!

First Larry King called the Bentwaters base 'Brentwood' then he started calling it 'Brentwaters'.





He also misidentified Penniston's notebook as belonging to Halt.

One new thing I heard Penniston say was that he photographed the object he saw on the ground. Where are the photos now?

I've never been a fan of LK but if you say that last night's show was BETTER(!) than the one in July which I wasn't even aware of I don't know what I would have done in July! Maybe throw something at the TV.

Larry is one boring host and rarely seems to be on top of whatever subject he's discussing. He certainly has no interviewing skills and seems to live just to go from commercial to commercial.

We need a UFO show which I'm sure would be a success, showing footage, interviewing those who shot the videos, etc. Mexico has Jaime Maussan and who do we have? Larry King! God we need a break.

Because that's the ONLY kind of UFO videos there are, crappy.

The King show was the same old BS.

This information has been known since the Rendlesham case first became public knowledge.

Penniston did report he took over 20 photographs of the landed craft which he sent to get developed. He never saw the printed photographs and the Ministry of Defence told him that the photographs he took apprently did not come out.

I thought it was a very fair program however that skeptic just had no idea what he was talking about. He tried to tell two military officials that they misidentified a lighthouse for a landed craft and a ball of light shooting down beams to the ground i mean how ridiculous. Its more likely to be other life than a common lighthouse i doubt a young child would even get the two mixed up never mind two former high ranking military officials.

Sam.

He was shocking!
Debunkers like him will not have it any other way. He insults every person who has seen a ufo. I would like to know what other skeptics think of him.

Well, isn't it commonly accepted from Hynek and Hendry's studies that 90 to 95% of 'UFO eyewitnesses', at least, are misperceiving/misinterpreting/misremembering? And that this percentage is HIGHER for pilots, who if they
are 'trained' as observers at all, it is to err on the safe side by seeing anything in the sky as a potential
collision hazard?

Or has that consensus shifted without me noticing?

Course people see stuff that they cannot explain, just because they just dont know what they are looking at. But, certin cases, just like the rendleshem forest case, some people are taking the de-bunking just to far. Surly you have to agree that some explanations to some cases are just a joke, and an insult to the witnesess. Im sure that if i saw a ufo hover above me, so close that i could see the windows before it shot off into space, and some de-bunker turned around and said that what i saw was venus, or a shooting, that would leave me frustrated and maybe regret talking to people about it.

Some people are just stuck in there ways. Why cant people look at a case, esp with more than one witness, and come to the conclusion that they did see something strange, instead of coming out with stupid explanations to satisfy thier de-bunking needs.

That bloke on that show was a joke, who will de-bunk anything with stupid explanations. I just hope that some skeptics feel the same as me because i need 100% proof that some of these ufo's are ET, but i know, and i am sure in myself that some ufo's are unexplained, and need further investigation.

That is correct over 95% of cases can be explained away however cases such as Rendlesham just cannot be explained away that easily.

Nobody would misidentify a landed craft for a lighthouse or a car with lights on it those two explainations just don't match up with the credible witness testimony.

Sam.

I am on the record for stating the the majority of UFO sightings can be explained, but I am very sure that when pilots report visual contact with a metallic, saucer-shaped flying vehicle that is flying circles around their aircraft, which is also tracked on airborne and ground-based radars, they are not mis-identifying that craft as Venus, Jupiter, nor confusing the craft as a weather balloon.

In this case, there were those who'd claimed that the following incident was caused by planets and when they found their mistake, they changed their explanation to ice clouds, which also proved to be incorrect, so here is a case where an aircrew not only identified saucer-shaped crafts flying in formation with their own aircaft, but ground-based and airborne radars confirmed the UFOs in regards to their sightings as well.

Weeks later, other commercial and even military aircrews encountered a similar gigantic saucer-shaped UFO in the same general area.

<a href="http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/JALalaska.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/JALalaska.htm</a>

I agree! Some of my compatriots were stationed there.



Agreed once again! My compatriots have also told me that there was no way a lighthouse could have been responsible for those incidents. A lighthouse supporter who decided to go there and see for himself, finally became convinced that the lighthouse could not have been responsible for the incidents either and Colonel Halt was with him at that point as well.

I might also add that the police car with rotating lights that some claimed was mis-identified as that UFO in the forest, was found to be itself, a hoax, as admitted by the perpetuator, Kevin Conde. He now claims that his prank could not have been responsible for the RAF Bentwaters incident of 1980, which is amazing that anyone took him seriously because that does not explain the object in the forest nor the UFOs in the sky over mulitiple nights.

NPC Day Book: Event Details
Event Date: Nov. 12, 2007
Event Name: UFO Close Encounters
Event Type: News Conference
Time: 11:00 AM
Sponsored by: FCZ Media
Event Location: Ballroom



National Press Club

Well, it wasn't my turn in the barrel for that gig, so King took who he could get.

Nothing came up that called for more responses than i've already posted on my home page, and none of them lend themselves to 30-second sound bites.

I will say that I never shared Klass's passion that EVERY 'unknown' could be matched to an explanation. I am far more satisfied living a universe that is to a significant degree unknowable, where any sort of hypothesis can lurk in the shadows and ambiguities that surround us.

But I seriously doubt that Jimmy Hoffa is on Mars, or there's a "Judge Crater" on the Moon. Lack of explanation allows, but does not COMPEL, the existence of extraordinary stimuli. That intellectual compulsion needs to be found elsewhere.

Besides, I've dug up far too many cases where the 'UFO MIS-perception" had utility for agencies (gummint, criminal, sectarian, pranksters, whatever) who preferred their activities remained unrecognized. It's touching, for example, that long after the Soviet regime so deservedly collapsed, some of its own fabricated 'UFO myths' (such as using an enthusiastic but hopelessly naive Feliks Zigel to camouflage illegal Soviet military space weapons tests as 'alien visitors from space') are still so fervently promulgated by today's 'pierce-the-coverup' posturing UFO buffs (e.g., Vallee), in an irony of cosmic-scale deliciousness.

Had I been on the show, I'd have realized the apparent foolishness of snap-solutions, and tried to stress constructive approaches to reducing the ambiguities and misinterpretations that we are laden with as ordinary people.

I'd also have given an 'answer', whether the question ever arose or not, that the growth of the meme that "our-ignorance-is-all-the gummint's-fault" is not only a cop-out of our own responsibilities and a betrayel of our own capabilities, it is a toxic threat to national political discourse.

As for the liars who say (eg, above, on this thread) that a critic of a witness's credibility is really calling them liars, I'd advise just growing up a little more, with eyes a little wider open, to realize the genuine drawbacks of oral testimony -- and it's not deliberate falsification.

Pilots? I'm with Hynek on this. Insofar as they are 'trained observers', they are trained to detect threats to their aircraft and act promptly. As a result they misinterpret celestial phenomena far more frequently than the rest of us. As they should -- the cost of a 'false positive' is embarassment, the cost of a 'false negative' is death. On which side SHOULD they err?

I can understand if a pilot see's something in the distance, say something that looks like a star, and getting a bit confused. But when pilots see solid objects fly beside them, or go straight passed them, then thats harder to explain. What really gets me is that some people really cant say ok, you saw something strange. They have to say that it was venus or some other stupid explanation. Ok, of course venus, and othe natural phenomena can be put down to many ufo's. but why cant some people look into a case and say yes, this is indeed strange. Its like they cant leave it that way and they will say any explanation, even if it does not match what the witnesess saw. I find this sad, because if people were more open to the subject, then maybe, just maybe, we may find some answers.

Not likely at all! Pilots fly at night on a constant basis and know what stars and planets look like.

There is a major difference between a saucer-shaped flying vehicle in close proximity of an aircraft that is also captured on ground-based and airborne radars, and planets, and besides, planets do not maneuver around aircraft nor are they captured on ground-based radars of the FAA and the Air Force.

Are you implying that this incident was caused by a celetrial body?



As far as seeing a bright light in the sky, most likely a pilot will think that it is the landing light of another aircraft, not a flying saucer, and then again, the environment for which pilots fly in are filled with lights, especially around airports. It is recommended that airline and military pilots keep their landing lights on if operating below 10,000 feet, so it is not likely that a pilot is going to confuse a pinpoint of light as a flying saucer that has been described as metallic.

I have flown many hours at night and not once have I ever confused a star or a planet as a flying saucer.

I find it amusing that there are those who think that these incidents could have been caused by a planet or a star.

I have never been a pilot, so you would know more than me. What i was getting at was people de-bunking cases where ufo's have flown close to the plane, close enough that the pilots could see a solid craft. I find some of the explanations for these cases laughable, and coming from people who jsut dont want to turn around and say yes, what you saw was wierd. Even for some de-bunkers to turn around and say yes, its strange, but i still need evidence, there is nothing wrong with that, but it seems they cant do that, and they dont see that as a flaw, but it is.

I understood where you were coming from and my message was kinda aimed at someone else.

When pilots report strange objects flying in close proximity of their aircraft, it is likely that the objects are also tracked on radar as well, but not in all cases. Here is yet another example that I have posted before.