Leslie Keane is a veteran of investigative journalism who has devoted more than 20 years to the study of the once taboo topic of UFOs. “They are now recognized as real,” says Keene. "Meanwhile, despite the sightings using advanced technology, we have no idea what UFOs are or where they came from."
Although Keene herself has not seen a UFO, examining hundreds of government documents, aircraft crew reports, radar data, and special studies with corroborating physical evidence, as well as interviews with dozens of senior officials and pilot witnesses from around the world, have strengthened her belief that UFOs deserve scientific study. “I think we are finally at the threshold of a new paradigm,” Keene said.
Space.com recently met with Keene to find out what she thinks will happen in the near future in ufology, as well as what prevents the scientific community from taking seriously the discovery of objects of extraterrestrial origin and much more.
Space.com: How can you characterize the current environment, given your NY Times article that brought UFOs back to the forefront of the public eye?
Keene: We've seen major changes since our December 2017 article, which included two videos from the US Navy. The government recognized the reality of UFOs and the fact that it affects national security, which in itself was a significant shift. We have other Navy videos of unexplained objects, the Unidentified Air Activity (UOT) Working Group, and a recent government report at the request of the Senate Special Intelligence Committee.
The report says there are no indications that the EOEs are of American, Russian or Chinese origin. This prompted many secret services to consolidate information for the first time and drew additional political attention to the topic. Prior to the June 2021 EOD report, senior officials made statements about the need to investigate these unexplained objects that exhibit characteristics beyond our understanding. The taboo on taking extraterrestrial objects seriously is waning, and scientists, for the first time in many years, have suddenly advocated an EE study in Scientific American.
Space.com: In your opinion, what is the difference between the terms UFO and UEF?
Keene: I don't think there is any significant difference. The term UFO has gradually become more preferred, with the use of the government and the military, as it covers a wider range of phenomena than the term UFO. While the acronym UFOs came into use primarily to avoid the toxicity associated with UFOs, the only difference is the impression they leave. The first term seems more cultured, while the second more formal. The IWY denies any association with conspiracy theories or TV shows like The X-Files. Nevertheless, the term UFO has not gone anywhere and, of course, it is more popular.
Space.com: What surprised you the most over the years of UFO research, and what disappointed you the most?
Keene: In the early years, what struck me most was the lack of curiosity among academics and politicians. I was also surprised at how deeply this stigma is ingrained in the media and culture in general. I was very puzzled why these people were not affected by the potential consequences of the evidence for this phenomenon. I soon realized that most of the people on whom something depends are ignorant and, for obvious reasons, have different priorities. And yet, it was difficult for me to understand this apathy and disinterest.
Many times I was amazed that experienced investigative journalists did not join us and dive deeply into the UFO topic. As a freelancer, I couldn't open the same doors as the Washington Post, the New York Times, or the New Yorker magazine. However, they, in essence, remained silent, and this greatly upset me. But now, of course, everything has changed.
I was also disappointed that there was not a single government agency in the United States that could receive reports from police officers, civil aviation pilots and other witnesses, and conduct investigations when necessary.
Space.com: With all of the current chatter about the IED, how do you think things are today, and what can we expect in the near future?
Keene: We have made tremendous progress over the past three and a half years. Prior to the publication of the National Intelligence Report, momentum has been gaining momentum for a long time, and we must keep it going. For the next steps, a well-funded, extended task force needs to be created to access information from government agencies, and all data compiled. This data must then be analyzed by the best experts from many fields. And, of course, I believe that much more information needs to be made public.
The Department of Defense files contain video and photographic footage that far surpasses anything we've seen so far. I think the public has a right to this and other data. The secrecy is excessive, although I recognize the need to withhold some data for reasons of national security.
We may be lucky enough to see an open congressional hearing on the EOE. And, finally, we must be presented with the final official conclusion that these objects are not of Russian or Chinese origin. It was clearly established that they were not ours, but the possibility of the involvement of a foreign adversary's technology has not yet been completely ruled out. Some, however, state this confidently. Either way, this should be stated in one of the written reports as a recorded fact. Perhaps the day will come when both countries mentioned will join the United States in recognizing the reality of UFOs. At this moment, we will cross the line separating us from the new world.
Space.com: In my opinion, there is a new wave of UFO craze in society, reminiscent of the fifties. In this arena, there are many charlatans who make good money. How do you think people should treat information about UFOs so as not to fall into the trap, while remaining open and trying to get to the bottom of it.
Keene: I would advise the public to take into account who they are listening to, focusing on the official information provided by former and current government officials and others who may have real information. Often they are forced to speak in general terms due to secrecy, but their words have real weight and should be taken seriously.
You should beware of people with extreme conspiracy views who are trying to influence public opinion in their own interests. Any statements must be backed up by facts, names and documents that can be verified, otherwise they are simply worthless.
Space.com: Do you expect "full disclosure" of UFO information in the foreseeable future? And if so, is the society ready for this, given the low level of trust in the authorities in recent years?
Keene: It depends on what you mean by full disclosure. According to some people, government officials should stand up and announce that we have been visited by alien spaceships for seventy years, and we have known this all along. I don't think this will ever happen.
However, if we get to the point where it becomes an officially established fact that these objects were not made in the USA, Russia, China or any other country on our planet, it will be a very significant milestone. At the same time, I understand that any such confession would have to be accompanied by the caveat that we have no idea what it is, where the UFOs came from and why they are here. It can hardly be expected that the answer will be found anytime soon.
Space.com: Finally, the last question. Do you think there is a need to internationalize the UFO / UEF dialogue?
Kean: Definitely yes. Sources have told me that other countries have contacted us since the June report. China has set up its own working group on DEF. South America is also actively involved in investigations. International cooperation is critical to moving forward. And I believe that scientists need to follow the example of the Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb, and be more active, initiating their own independent studies of these phenomena. They could tell us more than the government, because they have the right to publish the results of their work.