In partnership with Adobe Acrobat, we’re opening up our reporting. Using PDF Spaces, you can dig into original documents, research, and source material—so you can follow the story the same way we do.
Step inside our story

For most of American history, UFOs were relegated to the fringes of public discourse—the domain of conspiracy theorists, tabloid headlines, and late-night radio hosts. Journalists, politicians, and other “serious” people treated the topic with skepticism, if not outright derision. Even asking questions about UFOs, extraterrestrial life, or non-human intelligence would invite ridicule.

That is beginning to change.

In recent weeks, the federal government has released hundreds of pages of previously classified records related to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena, or UAPs—the term government agencies now use instead of UFOs. The disclosures include military reports, intelligence assessments, witness accounts, videos, photographs, and historical records documenting decades of government interest in unexplained aerial encounters. The Pentagon has described the effort as an unprecedented transparency initiative, with additional materials expected to be released on a rolling basis.

Critics have questioned the timing of the disclosures, arguing that the UAP releases serve as a distraction from more pressing issues, including inflation, the rising cost of living, ongoing conflicts abroad, and the continuing fallout from the Epstein files. For advocates of disclosure, however, the document dump represents something very different: long-awaited confirmation that the government has taken the subject far more seriously than it has publicly acknowledged.

Despite the sheer volume of material, the releases so far have offered more intrigue than answers. The documents contain unexplained incidents, unusual witness accounts, and glimpses into how government agencies have approached the phenomenon over the years. They do not provide definitive proof of extraterrestrial life, nor have they resolved the debate surrounding UAPs.

But there are undoubtedly examples of phenomena that cannot be explained. For example, a newly released report details a 2022 sighting over Colorado in which military personnel observed what witnesses described as a massive, stationary object resembling an irregularly shaped potato hovering above Cheyenne Mountain before disappearing. Government analysts later proposed possible optical explanations for the sighting, but ultimately concluded they had “low confidence” in those theories.

The significance of the disclosures may not lie in any particular document, but in the way the conversation has shifted. What was once confined to internet forums and fringe conventions is now being debated in congressional hearings, discussed by intelligence officials, and addressed by sitting and former presidents. The question is no longer whether UAPs deserve investigation. It is just how much the government knows, and President Trump is willing to share.

That shift was at the center of Shane Smith’s recent conversation with filmmaker Dan Farah, director of The Age of Disclosure, a documentary that follows those pushing to uncover exactly what the government knows. Farah agrees that the changing conversation has less to do with new evidence than with who is discussing it. His goal with The Age of Disclosure was to create what he describes as the most credible documentary yet made on the subject by focusing exclusively on military officials, intelligence personnel, lawmakers, and government insiders with direct knowledge of the issue. That credibility has helped push the topic further into the mainstream.

Farah describes the current moment not as a single revelation but as part of a significant historical process. Disclosure, he argues, is unlikely to arrive in one dramatic announcement. Instead, it is unfolding gradually through ongoing congressional investigations, whistleblower testimony, hearings, official reports, documentaries, and public conversations. “That’s why I call the movie The Age of Disclosure,” Farah said. “It wasn’t the moment of disclosure. It’s this age, this process.”

The government says additional records will continue to be released. But regardless of what future disclosures reveal, the most significant change may already have occurred.

The age of disclosure is here.

These men aren’t any old police officers or soldiers. This is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The mafia of Iran. The guys you never want to run into…

When the war broke out more than two months ago, my reaction was the same I have to every war: this is very bad. For years, Vice News has reported on the brutality of the Iranian regime: the repression, the crackdowns, the everyday reality of living without freedoms many of us take for granted. Before the war, a crackdown on anti-regime protestors killed thousands of Iranians. But none of that changes my belief that war is always the worst case scenario.

Most Western coverage has focused on military strategy and the Trump administration’s justification for the strikes the U.S. launched alongside Israel, including the core argument that Iran must be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Far less attention has been paid to what life in Tehran actually looks like right now. That’s partly because, for Western journalists, reporting from inside Iran has become nearly impossible.

So when we had the opportunity to travel to Tehran, I knew it was important to get on the ground and speak directly with Iranians about their experience of the war.

I also wanted to speak with government officials to better understand Tehran’s position on its nuclear program. If, as Trump says, the conflict revolves around Iran’s nuclear program—with the U.S. claiming Iran is pursuing a weapon and Iran insisting the program is for energy and development—then in theory, some kind of compromise should be possible.

I had never filmed in Iran during an active conflict, so I wasn’t quite sure what to expect. Being stopped by the IRGC two hours into our trip was an unpleasant experience to say the least. I’ve never gotten used to interactions like these. Iran has always felt like a police state, but now it feels like a police state on overdrive. But you have to be prepared for this when you’re reporting in an authoritarian country. Risk is part of the calculus.

As we ventured on to cover one of the city’s nightly anti-war rallies, we found the streets filled with traffic, the stores at the grand bazaar were full, and construction underway on luxury apartments. It was an unbelievable dichotomy. Despite the fact that the U.S. and Israel have carried out thousands of strikes on the country, Tehran felt, at least on the surface, surprisingly normal. Unveiling unexpected details like these is why it’s always been important to get on the ground- there’s a broader story that the mainstream media can’t capture.

Internet access in Iran is heavily restricted, but using local SIM cards, we were able to livestream portions of our visit. The familiar imagery of Iranian demonstrations was everywhere: flag waving, chants of “Death to America,” “Death to Israel,” and “Death to the Jews.” There were signs maligning Reza Pahlavi, son of the last shah of Iran, who- from exile in the United States- has become a kind of opposition figurehead. Teenagers crowded around booths playing podcasts about martyrdom. Vendors sold miniature Shahed drone keychains as merch.

Yet the people we spoke with were consistently friendly, polite, and eager to talk. That’s something you come to realize when you report in authoritarian places like Iran, North Korea, or Cuba: the people are not the regime. They wanted to connect, and to share with the world their frustrations, fears, and their hopes for peace.

As we filmed, police stopped us repeatedly to check our paperwork, but our fixers managed to smooth things over each time. We were in Iran legally as journalists, and because the regime controls virtually every aspect of foreign reporting, that meant the regime had allowed us to be there. Thus the people I was able to speak with on camera were overwhelmingly anti-war and supportive of the regime. Those that hold different opinions were unlikely to risk speaking candidly to journalists.

Still it was incredible to get the raw opinions of an important proportion of Iranian people. One night, when our friend Andrew Callaghan of Channel 5 News joined us at a rally, I met a man who surprised me. He approached me speaking perfect English and explained that he had spent part of his childhood in Ottawa — the same Canadian city where I grew up. With one child on his shoulders and another holding his hand, he came across as warm, thoughtful, and completely ordinary. But when I asked him about the war, he told me he actually wanted America to attack again. He was “waiting for it.” He explained that he believed another confrontation would allow Iran to finally “finish the job” — by which he meant forcing the United States out of the region entirely, leaving Iran and its neighbors to determine their own future without Western interference. I was stunned by how genuine he came across. This was a happy man.

Later in the trip, I sat down with the spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Esmail Baghaei. We discussed the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, the risk of regional escalation, and Israel’s role in the conflict, before turning to the central issue: Iran’s nuclear program. I asked him a question that many Americans would probably ask. If Iran’s nuclear program is truly peaceful, why not abandon it in exchange for a deal with the United States? Iran sits atop enormous oil and gas reserves. Why not focus on fossil fuels, or solar, or wind energy instead?

Baghaei rejected that premise. Iran, he argued, is not attempting to build a nuclear weapon but should continue to pursue nuclear energy. Critics point to Iran enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels, but Baghaei insisted the program is about “development” and “welfare.” He reminded me of something I had learned while visiting Iranian nuclear facilities with the IAEA last time I was in Tehran: before the Islamic Revolution, it was American institutions that encouraged the Shah to pursue nuclear energy, with U.S. and European companies helping build Iran’s first reactor. He also pointed out that several Gulf states with enormous fossil fuel reserves maintain civilian nuclear programs of their own, and that the world is pushing countries away from dependence on fossil fuels for their environmental impact.

I was relieved to emerge from Tehran with a mission accomplished: capturing perspectives on this conflict that hadn’t presently been shared. I understood the impasse between Washington and Tehran more clearly than before. The United States sees a regime inching toward nuclear weapons capability and says that military intervention is necessary to stop it. Iran sees itself as a sovereign power and says it’s being denied rights that other countries already possess. And caught between those two positions are ordinary Iranians, waiting to see what happens next.

In partnership with Adobe Acrobat, we’re opening up our reporting from Iran. Using PDF Spaces, you can dig into original documents, research, and source material—so you can follow the story the same way we do.

Step inside our story

Why did I get this? You are receiving this because you previously subscribed to a VICE News newsletter or digital service managed by Vice Media Group. If your preferences have changed or you no longer wish to hear from us, you can unsubscribe below.

In January 2026, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth told the US military to “accelerate like hell” in the use of AI, robots, and autonomous systems.

Now, just over 100 days later, we’re on the ground in Morocco, where AI-powered “robotic forces” are working alongside human soldiers as part of African Lion, the US military’s largest exercise on the African continent.

“The Russia Ukraine Conflict has provided interesting insight into how the battlefield has changed,” 1st. Lt. Vincent Gaspari told us in a tent at Camp America in Tan-Tan, Morocco. “We now have very low-cost solutions that are precise and effective.”

Indeed, the modern battlefield has become much more lethal with drones, creating asymmetrical warfare where one side becomes substantially weaker than the other. Here at Africa Lion, we’re seeing autonomous ground vehicles that are weaponized. But with anything lethal, a human is in the loop.

As this technology advances further, what are the ethics of of autonomy on the battlefield?

This and more as we cover Africa Lion 2026:

In partnership with Adobe Acrobat, we’re opening up our reporting from the African Lion exercise. Using PDF Spaces, you can dig into original documents, research, and source material—so you can follow the story the same way we do.

Step inside our story.

Shane Smith traveled to Venezuela for a special episode of Shane Smith Has Questions, on the ground for the first meeting between U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and acting Venezuelan President Delcy Rodríguez: the Trump administration’s first official visit since the regime change.

Reporting from Caracas, Shane gets rare access as U.S. officials engage Venezuela’s new leadership and begin shaping what comes next for the country and its vast oil reserves.

He also sits down with Venezuelan journalist María de los Ángeles Graterol and Wall Street Journal South America Bureau Chief, Juan Manuel Ferero, to unpack the power shift, the stakes for Washington, and what the future may hold for Venezuela.

• Watch the full interview on YouTube

• Follow and rate SSHQ on Spotify

• Follow and review SSHQ on Apple Podcasts

• Follow VICE News on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, & X

Shane and Channel 5/All Gas No Brakes’ Andrew Callaghan traveled to Denmark and Greenland covering the ongoing crisis over Greenland, which the U.S. is threatening to annex. A number of European countries are promising to defend Greenland, if necessary, under Article Five of the North Atlantic Treaty. Canada is weighing whether to send a small number of troops.

Watch the video to see what Shane and Andrew uncovered.

• Watch the full interview on YouTube

• Subscribe to Channel 5 on YouTube

• Follow VICE News on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, & X

Shane sits down in Denmark, immediately following today’s high-stakes US–Danish meetings, with former Danish foreign minister Per Stig Møller for an on-the-ground conversation about why Greenland has become one of the most sensitive geopolitical flashpoints right now. Coming off the press conference and escalating rhetoric between Washington and Copenhagen, Møller draws on his role negotiating a key defense treaty with the United States to explain what the agreements actually allow, and why the current moment has raised fresh alarms.

They break down the US narrative around security gaps, rare earth minerals, and competition with Russia and China, questioning whether those claims hold up under scrutiny. The conversation looks at sovereignty, NATO obligations, Arctic militarization, and what it means when long-standing allies begin treating territory and people as leverage rather than partners.

• Watch the full interview on YouTube

• Follow VICE News on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, & X