OK, now that the interview is recorded, I guess no one will mind if I hijack this thread a little further to clarify a few things.
Polterwurst,
Here's my suggestion: You admit you're "new to all this". Rather than pointedly question those who are not new to all this, it may be best to actually catch yourself up. Read my book to see what it actually is about; read other books. Do your homework, bring yourself up to speed, then you'll have a better grasp on who is saying what and where they're actually coming from. It's sort of going about it backwards expecting "veterans" (so to speak) of this stuff to have to step back to address things many others already know. I'm sincerely not trying to be rude.
.
Thank you. So am I, even if it might not seem that way. If my assumptions are wrong, I apologize, but after all I had heard on that Radio Misterioso interview and what I had read about the book, I was (and still am) of the opinion that you are quite forcefully trying to take the "airship mystery" and make it into some forerunner of the Nazi-UFO-myth.
(Yes, I know they were looking for a miracle weapon and they obviously tried to gain air superiority but that doesn't mean they found the secret to anti gravity or are secretly planning to take over the world in their Antarctica hideout right now.
)
You're right, I can't pass any judgement if I haven't even read the book and done some research. But I guess, to catch myself up, I should read some of the basic - and less speculative - stuff first.
Until a few years ago, like most of my countrymen, I thought that all this UFO stuff was utter nonsense. That's what I'd been taught practically from the first time I had seen something about the subject on TV or in a newspaper article. It was all just weird people believing weird things. Then I stumbled over a few very credible witness reports on the internet, like that of Parviz Jafari, the 2007 National Press Club conference with the (ex-) commercial and military pilots, and slowly I came around to the opinion that these people had obviously seen something they couldn't explain. And many of them I trusted to be able to tell some natural phenomenon / prototype aircraft / flare / rocket launch from something really anomalous. So the question became, why is there no serious research? Why are these people still laughed at?
The answer I came to was not "because of the evil debunkers" or "the evil government cover-up", not even because of the hoaxers but "because of the wild theories and claims some people in this ufology mess seem to generate like weekly sitcom screenwriters".
Maybe research in the field would stand a chance of being considered serious, if the researchers wouldn't have to fear being compared to these charlatans and tall-tale-tellers. Maybe the honest witnesses that have been ridiculed over the years would have a chance to be redeemed if not every credible sighting would be trumped at once by at least three wild speculations and stories about some naked Annunaki peeping through someone's backyard window.
At first I laughed at the idea that there was some concerted effort to discredit the whole field by putting out at least some of these stories deliberately. The hope to make some money and fame by coming up with a new speculation just at the time the ufology audience gets bored, or by claiming to be in contact with an insectoid from Nibiru or something should be enough to spawn them.
Maybe it's just a question of supply and demand. Lots of people look at ufology as a supplier of entertainment, curious stories and weird theories to ponder, so naturally there's going to be people who have no problem with resorting to hair raising speculations and obviously fabricated stories to cater to that demand (the Nazi UFOs being just one example for the latter, but they annoy me no end, as you might have noticed).
But over time, I stumbled over more and more of these ex government employees who were in this catering business, whose stories were either totally outrageous and crazy or they looked interesting at first but fell apart readily when examined closer. Both ways, they made the whole field look even more ridiculous and were further damaging the credibility of the honest witnesses.
It's actually too obvious to be a conspiracy theory. You either believe that these credentialed people, who should be paragons of honor and trustworthyness, are all charlatans, trying to make a fast buck, fantasy prone or plain crazy or you subscribe to the idea that they might get a nice inofficial pension to put out these stories by someone linked to their former employers. Both options seem equally improbable to me. If it was only one or two of these "whistle blowers", I'd go for the first option, but they keep coming.
But what do I know. I'll shut up now and try to bring myself up to speed. Which includes listening to the interview, I guess. And maybe reading the book. As I said, if my assumptions regarding the proto Nazi UFO myth and your motivations are wrong, I heartily apologize.
I suppose guests don't usually get involved in the question bank. I just figured I'd be honest and clarify what the discussion wouldn't be so people would be able to decide if they want to listen or not. 
