13 thoughts on “Davis-Wilson Analysis. Richard Dolan Show with Joe Murgia.

  1. AvatarPressToDigitate

    Good interview! But it just wet our apatite for more ‘Vintage Dolan’, so we’re now watching “Reclaiming Our Freedom from a Lifetime of UFO Secrecy” at the 5th British Exopolitics Expo held at the University of Huddersfield on September 28th 2013, on YouTube. Great Lecture!

    On that No. 1-61-E document:
    No one hates nitpicking “skepticism” on documents more than I do. BUT, on this one, I couldn’t ignore the fact that when discussing nuclear deterrence and retaliation potentials, in a classified context, to senior Defense policy people, mistaking “Parity” for “Parody” is not something that anyone would ever do. This isn’t a “typo”; its not even a subconscious grammatical error, like “there” for “their”. This one *has meaning*. It should raise a Red Flag. But, worse, is that in 1961, I don’t believe that nuclear war planners were [yet] of the opinion that an exchange would ‘kill off half the world’s population’. That is a much more recent – and political, rather than scientific – assessment of such post-war outcomes. That’s a second Red Flag. Finally, I am drawn to the typographical ‘justification’ of the “Prepared by” citations at the top of the first page. That spacing and alignment is a computer artifact. Red Flag #3, Are there any similar examples of that stylism from 1961 known to be authentic?

    Other than that, we should probably be focused on what kinds of nuclear material were found on those six crash retrievals discussed. Atomic Energy Commission records of anomalous radioactive hazard mitigation would still exist, and should be subject to FOIA by this time. One could request reports of AEC hazard activity proximate to already known or suspected Crash Retrievals – without mentioning UFOs (and, Ideally, with the request made in the name of someone not publicly identified with Ufology). It is unlikely the events would be undocumented, even if the specific details are not revealed. All we need are matches in time and location.

    We’re loving this 2013 lecture you gave in the UK. On leaks leading toward Disclosure, your optimism has largely been rewarded, by Elizondo, et al. On the NWO and dystopic Orwellian futures, you could have used a lot more ‘dark foreboding’ back then, to match what we’ve seen come to pass in recent years. Seven years from now, I believe the retrospective on 2020 will read pretty much the same.

    1. Richard DolanRichard Dolan Post author

      Well good points but I am not sure they stand. Regarding the typos, yes they are bad. But guess what? The sources who told ME about this doc have said that they know who the author of the doc was, and that he was a notoriously bad speller with lots of typos. So go figure. Is it true? Maybe, maybe not. As for blowing up half the world, I don’t think that was as unusual as you might think. When Ike was given his final briefing from head of SAC Gen. Thomas Power in Autumn of 1960, he apparently was told that our nuclear strike would destroy something like half the Soviet Union. Was that hype from Power? Again, I don’t know. I believe I cited that fact and footnoted it in V1 of National Security State. And I am glad you like the 2013 version of Richard Dolan! 🙂

      2
      1. AvatarPressToDigitate

        I don’t doubt a U.S. strike in 1960 could have destroyed ‘half the Soviet Union’ (my Dad was in SAC at the time, stationed at Griffiss AFB in Rome, NY, where I was born), but the document claims such an exchange would “kill half the world”. That dismal apocalyptic outlook didn’t really gain widespread currency until much later inside of strategic planning circles (and then primarily among Leftist academics), though it was the subject of sensationalist popular fiction much earlier. The one ‘typo’ that bothers me is “Parody” for “Parity”. Its just a word so *central* to the entire thesis, and purported to come from a subject matter expert, in briefing other subject matter experts. It would be like someone briefing you, Linda, Grant, and the Steves about the “Extraterritorials” visiting our planet – or worse. The alignment bit at the top right just seems peculiar, but is unimportant.

        But, as I said, if we accept it as legitimate, we should be able to correlate AEC- recorded radiation incidents with already known or suspected Crash Retrievals, where even a couple of the purported six, if matched, would tend to strongly corroborate the whole thing (and send us looking for the other four). If none correlate, there’s a problem. For one thing, its unlikely that an intense radiation leak from a crash could be covered up completely, in the nuke-paranoid 1950s; rather, they would explain it by some means. So many such episodes from back then, with prosaic explanation, have since been brought to light – and generally litigated for compensatory damages. (Hence, finding such a correlation isn’t that unlikely.) Another issue is that real ET craft would almost certainly utilize Zero Point Energy in some way, rather than Nuclear, and even then, would be using clean Fusion rather than dirty Fission, with highly radioactive materials. By contrast, man-made ARVs of the period (given that they existed then) *WOULD* have used Fission power, to obtain suitable energy densities for field propulsion experiments. So, perhaps its a genuine document, addressing the possible ramifications of ARV testing failures, cloaking the problem in distracting Alien lore. It would certainly explain the use of “parody” as a codeword, that might alert the cognizant recipients to understand a secondary interpretation of the information being presented.
        ON BACKGROUND:
        https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4533/Plum%20Brook%20Complete.pdf

        1. Richard DolanRichard Dolan Post author

          I do think there are still big problems with accepting this document as is. Paul Dean has made a strong case for it being a hoax, but I have a few feelers out and am waiting to hear back.

  2. Brian X0067Brian X0067

    Wow – great interview Richard; who thought Joe Murgia was so well connected!

    The interesting thing about Willson docs & re-visiting Millers involvement in all this – in his 2013 interview with Steven Greer, Miller suggests that the U.S. military already has gravity driven craft; does this corroborate Mike Turber’s claims about the Tic Tac craft being U.S. tech?

    2
  3. AvatarDennislogan.927

    Most important story in history! That and the tic tac story, (more to come), it’s strong poor that the government is in deep and hiding world changing proof of ufos.
    Thanks Richard once again. Tracy too!

  4. AvatarDennislogan.927

    One more thing. I met Lazar when I lived in Law Vegas, he strikes me as a man who isn’t lying about his story. He doesn’t care if some people think he’s lying. He said he wasn’t making$$$ on his story and didn’t pay attention to the whole UFO thing. I for one believe his story is true. What do you think, Ricard?

  5. Avatarcosinaphile

    sounds amazing … looking forward to this with what little hope i retain ….

    thanks in advance RD
    paul in nyc

  6. Carolyn3Carolyn3

    That was a great interview. I have to say when this first came out, the one thing that made it more believable for me was the involvement of Dr. Edgar Mitchel.
    To me It’s just crazy how Wilson at his level of rank was still denied access. Also makes you wonder who is in charge? Are the ET’s in charge? I’m still sifting through the information you posted. Looking forward to more interviews with Joe

    2
    1. Scott SantaScott Santa

      Hi Carolyn3 – I couldn’t agree with you more. Dr. Mitchell was no dummie and his credibility is beyond reproach.

  7. Scott SantaScott Santa

    Most excellent interview! Yeah, don’t let go of this sliver of the whole … it IS important. Thanks Rich!

Leave a Reply