Answering Questions on Disclosure and Deception

By | April 30, 2021

Hi everyone, 

In my email today was something from someone I’ve known for quite a few years and have a lot of respect for. This is a person who was formerly a moderator for Bill Ryan’s Avalon website. This person is extremely smart and has many relevant things to say about the subject of UFOs and all that is related to it. 

So today I saw an email from this individual in which he/she and several fellow (former) moderators of Avalon posed a series of questions to me. Many of these overlapped, but I decided to give a thorough treatment of this because it’s a useful way for me to clarify a few things. 

I sent the below series of answers back and I assume these will be posted somewhere. That’s fine, and I am happy to post them for you here. 

—————————————–

From XXXX:, thanks for the offer to put forward questions for Richard Dolan. I would ask him why he did the interview with his friend to talk about his early life through family photos – from my perspective of him as the intrepid Oxford researcher and guarded professional analyst, it was most unexpected.

RD: That’s a simple answer. Peter Robbins is one of my best, longest, and most trusted friends. His program format is to do exactly this kind of interview with all of his guests. I have never given a detailed biographical interview before, at least one that is publicly available. I wonder if the person asking the question is somehow taking issue with the fact that I talked about my life.

I would ask him why he trusts Lou Elizondo as an associate and partner and why he is not seeking the partnership of others who are eminent like Daniel Lizst, Joseph Farrell and Catherine Austin Fitts?

RD: First of all, I adore Catherine and Joseph. Daniel attacked my name publicly, however, and at least once in a manner that seemed angry and emotional, and which disappointed me, since my disagreements with him on TTSA never resulted in me attacking him. So of course I wouldn’t ask such a person to collaborate with me. As far as Catherine and Joseph are concerned, why of course I certainly would love to work with them on projects in the future. 

In any case, I am not close with Mr. Elizondo but I wanted him for my upcoming event because (a) we have never had an interview before, (b) he has a much higher public profile than any of the three individuals mentioned, and (c) I intend to push him as hard as I can on UFO crash retrievals and related matters. This last reason is the main one. And it’s something he has come very, very close to acknowledging publicly in the past, and I intend to push him hard on this — in a nice way and not as a way to attack him, or anything like that. But I do intend to push—a bit. 

I would ask him who he does not trust now on the road to disclosure?

RD: If I may say, I don’t think the question is well formulated. You don’t trust people. You trust reliable data. You trust facts that can be checked and verified. Therefore, anyone who can provide genuine information should be listened to, insofar as that information can be verified and utilized. There are people in our community who in my opinion have more relevant things to say than others, but I am not interested in making public lists. 

I would ask him if he is in contact with any ET groups. If so, who are they and what are you talking about?

RD: I am not in contact with any ET groups that I am aware of. I suppose I should be flattered that the questioner thinks that I might be. 

I would ask him, what is a question that no one has asked him yet that he feels is important to give an answer to?

RD: How about this: is there a relationship between the growing digital totalitarian surveillance system coming into place and a need to put all “conspiracy theories”, including the deep aspects of the UFO coverup, to sleep for good? (The answer obviously is yes).

From Chip Myers: Could you just let Richard know of my sincere concern over the truth of disclosure.  Humanity deserves the truth and not something wrapped in a political/financial agenda.

RD: After reading this statement a few times, I am going to assume that the questioner is suggesting that we are moving toward a “false” disclosure motivated by financial gain. Well of course we are! What else would anyone possibly expect? 

Now, my guiding principle is that we the people ought to govern our lives based on true information, not false information. That’s why I believe in genuine UFO disclosure. But of course that might end up being a dangerous proposition for several reasons. And it might very well be that if genuine disclosure were to happen, that many people would be angry at folks like myself and others who have promoted it all these years. I’m not just talking about a deepening of public angst and argument over these beings — which you can be sure will happen no matter how this thing is spun. But in terms of technology that will inevitably be released (probably unofficially rather than officially). 

After all, you have to wonder what nice new weapons can be fabricated based on revolutionary scientific principles? You might trust yourself with that knowledge (although that would probably be foolish), but in any case could you trust all of your neighbors, or fellow citizens, or people around the world? I have to think these are questions that keep the secret-keepers awake at night, at least sometimes. If it worries me sometimes, I can only imagine what they are thinking about. 

Even so, I believe in the truth over being lied to. Call it an instinct, call it a foundational belief. 

But the actual world we live in doesn’t operate by those rules and never has. In all of human history, it never has. Motives of financial gain and power have always been the dominant feature of policy everywhere throughout history. 

The real question I assume is implied here is whether or not the UFO news of the last three years (and of course TTSA) is explicitly part of such an agenda. 

Let me put it this way. Let’s say you are TTSA and just pretend for a moment that you actually do want greater public openness on UFOs. Just pretend for a moment that when Chris Mellon says things to this effect that he actually means it (I personally believe he does). Okay. If so, how would you get (a) a corrupt Congress and (b) the dumdum corrupt media to listen to you? Seriously, how would you do it? 

Well, you might go about it in a way similar to how I personally tried to do it with my first two volumes of history (which of course failed miserably in swaying those bodies). You would shake them by the shoulders, so to speak, and emphasize, quite accurately by the way, that there are genuine national security issues involved in the UFO subject. That is for real. That’s not the same as saying all aliens are bad or hostile. But there is no question whatsoever that the UFO phenomenon is a national security problem of the highest order and always has been. That is why the secrecy around it is so intense. Obviously. 

So if you are trying to get someone’ attention — a generally stupid and lethargic set of institutions such as the USG and the corporate controlled establishment media — you are going to have to emphasize some angle that will actually get people to listen. Potential threat scenarios are an obvious way to do that. 

One can ask: is it true that these objects are a genuine threat? Clearly, not all researchers agree. Steven Greer has emphasized for the longest time that the threat isn’t from these ETs but the US military industrial complex. My attitude is different. I see threats coming from both sides. Moreover, I see multiple factions and goals emanating from within both sides of this. In other words, I think this is probably a very complex situation in terms of who are the players and what they are actually trying to accomplish. 

From XXXX: What is the Disclosure plan by the CIA and is Luis Elizondo a part of it? If not, why do you believe him?

RD: Okay, once again I need to emphasize an assumption here that troubles me. It is the fact that one has to “believe” a person rather than investigate their statements. I need to repeat that it’s not about the people, it’s about their information. 

In any case, this question contains another assumption, which is that the current public conversation on UFOs is being driven by the CIA specifically. Let me just say that this could well be true. It’s probably true to SOME extent. How much and in what specifics, and toward what agenda, are all questions that remain unanswered. 

I do believe that the CIA is critical in the overall UFO coverup scenario. This has been demonstrated through Mockingbird, for starters. UFOs and everything else within mainstream media. I do think, however, that it’s foolhardy to assume that CIA control is total. But it’s definitely there, and we all generally understand this. 

Since we are talking about this, we may ask: what would be the CIA’s preferred position on UFO disclosure? My guess is that their preferred position is that the truth never comes out, not ever. I think if those decision-makers had their way, there would never be anything like a genuine UFO disclosure, not in a century, not in a thousand years or beyond. They have little to nothing to gain from it and much potentially to lose. 

Now, the reality has always been that even the CIA is not omnipotent. The Agency itself has always had factions and dissenters, not just Victor Marchetti and Philip Agee from the 1970s. And the same is true within the rest of the U.S. intelligence community (Binney, Snowden, many others). Although the military industrial complex is a behemoth, it’s not monolithic. 

So where is Lue Elizondo in all this? I don’t have that answer, and nor has anyone else persuaded me that they do, either. All I can do is listen to his information and decide whether it’s valuable or not. I think up till now, it’s been quite valuable and has added things to the public discussion on UFOs that we never previously had. We are discussing things today in 2021 that were undreamed of five years ago. He is a big reason for that. 

So in the true, current context of the situation, I work on the assumption that the CIA’s motivation (or the motivation of any group that has power here) is to slow down the process of disclosure as much as possible. To drag out the secret for as long as possible and to position the new narrative to the best of one’s ability. To me, it looks like the new narrative isn’t “the aliens are here and be very afraid.” It’s more like, “something is out there, but it’s still a total mystery.” And to me, that is ridiculous nonsense. Certain people and groups know damned well what is going on. But that is the new line of secrecy. The new version of the coverup. 

By what means are the CIA controlling the disclosure narrative and for what purpose?  

RD: This question is related to the last in that it makes an assumption not only that the CIA is attempting to influence the narrative, but is effectively controlling it. This could be true, but it’s just as likely that there are other factors involved here. Is the CIA working through the leaks coming out of the U.S. Navy? I suppose this is possible, but it seems unlikely to me. 

I believe the likelihood is high that the Agency, and the military in general, is being at least as reactive as proactive. I’ve been saying for years that the transformation of global society will enable the possibility of a groundswell of information to seep into the public discussion of UFOs. The only question was whether the global elite groups that want a digital totalitarianism will control the entire web before this happens. It’s something of a race, frankly. Well, I do think the bad guys are going to win this one ultimately, but we scored some points by actually getting legitimate, genuine UFO military encounters into the public domain over these last few years. That is a rather incredible coup, considering the period of intense dismissal and woeful ignorance that preceded it. 

Do people genuinely think that the CIA fully intended to rock the world with a series of UFO revelations that has challenged decades of silence, ridicule, and denial of UFOs? Something that has opened the door (at least a crack) to a belief in the ultimate “conspiracy theory?” After all, which conspiracy theory is greater than the idea of a UFO coverup? In an era in which unsanctioned “conspiracy theories” are uniformly under attack, this seems to be a genuinely risky strategy. Because the door has been opened to question all of it, and that is not a good thing for the coming digital surveillance system. No, it’s actually a great potential risk. 

Now, what I think is that some smart people upstairs undoubtedly realize that maintaining this type of secrecy — the old fashioned secrecy of denial — is probably doomed in the long run and that a facelift is needed. I have been arguing this for several years. I believe this is happening, and the shift from UFO to UAP is part of that “rebranding.” So of course you have to expect some kind of game plan in place to minimize the damage that is inherently within the scope of UFO disclosure. Which, let’s remind ourselves, will not be a picnic, even under the most ideal circumstances, and we are most certainly not in ideal circumstances of any sort. 

We can assume that the standard government shills within corporate mainstream media are following a CIA or intel community playbook. That has always been the case. Tucker Carlson is the most interesting of these people, by far, and I am personally not clear on any of his ulterior motives, but it’s clear that he has facilitated at least some genuine public conversation on this subject that frankly it had never received. Compare his coverage to the years of banal reportage in the CIA-controlled Washington Post or New York Times (prior to 2017). Even today, he strikes me as quite unique among mainstream voices and I am curious about whether he is getting pushback from behind the scenes or some form of encouragement. In any case, he remains pretty much the only major establishment voice that goes as far out there as he does. CNN for instance has remained at a much more infantile and establishment-oriented place in all this, and this strikes me as the actual preferred policy. In other words, a policy to contain the phenomenon within safe and acceptable parameters. 

So we can assume the Agency will continue to work its assets in corporate media (and that includes so-called alternative hipster media and the like, which are all owned by the same corporations). It probably also includes some people in the UFO community, although it’s hard for me to know who I would publicly single out. But there are probably at least a few. 

But the agenda? That is the question. For me, the number one goal is to slow this shit down as much as possible. The disclosure issue is closer to being dangerous than it’s ever been. 

Why is that? One reason, mainly. Because the public conversation is thisclose to an admission of genuine UFO crash retrievals and acquisition of ET tech. To me, that is the Red Line of Disclosure. I see nothing that will prompt the power elite voluntarily to cross that line. In fact, what they desperately need to do is to get the media to back away slowly from that line, because if they take one more step forward, they will be over it and into a completely new territory. The fact that Elizondo has taken the public conversation so close to that line might well be an indication that he is a problem for the secret-keepers. Just something to consider. 

Why is Luis Elizondo pushing an alien threat narrative?  

RD: First of all, it is far more significant that he is pushing the conversation so very close to being about UFO crash retrievals, which I just said in the last comment. 

But regarding the potential alien threat, this is something I have written about for over twenty years. Just read my two volumes of UFOs and the National Security State. The UFO phenomenon has consistently been perceived as a threat or potential threat by militaries (not just the U.S.) for generations. If you are a military person, how could you possibly not consider such a possibility? Their job explicitly is to defend national security. Any object that can violate sensitive airspace with impunity would obviously be considered a potential threat. 

This “alien threat narrative” becomes a problem for individuals who instinctively see the US military as “bad,” and especially if they see the aliens as inherently “good.” Now, in the scope of longtime US global policy, seeing the bad things done by the U.S. military machine is incredibly easy and obvious. Many awful things are constantly being done by U.S. global and military policy. Obviously. But even so, people in the military have an obligation to perceive unknown objects of extraordinary capability that can act with impunity over sensitive installations and outperform our best aircraft as — at least — a potential threat. I think that should be obvious. 

Is the CIA about to militarize space?

RD: The US has militarized space for a while. I can’t prove all aspects of what I think is going on, but it does look like US Air Force Space Command long ago took the lead in this. Plus you’ve got the Navy and the NRO at a minimum. Now that there is a unified space force underway, the covert weaponization will continue under a different bureaucracy. I don’t know how much the CIA is involved in this. We can assume the NRO is, of course, and undoubtedly the NSA as well, in order to attempt to monitor ET (and Russian/Chinese, etc) communications out there. So I think many players are in the game for militarizing space. Clearly this is inevitable. There is absolutely no way to prevent the further militarization of space. This was a fantasy in Steven Greer’s 2001 Press Conference and it’s a fantasy today. You’ll have more success at stopping the tides of the ocean. 

Why is the idea of interdimensional beings not being discussed as well as the possibilities of intelligence from other planets?

RD: Well, I’ve been discussing it lately, at least as a genuine possibility. I can’t speak for others. Eric Davis has made some very powerful statements along the lines of interdimensionality, and I firmly believe he knows what he is talking about. We live in a strange reality. I will only add that I do not consider the possibilities (ETH v IDH) as mutually exclusive. 

Why did you button your shirt to the top of your neck as a young child? 

RD: That question gave me a chuckle. I did that sort of thing all the time. It was a quirk that even puzzled my mom. Maybe a good psychotherapist can help me unpack that one, but I did certainly have a strong attitude about “right” and “wrong” and what was “proper” and so on. I imagine that factored into it. I had lots of fun as a kid, however, even with the way I dressed!

What false flags do you see in the future with relevance to the alien threat narrative and the possible militarization of space?

RD: Not a fake alien invasion. People have predicted this for years. Nothing gives me more of a long eyeroll than hearing that claim. (One caveat, however: IF there is an announced alien invasion ala Independence Day, then you can be sure THAT’S a false flag. But I seriously doubt it will happen and have tried to explain the history of the Blue Beam concept in the past. There is one long article I wrote on this back in 2010 that you can find). 

Having said this, it is clearly a possibility that with the soft disclosure now happening (“something is there but we don’t know what it is”) the promotion of a potential alien threat could be useful to certain groups who are vying for power, money, or influence. That’s an old game which has been done throughout history. (Sometimes with genuine cause, sometimes not). Whether people like Mellon, Elizondo, Puthoff, Delonge, or others close to them are doing this is highly debatable. To my mind, no factually based argument has been put forth to support this claim. Ask yourself, how much is the CIA-controlled mainstream media pushing an alien threat? Right now? Or at all in the past? In case you are wondering, the answer is zero. A couple of statements from Elizondo and Mellon have received almost no consideration in the “serious” establishment media. So if their plan is to scare the public into justifying more defense dollars (a laughable theory I’ve heard more than once), they aren’t doing much of a job of it. Besides, the defense budget is gargantuan and none of it is being justified as defense against aliens. 

But again, I want to emphasize that there is not a snowball’s chance in hell that space will not be further and further militarized. The militarization of space is inevitable and the process is inexorable. In fact, the presence of an “alien threat” is completely irrelevant to this. The militarization of space is as inevitable as the growth of air power during the First World War. In today’s world, if a nation is to dominate warfare on land, at sea, and even in the air, then dominating space is a military necessity. I am not defending this or arguing about it one way or the other. It’s just how it is. Most of those “smart bombs” and drones and all the other tech are useless without controlling space. This has been the case at least since the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Thirty years at a minimum.

Back to the question of an alien threat narrative. I recently wrote a book that tried for the first time to speculate reasonably about the various alien groups that I think are here and what they might want. I can never pretend that I have definitive knowledge. It’s just my best attempt. My current belief is that at least one alien group is dangerous to us. Others don’t seem to be and may not be. They might even be friendly in some way. There are enough case studies to support this conclusion. 

I also concluded that our society may have been infiltrated. If this is indeed the case, then there is an alien threat—at least, let us say, a great potential threat. But this threat as I see it is of a different kind than some space armada coming to destroy the planet. Therefore I am uncomfortable with (what appears to me at least) to be knee-jerk calls about “promoting alien threat narratives.” After all, what IF there is at least some genuine threat?

Do you trust the TTSA and if so why?

RD: As I said before, I think it’s wrongheaded to talk about “trust” in this manner. One doesn’t trust people. One should examine the data and ideas they present. Basing your conclusions primarily on who is doing the talking is an all-too-widespread disease in our world today. Yes, be aware of who the individual is and what his or her background is. But the information is primary. As King Oliver told a young Louis Armstrong, “stick to the main line, kid.” In other words, remember what matters, and it’s always the information that matters. 

I want to stay with this thought for a moment. I firmly believe this type of attitude is one aspect of our all too widespread cultural disease of postmodernism. In other words, judging information NOT by its intrinsic value or truth, but by WHO is saying it and what you think their motivations are. This is a very dangerous road for any society to go down. And in fact, I would say such an attitude is the perfect way to destroy the most important foundation for any society: the ability to listen to each other. 

In any case, TTSA seems to me to be dead in the water. You could say it’s morphed into having some of its former members now consulting with the UAP Task Force. The dissolution of TTSA is something I have been predicting for a few years. I always saw it as a group that had friends and enemies within the military industrial complex. That world is not monolithic. It’s more of a labyrinth, filled with factions. Clearly some “insiders” helped Mellon and Elizondo release those three videos (a hell of a coup, by the way). The information we have gained (in the public domain) from TTSA far exceeds anything that any previous organization or researcher has been able to accomplish. That’s the plain fact of the matter. They have transformed the public perception of UFOs more than anyone else has ever done. That is what makes them historically significant. 

Regarding anything coming out of TTSA (or any other source), it seems to me that we are better served by asking: (a) is the information checkable and true? (b) is it significant? (c) does it add to our understanding of the UFO phenomenon? 

Those are most important, because it keeps the focus on the actual content. That is always the most important thing to keep in mind. Now, if you want to go all postmodern, you can avoid asking content-based questions and simply try to crawl inside their head and pretend to know their secret motivations. There’s a lot of that going around in our world so you might as well pile on. 

Of course, we all know that everyone on this planet has some form of ulterior, often emotionally driven, motivation for the things they do. Everyone. I remember feeling shocked when I first started hearing this when I was an 18 year old university student. Oh my goodness! People don’t actually mean the things they say?!? Historical perspectives are skewed by ideology? 

The reality is that people are usually driven by some combination of the desire for money, power, influence, or prestige. Of course. We aren’t in grade school any more and should be able to recognize this, I should think, without freaking out. That is why we are human beings and not angels. 

Within the group that was once TTSA, I have no doubt whatsoever that they have significant motivations. Ulterior motives don’t necessarily invalidate something. Again, it’s about the content. In any case, I am going to speculate here, but quite possibly an important motivation was to gain access to the goldmine that surely they all know awaits within the black budget world. They want to get to the center of the labyrinth. Maybe they thought they could get a nice Pentagon contract. And you probably can’t break into that world without establishing Washington relationships and opening up the discussion to some extent.  I’m only speculating here — I must emphasize that I do not have any genuine inside information about this. 

But the point here is not to “trust” or “distrust” the people. This is a complex situation, and we the public lack a great amount of information. This will probably get worse not better. After all, we are moving at light speed into what I keep calling the Fourth Stage of Humanity. I’ve written about this. We are transforming our species and society into one giant anthill. And indeed, we are turning ourselves into the very aliens we are encountering and (often) fear. This is not something that is likely to increase our genuine freedom and our individual access to truth. But that’s another story. 

Regarding TTSA, or anyone for that matter, you should NEVER trust them, per se. Don’t trust people. Trust factual information that you can confirm. That’s it. 

Was Jan Harzan of MUFON set up?  If so, why may that be?

RD: I have no access to information and have no idea. 

If we have a breakaway civilization currently in contact with ET, are they co creators of the NWO agenda that we see being pushed out now?

RD: Personally I think yes. That’s my opinion. This is all related to the Fourth Stage of Humanity. That’s what globalization, NWO (and now Covid response) is creating. Relating to ET collaboration, I think one ought to consider the possibility that this is a reality to some degree. There may not be such a clear distinction between “us” and “them” that people generally assume. Again, I stress that this is not based on confirmed inside information, but on hints and a variety of datapoints that I have collected over time. It’s just what I currently happen to think. 

Please give Tracey our highest regards.

RD: Thank you, I will. 

 

32 thoughts on “Answering Questions on Disclosure and Deception

  1. AvatarRosanne Losee

    Fantastic summary. I wish I could keep up with things here, but just moved from house to another house and you how that goes. Boxes to the ceilings. I was mid into your book, Rich, but it is in one of the boxes. Will find it and finish it. Who else can give us this wonderful mini lecture on UFOs/aliens/government/military/ than you?

    You are so correct about trusting information rather than people. I think now how that translates to conservatives watching and believing All Things Fox, and liberals, All Things CNN, and all those others in between. It is not even the info, we just trust those talking heads…sorrowful for us all, as you say, Rich, because we are NOT listening to each other, we are speaking OVER each other getting nowhere.

    I am concerned about the aliens on this earth because I worry about my kids and grandkids. What will happen to them? Will they be forced into being hybridized by aliens, because one unholy truth that I see is that is exactly why they are here and what they are doing. Terry Lovelace ends his book “Incident at Devil’s Den” after he and his military buddy were abducted, with, ‘they are monsters.”

    The other troubling thing is so many readings appear to show that some military are involved WITH the aliens! How deeply troubling is this? If true, horrible.

    Finally, I was impressed by Elizondo and his group only because it was a frank discussion about UFOs interfacing with our aircraft. Surely, I thought, astronomers are now finally getting the picture? But you see no one actively in the Sciences in this country openly discussing such a thing, nor are they doing that in the universities, just shut up tight, still a topic to be ignored.

    I want to see the day when we are ALL discussing this; more ideas, more people interested is where we should be heading. I can only talk about this topic with my oldest son, but my other kids, no…have zero interest, so I leave it there. I am sure that is the case with most.

    We need a more open discussion about all this, it is past time. People are being abducted; are the people that are ‘disappearing’ in our national parks, as alleged by David Paulides, being taken by aliens. It would seem to be so. If true, we’ve got a heckuva problem on Planet Earth .

    Great, great job, Rich! You should be appearing on CNN and FOX !

    1
  2. AvataritsmeRitaC

    As usual, Richard, i have read part of this so far. 🙂 And i will comment anyway, as usual!

    I personally feel, and i am getting tedious i know, that if the military is the go to authority we have on ufo issues, than the threat narrative is all we have. Period. As Lou actually said, and i am not a fan of the man, the existence of uap in our ‘airspace’ makes it a threat to national security, as does signs of technology more advanced than what is supposedly ‘known’ by u.s. military. There is a third qualification that also is involved here which i can’t recall, but all three fit the definition. So how is that going to be anything but a fear based ‘disclosure’ or whatever we want to call whatever has been coming from the ‘navy’?

    Thanks! rita

  3. AvataritsmeRitaC

    “Tucker Carlson is the most interesting of these people, by far, and I am personally not clear on any of his ulterior motives, but it’s clear that he has facilitated at least some genuine public conversation on this subject that frankly it had never received. Compare his coverage to the years of banal reportage in the CIA-controlled Washington Post or New York Times (prior to 2017). ”

    Richard, i wasn’t aware of Carlson talking about ufos before TTSA. Maybe you are? I don’t know why i would compare his coverage, in 2021 or 2020, to the coverage by mainstream outlets prior to 2017? I also think it is obvious that UFOs are a known big ratings topic in the media! That is just a fact. I haven’t seen him take a perspective that would be problematic for the Navy, for instance. But i may have missed it.

    And i am wondering why the NYTimes and WAPO are highly reliable sources in this one instance, but disinformation at every other time? I find that a bit unlikely. I personally think there is a higher probability that they didn’t do an about face on this one issue, and nothing else for so many years. I thought that in 2017 in fact. Just an observation and analysis.

    I am not trying to be argumentative here, Richard. I just need to respond as i read or i will not remember what i wanted to say by the time i am finished reading. 🙂

    1. Richard DolanRichard Dolan Post author

      What I should have said more clearly is that today, Carlson is essentially alone in his mainstream coverage of UFOs. I don’t think he covered it prior to 2017, but the fact is that no one today is really doing what he is doing. Sure, the ratings are probably good for UFO stories. Why then do the rest of the MSM continue to drag their feet, and why is Carlson basically doing this alone? I don’t say that the NYT and WaPo are uniformly disinfo, any more or less than Fox. I do argue that they are hand in glove with the intelligence community on the issues that count. In the case of the NYT articles from 2017 onward, there is a good case that Leslie and Ralph had to fight in order to get that published, and even then there was heavy editorial control. I got this directly — that’s all I will let myself say on that. So there are always exceptions.

      3
      1. AvataritsmeRitaC

        I appreciate your response here Richard. Thanks. I of course agree with your opinion on NYTimes , etc. I also found that Fox pundits, in general, have been even more extreme regarding foreign policy over the past twenty years. After all, they were supporting Bush/Cheney completely. i don’t think they ever came out against torture.

        I am waiting to see if you are going to get on the Tucker for president train! 🙂 (I honestly don’t think you would. ) Although, i said that the fox punditry was trying to get Trump to run on disclosure toward the final months of the campaign. It was obvious. He didn’t seem to be that into it though.

        In peace, rita

        1
  4. AvatarGreg

    Hi Richard,
    It might be useful to think in terms of levels of disclosure. Here’s my stab at it:

    LEVEL ONE. Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs) are real.
    At Level One, there’s no concession that any UAPs are Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), only that there are genuine phenomena occurring above ground that cannot be reasonably explained by any known phenomena. In the past, meteoroids and ball lightning could have been regarded as UAPs if that term had existed. If “aerial” includes cis-lunar space, then the mysterious crater lights could (at least initially) be categorized as a UAP. Level One is the safest level of disclosure, one that invites thinking of unusual physical phenomena rather than artificial objects. (Note: There should probably be an Unidentified Submarine Phenomena (USP) as a companion category to UAP, much as we have USOs as well as UFOs.) It appears that a Level One understanding of UAPs is now mainstream or soon will be.

    LEVEL TWO. Some UAPs behave as if they were UFOs.
    My description of Level Two is meant to imply that our observations are limited to UFO sightings in the sky and not landed or crashed UFOs. The released USN footage are prime examples of Level Two disclosure. I believe AATIP has some criteria by which a UAP could be reasonably categorized as a UFO. At Level Two, one could maintain that the putative UFOs could be black budget, but given the behavior of the UFOs one would be forced to maintain: 1) that the black budget programs has achieved homegrown Buck Rogers technology that has been kept under wraps by us or a rival nation and 2) that maybe more than “Yankee ingenuity” was needed, like maybe a real saucer to back engineer. So even with my cautious statement of Level Two, this level of disclosure is unstable. Much of the high quality data (photos, witness testimony) that support Level Two also support higher levels of disclosure.

    LEVEL THREE. UFOs of non-terrestrial origin are real, and so non-terrestrial intelligent beings are also real.
    By now, we’ve discovered hundreds of exo-planets, with some that are Earthlike. Meanwhile, theoretical physics is chipping away at breaking the speed-of-light barrier. So, its become a lot easier for people to accept that ETs from other star systems could be able to visit us. Or if not the ETs themselves, then their AI ambassador. (Note: The astronomical variables in the Drake Equation have become more favorable to life, but he biological variables less so–both changes due to our increased understanding of astronomy and biology. However, it only takes one colonizing ET race (AI or otherwise) to get the ball rolling.) The term “non-terrestrial” does allow for other possibilities that have been raised: beings from other dimensions, evil spirits, etc. Those in Level Three do not necessarily believe that ETs have deliberately interacted with humans, although there may have been accidental interaction; e.g., a crash. At Level Three, one can seriously entertain that a crash really did happen near Roswell, and that the UFO remains may have kickstarted our own attempt to make homegrown saucers. I think it’s hard to stay at Level Three for long; there’s too much data pointing to deliberate interaction. However, even Level Three in itself is problematic for the powers-that-be because its suggests black budget programs done in the knowledge that UFOs are real. And just knowing that something is possible–even without crash remains–is often enough to jump start R&D. Beyond Level Three disclosure, this get interesting.

    LEVEL FOUR. Some UFOs have interacted with us on a limited basis, but have not communicated with any institution.
    Examples: Abductions considered as scientific collections of samples; accidental encounters with ETs that had landed; ETs disabling launch systems; ETs returning fire on attacking military jets. By this level, paranormal phenomena may also reveal themselves, suggesting that the ET’s understanding of consciousness may be very different from that held by mainstream science. So Level Four disclosure may also disclose that paranormal phenomena are real in a way that scientists (as opposed to ordinary people who may already have their own reasons to believe in the paranormal.)

    LEVEL FIVE. ET’s have large-scale plans for us, but they are seeking to accomplish their objectives without any cooperation from formal institutions.
    Included in Level Five are industrial-scale abductions (pace David Jacobs), messages to various people (“You’re ruining the planet!”). Level Five disclosure implies that governments may be aware of ET mischief, but powerless to stop it…one bif reason why Level Five disclosure might be resisted.

    The resistance increases exponentially with the next two levels of disclosure.

    LEVEL SIX. Some of the human elites are in on what the ETs have planned for us.
    At Level Six, you can believe that ETs have made their move mainly post WWII, of which the purported meeting with President Eisenhower would be one example.

    LEVEL SEVEN. We’re an engineered spiecies, we’ve been messed with for millennia, and there have always been some humans that have been the ETs willing quislings.

    Best to look at Levels 6&7 in particular as possible levels of disclosure, depending on the evidence that can be marshaled to support them. The big thresholds boil down to: Do ETs exist? Are they keeping themselves aloof from us (more or less) or are they seriously impacting us? Are any of our fellow humans cooperating with them, and to what end?

    I think it’ll be hard to keep the public at a limited level of disclosure since so much of the evidence crosses several levels.

    Cheers,
    Greg

    7
      1. AvatarGreg

        Thanks, Richard. Just a first attempt on my part, with refinements obviously needed. By Level Four, the possibility of breakaway black budget programs (if not yet a “civilization”) arises.

        I’m thinking of three columns that might summarize the extent of disclosure at any given time:

        The first column gives the Level of Disclosure, along a refined version of what I’ve presented.

        The second column gives the Strength of Evidence available for the given level. As a historian, you’d be particularly qualified in this arena, especially with regards to primary sources and the quality of witness testimony.

        The third column gives the Degree of Acknowledgement of the evidence. In effect, the third column gives the degree of disclosure already present. Level One is arguably mainstream, while Level Seven is held by a relative handful in the conventional world (the adherents in the black budget world may be a different matter.) Degrees of acknowledgement will differ between the conventional world and the black budget world, although within the latter world, there could be genuine disagreement about the nature of the ETs. Degree of acknowledgement can range from: impossible!, Ok possible but unlikely, possible, probable but room from doubt, highly probable, definitely true. That is to say, if the general public sees Level Five (for example) as at least possible where before they had seen it as impossible, then genuine progress has been made regarding disclosure.
        A trickier consideration is “degree of acceptance” among people of influence. Recall that one of the moves of intel was to marginalize those who had the independence of mind to be Early Accepters, thereby short circuiting the process of adoption of a new idea (or device like a PC) among the general population; e.g., using a PC proceeding from pioneers to early adopters to the population at large to late adopters.

        The most interesting message of the table is where there’s a mismatch between a high Strength of Evidence and a low Degree of Acknowledgement.

        1
        1. AvatarGreg

          Richard,
          The thought occurred to me: There’s some freedom in how we define the levels of disclosure. Rhetorically it may be useful to have, say, Disclosure Levels 1 through X be those levels where the evidence is strong and the public acceptance is broad (recognizing that a large swath of the public will likely be too distracted or uninterested to care about such matters, as is the case with many important earthbound topics.) Optimistically, that may take us to a slightly redefined Level Four:

          Level Four: Non-terrestrial craft have visited and continue to visit, Earth, since at least the 1930s–so coming on the past 100 years.

          At this version of Level Four, there’s no requirement to commit to flesh-and-blood ET’s visiting (which might require a concomitant belief in faster-then-light travel); it could be AI emissaries that have taken millennia to come here. Level Four requires only the acknowledgement of an alien presence, mediated or otherwise, without committing to a belief about ET motives or paranormal capabilities. Also, this version of Level Four does not require any belief in homegrown saucers, much less a breakaway civilization. At this level a person would be free to believe that the imposition of a policy of ridicule was merely to spare the government the embarrassment of not being able to explain, much less control, the behavior of those strange lights in the sky.

          If we can honestly say that a critical mass of people are at this level, then we can talk about “disclosure at the next level” rather than disclosure as if we’re starting from scratch. Indeed, there was a time when people didn’t believe in exoplanets, or life beyond earth in the material plane, etc. Disclosure about the nature of the universe we are in has been a centuries-long process.

          “Disclosure at the next level” says: OK, we all are convinced by the evidence that something or someone has been visiting us for at least decades. So now we have to confront the issue of what they are up to, whether its to our benefit or detriment, and whether any of our fellow earthlings have been interacting with them on the QT.

          The main point: Give ourselves credit for the disclosure and public acceptance that has already occurred, however modest it is and however long it took. See disclosure as peeling back the next layer of the onion.

          2
          1. Richard DolanRichard Dolan Post author

            Very good points, all of these, and I particularly like your previous comment that broke down the various levels of disclosure. I hope you don’t mind that I intend to borrow from that when I give my own talk next month on secrecy in 2030. Very insightful, Greg.

            1. AvatarGreg

              Borrow away, with whatever tweaking further thought suggests!

  5. AvatarPressToDigitate

    I guess Ufology, as a whole, and most all of the “believers”, are just as much ‘in denial’ on the ETUFO presence as are Academia, Officialdom, most Religionists, and the militant “Skeptics”; just in another [equally irrational] way. It is every bit as irrational and narrow-minded to deny that the ETs pose a direct and immediate Threat to Mankind as it is to deny their existence in the first place. Apart from the [“Stockholm”] accounts of *some* experiencers, who have been psychically [or psychotronically] manipulated, neurologically, mentally and psychologically with visions the Aliens *wanted* them to leave the encounters with, we have *not a shred of evidence* that the primary, dominant ETs here are “benevolent” or “benign”, in any way. NO, the fact that they haven’t trashed the place – yet – is in no way evidence of their ‘Good Intentions’.

    Meanwhile, we know for an absolute FACT that [at least] Tens of Thousands of Americans are kidnapped and clinically raped by these Aliens *every year*, and that it has been happening at that scale for the past 65 years or so; and that Americans may be no more frequently abducted and molested than other people, the world over. Countless women have been impregnated – and had the foetuses violently taken from their very wombs – and Hundreds of Thousands, if not Millions of Humans have been taken and involuntarily Implanted; tagged like Cattle, with unsolicited devices which interact directly with their nervous systems, for undisclosed purposes, without their consent.

    In what way is this violent assault on millions of people worldwide compatible with “benevolence”? You can’t reconcile the two. New Age blather about pre-birth “Soul Contracts” whereby the victims “asked for it” is grossly offensive; its *exactly* like blaming women rape victims for their predicament as if they’d “asked for it” by their dress, cosmetics or mannerisms. Because of the broad consistency of Abductee accounts that the harvested germplasm and anomalous pregnancies are used to produce Hybrid Containers for the Aliens, some of which can pass as Human, undetected among us, we must accept the probability of ALL of the potential dangers inherent in Infiltration, anywhere within our society, government, media, military and intelligence apparatus. The only prudent assumption is that the ETs would have already infiltrated, compromised, corrupted and co-opted any agency, company, organization or other institution that it would benefit them to so have done (as nothing prevents them from having done so). In what way is this NOT a dire, existential Threat to Human Continuity – if not survival itself?

    I think it is also a profound form of denial to keep considering the corrupt, malevolent, *demonstrably ‘inhuman’* agenda of the Illuminati elites and their global Deep State, in crushing the Individual in favor of a technocratic, totalitarian New World Order, and its Orwellian ‘World Government’ tyranny, as somehow separate, independent and divorced from the ETUFO presence – which the same elites and Deep State have been the ones concealing from the public for the past 80 years. Forget the “Breakaway Civilization” nonsense; there is no evidence that they have “broken away” – YET. But there is very substantial evidence that they are selling out the rest of us to *some kind of* an ‘Alien Colonial Regime’, for their own safety, survival, wealth, power, longevity, etc. – and that the Military Industrial Complex and Intelligence Community (and Mass Media, and Tech Sector) are just ‘tools’ for them in doing so. The *Vichy Collaborators* among our ruling elites just want to be among those “left over”, once billions of us “useless eaters” have been gradually disposed of (via Infertility), to facilitate Alien occupation of the planet – INTACT. Pretending that the “Theoretical” Conspirators have nothing to do with the ETUFO presence and its Agenda in their socioeconomic machinations over the post-War (WWII) period is the height of “Wishful Thinking”; it goes from mere “denial” into the realm of self-delusion. Likewise, I would add, is the totally unwarranted assumption that Man’s sudden headlong rush into transhuman technoslavery is somehow unrelated to the ETUFO presence – or unbidden by it to begin with.

    Richard, I admire your patience and ability to humor the Magical Thinking of all the “Alien Fanboys” in the UFO Community.

    1
    1. Richard DolanRichard Dolan Post author

      David, your comments are always interesting, but this one is good even by your standard. You have a gift for formulating scenarios that all of us can think about and learn from, certainly including myself. What you have been putting forward is a hypothesis, and I will not say it is proven by any means. But having said that, I f
      acknowledge there is power in this analysis. You have got me thinking.

      1
    2. AvatarGreg

      PDT,
      I agree with you that there’s been unwarranted optimism concerning the benevolence of ETs. Just because ETs aren’t laying the planet waste a la “Independence Day” doesn’t mean they aren’t taking over. That’s a bit like arguing an imperial power is benevolent because it doesn’t nuke the countries it strong arms.
      Don’t think of “breakaway civilization” as necessarily implying an Elysium somewhere above, but rather a broad suite of technologies of which space travel is only one, as well as an understanding of the nature of consciousness far in advance of that of the conventional world. (Come to think of it though, “civilization” is too flattering a word for a collaborating cabal.)
      It’s taken a surprisingly long time for a general acceptance that otherwordly craft are indeed visiting Earth (my tentative Level Four disclosure.) It’s frustrating to think that widespread recognition of what the ETs are up to may take additional decades (or until it becomes too obvious and too late.)
      The real frustration is that most of us who seriously entertain your scenario are either the black hats or concerned civilians with no clout. And your scenario should be taken seriously: the threat of global tyranny is in all our faces, and the idea that ETs are following some kind of “prime directive” while all this is going on is risible.
      My question remains: Other than mental and spiritual preparation, what should our countermeasues be? Is there any evidence of competing ET races? If we’re facing a Hybrid King George, is there an ET France willing to help us?

      1. AvatarPressToDigitate

        Those are very good questions. There should be an “Alt.SETI” project, directed at establishing discrete, reliable non-governmental contact (‘electronic’ rather than ‘imaginal’) with any/some/most/all of the non-dominant ETs in the vicinity; i.e. those who aren’t the Greys or Reptilians. While we have NO evidence that any of them are willing or able to ‘protect’ us from the predations of the malevolent Aliens – we have *zero* reports of Abductions being foiled by the intervention of *other* Aliens – it is a line of inquiry offering much greater potential for discovery than merely cataloguing “lights in the sky”.

        As far as ‘Active Countermeasures’, yes, *we have a pretty damned good idea* of what devices could be built, using existing technology and commercial, ‘Off-The-Shelf’ components, that would almost certainly be capable of substantially disrupting ETUFO operations in a given locality. One approach would utilize a Megawatt-class tunable industrial ‘Gyrotron’ or ‘Gyro-Klystron’ Tube, with appropriate beamforming and beam steering accouterments. A few simple, ‘real-world’ tests would quickly – and decisively – settle the questions of “What caused the [‘retrieved’] Crashes?”, “Are we really ‘Helpless’ against the ETUFO presence?” and “Just how far ahead of us are they, Really?” The contention that ETs crashed in Roswell (and other places) because *We Shot Them Down* is a fully testable – and falsifiable – proposition. It is disturbing that no one in Ufology has proceeded to wage that test in the last 75 years or so.

        2
  6. AvatarFerdi Öztürk

    Richard, this interview is really good. Thanks for sharing it!

    Can I suggest a new way to approach the “truth”? Especially because you are yourself sure there are many factions…

    I have some ideas going through my mind… Instead of trying to find the “one and only”TM truth by investigating all the alleged (partial) truths and cases out there, how about looking it from the other side? Looking at the Negative (photography analogy) of the bigger picture sotosay. By identifying what’s not said, what is ignored, what is doubted and intentionally targeted by factions you can perhaps develop the real big picture (by identifying what’s missing and what’s lied about).

    There is this relatively young new field of Agnotology, thanks to Big Tobacco and its billions they spent in their own cover-up of harmful effects of smoking). I would really love to see you discussing the UFO matter with a Agnatology Professor with the goal to approach the problem from the other side as I mentioned before.

    Another thought, if there are US-gov /-mil / human (global scale) factions and there are also probably groups of Aliens (or Entities) these groups are also factually factions on the ET-side… then I would think none of the factions want any other faction to know that they’re discovered at all. Many words, short precise idea: The government not disclosing their knowledge, because they don’t want the other factions (especially the other Alien factions!) to know what the government knows and also what it NOT knows (!). Like in a game of chess, whoever first leaves his cover probably loses. Tactically one could be aggressive and win a battle, but strategical one must be defensive and never leave their cover (if not being attacked)… that could be the whole reason why the USA never makes anything public, probably even them don’t know about all the factions out there. Meaning what they know is they don’t know everything, and that’s why they (like the good and very much strategically correct cowards they are) don’t say a single word unless they’re forced.

    Leading to why they released the Navy videos and nothing else. Not even some honest explanation regarding the vids. It is purely damage control, after ToTheStars forced their hand.
    They won’t release anything else to not give away how much they know or much more important: not know. It’s what I would do myself in the presence of seemingly allmighty “magical”-tech enemies.

    And it fits our observation: they silently and secretly suck in all information and crashed stuff and whatever they can. But they don’t give anything to the outside. “Zero-Trust” as we call it in Information Technology. Meaning everything is protected, even in our own networks. We don’t trust anyone. Translates to “Government doesn’t trust its own citizens with critical knowledge”. Understandable in my opinion and it would explain their strange behavior we couldn’t make sense of since decades. Simple strategical zero-trust

    I’m convinced even they don’t know all the factions and they will never know. So they will always play the silent mouse, that’s their task TBH, to protect their citizens, and how do you protect your own guys against unknown enemies? (Or even partially unknowns). They must feel as they’re on a potential battle field with unknown (number of [factions of]) Aliens, so they’re basically doing “Radio Silence” because they don’t know who (or *what* in the case of enemy AIs) is interested in their knowledge and if these are hostile or not (hostile until proven non-hostile?)

    Think about the Agnotology guys please, I have a very strong feeling we need academics to join the discussion and these guys study literally “the science of Non-Knowledge”

    2
    1. AvatarFerdi Öztürk

      BTW: not an English native speaker, sorry if I couldn’t express what I meant 😅 greetings from Germany and if you know some Germans (ufologists / etc) who you would recommend to read or listen to I’d appreciate it. But being a paying member now here I will force you to read my DeutschNglish a long time 🤣

    2. AvatarFerdi Öztürk

      I just want to add (if I’m correct about their “defensive chess” strategy) it is not us the governments fear. They fear the unknown enemy, either the one they already made first-contact too / allied with – but still don’t fully understand – or worse: the ones they know nothing about and scratch their heads like we all do. Or both, which I assume most probable. Some friendlies they don’t trust and a lot more unknowns

      1
    3. AvatarGreg

      Hi Ferdi,
      There’s an idea I heard about called “dark forest” where the last thing a planet wants to do is bring itself to the attention of other planets. In this view, to be known is to be conquered.
      Trouble is, we’ve been broadcasting our presence for a century-plus, and as time goes on the likelihood of coming to the attention of a hostile ET grows. (But who knows? They might be “I Love Lucy” fans.)
      Oops.
      The “dark forest” concept is most compelling for those who believe the ETs haven’t discovered Earth, and discovering and getting to a habitable world is difficult and limited by slower-than-light travel.. But the evidence suggests an ET presence is already here. So Earth is a bright forest.
      Maybe the ET’s have said something to our–ahem–leaders along the lines of, “Boy, you’re sure lucky those Zorgians didn’t come across you first. You’d be in their freezers along with a bottle of Anorkian ice wine. But don’t worry, we’ll protect you from them and anyone else who wants a piece of your planet, present company excepted. We always protect our friends. And we’re friends, right?”
      Yeah, that’s probably one exchange that’ll stay on the down low.

      2
  7. ChristinaChristina

    I really enjoyed reading this!

    Usually I prefer listening/watching, but this seems very appropriate for being in written. In fact, it made me think how it would be a great booklet (if that’s a relevant format at all) of introducing Richard Dolan to people who don’t know you very well yet.
    Of corse some of the questions should be slightly edited, and maybe some replaced with other, etc. But it gave me a really solid overview on a lot of your basic and updated perspectives on so many subjects, all related and connected to each other. And I like how you get around some of your thoughts that make you stand out from all the other researchers. Like the very useful advise that we shouldn’t neither trust nor distrust anyone 100% – I would like more people to get that message 👍🏻

  8. AvataritsmeRitaC

    “So if you are trying to get someone’ attention — a generally stupid and lethargic set of institutions such as the USG and the corporate controlled establishment media — you are going to have to emphasize some angle that will actually get people to listen. Potential threat scenarios are an obvious way to do that.”

    Sure, it also puts people in the seats of IMax theatres! I personally don’t find that ‘threat scenarios’ are a way of aiding in the enlightenment of humanity. What can i say? I guess we are getting tired of those Muslim terror threats. You can tell by what kinds of movies sell lately.

    I am not attempting to be annoying here, Richard. I am just sort of surprised.
    rita

    1. Richard DolanRichard Dolan Post author

      It’s not about enlightening humanity, though. It’s about the people with the message trying to get people to listen. It was my tactic for two volumes of history, at least to some degree. I didn’t consider that fear mongering. And again, the point is that for a military person, what else can we expect? Their job is literally national defense. Some of them take that seriously. I am not trying to disparage your position about this, Rita. I respect it. But I think there are other perspectives here, too, and not without merit.

      1
  9. AvatarAbeFX

    “RD: First of all, I adore Catherine and Joseph. Daniel attacked my name publicly, however, and at least once in a manner that seemed angry and emotional, and which disappointed me, since my disagreements with him on TTSA never resulted in me attacking him….”

    Hey Richard, very curious as to exactly what Daniel said. Do you have a link/source? Guessing that he might have taken it personally, as some others did, back when you were denigrating anyone that thought TTSA was an op, as even if you didn’t call him out by name, he is obviously in that category.

    1
  10. AvataritsmeRitaC

    Richard, thank you. I do realize that there are other perspectives and that military people have a very specific focus on many things, but in particular ufo, uap. I just like mine better. 🙂 But seriously, if that is what we get bombarded with information wise…………………………………….We end up with just another military enemy to be scared of. In all honesty, i don’t feel that is a good direction for humanity. I know you understand this. I am not being unrealistic. I see how it goes. I mean i don’t ever see that kind of focus turning out well.
    rita

Leave a Reply