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.