Richard Dolan — “UFOs and the National Security State” lecture (2010)

Speaker: Richard M. Dolan, solo lecture presenting his core thesis. ~1h40m.
YouTube: https://youtu.be/W8FGGqSW2XU (UFO CENTRAL upload, 2010)
Captured: 2026-05-29 via yt-dlp audio download → Whisper (speech_to_text_remote.py).
Primary for dolan-ufo-historian. His historian-of-state-power method: a document-based case (1949 FBI memo, 1952 Chadwell/CIA memo, 1966 Minot, Boeing missile study, Halt/Rendlesham) framed carefully as proving “a national security problem,” NOT “aliens”; plus his speculative “breakaway civilization” concept and “disclosure is impossible but inevitable.”
NOTE: Whisper auto-transcript; verify quotes against audio before load-bearing citation.

Thanks for watching! Thanks for watching! The topic that I want to cover with you today is the UFO cover-up. It’s history, it’s end, and beyond. So, in a sense, it’s looking back and it’s looking ahead. Let’s get started. I’ve tried to organize this topic in as easy a way as possible. Five general themes that I want to discuss with you today. The first part is to emphasize that the UFO phenomenon is a military problem. You will see why in a moment. The second part is what we might call the structure of the secrecy. In other words, how does this all work? How do the so-called powers that be keep this from being officially acknowledged? How do they do this within the clandestine world, the classified world? The third part is an attempt to understand what is this secret program all about? If you’ve got the secrecy, what are you doing with that secrecy? The fourth part is a concept that I’ve introduced in my most recent book. I call it a breakaway civilization. I’ll explain to you what I mean by that. The fifth and final part would be my attempt to look ahead, prognosticate. What will happen if and when the truth on this topic is known and it will be known. I’ve often described the disclosure of the UFO reality as a paradox. I’ve often said it’s impossible but nevertheless it’s inevitable. It’s both. It is impossible because those groups and individuals who know this secret and who really are read into the program have no incentive, none that I see, for wanting this information out. Nevertheless, not them, not anybody is going to have the power to stop it. History is moving much too fast. I will make that argument in a little more detail. Part one, we call the military problem. I will do a very brief summary of some of what I think are the more important documents that prove, not that UFOs are alien necessarily, but that do prove that UFOs are a problem from a national security point of view and a problem of anomalous objects. So let’s go. I like this little list. I’ve sat down many times and asked myself, not everyone studying this topic is on the same page, so to speak. There are people here who not only know that UFOs are real but they know the nature of the extraterrestrials or aliens that are here or at least they’ll tell you that they know. Then there are other people who are not so sure. There are people in this room, I’m certain, who are not sure that the problem is even legitimate. They need to be shown. That’s fair. So what I want to do is go over what I think is a short list of good, very good UFO documents that describe this problem well enough to give an idea of what we’re talking about. Those of us who’ve done research, I think, are very knowledgeable of this first document, the 1947 Twining Memo. Over 60 years ago, General Nathan Twining, a three-star general at Air Materiel Command at Wright Field, wrote a memo which is, I think, an important one in response to a general, Charles Shulgin, who asked him, essentially, what’s going on with all this flying saucer business? Do I need to do anything about it? Are we making them? Essentially is what Shulgin wanted to know. Twining wrote a memo, many pages, three full pages, in which, to summarize, he stated, the phenomenon is real, not visionary or fictitious. According to the military reports coming in, according to Twining, there are very specific features about these objects that were being seen. Among them, they were silent or nearly so. Well-kept formations of flight, evasive upon sighting. Round on top, flat on bottom. Round or domed on top, flat on bottom. Ask yourself, what objects in 1947, or today, for that matter, in 1947, would be domed on top and flat on the bottom? Interesting. And so much more. It’s an interesting memo, it’s an important memo, and to this day, despite the fact that any UFO researcher probably knows it inside and out, it still really has no play in the popular consciousness. There’s a bunch of these. I’m going to open up the list here and just describe a few of them. The 1949 FBI memo, very detailed, describing the matter of flying saucers, according to Air Force intelligence, as being listed as top secret. And you might want to ask yourself, well, why? Did the Air Force consider this matter top secret in 1949? That memo gives some pretty good ideas why, one of which had to do with violations of sensitive airspace that were not explainable at that time, nor are they today. Many of these documents also describe various types of airspace violations that were a very important matter to the military authorities at the time. One of the most important of these documents, I would say, is the 1952 memo to the director of the CIA, Walter Bedell Smith, by his director of scientific intelligence, H. Marshall Chadwell, in which Chadwell, this is in December of 1952, after a lot had happened in this nation regarding the UFO problem, Chadwell said to his director, objects, I’m paraphrasing here, but I’ll give it as accurately as I can recall, objects sighted at high altitudes over sensitive installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles. It’s about as explicit a statement in a memo of that classification that you’re going to find. Bureaucratic language just doesn’t work like boss, we’re being invaded, they don’t say it like that. But it’s a pretty explicit statement. And so on, a number of these. I could go on and on with detailed description of all of them and I don’t think it would be worth our while today. I will point out, though, many of these memos indicate that these objects have the ability to switch off our weapons systems. For example, the 1966 Minot Air Force Base document makes it very clear that an object was seen by a strike team tracked on NORAD radar, coming down, landing just outside the base. When the strike team went to investigate, their communication systems went offline. Static disrupted all of their communications. They saw visually this object on or near the ground and then it took off, tracked on NORAD radar at 100,000 feet and gone. Whatever this thing was in 1966. The following year, 1967, at Malmstrom Air Force Base. I misspelled Malmstrom, I just see that there. This is very well known. It should be better known. At two locations at Malmstrom, glowing red UFOs, whatever these things were, were seen by personnel above missile silos, which simultaneously went offline. Possibly 20 missiles went offline that day, in March of 1967. And we know this happened. It is not a matter of debate. It’s not one of these things where you can say, well, that’s what they claim. We’ve got the documents by Boeing, which had to do a study of the missiles, which were mystified. There was no reason they could understand why these missiles should have gone offline. But what we know is that personnel above ground saw these objects. And on and on. In 1975, there were, again, an awesome series of airspace violations along the U.S. northern border and into Canada. These are unexplained to this day. The 1981 HALT memo describing the Rendlesham Forest case, certainly one of the top five UFO events, I would say, is another instance in which an object was seen with a beam of light penetrating a nuclear weapons facility that was not supposed to be there, by the way. It was secretly there. And according to the deputy base commander, Charles HALT, a number of years later, he said that that object adversely affected the ordnance. Now, whatever he meant by that. So these objects have the ability. And then I should mention the 1976 Defense Intelligence Agency memo dealing with the Iranian jet fighter incident. Again, in which an object, an unknown object, was able to disable two F-4 interceptors in succession. As they got to a range of 25 nautical miles, their key instrumentation went offline. In one case, right before the pilot was about to fire a missile at this thing. So whatever they are, they are a national security concern and they have the ability to disable our military equipment. High-tech, sophisticated equipment. Okay. Those are some documents and the story doesn’t end in 1990 with those documents. The problem is simply that freedom of information has had its ups and downs. Its glory era was certainly in the late 70s. The Carter years, I think we can say, when literally more than half, to this day, more than half of all of the government UFO documents we have came from that period. It was an executive order in 1982 that severely limited FOIA and it’s not completely dead in the water, but it’s not what it was. Nevertheless, we know encounters have continued through the 90s and through our own century. This one, of course, is very well known. I wanted to describe it here because we’re in Washington. Just outside this city, just outside, a number of individuals saw F-16s chasing multiple objects that have not been explained, but that were, the Air Force did acknowledge that something unknown was tracked on their radar and that they did scramble at least two F-16s. This gentleman that I’m interviewing here, retired police officer Gary Dillman, was, I think, the first person to see the objects at all. He claims, to this day, that he saw four unidentified objects, large ones, being chased by four F-16s. Later witnesses in the town of Waldorf, Maryland, saw one object being chased by two F-16s. All of the witnesses describe this object as absolutely outclassing the interceptors. Of course, this is the theme that we get over and over again. Whatever they are, we cannot compete with them militarily. The Air Force spokesman, wouldn’t you love to be the Air Force spokesman to describe this to the media? I wouldn’t. So he says, well, you know, we did track something. Yeah, that’s true. It could have been any number of things. I’d like to know what number of things it could have been. I’d like to know what it could be. What blue object is able to outperform, to come down at an 80 degree angle and then stop, according to the witnesses, wait for the F-16s to catch up and then take off? Yeah, I’d like to know. Post-9-11 America? I think we’d all like to know, wouldn’t we? The very well-known event, again, I speak, this is all relative, well-known to researchers, the UFO event at Stephenville, Texas, central Texas. It’s a fascinating case. And the image that you see there is not a photograph of this. It’s an artist’s reconstruction describing what the object may have looked like in comparison with the size of two F-16s there. So what people saw was this enormous, absolutely huge object zooming along at low altitude, stopping then over Stephenville. Well, what’s up with Stephenville? Who cares about that place, right? Well, I don’t know exactly, but what we do know is researchers, some dogged researchers, were able to obtain FAA transcripts of… Cheryl, you wanted to bring me something here? Thank you. Thank you. Richard, you have extra time. Go to 1215. Well, good. I’ll use it. Okay. Thank you. What we know is that the FAA radar data that was obtained by some researchers indicated that this object, after it resumed its course… I’m not making this up, although it may sound like it. It was last seen going exactly in the direction of the Crawford Ranch, where President George W. Bush was staying at that time. This is true. What we don’t know is whether it landed or ended up there, because as the FAA said, well, we don’t have that data. So you can choose to believe that if you wish. They don’t have that data, but they did supply the data that indicated this object was going exactly in the direction of the Crawford Ranch. So I think that is interesting. There are a number of witnesses describing how enormous this object was, by the way. One of them described it and what could be scarier than flying Walmarts? I’m out of here when they do that. I’m gone. I’ll go to Canada. So, briefly, I just wanted to make the point that I think there’s more than enough documentation to prove. Again, not that UFOs are alien, necessarily, but that our guys are chasing them. I would like to point out, it’s not just America. I was earlier in my lecture thinking that I would want to include a reference to some of the Soviet encounters that we know about. Paul Stonehill, an outstanding researcher of Russian and Soviet UFO encounters, is here, and I’m sure that he’ll be talking about that. I would mention, though, that during the period of the end of the Soviet Union, when Glasnos and Perestroika were in full force, that is when the leaks occurred in that nation, of course. And what we learned is that the Soviet Union also had a large number of attempted intercepts of these objects, and they were equally outclassed by them. So, it’s a worldwide phenomenon. So, something is going on. Interceptions and military close encounters have been a constant feature of the UFO phenomenon from the 1940s until the present day. That has not stopped. It’s one important thing to keep in mind when we talk about the future of this phenomenon and disclosure. What we’re going to have to deal with, of course, is why have we been chasing these things? There’s some kind of trouble in paradise. What is going on? So, keep that in mind, please, until I go to the second part of this lecture, the structure of secrecy. Now, it’s one thing to say that we have a UFO phenomenon. It’s one thing to say that there are these unexplained objects that are being chased. Okay, that’s one hurdle, and that’s a difficult one for a lot of people. That’s enough for a day’s work, right, to prove that. And yet, it goes further. What we have found over the years is that we’re not in the area of necessarily confirmed documents, but, let us say, leaks from very prominent, respectable, brilliant, plugged-in people who have talked about, yes, possession of alien technology and alien bodies at deeply classified levels. Now, the top name on this list here is that of a researcher of the UFO topic, Leonard Stringfield. He’s no longer with us. In fact, only one of these people are with us. That’s Dr. Edward Mitchell on that list. Leonard Stringfield, in the 1970s and 80s, up to his death in 1994, was a conduit for many military people who trusted him and went to him and described stories about having seen either alien bodies at Wright-Pattison Air Force Base or having been attendant at a recovery of a crashed UFO or something along those lines, or the widow of someone who had done security detail at Wright-Patt where alien bodies were seen and so forth. Stringfield collected several dozen, several score of such stories. Not every single one could be confirmed and probably a few of them may not have been as accurate as he thought. But I think a lot of them were. The assessment of those of us who’ve studied them is that there’s enough smoke that there had to be some fire here. But that’s only one person. We’ve had direct statements from a number of very confirmable, prominent individuals. Senator Barry Goldwater famously stated a number of times, he was very close friends with Curtis LeMay, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and Goldwater admitted. And here’s Goldwater, ran for President in 1964, Republican, military friendly, he was an Air Force Reserve General. You’d think that a guy like Goldwater might know about these secrets and yet Goldwater stated multiple times that when he attempted to get information about this topic from his friend Curtis LeMay, on one occasion he said he was cussed out by Curtis LeMay who told him in no uncertain terms, don’t ever ask me about that again. Dr. Robert Sarbacher, who’s the black and white photograph in the center, a very prominent defense scientist in the 1950s and 60s. Toward the end of his life in the 1980s, for whatever reason, admitted in a two-page, typewritten, single-spaced letter to a researcher, that yes, yes, he was very much aware of the efforts to recover crashed UFOs and study the beings, which he described as insect-like, according to the scuttlebutt that he was encountering. He was part of a committee to study this phenomenon, he said. And some researchers ended up speaking to Sarbacher, he gave them the name of Dr. Eric Walker, who is still alive. Dr. Walker is this gentleman right here. Dr. Eric Walker was one of the very top defense scientists of the 1950s and 60s, later went on to become president of Penn State University. Eric Walker also made some startling admissions about the nature of this cover-up, the nature of the program to study alien technology and bodies. He admitted to several researchers that, yes, indeed, this is the case. Not just in telephone conversation, but we have written letters by Walker, which I intend to republish later this year. Ben Rich, former head of Lockheed’s Skunk Works division, also made some statements toward the end of his life in the 1990s about this. And Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the sixth man to walk on the moon, I’ve spoken with Edgar Mitchell a number of times about this personally. He has spoken publicly about his several individuals that he knows of ultra-elite security clearances who confirmed to him the existence of deeply classified programs to study alien technology and bodies. Now this man walked on the moon. He is a legend. He’s certainly a very clear and brilliant man. And yet, although he’s gotten some media attention on this in recent years, it’s still not been enough. Isn’t NBC curious? Isn’t Fox News, CBS, ABC? Where’s CNN really to dig into this story? Is Edgar Mitchell making this up? Well, no, he’s not making this up. So again, we’ve got statements by world-renowned individuals about a topic that is absolutely of critical importance to us as a species, and yet we have the media blackout. Nonetheless, this is some, by no means all, of the testimony on alien technology and bodies. So let’s rewind the clock here for us a little bit. Let’s go back to 1947. Imagine that you’re the President of the United States. And assume that you have been informed by somebody that a crash of someone’s technology not belonging to us and not belonging to the Soviets, and seemingly interplanetary, has occurred. And now your military has got possession of it. So what would you do? Your instinct might be to tell the world, certainly, but then you might think twice about it. If you tell the world, then you’re going to be hard-pressed not to share this technology at some point with the Soviets and with who else. You never know. No, I think the logical thing would be to gather your team together, your reliable people, and have them study it. Of course you would. I think that’s exactly what Harry Truman did. This is a photograph of Harry Truman with his Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal, the man who ended his life in 1949 with a 16-floor jump out of the Bethesda Naval Hospital. I wrote in my first volume of history my suspicions that Forrestal didn’t just jump, and I stand by that conclusion. It’s 60 years later, and we’ll probably never get the proof that we want, but keep in mind that Forrestal died 14 years before the Kennedy assassination. The investigation was completely internal by the U.S. Navy. There was no expectation that the public was ever going to get to the bottom of this. If Forrestal had been murdered, do you honestly think, in 1949, that the U.S. government would have said so? Clearly not. I think Forrestal died because there was a UFO connection of some sort. That’s my opinion. Actually, let me just back up and stay on Truman for a moment. If you are the president, you wouldn’t want to tell the world about this. You wouldn’t really want to tell Congress about it, because if you tell Congress, that’s the same thing as telling the world. So you’d need to create a separate organization, wouldn’t you? Something like what we now call MJ-12 or Majestic? I should think so. I think all of the evidence that I have seen, all of the logic points to this conclusion. It would be something outside the formal U.S. governmental structure. Now, as an aside, let us ask, well, who’s in control of this dealio here? Is it the president? Well, we elect the president. Our political system is designed, we like to think, we have a representative system, right? Don’t we? We’re in Washington, D.C. That’s what we’re supposed to have. Well, maybe. Okay, is the president in control? Or is it, you know, the guy who puts him in the White House? That’s a photograph of David Rockefeller. There’s no question. There is no question. At least for the last 50 years, that man has been the kingmaker of this country. That man and the people around him. In the study of my second volume of history, which covers from 1973 to 1991, there is no question that David Rockefeller was the man who said yea or nay to every one of the presidents that we had at that time. If he said yea, the guy was in. Gerald Ford. Gerald Ford, it turns out, was a six-time attendee of the infamous Bilderberg Group meetings during the 1960s. He didn’t just come into the White House out of nowhere. It is exactly a legal version of the mafia when you get made. Remember Goodfellas, right? Joe Pesci gets made before they whacked him. Too bad for him. You get made. You get tapped. Bill Clinton attended his first Bilderberg meeting in, guess when? The year before he was nominated for the Democratic presidential party president. And so it goes. Jimmy Carter was almost literally lifted up by Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski and dropped into the White House in 1977. Keep this in mind, please, as we continue with the next section of this theme. Because when you were talking about retrieval of UFO technology, I believe I’ve been arguing for some time that it has been necessary to collaborate with private industry in this. You have to. If you want to, if you’ve got this piece of alien artifact and you want to study it, you want to replicate it, well, at some point it’s going to have to go to Boeing or Lockheed or General Electric, Raytheon, wherever. These are the companies that have the people. They’ve got the engineering personnel. They’ve got the scientific expertise. They can make this. If anyone can make it or replicate it, they can. They’re going to have to get possession of it. And what that will mean is that at some point, if I’m the army and here’s Boeing and I give them this little thing, well, now who owns it? Well, presumably the attorneys would hammer out some covert agreement by which maybe there would be some sharing of ownership. It’s a great idea. It makes perfect sense. We have a government that really, since the assassination of Lincoln, has been dominated only by leaders of industry and finance. And so they’ve essentially managed, for the most part, U.S. policy, domestically and foreign policy, for 150 years anyway. Every one of the major advisors to the U.S. president, members of organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations, which again is explicitly created by and for the leaders of industry and finance. And they have dominated the U.S. State Department. They dominated all the branches of the executive government for about 80 years, 70 years. And privatizing the secret helps with secrecy, clearly. Because now it’s not classified, it’s proprietary. It’s a trade secret. It’s not a matter of public inquiry. It’s private. And once you, the four-star general who’s involved in handing this technology over, retire from the force that you’re in, you become a senior VP with this company and you make a lot of money and you’ve got a good life. You’ve got the revolving military-industrial nexus working for you, that revolving door. Who’s going to rock the boat? How do you pay for this research? It’s got to be expensive. It’s got to be expensive. Think about this. I spoke to one insider. He’s famous, famous person. A very brilliant man who said to me explicitly that by all estimates that he was able to ascertain, the money that goes into the security of this program is about seven to eight times more than the money going into scientific R&D. So it’s vastly more expensive to maintain the secret. I don’t have a breakdown of the accounting. That would be nice. But I might think you’ve got underground infrastructure possibly to build, right? Guns, management of media, all of these things cost money. Presumably that’s what he’s talking about. It’s a lot of money. And you can’t necessarily requisition it openly from Congress. So how do you do it? You’ve got to keep it hidden. It might help to divert a lot of funds covertly. Anyone who’s really bothered to investigate. Not just the CIA. You really look at any major intelligence agency of other nations and you look at connections dealing with such unseemly topics as narcotics trafficking, stock market fraud. These connections come up. And certainly when they make it to the mainstream there’s all kinds of spin control to minimize the impact of these revelations. But they are out there. Your public library has got very good sources on this. There’s a lot of funny business going on in the world of intelligence. So if you want to raise private armies, you want to subvert elections, you want to kill people secretly and not anyone know about it, well it certainly helps to have your own stash of cash that you don’t have to explain. And so there’s obviously an incentive here. So what I would suggest, and if there are students in this room or watching of the black budget, people interested in that, I would suggest that the UFO secret is possibly the originator or certainly one of the main forces behind the creation of a black budget. Students of the black budget continually miss this point because they’re afraid to look at UFOs. God forbid. But this is a real problem. It involves real money. And going back to the 1940s, this national security issue was prominent enough that it necessitated the creation of an extra constitutional black budget culture. Not a lot of work has been done on this publicly. This man, Bill Sweetman, aerospace writer, did a very good article about a decade ago on how these special access programs or black budget programs operate. And simply to summarize, at that time, he estimated there might have been 150 or so of these programs within the defense department. Basically, he said they don’t seem to have much or any oversight, certainly not from Congress. Many of them are unacknowledged, which means that they officially don’t exist. Of course, we know they exist. He indicated, his research said, well, their classification systems are all unique to themselves. They seem to be entities unto themselves. They’re dominated by the private contractors, not the military personnel. His conclusion was that the DOD liaisons of these programs were little more than gatekeepers of money. That’s what their function was. But that rather it was the private contractors who dominated these programs. And Sweetman concluded that he really had no idea how they got all their money. That was a decade ago. I’m going to return to this theme of the structure of secrecy in a moment. Let’s talk about what is this program about. Well, I think it’s probably definitely about making some UFOs. Yes, I think we can say that pretty confidently. I think it’s also about creating a secret space program. So let’s look at that a little bit. Making UFOs, yes. Studying alien bodies, conducting biotech research, yes. Developing a secret space program. Using all this free money to conduct the research and provide security for it. In other words, the program is about taking your money so that they can study this stuff. It’s also about making money from the acquired technology when appropriate, when convenient. That’s not hard to understand. You’ve got this exotic piece of technology. Some of your scientists have a eureka moment at some point. And you might want to spin some of this off into commercial applications and get on the ground floor of something nice. That’s not hard to see. But it’s also, I think, about hiding most of this from the U.S. military itself. After all, you have someone in the military. It doesn’t mean that they know anything about this, right? The U.S. military’s job is to protect all of this neat stuff. The U.S. military is being used by these interests for their benefit, plain and simple. And the program is also, and we must remember this, it’s about dealing however they can deal. It’s about dealing with the presence of non-human intelligences on planet Earth. And that cannot necessarily be an easy thing for them to do from their point of view. So let me expand on this. Making UFOs. Again, I never want to assume that we’re all on the same page. There is a lot of work done on this. In my last book, the second volume of UFOs in the National Security State, subtitled The Cover-Up Exposed, came out last summer. I wrote a lot about this. I would encourage you to take a look at it. One of the researchers back in the 1980s who really dug into this issue is James Goodall. I wrote Jane, good grief. James Goodall wrote for Jane’s Defense a number of other very prominent publications. And during the 80s and early 1990s, James Goodall interviewed a number of Groom Lake Area 51 insiders, concluded that there were unconventional technologies in use, there were many deeply classified programs, including a silent flying triangle back in the 80s. Before the world knew about Bob Lazar and his claims about reverse engineering alien craft, James Goodall was also digging into this topic. There were his own investigations. One of his contacts, Goodall, said to him, do you believe in UFOs? And the guy who had 12 years experience at Groom Lake, highly classified, said, absolutely, positively, they exist. Goodall asked, well, can you expand on this for me? The man said, no. Another of his sources said, we have things out there that are literally out of this world, better than Star Trek. Better than Star Trek or anything you can see in the movies. And Goodall again said, well, can you please elaborate? The man said, no. The fascinating piece of video that leaked out in the 1990s made it to the TV show Hard Copy from the Nellis Test Range. This is widely known. You can see this on YouTube. I’m going to show you about a 30 second clip of it. There’s been a lot of analysis of this object. Websites, if you can see here, there’s a few that do, I think, very sophisticated analyses. The reason we’re able to analyze this object is because data at the top around the screen gives the height, the altitude, azimuth, and key positional information on the object so you can track it and calculate its speed. The object had a range of speed from a low of about 15 or so miles per hour to up to 500 miles per hour within a couple of minutes. Zipping around, stopping, going up, down, and so forth. Very unusual. This video was taken in November of 1994. It made a right angle turn at about 140 miles per hour. Pretty amazing stuff. I’m sure some of you have seen this. Let’s just run the clip here. It should go. Come on. Oh, there it is. Good. I’ve disabled the sound for this. You can just watch it. You can see it’s moving. The operators, meanwhile, are asking, well, what is that? Is that a helicopter? That can’t be a helicopter. They did not know what this was. It’s just doing all kinds of crazy stuff. This is 1994. The question is, who’s making it? Well, I’m thinking that we made it. I’m not sure, but it was inside Nell’s test range. To this day, that object has no home. No one’s claimed it. All right? It may have even changed its shape. If you really look at the video long enough, it seems like it might have, although it’s really hard to know for sure. I am of the opinion that we probably made this object. That’s 15 years ago. So it’s a little bit about making the UFOs, a little bit of what I think might be interesting evidence. There’s more. I need to move on. Is there a secret space program? Well, yes, I think there is. And again, I’m scratching the surface here. We’ve got the case of Gary McKinnon. Gary McKinnon, a UK resident, has been basically in the midst of a living hell for the last decade. What he tried to do through the 1990s and up into the early 2000s was trying to peek. I used to think hacking, but he really wasn’t a hacker. What Gary McKinnon tried to do is essentially the equivalent of standing at the door waiting for it to be open long enough to get a look inside, looking at U.S. Space Command websites, defense sites, and so forth, looking for evidence of a UFO cover-up. And he says he found it. He says he found it. In November of 2000, at the Space Command site, got into an area where he saw a list of officers’ names under the heading Non-Terrestrial Officers. Other information in there. What we do know is Gary McKinnon was arrested in November of 2002. So the U.S. defense establishment, yes, has acknowledged that he was getting into things he shouldn’t have been getting into. They’ve been trying to extradite him. This has become a cause célèbre, not just within the UFO research field, but in Britain in general. A lot of the Brits are a little annoyed about the high-handedness of the U.S. government to just take one of their people. So Gary McKinnon’s fate is still up in the air. But what I would simply mention are two things about this case. One is when he was first arrested. If you look at the news coverage at that time, the UFO connection was very prominently discussed. If you look at McKinnon now, in any of the mainstream articles that have come out in the last few years, it’s almost never even mentioned, except as a little footnote at the back, at the bottom. So what’s happened, you see this evolution in media reportage of the case. Now he’s just known as the greatest Pentagon hacker of all time, which is a load of crap. Gary McKinnon is not anywhere close to the greatest hacker in Pentagon history. But he’s described as this, as completely unrealistic. He found something, something that they are not happy about. He’s been very consistent about what he’s seen. There’s no question that there are anomalies that have been recorded many times. NASA footage, Russian, European Space Agency, and also Chinese missions now. What these things are, I don’t know. Some of them are explainable. I’m going to show you a couple of clips in a moment. This one here, I wrote about this in my last book. I’m going to play this for you. It’s a very brief, it’s one second. I’ll play it a couple of times. I’ve asked around about this. I’ve discussed this with Dr. Bruce McAbee, a Navy optical physicist. The main thing I wanted to know from Bruce is whether this clip is genuine. He said, yes, it’s genuine. What it is, I don’t know, he said. Well, with that knowledge, as long as I thought, alright, it’s genuine. There’s an object that you will see, I’m going to show you in a moment, and then it’s going to come into the screen here and it’s going to move off the screen like that. It’s a ball. I’ve looked at this countless times and I’ve measured it on my screen. It gets larger. It’s moving toward the camera. It’s a second clip, I’ll replay it a couple of times. Here it goes. Alright, let’s try that again. Click. There it is. I’m going to do it again. It certainly seems to have depth. One more time. I need to get a full clip of that. It’s a particle beam. Someone flushed the ice crystals out the back. It’s interesting. What I haven’t mentioned, of course, is the statements by a number of American and Russian astronauts, Soviet cosmonauts in particular. Many of them, again, during the Glasnost era, were very forthright about some of the objects that they saw that were utterly inexplicable. Now this is the STS-48 from September 1991. It’s quite famous. Possibly everyone in this room has seen it. I wrote about it. I’m willing to recognize that both sides of this debate have very good points here. I don’t want to say for sure that this is a Star Wars weapon shooting at an object, but it sure as heck looks like it. I’m going to run this. This is, I think, 30 seconds. What’s going to happen is that right around here, you’re going to see an object seemingly just appear. Now it’s been argued that this is a craft of some sort. It’s also been argued that this is simply an ice crystal or a dust particle moving into a certain area of sunlight where it finally reflects. You’re going to see the thruster of the shuttle from over here. You will not see the orientation of the Earth change at all. It’s been argued that the thruster firing wouldn’t be sufficient to do that anyway. You’re going to see the object that appears suddenly move off into a different trajectory, and you’re going to see another object shoot up, zoom like that. You’ll also see some of these other objects moving around here. Some of them will change, and some of them will not appear to change their direction. Are these all ice crystals moving around? Here it is. It’s going to appear around here. There it is. Give it a few seconds. You’ll see the flash. Zoom. There it goes. Is there anybody who hasn’t seen this before? A few people have not seen it. This is on YouTube. You can just search STS-48, and you will find many, many clips of this, and you’ll find many debates about it as well. Some of the remarks people make are pretty stupid, and others are pretty intelligent. So go through it. Now, there’s a clip here that I’m about to show you that I think is more compelling to me. This is analyzed by the late Jeff Challender. Jeff was a gentleman who was obsessed by NASA, and he was obsessed by space UFOs. He spent his entire life, his entire adult life really, collecting video, studying the video, and looking for anomalous phenomena. He died in October of 2007 very suddenly. I met Jeff a couple of times. I met him one time, and we knew each other’s work, and we liked each other. After he died, his website eventually went down. It was gone. It was called Project Prove. Fortunately, I had did a complete download of his site before it went down, and I asked his widow if I could republish his site, and I have it now. It’s attached to my own site at keyholepublishing.com. You can spend weeks going through that and still not go through all of it. I want to show you an event, the only one that he’s got on his site, of an object that looks like it’s doing a U-turn. This is in a 2005 mission, the STS-114. It’s very strange. There’s a lot of strange things from that mission. This is one of them. When I move to the slide, it’s all sped up. What looks like a couple of seconds, actually in reality took a few minutes. He sped it up so you could see it a little more easily. It’s just going to cycle through. You’ll see it a few times. Here it is. Watch and back. It’s going to do it again. There’s an enhancement of this I’ll show you in a moment. It’s very odd. Jeff was no wide-eyed, gullible believer about this. He was a very analytical guy. He certainly didn’t think that every anomaly in space was a genuine alien artifact, but he couldn’t explain this one. I’m going to move to the next slide. You can see he does a stabilization of this. You can see it actually maneuvering and then turning around. Is there an optical effect here that we’re not getting? What would cause this object to change direction or to appear to change direction in space? I don’t know unless it’s actually doing that. What I can say very confidently is there’s a lot of these types of clips. When we talk about a secret space program, I think what we need to recognize is that there’s more than enough motivation for it. If there are anomalies out there, then you can bet that there’s going to be more than enough motivation for a clandestine component to the space program to be in effect for no other reason than to investigate all of this. That’s assuming that those objects aren’t ours. Of course, if they are ours, that would be de facto proof of a secret space program also. I didn’t really discuss some of the other elements of the program such as the biotech research and so forth. We’ll leave that for another day. I do believe that they are a big part of it as well. Let me move to the fourth part. I call this a breakaway civilization. This photograph, incidentally, is from 1966 from Provo, Utah. It’s a legitimate photograph. I think what it shows is one of our own man-made UFOs. This is not far from Dugway Proving Ground. So, my basic point, in my last book, The Cover-Up Exposed, I make the case for what I think is a breakaway civilization. The basic point is we’ve retrieved exotic technologies, they have to be kept secret, we’ve discussed all of this. You’ve got secret budgetary appropriations, that is a black budget, okay. And then the privatization of that secret. So, what does that lead to? Well, think of it this way, all right. In the history of our civilization, we’ve had many coexisting civilizations at one time. You go back 500 years, you’ve got, well, there’s Europe, there’s China, there’s Africa, there’s the Near East, there’s the Western Hemisphere. These are separate civilizations. They have different levels of scientific attainment, different cosmologies, different ideas about how the world is, okay. And the story of our world over the last 500 years has been the continuing merging of those separate civilizations into what we now have as global village. But even in our own lifetimes, we have the example of the Cold War to show not necessarily separate civilizations, but at least separate scientific infrastructures. So, you’ve got the Eastern, the Soviet bloc, and the Western science. Certainly, they kept secrets from each other. Certainly, they competed. They didn’t want to share their information, right. And so, we have these examples. So, now, with that in mind, ask yourself, if we were all part of a team with exotic technology to study, a near infinite amount of money to play with, and total secrecy, not just for years, not just for decades, but for generations, what could we come up with? We might come up with some really great breakthroughs, and we might not want to share all of them. Some of them we might want to spin off and make some money off of, okay, yeah. But there might be some breakthroughs that are so important, it might be considered really a bad idea to share with the world. Anti-gravity, field propulsion technology, for instance. If you share that with the world, as I’m going to get into in the next section, you’re going to create some serious problems, potentially. And so, what would happen is, the technologies that would be developed would be so classified, would be so secret, they must never be allowed to seep into the mainstream world. But then the problem is that as science operates, science works on itself, right. One scientific breakthrough leads to others. So, if you have this foundational new breakthrough, and that leads to other breakthroughs, well, the rest of the world is kind of out of the loop. And then the next thing you know, 20 years have gone by, and you’ve moved a hundred, a thousand miles ahead of everyone else. So, you’re in a world now, a clandestine world, not simply where you’ve got your own flying saucers, probably, but where you’ve got radical advances, perhaps in artificial intelligence, or nanotech, biotechnology. You’ve got a different conception of the universe also. It’s a universe in which, probably, contact in some form or another with these other intelligences is a given. Well, that’s a very different cosmology, for sure. And so, really, when you look at this, what you’re seeing is a separate civilization, a civilization that is broken off of our own, a breakaway civilization. And I believe that is what we are dealing with in the clandestine world. Not all of it, but I think parts of it. And that doesn’t mean that they all live separately. Some of these people, they come back, they mow their lawns, they’ve got their neighbors, they take their kids to ball games, they do all those things, but then they interact with this other world, which feeds off of our civilization, but really is off on its own. And this is my hypothesis. Okay. There’s a lot, of course, that one can really say about that. This is a theme that I know I’ll be coming back to again and again for years. Let’s look ahead. Can anybody tell me what time it is right now? I want to know how much time I’ve got remaining. 11.30? Perfect. Perfect. We’ve got a lot of time. So let’s look ahead. My training is as a historian, and it’s taken me a long time to sort of want to look into the future. Because we’re trained to look at the past. The past is a lot more fun, a little more manageable. The future is not so manageable. So with that caveat, let’s keep in mind that the history of prognostications is the history of really bad predictions. I’m thinking of two, go back a hundred years, two of my favorite 19th century authors. One is Edgar Allan Poe, another is H.G. Wells. We’ve all known these writers, of course. One of his short stories, the name of it escapes me, it’s fascinating. He wrote it in 1848, and it takes place 1,000 years in the future, in the year 2848. So it’s Poe’s vision of the future. And it’s really wild technology. The story is a series of letters by this person of the future writing about traveling around the world. Now remember, it’s 1848. And he’s up in the air, flying around the world at the amazing speed of 100 miles per hour in a balloon. A balloon. Now Poe, of course, is a man with great imagination, a brilliant writer, and that is the best he could come up with. And I’m not knocking him for it, it’s really hard. H.G. Wells in War of the Worlds in 1895, I think, around then. Remember, he’s got the Martians coming to Earth, and they land. How do they get around on the Earth? Well, they don’t fly, guys. They’ve got these big old tripods coming out of their craft, so they’re walking around like lumbering dinosaurs. This is 10 years less than a decade before the Wright brothers. And Wells, who was a very scientifically astute man, just couldn’t even see it. So seeing the future is really hard. So having said that, let’s try to do our best here. And I’m sure many of the things that I’m looking at turn out to be wrong, too. We’re just going to try. I do believe, despite the fact that secrecy on UFOs has held for seven decades now, just because it’s held for seven decades doesn’t mean it’s going to hold for another seven decades. You can look at it two ways. You can say, well, they’ve continually stopped every single attempt at breaking the secrecy. Yes, they kind of have, in a way. In a way, they have, because more and more information comes out. But it’s like a sporting event, like a hockey game. If you keep shooting at the goal, you’re going to get a score at some point. And what we see is that it’s a continual increasing barrage, increasing amount of data that is being thrown out, thrown at the establishment, saying, we’ve got this and this and this and this and this. At some point, I firmly believe this secret’s going to break. The pace of our history is too fast. This isn’t 1950. This isn’t even 1990. We are moving leaps and bounds, leapfrogging over ourselves technologically. And just like the song says, something’s got to give. We’re not living in normal times. So there’s going to be, what will it be? Will it be a statement from the president? Well, I’m actually not thinking that that’s going to be the case until he’s forced to do it. My gut feeling is that someone, I mean there’s a lot of very good video footage, video capture, it’s not footage, what do you call it? A lot of good video out there, people are capturing. And it’s easy to dismiss this because it’s all digital and you can say, well, someone used Final Cut Pro and did a good job of it. But some of these are increasingly hard to dismiss. What I can see would be an event where a live television event, say, newscaster, and something just goes right by the screen and everyone looks at it. And it becomes this moment where they don’t know what to do. I think it’s inevitable. Something unexpected is going to happen. And there are times when it looks like this could be it and that could be it. Well, it hasn’t happened, okay. But it can, and I think it will. I’ve never been comfortable, maybe this is just me, but I’ve never been comfortable with individuals who really claim to have absolute knowledge of this topic. You know, talk is cheap. I grew up in a family of New York City cops. I grew up with my dad telling me about his investigations as they were occurring back in ancient times, pre-Internet. My dad’s still around. He’s a great guy. His name’s also Richard Dolan. And I admit, you know, when I write my books, when I write my articles, I’m often thinking, what would my dad think about this? He’s like my reality check in a lot of ways. I can hear him saying, Richie, come on, what’s with this? You need a little more evidence for this. New York, everyone gets the I-E at the end of their name. There’s Richie, there’s Jimmy, there’s Paulie, there’s Joey, there’s, you know, whatever. My childhood people, they’ll call me Richie. And the only other people who ever do this are people I meet who live in the New York area to this day. I didn’t grow up with them. They just, hey, Richie, how you doing? So does my dad. All right, so back to who they are. They could be one thing. They could be many things. Do they look like the blonde guy? Do they look like the reptoid dude? Do they look like that gray alien? Maybe they look like all of them. What’s their interest in us? Do they create us? Do they own us? Do they think they own us? Here’s what I will say at this point. I think it’s very premature to assume that we can be ambassadors, to meet with them, for example, as Dr. Stephen Greer says, to establish an equal relationship with them in some way as part of their community. I’m not saying we can’t do this. And I’m not even saying we shouldn’t do it, but I’m just saying, as I see it, there’s a little bit more going on than this for us to say, yeah, let’s join your organization. My attitude is I’d like a little more information here, please. While we’re at it, let me just address the statements of Dr. Stephen Hawking in the news lately. Stephen Hawking, of course, has said in his recent television series, his current television series, that if we meet them, we’ve got to run far and fast. Essentially, we don’t want to be like the Native Americans bumping into Columbus. You never win when you make statements like this. Stephen Hawking, first of all, you get your scientific colleagues who think that this is such an embarrassing topic. Why are you even discussing it to begin with? So they cringe. Then you get the UFO research community, and Hawking’s taken many, many hits, of course, for this. The argument has been that, well, look, man, if they’re here, they’re obviously so much more advanced than we are. They’ve clearly found a way not to destroy themselves. They’ve clearly found a way to manage a civilization that is peaceful. And by the way, if they’ve been here all this time, and they haven’t blown us up yet, they haven’t destroyed us, obviously they’re not going to. Maybe I’m simplifying the argument a little bit. I hope I’m not too much. I just don’t find that quite compelling. It’s like the argument saying that the more advanced your technology is, the more peaceful you’re going to be. If we went back a thousand years to medieval Europe, and we met with these people, and let’s say we showed them our iPods, my new phone. I can’t understand my phone yet. Or our notebook computers and these things. And we showed them to some medieval monk. He might say, wow, you guys have really figured out all your problems, haven’t you? I’ll bet you got all your social, political, economic problems solved. That’s the logic. And we’d look at each other and maybe not say anything. Clearly technology is not going to solve social problems. And evidence and possession of advanced technology is not proof that you’ve solved your problems. Sorry. And it’s also grossly premature to assume that they, if they’re communicating with us, that they’re truthful anyway. Would we be truthful with a medieval village? How could we possibly be truthful with them? Even if we had their best interests in mind. There is no way we could. How could we tell them that the earth goes around the sun? That alone. How many times are you going to rock their world? Tell them about cells and microbes. Germs. Interstellar realities of the cosmos. Science. There’s only so much. And if you start… You would make their head explode. People can only take so much. So if there are these other beings that are here, we have to really ask ourselves, how much are they telling us? And that’s a best case scenario if they’ve got our interests in mind. And if they don’t have our interests in mind, then we really have to be alert. So… Oh, the other thing about Hawking, I just wanted to say, my main point of disagreement with him isn’t that we should be cautious. I mean, maybe he’s a little more fearful than I would be, but I don’t know if he’s a lot more fearful than I would be. But I would say that his real mistake is simply that he’s not acknowledging that they’re here. I mean, that’s my biggest problem. You know, read a couple of books, Dr. Hawking. It’s not that difficult. The information is there. Maybe he already knows, as has been argued. And maybe. I don’t really know, and I don’t want to speculate on that at this point. There are all kinds of possibilities. But certainly, it is also true that famous scientists even can be hidebound in certain ways. No one’s perfect. I understand that Marilyn Monroe couldn’t cook. Okay, well, that’s, you know… Right? So, no one’s perfect. Everyone’s got their limits. And maybe Stephen Hawking has his, too. We have to keep that in mind. Now, why would they be interested in us? Here’s one good reason. This is us about 10,000 years ago. Sickles, the beginnings of agriculture. Okay? It’s not that long ago. And in fact, our society looked like this for a long, long, long time. In fact, even 100 years ago, it didn’t look that different from this. A little bit better clothes, maybe. But agriculture really didn’t change very much. Human society went through changes, but we’ve gone from that to basically, you know, to this. That’s an illustration of what is said to be quantum computing. I’m trying to understand what quantum computing is. It’s on the way, we’re told. It deals with multiple dimensions. Simultaneous computing across dimensions. There’s a head spinner. Okay? And then, if people who are really unfamiliar with UFOs, if they think this topic is a little out there, I would suggest just read a couple of very good mainstream books on AI and the future of artificial intelligence. This has been an interest of mine for a long time. I’ve been thinking a lot about the future of AI. Well, what the experts there say is, in about 15 years from now, maybe less, who knows, your computer will claim to be conscious. You’ll talk to your computer. Your computer will talk back to you, and you’re going to think, are you conscious? You might not be sure, because it’s going to seem like it. Except, though, its computational power is going to vastly exceed ours, and it’ll be awake 24-7. It’ll be able to pull any data off the internet like that. So, in a lot of ways, they’re going to seem a lot smarter than we are, in some ways. That doesn’t mean that they’re conscious in the way that we are, of course. But what I’m saying is that, instantaneously, in the long term, in the last hundred years, we have not just reinvented our society, we have not just reinvented our civilization, we’re reinventing ourselves as a species. Some of these AI visionaries see us with nanobots in our brain, interfacing with the web. Imagine that. Is it really outrageous? Maybe not. So, in other words, within a century from now, it’s very possible that good, old-fashioned, unenhanced homo sapiens may not exist. We’ll have all kinds of gadgetry interfacing. We’ll be a hybrid human-machine intelligence, with IQs of 300, 400, 500, who knows? I mean, that’s a theory. It’s a possibility. But what I’m saying is, those guys get a lot of grant money to research what they’re doing, unlike us people in the ufological ghetto, but there are some very serious thinkers at major institutions who are looking at these problems. And so, what I’m saying is, we are about to leap into their world. It’s false to assume that, just because they’re way ahead of us now, that we will never have a chance of bumping into them. Because progress is not a linear thing. It’s exponential. And so, I think it’s very likely that we’re about to do a major leap into a completely new consciousness, level of reality, whatever you want to see it as. And we’re going to be in their world. As I’ve sometimes said and written, I think we’ve been in their world all along, but now we’re going to wake up. And I think they see this. So that’s one reason they’re very interested in us, because they’re going to have to deal with us in a much more substantial way than has been hitherto the case. So what is going on? Well, I think what’s going on is the fundamental question of exo-politics. What is going on? Are they even extraterrestrial? That’s a fair question. I started this field years ago thinking, assuming, like everyone else, they’re probably people, beings from another planet. I’m not so sure. I’ll admit that to you. I don’t know where they’re from. Do they just live here? If they were from another place originally, does that mean anything at this point? Maybe they’re just here now. Are they from another dimension, our reality, where they come in and out? Or is there something of both going on here, that they have bases off-world, they have bases in orbit, they have bases deep underground, but they can play games with dimensions and play games with space-time. We want to resolve those issues. It’s a fundamental issue of exo-politics. That is the relationship of us with them. We also need to resolve what the abduction phenomenon means. We watched last night, for those of us who were here, a screening of an outstanding documentary from Norway, wonderful people. They made a brilliant documentary last night. One of the keys about it was the nature of the abduction phenomenon. What came through very clear to me, and I’m sure to many of you who watched it, was that you’ve got two fundamentally opposed perspectives of our relationship with them. Those abduction researchers who look at this phenomenon as one in which they’re doing things to us without our permission, and that there’s a problem here, there’s a confrontation element, and they seem to be creating a hybrid human-alien species. With what goal in mind? Are they going to take over the world? Maybe. But then you have another school of thought, which does not see these ETs, or these entities, as inherently hostile, but rather as fundamentally, for the most part, positive and maybe even benign to us. It seems to me that the abduction phenomenon is a core issue that we have to understand, and really trying to figure out what they are. As I mentioned earlier, we need to remember that they are probably not truthful, and that doesn’t mean that they’re bad, if they’re not truthful, but it means they’re not truthful. It means they might not be truthful. Just a thought. What might they want from us? Well, let’s go old school here and think in totally human terms, how pedestrian I know. They might be interested in resources such as minerals and water, maybe our DNA. We’ve got a lot of DNA on this planet. A lot. Really neat genetic variations. And if you know how to play games with such DNA, well, gosh, this is the place to be. Right? All kinds of unique life forms. So they might just be interested in that. Are they interested in the creation of hybrids? Are they just voyeurs or joyriders? I know that sounds funny, but really, it’s entirely possible. They’re not necessarily mature. Really? Are they? Are we more mature as a species than we were 2,000 or 3,000 years ago? Well, in some ways, maybe. In some ways, maybe not. I’m not willing to give them the credit yet. Certainly, some of the accounts that have come out do not show them in the best possible light, to say the least. Are they helpers? Maybe, yeah. Some of them, I think, may be. Is there a spiritual component to this phenomenon? I think that there is, in the sense that there’s what any physicist would say is a non-local element of our reality. You can call it spiritual dimension of our reality. And it does appear that these beings are interested in that. Yes, it does. But that doesn’t mean it’s good. Spiritual can be good. Spiritual can be bad. And again, this is something we need to look at with a cold eye. We need to be objective and detached. And again, as I suggested, do they just live here? I think they do. Where are they, though? Well, maybe they’re in orbit. They could be. Sort of describe that with elements of the secret space program. Do they live underground? This is an illustration from a book that I’ve recently published by a colleague, Dr. Richard Sauter. Many of you know Dr. Richard Sauter’s work. He’s, I would say, the premier, really the only major author on the topic of clandestine underground undersea bases. He’s done some very good work. His latest book, called Hidden in Plain Sight, is a book that I published under my company Keyhole Publishing. I think it’s an excellent book. This is an illustration from it. It’s a German drawing from the 1930s describing an underground vacuum tube shuttle system. One thing that he points out is that within purely human technology, we’ve had the ability for years to create massively large, sophisticated underground bases and tunnel systems. If you want to read that, I suggest you get acquainted with his book, Hidden in Plain Sight. Are they under the sea? Even under the seabed? Again, this is another illustration, by the way, from his book, done by a man contracted with the U.S. Navy in the 1960s. The man is still alive, Walter Korshner. To illustrate explicit Navy plans, as they existed at that time, to create undersea bases. You think, impossible. It’s not impossible. We have the capability, we have examples of massive undersea tunnels. We’ve got the Channel Tunnel going from Britain to France, of course. That’s under 20 miles of seabed. Japan also has a tunnel that goes over 20 miles under the seabed. We know how to do it. Getting the oxygen? That’s no big deal. We’ve had nuclear submarines for 50 years. What do they do? They take the oxygen out of the sea water. That’s how they can stay submerged for four to six months at a time. The technology has been there. You extract the oxygen, you get a five megawatt nuclear reactor under the ground, under the ocean. You’re basically sent. The rest is filling in the blanks. Have we done it? Richard Sauter argues that we probably have. Have other beings done it? Well, I would assume it’s within their capability. Certainly would be a great place to go if you want a totally secure environment. There are certainly a lot of water-based UFO sightings, as many people have pointed out. Tim Good is here in the audience and he’s written extensively about this. A number of people have talked about water-based UFO sightings. What many people are not familiar with is that an enormous percentage, possibly a majority of good UFO sightings, take place over or near large bodies of water. Or where are they? Are they among us? Do they live among us in some way? Do they look like us? Sounds like a science fiction movie, I know. But think about it. If you were an alien and you didn’t look like us, you might want to get people who did look like us to merge. You might want to look at the human power structure. You might think, they’re going to be an issue in a few generations. Let’s manage them now. And you might want to put your people in the right places. Just saying. It’s only a theory. There are certainly no shortage of anecdotal evidence. Strange stories of strange people who look human but don’t seem like they are. You have to wonder. It’s what I would do if I were an alien. How much time? What time is it, anybody? I’ve got 15 minutes. Let’s see if I can do it. It’s my eternal struggle against the clock. No matter how much time you give me, I take more. We’re at a crossroads in our civilization. I think we all know this. How do we move forward to get to the truth and how do we get beyond the truth into the next era that we all know we need to be in? The crossroads we’re at now is that of freedom or that of global fascism? A world of truth or a world of fantasies? Either way is possible. The battle is being fought right now. The main battlefield, I would say, is the internet. It’s not just China. It’s not just North Korea or Iran that want to control the internet. It’s right here. Australia, Britain just passed some nasty little internet laws. We’ve been keeping up on this. There are always attempts within the United States to clamp down on the internet. And frankly, for most people, they turn on their news browser. What do they get? Their MSNBC or their AOL or their Yahoo, God forbid, so you can keep up on American Idol. Okay, good. Most people are not really using the internet anyway. But for those of us who want to use it, even for those of us, we have to be careful because there are attempts constantly being made to manage that flow of information. So that’s one battle. Another thing we’re dealing with is the probable end of our infrastructure, our petroleum-based infrastructure. Even if we’re not running out of oil right now, I would say the following. A, that supply is not infinite. There’s no evidence that I’ve seen scientifically that shows that Earth is generating that petroleum. Claims have been made. I’m just not finding it persuasive. Now, if I’m wrong, okay, I’m wrong. I don’t think I am. Even if there’s a lot there, the fact is that global demand for petroleum basically doubles every generation. So I don’t care how much is in the ground. At a certain point, demand is going to outstrip supply. And I think that we’re heading to that point right now. But even if petroleum were in total abundance forever, how long could we do this? We’re destroying the planet. Okay? So there’s a problem here. We can’t keep going like this. Everybody sees it. So now, there are solutions, I think, possible solutions, in the technology of what we call UFOs. Because whatever these things are using, they’re stopping on a dime, they’re silent, they can take off like a bullet, they can zigzag. It’s a little bit better than petroleum. Whatever that answer is, whether it’s a zero-point energy field or some form of fusion or something else, maybe we would want to know about it at some point. Like now. But there are definite challenges in that technology. It’s not going to be all wine and roses here. There are going to be serious challenges in managing this technology. So here’s what we need. If I were, seriously, to have the opportunity to speak with President Barack Obama, and I would certainly encourage his staff to get in touch with me, why not? Here’s what I would have him do. Or here’s what I would suggest. That we need a reasoned humanitarian policy by responsible leaders to bring about a peaceful transition and a courageous confrontation of the truth. What do I mean by that? This would be a policy program. The U.S. President must reclaim full constitutional authority in the name of the people of the United States. This is not easy. To get a sense of how bad things have gotten, it’s not easy. I’m not saying any of these following things are going to be easy. Maybe they’re impossible. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be the goal. The goal. Also, enforce authority over runaway black budget operations. That’s a no-brainer. That’s not easy either. Release individuals from black world, clandestine world, E.T.-related secrets. Establish open international collaboration on the full array of political, social, economic, cultural, religious issues, anything else important on an international scale. We all need to have an open discussion about this. Paying special attention to the problems of transitioning human society away from our petroleum-based global economy. Now, listen carefully to what I’m saying next. Don’t misread what I’m going to say here. Promote a federalized global system not under corporate domination and with a global bill of rights. The example, I think, to keep in mind is that of the United States Constitution itself. We fought for independence and we had a confederacy for a while. It didn’t work very well. Thirteen states, thirteen foreign policies, thirteen currencies, thirteen tariff policies. Massachusetts wants tariffs. Rhode Island says, no, no tariffs. There goes Massachusetts policy. It didn’t work. The states were easy pickings for European powers if they kept this way. They couldn’t do it. You couldn’t manage it. They had to federalize. The problem, though, was that the anti-federalists, who were patriots, people like Patrick Henry, said, no way. We didn’t fight this war to have another king. My state is sovereign. Go to hell. Well, the great compromise was our Constitution and it’s really a work of political genius. And the way that they made it work, of course, was the bill of rights. And that and the balance of power between federal and state authorities. It’s never easy, but it’s always possible. And so the bill of rights was the protection that the anti-federalists desired and needed and we all need. And the federal system, at least as it was originally conceived, I think, was a very good solution to that problem. We’re not in the world of 1787 anymore. We’re in a different era. We have to recognize this. We are in a world of total technological interconnectivity and we are also in a world of multinational, transnational corporations that are more powerful than most of the nations they inhabit. There is not a global structure up to the task of managing this and when you really look at this problem, that is what is necessary. The problem, of course, is that it’s letting the snake into the garden and we’ve got to find a way to manage this so that it’s done right, not done in a way so that the Rockefeller-Bildeberg click runs the whole thing, which is what it’s looking like. How do you fight this? I don’t have every answer here. I’m seeing the problems. We have to find the solutions. But that is the problem. It’s got to be dealt with. We also need a global culture that will facilitate the meeting of the E.T. Challenge. Ask yourself, how well prepared are we as a society to deal with this? We all have family reunions. I’ve got relatives. Some of them are not ready for this. Some maybe. Are our academic institutions preparing us to deal with intellects that are probably much more advanced than our own, maybe with spiritual understandings that are possibly more advanced than our own? Are we ready? Does our television culture prepare us? Where are our heads most of the time in our day? We need to step up our game to deal with it and we need to facilitate a culture that will enable us to do that. In short, Mr. President, you need to help oversee a radical transformation of our civilization. Not easy. Of course it’s not easy. It’s got to be done. How would this affect us? Energy. We all talk about free energy. I would love to have free energy. I’m not sure I want my next-door neighbor to have it. I don’t trust him. He’s a bit of a problem. Here’s the thing. You can have something that will heat your home for free forever and that’s great. But cheap energy won’t just do that. It will revolutionize the entire world in ways that we really cannot imagine even now. But there’s a problem because if it can do that, you might be able to make a really good bomb out of it. The technology might be there and there’s got to be ways safely to manage it. And not only that. The energy that allows us to clean up the environment, that’s good. But really, it’s possible to consider that the main problem to our global ecosystem isn’t just pollution. It’s just the fact that human beings have scurried around all over the world like termites. And if we have free energy, that just would make it easier for us to do that. So we’ve got to be careful about this as a panacea. The acknowledgement of an ET reality also might incorporate other new technologies that we almost can’t even imagine. Transporter technology. Think about how our world has changed with telecom technology just by itself. We go from the early cell phones that are as big as an arm almost, to these little devices that can have the entire world in your hand. How it’s changed our culture, social attitudes. Not always a bad thing, but it’s going to bring a lot of change and it will be disruptive to the society and we just have to be ready for that. Changes of the global financial picture. Look, if we have something to replace petroleum, most of the global financial community is based on petroleum. Most of the energy that goes into making anything that you can hold in your hand, 90% of it, the cost of the object is mostly the energy that went into it. So if you go from petroleum base to create and then transport this object, and then you go to something that’s almost free, well, that’s great. But what will happen is that the global financial scene is going to go through a lot of permutations, instability, and you just have to be ready for it. We might think, well, big deal, good, that’s great. Well, it’s great, but the short term, by which I mean maybe 10 or even 20 years, is going to be very, very bumpy. Get ready for it. Changes in biotech. Let’s say we develop a way to live 300, 400 years. Is it really outrageous to think that? I might want to live a little longer than 80. Maybe when I’m 250, I’ll think, yeah, I’d like to go another 200 years. But you have to ask yourself, if we do that, what kind of world will this be? And I’m not saying we shouldn’t. Would we all have children? We’re going to have a world in which the average age is 200? My own observation about people is they kind of shut down after the age of 30. Let’s face it. Where do we get change in our world? Present company excluded. Where do we get change in this world? It’s from generations, not from people. Generations. That’s how we get change. Fresh insights. People who grow up with a different perspective. What I find is most people, they get to around the age of 30, and they think, well, I have to grow up now. I have to solidify my world view. I’ve got to put away my childish things. And you see this hardening that takes place. It takes a lot of effort to keep it going into your later years. It can be done, of course, but you’ve got to be working at it. And so I wonder, just as amusing of mine, what it would be like to have a world in which we’re all 300 years old, in which there aren’t that many young people. Will we need to create a new political structure after all of this? I think the answer is yes. How will that structure play out is a good question. Are we going to move into a world where there’s relative freedom, or a world where there’s total control over your mind, even more than today? What might we learn from these other beings? Well, we might learn great things, and we might have to… Well, do we have anything to worry about? I’ve only got a few more minutes here, and I want to wrap it up, but I’m actually just about done. I’m an idealist, I admit that, but I’m not a utopian. I’m very skeptical about utopias. I’m skeptical about the idea that we can create a perfect world. I haven’t seen it yet. I’m skeptical of the idea that these other beings are necessarily all here to help us, as I see human society about to careen off the cliff, fall off the cliff. So there are… I’m not saying there aren’t good people out there, but again, I’m cautious about these perfect world scenarios. Free energy, or even free green energy. Again, it’s what I just said earlier. It’s not only pollution. Yes, we want to clean up the environment, and the energy solutions that are in the UFO technology could very likely be incredibly beneficial to help detoxify our environment and to prevent the ongoing toxification of it. Yes, yes, yes, yes. We’ve got to do that. But we’ve also got to be careful, because creating a suburb can also be environmentally damaging. Carving out more area where deer and wildlife need to be is also a problem. And free energy is not going to necessarily stop that. So it’s human living patterns itself that are a threat to much of the global ecosystem. We need to keep this in mind. Will the Galactic Federation save us? I’m a great believer… Well, I’m not trying to encourage laughter here. I mean, maybe I shouldn’t have phrased it this way. I don’t know all the dimensions of what’s out there, but I will say this. I think fear and hope are both enemies to us. Everyone can see how fear is an enemy. But hope is an enemy, if you use it as just wishful thinking. I hope everything’s going to be great, because what that does is it takes you out of the situation you’re in. What we need to be in right now is this situation. As alert and awake as we can be. Not hoping, not wishing. We have to see things as they are. And to expect that we’re going to be bailed out is not really the most mature position, if you really think about it. If you’re raising a child who’s creating all kinds of problems and you bail out that child over and over again, are you helping them? We have to bail ourselves out. And maybe that’s how they’re looking at us. Can’t keep helping humanity like this, they’ve got to fix their problems. We have to fix our problems. Will we ascend into the next level of consciousness maybe after December 21st, 2012? Well, I see radical changes happening, and it could be 2012. I mean, it really could. Whether it’s going to happen because of, in relation to the, for example, the Mayan calendar predictions and so forth, I’m not taking a position on it. I’m not, in that sense, a 2012-er, I guess I would say. But I think that we’re moving into a new era. But then to assume that we’re all going to jump into the next level, that I don’t, I’m not buying it. Consciousness is work. You don’t just get it. It’s not like drugs. You want a new state of reality. I guess you could drop acid, but if you really want higher consciousness, it’s effort. It doesn’t just happen. We have to work at it. And that means we have to look at ourselves, we have to look at our world in a very clear way. And so I’m just, again, here to caution against this idea that somehow, when it all transforms, it’s all going to be great. It’s going to be difficult. It’s not going to just become easy all of a sudden. The problems that we have are very concrete and the solutions we are going to have to bring to bear are going to be sometimes very difficult. It’ll be challenging. It will be fascinating. It might be the most wild ride we can possibly imagine and we might not want to trade it for anything, but it won’t necessarily be easy. And we have to be prepared and we have to be strong. We have to be brave, fearless. I think as skeptical and down and pessimistic as I can sometimes be about the situation, I retain hope in the sense that, I know, I just said it could be our enemy, but I still retain a belief that we really can pull ourselves out of this difficult situation. I’ll always believe that. I will never want to give up on us as a species. And I hope you don’t either. And I think that we’re going to be moving in the next few years into a direction that is just going to blow our minds. We’re going to have to be bringing our A-game to it all. I’d like to let you know, the last thing, is that I’m working on two books right now. I’m working on the third volume of my history, UFOs and the National Security State. But I’m also working on a book that will be out before that. It will be out in September. I’m co-authoring it with a gentleman, if you are familiar with the television show that was called Dark Skies back in the 1990s, a good show, kind of neat, very neat. The creator of that show is Bryce Zabel, and Bryce and I have become very good friends, and we are collaborating right now on a book which we are calling A.D. After Disclosure. I think our subtitle is Life After Contact. And we’ve got a lot of it written, and much of that book is our attempt to understand the world as it may be in the aftermath of whatever revelations of disclosure that there may be. How will it change our world? And again, my emphasis is to avoid the utopianisms and to try to look at this as concretely as possible. We’ve decided that we’re going to try to get this book out on the midnight of September 23rd to 2010, and the reason is that it’s two anniversaries. It’s the anniversary of the Nathan Twining memo of 1947 that I mentioned earlier, and the memo of the Truman MJ-12 memo of September 24th, 1947. We thought we’re going to get it for both of those, and we’re going to release this book. I think it’s going to be a great book. I’m really liking the way it’s turning out. The third volume of my history, UFOs in the National Security State, is still working, still coming, and it will be out in a couple of years, so that will be there too. I’d like to thank you for your time. This has been a pleasure being here. Thank you. applause beep Beep

UFOpedia

Explorer

dolan-national-security-state-2010-whisper

Richard Dolan — “UFOs and the National Security State” lecture (2010)

Graph View

Backlinks