Richard Doty on disinformation, Paul Bennewitz and Linda Moulton Howe (Rebelliously Curious with Chrissy Newton, The Debrief, February 2025)

0:00 We'll be right back. It was Falcon who sought me out in September of 1980, and it was Richard Doty, then with AFOSI at Kirtland Air Force Base, who soon came into play as the middleman in that process. Shortly thereafter, it became apparent to me that my supplying information to the government through Doty on the activities of Paul Benowitz, APRO, and to a lesser extent several other individuals, was to be a part

1:01 of this equation. I also discovered that whatever it was that Benowitz was involved with, he was the subject of considerable interest on the part of not one, but several government agencies, and that they were actively trying to defuse him by pumping as much disinformation through him as he could possibly absorb. Being a very small part of that process gave me, I thought, something of an advantage. It became my intention to play that advantage for all the information I could get out of it. Benowitz, for his part, continued to make what, in my opinion, seemed to be increasingly irrational claims, most of which gave every appearance of having been influenced by a heavy blanket of disinformation mixed with a small but significant amount of truth. The problem was always one of keeping a level head and trying to carefully sort the shit from the candy, something which Paul didn't seem to be very

2:01 good at. But then, Paul was by that time very emotionally involved with the affair, and rather skeptical of advice from any quarter unless it supported what he had already decided was the truth. Today, we dive into the story of Richard Doty, a former U.S. Air Force counterintelligence officer and famous in UFO circles. Doty played a key role in his psychological operation against Paul Benowitz, a businessman and UFO researcher. In the 1980s, Benowitz believed he had uncovered evidence of extraterrestrial activity near Kirkland Air Force Base. Instead of correcting him, Doty and others with orders from multiple U.S. agencies, like the NSA, the CIA, and the DIA, fed him disinformation, leading to Benowitz's mental and emotional unraveling. During our interview, Richard Doty recalls his past with Paul Benowitz.

3:03 We discuss whether reparations should be paid to Paul's family in Linnemote and how, and his thoughts on the current UAP landscape and recent whistleblower claims. Join us as we get Rebelliously Curious. Richard, thank you so much for joining me on Rebelliously Curious. To say the least, you are one of the most controversial UFO, I'll say notable people in this community. And there's been years that have gone by where people have so many questions about your involvement with Richard Doty, Linda Motenhow, and the American government. So I'm really happy today that we're having this conversation, because I feel that there's probably a lot, maybe hopefully we can unravel here, that I know you've done probably with multiple people in other podcasts as well. But I also think there's some current events that might be paralleling a lot of these conversations that you obviously were working on various materials

4:03 in the 80s with Kirkland Air Force Base. But first of all, thank you so much for joining me on the podcast today. Well, thank you for having me. I'll try my best and answer all your questions. I hope so. And I hope honestly. So Richard, tell me a little bit about your background, just so some people will be familiar with the story that happened in the 1980s and the work that you've done. But can you tell me a little bit about your background working at Kirkland Air Force Base in New Mexico, and what did your position consist of? I was a United States Air Force intelligence officer, a counterintelligence officer. I worked for the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, which was the counterintelligence agency of the Air Force. My job was to conduct counterintelligence operations on the base in the surrounding area for any connections to the military,

5:05 not just the Air Force, but the military. And I also saw duty in Nevada within the Nellis Test and Training Range, which you would call Area 51. My job was to conduct these investigations to protect national security. Right. And how long were you in that position for? From 1978 until 1988, 10 years. And so you were working at Kirkland Air Force Base and came across a man that owned a businessman and also a UFO researcher named Paul Benowitz, who is very well known within UFO lore and within UFO counterculture history. Can you tell me how you first met Paul and what your first initial thoughts were of him and how you started this relationship with him? Well, Paul lived right outside the fence line of Kirkland Air Force Base in an area called Four Hills.

6:08 And Paul also had a business called Thunder Scientific Laboratories, which was just outside the east gate of Kirkland Air Force Base, or excuse me, the north gate of Kirkland Air Force Base. Paul had a business, a Thunder Scientific Laboratory business. He made certain items for the Air Force and for the Navy. So he had a government contract. Paul first approached Major Ernie Edwards, who was the chief of security police at Manzano Base, where at one time they stored nuclear weapons. It was the largest nuclear weapon storage area in the Air Force. Paul told Major Edwards that he had seen some objects flying over the mountain. He filmed these objects, and he was convinced that these objects were unidentified flying objects

7:09 or flying saucers. Now, I was a counterintelligence officer for the base. So immediately upon hearing this news from Paul Benowitz, Major Edwards contacted me and informed me that this guy by the name of Paul Benowitz was taking pictures of things flying around the base. So that's how I first became involved with Paul Benowitz. I eventually made contact with him. I went out and visited him, conducted numerous interviews, and then we began an investigation. What was your initial thought when you met Paul? What did you first think when you met him? Like his character, his being, you know, what first came to mind? Well, Paul was a World War II veteran. He was up there in age. I don't recall exactly how old he was. He was probably in his early 70s.

8:10 He had very nervous mannerisms. He smoked a couple packs of cigarettes a day. He drank Coca-Cola bottles of, port bottles of Coca-Cola plus coffee. My first impression was, number one, he wasn't in very good health. Number two, he was a strong believer in UFOs. He told me that he had been a MUFON or before MUFON APRO investigator in New Mexico. He had contacts or, he would say, sightings and personal contacts with UFOs. So he was already a strong believer in UFOs. And so I believe that what he was telling me was factual. I mean, he gave me the whole story of what he saw from his house, what he took pictures

9:13 of, and what his concerns were. And his concerns were national security. He's a veteran. He had a government contract. And he was concerned about what these flying saucers were doing flying over the base. Did you, like off the bat, you're saying you noticed like he was having some type of codependency issues, right? If it was alcohol, if it was pop, whatever it may be. Well, I don't think it was pie. It was alcohol. It wasn't alcohol per se. It was cigarettes and caffeine. Cigarettes and caffeine. He was always drinking Coca-Cola or coffee and chain smoking cigarettes. So he showed a dependency to that nicotine and caffeine. So over the course of your relationship with Paul, you know, unfortunately, there were a lot of moments where obviously misinformation was presented to him consistently. When you met Paul, like from what I'm

10:13 hearing, did you know that he was suffering from mental health issues when you first saw him? Well, I wasn't a doctor, so I was, you know, I had a college degree and I had extensive training as a counterintelligence officer, about a year of training. But I wasn't a medical doctor. I realized that Paul was really, really a strong believer in alien contact and that he was thoroughly convinced that the aliens were here on Earth and that the UFOs were a danger to national security. So I passed that on to, in my reports, I passed it on to my supervisors. I had to do a report every time I met him. And they eventually asked, or I asked Paul if he would agree to be examined by one of

11:18 our physicians. And he said, sure, he would do that. And so he was examined by a physician, a, I should say a, not a military physician, but a contract physician that we used, a family practice doctor. He wasn't a psychiatrist. And also we agreed to, or the doctor agreed to look at all the prescriptions that Paul used and maybe manage them for him. And that's what was done. But that was done by them and not me. I didn't have anything to do with that. So you mentioned earlier, providing him disinformation. You know, Paul was the easiest person to convince that what he was, what he was seeing was, in fact, UFOs.

12:18 And that's all we had to do. We didn't, we didn't, we didn't use a whole lot of techniques on, on Paul, because, number one, he was already a believer. He believed in UFOs. He believed that what he was seeing with UFOs and aliens. So I had to do was agree with him. I'd say, you know what, Paul? I think you're right. I think what you're seeing is, in fact, UFOs. For a minute, though, just for people that are listening, and I'm sorry to cut you off, Richard. I'm like, break down what, the documents that maybe you, you did show him over that course of period of time. Because there was disinformation that was shown, right? It wasn't just like, hey, we're going to follow along with what you believe. We're going to consistently feed you information as well. That isn't correct. No, that's absolutely false. We didn't feed him any information. I just, me and others, there were nine other people involved in it. This investigation. And I can't tell you every single thing they

13:20 did. Okay? I can tell you what I did. And I was a lead agent. We would, we would sometimes, Paul was a pilot. He had a plane, his own plane. And we would fly him, or he would fly us around. And there were times when we flew him around. I wasn't a pilot, but we had a pilot. And we would fly him around and point out things to him on the ground and tell him what these things were. Now, not everything that we were telling him was factual. We would say, you know, over there in that particular location was something we used to track UFOs. That in itself wasn't, wasn't actually factual. But we wanted him to continue thinking that what he was seeing, these things that he was seeing, were in fact UFOs. But in reality, we knew what they were.

14:20 And we didn't want him to know, because what he, what was being flown around Kirtland was highly classified. Protecting somebody, some national security, right? That does make sense, because we, we would be unfortunate if people didn't, and that's part of their jobs. But knowing that he was already getting government contracts, he was already being awarded this information. He had Thunder Scientific that was working on these government contracts with Kirkland Air Base and the government. Why not just read him into programs? Why not bring him into programs instead of giving him false information or saying, giving him misleading information, if you don't want to call it false, misleading information? Why not bring him in into the inner circle? I was a, the intelligence officer there at the base. This entire operation was being controlled by people up in Washington, okay? That would have been probably, and we actually did at one point bring him in on something. But that would have been probably the

15:21 easiest things to do. But I wasn't controlling the operation. It was being controlled at a defense intelligence agency. I had to submit an operational plan. They looked at the operational plan, and they amended the operational plan. And then it comes back to me, and what that plan said, I had to, I dictated I had to do. So it wasn't me running this. It wasn't my decision to do these things. It was coming from headquarters, okay? So that's how it's, that's how it really works, okay? There's a lot of things I would have done differently looking at it over the years. But I didn't have a, I didn't have a choice. I was a young, relatively young intelligence officer. I did what I was told to do. I had other cases other than a pause. But as the information was being sent to headquarters, my reports and other people's

16:21 reports, remember there were nine other people involved, DIA would make the determination that we had, we would have to steer this case in a certain direction. And that's what we did. So, like I said, I probably, if I had it to do all over again, I probably would have asked them to do things differently. But that's, you know, hindsight's always 20-20. Right, so it's not acting alone. And I do understand that intelligence, you know, this is not just a solo enterprise, right? This is not a solo mission. This is with a group of people. Can we talk about that line of command then that was behind the actions doing this to Paul Benowitz? You know, we have the ODNI, we have the OSI, and we have the CIA, right? Can we talk about what that line of command looked like and how it went up the chain? Can you break that down for us? Yeah, we, I worked for the OSI, okay?

17:23 Air Force Office Special Investigations, the Counterintelligence Directorate. But this particular program dealing with extraterrestrials or UFOs was centered in the Defense Intelligence Agency, okay? Didn't go, we didn't, back in the 80s, we didn't have a DNI. We had the, now we do, back then we didn't. So, certain programs that the intelligence community was working on went through different agencies. There were some that we would work directly to the CIA. Anything overseas connected to counterintelligence, counterespionage or espionage overseas went In the States, anything dealing with counterintelligence in this particular program, which we refer to as 9Q matters, goes to the DIA, okay?

18:23 So, my reporting went from the base to my first-line supervisor to OSI, Counterintelligence Directorate, and then over to DIA. So, then, if we're looking at this line of command, then, you know, where does the CIA then become involved in this? Because we've heard these conversations. Was the CIA directing this to happen? I'll ask you answer that before I ask the other question. There was a certain element of this. Now, you've got to understand this. We should have said this before. The Paul Benevich case involved, it was called Seven Lambs, okay? Project Seven Lambs. That was a code name for the case. Now, the case involved, once we got into the case, there were a number of derivative cases that were created out of that, and I can't

19:24 go into details on all of them because some of them are self-classified. One particular matter went to the CIA. So, anything generated out of that particular part of this investigation was directly sent to the CIA, okay? Now, and there were some other parts of this that went to the National Security Agency, the NSA. So, that matter would go to the NSA. And there was another part of it that would go to the NRO, the National Reconnaissance Office, which at that time was still classified. So, that's the complexity of this case. And that's why there were nine other people involved in it. So, when you ask about how the CIA was involved, they were, but not only one part of it. They didn't care about anything other than that one part of it. So, now, here's the thing. When you are doing disinformation on

20:25 somebody, and this was also, you know, Linda Motenhow was involved in this as well. She was shown documents, and we'll get to Linda. But, isn't this against the law, initially, to do? No, no. But you're doing a disinformation campaign and lying to them that are civilians. It's not, number one, you won't ever find the word disinformation in our manuals. It's deception operations, it's called. Fair enough. Deception operations. And we do it whenever an investigation is generated, we have to meet certain criterias. Number one, is this person connected at all to the United States government or to the United States military? The answer to Paul's is yes. He had two classified contracts.

21:27 Well, one with the United States Navy. He made, and this isn't classified anymore. He made humidity sensors for nuclear submarines. Number two, Paul made a particular component for a nuclear weapon. Okay? So, that opens up the door to us being able to investigate Paul Benowitz. Why not just leave Paul alone and let him go? Like, the reason why I'm getting at this is I think that in the beginning, you know, we know that instantly coming in, you see a man that is already having some kind of maybe mental health issues, but having codependency issues that we're already seeing. You know, why not just remove his contracts and remove him fully and remove any connection that he has to the government instead of creating and leading him down a path that is, at the end, going to hurt his mental health even more? Why not just take those other things away

22:28 from him and leave him be? Well, it wasn't my decision to do that, okay? I was told to do what I, the information that was contained in the operational plan, line item numbers. I did those, okay? Now, in a real world, perfect world, you might, somebody might consider this. But number one, Paul had already seen something that was highly classified. Secondly, Paul was collecting a signal intelligence from something that was highly classified, okay? Number one, the things that Paul was seeing were drones, were highly classified. In the 1980s, the U.S. Air Force was experimenting with drones. They were highly classified. And these drones were being flown from an aircraft. They were launched from an aircraft. And it would fly around close to that

23:31 Paul was photographing that. He was photographing the aircraft. He was photographing these drones. But Paul didn't connect that these drones had anything to do with these aircrafts. So Paul thought these drones were UFOs. Well, that in itself, the whole thing is classified. We can't go and tell Paul this thing is, we're going to brief you into the program. Number one, it wasn't my job to do that. It would have been somebody else's job. Number two, Paul was on the base, on Kirtland. We had an NSA facility. And the NSA facility back then, and this isn't classified anymore. It's been written in books. They were shooting lasers up orbiting Soviet satellites and blinding them so they couldn't take pictures. Paul somehow was able to tap in to those signals. So that in itself is more highly classified than drones. So those two things he tapped into, well, we couldn't certainly tell him or give him a

24:33 briefing. And that wouldn't have been my job at all. My job was to conduct a counterintelligence deception operation to keep Paul from learning the truth about what he was doing. And so if he went out and talked to his neighbor or somebody else saying, you know what, Air Force flying drones out there. Hey, we're shooting lasers up a Soviet set. We can't let that happen. So that's what counterintelligence operations are like. And that's what we had to do. For sure. And I see, again, like the counterintelligence aspect for sure makes sense in national security. I get that. But I still believe like separating the man from that could be so much easier than bringing him down the road when you already know he's having troubles with his mental health. You know, when we look at Linda Motenhow and Paul Benowitz and his family, do you think that reparations should be paid to their families because of this information, this disinformation or misleading information or

25:34 deception campaign, whatever words we decide to use? Do you feel that the American government owes it to them, along with Linda Motenhow, who is still alive, knowing that this was already false and really did play havoc on their careers and on their mental health? Well, first of all, we had a contract with Paul, a legal contract that we formulated with Paul. He had an attorney, the staff advocate office, which is like the military attorneys on the base, drew it up. And he signed a contract after being that contract. Well, most of the contract was reviewed by the attorney. There was a section of the contract that would have been too sensitive for that attorney to read it. But anyways, he signed it. So we had a legal binding contract with Bob Benowitz. And so he knew exactly what he was getting himself into.

26:36 And he was cooperating with us. And there was a lot of things people don't realize is that we paid, the Air Force paid, Paul, $150,000 in this operation to assist the NSA with collecting certain signal intelligence or frequencies. So Paul made money out of this. And when it was all over with in 1986, I became very good friends with Paul and his family. Very good. Paul treated me like a son. I mean, he never had any hard feelings. There were a lot of times when we had to bring other actors into this, Bill Moore, Alan Heineck, Leo Sprinkle, to set the stage, so to speak. And Paul didn't like these people.

27:36 They were interfering with what he was doing. And some of them went above and beyond what they were supposed to be doing. So can we stop there for two seconds, too? Because J.L. and Heineck, you're saying, is, you know, an accomplice in this, is then you're saying. And he allegedly gave him a computer that had misinformation or a deception information on it. Yes, he did. He didn't give him a computer. He gave him a monitor. A monitor. Sorry, a monitor. Did he know what, did he know, did J.L. and Heineck know what was given or he's just asked to do that? I wasn't involved in that part of the operation. So whatever they told Alan Heineck to do was something that I wasn't aware of. I got into that after Paul already had a computer set up. And I went to his house and he said, oh, he had the computer and the monitor set up.

28:39 We gave him the computer. Okay, we gave him a computer. He had a computer. He had a Commodore, one of the older ones. We gave him a newer computer. Okay, we didn't put anything on it, to the best of my knowledge, because I'm not a computer expert. Jennifer, our computer expert in the DIA, OSI, she set that up for him. She set the monitor up. When I got there, he was telling me about the monitor. And I said, well, where's your other monitor? He said, well, Alan gave me that. And I said, Alan Heine gave you that? I thought, hmm, that's strange. So when I got back to the office, I went to the tech services, and that's where all our tech people, and I asked Jennifer, I said, Jennifer, did you hook that computer up for Paul? He said, yeah. I said, that monitor came from Alan Heine. She said, yeah, I know.

29:41 I said, who gave him that to give to him? He said, you'll have to talk to NSA about that. So that was their part of the investigation. I wasn't involved in it. So that's how that went. So was J. Alan Heineck knew that this deception was going on with Paul Benowitz? He was running the program, yes. So he did know, and he agreed then that this was something that he would either be part of potentially or that he knew that it was happening. Well, Alan Heineck was involved in a major operation in that area at the time that had anything to do with Paul. And so NSA and other elements, including the FBI, got Alan involved in this case. And there was a reason that I'm not going to go into it. It involved espionage, not Paul, but somebody else. So there was a reason this all happened. But I didn't know about that though later. And so everybody was interconnected, which

30:43 is like really interesting. Who was the person that was doing this interconnecting then? Who was that lead point? I was the lead agent. Okay. And then there was all these other people that you're saying you were not right into certain areas or sections. So you would have had somebody else would have been overseeing all of this, I would imagine. Well, I mean, the people in headquarters would have a Carl Dale is his name. He's in he's long dead, but he was the case monitor up at DIA headquarters. And I talked to him many, many, many, many, many times on a KY3 phone, which is a secure phone, about the operation. There were a lot of parts of this that was somewhat, I don't want to say disorganized, but because there were so many players in this, I wasn't there to supervise every single thing they were doing. That would have been impossible for me to do. Now, we would have every Thursday, we would

31:45 go into a secure facility and most of the time everyone was there, but there were sometimes somebody would be missing. And we would talk about the case status. Okay, where are we right now? And everybody would go around the table and say, okay, we are doing this and that or whatever. But not every single thing was discussed. So there are a lot of things. But not one person stopped and went, what are we doing? Well, I did that many times. In fact, it got so bad, not bad, but it got so confusing to me. Remember, I'm a young intelligence officer. I was 20, 26 years old at the time. I served in the Air Force, I got out, went to college, and now I'm in intelligence. Now, I went to a lot of training, okay, so I

32:46 knew what I was supposed to do. But then again, you learned why you're going in this particular field. And there were a lot of things that I didn't understand. And at one time, I told Carl, I said, you know, I talked to him on the phone. I said, you need to come down here at one of these meetings. Because, you know, I think NSA, I would say, wasn't playing by the rules, okay? There were things that they didn't tell me they should have told me. So Carl came down, sat at the table. He brought an NSA official from Fort Meade down with him. And we sat, and we went through this, you know, we went through the meeting. And the NSA representative there, the base, stayed. And we got a lot of things worked out that I didn't know before. So that was taken care of. So, but after that, it ran pretty smooth. I think the fact that the FBI was involved

33:47 in it doing something else, which was not necessarily connected with anything we were doing. But it connected Paul Benowitz, because they were centering on an employee of his at the Center Scientific. But that was involved in a way, too, because we were using their resources or their assets, and they were using our resources and our assets. So that's why it was somewhat complicated to go into. When we just isolate Paul away from everything else, it was more, there were more sanity in the room, so to speak. But everything else was occurring that was on a different tangent. Well, and it's wild to think that there's all these people for this one man. Well, he wasn't one man. It was what he was doing and what was developed from Paul.

34:48 It wasn't. Everybody was. That's pretty unbelievable, if you think about it. You know, it's pretty unbelievable that it's one man that is running, you know, really his team, the company, and then along with dealing with the American government and having all these people spying on him consistently. You know, it speaks volumes of what, you know, outside of what people might say about previously Paul having mental health issues before this, or any form of codependency. It really shows this vast, unbelievable man. Well, Paul was, he was quite a man. He was quite a person. He believed in God and country. He was enthused with what he was doing, not just because they were paying him money to do it, but because he thought that he was making a difference. And all we had to do was coach him along, because Paul was not somebody that didn't

35:49 believe in it, in the subject of UFOs and flying saucers, and we had forced him to believe it. He already believed in it. He believed everything he was seeing were, in fact, related to extraterrestrial. And then comes Dulcy, which is an entirely different part of this whole thing. And what he thought was going on up there. And we knew what was going on up there. It didn't have anything to do with the UFOs. It was a classified training area for U.S. Special Forces. All these things that we had to manage, and I was the one who was trying to manage it all. And, you know, in 86, as I was saying earlier, 1986 was all over with. I sat down and told Paul. I tried to explain to him what happened, and he didn't want to believe it. He said, no. No, I'm not going to believe it. I know what happened. I said, Paul, listen to me. I'm trying to explain something to you. Nope. Didn't want to hear it. He said, I know what happened. You're trying to tell me it didn't. But I know what happened.

36:50 So I said, okay, Paul. You believe whatever you want to believe. But at that point, he's already been told so much that, you know, if he's been gaslit so much that he's not going to believe anything else. When somebody says something to them one time and then says something else and then consistently flip-flops back and forth, along with a man that's struggling with his mental health, he might not know what to believe or he'll only believe what he feels is accurate at that point. So I don't blame him. I don't blame him for, really, for saying, you know, I want to believe what I want, you know, and being consistent with that. Because, you know, seeing things for his own eyes and then being told this is potentially what it is and that he is right, you know, he's getting that confirmation bias consistently. But that confirmation bias is not accurate information. Well, no, not necessarily. There were a lot. I mean, I'm not going to sit here for over five hours and explain it all to you.

37:51 But there's a lot more to it than that. And, you know, Paul was examined many times. And, again, I'm not a doctor, but we had a doctor that came in and examined him. In fact, we paid for a complete workup, cardiac workup on Paul, cardiac pulmonary workup on Paul. One of the things we did and one of the problems was he was taking too many medications and they were counteracting each other. And so our doctor said, you know, let's get together with your family doctor and we'll sit down and talk about this. So Paul was going to the VA hospital, which is just down the road from where he worked. And so they did that. And they got all these medications straightened out. And I think Paul was, I wouldn't say was a new person, but Paul, that really helped him

38:53 Paul wasn't as dependent on alcohol, not alcohol, but caffeine as he was before. He still smoked, but they did at one point. But this is after, it was 86, where he was wearing a patch. He tried to quit smoking. Paul didn't, did go into a hospital then shortly after that. But it was, I don't, I can't say that it was unrelated to what we were doing, but it was also his business was kind of going downhill because of problems. He wasn't a good administrator. The administrator that he had, he fired. Anyways, he had problems with his business. Okay. It was just to say that. And he went to hospital, he was there for a while, came out. I saw him five or six months afterwards. He was fine. And Paul lived up to, to 2002. And, you know, the reason.

39:54 But the quality of life wasn't that strong though. Like, you know, when we hear about the stories of him being in his room and scared that, you know, having injection marks on his arm and not, you know, he not saying it's from him and he's saying it's from aliens. You know, and then, and then also looking at his house being potentially, I believe windows were tampered with and not knowing if that was coming, who that was coming from. It wasn't coming from him, you know, and I believe I've read that you were like, I had nothing to do with this. And they said, you were unsure as well. So the question was, was, you know, at the end of close to, you know, Paul's dealing with a major mental health, he was having a very, very hard time. You know, he was injecting himself potentially with some kind of, we don't know what it was, or he was saying that was happening, but we were seeing Mark, they were saying marks are on his arm. So, and you know, in this conversation of potentially an MK ultra test was being done on him as well.

40:54 Like there's so many of these things, conversations that nothing has been concrete to say, well, yes, that was done to Paul. But it does seem like, you know, he was an experiment to some degree. Well, I, I know nothing about that. I've, I've never heard, in fact, I never, I've never heard of any of the puncture wounds. That's the first I've ever heard of it. There were things that the house itself, during the contract, the contract authorized us to enter Paul's house and set up equipment. All we had to do was inform him afterwards that what we did. So we did enter his house. It wasn't clandestine or covert. It was his knowledge. It was voluntary. He voluntarily allowed us. All the times that we entered, he wasn't there, but we'd set up equipment. There were times we'd set something up that we didn't tell him we set up just to see

41:56 what Paul would say, or just to see if we could collect something that Paul was collecting and we couldn't collect. So we did that. And we later, you know, weeks later or something, we'd tell Paul, listen, Paul, we set this particular device over here because you said you collected something over here. We wanted to duplicate it, and Paul said, okay, it's in the contract. So, I mean, it wasn't like we were doing anything illegal or against the contract. We followed that contract to the T. He didn't, but we did. And we don't care what he did. There were a lot of things that he didn't do that he was supposed to do, and so we never came to him and said, you were supposed to do this, this, this, and this, and you didn't. We did these things, Paul, but you didn't. And so, you know, he did what he wanted to

43:00 do. He brought things into the house that he wasn't supposed to bring in. He brought people into the house to see things that were supposed to be the orbs that were flying around his house, which he wasn't supposed to do. And so, and fortunately, those people had to be then contacted and talked to. I didn't do that, so other people did that. And this wasn't, this wasn't a textbook operation, but it solved the problem we had. It satisfied the United States government, the Air Force, into making sure he didn't talk about the highly classified things that he was doing that he didn't know he was doing. So I think, and then there were other aspects to it, like I said, I can't talk about all those things or, you know, are over with now, except for two.

44:01 And so. What are the two that are not over with yet? Those two are not within my purview to talk about with another agency that's doing it. So I'm, I'm, I'm still sworn to secrecy, few things I'm still sworn to secrecy about. And those, those were the two. So I can't talk about those. That's fair. And is there any work that was done now that are back then in the eighties that is consistently happening now that's related to Paul Benowitz or anything that would have been connected to UAP that is still continuing from your last projects? Oh, probably thousands of things. People don't realize that Paul Benowitz wasn't the only person being investigated by U.S. intelligence. There were literally hundreds and hundreds of, hundreds of other cases throughout the United States.

45:01 We went to Washington, D.C. about six months into the Paul Benowitz case. And we had other agents come in from other districts. We sat down, talked, exchanging notes on what they were doing, what we were doing. And I realized how many other cases that were pretty similar to, to Paul's case. Although, you know, Paul's a different person. He, you know, he was an older man, had some, some problems with, with caffeine and cigarette. I can't say that all the other operations were, were like Paul's, but there were a lot of other cases going on that was similar to what, what, what we were doing with Paul. So it wasn't, was it similar in the UAP context or was it just? Yeah, yeah. We didn't say, we didn't use UAPs back then, UFOs. Yeah, all of them, all of them, all of them, every one of them pertained to UFOs, extraterrestrial contact, every single one of them. That's what we did in the 9Q people. That's all we did.

46:01 And so every one of those cases that we talked about in D.C. and 81 pertained to that subject matter. You know, outside of looking at national security, was that part of then, would you say, the stigma, pushing the stigma of UFOs so that it was, I hate to use the word for cover up, but to push the stigma forward? I wouldn't say that. No, I'd say that these operations were, or projects, some of them were operations. There's distinct difference between operations, projects, and programs. I'm not going to go into details on that, but some of these were two deception operations. Yeah. Some of them were deception operations. Some of them were actual contact with extraterrestrials that we wanted to gain more information about what this particular person abducted. or somebody that actually had a contact with an extraterrestrial, what information they

47:04 were providing, things like that. So then we bridge into, you know, we'll talk a little bit about Linda Motenhow, but I think in a moment, I think it's smart for us to talk a little bit about, you know, Lou Elizondo, you know, Jake Barber. We have David Grusk, we have, you know, these whistleblowers that have come forward that have worked with the American government and intelligence and multiple different departments and have been run into multiple different programs. I find it really interesting that the information that you show Linda Motenhow and would speak to Paul Benowitz about is very similar to the information, especially what you were showing Linda Motenhow. So, you know, it parallels back to you, you know, and I've said this to Greg Bishop, I've said this to multiple people that I know that are in this space, and I said, it always goes back to Dodie. You know, it always goes back. This is one of the worst original stories that has been told ever, and so many of those elements that you said showed Linda

48:06 Motenhow are coming forward right now into the mainstream public. And, you know, should, and I ask you this, you know, and I would hope and to be honest and truthful, would you say now the majority of the things that you were showing Linda were ultimately true to some degree, and now we're seeing that in the forefront now, or is everything that we're looking in the forefront just disinformation or some form of deception project? Well, let me tell you how Linda Motenhow became involved, or how I became involved with her. For sure. I got a message from headquarters that I was to contact her and interview her, bring her to the office. Initially, that's all I was supposed to do, because she had, she was getting information, classified information, from somebody in a D.C. area. So that's counterintelligence or counter-espionage, actually.

49:07 So, okay. And they were pretty sure that it was from an Air Force person working at the Pentagon. So she comes out to New Mexico. I made telephone and contact. Well, actually, another person makes contact with her for me, named Jerry Miller. And he, of course, was prominently involved in Paul Ben-Oma's case. And to set up a meeting with me. The next day, I get a Armed Forces Courier packet from headquarters, okay? A packet of information. And in this packet, the Armed Forces Courier only carries highly classified stuff from one place to another. It's not just Moldane, you know, classified stuff. It's highly classified. So when it came in, I had a sign for it. I opened it up.

50:08 Now, this is two hours before Linda was to be here at the OSI office. I looked through it. There's a letter telling me what to do. I'm supposed to show her this document, not to let her copy it or photograph it or anything like that. So I briefly looked through the document, okay? And I said, wow, you know, I didn't. There's a lot of information in here, some of which I already knew because I'd been briefed into the program four years earlier. And there's a lot of information I didn't know. So there wasn't any caveats to said, okay, this is true and this is deception, okay? So I don't know. I didn't know. So I figured that there would be some that was truthful, some information truthful. And I could, when I was reading it, reading the document before she came to the office, I could realize, I'm sorry.

51:12 That's okay. Go ahead. No, no, go ahead. So I read it. And then I met her and brought her into the OSI office. Everything occurred to the way she said. It was a two-way mirror. We recorded everything, both with a camera and voice recording. She sat at a certain desk. I introduced myself. We talked for probably 15 minutes, just introducing. I knew a little bit about her, about her Alien Harvest movie, things like that. And we talked. And then I said, listen, there was a preamble I read her about what we would like as far as, and it was read off a form. So I'm not, I can't paraphrase it. I can paraphrase it, but I can't tell you exactly what it said.

52:12 But anyways, basically that we want her to assist U.S. intelligence. And I said, I'm going to show you something. You can read it. Take it all the time you want. You want to read it two times, three times. You can't take notes. And you can't photograph it. You can take notes once you leave here, but not here. So she said, fine. So I moved away. I was sitting here. She was sitting here. I gave her it. And I moved away. I actually left the room. And she, of course, we were watching her on camera. And she read it. She read it, I think, twice. And I could see that she was making mental notes. And I guess probably 25, 30 minutes, I come back in. She said, this is quite fascinating. Can I ask you questions? And I said, no. I said, you can't ask any questions. Number one, I probably wouldn't have been able to answer them because I didn't know

53:14 half of the stuff in there. And I wasn't in a position to be a respondent to her questions. So I said, no. You can't ask me any questions. But I'd like to maintain contact with you. She said, yeah, sure. So she left. I took her out to, I actually drove her out to a hotel or a motel just not far from the gate. I said, do you want to have dinner tonight? She said, sure. So I went to dinner with her. I picked her up, took her to a nice place, took her back to the hotel. We talked. She asked me a million questions, but I couldn't answer many of them. And my job is to try to recruit her because she lived in Colorado at the time, and I was the closest agent, 9Q agent, to recruit her as an asset for U.S. intelligence.

54:15 That was my goal. And that's why I maintained contact with her for a number of years, trying to get her to tell me her source in the Pentagon. Right. But unfortunately, she never did. And so we ended, we ended cooperations with her. That was it. Well, and, and she kept her word. Yes. Do you think that Linda is, is owed reparations then? Or even Ben, you know, Paul Benowitz's family at this point in time? I know that maybe you, you mentioned before that Paul was paid out, but do you think that in this kind of looking back now that they are owed any form of reparation for what happened? I don't, I would, I wouldn't be in a position to even answer that question. No. Who would be the person that would be the, who would you say would be the people that would look into that? You'd have to go back 45 years and talk to somebody in charge back then. And, you know, this, believe it or not, you

55:15 probably won't believe this, but believe it or not, President Reagan was briefed on the, well, Benowitz's case. He was briefed. And I got an award from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, John Bessie, in 1983. And I have a picture that's circulated on the internet and their number of times award for this case and how it was run and, and, and how successful it was. So, you know, you're on the outside looking in, I'm on the inside. I know that there was probably mistakes made along the way, but, and the, in a total aspect of this investigation, the Paul Benowitz case, it was probably one of the most successful operation that OSI ever ran because of what the results were at the end.

56:18 And, and unfortunately, I can't sit here and give you every one of the results. Now, you want to center on Paul Benowitz, I, I fully understand that because you're on the outside looking in. I do too. I mean, I, I, I like Paul. I really did. And we were friends right up to the day he died. Five days before he died, I was at, in his hospital room. Um, so I maintain contact with him, uh, even after I got out, uh, I went, went to work for Dr. Puthoff after that, but I, I, I, I maintain friends with, with Paul, uh, and, and for the most part, with Linda Howell. Uh, so, uh, reparations, uh, I, I don't know. I, I, I wouldn't be the person to, to ask, to answer that question. Well, okay, that's fair. And, you know, removing yourself, Dodie, let's just say, and, and the American government saying, you know, these are the things that you have to do when you're taking orders to do it. You know, I think it's successful as a campaign, I think, for the American

57:19 government shows that they are not caring about the casualties because their outcome is so more important than maybe looking at the civilian and the casualties that are happening because it's supporting their interests. Which I think is, is kind of sad. You know, there would, but maybe in my perception, again, I'm not, I'm outside looking in, I'm not inside, but instead of doing this to a group of people and using a counterculture to push agenda to some degree, that they could have stepped back and said, you know, what is on the line here? Someone's life, someone's life, someone's mental health, you know, there's other ways to go about doing this and being, you know, I mean, the government saying, you know, pat on the back, like we did a great job is one of the best programs that have ever been run, you know, speaks a lot to what they really do care about their people. Well, I don't, you know, that, if we, if we didn't care about Paul, we wouldn't have brought in another doctor to manage his prescriptions

58:22 because the doctor we brought in looked at his prescriptions and he was taking, I don't know how many, but quite a few prescriptions. The blood pressure medications and, and, and, uh, uh, uh, all sorts of cholesterol drugs and other things. And, um, I think six of them, I think he was taking six of them and our, our doctor said he shouldn't be taking those. And so that's why they met, they set the meeting up. That's why we put him through a car cardiopulmonary evaluation, make sure his heart was all right. His lungs were all right. Um, we managed his medication. Now I come back to you and saying, if we didn't care about the guy, we wouldn't be doing that. So we did, we did go above and beyond. Yeah, you can care, but are you, I think, well, and we can, we could debate it too, but, um, I think care can mean many things,

59:22 right? You might be looking at his prescriptions, but you're not caring about the overall facet of the man. Right. And knowing that with the longterm precautions are, you can take care of someone's physical health, but their mental health is just as important. And so I think that that was either not really cared about knowing that, okay, well, we're keeping him alive and that's what matters. And we're trying to do something instead of going, Hey, maybe it's not so much of his physical health that we need to worry about. It's what's going on mentally. Um, but you know, outside of Paul, I would like to move on from it and, and talk maybe a little bit about current events. If you're open to that, I would like to go back to the Lou Elizondo and David Gresh comment and Jake Barber from all of, you know, all that you've known working, um, on multiple different projects, what you're seeing in the forefront. Now, you know, if you had to put a percentage around what you feel would be deception or not, um, within what we're being told in the mainstream, you know,

1:00:22 through the American government and also just in general, what we're seeing, how much do you feel in a percentage wise would be deception at this point in time? I think there's a, uh, a number of, uh, of, uh, deception operations being run, uh, by the government against the UFO community. I can see a lot of things that are occurring, um, the information that, uh, the arrow, for instance, Sean could factory, uh, he puts out a paper that is just full of lies and falsehoods. Um, uh, because he was told to do it, you know, you, you, you interview him now, listen to him now. He said, I didn't believe anything was in there, but I had to put it out. Okay. That's a deception operation. That's trying to feed the public, uh, bull. And, um, you know, I, I think there's probably others, although I don't know, I'm

1:01:24 not in the government anymore. I don't know, but I can see things. I can see traits, uh, of, of, of disinformation operations or deception operations going on. Um, I don't, there's, there's people I just don't believe out there that's coming forward. Uh, they're making all these claims, uh, and it's easy to check these claims. Uh, for instance, there's some people that are claiming that they've already spoke to, uh, the DOD IG, uh, the ICIG. Well, they didn't, some of them did. I'm not going to name names, but I spent, uh, five hours in, in January, 2022 in the DOD IG's office talking about a number of reports that I did as an OSI agent, uh, which were, which some of which were still classified. Um, then I came back in September, 2022, uh, answering more of their questions about, oh,

1:02:27 what, what I did. So, uh, am I a whistleblower? No, I'm not a whistleblower. I'm one that's going to tell the facts as they relate to what I can talk about. The DOD IG gave me a clearance saying, Doty, you can talk about anything that's in any of these, these reports, except for these over here, because those over there are not unclassified. They're, these are class, I mean, they are still classified. So those reports still deal with UFOs. Every single one of them, every single one of them. And, um, so I did that. Now they call me occasionally. I've been up to the Senate. I talk, I didn't talk to many senators. Excuse me. I talked to staffers. We, I'm a member of the advanced working group, which just contains retired intelligence officers, retired military officers. We support disclosure. And we want it done in a certain way. And we facilitate, uh, senators, uh, on both

1:03:31 sides of the aisle that want disclosure. Now we only deal with the Senate. There's other groups like Lou's group. They deal with the house of representatives. So, uh, we haven't been getting together as a group, Lou's group and our group. But, um, I think Lou has, uh, the right, um, forward thinking on this, his group. Uh, but, uh, you know, and I'm not going to speak for Lou. I'm going to speak for himself. Some of the other people have come out, um, they're not believable because of, of certain things they've said, but the public is believing it. And that's, that disinforms, that's the, the perfect deception operation is when somebody comes out that is full of bull, a bull and tells their story that is all made up that the public's

1:04:31 getting what they want. When we're in a, we're still somewhat in the inside looking out saying none of that's true. And you're going to find out about it because when disclosure comes out, you're going to find out that the people inside that have shut their mouth and not said anything and then come out, they're going to be telling the truth. All these people out here are trying to make a buck out of themselves. They're the ones that's lying. Well, fair enough. And we're seeing this fire hosing technique, right? You know, counterintelligence uses it. Politicians use it. PR people use it. We're seeing fire hosing right now. Right. And we watch it, you know, even in the political spectrum we're seeing right now where everything's getting fire hosed. And when, for people not understanding what fire hose means, it's just that there's so much going out at one time that people just can't distinguish what is right or what is wrong or what is true and what is false. So when you're seeing this fire hosing happening, this must obviously be like a red flag for you. We're like, hey, this is a tactic.

1:05:33 It is. Right. What are some of those traits that you're seeing right now within media that you could pull out as nuggets that are their fire hosing, but then also parallel into conjunction what you've experienced and what you know that counterintelligence and the government does to persuade somebody away from a topic or to persuade them forward to mislead them? Well, one of the things they do is they change the topic. It's centered around extraterrestrials, but it's a different part of that program. Psyonics are coming out. That's big now. Is that real or not? Probably not. Something that happened inside Area 51. All these people are coming out saying, all these things are happening about Area 51. The aliens are out there. They live in underground. I was out there and I was driving and I ran across an alien that did these things. You know, 99% of all that stuff is absolutely wrong, made up, because we still

1:06:33 have OSI agents working out there and those OSI agents talk about to other people about what happened, what's the truth and what's the falsehood is. Now, I can't say everything that occurring out of Area 51, because I worked out there twice. And there are things out there. If somebody was to ask me, is there anything out there that would connect the United States government with extraterrestrials? Yes, absolutely. Is there anything out there or have there ever been or has there ever been an entertainment facility out there that stored or held extraterrestrials? I'd have to say yes. Can't go into details, but yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, I can say those things, but people make up wild stories about, you know, fighting them or... Still sounds pretty wild, though, still, Richard.

1:07:34 Yeah, but that's true. And it's been out there in the public. You know, what we have, and a lot of people don't know this. It's been out there, though. We have, the Advanced Working Group has a entry log for Nellis Test and Training Range. Nellis Test and Training Range is where Groom Lake is located. It's a big area. All these facilities are located inside, including the Nevada National Security Site or the Nevada test site where they tested nuclear weapons. We have the entry log from January 1st, 1979 to December 31st, 1991. We know every single person that's worked out there, every single person that had access out there, okay? So, these people come out and say, I worked out there, or I did this out there, or I went out there, and we can check the log, and we

1:08:35 know that they're lying because they've never been out there. The entry log doesn't lie. Well, and also, I think you had a tweet recently, too. I believe this is yours, and it says, I suggest everyone to check the USFA Special Tactics Center, Pope AFB, and I'll put this up, too, so everyone can read it as well, but it's looking at Barber's records and saying that they were not there. Is this who you're referring to? Yeah, yeah. He's claiming he was a combat controller and went to Special Tactics training at Pope Air Force Base. Well, he started, but he flunked out, and that's what they're saying. They're saying this. I'm not saying it. The Special Tactics Center is saying this. In their release, they're saying he only made it through three weeks of a 62-week program. He was eliminated, and then he went into another career field, okay? So, okay, that's fine.

1:09:36 He went into another career field. What's the other career field? Helicopter maintenance, okay? Now, when people are trying Greenwall and some of these other people are trying to get his military records, they got him. They got all of them. Now he's saying, oh, you got them all, but the rest of them are classified. So then you write to the Military Personnel Center at Randolph Air Force Base. That's where all military air force records, he was an air force member, are kept. And they say, we don't classify military records. We don't classify him. His DD Form 214 or any other records. So, and now he's saying, okay, those records are classified, but I'm going to tell you something that I did that is highly classified. Does that make any sense to you? It doesn't make any sense to me. Now, that film was, of course, third

1:10:38 generation. You know, and I don't know if you saw it. Yeah, it wasn't his. I don't know if you saw the thing on Twitter, X, where this guy posted something. He posted this. And it looks exactly the same, only it's clear. And he's saying, look what I just got. So, everybody is in X to say, oh, my God, where'd you get that? I created this in my living room. So, and there was another guy behind him filming that was released later, showing how he did this. So, I'm not, you know, Jake can say whatever he wants to say, but. Right, and video footage can be faked. Like, it's so easy to do that these days. Gosh, even with AI, you know, you can do amazing things. And it wasn't his footage, right? It was given to him. So, right there, it's hard to, you know, call that evidence as much. I do agree with that to a degree.

1:11:40 But looking at some of these claims that he's had, you know, we look at things. And, you know, I consistently talk about this because I think it's really important. And when we're looking at consciousness and we're looking at how the brain processes information and how we process information. You know, I talk about neurodivergency a lot on this podcast. I think it's really important. But we're seeing this thing with neurodivergency is intersecting with UAP consistently. And Jake Barber does mention that, right? He talks about having some type of, you know, being neurodivergent, you know, left-handed in some of these things that he makes comments towards being gay. He says in some of these comments doesn't mean that's neurological. But there is this connection, I would say, that we're seeing as well in the science community and edge science community is looking at telepathy, right? We're seeing this as telepathy tapes, which I imagine you're familiar with. And looking at how people that are autistic and have nonverbal autism are, and they're called spellers, are able to have some form

1:12:40 of connection with each other, right? Have these connections. And we're seeing that this is pretty evident. And then we look at synesthesia, too, which is another form of neurodivergency. You know, we're seeing so much connected into the UFO world. We see that, you know, Gary Nolan from Stanford is doing this type of research as well and looking at the brain and how this is all connected. When you're doing your work or any work that you've worked on in the past or recently, have you seen neurodivergency be a major conversation with anything that you've ever read or been privy to? And why? Well, I see it in people that are trying to learn remote viewing or a thought projection acquisition, which is something newer than remote viewing. And, you know, I go to almost every UFO convention and I talk to people. I speak at them, I do lectures and they

1:13:42 bring this up quite frequently, that subject, and they connect it to their strong beliefs or their contact. Now, whether they're an experiencer or a contactee or abductee, they have a way that they communicate with the extraterrestrials, okay? Now, if you look at these people and look at how they do it, it's probably, you can put them in different categories, but it comes down to doing it the same way. Everybody's doing it the same way. They might call it something different. And now they're this group of people that are trying to remote view, although they're not really using remote viewing. They're using more psionics and remote viewing to contact these UFOs that are flying out there. And so, yeah, I see it all the time. Now, do we know more about this?

1:14:43 Yes, probably do. We, I think the government knows a lot about UFOs. And one thing you've got to remember, Dr. Puthoff, who I worked for, I don't know if you knew, I worked for him for 12 years. One of the things he brings up is the problem with the UFO community is that they don't realize that we're dealing with more than one species of extraterrestrial. Now, we knew at one time when I was in, we were five of them. I don't know how many there are now, but every one of them comes from a different star group. They all are different biology, biologics. And they have different thought patterns. They're different anatomy or physiology. So, you can't put one particular contact,

1:15:46 way of contacting them in one, enabling the person to contact all of them. They're all different. So, when somebody says that they're able to contact through psionics or whatever, they're dealing with probably one species. They're not dealing with all of them because we know, I guarantee you, the United States government knows that they're all different and you can't communicate with them the same way. In fact, some of them don't even use a vocal language. I know that for a fact. They don't use vocal language. Everything is through telepathy or what we refer to as thought transfer. We think of something and then we send it their way. Now, another thing I worry about, they don't know our language and we don't know their language. So, how does people communicate? I've been to a UFO convention where we went out in the mountains around Laughlin, Nevada and somebody was claiming they were bringing

1:16:48 them in and talking to them and they were translating everything they were saying. So, after it was over with, and I didn't want to embarrass this lady, I said, well, what language were they speaking? And she said, oh, they were speaking English. I said, you said you were translating. She said, well, yeah, from my mind, I was translating. I said, so they were speaking English to you? Yes. I said, okay, all right. Well, then everybody took offense to that, not on my part, but on her part, because of what she said. So, that's just one example of people. I don't know, and maybe they can, but I can't imagine that a human being can sit someplace and think, or use the psionics, to call in an extraterrestrial using only English, because that's all they have in their mind, and calling them in, unless there's some other way they do that. So, that's my beef with these type of people. When you're saying that there's, like, you're

1:17:49 pretty much saying these are facts, you know, like, we do have, you know, there's multiple different types of race of extraterrestrial, you're saying, or non-human intelligence, or, you know, I would agree that there's probably multiple phenomena, but are you saying that this is, like, a definite fact? And, like, and if that's a fact, then where is that evidence that we want to see? And as a counterintelligence agent saying that to me, you know, how am I supposed to believe that that is generally a fact when I haven't seen the record to go with it? And knowing that this is something that you've been doing the rest of your life, your majority of your life is pushing those false deception narratives. You know, and I know you probably get that all the time, but I have to ask it because, you know, I think that people listening would go, well, Chrissy, how do you believe everything that comes from someone that's been doing that their entire life? So, you know, do you take, are you saying that's 100% a fact? That there's more than one extraterrestrial race? Yeah. Is that your question? And have you read this in government

1:18:50 document as well, then? Absolutely. And it's on the internet. And somebody leaked it on the internet a long time ago. And there's at least the five races. I don't know about what's out there now. But up to 1998, we knew, the United States government knew about five races of extraterrestrials. Okay, we knew it. And I talk about it. I've done lectures about it. I don't know that it's still classified because the FBI hasn't come and knocked on my door yet. They have when I said something that I shouldn't say, but I say this, and I'm almost positive that it's factual. Now, if you don't believe me, I'm not forcing you to believe me. I don't force anybody to believe me. I think it's just, it's one of those things where you're like, you know, we need to see, we want to see proof in so many ways. And I think that for sure, you know, right. You know, I think that it's fair for people that are asking for it. You know, when I see things of looking at, you know, telepathy and seeing that these

1:19:52 things are possible and humans can do it. And I know that, you know, they're saying if we're connecting to consciousness, are we creating consciousness? And the question is, you know, more than likely, are we connecting to it? And what is that source? Right. So I think that there are things that we don't know about that we're consistently learning because it's just going to happen. But I think over time, if we're saying that the government has known this for a very long period of time, then like everyone else, we're fighting for those receipts, right? Because it's so hard to really walk down the road with counterintelligence officials. And I don't even just say this with yourself. I say with all of them, I've interviewed multiple of them. You know, I've spent time with multiple counterintelligence officials myself, one-on-one in person. And you have to step back and say, well, how do I believe everything coming from counterintelligence? Right? Absolutely. I agree with you 100%. I mean, I do the same thing because I look

1:20:53 at the people out there that are talking about something within the government, and I see so many traits that they're advertising that they're lying. I mean, they're not telling us the truth. And I wish, I wish the government could open up every single file that we have on the subject and say, here it is. You want to read it? Here it is. Just like the Kennedy files, the Kennedy assassination. They're going to release 24,000 more files. Okay. You know, let's read them. Release the UFO files. Let's read them. Everything that you can release. Now, you've got to understand that there's some parts of that that they probably won't release because it's still classified. It could damage national security. Okay. All right. We don't want the Russians to know or the Chinese or the North Koreans or Iranians to know. But most of what we know, what I know, and I

1:21:53 was briefed into back in 1978, I don't see, with the exception of the abduction phenomena and some other things, I don't see any reason why the public wouldn't accept it. And we should release most of it. Well, I would hope, and I hope I'm alive to see all of it, because it would be unbelievable, along with my father and everyone else. I'm 70 years old. I hope I get it. We all want to see it. You know, we're looking at fire hosing right now. So if there's parts of the government that want to release this and parts that we don't, you know, you're not going to get a group of people or you're not going to get the world saying, well, this is a definite. When we're literally going through fire hosing right now. Like it's, you know, and that is a tactic on its own. It very much is. You know, how many people have I heard in the past, you know, since January or even before that going, I don't know what to believe anymore, Chrissy.

1:22:53 Like, I don't know what to believe and what to think. And I, it's so scary. You know, there's reasons why narcissism and words like gaslighting are so in the forefront. And like, you know, as being like the number one word, I think narcissism was like about four years ago. And I think gaslighting was like the following year. You know, it's not just interpersonal for them, but it's what's going on in society around them because of the amounts of deception and misinformation that is being spread. And UFOs have always kind of just been adjacent to that consistently, but now it's in the forefront and it's in the mainstream. And so people are just bewildered and they don't know what to do. And that's, you know, I guess in tactic, you know, why do you think is, and I would say maybe it was a political question. Why do you think that's the political conversation now and UFOs being right up against it and adjacent towards it and also being used within that deception? Is it political?

1:23:54 I think partly political. Let me give you an example of a senator. We spoke to a senator. I'm not going to name names, but in 2023, September 2020, or November 2023. Our vast working group, we've had a meeting with a senator. And a senator was one of these ones that's cleared, has a high-level security clearance. And him and six other senators were taken into a skip and briefed on this subject. But they weren't briefed. They were briefed by three different people, not all together, but at three different times. So from one o'clock to two o'clock in the afternoon, one person briefed him. From two o'clock to three o'clock, another person briefed him from a different intelligence agency. And from three to four, another person briefed him. Although it, you know, hold me to the times,

1:24:55 but it was something like that. He comes out and he says, we're more confused now than we were ever, because those people are telling us three different things. Exactly. So that's the government. That's the intelligence agency talking to members of the United States Senate and not telling them the same thing. And I wouldn't be, exactly. I wouldn't be surprised. You know, I wouldn't be surprised because if you're looking at trying to keep it, classify a secret as much as possible, you're going to put a whole bunch of disinformation in. You know, I guess the question is, and people don't ask right now, it's like, when I hear something, the first thing I ask is, you know, it's like two truths and a lie. Like, what's the lie? Or what's the two lies and one truth, maybe? Do you agree? And I've heard this from people that I've interviewed that have formerly worked in the White House through cybersecurity. And I've heard this from other counterintelligence officials. Do you go by saying 90% of deception or

1:25:56 misinformation or disinformation is 90% true and 10% of it is false? Well, I say that, well, I don't know today, but when I was in, it was probably 60% truth and 40% non-truth. What they did, and I can tell you exactly where it comes from, the Special Means Committee is the group in the DIA that creates this stuff. I'll say what they'll do is they'll take that 40% and they'll mix it up in that 60% so it's not easy to differentiate what's factual and what's not. It's very, very difficult for you, the person out there in the public. For us, normally, we get a sanitized version of it. With the Linda Howell document, I did later,

1:26:57 but that was nine months or so later. I got the sanitized version showing which information, it was color-coded, you know, however they do that back in those days. That, okay, everything yellow is factual, everything blue is something like that. I don't remember what colors we use, but so that's how they do it. So I'd say, at least back then, now, today, I think it's probably more factual, more fact than fiction. But then again, it's the fire hosing, like you said. There's so many people out there right now, the Jason Sands and the Jake Barber and some of these other people. I just saw a guy today that he sent me a video of himself talking about having worked

1:27:58 out at Area 51 and that, you know, he accidentally went into a place that he wasn't supposed to go into. And he saw this nine-foot alien and, you know, I said, well, I watched the video and it was 30 minutes or so where him just talking to the camera. And he said, and he had his DD Form 214 up, showed me his DD Form 214, which showed, in fact, he was an Air Force Security Policeman at Nellis. And he said, at Nellis Air Force Base, I said, were you with DET-3? And he said, yes, I spent detachment-3 of the 71-13th Security Police Squadron was at Grim Lake. Now, I checked the entry log. He was, in fact, there during that. He claimed he was there in 85, 86, or 80,

1:29:01 whatever it was, 85, 86, something like that. I checked, and, in fact, he does, he was there. So, now, am I supposed to believe everything he said? Now, he had the buildings right. He had the area and the environment exactly right. He knew exactly where all the buildings were. He said, you know, OSI was in Building 432. State Security Police was in Building 463. There's a corridor that runs between Hangar 3 and Hangar 4. He was really specific on everything. The only thing that I had questions about where he went into this area that was secure that he wasn't supposed to be into. Well, what he described, and he later sent me a map, a sketch, excuse me, a sketch, which was quite accurate, except for where he claimed this particular building was that

1:30:04 he went into. I have, I know the commander of Groom Lake. I know him. He's still alive. He's a member of our working group. All I had to do was send him that sketch and say, did that look familiar to you? Is there an entry into the second level? Because there are different levels, okay, in Area 51. He said, no. He said that where he claims that's a pump house. We pump a water pump or sewage or something. He said that's what's there. So he sounded so great up till then. So this is just an example of some of the things I get. And then, and I sent him back saying, you're talking about a pump house and there's nothing in that pump house. And I didn't say how I knew it, but I said, I just know that it's a pump house. I haven't heard anything more from him.

1:31:06 Well, and I, I'm not surprised. I've been in front of disinformation myself from people that have worked in the American government and have had to sit there and go, this person's lying to me consistently, you know, and sometimes you're in the moment and you're saying, I'm getting lied to. And then sometimes you have to look, think of it in retrospect, right? It's just how, how it works if someone's really good at their craft, right? Unfortunately. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Now, my, I have two last questions for you. My one question though, too, is we, we've seen these conversations with Jeremy Corbell that has been coming forward and saying that, you know, the government now will be talking about some kind of spaceship or something that will be coming towards earth, right? That's his alleged theory that the government will be saying that, and this will be false. What's your thoughts on that? Because I'll just say in the scientific community, you know, my job at the debrief, you know, is obviously we love to talk about UFOs. But we also look at edge science, right? We're always covering stuff that's happening

1:32:07 within the science and tech communities consistently. And so we're always on the pulse of what's happening where Penn State might be coming out with a report or NASA might be coming out with any type of information or data. So when we hear that this will be used against us, I find that very interesting because we've heard in 2029, you know, we're hearing that UCLA is saying that maybe potentially from pioneers will actually have some type of contact, meaning like signal might come back because of their last voyage. And it was going towards what they would feel would be a civilization that would report back to us. So we're hearing this from the science community. This is not just, hey, we're just throwing out theories. We're like, well, looking at this as being practical, right? And I feel that not saying a spaceship, maybe a signal would be the most consistent that we would have that would go into the forefront of the mainstream where people might believe it more. But what are your thoughts about Jeremy Corbell saying that these types of things will be

1:33:07 happening, some kind of ship or something will be reported from either maybe the science communities or the government communities that it's coming towards us and it will be used as disinformation or some form of, yeah, disinformation to confuse us. Well, I know Jeremy. I consider him a friend, George Knapp. Been a long, long, long, long friend of mine, a long time friend. All I can say is that I believe that what John Ramirez has said and what other people within have said, that there is going to be an event that occurs between the summer of this year, 2025, and September of 2027. Something is going to happen, some event that's going to be startling to humankind. Now, I don't know what that is. I wish I did. But I believe in the people that are talking about that.

1:34:08 There's a lot of other people are saying something's going to happen in 2032. And I don't know about that. I believe in what these other people are saying because they were in the inside. I certainly don't know. I've never heard of, while I was in, I've never heard of any kind of event that was happening. There's another guy out there that talks about an event. And nobody's given him much credit. But he claims to be a time traveler. And he went to the future, saw something coming back. And he's been pretty good at predicting things, though. But I'm not going to say I'm on his side or anything. There's other things that he has said in the past. And he's been around a long time. He goes back to our bell days.

1:35:09 So I don't know that he can do it or not. So, again, I don't know what's going to happen. I just would believe some of the other people that are talking that we're in a government and now we're talking about something's going to happen between this summer and September 2027. Do you think, as we used to call it, like, I haven't really heard these references in a while, like, big deal or little d? Like, is it, you know, there's so many things that this could possibly be, right? We've looked at 2027. And I've talked about this on other podcasts as well, where we have China might invade Taiwan, right? That could lead to war. We also have an unstable government in North America. I'm Canadian. And our government isn't very stable right now. And, obviously, we're dealing with terror force right now with the states. We look at governments around the world being very unstable, you know. And I think, you know, we have, I've heard from science communities between 2027 and 29, there might be some form of contact. We've heard that back to, like, defense.

1:36:11 We heard, too, like, the China conversation. And I've heard this for people that have, do work in intel as well that we've talked about. Not so much UFOs are interested, but more about the conversation of what might be happening in the world around that time. And then we look at astrology, funny enough. I've heard they're even having these conversations. So, we're having defense. The science communities and these, like, metaphysical communities like astrology and pseudoscience worlds, they're all saying this. So, it's, I've never heard that before. But, again, we have heard these doomsday scenarios consistently, right? I think one just passed recently, but we hear them consistently. So, what, you know, is this an internal core belief that you're, like, something might happen? Or is this just for sure, like, these are definites that are coming from intel or other communities that you're hearing?

1:37:11 I believe something's going to happen. I just don't know what it's going to be. I've studied this. I've dug it as deep as I can. I teach. I teach online. And I gave my students an assignment once. I teach math, advanced math, to gifted children. And I used to teach for the Department of Defense online, continuing education. Now, I teach at a private college. Anyways, I gave my students this last semester, last year, the first semester of last year, this question. And I didn't give them a lot of support on what's going to happen. But I just gave them. And what I wanted to do was to search the Internet, number one.

1:38:11 And there's a math part of this, too, that I wanted. It's called Theory of Probability, Combinations, and Permutation. I teach that. Theory of Probability of, okay, if something's going to happen, what's the probability of it? And it was a question. And surprisingly, they came back with 18 students. Unbelievable answers. Some of them are a gamma burst. As it's going to happen. One guy went back. One kid went back. He's a 16-year-old kid that has a 180 IQ that is already in his fourth year of college. It is unbelievable. He went back and checked the astronomical charts and did all these things. He thinks it's going to be a gamma burst. So, anyways, that's just. So, there are so many people out there trying to guess and figure out what's going

1:39:12 to happen. I don't know that the government knows. John Ramirez knows something's going to happen. I just wish. And I know John. I just wish privately we could slip into a closet and he could tell me and then go out so nobody would hear it. But I don't know. I wish I knew. I really do. But I understand the public's concern. And I understand your concern. In fact, my relatives came from Nova Scotia. So, I'm part Canadian myself. I have cousins up in Halifax still. Four cousins. One's a boat, a fishing boat. And one's a Royal Canadian Mount of Policeman. So, anyways. And I have a love for Canada. I go there. My dad, he was a hockey referee and played. And my grandfather, actually my grandfather immigrated, my grandfather and grandmother immigrated down to New York State from Nova

1:40:15 Scotia. But they speak a little bit differently in Nova Scotia, I'm sure you know. Oh, they do. They do. I have a love for Canada. So, although I'm going to root for the United States tonight, though. Well, I have to, I root for Canada consistently. And we are like sistering, you know, we're sistering countries. That's for sure. So, there's so much going on politically right now, which is wild. You know, I speak to Americans every day. I work with Americans. I, you know, I have so many American friends. I'm in the States consistently, you know, visiting, seeing people, you know, going to conferences myself. So, I just, I hope we can figure this out sooner than later. But my last, let's hope. I'm apolitical. But I, you know, I don't like to speak politically. But I think that was a grave mistake and a part of our president saying something like that. It just causes animosity.

1:41:15 And, you know, I don't, and then I saw the poll where, you know, about 51% says, okay, we want to be Americans. But I don't think that will ever happen. I just don't think that will happen. Well, and to be honest, like, just as, you know, outside of UFOs and more political talk, you know, a lot of Canadians, our patriarchy is just like, or sorry, our internal love for the country being very patriotic has increased immensely. Like, I think it's up 80%. Oh, yeah. Yeah. So, it's, we are, you know, buying Canadian. And it's not because we don't want to buy American. It's just because we just have to be smart in how our governments run. And it's for sure, it's time for Canada to wake up, too. You know, we have to invest in our own country as well, right? And we should be doing that. So, I think that things just need to be changed. And it is a wake-up call for us. But I, you know, I'm very optimistic that Canadians can work through this and know what they're doing. You know, we are smart people and, you know, we're committed.

1:42:16 And when we're pushed up against a wall, we will, even as much as we might not always agree, we will bind together. Because that's truly what it is, being Canadian for us. And also, taking care of others. That's just who we are and that's who our culture is. We will take care of ourselves, but we will also take care of others in our own country and around the world. We've always been known as the peacekeepers. So, I just hope that, yeah, we can find a, one day, we can find common ground, hopefully, in the next coming four years with all of this. My last question to you, Richard. We have so much going on in Congress right now in the UFO hearings. Have you been asked to be part of the UFO hearings? And if not, and if so, yes or no. But if not, would you go and testify? And if so, what would be your main platform if you did? I volunteered and I have worked consistently behind the scenes with Senate staffers to

1:43:22 set up, not just me, but other people within the Advanced Working Group, to set up a disclosure project, how it should be formulated, and the best way to get it out to the people. So, I'm working, but if they ask me to testify before Congress, I'll be the first one to do it. And I'll be on my dime, because I don't want any payment for me telling what I did during my time in. So, yeah, I'd be first in line if they let me. I appreciate that. I think that we should have multiple people that have experienced or have worked anything related in government on UAP projects, special access projects, you name it, should be talking in front of the government and should be speaking at hearings and testifying. Is it true that, maybe this is my last question to you, but is it true that when you are so read into a program for a very long time, that even though if you testify under oath and you lie, you can still be protected and

1:44:24 not be prosecuted because of the classification of how deep a secret might be? So then, if that's true, then what's the point of testifying? I don't know if there's any, when you're briefed into the program, there's certain parameters you have to meet. One of the polygraph examination, special access programs require polygraphs. And so I did that, you know, and then every three years we had to take a polygraph. So that's a good question. I would be clear to talk about everything I did, because when I talked to the DOD IG face-to-face in his office, this is quite a story. When I first was in there, they said, okay, we knew you had a clearance once before, and

1:45:24 we're going to ask you some questions about the reports that you made. Those reports, some of them are still classified, so we're going to clear you, so you can tell us anything that's in these documents. And you can go over them and tell us anything. And I signed some forms, and okay, but it was only good for 24 hours. So I didn't have to worry about 24 hours later. So the first document they showed me was a case I did in 1980. It was heavily redacted. I looked at it, and I thumbed through it, and I recognized it to be my report. And I said, what do you want to know about this? He said, well, we want to ask some questions. I said, you don't have a clear, unredacted report? And he said, no, we can't get one. I said, why? I said, wait a minute, you're the DODI gene, you can't get an unredacted report? He said, now it's the best we can get.

1:46:25 I said, well, I don't remember 40 years ago, 43 years ago. I'm looking through it. And I said, well, I'll try my best. So I did. I tried my best, and I told them what they wanted to know. And then they gave me one that was clear. It wasn't redacted. It had been classified, but it was declassified. So I talked to them about that. Well, when I come back in September 2022, that report that was redacted, they gave me one that was clear. It was unredacted. And so I helped them out. So I thought it was funny that even a DODIG couldn't get an unredacted report from DIA. And that's just an example, just an example of how one agency doesn't cooperate with the other agency, as that happens all the time in Washington. I guess the other thing, too, is you could be read in on something and not be accurate

1:47:26 as well. You know, I know that a counterintelligence move, too, or just in general internal government, is that you tell you lying doing disinformation campaigns on the greater masses of people is against the law. Right. But you can do it internally. So you can have people working on a program and say that and compartmentalize them and say they're working on one thing and then they're working on another. And you could say, well, you're working on reverse engineering and you're working on some kind of, you know, plane, right, to some degree. But they could be different stories told different things so they don't corroborate and they don't actually know, you know, what the true story is. So when you're read in on something and you go to testify, potentially that disinformation could come forward, correct? Yeah, I guess it could. But once you get into intelligence, you realize that everything's compartmented. Just because you have a high level security clearance doesn't mean you have access to everything.

1:48:26 Good example, I worked at Area 51 and I worked in a cubicle. There were four other agents and a supervisor. And I was working on projects that my partner across the hall didn't know. And he was working on things that I didn't know about. So that's compartmentization. It happens all the time in intelligence. You only need to know what you need to know for that particular operation. So that's a need to know for that time period. Sometimes it's just a paragraph. Sometimes it's a full briefing, depending on what you're asked to do. Like if I had to assist this agent across the hall, Dave would come to me and say, hey, listen, I need help. I got to go do this. Let me give you a briefing. And so he would give a briefing, which was documented. Two people had to sign off on it. Our supervisor and him. People had equal knowledge of it. And then I would know what we were going to do. We're going to go out and do surveillance or we're going to go out and do whatever.

1:49:28 So I would know only that. But I didn't know the full extent of that operation. That's compartmentization. Right. And that does make sense. Like I can see why for national security, you have to, to some degree, compartmentalize things. Right. Like it. Yes. Yeah. That for sure. I think. And I always say this to people, if they're interested in UFOs and get more interested in national security, because it's fascinating. And you'll, I think you'll learn more, right, throughout my entire career and also childhood loving UFOs. You know, I've, I've always, I still find UFOs interesting, but I find national security more interesting right now because of specifically what's going on. But it is possible that those people that are under oath, if that's, if that need to know moment or that national security secret is so important that they could lie under oath. Yeah. So then, then, then why, then why testify then if, if you know that they're just going to lie and it doesn't mean it's interesting

1:50:30 in how you can formulate a lie, right? You can formulate a lie by having those little elements of truth to it, but still also be spreading disinformation in that hearing, you know, because first of all, you might think that that's true and it's not, or second, you still, or you could say you didn't know and that's fine. And you still get away with it because you're always protected. I think maybe what I'm saying is that no matter what, you can spread some disinformation, but you can also lie and no repercussions will happen whatsoever. So then what's the point of even doing it then? I don't know. It's, I don't know that that would happen because if you go to, I tell you what, when you go in front of Congress or you're going to be thoroughly briefed before you go in there. And they know exactly what you're going to say and you're, you know what you're going to say. And so I don't know that you would, I

1:51:32 certainly wouldn't, if I was going to go to Congress, I would certainly wouldn't lie, especially if you're under oath. That's, you know, and if you don't know something, you're going to say you don't know it. But if you're read in so long into a program and you're like, I can't say this, you know, you would be protected, I would imagine. Like, again, I am not, you know, intelligent, but I can see that being a massive possibility. I would have to search that. I don't know. I really don't know. Yeah. I think maybe what I'm getting at is that that's that fear down the road is that we, some of those bad actors and bad apples have been sitting in front of Congress and, or being in hearings and doing that. No, the bad actors and actresses are the ones that's written books about UFOs or UAPs that are totally worthless. Those are the bad people. Those are the people that are actually

1:52:33 spreading disinformation. They make up stories because I've, I can tell you right now, and it's just not me. It's other people within our group, that there isn't one single book out there in a Roswell case that's true, true, none, zero, not one. I know the truth because I was briefing the truth. I saw the, I saw the film as others have, and we laugh at these books that come out and say, that didn't happen. You know, so those are the people that are spreading disinformation because people start believing that and then they'll say, oh my God, that's, and then when the truth comes out, they're going to be, you know, they're going to be left without a chair, so to speak. Because when the actual truth comes out, as I said earlier, everybody's going to be surprised and everybody's going to be shocked. And the people that have written books and lectured on UFOs are going to find themselves in a hole because what they've

1:53:33 said is not true. Well, right, fair enough. And the stuff that we've heard with Roswell, you know, has been recently, you know, Lou has confirmed it to a degree, verbally, right? Saying that's what he thinks and what he believes. It's not showing any documents. But then we've also heard from, you know, that there was human testing that was happening at Roswell. And this was American government program that they want to cover up because of the amount of people that died and inhumane it was. Well, the only thing that was tested, when we, the actual crash site was in Corona, New Mexico. The antenna field was at the Brazel Ranch, so that was distance away. But Corona, New Mexico was a craft, crash, the archaeological team found it, one live, ET. They took, the story you got is there was a doctor that came out and said, we took human

1:54:34 skin samples. We didn't know DNA back then, okay, in 1947, we didn't know anything about DNA. But they took blood, they took skin samples, they took, they scraped women's vaginal area, they took nails off people, they took all sorts of things they did, ink, and trying to compare all those things to this live ET that we have. And that's what, how that story developed, that they were doing all these horrible tests on human beings. I mean, I think, I don't know, but I think all the people that, the men and women that, that were guinea pigs, so to speak, were volunteers. I don't know that they did all these tests. And, and, and what, what did they find? I don't think they found, you know, Dr. Kit Green, I don't, I'm sure you know who he is. Yes, I do. You know, he talks about this and he says,

1:55:34 what were they doing? It was like us, us finding all this stuff. And what were we going to compare it to? This ET was a different biologics, different anatomy. It wasn't human. So I, you know, there again, that's what we, what we going to compare it to. I don't know. We did all these things. I would say, like when you were saying before the government, you know, these are people that have to be volunteer. It's like, well, you know, eugenics was a big thing in the States and also during World War II and throughout Germany, you know, and people weren't volunteering. You know, we, we've seen programs that have, that the CIA has worked with other doctors specifically in Canada and Montreal that were doing horrible testing on women and people. And these were not volunteers, if anything, these women, unfortunately, were pushed by their husbands to go here because they thought that they were insane. You know, that was happening in Montreal and that was connected to the CIA.

1:56:36 The CIA was funding it and he was funding this doctor to do these tests. So it doesn't mean, you know, and I do, as someone who's worked on a show about Roswell, he still asks those questions and no matter what we should, those things is possible. So, you know, do you a hundred percent know then that Roswell is a biologic from another, you know, planet? And it's not, you're saying to me that it is not any form of government testing when it comes to any type of humans or anything. No, it's a biologic from a different planet. We know the planet. We know the technology that we got out of the spacecraft is not ours. So, yeah, we know, I would say for sure that that's an extraterrestrial from another planet. We know the planet and there's a lot of things that we learned over the years that I wasn't totally briefed into, but I'm sure we

1:57:37 know a lot of things. But he only lived till 1952, but we learned a lot of information. And you know, the person that spoke to the, and interviewed the handling agent for that ET was Linda Howell. She spoke to that guy in 1980 for that captain, Air Force captain, who lived with Eva, one for, I don't know, for five years, I guess. And she knows a lot more about it than anybody else, because she interviewed that captain. So, I don't know if you ever interviewed her, but. I haven't interviewed Linda yet, but I have talked to her on the phone and I've talked to her via email many times. And as a woman in this space, like I have a lot of appreciation. I don't agree with everything that she might say. And I think that's fair for all of us to do that for all of our work, right? My, you know, people can critique mine as well. I think that's what this is about. But I do have a mass, mass amounts of respect for her as a woman, especially during the 80s and earlier doing this,

1:58:40 because that was not easy for women back then. And also in a counterculture that was full of men, for sure. Well, I think, I think she's one of the best UFO researchers out there. I truly think that she has good sources. And I wish I knew these sources. But a lot of her sources are military people who worked in intelligence or work on the project because she knows things that other people don't know. And she says things. I mean, I watch Earth Files and she'll say things. And I've, I've, I've, I've seen her at Gaia. She's on Gaia with, she's never done a show with me, but she's been there when I was filming and she was filming and we'd sit and talk about things. And so she knows things. She says things that I know to be factual that other people don't know, of course. And then I'll say, well, is she making that up? Is she, no, she's, she's talking the truth.

1:59:40 Well, I will, at one point in time, hopefully have a sit down with Linda in person and then also bring her on the podcast. Richard, thank you so much for taking the time and thank you for being rebelliously curious with me today. You know, I, this story that, that has happened throughout the 80s, and I've said this before, I, you know, I was born in the 80s. I was born in 84. So I, I wish that I was around to, to see, because I think ufology research then was so different than it's done now. And just being a bird's eye view and how it was done, gosh, with, you know, without using the internet, without, you know, the technology that we have now, and even the communicating, it would have been one of the most fantastical, crazy, runaround games that I could imagine. Anybody could be part of, like, we think it's wild now, but I also do think it was, it was pretty wild in the 80s, when all of this was happening.

2:00:41 So being part of it, and also experiencing it probably must have been something else out of this world, I guess you would say. It was fun. Thank you so much, Richard. You're welcome. We'll be right back.