Part 1 of 3. I read and discussed my unedited email thread from Jan. 10, 2022 with Richard Dolan posted at: https://www.brianruhe.ca/richard-dolans-correspondence-with-brian-ruhe-about-the-grey-aliens/
Mary Rodwell and Suzy Hansen also replied so I talked about that and the difference in view that I and Mary Rodwell and Suzy Hansen have with Richard Dolan about the Grey aliens and their agenda for humanity’s future. We seem more optimistic than Richard is. Thank you to Fred for video editing.
The whole email thread doesn’t fit in the space here, that BitChute allows. I explained to Richard that I felt that his description of Mary Rodwell's "new age view" was a bit too dismissive. His edited reply, to fit here, was:
On 1/11/2022 1:42 PM, Richard Dolan wrote:
Hi Brian, and greetings to Mary and Suzi.
Thanks for writing. Okay, a couple of things.
First, I hope that Mary and Suzi do not think I automatically seek to dismiss all of their research or conclusions. I do candidly admit here that I am suspicious of many "new age" perspectives and conclusions when it comes to ET contact. While I have not done hypno regression myself on anyone, I have sat in on sessions, and I have spoken to researchers of all types, and certainly done a great amount of reading and study on the matter. I have also spoken to a large number of alleged abductees. That number is certainly more than one hundred. I have no idea what the total is.
I am sure this number is lower than Mary's or Suzi's, but it's not trivial. So I do believe I am entitled to my opinion on the matter of abduction/encounter.
I am very familiar with the FREE study. I have two copies of the book and read every word. Which is not easy considering it's not indexed, which is a shame. And not always well written. And highly polemical at times, definitely not detached. I did read certain chapters in greater detail than others. As I have said and written many times, the methodology of that study leaves quite a bit to be desired. That does not invalidate everything in it, and indeed I used some of the data in my most recent book, but it's got to be understood that it's also far from ideal.
Whether people discuss their ET experience as "positive" or "negative" is somewhat important, yes, but that is by no means the final word in my view. First of all, cognitive manipulation by these entities is a given. We all know this. They easily manage not only our memories of an event, but our emotional response to it. They clearly know how to generate a "love" emotion in us -- something frankly the US military is probably quite good at as well. Manipulating human emotions is becoming a sophisticated science in warfare, and it's clearly in our interest to remember that other beings may easily have that ability. How logical is it that a person who experiences an abduction by an insect-like entity feels intense love for such a being?
I also believe that initial memories of an event, while important, may not really be entirely trusted. Screen memory is a real thing. All of which makes this subject so very challenging. We are dealing with highly advanced intelligences who clearly have an agenda.
At this time, this is what I believe:
Our society is transforming itself into something that represents a radical transformation of everything we thought we knew about human civilization. A transhumanist era is approaching, one with highly advanced AI, 5/6G, total surveillance, the development of something akin to a hive mind, loss of economic freedom, and the transformation of human civilization into something akin to an ant colony. This is my "take" on it, at any rate. Essentially, an anti-human technocracy.
The question I ask myself is, are they here in order to infiltrate and stop this process? If so, they are clearly failing. Or perhaps they might infiltrate and just manage things as they think they should? I don't know the answer but I could see this happening.
Brian, your comments to me were quite out of line. I am not an armchair amateur as you essentially implied. I have spent twenty five years thinking about this phenomenon. Simply because I don't regress people doesn't mean I don't know what I am talking about. I don't claim to have the final word, but I am entirely entitled to reason this out as I see fit.
It's true that I haven't looked at Mary's or Suzi's research lately, but I am not averse to doing so. I have, however, read the FREE study, which includes work (I think) by both of them.
Moreover, Brian, and this may come as a surprise to you, the phenomenon of "consciousness" is very important and interesting to me, and something -- believe it or not -- that I do know a thing or two about. Spirituality as well. Please do not make demeaning assumptions about what you think I know or don't know.
I wish Mary and Suzi well.
Richard
