On January 20, this website published a  story to the effect that the U.S. Navy had admitted that there is more video and information concerning the “Tic-Tac” objects that were videotaped  by planes from the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group off the coast of California in 2004. The Navy took the unusual position that revelation of this information would cause “exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States.”

Such a statement means that the release wouldn’t just reveal the functional capabilities of systems that it is helpful to the United States to keep secret, but that it would cause fundamental damage to our national security—that is, that it would potentially endanger the country so seriously that the security of all Americans would be compromised,  in the same way that, say, the release of information about how to build an atomic bomb endangered the country when it was leaked to the USSR back in the 1940s.

I cannot offer an opinion about whether or not such a strong statement was intended to communicate so grave a danger, or if it was an overstatement or even a false statement.

I will explore here the reasons such a statement might be made when it comes to something in the “UAP space,” which was until very recently assumed to be the territory of conspiracy theorists, UFO hobbyists and alien abduction believers–in other words, people regarded by the broad society as having no credibility and certainly in possession of no secrets of any consequence.

For the past two years, though, we find ourselves dealing with what amounts to an entirely new paradigm. Not only has the US government admitted that there are objects with unknown characteristics flying around in our skies, it has further provided video of such objects made with state-of-the-art cameras controlled by highly trained professionals.

So what about this reality has caused the government, over the past 70 years, to engage in what amounts to an effort at social control by denying the reality even while they were carefully studying it—and then, once its validity is admitted—to claim that further exposure of information in its possession would post an extraordinary danger to the country?

I will concentrate here on what the US Navy has exposed, what it appears to know and what it may be keeping hidden.

I would like first to address the question of why the Navy, in particular, would be so heavily involved in research into aerial phenomena, which would seem to be the province of the Air Force.

If the Navy has not exhibited hostile action toward alien visitors and the Air Force has done so, this might be a reason that it has gained more knowledge from its encounters with them. Of course, as I possess only hints of how the hidden world that studies these phenomena seriously operates, that’s only speculation.

It is, however, true that the Navy files far more secret patents than any other service. As of fiscal year 2019, according to the US Patent Office,  the Navy had filed 55 secrecy orders on patents, as compared to the Army’s 21 Air Force’s 10. Collectively  the NSa, NASA, DARPA and other agencies filed just two. There were 48 “John Does,” which are privately filed patents which were classified for one reason or another.

Back in the 1990s when I was providing implants and other unusual materials to Dr. William Mallow at Southwest Research, I met some people from a  Navy lab that was studying such materials. We had a very pleasant dinner together with Dr. Mallow and Anne. At this dinner, the materials I possessed were discussed, including the bismuth magnesium compound that resurfaced in the news recently when Linda Moulton Howe sold the portion in her possession to the To the Stars Academy.

So I know that the Navy has been taking an interest in such materials for a long time, and I have reason to believe that they are in possession  of much more extensive and various supplies than the fragment Linda had. How they came to be in the hands of the Navy, I am not sure, but it is possible that some of them were willfully give by nonhuman entities, not just deposited in sited where they might be chanced upon, as was true at the Roswell crash site and the Donation Site elsewhere in New Mexico.

But what would cause that extraordinary statement that “exceptionally grave damage” would be done to America’s national security if information now known by their own response to the FOIA request by researcher Christian Lambright to be in possession of the Navy was revealed?

I know that there is a race on between China, the United States and Russia to create anti-gravity technology, and I would think that all three countries must possess video of devices that use gravitic propulsion in their possession, and probably materials used in those devices as well.

It is likely that the country that achieves the relevant breakthrough first will have at least as much of an advantage over the others as the US did over the USSR when it was the sole possessor of the secret of the atomic bomb. I suggest this because the technology might enable not simply a new type of movement, but in the process a penetration into the larger reality that surrounds this one. In short, it might enable us to do what we so often observe the visitors doing, which is appearing and disappearing at will.

If this doesn’t just involve some sort of control over gravity, but opens an actual door into another reality, it might be incredibly dangerous. A machine that could do that would almost certainly be the most dangerous thing on Earth.

It would also be the most valuable possible military too and–potentially–weapon.

We live behind a barrier that prevents us from managing much more than glimpses into the larger reality that surrounds us. It seems to be less physically dense and to function differently than ours does. My life’s work has been about energizing us in such a way that we can cross the barrier more reliably and thus increase the reach of human consciousness and the human mind.

What might have started out as, and still be, an attempt to weaponize something that is as much a spiritual quest as a physical ability, might have run into some very unexpected obstacles, among them that there is something there that might react to an intrusion from our level.

I can see many reasons that such an endeavor would need to be hidden behind the claim that revealing it would indeed pose an “extremely grave danger to the national security.”

Of course, it could be simpler: a matter of revealing that they are indeed grappling with an unknown intrusion that no military power on Earth can control, and which takes an often unwelcome interest in us, and that they have been lying about this now for more than seventy years.

Dreamland Video podcast
To watch the FREE video version on YouTube, click here.

Subscribers, to watch the subscriber version of the video, first log in then click on Dreamland Subscriber-Only Video Podcast link.


  1. There is another more prosaic, but more likely explanation which is that the Navy believe that by revealing more information they would be forced to reveal something about the technology used to capture images of, or information about, the Tic Tac. I don’t know what this might be, but what we have seen are images from cameras. What if they had images from satellites or sub-sea acoustic devices or something. Normally secret agencies are more concerned to protect their methods of intelligence gathering than they are to protect the intelligence itself

    1. While I generally agree with you, David, protecting a secret camera or detection medium hardly constitutes an “Exceptionally Grave” threat to national security. However, there is no secret patent on Hyperbole….so who knows 🙂

      1. Thanks – I agree, it is all very mysterious and, as I think you are saying, the Navy might be over-classifying, but who knows. If Whitley is right (and he may very well be) then the situation is deadly serious.

    2. I agree, David. A lot is made of the definition in the blog, but really it just means that it’s classified as Top Secret. My experience with the DoD is that things often get over-classified in an abundance of caution, which is another way of saying the people whose name is on it don’t want their asses on the line.

      I believe that any toy in the arsenal that we think gives us a leg up over other countries, is likely to get stamped with Top Secret. And that can include any sensing device.

      As to what the Tic-Tac was, my guess is they have a lot more questions than answers, just like the rest of us.

  2. Alarming words like “Exceptionally Grave” only pour gasoline on the fire of attention and interest in this matter. The hyperbole from Navy spin doctors here whom you would think would try to downplay the incident seems counter-productive. How odd. Why wouldn’t they simply say that “for security reasons” the video must remain classified?

    1. Yes, their reaction was overblown, and suspiciously so. My sense is that they were and are trying to frighten us into complying with an agenda that has yet to unfold. Or, maybe I’m just being paranoid.

  3. I agree with the ideas in Whitley’s final paragraph, that they simply want to avoid revealing to the American public that things appear in the sky that defy their understanding and capability to control. And, the words, “exceptionally grave damage…” are so preposterously melodramatic that I feel like I’m reading the screenplay to Plan 9 From Outer Space. Who knows? Maybe we really are being prepped for a war with the evil aliens. But, if that does come to be, you and I and a lot of other people will know that the whole thing is fake. The “visitors”, most of them anyway, want for us to live in peace and for us to take care of our precious, beautiful planet.

  4. To echo what David Thomas said; I think it was David Prader on JRE who alluded to the issue of not tipping off adversaries about their level of tech, particularly radar, imaging etc.

    It reminds me of the German bombing of Conventry, where the Brits by intercepting the Germans message, knew the raid was eminent. Of course they choose not to act because that would tip off the Germans that their intell. was being intercepted. Lots of civilian lives were lost to keep that secret. Not sure that analogy is applicable but its a thought.

  5. Author

    If the Tic-Tac is ours, then it has been created using technology gained from the visitors. The reason I say this with such assurance is that there is a wealth of top-notch sighting information that goes all the way back to the fifties, if not before. If they admit that it’s ours, then they also have to admit that it came from them. And, for all the reasons I point out in A New World, that is something I don’t think they dare to do.

  6. Author

    Of course, if this is true and they do admit it, then the scientific and academic communities and the general media will shove the past under the rug and start screaming “UFOs are explained. They’re ours. Mystery solved!”

    1. I got the impression David Prader believed they were real, being extraterrestrial. His contention was how we were analyzing them involved secret things they didn’t want divulged to adversaries. Again, we don’t want someone knowing we’re reading their mail.

    2. It’s likely they would do just that. What a funny game– the UFO coverup, all the other coverups. I just have to remind myself to see it as a game.

  7. Personally, I don’t find the US Navy’s pronouncement of the ‘Extremely Grave’ situation as being overblown at all; nor do I see it as disinformation. I’ve learned to follow my intuition, which always seems in Hi-Gear when listening to Unknowncountry.com. The insights I get are stark.

    I think the statement is a subtle plea from the secret human groups who are facing the Visitors on the deepest levels. It’s not a contest between the US, and the Russians, or the Chinese, or Canadians, French, British, etc. They have all been ominously silent for just as long as we have. Every government in the world has kept the secret to the point of brutality ever since the beginning of the UFO era.

    The motive is not possessiveness of the technology, but they are running scared, (real scared!), of what they have discovered. Their behavior is totally fear-based, near panic. Given the Visitors intelligence, inscrutability, disregard for the known laws of physics, and ability to control human perceptions, and they have every right to be.

  8. Author

    I resonate with your thoughts, Cyan. Having had the visitors in my life for a long time, I can attest to the mysterious and terrible fear that they elicit. When they came to our old cabin and our cats were present, even they were terrified beyond anything I had seen from them before.

    In A New World, I theorize that this fear comes from the soul level. We know instinctively, I think, that they can control the fate of souls, and this is fantastically threatening.

    However, as I have worked harder and harder toward making my soul strong, my fear of them has grown less and less. They can still scare me, I’m sure, but normally I find myself grateful when they come around here.

    1. I’ve read A New World, respect your theories, and have a little bit of the fundamental terror experience when it comes to them, which I agree goes beyond animal terror and reaches the soul. What I’m trying to figure out, though, is how this might reconcile with (what I think are very credible theories) that “visitors” taught humanity how to be civilized, based on the near overnight appearance of agrarian science and so forth. Plus there are so many narratives from ancient texts around the world of some kind of era of contact with star people, which I think must have been a more straightforward exchange than is being posited in A New World. Isn’t there a way to take humanity into the next phase of civilization without so much inscrutable mystery?

      It seems to me that either we are now dealing with a different species, in the case of those in yours and recent “alien” experiences, or there’s some kind of disconnect here. To some extent I can go along with the theory that their end of the bargain is sharing in our experience in some way, and it follows in my mind the narrative I was first exposed to 30 years ago in The Return of the Bird Tribes by Ken Carey (with a forward by Whitley Strieber!) I’m less inclined to believe that their existence is so empty (so much has been made of that “coffin” image) that they need us as a sort of drug. The transcendental experiences of shamans and NDE experiences alike have glimpsed a sort of fully integrated consciousness that is utterly at peace and ecstasy with itself, both creative and needing nothing. I’d still like to believe that to ascend higher leads to ecstasy and not despair of knowing too much, and that’s essentially the story I’m reading into your version of these visitors.

      I also would still like to think there are advanced beings that we can relate to in a far less abstract way than these packs of shadow dogs who feel then need to pull their claws out near your genitals to remind you that you feel fear. Well of course the animal part of us will always pull away from such a visceral threat like that, where’s the real lesson in that? I don’t think that experience is a truly valid way for them to convey a message in the way you seem to justify them. It more sounds like, if we have a choice, it’s a good reason to NOT engage those particular entities/energies if we’re choosing our best path! What I am reading in A New World is that basically all of its narrative, interpretation, meanings, and understandings come all from you working out the puzzle, and essentially no narratives (in the usual sense) come from the other entities in what they could have communicated as pictures, words, or even meaningful thought forms. This makes me more than uncomfortable, it makes me very wary. And this is with (I think) full appreciation and great respect for your intellect and insight in your writings and remarkable experiences.

      Finally, as to the issue of secrecy related to the Navy and DoD in general, IMO the biggest source of secrecy in all of this comes from the visitors themselves. Clearly they are controlling the narrative more than any human agency, and I really don’t think it (visitor policy about the narrative) matters much that we shot at them or not, personally. No different than our agenda about saving tigers would be different if some tigers killed a few conservationists. All of that from us or from tigers is entirely predictable, especially if they’ve known us for thousands of years. In the end, if a non-human presence ultimately helped advance humans into beings who could reason and reflect upon their own consciousness, isn’t there a better way for them to engage what they’ve made us into? Instead of acting more like the aliens in Mars Attacks?

      1. Regarding the “coffin” issue, and our role in the relationship in this proposed communion, one has to realize that the Visitors are getting more than just some sort of voyeuristic “high” out of the partnership: they might have moved past what we think of as the physical universe (if they were even residents here to begin with), now that virtually all information is at their fingertips, but they weren’t ready for such a transition. Basically, they missed something fundamental along the way that they were supposed to learn from their experience, but now that they’re cut off from that avenue of growth, they have no choice but to rely on someone else to help them climb out of the purgatory that they trapped themselves in.

        This is specifically why they used a coffin as imagery when Whit asked them about what they thought of the universe: for them, what we perceive as a vast playground of discovery becomes a confining box that they can’t escape, being entities that intimately know each grain in that sandbox. A finite vastness becomes infinitely claustrophobic to an infinite mind.

        Also, as Whit alludes in A New World, it’s not appropriate to think of them as “advanced”; “different”—to understate—would be a far more appropriate description. More advanced in some ways, but less so in others.

        Their nature also makes them fundamentally and truly alien to entities like ourselves; with such a vast gulf between the thought processes and mentalities that exist between the two parties, communication would have to come in forms that we would consider less conventional, to the point where it might appear that we’re approaching the conversation entirely sideways. The 2006 film Happy Feet is an excellent illustration of this, a story of alien contact where two species with vastly different approaches to communication only find a common language through interpretive dance, of all things.

        Sure, there are a multitude of other factions out there that could communicate with us more directly, and at a level we could more easily understand. But they don’t need us, meaning what they have to offer would merely be a handout; or worse, there are those out there that would seek to exploit a vulnerable culture like ours that has as of yet to form its own self-identity.

        This is why communion with the Visitors is quite probably the best deal we could make: it’s an actual partnership that provides us with an equal amount of agency, enabling us to form a species-wide identity that could define us in the interstellar community, in exchange for allowing another group to ride our coattails along our climb up the ladder of the evolution of consciousness. Remember, it’s a new world if we can take it—it’s useless if it’s just handed to us as charity.

        1. “…the Visitors are getting more than just some sort of voyeuristic ‘high’ out of the partnership…
          …they missed something fundamental along the way that they were supposed to learn…
          …they trapped themselves…
          …an actual partnership that provides us with an equal amount of agency…”

          Maybe this is why the visitors are so angry when Whitley is not punctual with his meditation time so that they can commune together.

          It is as if the visitors NEED this relationship, they crave it, they “feel” something is missing in their lives, and they are almost desperate to have the communion experience, sometimes even more so than Whitley.

          It would be interesting to think of this as a negotiating point of strategy over them, too.

      2. Author

        I am writing from experience, not hypothesis, expectation or desire. So I report as best I can what I have perceived and what it means to me, always remembering that I may or may not be correct. My books are not acts of advocacy but explorations of question. Many people have different perceptions from mine, ranging all over the lot from positive to neutral to negative. My sense of the matter is that something is “off” in a deep sense or the experience of engaging with the visitors would not be so fraught and equivocal. As to what that is, I cannot say. I can only report how I have perceived it.

  9. The Visitor experience is a dynamic relationship at the deepest levels. I like to say; ‘As they change us, we change them’. I believe this parity is fundamental to the interaction that both camps experience.

    Whitley, we ARE afraid at a soul-level, but I feel so are they! When I consider how difficult and traumatizing your explorations with them have been, I cannot discount that maybe the Visitors are in their way experiencing the same struggles within their own souls.

    I think I know what you mean that you have feelings of love for them, and I salute their courage and dedication to this project, as well as yours.

    I read Communion, and my perspective changed, no my life changed; my very soul awakened a bit. This is how deep this experience runs inside of us and them.

    I have never had a close encounter with our extended family, but I felt something when I first saw the cover of your book way back then. Well, some say maybe the mouth was a bit too expressive, even a bit of a smile. But why did the artist draw it that way?

    Possibly, you both were inspired to create a depiction of something so sublime as to affect us all in our souls?

    I hope so.

Leave a Reply