End Game?


(For background information look here, etc.)

This page is going to be a departure from the past, at least in terms of its title.  This is to signal what appears to be a new departure on the political front.  There was certainly an intimation of this new departure at the end of the previous blog page.  This page appears to be a reversion back to the more politically explicit style of the original 'Aquarium' website which has just been reposted online here. 

The only previous time that politics became a focus on this website was last spring and summer: starting on 5/1/04, picking up again on 5/23, 7/11, and finally fizzling out on 11/6.  That was a longer run than I had remembered. 

Was that a fire drill?  In retrospect, yes.  There has been significant water under the bridge since that short time ago. 

In order to explain the present situation, and how it may be different, I will have to be more explicit about the names.  I have already forgotten some of the pseudonyms that I used last year.  This raises some protocol issues.  I am deciding to revert back to the more explicit stance of the original website.

The information now is more sensitive.  In the run-up last year, I believe it was, Ron instructed me to maintain established protocols at all costs, and I agree.  Certainly he is!

Let's cut to the chase.  Ron has informed me that he is 'in charge of' MASINT.  Technically that would put him at the level of Deputy Secretary of the DNI.  The other three sections are HUMINT, SIGINT and IMINT.  That would put him at the level of a Presidential appointee.  I would be skeptical about that.  If I were he, as a career officer, I would want to stay below the level of political appointee.  That would be for an outsider, like when my Dad took a leave from the HBS in 1952 to become eventually the Deputy to the Secretary of the Treasury in charge of tax policy, under Eisenhower.  Keep in mind that in the intel business, inside knowledge is everything. 

Already I might be causing a problem for Ron with his putative political boss, but, hey, I'm just following protocol.  I don't think Ron would have told me that, if it were not quite deliberate.  Ron is not given to casual bragging.  That is not in his job description.  His wife once told me that Ron had, perhaps in a fit of pique, told her that his job was more important than the President's.  Recall in this context that W's aunt is a long-time friend of my older sister.  If you have been attentive to my own ramblings, you will know that I can easily endorse that view of reality.  Nay, I have to endorse it.  Recall also that it was he who informed of my own place in the present scheme.

Here is a technical note.  Recall the incident with Google and MSN.  I complained to Ron about it.  About a week later there was a partial, and only a partial, restoration of service.  In the last few days the principals in the present initiative were experiencing significant disruptions of our email service.  Very early on, I informed Ron that if I ever discovered that my communications were not being monitored, I would hold him in dereliction of duty.  The point is that I am relying significantly on people who are better informed on such matters to monitor the traffic here to make sure that I am not speaking out of turn.  Only if and when push came to shove would I be likely to be more proactive about protocols.  The question before us is whether we have already come to that.

Another instigating factor here is an email purportedly from Ron that was forwarded to me yesterday:

Knights at large,

Normally I would not comment on an early draft so as not to dissuade others from offering independent contributions, but I think Jim caputures the issues so well that additional contributions would be of little value. I think we all share Jim's view that Gordon is the only legitimate leader of the RAM. He served his time, independently derived the circuit, and developed a plan to build a technology, industry, and new world order. But Dr. K. will want to know why he has been singled out for the briefing, what evidence the Knights will provide, and what they will expect in return. These are issues that I think should be discussed only within the inner circle. Therefore I suggest the dialog terminate within this outer circle by 16:00 EST Saturday. Please forward any additional comments or suggestions to Jim and John.before the deadline. Not discussed yet is how and where to bring this to fruition. I included on distribution those few individuals that I think have the intellectual and technical capacity to apply the circuit to make dumpsters fly. As the good Dr. Green pointed out, the demo may be key to acceptance by those outside the outer circle.

Lord of Oversight and Stewardship

I just about had Gordon convinced that this must be bogus, when Ron popped up on his other line to confirm his authorship!  Well, knock me down and call me stupid!  It's obviously high-time to look at the other side of this coin, before there commences the citizens' inquiry into the management of the DNI.  Have I been provoked, or what?

The public principles this time around appear to be Gordon Novel, Jack Sarfatti and myself.  Jack and I go back to around '97.  His particulars are easily available on the web (9,000 hits).  I (190,000 hits!) introduced Jack to Ron (only 232 hits!), early on.  I also introduced Gordon Novel to Ron soon thereafter.  But I had been hearing about Gordon from Ron, for several years before that.   

Gordon Novel (1,680 hits): what more can we say?  Gordon says that Jim Marrs is presently working on his biography.  I hear that he grew up (presently 67 years) on the wrong side of the tracks in New Orleans, and fell in with an 'aryan' bunch.  He is sometimes rumored to have been the 'umbrella man'.  He says he heard about, but did not meet Fred Lee Crisman in N.O.  He admits to having helped break up the Garrison investigation while under the purview of the White House.  He was arrested by the FBI, not long thereafter, while installing an off-the-books electronic security system at the White House. His mentor for many years has been Ramsey Clark, for whom he was the principal investigator, particularly at Waco.  Note that Ramsey is presently defending Saddam, another FOR.  Speaking of which, Ron transferred to MASINT because he could find no WMD in Iraq up to thirty days before the invasion, according to his (unpublished?) NIE. 

Anyway, Gordon has always been a speed freak, and that was how he fell in with DeLorean in Bonneville when Gordon was all of 15 and John 27.  They pushed the speed mark above 400 by using nitro, early on.  It was about 1989 that Gordon started investigating UFOs, another of his boyhood passions.  Knowing Gordon, and knowing about the rest of the ufologists, it is no surprise that he left them all in his dust, literally.  

That brings us right back to the above email. 

Gordon says, and I think rightly so, that if the results of his investigations do not represent reality, then he has been the victim of the greatest hoax of all-time.  According to one recent estimate, the UFO budget over the years approaches 100 billion: 10 for the 'research' and 90 for the cover & security. 

For all his street smarts, doesn't Gordon see that the above email is way over the top?  But who am I, 'Sonfish'(!), to point fingers?I ask you!  We are all subject to the same FOR syndrome. 

So here we are, three musketeer FORs: Gordon, Jack and Dan, I'll drink to that.  We're all dressed up with no place to go now except possibly to visit Henry Kissinger who is due to make a presentation to a special meeting of the Bilderbergers.  On Monday I was on a conference call with Gordon, Robert Shaheen(?), and Leon Lespona(?).  Robert, out of the four of us, sounded entirely sane.  He was well known to the Agency, and now to Ron.  He is also an associate of Adnan Kosiggi and Henry.  He is the designated go-between.  Ron has met Henry three times, but he did not say how recently. 

Whassup??  Well, Henry has long been rumored to be MJ1.  According to one story, it was he who turned the MJ national franchise over to the Bilderbergers. 

How close does this put us to the point of no return?  How do we know this isn't another fire drill?  From Ron's perspective, it would have to be rather awkward to have to restart this operation, another year or two down the road.  Here we are: new DNI, new MASINT, new four-year term of a tested administration, and, lest we forget, a new Pope.  I remain convinced that 9/11 was a definite marker for this time line.  Just now, that dust is beginning to settle.  Can we afford to take our chances further down the road?  None of us are getting younger, certainly not Henry. 

If no one else, Ron has invested a lot of effort in this little project.  I can surely attest to that.  If he were going to blow this off, he certainly should have done it a year ago.  You know what they say about carrying a joke too far. 

Given that we have finally reached the jump-off point, here is my little prognostication.

But first, let us review the end game.  There should be a bunch of internal links here, but I can't think of a good handle.  The ufos portend the Millennium.  Their appearance was triggered by the advent of nuclear weapons.  This forced their hand, and brought on this minimalist abrogation of the Prime Directive.  Ok, 'Herod' was the word I was looking for:  here, and don't ignore here.  I know I have said more than this, but maybe not here. 

The ufos came to neutralize the bomb and the modern Herod.  They needed a clandestine base on earth to work behind the scenes.  The CIA was a likely spot.  They would co-opt the agency into being their collaborator.  The Millennium plot would be hatched there.  Thus could the violation of the PD be minimized and hidden.  All of this came at the inception of the new agency, as now comes this new phase with the DNI/MASINT. 

The Cold War had to be resolved before the public phase could start in earnest.  Note the '89-'91 time frame for Gordon and me.  Then the Mideast had to be partially stabilized for this next phase. 

The first assignment for MJ12 was to help obfuscate the origins of the visitors.  An ultraterrestrial/metaphysical phenomena cloaked itself as an extraterrestrial/physical phenomenon.  There are two levels to the 90B cover-up.  First it is a psycho-social attack on witnesses until they have been marginalized to a fringe group.  If you get beyond that level, you come to the physical level.  Gordon was the first civilian allowed into that level, and he was fed a lot of info and disinfo.  Jack is mainly working on that level, on the theoretical side.  However, he also authored Beyond Space and Time, which got me started back in '75.  He and I need to get our physical/metaphysical act together, as in a two-part book that is supposed to ready in a few months. 

I can see a 2 1/2 stage disclosure.  Henry's talk to the Bilderbergers comes in a few weeks.  A few weeks after that, rumors get to the news media.  Fingers will then point to Gordon as the culprit.  He will not be able to produce physical evidence.  The initial buzz quiets down, until Jack starts things up again, on a smaller scale, with his showmanship and fancy equations and inside stories.  This will go on for awhile longer until Jack starts pointing at me.  My 'man bites god' story starts a whole new round of speculation and rumors, leading here, among other places.  Then something else, I'm not sure what, will blow the lid off of the bigger story, and the rest will be the end of history. 

There you have it, rather highly abbreviated.  The next couple of weeks should determine if the Henry initiative is really going forward.  I am leaning toward attending the Gaithersburg Expo this weekend where, with a couple of drinks, I would be capable of spilling these guts.  Big whoopee!  Joe Stefula will be my body-guard.  Better watch out!  He's an ex Air Force MP.  Tomorrow I'll be escorting a visiting cousin whose mother is going to the hospital. 

Have I left anything out?  And what if this leakage gums up the works?  Well, it's all about protocol.  And, if this is real, nothing can get in its way now.  It's all over, but the shouting. 



Well, you'll have to admit, that was quite a mouthful yesterday.  Meanwhile, of course, my sources have grown quiet.  Can anything happen before the HK initiative is resolved?  Jack and I may have to team up on Gordon and Ron.  Jack will have to find room for God behind his equations.  I may have to lecture him on the Mb.  Those two have played their aces.  If their plan A does not soon come to fruition, Jack and I need to be ready with a plan B.  I will need some more assistance to bring Jack into alignment.  Eschatology may be the key issue for Jack. 

In the process, J & I need to smoke out G & R if their mission fails or goes quiet.  What was Ron's motive?  Why was he pushing these buttons?  We will mainly go after Gordon.  There is Al Kehs 27th annual Spring party on May 7.  Ron and I have attended the last five of these.  If he does not show up, it will not go over well. 

Worst case scenario is that everyone just clams up.  That would be difficult for Gordon.  He would be our weak link.  We might need to get Hal and Kit involved.  That would not be easy with Jack in tow.  I may need to take this little show on the road.  We can press Gordon on whether he has a plan B. 

The big issue would be if we can eventually press on Ron.  He would have known that plan A was bogus.  He must have another plan.  Perhaps this faux HK deal was just intended to be his Avian swan song.  Bye, bye Birdie!  He'll then go hide behind John N. at DNI. 

Here's another scenario.  Ron has been working on Gordon's case ever since I first knew him in '91.  He wanted to crack open that part of MJ12.  He has already cracked open everything else.  He wanted to go after Gordon's sources.  It became a do or die thing.  He may also need to smoke out HK.  This may all be for internal reasons that the rest of us will never divine.  We will not know the results.  Ron will then take himself out of circulation, as above. 

One problem here.  What is to become of phenomenology?  Will cracking MJ12 get rid of the phenomenology problem?  Will all phenomena suddenly disappear?  I would be very surprised.  Will MASINT not still be responsible for phenomenology?  Let's face it, Ron or his immediate subordinate will still be left with a big bag to hold.  Phenomenology, as Ron has astutely recognized, has a very large public venue.  It cannot be effectively monitored without maintaining a public presence.  It was just the Aviary presence that would have enabled Ron to crack MJ12.  Will there never be another MJ12-like entity?  Ron is not in a position to dismantle the presence that will have to continue to feed MASINT.  Believe it or not, phenomenology is bigger than Ron.  In short, a swan song is the least likely bird song we might be hearing. 

Heck, even if the phenomena went away, will God go away?  Are Ron and MJ12 to render God's last judgment?  Don't hold your breaths, all you junior aviators!

If I have learned anything about intel, this HK operation is not a serious inside job.  It is pure performance.  Ladies and gents, the Show will go on. 



This will temporarily serve as a continuation of the discussion on Synthesis of physics and metaphysics from the last slide of Dummies. [a]  It is a fact that Ron has been pushing for a joint publication project since last year.  Only since Dummies, do I feel ready to move on it.

There is the idea of the BPW as a Self-exciting circuit.  Where can this fit into Jack's picture?  Into his emergent gravity?  How might this relate to the 'emergence' of the Mandelbrot, or to portals?  The portals are like the Mb filaments.  The vortexes are like the Mb critical points.

[5/2 -- This in now being taken up as the Physics-BPW PDF (0.2a).] 

News flash:  As of a couple of hours ago I am the proud owner of bestpossibleworld.com/.net/.org.  So there, all you search engines, go stuff that in your algorithm!  My cousin, Charles E. Hamilton, is the owner of chcs.com, my new webmasters, based in Seattle.  By sometime tomorrow it should accessible.  My original Aquarium site was @clark.net, owned by Sam's cousin.



I have been at the X-conference for the last couple of days.  It was confirmed that Ron is indeed reactivating the remote viewing program, as suggested in Jon Ronson's book.  This is no small deal.  Ron is widely reviled in the remote viewing community for having helped shut the government's program in the '90's, in which I played a small part.  The rationale for this reactivation is stipulated as being related to the problems of loose nukes.  If you are like me, you may not be totally reassured by this development. 

It has been stipulated that the proper placement of one such item could wreak havoc on our economy, at the least.  Every time I hear a distant rumble, this thought comes to mind.  

There was an additional item.  We are picking up signals out there.  That is about all that I was told.  So now we have three items, given in the same context: RV, nukes and signal.  I asked Dick Farley to help connect these dots.  I was unable to disambiguate his rambling response.  We ended up discussing the distinctions between Kissinger's and Rice's versions of globalism, and to what degree this this was similar to the socialist/capitalist distinction. 

So it goes.

Perhaps I should pass this tidbit along to Jack and Gordon.



Jack, [a]

I certainly applaud your sincere efforts to save the soul of Steve Greer and his minions. However, when I last checked my horoscope, that was supposed to be my job. No?

The two highest priority souls on my list right now are yours and Gordon's. That is the list that was handed to me by Ron two weeks ago. No? We are supposed to be the three (public) horsemen of the eschaton. You have a better understanding of that function right now than does Gordon.

But Gordon does have a problem with you, and that is a significant part of why he is being our reluctant cowboy. In order to patch this up, you need to understand that physics is not in the driver's seat here. That might help Gordon to understand that technology is not in the driver's seat either.

It was Aristotle who put his 'Metaphisis' after his 'Physis'. I go last, I get the last laugh, I'm the fat lady in this little horse opera. Gordon is slated to be the first out of the gate. You go second.

If I am missing any of my cues here, Ron will be sure to correct me in his own sweet time. Agreed?

If this rubber is not meant to be hitting the highway at this time, then, once again, knock me down and call me stupid. Until such time, it is my way and it is the highway.

The message I got yesterday from Joe Stefula, by way of Bill LaParl, was two-fold. MASINT has become so desperate about the loose nukes that we are making a major recall of the best and brightest psychics in the world, and doing so in the public light. Can you imagine what is the tolerance for error in that ball-game? Do you understand the meaning of ZERO?

At the very same time, and for the very first time, Ron is now admitting publicly, right here, that we are attending to uncorrelated signals from 'out there'. Jack, do you understand the meaning of cosmic trigger?

This is what the Eschaton Focus Group is about. Are you with us?


This was sent on Monday, and it did make a few waves in a small pond. 

There have been some developments in the last few days coming out of the conferences that Jack and I attended over the weekend. 

It now appears that it is Jack, rather than Gordon, who will be the first to meet with H.K., sometime in June. 

I gave my little presentation to Michael Heiser at the X-conference.  It seemed to fall well within his normal stride.  The main issue between Michael and Father Balducci of Vatican/UFO fame, who also spoke at the conference, concerns good vs. bad ETs.  This is a hot button, especially among abductees, as you might well imagine.  The issue touches upon the nature of the pantheon, or what I would call the Zodiacal realm of the demigods. 

Catholic orthodoxy tells us that the chief of the fallen angels was Satan, and that he and his minions all fell to Earth, and somehow, that was closely related to the subsequent fall of Adam and Eve.  In fact, was it not Satan who appeared as the Serpent at the tree of knowledge.  One point is that you can be bad, but if you don't eat the apple you are not  being willfully bad, and so not evil, and so not in need of salvation.  All the sinners in the cosmos are right here on Earth.  This is the only planet of choice.  It is only we humans who stand in need of salvation.  I can go along with this, to a considerable extent.  

Michael gave a public and private talk about this, but I'm still not sure what his take is. 

My take brings us back to the apokatastasis.  The fallen angels will be restored, and mainly by the Logos.  Both Michael and Father B. get into trouble by falling under the anti-anthropic spell of Copernicus, Galileo and Bruno.  Can it be possible there is no sin or satanic influence on Planet X?  Exobiology is not a forte of the Vatican.  It was only a few years ago that the Pope exonerated Galileo.  With the BPW, Galileo is unceremoniously escorted back to the dog-house.

But now there is other pressing business.  Madison Avenue meets the BestPossibleWorld.com via Google adWords.  As of Monday, I am now the proud and nearly exclusive owner of eschaton, eschatology, teleology, rationalism, cosmology, immaterialism, idealism, coherence, Leibniz, absolutism, relationalism, and the list is growing as we speak.  This could almost be fun!  The intellectual establishment is about to experience a rude awakening.  No?  It may not take too long for some folks in academia to wonder what is going on. 

I now need to create a 'landing page' for those out there in Google land who pay attention to the right-hand column.  Does academia have too many lefties?

Ok, we seem to have that part in hand.  I'm looking forward to getting my first email from a click-through customer.  How many weeks will I have to wait?  As it is, I am busily clicking away on my own ads just to keep the Google mercenaries happy.  There has got to be a better way to save the world!  But this is almost as much fun as eight hours on the you know what.  We aim to please! 

The HK initiative is moving forward cautiously.  I understand that a meeting is now set for June 16 in NYC.  I do have a suit that I have only worn once.  I wonder if I will get to wear it again?  Perhaps Henry has already been saved.

What next?  The main technical thing is for CHCS to bring up an onsite search function.  On Friday there will be a meeting in DC with my webmaster, webartist, webshaman and webpsychologist.  Don't you wish you could be there?  There is a possible issue here about the word of God.  I am no fundamentalist, but I do want to tread carefully in these waters.

Then what?

Maybe I need to do something about the cosmology diagrams on the old aquarium site.  I thought I had already linked to them.  Here is one link.  You will see some diagrams mentioned down towards the bottom of the page.  The Mandelbrot is our most recent cosmology diagram.  Most convenient!  Then there is this, and this



I'm still struggling with father B. and Michael H.  Yes, there are principalities, but Earth is the only planet that we could recognize as such.  It would be  more accurate to call it the only Principality of Choice.  That would put us in Satan's principality, but I am not happy with that.  I am reasonably confident that this is Jesus' Principality.  We are the only BPW.  The BPW necessarily includes free-will, and even free-willfulness!  The other principalities are more or less deficient in that regard. 

Now we have to deal with Satan.  Am I correct in supposing that Satan is more of a Catholic, and perhaps fundamentalist, problem, than he is a protestant problem?  I see nothing wrong with wanting to personify the miasma of banality that certainly does pollute the Earth's pneuma-sphere.   However, it certainly does run against the grain of our newfound Mandelbrot cosmology.   And does it not run smack into the spirit of Christianity?  Deontology can seemingly benefit from the Devil, but the theology has always been a non-starter.  You have to go back to Zoroaster to find a stark dualism. 

Ultimately every creature is an agent of the Creator: humans, ETs and Hitler alike.  There must and will be restitution.  Jesus ministered to the Damned, and it weren't for nothing.  Judgment day has not yet come.  Let us not preempt the Creator. 

Cousin Charles pointed out to me something interesting about the idea of the Only 'Planet' of Choice.  Given the choice, would we choose to go anywhere other than to the BPW?  Having made that first choice, would we then want to renounce that freedom to choose?  So, BPW = OPC on several levels of meaning.  What choice does the Creator have??  In what sense did Jesus choose to be crucified?  Are we into S/M here?  I doubt that the two perspectives are totally divorced.  Felix culpa?  We do approach the ultimate mystery of being.  Even the very idea of 'best' is nonsensical outside the realm of subjective freedom, as is the idea of 'reason'.  Subjectivity is nothing if not free.  In its freedom comes its transcendent universality. 

We are also struggling with potentiality and actuality.  Could there have been no actuality, even no potentiality?  Is there any reason to suppose that freedom, subjectivity, potentiality and actuality could ever be disentangled?



I met today with Judi, Eduardo, and Judi's student Thomas who hopefully will be the resident BPW artist.  We plan to meet on a weekly basis to bring together the art and the concepts.  He has already completed some preliminary sketches, including one sketch that is entitled The Atomic Reincarnation of the Earth.  We'll post it here as soon as we can get to the internet. 

Meanwhile back at the ranch, I have not heard back from Jack about his prospective meeting with HK.  Coming up next weekend is a prospective meeting with Ron.  I hope to get a better feeling from him as to whether there is a larger plan afoot, and whose plan is it anyway?  Am I slated to attend the other meeting, or do I have to make my own path here, like 'gate crashing'? 

Charles will be working on the navigation system here when he gets back to Seattle.  And so far the Google AdWords campaign has been a dud, but still a useful experiment.  I don't mind the free 'impressions', but Google is not happy.  I may let it wither away for now.  If Jack and HK get together, it would hit the internet rumor mill in a hurry, and I would hope to pick up some of the crumbs off that table.  Now I'm attempting to return Gordon's call. 

I have talked to Gordon.  He will be sending some correspondence.  I think Ron is trying to tell the three of us, including Jack, that no one of us has the crown jewels, but that if we can put our resources together, we'll come a lot closer.  Why can't he just come out and say it?  That allows me to be the mediator, which is significant in itself, and should be symptomatic.  It might be tempting for two of us to gang up on the third, but that would not be productive. 

So perhaps I should put this idea to J&G.  Supposedly, G is under pressure from Kit about not being able to produce anything truly convincing, and so is J, probably.  Neither one wants to admit it.  Each is hoping that Ron or HK will pull their fat out of the fire.  I doubt that will happen.  That does not conform to the prime directive.  There is a wall between them and us.  We do need a ménage a trois

At first Ron was pushing for this meeting, but now he and Kit seem to be backing off.  I have no idea if this was a ploy or if something intervened.  Why stir things up in the first place? 



I have sent a message to Ron, Jack and Gordon.  It is upbeat about moving quickly on the phenomenology front.  I propose an early meeting of the four of us. 

Here are the preliminary sketches of Thomas J. Codrick.  We'll meet again Wednesday. 

Well, both of my correspondents are now up in the air about any meetings in NYC.  I had to make some phone calls to track this down.  The best bet then is to work on a book project with Jack.  I might go out there week after next.  In the meantime I need to work out where Ron is headed. 



With the Henry initiative now in abeyance, the next step is to fall back to the book idea, with my going to SF week after next.  I need to get back on that -- maybe work up some slides (see 0.2a &ff) for Jack. 



I'm scheduled to visit Jack in SF on 5/25-28.  Jack suggests sharing facing pages of a 120 pg book.  On 5/22-24 I'll be with the family in Cleveland to see Orioles play and go to the Rock&Roll museum. 

Try out this one: The Just So Story of the Universe (0.2b).  Will Jack be able to live with this? 


[5/5ff]  See Comments



The Omni is on California at Montgomery. It should be convenient.

Should we not be having dinner with your Dad at some point? Where would he like to go?

When Ron did not show up at Al Kehs' picnic, I made a house call. It was Erica's fifteenth birthday. Also Ron had slipped a disk while gardening and was laid up in bed.

He did point out that the Lone Ranger and Tonto never had a showdown.

I had my thinking cap on last night. Here are the gleanings:

It is pretty obvious that somebody was hunting for the Moon Child back there in the '50s. Jack Parsons and L Ron, as the story goes, were more proactive in their 'hunting'. Also, recall that the Dalai Lama was in this mix back about then, and he should be an expert in this regard.

Another point is that the Doty story emphasized three high level visitors. Does that not fit the supposedly apocryphal story of the three kings bearing gifts from afar? Way out, man!

This does steer our little story a bit away from the LR&T theme.

It appears that if you are not particularly anxious to do the passion bit, you are entitled to two stellar roles: Saul & John. Have you had experience playing two parts simultaneously?

Just a thought....

N.B., Ron cannot be blamed for any of this!


No harm in trying, right? 

Should this be put into a story, or just played out as a California street drama?  Kinda like the OC, but different.  Who will get the copyrights and screen credits?  What about the 3 Kings trademark?  Is that already taken? 

How do we soft-pedal the story?  This genre has already been played out.  The Grail Quests, too.  Do it as a straight philosophical piece?  That would not be Jack's style.  He's the one who insists on jazzing up the story.  What other way to go with this? 



Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 8:02 AM
To: 'Jack Sarfatti'
Subject: KGB virgin takes Jack out behind the woodshed....

Yes, Jack, the 25th, and I'll be departing when my job is finished. And apparently you also missed another message. This little misplacement provides me with yet another opportunity to basically ask you, politely, to pull your head out.

The Lone Ranger idea was just a test, and you fell for it.

With excruciating obviousness, it does not suffice.

There is only one thing that has ever gone on between you and me. It is a reprise of the Passion Play with you playing the role of the Philistine.

I know that you wanted the part of Caesar, but that is not to be. That is Ron's part, you dummy.

More specifically, you have been assigned the role of Saul/Paul.

You have spent the ten years of our acquaintance in avoidance and denial of what really ought to be obvious, certainly by this very late date.

On the other hand, Jack, I have been listening very carefully, biding my time. I have you now right where I want you: out behind the woodshed.

You can go crying to Ron, but it will avail you of naught. Your jig is up. Your ship has come in, and guess what? I'm it.

I know that you wanted a flying saucer, rather like Gordon, but this is going to be Ron's best offer to you, until you learn how to listen properly.

This time I am bringing proof. It is my message in the bottle, straight from God. It is the Mandelbrot set. The building block that the scientists rejected becomes the cornerstone of a whole new world. That is what I will be waking you up with. That is what I will be waking you up to: your whole new world...the one that you rejected as so much pot smoke back in '75. Thank you. You cannot now say that you have not been afforded every opportunity.

I read with some amusement you little correspondence below. Both you and Jake have good advice for the other.

What you evidently fail to grasp, however, is that Jake is deliberately couching a spiritual message to you in scientific jargon. I think it must be deliberate on his part, because it is too good a job to be a mere coincidence. Here, and two weeks from now, I am not using jargon. I am speaking to you directly.

Jake, and I have no idea who he is -- it could as well be Ron, is prophesying to you about our imminent meeting.

Since Santa Fe, the universe has been slapping you around pretty good, just to open up your way too thick, Philistine-like skull.

This is not about the physics, stupid. This is about your rendezvous with God. For your sake, I get to represent God. And, as it appears increasingly evident, I will be doing so for everyone else as well.

Jack, this does put you in the cat-bird seat. It is not exactly the seat you had in mind, but, hey, it is not to be sneezed at, and ultimately it is not in your repertoire to refuse to be lead support in the greatest story ever told. Now is it?

Are you going to go crying to Ron, or are you going to take it like a man? Mano a Mano!


And, yes, I am expecting to have dinner with your Dad.

Sincerely yours,


-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Sarfatti [mailto:sarfatti@pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 7:58 PM
To: Ron; Dan Smith
Subject: Fwd: Jack meets Olga & Marina from Moldova & Kiev at Jake's & Dan

Just in case I disappear fyi - but what a way to go! Three Muses and everyone a virgin! :-)

Dan, you coming on 25th or 26th? Remind me. Your original message is on my other laptop back in SF. I am in La Jolla. You are coming on Wed May
25 and leaving on Sat right?

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Jack Sarfatti <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
> Date: May 9, 2005 4:53:58 PM PDT
> To: d14947 <d14947@gmail.com>
> Cc: CLSF4@cs.com
> Subject: Re: Jack meets Olga & Marina from Moldova & Kiev at Jake's
> Olga and Marina and third Russian girl Nadia are coming tonite to me,
> Jagdish & Shawn at Csaba's.
> On May 9, 2005, at 2:44 PM, d14947 wrote:
>> The disinfo machine is in full cry.
>> On 5/9/05, Jack Sarfatti <sarfatti@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>> Cool, but who the hell are you? Did you send the two 20's-something
>>> beauties Olga and Marina last night at Jakes On The Beach in Del Mar?
>>> More curious linguistic coincidences. Gavorita pa Ruski? Nimnoga?
>>> ;-)

Gee, it does sound kinda like an end game.  It's gonna be show time with Jack.  And what do I have to show besides the Mandelbrot, Ron and the three kings?  For Jack that might be enough, but what about for the other folks?  All I need is for Jack to facilitate a chain reaction cum skull session, 'Listen up folks, we need to know this.'  When the heavies weigh-in, I'll need some backstopping from Ron. 

It's just about postmodernism vs. coherence.  The message is that simple. 

I am thinking about taking this back to Sam's 'oil group' again.  It is time to get down to business and to practice what I preach, and preach what I practice.  I finally have to place my bets.  Will there be a better time to save the world?  Do we really want to wait and see?  What else are we waiting for? 



Dear Blog,

Gosh, it has been a while, and what have we to show for it?  Are we any nearer to the end?

First I'll  have to collect my thoughts.  The main news yesterday was that Gordon is to meet Jack in S.F. in about a week.  It's not quite clear whether or not I have an invite to this gala event.  Jack may have just wanted some hand holding.  Before that I was informed by Bill that Gordon's material may have derived the the channeling of a Yogi in London in the early 1920's relative to the Hindu vimanas.  Gordon may now be regrouping his forces.  If Jack and Gordon gang up on my metaphysics, I'll need more input from Ron and/or Kit.  Ron suggested he might help Kit out with Julian Nall, formerly the NIO for Science and Technology, with whom Kit once had an 'interesting' interaction.  His name is listed in my old notes without any context.  Need I hold my breath?  Jack met with the glitterati in NYC, but no HK.  The mailbox now languishes. 

I've been catching up on the 4400 with some prodding from my son.  It has definite possibilities.  In yesterday's NYTimes is a review of Robert Laughlin's new (first) book: A Different Universe.  It is a rather good treatise on anti-reductionism from the perspective of the quantum theory of solids.  There are no fundamentals is his world, rather there is the omni-presence and universality of various phases of quantum criticality.  Are our egos made of such stuff, analogically speaking?  With the Riemann Hypothesis, we might imagine that the integers are a critical phenomenon with the long range order of the Mandelbrot. 

My latest argument with Jack and Gordon took up the premise that any breakthrough in propulsion would, from a physical perspective, be concomitant to a comparable breakthrough in military technology, and so would necessitate a meta-universal hegemonic control system (MUHCS) so as to avoid a mutually assured destruction (MAD).  Such a cosmic power would hardly be distinguishable from that of a God, and that would presumably include the power of Creation.  Thus it might behoove us to consider our options from a more creaturely perspective. 



Gordon is trying to recruit Jack into his 'Kismet' meeting plan.  I am urging a more broad based approach, i.e. one that would include metaphysics. 



Let us reflect back upon the zodiac and its role in Creation.  In accord with the Mandelbrot model, each member of the pantheon produces a 'sub-creation', in accord with polytheism.  There is, however, a singular creation associated with the primary bulb.  This circular bulb and its attendant cardioid and straight line are the only perfect figures in the set.  This is what I refer to as the BPW, as taken in the context of the Mb. 



Yesterday I was failing to recall the latest PDF file: On Being Focused.  Evidently I have not properly integrated it with my core operating vision.  Here is the coda of that piece:

Well, I think that was a bit of a stretch.  I have some  more explaining to do here, but this is the core problem, after all.   

One missing connection is that between geometric perfection in the Mb and this notion of love.  Both notions allude to the transcendental or infinite.  Love and perfection are our connections to eternity.  The BPW is what mediates between the finite and infinite.  The transcendental is uniquely inherent in this one locus of Creation.  This perfection is the eternal soul of the creation and is the essence of our imago dei.  This also is suggestive of the apokatastasis.  The creative focus is also seen on the positive axis or 'elephant ravine'.  The ouroboric connection between the positive and negative axis is strongly suggested. 

However, every part of the Mb is holographic, but this is a given.  It is the symmetry of the Mb that also suggests its creative focus onto the 'BPW'.  It was a big step in our alleged evolution to go from radial to lateral symmetry.  That was for locomotion which then produced a fore and aft asymmetry, as with the Mb.  The ouroboric form is a restoration of symmetry. 

This focus should be viewed relationally.  There cannot be coherence without a focus.  Without coherence, the world is incomprehensible and so is unobservable.  The self is about focus.  This is what distinguishes theism from pantheism.  This logic can be further explicated. 

There can be no reality without the cyclic aspect, and all of the above is implicated therein.  Pantheism cannot contain cycles?  Their use is strictly illicit. 

I then need to add this to the PDF.  This could also be the title of the next page. 

Pantheism stresses the role of illusion, but there can be no illusion without selves.  The Buddha is the fundamental self.  The eternal cycle of illusion is centered on the Buddha.  There is nothing else that is comprehensible.  In some sense the Buddha must create or maintain  the Cycle, but strictly they would be inseparable.   Pantheism has always been a source of inspiration for idealism. 

A pure zodiacal cycle cannot exist without an observational asymmetry, which may be identified with Creation.  There is no such thing as a pure cycle, other than as an abstraction.  It is like perpetual motion.  Atoms are not observable unless they are disturbed by photons. 

Numbers exist only through the act of counting, which is also cyclic in nature, but it cannot be a pure cycle because it would be perpetual.  There must be something like an escapement on a pendulum clock.

The NY Times today has a feature article on the paradoxes of time and time-travel.  Implicitly it is pointing to the meta-physicality of time?  Why should time be more metaphysical than space? 

The intensity of the focus must be proportional to the complexity of the network it supports.  Creation must have a meta-focus.  Otherwise it loses coherence.  It becomes epiphenomenal.  What is the limit on the intensity? 

Coherence is to be found in functional and aesthetic diversity.  Creation will be optimized when the cosmic intelligence is focused upon it, not when there is random conflict.  Vulnerability would lead to coalition formation.  The stable/eternal state would be a single coalition.  This is what we see with the Mb.  There is a diverse coherence. 

Based on the primordial tradition of ultra-terrestrials, there is communication between distinct creations and realms.  There is separation mainly at the phenomenal level.  It follows that cosmic intelligence and coherence transcends these realms.  Out of this coherence comes a personal focus of creative love, and this results in the BPW, of which we are the nexus.  This is based in part on the notion that we are the only planet of choice, i.e. focused on free will.  This is the densest planet and the great attractor.  The other creatures will arrive here to share in the universal salvation or apokatastasis entrusted to us.  They may arrive by incarnation and other means.  This is one reason why we need not be overly exercised about the population problem.  We don't want to be a bottleneck in the salvation economy. 

The notion of a singular Matrix need hardly be speculative.  Potentiality is one of the least differentiable ideas.  This is just where the identity of indiscernibles should be most applicable. 



The Newtonian-Cartesian absolutist view of space-time is abstract and deist in the extreme, but once planted in our brains it is very hard to extricate.  It implies an omniscient Creator, with the creatures being epiphenomenal.  It works great for aiming artillery, but what else is it really good for?  Machines are dumb.  They must have rules.  The cosmos obliges our mechanical penchant with its Platonic seeming physics.  But physics can only be epiphenomenal to the relational system of things.  Modern physics is an endless revision of the Newtonian hubris.  There is no way to sneak vitalism in the back door, try though we do. 



Signed an NDA for Gordon's RAM, and saw War of the Worlds with son and nephew.  I was told another new RAMer is also an eschatologist.  I guess we'll see about that. 

And here is an email composed this morning in response to an inquiry from Sam concerning Robert Laughlin's A Different Universe: Remaking Physics from the Bottom Down, noted on 6/20:  [a]

Yes, I did notice this book, and then explored Laughlin’s website.

A phrase that springs to mind about Robert’s treatment of emergence is ‘damning with faint praise’.

The other message is: OK folks, you needn’t worry your pretty little heads about emergence, because we scientists have it under control. We’ll tell you what you need to know about it, when you need to know it.

As Robert admits, scientists despise philosophy and philosophers, with a passion. The outstanding divisive issue between science and philosophy since the inception of science has been precisely the issue of reductionism. Now, Robert assures us, scientists are finally getting religion!

Pardon us, if we are more than a little skeptical.

Much too little, much too late! The hand of holism has been writing on science’s reductionist wall for the last three centuries. Scientists of much greater stature than Laughlin have deliberately been ignoring this Ghost at their mechanical Banquet, because they had the wisdom of Louis XIV, ‘après nous, la deluge!’

If Robert really believes that science has its thumb in the flood gates of emergence and teleology, well, he should have a little chat with the person who is in charge of phenomenology at the Dept. of National Intelligence. He would then be directed to their consulting eschatologist. He would then realize that his key phrase, Bottom Down, makes no sense whatsoever, unless you have already stood the world on its head. Voila la Deluge!

I’m afraid that all of this will make the Oil Peak look rather like a molehill.



What's a Creator to do after Creation, I mean way after?  Do you eventually just leave it go? 

An obvious option would be to recycle it, but this would be counter to the BPW hypothesis. 

The last option is redemption.  That's apokatastasis.  That's the eschaton. 

The only question is when.  The only answer is, at the best possible time.  Which is? 

Which is when we have done just about everything we can possibly do down here.  When we are physically prepared to leave the planet.  When we are able to destroy the world, but before we actually do.  When the secret of Creation can no longer be kept.  In other words, right about now, folks. 

The next question is whether it is possible for there to be a creator.  This would seem difficult to deny, especially if we take mind seriously.  Instead of a primordial material stuff, why could there not be a primordial mental stuff, i.e. Matrix, with at least as much self-organizing potential as this alleged material stuff? 

The next question is how many creations.  In an immaterial, monist, relational world, there is no rational alternative to the BPW hypothesis.  Any network of being would be self-centered.  There would be an organic functionality.  Chaos, to exist, would be parasitic upon that organic network.  At most, there would be a functional network of realms, much as we see with the Mandelbrot, with everything in its place.  There is every indication that our world is spiritually the densest world, i.e. the center of spiritual gravity. 

(The above material has been appended to Being Focused.) 

The final chore is the reconstruction of the scientific cosmology.  Given immaterialism, we rationalize the manifest material image in terms of its contribution to our spiritual gravity.  The depth of creation is measured by the compelling depth of the image.  We are mesmerized by an image, to which we have unwittingly contributed to a very substantial degree.  In the depth of physics we see our own logic reflected back to us in mathematical structures that we can more or less intuit. 

Even starting from a materialist premise, the various futurist scenarios point toward an ultimate hegemony of mind over matter, as if to defeat the original premise.  Why should we suppose that we invented the mind?  What else could reside beyond the bounds of space and time, nature being the natural buffer between Creator and creatures?  


Yesterday, Sam asked how I would deal with the sectarianism of the second coming.  My suggestion is that we see it as the completion of the first coming, which would simply be its universalization. 

Christianity has long prided itself on its exclusivity, and deemed universalism to be a heresy.  That is one reason why it hews so closely to mystagoguery.  By rationalizing the X-event along with its content, we will have universalized it.  Will this is anyway detract from the notion of a personal Savior.  Hardly!  It turns out that the Savior is also our personal Creator. 

Will non-Christians be offended?  Probably no less than traditional Christians.  Sectarianism, even what we think of as organized religion, will be no longer.  The spirit is eternal, it is just the politics that changes.  We can get through the politics.  We never get through with the spirit.  Once reason has been liberated from its analytic/materialist cage, it will all be over but the shouting. 


What next?  I have been instructed to stand down for the next few weeks, pending Kit's meeting w/ Julian.  I'm not holding my breath for BJ to be born again.  BJ and Hal have circled their wagons against any metaphysical interpretation of our Visitation, and in particular against the biblical redaction of it as being the previously apocryphal Three Wise Men. 

Mainly I still need an interlocutor/debriefer.  I admit that would not be as easy to arrange as it might seem. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Smith [mailto:dantsmith@comcast.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 4:19 PM
To: 'Jack Sarfatti'
Subject: RE: Quantum mechanics and the time travel paradox

Jack: << The religious implications are profound of course.>>

 Well, then, you and I, at least, should be doing a podcast with RU Sirius to announce the imminent messianic event. 

 The BPW version of the Y2C ought to be sufficiently anti-authoritarian even for the likes of Goffman. 

 All we need is a little script.  I can still hop on a plane, although I do believe that the phone company has facilities to patch through hi-fi.

 Yes, no, maybe? 

 It might, however, take a few days to iron out the script, and who would get top billing, etc.

 Just a thought.....  

 -----Original Message-----

From: Jack Sarfatti [mailto:sarfatti@pacbell.net]

Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 2:08 PM

To: Dan Smith

Subject: Re: Quantum mechanics and the time travel paradox

 Dan, I already said that in 1973. Saul-Paul has it on tape with Hal Puthoff & Russell Targ near SRI. Saul-Paul Sirag wrote an opera based on it produced in Berkeley I think in 1974. The religious implications are profound of course. R. Gott has the idea in his Time Travel book ~30 years after I first suggested it.

 On Jul 2, 2005, at 10:50 AM, Dan Smith wrote:

> According to the Best Possible World hypothesis, our whole world is just such a self-consistent, i.e. coherent, ‘quantum’ loop.  This is just the least action principle extended to the cosmos.

> And, gee whiz, who was it who said, “I am the Alpha and the Omega”?  Have we not all done our homework on the cosmic Ouroboros?

> If not, feel free to consult, for example, page 13 of

>    http://www.bestpossibleworld.com/TheSecondComing.pdf


> From: Jack Sarfatti [mailto:sarfatti@pacbell.net]

> Subject: Re: Quantum mechanics and the time travel paradox

> Thanks, I suggested this years ago. Not new. I think Deutsch has this, also Novikov, Thorne et-al.


> On Jul 2, 2005, at 4:37 AM, Gary S Bekkum / SSR wrote:

> http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0506141

> Quantum mechanics and the time travel paradox

> Authors: David T. Pegg

> Comments: 18 pages, 3 figures

> Journal-ref: D. T. Pegg, Times' arrows, quantum measurement and superluminal behavior (eds. D. Mugnai, A. Ranfagni and L. S. Schulman)  (Consiglio Nazionale Delle Richerche, Roma, 2001) p. 113

> The closed causal chains arising from backward time travel do not lead to paradoxes if they are self consistent. This raises the question as to how physics ensures that only self-consistent loops are possible. We show that, for one particular case at least, the condition of self consistency is ensured by the interference of quantum mechanical amplitudes associated with the loop. If this can be applied to all loops then we have a mechanism by which inconsistent loops eliminate themselves.  



Last night I listened to Robert Merry on BookTalk: Sands of Empire (2005).  Bob contrasts the optimistic and pessimistic views of history.  On the one side are Hegel, Fukuyama and Freidman, on the other are Spengler, Huntington and now Merry.  The one is the linear, globalist view, the other is the cyclical, cultural view. 

From the POV of the BPW, they are both right and wrong.  What they miss is the gnostic/prophetic/salvational view of history, the concealing and revealing Creator.   Material 'progress' finally gives way to an eschatological spiritual rebirth or rapture.   



On Saturday I met with a person contracting to review some related documents.  In describing the BPWH, I was reminded that immaterialism is a particular sticking point.  This affords an opportunity to review that subject. 

There is still the jaw dropping reaction when I confess to a skepticism concerning stars.  I have not learned how to soften that shock.  How has the modern mind been so completely possessed by the idolatry of matter?  That is a tough nut to crack.  How came to western mind to be so contrary to the eastern mind on the matter of illusion?  Ne'er the twain shall meet? 

There must be a connection here with the dichotomy between theism and pantheism.  How easily we forget that the nature of reality is a perennial metaphysical issue, but only, it seems, in the mind of the philosopher.  There must also be a connection with egoism.  Egoism demands a solid platform for the ego.  Thus do share the dismay of the mariner stranded on the desert island, who wakes up one day to discover that his island is swimming away.  There is the sense of disorientation bordering on the quality of a mental breakdown.  The eastern mind, being more relational, is less susceptible to this manner of disorientation. 

That egoism finds its justification in theism, should be perfectly logical.  That theism is associated with absolutes and dichotomies of many varieties, is also perfectly natural.  That we then, in modernism, proceed to manipulate these absolutes, while neglecting their origin, should be no surprise.  The residual psychology of the absolute is our blind spot. 

Mathematical Platonism is one of the last repositories of the modern absolute.  The Mb and the MG have opposing implications in this regard, but perhaps less so when we include anthropics with the MG.  It is hard for us to explain the teleology of either object, or how the two might relate.  Then we need to find the logical connection to stars and dinosaurs.  This is if the eyes of our interlocutors have not already become terminally glazed!  Obviously we need an anti-glazing strategy. 

We seem to be terminally committed to the mechanical manipulation of matter, as the basis of our reality, as well as to the great depth of time and space.  The relativity and quantum theories, have only been like minor fender benders, in this larger context.  Mounting a frontal assault on Newtonian absolutism, seems not to be effective.  The self-coherence of science is impressive, superficially, at least.  And we don't want to become ensnared in a 'god of the gaps' argument. 

The mind-body problem is not something that troubles people outside of the philosophical arena.  Anthropics is too readily countered with many-worlds.  These anomalies resist concatenation in the imaginations of even the most thoughtful people.  The problem of the Ptolemaic style complexification of modern cosmology does not weigh heavily on the modern mind.  It does not count much against the more subjective sense of scientific coherence.  Postmodernism has done very little to shake these foundations. 

The problem of emergence and the non-reducibility of scientific knowledge counts for little against our collective commitment to the individual reality of atoms.  Somehow, we must be equating atomic reality with egoic reality.  The atoms are our bastion against all metaphysical assaults. 

The interdependence of ontology and psychology is something we choose not to dwell upon. 

The antipathy between theology and phenomenology, leaves the phenomenologists with nowhere to turn but to pantheism and paganism. 

The ontological infrastructure of materialism has been most resilient to normal wear and tear.  It is hard to imagine that it would be vulnerable to anything short of a major phenomenological shock.  One might hope for a straw that would break its back, but there is very little evidence to support such a scenario.  This observation counts against the possibility of a minimalist version of a messianic event. 

The last option is to keep the R&D show on a steady advance.  Perhaps this is the favored option.  Gradually we get more folks on board, up until either the fundies and/or a reporter latch onto the game.  Anything wrong with this picture?  Might the ufologists catch the drift of it first?  What about Jack and Gordon?  That would depend on BJ and Owl.  That sequence might turn this scenario into a domino scenario, which could be more dramatic. 

I'm once again asking Jack to give his rationale for the cover-up of the alien presence, and his own role in the matter.  This should be a major problem for him, despite his ability to deflect discussions. 



There has been continuing correspondence with Sarfatti list, and new correspondence with the exopolitical list.  I was introduced to this latter list by Ed Komarek, the same person who originally introduced me to Jack's list.  It may have been Don Allen, a ufo BBS operator in Florida, who linked me with Ed in the early '90s. 

The issue presently being pursued with four correspondents on these two lists is nature of our destiny.  The fact of a destiny is undeniable to quite a range of folks, especially with those who are future oriented, of course. 

With respect to the visitors the issue becomes how many destinies are there and how are they interlinked.  Are they mutually supportive or mutually antagonistic?  And how so?  Would we not, at the least, expect there to be a cosmic ecosystem in this regard, i.e. a salvational economy on the cosmic scale? 



There was on Monday a dinner meeting with BJ in DC.  Here is an excerpt from a follow-up message I sent to him.  There has been no reply:

Something I meant to ask you was whether anything was said to you concerning the alien agenda for coming here, and more specifically whether any non-technical information was delivered.   

For instance, it is hard to imagine that they would give us advanced technology without any suggestion as to how we should use it.  Or, perhaps, why it would be given to us and not to the Chinese, if that were the case.    

It is also very hard to believe that the topic of God or life after death would not have been broached over the years of contact.  If it had not been covered in the briefings, then, given you other interests, would it not have been your top priority question. 

This is why I remain skeptical about a categorical statement portraying a purely ‘nuts and bolts’ exchange. 

Rick Doty was adamant in speaking to me that the reason for the non-disclosure primarily had to do with the disturbing message that was conveyed to us in the contact.  He refused to further characterize this message.  You have held Rick’s information in high regard, but now there is this singular discrepancy? 

If no cogent answer is forthcoming, I will have to get back to Ron about it.  Allegedly, this person has had conversations with several Presidents and DCIs on the topic of the visitation.  It is hard to believe that the metaphysical issues never came up.  His categorical statements concerning the purely 'nuts and bolts' aspect of the visitation just don't compute.  Then he goes on to claim that everything to do with UFOs, other than this core story is simply delusional.  Are we dealing with a deeply irrational individual, or is this story merely a construct, intentionally disinformational, or both?  This will have to be straightened out before I can move forward.  Or is this simply meant to be an obstacle to progress?  I have sent a strongly worded note to Ron threatening to go outside with my questions and concerns about this particular matter.  He is the one who 'owns' the clearances for the individual in question. 


I'm supposed to meet with Ron tomorrow about BJ and his problem.  BJ is alleged to be deeply disturbed about something to do with the visitation.  It must have something to do with information that was conveyed to us in some convincing fashion. 

It is fair to say that an eschatological warning fits into the visitation scenario and its cover-up better than any other type of warning. 

If this were the case, this would have been the primary purpose of the visit.  There would have had to have been a reasonably imminent time-line, along with action items for us, including a suggested disclosure process.  There would necessarily be a tie-in with the prophetic tradition, and so some messianic event would have been indicated for facilitation. 

I would suggest that this scenario be the subject of the next Aquarium meeting.  The meeting would be early in September.  Who should be invited?  Who not invited? 

How many are aware of the eschatological version of the visit?  Are there factions within this number?  What is the politics? 

What are the action items?  Where are we on the time-line?  What does the President know?  How many Senators know?  Chris Straub?  How many other countries are involved?  Where does this tie-in to 9/11? 



It seems that there is more than one version of the bj/jn meeting.  Naturally, one is a bit more provocative than the other.  jb is probably not happy about being excluded from something.  He may not realize that he is being diverted to something else having to do with cl.  We might wonder about his being held in reserve up to this point.  Did the meeting go as planned?  Or was there a misstep by our guy?  Is there a breakdown, as suggested.  Perhaps there is a third version, even more provocative, that was disturbing.  Early recovery may be optimistic, and then what?  How critical is he?  Why so anti-communicative?  He is a major test subject.  Difficult to replace.  What is my input supposed to be?  Something had been going on with s for a year prior.  What about mp and dd? 

Where is the action item in all of this?  Who do I go after next?  How many more prelims?  Where is the chase?  Who has the plan?  I'd settle for a visible green light.  Visible to whom?  Message to jb?  And to Jack.  Then wait.



We have come to another impasse.  BJ still refuses to cooperate, even after a direct request from P.  This is a carryover from last summer.  It is hard to see how this obstacle can be ignored going forward.  It has become an major issue between us.  One might wonder if this was the intention.  The additional information about the meeting with JN that was indirectly relayed, was to the effect that he was in the loop.  Still no clue as to what may come next, if anything.  I don't see any advantage to pushing any more than I have already.  This is nothing about individual control. 

The bi-static radar or software defined radio, SDR, may provide an analogy as to how we receive cosmic signals.  It is a collective effort with multiple inputs.  The emphasis is on the coordination method.  There must be various forms of triangulation.  This is what we would do for the eschaton.  There would be various checkpoints such as 9/11.


After talking to Joe, the plan is to go back to Bill and then to P with the second version of the meeting.  If they deny it, then I would be inclined to go to Jack for dissemination.  That would be the most I could do.  There would be as much detail as possible.  Would this burn the bridge?  That is possible.  I can do this right here and now, just leaving out the names.  All I need is A-F. 

A is a high level intelligence officer.  B is a former mid-level officer, who used to work for C.  B asks A to arrange a meeting with C.  A tells me that he will do so and expects that this favor will persuade B to be more forthcoming with me.  B is chagrined when I pass this back to him. 

The meeting takes place in July.  Included are B, C and D who is a friend of A.  In an email to A and me, B briefly describes the meeting.  B does most of the talking, providing C with a recap of the information he has gathered, mainly over the last two decades, particularly in various briefings, with an emphasis on what he learned just in the last year.  B also tells C that he has had face-to-face conversations on this topic with 5 DCI's, 3 Presidents and many General Officers.  C then tells B to be more circumspect in the future.  In a subsequent dinner with me, B reiterates his determination to provide me with no further information on this topic. 

A then calls E and provides him with an additional piece of information about this meeting.  The purpose of the meeting was for B to petition C that he be given greater access to inside information.  C refused the request on the basis that his particular expertise was not presently needed.  E passed this information to F, who, in turn, passed it to me.  I then asked E if he had recently spoken with A, and he denied having done so.  A did volunteer to me that B did not make a very good case to C about the visitation.  B provided C only with his direct experience, without attempting to paint a broader picture.  This approach would make sense, however, in the context of the subsequently revealed purpose of the meeting. 

The above content has been sent privately to Jack and Bill.  Wherein I state that, In my estimation, this is the most provocative, specific and possibly actionable piece of information that we presently possess concerning ‘official’ knowledge and involvement with UFOs. 

In response, Jack evinces a conceptual grasp of the situation that may not be adequate to sustain his participation here.  The bigger picture of the visitation continues to elude him, in part due to its failure to support his own scenario. 



Jack was a bit more amenable on the phone last night.  Now I need to check with Bill.  People still want a meeting, but that depends on BJ, it would seem.  He is holding out for a promotion, but what will he bring to that table?  It is not the science or biology that is lacking.  Why need he be such an ingrate?  It is possible that he was partly read into the R&D show, and now is stalling for more time or info. 

The core story is now being recirculated through Jack.  We may have to strike while that iron is still warm.  Ed is then a problem with good celestial humans and his bad grays.  The CHs are the absentees.  They left no infrastructure. 



Ed K. has been keeping me posted on Bill Hamilton & Co.  It claims, in effect, to be a second aviary.  Their posting rate has ramped up considerably just in the last few weeks.  The hypothesis is that there has been a split over disclosure on the inside.  The story goes that there is a Committee of the Majority composed of some 32 international Masonic/illuminati types, of unknown ethnic persuasions.  This is an umbrella group with some sway over various specialized subgroups, the first of these being MJ12 with scientific and technical expertise.  Presumably there would be other subgroups in the political, economic and religious areas.  Where the Aviary might fit in is anyone's guess.  Dan Burisch is supposed to be a conduit from the disclosure faction. 

The story, allegedly from Dan, is that there are splitting timelines due to future trauma on Earth c. 2012.  Denizens of the various timelines use time portals to come back and manipulate us according to a variety of agendas, including intervention in the genetic and prophetic areas.  I still prefer the BPW, Mandelbrot parallel-worlds, Powers & Principalities cosmology with overlapping and non-linear timelines. 

There are natural and artificial portals here.  The artificial ones can be problematic.  They could contribute to the 2012 debacle in which they suddenly expand to Earth dimension and there is the primary time split between the few lines leading to the Celestial Humans and the many lines leading to the 'underground' Deros/ETs that are dead ends.  We have a potpourri of UFO legends, but this is much closer to the BPW scenario of geocentricity among parallel worlds, along with an eschatology, rather than to the original astronaut version of the ETs.  



Jack states that by adding a non-linear term to QM, he will account for most paranormal phenomena.  Those that cannot be so explained will be taken to be mental projections.  That this can pass for physicalism ought to be an embarrassment. 

The typical paranormal phenomenon exhibits intelligent control, i.e. mind over matter.  That this single non-linear term can first account for mind and then for its control over matter is simply incredible. 

In another area, the split remains between the old and new aviaries.  Collins and Hamilton remain at each others throats.  This does not bode well for progress on the disclosure front.  Then BJ remains uncooperative.  This lack or progress may spell the end of this year's initiative that began at the beginning of this page, back in April.  The question then is what it might take to resume the process at a later date, and whether I should attempt a unilateral effort.  Both Jack and BJ would need a concerted external push to produce any movement. 

On the research front, I have not given much thought to reestablishing priorities.  The marginal returns will be lower for the time being. 



<-- Prev      Next -->

Topical Index