Sunday, October 31, 2010

SP11 - Strickler Responds to Ufology

There has been and will most likely continue to be an argument between ufologists and zealot skeptics in reference to the existence of UFOs. "Do you believe in UFOs?"...the answer should be "I accept that unexplained objects are seen in the sky."

Society demands conclusive answers even if the reasoning is fallacious. Interest in the subject is usually construed as belief in aliens from other planets. This connection needs to be revolutionized, an objective that our future generations should strive to attain.

The "U" in UFO represents "unidentified"...most people and the media incorrectly assume "UFO" also means "aliens". This acronym is a detriment to other perspectives of the phenomenon, ex. abductions, close encounters, etc.

People that have an interest in UFOs need to realize that the aggregate examination of UFOs is simply theory. Overall, everything we perceive is basically theory...some are just more reliable than others.

SP11 Ouellet commenting on “reality” and ufology

“There is nothing truer than myth: history, in its attempt to ''realize'' myth, distorts it, stops halfway; when history claims to have ''succeeded,'' this is nothing but humbug and mystification. Everything we dream is ''realizable.'' Reality does not have to be: it is simply what it is.” Eugene Ionesco

Ufology, like any other attempt to regiment thought (hence the word “discipline” to distinguish the various sciences), is essentially a social process of inclusion and exclusion of what is relevant; it will both cast light and darkness at the same time. The fundamental question is always the same one: on what basis exclusion and inclusion are determined. The naive thinker would say “just observe and this will become clearer”, yet the less naive would ask “observe what?”. As soon as an answer is given to this last question, what is relevant has already been pre-determined. This is a classical epistemological issue.

Concretely, why UFO should be approached in any different ways than ghost ships stories, Bigfoot sightings, haunted coaches or lake monsters (just to name a few possibilities)? There are no good answers to this question. The airship waves of the late 19th and early 20th centuries were associated to a maverick inventor; UFOs, from the mid-20th century, were associated with spaceships from another world. As we look at a phenomenon, we will see what is being included and ignore what is excluded. Yet, any “discipline” ought to be reflexive; it needs to challenge its own assumptions, otherwise it is no more a “discipline” but rather an “enforcement”. What is excluded becomes “banished” and ultimately treated as a heresy. People “must” believe, and there must be something wrong for those who do not. The greater the intensity of the enforcement, the greater the cast of the shadow is.

In Jungian terms, shadows are archetypes, oftentimes guarding the entrance to the unconscious. They play a role in becoming a good excuse for not discovering what does not work; what does not work is a dysfunctional crutch for other unmet needs. Overcoming such neurosis, it is not about destroying the shadow, but about changing the lighting conditions to reduce the intensity of the shadow (and therefore moving away from enforcement). Yet, the pre-condition to all this is acknowledging the crutch and the unmet needs, a much more difficult task.
The UFO phenomenon, once more in Jungian terms, could be seen as the outcome of archetypes activation through the collective unconscious. The disenchantment of the world, arguable reaching its peak in the post-WWII with its naive belief in scientism, left many facing an existential void. The need to believe is a powerful human drive, and when it is unmet, anything goes. Durkheim’s first substantive observation about modern societies was just that: anomy. The UFO phenomenon serves the purpose of creating shadows, by blocking the way to the unconscious so that the real challenges are not addressed. Ufology, by casting shadows, cannot be distinguished from the phenomenon as they are in a symbiotic relationship.

“Describe a circle, stroke its back and it turns vicious.” Eugene Ionesco

Saturday, October 23, 2010

SP-10 Phillips Responds To Strickler

Lon, interesting evidence of events highly suggestive of alien mutilation or something similar. I've seen you cover some of these cases before on Phantom and Monsters (indeed, I may be mistaken but remember a very similar case in Pennsylvania I think) and they are mind boggling.

That said, IMO, they ARE limited. I mean, even if they number a few dozen (no comfort of course to those caught in such a situation) that is known via evidence on bodies `left behind' - a few dozen is truly minimal - at least IMO. And IF aliens are behind it - one could also assume something as nefarious as what Erich was suggesting IMO also --- that the aliens see us as perhaps no more important than a rosebush. (I do feel uncomfortable talking of `aliens' as ONE thing as I feel that up to four types of `entities' may interact with humans - as I've blogged about on The Heavy Stuff).

However, I do have to provide you with a link to missing person statistics - indeed, for 2009 even - and I think you will find the number of missing folks - at least officially thru government numbers - is considerably lower than the 10 million number.

Indeed, the link is burdensome to use IMO. But, IF I am reading it right - seems that less than 100,000 of the folks reported missing since 1975 are still `missing' --- (I could be wrong on this -- as when I first read the data - it seemed that up to 50,000 a year could still be `missing'.). Nevertheless, I do wonder if you had a link source too. Perhaps the millions number is a world based number?

Finally, I'd say that EVEN if it were a much larger number - that as a culling source - and EVEN if it were all aliens doing it - they wouldn't be making any real dent in population increases in the current world make-up. As world population is still increasing at nearly 100,000,000 a year.

Indeed, IF the real number of missing missing people over the last 35 years is indeed 90,000+, then that would mean about 3K a year and I'd be more than likely to say that those are in the bottom of lakes - and that someone got away with murder.

All that said, - IMO is it possible that aliens are abducting humans and that some are indeed killed, or mutilated? My answer is that it is possible - but - again IMO - just a small fraction of supposed `abduction' cases or ones who believe they have been abducted. I'm of the camp that favors a `structure of perception' answer to nearly all of these IMO subjective experiences.

The C Influence Blog - Actualizing Discussion!

Thursday, October 21, 2010

SP10 - Strickler Responds to the 'Necessity of Plagues'

The necessity of plagues. I find this to be an interesting term. Are these natural plagues - disease, famine, insect swarms, etc? How about man-made plagues or culling of the human herd - deliberate and systematic elimination of undesirables. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious other words, genocide. These events are necessary?

It's the same game we have played since early man grabbed that first rock and cracked opened a few heads. That same offender quickly realized that his actions made others afraid of him. He had instant power and status. Humans would continue to die as a result of disease and war. To the victors go the spoils, to the vanquished...well, they're dead. Then when humans can't kill off enough of our own, other entities will ultimately step in to finish the job. Well, it has already started.

The human race is merely a commodity to be harvested by interterrestrial and extraterrestrial beings. Abductions, sub-surface human herding, mind manipulation, slave labor, etc...why anyone would suggest that we are not 'in contact' with alien entities is beyond rational logic. You don't believe it? Then take the time to read the evidence.


For many years, there have been cases where the 'human mutilation' phenomenon has been suspected as a cause or effect to human deaths though, most cases have been officially ruled accidental.

A 1994 abduction case represented one of the most disturbing deaths of a human being ever reported. The victim was subjected to brutal mutilation, though the reality is that what happened to him is far more disturbing than brutality. This was systematic mutilation. There was specific surgical skill and human anatomy knowledge used as the perpetrators removed the left eye, the left ear, the lips, the tongue, and the jaw bone. As well, two perfectly round holes were incised into the chest and the entire rectal trait was removed.

The body was found near the Guarapiranga reservoir, located south of the city of São Paulo, Brazil. A actual copy of the autopsy report can be found here.

From the autopsy report: "We observed the removal of the right and left orbital areas, emptying of the mouth cavity, pharynx, oropharynx, neck, right and left armpit area, abdomen, pelvic cavity, right and left groin area."

"The axillary regions on both sides showed soft spots where organs had been removed. Incisions were made on the face, internal thorax, abdomen, legs, arms, and chest. Shoulders and arms have perforations of 1 to 1.5 inches in diameter where tissue and muscles were extracted. The edges of the perforations were uniform and so was their size. The chest had shrunk due to the removal of internal organs."

"Cause of death...acute haemorhage in multiple traumatisms. There is a component of causa mortis by vagus stimulation" (implying cardio-respiratory arrest caused by extreme pain). "The victim shows injuries with vital reaction characteristics, i.e., there is the component "torture". The suggested modus operandi is: incisions in soft parts and natural orifices using sucking devices".

We are to assume that the victim was alive during these procedures and most likely succumbed to blood loss and extreme pain. Some may ask if humans could have performed this horror...and I would have to say 'yes'. But the circumstances make that theory less than likely since it appears no restraints or weapons were involved and the residents of this area would not have the expertise to accomplish this feat.

Another incident was that of Sgt. Jonathan Lovette, who worked at the White Sands Missile Range. While on a two-man mission to collect debris from outside of the base perimeter, something unusual occurred. Lovette’s companion returned in terror to the base and claimed he had seen Lovette whisked into a flying disk by some kind of tentacle-like appendage which descended from the vehicle. Days later, Lovette’s body was found, mutilated almost beyond recognition. As in many cattle mutilations, the genitals, rectum and eyes had been cored out and the body was drained of blood. Lovette’s companion was initially charged with murder but the charges were later dropped.

In Great Britain there was the case of Zygmunt Adamski. An immigrant from Poland who had come to Great Britain during the war and settled there afterwards. The 57 year-old Mr. Adamski disappeared one night while walking to a local shop to buy some potatoes. His body was found four days later at the top of coal pit, approximately 30 miles away. There were strange burn marks on his body, and it looked as if some kind of ointment had been used to treat them.

Discussions with local health experts were unable to identify this unknown ointment. Local officials had seen strange lights in the sky on the night Adamski’s body was found. The coroner pronounced the death as baffling and said that it's mysterious nature lent credence to the "UFO theory."

These incidents are just a small sample of this phenomenon. If these mutilations were carried out by an intelligent alien species then the question must be asked...what are their real intentions? People go missing daily. Hundreds of thousands have never been found...without a trace. Are we considered a commodity to alien species?

Engineer and geologist Phil Schneider, who died in the 1990's due to a suspicious death claimed that world military and political powers have been in, "constant conflict with the outer space alien" both underground and on the surface. These aliens he stated, included the Small Greys, the Large Greys, and the Reptilians.

In the U.S. alone there are reports of over 10,000,000 people going missing per year. Out of this figure, a little over 500,000 are never found. That's one-half of one million Americans that are lost without a trace. Imagine what the figures are worldwide.

Question: The necessity of plagues? Answer: Nope...not needed.

Click for video

Click for video
Presented by Butch Witkowski who is a MUFON volunteer investigator and 27 year veteran police detective at the annual Pennsylvania Local MUFON conference.

Read for more reference at UFO Media Matters: UFOs And Human Mutilations as well as my previous post at The Todd Sees Case: Alien Abduction, Murder and Coverup

Mack, John E. - Abduction: Human Encounters with Aliens

SP-10 - Phillips Comments On The Neccessity of Plagues

There are a number of ideas that Erich brings forth that seldom make it into common thoughts - serious thoughts - about the whole Alien Issue. Indeed, what I like most is his leap into the assumption that they seeded man and that they have been monitoring their creation (us) and our planet for eons - and eons.

Indeed, not only is it not an outlandish assumption - it is possibly the probable scenario. And, if true, the `attitude' that Erich ascribes to the aliens is probably dead on; we are a herd to be culled when out of control - OR - controlled (much like what the NUKE UFO news conference of Sept. 27th) to prevent our folly with our planet, the living Earth.

Additionally, I really appreciate Erich's dead on evaluation of the media control of the overpopulation issue - one that I have been featuring at least a bit on my own Politics blog. Indeed, one is looked at like a devil for even bringing it up - politicians in this country will NEVER bring it up as how could they guarantee a ROI (return on investment) to entrepreneurs.

I also welcome Erich bringing the political tone he does and his biting assessments of the antelopes and how the nature of unintended consequences doesn't seem to sink in to many of the goody two shoes. And, I loved this line:

"But again, they are not as intolerant: their compassion is much more advanced than the average Hallmark cutesy superficiality. They don't stomp on one creature because its slimy and then prize and love another because its adorable"

As indeed, a PLANET guardian would have far bigger concerns than one species - even if it is the `highest' one and the created one.

If aliens exist and I think they do, they are surely looking down on us and factoring in just what combination of ecological disasters must occur to get us back to self-sustaining level, how long they should extend hunting season to get rid of all those deer parading through their backyards and eating all their rose bushes.....They'd be so slick you wouldn't even know they were behind your crippling flu

It's at this point that I would perhaps state that while they `could do it' - I'd be of the opinion that they wouldn't actually `cull the herd' - except in rare circumstances. I fully believe the aliens would be hands off unless it involved the planet living conditions. And, to me, wouldn't a crash of the electric grid pretty much do the trick for a quick cull?

"a vague 'see no evil' strategy, we refuse even to acknowledge the dark ambivalence of our own third eye unconscious, turning much of the 'New Age' philosophy into death-denying, evil-denying "all is love and light" bravado. All can be love, and love is stronger than darkness, but you wouldn't even 'feel' the light if not for that darkness. You wouldn't know what heat was if not for cold. We don't even know we're alive half the time if we're not facing death and confronting life's end at least once in awhile."

Love the above --- what would Blossom Goodchild think of that?

"I'm not saying become a Nazi or a murderer and I'm not saying stop taking your medicine, I'm just saying what I think needs to be said and hasn't.  If I the ideas in this post were commonly held beliefs, I'd be against them! I draw broad points because I'm trying to balance out the hysteria and irrationality of the other extreme. I do think that until we stop acting scared and holy and start owning up to our inner murderers we'll never be able to rid ourselves of modern society's stagnant hypocrisy. It's like in AA: you can't be helped until you admit you're sick.  If we can surrender to the inevitable, not demonize decay, and learn to stop struggling against mortality's sticky nets, not only will we be calmer and less antisocial, it might be just the thing that makes our keepers stir from their sleepy watch and pick up their clipboards and call the doctor in... a breakthrough in the treatment! Maybe then they'll decide we're ready to finally be cut loose and released back into the wild."

Nothing like brutal esoteric politics - Welcome Erich.


BUT, how can I not love Ouellet's point of view - as I am a market researcher too. And, Eric nails the correct viewpoint concerning population rates, skin color, and poverty levels and the reason for nearly all of the current conditions.

Indeed, FEW people are aware that with an assumption of falling birth rates in `developing countries' that the Earth will supposedly top out in population about the year 2200 or so and then will decline in population if birth rates hold to current and previous projections.

That said, I think Erich is probably 100% aware of the same `facts' and the situational cause of the politics of the world too. And, obviously, the so-called leaders of the `nations' are nearly all A influence, short sighted, and nearly worthless IMO. (But, don't get me started down that path.) Which, consequently, prevents any distribution of equality in nearly every manner. Of any resources.

Then, Eric drops this line in:
If there are aliens visiting us, and I really do not think it is a possibility,

Eric, my man, while not a certainty as far as a nuts and bolts comes in a vehicle aliens (though I'd say it is certainly over 50% - but - unlike many --- I don't think the nuts and bolts aliens are substantial in numbers and perhaps not a significant force compared to other `entities' that interact with consciousness) I will look forward to more about the above line.

(BTW, the person I am making initial motions too to join us at TCI would be a person who has many ideas about entities and human interactions.)

Finally, Eric says:
If there is a problem, it is in Western countries where industrialism and capitalism pushes the envelope of resources consumption to an ever-increasing level. Our hypothetical aliens would certainly ask themselves: they know this is unsustainable, so why they are persisting in that way of life?

Which IMO is the exact point of Erich's whole post - the aliens will simply cull the herd to cure the stupidness --- OR - as Eric says ---- indeed, ---- they may simply move onward.

TCI - hard to find a better discussion on the internet. Tell your friends about The C Influence Blog.

SP 10 – Ouellet on Demographics

The notion of overpopulation is one that is very much woven into ideological views. Those who wrote on the topic invariably refer to Malthus, and neo-Malthusian perspectives, to lay their argument. The best known of the neo-Malthusian writers is, arguably, Paul Ehrlich. These authors have been seriously criticized for the shortcomings of the neo-Malthusian approach, and such criticism is actually based on facts.

Anyone who knows about demographics is aware that Western countries (including Japan) are facing a serious demographic decline due to lower birthrates, and that immigration is the only way to avoid a population reduction in absolute numbers. This issue is discussed extensively and very publically in business, government and education milieus. Then, there are the cases of China and India which have experienced a slower population growth, in part directed by their respective government and in part caused by cultural practices of favouring male infants over female ones. Malthusian mathematical projections were always defeated by facts, and this conclusion still stand. So, really, where is the over-population problem?

Economists have studied this “C influence” on population and have provided powerful evidence that as a society becomes wealthier the lower its birthrate is. As well, from a sociological perspective, it is now well established that the higher the social status of women is the lower the birth rate is. This combination of influences explains in great part the demographic decline in the West, and provides additional clues to understand the slower growth in China and India.

Then, the issue is really why people still see a problem with over-population? One problem is, of course, confusing images from mass media and understanding processes. The Earth can sustain a much larger population, so the real issue is about how well resources are distributed, and not the lack of resources. So far, distribution is not very good, to say the least. If there are aliens visiting us, and I really do not think it is a possibility, I think that would be their first question: why are they not distributing their resources better?

Another problem is about how the unfair distribution is organized. Let’s be very clear here: overall, the browner your skin is the less you will have. The existing unfair distribution is very much an outcome of colonialism, which itself was based on racism and social Darwinism. So, these hypothetical aliens are likely to ask why these earthlings are dividing their resources unfairly on such a superficial and irrelevant issue as skin color (after all, aren’t we all Grey?...).

The last problem is the implicit fear that there will not be enough resources to sustain our Western life-style, so it is up to the (brown skin) others to curb their population growth and resource consumption. As an ethnocentric, and quite frankly racist, view, it is hard to beat. If there is a problem, it is in Western countries where industrialism and capitalism pushes the envelope of resources consumption to an ever-increasing level. Our hypothetical aliens would certainly ask themselves: they know this is unsustainable, so why they are persisting in that way of life?

In the end, I think our hypothetical aliens would say: “What a bunch of weirdoes! Let’s move on and see if there is something more interesting somewhere else”.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Seed 10: The Necessity of Plagues

Sure as all stars return again after they merge in the light,
death is great as life     - Walt Whitman
As a species, we humans are notorious for being completely blind to our own basic problems with sexuality and overpopulation, while chipping away at all the other outmoded biological functions--i.e. vice, sloth, intolerance, superstition--with complete lack of hesitation wherein the 'best interest' of common humanity overrules the possibly dangerous but perhaps worthwhile endeavors of the few. For example, psychedelic drugs and marijuana are outlawed even though almost no one dies from them and the health benefits are proven and substantial. The reason is always the same, 'the kids.' Meanwhile as a kid I assure you pot was easier to get than booze. (Cigarettes at the time had no age limit, and I smoked at my first office job at age 16) and far less destructive.  Sports that might be considered dangerous meanwhile are not outlawed, as the concept of physical death defying becomes somehow 'healthier' and more universal than the internal skydiving of, say, an acid trip. But how much of this is fear of the unknown and how much is actual human compassion? How much is short-sighted empathy and how much is genuine 'seventh generation' wisdom?

I consider myself pretty compassionate and yet I'm troubled by huge problems that only a few of us 'enlightened' or 'misanthropic' people seem to notice, and any solution to these problems other than 'the more the merrier' is dismissed as hateful.

Few of us argue that domesticated dogs and house cats shouldn't be "neutered" unless specifically meant as a breeder, and through sterilization we not only prevent more kittens and puppies being born than we can handle, we also, as Cesar Milan the Dog Whisperer says, eliminate the aggressive sexual frustration of animals not often presented with opportunities to mate.

And yet, who is more domesticated than man? Who suffers more from overpopulation and violence and antisocial behavior born of sexual frustration? Who breeds and breeds even when he has no means of support or idea how to provide or where on this packed earth is left to forage in? And yet, thanks to Catholicism and fundamental Christianity's hysterics and our elevation of sex--nature's most sophisticated of genetic con jobs--to some great and wonderful pie in the sky, this outrage and imposition goes unchallenged. Then there's history, wherein population control advocates are inevitably linked to Nazis.  One can't even mention over-population without drawing hostile responses from journalists like this chick below at Fox News, in an interview with Californians for Population Stabilization's Rick Oltman:

This video makes it clear that we're--on a basic mass level--a species that's so squeamish about facing matters of death, population control, sterilization, castration, and so forth that if someone tries to tell us their views we leap all over them, like if we don't instantly stomp on their little sapling of an idea it will blossom into a Nuremberg rally within minutes. We can assume it's along similar routes of avoidance (and of course good capitalism) that we've gone ahead blindly with programs designed--it seems--to keep the  maximum amount of poor, sick, and elderly people alive, even if it means draining earth's resources, and the finances of their great grandchildren, to do so.

Consider as a parable the environmental catastrophe wreaked upon the Native Americans or other indigenous races throughout the world during the height of colonial expansion and through to today. In areas where humanity and nature co-exist in actual harmony, it is always through the same model, of small hunter gatherer villages separated by miles of hunting territory. In these environments, people are always having sex, and naturally occurring population control factors like disease and infant mortality keep the population stable. When old people are no longer able to function unassisted, they are sent off into the woods to die. Deformed children are killed immediately. When Doctors without Borders and Christian missionaries or whatever international team moves in, infant mortality and the abandoning of the elderly are eliminated, resulting in ever-spiraling health care costs, increased population, decreased resources, the arrival of mass unemployment and what the theorists call "bare life," which can only allay the symptoms rather than eliminating (through, say, mass sterilization in economically stricken areas) the problem.

My grandmother is 96 years old and can barely move thanks to a really bad hip joint, and she is really bored with being so dependent on everyone, but when she even mentioned aloud she might want to stop taking her pills and just die naturally, the assisted living team began an intensive suicide watch: "I should have kept my mouth shut," she says in her letters, knowing I'll understand. Her own mother--my great grandmother--died at 107, so my Granny still may have a good decade left to go, of just lying around in a bed wishing her eyes could focus enough to read a book, and that she had been a smoker. I mention this of course as a comparison to the above description of the elderly sent off to die or left behind on an ice floe. If you examine both solutions to this difficult issue, is the 'green' one really so hard to discern?

In past posts I've compared humanity's relation to the greys and other alien species with conservationists at an African wildlife reserve. To bring in the overpopulation element, I would say it's akin to an overly concerned environmentalist riding to the rescue of a baby antelope separated from its mom and about to get ripped to shreds by a pride of lions--maybe the conservationist's PETA girlfriend or whiny children are visiting, seeing what's about to happen through binoculars, and then crying and demanding he go stop it. It's an impulsive move, but he saves the antelope and dozens more, and now he just can't turn them loose to be eaten, and he has resorted to feeding the now-starving lions with tins of beef imported from the states (compassion is always relevant to proximity, so the slaughter of the cute cows to fill the tins isn't considered).

After doing this for a number of years, the besieged but good-hearted environmentalist wonders why the antelope are so overpopulated and polluting the grasses with their dung and scorching the earth by eating everything that's not nailed down. Meanwhile the lions have grown sluggish and diseased on cheap Spam,  they've forgotten how to hunt. Everyone is now completely  dependent on our environmentalist.  The once mighty beasts of the jungle are now mere rats and roaches, parasites, a movable plague. Could foresight of this problem be why we've been sent mass genocide, disease and famine by our unseen rulers?

There's a scene in the sci fi movie THE LATHE OF HEAVEN (1979, above) wherein the hypno-therapist asks his patient (who can change the world when under hypnotism-controlled dreaming) to do something about the horrible overcrowding of their rainy Portland Oregon of the future. When the patient wakes up, 2/3 of the world population has been killed by a plague. "Oh no! This is terrible!" laments the therapist. But of course all that grief is soon forgotten when the benefits of elbow room are made apparent. It's an interesting sudden shift from this humane universal concern to personal relief. After all, does it make us savages if we think of how overpopulated our world would be without the bubonic plague, or the endless wars and genocides through the ages? When examined with detached clarity, it's apparent we owe our mass murdering ancestors a debt of gratitude we're far too humane to ever acknowledge.

If we can for the sake of argument presume the hypothesis that aliens 'seeded' us into existence, then our lives and deaths are most likely the equivalent to them of the antelope and lions to us, only the greys are the wise naturalists that prefer to let the lions do their job, let nature take it's gruesome, bloody course and keep the circle of life revolving in good order. The alien "gods" think in terms of generations, epochs, not the little flickers of centuries, so the cry of "Why have you forsaken us?" are barely even heard, as biblical floods or asteroids wipe failed genetic experiments from the drawing board. The aliens watch generations rise and fall and wars break out and mass famine and plagues are brought down to 'thin the herd' so to speak. To them we really are like rats and roaches. But again, they are not as intolerant: their compassion is much more advanced than the average Hallmark cutesy superficiality. They don't stomp on one creature because it's slimy and then prize and love another because it's adorable. 

If aliens exist they are surely looking down on us and factoring in just what combination of ecological disasters must occur to get us back to self-sustaining level. When you watch or listen to WAR OF THE WORLDS (above) don't kid yourself that the ending isn't the other way around; it's we who die from the flu, the latest version the grays had to invent to keep our numbers down. In real life they would never stoop so low as to march around firing lasers at fleeing humans like a bunch of futuristic Mongols. They'd be so slick you wouldn't even know they were behind your crippling illnesses. Clacking and clattering the universe into existence like an old lady sewing circle, they discard plenty of thread. The thing is it's on us if we choose to identify with the thread to the point we insist on hoarding it. We're the thread but we're also the sewing, the circle, the needles.

We, underneath the illusion-maya blanket they weave for us, are like children afraid of the boogeyman, allowing them--the aliens-- to rule the dark side of the moon between death and birth, a land we're too scared to peek out from under the covers to map out and reclaim for ourselves. In a vague 'see no evil' strategy, we refuse even to acknowledge the dark ambivalence of our own third eye unconscious, turning much of the 'New Age' philosophy into death-denying "all is love and light" bravado. 

All can be light and love, and love is stronger than darkness, but you wouldn't even 'feel' the light if not for that darkness. You wouldn't know what heat was if not for cold. We don't even know we're alive half the time if we're not facing death and confronting our mortality at least once in awhile. If you're happy all the time, happiness disappears. When you finally find that obscure object of desire, it's suddenly just an object. The grail is just a wine glass once you take that first drink.

So instead of the commonly held and completely dopey notion that the aliens are waiting until we stop our barbarism before they land on the White House lawn, maybe we should ask ourselves if it's the reverse: they're waiting for us to develop a way of life and death far-reaching enough that we become less emotional and sentimentally attached to our disposable vehicles, waiting until we develop a clearer eyed approach to parallel reality, life beyond death, reincarnation, astral travel, and the creation of artificial means of preserving human intellect and energy beyond the physical body. For now, as we begin to let in the idea of advanced alien intelligences, we really need to move beyond our avoidance of death and examine what some might consider Draconian (but is actually the opposite): population control.

These alien 'gods' are forces to whom birth and death are nothing more than two of the hundred stops on a very complicated express train. If we want to truly understand the alien agenda, and the salvation that can be found beyond their grasp, then we have to begin to just let that idea in and stop being so defensive about reproductive rights. I'm not saying become a Nazi or a murderer and I'm not saying stop taking your medicine, I'm just saying what I think needs to be said and hasn't. I draw broad points because I'm trying to balance out the hysteria and irrationality of the other extreme. I do think that until we stop acting scared and holy and start owning up to our inner murderers we'll never be able to rid ourselves of modern society's stagnant hypocrisy. It's like in AA: you can't be helped until you admit you're sick.  If we can surrender to the inevitable, not demonize decay, and learn to stop struggling against mortality's sticky nets, not only will we be calmer and less antisocial, it might be just the thing that makes our keepers stir from their sleepy watch and pick up their clipboards... a breakthrough in the treatment! Maybe then they'll decide we're ready to finally be cut loose and released back into the wild.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

SP-9 Disclosure - The NYC UFO Event(s)

All this week I've had the privilege of being a spokesperson, almost, on the subject of the NYC UFO Event of 10-13-10. Bruce Duensing also wrote a killer piece last week on Government Disclosure. You will find those links below: A new seed post is coming and at least one new writer is being recruited for TCI - stay tuned. Is Tomorrow 10-13 - The Day - THE EVENT? OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ---- Predicted UFO's Show UP And Provide A Show! The NYC `UFO Event' - The Day After, The Day After - A Gathering Of Information - The `NYC UFO Event' - My Analysis, Opinion, And Speculations - Conjectures Concerning A Repeat Of The NYC UFO Event -

Did The NYC UFO Event Begin At 9:30 A.M.? - Fraud Of Disclosure

Disclosure - In TCI - In The Skies!

Saturday, October 9, 2010

SP9: Regan’s Comments

Government Disclosure Won't Happen
The Disclosure movement means well, and disclosure proponents don’t bother me; however, I happen to think they’re naive. The government will never come clean, simply because it can’t. It’s a system that is its own entity which, regardless of original intents, ends up defending and protecting only itself. That’s the nature of all bureaucracies. It’s naive to think that the government would come forward in complete openness in regards to anything, let alone UFOs. My opinion doesn't not mean -- and it certainly doesn’t prove -- that UFOs don’t  exist, or that the government doesn't know a hell of a lot more than it’s telling. I don’t trust authority; it’s that simple. The government isn't in the truth business, so I don’t expect the government to be forthcoming. If there’s an agenda that will be satisfied by the government’s disclose concerning UFOs then they will give us “the truth” though no doubt that “truth” will be only some of the truth concerning UFOs.  There’s always a back room, which the rest of us in the front room will never get to see. The government doesn’t want to lose control over us, and it doesn’t want to admit it doesn’t know what to do about UFOs. That, and the need for self-protection, ensures that a completely authentic disclosure will never happen.

We need to focus on ourselves in regards to the UFO phenomena.

Definitions, Interpretations, Minutiae, Disclosures
UFOs exist, and that’s that. We need to get over the self-defeating cycle of engaging in the argument of whether they exist or not, and in pointless rounds of  defining “UFO.” UFOs exist; what they are, is something else. For those of us with direct experience with non-human beings and weird objects in the skies, we beg to differ when it comes to these now pointless time wasting arguments about existence. We don’t know with an absolute that the government has information concerning UFOs, although it’s a solid and rational thing to think that the government has plenty to disclose. It’s a safe and a rational assumption to make; that the government knows far more than it pretends when it comes to UFOs. No harm in asking, and for that reason, I just don’t have much of a disagreement with Disclosure people. I don’t think they’ll get anywhere, and I think it borders on the ridiculous to believe the government -- any government -- will reveal all, but it’s nice they’re trying. Little bits get revealed here and there, and that’s something. It all gets added to the vast, complex puzzle.

Even for us that have experienced such things as aliens and flying saucers and all the rest,  I can’t say they’re from outer space. They very well may be; or they could be inner earth dwelling creatures, or... combinations we haven’t even thought of. They are real, they are here. That is the reality. The rest is interpretation.

As Erich pointed out in his post,  many countries did “disclose”, in a sense. But it’s not true Disclosure until the alien is let out of the space ship on CNN. As to Project Bluebook, that was no attempt at disclosure, but a show to placate. Valuable data, thanks to the continued efforts of diligent researchers, but the intent? Appeasement and distraction.

It’s not a contest; this idea of disclosure concerning UFOs with other types of disclosure. The horrors of this world are real, and the idea that, because one has either experienced UFOs in some way in their life or has an interest in them is then uninvolved or disinterested and non-compassionate is another distraction. Interest in subject A does not negate interest -- or compassion and activism -- in subjects B, C and D. . .

The UFO phenomena is significant; and, if disclosure ever does take place, that will become even more evident. The fact that both myself and my spouse have experienced missing time in connection with UFOs on at least two occasions is very significant. And if the government was responsible for that, (a MILAB type event, for example) that’s damn well significant, because it means the government was doing things, obviously, it had no business doing. If it was aliens, that’s certainly significant.  Other possibilities, sure, but really, far less likely. No thank you very much, we are not mentally ill, or suffering from shared delusions, and I won’t dignify that argument with any more energy than this.

If one holds the view that such things don’t exist, or only exist in one context, how can it then be decided that that thing is significant or not?

It may be the aliens arrive, everyone nods and says, “Yeah, we kind of thought so,” and it’s business as usual. No major cures, wars continue, the human race isn’t saved from ourselves, the aliens don’t seem much to care. They’re here for sight seeing, or resources. They could not care less about us or the planet. Or, maybe they’re benign and loving and things will be groovy forever. I have no idea. That’s assuming  there’s just one race of alien. For all we know, there are several vying for power and control. Or, not. Point is; we don’t know.

Processing and Individuation
I accept that I’ve had experiences, and I’m trying to process them. But before we can get to some kind of individuation, as Erich refers to, we have to complete the processing, and that is different for everyone, including UFO Police, disclosure activists, and everyone else.

Is is so important we have some kind of individuation in UFOlogy? We don't know what we’re dealing with in the first place; labeling our responses to an unknown is expected -- how else do we make it so we can productively work towards understanding unless we break it down somewhat -- but we need to be aware we haven’t solved anything, simply because we stuck a label on it.

The assumption that it has to be aliens in the flying saucers, because what else could it be, is just that: an assumption. But it’s not a ridiculous assumption, nor is it irrational. It’s wrong headed to state, as a fact, that they’re aliens from outer space, but not so wrong headed to seriously consider that speculation.

It could be the UFO phenomena, including its entities, is a “mythic” journey, or some kind of “psi” event. Its responses to us  --  or what we see as in response to us -- ours to it, etc. --- our pursuit of “the answer” a hero’s journey. Into the underworld. Crossing liminal thresholds. Metaphors for an Other.  It could also be that that’s just a part of it, or that it seems that way to us, merely because of technology. As Budd Hopkins and Carol Rainey pointed out in their book Sight Unseen: Science, UFO Invisibility and Transgenic Beings , much of what the UFOs and aliens do seem “magical” to us because their technology is so beyond ours we aren’t able to perceive as simply manifestations of engineering and science. To us, it’s magic, or paranormal.

Levels of Disclosure
There’s personal disclosure, such as the encounters the individual experiences. Murky, confusing, for myself, no real anything other than the life long experiences. Very Zen like. No answers, no cures, just. .. UFOs and vague entities and weird moments over fifty plus years.  That’s pretty cool actually, and yes, significant, but as to answers: not much. Who they are, what they are, where they’re from, what they want.. nope. I can’t tell you. They just . . . are.

Then there’s the Disclosure humans. Activists who push the governments of the world to come clean. As noted, they’re naive and will never get any government to come clean. Even if an alien is shown inside a UFO on the news, and official government pronouncements are made that “they’re here,” -- how could we know they’re telling the truth? How can we be sure, really positive, that the alien isn’t a cleverly created puppet, or worse, some horrible science experiment involving hybrid animals; who knows what Dr. Evil madness lurks?

Finally, there’s the Oh My God Disclosure: “them.” They don’t need -- we don’t, won’t need -- any government to do anything. The aliens themselves have done it for us. They simply arrive in hundreds of mother ships, land, and, there you have it. They’re here. Like an episode of V, except real, a lot less cheesy, and, hopefully, not creepy human flesh eating reptilians.

Interpretations, The Djinn, Angels and Demons. . .
Some cultures accept these things as everyday realities as “normal” and expected as everything else. The mundane and the sacred are not so separate. Researchers Farah Yurdozu, Phillip Imbrogno, Rosemary Ellen Guiley (The Vengeful Djinn Unveiling the Hidden Agenda of Genies) among others, refer us to Turkish perceptions of these UFOs and beings; they call them Djinn, and accept that these entities cross into our dimension. Some Christians in our culture and elsewhere frame these experiences in a demon/angel dichotomy. While I have problems with that dogma the idea isn’t so far off. What came first, the demon/angel/god motif, or the alien from Mars?

Whatever they are, they are, and there are many paths on this very significant journey to discovery.

Friday, October 8, 2010

SP9 - Ouellet commenting on Disclosure

Demanding the disclosure of what does not exist is, in itself, an interesting anomaly about an anomaly (i.e., the UFO phenomenon). The (il)logic of disclosure has its own internal dynamics woven into the collective psyche of the nuts-and-bolts ufologists. To paraphrase Isaac Asimov, the disclosure movement is the last refuge of the ETH ufologists’ incompetence. Early on in the history of ufology, the door was open to find an exit from seriously pondering about this difficult and elusive anomaly called UFO; the government knows everything, so let’s pressure them to reveal everything. But who would admit in ufology that disclosure is an exit strategy?

Then, disclosure did happen. In spite of what many people may say, the disclosure of the largest UFO database in the 1970s, called Project Bluebook, provided a lot of useful information, and people like Hynek made good use of it. Since, other countries like Belgium, Canada, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom have done the same, providing a wealth of information. Interestingly, all these countries, including the United States, came more or less to the same conclusion: there is a small minority of UFO reports that are not explainable, but these do not represent a threat to national security and no useful technological advances can be found. These multinational conclusions are in line with the “nil” return of 65 years of ETH ufology. As public agencies are not mystery investigation organizations, it is not their business to spend public funds on researching anomalies. But who would admit in ufology that the governments of the world and ETH ufology produced similar evidence that there is nothing tangible to work with?

The disclosure movement is not only about UFOs, but it is allegedly about truth and democracy. Were the various governments not fully truthful over the years about UFO? Certainly. Did those lies really hid anything of substance? No. Would more of those revealed lies about UFO change anything? Very unlikely. By comparing themselves with those who unveil real horror stories (e.g. Watergate, unlawful medical experiments, various forms of corruption, etc.), the disclosure ufologists hope to look good, but their “stuff” is truly insignificant. Outside the people really involved in ufology, very few care about disclosure because, indeed, it is insignificant. But who would admit in ufology that disclosure is about nothing significant?

Individuation is about becoming a full-fledge individual, with his or her conscious and unconscious mind fully aligned to become totality. Individuation is about becoming aware of what one really believes at the unconscious level, so he or she can stop self-BSing at the conscious level. It means accepting oneself. But individuation is a two-way street, as it also means dealing with dysfunctional unconscious beliefs with the help of the therapist. It is about aligning the inner and outer truth, whatever it may be, to live a fulfilling life. The collective unconscious of ufology is light years away from individuation. If anything, it looks more like a collective neurosis.

Can the UFO phenomenon foster collective individuation, if the attitude is right? The small minority of UFO cases that remain unexplainable should be seen as an opportunity, rather than as a challenge, for collective growth. It encourages us to think much beyond the confine of our taken-for-granted assumptions. Its elusiveness is a constant reminder that short-cuts like “what else could it be but aliens in their spaceships” never work in science as in life in general. If the phenomenon is essentially a grand scale psi event, then it becomes our mirror, an opportunity to face our collective unspoken fears. The phenomenon oftentimes becomes woven into the political structures of our societies, reminding us that some are more equal than others; our societies remain profoundly hierarchical and create its lot of unfairness. The phenomenon does not discriminate, over time, reaching a small tiny fraction of every social classes and continent, reminding us of our common humanity. It calls upon us to be compassionate for those who were profoundly shaken by the experience.

Could we then say that the phenomenon is some sort of mythical process, guiding us towards collective individuation? It is the thesis of some. But for those acquainted with the humanities, this teleological thesis does not fare well when we look at our collective history. In the end, collective individuation is a non-sense. Individuation implies that one, by becoming totality, is not dependent on others to be. Communities, when they become truly totality, are arguably comparable to some healthy pre-modern societies. Large societies aspiring to become totality invariably became totalitarian; hardly a step forward. From all ages there were anomalies giving us opportunities to look at ourselves in a different way. Some societies, some generations chose to ignore them, others gave them heterogeneous interpretations (i.e., these must be the work of the gods), rarely were these anomalies interpreted in an autonomous way (i.e., about us, by us). These anomalies provide us with a mirror for the present; that’s it. The notion of us “evolving “ towards something (i.e. the teleological thesis) is only a projection of our collective unspoken fears; such teleological belief is in fact a symptom of a lack of individuation.

SP9: Strickler Responds to Disclosure

For decades, campaigning politicians worldwide have promised that full disclosure was imminent until, of course, they won the election, assumed office and realized that there was no way the general public was going to be told the truth for one simple reason - fear is power.

I'm amused when I think back to a quote made 25 years ago:“...when you stop to think that we’re all God’s children, wherever we may live in the world, I couldn’t help but say to him, just think how easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly there was a threat to this world from some other species from another planet outside in the universe. We’d forget all the little local differences that we have between our countries and we would find out once and for all that we really are all human beings here on this earth together...” - U.S. President Ronald Reagan on December 4, 1985 referencing a conversation during nuclear weapons negotiations with Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. This statement of solidarity may happen one day though, reality may be a bit different than the actual intent of the quote.

Wernher von Braun once revealed to Dr. Carol Rosin, his former spokesperson, that there was substantial proof that conspiratorial plans where in place by world governments and elites that justified using weapons in space and would also involve an intentional hoax of a 'false flag' extraterrestrial invasion. He referred to this as 'the last card' and it would be used to create order out of chaos. In a nutshell, the use of knowledge and technology to create fear and ultimate total control.

For all intents and purposes, actual UFO and extraterrestrial disclosure has been underway since the first human aircraft pilots reported strange lights in the sky. The extraterrestrials already reside in defined areas of this planet and have directly influenced human life since the end of World War II. Those citizens and researchers who read and examine the evidence know this to be true. The people who desire full disclosure from our governments need to be careful what they wish for...they may receive it.

Thursday, October 7, 2010

SP 9: Erich Responds to Disclosure: A Janus is Two-Faced

The idea of Disclosure from a Jungian vs. 'Universal' perspective raises an interesting question that heavy philosophy of the academic kind can't answer, as all academia is by nature filtered through the long tunnel vision of each prof's area of expertise. Academics suffer from a positivist refusal to believe or admit anything outside that 'known' area, since anything they write, say, or believe is automatically considered 'expert' testimony. It's understandable but short-sighted. If we limit ourselves to the already known then the already known begins to shrink.

Aside from the dogma of Catholic or fundamentalist Christian colleges, most academics are completely atheistic and since science refuses to acknowledge God and to admit the impossibility of pure objectivity,  they'll always be like a bunch of Dungeons and Dragons players who can't think outside the 'universe' of their parent's basement, as if to say 'sorry, I can't set my dungeon in space, it wouldn't be realistic'. On the other hand, religions that adhere to dogma "long written down" instead of championing the direct subjective experience of God are just as myopic. When a bible scholar says 'Ezekiel Saw the Wheel' for example, is he imagining a literal wagon wheel in the sky? To imagine literal interpretations of everything in the bible is to stunt reality. For example, if I see something I can't explain so I describe it as 'shiny and twisting like a snake' then in 2000 years (if I wind up in the bible) they'll say I saw a snake. Kenneth Arnold described the first UFOs as skipping across the sky like saucers...boom - he saw 'flying saucers.'

That said, we have to see this stuff as something, and there's nothing that says God shouldn't be seen as a white man in a beard instead of, say, an electrical matrix, something that might be imagined by artists like Alex Grey (below), for example, whose brilliant art reminds us that we're really not flesh and bone but electromagnetic energy running through a DNA motherboard and creating endless branches and manifestations of some pure higher consciousness. The many heads of the beings seen by Ezekiel (or the Hindi pantheon) can be perhaps translated as multiple dimension displacement effects, as per below:

The concept of 'the hero's journey' in Jung is able to adapt along with humanity, as does art, which is why my blog Divinorum Psychonauticus tries to deal with UFO and other high strangeness issues via art and collage (top), dream analysis and Charles Fort-style writing that leaves dichotomies like true/false and real/imaginary behind. When one refuses to allow themselves to be overcome by superstition and magical thinking, even for a few minutes, one misses out on the mystery of life. The more closed-off and scientific the masses become, the more desperately they need artists who can 're-mystify' the world.

Remember the purpose of the hero's journey is to leave the construct of the universal, to go deep into the woods of the personal and have that non-linguistic awakening and then to bring a piece of it back to the stale social order left behind. Art will silently effect change where a thousand competing voices cannot. But art does it indirectly, the way a therapist will lead you to the door and then back off, so you open the door on your own and go "wow, look what I found!" and the therapist goes "that's super!" while thinking to herself 'took you long enough!'

 If on the other hand the therapist takes all the credit and just says "here, look in this room: there's a, b, and c, in there" you wont think a, b, c are cool or interesting at all, you'll just think of the therapist's smug face and want to punch him for opening your presents. It's the difference between discovering America yourself and seeing a boring filmstrip on Columbus. Good art is neither one or the other, but a signifier created to instill an experience that gradually roots itself in the psyche so that you 'suddenly' discover America a few days after looking at the filmstrip. But the masses have to think it for themselves... it has to be their idea.

When you think about 'disclosure,' think about the way people who should know better still call the cops when they see strange lights in they sky, as if they expect the law to have an explanation, or to stop it, or do something about it "tell those aliens to turn off their lights so we can sleep." Right there is reason #1 why disclosure would mean the end of human civilization. Think of the government's refusal to admit the truth as the equivalent of a giant mom who sits on your bed and tells you you were having a nightmare, go back to sleep, even though she knows what you saw is real and she's powerless against it. This is one of the government's (and academia's and science's) key functions, to explain and rationalize and otherwise diffuse the terrifying enigmatic pull of the boogeyman. It's what we pay them for, and it's what gives them their assumed power.

To understand the seeming abandonment of the universal for the personal you have to turn to the east, to Taoism, and see that meditation and the evolution of the personal self are inextricably tied in to the world at large, fractal-like.

An old Taoist story goes that Chuang Tzu was visited by a student who had achieved a kind of enlightened state and was determined to go to a neighboring province where a corrupt prince was robbing his people. The student was sure if he traveled to the province and spoke to the king, the power of his enlightened state would shine through and king would see the light and lift the crippling taxes.

Chuang Tzu listened very patiently then told the student he'd help that cause far more by just staying home and meditating, sending his good will and prayers to the prince perhaps, forgiving all and removing his judgment.

I try to keep that tale in mind when I get all angry reading the morning paper. After all, what do I really know about these issues beyond what rabble rousing journalists are telling me?

I had a guy come in yesterday, an old man of 70 who's found 'inner joy' via the lectures of some guru, Pram Nam something or other.  I forget what I said to get him started, but he wouldn't stop pitching his guru's spiel about walking the path and finding joy (holding his hand over his heart and saying how joyful he was and so forth). I've written hundreds of new age music and meditation CD reviews so I've heard them ALL, every New Age spiritual thinker, and I tried to tell him there are many roads to the path up the ladder, etc., but he just sagely raised his hand as if to say 'but but but- let me wow you by delivering my humble message from the guru' and kept going on and on in this mix of sales pitch-slow, rhetorical question-laced, corporate retreat-taught dynamic speaking.

After he left, I felt sickened. I had just witnessed the process by which spirituality is hardened into dogma, the ignorance of thinking your personal ecstasy can spread through your repetitions of other people's descriptions and words, not realizing you're just positing yourself as superior (more humble, more 'in the moment') than your audience, and wondering why they close the door in your face, leaving you standing there with your pamphlet in your hand. I'm glad this guy found inner peace, but on the other hand I don't trust an inner peace that needs to trumpet its peacefulness.

Similarly, sitting around and blaming the government and the corporations and the general idiocy of the people and feeling YOU can make a difference and change the world is a fine past time, but it's not revolutionary; it actually enables and enforces the status quo. True change occurs when either a leader is so charismatic he can convince his followers to risk their own lives and walk humbly into the path of police batons and attack dogs or is ruthless enough to eliminate his opponent in the governmental process, ala Hitler's Night of the Long Knives or Stalin's mass executions.

The rise of the Tea Party is a hilarious example of the people's frustrations wherein they'd vote for inept, draconian Puritans for whom masturbation is a sin, who want to remove unwed mothers and homosexuals from teaching positions and next probably take away a woman's right to vote and reinstate prohibition and segregation. People who consider themselves conservative because they don't think the government should have a right to meddle in an individual's liberty are the same people who vote against marijuana reform and abortion rights, which makes no sense, like Jews for Hitler. They're just responding to most fear-based easy to follow rhetoric. It's fear of freedom! It's fascism! Why would anyone think fascism ever lost or will ever lose its seductive hold on basic human emotions?

It doesn't make rational sense, but in its Salem Witch trial-ish hysteria shows the very function of government in a fear-based society, which in turn shows why 'full disclosure' will never happen, and yet meanwhile has already happened. The recent testimony of astronauts and missile base officials should be enough evidence to convince anyone, but they would have to 'want' to be convinced. By withholding full disclosure the government gives people an option. Most people don't want to know and who can blame them? Those who do want to know can find enough answers amid the myths and eyewitness reports to keep them awake at night for the rest of their lives -- the truth is out there, all over the web, like a shot of terrifyingly potent whiskey... it's maybe too horrifying to fully 'take in' without without the sweet chaser that it might not be true

Another way to compare it would be parents who don't want to admit their son is gay. Let's say the son is very charismatic and athletic but has never had a girlfriend and is already 24: the parents are convinced he's just a late bloomer. The son brings home handsome boys for sleepovers and sexual moaning and rhythmic thumping sounds are heard late at night: "oh they're just being boys, probably wrestling around" - Finally the son comes out to them and the parents are literally unable to hear him say he's gay "You're hay? Like horses eat? I don't understand. Gay? Like happy in the 1930s? Of course you are!" Just switch gay for aliens and you got the picture. Hawking is the ultimate force in this, putting out a dozen documentaries on why your son isn't really gay so don't worry, you didn't fail as parents. Science can explain it all and put you back in the saddle of your own delusions.

The UFO disclosure clock at our present point in time would be right around the upstairs moaning and rhythmic thumping portion. I mean, the parents know/suspect the truth but have already buried it in a blind spot where they put their fear of their own mortality, and so forth. So with UFOs parked next the fear of death in their sub-basement unconscious parking lot, even suggesting they consider UFOs to be a reality is, by association, to sic the Grim Reaper on them.

Consider the awesome power that rock bands briefly had in the late 1960s. The Rolling Stone Altamont concert for example, was an event where the Stones had a huge amount of untapped power at their disposal -- a crowd of young people coming to San Francisco for a 'free concert' that was around the population of a small city. No army could control a swarm that big, and the Stones only had to announce where their fans should go to park the VW buses and set up their tents and that place would be instantly overrun. The local government and even the owner of the speedway was in no way going to be able to stop them, anymore than farmers could stop a swarm of locusts by waving an injunction at the sky.

Things quickly got out of hand, because they made the mistake of thinking people are basically self-governing. They are not. Individual people in small tribal units are often self-governing, but after a certain critical mass, the lowest common denominator takes over. The idea of 'need' trumps decency: "gimme gimme gimme" won the day at Altamont (hence the film's title). Woodstock was a lucky fluke. If Altamont hadn't happened, more such events would rise up and who knows what kind of chaos would reign once the good will dried up. The whole nation would be one big chainfight mudpit anarchic Hell's Angels free-for-all. Woodstock was the Roswell to Alamont's weather balloons.

In other words, stay home and listen to Beggar's Banquet on the radio. If you think the masses are dangerous and ignorant then yes, you are right - but you need to love and accept them as they are for them to change, not try and beat (brow or otherwise) some peace and truth into them, not ridicule their superstitions or rub their faces in your oxymoronic superior humility (I'm speaking to myself more than anybody. God knows I hate the masses).

In summation, the universal starts with the personal; past and future are illusions to comfort the terrified hiders from the moment; the government will only admit there are aliens when it can provide an action to deal with them or when it's such a given--aliens on the White House lawn, impervious to bullets, taking over the media--that they'd look bad not to. When people see UFOs but no one bothers to call the cops, we're getting close to that point. When people who hate the police see lights in the sky then call the cops and demand they do something about it, we're getting farther away. If we all stayed home and meditated tonight and skipped work tomorrow, the world's problems would be solved... somehow.

There's nothing wrong with the world in the end, or the masses, or the government, it's just our own perspective, and when we let go of that fixed identity in the sanctity of our private meditation headspace, we're forced to realize just how terrified of freedom we really are.

If we are ever able to let go of that fear, and let go of our nerve ending's tenacious hold on the realms of our perceived bodily awareness, then there would no longer be a 'we' at all, nor an 'I' nor a 'you' and all difference between individual and universal perception would completely dissolve. If that 'sounds' like it could be good, ask yourself this: how will you hear it without ears, or know whether its good or bad without judgment, or remember it without time? 

Monday, October 4, 2010

J.S. Flower - Observations on Society - Most Abused Substance

Operating at the very edge of The C Influence - the rantings of J.S. Flower can be found on two sidebars of my blogs (normally started when I send him some internet link - this time he is responding to a link I had featured on one of my blogs that provided a 30 Trillion dollar `solution' to the economic mess this country is in IMO) and now on TCI. I've also included a link in a similar vein from Bruce Duensing.
J.S. Flower:

Yo R.,

The other day after opening your link about bailout $ and the absolute absurdity of the situation...

I am reading from a book that I got while out west entitled: Dragons in Paradise ON THE EDGE BETWEEN CIVILIZATION AND SANITY (loved the subtitle written and signed by a Gunnison valley local who lived in Crested Butte in the 60's onward...) Anyway, after reading your bit I open the book where I had stopped and the next chapter was entitled:

The Trouble with Money

"The purpose of this piece is to arouse awareness about the most addictive, most culturally destructive, and most abused substance known to humankind: money

Some conventional Christian capitalists might want to gently correct that, and suggest that "love of money," or maybe "lust for money," is what is destructive, but the same can be said for all other drugs this society wars against, and in all those instances, we are expected to believe that stomping the addictive substances out of existence will eliminate the "love of substance problem". I've always thought this dubious, given our desperate creativity in always being able to find something to mangle our minds.

But where money and its corruptive effects are concerned - far more pervasive and pernicious than all the opium and coca derivatives put together- we hardly even have a guerrilla war going on; as a society, we've surrendered completely to the predations of money. George Sibley

So these as you would say these ludicrous numbers of trillions are supposed to convince me that they are real 000000000 really?

MBTQ sounds like a powerful new genetically altered accounting system, bring on the quadrillions

Here's that link of Bruce's - - called Loss and Gain In America.
Expect a new Seed Post soon!

Stumble - The C Influence!

Lee's Top Books

Erich's Top Books

Gunter's Top Books

Phillips's Top Books