Speaker 1: Something something somethings's so.
Speaker 2: So so.
Speaker 3: So so.
Speaker 4: So so.
Speaker 5: Our way, our anthropology is not derived by human psychology
Speaker 5: or you know, electirical.
Speaker 6: Data from I T or something like this.
Speaker 5: It's derived from the revealed aspect of what we see
Speaker 5: in prosology. And so there's no real way to diagnose
Speaker 5: man's problem and to understand man and man's anthropology.
Speaker 7: As I said, without the right theology, m.
Speaker 3: The no one sing sing sing.
Speaker 6: The logos is the icon of Father, and man is
Speaker 6: the icon of God. We are the image of God.
Speaker 4: And dire wave three, dire Wave three. The artists reflect
Speaker 4: the soul, the spirit. The architecture reflects the soul the spirit.
Speaker 2: So therefore you can sleep. The degeneracy, can see the degradation.
Speaker 5: And the loss of sets, the loss of the idea
Speaker 5: of it being harmony, order, symmetry. In esthetics, it's connected.
Speaker 2: With the loss of a conference and philosoph think of yours.
Speaker 5: Yeah, just one second, I had to turn the music off.
Speaker 2: Got you.
Speaker 5: How are y'all doing?
Speaker 2: Hey? Not bad? How are you jay?
Speaker 5: It was a tough day, tough day. Sorry, that's okay.
Speaker 5: Glad to have you guys on. Glad you're here.
Speaker 2: Glad to be here. All right.
Speaker 6: Uh, well, it's been a while.
Speaker 5: I got the book. I'm about fifty sixty pages in.
Speaker 5: I've kind of skipped around a little bit just because
Speaker 5: it's a b So yeah, it's long, But thank you
Speaker 5: guys for coming on. And I wanna tell everybody that
Speaker 5: I'm joined by the Collins Brothers. I hope you guys
Speaker 5: are doing good tonight. Everybody out there, be sure and
Speaker 5: hit the thumbs up and hit give us a share
Speaker 5: if you would, And we're going to be talking about
Speaker 5: their new book that they've just put out, invoking the
Speaker 5: Beyond the Contient Riff, Mythologized Menaces, and the Quest for
Speaker 5: the New Man. So if you guys want to, you
Speaker 5: want to give us a little bit of a background.
Speaker 5: I know it's been about five or six years since
Speaker 5: we did an interview, so catch us up on.
Speaker 2: What you guys have been up to.
Speaker 6: Tell us what's going on.
Speaker 2: Sure, well, as you know, in two thousand and six,
Speaker 2: two thousand and six, we had released the updated, revised
Speaker 2: edition of the Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship and we
Speaker 2: decided that now was the you know that. Uh, shortly thereafter,
Speaker 2: we we had a follow up in mind, and we
Speaker 2: knew what we wanted to do, what we wanted to
Speaker 2: explore as a thesis for the new you know, forthcoming book.
Speaker 2: But we started doing the manuscript and it wasn't coming
Speaker 2: out very good. It was actually it was coming out
Speaker 2: really terrible. So I took it, scrapped it, and started
Speaker 2: rewriting and just uh we you know, every every year,
Speaker 2: you know, I was like, oh, this year will be
Speaker 2: the year that we released the follow up. This is
Speaker 2: this is the year. This is the year. And every
Speaker 2: year something new would come up with you know, with
Speaker 2: the research, we'd find something new to write on. Also,
Speaker 2: you know, there was a point at which I found
Speaker 2: that the structure of the chapters just wasn't working, So
Speaker 2: I went back reconfigured the uh the chapter outline of
Speaker 2: the book, and uh, you know, it just it just
Speaker 2: what what I thought was initially going to be maybe
Speaker 2: a year and a year and a half turned into
Speaker 2: seven years. But uh, by and large, what we what
Speaker 2: we you know, we just we just we what we
Speaker 2: It started off as just really uh, you know, an
Speaker 2: acclaration of the topic of UFOs as a terrestrial based deception,
Speaker 2: which uh that are our research into that particular topic
Speaker 2: was really jump started by a friend of ours by
Speaker 2: the name of Michael Corbyn. He was the talk show
Speaker 2: host of the nationally syndicated radio talk show known as
Speaker 2: a Closer Look, and unfortunately he passed away. What what
Speaker 2: year two thousand and two thousand? Yeah, yeah, and uh,
Speaker 2: but what we found was was that, you know, we
Speaker 2: found that we wanted to explore this topic of the
Speaker 2: beyond in all of its possible iterations. And so obviously
Speaker 2: when you don't narrow your focus, it becomes a larger
Speaker 2: and larger, a larger and larger, you know, cheeseburger to
Speaker 2: take a bite out of.
Speaker 5: So to speak.
Speaker 4: And so.
Speaker 5: Is it better to get the book on Amazon or
Speaker 5: I Universe or where do I need to put the
Speaker 5: link for the best place to get it?
Speaker 2: Probably the best place to get it as I Universe,
Speaker 2: especially since Amazons. As I know you probably are aware,
Speaker 2: Amazon takes a larger cut of the royalties. And also
Speaker 2: I'm not not you know, given recent developments with Amazon's
Speaker 2: you know, propisity for censorship, I'm not especially not especially enthusiast.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I just wanted to add the link for the
Speaker 5: people in the chat and for the.
Speaker 2: If I may, sure, sure, if I may also add
Speaker 2: the print copy of the book admittedly is a pretty
Speaker 2: it is a pretty steep amount. It cost a pretty
Speaker 2: steep amount. We did not set the price. That was
Speaker 2: the price set by the publisher. I'm assuming that it
Speaker 2: cost as much as it does so they can cover
Speaker 2: printing costs. So fortunately there's also a kindle edition which
Speaker 2: is considerably less. So you know, if you don't have
Speaker 2: you know, you don't have a lot of disposable income,
Speaker 2: you know, then you can always do the kindle or addition.
Speaker 5: Gotcha, So I didn't mean to interrupt. Go ahead. So
Speaker 5: you were talking about getting into wanting to write about
Speaker 5: the beyond, And of course you guys had written many
Speaker 5: years ago about the ascendency of the scientific dictatorship, and
Speaker 5: I'm so glad that you tackled this issue of especially
Speaker 5: the UFO deception. I think you know, it was one
Speaker 5: of the essays that you guys had written a long
Speaker 5: time ago alien smoke screen that really opened me up
Speaker 5: to the possibility of a military intelligence, deep state kind
Speaker 5: of background to what was really going on with a
Speaker 5: lot of this alien stuff. And then of course you
Speaker 5: guys take it in a new direction with in the
Speaker 5: book with the sizeable chapter, which I've read the most
Speaker 5: of so far, uh ripped from Heaven. So before we
Speaker 5: get to that, though, let's let's maybe rewind and get
Speaker 5: to the early on sections where you cover the Enlightenment,
Speaker 5: you cover the the I guess you could say the
Speaker 5: Darwinian origins of all of this stuff too. So how
Speaker 5: do we get from Enlightenment and kant And maybe you
Speaker 5: could speak to what the rift is in the title
Speaker 5: of the book up to where we're gonna go with Darwin?
Speaker 2: Sure, sure, Okay, Well we discuss what's known as what
Speaker 2: we call the Kantient rift. And forgive me for coining
Speaker 2: another neo logism. We live in the day and age
Speaker 2: where the coinage of neo logisms just seems to be
Speaker 2: a national pastime. But the Kantian rift is an appellation
Speaker 2: to sign to the epistemalile disjunction between phenomenon, that is
Speaker 2: to say, appearances and newmanon, that is to say, the
Speaker 2: thing in itself. And forgive me if I'm re treading
Speaker 2: familiar ground with you, Jay, I know that you're more
Speaker 2: than you know literate and Kantian philosophy, but I you know,
Speaker 2: I feel that it would probably be best to tread
Speaker 2: through some of it for the yeah, for the audience assurance.
Speaker 2: But this bifurcation between newmanon and phenomenon, well, it was
Speaker 2: imposed upon epistemology by the enlightened theoretician in Manuel Kank,
Speaker 2: who of course lives from seventeen twenty four to eighteen
Speaker 2: zero four. Now clarity of definitions of very important and
Speaker 2: philosophical discussions. So for the edification of the audience, I'll
Speaker 2: try to define phenomenon neumenon as simply as possible within
Speaker 2: the context of contient epistemology. In kantient terms, phenomenon refers
Speaker 2: to objects that are discerned through sense perception, which, on
Speaker 2: Kant is supposedly faulty. Supposedly since perception structures the external
Speaker 2: world in a manner that is potentially disproportionate with actual reality,
Speaker 2: so phenomena amount to mere appearances. Man can only infer
Speaker 2: so much from these observable occurrences, so he must remain
Speaker 2: perennially agnostic concerning the true nature of those objects portrayed
Speaker 2: by phenomena. Phenomena are, to put it in platonic terms,
Speaker 2: phenomena are but the shadows dancing upon the wall of
Speaker 2: the cave. They're just vague representations of the actual objects.
Speaker 2: In contradistinction, Newmanon refers to the objects that must be
Speaker 2: discerned in the dependent of sense perception, and it is
Speaker 2: with constant invocation of this term that we're confronted with
Speaker 2: a considerable amount of terminological inexactitude. Schopenhauer actually took Kant
Speaker 2: to task for this. In the pre conting world of
Speaker 2: ancient philosophy, numana occupied the transcendent order, and they were
Speaker 2: typically discerned through intuitive reasoning. For example, Platonic ideas and
Speaker 2: the Platonic forms qualify as numena. For the Platonic realists
Speaker 2: Proo close the forms were thoughts within the mind of God.
Speaker 2: But Kant he redefined numanon as the danga on seekh
Speaker 2: or that is just German for the thing in itself,
Speaker 2: objects as they exist apart from man's potentially deceptive faculties
Speaker 2: of empirical observation so on count on, the humanities perception
Speaker 2: of the empirical world was restricted to just these untrustworthy representations.
Speaker 2: The newminal world remains perennially imperceptible and chaotic, and as
Speaker 2: a result, gone is the harmonious cosmos you have of
Speaker 2: ancient Greek philosophy. And also gone is the beautiful creation
Speaker 2: that God deemed good in the Book of Genesis. So
Speaker 2: gone is the cosmological optimism of orthodox Christianity. But all
Speaker 2: that remains is this alien world of appearances, and man
Speaker 2: can have no experience apart from that which is framed
Speaker 2: for him by the spatiotemporal matrix. Man becomes just this
Speaker 2: lost cartographer whose mental maps of reality are woefully suboptimal.
Speaker 2: And so we have epistemological barrier that severs the ad
Speaker 2: equation between the human mind and reality. We call this
Speaker 2: epistemological barrier the Kantian rift. Now, with man's consignment to
Speaker 2: this epistemological prison, we see the confiscation of a piece
Speaker 2: of philosophical contraband, if you will, particularly derided by modernity,
Speaker 2: and that's metaphysics. The philosophical discipline of metaphysics, of course,
Speaker 2: concerns itself with the discernment of reality's ultimate nature and
Speaker 2: its structure. And of course this discipline is neutered if
Speaker 2: consposition of indefinite epistemic incertitude told Swag, after all, we
Speaker 2: can only discern the order and structure of reality. If
Speaker 2: our epistemic faculties are trustworthy, and according to cant they
Speaker 2: are not, so, reality just remains eternally unintelligible, and even
Speaker 2: greater ramifications follow from this indefinite epistemic incertitude. The cherished
Speaker 2: metaphysical certainties of the classical era, the soul, the transcendent order, God,
Speaker 2: all of those are relegated to the fog of agnosticism,
Speaker 2: and such a world would be inaccessible to an angel
Speaker 2: announcing salvation. In fact, no savior could ever redeem such
Speaker 2: a world or a sin from it. The slightest intimations
Speaker 2: of the transcend have been purged, and all that remains
Speaker 2: is terra incognita, a chaotic, imperceptible, impenetrable world. So ultimately,
Speaker 2: there goes the soteriological claims of Orthodox Christianity, there goes
Speaker 2: the cosmological optimism of Orthodox Christianity, and there also goes
Speaker 2: the harmonious cosmos of ancient Greek philosophy. But if this,
Speaker 2: this teleological world rendered by the kantem Rift, sounds familiar,
Speaker 2: it's because it echoes the cosmological sentiments of an ancient
Speaker 2: heresy that was almost ubiquitous in Jerusalem after the destruction
Speaker 2: of the Temple in AD seventy. Now, many scholars argue
Speaker 2: that this heresy was probably it probably originated prior to
Speaker 2: the Temple's destruction, but nevertheless, its influence was almost certainly
Speaker 2: strengthened by the pervasive despair that was engendered by the
Speaker 2: destruction of the Temple. It was a very catastrophic event
Speaker 2: left a lot of people traumatized. After all, the Temple's
Speaker 2: fall intimated the ostensible failure of Jewish apocalypticism and the
Speaker 2: nullification of God's covenant with his chosen people. So if
Speaker 2: God's promises no longer hold sway, then there's good reason
Speaker 2: to doubt his involvement with the creative order. And of course,
Speaker 2: the world that's ontically divorced from the Creator invariably dis
Speaker 2: sins and succumbs to cosmological pessimism. And that's sort of
Speaker 2: cosmological pessimism we see endemic to gnosticism, which challenged the
Speaker 2: early Christian Church. Now I realized that an examination of
Speaker 2: gnosticism may seem tangential, but it actually will prove to
Speaker 2: be germane to the topic. In the interest of expediting
Speaker 2: this exploration of the beyond. I'm just going to offer
Speaker 2: a rather truncated overview of the heresy a more comprehensive
Speaker 2: examinations offered in our book. To be honest with you,
Speaker 2: that's one of the concerns I have with the book,
Speaker 2: because there's this very extended examination of gnosissism, and I'm
Speaker 2: afraid that some readers might say, well, well, that's the point. Well,
Speaker 2: it becomes it becomes more pertinent when we consider the
Speaker 2: formative ethos within which cons ideas will formed emulated the Gnosticism. Basically,
Speaker 2: for the Gnostic, the biblical God was just this ignorant
Speaker 2: being whose existence resulted from the statisation of another supra
Speaker 2: cosmic deities parent desires, and that's Sophia, of course. And
Speaker 2: you have this masotheistic depiction of the biblical God, which
Speaker 2: is a direct result of the gnostics assignment of a
Speaker 2: positive ontological status to evil. The Gnostics understood evil in
Speaker 2: terms of ontology, they did and understand it in terms
Speaker 2: of moral orientation. Evil for the Gnostic was viewed not
Speaker 2: as a tendency of the will from within man, but
Speaker 2: as an actual animated essence that was interwoven into creation.
Speaker 2: The curse and creation were ontologically inseparable. And this understanding
Speaker 2: of corruption contrasted very sharply with the ancient Church Fathers.
Speaker 2: As you well know, you're very well read in patricistics.
Speaker 2: The Church Fathers believe that evil was not some independent substance.
Speaker 2: From the patristic vantage point, evil constituted a negation of
Speaker 2: being and as such no place among the existent. While
Speaker 2: its effects are painfully real, evil is not real in
Speaker 2: and of itself. Evil basically can be analogized to cold.
Speaker 2: Cold does not possess a positive ontological status. There's not
Speaker 2: some concrete thing in the world called cold. Rather, it's
Speaker 2: only a condition. It's a condition precipitated by the absence
Speaker 2: of heat. Cold exists only as a privation of fourth
Speaker 2: and that's not That's not to say that cold is illusory.
Speaker 2: We know that cold is very much real, as is
Speaker 2: evidenced by well one word for you, Texas. But if
Speaker 2: we look at texts right now, we look at you know, failure,
Speaker 2: at their paragrid we see the effects of cold are
Speaker 2: quite real, but it's it's effects are real. But as
Speaker 2: is you know, as as is evidenced by cold induced
Speaker 2: medical emergencies like hypothermia and what have you. But cold
Speaker 2: itself does not exist as a tangible reality, and likewise,
Speaker 2: evil itself does not exist as a tangible reality. Instead,
Speaker 2: it's it affects tangible reality through the intangible will, which
Speaker 2: it affects through a privation of good. So evil's point
Speaker 2: of origin is the intangible will with the tangible you know,
Speaker 2: not the tangible world. Saint Maximus, the Saint Maximus is
Speaker 2: the confessor who he puts it probably the best I
Speaker 2: think he's He puts it in my favorite terms among
Speaker 2: the church fathers. He calls it a evil, a perfect nothing.
Speaker 2: So evil is this perfect not nothing? Since evil well
Speaker 2: is a perfect nothing. The will that adopts evil's existential
Speaker 2: trajectory inexhiberbly migrates back towards nothing. In this sense, evil
Speaker 2: just represents an inversion of creatio ex nahilo or cratium
Speaker 2: from nothing. You see that Saint Athanasius writes about this
Speaker 2: on in the On the Incarnation, where God created everything
Speaker 2: out of nothing, Evil returns everything to nothing, and those
Speaker 2: who align their wills with evil migrate towards the oblivion
Speaker 2: of non existence. And in this sense, evil is actually
Speaker 2: just this self imlating impulse of a disordered will. It's
Speaker 2: a consuming nothing, reducing the elemental constituents of creation to nothing,
Speaker 2: to non existence. Contrary to you know what, John Carpenter,
Speaker 2: what have you believe? In Prince of Darkness? Evil's not
Speaker 2: this swirling vat of listing that spits itself into.
Speaker 5: People a pleasant set that a spoiling as green who
Speaker 5: it is evil.
Speaker 2: Evil and animated substances. Yeah, so, you know. So, basically
Speaker 2: conflate error with the creative order is to just necessarily
Speaker 2: associate corruption with the author of the created order. And
Speaker 2: so we have That's why we have the musopheism there,
Speaker 2: and error and falsity become the author himself. From the
Speaker 2: Gnostic advantage point, the creator of the visible physical cosmos
Speaker 2: must have been an error. And the creator was not
Speaker 2: only an error, he was the error itself. He becomes
Speaker 2: not just the originator of error, he's the mistake. And
Speaker 2: any theology that really follows from that belief must either
Speaker 2: condemn or exonerate God, and the Gnostics chose to do both.
Speaker 2: In Gnostic theology, the exoneration of God basically entailed the
Speaker 2: rejection of his office of creator. They believe that the real,
Speaker 2: true God would have created nothing. God the Father had
Speaker 2: to be completely disassociated from creation, and this radical disassociation
Speaker 2: basically until divesting the true God of the office of creator.
Speaker 2: Agnostissism basically divorced God from creation by just positing these
Speaker 2: ridiculously elaborate cosmologies. You see these cosmologies all over pop
Speaker 2: culture nowadays. Neil Gaimon, Neil Gaimon, in a lot of
Speaker 2: his work he has he posits similar cosmologies where you
Speaker 2: have just this endless pantheon of lesser deities and rigidly
Speaker 2: tail you know, tiered heavenly locales. But these cosmologies not
Speaker 2: only did they render the you know, the one true
Speaker 2: God in the Gnostics belief, uh, absolutely trans mundane, and
Speaker 2: that also camouflaged these antagonistic dualisms that they advanced, which
Speaker 2: the early Church would have considered, uh, would have considered untenable. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2: But the the cosmological divorce uh that we see taking place,
Speaker 2: it leaves man and nature in a state of absolute autonomy.
Speaker 2: So this is and this is where we start to
Speaker 2: see uh, contine philosophy come into view, because neither nature
Speaker 2: nor man must comply with a divine law, because the
Speaker 2: high God is isolated from creation and he can only
Speaker 2: be known through secret occult you know knowledge, gnosis, Uh,
Speaker 2: the legitimacy of which is entirely self referential. And I
Speaker 2: have no sis. Why because I'm enlightened? Well why are
Speaker 2: you enlightened?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 7: I have no sis.
Speaker 2: And I mean you see kind of the self contradictory
Speaker 2: nature of these claims, like, for instance, the Gnostics reference
Speaker 2: to the flipbook book. The flickbook they believed to be
Speaker 2: the evidence of the fact that reality was simula crim
Speaker 2: They believe, you know, they had these old flip flickbooks,
Speaker 2: which you know, would simulate animate motion, kind of much
Speaker 2: the way you know people make cartoons, and they believed
Speaker 2: because these flip books could simulate motion, they believed that
Speaker 2: that was evidence of the fact that reality was somehow
Speaker 2: a simulacram. The problem is is that you're positing the
Speaker 2: inauthenticity of reality on the basis of an object in reality,
Speaker 2: you know. So we see, we see, yeah, we see
Speaker 2: the true contradictory nature of those claims. But nature need
Speaker 2: not conform to it on you know, the nastic view
Speaker 2: to any law but its own. It's it's not a
Speaker 2: tangible attestation to the court of God, as Saint Paul
Speaker 2: rises in the Book of Romans. It's just as ontologically.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, sure, yeah, no, go ahead.
Speaker 5: Can we can we talk about so you've laid out
Speaker 5: that the rift between right, the the knowing, the object
Speaker 5: and the mind, there's a there's a divide that puts there,
Speaker 5: and of course it's a version of rehashed version of
Speaker 5: the ancient gnostic mistake. And but but you do have
Speaker 5: a lot of chapters early on that that harken back
Speaker 5: to some of the old material that you guys had
Speaker 5: done that I read many years ago, where you connected
Speaker 5: the lodge and this full blas feed as well. Kind
Speaker 5: of after the Enlightenment, you get this period of the
Speaker 5: spread of the Goddess of reason and rationalism and the
Speaker 5: very the Bavarian Illuminadi, and then we get to the
Speaker 5: royal society and the lodges of freemasonry. So how can
Speaker 5: we how can you kind of trace that ideological map
Speaker 5: there from Enlightenment and Kant's rift to royal society and freemasonry.
Speaker 2: Sure well with with Emmanual Kants, you know, epistemological disjunction,
Speaker 2: the pistemological just junction of the Kantian rift, we have
Speaker 2: the banishment of metaphysics, at least metaphysics and its traditional regulation,
Speaker 2: and of course this dysteleological portrait of the world. Well, this,
Speaker 2: this teleology subsequently contaminated science before before, before you know,
Speaker 2: Emmanuel Kant and the likes of Sir Francis Bacon, science
Speaker 2: was this quasi spiritual contemplation of intrinsic purposes. The discipline
Speaker 2: of science actually initially presupposed the intelligibility of the cosmos.
Speaker 2: And you know, of course that that's a well founded
Speaker 2: presupposition to hold, because if the cosmos were not intelligible,
Speaker 2: then the scientist's efforts would be to understand the cosmos
Speaker 2: would be futile. But theoretician Francis Bacon, who was a
Speaker 2: member of a secret society known as the Order of
Speaker 2: the Helmet, and it was called the Order of the
Speaker 2: Helmet because the helmet was a reference to the helmet
Speaker 2: worn by the goddess Palosithene, which was the goddess of wisdom.
Speaker 2: And so we see there with that, with the veneration
Speaker 2: of that goddess, this kind of tacit autotheism, where it's
Speaker 2: the elevation of reason to this this virtually deific status.
Speaker 2: But he believed that nature could be forced to reveal
Speaker 2: her secrets up through systematic excasion, and he believed that
Speaker 2: this could happen once teleology was rejected. So he basically
Speaker 2: endeavored to expunge teleology from scientific scientific uh, you know,
Speaker 2: scientific inquiries and yeah, and so the problem is is
Speaker 2: that with metaphysics, the relationship with metaphysics is very important
Speaker 2: because metaphysics is prior to science. If you hold a
Speaker 2: very errant metaphysical proposition, that typically presages science going awry
Speaker 2: and science scientific data once it's the coupled from a
Speaker 2: legitimate metaphysical framework. Ideological biases have carte Blanche and Bacon. Bacon.
Speaker 2: He had ideological biases of his own, as is evidenced
Speaker 2: by his pedigree with his membership and you know, an
Speaker 2: esoteric speaker society, gnosticism and her meticism in other schools.
Speaker 2: He for him, really his ideological bias was a will
Speaker 2: to power, libido dominandi, a lust to dominate. And so
Speaker 2: with him he insisted that all the study of purpose,
Speaker 2: the purposes of things that should be confined to theology,
Speaker 2: which was diminishing in terms of tenability. And he believed
Speaker 2: that the sole purpose of science was the mastery of matter,
Speaker 2: this cynical mastery of matter. And you see with the
Speaker 2: British Royal Society, you see the Baconian school in full bloom.
Speaker 2: And of course the British the British Royal Society was
Speaker 2: you know, founded by Freemasons, and it was it was
Speaker 2: thanks to the efforts of the British Royal Society that uh,
Speaker 2: certain schools of thought such as Darwinism and Malthusianism were promulgated.
Speaker 2: For instance, the ex Club, which is characterized by Adrian
Speaker 2: Desmond and James Moore as as an invisible Masonic UH,
Speaker 2: an invisible Masonic UH, you know, Darwinian lodge within the UH,
Speaker 2: within the Royal Society. And that's his their characterization, not mine.
Speaker 2: So that so you know, call me conspiracy theorists. That's
Speaker 2: what they say that they managed to suppres all revelations
Speaker 2: concerning the scandal, the the the phibious ake a lie
Speaker 2: which really turned out just being an inanimate uh and
Speaker 2: inanimate uh piece of gypsum. But they believe that it
Speaker 2: represents mm hmm, yeah that and but but it was important,
Speaker 2: it was important for them to to to uphold the
Speaker 2: legitimacy of of that particular you know, that particular uh belief,
Speaker 2: the confidence and the thephibious hake a lie because they
Speaker 2: they believed that it represented the segua from inorganic material
Speaker 2: to life and so and that that that in turn,
Speaker 2: that in turn, uh legitimizes the metaphysical claim of self creation,
Speaker 2: which also affirms the sterior logical c of self salvation,
Speaker 2: which is gnostic. And so they had a vested interest
Speaker 2: in advancing that because that that basically upholds uphalled their
Speaker 2: autotheistic belief that man was in tauto God. And so
Speaker 2: we see, but we see how concept set the stage
Speaker 2: for that by abolishing metaphysics and gives it gives rise
Speaker 2: to this new cynical uh more cynical view of science.
Speaker 2: Science becomes science becomes basically just a means by which
Speaker 2: matter can be cynically manipulated. And and you know, basically, uh,
Speaker 2: you sculpted into whatever form uh the ruined elite wished
Speaker 2: to to sculpt it into. And and following from that
Speaker 2: we also see the anthroplile assumption that man is taboo raza,
Speaker 2: that he's a blink tablet. And so humanity can be resculpted,
Speaker 2: and as humanity has resculpted through means such as eugenics,
Speaker 2: which of course arose from Darwinism and social Darwinism, through
Speaker 2: the proper configuration of society according to whatever utopian blueprint,
Speaker 2: you know, whatever the utopian blueprints that they happen to
Speaker 2: hold a loft at the time, man can be gradually
Speaker 2: transfigured and be apotheosized. And this we see with this
Speaker 2: a just a hideous parody of the orthodox belief and theosis,
Speaker 2: which holds that, you know, man can be demonised, but
Speaker 2: man is devionised through energies, not through essences. Man. Man
Speaker 2: is not devionized on the essential level. There remain ontological
Speaker 2: distinctions between humanity and God. But that this is the
Speaker 2: project that the elite have been working towards. This is
Speaker 2: and that's that that's why it's in the subtitle of
Speaker 2: the book, the subtitle of course well being good quest
Speaker 2: for the new Man. That is what they have in mind,
Speaker 2: and that's why the elite have invoked the beyond. The
Speaker 2: beyond is basically a surrogate for divinity, since the metaphysical
Speaker 2: certainties of the classical era have been abolished now including
Speaker 2: the transcendent order in God. Now they now they have
Speaker 2: this terra incognita that they can populate with new gods
Speaker 2: and with new myths. And we see the invocation of
Speaker 2: the beyond. We we we UH, we basically examine it
Speaker 2: for forms, if I believe for we we examine it
Speaker 2: as invoked as the wrathful Earth Goddess, which we see
Speaker 2: with you know, the Green movement, radical environmentalism, and of
Speaker 2: course the wrathful Earth Goddess legitimized through the emulgation of Darwinism.
Speaker 2: But UH, the wrathful Earth Goddess demands recompense of humanity
Speaker 2: in the form of technological apartheid in population control. We
Speaker 2: examine it invoked as AI and technological singularity, where man
Speaker 2: basically abolishes himself and UH maybe becomes uh, divests himself
Speaker 2: of his biological the biological man and becomes you know,
Speaker 2: the transhuman uh, the transhuman oak ubermine. We UH examined
Speaker 2: the invocation of the beyond in the form of UH
Speaker 2: the uh uh of course super the super weapon, which
Speaker 2: the super weapon. Of course, it assumed several forms in
Speaker 2: UH fiction. You know, it was beam weapons, it was
Speaker 2: poisonous gases, it was, but the tangible form that has assumed,
Speaker 2: of course, was the atomic bomb. That was uh Leo Zillard,
Speaker 2: who was inspired by a modern myth that was promulgated
Speaker 2: by none other than H. G. Wells, who wrote the
Speaker 2: book The World Set Free. And with the super weapon
Speaker 2: we see the we see the mythic archetype of Prometheus,
Speaker 2: or more specifically Promethean fire. Of course Oppenheimer Oppenheimer. Pop
Speaker 2: culture has likened Oppenheimer to a modern Prometheus, and this
Speaker 2: this Promethean fire that he bequests the man. It becomes
Speaker 2: a desirable and readily attainable deific force for mankind, and
Speaker 2: the nuclear bomb becomes pretty much this Messiah. Richard Stanley,
Speaker 2: of course, the avant garde filmmaker, characterizes it as such.
Speaker 2: In an interview in Keinocasi magazine. He basically likens the
Speaker 2: Adam bomb to a gnostic messiah because it basically divests
Speaker 2: us of corruptible matter and reduces everything back to light.
Speaker 2: And then the last invocation of the beyond is, of course,
Speaker 2: extraterrestrial gods, which basically are just gnostically reinterpreted angels and
Speaker 2: demons and other heavenly beings. The most significant of which
Speaker 2: being God. And in all of these instances we see
Speaker 2: we see with this invocation of the beyond an attempt
Speaker 2: to bring the new Man into being, because each one
Speaker 2: is underpinned by a tacit autotheism, in particular with the
Speaker 2: extraterrestrial gods. The assumption being that because the evolutionary process
Speaker 2: the tree of life as Darwin called it, you know,
Speaker 2: which he is, of course the term he borrowed from
Speaker 2: Biblical Christianity, but he distorts it. If it's ubiquitous in
Speaker 2: its branches, branch out through all of the physical cosmos,
Speaker 2: then it stands to reason that the same evolutionary processes
Speaker 2: that gave rise to man have also basically touched the
Speaker 2: primordial soups of other worlds and given rise to other
Speaker 2: other beings, other you know, alien beings who we have
Speaker 2: interpreted as gods and who we through the same biological processes,
Speaker 2: may attain a deific status. But that's that's basically. Those
Speaker 2: are the four manifestations or invocations of the beyond that
Speaker 2: we uh that we touch upon in the book, and
Speaker 2: that's how the content Riff gets rise to the beyond
Speaker 2: by rendering reality aara incognita that can be populated with
Speaker 2: these manifestations.
Speaker 5: Beyond let's get to the the UFO alien style. This
Speaker 5: was where I really started digging in deep in the
Speaker 5: book because it just so happened that when you guys
Speaker 5: sent this, I was covering with Jamie a lot of
Speaker 5: the alien movies. And you note the chapter you started
Speaker 5: off with it being a new faith right the extraterrestrial gods.
Speaker 5: And there's a great quote there from Dean Kots of
Speaker 5: all people talking about it being in you know, countless
Speaker 5: movies TV shows. Why is that?
Speaker 6: Why is space.
Speaker 5: Religion and the alien gods so useful to the establishment.
Speaker 5: Why do you think they've chosen To me, it looks
Speaker 5: like they've chosen this to really try to bring in stuff.
Speaker 2: Well, those who study UFOs as a terrestrial based will
Speaker 2: most always recognize one thing, and that's the UPHO deception
Speaker 2: campaign that we see going on is characterized by function stacking.
Speaker 2: Function stacking is this. It's a term that appears to
Speaker 2: have been coined by the permaculture community, but it has
Speaker 2: application when you're looking at UFOs, and it has been
Speaker 2: defined as as an element in an operation that serves
Speaker 2: multiple functions, and with UFOs do just that they serve
Speaker 2: multiple functions for the elite or the all the cards
Speaker 2: and all. There are three functions that we looked into.
Speaker 2: Number one, they conceal the test of experimental aircraft and
Speaker 2: other covert technologies. Most people know that one, right, it's
Speaker 2: you know, fairly common knowledge that that's that's used as
Speaker 2: a cover for experimentation of R and D, of of
Speaker 2: advanced R and D. Number two, they helped conceal criminal
Speaker 2: intelligence operations such as drug trafficking, gun running, even sexual entapment,
Speaker 2: and blackmail rings and all. Look at like that Bob
Speaker 2: Lazaar he got caught for panduring you know after after
Speaker 2: Area fifty one, and the woman that he was working with,
Speaker 2: miss Bullock, who headed the brothel and all had ties
Speaker 2: to Las Vegas Police, to the FBI. And his part
Speaker 2: of that operation was the filming of life since plates,
Speaker 2: you know, all of cars that were of the visitors
Speaker 2: to the profitl and all. So there's actually, yes, there
Speaker 2: is actually a tie between uful, sexual entrapment, black memories.
Speaker 2: It's it's actually there and all not just not just
Speaker 2: uh not just anal probes and fields uh yeah, uh
Speaker 2: probing of a difference, Yeah, tied to uh tied to aliens,
Speaker 2: regime change. All these things are tied to UH are
Speaker 2: tied to are tied to the euphu phenomenon. The uphul
Speaker 2: phenomenon has been has been used to conceal these criminal activities.
Speaker 2: It leads researchers down evidentiary cul de sacts and also
Speaker 2: they find themselves going around in circles without ever finding
Speaker 2: the true meaning behind the UFO incidents in question and all,
Speaker 2: but most significantly number three is is that the advanced
Speaker 2: social engineering and radical reconfiguration of civilization. Most, if not all,
Speaker 2: of UFO deceptions serve that third function. They may have
Speaker 2: been concocted to serve one of the first two or both,
Speaker 2: but they eventually are employed to condition humanity to make
Speaker 2: a radical break from the past. Social engineering involving UFOs
Speaker 2: appears to have become extremely significant in the late nineteen forties.
Speaker 2: It may have been it may have very well taken
Speaker 2: place in years prior, but the final years of nineteen
Speaker 2: forties seemed to be when it became most prominent. At
Speaker 2: that time, a prior incarnation of the Beyond the super
Speaker 2: weapon appears to have begun to act as kind of
Speaker 2: a midwife for the UFO men in infestation of the
Speaker 2: beyond and in the book we support this contention with
Speaker 2: a passage found in the appendix to a nineteen forty
Speaker 2: nine report, replaced report that was released by Projects Signed.
Speaker 2: Project Sign was this official government study on the subject
Speaker 2: of UFOs that was conducted by the United States Air Force,
Speaker 2: And in the appendix to Project Sign the Project Signed report,
Speaker 2: there was a letter from doctor James lip and Lipp
Speaker 2: was He was an aeronautical engineer and a department head
Speaker 2: at the Rand Corporation, an American nonprofit global policy think tank.
Speaker 2: The Rand Corporation was the epicenter for a lot of
Speaker 2: very radical ideas report regarding nuclear exchange and nuclear war.
Speaker 2: For instance, in nineteen sixty three, the Rand Corporation produced
Speaker 2: a report that would serve as the foundation for Secretary
Speaker 2: Defense Robert McNamara's policy of mutually Assured Destruction or MAD.
Speaker 2: MAD would go on to become kind of a national
Speaker 2: security centerpiece during the Cold War. It held that in
Speaker 2: a nuclear exchange, both the aggressor and the defender would
Speaker 2: end up being destroyed. So MAD is widely considered to
Speaker 2: be the theory of deterrence put into practice. But like
Speaker 2: many other Cold War policies. MAD was characterized by function stacking.
Speaker 2: So while it did in fact discourage both major superpowers
Speaker 2: from entertaining the notion of a nuclear exchange, it also
Speaker 2: allowed the global aligarchical global establishment to universally impose what
Speaker 2: we term to be nuclear anxiety and nuclear anxiety best
Speaker 2: way to define it is a kind of pervasive and
Speaker 2: obsessive fear of nuclear extinction. And once the global aligarchical
Speaker 2: establishment induced this nuclear fever dream, an extended period of
Speaker 2: nuclear extortion took place. Sometimes nuclear extortion could could even
Speaker 2: be found in cultural artifacts. One of the most humorous
Speaker 2: examples would be Grease Too in nineteen eighty two. The
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty two sequel to the hit smash musical Grease
Speaker 2: into the Tee Birds, named Lewis takes his girlfriend Sharon
Speaker 2: to a fallout shelter and he fakes a nuclear attack
Speaker 2: and then attempts to convince her to lose her virginity
Speaker 2: to him in order to repopulate the nation, and this
Speaker 2: results in the musical number Let's do it for our Country,
Speaker 2: and of course do it is a reference to the
Speaker 2: Humpty Dance. So but nuclear extortion was very much real,
Speaker 2: and it was employed to advance advanced agendas that were
Speaker 2: much more sinister than Lewis's design to satisfy his sexual retardation.
Speaker 2: It was used to condition the world's population to embrace
Speaker 2: alternatives to nuclear extinction that were devised by the global
Speaker 2: archical establishment. Better than yeah, better red than dead. This
Speaker 2: included a model of world management that possessed very little
Speaker 2: of the democratic spirit. So this connection of ran to
Speaker 2: projects sign indicates that the nuclear fetishist that cultural history H.
Speaker 2: Franklin referred to as the cult of the super weapon,
Speaker 2: that they were endeavoring to breathe life into a new
Speaker 2: incarnation of the beyond. Lips letter demonstrates that he was
Speaker 2: clearly a skeptic regarding the UFO question. He pointed out
Speaker 2: that many of the UFO reports in nineteen forty seven
Speaker 2: and in nineteen forty eight really didn't conform to the
Speaker 2: requirements of interplanetary travel. He then, however, goes on to
Speaker 2: provide the foundation for the exploitation of belief and interplanetary travelers.
Speaker 2: The foundation is found in one of the theories he advances.
Speaker 2: Lip contents that there might be a causal relationship between
Speaker 2: atomic bomb tests and the appearances of UFOs. We threw
Speaker 2: them there. Yeah. Lip asserted that if they're real, interplanetary
Speaker 2: travelers came from came to our solar system, and were
Speaker 2: drawn to Earth by the detonation of nuclear devices. Lip's
Speaker 2: theory included marshing telescopes visually detecting a bomb explosions at Alma, Gofordo,
Speaker 2: and Hiroshima. Lipped In seemed to describe to subscribe to
Speaker 2: his own theory. As a matter of fact, he points
Speaker 2: out many of the deficiencies to his theory in his letter.
Speaker 2: He put quite simply believed that Martians would find observing
Speaker 2: Earth for a long period of time to be a
Speaker 2: very mundane exercise. It would have just gotten boring. All
Speaker 2: of that aside, Lip had either intentionally unintentionally contributed to
Speaker 2: a narrative that would be used to manipulate the UFO
Speaker 2: community for years and years to come. It was also
Speaker 2: used to deceive the public, generally speaking, Social engineers within
Speaker 2: the deep State introduced to the public imagination the notion
Speaker 2: that interplanetary travelers had detected our nuclear activities and they
Speaker 2: were now visiting Earth with both benign and sinister intentions,
Speaker 2: depending on which extraterrestrial race. You were discussing. Yeah, you
Speaker 2: find that there's two narrative paradigms. I believe Upton the
Speaker 2: perennial traditionalists. Yeah, yeah, he did. He discusses this in
Speaker 2: his book Vectors of the Counter Initiation. A few other
Speaker 2: researchers have brought this up too, is that the myth
Speaker 2: of the of extraterrestrial gods, it uses it usually assumes
Speaker 2: two uh, two ostensibly different, uh, paradigmatic characters. On one hand,
Speaker 2: the aliens are benign, they're basically gnostically reinterpreted angels who
Speaker 2: find this and uh for instance, uh uh Steven Spielsberg's
Speaker 2: Close Encounters of the Third Kind as as one of
Speaker 2: as Richard Dreyfuss is being prepared to be hoisted into
Speaker 2: the clouds and abandon his family because lord knows, you know,
Speaker 2: aliens and the discovery of yeah, yeah, they're worth it. Man.
Speaker 2: He basically turns to his family and says, screw you guys,
Speaker 2: I'm going you know with yeah later, I'm going with
Speaker 2: the aliens. But as they're preparing him that, there's the
Speaker 2: inclusion of a Bible verse, which of course is being
Speaker 2: situated in a very different context where wherein it says
Speaker 2: he shall give his angels charge over thee and we
Speaker 2: see this angelic depiction of angels all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: or angelic depiction of aliens. So all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: aliens become angels. So we have this transposition of the
Speaker 2: Esketon into the into space, into the vacuum, but the
Speaker 2: vacuum that separates celestial bodies. All of a sudden, this
Speaker 2: vacuum becomes the Esketon. It becomes the place where the
Speaker 2: questions of life and death, the questions of eternity are
Speaker 2: are resolved for us. And then then on the other hand,
Speaker 2: apart from you know, from on the other extreme polarity,
Speaker 2: apart from Steven Spielsberg's close encounters, you have hg Wells
Speaker 2: for the worlds where the aliens are now here to
Speaker 2: exterminate us, to destroy us. And so you have again
Speaker 2: this gnostic redefinition of aliens as demons. And then in
Speaker 2: the treatment to the sequel to the e T Yeah, yes,
Speaker 2: both yeah, And you have both in the treatment and
Speaker 2: the original the script that was supposed to be the
Speaker 2: sequel to et that never was made because I would
Speaker 2: have terrified the living hell out of audiences would have
Speaker 2: ruined ET for an entire generation. And I think it
Speaker 2: was called Nocturnal Fear, Nocturnal Fear, nocturnal. I don't call
Speaker 2: the name of it, but yeah, it's in the book
Speaker 2: and you can look it up online too. Basically, you
Speaker 2: have this this counterpart Race to Eat Tease Race showing
Speaker 2: up and they're the They look like ET, but they're albino,
Speaker 2: and Steven Spielsberg makes it abundantly clear they're evil because
Speaker 2: in the script he writes it in all caps, these
Speaker 2: aliens are evil, and they show up and they torture
Speaker 2: Elliot and his siblings, and they're only there. The Elliot
Speaker 2: and his siblings are only rescued at the end when
Speaker 2: Et makes a cameo and rescues rescues them like the Messiah,
Speaker 2: which of course ET is meant to be a cry
Speaker 2: a Christ archetype or an exo theological Christ. You see
Speaker 2: these two separate narrative paradigms where we have either angelica,
Speaker 2: angelic aliens or demonic aliens, and that of course is
Speaker 2: just this gnostic transposition or neo gnostic transposition of the
Speaker 2: Esketon into the vacuums, separating celestial bodies known as space.
Speaker 2: And either way, what's most important is that you get
Speaker 2: the crisis that comes with the introduction of the beyond. Right,
Speaker 2: if you have benign aliens, then you have the crisis
Speaker 2: of diplomacy where where no one nation can can satisfactorily
Speaker 2: represent mankind. And so if you don't have some kind
Speaker 2: of unification, there's going to be a breakdown in communication
Speaker 2: with the at Stan Friedman, the deceased, he was an astrophysicist,
Speaker 2: wasn't he well, he was, he was a He was
Speaker 2: a major voice in the in the euphological field, the
Speaker 2: uphological field he as he used to put it, who
Speaker 2: speaks for Earth Argentina?
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: So it basically basically creates this crisis where man, where
Speaker 2: national governments are ontologically and epistemologically overwhelmed, and there we
Speaker 2: require this supernational body now to speak on behalf of Earth.
Speaker 2: So we have to amalgamate all the nation states, all
Speaker 2: these disparate tribes of man a tee into a single,
Speaker 2: you know, one world government. And the second crisis comes
Speaker 2: with with the more sinister variety of aliens to hostile aliens,
Speaker 2: a crisis of security and all no one nation can
Speaker 2: provide adequate security for the whole planet against these against
Speaker 2: these aliens. And it so basically we're too We're we're
Speaker 2: moving into the realm of Independence Day where you have
Speaker 2: this Bill Pullman stands there and he says, the Independence
Speaker 2: Day is no longer an American Soliday to be a
Speaker 2: unified military response to the aliens in order to vest
Speaker 2: their superior technologies and all but the hands of the
Speaker 2: social engineers could be detected. Almost immediately following Project sign
Speaker 2: as the UFO Contact D phenomena began to emerge, nuclear
Speaker 2: anxiety was very much a comm and thematic thread running
Speaker 2: through the accounts of contact tactees. According to the contactees
Speaker 2: of the fifties, the aliens had come to warn us
Speaker 2: that we needed to cease our nuclear tests. The atomic tests,
Speaker 2: the aliens said, were leaking radiation that was having an
Speaker 2: adverse effect on the solar systems. Don't get balanced. And
Speaker 2: as far as we're concerned, the contact, these messages held
Speaker 2: too much common with Lipps theory to be accidental. Our
Speaker 2: suspicions were confirmed by the very strange story of Polish
Speaker 2: American author Georgiadomski. Yeah he claimed to have met with
Speaker 2: veritable United nations of alien races. These included the inhabitants
Speaker 2: of Mars, of Venus of Saturn. During one visit to
Speaker 2: an alien Kraftadomski alleged to have met an alien emissary
Speaker 2: named the Master. And the Master, according to Adomsky, provided
Speaker 2: descriptions of the politicals on all the other worlds, and
Speaker 2: he allegedly told Dadomski that the extraterrestrials had come to
Speaker 2: Earth on a selvivific mission to prevent humanity from falling
Speaker 2: to nuclear extinction. The Master explained that the extraterrestrials also
Speaker 2: came to prevent Earth's nuclear radiation from ad personally affecting
Speaker 2: the other planets. So now skeptics, they're going to write
Speaker 2: Adomsky off instantly as a mentally ill individual or simply
Speaker 2: a perpetrator of fraud. And who can blame them? The
Speaker 2: stories were wild, they were crazy if you read any
Speaker 2: of them, and all they they they are on parody
Speaker 2: with pulp magazine fictions. And Adamski's supporters see his account
Speaker 2: as a confort nation that alien visitation is real, and
Speaker 2: he still has his supporters to this very day, all
Speaker 2: these years later.
Speaker 5: Can I add something here, that one thing that really
Speaker 5: stuck out I didn't know was where you mentioned that
Speaker 5: Alan Dalles threatened to bring an injunction against anyone who
Speaker 5: had questioned question. Yeah, now, if there wasn't something more
Speaker 5: going on, why would he even care.
Speaker 2: That's the middle ground that needs to be considered here.
Speaker 2: There's the possibility that he was manipulated by covert forces
Speaker 2: in order to popularize the contact ee phenomenon that was
Speaker 2: being used for social engineering purposes. In nineteen fifty three,
Speaker 2: Adomski had published a book entitled Flying Saucers of Landed
Speaker 2: and in nineteen fifty five he wrote a sequel entitled
Speaker 2: Inside the Spaceships. And in those books of Damski talks
Speaker 2: about conversations with Venusian named Orphon. Orthon supposedly invited Adomski
Speaker 2: to take a trip on a spacecraft and see the
Speaker 2: entire solar system. And when Adomsky published this tale, there
Speaker 2: was a Cincinnati businessman and his name was Thomas Iikoff,
Speaker 2: and Ikoff sought to have the United States government bring
Speaker 2: charges of fraud against Adomski. Iikoff pointed out that Adomski
Speaker 2: had used the US Postal services to spread his account,
Speaker 2: so if the account was untrue. Ikoff asserted, then Adomski
Speaker 2: was employing the US Postal Service to perpetrate fraud. So,
Speaker 2: like you said, so Ikoff, he felt that there was
Speaker 2: that the US government had a substantial case against Adomski.
Speaker 2: Accusations reached the attorney of the man that you pointed out,
Speaker 2: the consummate deep state operative CIA director Alan Dallas. Dallas,
Speaker 2: his attorney, felt that Aikov was correct and that the
Speaker 2: government could bring a case, could bring suit against against Adomski.
Speaker 2: And so what was Dallas's response to all this? Well,
Speaker 2: he threatened an injunction to prevent anyone from testifying in
Speaker 2: court about Domski's claims. Quote, because maximum security exists concerning
Speaker 2: the subject of UFOs. Now, why did Alan Dallas wish
Speaker 2: to prevent a courtroom testimony against Adomski? We think that
Speaker 2: the answer was provided by Leon Davidson, a chemical engineer
Speaker 2: who participated in the Manhattan Project. Davidson believed that Dallas
Speaker 2: and the CIA played an integral role in manufacturing Adomski's votes. Davidson,
Speaker 2: in a nineteen sixty two article that we cite in
Speaker 2: the book, contended that the CIA orchestrated Adomski's close encounter experiences,
Speaker 2: including his famous nineteen fifty two encounter with the Venusian.
Speaker 2: According to Davidson, individuals working with the CIA convinced Dadomski
Speaker 2: that they were real space brothers and persuaded him to
Speaker 2: write his books about them. Davidson also asserted that the
Speaker 2: CIA had had orchestrated Dowdomski's space flight to lend authenticity
Speaker 2: to the contact experience. Now Davidson's accusation it shouldn't be
Speaker 2: dismissed as paranoia. During a meeting between the CIA and
Speaker 2: Air Force representatives, a CIA official had suggested Davidson was
Speaker 2: somehow a threat to the nation. The meeting had been
Speaker 2: held to discuss the possible responses to inquiries that had
Speaker 2: been submitted by two particular UFO researchers, Davidson and Keiho. Now,
Speaker 2: at the meeting, there was a very distinct change in
Speaker 2: tone depending on which one of those researchers you were
Speaker 2: talking about, and all Keyho he was treated with a
Speaker 2: lot of honor. He was treated with a lot of
Speaker 2: respect when they approached the topic of Kiho's inquiries. When
Speaker 2: the subject shifted to Davidson, however, the tone among participants,
Speaker 2: and considerably, Davidson was the Donald Trump of ufiology, the
Speaker 2: chemical engineer. He was spoke of with disdain, with contempt,
Speaker 2: and there's a lot of suspicion. One CIA officer, in particular,
Speaker 2: Frank Chapin, went so far as to imply that Davidson
Speaker 2: was motivated by ulterior motives quote, some of them perhaps
Speaker 2: not in the best interests of this country unquote. So
Speaker 2: Chapin followed up this accusation with a proposal that the
Speaker 2: fb I actually conduct an investigation on Davidson. So he
Speaker 2: implied that the man was working for a foreign power
Speaker 2: or some such thing. Davidson's accusation and proposal is analogous
Speaker 2: to a bombing raid. During the bombing raid, the bomber
Speaker 2: always knows that he's over to target because that's when
Speaker 2: he starts to receive the most intense amount of flack.
Speaker 2: The flat that Davidson was receiving from Chapin and his
Speaker 2: other CIA associates indicates that Davidson was over the target.
Speaker 2: He was not too far off the mark, and the CIA,
Speaker 2: simply put, just didn't like Davidson because he had correctly
Speaker 2: identified the agency's role in ushering in the age of
Speaker 2: the contact eed, which would basically end with a limper
Speaker 2: and not a bang, as many of these contents were
Speaker 2: either exposed as they were either complete charlatans or they
Speaker 2: were victims of deep state manipulation. Davidson also asserted in
Speaker 2: its nineteen fifty sixty two article that the CIA had
Speaker 2: quote sponsored the wave of Saucer articles in nineteen fifty
Speaker 2: two and Look Life and Look et cetera. Life Magazine
Speaker 2: and its counterpart Look Magzine Now Life was a weekly
Speaker 2: magazine that was published from eighteen three to nineteen seventy two.
Speaker 2: It's still periodically resurrected by Life Magazine because in nineteen
Speaker 2: thirty six it was purchased by American magazine magnet Henry Leos,
Speaker 2: who owned Time Magazine. Yes, now Loose. He was the
Speaker 2: publisher of Time Magazine and Time would continue to publish
Speaker 2: to uh to employ the Life brand after after the
Speaker 2: turn of the century, after turn into the twenty first century,
Speaker 2: when it wanted to release commenorative issues or special issues.
Speaker 2: But Loose has been called quote the most influential private
Speaker 2: citizen in the in the America of his day unquote.
Speaker 2: His influence appears to have extended to the realm of
Speaker 2: UFOs because Loose was after it was, after all, the
Speaker 2: owner of Life during the period of time when it
Speaker 2: was putting out a high volume of softler articles, and
Speaker 2: and not just it, but its chief competitor. Well.
Speaker 5: And by the way, we know from the wim Hof,
Speaker 5: the Big wim Hof book, that there was a direct
Speaker 5: connection to the CIA, Loose being skulling bones, Claire booth
Speaker 5: Lewis being herself an intelligence operative, all of the connections
Speaker 5: between John Courtney Murray being promoted by a Timelife magazine,
Speaker 5: the sixties countercultural revolution with mushrooms and LSD being promoted
Speaker 5: by Henry Luce. So no shocker here that it would
Speaker 5: also apply to this stuff.
Speaker 2: You're going right down the rabbit hole that I was
Speaker 2: pursuing here, Jay, because Lousi's influence on the realm of youthology,
Speaker 2: they have gone deeper than just publishing articles and lives.
Speaker 2: Louse's main fact totem was Charles Douglas Jackson. Now there
Speaker 2: was a Nightcap member named C. D. Jackson who actually
Speaker 2: interviewed Betty and Barney Hill. I have not been able
Speaker 2: to confirm yet that that CD Jackson is one and
Speaker 2: the same with the CG. Jackson, who was a primary
Speaker 2: assistant to loose in a TIME senior executive.
Speaker 5: And also it's awful the creator of the doctrinal warfare program,
Speaker 5: which was the CIA's usage of the Romancollolic Church.
Speaker 2: Yes, and that's there's a connection here with doctrinal warfare.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 2: Jackson, he was a senior executive of TIME, and he
Speaker 2: was an expert on psychological warfare who had served with
Speaker 2: the Office of Strategic Services OSS, which is the front
Speaker 2: forerunner to the CIA, during nineteen fifty three nineteen fifty four.
Speaker 2: Jackson was also instrumental in the formation of the Builderberg Group,
Speaker 2: which is an elitist combine that has played a significant
Speaker 2: role in the globalization process and also very preoccupied with transhumanism,
Speaker 2: which is one that represents another invocation beyond with AI
Speaker 2: and technological singularity. Both them and both them and the
Speaker 2: transhumanist shared this religious faith in homogeneity, which this belief
Speaker 2: that the other is a corruption, that the world of
Speaker 2: differentiated beings is a corruption, and that humanity should be one,
Speaker 2: that all beans should be that all being and amalgamated
Speaker 2: into one super being. And I think that it was
Speaker 2: at the Built I think it was the twenty thirteen
Speaker 2: Builderberg meeting. We bring it up in the in the
Speaker 2: book where they opened the gates wide to transhumanism. I
Speaker 2: think it was the twenty thirteen where they opened it
Speaker 2: up wide because they to transhumanism because they thought that
Speaker 2: the radical homogeneity that they were seeking to achieve could
Speaker 2: be done in an online world where everybody's conscious it's
Speaker 2: just merged together right in all but according to wim Hoff,
Speaker 2: Jackson acted as a kind of nexus between intelligence circles,
Speaker 2: media organs, banking and financial interest, big business, and theoreticians
Speaker 2: in the realm of communications, and he was able to
Speaker 2: mobilize all these different forces to advance the agenda of
Speaker 2: the oligarchical set. And Wimhoff makes it very clear in
Speaker 2: his book that Jackson used these forces to conduct what
Speaker 2: has been termed doctrinal warfare. What you brought up, that
Speaker 2: was an actual term in the CIA lexicon. It's not
Speaker 2: a militia or patriot movement fate fever dream. Anyone who
Speaker 2: doubts that needs to go onto the CIA's online reading
Speaker 2: room and read a paper that we cite in the
Speaker 2: book entitled the Use of Doctrinal Warfare and political, non
Speaker 2: military attack against the USSR. The paper was actually read
Speaker 2: to an audience of CIA officials on October twentieth, nineteen
Speaker 2: fifty two, and the document defines doctrinal warfare as quote
Speaker 2: an attack through the medium of ideas on the motive
Speaker 2: invasion of a given target, which seeks to reorient the
Speaker 2: targets target's will in the selected direction. Now, the document
Speaker 2: asserts that the Soviets were not reluctant to weaponize ideas,
Speaker 2: so America had to follow suit and not trying to warfare.
Speaker 2: If I recall, and Wimhoff points us out, included plans
Speaker 2: to infiltrate all religions Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam and essentially
Speaker 2: make them surrogates of the American Empire, which itself was
Speaker 2: merely a stepping stone to world government, which I might
Speaker 2: add holds parallels with mystical imperialism, because mystical imperialism, which
Speaker 2: of course it concerned itself with the creation of syncretistic
Speaker 2: religion to unite all of the otherwise fragmentary elements of Empire,
Speaker 2: of the British Empire together, and so we see kind
Speaker 2: of a syncretism taking place here. Now none of this
Speaker 2: is tangential because it is our contention. And then we
Speaker 2: point this out in the book that UFOT disinformation played
Speaker 2: an intake role part in doctrinal warfare. First of all,
Speaker 2: we have the Psychological Strategy Board the PSB, which wim
Speaker 2: Hoff tells us was used in doctrinal warfare, played an
Speaker 2: intake a role in doctrinal warfare. Wimhoff says that the
Speaker 2: PSB was actually responsible for coordinating doctrinal warfare is a
Speaker 2: There is a now legendary memo authored by Director of
Speaker 2: Central Intelligence DCI Walter Bedelle Smith in nineteen fifty two
Speaker 2: which calls for the PSB quote to discuss quote the
Speaker 2: possible the offensive defensive utilization of the UFO phenomenon. And
Speaker 2: even more substantial link exists than that, and that would
Speaker 2: be through one of the major participants in doctrinal warfare.
Speaker 2: That participant was doctor Charles Lowry, the chairman of the
Speaker 2: Foundation for Religious Action. Lowry was responsible for authoring two
Speaker 2: memoranda that provided a strategy for the transforming for transforming
Speaker 2: Buddhism in Southeast Asia into a mirrorage of the American Empire.
Speaker 2: This plan, which was endorsed by then Vice President Richard
Speaker 2: Nixon confide inspiration for the efforts to colonize Catholicism. In
Speaker 2: nineteen fifty four, Lowry was a pivotal was pivotal in
Speaker 2: an effort to organize was known as Freedom Day. Freedom
Speaker 2: Day was an event meant to commemorate the anniversary of
Speaker 2: the revolt of East German workers in Polish and Czechoslovakian
Speaker 2: rebellions against Communism that took place in June nineteen fifty three.
Speaker 2: Freedom Day, which was celebrated on June seventeenth, nineteen fifty four,
Speaker 2: was the brainchild of Nicholas de Rochefort Fort and n
Speaker 2: De Rochefort was a french Man and a psychological warfare expert.
Speaker 2: The Rochefort and Lowry worked together to see to it
Speaker 2: that Freedom Day was carried out, and later, on July
Speaker 2: twenty ninth, nineteen fifty four, both men were praised by
Speaker 2: George J. Kirst and the US representative from Wisconsin on
Speaker 2: the floor of the House of Representatives for making Freedom
Speaker 2: Day reality. The Rochefort is significant because he was one
Speaker 2: of many CIA officials who was involved in the infiltration
Speaker 2: of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon Nightcap. The
Speaker 2: rochwort Was and several other CIA officials played a very
Speaker 2: important role in the founding of Nightcap, ensuring that the
Speaker 2: US investigations and conducted by the UFO, investigations conducted by
Speaker 2: Nightcap would be subject to considerable deep state influence. During
Speaker 2: his remarks on the House of on the floor of
Speaker 2: the House of Representatives, Kirsten stated that Freedom Day was
Speaker 2: quote an example of what is possible to achieve in
Speaker 2: the field of unconventional psychological warfare against communism through imagination
Speaker 2: and private initiative unquote. So Kirsten made it clear that
Speaker 2: Freedom Day was a psychological warfare operation. Then Kirsten stated
Speaker 2: that a lesson quote unquote, a lesson could be learned
Speaker 2: from Freedom Day. In Kirsten's view, freedom Day provided an
Speaker 2: example of a project that was quote prepared and initiated
Speaker 2: by private initiative unquote, rather than by government. Kirsten then
Speaker 2: suggested that quote a private organization be created to carry
Speaker 2: such psychological warfare. To carry out such psychological warfare projects,
Speaker 2: we believe that Nightcap was formed in response to Kirsten's
Speaker 2: call quote to create a private organization unquote for the
Speaker 2: purpose of quote psychological warfare unquote, and in support of that,
Speaker 2: we point towards the findings of UFOL researcher Jack Brewer.
Speaker 2: Brewer pointed out that NIGHTCAP was incorporated some twenty seven
Speaker 2: months after Kirston made his remarks, So it appears to
Speaker 2: us that UFO investigatory bodies were being used to conduct
Speaker 2: doctrinal warfare. The personal over the personnel overlapped with the
Speaker 2: rochefort is certainly there. But it wasn't just organizations like
Speaker 2: NYCAP that were used to incorporate UFOs into doctrinal warfare.
Speaker 2: Motion pictures were also engaged in UFO related to doctrinal warfare.
Speaker 2: In addition to his important position at Time Magazine, C. D.
Speaker 2: Jackson was also president of the National Committee for Free Europe.
Speaker 2: The National Committee for Free Europe was a front for
Speaker 2: the Central Intelligence Agency, and executives in the Committee for
Speaker 2: Free Europe included Alan Dallies and Dwight D. Eisenhower. Eisenhower,
Speaker 2: of course, would go on to become President of the
Speaker 2: United States, Dollars would become the Director of CIA, and,
Speaker 2: as I mentioned earlier, a chief participant in the Georgia
Speaker 2: Edomski UFO case, A member who was very close to
Speaker 2: the organization's executative committee was film producer and studio executive
Speaker 2: Darryl Zanik. Zanik had worked as a writer. He had
Speaker 2: wrote more than about forty scripts during the nineteen twenties
Speaker 2: for Warner Brothers and then moved on to become head
Speaker 2: of production, and in nineteen thirty three he left Warner
Speaker 2: Brothers after he and the studio had Jack Warner, had
Speaker 2: a dispute over salary. He then partnered with Joseph Shrek
Speaker 2: Shrink to start Twentieth Century Pictures. He and Trank would
Speaker 2: transform that production company into a force to be reckoned
Speaker 2: with in the motion picture industries, especially in nineteen thirty
Speaker 2: five when they brought the when they basically brought the
Speaker 2: bankrupt Fox Studios into the fold and they merged it
Speaker 2: with twentieth Century to form twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation.
Speaker 2: But Xanik became much more than just a major film
Speaker 2: producer when America entered into World War Two. When our
Speaker 2: entry came in nineteen forty one, Xanak gained an intelligence background.
Speaker 2: He was commissioned as a colonel in the Army Signals
Speaker 2: Corps and he placed his film company at the disposal
Speaker 2: of the United States government twentieth century, Fox began churning
Speaker 2: out films that were made with the supervision of the
Speaker 2: Office of War Information OWI and a government agency engaged
Speaker 2: in large scale information and propaganda campaigns domestically and overseas,
Speaker 2: and populated heavily by social scientists who comprised the core
Speaker 2: of the OSS, which he eventually became the CIA. But
Speaker 2: as a result of this development in Xianic's life, in
Speaker 2: his mind, filmmaking and propagandizing became merged, whether intentionally or unintentionally,
Speaker 2: motion picture art and information. Warfare and persuasion became one
Speaker 2: and the same in Xani's mind, And in nineteen forty three,
Speaker 2: while he was still with the Army Signals Corps, he
Speaker 2: was quoted as saying, quote, if you have something worthwhile
Speaker 2: to say, dress it up in the glittering robes of entertainment,
Speaker 2: and you will find a ready market without entertainment, No
Speaker 2: propaganda film is worth a dime. On the book, Yeah,
Speaker 2: Xanik developed a very good rapport with CD Jackson. He
Speaker 2: became part of a group of Hollywood figures that Jackson
Speaker 2: could refer to as quote unquote friends, and this group
Speaker 2: also included Cecil B. Demel and Jack Warner and Walt Disney.
Speaker 2: Jackson turned to This Holly World, This Hollywood Circle when
Speaker 2: he wanted certain ideas to be subtly relayed to movie audiences.
Speaker 2: Jackson was the head of the Committee for Free Europe
Speaker 2: and Xantik was a member. In nineteen fifty one, when
Speaker 2: twentieth Century Fox released what was to become a very
Speaker 2: popular and important science fiction movie, The Day the Earth
Speaker 2: Stood Still, the inaugural the inaugural Benevolent myth film. The
Speaker 2: movie had a profound effect on audiences and left a
Speaker 2: permanent impression on America's cultural landscape. In nineteen ninety five,
Speaker 2: the National Film Registry described the film as quote cultural,
Speaker 2: historically or esthetically significant unquote, and usually science fiction, it's
Speaker 2: it's very surreal. The genre can be very bizarre, and
Speaker 2: audiences always have a sense that what they're watching is
Speaker 2: somehow divorced for reality. The Day the Earth Stood Still
Speaker 2: was quite different. There was a very realistic style to it.
Speaker 2: Xanik obviously wanted the audience to feel like they were
Speaker 2: viewing a very real event, almost a documentary. Yeah of
Speaker 2: particular more importance to was the now famous scene where
Speaker 2: the alien plat lands his spacecraft in the nation's capital
Speaker 2: and delivers his message to Americans and the rest of humanity.
Speaker 2: While he was discussing this scene with the movie's producer
Speaker 2: Julian Blaustein, I mean the movies director Julian blouse Stein, uh,
Speaker 2: the the movie screenwriter Edmund North. Uh, Xanik directed them
Speaker 2: to quote, treat it as realistically as you possibly can
Speaker 2: quote and if I may add their script the scriptwriter
Speaker 2: Edmund North, he openly acknowledged that clat two who's killed
Speaker 2: by soldiers, but he slavored or revives, you know, revived
Speaker 2: through the use of advanced technology. He he intended, Uh,
Speaker 2: he intended the character of Clatt two to be an
Speaker 2: alien Christ, and during his son journ on Earth, Clatte
Speaker 2: two assumes the very suggestive name of Carpenter as an
Speaker 2: carpenter from Nazareth. So very you know, you already have
Speaker 2: intimations of an exo theological Christ and the narrative. But
Speaker 2: Xanik wanted a very documentary style to the U landing scene.
Speaker 2: And he told North and blasting the following quote, you
Speaker 2: should suddenly hear radio programs being interested with startling flash
Speaker 2: announcements from Washington, New York, Los Angeles, et cetera. The
Speaker 2: whole nation is listening in this should be dramatized like
Speaker 2: the opening of a documentary film, quote Xanik. He was
Speaker 2: also very adamant that the audience quote must accept our
Speaker 2: entire project. Xanik wanted the audience's full investment in this
Speaker 2: particular big screen experience. He wanted to make sure the
Speaker 2: film's message was fully imbibed by viewers. This was to
Speaker 2: be a propaganda piece. The fact was probably not lost
Speaker 2: on Blasting the film's director, because he himself was a
Speaker 2: signals car an Army signals car veteran one of these.
Speaker 2: One of the messages that was was introduced by this
Speaker 2: film was Salvation from outer Space. An extraterrestrial messiah figure,
Speaker 2: the principal alien character and the extraterrestrial name Cloutu, comes
Speaker 2: to Earth bearing a cautionary message meant to help humanity
Speaker 2: avert disaster and avoid extinction. Clato is a misunderstood deliverer
Speaker 2: who experiences resurrection after being fatally shot. This, of course,
Speaker 2: is a reference to Jesus Christ. This Christ, however, is
Speaker 2: firmly anchored to the a manic world an interplanetary savior
Speaker 2: instead of one that's sent to us by some transcendent god.
Speaker 2: And at one point Plato, of course, he escapes custody
Speaker 2: of military guards and he hides out in a boarding house,
Speaker 2: where as Phil's pointed out, he assumes the name of Carpenter,
Speaker 2: and it's an obvious allusion to Jesus Christ. The Carpenter
Speaker 2: are from Nazareth. So Clatu is supposed to be a
Speaker 2: surrogate for the divine, which is the very definition of
Speaker 2: the Beyond. His message to mankind includes a warning that
Speaker 2: the inhabitants of the planet is the inhabitants of the
Speaker 2: other planets rather, are extremely concerned by the fact that
Speaker 2: that humans have developed a primitive form of atomic power.
Speaker 2: Clatu tells humanity that if it continues on its present course,
Speaker 2: that it will quote face obliteration. So we have one
Speaker 2: of the invocation of beyond the super weapon, which of
Speaker 2: course is of course Promethean fire and a gnostic Messiah.
Speaker 2: We have it segueing into the invocation of the Beyond
Speaker 2: as extraterrestrial gods. Yeah, Clatu's message it obviously caused the mind.
Speaker 2: The theory advanced by doctor James lipp in nineteen forty nine,
Speaker 2: and that Project Sign report, so The Day that the
Speaker 2: Earth Stood Still was released only two years after the
Speaker 2: Project Sign report and was overseen by a Hollywood production
Speaker 2: chief with an intelligence background and extremely close ties to C. G. Jackson,
Speaker 2: a principal participant in doctrinal warfare. The probability that this
Speaker 2: was all coincidental is very small, to say the least.
Speaker 2: In nineteen eighty three, journalist Linda Marlton Howe claimed that
Speaker 2: she was told by Air Force intelligence officers, one of
Speaker 2: which was probably Richard Doughty, who was involved in a
Speaker 2: whole plethora of alien disinformation schemes, including a disinformation scheme
Speaker 2: that led to the tragic downfall of Paul Benowitz, who
Speaker 2: was a UFO researcher and electric on an electrical engineer
Speaker 2: who suffered all the symptoms of a nervous breakdown as
Speaker 2: a result. And all but she was told by these
Speaker 2: Air Force officers that the Day the Earth Stood Still
Speaker 2: was quote inspired by the CIA unquote, and that it
Speaker 2: was probably probably and that was probably the only time
Speaker 2: that the Air Force intelligence candre that into the Air
Speaker 2: Force intelligence circles were ever honest with her how herself
Speaker 2: was used as a disinformation conduit by deep state forces
Speaker 2: and elements of the public state that had fallen into
Speaker 2: some degree of corruption and deterioration, probably as a result
Speaker 2: of excessive Could war paranoia. The aforementioned Richard Dody and
Speaker 2: agent with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations AFOSI,
Speaker 2: provided next between the deep state and public state. In
Speaker 2: the case of Linda Malton. How as an AFO SI agent,
Speaker 2: Doty was representing portions of the public state that had
Speaker 2: allowed its competition with Soviet intelligence to erode its integrity.
Speaker 2: The afosi's desire to counter Soviet intelligence efforts caused it
Speaker 2: to resort to some of the worst kind of lies, deception, disinformation.
Speaker 2: In the case of the aforementioned UFO researcher ele electrical
Speaker 2: physicist Paul Benowitz, delies and disinformation led to delusional paranoia
Speaker 2: and nervous breakdown. In nineteen seventy nine, Benowitz had begun
Speaker 2: seeing and filming strange lights over Kirtland Air Force Base
Speaker 2: in New Mexico. He was also intercepting some electronic communications.
Speaker 2: Benowitz he was an eccentric and came to believe that
Speaker 2: but he was the evidence that he was acting here
Speaker 2: was an activity. The AFOSI was among those portions of
Speaker 2: the government bureaucracy that became concerned with Benowitz's investigation, and
Speaker 2: they were afraid that Benwitz would become the unwitting puppet
Speaker 2: of the Soviets. In other words, his investigations would unintentionally
Speaker 2: reveal secret projects at Kirtland Air Force Base and other
Speaker 2: sensitive sites like the Monzano Nuclear weapons storage facility and
Speaker 2: Coyote Canyon Test Area. So, through Agent Special Agent Richard Dody,
Speaker 2: benefit Witz was fed some of the most paranoid UFO
Speaker 2: disinformation ever conceived. The very purpose of the disinformation seems
Speaker 2: to have been to engender extreme suspicion, in irrational fear
Speaker 2: in its precipit in its recipient, and it seems to
Speaker 2: have had the desired effect, because, as I said in
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty eight, Benowitz was exhibiting all the signs of
Speaker 2: severe mental distress and a family had to place them
Speaker 2: in a psychiatric facility. But thois I was not the
Speaker 2: only organization that Doughty represented during the sad Milits affair.
Speaker 2: It was revealed that Doughty was either a representative or
Speaker 2: a member of the Aviary, which was a group of
Speaker 2: intelligence operatives that derived its name from the fact that
Speaker 2: participants assumed bird names as aliases. The AFOSI was obviously
Speaker 2: motivated by national security concerns. The Aviary's agenda, on the
Speaker 2: other hand, was authored was authored somewhere within the balls
Speaker 2: of the deep state. Aviary was the classic example of
Speaker 2: a deep state entity. Its activities were morally questionable, and
Speaker 2: it did not receive its mandate anywhere from the public state.
Speaker 2: And more evidence that there was deep state as well
Speaker 2: as public state involvement in the In the Benowitt's affair,
Speaker 2: if Benowitz was accidentally compromising national security, all that the
Speaker 2: AFO SI, all that Richard dot You would have had
Speaker 2: to do is come to him and say, Paul, kindly
Speaker 2: cease and desist from all your activities and all Benowitz
Speaker 2: was eccentric, but he was. But he was also a
Speaker 2: very good hearted person and a patriot, and he would
Speaker 2: have listened. But no, the instead they used him as
Speaker 2: a as a disinformation amplifier and or when when If
Speaker 2: it was when, with national security was the sole motivation,
Speaker 2: All they would have had to do is tell him
Speaker 2: the stopping would have stopped. And all so Dotey presented
Speaker 2: how with an alleged briefing paper regarding alien's visitation like
Speaker 2: The Day the Earth Stood Still, The alleged briefing paper
Speaker 2: presents a Christ like figure that originated with extraterrestrials as
Speaker 2: opposed to a transcended God. How testified quote there was
Speaker 2: a paragraph that stated, two thousand years ago, extraterrestrials created
Speaker 2: a being that was placed on Earth to teach mankind
Speaker 2: about love and nonviolence. Reading this document caused how to
Speaker 2: believe that Jesus Christ was a herald of extraterrestrial civilizations
Speaker 2: instead of God's redeemer. So the Messiah motif was being
Speaker 2: co opted by deep stinct forces to promote concepts and
Speaker 2: ideas that originated with the oligarchs. The ends of UFO
Speaker 2: disinformation we find in doctrinal warfare is a new Jesus
Speaker 2: preaching a new gospel tailored to the contours of the
Speaker 2: global oligarchical establishments for human So we see pop culture
Speaker 2: had already seeded the uphology community for this in years
Speaker 2: in advance with the with the promotion of the film
Speaker 2: There the Day the Earth Stood Still, we already have
Speaker 2: that masienic motif in place and we already have the
Speaker 2: transposition of the escaton into space. We already have the
Speaker 2: reinterpretation of aliens as angels, all modern myth making all
Speaker 2: already we have Linda Malton House mind seeded with those beliefs.
Speaker 2: In this regard, UFO disinformation agents may be drawing inspiration
Speaker 2: from one of the progenitors of the modern deep state,
Speaker 2: the Bavarian Illuminati. This eighteenth century secret society also attempted
Speaker 2: to introduce a new Jesus and a new Gospel. The
Speaker 2: Bavarian Illuminatis founder professor of canon law at English Dot
Speaker 2: and Vice Shop, abandoned the Orthodox understanding of salvation. The
Speaker 2: Orthodox understanding is that salvation is the restoration of communion
Speaker 2: with God through his son Jesus Christ. Shalt presented to
Speaker 2: his order a different Jesus with a different death to salvation.
Speaker 2: I Shalt states that Jesus came to teach man how
Speaker 2: to liberate himself from ignorance through the use of reason,
Speaker 2: which which I shout capitalizes to indicate that reason is
Speaker 2: Divinity incarnated as the human mind. For Shalt, reason was
Speaker 2: a surrogate for Divinity, the agency through which man would
Speaker 2: solve all of his problems. Without any assistance from a
Speaker 2: transcendent God. Shop wrote, quote the secret preserved through the
Speaker 2: disciplinanum or can i, and the aim appearing through all
Speaker 2: his words in deeds to give back to man their
Speaker 2: rich is to give back to man their original liberty
Speaker 2: and equality. Now one can understand how far Jesus was
Speaker 2: the redeemer and savior of the world. The mission of
Speaker 2: Christ was therefore by means of reason to make man
Speaker 2: capable of freedom. When at last reason becomes the religion
Speaker 2: of man, so will the problem be solved. Shop also,
Speaker 2: Saul was also saw himself as something of a Masonic reformer,
Speaker 2: and he believed freemasonry to be a kind of secret
Speaker 2: doctrine that Christ taught to his apostles. Shopped asserted, quote,
Speaker 2: Freemasonry is hid in Christianity, and we find that Freemasonry
Speaker 2: has seen very significant ties to UFO deception through Christopher Melon.
Speaker 2: Christopher Mellan. His resume includes being a former United States
Speaker 2: Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and a former
Speaker 2: staff director of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Speaker 2: Christopher Mellan is part of the of of the oligarchical
Speaker 2: set the melon industry. I mean the Mellon dynasty. He
Speaker 2: is part of that whole oli some man submerged oligarchy
Speaker 2: that exists here in America. And this this Mellon dynasty,
Speaker 2: it claims uh Pittsburgh entrepreneur and banker Thomas mell mell
Speaker 2: as it's as its patriarch. Thomas Mellon. Mellon belonged to
Speaker 2: the Pittsburgh Scotch Irish industrial community. This is significant because
Speaker 2: the Scotch Irish Industrial commun unity owes much of its
Speaker 2: existence to Freemasonry. Freemasonry basically established that particular business community.
Speaker 2: Thomas Melon's collaboration with Freemasons included loans to Henry Clay Frick,
Speaker 2: the infamous industrialist and union buster. Frick and rased Freemason
Speaker 2: the Free Masonic Conception of God. He was a treasurer
Speaker 2: at the King Solomon's Lodge number three forty six and Comasville,
Speaker 2: and he was a member of the of the Urania
Speaker 2: Law Chapter number one ninety two green at Greensburg. It
Speaker 2: was almost inevitable that the Melons would imbibe Freemasonry. One
Speaker 2: of Thomas Mellon's sons, Us Secretary of Treasury Andrew William Mellon,
Speaker 2: was a Freemason, and according to a free Masonic source,
Speaker 2: he was able to attain the much coveted thirty third
Speaker 2: degree of free Masonry.
Speaker 5: Now, I'm not trying to be rude. I want to
Speaker 5: cut you guys off, but we can come back and
Speaker 5: do a part two. But I am going to have
Speaker 5: to get to the super chats here because we're going
Speaker 5: up towards two hours. So let's get you back on
Speaker 5: a part too soon in the near future when I've
Speaker 5: read more of the book. I've only gotten a few
Speaker 5: chapters in and it's really good. So let's get to
Speaker 5: some of these super chats we've got. First up is
Speaker 5: where is it at? Luthian? For ten dollars. I don't
Speaker 5: have anything to say other than that you've been helpful
Speaker 5: in under my understanding of orthodoxy. That's all, well, thank you, Luthian,
Speaker 5: much appreciated. Big BALLA for five dollars. What is up
Speaker 5: with all of the progressive woke stuff? Where is it
Speaker 5: coming from and where's it taking us? Well, it's really
Speaker 5: just a tool of social engineering, and it's taking us
Speaker 5: into the global technocratic world government. So you know that's
Speaker 5: that's the whole point of it. John Connor five dollars.
Speaker 5: Schopenhauer was Kant's blood.
Speaker 2: Boy.
Speaker 5: I know this because I come Fromman descent. My gamgam
Speaker 5: told me that Schopenhauer drained the blood from Nietzsche, and
Speaker 5: Nietzsche engaged in certain activities with Adolph, who gave us
Speaker 5: angela merkle. Okay, that person's joking. Five dollars are the
Speaker 5: College brothers? Are the College Brothers kg KGB spies because
Speaker 5: they look like Russians. They are super agents, they're sleeper agents.
Speaker 5: I think he's just he's just joking.
Speaker 2: German descent, a little bit of American.
Speaker 5: Jmel are ginger. There you go, Jmail says thirty dollars.
Speaker 5: Any Jacobsen wrote in her book on Roswell that the
Speaker 5: Saucer event Roswell Saucer event was a Russian style. Did
Speaker 5: the US government government know it was coming to it
Speaker 5: was coming so they could capitalize on a social engineering opportunity.
Speaker 5: I don't buy that it was a Russian operation.
Speaker 2: I think it was a we don't either. We go
Speaker 2: we go into that in the book. We believe that
Speaker 2: that's a cover story for a cover story, and a
Speaker 2: h uh. Philip Corso, in his book The Day After Roswell.
Speaker 2: He claims that it's all alien, but he betrays the
Speaker 2: reality of it at the beginning of the book because
Speaker 2: he says that he brings it, that he had to
Speaker 2: bring in her Ermine Oberth and and uh von Verner
Speaker 2: von Braun and all to to look at the debris
Speaker 2: because it resembled a Nazi technology. Well, if it's of
Speaker 2: alien origin, why does it resemble a Nazi technology and all?
Speaker 2: So we think we think that it was that it
Speaker 2: was either it was probably produced the indeed went off
Speaker 2: in three different directions, the Soviet Union, United States, and
Speaker 2: an extra territorial state. We believe, we present the case
Speaker 2: in the book that it was most likely Nazi orient
Speaker 2: R and D that found its approximate origins with America,
Speaker 2: with Capturedzi Nazi scientists here in the United States. So
Speaker 2: it was Nazis. It was Nazis in the employe of
Speaker 2: the American deep state. And I believe that in this regard,
Speaker 2: Annie Jacobsen was probably manipulated. That's just our personal opinion.
Speaker 5: Gotcha a World Economic Forum since twenty dollars submit. I
Speaker 5: think the World Economic Forum is telling me to submit
Speaker 5: to their global mandates. So that's also another joke profile,
Speaker 5: but thank you for that submission, and thank you guys again.
Speaker 5: The book is invoking Beyond and you can get that
Speaker 5: at the link that I put in the show description
Speaker 5: over at I whatever it is. I yeah, I've got
Speaker 5: the link there. So thank you guys very much, and
Speaker 5: we'll have you back and we'll get deeper into this
Speaker 5: because there's just so much content and too much to
Speaker 5: cover and in one installment, so we'll we'll definitely have
Speaker 5: some more installments. But thank you guys so much.
Speaker 2: Hey, thank you