'Belluminati', Pentagon UFO News

I know I'm not the only one who's noticed the new Taco Bell commercial:

Timing is interesting, and of course my conspiratorial oriented mind sees high strangeness with the juxtapositions of the Solstice season, Trump's tax cuts, and the Pentagon releasing the latest batch of UFO information.

As for the commercial, sure it's advertising just goofing on a trend, but those of us living in fringe world can't help but sense there's more to it than just pop culture appropriation of us fringe dwellers.

Fringe Implosions

Strange things going on in not only UFO Land, but the realm of the fringe as well.

We had the racist, sexist comments from John Ventre, the MUFON state director, as well as the initial apathetic reaction from MUFON itself.

Stan Romanek, UFO alien witness, or, alien gray in the window hoaxer, has been charged with being in possession of child pornography.  

Sean David Morton busted for tax fraud. 

David Paulides, author of the Missing 411 books, has upset many with his prima donna act, as well as, according to some, his research methods. (I had my own little drama with him and I regret being a nice girl and giving into his demands.)

And the latest: New Age angel and tarot writer Doreen Virtue has become born again in the Christian faith, and has turned against the tarot, and other oracles, as sinful occult tools.  (I will write more on Virtue on my tarot blog.)

None of this is really a surprise. This metaphysical field -- and I include UFOs in that term -- has always had its share of the dishonest, child molesters (look at all the would be cult leader guru types; a large percentage are either horny jerks, or pedophiles), frauds and egomaniacs.

Because of this truth, none of these areas, including UFOs, will be taken seriously -- respectfully -- by mainstream culture, including its institutions.

It's up to us to denounce these fools, creeps and cheaters because no one else will. Instead, these fools, creeps and cheaters will be held up to the mainstream as justification for mockery and marginlization.

These sad, cheesy events do not negate the reality of UFOs, angels, the tarot, spirits, remote viewing, or conspiracies and strange disappearances. So we need to keep exposing the dishonest (and not keep fighting amongst ourselves about what's worthy of investigation, and what isn't.) Some of the individuals involved are to be tossed out, obviously --tossed, shown up, exposed, and not tolerated -- but it's important we don't, as the saying goes, throw the baby out with the bathwater.

It's Not That I'm Jaded . . .

Because I'm not. Some have given it up altogether, others are close to walking away from UFO and all that relates, but not me. I've shifted.

UFOs, Sasquatch, ghosts and other paranormal, anomalous topics are related in many ways. Keeping with the contradictory nature of weird stuff, they're also separate from each other. Connected or not, I've long ago accepted the fact that they are. 

The "hunt" for Sasquatch -- not a literal hunt, not that, ever! -- well, what's the point? If you've seen a Sasquatch, you know they exist. If you haven't, well, maybe one day you will. And it seems to me the surest way to see one is to just be, sans guns, cameras, Paris of plaster, and just meet, (if you're lucky) in mind and spirit, the being in its own realm. I haven't personally seen a Sasquatch, but I know they exist. Some may argue that I prefer to have faith it exists -- philosophical quibbles. I know too many people who have seen one, and I believe them. Either I believe them, or I don't, in which case I am calling them liars. I am pretty sure they aren't lying. I know them -- why would they --in fact, some have only reluctantly told me upon promise of not repeating their encounters. So I accept along with the other evidence that's out there that Sasquatch exists.

Ghosts. I have seen, heard, and felt their presence.  It's difficult to explain to some who haven't experienced this for themselves. For example, the energy, the type of movement and motion involved in objects that do things they shouldn't. Or the voices that debunkers will say are just sounds from the radio, television or kids  other parts of the house. Nope. None of those satisfy, nor do the "explanations" that it's migraine or vision going wonky when seeming white mists forming before your eyes.

Not to mention the very location. A home that is over a hundred years old, once an old folks home, prison, hospital, orphanage, sanitarium, buried on top of an old cemetery, once a plantation -- haunted? You can be absolutely certain that place is haunted!

But while cameras do capture interesting images, and EVPS are always intriguing and evidence adding to the proof pile, there is something to be said for the sensitive, the medium, the psychic, that goes into these places. Respect, for one. Like searching for Sasquatch, a quiet and intentional respect for the situation goes a long way to an authentic experience.

So I no longer feel the compulsion to go out and take casts, photos and the like. I'm not out to prove anything to anyone, and certainly not to any infrastructure, so the only thing left is my personal experience in relation to the energy I'm curious about.

In many ways, the same goes for UFOs, USOs, UAPs.   Many have given up, as they have the search for Nessie or Sasquatch, because no Big Answer has appeared to us, revealing its reality or its purpose. I know its real, so I don't need to discover that aspect. I have no idea -- though I play around with tons of theories -- as to their purpose or intent. I'll probably never find out. But I've always been more of a process oriented type than a result type.

Gatekeepers: On Whose Authority?

UFO Gatekeepers. They come from all sides; uber-skeptics, debunkers, as well as those who believe, but insist on scientific approaches to exploring all that is UFO. The Gatekeepers wrangle one tentacle of the UFO Kraken, ignoring the rest -- even while it strangles them -- rejecting the elements that annoy them.

They decide who gets to, what methods, which cases.

On what authority?!

There is none.

James Mcgaha, uber-debunker, asks UFO witness if "she's qualified to look at the sky"

There is no UFO Authority, no matter how desperately some want there to be. There is no Official Method, case, researcher, witness, spokesperson.

No one is more, or less, qualified than anyone one else in this realm.

As soon as someone starts spouting off a need for standards: academic, scientific, "legitimate" cases, etc. I do not take them seriously.

Honesty is expected, at all times. That's about all we should expect. Sincere desire to explore, to share, to research, while holding the ball of integrity.

Other than that, the rest is a form of bullying. Self-righteous and arrogant demands to join, if you don't, then you're not honest, sincere and legitimate.

UFO Researchers, Witnesses: Learn These Signs of Psychotics, and, Beware Deviant Homosexuality

Because if you don't, that proves you are!

I do my best to avoid giving the verbose stuffed shirts at UFO Iconoclasts -- now UFO Conjecture (s) --  any attention, but sometimes one has to present the insanity in UFO Land to the rest of the inhabitants. Particularly so since so many otherwise reasonable researchers insist on playing with them.

Usually their posts are a form of UFO Guerrilla Theater. At least, that's how they see themselves; players in an unreasonable realm, (UFOs)  bringing reason to the rest of us deluded misfits.  Doesn't work; they're far too pedantic for any true surrealism, even while their spewing ends up being extremely surreal anyway. But that's simply a product of their clumsy hoax attempts (Trent photos, etc.) or dry and wordy laments about the time wasting study of UFOs. Even as they, themselves, pontificate thusly. (See what happens after reading their posts? One begins to sound like them.)

In a post dated earlier this month, they write about the inspiration given to them reading Hervey Cleckly, who wrote a  book on "homosexual deviancy" :

"The Caricature of Love by Hervey Cleckley (1957), a tome outlining the deviancy of homosexuality"

and found inspritaton in Cleckly's classic The Mask Of Sanity, (1941) outlining the traits exhibited by psychopaths. What does this have to do with UFOs? 
Well . . .

In a bizzare leap (told you they were surreal, in spite of themselves) Cleckley's book on psychopaths should be read by UFO researchers. The traits presented by Cleckly should be kept in mind when UFO researchers interview witnesses, or, when dealing with researchers themselves. 

(Remember, this is a book on psychopaths. Suggested for use in UFO Land. By a man who wrote about the "deviancy of homosexuality." )

Number six in Clecky's list is interesting here: "Lack of remorse or shame." In what context? Seeing a UFO? Studying the subject?  Oy. And so it goes. 

The jesters at the Conjecture(s) blog recommend UFO researchers learn about these traits:

"That UFO researchers do not have the qualifications, usually, to pursue personalities lies at the heart of the UFO dilemma, as it's UFO reports that make up the core of the UFO story, and that core is besotted by liars or psychotic personalities, telling the stories or asking the questions."

(Snarky little bastards aren't' they?) So that's why we can't get anywhere in solving the UFO mystery, er, "dilemma." And here I thought it was because of a tangled complex mass of cover-ups, misinformation, disinformation, religions, politics, infrastructures, fear, greed, misinterpretations, misunderstandings, manipulations, shadow governments, folklore, conspiracies,myth, power, corruption,galactic wars, vying entities, and simply not having gotten there yet in the whole magical mystery tour thing of mind, soul, universe and "them." When really, it's just been us psychos all along.

I don't think they're entirely serious; I do think they enjoy intentionally being ridiculous. Still, it is annoying. 

In UFO Land as well as the mundane world, psyopaths exist. This is news? It's good to be aware of the psychos among us. The more you know and all that. But really, the juxtaposition here of "psychopath" "deviant homosexuality" and "UFO witness/researches" is too much. 

Notice how I didn't link. That's on purpose. 

This Just In: There Is No Bermuda Triangle

Image source: Gutenberg Project

     I always am curious when official entities come out with denials of the anomalous. In this case, it's NOAA who has given up the secret of The Bermuda Triangle. Which is, there is no touch thing.  (A recent example of authoritative voices alerting us to the realities: the latest explanation for Mothman.) Why now, what's the point? Automatically causes one to think along cover-up conspiracy lines. I mean, where else is there to go? And by the way, just who is this "most of us already suspected…" speak for yourself, official debunker shill.

Sun Sentinel - Bermuda Triangle just a myth, U.S. says: Now it's official: The Bermuda Triangle is a bunch of bunk.

For decades, rumors persisted that hundreds of ships and planes mysteriously vanished in the area between Miami, Puerto Rico and Bermuda because it was cursed or patrolled by extraterrestrials.

Most of us already suspected that was a myth. Yet, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration just posted a story declaring the Devil's Triangle, as it's also known, is no different than any other open ocean region — and that foul weather and poor navigation are likely to blame for any mishaps.

Thoughts on an Unread Book: Nick Redfern's The Pyramids and the Pentagon

I've heard that one of the theories put forth in Nick Redfern's newest book The Pyramids and the Pentagon; The Government's Top Secret Pursuit of Mystical Relics, Ancient Astronauts, and Lost Civilizations (he must be the most prolific Fortean writer around, besides Brad Steiger) is that the government/military complex was responsible for many contactee experiences.  I haven't read the book, yet. (Just downloaded it to my Kindle.) And of course, can't wait to read about one of my favorite topics -- contactees -- from one of my favorite Fortean authors. If Redfern does theorize that the government was directly responsible for many of the contactee encounters, that fits in with the MILABS theory, for one thing.

Some might wonder why many UFO witnesses, contactees, abductees are so . . . "obsessed." From the perspective of the on-looker -- be they researcher, debunker, or mainstream observer -- it may seem indulgent, silly, pathetic, even, this "obsession." But this so-called "obsession" is often the valid attempts from the witness to find out what the hell happened! So simple. Yet often surprisingly overlooked by others much of the time.

For myself, it gets back to, well, me. Since childhood I've had UFO related and paranormal experiences, including missing time. I am now of the opinion there are at least two things happening at the same time: "them" meaning, whoever, or whatever, these things we call aliens might be, and some of "us" meaning, mainly, the cliched (but nonetheless real) military-industrial-complex. The latter is using the former for their own agendas, and the rest of us are its little puppets.

So yes, I am damn well immensely curious, not to mention pissed off, that either non-human entities or human entities, (or both) felt they could mess with my mind simply because they could. It's certainly possible missing time, various manipulations, and sightings were human caused events. Within the context of covert operations performed upon the rest of us, it's absolutely relevant and legitimate that witnesses, like myself, "obsess" (ahem) over what happened.


It's obvious to anyone who's honest at all that humans have been sharing this planet with a host of other intelligences since our beginnings. Whether some of these beings are aliens from other planets is almost beside the point -- the fact is, we've been existing alongside other entities all along. It isn't a stretch to assume that some humans -- those with power, money and the means to exert control over the rest of the human population -- have found ways to manipulate some of these non-human beings. 

Don't throw it back on us; this idea that we're the ones wasting time and pondering the imponderable. Wrong argument.

Trickster Theater: "Earthquakes" and the Pope

The world shared a global shudder of anxiety at the news that North Korea's earthquake yesterday was no "earthquake" but an earthquake due to a "nuclear test."

Checking the U.S. government's earthquake site, which I do several times a day, I see that Tonopah Nevada and surrounding area has had four earthquakes today. The largest being 5.1. That seemed very odd to me, so I Googled Tonopah, Nevada, to find that the area is a test range:

Tonopah, Nevada carries a legacy of being the home to the nation’s development and testing of smart bombs extending back to World War II where it was noted for its bomber bases. Follow the links to learn more about Tonopah’s role in our nation’s wars.

Not a coincidence.

And to really go down the rabbit hole, while I don't seriously think there is a connection between the above and the Pope's resignation, that last news item is a biggie. The Trickster Theater has been very busy these past few days!

The Cycle of No There There: 'UFO enthusiasts admit the truth may not be out there after all'

Once again, we see an item on how there's nothing to UFOs. Not from the overt and pathological skeptic crowd, but from the meh realm. UFO enthusiasts admit the truth may not be out there after all - Telegraph

This is not news. Oh, I don't doubt the debunkers and "skeptics" will jump all over this to support their ludicrous opinions on the UFO phenomena. It'll be juicy news for their disingenuous little black hearts.

We've seen this meme many times over the past few years. A few items here and there on how: UFO sightings are down, reports are down, UFO "enthusiasts" have given up, UFO organizations have closed their doors, and so on.

These fluffy little pieces circle around like black helicopters.

Feh.

The 'Goalpost' Paradigm

 “Which way you ought to go depends on where you want to get to...” ~ Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll

Skeptics, debunkers, and believers alike accuse each other of "moving the goalposts." In the context of how the term is used -- pieces in a game -- it's true. (Skeptibunkies do "move the goal posts" all the time when it comes to anomalous subjects. They assume much: why and how Bigfoot, psychics, UFOs, and so on should behave, without doing any of the research. And if they've done the research, they'd realize one can't assume a thing.)

But let's forget that. Why use a sports or game analogy at all? By using a verbal marker like "goalpost" we're keeping alive the idea that there are rules. Rules that must be followed - goalposts -- and, along with that the idea that, since a game is being played, there are winners and losers. It's a battle, a contest. A competition. It's a preconceived framework, with rules, boundaries, winners, losers. Anything outside of the game is rejected because, of course, it doesn't fit in with this particular game. You don't insert the rules of chess into Monopoly.

As long as we accept this idea of a game, with posts to be moved, or not, we stay stuck. It's not a game! Or, maybe, like Alice, it is a game in the very loosest of meanings.

The rule is, jam tomorrow and jam yesterday-but never jam today

It must come sometime to jam today, Alice objected

No it can't said the Queen It's jam every other day. Today isn't any other day, you know”  ~ Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

Why do we continue to force the unexplained into an established framework (the "game") when clearly, "it" meaning, the paranormal/Fortean/supernatural,  is playing by its own rules? If "it" is playing a game, it's one we don't know how to play. Insisting "it" play by our rules obviously isn't working.

Forget the "goalposts." Forget the game. At least, our game. I think if we stand back and watch for awhile as well as experiment, that would be both refreshing and revealing.

Just in Case, Rule Forty-Two

“Forty-two,” said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm. ~ Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

I'll end with this little synchronicity. Earlier this afternoon I finished Minette Walter's The Scold's Bridle. One of the characters, a policeman, references Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Specifically, the idea of the question, the answer and of course, how 42 plays into that. While working on this post, I looked up quotes from Alice in Wonderland, and came across this:

“Rule Forty-two. All persons more than a mile high to leave the court.” ~ Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll

Back to Conspiracy Park

For a few years now, in various parks around here, I've been coming across  images of NWO, electronic harassment and anonymous/V spray painted on the ground, on light poles, on support beams of bridges, or on stickers and paper stuck on poles and walls.

Last summer I found one on a telephone at the end of my block:

About a block from my house, last summer 

 Here's a picture I took in August of 2009 at the other end of the park:

Taken at Valley River/Greenway Bridge, August 2008

The above, spray painted at either end of the bridge, was painted over by the city. Same signage on the ground at the other end, near where we were today, at the intersection of two paths, since covered over by the city.

I'd been seeing these for at least a year. Randomly (so it seemed) one of the local news programs aired a small segment on these signs; I wrote about it at Oregon L.O.W.F.I.:

A couple of nights ago, the local news had a short segment on these signs. Some neighbors in the area are “upset” because the signs are offensive. Apparently someone, and I suspect someone else not the original sign maker, sprayed swastikas on some of these signs. I haven’t come across any with swastikas. The news said the signs were publicity for “a movie.” I’m not so sure about that, it seems like a strange explanation, especially when no title was given or reason why they came to that conclusion. Hand lettered signs on cheap paper stuck to bridge supports, telephone and light poles; hand painted banners on flimsy paper stuck to wooden fences — doesn’t seem like much of publicity campaign.

I couldn’t find anything on-line about this from any of the local news outlets. I’m not sure which local news it was either, since they’re all the same and I switch back and forth. The short segment ended with the warning that it is illegal to affix any kind of flyer or poster, etc. to city property such as telephone and light poles.

Today, I came across these, at the other end of where we usually walk, and where I've seen the images. Today, we were walking close to the University side and Alton Baker Park. The lettering reads "What is the plan? We won't forget. Expect us." I didn't do a great job of taking pictures, I'm no photographer and my camera is just a cheap one, but I think you get the idea.

Ed Komarek at UFO Digest: MUFON Psyops?

Ed Komarek on the morphing of MUFON, from investigative UFO entity to apologist faux serious UFO research entity. MUFON Psyops?. For some time now, MUFON has just gone over the edge, with upheavals in staff and shifts in philosophies.

MUFON's corporate decision to promote Astronaut Musgrave as its featured speaker at it's July symposium is a slap in the face to its membership and to the general public as well. Already Musgrave has been interviewed by the press speaking the NASA-SETI propaganda and misdirection deceptions that aliens may be out there, but are not here.

Komarek points out that it may be old news, but still valid news, to consider MUFON has ties to the intelligence community. I don't know if I agree with Komarek's ideas on what to do about this, only because it wouldn't do any good, in my opinion but MUFON is really a dead entity at this point.

Grass Roots Welcome Committee

The latest scandal in UFO Land -- Phil Imbrogno's lies about his academic and service background -- is still being discussed. I'm not supporting Imbrogno's lies, nor defending him for doing so. His ideas about things UFO -ish are still interesting, and, while not new, still worth exploring. I had respect for Imbrogno and am sorry this happened. But, it does seem clear it did happen. Which made me wonder: why would someone feel the need to lie about his or her background, when it comes to UFOlogy? Phil Imbrogno isn't the first person to have been exposed for lying about his credentials, and realistically speaking, he probably won't be the last. Yet, why do some people feel they need to lie, in the context of UFOs?

UFO culture is a grass roots culture. Anyone --- despite the UFO Police and snarky researchers who dismiss whatever, or whoever, they don't agree with -- can live in UFO Land. (Well, except scofftics.) Anyone. It doesnt' matter if you have degrees or not, or what those degrees are in. Degrees do not denote intelligence; oh, they point to a specific type and tell us the degreed person has focus and perseverance in order to receive that degree. Don't misunderstand me, I am not "anti degree" and I have one myself. [Sidebar: full disclosure in case anyone tries to out little ol' me: I have an Associate Degree in Early Childhood Ed, a Bachelor's in English lit with an emphasis on Folklore, a Certificate in Ethnic Studies and Folklore, and two years of grad school. ] Does this make any more or less qualified than anyone else? Nope. Not a damn bit. I'm intelligent if discussing Beat poetry or folkloric applications but a goddamn dummy when it comes to math, business or 12th century military history.

So why do some feel the need to lie or exaggerate in context of UFO research? I have a theory. Ahem.

It's the damn debunker skeptoids. As well as those within UFOlogy, many of whom are in the UFO Police camp, who drone on about being "scientific" and academic and all kinds of -ics. No, I'm not implying science is useless, of course it isn't. We need it all in UFOlogy. But because someone holds a degree in the sciences, or at the least, in academia, does not make them any more qualified in any way to research UFOs. Not one damn bit.

In this culture we place a lot of esteem onto those who have college degrees. We automatically think they're smarter and better than the rest of us. Studying UFOs is a fringe thing to do, a kooky, silly thing to do. You're not serious or smart if you consider UFOs to be anything more than a curiosity. (I know, some co-workers and acquaintances think I'm not as smart as they thought I was, once they find I'm "into" UFOs. Surely someone intelligent wouldn't waste their time...) Some think that having a degree gives a little bit of legitimacy to an illegitimate field.

But there's no need. No need to lie about your background, whatever it is. As long as you're using your head, are truthful and honest and following your own voice, you can't go wrong. Despite what some others might say to you about that, the research and the work will stand on its own. And that's all you need.

Seriously, A New UFOlogy. Seriously...

Another intent to remake UFOlogy, and they are serious. Here they are: The Serious New UFOlogy Institute. Words like "serious" and institute" are heavy and pregnant with meaning, well, you know, serious. They have a paper, authored by Paul Budding: BEYOND THE LIVING MYTH… AND FROM SERIOUS ‘OLD’ UFOLOGY TO SERIOUS ‘NEW’ UFOLOGY

The group admires  Richard Dolan's work and gives him plenty of credit, a very good thing. But something about any organization, especially with the words "serious" and "institute" both in their name, makes me want to run in the other direction. By definition, organizations are things, (er, "institutes") that defy my wanting to join them. (Or, er,  take them seriously.)  That's my nature.

The Institute of Serious UFOlogy (I can't help but get a bit of a Monty Python vibe when I read that title) contrasts serious old Ufology with serious new UFOlgy. No longer concerned with collecting UFO accounts, the new serious UFOlogy is only concerned with: what are [UFOs] they?  Excellent question, and I share their opinion the ETH isn't a given. It isn't a given, but it is a good possibility. It's also possible there are many answers all at once, because UFOs seem to be many things all at once. An ET here, an ultra-crypto-terrestrial there, a rogue government Dr. Evil thing over there. Or even the demons and Djinn and dark energies called up by semi-pathological rocket scientists.
 
The institute is concerned with the "Living Myth" of the ETH:

The Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) equates to a Living Myth. Many people love the feeling of awe and fascination that goes with the UFO Phenomenon and therefore they will not give up ETH. Giving up ETH would amount to giving up on archetypal awe, fascination, mystery etc. Therefore scientific and academic Ufology lacks confidence in itself precisely because the mythological projections onto the field contain so many archetypal contents and unconscious assumptions. Hence the field senses its own biases and makes it impossible to establish consensus within itself. Indeed for ETH to be the correct explanation there would have to be a coincidence of the myth equating to the reality of the phenomenon and vice versa.  

Much is true of the above. Budding writes the institute does not "condemn" the Living Myth, just that it needs to be excised in order to get an accurate  picture. But at what point does one decide the living-myth-projections-unconscious-assumptions et all are to be discarded? Like it or not, and obviously there are some UFO researchers who do not, there is a whole mess of confusing, seemingly magical at times, and certainly huge WTF moments within UFO events. Discarding those because they're part of a "living myth" taints the research. Now you're left studying only a bit of the thing. How can it be expected that one will find something of validity using that method?

To their credit they acknowledge that it is reasonable to assume there are many concurrent theories that are fairly equally true:

However, as already said, it is possible that no single theory can explain the whole phenomenon. Just because ‘X’ is true doesn’t mean that ‘Y’ is false in this case. Oddly enough there is an obsession for one theory answers: whether they are debunkers, ETH proponents or advocates of other dimensions, or those advocating an earth/human based answer.

It doesn't matter if it's Bigfoot, UFOs, ghosts or any number of anomalous events; many people demand a "one theory answer." Are UFOs solid craft or high strangeness events, are abductions fantasy or alien (ET) caused, is Bigfoot flesh and blood or paranormal, and so on. Black and white theories that are of a compact size, leaving no room for those gray baskets.

 As with the disclosure and other movements, the new serious ufology is brightly naive in thinking that skeptics, scientists and politicians will be open and accepting of UFOs once the phenomena is presented, well, seriously:

Politicians would be forced to show the field respect if Serious Ufology really was able to clearly demonstrate its differentiation from the Living Myth. This necessitates that serious physicists and technologists study the phenomenon.

No one will be "forced to show the field respect" because the field will never get respect. The existence of UFOs -- and their occupants -- are known among the politicians controllers of the world, as well as many in other areas. The details may or may not be known, but the fact of UFOs is. There are concurrent forces at work: one, the phenomena itself. Call it trickster or something else, the UFO phenomena -- which includes the high strangeness/"living myth" stuff -- has a built in function that ensures it remains marginalized. The second concurrent force are the agendas of those humans (above mentioned controllers) who have their own reasons for playing games with the rest of us. As cliche as it sounds, good old cover-ups, conspiracies and disinformation are the human created responses to the UFO presence.

Meanwhile, there are the witnesses. Remember us? Speaking of which, if the "new serious ufology" isn't concerned with collecting new UFO events, how will they recognize the ever shifting manifestations of UFOs? Questions and ideas about UFOs will never be addressed, because they're not being looked at. Soon the new ufology -- sorry, the new serious ufology -- will become the stagnant serious ufology. Before becoming the new old ufology, when another takes its place.

Gary Haden on Eschewing Emma Woods

Another excellent article by Gary Haden at Speculative Realms:The Nausea of an Emma Woods Idiot: Paranormal Celebrity Munchausen by Proxy, the Revolt of the Damned Alive and Making People Sick for Kicks concerning Emma Woods, this time on the responses, or rather, non-responses of the "shrug-so-tiring/boring" variety from researchers. (some who I respect very, very much; but on this one issue, I cannot understand why they think they way they do on this topic.)

Now, this is a hard one because Haden's words are harsh, and as I say, I respect some of the individuals he names. I'm the messenger, not the message. However, again, when it comes to the intentional "mind fucking" as Haden calls it, of witnesses by UFO researchers and disinfo agents, there doesn't seem to be any question as to the acceptance of such devious, manipulative behavior that, well, fucks with people's lives and minds! Yet, somehow, there has been a continued silence and/or acceptance of these doings.

Paul Benneiwitz. John Ford. Emma Woods, for starters. How many more?

It was hard for me to read some of Haden's words concerning Redfern, for example. But Haden is entitled to his opinions. Again, I am the messenger, not the message. Among the many very important paradigm shifting (UFO-wise) elements within Emma's story is the relationship between researcher and witness. What people are still not getting is that Jacobs, no matter what one thinks of his research overall and his theories on aliens, ET, abductions, hybrids, got away with absolutely egregious behavior. Behavior that is no doubt illegal, or would be in other circumstances.

I don't agree with everything Haden writes in this article, though they are minor, nit picky points. Anyway. Read the article. As usual with Haden, it's a great piece, and he is one of the few voices out there continuing to bring the Woods/Jacobs story to our attention.

(Updated) UK School Tells Students WWlll Has Broken Out

Another story from the UK about teachers playing mind games with students. In the past couple of years or so there have been several stories of English schools creating scenarios -- presented as being real -- of crashed or landed UFOs on school property, complete with local police arriving on the scene. One school had a crashed UFO scene along with claws and body parts of the 'dead alien,' along with the news that a teacher had been abducted by the aliens. ( see also my UK Still Staging UFO Crash Drills.)

Not all of these scenes were about UFOs. A teacher in Scotland told several students to quickly get their things together because they were being picked up and possibly sent off to an orphanage. Students were told their parents knew about this and had given permission for their children to be taken away:

Deputy head teacher Elizabeth McGlynn segregated nine pupils and told them they were to be sent away. After 15 minutes they were told it was all an act but that the role play would carry on up to lunchtime.


In a letter sent to council bosses, the unnamed mother said: 'Mrs McGlynn told the children they would probably have to be sent away from their families and that their parents had been informed about this and knew all about it.

The students were told they had to be segregated because they had "lower IQs" due to a "lack of sunglight in their mother's wombs."

Another staged event: the "murder" of a teacher on school grounds, which, naturally, severely upset students. Still another staged an "assault" on one of the female school employees, complete with fake blood on the ground.

In most of these cases, if not all, parents were not notified that  these little scenes were going to take place, permission asked from parents. Sometimes, the scenes were enacted while parents were there as volunteers at their schools.

Yesterday, news from the UK of a school who told students that London was under attack; World War III had broken out. The students were not just told this; they were shown footage from the Blitz in WWII and a tape of "Neville Chamberlain's war address" was played over the PA system to simulate real time news about "WWIII." Then, students were taken by teachers to a basement to hide:

Teachers then led them to a cellar when an air raid siren sounded and a firework was let off to simulate a bomb.

Headmaster Mike Richards is quoted as saying, many times over, that the exercise was to make students "sympathetic" to war victims. Studying WWll, the thinking behind this staged stunt was that students would really get it, since apparently Richards believed students were incapable of believing their teachers:

'The idea of it was to get the children to empathise with what it was like.  "The big concern we had was that the children wouldn't believe it.

Parents were angry and upset, students scared and confused.

In all of these staged events there are shared elements. The plot may differ: UFOs, government officials taking you away, murder, war, but they all contain the following:

An element of violent surprise.
Authority figures assumed to be trusted and respected (teachers,school staff, police) carry out these fake events.
Parents are not notified that these events are planned; permission is not asked for.
The local police are often involved; appearing on the scene, pretending to take part.
Specific character traits and emotional states are the target of these scenes:sympathy,empathy,feeling emotions, compliance, unquestioning volunteerism/work.

The rationale for given by schools for these events vary: sometimes it's to foster creative thinking and expression, in this case, make it real so students believe it. In other words: real (as far as students and parents know) events of a violent, unexpected and even bizarre (UFOs) nature are to be fully, completely believed, lived, accepted and experienced.

In the WWIII scenario,  the headmaster said the goal was to get students to sympathize with war victims. The Scottish school said they wanted "the children to experience an accurate emotional response."

Foxhill Primary school, where the fake assault on a female staff member was staged, justified their performance with the two layered rationale for these scenes; fostering creativity:

We wanted to give the pupils a topic that would inspire their creativity and their imaginations which is why the crime scene was chosen.

And unquestioning acceptance of authority and compliance, as well as overall moulding of state sanctioned character traits:

"This was also done to raise pupils' aspirations and to reinforce a positive view of the police and the work they do in the community.

Who is observing these reactions of children, and why? It is not coincidence; these scenes are part of a larger agenda. Individual teachers may think they are doing something creative and different for their students, but the curriculum and the nudges to enact it are coming from somewhere else, and for specific reasons. A desensitizing program; get children to feel comfortable with the abrupt intrusions of authorities, of violence, of the unexpected. But it goes beyond that; even more insidious is the trauma factor.

If students (and parents, by extension) are told that all these purposeful staged events are to foster trust in authority, that contradicts the fact the authority has just come in and lied to everyone. The message is: 'It's fake this time, but just you wait, next time it might not be. And we're the only ones around who can determine that."  Keep people nervous, jumping with anxiety, never knowing when the next assault, war, murder, or invading aliens will come.

Headteacher convinces terrified primary school children that World War Three has broken out | Mail Online

No Owls, But Hey, There IS Frankenfish. . .

Not much, owls are gone, oh, there's the occasional owl motif/image but that's about it. No synchronicities, no sightings, and I don't have much to say, for now anyway, about recent UFO events. Everyone else is saying things, and I simply don't have anything to say, yet, about things like "missiles" in the skies, authorities and their passive-aggressive attempts at appeasing the mainstream media and populous,  and so on. So here I am, saying how I don't have anything to say.

There is my response to a blog post about airships on The C Influence. And a new post on my blog Animal Forteana about what's cutely being called Frankenfish; genetically altered, DNA tweaked, Dr. Evil enhanced salmon that the FDA, corporate entities (like the prettily named AquaBounty, which lulls us into peaceful accepting slumbers of an endless supply of soothing hued foods from the sea to ensure we continue to exist in an endless stream of plentiful fishiness. . .) don't think we have the right to choose or think for ourselves. Oh it gets worse. . .

In UFO Magazine: Jeremy Vaeni's 'Aliens vs. Predator: The Incredible Visitations at Emma Woods

There is so much to say about the fantastic article by Jeremy Vaeni in this issue of UFO Magazine. (Aliens vs. Predators: The Incredible Visitations at Emma Woods.)

But for now, please, please, go and get yourself this issue, and read the article. Vaeni has done an excellent job with unraveling the seeming madness that is David Jacobs, the always precarious method of hypnosis used by some researchers to get at the submerged bits of missing time and nebulous memories of aliens, examinations, trips aboard saucers, and all the rest of "Abductions 101", and subject/witness Emma Woods.

From the beginning of this episode in UFO culture, I wondered why there wasn't more outcry from the UFO community. And yet, there still isn't; what there mainly seems to be, still, are a few stubbornly standing up for Jacobs, and misogynist pronouncements about Emma Woods' sanity, and worse. Other than that, little has been really said about this.

Richard Thomas Interviews Dean Haglund (X-Files, Lone Gunmen)

From June of the year: BoA contributor Richard Thomas interviews Dean Haglund of X-Files and Lone Gunmen. Haglund has interesting things to say about art, the culture's "zeitgeist of the moment," the trivialization of conspiracy theory-theory, Haglund's current projects and a lot more of course, including his thoughts on our world now vs. the world during X-Files days. 


And for more, visit Deanhaglund.com

Controlling Information: Colin Andrews on Conference Cancellation and the Future

Earlier today I posted a link to Colin Andrew's site, with a brief note on the cancellation of the Power Places International Crop Circle Conference. The conference was cancelled because, according to

Andrews, the conference coordinators refused to give in to the demands by researchers Michael Glickman and Gary King, who insisted Power Places directors dis-invite Colin Andrews, also scheduled to speak. Rather than acquiesce to Glickman's and King's ridiculous and arrogant demands, the decision was made to cancel altogether.  (Andrews linked to further commentary on his post; see here.

Andrews is both understanding and respectful of that decision, yet also understands what's at stake and who's responsible for the chilling reality that there are those on the inside -- our side -- as well as the expected outside, who would control information, and our ability to think for ourselves:

The public is treated as if they are no longer considered
worthy of receiving all points of view. Free thinking has
become a threat to easily led masses and many, from all
sides, are trying to control available information.

Andrews is not surprised that this happened however, and urges us to acknowledge these realities and then move on. At least, that's how I interpret his message; we are responsible for what can happen:

The situation we find ourselves in is not unexpected. It
fits perfectly into the discussion of “2012” and the
transitional period we are in. This is a time when old
structures of deceit and manipulation are failing.
Transformation into new and better structures for the
future is underway. What the future will look like
depends on what we create in the actions and decisions
we make today.  It depends on freedom of thought,
freedom of information and freedom of spirit. This is
what my research has been based on.

The point here, for me, is not whether one agrees with Andrews or anyone else; it's about access to information. There are those on the inside, let alone the outside of the fringes, who think nothing of making threats, behaving arrogantly and making demands in regards to information. That of course sends the clear message to the rest of us that we can't be trusted to think for ourselves. 

I've been commenting a lot here and there about the meme that UFOlogy is dead, and how it isn't dead at all. It's shifting, as all things are, within and without the esoteric world. The demands made by Glickman and King is just one more example of the shifts taking place in "fringe world." And while that may sound flippant, I will say, New Agey as it may be, that this is very important, and does affect, and will affect, all aspects of our world on many levels; from the mainstream to the anomalous.

I was surprised to hear that Glickman pulled this low brow stunt. I don't much of the crop circle research world or the researchers but from what I've seen of Glickman  -- primarily the Star Dreams DVD on crop circles -- he seemed above this kind of thing.

But, again, this isn't about agreement with this researcher or that, but the control of information, and, by natural extension, the control of "the people."  It's a pitiful reality we see this over and over in all categories of Fortean, paranormal -- call it what you will -- research. That, to me, is what "hurts" UFOlogy, or Bigfootology, or whatever -ology it is you're involved in. 

When I first heard Colin Andrews discuss his now famously misunderstood idea that most crop circles are "fake" I didn't want to hear it. I felt betrayed, and confused. But I listened. And found out Andrews isn't saying anything so simplistic at all --- far from it. Far from it. It seems to me that certainly fellow researchers would get that. I'll go so far as to say they do get it, and that's what makes their actions even more reprehensible.  I have no proof they do get it and are lying, simply my opinion. It's difficult to believe that researchers would be so lax in their awareness of what a Colin Andrews is doing and yet go so far as to demand he be removed from the presenter's list.