Month: August 2011

The Grandest Deception by Dr. Jack Pruett

A Book Review

There are few books I have read that both entertained and disturbed me. The Grandest Deception by Dr. Jack Pruett is assuredly one of them.

From the preface, through the opening chapters and well into the book itself Dr. Pruett kept me turning the pages not only by heaving disquieting opinions this reader’s way but also by hurling convincing – if not totally unarguable points of view about politics, economics, extraterrestrials and UFOs, religion, mankind’s origins and the nature of reality itself.

Where does one begin when one attempts to overthrow the belief system of an entire civilization? Dr. Pruett begins, ‘In the beginning…’ by rattling civilization’s very core.

One of the core pillars of the Judeo-Christian belief system is the Bible. In essence the Bible has always been portrayed in ancient and modern times as the divine and historical relationship of God with mankind – the Word of God. Countries have been founded on this premise; churches of all Christian denominations have used the Bible to disseminate the Word of God.

Irrespective of one’s belief system and according to biblical scholars from St. Thomas Aquinas to Billy Graham, the Bible represents the only divinely revealed foundation and guide depicting God’s relationship with mankind. Few other writings have predisposed humanity’s intellectual, political and religious development in such an influential and pervasive manner.

Until now.

After a modest preface and without wasting too much of the reader’s time Dr. Pruett states in the first chapter of his work: “The Bible is not a story about God or the Supreme Being. The Bible is a story about the Annunaki. That my friend is the grandest deception and has far-reaching implications.”

Dr. Pruett’s book is essentially concerned with these far-reaching implications – the Annunaki’s imposition of slavery on this newly created species to mine gold in servitude to a race of beings from a planet called Niburu.

One could well contend that this bold statement and the many interpretations that follow are abjectly frivolous or quixotic. However, coming from someone who at one time taught scripture, has graduated with a medical degree in obstetrics and gynecology and who has seen life emerge from the womb over five thousand times, the above statement about the Holy Book struck my mind’s eye like a shaft of piercing light… I had to read more.

In addition to its central argument about the nature of the Bible, Dr. Pruett’s work speaks to a whole host of global, historical and societal issues.

In detailing these issues Dr. Pruett employs an elaborate mixture of speculation and evidence to express his contention the planet and our civilization are essentially doomed. He argues the belief systems used to establish our civilization as a planetary genus are seriously flawed and, without a major reconstruction, we as a species are off to hell in a hand-basket.

Dr. Pruett weaves the threads of a grand deception through an historical tapestry; an alarming lattice of ideas many will dispute. However he quite adequately depicts our wanton and mounting incapacity to deal with an adversarial and dysfunctional political and judicial system of governance. Pruett also points to humanity’s lethargy in excising the ascendancy and dominance exerted on all of us by a sinister and elitist economic system; one that fans the flames of warfare and ethnic violence.

The reader is left with the distinct impression that Dr. Pruett believes the primordial servitude imposed on mankind by the Annunaki and the slavery modern institutions engender at all levels, have spawned a citizenry deluded into believing everything will be ‘just fine’ if we just let the rich and powerful manage things while we all look the other way.

Moving from his primary premise that mankind was not created by a single god or multiple gods but was created by ancient astronauts from another planet, to his bold condemnations of the Federal Reserve, governments, religion, secret societies and other social institutions – Pruett quite effectively illustrates how the tapestry has become a web of incredulous deception. Even the figure in the New Testament known as Jesus Christ and His role in the deception does not escape the scrutiny of Dr. Pruett.

The book is divided into two parts: Part One – The Grandest Deception and Part Two – The Grandest Rebellion. Part Two begins with a somber eye-opener that spirituality is not contingent upon a belief in a God or a Jesus. Dr. Pruett then suggests what amounts to insurrection by engaging humanity in a rebellion towards freedom by ridding America of the Federal Reserve Bank and the ruthless monetary ganglia embedded in a global financial warfare system that has the planet in a strangle hold.

Dr. Pruett pulls no punches as he insists pervasive radical change is a terrestrial imperative. His invitation to readers to dialogue with him about this need for radical change illustrates not only his commitment to change but his drive to attain it.

Notwithstanding the earth-shaking journey that Dr. Pruett takes his readers in this provocative work, two things will occur. First, his analysis will be roundly criticized. Secondly, you will turn the pages as frenetically as I did to see where he takes you next on the journey. This book is indeed an act of political courage.

Dr. Pruett’s Web site: http://thegrandestdeception.com/

Amazon Web site: http://www.amazon.ca/Grandest-Deception-Dr-Jack-Pruett/dp/1456892789

© Victor Viggiani – News Director – ZlandCommunications

Victor is a member of the Exopolitics Institute’s – Public Policy and Media Advisory Board.

Copyright Notice: Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirity on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact the author.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of any organization with which the author may be affiliated.

 

Alex Jones on Arab Spring & Globalism – an exopolitics perspective

Alex Jones Infowars Radio ShowBy Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Tripoli has fallen to a rebel advance and freedom loving people in Libya and around the world are celebrating the fall of Muammar Gaddafi. A cause for celebration given Gaddafi’s four decades old eccentric hold over Libya. Not so according to a giant in the alternative media – Alex Jones. Jones is a champion of the 911 Truth movement, and indeed the first to expose 911 as a false flag operation. Alex Jones has been at the forefront of efforts to warn the American public about the dangers of an unchecked police state, unfettered corporate power, secretive groups, and exploitative international banking. Jones’ websites, Infowars.com and Prisonplanet.com are filled with articles that broadly fall under the rubric of anti-globalism. Globalists, according to Jones and supporters, are those advocating the formation of a New World Order wherein government authority is centralized around the planet. A New World Order would be one wherein big government, big corporations and secretive organizations such as the Bilderberg Group dominate international politics and finances.

According to Jones, globalists use cherished U.S. Constitutional principles such as democracy and rule of law as fig leaves for the ever-steady effort to centralize life all over the planet into a future fascist, corporatist state. That’s why the Arab Spring, where young Arab protestors overthrow despots who have held power for decades, is criticized by Jones as a sham. The real agenda is to remove Arab dictators opposed to globalists now ready to expand into the Arab world in order to promote international banking, corporate penetration, etc.

Jones stance on the Arab Spring and support for dictators appears odd at first given mainstream media coverage of events in Libya, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, but is consistent with the anti-globalism Jones espouses. For Jones, better the little devil of Arab dictators firmly controlling their populations, than the big devil of globalists adding the Arab world to their international balance sheets. So the big question becomes, is Jones right? In many respects, Jones is insightful in his geo-political analysis, yet fails in a major way to understand the underlying dynamics driving international politics and events such as the Arab Spring. He fails to seriously consider the question of extraterrestrial life, and how an exopolitics perspective would change the way we view geo-political events.

Alex Jones, like many media personalities with large listening audiences, has largely sidestepped the question of extraterrestrial life. Jones has avoided immersing himself into controversies of whether or not extraterrestrial life is visiting our world and whether a “Cosmic Watergate” is occurring. Instead, he has considered the possibility that a fake alien invasion can be staged, and has publicly commented about an alien false flag operation. Jones position here is both consistent and cautious. He acknowledges that a false flag operation featuring alien life could be done with holographic technologies, without acknowledging that extraterrestrial life is real and is being covered up. In this cautious way, Jones has introduced his audience to the alien issue, but solely in the context of a possible future false flag operation. This is where Jones’ caution prevents him from seeing the bigger picture. That is visiting extraterrestrial life has been interacting with governments, corporations, military and private citizens for at least six decades. The policies implemented to shield all this from the world public all fall under the rubric of ‘exopolitics’ – the politics of extraterrestrial life.

 

The field of exopolitics is vast in its implications across all aspects of human life, and directly impacts on Jones’ central concern of the dangers of globalism. For Jones, globalism is driven by the avarice of international bankers and transnational corporations wanting to penetrate and control new markets and populations. That’s true to an extent, and we have much to learn from Jones and his supporters in that regard. If Jones, however, peeled back the onion layers a little more he would find a deeper dynamic behind globalism. A powerful factor behind globalism is the need for those in control of the extraterrestrial issue – to gain control over any extraterrestrial artifacts, knowledge or contacts found throughout the planet. The best way of understanding exopolitics is to consider that for at least six decades, major governments and militaries have worked secretly together to gain intelligence and conduct counter-intelligence on extraterrestrial life and technology. In addition, covert operations have been led around the planet wherever any information, technology or contact with extraterrestrials has occurred.

Organizations such as the Bilderburg Group, Council of Foreign Relations, etc., have played key roles by providing the intellectual firepower on how such a network of intelligence, counter-intelligence and covert operations can be conducted without the world’s populations learning about it. Globalism, in that respect, provides a very useful process for being able to conduct such operations across international borders. More importantly, international cooperation on the extraterrestrial issue has led to the creation of a “breakaway civilization” in highly classified underground and undersea bases. According to some credible sources, there are even human colonies on the moon, Mars and beyond. For many readers that might appear to be sheer science fiction. Yet once thorough research is conducted, the conclusion is inescapable.

The existence of a breakaway civilization is one of the great failings of contemporary world politics, and especially for progressive thinkers who have eschewed serious discussion of the extraterrestrial issue. The most advanced technologies known to humanity have been secretly developed and used in vast network of classified projects without any kind of oversight by representative government institutions, media or population. So where does Jones and his take on the dangers of globalism fit into this exopolitics picture?

Globalism is simply a process that can be used for good or evil depending on how it is managed by those with the most influence in directing and controlling it. In making globalism the big devil of the progressive movement and alternative media, Jones errs. He makes the profound mistake of not recognizing that it is how globalism is currently being managed that is the problem. Globalism can be a very good thing in monitoring and regulating international practices, especially when it comes to introducing transparency and accountability into the classified programs that have been conducted for decades around the planet. Humanity has a need-to-know what technologies have been secretly developed. This will require transparency not only in classified military programs; but, more importantly, classified corporate programs around the planet that defy oversight by any government or military agency. In the United States alone, the amount of black budget funds siphoned by the CIA into this network of deep black programs was estimated to be up to 1.7 trillion a year over the three year period from 1998 to 2000.

The reflexive anti-globalist stance, taken by Alex Jones and supporters has the unintended consequence of facilitating the continued secrecy that makes possible classified military and corporate programs across international borders. An anti-globalist ‘every country mind-their-own business’ approach encourages opacity and unaccountability across international borders. Anti-globalism eschews international cooperation and the strengthening of multilateral institutions such as the United Nations and International Criminal Court. At the same time, one needs to be wary that globalism is not hijacked in order to facilitate corporations and military programs seeking to secretly manage even more extraterrestrial information and contact all over the planet. Done correctly, globalism can help expose and bring to account those responsible for hiding how advanced extraterrestrial technologies have been secretly developed and used.

Supporting peoples struggling for democratic governments such as we are witnessing in Libya, Syria and other Arab Spring countries is an important means for promoting transparency and accountability across international borders. Alex Jones reflexive anti-globalist agenda not only unintentionally supports recalcitrant dictators in the Arab world, but also aids those that have secretly controlled a vast complex of secret projects and covert operations focused on extraterrestrial life and technology. The world has a need-to-know what has secretly happened behind the closed doors of highly classified compartmentalized alien related projects spanning the globe. We should not be afraid of globalism. Wisely embraced, globalism can bring about the kind of transparency and accountability across international borders needed to protect humanity’s freedoms well into the 21st century

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla, Ph.D. Exopolitics.org

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org

Scientific Study adopts unrealistic stance on extraterrestrial contact

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Extraterrestrial contact where humanity is almost destroyed to protect the ecosystem

There has been a flurry of recent stories by The Guardian and other major world media about the possible benefits or harm that may occur after contact with advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. The stories were sparked by a scientific study published in the June/July edition of Acta Astronautica. Titled, “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis” the study examines a number of scenarios concerning extraterrestrial contact. It adopts the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) paradigm that intelligent extraterrestrial life has not yet been discovered, and that scientific modalities such as radio signals are among the most feasible ways of establishing communications. The study examines the FERMI paradox, first established by Enrico Fermi, that alien life should be abundant in our galaxy, but he asked “where are they?”

Responses to the Fermi Paradox by the authors leads to three possible scenarios. The last scenario examined is the Zoo hypothesis that Aliens may be studying us remotely or invisibly, reminiscent of the non-interference principle popularized by the Star Trek series as the Prime Directive. They explain: “ETI are treating Earth like a wildlife preserve to be observed but not fully incorporated into the Galactic Club.”

The main purpose of the study (which I’ll abbreviate as “A Scenario Analysis” – full paper is here) is to answer the question: “If contact between humans and ETI is possible, then it is important to consider the capability of ETI to cause us benefit or harm” (p.6) In stressing the importance of the question, they go on to point out: “we do have a compelling reason to believe that ETI would be significantly stronger than us and therefore highly capable of causing our total destruction.”

The authors go on to consider extraterrestrial ethics. They write:

If ETI are significantly more advanced than humanity, then the outcome of contact may depend primarily on ETI desires. However, this leaves open speculation as to the specific desires of ETI and raises the question of what ethical framework they follow. Much can be said about ETI ethics. Here we focus on one key aspect: selfishness vs. universalism (p. 7).

In response, the authors examine three broad motivations or ethics of extraterrestrials. Basically, extraterrestrials would fall into categories of the good, the bad, or the indifferent leading to three broad scenarios. Considerable discussion is given to each scenario, and the benefits or harm to humanity. Of special interest is the possibility that “good extraterrestrials”, may decide to wipe out humanity for a higher good such as preserving the eco-system. This frightening scenario was vividly demonstrated in the 2008 remake of the Sci-Fi Classic, The Day the Earth Stood Still.

“Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis” is a very useful summary of a priori speculations about extraterrestrial life. It is the latest in a series of scientific speculations about contact with extraterrestrial life. Recent scientific discoveries such as exoplanets in habitable regions of solar systems, abundance of water found in our solar system, and the ability of life to flourish in extreme biological conditions has stimulated scientific curiosity about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. This inevitably leads to questions about the motivations of advanced extraterrestrial life after contact with them is made by SETI or other means.

What “A Scenario Analysis” fails to do is to actively engage with the more than abundant evidence that humanity is currently being visited by extraterrestrial life. In the abstract, the authors categorically state: “humanity has not yet observed any extraterrestrial intelligence.” Yet there is an incredible amount of physical evidence concerning sightings of UFOs under intelligent control displaying flight characteristics far above what is known to be possible in conventional or even classified aerospace research. In addition, there are also numerous whistleblower reports concerning crashes of UFOs, and retrievals of extraterrestrial biological entities. Finally, there are also first hand witness reports of contacts, both voluntary and involuntary, with extraterrestrial entities. Rather than acknowledge the existence of such evidence, the scientific study chooses to dismiss it all together adopting the well known SETI perspective that no extraterrestrial contact has yet been made.

In failing to even acknowledge the extensive literature that contact has already been made, and that a successful cover-up has occurred by select government, military, corporate actors, “A Scenario Analysis”is taking an unrealistic stance. Basically, it is ignoring the possibility that UFOlogy and exopolitical literature may contribute substantially to answering the main goal of the authors in answering whether extraterrestrial contact would be more harmful or beneficial to humanity.

For example, an innovative course in the new field of exopolitics titled “The “Science, Spirituality and Politics of Extraterrestrial Civilizations” offers a different conceptual framework for examining how extraterrestrials may benefit or harm humanity during contact. The course, taught in the Exopolitics Institute a examines how a typology of extraterrestrial civilizations based on energy consumption might help us understand how different alien societies behave, and how the available literature helps illustrate this. Another exopolitics course, both of which begin in mid-September, “The Role of Hollywood and the Media in the Disclosure Process,” examines how Hollywood is helping prepare humanity for both the beneficial and harmful aspects of various contact scenarios.

It is encouraging to see an increasing number of scientists openly engage with scientific, social, political and even economic consequences of the discovery of extraterrestrial life. Ongoing scientific discoveries make it clear that the conditions for the life flourish throughout the galaxy. This makes scientific curiosity over the motivations of intelligent extraterrestrial life inevitable. Encouraging scientific speculation on the basis of what can be deduced from NASA and other Space Agency press releases or peer reviewed scientific journals should not require an outright dismissal of the abundant literature from the fields of UFOlogy and exopolitics that extraterrestrial contact has already occurred. It would be basically advocating the very unscientific approach that a priori reasoning on the benefits and harm of extraterrestrial contact should be encouraged, while simultaneously dismissing all a posteriori evidence and arguments concerning the benefits and harm of such contact. If the Zoo Hypothesis is the more accurate answer to the Fermi Paradox, the authors of “A Scenario Analysis” might have to acknowledge that they might be among the majority of Zoo dwellers that have been kept in the dark by their Zoo keepers about who might be watching them

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla. Exopolitics.org

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org

Witness of Italian extraterrestrial contact case emerges

Gaspare DeLama flying saucer photos near Milan were printed in Domenica del Corriere in April 1962.

The Friendship case – interview with Gaspare de Lama (GL)
By Ivan Ceci (IC)

Painter Gaspare de Lama is one of the most important witnesses and protagonists of the “Friendship” case, a true case of contact between humans and aliens that occurred in Italy between the second half of the 1950s and the 1970s. This interview was done in May 2010 by journalist and researcher Ivan Ceci, in his home at Mandello del Lario on the shores of Lake Como, Italy.

IC – When were you involved for the first time with the Friendship [Amicizia] case?

GL – It started in 1960, between 1960 and 1961, in a very banal way, because I saw pictures made by [Bruno] Ghibaudi on a weekly magazine called “Settimana …” about 3 flying objects that appeared on the coast of Pescara [Italy]. One was very strange, the picture was very nice and I thought that it could be real, because one object was really peculiar, while the other two were classic saucer shaped.

So I wrote to him (to the magazine) a few lines, congratulating him and adding something like “let’s hope that those beings help us.” After 2-3 days, the time for the magazine to receive the letter, I received a phone call from Ghibaudi, telling me that my letter was chosen among the many they received (he was using the plural) and he asked for an appointment.

He arrived in the evening – I had a group of friends, with whom I was sharing sightings information and field research, analysing the different cases, selecting hoaxes, from real ones – and I invited this group, too. He told about the things directly, without mentioning names (like Bruno Sammaciccia), he told about W56, the bases, everything, and we were a little surprised.

Then at the end of the evening, while we were going down the stairs, someone said: “there will be very few left of those ones,” and in fact only one remained of that group, Paolo Torre, and all the others left. And after a couple of times that I have seen Ghibaudi, one evening he arrived with Bruno, and then my story began. I started to know a little more, the phenomena,… it lasted for 5 years.

Bruno was a charismatic man, fascinating, with culture, he could speak very well, a passionate man, from the south. It was difficult to say “no” to him, he was leading me slowly, nicely, through the events, the phenomena, I owe everything to Bruno. I still feel him in my heart, even if in the end he was tired, stressed. This story made 2 people go crazy, it’s not an easy story. I also had some difficulty in dealing with it, one needs to be really balanced. The other world: we don’t know it, but we would like to be there. This world here: it is too unbearable, and so you live somehow in between, but after a while you get used to it and you manage it. Humans, who have a normal nerves system, can get used to everything. I imagine that the ones, who had experiences even deeper than mine, had some stress, and Bruno also had a responsibility.

The first encounter was through objects’ teleportation, film reels were materializing in the air and falling down in the ground

IC – Film reels of movies?

GL – Yes, movies that we then would watch or audio reels, with sometimes a greeting or sometimes some direction of things to do.

Then there were those control nuclei of the apartment, there were blue lightning, 2-3 metres long, with a diameter of 20-30 centimeters, light blue, they would pop close to us without hitting us, they were renewing the nuclei of the apartment. Once every 20 days or so we would see those phenomena, because the nuclei needed to be renewed (updated?).

Then Bruno asked me to buy a little radio, he put it on the table and after 2-3 minutes a blue flame came out of it, half meter high and he then said “ok now it is ready” and I always carried it with me. Sometimes “SIGIR” (a [ET] member of the friendship case) or other members would speak through it. It would switch on by it self, Bruno would tell me to change the radio frequencies and I would change them, but the voices would still be there. I even tried to put another radio close to it, tuned on Milan, both radios were tuned on Milan, but suddenly mine would switch into the voice of Sigir, while the other was still tuned on Milan.

Then, one day, Bruno told me “they want to give you a present,” choose a place. So I have chosen a place close to Milan and we went there and we made a movie of the disc that I showed you before, and also photos, I then sent my photographic film to be developed and then we went home and we watched the movie.

Gaspare took photos and film of this flying saucer sighting near Milan. More of Gaspare's photos available - click image.

Then a lot of funny things happened, I remember that in 5 years I have seen 7-8 times other discs after a call for an appointment, also small, bright, in the night, in the sky. One was moving in a particular way (he shows with his hands in minute 9:12) doing like a theater, an exhibition, I saw many things.

 

IC – Did you have a direct encounter with one of the W56?

GL – No, I didn’t meet any, also because it was a dangerous time, they couldn’t get out of their bases, they were about 3 meters tall, so it wasn’t so easy, well some were smaller, but it wasn’t safe to go out, only once they showed up on a hill, about 300 meters from the house of Bruno in Pescara, but I wasn’t there (in the group we were about 10 people, there was a judge, an economist, a lawyer, …-) and they saw them on that hill, saying hello.

Bruno told us once that on that hill, that summer something would happen, and indeed it happened, they were there. They took pictures of them, there were some sea pines, and they were leaning towards these pines and were saying hello, I arrived just after that, and we went there afterwards to take measurements, and we measured that he was 4 meters tall. They took pictures of them and we all went to the photographer to develop the roll of film.

Once there was also my wife, we were at Bruno’s home, there was my little radio and we were 10-12 people and we were sitting randomly, and Sigir started to talk from the radio, he said hello to everyone, following the order of our position, he could probably see us.

IC – How was he speaking, using a good Italian?

GL – Yes, good Italian, the Italian was perfect for all members, but Sigir, when he was greeting, he was saying “saluto a tutti” (greetings to everyone) using an Abruzzo slang, and once I asked to Bruno “why does he say “saluto a tutti” while the correct form is “saluto tutti” and in that moment from the radio the voice of Sigir came immediately back and said : “Gaspare! Saluto a tutti!”. He wanted to make it clear that he greeted this way, because also Bruno was greeting this way.

IC – They were imitating the dialect?

GL – Yes, they were imitating the dialect, and sometimes Dimpietro [an extraterrestrial] said “Gaspare, change your thoughts” because I was thinking about something not really good.

IC – With which one of the W56 did you get on better? (did you enjoy more?) at least their voices.

GL – Sigir had a powerful voice, I liked Gallarate.

IC – Why?

GL – Because first of all, he was one of the youngest. We called him Gallarate, because the first time that he arrived on Earth he saw Gallarate [name of a town *translator note] and he said “how beautiful is Gallarate”, so we called him with this name. And one day there was the transmission of a radio quiz between two towns, Gallarate and Frosinone, and Gallarate was rooting (supporting) for Gallarate. And we laughed and I liked him because he was a little different from the others, he was more similar to us. But I liked them all.

Dimpietro did blame me twice, he was sweet but he was also very straight.

IC – Why did he blame you?

GL – Because I was thinking about something that shouldn’t be thought, I was thinking about nervous things.

At the beginning, humans are doubtful, doubt is part of an intelligent mind, otherwise we would be too naive, you can have strong doubts that disturb you or you can have light doubts, that are only worries, but then, in the long term, from their voices and from their vibration, you become trustful.

After all, the word “trust” exists, you can find it on the dictionary, so we should use it. At a certain point you have to trust someone. With doubt you can always question everything, endlessly, but trust came spontaneously. They make you feel it, it’s like when you fell in love with your wife, it was enough her word of love and you trusted her, you didn’t put her through a lie detector. You feel it. If we don’t feel trust, it’s our fault. You need more trust than faith, you could leave out faith, but trust is more important. Faith is too high, trust you can give it to a friend. Friendship is important, you can also not believe in God, but be “love”. I know some atheists that are wonderful people. Trust is for me the most important thing.

I think that the differences were caused by different ideologies, Bruno once explained to me. There are things that we don’t know about them (life values, laws, ethic, technology, science) we can not understand their different intentions.
To give me an example he said: “imagine a solar system that is disharmonic, that disturbs that side of the galaxy, well some civilisations, let’s say the CTR [the W56 enemies *translator note] with their technology they can cancel it, destroy it and therefore improve the harmony of that side of the galaxy. The W56, would do different, in their ideology they think that if nature has created this solar system, one can try to reduce the damage respecting the nature of things.” Of course the CTR would destroy the planet only if it was not inhabited, but they would interfere anyway on the nature of cosmos, while W56 would respect it, even if it disturbs.

This is a principle that develops also on ethics, on values. This doesn’t mean that CTR are bad, if they didn’t destroy their own civilisation it means that they love each others, they love their wives, their pets, but they have ideologies that are cooler and straight, science could be their God. While for the W56, God is Love.

IC – Why do you think that those beings, that are so evolved, needed your logistic help?

GL – Yes, they needed water, for us it was a minor effort, Bruno went to a friend who had barrels, he borrowed them, we filled them with tap water, we hired a van and we drove up there. Sometimes they would ask other material, rarely, 4 times in 5 years, it happened that you were asked for some material, and Bruno would organize it.

But I have a personal idea about this, I could be also wrong, but this is my idea: since they needed Uredda (love energy) to survive, they needed a certain quantity of it (if we want to put it in market words) but we didn’t give it to them, because, we were not in harmony between us.

Let’s say, I don’t give you love, I don’t give you friendship and so you jump in a river and, even if you can swim, you shout “help” to see if I give you my hand. So I have to help you and I give you my hand and so you receive my “rate of uredda” (love energy) that you need. So this demands of material could be a game to indirectly ask for uredda, but this is my idea, I told it to [Stefano] Breccia and he listened to me and said “it could really be like this”.

IC – Do you think that they have definitely left the planet, after 1978, after their defeat?

GL – Well, I left in 1965, so I didn’t live the last events, I hope not. I think not, because if they have this duty in regard to planet earth, they shouldn’t be stopped by the failure of 10 run-down people. I think, I hope that they are still around. They certainly are still around, but we as a group, on the uredda (love energy) aspect, we failed. We are not here doing heroics, saying “victory, victory”, no, no, we failed, which is worse.

IC – What did the W56 give you spiritually speaking? How did they change your vision about life?

GL – They made me understand that a better world is not utopia, because they exist. We are what we are, we are getting worse, while knowing that they exist and that they live on a wonderful way, and they are wonderful, make you realise that it is not an utopia, so it is something, to live in a cosmos, where there are goals that we could access.

Sometimes I was asking about God, once they answered me, “look Gaspare, think that we are here like a military party, not like missionary”. We then understood, me and my wife, that we were asking things to which they could not answer, because we would have understood them on our own, through our spiritual evolution, we met Osho and this also helped us. So I received a lot from their way of speaking, from their presence.

IC – Why, according to you, did the W56 project fail, if it failed?

GL – Well, WE failed. Because of that uredda (love energy) they called it uredda, it was an energy, like the one when there is a negative pole and a positive pole, quanta and tachyons, that uredda was the energy of love. A love that we should have shared between us in the group and toward them. Toward them it was easy, between the group…we are what we are. After 5 years it was broken.
So they needed this uredda, that they collected it in their instruments in the bases, defence devices or others, I don’t know, and when they didn’t receive this “fuel” (lets call it like this) the thing ended. They had to go, but I think, and it seems so, that they knew it very well, but they had to make this experience.

[Translated by Anissa Rahni]

 

Further Reading about Friendship [Amicizia] Case

UFOlogy Grand Deception–hiding the truth about human looking ETs

1950s Human ETs Prepare Us for Golden Age — Videos, Documents!

Extraterrestrial bases and contact revealed in Italy

UFOlogy Grand Deception–hiding the truth about human looking ETs

First Contact meeting with Italian ETs
Graphic of First Contact: first Friendship case meeting between 8 & 3 foot tall extraterrestrials with thee Italian witnesses.

Ask any UFOlogist about the reality of extraterrestrial life, and you’ll most likely get one of three versions of what is happening. The first is that we have been witnessing UFOs since the mid-1940s that offer abundant physical evidence of other worldly technologies sighted in our skies. This leads to the conclusion that someUFOs are extraterrestrial space vehicles observing our world, especially locations where nuclear weapons were being developed or stored. The second most popular version is that since the early 1960s, short “gray aliens” have been abducting people for genetic experimentation. The thirdis that some UFOs have crashed, and that strange looking “gray aliens” have been recovered along with advanced technologies for study in classified reverse engineering programs.Ufology’s three main versions of what is happening with extraterrestrial life is grounded in abundant empirical data. There are tens of thousands of cases from around the world involving physical sightings, radar trackings, photographs, film and testimony of UFO sightings. Similarly, there are thousands of first hand testimonies revealing the existence of alien abductions, and a genetic program conducted by strange looking extraterrestrials with human subjects. Finally, many hundreds of witnesses have come forward to confirm that some UFOs have crashed, and that the technology and occupants have been removed for highly classified study.

All three versions make up what is today known as scientific UFOlogy, and claims that this is as close as one gets to real science when it comes to the question of extraterrestrial visitation. The problem with all three versions of scientific UFOlogy is that they mask something that has long been officially kept hidden from the public. A secret that many leading UFOlogists have actively conspired to keep, along with government agencies encouraging such a process. Human looking extraterrestrials have been visiting our world and making contact with the general public since the beginning of the modern UFO era.

Stories of human looking extraterrestrials making contact with members of the general public first became known in the early 1950s. Famed contactees such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry, George Van Tassel, Orfeo Angelucci, and many other “contactees” from around the world thrilled the public with their accounts of meetings with extraterrestrial humans that in some cases where stunningly attractive. In many cases, the early contactees backed up their stories with supporting witness testimonies, photographs, film and other forms of physical evidence. The response from the world’s leading UFOlogists, let alone government authorities, was ridicule, derision, and outright dismissal.

Basically, the world’s leading UFOlogists – concluding that extraterrestrial life was visiting the earth and that select government/military agencies were keeping this secret from the public – were not interested in stories that extraterrestrials had made physical contact. Logically, one would assume that if extraterrestrials made the long journey to Earth from wherever they came from in the galaxy, that they would make contact with members of the public, let alone government authorities – that’s another story. Genuine stories of physical contact would be logical to assume, but UFOlogists employed another form of logic to dismiss such accounts. Yes, extraterrestrials were visiting and there was great public interest, but this unfortunately would lead to many charlatans and frauds deceiving the public with contrived contact stories. UFOlogists had to be on constant guard to filter out the many bogus contact stories if there was any chance that the conventional scientific community would take UFOlogy seriously. UFOlogists used the possibility of fraud to justify an impractically high evidentiary barrier for any claiming to have had physical contact with the occupants of flying saucers.

Consequently, the leading UFOlogists of the 1950s, experts such as Major Donald Keyhoe were quick to dismiss and ridicule the contactee stories. When the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon (NICAP) was created in 1956, it quickly become the preeminent UFOlogy organization for almost two decades, its leading officers and investigators were in agreement. Not one of the many contactee stories deserved serious scientific interest. None met the arbitrarily high evidentiary barrier created by UFOlogists such as Keyhoe and NICAP. Unfortunately, whether out of bias, shortsightedness or active collusion with government/military authorities, NICAP and leading UFOlogists led the charge to dismiss from public debate claims that human looking extraterrestrials have made contact.

More importantly, any aspiring UFOlogist quickly learned that if s/he was to be taken seriously by their peers, they should not study contactee accounts, and needed to reaffirm the prevailing orthodoxy that contactee accounts were the realm of outright fraud and deception. Many of Keyhoe’s peers and successors, UFOlogists such as Stanton Friedman, Richard Hall, James McDonald, Jacques Vallee, and many others dismissed contactee accounts as fanciful fabrications. Even UFOlogists such as Budd Hopkins and Dr David Jacobs, sympathetic to accounts of abductions by grey aliens that first emerged in the 1960s, dismissed stories of contact with human looking extraterrestrials as outright hoaxes. Examination of Richard Dolan’s two volume UFOs and the National Security State – the preeminent history of modern day UFOlogy – reveals a similar shortsighted dismissal of contactee accounts with human looking extraterrestrials. Adamski gets barely a mention in his unofficial history of UFOlogy, and other contactee testimonies are ignored altogether. Dolan’s book, aspiring to set the record straight about how the U.S. National Security System has historically dealt with the UFO phenomenon, fails dismally when it comes to examining claims of contact with human looking extraterrestrials and their significance.

Dismissal by the world’s leading UFOlogists of the many contactee accounts with human looking extraterrestrials has not been universal. British researchers such as Timothy Good (author of Alien Base) and the recently deceased Wendelle Stevens did investigate contactee stories and concluded that some, if not many, of the claims were accurate descriptions of real events. More recently, testimony has emerged from Italy concerning a case of contact with human looking extraterrestrials from the 1950s to 1970s that involved hundreds of witnesses, photographs and film. Apparently, a large base of human looking extraterrestrials existed for a twenty two year period from 1956 around the north-eastern coast of Italy, and the aliens worked with humans to supply their base with food and other physical materials. Meanwhile the Italian military, along with other European military authorities and NATO, closely monitored the aliens but did little to interfere with their operations. A book, Mass Contact, was written about the Friendship case by a retired Professor in civil engineering, Stefano Breccia, and published in English in 2009. A documentary featuring Breccia and other witnesses was made about the case and is now available on Youtube.

Anyone drawn to the modern UFO phenomenon will find an abundance of experts and authorities claiming that serious UFOlogy is focused either on sightings of unusual aerial phenomena (UFOs); human abductions by strange grey looking aliens; or secret UFO crash retrieval operations. To this day, many UFOlogists will act as “gate-keepers” dismissing, if not vigorously attacking, any claims of physical contact with human looking extraterrestrials – regardless of any supporting evidence. In this regard, UFOlogy and its leading proponents are perpetrating a grand deception orchestrated, to some degree, by the same military-intelligence-corporate authorities that are keeping the truth about extraterrestrial life from the public. The truth about human looking extraterrestrials directly contacting private individuals, and government/military authorities for that matter, has been UFOlogy’s best kept secret. Thanks to cases like Friendship now emerging that secret is slowly unraveling, and a more comprehensive exopolitical understanding of extraterrestrial life and its real impact on Earth will be reached.

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla. Exopolitics.org

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org

Knowledge of ET Life is Maturing at Warp Speed says paradigm activist

Steve Bassett at National Press Club

When venturing into the uncertain mine field of the extraterrestrial issue, an often side-lined or forgotten fact remains at the core of it: that we the people still outnumber the prevailing elite.  If the call to arms from the Exopolitical perspective demands that the people must be impelled to political action, then Stephen Bassett is a living testament to this.  He reminded us of the necessity for action when his usual, energetic style of dialogue filled the airwaves during his recent interview on the esteemed Coast to Coast am, on Monday 25th July 2011.  Bassett has, arguably, come to represent this particular form of Exopolitical activism.  His popularity with the people likely stems, in part, from his modus operandi to enlist them as recruits in the hero’s journey; a quest that evokes a powerful metaphor, traversing gender, religion, culture and time.  It speaks to the human condition and engages the psyche on a profound level.   As co-creators, Bassett speaks directly to the people and invites them to weave the tapestry of change.   The most recent opportunity to do so has arrived in the form of World Disclosure Day.  This, he tells George Noory, is a chance for the people, alongside sympathetic organisations, to register their support in an attempt to speed up the process of extraterrestrial disclosure by the governments.

At the beginning of the interview, Noory remarks upon the recent discord amongst some in the MUFON camp to enlist Story Musgrave, a retired NASA astronaut, as the keynote speaker for the upcoming MUFON 2011 Symposium.   The resistance is due to Musgrave’s assertion that, although he believes that life in the universe exists, he does not believe that the Earth has been visited by extra-terrestrial intelligences.  Bassett’s position on this is clear: that people arrive at the reality of the extraterrestrial presence via their own, personal mechanisms.  Alongside this, Bassett maintains that the issue of what astronauts may or may not be permitted to speak about is essentially unknown.   This inclusive approach is one that the sceptics usually fail to adopt when addressing the UFO community, and perhaps Bassett’s perspective reflects a move towards a more mature understanding of the phenomenon, born out of Bassett’s own personal journey of having to navigate the sometimes uncomfortable and difficult terrain of validating the UFO in consensus reality.  From this perspective, Bassett finds room to accommodate the difficulties that any civilian agency, such as NASA, would surely encounter if suddenly confronted with the proof of advanced extraterrestrial existence; a discovery that would inevitably result in its deferral to the U.S Department of Defense.  A clause in the Space Act, it appears, has pre-determined this scenario.  As Bassett informs Noory, NASA is ‘stuck between a rock and a hard place’.  There is hope, however, as Bassett implies.  The scale of probability for the existence of intelligent life seems set to tip in our favour.

An acceptance of the likelihood of intelligent species showing up in our reality has perhaps become a little easier for the mainstream to digest since the recent estimates by the Kepler scientists of some fifty billion planets in the Milky Way Galaxy.  Five hundred million of these reside in the Goldilocks Zone, an area that supports the existence of Earth like planets.  The possibility of intelligent life beyond the Geostationary Earth Orbit is ‘maturing at warp speed’.  That being said, Bassett’s approach of initiating an inclusive strategy in the fight for disclosure is evident in his statement that a ‘bridging into the larger world’ must be attempted.  Of course, any such effort is commendable, but this endeavour has not always proven to be a successful one in the past, for the old guard faction of Ufology at least.  It did, in fact, create a paradox.   In their race to convince the sceptics and mainstream society of the reality of unknown, intelligent species visiting the Earth, a reductive paradigm was established to select evidence on the basis of its’ credibility gage.   Ufologists were expected to strictly adhere to the parameters of authoritative, scientific discourse.   Strands were selected while others were discarded, despite the risk of consigning aspects of the phenomenon – frequently those that revealed a high level of strangeness – to the rubbish heap.   These self-imposed restrictions left the sceptics unimpressed, as those in the UFO community were still denounced as little more than believers.  Bassett, however, demonstrates an awareness of this.   Although not explicitly stated, he highlights a subtle distinction in his shrewd observation that Edgar Mitchell is not a ‘believer’, in the sense of how this term is usually employed, but rather he is ‘convinced’ of the reality of UFOs.  Edgar Mitchell of course, being able to add space exploration to his CV, is certainly more qualified than the sceptics to assert this.  Arguably though, the rise of quantum theory in popular culture has illuminated the path of the hero’s journey and has perhaps helped us to move more confidently towards an expanded awareness of our reality, enabling us to break out of such a chrysalis.  Certainly, we are living in different times now, as the experiencer phenomenon is now an accepted paradigm in mainstream Ufology.

Bassett remarks that a part of his role is to look for ‘disclosure indicators’.  A couple of main ones have already occurred; the suspension of SETI and the US Space Shuttle program.   These programs, Bassett maintains, are unsupportable and would warrant the additional criticism of governments in a world after Disclosure.   Additionally, Bassett astutely discerns that the next ‘big’ topic in the disclosure process is the rise of the contactee.   He cites public figures that have already stepped forward into the public arena and predicts that more will follow suit.  Of course, the impact of this would be significant in terms of bringing the issue to mainstream attention.   Alongside this process, however, it is essential to remember that extensive and dynamic work should also be carried out for the purpose of deepening our understanding of what is occurring in the contactee narrative.  For this work, detailed experiencer accounts already exist, but we have barely scratched the surface of understanding the implications and the purpose of inter-dimensional and (or) extraterrestrial visitation.

As the interview draws to a close, Noory seeks to understand the driving force behind Bassett’s pursuit of disclosure.  His recognisable brand of humour takes hold as he remarks that ‘an obsessive compulsive personality with an inability to hold down a regular job’, when faced with a ‘compelling’ issue, has determined his journey in life.   Humour aside, his determination to make a difference is evident throughout.  It is this resolve to put the disclosure issue centre stage that enables him to acknowledge the work being done by others.   Of notable mention is David Griffin’s, the founder of Exopolitics United Kingdom, contribution to the Exopolitical initiative in the UK, and Kim Carlsberg significant book, The Art of Close Encounters, is also discussed.  The prolific blogger and activist, Ed Komarek, is cited during the interview, and Anthony Beckett’s organising of the Leeds Exopolitics conferences in the UK receives a mention.  In addition, the immense contribution to the field of Ufology by Stanton Friedman and Linda Moulton Howe is highlighted.

One thing is clear.   By the time the listener arrives at the end of the Coast to Coast journey, they are left with a sense of the potential to make a difference.  Stephen Bassett’s Exopolitical activism seems set to continue, and a little thing such as the current state of non-Disclosure is unlikely to deter him from his journey.

In a further interview carried out in the run up to the UK Exopolitics Event in Leeds, Bassett expanded on how the contactee or ‘experiencer’ phenomenon would become increasingly important in the exopolitical field in the future. This is a notable shift when many researchers prefer to prioritise elements such as FOIA File Release and ‘reliable’ witness statements such as those documented by pilots and downplay ‘citizen’ type witness or experiencer data due to its ‘kooky’ image. The hour long discussion can be streamed or downloaded here: http://bit.ly/sbassET

For a detailed and alternative reading of the contactee narrative then please refer to the recent edition of the Exopolitics Journal: http://exopoliticsjournal.com/. Stephen Bassett will be speaking at the 2011 Leeds Exopolitics conference.  His talk is entitled ‘Disclosure: Who, What, Why, When, Where and How’.  To register you support for World Disclosure Day please visit:http://www.worlddisclosureday.org/

By Natasha Acimovic

Submitted by David Griffin - http://exopoliticsunitedkingdom.org

Copyright © 2019 Exopolitics Institute News Service. All Rights Reserved.