"When we can specially take up that subject, one of our leading ideas, or credulities, will be that near approach by another world to this world would be catastrophic: that
2 "navigable worlds would avoid proximity; that others that have survived have organized into protective remotenesses, or orbits which approximate to regularity, though by no means to the degree of popular supposition.
"But the persistence of the notion that we must be
3 interesting. Bugs and germs and things like that: they're interesting to us: some of them are too "interesting.
"Dangers of near approach - nevertheless our own ships that dare not venture close to a rocky shore can send rowboats ashore -
"Why not diplomatic relations
4 "established between the United States and Cyclorea - which, in our advanced astronomy, is the name of a remarkable wheel-shaped world or super-construction? Why not missionaries sent here openly to convert us from our barbarous prohibitions and other taboos, and to prepare
5 "the way for a good trade in ultra-bibles and super-whiskeys; fortunes made in selling us cast-off super-fineries, which we'd take to like an African chief to someone's old silk hat from New York or London?
The answer that occurs to me is so simple that it seems immediately
6 "acceptable, if we accept that the obvious is the solution of all problems, or if most of our perplexities consist in laboriously and painfully conceiving of the unanswerable, and then looking for answers - using such words as 'obvious' and 'solution' conventionally -
7 "Or:
"Would we, if we could, educate and sophisticate pigs, geese, cattle?
"Would it be wise to establish diplomatic relation with the hen that now functions, satisfied with mere sense of achievement by way of compensation?
"I think we're property.
8 "I should say we belong to something:
"That once upon a time, this earth was No-man's Land, that other worlds explored & colonized here, and fought among themselves for possession, but that now it's owned by something:
"That something owns this earth - all others warned off.
9 "Nothing in our own times - perhaps - because I am thinking of certain notes I have - has ever appeared upon this earth, from somewhere else, so openly as Columbus landed upon San Salvador, or as Hudson sailed up his river. But as to surreptitious visits 2 this earth, in recent
10 "times, or as to emissaries, perhaps, from other worlds, or voyagers who have shown every indication of intent to evade and avoid, we shall have data as convincing as our data of oil or coal-burning aerial super-constructions.
"But, in this vast subject, I shall have to do
11 "considerable neglecting or disregarding, myself. I don't see how I can, in this book, take up at all the subject of possible use of humanity to some other mode of existence, or the flattering notion that we can possibly be worth something.
12 "Pigs, geese, and cattle.
"First find out that they are owned.
"Then find out the whyness of it.
"I suspect that, after all, we're useful - that among contesting claimants, adjustment has occurred, or that something now has a legal right to us, by force, or by having paid
13 "out analogues of beads for us to former, more primitive, owners of us - all others warned off - that all this has been known, perhaps for ages, to certain ones upon this earth, a cult or order, members of which function like bellwethers to the rest of us, or as
14 "superior slaves or overseers, directing us in accordance with instructions received - from Somewhere else - in our mysterious usefulness.
"But I accept that, in the past, before proprietorship was established, inhabitants of a host of other worlds have - dropped here,
15 "hopped here, wafted, sailed, flown, motored - walked here, for all I know - been pulled here, been pushed; have come singly, have come in enormous numbers; have visited occasionally, have visited periodically for hunting, trading, replenishing harems, mining: have been unable
16 "to stay here, have established colonies here, have been lost here; far-advanced peoples, or things, and primitive peoples or whatever they were: white ones, black ones, yellow ones -
"I have a very convincing datum that the ancient Britons were blue ones.
17 "Of course we are told by conventional anthropologists that they only painted themselves blue, but in our own advanced anthropology, they were veritable blue ones - "
18 If you like what you see on my blog (ufojoe.net), YT (youtube.com/ufojoe1) & voluminous tweets, and would like to support my effort to do this as much as possible...
LE: Oct. 2017 & coming out of the shadows on that stage with TTSA: With his previous job, he was used to having enemies & being anonymous. He wasn't used to using his name.
2 LE: Lots of people came before us with these type of claims about UFOs, JFK, etc. so I don't take it personally that media didn't take it seriously until the NYT ran their article. This field has a lot of interesting characters so you need to figure out who is who.
3 LE: Pentagon full of good people but when there are pockets of people who are jaded & even corrupts. When I went public, people in my chain of command were pissed off. How come I wasn't briefed? Why were you briefing Sec. of Defense staff & WH liaison & not two-star equivalent
1 Great book. Art Bell partook in some big time #UFO-tainment (Ed Dames was his ratings king) but he was so good at what he did, you didn’t realize it. One of the best interviewers I’ve ever heard and always asked the questions you were thinking.
2 I communicated w/Art on FB & messenger & we talked about 2012 (I wanted him as my host for a 2012 TV show I never did. He was open 2 the idea), Trump (Art really liked him) & I brought up Dames & the dangers of, “I interview the guest & my audience decides if they’re credible.”
3 I wasn’t a fan of that bc Art would prop up & praise Dames in his intro. and make him sound more credible than he was. In reality, after training in NYC, Ingo recommended Dames NOT be a remote viewer bc his imagination got in the way. So Dames was just a monitor in the program
1 If 2019 West Coast events & other unexplained incursions from "drones" are actually #ufos, it makes many of us think (as Eric Davis said) the phenomenon dictates disclosure. Is it trying to force us into revealing their presence? If so, it could be a mixed bag of good/bad.
2 Are we facing some near-future calamity that will need us to get our act together quickly in order for us to deal with it? Bad. Are "they" trying 2 wake us up? Good. Are "they" trying to alert us that we're also dealing w/some other negative intelligence that's taking advantage
3 of us? Bad. All speculation. Whatever it is, if it's trying to get us to evolve in some way, that could be good. Or, it could be the Vallee control system that's kicking in. If it's "automated" or dictated by certain social conditions that we've reached, that could be bad.
1 #ufo Was referencing Lue's comments earlier today on this
Lue: "Not a single one of these have been shot down, not a single one of these have ever been recovered from the ocean, not a single one of them has had a mechanical issue, not a single one has been able 2B intercepted.
LE: "And by the way, we have helicopters on these ships and not a single one has been caught by one of our helicopters or aircraft. You know, okaaaay. But you really got to do a lot of mental gymnastics then, to prove to me that that is some sort of
3 LE: "drone technology. I’m not saying it’s impossible. What I’m simply saying is you’ve got to build a case then to prove that. Because at this point, that’s a greater feat than saying it’s a UAP. Really. Because at that point, it’s, “Okay, well, we’re really talking about
1 Decent VF article from 12/22/17 that many may have missed.
"For Times editors, the primary considerations that led to the A1 publication of 'Glowing Auras and Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program' were more earthly in nature. 'The reason this was a story was
2 "'because the Pentagon acknowledged it had spent $22 million of taxpayer money to investigate U.F.O.s from 2007 to 2012 - & because Harry Reid had pushed for the funding, and was proud of it, on the record,' Washington Bureau Chief Elisabeth Bumiller, who oversaw the reporting,
3 "told me. 'We talked about it the way we talk about all stories - it had to be airtight.' Bumiller also noted that 'the story did not have a huge presence on A1 in print—it had only a small run on the front. On the Web, it had great play, in part because the video was so
2 "The police can confirm that it was drones that flew over both Forsmark and Oskarshamn. (Read on. Can they? ~Joe)
"A security guard from Forsmark's nuclear power plant contacted the police after a drone flew over the facility within the protection area. The drone was of
3 "a larger model that can withstand wind, as it blew hard in the area.
"'We tried 2 locate it for a while, but we did not succeed in finding it again,' says Petra Blomqvist, press spokesperson at the police region Mitt to UNT.