The following is a continuation of something I started over at RosettaSister. Please go here:
And scroll down to below the peace sign to see what I posted previously.
[One cannot tell the Dan Burisch story without including a whole cast of characters, especially Don. I almost never agree with Don, but he seems to genuinely care about others and, in his own way, is a patriot. At times he seems to suffer from melancholy. Who doesn’t?! If the truth about the attacks is ever told, it will be in large part due to Don’s tireless efforts.]
Sat May 19, 2007 3:14 pm
To the Public:
What will soon follow (within 24 hours or so) is a very short, to the point, summary of findings over an investigation I conducted in the wake of claims being made in numerous locations on the internet, as well as here, concerning the tragic events of September 11, 2001.
The origin of this investigation occurred at the end of March, 2007 with posts by “Machobird” on the Eagles Forum.
I can assure all the readers that I have fully evaluated the contents of the 911 thread –
and its helper thread –
I have further evaluated numerous timelines, videos by academicians on both side of the aisle, scholarly papers, and the entire 9-11 Commission Report, including references.
The webpages attached to
(higher caliber than the pages listed next) and
have also been closely examined.
In determining the relevant facts, I am doing so as an individual citizen and not as a Corporate Officer of Eagles Disobey, Inc.
Insofar as the physics and chemistry are applied, my determinations should not be considered expert findings, nor could I testify as an expert witness to such relevant scientific data, as I am a professional biologist (appointed and retained in that capacity in industry), not a professional chemist, nor a metallurgist.
Insofar as my determinations are made to relevant facts to which I was a witness and how those facts correspond to other issues of the 9/11 timeline of events, all statements written by me should be considered as my publicly stated willingness to testify to the facts therein contained, should I be called before a trier of fact – U.S. Federal Court or other tribunal.
During the course of the investigation, I decided to rate my assessment of the facts by other than nebulous statements of belief.
I therefore set about the assignment of numerical values, rating from 0 to 4, with “0” indicating a claim that can be entirely “discounted” to “4” being a claim which was (in my opinion) “certain” to be true.
Until I next write…
When first engaging this investigation, an investigation started at the behest of the certainty of “Machodbird” that the tragic attacks on September 11, 2001 was an “inside job,” my first feelings were that of strong skepticism.
Skepticism is a good thing, but as we walk through life, the wise understand that cynicism is not. I recognize that I will be verbally attacked, no matter what I say.
That’s why I don’t pay real attention to those who make daily use of cynicism and anger.
One day this world may deposit me in a trash can, or I may find myself in an alley or a ditch, as so many people have had happen to them in the past – such as those who have been oppressed by Racism, Fascism, Socialism under the banner of Communism, etc.
I am no better than anyone else, and as I could have that happen to me, I just see no reason to deposit myself in the filth.
During this same general timeframe, of Machobird’s statements, I became aware of information from Dr. McDowell’s sister (presently being protected and in hiding out of fear for her life) that as early as the middle 1990’s, the former MJ1, the Looking Glass Staff (then at S4-2) were aware that a coming war with Islamic Extremists was in the offing.
[the former MJ1 – Not sure if Dan is referring to McConnell here – See:
The resulting dust up between the former MJ1 and myself has since been interpersonally, satisfactorily, resolved. [Definitely McConnell – also referred to as Dadmiral]
The resolution is short of the multiple layers which come in to play involving Dr. McDowell’s sister as the person who disclosed the information which was the proximate cause of the (albeit temporary) rift.
The assignment of numbers to the scale, from 0-4 holds, with “0” being “discounted” and with increasing probability from 1-3, until I reach the term “certainty” with “4.”
The questions/claims are put to the evidence:
1. AIRCRAFT ON 9/11 WERE DRONES?
2. AIRCRAFT WHICH STRUCK AT LEAST ONE WTC TOWER HAD A POD OR UNUSUAL DEVICE HOOKED TO ITS UNDERSIDE?
3. WTC I/II DROPPED BY THERMITE OR LIKE EXPOSIVE, ALONE?
4. WTC I/II DROPPED BY THERMITE OR LIKE EXPOSIVE, AFTER PLANES STRUCK THEM, THAT’S WHY THEY PANCAKED?
The angled cuts are representative of the removal and storage process of material and the cutting of the steel has been reproduced.
The MIT report is more conclusive than the allegations of Thermite by the BYU retired professor, as the quality control over the origin of the material (which tower, etc.) is lower than the quality of evidence by the MIT stress/strain analysis (including floor sagging proof).
The claim that the jet fuel + the available air was not capable of producing structural failure has been ruled out by scholarly analysis.
If this looks like straight pancaking…?
5. PROOF OF WTC7 COLLAPSE CONSPIRACY DUE TO BBC KNOWING AHEAD OF TIME? THE MEDIA?
By 2pm that day, the Fire Department was announcing the expected collapse. That information spread to the news agencies. Conspiracy? That statement is to come.
Conspiracy involving feeding News Agencies with scripts? No.
They (news agencies) kept their mouths moving and did on the spot analysis consistent with honest reporting…including what they got right and what they got wrong.
6. FLIGHT 93 WAS SHOT DOWN?
Correlations of military aircraft positions v. weapons stocks compare positively. That, and given standing orders, no certain 76104J it would make no sense that a shootdown would have occurred.
7. THE ITEM WHICH STRUCK THE PENTAGON WAS A MISSILE?
As the aircraft struck it was, by definition, a missile. Multiple resources have been examined…including the famous video.
Comparisons indicating that it was too small to be an aircraft are inconsistent with the actual size of the Pentagon.
Analysis of the crushing of the Pentagon’s structure is consistent with an aircraft of reported size striking it.
8. COMPANIES AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES INVOLVED IN WTC7 WERE INVOLVED IN A CONSPIRACY, INVOLVING 911.
Since the start of this investigation, I have been personally informed by a CIA operative I personally know, whom it would be a crime for me to identify without being compelled by a court, that financial draw downs and insider trading (stock sell-offs) by companies resident within the former WTC7 were conducted with prior knowledge that an attack was imminent.
At least one of those companies has since left the U.S. and the security company also involved with such trading has direct ties to the Bush Family.
9. THAT THE ADMINISTRATION MANUFACTURED VIDEOS OF UBL, USING AN ACTOR?
Mil BlkOps did it, and fed it to the Administration, via “The Company” (GT) with the VPOTUS and the former POTUS GHWB (41) knowing it.
[Is Dan suggesting that George W. Bush was lied to by his own VP and his own father?!]
The sense at the time was that CIA was aware that UBL was behind the ops and in fear that such a disastrous attack couldn’t be tied to him, which later proved wrong (he tied it to himself), they violated United States Code and their oaths of office to allow the manufactured evidence into the public. (The origin of this information falls into the same category as the CIA operative’s identity.)
To be continued…
10. MILITARY STAND-DOWN? BY ORDER?
the recollections and testimony of those in the WH-PEOC with VPOTUS,
the engagement of Vigilant Guardian VO-CPX, WH-PEOC realtime commo with ADOC-CMOC (NORAD-NORTHCOM, Cheyenne Mountain), and
the changing story of VPOTUS’s orders v. military response v. timeline
are compared, glaring and unresolved disparity dominates the equation.
The testimony of the former MJ7 (RBM) and N. Mineta highlights the disparity and creates the determination of a likely purposive response delay.
The United States Military is not responsible for the delay, even given the alert status, and positive TPDR: clear and concise – we had positive vectors and locations and sufficient hot fighters available on alert to have shot down one or more of the highjacked aircraft.
If the United States Military had been ordered to shoot, they would have shot.
The changing testimony of the WH-PEOC timeline v. military response indicates that the likely order…
(“Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??”)
…to which VPOTUS was referring, was a “no shoot” order.
11. THE POTUS ENGAGED IN A CONSPIRACY TO PLOT THE 911 ATTACKS? DID HE KNOW AHEAD?
While no affirmative evidence tracks directly to him, concerning plotting the 911 attacks, and while he is (by all internal accounts and many public ones) of low intelligence and selfish demeanor, the actions of those around him in the time period previous to the attacks, points to the reasonable assumption that he would have at least known that the attacks were imminent.
Further, addendum to number 10 (just above), the “Say nothing yet!” allegation points to complicity with delay, during the fact.
[The above is rather vague, is this conjecture or something more? Also, what was POTUS told exactly? And what was President Clinton told? And others “in the know.” i.e., did POTUS believe he was doing the right thing by “allowing” attacks? Remember, he was shown two probable scenarios, attacks being the lesser of two evils. How does one defend a sin of omission? How defend acting or not acting based on foreknowledge one should never have possessed? Rose]
12. THE VPOTUS ENGAGED IN A CONSPIRACY TO PLOT THE 911 ATTACKS? DID HE KNOW AHEAD?
* As the VPOTUS acted in a manner which indicates he slowed the response to the attacks;
* Given the information provided to me concerning the former MJ1’s mid-1990’s LG knowledge of an attack;
* Given the former MJ3’s admission of the immediacy of UBL as the primary suspect during his recent “60 Minutes” interview;
* Given the internal operative’s information about the VPOTUS and the hoaxed UBL tape;
* Given that the VPOTUS was in the immediate echelon loop involving the 12 –
The first part of the question can be worked out during an investigation to Impeachment, as the answer to the second part of the question appears to be “yes.”
“Dadmiral” with President George W. Bush
[Did VPOTUS know ahead? Since “We The People” are not in the immediate echelon loop, it’s impossible for us to know details which we would need to know in order to accuse anyone of anything. Based on what I’ve read so far, the most damning seems to be Number 8 above. Still, how to bring the guilty to justice, when that would require disclosure of time-traveling future human lineage? No wonder Dan and Marcia tell us disclosure not going to happen. I don’t know if these ETs or offworlders told us the truth. But those “in the know” on that terrible day in September 2001 believed they hadn’t been lied to. Can it be true that governments around the world have been in contact with a certain group of extraterrestrials since at least the Truman administration? One thing I know for sure, some humans have been contacted by other groups of offworlders who do not deceive. Rose]
[Something to consider: If sitting presidents are made aware of “what the future may bring,” then just what has President Barack H. Obama been told?]
More Dr. Dan Burisch Crain on September 11, 2001
Dan Burisch 5/26/2007 neweaglesforum [Dan & Marcia created forum]
” … Behind the scenes, on my end…all hell has been breaking loose (but not with Marcia), in response to my “so far sealed” humble recommendations……so…the more scientific evidence…the better.
What do I think? I don’t believe it [WTC7] was brought down by charges…but given the construction of the building (alleged stability even with floor removal)…plus the movement of monies and companies…?
Dan Burisch 5/27/2007 neweaglesforum (Dan, Marcia & hounddog created forum)
” … Papa T, may I ask you something? Who has ever claimed that the so called “powers” let 9/11 occur to keep us on Timeline 1?
Thus far I have indicated
(1) they let it happen…which is supported by evidence not required to even come from me…but nevertheless….and
(2) they made the wrong decision to allow it to happen, picking “it” (9/11) over a “worse possibility.”
I have never defined the “worse possibility” as having anything to do with the transition from Timeline #1 to Timeline #2.
So, at the risk of appearing as though I am defending against someone fiddling with my words, may I ask you from whence you derived the opinion?
Did their decision allow them to fill their pockets? Sure!
I think we’ve all figured out that no matter how they decide, they opt for financial increases. That’s not new.
The decision to allow the other option may have done the same, albeit offering much less financial structural support.
A careful read of my response about 9/11 shows that I state openly that
I have been made aware of the other option, will not disclose it,and that they should have chosen to defend the U.S. and pushed for a third “undeclared” path.
Dates? The operative ones, on my end, are these:
1980-2016: SOLSTICE SUN ON THE PLANE
1992-2012: FULCANELLI’S SEASON OF CATASTROPHE
1998: ON CENTER PLANE
2006/07-2012: MAJ DETERMINED RED ZONE
Concerning the seals and what they may offer…that would depend on who is in control of them. That information (“precisely who?”) is not available.
Papa T: “If we were able to see that 9/11 would take place and did nothing to warn the public then how much better are we than they in looking after this technology. Who are the keepers of this Technology and how am I to trust them in doing the right things with it? My trust has been broken.”
The seals and the technology are not being watched by the Administration. The decision to do/not do and what to do, for 9/11, was taken by the Administration.
I expect that Majestic, meaning the Committee of the Majority (CotM), may have informed the Clinton Administration, but I have not been allowed to peruse the CotM records.
I have perused the Maj12 records and found no related decisions based by vote of the body.
(I indicated this in my summary as well.)
Therefore, it is from
the records of those watching the LG [Looking Glass] and its probabilistic inferences,
the actions which have been documented surrounding the occurrences of 9/11,
the information which I have been passed by operatives and another former seated member, and
from whence I have based my opinions.
Papa T:”Who are the keepers of this Technology and how am I to trust them in doing the right things with it?”
That information (” precisely who?”) is not available to the public. Why? Well…let me ask you this… Who would you vote to take care of it?
Bush? Putin? Jintao or Jiabao? Elizabeth II or the UK PM? Kim Jong-Il? Maybe the United Nations? (They can sure be counted on! …and that would sure keep it out of the wrong hands! )
Truth be told…the prohibited technology is composed of 3 parts…
(1) an energy projection unit,
(2) a “barrel focus,” and
(3) a set of electromagnetic rings.
No one group has more than 1 part.
But, that’s all I can say pending an interview where I have promised to speak more about it.
Unfortunately, that interview was cancelled for a few weeks due to hitherto unforeseen circumstances.
Your trust has been broken? My bones have been broken.
That said…I am not waiting to hear how people feel after T2 doesn’t happen. That’ll be about the time when they all say it could never have happened anyway.
You snip the elastic bands so the blinders will come off, and they pass around the glue amongst themselves, lest a little light creep in.
ACTUAL AFFIDAVIT FOLLOWS.
NOTE THE DEFENDANT IS THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Peter A. Gersten, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
Arizona Bar #016925
Sedona, Arizona 86351
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
CITIZENS AGAINST UFO SECRECY, INC.
7349 Via Paseo Del Sur #515-194
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
DEPARTMENT OF ARMY
I, Col. Philip J. Corso, (Ret.) do hereby swear, under the penalties of
perjury, that the following statements are true:
That at all times hereinafter mentioned, I was a member and officer of
That during my tenure with the defendant I was a member of President
Eisenhower’s National Security Council and former head of the Foreign
Technology Desk at defendant’s Research & Development department.
That on or about July 6, 1947, while stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas, I
personally observed a four-foot non-human creature with bizarre-looking
four-fingered hands, thin legs and feet, and an oversized incandescent
light bulb-shaped head. The eye sockets were oversized and almond
shaped and pointed down to its tiny nose. The creature’s skull was
overgrown to the point where all its facial features were arranged
frontally, occupying only a small circle on the lower part of the head.
There were no eyebrows or any indications of facial hair. The creature
had only a tiny flat slit for a mouth and it was completely closed,
resembling more of a crease or indentation between the nose and the
bottom of the chinless skull than a fully functioning orifice.
That in 1961, I came into possession of what I refer to as the ‘Roswell
File.’ This file contained field reports, medical autopsy reports and
technological debris from the crash an extraterrestrial vehicle in
Roswell, New Mexico in 1947.
That I have personally read the medical autopsy reports which refer to
the autopsy of the previously described creature that I saw in 1947 at
Fort Riley, Kansas.
That said autopsy reports indicated the autopsy was performed at Walter
Reed Hospital, which was under the authority of the defendant at the
time of the autopsy.
That said autopsy report referred to the creature as an
‘extraterrestrial biological entity.’
Colonel Philip J. Corso (ret.)
Sworn before me
this day of ___ May, 1998.
The 9 Major Admissions
Selene, I actually had a very cordial conversation on the phone with Dr. Salla in the wake of the April 2005 Request To Admit; out of all the ‘ufers’ I talked to at that time, he was the most courteous.
Most of them acting indignant, even angry, that I had the temerity to be making the claims I was making, and tried to distance themselves,
but Dr. Salla appears to have recognized the ‘real deal’ and understood it was more complex than most people seem to think.
I’ve kept abreast of many of his later postings and IMHO, he’s incorporated the essential truth of it in his over-view.
Just because Dan Burisch and his hired thugs tried to fashion an Absurd Action-Figure Hero out of himself it doesn’t mean that the 9 major admissions (not including the transcript) in that document aren’t truthful.
Dr. Salla seems to be one of the few people in the ‘field’ who acknowledge it.
YOU ARE REQUESTED TO ADMIT, for the purposes of this proceeding only, the truth of the following facts:
1. You were made aware by Mr. Deppeller that he and his family were placed under surveillance, by persons unknown in early 2002, and that such surveillance continued until the Deppeller family moved to Canada in early 2003. You have personally heard allusions by individuals with which you have associated, that the allegations in the aforementioned statement are a fact.
2. You have been allowed online (over the internet, using text and webcam) conversations with Don Deppeller, known by his public internet moniker “DonDep”, and other apparently similarly-interested individuals, representing that they were from various locations from around the globe. Said internet personalities represented themselves as separate individuals, giving the public internet monikers: “Human Subject”, “Boomerang”, “Crackajack”, “PageMarker”, “Seion9”, “Harrdrawk”, “WhiteRabbit”, (and others), at various times during 2003 and 2004.
3. The facts relevant to the subjects in this document, as stated by you during the conversations recalled at the time of signing this document were then true and correct to the best of your knowledge, and were not conveyed with the intention to deceive. This includes the handwritten statement “For the sake of humanity, tell the world”.
4. You have been formally associated with the group known as Majestic 12, since 1986, were formally dissociated from the public on June 8, 2004 (then at the instruction of Majestic 12), and were professionally dissociated from Majestic 12, albeit under emeritus status, on March 21, 2005, at 05:00 hours (Greenwich Mean Time).
5. Some of the projects you have worked on have been named “Preserve Destiny”, “Aquarius”, “Lotus”, and “Preserve Mother”.
6. You state to the best of your belief that some implications of these projects (listed above as “5.”) are of such a grave nature that, were the general world human population to know the entirety of the information contained within them, the resultant reactions of portions of the present human population may vary from “no reaction” to potential “panic.”
7. You have also been a party during the negotiations of a treaty known as the “Tau-9 Conference for the Preservation of Humanity”, between present human authorities and certain individuals representing themselves as extraterrestrial peoples, with their origin alleged to you as the star constellations “Reticulum” and “Orion.” You have had physical interaction with at least one such extraterrestrial.
8. The normally required secrecy for these issues, as a consequence of the gravity contained within the aforementioned statement (“7.”), stipulated that individuals entrusted with such relevant information – including yourself – must swear a secrecy oath upon pain of death. You are not currently under such an oath, the previous one having been discharged by the issuing authority.
9. Individuals that receive such information, from sworn agents of Majestic 12, but who have not been sworn to secrecy – including the principal Applicant – could possibly be subjected to many forms of harassment, by non-Majestic agencies that have been requested or otherwise authorized by that group.
If you wish to read both both sides of this correspondence, please see:
[This is between Don Deppeller and Robert Collins and is about Dr. Dan Burisch Crain. I include for this reason and also because it is scarce online.]
Don Deppeller wrote:
I’m taking the liberty of copying our ongoing debate with the rest of the ‘list’ that brought the Serpo story to my attention, and my subsequent replies that contrasted that story (which Dan has gone on record to describe as a disinfo op “dress rehearsal”) with Dan’s Affidavit, which we are currently wrangling over.
I think you have raised the sorts of questions which many in the ‘mainstream’ will raise when they are confronted with Dan’s debriefing and Disclosure announcement next year, and so this is an opportunity for others to weigh in (hopefully with courtesy) and also learn from.
Even if our dialog ends with today’s responses, I trust they have been illustrative to the list.
The many that know about the “Clean Sphere” and how it was constructed (I myself have seen a huge and detailed diagram/”artist’s rendition” notated by those familiar with it) will be involved in Dan’s ongoing debriefing.
There will be quite a bit about the “Clean Sphere” not only in the debriefing but in the documentary that will be focusing on Dan’s time with the J-rod.
I’m not going to force Dan’s hand here; he has a specific timetable, and the world will find out together.
When it does, it will have more than enough corroborative information that it won’t need anyone to ‘investigate’; all of that will have been done to the nth degree. Hence the long delay.
As for whether an Affidavit demonstrates sincerity; legally, an affidavit is ‘presumptively correct’.
That means that it is considered absolutely true until someone can come along and disprove it, which would warrant legal charges of perjury on the person swearing to the Affidavit.
Dan alludes to this in his response to Rick. So yes, it demonstrates sincerity.
Dan is and was fully prepared to be cross-examined by the Crown or Congress, depending on where the Affidavit ends up.
One of the reasons for having 2 former members of Majestic there as secondary witnesses to the signer of the Affidavit during cross-examination is in the event the one tack is used that could undercut such an historic statement, which is that the deponent is ‘insane’ or otherwise too mentally ill to swear to a truthful statement.
The additional 2 witnesses will attest to Dan’s “sanity, sobriety, efficacy, authenticity, honesty and truthfulness”.
We also have a copy of Dan’s psychiatric evaluation, just as the Court had asked for mine.
Seemingly-fantastic claims require equally-demonstrative sanity and sobriety; hence the Dept of Justice’s squirming to avoid having to cross-examine Dan.
Hope that helped.
Let me emphasize that Dan’s debriefing will have copious amounts of data regarding the “Clean Sphere”.
Mr. Knapp has attempted to force the issue by running his first show on Dan recently, but as you’ve heard Dan won’t be forced to reveal these things before the right time.
Because all of the data along with the personnel allowed to speak openly will be included in the debriefing, there’s no need for Rick or anyone else to try to ‘investigate’ that which will be fully and thoroughly vetted with all manner of corroboration when the job is complete.
Again, on the matter of the Affidavit; American jurisprudence contains the concept of ‘presumptively correct’ when it comes to oaths made in affidavits.
That is, you can run from it, hide from it, and shrilly pout ‘it can’t be true’, but an affidavit is indeed “presumptively correct” and accepted as truthful until tested.
The same holds true in Canada, but up here there is a more selective application of precedence; here, the concept is known as ‘fundamental justice’, whereby an eyewitness who swears to a fact or set of facts is presumed truthful (until proven perjurious) simply because without that assumption, swearing a legal oath would mean nothing.
Sorry, that IS the law.
People may not like it because of the implications, but the flip side of that coin is that if you are able to prove that the facts sworn to are fraudulent, that the oath was made with intention to deceive, then the original deponent is up for some SERIOUS charges of perjury.
Dan would not have agreed to the terms I outlined in that first Form 255 if he were lying, knowing that he could be jailed for up to 20 years for perjury if a skillful lawyer was able to prove he lied.
You may want to check with a good lawyer friend to ask about the concept of ‘presumptively correct’, since without that concept, no eyewitness evidence would hold water in any civil OR criminal proceeding.
Then let me parse it for you. You’ve heard what “same type of stories”? About a J-rod? Hadn’t you just asked me about who else is talking about J-rods and a “Clean Sphere”?
Or simply that the truth would come out at the “right time”?
Yes, it’s frustrating, but I know for a fact that over 100 hours of video has been taken of Dan telling in explicit detail and methodically virtually every facet of his time working for Majestic and in particular the J-rod.
I know that Dan and his ‘team’ (not to confused with those of us ‘outsiders’ who are merely following the ‘saga’) have been gathering tons of corroborative data, setting up meetings with the relevant folks who can validate Dan in virtually every walk of life, collecting the flotsam and jetsam that puts flesh on the whole thing
( e.g. spare parts for the enclosed ‘scooters’ that were used to transport the ET dignitaries from their flying craft to the inside of the facilities where the treaty negotiations took place), etc.
There is a definite date for the Disclosure announcement during 2006, and a not-so-definite time- frame for the release of the contents of the debriefing
(Dan thinks it can be accomplished fairly early, say even February, whereas his team members feel that it may take until April or May).
In fact, this is even recounted in general terms on at least one surveillance tape of their meetings held in Las Vegas that was sent to me.
So, to answer your allusion, it will NOT be as vague as “sometime in the future”.
It’s my understanding too that there will be a number of earth changes and related phenomenon that will aid in validating the timing.
As for the Affidavit, once again; the challenge is for others to take up the gauntlet and press the issue upon the relevant authorities.
That Affidavit is only ‘presumptively correct’ in a court of appeal for my personal immigration case;
the appeal to the Supreme Court will also show the wider public interest that is reflected in the admission of the facts alleged;
the next step is to have Intervenors then go to the legislature and demand that
if this document is allowed to stand, then the implications demand that they ‘open an investigation’,
and by the time a responsive legislature initiates a hearing as to the facts, well let’s just say that a LOT will happen.
Also; why would “debate over aliens” get “laughed out of court”? Because the subject is too complex for some of the simpletons on the bench to understand?
Why does it alwys have to be the subject of ridicule?
That’s how they reinforce our discussion, by playing up to our naivete and reacting negatively against anything that actually WOULD suggest aliens seriously.
You may not have received a copy of the June 12th, 2005 Majestic session, wherein J announced
“Gentlemen, if Majestic is the brains behind the Coverup, the ufoology community is its gonads….”.
[J = McConnell]
People in that ‘community’ are so sensitized by any reference ‘out of the ordinary’ that they actually help perpetuate the loonie-bin mentality because they’re afraid of coming off just as bad by comparison.
Just some considerations; what it does show (and you had it posted on your own site, I noticed, Robert) is that, PENDING EXAMINATION (and it carries with it a ‘presumption of correctness’) the Affidavit can be safely used to account for much more than just my personal circumstances.
This is why I suggested that the ‘interested few’ join in as Intervenors in the appeal.
I mean, you would certainly want to know if they’re true, right?
Just because they may not fit your existing paradigm doesn’t preclude the possibility that what is being represented isn’t true, and as a truthseeker you should want to know if you also have been bamboozled over the years, right? Or am I wrong?
As for the videotape of ‘hundreds of others testifying before Congress’, let them fight that battle.
If you are that concerned, I would have expected to see you and others on this email list take up that fight in the legal arena just as I am doing in this case.
Personally I don’t doubt that there ARE many hours of videotaped testimony, but like the CBS story on Bush’s Nat’l. Guard (lack of) service, just because there wasn’t ‘complete authentication’ doesn’t mean that the facts contained therein are untrue (a reference to the ‘found to be lying’ inference).
Another factor is what I addressed in a previous reply, which is that a ‘Fact’, if expressed behind a gov’t. podium, carries more weight and ‘authenticity’ than if expressed by a dishevelled fanatic wearing it on a sandwich board and toting a bullhorn on a street corner.
The choice of podium doesn’t make the Fact more or less truthful, only that there is a legally unfounded level of acceptance that is therefore determined.
As to the Q94 document; I too can muster a cluster of aspiring physicists at the local junior high-school and ask them for an analysis of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, and they too could quite easily claim that it’s all a “word salad”.
Face it: there ARE no peers in the field of extraterrestrial biology that are qualified to weigh in on the Q94 document.
Please find at least one that has worked with an extraterrestrial and the public would willingly consider their pronouncements of whether the Q94 is a “word salad” or not.
Furthermore, the Q94 document was never intended to be “peer-reviewed” so that it could take its place in the New England Journal of Medicine or similar publication.
You can’t continue to use metric yardsticks when either imperial is called for or no yardstick is expected, only results.
Finally, to get back to the issue of being ‘laughed out of court’; since when does fear of ridicule stymy the true researcher?
Yes, I am not only laughed at but attacked constantly, and I fully expect it to get worse before it gets better.
This is one of the primary reasons for the previous glacial pace of ‘Disclosure’; fear of ridicule.
Test the waters; don’t assume they’re too hot or cold for your liking.
And enjoy the show, always. As Dan would say, “the beat goes on”.
“Many would not agree that an Affidavit is “presumptively correct.” There are many who have done Affidavits but lied.”
My response would be that it may come down to making that argument in court. The weight of an article of currency being true is favored, versus an assumption it is not true.
Most legal scholars would agree that this basic principle is one of the foundations of the requisite faith in institutions that is required for an orderly society.
The obverse is that to have those articles proved fraudulent carries stiff penalties.
It’s true that some affidavits may be fraudulent, just as there are many checks presented for payment to merchants the world over that are fraudulent, but they are a significant minority proportionate to the total.
(In the advent of a world-wide catastrophic Depression, this may change.)
You go on to characterize my comments regarding the positioning of Facts and the telling of them as “posturing”; that is your opinion and you are certainly welcome to it.
If you insist on not recognizing the possibility > plausibility > probability that the facts as alleged in the Affidavit are true, I will not attempt to dissuade you.
I will also stand just as firmly for the reverse, as the consequences of the document have a real cost in the real world – to me and my family, personally.
You then say:
“These experts are not from a local High School. Bad comparison, the National Academy of Sciences is not a High School. Terms used in that Q94 document can be found in any Microbiology reference. They are not EBE terms. The best experts would know if the Q94 made any sense biologically since Biological Laws are universal, it didn’t.”
I demur; at this point it is merely ‘opinion’, as one man’s treasure is another man’s junk.
Until you find a qualified microbiologist that has a familiarity with an extraterrestrial physiology, the point is mute.
To use yet another crude analogy; an engineer at Ford, schooled in the classic internal combustion engine, isn’t qualified to adjudge the efficacy of Toyota’s ‘hybrid’ program.
Robert, I don’t know if you have read the following exchange with one of Dan’s actual “classmates”; a “peer” as it were.
The following synopsis is taken from the conference to be found at:
The biologist in question seems to have been a fellow student and peer of Dan during his studies (1987-1989), presumably at SUNY in Stony Brook.
Biologist X: Okay, I have been provided with a copy of the so called Lotus Protocol and the 18 page document posted on BJ’s site. I have some concerns about the protocols employed, but not because they appear wacked out, but because there appears to be multiple levels of protocols being employed simultaneously.
Throughout the work, this guy alludes to other forms and “pursuant to other protocols.” I think we are dealing with paperwork that was never meant to hit the light of day. Certainly no self respecting peer reviewed journal would publish it, under current guidelines.
This doesn’t mean that it doesn’t make sense though, although I wish it made a little less sense as it is giving me some problems with cell origins theory.
His work appears to bear multiple logic levels and interdisciplinary ability on the level I figured he was bound, all those years ago…. Well, not if you take his theory into account. …. A change occurred in his ideology.
The Lotus Protocol was one of those papers that seems predicated on a set of procedures not mentioned. As I cannot independently confirm the existence of the group that he is allegedly working with, I cannot say for certain that such a set of protocols exists. However, if he does, it seems reasonable that we are dealing with what I have heard called upper-user reports. I am confused where StarFlower begins and Lotus ends?
In the Lotus Protocol, he set out to establish a longitudinal study to test the serial endosymbiotic theory of eukaryote cell origins.
BJ WOLF: George, you mentioned a change of ideology that took place with Dan back in 1987 or so. That was when he was working on something about cells in brackish water…..
[BJ WOLF = Dr. Marcia McDowell Crain]
It appears from his reports that soon after, a series of events began taking place at his research site, that swayed the procedures toward … well hold on just a second …
When I knew him, we were both graduate students taking what amounted to a structural biology course. He shared very little with me about his research intentions at that time. I will leave the institution out of this, but safe to say we were both trying to get the attention of the prof, I’ll put him to his initials WL, and roomed near each other in the Schomburg area. We (or at least I) were more concerned with getting ahead…
He seemed to have the golden spoon with all those people following him around.”
I hope this helps as we grapple with the issues.
I’ve been updating post at top of this page.
A few things the reader may not be aware of:
I first encountered Dan Burisch in a dream, still dream of him and Marcia quite often.
When I first contacted Marcia back in 2007, it was mainly because I was so distraught from multiple abductions and MILABS.
But I was incensed at an image posted at David Wilcock’s site which juxtaposed bin Laden and George W. Bush, which I interpreted as meaning that the two were of the same cloth.
I just wanted the abductions to stop and never paid much attention to the Truthers.
It’s taken me this long to find and look at what Dan had previously written all those years ago.
So now that I know, and I’ve made this my own, so to speak …
I still am not sure exactly what George W. Bush is guilty of, and no one is going to believe it, anyway.
Am I wrong in my analysis, or does Dan condemn Cheney and perhaps the father more than he does the son?
In 2007 and 2008, I commented at Dan and Marcia’s forum, and also at DonDep’s forum, although I don’t remember my moniker at the latter.
I didn’t have a clue about the history between Dan and Don.
The only record I can find is where Uncle John copied something I had posted at Dan’s to Don’s forum. It had to do with the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.
I was known as “SisterRosetta” then.
More recently I was also surprised to discover what Dan had stated about Chem Trails and HAARP and also Dan’s connection to Gulf War Syndrome.
I have been posting almost exclusively about Chem Trails and Morgellons at RosettaSister and also at BlessedIsTruth.
I know Dan and Marcia are upset with me because of what I copied from their forum(s), especially when they were seated at the head of Majestic.
Don probably doesn’t know what to make of me.