Thanks for your responses.
"It's possible that could happen, but maybe there are no aliens in our
vicinity when it come sdown to it (or at least none interested in nefarious
activities) and this takeover is a purely human/earth related situation.
Whatever the case, they will most probably present
that veneer you're talking about."
I see what you mean, Keith. I think we can be pretty near certain
that there are aliens in our vicinity though - a large number of them too.
Given that context, I think our human terrestrial powers-that-be would
automatically attract and be attracted to those aliens present who are most
like themselves in character, i.e. criminally-minded, self-deluding,
ruthless and despotic. (I could add many other descriptive terms of course,
but let these suffice for now.) These human-alien kindred spirits would
readily understand one another and share common values of powerfulness,
material wealth, status and immortality. All of us probably have some
desire for all of these things too and there may be nothing wrong with them
if they are sought in the right ways and with a willingness to share them
freely with others. But the earthly powers-that-be have been seeking them
in bad ways that are detrimental to everybody and instead of sharing them
liberally with mankind they have been hoarding them secretly for their own
exclusive benefit. Surely they will enter instinctively into any deals with
ETs that they think will advance their attainment of these selfish
goal-values. Through the criminal deal about which we have heard, they
would be made satraps of earth - absolute local governors -in a confederacy
of worlds whose dominion over this planet would be policed and enforced by
them and ETs in collaboration together. Given their corrupt, criminal,
despotic nature, I think they would jump at it.
"Incidently, I was just watching the film 'They Live'. It's rather cheesy,
but it illustrates some good points regarding a global elitist agenda of
I haven't seen that film and will look out for it. The genre seems
to be growing, which is all to the good in my view.
"In Australia we had a change of government late in 2007. The Australian
Labor Party won the election and Kevin Rudd is the new PM. He's
demonstrated his apparent enthusiasm for and loyalty to Australia but I
wonder about the nature and extent of his interest in an international
outlook and level of cooperation, an orientation which
apparently would suit the Elite very much."
Yes, I understand your concern. The Globalization program has been
entrenched in Australia for many years now and I imagine that whatever
ideals Kevin Rudd may have had when he came to office, he is rapidly finding
out how little power he really has to manifest them or to change anything.
Of course if he really does threaten to change anything I imagine he will be
eliminated from office, by hook or by crook, and replaced by someone who
will continue to foster and protect the criminal wealth-and-power elite's
selfish interests at the expense of the world people's lives and well-being.
Their reach does seem to be global already.
What they appear to lack though is legitimacy. At the moment they
exist as informal dictators of the planet who possess the power, but not the
popularly acknowledged right to issue commands and enforce their orders on a
global scale. The Globalization agenda can advance their despotic power,
but by itself it cannot transform their informal status into that of
formally authorised world despots because the world already has a formal
political system that does not include them in it and in order to be
included in it they would have to stand for election and run the risk of not
being elected. Hence the need for a legitimising intervention by ETs,
ostensibly to save the planet from our (elite-organised) depradations. Any
ETs that consent to go along with a nefarious scheme like that would have to
be as criminally-minded as they are, in my view. And from the stream of
data about them that has come to us via Dan Burisch and other
whistleblowers, that seems to me to be just what they are - insane, despotic
Yes, our seas are polluted; so is our atmosphere and so is our land.
So is our near-space environment too now after decades of military and
quasi-military hardware being thrown into it by the world's superpowers.
The primary reasons for all this pollution are cultural, not physical or
technical. They have nothing to do with population-size and everything to
do with popular behaviour. Reducing the population without changing the
cultural behaviour patterns that have created the environmental problems in
the first place will only buy a little time before the problems return in
full force and put us right back at square one, whereupon no doubt further
ET intervention involving stricter controls will be called for. I think
that any ETs who have not understood this elementary truth about the state
of human existence on this planet cannot be credible as wise and benign
interventionists in our affairs. Rather, they must be lacking in important
sensibilities with which they would otherwise perceive the real causes of
our problems. Consequently their (putative) claim to be able to intervene
benignly here is quite bogus and also lacks legitimacy, just like the
Dynamic Duo's recent intervention in Iraq.
And I think the outcome of any such intervention by ETs would
probably be just like the outcome of the Iraq invasion too, only on a much
bigger scale of course. The general populace will not want it and will
oppose it tooth and nail. It will bring terrible conflict and carnage to
this planet. Maybe that is what the powers-that-be really want - a global
war against space-aliens - and this is their way of bringing it about. I am
just speculating but they do seem crazy enough to try a stunt like that, to
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 12:35 PM
Subject: [ufodiscussion] Re: FW: Confirmation & Update of Secret United
Meeting Discussing UFOs/ETs
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, <masanga@...> wrote:
> Oh, no. If this is for real then it looks to me as though
> case scenario in my mind is the one that is actually unfolding.
This is the
> scenario in which the criminally-minded powers-that-be have entered
> secret deal with criminally-minded aliens to bring planet earth into a
> criminal cosmic empire that will be given an aura of respectability by
> manipulating public perceptions of what it is and what it is doing.
It's possible that could happen, but maybe there are no aliens in our
vicinity when it come sdown to it (or at least none interested in
nefarious activities) and this takeover is a purely human/earth
related situation. Whatever the case, they will most probably present
that veneer you're talking about.
Incidently, I was just watching the film "They Live". It's rather
cheesy, but it illustrates some good points regarding a global elitist
agenda of control.
> like the existing monolithic criminal empires on earth, such as the
> US Federal Government, the Russian Federation and the People's
> China. The nature of power-politics on earth won't change just
> involve aliens now. And the ways in which people are kicked around and
> abused by governments won't change either. Only the pretexts for
> will be different. Life on earth will get more complicated while
> basically the same. All this is as predictable as day follows night.
> But I think the Controllers may find that they meet with some
> unexpected competition for the ultimate prize of world rulership.
> Yesterday, on the BBC World Service News, I heard Hilary Clinton say
> various contenders in the current race for the White House):
> "One of us is ready to become Commander-in-Chief of the World!"
Interesting, veeerrry interesting...
> And she's a Democrat too.
> Should one laugh or cry? I really don't know.
In Australia we had a change of government late in 2007. The
Australian Labor Party won the election and Kevin Rudd is the new PM.
He's demonstrated his apparent enthusiasm for and loyalty to Australia
but I wonder about the nature and extent of his interest in an
international outlook and level of cooperation, an orientation which
apparently would suit the Elite very much.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dex
> To: UFOdiscussion
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 5:07 AM
> Subject: [ufodiscussion] FW: Confirmation & Update of Secret United
> Discussing UFOs/ETs
> Cross posting:
> Sources: http://exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-66.htm &
> & Update on Secret United Nations Meeting Discussing UFOs &
> I recently circulated an article
> describing a secret meeting that allegedly occurred at the New York
> of the United Nations discussing UFOs/extraterrestrial life. The
> confidential source (A) for the meeting is presently working as a
> the diplomatic community who relayed this information to two New
> researchers, Shawn and Clay Pickering. I am pleased to announce that
> received independent confirmation that the alleged meeting did occur
> morning of February 12, 2008 as Clay's and Shawn's source claimed. I
> also given information by an independent source (B), who I believe
> reliable, on what transpired at the meeting. It was claimed that a
> had been circulated at the meeting, and was now being relayed to key
> ministries of many nations for further study and comments.
> have yet to witness the document which allegedly refers to an offer by
> to help prepare humanity for the disclosure of extraterrestrial
> also apparently discussed how the UN was being encouraged to take a
> stand on the release of secret technologies that will enable the
> free energy. The date 2013 was given as the time when extraterrestrials
> unambiguously appear. This was consistent with the date given in my
> I will share more information on the alleged document circulated at
> and the independent source (B) confirming the meeting in my next
> on this unfolding UN initiative on UFOs/extraterrestrial life.
> follows next is a report of a further meeting between Clay and Shawn
> and their confidential source (A) regarding the UN meeting on UFOs
> morning of February 12, 2008. They pointed out that the "unambiguous
> up" of extraterrestrial life - sitting over major cities - would
> 2017, rather than 2013 as described in the earlier article. The role of
> and population growth was also allegedly discussed, and appeared to
> issues at the meeting, especially for India.
> significant descriptive term chosen by source A for the
> would show up in 2017 was "The Controllers." Such a term has clear
> connotations and was chosen to have a particular effect on the target
> - both UN member states in attendance and the general public to
> was being leaked. This is a clue that source A is conveying
> been designed to trigger a certain psychological reaction that
> issues are framed and discussed.
> aspect of the following report is that it was claimed that India
> difficult time processing disclosure of extraterrestrial life, possibly
> to the elimination of Hinduism. This appears inconsistent with
> of advanced technologies and extraterrestrial life in its Vedic
> of gods. If, as the confidential source claims, that Roman Catholics
> an easier time with disclosure due to the belief of "three Gods in one",
> so too might a religion like Hinduism which has a multiplicity of
> very eclectic.
> I believe that the mention of India as a country that might experience
> disclosure problems is likely a fabrication intended to confuse
> related issues. When combined with the use of the descriptive term for
> extraterrestrials, "The Controllers" designed to trigger a particular
> psychological reaction and lead discussions in a certain direction, the
> possibility that the information is being relayed through an
> agency with expertise in psychological operations cannot be
> the earlier message (February
> 13), Clay's and Shawn's confidential source (A) referred to an
> was the ultimate authority for disclosure of the UN meeting to
> UFO/exopolitical community. Is this evidence that the Office of Naval
> Investigations is involved in the UFO disclosure initiative at the
UN, or at
> least filtering information to be released to the UN and general public?
> interesting for me was contrasting the agenda of the meeting
> and Shawn's confidential source (A) , and what I had been told by my
> source (B) who confirmed the UN meeting had occurred. Source B
> concerning the release of restricted technologies for new energy
> document for feedback, while source A focused on population growth and
> Curiously, source A did not mention any document being circulated to UN
> states for feedback.
> In conclusion, I am now satisfied that a meeting took place at the UN
> headquarters in New York of February 12 to discuss the issue of UFOs
> extraterrestrial. What transpired at the meeting itself appears to
> according to the confidential source (A) Clay and Shawn have cited,
> independent source (B) used to confirm the meeting. The emergence of
> alleged document circulated at the meeting and relayed to key
> other nations will help considerably in clarifying what was
> the accuracy of these respective sources. The possible role of the
> Naval Intelligence in filtering information that is being related
> source A is something that cannot be discounted when considering
> specifically discussed at the UN meeting. I look forward to
> documents circulated at the meeting to get a better idea of the agenda
> issues discussed involving the role the UN would play in public
> extraterrestrial life.
> Michael E. Salla, Ph.D
> Kona, Hawaii
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Shawn and Clay <xxx@...>
> To: drsalla@...
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 9:21:17 AM
> Subject: Follow up of source's UFO meeting at the UN
> Dear Michael,
> This email is a follow up of the UN meeting which took place Tuesday
> 2008 at 8;00AM.
> We met our source 7:00PM, Monday, February 18, 2008. Our source
> 1) The meeting went well; however, our source left with a degree of
> 2) The meeting covered various topics. The issue of recent UFO
> one of many
> topics discussed.
> 3) Security around the meeting was intense.
> 4) Everyone was searched. Pens, pins, key chain items were collected
> in the meeting room. There were multiple security checkpoints. UN
> were confiscated upon entering the room.
> 5) 50 to 60 people attended. Everyone was in civilian dress, except one
> 6) Other countries may have had military there, but they came under
> respective civilian
> 7) UFO topic was addressed. The Russians are very paranoid about the
> is not very trusting. This frustrated our source greatly. Our source
> believes the
> Russians will eventually come around; "They always come back to the
> This mistrust appears to be an ongoing issue between East & West.
> 8) The religious implications of contact came up during the meeting. It
> turned into a
> 20 minute debate. Our source had to reel it in and refocus the
> seems that
> the Indians are very difficult to deal with on this issue of the
> regarding contact. Population is a major factor in how nation-states
> with a new
> paradigm. The Indian's world view has led to an unsustainable food,
> and water
> demand. Source stated that the world must gets its population and
> under control. ET will help, but we must show them that we intend to
> within our
> constraints. If we don't show some semblance of intent, they simply
> 9) Source said the 2013 date of official contact is wrong. That is
> when things heat
> up. The real date of contact is 2017. It is on this date when very
> craft will appear
> above cities and sit. There will be NO use of force; they will just sit
> there. Source
> stated the "Independence Day" film was close, but their ships are
> big and,
> again, no use of force will occur. Our source cannot reveal his
> the 2017
> date. His source is very high up in the
> 10) Source stated that it is our choice how we embrace this contact.
> 11) The ET's who will arrive on 2017 are referred to as "The
> They are a
> "galactic federation" type group; however, "galactic federation" is
> name for their group--it is hypothetical name used as a reference.
> 12) The controllers have a keen sense of freedom and free will. They
> not intervene
> and help humanity if humanity does not show them we want their help.
> entropic event happens (nuclear war), the controllers will not make
> is something they will not tolerate," our source stated.
> 13) The controllers will not give us technology to expand our
> feed ourselves
> if we do not recognize the necessity to stabilize our population
> They don't
> want our planet's population to double because of a technological
> by them. Our source used India as an example, " India has over 1
> people. It
> is clearly a country out of balance in terms of its population size."
> 14) A contentious moment in the meeting had to do with the religious
> implications of
> contact. It is this issue which is of most concern. Our source
> the more
> secular societies will adjust more easily to contact than the
> fundamentalist. He stated,
> " The Roman Catholic countries will not have a rough time, except
> problem; the Roman Catholics already have three Gods in one, so
> is not that much of a stretch. The dividing point is going to be the
> containment of
> population. The Protestant countries will deal fairly easily with
> So will
> countries with indigenous religions connected to nature. The Muslim,
> fundamentalist Christian religions will have the most difficult time,
> possibly even the
> elimination of said religions; we can expect mass suicides, social
> upheaval. The ETs will help with re-programming and the concept of an
> galactic order. However, society will have to step up to the plate to
> assist - one on
> one - those people who have shattered belief systems The Chinese
> problem because of the Buddhist and Taoist influences."
> Clay and Shawn Pickering
> as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate among private
> groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all
> Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.