Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11880Re: [ufodiscussion] Who Monitors Bill, Dan and Marci and Why?

Expand Messages
  • masanga@talktalk.net
    Sep 28 9:01 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Bill,

      I have been off-line for a while due to network problems and have
      only just got back on-line.

      You seem to have dismissed my points rather lightly. I hope you
      understand that I was not trying to criticise you; I was trying to point
      out the only solution that I could see to your expressed problem. Before
      replying, I think I should say that I do not see this issue as a private
      matter between ourselves but as a public one that implicates at least
      everyone in the UFO community and possibly everyone in the world.

      Bill: "I am sorry, but after interviewing over 20 cases like Dan's, all I
      can say and I have stated it in my book -- there is NO hard evidence so you
      can choose to ignore it. That is your perogative. Might as well as ask me
      for hard evidence of the spirit world or aliens. Its just not there."

      Regan: Perhaps I misled you by referring to "hard" evidence. I meant it in
      the sense of its being physical and objective in the way that photographs,
      tissue samples, voice-recordings, etc. might be accepted as "hard" evidence
      in a court of law. I did not mean "hard" in the sense of its automatically
      compelling conviction (although that would help, of course). If I had meant
      it in that sense, I would not also have suggested that the evidence needs to
      be assessed as I did do.

      But let me get what you are saying straight, Bill. Are you telling
      me that, after years of intensive investigation of Dan and his alarming
      claims about on-going human-alien relationships, trade-deals and abductions
      regulated by secret treaties, manipulation of the earth's time-line,
      unstable stargates, an apocalyptic geophysical threat to the whole planet
      coming around 2012 and the discovery of a positive proto-virus with
      miraculous healing capabilities (which could, potentially, be diverted to
      use as a secret superweapon) and more, there is in fact NO physical,
      objective evidence (i.e. "hard" in the sense that I meant it) and there
      never will be? Because if you are, then I think I should remind you of the
      time a while back when you took Dex to task in this forum for "crying wolf"
      too often without having any real evidence to back up his alarming claims.
      Dan's radical claims are alarming to the point of being profoundly
      psychologically disturbing because they threaten to overturn people's
      established worldviews. He is speaking the stuff of which people's worst
      nightmares are
      made. He has cried "WOLF!" at 300 decibels. So where is the evidence for
      the wolf? I think people will feel entitled to see it, or else to write Dan
      and his confederates off as the noisome, troublesome, time-wasting practical
      jokers that they will have demonstrated themselves to be. That is the
      predictable public reaction. It would not be my reaction, but all this is
      not about me. It is about you and Dan and your troubled relationship with
      the public. As I said, this is not a private matter.


      Bill: "I provided notorized statements, documents, and testimony which is
      about all one can do in a UFO case."

      Regan: This is not a typical UFO case and in principle there is more that
      you and/or Dan could do by way of providing substantial evidence to support
      at least some of his claims (in the absence of a legal prohibition from
      higher authority). For example, take Dan's alleged discovery of the Ganesh
      particle. What is to stop you from publishing a set of replicable scientific
      experiments which other scientists could do to verify its existence? The
      U.S. military/secret-government/whatever would not be able to claim
      intellectual ownership without exposing itself and Dan might even end up
      with a nobel prize and get the undivided attention of Congress on his case.
      Admittedly it would be much harder to provide direct evidence for the
      existence of the J-Rod (such as a signed photograph and a DVD for all his
      fans and well-wishers), but again an indirect method might be possible. For
      instance, Dan claims to have studied the J-Rod's DNA. Perhaps it would be
      possible for a gene-lab, acting on instructions supplied by Dan, to mutate a
      suitable terrestrially occuring cell into a J-Rod analogue and then to
      compare the behaviour and properties of that cell with those described by
      Dan as occurring in the J-Rod original. Similar indirect tests might be
      possible in regard to his other claims too. One has to be inventive about
      it of course, but "nothing ventured, nothing gained" as the saying goes.
      Anyway, I really think you should consider all possible alternatives before
      giving up, Bill, because the consequences of your doing that are awful to
      contemplate for you both - and for the world if Dan's claims are true.


      Bill: "Look at the Billy Meier case for instance. He provides photos,
      video, metal samples, testimony from eyewitnesses and not one jot of it is
      accepted. I am even skeptical."

      Regan: You are making my point for me, Bill. Meier has at least provided
      some putative physical evidence for his claims that is subject to critical
      examination and testing. To date, Dan has supplied little or none. It may
      not be his
      fault that he has been unable to supply it but the public will not care
      about that when they make their judgement of him. If Dan does not produce
      any testable evidence at all to back up his claims, they will give more
      credence to Meier's hub cap-like photos than they will to Dan's
      unsubstantiated claims.


      Bill: "If you think you can provide a shred of hard evidence about a UFO
      case, then be my guest."

      Regan: I hardly think this is about anyone's ability to provide hard
      evidence for just any old UFO-case, Bill. It is about the lack of any
      substantial evidence for one case in particular, which is not even a simple
      UFO-case anyway but is a complex case involving longstanding secret
      relationships between human and ET societies and of which UFOs are a minor
      feature. The difficulties of proving it are correspondingly immense. I was
      trying to offer help to you who are caught in this exceptionally difficult
      situation. The case has serious implications for terrestrial politics which
      I think only the most irresponsible-minded of people would feel that they
      can safely ignore - if Dan's claims are true. And if they are not true, he
      will be responsible for having disturbed and distressed a lot of people to
      no purpose. So the question of whether or not they are true is an important
      one which the public who he has aroused really does need to be able to
      decide. How can they decide it if not by the consideration of evidence?

      Regan


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: William Hamilton
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 10:40 PM
      Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] Who Monitors Bill, Dan and Marci and Why?


      Regan,

      I am sorry, but after interviewing over 20 cases like Dan's,
      all I can say and I have stated it in my book -- there is NO hard
      evidence so you can choose to ignore it. That is your perogative.
      Might as well as ask me for hard evidence of the spirit world or aliens.
      Its just not there.

      I provided notorized statements, documents, and testimony which
      is about all one can do in a UFO case.

      Look at the Billy Meier case for instance. He provides photos,
      video, metal samples, testimony from eyewitnesses and not one
      jot of it is accepted. I am even skeptical.

      If you think you can provide a shred of hard evidence about a
      UFO case, then be my guest.

      Bill


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <masanga@...>
      To: <ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:37 PM
      Subject: [ufodiscussion] Who Monitors Bill, Dan and Marci and Why?


      > Bill,
      >
      > I am sorry that you feel it necessary to withdraw from ufology in
      > order to get on with doing something more productive. But it does seem to
      > me that making controvertial claims and assertions without also providing
      > hard evidence to back them up is bound to fuel the unproductive and lurid
      > kind of internet gossip that so disgusts you. I think Dan needs to come
      > through with the goods, Bill, if the gossip is to be silenced. Thus far
      > we
      > have had only his, Marci's and your words to go on. The public requires
      > that new truth be demonstrated independently of persons before they will
      > accept it as fact. That is simply the rule of the game of revelation in
      > this world at the present time and we are all subject to it, whether we
      > like
      > it or not. The only way to avoid it is not to play the game. But you, Dan
      > and Marci have elected to play the game, Bill. So the rule applies.
      >
      > I appreciate that providing hard evidence to support Dan's radical
      > revolutionary claims is an extraordinarily difficult challenge, but I
      > think
      > it is one that must be met if anything productive is actually to come out
      > of
      > his making them. I am not alluding to evidence about his personal
      > background and credentials here, Bill, as I think most people in ufology
      > would be willing to accept those on trust while the significant import of
      > his message to the world and his evidence in support of that are assessed
      > as
      > a priority. I am rather alluding to the impersonal content of his message
      > that may have significance for the world at large, such as his claimed
      > scientific discoveries and his possible knowledge and understanding of
      > actual human-ET relationships. However his "message" to date seems to
      > consist of a series of partial, isolated, anecdotal glimpses into the
      > bizarre world that he claims to inhabit while there is no appreciable
      > evidence about it for us to assess. What can serious ufologists really be
      > expected do with such insubstantial data? There is nothing that they can
      > do
      > with it and the non-serious ones can only gossip and invent imaginative
      > fictions about Dan to fill their otherwise empty minds. I think you
      > should
      > not be surprised at their doing what is quite natural for them to do under
      > the circumstances.
      >
      > It is a cruel situation I know, but you three have placed
      > yourselves
      > in it by your own willed actions. It is made more difficult too by the
      > compromised positions from which all three of you are now speaking. Both
      > Dan and Marci are "part of the program" (whatever that is) and are not
      > free
      > to speak the impartial truth in so far as they know it, but only in so far
      > as they are allowed to speak it by the anonymous and secret authority to
      > which they owe their allegiance. And your position as an impartial
      > investigator and reporter of the truth in this affair has also been
      > compromised, Bill, first by your forming a personal friendship with Dan
      > and
      > then by your receiving a privileged "briefing" from whoever was in control
      > of Dan (you never said who that was). You are no longer a disinterested
      > party, Bill, and everything you say about Dan and his claims is now
      > suspect
      > because of it. No-one can tell any more whether you have also become
      > "part
      > of the program" and your personal credibility as an unbiased observer and
      > a
      > reliable reporter of the unvarnished facts has been diminished
      > accordingly.
      > Basically all that the public can see is some people who claim to be
      > striving to explode the Great UFO Cover-Up whilst working, to a greater or
      > lesser degree, for the people who ostensibly are maintaining it! Your
      > personal characters and integrity may be impeccable and beyond reproach,
      > but
      > your objective positions are ambivalent, unclear and somewhat
      > contradictory.
      > Naturally the ultimate effect of this is just to create doubts about you
      > and
      > general confusion in people's minds.
      >
      > They are doubts and confusion which can be swept away in an instant
      > however, when Dan actually supplies the solid, objective evidence that is
      > needed to back up his claims. And if he cannot supply it in fact, I think
      > he should admit it and allow everybody to stop suspending their judgement
      > in
      > the vain hope that he is going to supply it at some indefinite time in the
      > future. I think he would gain respect for his honesty by doing that. But
      > the rest of us cannot be expected to wait indefinitely for you, Dan and
      > Marci to get your act together, Bill. We also have more productive things
      > to do.
      >
      > Sincerely,
      > Regan
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: William Hamilton
      > To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:16 PM
      > Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] Who Monitors Our Internet and Why?
      >
      >
      > Dex,
      >
      > A lot of clap-trap, errant opinions, and just plain garbage gets posted on
      > these forums
      > about Dan B. I have to fend off some very offensive material myself. The
      > Golden
      > Thread is old and not up to date. Very few of these yahoos have seen or
      > understood
      > Dan's work. I am so disgusted with the responses I have decided to fade
      > out
      > of
      > ufology for a while and do something more productive.
      >
      > Sincerely,
      >
      > Bill Hamilton
      > AstroScience Research
      > http://www.astrosciences.info
      > "I don't see the logic of rejecting data just because they seem
      > incredible."
      > Fred Hoyle
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Dex" <dexxxaa@...>
      > To: "UFO-Prepare4contact" <prepare4contact@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 8:32 AM
      > Subject: [ufodiscussion] Who Monitors Our Internet and Why?
      >
      > See if you can follow this discussion from the Golden Thread forum..
      > A=Ann
      > D=Dan B.
      > M=Marci
      > J or J1=McConnell, heads our National Intelligence Agency.
      > --------------
      > Dxx=Dondep
      >
      > Dex
      > ******************************************************************
      > Cross posting:
      >
      > Dondep wrote:
      >
      > And, to quote Dex; Wowie Zowie!
      >
      > I wouldn't put it past the thugs to have set up that post at GLP as a
      > feint,
      > a 'trial balloon' to draw fire and ignite ire.
      >
      > I thought there were some very good posts that give a better snapshot of
      > how
      > the 'saga' or 'farce' is faring as a whole, to the outside world. The
      > Knappster had one of the most open missives he's ever written in response
      > to
      > some sort of saga-related stimuli.
      >
      > I see Marci's own "not wellness" is showing in how she's so quick to
      > instigate or otherwise "explain" those that don't toe her party line. I
      > think you're right, mjc; she's had a "humour-bypass" following the May
      > 18th
      > induction last year.
      >
      > Which reminds me; Shady, Dan was the one that confirmed what emails from
      > Commaj and K had already told me, unbeknownst to Dan (unless he was the
      > author of those emails himself, in which case he comes across as worse; oh
      > lawdy! what contradictions!), about his pending acceptance in the
      > 'religious
      > institution' (the Priory of Sion - which he insists he never joined, which
      > is what he swore to do). His and Marci's own comments to me, references
      > made
      > over the course of a couple of weeks, gave me the ability to triangulate
      > what was happening. Dan originally claimed not to want to have anything to
      > do with relying on their offer of a replacement doctorate, but said he
      > would
      > do it if SUNY wouldn't be allowed to admit to it. Now that damn doctorate
      > is
      > going to be so discredited by the time the viewers of the NDA validate it
      > in
      > the courts that it'll be shown for what it is: a REPLACEMENT for something
      > REAL.
      >
      > At least there are a whole lot of witnesses to the character assassination
      > and name-calling initiated by the SNEDs thugs, copies of which are being
      > carefully kept to show the hypocrisy.
      >
      > I'm posting here what I said at GLP, the "mother of all fringe forums":
      >
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > Re: Dan Burisch & Bill Hamilton Cyberstalk UFO Researcher Quote
      > Vance at GLP wrote:
      >
      > My biggest problem with Dan Burisch is how he could part of something US
      > black ops and be free to talk about at all, no less for years and going
      > around trying to make deals with Hollywood producers. I think, if there
      > was
      > a program like he says and he was part of it then he wouldn't be opening
      > his
      > mouth to anyone about anything. He'd be stopped before he started.
      >
      > I start from this point and judge everything else Burisch claims by this
      > simple fact. I think he's free to open his mouth because he never did any
      > of
      > the things he claims. I also think his false claims become helpful to
      > conceal any real black ops ET agendas that may be in progress if they
      > exist,
      > but that Burisch has nothing to do with. Burisch's claims would be used as
      > a
      > freebe disinfo tool.
      >
      > What's Burisch's excuse for getting around this disclosure problem? Have
      > you
      > ever checked out the disclosure problem I've pointed to? That's what I'd
      > like to hear. Make me a believer on this one sticky problem and I'll
      > consider other claims he makes.
      >
      > Quoting: Vance 302106
      >
      > Vance, you ask "how could he be part of something US black ops and be free
      > to talk about at all...."
      > ---------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------
      >
      > That part is answered in the orders that were issued by the last
      > 'official'
      > lineup of MJ-12 on Oct. 12, 2005, (of which I recently received a copy,
      > complete with Dan's signature, which we can take to court once we have
      > enough folks that have grown enough spine and stamina):
      >
      > "...you are hereby instructed, ordered and enjoined to the best of your
      > abilities and talents to present the truth of the extraterrestrial
      > reality,
      > as you have personally known it, on dates yet to be established, to the
      > population of the world. ....."
      >
      > It was also answered six months prior to those orders, in the Request To
      > Admit that Burisch signed an admission to, followed by the Affidavit of
      > April 13th, 2005:
      >
      > "...7. You [Dan Burisch] 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."
      > ---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------
      >
      > The entire text of the Request To Admit and the Affidavit are at [link to
      > www.danburisch.info] Click on "The Legal Case".
      >
      > When I hammered out that document with Marci (and the Majestic 12 lawyer,
      > Mr. Mundsen), I did so knowing that 'they' (the Maji) were using me to
      > help
      > promote their semi-false 'Disclosure', which I agreed to do so long as
      > they
      > would allow this method to help warn humanity of the coming poleshift.
      >
      > Todd wrote:
      > He wasnt lied to by J1 Dondep. They have no connection personally and
      > McConnell wouldnt even know burisch. The amount of crap they have
      > generated
      > with fake documents, sockp[uppet yahoo id's and emails etc is simply
      > amazing. What is equally amazing is the perpetuation of such unproven
      > diatribe. You make it sound like theres fact in there. Where? Please prove
      > any one of your sources outside of the internet. They are still writing
      > books and you are going to join the fray? Think carefully.
      >
      > Quoting: Anonymous Coward 302038
      >
      > AC, you weren't there in Dan's apartment office (he uses, or used to use,
      > the third bedroom in the apartment as his 'office'.) I was. A picture of
      > McConnell was still on display of John (er, 'Mike' McConnell; Dan knows
      > him
      > as 'John' or 'Daddy-O', whereas I refer to him as 'Dadmiral' because of
      > all
      > the anecdotal stories I've heard about him, in context, from not only Dan
      > but others....not to mention the emails from Dan and Marci to me that he
      > "stepped on" between their outbox and my inbox.) I know his personality a
      > lot more than many of my colleagues at work, with whom I work day-in and
      > day-out. I can tell you he really really enjoys McDonald's filet-o-fish
      > sandwiches, and when Dan gets teed off at him he usually eats one while on
      > a
      > teleconference with him. He also likes a certain brandy and fine cigars,
      > which was what he bet Dick Cheney over whether Dan was going to sit in as
      > temporary J-9 or whether a permanent replacement would be found before
      > that
      > happened.
      >
      > But hey! Don't take my word for it! Ask the DNI himself, and get him on
      > record denying Dan three times! Go for it! He and Dan joke about how he'll
      > deny Dan in the morning on the Hill, then do lunch with him the same day!
      >
      > As for books; the reason I haven't joined that fray is because it's an
      > admission of defeat, in a way.... a way of saying "the story's over" when
      > in
      > fact it has yet to climax. It will ONLY be resolved when we can get Dan in
      > front of Congress, TRANSPARENTLY (NOT limiting him to what he's already
      > had
      > to say to them in private) and then get ALL THE REST of the black-ops
      > community that want to testify, following a provision of immunity for
      > them.
      >
      > JAnunknown, at GLP, wrote:
      > Hoi all,
      > Mr. Blair is still alive. Good to see. DD nuanced respons.
      > I´m an insider. I studied for many years on this.
      > I combine issues. I can see the whole picture. TV producer is not correct.
      > Dan Burisch, Marcia McDowell (and Bill H.) are honest. Think like: if 10%
      > is
      > correct. Forget the 90% that is not. I know too much, that´s why I´m
      > unknown.
      > JAn
      >
      > Quoting: JAnunknown 8300
      >
      > JAn, while it is true you are an 'insider' now, belonging to Dan's
      > treehouse
      > Think Tank and having followed the saga since it began here at GLP on Oct
      > 2,
      > 2003, I'm sorry to say you can't see the whole picture. You've been
      > blinded
      > by your good heart and earnestness: Dan Burisch and Marcia McDowell are
      > also
      > DISHONEST. You refuse to see it. While they may justify their occasional
      > lies by telling themselves - and the assembled acolytes and black-ops
      > colleagues - it's "for the good of humanity", they are following a bogus
      > paradigm. Some, such as yourself, seem not to be able to find any fault
      > with
      > the policy of "the ends justify the means", but you HAVE witnessed the
      > ugliness of the command-and-control SNEDs forum (unlike the GT,
      > independent
      > thinking isn't allowed there, people are abruptly banned and without
      > public
      > explanation if they aren't oooohhhing and ahhhhhing enough in their
      > questions and statements). {P.S. You weren't there when Dan and Marci
      > started talking excitedly about being able to get Bruce Willis to play the
      > role of Dan.}
      >
      > The science may be 10% correct, maybe 80% correct, but there is at least
      > 10%
      > lies to 90% truth. Sadly, if even 1% is a lie, who can believe the 99%
      > isn't? This is the karmic epitaph to a project hatched by the likes of
      > Dick
      > Cheney and Heinz Kissinger, not to mention George Bush and the rest of the
      > military-industrial-surveillance complex that gave Dan his 'orders' and
      > signed the illegitimate Tau-9 Treaty. You may know too much of one thing,
      > but way too little of other things, things that are very important to the
      > future of humanity.
      >
      > George Knapp, on GLP, wrote:
      > .........
      > When I first read the email from the producer, it seemed legit. I'm still
      > leaning in that direction, although I had the same thought as "October",
      > that it might be a creation of Marcia or Dan as a way to rekindle interest
      > in their fable, or perhaps to suck people in to another of their
      > fantasies,
      > maybe with the idea of pulling the rug out from under the discussion group
      > somewhere down the line, just for kicks. Two things bothered me about the
      > email. One, the producer says he had a meeting---one meeting---to discuss
      > the project. He says he met Dan and Bill and someone claiming to be Dan's
      > mom. Dan's mother hasn't seen her son in 12 years, at least, that's what
      > she
      > has told me and others. She has been cut off from Dan by Dan's wife...oh,
      > and by the secret government. Unless there has been a recent
      > reconciliation,
      > it strikes me as unlikely that Dan's mom would be at that meeting. (Maybe
      > someone was there pretending to be his mom. Nothing would surprise me at
      > this point.) Two, the producer says the meeting was set up by a friend who
      > is a UFO researcher. Somehow, this UFO researcher did not know that Dan
      > Burisch is the 'scientist' previously known as Dan Crain. Really? The
      > researcher knew enough about the story to pitch it as a movie or TV
      > project
      > but had no idea Burisch is Crain? That's odd, isn't it? He or she didn't
      > know something so basic in the twisted tale? I'm not sure what difference
      > it
      > should have made---Crain or Burisch, the story is still ridiculous---but
      > that's what the email says. Maybe the producer will weigh in again and
      > explain further.
      >
      > Quoting: George Knapp 302174
      >
      > Hello George, it's good to read a post by you here at GLP, though it
      > appears
      > the posting form truncated your post; maybe you can share that last bit in
      > a
      > follow-up. BTW, I'm only regretful we weren't able to hang out at least
      > once
      > and have a beer one of those nights I'd pick up Toni at KLAS after she got
      > off work. When she got that job, working in the very same place of
      > business
      > with you and actually working WITH you on occasion, the black-ops
      > community
      > was in a tizzy for a short bit anyway, but I'm sure you can attest to the
      > fact that the only thing you discussed with her was shoptalk; the Dan
      > Burisch 'story' never made it into conversation. You know they even
      > accused
      > her of spying on you for me? tsk, tsk!
      >
      > I quoted the above paragraph from your post because it IS a big question
      > as
      > to who started this thread. Something about this doesn't "smell" right,
      > and
      > believe me, that says a lot. Many think I somehow fall hook, line and
      > sinker
      > for unquantified 'leaks' that appear designed to further the Dan Burisch
      > 'myth', but while there are certainly elements of that, the fact is that
      > the
      > information that's been important isn't so much what's been volunteered to
      > me (as this thread appears to do), it's what WASN'T told, or what was
      > shied
      > away from, or how it was shied away from, or what was reluctantly admitted
      > to. So much of what I've been told would point back to Marci, Dan, or the
      > Dadmiral himself, but ultimately was designed to show the falsity of what
      > they have been trying to 'disclose'. Now, who would have an agenda like
      > that? Hmmmmmm......
      >
      > Sure Dan worked with a zetan J-rod ET in the bowels of the S-4 complex.
      > But
      > then, so would a janitor! That means we should be able to see that
      > corroborated by.....the janitor! At least one of them! Nonetheless, what
      > that zetan J-rod TOLD him is as suspect as what God supposedly tells
      > George
      > Bush about 'staying the course in Babylon, to be there to save the day
      > when
      > Armageddon arrives.' Not to digress; I'm convinced, having seen no
      > evidence
      > to the contrary of the finely-detailed, highly-articulated diagrams and
      > first-hand accounts, that the so-called 'Clean Sphere' exists. The balance
      > of much other evidence argues for it, but again: THAT ISN'T THE ISSUE.
      > "The
      > tissue ain't the issue!"
      >
      > You're absolutely right about Doreen Crain being at any such meeting;
      > Doreen
      > spent a chunk of time with Jerry Pippin, who would probably know about
      > such
      > a meeting were it true. However, like the documents I recently received,
      > or
      > the ones Dan Rather is now suing CBS News over, there could be a germ or 2
      > of explosive truth there, packed in with a sizzlin' pack of lies. One
      > could
      > spend years trying to separate them, or......they could simply get their
      > Congress to deal with making it all transparent. These issues are
      > actionable! That's the only way they will be resolved!
      >
      > Sadly, I've come to understand that it will only be when the earth changes
      > become so dramatic that the Congress will do the right thing.
      >
      > Zack Savage, on GLP, wrote:
      > Hey DonDep!!
      >
      > Good to see you're still out and about. This other person has a thread on
      > an
      > artifact dealing with time.
      >
      > Interesting, but I find the thread loaded with bits and pieces of the work
      > of others. He has called hoax on many other players with relative ease.
      >
      > Of course, we are to believe his info beyond reproach with no validation
      > what-so-ever.
      >
      > At least Dan puts his name behind his words.
      >
      > I found it disturbing when Thessa left in a huff about something you did
      > or
      > did not do. I don't follow the drama, just the clues.
      >
      > Anyway, I always found you to be a stand-up person in my dealing with you.
      >
      > I hope you and Starry are doing well.
      >
      > Namaste
      > Z
      >
      > Quoting: zacksavage
      >
      > Hey Zack! Thanks for the shout-out; being that you were one of the
      > original
      > travellers of the Golden Thread, you can recall the sense of drama that
      > once
      > permeated these threads over the 'saga' of Dan Burisch, and you were there
      > during the infamous hours-long "huddle" chats when we'd sometimes be able
      > to
      > chat with him.....he almost seems more genuine in retrospect, when we were
      > all naive to it.
      >
      > The thread you refer to I checked out; this seems like yet another
      > black-ops
      > trial balloonist trying his wares out on the unsuspecting yet again.
      > Reason
      > argues against this paradigm of the stargates causing a poleshift by all
      > being 'turned on' at once, which is what Dan originally was telling us,
      > via
      > the 'Ravens'. Reason would argue that these devices, if real, would have
      > been used, and our consciousness would have CERTAINLY been disrupted by
      > them
      > by now. First we were told that Saddam had one (the original WMD), which
      > we
      > then captured finally, causing Rancher Bush to fly over suddenly for
      > Thanksgiving just to see it (oh, btw, it made for a nice photo-op; how
      > conVEEENient!), but now we're told that Saddamn 'never knew what he had',
      > as
      > if to now explain away the obvious question which is "so why didn't he use
      > it?"
      >
      > That Stargate Scenario is most plausibly put on by having yet one more
      > black
      > compartment design and manufacture the fake 'stargate stones', a la Moses;
      > then, they were being sold on the internet! So, send in a photo-oppable
      > FBI
      > team to 'arrest' the theives. Ultimately, the only agenda this scenario
      > seems to serve is Bush's. And, in a world governed by a just and merciful
      > God, that simply couldn't be truthful. "What's good for God is good for
      > America, and what's good for Bush is good for God." Say WHAT?
      > .......
      > "Of course, we are to believe his info beyond reproach with no validation
      > what-so-ever.
      >
      > At least Dan puts his name behind his words.".......
      >
      > Therein lies the quandary!
      >
      > As for Thessa, I don't know; troubles me to hear she was in a 'huff' over
      > something I did or did not do. She dropped a few posts in the GT a couple
      > of
      > months ago, but while we were discussing something, she faded back away
      > but
      > there wasn't a clue as to her being upset. That's news to me. I've always
      > had the deepest respect for Thessa, though we disagree on some things.
      >
      > Then again, Starry and I disagree on some things, some that are MAJOR.
      > But,
      > we're in this great old historic building and rebuilding our lives here
      > having left Nevada 5 months ago; while I had few problems with Sin City,
      > the
      > idea that we were continually under 'light' surveillance, coupled with the
      > fact that Starry wanted away from there, and I knew it would be no place
      > to
      > be trapped in either when the time came.
      >
      > "We're good", as some would say. Thanks for asking, and for your kind
      > words.
      > _________________
      > Address to send information helping expose the Coverup:
      > Dondep or Dagwood
      > 2433 E. Tropicana Ave
      > #420
      > Las Vegas, NV 89121
      >
      > Dondep
      > Moderator
      >
      > Joined: 25 Mar 2007
      > Posts: 255
      > Location: Las Vegas
      > Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:12 pm Post subject: Dadmiral, Dan, Marci and
      > Ann
      >
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > Transcript Of Dan, Marci, Dadmiral, & Ann - April 2007
      >
      > Even though a few months old, this transcript shows how strenuously
      > Dadmiral
      > is fighting to keep the consciousness of the REAL reason for the 'T-2'
      > calculations from crystallizing in Dan's mind:
      >
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > J: Listen to me! (yelling) The Planet X thing takes credibility, which you
      > have, and throws it in the shitter! It's no more than him changing what
      > you
      > said in the hallway about that other character and the affidavit. Future
      > visions? You watched a video, right? Listen up here! Apophis could hit us!
      > That's not a vision, that's science. That science backs up what the
      > Looking
      > Glass showed.
      >
      > D: What? I thought that was lowered?
      >
      > J: We're waiting on better data. So, it's stock up for awhile now in case
      > we
      > can't stop it. It's not a planet killer, but it will interrupt us for some
      > time.
      >
      > D: So, you are telling me Dxx is right?
      >
      > J: Yes and no. No. He is waiting for some Pole shift right?
      >
      > D: He is waiting for Nibiru as a Brown Dwarf or something like that. There
      > is a decided difference between an electromagnetic pole flip, which I
      > believe is underway now, and a geophysical as in T2. I tried to speak with
      > him about it, that this is a cyclic issue of chaos-cosmos. There's no
      > talking to him. He goes deaf just like the people he calls dissonant. Back
      > to the other. What's its potential as an impact event?
      >
      > J: He is wrong about the Brown Dwarf, right about a higher probability of
      > impact of an earth disrupting asteroid. It should be within visible range.
      > I
      > believe it will pass within the Earth Moon distance.
      >
      > D: Okay, I just wanted to make sure that this wasn't a T2 involved thing.
      > This still troubles me, as it's too easily, ah too easy added in your
      > subject matter. I've never heard you speak of this before?
      >
      > J: It's been in the mainstream. It's nothing we've been hiding.
      >
      > M: Okay, we understand that! Well, no I don't! The stocking of provisions
      > was earmarked as possible T2 stocking. I've never heard anything in the
      > way
      > of an asteroid until now. Plus, I still don't understand why we weren't
      > told
      > of you working an op against us involving Kxxxx's additions?
      >
      > A: I spoke with J and he said it wasn't more important than us getting the
      > XXXXXXXXXX on board so you could cut the XXXXXXX off at the knees!
      >
      > D: Wasn't more important, what, Apophis or Dxx?
      >
      > A: Dxx, silly!
      >
      > D: Well, I will agree that we have had problems with Dxx broadcasting
      > whatever he got his hands on, when it served his purposes, but these
      > issues
      > are apples and oranges to me.
      >
      > J: Dan, Marci, you two would be told before anything would get critical.
      >
      > D: Screw me! (yelling) What of the impact's ground zero? Are we readying a
      > protocol for movement of the populace from even an estimated ground zero
      > location?
      >
      > J: Dan, we don't know if it will hit us!
      >
      > D: Right, but we know when it's passing, yes? Why not project it hitting
      > us,
      > and estimate from there? Jesus Christ! (yelling) Do you know how many it
      > would wipe out, even if it isn't an Earth killer?
      >
      > J: That depends on where we estimate it will hit us! We might win the war
      > quicker! (laughing)
      >
      > D: Not funny!
      >
      > M: No, you know sir, I don't, I mean to say, I don't see that as funny
      > either.
      >
      > J: Look Dan -
      >
      > D: No, you look! (yelling) The first friggin chance I legitimately get, I
      > am
      > going to expose this information you just gave! (yelling)
      >
      > J: You make damned sure it's not from me! (yelling)
      >
      > D: I understand, you are in D.C. and trying to hold Dxxx together. I
      > understand that. I also understand that this is information I should have
      > been provided so that I could have given a more complete view of what we
      > have, or what some have known. Now, what? This information comes to the
      > public, and it emboldens those who have been screaming doom? You withhold
      > critical information, and how about you Ann? Did you know this?
      >
      > A: Sugarlady said Apophis misses us in T1 but maybe not now that we've
      > changed the course pushing us off T2.
      >
      > D: Which numbers? The ones before the stargates were grabbed or after?
      >
      > J: There are no real after numbers because we tore them down. The glasses.
      >
      > D: Exactly! Think about what Ann just said! I have no choice! I have no
      > choice but to announce what I've learned!
      >
      > J: How? Exactly what have you learned?
      >
      > D: Jxxx, I have no choice but to say that while there is a possibility
      > that
      > Apophis will strike us, and that while this has been in the mainstream
      > media, that the appearance of the lack of consideration by the Maji was
      > not
      > the full story.
      >
      > J: What does that do to help anyone? It will strengthen the idiotic claims
      > of people like Dxx, who are waiting for the sky to fall! (yelling)
      >
      > M: What it will do, is tell the truth.
      >
      > D: Thank you!
      >
      > A: For as bad as I've been, I agree that it should be told that the
      > Majestic
      > hierarchy has been watching the situation.
      >
      > D: Damned if we do and damned if don't.
      >
      > J: Not really, it will miss us.
      >
      > D: A moment ago you said we weren't sure it would hit us, now you are sure
      > it will miss us?
      >
      > J: The numbers say it will miss.
      >
      > D: Which numbers? The ones before the stargates were grabbed or after?
      >
      > J: There are no real after numbers because we tore them down. The glasses.
      >
      > D: Exactly! Think about what Ann just said! I have no choice! I have no
      > choice but to announce what I've learned!
      >
      > J: How? Exactly what have you learned?
      >
      > D: Jxxx, I have no choice but to say that while there is a possibility
      > that
      > Apophis will strike us, and that while this has been in the mainstream
      > media, that the appearance of the lack of consideration by the Maji was
      > not
      > the full story.
      >
      > J: What does that do to help anyone? It will strengthen the idiotic claims
      > of people like Dxx, who are waiting for the sky to fall! (yelling)
      >
      > M: What it will do, is tell the truth.
      >
      > D: Thank you!
      >
      > A: For as bad as I've been, I agree that it should be told that the
      > Majestic
      > hierarchy has been watching the situation.
      > _________________
      > Address to send information helping expose the Coverup:
      > Dondep or Dagwood
      > 2433 E. Tropicana Ave
      > #420
      > Las Vegas, NV 89121
      >
      > Back to top
      >
      > Dondep
      > Moderator
      >
      > Joined: 25 Mar 2007
      > Posts: 255
      > Location: Las Vegas
      > Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:56 pm Post subject: Clarifications
      >
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > Clarifications
      >
      > Dan wrote:
      > D: He is waiting for Nibiru as a Brown Dwarf or something like that. There
      > is a decided difference between an electromagnetic pole flip, which I
      > believe is underway now, and a geophysical as in T2. I tried to speak with
      > him about it, that this is a cyclic issue of chaos-cosmos. There's no
      > talking to him. He goes deaf just like the people he calls dissonant. Back
      > to the other. What's its potential as an impact event?
      >
      > Uh, not so fast Dan. That's what I mean by being dishonest... "I tried to
      > speak with him about it" isn't exactly correct. In the hallway at the
      > Hilton
      > you said at one point, just long enough for Marci to interrupt and call us
      > back in before I could respond, "you've got to give up on this Planet X
      > thing..." Yes, I remember clearly NOT brushing that conversation aside.
      > The one time you volunteered the subject in a manner which would have
      > exhibited respect for a whole side of the conversation you never heard,
      > and
      > it's blown by the usual reining in that always seems to occur at the wrong
      > moments.
      >
      > Ann wrote:
      > A: I spoke with J and he said it wasn't more important than us getting the
      > XXXXXXXXXX on board so you could cut the XXXXXXX off at the knees!
      >
      > Cut WHO off at the knees? My, such humility and love for humanity!
      >
      > Dan wrote:
      > D: Well, I will agree that we have had problems with Dxx broadcasting
      > whatever he got his hands on, when it served his purposes, but these
      > issues
      > are apples and oranges to me.
      >
      > Did we just read an admission that Dan, apparently in cahoots with Marci,
      > Ann, and Dadmiral, was directing 'info' to me? I don't know whether to
      > laugh
      > out loud, snicker, yell or wink!
      > _________________
      > Address to send information helping expose the Coverup:
      > Dondep or Dagwood
      > 2433 E. Tropicana Ave
      > #420
      > Las Vegas, NV 89121
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic