Saturday, October 03, 2015

Dead Bug

"...hers is a harrowing tale, snake pit stuff... fighting back against a host of capering misogynist psychopaths running amuck and dangling her over the slimy lip of insanity's chasm for salacious sport and sick thrills!"

UFOs And Racism...

Major Hector Quintanilla 

UFOs And Racism...
by Alfred Lehmberg

I'm going to suggest something likely uncomfortable.  It's what I do, I know, but bear with me.

I've ever meant no offense. I'm otherwise loath to offend polite sensibilities (sincerely!) but I don't think that Major Hector Quintanilla, a past Blue Book commander, is being considered at this time through the proper filter of the times in which he lived. A proper more realistic filter puts a different spin on the validity of Quintanilla's testimony as regards the existence of UFOs, his criticism of Hynek, and his contribution to the history of ufology.

The times to which I refer were very heavily influenced by social, overt, and institutional racism. Toxic fruit borne of this racism heralded significantly unequal professional playing fields and a speciously unfair cultural advantage for some members in the culture over others. 

By way of example, I once had a very white, blue-eyed Italian American and West Point second lieutenant tell me in the late seventies, during a helicopter live fire exercise at an aerial gunnery range in Germany, that he'd been mentored against expecting to be a General officer in the Armed Forces simply because his name ended in a VOWEL. This officer was even of some positive notoriety: he was feted as having kicked a winning field goal in an Army/Navy grudge game #78.  One would have thought that that might get him a star, but his hopes were not high.

Every year that one goes back in the history of the American Armed Forces, one discovers a further retreat from the (comparative) egalitarian reality enjoyed in it today. This is forgetting that the Armed Forces lead the way to social reform (for pragmatic reasons... the military has to work, so sometimes "fairness" becomes required even where it's begrudged!). A graduate of the Defense Race Relations Institute in 1972, this writer was a proud part of that reform, despite the pragmatism... but I digress...

Speaking with some experience in the matter I'd suggest that a Latin (Mexican?) American of any stripe—and wearing any uniform—in the late 50's and early sixties of American society, was seen as a second class service member by the contrived mainstream AND the branch of service in which he proudly served.  Such was indubitably so and requires no citation. 

This is, in no way, to denigrate the performance, capability, and intelligence of Lt. Colonel Quintanilla, quite the contrary. That an individual of color operating in a "white capacity" of that time had to put out 150 percent of effort to maintain 75 percent of the consideration of that capacity, is small hyperbole!

An officer of color had to be more steadfast than steadfast. He—exclusively, there were no women, essentially—had to be more efficient than merely efficient. An officer of color could be too intelligent and innovative and become an embarrassment to inferior "superior" officers.  That officer of color alluded to had to be more loyal than staunchly loyal... and therein is found the root of his ironic invalidity as a ufological witness for the prosecution.

Heading up the latter Project Blue Book was not a choice assignment, by any means. It was a dead end at best—an opportunity where one had every occasion to tick off the brassy principals. At worst? The assignment to Bluebook was likely perceived as career death...

Quintanilla would not have volunteered for Blue Book—it would have been thrust upon him after a string of white officers "more capable" had found some way to weasel out. Quintanilla would have had no such weasel room. 

With his career at stake from the beginning because of his ethnicity, he would follow his orders with a smile on his face and a resolute chin set. He would also try diligently to adhere to the party line. Quintanilla knew which way the wind blew. That he was where he was, at all, is stark evidence of that.

At the time, UFOs were evolving into a very "politically incorrect" line of inquiry. The mode of official investigation had become slapdash and biased on the side of the resolute negativists prosecuting a narrowly focused program for "reasonable" ufological denial.  It was up to Quintanilla to prove that UFOs were a non issue that did not warrant further "costly investigation." 

It fell to Quintanilla to get the fledgling Air Force out of the uncomfortable business of UFOs.  What a monkey on any man's back, more so for a man of color... for which a success was required of this no-win Herculean task to survive with honor.

Privy to a bit more of the big picture than the rank and file citizen of the time and on direction of his suspiciously motivated superiors, Quintanilla would have prosecuted that distorted picture with rare diligence if he wanted to keep a position and rank so meaningful to him. He might swallow pride and he might even compromise ethical principles, but he would be able at the same time to rationalize his contribution as the performance of his assigned and implied duty, which it assuredly was. Quintanilla is the innocent in all of this—a man under inordinate pressure—and at the cruel whim of his white ticket-puncher.

I've seen Quintanilla on black and white TV since I was a kid, testifying negatively on the subject of UFOs, and I always get the impression that he is stonewalling, effectively and believably, with some uneasy knowledge of the greater reality, but stonewalling none the less. Additionally, even as a kid growing up in a family not overtly racist, I'd idly wondered why they had given such an "important" position to a 'Mexican'... ashamed to say, but I digress.

Quintanilla did not seem comfortable, at any rate, calling the suspected black cat, white... but he was just the man for the job. Few worked harder than Quintanilla did to achieve what he had achieved as a career officer. I imagine that he was not going to let something he didn't have the time or inclination to entirely believe himself (alien space invaders, indeed!) torpedo his hopes and dreams and the hopes and dreams of his entire family, extended and otherwise! He would testify the same to the end of his life* from embarrassed inertia or perhaps from a sense of historical consistency to facilitate the "National Security..."

No, before one takes Lt. Colonel Quintanilla's negative testimony to the contributory level of Ruppelt, Hynek, and Vallee—or even use Quintanilla to discredit the reputations of those three—one must filter him through those times when men of color had to provide ample and inordinate demonstration that they were predictable and dependable company men, squared, or even cubed, to revisit that earlier small hyperbole above. One must also add to validity's equation how loath Quintanilla would understandably be to give up hard won gains for an ethereal and intangible no-win like UFOs.

At the end of my considered filtering and the reasonable addition of the "psychological baggage" imposed by a society of bigots that Quintanilla must have carried like Job, one might begin to conclude that Quintanilla's contribution to the "reasonable" dismissal of ufology had axes to grind difficult to talk about, consider, and finally accept. The institutional racism and bigotry that Quintanilla undoubtedly experienced as an Air Force officer is enough to mask his feelings, cloud his judgment, and make his testimony less than reliable, this writer offers. 

Doing his duty, between the rock and the invariable hard place men of color were more subject to then, Hector Quintanilla was just another unrecognized and unappreciated victim of bigotry and racism that continues in a form not all that reduced from what it was then, today. He was a, I think reluctant, transmitter of mainstream propaganda, to wit: "We are, too, Alone..."

Col. Robert Friend

It is interesting to note that another man of color, then Major Robert Friend—now a Colonel and the oldest surviving member of the famed Tuskegee Airmen—was put in charge of Blue Book in 1958, but shunted out, perhaps, when he took UFOs too seriously for the powers that be and inquiry was supplanted by the classic debunkery... I digress.

...So Quintanilla's testimony, in the unappreciated aggregate, may be questionable for reasons no one has ever considered before. He was not going to risk his career on a horse that was to be shot before it left the starting gate. It made much more sense to follow the lead of conflicted superiors, do his duty (even protect the National security), but parrot the accepted party line and qualify the usual propaganda he did not seem all that comfortable professing on black and white (but still vastly white) TV.

A conclusion that might be drawn: company men and "ringers," overshadowing those hanging on by fingernails to hard won careers, were employed to control the rank and file citizenry employing propaganda mechanisms—increasingly duplicitous and disingenuous—to klasskurtxian corporate ends. It seems more than merely conceivable that such might be so.

*Also interesting to note is that staunch debunker Quintanilla had published after his death thoughts to the effect that he'd believed all along in the existentiality of UFOs and that they were deserving of all study and investigation.  What is Truth?  It is true enough?  

Read on.

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Robert Nichol's StarDreams

Robert Nichol's 
by Alfred Lehmberg

What about the fakes?

Isn't it true that these strange constructions in our cereal crops are, and entirely, of human crafting? 

Don't they have to be entirely of human construction for the skeptic's position to have any validity at all? Just ONE genuine circle, consider, and the game a'foot is altogether new! Yet, impossible and not happening, some maintain.

...Graciously admitted!  Crop Circles get faked!  Conceded  [eyeroll]. 

Though, when those "fakes" occur... don't we, generally, know who the fakers are? Don't THEY tell us who they are? Don't they strut and crow...  preen, smirk and patronize?

...Aren't they stealthy people haters the likes of "Doug" and "Dave," even as these self-aggrandizing psychopaths die off and evolve, change their names with the years, upgrade their techniques over time, and justify or attempt to legitimize their crass sociopathy... as art? Could it be that these offensive fakers are behind all the circles? Builders of all the constructions? Composers of all these captivating glyphs?


Then how is it, as Robert Nichol informs in his compellingly sincere film documentary StarDreams, that these alleged "hoaxers" always finish what they start? Where are the failed attempts? Where do they practice their competency and completeness of vision, this exponential magnitude of astonishing endeavor... this meticulous perfection of flawlessly breathtaking execution and timing? ...Finally, where are the "blunders" in these huge constructions, extant, errors otherwise abundantly found in other human executions of highly complicated tasks from rocket science to brain surgery?

Why are the "greater" circles never duplicated in a time alloted? Why don't we see a balanced explanation for complex circle construction making it into the "National Geographic" or a Postmodern Art periodical. Spin me a "Catherine's Wheel", again—'Doug'! Stomp out an additional "Adams Grave," for me—'Dave'.

Speaking of art and artists, where is this extremely improbable army of gifted performers, performers "without egos"—astoundingly selfless and undeniably talented men and women—anyway?

Flatly, these uncharacteristically secretive persons are REQUIRED to execute—without the smallest flaw, remember!—the delicate artistic balances of line and curve, light and shadow... amidst other conventions of accomplished artistry ( include knowledge regarding the sacred or eternal geometrical... ...the strict adherence to the enlightened measure—meanings within meaningsor an educated unity in utility that is an artistic "golden mean"...), and this over a HUGE area on an entirely unique cereal canvas in a limited amount of time! A perishable message... that one can eat!  ...And what if that is not metaphor, reader... I digress.

These "artists" ARE the real deal, friends and neighbors ...And we haven't a clue who they really are!  No.  We're too well rewarded by society for not wanting to find out, for not being brave, and for not seeking out those ephemeral clues.  We're punished effectively for obstinately seeking them, too... ...served painful irony in the form of reward for negative, back-stepping, and cowardly behavior ignoring UFOs in existential "felt presence"  and punishment for the positive forward-looking pursuit of same...  ...that's tragedy

Verily, WHO hoaxes roughly tens of tens of quality circles a year, world-wide, for the last ten years? Who operates with no professional "recognition," no lucrative "pay-off"—no "reward" of any kind?  Who?

Clearly, few to none. Those who do are known to us, ply their trade for money, and even had their own trendy flash-fronted websites. 

No... it becomes obvious as one scratches the surface of this thing that these people are NOT the whole show. Something's hidden behind the official cultural tarp that is our corrupt and duplicitous mainstream... one just knows they're not getting it all or any efficacious portion of it either. 

On the subject of "who are these anonymous hoaxers," let's beat this dead horse a little; artists produce their work to be associated with it, to be defined by it, to be enriched by it... materially AND intellectually. I'm an artist of small note and legitimate award and I feel that's a fair statement. 

We won't ordinarily BE the artistic Samaritan (rare creature, THAT!) who disappears from the scene of the artistic "accident" before they can be celebrated and feted by admiring fellow humans. An artist signs his work, boyo! It's been that way since the renaissance from the middle ages, reader, and even before that the interested knew who their artists were.

...And those people of the renaissance were baffled by (officially intimidated by) CropCircles then too, remember. CropCircles have long legs in history.

Let's cut to the chase. Most circles could be FAKE, respected reader. But MANY are not, I suspect! Nichols suggests in "StarDreams" that this should, at least, give the reader pause... even if it does NOT fuel an ongoing epiphany of boundless optimism for the reader... like it does for ~this~ writer as alluded to before in previous essays on this subject.


This writer wept with joy during the first of what has been (and will continue to be) many viewings of Robert Nichol's documentary.  I won't apologise, what can be taken for genuine sincerity will move me to a state of profound appreciation.  They are cathartic and appreciating tears, astonished and inspired tears... thankful and enlightened tears. They are tears that elevate, reassure, and validate. They are tears that cement conviction, legitimize confidence, and lubricate assurance, too. 

...But assurance for, confidence about, and conviction with regard to... what?

Ok... a few of the high points.

Resolved: That reality is more fully featured and abundant than we are otherwise manipulated to believe by our duplicitous culture?  Perceive the relationship between those two words. 

Resolved: That we are not now, have ever been, or will ever be alone in the unending light and darkness that is the expanding and changing universe.  

Resolved: That 'existence' is not so much a "competition to survive" as it is a "cooperation to understand."  

Resolved: That we—you and I!—are the entire universe trying to comprehend itself.  

Finally, resolved: that it is the individual understanding ...the understanding individual, who is truly key?

You matter, reader, forgetting for a moment that I do, too.  You, reader, are the person that is reached out to with these crop glyphs, perhaps.  That's the message of "StarDreams". The individual is key... my favorite theme of many years.  Never "top down," ever "bottom up."

It's all about people, individual persons, Nichol implies... persons who can open their minds and hearts to an immensity of creative purpose, a plethora of quality potentials, and an infinity of efficacious intellectual productivity!  It is no more simply stated than that.

It's all about people willing to break free, at last, of the attitude we have collectively regarding an aggregate Earth we presently abuse like an unvalued rental property... and return to it the respect the truly intelligent would give any living creature!  Any other behavior lacks intelligence. 

We would treat the aggregate Earth—you and I and everything else 'on', 'in', 'about' or 'of' this Earth!—as we ourselves would be efficaciously treated.  ...That sounds familiar... 

For this, you and I and our kid's kid's, kids [>] would inherit the stars!  What do we lose?  Nothing.  What do we gain?  Everything. That's not the end of conviction, confidence, and assurance by any stretch!  That is its beginning!

Nichol's documentary is filled with individual persons, none of them seeming to scramble for individual recognition regarding the phenomenon, but standing out like individually shining stars, none the less, for their lack of apparent desire to do so! It is easy to have "regard" for these people—these individuals.   See how that works?

Watchers can even feel they might bask in the rich warm golden glow of the sincerity and honesty these folks seem effused with and which frankly exudes from the screen.  We are reassured by their integrity and frankness and openness and truthfulness... 

See, if they're lying?  That's on them.  The reader remains an innocent seeker, one willing to pierce the veil of existentiality to the "higher math" beyond.  ...To grow as a species and secure a greatness that could be had with the Kingdom  truly here at hand if we but wished it so.

These are serious people, intelligent and educated people... scientists, philosophers, researchers, and persons without a lot of formal education. I found myself loving all these persons in the absolute best and most efficacious sense of that word. ...And these persons love, without doubt and beyond question, those "artists" who anonymously compose the strange glyphs on a parchment that we can EAT. Think about that.  What does one make of that?  One can make much is this writer's intuition.

Is there analogy there? I think Mr. Nichols thinks so. I think so, too.

Who are these anonymous teams of selfless and talented artists manufacturing these compelling images? Who captivates our collective human intelligence so universally and further compels, at the same time, such intelligent love?  Agape, the high-test grade.

Well—they are artists, likely, NOT beholden to human agency, institution, government, culture or religion. 

They are, likely, NOT artists who celebrate the soulless corporate while they venerate the cloistered celibate! 

They are likely NOT artists who pander to duplicitous media while they sell their souls to officious and psychopathic sponsors. 

They are likely NOT artists who would dupe and disrespect you like they were somehow doing you a favor. They are likely NOT "artists" we would... know, sadly.

...It's ironic that they are likely artists we have always known, just forgotten, I'd bet...

...Be that as it may, their works are charming letters thoughtfully composed, magically engineered, beautifully rendered, and then "slid under the doors" of our consciousness while we're not looking... by some one or some thing who would attempt a communication of some type... one so wholly non-threatening and perhaps as nourishing to us as the grain that the artists compose in, on levels, quite simply, that we are incapable of appreciating, as yet. 

I'm gratified they take the time... and further gratified that Robert Nichol has produced something about this ...evolving reality... enduring, informational, and prescient... that I'm moved to joyful tears. Thank you, sir.

The film can be viewed here.  See this film.

...One more illustrative point before I go. Earlier, I wrote that William Gazecki produced an equally fine documentary about Crop Circles (I was as excited about!) called "Quest for Truth", and I provided, for it, a similar glowing review.

The point: On the radio, once, I heard Robert Nichol interviewed and pointedly asked a question comparing his film with Gazecki's. I wondered if Nichol would ruffle his feathers, even if only a little bit, that his was the "better film." That didn't happen.

Rather, he embraced Gazecki's film as his own, graciously making indication that both films were short chapters in the same compelling non-fiction... the same story that needed to be told. He implied that Gazecki's more pragmatic approach complemented the more metaphysical approach Nichol employed in his film and that the films, taken together, made for a more inclusive accounting of the more complete story... a stepping stone to even MORE inclusive chapters...

No reflexive competition here, good reader. Nichol's reflex, his astonishingly TELLING reflex, was for reflecting cooperation. Is that what the circles do to you? If so, I'll have more of that, thank you. 

...See the sedition?  I digress.

I've seen both films numerous times, and I can attest that the documentaries complement one another, magnificently. Do not tell yourself that because you have seen one film that you have seen the other. That would be unfortunate and inaccurate. Seriously, I think it would be synergistic if these gentlemen could get together, somehow, and provide both films in a boxed set or package. The films are extremely powerful individually, but together they are, I think, greater than the sum of their parts. See these films and begin to "understand."

That's enough—read on!

Tuesday, September 29, 2015

A Recited Prosery

A recited prosery for your amusement...

Monday, September 28, 2015

You Can't Call Them "Crap-Circles"

You Can't Call Them 
"Crap-Circles" Anymore

By Alfred Lehmberg

It is a larger world than we know. Much grander and more expansive than we even—could—know, it is composed of times, spaces, and dimensions inadequately known and wholly unknown. Conclusively, everything we know is very likely wrong or we're well served believing that it may be.

Further, these are times, spaces, and dimensions well beyond chaffing limits reflexively and too fearfully self-imposed... ...or suspiciously imposed upon us! All barriers to fear and dread can be rent asunder.  That's a good thing.  We find we ever had nothing but the fear to fear! 

Still, in this larger reality swim the prerogatives, imperatives, and unfathomed purposes of gargantuan cosmic beings, swift on any level and all levels of that measure. Presently?

We are but a mote in some distracted God's hoary eye.  We barely but exist.  That's enough as it turns out!

Be not to disheartened, discouraged or otherwise depressed good reader!  Quite the contrary, Rejoice!

Be invigorated, energized, and innervated sir and madam, be electrified with excitement concerning not a rebirth... but a new birth of human intelligence, cognitive ability, and our elevated place in an impending LARGER reality slowly (quickly?) resolving as we speak!

A new renaissance reveals itself if the reader would allow, one that will not take five hundred years to individually actualize for the masses like the last one, but will happen soon, very likely, in a matter of days, weeks, or months (for the masses!) if it does not occur more swiftly in hours, minutes or seconds!  Such seems so.

This is what Academy Award nominated director William Gazecki succeeds in doing with his landmark documentary produced by Suzanne Taylor, "Crop Circles—Quest for Truth."  He delivers even the skeptical observer, dazzlingly, to the threshold of that new renaissance and informatively, intelligently... comprehensively... educates the viewer with obvious regard to a very measured, painstakingly recorded, photographed and otherwise passionately studied... paranormal series of *cereal* events!
This ain't your normal bowl of Special K, indulgent reader.  Put Froot Loops and Frankenberries out of your mind.

In other words, CropCircles are real, in the aggregate, cutting to the chase, and they are no where near as dismissible as a corrupted mainstream would have its rank and file reflexively believe.  Not by a long shot.

Moreover, hoaxed circles are dismissed as beneath contempt, concern, and favorable consideration by Gazecki (and this writer!). Of course there are "hoaxed circles," he will readily admit! ...But that's not the issue, he informs, and no time is wasted in the film on its discussion save a few seconds in, pertinent, passing. Where just one formation is not a hoax, is the genuine article, all the hoaxed circles are invalidated and the question becomes begged why the hoaxed circles are constructed at all. 

Why indeed?

Besides, one can go anywhere else, actually, and be flam-boozled with knee-jerk dismissals on laughed at crAp-circles from both sides of the ufological isle. Ufologist Dr. Kevin Randle and CSI's late if representative Dr. Klass, both card carrying "crAp-circle" advocates, spring readily to mind.

But as Gazecki explains in a director's interview on the DVD (and briefly in the film), how is it that these *hoaxers* "always finish what they start", and where do they "practice" this meticulous perfection of execution?  Where are the blunders otherwise found in any other human execution of an extremely complicated task?

Where? No! Tell me WHERE... is this army of genius artists "without egos" (astonishingly selfless and incontestably talented men and women)?

They are REQUIRED to flawlessly execute delicate artistic balances of line and curve, light and shadow, and other rules of artistry (to include the sacred geometrical or the adherence to the natural measure of the artistic golden mean encompassing squared circles and the lot)? Verily, who hoaxes hundreds of quality circles a year, world-wide, for decades? Who operates with no recognition, no pay-off, or reward? Who? Clearly, few to none. Not enough to make all these CropCircles—safe to say.

Most circles may be fake. But MANY are perhaps not!  Seriously, says Gazecki. That should, at least, give one pause... even if it does not fuel continuous epiphany as it does with this writer.

Moving on, what's so convincing about Gazecki's documentary is the completeness of its production package.  If the watcher wants "Science", it is there. It the watcher wants "History", it is there, too. If the watcher wants the very experience of wandering around in a new circle with the principal "Croppies" perceiving the same kind fresh excitement and energy that the principal researchers felt... they can have it by the bionic boxcar!

Science is reflected in the measurement of these enigmatic circles and science determines that the degree of the circle's complexity handily obliterates the tedious argument that any amount of erstwhile "Doug and Daves" halfwits would be stomping them out drunkenly with a string and a board! Plant studies and soil analysis by Doctor W.C. Levengood, among other competent scientists, indicates that the energy creating crop circles has seemingly magical growing properties that are most profound. 

Node length studies demonstrates an unknown energy is used (in some cases) that unevenly expands the stalk-sides of the crop to lay them down, evenly expands them to keep them standing, or blows out the effected "node" altogether like an exploding aerosol can! Other studies find strange magnetic properties and artifacts in the soil and they detect a linear effect of these anomalous energies and artifacts that tapers off from the center of the circle... but still inexplicably manifests the effect all the way out to control plants that are not even in the construction. The scope of these effects and the complexity of the energies producing them is HUGE, Gazecki demonstrates.

Other mysterious crop circle effects are determined to have measurable linear distributions. Indeed, as Gazecki makes abundantly clear, dozens of quality scientific investigations have been made, are not conclusive, and are ongoing, still.  Serious science comes up significantly short.

History is accounted for in the filmed testimony of the farmers involved, men and women who make every indication that the phenomenon has been going on with them and their neighbors since they were children and long before that. Lettered historians interviewed point to old wood cuts and prints from the fifteenth century that talks about fairy rings and devil's circles thought (to this day actually!) to be playgrounds or meeting places of demons and witches. Earlier, before the common era (BCE), stone circles and mounds were conjectured to have perhaps been laid out on suddenly appearing crop circles in an effort to keep the power of the circle under them or to commemorate them in these times gone passed. 

Indeed, the viewer gets a very clear picture of the historical evolution of the entire phenomenon as Gazecki's film unfolds.

As a cinematic effort the film was a masterpiece of tight storytelling and stunning photography. I can understand, completely, why George Noory was virtually jumping up and down about it on his program—Gazecki had it all in his film! Science, philosophy, and metaphysics meet precipitously in cooperative meta-cognitions the viewer is present for! Many times I felt like I was down in the fields, myself, with the crop-circle principals, seeing what they saw and feeling what they were feeling! To say the film was beautifully photographed is a massive understatement! 

The play between the score and the visuals was nothing short of breathtaking... nothing short of ongoing spiritual epiphany! One could almost smell the rape seed oil as an early morning sun glittered through crop stalks still standing. One could almost see the dust they were kicking up with their own feet, or feel the chill an English autumn dawn! In Gazecki's film the individual is more participant than passive watcher.

Flatly and frankly—the film was just a complete enchantment!

I saw the film on low res television DVD and all the previously described effects were plain there. I can only imagine what the feature looks like on the wall to wall silver screen of a real theatre. I'm sure that it would be a whole new experience, an experience incompletely described in this article, to be sure. 

The reader must campaign to see the film herself and demand that it comes to her town cineplex, even. See how this can be done (or even purchase an inexpensive copy DVD of the reader's own to see again and again!) at Mr. Gazecki's web site found at Truly—a few bucks well spent. ...A small price to pay to be abundantly informed on one of the most long running, consciousness changing, wholly mysterious, and totally baffling paranormal occurrences of our time.

Finishing up—this review of Mr. Gazecki's effort barely scratches the surface of what is in store for the viewer as they take in this film. The experience is as satisfying as a dinner feast, full of interviews with competent, committed and dedicated men and women who are educated, intelligent, aware, open-minded—"with it", in short (in every sense of the expression!), so the film can be taken as seriously as it was meant to be.

In all candor, one can, and should, take this film very seriously. There is no hyperbole or histrionics found in an ardent contention that watching this film now will go a long way towards preparing the viewer for the larger reality (mentioned at the start of this review) coming, inexorably, later. 

Michael Glickman, author and lecturer—and who this writer wants to be when he grows up—opines at the close of the film, as it pertains to the certainty of a coming new reality, that we are "...on the... edge of it." Along with that thoroughly convinced assertion he communicates a genuine optimism with regard to it that this writer echoes readily.

Lastly? They can't call them "crap-circles" any more. William Gazecki puts that nonsense to rest. Without reservation, "CropCircles—Quest for truth" just may be one of the most significant pieces of documentary film work this writer has ever seen. I'm confident the reader will think so, too! 

Read on!

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Quinn's MJ-12


Of Walking Ironies
by Alfred Lehmberg

A decade ago, back when The History Channel still had a shred of informational relevance, documentary filmmaker Kathleen Quinn provided a singular effort regarding the "MJ-12" affair... don't groan.  I'd only have to cut you further and deeper.

Reasonable logic given UFOs as an existential reality plainly provides for a select group of top persons representing corporate and government interests in their studying regard, cut and print. Quinn's is a remarkable program.

"Conspiracy"-Majestic Twelve: The UFO Cover-up...

Sincerely, this writer detected an even-handedness and balance rarely seen on television about ufological issues.  The performance of the characters in this outre morality play decide the issue conclusively.  Logic, a performance record, the historical audit trail and a fighting platoon of other categories iterated in the preceding confirms the issue for a reasonable person without regard to an obvious cant the reader finds in the remainder of this essay.  This writer is not ashamed.

Consider, waddling and quacking does not always mean "duck" even if that's the first place one's expected to look. There's a host of web-footed water fowl from swans to Call ducks and a plethora of duck-like vocalizations can issue from them.  See, Occam—even if grudgingly—allowed that it might be necessary to complicate a considered hypothesis.  His admonition was not to do it without need. My philosophical antithesis stops cold at ducks without regard to evidence calling out for that same complication.

I won't be getting into the details of Quinn's excellent doc other than to say that Dr. [immaterial] Joe Nickell, bless his corn-fed traditionalistic's coal-black contrarian heart, is credited with putting a true face on the total irrationality—check skeptibunky accuracy here—that is the whole of CSI's "Klasskurtxian" *shtick*... pardon the coined word. It's meaning can be drawn, easily, from its context in the forthcoming discussion.

...So, in a quick sidebar, let me just cut to the chase!  Metaphorically, "klasskurtxianism" describes an ideologically canted and authoritarian intellectual group of stormtroopers from the biased Cartesian realms of jealous CSIcopia.  They prosecute a default and flattening imposition of a scientistic church every bit as fundamentalist (with regard to degrading a feeling humanity truth seeking the holistic efficacious) as a reductionist scientistic Taliban! Thank you, Doctor Rudiak!

There is more to existence than speed, rate, and electrical charge.  Reality is more than number and measure.  Overweening Aristotle is trumped decidedly by a more inclusive Plato...

I digress...

Back at the ranch, "Ufologists are, at best, irresponsible," implies an *earnest* Dr. [immaterial] Joe Nickell towards the end of the hour long program. Stanton Friedman is "derelict." Richard Dolan is "reckless."  The late Richard Hall is an "elder scoundrel" from an even deeper strata of irresponsibility. Jerry Clark lacks accountability. So do a lot of men and women, it would then seem, seriously investigating the single most important eventuality of our time.  Not, "we are not alone."  More, "how can we be remotely alone?"

Still, the preceding "radical seditionists" are not "dependable" persons, Nickell feels. They are without *responsibility*. They have no *liability*... Stop!

Nickell's (et al) stuffily unfounded pontifications are so much prolapsed and expulsive nonsense... steaming monkey droppings from high up in the privileged canopy—a dissembling reductionism meant to buttress convenient social barriers to an inconvenient truth. Get to cover!

See, It's Nickell who is irresponsible.  It's Nickell who is derelict.  It's Nickell who is reckless.
It's Nickell who is the scoundrel.  It's Nickell who lacks all accountability! Batting a thousand, It's Nickell who is undependable, bereft of responsibility, and who actually lacks all liability!  Dr. Nickell's a walking irony.

Consider the preceding paragraph an essay map with all points well cited.  Dare me to write the essay.

Moreover, our [immaterial] doctor implores that, "the public should be outraged"!  Not because critical information is withheld from interested individuals for spurious and manipulative reasons by an autocratic and authoritarian elite!  No. ...But that Ufologists, those radical funsters and seditious gamesters, Nickell implies, actually threaten America's culture and society by making, "a lot of [us] distrust [our] Government" and by "causing valid suspicions" with regard to currently worshipped "historical figures" undeserving of this worship... in the extremis!  An "overweening privilege" is the inexorable fate of that removing itself from earnest public scrutiny and oversight.

...And there we have the dying CSIcopian philosophy completely contained in its moldy nutshell of a reproductionist tediousness wholly missing the ironic mark with regard to enlightenment, elevation, and inspiration or at least the aspiration to these things for reasonable human beings.  The CSI, flatly, is ironically opposed to Human Beings working together to more efficaciously avail themselves of the Universe they were created into!  For such as these reductionism becomes the profitable and default regressive-ism.

To wit, their "Prime Directive": At all costs to common sense and efficacious sensibility, maintain the status quo. ...End of line.

That's it. That's all they've got. Everything else is stentorian proclamation, stretched assumption, a blithe indifference to the remotest investigation, and the always popular self-interested and insentient personal axe grinding of a "promethean press."

Pushing 70, a good citizen taxpayer, combat veteran, and educated patriot... I find it repugnant to the extreme that *Governments* can not earn distrust, or that *historical figures* are beyond the suspicions they themselves provoked! ...Even our own governments and historical figures... Especially our own governments and historical figures!

That's not the America I served in an honorable military career. That's not the America I described to my immigrant wife and only son! That's not the America I internalized in the freaking Cub Scouts, boys and girls!

Some figures of history have more than earned our suspicion, and governments, abundantly, our distrust, then AND now!  If that is not obvious in the extreme... than you're just not keeping up with current events... no, you're more likely chewing window sills lathered in wet lead paint, or you sense the truth and choose to turn away...

...Misleading, mislead, or mentally ill... "M" cubed. Sound familiar?  Feel it deviate your septums, skeptibunky spawn, CSIcopian caperers, and "klasskurtxian" sycophants!

Forget for a moment that it is just that recognition of a provoked *mistrust*, and the ancillary *suspicions* that justifiably arise—the ill will generated—which provide for that enlightening reexamination, revision, or more realistic research leading to an evolving human condition, at all! Understand, rather, that the doctor [immaterial] Joe Nickell exposes the CFInistic or CSIcopian "prime directive" in a few chosen words that won't respect individual sensibility and insensibly supports a status quo continuing only to discredit and devalue itself as it shortchanges you, reader, on a plethora of levels.

"Mistrust of government is dangerous and without support". I paraphrase the [immaterial] doctor. "Suspicions regarding the respected are dangerous and unsubstantiated." Is it any wonder which side of the sciento-fascist bullhorn our Dr. [immaterial] Nickell prefers to be?

Finally, there is this.  That ETH UFOs are most certainly extant is indicated in a vast evidentiary trove covering seven compelling categories and satisfying the prerequisites of both a sneering Fermi and a disingenuous Drake.*  So, presuming the truth of the matter regarding ET it is reasonable to believe that a panel of "top men" would be assembled, would be given a code name, and these men would regard, in some fashion, the most startling events of our time.

This is an effort hidden, of course, in plain sight by employing feints and distortions, official hoaxes and subterfuges, and red herrings or plausible deniabilities touted by the disingenuous and immaterially lettered...and iterated by Stanton Friedman, noy unlike our own [immaterial] Papa Joe. It remains still reasonable that such a group would exist and what else would they have to talk about during the biggest flap in UFO history, 1952's Summer Of Saucers?  They might even advise the President to shoot one of these UFOs down... but that's another story.

No. Weigh the pros and cons as they were ladled out in Quinn's surprisingly credible and balanced treatment of the mystery surrounding the controversial MJ-12 documents above to see for yourself which is more nourishing.  Mistrust of government is justified, and well justified since 2004.

Suspicion with regard to historical figures is not without support. Friedman, Dolan, and Rodeghier were just more convincing, less presumptive, and more authoritative than Kurtz, Klass, or Nickell, who were less than authoritative, entirely assumptive, and profoundly less convincing. The former were credible while the latter were "klasskurtxian," to use that derisive word one more time.

Verily, and in a manner similar to Dan Rather's "Bush Memo" imbroglio, where he reported the truth based on a lie, a trap the neo-cons laid for him... ...even if the MJ-12 documents are fakes, and some of them are as Friedman takes pains to point out... they're the likely truth, I'm betting. MJ-12 is a reality. Suspicion is validated. Mistrust is appropriate.

Together, they are the true skeptic's very soul... and an apparent klasskurtxian antithesis.

*Dr.  Drake shows ET is existential.  Dr Fermi said that if ET was existential humanity would know it.  He then smirked, "where are they"?  I offer that, given the reportage of credible men and women and seven compelling categories of evidence ET does seem to be known, after all, and well.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

Alien Tunes

Alien Tunes
A snippet of which is the opener to Bill and Nancy Birnes Future Theater !

Wednesday, September 16, 2015

Faux Mainstreams... And UFOs

Faux Mainstreams... 
And UFOs
By Alfred Lehmberg

I resent Sarah Palin for many things across many categories regarding her hypocrisy, her insentient privilege, her toxic personal "faith" and her egregious politics.  Her co-opting the word "lame-stream" to suit her mendacious proclivities is a fecal icing on her disassembling cake.

Better applications for that coined word abound and cry out for its use but it must fall into dis-use once it fell from the scowling maw of the Sarah-cuda, a useful teabagger uber-zombie in a coiffed human suit.

To quote Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."  I digress...

Back on the subject of a disingenuous mainstream (lamestream would have been perfect), here are some quotes that the "mainstream" has had plenty of time to be forthcoming about.  All are perfect opportunities for the "mainstream" to actually be a "mainstream"—a reflection of a golden mean (?), the core of rationality and logic (?), and a steady (trustworthy) social foundation for far too many people on much too small a world:

  • The unidentified craft appeared to take efficient controlled evasive action.FBI Memo, describing chase of UFO over the North Sea, 1947.
  • Before we could do any more, the Army, after conferring with [U.S.] officials, ordered the investigation stopped.Dr. Paul Santorini, on UFOs over Greece in 1946.
  • The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted ... lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled ...General Nathan Twining, Head of Air Material Command (AMC), 1947.
  • I was called one afternoon [in 1948] to come to the Oval Office - the President wanted to see me.... I was directed to report quarterly to the President after consulting with Central Intelligence people, as to whether or not any UFO incidents received by them could be considered as having any strategic threatening implications ....General Robert B. Landry, Air Force Aide to President Harry S. Truman.
  • From their questions, I could tell they had a good idea of what the saucers are. One officer admitted they did, but he wouldn't say any more.Commercial pilot, after questioning by intelligence officer, 1950.
  • Army intelligence has recently said that the matter of 'Unidentified Aircraft' or 'Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,' otherwise known as 'Flying Discs,' 'Flying Saucers,' and 'Balls of Fire,' is considered top secret by intelligence officers of both the Army and the Air Forces.1949 FBI memo on UFOs.
  • Information is desired if this was some new or experimental aircraft or for any explanation whatsoever.1949 CIA memo.
  • [Object] described as flat on top and bottom and appearing from a front view to have round edges and slightly beveled ... No vapor trails or exhaust or visible means of propulsion. Described as traveling at tremendous speed.... Pilot considered by associates to be highly reliable, of mature judgment and a creditable observer.Air Force intelligence report, following UFO sighting by combat pilot, 1951.
  • ...some propulsion method not in the physics books.Scientist who witnessed a UFO in 1952.
  • For six hours ... there were at least ten unidentifiable objects moving above Washington. They were not ordinary aircraft.Senior Air Traffic Controller for the CAA, Harry G. Barnes, 1952.
  • Based on my experience in fighter tactics, it is my opinion that the object was controlled by something having visual contact with us. The power and acceleration were beyond the capability of any known U.S. aircraft.F-94 pilot, after encountering a UFO, 1952.
  • In view of the wide interest within the Agency ... outside knowledge of Agency interest in Flying Saucers carries the risk of making the problem even more serious in the public mind than it already is.CIA memo, 1952
  • It was silvery in color, had a bun-shaped top, a flange like two saucers in the middle and a bun underneath, and could not have been far off because it overlapped my windscreen!RAF fighter pilot, 1954.
  • Maximum security exists concerning the subject of UFOs.CIA Director Allen Dulles, 1955.
  • Some military officials are seriously considering the possibility of interplanetary ships.FBI memo on UFOs, 1952.
  • Pilot of helicopters wished to stress fact that object was of a saucer like nature, was stationary at 2000 ft. And would be glad to be called upon to verify any statements and act as witness.Emergency Report from Maxwell Air Force Base on air space violation by UFO, 1954.
  • I have discussed this matter with the affected agencies of the government, and they are of the opinion that it is not wise to publicize this matter at this time.Senator Richard Russell, head of Senate Armed Services Committee,regarding his sighting of a UFO during a 1955 trip to the Soviet Union.
  • What bothers me is what's happening to our aircraft.Anonymous Air Force officer, 1955.
  • The Air Defense Command in Baton Rouge was on the phone, waiting for our report, when we landed there.Commercial pilot following a UFO sighting, 1957.
  • Saucers exist (I saw two). They were intelligently flown or operated (evasive tactics, formation flight, hovering). They were mechanisms, not United States weapons, nor Russian. I presume they are extraterrestrial.Lt. Colonel Richard Headrick, radar bombing expert, 1959
  • Reliable reports indicate there are objects coming into our atmosphere at very high speeds and controlled by thinking intelligence.Navy Admiral Delmar Fahrney, public statement, 1957.
  • Congressional investigations ... are still being held on the problem of unidentified flying objects and the problem is one in which there is quite a bit of interest.... Since most of the material presented to the Committees is classified, the hearings are never printed.Congressman William H. Ayres, 1958
  • Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense.Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
  • When the team was about ten miles from the landing site, static disrupted radio contact with them. Five to eight minutes later the glow diminished, and the UFO took off. Another UFO was visually sighted and confirmed by radar.Classified report by an Air Force Strike Team at Minot AFB, 1966.
  • ... reliable, but off the record information from the Pease AFB in Portsmouth, indicates frequent radar blips and fighters are constantly scrambled to pursue these objects.Journalist John Fuller, 1965.
  • I think there may be substance in some of these reports ... I believe the American people are entitled to a more thorough explanation than has been given them by the Air Force to date.Congressman Gerald R. Ford, March 1966.
  • If 'they' discover you, it is an old but hardly invalid rule of thumb, *they* are your technological superiors.National Security Analyst, Lambros Callimahos, 1968.
  • My own present opinion, based on two years of careful study, is that UFOs are probably extraterrestrial devices engaged in something that might very tentatively be termed 'surveillance'.Dr. James McDonald before Congress, 1968.

...All of the preceding are frozen moments in our ufological past and, collected together, are a largely unimpeachable indication regarding the actuality of some larger reality... a grand physical existence from which we are being—and very suspiciously, reader—protected" by a conflicted, corrupted, and likely criminal "mainstream."  Somebody knows.

...Let's consider now, that "mainstream," thought reflective and sincere, our limit on bad thinking—a buffer from our fear.  Supposed a "mediation," a "distillation" of the facts, it's been portrayed as logical—the cure for "fakes and hacks".  It's been sold as medicine, protection from the fringe, the unwashed and the ignorant, the deluded and unhinged.

It's the view that most will hold... because it is "official."  Other views are ridiculed, so, implode with their dismissal. It's opposed to other views—which fade in sad detraction—as the mainstream is a jealous foe and a master of distraction!  It will leave no stone unturned to keep its upper hand, and many that must challenge it are cursed, betrayed, or damned.

It owns the eyes and ears we have with which we watch our day, and what's perceived depends upon the values it portrays. But it pretends the common sense, the middle of the road, the sober and the rational, to what, at last, sells soap. Of needs I am suspicious of the track that it would take, the positions it's presuming, and the point it seems to make.

...And it's a point that satisfies... the folks with all the money, those owners of the "eyes" and "ears,"which seems a little funny...  The mainstream should reflect a mean, an average we could use to navigate from day to day—that path of least abuse.  Though it's in fact duplicitous and hobbled by its bias... which is prosecuted merrily by those few who would deny us.

"Deny us what?", some smirk and sneer (officious and complacent). Well... deny us well nigh everything, you less than perspicacious!

We're denied a real world, with real people leading. We're denied the oversight of oversight that's needed. We're denied the real deal on what our actions cost, on who must pay for us to play, a measure for our loss.

We are sold a bill of goods, we're led by turgid glands, and we don't get the "pictures" that occur in other lands.  See, we're denied a picture of the way things really are!  We're denied reality!  Now, isn't that bizarre!

Don't pretend to fool yourself the mainstream acts for you: the hapless individual who is looking for some truth.  It does in fact mistrust you and will punish you, you know? It's a buttress in the service of corrupted status quos. There is, in fact, corruption of a type that startles you when you find it in the fabric of existence; this is true.

It's a cunning contravention by a clan of psychopaths who support it with a covetous persistence, not for laughs.

And it won't care that Christians are allowed to prey on kids, or keep the crooked cops corralled when up to their old tricks.  It is unaffected by injustice we endure... as the CAPTAINS of the business world collude their bull manure.

It is this bogus mainstream that provides us all the pap that the talking heads are drooling from their storage bins of crap. It's unimpressed that children die, well up in to the millions! It shall not see a "Death Row" as a place for black civilians.

It won't admit to slavery, and it won't admit to graft!  It won't admit that it's remiss in practicing its craft.

The mainstream's not the mainstream when it won't reflect the views of the people it confuses with an obfuscation's ruse! It cannot be a mainstream if dismissing UFOs, as it's eighty in a hundred that are thinking "someone knows."

Our mainstream's a betrayer of the truth that most would seek! The mainstream's made the lap dog of some grand *conspir-cracy*?

...And that is like a mirror made to fudge its own reflection, where one can't see the blemishes one might find on close inspection—where one perceives "the fairest skin," no need to wash ones face, and so suffers rot and blemishes one should view with some distaste.

"Culture is not your friend."  Terence McKenna