Astronaut Edgar Mitchell Interview on Roswell Incident

[James Douglas]

Thanks James.

For those who doubt the ability of mind control technology, the following documents may be of interest.

The first report regarding the use of this technology by the FBI is correct. It was targeted against the David Koresh and the Branch Davidians. I hav a copy tape of a BBC World Service News report that shows this equipment in operation in Waco, Texas:

The second and third pages detail how a target can be remotely hynotized and programmed and discuss the inherent dangers involved. It may be worth mentioning the cautionary alarum about banning the use of this technology by the mass media.

and:

Thank you kindly back David. Very interesting.

Evan has recommended some Apollo related books and l found a copy of Dark Mission- The Secret History Of NASA by Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Barra at my local library. ( THIS WAS NOT ONE OF EVAN'S SUGGESTIONS)

http://www.darkmission.net/

Scroll down to the last few pages of this excerpts from the book doc for the strange tale of the gent who with the approval (so it seems) of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory media office was allowed to hand out a document "claiming that “NASA has

just faked the entire Apollo 11 Lunar Landing… on a soundstage in Nevada!”

http://feralhouse.com/titles/images/nasa_intro.pdf

Hoagland and Barra discuss Ed Mitchell's hypnosis on Page 178.

" Mitchell struggled so much with the issue that, on his own, he eventually sought the help of a professional hypnotist and psychologist to basically de-program himself!

Incidentally it didn't work.

According to a Hoagland source with a long professional association with Jean Houston, when Mitchell came to the part of his ( remember, personally requested) sessions in which Houston would repeatedly prod him with " Now try to remember what it felt like when you were walking on the Moon....." Mitchell would repeatedly deflect the question, saying " That's not important.....let's move on."

DARK MISSION- FERALHOUSE BOOKS

Edited April 1, 2008 by James Douglas

[Evan Burton]

Hoagland? Good Grief. Does anyone actually research the garbage he spews?

This is typical of him:

But contrary to common public and media perception that NASA is an open, strictly civilian scientific institution, is the legal fact that the Space Agency was quietly founded as a direct adjunct to the Department of Defense, tasked with specifically assisting the national security of the United States in the midst of a deepening Cold War with its major geopolitical adversary, the Soviet Union. It says so right in the original NASA Charter:

“Sec. 305... (i) The [National Aeronautics and Space] Administration shall be considered a defense agency of the United States for the purpose of Chapter 17, Title 35 of the United States Code...” [Emphasis added.]

In another section2 of the act, this seldom-discussed defense responsibility— the ultimate undercutting of NASA’s continuing public façade as a strictly civilian, scientific agency—is blatantly spelled out:

“Sec. 205... (d) No [NASA] information which has been classified for reasons of national security shall be included in any report made under this section [of the Act]...” [Emphasis added.]

Clearly, from this and the other security provisions3 incorporated in the Act, what the Congress, the press and the American taxpayers get to see of NASA’s ultimate activities—including untouched images and data regarding what’s really on the Moon, on Mars or anywhere else across the solar system— is totally dependent on whether the President of the United States (and/or his legal surrogates in the Department of Defense and the “intelligence community”) has already secretly classified that data. This is directly contrary to everything we’ve been led to believe regarding NASA for over 50 years now.

But does Hoagland explain what Chapter 17, Title 35 of the USC is? It's about patents. It means that patents can be protected under that provision, because for the purposes of the Act NASA is considered part of the DoD (the other agency was the AEC).

Let's see what else we can find...

Edited April 1, 2008 by Evan Burton

[Evan Burton]

Did any skeptics even know this official document existed, before we made it public in 1996?

This about what is referred to as the Brookings Report. It was terribly secret... if you consider the NY Times in 1961 a classified publication..

[James Douglas]

Hoagland? Good Grief. Does anyone actually research the garbage he spews?

This is typical of him:

But contrary to common public and media perception that NASA is an open, strictly civilian scientific institution, is the legal fact that the Space Agency was quietly founded as a direct adjunct to the Department of Defense, tasked with specifically assisting the national security of the United States in the midst of a deepening Cold War with its major geopolitical adversary, the Soviet Union. It says so right in the original NASA Charter:

“Sec. 305... (i) The [National Aeronautics and Space] Administration shall be considered a defense agency of the United States for the purpose of Chapter 17, Title 35 of the United States Code...” [Emphasis added.]

In another section2 of the act, this seldom-discussed defense responsibility— the ultimate undercutting of NASA’s continuing public façade as a strictly civilian, scientific agency—is blatantly spelled out:

“Sec. 205... (d) No [NASA] information which has been classified for reasons of national security shall be included in any report made under this section [of the Act]...” [Emphasis added.]

Clearly, from this and the other security provisions3 incorporated in the Act, what the Congress, the press and the American taxpayers get to see of NASA’s ultimate activities—including untouched images and data regarding what’s really on the Moon, on Mars or anywhere else across the solar system— is totally dependent on whether the President of the United States (and/or his legal surrogates in the Department of Defense and the “intelligence community”) has already secretly classified that data. This is directly contrary to everything we’ve been led to believe regarding NASA for over 50 years now.

But does Hoagland explain what Chapter 17, Title 35 of the USC is? It's about patents. It means that patents can be protected under that provision, because for the purposes of the Act NASA is considered part of the DoD (the other agency was the AEC).

Let's see what else we can find...

Evan is this passage from Hoaglands book?

What does this have to do with Ed Mitchell's hypnosis?

[Evan Burton]

Sorry James,

You mentioned Hoagland and I lit up. He's been around for years, and he keeps on treading the same line: we went to the Moon but covered up that there were UFOs there or evidence of ancient civilisations, etc. I was demonstrating that what Hoagland claims has to be researched to determine its accuracy.

I do not find Hoagland in any way credible, so I don't believe what he says about Ed Mitchell.

We could ask Ed, but it would not convince anyone who believes he is a subject of mind control. If he denies that underwent hypnotherapy to be "deprogrammed", the believers simply point to that as evidence that he IS programmed. It's a no-win situation for him.

[Robert Howard]

Sorry James,

You mentioned Hoagland and I lit up. He's been around for years, and he keeps on treading the same line: we went to the Moon but covered up that there were UFOs there or evidence of ancient civilisations, etc. I was demonstrating that what Hoagland claims has to be researched to determine its accuracy.

I do not find Hoagland in any way credible, so I don't believe what he says about Ed Mitchell.

We could ask Ed, but it would not convince anyone who believes he is a subject of mind control. If he denies that underwent hypnotherapy to be "deprogrammed", the believers simply point to that as evidence that he IS programmed. It's a no-win situation for him.

I usually avoid this topic like the plague, but in this case, I will have to, at least mention that ostensibly we are all seekers of truth, here on the Forum, [grins];

In the 1960's, for all of us [unfortunately?] old enough to remember, the vaunted Project Blue Book was an item of interest to some degree as controversial as the asssassination of JFK. Both of these topics, became intertwined as......

1. News of Marilyn Monroe's press conference, which never happened see Dorothy Kilgallen, where she ostensibly was going to mention the taboo subject became a sensational subject of that time period.

2. Paris Flammonde's book on UFO's became a best-seller.

3. The linkage between Phillip Corso who was associated with both subjects via Roswell and his position in the government, and subsequent revelations that he was connected to the Schickshinny Knight's of Malta, a story in itself became more commonly known.

These are just a sampling of some events, and are intended as such.

Flash Forward to our era and the events in the waning day's of World War 2, in Europe have become of heightened interest, in no small part due to the books of Joseph P. Farrell.......

So, it is noteworthy to mention that the event commonly referred to as the Phoenix Lights, a mass UFO sighting, which took place on March 13, 1997 in Phoenix, AZ is now documented in a recently released DVD. I have viewed the video, and it is not your father's Oldsmobile, if one catches the meaning. Then Governor Fife Symington at that time had outraged some 10,000 people in the state of Arizona, mostly in the Phoenix area by calling a press conference, unveiling a State employee dressed as an Extra-Terrestrial, to ridicule very real public concerns over an event, that was witnessed by

1. Air Traffic Controller's who saw the images, but did not see the images on radar.

2. Then current employee's of the US Government, who appeared on camera, face blurred asserting that there was extreme concerns, about the event.

3. An estimated 10,000 individuals who saw this event, and tried to jolt City Hall into addressing the issue, but who clearly did not want to.

If Evan's viewpoint is the higher path of this topic then in effect, the whole world has gone crazy, because it is arguably the first mass media UFO phenomena which has forced, or if Evan is correct, taken important time away from the global media's agenda of more important topics, as the topic was subsequently carried on USA Today, CNN, MSNBC, and Brokaw, Jennings, Rather

and Larry King. Perhaps the most ironic part of the video, is the years later admission of then Governor Fife Symington, that he too had witnessed the event and went agreed with the other estimated 10,000 individuals who all believed the objects were, not of this earth.

Edited August 31, 2008 by Robert Howard

[Evan Burton]

But belief is not proof. It may surprise you, but I believe UFOs exist. I think there is a good chance that there are other civilisations out there, and that at least some hold advanced technology, and some of those may be capable of Faster Than Light travel. I think it is possible - no, likely - that we have been visited by other civilisations in UFOs... but I have never seen anything I would consider to be proof of alien visitation and am the first one to admit that. All the images I have seen are misidentification, indeterminate, or faked. I have seen things, on two occasions. They are perhaps explainable, but I don't think so. That's why I hold strong views... but my views are not proof.

People like Hoagland do more to damage to serious research than most anyone else. People like Dr Mitchell I take very seriously... but don't necessarily accept. Like everyone else, we need proof.

Is there a world-wide UFO coverup? Maybe - but I don't think so. I just don't see the particular gains for a coverup.... yet there may be one. I don't have proof either way.

Do you have a link for the Phoenix Lights? I would like to learn more about them before I comment on them.

Thanks!

Edited September 1, 2008 by Evan Burton

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Evan try here

[Len Colby]

The Phoenix Lights were the subject of a previous thread here.

[Guest Gary Loughran]

I think there is a good chance that there are other civilisations out there, and that at least some hold advanced technology, and some of those may be capable of Faster Than Light travel.

That, I would like to see!!

[Evan Burton]

I think there is a good chance that there are other civilisations out there, and that at least some hold advanced technology, and some of those may be capable of Faster Than Light travel.

That, I would like to see!!

Well, if you follow the science news, you might be aware of the upcoming startup of the Large Hadron Collider. One of the things the experiments being conducted in it might advance is the ability to change (lower) the mass of an object without changing it's physical dimensions. If this can be achieve, it not only makes sending ojects into space a lot easier, it makes the possibility of FTL travel VERY real.

[Guest Gary Loughran]

I think there is a good chance that there are other civilisations out there, and that at least some hold advanced technology, and some of those may be capable of Faster Than Light travel.

That, I would like to see!!

Well, if you follow the science news, you might be aware of the upcoming startup of the Large Hadron Collider. One of the things the experiments being conducted in it might advance is the ability to change (lower) the mass of an object without changing it's physical dimensions. If this can be achieve, it not only makes sending ojects into space a lot easier, it makes the possibility of FTL travel VERY real.

I have been loosely following that project, in Switzerland isn't it??? I think they believe they can get particles accelerated close to speed of light - the last I heard there was a problem with one of the parts. I think this needs to be fixed then supercooled, and it can take a while to put right if even a little thing goes wrong.

I'm just now sure how this would work for organic matters.

[Evan Burton]

It's trying to delve more into what really makes up matter. The mass reduction theories, if proved correct, will be fantastic. FTL travel makes exploration beyond our solar system practical.

The FTL problem - to a layman like myself - is that our current understanding says that as an object approaches the speed of light, its mass increases. The closer it gets to the speed of light, the heavier it becomes and the greater energy required to continue to propel it. Nearly at the speed of light, the mass of an object becomes infinite... and thus why FTL travel is impossible with our current understanding.

If, however, the object has no or minuscule mass, then FTL travel becomes possible.

The possibilities from this research are simply staggering!

Edited to add: And, of course, the discussion of time travel becomes much more interesting!

Edited September 2, 2008 by Evan Burton

[Evan Burton]

For those interested, an interview with Dr Mitchell:

http://media.libsyn.com/media/apollotalks/...ar_Mitchell.mp3

[Steve Mcdonagh]

Just curious guys,

But would 4 x look something like this?

Thanks - Steve