Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) - View Single Post

orthodoxymoron · 10-25-2009, 02:55 AM

Here is a link from another thread...posted by eleni...which is pertinent to this thread: http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache...&client=safari I found this excerpt to be quite startling:

[begin quote]"Governance, as opposed to security, appears to not have been a major issue from the ’79 meeting to the present. The emerging picture concerning governance painted by informant words indicates that the USG continued business as usual both vertically – from the executive apex of the presidency, through its federal departments and agencies, to the state governments in the union – and horizontally – the foreign policy apparatus of the USG continued functioning as expected through its State and Defense departments. What did change was the sense of constituent security – that is, USG had to formally contend with the presence of two Anunnaki camps in conflict with one another, and the additional requirement of dealing with both. The meaning of security also appears to have undergone a subtle, yet quite real metamorphosis. We will briefly discuss this transformation below.

"It is evident from the literature (Good 1988, 1993; 1996, 1999; Maccabee 2000; Dolan 2000; Bryant 2002; Marrs 1998; Salla 2006; Corso 1997) that there is considerable belief based on evidence – some of questionable reliability, and some on verifiable validity – that the USG is involved in a massive cover up of anything from the existence of aliens, alien technologies, technology transfers to the private sector and more. While the focus of this essay is only on Anunnaki affairs and their impact on Earth governance, internal security, near Earth space security and Anunnaki inter-clan conflict, informants have also provided some information on contacts with “aliens” from outside the solar system (e.g., the Angleton tapes and the SERPA TS/SCI referred to by Collins and Doty 2005). This appears to reflect a reframing of how USG views the Anunnaki vis-ā-vis “the real aliens” (Six 2005). Our current hypothesis is that Anunnaki are currently viewed as “ancestors, not really aliens, but more like people who are like us, probably because they were here before the human race appeared on Earth through them” (Six 2005). This makes sense to us, since we were asked more than once to clarify our questions regarding “aliens” from the “incoming”. Is it that at present lead agencies regard this as a “local” event requiring a “local event response set”? It would seem so. This worldview on Anunnaki presence on Earth would also fit in with the seeming working definition of “those who are here and those from the incoming” as a “local problem” (Six 2005; Eight 2005).

"How, then, has the issue of governance been affected by the double Anunnaki presence since the ’79 meeting? One of the seeming results of the formalized infrastructure specific to this situation is the insulation of the White House from the appearance of real access to UFO information. Two examples of this approach are the handling of the Rockefeller initiative during the Clinton administration (i.e., the involvement of assets said to be with CIA at the time and the White House deft use of UFO/alien humor) in deflecting one of the most delicate exopolitical crisis faced by President Clinton; the other is the style and tenor used by the Bush-43 administration: silence. The Anunnaki seem to have forced the USG into a space security structure responsive to two exopolitical constituencies. This is reflected “in the way things get handled,” said Informant Eight. “Looks like everything political is handled by the [National Space] Council and the Vice President as chair. This is where the two tracks originate. One umbrella for TS/SCIs handling the incoming, another umbrella for TS/SCI dealing with those here, and the twain shall never meet. NGA looks like it works with both tracks, but it really is controlled by the other czar for space security. This is one of the most secret functions, “cause from what I can tell, this person is the Executive Officer of the whole space security apparatus” (Eight 2005)."[end quote]

Once again...this thread is an experiment...to stimulate thought. To me...presently...it is a sort of a line in the sand. But it is not set in concrete. Besides...it's not up to me anyway. I'm just living in a make believe world of 'what if?' What if the governance of the Solar System were up to you? What would you decide to do?

Solar System governance is a central issue...if not The Issue. It is very, very important. Please give the subject some very deep thought.

10-25-2009, 02:55 AM	#52
orthodoxymoron Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Lunar Base II Posts: 3,093	Re: The United States of the Solar System Here is a link from another thread...posted by eleni...which is pertinent to this thread: http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache...&client=safari I found this excerpt to be quite startling: [begin quote]"Governance, as opposed to security, appears to not have been a major issue from the ’79 meeting to the present. The emerging picture concerning governance painted by informant words indicates that the USG continued business as usual both vertically – from the executive apex of the presidency, through its federal departments and agencies, to the state governments in the union – and horizontally – the foreign policy apparatus of the USG continued functioning as expected through its State and Defense departments. What did change was the sense of constituent security – that is, USG had to formally contend with the presence of two Anunnaki camps in conflict with one another, and the additional requirement of dealing with both. The meaning of security also appears to have undergone a subtle, yet quite real metamorphosis. We will briefly discuss this transformation below. "It is evident from the literature (Good 1988, 1993; 1996, 1999; Maccabee 2000; Dolan 2000; Bryant 2002; Marrs 1998; Salla 2006; Corso 1997) that there is considerable belief based on evidence – some of questionable reliability, and some on verifiable validity – that the USG is involved in a massive cover up of anything from the existence of aliens, alien technologies, technology transfers to the private sector and more. While the focus of this essay is only on Anunnaki affairs and their impact on Earth governance, internal security, near Earth space security and Anunnaki inter-clan conflict, informants have also provided some information on contacts with “aliens” from outside the solar system (e.g., the Angleton tapes and the SERPA TS/SCI referred to by Collins and Doty 2005). This appears to reflect a reframing of how USG views the Anunnaki vis-ā-vis “the real aliens” (Six 2005). Our current hypothesis is that Anunnaki are currently viewed as “ancestors, not really aliens, but more like people who are like us, probably because they were here before the human race appeared on Earth through them” (Six 2005). This makes sense to us, since we were asked more than once to clarify our questions regarding “aliens” from the “incoming”. Is it that at present lead agencies regard this as a “local” event requiring a “local event response set”? It would seem so. This worldview on Anunnaki presence on Earth would also fit in with the seeming working definition of “those who are here and those from the incoming” as a “local problem” (Six 2005; Eight 2005). "How, then, has the issue of governance been affected by the double Anunnaki presence since the ’79 meeting? One of the seeming results of the formalized infrastructure specific to this situation is the insulation of the White House from the appearance of real access to UFO information. Two examples of this approach are the handling of the Rockefeller initiative during the Clinton administration (i.e., the involvement of assets said to be with CIA at the time and the White House deft use of UFO/alien humor) in deflecting one of the most delicate exopolitical crisis faced by President Clinton; the other is the style and tenor used by the Bush-43 administration: silence. The Anunnaki seem to have forced the USG into a space security structure responsive to two exopolitical constituencies. This is reflected “in the way things get handled,” said Informant Eight. “Looks like everything political is handled by the [National Space] Council and the Vice President as chair. This is where the two tracks originate. One umbrella for TS/SCIs handling the incoming, another umbrella for TS/SCI dealing with those here, and the twain shall never meet. NGA looks like it works with both tracks, but it really is controlled by the other czar for space security. This is one of the most secret functions, “cause from what I can tell, this person is the Executive Officer of the whole space security apparatus” (Eight 2005)."[end quote] Once again...this thread is an experiment...to stimulate thought. To me...presently...it is a sort of a line in the sand. But it is not set in concrete. Besides...it's not up to me anyway. I'm just living in a make believe world of 'what if?' What if the governance of the Solar System were up to you? What would you decide to do? Solar System governance is a central issue...if not The Issue. It is very, very important. Please give the subject some very deep thought. Last edited by orthodoxymoron; 10-25-2009 at 04:52 AM.