UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2001 > Nov > Nov 17

Re: Bassett on 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Johnstone

From: Lara <bravehrt@concentric.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 15:06:44 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:28:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Bassett on 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Johnstone


 >From: Stephen Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 23:58:10 EST
 >Subject: Bassett on 'Strange Days... Indeed'
 >To: ufoupdates@home.com

Stephen and others,

I am sure many will disagree with me on this, and many will say
'where is the evidence'? I don't have any 'evidence' except a
gut feeling, and I don't expect anyone to agree with me on it,
however I do wish to share it. Let all make up their own minds,
as I no doubt they will. :-)

 >[SB] Since 'Strange Days...Indeed' is archived, this can be
 >checked, but I did not state categorically that Bush moved to
 >block the Reagan papers for UFO reasons (EBK can perhaps verify
 >this). Rather, I raised this possibility.

Personally, my thoughts are this:

- President Bush realizes that for full UFO disclosure to occur,
other related disclosures will need to occur first, since they
are all related (Drug War, Foreign Policy, etc).

- In order to get UFO disclosure (which will require a huge
amount of support, not only from the US public, and will need to
be bipartisan, as well as include many religious leaders, as
well as leaders from the rest of the world), other disclosures
may need to occur before that. The issue is too big to just come
out with on Larry King, as I have stated before (considering
abductions etc, etc.) and the ramifications, as Dr. Greer has
stated (and Grant Cameron explained to me) could be similar to
ten WTC bombings on the same day (ie in how it would affect some
persons 'beliefs' and so on).

Considering this, it would be wise for any president who wanted
to come forward with disclosure, which I still think Pres. Bush
wants to, and is working towards, to be able to have a public
which was more aware, more responsible, and not running around
with knee jerk violent reactions. It would be good to have a
situation that could be monitored/contained so that those who
felt the most threatened by such a 'belief shattering' event
could feel 'safe'.

Before that could occur, other nations who also will be affected
would need to be apprised, so that they could help the
transition to occur. Especially nations which have strong
fundamentalist roots.

Also before disclosure could occur, issues such as the drug war,
and terrorism would need to be addressed. I don't think that
America could deal with the issue of UFO disclosure, when issues
such as foreign threats etc. were also a worry on their list of
problems.

RE: the issue of blocking the Reagan papers, and requiring that
all Presidents are given the opportunity to 'block' the release
of their papers, I imagine Pres. Bush wants to give these
Presidents the opportunity to feel that they are included in the
decision, that he is not going to release their papers withhout
giving them the opportunity to be part of such a decision. He
needs all of thier support, and I hope they will give it to him.
 From the 'outside' for those of us who are bent on 'conspiracy
minded ideas' it does look 'negative' but from his view (which
is my interpretation) it is a very courageous thing to do, and
he is in my opinion acting like a courageous statesman, being
inclusive in this decision. Of course I could have it all wrong,
but
those are my thoughts.

 >Why? More than a few
 >journalists have jumped on this issue and are generally
 >perplexed why Bush would do this.

I can understand their perplexity :-) I'm not sure many realize
how and what it will take to get Disclosure, and since many
journalists have been afraid to investigate the UFO issue, and
even less are aware as to how it is so deeply involved and
related to other black-ops issues, the funding of black-ops
issues, etc. -- it is a big conundrun - to say the least. I am
not even sure that many in the military involved in the UFO
issue may have been aware of how the Drug War and other Foreign
Policy related issues 'fitted in' with the UFO issue.

We cannot have disclosure of one without the others, as I have
stated before, and which I am even more convinced of now. Then
there is also the issue of how this would affect many
businesses, and they need to be apprised before disclosure, the
oil industry, the financial industry, the stock market, etc.

 >There is enormous political
 >risk in trying to overrule an act of Congress by Presidential
 >decree. The 1978 Presidential Records Act was specifically
 >passed because of the actions of the Nixon administration toward
 >presidential papers and communications. Nixon's tenure was one
 >giant cover-up, which as we are all coming to learn, sat on top
 >of a host of other cover-ups, ad infinitum. The people were fed
 >up.

The people may be fed up, but I imagine that many who have been
trying to maintain the coverup and who have suffered with
bearing the load of these secrets, and receiving only blame for
it, are probably as fed up, if not more. My thoughts are that
they are working for disclosure, and the enormity of it does not
make it any easier for them, and yet they also need the support
of the public and especially as and when disclosure gets closer
they are going to need those who REALLY want UFO disclosure to
be willing to get over their petty differences and be ready to
be support and voices of reason, responsibility and
understanding to many who are going to be really stunned by such
revelations.

My suggestions would be that people start the discussion of how
to setup community support groups in all major cities and
especially in places where 'strong religious beliefs' may be
threatened to help people deal with these issues, especially the
issue of abductions. I am pretty open-minded and when I heard
about it -- well it shocked the living daylights out of me, I
cannot imagine what or how it would affect some people in the
MidWest, or those in the Christian fundamentalist movement. It
will be one thing for them to read about it in the paper and
think 'holy cow' and another to be able to go to a local
community meeting or meet someone who can explain to them in
calm terms their experiences.

 >It would be tempting to assume that Bush's decree, which was
 >signed after 911, was a national security matter related to the
 >prosecution of the "war on terrorism."

Indeed the 'war on terrorism' needs to be dealt with, since the
ufo cover-up disclosure will bring forth the information as to
how the US has used reverse engineered technologies to subjugate
the rest of the world. It is therefore imperative for Bush and
the government to not have to deal with terrorist acts in the
middle of disclosure. The Drug war needs to be dealt with,
because one of the first things people will ask is: how was this
financed? Well, it was financed by waging a war on drugs, and
selling it to the people and making money to finance the
black-ops projects. Then you have the issue of the african
american and prison communities who suffered from the drug war
-- their anger and so on needs to be contained and they need to
be supported, otherwise it will just be a civil war. Does anyone
get the picture?

This, I imagine is some of the dialogue going on with other
nations, requesting that they support Disclosure and not
over-react, since in the end disclosure -- if it goes ahead
calmly and responsibly -- will in effect benefit them as much as
America, and will then lead to a world where less oppression and
more justice, truth and forgiveness will occur.

As that crazy in Patch Adams said when he held up his four
fingers and said "What do you see?" We have to look beyond the
problem, we have to see how we are going to support one another
to deal with the problem. If we cannot do that, the problem will
consume us and we will sink in the quicksand of our own
making...

 >But Bush began blocking
 >the release of these papers as early as January of this year.

He did say that one of the first things he would do when coming
into office would be to start the disclosure process. He seems
to be more aware of exactly what a monumental task that is, than
many in the disclosure movement do! :-)

 >Why? If, as some journalists have suggested, it was to protect
 >his appointees from the Reagan administration with ties to his
 >father, and looking ahead to 2005 when his father's papers also
 >come under the aegis of the National Archivist, then he would be
 >creating a political disaster, with the prospect of embarrassing
 >information coming out down the line about Cheney, Powell,
 >Rumsfeld, Armitage, Negroponte, Abrams, Reich - all suppressed
 >by a sitting President for purely political, party-serving,
 >self- serving, staff-serving reasons by OVERRULING CONGRESS.
 >This could destroy the Republican Party for years.

You may be right, but I see it from a total different point of
view. We cannot expect these people to come forward if we are
barking at them like a pack of hyena's, ready to tear them to
shreds. If we are not willing to listen, to be calm,
responsible, support them by supporting those who will be most
seriously affected in their beliefs, then we should all forget
about wanting disclosure.

This is not about party politics, it is about bringing out the
truth, and being willing to let these people speak and trying to
find it in ourselves to hear their stories, as to their motives,
their knowledge and the evidence. The Republican party cannot do
it on it's own, it needs not only the other parties support, but
also the support of as many brave Americans who are willing to
put truth before ideology, hate, religion, etc for the
betterment of mankind, which in the end will be for the benefit
of America, humanity and may lead to our exploration of the
cosmos -- but before that we have some serious work to do! :-)

 >Why on earth would a President who came to office in the closest
 >election in U.S. history, not even winning the popular vote,
 >move immediately to take such a political risk? Well, it is
 >worth noting that:
 >
 >If Reagan was briefed on the UFO/ET matter, regardless of the
 >extent, if George H. W. Bush was also briefed and was in fact
 >slated to be the "disclosure president,"

Which he is trying his best to do -- in my opinion.

 >then the release of
 >such papers would compromise the disclosure timeline of the
 >sitting president. And whatever that timeline was, the 911
 >calamity could only have set it back, thus making the delay of
 >the release of these presidential papers more essential, and
 >thus the four page decree.

No, 911 did not set it back, I imagine 911 was part of it -- as
difficult as that is to say. I don't think this is about
delaying the release of the papers, only about bringing out the
information in a timely way that addresses the issues that need
to be addressed before UFO disclosure can occur.

 >Why raise the point publicly? Easy. The journalists trying to
 >understand Bush's actions are in no way considering the UFO/ET
 >factor because it is not permitted or they don't know better.
 >Raising the matter publicly is one way to prod these journalist
 >to think outside the box of their "safe" protocols.

Good idea... but maybe a bigger box is an idea, a box that
includes the other disclosures so closely related to UFO
disclosure.... ! ;-)

[John Velez]
 >>We need to think very carefully about who and what we support
 >>before we actually go ahead and support it/them. If people don't
 >>become more thoughtful and critical in their thinking we're all
 >>doomed to ride this ufological merry-go-round that we've been on
 >>for over 50 years. Folks need to sober up, have a good look
 >>around at what's what, and then take some personal
 >>responsibility to correct the things that are wrong, or
 >>unproductive. If not, ufology will remain the butt of jokes and
 >>ridicule and _deservedly_ so.

 >>Strictly my opinion.

Very valid opinion, in my opinion John! ;-) And while I disagree
with Steve on some issues, as above, and also with Greer on many
issues, I also appreciate very much and respect what they have
gone through (and anyone for that matter, including the
witnesses, experiencers etc.) to bring us this far.

 >Anyone who believes I am spreading "dis-information" is invited
 >to debate this publicly in any reasonable forum straight up.

I don't think you are spreading dis-information, I think you are
only sharing your point of view, and I appreciate it, even
though I disagree with some of it!

 >Under such circumstances it can be readily ascertained who is
 >and who is not capable of "critical thinking".

That's funny! ;-) Thanks!

Lara




+------------------------------------------------------+
|  I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for  |
| justice, no matter who it is for or against. I'm a |
| human being first and foremost, and as such I am for |
| whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole. |
+------------------- Malcolm X. -----------------------+
|The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor, |
|      is the mind of the oppressed        |
+-------------------- Steve Biko-----------------------+
| Perhaps love is the process of my leading you gently |
|         back to yourself.          |
+------------ Antoine De Saint-Exupery ----------------+



[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com