Thanks for the link, that was a good talk by Bassett. Was cool seeing him argue against the interviewer's suggestions that since aliens have not attacked us overtly, they are basically benign. That's one of those classic alien disinfo rationalizations, and not the only one the interviewer threw at Bassett.
SB: [...] Given the fact that there is still evidence that some untoward things are happening, particularly when you get into the abduction phenomena research which I've gotten into fairly well, as an observer not a researcher, you cannot dismiss that there may be hostile intentions here.
I: But even John Mack, who was one of the preeminent researchers in the area of the abduction phenomenon, even he came around to saying, you know it appears that there is a presence that does not ... in the people that have these experiences, ultimately have these feelings of often-times appreciation, often-times almost a celestial kind of feeling about the experience. There are others who may interpret it differently. There's so much to go in there, we're not even going to go there...
SB: He started out that way. Toward the end he was going the other direction.
I: Well everything I read it was almost ...
SB: Toward the end John was starting to take a more open-minded view that the activities of these extraterrestrials was not necessarily easy to ascribe benignity. He started out with a very broad-minded, open-minded, approach very much emphasizing on spirituality, consciousness expansion and so forth. That was his camp, but he received a lot of pressure [from counter-arguments] over the years and just before his death he was starting to consider the possibility that it wasn't c...
No pressure from arguments, counter-arguments. Remember there were other researchers out there. The three top researchers were Mack, Hopkins, and Jacobs, and Hopkins and Jacobs were not in Mack's camp. He was moving to their camp at the end.
So again, I want to make it very clear - I have talked to too many abductees that are not happy about this, and some of the actions of these ETs is unacceptable. And so I cannot take a position yet that "it's all good, let's party and have disclosure." My position is we don't know, and if it's bad, I can make a very powerful case why all of us need to be informed. Tomorrow, if ETs are coming to colonize us, I'd like all six billion of us to meet them at the gate [...]
---
SB: One of my concerns as a political activist on this issue is that a whole lot of very nice people, good people with good hearts, who wish the ETs well and wish the human race well and everybody else, who are getting interested in this issue, who are taking this view that, "You know I think it's all good, and since its all good I'm just going to kind of sit back and it will all work out. I don't need to press the press, the media, I don't need to press the political candidates, I don't need to caus a fuss, I don't need to support any activism because it's all good. And I'll wait for it all to work out." I think they're making a mistake.
Didn't know John Mack changed his mind toward the end. I always wondered what the motive could be for him dying so prematurely if he was mostly pro-gray. But if he was coming around to the truth, eventually putting out new books and lectures on what's really going on with aliens, that makes perfect sense that he would be taken out just like the others.
Lightningeye wrote:Is it too late?
Or is disclosure of extraterrestrial presence impending within the next 5 years?
It's too late to prevent the changes (environmental, economic, political, spiritual) that are imminent, and the changes automatically force us into collision with disclosure of the ET presence. Five years? That sounds about right. I figure 2012 would be very convenient for the aliens since there is so much end-times anticipation building up and primed for hijacking.
I agree with Bassett that it's more likely that there would be some kind of disclosure and then several years of digestion and stabilization by the public before the aliens make their full appearance. The disclosure would be brought on by a major spaceship sighting or confirmed contact with aliens, just something little to titillate public interest and thereby open the floodgates of inquiry about aliens. Only, I think the disclosure itself is part of the alien agenda and will be used to disseminate alien propaganda (the same kind that is now being infused into the fringe crowd, and incorporated into popular sci-fi books, movies, and shows) on the global scale to a confused public hungry for convenient answers.
Bassett wasn't shy about discussing the possibility of malevolent alien intentions. He said he knows abductees who have had terrifying encounters. What I'd like to know is whether he acknowledges the possibility of malevolent aliens masquerading as positive ones. Because if not, then he would fall right into the alien agenda. Part of the agenda will include scapegoating all negative ET experiences onto a small group of negative renegade reptilians and/or negative grays, who are portrayed as predatory, aggressive, and who have secretly negotiated with "evil" human cabals for mutual collusion against the rest of humanity. By doing so, the masqueraders are given safe passage into taking over peacefully and integrating their cybernetic genetic programming vectors (alien hybrids) into the human gene pool. So even those who claim to be anti-cabal, anti-military-industrial-complex, or anti-alien, need to have their "antis" in precisely the right spot or else end up serving the human and nonhuman manipulators all the same.
Acquiring fringe knowledge is like digging for diamonds in a mine field.