I called Urantia a spin-off of the well-heeled Yale fraternity – my critic quibbled. But further along in his critique of me, he dismisses with a snort my postings on mind control technology.

I’m a “she,” not a “he.” Of course, you can’t be faulted for not knowing that. I’ve modified the “About” page to begin with the sentence “Hi, I’m Diane.”

Well, I’ve written about the technology for 20 years, and each article was documented. The technology exists, but some flatly refuse to believe the hundreds of documents and articles on the topic that I can and have produced. If someone simply refuses to believe it, and abuses me due to ignorance, I can only shrug and ponder the complexity of his psychology, but I’ve already responded in those articles on the technology and have no desire to repeat myself.

My critic writes: “10/30/2007: I just now came across A Urantia, 9/11Truth.org & CIA Mind Control Technology Development Timeline by Alex Constantine. Here, Constantine … talks about possible infiltration of the Urantia movement by the NSA and CIA, long after its founding.” I don’t even recall writing a timeline, but … not “possible infiltration,” but without a doubt. The Bones society is also known to be on close terms with the CIA, but the Urantia sect had long been a front for agents of government and the Complex before the CIA came along. “On this page, Constantine comes across as reasonably cautious,” good to know that I can do that, thanks for the vote of confidence, “although he nevertheless gives credence to some hard-to-believe claims such as ‘It is believed that secret technology also presently allows for direct wireless access to an unwitting subject’s visual cortex both for inputting and downloading of realtime awake and dreaming field of vision data.’”

I know enough about electromagnetic theory to know that the above claim is exceedingly unlikely. Something like it might be possible, maybe, if there’s also an implant involved. Even so, some very precise surgery would be needed for the latter purpose, which makes it unlikely that the subject would be totally “unwitting,” unless it were done under the guise of legitimate brain surgery.

Even so, the development of interfaces between the human nervous system and electronic devices is still in its infancy, at least in the public biotech realm, where it’s a research area only recently beginning to bear fruit. Here are some news articles I found just now about the current state of the art in the public realm:

- Snap, Crackle, Walk: Listening to the brain to understand hand-eye coordination by Kristin Elise Phillips, Science News, November 16th, 2007.
- Brain implants could restore speech by Mark Henderson, Times Online, UK, Nov 14, 2007.
- Thinking Makes It So: Science Extends Reach Of Prosthetic Arms, Science Daily, Nov. 12, 2007.
- New Brain Machine Interfaces: A monkey controls a robotic arm with better precision than ever before by Emily Singer, Technology Review, Thursday, November 08, 2007.
- Robot arm controlled by thought interface, European Design Engineer Magazine, UK, Nov 21, 2007.

“Secret technology” on such matters might be a little bit ahead of open, public technology, but I seriously doubt that it is very far ahead. In scientific work, secrecy is actually a huge handicap, because it means less peer review. Probably for that reason, even “secret technology” is often developed at least partly in public. For example, according to a math professor I know who teaches cryptography, many public developments in mathematical research have been funded as part of otherwise-secret developments in cryptography.

My conclusions: If someone claims to have been tortured by the CIA using the kind of technology Alex Constantine is talking about here, I might find this believable (depending on other aspects of the story) if (a) the alleged torture happened within the past several years, or at least the past decade, and (b) it involved implants. On the other hand, if it is alleged to have happened 30 or 40 ago, or if did not involve implants, then I would find it much harder to believe.

Anyhow, alexx1984 goes on to say:

After dismissing me, however, my critic admits his ignorance: “I should learn more about the CIA’s mind control experiments.”

Now, WHERE will he read about those experiments? In my books, perhaps, after dragging me through the slime. “It is known, at least, that the CIA did conduct such experiments … ” Yes, I and others have exposed that … I’m derided here, but spent years researching and writing about mind control experimentation – so the anonymous poster could cite my own work as he carves me up. ” …. although some of the claims that have been made about them have been rather wacky. (See the thread Judy Wood and the False Memory Syndrome Foundation in the Truth Action forum.)”

First of all, I’m not sure that I wrote the sentence ascribed to me – I edited that piece, if it’s even mine, and I don’t recall it (I’m a busy little researcher). But the tech can do much more than that and I say so elsewhere. But there is no doubt that it exists.

My critic’s lack of knowledge puts him in a position to judge someone who spent years researching the subject?

See above.

Also, I’m not inclined to trust the research of anyone who considers a sensationalistic piece of trash like Maury Terry’s The Ultimate Evil to be an even remotely reliable reference on Satanism. Whenever I do start researching the subject of CIA mind control, Alex Constantine will not be at the top of my reading list.

The important thing is that these devices are used to torture innocent civilians. Everyone who dismisses the technology as non-existent is leaving torture victims to twist in the wind.

That’s an important consideration. But it’s not a reason to accept all claims of torture uncritically, because there’s also the opposite danger that sensationalistic false alarms about exotic tortures may divert attention from the real victims of real torture.

Still, you do have a valid point here. One should not dismiss claims of torture without even looking at them. And, certainly, we in the 9/11 Truth movement should all care about opposing torture, because 9/11 has been used to justify torture. We ourselves are in danger of being tortured, if current trends continue.

But let’s sum up these criticisms of myself. I am guilty, the headline says, of:

“Agent-baiting, guilt by association, and religious bigotry.”

Actually, my post wasn’t primarily about you. It’s primarily a criticism of Brian Salter, who in turn quoted you.

I don’t mind the first two accusations because they are pointless, but I’m a “religious bigot” … because I frown on organized mind control/intelligence fronts … that preach the decimation of inferior races … and derationalize the guinea pigs …

The latter issue was not brought up in Brian Salter’s article, or in the article of yours that I looked at when I wrote my blog post. Apparently, Brian Salter is worried a lot more about “World Federalism” than about racism.

The question of Urantia racism is something I should look into, but keeping in mind the possibility that Urantia may have found a way to outgrow it, in much the same way that Mormonism seems to have found a way to grow past the racism in its scriptures.

Imagine if I had actually written something false and defamatory – you know, followed my detractor’s example.

Nothing I wrote could legally qualify as “false and defamatory.” I was merely commenting on something you wrote.

I’m not irate, though. I am too sorry for every programmed prole who thinks this way. Fascism has got them, and they don’t have the cognitive skills necessary to open up the universe a little and see that for themselves. Instead, they are prone to acting out on anti-fascists because they don’t understand what’s going on around them, and reports on fascist conspiracies “seem” incredible.

Hello? I don’t uncritically reject belief in any and all “fascist conspiracies.” For example, I’m inclined to believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

Anyhow, I am a staunch opponent of raligion-based bigotry. Whenever I come across what looks to me like an instance of someone being bashed unfairly because of the person’s religion, I will challenge it. And I won’t feel an obligation to research all the ins and outs before speaking up. In my opinion, the burden of proof is on those who make accusations against another person because of that person’s religion.

In New York 9/11 Truth, shortly before I joined, there was a schism over, among other things, Les Jamieson’s adherence to the Urantia religion. However, in my opinion, Les Jamieson and New York 9/11 Truth are doing far more to advance the cause of 9/11 truth and justice than the other group is. In my opinion, we don’t need “hecklivism,” but we do need a New York City ballot initiative for a new and truly independent investigation.

Skull & Bones, Urantia and “Race Science”

The Urantia Book is a “treatise” on racial eugenics,

Indeed you’ve cited some passages advocating “racial eugenics.” It is interesting to me that that issue was not brought up in the previous anti-Urantia tirades I’ve looked at. This suggests to me that the topic of “racial eugenics” may not be a sufficiently all-pervading them within the Urantia Book for it to qualify as a full-fledged “treatise” on that topic in particular.

I’ll admit that I have not read the Urantia Book. However, I am a staunch believer in the principle of “innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on those who make accusations, not on those who question them. And the evidence presented in the anti-Urantia tirades I’ve seen so far has been far from adequate to justify the claims made.

If you choose to continue this conversation, I’ll try to find a Urantia forum and see if some people there are interested in defending their own religion.

a political and academic document that reflects the beliefs and serves the political purposes of the social class that makes up S&B:

Or it may simply reflect 1920’s fashion. “Racial eugenics” was respectable back then. Lots of people believed in it. It ceased to be respectable only much later, after World War II.

Anyhow, it’s worth asking what role, if any, “racial eugenics” beliefs still play in the Urantia religion today. Religions do evolve. For example, the Bible contains passages advocating genocide (e.g. the many passages where the Israelites are commanded to kill all the Canaanites, the Amalekites, etc.). But most Jews and Christians today do not advocate genocide.

Prescott Bush’s “trading with enemy” (Nazis) was “unknown publicly and had no bearing when he ran for Senator in 1950, but last minute revelations of his “contacts with birth controllers” … “cost him the election … ”

“Birth control” and “racial eugenics” are distinct issues. By conflating them, and by implying that “birth control” is a horrendous thing, you display a religious right wing bias. Do you champion the official Catholic stance of denying people the right to any form of birth control other than the rhythm method?

(Yale and many of the Skull & Bones’ family have been at the forefront of the ‘race-science movement’ – a whole story in itself. Yale economist Irving Fisher, S&B 1888, was the founder of the American Eugenics Society.)”
http://www.ctrl.org/boodleboys/boodleboys1.html

I just now read this article. If the author, RA Kris Millegan, wants to be taken seriously at all, it would sure be nice if Millegan could use better citations when quoting people. For example, if you’re quoting from a book, tell us the title, the author, the edition, and the page. You know, like what you were taught in high school when writing term papers. Any decent scholar does this.

Dr. Kellogg himself was a great believer in race science, and so was his psychiatric coeval in the founding of Urantia, William Sadler.

and so were a gazillion other people back then. If there happen to have been any biology or social science professors in your family back then, they probably advocated “race science” too. This wouldn’t, in itself, make you a bad person, though. Things do change.

Salter notes: “Sadler got his start working for Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, Adventist surgeon,” and writes of “the intimate connections” to Skull & Bones.

Four of the nuclear Kellogg family were S&B, exposed to these eugenical beliefs. Sadler was employed by an S&B family. Further, there is Sadler’s marriage to Leona Kellogg. Sadler was an S&B family member, too; that’s two members of the family founding the Urantia sect, not one, as assumed above.

Perhaps my analogy was unfair. But calling Urantia a “Skull and Bones spinoff” still comes across to me as an attempt to insinuate guilt-by-association, which is a logical fallacy.

But that doesn’t matter – it’s still a spin-off.

Secret societies and cults are constantly spinning off new lodges. The OTO, for instance, has spun off numerous Crowleyite sub-organizations because individual members walked away and formed their own lodges.

Michael Aquino left the Church of Satan and founded the Temple of Set. It is accurately described as a spin-off.

It only takes one S&B member to conceive Urantia, and that’s properly referred to as a “spin-off,” despite my critic’s protests.

Depends exactly what you mean by “spinoff,” but it doesn’t seem productive to pursue that semantic argument further.

Take it from a “widely respected researcher and author on mind control, cults, and related topics.”

(For numerous examples, see Maury Terry’s The Ultimate Evil.)

I wouldn’t dispute the more general – and obvious – point that new groups are always emerging out of old ones. But, if you’re going to bother to cite a source on that obvious point, can’t you cite a better source than Maury Terry?

I started reading Terry’s book many years ago. Unfortunately I can’t find my copy at the moment, but what I remember is that I stopped reading when I got to a page about alleged “Satanic holidays.” Supposedly, if I recall correctly ritual murders took place on or around these alleged “holidays,” and supposedly a murder’s proximity to one of these “holidays” should be taken as evidence that it’s a ritual murder. One problem with this was that there were so many “holidays” that almost every day on the calendar was near one of them. Another problem, if I recall correctly, was that he didn’t give any decent sources for his alleged “holidays.”

For a reasonably decent (though outdated) book on Satanism, I would suggest Satan Wants You by Arthur Lyons.

Many of the cult’s early members

By “the cult,” you apparently mean Urantia? What exactly do you mean by referring to Urantia as a “cult”? What is your definition of that hotly-disputed word “cult”?

had positions in government and political bodies like the UN – similar to the career paths of Bonesmen.

And similar to a lot of highly-educated wealthy people in general.

Where do you suppose Unrantia’s founders got the idea of recruiting from and infiltrating government bureaucracies?

Just a part of their upper class family culture, I would guess, probably not limited to those members of the family who were Skull and Bones members.

I’ll reply to other parts of your comment later. Gotta run now.

Skull & Bones, Urantia and “Race Science”

The Urantia Book is a “treatise” on racial eugenics, a political and academic document that reflects the beliefs and serves the political purposes of the social class that makes up S&B:

Prescott Bush’s “trading with enemy” (Nazis) was “unknown publicly and had no bearing when he ran for Senator in 1950, but last minute revelations of his “contacts with birth controllers” … “cost him the election … ” (Yale and many of the Skull & Bones’ family have been at the forefront of the ‘race-science movement’ – a whole story in itself. Yale economist Irving Fisher, S&B 1888, was the founder of the American Eugenics Society.)”
http://www.ctrl.org/boodleboys/boodleboys1.html

Dr. Kellogg himself was a great believer in race science, and so was his psychiatric coeval in the founding of Urantia, William Sadler. Salter notes: “Sadler got his start working for Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, Adventist surgeon,” and writes of “the intimate connections” to Skull & Bones.

Four of the nuclear Kellogg family were S&B, exposed to these eugenical beliefs. Sadler was employed by an S&B family. Further, there is Sadler’s marriage to Leona Kellogg. Sadler was an S&B family member, too; that’s two members of the family founding the Urantia sect, not one, as assumed above.

But that doesn’t matter – it’s still a spin-off.

Secret societies and cults are constantly spinning off new lodges. The OTO, for instance, has spun off numerous Crowleyite sub-organizations because individual members walked away and formed their own lodges.

Michael Aquino left the Church of Satan and founded the Temple of Set. It is accurately described as a spin-off.

It only takes one S&B member to conceive Urantia, and that’s properly referred to as a “spin-off,” despite my critic’s protests. Take it from a “widely respected researcher and author on mind control, cults, and related topics.” (For numerous examples, see Maury Terry’s The Ultimate Evil.)

Many of the cult’s early members had positions in government and poltical bodies like the UN – similar to the career paths of Bonesmen. Where do you suppose Unrantia’s founders got the idea of recruiting from and infiltrating government bureaucracies?

But take a closer look at the cult’s “channelled” bible. The Urantia Book is highly political: “Dr. Sadler whose Urantia book preaches World Government under a World Executive – much like the Rockefeller drive for global government. … ”
http://questionsquestions.net/docs04/belitsos-urantia.html

The Urantia book is a reflection of S&B doctrines. See, for example, “Bush Family, Skull and Bones and Nazi Eugenics,” November 10, 2007 post -
http://wwwthesixthestate.blogspot.com/2007/11/bush-family-skull-and-bones-and-nazi.html

The Kelloggs were prominent in the secret society.

The Urantia book is a mind control tool that serves the upper-class comprising Bones. It is larded with the same eugenics that have been a hallmark of S&B for the past century:

from The Urantia Book — Part III. The History Of Urantia PAPER 111: Section 4.The Inner Life

“unrestrained multiplication of inferiors, with decreasing reproduction of superiors, is unfailingly suicidal of cultural civilization”
The Urantia Book — Part III. The History Of Urantia
PAPER 79: Section 2. The Andite Conquest Of India

“The indigo [Black] race was moving south in Africa, there to begin its slow but long-continued racial deterioration.”

THE URANTIA BOOK PART III – THE HISTORY OF URANTIA
PAPER 78 – THE VIOLET RACE AFTER THE DAYS OF ADAM Page 871

“Notwithstanding this obstacle, it seems that you ought to be able to agree upon the biologic disfellowshiping of your more markedly unfit, defective, degenerate, and antisocial stocks.” (P.585)

“Having failed to achieve race harmonization by the Adamic technique, you must now work out your planetary problem of race improvement by other and largely human methods of adaptation and control.” (P.586)

I called Urantia a spin-off of the well-heeled Yale fraternity – my critic quibbled. But further along in his critique of me, he dismisses with a snort my postings on mind control technology. Well, I’ve written about the technology for 20 years, and each article was documented. The technology exists, but some flatly refuse to believe the hundreds of documents and articles on the topic that I can and have produced. If someone simply refuses to believe it, and abuses me due to ignorance, I can only shrug and ponder the complexity of his psychology, but I’ve already responded in those articles on the technology and have no desire to repeat myself.

My critic writes: “10/30/2007: I just now came across A Urantia, 9/11Truth.org & CIA Mind Control Technology Development Timeline by Alex Constantine. Here, Constantine … talks about possible infiltration of the Urantia movement by the NSA and CIA, long after its founding.” I don’t even recall writing a timeline, but … not “possible infiltration,” but without a doubt. The Bones society is also known to be on close terms with the CIA, but the Urantia sect had long been a front for agents of government and the Complex before the CIA came along. “On this page, Constantine comes across as reasonably cautious,” good to know that I can do that, thanks for the vote of confidence, “although he nevertheless gives credence to some hard-to-believe claims such as ‘It is believed that secret technology also presently allows for direct wireless access to an unwitting subject’s visual cortex both for inputting and downloading of realtime awake and dreaming field of vision data.’”

After dismissing me, however, my critic admits his ignorance: “I should learn more about the CIA’s mind control experiments.”

Now, WHERE will he read about those experiments? In my books, perhaps, after dragging me through the slime. “It is known, at least, that the CIA did conduct such experiments … ” Yes, I and others have exposed that … I’m derided here, but spent years researching and writing about mind control experimentation – so the anonymous poster could cite my own work as he carves me up. ” …. although some of the claims that have been made about them have been rather wacky. (See the thread Judy Wood and the False Memory Syndrome Foundation in the Truth Action forum.)”

First of all, I’m not sure that I wrote the sentence ascribed to me – I edited that piece, if it’s even mine, and I don’t recall it (I’m a busy little researcher). But the tech can do much more than that and I say so elsewhere. But there is no doubt that it exists.

My critic’s lack of knowledge puts him in a position to judge someone who spent years researching the subject?

The important thing is that these devices are used to torture innocent civilians. Everyone who dismisses the technology as non-existent is leaving torture victims to twist in the wind. My critic, rather than act as an accomplice to torture, should go read the articles and books (mine included), and as he acknowledges, learn about mind control before addressing the topic and bad-mouthing me – then he won’t seem (so long as we are talking about appearances and impressions – without bothering to lift a finger to correct them) such a misguided, trivial ass.

But let’s sum up these criticisms of myself. I am guilty, the headline says, of:

“Agent-baiting, guilt by association, and religious bigotry.”

I don’t mind the first two accusations because they are pointless, but I’m a “religious bigot” … because I frown on organized mind control/intelligence fronts … that preach the decimation of inferior races … and derationalize the guinea pigs …

What gets into me?

Whoever wrote this, I say it’s a good thing the backward creature didn’t include a by-line … .

Imagine if I had actually written something false and defamatory – you know, followed my detractor’s example. He’d be angry THEN, I’m sure. I’m not irate, though. I am too sorry for every programmed prole who thinks this way. Fascism has got them, and they don’t have the cognitive skills necessary to open up the universe a little and see that for themselves. Instead, they are prone to acting out on anti-fascists because they don’t understand what’s going on around them, and reports on fascist conspiracies “seem” incredible. The result is always flaming brainwash juvenalia vomitted my way. Unfortunately, it comes spuming up with rage and insults directed at myself as the prole passes through the denial stage, similar to the child’s throes of profanity in The Exorcist. I never liked that part of the job so much …

(Learn something about the topics you write about before ignorantly attacking people. Why do you do this – to make a fool of yourself?)