Official spokesperson from Secret Space program about "big picture", Aug 31/15 (Randy Cramer)?

a reply to: sputniksteve

If his actual title is Brigadier General, the 2 really shouldn't be separated as far as I know, but if you must shorten it General would be appropriate. Brigadier is like a qualifier for the General title, not a title in of itself.

Julian Smith was a Lieutenant General of the Marines until 1946 when he retired.

He retired as a lieutenant general in 1946, and he died in 1975, age 90.

www.nps.gov...

Pardon my mis representing of Mr. smith.

originally posted by: sputniksteve
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Just so you know, he should be referred to as Brigadier General Smyth or General Smyth not Brigadier Smyth. If his actual title is Brigadier General, the 2 really shouldn't be separated as far as I know, but if you must shorten it General would be appropriate. Brigadier is like a qualifier for the General title, not a title in of itself. Like if someone was "Master Sergeant Johnson" you wouldn't call him Master Johnson, you would need to call him Master Sergeant Johnson.

I am not military so I could be wrong, but I am pretty certain I am right.

Apologies I stand corrected! I was just a little lazy and thought the "Brigadier" would be adequate, I know General can refer to several levels of rank.

Here's an interesting article in which claimed Mars experiencer Andrew D. Basiago validates Mars experiences of US Marine Captain Randy Cramer.

He list ten points which help support Randy's story:

2.

Randy claims that he was born in 1970 and that he began training for Mars in 1987 at age 17. This is a young age to begin such dangerous service and tends to strain the credibility of anybody offering such an account. Seventeen was, however, the average age of the five Mars jumpers that have been identified as being among the 10 American teenagers who were trained to go to Mars by Major Ed Dames at College of the Siskiyous in Summer 1980. They were: Barack H. Obama, born 8/4/61 (age 19), Andrew D. Basiago, born 9/18/61 (age 18), William C. McCool, born 9/23/61 (age 18), Regina E. Dugan, born 3/19/63 (age 17), and William B. Stillings, born 12/22/66 (age 13). Do the math. 19+18+18+17+13 = 85. 85/5 = 17. Clearly, the fact that Randy stated that his age at onset of training was 17 without knowing that this was the average age of our cadre of Mars visitors when we began training is probative of his claims.

Wasn't Regina Duggan that DARPA Director that left DARPA to become a Google executive? I wonder if she will read this post - she has accomplished great things in her career, my hat is off to you Ms. Duggan.

3.

Randy says he was part of the "Mars Defense Force." When we were training to go to Mars in 1980, Major Dames told our class that the three major reasons we were being sent to Mars were: (1) to help establish on Mars an extraterrestrial defense regime protecting Earth; (2) to create a basis under public international law to claim Mars as US territory by sending temporary visitors and permanent settlers there; and (3) to acclimate Martian humanoids and animals to our presence. From 1981 to 1984, I took the jump room in El Segundo to Mars about 40 times in furtherance of these goals. The fact that Randy states that he began training three years after my trips to Mars ended to participate in the establishment of a US military presence on Mars is consistent with the developmental time line. It would have been several years later that such a military build-up would have begun. The fact that Randy was sent there not only as a Marine but as a settler harkens back to what Major Ed Dames told us about how Mars would be staffed during our training in Summer 1980.

Well, you can read the rest if you think it is important/interesting.

Andrew Basiago on Randy Cramer

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Ah. So another (proven) liar supports this liar. This part I can believe.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Ah. So another (proven) liar supports this liar. This part I can believe.

So much judgement! Did you know that judgement is just ego, hence unconsciousness and not aligned with the truth of the universe which is love?

So......anyway, you are kind of known to "attempt" to force consensuses on here, is this your opinion or are you presenting it as fact?

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Did you know that judgement is just ego, hence unconsciousness and not aligned with the truth of the universe which is love?

Groovy, man.
Cool, nobody lies. Everybody is right. Right?
Nobody is delusional, right?

The Universe loves you man, except that if you don't pay attention it will kill you in an instant. And often, even if you are paying attention.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

So much judgement!

How do you reach that conclusion without being judgmental yourself?

This is a pretty funny article:

www.wired.co.uk...

It is not known what exactly Obama did on Mars. (Socialising Martian health care, perhaps? Building a birth-certificate printing press?) His mission was a perilous one, according to Basiago and Stillings. The CIA wished to "establish a defense regime protecting the Earth from threats from space" as well as a legal claim to "territorial sovereignty," making Obama something of a Martian conquistador. Presumably, Obama's CIA handlers needed him to "acclimate Martian humanoids and animals to their presence" in order to secure the US-Martian alliance. (We'll bet you weren't even aware of Martian animals.)

"Simply put, your task is to be seen and not eaten," an elder chrononaut, retired Army Maj. Ed Dames, is alleged to have told a young Obama.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Here's an interesting article in which claimed Mars experiencer Andrew D. Basiago validates Mars experiences of US Marine Captain Randy Cramer.

He list ten points which help support Randy's story:

2.

Randy claims that he was born in 1970 and that he began training for Mars in 1987 at age 17. This is a young age to begin such dangerous service and tends to strain the credibility of anybody offering such an account. Seventeen was, however, the average age of the five Mars jumpers that have been identified as being among the 10 American teenagers who were trained to go to Mars by Major Ed Dames at College of the Siskiyous in Summer 1980. They were: Barack H. Obama, born 8/4/61 (age 19), Andrew D. Basiago, born 9/18/61 (age 18), William C. McCool, born 9/23/61 (age 18), Regina E. Dugan, born 3/19/63 (age 17), and William B. Stillings, born 12/22/66 (age 13). Do the math. 19+18+18+17+13 = 85. 85/5 = 17. Clearly, the fact that Randy stated that his age at onset of training was 17 without knowing that this was the average age of our cadre of Mars visitors when we began training is probative of his claims.

Wasn't Regina Duggan that DARPA Director that left DARPA to become a Google executive? I wonder if she will read this post - she has accomplished great things in her career, my hat is off to you Ms. Duggan.

3.

Randy says he was part of the "Mars Defense Force." When we were training to go to Mars in 1980, Major Dames told our class that the three major reasons we were being sent to Mars were: (1) to help establish on Mars an extraterrestrial defense regime protecting Earth; (2) to create a basis under public international law to claim Mars as US territory by sending temporary visitors and permanent settlers there; and (3) to acclimate Martian humanoids and animals to our presence. From 1981 to 1984, I took the jump room in El Segundo to Mars about 40 times in furtherance of these goals. The fact that Randy states that he began training three years after my trips to Mars ended to participate in the establishment of a US military presence on Mars is consistent with the developmental time line. It would have been several years later that such a military build-up would have begun. The fact that Randy was sent there not only as a Marine but as a settler harkens back to what Major Ed Dames told us about how Mars would be staffed during our training in Summer 1980.

Well, you can read the rest if you think it is important/interesting.

Andrew Basiago on Randy Cramer

Good stuff i am enjoying reading your posts I recommend you ignore the naysayers, as they arent actually adding anything but insults to the thread.

Keep up the good work, sharing information is a good thing, and I think if its true then that means we are just waiting to experience some of the greater advantages of higher technology to benifit our civilization.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I recommend you ignore the naysayers, as they arent actually adding anything but insults to the thread.

To ignore something might make one look ignorant though,

and that goes against ATS's motto.

Many might say the naysayers as you call them ignore what being claimed but I see it that nothing has been ignored but that the naysayers have looked further into the claims than the ones that gobble this stuff up and have formed their opinion on a little in depth research of the said claims.

Many just read whats claimed and nod their heads in agreement because its conforms to their own beliefs and ignore what naysayers have say and simply believe that the naysayers are being paid or have the wool pulled over their eyes.

Others are curious because the subject of Ufology interests them and its they (the naysayers) that actually research a little bit more than those think some whistle is being blown.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Did you know that judgement is just ego

well yes baseless judgement might be so,

however,

Many have looked into claims made and have formed their judgement/conclusion/belief based on looking into whats claimed.

Just like you have, some just delve a little deeper than others.

But no matter how deep one delves everyone will have own perceptions of what they take in and will base their conclusion based on that.

You mention ego so often that you make yourself look or sound like I should say a very egotistical person, judging other people judgement's because they differ from yours, I guess many do it from all sides.

Its quite normal to consider many of these so called whistleblowers liars, then don't share anything concrete, they say similar things to one another when its suites their cause, other times these so called whistleblowers of alien nature go against each other and bad mouth each other when their claims contradict one another.

Its happened quite a few times in Ufology.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I recommend you ignore the naysayers, as they arent actually adding anything but insults to the thread.

To ignore something might make one look ignorant though,

and that goes against ATS's motto.

Many might say the naysayers as you call them ignore what being claimed but I see it that nothing has been ignored but that the naysayers have looked further into the claims than the ones that gobble this stuff up and have formed their opinion on a little in depth research of the said claims.

Many just read whats claimed and nod their heads in agreement because its conforms to their own beliefs and ignore what naysayers have say and simply believe that the naysayers are being paid or have the wool pulled over their eyes.

Others are curious because the subject of Ufology interests them and its they (the naysayers) that actually research a little bit more than those think some whistle is being blown.

Many of the naysayers seem to be just closed-minded to the idea of an ET interaction with Earth, denying it before even researching it. Science usually finds an anomaly then proposes a hypothesis and begins research. However, many of the naysayers on here see the anomaly of UFO's, crop circles, abductions and animal mutilations and begin with the null hypothesis that it can't be an ET interaction with Earth. There are a few that "seem" to be open minded though........

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


You mention ego so often that you make yourself look or sound like I should say a very egotistical person, judging other people judgement's because they differ from yours, I guess many do it from all sides.

I mention ego much hoping to wake people up, and realize their ego operates unconsciously. When I mention ego it is usually in conjunction with an observation I have made - in which there is no reaction and I remain emotionally neutral. If people were to recognize their ego it could change the world - for the better - but that is a topic for another thread, but one I consider the utmost of importance for humanity, even more important than the topic on this thread - that is why I bring it up often.

For example, you labelled me a "very egotistical" person. That is your right, of course I would disagree. Did you feel an emotional charge or sense of satisfaction when you thought that judgement? Then you have made it from ego. If you were emotionally neutral then it came from consciousness. To me it looks more like a simple judgement.

Could you please explain your rational linking one who mentions ego to being egotistical?

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Here's an interesting article in which claimed Mars experiencer Andrew D. Basiago validates Mars experiences of US Marine Captain Randy Cramer.

He list ten points which help support Randy's story:

2.

Randy claims that he was born in 1970 and that he began training for Mars in 1987 at age 17. This is a young age to begin such dangerous service and tends to strain the credibility of anybody offering such an account. Seventeen was, however, the average age of the five Mars jumpers that have been identified as being among the 10 American teenagers who were trained to go to Mars by Major Ed Dames at College of the Siskiyous in Summer 1980. They were: Barack H. Obama, born 8/4/61 (age 19), Andrew D. Basiago, born 9/18/61 (age 18), William C. McCool, born 9/23/61 (age 18), Regina E. Dugan, born 3/19/63 (age 17), and William B. Stillings, born 12/22/66 (age 13). Do the math. 19+18+18+17+13 = 85. 85/5 = 17. Clearly, the fact that Randy stated that his age at onset of training was 17 without knowing that this was the average age of our cadre of Mars visitors when we began training is probative of his claims.

Wasn't Regina Duggan that DARPA Director that left DARPA to become a Google executive? I wonder if she will read this post - she has accomplished great things in her career, my hat is off to you Ms. Duggan.

3.

Randy says he was part of the "Mars Defense Force." When we were training to go to Mars in 1980, Major Dames told our class that the three major reasons we were being sent to Mars were: (1) to help establish on Mars an extraterrestrial defense regime protecting Earth; (2) to create a basis under public international law to claim Mars as US territory by sending temporary visitors and permanent settlers there; and (3) to acclimate Martian humanoids and animals to our presence. From 1981 to 1984, I took the jump room in El Segundo to Mars about 40 times in furtherance of these goals. The fact that Randy states that he began training three years after my trips to Mars ended to participate in the establishment of a US military presence on Mars is consistent with the developmental time line. It would have been several years later that such a military build-up would have begun. The fact that Randy was sent there not only as a Marine but as a settler harkens back to what Major Ed Dames told us about how Mars would be staffed during our training in Summer 1980.

Well, you can read the rest if you think it is important/interesting.

Andrew Basiago on Randy Cramer

Good stuff i am enjoying reading your posts I recommend you ignore the naysayers, as they arent actually adding anything but insults to the thread.

Keep up the good work, sharing information is a good thing, and I think if its true then that means we are just waiting to experience some of the greater advantages of higher technology to benifit our civilization.

I realize that if even some of this information is true then there obviously has been a massive cover-up, and of course that cover-up would extend to posters on ATS, as we know paid disinfo agents are legion on the internet. Some are quite easy to spot using the tried and true but annoying tactics of ego diminishment and emotional engagement; others are quite subtle.

If this is not true it is entertaining, Randy Cramer is a very interesting, articulate and intelligent speaker; if it is true there have been a huge amount of crimes committed against mankind and it needs to end NOW. Those knowingly participating in the cover-up should be careful as they certainly do not have access to all the info and once they discover what they have been helping to abet they will be shocked and ashamed if they have the slightest conscience, and could be held accountable by post-disclosure tribunals.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: sputniksteve

If his actual title is Brigadier General, the 2 really shouldn't be separated as far as I know, but if you must shorten it General would be appropriate. Brigadier is like a qualifier for the General title, not a title in of itself.

Julian Smith was a Lieutenant General of the Marines until 1946 when he retired.

He retired as a lieutenant general in 1946, and he died in 1975, age 90.

www.nps.gov...

Pardon my mis representing of Mr. smith.

I appreciate your interest in this.

However, the Major General you are referring to that died a long time ago is Julian C. SMITH, whereas the one Randy Cramer reports to is Brigadier General Julian SMYTHE, "Julian" and "Smith" / "Smythe" being common names, I'm sure if you looked over the past century or so you could find general officers with names that were similar, such as Steve Johnson/Johnston, William Kelley/Kelly, Greg McKay/Mackay - I'm sure you get the picture.

Any other points you would like to discuss?

Well I think as time goes on and we understand our own existance as less material and more energetic the viels will lift.

Eventually we may become a kind of digital race, capable of coding and recoding ourselves/bodies to suit our needs.

I think it may all be just a matter of time.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

However, the Major General you are referring to that died a long time ago is Julian C. SMITH, whereas the one Randy Cramer reports to is Brigadier General Julian SMYTHE, "Julian" and "Smith" / "Smythe" being common names, I'm sure if you looked over the past century or so you could find general officers with names that were similar, such as Steve Johnson/Johnston, William Kelley/Kelly, Greg McKay/Mackay - I'm sure you get the picture.

I did and there is no other LT.General in the Marines with the name Smythe.

Had you done any research before just blindly believing this man you would see that.

Any other points you would like to discuss?

How about you try and show the man who supposedly gave this permission after his death as being real and not made up in Mr. Cramers mind.

Try that one first then we can go from there.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Apparently it can't be done. Better to make claims, why show they are true that's too much work.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Did you feel an emotional charge or sense of satisfaction when you thought that judgement? Then you have made it from ego. If you were emotionally neutral then it came from consciousness. To me it looks more like a simple judgement.

I will just quote what you said as a response to the above

When I mention ego it is usually in conjunction with an observation I have made - in which there is no reaction and I remain emotionally neutral.

I just observe your awakened stance and see it as you being an egomaniac, to say its important to wake others

What make you sure you are awake and others are in slumber?

Everyone wants to follow a religious path and preach their own understanding and judge those or as you put it awaken them to new understanding.

That is egotistical in my opinion

Could you please explain your rational linking one who mentions ego to being egotistical?

Well you seem to feel like you are awake and other are asleep and you need to wake them up.

Its that simple.

You are no more awake than I or anyone else, thinking you are is your ego playing tricks on you

One good example of your ego taking control and misinterpreting and hearing or reading whats not said or written is this

For example, you labelled me a "very egotistical" person.

No, I really didn't.

You actually quoted what I said, not sure how you get I labeled you as being a very egotistical when I simply explained an observation of mine by how you post quite frequently makes you look or sound as such.

Is that labeling you or giving an observation just like you do?

In this video Randy goes into his life time travel and the technology available to our secret space forces.