It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Free Energy and its Political Economic Reality

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 01:12 PM

To get back on topic, I want to address an issue that I have not covered much on my site, which is the fragmented nature of the spook world and FE, and William Colby in particular. Ralph McGehee began having his eyes opened when he briefed Colby about what was really happening with the communists in Southeast Asia in the 1960s:

In Ralph’s book, he described Colby’s performances on Capitol Hill when he was the CIA’s director. The CIA got drug through the mud in the 1970s on Colby’s watch. Ralph said that he watched Colby say things that Ralph knew that Colby KNEW were lies, and Colby was able to say them while looking like an honest Nebraska farmer. Ralph noted that Colby’s ability to lie like that was a “remarkable talent.” However, Ralph said that he NEVER saw the CIA tell the truth to the public, so Colby was just doing his job. The CIA is a disinformation agency,

along with its covert action duties. However, the American president can have little influence where the CIA is concerned. The CIA was definitely involved in the JFK hit:

although its involvement and motivation is a subject for debate, but preferably not on this thread. Colby was involved with Steven Greer.

Colby’s “hunting accident” in 1996 sent a chill throughout Washington. According to Greer, Colby was about to initiate an effort to release some of the FE and related technologies when he was found floating in the river. Colby was an insider who became a “loose cannon.” I cannot recall the movie’s name at the moment, but a relatively recent movie depicted how Colby was probably murdered – snatched in broad daylight from a D.C. park. When Jimmy Carter became president, he summoned the CIA director to his office and told him to hand over the CIA’s material on UFOs. The CIA director told Carter to take a hike; presidential curiosity was not enough to warrant receiving the CIA’s materials:

That CIA director who stonewalled Carter was George Bush the First.

When Clinton became president, he and the head of the CIA were also out of the UFO/ET loop, which led to Greer’s briefing of Woolsey.

So, we have one CIA director knee deep in the ET/disruptive technology field who paid with his life when he stepped out of line. We have another who went on to become president, after stonewalling another president on the UFO situation (Greer says that Bush the First is involved with the Big Boys, but his son is not – a debatable situation, but I do not know what Greer knows about it). Another CIA head, Woolsey, was stonewalled himself on the UFO situation, and Woolsey went on to become a neocon who helped initiate the invasion of Iraq:

What those disparate facts demonstrate, I believe, is the fragmented nature of those realms. Ralph McGehee was from the “white,” civil servant, bureaucratic arm of the CIA, the part that most CIA watchers are familiar with, the realm from which documents are eventually declassified, although even then it can be a crapshoot:

Colby was the face of the CIA for awhile, but was deeply involved with the spook side of the fence. That spook side included CIA contract agents (I have some personal familiarity with that world), but there are also conduits to the Big Boys, although Colby’s fate shows how low-ranking he must have been. Woolsey was another bureaucrat who aligned with the neocons who have created the U.S.’s current foreign policy disasters (which may be far from finished, if Cheney and gang get their wish and attack Iran). Greer said that Cheney and Rumsfeld have interfaced with the Big Boys.

One thing is evident: when all is said and done, energy runs the world, oil dominates the publicly available energy sources, and that explains why the U.S. military sits in the Middle East today. FE can eliminate that dynamic and change the world in radical ways:

but it would also thwart some grand plans. 9/11 has obviously played a major role in current events, and there is plenty to the official narrative that does not hold up:

I doubt that there was one person at our NEM conference in 2004 that believed that Mallove’s murder was random:

It is all related, IMO, but exactly how all the parts fit together is a tough puzzle, and that is where “conspiracy theorists” often get into trouble.

There is some food for thought,


[edit on 9-9-2007 by wadefrazier3]

posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 09:38 AM

I would like to introduce a few more facets to the mix. When I was told that NEM may have been under psychic attack, at the very same moment that Mallove was dying:

the feeling was a very intense and negative one. I also felt it right after we had our 2004 conference. I was already going through an agonizing mid-life crisis and dealing with a highly stressful job, so it was very difficult to stay balanced during all that mayhem. Emotionally unbalancing the targets is a primary strategy that is used, be it inflicted by the Big Boys and their agents, or just free-lance trolls and their friends.

When Brian O’Leary later publicly admitted that Mallove’s murder is what spurred him to move from the U.S., it made sense to me, in retrospect. Brian left for South America a few weeks after Mallove’s murder, and relocated to Ecuador immediately after our conference. I sympathize with his actions.

Dennis, however, keeps dancing at Ground Zero. Greer keeps up his efforts, and the few others like them also keep plugging away. The “opposition” is very organized, with resources at their disposal that can be considered awesome. A Dennis, however, says that he works on behalf of his god, and that resource has proven sufficient, at least to get him through each day.

A reasonable person can look at the situation and think that none of those FE revolutionaries has a prayer, but the miracle can always happen, and if one happens to send FE over the top, it will probably hatch in the hearts of many. A few “heroes” can carry the ball for awhile, but it will be up to the many to really make it happen.

With bombing Iran looking more likely each day (Chomsky is not exactly a shrill voice ), it may take some kind of divine intervention to keep the whole thing from melting down. I’ll take the miracle.


posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 02:27 AM
And all that has WHAT to do with free energy?

posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 10:07 PM

By NRen2k5
And all that has WHAT to do with free energy?
reply to post by NRen2k5

Could Wade be saying that when the Free Energy "ball" gets rolling there are always people like NRen2k5 there to try to stop it?

posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 10:47 PM
Hi PlumRanch:

This thread is about the political-economic aspects of FE, as the thread is titled. Some have tried to divert it into other pet discussions (known as thread hijacking). I purposely did not make this thread about debating FE physics, and on my site, I tell people where they can go to have those scientific discussions.

Interested ATS members can begin their own FE physics thread and discuss it there.

The political-economic dynamics of FE can be quite far-ranging and CAN include spirituality, the media, history, and other seemingly unrelated disciplines. The political-economic aspects of the FE conundrum that DO include science include the political-economic milieu in which modern science operates. There is no such thing as pure science. I have tried to help the radical left understand that situation:

to little avail so far.

As a group, I have not encountered anybody more naïve to the political-economic aspects of the FE situation than the scientifically-trained (and, ironically, they can be highly irrational where their dogmas are concerned).

What we call science and reason can be very seductive, with its related ideologies quite subtle at times:

My next large post is planned to be about achieving radical political-economic understandings, and I will present my journey and those close to me (in the FE milieu) as examples. There is no substitute for experience, and those with radical political-economic understandings usually got there through radicalizing EXERIENCES. Book-learning is ancillary.

Be well,


[edit on 11-9-2007 by wadefrazier3]

posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 02:21 AM

and those with radical political-economic understandings usually got there through radicalizing EXERIENCES. Book-learning is ancillary
reply to post by wadefrazier3

This should be interesting reading, indeed! Thanks Wade!

posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 03:00 AM
Discussion of the political and economic aspects of free energy is moot because there’s no such thing as free energy.

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 10:20 AM

I began this thread to initiate a discussion of the political-economic aspects of the FE milieu. FE could easily initiate an event that would dwarf the largest two previous events in human history, at least of those acknowledged by mainstream sources:

the Domestication Revolution:

and the Industrial Revolution:

Both primarily economic events were made possible by achieving a level of energy utilization not previously seen. It is also no accident that slavery appeared in early civilization and disappeared in early industrialization. Slavery was primarily an economic institution,

and industrialization made chattel slavery uneconomical. Coerced servitude still exists, however, and FE could topple the entire scarcity paradigm that humanity has ALWAYS operated under.

The people running the world know this well, which is why they have been so vigilant in preventing FE from being publicly used:

My experience has been that it takes a radical political-economic orientation in order to understand both the potential of FE and the phenomenon of its suppression. Very few specialists in the physical sciences achieve those radical understandings, and the reasons for that are several:

but it largely hinges on the indoctrination that they receive. The best of them simply have a tunnel-vision perspective of reality, and the worst of them sit glued to their armchairs in their “skepticism,” with the word “impossible” regularly issuing from their lips and keyboards. That kind has always filled the ranks of science and technology:

and all intellectual establishments. They will be among the last people to wake up (as Planck said, they eventually die off instead of wake up), and are not worth my time and effort to engage. Been there, done that, way too many times.

However, I do not want to pick on the scientifically-trained, as almost nobody I have ever met has been able to lay aside their scarcity-based ideologies:

In fact, perhaps none of the people whose journeys I will present below has entirely escaped their indoctrination, but they have come about as close as I have seen to doing so, and their EXPERIENCES were always primarily responsible.

Some began their journeys as simply part of their job, as FAA investigator Rodney Stich did.

His investigations into airliner crashes and their cover-ups led him on a bizarre journey that brought him to increasingly radical understandings. Most in his shoes, when confronted with such endemic corruption, just keep their heads down and keep drawing their paychecks, as my Justice Department buddy did when he investigated a case of Detroit suppressing high MPG carburetors:

Police detective Gary Wean stumbled into similar corruption as part of his job, but never quite got past his right-wing indoctrination:

It took the CIA’s Ralph McGehee sixteen years to figure out what his career was really all about:

His radicalizing moment was that grim day in his Vietnam quarters.

Dennis was in Vietnam too, but his radicalizing moments were stateside. He might note several, but the one in the bank, watching a starving family ask for help:

was his first. The event that radicalized his free energy pursuit was when one of his employees died as a result of the BPA Hit Man’s efforts:

All of the above people are considered “heretics” by the establishment. The heretics that I have always respected the most have begun their journeys as true believers.

They bought their indoctrination, and had a NEED to believe it. They pursued the ideals they were fed, to only come to the grim realization that those ideals were merely nice cover stories for the masses, to disguise the true reality and the motivation behind it. It has been that way throughout history. Peter Waldo took the Catholic Church’s rhetoric seriously, gave away his possessions and tried emulating Jesus’ example.

The Church declared Waldo and his followers heretics and enthusiastically slaughtered them.

Steven Greer started on his steep learning curve when he began briefing officials globally on the ET issue:

In summary, those “radicals” all had their EXPERIENCES to thank for their perspective, not their indoctrination. Brian O’Leary is a scientific heretic today:

and has said that if he knew what he was in for, leaving the cushy Ivy League world in his pursuit of the truth and a healed planet, he would not have done it. I have great sympathy for that sentiment, and I may be in the same boat.

This will run into two posts….

[edit on 14-9-2007 by wadefrazier3]

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 10:21 AM
Adam Trombly is another “heretic” whose journey was a radicalizing one:

What all those heretics had in common is that they CARED. That caring orientation makes them highly unusual – less than one-in-a-thousand in the general population:

If you truly CARE, you will not be satisfied with the lies and platitudes that ALL establishments spout, and if you keep pursuing your caring nature, you will eventually come to the same general territory that the above heretics arrived at. While it is possible to come to radical understandings without going through the meat grinder that those heretics did, you will have to do your homework, usually after you have had some kind of radicalizing moment yourself. My radicalizing moment occurred in a courtroom.

Those who pretend that they have performed some “research” before they challenged me (my journey is heavily documented) have always limited their “fact-checking” to spending a few minutes surfing the Internet. I have yet to see any of them put forth a level of effort that even amounted to an average day of research when I was creating my web site. I have never seen ONE person who challenged the veracity of my experiences do ANY homework (except for the dishonest Mr. Skeptic ).

While personal integrity is the most important ingredient in developing a radical political-economic perspective, there is another vitally important quality, and it has to do with having a comprehensive perspective.


Bucky Fuller said that specialization in science was purposely designed to keep scientists blind to the big picture, so the ruling class could control them and the fruits of their labors.

Only a multidisciplinary approach has a chance of seeing the big picture, and if you want to understand the big picture, you have to do the work. Nobody can do it for you. While I have found more personal integrity among the leading lights of the radical left than any other group that I have yet found:

their ideological tenets have kept them from seeing the big picture, and they have fallen prey to two major pitfalls that prevent understanding of the FE milieu:

1. FE is contrary to the “laws of physics”:
2. The suppression of FE is an unbelievable conspiracy theory.

When I engaged Noam Chomsky on the issue fifteen years, ago, he backed off further consideration of the situation because he was not an “expert.” It does not take much expertise to understand how steeped in dogma the scientific establishment is. There are NO laws of physics. There are only theories, but every epoch of human understanding has been plagued with establishments feigning CERTAINTY about how the universe works, and they dealt harshly with their heretics in order to keep their “certainty” safe from challenge. One day before long, today’s physics textbooks will be seen as quaint relics of an ignorant era, which many of today’s physics professors uneasily realize.

It is really not that difficult to encounter data that shreds many of today’s scientific dogmas:

Also, it not all that difficult to encounter evidence of a global control system.

Generally, that control system is encountered by activists who actually try to DO SOMETHING that might impact the various global rackets. That is when people can have their radicalizing moments. However, it is not all that difficult to investigate those incidents.

Once those ideological hurdles are overcome, the big picture can begin coming into view, although there are still many pitfalls to negotiate in the quest for a productive understanding of the FE milieu:

Fuller was one of the West’s first comprehensivists (also called generalist), and the comprehensivist perspective is really the only one that can see the big picture. I had my comprehensive education by the seat of my britches. Fuller proposed a comprehensivist curriculum, to train people to see the big picture. I hope I live to see such a dream come to fruition. Until it does, comprehensivism is largely a self-study course, and includes science, math, history, media studies, medicine, politics, economics, spirituality and other disciplines.

There are not many who are fit to develop radical political-economic understandings of the FE milieu and the world in general, but I keep looking for them here and there. I heard from one radical pal this week that described his journey in America as one of trying to wake up the “zombies.” My heart goes out to efforts like that, and he is a better man than me. I seek the awake and the awakening, not the zombies or those who try to keep them asleep.

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 07:49 PM
reply to post by wadefrazier3

It takes a comprehensivist or a generalist! I like it, sounds nice. Not too many of those around! How do you apply for accredidation or is it even taught? Silly question, I know. You either have it or you don't. In my profession people only specialize. If you generalize you are frowned upon and overlooked! I see how it could mesh well with FE development.

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 08:00 PM
I know someplace that you'd get some good questions from a spiritually and politically sophisticated perspective. I can't seem to find a way to PM you though

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 08:45 PM
My major in college was generalization with a minor in comprehensionalism. I have a BS in these subjects, just like others....

This just gets sillier, but then I actually am educated.

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 10:16 PM

My major in college was generalization with a minor in comprehensionalism
reply to post by hinky

I'm impressed! That would beat "Psyc" any day! What was required curriculum? I'll bet a potential employer would like it too!

Oh yes and ahh... stay away, Wade... she's mine!!

[edit on 14-9-2007 by plumranch]

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 12:59 AM

How did the FE device that you & Dennis were involved with work?

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 10:21 AM
Hi Has2B:

Thanks for the question. One thing I emphasize in my work is that my radicalizing journey was involved with technologies that operated BELOW what we would consider FE. Together, they might have had a chance.

My first professional mentor invented what was hailed as the best engine for powering an automobile:

I was a teenager when it made a splash in scientific and technological circles, and that is when my alternative energy dreams began. Then I had two paranormal events lead me into business studies:

and Dennis Lee’s company:

Then my wild ride began. Dennis was making, marketing and installing the world’s best heating system when we met:

Neither one of those technologies, by themselves, were initially thought of or promoted as being able to make free energy, but Dennis’ journey is the best example that I know of to understand the real world of capitalism, particularly in the energy arena. However, in late 1987, my first professional mentor proposed that marrying his engine to Dennis’ heat pump panels might be able to produce “free energy” (he also testified in court to his opinion). Back then, I was on the business end of our venture (I was the controller and financier), not the technological end, and they did not bring me in very far to the technical end of things. We began making a prototype of my mentor’s engine, and then Victor Fischer came along with his own hydraulic heat engine (Fischer also thought that FE was possible with his engine and Dennis’ panels):

so we began making one of those instead, and that is when the Big Boys dropped the hammer on us and the nightmare of my life began.

I will always be getting over it. After I left Ventura (I hope I never see the place again), I began researching the technology that we were pursuing. I did not have access to my mentor or Fischer, so I muddled through thermodynamic textbooks and patents and understood the mechanics of what they proposed. It flies in the face of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I am skeptical myself that it will work, but it would be nice if those geniuses could speak for themselves on the issue. However, they both know what the sledgehammer feels like, so they will not be speaking publicly about their technologies anytime soon. I believe that even if those technologies could not produce FE, they are still the world’s best heating system and the world’s best engine for powering an automobile, and both are worth trillions of dollars on that alone.

As you might guess, when we were standing on the national stage, we became a lightning rod for people like us. Many approached us with other technologies and grim tales of how they fared with their own alternative energy/disruptive technology efforts:

Of all the technologies that could do FE, I would rank marrying Dennis’ heat pump with hydraulic heat engines well down the list. It would be a lot of capital investment for something that may not produce that much energy (if it would work at all – FYI, in the late 1990s, Dennis got back together with Fischer, and they built a prototype that ran on its own steam for an entire day – the stuff may have legitimate FE potential – but it looks like the Big Boys got to Fischer with the carrot).

Stuff like Sparky Sweet’s, with no moving parts, blows away heat pumps and heat engines:

As, as you might imagine, when you play at the levels that we did, you begin running into people with truly incredible tales to tell, and some in our circles have been able to briefly glimpse behind the curtain at what the Big Boys have developed:

That is the irony of what people like Dennis, Greer and others are attempting. They KNOW that the Big Boys have anti-gravity, FE and many other disruptive technologies in their hands, and they make sure that nothing gets out to the public, but they keep plugging along on a shoestring, after rejecting vast bribes to cease their efforts.

Not long after Brian O’Leary invited me to help found NEM:

I read an article by Eugene Mallove that mentioned taking environmental heat and making FE was possible:

That was EXACTLY what we were pursuing, and I had Brian get me in touch with Mallove. Mallove proceeded to inform me that the Second Law was rubbish, and that he had reproduced Reich’s famous experiment with orgone energy:

I sent him patents and other information and looked forward to some rewarding exchanges to help enlighten me on the thermodynamics of what we were pursuing. Mallove’s murder a few months later ended our conversation. Almost nobody in Mallove’s circles believes that his murder was a random act. Brian began planning his move to Ecuador almost immediately after Mallove’s murder, and Brian has publicly stated that Mallove’s murder made him realize that the U.S. was no longer a safe place for FE activists.

So, that is a little of the technical background. Again, whether heat engines married to heat pump evaporators can do FE is really not all THAT interesting to me. My journey led me to the political-economic aspects of the alternative energy milieu. Paradoxically, technology is not the problem. The reasons that we do not have enjoy the benefits of FE today are political-economic in nature (including spiritual aspects), not technological. The scientifically-trained, however, almost never understand. They are either naïve or paranoid.

On comprehensivism, my pal Steve Meyers studied under Bucky:

and I am almost envious. Steve called me a “comprehensivist” several years ago, and it was the first time I heard the term. Bucky’s work was revelatory to me, and it was comforting to realize that somebody had been there long before me. I was not able to fully articulate my perceptions before digesting Bucky’s work.

Be well,


[edit on 15-9-2007 by wadefrazier3]

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 10:25 AM
I have accepted JimJamJerry’s invitation to post in another forum. I will go anyplace in cyberspace where the audience is somewhat receptive (VERY few are). I will keep posting at ATS while there are signs of life here, and I have been impressed with quite a few ATS members. But that other forum might be troll-free, which is a plus.


posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 10:32 AM

Originally posted by NRen2k5
Discussion of the political and economic aspects of free energy is moot because there’s no such thing as free energy.

Would you care to expand on that? "There is no such thing as free energy because the powers-that-be won't allow it"? Or "there is no such thing as free energy because the technology does not exist"? I'd agree to the first, but the second is patently false. The universe consists of nothing BUT energy, it's just a matter of learning how to harness it. That people HAVE learned how to harness it in various shapes and forms cannot be denied; probably the most obvious example (that I have seen) was on a documentary called The Race To Zero Point where an engine powered by nothing more than inertia was demonstrated, which was estimated to be around 20 times more powerful than a jet engine.

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 10:35 AM

Originally posted by wadefrazier3
I have accepted JimJamJerry’s invitation to post in another forum. I will go anyplace in cyberspace where the audience is somewhat receptive (VERY few are). I will keep posting at ATS while there are signs of life here, and I have been impressed with quite a few ATS members. But that other forum might be troll-free, which is a plus.


Wade, a point to note. Sometimes you NEED trolls in order to keep the discussion moving. Sometimes people will just read and nod their heads and go to do their own research without posting a reply. Sometimes (as my last post demonstrates...) people will only post to tell "trolls" to shut their grid! So don't let them put you off; just ignore them if they upset or put you off, there'll nearly always be someone else willing to take them on. The upside to that, as I said, is that it CAN keep the discussion moving.

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 11:09 AM
Hi Franzbeckenbauer:

I appreciate your observation on the trolls, however, I am troll-weary. ATS is actually relatively troll-free. When I have posted on more mainstream forums, the MAJORITY of the responses were troll-ish. I doubt that posts like “put up or shut up” or “FE is impossible” help develop the kind of conversation that I am aiming for. There is a high level, intelligent and multi-disciplinary discussion that is waiting to be developed on these vitally important issues. Infantile responses just pollute the waters, IMO. I do not seek a bunch of people who automatically agree with me and have nothing to add, but those who desire honest, intelligent, CRITICAL and open-minded inquiry with somebody WHO HAS BEEN THERE. That should not be asking too much, IMO. Quite a few posts on this thread are of that nature, which keeps me posting here, but this thread is at least twice as long as it should be so far, bloated with troll posts and jousting and me having to repeat myself over and over. I do not mind the repetition so much, if my message begins to be comprehended. The troll stuff, however, seems to be of little help. Look how many people have demonstrated how clueless this thread’s primary troll is, but his tune is the exactly same as it was when he joined ATS to troll this thread. It is like talking to a wall, and his stuff is ALL off topic. I am not looking for a large audience, but one that can simply understand the issues.

Be well,


posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 11:12 AM

Originally posted by franzbeckenbauer

Originally posted by wadefrazier3
I have accepted JimJamJerry’s invitation to post in another forum.


Wade, a point to note. Sometimes you NEED trolls in order to keep the discussion moving.

I totally disagree. you don't need trolls. trolls are an annoyance at best, and an intentional distraction at worst. They waste bandwidth, prevent the development of intelligent debate, and circumvent attempts to share information. I'm sure some trolls are even paid to do it, i.e., low level "agents" whose job is to prevent information from getting out.

there's other ways to keep a conversation going that don't require the disrespect and disruption that a troll brings to a conversation.

[edit on 15-9-2007 by jimjamjerry]

new topics

top topics

<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in