NSA Psychic Spying On Foreign Targets Blocked By "Unknown Extraterrestrial Source"

I'm an Army brat who was born at Ft. Mead, MD, home of the Stargate Project. My dad was stationed there as an MP and provided security for various NSA facilities. I asked him about the project, but he didn't recall hearing about it. I believe that was before the project started ['66-68]... not that he would be in the loop or, if he had been, would be able to talk about it.

While I have no problem believing the Cold War era government would spend $500K a year on such a project, I think the "Alien Psychic Jamscreen" claims by the OP's source are more than a bit wacky.



[edit on 21-6-2010 by draknoir2]

Originally posted by STARstream Research
Note the distinction between researching material that blurs the distinction between fiction and reality and actually creating material that blurs that distinction.

Thank you for your post.

When you say "blurs the distinction" do you mean it blurs on purpose (in the Dan Brown kind of sense - to create a better story), or because the information is possibly true but simply too unbelievable for most people?

Also, can you comment on the phrase "unknown extraterrestrial source". It seems to me a loaded phrase. Does it mean "unknown" as in literally unknown, or unknown as opposed to other "known" extraterrestrials?

[edit on 21-6-2010 by FOXMULDER147]

all of this will link up to how we one day [might] travel to stars far away. and one possible reason why mainstream physics is so dry.

STAR = Spacetime Threat Assessment Reports

Stream = my last name's translation to English

First point: I am not a source -- I am merely reporting based upon input from sources to me. Our goal is to apply the same rules of sourcing used by The Washington Post; although in this field this is not always 100 percent enforceable. The majority of our information comes from open-source real-world materials (STAR GATE files, USG documents, etc.)

Because of all of the public interest, we launched STARpod.org as a popular site (in the sense that Popular Science etc. are pop versions of the more serious journals like Nature).

There is an old fashioned notion that one may divide the world into what is real and what is imagined. Information theory approach to the world shows this is no longer a valid way of defining reality.

"When you say "blurs the distinction" do you mean it blurs on purpose (in the Dan Brown kind of sense - to create a better story), or because the information is possibly true but simply too unbelievable for most people?"

The blurring results from the functioning of the human mind; rigidity (reality versus fantasy) breaks down and the mind is more fluid and creative when it is enabled to move between those worlds. This was understood early on at CIA; DCI Smith requested investigation of the use of UFOs which were not understood for purposes of psychological warfare, for example. Later it was understood that the fluidity of the mind might be useful for collecting intelligence.

So to answer your question, the blurring is not about creating a better story but about the blurring in the human mind which appears to produce anomalies. The DIA calls it Anomalous Mental Phenomena, or AMP.

The extreme point of view (held by Dan Smith, Ron Pandolfi's civilian friend) is the simulation hypothesis: the reason the mind produces AMP is because there is no hard reality at all, since we are living in the equivalent of a computer simulation. Nick Bostrom, the Oxford philosopher, has written quite a bit about this idea.

As for the source on the extraterrestrial interference, that information came from our associate Gus Russo via his NSA source who personally knows a person involved in the NSA research.

www.bancroftpress.com...

Here is verbatim how Russo described his sourcing to us (2007):

My NSA source [redacted]

Here's what [redacted] said:

[redacted] has a [redacted] who is an NSA remote viewer. [redacted] was recently (within the last three years) sent to a University level course on RV. NSA considers remote viewing a valid SIGINT tool.

The program was relocated from CIA and is one of the most highly
classified at NSA. The source says the program encountered problems when when foreign targets were being blocked by an extra-terrestrial source that has never been identified.

There is (was?) also an NSA UFO Working Group that was overseen by
cryptologist LAMBOS CALLIMAHOS, PhD. My source sent me this early
declassified paper by Lambos (attached).

Source believes NSA historians James Bamford and David Kahn have
written about Lambos. Bamford may have some of his papers.

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
[Disclaimer - this article is written by Gary Bekkum. Take that for what it's worth

]

If you ever need a caveat like that before reading a writer's work, it should tell you a lot.

It does. It tells you to tread carefully. But I believe in judging everything on its own merits.

A well-known fraudster might hoax 99 UFO photos and take 1 genuine one. If you pre-judge based on the man's reputation, you'll miss out on that real photo.

Did you ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf? Yes the wolf really did come one time. But there's a moral to that story, I'm not sure you got it.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
[Disclaimer - this article is written by Gary Bekkum. Take that for what it's worth

]

If you ever need a caveat like that before reading a writer's work, it should tell you a lot.

It does. It tells you to tread carefully. But I believe in judging everything on its own merits.

A well-known fraudster might hoax 99 UFO photos and take 1 genuine one. If you pre-judge based on the man's reputation, you'll miss out on that real photo.

Did you ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf? Yes the wolf really did come one time. But there's a moral to that story, I'm not sure you got it.

I got the moral. But guess what - the people ignored his cries and the boy got eaten. So who wins?

I'm not talking about cries across a field, I'm talking about actual physical evidence. And to ignore evidence - regardless of the source - is illogical, unscientific, and self-defeating.

BTW - I'm not saying you should go out of your way to analyze every piece of evidence out there... just that we should all be open minded when a new piece of evidence comes along, and we shouldn't dismiss it out of hand purely because of the source.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by FOXMULDER147]

reply to post by AncientShade


Sorry, but your dissertation on EEG "fields," etc. are totally incorrect unless they come directly from an ET source that you can tune me into so as as to correct my assessement of what you say.

Seriously, RVers have not been found to have any special brainwaves except to be able to relax and get into the zone. It is quite possible, I think, that conventional EEG units that stop at about 60 Hz are too limited. (Not long ago it was considered that 40 Hz. was an acceptable limit.) You can bet sophisticated government-funded studies long ago had super units that are limitless in their abilities to pickup RVing "signals." (If they can't detect any, that medium may be outside conventional understanding and not brainwaves at all.)

Indeed, ETs have phenomenal mind powers. But you must not overlook the fact that with several decades of work that we and others have surely developed technological augments that can increase RVing capabilities. Actually, in neurofeeback training work, amazing advances have and continue to be made in healing and correctling brain disorders with cheap and typical EEG units. That work covers such things as sport training, mental training, and especially disfunctions such as hyperactivity, ADD, autism, IBS, etc. (Check it out, loads of info on the internet.)

(I have had my own personal, little EEG unit for several years. Most are only available by perscription nowadays.)

good, I am glad they blocked them.