Dr. Jacques Vallee ~ The Control System

We have been looking closely at certain pockets of time in the UFO history and the 1978-80 Bennewitz case ( other GUT threads) all the way to MJ12 mythology and later Serpo.

Why do they take all the time and effort to destabilize and marginalize Paul Bennewitz and the same source that does that goes out of its way to offer a replacement mythology?

That’s Control system to beat the ban.

We know now, or at least I KNOW, that Vallee was a member of this group in the late 70’s and early 80’s…that is the disinformation crew and dissemination crew sent to sort of “clean up the “aliens are going to eat us mess.”

This could very well have gotten legs and entered the mainstream paradigm laboratory, but the work of the disinformation crew stopped it in its tracks by taking down Bennewitz.

Doty, Moore, and the other guys.

Then ironically, (I‘M NOT MAKING ANY ACCUSATIONS HERE)
Bill Cooper and Phil Schneider get mysteriously violently killed later.

Somebody’s got a hell of a book here!

reply to post by Willtell


May I ask you, as you seem well read into this type of thing; What do you know of Vallee's corrospondence with a certain "Major Murphy"?

reply to post by The GUT

There are different kinds of control systems - open ones and closed ones - and there are tests you can apply to them to find out what kind of control system you're inside. That leads to a number of experiments you can do with the UFO phenomenon…


...The control system concept can be tested by a small group of people - you don't need a large organization or a lot of equipment - and you can start thinking about active intervention in the phenomenon.

I hesitate to be too specific. I'm speaking, as I'm sure you understand, of the attempted manipulation of UFO manifestations. It's a pretty tall order.

Why does Vallee hesitate to be "too specific?"


We're assuming that there is a feedback mechanism involved in the operations of the control system; if you change the information that's carried back to that system, you might be able to infiltrate it through its own feedback.

So, What is Doc Jock getting at? Has the "control system" theory been tested?

To comment on the first question presented from the selection in the OP:
Why does Vallee hesitate to be "too specific?"

I think it mainly has something to do with the applied methodology of the supposed manipulation, the only evidence of UFO's are UFO's and those "spooky" attributes that come with them. Since this happens at "will" by a sort of controllers the only way to stay credible in a sort of experiment is to stay unspecific as one can make a threat without specifics and be somewhat surprising. This is were question number two becomes relevant and ties in with this, "So, What is Doc Jock getting at? Has the "control system" theory been tested?" Outside of known conventional scientific means I believe that the actual interaction falls under counter intelligence and not so much more science anymore and for this, I would imagine would remain secret. The information given to us is given to us without the ability to find a whole of truth as it is in fact compartmentalized and very deceiving in nature.

reply to post by Brotherman


One commentator speculated that John Alexander is Murphy.
Of course when you deal with guys like this it’s a waste of time to depend on whatever they say, imo, since they are too tainted by their closeness to the government.
When dealing with anything form them I follow the formula

Black is white and white is black

reply to post by Willtell


I didn't really ask about who he is more-so the interactions and the revelations Vallee claims to have had do the correspondence with this individual. Primarily in regards to the observations made relating to how to run an intelligence operation and how to run a counter intelligence operation. Regardless of who this person is, it is most certainly a noteworthy and a profound revelation of Vallee's when he began to understand the limits of the information he did have and there forward how he analyzed and applied it towards research. This is why I asked. I would actually like to know more about this particular revelation but am limited to the information available. Thanks anyways though!

reply to post by Brotherman


Your welcome, stick around maybe others here can elaborate on Murphy

reply to post by Willtell


This article comes to mind, not sure if it was linked here or not but none-the-less interesting

Link

cuckooold
I just threw the chemicals out there as potentially having the power to influence us, but in general I don't believe they are intended for any nefarious purposes.I do wonder what detrimental effects there are, but yes, not especially pertinent to this discussion. Just getting into the 'Grand conspiratorial nature of things'

I will happily withdraw farming 'chemicals' from my discussion as irrelevant

That wasn’t necessarily my point, that they did not have an adverse effect, what I was attempting to point out was that the reason they are used is because of intensive farming practices. Some of the chemicals used, as pest- and herbicides, fertilisers, conditioners etc, do contain neurotoxins, organophospates which while they enter into our food in negligible quantities, insufficient to be overly harmful to both health and mental well-being, are devastating to the food chain in general. Additionally, run off effects water supplies and causes harm to the physical environment. However, as I stated, we, as consumers drive the demand for mass produced fresh produce at the lowest possible price, as well as produce that is imported in order to meet consumer demand for the widest possible choice. In order to meet that demand it is necessary for producers to use chemicals. Huge conspiracy there, in my opinion. Add into that, that the majority of food has to travel considerable distances from farm to plate, often by air, and you can incorporate into that equation the pollution caused by the transportation means, fuel used, plus the energy that goes in refridgeration and preservation of that produce. As consumers, the power is in our pocket, we could buy locally, we could buy produce only when it is in season in our locality. We create the system, supply meets our demands.

cuckooold
I do think the electro-magnetic effect something worthy of discussion. I cannot with confidence say that living with this type of pollution has a detrimental effect on us (or not). We too are electro-magnetic, and it seems self evident to me that electrical and magnetic fields would have some level of interaction if inadequately shielded.

I do recommend reading another thread by the GUT, ‘Electromagnetism UFOs and the Weaponization of Alien Technology’, If anyone was going to explore weird and obscure applications of this technology, GUT’s got it covered.

I am familiar with the thread, and while I do not disagree with you, my previous points stand. In addition to that, as you state, we live in a naturally electromagnetic atmosphere to which we are fully integrated, that we have developed technology that exploits the same natural principles to our benefit how can we measure what is detrimental and what is beneficial in that context? How can we shield ourselves from ourselves? Perhaps if you explain your point in detail I can better understand your point.

cuckooold
Does a control system by it's nature not allow choice? I think coercion, persuasion, and personal compulsion can be utilised as forms of control, and the latter two are far more effective than coercion, as this gives one the impression of exercising free will. Yes, of course personal responsibility is highly relevant, but this doesn't negate the fact that society in completely hypocritical about this. For instance here in Australia we have big social problems with electronic gaming machines being available in nearly every pub. For those with gambling problems, of course personal responsibility needs to be exercised. However, to allow deregulation to such a degree, where those who own and install the machines are permitted to put them in such high concentrations, in low income areas where a greater percentage of people are on welfare is questionable.

Funnily enough, in my previous response to you I was going to mention the current trend in UK advertising for online gambling, the majority of which is geared towards women. The adverts portray lovely bright colours, sunshine soaked domestic vistas, and happily, smiling, attractive women who’s life is given a little bit of added excitement by the odd game of bingo between chores. Nothing but a little bit of harmless fun. Of course though, the women that buy into that pitch are not reflections of the women in the adverts, the advert is offering an aspirational model that is contrary to the reality that gambling can, if abused, destroy lives and families. That the is the purpose of advertising, to sugar coat reality and make it more palatable. As J A C Brown puts it in ‘Power of Persuasion’...

“...the emotions to which they appeal are by no means the most pleasant: fear, social embarrassment, greed, hypochondria, emulation in keeping up with the Joneses...There is the appeal to social embarrassment in advertising relating to bad breath, body-odour, facial blemishes, the state of one’s W.C...the appeal to the greed of football pools and the food advertisements; the pseudo-scientific nonsense of patent medicines...which trade on hypochondria and personal insecurity...and the desire for emulation in buying an unnecessary new car or living in a house in a particular part of the country which is regarded as being in accordance with one’s social status.” (p174)

We are by all means manipulated and directed to indulge in certain purchases and pursuits. Our buttons are pushed and our wills are bent. If we allow them to be. Obviously, those suffering from addictions, succumb more easily, and are open to exploitation. Addiction to gambling is often accompanied by alcohol addictions, which is why such it makes good business sense to place them in drinking establishments. It is good business and few businesses are in it for love, pub landlords are no different, they are in it for the money and therefore they will exploit the weaknesses of others in order to maximise their profits. That works spread right across the board.

“The passion for having must lead to never-ending class war. The pretence of the communists that their system will end class struggle by abolishing classes is fiction, for their system is based on the principle of unlimited consumption as the goal of living. As long as everybody wants to have more there must be the formation of classes, there must be class war and in global terms, there must be international war. Greed and peace preclude each other.”
Erich Fromm, To have or to Be (p16)

As I stated earlier in this thread, that is the primary control system, currently, everything else, including advertising, product placement, chemically treated crops, etc etc, are merely symptoms of that disease.

Personally, I think that it applies to every point that you have raised, including MK Ultra. The CIA are afterall, much like MI6 a body who’s aim is to protect the overseas corporate interests of the USA (or UK). Part of that role includes taking out governments, via assassinations and coups, instigating wars etc in order to establish more favourable trade conditions, or to fully exploit that nations natural resources. They are also concerned with ensuring that the home populace supports such ventures even if only indirectly by continuing to consume and maintain a vested interest that prevents them from biting the hand that feeds them, thereby losing social status and or the lifestyle that they have become accustomed to.

Brotherman
Dr Jacques Vallee would agree with what I had said in which you reply the adverse to. For example:

"... It doesn't matter if UFO's are real or not, if enough people believe something is real, then its real. In its, in its effects in social reality, in terms of social reality in terms of what people act according to their beliefs and you know and that opens the question of I have read at 2 levels could the UFO phenomenon be manipulating us, could they leave us a teaching system of some sort perhaps something that we are creating ourselves perhaps a series of images that we have projected I think are you have came close in illustrating in his books. Could it be manipulated purposely by people who have the technology to simulate UFO sightings and people say well of course not who would do a thing like that? Well I would remind you during Watergate during the Watergate investigation it was discovered that there was a plan originated in the white house to surface a submarine off the coast of Cuba and paints the second coming of Christ over the island of Cuba using holograms, which is well within our technology today. The idea was that their is such a large Catholic population into about they would be so upset by this vision that this would such a raid on the communication channels you know telephone system in Cuba long enough for new vision to take place..."
Dr. Jacques Vallee

I am not sure that he would agree with you, because I still disagree with you while agreeing with some of what Vallee says above. You stated that the control system was 'literally the lies', what Vallee is proposing there is a manipulation of pre-existing beliefs to direct specific outcomes. The control system is not the lies, but lies can be fed into the control system which subsequently add to structure to the control system. The control system though, as Vallee describes it above, is a percieved reality, the greater the concensus of belief in that reality, the greater it's robustness. Vallee also confirms, or hypotheses here, which is of note, is dalliances with the application what sociologists refer to as the Hypodermic syringe theory.

The "Magic Bullet" or "Hypodermic Needle Theory" of direct influence effects was not as widely accepted by scholars as many books on mass communication indicate. The magic bullet theory was not based on empirical findings from research but rather on assumptions of the time about human nature. People were assumed to be "uniformly controlled by their biologically based 'instincts' and that they react more or less uniformly to whatever 'stimuli' came along" (Lowery & De Fleur, 1995, p. 400). The "Magic Bullet" theory graphically assumes that the media's message is a bullet fired from the "media gun" into the viewer's "head" (Berger 1995). Similarly, the "Hypodermic Needle Model" uses the same idea of the "shooting" paradigm. It suggests that the media injects its messages straight into the passive audience (Croteau, Hoynes 1997). This passive audience is immediately affected by these messages. The public essentially cannot escape from the media's influence, and is therefore considered a "sitting duck" (Croteau, Hoynes 1997). Both models suggest that the public is vulnerable to the messages shot at them because of the limited communication tools and the studies of the media's effects on the masses at the time (Davis, Baron 1981).

en.wikipedia.org...

As such, as described, it would require, to be successful, a highly passive response from the Cubans, Roman Catholic or otherwise. I doubt that it would have worked all that effectively given the active distrust by the Cubans, and was no doubt shelved due to it not having any constructive outcome. The UFO situation differs somewhat in that you have a number of factions or belief structures relating to the ET phenomenon. Those that wish us no harm, those that represent a threat, those that wish to aid our transition, etc, etc. Given the disparity of such intents, the 'control system' is much more open to persuasion. So that, if for example, a government wanted to justify greater expenditure on space programmes or high tech defensive capabilities, then it may want to feed lies into the control system that placed greater emphasis on those reports that portrayed the threatening forms of alien encounters.

Either way, whether we believe something is real or not, does not automatically render something a 'lie'. It is only a lie if the person telling it also doesn't believe in it, and that is not always the case.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Surely you understand I am not trying to make a pissing contest out of this an I greatly value your insights and respect you as a great contributor and often times illuminating and well thought out posts. The thing that motivates me most with what it is that I am trying to convey back to you is the actual information itself as its relevance to what and how it is engaged. I do better see where you are coming from now though and I will be off to ponder it for a little while longer. And again thank you for your timely, well thought out response S


B-man

reply to post by Brotherman


Given the crouching that my feminine bits dictate I avoid pissing contests at all costs...automatic fail.

Just disagreeing your point, not you in general...

...which, doesn't preclude my being proved wrong and admitting such...I am just interpreting the information available to me based on my own opinion and am open to the broadening of both perspectives and a subsequent re-evaluation.

All the best

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


It is fair enough, I guess to really boil it down to the most simplistic form of what it is I am saying that is disagreed upon is simply this, what if the information (the only information) is that the ufos and the things that happen around them and because of them what if that in itself is the LIE it does not matter so much the liar if being lied to is accepted and then those that believe this lie parrot it as truth. All I wish to say into the matter is of course it is my opinion, and like you, I also am open to new and diverse prospects and insights. I still have not seen anything compelling enough to tell me that even the most studied and credible people were not doing anything other then trying to pull apart a lie without context. What I am trying to say may not be coming out the way I mean it too so if there is a confusion I will try harder to explain my self deeper. Again much respect for you and retract my peeing comment I thought you were a guy btw sorry about my potty mouth, sometimes Im guilty of that.

cuckooold
reply to post by DJW001

 

Comeback withdrawn; I don't want to go OT.

edit on 15-2-2014 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

Brotherman
reply to post by KilgoreTrout

 

It is fair enough, I guess to really boil it down to the most simplistic form of what it is I am saying that is disagreed upon is simply this, what if the information (the only information) is that the ufos and the things that happen around them and because of them what if that in itself is the LIE it does not matter so much the liar if being lied to is accepted and then those that believe this lie parrot it as truth. All I wish to say into the matter is of course it is my opinion, and like you, I also am open to new and diverse prospects and insights. I still have not seen anything compelling enough to tell me that even the most studied and credible people were not doing anything other then trying to pull apart a lie without context. What I am trying to say may not be coming out the way I mean it too so if there is a confusion I will try harder to explain my self deeper. Again much respect for you and retract my peeing comment I thought you were a guy btw sorry about my potty mouth, sometimes Im guilty of that.

No need to apologise, I am a woman, not a princess

While I certainly think that lies are a significant part of all this, I don't feel as though that sufficiently addresses the issues and influences at play here. Nor do I think, even if lies are the primary basis, that parroting or repetition of those lies explains the overall phenomenon and it's popularity. I don't know if you are familiar with the psychologist Jean Piaget, but she suggests a process to aid in 'stepping into other's shoes' in order to understand their perspective without allowing what you know to create preconceptions. It is a very useful tool, and highly applicable to paranormal, supernatural and other types of unsubstantiated phenomenon. In many reports of such events there is a genuine sense of disbelief combined with bewilderment and confusion that cannot easily be attributed to lies, or parroting. So something else is at play here, but I agree that that is probably in addition to lies that add to the structure and direction that some of those experiences take when articulated. The fact that often those experiences evolve greater detail, for example, over successive tellings is indicative of their being both subjective and objective influences, or that the teller feels the need to embellish their own account with information gathered from other, similar accounts, in order to conform to some kind of ideal or more accepted version.

Another element to be considered is the desire by the wider group for such events to be 'real'. This applies throughout history, whether it is ETs or angels. This desire helps bolster such phenomenon. An excellent example are the 'Angels of Mons'...

On 29 September 1914 Welsh author Arthur Machen published a short story entitled "The Bowmen" in the London newspaper The Evening News, inspired by accounts that he had read of the fighting at Mons and an idea he had had soon after the battle.

Machen, who had already written a number of factual articles on the conflict for the paper, set his story at the time of the retreat from the Battle of Mons in August 1914. The story described phantom bowmen from the Battle of Agincourt summoned by a soldier calling on St. George, destroying a German host.[1] Machen's story was not, however, labelled as fiction and the same edition of the Evening News ran a story by a different author under the heading "Our Short Story". Additionally, Machen's story was written from a first-hand perspective and was a kind of false document, a technique Machen knew well. The unintended result was that Machen had a number of requests to provide evidence for his sources for the story soon after its publication, from readers who thought it was true, to which he responded that it was completely imaginary, as he had no desire to create a hoax.

A month or two later Machen received requests from the editors of parish magazines to reprint the story, which were granted.[1] A priest,[who?] the editor of one of these magazines, subsequently wrote to Machen asking if he would allow the story to be reprinted in pamphlet form, and if he would write a short preface giving sources for the story. Machen replied that they were welcome to reprint but he could not give any sources for the story since he had none. The priest replied[1] that Machen must be mistaken, that the "facts" of the story must be true, and that Machen had just elaborated on a true account.

Around that time variations of the story began to appear, told as authentic histories, including an account that told how the corpses of German soldiers had been found on the battlefield with arrow wounds.[1]

en.wikipedia.org...

Here you have an work of fiction, not clearly published as such, being taken as fact to such an extent that even the author's denial that it is anything other than the product of his imagination is dismissed. Given the time, a whole generation of men lost, leaving a huge sense of collective grief at the senselessness of such mass slaughter, it provided a sense of divine providence that was hugely desired by middle England at that time, so people chose to believe. This is what, if I am honest, concerns me most about the whole alien/UFO, and whether it represents a running away from reality. And how lies, distortion, sleight of hand and deflection are possibly being used to manipulate and facilitate that retreat.

web.archive.org...://www.brotherblue.org/brethren/valleege.htm

Here's Vallee's interview with Green Egg magazine.

DBS: In your book The Invisible College you stated that matter might have three aspects: substantial, energetical, and informational. Could you elaborate on this and show how it applies to UFO phenonmena?

JV: We learn in school that energy and information are two sides of the same coin, okay? That you can translate energy into information and vice versa. And yet, the only physics we learn is the physics of energy! The physics of energy should have a little sister, the physics of information, but nobody talks about it! It's interesting to ask what might be in that physics.

My speculation is that that physics of information exists and that it is what people through the ages have called magic. The magical tradition asks, how does the mind deal with information structures? And how does it relate to the rest of Nature?

DBS: Tell me what perhaps idealistic changes you might make in our present that would improve our future?

JV: By idealistic, what do you mean? If I could change human beings, I would make them more loving, more open, but I don't know how to do that. So I'm going to take your question on a different level: if I had the power to make changes in the way things are in the world, what would I change without changing human nature? I have to assume human nature is a given.

DBS: We'll have to assume that. But now we're going to give you temporary control of the world.

JV: Good! (Laughter, a long pause.) The reason I am silent is that it's so easy to come up with idealistic things. Jesus Christ did it, every prophet has done it, and usually they ended up with the exact opposite of what they wanted. The prophets say: "Let there be love!" and people say, "Yeah, let there be love, but of course it has to be my way and not this other guys's way!" and they end up fighting.

I do wish that the impulse to search, to question reality, to search beyond the obvious face of reality, became more widespread. I wish that people had more of an interest in the mysteries around them.

I also wish that there was a simple, medical way for all of us to experience what goes on in the moment of death without dying. I think that if people had that simple experience once, the rest of their lives would be very, very different. I have a few friends who have had a near-death experience, usually under very traumatic circumstances like a head-on collision. They changed radically the way they thought about their careers, their relationships, their life, their view of death. In some cases it eliminated their fear of death completely. When you don't fear death anymore your life is going to change radically. So if there was one thing...

You cannot wish for people to have head-on collisions! I'm just wishing there was a way for people to have the experience of dying, to take it with them into the mainstream of their life without going through the trauma of an accident. Of course, that's what initiation does, in part, with a lot of work. A head-on collision gives you that instant initiation, assuming you survive it. To some extent the UFO Close Encounter has the characteristics of a near death experience.

DBS: In quantum physics and biology scientists are considering models that no longer resemble the mechanistic models of the 19th Century. In particular, quantum physicists speculate that the observer influences the phenomenon observed. In biology microbiologists are examining relationships to determine if Earth qualifies as a literally living thing. How do you respond to these models? Will breakthroughs in these fields apply to UFO phenomena?

JV: In both of those cases you have an example of the relationship of information with energy.

What we seem to be discovering in genetics is that what's important is information storage. DNA is essentially a machine to store a lot of information. When you alter the information you alter the whole being. Essentially you are dealing here with software, not hardware. There may be other ways of representing it, other than DNA. It just seems to be an extraordinarily efficient way of storing information perfectly and duplicating it perfectly.

I'm not a physicist, but I do talk to a lot of physicists who are very puzzled these days. When you draw information out of an experiment, theoretically you're drawing energy, because energy and information are related; in fact, they are identical. So if I observe a certain phenomenon at the quantum level, the answer is translatable in terms of energy. That energy had to come from somewhere! So I've actually had an impact on the experiment. It might not have happened the same way if I had not been observing it.

That's another mechanism in which you see information and energy being related and unless we take that equation into account we don't have a real picture of the Universe. That leads to the question of what is the role of consciousness in the Universe. This also relates to magic, because in magic you are manipulating information structures that have a relationship to the material world around you. So I think that both of those examples are very relevant to the question of information versus energy. Increasingly we may find that information is the more important of the two.

I think UFOs are a special case that forces us to question what we call reality. In Close Encounter cases there is a point at which the witness seems to enter a different reality. There is an English researcher named Jenny Randles who calls this "the Oz factor." There is a point where all of a sudden reality has split and the reality of the observer has been replaced by another reality. If we could measure that, if we could instrument the witness, we might be able to learn about what we call physical reality. But that also raises the question: how do we know that this reality is the real one? How would we prove that it's the real one? This reality is merely a human consensus.

There are interesting experiments that have been done where a newborn cat is given goggles that have vertical slits, and the cat can't take the goggles off. It's known that visual reality is created in the first two weeks in the life of a cat. So after two weeks they remove those goggles and the cat has a vertical reality! The cat could not think of horizontal structures. The cat would never jump on this bench, for example. She would negotiate her way around a vertical structure, but she has no concept of horizontal things. If the goggles had horizontal slits, then that cat would have a horizontal reality.

The point is that we all have goggles over our minds and that's where the UFO phenomenon comes in. It challenges these goggles! Our goggles are called culture, education, tradition and so on, and these are the things through which we see the world! We're incapable of seeing the world through a different set of goggles. One of the opportunities that the UFO phenomenon is giving us is to look at reality in a much larger context.

Whatever UFOs turn out to be, the opportunity is here. Simply by stretching our minds and forcing us to look at the Universe in other ways.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

No need to apologise, I am a woman, not a princess

While I certainly think that lies are a significant part of all this, I don't feel as though that sufficiently addresses the issues and influences at play here.

Why do you not feel that lies do not sufficiently address the influences and issues at play? Again I contest that the issues at play here are UFO and the UFO query is the context of the "control system" consider one of Vallee's greatest revelations was that the data is NOT scientific it is applicable more to intelligence and counter intelligence. All the data being generated comes from a source that:

Kidnaps people at night
can bend and move reality and alter perception
Is violent (mutilations, abductions, etc)
Is elusive and manipulative
Influences beliefs in people to believe in new age philosophy and satanic principle
More to this list

So even the eye witnesses, credible video and other physical evidence, etc is derived from a source that only shows us what it wants to show us. A point made to Vallee was along the lines of "Science does not know the term "cost of information" " meaning that if we buy 95% of the info for less we already know the good stuff the other 5 is going to cost much more. Nothing else matters at this point in trying to understand what it is if is to be looked at purely scientifically it can only be looked at scientifically if it is assumed that the phenomenon is "naturally" occurring and in my opinion it is really not natural the ufo phenomenon. What do you believe, Natural or Induced? To be objective, I don't think living it through others shoes is the best approach to piecing together answers IMO I think the only thing that will do for us is keep us "in the system" I do believe the phenomenon is very real but when the witnesses and evidence points in a direction where as this phenomenon bends and alters time space and perception, you do have to sit back and approach differently because the bending and obfuscation means that what we know about any of this IS A LIE and that is the only truthful deduction we can gather. How the lie was/ is orchestrated, why, and by whom/ what remains mysterious. If whatever it is, is here to lie to us I don't think whatever they/it is but don't think it is good and don't think it has a physical take over the world kind of motive, I think it is much more sinister then that.

reply to post by 1ofthe9


Thank you for posting this. It shows that Vallee is thinking in terms of Information Theory, in which the word 'control' suggests a feedback loop, not political power.

reply to post by Brotherman

Why do you not feel that lies do not sufficiently address the influences and issues at play? Again I contest that the issues at play here are UFO and the UFO query is the context of the "control system" consider one of Vallee's greatest revelations was that the data is NOT scientific it is applicable more to intelligence and counter intelligence. All the data being generated comes from a source that:

Kidnaps people at night
can bend and move reality and alter perception
Is violent (mutilations, abductions, etc)
Is elusive and manipulative
Influences beliefs in people to believe in new age philosophy and satanic principle
More to this list

Why do you think it has anything to do with lies? Why do you think the meaning of 'intelligence' has to do with its sense as 'espionage?' Why do you associate anything in the above list with the actual UFO phenomenon? Most of your list are claims made by charlatans, and have nothing to do with UFOs!

reply to post by DJW001


Want to make a bet?

Excerpts from...
"Messengers of Deception"
by Jacques Vallee
1979
from VirtuallyStrange Website
[...] Scientific analysis will undoubtedly provide part of the truth about UFOs; however, I no longer believe it will lead to the whole truth. I owe this realization to a man I shall call “Major Murphy,” although his actual rank is much higher than that of Major. He taught me a lesson I am not likely to forget.

Major Murphy, who retired from a U.S. Intelligence service quite a few years ago, had seen action in World War II in Italy, and also described vividly his investigations in the Caribbean, where he organized efforts to intercept submarines and German spies on their way to the United States.

I met him at a gathering of UFO contactees and suggested a drink when it was over. I expressed my surprise at his interest in the event, which I had regarded as a complete waste of time. He asked me to clarify this judgment, and I said that in my opinion none of the people in attendance knew anything about science.

Then he posed a question that, obvious as it seems, had not really occurred to me:
“What makes you think that UFOs are a scientific problem?”
I replied with something to the effect that a problem was only scientific in the way it was approached, but he would have none of that, and he began lecturing me. First, he said, science had certain rules. For example, it has to assume that the phenomenon it is observing is natural in origin rather than artificial and possibly biased.

Now, the UFO phenomenon could be controlled by alien beings.
“If it is,” added the Major, “then the study of it doesn’t belong in science. It belongs in Intelligence.”
MEANING COUNTERESPIONAGE. And that, he pointed out, was his domain.
“Now, in the field of counterespionage, the rules are completely different.” He drew a simple diagram in my notebook. “You are a scientist. In science there is no concept of the ‘price’ of information. Suppose I gave you 95 per cent of the data concerning a phenomenon. You’re happy because you know 95 per cent of the phenomenon. Not so in Intelligence.

If I get 95 per cent of the data, I know this is the ‘cheap’ part of the information. I still need the other 5 per cent, but I will have to pay a much higher price to get it. You see, Hitler had 95 per cent of the information about the landing in Normandy.

But he had the WRONG 95 PER CENT!”

“Are you saying that the UFO data we use to compile statistics and to find patterns with computers are useless?” I asked. “Might we be spinning our magnetic tapes endlessly discovering spurious laws?”

“It all depends on how the team on the OTHER SIDE thinks. If they know what they’re doing, there will be so many cutouts between you and them that you won’t have the slightest chance of tracing your way to the truth. Not by following up sightings and throwing them into a computer.

They will keep feeding you the information they want you to process. What is the only source of data about the UFO phenomenon? It is the UFOs themselves!”
Some things were beginning to make a lot of sense.
“If you’re right, what can I do? It seems that research on the phenomenon is hopeless, then. I might as well dump my computer into a river.”

“Not necessarily, but you should try a different approach. First you should work entirely outside of the organized UFO groups; they are infiltrated by the same official agencies they are trying to influence, and they propagate any rumor anyone wants to have circulated. In Intelligence circles, people like that are historical necessities.

We call them ‘useful idiots.’ When you’ve worked long enough for Uncle Sam, you know he is involved in a lot of strange things. The data these groups get are biased at the source, but they play a useful role.

“Second, you should look for the irrational, the bizarre, the elements that do not fit: that’s what I have come to observe at this meeting tonight. Have you ever felt that you were getting close to something that didn’t seem to fit any rational pattern, yet gave you a strong impression that it was significant?”
[... Deleted: Vallee’s discussion of the immortality-claming group “Human Individual Metamorphosis,” the strange life of Jacques Bordas, and the mysterious Order of Melchizedek...]
The absurdity of many UFO stories and of many religious visions is not a superficial logical mistake. It may be the key to their function. According to Major Murphy, the confusion in the UFO mystery may have been put there deliberately to achieve certain results.

One of these results has been to keep scientists away. The other is to create the conditions for a new form of social control, a change in Man’s perception of his place in the universe. Are his theories fantastic? Before we decide, let us review a few other facts. We need to examine more closely the political connections.

Source

Just saying, and to be frank, I think this is Vallees most compelling revelation, but I don't think it necassary to have to dig into and cut and paste every source or reiterate every free and fact based thought I may or may not have because others cannot go and look into it for themselves. And your above observation was keen, it is an information loop, and it can be prodded using counter intel techniques its a deceptive game this ufo business, not mainly a scientific one. Of course it is only my opinion sorry if you don't agree, you don't have to if you don't want to.