Whitley Strieber, MKUltra Flypaper |480|

Alex

Administrator
#1
Whitley Strieber, MKUltra Flypaper |480|
by Alex Tsakiris | Jan 12 | Others
Share
Tweet

Whitley Strieber experienced military grade torture long before he encountered the visitors.


Alex Tsakiris: [00:029:39] …they intentionally try to create this DID (disassociative identity) situation because without even fully understanding it, they know it creates an entry point, and I wonder if our intelligence organizations had halfway figured that out and we’re fooling around with how to create that entry point.
Whitley Strieber: You know let me tell you something about black magic. First, it’s quite real and second it’s like flypaper you touch it, you can never escape, can never escape, an organization touches it, that organization is part of it.
Alex Tsakiris: A Country?
Whitley Strieber: A country too,,, and the more you try to escape from it, the deeper you get, there’s only one way to escape and that is to live a life of love, compassion and humility.
(more below)
 
#2
I read one of Whitleys books, I don’t recall which one. He’s got a pretty amazing story. I do tend to believe him. I also like the way that his experiences put him on this quest to understand reality. I think he has at least some interesting ideas. And, as oftentimes happens, his close encounter/abduction opened the door to other paranormal/supernatural events. There’s clearly some sort of connection (at least ofttimes) between UFO activity and other paranormal events. It really makes you wonder what these things are. Extra dimensional or “spiritual” beings? Or are they from our Universe and just have such an amazing grip on technology and consciousness that they appear magical. Perhaps both options are true in some way. Or maybe neither is true.
 
Last edited:
#3
This was an excellent episode.

Streiber's book Communion became a hit because it had such an awesome book cover.

People forget how disturbing it was to be walking through mall in 1987 and see this book cover in the display window at Hastings Books. I stopped in my tracks and my mouth dropped open. Normally you had to visit obscure specialty book stores reeking of patchouli candles to find such content.

This book was instrumental in promoting the idea that Aliens are real.

 
Last edited:
#5
Contradictions indicate deception.

The contradiction is that Streiber thinks these entities are evil and dangerous, but chooses to keep messing around with them.

That makes no sense. Him selling this as "the middle way" is a bad thing. He does it here at 44:00 in the YouTube...

 
#7
Monday's episode of The Higherside Chats dove-tails nicely with this episode of Skeptiko.

https://www.thehighersidechats.com/isaac-weishaupt-aliens-demons-disclosure-the-occult/

Nuggets within:

Dr. Diana Pasulka is being used. Scumbag propagandist Peter Lavenda wrote Tom DeLonge's book Sekret Machines.

Caveats:

Greg is being misled by his shallow, pop-culture understanding of Gnosticism.

Adam W. doesn't know enough about Crypto-Currencies. While it's true the Slave Masters did recently decide to co-op them, we anticipated this, and have already built defenses which fufil the original purpose of circumventing the Fed / IMF scam.
 
#8
I really loved this episode.

I remember reading Communion in the early 90's as a young man and it had a profound effect on me. Although I found it rather fear inducing and utterly perplexing, it was responsible to a large degree in helping to oil the hinges of my mind doors, and crack them open a little farther.

I remember wondering about whether the "visitors" were physical or something else. It also got me thinking about and re-evaluating my own strange dreamlike ( nightmarish ) experiences as a child. (I am sure many children have similar experiences).

I remember on many occasions waking in the night, being physically paralysed (sleep paralysis?) and seeing shadowy beings moving around my bed, touching me and doing who knows what. I was unable to call out for my mother or move.

I also remember being told mentally during one of these terrifying episodes, by a woman in my minds eye, that I should project a golden shell like force field from my heart that would enclose my body and keep these entities out.

I did this and it worked (and I still do when I get the heebee jeebies), though I was still terrified. I could literally see these creatures touching the golden shell I was projecting, and being unable to get through it. It looked like a kind of TV static shell to me, but to my childish imagination, it felt all very real.

It also however, felt very dream like, and I always thought and still do wonder if it wasn't just the over active imagination of the sensitive child I was, and the difficult early life I had.

Whitley's book forced me to reconsider these experiences (whether real or imagined), as they closely resembled his in some ways and so many other peoples experiences. I never saw any " greys" though. Back then, from memory, the beings I saw seemed monstrous and not physically very big, but very shadowy. I can't remember any exact or clear form, which adds to the dream like feeling it had.

Over the years, like Many of us, I have come to adopt the notion that mind or Consciousness is the foundation or ground upon which all else is built, and not the other way around as my mainstream teachers tried to inculcate in me.

My experiences helped me to shun that notion much more easily than if I had to do it by reason alone, although reason is ultimately the foundation I use to support my belief in a mental universe. Such an understanding of a fundamentally mental universe means necessarily that I place more value and meaning on things, even purely imaginal things, than a cold hard materialist would.

As a result, if the above childhood experience was purely emanating from my own childish mind, it still carries with it tremendous value and meaning, as much as if it were literal aliens in a tin can flying saucer actually visiting me. I will never know if my experience was 100% childhood imagination, or if it was an intrusion by some independently existing beings from an extended realm or dimension, but this almost doesn't matter. There is an archetypal experience here that I imagine millions of people experience, and my sense is that there is some valuable information to be gleaned from it, whether about ourselves, or about the world around and beyond us.

I didn't really understand your question Alex, about Whitley's fly paper analogy. I didn't get from the interview that he was insinuating that a thirst for knowledge about the extended realms was equal to black magic.

I can see that if such knowledge is used to serve the ego (ones selfish desire to satisfy ones insatiable and ever growing personal whims, wants and desires), rather than help one escape from the endless ego rat wheel, then this is by definition would be some form of perversion of truth, black magic, dark living, an askewed life path.

However, the paradox here is that some knowledge of these extended realms is also necessary when it comes to pursuing a shrinking or reducing, if not shedding of the ego mind. Otherwise, what would the motivation be for such on undertaking?

Why for example, would one choose love and selfless (egoless) service over the selfish pursuit of personal gratification if One didn't have a clear perspective on the lay of the land and the ultimate destination of the paths we choose to walk across the landscape?

Surely a good map is essential kit for any traveller. With a good Map, the destination will be one of choice rather than accidental wandering and happenstance. But good maps cannot be constructed without exploration and inquiry.

I did not get that whitley was equating a thirst for knowledge with black magic from this interview, but the way you posed your question made it seem that this was what you thought ?
 
Last edited:
#9
On a separate note, I can't wait to read Whitley's book about Jesus.

I am amazed you didn't hit him with the old Jo Atwill left hook that you frequently throw at unsuspecting guests venturing into the Jesus territory :D.

When Whitley mentioned both the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary, AND then the Turin shroud, he really peaked my interest.

As I have mentioned before on this forum (some time ago), I have listened with great interest to your episodes with Jo Atwill, and found them truly compelling. What Jo has found demands we re-examine the canonical Gospels and their authorship. I however, unlike you, do not take Atwill's remarkable findings to be the nail in the coffin for a historical Jesus.

The power of the Gnostic Gospels, their mystical instruction and implications move well beyond a purely political manipulation tool, and right into the extended consciousness realms. They impart powerful and intrinsically empowering truths that tantalise one with the notion that liberation from the injustices and sufferings of the world are achievable, and the path toward that destination is illumined. The path has the same essential paving stones as all the great paths, with love and truth being the cement without which such a path would crack and crumble.

Such a liberating teaching cannot merely be a device utilised by the Flavians and Josephus for the purposes of political control as Jo Atwill asserts, as it arguably would work against them in creating an uncontrollable group of independent people.

While the canonical Gospels in the new testament do put tremendous emphasis on love and truth, there is an underlying tone implied that accepting Jesus is the only real way to salvation - which is an obviously very useful political tool.

However, the Gnostic Gospels do not present Jesus in this light. Rather, the figure of Jesus is presented more as the lamp holder illuminating the path that we each must walk. It is the walking of the path that is the way to liberation, not the accepting of a creed or a person. Such a teaching creates an independent and confident group of souls who do not need an outside agency to guarantee their salvation, which would arguably make it virtually impossible to exercise political or any other control over such a group.

If the canonical Gospels were expertly authored either in part or completely by the Flavians, I could see how this might suit their ends. I would have a much harder time seeing how the Gnostic gospels could also have been a product of their goal of political domination in Judea, and my understanding is that they date back (archeologically speaking) to around the same time as the earliest canonical texts.

Could it be that two parallel Jesus myths but with vastly different political ramifications were authored by the same group for the same agenda?

Or could it be that there is some historical truth upon which both have been built, but by two different groups for two completely different outcomes? One perhaps for political control and subjugation of a people, and the other for their liberation along personal and spiritual dimensions?

Regardless of the Gospels, the shroud of Turin, as Whitley briefly asserted, is one of the most remarkable objects in human history, and really does present a powerful mystery surrounding the Jesus myth we are all so familiar with. The fuel for this mystery is not led by faith or belief, but the startling results of scientific inquiry which is what makes it so compelling.

It tells the story of a real person who must have undergone crucifixion, and has a clear and undubious photographic imprint of whoever this was (not some vague image that in the right light, if one squints enough, kinda looks like, maybe etc). It is all but impossible for modern science to come up with an explanation as to how such a detailed image was impressed upon the shroud. It is also very difficult to explain why the very clear image only shows up in the negative of a photograph (something medieval man, nor any man before that time could have fabricated), and wasn't discovered until the invention of photography.

The light (or whatever was responsible for the imprint the image) had to emanate from the body onto the cloth whose fibers were radioactively altered in such a way that paints or singeing, or any variation of methods medieval or ancient man might have had at their disposal can be ruled out.

It has 3 dimensional information encoded into it (which is highly unusual, but the science on this is quite complex and too difficult for me to condense by way of an explanation).

The thing really is an historical and scientific anomaly in the truest sense of the word. Whatever it is - whether the burial cloth of Jesus, or a forgery by some unknown master - it is one of the most perplexing mysteries one will ever engage with. But like with all mysteries, their secrets and implications only start to come to light with investigation. Many people think they know the shroud is forgery, or they think it is real without looking for themselves in any depth at the scientific work that has been done upon it, and in both cases this is a crying shame. The work is extensive and truly compelling.

I really would urge all those who think they know the shroud is a forgery or anything else about it, to look again at the scientific work. Only after that, can we have a discussion about what it might mean. It is incredibly challenging.

I mention all this here because my impression is that Alex seems to have filed the Jesus myth in the total fabrication drawer, and I have long felt this may be an unfortunate and premature conclusion to draw. It may actually be a total fabrication, but I for one don't yet feel that Jo Atwill has conclusively showed this from the compelling arguments he has presented.

All the above makes me wonder if there isn't a little, or probably quite a lot more to the story, and while I have a few interesting theories and many musings on what on earth happened with all this, I have no real idea. I do feel though that something remarkable is hidden in all this.

I am hoping Whitley's new book will be compelling enough to make people who think they know something about the story of Jesus to re examine their conclusions, myself included.

I also hope others will dig into it. It is utterly fascinating, and a total mindspin.

Thanks for reading all those that did.
 
Last edited:
#10
I am amazed you didn't hit him with the old Jo Atwill left hook...
I was pleased Alex refrained from asserting Atwill's silly theory that we debunked on this forum a couple of months ago.

Asserting Atwill's goofy theory erodes audience confidence in Alex's powers of discernment. That erosion reduces the number of listeners. I want Alex's podcast to be well-known, popular, and respected.

If you read Streiber's new book Jesus, A New Vision, please do report back here on it. Strieber's "Three Jesuses" idea sounds interesting.
 
#11
I was pleased Alex refrained from asserting Atwill's silly theory that we debunked on this forum a couple of months ago.

Asserting Atwill's goofy theory erodes audience confidence in Alex's powers of discernment. That erosion reduces the number of listeners. I want Alex's podcast to be well-known, popular, and respected.

If you read Streiber's new book Jesus, A New Vision, please do report back here on it. Strieber's "Three Jesuses" idea sounds interesting.
I must say, I felt and feel similarly that it was premature to slam the hammer on the gavel and proclaim in no uncertain terms that the notion of a real man behind the Jesus myth was disproved by Atwill's findings.

I cannot say Atwill is wrong, but I can say that his findings and assertions were not conclusive for me to draw a cast iron conclusion about what it all meant.

My worry was that Alex seemed to feel it was all undeniably conclusive, and I just hadn't and still haven't reached anywhere close to that kind of conclusion.

I still find Atwill"s work very compelling, but if anything it adds a new mystery to the Jesus story, rather than closes and replaces the old mystery.

I don't think Atwill's theory is goofy or silly at all, I think it is quite valid. What I struggled with was his (and Alex's) assertion that it was conclusive in any way.

A co opting of events and re weaving of historical narrative seems to have taken place somehow in someway, but what is unclear is how to unravel it all in such a way that is clear and explanatory.

It is also unclear what implications this re worked or co opted narrative may have to say about any actual historicity regarding a real contemporary figure of Jesus. Such a superimposed and skillfully worked piece of propoganda does not immediately say anything about whether a Jesus like figure may have or may not have existed around the same time. Or indeed whether the Jesus story was a complete fabrication from start to finish.

If it was a complete fabrication, then I wonder to what end it was fabricated. Josephus would not have been writing for contemporary audience, but a future audience who would have no means of challenging the account. Surely by that time, the work of fiction would have been useless and of little value to his and the Flavian dynasties' political goals of that time. Who knows.

Anyway, for me the gnostic Gospels and their core teachings as well as the mystery of shroud keep the Jesus myth very much alive for me, and very relevant and compelling.

I want to say here that I do not regard myself as a Christian, as opposed to a Buddhist or a Hindu, so I have no vested interest in challenging Atwill or Alex on this to keep some cherished creed alive within myself.

I do however consider myself a seeker of truth, and I like everyone feel I have a keen sense of when some proposed truth has that crystal clear ring to it, and that ringing out is usually supported by clear lines of evidence and rational argument.

I felt that Atwills theory had a lot of these elements of truth to them, but didn't quite fit as neatly as I'd like, and also raised many more questions than it gave any answers to.

I'm not sure how much the asserting of Atwill's theory may have impacted the audiences' evaluation of Alex's powers of discernment, but I can say on this issue, unlike most other issues, Alex and I were on opposite sides of a philosophical gulf.

For me personally though, whenever Alex rolls out the Caesars Messiah sucker punch, I just sit back and let him go with it, and wait for him to get back to a point were our respective mindsets re converge.

I imagine for anyone else that took similar issue with Atwill's hypothesis, a similar state of affairs has been in play.

I have found that Alex on occasions has asserted Atwill's theory with such force of certainty and conviction in some past interviews that it ended up shutting things down rather than deepening the inquiry into the subject matter at hand, and this has saddened me on occasion.

I am certain Alex will read these posts at some point, and I really hope that he doesn't find my critique offensive or confrontational in any way. I am the biggest fan of Skeptiko, and a long time avid listener of the show. For me and many others it has been and is still a life changing exploration of the most important questions the human journey poses.

I am infinitely grateful for the show, and Alex's biggest defender, but on this issue, I have hoped for a long time he might re open the case file so to speak, a re look at the data. Not just some of it (i.e. Atwill's), but all of it.

Maybe Strieber's new book will do that.

I want to add here for Alex's sake and to clarify my feeling -
Alex, I love you and what you do. I am so grateful for the Skeptiko project you have put so much of your life into, and it is a tremendous service for humanity and human enquiry in general. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Please don't take offence at anything I have said here, and don't see in me or anything I have said an adversary. I'm on your team. Thanks a literal million.
 
Last edited:
#12
This whole cabal within gov't thing and near death reminded of a French horror film some may be familiar with titled 'Martyrs' (2008). There was an american remake in '15 which was panned as awful, as is always the case with their remakes, heh.

Its about some secret society that are seeking proof of an afterlife. They've been engaging in the kidnapping and torture of young girls/women over a long time, to the point where that person reaches some transcendental stage where they are able to describe an afterlife.... sort of being in two places at once effect. Apparently they've never been fully successful until this last subject of theirs. Film ends in a twist of ambiguity
 
#13
#15
I must say, I felt and feel similarly that it was premature to slam the hammer on the gavel and proclaim in no uncertain terms that the notion of a real man behind the Jesus myth was disproved by Atwill's findings.
oh boy :) I've been deep into this lately so thanks for bringing it up again.

I think you may have misunderstood my position. my argument in the last Atwill interview was the christians engage in very sloppy thinking when they accept the historical jesus hypothesis... and even sloppier thinking when they accept the impossibility of a pro roman bible. so icy joseph atwells work as a jumping-off point for trying to come to a better understanding of the situation.

But like I said, I'm way way deep into this stuff right now and have interview scheduled and probably another book in the works on this topic.




A co opting of events and re weaving of historical narrative seems to have taken place somehow in someway, but what is unclear is how to unravel it all in such a way that is clear and explanatory.
that's my conclusion too. I also think we need to consider multiple co-opt-ings by different players at different points in the roman history. this is obvious once you start plotting these things out on a timeline, but seems to have escaped the attention of most biblical scholars.


It is also unclear what implications this re worked or co opted narrative may have to say about any actual historicity regarding a real contemporary figure of Jesus. Such a superimposed and skillfully worked piece of propoganda does not immediately say anything about whether a Jesus like figure may have or may not have existed around the same time. Or indeed whether the Jesus story was a complete fabrication from start to finish.

If it was a complete fabrication, then I wonder to what end it was fabricated. Josephus would not have been writing for contemporary audience, but a future audience who would have no means of challenging the account. Surely by that time, the work of fiction would have been useless and of little value to his and the Flavian dynasties' political goals of that time. Who knows.

Anyway, for me the gnostic Gospels and their core teachings as well as the mystery of shroud keep the Jesus myth very much alive for me, and very relevant and compelling.

I want to say here that I do not regard myself as a Christian, as opposed to a Buddhist or a Hindu, so I have no vested interest in challenging Atwill or Alex on this to keep some cherished creed alive within myself.

I do however consider myself a seeker of truth, and I like everyone feel I have a keen sense of when some proposed truth has that crystal clear ring to it, and that ringing out is usually supported by clear lines of evidence and rational argument.

I felt that Atwills theory had a lot of these elements of truth to them, but didn't quite fit as neatly as I'd like, and also raised many more questions than it gave any answers to.

I'm not sure how much the asserting of Atwill's theory may have impacted the audiences' evaluation of Alex's powers of discernment, but I can say on this issue, unlike most other issues, Alex and I were on opposite sides of a philosophical gulf.

For me personally though, whenever Alex rolls out the Caesars Messiah sucker punch, I just sit back and let him go with it, and wait for him to get back to a point were our respective mindsets re converge.

I imagine for anyone else that took similar issue with Atwill's hypothesis, a similar state of affairs has been in play.
great stuff. please send me a direct or start a conversation with me... I'd love to have you help me with this research. I think you find it really interesting.
 
#16
This whole cabal within gov't thing and near death reminded of a French horror film some may be familiar with titled 'Martyrs' (2008). There was an american remake in '15 which was panned as awful, as is always the case with their remakes, heh.

Its about some secret society that are seeking proof of an afterlife. They've been engaging in the kidnapping and torture of young girls/women over a long time, to the point where that person reaches some transcendental stage where they are able to describe an afterlife.... sort of being in two places at once effect. Apparently they've never been fully successful until this last subject of theirs. Film ends in a twist of ambiguity
watched the trailer... wow, intense!
 
#17
An IMDB rating of 4.0 is pretty terrible. My "unwatchable" cut-off is 5.2

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1663655/
I enjoyed this movie The Discovery.

The premise is that an Afterlife is scientifically proven, and everyone starts committing suicide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Discovery_(film)

Torrents here: https://1337x.to/search/the+discovery+2017/1/

Trailer

In most cases I agree with your ratings cutoff point. When I cruise scene release movie sites, 90% of the time I go right past all the ones that show 6.0 or less.
However, sometimes something catches my eye and despite lower imdb or metacritic numbers, a film can sometimes be a bit too oddball for pedestrian viewership and critics but that I'd enjoy.
Also, a film like Martyrs.... which is far and above the usual horror tripe..... is also not for everyone. If you're a horror film aficionado, this film is rated among the creme de la creme.

Mind you, I've long ago grown to thoroughly dislike the usual 'slasher' type horror. Anything that is based on human on human violence cuts much to close to potential reality for me. However, anything that adds the element of the paranormal or monsters and the like.... elements of pretty much implausibility.... then I can relax about it.

That Discovery movie sounds like an episode of one of those twilight zone or outer limits reboots over the decades I saw. It had to do with having proven evidence of reincarnation. People began killing themselves off in the hopes of coming back to a better life than the one they currently have. I'll check it out though, thanks for the heads up.
 
Last edited:
#18
watched the trailer... wow, intense!
Never watched the trailer until you mentioned it. You're right. They edited back to back cuts of various intense scenes so it looks non stop mayhem. It's not though.
BTW, there's no children being put through the 'method' this cabal has come up with in hopes of proof of afterlife. Film kinda starts off as what you might think is a person on an act off revenge, but then shifts gears to this groups 'effort'.

Aside from all that... you like David Icke. He apparently has made a new 10 episode series called 'Escape The Matrix'. Think its up on the the usual places... amazon, apple...
 
Last edited:
#19
Aside from all that... you like David Icke. He apparently has made a new 10 episode series called 'Escape The Matrix'. Think its up on the the usual places... amazon, apple...
It's a Gaia series. Not sure if Gaia series are released anywhere else. I have seen the first few episodes and I think they are pretty interesting to a Skeptiko listener (perhaps old news). They are not about his conspiracy theories but more of his theories of consciousness and the universe. At least the first few episodes.
 
#20
It's a Gaia series. Not sure if Gaia series are released anywhere else. I have seen the first few episodes and I think they are pretty interesting to a Skeptiko listener (perhaps old news). They are not about his conspiracy theories but more of his theories of consciousness and the universe. At least the first few episodes.
When I googled it I saw links for it to amazon and apple so I assumed. Don't have a clue about all that streaming business, heh. :)
 
Top