April 30, 2014 By Joseph P. Farrell

Yesterday I began to outline the historical circumstances around the revelation of the New World and the events surrounding the first voyage of Christopher Columbus as a way of studying how the high elite powers of Europe during the late Renaissance orchestrated that revelation, to see how a similar orchestration of the revelation - or to use the oft-over-worked word, "disclosure" - might be orchestrated. This topic has been the subject of discussion within UFOlogy for quite some time, most recently in Mr. Richard Dolan's and Mr. Bryce Zabel's study of the question, A.D.: After Disclosure. Yesterday I observed that the revelation of the New World was an orchestrated, socially engineered event involving four factors:

  1. The existence of hidden knowledge, in this case, the knowledge and covert exploitation of the New World for some time prior to Columbus' 1492 voyage, and the decision to reveal that knowledge when the technological and financial resources were present to fully exploit the New World;
  2. The orchestration of that revelation by careful coordination and inclusion of the main political powers of the day: being the political sphere itself(Ferdinand and Isabella's Spain);
  3. The financial powers (represented by the presence of Genoa in the revelation in the form of the Genoese admiral Columbus himself);
  4. The sanction of the international cultural-religious complex in the form of the Papacy of Giovanni Cybo(Innocent VIII) himself, who in turn has connections to more hidden international powers (sorry folks, you'll have to wait for the book!)

Yesterday, we saw how the Vatican appears to be involved in quiet but intensive study of the extra-terrestrial question, and how in some cases it is reflecting the opinions of the Brookings Report, particularly in its implications of the implied assumption of the moral and technological superiority of ET, a meme often encountered in UFOlogy.

With the above context in mind, consider this video of former President Bill Clinton's appearance on the Jimmy Kimmel show from April 3:

Bill Clinton: An Alien Attack would Unite Us, I INvestigated Area 51

While it is not so strange that such a subject would arise during an entertainment show interviewing a former president - after all, it makes for good laughs and sound bites and plenty of opportunities to roll the laugh track - when one steps back from this and considers the context and timing, it strikes me as rather significant. It occurs in the same month as the Vatican -ET stories, and notably, President Clinton, by no means a stupid man and by every means a carefully calculating one, principally echoed the views of another famous president on the subject of potential "alien invasion," Ronald Reagan(or, as one reader here put it to me, Ronald Raygun).

While all the laugh tracks are rolling, and Clinton and Kimmel are having their fun, the meme is again reinforced and planted: if you knew there were aliens would you tell us? Yes I would, is the response. Those who are aware of Clinton's attempts to investigate the issue through his appointee Webster Hubbel in the Justice Department, will recall that Clinton was basically stymied and stonewalled at every turn. Nonetheless, the ET-Independence Day invasion scenario of President Reagan is repeated: it would be a way to unite the world around a common threat.

What is interesting, when one juxtaposes this with the remarks coming out of the Vatican, is that one detects an interesting dialectic at work, the same dialectic found - albeit subtly to be sure - in the Brookings Report, and cleverly reversed. It is this reversal that tends to make me think we may be observing some clever social engineering taking place before our eyes, for in the Brookings Report, it is the religious reaction that is of great concern, the reaction that would view any ET revelation as hostile. This, it would appear, is being handled by the Vatican and its proxies. On the other side of the dialectic, we have the occasional reminder from politicians that there could be potential hostilities.

Let's turn the clock back a bit. Recall that  in the final years of the Reagan Administration, during meetings between the President and the Soviet Premier, Mr. Gorbachev, there were reports that the two actually discussed the whole ET-invasion-cooperation scenario. What many do not recall is that, at the time, Mr. Gorbachev indicated it was a bit "too early" for such considerations. The standard interpretations of this curious event are simply that the practical Russians thought it absurd, or that, already financially strapped, they were in no position to make any contribution to a system that would break the bank. But there is also another consideration: the statement implies also that there may already be in place secret agreements between various powers on how, and when, such disclosure is to me made. And given the geopolitical situation, commercial opportunities, and so on, that this would involve, it is likely that such agreements would have to be unanimous, and coordinated with an international source of some respect(the papacy once again).

There is another dynamic in the statements of the former President on Kimmel's show. These are not the types of questions that one would simply spring on a president; they would have had to have been approved, both by him, and, in any potential answer, vetted to make sure that no security arrangements were being violated. In other words, Clinton's remarks, while accompanied by smiles and laughs and laugh track, are to be taken seriously. And it is not the first time such serious statements were made in the context of laughs and comedies. Consider these statements of former astronaut and then US Senator John Glenn on the popular sitcom, Frasier:


Comedy? or actual disclosure? If the latter, it is, like the Kimmel Show, a clever way to do so, by contriving a context where any remarks are considered mere humor.  But again, consider the overall context, three politicians - two Democrats, one Republican - and all three are talking about "War of the Worlds" scenarios, and the former astronaut is doing so on a comedy show. Ronald Reagan did it in contexts considerably more serious: at summit meetings, and at the UN.

So... the political, and the international order represented by the papacy, are talking from more or less the same script, interestingly enough.  So what about the third leg of the stool, the technological and financial?

We'll have to wait until tomorrow.

See you on the flip side...