Las Vegas, June 2007

from ProjectCamelot Website








We were delighted to have the chance to interview Dan again almost a year after our first meeting - for details of which please see below. In this second in-depth interview, which arose from our having presented him with a long list of questions of our own, Dan goes into great detail about both the technology and the politics of the Stargates and the Looking Glass.


He also discusses the 'Cube', which may or may not be the same device as the fabled 'Yellow Book', or the 'Black Box' reported by our important witness Henry Deacon.

In this fascinating interview we found Dan once more to be outspoken, challenging, informed, values-driven, mischievous, human and likeable.

We also want to take this opportunity to publish an announcement, as supplied by Marci McDowell, who works closely with Dan. Marci asked us to make the following formal statement on Dan's behalf:

Dr. Dan Burisch is on a necessary hiatus from official public contact until later this year. Unfortunately, there is very little that I am allowed to say, regarding what Dan is doing. We have informed the public that he is NOT working for Majestic.


Majestic no longer exists. Dan retired from that group in September, 2006. Majestic sat formally adjourned in October, 2005.

I can say that Dan's present activities are so important, pressing and secret that those in the new group, the group which took over from Majestic at the end of 2006, the group for whom he has agreed to make himself available, sought him out for this assignment and insisted that he is limited to no public contact until after December 14, 2007. This will provide the time for him to complete his activities with them, and be debriefed from the assignment.


His present assignment is National Security related. Due to the nature of the assignment, Dan has accepted and been sworn to a National Security Oath.

Following his activities for the new group, Dan and I will be publishing our new book, 'Emanation of the Solfeggio', which will detail cutting edge discoveries in the area of acoustics. Next year, he and I will be speaking publicly (in person) about Project Lotus - the groundbreaking investigation into a strange silicate-associated phenomenon which may be altering the genomes of every living organism on planet earth.

We are presently scheduled for an academic venue and planning a general audience presentation. (Introductory video trailers are already on Google.) A new edition of our work on Mars and Earth anomalies is also underway.


At the time of the interview Dan was unaware of this new development, and so this was not mentioned or discussed when we spoke. We have no further inside information, but can surmise that at least some of the issues raised in the interview are likely to be connected.


This new interview is itself in two parts.




Stargate Secrets - Dan Burisch revisited - Part 1
A video interview with Dan Burisch
Las Vegas, June 2007
Shot, edited and directed by Kerry Lynn Cassidy

Start of interview



Kerry: How would you like to start? What's the best place to start as far as Stargates go?

Dan: Well, I've got a list of questions here in front of me, submitted by you two, all 30 of them.

K: [laughs]

D: Oh, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have mentioned the number.

K: No, no ...

D: They are decommissioned. They are separated into their three components: there's a projection component, a ring component, and also a barrel component to both the Stargate devices as well as the Looking Glass device. The Stargates also have field posts, and again I'm not a physicist so I wouldn't be the appropriate one to make comment as to how they work.

But there were field posts that were positioned around the actual “gates” and they have been stored, I guess. I'm not certain what happened to the field components. But the three components have actually been decommissioned and liasioned to the European Union, the United Nations, and NATO, who are actually in possession of them. And there is no one group which has the other one of the other two components.

K: OK, so ...

D: So everybody is staring at everybody and they're not ... They can't put the equipment together because everybody is mutually dependent and looking questioningly at everybody else. So everybody is literally protecting everybody else. Of the actual base operating equipment, there are three components to it, which is a projection device of some sort, a barrel, and a set of rings, electromagnetic rings.

K: Are we able to know how many man-made Stargates there were on the planet?

D: No. I'm not going to comment as to the total. I will say that there was over 50.

K: Really!

D: Yep.

K: Wow. In different countries of the world.

D: Yes.

K: OK. And these are man-made?

D: Yes.

K: OK. So, and now these Stargates ...

D: Well, see, it's not a Stargate. It's a device which accesses a portal, a wormhole.

K: Does it access a natural ... In other words, the manmade device accesses a natural Stargate.

D: Yes. It draws off from a natural ERB, an Einstein-Rosen Bridge.

K: OK.

D: It accesses it and somehow works, from what I understand, not in parallel, but almost like piggybacks, on the energy of the natural Stargate, yeah.

K: OK. So, in other words, if there were only ... If there were 50 man-made devices accessing, they would be accessing a corresponding 50 natural energy vortexes.

D: That I don't know.

K: OK.

D: There is a possibility that ... In fact when the Looking Glass was operated, they were usually worked in tandem. It required a second Looking Glass to be turned on at the same time to get acoustics through. So unless a second one was turned on ...which operated at one other place, where Will Uhouse had been. He saw the second node location, as opposed to the first node being over at the Papoose facility.

Two pieces of equipment, two Looking Glasses, were required to be turned on at the same time to be able to hear acoustics or sound, if you will, from whatever the people were watching, to piggyback in tandem with the visual response of the equipment. That it required two to be turned on to hear anything.

K: Uh huh.

D: And then both sides could hear the same thing. So I suppose, both of the Looking Glasses being tuned to the same thing was accessing the same “tunnel,” if you will, to the information.

K: OK, that's what I was wondering. So the Looking Glass has an ability to show one the future but a Stargate, or, you know, equipment that accesses a Stargate, or a wormhole, is for time travel? Right? We're talking about two different things?

D: Yes.

K: Are they using the same technology?

D: Essentially, yes. The original device was the Stargate device. That was then increased in power, if you will, with the use of these field posts. How it bumped up the power, how it stabilized it, I don't know. You'd need to speak with a physicist about that.

K: OK.

D: However ...

K: It increased it enough to where that it became a Looking Glass?

D: Well, no. No. No. It would be pumped up in power to stabilize the “doorway,” if you will, to step through into another location, which in essence, because distance and time are relative, the same thing - step through into another time. The Looking Glass device is a back-engineered Stargate.

K: OK.

D: So it was actually back-engineered from the original cylinder-seal data which allowed us to produce the Stargate access devices, if you will, what we call the Stargates.

K: Uh huh.

D: It's a back-engineered device, the Looking Glass is. So the Looking Glass is a secondary device and it was coming into its fore in the 60s and 70s and Will saw one of the first generations of it, from what I understand, a very large piece of equipment. They always get smaller, no matter what. Look at what's happened to the computer.

K: Who? Will saw?

D: Oh yeah.

K: Will ...

D: Will Uhouse.

K: ... Uhouse saw the original Looking Glass.

D: He saw one of the original Looking Glasses demonstrated. And in fact it's going to be in the DVD that we're getting ready to put out, the actual interview, where he was indicating the firing of a bullet, I believe it was, through an object, and there was a time delay where the bullet actually passed through the object where you saw the bullet past the object, or the projectile if you will, a rail gun, I believe.


What was the ... [Marci McDowell, off screen, confirms this]. Yeah, it was a rail gun being used. And then afterward they saw the impact of the device. So they were already playing with it in the early 70s, early to mid 70s, dealing with time sequences.

K: Wasn't the original Looking Glass back-engineered from alien technology?

D: [long pause] Yes.

K: OK. But there was also information around the cylinder-seals ...

D: Um hmm....

K: ...that they used also and that those cylinder-seals also came from an off world race.

D: From ... Well, no, the cylinder seals didn't. The information on them did.

K: Which was maybe the Anunnaki? Is that ...

D: I wouldn't feel comfortable in characterizing it with that name.

K: OK.

D: I really shouldn't. No.

K: But it was off world technology. Originally.

D: Yes ma'am.

K: OK. And at this point, like ... OK. Say that was in the 60s? the 50s?

D: Well ... Yes. That's when they started actually showing a lot of interest in actually building the equipment to be able to see over the curvature of time-space so that they could see into the future and somewhat into the past, but basically the future.

K: OK. So there's also our Henry Deacon contacts that deal with the “black box” that came on one of the craft.

D: Uh huh.

K: And I don't know if you're familiar with that black box.

D: Uh huh.

K: Did you have exposure to that as well?

D: Yeah. It was something that we called the Cube or the Yellow Disc. Yeah.

K: OK. But that was not ... Was that a Looking Glass?

D: That is a variant of the technology.

K: OK.

D: However, while the Looking Glass shows probabilities, or has shown probabilities, the Cube (below image) would react with the people present, so there was an alteration, if you will, over what you were seeing from it. It would actually spin out as a yellow disc out of the top of it ... where the word “Yellow Book” originally came from.





K: Yeah. OK. Yeah.

D: And, depending upon what predisposition ... Kind of like little Yoda telling young Luke, “Bring in there what you have with you.” You know, whatever's there is what you bring. You could then change the perspective, the “tilt,” if you will, the orientation or angle, of the information being presented back to you. So, unless you were well prepared to deal with such a thing, human interaction and human emotions bring instability of the provenance of the information.

K: OK. That's what went on with the black boxes, then.

D: Yes.

K: OK. But with the Looking Glass...

D: And actually I used that to our advantage at the T-9, because that in fact was present at the T-9 and I projected certain information which caused a little upset during the meeting, and they got certain abductions removed and Lotus removed off the calendar, and things like that. I caused some real trouble, in other words.

K: Can you elaborate? Are you willing to elaborate?

D: Well. The...the... Let me sit here and consider what I should and should not ...

During the negotiations for the Tau 9-6, I was asked to supply a model for the Lotus. In fact, Marcia and I were both asked because they knew tangentially she was involved. I agreed to do so, which is what you respond when you are a sworn operative. It's “Yes,” unless there are great, great objections. I was then taken to the location where the treaty was actually being negotiated.

To give a short recitation as to the nature of Lotus: What was happening is the P-45ks used Lotus. They wanted to use Lotus for the back-engineering of their own neurological problem. I was objecting to its use, but still to provide .... was under orders to provide a model. I was prepared to do so but I was also allowed to show them probable outcomes.

So in fact the Yellow Book, the Cube, was used for that purpose. Shockingly, they happened to see themselves standing on the bones of their own families and things like that in the vision and they ultimately decided to remove Lotus as well as certain abductions from the Tau 9 treaty. So we were successful in getting certain things removed I think I can safely mention at this time, because we're only one OF 9 and one Tau 9 treaty away from the passage through the... the completion of the passage through the galactic plane.


So I think I'm pretty well safe to go ahead and mention it now. They're not going to be able to get it back and put on the treaties and all of that in the time we have left. In other words, they got out-foxed, and ... that's what happens when you're negotiating treaties.



Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:

OF-9: Dan is referring to the "Omicron Phi 9" Treaty System, the Treaty System not involving the P-45ks, and the "Tau 9" or "T9" Treaty System involving all parties including the P-45ks. He is precisely speaking about the "Omicron Phi 9-8" Treaty gathering scheduled for 2009, and the "Tau 9-7" FINAL Treaty gathering scheduled for 2012.




K: So you used the capacity of the Yellow Book or little black box to show them the future implications ...

D: Exactly.

K: ... of what using the Lotus to amplify, or to rectify, their own biological problem?

D: This is true. And that was skewed by ... It takes a great deal of emotion to skew the imagery and the audio that comes with it. But I'll just say that I am extremely vehement with regard to my objection for Lotus being used, and apparently that vehemence was sufficient to skew the image enough to get them to jump back aghast in horror.

K: Wow. So... OK. And this, kind of like just for the sake of the audience to some degree ... You have seen in, I guess the Yellow Book or in the Looking Glass (and you can correct me on which one it is), the future of Lotus, in effect, how Lotus becomes ...You know, once it's brought to the fore by you ...

D: Well, actually, no. No, no, I haven't. I haven't. The reports to me which came concerning the future of Lotus, which we're not going to get into in depth this evening, ah.... was given to me as information.

K: OK. So you didn't see it.

D: Personally see it? No. I was told.

K: I see.

D: I was told. That was during the early years. I say the “early years” of Lotus. It's only been going on for 6 years now.

K: OK.

D: But this was the latter half of 2001 and this was a quid pro quo for them to get certain information from ... that Chi'el'ah (image right) showed me. I demanded certain information back, and it actually was information concerning the time travel issue, because they were still trying to be ... You know, they were still reticent about informing me as to what the real nature of the situation was as late as 2001.


K: Meaning, the real situation was ... Meaning how much access to Stargates, to time travel that they actually had?

D: Right. The whole treaty system, the situations involving the treaties, their outcomes, the actual potential for both Timeline #1 and Timeline #2 outcomes. In the case that we're in right now, we seem to be on a variant of Timeline #1, and that's good. For everything that I've seen and have read and have had reported to me concerning Timeline #1, it's not happening exactly the way that they figured that it would. But then again, it couldn't because we've made changes along the way which diverted us away from Timeline #2 and in so doing, our future ...

Again, I regard our future as something which is pretty much a blank slate. We're writing it for ourselves. And so we are now seeing something coming to pass which is slightly different than the prognostication in the probabilities that we were seeing. And I'm good with what we're seeing so far but, you know, we are still faced with the challenges, the environmental degradation, etc. But hopefully we will rise to the challenge.

K: OK. So this is interesting because it sounds like Chi'el'ah was instrumental in getting you to have greater access to intelligence about what the Looking Glass and MJ12 ...

D: Well, it was information that he was providing me which provoked the questions.

K: Yeah.

D: And the fact that they didn't even want to get into longwinded discussions with me in the late 90s concerning what he even was. After we had argued for years to find out even where the material was coming from, then we were finally given access to the material. I mean, this went on for a few years.

K: OK. But your interaction with Chi'el'ah was leading you one way and giving you one set of information and MJ-12 then had another set. Isn't that right?

D: Well, they weren't ... They weren't really ... It wasn't that they had another set of information. He was telling me ... He did tell me basically what was going on.

K: OK.

D: And they were simply not providing that information as what they considered a need-to-know situation.

K: I see. So ...

D: They just weren't going to tell me what they didn't feel I needed to know.

K: But little did they ... Well, this is my paraphrase, but little did they know that Chi'el'ah was basically clueing you in.

D: He was clueing me in and he was informing me his perspectives concerning the treaties. I knew something was going on and that is ultimately what they wanted to know about and I said,

“Well, for you to know about that kind of thing, then I need to know about certain other things.”

You know, it was truly a quid pro quo situation and they said,

“Well OK. We'll tell you if you tell us.”

So I told them and they told me a little more.

And it was right around that same time that Lotus was actually kicking into fore, the May 31st, 2001 event that took my prosaic project and basically threw it in the garbage can and it turned into what it is now, this project that it is now. And as a result I also found out from them where they said Lotus was ultimately destined. And that is, like I said, we'll discuss that at a slightly future date.

K: OK. But it isn't it true to some extent that Lotus could help Chi'el'ah now?

D: That was the perspective of the P-45 J-Rods, and that is not my perspective.

K: I see. So ... because I make a distinction between Chi'el'ah, who is, from what I understand, a P-52, and the P-45s. So, but they're on the same ...

D: They're on the same timeline, the same track, but just separated by 7,000 years.

K: OK. So, even so ...

D: Which is quite a big separation.

K: So what we get ...what you're saying is that, in a sense, Chi'el'ah couldn't get the benefit of Lotus because ...

D: Nor did he ask for it.

K: OK.

D: Nor did he ask for it. And I will say this. This is something that David ... I spoke with David on the phone not that long ago. I'll leave the last name off. I think you know who I'm ....

K: Sure, but we can use his name if it's OK with you.

D: Well sure. David Wilcock.

K: OK. Yeah, because we taped an interview with him.

D: Oh, OK. Wonderful. And he was talking. We were discussing the same thing, which was the Box, the Cube. And I said, “Yeah, but a strange thing happened.” I was pro temp or made MJ-9 for the 12 as the result of a bet that went on within MJ-12. And I got a chance to tap who ended up being the last MJ-9 prior to the adjournment.

Before tapping her, who was the first female to ever set in the 12, I got a chance to look at certain documents and look through certain archives in Washington DC, prior to going across to the continent and meeting with some folks and telling them basically I wasn't interested in their offers. I'm talking about a trip to Brussels.

K: To see the Illuminati?

D: Yeah. And during the same time, the Cube disappeared. And it hasn't been seen since. And it disappeared out of the archives. Of course I have no idea ... I have no idea where the item may be, but I do know this: I'm happy that they can't find it. Because what they were doing is they were handing this Cube around ...

And this was a question that Bill had asked, whether there was only one Cube. They were handing this Cube around from country to country, to the elitists in the countries, to look into their own futures so that they could pick the best paths for themselves. Why don't they just live their lives? And try to be good people? Why do they need a little black box to tell them when to jump and how to jump? That's not being fully human, at least from my perspective and those of our associates. That's not being fully human.

So, as I understand, it disappeared. Now, there have been certain, you know, allegations, that have been made that during the time when I had... Is it almost a year ago now? When I had the bad seizure? It was near the end of last year, was it? No. [Marcia, off screen, confirming date] It was about a year ago and I had a very severe seizure and was actually put out of commission, seriously, for a while, and there was a big hullabaloo to get over to my apartment to get something out of my apartment. What that object was, I won't comment. But I will say this to everybody: Whoever took it, it's in safe hands and it won't be used to harm humanity.

K: All right.

D: In fact, the fact that it's in safe hands will prevent it from being used to harm humanity. It has been thus far only used ... Aside from ... Well, I mean, I've got to try to justify my own behavior in Bandelier in using it for the purposes of skewing to get Lotus off and the abductions off. But I think that was for a beneficial cause.





Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:


Bandelier: Dan was referring to the "Bandelier" National Monument, where the Tau 9-6 Treaty gathering was held. See:


The P-52k delegates were trucked in from the nearby LANL [Los Alamos National Laboratory], and the P-45ks used the Tyuonyi ruins as the drop off point because they looked like a 9 and the pueblo ruins themselves looked like Inca City, Mars.



Bandelier National Monument

Tyuonyi ruins

Inca City, Mars


K: Right.

D: But it has been used since, actually, the 50s, by the potentates, by the leaders of the various countries to skew the history of the human race.

K: Wow. That's amazing.

D: And the common folk, the average people, all of us, have a right to a future which is our own, and not being skewed and designated and promulgated and promoted and provoked by bluebloods who feel that they are above everyone else.

K: Well, thank you, Dan.

D: You're welcome.

K: I think that we probably all owe you a great thanks for that.

D: Well, I'm just ... I'm happy to pass along the information. I'm honored to pass along the information that I understand that the Yellow Book is no longer accessible.

K: Yes.

D: That's all I know about it, though.

K: I understand. I totally understand. And, thanks for that information.

D: That may be the reason, too, why the Illuminati hasn't done something to us and it also may be the reason, on the other end, why the old Magi haven't and it may be why they're all so quiet and... Hmmm.

K: Right.

D: I don't know.

K: They don't have the upper hand any more.

D: The people should have the upper hand and they should have the upper hand for their own destiny and that's why we two, have gone as far as what we have to expose the NSSM200 report which was put in during the Ford administration, which I believe was written by Dr. Henry Kissinger, wherein he suggested the possible use of food as a weapon and its use against, in fact, as a tool against, the third world.






Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:


April 24, 1974

National Security Study Memorandum 200

Now, at the same time we notice that is a correlation going with findings from the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report concerning global warming that if the world average temperature rises, I believe between 2 and 3 degrees Celsius, that the Northern hemisphere, the higher latitude, growth will increase.


However, if it goes over that it will decrease. Yet the lower latitudes ... by the way that's where you find most of the third world countries ... the 2 to 3 degree Celsius increase will cause starvation and crop loss.





K: OK.

D: Now isn't this funny, how they're just allowing the global warming to increase through the provoking ... with the use of fossil fuels? Now I'm not saying that's the total cause. It's not. There are cycles involved, short as well as long term cycles. But isn't that funny? And it's my best guess that they'll probably order just enough ameliorative steps to be taken where it levels off where the higher latitudes probably don't lose their crops, where you find the majority of the rich countries.

K: Interesting. Well, that's actually a fascinating critical observation. I think that it is also interesting that most of the crops are being grown, though, in the lower latitudes. They're not being grown in North America anymore.

D: Right. But you have sustainability, though.

K: Sure.

D: Whereas when you have the loss of the crops in the lower latitudes you're also losing a lot of the population from the third world, which, unfortunately, according to the way that the documents read, some people find them expendable.

K: Right.

D: We don't feel that way.

K: That's the Iron Mountain report ... also talks about things of that nature. And you're familiar with that.

D: I've heard of it.

K: OK. It's actually ... It's freely available on the net to be read and it talks about something very similar to that.

D: You know, I'm not one that likes to interject myself in politics at all.

K: I know that. I ...

D: I like to stay to the research.

K: But at the same time ...

D: At the same time, I mean, you know, when we start hearing that the Codex is being placed in place which actually delimits food value. Oh, you can have all the food you want and starve to death while you're eating it if there's no nutrients.

K: Right. Absolutely.

D: When I start hearing that food is being used as a weapon and it's being used concerning the use of fossil fuels, I start getting personally angry. There's not one person in the lower latitudes that's worth any less than me.

K: Right. Right.

D: You know, everybody is worth exactly the same thing on this Earth and unfortunately there are individuals who feel otherwise.

K: I understand. OK. So Bill, the question you're asking: First of all, you mentioned Will Uhouse.

D: The son of Bill Uhouse.

K: The son of Bill Uhouse.

D: Right, right.

K: He's very well known. We didn't realize that it was actually ... that it was the son you were saying who had access to that technology.

D: Yes. Yes. Bill was the builder of the avionics and the testing equipment who back-engineered ARV testing equipment and avionics. I actually saw some of the equipment (and this is in the tape that Marcia and I did) ... in a room. I actually saw some of the equipment, some of the diagnostic equipment, in the B-bay, underneath the Galileo bay, that he actually built. And so when I started describing it, Will looked at me and said, “Oh, that's what my Dad built.” So we had a very nice little connection there.

K: So are you saying ...

D: But it's Will who had experience around the Looking Glass equipment in the 70s. His son, Bill Uhouse's son.

K: And Will Uhouse IS alive now?

D: Yes. Of course.

K: OK. Because that's very interesting ...

D: And his wife, Teri. They, in fact, from what I understand, they met during the course of conversations concerning our information coming to the public. Teri and Will met one another, fell in love, and were married. That makes me feel kind of personally really good.

K: [smiles and laughs] OK. Well, so it sounds like Will knows quite a bit about what makes the ARV run, then ...

D: Uh huh.

K: If his father had something to do with the back-engineering.

D: Uh huh. Yes.

K: OK. So in 1947, when the Cube was discovered, it must have really screwed up the idea of the two timelines by bringing in the ability to ... I mean, I don't know what the two can and can't do ...

D: Well, first of all, the Cube actually was not discovered in 1947. There's a mixture of the stories involved. The Cube was actually ... The information about the Cube and its existence was known as of 1946. It was further discussed in 1947 after a certain crash in a Midwestern, lower, Southwestern state, New Mexico, and following which, during the first brokering for treaties by the Orions with Eisenhower, the Cube was handed to Eisenhower. It was in fact expected to go to the United Nations authorities and it was in fact spirited away by the United States military.

K: OK.

D: They didn't hand it over.

K: But the way you're talking about the Cube is that it sounds like it connects emotionally with the viewer, in a sense.

D: It does. And in fact it was handed ... It was actually Orion technology.

K: OK.

D: And it was handed over by them in a spirit of goodwill but a mis-assessment as to our evolutionary state, our ability to handle the issue. And handle the equipment. They felt us more balanced than what we actually were.

K: OK. Well this opens almost Pandora's Box in the sense of United States history.

D: That is Pandora's Box. Yes. I'm not exactly certain what was seen relative to Cube for 9-11. However, the analysis which I was asked to do ... (of course I paid the price of having actually done it. Again, people don't want to hear the answers that I came up with.) But ... the analysis that I did indicated that certainly there is, at minimum, a great suspicion concerning the delay of response. And information that I have directly from one of the formerly seated members was in fact that we were aware (but this was Looking Glass technology, not the Cube) ...

K: I understand.

D: That we were aware as of the middle 1990s that there would be a coming Islamic extremist war with the United States. We were also aware of certain alternative situations that they used the statistics from the Looking Glass for the variability between the different pictures to show that would be occurring at the same time, the other probability at the same time.


And, from their perspective, that the least of the two consequences was 9/11. I am aware of what the other possible consequence was. I'm not willing to come out and start mentioning it because I don't know what the consequences are of speaking of things that have not thus far happened, yet the probabilities existed that they could.

K: Yeah.

D: So, you know, I'm feeling a little bit ... There's a little weight when it comes to that, but ...

K: OK. You're saying though, that the Looking Glasses have been, as you called it, decommissioned.

D: Yes, ma'am.

K: And that means across the board.

D: Across the board.

K: OK.

D: They are shut down.

K: And you said there was 50 man-made devices. And I'm assuming ...

D: I said at least 50.

K: ... that would access, or create, Stargates out of natural vortexes.

D: Yes. They would suck them in and make them available.

K: And a Looking Glass is not the same as a Stargate.

D: No. A Looking Glass is a back-engineered form from the original cylinder-seal descriptions on how to build the units that made Stargates, so that ... in essence you could take a Looking Glass unit and make a couple changes to the equipment, lift it up on an angle, put field posts around it and open up a hole to step through.

K: Sure. OK, but the Looking Glass can show you the future. So are we saying ...

D: Future probabilities. Not the future.

K: OK. So are we saying there were 50 Looking Glasses in operation as well as ...?

D: Oh no. There were much less. We had a basic monopoly over the Looking Glass. That and India. India brokered early on with Indira when Indira Gandhi was brokering the Committee of the Majority between the United States and the Soviet Union because the Soviets were threatening to start their own treaty system up with the extra terrestrials, which would have become untenable.

We agreed then to expand MJ-12 from a wholly operated and owned American operation to an international operation. Thus was born the Committee of the Majority between 1963 and 1967. And when that information was brokered, that happened in parallel with, kind of under the table but in parallel with the United Nations treaties involving things like the test ban treaty and the outer space treaty.

And so it was being done at the same time under cover of UN support. The diplomats were going back and forth and brokering the opening up, so that the treaty system would be a single treaty system and thus tenable and manageable, to, hopefully, a good outcome. And we'll be knowing within the next few years whether that was successful.

K: OK. So this is really fascinating. You're saying that some other countries, India for one, had access to Looking Glass technology.

D: Yes, ma'am. They had that written in as far back as the 1960s and 1970s when it was actually being back-engineered from the Stargate material. And so at the same time that Will Uhouse, for instance, was looking at the early generation Looking Glass, India had the same.




Video clip

Dr. Dan Burisch talks with Will Uhouse about secret base, S-4





K: OK. And are you at liberty to say what other countries had access to that?

D: To the information? Or to the equipment?

K: To the Looking Glass, to a Looking Glass, or the ability ...

D: No.

K: ... to create a Looking Glass and look back ... look at time, look forward into their own history ...

D: No. No.

K: Was that not acceptable?

D: No. No. And I'll tell you why the answer is no. Within the treaties, the Looking Glass as well as the Stargates, as well as the Cube, and the “information movement pods,” are all contained within the treaty system. Within that treaty system it also prohibits and allows certain passage of information amongst delegates on where the Looking Glass material is and where the information flow is, what the access is. Being that I stood in Bandelier and considered a delegate, therefore I cannot tell you.

K: OK. So you can't tell me who has ...

D: No.

K: ... access to that technology.

D: Aside from India and the United States. No.

K: OK. Right. But we can assume that some countries perhaps, that is, the leadership of some countries, may have had access to this technology at some point.

D: I think that it's fair to say that we can assume that they had access to the information from it. But I wouldn't place any characterization over any assumption of who may or may not have had it.

K: OK. All right, well, I think ...

D: I thank you for the question, though.

K: OK. But it also gives you a whole different way of looking at history. I mean, certainly ...

D: Indeed it does.

K: I mean... You know, this stuff has got to be kind of as natural to you as, you know, getting up in the morning, you know, and having a cup of coffee. This is all part of your world view.

D: Nah ...There is nothing as natural to me as getting up and having my cup of coffee! [big laugh]

K: OK.

D: And we should have never built... The Stargate, yes, OK, for the purpose of speaking with the visitors from the other timelines. Yes, absolutely. But Looking Glass, no. That was done because of our own shortcomings as people who aspire to things that we maybe shouldn't try to grab a hold of.

K: Well ...

D: It should never have been built.

K: It gives you power, right? We're talking about power, and the misuse of power here.

D: Yes.

K: I mean, bottom line, right?

D: Yes.

K: So ...

D: And I am an advocate against that misuse. In fact ... Well, I could say against the misuse ... I am against its use. Period.

K: OK. So let's say one has the Looking Glass, and you're saying it shows probabilities, and one of the things we were wondering is: How does it do that?

D: Well, from the best I understand (and I was speaking with Bill just a little while about it, a little while ago), the rings and the amount of information via energy which is passed into it. And I've got to be very careful with this ...The position of the rings, their orientation, the energy running through them, the position of the barrel, etc - because you can raise the barrel up on an armature inside the center of it – all come into play as if you have an onion with the various layers of the onion.

As you move through the different energy levels you also move through the different layers so you get different bits of information. Now, imagine an almost infinite number of layers overlaying in comparison to the positions of the rings and an almost infinite amount of energy that you can add or subtract, tuning it up, tuning it down.

K: Well, it sounds sort of like ...

D: Instead of going up by 1 hertz or 2 hertz, maybe by a thousandth of a hertz up and down.

K: OK. But it sounds like you're working with ... almost like a kaleidoscope effect. You know, like a kaleidoscope, a real kaleidoscope, the way you would turn and twist and focus and each time you get a different design. Right?

D: Right, except ...

K: The design and the colors change.

D: You get a different design and the colors change but it's like working with multiple kaleidoscopes where, when you find two different probabilities that you would run into, you have two kaleidoscopes and you make a change on one kaleidoscope that may factor or function to a different angular change on another kaleidoscope. So you get two separate pictures that you then have that are flashing back and forth.

K: OK.

D: But yes.

K: OK. So, is ...

D: That's the best analogy I can ...

K: Is there an interface with a computer to get these read-outs ...

D: Yes.

K: ... of the probabilities?

D: Yes. In fact there's a de-interlacing system which they used to actually de-interlace the flashing back and forth of the two probabilities or the multiples that they had at certain times when it starts skipping ...

K: You could freeze them, right? So you could look at them closer?

D: What they did is that they de-interlaced the video and then reintegrated the video and watched the individual videos and then determined statistically how much time was spent on each video to determine the amount of probability of each event occurring. And they tested that against probabilities in the field and probabilities of future occurrence to get a system which functioned scientifically. And that's ...

K: OK. And so, well, I'm going to go with that and I'm going to actually say that what they might have been doing is then looking back to see ... In other words, if they saw an event in the Looking Glass, all they had to do was calibrate, or look at the different possibilities to see which one happened and then ...

D: That's what they did.

K: ... as time went on ...

D: Absolutely. That's right on it. That's right on. That's right on the beam. And you know, some people like to say ... Some people say it's blue smoke and mirrors, but, then again, I was told something in 2001 that I'm living in right now. OK?

K: OK.

D: OK? Without going to what it is. And, like I said, we'll talk about that in the future. But it's the best scientific equipment that I can imagine for the determining of such a thing. But it goes to the old question: Just because we have the power to do something, should we?

K: Sure.

D: And I am a 100% advocate. She and I [gesturing toward Marcia] had a more than a small dustup out at Frenchman Mountain over this very same thing, which actually resulted in me walking alone down Lake Mead back toward Las Vegas, with she and I yelling and screaming at each other along the roadside.

They were doing tests out at Frenchman Mountain during the time that the Rosen Bridge was being accessed there - the Einstein-Rosen Bridge - with the equipment. They had the curtains up and all of that business, enough where Metro couldn't see it from the top of the mountain and all that. And they were accessing there and there was a mistake and a small explosion out there on the east side of this little ... what we call the Conquistador Helmet.





Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:


"Metro", referring to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.





And she wanted me to go out there with her to help clean some the evidence up of it. And she and I got into more than a little dustup because I didn't want anything to do with it. Because I don't believe ... I'm no Luddite. I'm all for grand technology. But I don't believe in playing with things which actually deal with looking into the future.

There's another issue that was going on at the time, in fact, the variety of communication which was going on via this equipment ...from elsewhere ... I presume ... she won't, still hasn't, won't admit to me, but I presume that it was from Orion and it was information, defense related information, on how this type of equipment, how an Einstein-Rosen Bridge at a distance, could be used to pull information out of a defense computer system.

K: Ah ha.

D: And I don't mean a U.S. defense computer system. I said, “You know what? NO.” Look, we've got the technology here. We've got the talent. We've got the willpower and we've got the willingness to defend our own country without the use of something involving time technology. I wouldn't want to go up against, for instance, god help us, the Chinese, on the ground. But at the same time, I don't fear their country either. I believe that we should be diplomatic with them and have a firm understanding and a respect for one another. But I also don't fear them. And so, the use of the technology like that is not honorable, to me.

K: Right. Well, it's like knowing how the game plays out means you can play to your advantage ahead of time in making sure that that eventuality will occur.

D: That's why I as so interested in... When I was doing my time ... During my time with the jobs involving safety and security training and all that here in Las Vegas, when I was interacting with Marcia and the Eye because we were literally on a daily basis talking about that same thing. And about the psychology of individuals who come to a table to play a game and who cheat to alter the outcome of the game.


And that whole psychology is something which I'm not ... you know, is not foreign to me and so that helped, if you will, prime the wick of the explosion between myself and that variety of technology, which actually primed my disagreement with them.






Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:


The "Eye" is a reference to the 'Eye in the Sky' or 'Casino Surveillance'.




K: OK. Well, I understand what you're saying and there's a million questions that all of this ..

D: I know, I know.

K: ... raises and I know don't have all night, but I would like to ask ...

D: There's 30 of them here. [laughs]

K: Now that I know what I know and what you've at least communicated, you're saying you don't want to use the Looking Glass for advantage over country to country, but what about country to off-world ...

D: No no no no. It shouldn't be used at all.

K: OK. I understand, but ...

D: All right?

K: But, is there something there? I mean, in other words, is the technology something that they are using now to look at our relationships with, because ...

D: [shakes head no] The technology is not being used at all right now.

K: OK. But the reason it's not used now is because of where we're going into the galactic ... the plane of the ...

D: [nods head yes] As of about 2017 I would expect that probably that all of these little pieces of equipment will probably all get reassembled, yeah.

K: Turned back on.

D: Oh sure.

K: 2017? That's quite a while ...

D: 2016, 2017.

K: Not until then?

D: Probably not.

K: Do you mean ...

D: I'm figuring that they're probably going to act conservatively on this. That's what all the people of wisdom have suggested to them.

K: Oh, wow.

D: Is to act conservatively. That yes, the so-called cycle of catastrophe, or season of catastrophe of Fulcanelli, the time period from, oh, right around 1992 to right around 2012, right around that area. While we will have passed it, passed 2012, we really ought to get through the entire cycle which is about 1980 to about 2016, to feel confident that the interpretation from the timeline from the future about their own catastrophe is not off by a few years. We're talking about 45,000 years or 52,000 years respectively. We have difficulty understanding what happened 2,000 years ago and we're talking about 50,000 years here. So, it's very wise for them to wait.

K: OK. You mean turn ... The Looking Glasses are now decommissioned, but also the Stargate technology.

D: Yeah. Yeah, they're decommissioned and the Stargates and the Looking Glasses, I'm sure they're all in their little mothball containers and all of that and they have been separated ... The three components of each have been separated and moved to different power structures, diplomatic and military authorities around the world. And we're talking about the EU specifically, the UN, and NATO. Those are in specific control of one of the three components each. And I cannot comment as to which component is contained by whom.

K: OK. But you're saying there's no doubt whatsoever that all this technology has been decommissioned.

D: There is no doubt whatsoever when it comes to the Looking Glasses and when it comes to the Stargate technology that it has been decommissioned. And ... However, there are a few threats going on, ongoing threats, from present countries stating that they will put it together at their will, through their own self determination. And those countries, if push comes to shove, will be shoved.

K: OK. Meaning ... Put it together now?

D: As in build one themselves now.

K: Yes. That's what I meant.

D: Yes. What was extant has been collected. I'm under very good assurance that what was setting there has now been collected and decommissioned.

K: OK. And we're assuming Iraq is one of those.

D: Oh, absolutely.

K: They were able to pinpoint in the Looking Glass the very highest probability for those things to occur ...

D: That's true. That's true. And Bill was asking about a future date involving another thing and a year was given to me. And he was saying, well, if a year can be provided for that, why wouldn't a year be provided for the other?

K: Right.

D: Well, there was a highest-probability year for it. However, telling me about something that might happen in the future involving a project which we're currently involved is one matter.

K: Sure.

D: Willy-nilly throwing a date out which is a probability involving the lives and the destiny of all of us here on the Earth, specifically to a predicted four-and a half, or four billion peoples' deaths, is another matter that carries an entirely different weight with it.

K: But are we to assume that we past that year yet? Or ...

D: You're not to ... No. You're not to assume.

K: No. OK. So that's still in the offing. What we're looking at is a very low probability of the event or the set of events occurring ... at this point.

D: Yes. Yes. We're looking at a low probability of the higher catastrophic portion of the events occurring. I expect that the events which would kick it off are still going to happen. For instance, the solar max which is coming at around 2012 and the expected loss of GPS equipment and things like that, which is out there as part of ... on the web you can find that. Engadget, I think, was one of the groups that spoke about the loss of GPS and satellite communications.

K: You mean the electromagnetic grid is going to go down.

D: Yes. Yes. And that would be the time that I would expect the highest probability of the T2 event, having correlated to the history of the J-Rods and the Orions. But that's as far as I can ...

K: Wow. OK. Well, that's pretty close.

D: I can't give a date though.

K: Yeah. I understand.

D: I can but I shouldn't because people will then target toward a date, and I ... Yeah, there are people out there now that are saying, “Yep, it's right around the corner at any moment now. Why won't the aliens save us?"

K: Yes.

D: We need to save ourselves.


D: And that's why the steps have been taken that have been taken in the world and are still under way, so that we will save ourselves.



Stargate Secrets - Dan Burisch revisited - Part 2
A video interview with Dan Burisch
Las Vegas, June 2007
Shot, edited and directed by Kerry Lynn Cassidy


Start of interview




Bill Ryan: I have a question about the probabilities, Dan... the low probability.

Dan Burisch: When you ask a question, I really ... [laughs]

B: ...the low probability, according to what I understand what you said earlier, is 19%. Is that still valid? Because that's still playing Russian roulette with one bullet in a barrel of five.

D: Is it not. Actually it's slightly worse than that. In all honesty it's slightly worse than that, because there's only an 85% confidence level to that 19%.

B: So that doesn't quite sound like we can all relax.

D: I don't think it's ... Well no, I don't think it's a question. I think we need to do the right things. And there was a correlation to the successful and unsuccessful outcomes which involved the people of the world being united in purpose for survival and for care for our world. And that's the reason why we did this crazy thing.

And you know, it sounded crazy, it looked crazy, but we did it because it was the right thing to do and I ended up having to send a team of people out, canvassing the regular people of the world, and handing flyers out, stating that the time had arrived for us to pray for unity. And I would still encourage that seriously and sincerely.


You know, I lost people. I was in charge of a team and some of them died as a result, well, a couple of them from accidents, and that, you know can happen anywhere, but a couple of them were put to death for proselytizing. And so I bear that on my soul now.

Kerry: Were put to death for proselytizing ...

D: In a country where ...

K: You mean China.

D: Ah ... there was in fact two deaths in China and we also lost some people in Saudi Arabia and a couple other places. I didn't make public how many-all we lost or how many-all we had but they did their jobs and the information was handed out and we did the best we could. Anyway, you were asking about the Stargate, the possible locations and all of that.

[reading from a document]

On June 16th of 2003, in RV Number 0403, Deborah was requested to do a remote viewing session, a sole one, a series of them in fact that she conducted, and she found several locations, among them was in fact Volochanka and she even said “to the north by the Tundra” in Russia and in the southwest Tibetan Mountains ... Tibetan Mountains (I'm sorry, I'm still a little bit ... thinking about my men and women.) Uh, I don't know how to pronounce this. In ... M-o-s-j-o-e-n ... in Norway and that was a big, big hullabaloo. There was one actually ... The equipment was actually removed from there. Syria. Turkey.

K: You're saying she remote-viewed the locations of the Stargates.

D: In fact she did, and the reason why I reacted to pull this out. In your question #9 it says: “How many LGs are/were there? How many man-made Stargates? Where are they?" And you gave a list of possible countries. In that list you mentioned Bulgaria.

K: Right.

D: Well, on the second page of it she's got the Pirin Mountains in Bulgaria listed, so I just wanted to kind of let you know.

K: Thank you.

D: And a couple of points in Egypt, and she didn't in fact in this one mention Iraq because she was working separately for Iraq. On February the 4th of 2003 she did a special RV, says,

“I came up with the following in my session. I saw a place 10 miles south-southeast of Baghdad.”

This, by the way, is the place where we ended up actually raiding and removing what they thought were rings for what they called “Weapons of Mass Destruction.” Well, there were rings all right but it was a different kind of weapon of mass destruction.

“I pictured a big tree on the ground surface of this location.”

Now think about how Saddam was finally found.

K: Yes.


“Behind the tree there was a hole in the ground and then a piece of wood over it. I saw a man looking and feeling like Saddam. A guard lifted the wood over the hole. Saddam then entered the hole adjusting the wood to look like a platform at the top of a set of stairs.”

In remote viewing (I don't remote view), but in remote viewing, from everything I understand from her time gets mixed up, overlaid, and sometimes off-shifted, and she clearly saw him in the spider hole. She also indicated that she found the work area down there and in fact drew the work area which they ended up finding, and finding the one Gate in Iraq.

Interesting stuff, huh?

K: Yeah, absolutely. So, we're kind of getting off the topic a little bit ...

D: That's good. [laughs]

K: ... of Stargates and all that.

D: Am I causing that?

K: I'm sorry?

D: I said, am I causing that? I hope not.

K: We know that Chi'el'ah escaped through a Stargate, with your assistance, because that was described in one of our last videos.

D: ET went home.

K: Yes, ET went home.

D: Yep.

K: And I ... The interesting thing about that is that you also had an experience in which you sort of fell into the Stargate and then kind of didn't go all the way, but stayed in this reality.

D: Well, kind of.

K: Kind of?

D: I was expelled several yards away onto a slab of ... it was either limestone or granite, I'm not really sure, sandstone. All I know is that it was hard [laughs] when I landed on it and it was on the other side of the tarpaulin over... The area was separated, human/ET side, for the actual staging around the Stargate. It was a military operation. And I ended up on the other side of the barrier, which were like raised curtains, so that the people around the area who were actual inhabitants of the area, couldn't see. And I landed on that and I moaned or groaned or was wondering where I was and was in fact then approached by men in guns who were very upset with me. But ...

K: OK, but so you saw the inside of a wormhole, right? Momentarily?

D: Oh ... I can't really say that. There was a gray curtain, almost a misty type curtain very similar to what I remember during the time that I was in a coma back in the '70s. And I saw certain things on the other side, but it was a flash, and that was about it, and nothing really remarkable to talk about.

K: OK. So you never went through, all the way through. I mean, I'm asking ... did you or have you.

D: No. I was just ... No. I did not end up ...I do not remember ending up anywhere else.

K: Have you ever gone through a Stargate?

D: No. no no. No. No. No. No, and there are no rotating ring-like devices where men with military equipment walk through and meet Ra on the other side and bring their nuclear weapons with them, no. No. There are ... yes, I'm being derogatory towards Serpo.

K: I thought we were talking about Stargates.

D: Well, that's what Serpo came from ... I mean, this list of, “We've got our nuclear weapon with us,” and all this business. And they could have picked something better than the name Serpo if they were going to go with it, but ... Serpo is a reptile park in, what is it? Argentina? Or is it the Netherlands? It's the name of a reptile park.

K: Uh huh.

D: And I think it was picked more by the former ops who were actually putting the disinfo together and what they did is that they just simply took a name and turned it backward. It was OPRES; it's a K-4 code.

K: There are no Stargates in Serpo, in the Serpo story, as told to people.

D: OK.

K: OK. But ... [to off camera: That's what I said.] So what I'm asking is ... we have Stargates, OK, that have been decommissioned which access time travel technology.

D: Yeah.

K: OK. These Stargates, before they were decommissioned, we must assume were used.

D: They were used for passing information and passing inhabitants this direction.

K: Oh, by other cultures coming this way but not by us going ..

D: By ... by P-45s and P-52s, both Orions and J-Rods.

K: What about all the other...? I mean, I don't know if you're party to this, but how many other races are out there?

D: I am aware of one inter-dimensional species that won't speak with us directly and was communicating via the Orions, the P-52 Orions. That's it. You know I've been 20 years ... It's confusing to me because I've got so many people with such great certitude, and I've been 20 years around these people and either they were the greatest hiders in the world, even while drunk, and some of them drunk and recreationally drunk. (And that's the way and ... best ... I should put that; comes with large amounts of money. Sometimes they pay for products to make them feel good, or whatever...)

I have never... It's been a joke. I hate to put it this way, but a lot of the UFO community, like, for them the stories have been a joke and a lot of them have been proffered by the folkloristic unit in Majestic. They actually promulgated a lot of these stories and now they hand me the bag to come out here and go, “Boo.” You know, “Sorry. The boogey man isn't real.”

I guess the only thing that I'm aware of are the P-45s and the P-52s. The intergrades between them over the 7,000 years between them cannot be contacted, per treaty. The P-52s J-Rods and Orions I am aware of, and the P-45 J-Rods. At the time the P-45s were around, they were unaware that the P-52 Orions, which would then be P-45 Orions, even existed. They didn't even know that they still survived, at the time. And they only found out as a consequence of coming here and the treaty negotiations.

K: OK, but what about the .... You're telling me that the Stargates were only used one way by ...

D: Used two ways, but one way by transport for delegates in.

K: OK. And that was ...

D: And that was only under extreme circumstances involving international uproar when there were problems with the treaties. Aside from that, products were exchanged back and forth and information was exchanged but it was deemed too dangerous to be handing people back and forth regularly. These things collapse, from what I understand, spontaneously. And if it collapses and you are not out one side or in the other, you're nowhere.

K: OK. So you're telling me that these people have such a conscience they were not sacrificing Americans or other, you know, or military people, to test the Stargate?

D: No. The treaties were basically inflicted on us by the Orions. As they were enforced upon us by the Orions that we needed to do what we needed to do when they figured out that we weren't able to handle the issue ourselves. They looked at their own history and said, “Huh, look at the cave men and women.”


OK? After we acted the way that we acted involving the Cube and all of that business. They inflicted the treaty system on us and they said, ”You will behave this way.” We don't have the ability to just take a Stargate and to step through onto the other side without violating the treaty. They don't want us out there. We are dangerous to ourselves, so why would we not be dangerous to another culture? They are sure as hell not gonna let us off this planet.

K: OK. Can I ask you ...

Bill [off-camera]: You should ask about Montauk and Henry's experience.

K: Well, yes.

D: I still, believe it or not, I still have not read about what Montauk is. Sitting here right now I have zero clue about what it even is.

K: OK. That's cool. What about the Philadelphia Experiment? Are you familiar with that?

D: I am familiar with the reports of the USS Eldridge.

K: OK.

D: I'm familiar with the unified field theory testing that went on. In fact the unified field theory testing did go on but it made something which was, from what I understand, radar-invisible but not involving everything that I've heard ... all of these other movies about people going back to 1941 and prior to Pearl Harbor and all of this business and walking the time tunnel, and all of this.


The information that I've heard from the military sources – because I asked when I was in there because I knew about the Philadelphia Experiment from way back from hearing about it – that it was a legit experiment, that there was a legit experiment that went on but it provided radar invisibility and was an early cloaking system. And it was electromagnetic cloaking.

K: OK. Now I'm wondering what ... Certainly Chi'el'ah gave you, sort of hidden cards in your hand that allowed you to get information from Majestic, or to trade information with Majestic such that you would learn what was going on in terms of the Stargates and everything.

D: Right. And if I tell you, that means that I'm telling that camera right there. [points into lens].

K: OK. And but if... Recently ... You know, I don't know if this is in the public domain, but recently you found out that MJ-1 had not told you everything about a certain incident.

D: Yes. True.

K: OK, which was a meteor, incoming meteors ...

D: Yes. It was Apophis and the big thing is the affidavit that I wrote. And the dustup that happened between he and myself was based on the fact that he said ...And I told him not to lie to me again, and the reason why I told him not to lie me again ... It involved the time period where I was told to keep my mouth totally shut because of the timelines.

Then I found out it was a bunch of garbage basically just to manipulate me to keep my mouth shut. And after that happened, then more votes were taken and then I was told to talk. I was given the orders to talk. Yo-yo. OK? When that happened I told him, “Don't lie to me anymore. Tell me, ‘It's none of your damn business,' if you have to. I can accept that better than being lied to.” It's more honorable. He said fine.

Then I found out that because he had carried the attitude that the Magi were not closely watching anything like neodes, the near earth orbiting asteroids, or anything like that. They weren't concerned about it at all. Well then, subsequently during a conversation I found out that in fact they were. This caused a mild dustup that was then heightened because of information from her relative [indicating Marcia off camera]. The information from her relative was in fact that they were aware that there would be an Islamic attack upon the United States as early - meaning they were aware as early - as the mid 1990s that it would be coming sometime in the new millennium. Well, right on, smack on the beam.

That made it worse. I had told him that if he ever lied to me again I would make him pay a price for it. The simple price was naming him.

K: OK, but ...

D: And after that I, you know ... We sent ... There has been conversation with that particular individual since and everybody's OK with everybody. I mean, you know, 20 years, more than 20 years ... I first met the gentleman at the back of the LAMS, the museum, more than 20 years, since the 1970s. The relationship is not going to go by the wayside over a dustup.






Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:


LAMS: Los Angeles Microscopical Society.




K: Sure. I understand. But what I'm ... The reason I'm alluding to that is that here's a case ...

D: I know what you're alluding to.

K: OK. Where you don't know everything ...

D: No. I don't.

K: ... about what's happening.

D: Thank God.

K: And you haven't necessarily been clued in to everything.

D: No, I haven't.

K: And so you are telling me that we don't go both ways in Stargates and this is what you've been told.

D: Uh huh.

K: OK? And you are telling me that there is only two races, maybe a third, but you know ...

D: Three races plus us, maybe a fourth.

K: OK. So all I can say here is ... This is interesting because we have gotten testimony from a lot of different witnesses, people who have different types of abilities, who have come from the inside, from Black Ops, like our Henry Deacon, telling us that we are accessing Stargates constantly and going in fact between the Earth and Mars and going between the Earth and the Moon and possibly other places as well. In other words, not just that we're staying out of space or out of the Stargates because the Orions tell us to.

D: They were used. They were used in timeline number two to gradually access Moon and Mars. Now, there is a possibility that the information that he has, or had, has to do with a future timeline. That would make sense to me on that level but not on the level of “Hey honey, let's take the kids to Olympus Mons today.”

K: No, but how about if the military is sending equipment back and forth, etc etc?

D: Well, OK. The Orions could trust us so much where they could hand us a Cube and we misused it to the state that we misused it. Where they then had to inflict a treaty system upon us.

K: Are they running our country? Are they running our world?

D: No. No. They're simply constraining what we're able to do. No. We're running our own show down here. Meaning, when I say we, I'm not talking about the common folks that are, you know, like being starved to death every day. We're running our own show politically down here. The statements about ... well, these are mind-controlled this or that, you know, automatons working for the ETs and the government ...No no no no no.


These are good hearted and black hearted people - both - all fighting each other to run the geopolitical scenario. hat is an honest assessment from what I've seen was going on. But we are constrained as to what we are allowed to do. Meaning where we are allowed presently to off-world.

K: I understand.

D: You know ... very nice, very nice, we placed our hands on our hips and Underdog flew the American flag on the Moon and we showed ourselves so wonderful and all that over the Soviets. But that doesn't mean that we're quite able at this point to go and camp out for too long.

K: OK, so now you're telling me why we're not, theoretically ...or we haven't gone back to the Moon. At least we're ...

D: Right, we're busy throwing sticks and stones at each other. And another reason why we cannot go back there, is part of the treaty system allows us to have a certain repository set somewhere on the Moon and that repository is presently there.

K: OK.

D: And that is in case the T2 timeline should eventuate or there should be a geological or a global catastrophe of like size.

K: OK. Was this what you called the Ark?

D: Yes. Yeah.

K: OK. Which, from what I understand, used to exist here on the plant.

D: Well, in several pieces.

K: Right. OK. So they took it up to the Moon somehow.

D: Yeah. It was assembled and it ...

K: Did they use a Stargate?

D: No. No. That was going ... In fact they were building equipment up north from here and they ended up getting it about three-quarters of the way built. I actually told Bill Hamilton about this when we were walking on the Jeep Road out on Frenchman Mountain one night. “Well, where's it gonna go?” I looked like that [makes face] and kind of pointed up and there the orb was setting. And he says, “Ah.”

K: OK. But you call it an Ark. Is this something ...

D: Well, it's a nickname for it.

K: But it sounds like it's going to save creatures.

D: It's got genetic and tissue and other products.

K: From us?

D: Yes.

K: OK. Other creatures on the planet as ...?

D: Oh yes, yes. A very good biodiversity, yes.

K: I see. And it's sitting on the Moon in case there's something very bad that happens down here. Is that the idea?

D: Yes.

K: OK. From the Moon where does it go?

D: It doesn't.

K: Oh really? But the Moon's not like, you know, the most inhabitable planet ...

D: No, but it's the place that we're allowed to be ... Right now. Do I sound like I'm weighing my words?

K: [laughs] Yes. Yes. OK, well ... I mean ...

D: It's your job to ask the questions. It's my job to answer them as honestly and as truthfully as I am able while being honorable and beneficial.

K: OK. And we do thank you for that, you know, regardless of what other people think.

D: Well I mean, you know, I ... [big sigh]

K: There's a huge amount ....

D: I know the exact spot that the thing is setting there. All right? I know what it looks like, I know how many pieces there are. I was involved in looking at and assisting with the biospherics on it. I know exactly where it sets and what happens if I say exactly where it sets and something happens to it?

K: Sure.

D: I can't take that on my back.

K: I understand.

D: Go back to the '50s here for a second.

K: All right.

D: An interesting thing happened ... You know, we were talking about the Cube and all of that and the meetings with Eisenhower and the Orions, the delegates .... An interesting thing ... [picks up document] And I'm just referring to this, of course because it happens to reference from the intelligence community, the appropriate event, albeit it was being said at the time during a different context.

This is referencing a Hearing of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the nomination of Mike McConnell to be Director of National Intelligence. And this was at 2.30 pm eastern time on Thursday, February 1st, 2007.


And Mr McConnell, the honorable vice-admiral, said the following:


“Senator, some years ago, I think '50s, '60s, there was a battle in the community with regard to authorities for signals intelligence,” [of course ... signals intelligence ... communication, and ... people can read between the lines, I think] “...and decisions were taken finally to cause the Director of the National Security Agency to have responsibility for signals intelligence, or SIGINT, as we refer to it, with regard to establishing priorities overseeing the technology, insuring it's conducted in an appropriate way. The training standards are right and investments are correct, and so on.”

I've got a little report here which was released on the 17th of February, 2003. This was actually sent to me by... Bill Hamilton! And it was written by a person named Matt Guza. I don't know who the person is aside from Director IC USUFOIC.


And he reports the following:



Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:


Matt Guza is/was Director I.C., USOFOIC. The file ID that Dan was referring to, coming from Bill Hamilton was AQPR17FEB0301-03.




“Aquarius background. Aquarius and other information.”


It says: “Aquarius findings described briefly below.” Because it was being ... For some reason Project Aquarius was being looked at very closely at the time.

“Number 1: From what we have found, we believe that it started in 1953 alongside of the Project Blue Book or Deal.”

Now ... '53 ... what happened in ‘53? This is pretty much around the same time ... general time frame as the Eisenhower thing... within a year? ‘53 was also the time when a certain craft dumped in Arizona, as I recall, right near Kingman, involving two P-45 JRods and a P-52. The P45 was the one met by Bill Uhouse and of course the P-45 was the P-52 ...I had the great honor.

But ... [continues reading],

“The theory on the drawing board at this time is that it started as an USAF black project and was overtaken by the intelligence community due to the content and the secrecy. From investigating the past interests of the USAF in UFOs, it seems that the USAF weighed their investigation too much on non-scientific data. This would explain the need for the intelligence community investigation.” (We can read between the lines here.)


“Herein, after finding, or seeing this, or due to other issues, the intelligence community took Aquarius out of the hands of the USAF.”

Isn't it funny how these two things co-ordinate with one another?

K: Well, what are you ... OK. What are you trying to say? Are you trying to say that ...

D: That there was an obvious allusion ... an obvious allusion here, in the testimony to the honorable vice admiral McConnell, two situations which were going on during the 1950s involving the present relationship between we and the extra terrestrial species. Yep.

K: OK.

D: There seems to be a rather direct correlation here. And then the fact that later on during the intelligence community interview of Mr. McConnell there was even an allusion to timeline changes.

[Continues reading]

“Senator Rockefeller:” [smiles, gestures: Does my heart good to say his name...] “I regret to say that my time has run out and I think somebody's manipulating this clock. Because that much time hasn't gone by. Oh my heavens.”

And then a woman walked in who was from another committee and that would be Susan Collins, I believe. But, the fact that there was a manipulation of a clock comment going on and ... there are several ... well, I've got it tabbed up [refers to paper in hand] as to the relationships here, but what I'm trying to, I guess, show the folks is how things are said publicly.

K: Yes. Absolutely. So, but what is interesting is how many in Congress know what is really being said?

D: Well, the head of the committee here ... This committee was chaired by [referring to the document] John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat, of West Virginia. And there is a ...

K: I have no doubt that Rockefeller is in the loop.

D: Well I have, I have little doubt that he is in the loop as well and may have been in the larger loop as opposed to not the Majestic-12 loop... Anyway ...

K: He's a member of the Illuminati?

D: Oh, No. No no no no no. There was a larger group that existed between '63 ... '67 properly, and approximately 2002 called the Committee of the Majority.

K: Oh, OK, well then ...

D: I mean, you've got people like Rockefeller that can call the war that happened in 1991 as the Persian Gulf Procedure. [smiles] That's right, he actually called it the Persian Gulf Procedure.

K: Fascinating.

D: It wasn't a procedure that I was in, but anyway ...

K: Well, OK. But we've heard that since then it's now called ... There are 40 members that it's called ... isn't it the PI-40?

D: That's an old name.

K: That's an old name?

D: That's an old name for it.

K: So what you're saying or what is being said here is that there is some catastrophic event that has been mitigated to some degree, hopefully, by a certain amount of unity on the planet and a certain amount of effort towards the positive. And I'm assuming the ...

D: And removal of equipment, yeah.

K: OK but they removed the equipment because the equipment told them to remove it? In other words ...

D: They removed the equipment because the history indicated that the equipment was operating during the time of the catastrophe and was a proximate cause to the catastrophe by increasing the amount of energy into our asthenosphere and causing a global catastrophe of geo...

K: Well, that, in a sense the equipment was telling ... You know, it's almost like ...

D: Well it was the equipment and it was the delegates. It was also the delegates to the treaties and the representatives, including Chi'el'ah.

K: The Orions were saying, “Hey. Hey guys, it's the equipment. Shut it down and you'll have better luck”?

D: They were ... they were the leading force in that, yes.

K: Really. OK. Now I'm going to ask you something that may come across a little controversial, but ...

D: [jokingly] Noo! We have been talking about such prosaic items all evening ... I'm not certain I could ...

K: What makes you think that they have our best futures in mind when they told us to turn that equipment off? In other words, why should we believe them?

D: Well, we should believe them simply because of the possibility and because we are talking about four and a half billion, up to five 5 billion people here, all right? Now let's think about this for a moment. If we leave the equipment in place and nothing happens. So what? What is the harm in removing it?

K: Right.

D: Now that would be the corollary question to the question that you just asked. If they don't have our best interests at heart, how would our removing that equipment prevent the catastrophe that we're hearing about from three different cultures? ... Meaning the Orions, the J-Rods and the J-Rods from an earlier time. How would removing that equipment proximate the catastrophe? Only leaving the equipment in place would be the dangerous move. So there's no harm in turning .. in unloading a gun, but there is a possible harm in having it loaded.

K: Sure. It's like the joke of believing in God. It's like the ‘60s joke about whether to believe in God or not. If you believe in God and there is no God, there's no harm. But if you do believe in God and there is a God, it's going to be a good thing in the end, right?

D: Well, it may take you a few more trips back, but ...

K: [laughs] OK. So ...

D: I don't know. That's up to God. [laughs]

K: Well, in a sense that's what you're saying.

D: You know this is an issue of practicality. You know, if we have a piece of equipment there that could possibly cause us harm. Let's say they're wrong and it doesn't. You better pull it apart anyway. We're talking about, you know, the consequence of nearly five billion people. We would be stupid not to, in other words.

K: OK. What about the natural Stargates that still exist on the planet?

D: What has been heard from my background concerning the natural Stargate issues is what was going on at Frenchman Mountain and to access that they were using one of the Stargate devices. They had it hauled out there.

K: OK. In mean, for example, Sedona has several vortexes.

D: Oh sure, they're all over the place.

K: Yes. And there are several natural vortexes, you know ... even a cyclone or a hurricane creates a sort of a vortex.

D: Sure.

K: OK. Through which certain races can travel in their ships, it is said. OK?

D: OK.

K: Do you have anything to say about that?

D: No ...

K: Those are natural Stargates ...

D: Meaning a portal which does not require hardware?

K: Sure.

D: Well. I don't know.

K: OK.

D: I don't know. Well, I guess I could probably make some sort of a comment relative to Lotus. There is a possibility that the portals that we're seeing during Project Lotus may be micro-wormholes. And certainly at least information is being carried through those portals from somewhere to here and it's causing an effect in the environment.

Now we're assessing presently to see whether or not they're naturally produced. And in August, according to certain circumstances, we're planning on running tests out at Frenchman Mountain to determine whether or not it is a natural phenomenon. Possibly.

K: OK.

D: I mean, you know, you could say that a travel in time could be a warp produced by a gravimetric device of a craft and could move large distances in little to no time. So I'm not certain what the difference is physically or mathematically between that and what is being called an Einstein-Rosen Bridge. You would need a physicist for that. I'm used to working on cells and ...

K: Right. But. You know ... and in a sense if Lotus is creating some kind of Stargate effect ...

D: That's wonderful.

K: ... or micro-wormhole ...

D: That's wonderful if it is.

K: It is wonderful, but in a sense you might also have to let go of Lotus in that sense if it's going to impact ...

D: Oh, I have. I have, in effect. But for more tangible reasons. We brought the fine art of producing these portals for demonstration up to a science. We knew exactly what to do ... know exactly what to do ... to propagate them with nearly 100% efficiency.

They range in size, thus far that we've seen, between about .02mm or about 20 microns, up to a millimeter. When we produce them now in the field they are approximately a millimeter in diameter and that's putting a heck of a lot of energy in, 50 times more energy than what we would do through the microscope. But we brought it to the point where it was a beautiful thing, where I could hook the right optics train on the scope, propagate with the use of a laser, and electricity ... and turn around immediately on the surface of silicate.

And then we started getting things coming through on this end, or at least results in the medium around the crystal or around the silicate material that we were using, which were not normal. Cells of anomalous origin. Self-organizing cells which appeared to be organizing. In one case we did a variant of the ancient Lazaro Spallanzani experiment - historic experiment - concerning beef broth, to rule out spontaneous generation.

And we had a very nice AB/AB neuronal type pattern formed by cells that were self-organizing and there were clearly ... Morphologically they appeared like neurons in the soup that we had. And so we had some real problems developing. We had two other consequences where we had what were produced were anomalous cells of unknown quality and ...

K: ... coming through ...

D: Well, what we had is we had an organization, I think, going on, on this end. Now we're coming very close and more is going to be said in about a year about this, but we're coming close to determining the mechanism and what it appears thus far is that there is a ... an opening to a somewhere which is then placed in communication with our environment acoustically and then there is a series of reactions with micro-shards of silicate material or micro-shards of quartz in our environment which then become actually spontaneously, or nearly so, enclosed with material from our environment. And they move off to various locations and actually have effects on target cells in our environment. And so, it's apparently based acoustically.

K: Well that's understandable, although it's complex and I'm not a biologist so I don't pretend that I understand all of it. But I understand where you're going with this. But you still ... In essence, to get back to Stargates, because that's the subject of this ...

D: Really! Am I still ...

K: No, you're there, but the thing is that what I'm curious about is ...

D: I'm loosening the lock on the camera so it drags ... [laughs]

K: ... is ... I'm actually curious whether or not these natural Stargates that do occur in nature are not being accessed by beings, whether they be the Orions or whoever, at will, into this dimension.

D: Well, I've got no information that the P-52 Orions or P-52 J-Rods or the P-45 J-Rods are accessing such a system save the use of time travel technology, gates that move one spot to another and than the use of craft for moving from there to here ... meaning to ... from a spot in Reticulum, for instance, to a place in the Aquarius system, Gliese ... or however it's properly said ... and then, which is the origin, from what I understand, of Project Aquarius itself because they were known to be coming from that direction. And that is, I believe, in the Aquarius constellation. But ...

K: Because they're not ...

D: They use craft, then, to move from there to here but they're using a gravimetric technology to warp time-space, so I suppose that could be the same use. But I don't think it's a situation kind of like, you know, you walk out into a wilderness and see a whole parade of people coming through a Stargate with, you know, 4 heads and 16 eyes, and things like that.

K: Well what about a parade of craft?

D: I don't know. That's the best answer I can give. It's the most honest one I can give. I don't know. I have not in 20 years of history ... of history with Majestic, heard of anything like that from them, meaning as part of either a treaty system or an ongoing operation. However, I've also heard reports of craft being seen in the sky. I've seen craft in the sky which I was not directly involved like the Mae Boyar Park incident in ‘73. I've seen what I believe ... Well I will have to say lights in the sky, not craft.

K: We've seen lights ....

D: She [indicating Marci] has seen craft, and, you know, she's not feeding me full of a line of bull.

K: Many nights you can stare at the sky and see craft zipping around.

D: Well there are meteors too, and there are also experimental aircraft of various types. There also back-engineered aircraft which are being spotted too.

K: OK, but according to what you're saying there is a treaty in which we have Stargates or access to wormholes that we mechanically opened and closed ...

D: Yes.

K: ... based on a treaty system in which we were allowed to get information, and send information back and forth but that we didn't use to go out but they used to come in ...

D: Substantially, yes.

K: OK, but we closed all those down, according to what you're telling us ...

D: Yes.

K: OK. So now I'm asking ...

D: Where's the Yellow Book? [laughs]

K: No. No. But if there are natural Stargates out there that they can use any time they want. So they no longer have use of our Stargates. So in the sense of a treaty, they have access anywhere, any time ...

D: OK, if they do, let's posit if they do for a moment. The ones that we have to be concerned about would be the P-45s because they are looking to justify their own history. They would be very happy, aside from being paid off constantly, they would be very happy to see their own history justified.

K: How are they paid off?

D: They're paid off with technology, with assistance. In the past they were paid off with a certain number of abductions per year.

K: What would they do with those people?

D: Aside from a longitudinal genetic drift study? That's enough. You know, people were, some of them were literally handed over and I consider it illegal and I consider it a violation of international law. I consider it a crime against humanity and that's why I did what I did to stand up against it as best as I could. And to get it off the books.

K: What about the idea that some P-45s have shape-shifted, you know, (excuse the terminology) but, into human form are here working in the government under a human form furthering their own, you know ...

D: It is a substantial probability that they have the ability because I've interacted with ones that would ostensibly look human and I really don't like talking about the so-called Men in Black, or Men in Black phenomenon.

K: But when you talk the Men in Black, those were people that, or beings, that ... and you went in, in our last discussion into quite a description of that kind of thing. But I'm talking about somebody who is acting like you and me, looking like you and me, absolutely undetectable ...

D: No.

K: ... and still could be furthering OR could even be ...

D: If they are, they're not J-Rods. If they are, they're not J-Rods. Orions? Possible. Possible. They are very, very brilliant people. The short interactions, the very short interactions that I had with them I was very impressed... Whereas I would not want to be spending that much time around P-45s at all, I would have enjoyed, in fact I would have felt privileged, speaking with them further.

K: Are you talking about ... When you say Orions, are you talking about the Nordics?

D: I think that's how they're usually ... They've been called Talls. They're essentially, you know, the anthropomorphic very tall human beings with blond hair, very large eyes, very blue, pretty eyes. Larger than our eyes, as in ratio to cranium size. The orbits are larger, etc.

They're just brilliant, just absolutely brilliant people. And what I found most intriguing about them was how they modulated what I consider their brilliance through emotion. The emotions coming from them were so less rudimentary, they were so more complex than what even I experienced with Chi'el'ah. I would have really enjoyed spending some more time with them.

K: OK, but they're here on this planet interacting with us, isn't that so?

D: Well they interacted with us. I'm not certain if there are presently any on Earth or not right now. I would say that, that, you know, they're 50,000 years or a little more than that ahead of us, but given the similarity between body structure, between size, even, and body structure, except for thoracic ratio ... similar enough.

I think they could probably, if their eyes didn't look the way their eyes look, they could probably get away with walking around. But their eyes are way larger than ours. And they look essentially like these Bratz dolls that the little twin girls are going after nowadays. You know, the eyes are too large. You see these eyes, these hypersized eyes. I mean, it's fine on a Bratz doll but if you walk this thing out on to the street, it's going to get picked out very quickly.

K: OK.

D: I just don't think so. Now, at the same time I have to say ... are they smart enough to probably get away with it, figure out how? Maybe. Maybe. I doubt it personally, because, you know .... I've met a lot of very interesting, but a lot of ... a few strange people in the last four and a half years talking with the public, who believe that there are literally reptilians walking around that are wearing masks and things like that. No.

You know, I'm a little more rooted in reality. I hate to put it that way but, no. I joked with her [gesturing to Marci off camera] that I wanted to do something over at the first place where we were at for my debriefing. I said when the debriefing gets done what I wanted to do is I wanted to hire some special effects people for real [lKerry is laughing].


We would end the debriefing then we would stop and then we would being filming with another camera. I was going to ... I was just suggesting a joke. It never got pulled off. Somebody ... [Marci says, off-camera: 'No way.' Dan laughs.] What I was going to do was have a special effects person work up ... work me up with my face over the top of a reptilian face. And I was going to rip it off and go, “God, I'm tired of these human masks!” And just have this little segment put out there as a joke. But she told me that people would take it seriously.

[Marci, off-camera]: You can't do that... people would believe it!

Kerry: It's true.

D: I don't know. I've got a strange sense of humor, I guess.

K: OK. But you have been dealing with P-45s and P-52s and these beings are ... their treaty system is being adhered to because they are here in underground bases monitoring us at all times because otherwise how do they know that we are abiding by the Tau treaty? Because supposedly we broke treaties. Isn't this right?

D: Well, we have ... we have, ah, strained ... Oh-ho, I've got to be ... We have strained the treaty system more than once. So have the P-45s.

K: Right, so ...

D: We have in fact come into conflict with one another at certain times. These conflicts have been amicably resolved and we are presently in an amicable state with one another. We're not the only ones with the Looking Glass technology that can look in to other timelines. In other words, they have the equipment too. And so it's not that difficult for those who might be to wishing to enforce the treaty on their great-great-ancestors to look in to the present time as an expression of them looking into their own past and watching it change.

K: OK, so in a sense you're saying they know what we're going to do before we do it.

D: They know the probabilities and so they are substantially capable of interacting with us if they feel that those probabilities are moving to eventuate their own history as they have it written for them.

K: OK.

D: The P-52s define that as an unacceptable outcome.

K: So they're pushing their advantage whenever they can?

D: They're pushing the advantage of not justifying their own past so that they may either split off on their own timeline, but that their own history would not eventuate a catastrophe. Now if you consider that pushing their own advantage, sure. Now the P-45s ... The characterization that you place - pushing their own advantage - I would say that that was an appropriate characterization.

K: Well, I was ...

D: Yeah. Yeah, the P-52s are much more amicable and a little further along. I'll just say that they are a little more spiritually adept, the P-52 Orions, certainly, more than the P-45 J-Rods. They are extremely mechanical, very very logical, yet ruthless. Extremely ...

K: You're speaking of the P-45s?

D: Yeah, they have no problem picking up somebody like me out of the middle of a park and shoving a probe up his wazoo to test him, yeah. And they've got no problem with that at all. I have, however, a substantial problem with that and I think other folks who have been largely abducted, not everybody, but, you know, a fair number of them also have a problem with that.

K: OK. What about the idea that ... We have somebody, Jim Sparks. I don't know if you know who he is. He's written a book called The Keepers.

D: I'm aware of Jim Sparks as he is the personal friend of a couple of folks with whom we became close acquaintances, and ... OK.

K: OK. So he's telling us that he has conscious recall of his abduction experiences.

D: Uh huh.

K: And that groups of people were abducted by what sounds like P-45s because they have real issues with control, and put in ...

D: Boy, that was said nicely.

K: [laughs]... and put in front of computer screens and shown scenes of the Earth... first a beautiful Earth, and potentially fantastic futures, and then shown the opposite of that, so that what would be generated in these people is a love of the planet and a desire to make it a better place.

D: Uh huh. And also there is an aim to this. They are aware that our emotions affect our state, our physical state. That our orientation to the energies which are available from the cosmos, if you will, affect the state of our DNA, affect the state of our health and they are applying that as an experimental protocol, a rubric, if you will, to change the state of the people onboard so that they can sample them for biological material.

The fact of what we take away from it is beside the point. That is just whatever we take away and it's our take on it and a person, an experiencer, if you will, then goes off into our world and says how he or she feels about the experiment or about what they were subjected to or about what they were shown. But there is a cold hard cruel reality involved here that we are being picked up for biological material as an experimental protocol.

K: OK, meaning, what these people that are being abducted are doing is, providing DNA, providing eggs and sperm so that they can, what? Experiment or create their own future humans?

D: What they're trying to do is that they're trying to ameliorate their own neuropathology which is already starting, and is becoming an issue within their populace at their timeline, concerning reproduction.

K: So how many people do they need to figure that out?

D: Well, as many as what they wanted to take until they get the answer figured out, and they really don't care because it's the old proposition of the anthill along the side of the road in Africa. You know, we are to them, from their perspective, the ants on the anthill, and how would we feel about stepping on one or two ants or a few million ants out of an anthill?


It may cause a few people with I consider higher intelligence, some moral problems just stepping on them, but you know, how much would we really care about that? They feel that way about us. They want to use us as biological material, watch us get destroyed to justify their own background, their own history, and at the same time take the biological material from us and solve their own personal present problems.

K: OK, but how are we fighting them?

D: What do you mean?

K: In other words, you've just told me they have a tremendous amount of control, they're abducting a huge number of people, and they're continuing their experiments.

D: Well, they have. The numbers who are being abducted now are not treaty related. In other words, there is nobody being taken presently ... zero ... authorized by treaty. I can't stop them from taking people out of their beds at night but I did influence the other.

To Kerry: Is it rolling?

K: I'm rolling ... [mumbled voices]

D: H.G. Wells ... The epilogue in his Time Machine ... The Time Machine, by H. G. Wells ... I keep this on my desk.

K: OK.

D: It says [reading]:

“One cannot choose but to wonder will he ever return? It may be that he swept back into the past and fell among the blood-drinking, hairy savages of the age of unpolished stone, into the abyss of the Cretaceous sea, where among the grotesque saurians, the huge reptilian brutes of the Jurassic times, he may even now, if I may use the phrase, be wandering on some plesiosaurus-haunted oolitic coral reef or beside the lonely saline lakes of the Triassic age.


Or did he go forward into one of the nearer ages in which men are still men, but with the riddles of our own time answered and its wearisome problems solved, into the manhood of the race? For I, for my own part, cannot think that these latter days of weak experiment, fragmentary theory, and mutual discord are indeed man's culminating time. I say for my own part.


He, I know, for the question had been discussed among us long before the Time Machine was made, thought but churlishly of the advancement of mankind and saw in the growing pile of civilization only a foolish heaping that must inevitably fall back upon and destroy its makers in the end. If that is so, it remains for us to live as though it were not so.


But to me the future is still black and blank as a vast ignorance, lit in a few casual places by the memory of this story. And I have by me for my comfort two strange white flowers, shriveled now, and brown and flat and brittle to witness that even when mind and strength have gone, gratitude and a mutual tenderness still lived on in the heart of man.”

That means a lot to me. I actually hold on to that. I hold on to that so much, as such a prescient bit of thought, that I actually keep the flowers from my great-grandmother's grave in there with it.

You know, I don't know what's going to happen in the future, and all I can do is hope like everybody else and pray like everybody else.

K: OK. Well, thank you, Dan. I understand that we've actually over-taxed you and asked you, you know, an incredible amount of information here, and you've been very generous. And I really want to thank you for ...

D: Well, it's my responsibility to say truth.

K: OK. Well, you definitely do that and what I would like to also say is ... How do we fight them? For the people that are out there, and what we know is, unity is one way in which we are progressing out of a certain timeline into another. Right?

D: Yes.

K: OK, but if you have anything else to add to that for people ...

[Marci, off-screen]: I'd like to add something.

D: To me it's unity ...

[Marci, off-screen]: Constant vigilance.

D: Yes. That's good, very good. Constant vigilance. Also, there are many operatives, not just like Marcia and myself, but many operatives that are coming out of the old Majestic, who have had experiences like this. Most of those operatives are not willing to say anything. However, that doesn't mean that they're not doing things.


We are acting in concert with some of those operatives and with other groups to try to motivate the information from the inside which could be used for the beneficial application for humanity. We're doing our very best to motivate that through and some of it is being seen, very little snippets of it ... the projects that we're proposing that are going to be coming in the future, like AARGO and ISIS.

I guess the only thing I can really say, aside from the constant vigilance, is to act to the right. When a wrong needs to be righted or there needs to be a stand taken for what is right versus wrong, that our present time doesn't mean that we have to ... that we're so modern we have to get rid of the ideal for the real.


We create our own reality, and so we should, in my view, act toward the ideal to create a better real for ourselves.