Area 51 Scientist Dr. Dan Burisch
"So we have echoes of the Epic of Gilgamesh where the hero Gilgamesh set
out on a quest for the secret of immortality, and got tantalizingly
close to success before being robbed by a wily serpent (see
it is fitting for it was Gilgamesh that has been said laid the
first stone for the temple of Ishtar, a name from which the
word "Easter" may be derived. This man is truly thinking, or at least
writing from inspiration! Whilst I am not the offspring of a goddess (lol!),
being 3/3 humbled-human, it is said that he may have seen the abyss. Indeed,
This abyss resides in the statement above, involving a quest
for the secrets, as the Fruit of the Tree of Life is such that would bestow
immortality. Thus, the fruit is guarded from all human beings, by the
Cherubim, to be bestowed only by Christ as a gift. In this case, though, the
wily serpent is not conjured as the robber, but again (as was in Eden) as
the tempter. It sets, within the darkest of human infatuations, as a
swirling helix awaiting its two mates, through our empathy toward it. There
it sets, being lost and awaiting its´ mating with the dualism of our present
circumstance, begging for completion as the three columns of the
Indeed, poor Gilgamesh, the wily
serpent comes! As to the next statement:
"No mention of
Pleiadians, Sirians, Andromedans, Arcturians, the Galactic Federation, etc.,
mentioned by numerous other researchers exploring the
extraterrestrial presence (see
It's as though we
are being conditioned to accept that the only extraterrestrials that are
relevant to the human condition are the J-Rods/Grays."
Surely, I cannot account for the
agendas others. Again, all I can say is what I have seen, read, and heard. I
have to admit that I found it a bit disconcerting that Dr. Salla,
with his litany of impressive origins and destinations, may have left from
the list (not having been briefed on any "membership statistics" for any Galactic Federation), those from Orion. Those, as I
have been told, (may) continue the spiritual side of humanity.
But to speak
of such things, may engender further accusations: such as being "spiritual"
in the time of "great aspirations" of those that would place
themselves above the stars of heaven. Indeed I know that it would have been
important for me to justify everyone's agenda, but to do so would require
that I lie to them.
For as much as it would have made people feel better (as
much as self satisfaction carries us through our lives), I have opted not to
"Disclosure that is made
with the Dan Burisch scenario at its core, is something that is
so highly contrived, that it would amount to little more than two small
steps forward followed quickly by one large step back. At the end, we
wouldn't know if we were better off or not. After five decades of
secrecy over the extraterrestrial presence, humanity deserves a more
honest reckoning of what has been happening behind the scenes with the
extraterrestrial presence, and an unambiguous step forward into a
Do I sense something? The term "contrived"
gives this away. The block above would necessarily posit knowing the truth
(if linked to the first and second sentences of it), for without that, the
statement "more honest" should not have been uttered. But, I do agree, in
part. One group is, in fact, attempting to mold the future of humanity, for
evil purposes. I fear that is not what he meant though.
Rather, I hear,
"Disclosure that is made with everyone's (including Dr. Michael Salla´s)
scenario at its core, is something so important that it would amount to a
giant step forward."
Be careful though, as someone in that group may just be
a Jedi and offer the Galactic Rights of the Wookie to the fore!
Unfortunately, not everyone is right, as others may well argue of me. The
democracy of the human does not instill the truth. I am not saying that
there are no aliens, and positing just the extraterrestrials of an uncertain
future. The size and complexity of our beautiful universe would strongly
argue for their existence, only that my work has not involved them.
Conference for the Preservation of Humanity" is an event, for humans
(not aliens), where our own dirty laundry, created by our unwashed hands,
will be sorted out. It's okay, Bill. If you have to placate them, do
it. You will see them relax and enjoy themselves and their philosophy. I
have been working as hard as my body and spirit will allow, for them too,
even so that they may enjoy themselves with their musings. It's not just for
the people that would agree with what has been said.
Can you really imagine the governments that are "in the know" telling the
world the truth? What does that mean, telling the world? Everyone? Hand it
to the United Nations? Does it mean getting everyone's input or
acquiescence, or just those that have struggled within the community of UFO researchers, or those members of the Cult of Great Men?
Further, could one speculate as to how, given the time line we have,
humanity (as a whole) could come to a decision? What rubric would one set to
meet, how would one mediate to equanimity, what process would give way to
total equality? Look at our world.
Bear witness to our own history, present
conditions, and to the structures and strictures we have built around
ourselves, ostensibly for self protection, on both personal and global
scales. Ought we to have everyone suspend their (let's say) religious
convictions, in order that they may deal with the issues? If not, how? We have 8 years for a solution to be found. This solution, in toto,
will not cure the ills of humanity, but it will, with the help of God, put a
band-aid over some of its errors. Sadly, as much as I believe in the
involvement of everyone in the destiny of humanity (and I really do) by the
time the debating would end, it would be too late. Sometimes reality
dictates that some must simply stand up and act.
They (as I) are available for
judgment afterwards. We'll see, on the morning of
December 22, 2012.
I hope to watch the Sun rise and know that all the work, of those now
toiling, is being greeted with laughter by those that have always "known
better." That is enough for me and all I ask in return for my small part: to
know. Do I believe that people should be told?
However possible, sure. I
think they should be told everyone's perspective, even those of poor
insiders, that struggle daily, while trying to help. It is not truth that I
hear and read most of the time, but fear. With truth, we always step
forward, sometimes painfully, but yet ever forward. We should listen to
everyone, and debate credence from their statements.
While we should act
with caution, we should not be afraid to step forward, for fear of the
boogeyman waiting in dark places. Such fear of the boogeyman does not serve
humanity, but is simply another excuse not to act, to keep ourselves where
we are, comfortable in our positions of self-grandeur. We know who that
serves. We should not lose sight of the truth and the struggle
for it, not even by means of the hatred for government, no matter how much
it has lied to us - and it has.
I have appreciated reading Dr. Salla's words, wish him all the
blessings from God, and ever look toward to having the opportunity to chat
with you in person again. You may communicate this letter to whomever you
wish. I do wish for freedom, and even as my bus pulls toward its
destination, I hope for it. I feel a little work left in me.
May God grant
this world peace and love.
From: "Dr Michael Salla"
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:54 pm
Subject: Letter to Dr Dan Burisch Vol5
Dear Dr Burisch, Thank you for kind response to my short article
[attached below] and I'm glad that you enjoyed the Gilgamesh
metaphor for the unique situation in which Providence has placed you.
As you know, what sparked the quest for immortality by Gilgamesh
was the death of his good friend Enkiddu. Enkiddu
was the only individual of King Gilgamesh's contemporaries that
matched the King in strength and manly virtue, and in their mutual
friendship Gilgamesh had found something that went beyond the
superficial loyalty and fealty of his subjects, and had found a true friend
in the sense of what the Greeks called 'philia' or brotherly love.
With the death of Enkiddu, Gilgamesh set off on
his quest for immortality so that he and others would never again have to
experience the loss of a `true friend´. So what we have in the
Gilgamesh myth is a story of deep friendship, of overcoming the
frailties of human life, and even the mitigation of human suffering. So we
have here echoes of Prince Siddartha who set off on his own noble
quest to mitigate human suffering.
Dan (I hope you don't mind me being informal here since I hope we can
continue to correspond) I wish to inquire about your 'friendship' and
experience with J-Rod where he performed a kind of mind-meld
with you where your mind was flooded with information on the origins of
life. No doubt this information has played an important role in your
subsequent research into the Ganesh particle, and appears to
be something that you highly value.
Perhaps, more significantly this information appears to be very highly
prized by the controllers within the institutions of the Committee of the
12 which puts you in this unique position of perhaps
being the catalyst for disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence on our planet.
My question about your mind- meld encounter simply is did J-Rod
ask your permission? Did he enquire as to whether you would accept the
information he wished to share with you? In that sense, was he being a 'true
friend' in passing on that information to you? I ask because I have observed
a distinct pattern in the way the
Grays as more commonly known, interact with humans.
The reports on the human and J-Rod interactions are quite varied ranging from the most
sublime of spiritual experiences, to what many would consider to be
exploitative. Nevertheless, the one common thread in these interactions is
that the J-Rods simply don't ask permission when they
initially interact with humanity. Permission or consent, typically comes
after the first interaction which is forced or a result of compulsion upon
an unwilling human subject.
Now you might inquire what's the relevance of asking permission
if what is gained is mutually beneficial and uplifting, and isn't the result
an important criterion for friendship rather than the process of asking
force? My response is asking permission is demonstrating a respect for
human free will, a recognition that the choices we make are the
ingredients of human maturity as a species, rather than the end results of
our human labors.
By simply interacting with humans where the J-Rods
took unwilling human subjects into their ships, downloaded their advanced
information into humans, performed their 'biological improvements',
and a variety of other 'mutually beneficial' projects, all typically
done without first asking permission, the J-Rods were
demonstrating a remarkable absence of a characteristic that is an important
criterion for true friendship.
You may ask whether I'm setting a rather high standard for how
extraterrestrials might interact with humanity, and whether we
should just accept that mode of interaction chosen on by the J-Rods
for passing on their information which in the end is 'mutually beneficial'.
I raise this issue since I do question whether the J-Rods can
be 'true friends' for humanity, and also wish to propose that there
are another extraterrestrial races that have demonstrably shown a greater
capacity of being the true friends of humanity.
You may not be aware that on February 20-21, 1954,
met with a delegation of humanoid extraterrestrials commonly described as 'Nordics'
which I will hence use as a 'general description' for those
extraterrestrial races that physically appear
sufficiently like modern humans as to blend in without being recognized. The
evidence for the Eisenhower-Nordic meeting has been quite
sparse as might be imagined given the secrecy over all things
extraterrestrial, but when all this disparate information put
together it makes for a compelling case that such a meeting took place. I
have subsequently learned that the meeting was even filmed.
I've compiled the evidence that I could find into an article
significant fact is that the meeting occurred eleven days before the testing
of the largest Hydrogen bomb ever by the US. The Bravo Test
took place on March 1, 1954 at Bikini Atoll, and had a 15 megaton yield.
meeting with the 'Nordics' did not go well since they
apparently asked that the U.S. end the testing of the hydrogen bomb, yet
offered no technological assistance in return, but only 'spiritual
advise', and believed that humanity had still not reached sufficient
moral maturity for the advanced technologies the Nordics
possessed. It appears that the Nordics were not interested in
reaching an agreement with the Eisenhower administration based
on 'mutual assistance' agreement, since they presumably were not
motivated by what the national security agencies had to offer.
The Bravo Nuclear Test indicated that national security
officials, in particular those within the Committee of the Majority
thought that they could get better terms from another extraterrestrial race
that would be more open to participating in an agreement based on 'mutual
assistance'. The treaty you refer to you in your reply – "Tau-9 Conference
for the Preservation of Humanity" was I believe one aspect of this process.
Now in exchange for their technological assistance, the
given the right to conduct a limited biological program based on a variety
of conditions that have subsequently been disputed by both sides in terms of
compliance and led to military conflicts according to a number of
whistleblowers such as Bob Lazar, Phillip Corso,
Phil Schneider, Bill
Cooper, Michael Wolf, et al.
You are in a better position than I to comment
on the accuracy of what has occurred and the contents of the treaty, but I
would like to offer some comments about what I have observed from the nature
of the interactions between the Nordics who first met with President
Eisenhower and the human contactees who have subsequently reported on the
The contactee reports between the Nordics and humans typically follow a
pattern that can be found in such classic cases as George Adamski, Billy Meiers,
Enrique Rincon and more recent cases such as Jay Solomon. I have
subsequently heard from others who choose to remain anonymous about their
Based on my research I believe that there is an active military-intelligence
campaign to suppress information on these 'contact' cases, as opposed to
'abductions' involving J-Rods which by and large are allowed to be
disseminated in UFO circles. This suppression of contactee reports makes it
difficult to gain a sufficiently large sample of cases on which to draw firm
Nevertheless there is enough information that points to the
'Nordic extraterrestrial' contact experience having the following
characteristics for the contactee:
1. heightened interest in
2. establishing telepathic communication with
3. physical meeting with
4. subsequent physical sightings of
5. voluntarily going on board of a
6. Nordics give assistance to the
contactee to disseminate his/her experiences
to a wider audience
Now this appears to be a classic contact pattern and the thing which strikes
me as most significant in this process is that the 'contactee' is asked for
permission by the Nordics when moving through these various stages which
is indicative of a high degree of respect for human free will. I believe
this is very significant and indicates that the Nordics display a key
characteristic that indicates that they are capable of being humanity's 'true friends' in the sense of
philia or brotherly love.
This of course
contrasts with my earlier comments about humanity and the compulsory nature
of the initial interaction with J-Rods, and leads me to your own rather
You are not doubt aware of the way in which information about your
experiences has been allowed to leak out to the general public, and in the
way in which you have been allowed to be interviewed by phone and in person
by individuals outside of the compartmentalized network of black projects.
This is quite unique and I have never heard of any other case where this has
occurred, and suggests that you are indeed the subject of an 'insider'
supported initiative to disclose the extraterrestrial presence on terms that
might be considered to be favorable to the Committee of the Majority.
One can read many motivations into this but what I see is that this as an
effort by the Committee to legitimate the historic decisions they have taken
to work with the J-Rods, and establish agreements based on mutually
beneficial projects. I am very concerned that the result of a disclosure
done in this way will be to legitimate the 'spin' on human-extraterrestrial interactions that puts the
Committee of the Majority in a
I suspect that the Committee does not intend to release
information on the failed diplomatic negotiations with the Nordics
involved in the
1954 Eisenhower meeting, or at the very least cast this in
the light of an obscure group of extraterrestrials not willing to
participate in mutually beneficial projects. This would be most unfortunate
since in my view, it is these extraterrestrials that have shown they are
most capable of being humanity's true friends, since they recognized that
the fruit of any technology agreements would not be beneficial to the human
condition simply because we were not yet morally mature enough to deal with
Subsequent history has show the truth of this since all the
technology achieved through interaction with the J-Rods/Grays has been kept
secret, and we still for instance consume fossil fuels when there are
alternative technologies that are secretly available. Public disclosure is
more than just revealing information on the secret extraterrestrial presence
on our planet, and of the 'mutually beneficial' projects that have been
Disclosure is a rite of passage which marks an important milestone in human
maturation where we enter into the greater galactic community. If the
general public is given information about extraterrestrials that is
sanitized of any mention of the earlier meetings that occurred with the
Nordic extraterrestrials, or casts a negative light on them for their
refusal to participate in 'mutually beneficial' technology programs, then
that would be most unfortunate.
What we would have instead is a sanitized
disclosure process based on a utilitarian principle of 'mutually beneficial'
projects, that resulted in much abuse by the Committee of the Majority in
terms of how the fruits of these projects were dispersed. The J-Rods are
complicit in this by virtue of their participation in these agreements, even
though it was the decision of the Committee of the Majority not to
distribute these technologies. This might be simply viewed as the J-Rods
respecting the will of the leaders of the secret political committees set up
to interface with the public, yet the behavior of the J-Rods in the
abduction process suggests they are not champions of human free will.
I hope that by sharing these ethical and exopolitical insights with you, you
may incorporate some of these into your efforts to promote a more
transparent disclosure process. It appears that you have been chosen by the
Committee of the Majority to play a significant role in disclosure of the
most important event in recent human history. I hope that the fair
mindedness and great integrity you have shown in your responses both to me
and to others, influences you in giving some of the issues I have raised a
fair hearing in what lies ahead.
I feel that Providence has placed you in a unique position and that you have
the necessary gifts to promote an outcome for the highest good of all. I
wish you well in your efforts.
In peace and friendship
Michael E. Salla, PhD