Escape from Eden

IT is NATURAL for people to wonder how they might be able to improve the world around them. A widespread misconception is that to be effective, a person must either be rich, a politician, or a saint. The truth is, one can successfully take responsibility for oneself and for one’s fellow humans from exactly where one is without greatly disrupting one’s life or livelihood. One may begin doing this gradually by first improving one’s own life, then by giving help to family and friends where it is wanted, then by joining or starting groups with laudable social goals, and finally by pursuing a sense of direct personal responsibility for the human race. It is important that more people begin this process. As history has clearly shown, if you do not create your own surroundings, someone else is going to create them for you, and you may not like what you get.

Major constructive changes to our world actually do not require much to bring about. As a specific example, the inflatable paper money system, which continues to create indebtedness and instability at every level, can easily be replaced with a stable monetary system by merely ending bank-created money and setting up a system whereby money is issued by national governments in proportion to their gross national products and dispersed without engendering debt. Banks could continue to participate in the system by being the conduit for the release and circulation of the money; but banks could no longer create money on their own.


Governments would no longer need to tax anyone or borrow; they could simply allocate to themselves the money they needed to operate, within limits imposed by their gross national products. Under this plan, all debts owed to banks could be instantly forgiven: banks could be paid by the governments for their services in dispersing and circulating the money, and by consumers for consumer services.

The Custodial society itself, if it exists, presents us with an extraordinary challenge, as we have seen. To reduce the human ability to meet that challenge by occluding the subject of UFOs and spiritual phenomena with false reports, dubious “evidence,” obfuscating “explanations,” and hoaxes is to do grave potential damage to the future prospects of the human race. At this time, scrupulous honesty from all sides is needed.

If Earth is indeed owned by an oppressive extraterrestrial society, then there must somewhere exist communication lines between human beings and the Custodial society. I am not talking about alleged telepathic communication, I am speaking of face-to-face contact between humans and Custodians. Part of the solution would be to find those communication channels and use them to begin negotiating an end to the pain and suffering on Earth. This proposal may sound utterly wild as it would mean trying to start a process of diplomacy with an extraterrestrial society which most governments do not even admit the existence of in order to win the freedom of the human race—a race which most people would deny is even imprisoned.


On the other hand, some people might argue that such negotiations would be as futile as San Quentin prisoners trying to negotiate their freedom with the warden, or Nazi concentration camp inmates trying to bargain with their SS guards. The Custodial society would need to be assured that the human race desires no revenge or political upheaval. Mankind seeks only an opportunity to work out its promised salvation, and the human race would share its successes with the Custodial society. The goal would be to let bygones be bygones and to get on with the future.

In the meantime, the problem of human warfare can be addressed directly. It should be clear that there is no true “security” during any state of war, “hot” or “cold.” People speak of nuclear disarmament, but why bother making a small reduction in nuclear arsenals when chemical and biological weapons are produced in greater number? Fortunately, many people understand that true national security is achieved through friendship and peace. Ask any American if they feel threatened militarily by Canada, or any but the most paranoid Canadian the same question about America.


Both nations feel a sense of security not because they are pointing hair-trigger weaponry at one another, but because they enjoy a basic state of friendship. In Europe, one does not find the nation of Belgium bankrupting its treasury to arm itself against the “Dutch Peril,” or the Dutch arming itself to the teeth against the “French Threat.” Reliance on weapons, espionage, propaganda, and other tools of war to achieve national security will inevitably fail. Sooner or later someone is going to build a better bomb or find a way to get around yours. They will recruit a better spy or will tell a more convincing lie. No one’s security should have to rely on such shenanigans.

There are many people today throughout the world who are striving to create security through friendship. Those people have not been able to overcome several major hurdles. World leaders have their ears bent by intelligence agencies which promote a chronic climate of fear and danger through secret briefings, alarming reports and grim scenarios. As long as artificial philosophical differences exist between national leaders, those leaders will not be able to think and communicate rationally with one another. If national leaders are convinced that a great Utopia will arise if they maintain their side of the struggle, there will never be peace. Peace will only arrive if our leaders are willing to drop their great apocalyptic struggles and join the rest of humanity in a simple pact of friendship.

The first thing that people can do to bring about human freedom is to become aware of all of the small freedoms they have and expand upon them. In our world, there is a great deal of emphasis on broad and gigantic social, political and spiritual freedoms, but many people find it difficult to exercise even the smallest freedoms, such as simply expressing a fact or opinion in a social circle. The irony is that broad sweeping freedoms really exist so that people may enjoy all of the small freedoms that make existence worthwhile. One can begin enjoying those small freedoms simply by exercising them. As more and more people begin to do this, freedoms for all will expand. It therefore follows that sacrificing “smaller” freedoms in the name of achieving “broader” freedoms will actually cause all freedoms to be lost.

Perhaps the greatest hope lies in the fact that all spiritual beings, whether they animate human bodies, Custodial bodies, or none at all, appear very similar in basic emotional make-up. There seems to be a core of good and decency within every individual, including within the most malevolent despots, that can ultimately be reached, although reaching it in some people can admittedly be a difficult undertaking! With persistence, intelligence, and compassion, it may yet be possible to bring a resolution to all that we have looked at in this book in a manner that will leave everyone happy.

There are plenty of additional problems to be solved in our world. Now it is your turn to dream up solutions. Once you have thought them up, communicate them and act on them. What you think, what you perceive, and how you view the world around you is extremely important because you have an inherently unique perspective not shared by anyone else.


Say what you have to say, discover what you want to discover, and pursue those humanitarian goals within you.


It could help us all.

Back to Contents


The Nature of a Supreme Being

BEFORE BIDDING YOU adieu, there is one last subject for me to touch on. It is a topic which has been lurking in the background of this entire book, but one which I have successfully avoided thus far.


It is the subject of a Supreme Being.

  • Does a Supreme Being of some kind exist?

  • If it does, what is its relationship to life on Earth and to the things we have discussed in this book?

I will try to tackle these questions, but be forewarned that this chapter is the most speculative and philosophical in the book. My discussion will be a simplified one and it is not intended to be definitive; I advise the reader to consult other sources for more information. If this is not to your liking, then please feel free to proceed to the next, and final, chapter.

It is unfortunate that the term “scientific method ” has become almost synonymous with materialism. The two should not be equated.


The scientific method is simply an attempt to understand and explore an area of knowledge in an intelligent and pragmatic fashion. It strives to find cause-and-effect relationships and to develop consistent axioms and techniques that will lead to predictable results. This is the type of methodology which needs to be, and can be, applied to the realm of the spirit, but it has not been done to any large degree. The great universities and foundations are too busy with their “man is brain” studies to do more than superficial studies into the mounting evidence of spiritual existence. The major religions already have their “word of God ” writings and so they rarely undertake scientific studies into this area either.

Some people deny the existence of a Supreme Being altogether. It is difficult to blame them considering the level to which spiritual knowledge has deteriorated. However, the overwhelming evidence of individual spiritual existence and the many characteristics which all spiritual beings seem to share in common would suggest that a “Supreme Being” of some kind probably exists as a common source of all spiritual existence.

If a Supreme Being exists, it is likely that most people would not recognize it if they encountered it. Many individuals expect a Supreme Being to be a giant man in a flowing beard who rants, raves, and kills people. Others think that a Supreme Being is a bright light that exudes love and warmth. Still others perceive it as some completely unfathomable mystery that no one can ever hope to comprehend except through strained mystical contortions.

A Supreme Being is probably none of those things.

While researching this book, I encountered many ideas of what a Supreme Being might be. Perhaps the best way to tackle the issue is to first try to determine what an individual spiritual being is.

A spiritual being appears to be something that is not a part of the physical universe, and yet it possesses both external awareness and self-awareness. The Samkhya definitions on pages 103 and 104 of this book appear to be fairly accurate, and I refer the reader to those pages. The mounting scientific evidence of spiritual immortality in near-death episodes and in documented past-life memories indicates that spiritual beings are best defined as timeless and indestructible units of awareness.1

Every spiritual being, or unit of awareness, seems to be completely unique and independent. Each appears to possess its own distinct viewpoint which cannot be entirely duplicated by any other unit of awareness. This uniqueness and individuality of viewpoint appear to be the very essence and purpose of spiritual existence. We may see some evidence of this in the fact that when individuals are crushed into a sameness, they become unhappier and worse off; their perceptions deteriorate and they are less creative.


When true uniqueness and individuality are restored to people, they regain their vitality and creativity.

It appears that every unit of awareness is capable of infinite creation because creation by a spiritual being is accomplished by the act of thought or imagination.*


* The words “thought” and “imagination” are probably not the best to describe the actual process, but they are adequate for our purposes.

If you imagine that there is a white cat on top of this book, you have created a white cat, even if it only exists for you. Such creations, when shared and agreed to by others, eventually give rise to universes that can be shared and experienced by all others. This seems to be how spiritual beings create universes of their own and in cooperation with others, and why there exists evidence in modern physics that our universe appears to be ultimately based on thought.

For any universe or reality to exist, an infinity must first exist in which a universe or reality may be placed. All reality, including this material universe, arise out of infinity and not vice versa; this has been demonstrated by some remarkable mathematics being done at various universities. Every unit of awareness is the source of its own infinity because thought and imagination have no bounds; any amount of space, time or matter may be imagined by any spiritual being and ultimately agreed to and shared by other spiritual beings.

Where did all of these countless units of awareness come from? Did there exist at one time only a single unit of awareness from which all others originated? The many similarities between all spiritual beings make it appear so. That original unit of awareness would be what is normally called a Supreme Being, which we might also call the Primary Being.

It appears that individual spiritual beings are actually the units of awareness of a Primary, or Supreme, Being, yet each unit is possessed of its own self-awareness, personality, freewill, independent thought, and infinite creativity.

This would mean that a Supreme Being had created, or had given “birth” to, an uncountable number of unique and individual units of awareness through which that Supreme Being could experience the uncountable infinities, universes, and realities which all of those spiritual beings could freely and independently create. A Supreme Being might therefore be very crudely likened to a person sitting in a television control booth who puts out trillions of video cameras. Each camera (spiritual being) feeds a picture into its own individual monitor screen in the control booth to be viewed by the operator (Supreme Being). Each camera is situated a little differently and so each has a different viewpoint and perspective. Each camera is also capable of creating its own ”special effects” (universes).

If the above theory is accurate, we might ask: how could a Supreme Being have been so foolish? Why would it create awareness units that were self-aware? After all, it is the quality of self-awareness, or the awareness of being aware, that allows spiritual beings to be completely independent and to engage in the silliness which has caused them to suffer the sorry plight that they now appear to be enduring on Earth and probably elsewhere. Why did a Supreme Being not simply throw out an enormous number of awareness units that were only externally aware and had no consciousness of their own existences? Better yet, why did a Supreme Being not do the sensible thing and simply retain its own single undivided viewpoint?

Self-awareness is apparently the quality which gives spiritual beings the capacity for thought and imagination, and hence to be a source of infinity and creation.

Without self-awareness, a spiritual being could not create on its own. Self-awareness appears to act as the “mirror” against which a spiritual being can be the source of an infinity, and within that infinity can create realities and universes.

Theoretically, of course, a Supreme Being was already capable of creating an infinity and of creating anything within it, hut only from its own single viewpoint. A Supreme Being could only be the source of one infinity: its own. If a Supreme Being wanted to experience another infinity, it had to first create another unique self-aware unit of awareness like itself. So it apparently did just that. But it did not satisfy itself with just one more unit of awareness: it appears to have put out an uncountable number of them so that it could enjoy an almost infinite number of infinities and realities. This suggests that the potential scope of a Supreme Being extends far beyond the boundaries of this one small universe—it encompasses trillions of potential infinities and universes.

“Aha!” you might interject. “By definition, only one infinity can exist. It is redundant for something already capable of infinite creation to expand itself. Infinity multiplied by uncountable trillions is still infinity.”

As noted, infinity appears to be solely the product of viewpoint. Only units of awareness are capable of viewpoint. There therefore would exist as many infinities as there are units of awareness (spiritual beings). Infinity does not arise out of the mechanical universe or from any of its laws; rather, the mechanical universe and its laws all appear to arise out of infinity.
What went wrong? How did so many spiritual beings, each capable of infinite creation, wind up with a dull thud on Earth thinking that they are nothing more than meat and electricity?

There are apparently many factors that caused this, including those discussed in this book. I will leave it to someone else to describe other, perhaps even more significant long-range, causes. I will only add that spiritual entities can become hopelessly caught up in the labyrinths of their own intricate creations. Although the universe appears to operate on very simple building blocks (please refer to the discussion on pages 104 and 105 of this book), once those blocks are put into place and other arbitraries are introduced, a universe can become extremely complex and solid-looking, like the universe we share now.


When that happens, spiritual beings may become fixated in those universes like cameras anchored in a dense rain forest; the cameras are unable to perceive beyond the foliage immediately in front of them. After staring at the foliage for a long enough time, the cameras may begin to believe that they, too, are nothing but foliage and they forget that they are cameras. Salvation would come by restoring to those cameras their true self-identities and by giving them the ability to come and go from the rain forest at will.

If we look at individual spiritual beings on Earth, we see that they are very small in relation to the universe. This is the situation that apparently occurs when spiritual beings become enmeshed in bodies or other physical objects. In that state, spiritual beings have lost their power to change perspective in relation to the physical universe. Perspective is apparently what determines the “size” of a spiritual being. Have you ever stood on top of a skyscraper and looked down? Your first reaction might be to think, “Gee, those people sure are small. They’re the size of ants!” Those people look so small, and really are so small, because of your change in perspective.


A spiritual being in an entrapped state can apparently change perspective in the same way in relation to the entire physical universe. The universe can appear no larger than a coffee cup, or an atom the size of a mountain. This is apparently how a spiritual being becomes “bigger” or “smaller.” Changing perspective in this fashion is not an act of mere thinking, however. It is a matter of actually shifting direct spiritual perception in as real and tangible a fashion as the person who hops an elevator to the top of a skyscraper. Spiritual beings on Earth are largely confined to the single perspective dictated by the physical bodies they animate. Mental perspectives can still change, but not the direct perspective of the spiritual entity in relation to the universe itself.

The foregoing discussion has some rather clear implications in regard to the rest of this book. The act of repressing a spiritual being, entrapping it in matter, or otherwise seeking to reduce its vision, creativity, or self-awareness as a spiritual being is the act of trying to reduce a Supreme Being. If one reduces a Supreme Being’s unit of awareness (i.e., a spiritual being)—even just one unit out of many trillions—one has still reduced a Supreme Being by that much. Since only other units of awareness can engage in such repression, it follows that a bizarre psychosis has arisen. It is as though extensions of the same ultimate body are trying to repress other extensions, e.g., the left hand is trying to reduce and trap the right hand. That appears to be one type of psychosis that can arise when beings possessed of free will become entrapped.

Some mystical religions teach that one’s ultimate spiritual aim should be to permanently “merge with” or “rejoin” a Supreme Being. This appears to be a false goal. If spiritual beings were created to act as unique and independent viewpoints, it would be contrary to the purpose of creation to permanently “merge” with other awareness units or with a Supreme Being. It may not even be possible to do so. The true goal of any salvation program should be to fully recover one’s unique spiritual self-awareness and perspective.

The above discussion suggests that many popular ideas about “God” may be inaccurate. For example, some people with “near-death” experiences report going through a tunnel and meeting a “being of light” which instills in the near-death victim feelings of love and “all-knowing.” I met a man who belonged to a Hindu sect which attempts to contact and merge with this “being of light” in its meditations. The man wrote a paper describing his personal experiences. His descriptions of spiritually traveling down a “tunnel” and meeting a “being of light” are very similar to the statements of near-death victims. While I acknowledge the importance and probable reality of many such experiences, I question some of the beliefs which have arisen from them.


The feelings of “love” and “all-knowing” conveyed by that “being” can be instilled by drugs, electronic emanations, and by other artificial means. Interestingly, some UFO abductees have reported such emotions during their alleged examinations aboard UFOs. In some of those UFO cases, the surrounding evidence strongly suggests that the feelings were caused by an electronic device used as a sedative. Whatever the near-death “being of light” might be (and I will not even try to guess), it is most assuredly not a Supreme Being. It may even be an object that contributes to post-death spiritual amnesia.


People should not be counseled to “merge with” or “go to” the “being of light” during meditation or at death. They should stay away from it if they can. In saying this, I do not mean to deny the otherwise positive and profound feelings experienced by some Hindus and near-death victims as a result of temporarily re-experiencing their spiritual immortality. What are we then to think of the idea of a Supreme Being sitting in “judgment” on the beings of Earth?

It is hard to imagine that a Supreme Being would condemn its own units of awareness, no matter how small and entrapped they have become, and no matter how insanely and destructively some of them behave as a result.

Would a Supreme Being, seeing how bad everything has gotten, perhaps end its experiment and vanish all other awareness units except itself? If such a thing were possible, I dare say it would not be done. Creating an almost infinite number of spiritual beings would actually have been a brilliant move on the part of a Supreme Being to expand itself immeasurably. The solution to what went wrong would be to preserve the awareness units and encourage them to achieve their salvation.

Spiritual salvation would probably not happen through the waving of a magical Godly wand, however.


Because spiritual beings possess free and independent will, salvation appears to be something that spiritual beings must take responsibility for themselves. It is up to every individual to seek out his or her salvation in an intelligent fashion. Salvation appears to be something that can be achieved as pragmatically as any other goal in life, provided that a rational understanding of how to attain it is developed.

Many theologies teach that a Supreme Being is opposed by an enemy. Perhaps there is an element of truth to this, even if the truth has been distorted. We do observe that at every level of existence there exists a condition or “game” in which survival is challenged. At the personal level, an individual’s survival is constantly opposed by aging, disease, and other factors. The survival of a family unit is often tested by financial problems, hostile relatives and outside sexual temptations. Organizations and nations usually have competitors and enemies. In the animal kingdom, the survival drama is most vividly played out in hunter-prey relationships. All physical objects face inevitable deterioration. Spiritual beings themselves appear to face survival challenges by being trapped in matter.

Since this survival game seems to exist at every level of existence, it is possible that it also exists in regard to a Supreme Being—a game in which a Supreme Being’s own survival is tested by the diminishment of its awareness units and perhaps by the ultimate diminishment of the Supreme Being itself. For such a game to exist, a Supreme Being would have had to either negotiate with one or more of its own awareness units to be the Supreme Being’s opponent(s), or a Supreme Being would have had to create in one or more of its awareness units an apprehension that a Supreme Being posed a threat to the continued existence of all other spiritual beings.


A Supreme Being’s opponent would not be any different or inherently more evil than any other spiritual being, any more than one neighbor who sits down opposite another to play a game of Monopoly is innately more evil just because he or she plays a different side.


An opponent would simply be one who became a different marker on a game board and played as well as possible. If such a game has indeed existed, then we can certainly hope that it may end soon by a Supreme Being conveying thanks to the opponent(s) for a game well-played, promising the indefinite survival of its awareness units, and asking that the game be stopped.


It seems time to put many old games to rest so that everyone may start moving into a new phase of fundamentally-improved existence.

Back to Contents


Back to Gods and Religions on Planet Earth


To the Researcher

It is the customary fate of new truths to begin as heresies.
Thomas Huxley

THANK YOU FOR staying with me. I realize that many of the ideas I expressed have probably been as challenging for you to deal with as they were for me. If nothing else, I hope that you found some of the information in support of my ideas interesting. I have always enjoyed new perspectives and I believe that it is important to be willing to express them. Every perspective has something to contribute, but no perspective can contribute anything unless it is communicated.

An important fact to keep in mind is that knowledge is, to a degree, an historical phenomenon in itself. Nearly every civilization, at any given moment in history, has possessed a broadly-accepted body of historical, social, and scientific teachings to explain nearly everything. The irony, of course, is that many of those teachings are different today than they were back in the 1300’s. More than likely, scholars working five hundred years in the future will be as amused by some of our 20th-century teachings as we are by some of the established teachings of the 14th century. It is therefore helpful to step back from one’s own time and to understand that knowledge has never been an “absolute,” despite assertions to the contrary. Rather, knowledge has been an ever-changing commodity as it is enhanced and refined over time.

The completion of this book marks the completion of my research. Except for the possibility of one revision to correct any errors which I may discover or which are pointed out to me, I plan to do no more work in this area. This book demanded enormous financial, emotional and social sacrifices that were enough to last me a lifetime. I hope to pass the torch of research to others.

Despite its length, this book is but an outline. It only begins to present all of the information and evidence available on the subjects discussed. There exists an enormous body of data that I never had the time, money or inclination to pursue, yet it is all highly relevant. I was also limited to the English language, so I barely utilized any non-English books or sources. Every chapter in this book could easily become a book in itself. My biggest problem was not one of scant and insufficient evidence; it was of being deluged with too much. I discovered that I could easily spend another eight to ten years accumulating it all and build a multi-volume encyclopedia from it, but that was not my purpose. When I began to realize the enormity of the project, I deliberately wound it down so that I would have some hope of presenting a one-volume book on the subject. I am trusting that others will add to what I have done by publishing writings of their own.

I ran across many theories that I did not use. As radical as the ideas expressed in this book may seem, they are, in fact, somewhat conservative compared to other theories in current circulation. I tended to accept historical facts, dates, and personages as they are commonly accepted by historians. This may have been a mistake in some cases, but it is the approach I chose to take. A person researching the topics covered in this book will encounter many revisionist theories that attempt to overturn commonly accepted historical facts.


For example, I ran into the “George Washington-Adam Weishaupt” theory which speculates that George Washington had been secretly removed from the U.S. Presidency and that Adam Weishaupt of Bavarian Illuminati fame, who actually looked a bit like George Washington, had taken Washington’s place after Weishaupt’s disappearance from Bavaria.


Another theory doing the rounds is that the television transmissions of U.S. astronauts on the Moon were actually filmed in a studio. Yet another is that the Earth is hollow and that UFOs originate from a civilization in the world below. Perhaps one, two, or all three of these theories are correct, but because I did not find enough information to conclusively validate them in my own mind, I did not adopt them.

People researching the role of secret societies in world history will sooner or later encounter the writings of Nesta H. (Mrs. Arthur) Webster. Mrs. Webster’s works were published during the first two decades of the 20th century and they bear such titles as The French Revolution, World Revolution, The Socialist Network, Surrender of an Empire, and Secret Societies and Subversive Movements. The main thrust of her books is that secret societies, especially the Knights Templar Freemasons, have been responsible for instigating most of the major revolutions of the past two hundred years. Her works have provided later researchers with a great deal of ammunition upon which to build “conspiracy” theories of history.

It is unquestioned that Mrs. Webster was very successful in bringing forth a great deal of valuable information that probably would not have otherwise reached us today. All of her books reveal exhaustive work. Mrs. Webster might have gone down as the top researcher in her field, and her contribution to mankind might have been enormous, had her own personal perspective not been clouded. Mrs. Webster made a fatal mistake by concluding that the world’s apparent Machiavellian source was a so-called “Jewish conspiracy.” In her book, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, she devoted an entire chapter to “The Real Jewish Peril” in which she blames the Jews for the Christian world’s subversion.


This anti-Semitic slant is so strong, as is an anti-German slant, that the value of her research is lost because a researcher cannot readily trust all of the information she presents. This is a shame, but it is also a good lesson to any researcher. It reveals that an anchored bias can utterly ruin any benefits that might otherwise accrue from this type of research. It also indicates the need to remain flexible in the face of changing history and evidence. Had Mrs. Webster lived longer and seen what happened to the Jews during World War II, her outlook might have been different.

There were many avenues of investigation that I never had time to pursue, but which could bring forth some fruit (although I make no guarantees). I present them here in no particular order for those who might be interested in digging further:

1. Throughout the world there is a very strong political and economic force: the labor union. Labor unions have done a great deal to improve working conditions for many working people, but there is no question that some union tactics have generated continuous conflict. Unionization has also had the effect of creating a mild form of feudalism by magnifying the superficial distinction between managers and non-managers, and bringing the two groups into conflict. Interestingly, one of the key forces behind the early American labor union movement was an organization known as the “Knights of Labor.”


The Knights were a secret society with secret oaths, just like other Brotherhood organizations. Although the Knights later dropped their mystical practices and eventually declined in strength, they played a role in creating the American Federation of Labor (A.F.L.), which has since grown to become the major union in America. Questions to research might be:

  • Who started the Knights of Labor?

  • Were any of its founders members of other Brotherhood organizations, as seems likely from the character of the Knights of Labor?

2. One argument against the idea that there has been a Machiavellian source behind human warfare is the fact that primitive tribal societies untouched by the Western world have also engaged in repeated warfare. This would seem to disprove the “Brotherhood connection” and suggest that perhaps warfare really is just a part of human nature.


Let me repeat that there are definite psychological factors behind human warfare that must be handled before the entire problem is solved. Machiavellian machinations merely increase the frequency and severity of war; conflicts can still erupt without such machinations. It is, however, a remarkable fact that Brotherhood-style secret societies are extremely pervasive throughout the entire world and exist even among very primitive peoples. In fact, such societies appear to be as common in the “primitive world” as they are in the “civilized” one.


For example, Captain F. W. Butt-Thompson, writing in his book, West African Secret Societies, says of Africa:

The Native Secret Societies found amongst the peoples and tribes of the West Coast of Africa are many. Nearly one hundred and fifty of them are referred to in the following chapters.1

Captain Butt-Thompson divided those societies into two basic groups: mystical and political. Of the mystical type, he wrote:

These approximate in organization and purpose the Grecian Pythagoreans, the Roman Gnostics, the Jewish Kabbala and Essenes, the Bayem [Bavarian] Illuminata, the Prussian Rosicrucians, and the world-wide Freemasons. In the course of the years they have evolved an official class that may be likened to the priesthood founded by Ignatius Loyola [the Jesuits].2

Some of the African secret societies were obviously brought in from the outside, such as the Muhammedan societies. In many primitive areas, however, from Africa to New Guinea, such societies are native. Questions to be researched might include:

  • Just how pervasive is this form of mysticism in primitive society?

  • How did the primitive secret societies begin and do they have legends of extraterrestrials?

  • To what degree have they taught mystical beliefs that exalt and encourage war?

3. If a Custodial society exists, then Earth’s history may simply be a tragic footnote in a much broader history beginning long before human civilization arose on Earth.

  • What might that history be?

  • What caused the apparent ethical, social and spiritual decay of the Custodial society?

  • Is there any way to find out?

4. On November 18, 1978, a tragedy occurred in the South American nation of Guyana. More than 900 men, women, and children were mysteriously murdered in an isolated religious commune known as the “People’s Temple” (“Jonestown”). A large vat of drink containing poison was found at the scene, leading to an initial assumption that the deaths were caused by suicide. The victims’ bodies were discovered lying side by side in neat rows as though the people had drank the poison and had then lain down together and died. However, when autopsies were performed on the victims, it was discovered that 700 of the 900 people had died of gunshot and strangulation, not poison.


They had not committed suicide at all; they were brutally mass murdered. It is very likely that those who drank the poison either did so involuntarily or did not know what they were drinking. The only people to escape the tragedy were not present when the 900 victims were murdered. There are no known witnesses to the entire event. The question is:

  • who murdered the inhabitants of Jonestown?

On September 27, 1980, investigative journalist Jack Anderson ran a column about the Jonestown incident. One newspaper headlined the column, “CIA Involved in Jonestown Massacre?” Mr. Anderson cites a tape recording made of People’s Temple leader, Jim Jones, in which Jones referred to a man named Dwyer. According to Mr. Anderson, investigators have concluded that this was Richard Dwyer, deputy chief of the U.S. mission to Guyana. Dwyer had accompanied U.S. Representative Leo Ryan to the Jonestown encampment on that ill-fated day.


Leo Ryan became one of the murder victims, but Richard Dwyer somehow was not affected and even claimed later that the reference to him by Jim Jones was “mistaken.” Richard Dwyer, as it turns out, has been listed in the East German publication, “Who’s Who in the CIA,” as a long-time CIA agent. Dwyer had reportedly begun his career with the spy agency in 1959. According to Mr. Anderson’s column, Dwyer replied “no comment” when asked if he was a CIA agent.

After the massacre, investigators found at Jonestown large quantities of weapons and drugs. The drugs included powerful psychotropics: Quaaludes, Valium, Demerol and Thorazine. Another drug found at Jonestown was chloral hydrate, which had been used in the CIA’s secret mind control program known as “MK-ULTRA.” Was Jonestown a CIA mind control experiment which recruited subjects, especially poorer black people, through the guise of religion? The Jonestown massacre was triggered when a U.S. Congressman, Leo Ryan, flew to Guyana to investigate Jones-town personally after he had failed to obtain information about it from the State Department.


Leo Ryan never lived to tell what he discovered and nearly every last man, woman, and child was silenced. The massacre occurred during a time when many American newspapers were carrying stories about CIA mind-control experiments—experiments which the CIA claimed that it was no longer conducting. Did the CIA slaughter 900 people to cover up the fact that it was still conducting such experiments on a massive scale in a small jungle compound in Guyana?

Additional questions to be researched are:

  • What is the true history of the People’s Temple prior to Jonestown?

  • What is Jim Jones’ background?

  • Who supported him and his early ”church”?

5. Books, movies, and other art forms tend to give a romantic twist to UFOs, spies, assassination conspiracies, and so on. As we are perhaps beginning to realize, behind the “romance” there lie some cruel and brutal psychoses. A significant problem in any society geared for overt and covert warfare is that sociopathic personalities tend to find a home in government. Sociopaths are not affected by qualms of conscience and often delight in harming others.


They are frequently promoted to high positions within agencies engaged in warfare because such personalities are able to attack and harm others repeatedly without it adversely affecting them emotionally. Sociopaths with high IQs can be quite clever in how they harm others; this deviousness is often valuable to intelligence agencies. As history has shown, the more that a nation is oriented towards war, the more it will become dominated by sociopathic personalities.


This domination, in turn, leads to a rapid decay of a nation and will eventually cause its ruin. This is one of the great dangers any nation faces when it becomes involved in long-term conflict, no matter how democratic and humane that nation might otherwise be.

Questions to be researched might include:

  • To what extent are true sociopathic personalities dominating governments today?

  • Why do people tolerate them?

  • Have those Custodial religions which demand the worship of criminally insane beings as “angels” and “God ” perhaps blinded many people to being able to see sociopathology for what it is?

6. This book barely touched on the influence of Brotherhood organizations in Asian history. I discussed Hinduism, but there is a great deal more to be found. For example, the bloody Boxer Rebellion of China in 1900 was instigated by members of an Asian branch of the Brotherhood network: the Boxers. The Boxers were fiercely anti-foreign, they massacred over 100,000 people (and often photographed the beheaded victims), and they stirred up a revolt which brought to China the armies of several major western powers to quash the uprising.


Questions to be researched might include:

  • What other wars and uprisings in Asia were caused by Brotherhood organizations?

  • What has the full impact of the Brotherhood network been on the history of Asia?

7. A topic I had wanted to research deeper was the subject of drugs. We discussed drugs several times, but not in any great historical depth. While drugs seem to have always been a part of human culture,

  • Was there a time when drugs were really first “pushed” on society?

  • If there was, when was it and who did it?

8. One highly-publicized problem today is that of vanishing children. Many children are abducted every year by parents during custody disputes, by relatives, and by strangers. Many more children vanish by running away from home. Runaways and parental abductions are easy to account for and they constitute the majority of missing child cases. There has been, however, some confusion about the extent of child abduction by strangers. In the early 1980’s, the nation’s leading missing child agency, Child Find, Inc., stated that anywhere from 20,000 to 50,000 children were vanishing every year as the result of abductions by strangers. In 1985, Child Find revised that figure down to 600.


I called Child Find to learn what caused such a dramatic change in the number. I was told that the earlier figure was really a broad “catch all” and that 600 was the true number of stranger abduction cases per year. To further confuse the issue, I later learned from another source that out of all runaways, about 3,000 in the United States disappear yearly without a trace. Will that figure also be changed? As the reader can see, there seems to be some genuine confusion regarding how many children are really vanishing. Many children are eventually found, of course. Others vanish completely.

I became interested in this problem because of reported abductions of humans by UFOs. The UFO abductions we learn of today are those in which the human victims are returned. Are there many known cases in which UFO abduction victims are not returned? Might some of those instances involve children? I even found myself asking this unthinkable question: if the human race had been created as a slave race, might it still be providing manpower, perhaps in the form of human children, to the Custodial society?


A respected UFO researcher of this generation is Jacques Vallee, who has authored several influential books about the UFO phenomenon. Mr. Vallee was one of the first researchers to focus on the fact that the UFO phenomenon has been very closely linked to episodes of social change throughout history. Mr. Vallee also noted an apparent connection between ancient folklore and UFOs. Some of the “little people” in folklore have been described in much the same way as modern UFO pilots. UFO-like phenomena have also occasionally been described in old stories of the “little people.”

One activity attributed to the “little people” in folklore was their frequent kidnapping of children. Many of those children would never be seen again. This was a major source of upset between humans and the “little people.” This raises some rather startling questions:

  • Are there any recent child-stealing episodes with a UFO connection?

  • Is it conceivable that there could exist on Earth today a child-stealing network which feeds an ongoing Custodial demand for human labor?

These questions are admittedly “far-out” and the stuff of supermarket tabloids (and certainly the most speculative of any asked in this chapter), but they may actually be worthy of investigation by some brave soul in light of all that we have come to know about the UFO phenomenon.

I hope that some of the above questions will provide good starting points for additional research. In the final analysis, the important thing is to be flexible with ideas, and even to have fun with them. By sticking my neck out as I have done in this book, I hope that I will encourage other people to explore those topics about which they are curious, and to share what they find. You and I may not always be right; the important thing is that we are willing to explore and communicate. Be careful that you do not base all of your beliefs upon a mere handful of writers, teachers, ministers, or scientists.


Learn from them, but also explore on your own, and have fun doing it. Do not always look to others for approval of what you have discovered. If your integrity says that something is a certain way, stick to it, regardless of any snubs or criticisms. On the other hand, be ready to change if you discover, in your own mind, that you are wrong. Learning that one has erred is often a hard pill to swallow, but it is a part of the learning process. The man who pretends that he has always been right is either an egoist or a liar, and he does not learn much of anything either.

Good luck ... and happy sleuthing!

Back to Contents