Thursday, April 02, 2009


The ART of Conspiracy


Advanced alien civilizations are in contact with Earth but the public at large is being kept in the dark about this fact.

That statement is the basis of exopolitics, the study of the relationship between humanity and offworld entities. At exopolitics.blogspot.com Ed Komarek talks about the conspiracy keeping ET contact limited to a privileged elite. He discusses Corporation X or the Alien Resource Development Corporation (ARDC), a shadowy inner circle that controls the alien research trade (ART?). [Link]

The human elite control alien tech for their own self-interests. For example, new sources of clean, cheaper energy are being held back so the oil companies can maintain their profits.

In one post Komarek speculates about a modern day slave trade: human abductees are being used for the harvesting of biological materials by certain aliens. (He points out that not all alien species in contact with our world are doing this.) He says the same powerful families who made their fortunes in the earthbound human slave trade during the 1600s-1800s could be involved in such activity.

He explains: “In the past the black African leadership sold their own people to the enslaving more technologically advanced European and American slavers as trade goods for metal weapons, cookware, ornaments and rum. Could the reasoning and justification be the same today as in the past, ‘if you can’t beat them join them’? Is history repeating itself, but this time the technologically superior unethical race is extraterrestrial.” [Link]

ARDC sounds like the fictional mega-conspiracy depicted in the TV series, The X Files, created by Chris Carter.

When asked about the concept of such a grand conspiracy, Carter said: “I believe that conspiracies do exist, but I also believe there are no secrets…people have a great inability to keep a confidence, and there are too many self-interested people. That’s why I believe with, say, the JFK conspiracy theory, that there aren’t enough people with enough dedication to the keeping of the secret to really have kept it this long. Death and deathbeds have a wonderful way of coughing up truths…” (The X Files Book Of The Unexplained, Volumes I and II (1996), Page 539.)

X Files story editor Frank Spotnitz agreed. He conceded that some government actions and experiments remain hidden from the public, but when it came to a grand political conspiracy involving covert contact with ETs, he thought people weren’t competent enough to maintain the secrecy. (Ibid. Page 540.)

I would have to agree. Even with some sort of mindwipe device as depicted in the movie, Men In Black, I find it hard to accept that someone wouldn’t get the story out, providing hard evidence that would blow the lid off.

A Corporation X as described by Komarek couldn’t stay hidden for so long. I’ll admit that it’s not impossible. Just really improbable.

And without any solid proof, probability is the only way to deal with the subject.

3 comments:

X. Dell said...

xI've always believed that it's impossible to maintain a secret forever. But I've also contended that one need not keep the secret in order to maintain it.

Fact is, where secrets are exposed, alternative stories abound, many of which are far sexier, in their ways more credible, than the actual events the secrets wished to keep under wraps. The plain truth thus has to compete with a number of other versions to the point where it can be easily swallowed.

Using the JFK assassination as an example, we have a number of different versions starting with the Warren Commission's. Then there's the conflicting second official version that finds Oswald in "a probable conspiracy." Then there are versions where Oswald works undercover to try to prevent the assassination. But there are more exotic versions, such as Bonnar Menninger's contention that Kennedy was actually shot by a drunken secret serviceman (who successfully sued the writer for defamation) who accidentally shot Kennedy. Some say, "Conspiracy theorists say...." the president was shot from an open manhole. I've even read one version averring that Kennedy committed suicide to cover up his soon-to-be-fatal health condition (Addison's disease).

Then there are the usual suspects--the Mafia, Castro, the USSR et al.

Now, wade through all of this, and you'll find that some people are beholden to their favorite version (although most people agree on many core facts--e.g., it happened in Dallas). Thus, consensus reality gets determined by political machination--or in other words, who manages to sell their story to the right people.

Meanwhile, the secret remains quite safe, for it looks like all the frauds. No one takes it seriously.

Ray said...

X. Dell:

I understand your POV: hide the dark truth in the murk. On the flip side, maybe the murk is obscuring the truth, i.e., Oswald acted alone and got off a lucky shot that day.

Ray

X. Dell said...

Well, you'd have to have evidence that backs up Oswald's guilt, not simply a repetitive association (i.e., more murk).

I think secrets management makes a lot more sense than an attempt to maintain absolute secrecy.