Luke’s Eureka: Trump & Heath, UFO Swamp Gas, Cultural Infiltrations & Parental Betrayals


Seems like I am overdue for a new blog post, so here comes something.

Things that have been causing my radar to beep this past month.

Claims that Trump is clamping down on sex abuse industry. For example this, which has been doing the rounds lately and which I saw even showed up at Zero Hedge:


I haven’t taken the time to verify this information, but it seems credible enough. Not because I believe Trump is the reincarnation of the Aryan Jesus, but because it seems like it could be consistent with sending a message that there’s a New Sheriff in town–by shaking the bushes and going after sex trafficking/child porn rings embedded at the highest levels of corporate power. When a new drug lord takes over the market, the first thing to do is strike some warning blows against the competition to make sure they keep on the right side of the line. (It also brings to mind how Hitler went after occult fraternities when he took power.)

Even so, all the hysterics about Trump’s fascist policies would seem to be a case of seeing only what people expect–are ideologically fired up–to perceive. Surely anyone who’s paying any attention knows that fascist policies have been de rigueur for the US since– I dunno–George Washington?! And that any illusion to the contrary is just a luxury of happening to live inside the US, rather than somewhere on the wrong side of the thin red, white, and blue line, or even on the receiving end of its foreign policy. In other words, isn’t Trump just a case of the chickens (or frogs) coming home to roost?



Another thing that’s been sort of zinging on my radar in a slightly annoying, slightly amusing fashion (mostly due to Tom Mellett’s many updates) is Peter Levenda’s exponentially ascending profile as the “straight man” to Tom de Longe’s ridiculously inflated, dog-eared UFO disclosure/inside (dis)info campaign via the Sekret (“cool” reddit culture sp.) Machines franchise. Besides a brief mention in my afterword to the up-and-coming book version of Prisoner of Infinity, I am not sure this TdL/PL/S&M warmed-over UFO horse-corpse-flogging affair is really worth much blog-space; except that, apparently people are buying stocks in the high-cheese industry, so either there’s some element of novelty I have missed, or I have overestimated the power of public discernment once again.

From what I can see, the whole thing is one more case of the Cultural Infiltrators Anonymous, complete with fake book sale figures and paid actors lining up for their cup of alien DNA or sprouting mushrooms in the dead-horse-manure pile. Now that I think about it, the trick is probably pretty simple: team up a lukewarm, middle of the road pop star with an “edgy” quasi-scholarly conspiracy author, make some outré and wholly un-substantiable claims about deep-inside information, et voila, a whole newly minted audience cult of hungry hopefuls predisposed to buy your product in both senses of the word, i.e., already invested in the deLonge industry and its many myriad tie-in products, and suitably virginal when it comes to what’s really new, interesting, or credible in the UFO field. To these culturally-infiltrated kule-kids, Peter Levenda probably seems like a real Gandalf kind of guy.


Remember These Guys?

(Note how the book-ended MIBs (de Longe & unidentified) have ghostly females whispering in their earsss.)

As for what’s in it for Levenda, I have speculated about this on Twitter and elsewhere. My guess is it’s the continuation of an ancient assignation, combined with throwing an old intell. dog a few bones for committing professional suicide in the line of duty. Maybe this is part of the deal for a smidgeon of literary success: they establish your reputation because it will prove useful later  on for promoting some really disreputable ideas. The question then arises, how long does a reputation last, once the snake oil comes out? Maybe PL’s consolation is that he gets to have “clout” among @tomdelonge groupies? I really don’t know. But something sure doesn’t sit right about any of this. (PL was just on Strieber’s Dreamland, and though I haven’t listened yet I notice the focus on The Lovecraft Code, not on Tom deLonge’s Final Truth about the Alien Question. It’s hard to see how Strieber could wholeheartedly endorse the latter, since it tramples so rudely onto Whitley’s staked country of unknowns. But then, I have never been convinced by Strieber and Levenda’s unholy alliance: it seems like a marriage of convenience in which neither party is especially enamored.


Ted Heath with you-know-who

Meanwhile in the UK, who has time for UFOria or getting apoplectic about The Donald’s social gaffes when high-level kiddie-fiddling is becoming like institutional wallpaper, the thing no one wants to talk about but that you can’t get away from except by keeping your eyes shut and groping your way out the room? Trump said he liked to grab women by the pussy.  Shocking, right? And Ted Heath was the Prime Minister of England for four years and now there’s a police investigation to determine if over thirty victim testimonies are accurate in charging him with child rape, possibly torture, murder, and ritual abuse. Over thirty! (Guardian link.)

“supporters of the late Tory leader have dismissed the investigation as a ‘witch-hunt,’ insisting that Sir Edward did not have the opportunity or inclination to abuse children.”

Oh well; in that case . . .

Before I continue, this is as good a time as any to correct an error I made in Seen and Not Seen when I wrote this:

One of the figures Icke named a decade or more ago was Jimmy Savile, who, it recently came to light, was behaving in ways more easily associated with a Vampire or alien predator than the harmless talk show host we took him to be when I was growing up.

Apparently the part about Icke’s prescience is not accurate, and despite this claim being made in the respectable British press (e.g., The Independent), Icke did not once name Savile publicly as a child rapist until after Savile was exposed (see here). He merely made claims to this effect, and these claims were believed because they seemed consistent with Icke’s output. Icke apparently did name Ted Heath, however, in more than one of his books, and even told a story a long time back about meeting Heath in a dressing room and seeing Heath’s eyes turn black. (I thought I remembered seeing footage of Icke confronting Heath in his apartment and accusing him of being a Reptilian; apparently it was someone else, however, as I can’t find anything about this online. If anyone remembers who Icke confronted, and when, let me know.)

To counter the as-yet unconfirmed allegations of over thirty Heath-victims, we have:

“One of the former prime minister’s former armed protection officers [who] previously dismissed the idea that Sir Edward could have abused youngsters because he was watched around the clock by police. The allegations were also said to be ludicrous because Sir Edward did not have a car and used a driver to get to wherever he went.”

Right. Case closed there then. But wait:

“The source said: ‘What stands out is that the people giving these accounts are not connected but the stories and the details dovetail. It contains disturbing stuff. Investigators have been shocked by what they have learned.’”

And then of course, on the other other hand, Rachel (formerly Richard) Hoskins, a transgender wo-man (he transitioned in 2016) is the expert witness for the defense:

“Hoskins was asked by detectives of Wiltshire Police to examine claims made by ‘Lucy X’ of a VIP satanic sex-abuse ring which included the former Prime Minister Sir Edward Heath, as part of two separate investigations by the force into sexual abuse. Fearing that she may be removed from the police database of experts as a result of her revelations, Hoskins nevertheless told The Mail on Sunday that:

‘I have established that the allegations against at least some of the people caught up in Operations Conifer and Midland are based on no more that two uncorroborated witnesses, whose claims of satanic abuse were made under the influence of controversial psychotherapists specialising in “recovered memories.” At least one of these witnesses was under the influence of hypnosis. I am profoundly disturbed. In 15 years of working as an independent police expert, I have never seen anything like it. …  I have exposed a catalogue of fabrication at the heart of two major inquiries. Worse still, Operation Conifer ploughs ahead. People remain accused of things that simply never happened. Wiltshire Police insist that not all their evidence is based on claims of ritual abuse. We will see. But those cases that are based on this pernicious fallacy must be closed immediately. Did it really take an expert on rituals to tell them that the likelihood of a child being ritually sacrificed in broad daylight in Wiltshire was worthy of closer scrutiny?’”


In case we are left with any lingering doubts: “Mr Cracknell, who worked at Sir Edward’s home, Arundells, in Salisbury between 1985 and 1990, said the long-running police investigation into claims he was a  paedophile who took part in satanic abuse was ‘ludicrous.’”

There’s the trusty L-word again! Where would we be without it?



Part of the reason for my lack of blogging is that I’ve been unusually ensconced in research for my next book, The Vice of Kings. This is by far the darkest thing I have ever attempted to write, and the more I immerse myself in this material, the more disorienting and destabilizing it is. It is very hard to reconcile the awareness of this darkness with the ordinary, everyday perceptions and beliefs held by most people about our world, and I keep coming back to the idea that it’s all a hoax of some sort. Admittedly it would have to be a very high-level hoax. But if someone like Aldous Huxley or Bertrand Russell (or Aleister Crowley) can propagate the most appalling scenarios under the guise of cautionary teachings and/or joke/fiction, all with deeply humanitarian intentions–if someone as seemingly beyond reproach as Carl Gustav Jung can be directly tied to Allan Dulles, MKULTRA, & the Tavistock Institute, where does this leave us? Surely not trusting people like David Icke and Alex Jones to tell us what’s what?

So then the mind, being the mind, starts to wonder, what if these high levels of social control, psychological wisdom, and cultural influence only want us to believe they are committing unspeakably atrocious acts, for whatever reason . . . ? As a proposition, this doesn’t make much sense; but when the alternative is that just about everyone you ever respected in the public realm is complicit with unimaginable crimes against children (including, for me, members of my own family), it is tempting to propose, or at least entertain, something that is absurd but not entirely impossible, and that at least less is not unremittingly bleak.

The other sort of inescapable, almost-unthinkable thought is: how bad can these kinds of acts be, if everyone who is anyone is doing them, or at least complicit with them? What becomes of our criteria for judging right and wrong, when all the authorities we have trusted to teach us the difference are manifestly not trustworthy?

We are surfing on cognitive quicksand. Getting to the bottom of this collective human swamp is what I hope to achieve; but if I am genuinely getting closer to that, then reaching the bottom seems to equate with realizing there’s no way to know:  a) what is real and what is fictionalized; b) what is somehow ethically justified, and what is just plain vicious, homicidal behavior.

If our Kings–our parents, caregivers, teachers and guides–are practicing the most appalling vices, are they still vices? If the people, teachings, institutions, and values that have established in our awareness the difference between right and wrong, if they have no respect for the same moral criteria by which we would judge them for their betrayal, where does this leave us?


It is Luke’s black eureka: the very thing that drives us to confront the dark side is the darkness that already exists within us. When we find it, we find the truth of ourselves. The final blow lands on the surface of a mirror, and there is nothing but us behind it.



90 thoughts on “Luke’s Eureka: Trump & Heath, UFO Swamp Gas, Cultural Infiltrations & Parental Betrayals

  1. “If our Kings–our parents, caregivers, teachers and guides–are practicing the most appalling vices, are they still vices?”

    Yes. But maybe vice is too light a word. Also overwrought. Some of our parents, some of our teachers, some of our caregivers, some of our guides would be better.

    “If the people, teachings, institutions, and values that have established in our awareness the difference between right and wrong, if they have no respect for the same moral criteria by which we would judge them for their betrayal, where does this leave us?”

    We are left where we are, in thrall to the extreme beauty and miracle of creation, happy to be alive and shocked by the depraved aspect of the human and the desire for control, stunned by the duplicity of satanic hatred. Same as the early Christians, for just one instance. Hey, let’s go to the colosseum! Twas Ever Thus.

    Stay strong preacher.

    Vietnam Infantry Soldier – Near Death Experience –

    Not that all the questions get answered but….a different look at life is offered. peace

  2. ” The Vice of kings” what a title! haha luke!, the abyss stares back! Vader makes no effort to force grab his sun! fade to black eh? i do hope you have some lighter things in your day to day to balance the darkness of your research. be well.

  3. I heard David Icke give a lengthy and specific denunciation of Jimmy Saville and a number of others on someone’s podcast…Probably Red Ice – quite some time before the issue surfaced in the mainstream leugenpresse in the UK. Not being a UK resident, I was only vaguely aware of Ted Heath- someone who the Monty Python relentlessly mocked. For good reason as it turns out.

    I often bristle when people like Levenda or Crowley are written off as ‘spooks’. It’s the way Miles Mathis casually dismisses anyone who’s had more than just their allotted 15 minutes of fame. (And yes, Andy Warhol was a fake too, I’m sure, Miles!) I think the reason is that in order for someone to have been part of the British establishment they had to make compromises with whatever Dark Forces lie at the heart of it. And it’s probably worse than Fabian Socialism or the Hellfire Club.

    The United States has been managed by a technocratic class which comes from a melange of powerful interests – the rise of the FIRE sector has undermined the economy badly and someone like Trump may be attempting to restore the pillars of American might before Vietnam; heavy industry, poitical religion and a powerful military that’s kept on a short leash. It’s curious the compromises he had to make almost immediately. Anyone paying attention (which is sadly rare) can see Betsy deVos was brought into the administration in order to secure the private military power of Xe or Blackwater or whatever Erik Prince’s Clone Army is called now. People calling Trump fascist are missing the pretty obvious fact that fascism is about a political party with a private army – what we’re seeing is the equivalent of the Roman Ceasar’s ‘German Guard’ – a gang of Sardaukar Warriors who don’t answer to the Generals (who are all on the take now, working for weapon contractors).

    I don’t think we are all mad, but we all live in a house of mirrors. People who think they’re rebels often find they’re doing the Emperor’s bidding all the while.

  4. Hi,

    My first ever comment on any blog/website. Enthralled by your dissection of the topics covered. Thank you for your erudite and thoughtful approach.

    It would appear that the human state, our bare bones if you will (whatever that entails), and our capacity as humans (what we manifest) qualitatively differ. The former being our natural state as it manifests freely (including ability for nurture, violence, etc), while the latter is what we can be/become in given circumstances, conditioned. Naturally, our capacities must be closely tied to what we “are” but are not identical.

    Army recruits who become savages at times of war are a prime and most common example of our capacity to cause harm by design. People who could have never dreamed of causing such pain, not willingly, not in absence of duress, end up acting out the violence they are exposed to, surrounded by. Most are traumatised for life by the harm they have done and witnessed. This darkness in us is often qualified as evil and it is presumed to be in all of us, our species, lurking all the time. Undoubtedly, human actions can be evil, but evil could be our response to an experience, an event, not an integral part of our being, which manifests as a reaction. It can be caused, induced and is not necessarily an ingredient of consciousness we are born with, not our natural state of being.

    Could evil be a separate entity which affects us, instructs or influences us? It is obvious that we are the ones both causing it and making moral judgement (although morals could very well be external to us as well). So, what or who creates the condition, our capacity? Is (it) in our very being? Is it an external force? Or is it cause and effect (the original cause being some traumatic event nothing to do with us, potentially by a cataclysmic event which effected our consciousness)?

    Abuse, in this case ritualistic child abuse, seems to go back to time immemorial and is recorded exclusively as an offering to the gods, mainly appeasement, conducted by the priest class (other important state representatives were present). This is why I don’t think current examples are merely a charade, or a high level hoax, to confuse or bewilder us (although as with everything else regarding this topic, not impossible). The idea that they’re using it to mystify their rule and system of power seems over the top and unnecessary, given that gaol and torture have successfully kept the hungry and angry at bay in many societies.

    What intrigues me is: did/does the priest class (magicians/astrologers) ritualistically sacrifice humans in order to send fear into the bones and psyches of their subjects or did/do they believe to be communicating with otherworldly powers? This has to be one of the key questions. If ritual abuse/sacrifice was intended to control the populace as a spectacle, then it wouldn’t be necessary today. We are mesmerised by an array of artificially controlled and produced manifestations. No need for ritualistic abuse/sacrifice. It could be a system of sabotage though. Given that representative government could offer a voice to the “people”, then perhaps people who have the need for, are inclined to, ritual abuse, child abuse, etc are stooges (actively promoted to required positions) and are being used as pawns by MI5, FSB, BND, DGSI… temporal powers that be, for their own ends.

    What are the options? They practice ritual abuse, they are insane, out of touch with common reality and dangerously so. Or, they are using abuse as a form of trauma to seed evil in the general population and cause discord, artificially creating a malleable populace disassociated from their fellow beings? Or the thirds option. They are in communion with beings we have no understanding of but which play a decisive role in all our lives…

    I don’t doubt our human collective/individual ability to commit heinous acts, unprovoked or facilitated. My query is whether ritual abuse is a system of control (whether as charade, or behind the scenes power interests manipulating high level perpetrators, or seeding of trauma based control) or if it actually opens up communication with whatever entities which bestow some type of temporal powers to the “magi”. I’m inclined to be torn between all three.

    I hope there’s some coherence to these extended musings motivated by a variety of topics of interest. My willingness to comment publicly is the result of inspiration I’ve had since reading a half dozen posts on this blog.

    PS Anyone watch “Braindead”? Very curious. Is it just a novel approach to a popular idea of the other as so often portrayed or is it intentionally referencing the Gnostic Archons? No idea. Just an off the cuff comment…

    PPS Upon rereading my comment I’m not entirely sure it’s comprehensible, it’s certainly convoluted, but have decided to go with the flow and post it.

    And yes, we could all be mad. Plausible. But how, why?

    • there is lots of uh, brain-food here.

      it sparked the thought that genuinely benevolent social engineers (if that’s not an oxymoron) could, conceivably, be creating conditions in which the psychotic element within humanity is given what seems like free reign to act out its darkest impulses, as a means to purge this from the collective human soul-psyche.

      this might reconcile some of the blatant contradictions I encounter in researching this, in the case of such seemingly positive wisdom elements working in tandem with such incontrovertibly malign and destructive ones (Jung/Dulles again). If there’s anything in this, I think it would also have to apply at an individual level, and that the greater the potential for good, the greater the shadow that must also be given its expression. We may all have hidden alters that act out the worst, the demon seed of Darth within us. (If thy right hand offend thee, let Vader cut it off!)

      • I have noted recently a very good web site devoted to outlining the strange case of Gordon Wasson -the international banker who ”discovered” magic mushrooms.
        I’ve had many many extremely positive experiences with psychedelic mushrooms as well as DMT. Now I know that Wasson was clearly dialed into the US WASPy elite, but I can’t conclude that this means that his agenda was necessarily malign. The matter needs much more study. Clearly these CIA types who ‘unleashed’ all that Sandoz LSD (according to the apocryphal story) knew that whitebread all American values were going to come under some pretty serious assault. Was this because some factions of the elites realize that that these values are bogus and pernicious? Or do they seek to create a situation demanding the heavy hand of authoritarianism?
        I watch with interest the posturing around legal cannabis. A giant part of Trump’s working class constituency is virulently pro -cannabis on several levels – libertarian politics being just the most obvious. If Jeff Sessions sends the Feds in to rip up the fields out west here- Trump will suffer in direct proportion.

  5. First point taken. Be more concise. Cheers for the euphemism 🙂

    Social engineering must be a mistake, in and of itself. Even if benevolent, they are creating us (a collective of individuals) artificially. Without the forced community (nation state, empire, etc) there would be no consistency in the psychotic element of human consciousness. Culture, taboo and transgression thereof, is what maintains it. If it’s not entirely created than at least the fire wouldn’t be stoked without the engineers. Then there would be nothing to purge. Perhaps to ignore and not encourage, “to let go”. At worst the purge would be individual. Here we have a collective purging of a particular inflated human state, to no discernible end, other than the constant state of purging.
    If collective purging results into some type of evolution of consciousness, than the world is even more ridiculous than I can imagine it. Which wouldn’t be a surprise.

    • Actually it wasn’t meant to be a euphemistic way to request concision, it was a reference to your mention of brain dead & a play on the double meaning of “brain-food.”

      You’re probably right about social engineering having no upside, but it behooves me to consider all angles. And, y’know, what is, is holy.

  6. “If collective purging results into some type of evolution of consciousness, then the world is even more ridiculous than I can imagine it. Which wouldn’t be a surprise.” Hence we are all mad here. Maybe real madness is there is no how or why? On the surface a pretty bleak statement, perhaps it is in the teasing out of the warp & woof the contradictions unravel. Or maybe like Luke we just need to let go.

  7. Jasun,

    Please do not despair! For you are on the verge . . . of a merge . . . that will surge . . . in about a week and prove how prescient you are! Or not! But, in any event, let me make like Warren Beatty’s sister Shirley and go “out on a limb” to prophesy!

    The “merge” I see happening soon is the linking together of all the John Podesta Pizzagate emails with the John Podesta UFO-deLonge emails. Your posting here prefigures it mightily! So that when the Sekret Machines book percolates out there on the web, it will not take long for all the people warning of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse to realize its connection with this new UFO narrative of the TdL franchise. Right now, it seems that the Pizzagate furore has hit a dead end, but now the meme may go viral again with its new connection to UFOs.

    And the one person responsible for this merging is Peter Levenda, not because of his new book, Sekret Machines, but because of his involvement with the Simon Necronomicon which, in turn, evokes Crowley as well as Lovecraft and, if you don’t believe me, just ask Whitley Strieber because the merging of Crowley and Lovecraft is the Great McGuffin of his interview with Peter, which you mention above.

    Probably one of the most ‘high-strangeness’ Dreamlands ever. In the course of discussing his new book, the Lovecraft Code, Peter Levenda reveals one of the strangest and most chilling facts ever heard on this radio program.

    Was there a date in 1907 that marked the beginning of the world of carnage in which we now live? Was something conjured then—released into our world by means of ritual magic—and did horror writer H.P. Lovecraft somehow pick up on it?

    Of course you have to be a paid subscriber to Hustler McDreamland in order to hear the discussion of the MacGuffin date, but Peter writes about it in his Dark Lord book. Well, that date is November 1, 1907 and I copy from a review of the Dark Lord that covers it:

    Although not a member of the Typhonian Order, Levenda fundamentally believes that Grant was correct in many of his assertions about the nature of the universe. He agrees with Grant that both Crowley and Lovecraft had been in contact with the same “spiritual material” (Levenda 2013, 129) that inspired their writings.

    As evidence, he highlights similarities between one of Crowley’s Holy Books of Thelema, Liber Liberi vel Lapidus Lazuli, which Crowley claimed to have received from a preternatural source in 1907, and Lovecraft’s short story “The Call of Cthulhu,” which was written in 1926 but which was partly set in 1907 (97–98). As Levenda puts it, “Either Lovecraft was in some kind of telepathic communication with Crowley, or both were in telepathic communication with … Something Else”.

    Well, now that 1907 Beast is about to be unleashed in 2017, and you, Jasun Horsely, are the Witness and Chronicler.

    Tom Mellett

    (but if any of my prophecies pan out, just call me Cassandra!)

    • Thanks Tom. As happens I am a momentary subscriber right now (tho I had tried to cancel this month) so I caught the whole thing last night. And as happens, Peter Levenda provided me with a crucial clue to the puzzle, one that effectively demolished his own argument against AC’s involvement with ritual child abuse. Following that lead up also provided more or less conclusive confirmation that Simon = Levenda, as the only two citations on the whole Internet I found about this (Star Sapphire’s relation to incest) besides Crowley himself (Ararita) came from, you guessed it, PL (The Dark Lord) and Simon (Gates of Necronomicon).

      So yes, a key date indeed. 1907-2017 = 110 years, the number of magick again.

      Was something conjured then—released into our world by means of ritual magic—and did horror writer H.P. Lovecraft somehow pick up on it?

      And is the nature of the ritual indicated by Strieber’s own formative experiences? (The other famous “boy in the box” = 6-yr old victim of the OTO-Solar Lodge, 1969.)

  8. Jasun,

    As long as we are on the subject of important dates in occult history, I think it’s important to set the record straight about when the above Podesta “Sekret Rogues Gallery” photograph was taken.

    In your posting of last November 6 when you discovered the photo,

    you declare that:

    The photo of Levenda next to Podesta was taken twenty days ago, before Podesta’s possible involvement in said rituals was made public via Wikileaks.

    Doing the math, I reckon that you attribute the date to be October 16, 2016

    However, I would like to quote Peter Levenda from a private email exchange, dated Jan 30, 2017 in order to correct your mistaken chronology.

    The Podesta photograph. This was taken in the summer of 2015, not 2016. It was taken shortly after Hillary announced her candidacy and before the campaign actually began. It only came to light on social media late last year, after the Wikileaks dump.

    Since the Wikileaks dumping began on October 7, 2016, I wonder if you are confusing the date of the dumping with the date of the photograph.


  9. Hi guys,

    Regarding Icke and his mention of Ted Heath, the earliest I found is from 2001, “Children of the Matrix”. He might have mentioned something earlier in his talks. Either way, a decent call by Icke.

  10. Correction regarding Icke and his outing of Heath First mention is in “The Biggest Secret”, first published in 1998, seven years before Heath died. Quite impressive.

    • Yes, Peter is quite the linguistic jokester. Cabana evoking Florida where he lives, as in maybe “Cabana boy” or the “Copacabana Club.”

      Anyway, the show with Simon was sometime in 2009, but before May 10, 2009, which was the date of the show where Ian Punnett had PL on as PL and asked about the previous appearance of Simon.

  11. Here’s what I found out…

    The “original” Simon was on the spinoff show “Coast To Coast Live with Ian Punnett” in 2006
    This is why you can’t find the episode on the Coast To Coast AM site.

    The shows appeared in this order?

    “Archive of Coast to Coast AM & Coast to Coast Live – August 2006”

    Security-Related Issues
    Date: 08-11-06 Host: Ian Punnett
    Guests: Open Lines, Andrew Colarik

    The Necronomicon
    Date: 08-12-06 Host: Ian Punnett
    Guests: Simon Cabana

    The Growing Earth
    Date: 08-12-06 Host: Art Bell
    Guests: Neal Adams

  12. Courtesy of KK:

    From comments: So Simon = Peter = the same person. Why would he deny it the whole time?

    Maziari3 months ago (edited)
    I don’t think that’s the case. I can’t remember what interview it was, but he recently said that “Simon” was indeed a real person that he collaborated with, but that “Simon” died soon after the Necronomicon was released. After that, Levenda took up the role of “Simon” in public.

    As opposed to, like, announcing that Simon was dead and showing up as Peter Levenda? 😀

    • Ah, the young Peter reading from the Necronomicion! You know, 25 years ago, I got involved with Australian David John Oates’ Reverse Speech technology. I don’t give it much credence now, but perhaps there are latter day Reverse Speech Analysts out there who could find reversals on the young Levenda here, as well as on any of his much more recent interviews.

  13. If this is the young Peter showing up as Simon, later explained by the fact Simon was dead by then, etc, etc, bla bla, then there’s no point in finding the old C2C, unless it’s to show that PL used a voice distorter,perhaps, though even then PL can always say there is or was a real Simon, it was just his job to pretend to be him, bla bla, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

    It’s like the UFO, you have to keep the mystery alive because once it’s solved it’s no longer interesting. The biggest mystery to me at this point is why anyone would believe anything PL says about anything, since he is clearly involved in cultural pranking/hoaxing and/or occult manipulations of collective beliefs, rather than the investigative researcher he claims to be.

    • Well, yes, the whole point of hunting down the Simon interview with Punnett is to verify what Joe Flatley wrote about here in his 2013 article:

      The most common theory is that the role of Simon is being played by The Dark Lord author Peter Levenda. According to a brief bio from the Coast to Coast AM website, Simon “has appeared on television and radio discussing such topics as exorcism, Satanism, and Nazism,” as has Levenda. In fact, when Simon appeared on the talk show, he attempted to disguise his voice by speaking through some sort of audio effect that lowered the pitch a couple of steps. When I played the audio file on my computer and pitched it back up using Ableton Live software, the unmasked Simon’s voice clearly sounded like that of the Peter Levenda I interviewed earlier this year.

  14. I think that YT comment about a “Simon is dead” admission is in error.

    From Levenda’s website:

    “One of the issues that keeps coming up is the fact that there is a copyright application for one of the books in the Necronomicon “series” that bears my name as the copyright owner. That seems like a smoking gun to the debunkers, ignoring the fact that I have said time and again that Simon’s identity must be protected and that I front for the man and his work when necessary. Obviously, Simon can’t copyright this material in his own name otherwise why the pseudonym? And in this age where everything is digitized and searchable it would be only too easy to trace him through dummy corporations or offshore accounts, if that was the intention.”

    That’s a weird paragraph with some strange admissions.
    So, if you find Simon’s real name…you will find all the dummy corporations and offshore bank accounts connected to this guy? All of them in his real name?….WTF??

    So Levenda fronts for a guy operating dummy corporations and offshore bank accounts.
    Why the fake corps and accounts? Levenda funnels the book royalties to him through these channels?
    Is the guy on the run from the law? Deep cover retired agent of some sort? Is this all a LARP?

    “His book Dead Names pretty much sums up the situation, offering a lot of the backstory and revealing the names of those who were involved in the book thefts, etc. If anyone truly wished to deconstruct the legend, there is more than enough information there to give one a running start: names, dates, places.”

    • Yes, KK, and the guy who really deconstructed Simon and his Necronomicon was Dan Harms, who posted this encyclopedia of the dark history of the Simon Dead Names book. Notice the date of Sept 11, 2006, just one month after the Simon-Punnett interview, which in turn was 5-6 months after the publication of Dead Names.

      Dead Names, Dead Dog: A Guide to the Dark History of the Necronomicon

      Then Simon/Peter had to work overtime to counter-attack and discredit Dan Harms because of this book that Dan published 3 years earlier.

      The Necronomicon Files: The Truth Behind The Legend
      by Daniel Harms and John Wisdom Gonce III
      July 1, 2003

      • Then Simon/Peter had to work overtime to counter-attack and discredit Dan Harms because of this book that Dan published 3 years earlier.

        How exactly did SP work overtime discrediting Harms? (Harm-Control, ha ha)

  15. Jasun,

    Here’s why you need to interview Dan Harms for a Liminalist podcast. This blog entry is Dan listening to the Simon broadcast of 8/12/2006 and logging parts of the show and he even calls in and gets on the air. Also please read through the 30 comments. I copy the ones concerning the voice disguise, both electronic and putting on fake accents.

    Getting Ready for Simon’s Necronomicon Podcast

    10:10 PM EDT – He’s not on yet.

    10:12 PM EDT – He’s on, using a voice disguiser. (That’s a really good idea, though it sounds pretty silly.)

    10:19 PM EDT – Tsk tsk. “Simon” has already contradicted his own story in Dead Names regarding why he uses a pseudonym…

    11:20 PM EDT – “Simon” gets touchy about the issue of royalties. I’m not surprised, but I’ll probably have to save that one for my memoirs.

    11:24 PM EDT – “Simon” even gets touchier on the question of how he can be offended by illegal Necronomicon downloads if the book itself is stolen goods.

    11:39 PM EDT – “Simon” denies being Peter Levenda. Believe it or not.

    11:51 PM EDT – Denial of any link between the Necronomicon and Satanism.

    11:52 PM EDT – Did he just say there were no blood sacrifices in the Necronomicon?

    11:56 PM EDT – “I do not cast spells.”

    I don’t know this for a fact, but to my ear, “Simon’s” pattern of speech, phrasing, and mellow tone (even when disquised by the digital alteration) sounds strikingly similar to Peter Levenda. I e-mailed Mr. Punnit but I don’t expect him to react in any way to my e-mail.

    [Levenda as Levenda] is very soft spoken, even tempered, and has a very educated manner of speech. And listen to the distinct way he says THE NAMES OF PERSONS who are key figures in the historical events he accounts in his book or books in that interview.
    That sort of personality attribute is very commonly overlooked by someone when a producer says, “Don’t worry. We’re digitally disguising your voice.”
    It’s a small thing, but it’s the kind of thing that I suppose a private detective might scrutinize.

    Oh, incidently, I notice that now that Ian has confronted Simon about what I was saying before, suddenly he effects a very FAKE sounding Russian accent. And ooh, like magic it’s slipping out again. What a dork.

    (fake Slavic accent and affected bad grammar under digital voice masking.)


    “During his time with Coast, Punnett interviewed all kinds of individuals. In one of the more memorable segments, he spoke at great length with an individual known only by the pseudonym “Simon.” An alleged Eastern Orthodox priest, “Simon” was the editor of the legendary Necronomicon, the most famous spell-book in modern history and a perennial point of contention. Embraced as legitimate by some and dismissed as a hoax by others, the text fast became a best seller, available at bookstores around the world. At the time of the Coast interview, the mysterious magician had just published Dead Names: the Dark History of the Necronomicon, a semi-autobiographical text that outlined how a New York City priest came into possession of an ancient Lovecraft Ian text. Critics were sceptical, and Punnett won’t divulge who he thinks was on the other end of the telephone that night in 2006, though the Deacon remains confident that “Simon” appeared on the program previously (using his true identity).

    How does Punnett know this? “Because the person used similar vocabulary and because they insisted on having their voice obscured, I thought for sure that would be because they knew I would recognize the timbre of the voice, but it was actually the way in which they paused and structured their sentences that lead me to believe I could point to who it was.” Punnett safeguards “Simon’s” identity, but he is also particularly careful when it comes to giving anything, supernatural or otherwise, the seal of his “belief.”

    • I found this reader’s comment on the Dead Names Amazon page to be quite telling and entertaining. He not only loves the book, he loves the real author, too. (I highlight the takeaway quote from his review.)

      Dead Names (published March 28, 2006, 5 months before the Simon-Punnet interview)

      Peter Levenda, at his fictional best!
      By gnawbit on December 9, 2014

      Honestly, even though this was one great big work of fiction that was trying to strum up sales for the Necronomicon hoax, I really liked this.

      Join Peter Levenda as he dons his SIMON persona once again to try and pull another sneaky attempt and pick pocketing the gullible and disenfranchised youths who are so angry at their parents, and god, that it is nearly physically hurting them.

      Watch as “Simon” glosses over the stories of most of the people in this story (all of which are somewhat true to the events, aside from mentioning that they were all in on the Necronomicon hoax), while almost devoting an entire chapter describing Peter Levenda’s childhood in so much detail you wonder why he even tries to make us believe that he’s not Simon.

      Seriously though, this book is well written and, if you allow yourself to suspend your belief, you can really get immersed in it. Good job, Peter, I hope the sales of this book has helped you in your research in your other works!

  17. At the Magickal Childe, there was enough space to dramatically increase the merchandise offered, and since Herman had the cash and the connections, the new store became, in effect, the one-stop-shop for any and all conjuring needs. In addition to herbs, oils, candles, books, robes, swords and other accoutrements of the Art, one could find human skulls, dried bats, mummified cat’s paws and a wide variety of unusual jewelry, a large portion of which was created by Bonnie, my ex-wife-to-be. A room in the back of the store served as a temple and classroom for the various strains of wicca that began to gravitate to the place.

    That temple also served as the launching pad for the explosive growth of Aleister Crowley’s Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO) in the city in the late 70s and early 80s.

    Simon” was also Levenda’s creation. He cultivated an elusive, secretive persona, giving him a fantastic and blatantly implausible line of bullshit to cover the book’s origins. He had no telephone. He always wore business suits, in stark contrast to the flamboyant Renaissance fair, proto-goth costuming that dominated the scene. He never got high in public.

    In short, he knew the signifiers and emblems of authority, and played them to the hilt. He hinted broadly of dealings with intelligence agencies and secret societies operating at global levels of social influence. He began teaching classes in the back room, and showed a genuine knack for clarifying and elucidating such baroque encrypted arcana as John Dee’s Enochian magick system in such a way as to make it understandable even to a novice. He also lacked the guts to let a woman know when he was through with her, or so Bonnie said. She was positioned to know at the time, despite her failing marriage to Chris Claremont, the comic book author who put the X-Men on the map. Chris was her third husband. I was her fourth, and last.

    As Simon, Levenda threw parties with various forms of live entertainment and staged rituals presented by the various groups that swarmed around the shop. He had no political enemies on the scene, owing to his adamantine and resolute refusal to affiliate with any one group. There has always been a very heavy crossover factor between the Renaissance fair/Society for Creative Anachronisms crowd, the science-fiction fan circuit and the occult/wicca scenes. Simon had friends throughout all of these arenas, and they all showed up to support this effort at unity.


    Not all of us took Simon’s hints of dabblings in intelligence work all that seriously, but apparently the Feds did. An agent infiltrated the OTO with the apparent intent of getting close to Simon, who was doing a great deal of consulting for the local lodge and seemed to be flirting with affiliation. As the noose tightened, Simon became more and more critical of the OTO, finally denouncing it as “fascist” and vanishing, some said to Singapore. Other reports placed him in Hong Kong or Shanghai. The truth is, no one knew.

  18. “Not all of us took Simon’s hints of dabblings in intelligence work all that seriously, but apparently the Feds did. An agent infiltrated the OTO with the apparent intent of getting close to Simon, who was doing a great deal of consulting for the local lodge and seemed to be flirting with affiliation. As the noose tightened, Simon became more and more critical of the OTO, finally denouncing it as “fascist” and vanishing, some said to Singapore. Other reports placed him in Hong Kong or Shanghai. The truth is, no one knew.”

    This paragraph is all wack. Who is infiltrating who? LOL. Simon was the one getting in close with the OTO in the first place.
    The “agent” showing up gives Simon the easy excuse he needs to bug out of the NYC scene? The Feds are after him maaaaaan. He’s just like us…all under-groundey and stuff.


    The OTO is fascist? Yeah, cause they wouldn’t give Simon complete insider access. And he was attracting unknown “Fed” types snooping around. I wonder though if they were meant to be a team if not exposed first. Because, if you are going to bring charges in court against any OTO members you (as law enforcment) would ideally like to have multiple witnesses on the stand right? That’s the legal gold standard.

    All these occult (and spy) organizations are inherently “fascist” and anti-human anyway.

    Read this page, with special focus on the addendum sections.
    What kind of people like doing this kind of stuff?
    Germans? Psychopaths? Psychopathic Germans?
    Yes, the Illuminati were real…and BORING PRICKS.

    Now it’s time for a little “character study”:

    (Funny, Angleton’s book title from 1933 took the Jain concept of “7 types of truth” and flipped it)

    “Angleton was not born into a normal life. He grew up in the network that would later become the P2 Lodge, where Italian fascism and Vatican intellectuals overlapped, the piously militant bloodlines traced by the Knights of Malta.”

    P2 Lodge? OTO? You don’t say?

    “Intelligence ran in Angleton’s blood; his father, James Hugh Angleton, headed the National Cash Register franchise in Italy; in the course of visiting NCR’s European operations, he set up his own amateur spy operation, which was of benefit to the United States when the war broke out. Angleton père was a Mason, and a professed admirer of Italy and Germany in the 1930s.”

    Angleton is deeply mysterious, but that’s a projected image, a studied pose. It’s worth considering that Angleton made himself scarce because in person, the puppet master was socially awkward and downright transparent. As Amos Manor would later observe: “…he was fanatic about everything. He had a tendency toward mystification.”

    Despite that, Angleton made it a point to appear when and where it really mattered. He understood that his longevity within the agency depended on his direct involvement with contacts. Despite the culture of cut-outs, Angleton built his espionage network on personal relationships”

    Why does this stuff sound so familiar? Why do these guys all follow the same formula?

    • More from PL. He seems to have doubled down as well as gone into damage control mode:

      I know many of you think I have lost my mind, or perhaps my credibility, for having become involved in Tom DeLonge’s Sekret Machines project. .. .

      A few years ago, I published a book on alchemy. (Yeah, I know what you’re thinking: another occult tome, more of Levenda’s obsession that has nothing to do with UFOs, etc etc. Well, wait a moment before declaring me completely insane!)
      How can we possibly entertain two such opposing ideas at once in the same brain, the same mind? It’s a kind of mental disorder, isn’t it?

      But it just might be the most important collective mental disorder of all time.

      The best metaphor for what we are attempting to accomplish with Sekret Machines may be the famous and influential text by Julian Jaynes, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind (1976). To overly simplify the general thesis, Jaynes suggests that the two hemispheres of the brain – the left and the right – control different elements of human consciousness, with the left brain (in most people) controlling the right hand and fields such as math, science, logic, etc. The right brain, which controls the left hand in most people, is responsible for creative thinking, for music, poetry, etc. Prior to about 3000 years ago – according to the theory – the brain’s hemispheres operated simultaneously in the sense that one “heard” the gods speaking through the right hemisphere and into the left. About the time that the later books of the Hebrew Bible were written, these two hemispheres had split apart and the bicameral mind “broke down”.

      The Sekret Machines project aims to re-create some of that early experience by presenting data in two forms: fiction and non-fiction, or “right brain” and “left brain” approaches, respectively. While one can enjoy the novels by A. J. Hartley as fiction and “right brain” material by themselves, and the non-fiction works I present as “left brain” material, the two forms together work to tell a deeper story.

      Give it a chance. You may just surprise yourself!

  19. “If our Kings–our parents, caregivers, teachers and guides–are practicing the most appalling vices, are they still vices? … , if they have no respect for the same moral criteria by which we would judge them for their betrayal, where does this leave us?”


    I don’t get the drama. These are childish questions. As to the “Vice of Kings”, it is rather straight forward:

    “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

    This idea has been tested in laboratory settings. (*)

    (*) Bendahan, S.; Zehnder, C.; Pralong, F. P.; Antonakis, J. (2015). “Leader corruption depends on power and testosterone”. The Leadership Quarterly. 26 (2): 101–122.,_1st_Baron_Acton

    Would one not be justified in reckoning all great men among the wicked? This is not so easy to demonstrate in the case of individuals. They are so frequently capable of masterly dissimulation that they very often assume the airs and forms of great virtues. … [967]

    In great men we find the specific qualities of life in their highest manifestation : injustice, falsehood, exploitation. But inasmuch as their effect has always been overwhelming their essential nature has been most thoroughly misunderstood, and interpreted as goodness. … [968]

    What could ten new years teach that the past ten years has not been able to teach?!

    … so the superhistorical thinker illuminates for himself all the histories of people and of individuals from within, guessing like a clairvoyant the original sense of the different hieroglyphics and gradually even growing tired of avoiding the constantly new streams of written signals streaming forth. For, in the endless excess of what is happening, how is he not finally to reach saturation, supersaturation, and, yes, even revulsion, so that the most daring ones are perhaps finally ready, with Giacomo Leopardi, to say to their heart

    Nothing lives which would be worthy
    of your striving, and the earth deserves not a sigh.
    Pain and boredom is our being and the world is excrement
    —nothing else.
    Calm yourself.

    A se stesso
    Or poserai per sempre,
    Stanco mio cor. Perì l’inganno estremo,
    Ch’eterno io mi credei. Perì. Ben sento,
    In noi di cari inganni,
    Non che la speme, il desiderio è spento,
    Posa per sempre. Assai
    Palpitasti. Non val cosa nessuna
    I moti tuoi, né di sospiri è degna
    La terra. Amaro e noia
    La vita, altro mai nulla; e fango è il mondo.
    T’acqueta omai. Dispera
    L’ultima volta. Al gener nostro il fato
    Non donò che il morire. Omai disprezza
    Te, la natura, il brutto
    Poter, che asoso, a comun danno impera,
    E l’infinita vanità del tutto.

    To Himself
    Now be for ever still,
    Weary my heart. For the last cheat is dead,
    I thought eternal. Dead. For us, I know
    Not only the dear hope
    Of being deluded gone, but the desire.
    Rest still for ever. You
    Have beaten long enough. And to no purpose
    Were all your stirrings; earth not worth your sighs.
    Boredom and bitterness
    Is life; and the rest, nothing; the world is dirt.
    Lie quiet now. Despair
    For the last time. Fate granted to our kind
    Only to die. And now you may despise
    Yourself, nature, the brute
    Power which, hidden, ordains the common doom,
    And all the immeasurable emptiness of things.

  20. He [= Charles Darwin] points out that the human species is still a wild species, it has never been domesticated. A domesticated species is one which is being tamed by another species. Until we get an invasion from Mars, we shall not be tamed by another species. All we can do is to try to tame ourselves, that an oligarchy tries to tame ourselves, but the oligarchy still remains wild. However much it succeeded in taming and domesticating the rest of the race, it must remain wild.

    Charles Darwin insists that because man is wild he can never expect to domesticate himself because the people on top will always be undomesticated and sooner or later run wild.

    The oligarchy is itself not subjected to the extremes of conditioning because it must pertain a certain freedom in order to be able to make adequate decisions.

    Again, exactly what this means and exactly what the significance is for us and the future, I don’t really know. I just feels so incapable of really understanding the unattributable odd facts of real life, I mean one has very often just to accept there they are and what really they mean I don’t know. Perhaps this is one of the charms of history, one never really knows what it means.

  21. This is not a volume for conspiracy theorists. I do believe that some of the networks that exist among the most powerful people in the world have enabled a remarkable few to shape the global system and often to set the terms of our discussions about that system. But I have seen enough of the world of backroom conversations and discreet meetings of the powerful to know that conspiracies are hard to come by. These elites are in fact riven with differences and challenged by the practical impossibility of most conspiracies; old fantasies about world domination just don’t add up.

    As a Jew, I have always had a particularly soft place in my heart for the old notion of a world Jewish conspiracy. … Had we really been in charge, surely we could have done better on all counts.


    It wasn’t only the despair of Shakespeare’s beset Richard II that led him to say, “For God’s sake let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings.” We have always had a particular fondness for stories of kings. History itself is the story of those with the most – the most to lose, the most to gain, the most power, and the most glamour.

    Elites are masters of their eras, but they are also metaphors for them. They illustrate what is valued, how success is earned, and how power is garnered and wielded. They also reflect what flaws we tolerate in those at the top and what flaws we find unacceptable. Indeed, elites reveal how we see our own societies, and throughout history we have creaded elaborate mythologies to justify and preserve the systems they built or run.


    “Is there a God? What happens after we die? Is there life outside the planet earth?” Why do people hate each other? Thinks like this. Philosophical questions that you have as children and that we still have as adults.”

    We want to believe in a system. We want to believe in higher powers. Chaos and randomness make life too threatening, to hard to understand, too easy to see as meaningless. So as human beings, we seek order in the universe. …

    The view that all is blind drift is largely a fatalist projection of one’s own feeling of impotence and perhaps, if one has ever been active politically in a principled way, a salve of one’s guilt.

    The view that all of history is due to the conspiracy of an easily located set of villains, or of heroes, is also a hurried projection form the difficult effort to understand how shifts in the structure of society open opportunities to various elites and how various elites take advantage or fail to take advantage of them.

    To accept either view – of all history as conspiracy or of all history as drift – is to relax the effort to understand the facts of power and the ways of the powerful.

    For many, order comes from a belief in God and a divine plan. Others, because they are uncertain about supernatural higher powers or because they seek to supplement them, find some comfort in the idea that someone is in charge here on this earth. Indeed, we accept power in others because it brings order with it, suggests that we are not random clouds of subatomic particles appearing and bouncing without rhyme or reason. … This fundamental need has benefited ambitious individuals thoughout human history, as they have translated it into acceptance of their power in the name of providing order and leadership.

  22. an oligarchy tries to tame ourselves, but the oligarchy still remains wild. Charles Darwin insists that because man is wild he can never expect to domesticate himself because the people on top will always be undomesticated and sooner or later run wild. The oligarchy is itself not subjected to the extremes of conditioning because it must pertain a certain freedom in order to be able to make adequate decisions.

    Remarkably, I just formulated this exact thesis yesterday & wrote it down. Now, if Darwin said it, I am more inclined to doubt it…. :/

    Do you have a citation/link for this?

    • “Remarkably, I just formulated this exact thesis yesterday & wrote it down. Now, if Darwin said it, I am more inclined to doubt it…. ”

      Remember, this is just another example of “slavemaster propaganda”.
      The site I linked in the past details it all.

      This statement:
      “The oligarchy is itself not ( to be???) subjected to the extremes of conditioning because it must pertain a certain freedom in order to be able to make adequate decisions.”

      Might have been said by the Greeks or Romans (in my amended form)…then dutifully written down by the British for use later.

    • It’s directly quoted from Huxley’s lecture, I would have to listen again, but I remember him mentioning Darwin’s book “The Next Million Years” – and hee I found it and it is not the famous Charles Darwin, rather it is his grandson:

      Sir Charles Galton Darwin, KBE, MC, FRS[1] (18 December 1887 – 31 December 1962) was an English physicist, eugenicist, and the grandson of Charles Darwin.

      And here is the book:

    • Here’s my shower thought:

      People need to get it together…and push legislation to claw back *money* from the scientists and politicians involved in this stuff. Scientists and politicians are well paid and create little dynasties. It perpetuates all this crap.

      When grandpa govt. researcher leaves his family money after he dies…the amount of every paycheck he earned in his years of “experimenting” should be confiscated and handed out to the victims. Same goes for politicians. It would be trivial to trace the cash with today’s systems. Family spent the money on a vacation cottage at a pristine lake somewhere? Bought a nice sailboat? Big landowners? They should be forced to sell the stuff and the cash gets put back into a fund for victims.

      Society is always picking up the tab for the mistakes of government otherwise. Government should be in abject fear of society at large and be kept on the tightest leash. The men who wrote the US Constitution did well, but didn’t go far enough.

      The other thing I can say is this…thank “the creators” for the modern internet.
      It’s like the Trailer Park Boys in that triumphant moment telling Mr. Lahey “The liquor works BOTH WAYS!!!”

      That’s why Freedom Of Speech was enshrined as the first commandment.
      And bearing arms the second one.
      The founders of the Unites States were not fooling around.

      This stuff from “Moses” is *weak sauce* in comparison. Read up and think about it:

      They knew all about religion and were very well read. The “Moses” stuff is a bunch of bull nobody has ever followed.
      Thou shall not kill? Scientists at the University Of Rochester killed people with radiation (look it up).

      What did a better man say to do? (Forget about this stuff being “Gnostic”)

      He talked about Freedom Of Speech, and the rise of the internet:
      “(6) His disciples questioned him and said to him, “Do you want us to fast? How shall we pray? Shall we give alms? What diet shall we observe?”
      Jesus said, “Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.”

      He spoke about rich people faking it, and what you are supposed to be doing in life:
      (14) Jesus said to them, “If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits. When you go into any land and walk about in the districts, if they receive you, eat what they will set before you, and heal the sick among them. For what goes into your mouth will not defile you, but that which issues from your mouth – it is that which will defile you.”

      He said sell your cloak and buy a semi-auto sword with 30 round magazine if you have to. Cause’ you can’t do the good work when you’re dead!

      Maybe it’s just the testosterone or something…but…

  23. “That’s not an argument against it being true, tho, just an expression of ideological opposition.

    What’s the counter-argument?”

    Well, maybe the men and women at the top are domesticated by Levenda’s evil ancient Sumerian gods.
    How would we know if they weren’t? LOL.

    Maybe the oligarchy is tamed and following it’s orders….from “sinister forces”?

    An oligarchy may be trying to control and tame society at large…but who says they themselves are wild?

  24. The insight I had about this pertained to the predations & savagery of the elite; the actions they commit in secret. The predator class that exploits but also protects the sedentary, agricultural class, which is its own “slave class.” The predator class rules and orders society and so gives rise to civilization in which brutality & barbarism is more or less contained & minimized (most people get to live comfortable lives), while still occurring in secret rituals by which the elite prey on the same people they are protecting, their “livestock.”

    I think a real counterargument, rather than positing some fictional ET overclass, would have to address the possibility of humans living together in a non-brutal, non-survival of the fittest way, without an oligarchical class maintaining the technosocial order of “civilization.” In other words, refute the argument that things would be even worse (lives more brutal and short), at an individual level, than they currently are under the cruel rule of the kakistocracy.

  25. “I think a real counterargument, rather than positing some fictional ET overclass, would have to address the possibility of humans living together in a non-brutal, non-survival of the fittest way, without an oligarchical class maintaining the technosocial order of “civilization.” In other words, refute the argument that things would be even worse (lives more brutal and short), at an individual level, than they currently are under the cruel rule of the kakistocracy.”

    Oh trust me…I’m behind ya pushing…

    I’ve been living in a place for the last 8 years that barely has police.
    I *might* have seen a cop car a week ago…but I forget actually.

    People live just fine for the most part out here. Open carry of guns with no license is permitted.
    You rarely see people with guns, and rarely hear people even talk about them.
    No wild random shootings happen. Only drug related incidents.

    Guess it depends on the mentality of a region…but many places would be peaceful and non-brutal when left totally alone.

    • Heh…….they could try to say that. But they might get a rude awakening if they set foot out here.

      As another example..see the Haudenosaunee Confederacy:

      Basically…a bunch of people decided to spontaneously stop killing each other and relax.
      They even had to overcome the practice of cannibalism to do it!

      “Assertion of the 1142 founding date is bound fo raise a ruckus among Iroquois experts who have long asserted in print that the Confederacy did not begin until a few years before contact with Europeans in the early 1500s, or even afterwards.”

      I believe the 1142 date myself. It’s attached to an almost supernatural astronomical event to boot.
      Of course the Europeans would try to claim these people only “came to Jesus” after they arrived. But that’s crap.
      The native humans were trying to get alone even before the Magna Carta.

      Think about that as counterargument for a second.
      The slavemaster types are *constantly* trying to put down any instance of rational, sane human interaction.
      They will go so far as to fake the history books to do it!

  26. Random paragraph from MM:

    “It has to stop. It has gotten so bad, the rich are actually undercutting themselves. For money to be
    worth anything there has to be something worth buying. The rich can no longer collect art, since they
    have destroyed it. They can no longer have the joy of underwriting real science, since they have
    destroyed it. They can’t collect books or poetry, since they have destroyed both literature and poetry.
    They can’t enjoy the company of innocent youths, since they have destroyed the innocence of youth.
    They can’t enjoy love, because they have destroyed it for profit. They can’t enjoy beautiful
    architecture, because they have destroyed it. And they can’t enjoy the feeling of a day well spent,
    because their days aren’t well spent. That is the thing about dirty money and a dirty conscience: no
    matter how much you spend, you can’t hire someone to clean it.”


    00:01 Welcoming Patrick Murray to Buzzsaw.
    00:51 Cutting through the crap.
    01:45 Selling your soul for the music business? Very strange people, indeed.
    02:57 Unbelievable debauchery in London’s high class catacombs.
    04:50 The menacing ambiance of the music industry scene.
    07:44 Demonic possession or human corruption?
    09:33 Music as a conduit for ‘the forces.’
    13:00 Stiv Bators of the Dead Boys–murdered to make money for music business masters.
    15:15 Johnny Thunders of the New York Dolls–drugs, secrets & murder in New Orleans.
    17:42 Spiritual influence on master recordings; the cost of going against the grain.
    21:36 A brilliant drummer killed for IRA interests.
    23:16 Influence+awakening=big trouble; channeling spirits against all odds in the face of madness.
    26:36 Archon rulers? The strength of suffering.
    27:45 A divine journey for the soul–unlinked and disorganized, but mighty.
    30:45 Where illusion and vision collides with perception.
    32:04 Manipulated creativity by the sinister powers that be.
    33:21 Thanks and goodbye.

    “Cosmos Factory” wrote:

    “I met Stiv Bators once. He told me the world was run by about three people. I thought he was crazy at the time. I realize now he probably was right.”

  28. “I think a real counterargument, rather than positing some fictional ET overclass, would have to address the possibility of humans living together in a non-brutal, non-survival of the fittest way, …”

    # There is a very good book on this question:

    This book proposes a novel systemic hypothesis about human behavior that on its face seemed like a synthetic exercise: that our political systems have evolved according to the systemic rule of “power maximization.”

    “Imagine a group of tribes living within reach of one another. If all choose the way of peace, then all may live in peace. But what if all but one choose peace?” From this basic premise, Andrew Bard Schmookler has built a towering work of intellectual and spiritual insight, a book that will shatter many preconceived notions about how civilization has developed and why human history has been so filled with torment.

    According to Schmookler there are four possibilities for these tribes: destruction, absorption and transformation by the conquerer, withdrawal, or a defense against power-expansion that forces the defensive tribe to imitate the aggressor. This model gives rise to an explaination of human civilization of progressing tumultousness and a disturbing lack of free will.


    A reader writes , “I second Mr. Greenwell’s statement that this is one of the ten greatest books of the 20th century. I would put it on my list of one of the ten greatest books ever written by an American.” And another one, “This book, The Parable of the Tribes, was by far the most interesting book I think I may have ever read.” And yet another one, “Arguably the Greatest Non-Fiction Book Ever Written. THE PARABLE OF THE TRIBES is an awesome achievement that will completely restore your faith in human nature.”

    • “This book proposes a novel systemic hypothesis about human behavior that on its face seemed like a synthetic exercise: that our political systems have evolved according to the systemic rule of “power maximization.”

      n55 in Denmark had good thoughts on minimizing “concentrations of power”

      Most discussions in our societies are dominated by habitual conceptions, subjective opinions, social conventions and reference to authorities.”

      “N55 argumentation:
      N55 tries to establish discussions that are based on conditions for description and thereby on logical relations and facts.

      A person can be described in an infinite number of ways. None of these descriptions can be completely adequate. We therefore can not describe precisely what a person is. We do however have the possibility to point out necessary relations between persons and other factors. We have to respect these relations and factors in order not to contradict ourselves and in order to be able to talk about persons in a meaningful way. One necessary relation is the relation between persons and bodies. It makes no sense referring to a person without referring to a body. If we for example say: here we have a person, but he or she does not have a body, it does not make sense. Furthermore, there are necessary relations between persons and the rights of persons. Persons should be treated as persons and therefore as having rights. If we deny this assertion it goes wrong: here is a person, but this person should not be treated as a person, or: here is a person, who should be treated as a person, but not as having rights. Therefore we can only talk about persons in a way that makes sense if we know that persons have rights.

      “Concentrations of power
      Concentrations of power do not always respect the rights of persons. If one denies this fact one gets: concentrations of power always respect the rights of persons. This does not correspond with our experiences. Concentrations of power characterize our society. Concentrations of power force persons to concentrate on participating in competition and power games, in order to create a social position for themselves. Concurrently with the concentrations of power dominating our conscious mind and being decisive to our situations, the significance of our fellow humans diminishes. And our own significance becomes the significance we have for concentrations of power, the growth of concentrations of power, and the conflicts of concentrations of power.
      It is clear that persons should be consciously aware of the rights of persons and therefore must seek to organize the smallest concentrations of power possible.”

      The fundamental purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons. If we deny this assertion we get: the fundamental purpose of politics is not to protect the rights of persons. This suggests that one of the basic tasks of politicians could be, for example, to renounce the rights of themselves and of others. This has no meaning. Or that there is a more important purpose to politics which does not have anything to do with persons and therefore also has nothing to do with the rights of persons. That is plain nonsense. Therefore, we now know that the basic purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons. In other words we can not talk about politics in a way that makes sense without the assumption that the fundamental purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons.

  29. This last seems circular to me: “the purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons,” but from what? Presumably it is from those who would infringe on these “rights,” but who decides what constitutes an infringement, if not politicians? Ergo the purpose of politics (and rights) is to give politicians something to do, i.e., to establish a social hierarchy around the notion of personhood and rights.

    Another reading would be that persons need to have their rights protected from reality/nature, making politics the system of inter-mediating between bodies and their environment, inner & outer, ie, priestcraft. This is what gives rise to concentrations of power and the infringement upon “human rights” (on bodies) to begin with.

    The notion of rights is conceptual and non-reality-based, in that it only makes sense within the context of a socially constructed pseudo-reality, which (I think) is how we end up with the right to define one’s own gender, etc., and oblige others to conform to said definitions, i.e., a negation of the reality of the body. The body is not a person but an organism, and it does not require personhood (or rights) in order to exist harmoniously with its environment. In fact I’d say it cannot do so as long as it identifies with the politics of personhood (& and personal rights).

    This suggests that identity politics is the natural and inevitable end-point of politics, that which (like fascism) reveals the inherent nature of politics as a system of thought, behavior, and social control. Simply stated: the imposition of the purely conceptual onto the organic.

    • “The fundamental purpose of politics is to protect the rights of persons.”

      In addition to Jasun’s astute remarks on the circularity of the tenet, it is often instructive to look at the original meaning(s) of a key concept:

      Politics (from Greek: Politiká: Politika, definition “affairs of the cities”) …

      The Republic (Greek: Πολιτεία, Politeia; Latin: De Re Publica) is a Socratic dialogue, written by Plato …

      Plato – widely considered the most pivotal figure in the development of philosophy, especially the Western tradition.

      Plato’s thought was directly connected to ancient concepts of totalitarianian rule, eugenics and euthanasia.








      “The multitude … perceive practically nothing, but merely echo this or that pronouncement of their leaders.”




      • I was intrigued by Patrick Murray’s claim (see interview further above) that there were good, empowering, positive archontic forces (usually they get a bad rap in the conspiracy communities), so I had a quick look, and this directly ties in with the concept of “politics”:

        From Greek archai, “origins, beginning things, prior in time.”

        In the classical Mediterranean world, archon was commonly used for the governor of a province, or, more loosely, any religious or governmental authority. Hence the plural, Archons, is often translated in Gnostic texts as “the Authorities.”

  30. From the same link:

    “Persons are, for example, totally different from their bodies. Persons can go for a walk and they can make decisions. Bodies can not do that.”

    Says who? As it stands, this is a wholly unsupported statement of ideological faith. There is no inherent logic in it that I can see. It could be argued, but it certainly should not be assumed.

  31. “Simply stated: the imposition of the purely conceptual onto the organic.”

    # I know you have some reservations against your “brother’s bible” (as mentioned in the podcast with Susan Frey), but to me it’s still the most illuminating book I’ve ever read on the human condition, and it directly deals with the issue:

    Becker argues that a basic duality in human life exists between the physical world of objects and a symbolic world of human meaning. Thus, since humanity has a dualistic nature consisting of a physical self and a symbolic self, …

  32. Plato: “The multitude … perceive practically nothing, but merely echo this or that pronouncement of their leaders.”

    Reminds me of Walter Lippmann’s “It requires wisdom to understand wisdom: The music is nothing if the audience is deaf.”


    In his first book, Public Opinion (1922), Lippmann said that mass man functioned as a “bewildered herd” who must be governed by “a specialized class whose interests reach beyond the locality.” The élite class of intellectuals and experts were to be a machinery of knowledge to circumvent the primary defect of democracy, the impossible ideal of the “omnicompetent citizen”.

  33. The Phantom Public is a book published in 1925 by journalist Walter Lippmann in which he expresses his lack of faith in the democratic system by arguing that the public exists merely as an illusion, myth, and inevitably a phantom.

    It followed his better-known work Public Opinion (1922) and moves further toward disillusionment with democratic politics.

    Lippmann is openly elitist. His theory of society is “a theory that puts its trust chiefly in the individuals directly concerned [the insiders, not the “public”]. They initiate, they administer, and they settle. It would subject them to the least possible interference from ignorant and meddlesome outsiders” [the public].

    The Public Philosophy (1955) … took almost twenty years to complete, …

    They are ill discoverers
    that think there is no land,
    when they see nothing but sea.
    – Bacon

    p. 14

    A mass cannot govern.

    p. 15

    Where mass opinion dominates the government, there is a morbid derangement of the true function of power. The derangement brings about the enfeeblement, verging on paralysis, of the capacity to govern. This breakdown in the constitutional order is the cause of the precipitate and catastrophic decline of Western society. It may, if it cannot be arrested and reversed, bring about the fall of the West. …

  34. Lippmann, The Public Philosophy (1955), p. 180f

    For it is a practical rule, well known to experienced men, that the relation is very close between our capacity to act at all and our conviction that the action we are taking is right. This does not mean, of course, that the action is necessarily right. What is necessary to continuous action is that it shall be believed to be right. Without that belief, most men will not have the energy and will to persevere in the action. Thus satanism, which prefers evil as such, is present in some men and perhaps potentially in many. Yet, except in a condition of the profoundest hysteria as in a lynching,


    Even Hitler, who was enormously satanic and delighted in monstrous evil, did nevertheless need, it would seem, to be reassured that he was not only a great man but, in a mysterious way, a righteous one. …

    For political ideas acquire operative force in human affairs when, as we have seen, they acquire legitimacy, when they have the title of being right which binds men’s consciences. Then they possess, as the Confucian doctrine has it, “the mandate of heaven.”

    In the crisis within the Western society, there is at issue now the mandate of heaven.


    The Mandate of Heaven (天命) was a principle used to justify the power of the emperor of China, …

    • Jasun and the Autinauts:

      I think you will enjoy my present tomfoolery with Peter Levenda on his Facebook page. I dared to post there the links to all 3 parts of Jason Colavito’s review of Sekret Machines. Peter responded overnight and I then explained my self to him. I copy the comments below:

      Eh… Colavito has his own set view on the subject, and a particular aversion from the, for lack of a better term, spiritual or consciousness approach to the UAP topic.

      Tom Mellett:
      Then all the more reason to listen to what he has to say. Peter has a Thesis, Colavito has an Antithesis. Whatever truth there is will be found somewhere in the Synthesis we readers make of it.‬

      No, I agree. It’s how ideas are refined. I just don’t want somebody who read his review (which I thought was a little too biased) to keep them from reading this book. Then again, I admit I am biased too; I happen to be a fan of Valle and Levenda’s take on the subject.‬

      Peter Levenda:
      [Tags Tom Mellett]: Colavito doesn’t have an Antithesis. He has an Antipathy. That’s different. (And I don’t know why my webpage should be used to advertise his. Next you’ll be posting Alex Jones transcripts here!) Anyway I have already responded to his earlier series of posts on this subject, pointing out his numerous errors, so have no more to add to this particular discussion. Interested readers can go to his site, to which Tom has helpfully (?) provided links, and read my detailed response for themselves if they are so inclined.
      [Scroll down to last Comment, which is #20]

      That guy is incredibly negative! You shouldn’t have to leave that on your page, it was incredibly rude of Tom Mellett to post it here. I would delete it if I were you! I am enjoying the book and I think that most of us would rather form our own opinions of it. Clearly we are mostly thinking people!‬

      Tom Mellett:
      Hello Peter, I come from the “old school”of Public Relations where the motto is: “The only thing worse than BAD publicity is NO publicity.” And I believe that’s even more true today in our age of instant social media.

      However, to explain myself here, I must point out to you an “advance” (sic) in human consciousness during the last 40 years since Julian Jaynes wrote the book which you refer to a lot in Sekret Machines:

      ‪“The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.”‬

      ‪I would like to put forth a title to express a new stage of human (d)evolution that began in 2004:‬

      ‪“The Bicameral Breakdown of Consciousness in the Origin of the Facebook Mind.”‬

      ‪Like (Sympathy) vs. Dislike (Antipathy)‬
      ‪(but maybe I should say: binary? ) ‬

      ‪So here’s the deal about your Facebook page here, Peter, which I think you need to define for yourself, at least in your own mind. Do you want it to be entirely a page of Sympathy for you and your writing, consisting only of Fans and Sycophants (and the inevitable occasional Psycho-Fan) who will only Like and praise your work? It’s fine if you decide that, and if so, I will gladly delete the links I made to the Colavito reviews since they are contaminating your Sympathetic Fan Page and need to be purged.‬

      On the other hand, please consider the positive advantage of allowing “bad news” to appear here. This new FB Mindset is a renewed Tribal Mindset and since you are the Chief and/or shamanic medicine man of this tribe, you need to understand these new dynamics.‬

      By judging Jason Colavito as entirely and absolutely filled with Antipathy toward you, you have thus signaled to your Tribe that Jason is a fiendish enemy that needs to be destroyed and thus you are right now encouraging your fervid and loyal fans to organize a war party and go out into that cyber jungle, infiltrate the blog-camp of that evil Colavito enemy and annihilate him. And then of course report back here with tales and maybe souvenirs of the battle. ‬

      So it’s up to you, Peter, as Chief of this tribe. As I said before, I’m willing to delete those enemy links and never post anything negative again here. (Already I see a tribe member has called me rude and demands you delete the links.)‬

      On the other hand, I am a wizened old cyber-scout for various other FB tribes and I am more than willing to do reconnaissance for you in order to ferret out your enemies — and bring news of them back here so you can organize a proper war council and seek out and destroy those enemies. ‬

      Facebook Mind is pretty simple, Peter, might be a reversion to Lizard Brain, but still there’s something awesomely pristine and beautiful about this stark polarity of love and hate. But wait, isn’t that why you are writing Sekret Machines in the first place? To ferret out the ultimate foundation of this polarity?‬

      I’m here to serve you, Peter, just say the word, and your tribe will do the rest!‬


            • But he hasn’t really been able to show his nakedness (like Noah to son Ham?) until the official publication date of Sekret Machines on March 6, 2017. That has always been the target date of what I have been referring to for months as the “Rocky Apocalypse.” So give it some time, it’s only been a week so far, and I reckon the “Tribulation Period” may not really get going until the late spring or early summer.

              Now to avoid awkward nakedness metaphors, I will say that, as of 3/6/2017, the “Levenda Cat is out of the bag!”

                • Now what did I just tell you about the coming Sekret “Tribulation Period”? I predicted: “late spring or early summer.”

                  Well, look what news story I just come across, dateline March 8, 2017

                  Proof of aliens? Ex Blink 182 frontman promises ‘BIG UFO ANNOUNCEMENT’ within 60 DAYS
                  FORMER Blink-182 frontman Tom DeLonge has claimed “a big announcement” in the world of alien and UFO disclosure is due in the next 60 days.

                  Let’s do the math! March 8 + 60 days = May 7, 2017. (OK, I know it’s only a week after Cross-Quarter Day, Beltane, but technically I can still claim “late spring.”)

                  Date does evoke for me this movie:

                  Seven Days in May is a 1964 American political thriller motion picture about a military-political cabal’s planned take-over of the United States government in reaction to the president’s negotiation of a disarmament treaty with the Soviet Union. Directed by John Frankenheimer, it stars Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Fredric March, and Ava Gardner. The screenplay was written by Rod Serling based on the novel of the same name by Fletcher Knebel and Charles W. Bailey II, published in September 1962.

            • Jasun, I think we can leave the unveiling (Rocky Apocalypse) to Jason Colavito.

              I just posted this “Declaration of Flame War” message to the Levenda Tribe FB page

              Be it known that an Official State of Flame War now exists between Jason Colavito and Peter Levenda!

              Man and Woman your Battle Stations please! ( And don’t forget the popcorn. But this looks to be a long war of attrition, so maybe more substantial food needs to be catered?)


              Peter Levenda Is Upset with Me. He Also Called Me “Arrogant” and Driven by “Personal Resentment.” Yes, He’s a Full-Fledged Fringe Writer Now!

  35. I think the n55 material needs to be read with a “Denmark-ian” language/brain filter on.
    Their material is striking at the heart of something though….

    The US Constitution still stands as an amazing achievement for the protection of man against fellow man.
    Wish for it’s demise at your peril, no matter where you live on Earth.

    Back to Levenda for a sec. I had to LOL at this:
    “Perhaps we should put this stupid argument for ignorance in terms Levenda might understand: There are many more defensible reasons to engage in space exploration than to waste time, energy, and talent performing ritual magick to commune with imaginary demons and cast pointless spells. Did the aliens program him to do that, too?”

  36. KK, in case you find it stimulating, here’s a argument that the constitution was pretty much set up to protect the propertied/merchant classes from the majority poor.

    A fairly random quote: “…as long as we value the accumulation and protection of property, and a judiciary to protect us from the government more than we value playing a meaningful role in the decisions that affect our lives, we obey. We don’t ask questions. We learn to care more about how much we earn than about what we do and even less about the impact that our work has on others. In fact, obedience implicitly means that when we go to work we leave our conscience at home.”

    • From your link:

      “While few would disagree that the Bill of Rights affords certain individuals important protection from the government and therefore ought to be celebrated and carefully guarded, one could also argue that there is more to citizenship than protection.”

      And of course…every current govt. on Earth uses it’s written laws to “it’s” own advantage 24/7.
      What I’m saying is that the US system may be “least worst” (lesser of a whole wheelbarrow of evils).
      Rail against it in various ways…..but you may be slitting your own throat.

      You may also find this stimulating:
      NO TREASON. No. VI. The Constitution of No Authority. BY LYSANDER SPOONER. BOSTON:1870.

      You may believe that the US Constitution is not binding on anyone…and is completely fake.

      Same with Canada’s Charter etc. Hmmm…looks like they left out the exact same thing the American founders did LOL.
      Namely, a guarantee of every person to *property*!

      I’m smelling human vs. human global conspiracy.

      n55 talks about the land issue:

      “Ownership of land
      It is a habitual conception that ownership of land is acceptable. Most societies are characterized by the convention of ownership. But if we claim the ownership of land, we also say that we have more right to parts of the surface of the earth, than other persons have.
      We know that persons should be treated as persons and therefore as having rights. If we say here is a person who has rights, but this person has no right to stay on the surface of the earth, it does not make sense. If one does not accept that persons have the right to stay on the surface of the earth, it makes no sense to talk about rights at all. If we try to defend ownership of land using language in a rational way it goes wrong. The only way of defending this ownership is by the use of power and force. No persons have more right to land than other persons, but concentrations of power use force to maintain the illusion of ownership of land.”

      But what do you do about it? The minute you simply disagree with your paper government, you are considered it’s enemy.
      Not just in the US…Canada too. I’m sure every single country has something similar “on the books”.

      What country’s laws affords the most personal liberty these days?
      What country guarantees that a human person can inhabit a space on the surface of the Earth free of charge?

      The land thing is the oldest human vs. human scam.
      The Roman governing bodies *killed* their leaders that attempted land ownership reform.

      Too much to go into.

      There is a lot here for Jasun to psychologically unpack.

  37. I would agree; we need to dig a LOT deeper than constitutional principles. My points above went unaddressed; the notion of the sovereignty of personhood can’t be laid at the doorstep of Danish linguistic quirks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s