Further Ruminations on the 2nd Matrix of Conspiratainment & Occultism (Inc. Peter Levenda-Simon Cabana Update)

Thanks to Tom Mellett, I finally got my hands (so to speak) on an audio file of “Simon”‘s interview for Coast to Coast, speeded up and I’d say identifiably Levenda, though I am curious to hear what others think. Here.

(The original, unaltered audio can be listened to here.)

Also, there is another interview I found in which he admits to working for intell, sort of, here.

I feel like this is one of those strange cases of, on the one hand, everybody knows, on the other, since Levenda’s denial continues with the tissue-y semblance of plausibility, nobody cares?

I asked Mark Pilkington, of Mirage Man, what he thinks of Levenda and deLonge and the old-new Disclosure Promise. He was fairly noncommittal (he said he needs more time to look into it), but gently suggested the odor of a rat. How could he not? The question (for me) is, is anyone calling Levenda out on this within the conspiracy field; and if not, why not? Peter Levenda is something of a pillar of the alternate perceptions community and within so-called conspiracy research. And what happens when a pillar is seen to be rotten?

My first ever paranoid awareness webpage 20 years ago (in 1998) had the banner: There’s a worldwide conspiracy to create the belief that there’s a worldwide conspiracy to create the belief, etc, etc. If true, this means that probably most of our own “intell” on the subject (as so-called conspiracy researchers) is sourced in ongoing info wars… Not that we don’t know this, but to actually ID one of the main players, doesn’t that make it possible to unravel the narratives that have been spun around us, just a little bit?

For example, if 90-95% of Levenda’s info in Sinister Forces (e.g.) is legit (as I think it probably is), what’s the extra 5-10% and how is it reframing the good info and turning it into a useful narrative for … the-powers-that-be?

Going out on a limb (well OK, inching a bit further out on a limb I’ve been on for a while now), Levenda strikes me as an insider whose job it is to establish a false narrative around good information so we will follow that template and put all of our own information into the context of the false narrative, thereby rendering it less accurate, true, or practically useful to us. Note how Levenda debunked my suggestions of an occult element in organized child abuse, for example. That’s not part of his (i.e., the officially unofficial) narrative. (I should say the one I am suggesting Levenda is affiliated with; Alex Jones & David Icke talk about that stuff, but they don’t have the credibility that Levenda does: they are disinfo merchants for a different, much larger, corner of the market.)

Simply put, I think Levenda’s info, like Strieber’s, has an ideological thrust that trumps, and hence invalidates, the informational content. To be fair, I’d say the same, to a degree, about books I wrote (as Aeolus Kephas); but then, I was informed and inspired by other “researchers” (intell) and so I also became an unwittingly unreliable narrator. I think Levenda is witting, and that this makes a huge difference.

Oh, and while we’re turning over the Simon stones, Tom also drew my attention to a 2016 glowing Amazon review of Michael Aquino’s We Break the Sword: The Nazi Peace of 1940., written by . . . Peter Levenda. Birds of a feather…?


In the case of Levenda being a possible tool for the cryptocracy, we may wish to raise the question of what the elite actually believe, what they want people to think they believe, and (probably closely tied) what they want the people they rule to believe. Then there’s what they want those of us who are becoming aware of their actual nature  (or think we are) to believe about what the elite believe. This latter may not be the same as what they actually believe. (People who do not believe in satan may wish us to believe they are satanists…)

In my last conversation with Levenda, I suggested that all occultist goals and practices are rooted in pathologies of one sort or another. He agreed! Yet you would never guess this from his output, which from Simon Cabana to Tom deLonge is all about promoting occultic narratives. His heroes are Lovecraft, Crowley, & Grant, so Levenda is not someone to frown on occult practices. So why did he agree with me? Was it because he was caught off guard and found himself telling the truth? Or was it the inverse, and he merely presented the veneer of agreement because he thought that was what I wanted to hear?


The spinners of fragmentary myths certainly have their own crucial fictions, and by crucial fictions I mean, partially at least, ideological narratives that provide false meanings to buffer awareness of death. The elite appear to believe that they can transcend the mass of humanity ~ and defeat death? ~ by gaining total control over it (and their own bodies?). But their main business seems to be the manufacturing, marketing, and selling of crucial fictions to others.

An obvious example of this might be how intelligence and shadow government agencies use the ideology of Americanism to justify and implement policies that serve their agendas, agendas that have nothing to do with Americanism, but with a deeper, darker ideology. So while they create propaganda that they don’t believe is true, they do believe (presumably) that it serves a higher truth, one the masses aren’t ready or able to receive, and so must be herded towards; or sacrificed to.


All of this dovetails with the problem of conspiratainment, as discussed recently at the forum, here.

Conspiratainment, in a nutshell, is what we get when people are analyzing & presenting “conspiracy” data, using the exact same mentality that has been conditioned into them via the conspiratorial agendas they are supposedly exposing. Puppets being manipulated to point at the masters.

This is how the culture generates narratives that will entertain people who are starting to become aware of being trapped in a culture-generated narrative. They/we need a higher kind of entertainment, a live action video game in which we get to feel like we are waking up, without any of the discomfort of getting out of bed.

Conspiratainment is more pernicious than entertainment because it makes people believe they are getting closer to truth and to changing things when they are just killing time. Also, and worse, unlike TV and movies, it doesn’t help people relax, it gets them fired up to act while instilling them with the belief that they are powerless to change anything. Naturally this makes them angry at the powers-that-be and want to blame (scapegoat) them for their sense of powerlessness (which they already felt before, being what drew them into the conspiracy moshpit in the first place). So then they start to unconsciously adopt the mentality of their abusers, because it makes them feel more empowered to fight them. But since they can’t ever identify them, they are just fighting (fragmenting) themselves.


A few word related thoughts too good to leave lying around on Faceborg:

The mundane is as underrated and undervalued as psychic-occult experiences are overrated. It’s only the mind that makes a distinction anyway. As difficult as it is to escape the matrix of our mundane identities, expanding them into the second matrix of our supposedly cosmic identities doesn’t seem to get us closer to freedom but further from it. There is no end to the tricks that a fragmented psyche can play on itself. Primary among them is the trick of believing that the mystery is “out there,” in the infinitude of mental projections, rather than in here, in the cells and organs of our bodies. Each of which may very well be a mysterious entity unto itself just trying to make contact with “us” (our inflated cosmic ego selves).

Those of us with natural affinity for the invisible get lured into reading about “the occult” as a means to get a handle on our experience; but isn’t a more likely result that we let those symbols and the thought forms hooked into them get handles on us, and on our perceptions?

I think occultism and espionage developed in tandem and that secret societies are akin to intelligence agencies, all with one main aim. Social engineering, perception management, harvesting of awareness. Gods are thought-forms or egregores that are created by directing and inspiring belief and worship, and that serve the original symbol-shapers.

I suspect all physical (“alien”) abductions are human engineered, as opposed to night visitations from “entities” that occur in sleep paralysis state or lucid dreamstate and the like, of which I have had many. I suppose they could be induced but then so could my experience right now so I try to avoid too much speculation, viz a viz, “what is real,” etc. All that said, I allow for some nonhuman/humanoid physical (or quasi-physical) presence on the planet, since faerylore is as old as culture (though then again, so perhaps are “psy-ops”). I just think the modern UFO cult as propounded by intell. assets or useful idiots like Budd Hopkins, Whitley Strieber, John Mack, David Jacobs, Stephen Greer, Jason Wilcox, Peter Levenda, et al. is a manufactured phenomenon that is both cover for mind control “experimentation” (long past the experimental phase) and one of the intended results of it (i.e., designed to simulate a global phenomenon of “alien abduction,” “cargo cults” and “Old Ones”).

At a certain point, the maps we are given prevent us from leaving the territory they claim to represent; worse, they make us believe that they ARE the territory. Nor do I think the imagination is (necessarily) the way out of the prison of the mind/map (tho I used to), but more often a way to build subtler and deeper matrices still. Maybe for the same reason, that our imagination was co-opted from infancy (via applied trauma and directed dissociation) by these false cultural narratives, archetypes, symbols, and theories?

The problem with occult theories is this: As often as not they don’t translate into practice; and when they do, it’s generally not the kind of practice we would want to follow.

Isn’t this occultism in a nutshell: a fascinating bunch of theories, and a deadly set of practices?

43 thoughts on “Further Ruminations on the 2nd Matrix of Conspiratainment & Occultism (Inc. Peter Levenda-Simon Cabana Update)

  1. Jasun, by posting only the speeded up version without the original to compare it to, and also without providing any context or identification of the host and the venue, it creates a lot of unnecessary annoyance to someone who has never heard about this interview before.

    The venue is the Coast to Coast AM radio show with weekend guest host Ian Punnett. The date was August 13, 2006.

    With the original version, most people familiar with C2C can immediately identify Ian Punnett —- but more importantly, they can hear just how Peter Levenda disguised his voice by lowering the pitch to masquerade as Simon Cabana.

    Then it really become a more satisfying Aha! Experience when your readers then listen to the speeded up version which is clearly Levenda’s normal voice, while Punnett and other callers sound like Alvin and the Chipmunks.


  2. John Michael Greer gives another perspective on the purposes of magic here


    In his Galabes blog he talked about Evola a fair bit, how his system while a very attractive one to lots of people spiritually , translated fairly disastrously into the real world. But if you are not going to translate it to the real world , whats the point ?
    I guess thats why he’s foing down the path of creating a nature religion and actively seeking recruits .
    Your view is starting to seem quite relativistic to me, Jasun , which in turn makes me think that the engineers or controllers are our own shadows , which we must absorb into ourselves ; i agree that the mundane is where its all at .

  3. In my opinion, occultism is just another tool many people have, unconsciously & consciously, abused over time through religions, science, the new age, etc. Likewise, imagination is another tool which, IMO, gets people closer to truth than the occult since it’s also closer to the soul & less dependent on anything external but still just one of many tools to peel back layers of distorted perceptions. Of course it is, like stated above, often challenging to tell how many of these tools are the master’s tools & how many of them are our own.

  4. Jasun has admitted that the problem with occultism is not that it doesnt ‘work’ , au contraire , it works too well , which means that there are forces there which have an effect , forces that we dont understand . They may be linked to the planet , and like electricity , have no interest in wether we become whole and ‘ enlightened ‘ or not . Messing with them is like a toddler sticking a fork in a power socket . When i work with them, though , thoughts , feelings and sensations arise which are seemingly from my past , present and maybe future , things that dwell below the threshold of waking consciousness , for whatever reason but they are neutral and how i interpret them and why are completely up to me , and the consequences of this are on me .
    For me , this has nothing to do with any group or cult , its personal , aimed at self knowledge .
    Jasun has a point that the occult symbology being provided through various channels these days , the formula or apparatus , may also be acting to filter and alter these perceptions , which is perhaps also why Greer is creating his own nature based system. But if he came through the ranks of the MI6 golden dawn technique as most of us have , perhaps its already too late ? Although he does strike me as a wise , kind and harmless sort of fellow ; the cure that doesnt quite work .

  5. I second the call for the original file to be linked up!

    This next one hits it out of the park.
    Speaking of peddling….”a fascinating bunch of theories, and a deadly set of practices”

    Gordon White from Rune Soup…
    Speaks glowingly of Sinister Forces book series, has interviewed Levenda etc. etc.

    He posts this piece at his blog after he watched the Joe Rogan interview with Paul Stamets:

    This is the interview where Paul Stamets shuts down a particular line of questioning about Portobello mushrooms in a very dramatic manner.

    Here is the relevant part of the interview (1hr 43min):

    Note, Stamets mentions Agaritine directly, then shuts down:

    Here is a video with the missing piece from Stamets. 4 years ago:

    What does Gordon White say on the blog after watching the interview?:

    “In amongst talk of black helicopters and how his knowledge of portobello mushrooms could get him killed by the CIA. Five seconds of research suggests this is because, in its raw form, it contains a compound that nullifies the effects of the CIA’s publicly acknowledged mind control drug. (Aren’t we all having a very gourmet 2017, then?)”

    Talk about a 100% reversal from the reality he just watched with his own eyes on YT!!!!

    Tell your readers to eat MORE mushrooms from the species that contains Agaratine….even though they just heard directly otherwise?!? What’s that all about? His mask finally slipped in my opinion.

    If you follow Gordon’s Pied Piper schtick, you may wind up being harmed by all the “deadly practices” he tells his readers to take part in.


    Stamets mentions the 5 types of mushrooms he *does* eat. White Button, Cremini, and Portobello (all the same mushroom) ain’t on the menu. Now, supposedly the compound in those mushrooms can be destroyed by cooking. There are “studies of studies” saying “nothing to see here” (of course). How hot do you have to get the mushrooms? That’s a murky topic.
    Personally, after hearing Stamets…I’ll eat *any* other species of edible mushroom instead. Zero Agaratine in those.

    You make your own calls.

  6. “I think occultism and espionage developed in tandem and that secret societies are akin to intelligence agencies, all with one main aim. Social engineering, perception management, harvesting of awareness. ”

    I could not agree more. Proof? How about this book?:


    The proceedings of these groups are flat out “intelligence agency” stuff:

    Read it all…but especially “Addendum A. Secret instruction for those tasked with recruiting new members to the Order.”

    “3. He should gradually attempt to stir in the Candidate a yearning for friendly and secret connections, and this approximately in the following manner:

    “7.Then, however, he should speak of the flaws of civil society, how faithlessly human beings act toward one another, how everyone is guided by his own personal interest, and how poorly one can often rely on friends and family.”

    Sounds like a Levenda book or Gordon White blog post. Join our secret underground club as we whisper about the flaws of civil society. The Baron beat these guys to it by 100+ years though. Of course, this crap has been around for far longer than that. Thousands of years.

    “In Philo’s Reply to Questions Concerning His Association with the Illuminati, Baron Adolph Knigge explained that the extensive questions catalog in Addenda A, B, and C were intended not only to gather information about a candidate’s suitability for this degree, but also to provide those members occupying themselves with the study of psychology with authentic research material. This claim is confirmed in the Priest, (or Presbyter) degree, which was tasked with directing and coordinating the order’s academic pursuits.”

    Addendum B and it’s subsections are just an HR manual for the agency!

    Spooky owls, rituals, skulls, bones, robes. 99.5% of it is cover for the other activities.

  7. Some quotes from Preparata’s Ideology of Tyranny, on George Bataille (NB It was J Kripal’s essay on Bataille that sparked Prisoner of Infinity):

    By the time he had broken his Catholic fast and cast off the cassock, Bataille had practiced much “acephalic play”: an assiduous frequenter of Parisian bordellos till the end of his life, he had savored therein the taste of debauchery, which he sipped in a variety of pungent aromas. “My true church,” he would later write, “is a whorehouse”: in youth, he had been “anguished by all things sexual.”

    Here Bataille isolated the subversive nature of eroticism, its rebellious character. The potential for perennial rebellion issues from the sexual fount of voluptuous energy of which women, as Sade had explicitly acknowledged, appear to be the privileged, sacred vessels—for example, the sex of Madame Edwarda as God. Hence the determination of forbidding devoutness (e.g., Islam) to keep woman under strict surveillance—a power wire to insulate cautiously with the hijab (the veil) and male stewardship. Erotic dissipation is, as known, most arousing if twined with violence; it seems most authentic then. That is why, for instance, much pornography stages the constant reenactment of a collective rape, which features a feminine prey as a hub fueling the raging thirst of masculine spokes; the suggestion of brutality and agony has to become ever more pronounced for the viewer to get off. Violence, said Bataille, frightens, but fascinates. (54)

    Bataille stated that he always wanted “to overturn everything.” To overturn is to  break the taboo. And the taboos are the interdictions planted in the course of history by the traditional God. Bataille made us believe that he had rid himself of the cumbersome, taboo-making godhead by tossing it into the trash can of profanity along with rational pretense (discourse). His claim, however, was no more convincing than that of his pious opponents, who pretend to have reserved successfully the same treatment to Satan, because Bataille wrote indeed that the attraction of transgression is that “it lifts the interdiction without suppressing it.” 

    “The truth of the interdiction is the key to our human attitude. [ . . . ] We feel, at the moment of transgression, the anguish without which the interdiction would not exist: it is the experience of sin. [ . . . ] It is religious sensitivity, which always ties tightly desire to fright, intense pleasure and anguish.” 

    Thus, if transgression is the “expected complement” of the forbidden, in other words, if one cannot be without the other, Bataille was in fact admitting that the pleasure to surrender to the “meditated cruelty” of the monstrous archons would not exist without there being, say, Jehovah/Zeus/Christ imposing the taboo in the first place. Bataille needed the One no less than the Evil One. Bataille did not seem to desire the resurrection of the Aztec regime after all (unrealistic, indeed): like a virus, his project rather felt designed to infect a traditional society, which is erected upon taboos, with the exclusive mission to overturn and subvert its entire system of prohibition. And this is a difference of some import, which qualifies his work essentially as one of intellectual destabilization, rather than unqualified matriarchal/Dionysian revival. It is no wonder that Foucault’s frustrated followers have so often lamented the inconclusiveness and irresoluteness of his politics of transgression, which does not contemplate emancipation from the system. 

    So God is not dead after all; it’s alive and kicking and forbidding, as always. Yet, in spite of this, Bataille appeared to believe that there would be still much time and room for impunity. Undaunted, and still pessimistically hopeful, he invited everyone to expose his life to danger, exhausting forces and resources through erotic activity, especially its foul manifestations, such as the orgy, which derived from “fundamental violence,” as he characterized it, its “calm and majestic character.” And for the time being, Christianity—this inveterate enemy of transgression and eroticism—may be held in check. 

    Bataille explained his early seduction: when Christianity was itself a movement of revolt, it attempted to suck the whole of demoniac brutality into the body of the redeemer, and build thereby a vision overcoming entirely the madness of violence by inverting its charge—that is, from the state of perennial war to the kingdom of meekness. “There is something sublime and fascinating in this dream,” he wrote. Christ valued “the poor, the pariahs, the foul ones”; he threw himself “into play” as the defender of criminals, indeed, allowing the authorities to treat himself like one. He thus identified with the sacred of the “left”—the impure side. And he ultimately communed with God through the paroxysm of evil, which is the torturing agony on the cross. “Communication amongst beings,” Bataille concluded once more, “is ensured by evil.” And the final truth is that it was “humanity” itself, as the mobs of Palestine, that tormented Christ and clamored to see him die; the throng, yet again, demanded that the king-son be put to death. This, for Bataille, is the sacred unfolding of “tragedy.” And tragedy, in turn, demands that we identify with the criminals and not with the victim, however shocking and harrowing his torment may be.

    “Christianity proposes [to man] to identify himself with the victim, to the slain king. It is the Christian solution that has hitherto carried the day. But this whole movement takes place in a world that is at variance with it.”

    So, once the origin of the desire to transgress (as well as to rape, ejaculate “sovereignly,” kill, sacrifice, and destroy) has been found in a substratum of base and monstrous matter revealed to the conscience by the inner experience, what remains to be done is to voice this call from the darkness, not as the proud cry of a Liberal libertine soloist—as Sade had done—but as the impersonal tongue spoken by a community of beings united by the selfsame spiritual, Dionysian communion under the sign of transgression. 

    “The sacred [ . . . ] is essentially communication, it is contagion. There is sacredness when, at a given moment, something is being unleashed which should absolutely be stopped but cannot be, and which is going to destroy—something which risks of troubling the constituted order. [ . . . ] Profanity, it seems to me, corresponds exactly to reason [ . . . ]; and reason is essentially the account that introduces the notion of equality.”

    “Being,” Bataille specified, “is never I alone, it is always I and my fellow creatures.”

    The emblem and symbol of Bataille’s sovereign eroticism is the knight of the French renaissance Gilles de Rais (1404–1440).

    In his commentary on the trial of Gilles de Rais, Bataille had similarly argued that “for the majority of mankind it is necessary to work, so as to allow the privileged ones to play, even to play, sometimes, the game of killing one another.” The sweat pouring down the brow of the masses is in the eyes of the sovereign individual but the effort preceding play. “We tend to forget this often,” Bataille pressed on, “but the principle of nobility itself, what it is in its essence, is the refusal to suffer the degradation, the forfeiture, which is the inevitable effect of [manual] work! In a fundamental manner, for the society of yesteryear, work is shameful.”

    As we saw and shall have occasion to reiterate, Bataille did not acknowledge the existence of barbarian gods but only of Dionysian power on the one hand, and of a modern degenerate, rational usurpation of this primordial, wild power on the other. Sovereignty is barbarism. When a whole civilization is constructed on the basis of such usurpation of “primordial power,” the result, so thought Bataille, is the foundation of modern society itself: God and bureaucracy are shoved together into this category. (64)

    “The unleashing of the passions is the only good. [ . . . ] From the moment that reason is no longer divine, from the moment that there is no god, [there] is no longer anything in us that deserves to be called good, if not the unleashing of the passions.” (67)

    Bataille suggested that there exist primordial creeds—he said so explicitly in connection with heterogeneity—of an infernal (degenerate) nature, cults of death that are animated by a core: it is the correct chanting of these particular prayers and mantras by particular people in particular places that set in motion these great waves of collective participation. (68)

    The phenomenon described by Bataille is not unknown to modern individuals; they frequently experience a faint echo of these powers of sacred radiation, as when, finding themselves exposed to strong, “graphic” images (be it pornography, slasher movies, or death on the screen), they often react by laughing—they laugh to deflect, at first, the gripping yet vertiginous pull that those images exert upon them. . . .

    Ancient sovereign empires might have disappeared but Bataille still believed that for man nothing was more important than “to recognize himself tied to what horrifies him the most”168—one way or another these heterogeneous prayers had to be re-evoked. As he journeyed through the past to survey the evolution of this “core,” Bataille considered that if “an agglomeration is characterized by centrality, as in the primitive and feudal societies, it still features a movement towards concentration of power, [which is itself] tied to the movement that revolves round sacred things. [ . . . ] It is power that creates the force of the police and not the police that creates power.” (69)

  8. I read the end part of Dark Oasis last night. Oddly, the image you present above of the seated satanist and the standing woman is the exact image (minus the pentagram) I had in my head when John and Leigh Ann interview Randi in regard to taking part in “the Calling”. It kind of shocks me to see it.

  9. Where I’m at with Gordon is that he, like me, delved deep into Levenda years ago. “This guy’s kickass!!” Then when it turns out Levendas agenda is maybe a little more complicated than saving humanity from the Sinister Forces, he looks the other way and gets prickly at anyone pointing it out.
    Always take note of what your favorite alt-researcher avoids discussing in interviews. Be like the Subgenius and metaphorically kill your guru.

      • I have the 3 volumes of Sinister Forces on the shelf, but haven’t read it yet. Just bought recently Paul Weston’s book on Crowley and skimming through it criticises Simon’s Sumerian/Lovecraft blend from an informed lingüistic perspective (he quotes another guy). I am busy on another projects and can’t read all I wanted right now, so I think I am of no use to that team. But if I can be useful in some way please tell me.

  10. Being aware that this is only my own very narrow view of this huge subject, I have a habit of thinking that if there are indeed powerbrokers that have any control over the masses, it seems like they are trying to control reality but, it may not be exactly the way they want it.

    My point is, maybe there’s a part of reality in the world they don’t want us to understand. Yet, they know we will experience it. So, they have to distort the information that it would take for us to grasp it.

    Maybe they understand this reality or, think they do and want to keep that perspective and benefits of it to themselves.

    They at least would have to put out accurate information to a certain extent about what this may be. But to keep it under wraps, they eventually misdirect it enough to keep all going around in circles.

    Who knows?

  11. Btw Jasun, good job mentioning the mundane. In my opinion, the mundane of life holds a lot of beauty and answers for me.

  12. Just read this from Guido Preparata’s Ideology of Tyranny (p. 77-78). Is this what Strieber, Kripal, Levenda & the implictly aligned “authors of the impossible” are up to?

    In synthesis, the story of Bataille is that of a French seminarian that in a night of delirium, holding an open umbrella under a sky without rain, had a vision, an inner experience. He experienced a reconciliation with a lost worship, which invited men to agree to the shedding of blood for the sake of religious communion. Not only did he begin thereafter to fathom the mystery of sacrificial surrender, but he also found himself able to reconnect and trace a multitude of otherwise inexplicable manifestations of bizarre or repulsive human conduct back to this creed of the Elders.

    Within the principles of this rediscovered inferno, all these clues reacquired meaning and a proper location. He became so entranced with the prospect of divulging the experience to his peers that he reinvented a series of rites, a society and, far more important, a brand-new “sociology of the holy” to serve as the book for his improvised cult. Understanding that this ancient religion might never relive in its original form, he devised means to graft its spiritual suggestion upon the conventional mindset. The method he followed to effect this transfer was to attack one by one all the taboos that tradition’s erected: promiscuousness, sodomy, murder, excretions, prepotence, the holocaust, and intoxication. And he attempted to rehabilitate each in succession, by consummating them, inviting others to follow his example, and legitimizing through discourse all such acts of transgression as the orderly commandments of some monstrous angels. Archons that are but the complement of a world of light and creation, the two being manifestations of the aboriginal seed, symbolized by a muscular ghost without head wielding a glaive.

    As he called the world to commune, he also contrived a theory of power, which emanated from a pulsating core. The core was the spark of the ancestral confession, which inspired men with sovereign behavior. In warrior-societies this kernel of sacred authority was in the custody of a militant priesthood, but in time modern State bureaucracy depleted the core to such a degree that it lost its solidity and slowly disintegrated. The fragmentation did not reduce its potential, but decentered its source of diffusion. Today the core is everywhere, waiting to speak through the actions of each one of us. Man is but a particle of this whirl of aboriginal knowledge, and he must use language to dissolve the consciousness of being who he is, and recognize at all time that he is but channeling the power of this fragmented core, which bespeaks the lore of those monstrous gods, with whom we must now make our long-lasting peace.

    If this were a hoax, what a hoax that would be.

    But, alas, it isn’t. Many have taken this seriously.

  13. Topical: “And so by the mid-eighties, when America began printing new editions even of Bataille, the postmoderns set out to “deconstruct.” They struck their hammers to the beat of “break and rupture of structure”: they disassembled the arguments of the “classics” with a view to isolating the ideological pigment, whose grain could unfailingly be shown to be patriarchal, racist, and disciplinarian. The color of power, in brief. The obverse of this opus of critical demolition was Foucault’s “genealogical” imperative: to denounce the sexism and bias of the West’s elitist martinets amounted to celebrating “otherness,” “difference,” and the “little narrative.” A marketing shift was in the air: the academic machine was about to roll out bales of clannish chronicles of localized, exclusivist victimization. Soon enough, each “group,” each “knowledge”—alternatively defined by race, gender, class, or creed—that had been historically abused by the dominant classes of the West, was going to enter into a grotesque contest to win, as it were, the award for most subjugated tribe.” (Preparata, p.119)

  14. “we may proceed to mince the spectrum of discourse into an innumerable set of
    epistemologies including, say, a “feminist epistemology,” or even more pointedly,
    a “black feminist epistemology”—something as far removed from and, as
    Foucault had suggested, as “harshly opposed,” to white male business as discur-
    sively possible. This would thus permit one to contend that women, or especially
    nonwhite women, acquire knowledge in ways genetically and spiritually different,
    if not diametrically antagonistic to those proper of Eurocentric males. And the
    whole “theory” may unravel through an exhibit of snapshots showing how the
    two creatures (the Eurocentric male and the nonwhite female) are aggressively
    alien to one another. Then, once this race is under way, one could very well end
    up devising an epistemology for every single human living upon earth—aren’t we
    all “different” from one another after all?

    “Although it is tempting to claim the Black women are more oppressed than every-
    one else and therefore have the best standpoint from which to understand the
    mechanisms, and effects of oppression, this is not the case. Instead, those ideas that
    are validated as true by African-American women, African-American men, Latina
    lesbians, Asian-American women, Puerto Rican men, and other groups with dis-
    tinctive standpoint, become the most ‘objective’ truths. Each group speaks from its
    own standpoint and shares its own partial, situated knowledge. But because each
    group perceives its own truth as partial, its knowledge is unfinished.

    “This is a prime example of postmodern discursivity. Aside from wondering
    whatever happened to the Latino gays, the Puerto Rican women, and the rest
    of the human population, one cannot but be struck by this presumption that
    certain racially and sexually defined groups, precisely because of the wrongs
    they have suffered at the hands of the whites, should be afforded a higher,
    clearer vista on truth, and on the depth of suffering and oppression (“more
    ‘objective’ truths”). As if given clans could be accorded by a self-appointed tri-
    bunal of “counterauthority” a proprietary right to the blues. Clearly, a favorable
    reading of this excerpt would suggest that these particular groups of subjugated
    people are those that still need strong support in their struggle for social accept-
    ance, a proud identity, and a peaceful life in white America. One may read in
    it a special motion of empathy toward some, rather than an acrimonious exclu-
    sion of others. But this would be granting this argument a favor it does not
    deserve. No question: the white male is to date the most abominable, arrogant,
    obscene, murderous, mendacious, and savage creature that has tread upon this
    earth—his record of ignominies, which grows by the day, is simply indescrib-
    able and matched by no other. Feminists are telling us nothing new; what they
    forget, however—and this is an unforgivable omission—is that the greatest
    amount of violence that the white male has expended, he has expended upon
    white males like himself. He oppresses ferociously, discriminates, and insults
    daily all those individuals mentioned in the above quote, but he violates and
    crushes with even greater determination, brutality, and profusion his own
    brothers. And this is a fact that the modern historical and social experience
    reveals unambiguously.” (ibid, p. 121)

  15. ‘”Hiroshima, Sabra and Shatila, Vietnam, Cambodia, Verdun, etc.; that was yesterday and the dirty work of the nation-state. And if globalization erases that, ‘good riddance!’”

    ‘But Empire, instead, Empire is postmodern, and “postmodernity,” the authors finalized, “is American.” American? The tone is ambiguous: What are we to deduce from this, that imperialism was pernicious, but that America’s postmodern Empire,
    because it allegedly rid the world of imperialism, is wholesome, or . . . ? Well, yes, American patriots should be pleased to hear that “The United States does not [ . . . ] form the center of an imperialistic project. ” Indeed, Hardt and Negri are convinced
    that “no nation will be the world leader in the way modern European nations were.” They are confident that we all now live in a regime “outside of history, or at the end of history.” End of science, end of education, end of history. . . . The authors have just driven us past another signpost of conservatism: if something is finished, why bother fixing it? And oppression, that old staple of dissenting oratory, how did it fare? Does (American) Empire oppress? Certainly, respond the authors, “but that fact should not make us nostalgic in any way for the old forms of domination. The passage to Empire and its process of
    globalization,” they wink, “offer new possibilities to the force of liberation.” “Our task is not simply to resist [the processes of globalization] but to reorganize them and redirect them towards new ends.” In brief, the name of the new game is to “construct counter-Empire.”

    ‘So what we are about to discover is a Bataillean tale combining Foucault’s fantastic sets with Marxian dialectics: the fluid and elusive villain will be played by “power” appearing for the first time on the screen as a global entity (i.e., “Empire”), while the romantic downtrodden masses—or rather, “the diverse legions” of “Multitude” to use the authors’ expressions—will be seen waging an underground struggle against a mechanized, capitalist State. Of special importance is the vital reliance of this faceless, decentered and computerized power on the energy of the core—represented by lifeblood of the Multitude as a whole—which the machines need to vampirize in order to function. The main tension of this drama revolves around the rebels’ plan to sabotage the machines, repossess the energy of the core, and “redirect” it to create “counter-Empire.” This is the summary of the plot, and it isn’t particularly promising, for we have seen it all before: not only in Bataille and Foucault, of course, but recently in the movie The Matrix.

    ‘We can only hope for some decent action and stunning special effects. Let us watch.

    ‘”The sovereignty of Empire is realized at the margins, where borders are flexible and identities are hybrid and fluid. It would be difficult to say which is more important to Empire, the centers or the margins. [ . . . ] We could even say that
    the process itself is virtual and that its power resides in the power of the virtual.'”
    (p. 127)

  16. Jasun,

    The Levenda Agenda is all about UFO disclosure which has finally happened, as you can read about in the recent NY Times story about the Pentagon’s Black Budget tracking of UFOs. Just this morning on his Faceborg page, Levenda explains that Tom deLonge’s “To the Stars Acadaemy of Arts and Sciences” is responsible for the present disclosure. I copy this FB link and then the entire text below in case the link does not work for you.

    The question your present posting here begs is: what is the connection between all this occult stuff and the UFO phenomenon? Is it not clear to you by now why Levenda was chosen to be the bearer and ultimate messenger of this great news for all of humanity?


    Peter Levenda:
    By now most of you will have learned about the articles that have been appearing in the New York Times, the Washington Post, Politico, USA Today, and elsewhere in the US mainstream press as well as the world’s press that the Pentagon has released film footage of UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) otherwise known as UFOs. This was done exclusively through To The Stars Academy of Arts and Science (TTSAAS), the project started by Tom DeLonge and with which I have been involved – via Sekret Machines – since 2015.

    The revelations that the Department of Defense had a project, funded by a black budget, to investigate UFOs during the period 2007-2012 will surely come as a surprise to some critics who believed that all that was over with Project Blue Book’s termination in 1970. It will not come as a shock to many who believed this was happening all along, of course. What is surprising, however, is that this is confirmation of what had only been suspected. We no longer have to speculate about black budgets funding UFO research: it has been confirmed. We no longer have to speculate about top secret film footage of UFOs taken by the military (and in recent years, no less): this, too, has been confirmed. Even further, we no longer have to speculate that elements of the US Government have been aware of this for years.

    If you were waiting for Disclosure, guess what: it happened.

    Your next question may be: why all the secrecy up to now? The US Senator who jump-started this particular project, Harry Reid, made it clear: it was a question of national security. We’ve known that all along, but until now no one in a position of authority has come out to tell us that so bluntly. (At least, not outside of Hollywood movies.)

    But it seems to me the Pentagon project could only go so far in answering all of our many questions about UFOs. I believe what is required now is a more concerted effort by individuals from all branches of learning: in both the “hard” and the “soft” sciences, to be sure, but also in terms of the arts, for the imaginative “thinking outside the box” quality that artists, musicians, and writers bring to the table. (Think of Arthur C. Clarke and Philip K. Dick, for example.) For this effort to succeed, we need participation by everyone: every field of human endeavor, every race, every ethnicity, every religion (agnostics and atheists as well), every gender, every age, every political persuasion. No one has a monopoly on truth; everyone has a piece of the puzzle. We are all blind men with the UFO elephant in the room, and we can only know this particular elephant by pooling all of our impressions, all of our resources.

    So, what do we know?

    The US government has been studying the Phenomenon in secret for years. It was funded by a black budget. It was a project of which most people in the Pentagon were not aware, it was that secret. And, as Harry Reid stated, it was about science as well as national security. So who do we have working with us in Tom’s project so far? Scientists and national security experts.

    We know that – however it happened, whatever machinations behind the scenes took place to make sure it happened – this is government disclosure. It may not be full disclosure, but as we used to say in Latin class: ovum ruptum est. The egg is broken. There’s no going back.

    Congratulations! Just think: You were alive to see it happen. It’s a bittersweet achievement, however, when I think of all those who believed but who are no longer around to share the experience with us. I am thinking especially right now of Jim Marrs, who would have loved to have been here for this. This Negra Modelo is for you, Jim! Salud!

    Watch this space.

    (pun intended)

  17. A good read:


    “Media reports indicate that most of the money went to a division of hotel billionaire and UFO crank Robert Bigelow’s aerospace company, to which the Pentagon outsourced most of the UFO research. This resulted in exactly zero alien spacecraft identified.”

    “Weirdly enough, Knapp was happy to trumpet the Pentagon program and Reid’s involvement as legitimizing ufology, despite also believing that the government is engaged in a conspiracy to suppress the truth about UFOs. Reid happily talks about UFOs now that he is retired but said not a word in office, because he is a pork-barrel hypocrite. The cognitive dissonance is surprising, both on Knapp’s part and Reid’s. If there truly is a conspiracy, what purpose does giving the conspirators more cash serve?”

    “But here is where things take a turn. George Knapp is also the weekend host of Coast to Coast A.M., where he promoted the “revelations” this weekend to the show’s audience of fringe believers. Peter Levenda, who coauthored a bad ancient astronaut book with DeLonge, similarly trumpeted the revelation on his Facebook page, even congratulating his readers for believing in a government conspiracy to study UFOs before the “proof” that such a conspiracy had in fact been outsourced to a major campaign donor with a UFO fetish.

    So, the bottom line is this: No evidence of space aliens has come to light, but a small group of people have made a lot of money off of this. Inspired by midcentury sci-fi paranoia, even members of the moneyed class, the media, and the Senate itself indulged in their fantasies of alien contact. Robert Bigelow received most of $22 million earmarked for UFO research. Tom DeLonge leveraged that into millions in investments in his own company, which pays him a minimum of $100,000 per year. Harry Reid received tens of thousands in campaign contributions from Bigelow. And Knapp and Levenda cash in through their media products. This isn’t so much disclosure as it is a multimillion-dollar round-robin cash grab where the truth seems to be lost amidst the many opportunities to trade fantasy for money.”

  18. More on the Conspiritainment angle. Insider govt. info parlayed into $$$$.
    Nothing these people do has any basis in truth:

    “So what’s happening? This is where John Podesta comes into play. Podesta, who has his own history of UFO interest, featured prominently in his Wikileaks e-mail, documented contact with Tom Delonge and has been repeatedly promoting Tom Delonge’s company via Twitter. I think it seems reasonable that Delonge’s team heard about the DoD UFO program being declassified prior to it’s declassification, and used this as a platform to provide entertainment, and a fictional backstory to the program.

    John Podesta, in previous emails, has been shown to have direct contact with journalists, publications, specifically the publications that have been promoting Delonge’s story. The NY Times, Politico, CNN, FoxNews is involved now as well.

    Does it not seem reasonable this is just an opportunistic cash-grab? The program was real, and declassified, although it did little except server as a tax-haven/slush-fund/whatever, and likely did no legitimate research. Delonge’s company TTSA jumped on this opportunity, as they already purportedly have $2 million in funding from outside investors, put together the video, the Elizonda backstory, and used their media contacts to make it all happen; completely unrelated to the Pentagon program.”

    • John, back in October, I made this comment on the Paracast forum in the Tom DeLonge Disclosure thread

      Is it just me or else my “Inner Harvey Weinstein” that reads the acronym TTS/AAS and instinctively interprets it as T&A, i.e. “tits and ass?”

      There’s the old saying: “Great minds think alike,”. But I think we should upgrade it to: “Dirty minds are possessed alike.”

      Hey, maybe we could write an essay together for Auticulture and call it “Prisoners of Concupiscence.”

        • Geez, thanks for the invite guys but between kids, work, music and other fun things I don’t even have time to keep up my own blog. I had to tie a bow on it and throw it up on the shelf a few years back. Think I’ll keep “semi-lurkin’-on” for the time being.

          Finished your book on de Ruiter, Jasun. Fascinating and fairly disturbing stuff.

          For those who read and liked the instalments published on the blog, I’d highly recommend picking up a copy of the book – Jasun left the most intriguing stuff for the end.

          If I find time I’ll see about getting a review up on Amazon.

  19. Jasun and gang!

    Far be it from yours truly to engage in piling on, but the water seems fine here, and there’s certainly none more deserving of a good piling on than our Peter…and please allow me to interject some factoids that point to Levenda having a far more sinister bent and calling than merely monetarily feathering his own nest amid like-minded company.

    That same company is perhaps interested in and pushing an agenda with major dark undertones. As Jasun well knows, this all goes back well into the archives of over a year ago and pertains to a strangely stilted back-and-forth that I had in the comments section of the Secret Sun site with Mr. Smooth himself, Levenda, who showed up at said site rather abruptly (like, within minutes!…weird) to issue some run-on rejoinders to my statements, taking particular exception to the ones pertaining to his buddying-around with Podesta and DeLonge, all cast against the background of the then-just-released Clinton-Podesta (pizzagate) emails.

    I go over the whole thing again in abbreviated form here, for those who’d like to place it all in context — I still think the whole episode says something incredibly telling, and important. For the even shorter version sans all MY run-on folderol, just scroll to immediately past the pics of Saturn and start reading — oh, and please feel free to let me and all of us know what exactly YOU think of all this: https://mcmmadnessnews.blogspot.com/2017/12/winter-solstice-times-and-wormwood.html

    Kudos once again to Jasun most of all for staying on this trail and having to good sense and ultimate foresight to initially recognize folks like PL for what they are — and to not let go of those first feelings and instincts. They’re never usually wrong.

    Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to Jasun, one and all!!!

  20. Recluse has posted an excellent analysis of the whole Tom DeLonge extravaganza, which turns out to be the Bigelow Boondoggle. What will be of special interest to you, Jasun, is the reference to AFIO (Association of Former Intelligence Officers) to which Petrus Levenda belongs. I quote that reference from the end of the blogpost


    On the whole, Las Vegas looms over all this like a specter. John Alexander is a key figure in the Las Vegas chapter of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO), an organization believed to covertly manage the US intelligence community. Another key figure there is Alexander’s friend, Colonel Michael Aquino, another figure with extensive ties to the far right (noted before here) who appears to have been running disinformation campaign in the UFO community for years as well.

  21. Jasun, if you can spare a few minutes and let me know what you think of Icke in a couple of paragraphs or direct me to material which argues that he’s a disinfo merchant, I would greatly appreciate it.

    • tricky question; my surgical lens has become more tightly focused as time has gone on (now I am at Jung), making it difficult to level it at someone like Icke, whose flaws are more like bloody lesions on his face than micro-organisms.

      Icke provides entertainment, which is fine, as long as it’s taken as such. There is true info in there but how to separate it from the untrue? I would think it is a hopeless and thankless task, might as well try and do the same with The X-Files. Like flat-earthism, Icke’s reptilian conspiracy can’t be reality-checked so it becomes little more, IMO, than an imaginative fancy, a dark metaphor that provides a pseudo-religious function (making “sense” of our experience) without offering the true opportunity of religion, which is a coherent system of practice, devotion and contemplation based on eternal metaphysical truths, that can lead to freedom. The problem with Icke, like Jones, is – what is he? He’s essentially a pundit who has created his own mini religion, Ickianity. But what are the tenets of Ickianity, can you name them, much less apply them and see if they are sound?

      • Whereas yours is: The Church of the Horsley’s Ass!

        (Just ask Whitley Strieber.)

        Ba-Da-Bing!!! With a hey nonny nonny and a. . . .

      • I would separate Icke from Jones. Jones has a specific type of franchise, with a specific market, and he’s shot himself in the foot repeatedly over the years, not least by supporting Trump. He has some valid material, but his gig now is obviously fearmongering. A type of snake oil salesman. The end is always neigh but a spiritual message is absent. Whereas Icke’s been more consistent and he has a spiritual message of sorts. Much of what he says rings true. Many of his claims regarding establishment involvement in paedophile rings have been vindicated, including his remarkable claims and commentary on political happenings. It was very brave and I think unique at the time to push these topics and conclusions. Although his message of love is a touch nonsensical and naive. I used to believe that his reptilian overlords shtick was a Swiftian metaphor. Recently he was on London Real: https://londonreal.tv/e/david-icke/. A very good overview of his beliefs, qualities as researcher and analyst. However, he, I would argue, betrayed himself regarding the reptilians, when he claimed that he’d seen peoples eyes “shift” but had never seen an actual morphing. Something about his demeanour expressed a man, I struggle with it all the time myself, who is using conjecture to paint a complete picture. It is definitely odd. Juxtaposing his political and social commentary and interpretations of historical events with the reptilian hypothesis is almost a marketing ploy to attract attention. I don’t know. The verdict on his sincerity is still out. That is also true about the validity of his message. I do agree with you that he offers belief without offering an opportunity for a coherent system of practice. What is he? Exactly. A showman with a coherent and attractive message, certainly.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s