Peace to the Sky
Sky to the Earth
Earth beneath the Sky
Strength in Everyone.
~ from Morrigu’s Prophecy

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Why? The question of Compass Morainn

IMAGES OF CHANGE...I could have left it as it was originally published...but change is as simple as re-writing ones future....going from paradigm of conflict and confinement to a different tack:

The question was why we come together in support of exopolitical mediation, when the places we emerge from are diverse and sometimes controversial?  Why is this desireable by those who've experienced aspects of the extraterrestrial contact paradigm?

Because we have forsaken ignorance, deceit, corruption, and the harming of those least in position to effectively defend their undeniable liberties and living truths!

It is possible for the philosophies of the individual and the collective to function in unison; two cogs making it possible for the wheel to spin in true efficiency; engaging potential in ways neither could do alone.  

Because we're fools to make war on
our brothers in arms. 
-- Dire Straits, Brothers In Arms.

Impossible is just a big word thrown around
by small men who find it easier to live in the
world they've been given then to explore
the power they have to change it

Impossible is not a fact.  It's an opinion.

Impossible is not a declaration.  It's a dare.

Impossible is potential.

-- Unknown.

Some things in this Universe unite All of Us.
Common Ground
The proverbial Third Option.

Dire Straits - Brothers In Arms
Album: Brothers In Arms
Year: 1985
These mist covered mountains

Are a home now for me

But my home is the lowlands

And always will be

Some day youll return to

Your valleys and your farms

And youll no longer burn

To be brothers in arms

Through these fields of destruction

Baptisms of fire

Ive witnessed all your suffering

As the battles raged higher

And though they did hurt me so bad

In the fear and alarm

You did not desert me

My brothers in arms

Theres so many different worlds

So many different suns

And we have just one world

But we live in different ones

Now the suns gone to hell

And the moons riding high

Let me bid you farewell

Every man has to die

But its written in the starlight

And every line on your palm

Were fools to make war

On our brothers in arms

Lyrics reprinted for expression of concept.

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Facilitating Drawing Water

Facilitating Drawing Water
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
July 14, 2011
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without changes.

What do all of the following have in common? Social policy, living conditions conducive, intellectual exchange, research, facilitation, cultural policy, ecopsychology, dialogues, impact, competitiveness, development, secret history, extreme prejudice, global paradigm shift, beyond myth, interactive, balanced outcomes, ancient mysteries, quarantined planet, foresight effect, self-centered policy makers, discipline parallel, watching veneer, negative vs positive thinking, exercize unique collection, back-channeling, university ufology, extraterrestrial hypothesis, exopolitics definition, positive psychology, exopsychology, exopolitics and bioethics, and ET contact all have in common? Exopolitical Mediation.

Now that I have your attention...

I spend entirely too much time wondering why people do what they do. I wonder how much time they invest in their choices. I see only one crooked hitch with extraterrestrial contact cold-turkey method...the cat is out of the bag that some global leaders and various groups of insiders know all about it and have a long running history in Contact AND that the history of Contact runs the full extent of human existance on this planet.

Presenting a case for peace:
Too many people can't and won't be lied to any longer. That is becoming a growing phenomenon around the entire planet. It's not Contact that is the's the lies that have the leaders and managers and other peripheral personnel in hot water with the public sentiment; its the failure to maintain an open line of communication or lack of meaningful and truthful communication. And it is fueling other sentiments about all the secrecy, lack-of transparancy, behavior that is seen as over stepping authority or even illegal at times, and the lack-of acknowledgement and responsibility taken for the mind-games of the past etc. I'm not specifically pointing fingers here. I'm trying to make a point and suggest some solutions. I consider myself a third party observer in this conflict-paradigm that has formed between them and the aware public. If you need an example (small scale) just check out Larry W. Bryant, a journalist of renown in ufological research, who recently experienced a direct snubbing by NASA who is trying to foist $100 plus dollar fees upon him for information to which he is legally entitled as a journalist. NASA is intelligent enough to send aerospace contraptions beyond the atmosphere, so one would expect that they're intelligent enough to do a simple google search and discover his credentials. Of course they know who Mr. Bryant is but that is part of the silly, destructive game. Both the aware public and aware PTBs are mutually responsible for the creation of this conflict-paradigm through seemingly miniscule, incremental behaviors which is then mimic'd across the social spectrum of the planet. I haven't perceived this as a one-way street. There are social factions among the public which are equally responsible for perpetuating this situation and the problems it creates. In my opinion, it will take both broadly described groups to fix it.

Members of the public are currently having a grand time chasing after ET's COVERT CONTACT and swapping tales over it. It is interesting to listen to all the conversations among these people about the PTB (powers that be). According to them the PTB are either proverbial imbeciles or brain dead to not notice what the public observers have; to not hear their stories; to not take all the evidence seriously or at the very least with a little interest and non-comedic respect, etc. This too fuels the conflict-paradigm and continues the construction of moments subjected to rises of resentment, open hostility, aggression, malice, and the professed need for recompense. Exopolitical mediators experience first-hand this conflict-paradigm behavior when trying to make connections between the public and aware intermediaries with the contact control structure and the PTBs.

This symptomatic behavior oozing from this conflict-paradigm sometimes results in negative feeding-frenzies with communicators ending up as the victims. This is an example of an Old Irish concept of 'dire-price' or 'honor-price'. When a perceived crime was committed against a person or against personal or tribal property, a fine or consequence, sometime social and sometimes monetary or tangible, was exacted or assessed against the criminal and his tuath (clan/family and extended relatives or adopted members and associates). The dire price is often given a greater subconscious priority than communication or communicative interaction which is defined as dialogues without proof involved.

Those individuals or groups acting upon exacting the dire price see an opportunity to do so and victims often cannot not pay their way free of it with any form of proof having a discernable value high enough for the opportunists to cease their attack. What is even more interesting is that those bystanders who either know or suspect a communicator to be genuine will follow the collective and stand silent when they could stop this social punishment. They do so because of the history. Those PTB and their associates who know, are seen by the collective as having breached the social codes of conduct of the collective (aware public).

In Celtic tradition a person's honor had a specific monetary value (dire/honor-price). If one's honor was damaged, the person who had done the damage could be made to pay a price; dire-price or honor-price. One's honor was a kind of strength which was highly valued. If an enemy tried to harm a person, the enemy would likely lose body parts for the trouble. But on the opposing position the enemy's relatives were liable for his crimes and legally responsible to pay the 'honor-price'. For committing some crimes a person's honor-price was revoked, which meant that others could kill or wound them with impunity, and the victims family could not ask or require compensation.

There is a saying, "Without Trust between Individuals, there can be no Tribe." There can be no coherent collective public or quasi-public without it. A conflict-paradigm is the antithesis to a coherent and cooperative effort as a collective based on trust. Trust ALWAYS begins with communication and finishes with a relationship based on mutual positive experience. There is nothing positive in social conflict or personal greed for recompense or social status ill-applied. When initial attempts fail at connecting paradigm groups into cohesive collectives it is persistance and perseverance that salvages the situtation. These things may be generally deplored but without them fears, concerns, and objections become irrelevant and the cause of the objection is often lost in the ensuing muck-throwing contest. I'm not defending the rotten behavior of either party...just observing it and shaking my head because this situation should not be left as's too destructive to both groups involved.

I have to ask, can this conflict-paradigm be surpassed? Can we as a specie escape this vicious circle, this rift, that has been created? Has there ever been a time when personal and often individualistic greed for recompense and personal social status, been relinquished in favor of choices which hold greater benefit and nurture for both individuals and the collective?

I suggest that the answer to these questions is yes. It can be done and has been done. I proffer to you an example out of ancient history: "Loyalty in the tuath was also important, for without this trust and cohesiveness it would be all too easy for any individual to perish, alone and without aid. The tuath depended upon mutual assistance and collective labor, for the survival tasks of herding, farming, and gathering were beyond the means of any one "nuclear" family. Truth was of utmost importance to the Celts, and the discernment of truth is a theme that is touched upon in many of the traditional tales. In "Cormac's Cup" for instance, the object of the tale was a cup which would shatter when three lies were told and mend again when three truths were uttered. This implies that some actions are not and can not be "relative", but instead are considered absolute and have value as being true. One either has or has not put water in the bucket. It cannot be both full and empty at the same time, at least within ordinary, mundane reality. The state of the bucket is a truth. Truth is one basis of proper judgment, and offering false judgment was believed to be one of the things that destroyed a tuath," Erinn Rowan Laurie. It is not the differences or the power that bind groups together into collectives, but rather the truths; those matters which groups hold in common relationships. It is their similarities on a social and spiritual level which bind the ties and support cohesion.

There was a time when we Old Irish seemed new to this world and generally practiced this aversion to greed; when the individual and the collective functioned for the most part, as a team....two well oiled interlinked cogs in the same wheel. I don't think it is that it didn't exist, or that it was always successful, or that myth paints pretty pictures for our time. Rather, I think compatibility and social cohesion existed in the collective of that time because there were clearly defined behavioral and ethical guidelines....boundaries of acceptable behavior, codes of conduct, that everyone understood clearly and agreed upon...making it possible for minor and major breaches of those codes to be pointed out and create a starting point for dealing with situations of breaching or transgression when they inevitably arose.

We don't seem to have any of that in this day and age. In mundane terms, we live in a socio-political free-for-all; laws are unclear, or hidden to all but a highly educated few because there are so many meaningless laws that law, itself, is a maze no one even cares to understand anymore unless greed is involved; philosophy is not taught as a required subject in schools; control of youth behavior by the family, for another example, is under severe attack to the point that many parents fear to do any firm disciplining without officials getting involved resulting in tribal-like social constructions among youth and general chaos in many communities. And two groups on Extraterrestrial Contact who have far more in common than they have in difference can't manage open and civilized communication events without alot of haggling over what constitutes a lie, or whether or not proof is actually proof or even necessary in the first place, and whether or not any act is ever legally or ethically actionable or of value. I think it is true that trust develops more easily and a community becomes more than a fractured group of people who claim they believe similar things when communication, honor, and truth are involved; when the parties concerned are at the very least willing to attempt it.

I do think is that individual and group greed is most often opportunistic behavior ill-applied. Sometimes that behavior is self-centered with altruistic results...and sometimes it is self-centered with destructive, disruptive, and incapacitating results. Like so many things on this world, I see it as a mixed bag of negatives and positives depending upon peoples choices. We don't teach about greed or how to manage or control it in this day and age. We don't respect inequities anymore so we pay for it day after day like gluttons for self-punishment, failing to understand how we got here and sometimes even missing where we are in the scheme of things.

I think we can figure this out. Basically, I don't so much think as I BELIEVE we can figure this out. No conflict-paradigm is healthy to leave intact. We have all the tools lying scattered across the ground around us. In order to use them effectively to solve our mutual problems and achieve mutually beneficial goals between paradigm groups, we need to learn to work together as a team once again...and that means going after the Unknown Country together -- including the PTBs, their people, and the full history of Contact too -- uniting a fractured and fearful world through our commonalities.

Friday, July 8, 2011

Mickey Komtra Facebook Discussion Taking It To Congress

Mickey Komtra a member of facebook has opened a discussion in the Disclosure Project UFO group seeking peer opinion on, "a way we the people could help take the disclosure project to congress? legit ideas not defeatest conspiracy crap. 400 members of all former areas of intelligence, military, and government step forward and admit what we all discuss daily, lay the paving stones, and 10 years later, the D.P. on youtube has a million hits, and justin bieber has 500,000,000. It hasnt even been featured on something like fox news.....GO!!!!"

It was an opportunity to open up the discussion further to reach the heart of why the national security state maintains its hold over the secrecy and elected officials. He is genuinely looking for a real and actionable course that concerned individuals could do singularly or as a group. He rightly pointed out the increasing numbers of the public who could be theoretically brought to bear through grass roots movement.

I suggested that it is a good idea to get involved but that a strategy would be necessary. One that produced positive benefits for more than just the public.

Hi Mickey, realistically you would have to grow a movement with more influence than the money which funds re-election campaigns. Power only respects power. Influence only respects a greater Influence. You have to have something on the table that is greater than oh well "they're here". Solve the 'why' they personally need to acknowledge it and you may find yourself on the right road. Better than a million man march...a million man sales pitch they can't refuse. Just remember some quarters of 'they' already know and anything that changes their safe & secure little hidden world scares the crap out of them. So your sales pitch needs to be sensitive to those people too or they will fight to the death for their own survival. They've often requested Amnesty for the decades of secrecy and national/international security state acts to maintain what they believe was peace and civilization. Why don't you take such an effort and solve both problems? Creating win - win situations are more likely to produce a result you would be happy with than one that continues a 'conflict-paradigm' between those who desire Disclosure and those who are terrified of the consequences.

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Online Event - The Future of Justice

The following event is one of interest to active mediators and communication facilitators. The transitioning of communication and conflict paradigm resolution to the online forums makes programs such as this one of great interest to the exopolitical mediator who, while working with participants, is also mindful of points involving social & legal agendas and parameters or requirements which are part of the confidentiality agreements and subsequent activities. It is useful to a mediator's profession to perceive modifications and trends in the landscape of the private & public resource environments as they surface. CY

The Future of Justice
Tuesday, July 26, 2011 from 10:00 AM - 11:30 AM (ET)

Early Registration tickets $10.00

Event Details:


A technology-mediated justice system is taking shape around us. What began as e-filing and online docketing has transitioned into the use of technology to enable the average citizen in creating complex legal documents, crowdsourcing legal information, and allowing lawyers and clients to interact on a virtual platform. These developments have merely touched the surface of technology’s influence on dispute resolution, the practice of law, and the justice system as a whole.

The Future of Justice program addresses this exciting future and offers insights from leading industry professionals on the critical issues facing technology and the justice system and what this future will look like. By addressing one of the main focal points of all justice systems, dispute resolution, the program looks at the history, past, and future of the industry that has come to be known as online dispute resolution.

Program participants will gain greater understanding of the past, present and future of online justice systems, how international organizations, NGOs, and the private sector are positioning themselves to shape the system, and how your business will be impacted as a result.


Ethan Katsh, Director of National Center for Technology & Dispute Resolution

Vikki Rogers, Director of Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace Law School

Chittu Nagarajan, founder of ODRIndia and Director of Ebay India & Ebay's Community Courts in India

Timothy Sze, Founder of China ODR Forum; General Mediator and Administrated Panelist at Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)

Moderated by: Vince Polley, President of KnowConnect PLLC

Who Should Attend:

Lawyers and Mediators: Learn about new directions for the legal industry and how to optimize your practice using technology to prevent, negotiate, and settle disputes in real-time and in a collaborative and time-sensitive manner.

Government officials: Learn to more effectively use resources to build efficiencies into your current systems, increase public participation, and build consensus.

Social Justice Practitioners: Learn how the quickly growing field of online dispute resolution can help to bridge the justice and technology divide, facilitate micro-commerce, and grow markets.

Program Sponsored By:

SMU Center for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management and

The Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution at University of Texas School of Law

Hosted By:

Hosted by InternetBar Org Institute; Sponsored by SMU Center for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management and The Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution at University of Texas School of Law
Internet Bar Organization is a non-profit organization that seeks to promote and shape the emerging online justice community through educational programs, providing businesses and individuals around the world with learning resources and by running Rule of Law & Technology programs in the developing world to empower individuals at the bottom of the economic pyramid with new tools to make a living.


Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Free Physics Resource - Richard Feynman Lectures

From the Desk of Cyrellys: I just ran across a free resource courtesy of Microsoft Research's Project Tuva. It is a series of Richard Feynman Lectures. For those of you who don't know who this guy is, he is not only one of physics greatest minds but also renowned for being able to put physics ideas in terms which anyone can understand. His lectures are said to be very interesting and entertaining not just educational. You will need Microsoft Silverlight to see the videos. Here is the link to them: Feynman Lectures It is the featured video series at this time. Anyone interested in exploring the Contact Paradigm, exotic technologies, and associated conspiracy theory could use a familiarity with Feynman's work.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Sociological Perspective in Exopolitical Mediation

Sociological Perspective in Exopolitical Mediation
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
Copy and Distribute Freely

The following article operates within an understanding that Contact, and an infrastructure to contain the knowledge of it, is a fact of our reality even while not supported yet by openly available empirical evidence.

The social perspective comprises the foundation of the sociological approach to understanding the human condition. It incorporates two ways of viewing people: “seeing the general in the particular” and “seeing the strange in the familiar.” It also seeks to discern social contexts, marginalities, crisis points, benefits, and applications. The field of sociology is the systematic study of human society from these distinctive points of view.

The conditions involving open humanity and the residents of the contact paradigm are subject to the same foundational principles of social ecology as other branches of human society. This condition is comprised of contexts, marginalities, crisis points, detriments and benefits, and lives that struggle with the reality that the world they live in is uninformed.

The general categories to which we belong in life shape our particular life experiences. It is through the power of society that these experiences influence our actions, thoughts, and feelings. These general categories or patterns offer advantages or opportunities to us based on factors such as social class, age, and gender. In exopolitical mediation, we add to this by observing that knowledge itself can define and shape lives and thereby actions, thoughts, and feelings. Knowledge patterns or degrees of understanding also offers advantages and opportunities, but the secrecy more often limits access to the commonly valued aspects of human needs; things which we associate as agents of socialization, such as stable family, traditional schooling, credentials, and clear access to peer groups across social spectrums.

The sociological perspective in most social circumstances “sees the strange in the familiar” because human behavior is largely “a matter of what people decide to do in favor of the idea that society shapes our thoughts.” What others think of us, matter to us. Deciding or choosing. which in American society is a hallmark of individuality, can then be influenced by the various opinions of others around us. Our notion of individuality is therefore commiserate to our relationships rather than other functions such as logic or physical well being. One peculiar example of this is the intense secrecy about Contact and the activities associated among the inhabitants of the paradigm. The control structure has many decades of experience in defying conventional human behavior to the detriment of those in-the-know. Their definition of individuality is based on their relationship to experience and needs based on unconventional knowledge unavailable to broader society. This removes much of broader society’s ability to influence. Individuality in this context is an activity of or self-contained state (autonomy) of a societal group operating outside of social norms and expectations.

Emile Durkheim explored the context of individuality through examination of profound “personal choice” exhibited in the social forces at work in the “isolated act of self-destruction.” Durkheim discovered that categories of people experienced differences associated to social integration that influenced suicide rates. He found that people with strong social ties had low suicide rates and more individualistic people had high suicide rates. His conclusion was that regardless of the “advantages of autonomy, it contributed to social isolation and a higher suicide rate.” The degree of secrecy involved in the context of the contact paradigm seemingly prevents in some cases the buffering effect that strong social ties can provide. The autonomy of the compartmentalized groups paired with the requirements of national security and secrecy causes these individuals to experience traumatic differences and an absence of perceived social integration within broader social systems. Unsavory control behavior within the paradigm is observed as not the only cause of death. Suicides, which we know by reports occur, may be linkable to the limited or absent social integration and may be as prevalent as any security measures to contain the knowledge.

Sociological perspectives run from individual and provincial experiences up through national and then beyond to global perspectives. There is potentially no real limit to what points of view could be taken. The global perspective is an important means of understanding the larger world and our society’s place in it whether that society is on the individual scale, provincial scale, national scale or higher. This logical extension of perspectives is based on the basic premise that our place in society profoundly affects our life experiences. The individual perspective provides us with the most personal examination of the paradigm while the compartmentalized groups could be more closely likened to a provincial perspective due to its limited contact with open society except where efforts have been specifically made to take a broader one. The interlinking and interaction with experiential groups and those of high social status residing in the contact paradigm allows us to come engage in a unique exploration of the idea of socialization which inevitably involves inconsistencies from different sources. Experts describe socialization “as not a simple learning process but a complex balancing act in which we weigh all the ideas we encounter, form our own distinctive personalities, and create new world views.”

Societies of the world are increasingly interconnected by electronic technology and the conscious awareness that the technology allows. The transmitting of pictures, sounds, and written documents brings each of the sociological perspectives to life within seconds and in ways that were largely unavailable in the past. The consequence of this is that a secrecy paradigm becomes less sustainable as many people all around the world now share “many tastes in things like music, clothing, food…,” and a thirst for knowledge and understanding in our relationships. Even as we share and project our way of life into the world, the larger world has an impact on us, and we are just as quick to adopt or experiment with many of the things we find in it. The money-siphon we know as the deep black infrastructure created to manage Contact and all the peripheral aspects of its consequences and human responses has become a sprawling structure that grew up like a break-away civilization virtually no one noticed. It tickles the curiosity and imagination of individuals and groups when they encounter portions of it. It causes us to think in terms beyond nationality and provincial perspectives. Stories wriggle their way into surface society and take on our understanding of life; challenging both accepted truths and entrenched mythologies. This sharing, experiencing, utilizing and experimenting “greatly enhances the cultural diversity of this country.” Exploring this new way of thinking about humankind and our world is a good way to learn about ourselves.

This increasingly interconnected world with its secrets emerging from the wood-work, through the interchange of fear-based secrecy, principle based searches for truth, and the interplay of individuals and groups opens an opportunity to “understand ourselves only to the extent that we comprehend others.” The sociological perspective gives us tools with which to explore our world in this new context and gain this comprehension.


Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg2

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg3

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 3

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 4

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 4

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 5

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 137

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8

Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 9

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Larry Bryant seeking records prohibiting all GSC personnel from publically discussing UFO-ET encounters

Larry Bryant, well known journalist, researcher, and member of Compass Morainn in the affairs of exopolitical facilitation is hard at work seeking records prohibiting all GSC personnel from publicly discussing UFO-E.T. encounters.  These records are very important to the public understanding of the restrictions under which our military first responders to extraterrestrial contact are forced to function. 
It also allows researchers, mediators, communication facilitators, and disclosure activists to understand how the secrecy works and what means of control are currently in operation. 
This is work that builds the fundamental image of our first responders not only as bounded-beings, but as individuals beyond skin and space.  It evolves our understanding of the current infrastructure; what drives its actions, what motivates it.  Aristotle once said, "the same causes and the same means that produce any excellence or virtue can also destroy it, and this is true of every art....the same holds true of the virtues:  in our transactions with other men it is by action that some become just and others unjust, and it is by acting in the face of danger and by developing the habit of feeling fear or confidence that some become brave men and others cowards...In a word, characteristics develop from corresponding activities.  For that reason, we must see to it that our activities are of a certain kind, since any variations in them will be reflected in our characteristics."  As a philosopher he said that our habits are no small matter; that it makes not only a considerable difference but all the difference. 
In order to grapple with these boundaries, we must first understand them.  The majority of the public trusts to the extent that we take them for granted.  Even many of the insiders live with them rather than challenge them.  This has produced a system which rules humanity rather than humanity ruling the system.  Research, illumination, and understanding returns control of our systems to those who would benefit or be managed by them.  It allows us to look at the true liabilities by which we suffer.  What are the results for our lives together?  What is invited and what is denied?  Kenneth Gergen, author of Relational Being - Beyond Self and Community, noted that there are enormous costs involved in our complacency over bounded-being and that this bounding emerges as a threat to the world.
to ufohastings
bcc cyrellys
dateMon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:34 PM
subjectThe USAF's Broken FOIA Record
hide details 10:34 PM (11 hours ago)

== The USAF's Broken FOIA Record ("No records, no records, no records, no ...") ==

[LWB Note (as posted in the comments section of my blog's Item 2.96):  The "authorities" here once again illustrate the public's need for emergence of whistleblowers bold enough to provide us with solid evidence that hard-core UFOtruth remains hostage of forces inimical to the public interest.] -

TO:  Larry W. Bryant

414 Curtiss Rd. Bldg 4714, Ste 208
Barksdale AFB, LA  71110

DATE:  April 12, 2011

Dear Mr. Bryant,

This is in response to your 11 February 2010 [sic] Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request #2011-02498-F, for a photocopy of all GSC generated and GSC received records prohibiting all GSC personnel from publicly discussing their own UFO-E.T. encounters and the UFO-E.T.-related reports of others, pertaining to Minot Air Force Base, Malmstrom Air Force Base, and F. E. Warren Air Force Base.

Upon your request, AFGSC FOIA office conducted a search to include Minot Air Force Base, Malmstrom Air Force Base, F. E. Warren Air Force Base, and Air Force Global Strike Command.  An appropriately detailed search of the relevant system of records was unable to locate any responsive records for your FOIA request.

Should you decide that an appeal of this decision is necessary, you must write to the Secretary of the Air Force at the address below in sufficient time so that the appeal reaches us no later than 60 calendar days after the date of this letter.  Include in the appeal your reasons for requesting reconsideration, and attach a copy of this letter.  Mail to:  Secretary of the Air Force; Thru:  HQ AFGSC/A60K (FOIA); 414 Curtiss Rd., Bldg. 4717, Ste 208; Barksdale AFB, 71110; Or e-mail to: .

Department of Defense Regulations 5400.7 indicates fees be assessed for processing FOIA requests; however, there were no chargeable fees assessed for this request.


Director of Communications [Headquarters, Air Force Global Strike Command]

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Three followers of wisdom:  imagination, purpose, and endeavor. -- Irish Triad

FiOs ~ "Vision, Memory, Dream" Berla Feini (old Irish), "Knowledge" Modern Irish.

In singing, in exploring our connection to our Spirit and the Creative Source, then turning to examine our Reality, what we thought was only Imagination or only a Dream is revealed to be the most powerful Truth of all...

Alan Sharland on bullying and conflict-coaching

Alan Sharland offered some advice to a fellow colleague workplace ADR Consultant/Coach. He recommened conflict-coaching as a method of dealing with the aggressive behavior we describe as bullying. Alan said, "Tamara, my view is that often the focus is on the person considered to be doing the bullying rather than support the person who feels bullied in finding different ways of supporting themselves in the situation. When the focus is on 'proving' there is bullying taking place this proves very difficult as it is not always clear what 'bullying' means. What is a bully? Meanwhile the person who feels bullied is left having to continue in their situation without support for them (an ongoing investigation into a boss/colleague for bullying is not the most comforting or effective form of support someone can have). This is one of the many reasons that conflict coaching has emerged. At CAOS we provide workplace conflict coaching as a confidential 1-to-1 support for both those considered to be 'bullies' and those who feel they are being bullied. I don't use the terms directly of 'bully' and 'victim' as often this is subjective, which is why it is very difficult to 'prove' it has taken place and thus the existence of the concept perpetuates, meaning the actual experiences of the person who feels bullied go unchanged and they go unsupported." Alan Sharland works out of the UK on Mediation, Conflict Coaching, Conflict Management Training + Consultancy, mainly in universities.

Friday, June 10, 2011

A Behavioral Modeling Text

The following is a book that was created for "the Human Effectiveness Division of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, with additional funding from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research" and so compiled by Greg L. Zacharias, Jean MacMillan, and Susan B. Van Hemel, Editors, Committee on Organizational Modeling: From Individuals to Societies, National Research Council.

Book: Behavioral Modeling and Simulation: From Individuals to Societies
Free PDF:

It is useful for mediators and facilitators to have an understanding of perceptional methodologies in common use by participants, particularly in highly structured social stratum such as the military. The editors point out that,

"the Air Force and the other military services are increasingly interested in using models of the behavior of humans, as individuals and in groups of various kinds and sizes to support the development of doctrine, strategies, and tactics for dealing with state and nonstate adversaries, in support of military planning and operations, acquisition programs, and as training and simulation tools. In this report, we are calling them individual, organizational, and societal (IOS) models."

These ideas about behavioral modeling represent the latest in institutional expertise and may be of use within the exopolitical mediation field. This book is submitted here for professional review.

News Flash - New Patriot Act has Senators Alarmed

News Flash for Exopolitical Mediators and Researchers:

This just in from our friends at Brasscheck,

The way the improved Patriot Act is being applied is new and disturbing.


There's no longer any pretence that it's
for investigation of terrorists. Now anyone
is fair game.

It's gotten so extreme that even Sentators
on the Intelligence Committee are alarmed.


- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.

That's how we grow. Thanks.

Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115

Recommended Reading June 9 2011

Here's a list of readings worth checking out:

Martin Dominik andJohn C. Zarnecki
The detection of extra-terrestrial life and the consequences for science and society
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 499-507; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0236
View Text

Baruch S. Blumberg
Astrobiology, space and the future age of discovery
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 508-515; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0239
View Text

Malcolm Fridlund
Extra-terrestrial life in the European Space Agency’s Cosmic Vision plan and beyond
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 582-593; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0233
View Text

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Deviance study notes as relative to exopolitical discourse on the subject of social-conflict paradigm

Deviance study notes as relative to exopolitical discourse on the subject of social-conflict paradigm.

By Cyrellys Geibhendach
June 8, 2001
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without change.

Collective notes and direct excerpts from the text Sociology, seventh edition by John J. Mcionis, combined with personal commentary on the subject of Deviance as relative to Exopolitical discourse.

The existing division between the public and the national security state infrastructure on Contact which I have referred to numerous times as a contact control structure has evolved from a simple matter of those who know nothing and those who know something into a social-conflict paradigm which muddies the water as to what is known and who knows what, as well as contributes to a hostile public environment in which communicators are placed at heightened risk for social injury and destructive outcomes in communcative efforts. These notes are an opportunity for both the public and insiders to consider how culture, natural behavioral tendencies, and previous behavioral choices has complicated an already difficult communication environment.

Deviance is the recognized violation of cultural norms. Norms guide virtually all human activities, so the concept of deviance covers a correspondingly broad spectrum. Not all deviance involves action or even choice. The simple existence of some categories of individuals can be troublesome to others.

The long-standing policies withholding a publicly perceived non-terrestrial interaction effort has given rise to a deviance behavior that resulted in creation of a sprawling community comprised of people from around the world who's cultural norms now include the concept of Contact or the possibility of Contact. The social-conflict paradigm involved is defined as a struggle over the power to define conformity and nonconformity, freedom of human choice, moral boundaries, how society defines social deviance, and who's definition of deviance will be the long-standing one. This conflict is specified as occuring between the public and the vaguely defined Contact Control Structure (CCS).

Most examples of nonconformity that come readily to mind are negative instances of rule breaking, but we also define especially righteous people, students who speak up too much in class, or people who are overly enthusiastic about new technologies as deviant, even if we accord them a measure of respect. What deviant actions or attitudes have in common is some element of difference that causes us to regard another person as an “outsider”.

There is dispute between factions of the aware community within the public, defined as ufology & exopolitics, and the insiders of the CCS as to who is defined as an "outsider", and as to who is an example of nonconformity.

Members of society try to influence each other’s behavior through various kinds of social control. Much of the time this process is informal. Deviance is much more than a matter of individual choice or personal failing. How a society defines deviance, whom individuals brand as deviant, and what people decide to do about nonconformity are all issues of social organization.

Surface society's attempts at influencing the behavior of those within the CCS through nominative social control methods has historically had severely destructive consequences prior to either side really gleaning understanding of each other or even of what each side is knowledgeable about or what each is capable of knowing.

Although we tend to view deviance in terms of the free choice or personal failings of individuals, all behavior – deviance or conformity – is shaped by society. Three social foundations of deviance are identified:

1. Deviance varies according to cultural norms. No thought or action is inherently deviant; it becomes deviant only in relation to particular norms.
2. People become deviant as others define them that way. Everyone violates social norms regularly, occasionally to the extent of breaking the law. Whether such activities are sufficient to define us as mentally ill or criminal depends on how others perceive, define, and respond to our behavior.
3. Both rule making and rule breaking involve social power. The law, claimed Karl Marx, amounts to little more than the means by which powerful people protect their interests. In short norms and how we apply them are linked to social inequality.

The structural-functional paradigm focuses on how deviance contributes to the operation society.

In his pioneering study of deviance, Emile Durkheim made the astonishing statement that there is nothing abnormal about deviance; in fact, it contributes to the operation of society in four ways:

1. Deviance affirms cultural values and norms. Living demands that we make moral choices. To prevent our culture from dissolving into chaos people must show preference for some attitudes and behaviors over others. But any conception of virtue rests upon an opposing notion of vice. And just as there can be no good without evil, there can be no justice without crime. Deviance in short, is indispensible to creating and sustaining morality.
2. Responding to deviance clarifies moral boundaries. By defining some individuals as deviant, people draw a social boundary between right and wrong.
3. Responding to deviance promotes social unity. People typically react to serous deviance with collective outrage. This Durkheim explained, reaffirms the moral ties that bind them.
4. Deviance encourages social change. Deviant people Durkheim claimed, push a society’s moral boundaries, pointing out alternatives to the status quo and encouraging change. Moreover he declared, today’s deviance can become tomorrow’s morality.

Durkheim wrote:

Imagine a society of saints, a perfect cloister of exemplary individuals. Crimes, properly so called, will there be unknown; but faults which appear [insignificant] to the layman will create there the same scandal that the ordinary offense does in ordinary consciousness…For the same reason, the perfect and upright man judges his smallest failings with a severity that the majority reserve for acts more truly in the nature of an offense. (1964)

Deviance then is not a matter of having a few “bad apples” around; it is a necessary condition of “good” social living. If deviance is universal, the kind of deviance people generate depends on the moral issues they seek to clarify. It answers questions about how much dissent to allow and what goals should be by celebrating some of their members while condemning others as deviant. Social scientist, Erikson discovered that even though the offenses change (over time), the proportion of deviant (people) remained steady over time. This stability, concludes Erikson, confirms Durkheim’s contention that deviants serve as ethical markers, outlining a society’s changing moral boundaries.

A failure on both sides of the proverbial fence (public & CCS) to understand how and why they have habitually made certain choices, results in further division and solidification of sentiments involving resentment and open hostility. This lack of mutual understanding withdraws freedom of choice in how to proceed for both groups. Inserting understanding allows introspection and the opportunity for reconcideration of potentially destructive future choices and behaviors.

Some deviance may be necessary for a society to function, but Robert Merton argues that excessive violations arise from particular social arrangements. Specifically the scope and character of deviance depends on how well a society provides the institutionalized means to achieve cultural goals.

Conformity, Merton begins, lies in pursuing conventional goals through approved means. Some people use unconventional means – deviance innovation – to achieve a culturally approved goal. According to Merton, the “strain” between our culture’s emphasis on [wealth and] limited opportunity, gives rise to unconventional behavior, illegal or destructive behavior, and street hustling. Minorities who find the doors to “legitimate” success [goals] all but closed, blaze their own trail to the top.

The inability to become successful by normative means may also lead to another type of deviance that Merton calls ritualism. Ritualists resolve the strain of limited success by abandoning cultural goals in favor of almost compulsive efforts to live “respectably”. In essence, they espouse the rules to the point that they lose sight of their larger goals. Low-level bureaucrats, for example, often succumb to ritualism as a way of gaining respectability.

A third response to the inability to succeed is retreatism – the rejection of both cultural goals and means, so that one, in effect, “drops out.” Retreatists include some alcoholics, and drug addicts, and some of the street people found in U.S. cities. The deviance of retreatists lies in unconventional living and, perhaps more seriously, in choosing to live that way.

The fourth response to failure is rebellion. Like retreatists, rebels reject both the cultural definition of success and the normative means of achieving it. Rebels however, go one step further by advocating radical alternatives to the existing social order.

The very existence of the street hustling, ufology & exopolitics community denotes a human choice toward placing greater value on Truth and movement toward integration of Earth within a greater community than the prior preferences of human safety and security still promoted by the leadership infrastructure. It should be noted that the amount of pressure from this human social faction routinely elicits the response defined above as retreatism, due to malicious misunderstanding and ignorance with regards to the umbrella power structure and its ability to control information and individuals. Actions have very real social consequences and a conflict exists when one or both groups routinely exceed percieved moral behavioral boundaries which may differ between groups.

The central contribution of symbolic-interaction analysis is labeling theory, the assertion that deviance and conformity result, not only from what people do, but from how others respond to those actions. Labeling theory stresses the relativity of deviance, arguing that all reality is socially constructed so that the same behavior may be defined in any number of ways. Howard S. Becker claims that deviance is therefore nothing more than “behavior that people so label”. Given that “reality” is relative to time and place, it is no surprise that one society’s conventions may be another’s deviance.

The response to initial deviance can set in motion secondary deviance, by which an individual repeatedly violates a norm and begins to take on a deviant identity. The development of secondary deviance is another example of the Thomas theorem which states that “Situations we define as real become real in their consequences.”

Secondary deviance also marks the emergence of what Erving Goffman calls a deviant career: As individuals develop a stronger commitment to deviant behavior, they typically acquire a stigma, a powerful negative social label that radically changes a person’s self-concept and social identity.

Stigma operates as a master status overpowering other aspects of social identity so that an individual is diminished in the minds of others and consequently, becomes socially isolated. Sometimes an entire community formally stigmatizes an individual through what Harold Garfinkel calls a degradation ceremony. A criminal prosecution is one example of this, operating much like a college award ceremony except that people statd before the community to be labeled in a negative rather than a positive way.

Once people stigmatize an individual they may engage in retrospective labeling. This is the interpretation of someone’s past consistent with present deviance. Retrospective labeling distorts a person’s biography by being selective and prejudicial, guided more by the present stigma than by any attempt to be fair. It also helps to deepen the person’s deviant identity.

Similarly, people may engage in projective labeling of a stigmatized person. That is, others keep an individuals deviant identity in mind when assessing any future action. The result, of course is that people find evidence of deviance in almost anything a stigmatized individual does.

All the various symbolic-interaction theories see deviance as a process. Labeling theory links deviance not to action but to the reaction of others. Thus some people come to be defined as deviant while others who think or behave in the same way are not.

The public and the CCS can be defined as independent social groups with extremely limited contact. Each have their own rules and boundaries which cannot or will not be crossed. It would be useful for the purposes of successful bridging if there were incorporated intervention between the two groups by those well versed in cultural anthropology as part of the mediation process. But as yet the classical intellectual community does not yet extend its boundaries toward or into the frontiers of observation, awareness, and social infrastructure without the confining biases and intellectual habits which instigated both the secrecy and the secondary deviance. The hostile atmosphere stemming from inequalities by and between both groups remains problematic.

The social-conflict paradigm demonstrates how deviance reflects social inequality. This approach holds that who or what is labeled “deviant” depends on which categories of people hold power in society.

Social-conflict theory links deviance to power in three ways.

1. First the norms – especially laws – of any society generally reflect the interests of the rich and powerful.
2. even if their behavior is called into question the powerful have the resources to resist deviant labels.
3. Third, the widespread belief that norms and laws are natural and good masks their political character. For this reason we may condemn the unequal application of the law but give little thought to whether the laws themselves are inherently fair.

What is considered deviant in society has much to do with the relative power and privilege of different categories of people. Historical limitations of portions of our society applies stringent normative controls. Groups within society have been socialized to define success and power in specific terms. And because society [class structure] puts certain individuals [classes] in positions of power over others these powered classes often escape direct responsibility for actions that victimize the non-powered classes.


Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Social Citizenship, Think Tanks, and Politics of Difference

Social Citizenship, Think Tanks, & Politics of Difference
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
June 1, 2011
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact, without changes.

One of the primary concerns in dialog between groups in the theme of Contact and its relevance to human systems and orientations is the politics of difference. The politics of difference and the compartmentalizing behavior established from efforts toward influence of power and information control hampers communication and discourse on the subject. This politics involves status, power, and privilege. Our world is currently a multi-faceted collection of fragmented social themes and interconnected but diversely oriented organizations based on or in those themes which operate in tandem with governmental and other non-governmental organizations, institutions, and social systems. Power and influence is being continually adjusted and situated in various forms as influence through individualism declines and groups establish themselves seeking to attain a voice in an increasingly complex globalized world.

Many have noted the attacks on individualism and the sovereignty of individuals. Americans particularly have a great concern that dialogs about redistribution and global politics is tearing away a fundamental respect, commonality, and solidarity with universally accepted beliefs on individual rights and privilege which people once possessed. This is causing self-conscious social movements or groups who’s philosophical content meaning is compatible to follow the suit of earlier competitors to collaborate and consolidate into organizations which reflect specific philosophical idea systems in order to regain a measure of influential social citizenship.

In light of this, the Chinese – English news is remarking on the growth and establishment of world think tanks. They recently published remarks by James G. McGann, of the Foreign Policy Research Institute and director of Think Tanks and Foreign Policy Program at the University of Pennsylvania from an interview with Xinhua.

A quote from the article states, “Regional and global intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations, World Bank, Asian Development Bank and NATO have recently come to recognize the significant role think tanks play in the policymaking process, he added.

While more think tanks are appearing around the globe, individual think tanks themselves are simultaneously globalizing. Individual think tanks are executing global expansion strategies, in which a think tank establishes multiple physical operational centers, either in different domestic locations or in countries outside of its headquarters, said McGann.”

The article, which did not specify the author, goes on to say, “He said think tanks have begun to prove their utility in the domestic and international policy sphere as information transfer mechanisms and agents of change by aggregating and creating new knowledge through collaboration with diverse public and private actors.”

"While policymakers may lack the tools to quickly respond to a critical policy problem, often they suffer not from a lack of information but from an 'avalanche of information' that gets in the way of effective decision-making," said McGann.
The article described McGann as particularly positive about the benefits of think tanks to contribute in an interconnected global dialog on policy issues of today. It noted McGann as describing “the encouragement of cooperation, collaboration, research analysis, and solution development,” among others like “networking between domestic political parties, bureaucracy, media, academe and internationally with other think tanks, NGOs and international organizations, and providing expertise on specialized policy issues.”

McGann in the interview pointed out the specific difficulties think tanks face (acutely present in developing countries) that of independence, funding, personnel requirements, and access to reliable data.

One thing to keep in mind might be the rise of think tanks in the global community as an indicator that we are not all equal in the community. Social citizenship in groups has greater prestige and influence than most individuals. They command a greater reach via name branding, for instance, which places them within social status levels remarkably similar to celebrity status particularly within their fields of expertise. These organizations are rewriting the book on real vs imagined community and systemic constructions. They are both a product of social system fallacies and failures as well as drivers of new social constructions. Some are even known to transcend the actual of scope of ideas the public at large ascribes to and create formal policies manipulating the public understanding and fundamental interpersonal belief systems.

This rise of special interests and think tanks is reminiscent of the Roman Republic’s treatment of influence where groups such as the Assembly of Centuries, Comitia Curiata and Comitia Tributa ruled policies and the latter that even took charge of various public works and financial matters. These groups effectively established a class system where participation (social citizenship) was based on status and privilege of association.

“Rome organized conquered communities by establishing several different degrees of privilege and responsibility among them. Residents of a few favored communities were granted the most highly prized status, full Roman citizenship. This meant that they were on the same legal footing as the Romans; they enjoyed the protection of Roman law and could hold office in Rome. Members of other communities became citizens sine suffragio (without the vote); such citizens had the right of intermarriage with Romans and had to supply troops to the Roman army on demand. At a lower level of privilege were the socii (“allies”). They received Rome’s protection from other peoples and were also liable for troops. None of these groups, once joined to Rome in whatever status, could follow independent foreign policies,” according to a description from The Western Experience, vol I, Antiquity to the Middle Ages by Chambers, Grew, Herlihy, Rabb, and Woloch.

This type of system constructed a false universalism that didn’t recognize differences and was not representative of the masses. In this way what masquerades as a representative system can in actuality operate as a feudal one with respective allegiances. A system like this ostensibly serves as a means of consolidating power into a severely pyramidal structure with limited or non-existent social citizenship for individuals at the bottom particularly if they don’t belong to a policy making group or have real influence in one.

Like any tool, organizations such as think tanks entail responsibility and functional morality incorporated into their purposing. They are capable of being a double-edged sword which can either benefit the human community or hamper its positive development. It is worthwhile to consider if in the course of the crucial roles these organizations are playing that we might be cementing the divisions between social movements and locking in power and relationships incompatible with representative governance which as an institution is designed to accommodate agency of the people through more direct and transparent contributions by individuals.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Charles Hall Interview - Oracle Broadcasting 05-11

New Interview with Charles Hall by Melodee Hallett
Cyrellys Geibhendach

My friend Melody Hallett at Oracle Broadcasting network interviewed Charles Hall and his wife today. Interview Replay. They talked about Charles experience in the Air Force and his time at Indian Springs. Among other things, Mr. Hall briefly mentioned his Hall Photon Theory and also discussed how Tall White/Human agreements are defined and adhered to.

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Identity in Exopolitical Mediation: Exopolitics Applied

By Cyrellys Geibhendach
February 7, 2011

When we work within the context of Exopolitical Mediation one of the subjects which presents itself for our attention is that of Identity. Identity is applicable to two different venues within exopolitical mediation. One venue being that of individuals within the covertly operating contact control structure and the other venue being in regards to extra-terrestrial contact or interaction under the currently theoretical scientific heading of astrobiology or the alternative paradigm field of Exopolitics. The first venue addresses the question of identity with its associated issues to the individuals whether they are whistleblowers, sanctioned operatives, or outside of the established contact control structure (CCS) as contactees or abductees, all of whom hold multiple identities out of necessity. The second pertains directly in relation to the extraterrestrials themselves and enters the realms of inter-specie and intercultural exchanges which back-feed into humanity’s diverse identity construction and characteristics.

For the purpose of this examination, I will not be presenting information in a context to prove to observers that extraterrestrial contact has occurred. This context is outside the scope of this work and would detract from the study of identity as it pertains to exopolitical mediation which operates within the context of Contact as a historical fact; hidden in plain view beneath an uninformed publics’ operative conscious awareness. This work is proceeding beyond the need for proving this paradigm to its readers. It is this author’s recommendation for anyone requiring contextual support in understanding the existence of Contact to refer to the work of Dr Michael Salla of the Exopolitics Institute[1], Steven Bassett of Paradigm Research Group[2], Dr. Steven Greer of the Disclosure Project[3], and Larry W. Bryant one of the leading ufological specialists in FOIA pursuit and operator of Washington DC office of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS)[4].

Identity is about delineating relations and interrelations. It is a way to identify sameness and differences which allow us to better understand ourselves and other individuals or groups in our experience. It is this need to understand and have certainty about our relationships that drives the creation, recognition and uses of identity.

In exopolitical mediation we engage with identities which are not operating in mainstream society to the degree that the community of humanity understands their relation with or to them. This relationship is not defined by society but rather by the individuals or groups from which they originate. So in exopolitical mediation it can be said that the mediator is working with individual and group identity forms.

The Insiders

The majority of the current work exopolitical mediation engages involves insiders to the Contact paradigm. Insiders is defined as an individual or group who is involved to some degree with extraterrestrial contact or the peripheral of the control structure. There are two forms of insider. One is a non-organized form who is a member of the public and has no ties to an official or organized contact engaging structure. This form encompasses the Contactee and the Abductee. The difference between the two being whether contact is perceived as a positive or negative experience involving willing or unwilling engagement. The second of the two forms is participatory in an organized contact control structure and can involve anyone who is a member or peripheral experiencer of that structure (CCS Insider).

When we discuss the subject of identity we are looking at key questions which grant us understanding of relationship on the personal, social, and institutional levels. A personal level is defined as how an individual sees itself and how others see it. A social level is defined as how elements of society see or relate to individuals or groups in a group context such as culture or more defined context such as skilled professional. An institutional level would refer to the ability of a organized structure such as a state, governmental, or corporate organization to influence or play a defining role in identity which can be seen in categorization of cultures, biological identity, and social group identities into organized identity tools such as identification documentation, group management, or exploitation processes.

Some of the key questions we look at in exopolitical mediation is:
1. What is individual or group identity association source?
2. What is individual or group identity association pattern in a societal context?
3. What personal identity categories are in use and which ones are we interacting with?
4. What purpose is involved in the utilization of dominant identity form? Or influence of passive forms?
5. How long has the engaged identities been in use?
6. What indicators are apparent that depict an individual or group nature or emotional composition?
7. What social, cultural, stereotypical, and biological constructs went into creating the present forms of identity in the subject individual or group
8. How has societal naivety played upon and affected this identity construct and maintenance.
9. What are the appropriate categorical activities, behavior, and traits of the dominant or passive identity forms.
10. Are an insider’s identity categories different from mainstream societal individuals and if so in what ways?
11. How has an insider’s identity been maintained and how has it evolved over the individual’s experience within the contact paradigm?
12. How has an individual or group utilized its natural capability to challenge, modify, or ignore expected types of paradigm identity and pre-defined behavior parameters?
13. How binding is identity roles for this individual or group and in what way?
14. What mistakes about the construction or context of identity by groups or individuals, both inside and outside of the Contact Paradigm, express an influence upon the dominant and passive forms of identity present?
15. What are the contextual meanings and values involved in paradigm identities? How do these differ from open societies viewpoint or perceptions to the insider group and individualistic viewpoints or perceptions?

The top tier of identity categories include: personal identity, paradigm group identity, and societal identity. Each of these can be further defined in terms of biological identity (including genetic & gender forms), social, cultural, and stereotypical categories of identity construction and maintenance. Like in open society, identity construction influences can include gender, ethnicity, and social class. However in exopolitical mediation an additional influence is added to this list in the form of institutionally and societally induced secrecy which creates additional division on the social and personal level of categories. Since identities are multi-dimensional the added dimension of secrecy or societal naivety instigates the rise of additional diversity in the creation of differences or defined identity groups. The primary contributing categories to an identity matrix influence through attribution, living experience, or deliberate imposition. They create meaning structures which comprise agency. Agency is the amount of self-control or other influences an individual experiences, possesses, allows, or takes over their own identity and behavior.

An interesting exploration could be made of investigating how identity construction and perceptions affect individual and group experiences. How do the influences involved in identity characteristics affect performance or human potential? Due to the influence of institutional and societal mandated secrecy, an insider’s social resources are highly limited. How are the concepts involving access to social resources imparting different meanings upon the multidimensional nature of identity on both individual and group levels?

Both society and paradigm institutions have created stigmas and derogatory cultural meanings to justify social exclusions and treatments having profound effects on the characteristics that contribute to identity constructions. It is pertinent to be concerned with theses meanings to understand the causes of self-modification of identity which differ from social definitions of identity characteristics. It is also of importance to examine the relativity and relational variances involved in each level of meaning. Because derogatory meanings can impart relativity, it may be difficult to provide a basis for collective identity on the social or societal perceptional level where definitions of positive or negative, ethical or unethical are sought to be applied.

Another influence upon paradigm identities is shared and contested ideas about the necessities of life which change or control the parameters of individual and group identity. These ideas have a profound influence upon capabilities, opportunities, and engagements of individual participants and others in their group or even on a wider context. This affects behavior both inside and outside of the Contact Paradigm on issues of structural or individual operation (behavior), Communication, and Disclosure. (The definition in exopolitical mediation of Communication is different from Disclosure in that, it entails communicative exchanges on personal and group levels which do not include paradigm proof. Communication operates beyond Disclosure under a supposition in which the Contact Paradigm is an existential fact complete with its own history, purposes, and range of effects on both an aware population and a separate unaware population. Disclosure ostensibly includes some form of belief-influencing or conceptual modifying proof of paradigm because it in contrast operates under the belief that a specific someone or group who is uninformed is influential enough and trustworthy enough to paradigm structures and stability to warrant a ‘need to know’ classification.)

Identities for insiders are a means to an end where individuals seek existential certainties in an uncertain world. Fear is a powerful influence on the construction of identity and the operational parameters for that identity as well as whether the identity in question is dominant or passive in its utilization.

For individuals within the CCS, identities can be temporary and fluid where they continually experience modification to integrate with perceived needs in social or operational categories. Modern technologies and the digitalization of identity data allows a unique flexibility for institutional identity modification which has never before been possible. Data can be modified, deleted or created based on perceived need across many societal venues at a rapid pace. It can supersede social perceptions of reality and accreditation or it can contribute to discreditation and a return to a zenith which is 9/10ths below the surface of human awareness. Human health professionals would undoubtedly find this capacity for and ability or practice of rapid identity transformation of keen interest when seeking to understand human health and welfare. An anthropological professional would find it of keen interest in terms of being an example of the human capacity for social, cultural, and environmental adaptation.

Both as individuals and through collective action it is possible to redefine and reconstruct our identities. We can negotiate and interpret the roles we adopt. Through collective action it is also possible to influence the social structures which constrain us, but there are clearly restrictions and limits. The scripts of our everyday interactions are already written and at the wider level structures are deeply embedded in contemporary culture, economy and society. Identity formation continues to illustrate the interrelationship between structure and agency. ~ Quote “Questions about Identity”, Open Learn University unit:

The exopolitical mediator must pay close attention to relevant identity descriptions, as well as other supporting or diverse associative descriptions. The exopolitical mediator is always examining the identity representation in terms of accuracy, integrity, and operational parameters on individual and group levels. For this reason it is markedly important to keep watch on situational context which affects identity and paradigm ensconced behavior. This situational context will modify or change in mediation participants, the definition of stable and flexible features of identity.

Identities are also constructed in relation to place (situational context), difference is unequally weighted and creates categories of outsiders. ~ Quote “Questions about Identity”, Open Learn University unit:

The Extraterrestrials and Ultraterrestrials

For the purpose of this examination of identity relating to non-terrestrials, whether human or non-human type, I will offer this brief description of the difference between extra-terrestrial (ET) and ultra-terrestrial (UT) in terms of current exopolitical usage. Extra-terrestrial refers to a corporal or physically located individual or group of persons not specifically of the classically perceived Earth population of humanity. An ultra-terrestrial refers to a non-corporal entity which whether through type or evolution exists in a non-physical form when involving themselves in our interactive planetary paradigm. Theoretically, the same questions of identity would apply to either of these collective groups and all subcategories possible within them.

Exopolitical mediation’s regard of identity in relation to ETs & UTs begins with the applicability of our preconditioned ideas, parameters, or assumptions involving identity definitions and construction processes which we utilize or apply to ourselves. In terms of applicability the very nature of biological difference is capable of supplanting or dominating certain possible influences on identity. A distinct example of this would be in question of gender. A specie which is not gender specific would not be influenced by the same defining categories or details influencing construction of identity and our human perception of gender-appropriate roles would not apply.

Another distinct influence on our own inter-specie relational perception and an ET or UT perception of identity would once again, be shared and contested ideas about the necessities of life which change or control the parameters of individual and group identity. Specie other than an Earth Human will have undoubtedly different views or concepts about their own necessities of life. How they societally or individually attend to or act upon those necessities may be predisposed to differences from choices which we in an attempt to empathize, might make when perceptionally placing ourselves in their shoes psycho-experimentally. The influences upon another specie may not be discernable to us since differences in biology, origin, local, and socio-cultural nuances among other possibilities will afford a consequential inability to fully discern all influences and their effects, especially when human experience is still collectively small and its interactive activities which add to and improve collective understanding is severely limited through a broken or dysfunctional management paradigm.

When examining the identity of ETs & UTs we are looking at some of the following questions and concepts:

1. Applicability. i.e. Is an extraterrestrial even aware of defined identity as a concept? Is it individual or hive? Is the nature physical, social, cultural or spiritual? How many or which of these terms apply?
2. Definitions of shared and contested ideas about the necessities life as pertain to this specific specie or on a wider Greater Community scale (collective).
3. Depth of form or hierarchy of categories involved in identity
4. Degrees of influence in applicable forms or categories: Biological identity, social identity, institutional identity, cultural identity or other commonly less specified or stereotypically unlikely specified forms. i.e. spiritual or sensory
5. Degree of interactive influence.
6. Individual and collective investments in identity….value, tolerances, & flexibility…
7. How much constraint is exercised in ET or UT social structures and how much agency is involved in shaping the identities of an interacting specie?

The unknown features of identity for which we have no human context available or unknown roles of identity, again, no human context available, or unknown choices as categories contribute to identity. We need to be aware of what we might describe as our inability to be aware of the self by which an extraterrestrial might live.

The importance of the degree of interactive influence pertains to the mutual exchange which occurs when two species meet or interact. There is always something received by both parties. There is a cross pollination in effect. The question is to what degree of influence it occurs or is allowed to influence. Mutual awareness is an example of an absolute. But what other absolutes, intermittent, or flexible influences exist in an exchange and how does it affect how an individual treats identity? Or reacts to personal or interpersonal identity relationships? How are personal identity perceptions and external identity perceptions influenced or affected on both interacting specie?

For example. A human individual’s perception of self alters when a human interacts with horses. A human individual’s defined identity alters with perceptions, reactions to and expressions of identity made by others toward them or perceived by them. Ideas about competency, human nature, and physical ability are modified and applied as constructs which help to rewrite an individual or groups identity when experience with horses is engaged. A person becomes ‘skilled’. A person become capable of exercising ‘empathy’. A group becomes defined by a dominant activity in their human experience. A person or group’s perception of the definition of communication and sentience becomes permanently altered due to an ability to engage in duality or shared terms of existence, physical control, safety, or the necessities of life.

It would be expected that a similar modification or exchange would occur during instances of contact or especially experiences involving environmental, cultural, and contextual immersion. An area of examination in relation to this would be each involved specie’s actions, efforts, and results in coping with change.

It is understood that identity is particularly useful as a concept for depicting the ability to cope with change and uncertainty, as well as the opportunities which arise from encounters with diversity. The nature of identities is, at the very least in human applications, fluid and self-modifying or continually changing in reaction or adaptation to needs and uncertainties. Again applicability would cause us to ask if this is appropriate for an ET or UT individual or group.

An investigation into identity, especially in changing times, raises issues about different relationships and tensions between the personal and the social, structure and agency, conscious and unconscious factors and between sameness and difference. Whilst structures may be very influential in shaping our identities there are always uncertainties and changes which often take place through agency, either that of individuals or collectively through groups of people. Uncertainties can lead to confusion, but change can also create diversity and new opportunities for us to shape our identities. Identity is a dynamic concept that has considerable significance within the social sciences and in our everyday lives. ~ Quote “Questions about Identity”, Open Learn University unit:

A peculiar and particularly ancient voice from humanity’s past gave us a potentially useful insight into change, our relationship with the Universe, and its bearing on our collective identity. This voice speaks to us of sameness and differences and of the deepest human value and context. He addressed our definitions, our reactions, our expressions, our participation, our interpretations and our allowances for change….the balancing act….and the dynamics of spirit. Marcus Aurelius in his personal dialog titled “To Himself” offered this:

Constantly regard the Universe as one living being having one substance and one soul and observe how all things have reference to one perception the perception of this one living being and how all things act with one living movement and how all things are the cooperative causes of all things which exist; observe too the continuous spinning of the thread and the contexture of the web; Thou art a little soul bearing about a corpse…it is no evil for things to undergo change and no good for things to subsist in consequence of change. Time is like a river made up of the events which happened in the violent stream for as soon as a thing has been seen it is carried away and another comes in its place, and this will be carried away too. ~ Marcus Aurelius, To Himself.

We apply this wisdom as we strive to identify with a group of Others….collective identification…how we traverse our initial collective identity through planetary social changes when we join the Greater Community and craft a new link with its own meaning that pertains to us and our relationship. Terminology can illustrate the dynamic processes of shaping, & forming; of transforming identities. Our identities change all the time here on this world….change in identity is not new on this world. Human kind is fussy and experimentive when it comes to terms of identity as seen in evolution of terms and meaning of terms. Humanity is in many ways highly adaptable, always seeking new methods of adapting, and with a penchant for embracing new opportunity.

Reference Notes & Bibliography

[1] Exopolitics Institute PO Box 2199, Kealakekua, Hawaii, 96750, USA The Exopolitics Institute is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit educational organization dedicated to the study, promotion and support of exopolitics. Exopolitics is defined as an interdisciplinary scientific field, with its roots in the political sciences, that focuses on research, education and public policy with regard to the actors, institutions and processes, associated with extraterrestrial life, as well as the wide range of implications this entails through public advocacy and newly emerging paradigms.
[2] Paradigm Research Group, 4938 Hampden Lane, #161, Bethesda, MD 20814

[3] Disclosure Project, PO Box 265, Crozet VA 22932, USA a nonprofit research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems. We have over 400 government, military, and intelligence community witnesses testifying to their direct, personal, first hand experience with UFOs, ETs, ET technology, and the cover-up that keeps this information secret.

[4] Larry W Bryant UFOView, 3518 Martha Custis Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302,

[5] The Open University – Open Learn, Great Britain. An online pubic access educational opportunity offered free of charge to participants in the form of interactive subject and topic units.