A: First of all, I liked The Alien Interview when I initially came across it a few years ago People who haven’t read it in its entirety—or who skipped over it when they read my book—have, in my opinion, missed out on something awe-inspiring. For the record, and as the story goes, what “survived” the 1947 UFO Roswell crash was not the “alien,” as such. Instead, it was Airl, the alien’s immortal soul, that retained control of its “doll body,” (unlike the others who had abandoned them and were thus considered to be “dead”). Airl is supposed to have relayed information telepathically to the U.S. Army Air Force nurse, Mathilda McElroy. She, in turn, reportedly received Airl’s thoughts, telepathically relayed her own thoughts, and then transcribed all of this immediately after each of their sessions. This is in contrast to how the information was related in my book: Athm conveyed the information verbally to Sos, who made an audio recording of it, and later transcribed it. Athm, of course, stepped into the shoes of Airl, and Mathilda’s stand-in is Sos.
My decision to include it as a kind of centerpiece in my book was prompted, first of all, by my desire to help Sos secure his identity. When Sos discovered that his own immortal soul can be traced to one of the members of the Domain Expeditionary Force, he suddenly apprehends who he is, in the sense of explaining why it was he had always felt so uncomfortable in his own skin, so “different” from those around him. He discovers that he is actually an “old soul” whose lineage can be traced to a highly advanced civilization, which means that his soul had “evolved” over eons of time through countless embodiments with innumerable “lessons learned.” It was no wonder, then, that Sos felt trapped in his own biological body and alien to this current-day world. He was, in a sense, beyond all of this. (If this sounds elitist, well, maybe it is. But what do we know about the “evolutionary trajectory” of other souls? If they are all immortal, it makes little sense to categorize them according to planetary pedigree. Instead, maybe it is the experiential quality of the soul over eons that makes it an “old soul”—but I digress.)
This notion that one can suddenly apprehend the core of one’s identity is apropos not only to this specific work of fiction, it is also a theme with exceptional currency in the world today. If, as the author believes, we are subject to an occult stratagem with its “twilight language” that is intent upon covering up the true nature of our world and preventing us from attaining to our optimal human potential, then we need to uncover this malicious deception and, by so doing, realize (i.e., actualize) our true selves. It is not only for Sos’s benefit that I present The Alien Interview and the work as a whole; it is for the benefit of the whole of our species, or at least my readership. Hey, we all have a duty to “wake up” from our long sleep, from the pathology of our mind control conditioning!
The reader may notice a relative confusion or “disjointedness” inherent in the first half of the book. This reflects Sos’s very own nature; his trepidation concerning what the world was all about, who he was and where he was going. Once he found out more about the nature of our planet and his own identity, he began to develop a surety of action or a more sound and sensible approach to going about things. He was still, of course, Sos—that beach-loving sub-genius trickster and serendipitous bumbler after self-knowledge. But once he knows who he is, he is able to screw his head on straighter; to get his shit together a bit better. As a result the second half of the book has a smoother flow to it.
Another reason I opted to include The Alien Interview in the book was to jog the mind of the reader by presenting an alternative view of the nature and history of our planet and its inhabitants, while feeding the imagination of what extraterrestrial civilizations may be like. If our planet’s back story has been cordoned off from us by gatekeepers of history, archeology and anthropology, then I wanted to bust that wide open. And why not? Life is full of wonder and mystery. So why not indulge ourselves? Life’s too short to live in the structured confines of the given conventions. I’d rather explore, even if I’m slightly off the mark, than accept the fraud and lies and utter nonsense that is spoon fed to us via false narratives by controlling elites, both in school and through the media. The populace needs a cathartic cleansing-out of this crap! And while we certainly do need frequent “tactical retreats” to preserve and protect ourselves—which is the meaning of the title, 23 Skiddoo—the people also need the truth, and lots of it! Putting truth (metapolitical non-fiction) in the form of a sci-fi story is one way to make it accessible and palatable—appealing, even.
But here’s the kicker: Long after I had gotten permission from its author and decided to use The Alien Interview, I discovered a back story about it and its author, Lawrence Spencer. Mr. Spencer had always maintained that this work was both “true”—as in he actually did receive the transcripts from Mrs. McElroy—but that The Alien Interview was a work of fiction; and that he, Lawrence Spencer, was only its “editor.” I knew this much already. What I did not know was that there is a debunker online who claims that The Alien Interview is pure Scientology; who cites an email that is purportedly from Spencer himself wherein he admits to having been a Scientologist for over 31 years!(See, http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?6865-HOAX-Lawrence-Spencer-s-ALIEN-INTERVIEW; also see, http://www.freezone.org/english/News/Alien-Interview/alien-interview.html)
Upon further examining this little gem, I came across a lengthy comment from Mr. Spencer himself wherein he defends himself and his work. In the course of doing so he mentions Aleister Crowley and jet propulsion scientist, Jack Parsons, referring to them as “mystics” and “spiritualists.” In fact, according to Michael Hoffman, in his book Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare, Crowley and Parsons were dedicated Satanists. L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, is also mentioned in Hoffman’s book as befriending Parsons in the late 1940s and falling in league with this Satanic crew. If accurate, then it casts a long Luciferian [1] shadow across Scientology.
Suddenly I discovered—after 23 Skiddoo was already published—that I probably sandwiched in a Satanically influenced, Scientologist-inspired narrative! Well, as I said in my Introduction, the addition of The Alien Interview adds to the “lushness” of the book (even if its “ring of truth” may have deceived me). To those readers who now feel somehow cheated or deceived as well, I can only instruct them to take it in stride; it could be that there still exists a degree of truth in the alternative explanation of the planet, its visitors and its inhabitants; it could be that we are more indebted to Luciferian1 promptings than we realize—and maybe we are more Luciferian by our genetic makeup and conditioning than we can ever know. “Lushness defined.” You can also think of it this way: if 23 Skiddoo is about the manipulations of humankind by Satanic forces, then perhaps the book presents a manifestation of that “by exhibit,” only one that is made explicit to the intrepid reader who has stumbled upon this exposé.
This, then, begs the question: to what degree has the whole counter-narrative to the System’s conventional knowledge been influenced by the same or similar exaggeration, fraud, lies and deceit? How does one know when a narrative or certain evidence contained therein has been co-opted by some ideology, slightly skewed, and presented for its own purposes? In my way of seeing it, just asking such questions is contributive to coming to terms with this conundrum. Being aware of the pitfalls is half-way to getting to the truth—or as Plato once said, “Perplexity is the beginning of understanding.”
Always look out for the curve balls…and it seems that Mr. Spencer has thrown us all a doozy. But Jeez, I don’t want to be an unwitting stooge for the dark side—there are enough of those around already. I think we just need to do the best we can, while always reminding ourselves that we can do better. This attitude is summed up best, I think, in the following saying: “Be not content.” Be not content—stinkbugs and grass skippers all…
______________________________________
[1] What is the difference between Satan, Lucifer, and the Devil? Beats me—they are all interchangeable synonyms as far as I am concerned. Neo-anthroposophy posits the following: Satan, born as a Chinese nobleman @ 2000 B.C.; Lucifer, born @ 2000 A.D.: and Ahriman, yet to be physically born on the planet. Each has its unique calling card of negative characteristics.
No comments:
Post a Comment