On the one hand, they insist there's NOTHING to it--NO UFO'S EXIST; NO ET'S EXIST according to the government's public claims. But here in this document, we read paragraphs from the law threatening fine and unconstitutional imprisonment for merely INDIRECT contact with a UFO or ET.
Found at URL:
http://www.karenlyster.com/law.html
EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL EXPOSURE LAW - PART ONE
Already Passed by Congress On October 5, 1982, Dr. Brain T. Clifford of the Pentagon announced at a press conference ("The Star", New York, Oct. 5, 1982) that contact between U.S. citizens and extra-terrestrials or their vehicles is strictly illegal.
According to a law already on the books: (Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, adopted on July 16, 1969, before the Apollo moon shots), anyone guilty of such contact automatically becomes a wanted criminal to be jailed for one year and fined $5,000. The NASA administrator is empowered to determine with or without a hearing that a person or object has been "extraterrestrially exposed" and impose an indeterminate quarantine under armed guard, which could not be broken even by court order.
There is no limit placed on the number of individuals who could thus be arbitrarily quarantined.
The definition of "extraterrestrial exposure" is left entirely up to NASA administrator, who is thus endowed with total dictatorial power to be exercised at his slightest caprice, which is completely contrary to the Constitution.
According to Dr. Clifford, whose commanding officers have been assuring the public for the last 39 years that UFO's are nothing more than hoaxes and delusions to be dismissed with a condescending smile: "This is really no joke, it's a very serious matter." This legislation was buried in the 1,211th subsection of the 14th section of a batch of regulations very few members of government probably bothered to read in its entirety, the proverbial needle in the haystack, and was slipped onto the books without public debate.
Thus from one day to the next we learn that, without having informed the public, in its infinite wisdom, the government of the United States has created a whole new criminal class: UFO contactees.
The lame excuse offered by NASA as a sugar coating for this bitter pill is that extra-terrestrials might have a virus that could wipe out the human race. This is certainly one of the many possibilities inherent is such contact, but just as certainly not the only one , and in itself not a valid reason to make all contact illegal or to declare contactees criminals to be jailed and fined immediately.
It appears the primary effect of such a law would not be to prevent contact, it would be to silence witnesses. If enforced, the law would prevent publication of contactee reports except under cover of anonymity, and unleash a modern inquisition in the Land of the Free. However, it is unenforceable, so obviously absurd and unfair that the public will refuse to accept it. The citizens of the United States will greet it with a resounding Bronx cheer and laugh it out of court, forcing it to be repealed.
It should be replaced by clearly worded legislation, not open to interpretation in a multitude of different ways, humanely relevant to the contingency of E.T. contact, debated and passed by Congress openly instead of slipped through "under the table" without the public being informed.
According to NASA spokesman Fletcher Reel, the law as it stands is not immediately applicable, but in case of need could quickly be made applicable. What this means is that it is ambiguously worded, so that it can be interpreted either one way or the other, as the government desires.
It is certainly not a coincidence that Dr. Clifford held his press conference during the period when the popularity of the film E.T. was at its peak. As E.T. portrayed a type of extraterrestrial that was benevolent and lovable, the inference is that the press conference was intended to discourage attempts to communicate or fraternize with UFO occupants. However, instead of having the intended effect, it backfired, causing public furor.
There may be some relationship between this fiasco and the next semi-officially endorsed attempt to deal with the subject of extra-terrestrials, the TV film V, which was featured with repeat performances and maximum publicity by major networks worldwide. The aliens portrayed in V are the most horrifying and repulsive nightmares imaginable, who are defeated thanks largely to a CIA hit man specializing in covert operations, the tough guy with the heart of gold who with the aid of the handsome hero saves the human race. This is obvious and transparent propaganda, designed to do what the government's widespread use of dis-information, and Dr. Clifford's press conference about the absurd lemon of a law already on the books failed to do: squelch attempts to communicate or fraternize with UFO occupants.
One way to avoid widespread panic at the announcement of the news that we are under surveillance by nonhuman intelligent beings with a technology far more sophisticated than our own is to point out that this situation is nothing new, but has literally been going on for millennia.
If the "flying dragons" mentioned in the I Ching intended to attack and destroy us, they could easily have carried out this objective long ago. Along with this article, the text of the E.T. Law will be presented. However, there are several points that I wish to make:
1211.101 Applicability. The provisions of this part apply to all NASA manned and unmanned space missions...
I could dismiss this whole controversy as a tempest in a teacup if the above passage contained the word "only", so as to read: "The provisions of this part apply only to all NASA manned and unmanned space missions..." However, it does not contain that one little word which would have made such a big difference.
If the government was suddenly faced with the accomplished fact of an undeniable overt E.T. visitation, this regulation could therefore, be construed as being applicable to all space missions, NASA or non NASA, whether of terrestrial or extra-terrestrial origin. As it stands, this law is applicable to UFO contact. The meaning would have to be stretched, but the built-in loophole does exist.
1211.102 Definitions. (b) (2): Touched directly or been in close proximity to (or been exposed indirectly to)... Even without involved in a UFO close encounter would become eligible for indefinite quarantine under armed guard according to the above.
By including indirect exposure, the NASA administrator is empowered to make the definition mean just about anything he wants it to. An example of indirect exposure is given, but an example is not a definition. Unless indirect exposure is defined precisely, it can mean almost anything. The possibility is not specifically ruled out that other types of indirect exposure than the example given might be considered valid grounds to Quarantine" a citizen or group of citizens.1211.102 Definitions.
In my opinion, it is vital that we challenge the validity of his law, for if it is allowed to stand unchallenged, UFO contactees and researchers may all meet behind barbed wire and armed guards somewhere in Alaska. I strongly urge everyone who reads the E.T. Law, Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations (at the end of this article), to clip it out, and send it on to your congressman, with a demand penciled in, to repeal this absurd and potentially lethal law. We must use reason, and transcend fear in order to make this planet a place where all may live in peace and harmony, as One.
Also found at the same site as mentioned above--the following summarized documents at their respective URL's. Opinions about the docs are IMHO, of course--Q.
A good, reasonably brief rebuttal to a series of skeptic's statements is found at:
http://www.karenlyster.com/mis.html
The following excerpted doc was written by an MD re a survey he did himself at his HMO re UFOs and abductions. It can be found at:
http://www.karenlyster.com/gordon.html
PREVALENCE OF UFO SIGHTINGS, CONTACTS, AND ABDUCTIONS IN AN HMO PRACTICE
The following is a document describing a UFO survey by David Gordon, M.D. and his wife and I did in their medical practices in 1992. The purpose of the survey was to establish the veracity of UFO sighting and contact reports and to get a general idea aboutthe scope of the phenomenon. They wish to re-post this survey at this time because of recent inquiries about it.
PREVALENCE OF UFO SIGHTINGS, CONTACTS, AND ABDUCTIONS IN AN HMO PRACTICE
There have been recent medical gatherings (1) and media publications (2,3,4) in which respected psychiatric professionals have supported the claims of people who say they were abducted by UFO's. Some of these people have been found to be suffering from a type of post-traumatic stress disorder (3). A recent Roper survey of over 5,000 people, whose results were mailed to 100,000 psychiatric professionals, found a 2 per cent potential UFO abduction rate in the general population (5). To discover the prevalence of both UFO abductions and sightings, and to establish the veracity and clinical relevance of these claims, I undertook a survey of my own HMO practice members.
One thousand fifty (1050) low acuity HMO members were asked in a serial fashion at the conclusion of their visit with me, if he or she, the member, "had ever seen a UFO". Members with known significant mental illness were excluded from the survey. If the member answered in the affirmative, a detailed sighting report, was taken of the time, place, and circumstances of the encounter. Members were asked to sketch the object if they had seen a structure to the object. Objects were counted as UFO's if they had structure or flight characteristics unknown to modern aircraft manufacturing and propulsion technology (I hold a commercial pilot's license). Examples of counted objects. were nocturnal lights exhibiting non-ballistic motion (sudden Z turns, impossible accelerations and decelerations ), flying and hovering discs, cigars, triangles, boomerangs, all of which were described as either silent or emitting a low humming noise.
Members who had seen a UFO were then asked specifically about contact with any entities associated with the object. They were asked about memory of abduction experience, unexplained missing time, or sudden translocation of physical position in association with their sighting.
The results were surprising. Out of 1050 HMO members surveyed, 115 (11%) reported having had seen a UFO by the criteria listed above. Only two had reported it to the authorities. Sixty (6%) of the objects had been close enough to be able to sketch structure. The other 55 (5%) objects had been nocturnal lights moving non-ballistically. Eight members (0.8% of the total surveyed population) related an involuntary UFO contact or abduction. four (0.4%) other members reported visual contact with UFO entities without abduction. Most of the members reporting objects or entities were known personally by me for several years and had no history of mental disturbance. Furthermore, medical records were available on all of these persons to confirm this.
[Q NOTE: HIS MD ALLERGIST WIFE did a similar survey at an office of the same HMO 20 miles away. She collected similar results with some impressive specific stories.]
-----------------
A SURVEY ON THE STATUS AND PROGRESS OF UFOLOGY is available at:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/2546/special.html
It appears to be reasonably well done. If that's a question you're curious about, it's worth a read.
----------
An interesting introduction to Hoagland and the Mars face etc. is available at:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shuttle/5604/glyphs.html
I think the intro is one of the best and covers quite a range of information including various scientists in various technologies and the parts they added in analysis of the data. Also mentioned were some interesting objects in the rings of Saturn--which I'd not read about before.
If you hate Hoagland and think various derisive things of him, this doc will probably not change your opinion unless you are quite fair minded.
I think their presentation of fractal stuff and various ratios was VERY fascinating.
The last paragraph of the doc is:
So what we see is an outside force drawing us a geometrically precise map of an energy field that covers everything from protons to planets. Fascinating, yes. True, yes. Real, yes. The author hopes that at this point, the truth behind this law of the Universe is becoming more and more crystal clear. There are many different sources coming together, and they are all trying to tell us the same thing. This is, plain and simple, "the way it is."
------
A very fascinating, believable article about "Implant Removals - Before & After Effects"
is available at URL:
http://www.karenlyster.com/effects.html
I strongly recommend it for anyone interested in implants.
wELLLLLLLLLLL ENOUGH FOR ONE LATE NIGHT.