Best Possible World: Gateway to the Millennium and Eschaton

Download 4.74 Mb.
Size4.74 Mb.
1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   ...   90
The preceding is a three paragraph synopsis of the BPWH, a bit shorter than I had in mind. Elaboration may be the main remaining task. Elaboration and system are not my strong suit is this arena, but there is not much choice for now.

In my ken, postmodernism dates to 1966. That was the year of the Free Speech movement at Berkley, and the year I dropped out of physics. That may also have been the high water mark for materialism. The turning away from scientific materialism was marked by a turning inwards. The emblem of the latter was Edgar Mitchell's Apollo 14 flight in 1971. The irony of his sudden conversion from astronautics to noetics was not lost on my generation.

The turning from outer space to inner space was marked by an upsurge in meditative practice, almost entirely of the Eastern variety. The only theistic support for an open ended spiritual quest was to found in Sufism. Although there was a parallel upsurge in Christian evangelical denominations, with many featuring 'charismatic' services, there was virtually no contact between these developments. Nonetheless, the communalism of the early Christians and the communalism of Haight-Ashbury both had a distinctly millenarian outlook. The inward quest is necessarily a solitary one. It may have been the logistics of drug use among the 'hippies' that was a principle, if temporary, source of social cohesion. It was their version of communion. Sustained communal practice almost invariably involves a devotional dimension, viz. the Hare Krishna and many other such cults. Even tribes must have at least totemic or ancestor worship.
If there is ever to be a global village, there will have to be a common devotional basis. The problem with refined monotheism is that it invariably becomes legalistic. The sacred text becomes the primary cohesive element. The sacred text cannot survive modernity, let alone postmodernity. That leaves us with only Gautama and Jesus, or some future messianic figure. I'm not aware that Gautama can hold a candle to Jesus in modern practice. Where is the passion? Will we ever outgrow our need for passion? Could there be a Millennial 'kingdom' without it? In terms of millennialism, there can hardly be a contest. Social pragmatism, even in this utopian context, is the foundation of rational theism.
Nevertheless, there will still have to be a messianic episode to initiate the epoch of the Millennium. It is hard to imagine that the label of 'second coming' would not be prominently attached to this advent. Could civilization survive without a millennial coda? If we had the choice, would we really want to find out? I don't expect there to be a real choice in the matter.
I have produced this scenario just out of historical considerations. There has been no allusion to the BPW. That the coherence of the BPW's metanarrative demands a very similar finale to history is, however, no accident. All paths of coherence must lead to the same Telos. The Matrix can only sustain one ultimate point of convergence. That we might be approaching a false summit, would not augur well for any relational metaphysic or coherent cosmology. It's 'Pikes Peak or bust', is it not? There won't be any rain checks or retakes. This is where theism and pantheism must part company. Could coherence get us that far and then fail? The divine closure, noted yesterday, is our cosmic seal. If the world were going to fall apart, it would have had ample opportunity prior to this.
A very practical question, needing a virtually immediate answer, is whether we could now revert to a sustainable human presence on the Earth without recourse either to a chaotic reversal, or to cosmic intervention. In other words, from the clearly unsustainable growth curve on which we now find ourselves, could we muddle through to a long term equilibrium state and still be able to think of ourselves as civilized? In more practical terms, this question might be rephrased as to whether we can confine the trauma of our inevitable growth slowdown to isolated or quarantined regions of the world? That seems to be what we are in the process of doing now. On the one hand there is continued globalization for the haves, and on the other hand is increasing isolation for the rest. I suspect that these two trends cannot be sustained. At some point, globalization would start to be reversed. Without that liberalizing force and outlet for the developed world, there would be an escalating inward turning and protectionism. Once these reactionary forces are set in motion, where do they lead? Will it be to something we can call 'civilization'?

A principle ingredient of postmodernism is its denial of progress, whereas the notion of a universal progress has been essential to liberalism. Globalization has been just one facet of the idea of progress. This is to underscore that postmodernism is likely to be the harbinger of reaction. A global deflation of economic and political expectations is a real possibility that we are now facing. Reaction and depression are concomitants.

Modern society is a complex and fragile construct. Its psychological dimension is just as real as its material dimension. When we lost our positive psychological edge in the last global depression, we were quickly delivered into a World War. Once the fabric of modern society starts to unravel, we will be reminded of how far we have come and how far we have to fall back. If the shock of that rude awakening is not sufficient keep us on the straight and narrow, then we will be in serious trouble.
The last world war did unleash a technological advance that has sustained our economic growth through the last half of the century. It is true that we have not completely used up our our technological potential, but the problem is that there is nothing equivalent to the earlier rise of atomic physics that is presently on our scientific horizon. Nanotechnology and bioengineering are still exploiting the same physics that was discovered a century ago. Instead, physics is treating us to the Theory of Everything, which is to say that it is no longer going to be a source of new discoveries. Atomic physics was a one-time event. That scientific envelope has been pushed to its logical limits.
If we find a new source of energy, such as ZPE, and if nanotechnology begins to deliver on its promises, then, indeed, we could return to another few centuries of material progress, and a revival of modern liberalism. But it is not clear that we should bet the farm on these two contingencies. The way forward may not be such a straight line. We may need to make an historically sharp turn. That is where the BPWH comes into the picture. It will deliver us a Millennium, but it won't come for free. We have our work cut out for us.
What I am thinking of just now is a Millennium Initiative, MI(1.0). This would be a citizens' effort to publicize and/or privatize what has been the Government's 'phenomenology problem'. A significant part of the problem is how to handle the potential overturning of the scientific materialist worldview. The Aviary, Aquarium, Fusion -> MI(1.0), is looking to take up this challenge. The first order of business would be to arrange for a meeting of the principals, which, hopefully, would be later this summer. I have sent the first email in this regard.
There is a ray of hope now that our little initiative may getting back on the track, but at a more modest pace than I might have wanted. Before there is any breaking of any glass ceilings, there are quite a few loose ends to deal with. More secure and dependable communication between me and my contact person are needed. I am hoping to enlist a third party in this effort, someone known to both of us, who can help with continuity and background info. Then there have to start being regular meetings. None of this will be easy to coordinate.
The Sarfatti group may still be a primary outlet, but I will need help to bring Jack into better compliance with some adequate protocol. That there often seems to be a rivalry between the two of us has not helped matters.
Perhaps it's time to reopen a discussion with Jack. The topic I have in mind is downward causation. Is this not the weakest point in the physicalist fortress? I can also discuss with Jack any developments on the MI front.

The ray of hope is flickering. Now, even my interlocutor is MIA, and Jack remains intransigent in his physicalism. With the help of the former, I could probably deal with the latter, but let's reexamine physicalism now, anyway.

On the practical side, I would argue with Jack, that if there were a purely technical solution to our problems, it would be easy for the good guys to supply that answer to us. Shall I go back on the net to say this?
Jack, et al.,
Yes, this is how Jack and his fellow traveling physicalists see the Universe. It is their private Tit. Getting between Jack and his Tit will invariably and understandably incur his boundless wrath.
Jack, by the age of 65, even most men have been weaned. You, however, are still hanging on to the Tit, for dear life. Like Peter Pan, you remain forever the Weenie.
Let's see if we can help you with your problem of arrested development.
Like most Weenies, Jack thinks all his problems will be solved if someone just gives him the right Formula. But even the Nestle Co. will not be able to help Jack in his predicament.
Yes, ZPE is the Great Tit in the Sky. It is being widely touted as just this. Shades of 1849, the great Gold Rush is upon us once again. Mammon is always just around the next bend in the river.
Why can a few of us afford to be skeptical? How can we bide our time?
Yes, if God had wanted us to be Weenies, She would have provided us with a Cosmic Tit. She would have provided us with ZPE. Like the Gnostical Knights of yore, the latter-day Physicalists search desperately for the Magic Key that will unlock Pandora's Box. Cornucopia is ours if we just recite the correct formula.
Like the crazed 'Miner, 49ers' before them, our ZPErs can exercise only tunnel vision in their headlong, headstrong dash to Eldorado. They are so anxious to reach their destination, they do not stop to think what they will find when they get there.
The Mammon will either be limited or unlimited. If it is limited, it will have already been used up by whoever got there first.
If the Mammon is unlimited whoever found it first will already have found a way to distribute it throughout Hyperspace. Unless we are the first to find the Mammon, it will already have found us. The game would already be over.
Subliminally, the Physicalist/ZPErs realize that in either case, their jig is up. If there is a Cosmic solution to the problem of existence, then we would already be existing under its Aegis/Aeon.
On the other hand, if there were not already a solution to the problem of existence, then it is extremely improbable that any life as advanced as ours would ever have been produced in the first place. We would simply be a miracle out of the blue.
Those of us who are not wearing cosmic blinders, those of us who can think outside the Gold Rush mentality, those of us who are not spiritual Weenies, who are older and wiser, can afford to bide our time. We can even enjoy the spectacle of grown men slobbering for the Big Tit.
Because we don't believe in miracles, we know that we are not here by accident. There is a plan and we can see it gradually unfolding in a remarkably orderly and rational fashion. In fact, in this spectacle of Latter-Day-Physicalism we see a clear omen of much bigger things in the offing. Yes, even eschatological things. It is not about Mammon, it is about the Matrix. There are similarities between the two, but there are also profound differences, differences which our Physicalist/ZPErs would find completely mind boggling.
Well, my little friends, prepare to be Boggled..........
Not too bad.

Lately I have been ruminating on the interface between biology and physics. It is not clear how to handle this boundary from an ontogenetic or phenomenological standpoint. This goes back to the game of Pokatok where the ball and the players seem to be of distinct provenance in this respect. What to do? What is the phenomenological origin of physics?

One possibility is to use a discrete space-time as in the game of chess. The rules of chess are an elementary form of physics, but then there is no connection with biology, which depends on a continuous space-time. Are we going to have to animate the pokatok ball, as in object oriented distributed intelligence?
As it stands, our ontogenesis has been oriented toward biological cycles. I was hoping the physics could take care of itself, somewhat along the lines of metabolism, thus avoiding a heterogeneous ontogeny. No such luck?
Historically, and thus phenomenologically, the discipline of physics originated with our study of celestial phenomena, viz. Copernicus and Newton, etc. However, I have suggested that ontogenetically, a cyclical heliotropism would be the more logical path to those phenomena. It is even the case in the game of pokatok, with the ball representing the nocturnal sun, that this non-cyclical version of heliotropism could still be brought under that rubric. But at some point, one will have to give classical physics or mechanics an independent standing. The use of stones as weapons is a classical example. I see very little biological precedence for such a phenomenon, but could the bodily mechanics of perambulation be extended to locomotion in general? The phenomenon of gravity comes to the fore. Jumping becomes complexly physical. The bio-mechanics of gravity is also complex for both flora and fauna. Perhaps gravity is our best bridge from biology to mechanics. Besides heliotropism we also have gravitropism. Perhaps these can be logically combined. These two forces combine to determine much of the structure of the biosphere. We might wonder, however, whether it would be possible to produce heliotropism without its being driven by photosynthesis. But this would tend to push our ontogenetic sequence back in a Darwinian direction. A minimalist, idealist version of Darwinism will be necessary to maintain genetic continuity. This is part of the Jurassic Parc scenario.
In attempting to solve the physics problem, the photosynthetic problem comes to the fore, where earlier it had been held in abeyance. What's a body to do? But this is a problem that should have been attended to earlier. We have ourselves a classic chicken & egg problem. Can we arrange for heliotropism without invoking every detail of photosynthesis? Is there no room for teleology here?

It may be that I will, at the same time, have to confront the larger JPc problem, which also remains in abeyance. Can we do JPc as a mind game? By how much will the intelligence have to be distributed? And how so? All we need for now is a handle for this problem.

The only handle we have so far is Z -> JPc. The other handle is the fact that JPc can exist outside of historical time. It need not be situated within history. There may be some confusion here because MPc was to serve as our Eden. This means that Xcaret would mix the metaphors, i.e. Xcaret /= JPc + MPc. One way to sidestep this problem might be to employ an expanding A/O loop. There would be a core ring of coherence that would be expandable, and be multiplied, but the core remains outside of the ordinary phenomenal domain. It is a reference loop. Then we have Z -> Rf, where Rf is the reference version of our archetypal R, the bio-cycle. A two step version of this would be Z -> Rf -> R. This fudge might temporarily pull our irons out of the fire.
When we equated X with Freya, we might have been touching upon this stratagem. We have the lunar weekly cycle and the zodiacal monthly cycle. We need to understand how the various cycles (1, 2, 3,) interact. Also, which ones are primal or referential and which are derivative or phenomenal. For now, it remains a puzzle.

We need to rationalize the transition from Z -> R, from psycho-cycle to bio-cycle. We somehow transition from a psychic chain to the food chain. The former may be reconstructed in light of the latter. This could be the crucial link of the BPWH. It could become the buckle of the bootstrap.

We think of the psychic world as running on ZPE or zero point energy. The potency of the Matrix is our ZPE. Is there anything like conservation of energy in the immaterial world? With total symmetry breaking, there can be nothing conserved. Coherence, however, is a form of symmetry, and so it relationalism. Might thinking not require energy, beyond its associated metabolics? Symmetry breaking might require energy. Would it come from the Matrix?
In the past I have alluded to the idea that the cosmic self might be in the business of growing and consuming its created selves. Is that why we sometimes feel paranoid? This is cosmic agribusiness, it is the harvest of souls. It is often reported that discarnates seem to be living off our psychic effluvia. Can thoughts not radiate? Does this render God to be a vampire? Is the material food chain just a shadow of the immaterial one?
Does the immaterial chain have the equivalent of a photosynthetic base, or are the selves the simplest actors? What is the simplest self? At the lowest biological level, the colony or species might constitute a collective self. On the other hand, there might not exist robust long-term individual eidetic memories much below the level of human. It is reported, nevertheless, that some fish can remember the social status of their peers over a lifetime. Every entity must be minimally microcosmic.
Does every material process have an immaterial analog or association?
It may be that the material world serves mainly the purpose of minimizing psychic predation or parasitism, deliberate or otherwise. Good fences make good neighbors. Creation without a material 'substance' would perforce be a much more limited affair. It is ignorance of the psychic world that is the main barrier to our abuse of it. Once materialism starts to unravel, there will have to be cosmic intervention to minimize the resulting abuse. We spend all our time exploiting matter. Psyches between lives must be contained by deactivation and compartmentalization.
We might wonder if computer viruses provide a model for psychic intrusions. We need to know the nature of firewalls that could function in various contexts. Biological viruses might also be instructive in this regard.

If you are playing pokatok, you will not have time to attend to psychic affairs, and the discarnates will find it harder to intrude upon the more structured and independent egos. Nowadays, we have pokatok as well as atoms and electrons to play with. If metabolism does not keep us busy there will be plenty of other distractions. Beyond mere distractions, our attention will begin to turn more toward coherence. The discarnates are advised to do likewise if they do not want to get left out of the hierogamos, or I should be saying hieros gamos (33,000 hits) (1, 2,) or rapture. God will be having us for the wedding feast. It is important that our switch from analysis to synthesis be made cleanly so that there is not the effluvia, or the crumbs off the table, to attract the spirits. Drug addiction provides a happy hunting ground for the shades. They don't want to kill the hosts, but just keep us incapacitated. Failed states are another happy hunting ground.

The question does arise as to whether the Millennium is essential to the eschatology. It may not be. If it were not part of the story, that would go along way toward explaining the high resistance to an X2 event. That event would no longer be pre-Millennial. It would rather signal the eschaton. Our rapture would then occur in real-time. This rapid 'hatching-out' is a common strategy that a prey species uses to overwhelm its predators. Witness last month's 17-year cicada event here in Maryland. 1970, 1987 and 2004 happen to mark significant dates for my sojourn in Maryland. I first mentioned this possibility at Al's house on 6/26. It had occurred to me just before then. This amillennial eschatology was my first take on immaterialism, but then I gradually moved toward the less radical view. That move may have been motivated more out of a sense of political correctness than concern for coherence. However, superficially at least, the amillennialism does seem more in the spirit of the BPW. Yet, concern for the table manners of the discarnates and several other considerations, including even the confrontation with my sister, played a role in this very recent shift in my thinking. The previous MI(0.5) came just before 9/11. The apparent failure of this last MI(1.0) got me rethinking the metanarrational possibilities.
As I phrased the issue at Al's, are we going out with a bang or a whimper?
I'll have to try out this amillennialism for a bit and see how it goes. We'll have to see how the shoe fits.
If the Millennium were possible, it would be hard to argue against its desirability. It may just not be in the cards. If we are meant to go out with a bang, the orchestration of the eschaton will be rather more demanding. Will it not place greater demands on the putative X2 event, if that event is still in the revised narrative?
It is a bit odd how we have managed to get from pokatok to the eschaton in one not very linear line of argument. It is hard to see how anyone could argue effectively for an imminent eschaton without having a fairly detailed picture to offer. This would also make it more difficult to minimize cosmic interference in the X2 event. The problem of authentication becomes acute.

There must be a whole bunch of ducks to get lined up prior to any public awareness, besides the usual background of fundamentalist expectations. May we expect to see a continuing run up in those expectations.

The issue of universalism comes to the fore with this new, more dramatic scenario. We would now have to contend with the likes of Hal Lindsey. Rapture would be very low on the list of paranormal phenomena that one might expect on the run up to the eschaton. The earlier than expected X2 event would serve the purpose of minimizing any such phenomenology, that is until we get a better collective or, hopefully, a universal handle on our situation.
A governmental intelligence organization would then have to be involved in facilitating X2. Their arm would have to be twisted by ET/UT. There would be no hope of generating an Internet initiative without a triggering event or announcement. There would at least have to be a handful of credible, independent witnesses to specific UT intentions and actions. This would be enough to provoke global speculation of a public sort. There might not have to be any further pump priming with regard to the concomitant phenomena. Once the phenomena get into the media pipeline, they would quickly become self-generating, according to the immaterialist metaphysic. The Internet would play a crucial but ancillary role. The orchestration of these phenomena would also be crucial, and that problem would fall initially upon X2. The Internet might be necessary for this full orchestration, and the rapid decentralization thereof. There would likely be a natural sequence that would need some cybernetic adjustment. What then has to play out would occur in just a few years before the calendar time would no longer be uniformly applicable. There might be some temporary new types of symmetry breaking prior to the cosmic realignment.
Our individual psyches are wound up tightly into our egos. Once these start to unwind, the process is likely to produce a chain reaction, with much phenomenal fall out. We will quickly have to get our bearings in this expanded reality of presence. We should expect the flora and fauna to participate as we make a partial return to the primal dream-time.
If the powers-that-be were to have their druthers, the Hieros Gamos would be postponed well beyond the global optimum. Thus do we need some external intervention to maintain the BPW. The idea of the Millennium is a good idea mainly in the abstract. There is nothing wrong with the idea of God's kingdom on Earth; however, it might imply that we would have to be superhuman humans. The new heaven and new earth might have similar implications. No sense in dilly-dallying. People will mainly want to get on with the show, once we have been apprized of it.
With respect to the Garden of Eden, we have been there and done that. Let's not wax overly nostalgic. The HG is something else entirely. That is where all the action will be. No one will want to miss that show. Let's not short-change the HG. The Millennium seems too much like Limbo.
The only real question is who, when and where. Does there need to be a run up to the X2? What are we waiting for? Upon what ceremony do we stand?

The question arises as to whether my knowledge of an imminent eschaton will make any difference in the run up. Could I not have been informed at the last minute, prior to the final networking? Is there something I am supposed to do with this new understanding? Am I supposed to do a preliminary networking just on this basis? Or am I just supposed to rework things here on the website? Probably both.

I need to figure out the best possible scenario for an imminent eschaton, and then be prepared to help explain and implement it. I'll have to go back and tell folks that I was being too cautious about the timing of the big E. It's going to be more like, 'Let her rip.'
I have mixed feelings about this development. I will need plenty of assurance that we will not miss the Millennium. It is an awfully big item just to toss aside at the last minute. I'll have to spend at least a month, if not a year on the rework. Longer than this might put me out of commission. I would go back into mothballs, a place that I have not actually been.
How great will be our opportunity to put our house in order? How serious will it be? Can the Middle East be resolved without an eschatological context or pretext? Certainly the Fundies think not. How much flexibility do we get in the timing and the content?
Will there not be greater resistance now without a Millennial buffer? Will we not all be getting cold feet? Will this not reduce our degree of participation? Is this to be a spectator event? The greater burden on X2 ought to be putting it well out of my league. Is it? When should I expect any feedback? What's the hurry for now?

There are two related items to be concerned about relative to our now putatively imminent eschaton. First there is the question of the proverbial apocalypse and/or tribulation, and secondly there is the issue of the judgment. As an ameliorative universalist, neither of these items sits well with me. I have had endless, unproductive arguments with my other sister about these. With this new and more dramatic end game, I will have to be paying more attention to these unwanted details. There are a lot of fundamentalists out there who will be very disappointed if there is not going to be blood in the streets, and if that spilled blood is not constituted by that of a very substantial majority of their conspecifics. It will be an uphill battle to get these items tabled for the duration. Do we need yet another scapegoat? Don't look at me.

My hope is that an eschatological shot across the bow will be sufficient to awaken the vast majority from their present and various somnambulations. That is hoping for a lot. What is the need for punishment? A lot of that is redirected guilt, and who doesn't feel guilty about something? And besides, will we not all have an eternity to reassess our sojourn in time? I suggest that we have already done this and have already forgiven ourselves, because we know that this can only be the Best Possible World. It can logically be no other. Have not one third of the Jews already forgiven Hitler, and this is without benefit of a BPW hindsight?
We wish to punish our conspecifics, mainly because we think that God is not doing her job properly. It is our only recourse for sanctioning God for her apparent failures.
Those who are metaphysically incapable of overcoming their grudges against the world will find themselves clinging to it as it descends to oblivion. This is the adequate object lesson. Move toward the light. That is all we ever need to know.
<-- Prev Next -->
Topical Index

End Times & Apokatastasis

I have been doing a hasty review of the Christian take on this subject. Needless to say, it is diverse.
I continue to rethink my Millennialist position. The traditional Christian Millennium had become the capstone of the BPW. It does seem logical to have a Golden Age be the final chapter of history. But is it coherent? Perhaps not. This is what we must investigate.
In the big picture, the Earth is a means to an end. Creation was never meant to be an end unto itself. Even the right to lifers would agree that life is not an end unto itself. Creation is good, not by itself, but in the eyes of the Creator. As co-creators we share in that vision.
The goodness of Creation lies in its realization. Its realization is in eternity. All is well that ends well, stands, obviously, sub specie aeternitas. History is the completion of the ouroboric circuit. The Matricial Ouroboros is the realization of our Selves.
The upshot can only be, I am now understanding, that we are meant to go out with a bang, not a whimper. We'll have to admit that the Millennium is more than a bit wimpy. It is certainly anti-climactic. We were meant to go out with our boots on, not wearing ballet slippers, with no offense to George Balanchine.
If this is correct, then we just might have to rethink our Millennium Initiative. Are we now the Apokatastatists (5,100 hits) or maybe Apokatastasians, which are like the ecstatics, but a bit more rational? Apocastasis is the restitution (salvation?) of all things in God. This is clearly Universalist and BPW-ish. Is this the position of Greek Orthodoxy, or only of its founders? It was widely taught in that Church until it was condemned in 543.
It is not surprising that the doctrine of restitution or restoration should be associated with eternal return, in which case it becomes a natural, rather than supernatural, process. This argues against divine grace. I have no desire to do that. This is not easy stuff: Origen of Alexandria and apokatastasis ... -- Edward Moore.

In the doctrine of eternal return there is usually a repeated decline from an original state of perfection, somewhat as in the case of biological reproduction. The repetition can continue indefinitely or until it is brought to a final conclusion or cosmic restitution. It is the doctrine of Creation that this cycle need occur only once. Redundancy may be natural, but also pointless. God does not sanction meaninglessness.

Is the doctrine of eternal damnation necessary to prevent repetition? Is it the logically necessary complement to eternal grace? It is curious that the idea of cyclic time is tantamount to the sanctioning of a background of linear time. There is in this a disregard for the mystery of time. This from the mystics!
Linear time is a Godsend. It has value, however, only in its finitude. God is the timekeeper. There is a pervasive feeling that we have been using up our allotted time. The time draws nigh for a wrapping up. The reconciling of our accounts is what some have taken as judgment, but it is only a reconciliation, a balancing and a closing of the books. The finality of it is just the seal of its blessedness.
How much 'time' will the wrapping up require? Would it not have to fall within the lifetimes of most of those participating? This would mean that the linearity of its time could not span more than a couple of decades of normal time. The end cycle might be viewed as a Millennium, but this would be a stretch.
More pertinent are the questions of apocalypse, Armageddon, tribulation and cleansing or purification. I would suggest that all of these are mainly the psychological concomitants of the metanoia of reconciliation. They will be onerous for those who have much to reconcile. Apocalypse does mean only to uncover, not to destroy. The only destruction is of our ignorance, our agnosis.
Is it to be surmised that biological reproduction will cease in the end? 'Woe be unto them that are with child in those days.' Is celibacy to be enforced in these days? I would suggest that it will become self-evidently discouraged. Might there be an increase in abortion? Certainly of the spontaneous variety.
What then are to be the signs of the times? Can 9/11 not be one? Can flying saucers and crop circles not be another? An epidemic of mental aberration and discontinuity? Anomalous phenomena? Culture clashes of the mainly non-violent sort, etc., etc.? I.e. more of the same? Yes, a lot more!
And, yes, my precious Millennium is being subsumed and overtaken by more dramatic events. It will be there for those in dire need of a respite. It will be the convalescent ward.
Please note that from the purview of eternity, the Fall is nothing too unnatural. It is rather its non-repetition that is unnatural. The fall is the act of Creation, of quasi-spontaneous, but ultimately optimizable symmetry breaking. It is reconciled and finalized in this End. There is only one salvation. Creation was no accident, but it does subsume all accidents that may be reconciled and rationalized. Anything not so meliorated need not exist -- it is only apparitional in the end.
Without a Millennium there can be no Earthly kingdom and no messiah. There can only be a Reconciler. I had been using messianics and the second coming synonymously, but that may no longer be technically accurate. The Satan being loosed at the end is materialism and the many versions nihilism, disbelief and agnosis. It is not too big a stretch to see that transhumanism, Marx and Hitler take the roles of antichrist. Have we not already had sufficient tribulation of the physical sort? From here on there will be the more psychic forms. A constant threat of terror falls into this category.
A major mundane concern will be the global economy. How will it respond to a more definite perception of the Apokatastasis? Will the Reconciler also have to keep the trains running up to the End? There are so many things that can go wrong, what is it that can go right? Relative moderation in all things will be the word for the latter days. Let us not be breaking rank. Let there not be a stampede.
Will there be too much temptation to finally settle scores? Justice is not finally a mundane matter. Justice is one thing, reconciliation is another.
What I am saying here is that the Millennium is to be overtaken by the Apokatastasis. The big M becomes only a niche in the larger picture. It will not be in the flow of the cosmic mainstream. It is a matter of historical interest to see how the Millennium gained it notoriety in these latter days. If there was a deliberate obfuscation, to what end? Does this all go back to Cyrus Scofield? The conspiracy buffs are quick to pass judgment: The Greatest Hoax!. Is it all about the NWO, WTO and WTC? I suspect we may have to parse through a bit of this stuff, speaking of the global economy. Speculation abounds: see the Historicist website.

What was the Millennium all about? Every other cosmology had put the pristine golden age at the beginning of the cycle, following the biological cycle of birth leading to death.

This organic, animistic, polytheistic, pagan view of the world was decisively interrupted, rather late in human history, by monotheism. The Jews, by about 1,000 BC are credited with this crucial invention, followed by Zoroaster, Jesus and Mohammed. The monotheist impulse inserted a moral and creative element into the cosmos. There was still the pristine primal state, the original golden age, followed by a degeneration, but no longer could there be a cosmic life-cycle. Creation had to be deliberate, and redemption had to be final.
Clearly there was a decisive abrogation, arrogation of nature. The natural order was seemingly disbanded by fiat. This arrogation has always been a tough sell, then and now. It seems so obviously contrived. The contrivance looms even larger as science delves further into the natural order, up to the point, at least, that anthropics rears its head. Creationists, however, continue having to fight what seems like a rear-guard battle relative to the scientific Juggernaught.
Nonetheless, given monotheism, what are we to do with nature? Where does nature fit into the salvational scheme? This depends somewhat on Armageddon. Is there a battle to be fought? As a universalist/apokatastasist I would think not. The apocalypse is simply the final revelation of Creation. The battle is over before it can be joined. With the finish line in sight, who is going to throw themselves down in front of the glory train? Who is going to play Ahriman?
Is there a last minute battle for the control of Creation? If we are the co-creators, there can only be a breakaway sprint to the finish. Will this disrupt the peloton? There may, at best be a tussle for Reconciler. If so, where is it? Has the breakaway succeeded? Where is the yellow jersey?
Creation has a plan. We are already the BPW. No Ahriman is going to take that away. Not now, not ever. Don't fight the system, don't fight city hall, not when we're doing cosmology. There is no deus ex this machina. There is no larger pond.
There can be no stasis with apokatastasis. Creation is wrapped up, tighter than a gravity-string. The best and the brightest were well distracted by the many trees in this forest, but then the forest is pulled out from under us. The curtain is lifted, the veil is parted. The Millennium was supposed to be the final act, but the set is about to be disassembled. The Millennium becomes redundant.
To the victor go the spoils. Bring on the wine and the seventy-two virgins. Bring on the Elysian fields. Where is the Millennium for us to celebrate our Conquest over Ahriman? Don't miss Paradise 2, the sequel. What is God good for if we don't get our just deserts?
One day with God or a thousand years for humankind? It seems that we are being given a choice here, but is it really? We have to choose between paradise and heaven. Paradise has three dimensions, and heaven has rather more. God has had a hard time squeezing into these three dimensions. Isn't it about time we gave her a break? And I dare say, the same goes for nature. We are about to experience a deep ecology. The Matrix awaits us. Are we not her prodigal sons? Do we not have much to offer?
Whose conspiracy was the Millennium? Is it not a hold-over from paganism? Is it not our security blanket, the last buffer between ourselves and the Matrix? Paradise was to have been our training training ground for heaven. But then what have we been doing for the last ten thousand years? Will sitting on our butts for another thousand years get us in better shape?
Can't we at least get a respite? Sure. Limbo is not to be sneezed upon. Any time things get too hectic, any time you want to stop the world and get off, this is the place for you. Ramstein holds nothing over Limbo, when it comes to R&R. Be sure to check out the spas, water courtesy of Lethe.
Can we not just go home? Well, I think you came to the right place.
All of this does make the present situation a bit more fraught. We are at a real jumping off point. False signals are frowned upon. Our take-off roll must be as smooth as possible. Let's hope it can be a roll-off and not a blast-off. Our check-list has to be thorough.
Now we will have to contend with the survivalists. For how long will the electricity and water keep flowing? What do we do when the lights go out? Does FEMA have an eschaton contingency? This is the reason I have to worry about Ron & Co. Why Ron has to worry about Ocelot & Ferret. Where are the EBEs when we need them? Who's got a plan?
In the end, we're just going to have to go with the flow. The Millennium was to be a staging area for the eschaton. The elect would be able to get their ducks in a row. Guess what? We are the elect. This is our stage. As with the peloton, try to stay in the draft. The Fundies will be screaming about false messiahs. There will be disturbances in the ranks.
We need a breakaway team on the Internet. That will require external input of the phenomenological kind. We are back to the witness problem. The breakaway team will not have much time to worry about the infrastructure. We chart the metaphysical course, the physics has to take care of itself.
At one or more points there will be panics, economic and otherwise. They will have to play themselves out. If the infrastructure begins to unravel, the process may have to accelerate. It could get messy. There may be blood in the streets. What is the least mayhem we might reasonably hope for, without a deus ex machina? Won't we have to assume there will be such at an early juncture? But it cannot come too early without becoming an agent provocateur. There will have to be a metaphysical docking maneuver at the appropriate time. I doubt that we can or should try to predict the time and place. There will have to be some practice dockings along the way, however. Are we talking UFOs and portals, etc.? Perhaps. We shouldn't expect anything either too clichéd or too exotic.

[7/12] [a,]

Another strategy is just to keep the eschaton card in our back pocket until a rainy day. There are also objections. There will come a point at which conditions on Earth will begin to deteriorate if we fail to adhere to the cosmic plan. By waiting for a rainy day, we are likely to be extending our sojourn here beyond its allotted time. On the other hand, we also do not want to cut our time short. The timing question will be handled in a nearly spontaneous fashion, and that may be another reason why we can expect minimal input. It is too bad that we cannot use the eschaton as a threat to hold over the high and mighty.
However, if I am correct about the Jack Anderson column, there must be some political awareness. At the time this was the most widely circulated column, subscribed to by upwards of 400 newspapers. I circulated this item to a few people on the Sarfatti list last month.
Washington Post

February 3, 1992

Edition: FINAL

Section: STYLE

Page: c12

Index Terms:




International trade

U.S. president





Article Text:

The balance of trade between Japan and the United States occasionally rests on something as inconsequential as a pair of cheap cuff links.
These particular cuff links were a gift from President Bush to his good friend Charles Leighton of Acton, Mass. Leighton treasured them just long enough to use them as a bargaining chip in a

multimillion-dollar deal with Toyota -- dangling them as evidence that he had entree to the White House. It was a good try, but the cuff links broke while in the possession of the president of Toyota. He was embarrassed. The contract later fell through, and Leighton learned that name-dropping is not enough to seal a deal.

Leighton is chairman of CML Group, which used to own SyberVision, the maker of pricey motivational tapes marketed to business people. Toyota was considering buying some of Leighton's tapes, 1 million copies of a Bobby Jones golf video to be used as part of a promotion for the sale of Lexus cars. The deal was worth $20 million to Leighton, so he pulled out the big artillery -- his friendship with George and Barbara Bush.
Sources close to Leighton say he occasionally boasted about the friendship. Then he put those boasts in writing in a letter to Dennis Yamamoto, executive vice president of International Consulting and Marketing Group Inc., Toyota's agent in the United States. The letter implied that Leighton could use his connections in the White House to make some points for Toyota.
In the letter, Leighton asked Yamamoto to pass on some items Leighton had received from Bush, to the "appropriate people at Toyota." According to the letter, Leighton said the items were a "way of letting {Toyota} know I will communicate to the Bush administration Toyota's purchase of SyberVision tapes and its importance to the balance of trade between Japan and the United States."
The items included pictures of the Leightons and the Bushes together, and the pair of presidential cuff links. The letter assured Toyota that these were not your run-of-the-mill White House souvenirs. Bush personally handed them over, Leighton said.
The cuff links were passed to the president of Toyota, in whose possession they broke, as did the deal.
The White House acknowledged that the Bushes and the Leightons are "good friends." Leighton and his wife, Debra, also contributed to Bush's 1988 presidential campaign, and our sources believe the friendship is really between Barbara and Debra.
We'll never know how Leighton planned to slip the good news to Bush that Toyota was buying American. Leighton refused to talk to us when he learned that our reporter Allison Hawes had obtained a copy of his letter. His spokeswoman said the cuff links were "inexpensive tokens" given out by Bush when he was campaigning, and Leighton merely thought someone at Toyota would find them interesting.
Leighton's spokeswoman said her boss wasn't serious about letting the president know personally that Toyota was buying American. She said the cuff links were a three-dimensional reminder to Toyota of the SyberVision deal, and more of a personal joke between Leighton and Yamamoto.

That's a joke Yamamoto may have missed. He wasn't laughing when we contacted him about the letter, and he refused to talk to us on advice from his lawyers.

Sources close to the deal say the letter was no joke, and that Leighton was eager to see that the lucrative deal went through, even if it took a little name-dropping.
Since the cuff link caper, CML has sold SyberVision, and is no longer trading in presidential memorabilia either.
Copyright 1992 The Washington Post

Record Number: 414766

One might wonder what the naive reader might have made of this story? It would seem that this is much to do about nothing. One might scratch one's head and pass on. If these events actually transpired, would they be newsworthy? Of all the items concerning international trade and the President, one might imagine that this would be about the least significant. It appears that someone is intent upon embarrassing Mr. Leighton. Perhaps someone is attempting to manipulate the price of CML stock. Would a reporter of Mr. Anderson's reputation likely be willing to participate in such a petty scheme, much less dragging the President into it? Questions were posed to the White House, but would not the folks there be curious as to the reason that Jack saw fit to have this item placed on the breakfast tables of millions of his readers? Are we to imagine that the politically savvy folks at the White House might not smell something fishy? What would be Jack's explanation?
Jack turns a broken cuff-link into an international incident. I turn it into a cosmic incident.
'Debra' happens to be my older sister. Does that make this any of my concern? Perhaps.
Here is my theory, along with some further information. I would never have known about this column if Deborah had not told me about it, and then sent me a copy of it. She was more angry with me about it she than she has ever been about anything else. She said that the President was 'furious' and that she suspected that I had leaked the story to Anderson. I was frankly baffled. Even though I was already communicating with Ron, I had no specific reason to suspect a connection. It was not until maybe a couple of years ago that I recalled this incident and began to suspect that it may well have been part of a bigger picture. It was only a few weeks ago that I got this copy off the Internet.
Let me cut to the chase. Suppose there was a secret operation that had international implications. You then wished to inform select segments of the international intelligence community as to the seriousness of this operation, but do so in a manner that other parties could not readily exploit or subvert. We have here a very informal, 'analog' version of 'public key encryption'.
But wait, why take this roundabout route? Why not just send a cable to the relevant agencies? There is the problem of 'false flagging'. How is the information to be validated? Someone with the relevant authority would need to personally vouch for the information. There would have to be a direct communication between the intended recipient and the person with the authority. The cable could be sent with the electronic signature of the author. But then an individual recipient would have no way to verify directly that the information was not being targeted or tailored. A more public venue is required, but this subverts the need for secrecy. Thus the 'public key encryption'.
There then has to be a second key, which together with the first one will open the particular box. As I was struggling though this scenario just a few weeks ago, it occurred to me that I was the one who had sent out the second key. I had sent it about four months prior to the Anderson column.
It was in about my second telephone conversation with Ron in Sept. '91, that contact having been initiated by me, that he reported his intention to visit Los Alamos to 'hunt for Aliens'. Quite naturally, I found this statement provocative. I reciprocated with my own provocation. I was, at that time, participating in the UFO Forum on CompuServe. I put out my own little 'press release' to the effect that 'Ron at the CIA' was planning to talk to the Aliens. I averred that this might not be necessary since I was the Holy Ghost and I could tell him what he needed to know about the end of the world. Furthermore, 'If Ron lets the air out of my tires, I will have my big sister tell Nancy Ellis on him.'
I had thought that this might put a crimp in Ron's MO, but it did not seem to. When I ventured to call him back in two weeks, he said that his phone had been quite busy. Even Whitley Strieber had wanted to know what was going on. I did not think I needed to ask him if he knew who Nancy was. She is the now former President's sister. He did ask me, in the future, to not refer to him as in the previous paragraph. Well, there has been much water under that bridge. In effect, I had blown his cover. None of his previous correspondents had done so, not to that considerable extent. You understand that George W. faces a possible jail term for possibly having committed a similar offense. Well, he is an officer of the government. I am not.
At the time of this incident, Ron was the head of the official interagency Phenomenology Group. As such he would need to be in contact with many of his co-'phenomenologists' around the world. There would have to be one or more global phenomenology networks among the mutually concerned parties. In fact it was my interest in the Crop Circle phenomenon in Britain that provided my entrée to Ron. It turns out that he was in close contact with a US citizen over there, in that 'field', who appears to be now, at least, a colleague. Ron might not have been willing to be completely reliant on his colleagues in British Intel, not for something that sensitive.
These are the bare circumstances of the transmission of my quasi-public 'key'. What did Ron tell his correspondents? My understanding is that the message was simple, 'Dan is crazy.' But if Whitley had heard about my outburst, what about Ron's global network? What were they told? Move forward four months and substitute Barbara for Nancy. Don't we then get a contrasting picture? There are now two dots that could be connected.
The next question is who might connect these dots. Frankly, I am the only person I know to have done so. Jack Anderson, based on some previous columns, would have been known to be in the 'phenomenology loop'. His column would have been followed by others in that loop. If something 'strange' like the above showed up, it would likely have been flagged for possible future analysis. My previous transmission that caught the attention of Whitley and several others, would have also been noted by those in the loop, if for nothing else than instancing a then unprecedented level of exposure for Ron. Two items flagged, one possible connection: Nancy Ellis.
If you enter that name in Google, the fiftieth entry provides the correct middle name. That is a stretch. Only a major intelligence organization would have been able back then to connect these dots spontaneously. However, anyone given a heads up, could do so, easily. And that would be all that would be necessary for the above stated purpose of verification. The President or someone near to the President would very likely be aware of the Ron&Dan 'show'. It would have been a very small loop then, but very easily expandable to include others outside that loop, as you now may be witnessing. Does that not mean the information could have been transmitted to people who might be motivated to act in contravention to the R&D 'operation'. I am now contradicting my previous assertion that this 'encryption' would be relatively secure. It would only take one bad apple to compromise it.
Two points: the show goes on, and it was bound to be compromised sooner rather than later. I was making a lot of noise about things, then as now. The aviary/aquarium protocol is well dispersed. My eschatological proclivities would not be assigned to mere lunacy by anyone who would take a few moments to consider the possible protocols along with Ron's ostensible continuing associations. If there were any doubt then that this was a serious contingency, can there be any now, now that the Anderson column has been nailed to this door? My sister will vehemently deny any connection. She does not remember having spoken to me about it. How then did I find out? I had previously asked her to have someone at the White House check out Ron's bone fides. She says that she never did so. Is she also forgetful about that? (I eventually had to go to Chris Straub, ranking staff member for the SSCI.) Why else might she have connected me with the column? I understand now that the article was delivered personally to her in Boston by a Presidential assistant. With her lawyer she wrote a response to the President. Did no one ask, 'What is this tempest in a teapot?'
I continue to twist in these winds. Reality is a precious commodity in these precincts. Do I grasp at straws? This is one instance where anyone, now, may judge for themselves. Should I now start to watch my backside? Ron made a big point of introducing me to his 'bodyguard' last month. Hmmm. And so it goes.
There may well exist an eschaton contingency, sufficiently serious to be deemed appropriate for briefings to heads of state. How does my reputation fare as a designated source, when a major component of my scenario, touted for the last five years, is unceremoniously dumped after an argument with my sister? This is hardly conducive to engendering confidence in the source. Surely there must be a better source. Could this visible component have been carried this far if there did not exist a reliable, covert reference source? What purpose then could possibly be served by the R&D amateur hour? Is this someone's idea of comic relief? Where is the E Team? Where is the Big Kahuna?
If this is not a joke, then this is eschatology of the people, by the people and for the people. Minimalism and spontaneity are for now and forever, if I have anything to say about it. If I am to be a stand in, then the real actor is beginning to look a bit bashful. Perhaps she has stage fright. It can happen to the best of us. If there ever were to be a paradigm case of WYSIWYG, would this not be a contender?

If George H. W. was briefed, has he behaved appropriately, with or without the Millennium factor? That would depend upon with whom the President would be advised that he could discuss the matter. This number would be limited, much smaller than the circle of policy makers. In that case, the ramifications would likely be minimal. There would be a lack of opportunity to integrate the information into the daily political grind, which would continue to progress with its own logic. A single point of reference would not constitute actionable intelligence for the President. There would be no encouragement for premature deviation or intervention on his part. Just keep on holding things together. The biggest departure from this line has been the invasion of Iraq. Perhaps W. does have a better source, and I'm not necessarily referring to Wolfowitz or Condi. There is the larger consideration of engagement, which is being played out in that arena. I personally do not feel motivated to second guess all of those considerations. I would not look forward to ever possibly having to do so. Well, given that 9/11 was part of the run up to the larger drama, something like the Afghan/Iraq engagements must have been factored in to this picture. That would have been a no-brainer. Should any of this factor into the next election. That would be pretty academic at this point. The eschaton will most assuredly not be a political event. The whole point of the clandestine preparation would have been to keep the politics out of the larger scenario. Any high level briefings would be directed mainly to that end. The political considerations are to be minimized. The bigger the stick, the softer the walk. Any political briefing would be mainly for the benefit of this effort, not for the enlightenment of the politician.

Perhaps we can now better appreciate the nuances of the Anderson column. Among other things, it acts as a tripwire relative to my general level of awareness, and also as a 'timed' release tablet. I daresay this would have been pushing the envelope of human ratiocination. One might wonder what Dennis or Charlie ever made of this incident. I'm not likely to find out. Curiosity can kill the cat.
Next up, and on this topic, I need to discuss the meetings with Chris Straub. This may shed more light on who knows what and why.
Why am I now, for the first time here, delving into the details of past events? It may have to with the recent change in my perception of these events relative to the Millennium or lack thereof.. Under the aegis of my former premillennial paradigm I did not fully appreciate the sensitivity of these events. I would let bygones be bygone. I had been turned loose. We were going to let nature take its course. No big deal. But the recent interactions with Ron seemed to geared to jogging my memory. In that process I began to realize that there was unfinished business, and the nature of this business did not fit well with my more recent turn toward laisser faire millennialism. I don't recall when I got onto the Millennium track, it may have been more recently than five years ago, as stated above. It was something I slid into. This may have been my subconscious reaction to the apparent deactivation of the Aquarium. That has been for about about five years.
The abortive reactivation of the Aquarium around 9/11 seemed like a fluke, suspicious though it was. It was a single data point. Last month constitutes another data point. When I draw a line through these latter two points, it seems to connect mainly back to the frenetic, more eschatological, early days of the R&D business, rather than forward to a Millennium scenario.
I adjust my thinking accordingly. This puts me back in something of a holding pattern, waiting for a third data point. If that point fails to materialize, I will again slide forward into a millenarian posture, probably over a period of some months. In the meantime there is an opportunity for recapitulation.

While I'm at it, and for the record, permit me to put down a cursory time line.

I was a Sputnik baby. Well, I was a very impressionable freshman in high school when Sputnik was launched. But that was not quite my introduction to things scientific. Perhaps I was more accurately a Menzel baby. But then this takes us back to 1943 and the rocket baby or moonchild. My father and I share a birthday, Nov. 20. JPL and I share a birth date, 11/20/43, according to their website. And we share the patronage of Amos Throop, as in Throop Polytechnic Institute, now Caltech. JPL co-founder, Jack Parsons, had more than rockets on his mind. He and L. Ron Hubbard were intent upon producing the Moonchild under the personal tutelage of Aleister Crowley.
My father taught at the Harvard Business School, which during the War became the Air Force's Statistical School, which in turn gave rise to the Whiz Kids. Dan, Sr. became involved in the planning for D-day, and served on the Academic Steering Committee opposite the Astronomer, Donald Menzel. In 1943, Dr. Menzel raised the prospect of preparing the University for its return to peacetime. My father knowing that VE day was still at least two years off, felt that this would be premature, but, of course, he could not apprise Donald of his proprietary logistical knowledge. Nor, as it turned out later, could Donald apprise the committee of his knowledge of the Manhattan project which was scheduled to cut short the war in the Pacific. My father was duly impressed by the ascendancy of astrophysics.
My bedtime stories c. 1950 became the Harvard Astronomy Book Series, edited by Donald. One of the first of which was Donald's slim leather-bound volume on Flying Saucers. I remember being impressed by the juxtaposition of two photos: lights in the sky, and stick appearing bent in a glass of water due to refraction. Clearly the great scientist had outsmarted the LGMs. Is it an accident that Donald is the one scientist listed in the MJ-12 documents, brought forward probably through Rick Doty? It is known that he participated in the tracking of UFOs for Navy Intelligence in the Pacific. His laughably crude debunking of flying saucers would send two very different messages, depending on the state of one's knowledge of phenomenology. The subtext is that phenomenology is taboo for science. Phenomenology was to be pursued on another track. That may be the track that has now devolved into the R&D business. Another long-time associate of my Dad's was Laurance Rockefeller, who was briefed at the White House in 1993 by Ron concerning his long standing interest in these matters. Laurance died this past Sunday.
Back to Sputnik. My interest in science accelerates. In the summer of 1960 I participate in the NSF's regional institute for budding talent. I charge through Stanford physics and on to Princeton, but there I run into what felt like a wall. Burnout? Yes, but possibly something more: a 'dark night of the soul'? For most of three days I lay on my bed, virtually paralyzed. Eleven years latter came tears of relief, also for about three days, right after the encounter with 'Sophia'.
I migrate into metaphysics via the Anthropic Principle and the Quantum. For several years I am a quantum dualist. But then, by dint of coherence, and curiously under the spell of the magical drawings of Kit Williams' Masquerade (1983), I drop the dualism. I quickly slide into immaterialism and then eschatology. That is where I am by about 1984. With this now more radical outlook, I give up on my previous attempts to network the metaphysics back into the academic and religious communities. I do not attempt to resume the networking until under the aegis of Ron, which then comes to include the offices of Senators.
It occurs to me, perhaps late in '93, that I could follow up on my failed attempt, though my sister, to check out my interlocutor's credentials. Eventually I end up talking to Chris Straub, ranking staffer for the SSCI, and we have three meetings. As we sit down at out first meeting I mention my concerns with eschatology and he states his familiarity with the topic. He cannot go into specifics about Ron, but he states that I can be assured that I am dealing with some very competent people.
Ron tells me later that Chris had to get a special briefing prior to that meeting. It was a briefing that allegedly had already been given to some of Chris's colleagues on the Republican side of the committee, a briefing that he had not learned about until he attempted to check who Ron was. Another, rather murky data point?
But, now, fast forward to:

NATIONAL DESK | December 7, 1998, Monday

Old Concerns Over Data Transfer to China Get New Attention

Share with your friends:
1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   ...   90

The database is protected by copyright © 2020
send message

    Main page