project camelot dan burisch stargage secrets transcript - part 1

8/2/2019 Project Camelot Dan Burisch Stargage Secrets Transcript - Part 1

1/16


2/16

...But I was also allowed to show them probable outcomes, so in fact the YellowBook, the Cube, was used for that purpose. Shockingly, they happened to seethemselves standing on the bones of their own families and things like that inthe vision, and they ultimately decided to remove Lotus as well as certainabductions from the Tau 9 treaty....They were handing this Cube around from country to country, to the elitistsin the countries, who looked into their own futures so that they could pick the

best path for themselves....I'm happy to pass along the information - I'm honored to pass along theinformation - that I understand that the Yellow Book is no longer accessible....I will say this to everybody: Whoever took it, it's in safe hands and itwon't be used to harm humanity.

Start of interview

Kerry: How would you like to start? What's the best place to start as far as

Stargates go?Dan: Well, I've got a list of questions here in front of me, submitted by youtwo, all 30 of them.K: [laughs]D: Oh, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have mentioned the number.K: No, no ...D: They are decommissioned. They are separated into their three components:there's a projection component, a ring component, and also a barrel component toboth the Stargate devices as well as the Looking Glass device. The Stargatesalso have field posts, and again I'm not a physicist so I wouldn't be theappropriate one to make comment as to how they work.

But there were field posts that were positioned around the actual gates andthey have been stored, I guess. I'm not certain what happened to the fieldcomponents. But the three components have actually been decommissioned andliasioned to the European Union, the United Nations, and NATO, who are actuallyin possession of them. And there is no one group which has the other one of theother two components.K: OK, so ...D: So everybody is staring at everybody and they're not ... They can't put theequipment together because everybody is mutually dependent and lookingquestioningly at everybody else. So everybody is literally protecting everybodyelse. Of the actual base operating equipment, there are three components to it,which is a projection device of some sort, a barrel, and a set of rings,electromagnetic rings.K: Are we able to know how many man-made Stargates there were on the planet?D: No. I'm not going to comment as to the total. I will say that there was over50.K: Really!D: Yep.K: Wow. In different countries of the world.D: Yes.K: OK. And these are man-made?D: Yes.K: OK. So, and now these Stargates ...D: Well, see, it's not a Stargate. It's a device which accesses a portal, awormhole.

K: Does it access a natural ... In other words, the manmade device accesses anatural Stargate.D: Yes. It draws off from a natural ERB, an Einstein-Rosen Bridge.


3/16

K: OK.D: It accesses it and somehow works, from what I understand, not in parallel,but almost like piggybacks, on the energy of the natural Stargate, yeah.K: OK. So, in other words, if there were only ... If there were 50 man-madedevices accessing, they would be accessing a corresponding 50 natural energyvortexes.D: That I don't know.

K: OK.D: There is a possibility that ... In fact when the Looking Glass was operated,they were usually worked in tandem. It required a second Looking Glass to beturned on at the same time to get acoustics through. So unless a second one wasturned on ...which operated at one other place, where Will Uhouse had been. Hesaw the second node location, as opposed to the first node being over at thePapoose facility.

Two pieces of equipment, two Looking Glasses, were required to be turned on atthe same time to be able to hear acoustics or sound, if you will, from whateverthe people were watching, to piggyback in tandem with the visual response of the

equipment. That it required two to be turned on to hear anything.K: Uh huh.D: And then both sides could hear the same thing. So I suppose, both of theLooking Glasses being tuned to the same thing was accessing the same tunnel,if you will, to the information.K: OK, that's what I was wondering. So the Looking Glass has an ability to showone the future but a Stargate, or, you know, equipment that accesses a Stargate,or a wormhole, is for time travel? Right? We're talking about two differentthings?D: Yes.K: Are they using the same technology?D: Essentially, yes. The original device was the Stargate device. That was then

increased in power, if you will, with the use of these field posts. How itbumped up the power, how it stabilized it, I don't know. You'd need to speakwith a physicist about that.K: OK.D: However ...K: It increased it enough to where that it became a Looking Glass?D: Well, no. No. No. It would be pumped up in power to stabilize the doorway,if you will, to step through into another location, which in essence, becausedistance and time are relative, the same thing - step through into another time.The Looking Glass device is a back-engineered Stargate.K: OK.D: So it was actually back-engineered from the original cylinder-seal data whichallowed us to produce the Stargate access devices, if you will, what we call theStargates.K: Uh huh.D: It's a back-engineered device, the Looking Glass is. So the Looking Glass isa secondary device and it was coming into its fore in the 60s and 70s and Willsaw one of the first generations of it, from what I understand, a very largepiece of equipment. They always get smaller, no matter what. Look at what'shappened to the computer.K: Who? Will saw?D: Oh yeah.

K: Will ...D: Will Uhouse.K: ... Uhouse saw the original Looking Glass.


4/16

D: He saw one of the original Looking Glasses demonstrated. And in fact it'sgoing to be in the DVD that we're getting ready to put out, the actualinterview, where he was indicating the firing of a bullet, I believe it was,through an object, and there was a time delay where the bullet actually passedthrough the object where you saw the bullet past the object, or the projectileif you will, a rail gun, I believe. What was the ... [Marci McDowell, offscreen, confirms this]. Yeah, it was a rail gun being used. And then afterward

they saw the impact of the device. So they were already playing with it in theearly 70s, early to mid 70s, dealing with time sequences.K: Wasn't the original Looking Glass back-engineered from alien technology?D: [long pause] Yes.K: OK. But there was also information around the cylinder-seals ...D: Um hmm....K: ...that they used also and that those cylinder-seals also came from an offworld race.D: From ... Well, no, the cylinder seals didn't. The information on them did.K: Which was maybe the Anunnaki? Is that ...D: I wouldn't feel comfortable in characterizing it with that name.K: OK.

D: I really shouldn't. No.K: But it was off world technology. Originally.D: Yes ma'am.K: OK. And at this point, like ... OK. Say that was in the 60s? the 50s?D: Well ... Yes. That's when they started actually showing a lot of interest inactually building the equipment to be able to see over the curvature oftime-space so that they could see into the future and somewhat into the past,but basically the future.K: OK. So there's also our Henry Deacon contacts that deal with the black boxthat came on one of the craft.D: Uh huh.K: And I don't know if you're familiar with that black box.D: Uh huh.

K: Did you have exposure to that as well?D: Yeah. It was something that we called the Cube or the Yellow Disc. Yeah.K: OK. But that was not ... Was that a Looking Glass?D: That is a variant of the technology.K: OK.D: However, while the Looking Glass shows probabilities, or has shownprobabilities, the Cube would react with the people present, so there was analteration, if you will, over what you were seeing from it. It would actuallyspin out as a yellow disc out of the top of it ... where the word Yellow Bookoriginally came from.K: Yeah. OK. Yeah.D: And, depending upon what predisposition ... Kind of like little Yoda tellingyoung Luke, Bring in there what you have with you. You know, whatever's thereis what you bring. You could then change the perspective, the tilt, if youwill, the orientation or angle, of the information being presented back to you.So, unless you were well prepared to deal with such a thing, human interactionand human emotions bring instability of the provenance of the information.K: OK. That's what went on with the black boxes, then.D: Yes.K: OK. But with the Looking Glass...D: And actually I used that to our advantage at the T-9, because that in factwas present at the T-9 and I projected certain information which caused a littleupset during the meeting, and they got certain abductions removed and Lotusremoved off the calendar, and things like that. I caused some real trouble, in

other words.K: Can you elaborate? Are you willing to elaborate?D: Well. The...the... Let me sit here and consider what I should and should not


5/16

...

During the negotiations for the Tau 9-6, I was asked to supply a model for theLotus. In fact, Marcia and I were both asked because they knew tangentially shewas involved. I agreed to do so, which is what you respond when you are a swornoperative. It's Yes, unless there are great, great objections. I was thentaken to the location where the treaty was actually being negotiated.

To give a short recitation as to the nature of Lotus: What was happening is theP-45ks used Lotus. They wanted to use Lotus for the back-engineering of theirown neurological problem. I was objecting to its use, but still to provide ....was under orders to provide a model. I was prepared to do so but I was alsoallowed to show them probable outcomes.So in fact the Yellow Book, the Cube, was used for that purpose. Shockingly,they happened to see themselves standing on the bones of their own families andthings like that in the vision and they ultimately decided to remove Lotus aswell as certain abductions from the Tau 9 treaty. So we were successful ingetting certain things removed I think I can safely mention at this time,because we're only one OF 9 and one Tau 9 treaty away from the passage throughthe... the completion of the passage through the galactic plane. So I think I'm

pretty well safe to go ahead and mention it now. They're not going to be able toget it back and put on the treaties and all of that in the time we have left. Inother words, they got out-foxed, and ... that's what happens when you'renegotiating treaties.Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:OF-9: Dan is referring to the "Omicron Phi 9" Treaty System, the TreatySystem not involving the P-45ks, and the "Tau 9" or "T9" Treaty Systeminvolving all parties including the P-45ks. He is precisely speaking aboutthe "Omicron Phi 9-8" Treaty gathering scheduled for 2009, and the "Tau 9-7"

FINAL Treaty gathering scheduled for 2012.

K: So you used the capacity of the Yellow Book or little black box to show themthe future implications ...D: Exactly.K: ... of what using the Lotus to amplify, or to rectify, their own biologicalproblem?D: This is true. And that was skewed by ... It takes a great deal of emotion toskew the imagery and the audio that comes with it. But I'll just say that I amextremely vehement with regard to my objection for Lotus being used, andapparently that vehemence was sufficient to skew the image enough to get them tojump back aghast in horror.K: Wow. So... OK. And this, kind of like just for the sake of the audience tosome degree ... You have seen in, I guess the Yellow Book or in the LookingGlass (and you can correct me on which one it is), the future of Lotus, ineffect, how Lotus becomes ...You know, once it's brought to the fore by you ...D: Well, actually, no. No, no, I haven't. I haven't. The reports to me whichcame concerning the future of Lotus, which we're not going to get into in depththis evening, ah.... was given to me as information.K: OK. So you didn't see it.D: Personally see it? No. I was told.K: I see.D: I was told. That was during the early years. I say the early years ofLotus. It's only been going on for 6 years now.K: OK.D: But this was the latter half of 2001 and this was a quid pro quo for them to

get certain information from ... that Chi'el'ah showed me. I demanded certaininformation back, and it actually was information concerning the time travelissue, because they were still trying to be ... You know, they were still


6/16

reticent about informing me as to what the real nature of the situation was aslate as 2001.K: Meaning, the real situation was ... Meaning how much access to Stargates, totime travel that they actually had?D: Right. The whole treaty system, the situations involving the treaties, theiroutcomes, the actual potential for both Timeline #1 and Timeline #2 outcomes. In

the case that we're in right now, we seem to be on a variant of Timeline #1, andthat's good. For everything that I've seen and have read and have had reportedto me concerning Timeline #1, it's not happening exactly the way that theyfigured that it would. But then again, it couldn't because we've made changesalong the way which diverted us away from Timeline #2 and in so doing, ourfuture ...

Again, I regard our future as something which is pretty much a blank slate.We're writing it for ourselves. And so we are now seeing something coming topass which is slightly different than the prognostication in the probabilitiesthat we were seeing. And I'm good with what we're seeing so far but, you know,

we are still faced with the challenges, the environmental degradation, etc. Buthopefully we will rise to the challenge.K: OK. So this is interesting because it sounds like Chi'el'ah was instrumentalin getting you to have greater access to intelligence about what the LookingGlass and MJ12 ...D: Well, it was information that he was providing me which provoked thequestions.K: Yeah.D: And the fact that they didn't even want to get into longwinded discussionswith me in the late 90s concerning what he even was. After we had argued foryears to find out even where the material was coming from, then we were finallygiven access to the material. I mean, this went on for a few years.K: OK. But your interaction with Chi'el'ah was leading you one way and giving

you one set of information and MJ-12 then had another set. Isn't that right?D: Well, they weren't ... They weren't really ... It wasn't that they hadanother set of information. He was telling me ... He did tell me basically whatwas going on.K: OK.D: And they were simply not providing that information as what they considered aneed-to-know situation.K: I see. So ...D: They just weren't going to tell me what they didn't feel I needed to know.K: But little did they ... Well, this is my paraphrase, but little did they knowthat Chi'el'ah was basically clueing you in.D: He was clueing me in and he was informing me his perspectives concerning thetreaties. I knew something was going on and that is ultimately what they wantedto know about and I said, Well, for you to know about that kind of thing, thenI need to know about certain other things. You know, it was truly a quid proquo situation and they said, Well OK. We'll tell you if you tell us. So I toldthem and they told me a little more.

And it was right around that same time that Lotus was actually kicking intofore, the May 31st, 2001 event that took my prosaic project and basically threwit in the garbage can and it turned into what it is now, this project that it isnow. And as a result I also found out from them where they said Lotus was

ultimately destined. And that is, like I said, we'll discuss that at a slightlyfuture date.K: OK. But it isn't it true to some extent that Lotus could help Chi'el'ah now?


7/16

D: That was the perspective of the P-45 J-Rods, and that is not my perspective.K: I see. So ... because I make a distinction between Chi'el'ah, who is, fromwhat I understand, a P-52, and the P-45s. So, but they're on the same ...D: They're on the same timeline, the same track, but just separated by 7,000years.K: OK. So, even so ...D: Which is quite a big separation.

K: So what we get ...what you're saying is that, in a sense, Chi'el'ah couldn'tget the benefit of Lotus because ...D: Nor did he ask for it.K: OK.D: Nor did he ask for it. And I will say this. This is something that David ...I spoke with David on the phone not that long ago. I'll leave the last name off.I think you know who I'm ....K: Sure, but we can use his name if it's OK with you.D: Well sure. David Wilcock.K: OK. Yeah, because we taped an interview with him.D: Oh, OK. Wonderful. And he was talking. We were discussing the same thing,

which was the Box, the Cube. And I said, Yeah, but a strange thing happened. Iwas pro temp or made MJ-9 for the 12 as the result of a bet that went on withinMJ-12. And I got a chance to tap who ended up being the last MJ-9 prior to theadjournment.

Before tapping her, who was the first female to ever set in the 12, I got achance to look at certain documents and look through certain archives inWashington, DC prior to going across to the continent and meeting with somefolks and telling them basically I wasn't interested in their offers. I'mtalking about a trip to Brussels.K: To see the lluminati?D: Yeah. And during the same time, the Cube disappeared. And it hasn't been seen

since. And it disappeared out of the archives. Of course I have no idea ... Ihave no idea where the item may be, but I do know this: I'm happy that theycan't find it. Because what they were doing is they were handing this Cubearound ...

And this was a question that Bill had asked, whether there was only one Cube.They were handing this Cube around from country to country, to the elitists inthe countries, to look into their own futures so that they could pick the bestpaths for themselves. Why don't they just live their lives? And try to be goodpeople? Why do they need a little black box to tell them when to jump and howto jump? That's not being fully human, at least from my perspective and those ofour associates. That's not being fully human.So, as I understand, it disappeared. Now, there have been certain, you know,allegations, that have been made that during the time when I had... Is it almosta year ago now? When I had the bad seizure? It was near the end of last year,was it? No. [Marcia, off screen, confirming date] It was about a year ago and Ihad a very severe seizure and was actually put out of commission, seriously, fora while, and there was a big hullabaloo to get over to my apartment to getsomething out of my apartment. What that object was, I won't comment. But I willsay this to everybody: Whoever took it, it's in safe hands and it won't be usedto harm humanity.

K: All right.D: In fact, the fact that it's in safe hands will prevent it from being used toharm humanity. It has been thus far only used ... Aside from ... Well, I mean,


8/16

I've got to try to justify my own behavior in Bandelier in using it for thepurposes of skewing to get Lotus off and the abductions off. But I think thatwas for a beneficial cause.Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:Bandelier: Dan was referring to the "Bandelier" National Monument, where the

Tau 9-6 Treaty gathering was held. See: http://www.nps.gov/band. The P-52k

delegates were trucked in from the nearby LANL [Los Alamos NationalLaboratory], and the P-45ks used the Tyuonyi ruins as the drop off pointbecause they looked like a 9 and the pueblo ruins themselves looked likeInca City, Mars. http://www.pirateplanet.com/nm/small/Bandelier_Ruins_2.jpg

K: Right.D: But it has been used since, actually, the 50s, by the potentates, by theleaders of the various countries to skew the history of the human race.K: Wow. That's amazing.D: And the common folk, the average people, all of us, have a right to a futurewhich is our own, and not being skewed and designated and promulgated andpromoted and provoked by bluebloods who feel that they are above everyone else.K: Well, thank you, Dan.

D: You're welcome.K: I think that we probably all owe you a great thanks for that.D: Well, I'm just ... I'm happy to pass along the information. I'm honored topass along the information that I understand that the Yellow Book is no longeraccessible.K: Yes.D: That's all I know about it, though.K: I understand. I totally understand. And, thanks for that information.D: That may be the reason, too, why the Illuminati hasn't done something to usand it also may be the reason, on the other end, why the old Magi haven't and itmay be why they're all so quiet and... Hmmm.K: Right.

D: I don't know.K: They don't have the upper hand any more.D: The people should have the upper hand and they should have the upper hand fortheir own destiny and that's why we two, have gone as far as what we have toexpose the NSSM200 report which was put in during the Ford administration, whichI believe was written by Dr. Henry Kissinger, wherein he suggested the possibleuse of food as a weapon and its use against, in fact, as a tool against, thethird world.Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:"NSSM200": NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506April 24, 1974; National Security Study Memorandum 200

Now, at the same time we notice that is a correlation going with findings fromthe IPCC report concerning global warming that if the world average temperaturerises, I believe between 2 and 3 degrees Celsius, that the Northern hemisphere,the higher latitude, growth will increase. However, if it goes over that it willdecrease. Yet the lower latitudes ... by the way that's where you find most ofthe third world countries ... the 2 to 3 degree Celsius increase will causestarvation and crop loss.K: OK.D: Now isn't this funny, how they're just allowing the global warming toincrease through the provoking ... with the use of fossil fuels? Now I'm notsaying that's the total cause. It's not. There are cycles involved, short as

well as long term cycles. But isn't that funny? And it's my best guess thatthey'll probably order just enough ameliorative steps to be taken where itlevels off where the higher latitudes probably don't lose their crops, where you


9/16

find the majority of the rich countries.K: Interesting. Well, that's actually a fascinating critical observation. Ithink that it is also interesting that most of the crops are being grown,though, in the lower latitudes. They're not being grown in North Americaanymore.D: Right. But you have sustainability, though.

K: Sure.D: Whereas when you have the loss of the crops in the lower latitudes you'realso losing a lot of the population from the third world, which, unfortunately,according to the way that the documents read, some people find them expendable.K: Right.D: We don't feel that way.K: That's the Iron Mountain report ... also talks about things of that nature.And you're familiar with that.D: I've heard of it.K: OK. It's actually ... It's freely available on the net to be read and ittalks about something very similar to that.D: You know, I'm not one that likes to interject myself in politics at all.

K: I know that. I ...D: I like to stay to the research.K: But at the same time ...D: At the same time, I mean, you know, when we start hearing that the Codex isbeing placed in place which actually delimits food value. Oh, you can have allthe food you want and starve to death while you're eating it if there's nonutrients.K: Right. Absolutely.D: When I start hearing that food is being used as a weapon and it's being usedconcerning the use of fossil fuels, I start getting personally angry. There'snot one person in the lower latitudes that's worth any less than me.K: Right. Right.D: You know, everybody is worth exactly the same thing on this Earth and

unfortunately there are individuals who feel otherwise.K: I understand. OK. So Bill, the question you're asking: First of all, youmentioned Will Uhouse.D: The son of Bill Uhouse.K: The son of Bill Uhouse.D: Right, right.K: He's very well known. We didn't realize that it was actually ... that it wasthe son you were saying who had access to that technology.D: Yes. Yes. Bill was the builder of the avionics and the testing equipment whoback-engineered ARV testing equipment and avionics. I actually saw some of theequipment (and this is in the tape that Marcia and I did) ... in a room. Iactually saw some of the equipment, some of the diagnostic equipment, in theB-bay, underneath the Galileo bay, that he actually built. And so when I starteddescribing it, Will looked at me and said, Oh, that's what my Dad built. So wehad a very nice little connection there.K: So are you saying ...D: But it's Will who had experience around the Looking Glass equipment in the70s. His son, Bill Uhouse's son.K: And Will Uhouse IS alive now?D: Yes. Of course.K: OK. Because that's very interesting ...D: And his wife, Teri. They, in fact, from what I understand, they met duringthe course of conversations concerning our information coming to the public.Teri and Will met one another, fell in love, and were married. That makes me

feel kind of personally really good.K: [smiles and laughs] OK. Well, so it sounds like Will knows quite a bit aboutwhat makes the ARV run, then ...


10/16

D: Uh huh.K: If his father had something to do with the back-engineering.D: Uh huh. Yes.K: OK. So in 1947, when the Cube was discovered, it must have really screwed upthe idea of the two timelines by bringing in the ability to ... I mean, I don'tknow what the two can and can't do ...D: Well, first of all, the Cube actually was not discovered in 1947. There's a

mixture of the stories involved. The Cube was actually ... The information aboutthe Cube and its existence was known as of 1946. It was further discussed in1947 after a certain crash in a Midwestern, lower, Southwestern state, NewMexico, and following which, during the first brokering for treaties by theOrions with Eisenhower, the Cube was handed to Eisenhower. It was in factexpected to go to the United Nations authorities and it was in fact spiritedaway by the United States military.K: OK.D: They didn't hand it over.K: But the way you're talking about the Cube is that it sounds like it connectsemotionally with the viewer, in a sense.

D: It does. And in fact it was handed ... It was actually Orion technology.K: OK.D: And it was handed over by them in a spirit of goodwill but a mis-assessmentas to our evolutionary state, our ability to handle the issue. And handle theequipment. They felt us more balanced than what we actually were.K: OK. Well this opens almost Pandora's Box in the sense of United Stateshistory.D: That is Pandora's Box. Yes. I'm not exactly certain what was seen relative toCube for 911. However, the analysis which I was asked to do ... (of course Ipaid the price of having actually done it. Again, people don't want to hear theanswers that I came up with.) But ... the analysis that I did indicated thatcertainly there is, at minimum, a great suspicion concerning the delay of

response. And information that I have directly from one of the formerly seatedmembers was in fact that we were aware (but this was Looking Glass technology,not the Cube) ...K: I understand.D: That we were aware as of the middle 1990s that there would be a comingIslamic extremist war with the United States. We were also aware of certainalternative situations that they used the statistics from the Looking Glass forthe variability between the different pictures to show that would be occurringat the same time, the other probability at the same time. And, from theirperspective, that the least of the two consequences was 9/11. I am aware of whatthe other possible consequence was. I'm not willing to come out and startmentioning it because I don't know what the consequences are of speaking ofthings that have not thus far happened, yet the probabilities existed that theycould.K: Yeah.D: So, you know, I'm feeling a little bit ... There's a little weight when itcomes to that, but ...K: OK. You're saying though, that the Looking Glasses have been, as you calledit, decommissioned.D: Yes, ma'am.K: And that means across the board.D: Across the board.K: OK.D: They are shut down.

K: And you said there was 50 man-made devices. And I'm assuming ...D: I said at least 50.K: ... that would access, or create, Stargates out of natural vortexes.


11/16

D: Yes. They would suck them in and make them available.K: And a Looking Glass is not the same as a Stargate.D: No. A Looking Glass is a back-engineered form from the original cylinder-sealdescriptions on how to build the units that made Stargates, so that ... inessence y ou could take a Looking Glass unit and make a couple changes to theequipment, l ift it up on an angle, put field posts around it and open up a hole

to step through.K: Sure. OK, but the Looking Glass can show you the future. So are we saying ...D: Future probabilities. Not the future.K: OK. So are we saying there were 50 Looking Glasses in operation as well as...?D: Oh no. There were much less. We had a basic monopoly over the Looking Glass.That and India. India brokered early on with Indira when Indira Gandhi wasbrokering the Committee of the Majority between the United States and the SovietUnion because the Soviets were threatening to start their own treaty system upwith the extra terrestrials, which would have become untenable.

We agreed then to expand MJ-12 from a wholly operated and owned Americanoperation to an international operation. Thus was born the Committee of theMajority between 1963 and 1967. And when that information was brokered, thathappened in parallel with, kind of under the table but in parallel with theUnited Nations treaties involving things like the test ban treaty and the outerspace treaty.

And so it was being done at the same time under cover of UN support. Thediplomats were going back and forth and brokering the opening up, so that thetreaty system would be a single treaty system and thus tenable and manageable,to, hopefully, a good outcome. And we'll be knowing within the next few yearswhether that was successful.

K: OK. So this is really fascinating. You're saying that some other countries,India for one, had access to Looking Glass technology.D: Yes, ma'am. They had that written in as far back as the 1960s and 1970s whenit was actually being back-engineered from the Stargate material. And so at thesame time that Will Uhouse, for instance, was looking at the early generationLooking Glass, India had the same.K: OK. And are you at liberty to say what other countries had access to that?D: To the information? Or to the equipment?K: To the Looking Glass, to a Looking Glass, or the ability ...D: No.K: ... to create a Looking Glass and look back ... look at time, look forwardinto their own history ...D: No. No.K: Was that not acceptable?D: No. No. And I'll tell you why the answer is no. Within the treaties, theLooking Glass as well as the Stargates, as well as the Cube, and theinformation movement pods, are all contained within the treaty system. Withinthat treaty system it also prohibits and allows certain passage of informationamongst delegates on where the Looking Glass material is and where theinformation flow is, what the access is. Being that I stood in Bandelier andconsidered a delegate, therefore I cannot tell you.K: OK. So you can't tell me who has ...D: No.K: ... access to that technology.D: Aside from India and the United States. No.

K: OK. Right. But we can assume that some countries perhaps, that is, theleadership of some countries, may have had access to this technology at somepoint.


12/16


13/16


14/16

There's another issue that was going on at the time, in fact, the variety ofcommunication which was going on via this equipment ...from elsewhere ... Ipresume ... she won't, still hasn't, won't admit to me, but I presume that itwas from Orion and it was information, defense related information, on how thistype of equipment, how an Einstein-Rosen Bridge at a distance, could be used topull information out of a defense computer system.

K: Ah ha.D: And I don't mean a U.S. defense computer system. I said, You know what? NO.Look, we've got the technology here. We've got the talent. We've got thewillpower and we've got the willingness to defend our own country without theuse of something involving time technology. I wouldn't want to go up against,for instance, god help us, the Chinese, on the ground. But at the same time, Idon't fear their country either. I believe that we should be diplomatic withthem and have a firm understanding and a respect for one another. But I alsodon't fear them. And so, the use of the technology like that is not honorable,to me.K: Right. Well, it's like knowing how the game plays out means you can play toyour advantage ahead of time in making sure that that eventuality will occur.

D: That's why I as so interested in... When I was doing my time ... During mytime with the jobs involving safety and security training and all that here inLas Vegas, when I was interacting with Marcia and the Eye because we wereliterally on a daily basis talking about that same thing. And about thepsychology of individuals who come to a table to play a game and who cheat toalter the outcome of the game. And that whole psychology is something which I'mnot ... you know, is not foreign to me and so that helped, if you will, primethe wick of the explosion between myself and that variety of technology, whichactually primed my disagreement with them.Note to the transcript from Marci McDowell:The "Eye" is a reference to the 'Eye in the Sky' or 'Casino Surveillance'.

K: OK. Well, I understand what you're saying and there's a million questionsthat all of this ..

D: I know, I know.K: ... raises and I know don't have all night, but I would like to ask ...D: There's 30 of them here. [laughs]K: Now that I know what I know and what you've at least communicated, you'resaying you don't want to use the Looking Glass for advantage over country tocountry, but what about country to off-world ...D: No no no no. It shouldn't be used at all.K: OK. I understand, but ...D: All right?K: But, is there something there? I mean, in other words, is the technologysomething that they are using now to look at our relationships with, because ...D: [shakes head no] The technology is not being used at all right now.K: OK. But the reason it's not used now is because of where we're going into thegalactic ... the plane of the ...D: [nods head yes] As of about 2017 I would expect that probably that all ofthese little pieces of equipment will probably all get reassembled, yeah.K: Turned back on.D: Oh sure.K: 2017? That's quite a while ...D: 2016, 2017.K: Not until then?D: Probably not.K: Do you mean ...D: I'm figuring that they're probably going to act conservatively on this.

That's what all the people of wisdom have suggested to them.K: Oh, wow.D: Is to act conservatively. That yes, the so-called cycle of catastrophe, or


15/16

season of catastrophe of Fulcanelli, the time period from, oh, right around 1992to right around 2012, right around that area. While we will have passed it,passed 2012, we really ought to get through the entire cycle which is about 1980to about 2016, to feel confident that the interpretation from the timeline fromthe future about their own catastrophe is not off by a few years. We're talking

about 45,000 years or 52,000 years respectively. We have difficultyunderstanding what happened 2,000 years ago and we're talking about 50,000 yearshere. So, it's very wise for them to wait.K: OK. You mean turn ... The Looking Glasses are now decommissioned, but alsothe Stargate technology.D: Yeah. Yeah, they're decommissioned and the Stargates and the Looking Glasses,I'm sure they're all in their little mothball containers and all of that andthey have been separated ... The three components of each have been separatedand moved to different power structures, diplomatic and military authoritiesaround the world. And we're talking about the EU specifically, the UN, and NATO.

Those are in specific control of one of the three components each. And I cannotcomment as to which component is contained by whom.K: OK. But you're saying there's no doubt whatsoever that all this technologyhas been decommissioned.D: There is no doubt whatsoever when it comes to the Looking Glasses and when itcomes to the Stargate technology that it has been decommissioned. And ...However, there are a few threats going on, ongoing threats, from presentcountries stating that they will put it together at their will, through theirown self determination. And those countries, if push comes to shove, will beshoved.K: OK. Meaning ... Put it together now?

D: As in build one themselves now.K: Yes. That's what I meant.D: Yes. What was extant has been collected. I'm under very good assurance thatwhat was setting there has now been collected and decommissioned.K: OK. And we're assuming Iraq is one of those.D: Oh, absolutely.K: They were able to pinpoint in the Looking Glass the very highest probabilityfor those things to occur ...D: That's true. That's true. And Bill was asking about a future date involvinganother thing and a year was given to me. And he was saying, well, if a year canbe provided for that, why wouldn't a year be provided for the other?K: Right.D: Well, there was a highest-probability year for it. However, telling me aboutsomething that might happen in the future involving a project which we'recurrently involved is one matter.K: Sure.D: Willy-nilly throwing a date out which is a probability involving the livesand the destiny of all of us here on the Earth, specifically to a predictedfour-and a half, or four billion peoples' deaths, is another matter that carriesan entirely different weight with it.K: But are we to assume that we past that year yet? Or ...D: You're not to ... No. You're not to assume.K: No. OK. So that's still in the offing. What we're looking at is a very low

probability of the event or the set of events occurring ... at this point.D: Yes. Yes. We're looking at a low probability of the higher catastrophicportion of the events occurring. I expect that the events which would kick it


16/16

off are still gonna happen. For instance, the solar max which is coming ataround 2012 and the expected loss of GPS equipment and things like that, whichis out there as part of ... on the web you can find that. Engadget, I think, wasone of the groups that spoke about the loss of GPS and satellite communications.K: You mean the electromagnetic grid is gonna go down.D: Yes. Yes. And that would be the time that I would expect the highest

probability of the T2 event, having correlated to the history of the J-Rods andthe Orions. But that's as far as I can ...K: Wow. OK. Well, that's pretty close.D: I can't give a date though.K: Yeah. I understand.D: I can but I shouldn't because people will then target toward a date, and I... Yeah, there are people out there now that are saying, Yep, it's rightaround the corner at any moment now. Why won't the aliens save us?K: Yes.D: We need to save ourselves.K: OKD: And that's why the steps have been taken that have been taken in the world

and are still under way, so that we will save ourselves.

(continued in Part 2 - please click here)

The wormhole graphic in the top right corner of the photo collage is by kindcourtesy of William Henry.__________________________

Support Project Camelot - make a donation:

Donations are not tax deductible for U.S. citizens.Thank you for your help.Your generosity enables us to continue our work.

Bill Ryan and Kerry Cassidy

[email protected]

[email protected]

project camelot dan burisch stargage secrets transcript - part 1

Documents