Hidden Agenda?

NASA is keeping many strange secrets, says a new best-selling book

Going dark,” in espionage parlance, means hiding and ceasing to communicate, as when a spy goes to ground un­til things calm down. To “take it dark” means to remove something from public view, meanwhile clandestinely con­tinuing to operate whatever the asset may be. This can be as simple as moving a suddenly sensitive discussion from an open radio channel to an encrypted one, or the more complicated faking the breakdown of a satellite, or even re­porting its loss, but continuing to clandestinely receive the data. According to Richard “Dick” Hoagland, the mave­rick space expert, in his new book Dark Mission (a best seller with both the New York Times and Amazon.com) coau­thored with Mike Bara, these are the least of NASA’s “sins,” dating clear back to its beginning.

Hoagland, a recognized authority for over 35 years on astronomy and space exploration, in the early nineties  au­thored The Monuments on Mars—which first discussed the enigmatic “face” on the Mars Cydonia plain. At various times he served as a space consultant for all of the major broadcast networks. Among his many contributions to his­tory and science, the best remembered is probably his conception, along with Eric Burgess, of Mankind’s First Inter­stellar Message in 1971: an engraved plaque carried beyond the solar system by the first manmade object to escape from the sun’s influence, Pioneer 10. Carl Sagan acknowledged Hoagland’s contribution in an article for Nature. The latter’s friendly relations with NASA, however, ended some time ago.

“There has been a consistent, conscious effort by NASA, since its inception,” Hoagland told Atlantis Rising in a re­cent exclusive interview, “to find and then conceal verifiable evidence of mankind’s ancient past, starting with the moon.”

That’s a grave charge to level against a purportedly transparent and benign civilian agency, but Hoagland says he has the proof. We are referred to the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, the law which created NASA, Sec­tion 305(i), “…The National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall be considered a Defense Agency of the United States for the purpose of Chapter 17, Title 35 of the United States Code…” Further, Section 206(d) explicitly states “No [NASA] information which has been classified for reasons of National Security shall be included in any report made under this section [of the act]…”

These revelations put the famous and oft pooh-poohed Brookings Institute Report into an entirely different light. The report, issued in the early days of NASA, had recommended that the space agency’s Administrator “seriously con­sider suppressing” evidence of extraterrestrial civilizations or technology found during NASA’s exploration of the moon and planets. Thus, Hoagland argues, NASA not only has the standard array of bureaucratic tools to hide what it has found, but it can now invoke “National Security” and wrap itself in layers of classification, some so deep that out­right lying is permitted to protect the secrets!

On Tuesday, October 30, 2007, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., The Enterprise Mission—a private research and public policy group led by Hoagland, held what was called a “review” of “NASA … its 50 years of cover-ups and hidden solar system data ….” Among the questions raised: Why does NASA continue to represent itself and its programs as “civilian space research?” Why did a NASA official direct Ken Johnston—a former NASA contractor in charge of Apollo photos in NASA’s Lunar Receiving Laboratory during the Apollo Program—to destroy copies of offi­cial astronaut photographs taken on the moon …? Did Apollo astronauts discover and bring back to Earth bona fide “ET artifacts” salvaged from the moon? And, was one of those artifacts an amazing “robot head”—immediately classi­fied, under NASA’s charter, because of its enormous national security implications? An unedited recording of the press conference will be available soon (for details go to Hoagland’s web site: http://www.enterprise-mission.com). At the press conference it was revealed that Johnston, had been fired from NASA for, it was said, his cooperation with the Dark Mission book project. Johnston, it was asserted, had secretly preserved missing Apollo moon photos which he had been told at the time to destroy. The photos which were displayed at the press conference appear to show pre­viously undisclosed artificial structures on the moon and other anomalies.

NASA, We hardly Knew Ye

According to Hoagland, to appreciate his message it is necessary to understand a concept which he says informs all of NASA’s policies: “The lie is different at every level.” Hoagland tells us he heard this from an individual he inde­pendently confirmed as being an intelligence officer and he has made the statement a kind of analytical springboard for determining what’s really going on at NASA. Bluntly characterizing what the authors call “coverup city from top to bottom, the book breaks open the lie at every level.” Hoagland seems quite serious!

If he is right, those steeped since childhood in the warm, fuzzy, safe view of a public NASA could be in for quite a shock. The real agency, he proclaims, is decidedly not that way. Rather, at its core, it has been carrying out a whole series of hidden agendas—and all at taxpayer expense.

The Players

While Hoagland is careful to point out that most NASA employees are both innocent and clueless as to what’s be­ing done by their agency to subvert its mission, he identifies three main, albeit shadowy, groups as running NASA for their private, and often bitterly contested, benefit. They are, he tells us: the “Magicians,” the “Freemasons,” and the “Nazis.” Strange as it may sound, Hoagland is in earnest. He has no problem calling the lot a “priesthood” adamantly determined to reserve whatever they choose for themselves, deeming only themselves worthy and initiated via blood­lines tracing, in some cases, clear back to Atlantis.

Consider rocket scientist Jack Parsons, co-founder of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena. Hoagland de­clares emphatically that Parsons was handpicked by the notorious black magician Aleister Crowley to head the Pasa­dena lodge of the OTO (Ordo Templi Orientis—Order of the Eastern Temple) and ultimately ran the entire U.S. branch of the OTO. Moreover, he says that JPL was founded on Halloween, 1936, the time when, in occult tradition, the veil between this world and the next is thinnest, letting spirits roam for a time. And the man whose rocket tech­nology to this day flies as the SRBs (Solid Rocket Boosters) on the Space Shuttle, it is alleged, was involved in occult doings so “out there” that Crowley himself was seriously disturbed by them. Parsons, says Hoagland, performed the Babylon Working with the goal of creating the very Whore of Babylon, as in the Book of Revelations. Object? Bring forth the End Times!

Consider Farouk El-Baz, the expatriate son of an Egyptian who was expert in the ancient Egyptian gods and their ritual worship by the priests. How did a man working for NASA contractor Bellcom, Inc. as a field geologist wind up the most powerful single individual in the American space program? as Hoagland puts it, “the guy who picked the landing sites, controlled the dissemination and analysis of all the photography, and directly oversaw and managed the astronauts’ geological training, preparing them for what they would actually observe on the lunar surface”? And how did mission after mission in which he was deeply involved just “happen” to align in such a way that one or another of these gods/goddesses was worshipped/honored/communicated with via exquisitely careful placement of landings with the stars overhead in particular parts of the heavens associated with the clearly defined Egyptian deities Isis, Osiris, Horus and Set?

Consider SS Major (yes, the title is correct) Werner von Braun, who per President Truman’s own decree didn’t qualify for admission to this country under ‘Operation Paperclip.’ The same applies to a slew of his colleagues who went on to control many key slots in NASA. Their records on projects involving V-2’s, slave labor, forced human ex­perimentation, even executions, were all sanitized, but their continuing values may have been revealed by a swastika left on a sign in El Paso, Texas, as the group visited from the nearby White Sands Missile Range. Hoagland describes the “outrageous” hijacking of no less than three NASA landings which he says were carefully timed to celebrate Hit­ler’s birthday, April 20—while the star positions were aligned for “resurrection.”

And as for the Freemasons? Hoagland says they were and are so prevalent at NASA as to be practically ubiquitous and have been occultically “signing” missions left and right with their trademark numerology for decades. They par­ticularly favor, he says, the transformative, Great Work signifying 33, while serving what Hoagland calls their ancient Egyptian gods, a “crafty” worship conducted in the earthly, lunar, and planetary skies, with the ignorant masses ut­terly unaware.

As Hoagland and his colleagues argue, these precise alignments must fall at exact times and geometries, and at no other, and amount virtually to standing a mission’s publicly stated purpose and its exacting calculations of celestial mechanics squarely on its head. In Dark Mission, the authors cite many such cases.

The Play

As detailed by Hoagland, Bara, and other similarly persuaded investigators, NASA used and continues to use the best technology and means available to hide one blockbuster discovery after another, though not always well. Some Russian researchers have recently claimed to have carefully confirmed NASA’s manual stripping in of black segments to hide something in a 1960’s vintage lunar surface shot, as well as the use of airbrushing. Photoshop’s capabilities, it is pointed out, were simply beyond imagining in the early days of manual image alteration. Hoagland and colleagues claim to have documented many examples of NASA’s digital paste-in of poorly chosen cloned background imagery on Mars. They cite the agency’s refusal to provide requested images of some areas, while freely providing other images which cover up critical data—digital processing conducted in such a way as not only to remove vital data but make what remains appear to be something other than what they are. Hoagland and Bara liken what NASA did to the Cydo­nia imagery (the face on Mars, shown as what has been called the “cat box” image) to be akin to taking your grand­mother’s picture, stretching it horizontally, flattening it, turning it upside down and reversing the color palette, thus making her unrecognizable even to her kin! The list does not include the deliberate misrepresentation of already provided imagery as either completely black or so dark as to be useless; the collection of imagery without reporting it; stonewalling the release of imagery and apparently making a host of embarrassing transcripts, records, imagery, even whole satellites, disappear from public view.

So, what exactly could NASA be hiding, anyway?

Too Secret for Us!

At this point, we can only scratch the surface, but here is a sampler of offerings from Dark Mission.

Remains of gigantic glass lunar domes, which Hoagland believes once covered entire craters, as well as evidence of covered and partially covered craters and underground lunar structures. Concerning the last, Hoagland notes that both the Russian and Chinese probes currently surveying the moon are equipped with “deep penetrating radar” to find such things, and he wonders why the Apollo Long Wave Radar tests were never made public. He goes on to inquire regarding what has been termed “Chapel Bell on Apollo 17. Then there’s the “small” matter of something called “Data’s Head,” (as in Commander Data of Star Trek: The Next Generation). Actually, though, the apparently ro­botic head, imaged in lunar crater Shorty, more nearly resembles C3PO’s from Star Wars. If you wish to dismiss it as a rock, you’ll need a cooperative geologist who can also explain the prominent bright red band running below the ap­parent nose, while simultaneously addressing the remarkable bilateral symmetry of the apparent head, eye sockets, eyes/cameras, nose and mouth.

Things are even wilder on Mars, where NASA bitterly contests pretty much everything Hoagland has put forward, from evidence of water flow to the artificiality of the Face. For engineering on a gigantic scale, Hoagland and Bara argue Mars is the place to be, complete with one stupendous critical geometry/tetrahedral (hyper-dimensional signi­fying) 19.5 degree geometry embodying one structure after another, arcologies straight out of “Blade Runner,” un­derground structures, glass underground tunnels, ruins of cities far vaster than Los Angeles. Mars landing sites were littered with so much technical debris from a long-dead civilization that NASA had to censor images shot less than a yard from Pathfinder. Hoagland says he has evidence that this incredibly advanced civilization was swept away by a solar system cataclysm which destroyed Mars as a habitable planet. Astronomer Tom Van Flandern and other mave­rick scientists have drawn similar conclusions from careful analysis of Martian photos.

The explosion of Mars’ neighbor, it is argued, blew away most of the the planet’s atmosphere, causing the oceans to slip their moorings in a titanic deluge as the gravitational forces holding them in check failed, and as the exploded planet’s debris turned the exposed side of Mars into not merely a ruin but a buried one. If, as the celebrated Brook­ings Report suggested, the mere evidence of extraterrestrial civilization could bring down society, how much more, we are asked, would the story of one wiped out within days at most? And what technology has NASA quietly recov­ered and not shared with the people who paid for the missions? What would “Data’s Head” be worth? Were samples of the lunar domes retrieved? Considering that Hoagland has found that the famous gold-flashed astronaut visors were spectrally optimized to see best in the blue range precisely occupied by the domes, it could be argued that NASA was looking for them? Hoagland doesn’t buy NASA’s lunar landing purported “take” as being no more than 88 lbs. of rocks. He thinks artifacts were brought back.

On the other hand, Astronaut Edgar Mitchell, a moonwalker from Apollo 12 and a bit of a maverick himself, who carried out telepathy experiments while on the moon and later founded the Institute for Noetic Sciences which open­ly pursues paranormal research, told Atlantis Rising, that he considered Hoagland a “flake.” Anybody who says that there were any undisclosed structures on the moon said Mitchell “is crazy.” In his book, The Way of the Explorer, Mitchell tells how he experienced a great spiritual awakening on his way back to earth from the moon. He reminds us the entire mission was shown live, and that it would be impossible to alter the pictures in real time, as Hoagland sug­gests.

As for Mars, officially we’re still trying to get there. Some say there is evidence, though, that we’re already there—not via conventional rocketry, either. And then there are those who say we never went to the moon at all. But those are all other stories.

Blackout by Major U.S. Media?

The October National Press Club briefing was remarkable in at least one other respect: how it was covered and how it wasn’t. “NBC Nightly News” wanted an interview the night before, but Hoagland was stuck in flight from Albu­querque, New Mexico to Washington, D.C. FOX wanted to do an interview on “The O’Reilly Factor,” then was never heard from again. The Washington Post had a reporter at the briefing—who published nothing. “Wired got a review copy” and has said nothing, but, we are told, the “editor of a major national magazine has a copy and plans an arti­cle.” We should, says Hoagland, compare our “free press” with the tightly controlled Russian media, involved, in his view, in a “political background conversation between Bush and Putin.”

Four Russian networks were there, he says, and some taped the entire briefing. The Russian equivalent of CNN, RTTV, did a three-hour interview, and NTV has scheduled two days of interviews, to be boiled down and presented to its 120 million viewers.

Readers will shortly be able to decide for themselves the significance of the briefing, for Hoagland videoed the whole thing and will be selling it, raw and unedited, at the deliberately chosen tetrahedral geometry price of “19.5” ($19.50), but meanwhile even more strange things are happening on earth.

The blog, The Space Review, ran a blistering two-part attack by Wayne Day in “the truth, it is out there” (www.thespacere-view.com/article/1022/1) which portrayed Hoagland as a commune-living nutty stud and his “Deep Throat,” Dr. Ken Johnston, as some bureaucratic nobody. Johnston, by the way, is the man who was Manager of NASA’s Data and Photo Control Department during the Apollo program. On another front, former NASA employee/ current CSICOP member James Oberg has made what Hoagland calls “absolutely unrelenting” attacks. Hoagland views the backblast as a sign the Dark Mission scenario is “gaining political traction within NASA.” Interestingly, at Amazon.com’s Dark Mission page, former NASA mission controller Dr. Ali Fant confirms some of the key claims. Hoagland continues to look for “some break on the national scene here” and says he wants congressional hearings.

In the meantime, a multinational stampede (U.S., Russia, China, India, Japan, Germany) is underway to get to the Moon/Mars. If NASA’s hiding nothing, why go there and why now? And why did neither NASA nor JPL have any offi­cial comments to offer on Dark Mission when formally contacted?

BY JOHN KETTLER

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*