Terence McKenna Admits To Being An Agent?

terence_piv“when I reached La Churerra in 1971 I had a price on my head by the FBI, I was running out of money, I was at the end of my rope. And then “THEY” recruited me. And said, you know, with a mouth like yours there’s a place for you in our organization. And, uh, I’ve worked in deep background positions about which the less said the better. And then about 15 years ago they shifted me into public relations and I’ve been there to the present.” – Terence McKenna

If you have followed the work of mercurial, yet highly intellectual author and scholar, Jan Irvin, you’ve no doubt witnessed many a conversation revolving around the grand conclusion that the New Age and Psychedelic Movements were generated by the CIA. I’m not here to say whether or not I agree with this in totality, but Jan has produced mountains of documentation on the overall subject at his website. It has just broken today that an associate of Mr. Irvin’s has released new evidence of Terence McKenna directly admitting to have worked for “they”.   It is possible he was speaking about “the machine elves”, but the way he says it makes it sound more like he was making a quick and clever admission to more dubious activity.  “Am I the Alien ambassador?” – he says…  There will doubtlessly be more articles to come debating what this really means, but for now we will just give you the facts as they seem to be and let you decide for yourself. Read the article and listen to the actual audio HERE.

, , , , ,

  • Charlie Primero

    I’m waiting for Daniel Pinchbeck, Simon Powell, and the rest of the faithful to apologize for all the filthy language, character assassination, and vitriolic hateful ridicule they heaped upon Jan Irvin.

    • Calypso_1

      They don’t need to. Did you listen to the audio in context? The ability to discern nuance, humor & multilayered contextual thought streams often atrophies in those overly focused on narrowly engineered systems.

      • Charlie Primero

        Context is indeed important. Instead of narrowly focusing on one piece of evidence, I agree with you that it is important of broaden our focus to include the thousands of policy papers, personal correspondences, and administrative memos which refer to these weaponized anthropology programs.

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          Exactly. But that would require effort that might result in a bubble being burst and that is no fun for the clergy here.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Calypso, provide a transcription please to validate your assertions, also please answer the following questions. They are very straightforward and to the point.

        http://www.gnosticmedia.com/McKenna-Agent

        Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
        recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical thinking:

        1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

        2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

        3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background
        positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something an
        agency would do?

        4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

        5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is
        that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for
        smuggling)

        6) Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI could do?

        7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his
        arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

        When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the
        contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their organization in public relations and deep background to the present – which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not mushrooms or UFOs. Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is clearly ridiculous. The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reachingfor anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you again.

        • Calypso_1

          How frequently do you have a bowel movement?

    • Gabriel D. Roberts

      I think Reality Sandwich will have a new article written by Dennis McKenna. That’s just my guess. No matter which side we are talking from, none of us know the whole story. But it sure is fun to speculate!

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Good luck with that. In their minds they are totally justified in acting like misinformationalist ass clowns.

    • imAwildman

      Yeah it’s amazing how these people and some people in this comments section are behaving. It’s shameful and idiotic.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Not going to happen. They are intellectually lazy and want to step gladly into the shoes Terrence left. They can’t be bothered to answer direct questions about their own beliefs and yet expect to be taken completely seriously no matter how ridiculous their assertions, no matter how contrary said beliefs run to all other evidence, as long as their is a league of wide eyed hippie offspring ready to latch onto a new guru teat, they will be there squeezing soma till the next fad strikes.

      • symbiont

        You are Jan, are you not?

  • PPE Student

    Interesting, but a sober reading of Irvin’s work will show that 90% of his supposed “evidence” comes down to guilt by association.

    • Calypso_1

      INFIDEL! OFF TO THE TRIVIUM WITH YOU!

    • Gabriel D. Roberts

      This is my personal opinion as well, but I’m trying my best to just put out the details.

    • gustave courbet

      I have noticed that as well. A list of connections, while interesting, is not necessarily meaningful without more corroboration. That said, intelligence organizations have brought clandestine work and obfuscation to a high level of sophistication, making it difficult to nail down what the heck is going on.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Check out his work, if you find fault, reason, critique and feedback without fallacies are a safe method for constructive dialog. Seeking the truth isn’t that complicated that we can’t adhere to a logical framework and let the evidence guide us. “They” are master manipulators, (no not the mushrooms Gabriel Roberts ;)

        people are afraid to admit just how completely controlled their lives and so attack all messengers is my experience. When will we learn?

        • http://www.youtube.com/chillmeester Chiller

          EVen if TM was starting as a ”good guy” , when he became important in the culture, he became a target for them to acquire him as an asset.
          He might have even been blackmailed as is not uncommon and a very effective technique. He might have still tried to let us know , and put a lot of good and interesting idea’s out there regarding opressive cultural programming and freedom. respect for nature etc.

          But his quote about reducing the male population and that the mushrooms told him that seems very odd in relation to the general humanistic themes he espoused.
          He was as far as i know not a part of the elite through family ties like Aldous Huxley. Huxley is a more clear cut case by his own admissions and indeed dubious connections.

          If there are too many connections with a certain kind of crowd, you cannot just dismiss this as coincidence.
          dont let emotions get in the way of sober research. and be prepared to accept that you might be wrong.
          The controllers like nothing more better then emotions getting in the way, then you are malleable as wax.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Exactly! Well said! Looking at the connections to the Huxleys, Esalen, etc requires time and is absolutely relevant to the entire formation of the counter-culture of the 60’s. It’s not black or white, but influence is in the hand of the people with the money, the media, the war machine, the history (eugenicists) and the will to do evil for material profit.

            Let us not presume our naivety will save us. That is playing into the predators hands.

          • http://www.youtube.com/chillmeester Chiller

            Thank you,

            When Jan first disclosed this research i must confess that i was emotional as well, as i have listened to many hours of TM’s talks and still am very fond of his lucid way of talking and tieing together things in an exciting ways.

            And i still think highly of a lot of viewpoints he generated.

            But to be honest even before Jan’s research i was surprised at some things he said/claimed. Like the timewave, even though i tried to imagine his theory for real. And when i later found out about the eugenic movement connections to Aldous Huxley and the cia ties of Timothy Leary and Jim Morisson’s father in the army at a high level position.

            I started to review again my previously held ”popular” beliefs i had gained from the figureheads of the counterculture and found that they were not all positive for mankind.

            Instead of tuning and and dropping out of society and going off so far in lifestyle and clothing etc, that you cannot connect your enlightened ideals back to society in a non combative logical way, seems to me that the brightest of that generation have been put in an icebox safely kept away.

            So they cannot influence the general public effectively.

            And in hindsight , the real opposition to the atrocious war machine had been diverted into empty slogans like hair peace and love and free hugs.
            Thats all cool, but without going back in society, even adapting in appearances and let the logic of your information do the convincing, nothing happens, except some superficial cultural changes wich are also coopted/created by the PTB.

            Look at the current entertainment industry.

            And urging young childred aged 16 to take acid, without them having developed a critical mindset and strong ego to deal with new information and possible predatory types is just plain criminal. Not every hippie from the outside is a hippie in the inside. Look at the latter days of Heigh-Ashbury, it became really dark and based on just drugtaking.

            Even LSD or any other consciousness changing drug can be used for destroying someone who is not ready.
            And TM’s advice to take 5 grams alone in the dark ?
            I had a friend who did that and went really bad, luckily someone could go to his house on time, and i talked him down on the phone.

            Nowadays i only take really small amounts , in wich i can clearly remember every thought and feeling and write things down.

            I really like the research of Tony Wright, wich makes a lot more sense.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            The funny thing about associations, friendships and relationships is that they are often personal matters. Let’s take myself for example. I worked for a private jet company and had conversations with ‘the elite’. All the big bankers, the CEO’s the rockstars, the pop-divas, I’ve met virtually everyone of present influence in the world who passed through NYC’s private airport. My resume touts recommendations from some of these people. I’m also good friends with the favorite jewelry designer of Madonna, Rihanna, Beyonce and Lady Gaga, putting me two degrees separate from the high-pristesses of the “illuminati”. My relationship to them on paper looks pretty damming if you didn’t know the actual nature of each individual relationship. I also had a coke habit about 7 years back in which I met all kinds of unsavory people. If you dug them up and had them tell you a few stories about my bad behavior, you could do a pretty good job of character assassination even though those days are far behind me. Based on everything I’ve voluntarily shared, you could write up an amazing story of the connections, the incriminating possibilities and so on. But the reality is that I’m sitting on my sister’s couch, living with family, trying to figure out how to pay next month’s bills. The problem is, nobody but me knows that unless I share it. This is why the association with 40 different connections doesn’t really prove much. I’ve got 40 connections that look just as dark if not seen in the proper perspective. So am I an agent? No, I’m afraid I’m just a broke writer.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Thank you for your candor and honesty Gabriel. The only issue is that what Jan is digging up is more than tenuous at best guilt by association arguments.

            Case in point.

            “… and since I feel pretty much around friends and fringies here (laughter), it doesn’t trouble me to confess that my book, Food of the Gods, I really conceived of as an intellectual Trojan horse. It’s written as though it were a scientific study. Footnotes, bibliography, citations of impossible to obtain books and so forth and so on (crowd really laughs now). But this is simply to assuage and ?calm? the academic anthropologists. The idea is to leave this thing on their doorstep. Rather like an abandoned baby or a Trojan horse.”

            ~ Terence McKenna [emphasis added] (starts at: 1:12: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuhrhT8Z5QA)

            See also Dr. Brian Akers’ refutation of McKenna’s Stoned Ape theory where McKenna provably falsified his citations in Food of the Gods: http://www.realitysandwich.com/terence_mckennas_stoned_apes

            Not coincidently, Tielhard also wrote a book with Julian Huxley’s introduction:

            http://www.amazon.com/The-Phenomenon-Of-Man-ebook/dp/B004HW7BZE

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            I listened to the Trojan Horse speech, all ten hours. He was talking about sneaking into the edifice of scholarly work by those who are too erudite to consider new ideas. the trojan horse would allow his ideas to spread before they knew what happened. It’s a good tactic, one I plan to employ when it’s appropriate. We must use our enemies methods against them.
            Funny thing about the stoned ape theory in relation to edge detection is that I have personally experienced a height in edge detection, also in lower stages experienced the awesomeness of love making. So that doesn’t really impress me either.

          • MRockatansky

            Gabriel, can’t help following up – in connection with question I raised to you (see above): can the ‘goodness of Terence’ doctrine be questioned? Its about this:

            “I have personally experienced a height in edge detection … So that doesn’t really impress me either” (relative to McKenna’s exploitation of research by Fischer et al).

            If I may – it sounds like you faithfully equate testimonials in support of ‘what Terence said’ (and he did use the phrase ‘edge detection’ in his stoned apes exposition) – stories – with data or evidence such as a scientific study offers. Or with empirical findings like Fischer’s – such as TM claimed supported his story – that ‘psilocybin in low doses enhances visual acuity (according to research by Fischer) …’

            Fine if some objective test were involved, to show an impression like you invoke and stand on, as if evidential, valid or not. If some reliable independent method confirmed, that indeed you weren’t imagining things or hallucinating (or worse, making up something to support stoned apes storyline) – ok. Well and good in that case.

            Otherwise, doesn’t such defensive-sounding narrative reflect the devotion of the Terence’s Witnesses? What is the significance of testimonials, story-telling about subjective impressions – as if that can take the place of qualified observation or data?

            It sounds as if you also overlook or exclude (arbitrarily?) such factors as heightened suggestibility. That’s an effect of psychedelics well documented, not by tripper tales but by valid research, studies. Considering psychological factors, like enthused TM ‘inspiration,’ the likelihood of suggestibility as a factor would be pretty high, I suggest.

            But apart from all that – surely your claim isn’t germane to the less forgiving question – of whether TM’s story about research by Fischer – was true or accurate, in the least? Or, is that a question that again can’t be addressed, or faced? One gets the sense of, again, questions that for purposes of TM loyalty – must be somehow obfuscated – by stories of heightened ‘edge detection’ (for example). What on Earth could such testimonials have to do with – what Fischer’s studies actually say?

            Along similar lines, is it okay to note – ‘edge detection’ isn’t even an aspect of visual perception? Your use of those two words is certainly true to TM’s narrative (see FOOD OF THE GODS, pp 24-25). And he didn’t make the phrase up. There is such a thing. It just doesn’t have to do with visual perception. Edge detection is a parameter for – technical analysis of digital images.

            That helps explain why you’ll find no reference to any such thing in Fischer or other lit in the field of visual perception.

            TM enthusiasts can talk up a storm about “oh, but I had heightened edge perception on a trip, believe me” – in defense of TM’s pretty blatant exploitation and outright fabrications, ripping of Fischer’s good name. But really, come one – can that carry any weight, or even credibility?

            This is why, the greater the rationalizations, the more the hue and cry … the more TM-damage control measures resemble struggling in quicksand. To some observing.

            Here’s a few points, from Fischer’s article TM used as he did. I trust they will not impress you. Nor even interest, most likely. There seems an avoidance of any such curiosity, as if some unstated fear of what the article might prove to say, if it were consulted – perhaps on hunch, it’d completely disprove TM’s claims upon it, show them as fabrication. Just the sense one gathers, from such consistent indications.

            A couple details: specifics of Fischer’s work, relative to TM’s ‘visual acuity’ deception. These aren’t opinions, they’re just basic facts anyone can independently check and confirm, simply by consulting the article if they care to:

            1) First: whether euphemized as ‘edge detection’ or ‘chemical binoculars’ etc (phrases TM used) – no ‘improvement of visual acuity,’ i.e. the supposed “effect” TM said Fischer discovered with ‘low doses’ of psilocybin – has ever been reported, at any dose, in any study. Zero, nada.

            And that goes especially for Fischer’s research – on which McKenna pinned his ‘visual acuity’ donkey tale.

            2) Second: “Low dose” of psilocybin – HUH? What ‘low dose?’ How many µg/kg?

            What glares here is – first, its never specified. Neither TM nor any source promoting this ‘infaux’ have ever said. Moreover, question itself is never raised. Seems its tiptoed around, avoided. TM and his admiration society merely tell and retell this story as if it were even remotely true or factual. And, with no factual backup – they try to support it with testimonials (lines like “I tripped, and my edge detection was enhanced .. so TM was right, and I’m not impressed etc”).

            3) Beyond the fabrication factor of “improved visual acuity” (and guessing games of what “low dose”) – Fischer et al didn’t even study ‘low dose’ effects. Another strand in the web McKenna wove, proves false and misleading. But unless you put his counterfeit theorizing under microscope, the fake brush strokes can’t be seen (as he well knew).

            Here’s a psilocybin dosage range, research-sourced – Wackermann J, M Wittmann, F Hasler, FX Vollenweider, 2008. Effects of varied doses of psilocybin … Neuroscience Newsletters 345: 51-55:

            12 µg/kg = Very Low Dose
            115 µg/kg = Medium Dose
            250 µg/kg = High Dose

            As reported in Fischer’s study dosage used to study effects was: 160 µg/kg. Compare with the range values, if you will.

            Amid the testimonials in support, and lively ‘interpretations’ of TM’s ‘ideas’ – its interesting that Fischer’s pubs are never quoted. And conspicuous that TM’s claims are parroted in defense of his ‘theorizing’ – yet the claims are never substantiated.

            Its really a question of values, clarification vs obfuscation. To force favorable conclusion, make TM come out ‘a good man’ – boldly-going, absolutely honest and trustworthy, an honorable figure worthy of adulation – is one value. There are others though; and when the “Terence Was Good” rule is applied, seems like there’s no room for much else.

            For better or worse, the TM ‘sacred cow’ witnessing seems to oppose, expel and exclude – almost any kind of more genuine interest in finding out what’s what, for real, no jive … whether it helps gild his image, glorifies his name (and his admiration society) or not.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            As far as his spurious edge detection reference is concerned, it’s been well known that he flubbed it. For my experience, what can I say, I noticed everything more acutely on mushrooms. But this article and the point of Jan’s production of this audio is to show damming proof that he was an operative. There’s a difference between defending idols and being annoyed that people are using weak evidence to support a big claim and doing so quite militantly in some cases. I’d venture to guess (yes I have the balls to speculate!) though that the evidence against TM would not hold up in a court of law. I appreciate you taking the time to follow through, but understand I don’t wholly discount anyone, CIA, FBI or not, IF they have something actually interesting to say. This isn’t a black and white world, which is unfortunate, because it would be easier to tell the goodies from the baddies. Meanwhile, present campaigns of runaround are working like gangbusters while we look at a dead man’s legacy under a microscope. Lastly, I feel like if we were all sitting at a coffee table having this talk, we would all be a bit more understanding and could have the actual time to articulate properly our positions. C’est la vie!

          • MRockatansky

            “As far as his spurious edge detection reference is concerned, it’s been well known that he flubbed it.”

            Golly, Gabriel – I mean, gee whiz. On one hand I don’t find anything substantially true. Quite the contrary – can you cite anything that could qualify as evidence,that would indicate any such statement?

            Saying ‘he flubbed it’ – comes off as a euphemism. Do you mean, yes, you’re aware TM fabricated or concocted the ‘fact’ about Fischer’s research and what it found? Or do you mean to disagree or deny the fact?

            Either way, I’m not sure how such a ‘flub’ assertion, whatever it means (or, is meant to mean) – fits with your story, previous moment – of having experienced some kind of heightened ‘edge detection.’ That was true to TM’s exact script, and your statement to which I inquired, to the effect of something doesn’t impress you, because you’ve experienced heightened ‘edge detection’ – a parameter not of visual perception, but of instrumented measurement of digital images.

            I don’t base my perspective on only certain things, picked out in smorgasbord fashion, that lend to a ‘resonance’ (i.e. ‘sounds good to me’) – leaving the rest. I based it on on all indications, facts methodically established as well as can be, tested and retested, taken together. The indications are diverse and rich, abundant and telling – and consistent, as I’ve found.

            I’d be delighted to have you in the same conversation, as the questioning one I pose – in reply to things you say. If you rather not respond, okay. If replying, yet without being responsive, is your preference, again that’s fine. I’m not sure what it purpose it can serve though, maybe you could address that? Explain, what is the intention, what would you hope to accomplish – in another post you said you’d employ the trojan horse trickery tactics yourself, like discussion is about who’s friends and who’s enemies.

            Is that it? Okay if so, I’m not criticizing or complaining, you’re a sovereign being. I’m just trying to understand, is that wrong? I would hope not to agree or disagree per se, but only to establish communication wavelengths – dialogue, hailing frequencies. If its not a purpose you share, okay, I understand. Some values and interests – like those of evolutionary science – may be irreconcilable with others – like evolutionary pseudoscience. Which version – old time religious right, or new age psychedelic left – might not matter much. I guess that’s what I’m finding out here, trying to engage you in discussion. I don’t want to conclude its a lost cause prematurely, without giving you every reasonable chance to reply responsively, addressing question I ask. You’re not obligated, only invited and I would welcome a more forthcoming rejoinder.

            If you rather not, okay. Its the customary and usual that I find, whenever question is posed. Sometimes, deafening silence of no reply – passivity – ensues. Other times ‘vicious personal attack’ (as Lorenzo cites in his Deep Dive – Watkins’ reception for having questioned too closely and critically, of Time Wave Zero). In other cases, one receives the sort of obfuscation, dodging and blurring – Bump The Microscope Ploy, I call it (after all that work to focus, so little effort needed to blur issues).

            All that becomes the basis of a richly informed perspective about the ‘resonance’ (as its called). I’ve found before the ‘inspiration’ is simply not ready, not willing, not able – has no interest whatsoever, apparently – to engage in broad discussion, especially across lines of disagreement.

            That perspective is reinforced over and over again, by the constancy of results under test, under question. For all the lively talk in the TM sciencey circus (“Hurry! Hurry! The Elf Clowns of Hyperspace Are Juggling Even Now In The Center Ring” – ARCHAIC REV) with its various exhibits and displays, eg. about ‘psilocybin and evolution’ – cabbages and kings, shoes and ships and ceiling wax – it really does seem to be an audacious pretense that simply cannot, will not, allow any meaningful questioning.

            So far, as I find, 100% – any attempt to zero in on pointed questions, specific and informed – is met with gestures to zero out – without exception, it seems. And its not unique in any way shape or form, indeed it is characteristic of an ideological hardline movement, whatever type. Once a line of conviction is crossed, it seems nothing else matters – now the ends justify the means. And its the same old story, a pathway to fanaticism opens up.

            And thus, informed inquiry that pulls no punches, wants to know and means full well to find out – becomes equated with necrophilia, some ghoulish disturbance of human remains. I really feel like you’ve had a good chance to reply on the level, straightforward, responsively – to some questions I’ve posed.

            That’s the best I can do, I’ve no judge I can turn to and say: “Evasive witness your honor, may I have court permission to use 3rd degree questioning tactics?”

            The ‘scientific’ creationists have had their trojan horses – Intelligent Design. Very high quality as such, and likewise, to unmask its deception it had to be hauled into court, put on witness stand in Dover PA. Where it couldn’t dodge and parry, bob and weave, obfuscate and blur issues. And findings of fact demonstrated (proved in legalese) – exactly what it was. Exactly opposite of what it pretended to be, an idea. After it tried so hard to pass itself off as some such, it turned out its only idea was – infiltrate science curriculum by impersonating a theory. Trojan Horse ploy.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            Again, perhaps it’s unclear to you that I am in Italy presently for work and getting to this when I can and thought I’m sure you will see this as a copout, but I just don’t have the time to spend giving you the pleasure of a response in the style you might enjoy best. To be clear, you are correct, for whatever purposes, Terence faked his reference and it was a bad move on his part. Just to remind you, this article is about a specific time and place in which Terence made a comment being construed either as an admission of guilt in the minds of the CIA plot buffs, or just a joking allusion to the Machine elves of the mushroom mind hiring him. To that end, I think I’ve invested enough time and energy to say that it’s not a slam dunk and have repeatedly explained in several ways that this is the only real gripe I have about the McKenna quote in question. I’ve cited in my conversations with Camron Wiltshire that the only real pieces of documentation of TM’s association with alphabet agencies comes from two sources. Source 1. A document that neither confirms or denies his association. A document Jan requested and posted that he cited as proof of guilt. I posted that on Disinfo as well. Lookup ‘Was Terence McKenna A CIA Plant?” 2. The audio which I posted directly from Jan’s site. The onus of proof lies with the accuser. Perhaps I’ve missed some other document that shows his connection to the CIA, but the rest is either circumstantial, or proof of guilt based on character flaws and bad behavior. I’ve explained this as my position and nobody has provided me with anything else. For not accepting this as a slam dunk, I’ve been referred to as “the faithful”, a “new age apologist” and related to “scientific creationists”. Oh, yes and a “riddler”. I have not responded in kind, nor have I really tried to challenge the posturing of those who make these assumptions about me simply because I’m not ready to ditch an entire legacy as bunk, much less approve of the behavior, which I still see as poor form. So unless you have a document I haven’t seen yet, this is just semantic posturing with a dash of erudite questions based on a “I can’t understand your words, therefore you must be wrong” position. Perhaps I’m wrong and this evidence is enough. Unfortunately, this is the court of public opinion, not a real court case. I fear we may not see eye to eye, but I thank you for your participation and thoughts. Though I try to refine my speech, it is clear from our conversations that I need to refine it evermore. Thank you for that.

          • MRockatansky

            “Terence faked his reference … ”

            Well well. Yes, it was fraud on his part, crass fake. Not some ‘flub,’ as you maneuvered to trivialize it in your previous post. As if sweep it under a circular rug of rhetorical fog.

            It was deliberate deception, on TM’s part and now on the part of those who rationalize, justify, deny and defy the truth. There’s your precious ‘baby’ – that poor innocent thing at risk of drowning, which you’re so bravely dedicated to rescuing.

            And in lying to his enraptured listeners, all eager to be duped apparently, loving every minute of it – he
            exploited Fischer & Hill’s good names pretty good. Bravo Terence and Company. Made handy use of their work, their reputations – as fabric for his sheepskin costume.

            “My what credible sources you have, Grandma.” (“The better to fool you with, my dear – and to lure you in. Convert you to my great cause, ME. The better to empty your mind of thought, reason, meaning, purpose … the better to banish conscience, ethical principle, petty issues of right or wrong – and anything but what I, Terence, tell you …”)

            “… for whatever purpose” … So now, you dramatize some mystery about that? As if we don’t know? Now we’re to pretend that’s some unsolved mystery to speculate about? Bearing in mind you award yourself ‘balls’ for arguing from ignorance, for not knowing and basing what you say on that – for ‘speculating.’ That primate chest beating bs of Terence’s Heroes – beats everything.

            Or is the truth about Terence’s purpose – not as a matter of some defensive bullet-proof opinionizing, just the facts ma’am, on record right from the Trojan horse’s mouth – just another unbearable-to-face bubble-burster? Too hard to admit, face up to?

            I’m struck how TM-literate you are NOT, apparently, for one so devoted to TM’s legacy. Acting competent to evaluate it, by way of airy assertion, talking in circles about some ‘baby’ in the bathwater. Like some hell spawn, Rosemary’s baby perhaps?

            TM blurted out his purpose on rare occasion, tipped his hand, carelessly made himself clear. Whether you know the inconvenient truth or not – here’s what TM
            himself said about his purpose – or motive, a better term for its forensic use. Because in TM, we’re dealing
            with a Modus Operandi. Not a theory, not philosophy or
            something intellectual. Oh, its ‘clever” – and not some obscure puzzle, as you suggestively imply.

            In TM’s own words:

            “IT WAS CONSCIOUSLY PROPAGANDA …” (http://deoxy.org/t_mondo2.htm)
            “I felt if I could change the frame of the argument and get drugs insinuated into a scenario of human origins … [If you could convince people that drugs were responsible for the emergence of large brain size …] … I would cast
            doubt on the whole paradigm of Western Civilization … completely re-cast the argument from: ‘Drugs are alien, invasive to Drugs are natural ancient and responsible for human nature.’ ….”

            Propaganda. Know the word? TM did. Its a standard tool
            of covert war. And its culture war in this case – about the
            drugs. In S.O.S. model of operational planning (Situation, Objective, Strategy) – that constitutes Situation.

            The operational objective he lays out (step 2) seems pretty straightforward too: to re-cast the issue, go after the ‘frame’ of the argument. Objective is simple: to put anything or anyone seen as ‘anti-drug; on the defense, instead of yielding to it the offense, thus always ending up on defense by default. Start dishing out a little counter propaganda, give the establishment a taste of its own medicine. Pure Sun Tzu.

            How, you say? Ah Grasshopper, wise question. And aren’t you the clever one to ask. Step 3: strategy. TM’s tactical detail seems pretty clear: Cast doubt on the paradigm. Standard covert methods – propaganda, disinfo, as with no-longer-Biblical creationists: pseudoscience,
            pseudophilosophy.

            So TM’s touted ideas prove to be decoys – ‘screen ideas’ – staged illusions, Rorschach wordblots inviting all and sundry to play along, in a sort of game show. It might be called “I’ve Got A Theory” (or “Think Along With Terence”).

            Now that we have him explaining his Modus Operandi – his purpose about which you mystify as if genuinely clueless, or artfully dodging – no wonder the ‘ideas’ he puts out on display prove to be counterfeit, when the brushstrokes are checked. They’re crafted camouflage, raw material for concealment of an undisclosed intention – an idea more real, if devoid of any intellectual content or value – for all the pretense of something intellectual or theoretical of by or for TM and the Terence’s Witnesses.

            Yes there is an idea behind, hidden by, the glittery ‘ideas’ of his trojan horsing around: “The IDEA is – to leave this thing on their doorstep, rather like an abandoned baby or Trojan horse …”

            From forensic pov – that does check out as an idea, when put on the lift and hit with light. Unlike TM’s ‘schmeories’ and ‘faux-losophizing’ – his display exhibit ideas, as touted. They prove – surprise! – to be audacious deceptions, spun from whole cloth, transparent as cheap lace curtain.
            Con art. Like medicine show snake oil – low quality, high potency. And beyond having no medicinal value or virtue – able to sicken, as main effect and result of anyone who swallows it.

            (My regards to Cam ! I saw that ‘incredibly insightful’ phrase, with thanks)

          • siphersh

            And from this you conclude that he was “falsifying evidence”?Non sequitur. If you knew what he thought about the current scientific method and the rules of evidence, you wouldn’t conflate the two.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Here is what McKenna had to say in his own words regarding humanism, feminism, transhumanism, and eugenics – “the limiting of male birth”, from the following Youtube video with Terence “Speaking the Unspeakable”
            (begins at 1 hour 11 minutes – the Q&A):

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IO7pHD3X9M

            Terence McKenna from Speaking the Unspeakable: Maui, 1994. (“In Praise Of Psychedelics”)

            Questioner 1:

            Hi, I just wanted to know if you have heard about a book called The Mutant Message?

            Terence McKenna:

            No.

            Questioner 1:

            I want to tell you little bit about its because it’s very interesting. I think it follows what you’re been talking about. I love what your ideas about collective consciousness. And I think the book describes an aboriginal tribe in Australia that has been living the way in which you’re speaking, in a collective, and what they’ve come to the conclusion of is that they can no longer procreate. Because they have recognized that they can no longer exist on this planet. And the reason they call it the mutant message is they believe we are a mutant life form on this planet that is destroying it to the extent that they can no longer continue their lineage. And it’s an interesting concept, because it’s the first culture that I know of that has selectively chosen not to breed and along with your concept of raising our consciousness so that we understand the destructive nature of ourselves, what about a parallel vision of reducing our population as these people are. Of consciously choosing not to procreate at this time?

            Terence McKenna:

            Well it’s interesting that you brought this up. Yes, I’ve been saying for some time that, ***the mushroom pointed this out to me***,if every woman had only one child the population of the planet would fall 50% in 40 years. 50% in 40 years – without war, revolution, coercion, anything else. Now when you suggest this to people they say, well didn’t they try that in China and it failed?. Yes. But you have to think about a couple of things. First of all a child born to a woman in Maui or Malibu or Manhattan, that child will use between 800 and 1000 times more resources in its lifetime than a child born to a woman in Bangladesh. Why do we preach birth control in Bangladesh? We should be preaching it on Maui, Manhattan and Malibu. Because the women in those places are highly educated, socially responsible, global people. And therefore are the population most likely to respond to this suggestion. If 15% of the women in the high-tech industrial democracies were to to limit their childbearing to one child, within 10 years certain pressure indicators on the planet would begin to move away from the red and into the black.

            So I think that we have got to think with this question of
            population. There are clearly too many people. And one woman, one child, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a psychedelic advocate, to understand the impact of that. If the population of the earth was cut in half everybody alive would be twice as wealthy. It’s possible in 120 years that we could reduce the world’s population to a billion very healthy, very comfortable, very well educated people.

            Ok, that’s part of what ***the mushroom said***. And that may seem radical and some circles, but not here perhaps. It also said something else which I rarely mention, ***but since you brought it up***, there are not only too many people, there are too many men [laughter]. And ***I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit male birth***. It’s very rare in mammal populations that you have a 50-50 ratio of male to female and in fact it’s well-known that male infants are less robust than female infants. And the reason why we have a 50-50 sexual ratio is because we artificially support males, and withdraw all resources from females. I suspect in the high Paleolithic the ratio is closer to 2 to 1 [unsupported – see citations]. And my supposition and thinking about this is that probably the best ratio is about this is 3 to 1. This is the way to feminize the human race if you’re serious. This is the way to advance women if you’re serious. Then what you have is less men, women whose dedication to the reproductive activities is confined in time to the amount of time it takes to raise only one child. This would be tremendously salutary to our problems. I’ve never heard it advocated even by the most radical,lesbian feminist, yada yada. I’ve never heard anyone say male birth should be limited. But it obviously should. And through amniocentesis* and this sort of thing we can steer ourselves toward a population with the predominance of females and those females should have only one child. And 75% of those children should also be female. And I don’t consider myself a gung ho feminist. I mean, ***I’m a feminist*** [feminism has been entirely disproved – by women – see my interview with Karen of Girl Writes What], but I don’t read the literature, or try to understand all of the factions and theories. ***AS A HUMANIST I advocate a reduction in male birth.*** It just seems obvious that that’s the way to go [regarding the current practice of poisoning the male population, see my interview with Curtis Duncan].
            If it doesn’t seem obvious to you then let’s have an a public debate about it, and at least make it part of the rhetoric of the culture that this is an option for people to think about.

            Terence McKenna quotes:

            “The Mushroom said. […] But since you brought it up.
            […] I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies, tax
            incentives, medical policies, insurance policies, put in place to limit
            male birth. […]

            This is the way to feminize the human race. […] I’m a feminist. […] AS A HUMANIST I advocate a reduction in male birth.”

            ~ Terence McKenna

            Is Terence actually trying to claim that the mushrooms wanted to promote eugenics and tyrannous government policies, taxes, and medical and insurance policies specifically against men, and limiting male birth, the exact antithesis of the hideous communist policies in China?
            Are we to believe Terence that the mushrooms would promote more hatred and the murder/limiting of men and baby boys? Does a mother not naturally nurture her offspring? As someone else pointed out to me, what
            greater evil could there be than to put words like this in the mouth of the sacrament – the mushrooms? What care could the mushrooms possibly have in tyrannical, communist government policies that promote hatred
            against half the population?
            Notice how Terence says the mushrooms said,but then switches it to “I would be very interested in seeing a set of social policies…”. Nice try, Terence.

            Via http://www.gnosticmedia.com/how-darwin-huxley-and-the-esalen-institute-launched-the-2012-and-psychedelic-revolutions-and-began-one-of-the-largest-mind-control-operations-in-history/

        • Gabriel D. Roberts

          It’s very telling to me that after I’ve spent a great deal of time and energy to hear out (specifically) the evidence posed against Terence and the overall story of governmental connection, I can’t pose an alternative opinion than that of the researcher. In our own law, the detective is not the same as the judge. I’ve read Jan’s work and followed it. I’ve heard the arguments for and against TM based on the evidence presented. I’ve satisfied the who, what, where, and why. A couple of days ago, I asked the ‘why’ over the course of 4 hours of internet conversation between Jan, myself and another individual who endlessly squabbled. When I finally heard the ‘why’, the response was that “they” (the new agers and psychedelic prophets) betrayed us en masse to support agenda 21. Now think about that. That is an awful lot of people who support a neo-feudalist empire, not for money, not for blow jobs, but so that some other group of people could rule the world based on their work of deception. It might as well have been something “they’ would all die for. The ‘Why’ of the argument that is provided is insufficient. Please take note, I will NEVER resort to name calling in insinuation or overtly. I hope that you will return this kindness. Disagreement with the final judgement is not the same as being an apologist (which is another way of saying I support New Age fanaticism without evidence). I think what I’ve said has been metered and balanced and I respect Jan’s efforts and empathize with his having to constantly deal with attacks. (here comes to appeal to authority) Many of our own friends and peers who I dare claim are neither ignorant, or fanatical, would and do disagree with the final judgement made on TM. Perhaps you mistake my disagreement on the final judgement for fanaticism. For that I would like you to consider whom you are talking to, a person who once was very sure he knew the truth about things that happened long ago and was greatly disappointed. If you pay attention to what I’m saying (take for example my reading on neo-pantheism on disinfo), then you will see that I hold these things lightly, promote a no guru policy and am open to evidence. That doesn’t mean we always have to agree. I still stand on my comment that relying solely upon the trivium is lacking as it allows the user to imagine that they can now speak infallibly and can undermine any argument based on semantic foibles or assumed lack of understanding, or proper research on the part of anyone who disagrees. It’s as if using the trivium makes one’s own opinion the only reasonable outcome. With respect, I believe that it is important as gentlemen to agree to disagree from time to time without debasing each other . I think this a very reasonable stance to take. I want the same truth you do, something that isn’t always easy to come by, the outcome of which we may disagree upon.

          • Calypso_1

            Jolly good.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            I disagree with your perspective on the trivium method. It is no complete safe guard for absolute truth, merely a tool for determining if the rhetoric flows from proper study of grammar and proper vetting and parsing via logic.

            The method is not the messenger and the fallacy would be to conflate someone’s personality quirks in applying it, with the methodology.

            Also my saying we don’t need “New Age Apologetics” or rather “New Age Apologetics we don’t need” comes from immense experience in seeing the cult like atmosphere engendered, nourished and protected by people who avoid all information demonstrating that they might be subservient to another’s agenda or just plain duped.

            We all get duped. My comment is not calling you that, I simply said we don’t need that. Defending Terrence with silly presumptions that he must have been referring to the Mushroom, when the words in black and white from his own mouth are:

            Questioner: I’m real curious about one thing. Why is it important for you to do this?

            And certainly when I reached La Chorerra in 1971 I had a price on my head by the FBI, I was running out of money, I was at the end of my rope. And then “THEY” recruited me and said, “you know, with a mouth like yours there’s a place for you in our organization“. And I’ve worked in deep background positions about which the less said the better. And then about 15 years ago they shifted me into public relations and I’ve been there to the present.”

            Anyone willing to say such a thing, someone who people trusted, someone who could have put people away for the rest of the natural lives by snitching, deserves the utmost scrutiny period. I’m not assuming he did that, but if he is admitting he conspired to do PR for “They” having just mentioned the FBI were hot on his tail and that he was out of money and at the end of his rope, then we must be willing to consider that he may have had to inform on others to save his own ass. Isn’t that how it goes when you deal with the devil? He would not have had the upper hand in such a negotiation.

            23 years is what Terrence is describing here. 8 doing things better left unsaid….15 of it doing “public relations” ie, propagandizing and seeding potentially the ideas his handlers request in exchange for not being given to the dogs on d-block to make bitch with, is something we have to honestly consider here. 23 years is a long time.

            I wager the bulk of his recorded material could have been made between 71 and 94. He died April 3rd 2000 so the bulk of his storied career necessarily deserves heightened suspicion with such a revelation.

            Thus “New Age Apologetics We Don’t Need!” Don’t take that personally, take it as sage advice that dovetails with your own desire to rid ourselves of gurus.

            Yes Terrence was smart, I get that, does that mean he is without fault? Does that mean we should ignore his testimony here and just believe whatever bardic tale he throws our way as part of his PR campaign?

            Why are people afraid to air his dirty laundry? Perhaps he is already been made a psychedelic saint and questioning his hagiography or hagiographers is akin to heresy? Oh the irony!

            Thanks for being a good sport.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            I’m not afraid of dirty laundry, but there is also a shame in ravaging the cadaver of a good man based on imagined claims and circumstances. Upon the evidence provided, the only thing that is really happening is the desecration of a man who meant well and inspired a generation, who was flawed yet ultimately provided a positive path forward. I would say that anyone too dim to see that is endangering any positive future imagined. Our actions today may indeed carry on as our legacy and I cannot betray the legacy of Mr. McKenna. Your case is insufficient in genuine evidence and therefore must be denied with all respect. I’ve said my peace on this matter.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            http://www.gnosticmedia.com/turning-the-tables-on-the-huxleys-gordon-wasson-terence-mckenna-esalen-psychedelics-2012-mind-control-151/ Have you studied any of the material above Gabriel?

            Questioning gurus does not equate with necrophilia amigo ;)

            I’m not shitting on Terrence here, I’m simply pointing out that there is evidence that he was in fact doing PR for “They” (FBI, CIA or some other Gov’t agency) yes he has had a positive influence, this doesn’t mean we should ignore all information supporting his negative influence and affiliation. That would support we were enslaved to dogma and not thinking clearly which again, is what the “archaic revival” may have been about at its core.

            “A video explaining my latest short article on “How Darwin, Huxley,
            and the Esalen Institute launched the 2012 and psychedelic revolutions —
            and began one of the largest mind control operations in history.”

            This video is the first to reveal the background origins of the
            Esalen institute through Aldous and Julian Huxley, both grandson’s of
            Charles Darwin’s “Bulldog” Sir. Thomas Henry Huxley. The Huxleys helped
            found the Esalen institute to promote Julian Huxley’s eugenics,
            humanism, transhumanism and feminism to manipulate middle class
            Americans into following their agenda through psychedelics and the new
            age movement.

            This is not to say that psychedelics or entheogens don’t have value,
            it just means that devious people have usurped them and created a false
            movement to fool people into thinking that they’ve completed their task
            of freeing their minds.”

            Remember.

            “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”

            Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            I have indeed read that article and watched the video. I don’t consider it a reasonable argument to throw dozens of pages of material at somebody and somehow expect them to see what you’re really getting at. This again is the assumption that since I have not come to the same conclusions as you have that I must have not read the material. If we’re talking about actual evidence, the only two things that I’ve seen offered as concrete evidence were the audio we’ve all heard and the “will not confirm or deny” reply that Jan got. I have a friend who submitted a request about himself and got the EXACT same document. So we’ve got the document that neither confirms or denies anything AND Terence whimsically talking in a manner that makes those who would suspect him as dubious to think they have the nail in his coffin. There is the question of the character witness and the question of association. For association: The following is my take on the 40 associations TM had that serve as proof he was up to no good: The funny thing about associations, friendships and relationships is that they are often personal matters. Let’s take myself for example. I worked for a private jet company and had conversations with ‘the elite’. All the big bankers, the CEO’s the rockstars, the pop-divas, I’ve met virtually everyone of present influence in the world who passed through NYC’s private airport. My resume touts recommendations from some of these people. I’m also good friends with the favorite jewelry designer of Madonna, Rihanna, Beyonce and Lady Gaga, putting me two degrees separate from the high-pristesses of the “illuminati”. My relationship to them on paper looks pretty damming if you didn’t know the actual nature of each individual relationship. I also had a coke habit about 7 years back in which I met all kinds of unsavory people. If you dug them up and had them tell you a few stories about my bad behavior, you could do a pretty good job of character assassination even though those days are far behind me. Based on everything I’ve voluntarily shared, you could write up an amazing story of the connections, the incriminating possibilities and so on. But the reality is that I’m sitting on my sister’s couch, living with family, trying to figure out how to pay next month’s bills. The problem is, nobody but me knows that unless I share it. This is why the association with 40 different connections doesn’t really prove much. I’ve got 40 connections that look just as dark if not seen in the proper perspective. So am I an agent? No, I’m afraid I’m just a broke writer.

            As to the question of him supporting a globalist agenda, either voluntarily or by threat, I’ll refer to my post from earlier today:

            “Listening to TM’s last interview, I’ve seen the light. It’s clear through his weakened tone that he is peddling his globalist agenda under threat of torture by his govt handlers, so that the masses will engage in wild dancing. As he pauses, recovering from brain surgery, you can almost feel his insidious mind grasping for one last lie to poison the world with! Oh wait, that’s ridiculous.” http://youtu.be/OdQ2-_JCIZQ

            I have good reason to collect all the details and judge that the evidence presented isn’t sufficient, therefore it falls in danger of defamation of character and not a slam dunk of proof that he was anything worse than I’ve ever been…A broke writer.

            I can understand the connections being made and how one could perceive your position as reasonable, but I simply don’t think it’s the only reasonable view. Which is ok. I’m really just done talking about it, because I doubt either of us will change their position and the only danger is that somebody is gonna think I’m not smart enough to figure it out. Judge for yourself if you really think I’m that dim. I’m off to Italy. Love and respect!

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            I’m not throwing dozens of articles at you to distract you silly, I’m sharing them with the hopes that you would want to do the work required to have an informed opinion on the matter. This is precisely the problem, people are running to rhetoric, denying their ignorance and twisting all facts to support their already entrenched beliefs (just like other cults we are both familiar with). Make the time to study, imagine that you might be wrong and be humble enough to say so if that is the case. Check your ego bromigo.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            I would say the evidence easily supports Terrence was a water boy for the establishment on some level. His level of culpability may be proportionate the amount of hard time he was threatened with. Or did they just forget all about him after ’71? Of course, you have to study the material to see why this is most likely the case. The crossover between 2012, humanism, feminism, etc is a bit too much to deny, but you have to dig into multiple arenas and pay attention to the signs all along the way. The eugenicists agenda takes time to understand but you can see the effects throughout society.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            I didn’t see anywhere in the eugenics/feminism conversation where he said we should kill people, but that we should become conscious of our birth control habits. Of course once we’ve already assumed he’s a shill, we read more into it. This assumption factor has been used against me several times here and in my conversations with Jan as well on varying subjects. That said, I think it’s feasible that he was involved with the gov’t on some level as you’ve just said. I’m not as staunch in my position as people here assume, it just looks that way cause I’m not getting out the matches, wood and gas to set the dude on fire. Again, I could be dead wrong, but probably not! Haha!

          • symbiont

            I already cited how Dennis’s book explains their situation in 1971 and how it got cleared up. Scroll up.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            I’ve said many times and many places on this discussion that I might be wrong. I’m really ok with that. But since I’m not quick to assume as I feel others have, I have mushroom zombie j#zz on my face now! Hahah! I totally think its funny (and not in the ironic, “I’m laughing to mock anyone” sense). The problem is that we’ve danced along many a rabbit trail in order to accept or reject this audio as an admission, BUT.

            I think I’ve invested enough time and energy to say that it’s not a slam dunk and have repeatedly explained in several ways that this is the ONLY REAL GRIPE I have about the McKenna quote in question. I’ve cited in my conversations with you and others that the only real pieces of documentation of TM’s association with alphabet agencies comes from two sources.:
            Source 1. A document that neither confirms or denies his association. A document Jan requested and posted that he cited as proof of guilt. A document that I’ve said my friend has that he requested of himself and has presented on the interwebs. I think I even tagged him in our Facebook discussion of this subject. I posted that on Disinfo as well. Lookup ‘Was Terence McKenna A CIA Plant?”
            Source 2. The audio which I posted directly from Jan’s site. The onus of proof lies with the accuser, right? Perhaps I’ve missed some other legitimate document that shows his connection to the CIA, but the rest is either circumstantial, or proof of guilt based on character flaws and bad behavior. I’ve explained this as my position and nobody has provided me with anything else that isn’t either circumstantial in the manner I’ve explained before, or just, “he did this bad thing and that bad thing, therefore he’s a CIA agent” manner. When I say legitimate as I have several times on this forum, I mean, something that might look like actual admission. When I say it’s not a slam dunk, I mean, I doubt that these two pieces are enough to put him away in a real court, much less the court of public opinion. Again, I MIGHT BE TOTALLY WRONG. I’ve also alluded to the concept that just because somebody did something bad, we shouldn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. We’d be hard pressed to find someone who didn’t have dirt in their past. It also seems impossible to the imagination of those who disagree with me that EVEN IF HE WAS AN AGENT, he might have participated in a manner like George Clooney, or Jeff Bridges’ characters in “The Men Who Stare At Goats”. of course this is big speculation because we don’t know. When I’ve said we don’t really know, the friendly, or not so friendly (from others here) slights come out. I think it’s reasonable to say we’ve each said our peace. For you, it’s safe, because only I am apparently dripping with hypnagogic seminary fluid.

            I will end this with a bit of anecdotal humor. Just now I went down to the local coffee shop here in Bologna and ordered a cappuccino, it was delicious. As the beautiful bar tender made my coffee, I noticed that she had 3 Amanita mushroom statues on the shelf. I asked her if she had eaten them before and she said yes. She waved her hands around symbolizing the intoxication and elation she felt. I told her the mushroom looked like the cardinals and the photo of Jesus hung like a mushroom. I also told her I ate other mushrooms that made me go (waves hands in swirls around head with crazy whistle sounds) to which she laughed and agreed was a great thing to do. It’s clear from this first hand evidence that Terence must have come to Italy and spread his vile CIA plotted agenda in order to get this barista to take mushrooms. She seemed soft-headed and malleable, ready to engage in frantic dancing, inter-racial mixing, breaking down her family unit and even homosexual activity…clearly the CIA’s reach is long!

          • MRockatansky

            Gabriel – “ravaging the cadaver of a good man” – ? Can the notion of TM as ‘a good man’ be doubted? Or is it simply over a line of taboo, to question – permission denied?

            Has a final ruling by some official authority, been formally handed down? Making it a settled matter, past question, that TM was a good man – and that’s that?

            That TM was a paragon of virtue, undeniably honorable, of unimpeachable character, and how dare anyone suggest otherwise – is of course a familiar belief or attitude. And not just TM, its the pattern with followers of almost any saint or robed prophet, any religious icon of glory. Isn’t it?

            No argument, he was a man. But from the way you put that, it just sounds like you hold it above question, that Terence McKenna was – good. Period; as if no denying it – no ifs ands or buts.

            Or do I misunderstand? I have to ask, straight up, because – isn’t that the very heart of the question here – whether ‘good’ is a good word to describe TM? I.e., a fair or impartial assessment, reasonably true or accurate?

            Isn’t that – TM good, yes or no – precisely what’s in question, for those questioning?

            Granted, some prefer not to ‘go there.’ Especially if they’ve personally put a lot of their time in TM with sympathetic interest, taken inspiration or intellectual influence from him, looked to him for ‘permission to think’ and so on.

            If one rather not question, okay far as I’m concerned. But for anyone wondering – its hard to avoid noticing the avoidance of issue. As if to draw wagons around TM’s ‘good name’ – protectively, to expel or banish question; especially inquiry prompted by reasonable doubt, even suspicion. Like – maybe his aura would go poof, if held up to the light and examined closely?

            And its not just about TM, it rubs off. How does such avoidance of question so basic reflect on enthusiasts who follow his example, adding more spin to try and salvage the web he wove?

            What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. A saying that comes to mind again and again, in studying the TM discourse – in nonpartisan critical light that is. Not uncritical partisan rose-tinted stage light.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            I assure you I’m more interested in legitimate evidence against him, not rejection letters from Govt agencies and jokes about working for mushrooms misconstrued as an admission of association with the alphabet agencies. I have the good sense to know what resonates with me and the wherewithal to know what works and what doesn’t. Many things TM said do indeed resonate, others do not. I’m not even saying it’s impossible for the claims brought against him to be true, I’ve just said the evidence is insufficient if we wish to skewer a man’s life work and yes, metaphorically dig him up and do our worst. It’s poor form and an insult to good sense to jump to that conclusion. Many things TM promoted are things that jan promotes ( ie, trusting your own good sense with careful thought) and yet we are to believe that EVERYTHING he said and did is moot because Jan believes his findings lead to a slam dunk closed case. Couple that with an inability to catch innuendo, nuance and just plain old fashioned humor, the grand scheme has been established only in the minds of a few who ironically could be seen as the faithful of the church of Irvin. The problem for the overarching plot by the CIA/FBI etc is that Eastern ideas were introduced and broadened and expounded upon within the scope of the 60’s explosion of consciousness talk and a resurgence of psychedelics in the west. None of it was new, in fact most of the stuff promoted was/is ancient. So was Buddha a CIA plant? Krishna for sure! Perhaps that will be the next adventure in cadaver ravaging! The rabbit hole has no bottom!

          • MRockatansky

            Hi Gabriel, thanks for your reply. You took time, went to the trouble of saying all kinds of things, but – none that seem responsive to what I asked. Nor even specific or clear, starting with your first sentence and sustained throughout.

            No offense, please – but it seems you speak in riddles. For example, offering to assure me, alluding to ‘legitimate evidence’ – I’m not sure how that can address my question.

            Add to that – if you study the discourse of ‘scientific’ creationism, you’ll find they also use such words, invoke such phrases, in comparable fashion – i.e., with no standard of evidence expressed or implied. No glimmer of any reliable or valid method for assessing legitimacy. And it happens in precisely equivalent context, where hard question is posed.

            Its not easy even to establish hailing frequencies with true believers, whatever type. It almost seems here, to me, that you’ve replied to me with a conversation of its own, no relation to my inquiry – personal impressions, based on some ‘resonance.’ That’s okay, we can all believe what we like in a free world, as sovereign beings. But the inspiration of ‘true belief’ so often leaves believers constrained by prior, foregone conclusion. That’s what they speak from.

            Followers, believers, the loyally inspired – have teachings, doctrine. That’s the cart they’ve got in front of the horse of any evidence, reason, or interest in such. Such a mindset, once it calcifies – can only resist or oppose authentic inquiry.

            Along with doctrine comes taboo, prohibitions on ‘wrong’ type talk. Probing inquiry that isn’t so impressed with some ‘resonance’ – i.e. ‘how it sounds’ to excitable ears (not perceptively critical ones) – doesn’t trade clarification for obfuscation. Nor sacrifice impartiality, pursuit of crtically inquiring, better-informed understanding – on an altar of faith, or inspired ‘wows.’

            Maybe I didn’t make my question clear enough. If so, mea culpa. Allow me to rephrase. It was based on your objection to, as you put it – ravaging the cadaver of a ‘good’ man. Your point seemed to rest on an unquestioned assumption that TM was a ‘good’ man, period. As if that is some fact undeniably established, and above doubt.

            As an opinion per se, fine if you think that. But do you qualify it as opinion? Or, do you consider it to be some undeniable conclusion, such that its above question?

            That’s what I was asking you – do you consider the ‘goodness’ of TM to be as if proven – beyond reasonable doubt? Like a result from some impartial investigation, or an established fact? Or articles of faith in a church service, where “Jesus Is Lord” – its not up for discussion? Its just understood, and if you want to question that – go do somewhere else?

            If you rather not address the question, its okay. This is a discussion forum, not a court proceeding. There’s no adjudication authority to compel you to answer, so if you rather not, okay. Nor have I any power of subpoena, to force anyone’s testimony to answer a question.

            As long as you at least have question, you have option. I ask based on my own explorations in the McKennasphere. Consistently, I find questions of conscience and principle seem to raise heebie-jeebies among those who’ve invested in its ‘resonance.’ That impresses them mightily, to the exclusion of anything else – like, numerous discrepancies from fact, logic and truth itself. But he made it all sound real impressive (he was articulate and had a big vocab).

            As I’ve discovered, nobody leading me around by the nose – its only by placing TM’s philosophizing and theorizing etc. under microscope – that one discovers significant deceit, little deceptions left and right – basic facts falsified, counterfeit brushstrokes.

            For you, is that a standard of ‘good’? If so, the ‘scientific’ creationists will be relieved to know. Its what they do too.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            My apologies, I’ve been in transit in Europe for the last 4 days without much internet time, sometimes just on a phone where I can’t respond. I finally have a little time to respond and hope to get more to the point. 1. “A good man”. Ok, there are many people in history who have contributed to discussions and practices in consciousness exploration. Many of them were not actually that great to be around. Take Alleister Crowley for instance; he had some great ideas, but was a total bastard. Discounting his ideas because he was a bastard would be removing some valuable ideas from the conversation. I hope that clears up my definition of “a good man”. My objection is not necessarily with the accusations put against Terence, but with the throwing out the baby with the bathwater, discounting the whole of his work. Make sense? We can and will prove to have our own foibles in life, some bigger and smaller, but hopefully the good stuff we do can still shine through, giving future peeps a chance to refine and improve.
            2. I speak in metaphors often, it’s just the way I talk. As I’ve said in other responses to you, I think if you had a sense of my general tone in person, you’d be a little bit less quick to associate me with scientific creationists and more like a reasonable guy. Again I hope you can understand that I hate to see some good babies thrown out with bathwater (Riddles!)
            3. The list of people that are allegedly part and parcel to this grand scheme to dupe us all into being soft-headed hippy (scientific creationist style!) suckers is quite long. Many of these people brought eastern thought to the West. Take Huxley’s book, “The Perennial Philosophy” in which he gives his own personal interlaced cosmology, based on a mix of common themes among shamanic cultures, eastern influences and hermetic wisdom. Using the babies and bathwater theme, we should then disregard EVERYTHING he said as well because according to the evidence Huxley was out to get us all. You see the problem with this? It makes the entire collection of conscious thought worthless. Buddism, Hinduism, Shamanism, all of it is tainted then. I’m knee deep in Jean Gebser’s “Ever Present Origin” presently. His work was not even translated into English until the 70’s and yet he’s integrating shamanism and magic and eastern thought into one presently applicable package. It doesn’t make sense that every person who ever had dirty laundry now has to be discounted for their positive contributions. (here comes the metaphor!) Do you not eat a delicious peach anyway even if there is a bruise on one side? Why not cut off the bad stuff and take what nourishes? This is really the crux of my gripe, that we should have the good sense to take what works and leave the rest behind. If that makes me some kind of creationist style linguistic gymnast, well then, I guess I’ve done a bad job of explaining what I think is pretty simple.

          • Guest

            I don’t know if my whole comment made it, so I’m reposting to make sure:
            2. I speak in metaphors often, it’s just the way I talk. As I’ve said in other responses to you, I think if you had a sense of my general tone in person, you’d be a little bit less quick to associate me with scientific creationists and more like a reasonable guy. Again I hope you can understand that I hate to see some good babies thrown out with bathwater <Riddles!

            3. The list of people that are allegedly part and parcel to this grand scheme to dupe us all into being soft-headed hippy (scientific creationist style!) suckers is quite long. Many of these people brought eastern thought to the West. Take Huxley's book, "The Perennial Philosophy" in which he gives his own personal interlaced cosmology, based on a mix of common themes among shamanic cultures, eastern influences and hermetic wisdom. Using the babies and bathwater theme, we should then disregard EVERYTHING he said as well because according to the evidence Huxley was out to get us all. You see the problem with this? It makes the entire collection of conscious thought worthless. Buddism, Hinduism, Shamanism, all of it is tainted then. I'm knee deep in Jean Gebser's "Ever Present Origin" presently. His work was not even translated into English until the 70's and yet he's integrating shamanism and magic and eastern thought into one presently applicable package. It doesn't make sense that every person who ever had dirty laundry now has to be discounted for their positive contributions. (here comes the metaphor!) Do you not eat a delicious peach anyway even if there is a bruise on one side? Why not cut off the bad stuff and take what nourishes? This is really the crux of my gripe, that we should have the good sense to take what works and leave the rest behind. If that makes me some kind of creationist style linguistic gymnast, well then, I guess I've done a bad job of explaining what I think is pretty simple.

          • MRockatansky

            Well, I guess trying to communicate is not a very effective approach for any hope of establishing dialogue, opening hailing frequencies – having a conversation together, same page.

            I feel I’ve pretty much tried. Results are what they are. Batman to Riddler – okay, you got away. Once again. Haven’t been able to bring you to face questions. Have your laugh, okay, enjoy riddling. But riddles don’t perplex. They are what they are, well and good.

            I feel I’ve asked you some questions, about things you’ve said here. About the ‘goodness’ of Terence, as you assert. And the significance of your testimonial about having personally experienced ‘heightened edge detection’ – on account of which, as you explained – you’re not ‘impressed’ by the fact that Terence lied his ass away about research by Fischer, in order to build his tatty trojan horse, amateurishly, rhetorical device for trickery.

            And as record shows, you’ve given your replies, as you’ve chosen to. I’ve read them and rejoined, to see if there’s any remote chance of any communication across lines of disagreement – even as a possibility. Results: as ROBOT MONSTER worded it: “negative, negative”

            I think we understand each other. No further questions here. Past any deliberation phase, at this point. Results seem pretty conclusive, and clearly indicative.

          • Gabriel D. Roberts

            And yes, one could totally doubt that Terrence was a good man, because the only fact of the matter is that we weren’t him, we weren’t there and we don’t have any legitimate documentation of anything other than what he said himself. Like Dennis said, Terence didn’t take himself too seriously. Unfortunately now Dennis is supposedly an operative now… honestly, I think Miley Cyrus has more cred as an operative than any of these relatively obscure psychedelics guys. I guess the CIA budget has to be spent somehow!

          • MRockatansky

            Gee whiz, how to even try and establish communication – I don’t assume its possible, for various reasons. I merely check and see. If its not possible, okay, I have to live with that. As I well know and understand, especially from past experience in the McKennasphere, testing those waters to see whether dialogue can even occur.

            “the only fact of the matter is that we weren’t him, we weren’t there and we don’t have any legitimate documentation of anything other than what he said himself.”

            Again, its the airiness of such an assertion, in light of its apparent untruth. Or by ‘we’ do you mean the Imperial we – you, youself, and you? I have to ask because I have many more facts that those to which, as you say, ‘we’ are limited.

            Not least of which – the facts of what Fischer’s article says, as contrast to what Terence kindly told us it said. In black and white, chapter and verse – Fischer’s publications, and Terence’s. So, your protest notwithstanding, what you suggest comes off defensive and completely false. Those of us who look into things, on actual interest in finding out, genuine human curiosity and intelligent in action – have, or can have, a helluva lot more fact and information than you seem to realize or allow for … based on what you said, or tried to say.

            Have you really thought thru any of that? Sure doesn’t have any detectable ‘think through’ – far as I can tell. Again, that’s okay, if that’s your piece, you’re the only one can say it, for yourself. As with anyone, we’ve only our own perspectives to speak from.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Yes. I agree completely. Gabriel you can’t say you want to see Guru’s taken down and then fellate their cadavers in hopes of maintaining an aura of potency! ;) just kidding man, but it is ironic yes. Now wipe off all that mushroom laden zombie jizz and get back to me. I kid, I kid!

          • http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch

            Haha, I see you’ve chopped the quote down even further (taking out the “alien ambassador” part which explains the question he’s answering.) Sheer, willful delusion.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Who is deluded here? You really believe that Terrence was taking all of his cues from “the mushroom”? If he believes this than he hasn’t realized the reality of “mind manifesting” substances, my opinion is he was manufacturing a way out of his own cognitive dissonance and brought others along for the ride.

            Good opportunity to apply logic. I will quote Jan as no one has respectfully or cogently answered his challenge that I have seen.

            Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
            recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to
            do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical
            thinking:

            1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

            2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

            3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background
            positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something an
            agency would do?

            4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

            5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is
            that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for
            smuggling)

            6) Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI could do?

            7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his
            arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

            When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their organization in public relations and deep background to the present – which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not mushrooms or UFOs. Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is clearly ridiculous. The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reaching for anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel
            uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you again.

            Please answer the questions raised by Jan here.

          • siphersh

            In terms of being an “alien ambassador”, within Terence’s world of ideas, the agenda of the “aliens” is a recurring theme. One’s public role as a psychedelic explorer is also a major theme. And in this specific context, that’s what they are actually discussing.

            “Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better”

            That’s a lie. He didn’t say that the mushroom told him that.

            “Are the mushrooms able to pay him”

            His books and talk tours are.

            “Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING?”

            “Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his arrest?”

            Completely irrelevant. Even if a templar grandmaster got him out of trouble, that won’t turn the quote into an “admission” of anything.

          • symbiont

            After la chorerra Terence and his father went to the station to turn himself in, and apparently no one knew what he was even talking about because it was far from being as big a deal as they thought, in their young paranoid minds. After they found the paperwork, he got off with 3 years of probation for telling them all that he knew about the hash suppliers in Bombay. This is coming from Dennis McKenna in his memoir- a guy who was very close to Terence from the beginning and with him every step of the way through it, who agrees that these claims of his involvement with the CIA are ridiculous.

            Do you really think they even knew about Terence’s ability to rave at this point, and were considering actually recruiting him?

            He got involved with smuggling a bit of hash, and the resources of investigation that they had back then were very limited. All of this went down in the early 1970’s long before Terence was even well known by the local hippies as a wild speaker.

            We’ve all looked at this evidence and concluded that its most likely him talking about the mushroom. You on the otherhand have steadfast denied that scenario of even being a remote possiblity! How open minded and dogmatic is that? Clearly the arguments outlined in this thread outline how that is possible, yet with the characteristic zeal of paranoid delusion you vehemently deny it.

          • MRockatansky

            “Terence and his father went to the station to turn himself in … He got off with 3 years of probation for telling them all that he knew about the hash suppliers in Bombay.”

            Where’s that documented? What you tell involves official actions, matters of record. What do you base that on?

            If someone wanted to independently check the fact you recount, verify it – where should they look? Where would they find it substantiated?

            Nothing against narrative and story telling. But it can’t take the place of facts established and confirmed as such. And to assess any info for accuracy, reliability, precision – all the criteria of validity and truth – requires tracing to its origin.

            Some info can’t be sourced, and if that’s the case, that’s of interest to know. Like the mysterious voice heard by the helmsman, as he explained, that ordered him to announce to the crew and passengers aboard: “The Great Pan is Dead!” (back during Tiberius reign).

            Some sources – even if they can be traced – are bogus, others not. Inquiring minds like to know where info, or anything presenting as such – comes from.

            In advance, thanks.

          • symbiont

            Yes i get how sources work/how important they are, thanks lol. As i said earlier its all in Dennis McKenna’s memoir about their life. I don’t know the exact page but its in the invisible landscapes chapter or the one just after it.

          • MRockatansky

            Thanks for your reply symbiont, fair enough. I appreciate your acknowledgment too about the larger issue I inquired from, context of info, sources and sourcing.

          • MRockatansky

            Just one more word of thanks symbiont, for sourcing that story (from DMcK, ‘Brotherhood of …’) – how/why TM got out of likely jail, didn’t have to serve in the slammer.

            Doubly interesting – word of info, from TMac not D? Especially insofar as … well, you be the judge, see what you think. (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDYdN3j2eTg).

            To a questioner in the audience asking about this, Terence replies by ‘theorizing’ about it, acting like gee whiz (wink wink – audience cue to laugh) – he doesn’t know, but what fascinating .. etc:

            “Ahhh, why am I not in jail? Hm. Well – that’s
            an interesting question. And I, number one – I don’t know. Here’s what I’ve come up with:

            Uh, notice that I use big words. I don’t boil, I don’t try to boil it down to a shoutable slogan, like Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out – that, then, they come (Audience: haha).

            So, that’s one possibility, that simply, if you’re defined in Their eyes as an intellectual, then They automatically put you in the harmless category, and send resources elsewhere. That’s one possibility.

            Now, the other possibility is slightly more disturbing. But in the interest of thoroughness, let me raise it:

            Uh perhaps I’m sanctioned.

            Perhaps They decided, um, ‘we don’t really understand what this stuff is, and we can’t have a mass movement. But let one guy just kind of keep the pilot light on (Audience: haha) in case we ever change our minds (Audience: haha) about this. And he will have kept the pilot light on, ummm.

            And the other possibility, which is probably too naive, but in – the interest again of exhaustive thoroughness – maybe They just haven’t notice yet? (Audience: ha)

            You know, Tim Leary, who’s a friend of mine, would address 25 thousand people at a throw. My crowds are, you know, a couple times a year they creep
            over a thousand. And I think the key is to keep it low key, and – we don’t want Dodger Stadium filled (Audience: ha) or anything like that. Its very good to atomize it and spread it through.

            END TRANSCRIPT

            BTW – I can’t help being struck by how TM’s last line there relates so directly to something I told Calypso in a post just yesterday – about the fundamentally strategic and ulterior, not theoretical or intellectual, nature of TM’s ‘ideas’ and ‘theorizing’ –

            Where Leary was overt, TM went covert.

            The last quote (just above) really puts that in TM’s own words. As I find (again and again and …) – his biz seems mainly to have been propaganda and disinfo in a subcultural ideological offensive.

            Under high magnification, his narrative (schmeories, thoughtscapes as Calypso called it) – turn out to be staged operations, dressed as ideas. Rhetorical maneuvers in a sort of guerilla culture war, disguised (Trojan Horse style) as some kina deep thought. Like something intellectual, philosophical, concepts rather than verbally staged illusions of meaning and purport – as deception ploys or tactics in a strategic campaign.

            Couldn’t resist slipping this info into the discussion stream here. For how it interacts with not just the “They recruited me” business – but also in relation to that, the ‘3 years probation is why’ account from DMac you brought to my attention.

            On one hand. On the other, as transcribed above – for how it relates so squarely to a point I brought out (from my analysis) – that surfaced in posting another participant here. Thanks again.

          • http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch

            Cameron, when you say “If he believes this then he hasn’t realized the reality of mind-manifesting..” you are acknowledging that the CIA recruitment interpretation fails IF McKenna believes that mushrooms possess autonomous agency. Now you and I might believe that mushrooms simply manifest the mind of the user, but it would be fallacious to assume that everybody must believe this because we do. Graham Hancock and Rick Strassman believe that drugs facilitate contact with autonomous entities. You can read, for example, literally hundreds of ayahuasca accounts where the people refer to ayahuasca as “the mother” and say “the mother told me…” and “the mother really kicked my ass…”. (Irving would probably argue that these people were really talking about the FBI, and copy and paste a series of questions starting: 1. Is the ayahuasca brew capable of mating and having biological offspring? 2. Can a drink talk?, and so on.) Now you know as well I do that McKenna spent HIS LIFE saying that mushrooms and DMT facilitate contact with autonomous entities rather than simply manifesting the mind of the user, and in order to counter this point, say “my opinion is he was manufacturing a way out of his own cognitive dissonance and brought others along for the ride.” That’s perfectly fine, but obviously your opinion does not make something a fact. If Irving had said “It’s my opinion that McKenna is talking about the FBI here..” then fine, I’d respectfully disagree. But unlike you, Irving is incapable of acknowledging that he is expressing an opinion in this matter. And please don’t insult your and my intelligence by further copying and pasting those questions…..what is in question here is WHAT MCKENNA MIGHT PLAUSIBLY HAVE SAID ABOUT MUSHROOMS, NOT WHAT IS LITERALLY TRUE ABOUT MUSHROOMS. Those questions are just plain stupid.

      • VaudeVillain

        It always seems to me that most conspiracy theorists put vastly too much stake on connections and consistently overestimate the capabilities of their assigned conspirators.

        For example, I can tell you right now that I, personally, fail the reliability test as generally applied. I have several friends and family members who are or have been involved in Freemasonry, the military, finance, law enforcement, elected politics, unelected politics, academia, military research, industrial research, organized religion, disorganized religion, organized crime, disorganized crime… the list goes on.

        If I’m an “agent” of some sort, it’s news to me, but by the standard of evidence required to “prove” such things in that community, I am without a doubt one of “them”.

        As to the overestimation… most of it boils down to simply foolish scenarios: people doing things with such skill and foresight that anyone smart enough and competent enough to succeed would have to see as ridiculously improbable and wildly risky with only the slimmest possible upside. Faking 9/11 requires far too many moving parts and loose ends for anyone with the skills and resources to do so to see it as a worthwhile ruse: exploiting a real 9/11 is much easier, much safer and just as effective. Likewise, inventing a subculture from whole cloth is virtually impossible, infiltrating and co-opting one that already exists is easy: why take the path of more resistance?

        • http://www.youtube.com/chillmeester Chiller

          I think that the main reason for creating a subculture is control.

          if the starters of such a culture are already in , then they can influence other people who join later personally and by their Originator status they have an authority.

          The same for any group process with humans.

          a subculture can also be coopted but if the big wigs of that movement refuse to cooperate it can be a liability in the eyes of the manipulators.

          Further it depends if the friends you have been associated with in freemasonry, intelligence etc. are high level people who are interconnected or are lower level nobody’s not connected to any mover or shaker. so it is necessary to make a distinction.

          Aldous Huxley and his connections were pretty up top, and not your average non-elite lower echelon associates.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Provide an example, and if you can support for your ad hoc statistical study…

  • Ted Heistman

    Intelligence has its finger in a lot of pots. But thing is I think Jan Irvin is looking at this the wrong way. He strikes me as looking at the psychedelic movement like it was dreamed up by the CIA from the outset and then put in place incrementally using people like Mckenna as shills.

    I think that’s pretty backwards. Its more like co-option and a co-option that isn’t even really complete, its like putting some things in place just in case it can be co-opted in the future.

    • The Well Dressed Man

      I’m not familiar with McKenna’s associations, but enough of the early promoters of psychedelics were close enough to the CIA to make me wonder. Ken Kesey and Robert Hunter were MKULTRA volunteers for drug tests at Stanford. Fast forward to Phil Lesh and Mickey Hart joining the Bohemian Club and performing at the Grove.

      • Ted Heistman

        I think people often attribute more rational planning to movements than actually exists.

        What actually happens is an attempt at shaping movements, or rendering them less effective.

        This idea in some conspiracy theorist circles that social movements are hatched by intelligence agencies as some kind of “evil plan” and then put incrementally in place, I think almost NEVER happens.

        • The Well Dressed Man

          This is that disinfo.com moment when WDM’s conspiracy theory is called out by TH.
          Cheers, amigo. :)

          • Ted Heistman

            LOL! wait “WDM”?

            I actually play the devil’s advocate more than half the time to be truthful. Its not really trolling, more like reverse Socratic dialogue. And then other times I have dumb ideas I try out before I know they are dumb!

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          Based on what exactly do you think this NEVER happens Ted?
          No offense, but you’ve just elaborately stated a seemingly unfounded opinion here amigo. Let’s just focus on the psychedelic movement. If ~95% of the key progenitors are found to have connections to the military industrial complex and gov’t that are significant, you would have to presume that there was an intention by those institutions for some reason. To presume otherwise in this regard would be require ignoring the evidence offered.

          • Ted Heistman

            Camron,

            I think its similar to how “Creation Science” works. Some people find it impossible to believe that impersonal forces can create anything complex. But actually it does happen.

            I think sociological forces display some type of collective intelligence, that some people anthropomorphize into the work of some mastermind, when none is there.

            Just because you can show an connection and an involvement between intelligence agencies and the psychedelic movement doesn’t mean The psychedelic movement was dreamed up by intelligence agencies and incrementally put in place according to some grand design.

            Anyway the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that this grand design exists and showing a connection and association does not make the case.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            It is the same defense that R.A.W invoked. The sad part is it is nothing if not a contrived myth. At least he spoke out about the FED at Disinfocon. And yes pins did drop, for the advant garde hipster occultists were struck by the revelation of their own en$lavement…. No offense to the disinfocon, I thought it was great, I’m just making a point that we have to take the piss out of every buddha (and if they are drinking Amanita, to recycle it in the pursuit of our own buddha nature, but I digress) McKenna ran the same lines of R.A.W dismissing any overarching conspiracy, while employing the role of self-trickster. Actors portray characters and people who compromise their ethics for security are inevitably found out, if not by man, then perhaps by man’s creator…

            Presuming they could not possibly achieve such influence ignores the mountains of evidence demonstrating that is exactly what they have done and continue to do. Case in point. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI_zFD879v0

          • Ted Heistman

            That’s not how influence works.

            It works more like trying to get behind winning causes in order to steer them. They aren’t the unmoved movers, these bankers.

          • Ted Heistman

            Camron,

            You are a loyal dude, I know Jan is your friend. I think some of his earlier stuff about the trivium is good, but something is wrong. He has gone of the deep end. This article reads like “reefer madness” its completely ludicrous. Rock and Roll is evil because it leads to sex, dancing and race mixing? WTF? Seriously?

            http://www.gnosticmedia.com/manufacturing-the-deadhead-a-product-of-social-engineering-by-joe-atwill-and-jan-irvin

          • The Well Dressed Man

            Ted, I don’t think that article is without merit, although the conclusion is rather grandiose. The suspicion that the intelligence community was intimately involved with the psychedelic movement is an idea I’ve heard from several old “heads.”

            The 1960s were a time of radical, global change. I certainly don’t think this climate was specifically engineered by any one group. In Europe, the youth movement was much more politically effective, Paris 1968 for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1968_events_in_France

            The word-of-mouth lore from old deadheads has been that the popularization of psychedelics was heavily promoted in the states as a way of diverting the raging youth culture from political power, and that this was a CIA operation. I don’t think that’s too far fetched. Part of the reason the US is so conservative compared to Europe is how effectively our leftist activists are duped. The labor and youth movements were intentionally separated. Our September Labor Day holiday was specifically chosen to separate us from the global Labor movement. May 1 is the holiday in the rest of the world.

            It’s fascinating how my ex-hippie parents and their whole demographic went from civil rights marches and anti-war activism to voting for Reagan. This conspiracy theory offers an interesting explanation, and is worth further exploration.

          • Ted Heistman

            I am not poo-pooing the connection, but that article says straight out ” elements in the govenment and Banking Industries created the counter culture…” becuz
            1. Sex
            2.Dancing
            3 Race Mixing

            I am barely fucking exaggerating. Jerry Falwell looks like a lefty compared to the authors of that article. Look:

            The
            “counterculture” had been developed by elements within the U.S.
            government and banking establishment as part of a larger plan to bring
            about a new Dark Age; or, as it was marketed to potential victims, an
            ‘archaic revival – See more at:
            http://www.gnosticmedia.com/manufacturing-the-deadhead-a-product-of-social-engineering-by-joe-atwill-and-jan-irvin/#sthash.Xkg916Ya.dpuf

          • The Well Dressed Man

            Yep. Much of the essay is way over the top, and I remain skeptical of the conclusion. But still a fascinating exercise, and to me, on the cogent side of much of the speculative content linked to on disinfo. fnord

          • Ted Heistman

            I think cogent is a stretch, but I don’t doubt any of the connections, he makes.

            I think over time I have gained more of an insight into how influence works and it doesn’t seem to work anything like Jan seems to think it does.

            Its like the Skull and Bones back in the day. His mindset would seem to be all these guys were complete ciphers before they were tapped by the Skull and Bones and then their careers were “made” but really they just pick people who seem like movers and shakers.

            Jan seems to imply people like McKenna are almost like actors simply playing a role created by the people who invented some master plan before hand and put it in place the exact way they wanted it to go.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Agreed.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Ted you are taking his points out of context and adding flair to
            your strawman’s garb.

            Comparing Jan to Jerry Falwell based on your own strawman attack is a weak ploy to kill the messenger. Got to come with something better than that here amigo.

          • Ted Heistman

            Camron,

            Maybe to you this narrative is brand spanking new. It must be great! But to me the narrative that “Satan” created the 1960’s, rock and roll music and race mixing in order to corrupt everyone’s morals, namely young white people, is old news. All Jan did is replace “Satan” with “Bankers/FBI/CIA”

            Same bullshit magical thinking. And the burden of proof is on you to make the case that “Bankers” are all powerful, not me. That is an assumption you and Jan never seem to question. I think that’s the problem with the trivium thing. You don’t use it to examine your underlying assumptions.

            so since you have this assumption that Banks and intelligence agencies are omnipotent you think all you need to do is show their connections to various people or movements and then you feel the case has been made that these people and movements were under the complete control of Banks/Intelligence agencies.

            Sorry but NO.

          • sonicbphuct

            I know I’m getting in late on the conversation here, but … my semi-ex-hippie-ex-religious-fundamentalist-christian mother who had marched in civil rights & anti-war marches took me to Regan rallies and anti-abortion marches after she “converted”. Later, after joining “Women’s Aglow ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aglow_International )”, she mentioned that she started becoming disillusioned with it as she started to see the influence of the Christian Businessmens’ Association ( http://www.cbmcint.org/about-us/vision-history/ ). After looking into it, the “Christian Right” saw an opportunity to convert a large swath of “spiritual seekers” to their particular brand of … whatever it is.

            In the end, it seems to me, the whole Hippie movement was as faddish as the whole christian movement, except they were not as capable at “doing” as the christians with money, power and prestige (as well as common acceptance).

            I don’t know of any clandestine connections with Intel agencies, but it wouldn’t surprise me. Anyway, probably off topic, but your last paragraph just reminded me of those conversations with my mother.

          • The Well Dressed Man

            Yeah it was the fundie Christian thing with my folks too.
            We were going to a hippie church in a warehouse for a while when I was super young. The aesthetic was folk songs and granola, but they were super-paranoid apocalyptic ultraconservative evangelicals.

            The whole vauge, unfocused woowoo aspect of flower-childhood was easily exploited by church orgs. To me this is related to the theory that the creation of this class of “spiritual peasants” was a psyop. An addled demographic that has rejected critical thought and economic security is quite easily manipulated.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Ted, take one point you take issue with. Provide the full context and then provide a rational refutation. Character assassination does not suffice to convince me that your position has merit, quite the contrary.

          • HCE

            Even if the CIA did create the psychedelic movement, it isn’t hard to see it quickly went out of their control. But then that often happens to the intelligence and M/I organizations. That sort of hubris blinds one to their own inability to recognize that they can’t see all ends.

      • moremisinformation

        “Fast forward to Phil Lesh and Mickey Hart joining the Bohemian Club and performing at the Grove.”

        “I’m Uncle Sam
        That’s who I am
        Been hiding out
        In a rock and roll band”

        -U.S. Blues, Grateful Dead ;)

        Having said all that, I don’t think Irvin has proven McKenna’s connection to intelligence agencies but he’s all but nailed down R. Gordon Wasson’s.

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          I would say it is fair to make the induction at this point.

    • Calypso_1

      This is a better approach. Also, why assume that highly intelligent ‘awakened’ individuals wouldn’t be interested in co-opting & infiltrating agencies. Irving continues the standard paranoid trope of monolithic boogeyman intel agencies.

      • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

        I’m playing the original Deus Ex for the first time, and you wouldn’t believe how close the conspiracy theories in it are to the real life theories. The all powerful evil agencies vs. the righteous self-aware terrorists story looks like it came right off of RT. I always worried about the (early) Assassin’s Creed games mixing too much fact with a paranoid fiction, but clearly games have been doing it for at least a decade. People need to take a step back and breathe methinks.

    • Charlie Primero

      That’s not the thesis. The thesis is that Elites use anthropology to influence culture for their benefit. The CIA are mere errand boys for implementation of that influence, not the actual people “thinking it up”.
      I agree that it’s often culture co-option, but add that there is also culture creation. It’s a mixture of both.

      • Jin The Ninja

        ‘anthropology,’ as a field of inquiry, was originally/historically (and is self-admittedly) based on the control of culture(s). any contemporary textbook on the history of- will admit these origins- which is why there exists other reactionary, multidisciplinary approaches to anthro since the mid to late 80s- often involving identity politics, and/or ethical humanism among others. if his thesis is that anthro is a discipline used by monumental power structures to ‘control culture,’- he is fundamentally correct; however this is not a conspiracy- this is factual, easily accessible history.- but regardless i agree fully-that a mixture of co-option and creation are the primary methods of control.

        • Monkey See Monkey Do

          Because of this I believe modern Anthropology has a leg up over other academic disciplines in promoting ethical humanism and empowering oppressed peoples. As you said, modern anthropologists admit that the information they gathered was used for control in the past. Now however the anthropologist/sociologist is in a situation where they can subvert dogma, infiltrate and expose corruption, and empower the oppressed in ways unavailable to other disciplines.

          • Charlie Primero

            In what year did the “leaders” of affluent populations stop using anthropology to predate less affluent populations?

          • Jin The Ninja

            ‘they’ never stopped. statistical sociology serves a very important function of social control. another example is that anthro prof who wrote a book calling contemporary western civ. the most ‘peaceful’ epoch of any generation. but i agree with Monkey that there are those within those disciplines (just as there are those within economics) that subvert, reclaim, empower.

        • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

          I disagree only slightly. I have to stand for a moment in defense of anthropology as a larger field of study…not necessarily in defense of some of its practitioners and their gaffes. Anthropology at its core acknowledges differences in cultural norms and lends itself to the admirable understanding that one’s own culture isn’t the end all and be all of acceptable thought/conduct. I’ve got a few friends in the field, and one is specialized in language ‘rescue’, recording and preserving latin american native languages that are jeopardized by monumental changes in resources and governance…(with, as one should expect, a very protective view of the subject languages and the cultures they emerged from, so the goal is two fold, to raise awareness of and hopefully prevent the imminent collapse of these smaller cultures, their mythologies and beliefs and traditions, and to second salvage what can be saved in the event that they are ground underfoot.

          So if it can be said that I dissent here…it would only be to the extent that viewing anthropologists as a whole as a negative force is wildly inaccurate. Viewing the perversion of the field by a few as a misuse of an important field of study…is completely appropriate.

          It’s easy to forget in an era where anthropologists are occasionally employed by governments to smooth over ruffled feathers while other nations are subjected to horrors…that most anthropologists have a very dim view of those who make use of the discipline not to understand and promote understanding, but to assist a process of homogenization that is universally antithetical to the origins of the profession.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Level headed analysis. You must have no sacred cows to protect here Charlie.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Why do you think this Ted? Have you studied the evidence supporting that literally, almost every major figure and story we’ve been spoon fed about the culture has ties to the CIA? Presuming Jan is wrong without studying his material is sadly a very common reaction and one that leaves us comfortable in our illusions, assuming they are true (confirmation bias) without investigation (grammar, logic, rhetoric).

      • Ted Heistman

        So what are my illusions? That the intelligence agencies aren’t omnipotent when they actually are? Saying intelligence agencies created the psychedelic movement- That’s almost like saying if not for the CIA and the FBI the 60’s never would have happened. Nobody would have grown long hair,listened to rock music or experimented with drugs?

        Let’s look at Occupy Wall street. Was it invented by the CIA/FBI/NSA/NYPD or was there an attempt to infiltrate it and steer it in a certain direction?

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          No, you are creating strawman’s again and again. You’re equivocation is your own projection amigo. Do you think WW2 just happened? Is there nothing else to the story of the origins of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? What of the War on Terror? Gulf of Tonkin anyone? If you can manipulate people to kill each other for evil war profiteers through propaganda (think Bernays) is it impossible to imagine you could manipulate millions to “turn on, tune in, and drop out” of political awareness or activity? Of course it is not a false dichotomy of binary polemics, some people did awaken because of psychedelics but many people were derailed and up ended by this cultural dosing. Admitting that is a blow to the ego alone that wants to hold on to it’s favored script for history, excuse me his-story. Let the facts lead you and if you want to take this on, be sure to be logical and avoid fallacies. In terms of maintaining convenient illusions or “noble lies”, look no further than the Federal Reserve’s ability to continually rape and pillage while hiding in plain sight utterly. We have every precedent imaginable for such wide scale mind fuckery, looking at it clearly is the challenge, for it immediately sends you into an altered state of consciousness and reflection. That is unless you go ape shit and kill the messenger. Listen to the story here regarding the monkeys with wireframe mothers. Very telling. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HI_zFD879v0

          • Ted Heistman

            Starting a war and starting a social movement are not the same thing. Its easier to wreck things than build things.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            If you study the Huxleys and there connection to the “counter-cultural” movement we are discussing here, you see exactly why McKenna shilling for an “archaic revival” is there war masquerading as positive social movement.

            As you read the following quote. Keep in mind the amount of children raised on HFCS, Ritalin, Fluoride, Hyper Vaccination and BPA and then consider that this is exactly what Aldous and Julian conspired to create according to their own words and actions.

            Via: http://www.gnosticmedia.com/manufacturing-the-deadhead-a-product-of-social-engineering-by-joe-atwill-and-jan-irvin/

            Aldous Huxley predicted that drugs would one day become a humane
            alternative to “flogging” for rulers wishing to control “recalcitrant
            subjects.” He wrote in a letter to his former student George Orwell in
            1949:

            But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis;
            and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the
            use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in
            even the most recalcitrant subjects.

            Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government,
            than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as
            completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as
            by flogging and kicking them into obedience. [emphasis added] [10]

            ~ Aldous Huxley

            We should all be “Grateful Dead” loving our enslavement to the masters. Let’s get our hemispheres detached so we can’t ignite the Holy Blazing Star within Plato’s Cave. Shazam Bitches Indeed.

          • imAwildman

            hahahaha indeed.

          • sonicbphuct

            Tl;Dr – however, this is spot on: “is it impossible to imagine you could manipulate millions to “turn on,
            tune in, and drop out” of political awareness or activity?”

            Cue Goldstein and Winston in 1984. It makes much more sense, as a “controller”, to be in control of the Enemy. That the Party had written the book & invented Goldstein would seem insane, were it not for the cold rational that not all people will be on your side, but if you give them a side to go to, one that you control, for all intents & purposes, you have all people on your side.

          • imAwildman

            Exactly! Controlled opposition.

          • imAwildman

            Once again well said and on point. Kudos.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            :)

    • Divinecomedia

      except that the psychedelic “movement,” whatever that is, WAS, dreamed up and started by the CIA, and other secret societies. the wasson’s expedition to mexico, publicized in LIFE magazine, WAS a CIA MKULTRA project #58. irvin has shared the documents from CIA files that prove this on his web site. furthermore, it is seeming more and more like the official story of LSD is a fabrication. see Alan Piper’s work….

      • Ted Heistman

        I know, I know and the reason was to corrupt America’s youth through racial integration, dancing, and rock and roll.

        • Divinecomedia

          and what exactly is your evidence for this stupid comment?

          • Ted Heistman

            Um…. Jan Irvin’s own writings, Hello!!!!

            http://www.gnosticmedia.com/manufacturing-the-deadhead-a-product-of-social-engineering-by-joe-atwill-and-jan-irvin/

            1. Overt sexual images in the popular media (pornography)

            2. Wildly uninhibited dancing

            3. music idols

            4. feminism

            5. integration

            6. psychedelic drug use

            – See more at:
            http://www.gnosticmedia.com/manufacturing-the-deadhead-a-product-of-social-engineering-by-joe-atwill-and-jan-irvin/#sthash.m2vV9wul.dpuf

          • Divinecomedia

            you don’t seem to understand the difference between evidence and jan irvin’s opinions about the evidence he has helped bring to light. evidence is CIA documents showing that they– not wasson, or leary– were behind the dramatic revelation of the mushroom to the public, evidence that shows Wasson had been lying for many years about his role. i personally don’t know why they did this, (i have my hunches), nor do i agree with all of jan’s opinions about it. but if this is going to be figured out it will be through methodical, epistemological, and intellectual rigor, which are in short supply these days, especially it seems, in many young people who are interested in these drugs… who accept the platitudes and unexamined assumptions of the media blitz that popularizes them today, and has popularized them in the past…

          • Ted Heistman

            So is my comment still stupid? Or is the outline in Jan’s article stupid? Anyway all the points on his outline are speculative. Its nearly all opinion. What documents are mentioned in the points in his outline?

            All he has proved is connections between Wasson and the CIA and various elites. It seems obvious to me that intelligence agencies ababdoned LSD and mushrooms as mind control agents because they can’t be used in that way.

            I think you will find that lots of intelligent people think Jan Irvin’s analysis is stupid.

            Its not simply a case of irrational people not liking him because he is so logical. Irvin makes several huge leaps in logic and has many underlying assumptions that are completely unjustified.

          • Divinecomedia

            it’s important to distinguish between the evidence, such as the MKULTRA documents he’s furnished and Jan’s interpretation of them. his conclusions are many and broad and sometimes, even often, expressed in such a way to make them even more distasteful. i’ve joked with him that he must be one of the agents he is trying to expose because he alienates people from pursuing the subject by being so obnoxious, sometimes. i agree: he makes huge leaps. i am not going to defend his interpretations, or him, though i consider him a friend and i commend his courage to pierce the veil , even as i critique his method. he hasn’t convinced me that terence was an agent, but he has brought to the fore some intriguing material that suggests the possibility; especially the apparently dropped criminal charges. irvin, that SOB, has surely shown that the CIA initiated the psychedelic movement, by engaging and funding wasson on his quest and his publicizing it in LIFE. i dispute your opinion that it was the other way around, and the evidence is on my side, unfortunately.

          • Ted Heistman

            The article I posted basically makes the ridiculous argument that the CIA not only “initiated” as you say the psychedelic movement, but the entire 1960’s counter culture as a whole including rock and roll music, because they wanted white youth to be more like black people because he says being former slaves, black people are more “archaic.” Her presents the argument that the counterculture was not only invented by “bankers” and CIA/FBI but that it was supposedly tightly orchestrated.

            This is total BS. For example I am a fan of R. Crumb. He got his start as an “underground” comic book illustrator. He didn’t even go to college and most of his early works were self published basically with xerox machines. No one funded him he became popular by word of mouth.

            The counter culture was a big movement involving many people. It was a product of the times. the 1950’s values weren’t going to last forever. This is a warped hyper paranoid view of the world. There are influential people but they not “controllers” with Omnipotent powers.

          • siphersh

            Hi.

            “the CIA initiated the psychedelic movement, by engaging and funding wasson on his quest and his publicizing it in LIFE”

            I’m trying to uncover the figurative kernel of truth, so I can take away something about the history of the movement, and not just about the person of Jan Irvin.

            Could you please help me out with a link or two on the source of that “the CIA were behind the dramatic revelation of the mushroom to the public”?

            Edit: I’ve been reading through the “Manufacturing the Deadhead” article, but more and more it seems to me that I won’t find anything showing that the Life article publication was somehow part of the MKUltra project, as a goal with a specific function.

            So I’m left with the last straw, that the expedition itself was funded by MKUltra. Which of course fits the picture of the MKUltra project, so not particularly surprising, but it would still be a somewhat juicy story.

            But all I can see is a letter from Wasson asking for money, but it doesn’t show who it was addressed to. So close. :(

            It’s all air. Always, when I delve into this research, my feeling is that when I try to zero in on a specific source, at the end the information slips away. There’s nothing there. It’s eerie. Like a land of informational ghosts.

          • Divinecomedia

            if you’ve seen the letters asking for money then you’ve seen that the story wasson tells again and again, that the cia infiltrated his trip, are untrue. wasson is on the record saying, “i declined to work with them.” and now we find he was working with them all along. they paid for him to go down there, record the event, and tell the world in LIFE magazine. this was surely one of the pivotal events in the unfolding, or launching of psychedelics…. i share your frustration, i might add. i’d love to see some memos, anything, about why this was underway. but the lack of documentation does not mean they, the CIA, was not behind this. was this an extension of some Nazi mind Kontrol , social engineering, along the lines of huxley’s dismal forecast? it’s not hard to theorize that, but so far, to my mind, there remains no evidence. but i hope he keeps trying. another thing i encourage him is to locate who in the modern scene is an extension of MKULTRA pretending to be otherwise…. Terence is dead and so is Wasson, but MKULTRA lives on…

          • siphersh

            Yeah, but how do you know that it was the CIA he was asking for money? All I see is a letter asking for money, but it doesn’t show who it was addressed to. Also, even if it was funded by the CIA, how do you know that they paid him to write the Life magazine article, and not just to explore the mushroom?

            I don’t think that Jan Irvin is the right person to uncover this history. Research like this would require clear thinking.

            But I’ll feel silly to have spent time reading these articles if I can’t take away at least one single relevant information.

  • rtb61

    His somewhat autistic preference for patterns, would indicate it more likely that he could have been involved in data analysis and for establishment of patterns of behaviour of select targets be they groups or individuals, for the CIA and of course the far the more base, being the lighting rod for leading others into traps by the CIA so as to extort their cooperation in various political intelligence operations.
    Likely even to the point of forecasting possible alien behaviour and intentions based upon the limited intelligence accessible.

    • Calypso_1

      I see far more autistic patterns in Jan’s thinking.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Didn’t you claim to suffer from aspergers yourself Calypso? Motes and Planks and so on.

        • Calypso_1

          No, I did not. You, however, have made that appellation towards me on several occasions.

  • symbiont

    Why is this even getting posted?

    He was obviously talking about the Others, or the Mushroom. The “deep background positions about which the less said the better” is referring to his massive mushroom operations, hash operations, and LSD selling days.

    Jan has gone off the deep end

    • Matt Staggs

      I published Gabriel’s post because Disinfo readers will enjoy debating it.

      • Toad

        Crystallizes the stupid, at any rate.

    • http://www.evolutionarylandscapes.net/ Jeremy Johnson

      This is what I thought too (about the actual recording). But yeah, I guess it did generate a nice, heated discussion.

    • Gabriel D. Roberts

      I posted this because we should know what is brought against Terence McKenna. What sounds to you like an admission of working for the Mushroom sounds like a piece of damming evidence to another. I personally feel he was talking about the mushroom, but also know that he had to have a run in with the Feds at some point, to what degree, nobody knows. I tried to relay the evidence, not my own opinion.

      • symbiont

        Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying. I guess I just don’t see how focusing or spreading awareness on the many facets of Jan’s information (or insanity) will do much good.

        But then again it is a good lesson in “what the thinker thinks, the prover proves” and the functioning of paranoid reality tunnels in general.

        • Gabriel D. Roberts

          Thank you for understanding. When something this stirring comes along, I would be remiss in not putting it out there for all of us to discuss.

      • Craig Bickford

        Who knows maybe he was co-opted and fed them as much misinfo as he could. The FBI is great at turning people into CI’s by way of black mail, threats etc.

        • Echar Lailoken

          Maybe you were co-opted.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Gabriel please see my above post from Jan’s site. This meme of presuming the “They” Terrence is referring too are the mushroom is hilarious and not supported by his own words or other contextual admissions. New Age Apologetics we don’t need.

        • Gabriel D. Roberts

          LIsten to the dude.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Sorry Gabriel, internet memes will not spare you here ;)

          • Craig Bickford

            Reality trumps opinions dude.

        • Ted Heistman

          Well, it may sound ridiculous but McKenna is on the record elsewhere expounding on that view.
          http://deoxy.org/mushword.htm

          So it actually IS in his own words. He said they were deep space probes responsible for seeding civilization. Ibogaine reportedly has a sentient intelligence associated with it ayahuasca reportedly has a sentient intelligence associated with it. Marley even personified ganja.

          Why is this considered totally ridiculous?

          • Calypso_1

            Marley was MI6.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Ted, you have a serious issue with strawman attacks. Where did I ever say that his perspective on the mushroom was ridiculous? What I said is it is ridiculous to presume that inspite of the other contextual clues that he must be referring to the Mushroom here. He just mentioned going on the lamb from the FBI right?

            Questioner: I’m real curious about one thing. Why is it important for you to do this?

            Terence McKenna: I wonder myself. You mean am I the alien ambassador whether I like it or not? [laughs]. Well, often when asked this question, I’ve said it beats honest work.
            I mean, my brother is a PhD in three subjects and works in hard science
            and yet I don’t think it’s brought him immense happiness. Not that he’s
            despondent. But I was always kind of a slider. You know?

            And certainly when I reached La Chorerra in 1971 I had a price on my head by the FBI, I was running out of money, I was at the end of my rope. And then “THEY” recruited me and said, “you know, with a mouth like yours there’s a place for you in our organization“. (do you really think he is referring to the Mushrooms here and their organization?)
            And I’ve worked in deep background positions about which the less said the better. And then about 15 years ago they shifted me into public relations and I’ve been there to the present.

            I think ideas get me high. And I like the feeling of understanding and I love diversity to the point of weirdness.

            Questioner: It seems that there’s more to it than that for you.
            Because, you know, being tuned in to ideas and turned on by ideas is
            one thing, but you can keep that just to self. The sharing of it is
            something else. I think that’s what we’re getting at. [??

            Terence: well one thing is, I’m really fascinated… I think of myself as a pretty savvy person, and not easily led into false dogma…

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          Via http://www.gnosticmedia.com/McKenna-Agent

          Questioner:I’m real curious about one thing. Why is it important for you to do this?

          Terence
          McKenna:
          I wonder myself. You mean am I the alien ambassador
          whether I like it or not? [laughs]. Well, often when asked this
          question, I’ve said it beats honest work.
          I mean, my brother is a PhD in three subjects and works in hard science
          and yet I don’t think it’s brought him immense happiness. Not that he’s
          despondent. But I was always kind of a slider. You know?

          And
          certainly when I reached La Chorerra in 1971 I had a price on my head
          by the FBI, I was running out of money, I was at the end of my rope. And
          then “THEY” recruited me and said, “you know, with a mouth like yours
          there’s a place for you in our organization“. And I’ve worked in deep
          background positions about which the less said the better. And then
          about 15 years ago they shifted me into public relations and I’ve been
          there to the present.

          I think ideas get me high. And I like the feeling of understanding and I love diversity to the point of weirdness.

          Questioner: It seems that there’s more to it than that for you.
          Because, you know, being tuned in to ideas and turned on by ideas is
          one thing, but you can keep that just to self. The sharing of it is
          something else. I think that’s what we’re getting at. [??

          Terence:
          well one thing is, I’m really fascinated… I think of myself as a pretty
          savvy person, and not easily led into false dogma…

          The question remains: which agency did he work for? Was it the FBI,
          or the CIA? Since it was mostly the CIA doing the psychedelic studies on
          the masses, I think it’s likely that he was CIA and is why the Agency
          was
          blocking my requests for his files several months ago:
          http://www.gnosticmedia.com/urgent-release-the-cias-terence-mckenna-foia-request-response-positive-affiliation/

          However, in Acid Dreams, Marty Lee, states (pg. 173):

          It was a typical sixties scene: a group of scruffy,
          long-haired students stood in a circle passing joints and hash pipes.
          The setting could have been Berkeley, Ann Arbor or any other hip campus.

          But these students were actually FBI agents, and the school they
          attended was known as “Hoover University.” Located at Quantico Marine
          Base in Virginia, this elite academy specialized in training G-men to
          penetrate left- wing organizations. To
          cultivate the proper counterculture image, they were told not to wash
          or bathe for several days before infiltrating a group of radicals.
          Refresher courses were also held for FBI agents who had successfully
          immersed themselves in the drug culture of their respective locales. For
          months they had smoked pot and dropped acid with unsuspecting
          radicals, and now the turned-on spies had a chance to swap stories with
          their undercover comrades. Former FBI agent Cril Payne likened
          the annual seminar to a class reunion. Between lectures on the New Left,
          drug abuse, and FBI procedure, the G-men would sneak away to the wooded
          grounds to get stoned while American taxpayers footed the bill.

          So there is also the possibility that he was FBI.

          Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
          recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to
          do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical
          thinking:

          1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

          2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

          3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background
          positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something an
          agency would do?

          4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

          5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is
          that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for
          smuggling)

          6)
          Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI
          for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI
          could do?

          7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his
          arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

          When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the
          contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing
          that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their
          organization in public relations and deep background to the present –
          which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not
          mushrooms or UFOs. Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is
          clearly ridiculous. The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting
          him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reaching
          for anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel
          uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal
          that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid
          the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by
          those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you
          again.

        • dave birney

          well its not like him being an agent is supported by his own words either so i dont see why you find one more hilarious than the other.
          you’re just presuming, much the same as everybody else is

      • Craig Bickford

        Catching up on an old post here. You know gabriel (and the others posting here), that in the same audio recording McKenna talks about the feds catching up with him, and then talks about the ‘deep background’. It’s in the same monologue. How is that not related? Back to Wiltshire’s points: do Mushrooms have PR assets? Do they have agencies? It’s hard to see how people rationalize that he was talking about mushrooms, and keep a serious face while doing it.

        • Echar Lailoken

          It could be that Jan Irving is attempting to force his own relevance.

    • Calypso_1

      In fairness to Gnostic Media, they have some fantastic guests (who’s patience in interviews I often marvel at). Irving is what he is. He works hard & I can respect that. I hope he discovers many wonderful things in the future that I can disagree with. : )

      • Charlie Primero

        Same here. Jan Irvin is often abrasive and completely lacking in grace, but his dedication to digging through dusty university archives and pestering agencies with FOIA letters to dig out the truth is unmatched and much needed. It makes up for his social shortcomings, (but just barely :-)

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Looks like someone is in the business of “damage conTROLLing. Yes let’s just presume he meant the almighty “mushroom” regardless of all other context, and then vomit up a fallacy laden screed with no factual basis. Take that Jan! ;)

      From http://www.gnosticmedia.com/McKenna-Agent

      opiatus croaker on August 23, 2013 at 8:04 pm

      Jan, as someone so familiar with McKenna’s
      work/words, did a third possibility not strike you as plausible? The
      tone he uses here is very similar to when he speaks of the other and in
      particular “The mushoom”, the “They” who recruited him were the “They”
      They were in La Chorerra to find and commune with… The Mushroom.

      I can picture your blinkered joy when getting this news. If this and
      the other video I uploaded that you love to quote is your amassed
      evidence against T, it’s pretty fucking flimsy.

      You’ve yet to answer me, why place so much importance on 2 minutes of
      a Terence lecture where he admit’s “I rarely say this” which you know
      full well to be the truth, none of the 100′s of hours of material repeat
      that part of the message and it’s only said on that one. The one that
      was digitized last year and before that time would have been seen by
      less than 1000 people, and you perceive this to be his eugenics agenda?

      As to the great ‘NEW MKULTRA DISCOVERY’ poppycock, I know, you know, we all know he means “the mushroom”

      You just want it to be this way so badly that you’ll latch onto and
      twist anything, totally regardless of your better understanding of the
      man and his message.

      Do please continue though and never stop, the unraveling, berating
      those who attempt to agree with you, blocking donaters who didn’t do the
      specified homework before asking Lord Irvin a facebook question. It’s
      my fav little reality soap opera on the nets. Next to Basil Fawlty
      you’re my favorite belligerent buffoon, condescending righteous prick
      and all around obnoxious shithead.

      Jan Irvin on August 23, 2013 at 8:33 pm

      Yes, I’ve looked into this for several years. You?
      poppycock? LOL… how is it poppycock? Because you say so? Where does he
      mean “the mushrooms”? Or are you confusing to different topics?

      I don’t want it to be any way. I’m looking at the direction the
      evidence points, while you all have already long ago decided it to be
      your religion and refuse to look at things point by point in context.
      He’s running from the FBI, he gets caught, they give him a job in the
      ORGANIZATION.

      …here is an interesting episode regarding McKenna being
      chased by Interpol and the FBI – from which no conclusion is ever
      mentioned. As Henk from Europe emailed me after this original article
      was published:

      In 1969, McKenna traveled to Nepal led by his “interest in
      Tibetan painting and hallucinogenic shamanism.”[6] During his time
      there, he studied the Tibetan language and worked as a hashish smuggler,
      until “one of his Bombay-to-Aspen shipments fell into the hands of U.
      S. Customs.” He was forced to move to avoid capture by Interpol.[6] He
      wandered through Southeast Asia viewing ruins, collected butterflies in
      Indonesia, and worked as an English teacher in Tokyo. He then went back
      to Berkeley to continue studying biology, which he called “his first
      love”.[6]

      Note he fled to avoid capture by Interpol but then after a time he casually returns to Berkeley?

      True Hallucinations page 166: “This decision to depart California
      (Henk:and return to the Amazon) was hailed by my circle in Berkeley.
      Concern for my mental state was rife among my friends, and rumor had
      reached us that the FBI was aware that I was somewhere back inside the
      country and had begun looking for me.”

      First of all, why would Terence friends hail the idea of him
      returning to the Amazon because they were concerned about his mental
      state while the cause of his mental state was his prior trip to the
      Amazon? That’s a contradiction. Why would Terence make up a reason to go
      back to the Amazon? Him being wanted by the FBI should be plenty reason
      I think.

      Attempts to get an answer from Terence’s brother, Dennis, regarding
      the above episode have failed. It seems they want us to believe that
      Terence just went from being wanted by Interpol and the FBI to just
      casually lecturing about psychedelics. What happened in the interim?
      Someone must know the answer.”

      But have you read his own books? He talks about running to La
      Chorerra to escape the FBI. Why would you ignore that? I wonder if
      you’ve ever read his books at all. He speaks of this event more than
      once and it’s also mentioned above.

      How is it flimsy, exactly? You don’t say. You ignore his own words
      about being chased by the FBI for drug smuggling and then go back to the
      mushroom thing, but there were also two trips. So you have a chronology
      issue. He went BACK to La Chorerra to avoid capture, as he himself
      states.

      He rarely says it because it would reveal him as an agent. But since
      this lecture is at Esalen, which was a center for MKULTRA, he was free
      to speak with his friends and the other agents there.

      But in fact, he also popularized the mushrooms by creating the first
      home grow method, which fits perfectly with the CIA and MKULTRA’s
      promotion of psychedelics… see the last 30 or 40 shows we’ve done
      covering these topics extensively.

      Berating those who agree with me, like your post here that ignores
      the facts that he himself admits he was running from the FBI? Checking
      the history, you’ve never donated once. But I like all of your name
      calling. This reveals that you already know your position is entirely
      flawed and that’s why you’re resorting to it. It’s an insecurity thing
      due to your own cognitive dissonance and not looking at or reading
      everything closely.

      Be well, and good luck name calling and berating while accusing others of the same. LOL. I hope that works out for you.

      • symbiont

        Thanks for confirming even further Jan’s delusion/douchebaggery

        (and if you are him then thank you)

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          Thanks for anonymously saying nothing of substance.

          • symbiont

            Does paranoid delusions classify as something of substance?

          • Andrew

            Around here, yes.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Why don’t you ask “they” ie “The Mushrooms” that controlled McKenna…. Seems like a pretty paranoid delusion you both share.

          • symbiont

            He literally talks about the concept of being the alien ambassador (which he often referred to as “spokesperson for the mushroom” or “mouthpiece for the Logos/Other”) RIGHT before the big bad quote you think is his admission of being involved in the CIA.

            His mention of the FBI is circumstantial and not being considered within the overall context of a typical McKenna talk. Think about it. He was laying out the background to his encounter with the cosmic giggle, as he calls it. Hes said this same thing numerous times in slightly different way: about how in that state of openness and naivete (often citing that period in his life) the cosmic giggle approaches.

            “you know, with a mouth like yours there’s a place for you in our organization“

            Do you really believe its completely ridiculous to think he might be talking about the mushroom when he says this, considering he already has been referred to them as their “spokesperson” in the past, and moments before saying this he referred to his “alien ambassador” take on the same exact topic? Please.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            You are missing the point here. You believe that Terrence was in fact referring to being recruited by “The Mushroom” yes? Does that make any sense regarding how he went from being on the run, out of money and at the end of his rope to suddenly being able to speak about Psychedelics on speaking tours with impunity? Did the mushroom tell the FBI to stop hunting him down? Which is more likely? Also you have to realize that he has already been shown to lie to achieve his results (visual acuity fabrication) and gleefully admits as much to suit his own agenda. Just because he consistently employed a narrative, does not mean his narrative is true. He may have convinced himself of this to avoid dealing with the fact that he was working for “Them” and I don’t mean, the mushroom…

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            For the umpteenth time I will repost because Jan has most succinctly refuted the illogical assertion that Terrence was ruled by “The Mushroom” and must therefore be referring to a supernatural organism who spared him from prison apparently…

            Via: http://www.gnosticmedia.com/McKenna-Agent

            Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
            recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical thinking:

            1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

            2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

            3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something anagency would do?

            4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

            5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is
            that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for
            smuggling)

            6) Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI could do?

            7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his
            arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

            When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their organization in public relations and deep background to the present – which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not mushrooms or UFOs.

            Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is clearly ridiculous. The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reachingfor anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you again.

          • Mylo_Abacus

            Perhaps McKenna has an extraordinary sense of humor.

            Mushrooms
            contain traces of copper, ubiquitous in any electronics component. If
            anything could talk to McKenna, it would be mushrooms. Therefore, if
            mushrooms talk to him and if the stuff in mushrooms were in with
            the_feds:), then he would have the same stuff in him and be their agent.

            Laugh; even so, McKenna died. Here was an obit:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_McKenna

            Ridiculous!

            %~If it’s not paranoia coming from the oppressed wing then it were paranoia coming from the wing wing.%~

          • symbiont

            “Does that make any sense regarding how he went from being on the run, out of money and at the end of his rope to suddenly being able to speak about Psychedelics on speaking tours with impunity?”

            It was a long time before he was going on speaking tours. Over a decade, in fact. He was always a raver, and apparently loved nothing more than to get people as stoned as possible and ramble to them non stop for hours- ever since he was a teenager he was doing this.

            Your “logical deduction and critical thinking” arguments are pathetic.

            Terence sold mushrooms, lsd, and cannabis for a long time. This is no mystery, its obvious. And its undeniably possible that this is the “background position about which the less said the better” is referring to. He even wrote the mushroom growers guide. If he was working for the CIA, then just what WAS he referring to here anyways?

            Referring to the Mushroom as an organization in a comedic and metaphoric sense is not out of the question when it comes to his rap, by any stretch of the imagination. Or did you miss the fact that he already regularly referred to himself as the SPOKES PERSON for the Mushroom (hmm..what is it that has spokesmen these day? Oh right…ORGANIZATIONS.)

            His situation with the FBI is explained in Dennis McKennas memoir, iirc. But of course I guess Dennis is just lying and perhaps even in on it himself right.

            And btw its spelled Terence not Terrence :P

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            15 years of deep background 8 of PR right? Since ’71 yes?
            Also what of the carry over from the agenda’s laid out by the Huxleys, Wasson, etc and Terence’s own theories and presentations. (sorry for the extra r, thank you for the heads up)

            To me it is far too convenient to see supporters of TM avoiding any information that casts him in a doubtful light, they make excuses and grant poetic license in his defense but never to question his potential obligations as a former wanted drug smuggler.

            Just because he constantly wrote that he saw himself as an ambassador for the mushroom etc does not mean that that is exactly what he meant, or that it makes implicit sense whatsoever, it is perhaps, what he wanted everyone to think and a convenient way to admit the truth while maintaining a mirage. Can you see that with the evidence brought forward and the nature of his quicksilver tongue (and fugitive status) that perhaps Terence was entirely capable of deluding himself along with his audience? Again he has already admitted to knowingly falsifying evidence to give the illusion of scientific rigor supporting his false argumentation or theories.

            Please scroll towards the bottom of the comments to see an incredibly insightful and thorough refutation of the common defenses given for TM’s potential dualistic nature on the psychedelic/esalen orchestrated scene. The dialog is between MRockatansky and Gabriel Roberts (who sadly, is embodying all of the defense mechanisms one would expect from a mentee in distress)

            Again I would be more convinced if you paid attention to the connections to the Huxleys, Esalen, Eugenics and their literally orchestrating the public unveiling of mushrooms to Americans. What is your perspective on this? Isn’t it odd that Subproject 58 was carried out by Gordon Wasson and that he would work so closely with the progenitors of the Esalen institute where so many new age myths are manufactured and distributed to this day? Including this talk where Terence demonstrates an odd revelation to attribute to “mushrooms.” Again I challenge you to answer any of the questions above from Jan.

            Again, TM referring to himself as a spokesperson for mushrooms while miraculously avoiding capture and being allowed to speak freely regarding psychedlics and other drugs around the country, does not mean that he wasn’t lying to you through equivocation. To avoid all other evidence and pin your hopes of his sainthood on this is actually an example of your own pathetic “logical deduction and critical thinking”.

            No offense, just quoting your own words here.

            As for his Brother’s perspective, please provide a source and quotes.

          • siphersh

            Maybe Terence was deluding himslef, maybe the CIA planted a delusion in his brain, that made him believe that his instructions came from the psychedelic aliens. Or maybe he was a conscious agent, and wanted the audience to believe that he was talking about the aliens.

            But none of that make his remark an admission.

            “To admit the truth while maintaining a mirage” is a contradiction. You’re stretching the meaning of admitting outside of what it really means, in order to support the assertion. That is not valid reasoning. It’s just an argument by shifting meaning.

            You are referring to a lot of supposed evidence on the whole theory. That is all irrelevant regarding the assertion that this really is an admission. That’s not critical thinking. It’s just argument by fitting the picture, also known as the preconceived notion fallacy.

          • MRockatansky

            Ahoy Cam, and thanks for the high sign. How would you feel if I underscore a point you made, of high critical importance if I may suggest? It’s this phrase in your post, referring to:

            “defense mechanisms one would expect from a mentee in distress”

            The web TM wove certainly ensnares those drawn into it. Its like a roach motel. They check in, but they don’t check out. Because of distress inflicted, engaging one of the most basic reflexes, infants are born with it – pleasure / pain principle.

            I don’t know if you’ve read Festinger’s 1956 classic, WHEN PROPHECY FAILS. It lays out his cognitive dissonance theory, which he derived from study of a millenial cult with its eschaton. Slated for a specific date, loaded with suspense and headed for a massive anti-climax. All the personal hopes and fears, expectations and wishes invested by those who’d taken the bait, swallowed the hook – became a source of distress so unpleasant, they couldn’t face it.

            They’d gotten comfy thinking they’d be enraptured, secured by their faith as special ones exempt from catastrophe. Against the pleasure of thinking themselves so special – the pain of all that crashing down around them, the bursting of an enthralling bubble – effectively impaired the believers psychologically, from being able to face it. They were forced in effect to dig deeper, retreat further into the delusion. By having it laid bare as such, they were psychologically driven into spasms of denial, script revision – propelled wily-nily into a deepening defiance of reality, sanity, reason, truth and meaning.

            The harpoon-barbed hook goes in just like that. But it doesn’t come out easy.

            Its admirably summed in this quote by author L. Vona, in a recent feature (“Addressing the Women’s Wisdom Circle Pyramid”), about another case from the cultic milieu of the ‘consciousness movement’ –

            “It is PAINFUL to realize the contradictions” (her capitals, not added).

            So, to spin people into a web of deception, there’s a clear method. Use certain bait – which needs to be real juicy for the purpose. I might suggest stuff like – “Nobody’s smarter than you!” Flattery of fragile egos, with IQ-insecurities needing ‘permission to think’ – tasty stuff and effective as a lure. Likewise, aggrandizing one and all in the charmed circle, as vanguards of human evolution, brave heroes for taking more and higher doses, valorize and glorify … that’s a ticket.

            For good measure, a Robin Hood angle, underdog theme. Here we are, the noble spearheads of evolution, without whose bravery and intrepid spirit – why, our species wouldn’t even exist. Humanity owes its very existence to us trippers. And What Thanks Do We Get From Society?

            In other words, deck the whole spell casting out with so many sweet nothings, as much ego-assuasion as possible. Flattery, vanity baiting and feel-good hypnotic suggestion, subliminal implications of dizzying head-swelling pleasure … get that ‘wow, wow’ thing going.

            At the same time, spin as many lies as possible into the web, to act like little restraining devices. Preferably many and – tiny. So they won’t be noticed, won’t be apparent from the gitgo. The more and smaller, the likelier they are to go unseen – until its too late for the prey. They’ve taken the bait, the hook is set. Now they’re on the end of the line, all silk-spun – invested.

            The smaller scale the points of deception the better, since it’ll take higher magnification to find them, and more time. Meanwhile, getting rid of any incentive to even want to know. But if any such surfaces, by then, too late – the web of deception is pretty well secured.

            So its a one-two deal.

            First, draw moths to the flame by all exciting ‘could be, who knows’ bs, writ large in plain view. That’ll help discourage anyone from ever even thinking to do any fact-checking – that might disclose a problem. No one wants to spoil their own party, cast a blue note on their own choir.

            Second, make sure you got a whole pack of lies, contradictions, deception points, woven in. The more of that loaded in, the harder it’ll be for anyone invested to ever disentangle themselves. Because if any awakening threatens, its just too painful to realize one has invested one’s entire ‘philosophy’ or belief or whatever … in a complete, thorough sham.

            (Great allegory from STAR TREK: FOR THE WORLD IS HOLLOW AND I HAVE TOUCHED THE SKY ..)

            That’s how the TM spell works, as I find. Pretty cunning, and predatory – based on results of tests and investigation (from particular framework of inquiry, including psychology of religion). Its not just the lures he uses, for the lines he casts. Its also the double-mechanism of pleasure/pain reflex, tapping the process of cognitive dissonance – to ensnare permanently, in many maybe most cases.

            LIkewise, if anyone wants to be a cult leader … there’s the recipe. Thanks for letting me toss that out, taking cue from your post Cam.

          • Calypso_1

            You make a good point related to cult dynamics, ‘true-believer’ syndrome, et al. Specifically related to TM these ideas would seem to most apply to ideas surrounding 2012/Time Wave Zero. That an entire industry sprung out of these is not in question and I will not make any attempt to correlate others belief/ involvement in this movement w/ TM.

            That vast majority of TM’s thoughtscapes were narrative story telling & theorizing on such experiences (One could also consider the entire TimeWaveZero to fall within these realms) . These experiences were equally available to others so unlike a true cult TM was not the sole intercessor and avenue to “The Vision”. People simply enjoyed the lucidity of his narrative. That he influenced persons who had not personally had such experiences or drove individuals to seek them is certain.

            I am sure there exists persons within the circle of TM’s influence that might be categorized by the dynamics of cult influence. You will find such persons who are fans of sports teams, in any given corporate environment or in general – groups of humans . However, I have not met such persons (maybe some shiny eyed newbies). Those I know are freethinking, imaginative individuals who love the man for what he was – a like-minded compatriot who had shared many of the same experiences we had. It really doesn’t matter – Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. Terence McKenna was & is a treasure in the lives of many. Those individuals are not suffering from painful deceptions, inability to interpret facts or constantly embedded in their ‘leader’ as a source of Magical Supply.

            Your insight & citation for cult dynamics is true & correct. That this is what has occurred during TM’s sojourn, is at a best an extremely particular & partial explanation that poorly fits the whole population. There are indeed many who have ‘checked out’, the ‘web’ never having been a trap but a momentary nebula of exchange.

          • MRockatansky

            Thanks for your rejoinder Calypso. On one hand affirmation of some points, and on the other – clarity of content and no incivility, where we may disagree.

            Where we differ, I wish I knew exactly what evidence or type data — as analyzed by what methods, from which disciplines, what theoretical framework – support
            your conclusion (i.e., that cult dynamics we both understand, as I gather, are not as defining of TM’s influence as I find). The sense I get is, compared with my perspective, yours is based to larger degree in personal impression, social acquaintances, ‘friends and family’ – experiences of your own. Fair enough, but not very susceptible to independent verification or testing.

            Of course I have my personal impressions too, and I don’t exclude them. But alas, they differ from what you describe. Add to that, they’re mine not anyone else’s, as they can only be. Just as yours are exclusively yours.

            I find that makes for a tough nut to crack. That experiences can differ so radically, depending on set and
            setting, who and where, what and how – seems to me a fatal thorn in the heart of TM’s entire emphasis and endeavor – to establish his experiences as a standard
            for what psychedelics do in general.

            If someone else (yourself, for example) reaches a different conclusion, but not from same methods and theoretical framework – i.e. without accounting for the data and evidence on which I base my perspective – an ‘apples and oranges’ problem arises. I don’t know how to make the comparisons and contrasts that would otherwise be possible, to open forward paths of exploration and inquiry.

            But I trust you understand, that comes from my interest and objectives, not someone else’s. And they aren’t necessarily the same – nor even reconcilable in some cases – with some others. Critical rigor and impartiality, as ideals, and to whatever degree achieved, are vitally important for my purposes. Any failure can incur consequences like the fallout of Piltdown man. Dawson (like TM as I find) was apparently a talented forger and talker. And like TM he deployed seductive persuasion, rather than coercive as in garden-variety brainwashing. For better or worse, the results seem similar, as does the
            damage done. Humpty Dumpty’s shell, breaks easy – but it doesn’t fix easy.

            That’s a core problem staring us in the face here, and one reason I don’t find a basis for agreeing or disagreeing with an opinion about who he meant by ‘They’ (recruited him). Because the issue starts, once again, with TM talking in his typical allusions, glib riddles. He offers, in reply to question – comments that can be taken one way or another; as pleases whoever. Is it possible to disagree about what he meant, strongly, and without anyone being able to convince someone else who differs? Yes – but only endlessly, I suggest. Can question be settled to decisive agreement of all parties interested?

            So TM’s legacy, fruits of his narrative – mainly seem a lively round-and-round. Discussion here and elsewhere resembles, at least to my eye – a dog chasing its tail. Unable to ever catch it, yet determined, regardless. Perhaps reflecting some helplessness, unable to pull back or out. Driven by impulse, until exhaustion and vertigo cause it to fall down. At which point – it can’t even
            chase its tail helplessly any more. How disenabled is that? And how much fun for the dog?

            We might not agree on percentages or estimates. But perhaps you acknowledge – for some few if not many in the circle of TM’s influence – at least a degree large or small, of perception constricted by ‘true belief,’ some constraint of thought by dissonance effects. How many
            show cognitive impairment when faced with discrepancy, contradictions from factually-informed perspectives – hard info that raises inconvenient reflections on the inspiration? And, how severely?

            Whatever the answers, I find these are questions that stand firmly in evidence. As such I rather open them to critical inquiry, than close by premature conclusion or argument.

            You’re right too, in noting the McKenna following is not a formally organized structure – i.e. not a true cult as you put it. For that reason, I prefer ‘proto-cult’ in reference it. Indeed the term cult itself is problematic, as specialists in neo-religious movements agree.

            Per your point, I find the TM preoccupation is indeed not centralized, but ‘cellular’ in structure. It comprises
            separate autonomous cells, each with its own broadcast sermons, often masquerading to varying degrees as educated theorizing, or something intellectual – but in typical pseudoscience / pseudoscholarly fashion, and sticking to script.

            For the ‘TM thing’ – Teafaerie’s term (how’s that for steering clear of what it is, exactly?) – primary comparison with cultism rests in a shared focus, not on substances per se (basis of psychedelia), but on a charismatic personality or iconic figurehead invoking their use and appeal within the subculture. And I find consistently, that critical question tend to raise heebie-jeebies with TM fans or followers, some if not all (how many and how rigid or severe?) – no matter how mildly worded. As in any form of fanaticism, outbursts of hostility and self-righteous belligerence are not uncommon. Its what I find, whether I’ve tested it myself or someone else has. The tone of protest is often that of ‘offended robes’ and the vocabulary likewise, of ‘slander’ and ‘disprespect’ i.e. disapproval and sanctimony. Nor is this a recent development. In his Deep Dive program, Lorenzo cited the reception to which M. Watkins was treated, far back as 1996, as “vicious personal attacks.” This stuff has been simmering and condensing over years.

            Bear in mind Watkins was a fan not detractor. His critique of TM’s Y2K12 ‘theory,’ by the reaction it provoked unexpectedly (for him) in effect exposed a problem of more than mere arithmetic – of relational values, ethical dimensions, conscience itself in the balance. The hostility that caught him by surprise spotlighted a hollowness in TM’s exhortations to ‘question everything’ (don’t be a true believer). His plaintive plea for ‘serious consideration – on grounds of possibility not certainty (as if to preclude ‘true belief’) – was exposed as pretence. If not by design than by effect, outcome, the fruit borne, the proof of its pudding – ‘theories’ above critique, a theorizer who on account of his robes, is held above question – irreproachable. All as communicated by signs, writing on the wall.

            Having said that, I can only concur with much you say. Out of TM’s whole repertoire, the pattern When Prophecy Fails is most evident in his Y2K12 (my term) narrative – a tapestry weaving in ‘novelty theory,’ ‘Time Wave Zero’ ‘glittering object at the end of history,’ ‘eschaton’ etc. Since the celebrated date came and went with neither bang nor whimper, a discussion has been in progress within the milieu. And I find it presents a fascinating (if not
            reassuring or ‘inspiring’) range of attempts to reckon with ‘wot happened’ – mainly by exegesis, i.e. how to reconcile so much interest, so intrigued, to the outcome. If it can be called that.

            That discussion and its range of ‘explanations’ is notably unaccounted for so far, in terms of cognitive dissonance. It strikes me as a major study awaiting, and warranting attention for many reasons, from theoretical to pragmatic and social. Alas, there seems little engagement so far by specialists in key fields – as well noted by Hanegraaff in his study of the Y2K12 frenzy, tracing its origins to McKenna.

            Echoing your point further, and agreed – no doubt the ‘time wave’ biz was TM’s prodigy child, for how it
            proliferated throughout the neo-pop milieu. A whole industry, as you put it. It achieved a prominence beyond his brand name as originator. It spawned, and was cross-fertilized by various colorful spin-off iterations, each with its own iconic proponent and promotional spokesman.

            One caveat – at lower intensity level, I find similar ‘prodigious’ pattern in other McKenna-brand ‘theories.’ I use qualifier-quotes in this context, as I do when referring to ‘Scientific’ Creationists – to express categorical reservation on due diligence, impartiality. Nothing scientifc about it, and 2012ism wasn’t ‘theory.’ I rather leave
            less room for misunderstanding by default, while ideally allowing more for civil disagreement.

            To my knowledge, Y2K12 is also the only TM ‘theory’ to have garnered another dubious distinction, for which cults have been noted – violence to life and limb. Injury and serious death. Not quite Waco TX, or Jonestown scale. But I wonder if you’re aware of a fall 2012 event – a shootout involving an eschaton-obsessed cult faction in Dominican Republic. It left only one dead. Not a huge bodycount. But it at least gets Y2K12 on scoreboard for cultic violence – more than stoned apes can boast. And one killed wasn’t the only casualty, two others were injured.

            Summing up, thanks for your acknowledgment. And where our perspectives differ, your reasonable and non-pandering approach to disagreement. I think you
            understand well the psychosocial dynamics of the cultic milieu I outlined. On impression, some of the difference
            in our views may be not so much of kind, but degree. For example, to what extent such dynamics are operant in the appeal and legacy of Terence McKenna – for his
            following, i.e., those who love the man and treasure his word. Whether the cult comparisons, cognitive dissonance issues etc, impairment of rationality (for better or worse) are more rule, or exception – sum up one major focus where we likely disagree on the whole. With no bad wishes here.

          • Calypso_1

            My perspective and knowledge of cult dynamics is not solely personal but comes from both an academic background in anthropology and clinical practice in psychiatry. I am not entirely clear on what aspect of a ‘theoretical framework’ you were querying: cults in general, TM, psychedelic movement etc? But I was referring to personal experience with many persons interested and involved w/ McKenna, his circle & ideas. I in no way consider my experience to be exhaustive but do consider it extensive enough to be representative of the population mean. I would qualify that there may be differences with a younger generation that I am less familiar with.

            If your primary dispute is related to his vision of what psychedelics do in general, there have been some general studies (sadly not enough) to show long term positive effects consistent with what one might call the psychedelic vision. I in no way disagree that they are not a panacea and that our culture is still poorly equipped to utilize their effects to the fullest.
            I am aware of the 2012 cult event you refer to. I have a particular abhorrence to eschatological cultism/ religious structures and the manifestations of such thinking in the realm of mental illness (and politics), which I have studied extensively.

            As to the hostility you have received from such parties: I would consider (of course not knowing the specifics you encountered) that such behavior is common in challenging any group identity & my initial analysis in such scenarios would gravitate to standard group dynamics and not aspects of cultism [though of course one kind find parallels : )]

            I don’t know if we have a major difference other than you may wholly subscribe to the theory of TM being an operative. I would note, something not often addressed, is the frequency of eschatological vision within the psychedelic experience which does indeed have the potential for serious pitfalls if adopted as a true belief and not a mythological or inner transformative experience.

            PS: Personally though I do not find the evidence for TM’s ‘operative’ status compelling, I certainly do not discount that there may be more to this. I find it rather intriguing. I do hope whatever the origins of your interests in these realms are that your path leads towards the more rational actors who proceed with a true exploratory spirit and not dogmatism and that we all can experience the fruits of the exploration of consciousness without too often falling prey to our lesser selves.

          • MRockatansky

            You speak of “falling prey” – a real and genuine hazard. And I think its the very heart of issue, where we disagree. Well-chosen words. But how well can they lend to a rosier assessment of the TM factor?:

            “It seems he was called by sirens of self-deception powered by fond wishes, and FELL PREY.” (Mar 28, 2011 – Concerning Stoned Apes, Reality Sandwich)

            (“TM’s case seems … a deeply, desperately split psyche … To date, I think he was his own principle mark, fooling others secondarily to a primary self-deceptive wish, to convince himself of sensational, psychotic-like ideas he knew better than to credit deep down, but which he found rapturously exhilarating, infatuating his imagination beyond his power of reason to resist…”)

            Obviously your apt phase has surfaced before in TM context. And I think it describes his tragic flaw well. Alas – now psychedelia’s too, in his honor.

            The latter is larger issue – of cultic significance. TM promotion, his siren song that remains in broadcast. Seeking new outlets. Soliciting attention, recruits, converts, prospective new fishers of men to cast its baited lines – more volume, power and privilege. For lo, it shall be with us always (I can only foresee).

            Among in-circle intrigues I note, is a question of whether TM’s influence is fading, or growing. I’ve noticed, to any concern voiced, the former line is often defensively cast, as if to rebut by trivializing issue. But in absence of such question, when no issue stirs – the latter tends to prevail. Often in
            triumphant, tentshow revival-like tone.

            Part of the fallout of TM enthusiasm, as I find – for all its intellectual ambition (and pretence, I note) – its self-limited to refute any critique as in Christian apologetics. Rebuttals are coherent only in its own ‘insider’ terms; otherwise uncompelling as a sermon to the choir (one function they appear to serve).

            To me its unclear whether an intelligent, well-spoken person such as yourself, Calypso – who takes time and trouble to address points I raise (which you clearly understand) – can, or is interested, to reckon very well with the type of info and findings on which
            my perspective is based. It has less to do with friends and family or personal impressions. As work in progress, its more based in impartially critical, ‘just the facts, ma’am’ investigation – including forensic questions that are simply disallowed by celebratory enthusiasm.

            Likewise, for looking into this I prefer methods and tools of greater power than hermeneutics and rhetoric – foundations of discourse mostly extant in the TM tent. I favor procedures of technical rigor, verifiable, steps that can be repeated. Checking the math as Watkins did, or TWZ’s associated
            ‘reasoning’ as Hanegraaff did. Actually reading lit sources TM cited – in crafty fashion, as turns out – to stage an illusion of some ‘idea’ or ‘theory.’

            Its just ordinary due diligence. But that’s almost unknown it seems – even as a value much less practice, in the McKennasphere. Its like a massive missing clue, an idea from another planet – unheard of. Unthinkable – specifically to those he regaled by flimflam, dropping article titles and author names.

            So, quite a problematic scenario for what purposes discussion such as ours may hold. I don’t see how a perspective based mainly in critical results and
            considerations, fully facing their scope and scale, can be addressed by sympathetic defense of TM or his following – based in other ways and means.

            Hit with light and magnification, I find the TM concern comes down less to ‘exploring consciousness,’ than problems of conscience. I mostly find sobering issues of principle, ethos, values – of character, human bondage. And if any such concern rears its head within the ‘resonance’ or radiance) – one common ‘response’ is “Exit, Stage Left” – deafening silence, play Ostrich,
            let’s pretend.

            Failing that, if silence is broken, its often for tactical exercise in diversion. Subtle as-if motions to change
            the subject – to Miley Cyrus, for example (see below). Simple strategy – digress, zero out not in, usefully vague to obfuscate. Speculation; argument from ignorance becomes a standard, as if a virtue not liability – and a basis for claiming ‘balls’ in TM’s name, as I see in a fire drill post (below) – how self-congratulatory. Coffee table iffing, pandering
            affectations of polity, almost everything plus the kitchen sink becomes handy for such purpose, it seems.

            If these tactics – the passive, and the covert – fail; the final recourse is active aggression. Best defense a good offense? So attack brigades in TM’s ‘honor’ are the inspiration’s last line of defense. Not just verbal abuse or trollism. It starts there with insolence and derision, mockery, dull attempts to provoke flame war, personality contest etc. But as I notice, it actually rises to a level of threats issued. It escalates into attempts at intimidation. Its classic; retributive, violent anti-social impulses of fanaticism issue from the ‘resonance’ – increasingly, I find.

            To exemplify, one need look no further than the present case. I find posts brandishing sabers of
            defamation and libel. That dissonantly frightened, so desperate to silence voices, by counter-attack. At one particularly fanatic-like internet cell – fane of some older more established TM fans (official ones, some) — here’s a fresh ‘huff and puff’ sample that threatens a lawsuit. Deed not word, action, a fond fantasy for fanaticism. Note its 2nd person address: “I hope you have deep pockets, Jan”

            You sound puzzled at the origin of my interest. Its no mystery, I merely tune in, note what’s going on and realize a sense of reasonable concern – as anyone not under a certain spell might. Especially something that operates so extensively by deceit and manipulation as I find with TM. To be or not to be street stupid – that is the question, for approach to assessment and evaluation of what meets the eye.

            I notice a lot by observing, looking closely, carefully. The TM cause inordinately relies on stealth, flying ‘below radar’ of broader awareness beyond subcultural bounds. Culture is not friend, and in wartime protocols, who goes there friend or foe – is the highest relational priority. With no interest in the foe understanding its transmissions, TMism deploys standard methods like jargonesque ‘code’ – impede detection and securing its purport from ears of ‘culture’ – turning away ‘wrong’ interest. As if to avert ‘bad PR,’ minimize risks that brought discredit and disrepute to ‘Scientific’ Creationism, and Timothy Leary – along with psychedelics in
            general.

            So where Leary was overt, TM goes covert. At any point the TM operation is breached, I find it digs deeper. When ‘Sci’ Creationism’s profile was exposed, it didn’t give up. It went deeper under cover – crafted itself a higher quality disguise, a
            new improved sheepskin costume (Intel Design), and tried erasing its tracks on the trail leading back to Bible-based pseudoscience.

            Blowing away the fog, stripped of its aura-shield, what the “TM thing” seems mainly to convey and express, is not just clear intent, but some grimness of determination. Its mainly ambition of influence,
            pursuit of privilege, to further its self-interest, build its power grid. On premise of ‘exploring consciousness’ yet – in manifest betrayal to such interest, in any good-better-best sense. Massive contradictions at every level, specific to general, do I find.

            But again – approach: I look at brushstrokes, its the only way to see – real or fake? – separate authentic from counterfeit, fact from fiction. Its the hypothesis one doesn’t test, or does, that leads to conclusion. I think that’s the moral of the story of our ‘big pic’ disagreement – though we seem not to disagree on
            certain details.

            Yet I can’t help feeling there’s little prospect for a view such as mine, in communication with one such as yours. What is the significance of such situation, as emerges? What makes it never-the-twain tough,
            because you express hopes for and about my path – that it will lead me to – whomever you mean by ‘more rational actors.’ On whose behalf, in what interest? Surely such hopes seem vain, in view of a broadly and deeply informed perspective I reach on verifiable information, documentary evidence, all taken together for better or worse, not cherry-picked.

            As for myself, perhaps equally of no avail – sadlier but wiselier? – I might wish there were something I could say not to convince you or change your mind. But merely to satisfy your understanding of difference, perhaps help you to better comprehend or grasp … Alas for good intentions, vain wishes, blown bubbles of hopeless hopes. Like ‘peace’ as Chamberlain sought, with Hitler, in Munich. We both know about the road to hell and what paves it I think.

            Maybe no use for you to anguish over my path. For me, the sense of being able to reach clear, broadly informed perspective about the ‘TM thing’ – my own, yes – and without regard to whether it pleases or displeases admirers (mostly strangers for whom I hold no brief) – is more than adequate for my interest and purposes. In all good sense and basic rationality – you mustn’t feel my conclusions should have to satisfy anyone or anything “in TM’s name, amen.” It strikes me as a waste of the potential human interaction holds. How can trading vain wishes or hopes, rather than other type engagement perhaps more constructive or of greater possibilities – be helpful for anyone; especially you or I, this occasion?

            Seems a waste of perfectly good concern. Hell I’m impressed you can stand in discussion with such strong difference as I pose. Might i suggest you ought to be too? With no bad regards.

          • MRockatansky

            One more tidbit, just surfacing – regarding my mention of TM’s culture war strategy, compared to Leary (i.e. covert, not overt). Here’s how TM puts his ‘tread lightly back behind, not loud out front’ (i.e. tiptoe, avoid alert, don’t draw ‘wrong’ attention) method in a vid, just brought to my attention:

            “Ahhh, why am I not in jail? Hm. Well – that’s an interesting question… I don’t try to boil it
            down to a shoutable slogan. Like ‘turn on, tune in, drop out’ – that, then, they come. Uh perhaps
            I’m sanctioned.

            Tim Leary, who’s a friend of mine, would address 25 thousand people at a throw. My crowds are, you know, a couple times a year they creep over a
            thousand. And I think the key is to KEEP IT LOW KEY, and – we don’t want Dodger Stadium filled, or anything like that. Its very good to atomize it and spread it through.” (www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDYdN3j2eTg):

            Very simple reasoning: “We” don’t want to create a scene like Leary did. That’s counter-productive, anti-strategic. Better approach is about sneaking ‘it’ through filters of culture, avoiding notice from any ‘wrong’ attention – not properly ‘pre-qualified’ (i.e., not your friend).

            Not to belabor, just demonstrate – by evidence, raw data, verbatim – type basis my conclusion is based in. An exercise in method, how I reach it.

            As you see, not much to do with mere impression or personal opinion, social experiences and good times (mine, yours, whoever’s). Just info, documentary verbatim. Right from the (Trojan) horse’s mouth. And type method and tools – using a ‘signals intel’ approach, testing and retesting the TM broadcast and message. This one merely exemplifies, again – the nature of TM ‘black ops’ – as something Other than what it dresses up as, pretends to be.

            Taking its elaborate verbal cloak, pretense of some ‘theorizing’ or ideas, etc – at face value doesn’t get to the heart things. Getting in on the shellgame, playing along – isn’t compatible with unmasking it. Pulling away the mask is – and critically necessary to find what’s under it, concealed. And what I detect, doing that, is a sort of guerilla offensive. A tactical campaign in a (pseudo-) psychedelic culture war. Via standard operating procedures, broadcast of propaganda, disinfo (deception, manipulation etc).

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Greetings MRockatansky, Please message me, wanted to learn more about your points on McKenna’s falsifying data to support his Stoned Ape Theory. Thank you again for all of your comments here!! Cheers :)

          • MRockatansky

            Hailing frequencies, Cam. You’re welcome – and I return my own thanks to you, for your inquiring comments and appreciation.

            Prelude-wise, I assume (and would value your correction if wrong) you’ve not yet read Fischer and colleagues’ research on psilocybin and visual perception. Especially key articles whose names TM dropped, in his beguiling stories about them. Which as I find, he told ‘right through his teeth’ to his target audience – not the most qualified or critically discriminating, or intellectually rigorous folks either, judging by TM’s description:

            “The target audience [for FOOD OF THE GODS] will be the converted first of all … the 18-25 year old group that is drug friendly but has no rationale except that its a good time …” (http://deoxy.org/t_mondo2.htm).

            Not sure how you’d like to proceed, but I’m happy to assist your interest as would suit it, however I can. One idea I might suggest, first stepwise if I’m right, is – I can email you (pdf file) their studies. That way you have the verbatim testimony, no stories from anyone about what they say. Just the facts, exactly as worded – complete, not picked over, nothing removed from context.

            I can also tell you in advance (if you like) – points to be on lookout for. Some of them aren’t obvious, and of course the technical nature of the research doesn’t qualify as “young adult 18-25 Easy Reading.” There are many salient contradictions and falsities, some of which I noted in another post here – I’m delighted by your interest, and heartily endorse your own independent fact-checking inquiry. If you like to read them but rather optimize for your own critically independent exercise – with no ‘leading question’ or pre-direction of your reading – that’s equally feasible. So whatever and however, please feel welcome to advise and direct.

            I’d no more want someone to take my word for something in question – instead of seeing for themselves, with their own eyes – than I’d have them subscribe to TM’s line and what the Terence’s Witnesses say. I’d rather support and assist, facilitate their inquiry in its own trajectory and course – to discover for themselves, what is true or not, all witness testimony about them aside. May I invite you, email me (bakers4@tampabay.rr.com) if you like to receive any/all of those research articles. With compliments and appreciable wishes, thank you for your intellectually inquiring, true-to-purpose curiosity and interest. Takes more than brains (nothing against ‘em) it takes heart, guts integrity of purpose – consciousness itself. That’s the right stuff, I modestly suggest.

    • Dan Muench

      I like how ‘them’ automatically equals ‘the mushrooms’ even thought it is NOT obvious, to a ‘believer’ at least. NO chance that [blank guy I like and read] could be co-opted, even though McKenna is the Psychonaut version of a Hendrix/Marley/Guevara poster up on the freshman college student’s wall…obvious and not exactly indicative of any deep dive into the murky, undiscovered waters.

      What did RAW say about believing and the death of thought?

      I see this reaction all of the time – McKenna, the Beatles, the Dead, they all HAVE to be ‘white hats’ because God Forbid that some wannabe Seeker actually look at their own lives under the same critical lens they prescribe for Others. Oh, the mass media is controlled – but not McKenna, not the Beatles, not ‘my favorite guy’, and – certainly! – not DISINFORMATION itself.

      Don’t worry, it’s just those OTHER unenlightened, purposefully miseducated fools that must question what they believe – not US, not OURSELVES, because, like some uppity 18 year old, WE HAVE IT ALL FIGURED OUT, don’t we?

      Put it this way: when the Psychedelic Revolution started, and since, have we gotten ‘freer’? More intelligent as a society? Better educated? Better economy? More power as a people and less for the Elites who were known about then as much as now?

      NOPE. Worse in all regards. Don’t give me the ‘but pot got legalized’ BS either.

      BTW, I have mushrooms ‘talk’ to me – I’ve been invited to leave this planet by ‘them’. However, I don’t uncritically take that without the antithesis of it ‘all being in my head’, either.

      As Jan has pointed out – McKenna is running from INTERPOL and the FBI, is in serious legal shit – but returns to the country to ‘work for them’, remains out of court, out of prison, and the FBI and INTERPOL drop drug smuggling charges that ESPECIALLY would have been useful to silence a supposedly ‘rogue’ element ‘spilling the beans’? Or, as the ambiguous statement suggests – as McKenna suggests by saying he rarely talks about it, was he EVER shy about talking about mushrooms? – was he co-opted? He ‘had a big mouth’ that ‘would be useful’ for ‘the organization’.

      I’d suggest you’re off the deep end a bit yourself, and prone to believing fairy tales as absolute truths. Don’t worry, you’ve got plenty of company!

      As someone who has read MANY mainstream publications – fiction and non-fiction, movies, etc – glorifying the ‘return to the archaic’, one wonders why the Hollywood Dream Machine would be so prone to promoting the very thing they’re supposedly so opposed to. Could it be Huxley-esque ‘learning to love your servitude’, ie your serf-ness? Going ‘back to the land’?

      I suppose all those Elites with weapons that make the most ardent Militia member look like he’s readying to attack the powers-that-be with a plastic spork are just going to LET us all ‘go back’ and surely will NOT want us to willingly turn our back on technology for ourselves – while they use it to make sure we never ‘get out of the pen’ again.

      Nah, couldn’t happen! ONLY THE ELEMENTS OF POP CULTURE I MYSELF DON’T GRAVITATE TOWARDS ARE INVALID AND EXAMPLES OF MASS PROGRAMMING, after all, you can tell the ‘counterculture’ worked so well for ‘us’ by the huge numbers of homeless hippies/road kids/gutterpunks/etc littering the landscape. Obviously the ‘alternative’ works so well, that’s why we’re so empowered and mighty 60 years down the road, right? Because the Hippies were such an unalloyed success?

      Thanks for the laugh, needed it!

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Well said Dan.

      • moremisinformation

        Interesting post – I agree with much of it. Even that McKenna could have been ‘recruited’ by ‘intelligence’. But this clip from the talk is not evidence, imo. Using Camron’s logic, the most immediate comment to the ‘damning evidence’, is, ‘You mean am I the alien ambassador’, which clearly alludes to the notion that McKenna, at least, assumed that the question was regarding mushrooms.

        And Jan’s diatribe of questions about whether mushrooms have organizations and need PR, is frankly embarrassing. I’ve listened to almost everything the guy has put out, I enjoy his research and I think he has made some valid and damning connections but he gets stuck in terrible ruts of ill-logic. Imo, this, just like the Wasson quote regarding the printing press, is one of those instances.

        For someone so prosthelytizing about the Trivium Method, the rhetoric is abhorrent.

        • moonmad

          I enjoyed your post .Normally, when something looks like the beginning of a rant, I pass . But many points here are provocative. I must say however, the BEATLES must mean something different to you than to me. I accept innovation in music production, ingenuity in arrangement and musicianship, Epochal relevance, and practically singlehandedly ,showing popular musicians another dimension in expressing themselves. wrapped in some of the best songs ever written that’s enough for me. I have no real belief in ” GOD ” yet Bach makes me think sometimes I just don’t know everything. it’s the same deal . keep posting i will read them.

          • moremisinformation

            I think you replied to the wrong person…

          • moonmad

            Lol sorry yes, it was intended for Dan, i like yours as well.

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          Ok point by point. You believe that because Terrence believes that “mushrooms” tell him to do things. That he is in fact working for “them” and not any alphabet organization that is hunting him?

          Let’s go over it again.

          “And certainly when I reached La Chorerra in 1971 I had a price on my head by the FBI, I was running out of money, I was at the end of my rope. And then “THEY” recruited me and said, “you know, with a mouth like yours there’s a place for you in our organization“. And I’ve worked in deep background positions about which the less said the better. And then about 15 years ago they shifted me into public relations and I’ve been there to the present.”

          I think Jan’s questions are entirely appropriate and challenge you to actually answer them. Here they are again.

          Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
          recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical thinking:

          1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

          2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

          3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background
          positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something an
          agency would do?

          4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

          5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for smuggling)

          6) Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI could do?

          7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

          When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their organization in public relations and deep background to the present –
          which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not mushrooms or UFOs. Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is clearly ridiculous. The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reaching
          for anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel
          uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you again.

          So, can you logically present that Terrence must have been invoking non physical entities have drafted him into their service, preventing him from being arrested by those who hunted him, allowing him to then very publicly present for years thereafter information on psychedelics? That he was presenting this at the Esalen institute is also something to take into consideration, if you have honestly studied Jan’s work, I shouldn’t have to point out why this would be bothersome… Regarding the Wasson quote, we can talk about that next if you like, but attend to the previous points raised here first please.

          Regarding “proselytizing”, tell me, is it proselytizing to present a logical process of vetting information that prevents illogical induction of information? Should we just sit on our hands while the deliberate dumbing down of the population moves forward full steam ahead?

          Each one teach one.

          • moremisinformation

            ‘You believe that because Terrence believes that “mushrooms” tell him to do things. That he is in fact working for “them” and not any alphabet organization that is hunting him?’

            No. I believe that if you listened to McKenna’s talks all day long, you’d be shitting your pants at all the crazy, literal things that he discusses.

            I can answer Jan’s ridiculous questions 1-4 really simply – listen to McKenna talk. Ever heard him? I bet you have. Ever heard him exaggerate? Use metaphor? Hyperbole? Bullshit? Yes you have.

            But, lo and behold, on this instance, we MUST take McKenna literally? Everything else is bullshit but this one key admission?

            I haven’t heard anyone (not saying they’re not) ‘claim the mushrooms tried to recruit him’ – literally. This is seriously starting to bother me a little bit. I’ve had and in some areas still have respect for Jan and yourself. But your inability to understand wordplay, nuance, metaphor, etc. or even make room (and it deserves WIDE room here) for it, is bizarre.

            So there. First four answered when McKenna’s comments simply, aren’t taken literally. Easy.

            And actually, question five can also essentially be answered the same way. I’m not really sure where the ‘pay’ comes into context anyway. Point out to me where it’s relevant and maybe I’ll spend more time thinking about it.

            Question six and seven which are essentially the same (sorry that puts a damper on the case since seven ‘tough’ questions seem a lot more daunting than 6) interesting. I’d be curious to know the answer to that as well. It be great to hear you or Jan come up with something other than, ‘clearly some agency that I cannot name, got him out of trouble’. It’s an interesting idea Camron and I don’t dismiss it (unlike you, is apparently sold) but, as has been said many times, the burden of proof is on Jan. And if this is the cornerstone of his case, he doesn’t have a case.

            ‘When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits…’

            ‘We’ don’t understand he was an agent. Please don’t collectivize me into this. And just as easily, by decree, I can say, ‘when we understand that McKenna was prone to metaphor and shit talking, as he admits…

            ‘we don’t have to twist things into believing that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their organization in public relations and deep background to the present – which he wasn’t allowed to discuss.’

            See above regarding metaphor, wordplay, etc. A dictionary and/or English class may be useful at this time.

            You keep mentioning UFO’s and magical mushroom beings. I’m not sure why? I never said anything about them. Can you explain your strawman?

            ‘The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting him…’

            Yawn. The one-trick pony is getting pretty old. See above. I will not attempt to knock down your strawman.

            ‘just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by those people.’

            I stopped listening to McKenna since long before I came across Jan Irvin because I admitted he was full of shit and of little benefit to me some time ago. So you need not employ your appeal to ridicule.

            I find the hubris of Jan Irvin and unfortunately you, rather interesting. As if, without being presented with the rhetorical trainwreck that is, Jan Irvin, the whole world would be crushed under a lack of logic magical thinking. At the very least, I can thank him for leading me to Richard Grove, Brett Veinotte, James Corbett and several other media producers who continue to turn out more substantial and useful information than not.

            ‘So, can you logically present that Terrence must have been invoking non physical entities have drafted him into their service, preventing him from being arrested by those who hunted him, allowing him to then very publicly present for years thereafter information on psychedelics?’

            I’ll be waiting with baited breath for the story about McKenna’s escape from arrest via being hired as an agent to an as-yet-unnamed organization. Was he really ever even wanted for smuggling? How do you know? Because he told you? How can you trust an ‘agent’? The burden of proof is on you. And as one can see, this word masturbation can go on and on and on and…

            As for the first part, I think I’ve done my due diligence. When one understands how to use the English language for more than it’s literal meaning, it’s really not that difficult of a concept.

            Yea Esalen may well have been a place for ‘agents’. It was also a place for people to just pay to come listen to a bullshitter tell fanciful stories about nonsense. Are you suggesting that the room was full of CIA operatives?

            Proselytizing: to recruit someone to join one’s party, institution, or cause.

            I think that speaks for itself.

            ‘Should we just sit on our hands while the deliberate dumbing down of the population moves forward full steam ahead?’

            Different strokes for different folks. I have evidence from my own experience and from people I know that Jan Irvin is more of a turn-off to these ideas for people than the opposite. In this post, I’ve named several more effective messengers to this cause and I would promote them everyday and twice on Sundays before I’d present Jan Irvin to someone new to these ideas.

            I’ve said it before. His grammar is outstanding, his basic logic is solid but often stretched and his rhetoric is abysmal.

            Also, I can’t get onto the schoolsucksproject right now for some reason but they have a good series over there about how logic isn’t the end-all-be-all and can lead to traps (I’m paraphrasing). If memory serves Tony Meyers and James Corbett are a couple of guests in the series. Maybe I’ll send the links over to Jan when the site is back up. Maybe you’d be interested in them too.

          • siphersh

            You must understand that if you excuse a single logical fallacy by fitting it into a large theory, you will step by step build up a false picture of the world.

            That’s why it’s important to clarify the reasoning behind an assertion before placing it on the puzzle board. The assertion here is that McKenna “admitted” that he was an agent. When Jan is asking stuff like “are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble”, he’s shifting the issue.

            Pay attention! Don’t let yourself be fooled!

          • Mylo_Abacus

            The mind starts dying as it becomes infected with illogic. I have never found the idea false, although you’ve got to bear a little illogic once it tries to infect. There were surely worse viruses. We sometimes tell ourselves, “The nut won’t come out of its shell unless it first becomes infected with crack.”

          • hagbard23

            The third question has some interesting answers if you’re willing to be creative about who They could be. I have tripped me some balls, man, and that isn’t really a smiple question.

      • hagbard23

        So many people think the way to free oneself from the negative aspects of modern civilization is to flee, to drop off the map (or drop out, since Leary had contacts with Them, too). They want to toil, separate from much of the good side of technology. You haven’t beaten anything. You’ve run away, and taken somebody insubordinate away from the conflict.

        There is no reason why Terence (and Dr. Tim, and RAW, and pretty much anybody else) can’t have been working for Them. If you knobs think it’s as simple as good guys fighting for freedom against the enslaving bad guys, maybe it’s time to reread Illuminatus!, eh? Every tool can be one of liberation and freedom, or a slaver’s shackles and whip. Language, medicine, the internet, magick, sex, and, yes, psychedelics.

        Don’t be so naive, people.

        • siphersh

          Maybe Terence was a government agent.

          But he was not referring to the government in the quoted talk. It’s a simple grammatical issue, grammar being one of the disciplines of the trivium.

          The audience laughs because they understand the meaning, because they are proficient in grammar, and they understand the rules of textual coherence.

          If someone listens to the recording, and doesn’t recognize the semantic cohesion, they’re just simply not proficient in grammar, in my opinion.

        • Mylo_Abacus

          To some extent, there have been helpful agents who were trying to do people general favor. But limitation of medium or media has to come into effect at some point.

          You may really need to know that what was coined back in 1969 on tape is no longer fit to trance to in this modern world because of realistic new obstacles of expansive enumeration. Back when you could realistically count them, it was simple enough to explain.

          Now, perhaps you’ve got to be like bending sapling admiring stinging jellyfish to handle this stuff.
          —————–
          Dear Blabby,

          When I am ‘bending sapling,’ I jump from one limb to another.
          I know I must bend less once I reach other limb to perch upon.
          But Terence McKenna said … that I must bend more when I hit other limb.
          Signed,
          truly I am lost from limb to limb without grasp

          What have I done!

    • Divinecomedia

      yes, the deep end, where all the big fish are. have fun staying in the shallow end….

      • symbiont

        If taking a line completely out of context, misconstruing it, and slandering that person to suit your paranoid reality-tunnel is considered a desirable deep end of exploration, I think I’ll stick to hyperspace.

        • Divinecomedia

          say what you like about some of his obvious shortcomings, which indeed often make him hard to take, but mr irvin has furnished documents, such as those pertaining to mkultra project # 58 being the wasson expedition to mexico and subsequent publication of it in LIFE magazine, that have started, in my mind, a giant unraveling of the commonly held account of how and why psychedelics emerged into modern society. i say this as a person who knew gordon wasson, and terence mckenna, quite well. have published or republished their writings, and collaborated in other ways as well. i am not yet sure what to make of his assertions about terence. i would have interpreted the above remarks as terence saying he was recruited by the mushroom before i became clued into the fact that it was the CIA, for more than we commonly believed, and repeated in a number of books, including my own, that propagated and publicized psychedelics in modern society. gordon wasson, the moses of the modern psychedelic movement, (according to Terence) was lying all these years. in fact he was a professional liar in his role as propagandist for morgan. i think my late friend albert hofmann was lying too, though it was not Jan who brought that to my attention. It was Alan Piper, a scholar in Europe, along with Hank Alberelli’s A Terrible Mistake, who effected that unveiling. Irvin has an axe to grind and his anger makes his work less readable. It is also understandable, given the mounting evidence that all is not what it seems in psychedelic history. far from being the anti-war, anti authoritarian change agents that Tim Leary tried to cast them as, they are more and more agents of distraction, more like Huxley’s soma. i am now forced to consider they were designed to be that way in most nefarious social engineering. we have been duped. none of this disputes the wondrous qualities that psychedelics can embody….

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Thank you very much for stating this here. Who are you by the way? It takes guts to admit we could have been duped, the fervor that goes into supporting illusions is much better utilized in understanding that many of the most charismatic figures throughout history have been charlatans, liars, thieves, whores, backstabbers and opportunists. Admitting this and understanding this potential is evidence of the humility of wisdom taking root. Cheers!

          • hagbard23

            Like I said in another comment, every tool can be used by all sides in a conflict. Psychedelics clearly allow for programming of consciousness, but what happens when they’re spread to unprepared individuals by the bad guys? Why only certain ones?

          • siphersh

            No. Psychedelics are deconditioning agents.

          • hagbard23

            If used that way. If you think that sort of powerful reprogramming can only be used for positive things and nothing sinister, you’re out of your mind.

          • siphersh

            No. “Deconditioning” doesn’t mean reprogramming used for positive things. It means de-programming.

          • Calypso_1

            It doesn’t mean either. It is a process of adaptation to decreased environmental stimuli, be it from norms or elevation adaptation. The existence & intent of outside agency is neither required or relevant to the underlying process.

    • Sansome

      Disinformation…for Disinformation.

      Some people would take this at face value and not analyze the facts at all. Hence someone is playing an “intelligence” game.

  • Kommie

    yes – and the CIA created earth in the 50s…..

    • Calypso_1

      Yes AND it was a flat Earth with a hollow core inhabited by Nazi-grey/sasquatch hybrids©.

      • Matt Staggs

        This is the best idea for a game setting ever.

        • Calypso_1

          I’ll take .23% and a minor kudos. Disinfo pub. can have the rest.

        • The Well Dressed Man

          Would fit right into the Illuminati card game. Expansion set?

          • wolfe23

            Classic or NWO?

          • The Well Dressed Man

            I still have my low-budget Steve Jackson set from the 80s, in the rectangular plastic box. No idea what happened to Car Wars though :(

          • Calypso_1

            CarWars – Goodtimes : )

          • Matt Staggs

            I rarely got to play it, but damn, I really got into modding out the cars and racing around a friend’s kitchen table when we did.

          • Calypso_1

            If it wasn’t for this game my buddies & I would have never started working on cars. My trucks roll bar has a pintle mount…just n case.

          • The Well Dressed Man

            Dude, does your truck have a gunrack?

          • Calypso_1

            Were a bit more serfistikated these days.

          • The Well Dressed Man

            Always more than meets the eye with you, Calypso.

          • Matt Staggs

            I sorely regret that I never got a chance to play that back in the day.

          • The Well Dressed Man

            The forum here is the real time strategy version.

      • BrianApocalypse

        I know a guy who claims to have met sasquatches from the inner-Earth. He told me their bodies could be used as organic vehicles for higher-beings/aliens to inhabit our realm of reality.

        He didn’t mention anything about the ideological affiliations however.

        • Calypso_1

          There is a resistance force. The Nazi ones are Mind-controlled from the moon via “Die Glocke”.

        • Calypso_1

          You didn’t happen to meet the guy at DisinfoCon?

          • BrianApocalypse

            Heh, no this is another guy. He’s actually sort of famous (but couldn’t be considered a celebrity). I wouldn’t reveal who it is, but he swore to me he met and talked to these things!

          • Calypso_1

            Ah, I was beginning to think we might have met.

          • BrianApocalypse

            Oh so you’ve encountered the sasquatches too?

            I was at Disinfocon, we might have met at some point!

          • Calypso_1

            I have had a liminal experience with a single entity. No use of entheogens. It was very much tied to deep geology (not hollow earth) it could just consciously transit through the earth.
            I had no particular interest in or knowledge of squatch lore prior to this event. As far as the ‘reality’ of the experience, I simple take it for what it was and view any number of explanations as possible, without really feeling the need for an explanation.

          • BrianApocalypse

            I think that’s the healthiest approach to such experiences. I’ve had some similar ‘contact’ type events happen (not Sasquatch related) and that’s essentially the approach I take as well. I would like an explanation, but it’s possible that these entities/technologies (or whatever they are) exist at the boundary of reality as we know it and we can never quite grasp them or define them. Like a perpetual fleeting glimpse from the periphery of vision.

            The Sasquatch thing appears so absurd on the surface but when you hear stories that have all these similarities, and especially in cases like yours where you had no prior knowledge of the ‘lore’, it’s pretty fascinating.

          • Ted Heistman

            That’s actually not an uncommon belief. That’s what many of the Indian tribes of the PNW have said all along since before the white man.

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          I hear Hiram Abiff was pure Sasquatch.

  • BuzzCoastin

    does it really matter?

    • Calypso_1

      Not to me. But I work for THEM.

      • BuzzCoastin

        But he worked for THEY:

        They’re Huckstering Even You

        • The Well Dressed Man

          But it’s been said that THEY are really working for YOU KNOW WHO.

    • Gabriel D. Roberts

      I don’t think it does, but to many it does. When guru infatuation is in full tilt, it’s hard to see the forest for the trees.

      • BuzzCoastin

        over the years I’ve made at least 35 Terrence McKenna videos
        https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL16ACA59DA6AB7C4C

        I never heard anything he said that made me distrust Terrence
        nor did I see him as a guru nor did I “put my faith in him”
        he made some great points and cited some interesting sources
        if he was helping “THEY” it’s hard to see how
        if “THEY” was the mushrooms
        then he served them well

        • Gabriel D. Roberts

          I love Terence McKenna and will continue to appreciate his works and agree with you. His work resonates deeply with me in my personal spiritual and psychonautical pursuits. I don’t think the shoe fits as Mr. Irvin suggests.

        • BuzzCoastin

          I might add
          if you get CIA pay to take schroomz, smoke pot & rabble-rouse
          sign me up

      • Guest

        Agreed.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Gabriel you really shouldn’t talk about “guru infatuation” without a mirror nearby amigo ;) no offense to you but you are obviously suffering from serious infatuation with your idea of Terrence McKenna here.

  • Ted Heistman

    Irvin’s identifies “They” as FBI/CIA as if they were the same thing. I mean they obviously work together, but also spy on each other and are prone to serious rivalries.

    Maybe I am just talking out of my ass here, but in my limited experience in talking to people involved in intelligence and from reading released memos from both organizations, I discern two very different cultures.

    I mean the FBI is a bunch of squares,that are glorified cops, basically.

    The CIA are a bunch of (often gay) aristocrats from Yale interested in the occult, and involved in all kinds of crazy overseas stuff, like drug trafficking and possibly even aliens and shit like that. The CIA is definitely the weirder and more international of the two.

    These types of people generally hate each other. I make an association between them and two entities philosopher Gilles Deleuze called the State and the War Machine. Pirates, Nomads, various anarchist groups, are on the category of the ” War machine” which is often co-opted by the State. I see the CIA in this role of co-option.

    The FBI is more about maintaining order and law enforcement. The FBI is more doltish. The CIA is more subtle and does a lot of things with no immediate obvious pay off.

    • Dingbert

      That’s an accurate depiction of CIA back in the Cold War, but it’s not quite the same today, even though the old guard still has a presence. They’re still aristocrats from Yale or wherever, but they behave more like politicians now (e.g. WMD in Iraq). They have no interest in mavericks anymore. They’re much more time involved in typical military operations, too, spending most among or as soldiers and drone operators. They used to be fixtures at DoS outposts, too, but I hope they reconsider that after their involvement in Benghazi. If you are conducting military operations, but are explicitly not military, are you still legitimate military targets? The world that remembers Cold War CIA sure thinks so.

      The main organizational clash today is, predictably, with NSA. They both report to ODNI (FBI is DoJ) and compete for funding and projects. NSA is the most secretive and is part of DoD, so they have more freedom to operate and receive funding. They’re the one’s doing really spooky stuff. CIAs lawyer types and NSAs mathematician types are not very compatible, either. The “no immediate pay off” money mainly goes to the DARPA and IARPA. There’s not much cash there, they mainly work with universities, and, since the payoff isn’t obvious, they are relatively open about what they do.
      That said, all these agencies are full of weirdos.

      Fun tip for you all to investigate: Navy organizations. Unlike the Army, the gov’t is constitutionally obligated to provide a Navy. But we haven’t had a real naval battle since WWII. Sounds like a good home for black budgets, eh? ;)

      • Ted Heistman

        Yeah, its interesting to me how hippy New age and horizontal rather than vertical DARPA is organized. I think somehow they know rigid hierarchies fuck up creativity, even if you are creating weapons.

        Even Leonardo Da Vinci got roped into designing weapons for the military. That seems to be a recurring theme with various geniuses of history, maybe we can include McKenna in that group too.

    • Charlie Primero

      “They” is not the CIA, FBI, NSA, Mossad, MI6, Russian FSD, or Chinese MSS.

      “They” is the global Super-class, basically about 6,000 people, or about 0.0000009% of the people on this planet. David Rothkopf, CEO and Editor-at-large of Foreign Policy Magazine provides a fawning illustration of them if you can stomach his continuous licking of their boots…

      http://www.amazon.com/Superclass-Global-Power-Elite-Making/dp/0374531617

      • gustave courbet

        I’ve read Rothkopf’s Super Class, and while I find his deferential and obsequious coverage to be shallow and propagandistic, he does a fairly good job of showing how even the top of the pyramid is not a monolithic ‘they’ but a heterogeneous mixture. I am not accusing you of this but the ‘conspiracy culture’ often falls into simplistic troupes such as ‘the illuminati’, ‘the masons’, etc, instead of dealing with the complexity of reality, which is harder to explain to laypeople and harder to form into a narrative.

        • Charlie Primero

          I agree. Both situations; “History is one long accident you nutters!” and “The X control everything!” are over-simplifications which lead to misunderstanding.

          For me, it all boils down to reducing the amount of Predation in the world. People can’t resist predation if they aren’t even aware it’s occurring.

          I used to work with bed-ridden people suffering from severe mental retardation. Employees of the institution would steal their Christmas gifts, but the “retards” didn’t even know because they lacked the ability to even understand concepts like radios, socks, and possessions.

          Was it morally wrong to predate those people if they weren’t even aware of it? I think so.

          • Ted Heistman

            Yeah, personally I am no fan of Intelligence operatives. I believe in transparency and peoples right to know. I think people need to be able to make informed choices.

            I think Freedom and self determination are important but it doesn’t guarantee people will make the right choice.

            I think the intelligence mindset is more about steering things they way you want them to go through manipulation and propaganda.

          • gustave courbet

            There’s no shortage of the ethically retarded on this planet, that’s for sure.

      • Ted Heistman

        Well, I look at these people as kind of like surfers. They don’t invent the waves, they just ride them.

        PKD wrote an anecdote in one of his posthumously published straight novels, that a sign of a true aristocrat is they work every situation to their advantage and always land on their feet.

  • atlanticus

    Just try to listen to Jan Irvin’s voice for more than five minutes and if you have any sense of self-respect your stomach will churn…

    Jan Irvin is obviously a shill for the Illuminati.

    • Calypso_1

      Does “Illuminati” = “Irvin’s Ego” ?

    • http://www.evolutionarylandscapes.net/ Jeremy Johnson

      I hope this was a joke in itself – if so, well played!

  • RemyC

    I always knew this. We discussed it when we met. That’s how he got carte blanche to grow psychedelics with impunity at his farm in Hawaii. You do what you gotta do!

    • Calypso_1

      Did you discuss the government’s secret vaccine programs as well?

  • http://www.evolutionarylandscapes.net/ Jeremy Johnson

    Having listened to the whole talk by McKenna, it seems very strange to me that Jan Irvin is warping this quote into an admission. The actual intonation and context of this quote is a completely different context than what Irvin is grasping at. Strange.

    • Calypso_1

      Perhaps if the audience had spent more time cultivating the Trivium they would not have been fooled by this crafty provocateur.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Provide the evidence for your assertion please. Why should we just believe you? No offense, but show some effort to prove your point man.

      • atlanticus

        “Provide the evidence”? He TOLD you where to look… *sigh* old people…

        Listen to the entire 5 and a half hours, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj1yFZRmFsw#t=15736

        You must listen to the *entire* talk because Jeremy’s point is that within-the-context-of-the-talk, the quote above is understood to mean something quite different than what it seems to, with this obvious cherry-picking.

        EDIT: Scanning your other comments, I see your position and I’m just going to head you off at the pass: Terrence McKenna was just a pseudo-intellectual entertainer. He was no god to me, but I was also far too young, even by the time he passed, to have any idea who he was.

        That being said, he was amusing and I have spent many hours at my desk job listening to his talks to pass the time. I know *because I have listened to these talks in their entirety* that this particular quote is out of context.

        Even after telling you all of that, I have little doubt that you will still attempt to stereotype me into some category which suits you, since it is *so much easier* than listening to a 5.5 hr lecture which contains all of the proof you would need to see that you’re wrong.

        In a way, I can’t blame you. That’s a lot of time, especially if you don’t care for the content. However, you’re not going to convince me or anyone else here who has actually listened to the…what? DAH-DAH-DAAAHHH: PRIMARY DOCUMENTATION!

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          I have no issue with listening to the entire talk. If you feel so confident though, feel free to zone in on the 10-30 minutes on either side and glean the most potent context you feel demonstrates that he in no way is serious about outing himself as working for the “They”.

          • atlanticus

            I’m confident that if you were familiar with McKenna’s (many, many, many hours of) lectures in general, it would be obvious what was meant by “they”.

            I’m also confident (by the general tone of your comments thus far) that regardless of the evidence, you will not change your mind because you have a thing about Irvin. I’ve listened to some of Irvin’s work, as well, and am familiar with his general arguments concerning Gordon Wasson, etc.

            I even recall that he has attempted to get information from the CIA regarding McKenna, and that they sent him a vague and shady letter. (Not really surprising in either direction…if McKenna was an agent, then of course they’re shady, but if he wasn’t, it certainly suits them if people begin to think he was…)

            Personally, I dislike Irvin’s personality (I find his character irritating), but this has little to do with facts and I am always open to actual evidence. Irvin has provided very little in this regard. The Association Fallacy should have been covered in his self-taught trivium method…

            This particular audio recording has been out for several years now and NO ONE who has listened to it before Irvin began positing his “theories” thought there was anything strange about it.

            That being said, I haven’t listened to this particular talk in several months. I am not listening to it again just to settle an online dispute, especially not before you have the first time…come back when you’ve put in the full 5 and a half hours, then maybe I’ll bother.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            So let me get this straight, you attack me and accuse me of not doing my homework, but you can’t be bothered to refresh your own memory to make your own case? Talk about hypocrisy. Also here are some questions for you. Would LOVE to hear your response since you are such a smart arse.

            From http://www.gnosticmedia.com/McKenna-Agent

            Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
            recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical thinking:

            1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

            2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

            3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background
            positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something an
            agency would do?

            4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

            5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is
            that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for
            smuggling)

            6) Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI could do?

            7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his
            arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

            When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their organization in public relations and deep background to the present – which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not mushrooms or UFOs. Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is clearly ridiculous.

            The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reaching for anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you again.

            PS> Smarm does not equal intelligence. Better luck next time.

          • atlanticus

            No, but “smarm” is what one gives when they’re trying to tell a thick-headed jerk that they could not give less of a shit about this conversation anymore.

          • siphersh

            “some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms recruited McKenna”

            No. some have pointed out that that’s what he meant. Not that it’s true. That’s a strawman argument, and then Jan goes on to try to refute the strawman.

            That’s the biggest problem with this research. Bigger than the method of the research itself. That Jan is throwing around such fallacies very liberally, and very overtly, in an in-your-face manner. And when someone points it out, he shouts ad hominem, ad hominem, and then shifts the focus to a different evidence, employing argumentum ad weaselum, it’s just not proper communication. This research has serious PR issues.

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          I listened to the 30 minutes previous to his admission and post. I see nothing there that would remove the stigma he has not so cleverly (though he would most likely argue this point…) assigned to himself. If you disagree please present why so in a rational way. Regarding your ad hominem attack, not sure who you are addressing it towards or why, but you are actually defending someone older than both of us by far for the record.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Also you presumed to say so much about primary documentation, how about a transcript? Go ahead and make your case and lead by example. I will let you off easy, the 5 minutes on either side of his seeming admission to be in bed with El Man.

          • atlanticus

            “Rational way”? I have no reason to address you because you said you would listen to the entire talk and yet, you did not.

            Neener-neener. :P

  • Antediluviancurrent

    Terence said “They” recruited me while in La Chorerra. The public laughs as he says that. Not because they’re like “oh the CIA!”, but because they get his sense of humor. We all know Terence saw the mushroom as a seperate intelligence outside of but in a symbiotic relationship with human consciousness, having their own agenda with the planet.
    Anyways, that’s my 2 cents. I don’t think you can claim solid proof for a supposed involvement of McKenna with the CIA when using a reference word like “they”.

    • Gabriel D. Roberts

      This is my view as well.

    • fenris23

      It’s really obvious from the context what he meant. Regardless of what any one else believes, McKenna believed that mushrooms or entities he contacted through the mushrooms had agendas they wished him to act according to.

      The writers at that site are cherry picking his statements out of context to make their argument. Which in the absence of any other evidence is not convincing at all.

      • Aram Jahn

        I think Antediluviancurrent and fenris23 read this pretty much like I did.

        However, I remember not knowing who Terence was, living in LA, and Roy “of Hollywood” Tiuckman of KPFK played tapes of Terence during Roy’s all-night “What’s Happening” show, and I was totally mesmerized and bought every Terence book that came out, and he became a huge inspiration. This IN SPITE of, about two years after I first heard Terence on Roy’s show…he stopped being played.

        I called the show and Roy answered.

        Me: I wonder why you don’t play Terence McKenna’s lectures anymore.

        Roy: I just don’t. That’s not something we’re going to do anymore.

        Me: But…why?

        Roy: I don’t trust him.

        Me: You don’t? Why?

        Roy: I just don’t. I’ve heard some things about him.

        Me: Like what? That he’s CIA?

        Roy: Something like that.

        Me: What? I was just kidding! Are you joking? Who said Terence was a spook? I won’t tell anyone. Just…where did you hear this?

        Roy: That’s all I’ll say. Goodbye! (Hangs up)

        Roy DID continue to play Dave Emory every Wednesday night, sometimes for hours on end, for years thereafter, and I remained a Terence McKenna fan, never believing he worked for the CIA. If he did work for them…it backfired! (I won’t go into dying of a glioblastoma in your early 50s.)

  • Gabriel D. Roberts

    Here is my original article containing the other piece of Jan’s evidence against Terence in his quest to pin the word ‘operative’ on him. http://disinfo.com/2013/01/was-terence-mckenna-a-cia-plant/

  • Trade Mark

    Jan is sucksesful salesmen, internet persona, egotistical, undergraduate charlatan; and rewrites allot what others have already written rearranged, much like Russel Pine AKA Yordan Maxwell. Just a prophit of the times rehashing others work for a ignorant unread, uneducated and angry audience, makeing them appear to be smart or even enlightened. Like David Icke, another act on internet TV programs. they are programs people.

    Correlations Coefficient

    But on this issue here, of controlled social change using drugs and new age moves and such = he is is prolly right since allot of social engineering has to happen in society, since the entire thing is a construct. To bad he can only make correlations and never have any real proof, besides the tricky speculative carnival barker routine, it will have to suffice as a podcast or what some one else is quoted saying to be evidence for truth. This is all he does all day for a living after all is sit on several computers and say stuff. People lineup to hear the preachers, just put your hands on the screen and be healed. Pass the plate twice three times a week even.

    The work of many scholar is just quoting other scholars and correlations to sell more theory and speculation, call is science nowadays when its more lie Seance. Selling logic, reason and critical thought under a “Brand” name, and pretending he and his affiliates own the very Gods of grammar and alone hold the keys to the trivium method? More of the same crap from all media who sells us more and more what ever sells, nothin free not even if it helps people and the world,

    Alternative media? = its just mainstream alternative media. the new, the way “We” see it is better than the way “they” see it = they lie we tell truth but they both sell us some thing. The good and bad are both dangerous so I stay away from both and divisive people like Irvin.

    Divisions and more and more divisions, lets argue tune in and learn how to argue rather than have a loving conversation let argue and divide instead, like irvin teach’s people. Even hosts coast to coast, a mainstream radio show, yet calls him self an alternative authority and scholar on many subjects. Put it on a mug, Tshirt or in a book and call it truth, and ignore he is an author = scholar = authority him self. More Bran names and talking heads, more of the same.

    Any Author is authority and Jan is against the authority’s he reports, therefor being against him self, a scholar who is in fact apart of the very system he claims to be against, a great divider of people a conqueror even.

    Anyone who is divided is against them self. He has nothing to offer but division and useless info that help no one, and offers all the problems and the only solution is buy his products and click here____________-

    • imAwildman

      Your sentence structure and grammar are appalling. How can anyone take you seriously let alone understand what you are trying to say.

      Jan was a guest on coast to coast not a host. Get your facts straight along with your grammar before you post.

  • Chaos_Dynamics

    The perfect diarrhea dripping over on an entire week of fecal cakes.

    Including the recent references of “DMT” in articles about the death/accident/homicide/assassination of journalist Michael Hastings.

    On behalf of machine elves and solid state entities everywhere: FQ.

  • http://twitter.com/urbster1 urbster1

    more of this horrible crap? jan irvin is a deplorable sociopath with an asshole for a mouth. he’s been anally researching the interior annals of his own shit-coated colon for years. anyone who thinks mushrooms or terence mckenna are out to “mind-control” the masses has to cherry-pick the hell out of any and every source they can find. isn’t it funny how everything is always taken out of context, and re-contextualized into jan’s made-up fiction scenarios? give me a break, please stop posting these myths from irvin and co. thanks.

    • Gabriel D. Roberts

      I figured I’d let you decided what to do with it. Withholding information seems like a bad idea. In this case, Terence Himself is speaking. And since the harbingers of the grand plot see this as a nail in TM’s coffin, I thought it should be brought to bear. I’d rather have you be upset i put it up than for you to find it elsewhere with a slanted context. cheers!

      • http://twitter.com/urbster1 urbster1

        honestly kudos to you for reporting it, since you’re right that it would be inevitable i’d hear about it somewhere. i have an uncountable number of bad things to say about jan irvin for spreading this total nonsense under the name of reason, logic, and truth. and this is a great outlet for them!

        • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

          See my above comment urbster (sorry not ubster).

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Ubster. Take the challenge, use your mind and reason why Jan is wrong versus hurling your own verbal tirade at his presumed character. If you can’t do that then you’ve done nothing but expose yourself as incapable of making a cogent argument and providing logical substantiation for your claims. Say what you will about Jan, at least he is willing to go through this methodology. If you want to enter the fray, there is nothing stopping you.

      • http://twitter.com/urbster1 urbster1

        if jan wants to maintain his character then he can retract all the bullshit he’s published and come forward, apologize, and admit his mistakes. he was and has been 100% biased towards, predetermined, and committed to reach his conclusion before he even set foot down this rabbit hole of insanity. if you could read, maybe you could answer the question above: why (isn’t it funny?) is everything taken out of context, and re-contexualized into jan’s made up fiction scenarios? did you see his request to the yale library? why would he state his true intentions when he already knew they would refuse his request, yet conveniently, with NO evidence, took their response as bolstering his own position? why has dennis mckenna not corroborated this story, nor anyone else, leaving jan to fly solo (except for the idiots who can apparently be fooled by such a blatant charlatan)? jan wouldn’t know logic if it fisted him up the ass. why does jan censor every negative comment that disagrees with him? just because you have “a methodology” doesn’t make it good, doesn’t make it right, and doesn’t make it possible to lead you to the truth. fundamentalists have a methodology: their holy books. worse, no one can explain what the actual role of the psychedelic culture is supposed to play in the alleged “masterminds” of the CIA. the reason they stopped experimenting with LSD and outlawed it is because it is detrimental to power structures and systems of control and authority. this is, in fact, an empirically testable hypothesis (try to find ONE testable hypothesis in jan’s work): legalize LSD (and/or psilocybin, MDMA, DMT, mescaline, etc.) and see what happens. if the control structures and systems of authority change, then jan was wrong and i am right. if not, then jan will have actual evidence to support his case. somehow i highly doubt the world will become MORE militarized and dumbed-down. there is a reason these substances are called “mind-expanding” and “consciousness-expanding” and not the opposite.

        • Max Freakout

          Camron can you respond in full to this?

      • imAwildman

        Agreed. Well said.

    • imAwildman

      Pathetic Ad-hominem attack.

  • fenris23

    This is an example of bad textual analysis in service of something someone is already convinced of. Where is there any real evidence other than a twisted contra-intention interpretation of an out of context audioclip?

    • fenris23

      However, I would be utterly unsurprised if he WAS an agency asset, seems like almost everyone was. This just isn’t actual evidence of that thesis.

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Induction versus Deduction. The exact summation is amidst a wider array of data than can provide such clarity. Forest for the trees my man.

        • fenris23

          I’m afraid I can’t see the forest for the LACK of trees. Perhaps if he laid out some of that forest, the context that overrides the clear authorial intent of that speech. But all he has done is repeat the same condescending reaction again and again and lecture us that we need to study the TRIVIUM! tm.

          Which would be a lot more convincing if he was a lot more convincing, as in, was successfully using rhetoric of the trivium. Or if his arguments made logical sense and wasn’t just sparring with straw man arguments no one was making, as in, actually using logic of the trivium.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            Why don’t you quote him? Show me where he is doing what you say, providing evidence and citations to support them? Again, this material connects with other previous involved articles, which in combination provide pretty compelling evidence for his assertions. Why not provide your refutation based on what he has actually presented, quotes and all?

          • fenris23

            Just go to his site and read the comments? It’s not hard. I’ve done all the arguing I feel the need to there.

          • siphersh

            A non sequitur fallacy won’t turn into a valid deduction by virtue of “combination”.

            It doesn’t matter how well it fits the pre-concieved thesis, the assertion that Terence is referring to a worldly agency is just erroneous by itself.

            Irvin argues that the transcendental meaning doesn’t make any sense for him. But that’s irrelevant. It makes perfect sense in the context of the source material.

            This is so bizarre. I know that different people have different brains with a different thought proccess, but this is scary.

          • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

            You are avoiding the information and just presuming it is incorrect. This is a convenient way to avoid doing the work to refute his claims. You’ve said nothing of substance here, just invoked that you believe that Jan is wrong by default and then peppered in various thinly veiled ad hominem attacks. Deal with what was actually said by Jan please. Take the time to show your own logic not just your emotional assertions that he must be wrong because it doesn’t conform to your beliefs or expectations.

          • siphersh

            The only claim of Jan’s that I’m referring to is that Terence “admitted” being an FBI or CIA agent. I don’t believe that Jan is wrong by default. I’m not saying that he’s crazy and therefore what he claims must be wrong. I’m saing that this specific misinterpretation sounds crazy, and I can’t imagine how a sane person can honestly believe that that’s what Terence is referring to.

            The “logic” in the comment that you’re replying to here is that fitting a pre-conceived thesis doesn’t turn a fallacious assertion into a valid deduction. It’s an important principle in resoning. Your referring to “previous involved articles” is irrelevant.

  • moremisinformation

    I just read the posting at gnosticmedia and read through the discussion board. Jan is looking pretty ridiculous. I’ve been trying to hold off judgement because I enjoy his research but this video proves nothing and Irvin is getting harder to listen to.

    I BELIEVE (don’t know, just believe) and I think it’s so far and away the most probable option, that if this clip were placed into the larger context of the rest of the talk, one would see that McKenna is talking about mushrooms recruiting him…shakes head…

  • adam

    haha this is taken out of context, i know the quote he’s talking about the mushroom as they, the dancing machine elves, thats why the other people are laughing when he says it. if you re out to get terence and his fans or just paranoid about everything you will hear what you like.

  • Darren Prosser

    The thing that puzzles me is why did the FBI just leave TM alone if they were truly in pursuit of him. They are not gonna just forget about it. We can hope this is all bull crap but then again I don’t think you can totally discount Irvin’s assertion as the simple ramblings of a nut case. Since the man is dead, we shall never know unless the files are opened some day when pigs fly.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Exactly! Do you think “The Man” suddenly grew a conscience? I sure don’t. People get blackmailed. He was a bard/trickster and known fabricator of information, let’s keep those points in mind before we write his hagiography.

  • Chris Bennett

    an obviously witty comment from a tall tale trickster, to a group of Esalen trippers, is more of a squirt gun than a smoking gun. But hey I’d be pissed too if I had bought all that 2012 bunk as well.

  • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

    Via http://www.gnosticmedia.com/McKenna-Agent

    Questioner:I’m real curious about one thing. Why is it important for you to do this?

    Terence McKenna: I wonder myself. You mean am I the alien ambassador whether I like it or not? [laughs]. Well, often when asked this question, I’ve said it beats honest work.
    I mean, my brother is a PhD in three subjects and works in hard science
    and yet I don’t think it’s brought him immense happiness. Not that he’s
    despondent. But I was always kind of a slider. You know?

    And certainly when I reached La Chorerra in 1971 I had a price on my head by the FBI, I was running out of money, I was at the end of my rope. And then “THEY” recruited me and said, “you know, with a mouth like yours there’s a place for you in our organization“. And I’ve worked in deep background positions about which the less said the better. And then about 15 years ago they shifted me into public relations and I’ve been there to the present.

    I think ideas get me high. And I like the feeling of understanding and I love diversity to the point of weirdness.

    Questioner: It seems that there’s more to it than that for you.
    Because, you know, being tuned in to ideas and turned on by ideas is
    one thing, but you can keep that just to self. The sharing of it is
    something else. I think that’s what we’re getting at. [??

    Terence: well one thing is, I’m really fascinated… I think of myself as a pretty savvy person, and not easily led into false dogma…

    The question remains: which agency did he work for? Was it the FBI,
    or the CIA? Since it was mostly the CIA doing the psychedelic studies on
    the masses, I think it’s likely that he was CIA and is why the Agency
    was blocking my requests for his files several months ago: http://www.gnosticmedia.com/urgent-release-the-cias-terence-mckenna-foia-request-response-positive-affiliation/

    However, in Acid Dreams, Marty Lee, states (pg. 173):

    It was a typical sixties scene: a group of scruffy,
    long-haired students stood in a circle passing joints and hash pipes.
    The setting could have been Berkeley, Ann Arbor or any other hip campus.
    But these students were actually FBI agents, and the school they attended was known as “Hoover University.” Located at Quantico Marine Base in Virginia, this elite academy specialized in training G-men to penetrate left- wing organizations. To
    cultivate the proper counterculture image, they were told not to wash
    or bathe for several days before infiltrating a group of radicals.
    Refresher courses were also held for FBI agents who had successfully
    immersed themselves in the drug culture of their respective locales. For
    months they had smoked pot and dropped acid with unsuspecting
    radicals, and now the turned-on spies had a chance to swap stories with
    their undercover comrades. Former FBI agent Cril Payne likened
    the annual seminar to a class reunion. Between lectures on the New Left,
    drug abuse, and FBI procedure, the G-men would sneak away to the wooded
    grounds to get stoned while American taxpayers footed the bill.

    So there is also the possibility that he was FBI.

    Lastly, some have actually tried to claim that the mushrooms
    recruited McKenna (which is tantamount to saying that “God” told him to
    do it). To this we must apply some logical deduction and critical
    thinking:

    1) Do mushrooms have organizations, deep background and public relations (propaganda)? Or does a spy agency?

    2) What would mushrooms need with a public relations or propaganda department? Or is that something a spy agency would have?

    3) Would mushrooms tell him the less said the better: “deep background
    positions about which the less said the better”, or is that something an
    agency would do?

    4) Do mushrooms have “positions”? Or does an agency?

    5) Are the mushrooms able to pay him because he’s out of money? Or is
    that something an agency could do? (remember he’s in trouble for
    smuggling)

    6) Are mushrooms able to get him out of trouble with Interpol and the FBI for DRUG SMUGGLING? Or is that something an agency like the CIA or FBI could do?

    7) Do mushrooms answer the story of what happened to him after his
    arrest? Or is that something that his employment as an agent would do?

    When we understand that he was an agent, as he admits, then the
    contradictions are removed we don’t have to twist things into believing
    that magical mushroom beings or UFOs hired and paid him to work in their
    organization in public relations and deep background to the present –
    which he wasn’t allowed to discuss. These are things agencies do, not
    mushrooms or UFOs. Such a claim that the mushrooms recruited him is
    clearly ridiculous. The false claims of mushroom or aliens recruiting
    him is clearly a case of psychological cognitive dissonance and reaching
    for anything to avoid facing the facts which make one feel
    uncomfortable when they’re faced with new information that might reveal
    that they were fooled. Rather than dreaming up magical beings to avoid
    the facts and issues, just laugh it off and admit you were fooled by
    those people. This way the next time it’s less likely to happen to you
    again.

    Hear the entire lecture here (See hours 4:21:50 – 4:24:05):

  • Sergio Poalsky

    Anyone who listens to enough Mckenna, knows the “they” hes referring to is the “intelligence” behind the mushroom. Hes doing it in a tongue in cheek way as he always does, thats why he’s entertaining to listen to!
    But for arguments sake lets just say he was secretly working for the FBI or CIA, why would he just casually admit it in the middle of a question period?

  • http://dailygrail.com/ Red Pill Junkie

    You could always ask his brother Dennis, you know…

  • http://2012diaries.blogspot.com/ tristan eldritch

    Jan Irving is like a mixture of Bob Larson and Alex Jones. I was reading one of Gnostic Media’s posts earlier today – it was waxing hysterical about the “debasing” dangers of “uninhibited dancing”, “fornication”, and “integration”. Personally, I don’t think Disinformation should be giving any time or traffic to this disingenuous Right Wing dreck.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      Disinfo is thankfully, still allowing sensible discourse in spite of your opinions on the matter. Free speech mate, deal with it.

      • Gabriel D. Roberts

        I’d like to remind everyone that a fair discourse is something we should prize. I brought this conversation to the table because its out there and it should be discussed among thoughtful individuals. Right or wrong, avoiding the discussion is not helpful. If Tristan disagrees, just have him look at the conversations I’ve had to endure on here. Love and peace to all here! (or is that soft-headed hippy talk?) Hahah!

  • Adam’s Shadow

    “Yes, there is a conspiracy, indeed there are a great number of
    conspiracies, all tripping each other up… The truth of the
    world is that it is chaotic. The truth is, that it is not the Jewish banking conspiracy, or the grey aliens, or the twelve-foot reptiloids from another dimension that are in control, the truth is far more frightening; no-one is in control, the world is rudderless.”
    – Alan Moore

    I know you’re a tool of the establishment, but I just can’t quit you Wikipedia.

  • GandalfsPipe

    How psychedelic are these characters really when they are trying to
    defame the career of a dead philosopher? Psychedelics should help
    illuminate the present moment of existence, not cast schizophrenic
    paranoia over the past. You can respect what Irving does all you want,
    but the way I see it, he is passionless. McKenna was a being of passion
    and energy, who always channeled the love of the universe in the present
    moment with elegant soliloquies, pondering our existence. He didn’t
    drone on in a passionless monotone about conspiracies regarding his
    predecessors. Irving is clearly out of touch.

  • dave birney

    so what happens if this turns out to be true?

    i kind of see it like those Albert Einstein quotes that are making the rounds on the internet these days. half of them arent even things that Einstein said, but they have a message, and if that message inspires you in some way of helps you think differently, then who gives a shit who actually said it in the first place? the message is the important part (for me at least)

    there are a lot of things Terence said that really resonated with me, and if it turns out that he was an agent?… it still dont think it matters, because those things had a good effect on me, and knowing whether Terence was or wasnt an agent, wont change that effect

  • KR Decker

    Irvin’s mistake is to include the actual audio clip. He quotes a transcripted TEXT and elaborates on it, on what it could mean. But then, in the clip, McKenna’s tone is so obviously IRONIC that Irvin’s entire popsicle-stick raft is blown right out of the water.

    End of debate.

    • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

      “End of debate.” < No, not really. Read through the notes here. Keep in mind you are presuming that Terrence literally received commands from "the mushroom". If that isn't fuzzy new age thinking, I don't know what is.

      • siphersh

        No. He’s not presuming that. He’s pointing out that that’s what Terence is talking about. You’re conflating the meaning of it with the truth of it.

  • johnsawyer

    I don’t know about McKenna vs the FBI, but as I vaguely understand the involvement of the CIA and other elements in New Age stuff, these are some reasons (all related) why they do/did it:

    • An attempt to co-opt a developing trend in ideas and turn it to their own purposes.

    • An attempt to start one or more religions tailored to the ends of the manipulators.

    • If you can convince someone of an untruth, or just a half-truth, you can often get them to believe all kinds of other things.

    • Recognition that seekers, who aren’t yet (or who are no longer) aligned with an existing mindset/religion, represent a valuable opportunity to fill heads with ideas that the manipulator hopes will serve serve the manipulators.

    • A corroborating observation by former CIA Director, William Casey: “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

    I don’t believe the CIA, etc. is some kind of maligned bringer of secret truth to the world, a la research into psychedelics, etc., because their more frequent involvement in killing people in “secret” wars worldwide for purposes of American empire, shows they aren’t.

  • wolfe23

    Guess after reading much of this (and spending WAY Too much time doing so…)
    Its not very convincing in several ways…
    Not thee least of which is, I find it hard to imagine thee CIA bankrolling this message:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5aGIWyGNUA

  • lchris33

    While I have heard of the whole “counterculture was really an MKULTRA plot” theory before I wasn’t familiar with Jan Irvin’s work or the notion that Terrence McKenna was part of such a conspiracy. I still don’t know, but based on what I’ve seen here Irvin is not a credible advocate for this claim.

    I spent an hour watching an interview with an obviously sympathetic interviewer (Corbett Report). What struck me was how Irvin’s tactics are almost a textbook example of spreading propaganda in a pseudo-scholarly style. He often does not answer questions directly. Then he hits you with a barrage of documents, names and alleged associations that he keeps saying tie together. Yet these connections are often extremely loose and questionable -as though two people who may know each other in some way or were once in the same building must be intimately connected.

    He constantly makes dubious links between individuals, often by saying things like “One of the biggest influences on Person A was Person B.” As though this proves collusion between the two. I don’t know if he really believes what he’s saying, but to me it comes across as (ironically) a type of mind control tactic. You could “prove” almost any theory using this type of “reasoning.”

  • siphersh

    The organization he’s talking of are not the FBI or the CIA, but the trans-dimensional tykes of the psychedelic hyperspace, obviously. One must try really hard to be able to misunderstand that.

    Or, alternatively, one must be a dishonest paranoid kook with an agenda.

    “This is a very central part of the psychedelic attitude toward the world, to entertain all possibilities but to never commit to belief. Belief always being seen as a kind of trap, because if you belief something you are forever precluded from believing its opposite.”
    — Terence McKenna

    • Ted Heistman

      Jan seems to have a type of retarded materialism that denies the existence of any type of collective intelligence or transpersonal entities, so he must attribute everything that happens to the work of normal human beings in positions of power. In order to explain history from this limited viewpoint he must attribute to them near Omnipotence and Omniscience.

      • Andrew

        Your description of his philosophy sounds a bit more like “retarded individualism” than “retarded materialism” to me.

        • Ted Heistman

          How so?

          • Andrew

            Crediting “human beings in positions of power” with “near Omnipotence and Omniscience” sounds extremely individualist to me, while crediting “collective intelligence or transpersonal entities” sounds collectivist.

          • Ted Heistman

            Yeah, maybe he is Luciferian and Collectivists are Ahrimanian. Both are out of balance.

      • siphersh

        That doesn’t explain how he could honestly miss that Terence was talking about a transcendental agency, and not some government agency. That’s an absurd interpretation, given the context.

        The way Terence talked about the “balkanization of epistemology” is very illuminating of this phenomenon, I think.

        • Ted Heistman

          Is he really balkanized or just paranoid?

  • siphersh

    Ugh.

    I’ve just read all of the discussion on the Gnostic Media site. Of course it was an exhausting read, but it’s relieving that the relevant arguments have been nicely and exhaustively explicated, so there’s no need to repeat them.

    After all, I don’t know what to believe. Even if I open my mind really wide, and I manage to believe that Jan Irvin, with his thorough knowledge of Terence’s style and ideas really believes that he meant a worldly agency, the other issue still remains:

    He keeps insisting over and over that in order to belive that Terence meant the aliens, you have to believe that the aliens are real, they have an agenda, and they do employ propaganda.

    That’s just simply illogical. Regardless of the facts, that’s just illogical in itself. I’m in the same position as I was back when I read the discussions about the CIA release, when Jan claimed that “it very clearly says their search revealed “an openly acknowledged affiliation””.

    There’s no way around it. There are only two possible explanations. Either he’s just playing dumb, and he’s just a colossal troll, or, as a final possibility, Jan Irvin can’t think right.

  • echar

    They or them got to Plato too!

    I do not know what effect my accusers have had upon you, gentlemen, but for my own part I was almost carried away by them–their arguments were so convincing. On the other hand, scarcely a word of what they said was true. I was especially astonished at one of their many misrepresentations; I mean when they told you that you must be careful not to let me deceive you–the implication being that I am a skillful speaker. I thought that it was peculiarly brazen of them to tell you this without a blush, since they must know that they will soon be effectively confuted, when it becomes obvious that I have not the slightest skill as a speaker–unless, of course, by a skillful speaker they mean one who speaks the truth. If that is what they mean, I would agree that I am an orator, though not after their pattern.

    Plato’s Apology
    http://philosophy.csusb.edu/~tmoody/apology2.htm

  • symbiont

    “Terence said “They” recruited me while in La Chorerra. The public laughs as he says that. Not because they’re like “oh the CIA!”, but because they get his sense of humor. We all know Terence saw the mushroom as a seperate intelligence outside of but in a symbiotic relationship with human consciousness, having their own agenda with the planet.Anyways, that’s my 2 cents. I don’t think you can claim solid proof for a supposed involvement of McKenna with the CIA when using a reference word like “they”.”

    Exactly. Wtf did they think the audience was laughing at? That he just admitted he works for the CIA/FBI? Give me a fucking break lol

  • jasonpaulhayes

    Jan doesn’t have all his filters enabled and Dennis though highly intellectual was heavily medicated. With the right kind of eyes, you dont need DMT to have visions of the Operations of the Machine and Blooming Chrysanthemum.

  • Max Freakout
    • siphersh

      If Jan Irvin knew anything about rhetoric, he would have recognized the stylistic clues. If he understood logic, he would have recognized the circumstantial clues. If he were proficient in grammar, he would have recognized the textual cohesion. And if he were familiar with Terence’s work, he would have recognized the theme.

      And from that it logically follows, that either he’s ignorant of all those subjects, or he’s being dishonest.

  • Kc James

    I recently debunked this claim that Terence was FBI. I found an audio recording of Terence actually saying that it was in fact “the mushroom” that had recruited him–not the FBI. You can read my debunking here: http://bit.ly/18lopnv

    • siphersh

      Let me point out that the FOIA response says “Our processing included a search for records that would reveal an openly acknowledged Agency affiliation existing up to and including the date the Agency started its search and did not locate any responsive records.”

      Here’s what Jan Irvin writes about it:

      “[…] it very clearly says their search revealed “an openly acknowledged affiliation” […]”

      I think that’s what’s called argumentum ab illiterato.

  • Kc James

    d

  • Kram

    Why not try putting his ideas up against the culture and then making a decision based on whether his messages would be beneficial for the planet/us/everything? If you think they are then what does that mean? Does it mean the CIA/FBI are trying to guide you to a better way of living? Wouldn’t that be the biggest irony if the CIA/FBI are guiding us to a liberation from a consumerist, materialist, ignorant society and into a new dawn? Would that mean that the CIA/FBI are all about conserving and taking care of the planet? If so, is that a bad thing?
    I don’t think it matters who he was working for – just listen to the messages; do you think they’re wrong? Is he guiding you to something you don’t agree with or want?

    Just enjoy life (and if you can’t then start to learn) and remove yourself from the conspiracy game. Be content in the fact that everything is an illusion.

  • siphersh
21
More in CIA, Drugs, FBI, Jan Irvin, Psychedelics
Hacks continue as FBI claims to have dismantled Anonymous

From GlobalPost: The FBI is declaring victory over Anonymous in a series of statements claiming the hacker collective is no longer able to carry out large, successful operations because most...

Close