Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 8052 are opening to the idea that this money is going somewhere. So, is it going off-world in the form of a tithe or tribute? Or is it going off-world in the form of commerce, or both? Fitts: Right. Farrell: If we return to space being collateralized after World War II, and companies now getting products from space, our search raises the ques- tion of tribute and tithe: So much debt in the system – who really owns it? Let me put it this way: If Dr. Greer and Mr. Dolan and some people in ufology are correct and there has been some sort of covert, high- level, secret contact with someone off-world, then we have to open the possibility that there might be trade covertly conducted. We have to ask if someone else might be servicing our debt that we may not even know. It’s not a new idea; I pointed it out at the last Secret Space Program conference that the idea has been around since Charles Fort. The real question is whether the financial system is open or closed? In one sense, that means that the system is open. But it also means that you’re dealing with a much larger closed system and still dealing with a debt model. That is very disturbing because, as I’ve attempted to point out in the banker series of books, if you’re dealing with the physics that allows you to tap into the energy of space-time – the zero-point energy – you have essentially an open system of energy. Fitts: Right. Farrell: In that system, in that physical possibil- ity, you really do not need a debt-based system of finance. Fitts: Other than to control. Farrell: Precisely. Fitts: It’s interesting that the way they’ve kept debt buoyed up is by bringing the energy price down. The latest headline in The Economist is, “Solar panels have fallen in price by 80% since 2010.” We know the price of fossil fuels was brought down by fracking technology whether we like it or not. Technology continues to drop the price, and we know, given the available technology, it could go much lower. That means that the economy could keep slow burning despite all the debt. The energy price is headed towards almost zero, but we know that the question of openness or closure is going to constantly bring us back to the question of the energy model and why is the energy model enforces central control when en- ergy should be free? Farrell: I’m glad that you put it in those terms. If we are moving toward a new energy paradigm – be it fusion or the DARPA 100-year project to make the United States warp-capable – people need to see that the new technology is engineer- ing the fabric of space-time itself to draw energy: a virtually inexhaustible energy supply. We’re not just talking about propulsion; we’re talking about energy supply. Therefore we are talking about a system of finance. So, if the price of energy as we know it keeps dropping, we are tapping into so much energy that the cost/benefit ratio is astronomical. We are getting a huge return on any investment. The dropping price of energy asks the question –“Why do these people keep their hands on the control mechanism? Why do they keep insisting on a debt finance model out of sync with this energy system?” The answer is that they have to have a system of controls because they don’t want anybody getting this technology that could weaponize it. The very simple reason is that if they weaponized this type of technology, forget about hydrogen bombs and ICBMs; they have something that can take out a star. So, they have to maintain systems of controls, which go back to our model. If someone off-world is exercising control, it could be for precisely this reason: Someone off- world does not want this little monkeys on this planet to get out and start blowing things up. That is one reason. Or, you might want to keep that technology for yourself and say, “We will II. News Trends & Stories “ I pointed it out at the last Secret Space Program conference that the idea (of off-world control) has been around since Charles Fort. The real question is whether the finan- cial system is open or closed? ”