Genes, Giants, Monsters, and Men: The Surviving Elites of the Cosmic War and Their Hidden Agenda

by Joseph Farrell

  Having thus interpreted the “pillar of cloud and fire” as a technology, the way is now open for the O’Briens to follow up on all the implications that such an interpretation poses, and the first of these is the meeting of Yahweh and the Hebrews at Mount Horeb:The people were now given three days to rest, to wash their clothes — in preparation for the awful prospect of meeting Yahweh. Until then, they had had to rely on second- and third-hand reports of this Presence through Moses and their Elders, although the sight of the aerial craft184 must have been a continual reminder that they were under the direction of an unusual form of leadership.

  The setting for this dramatic meeting, and the stage-management of it, must have been magnificent. Well-defined bounds had been set around the base of the mountain which no one — man or beast — was to overstep on pain of instant death. The threats had started!

  (Ex. 19:12–13) “Whoever touches the mountain shall be put to death; no hand shall touch him, but he shall either be stoned, or pierced through; beast or man, he shall not live.”

  At that time Moses was unfamiliar with Yahweh’s long-range methods of killing, and could only think in terms of stones, spears or arrows — he was to learn differently.

  At Horeb the Israelites had their first taste of Yahweh’s powers, the strictness of his orders, and of the penalties for disobedience. The mountain had probably been occupied by Yahweh as a base for a considerable time before the Israelites arrived... As a modern electric fence is used to control cattle, so it might have had its own physical protection against intruders — perhaps a lethal barrier. We incline to this view because of the reference to ‘beast or man.’ Such stringent regulations would have been unnecessary for the stray goat or dog unless there was physical danger for them on the mountain.

  We begin to understand that this was no mountain Eden with the Lord of Spirits strolling amongst his people; this was not Enlil walking through his plantations while men followed his benign instructions. Here at Horeb, Man was under a very different regime.185

  Interestingly enough, during the era of modern mind manipulation research, research was also undertaken in forms of crowd control that involved establishing invisible electromagnetic barriers that could — without the aid of electric fences — inflict terrible pain or potentially even death on those attempting to cross or breach it:There is, however, a small portion of [a] (Defense Intelligence Agency) report which remains classified. It clearly indicates that efforts to develop microwave radiation as an antipersonnel weapon have been underway in the United States for some years. Take, for example, the following paragraph:

  A study published in 1972 by the U.S. Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Center, titled “Analysis of Microwaves for Barrier Warfare,” examines the plausibility of using radio-frequency energy in barrier-counterbarrier warfare. It discusses both antipersonnel and anti-materiel effects for lethal and non-lethal applications for meeting the barrier requirements or delay, immobilization, and increased target exposure. The report concludes that:a. It is possible to field a truck-portable microwave barrier system that will completely immobilize personnel in the open with present-day technology and equipment.

  b. There is a strong potential for a microwave system that would be capable of delaying or immobilizing personnel in vehicles.

  c. With present technology no method could be identified for a microwave system to destroy the type of armored materiel common to tanks.186

  Note that such a barrier would have potentially lethal effects — i.e., be virtually an impermeable invisible barrier to organic life attempting to cross it.

  It is this “both man and beast” warning that, for the O’Briens, rightly signals the possibility of a technology in play, for such a technology, then as now, would be unlikely to be able to discriminate between the two. Indeed, it is this one fact that most strongly suggests a technology is in play at Horeb, beyond the “normal” pillar of cloud and fire.

  It is at Horeb that Yahweh’s character and behavior — for the O’Briens — shows itself for what it really is, and it is hardly that of even a relatively enlightened human being, much less a “god.” For example, there is the Covenant itself:The Covenant between Yahweh and his People was struck at Horeb, and the fact is recorded in Exodus — but we have to wait until the Book of Leviticus before finding out the terms of this Bargain. We shall, however, record its terms here because, without an understanding of what had been agreed, it is impossible to appreciate the vicissitudes that Israel underwent in the Wilderness through Yahweh’s interpretation of its clauses.187

  The O’Briens quip that “Yahweh’s verbal interpretation of how he intended to keep his side of the bargain should have given Moses many sleepless nights.”188

  Then come the “Blessings”:(Lev 26:3–13): “If you follow my laws and faithfully observe my commandments, I will grant you rains in their season so that the earth shall yield its produce and the trees of the field their fruit. Your threshing shall overtake the vintage, and your vintage shall overtake the sowing; you shall eat your fill of bread and dwell securely in your land.

  I will grant peace in the land, and you shall lie down untroubled by anyone; I will give the land respite from vicious beasts, and no sword shall cross your land. You shall give chase to your enemies, and they shall fall before you by the sword. Five of you shall give chase to a hundred, and a hundred of you shall give chase to ten thousand; your enemies shall fall before you by the sword.

  I will look with favour upon you, and make you fertile and multiply; and I will maintain my covenant with you. You shall eat grain long stored, and you shall have to clear out the old to make room for the new.

  I will establish my abode in your midst, and I will not spurn you. I will be ever present in your midst; I will be your God, and you shall be my people. I the Lord your God who brought you out from the land of the Egyptians to be their slaves no more, who broke the bars of your yoke and made you walk erect.”189

  Of course, all these blessings can come quite naturally from God. But — and this is the problem posed by the assumption of sophisticated technology — they can come equally from a technology capable of weather manipulation, and notably, such technological sophistication would also be a “multiplier” effect in military terms, easily capable of offsetting overwhelming numerical superiority of an enemy. The O’Briens’ point once again, while subtle, is nonetheless clear: such statements are not conclusively indicative of anything divine at all, for there are technological possibilities of interpretation.

  Again, the same two possibilities exist, and while reading the following passage, the reader is reminded to read it from the standpoint of someone who is in possession of such a technology dictating terms to someone who is not: (Lev. 26:14–33): But if you do not obey me and do not observe all these commandments, if you reject my laws and spurn my norms, so that you do not observe all my commandments and you break my covenant, I in turn will do this to you: I will wreak misery upon you — consumption and fever, which cause the eyes to pine and the body to languish; you shall sow your seed to no purpose, for your enemies shall eat it. I will set my face against you; you shall be routed by your enemies, and your foes shall dominate you. You shall flee though none pursues.

  Let us pause and look at that last statement more closely: “You shall flee though none pursues.” Such a statement, given the technological perspective of their overall interpretation, could be very indicative of a mind manipulation technology. To continue:And if for all that, you do not obey me, I will go on disciplining you sevenfold for your sins, and I will break your proud glory. I will make your skies like iron and your earth like copper, so that your strength shall be spent to no purpose. Your land shall not yield its produce, nor shall the trees of it yield their fruit.

  This, of course, sounds suspiciously familiar, for the “starvation” tactic was tried by the gods of the Sumerian pantheon long before, to bring down human population!190 Yahweh rages on:And if you remain hostile toward me
and refuse to obey me, I will go on smiting you sevenfold for your sins. I will loose wild beasts against you, and they shall bereave you of your children and wipe out your cattle. They shall decimate you, and your roads shall be deserted.

  And if these things fail to discipline you for me, and you remain hostile to me, I too will remain hostile to you: I in turn will smite you sevenfold for your sins. I will bring a sword against you to wreak vengeance for the Covenant; and if you withdraw into your cities, I will send pestilence among you, and you shall be delivered into enemy hands. When I break your staff of bread, ten women shall bake your bread in a single oven; they shall dole out your bread by weight, and though you eat it, you shall not be satisfied.

  But if despite this, you disobey me and remain hostile to me, I will act against you in wrathful hostility...

  Say what? The previous list was not wrathful hostility?...I, for my part, will discipline you sevenfold for your sins. You shall eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters. I will destroy your cult places and cut down your incense stands, and I will heap your carcasses on your lifeless fetishes.

  I will spurn you. I will lay your cities in ruin and make your sanctuaries desolate, and I will not savour your pleasing odours. I will make the land desolate to you so that your enemies who settle in it will be appalled by it. And you will scatter among the nations, and I will unsheath the sword against you. Your land shall become a desolation and your cities a ruin.191

  If Yahweh was one of the “Shining Ones” as spoken of in some ancient cuneiform texts as the O’Briens believe, then at least his rages and threats are true to form, for in the Atra-Hasis, the Mesopotamian Flood epic, as the gods are trying to starve humanity into non-existence, one may read that “They served up a daughter for a meal, served up a son for food.”192

  For the O’Briens the covenant becomes — just as it does for many devout Jews and Christians — a revelation of Yahweh’s character. The only problem is, what they see revealed there is hardly “God” nor even “a god,” but something far worse:We find this Covenant a most disturbing document on four counts:

  1. This was not a freely negotiated agreement between two parties in which both of them understood the full implications of their consent. It was dictated by Yahweh, and accepted by the Israelites in a state of euphoric bewilderment under the influence of the dramatic and, to them, supernatural happenings at Mount Sinai. They were a simple and trusting people who had no concept of the lengths to which Yahweh would go to ensure their compliance to his will.

  The ambiance of the manner in which the Israelite agreement was obtained was a form of duress and, in civilized terms, would have nullified the Covenant when Yahweh’s actions, and demands, became oppressive. As far as we know, the common people were never told that one of the requisites of the Agreement was that they should act as Yahweh’s troops in the conquest of the Near East.

  It makes no difference that the consent of the Elders was obtained during that visit to the mountaintop. Even there, Moses seemed to be surprised at Yahweh’s forbearance — ‘Yet he did not raise his hand against the leaders of the Israelites; they beheld God, and they ate and they drank.’

  The signing of an Agreement would have been followed, traditionally, by food and drink. But why should Moses have even considered that Yahweh might raise his hand against the Elders on such a visit? Surely, only if there had been some altercation, or if there had been reluctance on the part of the Elders, and pressure had been applied to make them sign.

  Israel did not ask to be taken out of Egypt, but allowed themselves to be led out in the knowledge that, although unpleasant things were happening to them where they were, worse might follow if they refused to go.

  2. The sanctions proposed by Yahweh, in the event of the Covenant being broken by Israel, were not such as would be acceptable to civilized communities. To threaten fever and consumption; terror; the killing of children by wild beasts; pestilence that would strike the weak and defenceless as well as the strong; reduction to cannibalism through extremes of hunger; and the utter desolation of the country, must appall all but the most depraved and power-hungry. In the Curse, there is an essence of vindictiveness and cold-blooded indifference to suffering that is redolent of the worst type of human despot.

  3. The world’s major religions all have common factors.... They are based on love, tolerance, justice, care for the weak and suffering, and just rewards for the good life; and, perhaps, a hell of their own making for those who deliberately choose an evil path. But in Yahweh’s reprisals, the good were to suffer with the bad; the innocent with the guilty; and the little children, and the frail, with the strong and resistant.

  4. But, perhaps the most disturbing factor of all is that, since those days, history has seen a series of events which have all the trappings of these declared reprisals. ...193

  As a result of these observations, the O’Briens conclude with what may be considered “the Gnostic question”: “[At] some point... we shall have to consider whether Yahweh was evil: whether the Israelites were right when they cried out in the Wilderness — ‘Yahweh hates us!’ We shall have to consider whether the Cathars, in the Middle Ages, were right in declaring Yahweh to be the Devil!”194

  a. Cowing Through Technology and Public Executions

  The O’Briens then examine one incident — that of the meeting of the Israelites with Yahweh in the “tabernacle” — from the standpoint of technological displays coupled with public executions, a classic of despotic behavior:We visualize the high canvas wall of the east entrance to the courtyard being rolled back to reveal the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. As the hour approached, Elders would have thronged the Courtyard of Assembly; and the mass of the ordinary people would have been in crowded ranks behind....

  At last, Aaron raised his hand to still the mounting excitement, and he and Moses went into the Tent of Meeting, in which Yahweh was. The tension in the Assembly must surely have been electrifying: at last they were to see, at close quarters, this Yahweh who seemed part Prince, part Warrior, part Magician, and completely awesome Being — who travelled in a ‘cloud,’ trumpeted from the mountaintop, and laid down laws of a most exacting kind. And who promised so much prosperity in a barren land!

  This Presence was shortly to appear in the doorway. What would they see? Had Moses, and their leaders, been able to convey any sense of the majesty and power of this Being? In the event, the reality must have been more than the expectation: certainly, the staging was superb.

  Moses and Aaron came out first, stepped aside and held up their hands for silence. Yahweh appeared in the doorway.

  (Lev. 9:23–24): “...and the Presence of the Lord appeared to all the people. Fire came forth from before the Lord and consumed the burnt offering and the fat parts on the altar. And all the people saw, and shouted, and fell on their faces.”

  This was a highly dramatic introduction to their Lord, who was not above using his technical superiority to hold the attentions of his subjects — or, perhaps, to cow them.195

  But according to the O’Briens, a mere technological display to cow his subjects was not all on Yahweh’s agenda that day:Although not described as such, there now appears to have been an interval in the drama. It was a memorable occasion, to be told and re-told in the tents for many generations, and there may have been feasting and drinking with all, including Aaron’s sons, joining in the celebrations. And Yahweh must have been looking on, perhaps seated in the doorway to his Tent.

  (Lev. 10:1–2): “Now Aaron’s sons, Nadab and Abihu, each took his firepan, put fire in it, and laid incense on it; and they offered before the Lord alien fire, which he had not enjoined upon them. And fire came forth from the Lord and consumed them; thus they died at the instance of the Lord.”

  Up till then, there had been threatenings of death, but these were the first recorded murders committed by Yahweh; there were to be many more. But we must be sure that we are justified in pronouncing — murder; we must ask ourselves
whether there could be any justification for the act.

  All the main translations give the same account — so there is no error, that we can see, in the translations. ‘Fire came forth from the Lord, and consumed them’; and the chronicler assumed that it was a deliberate act. Had the sons of Aaron endangered Yahweh in some way? Or was the killing an act of uncontrolled anger such as Yahweh had warned Moses might happen? — ‘if I were to go in your midst for one moment, I would destroy you!’ Alternatively, was it a calculated act of execution carried out on two servants who had, unwittingly, stepped out of their place?

  A decision is not difficult to reach. Either alternative, by our norms, was completely unjustified; and, in hindsight, after considering the other appalling actions which took place over the timespan of the Wandering, we are forced to pronounce ‘Murder’; but we might add — ‘while the balance of his Mind was disturbed.’ Nadab and Abihu were trying to do honour to Yahweh by presenting him with the aroma of incense; perhaps the flies were thick about him and they sought to bring him some alleviation of the annoyance. But it was still — murder.196

  This technological prowess was again used, according to the O’Briens, in a far more dramatic way to cow the Israelites, again through what can only be described as “serial public executions.”

  The episode in question is recounted in Numbers 16:26–35.(Num. 16:26–35): ...”Move away from the tents of these wicked men and touch nothing that belongs to them, lest you be wiped out for all their sins.” So they withdrew from the abodes of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. Now Dathan and Abiram had come out and they stood at the entrance of their tents, with their wives, their children, and their little ones. And Moses said, ‘By this you shall know that it was the Lord who sent me to do all these things; that they are not of my devising: if these men die as all men do, if their lot be the common fate of all mankind, it was not the Lord who sent me. But if the Lord brings about something unheard of, so that the ground opens its mouth wide and swallows them with all that belongs to them, and they go down alive to Sheol, you shall know that these men have spurned the Lord!’