An Outbreak of Fear and Paranoia in the Psychedelic Mushroom Community

I recently put my foot in it. I stepped, as they say, on a hornet's nest. All hell broke loose and verbal fury was loosed upon me. Here's what happened.
Some months ago, a chap called Jan Irvin, who runs Gnostic Media, put out a request for funds to help him pursue a project concerned with unveiling a sinister Elite/CIA/NWO conspiracy. Mind you, this was not just any old sinister Elite/CIA/NWO conspiracy. This one involved, allegedly, a vast labyrinthine PSYOPS involving psychedelic mushrooms, Gordon Wasson, Aldous Huxley, The Esalen Institute, Teilhard De Chardin, 2012 eschatology, Alan Watts, Terence McKenna, and all manner of other psychedelic spokesmen and counter-culture luminaries. The gist of it is that the whole hippy psychedelic movement was stage managed by the CIA/Elite/NWO and that the malign manipulations of these ultra-powerful puppet masters stretch back further even than Albert Hofmann's infamous LSD trip bicycle ride (Irvin even thinks Hofmann's bicycle trip was a "fabrication" and "BS"). Thus, Irvin is attempting nothing less than a total rewrite of psychedelic history. Believe me, with everything being bent into an infernal conspiracy shape, it's scary bad trip stuff. Of course, one might simply dismiss all this as the lunatic fringe, yet Irvin is backed and supported by numerous fans and supporters. Indeed, he has already managed to raise 3,000 bucks to fund this latest work.
What originally got me involved were Irvin's insinuations about Gordon Wasson. Recall that Wasson was the ethnomycological scholar who published a groundbreaking article about psilocybin mushrooms in Life magazine in 1957. This article was just as significant as Aldous Huxley's 1954 book The Doors of Perception in sparking the West's interest in psychedelics. Wasson was instrumental in channeling the psilocybin mushroom's mind expanding influence from the backwaters of Mexico to the very heart of the West. If you have ever experienced "magic mushrooms," then you have Gordon Wasson to thank -- at least in part.
Now, the conventional view of Wasson is that there was indeed a connection with dodgy mischief-makers -- in this case the thin-tied, shade-wearing CIA. But this connection was minor and indirect. The conventional view, which has been well documented, is that the CIA got an agent to infiltrate one of Wasson's mushroom hunting trips to Mexico. Here is what I wrote about it in my book The Psilocybin Solution:
"In his book The Search for the ‘Manchurian Candidate,' John Marks tells us of the CIA's covert involvement with our hero Wasson. In its relentless and arguably psychotic search for ever-more effective weaponry, the CIA had, by the 1950s, initiated a massive twenty-five million dollar long-term program called MKULTRA. True to its suspicious-sounding name, Project MKULTRA involved finding chemical and biological materials for use in "mind kontrol" and other psychological unpleasantries. Despite the morally questionable nature of such an unsavory federal project, its dogmatic pursuit meant that it was soon to pick up on rumors of sacred Mexican mushrooms. After learning of Wasson's 1955 experiences with the mushroom, an unscrupulous chemist named James Moore immediately began to work undercover for the conspiratorial agency. Presumably dollars changed hands surreptitiously. At any rate, in 1956, Moore craftily wrote to Wasson informing him that he knew of a foundation willing to finance another Mexican trip in order that he and Wasson bring back some of the legendary mushrooms. Moore innocently claimed that, as a chemist, he simply wanted to study the chemical structure of the mushroom's active constituents. The foundation was the CIA-backed Geschwickter Fund for Medical Research, and they were offering a two-thousand dollar grant. Would Wasson be interested?
Understandably, Wasson took the bait, and so it came to pass that the CIA's secret quest for the sacred mushroom became Subproject 58 of the MKULTRA program, possibly representing the most crass approach to psilocybin to date. It was as if the CIA were lobbing stones at angels. Fittingly, it transpired that the double-dealing Moore was well out of his comfort zone in Mexico and loathed the entire episode. Wasson later recalled that Moore had absolutely no empathy for what was going on. Whereas Wasson was sensitive to the customs of the native Mexican Indians and respectful of their cultural beliefs about the mushroom, Moore was there merely as a CIA pawn.
Once again, all those who were in Wasson's party took part in a mushroom ceremony hosted by the shaman Maria Sabina, though it was Moore alone who had a bad experience. Despite this, Moore was still able to bring back some of the fungi to the United States in the hope of isolating the active ingredient. Thankfully, however, he was beaten in his pharmaceutical pursuit by Roger Heim, an eminent French mycologist and coworker of Wasson, who managed to grow a supply of the mushroom from spore prints that he had taken in Mexico. Heim sent his newly cultivated samples to Albert Hofmann of Sandoz Laboratories in Switzerland, and it was Hofmann, a highly distinguished chemist who had originally synthesized LSD, who, in 1958, first isolated and then named the entheogenic alkaloid within the mushroom. Psilocybin was thus officially born, a name devoid of the weaponry connotations the CIA would invariably have conferred upon the substance had they successfully isolated it first."
The thing to bear in mind is that Wasson did not know that he was being duped by the CIA. It is also worth driving home the point that all these events took place during the paranoid anti-Communist McCarthyism Cold War era of the 1950s, when the CIA had an active interest in mind control drugs for use in espionage. However, things never worked out that well for the CIA, as psilocybin cannot be used as a mind control "truth drug." As users will know, psychedelic drugs are more like de-conditioning agents that can make one challenge orthodoxy and cultural control structures. Indeed, that is probably one principal reason why psilocybin has been demonized and illegalized by the authorities. If you wish to control someone and extract information, or get them to do your dirty espionage work or whatever, then the psilocybin mushroom is not a tool for your arsenal.
Despite this long accepted story in which the CIA briefly tried to subvert the psilocybin mushroom, Irvin has been asserting, in no uncertain terms, that Wasson was not duped at all, but was an actual CIA agent himself, and part of a cunning and elaborate "Elite" conspiracy. Irvin even tries to tie in Wasson with the assassination of JFK. And this is but the tip of his conspiratorial thesis!
It was the attack on Wasson's reputation that first roused my attention. I came across Irvin's project overview and appeal for funding many months ago via Facebook and thought it was nuts. I decided not to look further -- in the same way that I stay away from certain other ‘far out' ideas that are rife on the Internet these days and which zip around Facebook and the like.
Then, through the independent efforts of some new contacts (chiefly Jonny Enoch), I found myself being asked to go on 3Fourteen Radio, which is part of the popular Red Ice Radio network. Not being a follower of Red Ice, I knew very little about them (as Jonny Enoch has pointed out on a recent video, I am more interested in studying natural history than conspiracy theories). In any case, I went on their show not simply to have a go at Irvin, but to talk about my own work (books, films, music). However, given that Red Ice had recently interviewed Irvin about his Wasson-based conspiracy ideas, I mentioned that I would listen to his interview and comment upon it when they interviewed me. For some reason, I felt I had to do that. But I left listening to Irvin's two hour interview till the night before my own interview because I sensed that it would "work me up," and thus wanted to delay being subjected to it for as long as possible.
I should here point out that having read most of Gordon Wasson's books (including the esteemed Mushrooms, Russia and History along with The Wondrous Mushroom: Mycolatry in Mesoamerica) whilst researching for my psilocybin book, I had developed a deep respect for Wasson. I was always particularly impressed with his literary skills and his passion for all things "psilocybinetic." Regardless of the fact that Wasson was originally a bigwig banker, he was a dedicated scholar of psilocybin history. I particularly admired him because he presented the psilocybin mushroom to the West in such a reverent and passionate way -- and this includes his vivid descriptions of psilocybin induced visions. It was as if fate had chosen Wasson to spread word of psilocybin because he would undertake such an auspicious task with the due care and attention that it deserved. Here is a typical example of his vivid prose concerning the nature of the psilocybin experience:
"As your body lies there in its sleeping bag, your soul is free, loses all sense of time, alert as it never was before, living an eternity in a night, seeing infinity in a grain of sand. What you have seen and heard is cut as with a burin into your memory, never to be effaced. At last you know what the ineffable is and what ecstasy means.... The bemushroomed person is poised in space, a disembodied eye, invisible, incorporeal, seeing but not seen. In truth, he is the five senses disembodied, all of them keyed to the height of sensitivity and awareness, all of them blending into one another most strangely, until the person, utterly passive, becomes a pure receptor, infinitely delicate, of sensations."
Back to this Red Ice interview involving Irvin. The night before my audio date with Red Ice, I finally listened to Irvin's two hour interview (at the time of writing, it is here: http://youtu.be/E-XcsdXto7w). What he said had a decidedly frictional impact upon my psyche, as I suspected it would). I certainly didn't buy into his ideas. I smelled that something was not quite right, not right at all. I checked a few web pages and a few video interviews, but I did not check out his full Wasson conspiracy essay (which is very long and very detailed). Basically, my BS detector alarm had gone off, so I saw little point in working through that essay (at least at that juncture).
It seems to me that a man's legacy is the work he leaves behind. Wasson's chief legacy is his books and articles about psychedelic mushrooms, in particular psilocybin mushrooms. If you read his books, you get a feel for the man, a sense of the intent behind the words. So when someone starts making slurs about the character of someone you rate, you obviously take notice and may feel obliged to stand up for their honor (for want of a better word). The reader should also note that in the aforementioned interview, Irvin also intimated that philosopher Alan Watts had a ‘handler' and was, like Wasson, linked to this huge NWO/Elite conspiracy. Anyone who is familiar with Watts' talks and videos will know this is a Pythonesque assertion.
So then.... a tad "worked up," I went on the radio show (currently here: http://youtu.be/-XvBj4Bwea4). Some way into the interview, I made my feelings known about what Irvin had said in his two hour interview. I used a few expletives (but carefully placed I thought). As far as I recall, I did not direct those expletives at Irvin's person, but rather at his intent and his research conclusions. In any case, the following week was like the Blitz. It was crazy. So much was written -- Facebook and forum threads longer than time itself. Hate mail and hate messages of the most foul and vicious kind were sent to me and even started showing up on my Youtube videos. The shit had well and truly hit the fan. Apart from swearing every which way and making threats at people, Irvin even transcribed a fair whack of my interview and created a web page dedicated to highlighting my apparently lying fallacious mind (at the time of writing, it is here: http://www.gnosticmedia.com/into-the-mind-of-simon-g-powell-a-study-in-fallacious-logic/).
I have now, finally, read Irvin's essay on Wasson (at the time of writing, it is here: http://www.gnosticmedia.com/magic-mushrooms-and-the-psychedelic-revolution-beginning-a-new-history-or-the-secret-history-of-magic-mushrooms-by-jan-irvin-144-2/). Here is a brief quote typifying his rhetoric in this essay: "We've seen a cover‐up of a mind control and propaganda campaign regarding mushrooms and the field of ethnomycology that reaches to the highest levels of the U.S. government, intelligence, and banking, and may tie directly into MK‐ULTRA. We've also seen a concerted effort to cover up the origins of one of America's wealthiest banking families -- the Morgans. We've seen ties to the American fascists. And what's worse, we've uncovered a possible cover‐up of a conspiracy to commit the murder of a U.S. president -- John F. Kennedy."
That is pretty sensational stuff! Who on earth would have thunk it? I will not reply to every detail of the essay (or his Red Ice interview). That would take forever as Irvin covers so much ground and invokes so many, many names (apparently he spent five or more years developing these conspiracy ideas). The error of Irvin's reasoning process can be traced to the unwarranted conclusions he draws. It is my opinion that this is the crux of the matter. In other words, Irvin promotes guilt by association. Because Wasson knew a certain person, and because that person knew someone else, and because that person did something really bad, then Wasson must have been in on it.
For instance, Irvin makes the point that Wasson knew George De Mohrenschildt, who himself knew Lee Harvey Oswald. Yet that does not mean Wasson was conspiratorially involved in the assassination of JFK (as Irvin repeatedly alludes). How many commissions and hearings were there concerning the assassination of JFK? How many investigators looked into it? Heaps and heaps -- investigating the JFK assassination was an industry unto itself! Yet, as far as I know, Wasson was never called in to testify or account for himself or whatever. Certainly, he was never arrested and put on trial, and his name is not usually mentioned in significant connection with the JFK assassination. So what if Wasson's phone number was in De Mohrenschildt's notebook? There were probably hundreds of names in there. Both he and Wasson were bigwigs, knew one another, and moved in similar circles (Wasson was a high ranking banker). But if we play the guilt by association game, we can, of course, go ‘aha!' and condemn Wasson. It would be akin to condemning Irvin himself for some heinous crime simply because of an email he got from someone, or because a link could be made between him and an associate who committed some crime. Guilt by association is a dangerous game to play.
Here is another pertinent retort to Irvin, this time addressing Irvin's interpretation of a certain letter that he read out during his Red Ice interview. Let me quote from Tommy Decentralized, whose contrary interpretations of this letter were deleted by Irvin on Irvin's website. Tommy writes:
"Jan Irvin read a letter on Red Ice radio that, allegedly, is a letter by George Kennan to Gordon Wasson, from April, 1953. It appears the letter sent to Wasson by Kennan, is Kennan rejecting an offer to be recruited into the CIA. Irvin assumes Wasson must be a high level CIA agent for knowing about the CIA's recruitment efforts. The reality, however, is that Wasson, Allen Dulles [another guilt-by-association figure mentioned in the letter], and Kennan, were all friends. They had worked together previously via The Ford Foundation -- which used grants for Russian students to come to the US to study, a focus being on the liberal arts. By 1953, however, Kennan wrote new strategies concerning the containment of communism. Kennan had a "change of heart" by the time that letter was sent. Kennan no longer felt that a secret intelligence was needed, and that it would be better to talk with Russia and China. He also felt that communism could be contained by promoting education and capitalism to neighboring and third world countries. Kennan was made head of the Free Russia Fund that focused on exchange students with Russia. Kennan also felt that the US should support anti-communist countries as well and that there was no need for the CIA. In my opinion it was these new strategies for the containment of communism that Kennan proposed to congress, that Kennan was referring to in the letter that Jan read. It doesn't make sense that Kennan would work indirectly for the CIA, because by 1953, when the letter was sent, Kennan opposed the existence of the CIA. Kennan also regretted many of the talks he had given and papers he had previously written that were being misconstrued in the Cold War conduct. Therefore I feel Jan Irvin's speculation that the letter meant Kennan would secretly work for the CIA is false."
In other words, Irvin draws unfounded inferences from this letter, yet makes those unfounded inferences seem real, for he states outright in the interview that Wasson was an agent for the CIA. Repeating such unwarranted allegations to listeners who may know little about Wasson, Kennan, and all the other names dropped by Irvin, might well make those listeners simply take Irvin at his word. An endless stream of names, letters, documents, connections, and citations -- it all sounds terribly convincing and so it must be true!
On a similar note, much is made by Irvin concerning the Century Club in New York (see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_Association). According to Irvin, this club was a ‘front' for the CIA, a place where the CIA/Elite could conspire about mind control and world domination. Again, Irvin asserts this outright as if it were an established fact. Yet there is no conclusive evidence for this allegation at all. Over 100 years old and still going strong, the secretary there apparently sent Irvin a list of historical Club members, and this showed that many of them were members of the Office of Strategic Services (the OSS was a WW2 intelligence gathering organization). So what? The Century Club was for high powered New York socialites. Movers and shakers. Given that governmental organizations and secret services have thousands and thousands of staff, many of them are likely to be members of exclusive clubs. But just because someone was once in the OSS does not make them a sinister conspirational miscreant who graduated to the CIA.
And even if there were lots of CIA people at the Century Club, what of it? They had to hang out somewhere. It should also be borne in mind that back in the paranoid Cold War days of the 1950s, the CIA might well have been deemed an asset by the general public. If CIA agents were working behind the scenes to stop the dreaded Communist threat, many Americans would have thought of them as patriotic heroes as opposed to the way we may think of CIA agents today. In any case, one could doubtless find a way to link a randomly chosen Century Club member to, say, the arms industry. Or to Nazi Germany. Or to pharmaceutical giants. Or to Middle Eastern oil barons. Or right wing Fundamentalist Christians. Or any dodgy group or person that you care to think of. It means very little. Unless you are intent on making it mean something by way of guilt by association.
For the record, and from reviewing Irvin's copious work, I don't doubt that Wasson mingled with CIA people and other intelligence operatives. I guess he must have, as they moved in similar circles. As stated, the Cold War and the socio-political climate was different in the 1950s. People in positions of power and influence would have been talking about the relationship between the USA and the Soviet Union. Wasson may even have openly discussed his visionary mushroom encounters with CIA people. But, from direct experience, he would have well known that psilocybin would not be any good as a "truth serum" for espionage purposes. So when Irvin reckons that the aforementioned CIA infiltration of one of Wasson's trips to Mexico was but a red herring to act as a cover and throw off future investigators, and that Wasson was James Moore's superior at the CIA. Irvin is actually bending over backwards trying to fit everything together (like forcing jigsaw pieces into a spurious pattern). If the CIA wanted to get their hands on the active ingredient of the mushroom, there was no need for convoluted cloak and dagger operations and double bluffs and such. Just send a man out to infiltrate Wasson's mushroom hunting party (as happened) and then bring back some mushroom samples. And if that fails to deliver up the active ingredient, then go straight to Sandoz after Sandoz has managed to isolate it. Pretty straightforward really. No need for twisted double bluffs to foil people fifty years hence.
There is also the question of the material Irvin garnered from both the Century Club and the CIA archives and which he uses to build his case. Is this lax security or what? Are we to conclude that the slick shenanigans of the Elite/CIA/NWO have been defeated by the Freedom of Information Act and/or obliging Club secretaries that are only too willing to photocopy personal letters dealing (allegedly) with shifty covert CIA operations? After apparently masterminding the entire psychedelic movement (as Irvin claims), are the Elite/CIA really that weak and stupid that they forgot to shred personal letters and documents? Did Wasson miss the CIA lesson on how to cover his trail? Or do these tracks, trails and clues exist only in Irvin's mind? In fact, one could equally play Irvin at his own game and argue that the big stack of documents that the CIA and the Century Club allowed Irvin easy access to were, in actuality, fake and purposefully designed to confuse him, thereby throwing him off the real trail. After all, if history is little more than Illuminati-orchestrated mind control as Irvin believes, why would he himself be immune from its omnipotent, sinister influence? Maybe he himself is being played.
Another indication that all is not what it seems is the letter Irvin wrote to the Gordon Wasson Archives at Harvard asking for access to the material held there. The Harvard curators asked about the nature of his research and Irvin told them, in candid detail, what his aims were. Irvin wrote:
"I'm especially interested in missives that would show Wasson to have intentionally created the psychedelic movement via his ties to [Henry] Luce through the CFR and Century and the head of the CIA."
Given the curious nature of Irvin's request, it is perhaps understandable that the Harvard curators wanted nothing whatsoever to do with him, and thus they flatly denied him access. Here is what Irvin says about this unsurprising brick wall reaction:
"Of course this was the response I was expecting I'd get. Myself and several professors interested in investigating this matter had discussed this topic and how I should proceed. If I were granted access to the archives, then great, I'd be able to verify a handful of the other, less important materials. If, on the other hand I was denied access, then I'd just publish their refusal to grant access and bring attention to the issue. In fact, publishing their notice of refusal to grant access is almost better than giving me access, as it shows a probability that there is a concerted effort to keep people out of the Wasson archives if they aren't likely to perpetuate the Wassonian legends and myths."
This is telling. It sounds like Irvin orchestrated the block against him in order to support his unfounded conspiracy ideas. Yet, if Irvin had just played the game and said he was doing basic biographical research (or gotten someone else to approach Harvard), he could have gotten access to Wasson's personal documents with ease and could then have found more evidence to blow open Wasson's alleged secret CIA operations! If Irvin really, really cared for the truth, and really, really thought people in the psychedelic community were being hoodwinked, he would have said anything to access those records that he apparently believes to be so important. Yet he didn't, did he? He approached Harvard in such a way that he knew they would block him.
Things become even more odd. To support his allegations, Irvin has made use of "Brain software," which allows a user to show how everything is connected. To be sure about it, the issue here is the interconnectedness of people and organizations, something that Irvin is nigh on obsessed with (he has an impressive memory for names and associations). It is precisely these connections and associations that constitute Irvin's finger of guilt. Yet, just because there are connections between people and organizations, does not mean that sinister Illuminati conspiracies are afoot. I am here reminded of the movie Six Degrees of Separation, where the viewer learns that everyone is connected to everyone via other people. Indeed, I wonder if Irvin has ever considered exploring "Brain" connections with himself at the centre, or with controversial mushroom author John Allegro at the centre? If one were really intent on making conspiracy connections, the results might prove interesting.
Another point to make is that Irvin and his followers repeatedly invoke the Trivium, an ancient psychological system designed to facilitate knowledge acquisition and effective reason. The Trivium is wielded like a powerful amulet by Irvin's followers (some critics have called it a "fetish"). The assumption is that those who do not use the Trivium cannot see as clearly (i.e. see the big mind control conspiracies) as those, like Irvin and his followers, who do use it. In fact, as Tommy Decentralized has pointed out (before Irvin once again deleted his posts), the Trivium can rightly be used to debunk conspiracy theories! And, as Irvin has pointed out elsewhere, the Trivium can even be used to mislead people.
At the end of the day, what everything really boils down is interpretation. I have heard Irvin speak of the so-called "grammar" of the Trivium (the who, what, where and when) as being akin to bricks. And that once the bricks have been established, a house can be built. But the truth, it seems to me, is that Irvin is building something according to the dictates of his imagination as opposed to revealing an objectively existing building. This is to say that he takes all these bricks (people, places, associations -- the who, what, where and when) and then builds a vast conspiratorial architecture that is not actually there at all. So it is not an objective house of bricks that Irvin has constructed, but rather a paranoid house of cards.
All this suggests that Irvin is using his beloved Trivium in an erroneous manner. Here is an astonishing quote of Irvin's from his two hour Red Ice interview: "Anybody who tells you that logic goes first is a sophist and is trying to trick you." Say what? Anybody who does not use the Trivium and applies their own brand of logic and common sense when making a judgment about an issue is out to trick others? That contention sounds mighty paranoid and elitist to me!
If I am correct about all this (and I should point out that I have told Irvin that I will issue a public apology if his conspiracy ideas about Wasson, Alan Watts, McKenna, et al, turn out to be true beyond all reasonable doubt), then what we have here is an outbreak of conspiracy-based paranoia, hitherto more usually found in other areas of the socio-collective psyche. In point of fact, Irvin's take on reality is remarkably similar in kind to the scurrilous, fear-mongering paranoia whipped up by Lyndon LaRouche (check out LaRouche's sordid nuttiness on Wikipedia). The danger with paranoia is that it promotes an atmosphere of fear and mistrust. The psilocybin mushroom then becomes clouded and muddied. People may miss the point. And what is the point? The point is the actual psilocybin mushroom itself, the very fungal organism lauded and spread by Wasson over half a century ago and later cultured and further spread by McKenna. It is the potential ability of the psilocybin mushroom to empower an individual and boost their consciousness that is the key thing we are in danger of missing amidst all this fear-mongering. The virtuous effects of psilocybin (particularly their eco-psychological effects) is what the psychedelic community should be promoting, not fear and mistrust. Hence, the psychedelic community is obliged to make a stand on this issue. But that's just my opinion. Make of it what you will.
To conclude, I offer a germane quote from Jonathan Ott concerning the capacity of psilocybin to afford ecological/biospherical sensitivity. In Pharmacotheon Ott writes:
"I firmly believe that the contemporary spiritual use of entheogenic drugs is one of humankind's brightest hopes for overcoming the ecological crisis with which we threaten the biosphere and jeopardize our own survival, for Homo sapiens is close to the head of the list of endangered species. We need to recapture the mysterium tremendum of the unio mystica, the millennial awe our ancestors felt in the divine presence, in the sublime majesty of our marvelous Universe, in the entheogenic "bemushroomed" state the sage Gordon Wasson described."
NOTE -- this essay dealt chiefly with Irvin's take on Wasson. Examining his most recent video where he repeatedly calls Terence McKenna a "wilful idiot," and where he makes disturbing allegations against the Esalen Institute, Alan Watts, Aldous Huxley, and others, needs to be dealt with by someone else. Indeed, I have, by now, really had enough of all this. Thus, in the Comments section below, I expect others involved in the recent heated debates to step in and make their opinions known (at the time of writing, that most recent video is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3b9OvRAKfzw&feature=share&list=UU_lvvd3d3K7NgLtWstl6YNg)
ADDITIONAL -- thanks to Joe Rogan, Tommy Decentralized, Jonny Enoch, and those others who offered me words of support when things were getting really heated.
ADDENDUM (10/10/12) -- The author I quoted from at the start of the essay – namely John Marks (author of The Search for the Manchurian Candidate) – was, I assume, the man who first found out about the CIA guy who infiltrated Wasson's 1958 trip to Mexico. I have just discovered that there is a Wiki page about him here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Marks
It occurred to me that if anyone could have found out about whether or not Wasson was indeed a CIA spy, then it would be this John Marks fellow. Indeed, as Wiki states: "Marks' award-winning 1979 book The Search for the Manchurian Candidate describes a wide range of CIA activities during the Cold War, including unethical drug experiments in the context of a mind-control and chemical interrogation research program. The book is based on 15,000 pages of CIA documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and many interviews, including those with retired members of the psychological division of the CIA, and the book describes some of the work of psychologists in this effort with a whole chapter on the Personality Assessment System."
That sounds like much more extensive research than Irvin undertook. Yet no evidence, as far as I recall, that Wasson was a CIA agent.
Finally, Andrew Rutajit has been in touch and stated that it was a “fantastic article” and that he was in “full support” of me. Andrew once worked with Irvin at Gnostic Media and they are also co-authors. Andrew also requested that he would like his name to be added to those, mentioned above, who have been supporting me.
Image by AJC1, courtesy of Creative Commons license.
Tweet- 10-5-12
- Simon G. Powell's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version










Comments
Into the Mind of Simon G. Powell – a study in fallacious “logic”
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/into-the-mind-of-simon-g-powell-a-study-in-f...
Lana: So did you go through Jan’s entire article?
Simon Powell: No, I listened to the 2 hour thing, I, went to, I saw another video of him that I flipped through before, it’s an overview of thing.
Lana: Ok
Simon Powell: Look, I, I, I think, I might be wrong, but I think I’ve got a good sense of bullshit. I really believe that, the older I get I think I can detect bullshit. I think I’ve got a good.., it’s just my opinion I can’t prove it, it would be quite difficult to prove it, but I think I can detect bullshit, and there’s lots of bullshit ideas about there and you don’t pursue every single whacky idea you come across. And it’s just bullshit. I know, I know because I, well I don’t know, “know” is.., I’m convinced as convinced can be, having read.., like I said that thing about Allegro, the tell and all that, what I said about Allegro and having read Gordon Wasson’s book, he was you know, his life, the later part of his life, was dedicated to ah, ah, ah, unearth, unearthing the, the, the, the use of psilocybin in Mesoamerican culture.
I can't take someone serious who pretends to critique work he hasn't even bothered to read. Jan has at every turn offered to debate Simon and has had to defend himself against what amounts to nothing more than a pernicious strawman attack from Simon.
Therefore we've no other conclusion than that Simon is incapable and unwillng to intellectually defend his claims head to head with the person he is insulting and attacking.
Simon it's fine that you want to defend your religious icons, but why are you so unwiling to actually discuss the evidence as Jan presented it? Why are you afraid to debate him on these matters yet perfectly willing to go hither and yon online in casting such aspersions?
In the interest of fairness will RS offer equal space for Jan to present his own material?
In lieu of that level of appropriate honesty I submit Jan's systematic evisceration of Simon's venoumous and baseless screed against him.
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/into-the-mind-of-simon-g-powell-a-study-in-f...
Into the Mind of Simon G. Powell – a study in fallacious “logic”
Camron
Simon
Sure I could try to distance myself from a term Jan has already offered in his defense but I'm more concerned with presenting the information you didn't bother to read before you publicly defamed him and this is why I posted links to his work.
So let me get this straight. You want me to point out errors in your position when you have already admitted to not having studied the material you derided publicly?
Why don't you start with what I have already stated and explain why you felt it would be appropriate to defame someone while admitting you didn't make the effort to understand their position beforehand? Those are in fact verbatim quotes from your attack against Jan on Radio 3.14 correct?
Wouldn't you ask for someone to read your work before presuming to critique it?s
After studying someone's work, shouldn't you honestly and accurately present their positions? To avoid this responsibility is to present you are not a serious scholar nor concerned with being ethical or fair in the least.
Rather than having me repeat Jan's work deconstructing your illogical attacks why don't you debate him in public in a scholarly fashion? Surely if you believe so strongly the correctness of your position you should welcome the opportunity to present your side in a fair contest? This challenge has already been issued. What do you have to say?
I've listened to your talk. I've read this essay. I still find that you are ignoring information which supports Jan's theories.
Again this is well documented at the following link.http://www.gnosticmedia.com/into-the-mind-of-simon-g-powell-a-study-in-fallacious-logic/.
Why not head over there and defend your honor personally?
Any reputable surgeon will
@ Camron Wiltshire
Discursive Verse Is....
Tommy. Try to stay on topic.
All I have said is that someone who presumes to critique someone's work should at least bother to read it first. Do you not agree?
Here again in Simon's own words...
Lana: So did you go through Jan’s entire article?
Simon Powell: No, I listened to the 2 hour thing, I, went to, I saw another video of him that I flipped through before, it’s an overview of thing.
Lana: Ok
Simon Powell: Look, I, I, I think, I might be wrong, but I think I’ve got a good sense of bullshit. I really believe that, the older I get I think I can detect bullshit. I think I’ve got a good.., it’s just my opinion I can’t prove it, it would be quite difficult to prove it, but I think I can detect bullshit, and there’s lots of bullshit ideas about there and you don’t pursue every single whacky idea you come across. And it’s just bullshit. I know, I know because I, well I don’t know, “know” is.., I’m convinced as convinced can be, having read.., like I said that thing about Allegro, the tell and all that, what I said about Allegro and having read Gordon Wasson’s book, he was you know, his life, the later part of his life, was dedicated to ah, ah, ah, unearth, unearthing the, the, the, the use of psilocybin in Mesoamerican culture.
If pointing out the obvious is all it takes for you to go off an an ad hominem laden attack I could understand why you would have been banned from Jan's site.
Camron, You're not addressing the article
You're quoting from the radio show. This is not the radio show. It's an article that was written well after Simon went on Red Ice. As I've already said, and which is also very clear to anyone that read this article.
On The Red Ice interview with Jan, Jan goes over his own article, and a lot more that is not even in his article that was posted back in May, and or the updated version. I read all of them myself, so has Simon, now. But anyone that listened to Irvin's Red Ice can clearly tell when he is guessing. ie speculating. Which is what he also does in both of his articles. And else where. As I clearly demonstrate here:
Jan Irvin: "Lets do some simple logic here. On my website I've published primary documents that show Wasson working as a chairman to the Council on Foreign Relations, directly under the Director of the CIA, Allen Dulles."
--That's not a crime. What did Wasson say at the CFR?
"I've also published documents there that Wasson worked with Dulles at the Century Club."
--Again, that inst a crime. What did Wasson and Dulles say at the century club? What did they do there?
"I've also quoted letters, posted above, directly between Wasson and Dulles right before his publication of the LIFE magazine article."
--And they didn't talk about mushrooms, or LIFE mag.
"Furthermore, I have a primary letter from George Kennan showing Wasson attempting to recruit him for the CIA - which Kennan turns down - as I explained on Red Ice."
--But on that same Red Ice show you also said Kennan is saying he will work for the CIA/Dulles but not as an agent. Which is an incorrect assumption.
"As well, JFK assassination researcher, Bruce Adamson, whom I've also given you the citations for, has also shown Wasson to be CIA in more than 22 citations, most of which lead directly to the CFR archives at Princeton, all of which I have acquired directly from Princeton, and others lead to the Hoover Institute at Standford, many of which I have, as well as to other universities and archives. See above citations that you attempted to ignore and pretend they weren't provided."
--You don't have any such thing. You have Wasson communicating with Dulles whom is CIA. Not Wasson. Wasson was being spied upon by the CIA. Why send the CIA to spy on Wasson, if Wasson is CIA himself, that makes no sense.
"1) How do you discount the PRIMARY evidence that he was CFR and worked with the head of the CIA, Dulles, who was a director of the CFR?"
--No one is discounting that. The doubt only comes when you speculate reasons of why.
"2) How do you discount that he worked with the head of the CIA at the Century Club?"
---No one is discounting that either. Beside the high class rubbing elbows with each other, and keeping tabs on radicals that might support communism. What "work" are you speculating about, and why bother with speculation at all, why not just stick the the facts only?
"3) How do you discount that he attempted to recruit Kennan to the CIA, and how would he have such information unless he was a high level official?"
--Wasson was friends with Dulles and Kennan. Dulles probably asked him to help talk him into it. But by that time Kennan wanted nothing to do with them. Wasson asking Kennan, does not prove Wasson was CIA, or "high level CIA".
"4) If you're not able to disprove the primary documents on my site, and the Wasson / Dulles letters above directly available from the CIA archives from any public FOIA request, then how do you explain these letters between Wasson and Dulles in light of their working relationship?"
--It's not the citations and associations that are in question. What is in question is your speculation.
5) Wasson's Life Magazine article was published on May 13, 1957 - by provable Skull and Bonesman, Henry Luce, that worked directly with Wasson's boss. How do you dismiss this connection?
--Do you have any letters of Wasson and Luce communicating with each other? I suspect they knew each other. And Luce is excused of being part of operation Mockingbird. But most speculate that mushrooms are not good for mind control. But rather if you can get a type of person to use a drug, you can then outlaw the drug, and in a sense are outlawing the person. You now have cause to make their life hell in the jail/court system. As well as arrest leaders of groups and their members.
"6) The SAME WEEK Wasson's wife's article also PROVABLY went out to 12 million news paper subscribers. It was provably published by another of Wasson's directors that he worked with at JP Morgan. How do you dismiss this connection?
--No one is dismissing the fact that Wasson was well connected.
"7) If you're unable to show, with quotes, how these connections are wrong, and disprove these documents that prove they had a working relationship, then you must accept that Wasson was CIA and that the psychedelic movement was launched as an operation."
--You haven't proved Wasson was CIA, you only speculate that he is. Mushrooms didn't launch the psychedelic movement. LSD was a lot more popular. The counter culture movement was an organic outgrowth to what was going on in the world at that time period. Specifically the cold war, Vietnam war, abuse of power, nuclear arms race, civil rights and women rights, etc etc Not all protesters and or radicals were on drugs anyway.
Strawmen
Tommy.
Let's go point by point.
It only serves to confuse if you post 30 quotes out of context while limiting Jan's supporting evidence. This is deliberately ignoring his position and substituting your own weakened strawman in its place.
Also you have not addressed my question at all. Again I can see why you would be banned for your inability to stay on topic. Again, do you think Simon is right to libel against authors and their work which he hasn't bothered to study?
Answer that and then choose just ONE other point to discuss if you want to have an actual discussion with me. To avoid this is to avoid any authentic attempt at dialog and I'm not interested otherwise.
Cameron Darling
Take my word for it.....
Tommy..
I see this is pointless. If you wouldn't mind posting links to substantiate your own claims I might take you more seriously. Instead what I get is your assertions alone couched in ad hominem attacks. I've said my piece. Anyone who wants to dig into the material can finded it is well sourced on gnosticmedia.com unlike yourself or Simon.
Also reading someone's citatations alone is meaningless if you don't subsequently point out where they are in error, or if you continue to ignore facts which undercut your bluster.
Cameron still wont addres the topic
2. You wouldn't be asking for links if you knew anything about Kennan. Kennan wrote the "long telegram" I highly suggest you read it! Everything I've been saying is well known and documented: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_F._Kennan and were not ad hominem attacks.
3. The citations are not in error, Irvin's speculation is in error. As I have shown over and over and you refuse to even bother with it at all. And continue to gripe about meaningless nonsense.
4. Address the points I made, do some actual research, outside of Jan. Because Sir. It's quite obvious you have not discussed the topic at all. Irvin claims "Wasson is CIA beyond a doubt". But Irvin does not know that beyond a doubt. Irvin claimed Kenna would work for Dulles the head of the CIA. Which is not true. Jan clearly didn't know much about Kennan, just like you don't. That's why Irvin assumed that. And he was wrong. Irvin even went on to say "Kennan was involved in the JFK assassination" And that Sir, is total nonsense. Cameron, research these topics before you butt in and look a fool. got that. Especially if you're going to accuse other people of doing that in which you're doing. Ridiculous!
take this to your leader
Camron - I am still uncertain as to whether you have actually read my essay here - as I explain my position fully therein. In other words, everything that 'went down' (and why it 'went down') is explained. The most important things in the essay are, I believe, the points I make which counter Irvin's conspiracy hypothesis. As I said before, Irvin makes untold unfounded inferences.
Anyhow, the following quote is germane as it summarises the link between Wasson and the CIA agent James Moore who infiltrated one of Wasson's trips to Mexico. Note that this quote is from John D. Marks who had fully 15,000 CIA letters/citations at his disposal. Moreover, he even interviewed the CIA guy James Moore. Thus, John D. Marks likely researched the relationship between Wasson and the CIA in greater depth than anyone in his famous book about MK-ULTRA entitled The Search for the Manchurian Candidate. Here is the quote (PDFs of this book are widely available online):
"Moore and the others in the Agency's network pushed their lines of inquiry among contacts and travellers into Mexican villages so remote that Spanish had barely penetrated. Yet they found no magic mushrooms. Given their efforts, it was ironic that the man who beat them to "God's flesh" was neither a spy nor a scientist, but a banker. It was R. Gordon Wasson, vice-president of J. P. Morgan & Company, amateur mycologist, and co-author with his wife Valentina of Mushrooms, Russia and History..."
The fear of death is
his is the proper blog site
*_*
You're fighting the good fight
Simon,
Thanks for your candid and detailed take on this issue, and for exposing it to those of us not on the front lines. It is disappointing that so much energy is going into a fear-based interpretation of our psychedelic fore-bears.
I agree that the more important psychedleic narrative pertains to healing and transformation rather the personal details and associations of Wasson, et. al.
JF
Accolades
write on
First off a mind like Terence Mckenna which was great at linking a lot of desperate insights coming from the free association of psychedelic wave history ends.Strictly speaking we are not talking about linear links as such, as much as we talk the talk, where all this dominator paradigm verses cognitive dissonance comes in we see conspiracy in all its shapes and forms if in effect trying to out Terence Terence on his own terms.If we fill in some connections via Huxley and evil cabals we can find some very association by factoid check.Imagine the irony in Terence's mind, as if he just bumbled along from The Doors of Perception, and never questioned the source behind the source.A Horse of another color is a horse of course unless if you behold a pale rider, and even if you are speaking to the wrong end his name just might be mister Ed.I'd imagine if you are Nietzsche you would look directly into the horses eyes, and not listen to his mouth so much.As Jim Morrison lyric sez "If all else fails we can whip the horses eyes" ...when the still sea conspires an armor" is Jim A useful idiot to Huxley? Is James Joyce an agent of Darwin G.H. Wells, well well? And is the smoking gun the fact that Jorge Luis Borges was a associated supporter of a Argentina oppressive regime? As Mister Mckenna mentioned him, or is it Alfred North Whitehead who coined the term Dove Gray, is this a code word for eugenics? Only the shadows knows, ask Jung or Castaneda for that madder. Burroughs did a quantum leap kundalini-somersault in his clever take on the Mayan calendar, as he was able to see down the time lines and know how the evil cabal would use it, they would abuse it, if not confuse it, but we would all lose it, due to 1984, 2012 is just a shot away.Please allow me to introduce myself, play your Sgt. Peppers Album Backwards and notice Crowley up there with all the other guru's jugglers and clowns.Like A Rolling Stone, really is code language for the old world order, "you said you would never compromisewith the mystery tramp" How far does the rabbit hole go? Only in your Acid Dreams.
It's Terence with one R. just as Terence Stamp with one R, he was the star of Meetings With Remarkable Men, the movie..You see it's like Aliens or UFO's the closer you get the more they move back just enough, to create the illusion.No matter how many "facts" you dig up it only becomes stranger then you can suppose.2012 is about time cycles, but if that is only a fact, then you will never see the shift, the sense of time slowing down or speeding up.That's why all this conspiracy stuff surrounding Terence is extra-novel.If we concentrate on Tim Leary, we have moved too far back for attention span which is fixated on Terence.See what I mean? where does this all end or begin? What forces are just beyond the shifting illusion? Go after Terence with one R.Turn on, tune in, drop out.Now we can connect the dots to the Beatniks, those bohemian useful idiots
I too read about LSD in Life magazine, I was 17 in 67' when I first dropped acid.My self published novel on amazon, 'Gone Hallucinogen Freeway' describes those early psychedelic days.I wanted to tell what it was like from the inside of the trip.It was confusing but the confusion was good.In order to get that experience of coming on to Owsley in 67' I write about a series of trips from a surrealist perspective, to get the feeling of the language becoming psychedelic itself.It has to be experimental and at the same time telling a story within the trip.I wanted to put that little bit of psychedelic history in a poetic novel so that those that read it could actually see what I was seeing from the inside of the trip.Strange days had found us and all across the nation such a strange vibration.I write a novel about those wild flower power times.My little novel one such chronicle reporting from inside the trip."this is my favorite part of the trip"
1967 I was wandering Sunset Strip, 17 Yeas old
therefor, unto thou, Wilde Thingie, O Brother in Time, albeit "Time" is a Base Construct created to Enslave pawns to Labour, I seek to get a Read of the Writ of Esoteric Trip you allude to above.
I shall say, during my Owsley Trip in 1967 I learned A Day In The Life from a Guitarist (A OLD DUDE, probably 25) that somehow Jumped my Guitar Playing a 8 Mile Higher, and my biggest disappointment was Seeing the Beatles, in Memphis, 1966, and they were only able to do the Basest Rock hits of their "Meet The Beatles" album.
hat a disappointing thing. I learn later of Theo Ordono, the Frankfurt School, etc. from Alan Watt, the "cutting through the Matrix" guy in Toronto area, and being a Third removed nephew of Edward L. Bernays, I can "see" there was likely handler behind the "Fab Five."
Oh, my attempts to converse with Jan has been met with Gross Rejection, due only to my Sur Name, & he has hurled craven insults against myself & my dead uncle.even though I never questioned his work in any way, In fact, I praised him & his material!
So, he can truly be a real contrary person, and if you attempt to engage in Dialogue, he attacks you viciously. (or rather, me) I was left totally unable to comprehend, but that is the Benchmark of a Cult Leader, you can not question in any way.
He reminds me of the Founder of the Way International, I know a few people who were former members, and they HATE women, can be Shrilly Obscene, Curse worse than a Hobo Wino when he breaks his jug ofWine, so I would question if Jan was ever part of 'The Way , International" or is just naturally a Psychopathic Personality, as he obviously is, Classical Specimen.
In that context, and his Constant Beggering people for Money, I feel he could be best ignored, he appears on the verge of Going Amock if his Psychotic "Construct" world, which gives his life Meaning, is threatened.
I suggest Morris Berman's triology, Reenchanting the World, Wandering Gods, and I cannot recollect the first. He had a Out of the Body experience which changed his life, (he speaks of) yet he Remained a Atheist (he alleges) yet his eyes see as if he was "Totally Open"
Irvin's claims don't hold up to critical scrutiny
What the McKenna Forum has to say about Jan Irvin
Many thanks to Simon G. Powell for this article exposing Jan Irwin's pathetic and fallacious attempts to slander Gordon Wasson, Aldous Huxley, Alan Watts, Terence McKenna and other psychedelic pioneers, to whom we owe so much, with ludicrous claims of their participation in a CIA/Esalen-based conspiracy to impose a world government (after dumbing down and exterminating those held to be unfit).
I would disagree only with Simon's choice of title, since "fear and paranoia" have not broken out in the psychedelic mushroom community, only among Jan Irwin's fans on Facebook, who are clearly none-too-bright if they believe his claims.
For readers who have not discovered it yet, there is a long thread (currently 26 pages) on the McKenna Forum entitled Jan Irvin: Talking Smack And Saying Jack. Jan was invited in at the start, and fired a few broadsides, but failed to reply to some serious criticism by a few of the Forum members and since then has remained silent, apparently preferring to spend his time with his deluded fans on Facebook. This thread on the McKenna Forum occasionally goes off onto other -- often rather interesting -- topics but always returns to the subject of Jan. For those who don't have time to read through the whole thing I append some relevant excerpts below.
----------- Start excerpts --------------
The main point here, this being a McKenna forum is your accusations against Terence that are so fucking tenuous that if you expect people to take you seriously and invest their time reading your cut and paste, better you reveal some hard evidence and not just speculation based on guilt by association. If you can't express concrete evidence In a single post and your ego is such that you expect people to wade through 1000's of pages of convoluted horseshit that requires wild leaps of speculation and is as tedious as filing a tax return, then your mistaken.
-------------------------
Mind control experiments have been done by governments with no success. Look at the video when the British army gave some of their soldiers LSD. They couldn't follow orders at all. They just sat around and laughed and had a good time and could care less about being the "killing machine" that governments wanted. Psychedelics don't brainwash you and take control of you. The human mind is much more powerful than to succumb to such petty things. The science of Hypnotism has been shown to only be so effective and only when the mind allows it. Psychedelics decondition a lot of people to the lies people once thought was true. Only one with actual experience with psychedelics will tell you this. That's why the CIA and such, no longer use LSD as a "truth" serum, or mind control, cause it doesn't work.
-------------------------
I admire Terence mainly because he was a psychedelic advocate, and had the balls to get up in public and say that by using psychedelics we can acquire new and valuable knowledge of a radically different kind than what we were taught in school. He was an astute cultural critic, but he was not a social philosopher or a sociologist, so when he ventured an opinion in these areas he was sometimes mistaken. You have identified a few such mistakes and you use them (along with fallacious reasoning) to support a ludicrous claim that Terence was an agent of those who wish to bring in a one-world government. You are much less anti-one-world-government than you are anti-Terence-McKenna, and this is quite pathetic.
-------------------------
I would never say that conspiracies do not exist...of course they do and there may be some that have happened in the psychedelic community and counterculture, for sure. However, what Jan is presenting to us is in such a large scope that it calls for an incredible amount of evidence for it's support...a far higher quantity and quality of evidence and reasoning than he's offered thus far. Referring us all to a "database" doesn't count. Develop it further and write it all up in a coherent and persuasive manner. And until then, please stop spreading wild accusations based on tentative work and faulty reasoning. All you're doing is "potentially" stuffing your foot further and further down your own throat.
-------------------------
Terence McKenna is quite the opposite to the totalitarian and one-world-government ideal. As a matter of fact, I would go as far to say that Terence McKenna was anti-government with a lot of things. Especially government control of what people can and can not do in areas of exploring ones own consciousness and he was an activist.
-------------------------
I submit that the only way someone could come to Jan's conclusion regarding Terence (with the "evidence" he has provided thus far) is if they were actively trying to prove that idea, out of context, and with blinders on to all counter evidence. It's not at all convincing and it's infuriatingly disrespectful. If he had a well thought out thesis with legitimate supporting evidence, that's another story.....but, he doesn't. If he does put this evidence together in a respectful and rigorous manner I will be more than willing to read through it and change my mind on Terence, if the evidence calls for that. Until then, these questionably meaningful connections and Jan's arrogant and condescending tone toward anyone that questions his "authority" aren't worth my time.
-------------------------
To understand Jan's motivations for saying the things he does, it is important to know that he has been involved in 'Mckenna bashing' for several years before he started inventing these grandiose conspiracy theories about him recently. For example, see this post on another forum (http://www.thegrowreport.com/showthread.php?6622-Psychonautica-71-interv...) where Jan very casually likens Terence Mckenna (along with all "typical psilocybe users") to crack cocaine addicts. Jan's personality is marked by acute paranoia and depression, - he is a dark, angry man with a serious case of confirmation bias, he sees chemtrails in the clouds and covert government black-ops agents in amongst our most highly respected psychedelic pioneers. Jan cannot stand to be contradicted, and he can never acknowledge when he has made an error. He has contributed nothing of any significant value to the field of entheogen studies, but has instead made a career out of regurgitating the contributions of other scholars like John Allegro and Dorothy Sayers
-------------------------
I've hesitated to mention what I think of Jan's mental status, since I don't know him personally. But, I will say that you seem to be on the money for the most part. Dark, angry, and a sufferer of chronic confirmation bias. I have listened to his podcast for awhile now and though I only listen now and then, I have enjoyed many of his interviews. I've questioned his conclusions at times, but he's never really bothered me until recently with this witch hunt against so many people I admire based on faulty "evidence". I mean, I saw someone on his facebook mention that Joseph Campbell might be involved too and Jan should look into it. Campbell? Really?? I have at times posted on his Facebook, but after being attacked aggressively so many times after leaving a well thought out and respectful post....I've stopped entirely.
-------------------------
Yes i was watching him when he first embarked on this course of research about 2/3 years ago, he set out to find links between Gordon Wasson and the “illuminati agenda”, and he subsequently found them, exactly the ones he was looking for - “who else can i arbitrarily implicate in my elaborate conspiracy?” His blatant saviour complex actually sounds quite psychotic, like saying that everyone is 'mind controlled', that there are evil 'elites' who are controlling everyone's minds with their 'psy-ops, and he has found the secret 'trivium' weapon to defeat all the evil elites and restore humanity's freedom.
-------------------------
This begins to look like sickness.
-------------------------
He still hasn't answered how he can call Theodosius Dobzhansky a eugenicist when one of the first sources of information I came across said "As one of the world's most famous geneticists, he spoke out against eugenics and dismissed as silly any suggestion that genetics could justify racial bigotry."
-------------------------
I am considering turning it into a fact checking hub for Jan's work. I might loose my enthusiasm for such a project if Jan would just apologize for some of his defamatory remarks and treat people that have an honest difference of opinion with a touch more respect.
-------------------------
he sounds like a deluded megalomaniac at around 33 minutes in, fantasizing about starting a violent revolution against the 'elites' and their chem-spraying planes. And just like every maniac, he has no capacity for self-reflection, he takes his paranoid delusions (increasingly) seriously
-------------------------
If Irvin does indeed need a check up from the neck up this becomes something quite awful. That being said, he's very hard to ignore when he's posted everywhere and attacked many in the community (Simon G. Powell has been receiving hate mail from Jan's army) and there's also the fact that this isn't a recent development, Jan has been a prick for at least 3 years to my knowledge.
-------------------------
By the way - Are Jan and his sycophants actually denying Darwins theory on evolution? I've tried to make sense of their rabid, rambling incoherences, but they may as well be from another planet
-------------------------
Lorenzo rightly pulled Jan's thread at the Salon for his continued threats of violence. Looking forward to see what happens when Jan threatens to cut Joe's tongue from his head.
-------------------------
this may well be a case of delusional psychosis.
(In the U.K.) The fact that he has made threats of violence against others is certainly cause for concern and is definitely justifiable grounds for intervention and probable sectioning.
(In the U.S.) He'll probably start his own web/radio show - selling books and DVDs to the conspiracy consumers.
-------------------------
Not sure if you're joking here, this is exactly what he's been doing for years. In a world where scum rises to the top and the credulous continue to outweigh the questioning, I feel compelled to burst the bubble of pomposity and call bullshit on these type of people.
-------------------------
If there is such a thing as the 'psychedelic community' (of which I'm still to be convinced) then the fact that they (apart from Simon Powell) can't even come together to condemn Jan Irvin's threats (and incitement) means that they are as ineffectual as ever and, I still suspect, unwilling to risk their own ticket on the gravy train.
-------------------------
I listened multiple times to the Powell interview section where he calls bullocks on Irvin - Irvin takes his quotes and photoshops them into the top of the page COMPLETELY out of context...and I'm just floored with the effort this Irvin puts into this web page. I mean, I can't believe it. I'm astounded at the energy and effort he puts into his bent POV. This is just psychotic on so many levels. It's fucking sad, really. It's good brain power, good photoshop abilities completely wasted, LOL
Lastly, upon realizing how insane this poor fella is I just have to say - and I know I'm late to the party on this - but I have to say that this man is not even WORTH a thread in this forum. He's just not. And we'd all be better off to NOT ADDRESS this guy again. It's like talking about the Jersey Shore. It's a waste of forum space and our mental efforts and our time.
---------- End excerpts ---------------
You mean the Peter Meyer / unfunny-jones Forum?
(FYI) intelligence reports, preliminary: someone named Peter Meyer actively posts at that ‘Forum.’ But from behind cover - using puppet names. Especially, for example: ‘foxfire.’
Anyone care to go on record? Deny, or admit ;-)?
Either way, mildly interesting, can’t help notice - ‘foxfire’ excerpted among copy-pastes above; unsourced (no avatar cited). I’m sure as a TM inspiree, ‘foxfire’ can only be “an honorable man” - maybe like Shakespeare’s Brutus, as regaled at Caesar’s funeral, mmm?
While quote mining that “Jan Irwin” [sic] thread, why not toss in another ‘foxfire’ gem (Sept 2, 2012) on proud display there: “... Irvin, like Brian Akers (another McKenna-detractor), suffers from logorrhea.”
BTW: the link in your post is the 2nd I’ve seen at RS, to that very thread. The first (Aug 31) cited it as – get this – illustrating TMist fanaticism. Exactly as I’ve noted and commented on, in no uncertain terms. Ah, life’s little ironies (and yawns).
This year, in wake of unfolding surprise events – seems the TM schizoid delusional pitch is taking a back seat, to its sociopathic aggression. The latter’s focus, all ad hominem malice, contrasts remarkably with the disordered incoherence that marks the opposite pole of the TMist pathology. Its vicious impulses are escalating conspicuously, and exponentially. TMbots have long been noted for exploding in malignant hostility at any who defile TM’s robes, daring to utter ‘wrong word’ – the present “Jan Irwin” [sic] dust-up, is merely this week’s example. Now, TMism is imploding as well – attacking its own too, not just ‘TM- detractors’ (infidels). Its disarray has become like tigers eating their young. What a spectacle.
Targets even include “Terence’s jealous brother” as he’s cited now, after some inconvenient info he disclosed this past July (Deep Dive fiasco) - that his celebrated sib was (shhh) discretely avoiding trips like the plague, after a harrowing one in late 1980’s; just as his career was taking off, his legend taking shape - by exhorting his flock to trip more. Scolding and brow-beating fans as zeroes not heroes for disobeying, not taking big enough doses:
"One thing that people do that I'm definitely opposed to is to diddle with it. If you're not taking so much going into it you're afraid you did too much, then you didn't do enough" (ARCHAIC REVIVAL, 1992, p. 15).
Could it be Dennis; and TM’s ‘ex’ – under fire too, as accomplice; a ‘divorcee,’ woman scorned (you know the drill) – also suffer from the heartbreak of logorrhea? Maybe one for ‘foxfire’ practicing psychiatry without a license? About like Lucy in Peanuts; except she charges a nickel: “Oh boy, listen to that coin jingle, I love that sound ...”
As deals go, maybe to compare Lucy’s disagnostic service with Time Wave Zilch malware? I hear there’s a new android app; seems like I saw ‘foxfire’ talking that up.
yawn is great word
Which I personally think is funny. Since I've never been a TM fan. I think the stoned ape theory is interesting. But I can only laugh at anyone that think's it was factual. I think TM would pandered to w/e crowd his happened to be in front of. Like so many do, which clouds w/e true positions, or intentions, they may, or may not, have. Some of his ideals are interesting, from what very little I've heard. But I would have to agree that he, or anyone for that matter, shouldn't be put up so high on a pedestal, like Irvin once did, and many still do. Remember when you were on gnostic media praising Wasson, while Jan wished to attack him, probably unbeknownst to you. That was so funny. :)
What's to admit?
Brian Akers said:
someone named Peter Meyer actively posts at that ‘Forum.’ But from behind cover - using puppet names. Especially, for example: ‘foxfire.’ Anyone care to go on record? Deny, or admit ;-)?
What's to "admit"? Is Brian unaware that foxfire's identity has always been available to anyone who clicks on the 'foxfire' link at the left of any of his posts.
As for "using puppet names", would Brian care to admit that he posted several messages in the 'Stoned ape theory' thread "from behind cover" using the sockpuppet 'MRockatansky' (in whose profile the name is left blank). Since then he has kindly spared us further logorrhea, posting only a few links to some music videos (thanks Brian!).
yawn indeed
So this is the best you could come up with Brian? An attack against someone based on the sole fact that they're involved in an online forum under a username?! Wow what a find you have there! God forbid everybody doesn't use their real names on forums that talk about drugs!
Maybe you should actually click the name before making bullshit arguments that feebly attempt to devalue Peter's information so you don't look like such a dumbass. As Peter said, click the name, its no secret.
If you actually have any worthwhile information to contribute to the thread that isn't a completely irrelevant personal attack attempting to deflect, then we're all ears (but please, consider you're incessant loggorhea before posting, for all our sakes)
Kennan opposed the exsitence of the CIA
Wasson favored the white Russians. If your a fan of Peter Levenda like I am, you should know this already. The white Russians opposed the red Russian communist. The white Russians were Christians, and they viewed communism as atheism. They wanted the church to be in control of Russia. George de Mohrenschildt also favored the white Russians. And was friend's with Jackie Kennedy and JFK who were also Christians that opposed communism. The popular conspiracy is that Oswald was FBI. And back then the FBI and the CIA did not get along. The theory goes something like Dulles found out that Oswald was an FBI agent that infiltrated the CIA's inner circle. JFK supported the CIA and the white Russians. In fact JFK approved the bay of pigs. But after that embarrassment from the failure of the bay of pigs, he wanted to distance himself from the CIA. The theory claims that the CIA killed JFK and blamed if on FBI agent Oswald. To teach the FBI a lesson. I don't believe that theory, but at least it has actual claims of who, what, where, when, and why, unlike Irvin's failure to use grammar first in his grand conspiracy.
a word to Drew Hempel...
You, Drew, are as scurrilous as Mr Irvin. But at least he uses paragraph breaks. I do not have a "consulting position to a genetic engineering lab" (and I saw you wrote that elsewhere too). I know William Linton of Promega and he likes my work. They are a life science company, not a genetic engineering company. William (along with Dennis Mckenna) is on the board of the Heffter Research Institute - and he is involved with research into psychedelics and has an interest in consciousness and such.
Regarding my views on biotechnology, this science is neither 'good' nor 'evil' - it just is. What is of import is the value system and the general state of consciousness (and paradigms about the nature of life on earth) driving biotechnology and whether the benefits (to humanity) outweigh any costs. And the best arbiter of potential environmental harms and negative health effects is independent science. If genetically engineered crops interfere with otherwise healthy ecosystems and/or have negative health effects on consumers, they should be stopped - that is a no-brainer. Nor should farmers effectively be slaves to GM crop providers because of 'terminator' genes and such. Like many areas of culture, it eventually all boils down to consciousness and values - which are in serious need of an overhaul.
Some points
genocide justified?
>>the whole Mayan thing is silliness.<<
If you believe the 2012 phenomenon is all bunk, fine; please leave the cultural prejudice out of it.
The Pharmacratic Inquisition
The Pharmacratic Inquisition and Astrotheology and Shamanism was mostly the work of Andrew Rutajit. (See here: http://youtu.be/QswtH4IM4m4 )
But yes, I agree, Irvin claims he was mind controlled into that group, the psychedelic movement. He said that to Joe Rogan and posted that on his facebook. I believe Irvin was raised a Christian as well, if I remember correctly he once told me he was, as I confided in him that I was raised a Mormon. So it's understandable for him to attack his former beliefs. Which include him being a Christian (missionary is what i heard, and look at how vigorous they're trained to defend God when knocking on your door!) Irvin says he got into the 2012 movement a shift is coming in consciousness, and positive movements, etc So he attacks that former self as well.
The Maya measured the movement of the Sun in correlation with the center of the galaxy, and the galactic equator, from our perspective here on earth. That's what that is about, it's not a doomsday, or an enlightenment period. It's just a way to measure extremely long periods of time. (see John Major Jenkins: http://alignment2012.com/whatisGA.htm )
He than began hanging around Richard Grove, an Alex Jones type, and Irvin quickly formed into that type of group think bandwagon. Irvin shows a pattern of being sucked into group thinks. My theory is that when a person discovers something new to them, and it's shocking and controversial. This causes the brain to release serotonin, and so it can be an addictive rush to shock people with controversial theories and what not. Over time like minded people will flock together. And the once shocking theories are no longer shocking to the group think, so the addict begins to turn on the group to feed their addiction. The truth often gets over shadowed by the need to go against the grain, the group think one has conformed into. Groups of like minded people, like the Trivium Cult group think, which is void of critical thinking, are not always best because certain ideas and theories will go unchallenged. Diversity (many heads are better than a few) most always trumps group think, the like minded.
Simon G. Powell blocked me from his facebook page
I did
you rabbit on and on and on
Drew - I wish you would take your long and tedious rants elsewhere. For the record, my link to Promega is minimal. I just know the CEO there (who contacted me because he liked my work). Is it a crime to know the CEO there? If I can influence him, I will. If I can talk to him about my notion of natural intelligence, I will. I don't think they are 'bad' people - but I am sure you know better than me - and even now you are probably having a good dig (the "there's some lovely filth down here" line from Monty Python's Holy Grail movie comes to mind). I don't like genetic patenting - and I state why in my book Darwin's Unfinished Business. The biotech industry is run with a faulty paradigm - as we do not know what we are, and what role we represent in the biosphere. We do not know what life really is and what our conscious existence represents within life's web. Certainly nothing good will come if monetary gain continues to be chief driver of industry and innovation.
What I was alluding to before, is that evolution is itself a form of genetic modification. As Darwin defined it, evolution is descent with (genetic) modification. So too have we been altering genes of crops for millennia. All modern crops have been bred over generations for certain characteristics. But now we have learned to take it a step further. It was inevitable we would work out how to do this. I still maintain that this is neither good nor bad. If you could make a drought resistant crop and prove that it was safe to eat and that it did not ruin ecosystems, I can't see that it is 'wrong' (but I am open to change my mind - are you?). In any case, these days I am much more interested in notions of transferring cultures of symbiotic bacteria and symbiotic root fungi between species in order to improve plant crops in arid regions or whatever.
@Ben
well
Saying that Terence made 2012 into a "religious date" is just totally absurd, it's like saying that he bade poetic metaphor to get down on its knees before him and say an our father, or that mushrooms are the Christ, for mushrooms sake, and his comment about needing more women in the world, oh the horror, the horror.All this bending the facts to fit some agenda, it's like claiming that you now have disclosure.Here is what I think that 2012 has come upon us and there is a flood of lunacy that masquerades as rational debunking of everything that came out of the late sixties, it will pretend to be exposing the real agenda behind operation mindfuck, to create hippies so that they would not be real revolutionaries and before that beatniks were created so that hippies would look more dangerous and before that bohemians were created so that respectable people could point their fingers at the weirdos and before that anybody that did not fit into the history books we were given in grade school all the way back to anybody that the evil cabal did not see as a useful idiot including jugglers and clowns, crazy poets and rag pickers, gypsies, traveling sideshows, street corner ranters, and all the way back to the gnostics and any rabble-rouser mystics.
And more contemporary Terence included the surrealists and jazz.Hell, when is this Jan character going to blame James Joyce for creating an alternate language reality that must have been a secret plot by Hitler to make useful idiots out of fairies and free thinkers. I guess that because I read Alan Watts when I was 18 and it opened my eyes, I have been nothing but a un-useful idiot my whole adult life because I did not fit into society, and this whole time that I have been thinking about the taboo of knowing who you are, I was just another CIA planed obsolescence, please please set me free Jan the man, I have been a used idiot and I confess, when can I join your ranks and begin the torch light march on all those zombie freaks on psychedelic disinformation.
Well I think he already has
Well I think he already has blamed William Burroughs, which might make sense to someone absolutely unfamiliar with his work. I'm sure the master philosopher of the cut up was a CIA spook, using the Nova Heat as a cover.
My personal research identifies Kevin Bacon as the mastermind behind the whole thing... It's the only thing that really makes sense when you think about it.
Burroughs
More of Simon's incompetence and inability to read or fact check
Incredible… Simon either doesn’t grasp what he’s reading, or he started on page 23 and ignored all of the research and citations. So many fallacies of omission.
For instance, he completely ignores all of Bruce Adamson’s research, and all of my citations to the CFR archives at Princeton on the entire JFK assassination. His quote about the Morgan family, et al, was cited in the Prof. Andrews Archives from Yale and that was also very detailed in the article. Nope, no acknowledgement of any of that. No acknowledgement of the Hall Carbine affair, nor the Bertrand Russell missives – completely omitted – as well as Wasson’s decade long working relationship with Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda. No mention that Wasson co-authored the Stock Exchange Act – especially in light of all of the recent economic scandals. He completely avoids that I published primary documents on Wasson’s involvement as a chairman to the Council on Foreign Relations. He ignores the coinciding publications of Valentina’s article, that’s omitted, and that went out to 12 million news paper subscribers that same week, the publishers of both happened to work with Wasson, or his boss, who was Skull and Bones. Why was all of this omitted?
Also, I get a kick that Simon quotes Tommy of all people… the most unlearned of all in the trivium. “The trivium is used to debunk conspiracy theories” Sad, sad, sad.
Tommy is an internet troll that does nothing but go around the internet and cause trouble, misquote and distort everything he comes across. That Simon would cite him without fact checking him is absolutely hilarious and further reveals Simon’s incompetence and inability to fact check a single citation.
The trivium is a systematic method of verification. It’s not to debunk anything but poor research and unsubstantiated fallacies… that Simon completely relies on in his screeds, so of course he’s going to distort what the trivium really is – otherwise he’d have to face his own constant use of fallacies – from Latin: fallare – to Lie.
I explained that to Simon in my email. He ignored all of it. Also, I had sent Simon my citations regarding Bruce Adamson to his Facebook account, though he seems to have intentionally ignored the citations there too. He also quotes Tommy on his analysis that my only support of Wasson's involvement with the JFK assassination is George de Morhenschilt. This, again, is a lie and an omission of the citations.
On Simon’s comments regarding Kennan, this, again, is hilarious, as at first Tommy went around the internet claiming that Kennan had denied joining the Century Club and NOT the CIA, when in fact I had quoted the letters to cite his recruitment that it was in fact the CIA. After a dozen mentions to Tommy, he finally admitted that he distorted it all. This of course was also omitted by Simon and Tommy. But then, after I had pointed out that Tommy had repeatedly distorted the contents of the letter, then Tommy came out with this updated distortion (thoughtlessly quoted by Simon) that Kennan was against the CIA, which Tommy had omitted that Kennan was complaining to Wasson about these issues as to why he was refusing the recruitment to the CIA, but of course this, again, is omitted. Neither Tommy nor Simon bothered to ask me for the letter, nor has either of them quoted it – as it would reveal them as completely incompetent or lying. Simon’s repeated quoting of Tommy there is in fact a straw man argument – not using any of my citations – and Tommy blatantly distorts the letter and doesn’t at least quote my reading of it at all. Why didn’t either bother to ask for the letter? And why did neither of them quote me? Because it doesn’t fit with their distortions, omissions and lies of my work.
I get a kick out of the fact that nearly every comment on Reality Sandwich is ad hominem attacks, wild accusations, and unsupported claims – but hardly any seem capable of going to my site and reading my article and seeing if Simon is even telling the truth – which he’s obviously not. It would take all of Simon’s fans but a few minutes to discover that he's entirely misleading them and lying to them and is in fact repeatedly distorting my work.
But I actually don’t think that Simon even read my article, even though he claims here that he has. Maybe he read only the conclusion or a few paragraphs at the end – where, for instance, he took my quote out of context from the end of the article, pretending as though the entire article didn’t provide 70 citations supporting those claims with great detail, and instead he simply cited Tommy’s distortions! Gasp! He’s not even capable of getting primary documents and relies on an internet troll for his work.
Come on folks! Anyone who’s intelligent enough to read my work for themselves will know that Simon’s, Tommy’s, Jonny Enoch’s supposed deconstructions of my work, don’t in fact, even address my work or what was said – AT ALL. These are complete distortions – lies.
Anyway, fricken hilarious. Simon just keeps burying himself deeper and deeper into his world of incompetence.
Also, as I pointed out previously to Simon, he could have just called the librarian at the Century and asked for the documents, rather than making up wild speculations and conspiracy theories about me. That’s just incredible that he’s too incompetent to call the librarian there and ask.
Even the title is an appeal to ridicule and ignorance…
I told Simon that he’s promoting ignorance when he distorts information and promotes fear against people who might otherwise read my work on its own merit. I won’t bother with further response. I’ll just take all of the free advertising from Reality Sandwich. Anyone who’s intelligent enough will just read the work themselves and know that you’re all lying. As I told Simon the other day:
“Condemnation without Investigation is the Height of Ignorance” – Albert Einstein
- who Simon quotes extensively in the opening of his book. Indeed, pure irony.
Simon’s psittacism is rather sad, as is his blind ignorance of ponerology.
I’m still undecided if Simon is just completely incompetent, or a sophist liar.
Shakes head and walks away.
Stop lying Jan
well...
Not to defend all of Irvin's dot-connections, as I have not read his works, you make some good points about his making up for in quantity what he can't deliver in quality, I do agree, when one conjures ideas of his own and egotistically tries to force belief to fit the facts, in a puzzle, while vehemently trying convince others his picture is complete, this is a big mistake. Yet the fact that Wasson and others were running within the circles you admit to, I can't help but ask a couple of questions.
Sorry, but I have to ask, are you just mad because your heroes and your favourite fungus have been implicated in the whole mess? Was it just the way it was presented? Don't get me wrong, I love a good trip as much as the next guy and important research has been accomplished by Wasson, Leary, Hofmann and others, but it's obvious their research was used for military and covert programs, or pogromes whether they were aware of it or not. (Irvin's insistence that they were aware of it may or may not be true as yours is that they may not.) While Irvin's disdain for the NWO is apparent, and your disdain for his rants is also apparent, can we just say that none of us were there and none of us can say for certain how deeply involved our heros were in the matter but we do know for sure that secret agencies like the CIA employ a myriad "house of smoke and mirrors" compartmentalization methods in their activities and seem to only reveal their true intentions within their research and documents to those they work for and then destroy it if anyone who gets a serious grip on that reality comes too close and then some. Guilt by association may not work in these instances, but useful knowledge by association does. You're right though, we shouldn't make mountains out of molehills.
But:
You state that Wasson was in a high-level position in banking and was approached by CIA and offered a $2000 grant to go on a trip? Why would a "Big Wig" banker need a $2000 grant to go to Mexico on a mushroom trip weekend? It's not like he was some hapless college kid short of cash to get down there for spring break. And what interest would a banker have in experimenting with drugs and then completely changing career paths and becoming a serious scientific researcher anyway? Did he pick the wrong major, or was he just a party animal?
In another paragraph, you mention Wasson's associations with a George Keenan and the well-known CIA director Allen Dulles, that they were all friends with each other, but Keenan rejected efforts by the CIA to recruit him and thought the CIA was unecessary? From what I understand of Allen Dulles, he was ruthlessly opposed to Communism and gave his organization iron-clad support for it's programs to defeat it. Doesn't sound like Keenan would remain in Dulle's circle of friends for too long if that's really how he felt. Or was Dulles playing both sides of the US/ Soviet chessboard by meekly accepting Keenan's concepts of diplomacy and sharing?
"...many of them were members of the Office of Strategic Services...So what?...just because someone was once in the OSS...does not make them...the CIA." Ummm, if I'm not mistaken, the OSS was the preliminary CIA. As far as exclusive clubbing goes, there's plenty of evidence linking troublemaking agencies and cabals formerly known only to them going back a hundred years and even much further, undeniable, to drinking dens, think tanks and brotherhoods. Read any number of quotes and articles written by technocratic, theocratic puppets and puppeteers, you get the idea. So what? Spooks with money do protect the science and do exert influence on society. How was Wasson able to get published in Henry Luce's Life magazine, without that influence? Maybe Wasson just thought he liked him? Who knows?
Irvin apparently goes about his research and reasoning in bullheaded and stupid ways (again, I'm only extrapolating from your rebuttals), making paranoid and faulty assumptions about a paranoid organization (is he being played?) Looks like his behaviour in defending his position is like anyone who must admit he doesn't know for sure.As for me, I'll stand by the stuff I can well make educated guesses at, felt in my guts and which I've seen with my own eyes until proven otherwise, just like you in saving your apology for proof, which there probably is none, so no need.
And:
If drugs weren't illegal, we wouldn't need the CIA.
I have to admit that I was
and in the final analness
I have to ask, if you dropped LSD in 1967 and went down the rabbit hole, would you ask yourself the moment before, how far does the rabbit hole go? No, of course not, but lets just stand back for a moment and look at the other side of the hole, it is obvious that history is not just conjured facts in a vacuum, there are parallel meta-histories running along side of linear fact finding.It just so happens that quantum shifts via huge cycles of time does not equal conspiracy theory deluxe.
The reality does not fit the facts, yet there is a war in heaven going on, these people that would simultaneously erase facts and replace them with reverse psychology up the yin yang have been at this end game for centuries now, there are precedents and currents, patterns and blind alleys, back in the sixties the psychedelic wave crashed on our heads, no doubt secret societies were in on the biggest cover up of all time, but time gets old don't it? No matter how much they use religion, politics and crap science to blanket the real deal, no matter how they create fake reasons to colonize our minds and hearts.
It was Blake that spoke of cleansing the doors of perception.If you started out on this road, which I did, it was useful to me at the time to contemplate "Turn on, Tune in, Drop out" I hadn't read a lot of about history, But I knew on some level that something was deeply wrong at about the age of six, at 13 the Kennedy assassination signaled the end to my fifties childhood.Psychedelics came along in the nick of time as far as I was concerned, it was either Vietnam or vicarious thrills, but I didn't get much of the education that was offered so I needed a pill that would teach me something about mind manifesting.
All those years later, I didn't latch on to Terence Mckenna because I was looking for some leader, like he was the next big voice in the psychedelic wilderness, I listened to him speak and I heard the poetic resonance of his thought, I did not read into his thought, I read out of it.To turn around and attack the messenger because I thought I had been promised closure at the end of history, is like thinking James Joyce was the second coming.Alan Watts drank himself to death because he could see down the time lines and see what was coming.
@GnosticMedia "Shakes head
The facts will stand alone
Well this is all very very intriguing. It's quite interesting how vehement some of the response against Jan has been. In my experience people become the most defensive in an argument when they have a personal investment in the subject. Like many people on this site, my late adolescence was heavily influenced by people like Terence McKenna, Tim Leary, Aldous Huxley, and indirectly, Gordon Wasson. These people have obviously acquired the status of defacto sainthood in the psychedelic community. Having these kind of heroes is a positive thing, but we shouldn't be afraid to question them. I've learned from psychedelics that reality is usually stranger than we can imagine, and things are often not what they seem to be at first glance.
Wasson's connections to the CFR and the Century Club are reason enough to investigate further. Guilt by association is a fallacy, but thinking that someone's ties to a group like the CFR or the Century Club are irrelevant is quite naive. Associations of power is essentially the formula of secret societies and the powerful elites. Uncovering the associations will lead you to the source of power which is being exerted indirectly through people, consciously and sometimes unconsciously. This is called "hidden hand" control and it is very effective because it confuses the source of power. Something like an act of camouflage.
To believe that groups like the CIA don't have an interest in drugs and psychedelic culture is also woefully naive. The CIA realizes, I'm sure, that psychedelics are very very powerful. They know that you can take down entire countries and governments by targeting individuals in key positions of power. They experimented with using LSD as a targeted political weapon to make a person discredit themselves in a public speech by appearing disoriented. I feel certain that the stuff described in the book Acid Dreams is probably only hitting the tip of the iceberg of secret psychedelic research, and god knows how far they've progressed with that stuff by now. I'm sure that the combination of hypnotism and psychedelics for mind control can be very effective when administered in the right circumstances.
That being said, the CIA trying to control magic mushrooms is like a person trying to name all the names of god. The power of the mushroom is well beyond the realm of power of any worldly organization to control it. The CIA using mushrooms for mind control is not controlling the mushroom itself, and would not directly control or influence people's individual mushroom trips in any way. They are like children trying to turn god into a toy to play with.
If we want to have a mature discussion, as some people claim to want, then let's discuss the evidence and the facts rather than making useless red herrings out of personal attacks. The facts will stand on their own regardless of Irvin's personal issues. Clearly further research is needed. I am looking forward to seeing how the community will react to this information, and whether it holds up as being true, or not.
fair play Tristan, I have a
What did I just step in?
very well done
boring
Ultimate Revolution
The Huxleys had enormous influence on the 'cutting edge' of social and scientific progress, to put it broadly.
Aldus Huxley spoke of the 'ultimate revolution' where, as the effectiveness of terrorism declined, new forms of influence could arrise. He spoke of Pavlov's improvements upon terrorism, and of SOMA, the drug in his own work. He also speaks of the 'magic mushroom' and LSD-25 as being capable of delivering 'revolutions.'
"In the hands of a dictator these substances in one kind or the other could be used with, first of all, complete harmlessness, and the result would be, you can imagine a euphoric that would make people thoroughly happy even in the most abominable circumstances." You can stream the audio of him speaking it here:
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/hux1.ram
Julian Huxley was a leading eugenicist and coined the term 'Transhuman'. People have been critical of both eugenics and transhumanism.
The advancement of convergent technology continues! ;)
Lori B. Andrews, "The Ethical and Legal Issues Pertaining to the Patenting of Life Forms," in Engineering the Farm (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2002) (edited by Britt Bailey and Marc Lappé).