Latest / The Dustlight Archives / The Dustlight Archives Book Club: Sinister Forces: The Nine: Chapter 7 (Preview)

Transcript

The Dustlight Archives Book Club: Sinister Forces: The Nine: Chapter 7 (Preview) · The Dustlight Archives

• 0:18
  SPEAKER_00: Hey, hello guys.
• 0:20
  SPEAKER_00: Welcome to the latest episode of the Dust Light Archives Book Club.
• 0:26
  SPEAKER_00: We will be covering, I'll get this out of the way right now.
• 0:30
  SPEAKER_00: Normally, we've been doing two chapters.
• 0:32
  SPEAKER_00: I had oral surgery in the last week.
• 0:36
  SPEAKER_00: And uh besides the fact that it kind of waylaid me physically and mentally a bit, I also have limits to how long I can talk.
• 0:48
  SPEAKER_00: So we're just gonna do chapter seven this week.
• 0:51
  SPEAKER_00: But what I'm figuring is we have chapter eight, which is the final chapter in the first book, and then we have an appendix on the wandering bishops, and I I find them to be endlessly fascinating.
• 1:04
  SPEAKER_00: And then uh we have the introduction to book two.
• 1:09
  SPEAKER_00: So what I'm kind of figuring at this point is that we will do seven today, and then we will do eight and the appendix and the introduction for our next episode, at which point we will be all set to head into the second book in the Sinister Forces series proper.
• 1:34
  SPEAKER_00: Uh, and yeah, without uh any further delay, we can go ahead and get started.
• 1:41
  SPEAKER_00: Uh he starts out chapter seven talking about uh the the different layers of the Kennedy assassination, and I do think his you know thesis is kind of interesting and worth exploring, even if I don't know necessarily exactly how much I subscribe to it.
• 2:06
  SPEAKER_00: Like the basic idea being, you know, you have the uh regular political mainstream version that is, you know, the Warren Report and you know what you will find in local American newspapers, you know, the the debunked the debunking crews ideas of the Kennedy assassination.
• 2:30
  SPEAKER_00: And then you've got more of like the deep politics side, which is Peter Dale Scott, uh, who I would say is an absolutely excellent source for anybody who is looking to learn more about the mechanics of the Kennedy assassination.
• 2:49
  SPEAKER_00: I think he does a really great job.
• 2:52
  SPEAKER_00: And Levenda kind of stakes out his own space, saying that he wants to attempt to go a layer deeper than that.
• 3:03
  SPEAKER_00: And as I've said many times before, I'm not opposed to on principle to uh examining those deeper, more subterranean layers.
• 3:20
  SPEAKER_00: I do think that things tend to get more abstract and not as uh clear and not as provable the further you go down.
• 3:33
  SPEAKER_00: Um, but I I do think that there's probably some validity there, and being somebody who's fairly familiar with the deep politics version of the Kennedy assassination, which is something I would absolutely, you know, subscribe to, and I think there's very, very strong evidence for it.
• 3:54
  SPEAKER_00: You know, the idea that uh the CIA, the mob, and Cuban expatriates uh all kind of worked together to pull it off, and that Oswald was a Patsy.
• 4:11
  SPEAKER_00: Um I I I think that that's a really solid take on it.
• 4:15
  SPEAKER_00: And I I am interested in what we can pull out of getting weirder with it, even if you know some of the information can be more questionable.
• 4:26
  SPEAKER_00: So like I will say right off the bat, too, I've never read King Kill 33, which I feel like is sort of the Bible for this deeper uh analysis of the Kennedy assassination.
• 4:43
  SPEAKER_00: Uh having not read it, I'm going to say that I think it probably is very much in the Lavenda wheelhouse, uh, maybe even going further than Lavenda into uh symbology without the deep politics.
• 5:02
  SPEAKER_00: Because, you know, Lavenda, I think, still is sort of in this middle space where he does spend arguably too much time on the uh symbolic or mythological aspects of these things, but there there is real deep politics in it.
• 5:20
  SPEAKER_00: And actually, this week, I will say uh there's going to be a point where I read a a pretty extended passage from this chapter because I think it's actually very great deep politics work that I can't state any better than he does.
• 5:37
  SPEAKER_00: Um so he starts out really building up Mary Farrell's importance to modern day deep politics investigators of the JFK assassination.
• 5:54
  SPEAKER_00: And I do think he is completely right on that.
• 5:58
  SPEAKER_00: If anything, like I'd say maybe it's even a little bit understated.
• 6:02
  SPEAKER_00: Uh like it would be fair to say that no major work viewing the JFK assassination through a parapolitical or deep political lens is not heavily indebted to the indexing and documenting she did.
• 6:16
  SPEAKER_00: She made deep complex cross-references of over 8,200 individuals and essentially algorithmized the information by hand on over 40,000 note cards, and she made it really searchable before computer databases were even a thing, or certainly a thing in the public sphere.
• 6:38
  SPEAKER_00: So she I I I do think uh she deserves a ton of credit.
• 6:44
  SPEAKER_00: Where he does start to go off the rails is that he then uses that grounding to claim that Mary Farrell was into the occult.
• 7:00
  SPEAKER_00: And I've read a decent amount on her, and I will tell you just in a baseline, just the feeling I get from her.
• 7:08
  SPEAKER_00: I have a little bit of a hard time believing this to be the case, but she is she seems to be very uh rationalistic in her thinking, and she seems to uh have a certain type of academic rigor that tends to signal to me oftentimes that she would be uh dismissive of uh things that hit a certain level of weirdness.
• 7:52
  SPEAKER_00: And the fact of the matter is his claims that she was involved in the occult are are really flimsy.
• 7:59
  SPEAKER_00: Like, uh, first of all, it's totally unsubstantiated outside of him claiming she told him she was an occultist.
• 8:07
  SPEAKER_00: And like, I think it's just a general rule across the bat as we're going through this.
• 8:13
  SPEAKER_00: If Lavenda claims he knows something because somebody told it to him, that immediately to me requires further examination and maybe a certain level of skepticism, or if he claims he knows something because of some sort of personal unverified experience.
• 8:38
  SPEAKER_00: I think you know, in general, this is a a fairly good rule to have when you're looking at this sort of research, but also like when it comes to Lavenda specifically, uh, he's not built up that level of trust to where I I I feel like I can take him at his word, and I it it makes me even more skeptical when he tends to pull this sort of thing.
• 9:10
  SPEAKER_00: And the and the fact is like she collaborated with a ton of people in her work, and this was this is not something that you can find anywhere outside of Levenda's claimed recollection.
• 9:30
  SPEAKER_00: Like she wasn't she wasn't somebody whose motivations or beliefs are obscure or unclear.
• 9:38
  SPEAKER_00: She's actually there's a ton of letters, a ton of correspondences where you can suss out pretty well where she's coming from and kind of what her belief system is.
• 9:50
  SPEAKER_00: There's also the fact that she conveniently she died in 2004, and this book comes out in 2005.
• 10:00
  SPEAKER_00: And I'm just saying that if you were looking to bolster an argument you maybe didn't have the evidence for, I uh that that timing is real sus.
• 10:13
  SPEAKER_00: It it means that almost the second, like before her body is even cold, and she's no longer able to deny these sorts of not alleg allegations might be too strong of a word, uh, sorts of assertions that he's running around saying them.
• 10:37
  SPEAKER_00: So I I don't know.
• 10:39
  SPEAKER_00: I I don't believe him.
• 10:41
  SPEAKER_00: Well, and one problem with anecdotal information like this in general, even outside of you know, Lavenda in particular being an unreliable narrator, is that I think it's so left up to interpretation a lot of the time, and the writer's interpretation in particular, that things can get a little bit slippery.
• 11:06
  SPEAKER_00: You know, I was thinking of an example of like, you know, I haven't seen the uh TV show New Girl in like what 15 years at this point or whatever.
• 11:18
  SPEAKER_00: I watched the first few seasons of it, and I don't have any strong opinions on that show.
• 11:24
  SPEAKER_00: But if I was talking to somebody, you know, and they were like, Oh, I really love the show New Girl, I'd be like, Yeah, I remember that.
• 11:30
  SPEAKER_00: Like, I that was a pretty good sitcom.
• 11:32
  SPEAKER_00: I watched a few seasons of it.
• 11:34
  SPEAKER_00: And what if this person was to all of a sudden then like construct an entire argument based on like my new girl fandom or something?
• 11:44
  SPEAKER_00: You know what I'm saying?
• 11:45
  SPEAKER_00: Like, it's people are really complex and we and we have layers, and base anything on one conversation with somebody that was off the record that you don't actually know that well, is uh, you know, it leaves a lot of room for error.
• 12:06
  SPEAKER_00: I will also say, too, that he claims she was respond corresponding with Israel Regardi.
• 12:14
  SPEAKER_00: And, you know, he's one of the larger figures in the Golden Dawn.
• 12:18
  SPEAKER_00: He was a personal assistant to Alistair Crowley for a while.
• 12:22
  SPEAKER_00: He's still written some of the probably more cogent and better written books on her medicism in the modern age.
• 12:37
  SPEAKER_00: And I don't know where in the hell Lavenda is getting this from because the fact is she has a lot of correspondence and pretty well-preserved archives, and so does he, and there is there's not a single letter that anybody can point to to suggest that these two were ever in contact.
• 13:04
  SPEAKER_00: But he does kind of use this as a jumping-off point to then get into Israel Regardi for a minute, uh, claiming he was initiated into the Rosicrucian Order in DC in 1926, which is definitely established fact.
• 13:21
  SPEAKER_00: And then, you know, the way Lavenda loves to jump around, he spends some time talking up how culturally important the JFK assassination was, which, of course, um, but then after that he jumps back and he begins explaining the Golden Dawn, and he massively exaggerates his lineage.
• 13:40
  SPEAKER_00: He claims it comes from 17th century German Rosicrucianism, which comes from the Knights Templar, which comes from the Gnostics and the Heshitian, the Coptics, the Kabbalists, and Solomon the King.
• 13:53
  SPEAKER_00: Now, this is mixing up the Golden Dawn's own mythology with reality.
• 14:01
  SPEAKER_00: There is no direct line that can be drawn here, and to claim it can be is absurd.
• 14:09
  SPEAKER_00: Uh, what is true is that the Golden Dawn believes itself to draw from all of these different practices, which it does to wildly varying degrees of accuracy.
• 14:22
  SPEAKER_00: And that's in cases where accuracy can even kind of be measured.
• 14:26
  SPEAKER_00: They do study literature from all of these practices, but a regular criticism leveled at the Golden Dawn is that they are westernized, bastardized understandings of things like the Zohar or the Egyptian Book of the Dead.
• 14:41
  SPEAKER_00: On top of that, something like the Greater and Lesser Keys of Solomon, you know, the uh uh grimoirs that will regularly be used in order to summon demons or to uh do demonic magic.
• 14:59
  SPEAKER_00: Uh they claim that it has a biblic it claims to have a biblical or a Gnostic legacy.
• 15:06
  SPEAKER_00: And that is also not established, and almost certainly a retcon by the Renaissance era authors.
• 15:12
  SPEAKER_00: Basically, we have like to break this down, we have grandiose egotistical figures like Blavatsky or Crowley making claims to have basically discovered a unified field theory of magic when it's really a giant esoteric game of telephone, and even that game of telephone is obscured through several layers of unclear lineage, interpreted through the specific lens of interpreters, with con artists also floating around the edges and muddling things even more at best.
• 15:44
  SPEAKER_00: And for what it's worth, I've mentioned it before, but like I got really deep into ritual magic for several years in my 20s, so I'm not unfamiliar with these writings or ideas, and Lavenda taking this at face value is it is silly.
• 16:00
  SPEAKER_00: Like, I guess if I were to create an opposing thesis while still trying to be sympathetic to the ideas of hermeticism and of these groups having some sort of real material uh uh effect.
• 16:27
  SPEAKER_00: My thesis would be that obviously it doesn't mean the Golden Dawn has no power, then it cannot trace its lineage back like this.
• 16:37
  SPEAKER_00: People who believed these things would go on to influence others and take actions based on those beliefs.
• 16:43
  SPEAKER_00: I would say it's better looked at through the lens of chaos magic than through the lens of some sort of literal infallible transmission of specific power.
• 16:52
  SPEAKER_00: Now, I hope this is not too abstract.
• 16:57
  SPEAKER_00: But for instance, if you believe in something like divination, then tarot cards can be a tool, but you can also read tea leaves or clouds or throw sticks, and you can receive the same result.
• 17:14
  SPEAKER_00: As far as there is a mechanism of any utility here, it exists in the interplay between the subject's subconscious mind, the external world, and the subject's ability to read or control that space.
• 17:27
  SPEAKER_00: Symbols have power, and that power can affect the real world.
• 17:32
  SPEAKER_00: Couple of examples.
• 17:33
  SPEAKER_00: Money only works because of its symbolic power.
• 17:37
  SPEAKER_00: The second people stop believing in the worth of money, it immediately dissipates.
• 17:45
  SPEAKER_00: Like it is entirely dependent on our belief, especially due to the fact that at this point it is it is tied to nothing uh that exists in physical reality.
• 17:58
  SPEAKER_00: Also, a placebo can cause actual physical effects just because the person taking it believes it will.
• 18:05
  SPEAKER_00: In other words, the history of the Golden Dawn's lineage might be bullshit, but that doesn't mean it can't create the framework necessary, just like a placebo, to cause very real effects on the psyche of an individual, and through that have real material manifestations on the physical plane.
• 18:23
  SPEAKER_00: After that, Lavenda briefly relays an anecdote about a group called the Fountains of the World, ran by Krishnaventa, who was killed by some of his disgruntled followers in a suicide bombing.
• 18:36
  SPEAKER_00: Manson, a few years later, did a mock crucifixion at the same location.
• 18:40
  SPEAKER_00: It is an interesting anecdote, and I was unaware of it, but I'm not sure what the larger point of this story is supposed to be.
• 18:48
  SPEAKER_00: He kind of implies the ritual gave him insight he wasn't ready for and he crashed out.
• 18:54
  SPEAKER_00: Uh, Fountains of the World was preaching about a coming race war, and this would be really revealing if in fact the Bugliosi Helder Skelder narrative hadn't been widely disproven.
• 19:06
  SPEAKER_00: As far as this matters at all, it kind of just adds even more evidence to the idea that something was going on in Southern California in this area at this time with some sort of experimental laboratory that connects to something larger structurally.
• 19:22
  SPEAKER_00: And I don't know, it's kind of not the way Lavenda takes it or the direction he takes it, but that is, I think, uh very revealing.
• 19:33
  SPEAKER_00: Like, why are several cults in the same area preaching very similar ideas, functioning in a very similar way and crossing over into each other?
• 19:47
  SPEAKER_00: After that, Lavenda brings up the Lincoln Kennedy synchronicities meme to open up another conversation about synchronicities and coincidence.
• 19:57
  SPEAKER_00: And I thought this might be a really good time to I kind of uh explore that meme because I'm sure we've probably all mostly seen it and kind of just do a fact check on it.
• 20:12
  SPEAKER_00: Uh now the meme is a collection of fairly interesting juxtapositions, some sleight of hand and flat out lies.
• 20:21
  SPEAKER_00: So, first of all, Lincoln was elected as president in 1860 and Kennedy in 1960.
• 20:28
  SPEAKER_00: That is true.
• 20:29
  SPEAKER_00: They both were sworn into Congress in 1847 and 1947, respectively.
• 20:36
  SPEAKER_00: Although I will note the typical list claims they were both elected in 1947, which is wrong because they were both elected in 46.
• 20:46
  SPEAKER_00: But I mean, whatever, potato potato.
• 20:49
  SPEAKER_00: Um both were succeeded by somebody with the last name Johnson, true.
• 20:55
  SPEAKER_00: Uh Johnson is also the second most common surname in the United States.
• 21:01
  SPEAKER_00: So while it is an interesting fact, it is not quite as weird as it may first appear.
• 21:11
  SPEAKER_00: Uh, they both died on a Friday, is also a bit of a sleight of hand.
• 21:16
  SPEAKER_00: They were both shot on Friday.
• 21:19
  SPEAKER_00: Uh Lincoln died Saturday.
• 21:22
  SPEAKER_00: And this might just be another example of kind of the sloppy research of the people or person who originally put together this meme because, like, uh, you could just as easily say they were both shot on Friday and still have that same weird, mysterious sort of feeling in your meme.
• 21:48
  SPEAKER_00: They don't need to both die on Friday.
• 21:50
  SPEAKER_00: So it's also another situation where I'd be inclined to say the spirit of it is true, but the facts are a little bit off.
• 21:58
  SPEAKER_00: Now, this is really where we start.
• 22:00
  SPEAKER_00: To have to question the research and also the motivation of the people who made this meme because uh one of the I think most famous uh facts that they lay forward with this is that Kennedy had a secretary named Lincoln, and Lincoln had a secretary named Kennedy, and that the one advised Kennedy not to go to Dallas, and the other one advised Lincoln not to go to the play.
• 22:35
  SPEAKER_00: And this is just, I mean, almost complete bullshit.
• 22:40
  SPEAKER_00: Kennedy did have a secretary named Evelyn Lincoln, but there's no proof she ever advised him not to go to Dallas.
• 22:47
  SPEAKER_00: Lincoln did not have a secretary with the last name Kennedy.
• 22:50
  SPEAKER_00: That is a total fabrication.
• 22:53
  SPEAKER_00: In fact, his secretaries were John G.
• 22:55
  SPEAKER_00: Nicolay and John M.
• 22:57
  SPEAKER_00: Hay.
• 22:58
  SPEAKER_00: Like, we know the names of his secretaries, and this this is just incorrect.
• 23:03
  SPEAKER_00: Uh, and then Levenda kind of punts a little bit after that, where he goes, There are also several other similarities that exist as well that I won't get into here.
• 23:16
  SPEAKER_00: And those similarities I have to assume, just based on having seen the memes going around plenty of times, is that Booth shot Lincoln in a theater and was found in a warehouse, and Oswald shot Kennedy from a warehouse and was found in a theater.
• 23:37
  SPEAKER_00: This might be a little bit nitpicky.
• 23:39
  SPEAKER_00: Oswald was found in a barn.
• 23:41
  SPEAKER_00: A barn is not exactly a warehouse.
• 23:44
  SPEAKER_00: Uh also the other typical thing you'll see in these memes is that both assassins were born in 1839 and 1939.
• 23:53
  SPEAKER_00: Close, but Booth was born in 1838.
• 23:57
  SPEAKER_00: Now it's too bad because I think you could actually make a more honest list of these synchronicities that is still a little bit impressive, and you could totally cut out the fabrications and it would be fine.
• 24:17
  SPEAKER_00: But I mean, as it stands, I mean we're we're batting what a 50-50 ratio as far as uh things that are true in this general Lincoln Kennedy meme idea.
• 24:33
  SPEAKER_00: Uh after that, Lavenda writes a killer section that absolutely rocks.
• 24:40
  SPEAKER_00: It is some great parapolitical research regarding the Payne family and their ties to the military-industrial complex, as well as their ties to Arthur Young of Puharic's the Nine Seances, which we talked about earlier.
• 24:58
  SPEAKER_00: And I'm going to read a pretty extended passage from this, like I had mentioned at the beginning, because I just I think it's I think it's very good and I think it's worth reading.
• 25:12
  SPEAKER_00: If you happen to be reading along with me and you don't want to hear this again, I would suggest a jumping forward.
• 25:22
  SPEAKER_00: I don't know.
• 25:23
  SPEAKER_00: I'm reading I'm going to be reading six pages, so fifteen minutes maybe forward in the podcast.
• 25:34
  SPEAKER_00: Uh I apologize, I don't have an exact timestamp for you, but here we go.
• 25:39
  SPEAKER_00: Uh on the trail of the assassins.
• 25:42
  SPEAKER_00: While the inventor, psychic researcher, astrologer, zen enthusiast, and member of the original nine, Arthur Young, was writing the reflexive universe and the quiet of his home in the Philadelphia suburb of Paoli in August of 1963.
• 26:00
  SPEAKER_00: His wife was entertaining their daughter-in-law, Ruth Hyde Payne.
• 26:04
  SPEAKER_00: Ruth Hyde had married Michael Payne, Ruth Forbes Young's son by her previous marriage to George Lyman Payne.
• 26:13
  SPEAKER_00: On December 28th, 1957, in a Quaker ceremony in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
• 26:20
  SPEAKER_00: Ruth Hyde's background alone is suggestive.
• 26:23
  SPEAKER_00: Her father had been employed by the Agency for International Development, which was a well-known CIA front, which lost a few overseas officials to acts of terrorism, including the famous case of Dan Mitrione in Uruguay.
• 26:38
  SPEAKER_00: Her brother-in-law, based in Washington, D.C., was also employed by AID.
• 26:45
  SPEAKER_00: Ruth Hyde had been working in Philadelphia when she met Michael.
• 26:50
  SPEAKER_00: Upon their marriage, she moved in with Michael.
• 26:52
  SPEAKER_00: Ruth Forbes Young and Arthur Young at their home in Paoli, where the couple remained until the summer of 1959.
• 27:01
  SPEAKER_00: Michael working directly for Arthur Young in his stepfather's barn, building model helicopters.
• 27:08
  SPEAKER_00: This part of the story sounds quite strange.
• 27:11
  SPEAKER_00: According to his Warren Commission testimony, Michael Payne set up shop in Arthur Young's barn sometime in the early 1950s and started working for himself.
• 27:22
  SPEAKER_00: The nature of this work was not clarified, nor why Michael Paine would have been using Arthur Young's barn to work for himself.
• 27:31
  SPEAKER_00: Eventually, Arthur hired Michael to make model helicopters for him.
• 27:36
  SPEAKER_00: This sounds suspiciously like makework, since Arthur Young by this time had given up on helicopter design and was involved full-time in mystical pursuits.
• 27:46
  SPEAKER_00: The other problem with Michael Payne's testimony is that he cannot give dates.
• 27:51
  SPEAKER_00: He does not know when he began working for Bell Helicopter, he doesn't have a firm grasp of when he left school, joined the army, reenrolled in university, or anything else about his past.
• 28:04
  SPEAKER_00: Nor is he aware of what level of security clearance he had at Bell.
• 28:08
  SPEAKER_00: In fact, he cannot even remember what year he married Ruth Hyde.
• 28:12
  SPEAKER_00: He has further lapses of memory throughout his testimony.
• 28:16
  SPEAKER_00: Anything to do with his relationship to Ruth Hyde Payne becomes vague and ephemeral.
• 28:22
  SPEAKER_00: And also, I just real quick, I want to jump in it before we continue and say that if I hadn't already made this clear, one of the reasons I am reading this passage too is that I think I would stand by I'll jump in if there's anything that comes to mind that isn't based pretty well in approvable fact, but like uh pretty much all of this is, I mean, I it's dead on.
• 28:55
  SPEAKER_00: What we do know with some certainty is that Michael Payne, a native of New York City, graduated from high school in 1947.
• 29:03
  SPEAKER_00: He then went to Harvard for two years, but had to drop out as he was failing academically.
• 29:09
  SPEAKER_00: That would have been in 1949.
• 29:12
  SPEAKER_00: His mother had married Arthur Young in 1948 while Michael was doing his first year at Harvard.
• 29:18
  SPEAKER_00: At some point, he wound up working for a nuclear research firm, the Bartoll Research Foundation at Swarthmore, doing something vague with machines while attempting to finish a bachelor's degree.
• 29:30
  SPEAKER_00: He claims that he would have been in the class of 1953 at Swarthmore had he stayed in school.
• 29:37
  SPEAKER_00: With two years at Harvard already accomplished, and for which he probably received credit at Swarthmore, that puts him there in 1951.
• 29:46
  SPEAKER_00: But according to his testimony, he only worked about a year at Bartoll before leaving for the Army.
• 29:52
  SPEAKER_00: He spent two years in the Army and was sent to Korea.
• 29:56
  SPEAKER_00: This would have been during the height of the Korean War.
• 29:59
  SPEAKER_00: There is no indication in his testimony before the commission about what his duties were or even what his rank might have been.
• 30:07
  SPEAKER_00: It seems odd that his war record was not read into the transcript or that an attempt to get accurate dates out of him was not strenuously mounted by someone at the commission, but so it goes.
• 30:18
  SPEAKER_00: At one point, he is saved from embarrassment or inadvertent revelation by Alan Dulles.
• 30:25
  SPEAKER_00: When Michael Payne is asked about his duties at Bell helicopter, the following exchange takes place.
• 30:31
  SPEAKER_00: And then we have a little bit of the exchange.
• 30:34
  SPEAKER_00: Mr.
• 30:34
  SPEAKER_00: Liebler says, Have you been engaged in that type of work for Bell throughout?
• 30:40
  SPEAKER_00: To which Mr.
• 30:40
  SPEAKER_00: Payne replies, I have been in the research laboratory research group that long.
• 30:46
  SPEAKER_00: It has all been problems.
• 30:47
  SPEAKER_00: And Mr.
• 30:48
  SPEAKER_00: Dulles cuts him off and says, Are you a helicopter pilot by any chance yourself?
• 30:53
  SPEAKER_00: The reader is left with this tantalizing bit of personal anecdote, interrupted by a typical Dulles non-sequitur, of which there are quite a few when it comes to the pains.
• 31:04
  SPEAKER_00: The question of Michael Payne's work at Bell never comes up again.
• 31:08
  SPEAKER_00: This will happen several more times during Ruth Payne's testimony.
• 31:17
  SPEAKER_00: Alright, guys, I think that's where we're gonna cut off the preview for this week.
• 31:23
  SPEAKER_00: As always, if you would like to hear the whole thing, please head over to my Patreon at the Dust Light Archives.
• 31:32
  SPEAKER_00: Uh and like I've said before, I'll say it probably every other week if for some reason if you really feel like you can't afford it and you would really like this information.
• 31:42
  SPEAKER_00: You know, I'm not trying to keep this from anybody, and I know times are hard, so please just reach out to me and we'll figure something out if that is the case.
• 31:54
  SPEAKER_00: But if you can't afford it, I would really love your donations.
• 31:58
  SPEAKER_00: They help me do this work and they give me a lot more time and a lot more breathing room to be able to feel comfortable uh digging in deep to this sort of stuff, and also just the emotional validation of knowing that people care enough to contribute is incredible.
• 32:18
  SPEAKER_00: I appreciate the people who've contributed so far, and I will be back with a free episode of the Nexium investigation next week.
• 32:29
  SPEAKER_00: And uh thank you so much.