Relationships with inhabitants of Celestial Bodies a classic controversial document revisited

When I first saw this document….I toted the skeptic’s party line in thinking it is a Hoax. After all, it’s a collaboration between Oppenheimer and Einstein about E.B.E.’s…..really??

If I continue to believe it to be a Hoax..then let me look at it with the relevancy of today.

And as I read it again….I’m not so sure it’s irrelevant given some of the substance of the thought processes written in the document ….wheather they were the independent thoughts or combined thoughts of Oppenheimer and or Einstein or Joe Blow the Hoaxter.

Read for yourself and look at what’s happening today…points made back long ago are not so far off the mark..imo.









Now I know it has been mentioned that poor grammar, sentence structure and spelling errors are some of the reasons for believing the document is a Hoax……

But we are talking about two gentlemen who’s first language wasn’t English…..they weren’t exactly English majors (that I know of). Also note top right corner of the title page…..it does after all say “DRAFT” ….you would expect it to have grammar mistakes, inconsistencies, and errors to hopefully be change before the final draft document has been smoothed to submit.

What do you think about the context? Not that it’s either a hoax or not a hoax…just in what it say’s.

Btw… I can’t find the bookmark of the source where I downloaded it in pdf form. At some point I might find it.

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1


that's kinda funny, cause in 1952 five years after the date of this paper/ document, and after the UFO's over DC. Einstein responded to a question asked him.

“Those people have seen something. What it is I do not know and am not curious to know. Sincerely yours, Albert Einstein.”

Albert Einstein’s Letter About UFOs

so knowing that Einstein said his drive for knowledge was due to his curiously( paraphrasing), and he said wasn't curious to know,
did he lose interest over the five year period in between?

did he write the response to cover his work he did with Oppenheimer for the government and that it was just a scenario / what if they wrote?

did he not want to say that he did think they were real so newspapers at the time wouldn't quote him as believing they were and give more credence to something that at the time was unproven?

me i'm tending to lean scenario / what if, if it's not a hoax.

that said here is a article that gives a little more detail aand even mentions a thread here from 2013.

The Soul:Ask article was copied word-for-word from a forum post on Above Top Secret of the same title published two days earlier on Aug. 15, 2013, by the user skyblueworld.

Albert Einstein’s Top Secret Alien Document: A Critique

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Page one, several paragraphs down is this.

''we would have to come to an agreement with them to establish the legal regulations upon which future relationship should be based, and it would be necessary to accept many of their principles. ''

What a hurdle this could be, suggesting to so many earth leaders and peoples so well entrenched in age old religious practices and human centric perspectives would be a monumental challenge.

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Page one, several paragraphs down is this.

''we would have to come to an agreement with them to establish the legal regulations upon which future relationship should be based, and it would be necessary to accept many of their principles. ''

What a hurdle this could be, suggesting to so many earth leaders and peoples so well entrenched in age old religious practices and human centric perspectives would be a monumental challenge.

Is accepting their principles equal to authoritarian overlords?

Food for thought…..

👽

What caught my eye was relationships with Extraterrestrial MEN. Where are the ET women?

Another interesting word: Pentateuch

the first five books of the Hebrew Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). Traditionally ascribed to Moses, it is now held by scholars to be a compilation from texts of the 9th to 5th centuries BC. Jewish name Torah


There are no women ET, because the Pentateuch says so. Those are sons of God: Angels, fallen beings etc, and they are all male. There are many people who have relationships with these beings. Some of their thoughts are not their own. Some inventions and ideas come from others who are not human.

a reply to: BernnieJGato

Could it simply be that Einstein was genuinely scared of what might be….

He’s human and so like humans….we all have fears.

👽

"He was probably one of them..."

CETK

a reply to: BernnieJGato

From your linked article……

There are no official sources linking the document to the U.S. government or to Einstein or Oppenheimer directly.

Perhaps this is true…..but then why?

If you read the hand written statement at the bottom of the document….bare in mind it was a DRAFT that was submitted and what appears to be as being reviewed and upon review it was decided not to send the draft….in final form, I presume….to the President.

So then the draft of the document could have not been filed into official channels for official archiving purposes….hence…nothing to retrieve by FOIA’s.

How a copy of the original draft materialized is a mystery…..

In summary, the document in question seems to have been posted on the Majestic Documents website with no source cited. It was then written about by user skyblueworld on the Above Top Secret forum and their forum post was copied word-for-word and reposted to Soul:Ask and later Medium.

Like I mentioned….my point is not in it being a hoax or legit……it’s about the content and meanings of the writing.

Btw….here’s the full English translation of Vazquez’s Cosmic International Law

The Prologue is interesting as far as dates are concerned. The original book was published in French with a Spanish translation after that….then the English translation ….or so the article states.

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Could it simply be that Einstein was genuinely scared of what might be….

yeah it could be, but everything i've ever read about him, strikes me as he was anything but fearful.
he might have had reservations about things and maybe even real serious concerns, but he would face them straight up and not hide behind anything, or flat out lie unless it was for say like the document says top secret work. but even then he would find a way to not reveal any information and not lie. that's why i said if it's not a hoax.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Well, that observation was followed up by a statement about defense should any alien prove to be aggressive. I know that Einstein was part of a think tank that was established to just let those guys think and speculate and toss their thoughts around to one another. This sounds to me to be a best effort to speculate based on the current attitude that followed that recent war, that of advancing as a whole race rather than simply as divided nations.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

Countries are inherently territorial……I doubt a whole race….some might say a one world order…would advance together especially when it comes to power and greed.

Imo ….a whole race …..is to say that there would be no borders …..all territories are melded together. A cumbaya planet so to speak. I don’t see that in my lifetime. Whether there’s extraterrestrials or not.

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Nor do I barring some black swan event.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
What caught my eye was relationships with Extraterrestrial MEN. Where are the ET women?

Another interesting word: Pentateuch

the first five books of the Hebrew Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). Traditionally ascribed to Moses, it is now held by scholars to be a compilation from texts of the 9th to 5th centuries BC. Jewish name Torah


There are no women ET, because the Pentateuch says so. Those are sons of God: Angels, fallen beings etc, and they are all male. There are many people who have relationships with these beings. Some of their thoughts are not their own. Some inventions and ideas come from others who are not human.

Brilliant. I'm glad you noticed this smarty pants! The fallen angels slash watchers were without gender so you can consider them as A-gender or as men. But eventually, we must concede that there WAS a way for them to derive sexual pleasure and because they were bore children, and women carry babies, we assume a penis but really, we don't know. They could have made the girls lay eggs. They could be some sort of advanced biological cyborg who can create at will a functional genital to match their mate, who knows what is possible for these beings from a heavenly realm. But because they chose women and the Bible says they "came into then and bore them children..." (and no it doesn't mean THAT kind of c-...ahem...) it's more likely there was some sort of wiener involved. Holy cow though...if this paper were real it would be one of the most current pieces of support of Semitic mythology that we have ever seen if indeed, ETS are only men! It would also support their divinity if they don't usually reproduce or have means to.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

What do you think about the context? Not that it’s either a hoax or not a hoax…just in what it say’s.

Well first off, the first page's formatting is different from all subsequent other pages, so for me that's a red flag.

Having said that, if I look at this document as not a hoax then here is my opinion.

The context does seem to me to be of two minds (Oppenheimer and Einstein) although I know very little of Oppenheimer, I know more about Einstein and his philosophy, to me, is evident in the context of warning of future nuclear war as something nobody wants to happen and for the U.S. to disarm and exclude the nuclear aspect.

Oppenheimer's philosophy seems to be along the lines of arrogance in laying down the law, so to speak, to celestial entities in all things - should they want to live with us on earth (but why would they? we are destructive and tribal still). If there is a problem with them, then use the nuclear weapons on them? - cold and calculating.

I will have to read it again later, but these are my first impressions.

a reply to: quintessentone

Your initial opinion looks reasonable to me…..

By your characterizations….the document does speak to the opinions of two people….good cop (Einstein), bad cop (Oppenheimer) so to speak.

Looking forward to your final assessment 😉

In another reply post….I mis-spoke pointing out to read the hand written statement at the bottom of the last page……it’s typewritten of course.

The statement mentions three people “Myself the person presumably who initialed the document” “Marshall” and “Gordon”.

Both “Myself” and “Marshall” reviewed the DRAFT…..”Gordon” was told about it.

As for the page formatting differences….it could simply have been that after they finished the first page….Einstein could of said to Oppenheimer “you know what Robert…this format doesn’t look good to me….let’s try a different format” hence the format change.

I can’t emphasize enough that the document is written as a DRAFT according to the word DRAFT in the upper right corner of the first page….subject to all types of changes including content and format…..what type of typewriter, what type of ribbon, what type of font, what type of paper (thickness, bonded, vellum, etc).

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

In my vast documentation formatting experience, the word 'draft' needs to be on all pages, so there is that red flag too.

Final assessment to follow.

Semi-final assessment:

Page 1 third paragraph: Oppenheimer (O)?: “they should have similar psychology as man” – Me: God help us all!

Page 1 fourth paragraph: O and Einstein (E)?: Law among planetary peoples – “should follow the guidelines of the Pentateuch” – Me: And this is what religion you shall follow.

Page 1 fifth paragraph: O?: “they would have an absolute right to be recognized as independent and sovereign people” – but there will still be a need for legal regulations and mutual agreements – Me: there goes their independence and sovereignty, does it not?

Page 1 sixth paragraph: O?: “ if they reject peaceful cooperation” – we would have the right to annul this danger – Me: cooperation, as in you must comply?

Page 2 first paragraph after asterisks (center of page): O?: “the problem… - Me: the problem? Another one?

Paage 2 point 2: O?: “If they consider our culture to be devoid of political unity” (which they will) – they can still colonize earth but not on classic lines… - Me: In other words, we will continue with our political division and tribal warring, so you may have to pick a side.

Page 2 last paragraph: E?: “…United Nations tutelage” – Me: You will have no choice and need to attend classes by the U.N.

Page 3 second paragraph after asterisks: O? and E?: “…may take it upon themselves to occupy another celestial body” – Me: Is this another problem even though nobody owns the other celestial bodies in our solar system? We Earthlings want a piece of that action.

Page 3 Point 3: O? (paranoid?): “…this would create a situation of anarchy…” – Me: We Earthlings want a piece of that action and if we don’t get it we will become the anarchists.

Page 4 – most of it – and the formatting again is entirely different from other pages: Me: All about Earthling occupation of the EBE concerns.

Page 5 – second last paragraph: E?: “…our atmospheric (atomic) tests…they were alarmed…” – Me: You think?

Page 5/6 – last paragraph: O?: …”extremely perilous”…”…measures must be taken to rectify a very serious problem …” – Me: That says it all right there and I doubt we have changed our sentiments towards EBE’s even today.

What do you think Ophi of my breakdown? lol

I may have to reread it again because the paranoia and desire for the control and occupation of them is what jumped out at me.

a reply to: quintessentone

Q…that’s great!

One doesn’t know whether to be happy or sad, but both is evident.

Dismissing the idea that the document is a hoax……and if authored in 1947……we presently have heightened the sentiments of the context in the document.

The nuclear destruction probabilities remain perilous almost back to official cold war status.

We could barely handle the illegal migrations of our own earthlings let alone migrations of extraterrestrials.

I find the document compelling for its content overall.

A hoaxter’s concoction perhaps….perhaps not….perhaps somewhere knowingly or unknowingly written for a prophetic future…..such as extraterrestrials becoming a threat to National security locally and globally.

Do I believe the document is a complete hoax? Not necessarily…I’ve made a connection that shows there may be some small truth to it….at least imo.

👽

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: quintessentone

Q…that’s great!

One doesn’t know whether to be happy or sad, but both is evident.

Dismissing the idea that the document is a hoax……and if authored in 1947……we presently have heightened the sentiments of the context in the document.

The nuclear destruction probabilities remain perilous almost back to official cold war status.

We could barely handle the illegal migrations of our own earthlings let alone migrations of extraterrestrials.

I find the document compelling for its content overall.

A hoaxter’s concoction perhaps….perhaps not….perhaps somewhere knowingly or unknowingly written for a prophetic future.

Do I believe the document is a complete hoax? Not necessarily…I’ve made a connection that shows there may be some small truth to it….at least imo.

👽

The document has issues and I'm suspecting it's a patchwork of other writings trying to look as one cohesive writing.

If Einstein contributed to the piece then, as you may have noticed, I didn't find much of his personality or philosophy coming through, except the doom and gloom nuclear warning part. He was very much against nuclear weapons.

The context seems spot on, in that, their sentiments seem to be still in a wartime frame of mind, which is justified. So maybe we should take most of the paranoia with a grain of salt, or is war always on tap with us?

I would hope EBE's never want to live on Earth nor take over any of our nearby planets for colonization because we don't play nice with our neighbours.

a reply to: quintessentone

Now in the technicality terms of the “Hoax”………

It’s been called out by some that this is a case of Plagiarism…..the bulk of it being from one or parts of all three books authored by Modesto S. Vazquez

(The actual order of books should be French original , Spanish translation , then English translation )


The document if real….is dated 1947. As you’ll note the French was published in 1959.

Who is plagiarizing who?

The hoaxter would have had to have known of the books material from 1959 onward and then back date the hoaxed document with the plagiarized material back to the date of 1947 (btw, the year of Roswell).

Is it likely? Could be…..

Or did author Modesto S. Vazquez plagiarize Einstein and Oppenheimer? Could be….

That would mean that the Einstein Oppenheimer document surfaced from somewhere before 1959….for Vazquez to have read it….before plagiarizing and publishing the French original manuscript and the subsequent other publications.

It’s a coin toss on the question of plagiarism.

(The above is not the connection I found to which I eluded to in my previous post)

👽