Dan Burisch Updates
Read the current discussion on the forum .
See the end of this page for unedited archives of the prievious forum threads
25/10/05:
The fake nobel peace prize nominations for Dan Burisch and Marci McDowell have been re-created and mirrored for reference Please not how the coding style is exactly the same as the one used by the webmaster at the old Eaglesdisobey.com site. The use of the Alt tag field for placement of the name of the image file and byte size is a mirror image. Other website use that field for descriptions not filenames.
Dan Burisch Nobel nomination | Marci McDowell Nobel Nomination
18/10/05:
I'm working on short bios for Deb Burisch and Marci McDowell and a few others. If it's possible to do just a paragraph or too for Dan then that'll happen soon too . In retaliation to the open letter from George Knapp, Marci
14/10/05:
From : GEORGE KNAPP, KLAS-TV,
Friday, 10-14-05, 10:49 PST
To: MARCI McDOWELL
Subject: OPEN LETTER TO MARCIA A. MCDOWELL, M.A., REPRESENTATIVE
Ms. McDOWELL:
First of all, there is no need to call me "sir," as you did in your recent letter. After all, we've known each other for many years now. While I appreciate your respectful tone, it seems too formal and stuffy.
Second, I sincerely regret the decision by you and Mrs. Burisch to avoid the interview that you proposed in the first place. Frankly, I was astounded by your magnanimous offer, which I learned about by reading the Internet press release that you distributed long before you ever heard back from me. Your latest letter, which was also released to the world before I received it, was less of a surprise.
While I was looking forward to a healthy exchange of information under the hot lights of a television studio, I never believed you would actually go through with it. Not for a minute. Not for a second. I wasn't sure what excuse you would use for cancelling the encounter that you requested, but I had no doubt that you would come up with something. (It's not that I'm pyschic – I got a hot tip about this from a cherubim who talks to me from time to time.)
I was also confident that you would issue a public announcement about your decision to back out. Lo and behold. A suspicious person might think that this little episode was really meant for public consumption all along rather than being an actual offer to sit down for an interview with me.
What does surprise me is the flimsy excuse you are using to justify the
cancellation. In the past, you have always exhibited such a vivid imagination and a real talent for creative writing, so I assumed you would come up with a much better reason. Apparently, my expectations of you were somewhat inflated.
Just so I am clear on this, you cancelled the interview because I wrote a short note to a friend of yours who was pestering me about agreeing to an interview? As noted in my note, I was a bit irritated about being lobbied on your behalf. You placed the initial call to my phone in the evening hours, long after I had left the station. Then you immediately released your public notice on the Internet, which is where I first learned about it. Then you called and left another phone message.
Then two of your functionaries sent e-mails to my workplace to urge me to accept the offer. I'm sorry that I did not cancel all of my appointments so that I could respond immediately to your message, but some of us have actual jobs. By the time I retrieved my messages the following afternoon, I had several unsolicited communications from your supporters and was privy to quite a bit of Internet chatter about this offer.
As I explaind to your associate, I do not appreciate being lobbied so intensely about anything. It's a character flaw, I suppose. Yes, in my response, I did characterize this matter as "minor league." I did NOT mean it to be a derisive shot at you or Mrs. Burisch, and only intended it to be way to dissuade your associate from any additional lobbying on your behalf. I had already decided to accept your offer and didn't need any arm twisting from your cheerleaders.
A word of explanation. Every day, I get 50 or more phone calls from people who have various problems and need my help. I receive between 150 - 200 e-mails each day, also from people who have assorted problems or issues. I simply DON'T have the time to engage in e-mail debates with someone who wants to lobby me about a UFO story. I had every intention of ACCEPTING your offer of an interview, but I was going to respond after I had met my other obligations and deadlines. I didn't need to be prodded by your emissaries and resented the heavy-handed approach.
Is it really so terrible that I used the term "minor league" in my e-mail? After all that has been written about you and Dan over the years, is this phrase even close to the harsher assessments that you have already responded to with characteristic gusto? Really? Is it even in the top 10 or 20? I thought you had thicker skin, unless, of couse, you intended to cancel the interview from the very beginning.
Regarding the "minor league" phrase, allow me to explain further. I have just returned from a four-day road trip to Moab Utah. I'm working on a story about a 12-ton pile of uranium tailings that has threatened the Colorado River, the primary water source for 25 million people. To me, THAT is a major league story. I'm also investiigating a shocking allegation about politcal corruption in the local court system, shady land deals involving public officials, and the failures of Nevada's worker compensation program, along wth a few more projects.
These are stories that directly affect the lives of large numbers of people. They are real, documentable issues of immediate concern. While in Moab, I did not have to spend much time to verify the backgrounds of the people I interviewed. I didn't have to devote years to find out whether they actually worked at the positions they claimed. No bicycle messengers showed up to deliver copies of their college degrees. No secret society ordered them to keep quiet.
It was all pretty simple, which is a far cry from the story you are peddling. I don't mind putting hard work into verifying a story if I have a sense that the story is true and is worth the time and effort.
That's NOT the feeling I get concerning the Crain story. So, yes, in comparison, I would have to say that the Crain scenario is minor league when juxtaposed against real issues involving real people whose statements are reasonably verifiable. I meant no disrespect to you or anyone else. That's just the way I see it.
In the same vein, I respectfully submit that you and Deborah are lesser players in the Crain story, not insignificant by any means, but minor actors in the drama. Dan IS the story, not you. Dan is the person who should be interviewed and who should answer questions about his claims. I realize from your missive that this will not happen, but I never expected that it would. He's not going to submit to questioning by someone who is not a sympathetic supporter, not on camera anyway.
As for the notion that he would make himself available for a Congressional inquiry, remind me not to hold my breath. Would I still welcome a chance to ask questions of you and Deborah? Of course. It would make for a better story and would at least offer the opportunity for you to defend the larger scenario. We both know that isn't going to happen because you would never participate in a situation that you did not control. If I'm wrong, prove it to me. Name the place and the time.
Your letter accuses me of characterizing the pending interview as "a trivial bother." I never said anything of the sort. Please DON'T put words into my mouth. Compared to an interview with Dan himself, or compared to the other stories I am working on, I would still say that an interview with you and Deb is a lesser priority, but I certainly DON'T think of it as trivial. I'm sure it would be illuminating on many levels. If you want to reconsider, LET's GO FOR IT.
You mentioned that you felt I was ready to take a more balanced approach. That's exactly right. I really do prefer to have BOTH SIDES OF ANY ISSUE included in my stories. The only way to inject some balance into the story I am preparing on this case is to have some input from persons who know the material well. That means you, or Deb, or Dan.
But, if you somehow interpreted my politeness as a sign that I have suddenly become neutral on the Crain saga, I'm afraid you are mistaken.
My opinion about this is well known to you. That opinion is not carved in stone though, so if there is VERIFIABLE INFORMATION that might change my mind, I am anxious to hear it.
As for your tantalizing list of evidence that you were prepared to unveil during the interview, I am all ears. If you are going to drop the name of the anonymous medical doctor who supposedly supports Dan's tale, I would caution you against it. I know this person, and I know what his opinion REALLY IS. He shared it with me last week, in fact. I don't really want to drag his name into it, but he has authorized me to elaborate concerning his earlier statements, if it comes to that. I DON'T think you will like what he has to say.
If you want to talk about the cancer cure, there's a simple way to get the info out to the world. Let's have the cure. What's the hangup? Millions of people die of cancer every year. If Dan has the cure, shouldn't he share it with humanity? After all, it's been 19 or 20 years since he made this breakthrough discovery. How many more people must die before the secret formula is made public?!
Talk about a major league story. This would be front page news all over the world. So let's have it. Don't deny the cure to cancer patients simply because you are angry with me. I will hold some space at the top of every newscast for the next week if you are truly prepared to unveil this blockbuster news.
Concerning the eternally elusive PhD, you intimate that you and Deb were
prepared to clear this up once and for all during the interview. You were ready to lay out the real proof. Please continue. Either you have the degree or you don't. If you do, where is it? Why not release it, if not to me, then to the rest of the world? Please answer this one question: WHERE is the degree and WHY won't you make it public? Wouldn't it bolster your case? Weren't you going to release it to me during our aborted interview?
If this is the case, as you imply, let's have it. Put it out there for everyone to see and evaluate, especially since you say you were make the proof available to me anyway.
To anyone who is still reading this – I make one point. A few weeks ago, I submitted a detailed analysis of the whole PhD question. I asked Crain supporters to respond if they could. Has there been a single response? Has anyone come up with a single name of someone who can prove they were at SUNY when Dan was there? One professor? One fellow student? Anyone? Has anyone addressed the highly specious circumstances concerning this highly inventive scenario?
The answer is NO.
Prove me wrong Marcia. Show us the long-missing doctorate. Put it on display for all the world to see and rub my nose in it. Wouldn't that be a triumphant moment? Show us the degree and if it withstands scrutiny by the public at large, I will be humiliated, but will dutifully report the facts in my upcoming story.
Make no mistake though. I am proceeding with my plans for a TV report about this matter, whether you choose to participate or not. I appreciate your oft-stated concerns about my teetering career, although I am mystified by some of the snide wisecracks that have been made about all of the trouble I am now in at KLAS.
For those not familiar with this chapter of the drama, it started several weeks ago when I wrote an e-mail letter concerning the circumstances of how Dan met his wife. As you know, Dan was a parole officer and Deborah was a parolee resulting from her guilty plea to drug charges. I characterized her legal troubles as resulting from drug trafficking. I only used the term in a generic sense, but I understand Deb's concern that this is not technically correct, since "trafficking" is a seperate offense.
Allow me to set the record straight, as you have requested.
Deb was NOT charged with trafficking. Records from the Clark County District court show that she and three (3) other people were charged with four (4) counts of importation, transportation, manufacture, and sale of a controlled substance. According to Dodie Crain, the drug was cocaine. She also was charged with three (3) counts of conspiracy to commit conrolled substances offenses.
She plead guilty to two (2) counts and was sentenced to two (2) years behind bars. The sentence was suspended so long as she stayed out of trouble for a two-year probation period, plus she had to undergo drug counseling and pay a small fine. That's how she met Dan. I'm told that this arrangement was supposedly orchestrated by MJ-12 so that Deb could meet Dan and get him under her control. (Wouldn't it have been easier to just meet him in a coffee shop?)
Also, was it necessary to slap the three (3) other co-defendants with a FBI NCIC [National Crime Information Center] criminal rap sheet? I wonder if those three (3) persons who were part of the coke ring realize that it was all an elaborate set up? Hmmm.... Maybe I should ask them.
I have NO interest in causing Deb Burisch any embarrassment. To my knowledge, I have never met her and have never talked to her. As far as I know, she met the conditions of her parole and has stayed clean ever since. I'm aware that she does not have a very high opinion of me, but she certainly isn't alone in that regard.
The only reason her past is even relevent is because of the fanciful tales that have been concocted and widely distributed concerning their marriage, and her alleged employment as a government operative. Now, I see repeated assertions in various forums that Deb has been involved in consultations with my employers about possible legal action. Oh, come on!
This is ridiculous and untrue and you both know it. Deb did place a single call to the TV station. The call was made on a Saturday morning and was picked up by one of our weekend interns who happened to be manning the phone lines. The bewildered intern said Deb threatened to sue me unless I stopped harrassing her. That message was passed along to my news director who asked me on Monday morning what the heck this was about. I explained it, and that was the end of it.
There have been no conversations with my bosses about lawsuits. There have been no fervent negotiations. I have not been admonished whatsoever and certainly have not been instructed to back away from this story. In fact, this very day, I briefed my news managers about the status of my story and it is scheduled to air in November, whether you cooperate with me or not. It's a nice try, but you can do better. If I am wrong, please educate me.
Feel free to report to the world the names of those superiors who have been speaking with you and Deb about my precipitous position at the station. I'm not talking about mere unsolicited e-mails that you may or may not have sent to anyone at KLAS. I'm asking for the names of those persons who have been huddled in these high level discussions with you, Deb, or your attorneys. I look forward to any kind of verification you might offer.
(I also got quite a kick out of the phone call and letter sent by your associate DonDep to my colleague and friend Jon Ralston, asking Ralston to make room on his program for a discussion of the Crain case, and warning him that I would likely try to sabotage any fair and balanced coverage of this vital story. Believe me, I don't need to torpedo this idea with Jon. He's a very smart guy and quickly surmised that this is not worthy of his time. The problem for you is that he prefers to cover actual news events and issues of importance to the community.)
As mentioned previously, I am deeply moved by your continued concern about my career and by your predictions that my credibility is hopelessly tarnished and that my professional demise is just around the corner. Although you may not believe it, I have a pretty good reputation, both in the community and with my journalism colleagues. I just won my 7th and 8th Emmy awards and a national honor as well, and things seem to be clicking along pretty well.
Your oft-stated prediction that I am about to crash and burn is about as likely as you offering conclusive proof that the Crain story is legitimate. My guess is that both of these things will happen, followed by the freezing over of hell, sightings of pigs flying in formation, and a month of Sundays. But again, thanks for thinking of me.
Come on Crain supporters, answer the questions that were raised weeks ago. Ask Marcia and Deb to produce the doctorate. They've got it, so LET's SEE IT. If not, why not? Why is the final proof and vindication always just around the corner? It's as if someone enjoys stretching it out, like a prime time soap opera that strings people along.
The people who have stood by Dan deserve no less than verifiable proof so they can know their faith in this matter was justified. And if Dan really has been through such terrible turmoil and personal danger, he seemingly deserves to be vindicated as well. So where is it? I can't wait to hear this one.
While you are at it, please pass along the name of the bicycle messenger service that dropped off the doctorate in the park. I took a quick look at the phone book and couldn't find a single bicycle messenger service in the Las Vegas area. (Of course, maybe this was an MJ-12, double-secret probation bicycle service that specializes in diploma dropoffs and only delivers to public parks, which would explain why it doesn't need a phone listing.)
Answer the questions. Provide the PROOF. If you want to do so on camera, I'm READY when YOU are.
GEORGE KNAPP
KLAS-TV"
The Riskers site, which supposedly has no connection to Dan Burisch or Marci Mc Dowell / B.J. Wolf has been mirrored by V and is in the process of finiihing off the relinking. For a sneak preview go to Riskers
13/10/05: All posts by Dan Burisch from the Stargate forum Volume 2 have been preserved in a thread here. The posts were deleted by Marci McDowell after a 'staged '(in my opinion) discussion between an Israeli insider and Dan Burisch, where some bible codes were released pointing to Dan Burisch as some kind of Messiah who would save the world. I feel that the posts were deleted by Marci (or Dan) to increase the effect of the drama surrounding this discussion. If you look at the posts that have been replicated on this new thread you will see that far from being a saviour of man. Dan Burisch is fond of sublty digging at those that don't agree with him and is merrily using auto suggestion techniques to encourage his followers to label the membership here with some interesting terms. All good mind numbing fun and a far cry from what the saga is supposed to be about, lol.:)
Dan also enjoys photoshopping pictures of himself, Deb and Marci and telling 'Cheesy' stories. This is supposed to be someone who is famously 'humble', has no free time for playing around due to a criticly important 'debrief' and is an alleged PhD qulified microbiologist who is also a memeber of MJ-12!
Have a look for yourselves: Dan Burisch posts at stargate
I'm slowly working on bio's for the main characters, to replace the content for the Burisch section.The final goal being, to leave an intro to the game player's for those who are happy to look at the not so holy images that are part of this story rather than the rosy-tinted impression given off at the other sites. Once complete I'm walking, as this saga is nothing but a hoax mixed in with some strange misinfo courtesy of some ex aviary members and a possible blackops plant which.according to unsubstantiated rumour is Marci McDowell herself, the very person who has been trying to get Dan Burisch into the public eye for so long. It's like watching an repisode of soap trying to keep up with this drama, lol.
Bill Hamilton had terminated his involvement in the Burisch case (from 22/9/05, but has returned again)
Robert Collins pulls his web pages on Dan Burisch. Mirror are being replicated at V's site:
Bill Hamiltons Aquarius page also pulled:
Saga of S4 scientists and Dan Burisch aquarius link
Update About Microbiologist Dan Burisch, Ph.D.by Linda Moulton Howe
6/10/05:
EDITOR's NOTE (Bill Hamilton):
As some of you have heard through the grapevine, George Knapp of KLAS-TV
is doing a major investigative piece on the entire Dan Burisch/Crain
affair set for mid-November 2005. If you have ANY information –
either in support or disfavor of Mr Burisch – you're urged to contact
Mr Knapp privately with your FACTS and EVIDENCE at:
GKnapp@klastv.com
If his presentation is NOT to your liking and you had information which may have changed that outcome, then you'll have no one to blame but yourself for having withheld it, so SPEAK UP and be HEARD!
Permission is hereby GRANTED to forward and POST this e-mail to all Dan Burisch/Crain-related Web sites, forums, online discussion groups, newsgroups, postings, etc., in the furtherance of soliciting more information on this highly controversial and polarizing figure. ----------------------------------------
Part 1a: PROBING QUESTIONS ASKED BY INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST GEORGE KNAPP OF BURISCH/CRAIN's PhD
Part 1b: TWO (2) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE UK TACKLE AND COMMENT ON Dr DAN BURISCH's BIOLOGY/SCIENCE APPLICATIONS,... A MUST READ!
[ See Attachment] ------------------------------------------
Ex-AFOSI Special Agent RICK DOTY:
"The only CORRECT INFORMATION contained in the e-mail is [about] Burisch. The guy [Dan Burisch] is a HOAX."
From: GEORGE KNAPP, Investigative Journalist, KLAS-TV, Las Vegas, NV
Subject: THE LONG LOST PhD OF Dr DAN BURISCH/CRAIN,... DOES HE OR DOES HE NOT HAVE ONE?!
FLASH: General Comments Regarding the Purported Discovery of Dan Crain's Doctorate:
Did Dan Crain/Burisch earn a PhD from SUNY Stonybrook, as he and his supporters claim?
The question cuts to the core of Crain's story.
Crain is the person who made this claim in the first place, so the burden of proof should be on HIM to prove that it is true, especially in light of all the verifiable evidence that casts considerable doubt on this account. And if it can be shown that he made up thi part of his resume, it casts doubt on all the rest of this claims.
Crain originally claimed that he earned his PhD from the John Quincy Adams Institute. I tried to verify this claim but quickly discovered that the J.Q.A Institute does NOT EXIST. Crain and his supporters then explained that they used this false claim in order to throw me and others off the track, an admitted disinformation ploy on their part. They subsequently alleged that Crain earned his doctorate in Microbiology and Genetics at the State University of New York at Stonybrook [SUNY].
The degree was granted in 1989, 1990 or "around 1990," depending on which version of the story was being promoted at any given moment. It's just me, but if I had earned such a prestigious degree, I'm reasonably certain that I would remember the exact year in which it was bestowed. It's just a personal observation, not a major issue.
It didn't take long to discover problems with the Stonybrook story. The most obvious issue was the fact that the school denied having any records of a Danny Crain or Burisch ever attending the university and there is no record of him earning a doctorate.
Crain supporters have assailed me for failing to follow up on the story back before the Cone of Silence was dropped and his records were erased. This is simply UNtrue. I contacted the school by phone in 1994, whether Crain's crew wants to believe it or not. The school already denied ever having Crain/Burisch as a student.
[As an aside, the SUNY Web site shows that in 1989, a total of five (5) doctorates were awarded in genetics. ONLY FIVE. It's not like there were hundreds of students and that Dan's name was lost in the crowd. Surely, someone should remember him in a graduating class of that size, but so far, no student or professor has come forward to confirm his story.]
I also was successful in obtaining documents that proved Dan Crain lived and worked in Las Vegas during the time when he was supposedly earning a degree in New York. He worked from Feb. 1988 until April 1990 as a parole officer, employed by the state of Nevada. I have copies of his employment records, employee evaluation forms, and other paperwork that collectively demonstrate this was a real and full-time job.
I've also interviewed co-workers who confirm his daily presence in Las Vegas during that time period. It was a real job, not a cover job, although this is also the time frame in which he claims to have worked for the Navy in a secret underground lab near Area 51, but still found enough spare time to earn a PhD 3,000 miles away. By any standards, this would be an astonishing accomplishment in time management, if nothing else.
Crain and his supporters then explained that he earned the doctorate on weekends and that the U.S. Navy arranged for weekly cross-country flights so he could attend classes back east. By any standard, this alleged arrangement is tough to swallow.
I would not be surprised if at least some educated people who are reading this might take offense at this claim, considering how difficult it really is to earn an actual doctorate in any discipline, let alone a dual degree in the challenging fields of microbiology AND genetics.
Dan Crain did it on the weekends? He worked a 40-hour week as a parole officer, worked a second job in the lab at S-4, made weekly red-eye flights across the entire country, and still managed to do enough work on his weekends to earn a dual doctorate?! Wow!
Those professors who scheduled regular classes on the weekends to accomodate Crain must be incredibly dedicated, because after devoting six (6) years of my own life to college and grad school, and after teaching at four (4) universities myself, I can't recall a single professor who ever scheduled regular classes on Saturdays and Sundays. A special seminar, maybe, but EVER weekend? Does anyone else know of a professor with THIS much zeal?!
The point I am trying to make – with as little sarcasm as possible – is that this scenario seemingly flies in the face of the commonly accepted grad school experience. It is compounded by the fact that not a single witness from Stonybrook has come forward to verify Crain's presence on the campus at any time. No student, no lab partner, no teaching assistant, no professor, no one, nor has Crain given the name of anyone who might remember him.
If he could manage this seemingly simple matter, it would provide at least a shred of support for his story. No, it would be more than a shred – it would be significant. Crain's supporters presumably want his claims to be taken seriously. The BURDEN OF PROOF is on THEM. WHERE is the supporting evidence or testimony? I raise these questions without rancor or hostility and hope that even the most fervent defenders of Danny can acknowledge that these are reasonable points to raise.
If we all share a desire for a reasonable and civil discussion of the case, this is a good place to start. What, if any, proof does anyone have to bolster Dan's claim about his education? Give us the name of one person who remembers Dan from Stonybrook and who is willing to verify the claim. (A previous statement from Dan's former business partner who says he phoned the school and was told Dan had been there is not very convincing because there is no way to verify it.)
I seem to recall the business associate provided a sworn affadavit, and while this sounds official and weighty, it doesn't amount to much. Making a statement to a notary public in a matter that isn't under consideration by any court or legal authority means next to nothing. There is no risk to anyone who might be untruthful if the affadavit isn't part of an official proceeding. What value does it have? Surely, it is not comparable to a witness taking an oath in a courtroom, where perjury would be a real concern.
But more importantly, a witness who says he talked to an unnamed school official in a phone conversation is not the same as a witness who really was at Stonybrook, and can prove it. That's the kind of witness needed here, and I hope someone can address this head on.
In Danny's defense, there are two (2) people who claim to have supporting information.
– One is Ron Garner, a UFO researcher who has a business arrangement with Crain, Crain's mother, and other figures in this story. Garner is working on video documentaries about Crain's story, hopes to sell movie rights as well, and is acting as a literary agent for Crain's mom Dodie, who wrote a book about her now-famous son and hopes to land a publishing deal.
I met with Garner last year and found him to be an affable and open-minded researcher who wants to pursue the story in an honest fashion. I realise that others may have a different opinion of Garner, but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt for the time being. Garner told me in 2004 that he has the names of three professors at Stonybrook who oversaw Dan's doctoral work.
He said the three came to Las Vegas to administer Crain's oral exam for the degree. They stayed at the Hilton, he says. Garner said then that he intended to make the names public. We're still waiting for that to happen. If he can make good on the promise, it would be a major development, especially if the professors are willing to confirm the story. If the names are released, but the professors deny the story, then we will be back at square one.
– The other person who backs up Crain's claimed PhD is his mom, Dodie Crain. Mrs. Crain has not spoken to her son in 12 years. Danny cut off contact with his parents not long after he married Deborah Burisch. The parents believe that Danny's memory has been erased and that a clone of Danny has been created by the secret government. They believe that Deb Burisch is a government operative, that she is evil and manipulative, and that she controls everything that Dan does.
Dodie Crain is the source of Ron Garner's story about the three professors who visited Las Vegas. Dodie says she made the room reservations for them at the Hilton. She also says she believed Danny when he told her the government had arranged for him to travel out of state to earn his doctorate.
And she is a key witness concerning Danny's long lost doctorate. In an interview last year, Dodie said she opened the mail on the day the degree arrived. She proudly put in in a frame and hung it on a wall in the Crain's home, where it remained until Deb Burisch took it, supposedly to be copied, but never returned it.
Even though Mrs Crain has written a book about her son's claims and has a financial motive for supporting the story (after all, which version would likely sell more copies – one that supported this sensational story, or one that gutted it?), I give her the benefit of the doubt concerning the degree. It's only an impression, but it felt to me like she was being truthful.
For the sake of discussion, let's accept her at her word. We have no way of knowing whether the paper that hung on her wall was a legitimate degree from SUNY or not. Dodie Crain has NO expertise in verifying the authenticity of documents. She has no forensic training of any kind. Her son confirmed that the degree was real, and that was good enough for her.
It looked like a genuine article to her, but since there is no way for anyone else to examine the document, and since the school says no such degree was ever issued, Dodie's account is interesting, but far short of amounting to evidence. Again, the burden of proof is on the people who are making this claim in the first place. It is entirely possible that Dodie did possess something that looked like a genuine degree, but how difficult would it be for someone to create a forgery?
Throughout this long saga, documents, letters, and reports of highly dubious value have surfaced, always from anonymous sources and always of questionable origin. I personally have received dozens of anonymous missives about this case, all of them unsolicited, all of them unverifiable. Several of these were imprinted with amateurish, almost laughable recreations of military-like insignia. They were simply ridiculous.
Some were patched together as if they had been fished out of a trash can in a blatant but weak attempt to add an aura of mystery to the paperwork. Mysterious memos and official-sounding emails are an almost daily part of the scenario. I don't who for sure who is cranking out the bogus paperwork, but there is no question that forged documentation has been a major – and regular – part of the unfolding drama. I think it is reasonable for us to question the legitimacy of the original degree that hung on Dodie's wall.
If the degree itself – or even a copy – could be made available for inspection, we might resolve some of the questions. Without the degree, we have nothing. If Crain supporters want to prove their case, as I'm sure they do, then produce the evidence. It's not an unreasonable request.
Now we come to the latest developments – photos of Deb Burisch standing in a local park, examining a purported copy of the SUNY degree which was mailed from MJ12 offices in London, then delivered to Deb by bicycle messenger in the park. (We don't have a lot of bicycle messenger services here in Las Vegas,if any, so this offers an opportunity for further investigation on this end.)
Conveniently, an unknown photographer was nearby and preserved the moment, and the snapshots were quickly made available on line for all the world to see. Sadly, we have been allowed only a brief and blurry glimpse of the purported degree, but more than enough to convince Crain supporters that the moment of reckoning and confirmation is finally here.
OK, if a copy of the degree exists, let's see it. Crain and crew want their story to be believed, so why not make it available in one form or another to allow at least a cursory examination? If there are book deals and movie deals hinging on Dan's credibility, why not kick them into high gear by bolstering his credibility? While we're at it, how about showing us the envelope and the postage, or a return receipt from the bicycle messenger or anything else?
Is this going to be another in a long line of tantalizing teases in which the irrefutable proof or the unimpeachable witness is just around the corner? Is there some reason for dragging this thing out for as long as possible? In light of all that Danny has supposedly been through, doesn't he deserve the vindication?
Somehow, I doubt we are going to see this degree anytime soon. I hope to be proven wrong. Lest we forget, Deb Burisch is the person who absconded with the original degree. She never returned it and won't talk about it, presumably under orders from her bosses at MJ-12. If Dan really does want to get his degree back, don't you think he might have mentioned this to his wife, maybe over morning coffee? "Say, honey, would you mind giving me my degree back?"
If this happened in your house, wouldn't you raise the subject after so many years, especially if your whole life was riding on the outcome? This scenario simply does not ring true at its most basic level, but that's just an opinion.
We all remember seeing the photo taken near Sunrise Mountain. Dan and Deb were both wearing mlitary uniforms. Deb was driving the car, with Dan in the back seat. Deb exited the car, opened Dan's door, then saluted him in what sure seems like a ceremony staged for the benefit of hidden photographers, photographers who are close friends of the Burisch's.
If Deb was the driver, and she opened Dan's door and then saluted him, it would appear that Dan is the ranking officer in this unknown branch of the armed services. If he outranks her, couldn't he give an official order to produce the doctorate or face a week of KP duty? Couldn't he seek the assistance of those higher-ups who are supportive of his work? Surely someone could send out another bicycle messenger with an order to cough up the PhD?
To the best of my knowledge, neither of them has ever actually served in the military in the first place, so maybe it's a moot point.
Now, another degree has surfaced. A copy is available on line. Not surprisingly, this claimed doctorate is completely unverifiable and thus completely worthless as proof of anything. It's a doctorate in biological systems, issued by a European university. Which European university, you ask? We have no idea.
That information is blacked out. It can't be verified, but it also can't be disproven, like most of the other claims made by Crain. The story is that Majestic – presumably the same folks who suppressed the original degree from SUNY – arranged for Dan to earn this doctorate in a real fast program. If Majestic wanted him to have a degree, why didn't they simply release the one he already had? Silly question, I suppose.
The reason Dan needs this degree is that it allows him to access certain libraries and research facilities so he can continue his work on such projects as minimizing the toxic contamination of water following Hurricane Katrina. (I did NOT make this up.)
So, a password or code name or a run of the mill government ID won't get someone into these libraries. The libraries want to see a copy of your PhD, even though the copy doesn't indicate the name of the school that issued the degree. A critic might argue that this looks like an attempt to manufacture a measure of credibility.
We can't say for sure because, as usual in the Crain saga, there is no way to verify or disprove, which is exactly how things would be if the story was manufactured out of thin air. Why would Crain supporters make this degree public if it really is a turn-key document allowing access to classified places? Why?
I have my own idea, but look forward to hearing alternative explanations. Crain supporters – you have to admit this is really weak. Do you have any mutually-verifiable way to back this up? If so, please respond.
One final thought about the disappearing doctorate. WHY would Danny need a doctorate in the first place? WHY would the secret government go to so much trouble, flying him across the country and then to Europe, just to get a PhD? Is there an employee handbook that specifies that only those with doctorates are qualified to interact with aliens?
At the time he supposedly went to work on the SUNY degree, Dan was already inside the program. He was the only guy who could relate to the J-Rod. He was indispensable, no? So why would they require a PhD? Maybe it was something Danny wanted for himself. I can understand that, but we've already been told that he already knew the material to qualify for a PhD, which is how he finished his work so easily, so he wasn't doing it for the learning experience.
And really, if any of us had a choice between spending our time on classes and tests and lectures, or devoting our energies to ongoing, face-to-face encounters with an all-wise alien, how tough would the choice be?
I offer these questions and observations in hopes of generating an open and robust exchange with those who support the Crain story. These are extraordinary claims. If they are true, they're both exciting and disturbing. We'd all like to know what to make of them. The various stories about the doctorate are central to the larger picture.
I believe these questions are fair, reasonable, and relevent and hope that you can forgive my occasional lapses into sarcasm and that you will share your perspective on these issues. Feel free to return the sarcasm if you are so inclined, but while you're at it, please tell us all what verifiable proof exists regarding all of the above. What forms of evidence convinced all of you that there is merit to the Crain story?
I look forward to a healthy give and take. ---------------------------------------- Part 1b [ See Attachment ]
22/9/05 From Bill Hamiltons forum:I have just asked Don Dep to take over Administration of this forum.
As of tonight I am terminating my involvement with the Dan Burisch case.
I wish all of you much luck in your future efforts and wish Dan all the best.
Thank you all for your participation.
Bill
and later:
From an anonymous poster:Let's see now, two days after Dr. Burisch's PHD was found he terminates his involvement?
Only one answer: $
Did the faucet get turned off? or was it something someone said?
What goes around comes around. When one screws someone else sometimes they get screwed back.
Bill Hamilton: Yes, you hit the nail on the head: $$
Last night the suspected rest of the puzzle fell into place. Marci and Dan have now engaged Ron Garner (the guy who fouled up this investigation in 2003-4) in a contract for monies to make, in Ron's words, a "major motion picture" about Dan's story, something Ron has been strainging at the bit to do, to glom on to this story after having failed to do the same previously with known fraud Jonathan Reed. Many people shunned Ron because of his fanatical promotion of Jonathan Reed and now he wants to make up for it.
Ron explained to me how he wanted me to participate in this venture and I told him that I wanted nothing to do with it. I will not participate in the degrading of this case into a commercial product which also includes a book deal for Debbie. With this and Ron's connection to it, all credence for this case is lost. The critics who predicted that this was Marci's motivve in the first place will feel vindicated and the Disclosure process, started in other quarters, will roll on without them. For this Marci managed to leave Alan, Sandy, and Winston very upset and in effect, those who had befriended Dan are now asked to take a hike. I will not be a party to this.
When I told Ron that Marci did not tell me the truth about how she got involved with Dan in the first place and he said "I know she didn't", I knew that truth takes a back seat with Mr. Garner and the $30,000 he said he spent on going to Canada to help Don Depeller are monies he wants to recover with $ signs in his eyes on the movie venture. He forgets that Bob Lazar was also participating on a movie venture with New Line which, of course, never materialized and is doubtful that this one will too.
In addition Ron showed me a paper signed by Dan and Marci in which they conferred the rights to the 2003 interview to Ron and Ron asked me not to show it at the meeting and I did not. I was only showing 30 minutes of Dan to have people get a feel for his honesty, but I told him that I had so much other material on time travel that the video would make the meeting run late. I will no longer be selling this video for the pittance I was selling it for as the book and DVD sales are just an aid to cover research and travel expenses and fall short of even doing that.
That is pretty much the story from my end. If you want to contact me, please write to my skywatcher email address.
I will turn over the administration of this forum to Uncle John until he can find someone else if he decides to.
I enjoyed meeting you last night Waterspider.
Best wishes to you all and to Dan and Don...
skywatcher
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To come: More information about Don Deppeller's links with Ron Garner and Ron Garner's 'links' with the mastermind behind the Heaven's Gate cult
21/9/05
Richard Doty continues to withdraw his support from the Dan Burisch saga and dondep reacts
SKYWATCHER (Bill Hamilton)
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:49 pm Post subject: Rick Doty now says...
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
Rick Doty posting 9/5/2005
(Victor's remarks on "high crimes" -- I just posted that
Victor is the fraud...
For the high crimes of Lazar & Burisch as fakes see,
http://www.astrosciences.info/Aquarius.htm
For Tom Mack see,
http://www.ufoconspiracy.com/reports/tom_mack_groomlake.htm
RICK DOTY wrote:
Don't get me too involved in this thing. I was not cleared at all levels. I don't know what Lazar and Burisch or Crain knew. So don't connect me with all this specific information. I agree with Gene on some points, no one knows it all. I certainly don't and never said I did. I see Gene mentioned site 23. Never heard that from anyone before outside of the group. I guess he might want to explain that. Or maybe that is just a feeler he sent out to see if anyone knows what site 23 is. I knew Tom Mack and he was a great guy. I worked with Tom on a number of projects. Tom knew a lot but I don't think he knew it all! Tom died too soon for his time. I wish he was still around to join in on these exchanges. Kit was involved in a number of specific operations. But I'll let him speak for himself. R. Doty.
Shredded GWB rancher Memo TS/MAJIC
Description: Unauthenticated scan of a shredded memo, purported to be written by GW Bush, re: Burisch and Severs. Professor Nicholas Severs
21/9/05 From Rick Doty to Robert Collins
RICK DOTY wrote:
Bob: This looks like a fake. First of all MAJIC is no longer being used. It is something else. Secondly, this isn't any memo I've ever seen. Thirdly, it appears to be a real fake, not a hoax but just a fake. Lastly, if I could smell it, I'm sure it would even smell like a fake.
Rick
Response from Don Deppeller AKA dondep:
While it's on my mind, Bill, I happen to know the name and rank of the officer in the United States military who has provided the famous Rancher Memo, and when the time comes and the g-damned illegitimate US Congress has been dragged kicking and screaming into holding the right hearings and provides him [Dr Dan Burisch] with immunity, I'll personally make sure he's awarded the nation's highest honors for his service to humanity. Mr. Doty can bite my fat ass if his self-righteousness rears its ugly head again and you can tell him so.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Click on each image to see larger version of the 'shredded memo' So who is telling the truth:)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Archives of the original forum discussions at Godlike productions A new page with more in depth descriptions concerning these archives will follow shortly.
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 1 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 2 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 3 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 4 |
| GLP forum posts Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 5 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 6 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 7 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 8 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 9 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 10 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 11 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 12 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 13 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 14 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 15 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 16 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 17 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 18 |
| GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 19 | GLP forum thread Dr. Dan Burisch Volume 20 |
18 page document
Description: The heading on the document cites Sector 4, Pavilion 3, Residential Bay 1, Unit 2. Could this be similar to an address inside Area-51/Sector 4/ one ued for their residential accomodations? The document is an 18 page draft, identified as R#02-02 with extensive notations by Dr. Burisch in the margins. I know Dr. Burisch's handwriting to see it, and am confident that these are indeed in his handwriting. It was accompanied by a floppy with four small photo images showing Dr. Burisch reading from some papers that could be the document. I am not sure, of course, because the photos are not too clear. I will try to enhance them so I can see what is on the papers in his hands, but I posted them in the form I got them in. I have scanned each page of the document and will post them for review and consideration as rapidly as I can. The contents in several sections are particularly troubling and thought provoking. (BJ Wolf)
 |
 |
Lotus Protocol Overview
Description: In the early part of 2001, information was leaked concerning Dr. Dan Burisch and his development of a new protocol for defining a "Genesis" mechanism, which could have profound effects upon our future human evolution. The protocol was broken into six parts - seven if you consider 4a and 4b independently. Dr. Burisch gave a strong warning about the potential dangers should this protocol be converted into an actual experimental program. Dr. Burisch?s Warning: Due to the potential for destruction of a fully functional and conjoined L, it is my suggestion that any direct evaluation be conductedin biocontainment levels normally associated with potentially hazardous "foreign" materials (AKA: another name for a "Native American baby").The vitality of the L should not be underestimated given its ability to conduct graded continuouscreation/proliferative cytogenesis and the common instances of ancient DNA (aDNA) revitalization.
The 'Last' Letter from Dr. Dan B.C. Burisch
Description: The Last Letter from Dr. Dan B.C. Burisch This message was a response by Dan to another member of the ?Projects? and contains plain language about his work, his thoughts, his contact with J-ROD, the extraordinary Doctrine of the Convergent Timeline Paradox, and his beliefs as a person and a scientist. This is recorded for posterity for it will be those who inherit the future who will discover the truth or falsity of these statements. The first information will be Dan?s ?non-technical? statement about his work.
 |
 |
This 2nd draft of a document was written in 1994 by Dr. Dan Crain at Papoose Mountain, R-4800, Site 4 in Nevada. It has no security markings. The original had the logo of the U.S. Naval Space Command on the first page.The microbiological terms in this paper have been found to be consistent with standard use with the proviso that it refers to the alleged tissue sampling of an extraterrestrial biological entity with a different physiology and cell structure. This entity was known as J-ROD (and other nicknames), a class of Grey from Gliese 876C*, a staging area for this entity who originated in the Zeta Reticuli binary star system. This entity was housed in an environmental clean sphere in an underground biological laboratory at S-4.
Gliese 876C: The planet in this system is the only one I have been given information about. It is not what we would consider habitable, however it is the location that they selected for their remote staging base, the one that they use in a cooperative effort to study and interact with us. It was described to me as being below the cloudy surface layer, as this planet appears to have a great deal of gas on the surface. The rationale behind this is that both Zeta Reticuli and Sirius/Orion were too far to keep going back to. They needed to conserve energy and time so they established a cooperative base. When they need to return home, they use the Gliese876C as a jump gate back to their respective systems. Dan indicates that the light from these jumps shows up as variability around the star but due to the distances involved (15.3 light years from here to Gliese) that variability would not be visible here at the same time as the jumps took place. There would be a gap time we would have to consider.Astronomical info on Gliese 876C: http://www.extrasolar.net/star.asp?starid=2 More on Zeta Reticuli: http://www.ufoconspiracy.com/reports/zetareticuli_star_sys.htm
 |
 |
|
 |
Burisch Document and credentials
Comments from the mirrors old Eagles site
Eagles Unchained: "Top Secret, Majestic, Star Flower" Secrets Revealed: Area-51 Scientist is held against his will & forced to work on "Dark Project". Lotus/Star Flower communications, documents, photos and videotapes tell his amazing story.
Eagles Unchained Volume 1 | Eagles Unchained Volume 2 | Eagles Unchained Volume 3 |
Eagles Unchained Volume 4 | Eagles Unchained Volume 5 | Eagles Unchained Volume 6
Each volume has been returned to html format to allow viewing online. To download the original ebooks please go to the mirror of the original eaglesdisobey.com. When I originally found the ebooks on the wayback machine they were corrupted and each archive had to be repaired. From the look of Volume 1 page 15 has gone 'poof' permanently. Volume 1 also contains a text version of the Lotus protocol and many emails from alleged 'blackops' insiders. Again please make your own decision as to the authenticity of all these documents. Before accepting this man as who he claims to be, it is my opinion that every researcher should take a copy of the lotus protocol, the Q94 doc at the very least to a qualified microbiologist as this is much debate regarding the science contained in these documents which are apparently phrased in such a way to confuse the average reader as well as the average science student. Accepting this man on his ongoing alleged life drama and online personality and that of his 'handlers' is in my opinion somewhat naive.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Links we like
links we like:
UFOwatchdog's dirtbag of the month
The Burisch Andrews Riskers Discovery to show the denied link between Riskers and Burisch
Glass tubes on Mars Burisch and Riskers research
A mirror of the old Riskers site
A backup of the old version of Bill Hamiltons Burisch page before he edited it for 'security' reasons see what is supposedly too sensitive for national security
Archive of all the unedited Dan Burisch forum threads