Behind-the-scenes connections and behaviors of which you probably were unaware


Hi.  My name is Dave.  And I have a little story to tell about the behaviors of The Colorado College.

I am an alumnus of CC who majored in physics.  I transferred after having dropped out of the engineering college of an Ivy League university years earlier.  While CC lacked some of the sense of tradition I felt at the ivy-covered school back East, CC more than made up for it with its setting and sense of intimacy and personal attention and, perhaps most of all for a non-great time manager such as myself, The Block Plan.  Being encouraged to totally immerse myself in one subject at a time was fantastic.  That the Tigers also played good hockey (and CC had a skating rink) made it perfect.  I graduated in 1980.

I learned physics more than sufficiently well to have questioned the gravity-defying official government explanation for 9/11, and to finally have seen through it and recognized it for The Big Lie that it most certainly is.  My great CC liberal arts education had given me the ability to put on different intellectual hats; that enabled me to eventually connect the dots not only on 9/11 but also, based upon their reactions to 9/11, some of our most trusted and respected institutions.  But you need not agree with me on that -- you need only observe Colorado College's highly anti-collegial response to information -- in order to begin to see that something is rotten within Colorado College.

As I grew weary waiting for the news media to pick up on the 9/11 story -- the local newspaper in Colorado Springs does not even have a science editor -- I decided that Colorado College might be the perfect institution to unravel the onion-like layers of The Big Lie, including physics, psychology, sociology, political 'science' and other departments.  This, it seemed, would truly fulfill the promise of CC's Vision 2010 initiative, and make CC a crown jewel among U.S. institutions of intellect and higher learning.

Some of the CC professors have been quite collegial in privately discussing what I have learned through my investigation into and dissection of 9/11.  Some, including my old physics professor, have told me that I am correct in my analysis of 9/11 lie-busting evidence.  A highly respected political science professor privately acknowledged the correctness of my inescapable conclusion regarding the phony, staged-opposition nature of the duopolistic U.S. political system.  One department head agreed to allow me to present my findings to her sociology class, before abruptly canceling without explanation (just an "I know what you must think of me now").

Former (2002-2011) Colorado College President Dick Celeste, on the other hand, was rigid in his opposition to my views, and said that openly discussing and unraveling 9/11 was contrary to his work with The Century Foundation.  That made it seem as if Dick Celeste's stated goals for CC were not truly important to him, and that the conversion (reduction!) of "the land of the free and the home of the brave" into "the homeland" was on the agenda of some behind-the-scenes foundations and think-tanks, and that that's where Mr. Celeste's loyalty truly lied.

Not long after that remarkable conversation, on November 5, 2004, a CSPD officer came to my door and presented me with a list of 11 individuals at CC with whom it was requested that I was to have no contact.  At the top of the list was Dick Celeste and his secretary (who takes his calls) and chief-of-staff (who'd told me that I could contact her, instead).  The presence of some of the other names on the list suggested, based upon my limited contact with them, that they'd honestly/innocently followed up in their official capacity with CC regarding the possibility that CC had suppressed some knowledge, and that CC had subsequently become annoyed at me for having put such thoughts into their heads, and the do-not-contact request had been made without the knowledge or consent of at least one of those on the list.

Lies of omission are the deadliest...

Some time after that I noticed that I hadn't received any mailings from CC in quite a while.  I called the alumni office and was told that the database had been migrated to a new computer system and that some records had been lost.  I was told that mine would be manually added back into the database.  Some time after that, I realized that I still had not received any mailings from CC.  I called again, and was once again told that it would be taken care of.  Once again, it wasn't.  (So much for the old 'joke' about a faked obit submission being the only thing that can get your alma mater to stop mailing you...)

In the years that followed, I kept up occasional contact with various CC professors (ones not on the list, of course).  Occasionally I'd walk by the campus and sometimes strike up conversations with students, most of whom were incredulous.  Periodically I called the alumni office and inquired about the state of their mailing list.

At the end of August, 2008, I called once again and somehow reached Jody Hinz in the Communications office.  We had a nice chat.  She was very courteous, and apologetic about the mailing list situation, and helpful; in early September she sent me some back issues of The Bulletin she had in her office.  Enclosed was her business card, and a handwritten note which read, "I will check again later this week to make sure your name is back on the mailing list for future Bulletins."

On October 10, 2008, I called her number to see if she'd had success.  She did not say, but put me on hold to speak with "someone in advancement".  After about 5 minutes on hold, just as I was about to hang up, a "Mrs. Smith" came on the line and abruptly and rudely told me that she did not want to speak with me.  So I did not speak with her; I hung up.

Just before 9 p.m. that evening, a CSPD officer (with another one lurking around the corner of my house) came to my door and asked me if I'd called the college that afternoon.  When I told him what happened, he handed me 2 papers from CC stapled together.  The first one was from Ronald W. Smith, the Director of Campus Security.  It's a "trespass warning" that says that I am on private property and that CC limits the use of its buildings and grounds to currently enrolled students, employees, and invited guests, and that I have unlawfully entered or remained in or upon the premises of CC, and that if I return to the buildings or grounds of CC, I will be charged with trespassing and prosecuted to the fullest extent possible.

The second was a letter signed by Ronald.  It went further.  Much further.  It said:

    "It has come to our attention that you have been engaging in conduct that is detrimental to The Colorado College.

    "Because of your conduct and for the safety and welfare of the campus community, we are hereby asking that you do not return to The Colorado College campus.  Also, you are not aloud [sic] to come within one hundred feet of any Colorado College owned property.  I am also informing you not to contact (via phone, e-mail, etc) any one associated with Colorado College.  You will receive only this warning; if you are seen on campus or contact any one on campus, the College will file a legal complaint with the Colorado Springs Police Department."

Stunning.  Perhaps CC would like to buy some kind of legal separation by refunding my tuition?  If Colorado College can really mandate all that, then perhaps my grave concerns over the health (existence?) of the U.S. Constitution have been deficient.

I don't know who's the slower learner, me or CC, but trying to stifle knowledge by telling me to voluntarily shelter members of the CC community from the thoughts and ideas CC has deemed "forbidden" is outrageous and unacceptable on many levels.  The publication of this web site (I'd registered the domain years ago but always hoped that it would not be needed; that this could be handled within the CC community) is my response to CC's attempt to stifle the flow of ideas and information -- the hallmark of any democracy.  The stifling of such knowledge is not only anti-American, but it is contrary to letter and spirit of CC's own stated core values!

Thus it is CC's anti-democratic (as well as intellectually dishonest and hypocritical) behaviors, not mine, which betray CC's dirty, not-so-little secrets regarding its role(s) in our messed-up world.

I do not want to see any harm come to CC.  I wish for it to live up to its promise, and the vast intellectual potential and promise of all the members of the CC community.  Learning the not-so-pretty truths about CC can enable the CC community to reach its full potential by shunning CC's dark side.  The only way the shedding of CC's dark side could harm CC is if that is its true and primary (but hidden) purpose.

The Colorado College is an institution.  As such, it does not have a conscience.  It is always an abstraction to think of any group as an "it".  Sociologists and psychologists can explain better than I can how group dynamics function, and can be made to malfunction in terms of any kind of collective conscience.  As a physicist, I just ascribe such right/wrong behavioral aberrance to "social gravity", including the desire to be a part of something larger than one's self, and to not wanting to blow a cushy prestigious paid position.

But that only explains a pattern of complicit silence, of going along with the suppression of knowledge.  It cannot explain the presence and maintenance and persistence of an atmosphere of hidden this-changes-everything truths and suppressed important information at an institution supposedly founded upon the quest for knowledge; one which charges tuition for professors to profess knowledge.

I attended the old ivy-covered university back East during the Viet Nam war (it, too, you may recall, was entered into by the USA under false pretenses).  Back then, students, facing a military draft, protested such injustices.  We shut down the campus in protest.  Among our demands was that the University financially divest itself of its military-industrial complex holdings -- we were part of the community and we saw that our school was in bed with those who fueled and fed off of war, death, and destruction.  There have been some changes since then: The military-industrial complex has grown to be the military-industrial-intelligence-media complex.  One thing that has not changed is that virtually all institutions of higher learning remain sympathetic to it.

I've read that David Boren (cached_2011 cached_2014), former U.S. Senator, is, like GHW Bush and GW Bush and John Kerry, a member of Skull & Bones.  He is the president of Oklahoma University.  He was the longest-serving chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.  Robert Gates, former director of the CIA, was president of Texas A&M University, before he was tapped to head the Department of War (the now-misnamed Department of Defense).  There are other examples of a revolving door between academia and those in government who [mis]lead We The People and keep secrets from Us.

A quick look at the steerers of Colorado College makes it clear that CC is no slouch when it comes to cozying up to the military-industrial-intelligence-media complex:

Dick Celeste was the governor of Ohio.  He was also the U.S. ambassador to India.  A nation's foreign embassies are its spy shops.  Given India's proximity to and tensions with Pakistan, that was an important intelligence position.  (If that sounds far-fetched to you, consider that outed covert CIA agent Valerie Plame is married to Ambassador Joe Wilson.)  Dick is also a Rhodes Scholar, a lofty-sounding and much-respected honor.  While I do not believe in guilt by association, I do believe in the power of pattern recognition.  Some people are suspicious of Rhodes Scholars, and what they see as a hidden agenda (something about a world empire dominated by English-speaking people...).  Then there's Dick's other big affiliation, with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the intellectual semi-covert U.S. executive governance arm of a dominant, if not ruling, wealth apparatus.  Dick also has links to Ralph Eberhart, the man in charge of NORAD's contributions to 9/11, the worst defensive military failure (actually a stand-down!) in U.S. history, one for which Eberhart was not reprimanded or demoted, but promoted to run NORTHCOM, the 1st permanent military command over the United States, which was established in the wake of NORAD's great 9/11 "failure".  Ralph is also a CFR member.  And Dick sits on the ISAG board within NORTHCOM.

    Not that any of that proves anything...

Who chairs the Board of Trustees?  David van Diest Skilling, with a mostly unknown past other than ONI, the Office of Naval Intelligence.  A man named William Cooper was once a part of ONI, and he said that no one who is not a member of a "secret society" was ever selected for ONI duty.  (Cooper said he'd attended some DeMolay meetings as a youth, and so had innocently checked the box marked Freemasons on his security application, as it had no checkbox for DeMolay...)

    In 1961, JFK warned us that secrecy is antithetical to democracy.

And who vice-chairs the board?  Suzanne Woolsey.  She is the wife of James Woolsey, a Rhodes Scholar, and former head of the CIA.  (In the wake of 9/11, when mentions of a continuity-of-government "shadow government" surfaced, there was speculation that Woolsey was the president of that U.S. shadow government.)  Woolsey's firm, Paladin Capital Group, has benefited greatly from the bogus terror wars and "'homeland' security" which followed the false-flag 9/11 synthetic terror attacks.  James was also a cheerleader for a U.S. invasion of Iraq. He now seems to consider himself a great venture capitalist as he greedily and ill-advisedly advocates the USA switching over from burning petroleum-based products to burning other things instead.

I've spoken with many of the Trustees.  Some seem totally unaware of any possible link to any kind of dark side to CC.  One told me that he'd met former head of the CIA and President George Herbert Walker Bush, and Bush seemed like too nice of a guy to ever do anything rotten.  It seems that as long as respected decision-makers and opinion-leaders are not too obvious or outrageous, they can socially steer a group without much difficulty, and like and trust and respect for them prevents others from ever being able to think anything bad about them.

I asked an eminent CC political science professor if any of the undergraduate students ever recognize the fraudulence of the U.S. political system.  He said none ever have (although I still wonder about the 3rd-generation CC students who matriculate primarily to study the IMF and the World Bank).  I wish I'd asked him how many of the professors are aware of the existence of "forbidden knowledge" (before CC Director of Security told me I was no longer aloud [sic] to do so).  I am of the opinion, based upon my conversations and experiences, that many of the CC professors are aware of [the existence of] "forbidden knowledge" while many others are totally unaware of it.

Further, there is compartmentalization: physics professors who've privately seen through the fraudulence of 9/11 may be unaware of the true nature of the "bipartisan" political system, while the reverse is true of political science professors.  That may account for why the powers that be at CC would make such a heavy-handed attempt to try to prevent me from (cross-)"contaminating" their minds with what I know about 9/11 and, by CC's intellectually dishonest reaction to 9/11 (and to me), what I know about CC.

As I said, most of the CC students have been so thoroughly immersed in government and media (and educational institution) propaganda (including huge lies of omission) their entire lives that they are effectively brainwashed and thus totally incredulous, but a truth uprising among agile-minded CC students is something else the truth-hiding lie-keepers who act like they own CC and rule the world would undoubtedly very much like to avoid.

Now, October 11, 2008, CC's dirty, not-so-little secret cat is out of the bag.

I will get to, and improve, this web site as time permits and information becomes available.  Until then, I leave you with a recommended reading list:

Please don't trust me.  Please don't believe me.  Please do fact-check me.

And if you find the facts credible, or even if they just seem worthy of discussion, please share them with the students and faculty and trustees at your school, ASAP.

The U.S. Constitution is like a covenant handed down from generation to generation.  If We The People want Our children's children's children to taste freedom, We must not -- We dare not -- remain complicitly silent regarding these matters.

A wise person once said, "All it takes for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing."

Feel free to contact me or to leave a public comment: