Whitley's Journal

The Old Edition of the Key was CENSORED, the New One is Not

A few days ago, an astute reader informed me that there were differences between the new edition of the Key and the one I published in 2002.

The 2002 edition, it turns out, was secretly censored by unknown parties. Crucial changes were made, that had the effect of obscuring and diminshing the message of the book. If you have the old edition, you can use this journal entry to annotate it. To make this easier, I have provided page numbers from the old edition beside each comment that needs to be changed.

I provided Tarcher/Penguin with the same copy of the dialog between myself and the Master of the Key, dated November 16, 2000, that I used in the creation of the first edition.

My edition was changed by an unknown party. The current Tarcher edition reproduces the actual dialogue exactly, changing only a few typographical errors and misspellings. Thus the Tarcher edition contains the actual, correct dialog, while the one I published in 2002 does not.

The file that I sent to the printer of the orginal edition and to Tarcher is dated November 16, 2000. It was generated by converting the a Word file into PageMaker using the conventional process, which certainly wouldn't have led to the changes that appeared in the book.

At some point prior to being printed, the file was edited by somebody other than me, and the edits resulted in crucially important changes. When I got the proofs back from the printer, they corresponded with the original, but when the book was actually printed, changes had been made.

These changes are extremely subtle and brilliant. They were made by a skilled censor with a very definite agenda, which was to diminish the ways in which the dialogue offers empowerment to the reader.

Since the proofs were accurate, I did not think to check the finished books, and thus have been unwittingly selling the edited version for ten years.

I have to say that I am appalled and horrified by this, and extremely glad that the actual conversation, as I remember it, has finally been published.

I just thank God that the Tarcher edition contains the actual dialogue, as it was meant to be read. In a sense, therefore, the SECOND edition of the Key is really the first!

Here are some of the notable differences between the Tarcher edition, which follows the original transcript, and my edition, which does not:

New Edition:

Ah. I’m lost.
All being includes all elements of the earth, and thus all are part of all bodies. We are the consciousness of the planetary level that it has spent all of its life evolving, each and all of us. My being is the awakening earth. As is yours. The destiny of earth and the destiny of man are one. If we kill earth, we kill ourselves. If we die before our time, then we will not be able to enter ecstasy as a whole being. You are not a whole being, child. And ‘Whitley’ is only a tiny part of you. All mankind in all time is a whole being.

Old Edition P 30:

Ah. I'm lost
All physical being includes the same elements, and thus all are part of the earth and of each other. Living bodies are the consciousness of the planet. Man is earth's mind. If man kills earth, then earth has committed suicide, because its mind has reached the next level, which is ecstatic union with the rest of the universe.

Comment: The statement in the new edition is closer to what I remember being said, and it is profoundly empowering because it contains the powerful sentence, "All mankind in all time is a whole being."

New Edition:

If we kill earth before we have all reached ecstasy, what happens?
We wait until and if the earth spins elemental bodies once again that fit all the attachments of our energetic bodies. If it does not, then we wait forever. We remain incomplete.

Old Edition:

This crucial idea is not present in the text of the 2001 edition. It is a gentle warning, but a very important one. It shows us why we need to preserve our planet, how deeply this matters to us.

New Edition:

What’s it like, going to another planet?
Other worlds exist on many different levels, and contain beings of many different levels and appearances. The details from world to world can be very different. But the basic laws of reality remain the same.

Old Edition P 34:

What’s it like, going to another planet?
The details from world to world can be very different. But the basic laws of reality remain the same.

Comment: The text in the current edition adds the concept that worlds "exist on many different levels and contain beings of many different levels." This would appear to include the possibility of parallel universes.

New Edition:

There are aliens here?
Using you and guiding you.

Old Edition P 35:

There are aliens here?
Some using you and some guiding you.

Comment: The original transcript and current edition imply a consistency of policy among all aliens who are here, who are both using us and guiding us. The first edition suggests that different groups may have different motives—a skillful lie, I believe, intended to convert an empowering statement into one that will lead only to confusion. It strikes me as a small but extremely sinister edit.

New Edition:

We're being exploited?
You are, but also helped. You are being guided to your place as guides of another world.

Old Edition P 35:

We're being exploited?
You are, and in some respects horribly, by creatures of the dark. But you are also being helped. You are being guided to your place as guides of another world.

Comment: This difference is consistent with the one noted above, where the original transcript suggests a single alien presence both exploiting us and guiding us, while the first edition suggests different types of aliens with differing agendas. The first edition added the idea that 'creatures of the dark' were present. There is nothing else in the book that suggests 'creatures of the dark' and the phrase, with its lurid, horror-story overtones, doesn't sound like the Master of the Key. I think that this was added so that people would seize on it and waste their energy indulging superstitions of demons and such, when the truth is that we need to see ourselves as we are, a mysteriously self-aware presence in an unconscious world, facing not illusory "creatures of the dark," but rather facing ourselves.

New Edition:

Another world is in control of this one?
Yes.

Old Edition P 36:

Another world is in control of this one?
Other worlds participate, both elemental and energetic.

Comment: At least the censor was consistent. The simple "yes" has been replaced by a statement that can, once again, send us into a labyrinth of confusion.

New Edition:

How do they control this world?
By planning, and they use mind control.

Old Edition P 36-37:

How do they control this world?
Very generally.

Comment: All I can say is that I am very glad that the current edition was published, otherwise this frank truth would have remained hidden. In my opinion, this is the most disturbing change in the whole book. "Very generally" tells us nothing. "By planning, and they use mind control," tells us everything.

New Edition:

Am I under mind control?
The opposite. The technological intervention that has occurred in your case has been done to make it certain that general fields of control will not affect you.

Old Edition:

Question and answer not present.

Comment: I vividly remember asking this question, and thinking at the time that the 'technological intervention' that he was referring to was the implant in my left ear. I suspect that I am among a very small band of people who are not subject to this general level of control, and that my readers and I constitute the great majority of people who are free of this general influence. It is why we see the world as it truly is, and why the vast majority of people around us seem strangely blind to what to us appears to be obvious reality. They are blind. They have been blinded. For whatever reason, we can see.

New Edition:

General fields of control?
Directional suggestion is applied to all who are enhanced electrically. This is the means of control of military and government.

Old Edition P 37:

General fields of control?
Directional suggestion.

Comment: Again, the statement in the edited first edition is essentially meaningless and certainly useless. But the statement in the unedited version is filled with meaning and even suggests a potential means of escape for a species that I believe is being held in a state of mass hypnosis.

New Edition:

Telepathy?
Radio frequencies. Extremely sensitive circuits can pick up and decode thought. Microwaves can be used to project thought into the brain. But the fields of which I speak are much more general. They create tendencies. The desire is to preserve the maximum amount of freedom in the maximum number of individuals.

Old Edition P 37:

Telepathy?
Extremely sensitive circuits can pick up and decode thought. Microwaves can be used to project thought into the brain. But the fields of which I speak are much more general. They create tendencies. The desire is to preserve the maximum amount of freedom in the maximum number of individuals.


Comment: The censor here removed the sentence "Radio frequencies." By doing this, he cuts off any possibility of actually understanding the technology that must be involved here.

New Edition:

What do they do here?
They enforce mankind’s blindness by preventing science from exploring the key mysteries of the past and discovering a practical means of expanding into the universe, and they maintain the official secrecy that keeps the question of whether or not aliens are here from being answered.

Old Edition P 39:

What do they do here?
They enforce mankind's blindness by preventing science from exploring the key mysteries of the past and discovering a practical means of expanding into the universe.

Comment: The secret censor removed yet another reference to governmental involvement from the old edition. But the new edition includes the full statement that was actually made, which makes it clear that there is some sort of penetration of government, and use of official secrecy to conceal themselves.

New Edition:

Was Christ God?
The promise of resurrection is the essential promise of being. Rebirth is not a literal reconstitution of the elemental body. It is, rather, awakening from the sleep of being. Resurrection can take place in you right now. You are Lazarus in the tomb, all of you. And Christ is always knocking upon the door, calling you to come out. Soon, the tomb will be torn down around you, and you must come out.

Old Edition P 39:

Was Christ a product of this science?
The promise of resurrection is the essential promise of being. Rebirth is not a literal reconstitution of the elemental body. It is, rather, awakening from the sleep of being. Resurrection can take place in you right now. You are Lazarus in the tomb, all of you. And Christ is always knocking upon the door, calling you to come out. Soon, the tomb will be torn down around you, and you must come out.

Comment: The answers are the same, but there is a critical difference in the question, one that reflects on me. In the old edition, I am made to ask an arrogant, cold question. In the new edition, the question that appears is the one I actually asked: Was Christ God?

New Edition:

What practice would make us physically able to communicate?
Over the course of our discussion, everything you need to learn how to objectively communicate with these beings will be given, just as all information necessary for your science to begin to detect living energy, which is trying now to communicate with you.

Old Edition P 41:

What practice would make us physically able to communicate?
When you know by the use of scientific instruments that you are in the presence of such a being, go into a meditative state. Concentrate your attention on your physical body. You will soon find yourself in communication.

Comment: The reply in the old edition is intended to disempower. What 'scientific instruments' are we supposed to use? No indication of that. Then the promise, 'you will soon find yourself in communication.' This is a very subtle and sinister comment, intended to reinforce failure. By contrast, what he actually said is that the conversation itself contains the information we need to learn how to communicate, and all information necessary for our science to make a start at detecting living energy, and ends with the precious and empowering reassurance that it is trying to communicate with us now.

Old Edition P 41:

Do energetic beings appear in the physical world?
An example would be the much maligned crop circles. These are two dimensional portraits of these beings, self-created. They are trying to introduce themselves to this age.

New Edition:

How?
An example would be the much maligned crop circles. These are two dimensional portraits of these beings, self-created. They are trying to introduce themselves to this age.

Comment: Here, it looks as if my mysterious editor simply preferred a more precise question that the one I actually asked, but a crucial piece of information is omitted: that they are trying to introduce themselves "to this age." We have a lost and muddled history. Apparently somebody does not want us to realize that there has been an earlier attempt to communicate with us.

Old Edition P 41:

Why doesn't anybody believe in them?
They are a manifestation of the rising of the dead and thus the end of time during which souls can change. For those souls who are yet incomplete, this is terrifying, because they fear two things: first, that this means that it's too late for them; second, that they will, if the conjoin the world of the dead, also see as the dead see, and thus become unable to change even if the earth remains able to support elemental bodies. So they pretend that it's all false. There are many other reasons to conceal such things, but these are the strongest.

New Edition:

Why doesn’t anybody believe in them?
To face the return of the dead is to face the change of the age. For those souls who are yet incomplete, this is terrifying, because they fear two things: first, that this portends that the time during which they can grow and develop is ending; second, that they will, if they conjoin the world of the dead, also see as the dead see, and thus become unable to change even if the earth remains able to support elemental bodies. So they pretend that it’s all false. There are many other reasons to conceal such things, but these are the strongest.

Comment: Here the censor wanted to muddy the waters. He removed the stunning, utterly clear sentence that is among the most powerful and clear ever uttered by anybody: "To face the return of the dead is to face the change of the age." This statement was burned into my soul. It is, in fact, the central reality of our age and the central meaning of the whole close encounter experience. It is also theme of the book I am publishing in January, 'What Is to Come.' To understand it is to understand human reality as it is unfolding right now. I can only thank God that it is at last available to my readers.

New Edition:
What has this all got to do with resurrection?
The resurrected man is a consistent theme of the mythology that developed out of observations of a certain type of being, beginning with Osiris and ending with Christ. Fully conscious beings adept in this science can enable the radiant body to appear as an elemental body, so perfectly imprinted are its sensations on their energetic being.

Old Edition:
Statement censored.

Comment: This incredible statement tells us that resurrection is not a mystery, but a practice that is potentially available to anybody, and also tells us that Jesus is not the only being who has done this. I can well understand why somebody seeking to diminish the empowering potential of the Key would remove it.

New Edition:

You are saying that the demon is not evil, that he is—what--the bringer of knowledge?
We learn from our mistakes. But those who give themselves to evil suffer. Make no mistake. They can become so heavy that they sink into the earth. Just as the energetic body can enjoy extraordinary pleasure, it can suffer excruciating pain. You have in your body a few million nerves. But in your energetic body, every tiny bit of being can experience the totality of ecstasy or agony.

Old Edition P 49:

You are saying that the demon is not evil, that he is—what--the bringer of knowledge?
We learn from our mistakes. But those who give themselves to evil suffer. They can become so heavy that they sink into the earth. Just as the energetic body can enjoy extraordinary pleasure, it can suffer excruciating pain. You have in your body a few million nerves. But in your energetic body, every tiny bit of being can experience the totality of ecstasy or agony.

Comment: Dropping the sentence "Make no mistake" removes emphasis from the statement and makes it easy to pass over.

New Edition:

What did the word sound like?
I don't know, I wasn't there.

Old Edition P 52:

What did the word sound like?
A whine.

Comment: This is just an outrageous change. Sickening, and doubly sickening to me that I never noticed it. "A whine," indeed. It's calculated to make the Master of the Key look silly and arrogant, when his actual statement makes him appear clear, careful and humble.

In the old edition, I then ask him 'That's a joke?' He says, 'It's a joke.' In the new edition, this exchange obviously isn't present.

New Edition:

And nobody ever leaves the recurrence? Every soul eventually comes back for a new life?
All recur, all do not.

Old Edition P 54:

And nobody ever leaves the recurrence? Every soul eventually comes back for a new life?
If needed.

Comment: It's almost as if the ambiguity of the Master's actual statement bothered the censor, who wanted a simpler answer. In truth, the Master's comment is extraordinarily multidimensional. It means two things at once: first, that we all share in everything that happens to any of us; second, that even though we must live many lives, we also will eventually be free, all of us. A glorious promise in an incredibly dense few words, reduced by the censor to the mundane.

New Edition:

What’s going to happen to us?
You have come to the end of the resources that were given you in the time that was given you. We measured the rate at which you would expand and grow very precisely, and fitted your development to a calendar which we devised called the Zodiac. In your writings, Whitley, you have wondered why mankind would have such a long-count calendar. Why were simple farmers in need of it? They were not. We needed it. The constellations of the Zodiac are arbitrary inventions to enable us to mark the progress of the equinox and keep track of exactly where you are in your journey. At this moment, the little fish of Pisces is about to be spilled out onto the dry land by Aquarius. All you know how to do, little fish, is swim. How will you swim upon the dry land?

Old Edition P 56:

What’s going to happen to us?
You have come to the end of the resources that were given you in the time that was given you. We measured the rate at which you would expand and grow very precisely, and fitted your development to a calendar which we devised called the Zodiac. In your writings, Whitley, you have wondered why mankind would have such a long-count calendar. Why were simple farmers in need of it? They were not. We needed it. The constellations of the Zodiac are arbitrary inventions to enable us to mark the progress of the equinox and keep track of exactly where you are in your journey. At this moment, the little fish of Pisces is about to be spilled out onto the dry land by Aquarius. All you know how to do, little fish, is swim. How will you swim upon the dry land? Let me give you a hint: that water of Aquarius is the energetic body.

Comment: The mysterious sentence that is added to the statement, "Let me give you a hint: that water of Aquarius is the energetic body" is wrong. It is a misdirection. The truth is that the water of Aquarius is the world around us. I assume that this misdirection was intended by the censor to render the statement useless to the reader, which is consistent with what I perceive to be a desire by somebody who is in control of our world to continue to deceive us in every way possible so that we will blunder into the great changes that are coming in a state of total ignorance, and end by losing every shred of civilization and humanity in a worldwide holocaust of destruction and terror.

New Edition:

The Meister Eckhart? How did you know I was interested in that?
I read over shoulders, child. A bad habit of mine. God laughed, and his laughter begat the son, and their laughter begat the spirit, and out of the laughter of the three poured the creation. Laughter is the key to everything. It is far more powerful than prayer, than meditation. It is the stuff of which the world is created. Find laughter, find freedom.

Old Edition P 67:

The Meister Eckhart? How did you know I was interested in that?
I read over shoulders, child. A bad habit of mine. God laughed, and his laughter begat the son, and their laughter begat the spirit, and out of the laughter of the three poured the creation. Laughter is the key to everything. It is far more powerful than prayer, than meditation. It is the stuff of which the world is created. Find laughter, find God.

Comment: Once again, the censor is consistent in spreading disempowerment, and doing it with great cunning. "Find laughter, find freedom" is an incredibly valuable and useful statement. "Find laughter, find God" tells us very little of practical value.

I cannot tell you how grateful I am to the reader who noticed these changes. He naturally thought that I had rewritten the dialog, which I would never do. When I realized what had actually happened, I also understood a great deal more about my life and the lives of those of us who are open to material like this.

Overall, this does NOT mean that the original edition of the Key is without value. On the contrary, it is filled with wisdom and valuable informaiton--just less of it than there should have been. I am so grateful, though, that the new edition exists!

I know now why so many people tune me out. They're captives. Sleepers. Rendered passive in the face of a world that is disintegrating before their eyes. Well, they might be fodder, but I'm not and neither are you, or you wouldn't be here reading this right now.

We are outside of the context of control that rules this world. Now, I don't think that it is necessarily evil. What it is doing is making sure that the full shock of what is coming impacts the human species as intensely as possible.

So, why are we outside of the enormous barnyard that contains the vast majority of the human species? The answer is obvious to me: there is a different fate in store for us, and for all who wake up and join us. We are here because we are able to face the unknown, not with answers that, in the end, are just guesswork, but with the truest and most human of all responses: the question explored with care and intelligence, but left open.



This issue has captured my imagination for some reason--my second comment in as many days (third actually if you count a comment on another thread on this website). For all of the doubters and hand-ringers out there, just buy the new edition. At ten bucks, it's the equivalent of a couple of trips to Starbucks. The work is valuable and Whitley's efforts to bring it to us then and now are well worth the support. Last comment (promise).

Of course it makes me furious that people would be suspicious that this is a ploy to sell new books, but at the same time, it's a completely understandable and justified reaction. This is why I was careful to make it easy to use the journal entry to annotate your existing copy. I just wish that I had noticed it before. But it took a reader, comparing the two editions, to see it. I've been through a very dark personal space over this for the past few days. How could I have failed to notice? Was I under some kind of mind control that I didn't see this in TEN YEARS? I just wish I had an answer, but I do know one thing: the reason that this was discovered was because the new edition was published, and I sense that the emergence not only of the true message of the book, but also the revelation of what the censor wanted to hide is part of the opening of secret doors that is going on right now. So, in that sense, I'm grateful. Still royally furious at myself though. Jim Marrs, who has had censorship problems of his own, is going to interview me about this on Dreamland this weekend. The great thing is this: because we can compare the censored material to the original, now we know what the people who are trying to control us want MOST to hide. That is a huge breakthrough. Had I seen these changes before the original edition was published, I would simply have removed them, and what has turned out to be an extraordinary revelation of some deep, deep secrets would never have happened. So, there is a good side.

I didn't even want to touch on the intentional vs. accidental subject - not wanting to engage the 'doubters'. But since Whitley is clearly feeling the anguish of regret over not noticing the censored text, I want to put my two cents' worth in.....
In my job, I have to do a lot of proof-reading for material that is published to our website, pamphlets, etc. and after I sign off on the edits, it would never occur to me that our IT and/or communications staff would deliberately alter a PDF or Word document. It just doesn't happen. (Unless someone, somewhere, has the motive of sabotage).
Of course, you always give a cursory glance to the finished product, but it's more of a cosmetic check-up.....Does the text line up nicely? Did they use the right font? Are the headings centred? etc, etc. Then, you move on to the next project. You don't sit and obsessively re-read your own work. And even if you did, you just might miss the odd typo.
Enough said on that issue.
As to the timing of this new edition - it seems there is some possible synchronicity in this, and I'm glad Whitley can see that there may be a positive side. Maybe there are readers out there who need to pay very close attention to this material, and this will ensure that they DO pay close attention.
I guess my 2 cents turned into 3 or 4 cents.....signing off now :)

Whitley, Don't beat yourself up over this. Things happen for a reason and when they are supposed to. It may be more important that the censorship came to light now than it was for the original book to have been published correctly. I told a friend that I could sense you were in a dark place for more than a few days and I hope that the support you are finding here will help you out of that place. Perhaps there are going to be instances of a greater degree of attempted censorship of you and/or your material/messages coming at you soon. Now your headlights are on and it will be neigh on impossible for that to happen. That may be your lesson in all of this. I believe that everything that happens to us should be viewed as a lesson. Learn the lesson, move the knowledge to your soul, and dump the rest as baggage you don't need to be dragging behind you. As a P.S. to this post and take it for what it is worth to you (no worries from either of us if you totally disregard it): My Visitor Guide told me to tell you to be very careful who you trust for a while and to rethink those that you do trust now. You know you have my support and a little bump like this isn't going to change this. Hugs to both you and Anne.

Here's an article that takes an alternate view on the changes:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55657691/The-Key-A-Minority-Report

Any change to the text that were done without Whitley's knowledge is indeed a corruption. I agree with Whitley that the changes are subtle and brilliant. Perhaps the writer of the above article failed to truly understand this.

Let me follow up my previous post by letting you know that I have been an avid reader of your works. I do listen to your pod casts often and have for the most part enjoyed your style of presentation. So when I read your latest Journal entry I was honestly not to amused that someone I respect for standing up where so many have turned away came as a blow. Where I draw the line is when you cross it. I work in this arena also and know how to swim in it very well...so when someone I admire begins to go down a road I am all to familiar in seeing...I react. You mentioned The 2002 edition was secretly censored by unknown parties. In fact...and this may come as a surprise to many..."The Key",© 2001 Walker & Collier...was self-published through Whitley Strieber's own company, Walker & Collier. Printing of the book was performed by Whitehall Printing Co., Naples, Florida. I also noticed the first publisher you did have listed on your journal entry is now gone. Using Censorship as a tool is wrong. It could be as simple as an attempt to make the material more palatable for the readers in the new edition. It could be to stir up controversy. Whatever the reason...the subject matter calls for integrity if it is real. Any writer or artist in today's information society would have noticed his work manipulated early on and brought suit against the publisher or printer. 10 years is a long time to be quoting from your own works. So tell me you are filing some sort of legal action. Against yourself? I have not lost faith in you or stopped being a supporter...only cautioning you against going down a road that will mislead you...

This is directed to gary purviance: Whitley has explained what happened. We all knew the first book was self-published. That doesn't mean that he did all the work himself. It means that he paid that publishing company to publish what he sent them. There is no reason why between his submission of the work and the book actually coming out, that someone could not have altered it. He trusted them to do a job that they did not do. Why do you continue to beat him up about this? You again to caution him about going down some road, which I assume is the same one that you accused him of in your first post: greed. Then you couch you words by stating that you are still a supporter and have faith in him....geez, if those posts are what you call faith and support, one has to wonder what you do to your enemies. Kick any animals lately? I read between the lines and energy very well. I, personally, believe you have an axe to grind here that is different from your stated reasons for the posts...and that is to make Whitley look as bad as you can. The word "troll" comes to mind.

Look. Whitley is not an idiot. He has been working with publishers since the 1970's. "Walker & Collier," with all due respect, is nothing more than a paper-bound entity, a nominative business tool. A transitory thing you set up in the vanity press process. The First Edition of "The Key," that lies upon my desk as I write this, was published in 2001, when POD was in its infancy. Without the benefit of consulting Whitley or his personal business records, my assumption is he placed his personally edited manuscript in the hands of the Floridian printers without suspicion. And why would he suspect? Just my assumption... I believe what Whitley states is that between the time he made his editorial checks and the submission of the MS to the printer is where the mischief occurred. On this humble level of business, it seems to me infiltration would be pretty easy to exact. Again: assumption. Conspiracy theorists perk; skeptics pall. If it happened, it was at this juncture. (Note: If a pristine bullet can be found on the gurney that, many hours before, bore the body of JFK, then mere text altering is child's play.) Finally, Whitley has made it clear in This Very Journal Entry that anyone can use these corrections to annotate their vanity press edition of The Key. I see no profit motive or PR stunt in this. I see a man who has fostered a community doing his best to serve his community.

Whitley,

Remember the "Open Doors" and also that the floor resembles a chess board. This is all part of the game.

The Master of the Key never said that it would be easy. This is not a set-back, but a new opportunity.

I will still continue to support Whitley and his work. I have decided to accept him as he presents himself and take him at his word. That is honestly all we can do with anyone. It is all rather silly anyway. I do enjoy his journal and look forward to when he does make entries. I have always enjoyed how he writes and his passion. I am happy to withdraw my remarks and offer my apologies to all of you including Whitley.

Note to Gary - have you ever actually been in charge of proof-reading and editing? Also, are you completely void of empathy that you can't play out the chain of events as presented by Whitley and believe that things unfolded as they did?
Like I said in my previous post, any author, at the end of their project, having proof-read and double-checked everything for the umpteenth time would not in a million years suspect foul play at the printer's! Clearly, there was sabotage and clearly it's the last thing Whitley would have been looking for. As well, why would Whitley read his own book cover to cover? He wrote it! He has a full schedule - he likely was on to the next project the day after he sent the proof-read manuscript to the printer.
It's a no-brainer. Let's move on now :)

Glad to hear you're coming around Gary :)
I have a very accurate instinct for phonies, and I've never for a moment questioned Mr. Strieber's honesty. I don't enjoy this kind of posting. It seems juvenile. We can all do so much more with our thought energy.....
I'd rather be smelling the flowers, or gazing at the moon :)

This explains a lot. I had a weird feeling when I read it the first time, and then when I read it again recently, that something was being held back and that there was more going on. I would say that the changes are significant, and that some of them are the same passages that made me think that there was something that I wasn't understanding.

The idea of the dead coming back is very interesting. I look forward to "What is Coming", and can't help but think of an idea that is floated on the web every now and then about the 'end of the world' actually consisting of all times being experienced simultaneously instead of linearly.

If I were an intelligent machine, I would prefer the 2nd edition.

Can someone please email Whitley Strieber that there are a number of more edits that have been MISSED in his post above. Specifically:

Page 66 Old Key:
... if all the world was to pray in the same hour, the whole universe would hear you....

NEW KEY:
... ... if all pray in the same hour, the whole universe will hear you.

Also, at the end of same paragraph p. 66 Old key:
... These beings, though, they hunt you, body and soul.

NEW KEY:
...These beings, though, they even seek your souls.

These were noted on the message board, but no one seems to have notified Whitley about them. There is another as well.

This one seems to involve changed text that was moved out of place or it involves a chronological blip in Whitley's memory:

NEW EDITION:
...You mentioned monsters in the world of the dead. [No mention of monsters appears earlier to this, BUT it seems to reference something said LATER on, in two places, both relating to regret, recrimination.]

Old Edition p. 23, instead of the above, it says:
.. What do the dead look like?

@sophie, Whitley addresses the "monsters in the world of the dead" question on the latest Dreamland at the 35:05 minute mark. He said he remembers asking him that question but doesn't recall exactly what the MOTK said about monsters previous to that question. Whitley stated: "I know he said something [about monsters in the world of the dead] but I just can't capture it. I can capture it in images but not in words..."

Whitley, while I am also confused by the lack of knowledge on your part, I am absolutely sure that there is no greed a work here. As you've said in the past, you were a best selling, gifted author of "thrillers" prior to the visitor experiences and could have made a FANTASTIC living had you not chosen your current path. If greed is your motivation, then you never would have pursued the mystery of the visitors, and all that came with it. As a result, I believe you've experienced a great deal of financial hardships, but you've always been true to yourself and to others. I'm thankful for having stumbled upon your works, and thankful to you for having forged a difficult path. I admire your bravery and hope for an opportunity in my life to approach fear with the same obstinence.

I've never posted on this site before, even though I have been a member of unknowncountry since it first started. I am frankly furstrated and cheesed off with the negativity aimed at Mr Streiber. I can think of many occasions that, with hindsight, I wish I had done somethink differently or more thoroughly and how bad I felt about not having done so first time round. The only place you get the truth is on this website, so why would anyone be so untrusting, suspicious and without empathy. As to the comment that no one will edit their old version of the key; I have an old copy of 'The Key' and will be marking up the revisions. I am grateful to Mr Streiber for providing us with the changes so that we don't need to buy a new copy.

Big hug for Mr Streiber :-)

In response to Gary Purviance's comment "Any writer or artist in today's information society would have noticed his work manipulated early on and brought suit against the publisher or printer". I'm not convinced this is the case; as a research scientist I have published many science reports; when the report comes back from the publisher for checking I make the automatic assumption that the text has not been altered (I also know that many of my colleagues assume the exact same thing). And I can honestly say that once a report is published I never read it again; why would I when I know it inside out.

I rarely post anything, anywhere, because I’m a low profile kind of person, but I just have to speak out on this issue.

I bought the first edition of The Key about 5-6 years ago and found it to be a vessel of extremely important, accurate and clear information. Today, when I first read Mr. Strieber’s journal entry, I thought, OK, well there are plenty of careless people out there leaving behind destruction in their wake of thoughtlessness. Maybe the editor was an idiot. But, after I read the differences between the editions, I have to agree that this was not the result of some clueless cubicle dweller; it was intentional.

My heart is with you Mr. Strieber. To have someone do this to your most beautiful work is like waking up one morning to find someone has tattooed a small gang symbol to your neck during the night. It is nothing short of a hostile, invasive, destructive act. BUT, you have a new edition, so I’m going to buy 4 and send a copy to friends. I suggest other members do the same. Fight back, speak the truth, stand your ground. Thank you, Mr. Strieber for your strength, honesty and clarity.

It seems to me with regards to the conversation about the electronic or radio control (implants? Enhanced electrically) we are definitely talking about control of the population. If you take this a little deeper we could extend the meaning to also mean they are controlling the population by energetic or ‘fields of energy’ that are given off by cell phone towers, cell phones themselves, digital TV broadcasts and antennas, cable-internet anything that networks humanity together. This is exactly what the independent scientist Leuren Moret speaks about when she talks about the history and evolution of MK Ultra and the mind control programs, and how this morphed into the Haarp system and then it expanded into utilizing cell phone towers and TV towers to control the population. Perhaps those ‘implanted with chips’ can either be protected from those fields of energy or made more receptive to them. Imagine that when watching your TV you are not only receiving the audio / video signal but also another frequency that radiates out into the room. This radiation or frequency is on the microwave wave length and affects our brain waves and nervous systems AND changes our DNA. I often wonder what’s really going on when they run those emergency TV ‘tests’ on occasion. Ms. Leuren Moret also speaks about the abilities of black programs/science to be able to locate new species by utilization of satellite technology because they know every living thing gives off a certain energy signature and that our DNA can be changed by applying a certain frequency radiating out from our computer montors while we are on the internet....

Would you ever considering releasing an annotated version of The Key that would further explain the meaning of The Master's answers to your questions? I find The Key a difficult book to digest because very complex ideas and concepts are explained with very compressed answers and I find myself saying "Wait, Stop! Explain what you mean by that!" The Key is written in the most simple and direct way a transcript of its kind can be, but for the average reader thinking about these concepts for the first time, they require much more background and relation to our own world to make sense.
Also, I'm curious how you were able to conduct the interview with no preparation? The questions, themselves are so deep and complex, I would think it would take days or weeks to prepare for such an interview. Moreover, the sudden nature of the interview in the middle of the night must have been jarring. Do you feel the Master helped you in some way, by helping to focus your mind on the types of questions to ask and the focus to retain what he was telling you?
Thank you for releasing The Key, but in its original doctored form and the new uncensored version. You have battled great adversity from within and without to reach this point.

Thockman: You can't read this book with your mind/ego, you must read it with your heart/soul. Your mind/ego seeks to control and confuse anything that the soul needs to understand. In other words, you can't 'think' about what is said, you must 'feel' what is said. For those of us that are used to spirits or manifestations appearing, this would neither be unusual nor dis-concerting. You have to be willing to look at the unknown with no fear or you will not be able to do this.

For those who requested a full list of changes:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55988421/Complete-List-of-Changes-in-The-Key-w...

Whitley, I have read The Key in the past and now I realize I must go back and read it again, but I must read the real edition that is complete. In listening to your interview with Jim, something struck a note of familiarity with an event that happened to me many years ago. I used to work nights at a Pharmacy in Austin Texas. One night a man and a woman, dressed totally in black, walked in to my pharmacy with a medical question. They struck me as someone I needed to take good care of and in payment, I would receive a special gift. That became true. Over the course of all the years I worked that shift, they kept coming back to talk. Let me say, the man was the source of a great deal of information and confirmation of knowledge I had been gathering over the years, while on my spiritual path. But, what you said that rang true with what my mentor said was the bit about the power of needed for creating the Radiant Body. The Radiant Body is something my mentor's Master achieves when he wants to be in that hyperdimensional form. I think these Masters are everywhere. I think they teach us in a quiet manner that is meant only for those who will listen and understand. As far as the Word.... it is like a roaring river to some who hear it... wrapped in a light so brilliant that it is like a million suns shining... Thanks for sharing your lesson from your Master.

You know, all this loopy suspicion and anger that I 'dreamed this up' to sell more books is really very poorly thought out. The fact that the old edition was altered is a great embarrassment to me. Why didn't I see it? Who did it? How did I ever let it get past me? Obviously, it's not a ploy to sell books, but I have a question, here, WHAT IS SO WRONG WITH BUYING MY BOOKS? There are people around here who seem to think that buying the new Key would be some kind of horrible thing to do, if they have the old one--or, for that matter, even if they don't. The new one is full of terrific new material about all the different ways the MOTK's predictions have come true. It's worth buying, darn it, just for itself!

I'm sure I speak for many when I say, 'I appreciate your frustration, Whitley.' There is but a small pocketful of authors that can be categorized as wealthy. The rest of us simply make a living. And for the record, I am glad and grateful to say I have both copies. The added comments in this new edition, and especially the rich prose in which it is delivered, make it well worth the few dollars spent. There's no conspiracy here, folks! Just a man of erudition plying his craft. Thanks, Whitley.

I bought the new one. I own both copies. Don't see the problem doing that. It was my choice and I do not regret it.

Subscribe to Unknowncountry sign up now