Archived podcast for paid Subscribers only. Please login to access.

You knew this day would come. Finally, it has. And it is as special as you’d hoped. Host Jeremy Vaeni’s all-time personal favorite interviewee Whitley Strieber joins us for a conversation that begins with what it’s like being a famous experiencer/writer, but later takes a turn when Anne Strieber posthumously joins the conversation.


Dreamland Video podcast
To watch the FREE video version on YouTube, click here.

Subscribers, to watch the subscriber version of the video, first log in then click on Dreamland Subscriber-Only Video Podcast link.


  1. EPIC.
    I believe you. I


    I believe you. I believe you as much as I believe in my own experience. And what else do we have besides our own experience?

  2. Hey Jeremy,
    good deal.

    Hey Jeremy,
    good deal. There was a nugget that I hope everyone got. You know, that was always a question that puzzled me. People are born on both sides of the veil. What happens when the “universe” ends? As the structure of the atom is so similar to the solar system…what happens to us as energies? A rebirth? As Ive seen “outside” the universe, there is “something” outside there. Existence beyond existence beyond existence? Will there be another shakespearian intrigue for these worn thespians to perform???
    Thanks to you, Whitley, for blazing your trail. a dent? Really? I would say the unheralded doorman who ushers others into the grand halls. And those whom enter said halls gasp in its enormity.
    My card is the Chariot. (for some reason that last statement was important.)
    Gods speed.

    1. Well, I hope we all get front
      Well, I hope we all get front row seats, but, don’t support the scalpers.

  3. I enjoyed the show since
    I enjoyed the show since it’s, well, Whitley Strieber! Will have to listen to it at least one more time, but I felt that there wasn’t much new here from him that Whitley hasn’t expressed elsewhere. Perhaps I was expecting too much, or… perhaps I just need to re-listen.

    I also felt the “crossed over Kahunas stuck in limbo” story/myth has no particular reason to believe it’s true, other than perhaps a willing immersion in Hawaiian culture; my instinctive reaction was that I highly doubt that’s how reality works on the other side. Seemed to me that Whitley gently stepped around that one by how he responded.

    Thanks Whitley and Jeremy!

  4. Jeremy, your gifts of
    Jeremy, your gifts of listening down deep inside, and ask pertinent questions to bring out the truth of the persons you interview, are so evident in this interview. Thank you for doing and being who you are.

    Whitley, thank you for doing this interview. I have found so much which validates things i have thought and experiences i have had… AND brings me to new understandings. The courage it takes to do what you do… that is, to stand up against all odds for something you believe despite the negatives… is no small matter in this life. It has to be the lesson we in the U.S. are now confronting… in many areas which are either life giving / life taking or as some say “good/evil”. And that is not just for the current times…for the future which we cannot yet see or guess.

    Anne, i never saw you the way Whitley described until the end of this interview. How amazing, since in a real solid way… my father did the same for me as i was growing up. I didn’t understand yet was learning really important approaches to life and how to question not only myself but ideas and ideals which are harder to reach. I have much still to learn, and i am so appreciative of your gifts – especially the love which is strong like iron and like elastic bends and stretches to reach us. AND i am reading a book by Richard Martini about the afterlife. Seems it is “in agreement” with what i hear here.

    So thank you all. And the comments from listeners will be quite helpful as well. They always are.

  5. Jeremy, I think the interview
    Jeremy, I think the interview was cut off at the end. Whitley seemed to be in mid-sentence.

  6. This Strieber fellow sounds
    This Strieber fellow sounds like an interesting guy. I should look him up.

  7. It actually all comes down to
    It actually all comes down to ego—and letting go of it. I remember a couple years ago that Jeremy and I went back and forth in the ‘comments’ about ego, and our real fear may not be one of ‘non-existence’ as death, but probably more like being tied to the loss of identity as the person or personality that we are in this life. You know, cross over, look and feel like my old self, maybe with fewer pounds, and like I looked at 25 rather than 65. I’m still me! Plus, I get to walk on golden streets and sing with the angels! Sweet! (BORING…)

    What Whitley discussed about Anne’s state is much more in line with things that have been communicated to me, as well. We are soooo much more, and why that idea bothers some people is beyond me, but then I experience other memories and lives often. I work on my ego too. I do wish it would take a hike sometimes, because I have come to realize it really is the source of any ‘problems’ that have occurred in my life. Realizing and remembering that my ego is the real issue does help though (Even on those mornings when I look in the mirror and go, “Ugh!”. I’m still human, and hooray for that! It’s my ticket to the next big thing.)

    Whitley, like Jeremy, I have read your books. You have made a ‘big dent’ not by the sheer number of books sold, but by those books touching and influencing the people that that were ready for them (That includes your fiction). When I saw that face on ‘Communion’ all those years ago, I not only went out and bought the book that same day, I remember thinking to myself upon completing the book, “Finally! Now we’re getting somewhere!”

  8. At one point in the
    At one point in the interview, I thought we might be heading towards a discussion on the contentious issue of hypnosis in memory retrieval, as I know Jeremey has quite strong views on the subject…but no.

    1. Yes, and even more
      Yes, and even more interesting to wonder about in light of this week’s Dreamland interview…

  9. MP3 cuts out at 54:45
    MP3 cuts out at 54:45

  10. Jeremy,
    A wonderful


    A wonderful interview. One question that came to me Wednesday evening after listening to this is for Whitley. Why are the visitors interested in you? It seems that once one’s cosmic egg gets shattered, the door is opened to the experience, but once they come, is it a a two sided interaction? By this I mean, that once the visitors begin to interact with you and you them, what keeps the interaction going? What do you think makes you someone that they are interested in and therefore want to keep interacting with? At some point, in the 80’s if you had pushed it away, do you think that they would have come back to you? Once the door is opened, does it matter which side approaches the doorway and reaches through? Is all that’s required is an outstretched hand, waiting to be held?

    Another interesting paranormal research study I stumbled upon last night was the Philip the ghost experiment. This was a very intriguing study. Jeremy, if you haven’t heard about this, I would suggest that you read up on it and let us know what you think about it.


    1. In my case, what has kept it

      In my case, what has kept it going through the years of my life is my wish to engage. As a little boy, I treasured my relationship with the visitors. When they left my life at about age 12, I was devastated, so much so that I gradually put them out of my mind. I think that I simply could not bear the loss. My childhood was very hard and they were the one thing I had that I truly wanted.

      When they came back, I tried hard to re-engage and was able to do so, to the point now that I share my life with the. They are very tough, very uncompromising but also very determined to help me further my search. A lot of people fear and hate them, I know that. I don’t care, frankly. I’m getting a hell of a lot out of my relationship with them, and my guess is that they are getting something, too, although I cannot say that I know what that is.

  11. I one tried to tell someone i
    I one tried to tell someone i loved, what i was going through. They basically ran away. I was hurt terribly. That night i awoke to some one talking to me telepathically. He said ” You must not tell anyone the secret you have inside you”. I said in my mind “What secret”. Then he repeated the statement. I drifted off to sleep. I awoke again with what i thought was the light that was next to my bed had fallen onto my arm, and broken as there was a strange electrical current coming into my arm. I didn’t want to get shocked so i gently shrugged my shoulder in the hope that it would slide off. It didn’t. Then i felt it was a finger and i knew it was the visitor i normally deal with. He slid the finger down my arm and flicked with his finger and implanted an image of the most beautiful butterfly with radiant colours in my mind This electrical charge that came from the visitors is interesting. Does it mean they are robots or does it mean they are so advanced that their souls can produce this feeling.

  12. This is darn good.
    This is darn good.

  13. I would have liked to hear
    I would have liked to hear Whitley directly address the paper at A lot of questions have been raised about imagination in his work, especially ‘The Key’, in that devastating critique. The quote about Strieber that he ‘believes his own fiction’ may not be totally inaccurate. When Strieber re-visits his lifetime of anecdotes in an interview like this after this paper’s cast so much doubt on him, I just scratch my head.

    1. Hi Strava,
      It is hard to

      Hi Strava,
      It is hard to believe the stories that are in Whitley Striebers books. I came to his work late in his career and as I’m in the UK had no knowledge of his turbulent history surrounding communion, so I literally had no idea who he was. I think the first book I read was ‘breakthrough’ and can remember thinking this guy is either completely insane, a brilliant fantasist, or it really happened. But the conclusion I came to was that because it was so intelligently written (it struck as someone rationally trying to get his head round something really f**king strange that had happened to him), that it actually doesn’t matter if it is made up, or an hallucination, or if it’s real, because the end result is super sharp, and enlightening. If he has made it up then the Key is the work of a BRILLIANT mind and it should he respected in the literary world as being such. We’ll only find out the answer when we die, which unfortunately for him, will be a bit late to salvage his literary career :0)

      1. I’m not sure that the most
        I’m not sure that the most important issue ought to be whether Whitley Strieber has a ‘brilliant mind’ or not. If you’re a fan and you take from his writing only what it offers as entertainment or as literature, then sure. Of if you are Whitley Strieber himself maybe that’s an important personal concern. But a great deal of what is presented in ‘The Key’ – whether it’s scientific predictions, climate change, the nature of the soul, and so on – has been advanced as being true on account of the fact it came from this man with his unique presence. But if you read the paper, you’ll find that you don’t have to wait till some magic moment years from now to find out if it’s a literary invention. It clearly is. So the question becomes what about Strieber allows him to convince himself the Toronto encounter happened.

        1. Strava,
          I have read the paper

          I have read the paper that you reference. I have read all sides. When I first read ‘Communion’, I remember telling my partner that I was not sure what happened to Whitley, but I knew for certain that something profound really did happen to him. To this day, I’m not sure what happened to him or why, but I also know that I have experienced some ‘connections’ to Whitley that I cannot explain (And I have relayed them to Whitley. And no, we are not good friends or buddies, but acquaintances, like many here at Unknown Country. I have only met him once.) I don’t personally feel that Whitley wants to be ‘believed’ above all else. Like many people that have been through trauma (of any kind), he is seeking answers, and people who will listen without judgment.

          I will be the first to say that I also spotted some things in ‘The Key’ that were not new, especially in regards to climate change and some of the science discussed there. What I DID pick up on was the concept of sin as denial of the right to thrive. I had never heard it expressed exactly that way before, and it made a huge impression on me. (‘Denial of the right’ to thrive also extends to ourselves as individuals, as well as to others and everything on the planet. It may be the key of ‘The Key’, as far as I’m concerned. Whether or not that concept is new or original is not important. But the fact that I finally read it expressed in a way that I got, WAS.)

          I applaud Whitley for doing any interviews, because he surely knows that each and every time he is interviewed, people will be bringing up issues, just as you and orangeluckypierre have done here. That’s fair, and as long as you respectfully disagree, that’s more than ok too. That’s why we are all here at Unknown Country, to see some new perspectives objectively, and also learn from each other, and maybe more than we do from Whitley himself. I am NOT a believer, I am a Seeker, as are many of us.

          1. I can’t help but think if you
            I can’t help but think if you read the paper carefully and completely you’d have a slightly different view. The question of whether Strieber’s had experiences is neither here nor there. I happen to think he has had some real experiences. The question of whether he ever really experienced anything or not is of interest only to debunkers and to people new to the subject.

            There are a lot of problems with Strieber and ‘The Key’ that shouldn’t just be set aside. One big one is: if you are an author, and like all authors you are keenly aware of what words are yours, what are another’s – how can you not notice that you’ve written a book about an encounter with a man who recited to your own ideas, often verbatim? And if it can be shown that the visitor you say you talked to is 100% you, how can you talk with real emotion on podcasts and so on about this remarkable man, his authority, his gentleness, and so on? Like I said above: if you like ‘The Key’, for example, as a literary work or a piece of entertainment, that’s fine. Then it makes no difference whether any of it’s true. But a lot of people have taken the book and Strieber’s work more seriously than that. A lot of people have followed his work for years and thought that basically what he says is probably right. The paper at puts an end to all that for most intelligent people.

          2. Srava,
            I realize that you


            I realize that you don’t know me, personally. I also not only agree, but know for certain that a lot of people are followers and ‘believers’, and I can’t change that. I am not a follower or believer, because, honestly, I do not know a lot for certain about anything, except my feelings towards friends, family, life, and the love I feel for being human and a part of this very remarkable Universe. I try to use my own knowledge and discernment when it comes to just about everything. While I don’t believe in the dogma of formal religions and some spiritual practices, I have been able to find common threads and grains of Truth between many of them. It’s uncanny…My bookshelves are full of books on the sciences, philosophy, history, religion, metaphysics, the classics, as well as science fiction. When you say, “the paper at puts an end to all that for most intelligent people,” judgment has raised its ugly head.

            Keep seeking truth, knowing that it may be subject to change without notice. 🙂 Keep your mind wide open about Whitley, and just about everything else. If you truly feel the way that you say you do, then my question would be, why are you involved with Unknown Country at all? Or just agree to disagree without judgment. You are welcome here, no doubt, because we all need other voices and ideas to keep us on our toes and to also shake us up a bit.

          3. There comes a point where an
            There comes a point where an all-accepting attitude itself becomes destructive. You write above that you read the paper. But your comment was posted some four hours after I posted mine with the link. You read a 300+ page paper in under four hours? If so, I salute you. But I think your gracious approach might be a way of avoiding having to confront some tricky issues.

        2. To interject here….. i
          To interject here….. i appreciate the speculation and asking the questions out on the forum. Since Whitley is loved here, you took that chance. Most places, users would “flame” you for a question of a beloved personality. Ive read thru the comments and I really like the way “we” as a group respond. As for the question of, “…believing his own fiction.” we have opinions. Mine is fairly simple. I have enjoyed his writing. I was not there, I didnt see what Whitley went thru if anything. What i do believe is this: Like me and others, things happen that are beyond the ken of man. I experienced this and you cannot take it away from me. No one has to believe me that it happened or not. Its healthy to question…aka the Seeker. Its mine; I own it. So too Whitley Strieber shared with the world. He has taken a black eye from some and embraced with acceptance from others. He stood up in a time when standing was(is) hard. Again, its good to ask the question. This was my 2 coppers worth.
          Its all good.

          1. Just a note acknowledging
            Just a note acknowledging your comment. None of my comments here should be construed as an attack on Strieber or anyone else and I appreciate the civility. In answer to Cosmic above, I’ve followed Strieber’s work for nearly twenty years. I’ve also been a subscriber off and on for almost ten. I feel I’m entitled to comment. Now, however, I’m completely disenchanted with that work. It’s been shown to my satisfaction that it’s not just flawed. It’s fatally flawed. I think Whitley has some serious personal truths he needs to confront. And no amount of personal earnestness or appeals to government persecution and social engineering or intellectual finaglings are going to save his work for any but his most die-hard fans. This is simply a fact. He might regard the paper where this is even-handedly shown as a gift.

          2. That escalated quickly :0)
            That escalated quickly :0)

  14. Whitley, all you/all of us
    Whitley, all you/all of us can do is what we know to do, the task that has been given/expected of us. What you have lived will be bequeathed on to history. I have a few heroes and you are one of them. 

  15. Good grief, Whitley Streiber
    Good grief, Whitley Streiber goes full tin foil hat in believing that Trump is in the pocket of Putin. Yes, this the narrative promoted by the Democratic Party, and its ally the mass media. That’s because they can’t believe that the public agreed with Trump on trade and immigration. (I suspect that not one in a hundred people voted for Trump based on his denial of global warming.)

    1. BobW,
      …And you thought that


      …And you thought that was the most relevant part of the interview because…?

      1. Because Whitley Streiber then
        Because Whitley Streiber then went full Alex Jones in suggesting that Putin would create false flag act of Muslim terrorism in the United States so Trump cold impose martial law. I have many disagreements with Trump and don’t like his bombastic style at all but this is the stuff of delusion.

  16. What an incredibly
    What an incredibly shortsighted comment.

    1. I hope it is the stuff of

      I hope it is the stuff of delusion, too! But a man who is friendly toward dictators and openly contemptuous of the leaders of democracies is a very dangerous man to have as the leader of a democracy.

      Since the Patriot Act, it only takes one signature to declare martial law and end the American republic. Under the circumstances, given the stated attitude of this president, I hardly think that a fear such as the one I expressed is “going Alex Jones.” Mr Jones is a hysteric, at the least. I am hardly that.

      I hope that Russian agents are not capable of carrying out such a program, but I continue to believe that it is a very legitimate fear.

      1. Whitley, I agree that Trump’s
        Whitley, I agree that Trump’s personality would allow him to make such a move, but doesn’t what Anne told you, that Trump “wouldn’t do much” give you reassurance that it won’t happen? It’s a remarkable statement, because it’s so far come remarkably true, something I certainly neither foresaw nor expected (and I expect Trump and his troop feel the same). Such an action would be about as diametrically opposite of that prediction as could be. There have already been massive demonstrations in protest of Trump, his support has never risen above the minority and isn’t likely to rise. I think even a false flag event has a tough hill to climb before we collectively allow Trump the Dictator to become a reality, or at the very least an enduring one.

  17. And this, people, is exactly
    And this, people, is exactly what Whitley has faced ever since he came out with Communion. Personal attacks against him for speaking his truth. Whitley drops under the radar to most people then he sticks his head out and gets all sorts of personal attacks against him. Whitely Strieber is very controversial. There are many pros and cons about him and his experiences. Unfortunately, he has become a very good example for those of us who have experienced unusual/paranormal phenomena and what may happen if anyone disclosed it publically.

    Whether it’s true or not, even with evidence, many people would still be hesitant to believe. As with anything that centers around faith and belief in something, there will be believers and non believers. Can it not be enough to merely say “I don’t believe Whitley” and leave it at that? Here’s a good test: If your best friend, or an acquaintance (thanks CL for using this) told you that he or she had a crazy story and went on to tell you a story that was very incredible, how would you treat them? Call them a liar to their face and gather everyone you could find and say that they are a looney. Or, would you say, that’s incredible, but I don’t believe you. Everyone that reads Strieber’s books can use their own methods of reasoning and deduce for themselves whether they want to keep reading or not. It looks petty and immature for individuals, even more so for paying subscribers here, to start personal attacks against the truth of what may or may not have happened to somebody nearly 20 years ago.

    I suppose that everyone has a right to free speech. I don’t see the controversial element come up when Jeremy has a subscriber come on and tell his story. Why is that? Probably because listeners have respect for the brave unknown soul who dares tread the waters of an internet podcast. Why can’t these same listeners have the same respect for the individual who’s hard work has created and maintained this very site?

    Thank you again Jeremy for having Whitley on your podcast and thank you Whitley for telling us what is on your mind.

  18. Wow, I could do an entire
    Wow, I could do an entire episode on this thread alone. We’ve got this week off. Keep the comments, questions, and concerns flowing and perhaps I will.

    I read the preamble at the strieberkey site, but not the PDF. Is it really 300+ pages? Someone wrote a 300+ page rebuttal to a 256 page book? Seems a bit overkill. In my experience with such rebuttals, it ends up amounting to a whole bunch of examples to prove a point that the author is so excited about they missed the flaw. Because the paper is so long, we’re supposed to be impressed enough to not even read it and just assume they nailed it. Still, if anyone here can assure me it’s not a PDF riddled with viruses, I’ll crack it open.

    That said, right off the bat I can tell you exactly what’s wrong with the criticism on the landing page there, which is what Srava is pointing out here. I’ll wait to lay it out on the show, but maybe one of you will beat me to it. (Hint: Strieber spells it out in the original foreword and original afterword, which is in both the self-published and Tarcher editions.)

    1. Yes, Jeremy. It is over 300
      Yes, Jeremy. It is over 300 pages. As far as I know, I’m not infected, ha, ha. It was written by an actual journalist, I think (Heinrich Moltke, and he’s shown up a few times in the comments here at Unknown Country. Pretty sure it’s the same guy) I can honestly say that points are made, if you are willing to wade through it all. Yes, it is overkill, and it doesn’t just cover ‘The Key’, but various interviews and Whitley’s other books, but the whole point of it is that it APPEARS to be ” presented for free download to enthusiasts and researchers of the paranormal, the extraterrestrial, and the otherworldly.” Uh-huh. That would be many of us. It is one-sided, and is also very derisive, but I read through it, like many other criticisms of Whitley. One of the first clues for me about the tone of the piece is on that home page, and it is the email address for contact: (Ok…lmhowe, Linda Moulton Howe, doty, and here I am guessing because ‘doty’ is a slang expression, and also has several other meanings, but it probably refers to being mentally impaired, and 42 probably refers to 1942, which is Linda’s year of birth.(Chuckles all around, right?) So, Linda Moulton-Howe appears to be treated with disrespect too. To understand Whitley and get a taste of what he has been through, this loooong-winded piece provides a good place to start, if you don’t fall asleep half way through it. All of us could be picked apart in the same way, piece by piece, and probably not come through it as well as Whitley has. While many ‘facts’ are presented, in the end, it just seemed mean spirited.

      One take for me: I think for some people searching for answers, a certain level of disenchantment may set in as soon as they realize that the answers are no where near to being black and white. The result is that ‘killing the messenger’ comes into play, especially when it’s discovered that the messenger has feet made of clay, just like every person walking on this earth.

      1. Oh, Heinrich Moltke! Thanks.
        Oh, Heinrich Moltke! Thanks. Yes, I had him kicked off of here for completely cruel and insensitive comments many months ago. Perhaps this strieberkey website is revenge (against the wrong person.) Either way, what you point out about the disingenuousness of this being for enthusiasts of blah, blah and blah is correct. Like any good debunker doing the good work of objective reporting (wink/nudge), he just can’t contain his enthusiasm to insult and deride. And so while he may or may not have some good points about Whitley’s work, if the overall point is to call into question Whitley’s motives or sanity… How about a mirror, Mr. Moltke? You’ve already shown yourself to be disingenuous.

        On a related note, I think “doty” is less clever than that. It’s a reference to Richard Doty.

        1. Richard ‘Rick’ Doty…Good
          Richard ‘Rick’ Doty…Good catch! Just proves the true intentions of the piece even more than ‘Peristalsis Digest’…

      2. Yet honest criticism has
        Yet honest criticism has value, not for its own sake or as misdirected frustration, but only to bring clarity where clarity is possible. Where it isn’t, criticism has no place, because it has nothing to offer, but in this elusive field it must be applied where it’s appropriate. I followed a false guru for 17 years because I allowed my criticism to take a back seat. I was hoping that would pay off. It didn’t, at least not the way I thought it would.

  19. How do I hear rest of
    How do I hear rest of interview that was cut off mid sentence? Why are you not answering others who have asked same?

    1. Sorry. I emailed Whitley
      Sorry. I emailed Whitley about this and then forgot about it. He’s out of the country and may not be able to fix anything this week, but I’ll write to him again in case he forgot, too.

      In the meantime, the streaming player above has the full show.

  20. Thanks so much for this
    Thanks so much for this Whitley!

  21. Whitley, you say no one reads
    Whitley, you say no one reads your books. I just want you to know that I do. I even have signed copies of your books and I cherish them. I really wish I could meet you. So, yes, while your books may not sell, there are those who do and that is important.

  22. Regarding

    Regarding theproblemswiththekey website, it has an entirely fallacious focus. I think that it is inevitable that some of the ideas in the book must be related to my previous work. Why wouldn’t they be, and why does that invalidate them as ideas? In fact, it does nothing to change their value.

    Very few people have ever had an experience like the one that led to the writing of the Key. It is not possible to determine the origin of these experiences, as I have always said, in fact, repeated endlessly.

    One thing that makes certain people hate the Key is that it makes a demand of readers that we look to our own souls and examine how we are living. “Sin is denial of the right to thrive.” We all know that this is true. The second you read it, you know. And not only that, we never lie to ourselves, not deep within. But some of us, who have hurt ourselves and others, will do anything to push away the challenge that is in those words. I know very well that this is one important motive of the author of that website.

    1. Whitley, I don’t think the
      Whitley, I don’t think the focus of the critique was on invalidating the ideas, but in challenging the claim of their originality, particularly in reference to the Gurdjieff/Ouspensky material. I’m not personally familiar with the latter, so my statement is based only on the claims of the critique itself, but if valid, I think he has a point. I’m sorry you feel persecuted, but human nature being what it is sometimes it’s better not to take things personally, even when they’re intended that way; it’s only likely to feed the purpose of the persecutor, whereas having a more detached perspective is likely to be the best way to rise above it, both internally and externally.

  23. I am deep in the Italian
    I am deep in the Italian countryside and cannot manage to re-upload the downloadable versions of this show. I will do this as soon as I can.

  24. I just thought it was
    I just thought it was interesting that ‘Moltke’ is an anagram of The Master of the Key…in French…’Le MOTK’. Oh le irony 🙂 I was bored, sorry!

    1. Moltke is not meant as an

      Moltke is not meant as an anagram. It is a reference to a Nazi diplomat who worked in Poland in WWII, and is used by this man, in my opinion, because of sympathies for the Nazi movement. Understand that I know the actual identity of “Heinrich Moltke.” We looked him up because of some of the disturbing comments he left on Unknowncountry in the 6 years he was there. After Jeremy had him blocked, he reappeared under another name for a while, but left on his own.

      I believe that this person may suffer from paranoia, among other things. He has been under treatment for mental illness in the past as he admits on the internet under other of his aliases. I also believe him to be a virulent anti-Semite. If I am right, then these two things together–the anti-Semitism and the paranoia–explain the poor creature’s obsession with the Key. I say “poor creature” because of other things I know about him.

      1. I’d like to see the evidence
        I’d like to see the evidence of this. Otherwise calling a critic of your work a mentally-ill anti-Semite seems a bit much.

  25. To Whitley, Jeremy, and
    To Whitley, Jeremy, and Srava,
    Did Whitley already have an implant before he met the Master of the Key? If so, perhaps the implant was guiding his thinking and writing, providing him with certain insights even before the interview with the Master.
    Love to you all.

  26. Speaking of Whitley’s
    Speaking of Whitley’s implant, I was just reading a claim that it was merely collagen. I presume that is incorrect? Blessings, dear friends.

    1. Hi Michael, regarding
      Hi Michael, regarding Whitley’s implant, you might like to listen to this Subscriber Special from 2008 with Dr. John Lerma, who attempted to remove it…
      “Saturday, February 9, 2008
      Whitley Strieber and Dr. John Lerma on Whitley’s Implant
      For our subscribers Whitley and Dr. Lerma dialog about the doctor’s experience removing his implant. It is chilling to listen to Dr. Lerma describe it, after ten years, as “the strangest thing I’ve ever seen”–and then to tell of the highly unusual call he received from the laboratory where he had sent it for examination–the only such call he had ever received in his career. But it doesn’t end there. Suddenly–incredibly–they launch into a discussion of all sorts of secrets, including the Kennedy assassination, and talk about an extremely powerful but unnamed man they both knew, who apparently possessed some of the greatest secrets of modern times, a man Dr. Lerma helped during his last days in his transition to the other side.”

      …You also might like to look at this video…
      “Tuesday, June 6, 2006
      Whitley Strieber Implant Removal
      This video was taken during the attempt by Dr. John Lerma to remove the implant from Whitley Strieber’s left ear that was placed there in May of 1989. The removal attempt failed because the implant moved out from under Dr. Lerma’s scalpel. He then withdrew, due to this anomalous event. The implant remains in Mr. Strieber’s ear.”

      There are lots of other references to the implant, if you do a search within the UC site for either “implant” or “John Lerma”….for example this Journal entry from Whitley, in 2008… An excerpt “…I have an implant in my left ear that remains the strangest thing that Dr. John Lerma, who attempted to remove it, has ever seen. It could not be removed because it was self-mobile and moved, before his eyes, to another part of my ear when he touched it with a scalpel. Not only that, the biologist who examined the fragment of it he did collect said that it had cilia on it, that would explain its ability to move…”.

      The only specific reference to ‘collagen’ relating to implants that I can find on UC, is within the following ‘News Stories’ article from 2001… …but that is about Dr Roger Leir and has nothing to do with Whitley’s implant, as far as I can see.

      Sherbet UFO.

    2. The implant was inserted in

      The implant was inserted in May of 1989. The Key experience was years later. As to these fake claims popping up about me, understand this: the UFO community is deeply corrupt at many different levels, and there are people after me, ranging from racists and neo-Nazis within the movement to people following an “evil alien” agenda that has an insider locomotion.

      As it becomes more and more difficult to deny this reality, as is happening now with things like Robert Bigelow’s statements on 60 Minutes, it becomes more and more important to many of these people to discredit me. Thus the recent upsurge in attacks. They must not let me be empowered in this way and they are fighting hard to prevent that.

      They are especially afraid of things like the Key, because it provides a moral compass and an understanding of the soul that they do not want people to have.

      1. Crude methods such as
        Crude methods such as disinformation and straw man attacks must by their very nature effect only those fields they emanate from. If your message is deep and real it will resonate there and prevail in those whom it’s meant to. The outcome of this battle is not determined by surface forces.

  27. GREAT SHOW….one burning
    GREAT SHOW….one burning question to WS…from the KEY & MOTK & many years on the Climate watch.

    We all know bout the North Atlantic conveyor belt grinding to a halt due to equalization of the salinity from melting ice.

    What happens in the Pacific? Was this mechanism foretold? Will Atlantic be first & Pacific follow? The tropical current is reverse in the Pacific.

    What happens in the Pacific!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????????

    1. The Pacific currents may or
      The Pacific currents may or may not be interrupted, but they also may or may not be interfacing with any water-facing radioactivity that cannot be contained from the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the short and long term effects of which on a vast cycle of life has now to be our long-term concern.

  28. Jeremy, This is in response
    Jeremy, This is in response to your May 17th on-air reply to my post about the role and necessity of scientific development in human evolution. All human activity can legitimately be subject to criticism without deserving ultimate condemnation, because all human activity can be justified as necessary for a time, but none for all time. Absence of condemnation doesn’t mean acceptance. What I mean is you can’t condemn something as unnecessary folly. Folly yes, unnecessary no, because however ugly and evil, it’s an expression of human nature, and must therefore at some point come forth, or else we don’t get the opportunity to confront it, and learn from it. Evolution demands both change when necessary and stasis for the same reason, but neither can be a welcome end point unless the process of evolution itself comes to an end. All human activity is a reflection of human nature and is by necessity a mixture of good and bad; neither of which can be easily vanquished in spite of the best efforts of the representatives of each. All forms of social order, religion, etc. have their virtues and vices, but none, against all hope and claim, are ends in themselves. They must and ultimately do serve only the evolutionary purpose, and it’s only from that they derive their true value. I make no claim of the superiority of the scientific mindset over that of the first-world, but neither do I claim the reverse, only that both should be acknowledged for what they are – reflections of human nature that must be given their field and their opportunity to be both taken up and left behind, for both serve a greater purpose than themselves, because fundamentally, we do.

  29. I wish I knew. I wonder if

    I wish I knew. I wonder if anybody does. There is little study in the scientific literature, where the Atlantic has received most of the attention.

    But not to worry. We’ll soon find out.

    1. “But not to worry. We’ll soon
      “But not to worry. We’ll soon find out.”

      Whitley, your macabre sense of humor tells me you have more novels to write. If you feel your name is currently a block, why not use a pseudonym? If the enemy employs radar, fly under it.

      1. Macabre humour maybe…
        Macabre humour maybe… purposefully feigned optimism suggesting an undercurrent of resignation. It seems the climate ‘tipping point’ has been and gone.

        Regarding Whitley using a pseudonym, I was thinking the same thing the other day…but maybe the Visitors would object to that, as Whitley’s voice would get completely lost in a sea of other authors. Better to speak directly to a largely unreceptive audience, than to shout from a distance where no-one can hear you?

        1. While it’s not ideal it could
          While it’s not ideal it could be a path to honest publicity focused on the work itself without stepping on any biased tails, and then revealing the true authorship, redeeming his name at the same time as putting the disingenuous
          nature of his critics in bold relief, all this provided the work itself can successfully carry this burden to completion.

          1. It could be worth considering
            It could be worth considering but on reflection, I am not convinced a time-delayed reveal of true authorship would help. A case in point being which was written in 2017. Considering ‘The Key’ was initially published in 2001 and republished in 2011, that is quite a few years for the woodwork to reveal its contents.

          2. But every author has or may
            But every author has or may have critics. Once a work is published it must stand on its own merits. What we’re talking about here though are barriers to publishing, and honest reviews at the beginning of the publicity cycle. This is what the plan addresses, as to what happens after and long after that’s for the not only the critics but the readers to decide. Not every book by Whitley is subject to the same criticism as is The Key but whether its merited or not that’s not the problem we’re addressing.

            As far as a publisher, perhaps contact Richard Dolan, this would put the book close to the intended audience and away from the noise of a sea of random authors. After the reveal, a series of mutual interviews could be used to redeem Whitley’s reputation directly after the agency of the psuedonym has done its work.

          3. “that is quite a few years
            “that is quite a few years for the woodwork to reveal its contents.”

            Also quite a few years for the work to remain unmolested, at least by this particular critic. If there was an urgency to suppress, apparently this guy missed the memo.

          4. They sound like potentially
            They sound like potentially good ideas for publishing and early release phase.

            …And ‘Linda Moulton Doty’ of ‘’, whoever he or indeed she is, certainly has missed that memo! Either that or has been busy writing twenty pages a year since initial release of ‘The Key’, waiting for a final monumental dump.

          5. LOL to borrow a phrase from
            LOL to borrow a phrase from Kurt Vonnegut, “Busy busy busy”.

    2. TY whitley… I do know that
      TY whitley… I do know that the rotation of the earth brings the cold artic waters down the CA coast and beyond conception point. Does that salinity gradient equalize out and the currents stop and warm waters come North? Exactly the opposite of the Atlantic? I wonder what the bouy data shows?

      Interesting study to cross correlate???

  30. This is the craziest, most
    This is the craziest, most chaotic period of time in my life, EVER (Fortunately, my personal life is pretty good, and overall balanced). Not even the highly weird incidents with time, UFOs, and ‘ghosts’ compare to what is going on NOW in the ‘real’ world at large regarding climate, politics, wars and religion, what-have-you…And some highly suspect folks are coming out of the woodwork (…and out from under rocks?) too. Phew!

    1. I admit to being rather
      I admit to being rather fascinated with the political machinations currently taking place, but it seems to come down to a personality-disordered president with an unfortunate political agenda disingenuously supported by a group of political elites sympathetic to it, all taking place at a time when that agenda has past its sell-by date, but, nothing really outside of the mundane, run-of-the-mill abuses to which those in power have been at home from time immemorial.

      If you would like to elaborate your thoughts I’d love to hear them.

  31. And I just saw that there was
    And I just saw that there was a journal article rehashing one of the themes in this thread. Jeremy, could you include your friend Jeff Ritzmann’s take on all of this. It seems vaguely familiar to examples that he mentions in his blog.

    What is this opposing, negative force that seems to pop up from time to time, especially when in the midst of high strangeness events?

    One should take into account the Whitley has been traveling out of country and there was also Whitley’s missing time experience.

    1. Quantum Johnny:
      Oh, yeah. I

      Quantum Johnny:

      Oh, yeah. I wondered about the travel and missing time experience too in the middle of all of this.

      Funny thought…Breach in the timeline?

    2. I’ll see what I can do here.
      I’ll see what I can do here. Funny enough at my last job the owners were deeply involved in the day-to-day stuff and EVERY time they’d take time off, machinery would break, someone would quit–just everything would go haywire. Maybe there is something about focusing so much of yourself on one thing and then stepping away that makes it come unglued.

  32. Sorry about that! (image of a
    Sorry about that! (image of a cat staring wide-eyed)

  33. Glad somebody agrees with me
    Glad somebody agrees with me that Steven Hawkings talks about a lot of things- that he doesn’t really know what he’s talking about.

  34. Whitley,
    I have

    I have read and own all of your non-fiction books except Super Natural. My Father gave me a copy of Communion as a kid so I would leave him alone to beer and sport rather than tell me, again, about his weird experiences.

    As for most books worth reading, good luck getting them in some Antipodean parts, where it’s either the e-book or wait two months for the ship to get here.

    I had to buy all of Jaques Vallee’s books at grossly inflated prices from the US as anything by yourelf or on similar subject matter gets stolen not long after libraries buy copies.

  35. Whitley, I just listened to
    Whitley, I just listened to Linda Moulton Howe’s program about esp and Annie Jacobsen’s book…. i think it definitely connects with the questions about truth and what is going on. I think if gives people an additional piece of the puzzle… or more… and directly addresses the folks who think all this is “junk” or untrue. I am applying her work in relation to your experiences although she didn’t do that. However, there is a lot of connection. I haven’t read the book by Ms. Jacobsen, but i do not think this is a stretch.

    You have had such patience and generosity with folks who think this is all bosh, especially after last weeks show with Jeremy. I just want folks to know there’s more out there which supports the reality which you and so many of the subscribers have touched.

  36. Thank you, Sherbet and
    Thank you, Sherbet and Whitley!
    Whitley, few people would have your fortitude in the face of the attacks you have received over the years. I deeply admire you, and am so happy to learn from you.

  37. Whitley… what i wrote above
    Whitley… what i wrote above “…folks think this is all bosh…” not a comment about you, your work, or about Jeremy’s show.

    Often negative diatribes say/show something about the person who is “in that place of negativity” rather than the person to whom it is aimed. You are wise in how you “handled” it all. I am sorry that you had to go through it – not just here but through the years.

    There is light though, … many came forward standing with you on the front line, while many more make quite a depth of humanity around you, learning from you, reading your works, etc. You needed to know there is much support out here as we have found “you” and that is indeed, a gift to us.

  38. I seriously doubt any future
    I seriously doubt any future psychic predictions.. Note at 27:16 WS claims that Ann never deals in the future. I have also heard cop-outs by physics who claim this escape clause:

    ” The future is always changing and a moving target to predict”

    Then why attempt it? Seems it put one out of business! Silly Shit and a cop out…
    I have re listened to old recordings of future projections from 1 year ago an they are all wrong and when called on it , the cop out clause is trotted out…rubbish!

  39. Whitley’s (and Anne’s of
    Whitley’s (and Anne’s of course) contribution to understanding what it is to be human and the possiblilities we have in this physical ‘reality’ and non- physical realms is in my opinion monumental.
    Explaining his experiences in Communion, and subsequent continuations, plus the astounding The Key, Whitley has expanded mine and many others boundaries of possibility and wonder.
    It’s easy to be a critic.
    Especially when criticising someone who in exposing his deepest personal experiences asks us to look deeply within ourselves with such honesty.
    I will forever be grateful to Whitley and Anne for the contributions thay’ve made and continue to make in trying to help us all understand our potential within ourselves and in the (many) Worlds around us.
    Few in this world make such a contribution to the very essence of ‘being Human’, and critics will seek to make a name for themselves by attacking the messenger who brings us such insights.
    These critics come from a place of negativity, closed-mindedness and fear.
    How many ‘debunkers’ have ever touched your heart and soul in such a way that it alters your very perception of yourself and your potential, opening you up to being Human in all it’s expanding possibilities?
    Whitley & Anne, thank you.
    You have made a HUGE positive difference in this world, and you are appreciated and loved, always.

  40. Just a note to reassure
    Just a note to reassure Whitley that some of us (me, anyway) will still buy his books. The Super Natural was pretty darn good, and I certainly wouldn’t mind another Alien Hunter novel if one popped up.

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.