Clarification Time: Behold a Pale Horse pp. 41-42

Before we even begin the first chapter I have to make something clear: this Cooper's book, but he didn't "write" it. What he's done for the most part is compile other works and then offer commentary on it. Think of it like the framing of the Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Tolkien sets up the book as though he was not the author. Rather it is framed as though the Hobbit, whose actual title is "There and Back Again," is a book by Bilbo Baggins that was "found." Everything in this book is something that he found or something that was sent to him by another individual--with some exception. His contribution is commentary and emphasis. So let's dive in: 

"Chapter 1: Excerpts From Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars, copy furnished by Mr. Tom Young A fellow warrior in the cause of Freedom." 

This is what I mean, the book's self-serving introductory chapter leads us to believe that Cooper is going to regal us with the stuff that he learned in ONI. Instead, he's treating us to Tom Young's document, and not only that--just part of it as well. This is an excerpt not even the full document. 

The first thing that we should be asking as skeptics is, "who is Tom Young?" No idea. The name is too generic for me to research. I found a Vietnam Naval Veteran who died in 2015...could be him, but I have no way to verify this information. It would be nice if Cooper began this section by explaining who this guy is/was; and importantly, how he knew him. Did they meet at a UFO conference? Did they serve together? In academics, this information isn't just important, it is vital. If someone claims that they found Hitler's diaries, that person must be able to prove providence (chain of custody). Cooper is going to skip all of that. The title page claims "excerpts printed word for word exactly as discovered."

Which is good, but Cooper is going to prove that wrong almost immediately. The chapter properly begins, "The Illuminati's declaration of War upon the People of America. [above titled added by WC (William Cooper)]"

Robison, at least, lead us slowly into the Illuminati claim, but Cooper is just diving right in. Ok, that's fun, but he has to introduce who the Illuminati is or what it is. A mass market book like this would hit better if we knew who the bad guy was in the story.

In the biography of Cooper, "Pale Horse Rider," there is a story about Cooper and a few other Ufologists discussing something known as the "Krill Papers." The Krill Papers were alleged to be the documents concerning the US government's acquisition of UFO technology. In the UFO world this was a big deal, but the Krill papers were a fraud, they were made up by two ufologists (whose names I will have to find--I believe it was John Lear and Bill Moore who were pretty legendary in the UFO community for a bit) in the 1970s. Cooper tried to convince them that he had seen these papers while he was in ONI, but that is impossible. I bring this up because conspiracy theorists will often resort to a game of one-upmanship with each other. The need to be the person that sees above the crowd becomes so much that they begin fabricating information. They do this in a backhanded way as well, Cooper is telling Lear and Moore, "yes you are correct, because long before you saw them I had also seen them."

Cooper does the same here. The "Silent Weapons" document is supposed to be the plan. This document, the one appearing the book is claimed by Tom Young to have been found in an IBM copier in 1986 dated as 1979. However, Cooper claims that there was a copy in the hands of Naval Intelligence in 1954 that he saw in 1969. Even in his own book Cooper has to establish dominance. 

Cooper goes further attaching this book to the Bilderberg Group. That's a name I only hear out of Alex Jones's mouth lately. We will deal with the Bilderberg Group later on. 

One thing about this chapter is that it is supposed to be an official manual given to people who are going to carry out the Quiet War. Every time we see capital letters, that's Cooper making an emphasis. Comments or editorials are going to be bracketed. 

"WELCOME ABOARD" ok, why has Cooper emphasized this? Unless, that is how it originally began, which is a weird orientation opening for the soldiers in the New World Order. Does Destro begin his orientation, "Good morning everyone, welcome to Cobra--a terrorist organization bent on world domination. If you open your orientation packets you will find..."?

It continues, "This publication marks the 25th anniversary of the Third World War, called the "Quiet War" being conducted using subjective biological warfare, fought with "silent weapons."

This is Cooper/Young being sloppy in their fabrication. They call it a war, they call them silent weapons; but that is only because Cooper/Young believe "them" to be evil. If this were true they wouldn't call it World War III, they would call it something else: "The Utopia Project" or something like that. Villains don't know they are villains. In Shakespeare Richard III doesn't know he's the bad guy: all of his scheming and murders are done for the greater goal of him becoming king, much as he viewed the Lancasters as the villains during the civil war. It wouldn't be called a "quiet war" either, it would be a series of actions and policies. Only Cooper/Young would call it a war. I do like the term "subjective biological warfare" as a label though it is essentially meaningless. 

The next section is headed: "SECURITY"  but it then goes on to say, "It is patently impossible to discuss social engineering or the automation of a society, i.e., the engineering of social automation systems (SILENT WEAPONS) on a NATIONAL or WORLDWIDE SCALE without implying extensive OBJECTIVES of SOCIAL CONTROL and DESTRUCTION OF HUMAN LIFE, i.e. SLAVERY and GENOCIDE." 

Ok, none of that is about security, so this is, pretending it is true, is a weird manual for new recruits. If it were titled "Security" it should discuss security policies. The caps lock is distracting but it lets us realize what is going on here. Cooper is highlighting the words that are going to have the most emotional impact. The rest of the sentence is unimportant compared to these words. What Cooper wants you to read is "National worldwide scale objective social control destruction of human life, slavery genocide:" and not the strange claim that this is the security portion of this alleged document. 

Keeping that in mind there is a warning that this document needs to be kept from public scrutiny. Ok, sure, just stamp it confidential and that takes care of it. Still, I do wonder again about the recruitment, if you get this far and they hand you this document and you think, this isn't for me, do you get to leave? What's the policy on that? Cooper hasn't thought this through either. 

It's important because he goes on to say that this document could be interpreted as a "TECHNICALLY FORMAL DECLARATION OF DOMESTIC WAR." 

As we all know, the "technical" stuff is always the best stuff. Yes, you're technically right, but actually wrong; is how that phrase usually goes. A formal declaration of war has to be formally presented. It could never be a formal declaration of war without someone stepping out of the shadows. You cannot have an informal declaration of war, you can have an informal war--but a declaration has to be declared. 

Cooper seems to remember that this is the introduction to the packet so the document welcomes the new recruits and congratulates them on their ability to look at human society with "COLD OBJECTIVITY" and then discuss observations with others of a similar stature "WITHOUT A LOSS of DISCRETION or HUMILITY." 

I have no idea what that means. I know what Cooper is trying to claim here, that the recruits are cold vulcans who can make decisions on solving overpopulation without emotion. However, the loss of discretion? I don't think Cooper knows what that word means, similar with "humility." Niether of those words makes sense here.  

This section ends with another disclaimer by Cooper wherein he reminds us that he's been adding emphasis to the document and then commentary in the brackets. It's unnecessary, but I admire his attempt at legitimacy here. He wants to make sure that we know he did not write the document but that he's added to it. Which is nice, but then he follows this with a paragraph that is clearly him speaking and he forgot to bracket it off. This time he's confessing to having prior knowledge of the document which he claims is a formal declaration of war on US citizens by the Illuminati--which is what he added to the beginning of the chapter. It's important for him to remind us of this because now we can declare war on them and take "whatever steps may be necessary, including violence, to identify, counterattack, and destroy the enemy."

Did I mention that Oklahoma City Bomber Timothy McVeigh was a fan of Cooper? That the two may have even met...at least the claim was made by Cooper and the FBI looked into it? While possibly inspiring McVeigh, it's at least refreshing to have such a call to violence be obvious, unlike the cowardly dog-whistling of Alex Jones and the modern conspiracy theorists. The ultimate issue here is that we have to take Cooper's word on everything. Unlike Allen or Robison who tried, and failed, to prove their claims, Cooper is just assuming that we agree with him and that everything he says is a fact. He saw all of this at ONI...but then again, he also claimed that he saw all the UFO stuff there too, and by the 90s he had backed entirely away from it. 

Next week, we will cover his section on HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.