NOTE: I thought this would be of interest in light of the overall Hornet’s Nest topic…and before I post the MUFON update on Thursday.

I recently had the opportunity to engage in an exchange of emails with someone outside of the UFO field who said that they had very high level contacts in a number of, political, entertainment and scientific fields etc., in fact all the way up to the…White House. There were a few things that I learned in these exchanges that were both surprising and a bit disappointing. To me they confirm what Meier and the Plejaren have long said about our beliefs-dominated behaviors.

John is someone who seems sincere in his values and goodwill towards humanity and, as a student of life, meditation, etc., I’m sure that he can not only handle but possibly also benefit from the open conversation.

I want to make a clear distinction between possibly embarrassing and bashing someone. I won’t post any comments that attack his person. While you may or may not approve of his positions, John has no obligation to support, like, agree with, endorse or assist in furthering the discussion about the Billy Meier case, which is really all I did ask of, and want, him to do. I suspect that the things he seems to fear the most, i.e. embarrassment and loss of face, ego, self-image, etc., are still more important to him than the naked truth.

For the most part I will let our email exchange speak for itself. I will add that we had a nearly two-hour initial phone conversation prior to the more detailed emails, which I refer to*. In the conversation it was already clear to me that John’s belief systems and ego were very threatened by the Billy Meier case, its evidence and information. David is John’s business partner and wasn’t directly involved in our conversation other than to make the comments towards the end.

The correspondence, which is uncorrected and unedited (with only the addition of clarifying who’s speaking) starts with John’s acknowledgement of:


DVDs received.

Will watch.

What are you looking for from us?



Hi John,

I think that will become more clear after you’ve seen the films.

However, I find it very interesting that your quote, “Consciousness is primary and the essence of personal, social and global transformation.” is very much in alginment with what Meier says at the beginning of the first film, The Silent Revolution of Truth, “The meaning of life is the evolution of consciousness.”

Please let me know when we might chat about the possibilities.




*Good morning John,

I very much appreciated our epic conversation!

A couple of things:

What is the criteria that reasonable people use to determine the truth? I’ll gladly provide that.

Also, the people involved are generally a-political but perhaps what an Italian member of the group wrote about Obama four years ago would interest you, as well as what was Meier was told regarding Obama and Romney, in September 2012, prior to the outcome of the election. (You may want to search “Obama” and skip through the other things, though the info about Bush and 9/11 is interesting. Meier was forewarned of this in 1976 and 1986 and briefly discussed it with Quetzal in 1989.)

And here’s what Foster Gamble, director of the mega-success “Thrive”, said about “And Did They Listen?”, “Thanks, Michael Horn, for researching this all these years and putting it together in a way that those with open minds can consider it for themselves. This story has intrigued me and many of the brightest, most diligent people I know for decades. The implications are astounding.”

I look forward to speaking with you again,



Good morning John,

I very much appreciated our epic conversation!

JR: Me too.

MH: A couple of things:

What is the criteria that reasonable people use to determine the truth? I’ll gladly provide that.

JR: I can’t speak for others. I suppose it is a collection of elements. For me, intuition is a real barometer of of gauging if someone is telling the truth — how someone or something “feels” — I use the term feels though the experience of intuition is much subtler, a very, very fine feeling. And I have found it to be about 80% reliable. For me, the experience of intuition is a pre-mind experience and therefore not subject to the limitations of the mind. No matter how logical, no matter what the “evidence” might be or uggests, intuition can often reveal what the mind cannot. That is why for me, if the “needle” doesn’t move, or moves in a direction counterclockwise to what is being perceived / presented as “true,” I generally trust it.

MH: That’s one of the reasons that, in The Silent Revolution of Truth, I chose to bring in a psychotherapist and an expert consultant to the US Army Special Forces, Michael Arndt. I don’t know if you caught that segment but Arndt is a master practitioner of NLP and teaches troops to almost instantly assess body language, non-verbal cues, etc., since soldier’s lives may depend on such assessments regarding congruity, indications of whether someone is lying or not, etc. In fact, I had Arndt watch both Meier and Phobol Cheng, the retired UN representative representing Cambodia – for 12 years – and to do so with the sound off so that he wuldn’t be influenced by the content (even though Meier psoke in German, I didnt want to take the chance). He gave them both a thumbs up for honesty.

BTW, I tried to trick Meier, four times over three years, with a question pertaining to one of his unusual claims. Each time the answer was, unhesitatingly, effortlessly, the same. Wehn a man tells the truth…there’s nothing to remember.

(Speaking of NLP, Tony Robbins used to have me come to his Firewalks and sing my song “I’ll Be My Own Here”, which I included in my daughter’s and my award-winning documentary, Breaking the Silence.)

Also, the people involved are generally a-political but perhaps what an Italian member of the group wrote about Obama four years ago would interest you, as well as what was Meier was told regarding Obama and Romney, in September 2012, prior to the outcome of the election. (You may want to search “Obama” and skip through the other things, though the info about Bush and 9/11 is interesting. Meier was forewarned of this in 1976 and 1986 and briefly discussed it with Quetzal in 1989.)


MH: And here’s what Foster Gamble, director of the mega-success “Thrive”, said about “And Did They Listen?”, “Thanks, Michael Horn, for researching this all these years and putting it together in a way that those with open minds can consider it for themselves. This story has intrigued me and many of the brightest, most diligent people I know for decades. The implications are astounding.”

JR: Not a good example to use with me as I know that “Thrive” wasn’t mega-successful, at least by the standards I care about. It was popular in the BMS community to an extent, but didn’t achieve anywhere near the success as “What the Bleep” or “The Secret.” So, to use it as an example in an effort to bolster credibility doesn’t work for me. Nor I do not hold Mr. Gamble as an authority.

MH: Fair enough but – as you well know – using everything to one’s advantage, ethically, is the way to go. For some people it’s meant more than it may mean to you. And here are reviews from some of the ordinary folks, I keep getting them but those are sufficient.

I look forward to speaking with you again,

JR: I started to watch this morning. One thing that bothers me is that the woman who “interviews” you really isn’t interviewing you in a way that creates, supports or establishes your credibility. I would have much preferred to see a more “60 Minutes” style interview where your feet are being held to the fire.She’s giving you free reign to talk, talk, talk. This is more of an long-form expository interview — kind of like an informercial. She asks a question, generally in a supportive manner, and you then speak for a long time before another question is posed. This gives the impression that this is a feigned, constructed interview instead of one designed to reveal truth.

MH: This was an absolutely unscripted, unrehearsed interview. And, to your point, I would love having the toughest interview/interviewer you could come up with. There’s a reason why the Plejaren and Meier have me as their rep. I do all of my interviews and presentations (up to four hours) without script, only with bullet points…if I use PowerPoint, etc. Once one knows the truth, it’s fairly simple. So if you think that any truth was withheld, avoided, etc. please, feel free to hit me with it.

JR: As I mentioned to you yesterday, and you agreed, the presentation of this whole subject area has been at the mercy of people who don’t know how to communicate in ways — not just verbally, but in terms of messaging, story construction — that create credibility and who themselves leave much to be desired. The “facts” or “evidence” can rarely standalone: Often, people believe people more than they believe what is presented as empirical evidence. Everyone has intuition and it comes into play virtually always. I think this is one of the reasons why this subject area has not really gained much traction.

MH: I really suggest you read my numerous excoriating articles about the “UFO community/INDUSTRY” and the shills, charlatans and frauds who populate it and from whom such nonsense is spewed forth continuously. It’s no accident however, as you’ll understand better from:

Concealing Contact at all Costs

Astronomer Discovered Pluto…but MUFON Can’t Discover the Meier Case?

Keeping the Truth under the Radar

MUFON’s Director: “Meier Case Real, just…too Good”

JR: I had a conversation last night about our conversation and the person I was talking with is a well-credentially physicist from CalTech, transformationally sympathetic who knows a thing or two about this area, and he made an observation that the people who tend to champion this “cause,” present company excluded, tend to be of a particular personality type, in need of external validation and of a particular type of intelligence and socio-economic background if you get the ethos he is pointing to.

MH: I think you’ll find I’m quite the exception, as is Matthew Wiezckiewicz. Please read my bio and his. By the way, he and I are both INTJ, we tend to need…no one’s validation.

Of my two presentations in Hong Kong, one was for the overall 1,500+ attendees and the second one was for the…scientists. I refer to myself, oh so modestly, as The World’s Leading Expert on UFOs , simply because I am (with the obvious exception of Meier and many of hte Swiss, none of whom do public presentations).

JR: I am curious, when was the last time Billy filmed the UFOs?

MH: He last filmed them in 1976 (forget the hokey music!) and last videoed in 1981 (the WCUFO shown in the film and on The logical reasons, as expalined to and by him, were that past that point in time with the advent of home computers, digital and special effects, it would be pointless, since people would dismiss everything as a hoax…even as they tried unsuccessfully to do with his pre-computer evidence. (Note that the UFO in the film has two lights that flash on and off in broad daylight…ain’t no model)

See also: Scientific Experts’ Comments on Meier’s Evidence

For your scientist friend, who I know that both Matthew and I would be delighted to communicate with and answer questions for, and for your friends connected with Steven Spielberg like Douglas Trumball, the WCUFO analysis that is reported on here is supported by information (linked online from here with two demonstration videos) as to exactly what techniques and state-of-the-art technologies Rhal Zahi used so that – in accordance with the scientific method – anyone can attempt the same work and compare their results. Anyone is free to do just that.

As I mentioned, I did the same thing with the photo here, putting it in PhotoShop, and got the same results. That’s quite a trick for a “simple, one-armed farmer” to pull off using 35mm film in 1981…and foreseeing how to “defeat” our 21st century technology to “hoax” it 33 years later!

John, as we both acknowledged yesterday, we’re essentially on the same side, i.e. the side of truth, life, spirituality, etc. In my opinion, we have the rarest of opportunities to contribute something of immense, unparalleled value to humanity. In the simplest terms, it’s essentially about this very kind of dialogue and letting it seek its own higest level, organically, like water.

As long as you are willing, I will gladly do my best to answer, or get the answers, to any and all challenges and questions.





Since you are very deeply involved with meditation, which is an essential and extremely important element in the spirual teaching, you may be interested in this information. Again, there may be a lot that deosn’t interest you so you can search for “meditation”.

I found out a few years ago that my Standing In Spirit workshop, which I created in 1991, could be considered a form of Vipassana.





Yesterday you menitoned Sanskrit as the best language, etc. I neglected to mention that while it may be an exceptional language, unlike German it is not at all a widely spoken language so that it wouldn’t be practical or effective to try to get everyone to learn it a fresh.

The following excerpt from the English language FIGU publication, 49 Questions, explains the word OM.

OM (AUM in Sanskrit) is an ancient word derived from the old Lyrian language, which was long since lost on Earth. The actual meaning of the acronym OM is disclosed when the full significance of both letters are revealed by an explanation of the two words whose first letters are the “O” and the “M” – OMFALON MURADO. When abridged as O and M, these two words OMFALON MURADO possess the identical, indeed, an even greater tonal-harmony significance that when the two are fully pronounced as OMFALON MURADO. For this reason, the abbreviation “OM” was used and became the traditional form. The ancient Lyrians referred to their writings about the truth – the BOOK OF TRUTH – also as the OM, OMFALON MURADO, LIFE’S NAVEL or the NAVEL OF LIFE. The text, entitled “OM” incorporates all Creational teachings, that is to say, the book holds all teachings of wisdom and life as a written record.

(P.S. Yes, they also practice an OM meditation.)

When I sent you the link to the meditiation info, I neglected to give you this information pertaining to Meier’s time in India, in 1964 (when he hadn’t yet lost his left arm):

India 1964: The Foundational Evidence that Establishes the Authenticity of the Billy Meier UFO Contacts

Okay, I will stop now until I hear from you!



Greetings Michael,

After watching the DVD, it became evident that there are too many statements, circumstances and understandings that feel amiss to me. There isn’t enough deep, naturally-occurring, resonant chemistry between me and this particular material to warrant my sincere and authentic attention and involvement.

I wrote a much longer email, but decided to edit it, as I know that sending the long-form email would evoke similar long responses from you and create an endless loop of responses between us, leading to more rigorous intellectual debate which I wouldn’t find valuable at this point. Writing the longer email, however, did help me clarify what’s important to me around this subject and put it into proper perspective which is valuable.

Trying to convince me of the validity of this particular material isn’t an option — either I feel the inherent truth of it and form a relationship with it, or I don’t. And in this case, I didn’t. However, this is not to discount the whole subject matter; only that the Meier “story” is full of too many holes so as to not be satisfying and credible to me to a great enough degree necessary to inspire my committed interest. Let me be clear: I have no doubt whatsoever that beings of higher intelligence / consciousness exist on the different planes of relative existence and in the universe(s), and whose guidance is useful to humans. I further believe that contact between such beings of higher intelligence and humans has taken place and will continue to take place. But this particular “package” feels subordinate and flawed to what I know to be true, based on my own inner experiences, intuition and understandings, and to what awakened teachers whose authoritative knowledge I profoundly respect have stated about higher intelligences and other related subjects.

I believe that you are sincere in the work that you do and the mission that you have undertaken, but I don’t feel authentic alignment at a great enough level fitting for my involvement. I’m sure that you will continue to find others who feel resonance with your work and this material and who will support it, and I wish you the best in all ways.



Hi John,

I’m a bit surprised that you would choose such a very subjective set of criteria to dismiss that which has voluminous, expert, scientific authentication. It’s apples and oranges…and I think you know that.

Relying on the illusory kind of dualism in subjective “like-dislike”, “feels good-doesn’t feel good” isn’t the criteria for making decisions based on science. Nor is it philosophically consistent with non-duality.

Experts from NASA, JPL, USGS, etc., etc., completely disagree with you, so shouldn’t the public have an opportunity to consider their evaluations? As a thinking person, I hold you to a higher standard than to assist in withholding from humanity the opportunity for it to make up its own mind about something so important.

Honestly, don’t we know better than to think that everything that feels good or bad isn’t necessarily good or bad?

Otherwise, aren’t you really taking a position that is essentially no different than the right-wing fundamentalists, Christian conservatives, etc., who because they like and feel that it’s the “word of God” to be anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-women’s choice, anti-evolution, etc., they fight against letting people make up their own minds through free discussion and choice?

So how is it any different when a good person lets their feelings get in the way of a possibly historic shift in awareness and consciousness that could help us, in this country?

You, John, are right now the one, single person who could assist in opening that discussion, and do it wothout losing an ounce of credibility, without even having to endorse the material. But it would take impeccable intellectual honesty, non-dualistic self-mastery and pure courage to do so.

Consider the fact that many people that you know will view this very differently than you do…and be unbelievably grateful that you brought it to their attention. 

Now, if you’re the man you believe yourself to be, and that I hope you are, I’d like to proceed to discuss how to do this with you.



You’re an excellent salesman, Michael! That is meant to be a sincere compliment.

However, your narrow and skewed judgments on what I stated in the previous email shows me that you obviously couldn’t grasp the essence of what I expressed. Since you believe Meier to be the “7th and final prophet” — I emphatically don’t — it makes sense that you would endeavor to use somewhat coercive language, and guilt, to get me to see the light, to revise my position. That’s what a zealous temperament sometimes does. However, I stand steadfastly in what I previously stated.

I believe that intuition cuts deeper than science and yet complements and upholds it. I firmly believe in science. After all, it helped establish the the objective realities of the subjective meditative state in 1970 and has since gone on to verify and validate the scores of benefits of meditation. However, I don’t necessarily agree that what you are characterizing as science is in fact science or more accurately, rigorous science. And, all the doors I tried to open in consideration of establishing credibility were quickly closed with pat, constructed, practiced answers. You’ve obviously worked out your talking points very well and have had much practice in answering objections over the years. And, you have too many answers which can detract from your credibility. I hope you still have questions, and doubts too, and can hold Meier’s feet to the fire.

As I indicated, I remain open to the whole subject and I know there are many general points in which we can concur, but just not in the particular package as you’re presented it. With respect to a statement that you made, if people in my circle are meant to discover this, they will. Cosmic Intelligence is infinitely more capable than mine.

Michael, I do appreciate your passion, commitment and faith, I just don’t share it — in this case. I know you are convinced of the reality of Meier and all within his territory. You are a believer. I can hear that you are frustrated in that you want to move your mission to a greater standing and can’t get the traction needed and necessary to do so. I do sympathize.

But let’s put this to rest and know that I am not “the one” to save your mission. That is your responsibility since you are, in your words, the representative of Meier and the Plejarans, and you can do it and there will be other believers who will support you.

I can’t dance on this particular topic further as I have a lot on my plate and I’ve been generous with my time and attention, as you have, but I’m done with it and it’s time to move on.



Well thank you, John!

I must state, however, that I don’t believe that Meier is the seventh and final prophet, since I don’t know it, i..e. have the means to prove it, one way or the other. Certainly, based on his track record I’d give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t live by beliefs, that’s not my nature at all.

After 35 years of research and taking on all challengers, and considering my varied accomplishments in numerous fields, I’ll forgive your generalized, broad brush attempts to be dismissive of me personally because this is far more important than ego history will absolutely confirm.

By all recognized standards of both scientific and legal  proof, the case is proven authentic.

However, since you do challenge that assertion, and at the same time don’t want to personally test it yourself, I would only ask that you do one thing to settle the question of “rigorous science.” Please feel free to put us in touch with your associate, the physicist at CalTech. It would take all of about 15 minutes, at the most, for Matthew Wieczkiewicz and me to make our case.

One way that people deal with controversial, highly interesting matters about which they have no expertise, and may even have doubts, is to say something like, “I don’t know about this one way or the other. It’s interesting and something that perhaps you’d like to check out for yourself. I have access to the persons with the information, etc., and you can feel free to look into it, etc.”

Since you trust Cosmic Intelligence, I would ask you to, in a neutral, non-dualistic or prejudicial manner, allow what may well be impulses from that Intelligence – of which we all are a part – to reach those who could possibly even confirm your opinion…or further enlighten all of humanity. Why bet against that possibility?




I passed on this film. “Meier is the 7th and final prophet” and other statements didn’t work for me. Michael pushes that this is the most scientifically validated case and it may be, but the science is highly questionable. Feel free to watch and form your own conclusion, but this is not a project I would want to be associated with. Michael is highly persuasive and has an answer for every question, which is suspect to me, and is the official media representative for Meier and Plejarans.




I think we can agree on one thing: the truth is all that matters. And as I asked of John, it’s important to know what criteria reasonable people use to determine the truth.

John asked a number of good questions but his understanding and appreciation of the answers wasn’t as good. When someone actually complains that I can answer their questions…I’m both flattered and dismayed!

John was dismissive of the scientific authentication but science isn’t his specialty. It is the specialty of scientific experts like Michael Malin (NASA Mars Mission), David Froning (astrophysicist McDonnell Douglas, top secret clearance), Marcel Vogel (IBM) and Matthew Wieczkiewicz (NASA,International Space Station, Space Shuttle, Boeing, etc.). They have authenticated the case.

David, I’m sure that like John and me, you are a deep feeling, intuitive person. As I told John, both Matthew and I are (tested) INTJ. I agree with John that intuition is an element of Cosmic Intelligence, it’s led me forward most of my life, resulting in my being a very creative, self-made man.

However, the irony is that my intuition…led me to you guys! So I think we will find out one of two things. Either this thing called intuition is flawed – if we do end up in disagreement. Or perhaps we just have to be patient with each other and simply focus on finding out what the truth is. If what my intuition (and 35 years of study) indicate, we have a gift to share with humanity and indeed are the right people to do it.

I’ll stop here; I’ve given John enough headaches with my lengthy, detailed emails, etc. However, with John’s permission, I’ll be glad to forward you, David, our correspondence at your request, as it contains many questions and answers that may interest you.

Feel free to let me know as well as to pose any challenges you may have.

To truth,

Michael Horn

Authorized American Media Representative

The Billy Meier Contacts



John and I work together.  When he feels this strongly about something, I honor that.   We’ve worked together this way for nearly 20 years.  We seldom disagree on our “take” on a project.




That’s fine David, I understand your position.

However, I’m reminded of how Galileo tried long and hard to get the Church to just…look through the telescope.

Sometimes the truth comes knocking on our door, dressed in very unfamiliar garb. The very truth that we’ve claimed to be searching for often gets turned away and by the people who profess their dedication to it the loudest.

John worked very hard to attempt to discredit the information because it didn’t align with his beliefs, expectations…ego and self-image. He failed to make a dent in it.

All that was asked here – all that was asked here – was for assistance in forwarding the discussion, so that other people, who may actually be grateful for having this brought to their attention could have the opportunity to decide the truth for themselves.

John is far too threatened by it…so this effort dies on the vine to protect his ego.

Sorry my friend, we are plain spoken and it’s painful to see the same kind of censorship that usually comes from the religious right, conservatives, etc.

All the best,

Michael Horn

Authorized American Media Representative

The Billy Meier Contacts


Thank you, Michael. I understand. We are doing this together, he and I.  But I do hear you ….




27 comments on “The Things He Fears the Most

  • This e-mail exchange reminds me of some of my own conversations with eastern-philosphy-new-age-mixture types. They meditate, are often buddhists and quite nice people, but they don’t want the truth. That’s the problem.

  • Great job as always Mr. Horn , some people aren’t ready for the truth , they must find their own path to it … At the very least you give them the steps in the right direction so they have a chance when they are ready to begin …

  • I had this type of discussion as well… In the end, it was like “Luis, is just that you BELIEVE the case is real”.

    Well, so I believe that Meier gloriously SOMEHOW faked everything, pictures, videos, audio, metal, predictions. What for, money? Fame? Worship?

    People who have REALLY (with intelectual integrity) investigated the case and read the Contact Reports knows better.

  • Who is this John? And David? Are these first names even real? Did “John” read this post on your blog? Did he read these comments? Will he read this comment?

    Michael, what you suspect about him is true. This “John” is a person of above average intelligence, but he’s not a genius. For the most part of your communication he used his intelligence to rationalize and validate his answer. Which of course was a losing battle from the beginning. He did what he had to do. He was also a bit nervous and at some point he only thought about how to end this communication quickly, decently and properly.

    • Yes, those are their real first names and I forwarded the blog to them. I kept them anonymous because I felt that the “lessons” John (mainly) was teaching were sufficiently loud and clear. They’re not involved in the overall topic of UFOs, and I approached them because of their connections to the world of media, etc., and the possible benefit that they could bring by even just forwarding the information to people in their circles who definitely would be interested.

      When it comes time to walk their talk, there are many ways that people avoid dealing with things that may threaten their self-image, comfort zone, ego.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *