Global Racket Risk Analysis and the Threat that Dennis Lee Presented

By Wade Frazier

July 2010

Introduction

Risk Analysis

Dennis on the Radar, and that Billion Dollar Bribe

Risk Ranking and Responses

Footnotes

Introduction

Every American mainstream media presentation about Dennis that I have ever seen or heard of has been disinformation, with the national television programs of recent years featuring the spectacularly dishonest Mr. Skeptic, as he pontificates about Dennis’s “criminality.”  The media’s motivation is also revealed by the fact that none of them have ever contacted me, while they eagerly repeat each other’s lies.  I have noticed that for those who acquainted themselves with the facts of Dennis’s journey, few had any business world experience, particularly in its entrepreneurial aspect.  Consequently, they had difficulty understanding why Dennis’s efforts represented such a threat to the world’s power structure.  This essay is intended to make the situation more comprehensible. 

 

Risk Analysis

In the wake of the Western financial system’s meltdown in late 2008, corporations have been rediscovering risk analysis.  I perform risk analysis professionally, and can readily imagine the kind of risk analysis that the Global Controllers (“GCs”) perform and why somebody like Dennis was such a perceived threat (and probably still is).  The seven cartels that control the world economy are vigilant.  An early example of response to racket risk is how the Roman Catholic Church responded to the Cathar threat in the 1200s.  Organized religion is relatively insulated from disruptive technological advances (although the printing press was disruptive to the Church’s monopoly in Western Europe, and when the ET presence finally becomes undeniable, almost all organized religions will be challenged to maintain their legitimacy), but the other cartels can be acutely vulnerable and all have their radar up, sometimes literally, to prevent potentially disruptive technologies from coming to market.  A disruptive technology, at the global racket scale, can deeply impact the cash flows, but at the GCs’ level, power is the game and, in a world of scarcity, economics is the means.  

The risk analyses that the GCs perform for disruptive technologies probably include the features listed below.  The following outline is partly reverse-engineered from responses to the perceived threats.  All of the potential responses listed below I have either experienced/witnessed myself, or heard of first- or second-hand. 

General Market Parameters:

  1. Size of market;

  2. Profitability of market (often directly related to concentration, i.e., lack of competition);

  3. Vulnerability of market (barriers of entry, age and dynamism of market, viability of currently marketed technologies, ability to use governmental and other resources to neutralize threats);

  4. Strategic nature of product (including dependence of other markets on it).

Individual Technological Effort:

  1. The technology’s potential disruption, in market share and absolute dollars;

  2. Path of development (development length, technical resource requirements and difficulty);

  3. Stage of development (drawing board, proof-of-concept, working prototype, production-ready, on the market; level of public awareness and participation);

  4. Potential of particular effort (personnel, methods of development/marketing/funding);

Potential Responses:

  1. Monitor Development (few efforts ever become an active threat, often due to the effort’s internal weakness and local/national market interests suppressing in their own interests);

  2. Perform Game Theory analysis to devise suppression strategy;

  3. Subtle Tactics (help effort “self-destruct” by targeting organizational weaknesses and personal foibles);

  4. Initial Friendly Tactics – “Carrots” (often the buyout offer, but also the offer of alliances and other techniques of relatively inexpensive threat neutralization);

  5. Initial Hostile Tactics – “Sticks” (subtle threats, mobilize local assets - local law enforcement, professional saboteurs who can perform social manipulations, but can escalate to burglary, arson, physical beatings);

  6. Secondary Friendly Tactics – “Big Carrots” (add zeroes to original friendly offer, and can make it an ultimatum);

  7. Secondary Hostile Tactics - “Big Sticks” (mobilize national or international assets, federal sting operations, murder – usually subtly, so it does not appear to be murder, or can be attributed to “retail” crime).

 

Dennis on the Radar, and that Billion Dollar Bribe

An interesting aspect of the free energy (“FE”) milieu is the diverse paths that many of us traveled to get there.  Some were inventors, some were scientists, some were journalists, some were businessmen, some were visionaries and activists in other fields of endeavor, and some were minding their own business until Dennis’s circus came to town.  Nobody has ever done FE barnstorming on the scale that Dennis has, nobody has ever mounted the kinds of business efforts that Dennis has, and nobody has ever put five thousand people in one building to discuss FE like Dennis has. 

The past five presidential administrations, going back to Ronald Reagan, have been highly aware of Dennis’s efforts, and American presidents are not playing at the GCs’ level, but largely represent the national interests. 

Dennis did not begin to attract attention at the national level until he had survived for many years in the USA’s capitalistic shark tank, being mauled several times and continually rebuilding the efforts from scratch.  Extremely few people can survive one of those episodes, much less several of them.  In Seattle, beginning in 1984, Dennis mounted what arguably still stands as the greatest effort yet made to bring alternative energy to the American market.  When one of his employees died due to a corporate hit man’s efforts, Dennis began his radicalization in the energy field.  After he was run out of Washington, I followed him out to Boston and eventually became his partner.  We were operating out of a hole-in-the-wall office, and not only did Dennis get an audience from the most powerful electric company executive in New England[1], but at about the same time, in a room right outside of my office, Dennis met with a non-descript group of businessmen who offered us ten million dollars for the exclusive rights to technology that was still on the drawing board, with our effort being little more than a few volunteers barely scraping by.  I would have been an instant millionaire, but that was not our program, and it was the first time that I witnessed an event that was like the stories that I had heard for many years. 

Dennis received the second buyout offer a year later, when we had a national profile, hundreds of individuals and businesses were involved, and our technology was not only past the drawing-board stage, but the technical talent in our stable was world class.  It is a long story that I cannot publicly discuss today, but I never even heard of that second offer until several years later, when Dennis began speaking of it publicly.  In one of Dennis’s books, he said that he could name his price, and when I heard Dennis speak about it, he said that the offer was for them to put a one on the check and he could add the zeroes.  Several years later, I heard Steven Greer use that exact “you can put on the zeroes” language when referring to such buyout offers.  So, Dennis never said “billion” to me, but a hundred million was peanuts, and I had already encountered the two zeroes added strategy.  A billion was easily within their budget, even trivial, and it could have been as high as ten billion.  Some attention that Dennis has received I cannot discuss publicly at this time, and do not know when I will be able to, but the GCs have been keenly aware of Dennis for many, many years. 

I do not even try to collect stories about the buyout offers, but I continually encounter them.  In the few times that I have told co-workers about my FE experiences, twice I have been told about buyout offers that my co-workers knew of, first- and second-hand.  One came from a buddy who saw one during his Justice Department days that related to a high MPG carburetor, and another I recently heard; in that instance, an inventor merely had a design on the drawing board, and was paid two million dollars.  None of those acquired technologies have ever made it to market; they are shelved, Raiders of the Lost Ark style.

Lower-level suppressors on the energy scene have allegedly offered a billion dollars to buy out FE energy technology.[2]  In that Justice Department situation, what were probably lower-level suppressors had no problem with adding zeroes to the carrot when the need arose.  When I heard Steve Greer state that the GCs have admitted to paying out one hundred billion dollars in quiet money over the years, it brought the offers to us into clearer perspective.  On the global scale, Dennis’s efforts have been at least a one-percent problem.  Putting together billion dollar deals, threatening to carpet a state with disruptive technology, barnstorming the country with FE talk – those are all historically unique alternative energy activities, which is partly why national television shows have continually slandered Dennis, using criminals such as Mr. Skeptic to spread their disinformation. 

The technology that we pursued in Ventura was fairly mundane, and by itself was not much of a threat.  How Dennis went to market was the threatening aspect of his efforts.  Also, people like Sparky Sweet lived nearby; Sparky’s technology was highly threatening, and he was actively trying to develop/promote it.  What made Dennis really scary was offering to promote/develop the wares of FE inventors and the possibility of hooking up with somebody like Sparky.

Why are some efforts bought out, some left alone and some ruthlessly suppressed?  The GCs have honed the art of suppression to a science, and the local and national interests have their own version of risk analysis and response.  We are still burning gasoline in automobiles and still largely burn coal to get our electricity.  The primitive energy production methods on the market are extremely vulnerable to disruptive technologies, and the GCs are well aware of it.  The response is likely dictated by an effort’s attributes and the particular group performing the risk analysis.  The responses were far more blunt and violent a generation ago.  Today they are more refined and subtle, and the GCs rarely resort to violence. 

While Dennis’s treatment was not unusual, given the threat that he represented, people still have their minds boggled by the billion dollar bribe offer, and usually respond with pure denial.  What follows may provide some insight into why the GCs would not flinch at paying a billion dollars to thwart efforts such as Dennis’s.  The United States has had the world’s largest Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) for the past century, and it all relies on energy consumption.  Energy use and GDP have a near-linear relationship, from the world’s poorest to richest nations.  That relationship has minor variances (Japan, for instance, had a slight variation in reaction to the 1970s oil crises, but the relationship reverted to its linear nature before long) due to local conditions, (cold and hot climates, distances between urban centers, level of industrialization, etc.), but the direct relationship between energy and economy is evident and, to an overwhelming degree, energy is the economy.

The USA consumes about five times humanity’s average energy consumption per capita, and average Americans consume about eighty times the calories that comprise their diets.  In 2009, the world’s GDP was somewhere between $60 and $70 trillion.  Only about one billion people live in the industrialized world, with the other six billion living in non-industrialized societies.  If all of humanity could live at the American standard of living, the global GDP would rise to roughly $300 trillion per year.  However, that is an inconsequential aspect of what FE can do.  If humanity consumed a thousand times the energy that went into its collective diet, global GDP would rise to around four quadrillion dollars per year.  If all humans consumed a Star Trek-like ten thousand times their dietary calories, global GDP would rise to around forty quadrillion dollars per year.  FE is not a trillion dollar technology, but a many-quadrillion-dollar technology.  If readers have difficulty imagining such numbers, they are normal.  The ramifications of FE and how it can usher in an epoch of abundance is difficult for me to imagine, and I have been living with its potential for most of my life.  That is partly why more than 99% of humanity is currently trapped in the early layers of the free energy onion.  Humanity’s inability to even imagine the kind of world that FE can bring about is a primary reason why we do not have it today, even though FE and a host of disruptive technologies are already highly developed.  

A billion dollars to make somebody like Dennis disappear is a pittance to pay for the game that the GCs are playing, and is about on the level of a rounding error.  The $100 billion that they have paid in quiet money so far is probably less than ten percent of their bribery budget, and is probably less than 5% of their disruptive technology suppression budget.  No effort mounted by “outsiders” has ever come close to making them really sweat.  At best, a few high-level activists have only visited the GCs’ lobby for a short time. 

All that I do any more is writing, but I have been stalked on the Internet since 1997 and am attacked wherever I appear.  People like Dennis get special treatment every step of the way. 

 

Risk Ranking and Responses

Below is a risk ranking of various FE efforts.  The numbers that I used for various scenarios are debatable, but are probably not too far from reality. 

Risk Ranking of Disruptive Technology Effort
1 to 10 ranking
  Assigned Value >95% of Garage Inventors 1-5% of Garage Inventors Successful "Vanilla" Inventor Successful ZPE Inventor Successful ZPE Inventor and Businessman Ally Naïve and/or Greedy Business Associates Typical Venture Capitalist Publicly Held Company Fortune 500 Company Public Education Effort Rich Windmill Entrepreneur College Kid in Lab Sparky Sweet Adam Trombly Dennis Lee in Seattle Dennis Lee in Ventura Attributes
Potential Attributes                                    
Technology Potential   13 27 77 77 30 27 1010 47 "Vanilla" technology (super heat pump, low temperature turbines, direct solar, windmills, tidal energy); ZPE technology (moving parts, solid state)
Personnel Potential   12 22 41 34 52 62 56 58 Personal integrity, intelligence, training, creativity, social interface
Capital Potential   12 24 40 35 101 50 35 58 Private Equity, IPO, government, grass roots funding (capitalist, donations)
Market Potential   00 00 20 14 70 50 01 1010 Marketing talent/experience, marketing approach
Experience and Persistence   01 22 30 13 52 51 45 69 Years, intensity, level of experience
                             
Stage of Development                            
Drawing Board 1 1            1        1  
Proof-of-Concept 3  3 33 33 3      3        
Working Prototype 5           5       55     
Production Ready 7             7            
On the Market 10                10     10   
Level of Public Awareness and Participation   00 00 10 24 95 20 23 57 Vying for media attention, direct national advertising, public meetings
                             
Risk Analysis Result  4 1111 1824 1120 3246 1135 1329 3545 50  
 

Below is a graphic presentation of the scenarios (with clickable links to most of them) that the GCs probably analyze, where various efforts might appear on their ranking, and a rough demarcation of their responses.  Their analyses probably produce probabilities of disruption.  There are also outliers that may relate to the interactions of scenarios and players.  For instance, Eugene Mallove not only agreed to be our first conference speaker a few days before he was murdered, but he was also stirring things up in Washington D.C. and elsewhere.  Also, killing him may have sent an unmistakable message to those it was intended for.  Also, there can be a combination of tactics used; the final ultimatum is usually a big carrot and big stick used in tandem (“Take our final offer or we will destroy you.”).  Also, sometimes the local interests do the GCs’ work for them, either when subtly encouraged to or by merely protecting their own interests, due to their own initiative.  There are several dimensions of the analysis, but the graph below is two dimensional; I have also tried presenting a third dimension, with the probability declining as scenarios get further from the centerline.  The probability centerline ends at 60% because no effort has ever come close to success.  Almost all efforts are derailed early on; the GCs are expert at strangling such efforts in their cribs.  They have never had to consider the nuclear option, not for efforts launched by the public.

My website (I hope!) Rich windmill entrepreneur Loose cannon GC posessing  FE technology College student in lab who invents working FE prototype FE public education effort Secretive inventor with FE prototype Dennis Lee in Boston Inventor with FE prototype seeking venture capital Dennis Lee in Ventura Dennis Lee in Seattle Adam Trombly Sparky Sweet Fortune 500 company involved with alternative energy effort Most inventors Page-1

With that kind of vigilance and available resources at the GC level, combined with the internal weaknesses of FE efforts and their almost complete lack of public support and awareness, it can be difficult to imagine that any FE effort will ever become successful.  At this time, I think that the outcome will likely be decided by what is happening at the GC level.  However, I still have hope that enough people might become aware enough to turn the tide.  It would not take many of us. 

Footnotes

[1] Dennis told me about the contact from the Seabrook Association’s Chairman of the Board and, a few days later, our office phone rang and I answered it.  The caller asked for Dennis, and when I asked who was calling, he identified himself as the Seabrook Chairman of the Board.  It was one of many instances where I saw the reality of the events that Dennis participated in. 

[2] Stanley Meyer, whose technology Greer has been trying to resurrect for years, reported a billion dollar bribe from Arabic interests.  The veracity of his claim and viability of his technology can be challenged, but what cannot be challenged is that reports of such offers are not all that unusual.  Oil companies, automobile companies, American presidents and the like are lower-level players.  Almost nobody has ever heard of the GCs, as far as who belongs to that club and the names of their organizations.  They operate in the above-top-secret world.  Even clandestine agencies such as the CIA and NSA are, at most, tangential to GC operations. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Next Section: The Strange, Harrowing Journeys of Free Energy Activists (75K) 

Return to My Home Page (The address on the Internet of my home page is http://www.ahealedplanet.net/home.htm)