|
My Blog
Knowing the truth
Sat, July 25, 2009 - 9:33 AMIt's difficult to know the truth, is a comment I get.
It's not just a question of knowing the truth - but the struggle of constructing a (on the side I'm on temporary) truth that you want. I think that what is going on in the world today, is a struggle between competing incompatible truths. A "truth" that require a liiittle too much 'looking sideways, and squirting your eyes in a certain way, and on top of that the introduction of a liiiitle too much willful illusion, is in my book not a worthwhile "truth", even temporarily.
Matthew Delooze wrote ( www.oneballradio.com:80/node/666 ) "Anyone experiencing ‘an awakening’ would assume they were ‘fully awake’ after breaking through the first net when indeed they were still surrounded by many other layers of netting that they still ‘could not see’. In other words they were not ‘awake’ at all they were simply asleep in another zone of reality. In other words they had landed in a comfort zone in which they thought or felt they were free and awake in. Do you understand this? If not it is bloody well time you started to."
In our own personal inner process, we need to take a break sometimes. Rest an hour, a day or a week in what we for the time being accept as our temporary reality. But unless our goal is to create or to maintain an illusion, we should not get too attached to any reality / "truth" for too long.
In Project Camelot's interview with Dr Bill Deagle, he is saying: " ... You are an extention of [the Creator God]. ... We have a society that thinks by external rules and controls we can create this Luciferian world of order and chaos so that they can create a world of "peace". Which is completely an ordered world that is completely under scientific control. It is a scientifically controlled society, not ruled by spirit. What we are though, a spirit being passing through matrixes of energy to create worlds. We are litterally creating our own timeline and our own name. The thing is, corporally, we are creating our own timeline and names. That's why for example I tell people on the show repeatedly not to drink the Kool Aid of fear. Because fear itself creates a background or atmosphere that allows them to create destruction. In other words, they can think themselves into bombs going off in cities, they can think themselves into releasing a plauge. ... "
I got my PDF version of "Penetration: the Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy", by Ingo Swann, a year ago. I read it then. He made some sharp remarks on how to construct reality, and on how cover-up works.
QUOTE
The process of constructing a reality requires three activities, all of which require information-management talents:
(1) facts, evidence, and information that might support the reality (thereby proving it real) need to be emphasized and, best of all, taught as the truth;
(2) facts, evidence and information that would tend to deconstruct the reality need to be disposed of somehow;
(3) the willful introduction of useful illusion if and when (1) and (2) above cannot be made to seem consistent or to be creatively managed.
UNQUOTE (Ingo Swann, p.68 (PDF p.76), "Penetration: the Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy".)
QUOTE
In this sense then, the counter-cover-up enthusiasts work to demobilize the cover-up by attempting to put the lie to the cover-up.
However, this in turn means putting the lie to the official echelons which have promulgated the cover-up - and continue to do so regardless of the availability of counter-cover-up information.
In this way, a powerful dichotomy has come into existence. DICHOTOMY is defined as a division or the process of dividing into two - especially into two mutually exclusive or contradictory groups, or into two contradictory information sets.
Although the great uninitiated masses might not understand it very well, there is a famous dictum along these lines called Divide and Rule.
At first sight, one might think this has nothing at all to do with the counter-cover-up fiasco, but there are several elements of Divide and Rule that can become apparent if one patiently constructs a larger picture of what is involved.
Rulership through dividing requires that the dividing first result in rather hefty and perpetual confusions - behind which, and through which, the rulership can be effective.
As it is, the counter-cover-up enthusiasts tend to focus on the extraterrestrial details which are being covered up, many details of which can be completely documented as fact.
The cover-up forces continue to "rule" anyway - largely, it might seem, because the facts apparently don't matter on the one hand, while on the other hand the resulting confusions seem to aid and abet the cover-up.
This kind of rather astonishing situation suggests that if the cover-up was to be submitted to legal procedures and dragged into court where not insignificant amounts of evidence would be considered, the most probable outcome might be that the cover-up would undergo indictment.
The cover-up, however, is not submitted to legalistic inspection. Instead, it is "submitted" to science, and to scientific oversight - and the whole of which not only pompously comes down with a mainstream bang on the side of the cover-up, but can be seen as giving sustenance and artificial life-support to it.
As but one easily accessible example of this, the atmosphere of the Moon had been identified as early as the 1920s, and, as well, identified by prominent scientists of that decade.
With the advent, however, of the Earthside space race to colonize the Moon, the prevailing wisdom of Science obstinately downloaded into public cognizance the authenticity of the airless Dead Moon Dictum.
The airless Dead Moon Dictum was maintained in place by SCIENCE until 1997, when Science thence "discovered" the lunar atmosphere.
UNQUOTE (Ingo Swann, p.109 (PDF p.117), "Penetration: the Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy".)
"Penetration: the Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy", by Ingo Swann
Binding: Paperback
Publisher: Ingo Swann Books
Date Published: 1998-11-30
ISBN-13: 9780966767407
ISBN: 0966767403
The cover-up works because it makes things look confusing, and those who don't like to be confused then stick to the official story.
That simple. ;)
As for "Knowing the truth", that's not the issue at all! Reality is something you choose. Then you adjust your perception to support the reality you wish to create. But I am not particularly attached to any temporary reality or truth, but wish to keep on searching. I was mistaken when I in 1988 thought that "I had found the Truth" (then a religion). Trouble was, I just had to do a liiittle too much 'looking sideways, and squirting my eyes in a certain way, and on top of that using a liiiitle too much of willful illusion, in order to make it "true". In 2004 I let go of "The truth". Since then, I have seen that reality is pretty fluid, if you let it. I want to discover who and what I am - THAT IS THE REAL ISSUE!
Who am I? One who go along with lies for the protection of illusion, or one who remove layer upon layer of illusion -- scales off my eyes?
Sat, July 25, 2009 - 9:33 AM -
permalink -
7 Comments
7 Comments |
add a comment |
|
Sat, July 25, 2009 - 9:37 AM
We are all in on it
We are all in on it.
- What 'it'? On creating this illusion we call our reality. Only, we have infighting in the ranks, because we are not agreed about how far we can push things. Some of us feels that some others (NWO) have gone too far. But we who think that they've gone too far, we also have infighting with eachothers about how much to reveal. :) (On a subconscious/dream-level we see beyond the Matrix/illusions.) There may be an active plan to divide us down into 2's and 3's, but we regardless make a fairly good job of that ourselves, as long as we focus on differences, saying others are suspect for saying X. What I am saying is that I think "finding the truth" is a dead end. We will never find one single truth we all can agree on, unless we allow someone else to create it and accept it on authority. In essence, I think that in fact that IS the NWO! But what I instead think must be accepted, is to accept that the opposite of the cover-up is not buying into their cover-up. Don't buy their science, either. Also a cover-up. Someone elses reality. But if one attempts to make another one-for-all reality, then one is playing THEIR game. And they know the game much better. They have books all back through ancient China on how to play that game. So, how do we change the rules? I say acceptance for difference. I accept that NN don't believe that mini-nukes or scalar technology was used in the Murray building, WTC, etc, and NN accept that I can entertain that Hurricane Erin might have been involved on 9/11 and we don't call each other ugly names and we ignore the people with the several thousand year old Divide and Conquer Rulebook who keep saying we must fight within since we don't agree on some mutually exclusive things, but instead we agree that what brings US together is that we absolutely refuse to go along with patently obvious lies and illusions protecting the 9/11 and other false flags. I have not finished this thinking. The "One Single Reality Created by Somebody Else" people with their several thousand year old Divide and Conquer Rulebook have a big advantage. Being their One Single Reality Created By Someone Else, that they scientifically can refer to. (That's the job of Science, being the authority on what is Real.) As I said, I have not finished this thinking. So I leave it at this, for now. Maybe I gave you food for thought. |
|
Sat, July 25, 2009 - 10:57 AM
i agree with you lief.
each of us has an individual reality which is a by-product of our beliefs. our shared physical reality is a by-product of our shared beliefs. the theme at burning man in 2003 was "beyond belief". sitting in my van in the queue at the gate there were signs carrying inspirational messages. there was one that really struck me and has resonated ever since: "a belief is just a stepping stone on the way to the Truth". ever since reading that, i have made a practice of allowing myself to acknowledge belief as just "where i am right now on this path to the Truth", not an idea that i am needing to defend or hold onto or protect. it has helped me to remember to invite challenges to my beliefs because it will always have a good outcome: my belief may be validated, it may be enhanced, or honed, or my belief may be proven wrong. in any case, being open and willing to be wrong is very beneficial on my journey to the truth. as you suggest, it comes down to the question of whether we prefer truth or validation of our belief. |
|
Sat, July 25, 2009 - 1:12 PM
a zen saying--if you want the truth-give up your beliefs.,.,im working on that one and i can see.,im not alone~~
|
|
Sun, July 26, 2009 - 12:42 AM
"Each of us has an individual reality which is a by-product of our beliefs.
Our shared physical reality is a by-product of our shared beliefs. " I like that. Thanks. |
|
Sun, July 26, 2009 - 1:07 AM
I'd also like to share what I sent privately in the private e-mail dialogue that this whole thread has been extracted from (I often begin my writings in private correspondence, and then extract stuff that can be shared publically):
"I imagine we are each of us creators. It got boring being alone, so we connected. One to one, or two. Groups. Etc. From individual universes where we each had total control, to having to cooperate for a SHARED reality. That's the game of life. So where it matters practically, I agree with you. I have read about some pretty interesting results from two people simultaneously hypnotizing eachother, and creating SHARED worlds they BOTH EXPERIENCE AND SHARE, that they afterward independently debriefed can both tell - same story even though they've only communicated INSIDE the SHARED "fantasy" world, not in our external 3D physical world (i.e. only telepathically/through "the great unknown"/subconsciously/outside the mainstream matrix, in their matrix for two, that they created). The game is control. If you are still playing that game. I got sick of it when they pulled 9/11. Since then, I have figured out much of the esoteric agenda. But the only conclusion I keep returning to is to stick to my truth - never to accept manipulation and lies. I know that I don't have to tell you how 'popular' that makes me." |
