Shadow Work - the Prerequisite to Disclosure
@Raymond_Mikal recently posted two links to videos about UFO disclosure. One, a lengthy and at times repetitive edit of conversations between Gregg Braden and John Peterson (https://youtu.be/uTZKXuSB_oI). The other, an interview with Steven Greer on Redacted (https://youtu.be/vDdjHs8CddA). May I suggest pairing these two, and see if the following makes sense?
In the Braden/Peterson conversation, one of the points featured is that Peterson's team at Arlington Institute came up with 38 scenarios of disclosure, and only 2 or 3 do not result in civilization driving off a cliff.
In the interview with Greer, a significant detail is that the leadership at the center of secret black budget development of UFO tech deliberately screen for psycho-/sociopathic personalities to be admitted into the deeper ranks. He points out that most people find it impossibly difficult to attempt to contemplate the mindset of the truly evil.
The combination of these two points from the two interviews indicates to me that in order to break the disclosure barrier, there first must be a critical mass of individuals willing and able to cease projecting evil onto others with whom they disagree, and instead to look within with complete honesty to take ownership and responsibility for all that we harbor inside ourselves, even if it is not expressed.
To paraphrase Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, "The line between good and evil runs through the heart of every person."
Posts by @Raymond_Mikal:
I made this for my friend's daughter who is trying out pottery. I've been making her little instructional videos and this one is a timelapse of me trimming and putting a handle on a mug. Thought I would share in case you guys find this interesting.
Someone shared this with me who said it had been circulating in the Hasidic community. Will likely offend a lot of people these days.
Hi everyone, I haven't been active in Solid Ground for a while, but I am still alive and kicking! I now work as personal assistant to a mind-bendingly weird and diva-esque artist-lip-syncher-performer named Fiona Blueberry. She is blissfully clueless about politics and seems to be completely unaware of the culture wars. Working with her is a breath of fresh air. If you need a mood lift, I encourage you to watch this video we made together. Happy 4th, everyone! Wishing you fun/love/peace on this holiday. :) www.fionablueberry.com
Holy cow.
I asked chatGPT about being asked to “respect” using pronouns in email w a lawyer.
A canadian lawyer is using manipulative language ie: “please respect someone’s pronouns” regarding our email correspondence. How could one make an argument one way or another, in detail, that the canadian charter of rights argues for a freedom of expression and from tyrannical policing of language OR for a “respect” for the identity language claims/impositions.
Copy
Select text
ChatGPT said:
The Canadian Charter, freedom of expression, and pronoun disputes
The strongest legal analysis begins with a distinction: there is a difference between asking someone to use respectful language, criticizing their refusal to do so, and using the force of law to compel them to use particular words. Those are three different things, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms may apply differently to each.
A Canadian lawyer's statement, “Please respect someone's pronouns,” is not, by itself, proof of censorship, coercion, or a Charter violation. It may simply be a request for professional ...
Apparently this happened. In our church we have separate women’s and men’s meetings (in addition to Sacrament services and Sunday School where we meet together). I value the opportunity to meet with my brothers in Church, and as well for the sisters.
But yeah some men go to Relief Society (women’s organization). Some women are “welcoming” (how progressive) and some are protective of biological women’s spaces, as they should be.
