Weapons for Silent Wars???

I received the following link in my inbox…

Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars

Video:   (about an hour in duration)

along with the question, “What do you think of this?” I watched the video and replied, but thought the whole thing – video and reply – might be useful for helping others sort out the stuff being passed around on the internet. So I’m sharing it here.

Hi Gary,

I watched and listened to the video and was not impressed at any level. I don’t know who wrote it, but within the first few moments my intuition was on high ‘fraud’ alert. The entire document smacks of something created recently that is trying to look and sound older than it really is.

It starts out saying that the document was delivered to their offices by an unknown person, and that it was not stolen or gotten by dishonest means. Later, it says the document was found inside a copy machine. Which was it – delivered by an unknown person or found inside a copy machine? Perhaps a copy machine was delivered to their offices by an unknown person??? That is possible, but that is stretching things to make them fit and to overlook the contradictory statements about how the document was found. People who go to great lengths to make the origins of something very murky and mysterious often make contradictory statements like this.

Supposedly the document has been authenticated by 4 experts – but no proof or names are given that would back up such claims. The problem with lack of proof is often explained away by saying that people want to remain anonymous. However, my observation of documents that are legitimate is that people sign their names and often feel they are doing something good in the world. Even David Rockefeller said that he felt he was doing something good by trying to get the world into a New World Order.

The document was obviously written by someone who sees the world through the eyes of a mechanical/electrical engineer who is very good at math. He-or-she has put a lot of thought into interpreting the world through the metaphor of engineering and clearly sees the analogies between the mechanics of engineering and the mechanics of the banking system.

Since it is over 40 pages, and hardly anyone is willing to read anything anymore, it was probably hoped that by claiming it was “a leaked document outlining a plan to destroy us written a long time ago and found accidentally” perhaps more people would read it and be upset with our government and entire financial system. This idea of creating distrust in this way does result in chaos, but if the truth comes out, it can quickly backfire.

The document has been carefully scrubbed of almost all references to computers until you get almost to the end, and then computers are mentioned only briefly. I graduated from high school in 1966 and my very first job was in a computer office. I was also married to a computer programmer-turned-cop. Thus, I am very familiar with computers, their presence in business and the population, and their evolution from the mid-60s onward. The entire feeling of this document is one of careful avoidance of mentioning computers because that would give away how recently it was written.

Speaking of being scrubbed, in spite of the efforts to make the document sound like a plan leaked from CIA or political offices, there are a few key words and phrases that indicate it was written recently. Words like “shock” – as in the shock doctrine, or phrases like “Problem-Reaction-Solution.” These are very current phrases and hint at the fact that the document is not as old as it purports to be. There are a few allusions to the CIA being implicated in this document, which is supposedly part of a training program, but these few references seem to be trying too hard to connect the CIA to the whole thing. It doesn’t ring true.

Copy machines existed in 1979, a date that is mentioned in the document, and maybe a few VERY sophisticated machines were around back then, but I question the idea that they had the capacity to store documents in them at that time. I’m not sure what year copiers, computers, and printers merged, but in any case, the story gets very questionable in hinting that this “plan” originated shortly after WWII and was accidentally left in a copy machine.  It is also quite unlikely that a 40-page paper document left in the document feeder would be unnoticed and accidentally delivered with said copy machine.

The narrator and several unknown others supposedly find the document plans “disturbing” yet there is little that amounts to a “plan” in the document. The document remind me of the writings of the “Uni-bomber” and is mostly the ranting of someone who is highly irritated with the “ignorant masses” who “refuse to think for themselves.”

I am no expert on documents purporting to tell of the planned destruction of humans, but this document has more of a feeling of some individual simply bemoaning the things he is observing out there in the world, back-tracing the origins of what he is seeing, and trying to assign blame – which mostly falls on the ignorant masses as being “stupid and lazy.” The few documents I have read that consist of real “plans” and that have the capacity for destructive results are not usually written in engineering/mathematical language. Those that are – like the patent documents on manipulation of weather – do not contain paragraph after paragraph ranting about humanity and describing how they are being manipulated. Scientific notation is not the language that bankers, social engineers, or politicians use. This has more of a flavor of the document author realizing that banking, money, and the economy are being used to manipulate society, compares it to his field of expertise (engineering of some sort) and expresses helpless rage that other people do not see what is happening, thus are not doing anything about it.

One of the problems of our time is that there really ARE efforts to set up a New World Order, no one really knows what the original motives of those doing this were, AND the Powers-That-Be went about this in a really stupid manner! It could have been done in an upfront, positive, inclusive, look-at-the-magnificent-world-we-can-create-together kind of way. Instead, they tried to be sneaky. This left the taste of mistrust in everyone’s craw. We DO need to do something about over-population and we know it…but not the way the Globalists are going about it. We DO need to reduce the destruction of the planet…but not by spinning lies about ‘climate warming’ when the truth is we know very little about the real life cycles of the planet and have not put together a decent story that can be adopted and appreciated by all. We DO need to stop wars and fighting over resources, but not by creating stronger and more destructive weapons. These are only some of the issues.

We are seeing a proliferation of false documents, lies, misperceptions, biased reporting, news that is distorted and incomplete, and attempts to stir up trouble between and among us. This document strikes me as one of those attempts.


9 Guidelines to Use When Navigating the Alternative News

This started out as a reply to Tom Van Berckel, but became an entire blog. Thanks for the inspiration, Tom! And thanks for the compliment.

You aren’t the only one who gets confused when trying to figure out what to believe or who to listen to when wading through the ocean of alternative news. In my experience, and from conversations with many others, it takes at least a couple of years to learn to navigate that ocean and develop the capacity to put together a realistic picture of what’s going on out there. Along the way you discover several things that really have more to do with consciousness than anything else.

#1 – everyone has their own point of view and whether we think their views are right or wrong is somewhat irrelevant. Their point of view tells us where they are at with their perception, NOT where we should be at with ours! We each NEED our own point of view because that is the center point from which we communicate, learn, change, and grow.

#2 – we live in a consensus reality system – but that consensus is VERY loose. In my view, it is amazing that it holds together at all given the huge diversity of beliefs, experience, and perception that exist here. It is only because of our tolerance (unspoken) for one another, and our gratitude (unacknowledged) for their willingness (unconscious) to help hold it all together, that we are able to continue with the reality.

#3 – the idea of “proof” is useless. Even the best of scientists rarely think in terms of “proof.” They say, “This is what most of us agree on at the moment,” and they know that new insights and information will eventually go beyond the current agreement. My own stand is that there is no proof, there is only what we each experience, and each of us is responsible for assessing that experience from moment to moment and responding to it wisely and well. For most of us who are trying to wade through the huge amounts of alternative news, a good rule of thumb for judging any news is that the reporter should at least have some evidence to show, and when they have finished offering evidence, they should make it clear when they are switching to their own interpretation of that evidence.

#4 – you will resonate deeply in your gut, your heart, and your mind when you see or read news that is true and important for YOU to know. Not all news is relevant to all people.

#5 – listen to what people say, but watch carefully what they do. Keep a notebook handy in which you jot down lists, or create a folder on your computer in which you save speeches of key promises and predictions that people make. Then pay attention to whether they do what they said they would do, or how they behave when the prediction doesn’t come true. A few people will complain that this is too much work, but this is the burden of being a real citizen. We are where we are in this country because the hens have been selling eggs AND fresh chicken to the fox – and no one is paying attention!

#6 – find news sources that do a fairly good job of synthesizing lots of information and presenting a well-thought-out view of the big picture, or that consistently present smaller slices of information in a clear and honest way. The task here is to eventually find news sources you trust and that you can return to again and again because their information is always presented in a straightforward,  thoughtful way that makes you think.

#7 – learn to discern the difference between sources that sometimes get excited or upset about something, those who are continually outraged and spouting off about it, or those that are always trying to incite fear and dread. It’s like the difference between fresh milk (news), sour milk (news with an attitude), and fermented milk (news with a hidden agenda). In each case it’s milk, but you will respond differently to each.

#8 – you have a right to be interested in some things and not others. Follow the threads of conversation and information that you find interesting, and let yourself become knowledgeable and aware in the areas that you are interested in. Some people love politics, others love to read about the economy, some are only interested in technology, or science, or war, or psychology. Some follow music closely, or entertainment, or sports. So follow your nose, consuming information and arguments about the things that interest you, and occasionally graze in other pastures that offer other topics.

#9 – as for “truth,” there is only one unchanging and reliable truth – and that is that everything in existence is made of an intelligent Light that we call God, or Source, or The Universe, or whatever. All the stuff that emerges from that Light is temporary, which is why we say it is an illusion. It’s really not an illusion, it’s just temporary in the sense that it is not eternal and forever unchanging like that Light is. But you can damn well count on having a sore foot if you drop a brick on it. You can’t just blow that off as “illusion.” The truth is that it hurts!

In closing…we are in the middle of a paradigm shift of global proportions. A paradigm shift is a change in consciousness. If you are going to make that shift along with everyone else, you have to take responsibility for what you feed that consciousness and what you do with that consciousness. We are moving out of the paradigm of one-size-fits-all-and-one-story-informs-all. How you assemble the world is up to you!

Community vs. Connection

There is a great deal of talk among New Age people about ‘community.’ I have a little experience with this idea of creating a place where like-minded people could come together and live in peace and harmony. I’ve been involved in several attempts to establish community. What I learned from each attempt has been very instructive. I can sum it up in a few sentences.

The people who want community are often people who want to escape from the pressures of everyday reality. They want to drift into a situation where all is beautiful and light. It takes a great deal of money and work to run a community, but these are precisely the things most people are running away from. They want a boss or leader to put the community together – and they will participate. However, they will also resist in the way that they have always resisted authority. Living with other people is stressful and the old saying, “Wherever you go, there YOU are,” is doubly true in community. Squabbles, misunderstandings, and scapegoats are everywhere. I have loved the people who came to be part of our small attempts at community. Even though the community didn’t last, these were important steps on the road to wisdom, and I am very grateful for that.

In a conversation with a friend the other day, he commented that more and more people are living alone. I have noticed the same thing. We talk about community…but in actual practice we are pulling away from one another in many ways. No one wants to be under anyone else’s thumb, or even their roof. We don’t want to be stuck with someone’s mess, their spending habits, their diet, their TV programs, their snoring, or their bad moods.

As this pulling away continues, our need for connection intensifies – which is why the smartphone and social media have been so successful. I’ve heard a number of people decry the direction we are moving in as a culture, and I can’t help but think we are exactly where we need to be. In any healthy healing process it is necessary to back away a bit and get a new perspective. The gurus call it detachment. We have all backed away from one another, but we’re still connected…and that may have to be enough for now as we feel our way along to a new way of seeing and being in the world.