http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/forum/topics/nasa-sets-conference-on?xg_source=activity&id=2859786%3ATopic%3A523305&page=4#comments
...You know, let's take a step backwards. Maybe we can then step forward five steps.
Ok, so we have this situation where people are arguing over how they'reright and others are wrong. "Landed!" "Not!" "Yes!" "No!" "yehah!""nuhuh!" "pbbt" "pbbt you" etc... it seems calm, but at the heart,people are just defensive of their belief; it is inevitable, peoplehave only their own experiences to go on. Most would go crazy if theirentire dogma (no matter how different it is) was shattered.
Now am I level headed, a fair party? Hell no. Am I going to pretend I am? You bet your britches.
Ok, so let's look at your assumptions.
What made these books so great, that they are almost religious incontent? You leave the ordinary subjugation of ordinary life to besubjugated by other people and their books? Come on now, Ravinder, alot of people are going to tell you that you are too deeply cemented inyour beliefs. And you probably are, like an evangelical. It might makeperfect sense to you, and that is OK, but it is kinda useless to arguewith other people who don't see it your way.
{This is masked annoyance towards his statement "I am better than all people."}
And, you all seem to argue about what others told you. What are you socaught up about? Why must you make other peoples' business your own? Doyou hope to convert them to your belief? If so, what is the point? Tobolster your own pride, in knowing that you are correct?
{One could say that he is trying to be correct,and make others see his"correctness", and bolster his own pride in knowing that he is"correct."}
I would like to call in the tool called the analogy.
{Permission granted.}
Let us say that assumptions are like the bricks in a tower. Let us say,also, that the ground is the actual truth. The more assumptions youmake, the further from the truth you get, because the more bricks youare using, the taller and more secure your tower can be. However, itgoes counter-point, because for some reason people have got it intotheir heads that they don't really want to see the truth.
{Perhaps it is to see what being in a tower is like.}
Perhaps. But I want people to realize, that every person has his owntower, and that they quibble over whether their tower is made of betterbricks. Like science, for instance. Science is the crowning achievementof assumption. Laid from a base of observation, they build up theirtower, making strong, secure bricks of variegated assumptions, withwell intention and advancement as the mortar. Due to this structure,the tower of science is able to reach staggering heights, with manypeople spending their lives continuously checking the structure, makingsure it's stable, and building it up higher to reach a supposed heavenof technology and science. Science- the great assumption.
{You sound like you don't live in the real world.}
I bloody don't, if this is the real world. Sure, all my basic needs areprovided to me with no real work on my part. But at least I realizethat. I do not act upon it, or worry about it, mainly because I do notsee a need to. Anyway, back to my so-called aristocratic ramblings. Wehave built ourselves these towers of assumption and strayed from thetruth.
{Don't push the analogy too far; it could collapse.}
What we don't realize is that there is no real truth. All the towersare built on the others. Imagine that- towers built on towers. We havemade our own reality, by agreeing to it. We really have control overthe reality that we make. Or, we could choose to not partake in it atall, by just not having our own tower, and walking all around thetower-world.
{So what was the first tower?}
I honestly don't know if there is an answer. I think it would be what we call the Big Bang.
{You have pushed the analogy too far; the privilege of analogy is rescinded.}
Ok, that's really what I am saying. Your world (as you know it) is onebuilt of assumptions. Maybe, I don't know, deep meditation, "oneness",or "ascension" is just the destruction, or the realization, at least,that the world is whatever you want to make it. If you want to interactwith other people and their truths, fine. This world is designed tomake us interact; however, you could live in a world of your owncreation. But, I think we all got bored of that, you know? So, wejoined together, in this world of connectivity, but we had make azillion and one assumptions in order to do it. Now, I think, the goalis to be able to get rid of those assumptions while still interactingwith those others. The "best" of both worlds.
{Isn't that all one great big assumption?}
Yeah, but it has a great view. I'm not concerned too much with stability in my tower.
Ok. It seems I went on a fantastically distant tangent. But I think it puts across the point I was trying to make....
Comments
Where'd you learn all this?
When I say, It's all about perspective, I mean it, I saw first-hand, by my own experience, that one's view on a situation really defines the situation. Does this mean that there is an underlying reality? I've no bloody clue.
I really have no experience to this karma thing, why we MUST 'work it off', or 'it'll come back to us', the wheel, it's all a bunch of stuff that my personal experience doesn't back up. There is shift in perspective, however - that is what I can define, although edgily, as bad or good. Good = more perspective, bad = less. Then it starts to fade, as my experience really doesn't go much farther than that. Let me say this, though- pain and pleasure, are just carrot and stick, to make you learn lessons. Who's teaching you, and when did you decide to start learning, I dunno. A revolutionary would not revolutionize if there weren't something wrong, right? And what is pain and pleasure... again, it's defined by you. Maybe, when you learn the lesson, you just don't really notice the pain/ pleasure, you just get to do whatever you want pertaining to that lesson once you've learned it. You can teach it, maybe, or review it, or just throw it away... and then it comes back again, and you have to remember.
The majority of that paragraph is just extrapolations from "It's all about perspective"... maybe I made a statement somewhere that's false. But really, that's something I believe is true. I don't know what is inherently good or bad. I certainly don't want people to be tortured, especially me, but I can't say it's good or bad if you ask me for a reason.
Another way of saying it's all about perspective is it depends on the context. This stuff really gets confusing after a while, huh? Here's a counter argument to the life is good death is bad thing: I have in my gut right now a trillion (and sixty-three) bacteria that eat each other alive and farting just so that I can sit here and ty
...My theory is that he does it via language. He knows that the truth aboutUFO´s is that the english term itself ´UFO´defines them pretty much.
That is - they´re a manifestation of language. This means that whenever
we argue and bullshit about UFO´s all we´re doing is expressing
something we are seeing in the sky linguistically. If we all started to
connect with each other telepathically we´d know it instantly if
somebody is coming for a visit and what would be the nature of that
somebody. We wouldn´t be asking ´can that somebody be trusted or not´.
Now , let´s say that Obama decided not to unleash the UFO stuff that
everybody wants him to unleash. He can then always add ´well there´s
this and that´, and everybody goes ballistic. The point is , again ,
language.
William S. Burroughs wrote this book titled The Language Virus or something like that. It explains how language works much like virii doby infecting everything. I think that what he was saying was that
language is much like a zombie - between life and death. It´s neither
100% live nor 100% dead. So when people hear about telepathic aliens
who never ushered a word they go ballistic and say ´that´s impossible´-
or at least that´s what they did in the last century , the 20th. Almost
everything in your life is dictated to you via language - so he has to
unleash the truth via language - but he knows that once control
continues to get out of the hands of the White House and out of Wall
Street and into the hands of the people when it comes to deal with the
language part of the story , he can´t be 1000% Wall Street anymore if
that is who he is as the official story goes. So he has to be 100% Wall
Street , and then less and less and less Wall Street until he realizes
he doesn´t have to have all this power anymore. Or maybe he´s not
really 1000% Wall Street at all because it could be a lie designed to
unite the sheep against him.
So let´s put it plain and simple here folks - you are being manipulated into accepting something that is somebody else´s version ofreality than your´s. And that somebody can only keep doing it as long
as you keep trying to rely upon that the way that full UFO disclosure
is done is via language and while having to trust someone to tell you
their version of a story rather than choosing to conclude on your own
terms what to believe. I think that if too much was unveiled at once ,
significantly large numbers of human beings would suddenly start to
stop speaking. They´d make a conscious choise on stopping to express
themselves linguistically. The basic structures of most societies would
collapse alongside the entire infrastructure of today´s economy from
top to bottom. Life would be 25 hours of constant picture - sharing and
data - downloading , much like now. So what has happened has been that
some of you have permitted themselves to be conditioned to kinda ´jump
out of their stairs´whenever hearing the term ´Full UFO disclosure´.
What if I told you that these are just two english words that don´t
have to mean much as such? That´d scare a lot of you. So I don´t want
to scare people here. I realize now that Obama is a person just like me
who can´t be friends with everybody and that it´s all more or less
about language. So what does ´hide the truth with NASA´mean really when
that guy said that during some reverse speech (and it wasn´t Obama but
some news guy)? Well it means that the secret itself that is being kept
hidden from you is that once you realize this , you must not lose the
importance of your innovation....
-Bernard's Star
And another one... not typing it, too long. Someone else's-- this is my personal "spotlighted" area.
http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/profiles/blogs/the-silent-pond-bel...
Here's another one.
...I'm sorry, Dial-up does not allow me to reasonably load this video within a day. Is it a movie?
Obama DeathCare: Certainly, that's one, the privilege under the U.S. government to determine whether you live or die is not your decision, assuming that DeathCare is real.
I'm skipping over 'Dishonesty'; I can't load the video of your last post.
Printing money may be open to interpretation. Don't we need enough dollars for every new baby to pay their debt? Mighty frustrating if an office job was suddenly $1000 a year due to deflation. I know I'm frustrating you by saying this, as I just can't see what you're trying to say; but you can't really know what I'm saying either. Or do you?
Finally, executive orders given to himself only matter in the context of government; if he walked up to you and shoved a piece of paper in your face and said it gave him power over you to do whatever he wanted to to you, what would you do? You could honor it, like so many do, or you could give him a knuckle sandwich right in the face! Or you could stick out your tongue at him. Or take the piece of paper and rip it to shreds! The only power he might have is to make you die, and that's only because so many people back him, because they're afraid they might kill each other! So, instead killing each other, or being afraid of it anyhow, they kill you. That is the only thing that holds government together: fear of death. You know the single thing all rebellions have in common? Lack of fear of death. When people are not afraid to die for their cause, however maladjusted it may be, that is when they have the power over other people who are afraid to die! This applies to many situations, and indeed governments have been able to manipulate it. But the thing that the most people believe in so much that they would give their lives for it, that is the ruling power. So maybe, if people fought for themselves as individuals instead of as a group for some cause, maybe we'd all be individuals finally. Instead of the berative term "sheeple". They are individuals, they have the potential, but they just kinda like being part of the herd, as long as it serves themselves. But when being part of the herd is not favorable to them anymore, they either go insane or become an individual. Hey, let's look at the word individual. "In- divide- ual". Not dividable. Hmm. Anyway, the ones that go insane, are usually the ones who fully realize what it is to be themselves... no society to support them, they have to stand on their own, they have to clobber their way through life with no support, and they develop themselves as an identity. As a being of infinite potential. With no crutches, a person has to learn to stand on their own. They become their own support, with no reliance on outside influences. Those that can't, they die, as they aren't afraid of death, remember, because they know (hopefully) that they'll just come back anew and better prepared. Accepting the grace of another group just makes you dependent on it, no matter how good the intentions. The best intention is to let a person try to stand on their own, let them figure out things for themselves, for that is the reason we are here, to become individuals!
Wow, that was something. I just inspired myself.
Pulled from: http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/forum/topics/wikileaks-deception-c...