Philosophical Comfort...

It's a difficult decision for me - well, I have to give it some thought anyway - as to whether to go the route of just demonstrating how we suddenly made some pretty sizable money here, or whether to deal with that second to establishing a basis for being able to intellectually rest within a solid framework of understanding our world, and our life.

Which one do you think is the more difficult...?

That was a Jesus question too, or so I recall from some old texts. You know, as in, He asked the people around him whether they thought it was easier to 'forgive their sins' or to do material miracles.

Mystical fire... LOL

I know there are some, what I would term 'kids' by which I mean people, who read here - actually they would have to be rather smart people - who are much younger than most of us who venture here!

Now they're going to potentially fall into the trap of becoming too wrapped-up in the 'cares of the world,' as they say, where in fact, they would be far better off in some effectively, Benedictine-style Monastery!! LOL Well, okay, maybe not so extreme of a life of seclusion from 'the world.'

Just earlier today, I had a discussion with one of our closest colleagues here, who happens to be a Muslim, perhaps more of a 'Westminster' version - as in, like a 'Baronness Warsi' of the UK House of Lords-style of Muslim. And this conversation was to do with the Iraqi scholar Sheikh Ahmed Al-Gubbanchi. Al-Gubbanchi is one of the top three Arabic language and Islamic scholars in the world today, the other two being Mufti Abu Layth and Christian Prince, the latter one being a Christian not a Muslim albeit he is formally trained in Islamic Jurisprudence.

That's one of the Maktoum's shaking the Sheikh's hand.
Ahmed Al-Gubbanchi is on the right.

Al-Gubbanchi is widely misquoted in the West and also misquoted and completely misunderstood in the Middle East as well. Most Muslims want to cut his head off.

However, what he has proposed is that the Quran is a text inspired by some 'spiritual wind,' yet otherwise it is the expression of men and not exactly the actual written speech of Allah.

And the meaning of this is that the words in it, are an expression in the context of the times, of various ideas, which require re-interpreting into our modern language and context. This is more or less exactly the same proposition that Christian apologists have regarding the Old Testament - namely, that it is a human-made narrative account of people's interactions with spiritual morality and also of what they perceived as encounters with 'God.'

I am mentioning this in reference to a rather peculiar notion I am, let's say, slowly edging forward here, namely that again, let's say, you suddenly see a whole lot of money being 'miraculously,' as it were, made here, and maybe you even get a piece of the action rather easily - then what happens next, though? Do you sit back, waiting for super-advanced Alien intelligent beings to knock on your door, and take you away in their space craft to some phase of extended physical longevity but which is still more or less 'burdened' with the problematic nature of human proclivities and regular tendency to do 'wickedness?'

There's no point making money unless you can relax with it.

What would be the point of that?

Right now in the American Christian mindset, there is a clear dichotomy between the so-called 'Progressives' and 'New Age' Christians, and the regular Scriptural Christians, who consider things like 'Yoga' and 'Reiki' and other Eastern or Oriental teachings clear-cut 'works of Satan' and demonic and 'non-Christian.' Of course we just don't need to even go into where atheists or agnostics stand in the considerations. 

Older readers here can look after themselves at least to the extent that they will have already found some way to come to their own judgments about things, especially any new things that they see. Everything does have to 'sit well' in the experienced reality... The closer you get to death the more you come to some form of terms with what that means - and categorically, what it does mean, is that it is natural.

So really, you (the mature people) want to make the money, and if it looks as though - oh dear, this was made by some 'very very strange process;' it doesn't necessarily matter that you spin your remaining years out just living a natural life then, thereafter. That was going to happen anyway. You don't need to go for a ride in a space craft that travels even faster than '17x the speed of sound' (Donald Trump's recent admission about the latest US missile technology). Not if you have the latest M3 BMW in the garage.

But for the younger people, their feet are going to get itchy. Especially if they 'see' something, get a real inkling that something funny has been going on. And so what I am suggesting is, that you need to get your mind into a real, a realistic, place of being comfortable and completely satisfied in its framework of understanding how the Universe works, aka 'what it is all about.'

Stupid stupid joke - 'blague' is the French-Swiss word for it.

And that is completely possible. You're not going to find it at any University anywhere on the planet. Give that idea up.

And I'm not going to give any ideas away too openly here.

But it is possible. You can get there. And you should try to.

Because you see, you cannot get 'up there' unless they know, you are not going to stab them in the back. Promises promises, right? Humans. SMH. You keep on telling yourself that you are trustworthy. Are you so sure? Really?

The 'Yoga Christians' are just falling prey to commercial enterprises, oh maybe there are a few 'demonic forces' around too - I mean, if there ever was a 'Reptilian' it would have to be that Kenneth Copeland(!) So sue me.

The Scriptural Christians are nearly there but even they will not face those 'never spoken about' passages that none of them even know, apparently, although they'll quote you every other thing in there and preach at you about all of those all day long.

I would definitely entertain anyone who wants to challenge some of the things I have been saying - there must be someone who has fixed, firm views, you know, strong-minded, beliefs that run way counter to what I am saying. I'd love to take on the smart, learned American Christians like Dr Michael Heiser - he has some decent ideas... Or Melissa Dougherty. The trouble is they have material lives - I don't. So I really don't feel like messing with them too much. I can afford to risk my life, and they can't. So they're mostly stuck in the blinds even though they see the cracks of light. Like the men of Hindustan, they're partly right...

The video below was one of the brand new things she played
in the live-stream, out in the open, in the cold, at Gstaad, Switzerland
just the other day.

So... When, not if, WHEN, you start to see the money turn up in force here - I am not going to signal punches to any potential competitors at all (and that's just plain standard operating procedure, 'across the Universe' as far as I can ascertain) - if you're a kid and you start having 'moral philosophy doubts/questions/cravings for information' then by all means contact me privately. Not yet though; wait till you see the green of the green-backs!

Right now, as in, RIGHT NOW, we have been able to acquire something not too dissimilar from 'ten tiles of gold-pressed Latinum.' LOL I don't even know what the whole stock is worth, I haven't calculated. But it's extremely valuable, in very rare supply, has a stunning high demand among pretty much only very rich people, and yeah, I have it all; as in ALL. I have the monopoly.

Protecting a monopoly is a task. You can never show what you're doing, or how you make the money, because in this day and age, as soon as you do that, all the sharks rush in.

We're so far in front now though, it hurts.

Any Bartok classical music fans here:

Beware Of Clever Dissembling

As always, we have to be aware that anything valuable and powerful within its own lane, is apt to be 'stolen' and proposed in a copy form - a false form - of the real thing. And people get away with that because the bulk of the general population is not equipped with anywhere near sufficient critical thinking skills.

It's absolutely as true in the modern world of science as it is anywhere else - in fact this is one of the places where it is particularly easy to employ the so-called 'straw man' tactic. This is where someone says a person has said such-and-such (which they haven't), and then they tear down that false depiction with its deliberately inherent flaws.

This is a huge 'Christian' music festival called 'Awakenings.'
It is not the same thing I have been referring to. It is something designed
arguably, to commercially exploit marketplaces like Brazil
and elsewhere that there are a
lot of Christian religious in the general population. It is doubtful in my own mind,
how actually 'Christian' this particular thing is in the first place!

And of course it's very true in the world of religions. 'Religion' coming from the Latin root 'to be bound.' In other words, you are obligated, bound, to someone or something.

But even such things as the Sanskrit Vedas, are taken by all of these modern-day 'yoga' teachers and 'masters' and what-not, twisted around, and vended to people as the real thing. They are not. None these 'experts' either really reads these texts, or if they do, many deliberately misconstrue what is being said in there.

Yes there are a tiny few Veda scholars who have an understanding of what is being said; too few to say that if you go and practice 'Yoga' you are really doing what it says in the Vedas. And there are plenty enough ethnically Indian people who will scream me down on this, but it remains the case - what I have said.

The same is true of those purporting to be able to teach just about any religion there is, be it Christianity, any of the Nordic systems, tribal systems.

Colors of the past

So why do I think that just because we 'discover' there really are alien beings out there, some right here too - somehow this challenges the stupidity and ignorance already 'in place' in the minds of a huge proportion of the population?

LOL

I don't!

You need personal critical thinking now, you needed it beforehand, before any such 'revelations' appear in the 'officially respected' media - and you will certainly need it afterwards. You'll need it when we move firmly into the Age of AI.

Now. 

I'm going to show you some reality.

This is the level of things going one right now.

If you have a really good headset-style earphones, you will notice that at around (exactly in fact) 1:05 in, after a brief lowering of the overall sound level, there is a 'clicking sound' that should be seeming to come from your rear and slightly off to the left. 

Colors of the 'now.'

In the old old old days, there was this thing called 'clock code,' where one covert person, would make a finger-mark on a dusty car window or some dusty screen, in the shape of a circle, and then place a mark at the relative 'hour mark' that they wanted the other person to meet with them. It still works!

And you can easily locate someone, if you know what you're looking for, even in a vast crowd... ...if you were given the appropriate signal.

I promise I will soon find some nice, sedate, calming music:

...Everything's easy when you've been told what to 'watch' for; everything's easy 'when you know how.'

And Critical Thinking

This is addressed to all of those younger people who may be reading here.

There is a difference between someone telling you what to think, and the possibility that there is actually a genuine authentic 100% constant source of truth. And I do mean 'truth' as opposed to just 'true information' or 'correct/accurate information.'

Someone telling you what to think is quite likely to be an indication of that someone also trying to control you. And that is not a good thing. Even if you are that young you are under the control and authority of parents - even then, responsible parents are going to guide you towards, or at least give you enough opportunity, to discover firstly good and accurate information, and then also moral and ethical examples so that you will make your own good judgments about various things.

They're going to try and take you here - to the world
of AI. But you will be prepared for it.

When people are not secure in their own ideas and a sense of what sound knowledge really is, then they turn into little dictators and resort to telling, rather than soliciting critical thinking in other people.

The absolute worst, and most misleading thing you are ever going to hear (and numerous hugely famous world figures have said this misleading thing and are often quoted on it), is 'no one has a monopoly on truth.'

That is not only the stupidest thing you can be told, it is outrageously false.

What those people who have voiced the notion - and who are sincere people - might really mean, is that you shouldn't just swallow what someone is telling you without yourself being able to make clear, objective, independent judgments on those things. 

The good side of modern technology.

The rest who swing the phrase around are being dissemblers - that are saying it to impress you that they are open and honest and ought to be trusted since they are encouraging you to think skeptically... ...but then they always mean that you are to be skeptical about others, and not about themselves.

'Critical thinking' means you have to search by yourself to find a sound, objectively correct basis for making a particular judgment about something. 

Often there are important matters that can have two opposite ways of being morally a-judged: should I lie to someone who has a serious life-threatening condition in order to relieve them of counter-productive anxiety - or should I tell them the truth because one should never lie...? These things are sometimes characterized as 'black or white' issues. They need not in actuality be only one thing or the other, what I'm talking about is simply when these are considered as 'black or white' issues; having only two, usually opposite 'values' in terms of the way you are expected to judge them.

And then there are those matters where there could be a multiplicity of varied potential judgments - and these things are treated as 'matters of degree.'

But in all of these situations there is an initial uncertainty about something that requires it to be judged by the human mind applying moral values or complex utilitarian yardsticks, or 'best possible educated guesses' such as when an experimental scientist has to take a certain risk before he or she can find out with authentic certainty what an outcome, usually a potentially dangerous outcome will be. The testing of the nuclear bomb would be an example of that.

The good side of Paris restaurants - the real side; this
is a real high class place.

Critical thinking means that in the end, you are required to make judgment yourself. If such 'judgments' are only you blindly following someone else's edict, then you are being manipulated and mind-controlled.

The Universe, however, and its underlying physics are a total and complete monopoly of truth. They will do 'their thing' regardless of what you only think, or 'believe.'

The really big and malicious liars, will take you right up next to reality and truth, so so close, but not sufficiently close to actually breach the necessary and vital boundary conditions allowing whatever it is they are saying to be inside the definition of the thing they are telling you about.

Is the Universe 'the Source?' Can you vibrate into a magnetic attraction any particular thing you want, because this is some kind of 'law' of physics?

Or is only some word, some 'holy name' the thing alone, that, without visible process or scientific mechanism, makes or allows things to happen?

If you look at someone as the only source of truth, that is close to a cult phenomenon. 

Now here's a thing - let's say you're a Christian, and you therefore know and or believe, that Jesus is the ONLY source of Truth, the ultimate source of Truth, in fact, the Truth - the relevant scriptural texts actually tell you outright you don't need to rely on that as dogma or mere doctrine: your job is to stick your fingers into the bleeding palms without which personal experience you need not just believe it, because in fact you might not have the faith to believe it.

The complexity of Bouillabaisse... 

But the complication, the complexity of these kinds of 'high end' epistemology discussions is that in the obverse, if you just then suppose personal experiences, are the sole necessary factor, then you are feeding sensory stimulation which can very rapidly turn into a form of addiction - so once again, you are being 'mind controlled.'

The truth is (see what I mean, there is a truth as you will now find), that it is a very subtle, balanced combination of all of our available tools - the mind, logical thinking, and personal sensory, physical, experience/s, and as much objectivity and independence as possible that we can muster, that gives us the way to a reliable outcome of our judgments as to what is true and what is good or bad.

So, despite that Nelson Mandela said 'no one has a monopoly on truth' he was completely wrong because what you just read above in the immediate above paragraph is the absolute monopoly mechanism and pathway to truth.

Use it.

Truth has a monopoly on Truth. Truth is a thing. I'm not necessarily sure what kind of a thing, but it is a definite 'thing' in the sense that it is both a 1. process path and 2. an outcome and 3. a definition of reality. All at the same time. ; )

Truth is Reality.

...They're both Bouillabaisse, they're both good,
but they are different.

Reality can be very very complex. But that is no excuse to suggest there is no such thing as absolute reality. There is an absolute reality, and we are living in it.

'Monopoly' in economics always means it is exchanged expensively. You get truth and you will be rich. You get it. Though you have to get it yourself. 

'No one has a monopoly on truth.' Totally wrong, but I'm not explaining it beyond the limit that I went to just here in this post. I gave you the process path. And that's way enough to get you to where you want to go.

The oldies around here already know this stuff. They use it all the time. It doesn't necessarily make them totally happy all the time, and it doesn't make them rich all the time or enough of the time as much as they want - and that's because we're all only human and we can make mistakes, or be too slow, or too lazy or whatever.

But we're not stupid though. And you shouldn't be either. There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever for you to be stupid. So don't be.

You don't look, you won't find.

All the good stuff is hidden stuff.

...Definitely Use Your Brains!

I think I remember saying a short while back in this immediate series of posts and articles that it is not for everyone, and that maybe some people will find certain aspects objectionable.

If you are a kid, or someone less than a whole lot of years of experience on this planet(!), then go to source texts and study them. Maybe there will be source texts mentioned here from time to time but actually go to those and read them yourself; you cannot rely on just reading commentaries. And this does not mean I am deliberately telling lies or making things up about various source materials, but it does mean that you should read the whole things as well yourself.

'Listen kid, you can't come in here...'
LOL

Why am I saying this (again)?

Because in case someone has 'expectations' and those expectations fail to be 'delivered' in reality to them actually, then in the first place the whole point of what I have been saying and why, was lost, misunderstood.

This message is the delivery.

Things are going to happen, in your life, on the world stage, throughout wider society and my aim is to prepare you for them.

We live in an extraordinarily sinister place, an extremely sinister world - of other people, their behavior and intentions, of rulers, or ideas and ideologies.

To underestimate any of this is a 'fatal mistake,' potentially fatal. And it will destroy your mind and your personal self in many ways, if you misjudge certain things as a mature adult.

'Moral imperative' - moral ethos and thus 'idea dominion' - is the contested space; not the actual material world itself.

As we come up upon realized 'AI' into our lives, we are being confronted, if however subtly, with moral relativism versus absolute moral prescription as defined by some, usually religious set of ideas.

'...Unless you go to Morty Sills, the tailor.'

You may not realize this yet, may not have genuinely even perceived it, but everything in human life has two different representations existing alongside each other...

And you can even use a word, employ its generic meaning - and end up with widely differing results or consequences nevertheless.

Okay let's say, for example and for argument's sake, that you are a fundamentalist Christian or an Evangelical Christian or a 'Pentecostal' Christian or a 'any other style' of Christian - and you are suddenly told next week by NASA and the US government, 'oh well, yes it's true we have been contacted by ET aliens...'

Some of the interior of the Hagia Sophia.

Half the world of Christians will say these are 'fallen angels' the other half will automatically say 'demons masquerading as little green-skinned beings,' David Icke will say 'see, I told ya: Reptilians!!' ...And half the Muslims in the world will say 'the Jinn' and the other half 'Shaytan!'

Michio Kaku will say 'no problem, just a statistical certainty come to visit us at last.' Dawkins will say 'ordinary evolution max'd out across the ambit of Cosmic Time and Space.' deGrasse Tyson will just laugh because he is plain nuts anyway.

...And you might go 'oh, I'd better hedge my bets and go - Jesus, if you are out there, I believe, okay?'

And then that will save you, right?

Here is a picture of something. And it is not 'the Blue Mosque.'

This square bit is the Blue Mosque.

The Blue Mosque is a building Sultan Mehmet Ali built alongside the Hagia Sophia to rival the temple, and to exceed it, to demonstrate the supremacy of Islam - which it doesn't and by some distance too.

But that has not prevented you having been misled by the media and by everyone else as to what 'the Blue Mosque' actually is.

Soon, we simply must step away from all of this silly nonsense talk and go back to things like - the lunch scene from the original 'Wall Street' for which we are indebted to Tao-of-Jonz for reminding us about:

Ya Think?

Friends in low places. We all have those, right?

Well you should. 

Yesterday at my local shopping center people were a bit amazed when this old African woman, who usually asks for coins, came up to me, had a few words and then 'high five'd' me.

Great great actress - actually pretending not
to know how to wink and still winking anyway.

...I had noticed earlier that she had this brand new coat on.

So what do you think? Can you guess?

Anyway, years and years ago - many years ago - when there was still a real commodities futures market, this trader for National Australia Bank, who traded for Will Buttrose (Ita Buttrose's brother) by name of 'Wayne G.,' well, we had this competition between us over who would develop this program first that would be able to 'make a million bucks in thirty minutes.'

Prominent Australian, Ita Buttrose - occupies all of the media's attention and you can't get her off the Google Images pages - is currently head of the Australian Broadcasting Commission.

In those days it was basically all about the technology, the screens, the live-feeds - and even the Telex private direct lines. Computer processing speed was a thing.

It's all different now and at any rate, even back then, I would prefer to do things the really old fashioned way, by doing direct trades with Mocatta and Degussa and Norilsk and only then, list stuff afterwards on CBOT or COMEX. And I had a Platts membership account. Well most of these things don't even exist anymore (except for the Russians, of course, who have been buying gold bullion like there is no tomorrow for paper junk). Just as a side note, in those days, we thought Bernie Madoff was this private bit-player who maybe had some inherited real estate in slum areas of Chicago - he had a really small, miserably-lit old, old, office in the main city block under some overhead rail tracks...

Argh! We don't remember this! But,
he was dressed by Alan Flusser.

If you had good hand-eye co-ordination and you could think rapidly, you stood a chance of becoming quite proficient taking some scalps in the screen action.

There was one guy, literally a burn-out from Air-Traffic Controlling, who turned his hand to this stuff and within one year ended up owning a large local real estate company, which is still around and still 'big.' But he was also pretty OCD, I thought. 

'A million bucks in thirty minutes' is about the structure, the template, not even the algorithms - and in the end it's also a little bit about 'your belief' because if you believe the Fed will indeed underwrite junk corporate bonds well anyone can still 'make a million' at least on paper and realizable 'on delivery/maturity' whichever comes first. I mean it's just a given that a large amount of deep discounts will be met at 100 cents on the dollar...

'Belief' is eventually linked to 'opportunity cost' choices.

Would you buy Boeing, Ford, Caterpillar, v. pure gold bullion? One will make you a million, and the other will definitely not but it will rise and it will be safe every step along the way.

Who knows? Who knows what choice sits well with any particular individual? If it's only about choice.

But we want BOTH; we want all outcome opportunities fully delivered. That's what we really want. With equivalent risk which is preferably running at 'no risk at all' or near enough to.

So was Roger Stone taking any kind of risk?

'Go to work, Bud.'

He didn't do anything wrong - unless you think him running his mouth is particularly wrong...

I mean Robert Mueller claims that he (Stone) lied to him. 

And this is on the amazing 'proof' that one 'log-in' by Guccifer 2.0 was from the GRU in Moscow, or some IP address said to be used by them. And that was because, 'probably' the GRU officer 'forgot' to use his VoIP security scrambler.

Which then somehow means that Stone necessarily knew that Guccifer was a Russian agent and who had hacked Hillary Clinton's emails.

Yet Roger Stone says he knew/knows who 'Guccifer' is and has offered to say who it is, and that he was not the person from whom Stone had gotten his actual information.

Theoretically, 'Guccifer' is a hacker, called 'Marcel Lehel,' currently in a US prison.

And, I happen to know that this is only very partly correct. But so what? No one cares.

I even asked Lionel Nation to comment on Stone's tailor, the esteemed Alan Flusser, and he literally said to me: 'Who?'

$1,500 a pair. What?!! Yep, and not even by Alan Flusser, either.

But no worries, right; the general media knows more than what we all talk about freely here.

Yeah, so... ...Alan Flusser. Dressed Gordon Gekko.

'Who?' 

Okay so listen to me very carefully - the US Military is not able to deny, that they had a small, highly secretive program, many decades ago, that was intended to monitor, what people like Wernher von Braun had claimed, were, as in literally were, either 'merely' the Lebensborn, albeit a very very clandestine segment of those, or actual human-alien hybrid children 'made' in that project of the Germans during the War.

John Ratcliffe would not be able to deny it, if he were asked about it. Because there are files about it.

Except that no one, so far as I know, at any high level, really treated any of it too seriously after about the Seventies. All the same, you should know, that CIA continued the monitoring, as a soft exercise for their people who were close to retirement from active field operations, and who had previously been well, the very active people... ...as in, you know, blew up bridges in Yugoslavia under cover of being priests and nuns by day; those kind of people.

CIA, nothing if not diligent over time.

And then. And then. Something happened in Florida, see.

More on that when we are allowed to say.

Meanwhile...

It is what it is.