Way Too Scary For Children...

Listen to me carefully. In this world there are things that no media company, not only would not even dare to talk about, their people would literally not be able to psychologically handle the information if they had it.

This week Tennessee Representative (to the US Congress), Tim Burchett explained a few key things to several news agencies, following his participation in a 'SCIF' - which as I understand it, is not necessarily 'being read into' the top secrets, but under secrecy provisions being given access to a 'Secret Compartmented Information Facility' - in this case which was specifically to do with the current Congressional inquiry into whatever the government knows about Aliens and UAP's.

Quote, Rep. Tim Burchett: 'Americans should know
what the government knows about UFO's.'

His direct statement to the news people was exactly what I have told you from several years back, namely, that there is known to be something, but it is outside of the FOIA process because the knowledge and details are in the hands of what he termed 'quasi-government groups' or companies with government funding who were essentially private now, if they 'even existed here at all any more...'

What exactly he meant by that I'm sure I cannot say.

And then he went on to say that unless someone stepped forward with evidence from those groups, it would be virtually impossible to force access through FOIA.

But why would anyone come forward gratuitously though?

Secondly, the whole aspect of 'with proof and evidence,' well what does that mean - that someone is going to give you anti-gravity technology, for example, for nothing?

What I mean by 'way too scary for children' is this: let's say there are some secrets which involve genuine, completely authentic matters to do with at some earlier point, official government engagement with beings not of this planet. (And we'll get to the key point presently).

...All of the currency of any kind of source opinion, of the very raison d'etre at all, of such beings coming here since the 1940's, or at least making themselves known, was always related to the nuclear bomb and what happened during the two major World Wars and the immediate aftermath context of a nuclear threat. No one from any quarter has ever posited another reason.

There is a small amount of factual basis to the insinuation that 'UFO's' were responsible for temporarily closing down some North American nuclear missile facilities.

But what is not made so clear by those saying that the point of their 'appearance' was some concern about nuclear wars - is not so much that they could prevent it, but whether they actually would do so...

Well there are no ancient tales about otherworldly 'agencies' preventing calamity; the stories are all along the lines that the calamity took place.

Sodom and Gomorrah, Atlantis, Tyre and Sidon - these were all ancient accounts of their utter destruction. Ironically, I guess, in the case of Tyre and Sidon, their stone remnants were taken and thrown by Alexander the Great into the sea to create a useful causeway.

You see the thing is this - the phrase 'the nuclear option' in modern parlance does not mean someone is going to use nuclear weapons to overcome an enemy in a battle; it means to blow everything up on the way out because they are actually losing.

When the nuclear bomb was first used, it seems to have been used to demonstrate to Stalin that the West had a very serious means of countering any Stalinist agenda and ambition in the West.

Iran does have nuclear weapons and very sophisticated delivery systems. So does China.

These places are in the first place ideologically driven -, not primarily driven by reason of actual threats against them.

No doubt both of them would argue though and say that 'regime change' is already an open goal by the part of the West that is led by the United States.

But 'way too scary for children' does not refer to these things.

Way too scary would be what you would find out, not so much if you were to see who, just who is involved with ET Aliens in 'private organisations and corporate entities or groups,' what they do, where they are situated -, but by the counterpoint, namely who are those opposed to such groups.

Because there are large scale, national 'arrangements' - some wealthy governments here and there, some 'philosophical' and ideological, even 'occult' you could say (and I'm not talking about Freemasonry in this specific context here) trans-global conglomerates - which are mortally opposed to anything that would give new and advanced power into the hands of a broad cross-section of the man-in-the-street human world.

We are not so much just on the threshold of major global conflict catastrophe, but we are rather close to the introduction of anti-gravity technology and also extremely light but strong materials technologies. These things would radically alter the topography of global economics and politics forever.

Over the next two years, you will see the stepped exposition in the public arena of various new 'advances' in technology (where they come from, who's to know) that will completely overturn governments and government systems all over the world. 

Unless the overlords can tie you to a 'home,' they cannot cause you to fight and die for a homeland.

In the coming weeks, maybe month or so, not a hundred miles from right here, there will be a very special wine tasting thing being held - somewhere - involving a wine of exorbitant price and value. If I can get a cam into there, I will show you a person, or even some people, who are literally of the kind that Rep. Burchett was talking about.

Now just keep in mind, you are only a few people, who come here and read at this place. This is not widespread knowledge and it never will be.

And we can truncate it real quick if things got too 'complicated' for any of us. Not being over-confident either. I acknowledge that when one team takes the field, the other side will also turn up on the day.

Hearing Voices??!

What?!

As people who are generally supportive here of fairly esoteric training programs like the ones provided commercially by the Monroe Institute, and since I certainly talk about some of the elements of those things in detail here - it is very important to create some considerable distance between anything like what is being reported in the news about people who go off the rails and do some really atrocious things (the Lewiston shooter), and sophisticated controlled processes to better and more functionally engage deeper levels of the human mind.

It should be made absolutely clear that there can be no linking the 'hearing of voices' with anything that Monroe Institute-style programs, advisedly speaking, enable.

There's nobody in the world that can tell you
this, other than someone who knows and can
say - Karl 'may have been' for many
years, not only just an 'asset' but an
operative of MI6. But he might have also
abandoned that at some point too...
I'll give you the secret that is 'traceable:'
it is to do with his shirt-makers.
Fact. Inescapable. Ask
Stella Rimmington.
Anyway they were Savile Row...
'Not many peeple noh dat...'

There are also a large number of modern chemicals - for one specific instance any kind of methamphetamine for example - that speed up the signal traffic between neural networks and brain centers, and their connected afferent and fundamental sensory terminating point nerves.

By tampering with the speed of those connections, it is always at least potentially possible, to have the brain cell memories of words and even phrases triggered in the immediate conscious receptive awareness, before any actual proper physical sensory stimuli went off (neural semiotic signal threshold). The jumbling of neural patterns and afferent/efferent responses is common with chemical stimulant use (or abuse, of course).

This can give rise to impressions in the brain of disembodied words and phrases, even whole sentences, being 'heard.'

We should all be committed, intellectually committed, and intelligently fully committed, to the view that we do already have our plain existent senses, and these must be the natural pathway to 'seeing' and communicating with very advanced intelligent beings - and not some other, mysterious pathway that becomes impossible to verify by external and independent, critical observers.

That advanced Alien intelligent beings often choose to behave highly surreptitiously, denying access to verification by others, other people, that is independent observers - is not strictly speaking our etiological problem or even our or an epistemological problem.

The Monroe Institute has as its most basic process requirement in the programs, that there is always someone there with the subject who is meant to be doing the 'targeted visioning.'

That person ideally should be trained to follow rules of objectivity in practice.

This does not mean that the observer should bear a demeanor of continuous gratuitous doubting, such as you would always find with a person like Richard Dawkins - and also de Grasse Tyson. Because that would itself necessarily already defeat the premise of true objectivity: by which is meant that the person there is someone capable of dispassionately recording what is going on, and what was said by the program subject in the 'mind state process' time.

Karl was her stylist at the end of his life.

In the very first place, the point never was to 'see' what was not there, when organisations like Eastman-Kodak's Hawkeye facility and Bell High Altitude Photographics were having specially trained and 'augmented mind state' map readers look at developed film...

...It was to have them virtually subconsciously interpret the images in front of them using what was presumed to be their 'deep mind,' absent from the normal (normally conscious state) doubt fear and anxiety about getting things right or having to 'see' anything at all from the highly classified intel maps and images.

What happened of course, was that they discovered that most of the subjects reported a much clearer set of sensory impressions than what they would normally experience in the ordinary waking state - not a more vague or dream-like condition. 

Like spectral colors that are additive primaries, when they all combine they create 'white' -, then in the same way intensified capacity to sense along the fundamental sensory pathways all at the same time together, as an actual meta-meaning (haptics plus semiotics) connected symphony, becomes something that is much more accessible in terms of a communication style, to super-advanced (possibly Alien) intelligent species.

And that is all that there is about it.

You're expected to hear their spoken voice coming from out of their 'ordinary' physical mouth. Not imagining something that appears to sound like a voice, or having some internal brain impression that seemed like you heard a word spoken or some snatches of words.

'Old school' stuff.

I can easily teach someone, one-on-one, to get to this state of play; but it is both impractical and very likely problematic to try and do such a thing simply on-line, via some 'cold medium' and some text.

It's also not the point that people just follow a process path that someone, no matter how good of a hands-on instructor they are, shows - when the core reality is to do with one's own deep inner outlook on the Universe as something they are living in, being actually present in.

Because most people today, and I say most and I believe it is that - are seeking to escape from their reality! So consequently it is just too easy for people at arms' length (IE on-line and at a physical distance), and un-monitored -, to try and use these kinds of techniques and ideas to get sensations just for the 'ride,' and also of course (flawed) sensations of 'release...'

I mean what kind of crazy person in any case, is hearing voices and then going ahead and following those voices -, when they say 'hey go kill a bunch of people!' 

That's totally nuts.

Actually, it starts to become suspect whether such a thing was even true, or, to phrase it better - just what are we talking about here, when a psychiatrist reports so-and-so claimed to be 'hearing voices?' 

Why would a person merely hearing a voice, then convince themselves that voice was more to be complied with than any other voice?

No I think we can discount that it was just a matter of someone hearing voices. 

If it were even true at all, then what is much more important is what the content of those messages or instructions were, and what then compelled the person to follow any of them.

Even crazy people who are organized enough to carry out major physical violence using tools, are not so random that they fail to follow linear logic altogether. They have assigned a moral content judgment and given a moral value label to their victims. How did they do that?

This whole thing about 'hearing voices' needs to be elucidated better in the media if people are expected to accept that was the only thing that was going on in that crazy person's life and brain and mind.

It's specious.

Also 'old School' but updated. Though actually
I just like the photo composition.

It's specious to think the cause of the deadly mischief was the hearing of voices.

When it comes to engaging with, or potentially engaging with; communicating with -, actual ET Aliens, what is the content of what that communication is...? What is it expected to be, from your side...? What are you seeking from them?

And that leads us all straight back to the greatest texts on morality and ethics and epistemology and mathematics and geometry and physics and aesthetics - the world has ever produced. Nothing less than that will do.

I'm afraid not. We cannot expect to come half-baked here!

Given that there is such greatness in the human background, why would you choose to leave it 'behind at home,' so to speak - when you were presenting yourself as a valid example of the human race to a truly sophisticated advanced other intelligence?

Who would you 'bring with you' as the paramount examples of humanity, to show to some incredibly advanced ET Alien beings: 'Hey, this is what we want to tell you that we are like at our best...' 'And we are not necessarily any single one of us right now as good or as great as that particular example/those examples, but that is our aspiration and our intention (to be like) and how we would like you to view us...'

; )

Did that give you a clue?

I mean did that just give you a really big clue?

Just remember - to avoid being 
hammered by the authorities(!) what we
will sometimes do, is
show 'connected' pics' but in upcoming, later,
posts here so as not to make things
too too very obvious.
Just like what you will find in the below music if you
bother to listen past halfway in...

Are you as to any doubt whatsoever that we cannot deliver here?

Matthew 13:52

LOLOLOL

Were not expecting that, now were you? Tell the truth now.

Trust you actually listened to the music clip in the last post here, right? Because...

Fundamental Comparisons

It is impossible to sell debt securities at virtually zero percent, when the obtaining market benchmark rate for debt is five percent.

Hence what we have going on all across the Western World right now is a fundamental illiquidity of mainstream capital.

And, certainly, that mainstream capital (paying mostly all zero percent coupons) is almost all entirely in the hands, not of private investment banks like it would have been in the past - but in the hands of government via their central banks.

In all the world, the place where
I found the most obvious,
casual and quite overt displays
of real cash wealth among the
people there - was Vienna.

Secondly, the basic and critical intrinsic reason no one is able to sell existing debt (IE not new lines at current rates or ahead of those - as will be necessary) is that governments insisted on forcing (borrowed money) capital investment into building projects and real estate (because these things are immobile and are easy to extract taxes from the 'owners' of) and stone does not produce anything, as the ancient Egyptian pharaohs eventually discovered.

Zero percent... Five percent. Zero percent. Five percent.

Well you will be soon enough looking at some percentage that it would not be advisable for me to say here right now.

And energy prices are going up.

So what happens next?

LOL

Not sure.

; )

'I - am - not - sure - that - I - can - say.'

I guess if you go down this doom-sayer thinking to what looks like its logical ending, you would have to think there is little or no point buying expensive wines - that is, 'investing' in them hoping to realize some kind of profit in the future.

But it is one thing to speculate about what a certain trajectory looks like from a present standpoint, and another thing to say that you know for sure nothing good ever happens from out of the blue.

Plenty of women still wear
opera gloves there.
In Vienna.

As our poet friend set down in verse in the immediate previous post comments section -, you could be suddenly blessed by a gift from some divine source.

That is indeed what the world needs right now. 

It does not seem, on the surface of things that human mortal leaders are capable of discovering any new solutions to literally age-old problems.

But why will you be blessed?

You are certain to be blessed.

You.

Maybe not others but just you.

Coming here you have opened a door - entered as it were, through a portal.

To another place.

Where bits of broken ceramic are all put back together with gold... (The Japanese art of kintsugi).

Shall we invite some people around and offer them the best wine - to be drunk from some kintsugi?

Shall we though...

We shall see.

 

Sinning With Wine

Well, it feels like sinning, anyway...

So you're at this restaurant, see. With people who know you and think they know what kinds of things you can get up to.

It's the sort of affair that someone like John Brennan might attend: there's career local Navy guys in their fairly dry-cleaned and pressed whites...

It isn't like the old days when Commander Bond was an authentic reflection of many people in the Admiralty (of Great Britain).

Royal Tokaji wine.
Last you easily two hundred years.

Today, Barbara Broccoli hasn't got it quite right - she says there is a credibility problem with 'old Bond' in the modern-day context. But there is no credibility problem with Bond; there is a credibility problem with the Empire.

'Here, John Brennan, you like to do transgressive things -. Here's something right down your alley."

Brennan: 'Who TF are you, pip-squeak.'

'Never mind that -, have this, casually vandalize this in three minutes.'

Hand him the small glass filled with its amber-golden thick liquid that definitely has a sulfurous scent.

Actually, preferably it isn't a glass, but a large glass spoon. That's the traditional way of having this thing.

You continue: 'It has taken fifteen years to have this ready for bottling, and this particular one has been in its bottle for a further fifty years. It takes a long long time to ferment and it hardly reaches 2.9% alcohol by volume even at the end.

'You can wreck this now in just two or three minutes.'

When you think about just how long it takes to turn out a very good Hungarian Tokaji (or Tokay), and you think how blithely one downs the thing until there is not even a single beading drop left inside a decent bottle, it certainly feels like sin doing it. I feel guilty about consuming, making something disappear, that took so long to make.

Very old fashioned style.

But there is a great secret here - Dionysus the god, himself caused humans to forget themselves and what they were doing in the moment; Jesus did the same thing when He 'gave out the wine.'

What goes cannot come back...

...they say.

But what would they know, John Brennan?

What would they really know?

Still, it still feels like an act of sinning to me.

Think of the years it took.

You can keep a bottle of Tokay for two hundred years (and people have done) and it is as perfect after that, or even better than, the day it was originally bottled.

Here we are, we humans, taking things that took so long to build, and consuming them in a moment.

Very old fashioned style.

This strange person told me, one time: 'Every mouthful that you take, think about what went into its making, and hope and pray that all of what it took becomes a part of you going forward.'

There's that phrase again. It's a 'Company-speak' phrase btw. Same as 'non trivial.'

Well, let me tell you - drinking the greatest wines in the world of all time is a non-trivial thing.

How do we go forward from here?

They say you cannot take things out with you when you go from here. That's not true. Because in any case, how would 'they' even know?

You need to find out what someone who has gone and come back says about it.

Going forward from here, take things from the past with you.

Nothing good ever just disappears forever. 

Find out what 'all of you' is, what it means - and then take all of you into the future.

 

The High Volume Wines Industry

The word 'algorithm' today has the sense of some mathematical operator (symbol denoting a transformation) in a volumetric or let's say calculus equation.

However, its original source, and from which the word itself comes - namely from the 9th century Arabic Polymath al-Khawarizmi - is to do with finding ways to defraud gold and silver buyers by placing one's thumb down on the scales in a certain prescribed way that always effected the outcome favorably as long as you knew the mechanism of the balance system involved.

In other words, what it means - what its implication is - is how to cheat.

Nakedly, the general online worldwide media that falls under 'branded outlets' as such, declares that it selects the stories to publish as determined by 'algorithms.'

And usually these are so-called 'proprietary algorithms.'

The luxury wine experience.

But a thumb is a thumb is a thumb, and what it is actively and deliberately doing on one side of a balance scales is the opposite of 'telling the truth.'

The unfortunate thing about information versus lack of information, is that even if you could decode the thumb pressing, it would not thereby give you access to critical information because in fact, that was missing altogether in the first place.

All that happened was that a certain 'story' or a line of stories was overly-pushed, heavily marketed, in other words sold to the reader and the viewer - while any work that really is necessary to finding out information especially hard to get information, simply didn't happen at all.

In other words it would be one thing if on the other side of the scales there were actual news and new information available at all - but in fact there was nothing on the other side of the scales.

It takes work to find information that is hidden by politics or by special interests or by someone's guilt. Nobody in the modern kinds of large-scale media pays for that work.

Arguably, it is no wonder that French wine-makers insist on claiming there is some major importance to terroir, on account they cannot factually claim there is significance to actual grape varieties they take the names of and stick on their wines - because there are no such varieties any more; not since the Great Phylloxera Plague of the late 19th century there.

They are all, except maybe for the Bollinger Estates alone (which are in the Grande Champagne region) American root-stock grafted varietals. 

A hundred years into the future...

Additionally, the massive overuse of pesticides and the industrial-scale continuous inserting of nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus, means the grapes produced are anything but coming from something intrinsically unique or naturally spectacular to do with the soils, the climate, or the timing and craft of the harvesting and the purity of the fruit and of the agriculture involved.

Do these massively over-industrialized and super-high volume wines taste any good?

I'm sure I cannot say.

I mean for example, how do cognac producers expect not to have the pesticide residues negatively affect cognacs that are kept in casks or bottles for many many decades?

Are they extracting those traces by some technically clandestine or obscure scientific process using chemistry and machines during the wine-making phases?

Our 'friends' - yes, those ones you know about that we talk about - let's just say 'speculatively' and maybe just using the Monroe Institute 'targeted viewing' methodology, have been to the future and they know what the Louis XIII cognac is like a hundred years from now.

And yes, it is very good (@ then).

Same as it is very good right now.

The Remy Martin Estates make their wines (cognacs) also from the Grande Champagne and Petite Champagne regions and it is conceivable that at least in their case, most of the vineyards even those in the Petite Champagne areas from which they get their best grapes are all intact varieties from pre- the Phylloxera problems era.

Time...

Not all French classic wines are all that good or great, but then not all of them are not great - because some of them are very great indeed.

Nobody is cheating at Remy Martin, or at Bollinger. And there are some others too, where the standards (Bollinger instituted a formal 'Charter of Ethics and Quality' in 1992) are very high.

If you want to invest in wine - or in cognac - definitely start where the standards are very high and the ethics are genuinely held as completely important to the makers.

Because you certainly will not be told by the general media anything about people's real ethics and standards.

The fact that they employ algorithms already tells you enough.

Waiting some time into this track, is rewarding... (For the impatient, from around 3 mins., in):