Hello, Cy, OMF II - Part 2

First topic message reminder :

2:40pm EST

White Smoke 30 min ago.... Watching it live... awaiting the New Pope to walk out on the balcony. Vatican Guards and Italian Naval Soldiers marching on the steps of St.Peters Basilica, to the music of the Marching Band.




--------------------------

edit notice: This thread is the Part Two continuation from the original thread - last post here -

https://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t6p990-hello-cy-hello-omf-ii#2215

MD02,

You're asking Gary and me, who it is that we do or should trust, within the whole cosmic gamut of beings (T, ET, UT, etc.) who may be interacting with us?

Hmmm........ I try to pay attention to any unusual phenomena or beings that seem to be attending to me. My default stance is to be relatively open and trusting. If this is not reciprocated, then I just walk on by.

Nothing terribly sophisticated about this rule of thumb.

What would you recommend?

I was asking for Gary's and everyone's opinions. The lore relates, neither side seems as if they can be trusted.

Let me ponder awhile - perhaps over sleep. My suggestions - have little weight, I truly Believe, but perhaps more than a month ago.

From: Dan
Date: October 25, 2013, 10:13:11 AM EDT
To: John Taves
Cc: ..... CoF........
Subject: Re: The Hermeneutics of John (&Dan).......

(cont.......)


Allow me, please, to provide you with some background information........ about both me and one of the POTUS's........

I was a drop-out....... in 1966 I dropped out of my Princeton graduate physics class, realizing that the scientists did not have the answer to the world's problems.

I commenced doing volunteer work for Planned Parenthood. This also was frustrating, now politically. I did not understand why Nixon was not paying attention to the population problem. I even used to fantasize commandeering an airliner, and flying it into the White House (I still hold a pilot's license, btw), just to demonstrate how important I thought the population problem was.

Why, then, aren't there more people like you and me, John, who feel severely frustrated by the lack of leadership in this matter that is so obviously crucial to human survival?

Over the years I have gradually come around to understanding what is going on.........

One of the things I have learned about is NSSM 200, which was authored by Henry Kissinger, evidently acting on Nixon's instructions. It was 'shot down' by the Vatican, exerting political pressure directly on the White House.

On June 4th, 1968, I had a personal confrontation with Bobby Kennedy, as he walked off his campaign plane at SFO. I stepped directly into his path. He stopped short. As innocently as possible, I asked...... 'Bobby, what are we going to do about the population problem?' He barely blinked. In a somewhat annoyed tone, he said, and, trust me, these were his exact words...... 'You handle it!' He was shot, about 48 hours later.

So, yes, John, you truly don't need to tell me about the importance of this problem, and the sense of frustration and despair that is sure to come to people who take it as seriously as we do.

Perhaps, you would like to know what I have gradually come to know about what is actually going on. But, if you prefer, I'll be glad to role play for you.

Yes Gary, if you could answer MD02's question, please?  I would be most interested too.

Dan wrote:Perhaps, you would like to know what I have gradually come to know about what is actually going on. But, if you prefer, I'll be glad to role play for you.

Hey Dan, since you and John have once again removed me from the email stream, which always seems to happen when a cacophony of voices cheer in the wake of my replies to you two, I will make my comment here to your latest....

I have a question for you both because I suspect both of you know a good deal more about the depopulation agenda currently underway than either of you have professed openly...

My current question is rather pointed and asks just why did the  National Disaster System (a branch of the continuity of government deep black/deep state apparatus)  just add a 20 module Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Teams course to its e-learning site?  

And Delaware just held a Pandemic Flu & Mobile Mortuary Response System drill?  

And Indiana is "currently in the process of forming the Indiana Mortuary Emergency Responce Team (I-MERT)"?

And what's this about the country of Ireland having a purchase order out for a 100 corpse mobile mortuary unit?

Or that Mobile Mortuary Trailer manufactures are reporting sales and orders of rather substantial numbers?

And then there is newspapers making an attempt at familiarizing the public with Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Teams.

Exactly what about the coming Bio-Release would you like to tell everyone?

And just how much of what is planned involves the nano-technology NDQ - DTFN?  Nano Domestic Quell?  Causes flu like symptoms upon activation and kills in roughly a week?

I could go on...

Military Police Leak FEMA Gun Confiscation & Martial Law Plans (RAW VIDEO)



Edit to add: From the document - National Nano Domestic Quell (NDQ) Protocols for Phase 4 DTFN Esti8mated Rates & Phase 4 Updated Compliance for N.D.Q. Current total infection rate for United States general pop. 87.2% Projected infection for general U.S. population by January, 2014 is estimated to reach 98% Total infection for ages 18 and above may reach 99% DTFN projects dispersal mediums will require additional resources for Phase 4 of NDQ DTFN recommends an increase in the following medium inflows and outflows, specific in liquid dispersal.

And the document continues from there. Cy

cc. list

Cyrellys wrote:Yes Gary, if you could answer MD02's question, please?  I would be most interested too.

Patiently awaiting.

Cy,

Concerning what you refer to as a 'removal from the list', there was no such thing.  The fact is that, on occasion, I have added your name to a subset of the Sarfatti physics list.  When the particular topic runs out, then your name is not automatically renewed for any new topics, that would be up to Jack Sarfatti.  

John Taves, however, is on a very distinct list, the Steve Salmony population/resources list.  Your name has not yet been added to that list.  It could be arranged if you like, but that would be mainly at Steve's discretion.  

But, yes, I would like to see all of these lists combined, when the time is right.

dan wrote:Cy,

Concerning what you refer to as a 'removal from the list', there was no such thing.  The fact is that, on occasion, I have added your name to a subset of the Sarfatti physics list.  When the particular topic runs out, then your name is not automatically renewed for any new topics, that would be up to Jack Sarfatti.  

John Taves, however, is on a very distinct list, the Steve Salmony population/resources list.  Your name has not yet been added to that list.  It could be arranged if you like, but that would be mainly at Steve's discretion.  

But, yes, I would like to see all of these lists combined, when the time is right.

Ok thank you taking a moment to explain that about the lists Dan. Yes I'd be interested in being added to them. Particularly the population one with Steve and John. But both would be interesting to listen in. Thank you.

And MD02 is still hoping to hear from you on your question. It is very pertinent to the big picture. I would like to hear it as well.

The PTB like to complain about Bards, but the funny thing is the PTB tend to create their own problem. Simple things like communication and discourse could solve many issues before they start or head them off once the ball is rolling down hill. I realize such things are not elegant or fanciful...they don't make for aggrandizement but they are important to those experiencing both ends of the proverbial stick.

Cy

Cy and MD02,

What I trust is that this process that we call life will work itself out, to the benefit of all and sundry, because we all hale from and return to the same Source, and, deep down, everyone knows this better than we know our own selves.  

And, yes, the hand is writing on the wall..... we are rapidly approaching the logical end of this process.  And we all know that, too, deep down.  

Also, I trust that you can fool some of the people all the time, and all the people some of the time, but not all the people all the time, and foolish time is running out.  

I do trust the BPWH.  If that trust is misplaced, then I (and we) have nowhere else to turn.  

The PtB are, by definition, excedingly vulnerable.  They all live in glass houses.  They are particularly vulnerable wrt the Source.  Do we truly suppose that the Source does not have the PtB wrapped around its little finger?  They are smart enough to not take the Lord's name in vain.  They have enough problems as it is.  

Yes, it often seems that the Source is not paying attention, but I disagree.  The hidden hand will continue to function, up to a point, and then there will be diclosure.  At first, it will seem like the biggest anti-climax in history, but then you just wait a little bit more.  

It's all in the process, and all the process chickens are coming home to roost.  The bird tribes are returning, no?  

Yes, and all we need to do is combine a few lists.  Those first few steps are always the trickiest.......

Trust me this........ I will continue to keep you all posted.

From: Dan
Date: October 28, 2013, 1:32:25 PM EDT
To: Paul Z
Cc: Jack S
Subject: Hail Mary........

Paul,

What I am suggesting is, of course, a Hail Mary.  It is just a far out contingency, it is not even to suggest a research program.  

I don't think that I have adequately emphasized this caveat to Jack, and perhaps not to you, either, Paul.  

Nor is this meant to be a substitute for continuing the research programs in conventional and exotic physics related to cosmic communication or, as I like to say....... cosmic intercourse.  

Nonetheless, my far out conjectures are borne out of the very real possibility of an historical crisis, as we appear to reach the limits of conventional growth.  

IOW, there is nothing to be gained from picking these ideas apart, unless the critique can, fairly obviously, suggest a more direct route.  I know, full well, that the Scientific Establishment is out to defend its citadel, at all costs, come both hell and high water.  

Ok, so where do we start........?  

And, yes, I have cc'd Jack at this very outset.  But, please, Jack, if you wish to not be copied, just give the word....... no need for histrionics.  Yes?  I do believe that you could be helpful, further down the road, but, if you can stand it, please allow me enough rope so that when I reach the end of it, my death will be quick, and relatively painless, not unlike my regicidal ancestors.  


(cont......)  

 

From: Dan
Date: October 28, 2013, 2:28:06 PM EDT
To: Paul Z
Cc: Jack S
Subject: Re: Hail Mary........

(cont.......)


The simple essence of this hail-mary is just the radical possibility that mind logically precedes matter......

How might this be rationalized......?  

Well, the starting point could simply be the Einsteinian/Pythagorean notion that God is a mathematician.  This also points to Wigner's 'unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics'.  This latter point begs the question of the unreasonable congruence between the cosmic and human mind, a point that has been haunting us since the dawn of history...... encapsulated in the notion of the microcosm.

If mind does comes before matter, then what the heck has been the point of (material) evolution?  What an exercise in redundancy!  Why is God playing this game of evolution, we'd like to know?  

And, yes, here comes the hail-mary.....  

Or, is this really that big of a stretch?  I mean, where would we be without Nature?  We would be in the lap or womb of God.  We would simply be at-one with God.  Or, to put it another way, why is their something rather than nothing?  Why didn't the cosmic mind leave well enough alone?  What is the point of Creation, then?  

What can the point be, other than a bootstrap operation?  We are simply, then, the business end of the self-creation of God.  We are not even slightly redundant in the larger scheme of things.  We are the buckle of God's bootstrap, if you will.  What are the alternatives, other than cosmic accident or cosmic toy?  

But, yes, at first sight, evolution looks nothing like a bootstrap.  It looks a lot like a cosmic accident.  I mean, hey, we could blow ourselves up, tomorrow, leaving God twisting in the wind.  


(cont......2)  

From: Dan
Date: October 28, 2013, 3:25:12 PM EDT
To: Paul Z
Cc: Jack S
Subject: Re: Hail Mary........

(cont......2)


Given that we are the necessary microcosms that make up the cosmic mind, not unlike the way our braincells constitute our own minds.  Analogies abound in any attempt to reinvent cosmology.  

So, no, I'm not trying to fix cosmology, because it's not broken.  It has served it's purpose very well.  Cosmology has provided the primary stimulus to the scientific revolution, and where would we be without that?  

What I am suggesting is that, failing a technological solution to the looming human predicament, it might behoove Paul and myself to think outside of that box.  TBMK, there is only one way to think outside of the scientific box......... which is, quite frankly, to attempt to take a God's eye view of the world.  Quite likely, this will be a fool's errand, Jack, if you're still there, but I see no other recourse, given the possibility of our dire straits.  

But then here is another point that comes to mind......

Jack and I are in similar straits wrt our putative ET's and/or UT's........  Where are they when we need them?  This you will note, is just a variation on Fermi's paradox.  Are they just laughing at us, having come from across the universe just to watch our train-wreck, in living color?  

Or does God lay awake nights, worrying that our end of her cosmic bootstrap or circle of life is going to be broken?


(cont......3)

From: Dan
Date: October 28, 2013, 3:59:13 PM EDT
To: Paul Z
Subject: Re: Hail Mary........

(cont.......3)

(I see that Jack is busy with his upcoming presentation, so let me anticipate his annoyance with metaphysics, at this juncture......)


To be very brief, if the ET's happened to care about us, for whatever strange reason, then they really should have intervened decisively with us, a long time before our situation became so precarious. Why would they keep us in the dark for so long?

OTOH, God can afford to be lazy, and even be, seemingly, cavalier with our fate, knowing full well that the human drama, necessarily turns out for the best. Yes, in some sense I'm suggesting that the seeming absence of God can be used as an argument for his total undiminished presence, just not in our faces, thank you very much!

So is God saving up for his Grand Entrance? I submit not. Subtle remain his ways, up to and including the very end. Yes, God is a drama queen, but the drama always has been by us, for us and about us. Is he trying to give us heartburn? No, just keeping us on the edge of our seats.

But, no, none of this is intended to diminish the necessary drama of the MoAPS. It will be a thunderbolt out of the blue.

Back to the metaphysics........


(cont.......4)

Cyrellys wrote:

Dan wrote:Perhaps, you would like to know what I have gradually come to know about what is actually going on. But, if you prefer, I'll be glad to role play for you.

Hey Dan, and John

(snip)

I have a question for you both because I suspect both of you know a good deal more about the depopulation agenda currently underway than either of you have professed openly...

My current question is rather pointed and asks just why did the  National Disaster System (a branch of the continuity of government deep black/deep state apparatus)  just add a 20 module Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Teams course to its e-learning site?  

And Delaware just held a Pandemic Flu & Mobile Mortuary Response System drill?  

And Indiana is "currently in the process of forming the Indiana Mortuary Emergency Responce Team (I-MERT)"?

And what's this about the country of Ireland having a purchase order out for a 100 corpse mobile mortuary unit?

Or that Mobile Mortuary Trailer manufactures are reporting sales and orders of rather substantial numbers?

And then there is newspapers making an attempt at familiarizing the public with Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Teams.

Exactly what about the coming Bio-Release would you like to tell everyone?

And just how much of what is planned involves the nano-technology NDQ - DTFN?  Nano Domestic Quell?  Causes flu like symptoms upon activation and kills in roughly a week?

I could go on...

Military Police Leak FEMA Gun Confiscation & Martial Law Plans (RAW VIDEO)



Edit to add a descriptive quote from the document above, which is part of the question:  

From the document -

National Nano Domestic Quell (NDQ) Protocols for Phase 4 DTFN Esti8mated Rates & Phase 4 Updated Compliance for N.D.Q.  Current total infection rate for United States general pop. 87.2%  Projected infection for general U.S. population by January, 2014 is estimated to reach 98%  Total infection for ages 18 and above may reach 99%  DTFN projects dispersal mediums will require additional resources for Phase 4 of NDQ DTFN recommends an increase in the following medium inflows and outflows, specific in liquid dispersal.

And the document continues from there.  Cy

(snip)

Thank you for your thoughts Dan, but I know I didn't feel as if you answered my question.

And I don't believe MD02 feels as if his question from the prior page now has been answered either.

Just more skirting?

btw, John's (Taves) latest reply to the list, which came across to me as rudely indirect (before the peers present) concerning a response to my rebuttal to his theorem, not to mention abruptly dismissive without the consideration I respectfully gave his theorem of concern; left much to be desired.

From Cy's email wrote:
John Taves
Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 12:12 PM
To: Cyrellys

(snip)

He wishes to present an argument that pregnancies kill and move to be a contributor/influence to creation or justification of actionable policies or mandates that will fulfill alleviating his concerns about population over-reach. Yet he seems unwilling to recognize my response which addresses his concept.

He declares he has not found any response which addresses his concept in any way. He declares he cannot find any scientific paper or researcher which which "pays lip service" to ourselves being in a situation where pregnancies are killing.

He describes my rebuttal to his argument/theorem, as being a fine example of researchers that are totally unaware and making a poor assumption; that our conclusions are useless because "their research assumes we are not at the limit where pregnancies kill. Providing that research just proves again that Cyrellys does not comprehend the concept I am trying to get across."

He said, "I am trying to get across that fact that everyone has made an incorrect assumption about the nature of births, deaths, and population. Reciting conclusions from research that assumes the same incorrect state of things does nothing to correct or refute the point that there is a bad assumption at the core of our understanding."

It seems to me that he just described his own handling of my reply.

The issues I raised were based on the reality of the paradigm. Did I insinuate that he might be at the very least participating in a subculture's attempt at preparing justification for application of catastrophic depopulation measures in opposition to the outcry of the vast majority of the situational-ly aware, AND both ET groups AND UT groups? Darn straight I did.

His response was suspiciously demeaning considering the import of what I said about the corruption.

And then instead of addressing my concerns on their own merits as I addressed his, he tries to cut and run: "I doubt I will reply at all to any more responses that seem to be responding to my life boat example, but continue to ignore this concept."

The kitchen got a bit hot and rather than deal with it he abandon's his oven with the cake in it.

He professes to seek civil discourse but won't partake of the opportunity? How exactly am I to assume, if he cuts and runs, that he didn't have ulterior motives to the presentation and application of his theorem?

Cy

Cy,

Please do not fret about John.  He has been a burr under the saddle of the Salmony/CoF list for most of the two years that I've been on it.  I am also, and that is why I attempt, on occasion, to sidle up to him.  

KIM, Cy, that I am the only one on this planet who is claiming this to be the best possible planet, 'overpopulation' and all.  I can even rationalize the Vatican's shooting down of the Nixon/Kissinger NSSM 200 depopulation initiative.  Have you looked at it, yet?  

What I am also pointing to is Jesus' injunction for the latter days...... Woe be unto those who are with child or give suck, in those days!  Are you familiar?  What do you think?  

Are there human driven coercive depopulation conspiracies afoot?  I would be surprised if there weren't.  Will God allow such conspiracies to proceed?  I think it unlikely, or, not over my dead body, let us say.

dan wrote:Cy,

Please do not fret about John.  He has been a burr under the saddle of the Salmony/CoF list for most of the two years that I've been on it.  I am also, and that is why I attempt, on occasion, to sidle up to him.  

KIM, Cy, that I am the only one on this planet who is claiming this to be the best possible planet, 'overpopulation' and all.  I can even rationalize the Vatican's shooting down of the Nixon/Kissinger NSSM 200 depopulation initiative.  Have you looked at it, yet?  

What I am also pointing to is Jesus' injunction for the latter days...... Woe be unto those who are with child or give suck, in those days!  Are you familiar?  What do you think?  

Are there human driven coercive depopulation conspiracies afoot?  I would be surprised if there weren't.  Will God allow such conspiracies to proceed?  I think it unlikely, or, not over my dead body, let us say.

Yes I am well versed in NSSM 200.  That document was about maintaining the policy controller's "position", power, and control.  The agencies that were involved in it were led to believe that it was entirely about national security for the US.  From the moment it was accepted and a "decision" document was signed making it the driving influence behind the justified policy, the recommendations were handed off to the multi-national organizations and corporations to supposidly handle administering a fiddling but "benign" policy stated to benefit the US.  But as Eisenhower learned earlier in his experience what you hand off to those groups you promptly lose control over...thing is, it was all prearranged so it is illusional that our nation via those agencies ever really controlled it.  They were used.

Sorry I just lost a long post about it.  The general point I intended to make is above.

And yes I am familiar with that Jesus quote.

Knowing what I know, and I won't claim to know all of what is going on but a good chunk, I'd say he was illustrating the extent to which the eugenics/depopulation policy has yet to go.  It's bad now, but with even just what I have listed and questioned you about Dan, it's going to get ugly before this mess is straightened out.

yes Dan there are human coercive depopulation "programs" afoot.  I've mentioned a good number of the one's I'm aware of over the course of the many times you and I have spoken on this topic...I even pointed out the latest leak in the post mentioning nano domestic quell.  

I take it, you are uninformed about these various programs, since you have always avoided commenting?  i.e. not in the loop for the actions of the policy implementors or creators?

Will God allow these things to proceed?  HE HAS ALLOWED THEM, because he does not interfere with FREE WILL.  There is a difference between making recommendations to a child, same with guiding, encouraging, and nudging.  But those things are not the same thing as correcting or preventing a catastrophe.  Yes Dan he will allow mankind to suicide if that is the choice that is made either through conscious action or by default because individuals clung to blindness or because they stood by waiting for God to rescue them.

Cold hard truth.  

So, how do you propose to stop those programs (you haven't to date Dan) in your declared capacity, if you don't even know about them barring a wildcard like myself wandering in and shouting from the roof?

It was not all that long ago you and I argued on this very thread about depopulation policy and means of reducing the planetary population to 144,000,000 million.  Yes I noticed the change in stance you've made on it.  But I am curious as to how permanent that is?  Not over your dead body is an encouraging statement but this will take more than just speaking with these people before all is said and done.

Cy

Useful reference for anyone who does not know NSSM 200  What is NSSM 200 "Population Control" by Kissinger?


****

And on the internal infighting, here is the latest:

Agenda 21 being one of the products of NSSM 200 - whereas the evolution of the policy is applied at the international level including application in the US...http://thecommonsenseshow.com/siteupload/2013/10/agenda-21-map.jpg








Quote:  

The next shot heard round the world will be Northern California - Before Its News wrote:I have been aware of Agenda 21 abuses in places like Fort Collins, Colorado, where the courts steal the children from parents who protest against draconian Agenda 21 policies. I’m also aware that in places like Santa Cruz, California and Austin, Texas that individual property rights are severely limited because the local governments have adopted United Nations Agenda 21 policies. However, nothing and I mean nothing, matches the Agenda 21 abuses of individual liberties and private property rights that is going on in the northern counties of California and Southern Oregon. And true to form for the mainstream media, barely a word of coverage has been broadcast or published for a national audience.

snip

Secession Moves Forward
A public meeting in September of 2013, in which the Siskiyou County board of supervisors approved a secession declaration, the Redding Record Searchlight reported. 
  


They want to make this entire region a dead zone.
The fervor to leave the state of California was also fueled by Modoc County Supervisors  who voted 4-0 in favor in secession. Federal government abuse of property rights is fueling this rebellion in Northern California and Southern Oregon.

snip

Agenda 21 Objectives Being Fulfilled

   There are clearly a number of forces at work here. First, we see the clear Hunger Games type of agenda in which people have been forced off of pristine land, denied the use of water which results in the destruction of their local food supply. This fact makes people dependent upon the government and the residents of this region will be forced to relocate to urban areas following the devastating loss of their land. This is becoming a popular way in which the federal government is forcing people off of their land all across the country while not having to pay the costs associated with legitimate eminent domain. Plain and simple this process represents a cost-effective method to steal private property on behalf of special interests.

Speaking of forcing people off their land to achieve an "Agenda 21" aka NSSM 200 goal/policy, this is where force conditioning comes in:

SQ Alerts - witness testimony wrote:AC-130 GUNSHIPS BEING TRAINED TO FIRE ON CHURCHES-READ THIS AND PRAY -'CHURCH FARMING'
Brother Steve,
Peace be with you. I pray that what I tell you will be a benefit in
keeping many of the frozen chosen safe. 
I often listen to you on The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, your insight has
given me quite a thorough understanding of what we face as active duty
members and as Americans.
Sir, I have experienced a few things in my short career as a AC-130U Aerial
Gunner in AFSOC as you can imagine. What I have to share with you deals
with the training we do on a normal nightly routine.
During our normal 4 to 5 hour training missions here in the states, we
accomplish a Live-Fire mission over one of the Eglin AFB ranges, and then
we complete a "Dry-Fire" mission over a town in Alabama and Florida. A
dry-fire mission is a simulated Live-Fire mission without expending any
rounds out from the plane. I believe you might know the capabilities of
the AC-130U Spooky Gunship, so I won't cover them. During a Dry Fire
mission, the Aerial Gunners mainly practice calling out combat evasive
maneuvers to move the plane away any simulated threats (Triple A, and
Manpad). A very demanding requirement in crew communication in order to
keep our 13 member crew safe.
The Dry-Fire missions are brief after the Crew Brief prior to take-off. 
Each Dry-Fire mission has a combat scenario that is followed in order to
complete the required training for a given flight. Every scenario has GPS
cords of the simulated enemy headquarters/positions. So far, 80% of the
Dry-Fire I have been on, the simulated enemy headquarter positions would be
a "Church" (Primary Target).
Picture this: at 9,000 feet in a 30 degree-bank orbit, an AC-130 Gunship
with firepower enough to handle most any Close Air Support (CAS) Call for
Fire tasking is above any town USA. Along with a simulated stack of a UAV
at 6 to 7,000 feet, and a fast mover over top.
I will try to give you a feel for the mission execution: Pattern is
(Simulated) cleared, and we have clearance to go HOT over the target
(unless we have a Kill Box, then it is open season). First simulated round
of 105MM HEI is sent through the roof of the building, this stirs the
enemy, and soon their running in every direction. Time to go DTA (Dual
Target Attack) mode, with 105's still addressing the building structure, we
then (simulate) bring the No. 1.(25MM) or No. 2 (40MM) gun on line to
assist to eliminating any IR signatures that are (simulated) running out
the doors and windows. I will let you fill in the rest.
Everything during the event during a Dry-Fire mission is simulated..No live
rounds ever get chambered or move towards the guns. What I want to make
you aware of is our use of Churches as Enemy Headquarters. Could it be
that leadership is desensitizing us (Special Ops crews) the Quiet
Professionals in possible future missions in firing on "Churches"? There
might be nothing to this training, but I thought you might want to see if
your sources might know.
God Bless You, and Stay Safe.

Oct 29, 2013

SQ Alerts - witness testimony wrote:FIGHTER PILOT SHARES HIS PERSPECTIVES ON HOW DISGUSTING THIS DESENSITIZATION IS ON GUNSHIPS TARGETING CHURCHES
Steve, In my years flying fighters in the Air Force we never did anything like this. This is outrageous. At times we would use churches as turn points on our low levels because of their prominent visual aspects. To be desensitizing combat aircrews to the concept of attacking churches is the height of satanic manipulation. I pray that military members know what is going on. 

God Bless you'all.............Dave

Oct 29, 2013

And more on the length to which they will go to cull the herd, remember I mentioned the mortuary teams?

SQ Alerts - witness testimony wrote:CDC GETTING PREPARED FOR MASSIVE PANDEMIC:CDC created new team for pandemic response. 1000 officers, for the 1000 climate controlled tents and the 1000 Mortuary tarilers FEMA ordered"

Steve,

Got this last night,

"CDC created new team for pandemic response. 1000 officers, for the 1000 climate controlled tents and the 1000 Mortuary tarilers FEMA ordered"

Looks like its Game On.

Prepare!

"Mini-V"

Oct 29, 2013

And another related item:

• Food Bank CEO Suggests Welfare Cuts May Spark Riots:Riots always begin typically the same way: when people cannot afford to eat food 
  

Cy,

FWIW, here is Ron's explanation for the nuke misadventure at Dyess AFB........

Some General knew that there were some dummy warheads stored at the base, and, when he saw some such in an unusual place, he made the assumption that they were the dummies, and there was also some larger confusion about the color coding, and so, quite innocently, he suggested that they be removed, to prevent possible confusion...... right?! They were trucked to SC, and placed in a surplus storage facility. They were not thrown on the town dump, as seems to be suggested.

But, clearly, this was a major breakdown in security. It is not something that anyone wants to brag about.

Cyrellys wrote:

And I don't believe MD02 feels as if his question from the prior page now has been answered either.  

Just more skirting?

Who knows, Gary may not have been back since my post, but there is always the possibility that he is a little 'drone-shy' about his deepest opinions.  I mean, let us be honest, we don't want to offend anyone of technological/political esteem.  

Dan answered how I expected, and that is fine.  We do have to give him some credit as he is the reigning champ at ballroom dancing and tap and does not want to loose that title, just yet.

Apparently,  In my short departure for introspection I discovered the impression that I am not allowed to depart interacting with this house, just yet, despite its 'Tick-Like' nature, leaving marks and all......

Besides, I'm all about a good Majic show.

dan wrote:Cy,

FWIW, here is Ron's explanation for the nuke misadventure at Dyess AFB........

Some General knew that there were some dummy warheads stored at the base, and, when he saw some such in an unusual place, he made the assumption that they were the dummies, and there was also some larger confusion about the color coding, and so, quite innocently, he suggested that they be removed, to prevent possible confusion...... right?!  They were trucked to SC, and placed in a surplus storage facility.  They were not thrown on the town dump, as seems to be suggested.  

But, clearly, this was a major breakdown in security.  It is not something that anyone wants to brag about.  

Either he's unaware what is going on internally or that is the story someone wants someone to believe.

I don't buy it for a minute.  And neither do a good many other people.

Dan I get real time earthquake reports...

http://earthquake-report.com/2013/10/08/moderate-earthquake-off-east-coast-of-united-states-on-october-8-2013/

off the coast of South Carolina

And then there is the purging...http://beforeitsnews.com/christian-news/2013/10/obamas-military-purge-removes-197-officers-and-counting-as-dhs-takes-over-streets-video-2485130.html

speaking of purging...the reasons given for the ousting of US Navy Vice Admiral Tim Giardina and US Air Force Major General Michael Carey, and two US Marines - top officers, Major General Charles M. Gurganus and Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant comes across as lame excuses.  And they're the talk of the town in back channels for being involved in the incident.

But whatever....back channels never discuss facts right?

Cy

MD02 wrote:

Cyrellys wrote:

And I don't believe MD02 feels as if his question from the prior page now has been answered either.  

Just more skirting?

Who knows, Gary may not have been back since my post, but there is always the possibility that he is a little 'drone-shy' about his deepest opinions.  I mean, let us be honest, we don't want to offend anyone of technological/political esteem.  

Dan answered how I expected, and that is fine.  We do have to give him some credit as he is the reigning champ at ballroom dancing and tap and does not want to loose that title, just yet.

Apparently,  In my short departure for introspection I discovered the impression that I am not allowed to depart interacting with this house, just yet, despite its 'Tick-Like' nature, leaving marks and all......

Besides, I'm all about a good Majic show.

Yes, I give Dan a great deal of credit.  He's very good at wandering pertinent areas of society.  He's not in any danger of losing his title.

On your departure attempt, I think it is one of the things you and I have the most in common - the paradigm gravitates to us and we to it.  Our lives are intrinsically interwoven with it in many ways.  And it is necessary that individuals from our venue of experiences are included in the imperative imbued portions of the story.

It is the nature of stories.  

If the story was only about the machinations then what kind of story would it be?  What makes it a living chronicle is the scope of all participants, not just the wheelwrights.

Salute O' Bard, sing on.

Cy

Cy,

I would agree with you that Ron's version of this story sounds pretty lame.  Who knows how many levels of subterfuge and crossed agendas might actually be involved.  


MD02,

Who me...... tap-dancing.....?  

Please, KIM, that I am only an apologist for God, and the fact that God may use folks, like my good buddy, Adolf, to further his plan of salvation is what I have to explain.  I do not, thereby, exonerate Hitler, although he probably will end up in heaven with most of the rest of us.  He might prefer to have gone to hell, but that's another story.  

Humanity is in an increasingly precarious situation, and the often well-founded rumors of evil conspiracies will only continue to multiply. Does this mean that God has lost control?  Not necessarily....... Hopefully, it is just that God is a drama-queen, on our behalf, so that we may be able to live in interesting times.

Hey Dan on the subject of "stopattwo", and the international policy in effect, compare this http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/m/discussion?id=2734278%3ATopic%3A585274

to the NSSM 200 text.  Remember how the policy is technically still in effect?  Well if you have money that is regularly contributed to populations that goes to "essentials" they can't live with out, and you want fertility and thereby their "politics" controlled then they will bend rather than risk having their people freak if you were to pull your $ out.  What do you want to bet that despite our own financial condition as a nation we're still "funding" essentials in the nations that the NSSM 200 lists?

Slide that one under the nose of "Mr. it isn't happening" Taves.  The deliberate crashing of the economy and government taking control of healthcare (obamacare) could be construed as a way to blackmail the American population into accepting gun confiscation and the "stop at two" agenda.

IMO healthcare is something we will have to learn to live without, because with doctors leaving the industry in droves, over 1 million policies already sent cancellation notices to their customers, and many more to follow suit, we can assume the damage has been done and is probably not reversible.  It is our self-sufficiency and liberties which define us a people and a nation.  Without those, we fall apart and chaos ensues.

Cy

Cy,

The poeple on the Salmony/CoF population list are mainly concerned about the global issue, whereas you see it as mainly being related to the domestic politics. And, yes, most of them are academic liberals. They would have very little patience with your domestic concerns.

Evidently, you see the US as the last (decaying) bastion for individual rights, and that may be the case. I agree that there is no other country where I would get away with my Chicken Little stunts.

But, now, as a point of clarification, what is your view on the question of women's right to choose?

Consciousness comes in a great variety of states, more or less associated with our individual bodies.  

Altered states generally have much less access to memory, in real time, although they may well become part of our permanent collection, after the fact.  In an altered state, we may have only a vague notion of our own identities, but afterwards, there will be no ambiguity as to the perceiver.

I generally suppose that our memories are direct perceptions of past events, not unlike remote viewing, although usually more vivid.  An argument against this view is that we can also remember our internal states, or ideas, for which our perception would have a very different modality, e.g. remembering stories.  Ideas would also seem to have a very different modality of perception.  Consider the perception of a mathematical theorem.  Are we accessing a collective memory?  

How does the memory of a tree differ from that of a theorem?  Mathematics may be considered to have its own landscape, although it would be more multidimensional.  

Or consider the study of ecology as being closely related to instances of particular ecosystems.  Abstractions and instances can never be fully disentangled.  Universals and particulars are always entangled.  

Consider also the problem of personal identity.  Our personalities may undergo large changes, while the continuity thereof seems never in doubt.  My childhood remains mine, despite upheavals.  Is myself from an hour ago more of a subject or an object?  My childhood identity may take on very different meanings, over time.  Large portions of our memory may be lost or blocked, without loss of identity, up to a point of total amnesia.  

We should not forget hypnotic states, which can be well compartmented, as with multiple personalities.  


All of the above is intended as an excursion into ontology, coming back to the question of materialism vs. immaterialism.  


noon--------

We can probably get considerably more traction out of Leibniz' Id. of Indi. (II).  There can only be one ultimate or supreme monad, in any sort of relational scheme.  Only one mathematical landscape.  

And, I would submit, that the same considerations apply to the ontology of our 'rare' Earth.  Can we rule out the putative objectivity of astronomical science, merely on a logical technicality?  That is what I'm suggesting.  

The UTH vs. the ETH is just another aspect of this logic.  


Photons and atoms are a major bugaboo for any aspiring immaterialist, but neither should they give much comfort to the entrenched materialists.  

W/o memory, mere sentience provides very little support for objectivity.  The II undercuts much of its physical objectivity.  

Then there is the horizon problem, which, in its most gneral form, continues to bedevil AI..... there is no end to meaning.  It is similar to the problem of holism in language, and to vitalism and teleology in biology.


3pm---------

The horizon problem is similar to the context problem....... meaning can depend radically on the context of the utterance or situation, and there is often ambiguity as to how far the relevant context or horizon is meant to be extended.  

Entanglement in quantum theory raises similar issues in physical ontology.  There are strong limits to analysis, within any venue, unless artificial, ad-hoc constraints are imposed.

And we may well wonder what it is that lights up our dreams and memories. Such innocent questions. And then we enter a dark place.

IMHO, photons and atoms emerge out of the logic that defines the cycles of the collective background to our mundane phenomena.


(cont.)

just thought I'd bring you some good news on the omf website its now fully workable and still a few minor things to do like add all the images back , but that will be a walk in the park after all the hard work.  A few other tweaks need to be done but in general its all good to go , of course there maybe some errors , and for this I ask you to let me know if you come across any.

This link i'm giving you is whats left to work on so please ignore it Smile , the main link is still accessible here http://theopenmind.hostingsiteforfree.com/index.htm

pman35,

This is fantastic.  What a lot of work!  

Now is this supposed to replace or suplement the Archives I, II & III that are listed on the forum page, here?
-----------


My point from yesterday is that atoms gain their objectivity only in a contextual/relational manner.  

Keeping in mind that context necessarily has a strongly subjective component, by just that amount are atoms non-objective.  

Does this mean that Earth atoms are more real than Moon atoms, for instance?  I would have to say, yes, even though this difference would not be objectifiable.  Moon atoms obtain their reality indirectly, by propinquity.  Theirs is a borrowed existence.  

In a relational world, all existence is borrowed.  How do we know that the world is relational?  Well, if it weren't, then how could we know it to exist?  

The mere possibility of UT's is perhaps the strongest argument for the SWH/BPWH.  But how then do we explain the unreasonable effectiveness of astronomy (UEA)?  Mainly by appealing to the UEM (mathematics).  

Practically speaking, the Earth could have done fine, with just the Sun.  So why the rest of it?  Or is it how?  

Is nuclear fusion in the Sun any less real than nuclear fusion on the Earth?  Well, it is rather more generic, I would say.  

Consider pond scum on the planet of a distant star.  We might even be able to pick up the oxygen spectrum in a telescope.  Where is the non-objectivity?  

Here's the deal......  The pond scum does not know where it is.  Do we?  Are we not also lost in space and time?  Blind leading the blind?  

Well, of course, the materialists assure us that we are lost souls!  How can I disprove them?  Only by inference.  There is no smoking ontology gun.  Even God could not disprove materialism, when you come right down to it.  The proof of contextuality lies, necessarily, in the circumstantials, of which there are an infinity.  

Well, ok, the closest thing to a smoking gun might be a UT.  Given any UT, ET's are rendered redundant.  W/o ET's the rest of the universe is relationally redundant.  

Redundancy has everything to do with intentionality.  If intentionality is real then relationality is real.  If intentionality is false, then materialism is true.  

Many folks, over many centuries have attempted to straddle the line between materialism and immaterialism.  But it all comes down to the logical point that a world cannot be partly relational.  It would be like being half-pregnant.  If vitalism gets its foot in the ontological door, it will take over the whole neighborhood.  Like pond scum?  Well, that is not entirely unanalogous.  

If you and I can harbor even a single intention, then case closed.  Mind over matter.  Deep down, the materialists understand this fact of life better than do we, and that explains their posture of bitter-endedness.  They can afford to take no prisoners.  

Over all the protestations of science, I know that I exist, now, and in some non-trivial manner.  If anyone knows that much, then they also know that science is overdue for its Waterloo, its MoAPS.  


12:30--------

Now, it's only a question of timing.......

When is the best possible time for Disclosure/Revelation/MoAPS?  

Right, now, the only thing between us and the 4M/K/SoT/X2 is fracking.  But what about Thorium?  Will Th232 not allow us to muddle through for another thousand years?  

That is possible.  But there would be a great deal more suffering in the process of making that transition, without divine intervention.  This mere fact suggests to me a strong case for the minimalist intervention suggested by the BPWH.  

But this scenario is predicated on the eventual rapture event, which is, quite admittedly, non-minimal!  


2pm--------

According to Wiki, I have misused intentionality, by taking it to refer to intentions.  But, in philosophical parlance, intentionality is the 'peculiar property of minds to be about something'.  I do prefer this wider scope of the term, as in..... I'm thinking about you.  

Even the strong AI folks may concede that no physical state can refer to another physcial state.  It may do so only only via some mental state.  If I recognize a picture of grandma, I am the agent.  But suppose I program my computer to recognize such photos, as is commonly done, nowadays..... How need that differ from my state of recognition?  There is no direct proof that it does.  But I submit that the circumstantial evidence ought to be overwhelming.  

Machine recognition is a step-by-step process.  There is no 'aha' step.  There is no gestalt, there, just a bunch of logical either/or steps.  Each step could be perfectly performed by a zombie.  The only question would be why anyone would suppose otherwise, other than as a point of professional pride.  

Professional pride is a powerful force.  Just ask any scientist.  The MoAPS will simply be the overcoming of that force.  It will be a quantum leap.


Only an existential crisis will offer sufficient motivation, but at what point does a problem become a crisis?  When does denial stop?  Can we recognize a problem without recognizing a solution?  It is much more difficult, in this latter situation.  

But, wait, I did make an earlier statement relating redundancy to intentionality.  I had something in mind that is now gone.......

Hmmm........  This might have to with whether intentions can be cloned, or whether persons can be cloned.  Suppose we attach no-cloning to the II?  There can only be one creator and one creation.  No?  


3:50--------

The above point may go back to the pond scum.......

Cyanobacteria are, indeed, lost in space and time, and there is no self-imposed differentiation.  There can only exist one such, and, yet, all life is derived therefrom, so there can only be one such origin.  But the same could be said of planets, and there does seem to be a plurality thereof.  

But here is the point......  the plurality of anything is only an artifact of mind, which, in my quasi-scientific scenario, can have only have a singular origin, biologically/ontologically.  

We could apply the same logic to Adam&Eve.  No?  Or to the birth of intentionality.  Do dogs have intentions?  Possibly not, not w/o a robust self-reference.

I'm looking at creation ex potentia.  There can only be one potential intention, which is ramified through creation, but only via agency.  There cannot be intentional compartments within a regime of pure potency.  

Hey, I admit that this line of thought is more than a bit abstruse, and the logic of it is fuzzy at best, but this is what we get when intentionality gets its foot in the door of ontology.  Sorry 'bout that!  

This then is the question I pose to philosophers...... does ontology make a lick of sense w/o epistemology?  How could we suppose them to be independent fields, w/o begging the question of materialism?

Does not the observer problem of qm point to the same issue?  Where does the ontological buck stop, if not with Wigner's friend?  I just need to make plausible the logical necessity of qm, but isn't that virtually a given?  


6pm----------

Once epitemology gets its foot in the door, the sky will fall.  

The ET story makes sense only from a Darwinian perspective.  If there is the slightest bit ot teleology, it makes no sense.  I spent five years trying to make sense of convergent evolution.  It doesn't compute.  Can I prove this?  

Well, if the tail wags the dog, there can only be one dog.  If there are two dogs, they cannot both chase the same tail.  That would a most awkward redundancy.  Intentionality cannot be compartmented.  It cannot be circumscribed, without rendering it a mere artifice.  Intentionality is necessarily transcendental.  If I can think about one thing, I can think about everything.  Nothing can exist that is not a microcosm.  There must then be a cosmic self.  Such a self, however, must be an end in itself.  There can be none other.  Whatever it might create must be self-complete, complementing its creator, in that fashion.  

Hey, this is only a restatement of the ontological argument of self-sufficiency.  It is the only logical resolution of the observer problem...... the buck stops nowhere short of eternity.  


Does omnipotence follow from omniscience? Well, in an immaterial world, to be conceived is to be. The totality must be harmonious. It cannot contain self-contradictions. Everything in its place. All being must exemplify eternity, including, especially, mortal beings, exemplifying the circle of life.




(cont.)

@Dan the web archive in the 1st link is the same i'll add a new second link soon