Blind spots, cover story and disinfo

 https://off-guardian.org/2021/04/10/whats-up-with-our-fact-checking-blind-spots/

I smell smear tactic here.

Rosemary Frie called out Bossche who runs a scam to shoehorn Biosecurity state via the ‘Good Cop’ syndrome. But then smears the Tom Cowan – while downplaying the smear as ‘a random example’. Both of them are operating divisively with disinformantion.

The very use of the term ‘fact checking’ is suspect, and then why does she deal out other’s blind spots without laying out her own?

The blind spot is where we think we KNOW, or where we identify in or against a narrative as our primary source of identity. That errors and omissions, biases or poor quoted studies, comments or associations can be invoked to smear the character of another is the INTNT to attack the messenger so as to destroy the message.

I don’t recommend FOLLOWING anyone anywhere that does not ring true, whether you love them or not. I appreciate Those who are actively challenging ‘pathogenic virus theory’. But while I hold them dear, I also hold anything they say that I hold to be questionable or inconclusive or not fully formed, in ‘brackets’, for I am not a follower, not have I any followers – excepting companions in a willingness to uncover truth.

The ‘war’ narrative dictates that your enemies enemy is your friend. Conditional ‘love’ uses others for whatever you can get from the affecting of relationship while conditions fit the terms and conditions. No thanks. It also dictates that you must not be critical of your ‘side’ or cause’ and must all rally behind it as a ‘unified’ lockstep. As in post 911. “You are either for us or against us” – Bush.

I don’t buy the war narrative at the level of Truth. Though I see that lies and deceit sets our mind in conflict with itself and with each other.

Without this deceit-backed conflict – that runs as conflict-driven deceit, fear and control would be undone to a true presence – instead of stamping on the face of a present set in the image of a past made in grievance of attacks led by blind hate – set as justified by grievance set over truth.

Blind spots are set by what we do not want to know, to be exposed or seen, by cover stories that become the vector or Trojan horse by which we act out the very thing we hate under a narrative of ‘masked virtue’. We all share a part in a world of self-illusion. And yet the way out of lies is to truly address the issues that cover stories offer diversion and redistribution of psychic energy, funding and control – so that SOMEONE ELSE pays the consequence.

An elitist clique wants everyone else to pay for (suck up the toxic consequence of) their sins. But they are also reflecting something held in everyone else, that can be called ‘control mentality’.

This goes deep, for everyone protects their ‘self’ as they define and accept themselves to be.

If we hate deceits that betray us to evils and insanity, then we have to be willing to grow in responsibility for our own conflicts of interest. Yet a social ‘normal’ works to make these conflict invisible by looking OUT from shared agreements that are tacitly or behaviourally taught and acquired, much of which is a personal and social masking strategy learned in infancy or childhood before we has any consciousness of a means to evaluate or articulate our experience.

WHATEVER we hold in mind will go forth and multiply, because the mind’s function is a projector. The issue is not of self-reinforcing significances, but of a true alignment or integrity of thought word and deed. Conflict/garbage in; garbage out. But as @dollar vigilante ALMOST says in his latest offering; “You can ignore reality, but you cannot escape the consequences of ignoring reality”. Therefore to persist in self-illusion has to generate masking cover story to account for the increase in conflict by externalising to false flags, that then justify the role of ‘rule’ over the increase of denial, hollowness and ritual parody of life ‘at home’.

So regardless anyone’s faults, I celebrate a willingness to call out a lack of substance in the ‘robes of externalised authority’. If there is a false call, then the authorities or those in such positions can easily demonstrate this rather than obfuscate, smear and attack the messenger, and drive the question out of awareness by use of securitised narrative dogma.

For when ‘authorities’ are used to assert a Big Lie, most are automatically aligned to support their investment in established roles, positions, privilege and prospects, and seek out only the ‘fact checking’ that tells them they don’t have to look or listen because ‘experts’ have already done all the work, and so they are exempted from responsibility as well as implicitly assumed unqualified to comment.

If anyone has interest in spiritual synchronicity – this was my reading today.

http://a.courseinmiracles.com/workbook-lessons/121-thru-150/lesson135.php#gsc.tab=0

If I defend myself, I am attacked

Who would defend himself unless he thought he was attacked, that the attack is real, and that his own defence can save himself? And herein lies the folly of defence; it gives illusions full reality, and then attempts to handle them as real. It adds illusions to illusions, thus making correction doubly difficult.

And it is this you do when you attempt to plan the future, activate the past, or organize the present as you wish. You operate from the belief you must protect yourself from what is happening, because it must contain what threatens you. A sense of threat is an acknowledgment of an inherent weakness; a belief that there is danger which has power to call on you to make appropriate defence.

The world is based on this insane belief. And all its structures, all its thoughts and doubts, its penalties and heavy armaments, its legal definitions and its codes, its ethics and its leaders and its gods, all serve but to preserve its sense of threat. For no-one walks the world in armature but must have terror striking at his heart.

Defence is frightening. It stems from fear, increasing fear as each defence is made. You think it offers safety. Yet it speaks of fear made real and terror justified. Is it not strange you do not pause to ask, as you elaborate your plans and make your armor thicker and your locks more tight, what you defend, and how, and against what?