When we are listening to testimony from a person who wholly believes what they are saying, we also believe in what they are saying a great majority of the time. This is because of the empathy factor we all have. When a person believes what they say they invest their emotion into it. Often we say this person has a 'passion' for what they are talking about. Our ability to sense emotional undertones and current is inherent in our survival equipment. We all know what it feels like to be lied to, we all know what it feels like to be the recipient of an angry tirade, and we ALL know when to duck.
That being said, if a well-known figure in the UFO circles talks about being visited by real-live space visitors, that he saw face to face, say for instance George Van Tassel, I can definitely believe he was visited. ( I cut my eye teeth back in the early 60's on GTV and Howard Menger and George Adamski. Little did I know that the visitors were Nazi breakaways, and that the 'teachings' they gave were Theosophical in nature - much like the current iteration of the Law of One, I just knew that in my mind it made sense. ) But, the questions remains, by whom? How were they representing themselves? As CG points out in his latest article, the 'Space Brothers' were not alien Ets, BUT GVT was telling his whole truth!
From Stillness In The Storm
wouldn't it be more wise to trust GVT who was a man of high integrity, rather than the US military?
[That last sentence reveals a great deal. Essentially the commenter is using credibility as a determination for veracity, that someone's reputation and character somehow affects the truthfulness of information shared. But this is a flawed discernment process. If a known liar says that water is healthy, does water become any less healthy? No. If a trusted source says that there are no cures for cancer, does that mean it becomes true? No it doesn't.
This is what I call the credibility mind trap, where in our process to investigate an offered idea, we focus only on the person who is sharing it, and not the content of what is being shared. And this usually manifests in other ways, as dualistic and polarized thinking. That we can't consider what one person says, because it conflicts with what another 'trusted' source says. Even if we blindly accept the statements of a source based on their reputation, any consciousness evolution that could be gained remains inactivated because we did not personally explore and investigate the ideas offered. Dogma in any form will always limit our growth.
In the end, the truth is no respecter of persons. What is truth now, was truth before, and will continue to be truth into the eternal future. Therefore our process of seeking it must be objective, not subjective. We can use credibility as a general guide, but only by investigating what is being said, the ideas alone, can we discern the truth in them. And this also underscores why open mindedness and an omnivorous approach to data consumption is essential, for all points of view are reconciled into all that is.]
Sphere Being Alliance It is true. Dozens of races began to visit and deactivate nuclear devices through the 1950's to the present day. They too met with government officials and were told to stay out of our affairs. During the time of the late 1940's through the early 1960's there were many meetings with both ET groups as well as Ancient Earth Breakaway Civilizations pretending to be ET's. One of the latter groups was the largest supporters of the Nazi's. The Nazi's were ahead of the US on developing the Atomic Bomb yet abandoned the research after deals were struck with the Ancient Human Break Away (Agarthan) Groups they allied with. They were assisted in other ways that gave the Nazi's a breakaway civilization of their own very quickly. The Nazi's were indeed among the groups of breakaway civilizations and ET groups that met with US Officials and Military during the time period that treaties were signed and agreements made.
GVT only had a piece of the puzzle. He was a man of high integrity yet a person's intel is only as good as their source. A person of the highest integrity can be shown and told of wonders and led to spread Misinformation unintentionally. This is especially true of all contactees from the early era of Ufology. From <http://sitsshow.blogspot.com/2015/09/david-wilcock-on-weather-warfare.html>
Clark McClelland adds to this database, even though I feel that it is difficult for me to hear 'truth' in his voice though a lot of his information jives with what is 'out there', ever have since I first saw his interviews on KC's you tube channel. Here are a few.
Maybe because he has been 'restrained' from telling the whole truth since the beginning, this inner truth comes across as a fractious vibe in his voice, or his energy? However, remember that 'round file' I've mentioned before, where all the information goes, waiting to slide into the bigger picture? It's part of learning to be sovereign in your own self.
Why not step waaaay out of the box and ask if we are
actually seeing the right box?
Might there not be an even bigger box that we can’t see and haven’t defined yet, but are just beginning to bang up against its sides??? I’m trying to get WAY outside the box at the moment… It’s baffling and hard. But something is not right, something stinks and I’m just starting to get a whiff of it.
Why do we even want a box? Plato, Soren, all of the early academic thinkers were trying to define how the universe works and why, because the universe was a surprising and dangerous place and if you knew more about it then you could be safer. So is fear a motivation for wanting a box or a system or a set of principles?
So when did we get stuck and turn it into a cage?
And there’s nothing wrong with a set of principles or systems or things that you can prove to yourself that becomes self-evident but what is wrong is when you blindly follow anything without understanding it and hand your sovereignty over to somebody or something else for a promise of safety or assurance. Maybe we are still suffering as a world from an unremembered traumatic memory of being wiped out in the last deluge and we are still looking for saviors to come and Save The World? Handing who or what you are away to anything or anyone for any reason is a form of slavery.
Then there is the ancient aliens theory – that we were bred to obey, and worship and once again hand over our sovereignty to the gods (little g). One of my favorite sayings is:
If you meet Buddha on the road, kill him. Belief of any kind is a trap. From <https://alsionsbells.wordpress.com/2015/01/15/the-sovereign-box-maybe/>
When reality kicks your butt on an established and much loved "the way it is" story, ALWAYS take a step back and look larger. You may not have to give up your favorite stories and heroes if you can see where they fit into the bigger story. Its seems to me that everything we are, everything we do, the everything of everything is all connected and interwoven, each thing a part of the whole so intimately touching and enmeshed that nothing, and everything is true, at all times. Lovely thought, isn't it? Both yes and no, because it's messy to our addiction to linear order, but so organic that it's both a mess and a glory. And I have a feeling it's only going to get messier and more fantastical as we go along. As to who's right and who's not, well I think we can begin to see that we all are right and we all are wrong and it's just a matter of where you happen to be looking at any given moment. There is always chaos before new learning. There is always seeming chaos in a vantage point until you pull back to a larger view and the order of the subset fits into the set in such beauty.