Connect with us

Sex, Dating & The Expectations Trap

Published

on

I was surfing around facebook one evening when I came across a comment by Berkeley’s “radical philosopher” Benjamin Smythe. It was in response to a guy’s question about dating, and while I don’t remember the specific question, I do remember the gist of Ben’s answer:

advertisement - learn more

“If you are meant to have sex with her, the sex will happen, and if you are not, it won’t. So there’s no point in worrying about it.”

-->FREE Report: Discover the Top 10 Nutrient Deficiencies, including key signs you may be deficient in them and what you can do about it Click here to learn more!

So often when we go on a date, we don’t go empty handed, allowing the moment to unfold organically, however it unfolds. Rather, we come “pre-packed,” with a head full of things we want and don’t want to happen. And so naturally when we are hoping for a certain outcome or experience and it doesn’t happen, we feel disappointed/let down, i.e., we suffer.

laotzuNow compare that experience to going out with someone and simply going with the flow. You are genuinely open to whatever happens simply because you realize you have no idea what will happen! Why pre-judge (be prejudice toward) something if you haven’t experienced it yet? Besides setting yourself up for disappointment, oftentimes when we come with expectations, we give off a “needy” vibe that is usually a turn-off. It’s basically saying, I need you to be a certain way in order for me to be happy.

Again, compare this vibe to going out with someone who seems happy and content naturally, and doesn’t need anything from you. I can tell you from personal experience that women are more attracted to men who are present and happy to be with them, than a guy who is focused on trying to get in their pants.

And the first step to being present is to do less talking and more listening. Woman have told me that sometimes men will try to impress them with all their worldly accomplishments, but when it comes to being genuinely interested in their passions and interests, the men will turn the conversation back toward their own achievements… as if they are trying to “one up” the woman!?

advertisement - learn more

Another part of being a good listener is eye-contact. That’s why nothing kills a woman’s interest in a man faster than if she notices him looking at other women while they are out on a date. Bottom line: don’t do it.

Finally, I’ll share one last thing that I read in a comment section underneath an article on dating I read awhile back that I found very helpful. The commenter said that it wasn’t until he stopped “trying” to find someone that he met his current girlfriend. That it wasn’t until he learned to be happy on his own that she came into his life, and not before.

Those last three words really hit me: “And not before.” I remember reading that and realizing that he was right. That a part of me was “waiting” to be happy. In other words, I could feel that I had belief running somewhere that said, “I can’t be happy unless I have a girlfriend.”

And so, instead of focusing on trying to “get” someone, I made the decision to stop waiting to be happy and to just “do my thing” from a place of love and contentment. In other words, I discovered that the happiness and peace I had longed for was not in someone else, but inside me all along.

Well, sure enough not long after this I did meet a woman, and we are currently happily dating. But, like the guy said in the comment section, it didn’t happen until I learned to be genuinely happy in my own skin.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

“Wearing A Mask…Offers Little, If Any, Protection From Infection” – Harvard Doctors

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study published in the New England Medical Journal outlines how it's already known that masks provide little to zero benefit when it comes to protection a public setting.

  • Reflect On:

    Should we have the freedom to wear masks? Why are so many things we are doing right now contrary to data and evidence? Are these measures helping us thrive, or are they totalitarian type measures?

What Happened: Is this fake news? No, it’s a quote directly from a paper published a couple of months ago in the New England Journal of Medicine by, Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H., Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H., Julia Sinclair, M.B.A., Madelyn Pearson, D.N.P., R.N., and Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D. Whether or not it’s may be up for debate, but one thing is for sure, the conversation shouldn’t be censored. According to the paper:

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.

The calculus may be different, however, in health care settings. First and foremost, a mask is a core component of the personal protective equipment (PPE) clinicians need when caring for symptomatic patients with respiratory viral infections, in conjunction with gown, gloves, and eye protection. Masking in this context is already part of routine operations for most hospitals. What is less clear is whether a mask offers any further protection in health care settings in which the wearer has no direct interactions with symptomatic patients.

The study goes on to examine whether a mask alone is even an effective health-care measure, and discusses its capability alone devoid of other, what seem to be more important practices, like washing your hands. The point is, outside of a healthcare setting, where their usefulness is still questionable, they provide no clear protection from Covid-19, so why are they being mandated like they are? Instead of a mandate, should the citizenry simply be encouraged to wear masks, with the government explaining the science and still giving people a choice?  Why are they saying it’s to protect other people when there is no evidence that it actually does that?

What’s interesting about this particular study is that it’s one of multiple that mention how masks are more of a symbolic representation. As mentioned above, the paper states that “in many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.” Again, the study is an examination of the validity of masks in a health care setting (which is also questionable) with regards to the new coronavirus, and clearly states that it’s already known that they offer almost zero protection in a public setting.

It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis. Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19.

The study provides other justifications for masks, but the prevention of Covid-19 is not one of them.

Below is a quote from a very interesting paper published in 2016, titled “The Surgical Mask Is A Bad Fit For Risk Reduction.”

As represented by our cinema and other media, Western society expects too much of masks. In the public’s mind, the still-legitimate use of masks for source control has gone off-label; masks are thought to prevent infection. From here, another problem arises: because surgical masks are thought to protect against infection in the community setting, people wearing masks for legitimate purposes (those who have a cough in a hospital, say) form part of the larger misperception and act to reinforce it. Even this proper use of surgical masks is incorporated into a larger improper use in the era of pandemic fear, especially in Asia, where such fear is high. The widespread misconception about the use of surgical masks — that wearing a mask protects against the transmission of virus — is a problem of the kind theorized by German sociologist Ulrich Beck.

The birth of the mask came from the realization that surgical wounds need protection from the droplets released in the breath of surgeons. The technology was applied outside the operating room in an effort to control the spread of infectious epidemics. In the 1919 influenza pandemic, masks were available and were dispensed to populations, but they had no impact on the epidemic curve. At the time, it was unknown that the influenza organism is nanoscopic and can theoretically penetrate the surgical mask barrier. As recently as 2010, the US National Academy of Sciences declared that, in the community setting, “face masks are not designed or certified to protect the wearer from exposure to respiratory hazards.” A number of studies have shown the inefficacy of the surgical mask in household settings to prevent transmission of the influenza virus…

A study published in 2015 found that cloth masks can increase healthcare workers risk of infection. It also called into question the efficacy of medical masks. You can read more about that and access it here.

The physiological effects of breathing elevated inhaled CO2 may include changes in visual performance, modified exercise endurance, headaches and dyspnea. The psychological effects include decreased reasoning and alertness, increased irritability, severe dyspnea, headache, dizziness, perspiration, and short-term memory loss. (source)

There are studies out there that also suggest that wearing masks can indeed help prevent Covid-19, especially in an acute care setting, it’s just that we are hearing so much of it that we forget to examine the science on the other side of the coin.

The list goes on, these are just a few examples.

Manufactured Panic?

The next important question to ask ourselves is, are health authorities making this pandemic out to be more serious than it actually is? Many scientists and epidemiologists from around the world have expressed this belief, and many of them, as a result, have been censored by social media platforms. Why is there an authoritarian “fact-checker” going around censoring information, evidence, and opinions being presented by some of the worlds leading scientists in this area simply because it opposes the narrative given to us by organizations like The World Health Organization? (WHO)

Are masks being used to prolong fear and hysteria?

John P. A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford University has said that the infection fatality rate is close to 0 percent for people under the age of 45 years old. Why are we taking such measures for a respiratory infection when tens of millions of people get infected and die from respiratory viruses every single year?

Why is there so much controversy surrounding the deaths? For example, in Toronto Canada, “Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19 are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.” (source)

Dr. Ngozi Ezike, Director of the Illinois Department of Public Health, recently stated that, even if it’s clear one died of an alternative cause, their death will still be marked as a COVID death.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment announced a change to how it tallies coronavirus deaths amid complaints that it inflated numbers. This has been a common theme throughout the US as well as the World.

Vittorio Sgarbi, Italian politician Mayor of Sutri gave an emotional speech at a hearing on the 24th of April where he emphasized that the number of deaths in Italy due to COVID-19 are completely false and that the people are being lied to.

This isn’t even the tip of the ice-berg when it comes to manufactured deaths.

What’s really going on here? Is this actually about the pandemic, or was Edward Snowden right? That governments are using the new coronavirus to impose more authoritarian measures on the population, measures that will stick around long after the virus is gone? You can read more about his comments here.

Was Dr. Ron Paul correct when he said that this virus is less dangerous than it’s being made out to be? And that people will profit both politically and financially from this in the form of more of our basic rights being taken away? Is this simply being used like the justification for mass surveillance was used? To protect the population, or is it for, as NSA whistle-blower William Binney says, “total population control?” You can read more about his comments here.

The Takeaway

It’s quite clear that a large portion of the population doesn’t agree with various medical mandates, and wearing masks is one of those mandates. The reason is justified, and that’s simply because there is no evidence that they can protect the general public, and depending on the material, in some cases it can be harmful. I find it hard to believe that someone would have an issue with someone else not wanting to breathe in their own carbon monoxide, but I also understand that many peoples perception with regards to this pandemic has been severely manipulated.

On the flip side, due to so many instances where things don’t make sense, this pandemic is contributing to another large amount of people questioning what we are being told and being forced to do by our government, this is causing a deep awakening of the masses. Perhaps this is the larger reason it’s playing out from a collective consciousness perspective.

At the end of the day, more measures are continually pushed upon the population without their consent. We don’t have to continue to obey, continue to elect, and help maintain a system that is clearly not serving us to thrive.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Fact Checkers Can’t Possibly Know Wayfair Human Trafficking Allegations Are False

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Fact-checkers assert that there is no truth to the Wayfair human trafficking allegations, yet they could not possibly know this for a fact. So why are they saying this?

  • Reflect On:

    Is their erroneous labelling of this information as false creating a culture of blind acceptance of ideas with no facts behind them? Sure, Wayfair may be innocent, but an investigation will reveal that, not a fact checker.

You are being told the Wayfair human trafficking allegations are false, there’s only one problem: fact-checkers can’t possibly know that as no investigation has been done. So why are they saying it?

What happened: Fact-checkers were quick to arrive on the scene when allegations emerged that Wayfair was trafficking humans through the sale of extremely high priced items. It all began when a Reddit user noticed some industrial cabinets were priced at $10,000+, and had different female names for each.

“Is it possible Wayfair involved in Human trafficking with their WFX Utility collection? Or are these just extremely overpriced cabinets? (Note the names of the cabinets) this makes me sick to my stomach if it’s true,” one Redditor user named PrincessPeach1987 posted.

This erupted into a massive online investigation that returned more products priced over $10,000, also with female names. This included desks, pillows, shower curtains and more. As it began going viral on Facebook, fact-checkers jumped in to quickly debunk the story.

LeadStories, a company we have dealt with many times in the past, was quick to say this wasn’t true. Initially stating  “Fact Check: Wayfair is NOT Selling Human Trafficked Children On Their Website With Very Expensive Cabinets” they later updated their title to say “Fact Check: No Evidence Wayfair Is Selling Human Trafficked Children On Their Website With Very Expensive Cabinets”

How did LeadStories perform a full on FBI-like investigation to find out this wasn’t possibly happening? They asked Wayfair. Lead Stories claims: “Wayfair released a statement to Lead Stories on July 10, 2020 after the claim went viral, denying the connection to human trafficking.

There is, of course, no truth to these claims. The products in question are industrial grade cabinets that are accurately priced. Recognizing that the photos and descriptions provided by the supplier did not adequately explain the high price point, we temporarily removed the products from site to rename them and provide a more in-depth description and photos that accurately depict the product to clarify the price point.”

Snopes was no different, claiming the whole idea is ‘False’, asserting that “The claim that Wayfair is trafficking children is based almost entirely on one person’s confusion over an expensive cabinet. This conspiracy theory, like so many conspiracy theories, started with a wild and unfounded assumption that would be sickening if it were actually true. As of this writing, absolutely no credible evidence has been offered to back up this accusation. “

Their quote there makes it clear they don’t understand the story, have not researched it deeply and don’t understand how investigations work.

It’s like saying “a man was seen running away from a crime scene where someone was just shot. Police asked the man if they shot him, he says no, investigation over.” Did the man shoot him? We don’t know, we should investigate, not simply call the whole story false.

Why it Matters: What I found interesting about this is how quickly a fact-checker was able to debunk such serious allegations where there have literally been no facts to do such a thing. Would someone guilty of serious allegations come out and admit to doing it? If they deny it, do we suddenly believe them? Innocent until proven guilty is one thing, but saying the whole story is false is simply misleading. And that’s what many fact-checkers do. We spoke about yet another story with an emerging “fact-checking” website called ‘The Dispatch”. They tried to claim our article about the COVID-19 being on the threshold of the CDCs ‘epidemic’ status was false. We told the whole story here.

Notice the wording Lead Stories uses. “Hoax Alert” and “No Child Sales”. How do they know this? What investigation did they do outside of believing Wayfair? Is this fact-checking or is this simply reporting on statements from corporations? What does this lead the public to believe? Is the story true? Or is this just another crazy conspiracy theory that no one in mainstream media or fact-checking has actually taken the time to investigate?

The fact is, many people on the internet who are sharp, grounded in their approach and who truly investigate, are better journalists than most mainstream journalists – including fact-checkers.

The reason why all of this is so important to realize is because we are literally being told something is bogus based on no investigation, and this creates a culture that is completely uninformed to what is actually going on. We allow a ministry of truth to shape our perception – not facts.

The Takeaway

If we are to truly wake up and create a world where we can thrive, we must learn to be critical in our thinking and snap out of the spell we are under when it comes to mainstream media and fact-checking. We call this process Breaking the Illusion. It’s an important aspect of waking up to a deeper understanding of who we are and how our current human. condition is creating the world around us.

Are fact-checkers truly asking the right questions? Are they truly investigating? Or are they just siding with the unscientific claims of the very people independent media is debunking?

Why are they so keen on debunking everything that seems ‘fringe?’ Should we not allow fringe ideas? Are they not worthy of exploration?

One of the big reasons why this story is so important relates to Jeffrey Epstein and survivors of his actions. They have stated that humans, including teens and children, are trafficked to high profile people including politicians and celebrities. Why would we as a citizenry want to allow this to continue by turning a blind eye and simply saying every allegation of this is false when we can’t possibly know yet?

We have interviewed a number of survivors of elite child trafficking and pedophilia, we highly encourage you to watch Anneke Lucas’ testimony here, as it helps you understand just how Wayfair could actually be involved in doing this.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Ex VP of Major Military Contractor DynCorp & Sr. Pentagon Official Guilty For Child Sex Abuse

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Retired Army Maj. Gen. James Grazioplene has been given 20 years for continually sexually abusing his daughter from a young age. DynCorp has also been implicated in trafficking children abroad.

  • Reflect On:

    How many people are aware of these actions? How much power and influence do they have over what happens on our planet? Ultimately, we as a collective decide the direction we choose. Is it time we start asking questions?

DynCorp has been implicated in trafficking children all over the world, why have they not been properly investigated?

What Happened: Retired Army Maj. Gen. James Grazioplene has been given 20 years for aggravated sexual battery. He has been in jail for approximately 18 months. He was expected to be released on Wednesday and will serve 20 years of probation, according to Elmore’s lawyer, Ryan Guilds. (source)

Grazioplene has been implicated in multiple sexual abuse allegations over many years, this specific case had to do with his daughter, who first reported to Army officials in 2015 that her father had repeatedly molested and raped her throughout her childhood from the age of 3 years old. The military launched an investigation and found enough evidence — even 30 years later — to move toward a trial in 2017.

Grazioplene retired in 2005 after a career that included stints as a commander within the 82nd Airborne Division and senior staff positions at the Pentagon. He also became a vice president at the contractor DynCorp International but is no longer with the company. (source)

Why This Is Important:

First of all, whenever this type of thing happens there is usually one person that takes the fall, while many of those surrounding the individual in similar places of power are not implicated or accused, despite the fact that many may be involved.

DynCorp receives nearly all of its income from doing work for the U.S. military. Apart from doing the work that they do, being “An American global service provider,” this company has been heavily implicated in the trafficking of women and children all over the world, so it’s not a surprise to see that Grazioplene is/was connected to them.

Former U.S. representative Cynthia McKinney was well aware of the corruption that was going on within DynCorp, and she actually addressed it in 2005. She grilled former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on the government’s involvement and compliance with military contractor DynCorp’s child trafficking business of selling women and children. (source)

Put bluntly, DynCorp was involved in a sex slavery scandal in Bosnia in 1999, with its employees accused of rape and the buying and selling of girls as young as 12. Dyncorp, hired to perform police duties for the UN and aircraft maintenance for the US Army, were implicated in prostituting the children, whereas the company’s Bosnia site supervisor filmed himself raping two women. A number of employees were transferred out of the country, but with no legal consequences for them. (source)

This company is still in operation and functions in many countries around the world.

Thanks to Wikileaks, we also know that the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan sent a cable to Washington, under the signature of Karl Eikenberry, U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, regarding a meeting between Assistant Chief of Mission Joseph Mussomeli and Afghan Minister of Interior Hanif Atmar. Among the issues discussed was what diplomats delicately called the “Kunduz DynCorp Problem.” Kunduz is a northern province of Afghanistan.

The problem was this:

1. In a May 2009 meeting interior minister Hanif Atmar expresses deep concerns that if lives could be in danger if news leaked that foreign police trainers working for US commercial contractor DynCorp hired “dancing boys” to perform for them.

You can read more about that here.

It’s also interesting to note that this was one of many senior officials within the Pentagon. Did you know that Congress was recently looking at a bipartisan bill to stop employees from sharing child porn on Department of Defense computers? Where are these kids coming from? Who is making these kids ‘perform,’ who is filming them, and where are these high-ranking people getting this from? Are people like Jeffrey Epstein connected?

“The notion that the Department of Defense’s network and Pentagon-issued computers may be used to view, create, or circulate such horrifying images is a shameful disgrace, and one we must fight head on.” – Abigail Spanberger (D-Virginia), spoken in a  statement on Tuesday as she and co-sponsor Mark Meadows (R-N. Carolina) introduced the End National Defense Network Abuse (END Network Abuse) Act in the House. (source)

As The Hill reports, “The Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service subsequently identified hundreds of DOD-affiliated individuals as suspects involved in accessing child pornography, several of whom used government devices to use and share the images.” It’s called the End National Defense Network Abuse (END Network Abuse) and it was introduced in the wake of an investigation called “Project Flicker” carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This investigation identified over 5,000 individuals, including many affiliated with DOD, who were subscribed to child porn websites.

Diving Deeper

Just to give you an idea of how widespread this activity is in places of high power, a paper published in European Psychiatry outlines:

Research eventually led to the Franklin scandal that broke in 1989 when hundreds of children were apparently flown around the US to be abused by high ranking ‘Establishment’ members. Former state senator John W DeCamp, cited as one of the most effective legislators in Nebraska history, is today attorney for two of the abuse victims. A 15 year old girl disclosed that she had been abused since the age of 9 and was exposed since the age of 9 and was exposed to ‘ritual murder’ of a new born girl, a small boy (who was subsequently fried and eaten) and three others. – Dr. Rainer Kurz, explains, a chartered occupational psychologist (Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) at The University of Manchester. Master of Science (MSc) Industrial Psychology at The University of Hull) 

We have interviewed a survivor of elite child sex trafficking.

Anneke Lucas is an author, speaker, advocate for child sex trafficking victims, founder of the non-profit organization Liberation Prison Yoga, and creator of the Unconditional Model.

Her work is based on her 30-year journey to restore her mental and physical wellbeing after surviving some of the worst atrocities known to humankind before the age of 12. Sold as a young child into a murderous pedophile network by her family, she was rescued after nearly six years of abuse and torture.

We recently conducted an interview with her. Below is a clip from the four-part series, as it was a very long and detailed interview. You can access the full interview and start your free trial HERE on CETV, a platform we created to help combat internet censorship and allow us to continue to do our work and get the word out about various issues and topics.

The topic of child sexual abuse in places of great power from the Vatican, to the world of the financial elite, the Royal Family, entertainment and the world of fame is a hot topic right now. One thing is for certain, trafficking, sexual abuse and even the murder of children is far from a “conspiracy,” and there are multiple examples to chose from that make this quite clear.

How is this activity able to sustain itself? A great example comes Cardinal George Pell, who a couple of years ago became the highest-ranking Vatican official to ever be convicted of child sexual abuse. Of course, he has now been freed from jail after Australia’s highest court overturned his conviction, but did you know that he himself established The Diocesan Commission Into Sexual Abuse?  This is a common theme. The ones who we go to combat these problems are often, themselves involved.

The Takeaway

Is it really a surprise that our planet is in the shape it’s in with regards to environmental, health and several other issues when the ones in charge of making decisions in this area are committing acts such as this and working to cover it up?

Do we want to continue participating, and voting for people who don’t have our best interests at heart? Why do we give our power and our perception of what’s happening to such a small group of people? Why do we continue to obey instructions from governments, under the guise of goodwill, that are clearly not in our best interests?  Why is there so much controversy these days? Why is there an authoritarian “fact-checker” patrolling the internet censoring any information that threatens the mainstream one?

At the end of the day, humanity has limitless potential to create, but we must do so in an environment that is free from such deception, and in order to do that, the first thing we need to do is SEE it, and realize that we can change the game anytime we want.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!