Connect with us

Alternative News

Reader Email: Is Trump Legitimately Working To Take Down The Deep State?

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A reader sent a passionate email after reading one of my articles. This email contained many important questions about how we look at Donald Trump (and others like Hillary Clinton) that I felt would allow me to give clarity and nuance to my message.

  • Reflect On:

    Is it necessary to ignore one person's character flaws in order to get behind efforts to take down the Deep State? Is it important to identify a 'savior' here, or can we see it as more of a collective awakening within which we are all participants?

The following email came from a reader who brought up some very important concerns about Donald Trump and his role in fighting for justice on behalf of women (combating sex trafficking, for example) and taking down the Deep State. I thought that it would be worthwhile to publish my response to this email since I thought that many readers may have similar concerns and questions, and Sharine graciously consented. Below, I have broken up her email into several sections so I can respond one section at a time, but please note that her words were all sent in a single email:

advertisement - learn more

Hi Richard!

My name is Sharine and I am fairly new (summer 2018) to the Collective Evolution site. I became a member last month.

Today, I read your article “Many Insiders Believe Military Tribunals For Deep State Will Happen Any Time Now,” and I have some questions and concerns that you may or may not have time to address, but I feel compelled to share anyway!

First, I feel that I grasp a basic understanding of the Deep State, mostly from reading on CE and watching both David Wilcock’s “Disclosure” interview and Joe Martino’s video about the illusion and the cycle of the cabal in politics.

Second, I want to disclose that I am a cis-gender female survivor of sexual assault at the age of 52, sexual harassment throughout my whole life, and an attempted rape at the age of 15. This is important to my concerns.

advertisement - learn more

That said, here goes:

Why would enlightened beings set up our world so that men as hideous as Donald J. Trump and possibly Brett Kavanaugh would be the people I am to trust to take down the Deep State and begin to cripple the cabal?

R: First off, the contention that Donald J. Trump is ‘hideous’ is a matter of opinion, and when you say ‘possibly’ Brett Kavanaugh, I take you to mean he is ‘possibly’ hideous (rather than ‘possibly’ someone you should trust). Nonetheless, let’s focus on Trump for this question: is it likely that Donald Trump has had sex with prostitutes, been unfaithful with partners, acted and spoke in a ‘macho’ way at times, lied in business and in relationships, cheated on his taxes and otherwise did many unethical and illegal things in business? Yes. Some people may feel this makes him hideous, fair enough. But we have to look at the context.

In the article you read, we were discussing a Deep State that indulges in sex and slave trafficking, human mind-control and experimentation, the sexual abuse, torture and murder of children, as well as war, genocide and mass disease creation in the world. Assuming, as I do, that Donald Trump does not do any of these things, and his greatest crimes are those mentioned above, then if we call him hideous then have we left ourselves with any proportionate adjective to describe perpetrators within the Deep State?

To your main question about enlightened beings, who I take to refer to higher-dimensional positive beings that are fostering human evolution from a higher density, I would say: Why not Donald Trump? If it were some kind of perfect Jesus-type character, would we not feel somewhat disconnected from any positive actions that would be brought, and simply have a new idol to follow? True, some people do idolize Trump, but that is the unhelpful extreme in the other direction, because we have to move past idolatry and see ourselves as all being in this struggle together, each having to acknowledge our own darkness and inadequacies while not giving up our push towards enlightenment. In having a fallible, flawed person leading the charge to take down the Deep State, we may not have an ‘inspiring’ leader at the helm, but it becomes much easier to look past him and see the takedown of the Deep State as the fruits of the collective efforts of thousands, if not tens of thousands of patriotic men and women of integrity, an effort ultimately grounded in the collective consciousness of humanity as a whole.

I want the demise as much as any loving human, but that’s a big, nasty, jagged, bright “red pill” to swallow. It’s like saying it’s okay that Trump is an admitted sexual assaulter and racist, misogynistic homophobe but it’s not okay that Clinton turned a blind eye to sex trafficking (or whatever it is CE claims about her) because he’s going to save the day.

R: I would challenge your assertion as ‘fact’ that Trump is an ‘admitted sexual assaulter.’ I don’t think Trump has ever admitted to being a sexual assaulter. As far as being a racist, misogynistic homophobe: I haven’t seen any evidence that Trump is either a racist or a homophobe. Is he misogynistic? A misogynist is defined as “a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women.” I don’t get the impression that Trump is this way at all. Certainly, he may have long been an egocentric, macho, privileged white male who puts himself above woman, but I believe this stems from personal insecurity rather than an actual hatred.

Whether or not you have to be ‘okay’ with who Donald Trump actually is, is your own personal matter. You don’t have to be ‘okay’ with Donald Trump in order to want the Deep State taken down, even if you do believe as we do that Trump is serving a role (certainly not leading) this takedown. In the bigger picture, though, our destiny as human beings is to be ‘okay’ with whatever IS, with the TRUTH, and seek not to resist the truth, but fight against those whose agenda is to hide the truth.

Which brings us to Hillary Clinton. I have to say that personally I am ‘okay’ with Hillary Clinton, because as a matter of spiritual practice I believe that everything is as it should be in our world for the evolution of humanity to be served. That said, I strongly believe that revealing the truth about who Hillary Clinton is will serve that evolution, and if this truth is revealed then it will be plain as day that she needs to be removed from our society. It is only because of the immense power of the Deep State that Hillary Clinton is not in jail right now.

If the Deep State was not protecting her, you or I could have her indicted on several crimes simply based on the information that’s in the public domain, let alone the hordes of more sensitive information that is hidden. Just off the top of my head, evidence is out there demonstrating that she allowed diplomats to be killed at the Benghazi embassy because they were beginning to resist the gun trafficking operation there, leaked confidential information on an illegal private server to China which led to the death or incarceration of at least a dozen CIA officers embedded there, illegally took over the Democratic National Committee in order to defeat Bernie Sanders who otherwise would have won the nomination, was involved in (not necessarily ‘running’) a pedophilia operation in Washington, and is highly implicated in the staggering number of murders of people who were investigating the Clinton Foundation, which itself is well known to be linked to illegal activities.

Didn’t Clinton inspire women and men all across the USA to stand for things like universal healthcare and other good stuff, while Trump inspires hatred and anger?

R: Clinton may have inspired some women and men in her rise to power as a woman in American politics, but I don’t believe she cared about inspiring people except to the point that it got her elected and gave her power. There are many women in politics who fight for the truth and are positive role models, such as Cynthia McKinney and Tulsi Gabbard, whom I have written about. To equate supporters of Clinton as supporters of women and non-supporters of Clinton (or supporters of Trump) as non-supporters of women is one of the most egregious and sinister points of perception that has been carefully crafted by mainstream media, and easy to fall prey to. Plain and simple, I believe Hillary Clinton is a modern-day Lady Macbeth. I believe her whole public face is an act and a deception, that she is part of the Deep State and guilty of some of the most horrific crimes imaginable to humanity, including the sexual abuse, torture, and murder of children.

As for Trump inspiring hatred and anger, it is important to observe that since Trump came into office intent on helping a huge alliance of patriots take down the Deep State, all the Deep State flunkies in politics, Hollywood, and mainstream media have done is everything they can to invoke anger and hatred upon him. Earlier in his presidency, there were over half a dozen celebrities who all suddenly tried to seed the idea of Trump getting killed into the minds of people (you’ll recall the Kathy Griffin photo below among others). Who is truly inspiring anger and hatred here? If you can separate Donald Trump from the campaign to demonize him that has been relentless and ongoing through mainstream media, you may find that Donald Trump himself is not inspiring as much hatred and anger as it seems.

Isn’t the cabal in existence to restrict and eventually deny freedom and well-being for women, vulnerable populations, the poor, the Earth itself and its inhabitants?

R: They are not in existence to restrict and deny freedom as such, but only to the extent that it serves our evolution. That is why their ultimate plans of world domination will fail. From the point of view of the higher realms, when it gets to the point that the cabal no longer serves our evolution, then it is time for them to disband. But their disbanding is not going to happen if we stay asleep as a collective. Humanity must act, and take back its power through an awakening of consciousness.

I guess what I’m saying is, the physical world matters, too, so why would the forces of light and love in the Universe demand that I overlook abuse and corruption by one person, but not another? I’m confused.

R: I agree that the physical world matters too. The forces of light and love are not asking you to overlook one thing and not another; there is no need to overlook the ‘truth’ about either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, but rather to separate the ‘truth’ from the propaganda and deception. In a way, it is a good practice of consciousness to embrace some ambiguity, because human life is filled with ambiguity and we need to embrace it rather than gravitating towards one polarity or the other. The idea that Donald Trump is a deeply flawed man who has done things in his past that would not endear him to women, and the idea that in his current position of considerable power he would like to do what he can for the freedom, safety, and standing of women in society are not mutually exclusive statements. There’s ambiguity, but not contradiction.

It seems to me that this premise is asking me to dismiss the very real-world fact that my teenage brother’s best friend tried to rape me in my own home, when what he did was wrong. His negative energy caused darkness in the Universe, just as it is wrong for Trump to openly mock a disabled person, and a woman who claims to have been sexually assaulted, and a female reporter who was simply asking him a question, and on and on.

R: It’s important to notice where you may be building a chain of assumptions on a flawed premise. You use the word ‘dismiss’ here, and nobody is asking you to dismiss something real that happened to you. You have the freedom to hold its ‘wrongness’ for the rest of your life. That being said, your only hope of healing from this event will be through forgiveness, and rising above the power you may still be giving to this event. I recently interviewed Anneke Lucas, a survivor of the horrors of Satanic ritual and sexual abuse within an elite Belgian pedophile network between the ages of 6 and 11. In the interview she is beautifully able to express and exemplify the need for forgiveness and acceptance in a healing process that is anything but a ‘dismissal’ of the experiences she went through. CE will be broadcasting this 4-hour interview in November and it may be one of the best and most elegant explorations into the healing process available for women who have been sexually abused.

In terms of the wrongness of things that Trump does, like openly mock a disabled person (which seems to have been presented out of context by mainstream media, but no matter) it is important to make a distinction between condoning and accepting. By standing firm in your principles you do not condone those acts which go against those principles, and when it is something that is directed at you personally it is important to take actions that appropriately show that you do not condone such behavior. However, to not accept that it happened, (whether it involves Trump openly mocking a woman who has been sexually assaulted, or your brother’s best friend’s attempted rape) by continuing to be angry and upset about it, or feeling that punishment needs to be meted out in order for you to let go of the power it has over you, is self-defeating. When you hold Trump’s words and actions to have emotional power over you, that is what you are doing.

Are you saying that disabled people ought to be made fun of? That Dr. Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh’s other accusers — and women like me — are lying? That women should be “negged”? That taking away a woman’s right to care for her own body is a good thing? Because I don’t know how this is light and love on any plane of existence. And if it is, can’t we also say that the cabal is okay, too? War is peace? Hatred is love? Rape is consent?

R: Of course I am not saying that disabled people ought to be made fun of. Having said that, I truly believe our course of action as evolving individuals is to work towards a greater sense of self so that we become immune to insults and slights. In my article ‘Let’s Discard The ‘Right’ To Be Insulted By Free Speech,’ I make the point that being insulted or made fun of does not say anything substantial about us, it only says something about the person saying the insult. Each of us having this clear perception is what will virtually put an end to ‘disrespectful’ speech.

Putting yourself in the same group as Dr. Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh’s other accusers is a dangerous leap, as it shows how you may be projecting your story onto other people and then suffering when they are not being believed. Do I think Dr. Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh’s other accusers are lying? On the strength of the evidence I’ve seen, yes. Either lying or having had their minds tampered with. Do I think you are lying? No. There is ample evidence and reasons to believe that Kavanaugh’s accusers were brought forward by Deep State forces to created a narrative out of either sketchy or even non-existent memories. There is no reason for you to lie and no reason for me to doubt you.

I assume I don’t need to answer whether I think women should be “negged” or whether taking away a woman’s right to care for her own body is a good thing. As far as us saying the cabal is okay? Yes, at the highest level we must accept that they are here to play a role in our evolution. And having said that, our evolution is now hinging on our capacity to defeat them and remove them from power. And that includes rejecting their Orwellian Doublespeak perception-benders like ‘War is peace,’ ‘Hatred is love,’ ‘Rape is consent’ and use our discernment of the falseness of these slogans to lead us to the truth.

And in the end, then, what are we working toward, if not for true peace and love on our shared home, Earth?

R: True peace and love on Earth is certainly our goal, but in a deeper sense our goal is evolving towards that by choice, rather than having it given to us. Otherwise, we would have stayed in the Garden of Eden and not eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I wrote a 7-part series on Lucifer that goes into this matter in much greater depth. In our journey back to love and peace, then, the darkness is our ally, and helps us return to unity with greater freedom, and a greater ability to create a future world in our highest shared image.

Thanks for your consideration. I won’t bother you again!

Sincerely,

Sharine

Dear Sharine, thank you for your honest and heart-felt questions and the opportunity to respond to them. The time and space I have had to answer your questions is limited, and it’s difficult to say things in writing that are better served in a one-on-one conversation. I sincerely hope that I have not missed the nuance of some of your points, nor that I appear to be marginalizing the suffering that you have gone through in your life. I believe the healing of women who have suffered abuse at the hands of men will be one of the pre-eminent beacons for our collective evolution.

I wish you all the best of healing, light, and learning in this journey we are sharing together.

Richard

The Takeaway

It is important for each one of us to recognize when we are making assumptions that deviate from the truth, and thus lead to incorrect conclusions. Our battle is not truly a political one, though it is manifesting in the political arena. Our battle is one of consciousness. There is no need to hoist any particular person in the public eye into the role of ‘savior,’ or dismiss their human flaws in order to get behind their efforts to bring about the revelation of truth.

Our own awakening to the truth that lies beyond false perceptions is how we must participate. And part of this awakening involves acknowledging our pain, both our individual pain and our collective trauma, and recognizing our part of the responsibility in how we create and maintain this pain within ourselves. The brave act of healing, founded on forgiveness and a simple acceptance of that which is, inevitably will help us see the truth more easily and naturally, and will ground us in the creation of  a life of ‘true peace and love on our shared home, Earth.’

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

UFOs Spotted Off The Irish Coast By Airline Pilots – Here Are The Details

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Multiple pilots recently reported a fast travelling UFO that seemed to have taken corrective measured and made maneuvers at very high speeds.

  • Reflect On:

    There thousands of reports of radar trackings which exist, and multiple events that've occurred involving commercial pilots. What is going on in our skies?

A pilot flying from Montreal, Canada to Heathrow airport in the UK spotted “a very bright light” that had come up along the left side of their aircraft before it “rapidly veered to the north.” This is a common characteristic of UFOs that have been spotted by both airline and military pilots since the dawn of human aviation. The older our civilization gets, the more time we spend in the air and the higher we climb, the more reports of strange objects seem to arise.

She wondered what it could be, but said it did not seem to be heading for a collision. When I read this, I thought of Ex-Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer’s comments stating that these objects often performed evasive maneuvers when in the vicinity of our aircraft.  Unfortunately, he stated that as the jets scrambled to look closer at the UFOs, they were ordered to “shoot first, and ask questions later.” Add that to Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell’s statement that, “yes, there has been crashed craft, and bodies recovered,” and we can deduce that the protocol, in the military at least, is to try and shoot these things down. That doesn’t seem like a very intelligent approach.

This topic goes far beyond witness testimony from some very credible people; there is electrooptical data and physical evidence that has been associated with this phenomenon as well. These objects are not only seen by pilots, they’re also tracked on radar.

Glowing Orbs Over Ireland

At least three pilots were involved in witnessing glowing orbs that were spotted near Shannon, Ireland at “astronomical” speeds,  according to the Guardian:

Other aircraft flying in the area reported the same thing. A pilot, flying a Virgin Airlines plane from Orlando to Manchester described the sight as a “meteor or another object making some kind of re-entry,” adding it seemed to be “multiple objects following the same sort of trajectory – very bright from where we were.” Another pilot also weighed in, saying: “Glad I’m not the only one.” A spokesman for the Irish Aviation Authority told the Irish Times it was investigating the incident and would file a report. “This report will be investigated under the normal confidential occurrence investigation process.”

There were multiple objects reports here, and meteors do not veer off at astronomical speeds. The pilots reported seeing one object become multiple objects, which is common in UFO lore. I’ve been studying the subject for more than a decade, so it didn’t surprise me. Identifying this as a ‘meteor’ may comfort some people reading about this incident in the mainstream, because it fits within their current perception. But more and more people are having to face the fact that these incidents clearly do not fit within the mainstream paradigm of reality, and we really need to go through the discomfort of breaking this paradigm in our own minds if we hope to arrive at the truth of what is going on.

advertisement - learn more

Other Incidents

There are many corroborating incidents out there of even more ‘jaw-dropping’ proportions, from the perspective of the pilots involved. With regards to commercial aviation, perhaps the most well-documented incident is the one that took place at O’Hare international airport. It caused a shutdown of the entire airport, similar to an incident that took place in China a few years ago.

Here’s a quote from December 16th, 1978, issued by the Chilean Air Force with regards to a UFO encounter, similar to what the Pentagon released. Again, keep in mind, this is something that’s happened thousands of times over the past few decades, and perhaps thousands of times every single year:

“Two pilots on a training mission, each flying an F5 fighter aircraft, tracked the object on their airborne radar. It gave a return equal to ten or more aircraft carriers-except this object was in the air, not floating on the water. Each pilot assumed his radar equipment was faulty until he learned that the other pilot was also getting the same return. Not only this, but ground radar from a nearby airport also picked up the object and confirmed its huge size. The pilots also saw the object with their own eyes. One pilot later said that at a distance of twenty miles, it looked “like a plantain banana swathed in smoke.” The pilots were frightened, having no missiles or weapons. As they approached the massive object, which had been motionless all this while, it took off at an unimaginable speed. All at once, it vanished from the three radar screens.”(1)(2)

This document from the CIA, relays several pieces of information, with the part about these UFOs highlighted in brackets, which suggests special attention was being paid to it. It goes to show just how interested they were in it, and how important this topic is within the intelligence community:

“ANTARCTIC FLYING SAUCERS” – A group of red, green, and yellow flying saucers has been seen flying over Deception Island for two hours by Argentine, Chilean and British bases (military) in Antarctica. The flying saucers were also seen flying in formation over the South Orkney islands in quick circles.”

We’ve written a number of articles about numerous UFO sightings. The point is, it’s happening, but for decades we’ve been brushing a lot of these sightings off as natural phenomena, if we even hear about them. There are millions of pages of documents and thousands of examples like the ones above. They’ve been studying it for years under the guise of “national security,” a term now used to classify everything, but more and more we are learning that this is done to protect the interests of the global elite as well as allow them to basically do whatever they please, with justification.

The “Anchorage” Incident is a well known UFO event involving a veteran Japanese airline pilot who saw three UFOs following his 747 aircraft carrier for over 400 miles. One of the objects was much larger than the 747, while the other two were smaller. The crewmen of JAL Flight 1628 reported seeing flashing lights trailing their jet to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). FAA officials confirmed the conclusions drawn from the controller who handled Flight 1628 on his radar. His conclusion was that the aircraft were unidentified. Air Force officials at the Alaska Air Command also said their radar picked up something near the JAL plane. The United States Air Force scrambled a jet to get a closer look at the object. This incident occurred in 1986.

Below is an interview with retired FA Senior Division Chief, John Callahan. Check out his testimony below given to Dr. Steven Greer. He was directly involved with this incident, it is amazing to hear his story and the events that transpired because of it.

The Takeaway

The disclosure of the existence of UFOs has been confirmed around the world by multiple nations. Secrecy dominates our world, and important information about the nature of our reality is being kept from us. Not only that, but our own money is being taken from us to finance this continued secrecy. I recently wrote an article about a Michigan State University economist who headed up a group that found trillions of unaccounted-for dollars missing from housing & D.O.D. that were funnelled into black budget projects. You can read that here.

The implications of these revelations are huge and would result in huge changes in all areas of humanity. But one reason why secrecy has been so rampant is that powerful controlling forces don’t want us to look closer and think critically about the nature of our reality, and about who we really are. The extraterrestrial hypothesis provides a valid explanation for some of the questions we are now asking, and it’s getting more difficult to ignore the evidence for intelligent visitation like we used to. The sooner we are able to handle and process the evidence coming before us and its implications, the sooner we will live from a deeper understanding of ourselves and the nature of our universe.

Sources not linked within the article:

(1) Huneeus, J, Antonio, “A Chilean Overview,” MUFON UFO Journal, 6/86; Huneeus, J. Antonio, “A Historical Survey of UFO Cases in Chilie,” MUFON 1987 International Symposium Proceedings (MUFON, 1987.)

(2) Department of Defense JCS Message Center, Subject: B6/BAF Has a Close Encounter of the First Kind. Date: 20 May 86. Subject: Numerous Unidentified Objects Were Cited in the Skies over Brazil. But BAF Fighters Were Unable to Intercept Them. Berliner, Don, The UFO Briefing Document, p. 121-127. Huneeus, J. Antonio, “UFO Alert in Brazil,” MUFON UFO Journal, 11/86. Andrus, Walt, “UFOs Over Brazil,” MUFON UFO Journal, 9/86. Smith, Dr Willy, “The Brazillian Incident,” International UFO Reporter, 7-8/86. Smith, Dr. Willy, “More on Brazilian OVNIs,” MUFON UFO Journal, 9/86.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Serious Errors Found In Widely Cited Global Warming Study

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study claiming that the Earth’s oceans have retained 60% more heat than previously thought over the last 25 years, suggesting global warming was much worse than previously believed, has turned out to be false.

  • Reflect On:

    Many scientists within the field have been quite outspoken about the politicization of climate science, and how it's a serious problem. We see it in all fields, like the medical field, for example. Ridicule has been used to suppress discussion.

There is a troubling trend among internet readers, and that’s the fact that billions of people area reading titles of an article and having a bad reaction before reading the actual article and examining the sources. The bad reaction usually comes when evidence is presented which strongly goes against the widely accepted belief held by the majority of people. This type of evidence is often ridiculed by the mainstream media, which is why the majority of people believe what they do in the first place.

We have been subjected to massive amounts of ‘mind-persuasion’ on various topics. Today, when evidence goes against the grain, especially when it threatens many political and financial interests, false evidence is manufactured in order to counter the actual evidence. This has happened in all areas that touch humanity. I refer to it as the politicization of science, in this case, climate science. We’ve seen this everywhere, especially with medical science.

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. . . . Science has taken a turn towards darkness.” – Dr. Richard Horton, Editor in Chief of The Lancet (source)

Now, just to be clear, this article is NOT debating climate change. Drastic and unexpected climate change and natural disasters are rampant right now on our planet, for multiple reasons. It’s clearly a problem that needs to be fixed and could have been fixed/mitigated decades ago, yet we still seem stuck. Revolutionary technologies have been in existence for a long time, from solar, to wind, to vortex-induced vibrations and over-unity energy technology. Many of them have been subjected to patent suppression and secrecy, for “natural security” purposes. Meanwhile, it’s this national security apparatus that have created a breakaway civilization, one that’s become highly technologically advanced. They use these technologies, not for the benefit of humanity, but it seems more so, for their own purposes and the enslavement of humanity.

All that being said, climate change is, in my opinion, the result of multiple factors that go beyond human beings. These include natural cycles Earth has gone through before in it’s past, the activity of our sun, etc…

Again, I am not denying climate change, I am not even denying anthropomorphic climate change. I’m simply pointing towards the politicization of science. Something fishy is happening.

advertisement - learn more

In fact, approximately more than thirty thousand scientists have all signed a petition regarding the political agenda of global warming. The scientific consensus, which includes over 9,000 scientists with Ph.D.s, is the real scientific consensus. There is no real source for the “97” percent of scientists agreeing, that’s false information.

Warmer Oceans?

Princeton scientist Laure Resplandy (pictured above) and researchers at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography recently published a study claiming that the Earth’s oceans have retained 60% more heat than previously thought over the last 25 years, suggesting global warming was much worse than previously believed. The reported was beamed out by multiple establishment mouthpieces, including the Washington Post, New York Times, BBC, Reuters and others.

Independent scientist Nic Lewis found the study had “apparently serious (but surely inadvertent) errors in the underlying calculations.” Lewis’ findings were quickly corroborated by another researcher. The post appeared on the website of Judith A. Curry, an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She has been one of the many outspoken scientists in the field the “tribal nature” of parts of the climate-science community, and what she sees as stonewalling over the release of data and its analysis for independent review.

Lewis corrected the math area, and found that the paper’s rate of ocean warming “is about average compared with other estimates they showed, and below the average for 1993-2016.” Roger Pike Jr., a Professor at the University of Colorado, tweet his work and replicated the data. Key phrase: “It’s a big error at the core of the paper’s findings.”

It seems that the majority of climate scientists all support this type of fraudulent data, and the problem of political interests taking over what the science is actually saying.

Lewis found the study’s authors, led by Princeton University scientist Laure Resplandy, erred in calculating the linear trend of estimated ocean warming between 1991 and 2016. Lewis has also criticized climate model predictions, which generally over-predict warming. Resplandy and her colleagues estimated ocean heat by measuring the volume of carbon dioxide and oxygen in the atmosphere. The results: the oceans took up 60 percent more heat than previously thought. The study only sent alarm bells ringing, especially in the wake of the United Nations’ latest climate 

Laure Resplandy, the author of the widely distributed and cited study, has recently replied, acknowledging the error. Although the reply comes from an establishment mouthpiece, one that ridicules any questioning of anthropomorphic climate change via carbon output.

Below is a brief interview with Curry.

The Politicization Of Climate Science

Again, we need to be looking at deforestation, the lack of disclosure of new energy technologies, and the lack of implementation of new ones. We need to be looking at the destruction of our Earth and the poisoning of our water and soil, more so than we do our carbon output. But carbon is very heavily focused on.

The politicization of climate science is something that’s vouched for by the majority of actual climate scientists.

It’s hard to talk about because I am a proponent of clean energy technologies, and they are a must. Our industries and our usage of pollution services, like the automobile industry, is a toxic and environmental health hazard. But the global elite are very smart, they are using climate change, and global warming, to basically cause climate hysteria for political and financial gains.

The “97 percent” tagline is often used to demonize those who question anthropogenic induced climate change, and the mainstream media will do their best to make those who question it, no matter their background, credentials, or credibility, look foolish.

Ivar Giaever, a Norwegian-American physicist who shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1973, compares current climate science to pseudoscience.

Dr. Richard Lindzen, among many others, refers to this type of narrative as hysteria and argues that climate scientists raising this issue have been demonized. He’s one of the world’s top experts in the field and lead author of “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” Chapter 7 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change.

He is a  dynamical meteorologist with interests in the broad topics of climate, planetary waves, monsoon meteorology, planetary atmospheres, and hydrodynamic instability. He has made major contributions to the development of the current theory for the Hadley Circulation and pioneered the study of how ozone photochemistry, radiative transfer, and dynamics interact with each other. He is also the Emeritus Sloan Professor of Meteorology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

A slide from one of his lectures below states:

Global warming is about politics and power rather than science. In science, there is an attempt to clarify; in global warming, language is misused in order to confuse and mislead the public. The misuse of language extends to the misuse of models. For advocated of policies allegedly addressing global warming, the role of models is not to predict but rather to justify the claim that catastrophe is possible. As they understand, proving something to be impossible is itself almost impossible.

I am using him as one of many examples. pointed out how policymakers were heavily involved with the IPCC and their publications. He is one of many to do so. Here’s a video in which he did try to bring awareness to what climate scientists REALLY believe. It’s quite contrary to the climate hysteria we see that’s constantly beamed. Right now it’s happening with forests fires, which have been happening for hundreds of millions of years.

Why No Mention of Climate Engineering?

What about climate engineering? Geoengineering is the manipulation of the atmosphere through artificial means.

The US Air Force has the capability to manipulate climate either for testing purposes or for outright military-intelligence use.  These capabilities extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts, and earthquakes.

Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence  purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog, and storms on earth or to modify space weather, … and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of technologies which can provide substantial increase in US, or degraded capability in an adversary, to achieve global awareness, reach, and power. (Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ . Emphasis added)

We’ve covered this topic in depth in multiple articles, and right now, geoengineering is being proposed as a solution to climate change, or what scientists above mentioned as ‘climate hysteria.’ The weather today is largely manufactured and owned, it’s changed and manipulated for various reasons. It’s hard to tell what’s actually going on. Here’s a clip of Ex-Cia director voicing his support for geoengineering…

Climate hysteria can be created, as much as terrorism can in order to create the war on terrorism…

The Takeaway

You could literally write a book on how the majority of reputable scientists within the field of Climate Science, and the ones actually involved with the IPCC, are all concerned about these things. As many of these scientists have pointed out, at a certain point, the final drafts and publications are taken over and written by politicians and policymakers.

There is a big problem here, and the elite who seem to be behind this type of thing, have been using their tools for years (mass media, education, etc..) to drill this idea in the people’s heads. Climate initiatives are being supported like war was with mass propaganda, our hearts and care for Mother Earth are being taken advantage of and capitalized on. Those who question the official narrative of global climate change are often the ones who care about Earth the most. This is one of the reasons it is so important for the awakening community to strive for the truth, and then to bring out that truth widely. The future of our planet hangs in the balance.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

CNN Takes Trump To Court: Is He Winning The War Against Fake News?

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A heated exchange between Donald Trump and CNN reporter Jim Acosta at a White House Press Briefing has led to Acosta losing his press pass, accusations of video doctoring, and a lawsuit claiming White House violations of the 1st and 5th amendments.

  • Reflect On:

    Does this battle represent a flashpoint in the larger battle between the Alliance and the Deep State? If so, what is our role in this?

Once a model of journalistic integrity and governmental decorum, the White House press conference seems to have devolved into a verbal street brawl of mutual disrespect between President Donald Trump and Mainstream Media. But at a deeper level, it has become Ground Zero for the battle for our collective perception of reality.

The notion that Mainstream Media is in the business of ‘framing’ a perception of events to suit a particular agenda is something that the public is beginning to awaken to in larger numbers. Now this is not to say that the President does not frame a perception of events as well. We have long known that all politicians do this. The difference is that President Trump does it to look good, be popular, and ultimately to be able to do what he believes are positive things for American citizens. The agenda behind the Mainstream Media is the destruction of American sovereignty and the implementation of a global power structure of enslavement. If we look at the ‘Acosta Incident’ through this lens, then an understanding of exactly why this is happening at this time comes into focus.

The Acosta Incident

The ‘Acosta Incident’ essentially involves CNN Journalist Jim Acosta asking questions to President Trump, being told by the President that he is done with Acosta and is moving on to the next reporter, and Acosta resisting attempts on the part of a young White House intern to take the microphone from him, actually using his arm to physically impede her arm from reaching over to take the microphone. Here is a full video of the incident:

As we can see in the video, the journalists (not only Acosta but the subsequent one) are spending most of their airtime building a narrative, finishing their statements with a slanted yes/no question which they already know the answer to. They try to characterize a given situation (i.e. Acosta saying that the ‘caravan’ is not an ‘invasion’) and basically trying to refute the President’s characterization. There is no real attempt here to inquire, to get new information, to listen to what the President has to say. And of course the President also replies with his own narrative-building.

In a way, this has long been the dynamic in White House press conferences, but never in history have journalists tried to single-mindedly frame a narrative in such a combative way. No doubt one could look at Donald Trump’s direct assault on Mainstream news as ‘Fake News,’ it has added much fuel to the fire. Objectively speaking, though, it would be hard to argue that Jim Acosta has not crossed a line of propriety in physically restraining a young woman from taking the microphone from him at the President’s request.

advertisement - learn more

Sarah Sanders’ Tweet

It cannot come as a shock to the objective observer that the White House believes it had grounds to revoke Jim Acosta’s press pass. In this CNN article, which denies any wrongdoing on the part of CNN or any apology for Jim Acosta, we see the narrative-building verbiage in full regalia:

CNN said in a statement that Acosta has the network’s full support. The revocation of his pass “was done in retaliation for his challenging questions at today’s press conference,” the statement said. “In an explanation, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders lied. She provided fraudulent accusations and cited an incident that never happened. This unprecedented decision is a threat to our democracy and the country deserves better.”

I’m sorry–is there anybody reading this article that is buying the claim that the revocation of his pass “was done in retaliation for his challenging questions at today’s press conference.”? Wow, not even a MENTION of Acosta’s physical contact with the intern. A tweet by White House Press Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, without audio, makes graphically clear what the White House, and, it must be said, any objective observer, would highlight as the reason his pass was revoked:

Now as we will see, the ‘source’ of her video, which shows 4 consecutive close-ups to drive the point home, is notable. According to this Wired article,

The video posted by Sanders appears identical to a video shared two hours earlier by Paul Joseph Watson, an editor-at-large at the right-wing media site InfoWars. Both videos were edited in the same way and had no sound. While the White House hasn’t responded to inquiries about the source of the video posted by Sanders, it seems reasonable to say that the chance the two videos were created independently is extraordinarily low.

Claims The Video Was ‘Doctored’

Not long after the tweet, claims that the White House was using a ‘doctored’ video, or that they had ‘doctored’ it themselves, began to pop up widely across Mainstream Media. Video experts were being called on to explain a frame-dropping or frame-pausing technique that was said to have made Acosta’s wrist restraining the intern’s arm look more like a ‘karate chop.’ Here is one of many videos up now explaining this:

And here is Infowars’ Paul Joseph Watson’s reaction to the claims that he doctored the video:

Even as a video editor myself, I don’t know whether this video was doctored or not. Either one of the arguments above seem to have some logic, and it would take me a lot more time and effort to get to the bottom of it, time and effort I certainly don’t want to spend. Why? Because it really doesn’t matter.

While it would be possible that Watson would go through the trouble of doctoring a video to have a slight, barely perceptible effect of seeming more aggressive, the fact of the matter is, as Watson points out in his video,

‘The media invented a giant conspiracy theory to distract from a real controversy…Sarah Sanders was right. Jim Acosta put his hands on a woman. He used his strength to overpower her, and that’s clearly seen in the video. Does that mean he assaulted her? No. It doesn’t. But he clearly used his hand, his wrist, and his arm to push her away…don’t take my word for it, go and watch the footage yourself and come to your own conclusions.’

CNN continues to reference Sanders’ tweet as ‘a distorted video clip of the press conference that didn’t show the complete back-and-forth. The same video had been posted by an InfoWars personality two hours earlier.’ To persuade those people who don’t investigate all the facts and rely on the validity of the narrative, these kinds of phrases and talking points are essential.

CNN Sues The White House

Now, it looks like the battle of narratives is headed for court. CNN has filed a lawsuit against the President and top aides for banning Acosta, believing his 1st and 5th amendment rights are being violated.

In an interview on Tuesday morning, [attorney Ted] Boutrous said CNN tried to resolve the matter privately, but the White House was not responsive so “we really had no choice but to sue.” “We didn’t want to have to go to court. We wanted to just report the news,” he said. “Mr. Acosta wants to report the news. CNN wants to report the news.”

If the full clip of Jim Acosta’s tactics and line of questioning are those of a journalist who ‘just wants to report the news,’ I must be missing something. Of course it should come as no surprise that CNN is using all of its rhetorical devices to characterize itself as the victim here. But more and more, those speaking on behalf of the Alliance are also firing up their rhetoric to continue to pound away at the ‘fake news’ characterization of mainstream media, trying to reveal to the public the hidden agenda behind machinations like those of Acosta. Here is the response of Sarah Sanders and the White House to the lawsuit:

“We have been advised that CNN has filed a complaint challenging the suspension of Jim Acosta’s hard pass. This is just more grandstanding from CNN, and we will vigorously defend against this lawsuit.
CNN, who has nearly 50 additional hard pass holders, and Mr. Acosta is no more or less special than any other media outlet or reporter with respect to the First Amendment. After Mr. Acosta asked the President two questions—each of which the President answered—he physically refused to surrender a White House microphone to an intern, so that other reporters might ask their questions. This was not the first time this reporter has inappropriately refused to yield to other reporters.
The White House cannot run an orderly and fair press conference when a reporter acts this way, which is neither appropriate nor professional. The First Amendment is not served when a single reporter, of more than 150 present, attempts to monopolize the floor. If there is no check on this type of behavior it impedes the ability of the President, the White House staff, and members of the media to conduct business.”

This is an interesting fight in that it seems like a flash point whose outcome might indicate the relative strength of the two heavyweights, the Alliance fronted by Donald Trump, and the Deep State as mouthpieced by Mainstream Media. It’s hard to know who is more up for this battle, to be honest. It will be interesting to see how this particular battle plays out.

The Takeaway

As usual, our discernment is required for sifting through these battles of conflicting narratives. The more we are able to find where the truth lies, and the more people that gain this power of discernment, the less we will have to live through the drama that is playing out in front of us. Living our lives in truth is our ultimate destination.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

EL

We Need Your Support...

 

With censorship, things have become tough. If just 5% of people seeing this today supported CE, we'd be able to fund a TRUE investigative team INSTANTLY. Your support truly matters and goes a long way! 

Thanks, you're keeping conscious media alive.