Mass Disclosure Preparation

The recent series of talks “How Much Can People Cope With” by Randi Green prompts this post exploring the kind of planning requirements coming along with a significant mass scale societal disclosure from the reams and reams of (now mostly) classified information — topics with potential to destroy the worlds the vast majority of people now “live in”.

It is hard to know exactly the current extent of the amount of classified information — because it’s classified. There’s an entire “Intelligenceindustry surrounding it with many clearances, compartmentalizations, hierarchies, subterfuge, hijinks, hijacking, counterintelligence, sequestration and myriad other protection methods and strategies. Not to mention Special Access Programs and especially the more off-book Unacknowledged Special Access Programs operating with minimal to (below) zero accountability and oversight.

Such extreme classification seems a significant factor in why more and more people speculate on metaphysical, geopolitical, parapolitical and exopolitical phenomena. While some of this speculation is more skillful than others, it is not unsurprising since there are so many questions and holes, and things not adding up with what we now know and are told. And because of such accelerating speculation, credible information that seems like speculation, can now be more easily written off as speculation.

First off, unfortunately, it’s not just as simple as getting information. Information comes in various types including:

  • credible
  • false
  • distorted
  • misleading
  • colored
  • a mix of these

While obviously some information requires heightened secrecy and security — such as major weapon systems and other potential means of harm and death — it is highly likely other classified information of a more benign nature has already circulated amongst the public for quite some time, yet remains officially classified. Sensitivity of information ranges from between high red alert to pedestrian, as well as stuff that likely doesn’t even apply to such a scale.

So how do we go from where we are now to where we need to be with disclosure, and how can that even be determined?

Many in the alternative media continue calling for an official-like “disclosure” (event). [Note: the links in this blog post do not necessarily imply any connective significance.] But I’ve yet to see nor hear a detailed action plan of how this can ideally be gone about. I neither advocate nor oppose such a thing. However, here are a few questions to toss on the fire, and/or move around with a poker:

  • Due to the vast difference of abilities, interests, levels of consciousness, patterning, ways of coping and responding, etc., where would the starting point even be for determining what to share — and not share — with the public?
  • How then would information prioritization and rollout occur?
  • How many rabbit holes would this open up? How many would it close? How many would dig new rabbit holes? How many would know how far to follow — and not follow — a rabbit hole? How much would be beneficial, and how much would be distraction and detrimental?
  • If certain information has been known for a long time, and the intel community has continually lied about it, how would they then manage their credibility?
  • What are, or would be, the agendas and counter-agendas involved, and how would we know?
  • How would any false or misrepresentations of history and true(r) depictions of history — in addition to prediction models of the future — come into play?
  • How might the determination of the effectiveness for passive disclosure and active disclosure methods be carried out?
  • If it hasn’t already been in the making, what kind of viability is there for the extent of activity needed within the intel communities for enacting large scale disclosure?
  • What about the small amounts of credible and non-credible disclosure we’ve potentially already received for awhile now and maybe (will) continue to get?
  • Are some meant to come across certain high-level information due to (pre)determinism, or karma, or affinity, or progression level, or synchronicity, or state of being? If so, how does this factor in? Do folks know exactly what they need to know, exactly when they need to know it? How would you know one way or another?
  • It seems if somebody is not meant to encounter certain information then all manner of coping and protective mechanisms automatically kick in. What are all these; how do they work; what makes some of these more likely to be effective for certain people; and how can their helpfulness or harmfulness be assessed?

If for some reason (important) disclosed information is rejected, it is still a seed planted in consciousness. We can also likely learn what kind of stuff is skillful and wise to be disclosed, and what isn’t, by noticing reception, response and behavior.

Is disclosure relevant to your meditation practice? If so, how? If not, why not?

Published by josh dippold

IntegratingPresence.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: